Well now, Ron Paul even agrees on the reason for 911!

[GostHacked]

See my thumb?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident

Boy, you're...

That's called a False Flag attack. Surprised you don't understand the difference.

The Gleiwitz incident was a staged attack by Nazi forces posing as Poles on 31 August 1939, against the German radio station Sender Gleiwitz in Gleiwitz, Upper Silesia, Germany (since 1945: Gliwice, Poland) on the eve of World War II in Europe.

This provocation was the best-known of several actions in Operation Himmler, a series of unconventional operations undertaken by the SS in order to serve specific propaganda goals of Nazi Germany at the outbreak of the war. It was intended to create the appearance of Polish aggression against Germany in order to justify the subsequent invasion of Poland.

Are you saying that 9/11 was a False Flag attack?

[DogOnPorch]

I'm well aware of the Gleiwitz operation. You're the one who is not.

[GostHacked]

I'm well aware of the Gleiwitz operation. You're the one who is not.

I don't know all of history. However I asked if the Poles ever did covert operations against the Germans. And you said some things, and then linked me an article about the Nazi's doing a false flag to make it look like Poland did it. This was your proof about Poles doing covert operations in German. Laughable at best.

Are you using 'Shady' logic when reading these threads?

[DogOnPorch]

I don't know all of history. However I asked if the Poles ever did covert operations against the Germans. And you said some things, and then linked me an article about the Nazi's doing a false flag to make it look like Poland did it. This was your proof about Poles doing covert operations in German. Laughable at best.

Are you using 'Shady' logic when reading these threads?

Thus my 'asked for it' being in quotes. You really must try harder.

[GostHacked]

Thus my 'asked for it' being in quotes. You really must try harder.

So what was your point exactly?

That I don't know history?

Or showing how Germany did a false flag attack on itself prove that the USA deserved the Blowback that was 9/11?

Or by showing me said German False Flag indicates that 9/11 was a false flag?

Where are you really trying to go with all this?

[DogOnPorch]

So what was your point exactly?

That I don't know history?

Or showing how Germany did a false flag attack on itself prove that the USA deserved the Blowback that was 9/11?

Or by showing me said German False Flag indicates that 9/11 was a false flag?

Where are you really trying to go with all this?

Hey...you're the Alex Jones fan. Not me. That you are unfamiliar with the details of Case White is NOT my problem.

[GostHacked]

Hey...you're the Alex Jones fan. Not me. That you are unfamiliar with the details of Case White is NOT my problem.

Awesome. Now you are attacking Jones and not me. And well, I am not familiar with all of history. Are you?

But in the end Case White does not support your argument. Germany wanted to invade Poland. So Germany did a false flag attack with the other thing you posted. And yet you think all this helps your argument?

Are you comparing the USA to Nazi Germany? Because this seems like you are making the case that 9/11 was a False Flag attack.

[DogOnPorch]

Actually, what I'm seeing here is narrow thinking that seems to think only AMERICANS are behind the planet's ills and everything is a response to them. Other countries are either too dumb or too pure to even attempt such things as a...gasp...false flag operation. Which is either the bigotry of low expectations or a pie-in-the-sky world view. Take your pick.

[GostHacked]

Actually, what I'm seeing here is narrow thinking that seems to think only AMERICANS are behind the planet's ills and everything is a response to them. Other countries are either too dumb or too pure to even attempt such things as a...gasp...false flag operation. Which is either the bigotry of low expectations or a pie-in-the-sky world view. Take your pick.

Actually we are specifically talking about the reasons behind 9/11 and why the USA was attacked, and the fact that Ron Paul agrees with those reasons, hence the title of this thread.

Edited January 13, 2012 by GostHacked

[DogOnPorch]

Actually we are specifically talking about the reasons behind 9/11 and why the USA was attacked, and the fact that Ron Paul agrees with those reasons, hence the title of this thread.

Oh...so I just imagined the posts re: 'asked for it'. My apologies.

[GostHacked]

Oh...so I just imagined the posts re: 'asked for it'. My apologies.

Maybe you should take that up with the posters who actually said that. I seem to be your fave goto guy to pick on when someone else says something.

[DogOnPorch]

Maybe you should take that up with the posters who actually said that. I seem to be your fave goto guy to pick on when someone else says something.

My post was not directed to ANYONE as you can see. But YOU did respond to it claiming you knew what I was talking about AND claiming it a fail. Have another beer, GH. I'll join you once I wrap things up for the day.

[sharkman]

This 'asking for it' mentality really explains a lot of things. We all know that Iran is just asking for it. So is China, Russia, several south American countries, and most of Europe. North Korea was asking for it, but now that their leader is dead(long live the new king) they get a 6 month reprieve.

[Shady]

Are you using 'Shady' logic when reading these threads?

It's your logic that's laughable and makes no sense. Please distinguish the demands of a terrorist in the Middle East demanding certain governments change their foreign policy to terrorists in North America that demand governments, industries, and doctors demand they change their practices? Why do you think we should comply to the demands of one set of terrorists, but not the demands of others? And on what basis?

Also, where do these terrorists get the authority to dictate the terms of diplomacy or health policy of various governments or industries.

Using your logic, how can it be argued that an abortion doctor that doesn't stop their practice, doesn't in at least a small way, bring attacks upon themselves?

Thanks in advance.

[Shady]

This 'asking for it' mentality really explains a lot of things. We all know that Iran is just asking for it. So is China, Russia, several south American countries, and most of Europe. North Korea was asking for it, but now that their leader is dead(long live the new king) they get a 6 month reprieve.

Exaclty. And as I've already illustrated. How can it not be said that an abortion doctor that ignores the pleas from terrorists demanding that they stop the killing of innocent unborn children, doesn't also bring attacks upon themselves. It's impossible to argue otherwise.

Edited January 13, 2012 by Shady

[Moonlight Graham]

So keep using "asking for it" and you know people will justifiably believe that you are saying that they deserved it, me included. Even the Cambridge Idioms Dictionary from Cambridge University says so. If you still insist on using the expression after what I've shown you, you mean "deserved it" as far as I'm concerned. If you don't mean that, you would make sure that what you are saying clearly says otherwise; you wouldn't be saying something that leaves not only so much ambiguity, but according to Cambridge University, says exactly what you claim not to be saying.

One dictionary says "deserve". I posted 7 others, the 1st 7 that came up on google, that didn't, so I win.

I also posted this definition of "asking for it/trouble" (the exact words I said!: "the US & the West were asking for trouble...and they got it. That doesn't mean they deserved it, it means they were asking for it") from the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary & Thesaurus:

be asking for it/trouble

Definition

to be behaving stupidly in a way that is likely to cause problems for you

Drinking alcohol before driving is really asking for trouble.

I'm not surprised she lost her job - she was really asking for it.

It's also impossible for anyone with working eyeballs to assume that I think they "deserved it" since i specifically said different times, and in my "argument in brief", that they didn't deserve it.

Edited to add: I can only assume that you believe Daniel Pearl "asked for it" too; that anyone who has met death at the hands of the terrorists "asked for it," and I find that disgusting beyond words.

Jesus. I'll repeat my argument for the 50th time: "At the same time, the US & the West were asking for trouble...and they got it. In other words, they had it coming. That doesn't mean they deserved it, it means they were asking for it". The US as in the state of the United States of America, not the US as in Daniel Pearl or any other civilian. The US government/state is in some part culpable for terrorist attacks against US citizens because the US (state) has done a wonderful job to provoke them. Was Japan "asking for it" when they bombed Pearl Habour? Hellz yes.

[Moonlight Graham]

It should be abundantly clear, however, what he means after he posted several definitions from multiple sources. Going back to the Cambridge Idiom Dictionary is meaningless. As you can see from all the other sources, the idiom dictionary is the only one that suggests the actions are "deserved" rather than "invited." It's quite obvious that MG is saying that the terrorist attacks are a "foreseeable response," as reprehensible as it is, to US foreign policy.

Exactly, thank you. One person who understands what I'm saying instead of pretending not to.

Smallc said:

The US, at least in part, brought the terror attacks upon themselves. How is that even controversial? US actions around the world have drawn the ire of many groups. That can't be denied even. Does that mean that the terror attacks were right, or deserved (especially by the direct targets of the attacks)? No, but it simply means that US actions around the world resulted in a backlash. The 9/11 terror attacks were part of that backlash.

Exactly.

Edit: I'm not posting in this thread anymore. It's done. If people don't argee or understand what I'm saying, that's fine.

Edited January 13, 2012 by Moonlight Graham

[eyeball]

The US government/state is in some part culpable for terrorist attacks against US citizens because the US (state) has done a wonderful job to provoke them.

Don't the participating members of a democracy assume at least some of the responsibility for the actions of the governments they elect?

If not, then what does the phrase 'people get the governments they deserve' mean?

[bush_cheney2004]

Edit: I'm not posting in this thread anymore. It's done. If people don't argee or understand what I'm saying, that's fine.

OK...but if the dead victims haunt you to madness, you "had it coming", "deserve it", and "asked for it".

[cybercoma]

Switched dictionaries? Both definitions were from Cambridge. Read much?

The Life of Charles Dickens is also from Cambridge, but I'm smart enough to know that's a different book.

[Guest American Woman]

The Life of Charles Dickens is also from Cambridge, but I'm smart enough to know that's a different book.

Are you also smart enough to know that The Life of Charles Dickens isn't a dictionary, and therefore your comment isn't as smart as you think it is - and is, in fact, quite ignorant?

[cybercoma]

Are you also smart enough to know that The Life of Charles Dickens isn't a dictionary, and therefore your comment isn't as smart as you think it is - and is, in fact, quite ignorant?

Not nearly as ignorant as looking at 7 different dictionaries that corroborate a single point and rejecting them all because a single dictionary says otherwise.

[Guest American Woman]

Edit: I'm not posting in this thread anymore. It's done.

Thank God for small favors. At least we'll no longer be subjected to your passive-aggressive claim that the people who died on 9-11 deserved it.

[Guest American Woman]

Don't the participating members of a democracy assume at least some of the responsibility for the actions of the governments they elect?

Well then, that explains why you deserve to be murdered, but it doesn't explain why this four year old did. Sins of the father, perhaps?

:angry:

[cybercoma]

Thank God for small favors. At least we'll no longer be subjected to your passive-aggressive claim that the people who died on 9-11 deserved it.

He never once said that. What a disgusting thing to even suggest. You should be ashamed of yourself.