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.

 

President Bush accused of rape, why have you not heard about this?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2005 @ 03:26 PM
link   
One of the things that amazes me more and more these days is how selective the media has become on its reporting, when Clinton was accused of all sorts of things it was reported over and over and justly so thats what the media is supposed to do give us the news, all the news but when our current President Bush who corporate media owned news loves well they forgot to tell us a few little items. I'm not saying Bush is guilty or not guilty of this but when charges are made against a sitting President it should be reported. Here is a link to the story and an excerpt of the story. also here is a link to the court documents called plantiffs original petition.
ccweb.co.fort-bend.tx.us...
also if that one does not work try this one.
www.rense.com...
It is also interesting to note that said petitioner supposedly committed suicide for that story go here
www.rense.com...
also very interesting link is www.rense.com...


english.pravda.ru...
However, the people, who knew George Bush very well in his “pre-presidential life,” were not really surprised about rather a shocking piece of news. It became known that a resident of Missouri City, Texas, Margie Schoedinger, filed a lawsuit against the former governor of Texas and the current president of the United States. PRAVDA.Ru has the complete text of Schoedinger’s petition at its disposal.

In her suit, Margie Schoedinger states that George W. Bush committed sexual crimes against her, organized harassment and moral pressure on her, her family members and close relatives and friends. As Schoedinger said, she was strongly recommended to keep her mouth shut. In addition to that, three unknown men attempted to kidnap her on October 26, 2000.


[edit on 29-5-2005 by goose]




posted on May, 29 2005 @ 03:43 PM
link   
I suspect the reason you haven't heard more about this in any mainstream press is that it is without credibility or foundation. While none of us can reliably comment on the case without being well acquanted with the facts (if any), my reading of the complaint suggests that its a paranoid fantasy.

You know, anyone who opposes Bush could theoretically go to the authorities, make complaints and lay charges, completely without foundation, just for the sake of making mischief and impeding his work. And I don't doubt that many would like to do just that. Granted, anyone doing so without foundation is open to charges of their own, so nobody in their right mind would do that. But someone not, would.

The mainstream media has no obligation to report such claims. Indeed, I would argue that they have a responsibility not too, since they simply get in the way of genuine news and information that the public requires.



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Unfortunatly the souces you cite, Pravda and Rense have no legitimacy as news sources.

Also the date for the pravda one is 2002-12-13,

Yet in a bizzare manner, the woman who filed the complaint was found dead several months afterwards...

source

//ed to shorten link//

[edit on 29-5-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Netchicken
Unfortunatly the souces you cite, Pravda and Rense have no legitimacy as news sources.


Actually, on the Rense site you could download the actual civil court case paper.

There is a link provide within the article...



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 03:59 PM
link   
I have indeed heard this tale. It's true btw. It was reported by a local Sugar Land newspaper, if I'm correct. The wicked corporate newsmedia leaders who quietly and gushingly support BushCo. (despite their employees) completely blacked it out. It didn't happen. Nothing to see here folks.

Move along.



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Talk about propaganda chaser !

I cannot beleive that people actually take the time out of there day to chase down (BS) any kind of negative story out about President Bush !

When will these people get LIFE !


The Shame ! It's actual rather embarrassing when these pro-democrats shoot down president bush, yet they will stick up for the worst president in our history that shamed this whole country as well as the world on our behalf.

Who do we owe this great thanks to ?

You guessed it- The Clinton Klan !!!!

And once again the republicans are here to clean up the mess of the prior party !

If Good ole Bill kept his pecker in his pants and concentraded on the world at hand Bush might not have had to invade Iraq.

What makes it worse is that he actually lied to the american people as well as the world on HIS OWN CONSCIENCE. HE LIED UNDER OATH PEOPLE !

Or is lying by the president is ok in your terms ? Sounds a little hypocritical !

Where Bush (supposedly) lied ? About What ? Was it lying or did he receive mis- information from the Intelligent sources.

Remeber people. The President is not the one by himself who makes the final decision to go to war.

So instead of going out on a witch hunt maybe a better idea would be to research all of the other things that he ( Bush ) is involved with beside the war. You might even get a brand new perspective of this great individual.
Imagine that ? Reading, Learning and then making a decision based on FACTS not media BS !!!

DENY IGNORANCE !














posted on May, 29 2005 @ 05:05 PM
link   
Umm, uhhh, wait, wasn't Clinton severely investigated for sexual misconduct? I guess some of us here are selective in which presidents we should investigate.



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 06:30 PM
link   
For all of you making accusations about this just being a thread by a democrat trying to make Poor little Bush boy look bad think again the reason I began to look for this was a thread that started from another thread about Clinton's involvement in something.
www.abovetopsecret.com...'
Anyway after a comment was made about Clinton being a rapist I wondered if Bush had ever been accused of anything similar so I checked it out.



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 07:14 PM
link   
NO! Not our Bush!!!

*bows head in shame*

Too much for my little brain to handle...And she was conviniently found "dead"?


Mon Dieu, they are all alike, arent they? I wonder how this hasnt come to light here before...The moral president- what a scandal!



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Give me a break. The difference between Bush and Clinton is that Clinton demonstrated a clear pattern of abuse, harrassment, and rape of women for decades. So many victims have come forward that I've lost count. I don't think it's the media's responsibility to report on the suit filed by one woman without any corroborating evidence. This woman could very well have been insane. I could file suit against the President and say that he raped me. Does that mean the media should cover it? Do you realize how many lawsuits are filed on a daily basis against someone like the President of the United States? Should they all be reported on regardless of their validity? Of course not!

And lets not forget that this is a LIBERAL media we're talking about here. I think it's absurd for anyone to even insinuate that they're on Bush's side. Hell, most of them are large donors to the Democratic Party.

You know a story is bogus when one of the links has "Rense" in it. Thanks for wasting 10 minutes of my life with this story that I'll never be able to get back!



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 07:37 PM
link   
If I had to guess..

I'd say someone set the girl up to make the complaint..promising her protection...

Then the same person who set her up, put her down...

And the appearance of guilt is automatic.

See, if this went to court, nobody would believe it. They'd write it off like everyone in here is doing, saying that she's lying, saying she's a golddigger, etc...

Now that she's dead..she gets some degree of credibility, in the sense that she's a victim...

I think this is a pretty interesting case, personally. I would be very interested in knowing who supplied those stories to the outlets..and who approached the woman in the first place. Could have been a lawyer, could have been a politician...

Interesting. I think there's more to this story. The POTUS has done a whole lot of things that are perfect for use as blackmail, and this aint one of them..too many holes, too easy to make the problem dissapear (as it did a few months later). No, this was something else...

I'd say this was an attack against the POTUS, in a sense.

So that makes me think...

If someone is willing to do this to get him out of office, who did he break a promise to?



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 08:30 PM
link   
If this story had even a shred of credibility it would have been picked up and thrown out there by the DNC. All they would have to do is give it to their buddies at the LA Times or NY Times or the thousand other liberal rags in the US. Not to mention the major networks.

Trust me, this has nothing to do with the NWO, Illuminati, Bush's CIA links, etc. It has everything to do with this not being a credible enough story. Just look how many Bush hate mongers are on ATS. There's even more in the media who would love to have a story like this.

I hate to break your hearts, but Clinton is the rapist. Sorry guys. Looks like you'll have to go back to your "Karl Rove punched Bush in the eye" conspiracies!



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 09:20 PM
link   
If there is such a thing as a liberal media then there must be a conservative media as well, could you give me the definition of both. As for the liberal media that is a joke the current news outlets we have in this country are all owned by 6 corporations and most of the owners backed Bush, but the term liberal media is a good one, after all everytime something is reported on Bush people just automatically claim it is the liberal media attacking that poor man again because they hate him, what a joke it is the media job to find the dirt on him, I mean I guess it was the so called liberal media that reported on Clinton and Monica Lewinski constantly, oh no it could not have been they don't go after liberals just Bush, give me a break!



posted on May, 30 2005 @ 12:52 AM
link   
Rasputin, on the words of yours about liberal media, I refer you to your own signature.

But all in all, your right, innocent until proven guilty, we should just go back to him being a coke-head.
And if we are to apply this "innocent until proven guilty" motto to Clinton as well as Bush, than Clinton could not be said to be a rapist. I guess everyone has an agenda, not surprising though.



posted on May, 30 2005 @ 03:53 AM
link   
Mods. Why hasn't this thread been moved to BTS or even WBTS (Way Below Top Secret)?

dgtempe and jamuhn - Deny Ignorance


Even you two should be smart enough not to have your names associated with this kind of drivel.


[edit on 5/30/2005 by centurion1211]



posted on May, 30 2005 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasputin13
And lets not forget that this is a LIBERAL media we're talking about here. I think it's absurd for anyone to even insinuate that they're on Bush's side. Hell, most of them are large donors to the Democratic Party.


It makes people angry when they havn't heard about something. It's only human nature.

Those of you who do not believe this story should go look into it. It's in the city's records and on record in one or two Texas papers. I thought it was outrageous myself until I looked into it. It's a waste of time, though, b/c the national media will not even entertain it. It's called a blackout.

I hate to say that about the woman in question, God rest her soul.

As for you folks who STILL do not understand the US media, I would say (A) quit listening to Rush Limbaugh! He's a joke. And I used to listen to him all the time till he sold his soul back in '96. He's so full of it, it's funny. (B) The mainstream media (broadcast & print) in this country is owned by a small number of interests. Those interests are beholden to shareholders. Shareholders want their PROFIT.

Although a large number of journalists (in the print media) are liberal, their bosses are not. They are conservative. And it is they who controls what you see in the papers. I've seen stories/op/eds get killed b/c they were a bit too truthful, if you know what I mean. I assure you all, if the media was liberal like you imagine, the invasion of Iraq would probably not have taken place. OR, the media would be going after Bush for impeachment (for lying about WMD - especially in the State of the Union address). They'd also be delving into the strong possibility that the 2004 election was stolen. But you're not gonna see that stuff. The folks who run the national media support Bush, to hell with what the little journalists think.



posted on May, 30 2005 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Why Reading The Source Documents Is A Good Idea

This link:

ccweb.co.fort-bend.tx.us...

doesn't work because it can't. It's just a link to a blank search page.

I downloaded the document CCCIVIL217038-1-7.pdf from Rense.com and read it. It is claimed to be a copy of the petition filed by Margie Schoedinger of Missouri City, Texas in Fort Bend County Court.

In other words, the foundation for this story.

For those of you eager to hop on the bandwagon and point fingers at Bush over this, I strongly recommend you read the source document for this story if you have any self-respect whatsoever.

The document speaks for itself.

If you want to know why this story is “suppressed”, read that document.

Then I challenge you to come back and claim to believe it with a straight face.

Those of you who are willing to bash Bush without having done so are showing the rest of us the value you place on your own opinion.

Try not to sell yourself short.

By the way, it is not unfair of me to point out that while true stories can be found on Rense.com, its reputation as being the conspiracy equivalent of the Weekly World News is very well deserved.

The main difference is that instead of Elvis, Bigfoot and Bat Child, Rense brings you stories like this one.

To answer the topic question: The reason we haven't heard about this story is because psychosis is not anything new, and neither is this story.

The petition was filed on December 2, 2002.


[edit on 5/30/2005 by Majic]



posted on May, 30 2005 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlexofSkye
I suspect the reason you haven't heard more about this in any mainstream press is that it is without credibility or foundation. While none of us can reliably comment on the case without being well acquanted with the facts (if any), my reading of the complaint suggests that its a paranoid fantasy.

You know, anyone who opposes Bush could theoretically go to the authorities, make complaints and lay charges, completely without foundation, just for the sake of making mischief and impeding his work. And I don't doubt that many would like to do just that. Granted, anyone doing so without foundation is open to charges of their own, so nobody in their right mind would do that. But someone not, would.

The mainstream media has no obligation to report such claims. Indeed, I would argue that they have a responsibility not too, since they simply get in the way of genuine news and information that the public requires.


You know, as much as I dislike Bush's policies, etc... I agree. For one thing, I've read Rense before, and while it can be amusing, it does not strike me as a very strong source of news. It seems as is their "news" is whatever they want to write.

However, unfortunately, it seems as if our mainstream regular media, ABC. NBC, CBS, etc... also do quite a bit of one-sided, unsubstianted reporting themselves. So, who can we really listen to and believe that what is being reported is really the whole truth? I recently posted in another thread, something I noticed that has become more and more commonplace even among some of the supposedly most "reliable" news sources, and I believe that I was discussing something that I has noticed while reading a short article from the AP. It was to the effect that we have been so conditioned to hearing such phrases in media as: "U.S. Military Officials have issued a statement"; "The Pentagon asserts"; "FBI records cite....",etc..... when how are we really to have any more knowledge that they even have the records and reports, much less if what those mysterious reports really say, and does what they say have any bearing on the truth?

We have no more way of knowing those type of things that we hear on a daily basis from our own mainstream media, than we know if the allogations toward Dubya are true or not.
Thread I was just refering to.




posted on May, 30 2005 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

dgtempe and jamuhn - Deny Ignorance



Reread my statements, I am not assumming guilt on Bush's part.



posted on May, 30 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
Why Reading The Source Documents Is A Good Idea


Forget those links. Go to the REAL source. Where? Sugar Land, Tx.

Google the lady's name. Someone has got to have those mainstream NEWS articles archived. I have them somewhere. (Hardcopies)

Then you have the name of the judge who supervised her claims. Then you have the name of the doctor who pronounced her dead.

With that information, you know where to look. PUBLIC RECORDS.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join