Rand Paul: Dick Cheney used 9/11 as excuse to invade Iraq for the benefit of Halliburton

reply to post by Sremmos80


That strikes me as pure speculation on your part.

There's always been "comfort" in "certainty" of a view. My intent was to remove that certainty from the "everyone knows Cheney was evil".

My view of it won't move many, but if it gives pause to some, to reflect on the attacking agenda equally with the so-called agenda of Cheney , then the picture becomes less clear. But, just my view of it.

You may very well be correct in your assessment. I remain untrusting of the attacker's agenda. They've attacked so many, so often, that I see the attackers as guilty until proven innocent. Perhaps as bad on my part as Cheney being guilty until he's proven innocent.....

reply to post by nwtrucker



There is just as much speculation in my post as there is in yours....

I guess I see what your saying, you want people to take a step back and look at cheney from both sides. I think many have done that and come back to the same conclusion based on his actions.
Keep fighting your fight for cheney, I am sure he needs all the support he can get

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


An interesting thought just occurred. In all of these posts, there's not one mention of 9/11.

To discount that as a motivation in all this, rightly or wrongly, adds to my belief that this fixation with Cheney has gotten way out of perspective, lacks "overview" and therefore is, at least, distorted. IMO.

nwtrucker
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

 

An interesting thought just occurred. In all of these posts, there's not one mention of 9/11.

To discount that as a motivation in all this, rightly or wrongly, adds to my belief that this fixation with Cheney has gotten way out of perspective, lacks "overview" and therefore is, at least, distorted. IMO.

Well, I must admit your almost half right.
That is to say that a little less than half of the replies to this post either mention 9/11 or make some reference to it.
I don't see how you missed them; if you read any of the previous replies.

reply to post by teamcommander


Hmm, hate getting old... The thought "occurred" the memory hung fired. Cancel last...

reply to post by nwtrucker


Seriously?? No 911 post? Ya you must have not read the thread at all because there are plenty... You may have even missed it in the title...

Cheney was part of the planning of 911, he was fundenmental and that is why chain of command was broken and he was in charge that fateful morning.
Then went on and made a killing pun intended and stolen from earlier post in this thread, in Iraq.

Keep thinking he is not evil, and keep fighting his fight, he needs it

reply to post by Sremmos80


Like I said , my bad on the 9-11 posts.

Cheney planned 9-11??

Short term memory loss is part of getting old. What's your excuse?

I guess we all need our "anti-Christ". You have Cheney, I'll settle for Obama. At least, I'm current. Cheney has one foot in the grave...find a new theme..

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


Not just evil Dick but the whole lot of em made off with a heap of blood money. Especially Larry Silverstien lease holder of WTC who made a killing off the insurance after 911 lining his pockets that took out specific insurance covering terrorist attacks via plane just a couple months before. What are the odds? You dont suppose the guy is a fortune teller do you? Oh and W being business partners with OBL family also big oil ? What are the odds astronomical ?

reply to post by nwtrucker


When you say it like "cheney planned 911" you make it sound as if I think he was the head honcho.
Far from that, I do think he played a key role in the planning and execution, just by the sheer fact that he was left in charge and has the whole "stand down" issue that morning.

Not sure what I need an excuse for... do i need one for calling you out on your mistake that you had not posted the correction yet? In that case I guess time is my excuse??

Cheney is not my anti christ, IMO that is a church scare tactic, and I think obama is just as bad if not worse. But they are all cut from the same cloth so it doesn't really matter who is feeding the BS

reply to post by DarthFazer


And why would larry buy 2 builidngs full of asbestos that he knew had to replaced floor by floor.

nwtrucker
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

 

An interesting thought just occurred. In all of these posts, there's not one mention of 9/11.

To discount that as a motivation in all this, rightly or wrongly, adds to my belief that this fixation with Cheney has gotten way out of perspective, lacks "overview" and therefore is, at least, distorted. IMO.

I have no idea what you're talking about, "there's not one mention of 9/11"? It's only in the thread title and half the posts in this thread. The topic is about Rand Paul and his stated belief Cheney took advantage of 9/11 for Halliburton.

If you dig deeper, the privatization of the DoD was Cheney's baby.

DarthFazer
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

 

Not just evil Dick but the whole lot of em made off with a heap of blood money. Especially Larry Silverstien lease holder of WTC who made a killing off the insurance after 911 lining his pockets that took out specific insurance covering terrorist attacks via plane just a couple months before. What are the odds? You dont suppose the guy is a fortune teller do you? Oh and W being business partners with OBL family also big oil ? What are the odds astronomical ?

There's no shortage of guilty parties when it comes to 9/11.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


I've covered my error on the 9-11.

As far as "Privatization" of the DoD. I could care less. I see gov't as "The" Corporation. No different than the private ones, practically speaking. Farming out work at Ford or the Feds is in the same area code.

Seeing the democrats fully ran the hearings into 9/11, then by that logic, they all have horns and cloven hoofs.

Spread the wealth around will you...after are all, you do support "wealth" distribution....

reply to post by nwtrucker

Seeing the democrats fully ran the hearings into 9/11, then by that logic, they all have horns and cloven hoofs.

Absolutely

Sremmos80
reply to post by DarthFazer

 

And why would larry buy 2 builidngs full of asbestos that he knew had to replaced floor by floor.

Ahh yes thanks for reminding me how could I forget ?

And those black vans that were seen outside in the late hours supposedly working on the buildings for renovation . The asbestos removal would have cost the old Zionist a fortune mind you. Or as the Church Lady would say "how convenient "

mmmmm Satan

yep

Blackmarketeer

nwtrucker
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

 

An interesting thought just occurred. In all of these posts, there's not one mention of 9/11.

To discount that as a motivation in all this, rightly or wrongly, adds to my belief that this fixation with Cheney has gotten way out of perspective, lacks "overview" and therefore is, at least, distorted. IMO.

I have no idea what you're talking about, "there's not one mention of 9/11"? It's only in the thread title and half the posts in this thread. The topic is about Rand Paul and his stated belief Cheney took advantage of 9/11 for Halliburton.

If you dig deeper, the privatization of the DoD was Cheney's baby.

You got that right even the Saudis played a hand in it, USA Israel and Saudi's make for strange bed fellows
www.abovetopsecret.com...

nwtrucker
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

 

An interesting thought just occurred. In all of these posts, there's not one mention of 9/11.

WHAT?????


I'm kidding

reply to post by DarthFazer

The asbestos removal would have cost the old Zionist a fortune mind you.

No doubt, and it he easily could have waited until the previous owners took care of it before he bought the buildings, TBH I think he should of even had a plan for what he was going to do about the asbestos when he bought the buildings.
Another tidbit bout the deal, Larry had been in a car accident before the signed the papers. He had to be taken off his medication so that he could legally sing the papers. Now that doesn't sound like much and in no way a smoking gun, just always strange to me. Almost like they needed to get his deal done NOW

zazen
Thank you very much, Senator Obvious. Finally picked up on this, and only a decade after everyone else.

Not really this was from 5 years ago.

What war in the last millennia hasn't been fought with economic gain as the primary motivating factor? See: War Is A Racket by the most highly decorated marine ever: Smedley Butler.