Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
For Eots and Other 'Truthers'
- Thread starter Annie
- Start date
Thats a good place to start
And perhaps yours is a bad place to end. That's pretty much all I'm saying.
eots
no fly list
And perhaps yours is a bad place to end. That's pretty much all I'm saying.
ya well its more than some at least you will have that to your credit when the this steamroller of truth ,36% of the population gets the investigation 911 deserves a the truth comes out we wont totaly be able to say told you so
because you said maybe
NuclearWinter
Rookie
- Apr 13, 2006
- 1,878
- 23
- 0
- Banned
- #104
Are you for real?! I hope your last name isn't Dahmer/Kacinzky/Bundy cause that would just automatically make you a bad person too.
lol. If my last name was Dahmer/Kacinzky/Bundy, and it was true that my father or brothers just so happened to be business partners of the President of the United States...than you would have good reason to be concerned.
Only if we were talking about me having a direct Bloodline that connected me to those 3 murderers. As well as if I had known them or not. No reason to worry about someone who isn't connected to them other than by name.
But we're not just talking distant relatives. Not some people who don't know eachother. No no my friend, we're talking about Bush doing direct business with Osama's BLOOD related family members. All the way up to and after 9-11. Doing business with those who knew him well.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS COINCIDENCE. EVERYTHING CAN BE TIED TO SOMETHING.
eots
no fly list
Bin Laden's latest 'confession' tape a fraud
The New York Times : "According to British officials and CNN, which has a contract with Al Jazeera, the Oct. 20 videotape was not shown on Al Jazeera.The Sunday Telegraph reported its existence, noting that a correspondent had "obtained access to the videotape in the Middle East," the video has not surfaced.
The Sunday Telegraph of London was the only news organization to report that Osama bin Laden had justified the Sept. 11 attacks in a recent video circulating among his supporters. Four days later, Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain cited that video as evidence of Mr. bin Laden's complicity.
It was Anthony Loyd, a Times of London reporter, who discovered documents in an abandoned house in Kabul said to contain instructions on how to make a nuclear device.
And when Mullah Muhammad Omar, the spiritual leader of the Taliban, wanted to express his defiance after his troops' ragged retreat on Wednesday, the British Broadcasting Corporation said that he telephoned its World Service network in London. As the BBC recorded, a Taliban aide in Kandahar held a telephone receiver up to a walkie-talkie as Mullah Omar shouted from the other end.
In a week of dramatic, rapidly changing news, British news organizations have broken a noticeable number of news accounts that are not solely a reflection of the competitive zeal of British reporters. Ever since the September attacks on the United States, the British government has shown itself to be far more forthcoming and sophisticated than the White House in giving out information. But in the case of the bin Laden videotape cited by Mr. Blair, no television news organization in Britain or the United States has been able to obtain a copy. Even Mr. Blair relied on a written transcript. British officials would not discuss intelligence sources but said that the prime minister would not rely on the information unless it was 100 percent certain. When asked about the tape, a White House official suggested that questions be directed to 10 Downing Street. Anna Perez, a spokeswoman for the National Security Council, said, "We have not seen it."
The reticence to release the videotape may have led to one of the more paradoxical twists in the coalition's media campaign: the footage that is said to show Mr. bin Laden at his worst, gloating over the thousands killed on Sept. 11, and that is at the core of the coalition's legal case against him, has not been shown to the public.
According to British officials and CNN, which has a contract with Al Jazeera, the Arab-language network that has aired other bin Laden videotapes, the Oct. 20 videotape was not shown on Al Jazeera. But even after The Sunday Telegraph reported its existence, noting that a correspondent had "obtained access to the videotape in the Middle East," the video has not surfaced even though the newspaper said the tape had circulated among Mr. bin Laden's supporters for 14 days.
Matthew Furman, a CNN spokesman, said the network was seeking a copy. He noted that the Sunday Telegraph reporter told CNN that he had not actually seen the video, but only the transcript. To date, no news organization has located the videotape, let alone broadcast it. And that surprises 10 Downing Street, which seems to think reporters should have found it by now.
"We know that bin Laden has recorded far more than has been broadcast, and we know that a large number of people have seen the videotape we used to update the documented evidence against him," Alistair Campbell, a spokesman for Mr. Tony Blair, said. "We can only assume that the video was not shown either because his supporters thought it was damaging or the media just thought it was just him ranting." Mr. Campbell said that he had only seen a transcript. "We do not have the videotape," he said.
News organizations would like a first-hand view. "We've been looking for the tape, but it is dry wells everywhere," Erik Sorenson, president of MSNBC, said. "We have only the good word of our good friends the British to go on." Some British journalists, particularly those who work for tabloid newspapers, are known for having a richly imaginative view of accuracy when writing about the royal family or the personal lives of their own politicians. But Britain has produced many rigorous and highly experienced war correspondents, some of whom work for American newspapers and television networks in Afghanistan, including Matthew Chance and Nic Robertson of CNN. Still, no British news organization has yet claimed to have found the missing video.
The New York Times : "According to British officials and CNN, which has a contract with Al Jazeera, the Oct. 20 videotape was not shown on Al Jazeera.The Sunday Telegraph reported its existence, noting that a correspondent had "obtained access to the videotape in the Middle East," the video has not surfaced.
The Sunday Telegraph of London was the only news organization to report that Osama bin Laden had justified the Sept. 11 attacks in a recent video circulating among his supporters. Four days later, Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain cited that video as evidence of Mr. bin Laden's complicity.
It was Anthony Loyd, a Times of London reporter, who discovered documents in an abandoned house in Kabul said to contain instructions on how to make a nuclear device.
And when Mullah Muhammad Omar, the spiritual leader of the Taliban, wanted to express his defiance after his troops' ragged retreat on Wednesday, the British Broadcasting Corporation said that he telephoned its World Service network in London. As the BBC recorded, a Taliban aide in Kandahar held a telephone receiver up to a walkie-talkie as Mullah Omar shouted from the other end.
In a week of dramatic, rapidly changing news, British news organizations have broken a noticeable number of news accounts that are not solely a reflection of the competitive zeal of British reporters. Ever since the September attacks on the United States, the British government has shown itself to be far more forthcoming and sophisticated than the White House in giving out information. But in the case of the bin Laden videotape cited by Mr. Blair, no television news organization in Britain or the United States has been able to obtain a copy. Even Mr. Blair relied on a written transcript. British officials would not discuss intelligence sources but said that the prime minister would not rely on the information unless it was 100 percent certain. When asked about the tape, a White House official suggested that questions be directed to 10 Downing Street. Anna Perez, a spokeswoman for the National Security Council, said, "We have not seen it."
The reticence to release the videotape may have led to one of the more paradoxical twists in the coalition's media campaign: the footage that is said to show Mr. bin Laden at his worst, gloating over the thousands killed on Sept. 11, and that is at the core of the coalition's legal case against him, has not been shown to the public.
According to British officials and CNN, which has a contract with Al Jazeera, the Arab-language network that has aired other bin Laden videotapes, the Oct. 20 videotape was not shown on Al Jazeera. But even after The Sunday Telegraph reported its existence, noting that a correspondent had "obtained access to the videotape in the Middle East," the video has not surfaced even though the newspaper said the tape had circulated among Mr. bin Laden's supporters for 14 days.
Matthew Furman, a CNN spokesman, said the network was seeking a copy. He noted that the Sunday Telegraph reporter told CNN that he had not actually seen the video, but only the transcript. To date, no news organization has located the videotape, let alone broadcast it. And that surprises 10 Downing Street, which seems to think reporters should have found it by now.
"We know that bin Laden has recorded far more than has been broadcast, and we know that a large number of people have seen the videotape we used to update the documented evidence against him," Alistair Campbell, a spokesman for Mr. Tony Blair, said. "We can only assume that the video was not shown either because his supporters thought it was damaging or the media just thought it was just him ranting." Mr. Campbell said that he had only seen a transcript. "We do not have the videotape," he said.
News organizations would like a first-hand view. "We've been looking for the tape, but it is dry wells everywhere," Erik Sorenson, president of MSNBC, said. "We have only the good word of our good friends the British to go on." Some British journalists, particularly those who work for tabloid newspapers, are known for having a richly imaginative view of accuracy when writing about the royal family or the personal lives of their own politicians. But Britain has produced many rigorous and highly experienced war correspondents, some of whom work for American newspapers and television networks in Afghanistan, including Matthew Chance and Nic Robertson of CNN. Still, no British news organization has yet claimed to have found the missing video.
eots
no fly list
Of course, we shouldn't find it surprising that Bin Laden consistently helps Bush, after all it was the Bush Administration that allowed all members of the Bin Laden family to fly out of America immediately after 911 whilst all other air traffic was grounded.
It was Bush himself who signed document W199I, ordering the FBI to back off investigating the Bin Ladens before 911.
It was George W Bush who went into business with Bin laden's brother in the 1970s.
It is George W Bush's father who is STILL DOING business with the Bin Ladens via the Carlyle Group, an international consulting firm.
FBI Special agent Robert Wright broke down when testifying that he had been gagged and could not reveal the true extent of what he knew about the Bush-Bin Laden connection and 911. his lawyer stepped up and said live on C-Span that "The Bush Family vacations with the Bin Ladens".
The ties run deep and all lead to money, huge amounts of money. This is how the Bushes do business, this is how they have always done business, they own the best enemies money can buy.
Previous to the 2004 election, Bin Laden surfaced on a video on the eve of the two year anniversary of 911. Once again impeccable timing to deliver a video, given that he was reported to be hiding in the mountains of Pakistan.
However, the video was quickly recognized by experts as simply a re-hash of old material cobbled together quickly and so amateurish that it could not have fooled anyone.
Previous to the beginning of the Iraq war, Bin Laden appeared in February 2003 on an audio tape that was touted as proof positive of Al Qaeda links with Saddam Hussein.
In another amazing timing coincidence, the tape came barely a week after Colin powell's attempts to link Al Qaeda and Saddam in his botched presentation of lies and exaggerations before the UN Security Council.
In an even more bizarre twist, just hours before the tape was found and aired by AlJazeera, Colin Powell announced in the US Senate that a Bin Laden tape is coming proving Iraqs links with Al-Qaeda.
How does Colin Powell know what AlJazeera are going to broadcast before they do?
The tape voiced support for Iraq, but did not prove any link between al-Qaeda and the Iraqi leadership. It was described as dubious at best and at worst as an outright fake.
Previous to this tape a poor quality release in November 2002, deemed to be completely authentic by US Experts, was determined to be a total fake by the Dalle Molle Institute for Perceptual Artificial Intelligence in Switzerland.
This time Bin Laden was said to be admitting to recent small scale terror attacks. Yet the voice on the tape was different to around twenty previous recordings of Bin Laden.
And of course, then there is the all time classic Bin Laden video, the number one hit from december 2001. The one we like to call the "Fat nosed" Bin Laden video.
This one was magically found in a house in Jalalabad after anti-Taliban forces moved in. It featured a fat Osama laughing and joking about how he'd carried out 9/11. The video was also mistranslated in order to manipulate viewer opinion and featured "Bin Laden" praising two of the hijackers, only he got their names wrong.
Despite the fact that the man in the video looks nothing like Bin Laden, the CIA stood by the video whilst many have declared it an outright fake.
And so we come back to this week's tape, Osama's "latest release". Already experts are coming forward to suggest that yet again this is a fake that has been put out at a very convenient time to divert attention away from important events.
Professor Bruce Lawrence has described the tape as "like a voice from the grave".
He thinks bin Laden is dead and has doubts about the tape. Lawrence recently analyzed more than 20 complete speeches and interviews of the al Qaida leader for his book. He says the new message is missing several key elements.
We have previously highlighted the evidence to suggest that Bin Laden is dead. More and more experts are now coming forward with the same opinion. Every time a new tape is released it seems to become shorter and more vague as if whoever is making them is running out of material to work with .
If it is conceivable that there is one group of fundamentalist individuals who wish to change the way we live because "they hate our freedom", then it is equally as conceivable that there is another group of richer, more sophisticated fundamentalists that wish to do the same thing themselves and will use the first group as a cover for what they do.
They have groomed Bin Laden for their own ends and will continue to use his image (whether he is dead or not) until they no longer have a cause to, this is simply another example of his usefulness in the fake war on terror
It was Bush himself who signed document W199I, ordering the FBI to back off investigating the Bin Ladens before 911.
It was George W Bush who went into business with Bin laden's brother in the 1970s.
It is George W Bush's father who is STILL DOING business with the Bin Ladens via the Carlyle Group, an international consulting firm.
FBI Special agent Robert Wright broke down when testifying that he had been gagged and could not reveal the true extent of what he knew about the Bush-Bin Laden connection and 911. his lawyer stepped up and said live on C-Span that "The Bush Family vacations with the Bin Ladens".
The ties run deep and all lead to money, huge amounts of money. This is how the Bushes do business, this is how they have always done business, they own the best enemies money can buy.
Previous to the 2004 election, Bin Laden surfaced on a video on the eve of the two year anniversary of 911. Once again impeccable timing to deliver a video, given that he was reported to be hiding in the mountains of Pakistan.
However, the video was quickly recognized by experts as simply a re-hash of old material cobbled together quickly and so amateurish that it could not have fooled anyone.
Previous to the beginning of the Iraq war, Bin Laden appeared in February 2003 on an audio tape that was touted as proof positive of Al Qaeda links with Saddam Hussein.
In another amazing timing coincidence, the tape came barely a week after Colin powell's attempts to link Al Qaeda and Saddam in his botched presentation of lies and exaggerations before the UN Security Council.
In an even more bizarre twist, just hours before the tape was found and aired by AlJazeera, Colin Powell announced in the US Senate that a Bin Laden tape is coming proving Iraqs links with Al-Qaeda.
How does Colin Powell know what AlJazeera are going to broadcast before they do?
The tape voiced support for Iraq, but did not prove any link between al-Qaeda and the Iraqi leadership. It was described as dubious at best and at worst as an outright fake.
Previous to this tape a poor quality release in November 2002, deemed to be completely authentic by US Experts, was determined to be a total fake by the Dalle Molle Institute for Perceptual Artificial Intelligence in Switzerland.
This time Bin Laden was said to be admitting to recent small scale terror attacks. Yet the voice on the tape was different to around twenty previous recordings of Bin Laden.
And of course, then there is the all time classic Bin Laden video, the number one hit from december 2001. The one we like to call the "Fat nosed" Bin Laden video.
This one was magically found in a house in Jalalabad after anti-Taliban forces moved in. It featured a fat Osama laughing and joking about how he'd carried out 9/11. The video was also mistranslated in order to manipulate viewer opinion and featured "Bin Laden" praising two of the hijackers, only he got their names wrong.
Despite the fact that the man in the video looks nothing like Bin Laden, the CIA stood by the video whilst many have declared it an outright fake.
And so we come back to this week's tape, Osama's "latest release". Already experts are coming forward to suggest that yet again this is a fake that has been put out at a very convenient time to divert attention away from important events.
Professor Bruce Lawrence has described the tape as "like a voice from the grave".
He thinks bin Laden is dead and has doubts about the tape. Lawrence recently analyzed more than 20 complete speeches and interviews of the al Qaida leader for his book. He says the new message is missing several key elements.
We have previously highlighted the evidence to suggest that Bin Laden is dead. More and more experts are now coming forward with the same opinion. Every time a new tape is released it seems to become shorter and more vague as if whoever is making them is running out of material to work with .
If it is conceivable that there is one group of fundamentalist individuals who wish to change the way we live because "they hate our freedom", then it is equally as conceivable that there is another group of richer, more sophisticated fundamentalists that wish to do the same thing themselves and will use the first group as a cover for what they do.
They have groomed Bin Laden for their own ends and will continue to use his image (whether he is dead or not) until they no longer have a cause to, this is simply another example of his usefulness in the fake war on terror
lol. If my last name was Dahmer/Kacinzky/Bundy, and it was true that my father or brothers just so happened to be business partners of the President of the United States...than you would have good reason to be concerned.
Only if we were talking about me having a direct Bloodline that connected me to those 3 murderers. As well as if I had known them or not. No reason to worry about someone who isn't connected to them other than by name.
But we're not just talking distant relatives. Not some people who don't know eachother. No no my friend, we're talking about Bush doing direct business with Osama's BLOOD related family members. All the way up to and after 9-11. Doing business with those who knew him well.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS COINCIDENCE. EVERYTHING CAN BE TIED TO SOMETHING.
Way to miss the point, but if I understand correctly if it's blood related it's all good, but if you were say Dahmer's brother then I should avoid you like the plague as well right? I'm sure you never did anything wrong but hell you're his brother so you're just as guilty by default. Makes perfect sense. Were you aware that Osama's blood relatives basically disowned him?
eots
no fly list
Way to miss the point, but if I understand correctly if it's blood related it's all good, but if you were say Dahmer's brother then I should avoid you like the plague as well right? I'm sure you never did anything wrong but hell you're his brother so you're just as guilty by default. Makes perfect sense. Were you aware that Osama's blood relatives basically disowned him?
as president i believe if your dahners brother a prudent man would not involve himself in business with you especially if you shared common views with you brother dahmer and financed him and he was still on the loose
as president i believe if your dahners brother a prudent man would not involve himself in business with you especially if you shared common views with you brother dahmer and financed him and he was still on the loose
Why? For people like you and Nuclear that can't make a distinction? The following are excerpts from "Michael Moore is a Big Fat Stupid White Man."
One of the Theses of "Fahrenheit 9/11" is that the President George W. Bush is awash in secret, nefarious ties to the bin Laden family and, thereby, Osama bin Laden himself. This is no doubt a powerful, dramatic theme to organize a documentary around. After all, is there a more vicious or attention grabbing way to bring down a president than to devote two hours of film to tying him to the most infamous mass murderer of recent history, while terrorizing your audience with fears about a secret New World Order?
But Moore's thesis has problems-big problems. First off, the bin Laden family is enormous in size, most of them are pro-Western and have useful power in a part of the world where we are short on allies. Second, it's quite important to note that the bin Laden family has long since disowned Osama. (Not too surprising: he's declared that Arab moderates and particularly Saudis are heretics and traitors to Islam. He takes particular offense at the proliferation of U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia-and bin Laden construction firms are building many of them. Denouncing one's family as worthy of death doesn't do wonders for family ties.).....
Sometimes Moore's conspiracy web stretches to the snapping point, such as his claim that businessman James W. Bath was hired by the bin Ladens to invest their money and when George W. Bush founded Arbusto Oil, "some $50,000-or 5% of control of Arbusto-came from Mr. Bath" Journalist Craig Unger, who has been critical of the Bush family, discounts this claim, noting that Bath avowed the $50,000 was his own invenstment, and Unger could find no evidence to the contrary.
Not to mention that Moore's definition of ties is insanely loose. Investing in the same company, an action akin to putting your money in the same bank, constitutes 'ties'.;
William Joyce
Chemotherapy for PC
Interesting to see how these critics have made belief in "the Holocaust" the touchstone for the validity of all other beliefs.
Let's see...
I believe the earth revolves around the sun, gravity holds objects down, and the Holocaust didn't happen/is exaggerated.
I believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the tooth fairy, and that the Nazis killed 6 million Jews by gassing them in gas chambers, turning them into soap or soup for Hitler to eat.
Hmmmm....
Northwestern Prof. weighs in:
http://www.heretical.com/miscella/butz1.html
Warning to UK/European viewers: this website may illegal to watch in your country.
Let's see...
I believe the earth revolves around the sun, gravity holds objects down, and the Holocaust didn't happen/is exaggerated.
I believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the tooth fairy, and that the Nazis killed 6 million Jews by gassing them in gas chambers, turning them into soap or soup for Hitler to eat.
Hmmmm....
Northwestern Prof. weighs in:
http://www.heretical.com/miscella/butz1.html
Warning to UK/European viewers: this website may illegal to watch in your country.
trobinett
Senior Member
Come on, who really gives a shit what the numbers are?
Just the fact that it happened should be enough to sadden most.
There isn't any wiggle room here. These slim balls killed these people, and now, years latter, their trying to spin the whole terrible mess.
I personally know people, that went into those "death camps", they existed, the results of the mass murder existed. It was NOT the figment of anyone's emagination.
Its just like those that would try to lessen Saddam's terrible murders.
The SOB is a murder, it doesnt matter the body count.
The things people do, and say to lessen their godawful conduct.
Just the fact that it happened should be enough to sadden most.
There isn't any wiggle room here. These slim balls killed these people, and now, years latter, their trying to spin the whole terrible mess.
I personally know people, that went into those "death camps", they existed, the results of the mass murder existed. It was NOT the figment of anyone's emagination.
Its just like those that would try to lessen Saddam's terrible murders.
The SOB is a murder, it doesnt matter the body count.
The things people do, and say to lessen their godawful conduct.
NuclearWinter
Rookie
- Apr 13, 2006
- 1,878
- 23
- 0
- Banned
- #112
Way to miss the point, but if I understand correctly if it's blood related it's all good, but if you were say Dahmer's brother then I should avoid you like the plague as well right? I'm sure you never did anything wrong but hell you're his brother so you're just as guilty by default. Makes perfect sense. Were you aware that Osama's blood relatives basically disowned him?
No I think you missed the point.
3 points.
1. The President of the United States is involved.
2. The father of the President of the United States is involved.
3. Blood DOES have something to do with it. Because like I said before, Bush was doing business with those who knew Osama Bin Laden best.
The whole "money talks" thing doesn't sit with me too well.
previous President George Bush must think we are all idiots!
When curious George W. Bush got on the podium and started talking about how he was going to kill Osama Bin Laden and bla bla bla, and how bad of a person he is and bla bla bla, why did he neglect to mention the fact that his father is a big fan of Osama's family members? So much so that he did business with them for over 20 years? And for all I know, is continuing to do business with them to this day.
Oh wait, never mind. Osama's family convieniently took all their money out of the Carlyle Group right around 9-11.
lol. Another coincidence? THEY DON'T EXIST.
NuclearWinter
Rookie
- Apr 13, 2006
- 1,878
- 23
- 0
- Banned
- #113
And regarding Osama's family. How "good" do you really believe these people are?
Sure, they are extremely wealthy? But what exactly does that entail about them? Nothing.
In fact, I plan to do some very deep research into who these people are, and whether or not they are "pillars of the community" which is I'm sure the image of them that George Bush would love for everybody to believe.
Did they have ties to any terrorist organizations previously? Are they tied to guns, blood, drug money, ect? The opium fields in Afghanistan? Are they involved with stuff like that? I plan to find out. And I know it won't be hard to do so.
Also, Saddam Hussein as everybody already knows, was a business partner to George Bush at one time in the past. In fact, this simple fact should be cause for EVERYONE to be concerned. What excuse could possibly account for that fact?
Was Saddam Hussein a good enough guy to do business with before he "got out of line" and altered Bush's agenda? Was he at one point such an outstanding person that President Bush thought it was just dandy to do business with him on a large scale?
Or was he a tool? A tool for George Bush to further his plans in the middle east? Why suddenly, did Saddam Hussein become an "enemy" of the State? lol. Was it really because he started killing his own people? Because surely he had killed long before that. Or was it because he broke away from Daddy Bush's game plans?
I mean really. All this makes me sick. The Mafia was and still is known for doing business with "bad" people. As long as they keep in line with the plans with what they want. The mafia is also known for killing those who turn against them as well.
So...how are either Daddy Bush or our current President any different in tone? They both got angry when Saddam got "out of line", and then they wanted him dead. Does that make them heros? Or does that make them just like the mafia?
You decide. Because I already know how I feel about all this Bullcrap. It's nonsense. And for awhile, not so much anymore though, the American people were being manipulated to believe something that simply wasn't true. All in the name of war. And all in the name of money.
Sure, they are extremely wealthy? But what exactly does that entail about them? Nothing.
In fact, I plan to do some very deep research into who these people are, and whether or not they are "pillars of the community" which is I'm sure the image of them that George Bush would love for everybody to believe.
Did they have ties to any terrorist organizations previously? Are they tied to guns, blood, drug money, ect? The opium fields in Afghanistan? Are they involved with stuff like that? I plan to find out. And I know it won't be hard to do so.
Also, Saddam Hussein as everybody already knows, was a business partner to George Bush at one time in the past. In fact, this simple fact should be cause for EVERYONE to be concerned. What excuse could possibly account for that fact?
Was Saddam Hussein a good enough guy to do business with before he "got out of line" and altered Bush's agenda? Was he at one point such an outstanding person that President Bush thought it was just dandy to do business with him on a large scale?
Or was he a tool? A tool for George Bush to further his plans in the middle east? Why suddenly, did Saddam Hussein become an "enemy" of the State? lol. Was it really because he started killing his own people? Because surely he had killed long before that. Or was it because he broke away from Daddy Bush's game plans?
I mean really. All this makes me sick. The Mafia was and still is known for doing business with "bad" people. As long as they keep in line with the plans with what they want. The mafia is also known for killing those who turn against them as well.
So...how are either Daddy Bush or our current President any different in tone? They both got angry when Saddam got "out of line", and then they wanted him dead. Does that make them heros? Or does that make them just like the mafia?
You decide. Because I already know how I feel about all this Bullcrap. It's nonsense. And for awhile, not so much anymore though, the American people were being manipulated to believe something that simply wasn't true. All in the name of war. And all in the name of money.
And regarding Osama's family. How "good" do you really believe these people are?
Sure, they are extremely wealthy? But what exactly does that entail about them? Nothing.
In fact, I plan to do some very deep research into who these people are, and whether or not they are "pillars of the community" which is I'm sure the image of them that George Bush would love for everybody to believe.
I'm waiting with baited breathe cause you come off as such an objective researcher. Your opinion is based on one thing and one thing only. A name.
Did they have ties to any terrorist organizations previously? Are they tied to guns, blood, drug money, ect? The opium fields in Afghanistan? Are they involved with stuff like that? I plan to find out. And I know it won't be hard to do so.
as with most people with an agenda you will only find what you want to find
Also, Saddam Hussein as everybody already knows, was a business partner to George Bush at one time in the past. In fact, this simple fact should be cause for EVERYONE to be concerned. What excuse could possibly account for that fact?
Was Saddam Hussein a good enough guy to do business with before he "got out of line" and altered Bush's agenda? Was he at one point such an outstanding person that President Bush thought it was just dandy to do business with him on a large scale?
Or was he a tool? A tool for George Bush to further his plans in the middle east? Why suddenly, did Saddam Hussein become an "enemy" of the State? lol. Was it really because he started killing his own people? Because surely he had killed long before that. Or was it because he broke away from Daddy Bush's game plans?
News flash: Saddam was dictator and yes in some part in power by the U.S. long before either of the Bushes came on the political scene. The fact that you mention the two together so often is quite revealing when it comes to your agenda
So...how are either Daddy Bush or our current President any different in tone? They both got angry when Saddam got "out of line", and then they wanted him dead. Does that make them heros? Or does that make them just like the mafia?
You decide. Because I already know how I feel about all this Bullcrap. It's nonsense. And for awhile, not so much anymore though, the American people were being manipulated to believe something that simply wasn't true. All in the name of war. And all in the name of money.
I am deciding, and once again your tone with regaurd to all things Bush is quite revealing. It shows quite clearly that you will use anything to show that whatever disgust you seem to have for the Bushes is correctly founded. It is quite ironic that people like you preach about this 'war crap' and how we should always use diplomacy. Diplomacy only works for rationale/objective people, something you lack and a reason why you will never get to the truth.
NuclearWinter
Rookie
- Apr 13, 2006
- 1,878
- 23
- 0
- Banned
- #115
lol.
You got me twisted Bern.
I don't care for the Democrats or the Republicans. I care about my Country.
Bush, Kerry, the whole lot of them, they are almost all scoundrels as far as I am concerned. With very few genuinely good people in between. Those strong enough to stand up for what they know is right. Very few.
And about my research, let's not put the wagon before the horse shall we? I said I was going to do some very deep research. So don't expect a full blown report in 2 days. lol. These things take time.
As far as how you feel about my researching skills, let me just start by saying I don't care how you feel about them. lol. What I do care, is whether or not people are able to aquire Truth from what I post. Even if it's just a shred. That's something I DO care about. Even with you. Believe it or not.
And if you think I'm afraid to admit when I don't know something. You're dead wrong. I have just as much to learn as the next guy does. The only difference between me and any other "Truth Seeker" is that I am a separate form of the same Source as they are.
You are talking to someone who is in Love with the Truth more than anything else in Life. There are 2 types of facts my friend. Those which are interchangeable (through perception) and those which are not. The Solids vs the Ethereals.
I strive to find the Solids. And I try to strive to allow myself to continue adjusting to the Everlasting changing of the Ethereals.
You got me twisted Bern.
I don't care for the Democrats or the Republicans. I care about my Country.
Bush, Kerry, the whole lot of them, they are almost all scoundrels as far as I am concerned. With very few genuinely good people in between. Those strong enough to stand up for what they know is right. Very few.
And about my research, let's not put the wagon before the horse shall we? I said I was going to do some very deep research. So don't expect a full blown report in 2 days. lol. These things take time.
As far as how you feel about my researching skills, let me just start by saying I don't care how you feel about them. lol. What I do care, is whether or not people are able to aquire Truth from what I post. Even if it's just a shred. That's something I DO care about. Even with you. Believe it or not.
And if you think I'm afraid to admit when I don't know something. You're dead wrong. I have just as much to learn as the next guy does. The only difference between me and any other "Truth Seeker" is that I am a separate form of the same Source as they are.
You are talking to someone who is in Love with the Truth more than anything else in Life. There are 2 types of facts my friend. Those which are interchangeable (through perception) and those which are not. The Solids vs the Ethereals.
I strive to find the Solids. And I try to strive to allow myself to continue adjusting to the Everlasting changing of the Ethereals.
I don't care for the Democrats or the Republicans. I care about my Country.
Bush, Kerry, the whole lot of them, they are almost all scoundrels as far as I am concerned. With very few genuinely good people in between. Those strong enough to stand up for what they know is right. Very few.
Indeed you do speak with much passion in what you say above. But that will, whether you want it to or not have an effect on what you claim below. Look at the language you use. "Scoundrel"? that is a word which for you has a lot of emotion behind it. Emotion and truth seeking, which by it's very nature requires objecitvity do not make good bed fellows. I think you would have to admit that. I do somewhat agree with you however. This will sound funny but I don't see them so much as scoundrels as victims of a system. You say this isn't a party lines thing, fine it doesn't matter as far as what the outcome will be in your research. If you say they are all scoundrels then that is exactley what you will find wether it's the truth or not.
You are talking to someone who is in Love with the Truth more than anything else in Life. There are 2 types of facts my friend. Those which are interchangeable (through perception) and those which are not. The Solids vs the Ethereals.
I strive to find the Solids. And I try to strive to allow myself to continue adjusting to the Everlasting changing of the Ethereals.
eots
no fly list
Nuclear maybe you just need to think in a new way it works like this.
theres all these facts that get in your way .what you have to do is break them in to category's true facts /untrue facts ,the way you do that is take what corporate media and world elite tell you and try to fit your facts to there story. if the facts fit story that means they are true facts . if they don't fit the story dismiss them because . if they don't fit the story you know the must be a untrue fact same goes for testimony or statements if they fit the story , you know there true...if not.. untrue.... its as e-z as 2+2=5
theres all these facts that get in your way .what you have to do is break them in to category's true facts /untrue facts ,the way you do that is take what corporate media and world elite tell you and try to fit your facts to there story. if the facts fit story that means they are true facts . if they don't fit the story dismiss them because . if they don't fit the story you know the must be a untrue fact same goes for testimony or statements if they fit the story , you know there true...if not.. untrue.... its as e-z as 2+2=5
eots
no fly list
Oh dear! You have a point!
Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter. U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear
Engineering, Cal Tech).Who gained from 9/11? Who covered up crucial information about 9/11? And who put out the patently false stories about 9/11 in the first place? When you take those three things together, I think the case is pretty clear that it’s highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Dick Cheney.
I think the very kindest thing that we can say about George W. Bush and all the people in the U.S. Government that have been involved in this massive cover-up, the very kindest thing we can say is that they were aware of impending attacks and let them happen. Now some people will say that’s much too kind, however even that is high treason and conspiracy to commit murder
Col. George Nelson, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. 34-year Air Force career.
As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to be involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history." http://www.physics
Raymond L. McGovern – Former Chairman, National Intelligence Estimates, CIA, responsible for preparing the President’ Daily Brief (PDB) for Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. 27-year CIA veteran. Former U.S. Army
Intelligence Endorsement of 9/11 and American Empire (Vol I) – Intellectuals Speak Out: "It has long been clear that the Bush-Cheney administration cynically exploited the attacks of 9/11 to promote its imperial designs. But the present volume confronts us with compelling evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: that the 9/11 attacks were themselves orchestrated by this administration precisely so they could be thus exploited. If this is true, it is not merely the case, as the Downing Street memos show, that the stated reason for attacking Iraq was a lie. It is also the case that the whole 'war on terror' was based on a prior deception." http://www.interlinkbooks.com
Signatory: Petition requesting a reinvestigation of 9/11. http://www.911truth.org
Bio: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
911.net
murder."
William Christison – Former National Intelligence Officer and Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis. 29-year CIA veteran
Essay Stop Belittling the Theories About September 11 8/14/06: "I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. … An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. … The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them." http://www.dissidentvoice.org
Article 9/7/06: "David Griffin believes this all was totally an inside job - I've got to say I think that it was too. … I have since decided that....at least some elements in this US government had contributed in some way or other to causing 9/11 to happen or at least allowing it to happen. … The reason that the two towers in New York actually collapsed and fell all the way to the ground was controlled explosions rather than just being hit by two airplanes. … All of the characteristics of these demolitions show that they almost had to have been controlled explosions." http://www.prisonplanet.com
Audio interview 9/29/06: "We very seriously need an entirely new very high level and truly independent investigation of the events of 9/11. I think you almost have to look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a joke and not a serious piece of analysis at all. It gave the administration what it wanted to support their official story on what happened on the date of September 11 and that's all they cared about. ... It's a monstrous crime. Absolutely a monstrous crime." http://www.electricpolitics.com
Bio: http://www.amalpress.com
Nuclear maybe you just need to think in a new way it works like this.
theres all these facts that get in your way .what you have to do is break them in to category's true facts /untrue facts ,the way you do that is take what corporate media and world elite tell you and try to fit your facts to there story. if the facts fit story that means they are true facts . if they don't fit the story dismiss them because . if they don't fit the story you know the must be a untrue fact same goes for testimony or statements if they fit the story , you know there true...if not.. untrue.... its as e-z as 2+2=5
ironic that the exact same can be said about your particular story as well, isn't it?
Annie
Diamond Member
- Nov 22, 2003
- 50,848
- 4,827
- 1,790
- Thread starter
- #120
eots, you were warned about hijacking, conspiracy including 'treason' stretched to the breaking point-if the conspiracy is first accepted, doesn't cut it. Keep these on your own threads.
Note, the one about civilian tragedies I did NOT move, at least there is some relevance.
Note, the one about civilian tragedies I did NOT move, at least there is some relevance.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 44
- Views
- 3K
- Replies
- 12
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 5
- Views
- 2K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 33
- Views
- 237
- Replies
- 86
- Views
- 668
- Replies
- 57
- Views
- 243
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8043
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 469
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-