The government lied to us...and they should have

reply to post by jackinthebox



Again, I ask…If the Constitution has been suspended since whatever year and the President is in control….how are the courts able to over ride things? How is it possible to still over ride a veto. How were Nixon and Clinton impeached? They let them do it here and there? For 70+ yrs this has been in place? Total control? The ‘60’s show how “in control” the President was…you’re right. I’m sure there is a reason…………somewhere.
What do you think is the reason to check people’s bag in the subway? Are the subway cops (I don’t what they are called, sorry) snooping? They want to pull out (sorry) porno mags from a person’s bag? I do realize there are bad cops, guys who just want to be bullies…I went through many Criminal Justice classes in college with cops, so believe me I do know…. You said the subway is vital. That makes it all the more tempting of a target. And I do understand the odds on getting killed by a terrorist are almost nothing. If you did nothing and they grabbed you up, then yes, you were mistreated. What they did was wrong and illegal. But cops do not need anything other than a “reasonable suspicion” to stop you. To go into your bag, they need “probable cause.” I have no idea what happened with your particular instance, but maybe, it didn’t have anything to do with the Patriot Act or things of that nature and they were just being jerks. That is something only you will can know.
But you say I have no evidence to go with what I believe. So I guess the Purdue study (which you asked for and I provided)…which truly had nothing to do with 9-11 and says the exact opposite of the CT…is a lie. Are the professors there not studied enough too?
Yes, I agree with you on the shoes…that is stupid. The no using cell phones rule is just as bad.
But to say they are not looking for bombs and knives or things of the such? Huh? Now granted, it would have to be a very simple minded terrorist to think they could get one on board these days, but that is the main reason they are doing it. If not, they are checking my bags because I may bring on…what? Are they worried about my laptop or my portable dvd player?
I will give you benefit of the doubt and say you know more about history than me. If that works for you…great.
You see your example of Nazi Germany as valid…is it still not a scare tactic? Nazi Germany is not a scare tactic? I am not saying you are wrong or right with the example, I am talking about how it is used.

reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi

What is easier? A small group of people with religous zeal and a belief they go to paradise when they kill thousands of people, or an untold number of people thying to hide a plan to blow up a building in their own country and kill thousands of their countrymen at the same time.
You put the numbers out there like it would be a plus to have more people working the project. When you are trying to keep a secret...don't you want as few people to know?
So yes, I do believe it was far easier to attack America in a new way and with just a handful of people.
I'm not sure if it was you or not ( my eyes are loosing their focus...bedtime soon) who asked about the terrorists who are still alive somewhere. If that is true, then yes, the way you think things played out has much more weight.
I heard somewhere on the radio or news they had found several of them. What i didn't see was any pictures of them or any interviews. My thinking would be, if I was one of the people implicated in the worst terrorist attack in history and i am still alive...I want the world to know. But they are from a different culture so maybe that is not an idea natural to them.
I don't know the answer to this, but maybe there is more than one person by the name as the terrorists. There are lots of John Smiths in the US...could it be the same way there? Did the people who did the hijacking use stolen names? Again I have no idea on that and until they match a picture of a guy in Saudi Arabia hanging out with his kids, to one of the guys walking on the plane...second and third hand accounts don't really have a lot of weight.

reply to post by Justin_Case


But not wanting to know because it changes how you see reality to what it truthfully is ... is to me, not a valid excuse to not tell everyone.


Some people would rather not know they have cancer, aids, or some other disease.

Yes, it may be less stressful ... but knowing, they may go through some stress, but in the end, they could end up living a longer life and possibly healthier life than if they were never told.



Lies can become a cancer to the public. They grow and multiply. They attack the body in secret. Once the cancer is known, it can be removed and the body can be healed. If not, the cancer will destroy its own host and both shall die.

People who are public servants who start to try to gain power and immunity for their actions are nothing but a cancer to the democratic process. If they over-reach their duties, if they step over their boundaries, it is never for the good of the nation.

This is not just about flight 800 ... this is not about which 9/11 theory you believe in (official or the many others) ... this is about transparency and honesty from the people who are elected to serve the public.

This is greater than any of the conspiracy stuff, and definitely more important than Roger Clemens, Ms. Spears, Ms. Hilton, and the other nonsense that airs as news or wastes the time of the courts and system.

When you have people who write laws to protect themselves and their buddies, when you have them lie to your face, when you have them excuse atrocious actions ... when they commit serious crimes (treason & perjury(lies)) and violate human rights as if they have no conscious and answer to no one but themselves ... this is when we run into problems such as we have now.

Secrecy about things such as where are troops are and where their next strike is ... the equipment they use ... 100% support from me, no question. No one should know that stuff. BUT, we should know and collectively decide whether they should be striking in the first place. Whether or not they should be risking their lives ... and for that, we need the TRUTH.

Hiding like criminals and stealing our rights, torturing people, and living as though honor is a disease then lie to our faces about it ... that is cowardly and will never have my support. This is what some of the idiots (though they aren't stupid) are doing.


If something happened to you or a family member, would you not want the truth? I know if a loved one was murdered, I would want to know the truth, not a lie and be brushed aside for questioning it if I can tell it doesn't add up.



It is not that no one trusts anything the government says ... it is that we know when something isn't quite right. You can't just point out things that people have distrust for and use that as an argument that people believe nothing they say. You can't point out those who have prove themselves corrupt and say that the people think all of those who serve us are so.


It seems a bit like a stick man argument, and that is evidence of denial of the truth that is starting to show itself inside.


People (a lot, not all) don't trust Bush, but, they trust other Republicans, like Ron Paul. Some trust Huckabee. They may trust the ones on the local level, or certain ones on the national level.

People don't trust Pelosi, she went back on her word, and will not follow the will of the people. There are plenty who still trust Democrats, like Kucinich. Some trust Obama.

A lot of people are turning away from the elephant and the jackass. One is bloated, the other is self-explanitory. People have hope, people search for other options. They don't want what they are given, but the choice of something else just isn't there.


Just because people feel lied to ... and demand truth, doesn't equal that they can't trust everything, they just use the same skepticism you see rampant on this site (I will believe it when I see it, have undeniable proof - reference aliens, ufos, etc.).

If the government and the public servants began telling the truth at all times that would not equal the country falling apart, losing to terrorism, and all other kind of doom sayer bull#. It would make the country stronger. In fact, honesty would have prevented Iraq and those soldiers dying for lies purported by a few who pushed for the altercation. We would be MORE secure because our troops (National Guard) would be full force on our soil. If the money spent on the Iraq war went to a wall ... instead of the Great Wall of China ... we could have the Great Wall of the U.S.A. across the south border. Though, maybe one day a leader of another country would plead with us as Reagan did with Gorbachev.



Not only do you have to look at things from multiple perspectives from within this country ... but look at it from all the perspectives from outside this country.

Think about how we look to the people we beg to be up in arms with us. The people who we tell we are the best way and the most free. How hypocritical do we look to the outside when we talk peace and practice war?

Seriously, ask around. Thing is, the U.S. is not on top of the happiest countries to live list. We are no longer on top of the most free list either.


We are miserable, in debt, and have morons willingly giving up freedom for temporary safety ... based on LIES that their own government spills to them.


I am saddened that I have watched this happen so swiftly in my lifetime. If I was younger, I wouldn't know better. If I was older, I would be even more upset considering I probably would have fought in a world war against this sort of thing.

This country isn't what it used to be, but it can be again. If you don't like it, don't leave it, change it. Fight to get it back the way it is suppose to be. Don't give up and run away or accept the changes as necessary and inevitable.


But in the end, it is all perspective and opinion. I may disagree, but I can respect and see what you are trying to explain. I may understand the viewpoint, but I can never accept it as being justified for any reason.

Okay. I see your point. We have plenty of reasons to mistrust our government. Even so, I am intrigued by Johnny's question. Are there some things we should NOT know?

reply to post by FreeThinkerIdealist



I have to say you are the most civil person who has replied in disagreement. Thank you.
Much of what I said before was to reply to the absurd idea(s) that our Constitution has been suspended and the Presidency has been a dictatorship since 1933 ( someone said that a page or two back). There is this huge fear( I am not saying you believe this) that Executive Orders are the only law of the land now. It is laughable but at the same time infuriating. A simple search on Wikipedia will show it is quite different. They are enforceable to the point they do not contradict with the Constitution. When that happens, they are struck down. For lack of a better phrase…the Constitution is our dictator.
I see what you are saying in “looking at things from all perspectives.” So when you put up the example of whether I would want to know what happened to my family, it makes sense. But that is one perspective…a personal and focused one. That is not a whole perspective.
The truth of what happened to your or my family, while it is a good analogy, does not have the same gravity when it pertains to flight 800. The whole perspective would look at what is good for the country? Yes, I know, several people have said they would have handled the situation just fine if the truth had come out. But maybe…they wouldn’t have. They way things were handled, it didn’t matter. My point is, we didn’t HAVE to find out. There was no harm done.
I guess it brings up another question that I don’t know if anyone can really answer. What is the balance between the interests of an entire nation vs the “right” (if there is such a thing) of the families of the victims to know the truth? Is there even a way to answer that in honesty? It was a tragedy either way, but to add unneeded worry…couldn’t that make it worse?
I agree with much of what you are saying. I am so glad to finally hear (read) a voice that understands if the country needs to change…WE need to do it…AMEN!
There will probably never be another document created by man that will surpass in greatness, the constitution of the United States. The founders understood that a democracy doesn’t protect the rights of the minorities only the majority. SO what did they do? They made a different kind of government. One that takes into account the will of the people but understands there are certain freedoms which all men deserve, even if they are just a few….just one.

I am new to ATS and have been lurking around reading for a couple months.

IMHO we all need to know the truth, even if it hurts. That is the only way we can face any problems and solve them. If we dont know the information or are faced with fake problems, we come up with fake solutions. Fake solutions dont help...see rebate checks in 2008!

Originally posted by lostshepherd
I am new to ATS and have been lurking around reading for a couple months.

IMHO we all need to know the truth, even if it hurts. That is the only way we can face any problems and solve them. If we dont know the information or are faced with fake problems, we come up with fake solutions. Fake solutions dont help...see rebate checks in 2008!

rebates!

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_


Yes I thought that would be funny.

Johnny Utah,

Rad thread - very thought provoking. Unfortunately, I disagree w/ your assertion.

Yes, your argument is a well made one - no sense in the panic, etc. - but as you should know as you stated earlier having taken admin of justice classes - the law is the law.

You're right - a coverup is ok as long as you don't get caught for it.

That's the funny thing about the law - you must follow it to the letter - no matter what. We can't have people interpreting what/how much, etc. they follow.

I personally think we shouldn't know things that could compromise natl security in terms of intelligence, etc. 'Need to know clearance' based upon 'economic interests' seems a bit murkier and possibly self serving to the people in the know.

re: plane/missle - Yes a similar attack didn't occur - but what if it had? would u.s. be culpable?

China and economic espionage makes this stuff even murkier - but at the end of the day - follow the law. If not, what's the point?

RE: UFOs/ALIENS - what worries me about my govt keeping this secret for socio/economic reasons is that what if they are wrong?

was the church wrong several hundred years ago for keeping scientific/astronomical knowledge secret? afterall, it was knowledge of things average person could have no effect on.

I myself, when i think of such secrecy am saddened and wonder what might have been.

this notion that by revealing something most people already suspect and believe in will catastrophically tear society asunder is lazy, misleading and shortsighted.

societies fall from lack of innovation.

they fall with stagnation. they crumble under the brittleness of apathy, complacency and no greater horizons to look to.

when i see news articles on a woman in saudi arabia facing death for 'witch craft' i wonder if DISCLOSURE is the most patriotic movement of them all.

yes disclosure could really upturn the apple cart; but we could also find ourselves surprised and bolstered as such knowledge reveals religion for the genius/precious part of humanity that it is - a belief system which pulled us out of the brutalities of the animal kingdom and placed us on a road of enlightened, ethical and moral civilization. (notwithstanding all the carnage from zealots, etc.)

Religion's underlying moral principles of fellowship, faith and humility in the face of a more complex Creator would hold true.

Disclosrure/Contact would also send a powerful mssg to the those in the Islamic extremist community that wish to do us harm that we are not alone in the universe.

might really take some zest out of their fight.

to sum it up - there might not be a law per se stating that just because someone wants to know about something really bad they should be allowed to - sounds like a 'spirit of the law' kind of thing to me.

i just think the good old u.s. of a would become a stronger nation for it.

Like countless scientific/astronomical coverups before it - i'm sure they seem like a good idea at the time.

and who knows - maybe the public could really help out with their study and interaction. if it's knowledge was so 'toxic' there wouldn't be anyone to work on such programs

disclosure is patriotic!

flagged and starred!

reply to post by damagemouse



Hello Damagemouse,

In return you make a good argument, but…guess what? I don’t agree (knew that was coming, huh?).
The murky idea of economic security isn’t really that murky me. To NOT think of our economic security is very short-sided…no? Isn’t it a nation’s economy which fuels it stature and helps to protect its place in the world?
Look at Russia. The fall of the USSR destroyed the economy, and vice versa. They are, however, very quickly regaining their power/security…why? Among other things, they have rediscovered the resources they have in the massssssssive expanse of the country. They are now selling enormous amounts of crude oil, supplying natural gas to many other nations, selling nuclear fuel (iran like that one) and money is being pumped backed into their economy. Putin, while mad, is finding ways to strengthen their military and aims to have it at Cold War strength and then much stronger. Their nation’s security is blooming. And it did it because the economy of Russia is too. They are tied together without question. Damage to one damages the other (no pun meant).
I know the “it may not have happened” and the “you don’t know” questions or open ended statements still hang out there. My point is, it didn’t. We did have to find out. It was a good call, at least this time.
I am like you, I don’t know that people really have a “right” to know what happened. If I was a family member, sure I would probably feel differently, but that doesn’t change anything. Because a person is closer to a situation, their personal interests have gained or added weight? Of course not.

check out this report: www.wtec.org...

and see this awesome thread! -

www.abovetopsecret.com...

this is a forbearer of things to come. carl sagan used to ask/paraphrasing: 'what is it to be a civilization one million years ahead of us?'

i don't mean this in some nutso kooky way - but just based on math/statistics - our universe is a big place - most likely with a lot of life. the technology which is around the corner - seriously - really read that report - i think makes money obsolete.

20 - 30 years from now it'll be like napster but instead of songs it'll be matter manipulation. if our free market society truly becomes global and all encompassing, with the compounded effect of exponentially advancing technology - such society(s) would no doubt eventually move from being a political/monetary based civilization(s) to that of a knowledge or information based one.

indeed, new knowledge or information is the most valuable and precious resource a society can have, as smarter dudes than i have said.

imagine what disclosure must be worth

you're right - china, russia, india, pakistan, (the former soviet blocs i think are just waiting to discover the mfctg labor potential they possess) are growing with mind numbing rapidity. but like russia, they all suffer from economic upheaval/constraints - both now and in the future.

they'll never be able to defeat us military - it will always be mutual destruction. tho we should always strive to be number one and stay there

greenspan is right - this is the age of turbulence.

we must massively increase our defense budget and allocate a large portion of said increase to science, r and d, etc. and the creation of laws/govt agencies to work with these coming advances/changes.

the world looks to us for innovation and accomplishment. that will never change. we are the strongest because we're made up of so many different types of peeps - like voltron. we'll always be ahead as long as we're smart and we follow the law.

no - economic espionage isn't murky in terms of defending our country - just defend it legally. and if you feel you have to act outside the law to do so - that's your call - btwn you and yr maker.

but if you have to make that call then take that burden upon yrself.

no one during the cold war (on our side) was jumping up and down crying for enhanced interrorgation techniques - give me a break.

it's just bad pr - it's just not good to argue such a point. who wins from that argument? not the good guys - unless you count the world seeing a rad and democratic discussion take place.

i'm not sure what i'm arguing anymore.

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_

Again, I ask…If the Constitution has been suspended since whatever year and the President is in control….how are the courts able to over ride things? How is it possible to still over ride a veto. How were Nixon and Clinton impeached? They let them do it here and there? For 70+ yrs this has been in place? Total control? The ‘60’s show how “in control” the President was…you’re right. I’m sure there is a reason…………somewhere.

I never said anything about total control. Again with your sweeping generalization logical fallacy.

Ignorantly and in a childish manner, you attack the people who actually know what they are talking about, yet if you bothererd to do any of your own research you would know that what I have stated is fact. Fact is not subject to debate. If you want the answer to your questions, do your own research. The FACT remains however, that the Constituition was suspended in 1933 and has never been reinstated. This was verified by Senate Report 93-549 in the 1st Session of the 93d Congress.

I am not talking about conspiracy theory here. I am talking about facts that are a matter of public record.

I will return to reply further to your responding post...













[edit on 2/14/0808 by jackinthebox]

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_

What do you think is the reason to check people’s bag in the subway? Are the subway cops (I don’t what they are called, sorry) snooping? They want to pull out (sorry) porno mags from a person’s bag? I do realize there are bad cops, guys who just want to be bullies…I went through many Criminal Justice classes in college with cops, so believe me I do know…. You said the subway is vital. That makes it all the more tempting of a target. And I do understand the odds on getting killed by a terrorist are almost nothing. If you did nothing and they grabbed you up, then yes, you were mistreated. What they did was wrong and illegal. But cops do not need anything other than a “reasonable suspicion” to stop you. To go into your bag, they need “probable cause.” I have no idea what happened with your particular instance, but maybe, it didn’t have anything to do with the Patriot Act or things of that nature and they were just being jerks. That is something only you will can know.

They don't need a reason anymore, that's the whole point. Warrantless search has been made "legal" by the US Supreme Court. Another very important FACT you seem to have overlooked, while ignorantly presuming that the subjects of the search were just being "jerks."

This has nothing to do with "bad" cops either. This is about BAD GOVERNMENT. What they are doing is wrong but it is no longer "illegal."

They no longer need probable cause, and that's the whole point. But again, you must have missed the memo on that.

EDIT to add: The "subway cops" you refer to are the NYPD.

I will return shortly...


[edit on 2/14/0808 by jackinthebox]

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_

But you say I have no evidence to go with what I believe. So I guess the Purdue study (which you asked for and I provided)…which truly had nothing to do with 9-11 and says the exact opposite of the CT…is a lie. Are the professors there not studied enough too?

No, I asked for evidence that proves your basic premise that it is okay for the government to lie to the people, and that conspiracy theories have no basis in fact. As if the thousands of members on this one site alone are just wasting their time and that none of us know what we are talking about.

I admit, I did not bother to watch your "Purdue" study, because it is irrelevant to me. I can do my own research into specific CT's. Debunking one CT, does not debunk all of them. Are you really so ignorant to assume that someone who doesn't believe the official story about 9/11, actually believes avery single conspiracy theory about 9/11?!

But as you said, your source had nothing to do with 9/11 anyway, so what was it about again? Which CT are you actually referring to? That the government lied to us about 9/11? Because I can prove without a doubt that they did, with video.

But to say they are not looking for bombs and knives or things of the such? Huh?

Sure, they will obviously do something about it if they come across a bomb, but they are actually looking for things that they find much more commonly. Things like contraband, large amounts of cash or valuables, things that might do damage to the plane under the conditions in stowage, even people trying to get a free ride for their pet. Often times there are things that can be dangerous to an airplane that people don't even realize, and put in their bags inadvertantly.

The point is, that it really doesn't matter what they're looking for in the interest of security. It's just another way for them to invade your privacy. Just because a Texan wants to carry his pistol on the plane doesn't mean he plans on using it. On the other hand, I know how how to kill a man with a newspaper. So what difference does it make in the long run? None, except to the law-abiding citizen who is having their rights violated, their privacy intruded upon, and their time wasted if nothing else.

You see your example of Nazi Germany as valid…is it still not a scare tactic? Nazi Germany is not a scare tactic? I am not saying you are wrong or right with the example, I am talking about how it is used.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, guess what, it's probably a duck. There is a difference between a "scare tactic" and drawing a valid comparison. "Scare tactic" implies that I am merely referring to the Nazis strictly for the purpose of emotional appeal. I am not. I am pointing out the similarites which should be of concern to anyone who has a negative opinion of fascism.




[edit on 2/14/0808 by jackinthebox]

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_

Much of what I said before was to reply to the absurd idea(s) that our Constitution has been suspended and the Presidency has been a dictatorship since 1933 ( someone said that a page or two back).

NO. It was I who brought up the topic, and I never said that the Presidency has been a dictatorship since 1933. I said that the Constitution has not been reinstated since it was suspended by FDR in 1933. There is a difference. It is the Patriot Act which has shifted our government from a Representative Democracy, with shared power among three branches ensuring effective measures of checks-and-balances, to a dictatorship where the ultimate government powers rests with the President.

If you bothered to read what I wrote instead of trying to push your petty propoganda, I would not have to clarify your flagrant attempt at misdirection. Furthermore, if you bothered to read anything on the subject, you would see how absurd your ignorant statements actually are.

Seriously, why don't you bother to do some research on any of these subjects? Whichever one takes your fancy. There is plenty of material here on ATS. And you will see that much of it is rigorously debated. Conspiracy theory is not some wacko brotherhood/sisterhood trying to lead the sheep to slaughter. (In fact, most of us hate secret societies and are trying to save sheep like you.) There is actually little unity among us except for one single unwavering principal, to DENY IGNORANCE.

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_


You seem to have a lot of nice things to say about Russia, and fail to see the real reason why the Soviet Union collapsed. Because the people at the top ran their country into the ground and walked away with the profits. Hwo could this happen? Because the people did not have the right to question anything, and were never told the truth.

The whole perspective would look at what is good for the country?

Are you a Communist Johnny? That was the backbone of their system. The collective good. When you sacrifice the truth for the collective good, you are a Communist.

reply to post by jackinthebox

Hello, Jack. I missed you.


So tell me how I this is a sweering generalization...
"... the Constitution has been suspended since 1933 by Executive Order of FDR and approved by Congress. It has never been reinstated. Now we have the Patriot Act which is the outline for a new American government. A dictatorship. Led by a President who is no longer burdened by a system of checks and balances."

You said this.

reply to post by jackinthebox

And since there are no checks and balances anymore...the dictator only serves in 4 and 8 year terms?

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_


Yes, I did say this. And? Are you trying to say that I have resorted to your tactic of making sweeping generalizations? If so, then once again I humbly point out that you do not know what you are talking about. What I have stated here are specific facts supported by evidence, nothing general about that.

[edit on 2/15/0808 by jackinthebox]

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_

And since there are no checks and balances anymore...the dictator only serves in 4 and 8 year terms?

Well, we'll just have to wait and see about that won't we?