Bill Clinton says 9/11 doubters are idiots

On the campaign trail for Hilary, Bill Clinton was heckled
by someone in the crowd concerning the 9/11 truth movement
saying it was an inside job and Bill responds calling the truth
movement idiots.

Bill Clinton calls 9/11 truthers idiots

i would have to agree with mr clinton on this. i dont really like the man but in my eyes hes been right twice now. the first time was a *SNIP SNIP* in the white house. if i had the chance i would film such actions in the oval office

[edit on 31-1-2008 by NGC2736]

Bill Clinton has little room calling anyone an idiot, with his record of sexual decisions made while he was in the whitehouse.

What else is he going to say, also most supporting hillary are going to believe the government version anyway.

He also has said this plenty of times, so we know his position.

Bill also said he had no sexual relations with monica.

Case closed.

Originally posted by abovetech
Bill also said he had no sexual relations with monica.

wouldn't you say that too if your sex life was scrutinized
on national TV.

According to mens polls app 60% of married men have
extramarital affairs.

And 50% of Americans say President Clinton's adultery makes
his moral standard "about the same as the average married man,''
according to a Time-CNN poll.

Infidelity statistics

So I would consider his actions to be normal based on
the average married man.

And therefore which of us here can truly stand up and say
that we have not done the same exact thing .....
and lied about it when we got home ???

So if we take away his credibility based solely on that
basis, then by in large the majority of the population
is guilty as well and should not cast the first stone.

He just got caught is the only difference

I didn't start this thread with the intention of stirring
up conjecture on Bill's history, just his thoughts
on the 9/11 truther statements.

Many people clinging to the absurd "Official Conspiracy Theory" put forward by those who have benefitted from this heinous crime are self-proclaimed "Conservatives" and hate every sinew in Bill Clinton's "Liberal" body. They will carry on incessantly about how this obviously dispicable man is a pathological liar who has built a career out of deceit, and will quickly rattle off many cases of "Slick Willies" provably false statements at the slightest provocation to do so.

My question to them is this: If Bill Clinton tells you something, do you believe it?

This SHOULD be a bright red flag popping up to anybody who considers themselves to be a "Conservative". Personally, if Bill, or Billary for that matter, say anything, I immediately am suspicious. If the Deceitful Duo tell me the sun is going to rise tommorrow, I might consider running to Wal Mart to stock up on flashlight batteries and propane lanterns!

I liked Bill Clinton back in the day... but he also just said that Obama's win in S.C. is frivolous because Jesse Jackson did it twice in the '80s and lost.

reply to post by ItsHumanNature


I believe Bill will lie to save his skin, but I don't believe that every word out of his mouth is a lie. I'm not a Clinton fan, but....I don't just write off his statement of opinion as a lie.

It is getting pretty hackeneyed...this 9/11 stuff.

Redundant...no real progress, no new revelations. The arguements have been heard and the "alternative explainations" are in the court of public opinion.

Everytime I see someone spouting these "Inside Job" claims in a room of people-- they are Booed mercilessly, laughed off as idiots, or rolled off like hari Krishna's handing out carnations at an airport -- ya sorta feel sorry for them, but ya really just want then to just go away from your space.

To me, this says the court of public opinion has made its verdict.







It gets sadder and less relevent everyday.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by ItsHumanNature

 

I believe Bill will lie to save his skin, but I don't believe that every word out of his mouth is a lie. I'm not a Clinton fan, but....I don't just write off his statement of opinion as a lie.

"If" 9/11 was an inside job, the planning for it would certainly have to have begun during Bill Clintons' Presidency . He would therefore be involved. He would therefore be "lying to save his skin" now wouldn't he?

Originally posted by ItsHumanNature

reply to post by ItsHumanNature

 

"If" 9/11 was an inside job, the planning for it would certainly have to have begun during Bill Clintons' Presidency . He would therefore be involved. He would therefore be "lying to save his skin" now wouldn't he?

"If" 9/11 was an inside job indeed. How's this for a theory then- Clinton was responsible for 9/11 instead of Bush, to try to make him look bad.

reply to post by SimonSays


No surprise. What else could he say? To allow for any doubt in the eyes of the media, to even vaguely hint that 9/11 was an inside job, invites political disaster, not just his, but Hilary's and perhaps any Democratic ticket in November.

Besides, if there was an inside job for 9/11, would Bill be aware of it? He was no longer in office, was an adversary of the current administration, and no longer a Whitehouse insider.

While there are numerous theories that suggest 9/11 was pre-planned, no one has produced overwhelming evidence, no smoking gun. If you work in Washington, you won't latch on to a politically career-ending theory unless you can see the end game and know that you will come out smelling like roses.

And if 9/11 was pre-planned, don't you think that the perpetrators of such an enormous, far-reaching crime would have little trouble extinguishing the voice of any serious, high-profile cynics? Such a protest, then, might be more than just political suicide.

If the events of 9/11 were somehow known to be the work of this government or its shadow government, I would expect both sides in Washington to keep a lid of the horrid truth. Such a revelation would undermine the fabric of our social and political system and bring the whole works crashing down. The short term effects would be catastrophic to our economy and all would suffer.

Those that perceived the 'real' truth would best be served trying to overthrow the current regime internally, working to gain political power in the hope of preventing such measures in the future, rather than blowing the whistle on the past.

Originally posted by ItsHumanNature
"If" 9/11 was an inside job, the planning for it would certainly have to have begun during Bill Clintons' Presidency . He would therefore be involved. He would therefore be "lying to save his skin" now wouldn't he?

That's debateable. Depending on the scale of the "inside job", there was enough time for the new administration to plan it. Many of the top players were together before taking power in groups such as PNAC.

If the extent of the inside job extends only to taking existing anti-american sentiment and willing muslim extremists and providing them the opportunity and perhaps resources, then planning need not date back to the Clinton Adminstration.

I read this book about brainwashing , and it clearly explained the effects and gave a number of great case studies. One of the things it highlighted is the difficulty to unbrainwash or deprogramme people, because they have been programmed to shut out any influences that may change their view of things. Everyone knows how this feels, you hit this point where you dont want to listen to someone, maybe because you feel you cant take the truth. Most people do it as kids, when they put their fingers in there ears and shout "LA LA LA LA LA". Watching this video it cracks me up the way the people can't handle this guy challenging their reality, and they all create a massive furor to drown him out. Suspending rationality is what americans are taught best. Thankfully for me, people in Britain where I live don't believe a word any politician says.

Originally posted by AJ Lavender
reply to post by SimonSays

 

While there are numerous theories that suggest 9/11 was pre-planned, no one has produced overwhelming evidence, no smoking gun. If you work in Washington, you won't latch on to a politically career-ending theory unless you can see the end game and know that you will come out smelling like roses.

In the last few posts comments have been made alluding to "no evidence linking insiders with involvement in 9/11" This is of untrue of couse- there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence, but no paper trail or confession.

Does this mean that people should not even consider the possibility?

Many criminal cases producing convictions do so without a single shred of physical evidence or a confession from the accused. The case is circumstantial , relying on the motive, means, and opportunity of the accused to establish culpabilty for the crime.

A classic case that bears striking parallels to the crimes of 9/11 is the crimes of the Nazi regime of Adolph Hitler, specifically the systematic murder of millions of Jews.

It is generally accepted that Hitler personally planned and implemented this mass slaughter. If you ask most people they will say "the evidence against Hitler is overwhelming" he is therefore guilty. To date there is not one shred of physical evidence or of course a confession by Adolph to the ordering of or involvement in these crimes. And this crime was carried out on a vast scale over several years involving hundreds of thousands of people in its commission.The reason people have concluded that he is guilty is because he stated that he wanted to do it in his Manifesto "Mein Kampf"(My Veiw) this is known as "Motive", and when he rose to power and gained the means to carry out his publicly stated goal it happened.

Motive, Means, Opportunity

Does this mean that in the absence of a document titled "Our plan to seize total control of America by carrying out a false flag attack upon its citizens" signed by those in charge of the operation or of a public confession by Dick Cheney and others who are accused of the crimes of Black Tuesday that they are innocent?

The government insiders who are accused by many of carrying out this crime also had a Manifesto. It is called the "Project for the New American Century" and its signatories include Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, And the Goldenboy of the Bush Crime Family Jeb. In a document titled rebuilding Americas defenses they state their goal of total American hegemony worldwide and alluding to what would be necessary to happen for them to make this desire a reality-namely a "New Pearl Harbor" to get Americans behind this insane agenda. When they gained the means and opportunity to make this "New Pearl Harbor" happen- IT DID.

Motive, Means, Opportunity


Heres a link to the PNAC site for those who have never bothered to read who they blindly support. The second one is the document "Rebuilding Americas Defenses"

www.newamericancentury.org...

www.newamericancentury.org...

Nowhere in the PNAC statement does is say anything about it taking an inside job attack against the US, to get everyone on board. Do you think anyone would be stupid enough to announce the keystone to their plan being to attack their own country, and putting it in writing? Additionally, I haven't seen anything from PNAC that would lead me to believe that they have any disloyalty to their own country. If anything they're wanting to do things that are for America's benefit, not some shadow government, the Military Industrial Complex, Oil companies, etc...

No, people should always consider the possibility of an inside job. But the onus of proof lies with the accusers. And yes, with something as mammoth as 9/11, the evidence needs to be absolute and damning.

The difference between the Nazi trials post WWII and any investigation post 9/11 is the political mood. Nazism was defeated. It was okay to persecute those that practiced it. Post 9/11, the same administration is in office. The enemy is not some defeated European nation practicing genocide, but our own country. What sane political group would be interested in the downfall of its own republic?

I agree with much you say; the administration had motive and opportunity. The PNAC sends shivers down my spine. I have not given the 9/11 conspiracy theories more than a cursory examination, so don't want to comment about the reality of it without conducting more research. But the odds are overwhelmingly stacked against those that believe in a conspiracy. As an earlier poster stated, too many simply refuse to believe.

The court of public opinion has found the U.S. innocent. For the minority of believers to overturn this decision will require more than circumstantial evidence.

The ' country ' of the PNAC crowd is ISRAEL as the capitol of the NWO. It is NOT the USA. How many of those NEOCON's are dual Israeli and US citizens? A lot, statistically outrageous.Their loyalty is to Israel and to hell with America. We are but a money spigot for them to tap until they have achieved their goal of regional domination in the middle east and the center ( jerusalem ) of the NWO will be right in their hands.

Bill Clinton covered up the Mena, Arkansas coc aine smuggling operation, which caused the murders of two boys who got in the way.Bill is as dirty as a man can be. Politics and money and power are his Gods. As well as lust of the flesh, of course. The elite tend to enjoy themselves as much as possible while they avoid the gaze of a Holy God.

Clinton knows darned well that the Towers were brought down; he told a reported once that there ' is a shadow government and I cannot tell them what to do". He knows not to make enemies of the perps, as they are in power now. He is a slick and amoral man, with Hillary as cold as an ice pick and shrewd as an robber baron. Great couple. No souls but great talkers.

9-11 was so obviously an inside job that only those who are ignorant of the facts or those who are a part of the events or coverup could possible accept the excuses given for the events seen. A giant psy op with a media firmly controlled and all elements in place. The planners were top notch and well funded and equipped, with access to the sites and coverage from the military aspect. All bases covered. Only a fool could believe the official story given the evidence, or someone in denial. No other way.

reply to post by eyewitness86

Great post, Very concise and accurate.(funny how people who make the most prescient posts seem to always fall on the same side of the "truth fence" )

Something I think you have overlooked regarding the agenda of the string pullers however is this: Senator Prescott Bush, GHW Bushs' father and role model, was extremely anti- semitic and openly supported the Nazi regime and strove to get America into WWII on Nazi Germanys' side.

Is it possible that the "Jews did it" theory is actually a ruse using reverse psycology to portray them as the villains? The more I dig into 9/11 the more I see reverse psycology employed and one of their real goals may very well be the destruction of Israel.