More emotive anti-Bush diatribe

Bush Impeachist Pick Of The Day:

My fellow Americans,

Michael Rivero from What Really Happened said something insightful in response to a letter I wrote to WRH, in which I asked why people choose to believe the lies in the face of the blatant truth. I was referring to Cheney's Energy Task Force that had staked out Iraq, and to confessions from our government that in order to carry out the transformation necessary in the military and government policy, there would need to be a "Pearl Harbor" event. Without this "Pearl Harbor" they spoke of, none of their goals could come to fruition. Well, their "Pearl Harbor" was September 11, 2001. The World Trade Center was Bush's Reichstag. Of course, the reference to Pearl Harbor is fitting, also, since our government also had full foreknowledge of and orchestrated that event. The thing Mr. Rivero said (he was quoting himself) is this:

Why do people choose lies? Most people prefer to believe their leaders are just and fair even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which they live is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of a corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one's self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all.

Quite right. On this same topic, Adolf Hitler wrote:

All propaganda must be presented in a popular form and must fix its intellectual level so as not to be above the heads of the least intellectual of those to whom it is directed. Thus its purely intellectual level will have to be that of the lowest mental common denominator among the public it is desired to reach. When there is question of bringing a whole nation within the circle of its influence, as happens in the case of war propaganda, then too much attention cannot be paid to the necessity of avoiding a high level, which presupposes a relatively high degree of intelligence among the public.

Hitler also said, "The great masses of the people...will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one" and

"The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, for the vast masses of a nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than to a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies, but would be ashamed to tell big lies."

Tony Blair also said something revealing before our Congress the other day. He said, "History will forgive us." He therefore acknowledges the sin. And yet, perhaps he said this simply because he knows who writes history.

"He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past" -- George Orwell.

Consider this statement by George W. Bush:

"I know there's a lot of revisionist history now going on... This nation acted to a threat from the dictator of Iraq. Now, there are some who would like to rewrite history--'revisionist historians' is what I like to call them," -- George W. Bush, June 17, 2003, attempting to disacknowledge the fact that the invasion of Iraq was unjustified.

Now consider this:

"The larger point is and the fundamental question is: Did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is: Absolutely. And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in. And therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him from power..." -- George W. Bush, July 16 2003

One good lie deserves another. Try the following on for size, but keep in mind that the fact that these are lies is not new information. In case you've succumbed to the powerful "revisionist history" taking place, let me remind you that some of us have been decrying these lies as such since well before the war.

We've known for a fact that these are lies since well before hundreds of American youths were sent off to be killed.

We knew before 6000 civilians were murdered that our government was lying to us.

If the bit about the forged Niger uranium documents sounds familiar to you, that's because some of us have been telling you about it--that it was a lie--well before the war. Some of you chose to ignore such deception, saying things like, "I believe our President has good intelligence, or he wouldn't be saying Iraq is such a threat", "He knows things that you and I don't know, and can't know, and we should trust him", or "We should give the President the benefit of the doubt". One of you even tried to justify these lies by suggesting to me that since this person believed that Bush truly believed Saddam was a "threat" to our country, then that made lying about that threat okay. This behavior and these attitudes were unacceptable then and are unacceptable now. I think it is important to remind you of the seriousness of the situation in light of the torrent of spin you are being spoon fed right now by the corporate media. Don't forget that the media was complicit in these crimes against humanity when you see them making light of Bush's lies. Remember the following?

"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons...and...the regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing chemical weapons... It retains physical infrastructure needed to build a nuclear weapon. Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon..." -- George W. Bush speaking before the U.N., September 12, 2002

"[Iraq] posesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. It has given shelter and support to terrorism... We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gasses... Saddam Hussein is harboring terrorists and the instruments of terror, the instruments of mass death and destruction... The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program... Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons... If the Iraqi regime is able to produce, buy, or steal an amount of highly enriched uranium a little larger than a single softball, it could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year... Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more. And he is moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon... We could wait and hope that Saddam does not give weapons to terrorists, or develop a nuclear weapon to blackmail the world. But I'm convinced that is a hope against all evidence." -- George W. Bush, Cincinnati, Ohio, October 7, 2002

Here's a whale:

"But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them." -- George W. Bush, responding to critics by referring to two trailers used to manufacture hydrogen for weather balloons, May 30, 2003

Are the American people sleeping? This man is a traitor to our country. This man is a war criminal. Why is he still in office? The manner in which the media is "debating" the matter of Bush's lies is sickening. Get him outta there. Get them all out of there, for the love of God. Get these psychopathic megolomaniacs out of our government. Get them right the hell out of our country. Bush isn't the only one who can shoot from the hip. Remember "Bring 'em on"? (Yeah, those are American kids being shot up in Iraq right now.) This is treason. Hang 'em high! Write your Congressmen. Write the media or your local newspapers. Visit www.votetoimpeach.org. Do something!

"All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." -- Howard Zinn

If we, the American people, do not take action now to hold our leaders responsible for their actions, to see that justice is preserved, then we will suffer the most severe consequences of our inaction.

And we will deserve it.

Sincerely,

Jeremy R. Hammond

www.yirmeyahureview.com...

I wholeheartedly agree. But, my thing is, you can't just get rid of Bush, you have to get rid of the ENTIRE cancer. The Rumsfelds, the Cheneys, the Wolfowitzs, the Perles, the Rices, the Powells (son too), the Ashcrofts, and so on. You need to get rid of the entire sickness in order to cure the body so as not to have a return of the disease.

[Edited on 20-7-2003 by Colonel]

"But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them." -- George W. Bush, responding to critics by referring to two trailers used to manufacture hydrogen for weather balloons, May 30, 2003

I see nothing in this post that is evidence of anything. The above statement does nothing but indicate to me that the anti-Bush, anti-Blair, anti-West people will believe anything, up to and including that the production of weather balloons mus tbe accomplished in mobile labs and that no country has the foresight to give the appearance of alternative uses so useful idiots can throw up the smokescreens for them.

I find it interesting that a despot that violates all agreements that were made to halt aggression, continuously fires on allied planes flying a no-fly zone designed to protect the despot's own countrymen from slaughter, hinders the U.N. inspection teams who document hide and seek games played by the despot and records communications by the henchmen playing the games, openly demands war be brought upon the U.S. and, yes, has ties to terrorism, is given more credibility than anyone else involved.

There is nothing here but the same old mantra, no new information or propaganda, merely the same old stuff with the same old "Why do people choose lies?" accusations that anyone who believes Bush and Blair over Hussein is believing a lie.

The quotes from Hitler are a nice touch as well, clearing linking Bush to Nazism, as if the people who have been anti-Bush since the beginning of his run for office are above anything like propaganda tactics.

Nothing to learn, here, same old thing attracting people who come here to contribute nothing but anti-Republicanism *ahemColonelcogh*

Thomas Crowne

I see from your response you actually learned a few things, but you are reluctant to say so.

The Bush administration pre-empted the term "revisionist historians" in a vain attempt to disguise the impossible revisions the Bush administration has forced itself to make.

I don't give Saddam Hussein any credibility, nor do I need to remind anyone of who acted to lift his credibility before Gulf War 1.

Personally, I prefer the illustrative mantras in the article presented, over these ones from Bush:

"Bring 'Em On" (I saw your critique of that mantra TC)

and

"The problem with France is they don't have a word for entrepreneur."

Quote, "I see nothing in this post that is evidence of anything. The above statement does nothing but indicate to me that the anti-Bush, anti-Blair, anti-West people will believe anything, up to and including that the production of weather balloons mus tbe accomplished in mobile labs and that no country has the foresight to give the appearance of alternative uses so useful idiots can throw up the smokescreens for them. "

It interesting the smokescreens that we do allow ourselves to see.......

Not very many of us here at ATS, actually like politicans. That goes FOR ALL OF THEM! There is no need to keep reposting threads bashing the freaking politicans. PLEASE keep one president bashing thread ongoing instead of createing a dozen each day. If I see anymore president bashing threads I am going to hand out warns like candy on Halloween

Colonel, I don't see that blog happening...
As for the rest of you. I amnot trying to censor your party, But it would be appriecated if you could just limit your DAMN bashing to ONE thread.

Bush and His Neo-con Cronies needs to be sent over to iraq to help keep the peace. Colin Powell is the only respectable one out of all of them. Bush is a draft dodger and Cheney is the same. What we need is somebody to step up to the plate and take the presidency from these bumblin idiots before out country falls deeper into debt.

Advisor

The article in my original post was an analysis of current propaganda tactics of an administration in a heap of trouble, comparing them with a highly influential satirical writer's view (Orwell) and with the tactics of one of the century's most influential and despised speakers and leaders (Hitler).

The writer's 'call to action' was clever in that he used the same style of language and hyperbole as Bush, but addressing it back at the originator.

It was, in my opinion, a useful bit of writing, with enogh bias that you could tell where the guy was coming from.

Personally, I don't bash Presidents or 'presidents'. I bash corruption and stupidity. There has been a lot of it to bash, of late.

I wouldn't like to think that anyone would ever receive a "warn" at ATS for posting a piece of writing like this.

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
Advisor
I wouldn't like to think that anyone would ever receive a "warn" at ATS for posting a piece of writing like this.

The republicans can't handle it so they try to silence. You see it all the time.

I agree with on your post and it's purpose, this is a very good article.
I would like to make it clear that this is a prime example of what "scandel" topics should be. I was only preventing a possible reaccurence.

If you guys are passionate about exsposing Bush and the Republican "Conspiracy" see about starting a blog. Just check the XMB forum.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
"But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them." -- George W. Bush, responding to critics by referring to two trailers used to manufacture hydrogen for weather balloons, May 30, 2003

I see nothing in this post that is evidence of anything. The above statement does nothing but indicate to me that the anti-Bush, anti-Blair, anti-West people will believe anything, up to and including that the production of weather balloons mus tbe accomplished in mobile labs and that no country has the foresight to give the appearance of alternative uses so useful idiots can throw up the smokescreens for them.

I find it interesting that a despot that violates all agreements that were made to halt aggression, continuously fires on allied planes flying a no-fly zone designed to protect the despot's own countrymen from slaughter, hinders the U.N. inspection teams who document hide and seek games played by the despot and records communications by the henchmen playing the games, openly demands war be brought upon the U.S. and, yes, has ties to terrorism, is given more credibility than anyone else involved.

There is nothing here but the same old mantra, no new information or propaganda, merely the same old stuff with the same old "Why do people choose lies?" accusations that anyone who believes Bush and Blair over Hussein is believing a lie.

The quotes from Hitler are a nice touch as well, clearing linking Bush to Nazism, as if the people who have been anti-Bush since the beginning of his run for office are above anything like propaganda tactics.

Nothing to learn, here, same old thing attracting people who come here to contribute nothing but anti-Republicanism *ahemColonelcogh*

As usuall TC your memory lets you down.

The British government sold the hydrogen labs to Iraq, Saddam went back on the deal and the British tax payer wrote Marconi a check to cover the difference.

i found an article exposing this little white lie

"Iraqi mobile labs nothing to do with germ warfare, report finds

Peter Beaumont, Antony Barnett and Gaby Hinsliff
Sunday June 15, 2003
The Observer

An official British investigation into two trailers found in northern Iraq has concluded they are not mobile germ warfare labs, as was claimed by Tony Blair and President George Bush, but were for the production of hydrogen to fill artillery balloons, as the Iraqis have continued to insist.
The conclusion by biological weapons experts working for the British Government is an embarrassment for the Prime Minister, who has claimed that the discovery of the labs proved that Iraq retained weapons of mass destruction and justified the case for going to war against Saddam Hussein.

Instead, a British scientist and biological weapons expert, who has examined the trailers in Iraq, told The Observer last week: 'They are not mobile germ warfare laboratories. You could not use them for making biological weapons. They do not even look like them. They are exactly what the Iraqis said they were - facilities for the production of hydrogen gas to fill balloons.'

The conclusion of the investigation ordered by the British Government - and revealed by The Observer last week - is hugely embarrassing for Blair, who had used the discovery of the alleged mobile labs as part of his efforts to silence criticism over the failure of Britain and the US to find any weapons of mass destruction since the invasion of Iraq.

The row is expected to be re-ignited this week with Robin Cook and Clare Short, the two Cabinet Ministers who resigned over the war, both due to give evidence to a House of Commons inquiry into whether intelligence was manipulated in the run-up to the war. It will be the first time that both have been grilled by their peers on the Foreign Affairs Select Committee over what the Cabinet was told in the run-up to the war.

MPs will be keen to explore Cook's explanation when he resigned that, while he believed Iraq did have some WMD capability, he did not believe it was weaponised.

The Prime Minister and his director of strategy and communications, Alastair Campbell, are expected to decline invitations to appear. While MPs could attempt to force them, this is now thought unlikely to happen.

The Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, is expected to give evidence the week after.

The revelation that the mobile labs were to produce hydrogen for artillery balloons will also cause discomfort for the British authorities because the Iraqi army's original system was sold to it by the British company, Marconi Command & Control."


observer.guardian.co.uk...




And here is why this matters to some TC.

"Why the Lies About WMD Matter
A Crime Against American Values
By RAY CLOSE
former CIA analyst

It seems to me that the public controversy over the WMD issue has gotten considerably off track --- in a way that diminishes its overall importance to the country and, incidentally, depreciates our contribution to the debate.

This became clear to me the other evening when I watched a discussion between Senators Richard Lugar and Joseph Biden, senior Republican and Democratic members of the Foreign Relations Committee, respectively. They both agreed that the task of collecting and evaluating intelligence about a subject like WMD was very difficult, but that in the case of Iraq, it really didn't matter very much whether prohibited weaponry was ever discovered. After all, it was clear that Saddam Hussein was a monster, and that a commendable service was performed by the United States in eliminating him. The rest of the world seems to be concerned that America's declared reasons for launching a war are turning out to be somewhat dubious, observed both Lugar and Biden, but the important thing is that the American people don't seem to care very much about that; the great majority feel that the outcome has been a resounding national triumph.

That attitude has contributed to what I see today as a real diversion from the important central issue. The debate has indeed now degenerated almost entirely into a mean-spirited squabble between various bureaucratic elements in Washington over how certain intelligence about Iraq was evaluated, and whether partisan elements might have manipulated the raw intelligence data to support particular policy objectives. On a certain level these are still very legitimate issues that deserve to be investigated with great care. The debate surrounding them has not been irrelevant or without purpose. But that's not really my point.

Rather, I think the time has come to try to lift the substance of the dialogue to a much higher level. We need to leave behind the haggling over methods and procedures and get back to some very important principles that have been violated.

We might start by reminding our audience that there are several subjects that are NOT germane to the current debate, because they are not questioned by anyone. These include the following:

1. That Saddam Hussein was a vile despot who terrified and enslaved the population of Iraq;

2. That Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction, that he used them against his own people, and that he probably would not have hesitated to reconstitute his WMD program at some future date if given the opportunity.

Those subjects should be excluded from the debate entirely.

The issues that are critically important, on the other hand, are these:

1. The Bush Administration declared that it had irrefutable, ironclad proof that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction that posed an imminent threat to the safety and security of the United States, and this claim was used as the justification for launching a preemptive war.

The whole question of whether initiating preemptive military action is appropriate at all for a democracy like ours, under any circumstances, is a subject that deserves much more careful debate on the national level here in the United States than it has received --- in terms of its moral justification, its constitutional legitimacy and its practical utility as an instrument of national policy. But on one vital point EVERYONE is already in complete agreement --- that preemptive war cannot possibly be considered unless there is compelling evidence of an imminent threat to our national security. Not an unprovoked attack against a POTENTIAL FUTURE threat; not a war based on an intellectual conviction that harm COULD be done to us someday by a particular foreign enemy. Those are ideas that are new and unique to the self-proclaimed "Bush Doctrine". We are, by our own established moral and legal constraints, limited to launching military attacks ONLY against an enemy who poses an IMMINENT threat to our physical safety and our vital national interests, or who has already committed an act of war against the United States. There has been no national debate in which a change in those long-accepted and time-honored criteria has even been proposed for consideration, much less approved.

Today, it is very clear that no legitimate casus belli existed. In fact, many of the intelligence reports on which this momentous decision was based, and which were used to give that decision a patina of moral justification, were largely unsubstantiated. Some of the intelligence was even based on documentation that was known at the time to have been forged. In other words, it should be acknowledged beyond any question that the claimed "imminent threat to the safety of America" was a complete myth.

2. The main issue, we must conclude, goes far beyond the question of how available information was evaluated and used in making policy decisions. We are not talking just about errors of judgment on the part of earnest and conscientious analysts in Washington, and we are not denigrating the quality of U.S. surveillance technology or challenging the probity of our human intelligence sources. Nor are we limiting our concern to the question of whether or not certain individual officials in the Administration tinkered with the intelligence process to please their bosses or to support partisan political agendas --- serious as such corruption would certainly be.

What emerges as beyond dispute is the simple and straightforward reality that a preemptive war was launched on the basis of intelligence information that was represented to the American people and to the world by our leadership as incontrovertible proof of conditions that they must have known perfectly well did not really exist. Thousands died in that war. Immeasurable physical damage was done to an entire nation. A critically important principle of international law was violated and mocked. That was not only dishonest and immoral. It was a crime against those values for which America stands most proud.

Ray Close was a CIA analyst in the Near East division. He is a member of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) and can be reached at: [email protected]."

www.counterpunch.org...



I am glad Saddam Hussein is gone, but that is beside the point, some of the strongest opposition to the war comes from people who have been campaigning against Saddam Hussein for decades.

I can think of a few good things that have come from the war, apart from the people who have died through the invasion, some Iraqi's who would have been tortured and killed by the Bathe party have been saved.

But this is not a point scoring contest, we went to war because of an immediate threat that doesn't appear to have existed, could the US and UK have made a mistake?... I doubt it, therefore we were tricked into backing a war of aggression.

Afghanistan is still waiting for elections, the Iraqi's may have to wait years, and this were supposed to be wars fought for democracy.

On a not so seperate note, i read the other day that Richard Pearl put his name to a piece of paper in the 1990's stating that Israel would never be safe until there was a regime change in Iraq, Iran and Syria.
I have nothing against Israel but she can fight her own wars, Israel loves showing the brute force of it's armed forces, why can't she fight her own wars?

Dozens of Brits dying for the fact that Saddam might have annoyed Israel in the past, i don't like that very much at all.

So....
Why did we go to war?
The US energy crisis is solved for the moment, Saddam was a pain in the arse, it helped people forget about Bin Laden, Israel has one more ally in the region, the UN looks weaker and less important, Bush is more likely to win the next election.

Those reasons are all true, and they are the reason i was and still am against this war

During the Clinton years the ATS board was slathered with post after post, subject after subject in multiple forums on dem & Clinton bashing. No one questioned these except in the expected way but your opinion was not censored nor were attempts made to contain where & how you shared your ideas.

Yet now since yer boy shrub is in the hotseat y'all feel a need to do some damage control and try to limit the bashing to a few forums or posts!!! That is called censorship, that is not what America is about nor is it what the internet or this board is about!!!!!!!

What a bunch of hypocrits!!! I thought TC was one of the brighter righties here and Advisor seemed to be reasonably open to real debate but I see now that niether of you are any different than the others... its pure party line propaganda and don't believe a word from anyone who isn't a repugnant spewer!!

Over the last 2 years I've gone from recommending this site to many of my friends and family members as one of the few boards that allow for REAL DEBATE!!! I no longer endorse your drivel and I feel that our original UK founders would be quite disturbed to see the direction the ultra-rightwingers have taken with ATS.

Some suggestions:

1. STOP CENSORING THE MEMBERS INPUT
2. LEARN TO ACCEPT OTHERS AS THEY ARE
3. COME TO UNDERSTAND THAT REAL DEBATE DOES NOT INCLUDE CENSORING THE OPPOSITION - this is a totalitarian concept not one that our American forefathers would have chosen I'm quite sure.

THE TRUE REPUBLICANS, LIKE MY FATHER, TRULY VALUED FREE SPEECH AND THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO SPEAK OUT EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THE POWERED ELITE. I HARDLY EVER AGREED WITH DAD BUT HE WAS OKAY WITH THAT SINCE THAT IS OUR RIGHT AS AMERICANS!!!!

I FEAR THAT THOSE TRUE REPUBLICANS ARE NO MORE, INSTEAD THEY'VE BEEN REPLACED WITH DITTO HEADS WHO CENSOR WHAT THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND, AND SCREAM OVER THE TOP OF THOSE WHO REFUSE TO BE CENSORED.

I'm sure that many true republicans like my Dad have left the party for a more centrist option. Dad has been a registered Independant for over 10 years now, although he admits to voting for shrub he's said that he would not make that same mistake again. I hope there are more like my Dad out there in the 2004 elections!!!

Peace!!

[Edited on 21-7-2003 by USMC Harrier]

I just wanted to give a "thumbs up", but the post police said it was too short a post?

Anyway, keep it up Harrier ( even if they do decommission your namesake!)

those who believe they are in authority are ultimately corrupted by its vices, whether its here at ATS or in the white house. Let them tighten their grip. the sand that can escape does, the sand that remains will end up molded to their desires. Real discussion will end, new inFORMation will not be tolerated. Belief systems will start and thinking will end.
But, new things will be created and life will continue and that joyous prospect should be embraced.

Give 'em hell, Harrier, 'cause they're coming down on me like THE MAN.

Originally posted by USMC Harrier
What a bunch of hypocrits!!! I thought TC was one of the brighter righties here and Advisor seemed to be reasonably open to real debate but I see now that niether of you are any different than the others... its pure party line propaganda and don't believe a word from anyone who isn't a repugnant spewer!!


[Edited on 21-7-2003 by USMC Harrier]

Look, he even used my line.

(I should get that copywritten)

I've got no patience for ignorance or intolerance!!

Apparently the address for both is RIGHT here at ATS!!!

Sad how the mighty have fallen but they shall rise again from the ashes just as the Pheonix before them!!!

Peace

Harrier

Bush will not be mighty when he falls. Never has been.

as a mod on another board i can understand the job advisor is doing.

IF the people running this board really wanted to censor what you all are saying about "Their president" as you call him guess what? you'd all more than likely be looking for other boards to post on. thats the cold hard reality of it.

dont take it as a slight when they ask you keep the bashing rhetorix to one thread.

trying to compare ATS now to ATS years ago is rather stupid. it isnt the same board. i remember a phrase....something about apples and oranges....can anyone help me here????

this is a conspiracy site, not a political site and while some are claiming that every last one of these bashing posts and threads have some conspiracy hint to them i think its a thinnly vieled attempt to simply bash. what makes me think this? the accusations against people who dont agree with the mindless bashing, the accusations against the mods claiming they're trying to censor you. name calling (words "repugnants" substituted for the word replublican comes to mind), the list goes on.

being here is a choice. not only is it a choice it is a priviledge to come here and post, not a right. that being said if you dont like what the mods and admins are doing.....LEAVE l e a v e

thats right. move on, shove off, get lost, take a hike. if you really think you're being censored and you really think the board isnt what you think it should be then find one that is and quit whining when a mod asks or tells you to quit making so many bashing threads.

advisor makes many good points about this subject. this isnt just about "exposing" a conspiracy, its obvious from some you that your posts are dripping with bitterness and personal hatred. this is not just about showing corruption, some of you have a vendetta and it sickens me to no end. some of you take this way more personally than you should and i think some of you need to seek help for this.

we get the point, some of you hate, loathe, despise bush. GOOD FOR YOU! now stop this bashing, its getting tiresome.


btw he didnt say you couldnt bash him, he only said to leave it in one thread. if he really wanted to censor you your posts in this thread if not this whole thread would be gone and so you would you. a little paranoia is ok but some of you have enough for a small ecuadorian village.

Monkey

You're right, I'm glad I'm not on the other Board you moderate.

These conspiracies are unique to the Bush administration, and involves them in direct execution or complicity, and I deal with them as conspiracies (because they are):

PNAC agenda and infiltration of government
2000 Electoral Process
9/11 events and cover-ups
Illegal invasion of Iraq

I don't care for Democratic and Republican politics at all.

I agree with you on the issue of personal choice as well, if something sickens you, you have the right to leave. But that wouldn't encourage free discussion, would it?

I don't think ATS will be diminishing the posting of new topics about corrupt practices in the Bush administration anytime soon, but if people agree with you that they are just bashing and tiresome, then they won't get read.



[Edited on 22-7-2003 by MaskedAvatar]