PDA

View Full Version : Manchester Tragedy: Understanding The Big Picture




Brian4Liberty
05-23-2017, 10:52 AM
Manchester Tragedy: Understanding The Big Picture (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLdbHWja6jM)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLdbHWja6jM


Yesterday's tragedy at a Manchester, UK pop concert reminds us again that terrorism is alive and well. ISIS claimed responsibility and governments will respond. But will their response make future attacks more or less likely? Looking at the larger war in today's Liberty Report.

PierzStyx
05-23-2017, 12:05 PM
One word: BLOWBACK

merkelstan
05-23-2017, 09:57 PM
Lol, Ron gettin a bit edgy here - implying the migrant crisis was created by someone.

osan
05-24-2017, 04:37 AM
"ISIS claimed responsibility..."

And who, pray tell, is "ISIS"? Who is standing up to be counted as the leadership? To my mind, "ISIS claimed responsibility" could as easily be written "The State Department claimed responsibility", or something similar. The same questions arise every time I see/hear something from or about "Anonymous".

The degrees of misdirection in this political world ought never be assumed, for I suspect they are far wilder than most people dare entertain.

osan
05-24-2017, 04:45 AM
One word: BLOWBACK

Pardon me, but this is a child's answer. Blowback is but an element in a far broader fabric of intimately and subtly entangled elements, not the least of which is state sponsorship pursuant to state agendas. The stake is the very soul of the entire world, and those vying for it are dangerously clever and endlessly ruthless.

People of Empire are what they have always been since the first days of Empire: cowardly, lazy, greedy, and broadly speaking, ignorant. That set of qualities pretty well corrals their potential futures into comparatively narrow channels, whether as masters or slaves. We gore our own oxen.

juleswin
05-24-2017, 04:52 AM
"ISIS claimed responsibility..."

And who, pray tell, is "ISIS"? Who is standing up to be counted as the leadership? To my mind, "ISIS claimed responsibility" could as easily be written "The State Department claimed responsibility", or something similar. The same questions arise every time I see/hear something from or about "Anonymous".

The degrees of misdirection in this political world ought never be assumed, for I suspect they are far wilder than most people dare entertain.


https://youtu.be/Lqv3rkwDSvU?t=423

This belongs here.

juleswin
05-24-2017, 04:57 AM
One word: BLOWBACK

What if what we are seeing is exactly what our leaders were looking for? what if this result was guided by our intelligence orgs so that they would have a pretext to invade X country they have been trying to justify invading? do we still consider it a blowback?

osan
05-24-2017, 06:11 AM
https://youtu.be/Lqv3rkwDSvU?t=423

This belongs here.

Netanhayu's statement about 1/2 way in is very revealing.

Theye have woven a great Gordian knot and the world has become a very interesting place in result.

I confess my curiosity to see where this ultimately lands the race of men.

Ender
05-24-2017, 10:27 AM
Pardon me, but this is a child's answer. Blowback is but an element in a far broader fabric of intimately and subtly entangled elements, not the least of which is state sponsorship pursuant to state agendas. The stake is the very soul of the entire world, and those vying for it are dangerously clever and endlessly ruthless.

People of Empire are what they have always been since the first days of Empire: cowardly, lazy, greedy, and broadly speaking, ignorant. That set of qualities pretty well corrals their potential futures into comparatively narrow channels, whether as masters or slaves. We gore our own oxen.

Not a child's answer, osan- just a simple definition of what is going on. And, it's Ron Paul's answer from the onset of 911.

Here's an interesting article on the bomber from the Ron Paul Institute:

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2017/may/24/manchester-bomber-was-product-of-wests-libyasyria-intervention/

osan
05-24-2017, 11:15 AM
Not a child's answer, osan- just a simple definition of what is going on. And, it's Ron Paul's answer from the onset of 911.

OK, depends on how one defines "blowback", so yeah you make a valid point. I was assuming the customary colloquial use of the political term. That said, it still fails to give very much information. It's not unlike saying the cause of the Challenger disaster was "an error"; correct so far as it goes, but still offers nothing particularly useful, forensically speaking.

PierzStyx
05-24-2017, 11:58 AM
What if what we are seeing is exactly what our leaders were looking for? what if this result was guided by our intelligence orgs so that they would have a pretext to invade X country they have been trying to justify invading? do we still consider it a blowback?

Certainly. The idea that those in power manipulate the populace shouldn't be ignored. Those in power certainly know how to manipulate teh cycyle of violence and teh way we a shumans justfy killing others. But that still doesn't mean that it isn't blowback. It was just expected blowback.

RJB
05-24-2017, 12:37 PM
Relax. It's just a little blowback. It's just some good old boys blowing off a little steam. Why it's nothing compared to back in the day when the Turks got a little rowdy and genocided the Greeks and Armenians off of Asia Minor. Unfortunately it stopped at the walls of Vienna. If they had some free market wisdom back then they would have profited off of charging them for fantasy blowback tours of Europe. Good times. Good times.

juleswin
05-24-2017, 01:18 PM
Certainly. The idea that those in power manipulate the populace shouldn't be ignored. Those in power certainly know how to manipulate teh cycyle of violence and teh way we a shumans justfy killing others. But that still doesn't mean that it isn't blowback. It was just expected blowback.

Ok, but what I was trying to get at is this. Can it still be considered a blow back if its also an inside job?

dannno
05-24-2017, 02:17 PM
Can it still be considered a blow back if its also an inside job?

Are you really that unimaginative? Of course it can.

You have a group of terrorists who are pissed at America's foreign policy.

You have a bunch of government goons who want to go to war in the Middle East.

Mix them together, add a pinch of salt, and you have 9/11.

I don't think this one was a false flag, it doesn't really go with the narrative anymore. But it's certainly possible.

osan
05-24-2017, 06:03 PM
What if what we are seeing is exactly what our leaders were looking for? what if this result was guided by our intelligence orgs so that they would have a pretext to invade X country they have been trying to justify invading? do we still consider it a blowback?

I cannot prove it, but suspect that this is very much what is going on. At that point, "blowback" becomes irrelevant because Theye have no intentions of avoiding it.

Feeding the Abscess
05-24-2017, 06:26 PM
What if what we are seeing is exactly what our leaders were looking for? what if this result was guided by our intelligence orgs so that they would have a pretext to invade X country they have been trying to justify invading? do we still consider it a blowback?

Yes, because this isn't presented to the public by governments. Blowback, classically understood, is the reaction to clandestine operations that the public at large is kept away from or otherwise not informed about.