Printable View
Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., says homegrown terrorist plots like the alleged plan to bomb fuel pipelines at John F. Kennedy International Airport are provoked by the U.S. presence in Iraq.
"Absolutely," Murtha told George Stephanopoulos in an exclusive interview on ABC News' "This Week." "Our presence in Iraq, our occupation of Iraq gives these people the inspiration."
ABC News: Murtha: U.S. in Iraq Inspired JFK Plot
Another nominee for a pic under Assclown in Websters.....
Have a good one!:s4:
Why, I didn't know you cared, assclowns for sure. BTW can you get me a picture of an assclown, sounds interesting. I guess you're jealous that a politician can actually express the truth these days with all the lying Repubes sucking the air out of the country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
sounds like a conspiracy to me:
con·spir·a·cy
1.the act of conspiring. 2.an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot. 3.a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government. 4.Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act. 5.any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.
just another fake event that everyone will have already forgotten about in a few weeks when we find out it was fake...
but hey, i heard them on fox saying this is why we all need a national id card, to keep us safe...so it's good propaganda...
JFK Airport Plot Has All The Hallmarks Of Staged Terror
Near-retarded "ringleader", paid government provocateur mirrors legion of previous cases Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Monday, June 4, 2007
[align=left] An alleged plot to blow up fuel tanks, terminal buildings and fuel lines running beneath Kennedy International Airport has all the hallmarks of being another staged terror alert, having never advanced beyond a rudimentary planning stage while being prodded and provocateured by a paid government informant.
In every single major terror sting we have researched in the west since 9/11, not one single plot has been absent the ingredient of a government provocateur, save the cases that were outright manufactured by imaginative government propagandists in alliance with the corporate media.
In this case, the provocateur was "An informant with a criminal history including drug trafficking and racketeering agreed to work with investigators on the case, in exchange for payments and a reduced sentence," according to the New York Times.
Officials have refused to say how they became aware of the plot in the first place, but in every previous case of this nature we have found that it is the government agent provocateur who radicalizes the group and formulates the plot. The cover story is that the group is infiltrated by the informant having already planned the attack but as more details emerge, inevitably the plot always reveals itself as an artificial creation on behalf of the intelligence services.
What's the motive? The war on terror is the most politically exploited concept since the cold war. The propaganda boon from hoodwinking Americans into thinking they are constantly under threat from terrorists is unsurpassed. On the very day that this alleged plot was announced, Rudy Giuliani was already using it to inflate his presidential campaign.
In addition, the new head of the Arkansas Republican Party, Dennis Milligan, told a reporter this past weekend that America needs to be attacked by terrorists so that people will appreciate the work that President Bush has done to protect the country.
Once again we learn that "the plot was only in a preliminary phase and the conspirators had yet to lay out detailed plans or obtain financing or explosives," and yet the event is reported by a jingoistic and frothing media as if an imminent attack on the scale of 9/11 has been averted.
But as always, the devil is in the details, because even if the group had managed to acquire the financing and explosives to enact the plot, it would have been unsuccessful, due to "safety shut-off valves would almost assuredly have prevented an exploding airport fuel tank from igniting all or even part of the network."
The sum of the group's planning for the alleged attack amounts to nothing more than visiting Google Maps and printing off photographs.
It appears that part of the agenda in hyping the alleged plot is to undermine Hugo Chavez, since the ringleader, Russell Defreitas, has links to Jamaat al-Muslimeen, a Muslim group headed up by Imam Yasin Abu Bakr, and in turn Bakr has been affiliated with Chavez.
As Kurt Nimmo writes, Neo-Con websites are already exploiting these tenuous links to demonize Hugo Chavez, who - whatever you think of his domestic policies - has been a constant thorn in the side of the Globalists and was subject to an attempted CIA coup in 2002.
Defreitas is described by one law enforcement official as ??a sad sack? and ??not a Grade A terrorist,? who would have been incapable of carrying out any attack. A friend described him as "not smart enough" to have carried out the attack.
In several other cases, we see a pattern where near-retarded individuals are used as patsies for terror plots orchestrated by intelligence agencies because they are easily manipulated and cannot defend themselves after the fact.
From out of nowhere, Defreitas goes from embracing American culture and enjoying jazz music to dressing in traditional Muslim garb and referring to himself as Mohammed while planning a devastating attack due to his supposed hatred of the west.
The basic tenet that the terror threat has been overhyped and magnified a thousand-fold for political propaganda is proven alone by documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act that show only 0.0015 percent of the total number of cases filed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security were terrorism related, despite the fact that the Bush administration has repeatedly asserted that it is the primary focus of the DHS.
As more details leak out, there seems little doubt that the JFK airport plot will dissipate into nothing more than another hyped terror alert - coddled, molded, and directed by the government, before being unleashed on an increasingly skeptical American public in another vain attempt to prop up the flagging legitimacy of the "war on terror".
[/align]
Now I might be mistaken, but it is so crazy to think that every action will have an opposite and equal reaction? The United States invades a sovereign nation under false pretenses. Within a short amount of time its "Mission Accomphished" but the troops don't leave. Occupation continues and the death toll continues to climb. Torture now given tacit approval as a valid intel source. Without any sort of plan to withdraw, members of the Executive branch begin rattling the saber once again at another Middle Eastern (read Islamic) country. Death toll still climbing. President of US then compares situation to Korea and suggests military would remain in Iraq for an undisclosed amount of time. Innocents killed. Tortured. Militants killed. Tortured. Children killed. Death toll still rising. No end in sight.
But to point out this connection is somehow stupid and crazy? Why?
LOL, I thought you were talking about the assasination of JFK.
I didn't receive anything to my knowledge.......please send again to Psycho_4_bud at yahoo. Thanks much!Quote:
Originally Posted by shaitanx
Have a good one!:jointsmile: