"Everybody Knows" - Another Lie!
Just because something is 'common knowledge' which most people seem to think is true, this does NOT mean in any way, shape or form that this supposition is actually true!
The Liberals complain that the Conservatives control the Press, and vice-versa, but it is actually the rich and powerful who actually control the Press and most other things in our reality. They are the ones who select the 'Rulers' of our various 'countries', and the fact is that they really control the world just about completely already, making the fear of 'One World Government' redundant. In turn, they are themselves being directed by an even 'higher' group. I am not going to remark more on this concept, but if one is interested in discovering who these 'higher' ones are, they might consider reading the material at Cassiopaea. org for an in-depth study.
Perhaps understanding some of the 'lesser lies' and realizing their import can help bring one to understand the real 'whoppers' we have been told!
The following article from Signs of the Times explains well how these lies are distributed in such a way as to become 'common knowledge' of the masses, even though nothing could be further from the Truth:
Stumbling Over The Truth
Signs of the Times Editorial
Mention it to anyone and they'll already have heard it; that crazy conspiracy theory that claims that members of the Bush administration deliberately conspired to deceive the world into believing that Saddam had WMDs and thereby provide justification for an illegal invasion of Iraq. But all right-thinking people know better than to allow themselves to be suckered into believing such claptrap. All 'sane' individuals KNOW that Saddam posed a clear threat to the US and the American people and that he was 'in' with Osama bin Laden, the evil mastermind of the September 11th attacks. And how do they know this? Why, because we were TOLD as much by our elected representatives. There is, of course, only one problem with this belief and it centers around last week's testimony of the British Attorney General which is only now being reported in the US mainstream press.
As we reported at the time, the British Attorney General stated quite categorically that the head of British foreign intelligence reported to Prime Minister Tony Blair that President Bush wanted to topple Saddam Hussein by military action and warned that in Washington intelligence was, in his own words, "being fixed around the policy." Which is simply another way of saying that Bush and Co were LYING about the threat from Saddam.
Taken in isolation, this fact, while shocking to those members of the world public who have always believed that their leaders would never lie about something of such import, is not really surprising to those of us who have long ago understood and accepted the corrupting nature of politics and power. Bubbling below the surface of this duplicitous chapter in the history of American foreign and domestic policies however, is a matter of much more gravity.
The fact is, the Iraq invasion and the reasons for it, which have now been revealed as outright lies, cannot be divorced from the overall "war on terror" and that which gave rise to it - the 9/11 attacks. We are told by the British Attorney General that members of the Bush administration were brewing the lies that would lead to the Iraq invasion in the Spring of 2002. Yet documents posted on the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) web site make it clear that the plan for an Iraq invasion was first conceived of by leading NeoCons as far back as 1997, four years before the events of 9/11 that provided the casus belli for the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
While no one can now reasonably dispute the fact that the Bush administration knowingly lead America to war on false pretences, many will still argue that, while they may have lied about the threat from Saddam, the NeoCons simply took the opportunity to capitalise on the "freak event" that was 9/11. As Winston Curchill said, "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened".
Given the fact that the Iraq war was planned up to 6 years before it actually occurred and four years before 9/11, and the fact that it has now been categorically proven that the Bush administration lied to the entire world about the existence of Saddam's WMD threat to America, it seems logical to us to at least consider the possibility that members of the Bush administration also played a part in stage managing the 9/11 attacks which created the essential atmosphere of a terrorist threat - the breeding ground in which the lies about Saddam's WMDs could take root?
Few will deny that, regardless of who the real perpetrators are, the 9/11 attacks generated the public appetite for revenge and war that was instrumental in facilitating the Iraq invasion. Considering that the Washington NeoCons had been planning an attack on Iraq for 6 years prior to 9/11, and remembering that it has now been proven that these same people lied to the world about Saddam's WMDs, is it not reasonable to suggest that the official story of how and why 9/11 happened is simply more NeoCon lies and that the perpetrators of the WTC and Pentagon attacks and the architects of the phony claims that lead to the Iraq war are one and the same?
To answer our own question. It is indeed an eminently logical supposition and one that has nothing to do with crazy conspiracy theories but rather very real evidence of a very real conspiracy to con the world's population into accepting a "Novus Ordo Seclorum"
The Liberals complain that the Conservatives control the Press, and vice-versa, but it is actually the rich and powerful who actually control the Press and most other things in our reality. They are the ones who select the 'Rulers' of our various 'countries', and the fact is that they really control the world just about completely already, making the fear of 'One World Government' redundant. In turn, they are themselves being directed by an even 'higher' group. I am not going to remark more on this concept, but if one is interested in discovering who these 'higher' ones are, they might consider reading the material at Cassiopaea. org for an in-depth study.
Perhaps understanding some of the 'lesser lies' and realizing their import can help bring one to understand the real 'whoppers' we have been told!
The following article from Signs of the Times explains well how these lies are distributed in such a way as to become 'common knowledge' of the masses, even though nothing could be further from the Truth:
Stumbling Over The Truth
Signs of the Times Editorial
Mention it to anyone and they'll already have heard it; that crazy conspiracy theory that claims that members of the Bush administration deliberately conspired to deceive the world into believing that Saddam had WMDs and thereby provide justification for an illegal invasion of Iraq. But all right-thinking people know better than to allow themselves to be suckered into believing such claptrap. All 'sane' individuals KNOW that Saddam posed a clear threat to the US and the American people and that he was 'in' with Osama bin Laden, the evil mastermind of the September 11th attacks. And how do they know this? Why, because we were TOLD as much by our elected representatives. There is, of course, only one problem with this belief and it centers around last week's testimony of the British Attorney General which is only now being reported in the US mainstream press.
As we reported at the time, the British Attorney General stated quite categorically that the head of British foreign intelligence reported to Prime Minister Tony Blair that President Bush wanted to topple Saddam Hussein by military action and warned that in Washington intelligence was, in his own words, "being fixed around the policy." Which is simply another way of saying that Bush and Co were LYING about the threat from Saddam.
Taken in isolation, this fact, while shocking to those members of the world public who have always believed that their leaders would never lie about something of such import, is not really surprising to those of us who have long ago understood and accepted the corrupting nature of politics and power. Bubbling below the surface of this duplicitous chapter in the history of American foreign and domestic policies however, is a matter of much more gravity.
The fact is, the Iraq invasion and the reasons for it, which have now been revealed as outright lies, cannot be divorced from the overall "war on terror" and that which gave rise to it - the 9/11 attacks. We are told by the British Attorney General that members of the Bush administration were brewing the lies that would lead to the Iraq invasion in the Spring of 2002. Yet documents posted on the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) web site make it clear that the plan for an Iraq invasion was first conceived of by leading NeoCons as far back as 1997, four years before the events of 9/11 that provided the casus belli for the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
While no one can now reasonably dispute the fact that the Bush administration knowingly lead America to war on false pretences, many will still argue that, while they may have lied about the threat from Saddam, the NeoCons simply took the opportunity to capitalise on the "freak event" that was 9/11. As Winston Curchill said, "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened".
Given the fact that the Iraq war was planned up to 6 years before it actually occurred and four years before 9/11, and the fact that it has now been categorically proven that the Bush administration lied to the entire world about the existence of Saddam's WMD threat to America, it seems logical to us to at least consider the possibility that members of the Bush administration also played a part in stage managing the 9/11 attacks which created the essential atmosphere of a terrorist threat - the breeding ground in which the lies about Saddam's WMDs could take root?
Few will deny that, regardless of who the real perpetrators are, the 9/11 attacks generated the public appetite for revenge and war that was instrumental in facilitating the Iraq invasion. Considering that the Washington NeoCons had been planning an attack on Iraq for 6 years prior to 9/11, and remembering that it has now been proven that these same people lied to the world about Saddam's WMDs, is it not reasonable to suggest that the official story of how and why 9/11 happened is simply more NeoCon lies and that the perpetrators of the WTC and Pentagon attacks and the architects of the phony claims that lead to the Iraq war are one and the same?
To answer our own question. It is indeed an eminently logical supposition and one that has nothing to do with crazy conspiracy theories but rather very real evidence of a very real conspiracy to con the world's population into accepting a "Novus Ordo Seclorum"
posted by The Observor | 2:49 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home