Too many co-incidences?
People often ask for proof on ATS, which is fair enough. But I find people to willing to ignore the reality, simply because proof doesn’t exist.
“Please prove to me, that all that is happening is the agenda? “
They will accept nothing but video footage or signed presidential documents which state:
‘’We shall trick the public, we shall lie about war, and we shall make money from their blood‘’
But be honest, could such a document or video exist? No matter what the reality? When you break a law, especially one that could have you executed,
you don’t exactly film the proof the prosecution would need, would you?
In-fact, you go out of your way to ensure that no ‘solid’ evidence exists. Whispers, codes, direct one to one dialogue; these are all things which
are able to be denied. After all, it all comes to down to your word, against his, and when they are in power, who do you think will have the final
For all his stupidity, George Bush isn’t a complete Muppet, and Dick Cheney is a very successful business man.
So, you have to look to the co-incidences of the situation.
How many co-incidental events have to occur, which all benefit ‘one’ party, until people turn around and go,
“Ok, something’s not quite right here! “
Well, I am going to endeavour to create a list of co-incidences from the year 1999, up until April 1st, 2007.
I’m going to look at who’s benefited the most from these co-incidences, and who has had the power to ensure these co-incidences are never
- The Election
- The Desires of the president to be
- The Tragedy
- The Iraqi Threat
- The Result
Now, we’ve all heard of elections that weren’t quiet right. Zimbabwe, Russia, Ukraine.. But who would of thought so many questions surround the
United States elections?
It has been found that during the election process, at the crucial time, mysterious happenings occurred in the Florida votes. Unusually high numbers
were recorded at the precise moment of declaration, and then those figures happened to vanish after. Now if anyone knows computers, you know how
easily they can be manipulated.
And when you fail to win convincingly through direct number tampering, well you go to plan B, murky the waters around the political aspects.
Above is a list of laws broken, by the republicans in regards to Florida voting.
Here’s one, I hand picked to kick things off:
Public Records Law (Palm Beach)
Destruction of computer records of 2000 Presidential vote
Have a read, Some of them are pretty specific.
"DELAND, Fla., Nov. 11 - Something very strange happened on election night to Deborah Tannenbaum, a Democratic Party official in Volusia County.
At 10 p.m., she called the county elections department and learned that Al Gore was leading George W. Bush 83,000 votes to 62,000. But when she
checked the county's Web site for an update half an hour later, she found a startling development: Gore's count had dropped by 16,000 votes, while
an obscure Socialist candidate had picked up 10,000--all because of a single precinct with only 600 voters."
- Washington Post Sunday , November 12, 2000 ; Page A22
Is It just a co-incidence, this major flaw happened to DEDUCT votes from Gore, and GIVE votes to bush?
This one issue alone, should of rang some major bells, and caused extreme investigations. Instead, what happened?
I revert to the above
Public Records Law (Palm Beach)
Destruction of computer records of 2000 Presidential vote
But, im willing to look at it from both sides.
Both these case were flukes, rare anomalies that occurred, and for the luck of the draw, just happened to benefit GW Bush in winning the
And the following well, its not really even worth worrying about:
“ChoicePoint of Atlanta, was paid $4.3 million for its work, replacing a firm that charged $5,700 per year for the same service”
Why would you pay someone 4.3million to do a job, someone could of done for $5700?
What was the end result of this mass overpayment?
Thousands of eligible voters were disallowed the right to vote in predominantly democratic regions.
Obviously, this wasn’t a normal, run of the mill election campaign down in Florida.
We’ll just over look this co-incidence. And turn to the next chapter
The Desires of the president to be.
Jerry Caufield :Worked on Bush’s Campaign trail during 2000/2001
We’d be on the campaign plane talking about domestic issues, and he’d change the subject and start rattling on about what a great evil Saddam
Hussein was, and how if he won the election, he’d finish what his father failed to do.’’
Mickey Herskowitz: Was hired as GW’s auto-biographer in 1999/2000
He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999,” said author and journalist Mickey Herskowitz. “It was on his mind. He said to me: ‘One of the
keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.’ And he said, ‘My father had all this political capital built up when
he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.’ He said, ‘If I have a chance to invade….if I had that much capital, I’m not going to
waste it. I’m going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I’m going to have a successful presidency
John O’neil: Us treasury secretary
From the very beginning, there was a conviction that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go," O'Neill told CBS, according to
excerpts released Saturday by the network. "For me, the notion of pre-emption, that the U.S. has the unilateral right to do whatever we decide to do,
is a really huge leap.
Suskind said O'Neill and other White House insiders gave him documents showing that in early 2001 the administration was already considering the use
of force to oust Saddam, as well as planning for the aftermath.”
There are memos," Suskind told the network. "One of them marked 'secret' says 'Plan for Post-Saddam Iraq.
So, Is it a co-incidence, that GW and the administration happened to make so many mistakes, and end up exactly where they wanted to be?
Or again, is this merely a fluke, an anomaly where he just happens to be an extremely lucky person.
Because, from my point of view, GW and Co seem to be in a position to maniuplate certain events, which could potentially open the door to something
they dearly wanted, Iraq.
But ok, 1 coincidence, im willing to accept.
2 coincidences, im willing to entertain.
What else possibly happened that happen to give him what he wanted, without him involved?
911 is one of those days, where you can ask any person on this planet, what they were doing, when the towers were hit, and they can remember with
Myself? I was kissing my girlfriend goodbye, when my friend came running through the door:
‘’ dude, dude you gotta check this out ‘’
He was in utter disbelief at what he had just witnessed.
And so was I, so were 99.9% of the population.
But, who were those .1% who looked at it and said
‘’ About damn time ‘’
North Carolina Democratic Sen. John Edwards said on ABC's "Good Morning America" there were three "enormous red flags" that should have sent
alarm bells ringing.
National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice was warned of a possible attack on July 10, 2001 by then-CIA Director George Tenet.
Rice has denied that such a meeting took place, citing the 911 Commission Report, which never mentioned any such meeting.
In a remarkable turn of events, however, records of the meeting between Commission members and Tenet counter that claim – as does a State Department
log book – and support Woodward's assertions about the warnings that Rice and Ashcroft had received from the CIA. As reported by the San Francisco
•June 30, 2001 Senior Executive Intelligence Briefing (SEIB) entitled "bin Laden Threats Are Real"
• June 30, 2001 Senior Executive Intelligence Briefing (SEIB) entitled "bin Laden Threats Are Real"
• The threat of President Bush's assassination at the G-8 Summit by al Qaeda in July of 2001 – using aircraft to dive bomb the summit building
• July 2001 Phoenix memo, which told of potential terrorists taking flight lessons
• 52 FAA warnings – five of which mentioned al Qaeda's training for hijacking
• August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Brief entitled "bin Laden Determined to Strike in US"
• National Intelligence Estimate (NIE)entitled "Islamist Extremists Learn to Fly"
• Intelligence agency heads describing themselves with their "hair on fire" to characterize the imminent nature of the threats they were
intercepting from Al Qaeda and their sense of urgency in relating them to the Bush Administration
• The arrest of Zacharias Moussaoui in August of 2001
• FBI Agent Harry Samit's 70 unsuccessful attempts to get a FISA Warrant to examine Moussaoui's belongings
“ALEXANDRIA, Virginia (CNN) -- At Zacarias Moussaoui's sentencing trial, an FBI agent testified Tuesday about al Qaeda's training manual, what
the FBI knew prior to 9/11 about al Qaeda operatives' lessons at U.S. flight schools, and missed opportunities to learn more.”
Is it a co-incidence that we happened to ‘miss’ all this vital intelligence, which led to a devastating event, which manipulated the public into
following the president on the vitally important war in Iraq?
Which just happens to be the very country GW wanted to invade before any of these co-incidences ever happened?
I mean, its not that he wanted to go into Iraq was it, it was out of necessity from September 11.. and its just a coincidence he was quoted as saying
BEFORE this happened, that Iraq was in his sites.
Its gotta be a co-incidence.
So far, im yet to see anything that warrants an investigation, do you?
The election, the agenda before hand, and 911.
So, this all happened, by chance, and we believed, honestly, that Iraq was the big bad enemy of the west, and it was essential to take him out above
all else, so what did we have to justify our claims that Iraq was worthy of blood being spilt, economies being weakened and nations being
Iraq, will go down as one of the worst blunders in American foreign policy.
Even more so than Vietnam, who woulda thought in the 90's that would be possible?
This is a topic that, honestly, you just don’t know where to begin.
The absolute mountain of evidence out there, the absolute mountain of counter-evidence, allegations, fraud so on and so on.. I think its perfect to
start from the beginning, with a few sentences which, in hindsight were the only honest assessments of Iraq’s weapons programmes.
In Cairo, on February 24 2001, Powell said: "He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass
destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours."
On May 15 2001, Powell went further and said that Saddam Hussein had not been able to "build his military back up or to develop weapons of mass
destruction" for "the last 10 years". America, he said, had been successful in keeping him "in a box".
Condoleezza Rice also described a weak, divided and militarily defenceless Iraq. "Saddam does not control the northern part of the country," she
said. "We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."
Even Tony Blair, himself, just prior to the invasion:
TONY BLAIR privately conceded two weeks before the Iraq war that Saddam Hussein did not have any usable weapons of mass destruction, Robin Cook,
the former foreign secretary, reveals today.
So how did we make so many mistakes?
What is it exactly that we said, what did we accuse Saddam of:
: Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.
George W. Bush
: Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.
: If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world.
George W. Bush
: We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more.
George W. Bush
: We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons --
the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.
: Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and
chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes.
Ok, well there's a HELL of a lot of direct quotes, of just what the administration was telling us they knew.
After all, and im quoting here
Simply stated, there is no doubt
we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction
No wonder the public believed him, who honestly would think the government would lie on such a tremendous level? especially when the sovereignty of
another country was at stake?
And just for your own interest,
Here's a scanned copy of the Niger documents, which we were 'unaware' of being fraudulent.
How did we make so many mistakes? and end up in Iraq wrongfully?
I mean clearly, being this is all a co-incidence, GW and Co never, ever used faulty intelligence and manipulated documents to garner support for the
war in Iraq they had wanted since before 2000. This is all clearly, another coincidence.
And the fact that our German and French counter parts even told us so:
Doubt grew exponentially as France and Germany, with whom we have extensive intelligence sharing arrangements, took strong issue with your
administration's claims about Iraq. Those two major allies and others have concluded that the evidence that Iraq is continuing to pursue new weapons
of mass destruction is far from conclusive and that it falls far short of justification for starting a war.
And when our officials were quizzed to cough up some evidence:
When NATO ambassadors asked Wolfowitz last month about the evidence against Iraq, he likened it to pornography: "I can't define it, but I will
know it when I see it." He did little to rehabilitate himself as super analyst last Thursday with his long, unpersuasive speech in New York.
But, do you want to know the most unbelievable part?
The part that is meant to be, in no way a co-incidence?
Interesting little company there, but after reading the above link
let me get this straight.
Dick Cheney’s Daughter is a top official in the above government branch.
Paul Wolfowitz's Saudi Girlfriend is also now a TOP OFFICIAL for the government branch.
What’s the HISTORY behind this offices dealings?
The Office of Special Plans (OSP), which worked alongside the Near East and South Asia (NESA) bureau in Feith's domain, was originally created by
Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Paul Wolfowitz to review raw information collected by the official U.S. intelligence agencies
for connections between Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.
Surely, this is just a mere coincidence. They honestly believed all the evidence that said Iraq had WMD's. They cant show us this evidence, and its
their families and friends in charge of creating this evidence, but that doesn’t matter. Because there belief in the evidence had absolutely nothing
to do, with GW's statement from 1999, that he wanted to enter Iraq if he was President.
Of course, once again, this is all happening by chance.
And up to date, there's absolutely no reason here, to be doubting GW, or questioning anything that has occurred to date.
Its all, very co-incidental.
The big lingering question about Iraq, that has yet to be answered, is
'' where's all this evidence ''
We were so sure, we had concrete evidence that left us with NO DOUBT
as to Saddams WMD capabilities.
So, what possible evidence could we of had, to suggest his WMD strength, when it turned out he didn’t have one, single weapon of mass
But, as always, we'll just over look that question.
Ok, So, who benefits the most from this colossal mistake?
The Iraqi's? Terrorists? America?
Well for starters, there’s the vice president.
According to financial disclosure forms, he was paid from Halliburton:
$205,298 in 2001
$162,392 in 2002
$178,437 in 2003
$194,852 in 2004
And in 2005 his stock was estimated at $8,000,000.00
Pretty good for someone with no financial tie
It again, just happens to be a coincidence, he's the VP, who pushed for war.
His making a direct profit from the conflict is in no way, considered war profiteering.
This has been detailed
Then, theres the Terrorists
"If Osama believed in Christmas, this is what he'd want under his Christmas tree," one senior intelligence official told me. Another
counterterrorism official suggests that Iraq might begin to resemble "Afghanistan 1996," a reference to the year that bin Laden seized on
Afghanistan, a chaotic failed state, as his new base of operations.
' The Iraq conflict, which began in March 2003, made "America arguably less safe now than it was on September 11, 2001," Batiste, who commanded
the 1st Infantry Division in Iraq in 2004-2005, told a hearing on the war called by U.S. Senate Democrats.
"If we had seriously laid out and considered the full range of requirements for the war in Iraq, we would likely have taken a different course of
action that would have maintained a clear focus on our main effort in Afghanistan, not fueled Islamic fundamentalism across the globe, and not created
more enemies than there were insurgents," Batiste said.
So, what is the trade off here?
The West here becomes less secure, and more hated?
While GW gets his Iraqi wish, and VP makes millions.
Does anyone look at this:
Then look at this:
And feel nothing but disgust for the leaders?
Do you really declare:
" Its a good thing we did what we did, Id hate to think of the world we'd be in now, if we had of engaged in Dialogue "
Was this really all just blind luck?
Just a long series of coincidences, that no one predicted or wanted, that went terribly wrong somewhere?
I certainly don’t believe The Administration wanted things to get this out of hand,
Well, im actually certain of it:
Rummsfield: The way might take weeks, months, probably not years!
The truth is, wether they planned this or not, they have lost complete control.
Everyone warned us of this, but no one listened.
Well, if anyone’s still here by this time. Thankyou. This thread took a long time, and a lot of work.
There's thousands, upon thousands of different points and links I could of thrown into this, and that other people probably feel deserves more time
than others, there probably right.
In the end, we have lost a lot of good men and women (soldiers).
A nation has lost hundreds of thousands of good citizens (Iraq)
And a once great and powerful nation has lost all the worlds respect (USA)
A lot is going to happen before this mess sorts its self out, A lot of people are going to pay the maximum price.
But If I were a solider in Iraq, On the battlefield there's only one thing id want, if I were to die.
and thats to die, knowing what led me to my death, instead of who fooled me to my death.
If you still believe, everything to date happened by coincidence, then you my friend must of experienced some truly unbelievable series of events in
Because all I see,
Is that from day -1 GWBush & Co wanted Iraq.
And every event up until today has led him there, and them some.
The problem is, they under-estimated the Iraqi's to a massive respect, and have now devastated a country, created further Anti-US sentiment and
ultimately changed the entire tide of the planet toward chaos, rather than peace.
Was all this chaos, REALLY about one man?
If I am to die in the war that is approaching, at least I can face my maker and tell him, I didn’t die a fool. I died defending the truth. I died
fighting the US Government, and everything it stands for today.
Ultimately, Clearly the US Administration has undertaken actions to manipulate the public, con the world and dupe the people into following them into
Iraq, a quest their leaders desired from before they were in Office.
They allowed 911 to occur, they used your pain to trick you, then they used your soldiers, to make money, to make a corporate piggy bank on another
countries turf, at the cost of their blood, your blood and your future.
They deserve to be tried for treason, and convicted for Crimes against Humanity, Crimes against the American people and for 600,000 + counts of first
[edit on 1-4-2007 by Agit8dChop]
[edit on 1-4-2007 by Agit8dChop]
[edit: image link]
[edit on 1-4-2007 by 12m8keall2c]