America moves nukes in range of North Korea?!

We should just send NK a big crate of pokemanz or something. They're probably just bitter because SK has so much more cool stuff and better soap operas while they've barely discovered electricity.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_268_pBvPs"]YouTube - Documentary: Inside Undercover In North Korea 1 of 5[/ame]

Just the first in a series of clips from a nat geo documentary. I haven't watched it and I don't know what might be skewed, but if anyone's interested....
 
I think that the reason that 'conspiracy theories' abound is because there is a void where information should be, which is then filled with rampant speculation. This void is a gaping chasm between the people and the people who lead them, which points to a failing on the part of governments to inform their public. All conspiracy theories however seem to be built on the same premise: that the government is lying. However outlandish a conspiracy theory may seem the basic premise on which it is built is invariably true. The reasons government lie are many. The influence of money is one, the nature of a profit driven society is another and the heirarchy which is perpetuated within society is yet another.

The competency of a government is unimportant. It doesn’t matter if you cover your physical tracks so much, just as long as you convince your public. As Joseph Stalin once remarked: ‘It doesn’t matter who does the voting; it only matters who does the counting’. After some controversial election counts this is a lesson the US might do well to learn.

Some people might not be amenable to idea that their government has lied to take them to war, however it still remains true; a reality that has never been clearer than with the web of deceit spun by the neo-cons to justify going to war with Iraq.

The gulf of Tonkin incident involved provocation of N.Vietnam followed by a second incident which didn’t even happen. These were used as a justification of war. President Johnson spoke to the American people and told them they had come under attack and that although they didn’t want war they had to get involved; he didn’t mention that the US was already involved in covert land and air missions against N.Vietnam

The cause of the sinking of the USS Maine is still a mystery yet it was still used as a justification to enter into war with Spain

Tension between Japan and the US had been building throughout the 1930’s and the US imposed sanctions on Japan. These acts may have acted as a provocation to Japan. There is much evidence that President Roosevelt knew about the Japanese plan to attack Pearl Harbour and did nothing about it in order to use the incident as a way to bring the US into the war. Here is a link to some info which concludes with the following passage about the 2 investigations into it ( http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/pearl/www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/pearl.html?q=pearl/www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/pearl.html )






Two and only two courts of law have decided the issue of whether FDR and Washington or the commanders in Hawaii were responsible for the Pearl Harbor disaster. Both the Navy Court and the Army Board found Washington guilty (in 1944).
  • NAVY Court of Inquiry
  • !!!Top Secret ARMY Board Report!!! (30K), Oct, 1944, "Now let us turn to the fateful period between November 27 and December 6, 1941. In this period numerous pieces of information came to our State, War, and Navy Departments in all of their Top ranks indicating precisely the intentions of the Japanese including the probable exact hour and date of the attack. " In response to this report, Marshall offered his resignation - the sign of a guilty conscience. Marshall testified at the MacArthur hearings that he considered loyalty to his chief superior to loyalty to his country.
  • JOINT CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE on the Investigation of the Pearl Harbor Attack, Nov 15, 1945 to May 31, 1946, proved that there had been so much reversion of testimony, coverup and outright lies that the truth would have to wait until all Pearl Harbor records were declassified.
Most of the conspirators were military men, all men of FDR's own choice, men who only followed orders and FDR never delegated authority. Stark, in answer to charges that he denied IQ to Hawaii, publicly offered a Nuremberg defense in August 1945 that everything he did pre-Dec 7, 1941 was on FDR's orders. The handful of military men in DC responsible for the disaster at Pearl Harbor were directly under the control of FDR and were later promoted and protected from investigation; promoted with FDR's full knowledge that they were responsible for not warning Hawaii. On the record, Intelligence tried to warn HI scores of times but were prevented by FDR's men.

A radar station picked up a flight of aircraft heading towards Pearl Harbour but no warning was given to the fleet. It has been claimed they thought it was a squadron of US bombers. This does however kind of defeat the purpose of having a radar station.

The sinking of the Lusitania brought the US into the first world war and it appears that various warnings were ignored allowing the ship to carry on its journey when German U boats were in the area. Churchill was involved in this and he was also involved in not warning the city of Coventry that they were going to be bombed because he didn’t want the Germans to know that the British had cracked their enigma code.

9/11. I don’t know the extent of the deception regarding this one. I have heard many theories including that there had been warnings to the US government about the possibility of an attack and also the strange fact that NORAD were carrying out exercises on the day of the attack which lead to confusion on the day, which was later covered up by lies as found in the 9/11 commission: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QG9KOdEPAQQ&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QG9KOdEPAQQ&feature=related[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1bm2GPoFfg&feature=fvw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1bm2GPoFfg&feature=fvw[/ame]
What is very clear is the web of deceit which was spun by the US administration after 9/11 to their public in order to justify the invasion of Iraq:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_nXmPnAe1Q"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_nXmPnAe1Q[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7J2-XLQUq_U"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7J2-XLQUq_U[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYmEFoN8UJ8"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYmEFoN8UJ8[/ame]
Economist Joseph Stiglitz as calculated that so far the war has cost the US $3 Trillion dollars. And people wonder why the economy is suffering?
 
Last edited:
Last I checked, the economy of the world was suffering. It is a bit more complicated than a simple war, as complex as a war is.
 
Everything is linked

As Bill Hicks once said the US annual defence budget is vast. If instead of spending that money on weapons the US gave clean drinking water to the entire planet imagine how the US would be perceived by the world

If the US stopped giving money and weaponry to Israel (5 and half billion $ a year see: http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/cost_of_israel.html ) and instead used the money to help Palestinians rebuild and integrate with Israelis and helped Palestinian refugees in Jordan and other places, the US could bring peace to the middle east.

If the US could stop crushing the spread of socialism and embrace it, it would bring the world together in peace.

If the US used its wealth to stop using fossil fuels it could help the environment and lessen global conflict

etc etc etc

The problem is that the US is a tottering unstable structure. It is made up of a pillar of arms dealing, a pillar of narco dollars, a pillar of petro dollars, with a roof of propaganda and lies all built onto a shifting foundation of debt through mindless consumption

It is a giant ponzi scheme which is driven to desperate acts to perpetuate the bubble
 
muir said:
Everything is linked

As Bill Hicks once said the US annual defence budget is vast. If instead of spending that money on weapons the US gave clean drinking water to the entire planet imagine how the US would be perceived by the world

If the US stopped giving money and weaponry to Israel (5 and half billion $ a year see: http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/cost_of_israel.html ) and instead used the money to help Palestinians rebuild and integrate with Israelis and helped Palestinian refugees in Jordan and other places, the US could bring peace to the middle east.

If the US could stop crushing the spread of socialism and embrace it, it would bring the world together in peace.

If the US used its wealth to stop using fossil fuels it could help the environment and lessen global conflict

etc etc etc

The problem is that the US is a tottering unstable structure. It is made up of a pillar of arms dealing, a pillar of narco dollars, a pillar of petro dollars, with a roof of propaganda and lies all built onto a shifting foundation of debt through mindless consumption

It is a giant ponzi scheme which is driven to desperate acts to perpetuate the bubble
Click to expand...

137529-39075-dc-animated-universe_super.jpg
 
I am sorry, but my niece said something I have to say here: some people just don't get it.

Why didn't the US send clean drinking water to Hitler? Try to placate the world into believing there will be peace and find yourself sitting front row 50-yardline to a nuclear war.
 
You ARE sitting front row in a nuclear war. That is where the current approach of the US has lead

The status quo is unsustainable. As a citizen we simply have to ask ourselves what sort of world do we want to live in? Violence begets violence; it creates cycles of violence.

We also need to ask what do we want our governments doing in our name?

Hitler's rise to power was possible because of the events that preceded it such as war and humiliation....a cycle of violence. You cannot see it in isolation.

Many people view the US in the same way. It is a big beast that wants to consume everything.....some try to placate it and others try to resist it

Please know that when i say the 'US' i mean the US/UK alliance; i also do not mean the people of the US or UK, i mean the governments of those countries which are run by super rich elites. I trust the people to do the right thing if given the chance
 
The lesson of world war II seems to be "don't be blitzkrieged".
 
If you want to see an example of modern blitzkreig then look at how the US invaded Iraq the second time round

Donny Rumsfeld's plan involved a lightening strike up the supply routes to cut off the nerve centres. However this did not allow time to consolidate what had already been invaded so pockets of resistance kept cropping up behind the frontline troops like brush fires.

Anyway....rest assured neither Iran or N.Korea is going to blitzkreig the US anytime soon!

I'd say the lesson of world war two was not to enter into cycles of violence and not to humiliate countries. The lesson hasn't been learned and the violence continues. The US military industrial complex rumbles on.
 
Yes, they rumble on passing out water and humanitarian aid in places like Pakistan and Haiti all around the world.
Russian planes and others from around the globe are helping Israel fight fires started by idiots.

Someone has to make decisions and carry on. Maybe with a political science and law degree, someone else here could help make things better.
 
You do know why they give aid though don't you? It is a public relations exercise.

For example it was stated in the press recently that the US has dedicated $75 million towards clearing land mines. However at the same time the US is making BILLIONS of dollars flooding the world with weapons.....wake up and smell the hypocrisy

Sure they give a bit of aid now and again but it is only to create the perception in the publics mind that they are a positive force in the world, meanwhile they are robbing those very same countries of their natural resources through their vicious corporations often backed up by the US military.

It is a sick game of deception
 
I can see your mind is pretty much stuck on that.

The world's second largest supplier of "arms" must be getting all fat and rich, too, I suppose.
 
[MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION]
Lol, why on earth would you think that we all, denizen of the Internet all of us, haven't heard all of this before. Why are you trying to convince us about something we've all been OVER exposed to for almost a decade? You're pretty much just talking to yourself.
 
I think if you take a look at the number of hits these threads have had I think you will see that there is a lot of interest on these topics. It is clear if you use your common sense that I am not 'talking to myself'.

Am i getting a slap on the wrist for a blunt comment i made to your boyfriend on another thread? I know the comment was blunt and I did apologise for it, however I think it did highlight the weight of the implications of the changes that are happening in the UK

I have been trying to wind down the discussion on this thread for a while now and have only been responding to people who have adressed me directly. I do however think that my initial post does give some interesting perspective on what is happening in N.Korea (and elsewhere) which is the topic of the thread
 
Last edited:
just me said:
I can see your mind is pretty much stuck on that.

The world's second largest supplier of "arms" must be getting all fat and rich, too, I suppose.
Click to expand...

Nope just the elites that are running it
 
I appreciate what muir has to say.

There are some ugly things going on in the world.

I think it is our responsibility to pay attention and make changes where we can.
 
Thanks myself

I think that what our governments do affects us directly and indirectly.

I also believe that greater understanding of the political and economic forces that shape our lives can help us to better navigate the world and to not fall prey to the architects of false perceptions

These issues affect every aspect of a persons life and insight into them can help in tackling the big questions we all face eg: who am i? what do i believe in? what do i want to do with my life? How can i effect positive change? ......in fact many of the issues which are dealt with elsewhere on the forum but in different ways.

I don't think people need to come up with a cure for cancer or bring about world peace to make a difference. I think every mind which switches on to the possibility that those at the helm might not be the best people to be there and might be taking us in the wrong direction is a mini revolution and a step closer to the necessary public consciousness required to effect positive change
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top