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.

 

Al-Qaeda calls Bush 'Failure'

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Unfortunately Bush is a highly successful president, for his owners, but not for the rest of the American population.... but hey thats what you get when less than half the people vote, it becomes easier and easier to stage a coup without a shot ever being fired. Mark my word, this so called new terrorism bill that suspends habeus corpus for "terrorists" will be used against political enemies (first) and the American populous before all is said and done.

Hey Semper would you tow the party line to the bitter end or stand up against it for the good of the country. I know I would but then I don't endorse any party.

The only difference between the Republicans and the Democrats is that at least the Democrats try and kiss ya before they tell you to bend over. With the republicans it more akin to date rape.




posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
Come on now grover....

You know that I have moved closer to the middle of the road...



Originally posted by semperfortis
I am not saying that a shake up in the House and the Senate is NOT a bad idea. I'm still kind of on the fence with that. Yet with the latest developments revolving around my party, I'm starting to wonder if they deserve their position anyway.




Dude! You really did shift to the middle! I'm impressed.


Let's face it, BOTH parties are a complete disaster. What we need is real leadership. That is only going to happen if the people shed their old party affiliations and stick with the basics- remembering our American principles and values.


Originally posted by semperfortis
What scares me is the complacency the American Public has developed as of 9/11. Because we have managed to dodge the bullet for this long, what happens when the weak willed Dems get in there and we are suddenly wide open?


See, here's the problem. We are already wide open.

How do you assess our national security today compared with that shortly after 911?

I see no material improvement, and I'm even inclined to believe we are worse off.

But this is not because of the complacency of the American public. On the contrary, the "public" has thought of nothing else since that terrible day. In fact, the command of the public's attention on this issue is the very tool this administration has used to remain in power.

I followed grover's post on the Bin Laden support for Bush rationale, and I have to say that when that first happened, I instantly understood the same. I also think that most people missed that because of the cookie-cutter knuckle-dragging boogie-man approach this administration has chosen to paint the terrorists.

Think about it. We tend to view them as if they have an IQ of 20. How is this possibly true?

The war of ideology that is being waged in the world is a serious game of chess.

Bin Laden knew precisely the impact his statements would have on the election.

So why do you think he wanted Bush to remain in power?

I think it's because he believed this administration, more than anything else, effectively elevated his cause and importance in the world.

The oxygen of terrorism is recognition, and Bush has done much to hand them this on a silver platter.

I look forward to different leadership on this issue. I'll take that wherever I can find it- Republican or Democrat alike.

[edit on 30-9-2006 by loam]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Original quote by loam:
How do you assess our national security today compared with that shortly after 911?


Though we do not live in a box, and with our freedoms intact, it is virtually impossible to truly, "Secure", the US.

However, I can say with complete confidence, that we are a "lot" safer then before 9/11.

As many of you in my ATS family know by now, I work with HS as part of what I do. The electronic efforts that I am familiar with are AMAZING in their ability!!! I attend several updates and seminars each year and despite news to the contrary, many are quietly moving on with protecting the country.

Semper



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 10:13 PM
link   
Excellent post Loam...my hat is off to you.

While I fundamentally agree that we have to fight terrorism, this administration has gone about it all wrong. The majority of the countries that I have seen deal with acts of terrorism within their borders (or against them) as essentially criminal acts and deal with them as such...this so called war on terrorism does nothing except to convince the very people we are trying to reach in a positive way that the extremists are right, that we are waging a war against them and their religion. And, the war in Iraq does not help at all, and in fact makes things far worse.

I have said before (but no one has ever picked up on it) that in specifically Russia but also Germany and other countries where the anarchists of the 19th century were active, there was this idea that acts of terrorism were the most effective way to bring down the state. Not because of the acts themselves, but the repressive crackdowns afterwards would help to further alienate the populous (and increase recruitment), and so further weaken (and hasten its collapse) the state. This idea was active in the 60's and the motive behind acts by groups such as the weather underground and the black panthers. And from what I can tell based on what I have read and the communiques from Al Qeada itself, that this was the idea behind 9/11 itself. In short they set a trap for Bush and he walked right into it. Everything we have experienced since falls right into this plan from the patriot acts to the suspension of habeus corpus.

As George Carlin said about the Bush White House...."We are being led by a man who knows nothing of history who is advised by men who care nothing for it."

[edit on 30-9-2006 by grover]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 10:14 PM
link   
You never answered my question semper.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Hey Semper would you tow the party line to the bitter end or stand up against it for the good of the country. I know I would but then I don't endorse any party.


Now grover!!!

What a question to ask a friend. We have talked much and you know what I have devoted my life too.

My Country of course.



I could be actually making some money, instead I can't stop serving, so of course the answer is "what is best for my country."

I just think that we differ slightly in our approach. I do not think for a minute that you are wrong, I just see some things differently.

I am not currently swelling with pride at the recent actions of my Party. (Perverts) Yet, what the Republican Party is supposed to stand for, I am behind 100%

Small Government/Personal Freedoms/More State Power etc.

Semper



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
Small Government/Personal Freedoms/More State Power etc.

Semper


Perhaps you out to fire your party administrators because they have deviated from the roots of what your party Use to stand for.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 10:30 PM
link   
Good. semper, good.

The difference between what both our parties supposed to stand for vs what they do is vast. Two things determine my vote anymore these days (1) Do they stand in opposition to what Bush is doing which I personally feel is profoundly wrong (2) have they tried to make political hay from 9/11. If they have they have lost my vote regardless of everything else, which rules out 99% of the Republican party and a good portion of the Democratic on.

I think this year I will break out my OBA (oxygen breathing appratus) and wear it in to vote again, like I did in 88...94...and 2004.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
I am not currently swelling with pride at the recent actions of my Party. (Perverts) Yet, what the Republican Party is supposed to stand for, I am behind 100%

Small Government/Personal Freedoms/More State Power etc.


semperfortis, I'd be curious what party affiliation you would presume me to have? (Hint: I had one prior to the Lewinsky scandal.)

I'll explain more after you answer.




[edit on 30-9-2006 by loam]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 10:35 PM
link   
Darn Grover,

Who DO you vote for????

And I want a picture of you in the SBA...

Gotta be a hoot..

Semper



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 10:45 PM
link   
I vote Democratic because the people in taken over the republican party turn my stomach though if I have the chance to vote independent I will. Unfortunately their odds for winning are usually next to none and I hate to waste my vote.

Semper I know that there are good people serving our country, the trouble is that there are bad people leading it and like it or not the day is rapidly approaching when you will have to make that choice between party or country. And that is not hubrius.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Honestly Loam,

I would expect you would be either some form of Independent or a Republican.

We tend to stand together on many issues.


Grover,

My friend, I rarely vote 100% Party line.
I do tend to favor Republicans but you know me well enough by now to know that I research, listen. watch and learn.

I make no "hard" decisions until I know the candidate.

(I voted Clinton the second time) SHHHHHHHHHHH
Tell anyone and I'll have to move back to Korea...

Semper



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 10:54 PM
link   
Semper, where did you get the idea republicans are FOR personal freedom? Sure the gun issue is one, but gay marriage? is that not a personal choice? There are some parts of private life that republicans are against, just like democrats actually.

Im libertarian at heart. The only difference between your views and that party is that you believe in more state rights, we believe in less government in general. People handling their own problems. For instance, get rid of social security. Let people save the money how they want. If they blow it all away, thats their own fault. Entitlement needs to go right out the window, and so does government handling responsibility not because of our inability to handle the responsibility but because of our laziness in neglecting our responsibilities.

I believe in self control, and consequences if you cant manage yourself. You are responsible for you, not the government. The government is suppose to be protecting our rights, not our welfare and such. Any problem that we can handle ourselves, should be handled that way. Laziness is the current form of government, not freedom.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 10:57 PM
link   
Grim,

Philosophically I am pure Libertarian..


I am also a realist and there is no way that party is going to come to the front in our lifetime. If I can make a difference in the Republican Party, I feel it is incumbent upon me to try. I guess I feel it is a civic duty as corny as that sounds.

Semper



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Did everyone go to bed on me??

Semper



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Realist huh? I always had a quote for them "theres never been any difference between a realist and a pessimist". No offensive to you, just my person thoughts. No great leader was a realist, they were the opposite.

"Realists obey the laws, leaders define them." Never going to change anything by being a realist, cause when it comes down to reality, nobody wants change. You have to go a search for something that isnt real and make it a reality, cause thats what its going to take to change things. Cause in the end, a better way of life isn't reality, its on us to make it a reality. So if you want to be a realist, be my guest. Id say you have the heart to be a leader, and leaders find what SHOULD be reality, and make it become reality.

thats just my 2 cents though.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 11:09 PM
link   
I appreciate the compliment Grim...

My wife keeps trying to get me to run for office, but I can not in my present position and I really make a difference here.

However, she also says, I would make a good used car salesman.. LOL


Semper

[edit on 9/30/2006 by semperfortis]



posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
Honestly Loam,

I would expect you would be either some form of Independent or a Republican.

We tend to stand together on many issues.





You impress me. You have no idea how many times I have been called a liberal or Democrat on this board.


Prior to the Monika Lewinsky scandal, I had always identified myself as a conservative Republican- though I always opposed the strong religious right agenda within the party. Nonetheless, it was the party that most closely reflected my political beliefs... small government ...lower taxes ...(at one time, I agree with you) individual rights ...pro free-markets ...etc.

But something changed. It wasn't my beliefs, it was my party. None of those principles were represented by it. Only hollow speeches paying lip-service to the concepts...and a lot more religious right conviction.

When the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke, I saw a level of dishonesty issuing from the party that made me more than uncomfortable. I wasn't thrilled by the concept that our president was fooling around with an intern in the oval office, but I wasn't obsessed by it either.

Then came this administration...

Month by month, and for years now, I have seen this President dismantle or violate nearly each of the principles I mentioned above. I have seen a level of dishonesty and parsing of reality that makes Clinton's "definition of is, is" a statement by comparison of far more clarity.

I have also witnessed a level of incompetency that continues to reach new ground almost each day ...and astounds me.

I'm done with the whole party affiliation label thing. It is meaningless and inaccurate anyway.


I'll take competent leadership wherever I can find it- even if it comes from a Democrat.




[edit on 1-10-2006 by loam]



posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 01:53 AM
link   

You have no idea how many times I have been called a liberal or Democrat on this board


Because your honest. Something sadly missing on some of the threads we have been frequenting together...

I am much in line with you, with a few exceptions. I support President Bush and do not have the conviction that you have that he has lied as many of his opponents would have us believe.

I am however skeptical of many conspiracies. (comes with the job)

I am becoming more and more disillusioned especially after the Immigration fiasco, and WHAT IS ALL THIS SPENDING!!!! You would think Kennedy is back in office... LOL

Though I feel it is necessary right now, I do not like that the "Patriot Act" has very limited provisions for timetables set to dismantle the act upon congressional determination of closure. Scary....
Again, flexing of big government muscle. Again, more scary..

I guess it is my nature to be a servant to my country, and that is why I maintain much of my loyalty.

Semepr



posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 01:59 AM
link   
as horrible as it is to admit...he is right. bush has failed the usa. he's made a mockery of what it means to be president and he's shamed our nation in ways we can't even immagine.


it's going on almost 6 years we be fighting this war...for what? what have we gained? i still don't feel satisfied like we avenged 9-11. to me the usa has shown they are soft by bungling the war on terror the way they have. i dont feel we have truley gotten those responsible and really put a dent in terroristic ideals.

i also feel worse for the innocent people whos foreign country we are destroying. dont forget just as many nameless citizens have died overseas as american citizens.

i wonder if bush even knows how to stop the terrorists. i dont understand how he can blink away a war like those people don't even exist. people die every day on his watch and he honestly does not care.

honestly he is a strong candidate for worse president in the history of the nation.




top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join