The Great American Conspiracy Theory

[msufan]

OK, the current thread on 9/11 got me thinking. What if all of the conspiracy theories are true?

-We didn't really land on the moon. It was all a staged ploy to assert superiority over the Russians.

-The government actually had a hand in making 9/11 happen. Why?

3) Instant Fulfillment of the Neocon Wish List
For a huge military buildup and Middle East energy control

In September 2000, one year before 9/11, the Bush team's neocon think tank PNAC (Project for a New American Century) published a plan for global domination called "Rebuilding America's Defenses". (Top Bush Administration figures like Cheney, Perle, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld et al. were signers of PNAC's Statement of Principles.) Their plan called for a huge boost in defense spending, full spectrum dominance over all nations and regions (including outer space), long term petro-resource control with permanent Middle East bases, and a preemptive war policy against recalcitrant states. However, they openly conceded that such a huge "transformation" would take forever "absent some cataclysmic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor."

4) Political bonanza for Bush/Rove team
Instant irresistable power in Congress, media and the polls

In 1999, two years before the September 11 attacks, presidential candidate George W. Bush was already talking about the political benefits of attacking Iraq, according to his former ghost writer, Mickey Herskowitz. Bush: "One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief. My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it. If I have a chance to invade... if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed."

Bush's former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill recounted that at their first Cabinet meeting in January, 2001, Iraq oil concession maps were circulated and discussed and that Bush baldly told them to "find me a way" to take Iraq.

-The War in Iraq is all about establishing control over oil for the forseeable future, and we will never try to exit the area

-The anthrax scare was also perpetuated by the US govt.

"So why did the White House go on Cipro on the very day of the World Trade Center attacks? Larry Klayman said, 'We believe that the White House knew or had reason to know that an anthrax attack was imminent or underway.' "

What else am I missing? Someone help me connect all the conspiracy dots here.

[chachi]

Originally Posted by msufan

-The War in Iraq is all about establishing control over oil for the forseeable future, and we will never try to exit the area

The war in Iraq gives us base of operation in the region with no restrictions. The Saudi people are not big fans of us using their country as a base for military operations so why not just take Iraq and do whatever 'we' want. Same goes for Afghanistan. For the US these are two very strategic locations with many resources to use against others in the region should we choose.

[Al Czervik]

You are pretty much on it. They wanted war in Iraq and to attempt to redo the middle east and take control of energy and needed a pretext. The energy task force docs that were released show their eyes were on the prize at the beginning of the first term, and John O'Neill and Richard Clarke confirm this. Debate rages in the 9/11 truth community over MIHOP/LIHOP, made it happen on purpose v. let it happen on purpose. Here is a summary of one author's theory.
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/fre...html#bullmeans

[msufan]

Quoting from that site:

MOTIVE: Peak Oil
The world is about to start running out of oil.

• Half of the world's oil has been, or is about to be, exhausted.
• Once that midpoint is crossed, every barrel of oil will be harder to find, and more expensive, as demand grows. Controlling the last remaining oil reserves is the key to controlling the world.
• Almost everything in modern society - vehicles, buildings, bridges, weapons, consumer products, and much more - consumes oil in its manufacture, its operation, or both.
• Cheap and abundant hydrocarbon energy keeps the industrial world warm and cooks our food. Most houses are heated with natural gas.
• We "eat" oil and natural gas: For every 1-calorie of food energy produced, 10 calories of hydrocarbon energy is consumed.
• Four days after becoming Vice President, Dick Cheney convened his National Energy Policy Development Group (NEPDG) in which he received extensive information on Peak Oil from world-renowned experts. He has refused to release the documents from those hearings to Congress or the American people. FTW has always contended that the deepest, darkest secrets of 9/11 lie in those documents.
• Dick Cheney knew about Peak Oil at least as early as 1999. He knows the economic impact of oil depletion and the catastrophic effects that will result.
• 9/11 made possible what Dick Cheney called, "The war that won't end in our lifetimes." This is a war that is chasing the last remaining hydrocarbons across the globe. The "war on terror" is in reality an energy war and 9/11 was its pretext.

So both of you basically agree with what I originally termed a "conspiracy theory?" You think the debate is really just whether they let it happen or made it happen?

Wow.

What about the moon landing? Anthrax?

[Al Czervik]

Originally Posted by msufan

What about the moon landing? Anthrax?

Moon landing - not a farce.

Anthrax, absolutely inside job. It's been a while since I looked at the issue, but weapons grade military anthrax that something like only a dozen people could have had access to or made and key Democrats got the letters with white powder. And they can't figure out who it was? Yeah, right. And they had a piece of legislation that must have taken at least months to develop ready to go right after 9/11 in the form of the Patriot Act? It would all be if it wasn't true.

[chachi]

Originally Posted by msufan

Quoting from that site:

MOTIVE: Peak Oil
The world is about to start running out of oil.

• Half of the world's oil has been, or is about to be, exhausted.
• Once that midpoint is crossed, every barrel of oil will be harder to find, and more expensive, as demand grows. Controlling the last remaining oil reserves is the key to controlling the world.
• Almost everything in modern society - vehicles, buildings, bridges, weapons, consumer products, and much more - consumes oil in its manufacture, its operation, or both.
• Cheap and abundant hydrocarbon energy keeps the industrial world warm and cooks our food. Most houses are heated with natural gas.
• We "eat" oil and natural gas: For every 1-calorie of food energy produced, 10 calories of hydrocarbon energy is consumed.
• Four days after becoming Vice President, Dick Cheney convened his National Energy Policy Development Group (NEPDG) in which he received extensive information on Peak Oil from world-renowned experts. He has refused to release the documents from those hearings to Congress or the American people. FTW has always contended that the deepest, darkest secrets of 9/11 lie in those documents.
• Dick Cheney knew about Peak Oil at least as early as 1999. He knows the economic impact of oil depletion and the catastrophic effects that will result.
• 9/11 made possible what Dick Cheney called, "The war that won't end in our lifetimes." This is a war that is chasing the last remaining hydrocarbons across the globe. The "war on terror" is in reality an energy war and 9/11 was its pretext.

So both of you basically agree with what I originally termed a "conspiracy theory?" You think the debate is really just whether they let it happen or made it happen?

Wow.

What about the moon landing? Anthrax?

I think when you connect everything into a grand conspiracy, the average person loses interest.

For now, all I would like to see is the information on WTC 7 get out to the public in an easily digestable format.

The rest, whatever the rest is, will come out in the wash after that.

[Al Czervik]

Originally Posted by MSU_CIO

I think when you connect everything into a grand conspiracy, the average person loses interest.

For now, all I would like to see is the information on WTC 7 get out to the public in an easily digestable format.

The rest, whatever the rest is, will come out in the wash after that.

I agree with this. When you introduce 9/11 truth to people, you can't do it all at once. Just feed them bits and pieces like WTC 7 and the stock trades, then hit them later with the PNAC motive stuff.

[ConQueso™]

I don't necessarily believe in the conspiracy theories...but i think that anything is possible.

I may not think that the government set up 9/11 but i wouldn't put it past them to know about it and not do anything and use it to their advantage...isn't that a generally accepted version of what happened to Pearl Harbor?

[msufan]

So let's piece everything together... more and more people today are dissatisfied with the war in Iraq, and wants our troops out of there. Bush figures, this isn't a war about Iraq, like you think, people, this is a war for oil. But he can't say that because to admit that this is a war for oil is to admit that this is not a virtuous war effort, and it also emboldens other countries (China?) to pursue more vigorous rebuttals as well.

So he started with the WMD excuse, when there weren't any, he shifted the focus to Saddam and freeing the Iraqi people, then the focus becomes setting up an Iraqi constitution and government, then the focus becomes fighting insurgents and terrorists in Iraq, etc., etc. And the months tick by, and we continue to have access to Middle East oil.

So Bush allows himself to be portrayed as a bumbler, when really he's trying to do something completely different than what he says. People say he's backtracking or spinning things all the time, but in reality he's very dedicated to his original mission... getting oil.

Right direction?

[msufan]

And we could've captured Bin Laden long ago if we wanted to, but we allow him to remain free because he is actually helping us out by giving us another excuse to remain in the Middle East?

And with Bush's ratings creeping to record lows and the American people getting more dissatisfied with the Iraq situation, it's about time for something else to be "allowed" to happen...

[chachi]

Originally Posted by msufan

So let's piece everything together... more and more people today are dissatisfied with the war in Iraq, and wants our troops out of there. Bush figures, this isn't a war about Iraq, like you think, people, this is a war for oil. But he can't say that because to admit that this is a war for oil is to admit that this is not a virtuous war effort, and it also emboldens other countries (China?) to pursue more vigorous rebuttals as well.

So he started with the WMD excuse, when there weren't any, he shifted the focus to Saddam and freeing the Iraqi people, then the focus becomes setting up an Iraqi constitution and government, then the focus becomes fighting insurgents and terrorists in Iraq, etc., etc. And the months tick by, and we continue to have access to Middle East oil.

So Bush allows himself to be portrayed as a bumbler, when really he's trying to do something completely different than what he says. People say he's backtracking or spinning things all the time, but in reality he's very dedicated to his original mission... getting oil.

Right direction?

There is more to it than just oil there is also the military positioning aspect, but yes I would think this is the right direction. Many people think Bush is more of a pawn than some genius who devised all of this.

[Feckweed]

If only the rest of the world was as clever as those on this message board

[msufan]

Originally Posted by ****weed

If only the rest of the world was as clever as those on this message board

I hear what you are saying and I expected more responses like this. It does seem egocentric to think that we've got it all figured out. So do you think all of this is wrong?

[chachi]

Originally Posted by ****weed

If only the rest of the world was as clever as those on this message board

I think they are. I think that a small, fearful American minority is so vocal in labeling something a "conspiracy theory" that the 50-80% of people who actually see the facts for what they are do not want to admit it.

If we are dumb and wrong please explain any of this:

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

[msufan]

Originally Posted by MSU_CIO

There is more to it than just oil there is also the military positioning aspect, but yes I would think this is the right direction. Many people think Bush is more of a pawn than some genius who devised all of this.

And Cheney and Rove and Rice and co. are the real people behind this?

If this is true, is it a bad thing, or is oil really that precious now and in the coming years? Is it worth losing soldiers over?

[wingfanjim]

While a strong case has been made on this, I just can't fathom that to be possible. key leaders of the government conspiring to to attack their own people? I mean...If that sort of stuff is true and could be proven then you'd have the entire white house staff and key republican leadership swinging from the gallows after being convicted of high treason. I mean don't get me wrong, I don't like the war, I don't like the President, and I don't like the policies of the current republican leadership. However, I don't honestly believe they could commit such heinous crimes.

[Feckweed]

Originally Posted by MSU_CIO

I think they are. I think that a small, fearful American minority is so vocal in labeling something a "conspiracy theory" that the 50-80% of people who actually see the facts for what they are do not want to admit it.

If we are dumb and wrong please explain any of this:

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

Obviously it was our gov't that brought down the Towers, crashed a plane into the Pentagon, and....hmmm, let's see, what reasons did our gov't have for taking out the plane over Pennsylvania...oh right, something about it hitting the White House...couldn't let that last scenario play out, it would look pretty bad for Dubya to have to set up shop permanently in Crawford

[wingfanjim]

Originally Posted by msufan

And Cheney and Rove and Rice and co. are the real people behind this?

If this is true, is it a bad thing, or is oil really that precious now and in the coming years? Is it worth losing soldiers over?

it's bad (if it's true) for 2 reasons

1) it is predicated on more than just soldiers dieing. the thousands of civilian 9/11 victims are included as casualties of this oil grab as well.

2) I don't want a precedent set where the White House can feel like it is ok to decieve the nation like that.

Personally I see things going either way...treason charges or an Oliver Stone movie.

[chachi]

Originally Posted by wingfanjim

While a strong case has been made on this, I just can't fathom that to be possible. key leaders of the government conspiring to to attack their own people? I mean...If that sort of stuff is true and could be proven then you'd have the entire white house staff and key republican leadership swinging from the gallows after being convicted of high treason. I mean don't get me wrong, I don't like the war, I don't like the President, and I don't like the policies of the current republican leadership. However, I don't honestly believe they could commit such heinous crimes.

It has been planned in the past... as early as the sixties. This fact is not in question.

In his new exposé of the National Security Agency entitled Body of Secrets, author James Bamford highlights a set of proposals on Cuba by the Joint Chiefs of Staff codenamed OPERATION NORTHWOODS. This document, titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba” was provided by the JCS to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962, as the key component of Northwoods. Written in response to a request from the Chief of the Cuba Project, Col. Edward Lansdale, the Top Secret memorandum describes U.S. plans to covertly engineer various pretexts that would justify a U.S. invasion of Cuba. These proposals - part of a secret anti-Castro program known as Operation Mongoose - included staging the assassinations of Cubans living in the United States, developing a fake “Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington,” including “sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated),” faking a Cuban airforce attack on a civilian jetliner, and concocting a “Remember the Maine” incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage. Bamford himself writes that Operation Northwoods “may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government.”

Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba [includes cover memoranda], March 13, 1962, TOP SECRET, 15 pp.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20...northwoods.pdf

[chachi]

Originally Posted by ****weed

Obviously it was our gov't that brought down the Towers, crashed a plane into the Pentagon, and....hmmm, let's see, what reasons did our gov't have for taking out the plane over Pennsylvania...oh right, something about it hitting the White House...couldn't let that last scenario play out, it would look pretty bad for Dubya to have to set up shop permanently in Crawford

It is conjectured that the plane that was taken down in PA was supposed to hit WTC 7 and when "something happened" it was aborted and taken out. WTC 7 was left standing only to mysteriously and perfectly implode later in the day.

[Feckweed]

Originally Posted by MSU_CIO

It is conjectured that the plane that was taken down in PA was supposed to hit WTC 7 and when "something happened" it was aborted and taken out. WTC 7 was left standing only to mysteriously and perfectly implode later in the day.

Yeah, because WTC 7 was such a valued and symbolic target for AQ

[chachi]

Originally Posted by ****weed

Yeah, because WTC 7 was such a valued and symbolic target for AQ

It was most likely taken out because it housed a lot of evidence. Do you know what and who were housed in WTC 7? AQ had nothing to do with it other than play the scapegoat.

[msufan]

Originally Posted by wingfanjim

it's bad (if it's true) for 2 reasons

1) it is predicated on more than just soldiers dieing. the thousands of civilian 9/11 victims are included as casualties of this oil grab as well.

2) I don't want a precedent set where the White House can feel like it is ok to decieve the nation like that.

Personally I see things going either way...treason charges or an Oliver Stone movie.

I agree. But could you see them thinking that the lives of a few thousand Americans are nothing in comparison to the lives that could be shattered when we run out of oil?

[Feckweed]

Originally Posted by MSU_CIO

It was most likely taken out because it housed a lot of evidence. Do you know what and who were housed in WTC 7? AQ had nothing to do with it other than play the scapegoat.

So then by your logic, the Pentago was also rigged with explosives in case something similar happened to that plane. Got it

[msufan]

Originally Posted by wingfanjim

While a strong case has been made on this, I just can't fathom that to be possible. key leaders of the government conspiring to to attack their own people? I mean...If that sort of stuff is true and could be proven then you'd have the entire white house staff and key republican leadership swinging from the gallows after being convicted of high treason. I mean don't get me wrong, I don't like the war, I don't like the President, and I don't like the policies of the current republican leadership. However, I don't honestly believe they could commit such heinous crimes.

I wonder if that's what they count on.