in general the issue with faked death stories is that most families love the lie. they want to beleive the hero story and make no effort to disprove it. the problem is that tillman is a celebrity and his family is wildly opposed to lies, thats why they are vocal atheists. so like i said, the government will usually give the option for families to believe a hero story, and that is nice of them, as most people love to delude themselves, it is easier that way (thats why they are religious). but the tillmans are brutal truth tellers, to the point where the brother basically tells mccain to **** himself at his brother's funeral, in front of the whole world. thats ballsy, to say that on your brother's behalf at a funeral. i like when the "no atheists in foxholes" myth is exposed. atheists are fine folks and deserve a little respect, they dont need you going to their funeral and saying all kindsa god nonsense. when my father dies, the funeral will be at a church, and my mother and i do not believe that crap and will resent it. but we dont have the brass balls of the tillman family and we will keep our mouths shut. so given that we have established that tillmans brother is completely unafraid to speak his mind and does not trust the government, and makes no claims that his government has murdered his brother, i think we might reconsider our own conspiracy theories.
The problem with this line of reasoning is that the only party complaining is the injured party. Those that benefited from the scenario (in God knows what way, I have no idea) never talk. In the case of 9/11 the injured party would certainly be the Muslim world and they have a very different take on what happened that day. I think Achmadinijad or however you spell it is probably right. He is not alone, by the way. I'll tell you another thing he is right on is about Iran's right to nuclear power. We have no legal right to decide what country gets to have nuclear technology or doesn't. And I am curious Red, I can't remember. Do you think Oswald actually shot JFK or not? I thought with Louisiana being so close to the action that most people down there were convinced there was something fishy going on there. Or how about Huey Long? Are you telling me that was a lone gunman? Really? Nobody else was interested in having him killed? I don't understand why the label "conspiracy theory" is successfully used as some sort of a dismissive "Jedi mind trick" to stop all critical thinking when history is full of them.
When you insist that government statistics and press releases can be relied on to accurately represent the situation....then, yes, I do. So are you still insisting that the recession is over or not?
No one is suggesting that. See my comment about you being incapable of understanding things. Economic growth, which we are currently experiencing, would indicate that.
Why the constant interjection of UFOs into this discussion? Are you afraid to stay on topic or something? There is plenty of evidence to question the motivation and accuracy of the government's story regarding 9/11. As well as the Kennedy assassination. How about the Gulf of Tonkin? How'd they do on that one? Where does Uncle Jesse stand on that one? On the same side a Sec. McNamara or no?
You miss the point. The truth broke because the government could not contain the story. Too many people knew the truth. WHAT? :huh: So what, they can't reinvent history. It ain't about legal rights, it's about global geopolitics. The rules are different. But Bush and Obama are both wrong in dealing with iran. We can't bomb them into submission, we can't reason with them at all. We don't even need to. Iran is no threat to us, only to Israel and they can take care of themselves. In fact, letting a hostile country that is rich in oil resources waste them on extremely expensive nuclear weapons is in our interests. They will drop $3 Trillion on their bomb before they are done and then what do they have? A bomb that they can put in their national museum because they have no delivery system. It could bankrupt them and start the next Iranian revolution which we are encouraging. They can't use the weapon, it is just prestige for them. Hillary had it right when she told them just that. If they use a nuclear weapon against the US or any of our allies, it will be national suicide for Iran because we have thousands of very big warheads and very accurate delivery systems. Of course, Oswald shot Kennedy. Whether he had accomplices is something we may never know, but it is unlikely considering his mental issues. Certainly there is no convincing evidence that Cubans, Russians, the CIA, the FBI, the Mafia, or Texas Oil Barons ordered a hit. What is bullchit is the notion of a government conspiracy to kill Kennedy. A case can be made for a government cover-up of the colossal failure of the Secret Service. And the Kennedy family was allowed to interfere in the investigation and destroy evidence, which was a travesty. Irrelevant how many people were interested in having him killed. Only one man went there to shoot him. But Huey may have been killed by one of his own bodyguards bullets. No evidence for a conspiracy at all. History is full of bullchit stories, too. THis ain't the thread for it. We have truther and Kennedy threads on FSA you can resurrect if you have something new.
This is a thread on 9/11 and whether or not there was some sort of cover up. Previous examples of government cover ups certainly seems relevant to me. I have no interest in rehashing old threads. My point is the government is not infallible and is not run by saints. I appreciate your answering the question regarding Oswald though. No way in hell Oswald was responsible for killing Kennedy. If you can't figure that much out than your chances on this one are pretty slim. I agree with you on Iran. Regarding Long: Huey Long's Assassination - Who Killed Huey Long
