Even though we had a little bit of warning about federation, I think we're off to a rocky start. Maybe we should have compiled a list of things we think that may make other people very upset. That way they can quickly get to know what we're about and go hide in a social media bubble if it scares them.
I figure I'd start with a good one. America deserved 9/11. I'm burying the lede a bit with that one. I don't think random acts of violence really accomplish much and I don't think randos, albeit imperial core randos, should die. But this wasn't a random act of violence, was it?
There's a little something called Foucault's Boomerang. Basically it's the tools, means, and experiments carried out by imperial countries tend to make their way back home one way or another. Military gear gets tried out on the battlefield then next thing you know cops at home have the same equipment. It also works for cause and effect. America did 9/11 to itself.
After WWII America courted the monarchy of Saudi Arabia, who had some really "interesting" religious ideas at the time, to ensure a source of oil. Oil was very important to American manufacturing and the war effort. Our domestic reserves helped us get through WWII. We needed more. So the US decided to look the other way on Saudi foreign policy while they ensured us first dibs on the oil. The UK also made deals on building their infrastructure and finance needs, to which the US eventually pushed them of the back rooms where such deals were made. But that's another story.
The US also backed anti-Soviet/anti-Communist groups in the Middle-East as they had in other parts of the world. This meant giving aide and weapons and training to those groups. In exchange they would beat up all the communists and pro-soviet people in their country and keep the borders open for US trade.
Not to "yadda yadda yadda" through a lot of interesting history but the US made a lot of enemies and ruined former alliances in these places because we valued the exploitation of their resources more than the actual relationships formed. Once the Soviets were gone, we could just do what we wanted to them and there was nobody left to oppose us.
So our former (and some current) friends stabbed us in the back. The imperialism boomeranged back home and we got a terrorist attack on US soil.
The people who died didn't particularly deserve it but people die when an imperial power does imperialism. That's part of why it's bad. Imperialism will never benefit the common person, it will only hurt us in the end. You best believe all this funding, weapons, and shit going into Ukraine will come back on us too.
What are some other real-ass takes for our visitors who need disillusioning?
I don't think it was a "controlled demolition," but I do think that the Bush administration did know about it in advance and let it happen because it was a useful justification for what they already wanted to do. I like showing people this picture. Because this picture is what's really important to me: The fact that 9/11 was used as a flimsy justification for a "war on terror" but none of the countries the USA attacked had anything to do with 9/11 and the countries that the hijackers were supposedly from got left entirely alone.
We know the names of the people who died on the flights, so I think that part is very hard to fake. I think planes really were flown into the Pentagon and the WTC buildings.
To be fair (
) I don't get the impression that the controlled demolition conspiracy guys think the planes didn't exist or anything. Just that the planes were used as props in the show, and that the actual main event was a controlled demolition.
I think this is a silly view for the record, planes slamming really hard into a building which then starts a bunch of fires seems like plenty to cause that building to go down
A blacksmith years ago responded to the "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" bs by heating a piece of steel to the burning temperature of jet fuel and then bending the steel with his pinky. It was a gun video.
Shit, hope he had gloves on
deleted by creator
Yeah even if it was entirely a false flag you could just get some terrorists to do it for you.
I've never really thought about this, but this makes a lot of sense. If the Bush admin actually had done a controlled demolition false flag, they definitely wouldn't have said the hijackers were from countries friendly to the US. They would've just said Saddam did it.
There were also some guys who were convicted of insider trading they did the week before 9/11
They couldn't have made that profit if they didn't have advanced knowledge of what was going to happen, so at the very least there were some members of the ruling class who knew
Lastly one of Epstein's victims claimed that he was talking about 9/11 before it happened, don't know it if it's true but I'm inclined to believe her
It's this map that completely sank the controlled demolition theory for me, not that it had much to stand on in the first place. Wouldn't it make much more sense to have fake IDs of the countries you're going to invade instead of countries that are already allied with you?
The controlled demolition theory is libshit to explain away imperialism as some 'elite scheme'.
The US just used it as an excuse. They don't need to stage shit, crises they can lie and spin come about often enough that it's trivial to wait a few months for the next one.
Yes, we know the names of the people that died and we found the passport of one of the hijackers on the ground close to the towers. How convenient. As I asked others, explain me how the towers came down so fast. Free fall, no resistance. Buildings only collapse like this with a controlled demolition which confirmes to me that the story they gave us is not true. Pentagon, WTC 7 collapse due to fire?
That is weird, and I have always found that weird, but what has yet to be explained is if the passport was just a plant to justify attacking the middle east, why did the USA not actually attack the countries the hijackers were "from" according to the "fake passports"? Why didn't "they" plant passports from Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia, and Yemen? Why did "they" plant passports from Saudi Arabia (US ally), UAE, Egypt, and Lebanon? Why aren't Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, and Lebanon invaded in the "War on Terror" if the passports were just plants to justify the invasion? This is why, rather than embracing controlled demolition and fake passports, I embrace something a little different. The US government knew it was gonna happen, let it happen, then used it as an excuse to do what they were already going to do, which is attack nations that had nothing to do with it.
I think there's a lot more fishy stuff if you actually buy into the fact that Osama Bin Laden did it. Like for example his family's wealth, their ties with the Saudi Royal Family, their business dealings with the Bush family, their ties to the petrodollar scheme that allowed the USA to easily maintain global dollar hegemony in that era because the Saudis would artificially glut the oil market on purpose on behalf of the USA private sector interests, in order to keep their theocratic absolute monarchy untouched.