Ah, so it includes some stuff about Afghanistan? Good, because I'm very sketchy on Afghanistan and Pakistan's role in all of this.Ry wrote:
911 and the coverup by Ryan Dawson
Re: 911 and the coverup by Ryan Dawson
Get The Empire Unmasked here
-
JayJ
- End the occupationS. Yes, all of them.
- Posts: 378
- Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:16 am
- Location: The Bureau of Counterpropaganda
Re: 911 and the coverup by Ryan Dawson
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing." - Malcolm X
"We know too well that our freedom isn't complete without the freedom of the Palestinians." - Nelson Mandela
"Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable." - George Orwell
"We know too well that our freedom isn't complete without the freedom of the Palestinians." - Nelson Mandela
"Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable." - George Orwell
Re: 911 and the coverup by Ryan Dawson
Read Ry's paper "why did the US really invade Afghanistan."
Re: 911 and the coverup by Ryan Dawson
Get The Empire Unmasked here
-
Germanic Fox
- Anti-Neocon novice
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 7:40 am
Re: 911 and the coverup by Ryan Dawson
Snoopes says that you are wrong and the dancing Palestinians were real... You have rebuttel to Snoopes! Otherwise I have no questions!
If Jews never ever have anyone among thier kind contemplates conspiracy against the public good then it as much of a stange fact as if everyone of them was doing it!
An "anti-semite" in actual usage, is less often a man who hates Jews than a man certain Jews hate. The word expresses the emotional explosion that occurs in people who simply can't bear critical discourse about a sacred topic, and who experience criticism as profanation and blasphemy. The term "anti-semitism" doesn't stand for any intelligible concept. It belongs not to the world of rational discourse, but to the realm of imprecations and maledictions and ritual ostracisms.
An "anti-semite" in actual usage, is less often a man who hates Jews than a man certain Jews hate. The word expresses the emotional explosion that occurs in people who simply can't bear critical discourse about a sacred topic, and who experience criticism as profanation and blasphemy. The term "anti-semitism" doesn't stand for any intelligible concept. It belongs not to the world of rational discourse, but to the realm of imprecations and maledictions and ritual ostracisms.
Re: 911 and the coverup by Ryan Dawson
snopes is one guy in a his basement it is not a fact checking site. they were "real" but they were not celebrating 911. That was a tape of kids dancing because they had been given cake.
Get The Empire Unmasked here
-
Germanic Fox
- Anti-Neocon novice
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 7:40 am
Re: 911 and the coverup by Ryan Dawson
Could you show the origenal tape please... I gotta show this to my still skeptical family!Ry wrote:snopes is one guy in a his basement it is not a fact checking site. they were "real" but they were not celebrating 911. That was a tape of kids dancing because they had been given cake.
If Jews never ever have anyone among thier kind contemplates conspiracy against the public good then it as much of a stange fact as if everyone of them was doing it!
An "anti-semite" in actual usage, is less often a man who hates Jews than a man certain Jews hate. The word expresses the emotional explosion that occurs in people who simply can't bear critical discourse about a sacred topic, and who experience criticism as profanation and blasphemy. The term "anti-semitism" doesn't stand for any intelligible concept. It belongs not to the world of rational discourse, but to the realm of imprecations and maledictions and ritual ostracisms.
An "anti-semite" in actual usage, is less often a man who hates Jews than a man certain Jews hate. The word expresses the emotional explosion that occurs in people who simply can't bear critical discourse about a sacred topic, and who experience criticism as profanation and blasphemy. The term "anti-semitism" doesn't stand for any intelligible concept. It belongs not to the world of rational discourse, but to the realm of imprecations and maledictions and ritual ostracisms.
Re: 911 and the coverup by Ryan Dawson
pause the video on that part i took screen shots of the articles debunking it. Snopes is chasing a strawman claim about some 1991 footage that is not and never has been the claim. Two reporters for a parmona were in place in palestine already to film a reaction to 911 they didn't get what they wanted so they offered the kids candy and gave that one ugly woman you see in every single 13 second film of it on cnn or fox or wherever some cake to cheer.
how old are you by the way because some of your post have been quitr loopy.
how old are you by the way because some of your post have been quitr loopy.
Get The Empire Unmasked here
-
Germanic Fox
- Anti-Neocon novice
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 7:40 am
Re: 911 and the coverup by Ryan Dawson
Mid Tweenties!Ry wrote:how old are you by the way because some of your post have been quitr loopy.
If Jews never ever have anyone among thier kind contemplates conspiracy against the public good then it as much of a stange fact as if everyone of them was doing it!
An "anti-semite" in actual usage, is less often a man who hates Jews than a man certain Jews hate. The word expresses the emotional explosion that occurs in people who simply can't bear critical discourse about a sacred topic, and who experience criticism as profanation and blasphemy. The term "anti-semitism" doesn't stand for any intelligible concept. It belongs not to the world of rational discourse, but to the realm of imprecations and maledictions and ritual ostracisms.
An "anti-semite" in actual usage, is less often a man who hates Jews than a man certain Jews hate. The word expresses the emotional explosion that occurs in people who simply can't bear critical discourse about a sacred topic, and who experience criticism as profanation and blasphemy. The term "anti-semitism" doesn't stand for any intelligible concept. It belongs not to the world of rational discourse, but to the realm of imprecations and maledictions and ritual ostracisms.
-
PlutoCharon
- Revolutionary Party
- Posts: 450
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 2:37 pm
Re: 911 and the coverup by Ryan Dawson
I'm trying to better understand the Pentagon's unaccounted $2.3 trillion in DOD transactions so I don't come off as ignorant when debating with skeptics. This is how I think I understand it:
In 1990, the CFO Act was passed requiring annual audited financial statements from Federal agencies, extended to all agencies in 1994 with the Government Management and Results Act. The DOD has failed to comply with the required act to this day. Congress has given them a deadline of 2017, however, this date is doubtful for various reasons and realistically nothing should be expected before 2020 or later.
The $2.3 trillion figure apparently comes from a DOD inspector general report for FY 1999 showing $2.3 trillion in unaccountable transactions. For FY 2000, $1.1 trillion was unaccountable. For FY 2001 they declined to report unaccountable transaction totals and for FY 2002 it was $900 billion (FY 2002 began two and a half weeks after 9/11).
Obviously Rumsfeld brought up the $2.3 trillion on 9/10/01, but it had been mentioned several times by congress and the media in the preceding year or so. Skeptics say the $2.3 trillion isn't actually missing and use language quoted from the above media/congressmen/Rumsfeld to downplay it's significance as "unsupported", "undocumented", "cannot be tracked", etc. All of these words being interchangeable with unaccountable and missing, missing not the same as gone (although it is probably gone for good).
Skeptics also point out that the $2.3 trillion comes from a $7.6 trillion department-level accounting interest total for FY 1999, transactions which are repeated in the books multiple times meaning (according to skeptics) that the actual unaccountable figure is merely a fraction of $2.3 trillion. Is that really how it works? Maybe that's true to an extent and for the $7.6 trillion figure, but if transactions repeat it's all the more reason to be suspicious when $2.3 trillion cannot be accounted for.
In the 9/10/01 speech, Rumsfeld brought up his exchange with Robert Byrd (from earlier in the year) regarding the DOD's request for a $50 billion budget increase. A request that didn't make much sense considering their "un-auditable" accounting and missing $2.3 trillion during a single year.
By early 2002, Comptroller Dov Zakheim was claiming 70% of the missing $2.3 million was recovered but that's hardly reliable considering the number of auditors/accountants/bookkeepers who "coincidentally" died during the impact of flight 77. Also, Zakheim is both a neocon and a Zionist.
Even though it had been mentioned, the timing of the Rumsfeld speech was suspicious. More or less (IIRC) he said the DOD's accounting abilities were lacking due to various reasons like outdated technology along with saying the $50 billion increase couldn't be taken seriously because of all this. But that hardly mattered a day later (and the budget has continued to rise ever since for the most part).
Flight 77's passenger list was very strange. Lots of naval and aerospace guys. The impact zone was the Office of Naval Intelligence. At least one passenger worked at the Pentagon and was a finance guy. And again, of course, the auditors/bookkeepers/accountants who were among the victims inside of the Pentagon and also the destruction of whatever they were working on. Skeptics downplay this by saying we don't know what they were working on, but that's a weak response.
The Pentagon employee on flight 77 was Bryan Jack, a budget analyst for the Office of the Secretary of Defense. He worked at the Pentagon for 23 years. His wife was a member of the naval reserve and deployed at the time of the attacks IIRC (she was also a former Pentagon employee). He most likely would not have been near the impact zone if he had gone to the Pentagon on foot that day. What are the statistical odds of this? A Pentagon financial guy whose wife is a former Pentagon employee and currently (at the time) deployed in the Navy, boards an under-booked flight to LA (53/239 passengers) full of naval and aerospace guys which crashes into the Naval Intelligence section of the pentagon killing a bunch of civilian financial people at a time when $2.3+ trillion is missing from the Pentagon.
Rumsfeld brings up the missing $2.3 trillion again one day before 9/11 and six months afterwards Dov Zakheim claims 70% has been accounted for. A six month period involving 9/11 and its aftermath including the war in Afghanistan. This after the Pentagon itself was attacked and a bunch of auditors/bookkeepers/accountants are killed and everything they were working on destroyed. And this is just the $2.3 trillion, what about the other missing trillions? Trillions are a very big deal.
Sorry for the lengthy post, but does that sound about right? Am I wrong about something or missing anything? Are some of my details irrelevant? I haven't given 9/11 much attention recently and upon "returning" I noticed the $2.3 trillion really resonates with people and more are aware than they used to be. I think it's a good neutral "gateway drug" to "red pill" folks with.
In 1990, the CFO Act was passed requiring annual audited financial statements from Federal agencies, extended to all agencies in 1994 with the Government Management and Results Act. The DOD has failed to comply with the required act to this day. Congress has given them a deadline of 2017, however, this date is doubtful for various reasons and realistically nothing should be expected before 2020 or later.
The $2.3 trillion figure apparently comes from a DOD inspector general report for FY 1999 showing $2.3 trillion in unaccountable transactions. For FY 2000, $1.1 trillion was unaccountable. For FY 2001 they declined to report unaccountable transaction totals and for FY 2002 it was $900 billion (FY 2002 began two and a half weeks after 9/11).
Obviously Rumsfeld brought up the $2.3 trillion on 9/10/01, but it had been mentioned several times by congress and the media in the preceding year or so. Skeptics say the $2.3 trillion isn't actually missing and use language quoted from the above media/congressmen/Rumsfeld to downplay it's significance as "unsupported", "undocumented", "cannot be tracked", etc. All of these words being interchangeable with unaccountable and missing, missing not the same as gone (although it is probably gone for good).
Skeptics also point out that the $2.3 trillion comes from a $7.6 trillion department-level accounting interest total for FY 1999, transactions which are repeated in the books multiple times meaning (according to skeptics) that the actual unaccountable figure is merely a fraction of $2.3 trillion. Is that really how it works? Maybe that's true to an extent and for the $7.6 trillion figure, but if transactions repeat it's all the more reason to be suspicious when $2.3 trillion cannot be accounted for.
In the 9/10/01 speech, Rumsfeld brought up his exchange with Robert Byrd (from earlier in the year) regarding the DOD's request for a $50 billion budget increase. A request that didn't make much sense considering their "un-auditable" accounting and missing $2.3 trillion during a single year.
By early 2002, Comptroller Dov Zakheim was claiming 70% of the missing $2.3 million was recovered but that's hardly reliable considering the number of auditors/accountants/bookkeepers who "coincidentally" died during the impact of flight 77. Also, Zakheim is both a neocon and a Zionist.
Even though it had been mentioned, the timing of the Rumsfeld speech was suspicious. More or less (IIRC) he said the DOD's accounting abilities were lacking due to various reasons like outdated technology along with saying the $50 billion increase couldn't be taken seriously because of all this. But that hardly mattered a day later (and the budget has continued to rise ever since for the most part).
Flight 77's passenger list was very strange. Lots of naval and aerospace guys. The impact zone was the Office of Naval Intelligence. At least one passenger worked at the Pentagon and was a finance guy. And again, of course, the auditors/bookkeepers/accountants who were among the victims inside of the Pentagon and also the destruction of whatever they were working on. Skeptics downplay this by saying we don't know what they were working on, but that's a weak response.
The Pentagon employee on flight 77 was Bryan Jack, a budget analyst for the Office of the Secretary of Defense. He worked at the Pentagon for 23 years. His wife was a member of the naval reserve and deployed at the time of the attacks IIRC (she was also a former Pentagon employee). He most likely would not have been near the impact zone if he had gone to the Pentagon on foot that day. What are the statistical odds of this? A Pentagon financial guy whose wife is a former Pentagon employee and currently (at the time) deployed in the Navy, boards an under-booked flight to LA (53/239 passengers) full of naval and aerospace guys which crashes into the Naval Intelligence section of the pentagon killing a bunch of civilian financial people at a time when $2.3+ trillion is missing from the Pentagon.
Rumsfeld brings up the missing $2.3 trillion again one day before 9/11 and six months afterwards Dov Zakheim claims 70% has been accounted for. A six month period involving 9/11 and its aftermath including the war in Afghanistan. This after the Pentagon itself was attacked and a bunch of auditors/bookkeepers/accountants are killed and everything they were working on destroyed. And this is just the $2.3 trillion, what about the other missing trillions? Trillions are a very big deal.
Sorry for the lengthy post, but does that sound about right? Am I wrong about something or missing anything? Are some of my details irrelevant? I haven't given 9/11 much attention recently and upon "returning" I noticed the $2.3 trillion really resonates with people and more are aware than they used to be. I think it's a good neutral "gateway drug" to "red pill" folks with.