submitted for your consideration...

I certainly stand corrected, marcus.

In that case I would like to know the real reason for the invasion…

That is what was the facts brought up at the UN hearing which Ok’d an attack on Iraq.(if it wasn’t the supposide nuclear threat)

Perhaps this PLANE was the real reason! Zee Plane boss, Zee Plane!

Is any of that info available to the public?

keep shinin’

jerm
:cool:

Quote (jeremysdemo @ May 31 2006,19:09)
In that case I would like to know the real reason for the invasion....

That is basically what this thread - The Decider (remember this one?) degenerated into discussing.

I know this is off topic but found these quotes interesting…


<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
“The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him.”
- G.W. Bush, 9/13/01

"I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02


:cool:

thanks for all your good input-
jeremy-i can’t present what you want,i just say consider the evidence,
you must educate yourself (me too)
you must remember we acted with out the un,unilaterally.
i think your assocation between iraq(or afghanistan) and “the terrorists” is not sound-
we did not invade iraq with the worlds’ approval,only the fantastic “coalition of the willing”-who was that,us,gb,and surinam or something- hardly a consensus
by the way,there was no “nuclr” threat-many of us knew that from the begining.i still can’t understand your marginalizing the wtc attack-if it wasn’t the cause to go to war,it is a watershed event in american history-you’ll see
don’t you want to know who did it?
don’t you want to know who the enemy is?
it’s all crap-killing people for money
what does your jesus say(i think your comments are heartfelt,and i appreciate them none the less)
CG-no disrespect,you say 3 buildings could have been destroyed by the damage-
collapsed,into their own footprint,dropping at an impossible rate of speed,into pieces just so big as to fit on the trucks,and hauled away and destroyed,falling in a symmetrical pattern,one floor after the next,like lps on a record spindle,in spite of the fact that the inital reports from nyfd report minor damage and a small fire on 2 floors in wtc7-did you see that?
firemen report hearing “squibs”(explosions)in rapid sucession.
there are many hours of video readily available where i believe you can see the controlled explosions
(www.physics911.com)
i think i am a worthy representitive for the lunatic fringe,and will keep representin’…
some folks will consider this stuff,some not.
(i consider evidence contrary to “conspiracies”,too)
just stirrin the pot…

fair enough. I don’t pretend to know everything, just my own experience.

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
adiobru wrote:Posted on June 01 2006,00:14

jeremy-i can’t present what you want,i just say consider the evidence,
you must educate yourself

I guess it would help to know where to start. There’s alot of publications out there bru. I can’t make connections where there is no evidence to support them.


<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
adiobru wrote:Posted on June 01 2006,00:14

i think your assocation between iraq(or afghanistan) and “the terrorists” is not sound


There’s certainly a decent amount of evidence to disolve that statement.

I don’t beleive I ever made an association beteewn Iraq and terrorist. If I said that, just quote it. But please don’t put words into my mouth, that your not willing to defend.
I have made a reference to Afgan, in repect to terrorist. That country was Osama’s headquarters for many years. And there is plenty of evidence that he was there for long periods of time.

<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
adiobru wrote:Posted on June 01 2006,00:14

i still can’t understand your marginalizing the wtc attack-if it wasn’t the cause to go to war,it is a watershed event in american history-you’ll see


I have not marginalized anything about this attack. I agree it was a historical event which will remain infamous. Just having trouble connecting the two. As I have said before, there has been no logical, factual conection made by you, or any other poster. You say I have made an association between terrorist and Iran; but it is you who insist the US went in there because of a terrorist attack on US soil, not me.

<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
adiobru wrote:Posted on June 01 2006,00:14

don’t you want to know who did it?


<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
jeremysdemo wrote: Posted: May 30 2006,19:17

The mastermind of the crash being Osama, and his constituances.


I will have to go with the evidence that has been presented to me, until otherwise informed.

<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
adiobru wrote:Posted on June 01 2006,00:14

don’t you want to know who the enemy is?


Yes, this way I can Love them. Pray blessings upon them, and mercy. Right now I prayin’ for Osama, until there is evidence for me to consider another in respect to these events.

<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
adiobru wrote:Posted on June 01 2006,00:14

what does your jesus say


See previous comment. ^^^


peace be with you.


jerm
:cool:

good answer,jerm-you see the higher ground.much respect!
in this case,i believe that osama is an enemy that the bush gang(41 inc) and others created just for this event-cia trained(as a “freedom fighter"against the soviet occupation),osama’s family has been in business with the bush family and others for years(carlisle group).most of the “hijackers” have reported histories of cia involvement in the sudan.
i don’t think these associations are unimportant…
or coincedental…
i believe that the war was manufactured,for a purpose-
all"reasons” are manufactured,too…
here’s a few websites to get you started-
democracynow.org(left-wing mainstream)
physic911.org(how many facts do you need?
fromthewilderness.com(Ruppert is the man!)
serendipity.com(wild stuff,open minds only!)
you can go to killtown and webfairy thru the link at the 1st post-did you look at these sites? i’ve been leaving links…
i don 't know what you want to hear-
wtc is gone-
we’re at war in 2 countries-(and it’s not going well)
all these associations and evidence
it’s all planned and manufactured,man :)

Quote (jeremysdemo @ May 31 2006,11:54)
Bru,

Regardless of your wealth of data and supporting information presented I still am failing to see the connection between these events and the current war in Iraq. You abviously have made one, but haven't presented it. I conceed these events swade public opinion in the US, nothing more. Public opinion doesn't dictate foreign policy.

The war in Iraq was decided at the UN, not soely in the US. With many other countries.(some of which have also had attacks by extreemist Muslim groups)
The evidence presented at that summit did not include anything from this crash. Or any of the other terroist attacks by simular groups around the globe.
It included evidence from intel sources within Iraq regarding it's ability to produce nuclear weapons. Had Sadam allowed the inspection of his facilities, which were later found to be empty of such material, this conflict could have been delayed, possible even avoided.

keep shinin'

jerm :cool:

Jerm-[QUOTE]Public opinion doesn't dictate foreign policy.
you weren't alive then,but i witnessed- first hand-public opinion against the vietnam war(marches,protests)change the foreign policy of the regiem(nixon)
another way public opinion dictates foreign policy is thru voting...do i need to explain this?
what'd someone say-sheesh!

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
another way public opinion dictates foreign policy is thru voting…do i need to explain this?


Please do,

Public opinion doesn’t directly translate into votes.
You can have a large % of citizens show an opposition to a policy.
Unfortunatly, only a small % of people vote, and that vote being distributed between the two opposing arguments. Hence the % of people with the opposition often losing and not giving an accurate representation of those who oppose.
Also, a canidate can promise all the reform he wants in the race, and has no reprecussion should he/she not deliver.
So even if a large % of people manage to make their opinions count as votes, there is no garauntee that the person they put their faith into is going to follow through.

EDIT:

Not to go off topic here, but this is your thread, so I will humor you.

Quote (audiobru wrote: Posted: June 01 2006 @ 14:36)
you weren’t alive then,but i witnessed- first hand-public opinion against the vietnam war(marches,protests)change the foreign policy of the regiem(nixon)


I wasn’t there to witness that. However in retrospect it doesn’t seem that was the case.
It seems more likely that the military leaders were faced with the fact that they weren’t going to win the conflict.(due to a variety of issues)
And under that advisement, they informed the commander and chief of the most sound and viable solution.
It does seem convenient that the same solution would also appease the publics opposition…
But, even if there was wide support of the war, it wouldn’t have changed the commanders options on a strategic level.

The government is very good at making it look like they are appeasing the people, when in fact they are serving there own purposes.

And people have always had the need to feel empowered. That somehow their protest made the difference.
Satisfying that need is not always easy, it takes groups of professionals and analyst and occasionally a coincidence presents itself as the solution.
I believe it was you who said.
<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
like i said -everyone believes what they want and need to…


Maybe I’m wrong on this.
Maybe the US was a shoe-in. Maybe we had the advantage, and were just about to win that one, then…
The president sad, NOPE, were gonna do what the people want instead of winning this conflict, we’ll pull out.
The facts certainly don’t support this idea.
But then again I’m looking at the whole event from a non-bias stance.

You say that only a person with an open mind will understand your first post and see it for what it is.
But I would say to you, that you are not approaching this with an open mind.
You’ve already drawn your conclusion.
And now, any evidence you uncover along the way is only going to support you conclusion.
If you truley want to look at this situation with an open mind it would be best to collect all the data possible. Considering all the sources, eye witness accounts, credibilty factors, plausibilty factors. Then without drawing any conclusion weighing out all the information with a objective mind.
Start with the plane crash or explosion.
Remove the connection to the war, one thing at a time.
I see a person with military experience smelt cordite.
<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
“A bomb had gone off. I could smell the cordite. I knew explosives had been set off somewhere” - Don Perkal

SOURCE:http://911review.com/attack/pentagon/witnesses.html
And several other people also confirmed that type of smell.
However, that neither supports or confirms the lack of a plane.
The plane could have had a bomb on it. Possible in the cockpit,(and worn by the hijacker) which blew up on impact, thus exploding the plane in a very unatural way in relation to it trajectory.
From information on that site it seems the “Missle” comment was taken out of context from a persons statement that this said later in the same interview,
"I looked out my window and I saw this plane, this jet, an American Airlines jet, coming. And I thought, ‘This doesn’t add up, it’s really low.’"
The missle reference was the persons account of the speed at which the craft was moving, which was twice the speed of a normal jet at that altitude 400MPH.


keep shinin’

jerm :cool:

i’m afraid i still don’t get your point- i offered this “for your consideration”-you are not obliged,don’t consider it.i don’t care.i’m not trying to sell you anything…if one has an open mind,this stuff is interesting…or not.we disagree,that’s clear.i’m not going to argue the effect of voting on foreign policy,or what the “cause” or “reason” is for the illegal invasion of 2 sovreign nations…you are missing the forest for the trees,my friend…
Did you go to any of these sites ?did you do any research?or have you already made up your mind?
you’ve ignored every reference i’ve made(IE:bin laden/bush connection,evidence of other elements in the wtc attack,etc,etc,etc.)
i don’t know what happened,but i can’t accept the given explanation.i think at least there’s proof of prior knowlege
but that’s just me…
i’ll post what i think is interesting-
some will agree,some not
it’s ok…

I just edited the above posted…actually added.

I’m not saying there is no connection between Bush, and Bin. I have niether evidence to support of disprove such a claim.
I do remember a few years back something comes to mind… Oh yea, the IRAN contra scandal, was it?

It does seem common knowlege where alot of the weapons came from for most of those groups in the mid-east.

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
Did you go to any of these sites ?


Honestly, yes the one. But as soon as I saw all the evidence was being layed out to support a bias hypothesis, I left.
I’m not going to get my information from a source that is twisting it to meet a set ajenda. If I can find the same accounts within context, and without anothers authors objectives I will consider adding it to the evidence.


<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
did you do any research?or have you already made up your mind?

yes, and no

<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
you’ve ignored every reference i’ve made


I haven’t ignored anything. I prefer to withhold a decision until all the relevant evidence is sifted through and analized with a objective mind.


keep shinin’

jerm :cool:

"And now, any evidence you uncover along the way is only going to support you conclusion."huh?evidence would support a conclusion of some sort,thats how it works.like i said(i don’t think you’re even reading these posts)i haven’t made up my mind -i’m considering ALL the evidence,or clues to it,no matter where i find it.i don’t think you are doing that.whats your point?ALL conspiracy theories are wrong?,only what your known sources are credible?,the bush gang is credible?nothing you don’t know already is true?there’s no possibility of anything anywhere like i propose?whatever

Quote (audiobru wrote: May 30 2006 @ 12:08)
the pentagon recently released this “video” of the 9/11 strike
have you seen it?

Yes.

Quote (audiobru wrote: June 01 2006 @ 14:13)
how many facts do you need?

It’s not the number of facts but the creditablity of said facts.

Quote (audiobru wrote: June 01 2006 @ 17:14)
like i said(i don’t think you’re even reading these posts)i haven’t made up my mind

Really?
Quote (audiobru wrote: May 30 2006 @ 22:59)
i don’t believe we know the truth around these events,that’s all

Certainly seems like you’ve made up your mind to me, even without the supporting evidence. Hence any evidence you do find is going to point to the already stated belief.

be·lieve
Audio pronunciation of “Believe” ( P ) Pronunciation Key (b-lv)
v. be·lieved, be·liev·ing, be·lieves
v. tr.

1. To accept as true or real:

Quote (audiobru wrote: June 01 2006 @ 17:14)
whats your point?


Touche’. :p
I’m having trouble finding yours. Too many contradicting statements I guess.

Quote (audiobru wrote: June 01 2006 @ 17:14)
ALL conspiracy theories are wrong?

No, but many of them do have some basis in fact, then are built from there.

Quote (audiobru wrote: June 01 2006 @ 17:14)
only what your known sources are credible?

I don’t have any known sources. But when you read something with an objective mind, you tend to hear any bias intent rather quickly.

Quote (audiobru wrote: June 01 2006 @ 17:14)
the bush gang is credible?

As I have asked in the past, don’t put words in my mouth.
I didn’t even know Bush was part of a gang.

Quote (audiobru wrote: May 30 2006 @ 22:59)
nothing you don’t know already is true?

On the contrary, much of what I don’t know is true.
But in order to learn something new, I must first let go of what I already believe and listen to the facts without preconception. :)

Quote (audiobru wrote: May 30 2006 @ 22:59)
there’s no possibility of anything anywhere like i propose?


There are alot of possibilities in life. But the probability of one hearing them all when one has a preconception is limited.

Quote (audiobru wrote: May 30 2006 @ 22:59)
whatever


You obviously have reached your end. At least that’s what I come to believe that word to mean at the end of a rant. :;):

I have answered all of your questions to me since page one.
Sorry if my answers offened. i assure you I am keeping an open mind about these things you have presented. And I thank you.

peace be with you,

jerm :cool:

you clip up my posts and respond to the segments of sentances?you completely misunderstand where i’m comming from.like i said, i’m not selling you anything,you are very confused…
it’s like Laurie Anderson says;don’t attempt to appear more intellegent than you really are…we disagree-get it?don’t dis me cause you don’t …once again,i said “for your consideration”-i don’t have to prove squat to you

now,please young friend,have the last word i’m sure you are waiting for…:slight_smile: