Originally posted by PVS
whatever deano.
just cut down on the spam.
the adults are talking here.
you dont sound like one
its funny you decide to open a 9/11 thread suggesting that you think something isnt right with the whole 9/11 thing 🙂 and yet ive been telling you that for years, has pvs seen the light? 😱
Sure 9/11 could have been prevented, but the structure of government made that impossible. Things like the Patriot Act and the restructuring of the CIA, FBI, and Homeland Security are inceredible ideas in theory. The big problem is the current administration has warped them into tools of their agenda instead of security precautions needed to protect the country. I do believe there is a choice between total privacy and complete protection. One is going to have to be sacrificed for the other. But it's still up to the people to decide.
Originally posted by PVS
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklini'm with the fat man on this one ✅
Please define "essential liberty." I interpret that as giving up all freedom for the sake of security. I completely disagree with the notion that we should have to do that. Rather, certain privacy rights, such as ID cards, terrorist watch list search that include Arab nationals, and background checks on all foreign students studying over here, when taken away would increase our protection tenfold.
If Ben Franklin is saying the liberty is keeping everything about an individual private, I would have to respectfully disagree with him.
Originally posted by Deano
i said everyone contradicts everyone elseive posted links where they contradict your post
it just depends on what you believe
thats his version of an answer. reminds me of bush and company when asked about carl rove. "we previously answered that question, so we wont answer it again" bravo deano!!! you got my vote
churchill also said
From the days of Sparticus Weishaupt, Karl Marx, Trotsky, Rosa Luxemberg, and Emma Goldman, this world conspiracy has been steadily growing. This conspiracy played a definite recognizable role in the tragedy of the French revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the 19th century. And now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their head and have become the undisputed masters of that enormous empire."
Originally posted by Oswald Kenobi
Please define "essential liberty." I interpret that as giving up all freedom for the sake of security. I completely disagree with the notion that we should have to do that. Rather, certain privacy rights, such as ID cards, terrorist watch list search that include Arab nationals, and background checks on all foreign students studying over here, when taken away would increase our protection tenfold.If Ben Franklin is saying the liberty is keeping everything about an individual private, I would have to respectfully disagree with him.
ahh, but its a slippery slope. when the law is authorised to spy and even arrest people with no warrant and no charge, then everyone is in danger.
i think ben meant just what he said. "essential liberty" as in "liberty is essential", and not some liberties over others. i would rather be bombed than live in a police state.
Originally posted by Deano
i said everyone contradicts everyone elseive posted links where they contradict your post
it just depends on what you believe
You've posted links wherein the author, who lives overseas, contradicts the statement of an eyewitness inside the building. It depends on what you believe? So, you're going to disbleieve the eyewitness in favor of a guy who wasn't even there? And you claim to be intelligent?
Originally posted by PVS
ahh, but its a slippery slope. when the law is authorised to spy and even arrest people with no warrant and no charge, then everyone is in danger.
i think ben meant just what he said. "essential liberty" as in "liberty is essential", and not some liberties over others. i would rather be bombed than live in a police state.
Oh absolutely. A police state would be worse than living in fear of the next attack. But I would give up some privacy in order to be safe. I agree with the your view on arrests and spying, but I still believe that a person must give up a small level of privacy to live safely.
Originally posted by Oswald Kenobi
Oh absolutely. A police state would be worse than living in fear of the next attack. But I would give up some privacy in order to be safe. I agree with the your view on arrests and spying, but I still believe that a person must give up a small level of privacy to live safely.
thats why they orchestrate these attacks..so they can get us to accept a police state..they want us controlled and watched..a prison planet..and they use terrorism has one of there major weapons.. all is leading to a one world goverment
you say people must give up a small level of privacy? SMALL?! yeh rite
come back in 10 years time and say that..when you have a microchip in your hand
so fukin ignorant
go ahead and wallow at the feet of your goverment begging them for protection if it makes you happy..cos they really care about your well being 🙄
9/11 is just an example of advancing the agenda futher, hitler did it to his own people, and now it happens again
when you finally drill this in to your head,the better.
whats wrong with you
blinding ignorance does mislead us
but most people have believed it, and the wars of conquest that have followed have been 'justified' by the official version being true. This has included the deaths of at least five thousand Afghan civilians. These were men, women and children, like those who live in your street, who were slaughtered by US and British bombing to "get Bin Laden" - the man who was supposed to have organised 9/11 from a cave in Afghanistan. It's a lie, but the lie was believed and, therefore, led to the reaction that killed and maimed still more people in the name of 'peace' and 'justice'. Some idiots have asked what was the point of people knowing what is going on. Well, if the public realised who the true perpetrators of 9/11 really were we would not have had our freedoms destroyed by the day since those planes hit, and thousands of civilians in Afghanistan would still be with us. Nor would we have had the invasion of Iraq with more than seven thousand civilians killed and tens of thousands maimed,
but all thanx to people like you who swallow up everything pricks like bush(the puppet) and his minions tell you.
it makes me laugh when i hear you lot talk..you think you are intelligent but you have proved to me your not..
i love the fact that people keep bringing up the "bush ignored warnings" issue
do you people have any idea how many terrorist threats the US recieves on a daily basis?...quite literally hundreds...the president recieves whats known as a daily threat assessment of intelligence gathered from communication intercepts at the NSA's listening post which monitors internet, email and telephone communications of potential threats to the US
the top 10 threats are then presented DAILY to the president and other members of the governemt who can decide what action to take
how many of those threats actually emerge to be real?...almost none
you only have to look at the fact that every time there IS a terrorist attack...up to about 50 different terrorist organisations announce that they were responsible....
so why would the attacks of sept 11th be any different?...why would they be considered to be any more a credible threat than any other?...especially given that you all love to criticise the intelligence workers for their apparent uselessness and incompetency