There was an error in this gadget

Friday, 27 March 2009

Truth movement continues to enthral

Lots of videos and stuff being watched recently. First one you guys should check out is the investigation documentary called “Zero”, here’s a link to the first (of ten) parts, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-YqET96OO0 -  you can see the next part in the list on the right, and the following videos are always in the same place. It’s long, but interesting and worth it. As always with a movie of this kind I’d suggest viewer discretion and I wouldn’t expect to take everything at face value or see everything as relevant, but as always my argument is that if you watch said film and have just ONE unanswered question left over and the 9/11 commission doesn’t answer it, then the Government has been negligent (in the least) to explain what happened on that day. That’s what really drives me with the truth movement stuff. DSCN0862Anyway, back to Zero, Chooch and I watched it for the first time last night.  She hadn’t seen a proper Truth-movement film in ages, so it was interesting to see her reactions. Think I’ll make a ‘truther’ of her yet!! So check that documentary/investigation thing out if you get a chance. Harry will dismiss it (and this post) from the start, but I don’t care, because he’s not the only reader lol.

I thought I’d post another video on here (that is thankfully just one part) that raises some interesting questions. Everyone has heard the “controlled demolition” theories, and if I’m honest I have slowly begun to doubt them in part, but every time I watch the video footage it collapsing and examine the official explanation, something doesn’t add up still, which is nicely rounded up (in part) with the following video…

A lot of people, when I tell them about the Truth movement, often say things like “Why the hell would the Government attack their own people!? It makes no sense!” But if you look into it though, it makes a lot of sense. False flag terror, as it is known, has been a recurring theme throughout America’s history to start involvement in conflicts and countries that would otherwise have no baring for them and have no public support. Support is raised when it directly affects the people who need to be behind the action, as Rebuilding America’s Defences (written by Cheney and Rumsfeld, among others) stated in 2000, a “catastrophic and catalysing event…like a new pearl harbour” would be needed to raise support for new presence of American forces in the middle east. Guess what, one year later an attack happened and America is now in the middle east. I guess the answer of “why” still hasn’t been answered, in my opinion it is part of a larger scheme beyond the natural “omg they want oil!” thoughts – it’s more about policing the world, fear, oppression and of course the aforementioned material gain. A friend of mine, who is an opposer of the truth movement, said that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost the US Government more than it has gained, so the theory doesn’t make sense. But of course it does, did Bush, Cheney or Rumsfeld fund the government? Or fund the military? Not unless they could raise a trillion dollars. No, they did not fund the war, so it is of no personal loss to them – they will live out their lies in the safe financial security of Government pensions, paid for by the taxpayer – the same people who funded (and continue to fund) their illegal wars.

Speaking of illegal wars, which Iraq definitely was, why were the American and British Governments not held accountable for war crimes after they openly admitted that there were no weapons of mass destruction? After all, the invasion in 2003 was not allowed by international UN law and was under veto by several countries. Okay, if the co-illusion had gone in and found those weapons, then fine – the inspectors were wrong and the war was ‘excusable’ (if the killing of 600,000 Muslims can ever be excused?) but the fact that they weren’t there proved that the war was illegal and therefore the UN should prosecute those responsible, or intelligence agencies should be held responsible at the least. I’m not going to pretend Saddam was a nice man in any way shape or form, but he (like Bin Laden or should I say Tom Osman as he was known by his friends in the CIA) is a figurehead for the fear campaign taken up by the Western Media and governments. “The campaign of fear and consumption” as Maralyn Manson so rightly put it (here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90xJVOUuV-I). Stay afraid and don’t ask questions, if you ask questions then you’re not patriotic. I love America, it’s a beautiful and amazing place, I see myself as a distant patriot for what the American dream stands for, and as an outsider I’m not bashed from left and right by American media publications, so I like to think that I have a nice standpoint looking in on the situation. How ironic that the bill that takes away American civil liberties is named The Patriot Act – suggesting that to be patriotic you have to submit to the Government’s invasion of your privacy.

 

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2008-09/2008-09-10-voa59.cfm?CFID=152333118&CFTOKEN=52946794&jsessionid=de3029e0b79ab10be285264359e3c3926737

 

Sorry for writing so long, but I’m very passionate about this subject, and it’s helping me for my dissertation writing style – speaking of which, I’m now at 7,154 words down (out of a minimum target of 9,000) and I’ve got over a thousand words in appendices too! Looking good brothers and sisters.

 

Okay, before I go, listen to this song, it’s awesome (would you expect anything less from my music taste?)

 

 

Reno x

No comments:

Post a Comment