Wrong about Bin Laden, he is on the FBI's most wanted list for crimes committed overseas (there are actually statements by the fbi saying they have 0 evidence against ole bin, but I doubt you would believe it even if I posted it), but not 911. If you wish to believe that 19 rag heads took out three buildings with 2 planes (plus the pentagon with another), building seven not being hit at all, and came straight down as some in the biz called the most perfect controlled demolition they had every seen, through the most defended airspace on earth, completely in disregard to all previous SOP for such an event to intercept at the first sign of trouble on a commercial flight (all things I asked how it could be day 1, except building 7 since I didn't find out about it later), that any third world air force could have handled otherwise, and a million and one other inconsistencies in the official story that makes it look like a complete fantasy, then I'm sure you have your reasons other then really thinking and investigating it, except for perhaps investigating the versions that are meant to sound so far fetched that it allows people like yourself to write off all the real evidence against the official story. That is up to you, but there are more and more people everyday that are doing real investigations into what happened, and your fictional view of reality is losing ground daily to some pretty serious and well thoughtful people in high and responsible positions who can see that the official story is just plain hogwash. shrug
Truthfully, I doubt people such as yourself with the views you have expressed here will ever be part of the solution, and luckily people such as yourself are pretty much now the minority, kind of like flat earthers were or still are, in those who still believe in such. Goat Bob Giramma wrote: > The polygamous bin Laden family is quite large, and I am unaware of any bin > Ladens (beyond one of Osama's sons) who are involved in the militant Islamist > cause. The FBI has authority mostly limited to the US, so if bin Laden is > not on the most wanted list, it could be due to the fact that bin Laden is > not in the US. > > The dysfunctional culture and corrupt political system of Saudi Arabia are > complicit in Islamist terrorism. You can say that about most Arab countries, > as well as Pakistan and Iran. The US government has chosen to work with > those leaders so willing. The government of Saudi Arabia is one of those. > However, if you'd like to nuke Mecca and Medina, I won't stand in your way. > Just as I see some staunch critics of Christianity and Judaism here, you can > accurately label me a critic of Islam. It is false and harmful. > > I refuse to entertain 9/11 conspiracy theories. I've read them, and they are > all easily-refuted. > > The Constitution is something dear to my heart. If we could get the > government to interpret it properly, we would have a highly (though > imperfect) libertarian system. The damage, however, started long before > Bush. While I don't like the Patriot Act, TSA, and other police state acts > of recent years, those don't affect me personally nearly as much as the > abuses done over the years by the leftists. I pay for those and witness the > damage done every day. Those welfare state and nanny state programs started > growing fast under FDR and again under LBJ. > > One additional note: You say "Islamics," while I say "Islamists." My term > is limited to those Muslims who advocate an authoritarian system of > government based on the Koran and run by theocrats. While I am critical of > Islam as a faith, I believe most Muslims are not Islamists. > > > From: goat! > Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 7:31 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Libertarian] Stop the War FOR Terror > > > Except even by your logic, the threat didn't originated from Iraq or > even Afghanistan (Bin Laden isn't even on the FBI's most wanted list for > doing 911, and the government allowed the Laden family to fly out when > no other planes were flying right after 911, even while Bush was saying > it was Bin Laden that did it), it originated from Saudi Arabia, and that > is where we are not only at already, but this administration has moved > all their biz there too, and are very cozy with them. So why didn't "we" > take out Saudi Arabia since that is where the threat came from? > > You really need to figure out that 911 was a psyops for your "heroes" > the neocons, to stage a coup here, and steal or control most the Arab > world, and the garbage that they have been dumping into your and > everybody else's head that believe as you do because of it, is just > that, garbage, including that the Islamics are any more of a threat then > any other group. If it was Christians over there in that area that the > ptb wished to steal from Christians, they could make them look just as > bad if not worse then the Islamics. In fact, most the the Islamics they > hold up as being so big and bad are either ADL that have "converted" > (like the one in NY) or have been on "our" payrolls for years (like > since we have been using them against the Russians in Afghanistan's and > anywhere else in the world we wish to use them as a proxy without > getting our hands dirty, but that has always been the SOP of this > faction, that is to use and establish the worse governments, while > tearing down the good ones, as there is more money and control in > destruction, then in peace, for them, or at least they think so), and > the only war against terror is against us the people and others who will > not go alone with the ptb's NWO. > > It hasn't been the Islamics who have ruined the economy and turned the > Constitution into "just a god damn piece of paper." It has been this > administration. And remember why this admin said the terrorist attacked > us? Because they hate our freedoms. Well that much is true from the > results of what this admin did (that is make the constitution toilet > paper), but it seems we either do negotiate with terrorist or the REAL > terrorist are somebody other then we are being told they are. And since > crime is now terror, and we are all "criminals", that means the war on > terror is against us the people and the REAL terrorist are the neocons > and their ilk (no matter what party or they call themselves). WAKE UP! > > For god's sake stop getting your news from fox and other neocon sources, > they and others are paid billions of dollars to give you your screwed > up views from the "US" government and the best PR firms money can buy so > they can make you a slave or dead, while you bleat for it. > > The real threat has always been the bankers, who the neocons are agents > of (though Hillary and a very lot of other factions are also agents, > because the bankers can buy all sides, since they can print money out of > nothing but paper or make it out of electrons), and it was exactly this > same faction of bankers / corporatist that we have been fighting since > the war for independence. They are more of a threat then the Islamics > (except the ones the neocons are partners with and where the supposed > hijackers came from, as I said, Saudi Arabia) could ever hope to be. > > Take it for what it is worth, as unlike you, I can document what I say > (and all of history screams it), and know it is much more so then your > fantasy you have internalized, though you certainly aren't alone, but > until we all start to figure out what is really going on, there is no > way we are going to be able to stop it, and will continue to run in > circles biting our own asses, which is after all, the best of the Art of > War teaches, to get your enemies (us, free humanity) to kill each other > and not make a fight of it at all against the real enemy. > > It is up to you, keep being a rube, or figure out what reality really > is, so we can at least start fighting the real enemy. > > Goat > > Bob Giramma wrote: >> You have chosen a portion of my statements that excludes the "life, liberty, >> and property" qualifier on my definition of "interests of Americans," >> although that may have been in another response within this threat. Anyway, >> I would oppose a "war for oil," if that's what I believed were being fought. >> I do not believe that, however. >> >> Islamist attacks on individual Americans and their property originate >> outside the US. The country is highly unlikely to be invaded, meaning any >> military action is likely to require action overseas. The risk of invasion >> would only occur if the US military disarmed and shut down. >> >> Does your disapproval of a collective US military force require that >> individual Americans affected by foreign-originated Islamist attacks hire >> their own hit men to retaliate? Does the mafia make house calls to caves in >> Afghanistan? Or what do you propose? >> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > ------------------------------------ > > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- Goat (Generalist of all Trades)! Jeremiah 50:8 "Flee out of the midst of Babylon, and go forth out of the land of the Chaldeans, and be as the male goats before the flocks." "A first attempt to recover the right of self government may fail, so may a second, a third, etc. But as a younger and more instructed race comes on, the sentiment becomes more and more intuitive, and a fourth, a fifth, or some subsequent one of the ever renewed attempts will ultimately succeed... To attain all this, however, rivers of blood must yet flow, and years of desolation pass over; yet the object is worth rivers of blood and years of desolation. For what inheritance so valuable can man leave to his posterity?" --Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1823. Send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and in the subject line enter: [subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], to subscribe to Liberty Colonies. Note: Do not include the braces, and it goes on the subject line, not the body of the email. Also, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not required if you want to use the addy that you are sending the subscribe from.
