Ron Paul
Has gone off the deep end. Grilling Bernanke about the Fed’s involvement in Watergate? WTF?
Sacrilege! Ron Paul is the man. Just ask Saul4Paul!
He just hates anything to do with the Fed.
[quote=Moraen]Sacrilege! Ron Paul is the man. Just ask Saul4Paul!
He just hates anything to do with the Fed.
[/quote]
Did you see his testimony? He also accused the Fed of going around
Congress to appropriate $4billion for Saddam Hussein to buy weapons
from the US military industrial complex in the 1980s. Bernanke’s
response was classic.
No. Didn’t see it. I don’t watch TV during work hours, I do meaningless calculations, data mining, and try to express news and media events as mathematical formulas. Screw it, I should just bring my Xbox in here!
What did Ben say?
Congress is very impressive.
[quote=Shania Twain]Congress is very impressive.
[/quote]The fed on paper makes sense.
But hell, maybe paul is right. Has the economy performed any better over time with the fed tweaks? Im such a champion of free markets......do you need the damn Fed?We need the Fed like we need an electoral college
I agree, we do need both the Fed and Electoral colleges (honestly).
Ron Paul is like Kucinich(sp) to me.Oh no I implied that I do not believe we need either.
Free markets will set interest rates themselves and I disagree against electing a president despite the majority of the country voting for his opponent.I think we can get rid of the fed, but keep the electoral college.
In it’s way, the electoral college is more of a ‘republic’ than just having a popular vote.
I see you (GetHard) are a fan of the tyranny of the majority. As Moraen pointed out, the EC is one of the great tools from keeping us from being a Democracy - which would be an absolute mess.
Furthermore, if we didn't have EC, then Gore would have been a president. I think that is enough supportive proof. I strongly doubt in the free markets ability to set interest rates. I have no doubt that the free market could not adequately control the money supply. A "Free Market" is like Direct Democracy. In theory, it sounds nice, but in practicality it is a terrible idea.[quote=Wet_Blanket]I see you (GetHard) are a fan of the tyranny of the majority. As Moraen pointed out, the EC is one of the great tools from keeping us from being a Democracy - which would be an absolute mess.
Furthermore, if we didn't have EC, then Gore would have been a president. I think that is enough supportive proof. I strongly doubt in the free markets ability to set interest rates. I have no doubt that the free market could not adequately control the money supply. A "Free Market" is like Direct Democracy. In theory, it sounds nice, but in practicality it is a terrible idea. [/quote]I'm not saying completely get rid of a "fed-like" institution. But as it is, it is a complete mess. And no, I don't have a recommendation on how to fix it.
The FED is an excellent idea. The problem is when it gets politicized. For instance, Rep. Waters from Calif. worried that raising the discount rate would hurt mortgage rates and cause more foreclosures due to ARMS resetting? Are these people, in charge of setting policy and approving budgets, that moronic that they don’t even know how interest rates work. Moreover, they grill him on things that are out of his jurisdiction. He’s in charge of the money supply, credit markets, overall monetary policy NOT Budget Policy.
The fact that the FED buys the majority of our National Debt should probably raise some red flags but ulitmately it then auctions it off to investors anyway.Damnit I can see both sides of the story…
I had a post typed out on capitalism and whether or not our country is 100% capitalistic then I realized it would spark an entire new debate, one that's been covered many times over.
I also wikipedia'd "capitalism." Warning: not for the faint of heart. back to cold calling get money get paid
[quote=LSUAlum]The FED is an excellent idea. The problem is when it gets politicized. For instance, Rep. Waters from Calif. worried that raising the discount rate would hurt mortgage rates and cause more foreclosures due to ARMS resetting? Are these people, in charge of setting policy and approving budgets, that moronic that they don’t even know how interest rates work. Moreover, they grill him on things that are out of his jurisdiction. He’s in charge of the money supply, credit markets, overall monetary policy NOT Budget Policy.
The fact that the FED buys the majority of our National Debt should probably raise some red flags but ulitmately it then auctions it off to investors anyway.[/quote]Michelle Bachmann asked Bernanke if there were two discount windows.
This is a republic, just as the Founding Fathers intended.…and I disagree against electing a president despite the majority of the country voting for his opponent.
This is a republic, just as the Founding Fathers intended. [/quote] Wow realized my original statement contains a lot of negatives...[quote=gethardgetraw]…and I disagree against electing a president despite the majority of the country voting for his opponent.
For clarification: I agree with electing a president once he has captured the majority of the citizens' vote. __________ James Madison defined republic in terms of representative democracy Representative democracy is a form of government founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people
[quote=NYCTrader] [quote=LSUAlum]The FED is an excellent idea. The problem is when it gets politicized. For instance, Rep. Waters from Calif. worried that raising the discount rate would hurt mortgage rates and cause more foreclosures due to ARMS resetting? Are these people, in charge of setting policy and approving budgets, that moronic that they don’t even know how interest rates work. Moreover, they grill him on things that are out of his jurisdiction. He’s in charge of the money supply, credit markets, overall monetary policy NOT Budget Policy.
The fact that the FED buys the majority of our National Debt should probably raise some red flags but ulitmately it then auctions it off to investors anyway.[/quote]Michelle Bachmann asked Bernanke if there were two discount windows.
[/quote] Missed that part. I wonder if he said, only during peak breakfast and lunch hours. We modeled it after the great R. Kroc's franchise.
This is a republic, just as the Founding Fathers intended. [/quote] Wow realized my original statement contains a lot of negatives...[quote=LockEDJ][quote=gethardgetraw]…and I disagree against electing a president despite the majority of the country voting for his opponent.
For clarification: I agree with electing a president once he has captured the majority of the citizens' vote. __________ James Madison defined republic in terms of representative democracy Representative democracy is a form of government founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people[/quote] And that is exactly what the Electoral College does. It casts it's votes based on the STATE's election of the next president. Do not confuse the issue that we are a group of STATES who are UNITED together. We are a really large Eurpean Union. Each state has it's own rights. Unfortunately the Federal Government has infringed upon those rights over the years to the point where people forget that we were founded on the notion that the STATES maintained the majority the decision making within their own borders. The federal government was supposed to control the national defense and provide a unified national foreign policy so that say Louisiana wasn't negotiating with France while New York was negotiating with Spain on the same issue.
Yeah you’re right. I’m in way over my head; this is definitely not my strong suit. I totally overlooked the fact that we’re the United States with emphasis on both words.
Very interesting topics.[quote=gethardgetraw]Yeah you’re right. I’m in way over my head; this is definitely not my strong suit. I totally overlooked the fact that we’re the United States with emphasis on both words.
Very interesting topics.[/quote] Well then, if you realize that we are the UNITED STATES, with emphasis on both words, then why would you not understand that the electoral college is completely necessary. It isn't one big election, it is a collection of 50 small elections. Each state's election is it's own thing. If you get the most votes in that state you win that state's election. I don't understand why people don't get this. IT HAS TO WORK THIS WAY if we are to remain States United together. Without the electoral college a candidate could carry every single state except say, maybe lose one by a landslide and LOSE the election. That's rediculous.This is a republic, just as the Founding Fathers intended. [/quote] Wow realized my original statement contains a lot of negatives...[quote=gethardgetraw][quote=LockEDJ][quote=gethardgetraw]…and I disagree against electing a president despite the majority of the country voting for his opponent.
For clarification: I agree with electing a president once he has captured the majority of the citizens' vote. __________ James Madison defined republic in terms of representative democracy Representative democracy is a form of government founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people[/quote] And that is exactly what the Electoral College does. It casts it's votes based on the STATE's election of the next president. Do not confuse the issue that we are a group of STATES who are UNITED together. We are a really large Eurpean Union. Each state has it's own rights. Unfortunately the Federal Government has infringed upon those rights over the years to the point where people forget that we were founded on the notion that the STATES maintained the majority the decision making within their own borders. The federal government was supposed to control the national defense and provide a unified national foreign policy so that say Louisiana wasn't negotiating with France while New York was negotiating with Spain on the same issue.[/quote] Quick question LSUAlum, so that I can gage your political leanings... Abe Lincoln. a) National Hero b) Federalist Oppressor
without the Fed, ML would have gone down in dec 08 and the world financial markets would have collapsed and many of us would be out of jobs. The credit crises had what the depression didn’t…the fed and monetary controls
without the fed.......mer would not have been in trouble with the bubble????????
electoral college is dumb.
someones vote in CA or ill or where ever is potentially "worth" more
retarded
This is a republic, just as the Founding Fathers intended. [/quote] Wow realized my original statement contains a lot of negatives...[quote=LSUAlum][quote=gethardgetraw][quote=LockEDJ][quote=gethardgetraw]…and I disagree against electing a president despite the majority of the country voting for his opponent.
For clarification: I agree with electing a president once he has captured the majority of the citizens' vote. __________ James Madison defined republic in terms of representative democracy Representative democracy is a form of government founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people[/quote] And that is exactly what the Electoral College does. It casts it's votes based on the STATE's election of the next president. Do not confuse the issue that we are a group of STATES who are UNITED together. We are a really large Eurpean Union. Each state has it's own rights. Unfortunately the Federal Government has infringed upon those rights over the years to the point where people forget that we were founded on the notion that the STATES maintained the majority the decision making within their own borders. The federal government was supposed to control the national defense and provide a unified national foreign policy so that say Louisiana wasn't negotiating with France while New York was negotiating with Spain on the same issue.[/quote] Quick question LSUAlum, so that I can gage your political leanings... Abe Lincoln. a) National Hero b) Federalist Oppressor[/quote] Depends. Do you feel the ends justify the means? Do you think the Civil War was about: (P.S. I grew up hearing the Civil War referred to as the 'War of Northern Aggression' for many years) a) Slavery b) The North's realization that the South was becoming economically independent with both Agriculture and Industry and thus disliked the competitive disadvantage? That the North then used slavery as a 'populist' movement to usurp states rights for the 'good of the nation'? That being said. I think Abe is a national hero for how he handled the period. I also think that Slavery is wrong. I do, however, think that the civil war history is revisionist history depending on where you live and that the north couldn't give a rat's ass about blacks at the time, they just were concerned about the economic disadvantage that cheap labor gave to the south. Coincidentally, you can draw parallels to Obama and the North's complaint about cheap labor in how he favors labor unions to free market wage equilibrium.
This is a republic, just as the Founding Fathers intended. [/quote] Wow realized my original statement contains a lot of negatives...[quote=Wet_Blanket][quote=LSUAlum][quote=gethardgetraw][quote=LockEDJ][quote=gethardgetraw]…and I disagree against electing a president despite the majority of the country voting for his opponent.
For clarification: I agree with electing a president once he has captured the majority of the citizens' vote. __________ James Madison defined republic in terms of representative democracy Representative democracy is a form of government founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people[/quote] And that is exactly what the Electoral College does. It casts it's votes based on the STATE's election of the next president. Do not confuse the issue that we are a group of STATES who are UNITED together. We are a really large Eurpean Union. Each state has it's own rights. Unfortunately the Federal Government has infringed upon those rights over the years to the point where people forget that we were founded on the notion that the STATES maintained the majority the decision making within their own borders. The federal government was supposed to control the national defense and provide a unified national foreign policy so that say Louisiana wasn't negotiating with France while New York was negotiating with Spain on the same issue.[/quote] Quick question LSUAlum, so that I can gage your political leanings... Abe Lincoln. a) National Hero b) Federalist Oppressor[/quote] Depends. Do you feel the ends justify the means? Do you think the Civil War was about: (P.S. I grew up hearing the Civil War referred to as the 'War of Northern Aggression' for many years) a) Slavery b) The North's realization that the South was becoming economically independent with both Agriculture and Industry and thus disliked the competitive disadvantage? That the North then used slavery as a 'populist' movement to usurp states rights for the 'good of the nation'? That being said. I think Abe is a national hero for how he handled the period. I also think that Slavery is wrong. I do, however, think that the civil war history is revisionist history depending on where you live and that the north couldn't give a rat's ass about blacks at the time, they just were concerned about the economic disadvantage that cheap labor gave to the south. Coincidentally, you can draw parallels to Obama and the North's complaint about cheap labor in how he favors labor unions to free market wage equilibrium. [/quote]
That's true. A great book to read would be "Lies My Teacher told me".
This is a republic, just as the Founding Fathers intended. [/quote] Wow realized my original statement contains a lot of negatives...[quote=LSUAlum][quote=Wet_Blanket][quote=LSUAlum][quote=gethardgetraw][quote=LockEDJ][quote=gethardgetraw]…and I disagree against electing a president despite the majority of the country voting for his opponent.
For clarification: I agree with electing a president once he has captured the majority of the citizens' vote. __________ James Madison defined republic in terms of representative democracy Representative democracy is a form of government founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people[/quote] And that is exactly what the Electoral College does. It casts it's votes based on the STATE's election of the next president. Do not confuse the issue that we are a group of STATES who are UNITED together. We are a really large Eurpean Union. Each state has it's own rights. Unfortunately the Federal Government has infringed upon those rights over the years to the point where people forget that we were founded on the notion that the STATES maintained the majority the decision making within their own borders. The federal government was supposed to control the national defense and provide a unified national foreign policy so that say Louisiana wasn't negotiating with France while New York was negotiating with Spain on the same issue.[/quote] Quick question LSUAlum, so that I can gage your political leanings... Abe Lincoln. a) National Hero b) Federalist Oppressor[/quote] Depends. Do you feel the ends justify the means? Do you think the Civil War was about: (P.S. I grew up hearing the Civil War referred to as the 'War of Northern Aggression' for many years) a) Slavery b) The North's realization that the South was becoming economically independent with both Agriculture and Industry and thus disliked the competitive disadvantage? That the North then used slavery as a 'populist' movement to usurp states rights for the 'good of the nation'? That being said. I think Abe is a national hero for how he handled the period. I also think that Slavery is wrong. I do, however, think that the civil war history is revisionist history depending on where you live and that the north couldn't give a rat's ass about blacks at the time, they just were concerned about the economic disadvantage that cheap labor gave to the south. Coincidentally, you can draw parallels to Obama and the North's complaint about cheap labor in how he favors labor unions to free market wage equilibrium. [/quote]
That's true. A great book to read would be "Lies My Teacher told me".
[/quote] I've read portions. It's on my shelf with several other half-read-I-need-to-finish-soon books. He's also very critical of Reconstruction and how it's taught as the northern whites treated the freed blacks very poorly and actually many of the Jim Crowe laws were supported by the northerners at the time.
[quote=LSUAlum][quote=NYCTrader] [quote=LSUAlum]The FED is an excellent idea. The problem is when it gets politicized. For instance, Rep. Waters from Calif. worried that raising the discount rate would hurt mortgage rates and cause more foreclosures due to ARMS resetting? Are these people, in charge of setting policy and approving budgets, that moronic that they don’t even know how interest rates work. Moreover, they grill him on things that are out of his jurisdiction. He’s in charge of the money supply, credit markets, overall monetary policy NOT Budget Policy.
The fact that the FED buys the majority of our National Debt should probably raise some red flags but ulitmately it then auctions it off to investors anyway.[/quote]Michelle Bachmann asked Bernanke if there were two discount windows.
[/quote] Missed that part. I wonder if he said, only during peak breakfast and lunch hours. We modeled it after the great R. Kroc's franchise.[/quote]
By the way, how did we go from Ron Paul to Jim Crowe?
End the Fed. It is a private banking organization owned by Bank of England, Lazard Feres, Goldman Sachs, JPM and Rothschild Banking interests of Europe. They print trillions out of thin air to finance wars and own governments. Read “End the Fed” by Ron Paul or The “Creature from Jekyll Island” by G Edward Griffin. You people are so uninformed its pathetic. Ron Paul is the man…he is the only statesman left in the U S House! Two families (Rothschild and Rockefellers) control indirectly thru these banks the central banking institutions of Europe and North America. Their goal is to rule the earth. As Mayer Amschel Rothschild said back in the 1600’s “Give me control of the worlds currencies and I care no who make its laws.”
[quote=tdude]End the Fed. It is a private banking organization owned by Bank of England, Lazard Feres, Goldman Sachs, JPM and Rothschild Banking interests of Europe. They print trillions out of thin air to finance wars and own governments. Read “End the Fed” by Ron Paul or The “Creature from Jekyll Island” by G Edward Griffin. You people are so uninformed its pathetic. Ron Paul is the man…he is the only statesman left in the U S House! Two families (Rothschild and Rockefellers) control indirectly thru these banks the central banking institutions of Europe and North America. Their goal is to rule the earth. As Mayer Amschel Rothschild said back in the 1600’s “Give me control of the worlds currencies and I care no who make its laws.” [/quote]
Oh, because Ron Paul is the only person without an agenda?! Griffin is a shill for Paul.
I admire Paul as much as the next guy, but don’t think for one second that people are uninformed just because they don’t agree with you.
Great to have you back Mel!End the Fed. It is a private banking organization owned by Bank of England, Lazard Feres, Goldman Sachs, JPM and Rothschild Banking interests of Europe. They print trillions out of thin air to finance wars and own governments. Read “End the Fed” by Ron Paul or The “Creature from Jekyll Island” by G Edward Griffin. You people are so uninformed its pathetic. Ron Paul is the man…he is the only statesman left in the U S House! Two families (Rothschild and Rockefellers) control indirectly thru these banks the central banking institutions of Europe and North America. Their goal is to rule the earth. As Mayer Amschel Rothschild said back in the 1600’s “Give me control of the worlds currencies and I care no who make its laws.”
u r quite uninformed my friend. The Fed needs to be dissolved! It is a leach on the American Republic. They have destroyed the $. The goal is world domination. To rule the earth u need a removal of borders and a one world currency step by step. The half dozen Illuminati families have already conquered Europe…loss of national currency, national soveriegnty and national borders. Laws are made in Brussells. The North American Union and African Union are next. 1st regional then world govt. Quietly orchestrated by a half dozen families behind the scenes. U need to wake up. America is the crown Jewel because its the only nation with an armed (80-90 milion homeowners) population. Swiss also are armed but they dont have the numbers…Note they still have there currency though. Once they have the USA the globe is toast! These families use the central banks for their financial power base. The folks at this forum are quite naive.
[quote=Wet_Blanket]
Furthermore, if we didn't have EC, then Gore would have been a president. I think that is enough supportive proof. [/quote]Right, because we were all so much better off having GW Bush run the country into the ground for 8 years.
[quote=tdude]u r quite uninformed my friend. The Fed needs to be dissolved! It is a leach on the American Republic. They have destroyed the $. The goal is world domination. To rule the earth u need a removal of borders and a one world currency step by step. The half dozen Illuminati families have already conquered Europe…loss of national currency, national soveriegnty and national borders. Laws are made in Brussells. The North American Union and African Union are next. 1st regional then world govt. Quietly orchestrated by a half dozen families behind the scenes. U need to wake up. America is the crown Jewel because its the only nation with an armed (80-90 milion homeowners) population. Swiss also are armed but they dont have the numbers…Note they still have there currency though. Once they have the USA the globe is toast! These families use the central banks for their financial power base. The folks at this forum are quite naive. [/quote]
Ron Paul’s base, right here folks.
NYC TRader…The bankers own the Bushes and they own the Obama’s. The presidency is middle management. David Rockefeller rules the wstrn hemisphere and Jacob Rothschild rules the eastern. They ownthe Clintons and most other politicos. Ron Paul is one of the few who cant be bought.
Wow. You are crazy.
So you are Saul4Paul!
[quote=NYCTrader]
[quote=Wet_Blanket]
Furthermore, if we didn't have EC, then Gore would have been a president. I think that is enough supportive proof. [/quote]Right, because we were all so much better off having GW Bush run the country into the ground for 8 years.
[/quote]
Sorry NYC - Gore would have done worse. Not to mention, how's that AGW working out? Record snow, a decline in temperatures for 2/3's of the world the last ten years (on average) and sea levels actually falling. Craaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaazy!
And Arabic is a pretty language, but I wouldn't want to be speaking it or trying to type it on this forum (we'd all be out of business anyway). Al Gore didn't have the balls to retaliate against al Qaeda. Nor go into Iraq (even though Bill Clinton thought that Hussein was the biggest threat we faced).
Oh naive ones…here is today’s news from across the pond:
Gordon Brown calls for a World Constitution
DIGG ATS
for original
content
more info
Out Of Chaos , Comes Opportunity
Using the last 2 years of Global Downturn as a backdrop , Brown uses this
an a excuse for a Global Constitution to cure the ails.
He seems to claim that the only way to progress out of this downturn, is to
use this crisis, for a radical new start.
The man loves 2 words, Global, Globalization.
YouTube Link
[quote=Moraen]
[quote=NYCTrader]
[quote=Wet_Blanket]
Furthermore, if we didn't have EC, then Gore would have been a president. I think that is enough supportive proof. [/quote]Right, because we were all so much better off having GW Bush run the country into the ground for 8 years.
[/quote]
Sorry NYC - Gore would have done worse. Not to mention, how's that AGW working out? Record snow, a decline in temperatures for 2/3's of the world the last ten years (on average) and sea levels actually falling. Craaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaazy!
And Arabic is a pretty language, but I wouldn't want to be speaking it or trying to type it on this forum (we'd all be out of business anyway). Al Gore didn't have the balls to retaliate against al Qaeda. Nor go into Iraq (even though Bill Clinton thought that Hussein was the biggest threat we faced).
[/quote]
No time or energy to get into this debate. Sorry man.
Bernanke needs to apologize to Ron Paul
http://www.infowars.com/fed-chairman-bernanke-should-apologize-to-ron-paul/
tdude - your boy Griffin thinks that 9/11 was an inside job. Makes him a nutjob.
http://www.realityzone.com/
What BS. ron paul is an annoying whiney fukc.
Fed chairman Bernanke simply doesn’t know Fed history as well as Ron Paul (Or the history conveniently slipped his memory). As far as Watergate, I always thought it was pretty common knowledge that the money ended up in the burglars’ hands through some pretty fishy means. Even wikipedia has part of the story:
[Watergate burglar Bernard] Barker had attempted to disguise the origin of the funds by depositing the donors’ checks into bank accounts which (though controlled by him), were located in banks outside of the United States. What Barker, Liddy, and Sloan did not know was that the complete record of all such transactions are held, after the funds cleared, for roughly six months. Barker’s use of foreign banks to deposit checks and withdraw the funds via cashier’s checks and money orders in April and May 1972 guaranteed that the banks would keep the entire transaction record at least until October and November 1972.
Wikipedia, also states:
Investigative examination of the bank records of a Miami company run byWatergate burglar Bernard Barker revealed that an account controlled by him personally had deposited, and had transferred to it (through the Federal Reserve Check Clearing System) the funds from these financial instruments.
Clearly, there were some very, very odd transactions that went down which may, or may not, have been abnormally facilitated by the Fed. Was this a normal Fed wire, or something more convoluted? My sense has always been that there was something a bit extraordinary about the way the funds went through the Fed system. It does smell, for sure, and to ask about it is not bizarre. It should be noted that the Fed chairman at the time was Arthur Burns, who would have sold his own children to a white slave ring if Nixon had asked. (In a recent report by Micahel Labeit, here at EconominPolicyJournal.com, Labeit details the speech of former Columbia University PhD student Walter Block, who during the speech reminisced about his years studying at the school ,Block specifically recalled how Arthur Burns in his class, instead of teaching, simply told stories of his dinners with Nixon.) Note, I don’t think Nixon, himself, necessarily asked Burns to help in the transfer of the funds, but Burns would very likely have responded positively to a request from a Nixon lieutenant, given his adoration of Nixon.
Here’s the late investigative reporter Sherman Skolnick reporting on the documents the Fed blocked Congress from seeing about its possible involvement with money sent to Hussein:
….in October, 1990, at the time of the Persian Gulf conflict, there was an unpublicized case in the Chicago Federal District Court (No. 90 C 6863). The Illinois Bank Commissioner sought an injunction against the Federal Reserve Board to stop them from turning over certain bank records to the House Banking Committee. The records were those of the Chicago branch of Italy’s largest [bank], Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, owned in part by the Vatican.
Called BNL, it had records of Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein and his secret private joint business dealings with his partner, an American. A close crony of the Federal Reserve, Chicago Federal District Judge Brian Barnett Duff, ordered the return of any records from the Banking Committee, then headed by a Democrat,Rep. Henry Gonzalez (D., Texas).
The House Banking Committee was an intervening party-litigant in the controversy. Judge Duff so opposed the House Banking Committee’s efforts to get those records, that the Judge would not listen to the Committee’s attorney; did not want the attorney in the Judge’s courtroom, the Judge calling him an 800 pound gorilla showing no respect for the court.
In May, 1991, right after the War ended in the Persian Gulf, the case ended up in the Federal Appeals Court in Chicago; a court dominated by Judges tied to the major banks and cronies of the Federal Reserve.
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
From what I understand,the Illinois Bank Commissioner filed against the Fed at the request of the Fed! What were they hiding? Ron Paul’s question wasn’t bizarre, it was Chairman Bernanke’s response that was bizarre, disrespectful and out of order. It’s time for an apology by Chairman Bernanke. And let’s see those Fed records about Hussein, the Chicago branch of BNL and the Fed!
Bernanke’s response of total ignorance reminds me of the time former Treasury Secretary for Economic Policy, Phil Swagel told me, with a straight face, he didn’t know what a gold swap was.
When it serves them, these guys have very forgetful memories. Thank the heavens there are people like Ron Paul around to remind them.
UPDATE Here’s more on possible Fed involvment in the Watergate money. From David T. Beito (Via LRC):
Well, it seems that Paul may have been onto something…or at the very least raised legitimate questions that deserve investigation. A few minutes on google news produced this 1982 story from the Milwaukee Sentinel by Richard Bradee of the paper’s Washington Bureau
“Police who searched the room the Watergate burglars used found $4,200 in $100 dollar bills, all numbered in sequence. Proxmire asked the Federal Reserve Board where the money came from. As he explained in a letter to the late Rep. Wright Patman (D-Tex.), chairman of the House Banking Committee: “I got the biggest run-around [from the Federal Reserve] in years. They ducked, misled, lied, and gave me the idiot treatment.”
I consider myself pretty pragmatic, and a fairly independent thinker...and know without a doubt that a Gore presidency would have been awful. That's it. This is and endless debate not worth having - but is good support for EC (kindof).
[quote=mlgone] without the Fed, ML would have gone down in dec 08 and the world financial markets would have collapsed and many of us would be out of jobs. The credit crises had what the depression didn’t…the fed and monetary controls
without the fed.......mer would not have been in trouble with the bubble????????
electoral college is dumb.
someones vote in CA or ill or where ever is potentially "worth" more
retarded [/quote]
Without the electoral college, rural areas would be completely ignored. Candidates would focus their entire campaigning efforts in the cities since that would be the most efficient use of their time and resources (why spend an entire day trekking through the sticks to glad hand 50 dairy farmers when you can have a 2 hour televised rally in front of 20,000 at a downtown arena). Policy platforms would be skewed to benefit urban Americans since it would be the easiest way for candidates to lock up votes.
The system isn't perfect, but relying purely on the popular vote would not make things better.
[quote=NYCTrader]
[quote=Shania Twain] [quote=mlgone] without the Fed, ML would have gone down in dec 08 and the world financial markets would have collapsed and many of us would be out of jobs. The credit crises had what the depression didn’t…the fed and monetary controls[/quote]
without the fed…mer would not have been in trouble with the bubble???
electoral college is dumb.
someones vote in CA or ill or where ever is potentially “worth” more
retarded [/quote]Without the electoral college, rural areas would be completely ignored. Candidates would focus their entire campaigning efforts in the cities since that would be the most efficient use of their time and resources (why spend an entire day trekking through the sticks to glad hand 50 dairy farmers when you can have a 2 hour televised rally in front of 20,000 at a downtown arena). Policy platforms would be skewed to benefit urban Americans since it would be the easiest way for candidates to lock up votes.The system isn’t perfect, but relying purely on the popular vote would not make things better.[/quote]
You’re right. I did’nt think of that angle. duh
[quote=Wet_Blanket]
I consider myself pretty pragmatic, and a fairly independent thinker…and know without a doubt that a Gore presidency would have been awful. That’s it. This is and endless debate not worth having - but is good support for EC (kindof).
[/quote]I disagree with you re: Gore, but agree that the EC is essential.
[quote=NYCTrader]
[quote=Wet_Blanket]
I consider myself pretty pragmatic, and a fairly independent thinker…and know without a doubt that a Gore presidency would have been awful. That’s it. This is and endless debate not worth having - but is good support for EC (kindof).
[/quote]I disagree with you re: Gore, but agree that the EC is essential.[/quote]I cant believe what I am about to say…would Gore have been worse>?
Iraq was fukcing insane.
I was 100% behind it at the time
In hindsight it was totally wrong
waste of money and GI’s
man…did i say that
[quote=Shania Twain] [quote=NYCTrader]
[quote=Wet_Blanket]
I consider myself pretty pragmatic, and a fairly independent thinker…and know without a doubt that a Gore presidency would have been awful. That’s it. This is and endless debate not worth having - but is good support for EC (kindof).
[/quote]I disagree with you re: Gore, but agree that the EC is essential.[/quote]I cant believe what I am about to say…would Gore have been worse>?
Iraq was fukcing insane.
I was 100% behind it at the time
In hindsight it was totally wrong
waste of money and GI’s
man…did i say that [/quote]
Wow Shania, props for thinking outside the box. Good man.
moraen…9-11 was an inside job. It was hatched by a radical element
in Paki intel using Saudi radicals. Pakistan govt caught wind of it and warned NSA. U S Govt new the location and time and Cheney ran the operation from the bunker. Goal was to allow it to happen for 3 reasons. Iraqi oil, Afghani opium and oilpipeline and to pass the Patriot bill to snoop on Americans.
Lets see…Saudis fly into buildings, USA attacts Iraq and Afghans, Starts new dept of Homeland Security (thought defense dept Army Navy etc) was for homeland security but they are empire building. Does DHS protect our borders…no they steal our toothpaste at airports and put a camera on every intersection in America…U R quite naive. Remember what Rahm said…never let a good crisis go to waste. Many naive bloggers here
:
[quote=tdude]moraen….9-11 was an inside job. It was hatched by a radical element
in Paki intel using Saudi radicals. Pakistan govt caught wind of it and warned NSA. U S Govt new the location and time and Cheney ran the operation from the bunker. Goal was to allow it to happen for 3 reasons. Iraqi oil, Afghani opium and oilpipeline and to pass the Patriot bill to snoop on Americans.
Lets see…Saudis fly into buildings, USA attacts Iraq and Afghans, Starts new dept of Homeland Security (thought defense dept Army Navy etc) was for homeland security but they are empire building. Does DHS protect our borders…no they steal our toothpaste at airports and put a camera on every intersection in America…U R quite naive. Remember what Rahm said…never let a good crisis go to waste. Many naive bloggers here
: [/quote]
You lose any credibility you may possibly have had with that statement. Scientists from renowned institutions and laymen (the guys who actually do controlled demo for a living) have refuted every one of the “Truthers” points.
“But it would have worked if they were using the top secret military grade thermite!”. I never laughed so hard in my life. An eighteen year old kid who is angry at his parents makes a film and gets experts who got their Ph.D’s from the University of Phoenix Online to back him up.
9/11 was an inside job! I can make you 7000% on penny stocks too.
By the way, my Dad works for DARPA, now that he’s out of the Army. No such thing as “military grade top secret thermite”. Clowns.
Back on topic: Gore. I will admit that he has done some good - and I admire what his Father did in the Senate. I can see why he totally lost it after the 2000 elections. When the Democrats were first picking candidates to go against Bush Sr., Gore was considered an “A” class pick. However, Bush Sr’s approval rating was so great that the Dems didn’t want to waste any top candidates on the race - so came in “B” class Bill Clinton. Ofcourse we all know what happened then. So Gore had to wait 8 years for his next chance, only to come soo close to getting the presidency. Put this defeat in context by considering what happend to his Father and you will see that this would have been “payback” for Gore (getting the presidency).
I would have gotten fat, grown a beard, and gone into seclusion as well. Doesn't change the fact that I think Gore is hipocrit on other issues, but I can empathize with that.You do know that every single wire from banks in the US to Banks in the US goes through the Federal Reserve system right? Because it goes through that system does not mean it originates from the fed. If I send my friend a wire for 10,000 from Chase to his account at Bank of America it goes from Chase to the FED to BAC. The FED issues a FED REFERENCE number so that I can track where the funds ended up. It's like saying that UPS sold guns to Al Queda because they delivered them from Cairo to Tehran (not looking into who actually MAILED them). It's idiotic and very poor journalism.Bernanke needs to apologize to Ron Paul
http://www.infowars.com/fed-chairman-bernanke-should-apologize-to-ron-paul/
Bush and 3 jews smoking havana tampas planed 911. Everyone knows that-duh[quote=tdude]moraen….9-11 was an inside job. It was hatched by a radical element
in Paki intel using Saudi radicals. Pakistan govt caught wind of it and warned NSA. U S Govt new the location and time and Cheney ran the operation from the bunker. Goal was to allow it to happen for 3 reasons. Iraqi oil, Afghani opium and oilpipeline and to pass the Patriot bill to snoop on Americans.
Lets see…Saudis fly into buildings, USA attacts Iraq and Afghans, Starts new dept of Homeland Security (thought defense dept Army Navy etc) was for homeland security but they are empire building. Does DHS protect our borders…no they steal our toothpaste at airports and put a camera on every intersection in America…U R quite naive. Remember what Rahm said…never let a good crisis go to waste. Many naive bloggers here
: [/quote]
You lose any credibility you may possibly have had with that statement. Scientists from renowned institutions and laymen (the guys who actually do controlled demo for a living) have refuted every one of the “Truthers” points.
“But it would have worked if they were using the top secret military grade thermite!”. I never laughed so hard in my life. An eighteen year old kid who is angry at his parents makes a film and gets experts who got their Ph.D’s from the University of Phoenix Online to back him up.
9/11 was an inside job! I can make you 7000% on penny stocks too.
By the way, my Dad works for DARPA, now that he’s out of the Army. No such thing as “military grade top secret thermite”. Clowns.
[quote=Wet_Blanket]Back on topic: Gore. I will admit that he has done some good - and I admire what his Father did in the Senate. I can see why he totally lost it after the 2000 elections. When the Democrats were first picking candidates to go against Bush Sr., Gore was considered an “A” class pick. However, Bush Sr’s approval rating was so great that the Dems didn’t want to waste any top candidates on the race - so came in “B” class Bill Clinton. Ofcourse we all know what happened then. So Gore had to wait 8 years for his next chance, only to come soo close to getting the presidency. Put this defeat in context by considering what happend to his Father and you will see that this would have been “payback” for Gore (getting the presidency).
I would have gotten fat, grown a beard, and gone into seclusion as well. Doesn't change the fact that I think Gore is hipocrit on other issues, but I can empathize with that.[/quote]Gore was admittedly a horrible candidate (not as bad as Kerry, but pretty terrible -- now that I think of it, Dems have had some really horrendous presidential candidates in my lifetime). Not allowing Bubba to campaign for him was a huge mistake. And not carrying his home state was inexcusable.
[quote=NYCTrader] [quote=Wet_Blanket]Back on topic: Gore. I will admit that he has done some good - and I admire what his Father did in the Senate. I can see why he totally lost it after the 2000 elections. When the Democrats were first picking candidates to go against Bush Sr., Gore was considered an “A” class pick. However, Bush Sr’s approval rating was so great that the Dems didn’t want to waste any top candidates on the race - so came in “B” class Bill Clinton. Ofcourse we all know what happened then. So Gore had to wait 8 years for his next chance, only to come soo close to getting the presidency. Put this defeat in context by considering what happend to his Father and you will see that this would have been “payback” for Gore (getting the presidency).
I would have gotten fat, grown a beard, and gone into seclusion as well. Doesn't change the fact that I think Gore is hipocrit on other issues, but I can empathize with that.[/quote]Gore was admittedly a horrible candidate (not as bad as Kerry, but pretty terrible -- now that I think of it, Dems have had some really horrendous presidential candidates in my lifetime). Not allowing Bubba to campaign for him was a huge mistake. And not carrying his home state was inexcusable.
[/quote] The problem lies in that everyone wants Capitalism on the way up and Socialism on the way down. Gore instilled zero confidence in people so they went with Bush for 8 years. Things head south and now they want 'change'. The dems could have put Gay Black Jewish Illegal Immigrant Ex-Con on the Ballot this time and won.
Kerry was a complete Douche. Now with the whole Edwards scandal I constantly make fun of my wife for voting for those two. Although, with Edwards now, Kerry seems less douchey by comparison.
Larry Craig and Mark Foley are much more upstanding than John Edwards.
Larry Craig and Mark Foley are much more upstanding than John Edwards.
Rut Row...a lib broker is in the house......
Kerry was a complete Douche. Now with the whole Edwards scandal I constantly make fun of my wife for voting for those two. Although, with Edwards now, Kerry seems less douchey by comparison.
is she hot?
damn....im sorry man. i lost my head.
forget that question
A friend of mine and I used to have lunch together quite often. He provides education for defined contribution plan administrators. We used to have conversations all of the time (arguments really). He was a big supporter of Edwards because Andrew Young was his neighbor (literally right next to each other). I used to tell him that Edwards was a scumbag. When all of this broke, he stopped returning my calls.
Larry Craig, Mark Foley, John Edwards, Newt Gingrich, Bill Clinton - all scumbags.
[quote=Moraen] A friend of mine and I used to have lunch together quite often. He provides education for defined contribution plan administrators. We used to have conversations all of the time (arguments really). He was a big supporter of Edwards because Andrew Young was his neighbor (literally right next to each other). I used to tell him that Edwards was a scumbag. When all of this broke, he stopped returning my calls. Larry Craig, Mark Foley, John Edwards, Newt Gingrich, Bill Clinton - all scumbags.
[/quote]
Liz, huni buni…could u move your chemo equipment from the bedroom?
sorry dear. I have a friend coming over later tonight…
I love you muffin head!
Here it is. Hilarious! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBGfJOA518o
Moraen…who is talking thermite…Im talking the U S Govt knew when where and how and they took advantage of it to further their agenda.
u r quite naive. Cheney was all over this deal…as to the 911 truthers and explosives in the bldng I never brot that up…u did. Did the US Govt know…absolutely. One world govt is on the horizon…surprising that more folks here are so clueless.
The Road to Armageddon
Paul Craig Roberts
February 25, 2010
The Washington Times is a newspaper that looks with favor upon the Bush/Cheney/Obama/neocon wars of aggression in the Middle East and favors making terrorists pay for 9/11. Therefore, I was surprised to learn on February 24 that the most popular story on the paper’s website for the past three days was the “Inside the Beltway” report, “Explosive News,” about the 31 press conferences in cities in the US and abroad on February 19 held by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, an organization of professionals which now has 1,000 members.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said on February 21 that American extremists are now as big a concern as international terrorists.
I was even more surprised that the news report treated the press conference seriously. How did three World Trade Center skyscrapers suddenly disintegrate into fine dust? How did massive steel beams in three skyscrapers suddenly fail as a result of short-lived, isolated, and low temperature fires? “A thousand architects and engineers want to know, and are calling on Congress to order a new investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7,” reports the Washington Times.
The paper reports that the architects and engineers have concluded that the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Institute of Standards and Technology provided “insufficient, contradictory and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers’ destruction” and are “calling for a grand jury investigation of NIST officials.”
The newspaper reports that Richard Gage, the spokesperson for the architects and engineers said: “Government officials will be notified that “Misprision of Treason,’ U.S. Code 18 (Sec. 2382) is a serious federal offense, which requires those with evidence of treason to act. The implications are enormous and may have profound impact on the forthcoming Khalid Sheik Mohammed trial.”
There is now an organization, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth. At the main press conference in San Francisco, Eric Lawyer,the head of that organization, announced the firefighters’ support for the architects and engineers’ demands. He reported that no forensic investigation was made of the fires that are alleged to have destroyed the three buildings and that this failure constitutes a crime.
Mandated procedures were not followed, and instead of being preserved and investigated, the crime scene was destroyed. He also reported that there are more than one hundred first responders who heard and experienced explosions and that there is radio, audio and video evidence of explosions.
Also at the press conference, physicist Steven Jones presented the evidence of nano-thermite in the residue of the WTC buildings found by an international panel of scientists led by University of Copenhagen nano-chemist Professor Niels Harrit. Nano-thermite is a high-tech explosive/pyrotechnic capable of instantly melting steel girders.
Before we yell “conspiracy theory,” we should be aware that the architects, engineers, firefighters, and scientists offer no theory. They provide evidence that challenges the official theory. This evidence is not going to go away.
If expressing doubts or reservations about the official story in the 9/11 Commission Report makes a person a conspiracy theory kook, then we have to include both co-chairmen of the 9/11 Commission and the Commission’s legal counsel, all of whom have written books in which they clearly state that they were lied to by government officials when they conducted their investigation, or, rather, when they presided over the investigation conducted by executive director Philip Zelikow, a member of President George W. Bush’s transition team and Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and a co-author of Bush Secretary of State Condi “Mushroom Cloud” Rice.
There will always be Americans who will believe whatever the government tells them no matter how many times they know the government has lied to them. Despite expensive wars that threaten Social Security and Medicare, wars based on non-existent Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, non-existent Saddam Hussein connections to al Qaida, non-existent Afghan participation in the 9/11 attacks, and the non-existent Iranian nukes that are being hyped as the reason for the next American war of aggression in the Middle East, more than half of the U.S. population still believes the fantastic story that the government has told them about 9/11, a Muslim conspiracy that outwitted the entire Western world.
Moreover, it doesn’t matter to these Americans how often the government changes its story. For example, Americans first heard of Osama bin Laden because the Bush regime pinned the 9/11 attacks on him. Over the years video after video was served up to the gullible American public of bin Laden’s pronouncements. Experts dismissed the videos as fakes, but Americans remained their gullible selves. Then suddenly last year a new 9/11 “mastermind” emerged to take bin Laden’s place, the captive Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the detainee waterboarded 183 times until he confessed to masterminding the 9/11 attack.
In the Middle Ages confessions extracted by torture constituted evidence, but self-incrimination has been a no-no in the U.S. legal system since our founding. But with the Bush regime and the Republican federal judges, whom we were assured would defend the U.S. Constitution, the self-incrimination of Sheik Mohammed stands today as the only evidence the U.S. government has that Muslim terrorists pulled off 9/11.
If a person considers the feats attributed to Khalid Sheik Mohammed, they are simply unbelievable. Sheik Mohammed is a more brilliant, capable superhero than V in the fantasy movie, “V for Vendetta.” Sheik Mohammed outwitted all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies along with those of all U.S. allies or puppets, including Israel’s Mossad. No intelligence service on earth, or all of them combined, was a match for Sheik Mohammed.
Sheik Mohammed outwitted the U.S. National Security Council, d*** Cheney, the Pentagon, the State Department, NORAD, the U.S. Air Force, and Air Traffic Control. He caused Airport Security to fail four times in one morning. He caused the state-of-the-art air defenses of the Pentagon to fail, allowing a hijacked airliner, which was off course all morning while the U.S. Air Force, for the first time in history, was unable to get aloft intercepter aircraft, to crash into the Pentagon.
Sheik Mohammed was able to perform these feats with unqualified pilots.
Sheik Mohammed, even as a waterboarded detainee, has managed to prevent the FBI from releasing the many confiscated videos that would show, according to the official story, the hijacked airliner hitting the Penagon.
How naive do you have to be to believe that any human, or for that matter Hollywood fantasy character, is this powerful and capable?
If Sheik Mohammed has these superhuman capabilities, how did the incompetent Americans catch him? This guy is a patsy tortured into confession in order to keep the American naifs believing the government’s conspiracy theory.
What is going on here is that the U.S. government has to bring the 9/11 mystery to an end. The government must put on trial and convict a culprit so that it can close the case before it explodes. Anyone waterboarded 183 times would confess to anything.
The U.S. government has responded to the evidence being arrayed against its outlandish 9/11 conspiracy theory by redefining the war on terror from external to internal enemies. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said on February 21 that American extremists are now as big a concern as international terrorists. Extremists, of course, are people who get in the way of the government’s agenda, such as the 1,000 Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. The group used to be 100, now it is 1,000. What if it becomes 10,000?
Cass Sunstein, an Obama regime official, has a solution for the 9/11 skeptics: Infiltrate them and provoke them into statements and actions that can be used to discredit or to arrest them. But get rid of them at all cost.
Why employ such extreme measures against alleged kooks if they only provide entertainment and laughs? Is the government worried that they are on to something?
Instead, why doesn’t the U.S. government simply confront the evidence that is presented and answer it?
If the architects, engineers, firefighters, and scientists are merely kooks, it would be a simple matter to acknowledge their evidence and refute it. Why is it necessary to infiltrate them with police agents and to set them up?
Many Americans would reply that “their” government would never even dream of killing Americans by hijacking airliners and destroying buildings in order to advance a government agenda. But on February 3, National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair told the House Intelligence Committee that the U.S. government can assassinate its own citizens when they are overseas. No arrest, trial, or conviction of a capital crime is necessary. Just straight out murder.
Obviously, if the U.S. government can murder its citizens abroad it can murder them at home, and has done so. For example, 100 Branch Davidians were murdered in Waco, Texas, by the Clinton administration for no legitimate reason. The government just decided to use its power knowing that it could get away with it, which it did.
Americans who think “their” government is some kind of morally pure operation would do well to familiarize themselves with Operation Northwoods. Operation Northwoods was a plot drawn up by the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff for the CIA to commit acts of terrorism in American cities and fabricate evidence blaming Castro so that the U.S. could gain domestic and international support for regime change in Cuba. The secret plan was nixed by President John F. Kennedy and was declassified by the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Review Board. It is available online in the National Security Archive. There are numerous online accounts available, including Wikipedia. James Bamford’s book, Body of Secrets, also summarizes the plot:
“Operation Northwoods, which had the written approval of the Chairman [Gen. Lemnitzer] and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing, they needed to launch their war.”
Prior to 9/11 the American neoconservatives were explicit that the wars of aggression that they intended to launch in the Middle East required “a new Pearl Harbor.”
For their own good and that of the wider world, Americans need to pay attention to the growing body of experts who are telling them that the government’s account of 9/11 fails their investigation. 9/11 launched the neoconservative plan for U.S. world hegemony.
As I write, the U.S. government is purchasing the agreement of foreign governments that border Russia to accept U.S. missile interceptor bases. The U.S. intends to ring Russia with U.S. missile bases from Poland through central Europe and Kosovo to Georgia, Azerbaijan and central Asia. U.S. envoy Richard Holbrooke declared on February 20 that al Qaida is moving into former central Asian constituent parts of the Soviet Union, such as Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan. Holbrooke is soliciting U.S. bases in these former Soviet republics under the guise of the ever-expanding “war on terror.”
The U.S. has already encircled Iran with military bases. The U.S. government intends to neutralize China by seizing control over the Middle East and cutting China off from oil.
This plan assumes that Russia and China, nuclear armed states, will be intimidated by U.S. anti-missile defenses and acquiesce to U.S. hegemony and that China will lack oil for its industries and military.
The U.S. government is delusional. Russian military and political leaders have responded to the obvious threat by declaring NATO a direct threat to the security of Russia and by announcing a change in Russian war doctrine to the pre-emptive launch of nuclear weapons. The Chinese are too confident to be bullied by a washed-up American “superpower.”
The morons in Washington are pushing the envelope of nuclear war. The insane drive for American hegemony threatens life on earth. The American people, by accepting the lies and deceptions of “their” government, are facilitating this outcome.
[quote=tdude]The Road to Armageddon
Paul Craig Roberts
February 25, 2010
The Washington Times is a newspaper that looks with favor upon the Bush/Cheney/Obama/neocon wars of aggression in the Middle East and favors making terrorists pay for 9/11. Therefore, I was surprised to learn on February 24 that the most popular story on the paper’s website for the past three days was the “Inside the Beltway” report, “Explosive News,” about the 31 press conferences in cities in the US and abroad on February 19 held by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, an organization of professionals which now has 1,000 members.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said on February 21 that American extremists are now as big a concern as international terrorists.
I was even more surprised that the news report treated the press conference seriously. How did three World Trade Center skyscrapers suddenly disintegrate into fine dust? How did massive steel beams in three skyscrapers suddenly fail as a result of short-lived, isolated, and low temperature fires? “A thousand architects and engineers want to know, and are calling on Congress to order a new investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7,” reports the Washington Times.
The paper reports that the architects and engineers have concluded that the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Institute of Standards and Technology provided “insufficient, contradictory and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers’ destruction” and are “calling for a grand jury investigation of NIST officials.”
The newspaper reports that Richard Gage, the spokesperson for the architects and engineers said: “Government officials will be notified that “Misprision of Treason,’ U.S. Code 18 (Sec. 2382) is a serious federal offense, which requires those with evidence of treason to act. The implications are enormous and may have profound impact on the forthcoming Khalid Sheik Mohammed trial.”
There is now an organization, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth. At the main press conference in San Francisco, Eric Lawyer,the head of that organization, announced the firefighters’ support for the architects and engineers’ demands. He reported that no forensic investigation was made of the fires that are alleged to have destroyed the three buildings and that this failure constitutes a crime.
Mandated procedures were not followed, and instead of being preserved and investigated, the crime scene was destroyed. He also reported that there are more than one hundred first responders who heard and experienced explosions and that there is radio, audio and video evidence of explosions.
Also at the press conference, physicist Steven Jones presented the evidence of nano-thermite in the residue of the WTC buildings found by an international panel of scientists led by University of Copenhagen nano-chemist Professor Niels Harrit. Nano-thermite is a high-tech explosive/pyrotechnic capable of instantly melting steel girders.
Before we yell “conspiracy theory,” we should be aware that the architects, engineers, firefighters, and scientists offer no theory. They provide evidence that challenges the official theory. This evidence is not going to go away.
If expressing doubts or reservations about the official story in the 9/11 Commission Report makes a person a conspiracy theory kook, then we have to include both co-chairmen of the 9/11 Commission and the Commission’s legal counsel, all of whom have written books in which they clearly state that they were lied to by government officials when they conducted their investigation, or, rather, when they presided over the investigation conducted by executive director Philip Zelikow, a member of President George W. Bush’s transition team and Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and a co-author of Bush Secretary of State Condi “Mushroom Cloud” Rice.
There will always be Americans who will believe whatever the government tells them no matter how many times they know the government has lied to them. Despite expensive wars that threaten Social Security and Medicare, wars based on non-existent Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, non-existent Saddam Hussein connections to al Qaida, non-existent Afghan participation in the 9/11 attacks, and the non-existent Iranian nukes that are being hyped as the reason for the next American war of aggression in the Middle East, more than half of the U.S. population still believes the fantastic story that the government has told them about 9/11, a Muslim conspiracy that outwitted the entire Western world.
Moreover, it doesn’t matter to these Americans how often the government changes its story. For example, Americans first heard of Osama bin Laden because the Bush regime pinned the 9/11 attacks on him. Over the years video after video was served up to the gullible American public of bin Laden’s pronouncements. Experts dismissed the videos as fakes, but Americans remained their gullible selves. Then suddenly last year a new 9/11 “mastermind” emerged to take bin Laden’s place, the captive Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the detainee waterboarded 183 times until he confessed to masterminding the 9/11 attack.
In the Middle Ages confessions extracted by torture constituted evidence, but self-incrimination has been a no-no in the U.S. legal system since our founding. But with the Bush regime and the Republican federal judges, whom we were assured would defend the U.S. Constitution, the self-incrimination of Sheik Mohammed stands today as the only evidence the U.S. government has that Muslim terrorists pulled off 9/11.
If a person considers the feats attributed to Khalid Sheik Mohammed, they are simply unbelievable. Sheik Mohammed is a more brilliant, capable superhero than V in the fantasy movie, “V for Vendetta.” Sheik Mohammed outwitted all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies along with those of all U.S. allies or puppets, including Israel’s Mossad. No intelligence service on earth, or all of them combined, was a match for Sheik Mohammed.
Sheik Mohammed outwitted the U.S. National Security Council, d*** Cheney, the Pentagon, the State Department, NORAD, the U.S. Air Force, and Air Traffic Control. He caused Airport Security to fail four times in one morning. He caused the state-of-the-art air defenses of the Pentagon to fail, allowing a hijacked airliner, which was off course all morning while the U.S. Air Force, for the first time in history, was unable to get aloft intercepter aircraft, to crash into the Pentagon.
Sheik Mohammed was able to perform these feats with unqualified pilots.
Sheik Mohammed, even as a waterboarded detainee, has managed to prevent the FBI from releasing the many confiscated videos that would show, according to the official story, the hijacked airliner hitting the Penagon.
How naive do you have to be to believe that any human, or for that matter Hollywood fantasy character, is this powerful and capable?
If Sheik Mohammed has these superhuman capabilities, how did the incompetent Americans catch him? This guy is a patsy tortured into confession in order to keep the American naifs believing the government’s conspiracy theory.
What is going on here is that the U.S. government has to bring the 9/11 mystery to an end. The government must put on trial and convict a culprit so that it can close the case before it explodes. Anyone waterboarded 183 times would confess to anything.
The U.S. government has responded to the evidence being arrayed against its outlandish 9/11 conspiracy theory by redefining the war on terror from external to internal enemies. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said on February 21 that American extremists are now as big a concern as international terrorists. Extremists, of course, are people who get in the way of the government’s agenda, such as the 1,000 Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. The group used to be 100, now it is 1,000. What if it becomes 10,000?
Cass Sunstein, an Obama regime official, has a solution for the 9/11 skeptics: Infiltrate them and provoke them into statements and actions that can be used to discredit or to arrest them. But get rid of them at all cost.
Why employ such extreme measures against alleged kooks if they only provide entertainment and laughs? Is the government worried that they are on to something?
Instead, why doesn’t the U.S. government simply confront the evidence that is presented and answer it?
If the architects, engineers, firefighters, and scientists are merely kooks, it would be a simple matter to acknowledge their evidence and refute it. Why is it necessary to infiltrate them with police agents and to set them up?
Many Americans would reply that “their” government would never even dream of killing Americans by hijacking airliners and destroying buildings in order to advance a government agenda. But on February 3, National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair told the House Intelligence Committee that the U.S. government can assassinate its own citizens when they are overseas. No arrest, trial, or conviction of a capital crime is necessary. Just straight out murder.
Obviously, if the U.S. government can murder its citizens abroad it can murder them at home, and has done so. For example, 100 Branch Davidians were murdered in Waco, Texas, by the Clinton administration for no legitimate reason. The government just decided to use its power knowing that it could get away with it, which it did.
Americans who think “their” government is some kind of morally pure operation would do well to familiarize themselves with Operation Northwoods. Operation Northwoods was a plot drawn up by the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff for the CIA to commit acts of terrorism in American cities and fabricate evidence blaming Castro so that the U.S. could gain domestic and international support for regime change in Cuba. The secret plan was nixed by President John F. Kennedy and was declassified by the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Review Board. It is available online in the National Security Archive. There are numerous online accounts available, including Wikipedia. James Bamford’s book, Body of Secrets, also summarizes the plot:
“Operation Northwoods, which had the written approval of the Chairman [Gen. Lemnitzer] and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing, they needed to launch their war.”
Prior to 9/11 the American neoconservatives were explicit that the wars of aggression that they intended to launch in the Middle East required “a new Pearl Harbor.”
For their own good and that of the wider world, Americans need to pay attention to the growing body of experts who are telling them that the government’s account of 9/11 fails their investigation. 9/11 launched the neoconservative plan for U.S. world hegemony.
As I write, the U.S. government is purchasing the agreement of foreign governments that border Russia to accept U.S. missile interceptor bases. The U.S. intends to ring Russia with U.S. missile bases from Poland through central Europe and Kosovo to Georgia, Azerbaijan and central Asia. U.S. envoy Richard Holbrooke declared on February 20 that al Qaida is moving into former central Asian constituent parts of the Soviet Union, such as Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan. Holbrooke is soliciting U.S. bases in these former Soviet republics under the guise of the ever-expanding “war on terror.”
The U.S. has already encircled Iran with military bases. The U.S. government intends to neutralize China by seizing control over the Middle East and cutting China off from oil.
This plan assumes that Russia and China, nuclear armed states, will be intimidated by U.S. anti-missile defenses and acquiesce to U.S. hegemony and that China will lack oil for its industries and military.
The U.S. government is delusional. Russian military and political leaders have responded to the obvious threat by declaring NATO a direct threat to the security of Russia and by announcing a change in Russian war doctrine to the pre-emptive launch of nuclear weapons. The Chinese are too confident to be bullied by a washed-up American “superpower.”
The morons in Washington are pushing the envelope of nuclear war. The insane drive for American hegemony threatens life on earth. The American people, by accepting the lies and deceptions of “their” government, are facilitating this outcome.
[/quote]
I like this theory better:
David Icke argues that reptilian, shape-shifting extraterrestrial humanoids
are responsible for the 9/11 attacks. According to Icke, a reptilian
global elite is behind all things that occur in the world. Icke’s
theories are rejected by 911blogger.com and other conspiracy theory
sites.
I agree with NYC. His theory is more probable than nano-thermite.
tdude - Americans first heard of UBL because Bush tried to pin the 9/11 attacks? You are living in a different world than everybody else. You mean the rockets that Clinton launched weren’t publicized as “trying to kill bin Laden”.
Take your lies somewhere else.
You’ve been hoodwinked by the “truthers”.
tdude - PCR reading David Ray Griffins book and regurgitating it is not research. David Ray Griffin is about as credible as Pat Robertson.
Process theology indeed.
There will always be conspiracy theorists. Whether you choose to align yourself with them or not is your choice. But inevitably, it is a coping mechanism for some people. What I find odd is that a religious guy, who relies on faith in the afterlife, finds it so hard to believe that some things are not fully explainable.
We can’t believe that someone could get through our defenses and attack us on our own soil. We can’t believe that men of Arabic descent could be so skilled. Well, facts are facts. The scientists who proved the 9/11 conspiracy false are more respected, more widely published, likely had better grades, and graduated from more difficult programs.
The people who work with controlled demolitions have proven three ways that the conspiracy wouldn’t work.
You guys are like Wac-a-mole though. You debunk one thing, and you make something else up. Clowntown.
[quote=NYCTrader] [quote=Wet_Blanket]Back on topic: Gore. I will admit that he has done some good - and I admire what his Father did in the Senate. I can see why he totally lost it after the 2000 elections. When the Democrats were first picking candidates to go against Bush Sr., Gore was considered an “A” class pick. However, Bush Sr’s approval rating was so great that the Dems didn’t want to waste any top candidates on the race - so came in “B” class Bill Clinton. Ofcourse we all know what happened then. So Gore had to wait 8 years for his next chance, only to come soo close to getting the presidency. Put this defeat in context by considering what happend to his Father and you will see that this would have been “payback” for Gore (getting the presidency).
One thing I never understood about 2000 was why did they pick Liberman. When hadassah lieberman started talking about having to bury the white house silverware under ground for 3 days to purify it according to jewish traditions; I got a little freaked out and voted for bush.
Gore should have guaranteed TN
Liberman should have guaranteed FL
They both failed.
I think McCain/Ridge would have been a great team in '08. I bet Ridge has some skeletons. Just seems like a cool guy.
[quote=Lawrence][quote=NYCTrader] [quote=Wet_Blanket]Back on topic: Gore. I will admit that he has done some good - and I admire what his Father did in the Senate. I can see why he totally lost it after the 2000 elections. When the Democrats were first picking candidates to go against Bush Sr., Gore was considered an “A” class pick. However, Bush Sr’s approval rating was so great that the Dems didn’t want to waste any top candidates on the race - so came in “B” class Bill Clinton. Ofcourse we all know what happened then. So Gore had to wait 8 years for his next chance, only to come soo close to getting the presidency. Put this defeat in context by considering what happend to his Father and you will see that this would have been “payback” for Gore (getting the presidency).
One thing I never understood about 2000 was why did they pick Liberman. When hadassah lieberman started talking about having to bury the white house silverware under ground for 3 days to purify it according to jewish traditions; I got a little freaked out and voted for bush.
Gore should have guaranteed TN
Liberman should have guaranteed FL
They both failed.
I think McCain/Ridge would have been a great team in '08. I bet Ridge has some skeletons. Just seems like a cool guy.
[/quote]
They chose Lieberman because he was one of the only Dems to challenge Clinton on the Lewinsky scandal. They wanted to bring in a “conservative” and “family values” voice that would offset the Clinton baggage Gore was bringing to the ticket. It was a dumb, calculated, and spineless move. One of the many horrible decisions that cost the Dems an election that should have been in the bag.
Source URL:https://www.wealthmanagement.com/forums/whats-firms/ron-paul