Pedophiles don’t control what I do in my professional or personal life either, that doesn’t make it right.
An Example of Social Engineering
Nathan profited ridiculously from a panic he was responsible for creating. This would go on to be a common tactic of the ruling elite: get people worked up using war, terrorism or some other scare tactic, make moves that direct the mass-mind the way you want it to be directed, and use the fear and hype in a way ultimately benefits you.
In Nathan’s move, we may have an early example of social engineering that solely benefits the engineer. He expanded his fortune by over 6,000 times what he already had, by engineering panic and ‘legally’ stealing from the people.
The best way to control people and/or make money is to orchestrate artificial panic among the masses, which is exactly what Nathan did. The events of 9/11 made this clear, and regardless of whether you think it was a false flag, it’s obvious that it was used by the ruling elite as an opportunity to get the public on board with war, increased surveillance and an out-of-control police state. They took a page from Nathan Rothschild’s book, whose move basically secured his reign over the British financial system.
Brought to you by the US Government, or in smaller circles, also known as the Entertainment division of the Military Industrial Complex.
Make what right? ■■■■ owning media companies?
Oh BS. The Reno-Gorelick “Wall of Separation” prevented the LEO’s and Intl people from sharing information and the tidbits about the attackers that were known could not be put together to prevent the attack even if they had been since no one had ever even envisioned such an attack before and they certainly were not advertising it.
No “country” attacked us but Afghanistan under the Taliban most certainly was harboring Bin Laden and AQ and refused to give them up.
Iraq had been targeting and shooting at our aircraft for more than 8 years before OIF and evn the democrats at the time including both Clintons, Gore, and most of the house and senate leadership were all calling for us to finally remove Saddam. The intel that showed he was still hiding WMD’s and meeting with heads of terrorist organizations was he final straw so we invaded and removed the problem.
You don’t get to rewrite history to suit your own hatreds and partisan bitterness.
1 Like
What a pathetic attempt. Let’s start with the most basic truths shall we?
Owning media outlets is perfectly legal and moral.
Pedophilia is neither.
It may be legal, but it’s anything but moral. At least not nowadays. The media just exists to manufacture consent. Very few media outlets are actually conducting journalism on the citizen’s behalf.
Except that was false intel. Even leftist media debunks it.
Media outlets encompass far more than just news. Rethink your premise.
BS, he went with the best intel we had at the time.
The intel we relied on was coming from the Brits, Germany, and Israel as the CIA had virtually no eyes at all inside of Saddam controlled Iraq.
The big stockpiles were moved to Syria just prior to the invasion or destroyed during/post invasion.
Our own intel people briefed the WH and Congressional Leadership on the convoy moving the WMD stockpiles to Syria in the weeks before we rolled.
Vox is your source?
Seriouslty?
Are there still people out there that believe the Bush Administration was telling the truth about WMDs in Iraq?
I thought this was one thing everyone had agreed on at this point, since it has been pretty much established that there were no WMDs and Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11.
I’m certain that 95% or more of Progs have no idea what this means.
1 Like
Not thinking very critically today, are we? Who told you that we went into Iraq because Bush accused Saddam of orchestrating 911? Umm… no. I won’t even bother to correct you. You are more fun posting stupid things
Except your wanton need for practicing intellectual dishonesty is really revealing! You are either a very ignorant person or you are purposely omitting facts. The New York Times eventually discovered and admitted that there were indeed WMD’s discovered in Iraq, just that the rest of the twat MSM didn’t want to admit that inconvenient fact.
Just out of curiosity, did you serve in Iraq? Or are you just another arm chair quarterback offering another opinion without verifiable facts to back it up?
It’s what Google gives. Here’s Pediwikia also. Either way, it was a hoax.
1 Like
Why is that article so long?
Wasn’t it just a simple and obvious matter?
Being wrong does not mean the same as lying. Lying requires the teller to know what they say is false. There has never been one shred of evidence to support the accusation that Bush knew what he told the World was not true.
Nobody of authority said or even suggested that Saddam was behind 9/11. And, furthermore, the presence of WMDs in Iraq depends entirely on your definition of what constitutes a WMD. He most certainly was in possession of chemical weapons (and had a history of using them) and the ability to make more. There is also the trail to Syria, where the use of chemical weapons that quite probably came from Iran, has been confirmed.
I would add that it was Leftists in Congress, such as Hillary, that talked up WMDs because they needed it to get their base to support / not turn on them. Bush frequently spoke on what I would call Churchillian term, of a growing threat to nip in the bud before things got out of hand.
The existence of WMDs wasn’t something the Bush administration created, it reflected intelligence assessments going back to Clinton’s time and, lest we forget, Saddam himself sure did a decent job of acting like he had WMDs.
1 Like