• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

This is the thread that may very well change the way you look at 9/11 FOREVER!

I dont think 28K is PD. Even PD with his regular rantings was not this ignorant of something so obvious.

TAM
 
You said that we would eat our words that ONW called for the ACTUAL KILLING of US CITIZENS. Hijackings does not necessarily call for killing does it?

Try again.

TAM
 
28th Kingdom said:
HEY YOU F************* DRIPS:

"The plan, which was not implemented, called for various false flag actions, including simulated or real state-sponsored acts of terrorism (such as hijacked planes) on U.S. and Cuban soil."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Click to expand...
"hiajcking" a plane doenst mean kill people

"capturing" cuban insurgents doesnt mean kill people

staging anti-us demonstrations doesnt mean kill people

setting fires doesnt mean kill people

you following this?
 
28th Kingdom said:
HEY YOU F************* DRIPS:

"The plan, which was not implemented, called for various false flag actions, including simulated or real state-sponsored acts of terrorism (such as hijacked planes) on U.S. and Cuban soil."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Click to expand...


You do realize wiki can be edited (incorrectly at times) by anyone.

Please refer to the Northwoods document for your proof please, not someones incorrect assessment of the document,
 
Last edited:
Here 28K:

Page 7 onward within ONW (appendix A actually):

2.....
a. Incidents to establish a credible attack (not in Chronological order):
(1) Start Rumors (many. Use Clandestine Radio.
(2) Land friendly Cubans in uniform "over-the-fence" to stage attack on base.
(3) Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base.
(4) Start riots near the base main gate (friendly Cubans).
(5) blow up ammunitions inside base; start fires.
(6) Burn aircraft on base (sabotage)
(7) Lob mortar shells from outside base into base. Some damage to installations.
(8) Capture assault teams approaching from the sea or vacinity of Guantanamo bay.
(9) Capture militia group which storms base.
(10) Sabatoge ship in harbor; large fires
(11) Sink ship near harbour entrance. Conduct funerals for "MOCK" victims.
......

There is much more in the document, and none of it is pleasant or admirable by a long shot, but not once do they suggest the ACTUAL killing of US Citizens.

TAM
 
defaultdotxbe said:
"hiajcking" a plane doenst mean kill people

"capturing" cuban insurgents doesnt mean kill people

staging anti-us demonstrations doesnt mean kill people

setting fires doesnt mean kill people

you following this?
Click to expand...

Yea, I understand....because you didn't see the word KILL... I don't even need to finish that. Why does everyone else in the world...including - ABC NEWS....seem to think ONW entailed killing innocent americans:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

MAYBE BECAUSE - you have only seen 15 DAMN PAGES (Declassified) There are over 150 pages to Northwoods...f***** infidels.

James Bamford: In answer to an earlier question on Operation Northwoods, this was a plan by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1962 to trick the American public into thinking that Cuba was attacking the US. This would then give the JCS an excuse have a massive invasion of Cuba. As part of Operation Northwoods, people would be shot on America streets, bombs exploded, and boat loads of refugees sunk on the high seas -- all of it blamed on Cuba. The plan was approved by the JCS but later shot down by Defense Secretary Robert McNamara.

http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/01/nation_loeb060601.htm
 
Last edited:
T.A.M. said:
Here 28K:

Page 7 onward within ONW (appendix A actually):

2.....
a. Incidents to establish a credible attack (not in Chronological order):
(1) Start Rumors (many. Use Clandestine Radio.
(2) Land friendly Cubans in uniform "over-the-fence" to stage attack on base.
(3) Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base.
(4) Start riots near the base main gate (friendly Cubans).
(5) blow up ammunitions inside base; start fires.
(6) Burn aircraft on base (sabotage)
(7) Lob mortar shells from outside base into base. Some damage to installations.
(8) Capture assault teams approaching from the sea or vacinity of Guantanamo bay.
(9) Capture militia group which storms base.
(10) Sabatoge ship in harbor; large fires
(11) Sink ship near harbour entrance. Conduct funerals for "MOCK" victims.
......

There is much more in the document, and none of it is pleasant or admirable by a long shot, but not once do they suggest the ACTUAL killing of US Citizens.

TAM
Click to expand...
the best evidence out of those are actually 5 6 7 and 10, since concievably those could easily result in accidental deaths and injuries

but given the nature of the plans outlined the entire base would have to be in on it, so they would likely clear the areas before blowing anything up

and in either case, it doesnt specifically call for anyone to be killed, and given the intentions of the other outlines (which go out of their way to ensure the safety of those involved) its doubtful they would have executed anything unsafe
 
ALL you have to do is show us a quote, a verifiable quote, from the paper, 15 page one, or the 150 page one, that calls for the ACTUAL KILLING of US Citizens, and I am convinced. Please read the previous sentence again, closely, for my wording.

TAM
 
28th Kingdom said:
Yea, I understand....because you didn't see the word KILL... I don't even need to finish that. Why does everyone else in the world...including - ABC NEWS....seem to think ONW entailed killing innocent americans:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

MAYBE BECAUSE - you have only seen 15 DAMN PAGES (Declassified) There are over 150 pages to Northwoods...f***** infidels.

James Bamford: In answer to an earlier question on Operation Northwoods, this was a plan by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1962 to trick the American public into thinking that Cuba was attacking the US. This would then give the JCS an excuse have a massive invasion of Cuba. As part of Operation Northwoods, people would be shot on America streets, bombs exploded, and boad loads of refugees sunk on the high seas -- all of it blamed on Cuba. The plan was approved by the JCS but later shot down by Defense Secretary Robert McNamara.

http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/01/nation_loeb060601.htm
Click to expand...

so youve read the all 150 pages and can quote where it explcitly states peopel will be killed? because beyond that its nothing more than your assumptions

and BTW bamford is a journalist, he wouldnt know anythign more about northwoods than anyone else in america
 
Frankly, even if that document specified exactly that their intentions were to kill US citizens and blame it on a foreign power, which it DOESN'T, it would not go very far to prove that 911 was an inside job.

Northwoods is only used by CTs when all their other so-called evidence is shown to be false, or baseless conjecture.

It usually follows some compelling evidence that shoots down one of their pet theories that they will stutter, then spew spittle "well...what about Northwoods. HUH?"
 
28th Kingdom said:
Yea, I understand....because you didn't see the word KILL... I don't even need to finish that. Why does everyone else in the world...including - ABC NEWS....seem to think ONW entailed killing innocent americans:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

MAYBE BECAUSE - you have only seen 15 DAMN PAGES (Declassified) There are over 150 pages to Northwoods...f***** infidels.

James Bamford: In answer to an earlier question on Operation Northwoods, this was a plan by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1962 to trick the American public into thinking that Cuba was attacking the US. This would then give the JCS an excuse have a massive invasion of Cuba. As part of Operation Northwoods, people would be shot on America streets, bombs exploded, and boad loads of refugees sunk on the high seas -- all of it blamed on Cuba. The plan was approved by the JCS but later shot down by Defense Secretary Robert McNamara.

http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/01/nation_loeb060601.htm
Click to expand...

Yes 28th; people as dumb and insane as you make General, in our army, they sometimes are weeded out.

But you believe thermite, and these idiots proposed idiot ideas. So you see, even you can find your way to the top and be as dumb as your are now.

We can all pray when you do make it; someone will stop you from doing real dumb stuff!
 
funny that he talks of the 150 page document, and that that is where the damaging quotes are, yet in his arguments with us he uses only quotes from the 15 page document.

TAM:)
 
T.A.M. said:
So you have read these 150 ages, you infidel? Please inform us.

TAM:)
Click to expand...
In-"Fidel"? Cuba? See?

So it WAS Castro what pulled off the JFK assassination. Is this the right thread for that? Or is that a different conspiracy theory? Would 28IQ know the diff?
 
BTW in case anyone is wondering, since 28th failed to feed me my own words (and i was really hungry) i decided to make some soup

so im fine
 
twinstead said:
Frankly, even if that document specified exactly that their intentions were to kill US citizens and blame it on a foreign power, which it DOESN'T, it would not go very far to prove that 911 was an inside job.

Northwoods is only used by CTs when all their other so-called evidence is shown to be false, or baseless conjecture.

It usually follows some compelling evidence that shoots down one of their pet theories that they will stutter, then spew spittle "well...what about Northwoods. HUH?"
Click to expand...
Right Mr. TwinStead from my old hometown of Cleveburg.

And when Northwoods fails: There's ALWAYS the trusty "Well where was Poppy Bush on November 22, 1963? Hmm? What about that picture of him on the steps of the Depository? Hmm? Bush in '63, Bush in 2001. Get it? Hmm?"
 
It is a bit spammish, but If your gonna call me a name, i want you to understand what you are calling me.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1) - Cite This Source

in·fi·del /ˈɪnfɪdl, -ˌdɛl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-fi-dl, -del] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. Religion.
a. a person who does not accept a particular faith, esp. Christianity.
b. (in Christian use) an unbeliever, esp. a Muslim.
c. (in Muslim use) a person who does not accept the Islamic faith; kaffir.
2. a person who has no religious faith; unbeliever.
3. (loosely) a person who disbelieves or doubts a particular theory, belief, creed, etc.; skeptic.
–adjective
4. not accepting a particular faith, esp. Christianity or Islam; heathen.
5. without religious faith.
6. due to or manifesting unbelief: infidel ideas.
7. rejecting the Christian religion while accepting no other; not believing in the Bible or any Christian divine revelation.
8. Also, in·fi·del·ic /ˌɪnfɪˈdɛlɪk/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-fi-del-ik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of unbelievers or infidels.
[Origin: 1425–75; late ME < LL infidélis unbelieving, L: unfaithful, treacherous. See in-3, feal]

—Synonyms 1–3. See atheist.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source
in·fi·del (ĭn'fĭ-dəl, -děl') Pronunciation Key
n.

1. Offensive An unbeliever with respect to a particular religion, especially Christianity or Islam.
2. One who has no religious beliefs.
3. One who doubts or rejects a particular doctrine, system, or principle.



[Middle English infidele, from Old French, from Latin īnfidēlis, disloyal : in-, not; see in-1 + fidēlis, faithful (from fidēs, faith; see bheidh- in Indo-European roots).]

(Download Now or Buy the Book)
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
WordNet - Cite This Source
infidel

noun
a person who does not acknowledge your god [syn: heathen]

WordNet® 2.1, © 2005 Princeton University
On-line Medical Dictionary - Cite This Source
Click to expand...

TAM:)
 
So you don't have a problem with American citizens being shot on American streets by the US government? Okay...tell that to the karma police.

WHY DO YOU THINK THEY ONLY Declassified 15 pages? You saw how bad some of that stuff looked...can you imagine what they're trying to hide with the other 130+ pages? You probably wouldn't be able to sleep at night if you read it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom