Cheney is Darth Vader, says Bush

Nobody has mentioned this yet (on this thread), but I find this comment to be eerie. Lots of people on this site believe Bush's Skull & Bones affiliation to be "Satanic" or evil. There is also a lot of talk about him somehow extending his "term", by staging some kind of crisis. Then he refers to his sidekick as Darth Vader.

Any one or two of those things alone I could easily dismiss. But all three together are just creepy. Lucas wrote most of Star Wars during Nixon's administration, and it's yet to be seen whether we'll get extra innings of W, but if that happens, the parallels between Palpatine and Bush are just downright SCARY.

So, is it just a coincidence? It would have to be, right? Unless the NWO is 100% real, and this plan IS hundreds of years old, and somehow Lucas was privy to this info (which he has categorically denied). It's been suggested before that writers sometimes have info planted into their psyches by external means... Was it Hagbard Celene in his golden submarine, broadcasting to Skywalker Ranch from the coast of Northern California?

And is Arnold Schwarzenegger JarJar Binks?



[edit on 11/1/2007 by Teratoma]

Now that is an insult to mister Anakin Skywalker!

I bet he is HURT

But - he does kind of look like him:

Originally posted by yahn goodey
reply to post by DeltaNine

 

politics shouldnt be taken seriously ?----thats what most of the world did when hitler came to power in germany----only one other well known politician took hitler seriously---winston churchill---and he was ignored until hitler started to invade his neighbours.if churchill had been taken seriously when he warned about hitler long before hitler became germanys chancellor ww2 might not have even got off the ground----now we have a reoccurring nightmare staring us in the face with hitlers double ahmadinejad of iran and he wont be taken seriously until its too late i fear.

Your post seems to be a fusion of confusion.

Chamberlin took Hitler seriously- he was wrong but it was serious none the less.

Besides, I'm talking about politics, not International Relations

Originally posted by DeltaNine
Chamberlin took Hitler seriously- he was wrong but it was serious none the less.

I disagree that Chamberlain was wrong in his dealings with Hitler. Chamberlain bought the Allied powers another 12 months to reconstitute their armies before engaging Hitler in war before his country was attacked (something no other country did in WW2).

Chamberlain aimed to show the German people the true nature of Hitler. If he'd of gone to war in 1938 over the Sudetenland it would of been unclear who the agressor would of been to the British public. This would of caused Chamberlain to not have the civilian support needed to wage total war successfully against the German war machine.

Regardless, my point still stands.

It's like these people love to throw it in our faces how much power they have. I say we send Bush to Iraq to fight for one day, lets see if he thinks its still funny afterwards.

reply to post by Night_Prowler



Night_Prowler, what makes you think he thinks it's (Iraq War) funny?


[edit on 5-11-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Yeah I can go with that . Cheney is Darhth and Bushy is definately the Emperor (not as SMART, but just as evil.)