digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

"Father of Reaganomics" Says Bush May Stage False Flag Events

jonesreport.com — Former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration Paul Craig Roberts has gone further than ever before, warning that the Bush administration could be about to stage false flag events and/or terror attacks in order to reinstate the draft, announce a dictatorship and possibly attack Iran.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Fallout911, on 10/11/2007, -36/+237I believe this.
    • deepdiggdude, on 10/11/2007, -27/+9Children's ice cream, Mandrake!
      • cyberstall, on 10/11/2007, -2/+34There was a story yesterday about this, but it completely disappeared, and despite having 800+ diggs and 300+ comments, it never made it to popular status. Glad this did.

        http://digg.com/political_opinion/Former_Reagan_Official_Bush_May_Stage_False_Flag_Events_To_Reinstate_Draft
        • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -6/+13 It did make it, and promptly got buried right after - well after the usual suspects showed up to defend the Admin and they were handed their intellectual asses(again) - suddenly disappeared.

          Another one today has been taken off the servers it seems...
          http://digg.com/politics/Ellison_Backpedals_Furiously

          Not sure how that happens. I asked the question in the thread, but didn't get an answer(But got dug down).
        • DavidBGie, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2Paul Craig Roberts has been anti-war from the beginning.
          Hey look!, A Reagan guy who is against the war! Grab him! Makeup! 5,4,3,2, .... You're on the air!!!

          I wonder who they are going to dig up next?
          Bonzo speaks out against Bush!!! News at 11!!
        • spudnic, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1There's absolutely no chance of the draft ever being re-instated. You think the tens of millions of people who can't be arsed to vote would still not bother if it was going to cost them a few years in the army? I sure as hell don't, they'd go out and vote democrat. It'd be political suicide, The Republicans are stupid, but not that stupid.
          • cyberstall, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2if we have that much time after all of this takes place...
          • JohnReb, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1No Republican has sponsored a bill to reinstate the draft. Only Democrats have done that.
      • worldinmyeyes, on 10/11/2007, -1/+22Bury brigade = pissed. :)
      • deepdiggdude, on 10/11/2007, -5/+12"Children's ice cream, Mandrake"...A Doctor Strangelove reference for those who were confused. It was from Jack Ripper's rant about fluoride in drinking water and even ice cream as an evil communist plot.
    • JohnGalt01, on 10/11/2007, -40/+11I have some land in S. Florida you may be interested in.
    • knupso, on 10/11/2007, -21/+10You can not stop the New World Order! HAHAHA! Brothers the time is near. We have prepared for this for decades! Ο κόσμος είναι δικός μας! You can choose to follow people like Jones and become a slave or join the elite. Jones is not even on the right track our conspiracy runs deeper than you can even imagine.
      • scoobydoo84, on 10/11/2007, -9/+9Move out your mothers basement dumbass!!
      • knupso, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5Dumbass? Sorry I won't be waiting in line for scraps when we are in power. You may want to head to the nearest lodge and hope they let you join before it's to late.
        • Violent, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Take a shower too - you're starting to smell funny and please go outside and see the sun again soon. Your mommy will make you some lemonade if you ask nicely and come home before sunset.
    • gmillerd, on 10/11/2007, -0/+16thats why http://gunbroker.com exists
    • Superthug, on 10/11/2007, -5/+6Is this site actually credible? Because It doesn't really give any sources. Also, all the ads make the site look extremely bias.
      • g30ph, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13It's an Alex Jones site, of course it's biased. But I really think Jones is biased in favor of freedom, his heart is definitely in the right place.
      • metalhead3767, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Last month, the new chairman of the Arkansas Republican Party Dennis Milligan said that there needed to be more attacks on American soil for President Bush to regain popular approval.

        Yearning for more terror was also explicitly expressed in a 2005 GOP memo, which hankered for new attacks that would "validate" the President's war on terror and "restore his image as a leader of the American people."

        Reading that made me sick.
    • knupso, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2It's not. They are a bunch of extreme right wing end of times christian types. Using their extreme hatred of Bush and Co they duped some liberal moonbats going along with them. Mean while Jones is smiling all the way to the bank.
    • thomash, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2I don't believe it. I think they're not smart enough to pull something like this off. I mean come on, they weren't even able to plant any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That seems much easier to me and would have given them a lot more support for their agenda.
    • gernblansted, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Expect the "terrorists" to carry out the world's biggest cyber attack, rendering the Internet in the USA unusable, and therefore denying opposition the ability to coordinate an attempted constitutional restoration.

      Oh, and forget about calling on the phone to build resistance to the takeover, that's already covered and you will disappear at 4am.

      Don't expect to be able to drive to supporters houses - travel will be tightly controlled.
    • wishninja, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3I give our chances about a 50/50 chance that this will come true.
    • DavidBGie, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2Paul Craig Roberts has been anti-war from the beginning.

      Hey look!, A Reagan guy who is against the war! Grab him! Makeup! 5,4,3,2, .... You're on the air!!!

      I wonder who they are going to dig up next?

      Bonzo speaks out against Bush!!! News at 11!
    • kobewan0824, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1If you belive this drivel then you are a fool. This is just an older man nobody cares about trying to draw attention to himself. Totally Absurd. This is America. The people are too well educated these days to let something like this happen. Although, Venezuala is falling for ***** like this right now. Chavez is going to make it legal for him to be in office for the next 25 years at least. Then again, Americans aren't as dumb as the Venezualan people.
      • alterImperson, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3You my friend, are a fool. If the news = Paris Hilton going in and out of jail, or 48 hours devoted to covering the death of Anna Nichole Smith, then that means our eyes are on Hollywood, not Washington. How educated a population is has no effect on how easy they are to manipulate, its how aware and how willing. It's hypnotism.
    • tbenathan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2With a name like Fallout911, odds are you'd believe any conspiracy theory at all.
    • userini, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Ask yourself: Would a columnist that knows how popular and widely read anti-Bush columns and conspiracy articles are, shrink from publishing a ***** article combining the two into one solid lie?
  • duggtodeath, on 10/11/2007, -20/+130Gulf of Tonkin, part 2 :(
    • Muyoso, on 10/11/2007, -15/+25Frankly I hope this guy is right even though I think he is a nutcase. I hope Bush does try something stupid like instating himself dictator. I hope this happens, because the US isnt like other countries, and there would be an armed rebellion, led by our military. The country would get what it needs, a GIANT enema.
      • 4degrees, on 10/11/2007, -2/+32change "dictator" to "decider" and bush has already named himself the "decider"
        • Alpione, on 10/11/2007, -20/+3He is, you know, the leader of the country... If there's a "decider," he's it...
          • JayD16, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17Uhm...congress are the 'deciders.' The executive enforces the law.
          • maxtangent, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I thought "WE THE PEOPLE" were the deciders. Naive of me, I suppose.
          • alterImperson, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"He is, you know, the leader of the country... If there's a 'decider,' he's it..." said Alpione.

            Little did he know, a little piece of paper written two hundred years ago "decided" otherwise, because a man named George thought he could 'decide' to take away the writers rights.
      • duggtodeath, on 10/11/2007, -6/+21Nah, the military will stand with Bush, if anything. Sad huh?
        • Vicissidude, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Unfortunately, I tend to think the military will stand with Bush. The president has been firing general after general who disagrees with him. At this point, apparently the only generals left are those who like and follow Bush and his policies.

          That's why it's completely dishonest when Bush says he'll follow the general's suggestions - because he hand picked the generals to fire and which to promote.

          It's all scary stuff.
        • williamdyer, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I fear you are right.

          We have a thug-cop/MP revolving door. That's how we ended up with the Abu Ghraib torturers. They would taser a child without second thoughts.
        • maxtangent, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I don't for a minute believe the ENTIRE military will back tyranny. Then again, civil war for the U.S. may well be part of the plan.
          • republicker, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2You'd be surprised how many brainwashed U.S. soldiers will be capable of shooting civilians in the back of the head, its been done for the last few hundred years. Its a thin line between shooting people in Iraq and shooting people in the states, after all if your a suspected terrorist then you deserve to die right?
      • evilregis, on 10/11/2007, -1/+28In response to that, I'd like to quote from Boston Legal... it perfectly summed up how I felt (and still do) at the time I saw it. It's Shore's closing arguments:

        When the weapons of mass destruction thing turned out to be not true, I expected the American people to rise up. Ha! They didn't.

        Then, when the Abu Ghraib torture thing surfaced and it was revealed that our government participated in rendition, a practice where we kidnap people and turn them over to regimes who specialize in torture, I was sure then the American people would be heard from. We stood mute.

        Then came the news that we jailed thousands of so-called terrorists suspects, locked them up without the right to a trial or even the right to confront their accusers. Certainly, we would never stand for that. We did.

        And now, it's been discovered the executive branch has been conducting massive, illegal, domestic surveillance on its own citizens. You and me. And I at least consoled myself that finally, finally the American people will have had enough. Evidentially, we haven't.

        In fact, if the people of this country have spoken, the message is we're okay with it all. Torture, warrantless search and seizure, illegal wiretappings, prison without a fair trial - or any trial, war on false pretenses. We, as a citizenry, are apparently not offended.

        There are no demonstrations on college campuses. In fact, there's no clear indication that young people seem to notice.

        Well, Melissa Hughes noticed. Now, you might think, instead of withholding her taxes, she could have protested the old fashioned way. Made a placard and demonstrated at a Presidential or Vice-Presidential appearance, but we've lost the right to that as well. The Secret Service can now declare free speech zones to contain, control and, in effect, criminalize protest.

        Stop for a second and try to fathom that.

        At a presidential rally, parade or appearance, if you have on a supportive t-shirt, you can be there. If you are wearing or carrying something in protest, you can be removed.

        This, in the United States of America. This in the United States of America. Is Melissa Hughes the only one embarrassed?
        • miriclaire, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10I say the same thing! Only with more brevity. But YEAH, America! The Revolution is NOW!
        • BHSPitMonkey, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I thought that episode had a good message as well, but, then, they still made it out to be a feeble attempt at justifying a ditsy blond who just didn't feel like paying her taxes.

          Not that I believe the tax system is rightfully and legally implemented here in the US, but in the show you really had no compassion for her. Thus, the long-winded speech above is taken with a chuckle, and chalked up as BS. Although, perhaps it was in the writers' best interests to sort of "tuck away" that message in such a way. [/ruminations]
      • PastorFrancisCC, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Ummm...given that radical evangelical christians control the united states, dont you think they will accept dictatorship in exchange for something stupid...like a bill banning gay marriage?
      • iamlutheran, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0This country is going to have Civil War 2 very soon.
    • gibbwake, on 10/11/2007, -2/+54Governments all throughout history have staged terror attacks on their own citizens to start wars. This is whats called a false flag attack. Our government has done this as well with operation ajax, northwoods, and admittedly, many others. All of those 911 truthers you see and hear everywhere aren't so crazy when you begin to see the history of this method.

      The project for a new american century called for an invasion of the middle east, and arms build up, and full spectrum dominance, but they couldn't do it without a a catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new pearl harbor. They wrote about that in september of 2000, and after 911 they're doing exactly what they said.

      There was a documentary made on false flag attacks last month, watch it here for free: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6885277369482418431
    • tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -27/+3The Gulf of Tonkin was not a false flag attack. Just goes to show how stupid you people are.
      • profertel, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11No, it was just a fabrication.
      • JonForTheWin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+19The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident never happened it was completely made up and the president of the time knowingly lied about it happening when he claimed it happened it's declassified if any of you don't know what that means it means OPENLY ADMITTED TO.
      • scoobydoo84, on 10/11/2007, -4/+9@tehpwnrate
        You are clearly a dumbass and an ignorant bot!! Please do explain exactly what the Golf of Tonkin was??
        • JohnReb, on 10/11/2007, -6/+4Do you want to know about the first incident, the attack on the USS Maddox on Aug. 2 1964, which actually happened? Or the second incident on Aug. 4, 1964 which was made up?

          Since the first one was real and actually carried out by the people claimed to carry it out, it isn't a false flag. And since the made up one wasn't carried out by anyone at all it also isn't a false flag incident.

          A false flag incident is one where some one pretends to be someone else.
        • tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4JohnReb said it. Neither the first (legit) attack was a false flag, nor the second (mostly made up) attack. You should learn what "False flag" means before spewing it around Digg.
    • morsosky, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1um this would make it Gulf of Tonkin part 3
  • SaudiOrthMuslim, on 10/11/2007, -75/+8LOL @ attack Iran. Shi'ites are essential allies of the US. This is all just a charade. There's no chance in hell the US would attack Iran. Shi'ites have proven worthy stooges/puppets/bitches for the US in Iraq. Ask anyone with knowledge about the insurgency, what sect do they come from? Sunnis.
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/11/2007, -13/+15Wow. buried by all sides.
    • tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -4/+14What about this guy?
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muqtada_al-Sadr
      Just from a cursory glance, it looks like plenty of insurgents are Shiite. At the beginning the Sunnis (a minority with what, 10% of the population?) were pissed because without Saddam, they didn't get special treatment. But it seems like now everyone's fighting... it is a civil war, after all.
    • crichton101, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11That would be why Cheney is pushing for attacking Iran. Why they keep telling us that Iran is meddling in Iraq affairs and aiding the insurgency.

      Have you been living in a cave for the last 2 years?
  • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -27/+124 There was another story about this yesterday and then the bury brigade got on it. Was front page and then disappeared. I don't mean just off the front page, off any of the pages, etc. Apparently someone said they couldn't even find it when they searched for it. Anyway...

    http://digg.com/political_opinion/Former_Reagan_Official_Bush_May_Stage_False_Flag_Events_To_Reinstate_Draft

    Check it out, and see if we can get this story back to the front page...?
    • theblueprint, on 10/11/2007, -56/+16Quit crying. It got buried, just like I'm about to do to this one.

      It's inaccurate conspiracy-drivel to begin with, and now you're openly attempting to game Digg to push your agenda. Is it any wonder why "truthers" aren't welcome here?

      Buried, with vigor.
      • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -6/+43 Jag off - if it was buried would it still get diggs? How is it at 800+ diggs and it suddenly, within minutes, disappears from the site?

        BTW - this isn't crying. You'll know crying when this is all said and done - and it won't just be one side - it will be hell for both sides, because one side refused to listen, "it couldn't happen to us" despite happening to you for 6+ years...

        BTW - Your comment? You rudeness? You asinine attitude? Guess what I did with vigor?

        Nothing - because I don't fear alternate viewpoints that is how I live with myself - I don't know how the 20%'s do.
        • Dubbsacc, on 10/11/2007, -3/+14Just to clarify.

          Diggs != Front page

          I'm positive that the amount of buries vs. the amount of diggs has everything to do with whether it shows on the front page or not.
        • mike17032, on 10/11/2007, -13/+4Because 2000 people prolly buried it as the propaganda that it is. Jonesreport.com, lol give me a break.
        • williamdyer, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4It is getting buried because people are connecting Israel to the war. Can't have that.
      • satanatnmtedu, on 10/11/2007, -26/+5As if truthers and Ron Paul fainbois aren't the same group.
      • LucidOne, on 10/11/2007, -4/+19Everything that doesn't support the Neotards distorted view of reality they labeled as "inaccurate" or "spam" and bury. This increasingly encompasses even conservatives who served in past Republican administrations. As the gap between reality and their fantasy world grows they will become increasingly marginalized.
        • Ndiggnation, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13That's what I've always though. They worhsip at the Altar or Reagan, but even when people slose to him and Bush 1's administration come out against the policies of this one, it's all "conspiracy driven tripe?".

          Come Republicans, this is Paul Craig Roberts.
          • Ndiggnation, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9Guess I shouldn't have been smearing vaseline in my eyes while typing this. Hopefully you get the point. The guy is freaking Moses of the House of Conservative Thought and Chruch of The Gipper.
          • JonForTheWin, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Also take note how zealously neo-cons bury and argue against this yet they have no problem with things that can be suspected (or unlike this, even proven) to be inaccurate.

            Gee I wonder what they're so afraid of.
        • c0yote, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1Or it could be that this particular story is pure ***** and that a number of diggers have the ability to see it for what it is. But enjoy putting people into boxes with labels like "Neotards".

          Let me put it this way: There is NO CHANCE of a draft. NONE. ZERO. The military doesn't even WANT a draft, it wouldn't help. The modern military requires substantially more training than it did in the 40s. Go READ the things top military officials are saying. A draft would result in substantial civil unrest and would be a political nightmare for Bush & co as well. To reiterate, there is NO risk of a draft anytime in the near future.
      • JonForTheWin, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Who're you to say the Father of Reaganomics didn't say these things?
    • devou33, on 10/11/2007, -6/+41I saw the story and its not the first time stories like it have been deleted off the front page.
    • Hetman, on 10/11/2007, -19/+9There is a difference between something being buried and something being deleted. This was buried. Because the survey says its ***** retarded. A nd you can find it if you search all you have to to is put search buried articles and you will find it.
      • mike17032, on 10/11/2007, -19/+4Shhhhh, dont spoil the libtards paranoid delusions. Idiots need to belive in that kind of nonsense to be able to understand the world.
    • mike17032, on 10/11/2007, -19/+5Anything from Jonesreport gets buried off the homepage like the ***** that it is. This one wont last either.
  • Nodaki, on 10/11/2007, -19/+218The near future is scary...feels like we are balancing on a razor edge.

    Why would Bush be shoring up all this "unitary executive" powers on his way out if he has no intention of using them? Wiretapping, suspension of habeas corpus, large scale camps/prisons being built at remote military sites, unconstitutional presidential directive giving the president inscrutable power in the aftermath of a "national emergency" http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

    You know what screw it, I hope Bush does try to pull something like this off. Maybe after our neighbors are carted off in trains to secret prison sites we might wake up as a collective and live out our forefathers intention that revolution becomes inevitable when our liberty is discarded.
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/11/2007, -58/+10QUICK buy some more ALexJones Brand Water Pills and DVDs! YOUR life depends on it!
      • scoobydoo84, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2Actually the miracle water you drink might be better. Hurry give him some!!
    • RhymesWithSauce, on 10/11/2007, -51/+8Throw in more emotionally charged comments next time please.
      "near future is scary" "balancing on a razor edge" "inscrutable power" "large scale camps/prisons" "carted off in trains"

      I thought fearmongering was the job of the right... apparently not.
      • gernblansted, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Actually, the large scale camps HAVE ALREADY been constructed. That much is true. That was one of those little covered news stories awhile back.
    • andshewas, on 10/11/2007, -4/+21Well spoke, Nodaki.
    • laserdog, on 10/11/2007, -13/+10Rhymes has a point here Nodaki.

      This administration has provided a litany of concrete actions that threaten our democracy, no need for hyperbole when the actual facts could make you drop a brick.
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 10/11/2007, -9/+19It would at least finally let everyone know that all the tin-foil-hat wearers were right.

      We seem to have a better batting average in conspiracy land than the Main Stream News -- and those folks get paid to be stupid.
    • cjackson, on 10/11/2007, -3/+24You're right about our forefather's intentions. That's why they put the second amendment in place -- revolution against a government that controls the army really only works when the people are armed. Of course, a lot of people don't really own firearms these days. Irony, thy name is gun control!
      • profertel, on 10/11/2007, -9/+5Yah, the lefties need to connect to their inner NRA leanings, I think.
      • Disfnord, on 10/11/2007, -7/+13Also funny how the people who own guns tend to support the president... and jesus
        • Spytap, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1If you take the time and energy to convert those who own guns to feel like you're the only choice, then whose side are all the gun owners going to be on if anyting revolutionary happens?
      • Vicissidude, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6There's a reason the second amendment came after the first. A country needs an armed citizenry to protect the right to freely speak, meet publically, and print papers - all of which ultimately keeps the government honest.

        Yes, gun control is a Democratic issue. However, don't confuse that by saying all Democrats support gun control. There are many who do not. There are many moderates who do not. THAT is why gun control bills generally fail, even when Democrats control the Senate, House, and Presidency.
        • jerbaker, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Controlling *who* can buy guns is fine. We all know people who should not own guns like violent felons, mentally unstable people, etc. However, banning certain types of firearms just because they *look* menacing is just retarded.
        • maxtangent, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Wait until people with ADHD are considered mentally unstable - then watch as even more people are diagnosed with ADHD....
      • reiner15, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1good thing those that own guns usually own more than one. Course it would be a long ass revolution if I had to use my fathers black powder rifle.
    • tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -19/+7Nodaki, your rhetoric is matched only by the "fear-mongering right" you hate so much. Funny how "fear mongering" isn't bad when you or Alex Jones do it.
    • mesmeriffic, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16Viva la revolucion!
    • jerbaker, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12Arm yourself while you can.
    • liveloveburndye, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7i find myself scared to sign petitions.. which sounds crazy in a "democracy."
  • gdenfield, on 10/11/2007, -15/+77What gets me is that such an attack should demonstrate the failure of the Bush administration to be able to handle our security, causing an uprising against the administration. But they're probably right; people will become too frightened to challenge any leadership at that time, no matter how inept and deceiving.
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11They've already demonstrated that.

      It's like watching Mayberry, and Barnie Fife screws up again and Andy gives him an Uzzi.
    • DangerCollie, on 10/11/2007, -1/+22"But they're probably right; people will become too frightened to challenge any leadership at that time"

      Your frustration is justified. I'd only point out that in the past that America has been a self-correcting organization. We'll tip one way, then another, but eventually we come back to the middle. I share your frustration but not all your pessimism. It wouldn't require an armed revolution, all it would take is millions of Americans doing what they do best: Annoying the hell out the people in power. History is littered with the bodies of people who underestimated America and Americans.
    • MindTrigger, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Not to mention that ANY sizable attack that would be big enough for Bush to continue in office, would also include martial law, military control, gun removal (see katrina), etc.
    • strOphe, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I won't stand idly by and I know a few friends who won't either. They know a few friends... And those friends know a few friends...

      Revolution is a fractal; the belief of one individual in a better world, carried and spread one person at a time.
  • VeryBoredNow, on 10/11/2007, -26/+72 Words: Russia & China
  • UnFriendlyFire, on 10/11/2007, -25/+32Ok, lets try this again and see if it gets buried like it did yesterday.
    • theblueprint, on 10/11/2007, -37/+13How about you do the right thing and bury this as a duplicate?

      Rhetorical question, since it's blatantly obvious that this is an organized attempt to game Digg and push the "truther" agenda.

      If you learned anything from yesterday (which apparently, you didn't), it's that people aren't buying your *****, regardless of how many sock puppet accounts are "faux-digging" this fiction.

      • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -11/+14 Not that I have any reason to not believe you but.....

        why is it when it got buried it was because the system works - but when the news is getting diggs it is because the system is being gamed?

        Regardless on which side, politically, you find yourself shouldn't there be one rule?
        • Alegoo92, on 10/11/2007, -23/+8I don't even know how this can get dugg. It's utterly outrageous and takes a completely ignorant fool to believe.
        • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -2/+28@alegoo

          Why is it unbeleiveable? If I were to say to you that the US had secret prisions around the world 6 years ago what would you say? If I had said that the US engages in Torture - what would you say? If I said that the US would hold people, indefinately, without charge - what would you say?

          Exactly what you are saying about this! I am not saying that people should take this as Gods' own truth - but in light of the extreme disconnect between what Americans perceive of their country, and the reality of their country(At least recently) - nothing should be taken as outrageous or ignorant.

          Why can't you see it? What is it that is hard to grasp?
    • faskippy, on 10/11/2007, -16/+3How bout we just bury YOUR comments?
    • tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -20/+4I buried it as lame. Sorry, but after years and years of this crap, I find it easier to believe the trend will continue where there is no vast conspiracy.
  • TrentTheThief, on 10/11/2007, -17/+109Even in the worst days of Nixon's administration, this was the sort of idea that was utterly inconceivable

    What a sad state of affairs.
    • tastic, on 10/11/2007, -3/+27Not quite - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
      • petemcfraser, on 10/11/2007, -12/+5"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
    • crichton101, on 10/11/2007, -7/+15That's because Nixon was just stupid, Bush and Cheney are EVIL. Especially Cheney.
      • kobewan0824, on 10/11/2007, -4/+0Cheney may be evil, but not Bush. He just isn't that bright. He is doing what he thinks is the right thing. I respect him for that. You truly believe he does not care about our soldiers dying? That it's all for oil? Or maybe you think we live in a movie, and this is like V for Vendetta, which is incidentally a piece of propaganda trash.
        • hobonetweaver, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I have a friend that always tells me Bush isn't evil, he's just dumb, but he is doing what he believes is best.
          I don't mean to sound disrespectful, it's an honest question... can you respond to this and just explain it a little bit?
          Cause I can't see conclusive evidence that he's one, but not the other.
      • renegadeafk, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Obviously he's evil and dumb.
  • bluenullity, on 10/11/2007, -65/+9Its good to see some government run crackpot websites making it seem like they are all to powerful when they have none at all. Go Alex "Bushie" Jones
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/11/2007, -26/+10Hey, don't insult their cult leader! All Hail Leader Alex Jones! Truth teller. Bringer of the Truth. One Who Never Exaggerates. One Who Never Lies. One who sells us What we need! Cursed Be the Makers of Meds, RFIDs, and chemtrails! Alex Shall Rise Up and We Will RULE!"
      • bluenullity, on 10/11/2007, -10/+4I see your sarcasm is strong within you. Go Alex "Bushie" Jones
    • gibbwake, on 10/11/2007, -6/+15Alex isnt anyones leader, there are several radio show hosts and film makers exposing the lies of 9/11. According to an angus and reed poll last year, only 16% believe the government is telling the truth about 9/11. Watch this and see why, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6885277369482418431
  • BOFH2, on 10/11/2007, -41/+8BAH!
  • JohnGalt01, on 10/11/2007, -75/+18Good lord, you moonbats really have gone around the bend these days. Be sure to adjust that tin foil hat and give Fox Mulder a call.
    • duggtodeath, on 10/11/2007, -4/+15I would agree that it sounds crazy, but do you recall who killed all those Jews during WWII? We always just say "the Nazis", but you forget that they were LEGALLY in power of the country. The German government murdered their own CITIZENS. That is a point of WWII which is always missed. The same with Sudan -- who is killing those people? Their own government.
    • gmillerd, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4agreed reagan's economic policy was horrible
  • ColonelJessup, on 10/11/2007, -57/+17*****.
  • STKD, on 10/11/2007, -58/+16How in the bloody hell is this kind of crap making the front page?
    • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -4/+25 because more people are "digging" it, than "burying" it. Isn't that the way this is supposed to work?

      • tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -17/+2Yeah, you're really clever, smartass. His point is, why are so many people on Digg.com such ***** retards.
        • HippyInASuit, on 10/11/2007, -5/+9I ask the same question. Why would so many people bury this important information?
        • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10Not being a smartass at all - a question was asked - I answered. Stop trying to read between the lines when there is nothing there to read. Stop trying to be offended. You are worse than homosexual liberal hair dresser.;-)
        • Disfnord, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3"why are so many people on Digg.com such ***** retards"
          you must be new here
    • gibbwake, on 10/11/2007, -4/+23Because false flag attacks are real and admitted? Educate yourself instead of watching the next ball game you twit: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6885277369482418431
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/11/2007, -12/+7Because Alex Jones organized his creepy cultists to all digg at once.
  • Alegoo92, on 10/11/2007, -46/+11You people are so ***** dumb if you believe that. I'm pretty sure you don't, cause only the sorriest bastard would think this is coming and go "what a sad state of affairs..."
  • Hetman, on 10/11/2007, -49/+13Buried as lame. LOL That is the greatest picture ever. Who does there photoshopping a 12 year old. Jones is a retard and truth be told his followers are even more retarded.
  • Mosatii, on 10/11/2007, -40/+10Digg leans strongly to the left. If something like this gets buried, it's for a good reason.
    • bluenullity, on 10/11/2007, -16/+6Yeah cause we don't believe in what a government agent says. Alex "Bushie" Jones FTL
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2The truth has a well know Liberal bias.

      So evidently, you would get a left-leaning blog about news that gets buried.
    • HypocriteDigg, on 10/11/2007, -9/+7Digg is rightwing you dumbass. There are way more fascists neocon diggers than liberal diggers.
      • TheEditor1, on 10/11/2007, -5/+8That has got to be the most asinine comment of all that I have read on digg. You are so wrong that even education would not help.
      • mike17032, on 10/11/2007, -9/+4Wow, did is mostly fastists neocons now? You are one stupid ***** if you think that for even 10 seconds.
        • anachronaut, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2"Wow, did is mostly fastists neocons now?"

          What was that you were saying about stupid *****? You can't even spell "fascist" or "digg" properly. Glass houses, m'man.
    • Mosatii, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6@HypocriteDigg

      You have to be ***** kidding me...
    • JonForTheWin, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8I would think most Digg members would know the whole left/right thing is a joke and a bunch of ***** but alright.
  • dafuser, on 10/11/2007, -53/+9Loosen up your tin foil hats, or better yet remove them completely. Why anyone would believe this crap is beyond me.
    • Chandon, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16"Tinfoil hat" is just an excuse for *you* to avoid coming up with something relevant to say in the discussion. If it's really obvious that this is absurd, then you don't need to say anything - everyone else will see that it's absurd too. If you have evidence that it's not true, that would actually add to the conversation.
    • JonForTheWin, on 10/11/2007, -5/+6Gee a uh I dunno maybe because the err ***** FATHER OF REAGANOMICS SAID IT.
    • miketrin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4You right wing kooks think iran is perusing nuclear weapons. See you guys have kooky conspiracy theories too. The difference is this theory has some basic facts that back up the assumption. Where's the facts that prove iran is going to make a nuclear weapon? You have none. So just shut the hell up and go back to your kooky LGF site.
  • tastic, on 10/11/2007, -9/+74Ample precedent in this regard - in addition to Tonkin Gulf Indicent, see Operation Northwoods at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

    • kinerry, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Operation northwoods never got off the ground, was immediately thrown out the window, and the guy that proposed it was fired on the spot
      • Spytap, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5If you read about the project, and about the man in question, he was not in fact fired on the spot, but promoted to Supreme Allied Commander of NATO.
  • degoba, on 10/11/2007, -26/+7As long as I can continue to fantasize about the snorg tees girl im cool with whatever.
    • philipl411, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3She is an ugmo.
    • nondescrypt, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2...& to think that same comment would have earned him Hero status at Maxim... I Love Digg !
  • sensoukami, on 10/11/2007, -25/+6the author mentioned that the Bush administration "lied us into TWO wars"...I'm curious. That the Bush White House misled the American public into the Iraq war is beyond doubt, but what exactly is the 2nd war? Afghanistan? I don't recall any lieing going on there. Osama & Al-Quaeda were being sheltered by the Taliban. Where is the lie?

    Kinda killed the guy's credibility....
    • Netmonger, on 10/11/2007, -4/+14Uhh.. Afghanistan didnt attack us, and Bin Laden is *still* free. The whole thing is bulls**t.
      • sensoukami, on 10/11/2007, -10/+3Uhh...Afhasnistan sheltered the people who did attack you, and refused to turn them over. And it's not like the Taliban were particularly nice people. And the fact that they didn't manage to catch Bin Laden doesn't invalidate the reason for the orginal invasion of Afghanistan.
        • crichton101, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8Actually they offered to turn him over to us if we could provide proof he was guilty. We didn't, so they didn't, so we attacked.
        • maxtangent, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2The FBI wants OBL, but not for the attacks of 9/11. So why did Afghanistan get invaded?
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9It's like invading the US because the Unabomber was here or the OK City bombing.

      The people flying the planes mostly came from Saudi Arabia. The only reason we invaded Afghanistan is to cover up the economic down turn and to get UNOCAL a Gas Pipeline through Afghanistan. It's only after the talks to get such a pipeline fell through that there was any talk at all about problems in that country.
      • maxtangent, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Don't forget that the Taliban reduced opium poppy production by 90%. Now records are being set and the spin is that the Taliban are using the crops as income. Gee, I wonder why they didn't do that originally?
  • ASkillz, on 10/11/2007, -20/+10The headline itself discredits itself as anything I want to read or even be exposed to on my own free will. "Father of Reagonomics" Says Bush May Stage False Flag Events" - so what? How is this news? How does being the "Father of Reagonomics" qualify him to do anything other than balance my checkbook? Now if the headline read "Maddox Says Bush May Stage False Flag Events", I'd be interested...
  • f4nt0m4s, on 10/11/2007, -22/+13Nothing like a non-biased, credible, conspiracy theory-free website like the Jones Report. If they said it, it must be true!
  • iamsamsamiam, on 10/11/2007, -17/+15Well, I do agree that Iran is the next target (because Middle East > China + North Korea + Dafur + Sudan), but going through an elaborate conspiracy theory to stage a need for a draft is thinking too highly of the Bush administration. I think he'll go into one of his "Decider" speeches and initiate something that's a pseudo draft, you know for poor rural kids only and leaving out the rich children of his supporters.
  • ryanr313, on 10/11/2007, -17/+33The seeds of doubt are planted. Now if there is an actual attack many people will not take it seriously. Great.
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 10/11/2007, -5/+20Well, then perhaps the next time the people ask for an open investigation, the Government won't hinder it.

      Did you miss the article on Digg, where it was reported that this administration classified a Billion documents? It's secrecy like that (of incompetence or worse) that makes us not trust them.
    • Chandon, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12That's better than initiating a draft and invading some random country would be - even if it is a "real attack".
    • JonForTheWin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8It's ***** like just every major event before 9/11 admittedly being an inside job, never happening, or foreknowledge being had that makes us exercise the common sense of distrust.
    • floatingpoints, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2...and people shouldn't take it seriously.
    • Shandooga, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3There is no danger of an "actual attack". There are no terrorists. The whole story is a sham and will always be.
  • clownguyx, on 10/11/2007, -3/+23This article and the suggestion it makes is a bit out there, but it's a sad day when you have to think about it for a second as remotely possible by this administration.
  • krnldmp, on 10/11/2007, -14/+5What kind of idealist would use the word "may"?
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5A thoughtful person can tell you someone is planning an act -- but they can't decide for them or know what is in their mind in order to say if they are going to do it.

      If any group would -- it would be this government.
  • hmugabe, on 10/11/2007, -36/+1more libturd libernazi liberbrownshirt nonsense... Reagan... does not compute
    ...
    ...
    moonwing pigbat
  • THE4IRON, on 10/11/2007, -8/+19No surprise.
    Also no surprise about the recent talks of "Terrorist are building up...get ready..."

    The unfortunate thing is that when something REALLY is going on, it's going to be the boy who cried wolf story.
  • serpicolugnut, on 10/11/2007, -25/+11Funny, I thought the father of Reaganomics was Ronald Reagan. Who knew.
    The libDiggers love to pull up people supposedly from within conservative circles that are at odds with the current administration. The problem is, this dude was never a conservative. And by the content of his comments, I'd say its fairly certain that he's a tin foil hat wearing looney.

    False Flag operations? Please. The Taliban had it coming and we're given a way to avoid the ass beating they got (Give up Al Qaeda and co-operate). We used due diligence with the UN on Iraq. The UN sanctioned the event in their own resolutions. Or did those resolutions not mean what they said? As for Iran, well, they were the country we should have attacked before Iraq.

    I disagree with Bush on a lot of topics (immigration for one), and he has had his shortcomings on Iraq. But the move was right, and if we survive the liberal onslaught to cry uncle and leave, we'll be better off.
    • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7Please tell me how anything with Iraq was "right? as in "and he has had his shortcomings on Iraq. But the move was right, and if we survive the liberal onslaught to cry uncle and leave, we'll be better off" ?

    • Netmonger, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6The Taliban 'had it coming'? Regardless of how backwards their society is, they didnt attack us. Since when does hiding a fugitive justify a full invasion of their country? As for Iraq: It was wrong - they also did not attack us, the UN ruled against an attack, there wasnt any godamn weapons, and its blatantly obvious it was a total mistake. As for Iran: What in the name of God is wrong with you - again they HAVENT ATTACKED US, their people dont like their government anyway, and attacking them would in addition to being wrong, destabilize the entire region!

      This isnt a video game you bastard -- when you talk about 'nuking this' and 'attacking that' you are talking about killing real life innocent people who did nothing wrong to you!

      With this kind of ignorant, cold hearted, cynically attitude, you show yourself to be just as much as a piece of s**t as our president!
    • crichton101, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Yes, please explain how attacking Iraq was a right move. Cause there have been so many reasons, WMD's being the original, disposing a dictator another, terrorism. There's been so many reasons I'm surprised Bush hasn't claimed it was because Saddam was going to allow stem cell research or same sex marriage.
  • schnikies79, on 10/11/2007, -20/+11umm, okay. This administration will disappear with a whimper and will soon be forgotten. There will be no dictatorship, there will be no draft (the last draft resolution was started by a Democrat, though it was to make a point.)

    This is shoutwire *****, no something that should ever make it to the front page of Digg.
    • JonForTheWin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4But there will still be the DSE, the MCA, the WDA, and all the other criminal unconstitutional (thus anti-American) legislation ready to be illegally abused and illegally carried out by the federal terrorists then illegally complied with by the slaves of America.
  • gibbwake, on 10/11/2007, -11/+63Governments throughout history have staged terror attacks on their own citizens to start wars. This is called a false flag attack. Our government has done this as well. All of those 911 truthers you see and hear everywhere aren't so crazy when you begin to see the history of this method. The project for a new american century called for an invasion of the middle east, and arms build up, and full spectrum dominance, but they couldn't do it without a a catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new pearl harbor. They wrote about that in september of 2000, and after 911 they're doing exactly what they said. There was a documentary made on false flag attacks last month, watch it here for free: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6885277369482418431
    • tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -10/+7Please point me to an actual false flag attack. Not a "proposal," and don't link me to anything even remotely related to that assclown Alex Jones.
      • gibbwake, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11Operation Ajax
      • JonForTheWin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Operation Gladio covers HUNDREDS of bombings. al-CIAda bombed everything from trains to schools and SCHOOL BUSES those sick *****. It's admitted.
      • LucidOne, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6The USS Liberty. Google it!
        • JohnReb, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Granting, only for the sake of argument, that the Liberty was intentionally attacked while known to be a US ship, which I don't believe. It's still not a false flag incident since the Israelis never hid the fact it was Israeli planes making the attack.
      • c0y0t3, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1Operation Alex Jones is an Assclown (still going per plan).
        • lexod, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Stop with the baseless personal attacks. Have you ever watched terrorstorm? Alex is a patriot and you are a sheep just going along with what you are told.
    • IslandDog, on 10/11/2007, -10/+4"All of those 911 truthers you see and hear everywhere aren't so crazy when you begin to see the history of this method."

      Actually they are crazy. There is not a single piece of evidence that Sept. 11 was an "inside job" or any other loony claims they make. If you people believe nonsense like this then you need to step outside more.
      • taurustiger, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8To say that there wasn't a single piece of evidence makes YOU sound crazy, or stupid, can't decide which one.
      • Pssdoff, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3WTC BLDG 7
        Thermate
        Pools of molten metal
      • maxtangent, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1NORAD not being able to intercept planes flying off flight plans when NORAD does it as a matter of routine??
  • MERKABA333, on 10/11/2007, -14/+70Please do not keep your heads buried in the sand. Reagan was a evil man, and if his staff are coming forward with these claims they should not fall on deaf ears. George H.W. Bush was VP to Reagan and is undoubtedly pulling GWB's strings. We did not elect this party of criminals. They must be removed or resign before more Americans are sacrificed for the gain of industrial elitists. These 'people' have no allegiance to any nation, only to corporate interests. To those who say I'm a 'nutter' or paranoid, I say "Pull your head from the sand, while you still have one to pull."
    • philipl411, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7And why was Reagan evil?
      • JohnGalt01, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Two reasons:

        1) He was a republican: Prima Facia evidence that he is evil.
        2) He defeated the Soviet Union and discredited socialism. Heresy never to be forgiven.

      • maxtangent, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2"I don't remember"
      • PastorFrancisCC, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0He conducted illegal wars in Latin America, toppled democratic dictators who refused to do business with America, gave chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein so SH could kill Kurds...how much more evidence of evil does one need???
  • Hetman, on 10/11/2007, -21/+12Here is the thing. There is no proof that 911 was an inside job. You can say ***** like who has the most to gain? That is just a stupid question. Who has the most to gain from the VC massacre. Obviously it is the gun control freaks. Therefor they trained cho to be an effecient killer "because there is no way a kid living in a "Dorm" could pull off such an elaborate massacre" IE it was the crazy leftiest trying to get better gun control laws. That makes as much sense as 911 being an inside job.
    • JonForTheWin, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4One of the police officers who were actually there at the v-tech massacre said he thinks it was a black-op because the feds told the police to stand down for hours. He said that on national radio.

      Which opinion do you think is more important to me?
      That of a police officer who was actually there when the massacre happened . .
      or the ***** sarcasm of some random Digg user?
      • ricorodriguez, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1holy *****, i had no idea people as dumb as you knew how to use the internet
  • Kmack928, on 10/11/2007, -10/+51The Bush administration is already guildty of "staging false flag events", look at how they spun Pat Tillman's story, or Jessica Lynch's. I believe they just invoked executive privelage in regards to the Tillman story, it's amazing people aren't more upset about this.
    • AsusMobo, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4You assume that the average American has the time or the passion to care. They don't.
    • jbhannah, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2The Tillman cover-up was, you got it right on: more "executive privilage" flag-waving.

      My vote: we hire ninjas. Ninjas can solve everything.
  • jron, on 10/11/2007, -10/+34Why is it that all information coming from Alex Jones' site gets ripped a new *****? Take the time to read, then educate yourself, then rip on it all you like if the claims are false. If you don't like Jones' write-up, perhaps Buchanan's would be better? http://buchanan.org/blog/?p=803
    • phlanx, on 10/11/2007, -4/+9Cool, thanks for the link. This was submitted yesterday. Digg it up so more people can read it.
      http://www.digg.com/political_opinion/Pat_Buchanan_Tonkin_Gulf_II_and_the_Guns_of_August
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/11/2007, -8/+9Because Jones is a conspiracy theorist who believes in crap like the moon landings were fake, chemtrails are out to poison your mind, the NSA is spying on YOU because YOU know the "Truth", and other such *****. Oh and he peddles his crap 5000 times on every page! Then he has 4 different websites from which the SAME ***** ARTICLE is submitted to digg a thousand times. If it fails once, twice, three times, (like it usually does) 4th times a charm!
    • mike17032, on 10/11/2007, -7/+7Because everything from his site is total ***** *****.
    • adrianmonk, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5@ "Why is it that all information coming from Alex Jones' site gets ripped a new *****?" :

      I live in Austin and have watched my fair share of cable access. I've watched Alex Jones on TV numerous times over the course of many years, and I've concluded he's a nutcase. He's a nutcase now, and he was a nutcase long before 9/11 happened.
  • sin667, on 10/11/2007, -24/+6If you believe this, I have a great pic of bat boy for you.

    Buried...
  • LastVisibleDog, on 10/11/2007, -17/+11And Bush will also "turn peas into beans!" (that is a line from a movie - can anybody name the movie?)

    Roberts also says it is a scientific fact the WTC could not pancake like it did despite the fact pretty much all real scientific authorities disagree and not one real scientific resource supports his view. He may have had some good economic ideas - nevertheless he is still a Moonbat (and not a trained scientist)

    • danarama, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6ah ***** building seven imploded perfectly in front of everyone's eyes.
    • theoallardyce, on 10/11/2007, -5/+6I agree, as much as I hate George Bush and consider him to be either incompetent or greedy (I'm not sure which) these conspiracy theories are complete crap. None of the people ive talked to can explain to me why it would be done their way rather than the way everyone saw that day.
      • LucidOne, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6Please allow me to explain it to you then theoallardyce. The reason 9/11 has to be an inside job is because the "official" conspiracy theory is impossible! The Towers could not have come down simply from the planes hitting them regardless of what crap you've been told. The explanations of why they fell have changed several times and none of the explanations hold up to scientific scrutiny. And that's without even mentioning WTC7, the crash site at Shanksville, the damage to the Pentagon, The cell phone calls from flight 93, etc... Every single one of these assertions by the government can be proved false. If the government is covering up the truth than it is obvious they were involved. Do some research yourself and come to you own conclusions but don't just parrot the official "conspiracy theory", it's total bull!
        • fjc8, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2> The Towers could not have come down simply from the planes hitting them regardless of what crap you've been told.

          You're right! Let's bring in gravity for questioning.
  • whtnoise, on 10/11/2007, -18/+1*****.
  • evil-doer, on 10/11/2007, -12/+40the very best the neocon bury squad can do is namecall. what brave intellectuals they all are. bravo gentlemen.
    • Mosatii, on 10/11/2007, -20/+6Neocon bury squad?

      Try well adjusted rational person that could be either liberal or conservative.
      • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13Why would a "well adjusted person" name call?
      • stanleyford, on 10/11/2007, -14/+2Your statement is inherently flawed. A person that disagrees with Digg paranoia is _by definition_ a neocon or religious fanatic and therefore cannot be well-adjusted or rational. A well-adjusted, rational person is _by definition_ one who agrees with the Digg groupthink.
        • JonForTheWin, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4A well-adjusted person is one that can know some history, know their ***** sources in the first place, cite sources, and debate effectively rather than resort to name calling.
        • ricorodriguez, on 10/11/2007, -3/+0couldn't agree more stanleyford, too bad you got buried down, all the rational comments are buried

          i'm just going to block the entire world & buisness section
    • CourtesyFlush, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2The best the cubicle monkey action committee can do is post pure conjecture and pretend it's some sort of valid news.
      THIS JUST IN: Lovesick Martians MAY fly to earth in their super atomic spacecraft and steal Earth's women. Film at eleven.
    • Arkonnan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2That's what happens when the klansmen over at Free Republic don't have anything better to do. I guess they ran out of polls to rig on msnbc.com.
  • xlar54, on 10/11/2007, -22/+8My gosh you people are paranoid. There's medication for you. Bush's "reign-o-terror" will quietly fizzle as he is escorted out of office, and another's "reign-o-terror" will begin. All this conspiracy junk is just plain retarded and if you believe any of it, you're a numbnut like the rest of em.
    • crichton101, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6And when next year rolls around, and a terrorist attack hits the US again, and Bush declares martial law and suspends elections and remains in power, I look forward hearing from you again.
      • mike17032, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5And when next year rolls around, and the presidency passes to the next person just like normal, are you gonna post about what a ***** idiot you have been? Or are you gonna slink away and find some new wild tale about sasquatch like the crazy libtard you are without having the balls to own up to being full of *****?
      • siszam, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3My gosh xlar54 you are gullible. Just read the news each day. The majority of Americans don't trust or approve of the government. There own government papers show the many times they've lied and deceived the public. You still think they are trust worthy and have your best interests at hear? You have to work hard to be so ignorant.
  • BufordT, on 10/11/2007, -23/+8"establish a dictatorship"
    Do you realize the impossibility of that occuring?
    • danarama, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8it'd happen and 90% of americans wouldn't even realize it. sort of like the holocaust.
    • gopher043, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Tell that to Rome when Ceasar took power.
    • JonForTheWin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Tell that to my grandfather who served in this one thing you may or may not heard of called the Second World War.
    • omio, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2You sure its not one right now?
  • Nougat, on 10/11/2007, -7/+42I find the use of private "security" contractors to be very interesting. In the past, we've had a volunteer citizen military to handle that, or at least a non-volunteer citizen military. Seems like the administration has engineered the purchase of its own private army, answering not to the populace, but to those who pay them.

    I'm betting that when the 2008 election is fixed, and people start to riot in the streets, Blackwater will come in to quash the opposition. And I don't even own a tinfoil hat.
    • jobu00, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Precisely. Blackwater is a way around the Posse Comitatus Act. It would be illegal to use the military against its own population. But a private contractor force? Nothing in the constitution about that.
      • Nougat, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5And, in a daring brush with Godwin's Law, I encourage everyone to become familiar with the origin of the SA (1921) and the SS (1925) in Germany. Note that Germany did not invade Poland until 14 years later, 1939. In the interim, world leaders sought to deal with the National Socialist party diplomatically.

        GW Bush drew us into Iraq partially on the claim that we would have to deal militarily with Saddam Hussein, that to continue to deal diplomatically would allow Hussein to become more like Hitler. I expect that the rest of the world will attempt to ameliorate the Bush administration and its successor megalomaniacs with diplomacy as well.
      • scott88008, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Godwin's law was violated long ago on this thread.
    • c0y0t3, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1What are you using to deflect the thought control waves then, a faraday cage?

      Technically, Blackwater are civilian, aren't they? They're private contractors - they are getting paid, yes, but so would a "volunteer" civilian military... or should they live on free Reagan cheese?

      Where am I? Who are you people? Why are you in my house? This isn't my television.
    • jerbaker, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7There's the corollary to that though: I won't mind shooting and killing mercenaries who are paid to invade my home town, whereas I might feel bad shooting at young kids who are stuck in the Army.
    • kobewan0824, on 10/11/2007, -4/+0You people are morons. Why fix the 2008 elections? The Democrats dont have a chance in hell of winning, barring Al Gore running. Hilary is a woman, and Obama is black. Republicans have already won. I personally would like to see Mike Bloomber, mayor of NYC, run for prez. Best man for the job. Heck, best man for any job.
    • PastorFrancisCC, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1private "security" contractors = Mercenary
  • BufordT, on 10/11/2007, -19/+2Wouldn't the father of Reaganomics be Ronald Reagan? To me having 'Reagan' in the word was a dead giveaway.
    • evil-doer, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7the reagan administration, you idiot. you think he wrote everything? he had writers for EVERYTHING he said, as do most presidents.
      • BufordT, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2Without Reagan, there would not be Reaganomics. He was the reason that set of economic policies was conceived, publicized, and finally put into action. In other words, he is the sole reason for their existence. I realize you must like to resort to calling people idiots to make your point, but think about what you are saying before doing it. It seems to me, the publishers of this article titled this guy the father of Reaganomics to give the article itself more credibility. This practice is common in the media.
    • n3demonic, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Reaganomics is under Reagan but he didn't think it up himself, hence father of Reaganomics != Reagan
    • spinchange, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Actually the father of Reganomics is Arthur Laffer anyway. Google "Laffer Curve." It's Republican Tax Policy-Religion. Seriously.
  • bsbdeb, on 10/11/2007, -9/+6Attack Iran? Maybe. I hope not.
    Reinstate the draft? Highly doubtful but a full scale war could change his current position of not reinstating the draft. I should remind you all though, that only democrats have suggested reinstating the draft. i.e. Charlie Rangle.
    Declare Dictatorship? Heh. heheheheheheheh. Okaaaaaaaay.... Any of you liberal wackos who think Bush will DECLARE a dictatorship willing to make a substantial bet on this? Remember now. A dictator would never allow elections to occur in 2008. I mean after all, a dictator is someone who claims ultimate authority and is never willing to reliquish his power. i.e. Castro, Kim Jung Il, and now Hugo Chavez. I'm willing to take out a 2nd mortgate and potentially decimate my entire financial future over this. Who wants to make an actual bet on this point? No takers? I didn't think so. Freekin lunatics.
    • danarama, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3dictatorship doesn't need a declaration he's been windling away the system and division of power since day one. it's the thought that counts.
      • kobewan0824, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0Moron. This isnt star wars. He isnt Palpatine. Jesus Christ. stop with the consiracy theories. This America. Not Iraq, not Iran, and not South America. I would love for someone to assasinate Chavez
    • gopher043, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Actually Bush could very well stay in power if there is a declaration of a national emergency. which means any act of aggression on our soil for instance a terrorist attack, or a major disastor on U.S. soil similar to the tsunami in Indonesia or if any of the U.S. interests get attacked or thrown into a war such as Israel and Iran. Even during an election year, if this were to happen, guess what? The person elected wouldn't be able to take power of the white house untill the threat is over. That is if anything like this will happen in the next year. Which I am a betting man and I would take that bet that something on that line will happen to ensure Cheney and Bush stay in DC.
      • kobewan0824, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0And how do u kno that all these stories these liberals cook up arent just put in place in case something real happens? then they can say told ya so
        • Arkons24, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0no no you have it all wrong. The liberals are spreading this story around for their own false flag operations. Hillary has a skooze in her sneech and is going to blow something up. Then the liberals will take power from Bush by saying it was really his false flag operations and we can declare Hillary dictator of the world. ALL HAIL HILLARY CLINTON THE FIRST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    • Violent, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10You still believe that there is a difference between the Democrats and the Republicans don't you? They share the power - its all a stage show. Bread and Circus. Queen Hillary will be up next - but they are both left and right wings to the same bird, and those like you who think you have a clue about politics are in for a rude awakening.
      • kobewan0824, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Hilary isnt next *****. she is a women. if she wins, im going to canada
  • ProvoloneNinja, on 10/11/2007, -3/+17I honestly don't understand how anyone can trust this administration after all the *****. Whether this story is or is not true I wouldn't put anything past this administration based on the continual raping of the American people it has already done. How far must people be pushed? Is America really this afraid of its own government? Its mindboggling just to have to ask these questions. I seriously hope Washington changes course or there will be widespread revolts instead of peaceful protests.
  • Iamnotwhoiam, on 10/11/2007, -11/+4Come on now are you people stupid enough to believe anything posted on the web. I am not fond of Bush but this is more neolib *****.
  • MisterZero, on 10/11/2007, -9/+3BS.
  • RanZom, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10American revolution 2.0
    • mike17032, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1That wouldnt be to bad. It would give the rest of us a chance to clean these "truther" idiots out of the gene-pool like the cancer that they are.
  • Hetman, on 10/11/2007, -14/+5All you troothers need to get a life. Go outside breath some fresh air. Make some friends. Hey you might even be able to talk to a couple of girls. As long as you dont bring up crazy ass conspiracies that have no proof.
    • doconnor5, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2"Troothers"???? Like Jim Carrey said in "Dumb and Dumber".... "You are one pathetic loser...."
    • worldinmyeyes, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3Hey Hetman, two Alex Jones stories on the front page - and here you are crying about it.

      Why should it threaten you that more and more people believe 9/11 was an inside job?
      Why does it anger you that people turn away from the main stream media for news and analysis?
      Why are you shouting and criticizing people who do this? Is this a hobby or in your COINTELPRO manual?
      Sounds like you are the one who needs a life.
    • Hetman, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4I just want proof. Thats it. There are lots of problems in this country and people sit around making fake ones up. Seriously when someone can give me actual proof that Bush was behind 911 I will stand up and proclaim it as truth. The fact is you dont have any. It is the same with young earth creationists. They make up ***** to try to prove there false theories. You sir are no better.
      • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3What proof would satisfy you? How many coincidences are required before you question it? Or rather - have you questioned the official story and just see it as being true?

        I have no troubles with people thinking something different than I do, but I do have issues with people "believing" stuff because they have been told to, or conditioned to.

        Think of it. Proof, either way should be there - but what happened to the wreckage of WTC's? Why did Bush and Cheney refuse to testify under oath? Why only together? Why would they, the Admin, put together a commission report, only for political reasons(read - the commission wasn't there to find out what happened, it was there to deflect the Admin from being blamed) as was later admitted ? That alone is troubling, but when the same people that did that claim that they have a right to spy on you and if you are troubled by that you clearly have something to hide.... Tell me, how that can in anyone say that they haven't done anything to be suspicious of?
        • Hetman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3I dont base my life on coincidences Im not some bible freak. I need proof. Please give it to me if you have it. I have read the 911 commission report and been to every troother website. The truth is that there is no proof that 911 was an inside job.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 178 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.