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.

 

How is Kerry the bonesman better than Bush the bonesman?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Well somebody had to ask the obvious (hopefully this won't get scooped too), what is the difference between Kerry and Bush really?

I don't see too much but some people think that Kerry is going to do things differently than Bush is, HAH!

I am willing to bet that if Kerry is elected (if he even wins the nomination because Edwards is starting to move now), he will not change anything. Big fat liar, pants on fire.




posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
Well somebody had to ask the obvious (hopefully this won't get scooped too), what is the difference between Kerry and Bush really?

I don't see too much but some people think that Kerry is going to do things differently than Bush is, HAH!

I am willing to bet that if Kerry is elected (if he even wins the nomination because Edwards is starting to move now), he will not change anything. Big fat liar, pants on fire.


its now that kerry wont change anything, its that he CANT. him and dubya and all the other S&B are controlled by their colleagues to some extent.



posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Every president of consequence ( JFK, Clinton ) could not have gotten into office without appealing to the dark side.
It's whether you cater exclusively to it, or throw it lip service... that is what counts.
Even Reagan, while he was still in command of his faculties ( the first year of his first term ), curtailed some of the initiatives that are unbridled under this administration.
Look up Kerry's record, and compare to bush's time in Texas..........what you do when you think no one is watching speaks volumes.



posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
Well somebody had to ask the obvious (hopefully this won't get scooped too), what is the difference between Kerry and Bush really?

I don't see too much but some people think that Kerry is going to do things differently than Bush is, HAH!

I am willing to bet that if Kerry is elected (if he even wins the nomination because Edwards is starting to move now), he will not change anything. Big fat liar, pants on fire.


Fundamentally, no. Nothing will change, other than the neo-cons having control of foreign policy. We will revert back to a more Clintonesque diplomatic world-friendly foreign policy, although it will still be iron-fisted in the reserve.

Nothing fundamentally will change because it's all - the economy, infrastructure, trade - based on oil. Or is intricately connected to the oil economy. Kerry will feign looking toward investing in alternative forms of fuel, but it won't go anywhere.

Kerry's backers lurk in the shadows as do Bush's. Many of those are even the same. First and foremost, Kerry serves the best interest of his fellow elites.



posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Ya, I was right, it did get scooped.



posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
How is Kerry the bonesman better than Bush the bonesman?


Easy to answer. Its not.



posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Agreed,

so what are the Dems going to do about it then?



posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 01:21 PM
link   
VOTE FOR EDWARDS!!!!!



posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 01:24 PM
link   
I still question how much influence S&B has over these people. I mean, Bonesmen aren't supposed to criticise each other in public yet these two have.
There is the possiblity that there's not a huge S&B cabal you know....

P.S.- I worry that Edwards is too....well....nice.

[Edited on 2/5/2004 by Flinx]



posted on Feb, 5 2004 @ 01:53 PM
link   
The fact they're both Illuminati members (Skull and Bones chapter) means the investors backing both candidates are nearly identical, and represent nearly identical interests on foreign policy and on national economic issues. However there are probably some small variations within the group, and even minor differences can have a very significant impact on how the outcome of the election effects the lives of us pions.

Also you should consider the financial interest of the candidates themselves, and of their extended families.

For example Dubya has a younger brother named Marvin who heads an investment group called Winston Partners, and one thing they've invested in is a company with products and services concerning Smallpox epidemics. If 'terrorists' were to unleash this deadly disease on our population the company owned by Winston Partners would be called upon, and likely given a very generous federal contract, to combat the spread of the disease.

I use this example to illustrate how there may be conflict of interests involved on issues that could have an effect on whether you and your family members live or die in the near future. It could be argued that the Bush family has financial incentive to let bioterrorism happen. By the way, George Soros is also a major partner in this particular venture. On the other hand if Kerry was president the government might still award a smallpox abatement contract to Marvin's company in the event of an epidemic, but Kerry's family wouldn't be in a position to benefit financially from such a move, at least that I know of.

I'm not saying that the Bush family are murderers or terrorists, nor am I implying that Kerry is free from these kinds of kinds of financial conflicts, I'm only illustrating that very small differences have the potential to effect your lives in important ways.

When deciding political candidates I always like to consider what investment groups they are likely to represent.

[Edited on 5-2-2004 by Condorcet]

[Edited on 5-2-2004 by Condorcet]



posted on Apr, 25 2004 @ 09:56 PM
link   
What a fascinating coincidence! Bush and Kerry are both bonesmen! Oh well, move along, nothing to see here!!


I mean, its not like they are both alpha omegas or something from some lesser known school. I am too uninformed about the structure and the rumors of the skull and bones society to make an informed opinion at this time, but be certain this has piqued my interest.



posted on Apr, 25 2004 @ 10:06 PM
link   
Hehehe BT, don't lay a "waffle" now, k?

Look up Kerry's record, and compare to bush's time in Texas..........what you do when you think no one is watching speaks volumes.


Let's not go there BT, I don't think you want to bring into play Kerry's medals and time in Vietnam, probably one reason he is and has been very quiet on this.
Oh wait, except for this one...'nutter flip-flop, shame, shame:
Discarded Decorations

In either's case, I hope they go at it on this issue of military service in a televised debate and see who ends up on top that night, eh?




seekerof

[Edited on 25-4-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Apr, 25 2004 @ 10:29 PM
link   
S&B member's allegiance to the society must supercede all else - family, friendships, country, God. They are taught that once they get out into the world, they are expected to reach positions of prominence so that they might further elevate the society's status and help promote the standing of their fellow Bonesmen. What better way to facilitate The Knight's agenda then to have another S&B running flank within the Democratic party?
Do you really think it's just coincidence that both candidates are members of one of the most elite "secret" societies around? And to make this even more staggering...how many of the 800 or so still living are eligible and qualified to run for the highest office in the country? Still think it's just coincidence?

[Edited on 25-4-2004 by s.o.r.r.y.]



posted on Apr, 25 2004 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Let's not go there BT, I don't think you want to bring into play Kerry's medals and time in Vietnam, probably one reason he is and has been very quiet on this.
Oh wait, except for this one...'nutter flip-flop, shame, shame:
Discarded Decorations


well...at least he went to vietnam, won medals, and realized the war was wrong...as for his contradiction, who knows, its politics. Bush on the other hand was saved by his dad and given a cozy position in TX Air National Guard, where his records are questionable...I'm not trying to defend Kerry, but if I had to vote for one man based on these military accomplishments, or lack thereof, it would be Kerry...



posted on Apr, 25 2004 @ 11:02 PM
link   
The biggest change I foresee is foreign policy. Someone here mentioned that Kerry would take a more Clinton-esque approach, and I'd agree with that prediction.

Taxes, etc., would end up in a gridlock in Congress. Four years is a very short time to effect changes in domestic policy, unless the House and Senate are same as you. And even if Kerry wins, it's only a four year ride, IMO. Not necessarily because the GOP would take it back, but because Hillary Clinton wants the job in 2008.





posted on Apr, 25 2004 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by s.o.r.r.y.
S&B member's allegiance to the society must supercede all else - family, friendships, country, God. They are taught that once they get out into the world, they are expected to reach positions of prominence so that they might further elevate the society's status and help promote the standing of their fellow Bonesmen. What better way to facilitate The Knight's agenda then to have another S&B running flank within the Democratic party?
Do you really think it's just coincidence that both candidates are members of one of the most elite "secret" societies around? And to make this even more staggering...how many of the 800 or so still living are eligible and qualified to run for the highest office in the country? Still think it's just coincidence?

[Edited on 25-4-2004 by s.o.r.r.y.]


Excuse my asking but, if the society is so secret, how do you know so damn much about it?



posted on Apr, 25 2004 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica
Excuse my asking but, if the society is so secret, how do you know so damn much about it?


There have been a couple books written about it, with information used from anonymous S&B members that were interviewed...one writer of a book received threats demanding that he/she turn over the name of the member who gave the information, and when refused, the person calling said something about their life being destroyed. Supposedly skull and bones has ties all over the place, and anyone who joins is basically guaranteed to succeed financially and/or politically..



posted on Apr, 25 2004 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica
Excuse my asking but, if the society is so secret, how do you know so damn much about it?


Your smugness is excused! Please excuse mine! Ever here of a thing called google?






Skull and Bones book exposes secret society



posted on Apr, 26 2004 @ 12:37 AM
link   
According to the book summary and reviews, it is meant to dispel the myth that S&B is trying to take over the world



posted on Apr, 28 2004 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica
According to the book summary and reviews, it is meant to dispel the myth that S&B is trying to take over the world


That's not the idea I posed but merely was pondering that maybe the S&B rule of furthering the brotherhoods interests was at play. But nowhere in the excerpt or review did I find what you mention. Could you show me where it says what you state?

This is one of the most powerful secret societies in the world. Under the society's direction, Bonesmen developed and dropped the nuclear bomb and navigated the Bay of Pigs invasion. Does this sound like a group you want your prez associated with?



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join