Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The cause of terrorism - An Article...

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ghostsoldier


Everyone saw the reaction to 9/11, yet non of them seem to realise that the US has done this and more to so many more people... Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki... you cant tell me all those people died because they were all "the bad guys"?!?



Well there goes any credibility you had if you ever had any.......gezz

Well crap you better throw Dresden in also, or Tokyo for that matter.




[edit on 7-3-2005 by edsinger]

[edit on 7-3-2005 by edsinger]




posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 10:02 PM
link   


Originally posted by edsinger
Well there goes any credibility you had if you ever had any.......gezz


Elaborate on this please...

Im making a statement, 3000 people die in the twin towers... How many incoents have been killed in US bombings? This is all Im saying...



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Well ok so his title doesnt mention the IRA, but lets be seriuos a minute, who is behind 95% of the worlds Terrrorism in the last 20 years?


As I said he doesnt pull punches and neither do I?


1. Define Terrorism for me
2. Was Iraq the Most Dangerous Place against the world?
3. See #1

If you want to go by "Defintion" of terrorism, Im sure the US leads it. Im throwing in murder, kidnappings, rape cases... etc etc .. If you go by the Actual defintion. It seems to me, at least, that this definition has been twisted since 9-11. I dunno, before going into Iraq, I thought that North Korea and Syria were more dangerous to the world. Some might even throw in Israel. In all honesty, I have seen nothing but a hatred against the US I have never seen before. I dunno if it was after the Iraq invasion, or I was just blind before.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 11:01 PM
link   
Well terrorism is a tactic of war isn't it?

So, the cause of a tactic of war must be "to gain some advantage."

Now let us ask the question "quo bono," who benefitted from "terrorism?"

Whoopie, the military industrial complex, I mean the "arsenal of democracy."

Now our mainstream media of course has "locked down," a story of what happened on September 11, 2001. That story says Osama bin Laden directed and financed everything, and it was 19 Saudi Arabians, whoops less than that, uh oh the FBI says it does not know. There are lots of whoops to this whole thing, but the same lockstep story keeps filling the minds of most people who are portrayed as basically NASCAR fans or Professional Wrestling fans. Such a huge intellect cannot be convinced otherwise! Hey I like both sports, but I also like to read the Classics, Shakespeare, and technical journals.

Now the cause of "terrorism," is that it is a tactic of war, and all tactics of war are applied during war by all sides to greater and lesser degrees. Of course when the "good guys do it," we are blind to it, or it is "justified."

Now please research 911, figure out how buildings do not collapse after fires, except for the trade center, and they do not collapse at the rate of gravity unless there is great assistance, or rather ordnance strategically and tactically placed. Larry Silverstein said on that day, about Building 7, "we are going to pull it," an industry term for controlled demolition. He said it on Public TV.

Ed please are you and others fooling yourself too much on this one? It just looks so silly, with some thoughtful Googling even a 9 year old can master and recognize with 4th grade reading skills. Oh and others here, oh well I guess maybe you just have to make a living and have to agree with everyone else. Some of you might just be on the payroll, okay I give up, go pay your bills this way. For me I have alternative futures.

[edit on 8-3-2005 by SkipShipman]



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by ghostsoldier


Originally posted by edsinger
Well there goes any credibility you had if you ever had any.......gezz


Elaborate on this please...

I'm making a statement, 3000 people die in the twin towers... How many innocents have been killed in US bombings? This is all Im saying...


Hiroshima and Nagasaki and 911?? We were at war with the Japanese, not so in this case, just bad comparison imho.

As for all the conspiracy crap about 911 being an inside job, just think Roswell here ok.......you have been duped.

No way Bin Ladin would not have taken credit for something HE didn't do, it is not his style.....oh I forgot, he is still employed by the CIA right?




posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger

No way Bin Ladin would not have taken credit for something HE didn't do, it is not his style.....oh I forgot, he is still employed by the CIA right?



LOL is right. In fact bin Laden in his verified video denies having anything to do with September 11, 2001. Subsequently the most sloppy bin Laden doppleganger with a broad nose, "takes credit." Oh and yes when you have millions to burn, who needs to be on a "CIA payroll?" Nonetheless bin Laden had great help from the CIA during the Soviet occupation, and it is commonly said as in many other persuasions, "Once CIA, always CIA." It would be laughable, except the record shows what it shows. There is no plausible deniability remaining on the fact that bin Laden was during the Soviet-Afghani conflict a CIA asset. But who needs plausibility anymore, when your overlords own the newspapers and concentrate ownership to an even greater extent than ever before. After all "we make reality now, because we are an Empire," the Bush people say.

[edit on 7-3-2005 by SkipShipman]



posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Sometimes you conspiracy nuts crack me up, in all honesty I bet Bush is laughing when he reads that crap, if he even bothers.



posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
who is behind 95% of the worlds Terrrorism in the last 20 years?



Estimates:

Clandestine operations of western superpowers: 40%
Radical Islamists supported by them: 30%
Marxist rebels and revolutionaries in third world countries: 20%
Crazy rebels without a cause: 5%.


[edit on 8-3-2005 by MaskedAvatar]



posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 07:29 PM
link   
All though I think those figures are high, I guess the definition of terrorism that you and I have are different,

you would consider the Contras terrorists, I would not. I do not remember them blowing up supermarkets and such.

One example, in Columbia these freaks kill judges but do not deliberately pick random civilians to kill or do they?



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar


Originally posted by edsinger
who is behind 95% of the worlds Terrrorism in the last 20 years?



Estimates:

Clandestine operations of western superpowers: 40%
Radical Islamists supported by them: 30%
Marxist rebels and revolutionaries in third world countries: 20%
Crazy rebels without a cause: 5%.


[edit on 8-3-2005 by MaskedAvatar]


with all the militias and bandits in Africa sweeping across the land laying waste to many of the interior countries, that 5% has got to be completely wrong.



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 12:46 PM
link   
This passage from the article quoted by Ed cracks me up:


One of the primary barriers to the Islamic takeover of the world has been the western powers, most specifically, the United States.


because it sort of contains a corollary which sounds like that: one of the primary barriers to the American takeover of the world has been Islam.



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita
because it sort of contains a corollary which sounds like that: one of the primary barriers to the American takeover of the world has been Islam.


Gee I don't see it that way, in 1945-48 Islam was not much of a threat now was it? Your are grasping at straws.



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Sometimes you conspiracy nuts crack me up, in all honesty I bet Bush is laughing when he reads that crap, if he even bothers.

Sometimes you conservative blind sheep crack me up, in all honesty bush is probably laughing when he see's how he controls the masses of the most powerful country of the world, which he bothers to do.



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by wang
in all honesty bush is probably laughing when he see's how he controls the masses of the most powerful country of the world


The funny part is your sincere about this.......talk about duped.



posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 02:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger

Originally posted by wang
in all honesty bush is probably laughing when he see's how he controls the masses of the most powerful country of the world


The funny part is your sincere about this.......talk about duped.


I hardly consider having an opinion different from you being duped... In fact I would go as far as to say that YOU edsinger have been duped... By years of primary and secondary schooling, by years of patriotic media/proganda, by years of living in a rich country, by years of social conditioning and probably most of all by you beleiving everything your goverment says it stands for without questioning it, without making up your own beleifs...

Its not even Bush that is "masterminding" all this... its been happening in your country for decades... The problem with Americans that think like you is that you are Patriotic to the point that you are ignorant to anything happening outside your own country, and ignorant to things you cant see on TV.

Bush isn't laughing at us, he's laughing because no-one can do anything about it.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for being a war with Japan, and using A-Bombs... Islamic "terrorists" are at war with America, they just dont have the billions of dollars you have to make nuclear weapons....

[edit on 10-3-2005 by ghostsoldier]



posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 03:05 AM
link   
How is Nagasaki and Hiroshima not terrorism?

By the current US definitions, Terrorism is the targetting of civilians. So, in a war, it's ok to wipe out civilians?

I certainly harbour no love for the Japanese in WW2, but i do believe the act itself was used to cause terror among the Japanese and force them to surrender.



posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by rapier28
How is Nagasaki and Hiroshima not terrorism?

By the current US definitions, Terrorism is the targetting of civilians. So, in a war, it's ok to wipe out civilians?

I certainly harbour no love for the Japanese in WW2, but i do believe the act itself was used to cause terror among the Japanese and force them to surrender.



Well then I guess the whole thing is moot, the Minuteman were terrorists were they not?

NO, why? They did not kill civilians , women and Children and then BRAG about it. the Japanese were no different the the Germans of Dresden, and that is a sad thing yes but that was 50 years ago and that war was in a different time and the stakes were a bit different but you are probably to young to even recognize that.

You can go ahead and call the WWII veterans terrorists, but don't do it in my presence ok?

[edit on 10-3-2005 by edsinger]



posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 09:38 PM
link   
In World War 2, you a-bombed the Japanese because it was a war.

Today, Al-Queda are attacking America because it is a war.

Nowdays, even if they suicide bomb a tank, they are still called Terrorists.



posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by rapier28
In World War 2, you a-bombed the Japanese because it was a war.

Today, Al-Queda are attacking America because it is a war.

Nowdays, even if they suicide bomb a tank, they are still called Terrorists.



Last I checked they were blowing up funerals......some warriors huh?



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 01:43 AM
link   


Originally posted by edsinger
... but that was 50 years ago and that war was in a different time and the stakes were a bit different but you are probably to young to even recognize that.

You can go ahead and call the WWII veterans terrorists, but don't do it in my presence ok?


Stakes were different? I dont see how they are different, except for the fact that this time its you, America, that is taking over the world... And the "terrorists" are doing everything they can to stop it... And 99% of Americans don't realise it, because your ignorant to anything that doesn't affect you personally... Not to mention the fact that you are brainwashed from the day you are born, until the day you die.

Do you think that if they could legitimise their army they'd be resorting to such tactics?

EDIT:
By the way, if you could ask the pilots who dropped those two bombs, you know what I think they would say... "They have nightmares about it every-time they close their eyes..."

[edit on 11-3-2005 by ghostsoldier]





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join