Is Bush's "War on Terror" a fraud, a stalking horse for overthrowing the Constitution?
As Daniel Hopsicker's book, Welcome to Terrorland (and FBI translator Sybil Edmonds' testimony) shows, Bush family cronies do big $ business in
heroin traffic (via intel) with Bin Laden's network. When Bush was elected in 2000, he shrugged off Al Queda as secondary. Why? Billions worth of
heroin was flowing from Afghanistan, controlled by Bin Laden (whose only rival was a one-eyed, illiterate leader, Mullah Omar). Despite the Taliban's
crackdown on opium cultivation, near-billionaire Bin Laden used the billions worth of opium that leaked out to his advantage. There appears to have
been a quid pro quo: Al Queda's heroin was sought out by Bush Sr.'s intelligence network (the DuPont/Dulles/Bush faction of CIA) the worst Nazi
enablers from 1924-1942) in exchange for US-supplied weapons and technology. Would the US actually deal with Al Queda? Of course. CIA has NO
compunction about doing so, and US Machiavellians actually sided with the Khmer Rouge, back when it was to their advantage to do so.
So, Bush seems to have decided that his presidency was more about money (continued BIG HEROIN dealings with Al Queda) i.e. in the case of Wally
Hilliard, the owner of the Venice, FL flight school where the two leading 9-11 hijackers did flight training) than security. Bush turned a blind eye
to Clinton Security advisors' warnings about Al Queda. It was business as usual. Al Queda heroin was worth more to Bush and his cronies than was
security. Al Queda/Afghani heroin was used to fund black budget programs that humankind would surely rebel against, and narco $ were also used, as
Sybil Edmonds alleges, to pay off US legislators. In old Europe, the monarchs ruled. In the US, money rules--more nakedly. Antisocial behaviors are
actually encouraged by super-rich parents, provided, of course, the child learns how to commit crimes through "our thing," the military-industrial
and legislative organs without being caught.
Do you honestly think that Bush is out to kill Bin Laden? That would curtail DuPont-Bush faction control of the dirty monies. They don't want that.
Instead, they want more power (the question is why?) and more control of breathtaking new technologies engineered in the black budget complex. The
more dirty money they put into it, the less Congress can know and supervise. They want control, irregardless of the human/environmental cost. Their
motives may be much worse than most would begin to suspect.
To kill Bin Laden would eliminate the ~bad devil~ of Bush propaganda. Why kill a corporate prince like Bin Laden? He probably used to drink and cavort
with Bush Jr. himself. They certainly went to the same parties, maybe slept with some of the same women. Remember James Bath, the Bin Laden hireling
who was Bush's main buddy during his drinking days, the guy who used Bin Laden money to fund Bush Jr.'s inept businesses? It was the usual
Bush-Saudi nepotism. Daniel Hopsicker reports that Alvin Malnik, mob financier Meyer Lansky's "heir apparent," managed main financial accounts of
the Saudi royal family. Malnik's son married the niece of the king and moved to Saudi Arabia. Remember Prince Bandar, the Bush family's preferred
Saudi "son"? Cathy O'Brien, survivor of intel mind control and ops says she watched Bandar do coc aine and accept a large parcel of it as
(paid-off) Nashville police watched in a restaurant parking lot. She has worse allegations about Saudio King Fahd's sex with a child while she
watched. (They haven't filed slander charges, just yet...)
And that heroin-dealing flight school owner Wally Hilliard? He leased executive jets to Saudi royals when they did heavy-drinking playtime in Florida
AND when Saudi royals escaped the US the day after 9-11. Most ironic.
Bush has NO interest in killing Bin Laden. He prefers to leave the door open for Bin-Laden heroin (as opinion.paifamily.com...
Pakistan may have notified Al Zawahri of the recent village missile attack there because Pakistan is a prime Bin Laden-related heroin
conduit--BILLIONS of $ worth every year).
Corporate prince Bin Laden fulfilled the Cheney moan for "a new Pearl Harbor," an excuse for yet another stupid worldview of black and white, us vs.
them, only this time there's no country as enemy. Bush lets Bin Laden off, even says the former "evil one" is no longer important. Meanwhile, Bush
makes YOU sign a paper that says national intel has the right to check YOUR every prescription record (for security purposes) while Bush turns tail
and lets the whole Al Queda-Wally Hilliard 9-11 heroin scandal go free. Bush repeatedly tried to silence those who would talk about it. Sybil Edmonds
is under gag order. The FBI supervisor who told Cowleen Rowley to back off and not look into the 19th hijacker Moussaoui's computer WAS GIVEN A BONUS
(for not exposing what Moussaoui was up to before 9-11). The FBI warned witnesses to Mohammed Atta's Venice FL partying (dated a stripper) and
Atta's talks with Hilliard stooges to shut up. Why was that?
Read between the lies. You live in a nation that is no longer a democracy, due to easily stolen electronic votes. All the Bush cabal needs to do in
2008 is pump nearly $1 billion into campaign ads to nearly even up polling, then steal the needed vote on a relatively small number of vote compilers.
Bev Harris? Black Box org demonstrates how easily this can be done. Human history has shown that if you leave the door open to extremes of corruption,
elite criminals will ALWAYS take maximum advantage. For every thousand hacking at the branches, there is only one hacking at the roots of corruption.
Take back your country. Expose the scoundrels wherever you can and oust them, then ensure reforms so that they can never arise again.
[edit on 18-1-2006 by gl2]