Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Conspiracy or not, TPTB love 9/11

page: 2
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 19 2014 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Isn't it just a little uncomfortable to know that TPTB, our leaders, whatever you want to call them... That no matter how they might speak about the tragedies of 9/11 or show up at the WTC site on a 9/11 anniversary, that secretly they're happy 9/11 happened?

And sometimes when we the people start to resist their plan, TPTB remind us that ANOTHER 9/11 will happen if we don't all get with the program.

Such terrorists hating us for our freedoms.




posted on Jan, 19 2014 @ 10:33 PM
link   
David Ray Griffin

According to the theology of one of the leading experts of "9/11 truth," America is in the grips of a struggle with "demonic evil."

Asked in a 2005 interview with the L.A. Times about his “role as a 9/11 dissenter depart from [his] life's work as a scholar and theologian,” Griffin responded, “At first glance it may seem strange, but the task of a theologian is to look at the world from what we would imagine the divine perspective, [which] would care about the good of the whole and would love all the parts. [So] 9/11, if it was brought about by forces within our own government for imperial reasons, is antithetical to the general good.”

In 2003 Griffin began to believe that the official 9/11 account was false, “not simply in minor ways ... it [was] false from beginning to end.” After researching the topic he came out with his first 9/11 book, The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9-11, the same year he retired. Within a short time, Griffin gained status as a major scholar in the 9/11 Truth movement. Griffin has argued not only that the government’s account of 9/11 is false, but that it was “a rather obviously a false-flag attack. A false-flag attack occurs when some country, which wants to attack another one, orchestrates an attack on its own people while planting evidence to implicate that other country."

www.alternet.org...



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 06:12 AM
link   


For example a key aspect of American neoconservitism is the idea of aggressively promoting America's international interests this some would argue manifested itself in what we now call the "Bush doctrine".


That is an opinion not established fact. Using the internet to go back in time and pick out things to brand someone in a preconceived notion in real time does not make it a fact.

In president Bush's book 'Decision Points' he sets out his agenda for keeping America safe from terrorist attacks as:

Make no distinction between terrorists and the nations that harbor them--and hold both to account."
"Take the fight to the enemy overseas before they can attack us again here at home."
"Confront threats before they fully materialize."
"Advance liberty and hope as an alternative to the enemy's ideology of repression and fear."

Again your preconceived notion of some kind of evil doctrine coming forward from neoconservatives fall flat on it's face with the fact that President Obama has not only adopted these policies but enhanced each and every one in the extreme.

That is what is racist because it's OK for an African-American president to push a conservative doctrine however when a white president does the very same thing it's evil and oppressive not counting infringement on any and all liberties.

You didn't answer this in the previous post.

This is a touchy area as you might have noticed and I would never even respond to many here who have fallen completely off the edge and into fanatic disciple of delusion, however labeling people and grouping them into categories aligned with a murderous agenda is not allowed in America anymore.

There are dozens and dozens of conservative groups in America and they are free to pursue their agenda within the boundaries of the law. Not only is that their right they also have the right not to be profiled into unfair alignments of evil.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by spooky24
 


Spooky24, are you aware that these Neocons wrote about the need for a new Pearl Harbor event a year before 9/11 when they were not in power, and then it happened a year later when they were in power? Is that not suspicious to you?



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by spiritualzombie
 


She's well aware (see last page), but she pretends she never saw it. The poor dear works FOR the US Government, maybe even the agency, so what's she to do but go out and create a personal library of September 11th official story material, and then work real hard to try to win brownie points in the sight of her bosses and the various embedded OS government loyalists here at ATS.?

Therefore, she deserves a pass, and to be ignored, imho.

I just wish she'd wash the blood off her avatar face, given the context of her participation here, but that's not for me to say how a person wishes to present their image.



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by spooky24
 


Spooky, you're an odd one. So now it's racist to be suspiscious of Neocons? Listen, I promise you, if Obama wrote a book saying, "You know what this country need is a major increase in defense spending, and the only way I see it happening anytime soon is if we had a new Pearl Harbor"-- and then if that happened while he was in office. That would be CRAZY suspiscious!

That's exactly what the Neocons did.

Fact.

Kinda suspicious, don't you think?






 
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join