The Forum > General Discussion > Prof David Ray Griffin On Afghanistan
Prof David Ray Griffin On Afghanistan
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Page 5
- 6
-
- All
Posted by King Hazza, Tuesday, 29 June 2010 6:04:45 PM
| |
rache,Westralis, our detractors talk about agendas but fail to confront the facts.Not one point of Prof Griffin's essay proven wrong.
2 yrs ago I believed the offical conspiracy theory of 911.Then a saw World Trade Centre Building 7 which took over 6 yrs for an official Govt report to be released,that was a sham.Even NIST as Prof Griffin says it cannot explain freefall.NIST withdraws a previous statement and admits by default that it was impossible for fires to destroy a building in such a fashion. The difference between myself and my detractors is that I've made the effort to meet people like Prof Steven Jones mentioned in Prof Griffin's article.Prof Jones has his degree in physics and there is no room for equivocation or error.WTC 7 486m tall came down in 6.5 sec and for 2.5 sec it was absolute freefall as in a vacuum.This means that the building had not structural integrity what so ever.It was impossible for it to stay erect for an instant,let alone for 30yrs. http://ae911truth.org/ since 2007 when it was formed has now over 1200 professional architects and engineers demanding a new independant investigation into 911.I met Richard Gage its founder last year when we had an international conference in Sydney.Luke Rudowski the founder of http://wearechange.org/ was also there. Prof Niels Harritt is coming to Sydney on 17/7/10 to present his paper on nano thermite,the highly sophistocated explosive found in the dust and rubble of 911.Dr Frank Legge( the Australian rep) will also be there who was one of the 9 international scientists who did the research and published the peer reviewed paper,proving the use of explosives.Book; johnbursill@gmail.com After 911,George Bush brought in presidential orders that negate Congressional authority.The Patriot Act circumvents habeous corpus and you may be detained indefinitely on the mere suspicion of being a terrorist.Obama has been worse by the official presidential order of the assassination of suspected terrorists without trial. We have entered an era in which the large corporates that JFK warned about,the Military Industrial Complex,now control Congress through the power of money. Posted by Arjay, Tuesday, 29 June 2010 8:20:34 PM
| |
Obama's a Marxist??
Beck also calls him a racist (among other things). I suppose when you listen to the rantings of all those fascist extremists, everybody else is way off to the left - even those crazies in the middle. As for your Glenn Beck worship, here's a conspiracy generator you can use - http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bl-glenn-beck-conspiracy.htm?PS=855%2C447%2C642%2C291%3A1 Ahh, fear and loathing - the Conservative's weapons of choice. What can be done about Haliburton here anyway? Unlike AWB, it's not our problem but like Blackwater, CIC, KBR and Dyncorp plus a host of other companies on the make over there, it's a problem that the US has to address if it wants some sort of solution. Posted by rache, Wednesday, 30 June 2010 2:00:47 AM
| |
Let's try an experiment:
A race actually! Who can be the first person to turn this thread BACK on topic? That being, WHY are we in Afghanistan and should we STAY? Not -911 conspiracies -Socialism Posted by King Hazza, Wednesday, 30 June 2010 10:19:18 AM
| |
The invasion/war/bombing etc of Afghanistan was supported by UN Security Council Resolutions, including http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2001/sc7212.doc.htm.
Unlike Iraq, the US and UK did not breach International Law. Posted by mellou, Wednesday, 30 June 2010 11:06:17 AM
| |
It is important that we identify who is being bommed and why they are being bommed. The Allied troops are not bomming a country to acquire land for self interest; so there is no invasion of the country of Afganistan. Such a view is a propagander lie. They are there specifically targeting the Taliban who wish to impose their will on the whole population of Afganistan by death to discenters.
For the troops to leave would mean treachery and wholesale bloodshed on the population until the Afganistan armed forces are able to maintain order by themselves. Posted by Philo, Wednesday, 30 June 2010 3:56:37 PM
|
There are a lot of questions I'd like to ask but at the moment I can't be bothered, as I have a feeling nobody will want to answer but try to segue onto some pet issue.