Back In 2002 if you said that Iraq dont has mass destruction weapons you could been called conspiracionist. Bush lied for USA to take down Saddam, but in early 2000s americans would say: "he is your president, he dont lie".
It is becoming common knowledge that American government had a hand in the September 11 attacks, because there are some really strange facts which are not easily explained, such as the increase in insurance by the WTC CEO. The fact that he was not in the building on the day of the attack etc.
Regarding the attack on Trump, everyone is free to believe what they want. But if it were a white man trying to enter the hall armed, it would be more acceptable. However, for a black man with Muslim traces to easily enter armed is madness.
I'm going to disagree here.
I disagree that one would be called a conspiracy theorist for not believing in Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Not true. Unpatriotic, probably; liberal pussy, likely; but the conspiracy theorist label was unlikely.
Prior to 2003, there was plenty of evidence from legitimate institutions and individuals showing that Bush, Cheney, Powell, and Rumsfeld were full of shit.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the United Nations Monitoring, Verification, and Inspections Commission (UNMOVIC) conducted more than 900 inspections at more than 500 sites. The inspectors did not find that Iraq possessed chemical or biological weapons or that it had reconstituted its nuclear weapons program. Iraq accepted rules for even stricter inspections with UN Resolution 1441 to keep the US at bay.
The non-kooks in the US government ("deep state liberal globalist UN pussy elites" in today's lingo
) pushed against the narrative that Iraq was a threat w/weapons of mass destruction and that it had connections to Al-Qaeda.
I'm pretty sure it was the same idiots who pushed the idea that the USSR was responsible for all terrorism in the early 80s with little evidence--they asked people to look past the obvious motivations of the (P)IRA, Mau Mau, and others and blame it all on the USSR global terror plots--wanted to use Iraq as their boogeyman story to push their neo-con bullshit again.
https://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/24/world/threats-and-responses-a-cia-rival-pentagon-sets-up-intelligence-unit.html#:~:text=''Yes%2C%20there's%20frustration%2C,the%20domain%20of%20the%20C.I.A.
That whole war was similar to our current war attacking Iran. The same type of idiots and political ideologues pushed their feelings rather than listen the evidence provided by those liberal data crunching pussies. The key difference seems to be that Bush Jr. went on a publicity tour to sell the war to the public (along side wide spread fear caused by 9/11) and Trump just manufactured reasons to go to war after starting the war.
-----
The US did not allow Bin Laden to fly planes into the WTC buildings. If this was true, it would be the best kept secret ever. We couldn't keep Reagan selling bombs to Iran under wraps, we couldn't even keep nuclear secrets away from the Soviet Union, but we somehow managed to keep killing our own people with civilian planes under wraps? If the Rosenbergs were able to get nuclear secrets to the USSR and Snowden was able to expose the NSA, there is no way, 9/11 was magically comprised of the first group of humans to be able to keep a secret.
The CEO not being there is par for the course. The US president barely spends time at the White House and the rare occasion my CEO comes into one of the buildings, it makes our news feed. Only the rank and file have to RTO.
Distrust is good, but distrusting the simplest story and coupling incompetence with omnipotent powers might not be the best way to interpret what is going on. MK-Ultra was gnarly, the government following MLK Jr around was terrible, the police setting up Leonard Peltier was crazy, the police manipulating kids with disabilities is fucked up, but just cause those fucked up things occured doesn't mean the government is able to change the weather, fake moon landings, or crash plans into buildings. The level of ability and risk involved in tricking a disabled kid into buying weed, harassing a Black socialist, poorly attempting to frame a Native American activist, etc. is no where near the level of risk of inviting a man to come to a hotel with a gun risking the lives of the sycophantic but powerful lackeys of the Trump admin.
Topic: Changes under Trump 2.0 (Read 188776 times)