snafu
New member
So I guess JFK saying no to operation Northwoods and sacking the plotters of an attack on Americans, along with staged terrorist attacks on American soil, hijacking planes and substituting drones painted up to look like commercial jets, was more "progressive" bullshit, TJ?
You really are brainwashed, I was wondering for awile but you have completely lost all connection to reality. I had not really understood your brand of lunacy until recently when a friend of mine gave me a book explaining anti-colonialism, and this is another root motivation for Obama as well.
To you, any lie is justified as long as it fills your need to attack the systems you hate.
For the few on the forum interested in knowing what Builder is talking about, the joint chiefs were instrusted to provide a list of available options for dealing with Cuba. This concept was indeed included among a huge number of other ideas all brainstorming from different angles. It was never fully developed and never completely accepted as an alternative by anyone in power.
BUT.
Even if it was, we are still stuck on the same problem, a problem Builder refuses to address because he knows it proves an inside job to be impossible for 9/11.
The "regular Joe" who must be in on the conspiracy for it to work. It is one thing for a President, or even a General to offer theories or ideas to try and conduct some kind of "false-flag" operation, but these Generals and leaders are not going to be the one doing the deeds, these operations must be performed by "little guys" and other civilian groups like first responders (fire fighters, cops, etc.) must also be pulled into the conspiracy.
None of these "regular Joes" would have any reason to keep that blood on their hands. They would have nothing to gain, no reason to lie, so no reasonable excuse not to tell.
How can someone pull that off when Clinton could not even get a hummer in the Whitehouse without the entire world finding out?
Well thats the whole thing. There are so many people involved a conspiracy would be ludicrus.