It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Brits mock Bush Inauguration Pledge... (from ATSNN)

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 03:20 AM
link   
Seems like the President made his point, and the message was picked up world wide.. do you still think Bush is going to stop the wars?

Regardless, the Brits have either a superb hatred for this man, or they're catching the vibe of Bush being a war bent power hungry President causing problems throughout the world..

You decide.. are they over reacting, or do they see a completely different man standing in the White House.. perhaps not the one that CNN and FOX try to paint him in the USA.. perhaps.. the real man?
 



www.drudgereport.com
"BUSH: I SWEAR IT'S IRAN NEXT, George Bush pledged all-out global war on terrorists and tyrants," headlines the STAR.

"POMP AND CIRCUMSTANCE, The band played Hail to the Chief. A 21-gun salute sounded. Then, protected by a bullet-proof shield, President George Bush repeated his message to the enemies of democracy," screams the INDEPENDENT.

MORE

The TELEGRAPH slapped: "DEFIANT BUSH DOESN'T MENTION THE WAR, President George W Bush began his second term in unapologetic style yesterday, pledging to maintain his muscular foreign policy and spread freedom "to the darkest corners of the world."

The TIMES rips: "HIS SECOND-TERM MISSION: TO END TYRANNY ON EARTH, Four years ago he was the Accidental President, scion of a ruling family propelled into the highest office more by genetics and duty than by political zeal and ideological mission."

The GUARDIAN: "SMILES FOR THE FAMILY, A FIERY WARNING FOR THE WORLD."


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Those quotes alone make me wonder just where all this hatred is forming.. perhaps.. from the US President..

Or maybe insulting the US President is raising their ratings.. who knows..




posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 03:37 AM
link   
I just want to reply that I see bad things happening in the next 4 years. Bush repeatedly says hes going to spread "peace and democracy" all over the world. And he's proving he's going to do it by taking Afghan and now Iraq. With Iran possibly next.

Might I note that this is exactly what hitler did. Slowly taking over a part of the world until he finally stepped on the wrong country and sparked a huge war.

I know its odd comparing Bush to Hitler.. but the potential is there.. and we have a president that has made it quite clear he doesnt have a problem taking over a country in the name of democracy.. and a congress that seems to fall for every stunt laid in front of them quickly passing a declaration of war at any given time..

Never in USA's history has a president actually munipulated congress into passing war bills. Until now. First with 9/11 (not talking about the US doing it) and then the WMD fiasco about Iraq.. and now the nuclear threats that "started" in Iran and N. Korea marking the next two targets.

Allow me to dream..

If a nuke were to go off in some city.. like.. say BOSTON.. sometime this week.. And a few hours/days after the event, the world has been awed by the loss of life.. and looking for someone to strike down at for this.. and the USA "intelligence" says it came from Iran .. without any supporting proof, the world will want to crush them.. and maybe even N.Korea.. hell.. Russia?

Maybe Iran knows?

Could this be a start of something severe?

The USA military is in a very uncomfortable situation.. If they strike the wrong country, they could face strong resistance in the Quagmire they are making "Home Base" aka Afghan/Iraq/Kuwait deployment positions. .. An attack by Iran on the kuwaiti base would cripple our southern deployment, at least for a few months... And a joint attack by another country (Russia?) on the Afghan deployment base would cripple our Western deployement..

Leaving the 100,000 soldiers pinned having to street fight resistance and Iran/Russian troops until they run out of stock and ammo..

Still think the USA is the almighty war engine? .. At the very least the US President either has tricks up his sleeve, or he has absolutly no clue what hes doing.. which could cause us the biggest war in history if he doesnt back the f&#k off.




[edit on 1/21/2005 by QuietSoul]

[edit on 1/21/2005 by QuietSoul]



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by QuietSoul

Might I note that this is exactly what hitler did. Slowly taking over a part of the world until he finally stepped on the wrong country and sparked a huge war.


no he annexed neighbors first then invaded poland which caused the war, he conquered, afghanistan was just so why do people bring it up? and iraq is not conquered, huge difference.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 04:02 AM
link   

he conquered, afghanistan was just so why do people bring it up? and iraq is not conquered, huge difference.


What makes you think he hasnt conquered Iraq? He moved in, destroyed its military and removed its government and is replacing it with its own.. how much more conquered do they have to be?

The puny resistance fighting? Those guys cant even hold a city (As you witness with Fallujah)... let alone fight off all of the US military packed into Iraq.. but they're fighting a futile war they cant or never will win.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 05:40 AM
link   
All these headlines are reflective of the sentiments of America's closest ally in Iraq and the so-called "war against terror'.

Now, that's terrifying for Tony Blair as he will have to sit up and take notice and see how best to tow the line.

In fact, the practical target here looks to be Tony Blair. He cannot ignore the common sentiments expressed by so many of the papers. Interesting to see his reaction (or maybe safest way for him is non-reaction) to this major domestic politics pressure.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 06:01 AM
link   
Further simpified anti-war and anti-Bush sentiments, nothing more, nothing less, courtesy of the foreign press.

Everyone has an opposing opinion and bias, and it seesm self-evident of such within this very thread, as with countless others within ATS. How wonderful that we can all continue to express our opposing opinions, huh?

Blessed be the freedom of press and free speech.



seekerof



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 06:05 AM
link   
People in England dont like the fact that a fundamentalist Chrisitian seems to have total control over English foreign policy, leading to the deaths of English service men and women.

Not really that hard to understand.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 06:20 AM
link   
It's often hard to gauge how much of all this is media hype and how much it refelect the sentiments of the population. Although there is no doubt in my mind that the press will have influence on the populations opinion. That said when it comes to election time does the UK have any party to vote for that will do what the population may want? If the UK Labor party is anything like our Labor party than it is already the most liberal and anti-war party that has a real chance of election. Can someone fill me in on the choices UK citizens have for the next election and if any of them are against the UK getting into more wars with the US. If indeed that is what the people want by election time... I'm not suggesting that it is but it would be good for them to have a party to vote for if do want this to happen.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 06:37 AM
link   
Let them mock. They mocked Reagan as well but their precious EU would be missing the East and have communist tanks staring at them if it wasn't for him.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 06:48 AM
link   
I think the Brits are a bit extra pissy about Bush because of what happend with Tony Blair playing his laptop.

Brits are and always were extremely proud of their country, the british empire and God save the Queen ...

They are extremely pissed about their elected prime minister selling them out to the US and sending their soldiers to Iraq while the people didn't even support it. They are pissed because Tony put the Iraqi crisis over the good of the people, above the local pressing points the Brittish goverment was supposed to handle over the last few years and opted to focus on Iraq instead.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 07:30 AM
link   
I suggest you look up the fact that the Times is owned by NewsCorp as is FoxNews.

Brit's don't like Bush. And we'll print whatever we see fit.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 07:52 AM
link   
People when you are going to learn that the only people that loves bush blindly are his followers.

See no evil on anything he does or say.

feel no evil coming from him, but guess what is people here that can see it and feel it and so the rest of the world.

Lets pray that he uses diplomacy better because common sense he has none.

[edit on 21-1-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 07:56 AM
link   
To bad the US papers won't print the truth about bush like they have



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
People when you are going to learn that the only people that loves bush blindly are his followers.

See no evil on anything he does or say.

feel no evil coming from him, but guess was is people here that can see it and feel it and so the rest of the world.

Lets pray that he uses diplomacy better because common sense he has none.


That would make following Bush like a religion, total and blind submission and faith for him and his cause.
Politics turned into religion, no more need for seperation of religion, politics and state.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 08:10 AM
link   
Stereotypical

As par, the rhetoric always points to and points out that only those that oppose Bush have any type common sense or independent abilities to think, as compared to those who support Bush, and them simply having no common sense, no independent ability to critically think, and amounting to simple followers and devotees.

*shakes head*




seekerof



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Stereotypical

As par, the rhetoric always points to and points out that only those that oppose Bush have any type common sense or independent abilities to think, as compared to those who support Bush, and them simply having no common sense, no independent ability to critically think, and amounting to simple followers and devotees.

*shakes head*

seekerof


The quote in your signature sums up a Bush supporter. Little regard for anything but their own interests.

Disraeli is tarnished by the actions of such fools.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 08:17 AM
link   
As such, Mr. Nerdling.
I am not a belligerent, mindless follower of Bush. My signature captivating your attention is like me pointing out your, immaterial.



seekerof



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Stereotypical

As par, the rhetoric always points to and points out that only those that oppose Bush have any type common sense or independent abilities to think, as compared to those who support Bush, and them simply having no common sense, no independent ability to critically think, and amounting to simple followers and devotees.

*shakes head*






seekerof


WOW Seekerof! You are finally getting it! Im impressed



If these are the quotes of our closest ally.............I wonder what the rest of the world truly thinks of us



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
As such, Mr. Nerdling.
I am not a belligerent, mindless follower of Bush. My signature captivating your attention is like me pointing out your, immaterial.



seekerof


I know you're not but I've experienced many that are verging on cult status.

It doesn't pay to alienated your friends.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 08:28 AM
link   
The world is mocking this speech given by mr. Bush- Its full of "God" and soooo far reaching, why its akin to a dictatorial speech. This man has plans, folks, and his plans are to have a war with every nation on earth and bring Democracy to them whether they like it or not. By the way, how long do you suppose Bush would need to be in power for such a cause?? hmmmm...more than 4 years i would say. Can you say "Dictator"??
He's offering your young to the world to fight his wars, how do you like him now....
We will not be rid of this man by "normal" means




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join