Zap I'm not certain, but from the scientific evidence I've seen I believe that Oswald acted alone.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/10/041025131255.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/10/041025131255.htm
There is no evidence that 9/11 was orchestrated by the government. All your "evidence" is merely casting doubt on the "official" story. In your Teapot/Flying Spaghetti Monster logic, you think if one thing isn't true, then it must be this other thing. If there's evolution, it's a test of faith, if you can't see my teapot, it exists, and so on.
I haven't been following this FEMA Camp story, but the common factor in most conspiracy theories is this ability to adapt to evidence, I don't give a shit about thermite, until you find a CIA badge embedded into the steel of the World Trade Center, your conclusions will be non sequitur. Example of bullshit Truther argument, Pentagon hit by missile. Why? Not really important. What's important is the video is suppressed. If the video were released and it showed a plane hitting the Pentagon, would Truthers stfu? OF COURSE NOT, because it is a smokescreen, the actual theory is the government did it, it doesn't matter how. Truthers have a dozen theories on every event, and each one proven wrong has two to replace it. And yet never, ever, ever, is any of this "evidence" an actual indicator of government involvement. Never. Ever. Ever.
Ron Paul is not a reputable scientific investigative journal.
How can you possibly "debunk" concentration camps? You can prove they exist, as they appear to have done here, or you can't prove they exist.. but it would be impossible to prove that they don't exist.
Even if Popular Mechanics disproved some or (unlikely) all of the evidence that there was for FEMA camps in a past article, there is no reason why new information cannot turn up later that proves that they do exist. It appears this documentary is filled with new information, however if you doubt that the past evidence for camps and related legislation is strong evidence that they have something in the works, I recommend you go back and do more research before the show airs on Friday.
If you learn anything from Rand Paul's victory in KY it's this. Sometimes to be politically viable politicians don't always say what they believe. I know that's shocking to some, but it's true. Ron Paul was asked after the 2008 election was over why didn't come "come out with the truth about 9/11". He said, and I'm quoting "Because that would be too controversial to me." If he really believed the official story about 9/11 he could have said "I've already come out with the truth about 9/11". And no, I won't post a link here on the main forum and violate the spirit of the forum rules. But you can do a search and find the video of this if you are interested.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. The same people who try to "debunk" 9/11 and FEMA also call the North American Union (something Ron Paul has talked about openly) a "conspiracy theory". And they are the same idiots who claim Oswald acted alone. Actually these people aren't idiots. They just think you are.
The thing about government stories is that most people will cling to them because they are published by offishildumb and deny any reasonable attempts to disprove the lack of logic within their claims. The thought that people with power and money would collaborate to protect said power and money at all costs and would (look shocked here!)lie is completely insane.![]()
This is about the only thing I agree with Noam Chomsky on. Are you familiar with the term institutonal analysis?
He has framed the conspiracy debate into one of institutional analysis where you look at what an institution is most likely to do based on documented history of that institution.. So if you look at all the lies governement has told to hold power and protect power, then believing offishildumb without a shred of skepticism is ignorant.
I was under the impression that H.R. 645 had not passed. Has it?
Again, I don't care totally care about what the committees say, I care about what the scientific evidence says. I'll get back on topic though. I was under the impression that H.R. 645 had not passed. Has it?
I haven't seen any papers that have said anything either way. I was asking that because I was wondering, not because I was trying to disprove you. But you need strong evidence to overturn something that is seen as established fact.
1. I don't trust either the President or Congress to be totally truthful. I make my own decisions based on what I see are facts.
2. I need more than one guy saying something in a book to believe something that there was a massive conspiracy to assassinate Kennedy. Again, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You have to be skeptical of not just government, but also of everyone else. What might be his reasoning for saying this? To sell books? Is this guy crazy or sane? You have to take everything into account.
Are there any legitimate peer-reviewed papers in respected scientific journals saying that there were two gunmen?
Here's a good site debunking JFK conspiracy theories: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
And yet never, ever, ever, is any of this "evidence" an actual indicator of government involvement. Never. Ever. Ever.
I guess it's a little too early to be searchin for a tube................
*sigh*
More waiting....
EXCLUSIVE: Al Qaeda Leader Dined at the Pentagon Just Months After 9/11
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/10/20/al-qaeda-terror-leader-dined-pentagon-months/
"In a dramatic interview with ABCNEWS, FBI special agents and partners Robert Wright and John Vincent say they were called off criminal investigations of suspected terrorists tied to the deadly bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa. U.S. officials say al Qaeda was responsible for the embassy attacks and the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States.... The suspected terrorist cell in Chicago was the basis of the investigation, yet Wright, who remains with the FBI, says he soon discovered that all the FBI intelligence division wanted him to do was to follow suspected terrorists and file reports — but make no arrests.... 'The supervisor who was there from headquarters was right straight across from me and started yelling at me: 'You will not open criminal investigations. I forbid any of you. You will not open criminal investigations against any of these intelligence subjects,' Wright said.
http://www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents/RobertWright.htm
Anthrax from USAAMRID
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_anthrax_attacks