CONS: Project Northwoods. America's plan to attack America.

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 03:29 PM
link   
I wonder if this same group dreamed up the Gulf of Tonkin incident? Someone was asking about a 9/11 motivation. It is an awful coincidence that the President of Afghanistan is a an ex-Unocal employee. The company that for years have been trying to build a pipeline in Afghanistan.




posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 04:26 PM
link   
I'm coming across the usual suspects detracting the idea of this operation ignorantly and blinded in heavy patriotic innuendo regardless of the fact of the princinple of the matter; the United States governments respected advisory councel suggested unfathomal sacred ends justified by unhuman and murderous means.

I read this operation thoroughly and have heard of it before vaugely suggested by Noam Chomskey - a man we can agree more than likely new of this before the rest of the world did - and have come to conclude that though the fruition of this operation was defunct, it still remains factual that such tactics and strategies are being used currently by this very administration to faciliate the current war in the Middle East coupled with harsh and blatant realizations of follies members have found in this current war; from Nick Berg, to the constant debate over 9/11, and even the endless suicide bombers appearing out of thin air, or even the propaganda war propogated, there seems to be an eery and coincedential atmosphere beset....

The question remains, what do we do now that we have such information, and exactly how do we faciliate this unto the war on the Bush Administration?

Luxifero



posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Luxifero
The question remains, what do we do now that we have such information, and exactly how do we faciliate this unto the war on the Bush Administration?

Luxifero


The fact that were discussing it on a pretty large site is one of the best ways to get it out there. You can bet that members here are also members on other boards and are spreading the word to them as well.

I don't think were going to be getting this into the mainsteam media simply because they tell the people what the government wants them to tell the people.

Spread the word far and wide and see where the chips fall. You never know, it may be the beginning of a revolution of thought, the tsunami that takes the radical right wing down.

I can only pray for such.

Wupy



posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 05:01 PM
link   
This is a important and informative thread Wupy....kudoes dude
.........I sent the link for this thread to my email contacts......"HI FRIENDS & FAMILY!"

I figure the best thing I can do on a personal level to somehow put up a 'fight' against such plots and schemes, is to share the awareness with as many folks as who may bother to read it........your right about getting the info OUT is the best way possible to harold some kind of change.



posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Luxifero
I'm coming across the usual suspects detracting the idea of this operation ignorantly and blinded in heavy patriotic innuendo regardless of the fact of the princinple of the matter; the United States governments respected advisory councel suggested unfathomal sacred ends justified by unhuman and murderous means.

The question remains, what do we do now that we have such information, and exactly how do we faciliate this unto the war on the Bush Administration?

Luxifero

The first thing I'd suggest you do is to get some thicker rope, because the strings that you think tie Operation Northwoods to the the Iraq war are about to break. The facts that you speak of in the Iraq war need to be proven; until then, they remain unfounded theories.

But this is a distraction and deserves it's own thread.



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
The facts that you speak of in the Iraq war need to be proven; until then, they remain unfounded theories.


I agree with that. However, you conveniently avoid mentioning that this is one of the most secretive administrations in my lifetime.

If our government was prepared to do what is represented by those Northwood documents only a few short years ago, then what has materially changed now? Why would the risk be lower that such depravity *might* operate within our government today?

It's ludicrous to assert that someone is not guilty if you don't have any meaningful opportunity to verify otherwise. I have read in other threads how I should be unafraid of the government's monitoring of my activities- as long as I have nothing to hide. Why does that logic not apply to our government? ...This administration?

What I do not trust is the lack of accountability....

I do not believe America stands for the horrors found in the Northwood document. I also believe that it is our responsibility to remain vigilant against such examples.

America was not found in that document.


[edit on 9-1-2006 by loam]



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 04:59 AM
link   
This was a good and important find and I have tried to read up on other threads which have discussed Northwoods prior to this.

My thoughts are that Northwoods did not call for taking of lives to facilitate those plans. What happened on 911 to the towers took about 3000 lives plus the passengers on the aircrafts. Almost all of the Cuba plans were to take place off US soil with some harassment taking place in Florida.

Perhaps I have not understood what I have read and I am sure if that is the case I will be corrected.

I have also read much of the material posted about 911 and must admit there are questions still unanswered in my opinion.
1. The way the buildings fell.
2. The time lapse between American flight 11's last transmission and when the Pentagon was hit. The fighter planes did not arrive in time to do any good anywhere. Something fishy about that whole picture. IMHO



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 05:59 AM
link   
Actually in my mind it is not that bigger jump to see this Operation Northwoods updated and carried out on 9/11/01 by our government and then to proceed on into the war in Afghanistan and Iraq to achieve their purpose.

Take into consideration the technology we have protecting our skies and how it had never failed before that day. Everyday before 9/11/01 NORAD worked just fine, jets went up and intercepted planes when neccessay without fail. On that date not one but 4 planes were not intercepted even though the last two were known about for a long time and we even knew where they were headed.

I swear I feel like the little guy that played on Fantasy island running around screaming, "The plane boss the plane!"



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 06:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by loam

Originally posted by jsobecky
The facts that you speak of in the Iraq war need to be proven; until then, they remain unfounded theories.


I agree with that. However, you conveniently avoid mentioning that this is one of the most secretive administrations in my lifetime.

Here we go again. I also conveniently avoided mentioning that Harry Bellafonte is down in Venezuela badmouthing the USA, or that it's 23 degrees F on my patio right now. What you say has no relevance.


If our government was prepared to do what is represented by those Northwood documents only a few short years ago, then what has materially changed now? Why would the risk be lower that such depravity *might* operate within our government today?

Thr gov't was not prepared to carry out Northwoods; that's why it failed. And that happened nearly a half-century ago. I cited McNamara and said he deserved a medal. Do you know who he was and why I suggested he get a medal for his Northwoods role? It doesn't sound like you do.


It's ludicrous to assert that someone is not guilty if you don't have any meaningful opportunity to verify otherwise.

You don't belong in the USA; we operate entirely differently. We presume innocence, and witch-hunters must prove guilt.


I do not believe America stands for the horrors found in the Northwood document. I also believe that it is our responsibility to remain vigilant against such examples.


So what? You try to make it sound like you are alone in that thinking. You're not; you're not special. The overwhelming majority of Americans are of the same mind.

This thread is about Project Northwoods and the times and events surrounding it. It seems like it's a great opportunity for you to pollute it with your typical anti-Bush rhetoric. It isn't. Please start another thread if that is your intention.



[edit on 9-1-2006 by jsobecky]



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 07:28 AM
link   
This is a document that was created by a few memebers of the military and it was never 'officially' submitted or used. It was a proposal, one of many, and one that was not used.

I remember the first time I read about it I was shocked, until I did a little more research and found and unbiased site that explained the true nature of the document, not put into a 9/11 context.

There are ideas and proposals created everyday at the Pentagon and other military institutions througout the country. If we were to see the documents on how they would control the population in case of invasion, most people would immediately think it is a Big Brother plan, when in effect, it is a proposal. or in other words, an idea.

Now, I am not stating that my country has not done things to influenece events not only here, but abroad, I am stating that this is a good piece of information that can cause anger against our government and that is it. Why does it seem that anything that is Left wing wants me to fear my government, when eerything Right wing wants me to fear the world? which is more important, the threat rom foreign attack, or from my fellow countrymen, becasue that is what you suggest when you attempt to state that the United States is out to get and control it's citizens with a staged 9/11 that was scripted from a 40 y/o document.

Our country does not need to attack itself, there is enough hate out there that we fend off everyday to last a lifetime.



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
You don't belong in the USA; we operate entirely differently. We presume innocence, and witch-hunters must prove guilt.


That's not strictly true, it depends on if you go through a Civil Court or Criminal Court.

In a Civil Court all that needs to be proven, is their is a strong chance that the person/group could have done those actions and doesn't use the burden of resonable doubt.

Plus...people still stereotype.



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
This thread is about Project Northwoods and the times and events surrounding it. It seems like it's a great opportunity for you to pollute it with your typical anti-Bush rhetoric. It isn't. Please start another thread if that is your intention.


This thread absolutely is about a possible connection to the Bush Administration and a possible forerunner to 9/11. It’s mentioned in the very first post and on every page of this thread. Northwoods itself is old news. The possible connection to 9/11 is the news of this thread. It's uncomfortable, but it's what we're talking about.


Originally posted by Mahree
My thoughts are that Northwoods did not call for taking of lives to facilitate those plans.


How about the war that the whole thing was meant to cause? Do you think no lives would have been lost in the war?

For those who think that 'taking lives' is some kind of a definitive threshold that our government would not cross; that Northwoods is different than 9/11 because the Northwoods plan took no lives, and therefore could not possibly be the plan for 9/11, I invite you to consider the character of a government that would set up a fake situation just to cause a war. A war means lost lives. A war, based on false pretenses as outlined in the Northwoods document would most certainly have cost the lives of our military.

So saying that the planes would have been emptied, doesn’t mean that nobody would have died. People, Americans, would have been knowingly sacrificed, not to mention whoever was dragged into this false war.


[edit on 9-1-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 08:31 AM
link   
All the talk about 911 here, is, imo, a bit of a distraction. Operation Northwoods is disturbing enough as it is. If 911 was a false flag operation (which it wasn't) they didn't need Operation Northwoods to do it.

The people that ploted Operation Northwoods were, effectively, rejected and derailed, they were sidelined within the establishment, to a various degrees anyway, and the cabal (literally) pretty much ended with Northwoods. Rumsfeld wasn't a student of Lemnitz or anything like that.


Originally posted by jsobecky
This didn't happen in a vacuum.

I understand, the threat of internationalist revolutionary communism was very real and very great. Still does not justify treachery.


If guilty are to be named, start with Eisenhower.

Eisenhower had nothign to do with this actual plot to kill americans, to betray an army in the field, and to destroy private american property. This is like saying 'Its ok that I killed a bunch of people, I wasn't hugged enough as a child'. This was a plot hatched by a group of people, I agree, there was a context, and they weren't doing it without reason. Regardless, it was traitorous, and traitors should be executed. The romans used to consider this sort fo thing similar to parricide. When someone commited actual parricide, they'd put them into a sack with a wild and ravenous babboon and a visious snake, sew it closed, and dump them into the Tiber. Thats how foul being a traitor to the patria is.


But don't condemn the whole USA,
I'm not. Indeed, once again the incredible sagacity of the Founders comes through here, nearly two hundred years after they made the government. They made the office of the president the cheif commander of the entire military, and thus put civilian control over the military. It was that civilian control that stopped this, in the person of kennedy. And kennedy can hardly be said to be soft on communists, he started vietnam and went to the brink of nuclear war over cuba. But even he realized that this Operation Northwoods was unacceptable.
The military is, as often described by its own members, 'the biggest, meanest dog on the block'. It serves to destroy the enemy when Congress says "Sick'em!", not to determine when there is a war nor manufacture one. Its supposed to be made up of warriors, not policy makers.


the office of the presidency,

The presidency is the hero of this story. Its the actual figures that came up with and recommended this plan that are the criminals.


And it in no way justifies a conclusion about 9/11.

I'd agree, that there is no need to propose that 911 was a new northwoods, since al-qaida clearly exists and has attacked the US before.

However, if you think Northwoods woudl've been justified in the face of the admitedly wildly dangerous communists, would, if true, a new northwoods have been worth, say, pacifying the entire middle east, stamping out radical islamist fundamentalism, stopping the dangerous social instability wrt islamism that we are seeing in france and now australia, and ensuring the perpetual and proper flow of oil to all civilized nations of the world?
I don't think it'd be worth it, but if betraying an entire army in the field is worth having war with cuba, not even all of communism but cuba, then why wouldn't the same logic apply?


Someone asked, did GWB ever hear about this? What would be your best guess on that?

Of course he heard about it. I doubt 911 was a new northwoods though.


Relentless
but it seems that in the Northwood Project, it would involve no real casualties.

No. That is not the case. Part of Northwoods was to have these manufactured incidents where there were a few servicemen killed. Other parts of it were to blow up factories and commit acts of sabotage and blame it on communist cuban agents. And one plan was to have send in a small US force, inform the cubans about it and give them top secret information about it so they could defeat it. This was a huge conspiracy.

[quopte]muaddib
some military analysts who have been a bit "wacky" in some of their contingencies plans
This was not some 'out-of-the-box' strategizers within the military, this was very high level pentagon brass directly recommending to the president what amounts to acts of treason, and plotting to kill hundreds of americans.


mrwupy
This is just a few lines from Wikipedia on the subject,

I would look for citations outside of wikipedia for something like this.


esdad71
This is a document that was created by a few memebers of the military and it was never 'officially' submitted or used.

This was a plan created by top level brass in the pentagon who'd been higher ups for a long while and submited directly to the president of the US. It doesn't get more official than that. The only reason it never happened was because the civilian government rejected it.



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Here we go again. I also conveniently avoided mentioning that Harry Bellafonte is down in Venezuela badmouthing the USA, or that it's 23 degrees F on my patio right now. What you say has no relevance.


It is no surprise to me that you threw your support to Anne Coulter in that other thread, because your logic here is the very type of intellectual dishonesty I referenced there.

Under your legal view, there can NEVER be a crime if you successfully hide it.

I can clearly see you cheering for the suspect in all those police car chases seen on television...or the murderer disposing of his weapon...or the embezzler diligently using his eraser...

If you can hide it, it didn't happen.
That's ok in your book, isn't it?




Originally posted by jsobecky
Thr gov't was not prepared to carry out Northwoods; that's why it failed. And that happened nearly a half-century ago. I cited McNamara and said he deserved a medal. Do you know who he was and why I suggested he get a medal for his Northwoods role? It doesn't sound like you do.


.....continuing with your sound legal logic, I should then have nothing to fear by constructing written plans to knock off my local bank? In fifty years from now, if I were to actually knock off a bank, discovery of my former document should have no relevance to the prosecution.


Originally posted by jsobecky
You don't belong in the USA;


....which is why I am glad that I do! It protects us from thinking like yours.



Originally posted by jsobecky
we operate entirely differently. We presume innocence, and witch-hunters must prove guilt.


...more sound legal logic....


We are talking about the actions of government. In America, our constitution protects us from the actions of government. It is not the other way around.

Nobody said anything about guilt. You arrived at that word, because people like you have long stopped listening to the lessons history teaches about the perils of unchecked government power.

We are a nation of laws for a reason.


Originally posted by jsobecky

I do not believe America stands for the horrors found in the Northwood document. I also believe that it is our responsibility to remain vigilant against such examples.


So what? You try to make it sound like you are alone in that thinking. You're not; you're not special. The overwhelming majority of Americans are of the same mind.


I assume as much....or we have no hope.


Originally posted by jsobecky
This thread is about Project Northwoods and the times and events surrounding it. It seems like it's a great opportunity for you to pollute it with your typical anti-Bush rhetoric. It isn't. Please start another thread if that is your intention.


Is the problem for you a reading comprehension one?


In any event, I'm not taken in by your agenda... I'm sure your arguments will be viewed more persuasively with others:

mod edit:

Image removed. It's distracting and off topic.

[edit on 9-1-2006 by parrhesia]



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Northwoods did not fail, it was rejected before it started. An idea that was created to be submitted as a way to start a war.

I am not sure that the sitting president even saw the plan, although I am sure he knew about it. Now, seeing as this happened in 62, and there was a certain someone shot in 63, does anyone here think that maybe that is a better direction to go in, and research rather than try to find similarity in Northwoods/9-11.

Remember, Kennedy did not want to go to war with Cuba, nor did he want to go to war with Russia, nor enter the Vietnam conflict. The individuals who presented this idea should be looked into and see if there are connections to the people who supposedly killed JFK. America needed a war for economy, but Kennedy was thinking of lives lost, not money made. If the men behind this would risk the lives of thier own men, how much do you think they valued the life of a president who did not agree with thier views. Remember, Gulf of Tonkin was in 64, after Kennedy was gone with his non approval.

9/11 was an attack on US soil by Al- Qeada, nothing more and nothing less. The only thing hidden in the 9/11 scandal, is that we shot down the plane in PA. to save Washington.





[edit on 9-1-2006 by esdad71]



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

.


Originally posted by Mahree
My thoughts are that Northwoods did not call for taking of lives to facilitate those plans.


How about the war that the whole thing was meant to cause? Do you think no lives would have been lost in the war?

For those who think that 'taking lives' is some kind of a definitive threshold that our government would not cross; that Northwoods is different than 9/11 because the Northwoods plan took no lives, and therefore could not possibly be the plan for 9/11, I invite you to consider the character of a government that would set up a fake situation just to cause a war. A war means lost lives. A war, based on false pretenses as outlined in the Northwoods document would most certainly have cost the lives of our military.


I did get the point that if Northwoods had been enacted a war would have been the result and therefore there would be deaths. I thought that would be obvious so did not bring it up as Northwoods was not enacted and so there wasn't any loss of lives from war.

It seems like a big difference to me from the Northwoods plan to what actually happened and the loss of life on US soil during the 911 attacks.

I really do understand that "war" means the loss of lives of our military.

Yes, it was terrible that such scenarios were envisioned to enable us to instigate attacking Cuba, but wiser heads prevailed and the plans were not carried out. I can be positive enough to think that wiser heads would always prevail to keep the United States from carrying out such deceit upon the American people.



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mahree
It seems like a big difference to me from the Northwoods plan to what actually happened and the loss of life on US soil during the 911 attacks.


It is. There is no question. I don't think anyone in this thread has said that the former proves the latter.

However, it *IS* a disturbing fact that our government would consider such options, even if they were later rejected. It leaves one less confident that in other situations a "sanity check" is applied to such outrageous schemes.

History is replete with examples where more sound judgement was not applied.

List of scandals

Moreover, at least with respect to the intentions demonstrated by the Northwood documents, does it not bother you that some in our government believed it necessary to "manufacture" additional reasons to obtain public consent for a particular course of action? That means they think we are too stupid to otherwise draw sound conclusions on the basis of the actual facts alone of any given situation.

I will never tolerate such manipulation by government. Those tactics have no place in America. We are a nation that supports truth...not deceit.



I can be positive enough to think that wiser heads would always prevail to keep the United States from carrying out such deceit upon the American people.


...which is the "hope" of all wrongdoing... People who do wrong want you to believe in the unlikelihood of their crimes... By definition, they abuse your very trust. It is what contributes to their success.


[edit on 9-1-2006 by loam]



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mahree
It seems like a big difference to me from the Northwoods plan to what actually happened and the loss of life on US soil during the 911 attacks.


Yes, there IS a big difference. And if my suspicions (and those of many others) are correct, the difference is that one was prevented from being carried out and the other one wasn't. And the most powerful 'wiser head' in the Northwoods scenario was killed in a highly questionable assassination the following year, as has been pointed out many times.

I don't understand the distinction about the loss of life "on US soil". Why does that make any difference? Loss of life is loss of life regardless where it takes place. If a government needed the world behind it to carry out a plan, I hardly think the location of the deaths would matter. If anything, it would be important to the people of the USA to have it happen right in their back yard.



but wiser heads prevailed and the plans were not carried out.


Yes. So if one were to succeed with such a plan, the smart thing to do would be to prevent the 'wiser heads' from even knowing about it...



I can be positive enough to think that wiser heads would always prevail to keep the United States from carrying out such deceit upon the American people.


Fair enough. I do not share your positive outlook.
I am much more skeptical, suspicious and cynical.

[edit on 9-1-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Just a couple of add ons for support:

Pearl Harbor was another "controversial" action....

based upon many documents, Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen, to sway public opinion to get the US in the War.

In regards to 9-11 and its connection to Northwoods, there was a very scary article put out by RAND corp in febuary preceeding 9-11.

It stated that the US's new challenge would be terrorism, and its tools to fight it were also new.
It suggested the formation of a homeland security agency, that would collect all the data from other agencies for use in fighting terrorism. It also mentioned the possibility that aircraft used as bombs might be used by terrorists

Now that is not all that scary...
except when 9-11 happened, Bushco "admitted" that homeland security hadn't been a thought, and it would take a little while to construct an agency that could handle terrorism...

except that the plans had already been drawn extensively...

the RAND corp memo and study, was taken off the net shortly after I posted a link on it here...
HUmmmmm, isn't that conveinant?

Connection: the Rand memo could very well be used to lend support that plans had already been considered of where to turn our armed forces after the cold war. but now it dissapeared.
along with all the other suggestions made (many controversial challenges to freedoms)

someday, it will emerge from someones archives as another "Northwoods" document...



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I don't know how you came to these conclusions. Sure, militant Islam (i.e. Al Qaeda, etc.) have desires to grow their armies, but it's the US government and the media that are spreading the fear about it and blowing it entirely out of proportion.


First off, we are going off topic with this, i don't know why you had to start with the "U.S. government is to blame for everything in the world" once again. But to anwser your question, many countries in the world, including France, Germany, Spain, Russia, etc, etc, "are spreading fear about radical Islam"....so get your facts straight and stop the blame game.




Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
And I would venture to say that without the help and support of the US government, Al Qaeda et al would be a struggling ideal in the minds and hearts in a few remote areas of several Middle Eastern countries. Don't forget the support we gave these organizations in the period leading up to 9/11...


And don't forget that then the Russians would be in control of the Middle East by now and maybe things would have turned out differently having more nukes pointed at us. The U.S. was fighting communist Russia back then and the U.S. decided that they should heed back then the phrase "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" and put it to use in the fight against communist Russia. Let's get back on topic please.....


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Have you ever heard of anyone proclaiming that their partner in crime is really their enemy? Many con jobs work on this premise.


Excuse me?....so now all the Radical Islamic tantrum of "the west is evil and the U.S. is satan, etc, etc" is a con job?.....


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Yes, it is real. But is it as prevalent as we're being led to believe? And more importantly, to whom does it owe it's existence and current strength? Who has supported and nurtured it to become the monster fear that it has become since 9/11? Who is benefitting?


Use google and put in "Islamic terrorists "insert European country of choice" and see what you come up with....


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
This is the part of your conclusion that I do not understand. The distraction has been built and fed by those who would benefit from it, in other words, the puppeteers. The rest are just followers.


My part of the conclusion you don't understand?.... You are the one coming up with the generalizations and blaming everything on the U.S. government....not me...

Many other governments also have to combat Islamic radicals and their news media show this in their countries and the world regularly....but I guess it is all done by the U.S. government right Benevolent?




Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
And who sets the regulations on the industries? The government. To whom do these industries give great sums of money to relax the standards and regulations under which they operate? The government.


You have the lawyers to thank for that, and those who have been bought to change the laws, it happens in every country. Now can we stop the "let's blame everything on the U.S." and get back on topic?.... thanks...





new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join