Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: 5 terrorists in Cleveland

Posted 2 years ago on May 1, 2012, 1:43 p.m. EST by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The 1% are scared. Now they are taking five guys who "supposedly" were planning to blow up a bridge in Cleveland, and are trying to associate them with OWS. They are scared, so they are trying to scare the public with fake terrorist threats. We are winning.

168 Comments

168 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by mserfas (652) from Ashland, PA 2 years ago

Well, I doubt OWS protesters firebombed a Democrat to punish him for defending contraceptive programs. Wish I could say the same about the stupidity in Ohio...

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 2 years ago

Winning? The terrorists were bigger news than the leftist May Day protests. Not a good press day for Occupy.

[-] 1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

That was the point. And they were only bigger news to people who watch mainstream media.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Gee, I wonder how that happened?

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

shame the government is back into a corner

that it has to cry terrorist

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

one less fake terrorist story to tell

the nation is ruining it's "cry wolf" credibility

but ya

the government did triumph with fear this day

[-] 1 points by Frog12 (0) 2 years ago

They tried to blow up a fucking bridge! They are to innocent people they are being blamed for this just to stop OWS. Just because some people linked to you're cause are criminals doesn't mean they are innocent. Tis isnt some conspiracy to take down OWS. Just cause you think that doesn't mean it's true.

[-] 1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

You're very right. But it also doesn't mean that I'm wrong.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

link

link

link

link

[-] 1 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

Look at your own posts. Have yo ever written things that de-humanize the opposition? Posting such comments is like like putting billets in the gun of already unstable people that then take your rhetoric to the next level.

Is this forum guilty of fomenting violence?

[-] 0 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

Really?

[-] 0 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

It is easy to justify violence against others if their humanity is denied (as it is frequently in posts on this site).

Are you guilty?

[-] 1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

What violence did I justify? Who's humanity did I deny? I don't know what you're trying to say, please elaborate.

[-] 0 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

I have never read anything posted by you that was not respectful. Did I miss something that you are not proud of?

[-] 1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

I get it. You weren't talking about me. Okay. Thanks. I agree with you wholeheartedly that the comments about executing these men are inappropriate.

[-] 1 points by jbgramps (159) 2 years ago

Yep, Kinda settles it for me. This is the last straw for me. I’m an early OWS supporter. Still believe in a lot of their ideals (unions and collective bargaining, getting the banks under control, get big money out of Washington, affordable education and health care, etc ,,,) But the uber extremists (maybe I mean terriorists) are coming out of the wood work.

Of late I’ve seen too many over privileged, over idealistic kids just looking for a street party. Not much attention on the issues, just on hassling the cops and disrupting things. This will not sell to the masses. The public is already turned off by our antics.

OWS is a terrorist breeding movement. I’m done with them. I still have the same concern I’ve always had, but will look for more adult avenues to work on them.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Terrorism is being bred by injustice and iniquity not by those who are struggling against it. Plus Occupy doesn't have a secret police department to cook up plots like this and snag unstable people like these into participation.

[-] 0 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

You're missing the point. It was fake. Just like terrorism itself is fake. What proof have you of the existence of terrorists other than the national media?

[-] 2 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

don't sweat it, it'll make more sense when you become an adult.

[-] 2 points by BannedAgain (6) 2 years ago

Uh, that big hole in Manhattan?

[-] 0 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

I thought we were talking about Cleveland. What has Manhattan to do with it?

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Surixurient (3) 2 years ago

You serious beleive that terrorism is fake? Don't be so naive.

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

"Terrorism" was used for many years by republicans (mainly) to scare the crap out of people so they could pass their unconstitutional agenda curtailing our freedom and wasting our money and lives. There is still an element who would continue to misuse this word/phenomenon to discredit the ows because ows represents the biggest threat to the domination by the 1%. So you gotta question this bad press, the timing. the FBI tactics. All of it.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Before that it was "commie." But terrorism is even better, because they can call anybody a terrorist, and people know it.

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

And this war is never ending. Lord we would be in this foreverif Bush and the repubs get the Presidency

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

You got it!

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

They can end it whenever they want. You faith in political parties is blinding the both of you.

[-] 0 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Calling me blind is non productive. we disagree. I don't support repub war on terror I guess you do. No more war. support ows. Vote repubs out

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Obama has attacked 6 nations in three years. Im anti war. Thats why I dont support Dems or Reps.

And go to an occupy and spit your pro Dem bullshit, see how that goes over. You are a fraud.

What city do you go to again?

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

More vulgarity, and name calling. you like the safety of the internet huh.?

I think you would be a little more respectful if I was standing in front of your soft little tampa ass...... I'm a New Yorker and proud of it. I breathed in the ashes from the wtc and I am still anti war. I say this world would be a little better if Bush warred like Obama wars. I may not support bombing other countries but I know the Dems can be made to serve the 99%. the Repubs are too far gone. support ows, vote out republicans

[-] -2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

I could give a shit if you are a new yorker, Im from Rochester. You vote for more war, for more terror, and if you want to have a debate over is the better fighter then post your resume and I'll post mine. I'll win that one hands down too.

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Rochester oooooh! LOL. Better fighter? What are you talkin about? Resume, for what? you gonna beat me up with ad agency work history. Give me a break. you are clearly some kind of republican troll trying to convince your fellow Americans not to exercize there right to vote. everyone should vote and everyone should know that Big oil, big Finance, big pharma all love republicans, and hate democrats. Support ows, vote out republicans

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Saying Im from Rochester wasnt supposed to mean I was tough. I was simply stating where I was from, as were you. If you knew anything about anything, you'd know some of us eventually straighten up over the years.

Please go to a GA and say what you say, and we will see who the troll is. Your just another interenet hack who wants to keep doing the same thing the country has been doing for a long time.

I'm going to assume you were enlisted at some point, and messed a few people up? Or perhaps have been in quite a few fights on the side of the street? Maybe been in a lot of trouble over the years? Or maybe you were a wrestler when younger, and continued training into adulthood?

Go to your local Occupy. That is support. Your views and assumptions lead me to believe you don't go. Because your rhetoric is typical of interenet chat rooms, not occupy.

[-] 2 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

I can vote how I please thank you very much. I have better chance with Dems, their problems pale in comparison to republicans. I can vote working families, independent, socialist. Don't worry about my vote. I will identify the pol who supports right to choose, gay marriage, volker rule, alt energy, cap n trade, removing oil subsidies, buffet rule, taxing wealthy. And you can vote for your republicans. Support ows. vote out anti gay marriage politicians.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Why do you assume, because I am extremely frustrated with the Democrat party, to which I am still registered, it would mean I am pro Republican?

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

you have come to their def repeatedly, you parroted their positions repeatedly. You seem like a Repub to me. but it don't matter what I think. Be what you want. Support OWS. Vote out the anti gay marriage, anti abortion politicians

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

wrong answer. I've been to many ows protests. over night as well. I don't have to agree with every ows opinion. I have my own well thought out rational ideas. I support ows. I believe we can get the dems to serve the 99%. Even if the whole movement is against that doesn't change my opinion. I stand with the people against the corps. support ows. vote out the corp lovin politicians

[-] -2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

" I stand with the people against the corps. support ows. vote out the corp lovin politicians"....

You cannot say this, and then vote Democrat. The change has to start somewhere, with some group of people. If not now, then when?

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Scaring the people isnt a Republicans thing, its a GOVERNMENT thing, and its been happening long before you or I came around.

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Yeah but they have been at the forefront of it in current times and they have brought it to a new level. So since ows is less republican than democrat I suppose the fearmongers would want to discredit ows with fear. no?

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

The government doesnt care about what letter is at the end of people's names. Its all one big scam. Illusion of choice.

For every example of Republicans scaring people, I can show you Democrats doing the same thing.

If "they" are attempting to scare the people from joining OWS, its only because they have realized they cant get it into the left corner. And I dont think they have given up on that.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28441) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Sorry - Fail.

The MSM is an arm of the corrupt greedy that have bought influence in government. They use their propaganda machine to push their issues forward.

Currently the republicans in office seem to be the "most Visibly" in line with special interest ( the Greedy ).

Democrats are not immune but at the moment they are not as visible nor as completely infected as a party either.

Further proof. Look at this PDF and the individuals signed on in support:

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/CFTCPositionLimitsLetter.pdf

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

All nonsense. If they had any balls, they would call for a reinstatement of Glass Steagall. Its all smoke and mirrors nonsense. Avoid the real issues. They want to talk about speculation, but no one wants to talk about the role QE 1 And QE2 and Twist had anything to do with it.

They are all working for the same people. Their main goal is to keep the people believing. If they fail, they are out of their special little club, and all their perks go away too.

If you remove all your preconcieved notions of the parties, and judge them by what they do, you will see it is about as bi-partisan as it gets.

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Left corner? Please explain. How have Dems fear mongered.? This President has gone so far as to refrain from using "war on terror". Thank god, finally.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

He opened the state of union address with war, and closed it with war. Immediately afterwards a "threat" of a van with explosives played across the entire nation. He just signed onto the afghan bullshit for another 10 fuckin years with that scumbag Karzai, because "we must remain vigilent".

Threats of ending SS payments if we didnt raise the debt ceiling- I guess htey would rather bomb people than pay our old people. Its all the same tired tricks that both parties, and every gov before them, has done.

Keep the people divided, let them argue over semantics (like the Buffet tax) while the real problems are not talked about.

[-] 0 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

he ended the Iraq war. ending the Afghan war, troops there? sure. we got troops everywhere. thats not fear mongering. Thats bad policy. He isn't using fear to continue any war. He isn't using fear to continue indefinate detention! Dems aren't using fear to kill American citizens without trial, That is repub tactic these days. Dems may be keeping troops, passing indef det laws, & killing citizens w/o trial but they aren't fear mogering to do it. SS? dems have been accused over the years of scaring the elderly with claims repubs want to take their benefits away, but the repubs have tried to take their benefits away. That is also what repubs are about. Cut benefits for elderly, working families so they can reward their 1% puppet masters. Right? isn't that what we are fighting against? I support the buffet rule and more! Don't you?

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6592) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

I strongly urge you to watch an upcoming documentary called "The Shock Doctrine" for an insight into how all administrations, and governments in general (not only ours), use fear and uncertainty to push forward their agendas. It's a fascinating, eye-opening documentary. It will change your idea as to how we're being manipulated.

[-] 0 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Seen it. Repubs are masters at using it. don't see it so much from Dems.

Do you? How so.?

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6592) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

I'm one from the crowd that seriously believes that, although the parties aren't necessarily identical, they are indeed in bed together and generally use the same playbook, although to varying degrees depending on the situation and desired outcome. That's why I'm starting to believe that change may be impossible within the framework of the two existing parties.

[-] 0 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Ah you know if you vote for 3rd party it splits the vote. but you don't mid. the 2 parties have us by the balls but we can take one back. the only way. Sorry. I sympathize. really but you already know. the dems can be made to serve us. not the repubs

[-] 0 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

That would be giving up. And giving in to the corps. It seems to me that big oil and big finance hate Dems & love repubs. It seems to me repubs hate immigrants & minorities. Dems need these groups and are criticized for catering to them. the Dems can be made to serve the 99%. The repubs are too far gone. If we can't get Dems to do so then all is lost and we SHOULD give up. Don't give up. we can do it.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6592) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

Not giving up at all. Third party. And let's not get into the tired discussion about third party votes doing nothing but split the votes of the two contenders, it's old news. This country's become such a quagmire there are no easy answers. But, I will not vote for Obama or Romney in November.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Exactly, he doesnt have to, he can just do it. That state of the union, with the ending was disgusting.

Gitmo- the saddest thing ever- still open and thriving.
6 nations bombed in the last 3 years. Iraq is still heavily occupied and bombed - you go off the media, Ill go off of the troops

The Buffet rule was a joke. The tax code is 76,000 pages. Its just fluff, has no substance in the tax code, how its currently set up.

Perhaps the Dems dont need to use fear, their base just bends over and takes it willingly?

Ofcourse the Dems have been accused of the medicare stuff, both sides are guilty. Obamacare cuts billions from medicare, the Repubs attacked them at length about that, said they were ruining it.

I know what OWS wants- a new system. Only political hacks support either of these two corporate parties. And your fear of the other one (inspired through them) is how they keep you voting for them.....

[-] 0 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

I don't think dems just take it. They stay home and repubs win. Eventually they protest like the 60's and now. War is hell I'm not so big on bombing other countries but imagine if repubs did Iraq and afghan like Dems did Libya. Think of the trillions of dollars and thousands of lives we could have saved. Gitmo is a shame but I have no doubt it will close. I am more concerned about American middle class. tax code is too large and complicated because it is slanted to favor the 1%. It should serve the rest of us. The 1% owe the 99% a huge debt because everything they have came from us. The dems can be made to serve the 99%. The repub are too far gone. I am registered ind., I hv voted for both parties but like you I think they are both corrupt. but I don't think corrupt equally.

[-] 1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

I'm far from naive. I don't believe everything I've been told about terrorism in this country. I believe that there are terrorists in the world. I have many friends who have fought in the middle east, and there was someone shooting at them, but I believe that they want everyone in this country to be afraid. Are they pushing for totalitarianism? Maybe, maybe not. But frightened people are easier to control. And thank you for not insulting me.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

countries' use fear to control the populous is terrorism

[-] 1 points by commonsense11 (195) 2 years ago

Supposedly? That's why the movement has no credibility. Because many of you losers fail to take responsibility for anything especially yourselves and your own destinies. These 5 should be publicly executed for what they planned to do and doesn't matter who they are associated with. I run the tow path under that bridge. I know others that spend time in that area. Killing innocents to try and prove a point is deserving of a public execution so I say let these 5 losers get what they deserve.

[-] 3 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

No credibility? Is that what you and your drinking chums at the local bar have come up with? If OWS had no credibility, you wouldn't be fouling the forum with your hysteria about public executions; nothing has been proved. Imagine, our ancestors battled and died for the Magna Carta and so simple a thing as common law (which we take for granted), in which the accused are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

[-] -1 points by commonsense11 (195) 2 years ago

You've watched too many movies and are out of touch with reality sir. I'm not against change but I won't throw my lot in with violent protesters. I'm far to intelligent and believe in the value of a hard days work to do that. I've listened to my 25 year old step son and his loser friends enough to know what drives a portion of OWS and I want no part of that garbage. Exercise your right to vote and find candidates that represent you, not special interests if you really want change.

[-] 1 points by behindthemask (-124) 2 years ago

They wanted big violence for their May Day party . . .so they could say it was the police pushing their poor frail bodies around . . .FAIL.... No purpose . . .no point . . .no sense . . .nonsense . . . They even think the FBI set up the whole Bridge Bomb thing . . . and looking at the culprits its hard to believe they could plan their way out of a paper bag . . .but THEY were the instigators . . . I suppose OWS'rs would believe someone stealing a "bait Car" is the cops fault as well . . . .

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

I had a NO WAR bumper sticker on my car in 2002

someone busted out the window

[-] 0 points by commonsense11 (195) 2 years ago

My problem isn't with what group they might be affiliated with. My problem is with what they intended to do. For that they should fry. I live in Cleveland. I drive on that bridge. My 26 year old and 22 year old sons drive on that bridge. These losers deserve a public execution.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28441) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Would you also include their FBI recruiters/handlers/instigators ? Dumb Shits are Dumb Shits they can claim anything they want - But they are not supporters of the movements against greed corruption and "crime".

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Another uneducated troll from the swamps .... oy!

[-] -1 points by commonsense11 (195) 2 years ago

I would say you are the uneducated one.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

oooooooo .... :)

[-] -2 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

This is exactly the de-humanizing comment that foments violence. It pushes already unstable people to blow up bridges.

Why is it not possible to criticize without making personal attacks?

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Boo hoo .... someone give this man a tissue, sounds like his mutant pussy hurts :)

[-] -1 points by behindthemask (-124) 2 years ago

Occupy has adopted an "I only believe what I Believe" thinking process . . . They refuse to think through anything that derails their "intellectual" conclusions on anything . . . They are so segmented now . . .they say infiltrated . . .that as expected . . . any two together could not reach a "concensus"on what to have for lunch . . . Three or more and violence erupts . . .it is senseless to try and have discourse with the senseless . . . . . They become loud, vulgar and even more irrational when their slogans and placards are challenged . . . They do not know what they want . . .and would not know if they got it

[-] -1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

It's not about accountability. Learn to read correctly. What I was saying was that it was fake. These terrorists we're supposed to be afraid of don't exist. They want bad publicity for OWS. It's classic divide and conquer. It's very effective.

[-] 3 points by commonsense11 (195) 2 years ago

I live here in Cleveland and they do exist. One word for you "Denial" I see it in my 25 year old lazy step son that refuses to "work for the man". He's completely out of touch with reality and when it comes down to it an lazy individual full of excuses as to why he shouldn't have to achieve anything for himself in his life and believes in handouts. It's clear that many of the OWS fall into this category as well. There's nothing wrong with wanting change and for things to be better but I see a lot of it driven by pure laziness and a failure to take personal responsibility, wanting someone else to pull their load.
This story isn't a conspiracy. It's real and you are a fool for doubting it.

[-] 0 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

I work, sir, and very hard at that. What proof do you have that it's real? I'm not saying that all people in the media, or the police, or the FBI are bad or evil. I'm just saying that it is entirely feasible that some of them are.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6592) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

In this day and age, nothing can be taken at face value. Not saying this isn't a legitimate story, but it may be wise not to jump to immediate conclusions. Remember the 'rapes' and 'murders' last year that turned out to be, uh, embellished. For example, when did Baxter and Stafford join OC? Could they have been FBI plants from Day 1? It wouldn't be the first time the FBI resorted to such tactics.

Just some food for thought.

[-] 2 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Some might call you a conspiracy theorist but I think it's important to doubt what we are told about anything and everything by the MSM and PTB.

Also though in times like these some people might be so much in despair that they could be lured into such a whack scheme. It's clear that without the FBI there would not have been a plot to begin with.

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (6592) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

Yeah, last year showed us how the MSM was going to handle OWS. Out of the eighteen alleged rapes claimed by Breitbart on his blog (and by others elsewhere), not one was actually OWS. Even the cops in a lot of those cases said there was no evidence OWS participants were involved, yet that didn't stop the MSM from parroting those "cases" over and over. So, any time I hear anti-OWS news, especially violence, I'm skeptical. And then there's history. The FBI infiltrated the Panthers, the SDS, and many others. If they did it in the '60's and '70's, I'm pretty sure they'll do it to us. It's just a matter of time.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

gnomunny : Even I had thought that there indeed were some instances of rape and so did others who were and are sympathetic to OWS. It's good to know that these were lies to begin with. Maybe a post with links would be useful in this matter. Thanks.

(edit) It's a guarantee that the #Occupy movement is infiltrated. That's not conspiracy theory or paranoia. #Occupy is very potent. It's an idea whose time has come and the enemy will move heaven and earth against it.

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6592) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

I'll try to get some links for you. I had some but lost all my bookmarks recently. I also saw an episode of The Young Turks where they went through the whole list of 18 one by one, with actual newspaper excerpts, quotes from the cops, etc.

Wait, just found one from the daily Kos:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/15/1065161/-Debunking-Breitbart-s-Occupy-Rape-List-

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Thanks.

[-] 1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

Of course I'll be called a conspiracy theorist. Everyone involved with OWS is a conspiracy theorist in one way or another. Any challenge to the validity of the status quo is a conspiracy.

[-] -1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

How is it "clear" that without the FBI there wouldn't have been a plot to begin with?

Does the clarity involve an unsubstantiated guess based on a reactionary emotional response? Or do you have info others do not? Please explain how it is so clear to you.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Because these bozos couldn't plan their way out of a paper bag. It's very sad that OW has to be implicated but Occupy does and will attract all kinds of people plus FBI agents and informants.

[-] 1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

So you've studied their planning capabilities thoroughly, huh?

Right.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

As per the media these guys were pathetic. I don't excuse what they allegedly did.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Surixurient (3) 2 years ago

Supposedly were planning? They detonated a fake FBI provided bomb. Associate them with OWS? They were infiltrated by the FBI at an OWS rally, one of them was an occupy Cleveland organizer whom the community was "shocked, just shocked" to find he had violent ideologies.

[-] 1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

You were there when they tried to detonate it? Or someone you know? The only evidence there is that it happened is the report circulated by the FBI and parroted by the media.

[-] 2 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

apply that logic to everything--you know, so you won't be a hypocrite or anything--and see how your life goes. you sure your parents are your parents? you may have been "there" when you were born, but how do you reeeeeally know if they are your parents?

could so easily be govt agents.

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Gulf of Tonkin begs to differ

[-] -2 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

Auto-responder truthtard says what?

I know it is impossible for you truther morons to stay focus and think about the topic and offer something relevant, but at least try.

Btw, non-truther occupy people, see what I mean? See how truthers have destroyed any chance of having any credibility? No matter the topic, they just mindlessly spew their silly little talking points. Allowing truthers in the movement killed it.

[-] 1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

That is a valid point. I didn't have any proof that it was fake. There is also no proof that it was real. It will be interesting to see the results of their trials. It was just my opinion. We may not even be here right now. I don't know.

[-] -2 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

"I didn't have any proof that it was fake."

But you said it anyway. That's known as "being full of shit."

[-] 3 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

When we know the movement is non violent and we know the government wants to label it terrorist in order to use extreme oppression to shut it down we must be suspicious when this type of possible entrapment/infiltration arrives on the eve of a big relaunch. same thing with the white powder envelopes. I would lean towards government trying to discredit the movement by using mentally disturbed fring individuals. We disavow violence. Millions of us! isolated incidents are irrelevant.

[-] 2 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

The movement's ideals may be nonviolent, but there has been violence. How do you know the govt wants to label ows as a terrorist group? Are you sure you aren't making that up so you can claim victimhood? And amp up the drama?

It's been a few days now. Any evidence this was a set-up?

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

i have no interest in that little distraction. I saw enough evidence of entrapment, and enough similarities to clumsy police overreach on the 1st day. The timing alone is highly suspicious. regarding violence by self professed OWS related people. We cannot and do not control all of the millions of people who might perpetrate a crime. It may even be anti OWS people attempted to hurt the movement by claiming to be OWS. We can only practice non violence and rely on the vast majority of peaceful protesters to define us.

[-] 1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

"I saw enough evidence of entrapment"

Hilarious. As of you'd know it even if you did see it.

And then the typical paranoia roll call. Look at what allowing 911 Truthers into the movement has done to it.

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Your focus is on any bit of negativity you can find. How about this: We support onshoring of jobs, investing in education for all, alternative energy, Prosecution of the corp criminals who crashed the world economy!, Repeal corp personhood, Tax the wealthy, These are the positive that matter. And this IS a peaceful movement.

[-] 1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

"Your focus is on any bit of negativity you can find" wrong

"We support onshoring of jobs" swell!

"investing in education for all" already happening.

"alternative energy" me too, but not paybacks to campaign bundlers disguised as "investment." let it happen naturally, it will happen. govt involvement will fuck it up.

"Prosecution of the corp criminals who crashed the world economy" yep

"Repeal corp personhood" if you mean in regards to political activity, I'm ok with it if the same rule applies to labor unions.

"Tax the wealthy" they already are taxed. a lot. top 1% pays almost 40% of the taxes. the top 5% pays almost 60%. top 10% pays 70%.

see, I am not against all of ows. I am against paranoid fools like 911 truthers who talk out of their ass on a regular basis.

[-] 2 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

I don't know what your talkin about regarding 911 truthers. haven't seen them. And the 1% may pay 40% of taxes but the get 90% of the wealth that we provide as the workers in this great nation. Support non violent OWS. Vote out anti buffet rule republicans

[-] 1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

"I don't know what your talkin about regarding 911 truthers. haven't seen them."

<eyeroll>

sure.

[-] -2 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

What you want and what your ideals are do not matter when it comes to reality. There was an informant, the guys plotting this were involved in ows, and they could have hurt or killed a lot of people. Just because they were dumb, doesn't mean they are harmless. Let me remind you one of theoriginal twin tower bombers in '93 went back to the truck rental agency to get his deposit back! You can make the case that it is isolated, but you cannot pretend this never happened or fall back on the easy/paranoid excuse that it, and anything that makes ows look bad, is fake if you want to be taken seriously.

And that seems to be a major problem with ows. It appears as if most do not want to be taken seriously.

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

Occupy is a political peoples movement,. you attempt to link a non-violent political moment with some alleged acts that seem to have been created and orchestration by a federal agent. It is always easy to cull some dipsht from any group and manipulate them to some ends. the problem with your provocateur position is that the movement itself has never called for such actions,. the feds just happened to find some. in a simple chicken/egg maneuver one could assume the feds created the action? no?

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

I attempt to link? What a joke. The link is undeniable, so learn the facts before making a kneejerk response like that.

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

they may have been lead to bad decisions, this is only a charge remember, we used to do this old-fashioned thing and have trials for people charged with crimes,. not this new style call him a terrorist and he loses his right to a trial or even a charge!

you clearly revel in this charge, showing your character. again this is a movement, not a corporation, the actions of a few individuals of a group so loosely defined, hardly defines the rest of the group,. this is simple logic. sure, some of the people may be a tad reactionary,. the actions of some do not extend to the group.

[-] 1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

Who said anything about not having a trial? Is this the best you can do, setting up strawmen?

"the actions of some do not extend to the group"

<eye roll>

Right. except when it comes to corporations, right wingers, oil industry executives, insurance executives, investment house executives, rich people in general....I suppose it is ok to do it then. Hypocrite.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

how is that hypocritical? investment bankers, oil-industry executives, etc. all make decisions and take actions that have measurable effect,. when they are negative and we see who profited and how,. we can hold them to account when they are criminal.

when some random individuals supposedly take some 'criminal action' you attempt to blame the whole of a loosely defined group that does not even have a membership? it is ridiculous and only serves to show you dislike the group, not anything more. please make valid criticism, not pointless slander, or we just don't care. sorry to disappoint, but this psy-op = fail.

[-] 0 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

"how is that hypocritical? investment bankers, oil-industry executives, etc. all make decisions..."

well if can't understand how that is hypocritical, you can always add delusional to it, too.

"all...." of these people do bad? every one? there are no bankers who didn't screw over people? that is how absurd and absolute you are? how can you be taken seriously.

as for downplaying the wannabe terrorists' ties to ows, save the effort. it is clear they were involved with ows. like it or not, that is reality.

but like most ows and truther types, you prefer to gloss over the substance and talk about me. gosh, haven't seen that 60,000 times before.

[-] 2 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Most do want to be taken seriously. I disagree. But I won't let isolated incidents that may be government entrapment change the fact that millions of non violent people are marching to help the working families in America. The violence against non violent protesters can't deter us. Individuals who perpetrate violence in the name of ows do not define us. We cannot be deterred. the stakes are too great, the future of the American dream is at stake. We can't let the actions of a tiny few or criticism from people who latch onto it as an excuse to shut us down change our direction. Keep your eyes on the prize. A fair America for all not just the 1%. Join us in non violent change. don't give up.

[+] -5 points by toonces (-117) 2 years ago

... and most of Al Quada was non violent on September 11, 2001. It was just 19 of them that went outside the groups desires...

[-] 3 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

beg to differ... that was the plan by the leader. not the 19 that carried out and need i remind you that the president himself aided that terrorist's sister out of the country? when logic would dictate she be incarcerated for information. odd that he knew it was bin laden before the fires were even put out.

[+] -4 points by toonces (-117) 2 years ago

The leaders of OWS have been trying to stir up violence since the movement began. There has been violence and vandalism since OWS began their occupations.

[-] 2 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

So you are comparing OWS with Al Quada? HA!. We are non violent we espouse it, live it, train it, disavow it. And aren't religious wackos. Some of our detractors are religious wackos. Lets see who could that be......? ......... ....... HMMMMM.......... Could it be republicans!.? Support ows. Non violent change for working Americans, Vote out Republicans

[-] -3 points by toonces (-117) 2 years ago

Well, they do have similar tactics... They have been violent and vandals since OWS started.

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Similar? you mean republicans and al quada? ows is non violent, espouse it, live it, train it, disavow it. Support your fellow working Americans. Support ows. its our only hope. we need each other.

[-] 0 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

Support your fellow Americans by comparing almost 40% of them to AQ.

Good thing you're not a hypocrite, huh?

News Flash: the democrats are bought and paid for corporate whores just like the GOP. That you think there is a profound difference tells me how influenced you are by lefty media and pop culture. Way to think independently!

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

That was a question and a joke in defense of a offensive republican troll comparison of ows and al quada. lots of dems have been bught, co opted. However the Dems are hated by big banks, big oil, big pharma, who then turn around and shower repubs with crazy money. The dems can be made to serve the 1%. the repubs are too far gone. Support ows, vote out big bank, big oil lovin republicans.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

how could someone get a deposit back without returning the truck ?

[-] 1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

He claimed it was stolen.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

sounds like a set up

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

THE NEW YORK TIMES


Thursday October 28, 1993 Page A1

"Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast"

By Ralph Blumenthal

Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building a bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center, and they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting harmless powder for the explosives, an informer said after the blast.

The informer was to have helped the plotters build the bomb and supply the fake powder, but the plan was called off by an F.B.I. supervisor who had other ideas about how the informer, Emad Salem, should be used, the informer said.

The account, which is given in the transcript of hundreds of hours of tape recordings that Mr. Salem secretly made of his talks with law-enforcement agents, portrays the authorities as being in a far better position than previously known to foil the February 26th bombing of New York City's tallest towers.

The explosion left six people dead, more than a thousand people injured, and damages in excess of half-a-billion dollars. Four men are now on trial in Manhattan Federal Court in that attack.

Mr. Salem, a 43-year-old former Egyptian Army officer, was used by the Government to penetrate a circle of Muslim extremists who are now charged in two bombing cases: the World Trade Center attack, and a foiled plot to destroy the United Nations, the Hudson River tunnels, and other New York City landmarks. He is the crucial witness in the second bombing case, but his work for the Government was erratic, and for months before the World Trade Center blast, he was feuding with the F.B.I.

Supervisor `Messed It Up'

After the bombing, he resumed his undercover work. In an undated transcript of a conversation from that period, Mr. Salem recounts a talk he had had earlier with an agent about an unnamed F.B.I. supervisor who, he said,

"came and messed it up." "He requested to meet me in the hotel,"

Mr. Salem says of the supervisor.

"He requested to make me to testify, and if he didn't push for that, we'll be going building the bomb with a phony powder, and grabbing the people who was involved in it. But since you, we didn't do that."

The transcript quotes Mr. Salem as saying that he wanted to complain to F.B.I. Headquarters in Washington about the Bureau's failure to stop the bombing, but was dissuaded by an agent identified as John Anticev.

Mr. Salem said Mr. Anticev had told him,

"He said, I don't think that the New York people would like the things out of the New York Office to go to Washington, D.C."

Another agent, identified as Nancy Floyd, does not dispute Mr. Salem's account, but rather, appears to agree with it, saying of the `New York people':

"Well, of course not, because they don't want to get their butts chewed."

The result of the explosion:

6 civilians killed

Over 1,000 injured

105 firefighters injured - 5 admitted to local hospitals

reinforced floors almost 30 inches think blasted away on 3 levels below grade, plus a concourse level floor, leaving a crater about 150 feet in diameter at it's largest point.

On the B1 level, the operations control center of the Port Authority Police Department (and the fire command station forthe complex) was heavily damaged and rendered out of service.

On the B2 level, various walls of elevator shafts and freshair plenums severely damaged, allowing smoke to enter and rise through the cores of both towers.

Numerous concrete walls destroyed or damaged.

200,000 cubic feet of water poured into the lowest grade from damaged refrigeration unit supplies (from the Hudson River), sewer lines, fresh domestic water lines, steam pipes, and condensate return. Water 1.5 feet deep across the B6 level.

124 parked cars destroyed, 102 damaged.

Partition walls blown out onto PATH train mezzanine.

Numerous telephone conduits collapsed from ceiling onto cars (but phone service was not cut, miraculously).

Fire alarm and public address systems out of service.

Elevators out of service.

Water cooled emergency generators shut down due to overheating when their water supply was cut. This disabled the emergency lighting.

Sprinklers & standpipes out of service.

2,500 tons of rubble removed.

Clean up effort involved 2,700 workers per day, plus a total of 160,000 gallons of cleaning fluid and 200,00 gallons of detergent.

Restoration cost: $250,000,000.

[-] 1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

Like I said, just because he was stupid doesn't mean he wasn't dangerous.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

or believable

[-] 1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

Then you are equally "full of shit" for believing it because there is no definitive proof that it did or didn't happen. We do know for sure that the FBI was in charge of the whole operation. That's called entrapment. But that wasn't my point. I think the whole thing is fake. It's called expressing an opinion. It's still legal in this country for now.

[-] 1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

Expressing an opinion based on nothing doesnt help your case much. And nice try with the "rubber-glue" thing, but I have not made a statement that it is definitively true or false as you have.

[-] 1 points by Surixurient (3) 2 years ago

is it really so hard to beleive that anarchists have latched onto the OWS movement? Instead you would beleive it to be a government conspiracy? Where is the logic in that

[-] 0 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

That's an interesting point. And, no, it is not hard to believe. The logic is that it happened on one of the biggest days of the movement, and the media made sure to mention that these men were connected to OWS. Is it equally hard to believe that it is a government conspiracy?

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

If you look at the way the media has played this, one thing is CLEAR, and that is they produced a strategy ahead of time to "handle it. If we accept this simple and obvious truth, then a lot of other things fall into place.

[-] -2 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

"latched on"???

Anarchists were, along with socialists (strange bedfellows, anyone?), the main supporters of ows from the start. These opposing ideologies are what made the movement so incoherent: "smash the state" and "hey, state, gimme gimme gimme!" ...how was that eer supposed to work?

Add truthtards and, viola!, instant joke.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

if you have never heard or read about anarcho-socialism then perhaps political debate should be avoided,. lol.

[-] 2 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

I have and it is a joke. If you think it is a plausible ideology, maybe YOU should avoid political anything. It's so absurd it can't be taken seriously. Might as well be a plutocratic communist.

[-] 0 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

if you find it difficult to understand a society with no leaders, that has a participatory democratic system, and collectively manages the worlds resources,. then you are destined to live a confused life. This is the world we are heading to,. sooner rather than later. everyone with equal power to influence the whole. the most creative and effective ideas easily as accessible as any other, to anyone.

[-] 2 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

"sooner rather than later"

Do you really believe that nonsense? Who will organize these elections? Someone NOT in charge of them? When no consensus on collectively managing resources is reached, then what? Who will run the sewers and waste disposal, if not leaders of those ndustries with expertise? This notion of a leaderless society is absurd and cannot work. It never has and never will. If you honestly think the world is even thisclose to something like it, you desperately need a reality check.

[-] 0 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

I see you are angered by change,. this is normal for some. There is nothing stopping any of this, only entrenched power! Power likes to hold power, it is an endless feedback loop, it has to be broken from the outside, for the most part.

Just one of many plans of action to achieve this; http://www.globalsafe.org/ One I like ;)

I think I see the problem some people have with the concept of anarchy, they just think there is no social organisation in such as system,. this is simple not the case,. it is simply removing the 'representatives' that are clearly so easily corrupted,. while also facilitating more ideas in the idea pool we use to move forward. why let a few hundred corrupt fools run the show? they are 'experts' in all fields? instead, why not listen to all the experts in their fields and decide the direction for ourselves???

[-] 1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

you see disagreement as "anger"? that's amusing. what is stopping this isn't entrenched power, it is human nature. if your fantasy could happen, it would. it won't because people with more money or power than you aren't as different as you as you would like to believe. different people in the same positions would make many of the same decisions. some good, some bad, some neutral. there are more options than the star wars reality your fantasy solution fits into.

want to stop entrenched power? term limits and publicly funded campaigns with 100% of all activity public and transparent.

anarchy will not work because too many people would try to fill the void of power. we havent evolved enough yet and we wont any time soon because you want us to.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

You raised some questions about how a participatory democracy will function, and I give you a link [ http://www.globalsafe.org ] to a fully fleshed out answer to your concerns, and you just ignore it?

Participatory democracy is coming, the old why of elected 'representatives has proven it's inadequacies are too destructive to stay with this old system of top-down control by the few,. progress is now.

[-] 0 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

"Participatory democracy is coming"

it isn't. might be nice, probably wouldn't work, but it isn't coming.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

yes it is,. . (you offer no reason for your claim, so neither will I)

are you afraid of change? are you dominating others using the current system, and wish to continue that?? why oppose better ways of organizing the social order here on earth? people will always choose the better way, once they are offered it. we can keep rowing the sinking ship, or we can move to that little island of hope and a bright green future, before the thing goes down.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by jbgramps (159) 2 years ago

"They are scared, so they are trying to scare the public with fake terrorist threats" Well if the's true then it's working. The public sees these guys as terrorists; and by association OWS also. Blame the anarchists mentality.

[-] 2 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

Ok, that's fair, but what I'm trying to say is that maybe these are five guys who never would've done more than talk if they weren't manipulated by the FBI. The FBI is in control of the story until these men are allowed to speak in court. And with NDAA that may never happen, but I think the FBI found some guys who were just talking big and convinced them to go through with this fake plot.

[-] 0 points by jbgramps (159) 2 years ago

I’m not much on conspiracy theories. I also believe 99.9% people of people arrested today are guilty. Especially in case like this. I don’t know if these guys would’ve done it or just talking trash; nor do you. We only have opinions. But considering they were buying explosives takes it past the talking stage.

I’m disappointed at the posts that give these guy the benefit of doubt or excuse their actions. In my mind they are failed domestic terrorists. Would you have given Timothy McVeigh the same considerations?

Personally, I think the anarchists have some overly romantic view. They just want to shake things up to see what happens. OWS isn’t as important to them as just wanting cause problems. If OWS fails it will largely be because of the anarchist crazies.

[-] 1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

The whole thing is a conspiracy theory regardless of which way you look at it. There is an article about the whole thing on rt.com. I would post the link, but I don't know how. But paraphrasing from that article, the FBI sets up stings like this all the time to trap domestic terrorists. That sounds an awful lot like entrapment to me, and entrapment, we both know, is against the law. But these laws are overlooked in the interest of trapping terrorists. And even the most heinous criminals in the United States are protected by the law. But it's really inconsequential because either way they are bad for OWS. Whether they are terrorists or no they are now associated with OWS in the public's eye.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28441) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Highlight the link with your mouse (depending on how your buttons are set-up) either left click or right click and a menu will appear choose copy link, go to where you want to place the link left or right click again you will get that menu again this time choose paste.

[-] 1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

Thanks.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28441) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Not a problem. Did you try it?

[-] 0 points by jbgramps (159) 2 years ago

Well, we agree on one thing for sure, that NDAA is wrong and should be removed. I don’t think it will last because most Americans feel the same way. But I digress.

The point in all my posts here is Anarchists may bring down OWS. The public isn’t very tolerant of violence and will not support any organization associated with it. And the public irritation will turn to hate if anyone gets hurt or killed in a anarchist action.

Your point seem to focus on illegal activities of law enforcement in trying to catch those who will do violence. I kind of give the FBI the benefit of the doubt in these matters. After all they are trying to protect the public.

[-] 1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

I think you're right in both instances. The world is not made up of just good and bad people. I think there are good people in law enforcement as well. If what the FBI is doing keeps people safe then the ends justify the means; and I really mean that. But my original point was that it came on such a big day for the OWS movement that it may have been more fabrication than any other instances.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

yep

doubt is what rises immediately when the government acts in sync diverting news from other events

[-] 0 points by jbgramps (159) 2 years ago

You have a good point. However, it’s also possible that the bombing was planned on Mat Day and the FBI had to act immediately.

Listen, I’m not saying the FBI are always the good guys. But they had to act to prevent a violent crime. For that I’m thankful, regardless of the suspicious timing.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

not by OWS

we are non-violent

[-] 0 points by jbgramps (159) 2 years ago

The fact that these guys, at least a couple of them, associate themselves with OWS brings us into the picture. It doesn’t matter what you or I think. The public sees these guys as part of OWS; and that’s going to be a hard rap to beat.

As I’ve said a couple of times, the anarchist mentality has strong potential to bring down OWS. The masses will not tolerate the crazies. OWS must publically denounce the anarchists and loudly assert OWS is non-violent.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

yes, like they denounce the government for its violent foreign policy

the public does not see these arrests as part of OWS

OWS is non-violent

[-] 0 points by jbgramps (159) 2 years ago

I respectfully disagree. The public does see these guys as part of OWS.

But I’m done here for today. Taking my .308 AR15 to the range, just in case these anarchists start wanting to harm me and mine. I want to be able defend myself.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

I don't respect your disagreement

anymore than I respect those who would bomb

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 2 years ago

This is just SOP for discrediting protest movements. yawn

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-white-powderbomb-threat-bullshit-has-happened-/

[-] 0 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

It doesn't matter what you believe about the story. It will be the biggest story associated with May 1, 2012 now, and as it goes to trial, it will be the only thing remembered about the day. Occupy has lost a lot because of this.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

No, most people know a whitewashing when they see it.

[-] 2 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

Not sure they do, the majority haven't seen through their own corrupt politicians. We all see what we want to see.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

That is what we are attempting to change here, and I think people ARE waking up.

[-] 0 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

Good luck, but I think you're overly optimistic. You have more people that can name reality show characters then know or care about what occupy is trying to do.

[-] 0 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

The maroon sights his own post as evidence!!!

[-] -1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

That was the point. That's why it was done. People in this country are petrified of terrorists that don't exist. You're right. No one gives a crap about what I think or believe. They don't have to. I just said it was an obvious attempt to scare people, and it probably worked.

[-] 0 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

i think the fact that the operation was 'under ' fbi control says it all.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by TheMisfit (48) 2 years ago

Yep, you are all over it.

[-] -1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

people have generally believed al cada to be made believe terrorist for years



[-] -1 points by behindthemask (-124) 2 years ago

Denial is Not a river in Egypt

[-] -1 points by behindthemask (-124) 2 years ago

http://occupywallst.org/forum/blowing-up-bridges-in-cleveland/

see related discussion

Denial is NOT a river in Egypt

[-] -2 points by Jagger01 (-6) 2 years ago

Oh yeah they (who are they can you be more specific) are afraid. And you (the OWS) are winning. The only thing the you are winning is a free stay at a prison

[-] 1 points by dan1984 (108) from Cumberland, MD 2 years ago

They are the bankers, lawyers, government officials, military officials, FBI officials and so on who control our country with fear, intimidation and lies. Yes, we are winning. And why am I going to prison?

[Removed]

[Removed]