It bears noting that that last video (from the history channel) reflects the CIA version of events, attempting to lay the blame more on the ISI and pretending that the CIA's involvement was just in providing the funds.
But as always, To know who is running things, the rule of thumb is to "Follow the money".
The CIA never funds anything it doesn't directly control.
As far back as the creation of Al Qaeda by the CIA in the late 70s the Pakistani intelligence agency ISI was directly involved in the process of funding the operation and in furnishing logistics and supplies to Bin Laden. Of course the CIA was directing the whole process and US taxpayers were footing the bill.
The ISI, like Al Qaeda, was a CIA asset and largely remains such to this day. Pakistan cannot pay its intelligence service as well as the US can. So, no matter who the Pakistanis elect, the ISI works for the US administration.
I never bought a house in Japan. But I know that my landlord paid the equivalent of 300,000 dollars (in 1980) for the small, modest 4 bedroom house where I was living in Minoo.
I don't know about now, but when I lived in Japan for 5 years back in the 80s it was so expensive that US dollars were useless there, the exchange rate was so low that it was better to just leave the dollars for later return to the west than to change them and lose most of their value.
Rent for a small, modest, 2 room apartment in Japan was equivalent to rent for a large well-equipped house in the US. Just a simple restaurant meal was about 20 dollars per person (remember this was in the 80s). Fortunately, salaries were fairly high too, so although life was expensive, it was possible for people working in Japan.
But anybody who's income came from the US or Europe would see their money disappear before their eyes.
That would be silly wouldn't it. Of course the WTC collapsed.
But the pretense that planes disappeared into the buildings is certainly a hoax (although Hollywood would have done a much better job of faking it).
That, in itself is a disinformation tactic. Insisting on "conclusive proof" before being willing to debate an issue.
From "the 27 rules of disinformation" (a clarified version of Lifton's "25 rules of disinformation").
21. Ignore proof presented, but demand impossible proofs. Regardless of what material may be presented, claim that it is irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by.
It is impossible for anyone to offer "conclusive proof" that the moon landing DID or DID NOT occur?
If such "conclusive proof" existed there would be no debate.
In the absence of such undeniable proof, debate and is the only way to even approach the truth.
The moon missions supposedly occurred way back in the 60s when computers still had tubes and LEDs didn't even exist.
The available technology at the time was more industrial than scientific. There is no way that it could have supported a moon mission.
I don't believe for a second that the US was capable of putting men on the moon in the 60s, or even now for that matter.
Crossing the Van Allan Radiation belts in an unshielded aluminum spacecraft, the astronauts would have been cooked alive.
The following is claimed to be scientific proof that the astronauts could have crossed the Van Allen belts without harm.
...to escape from Earth requires a speed of about 7 miles per second, which is about 11.2 km per sec. At that speed, it would require less than an hour to pass outside the main part of the belts at around 38,000 km altitude. However...because as soon as the rocket motor stops burning, the spacecraft immediately begins to slow, it would ...be moving only about 4.6 km per sec, and would take about 1.5 hours to pass beyond 38,000 km....
Assuming...no shielding by the spacecraft gives a (total) dose of something like 50 mSv in 300 sec due to protons in the most intense part of the belt.
... the US recommended limit of exposure for radiation workers is 50 mSv per year, based on the danger of causing cancer. The corresponding recommended limit in Britain is 15 mSv per year.
Now lets look at the obvious holes in that "proof".
First, If the dose of radiation in the belts is (as claimed) "50mSv in 300 seconds" and the craft were in the belt for 1.5 hours (as claimed) the astronauts would already receive far far more than a lethal dose of radiation.
But if we strip away the disinformation we see just how ridiculous the claim really is.
Although the craft would indeed be moving at 4.6 km per sec, that motion would not be vertical speed, it would be orbital speed.
A spacecraft doesn't just aim at the moon and fly straight to it at 4.6 kps. It first orbits the earth in low orbit and then accelerates orbiting higher and higher, before performing a slingshot maneuver to sling it from earth orbit into lunar orbit. The orbital escape velocity of 4.6 kps only translates to a vertical speed of about 1 kps.
So instead of crossing the most intense part of the radiation belt in just a few minutes (as lyingly claimed), it would take a couple of hours and the astronauts would receive many times the lethal radiation dose.
Admittedly that article is from the Washington Times, the "Mooney" newspaper.
Admittedly that newspaper reflects the thinking of the lunatic fringe of neo-conservatism.
But still there is a thread of truth in what the article says.
The Obama administration is actively flooding internet forums with trolls whose objective is to disrupt genuine political discussion and replace it with endless gibberish that centers on Obama.
They don't care whether Obama is popular or not. They intend to discard him soon anyway. But what they do care about is that Obama keeps the political spotlight for the moment. Whether people are applauding or booing. They don't want anybody else to start getting attention.
who ordered the demolition of twin towers * BUSH * BIN LADEN
I voted "Bush" since there were only 2 choices but it wasn't him really He was just a puppet Bin Laden was a puppet too Both of them were cardboard cutouts, caricature props, in a cheap made for TV disaster film Sponsored by wall street written by PNAC and directed by the CIA
Ils n'ont plus rien à se maudire They don't have anything left to curse each other about Ils se perforent en silence They shred each other in silence La haine est devenue leur science Hatred has become their science Les cris sont devenus leurs rires Shouting has become their laughter L'amour est mort, l'amour est vide Love is dead, love is empty Il a rejoint les goélands it has gone back to the seagulls La grande maison est livide The big house is furious Les portes claquent à tout moment doors slam at any moment Ils ont oublié qu'il y a peu They have forgotten that not long ago Strasbourg traversé en riant as they crossed Strassbourg, laughing Leur avait semblé bien moins grand it had seemed much smaller to them Qu'une grande place de banlieue then a big suburban plaza Ils ont oublié les sourires They have forgotten the smiles Qu'ils déposaient tout autour d'eux That they left all around themselves Quand je te parlais d'amoureux When I spoke to you of lovers C'est ceux-là que j'aimais décrire It was them that I wanted to describe Vers midi s'ouvrent les soirées (now) At about mid-day the evenings begin Qu'ébrèchent quelques sonneries broken by several calls, C'est toujours la même bergerie It's still the same sheep-pen Mais les brebis sont enragées But (now) the lambs are rabid Il rêve à d'anciennes maîtresses He dreams of former mistresses Elle s'invente son prochain amant She invents her next lover Ils ne voient plus dans leurs enfants They no longer see in their children Que les défauts que l'autre y laisse Anything but the defects that the other passed to them Ils ont oublié le beau temps They have forgotten the good times Où le petit jour souriait when the early morning smiled Quand il lui récitait Hamlet When he recited Hamlet to her Nu comme un ver et en allemand Naked as a worm, and in German Ils ont oublié qu'ils vivaient They have forgotten how they lived A deux, ils brûlaient mille vies Together they burned up a thousand lives Quand je disais "belle folie" When I said "beautiful madness" C'est de ces deux que je parlais It was of these two that I spoke Le piano n'est plus qu'un meuble The piano is (now) but a piece of furniture La cuisine pleure quelques sandwichs The kitchen cries a few sandwiches Et eux ressemblent à deux derviches And they resemble two dervishes Qui toupient dans le même immeuble Who spin in the same building Elle a oublié qu'elle chantait She has forgotten that she sang Il a oublié qu'elle chantait He has forgotten that she sang Ils assassinent leurs nuitées They murder their nights En lisant des livres fermés By reading closed books Ils ont oublié qu'autrefois They have forgotten that at other times Ils naviguaient de fête en fête They sailed from celebration to celebration Quitte à s'inventer à tue-tête Even if it meant inventing, at the top of their voices Des fêtes qui n'existaient pas Celebrations that never existed Ils ont oublié les vertus They have forgotten the virtues De la famine et de la bise Of hunger and kisses Quand ils dormaient dans deux valises when they slept out of two suitcases et mais nous ma belle and "but us my love" Comment vas-tu ? Comment vas-tu ? How are you (dear)? how are you (dear)?
And Dude somehow lives on the American time schedule and has several alter-ego clone personalities at CS with whom he converses for 10 or 12 hours each day.
If Obama fulfills his threat to set up a Civilian National Security Force, "just as strong, just as well trained and just as well funded as the military", what role do you think that huge force will play in the US?
It will be run by an Obama appointee of course. And being outside of the officially non-partisan military chain of command, don't you think it just might tend to impose Obama's will rather than protecting constitutional values?
It will amount to Obama's private army. Like Mao's Red Guard.
In the cases of both 1930 Germany and the US now, the economic collapse was not just an accident. It was brought on deliberately by the government and the banks as a way to rob the middle class and to psychologically prepare the population to accept a dictator. In the face of the crisis the people were looking for someone to save them. And then, just in time, along came a politician who seemed to have all the answers and who the media supported unconditionally.
It didn't matter that some people began to wake up soon. By that time he was already in power and could work behind the scenes to actually change the laws and policies of the government to perpetuate his reign.
And of course he wasn't working alone, he was just the front man for a powerful cabal of industrialists, media moguls, financiers etc. All of whom sought to profit from a massive militarization and socialization of the nation and a neo-colonialist foreign policy aimed at conquering territory and seizing resources.
By the time it all begins to unravel, the financiers have taken all the loot and left the country. Leaving the people and their great "leader" to bear the consequences.
I am no follower of Alex Jones. I think he's actually in league with some of the people he pretends to oppose.
He's setting up the opposition to the government for a coming terrible violent conflict that will lead to world dictatorship.
But in the process of doing that he does indeed do a good job of exposing the evils of the current system (obama, Bush, Clinton, CFR, Trilateral commission, wall street, etc).
I agree with him on nearly everything in this film.
RayfromUSA Forum Posts (6,611)
RE: What Do You Think, Did Pakistan Know Of OBL's Whereabouts?
It bears noting that that last video (from the history channel) reflects the CIA version of events, attempting to lay the blame more on the ISI and pretending that the CIA's involvement was just in providing the funds.But as always, To know who is running things, the rule of thumb is to "Follow the money".
The CIA never funds anything it doesn't directly control.