Iran in Mexico and the Caribbean: Building a Strategic Trampoline towards the US - Page 3




 
--
Boots
 
November 9th, 2011  
03USMC
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zultra
Proves my point exactly, the Afghan governement has been blamed for many civilian deaths, the whole of NATO, UN, EU etc.. should just be scrapped, Armed Neutrality is the natural course of affairs.

Remember the US Army are not the good guys, invasion of soverign states without valid cause (Iraq for example), or for Dubious reasons (poppy fields in Afghanistan), Nor are pretty much all Western Militaries (Excluding Switzerland).

The average soldier is nothing more then a hired gun for the Elites, but I guess brainwashing has had a big effect in these forums.




Yeah Buddy!!!!!!!!!
November 9th, 2011  
George
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zultra

Remember the US Army are not the good guys, invasion of soverign states or for Dubious reasons (poppy fields in Afghanistan),
Really! And all this time I thought it was because the Taliban allowed Al Queda to use the country for a base for 9-11.
November 10th, 2011  
Zultra
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by George
Really! And all this time I thought it was because the Taliban allowed Al Queda to use the country for a base for 9-11.
You are a Conspiracy theorist, you believe that a few old men in a cave can organise to hijack a plane (whose 'new' pilot only flew light planes), get NORAD to close down for a day, not get **** raped by interceptors and manage to hit a building right where it needed to be hit.
--
Boots
November 10th, 2011  
03USMC
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zultra
You are a Conspiracy theorist, you believe that a few old men in a cave can organise to hijack a plane (whose 'new' pilot only flew light planes), get NORAD to close down for a day, not get **** raped by interceptors and manage to hit a building right where it needed to be hit.
No Pumpkin, that would be you. Might wanna stay off the Truther Web-sites and research actual events and occurances like NORAD was operational and at no time "shut down" and the availabilty of military aircraft and their readiness status pre 9/11.
November 10th, 2011  
Zultra
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 03USMC
No Pumpkin, that would be you. Might wanna stay off the Truther Web-sites and research actual events and occurances like NORAD was operational and at no time "shut down" and the availabilty of military aircraft and their readiness status pre 9/11.
http://standdown.net/ (quite a old site, still a good read)

Then how comes there was no response from NORAD? If there was over 110 minutes of lost contact and no response means essientially NORAD didn't serve it's purpose (might as well shut down) and let this happen.
November 10th, 2011  
03USMC
 
 
Because prior to 9/11 it was not NORAD's mission to monitor all aircraft in US air space, and Noble Eagle did not exist. The FAA was responsible for commercial air craft, and notification of NORAD if something went wrong.
November 11th, 2011  
Yossarian
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 03USMC
Because prior to 9/11 it was not NORAD's mission to monitor all aircraft in US air space, and Noble Eagle did not exist. The FAA was responsible for commercial air craft, and notification of NORAD if something went wrong.
Agreed, furthermore


A lot of the procedures then were under the pretense that a violation of American Airspace, would be via Russian bombers or other military aircraft on more traditonal courses of attack, not civilian airliners used in a fashion that was demostrated on 9/11.

If you are wondering about how the FAA for example has changed such procedures after 9/11 in terms of crisis situations, everything from hijackings to MANPAD threats, they publish manuals and reports quite often on the subjects, many are avaible to the public.

The information is definently avaible, it's just nobody seems to want to take the time to sift through an 11,000 page report, mostly all official rift raft just to learn about a few key changes in air conduct and attack situations and how they are to be dealt with before or after 9/11.

And no, I am not talking about wikileak esk stolen documentation, just the stuff released for public viewing.
November 11th, 2011  
wayword son
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zultra
RT picks up a lot of what the Western stations miss/'forget'.


or news western stations will not show due to the lack of evidence, or truthfulness.
Then again, “Pravda”, wasn’t pravda, was it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zultra
Of course the US are really innocent angels they are indeed not the biggest Terrorist state in the world.


your first statement is correct, the US is not a nation of little angels, short of the afterlife, there is no nation of angels.

but your second statement is incorrect. America is not the largest terrorist state in the world.

of course, you do not have a point, when you use sarcasm as supporting evidence for allegations of wrongdoing.

I do know the terrorists, and apologist for terrorists, use allegations of atrocity on the part of the US military to JUSTIFY flying airliners into buildings. But they are just trying to feel good about being imoral, mercyless murders, by baceless claims that my countrys uniformed solgiers are as bad as they are.
November 11th, 2011  
wayword son
 

Topic: reality check.


the reason conspiracy theory’s are so hard for me to believe, is I have found. a conspirisist inserts shadows into what is, in reality very simple in the light of day, then assigns motives to the shadows they have created.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zultra
You are a Conspiracy theorist, you believe that a few old men in a cave can organise to hijack a plane (whose 'new' pilot only flew light planes), get NORAD to close down for a day, not get **** raped by interceptors and manage to hit a building right where it needed to be hit.


a little reality here Zultra.

1. Your characterization of al-Qaeda as a few old men in a cave is not accurate. It is possible for a well funded organization made up of hundreds (Thousands?) of professional terrorists and paramilitary’s (like al-Qaeda) to plan, and execute complex terrorist attacks, from a safe, Base (in Afghanistan) a base that is not a "cave", but is a fully staffed facility with security, communications equipment, transportation, computers, and paramilitary training facilities. especially when that organization has the blessing of the host nations government, (mulla omars taliban)


2. as noted, norad did not monitor domestic flights, (I believe the priority threat was at the time, ICBM missile launch, not aircraft) before 9-11, our air force had no quick procedure in place to locate, intercept and shoot down airliners, and could not have responded in the critical 110 minutes after losing contact with the hijacked airliners

3. steering an airliner to impact such a large target as the WTC or the pentagon is not that difficult. its far harder to fly a WWII zero fighter straight and level, and poorly trained individuals’ were able to do that well enough to target ships at sea (kamikaze) the terrorists “pilots” did not have to do any of the complicated tasks such as tacking off or landing.

that being said, your thought process boggles the mind,

you say its conspiracy to simply believe that al-Qaida committed the act the al-queda leadership bragged about committing. when that terrorist organization is proven to have had the will, the opportunity, and the resources to have committed it?

it doesn't take Sherlock homes to figure it out.
November 11th, 2011  
Seehund
 

Topic: The Allegory of the Cave


Quote:
Originally Posted by wayword son
the reason conspiracy theory’s are so hard for me to believe, is I have found. a conspirisist inserts shadows into what is, in reality very simple in the light of day, then assigns motives to the shadows they have created.
Plato realizes that the general run of humankind can think, and speak, etc., without (so far as they acknowledge) any awareness of his realm of Forms. The allegory of the cave is supposed to explain this.

In the allegory, Plato likens people untutored in the Theory of Forms to prisoners chained in a cave, unable to turn their heads. All they can see is the wall of the cave. Behind them burns a fire. Between the fire and the prisoners there is a parapet, along which puppeteers can walk. The puppeteers, who are behind the prisoners, hold up puppets that cast shadows on the wall of the cave. The prisoners are unable to see these puppets, the real objects, that pass behind them. What the prisoners see and hear are shadows and echoes cast by objects that they do not see.

Such prisoners would mistake appearance for reality. They would think the things they see on the wall (the shadows) were real; they would know nothing of the real causes of the shadows. So when the prisoners talk, what are they talking about? If an object (a book, let us say) is carried past behind them, and it casts a shadow on the wall, and a prisoner says “I see a book,” what is he talking about? He thinks he is talking about a book, but he is really talking about a shadow. But he uses the word “book.”

If a prisoner says “That’s a book” he thinks that the word “book” refers to the very thing he is looking at. But he would be wrong. He’s only looking at a shadow. The real referent of the word “book” he cannot see. To see it, he would have to turn his head around.

The prisoners may learn what a book is by their experience with shadows of books. But they would be mistaken if they thought that the word “book” refers to something that any of them has ever seen. Likewise, we may acquire concepts by our perceptual experience of physical objects. But we would be mistaken if we thought that the concepts that we grasp were on the same level as the things we perceive.