Government Lies

1. 0

   Sooner28posted 11 years ago

   The government has a tendency to lie about important things in the world, like motivations for foreign policy decisions.  Examples are: Nero's Great Fire, The Reichstag Fire, Instituting the Shah of Iran, The Gulf of Tonkin, and Iraq.  It's not unprecedented in the least for a government to blatantly lie about something big.
   
   What I find most amusing about the Boston Bombing is the mindless acceptance of the authority's account, even when they constantly contradict themselves (such as the FBI initially claiming they had no clue who the "suspects" were, but we later learn they were being watched since at least 2011).  People are  completely swallowing what the authorities tell them, even when they are generally skeptical of government.  Why this is I don't know.
   
   Now, the former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, is questioning the official Boston story.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Murray
   
   http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-boston … se/5332535
   
   I wonder if the mainstream media will report this.

   replyreport
2. 88

   Zelkiiroposted 11 years ago

   You're late to the party, son. The nutjobs have already farted out their conspiracy theories about this.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Sooner28posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Don't forget: http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/09/five- … o-be-true/

      replyreport
3. 66

   innersmiffposted 11 years ago

   You're right about the inconsistencies in those that don't bother to question these kinds of events yet are largely anti-government on other things. Many of them are amongst my fellow libertarians that understand the government is an agent of violence that lies, steals and kills to get what it wants . . . yet they believe it would never lie about terrorist attacks, assassinations and other tragedies. Give me strength. And they will defend this inconsistency under the pretence of being 'rational', or something.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Sooner28posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I've become more sympathetic to the way media doesn't like to directly address arguments.  They keep saying "right-wing conspiracy theories."  The site I linked to is liberal.  It's not a libertarian/liberal thing at all. 
      
      I think the older brother may have been a double agent that turned on the United States.  The FBI doesn't want people to know how much we are funding shady organizations overseas.

      replyreport
4. 66

   innersmiffposted 11 years ago

   Why is it that all of these 'lone nuts' are connected to US secret service agencies in some capacity?
   
   Why would anyone accept anything the government said as gospel after Gulf of Tonkin, Iraq, etc.?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Sooner28posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/opini … wanted=all
      
      NEW YORK TIMES.  No one can claim this is a "right-wing" source.

      replyreport
      1. 66

         innersmiffposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Of course. This is completely un-controversial, but if anybody questions it, these people are beyond the bounds of acceptable opinion.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Sooner28posted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Who needs the government to penalize speech when the populace police themselves?

            replyreport
   2. 0

      Sooner28posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politi … acy-theory
      
      Mainstream liberal media has acknowledged there are inconsistencies.  The article seems afraid to draw any strong conclusions, but even posting a list like this shows people are starting to wonder.

      replyreport