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.

 

Bush should have been Impeached

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 02:24 AM
link   
I apologize if this topic has already been hit, but I couldn't find this argument anywhere.


Bush should have been Impeached. Not on grand "Oh he orchestrated 9-11" or "He invaded Iraq illegally" and all that jazz.

He should have been Impeached on very common sense reasons. He was either incompetent, overly arrogant, or just plain apathetic about 9-11.

Hear me out, Bush was in charge of the defense of his nation, just like a company supervisor is in charge of the safety of his subordinates. For weeks we had intell that Al-Qeida was going to attack us with planes in to our buildings. They were doing this in response to the government having what Al-Qeida viewed as tyrannical policies in there home country. (Keep in mind this is from the view of 9-11 NOT being an inside job. Not saying it was or if it wasn't, but if the official story is true, then that makes me worry even more.)

If I, as a supervisor, have my employees come to me every week saying the office hot head, Al, is stating that he's going to blow up the office if someone keeps stealing his coffee cup, then its up to me to do something. First and foremost, I should talk to Al. I should ask him what can I do to help him not get his coffee cup stolen. I should warn him that threats will not be tolerated and if I get another one, he's fired. Lastly I should keep a damn good eye on him and make sure he's not assembling a bomb at his cubicle.

If I were remiss in my duties, and the office got blown up, with multiple lives lost, I would be fired. Either the bosses would investigate me and terminate my employment on negligence, or my subordinates (the ones who didn't die) would strike and refuse to work for me because I knew all the facts and I did nothing to keep them safe.

This is why, in laymans terms, Bush should have been Impeached. Either Congress should have done something, or we all should have. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.




posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by midnightbrigade
 


I totally agree Bush should have been impeached due to incompetence. In fact, his incompetence was so blatant that it has spawned all sorts of theories, many of which we are all too familiar with. Quite frankly, it is my opinion that at the very least many within his administration, and Bush himself, allowed the attacks to occur in order to have a pretext for war with the middle east. But I agree, even if his motivations were not so underhanded, his sheer incompetence was worthy of impeachment. Believe me, I sleep quite well at night knowing that I never voted for Bush and did my best to persuade others to follow suit.



posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 04:27 AM
link   
My God people......he's not the prez anymore. Let it go.

How can you possibly say he was incompetent relative to 9/11?? Have we had another attack on our soil since 9/11/01? You think that's coincidence? Bush did a great job defending the US from further terrorist attacks. If you want to discuss incompetence. Try the Clinton angle. He was offered Bin Laden on a silver platter and turned him down. So the way I see it, Clinton is more to blame than anyone.

Ya'll really should try to let it go. It's not healthy to carry such hate.



posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Hugues de Payens
 


"Letting it go" never solved anything. You're on a conspiracy website, that drags up stuff from 100's of years ago. Do people "let go" of the Kennedy assassination? Do folks "let go" of the Roswell incident?

Not here friend. I get your point. I'm ok with your point. My issue is more that I was sitting around, idly thinking about stuff and I stumbled in to an idea that I'd never seen discussed before.

My post isn't about hating Bush or any of that. It's more of a "what if" and what we should have done about it. If nothing else, it could help provoke thought on if something were to happen again, how would we handle it this time.

Thanks for contributing!



posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 07:11 AM
link   
Interesting point of view. Wouldn't that set the standard to impeach any President if a terrorist is lucky enough to hit inside the US?

What do you do about all the gaps in intelligence from top to bottom prior to 9/11? Wasn't it the job of INS to get those terrorist out of this country once they violated their visas.

I could go on with many more questions but I won't. I agree with you to a point that Bush should have been held accountable in some way. However, I feel that there were hundreds more that should have been punished right along with him.To call for the head of one person is not enough. Many dropped the ball from the word go and many people have paid a heavy price because of it.



posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hugues de Payens
My God people......he's not the prez anymore. Let it go.

How can you possibly say he was incompetent relative to 9/11?? Have we had another attack on our soil since 9/11/01? You think that's coincidence? Bush did a great job defending the US from further terrorist attacks. If you want to discuss incompetence. Try the Clinton angle. He was offered Bin Laden on a silver platter and turned him down. So the way I see it, Clinton is more to blame than anyone.

Ya'll really should try to let it go. It's not healthy to carry such hate.



Believe me, we are all thanking god that he is not president anymore. You asked how I could possible say Bush was incompetent relative to 9/11. This is something you should have realized a long time ago, that is, were it not for your Republican blinders. Since I feel sorry for you as I never allowed myself to wear those, at one time, fashionable accessories, I will do my best to explain Bush's incompetencies relative to his action pre-9/11. Below is a chronology of Bush's early presidency.

1. Bush takes office in January 2001.
2. Early in 2001 the US fingered Al Qaeda for the bombing of the USS Cole.
3. Bush counterterrorism adviser Richard Clarke submitted a plan for taking down Al Qaeda, however, instead the NSC began discussing invading Iraq and had a plan for a post-Saddam Iraq.
4. By March 5, Bush had a map ready for Iraqi oil exploration and a list of companies, all large contributors, who would do this exploration.
6. August 6, 2001 a CIA anyalyst briefs Bush on vacation with a memo entitled "Bin Laden determined to strike in US." Bush takes NO ACTION and instead tells the analyst "all right, you've covered your ass now."
7. Minnesota FBI Special Agent Harry Samit, the one who arrested Zacarias Moussaoui, stated that he wrote at least 70 pages of memos during the 3 weeks prior to 9/11 expressing concerns of an impeding attack on US soil. Those warning were ignored.
8. A Phoenix based FBI agent sent a memo to George Tenet warning that radical Islamists were taking flight training there. Tenet said he did not read the memo until after 9/11. If you believe that I have some ocean front land here in Kentucky to sell you. Never the less, this warning too was ignored.
9. Intelligence agencies from around the world including France, Brittan, and, of all places Iran, warned the CIA that Al Qaeda was plotting an attack on the US. Once again, those warnings were ignored.
10. In early September Richard Clarke requested using predator drones to kill Bin Laden, the Pentagon and CIA said NO.

This list only includes the mistakes/incompetencies made by Bush pre-9/11. The list would be at least 5 times as long if I also included Bush's mistakes made in its aftermath.

Hopefully you are now seeing the pattern of incompetence by former president Bush that led to 9/11. If not, I can only advise that you now take off those Republican blinders, they are not cool anymore. Once you have removed them, try re-reading this post.

On a side note, I would not expect the criticisms of the Bush presidency to end anytime soon given that a vast majority of living historians are already calling his presidency the worst ever. In fact, I would never expect these criticisms to end. Were I you, I would just admit that the votes you cast for him in the past were some of the worst errors in judgment you have ever made and finally come to the realization that you made a mistake. I only hope that you do not choose to repeat this mistake when another incompetent Republican asks you for you vote.

By the way, I don't think that all Republican politicians are incompetent and have myself voted for a few. However, when I first laid eyes on Bush I knew he was an incompetent, crooked, puppet who would be a disgrace of a president. I think most would agree that history has vindicated this opinion.

With regards to Clinton's failure to take a shot a Bin Laden, Clinton stated he felt that the certainty of Bin Laden being at the location was too low and that the number of civilian casualties in the attack would have been too high. I for one appreciate this level of judgment from a president.

Also, I do not "hate" Bush. I have often said that I thought he would be a great person to sit down and have a beer with, I just did not want him running my country.

Lastly, I would like to say that we all make mistakes, it is a fact of being human. However, it is only the ignorant who do not learn from those mistakes and continue to make them in the future. I don't fault you for voting for Bush, only for continuing to let him off the hook for his incompetence.




[edit on 11-2-2009 by BluegrassRevolutionary]



posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Well thanks for the lecture there buddy. I really do not need one from you, but that's OK. Maybe it made you feel better?

You made a statement about 2/3 of the way through your diatribe about voting for what you call an incompetent Republican. FYI......I have seen nothing but incompetent Democrats since I began voting in 1980. They offer nothing good for this nation as far as I am concerned. Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Charlie Rangle, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Barney Frank.....the best the Dems have to offer, and idiots or scoundrels to a man/woman. Yea...lovely line up!

Oh yea....almost forgot...."Change We Need!".....the only change our new president is interested in is the change in my pockets to pay the taxes his cabinet nominees didn't. Classy guy, Obama......still can't believe he got Gietner through. What were they thinking?!!

Thanks again for the lecture bubba, but you can keep your idea of competent and spare me the BS. I'd rather be in the minority this time round.

Did I mention Rush is Right?

[edit on 11-2-2009 by Hugues de Payens]



posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Sorry, you had not one but two chances with Dennis Kucinich to impeach Bush and neither Nancy Pelosi nor Harry Reid seemed to be very interested. In fact, it's only Patrick Leahy at this moment that's interested in doing anything about Bush.

Those of you who agree with the OP, you have Congress to thank for a lack of action on Bush's impeachment. Remember that the next time you go to vote for them.



posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 09:20 PM
link   
I think the major reason our economy is fried right now is because of the Iraq war...we basically we're shelling out millions if not billions every month and it finally added up. We can blame the crisis on Bush seeing as how during his eight years things sharply declined....

I honestly want to see him go to trial. We let a criminal run our country for 8 years!

I personally believe Bush got off scott-free way too easy....The man is an idiot and a monster.

I love meeting people that feel he was a good man because then I really get an idea of how dilluted peoples minds are. This man stole our country and raped it essentially. America went from being a high-class woman to a cheap bar skank real fast thanks to that man...

Still wonder how he wasn't assassinated...



posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfAces
I think the major reason our economy is fried right now is because of the Iraq war...we basically we're shelling out millions if not billions every month and it finally added up. We can blame the crisis on Bush seeing as how during his eight years things sharply declined....

I honestly want to see him go to trial. We let a criminal run our country for 8 years!

I personally believe Bush got off scott-free way too easy....The man is an idiot and a monster.

I love meeting people that feel he was a good man because then I really get an idea of how dilluted peoples minds are. This man stole our country and raped it essentially. America went from being a high-class woman to a cheap bar skank real fast thanks to that man...

Still wonder how he wasn't assassinated...


Yeah, sure. The housing bubble and predatory lenders convincing people to overextend themselves into subprime mortgages had absolutely nothing to do with the economy being the way it is. After all human beings are NOT greedy people. That is just a myth perpetuated by the media! And Congress approving the budget during the war, 2 of those years being a Democratic majority, should not be held accountable at all. No sir, it all falls on the shoulders of one man making the biggest financial disaster in history, felt all the way around the world. Because one man has THAT much power, by himself.

Ignorant.

[edit on 11-2-2009 by sos37]



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hugues de Payens
Well thanks for the lecture there buddy. I really do not need one from you, but that's OK. Maybe it made you feel better?


Apparently you did given the statements in your first post. When you asked a question like "how can you call Bush incompetent" with regards to 9/11, I had to give you an appropriate answer.



Originally posted by Hugues de Payens
You made a statement about 2/3 of the way through your diatribe about voting for what you call an incompetent Republican. FYI......I have seen nothing but incompetent Democrats since I began voting in 1980. They offer nothing good for this nation as far as I am concerned. Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Charlie Rangle, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Barney Frank.....the best the Dems have to offer, and idiots or scoundrels to a man/woman. Yea...lovely line up!


Actually, I said that I had voted for a few Republicans and made no mention of their competency.

I must admit I will be the last to step up in defense of Pelosi, Reid, or Rangle given their incompetence (since this seems to be the word of the day) in getting Bush impeached. This should have been the easiest impeachment in history however they lacked the guts pull it off. However, Bill & Hilary Clinton and Al Gore have all been highly competent politicians. If I need to list some of their noteworthy accomplishments I can upon request. Somehow though, I am sure I will only be wasting my breath.



Originally posted by Hugues de Payens
Oh yea....almost forgot...."Change We Need!".....the only change our new president is interested in is the change in my pockets to pay the taxes his cabinet nominees didn't. Classy guy, Obama......still can't believe he got Gietner through. What were they thinking?!!


So I guess since you are upset about tax increases you must make more that $500K a year. If this is not the case, your frustrations are wasted given that your tax increases will be non-existent. Given you do not make more than $500K, perhaps you should have paid more attention to Obama during the debates and less attention to good old, oxycontin loving Rush.



Originally posted by Hugues de Payens
Thanks again for the lecture bubba, but you can keep your idea of competent and spare me the BS. I'd rather be in the minority this time round.


No problem, anytime. However, I sent no BS your way and tried to stick to the facts with regards to the incompetence of our last president. I know you guys hate the facts, and the conclusions they lend themselves to, but they are what they are. Your inability to counter them only vindicates their validity. But I guess you do get 1/2 a point for your original and juvenile use of name calling. Way to go!!!



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Didn't call you a name Blue. And it certainly appears that the old adage is correct - truth is relative.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:24 AM
link   
It's because of the Iraq War and the overall bloated military budget-imperialist nations go down-always have and always will, this talk about 'predatory lenders is a myth; the government sets regulations for lending money, when the country starts spending too much on war-the loosen the restrictions so they can keep the economy growing at any cost, and too keep the working class population appeased so they don't oppose the massive spending they hear about on tv that is the cost of the war..

now when the policy fails due to the government overextening itself, they don't want to admit that the imperialism is what is causing the problem, so they invent this myth of 'greedy wallstreet people'

How is it greedy to lend people money when you now they can't possibly pay it back? the government, the central bank, and the corporate banks that exist under it set this policy, not 'greedy people'.

BTW I think Obama should be impeached, because a month into his term i can't tell the difference between him and bush, more troops to Afghanistan, a slow and uncommitted withdrawal from iraq, borrowing money and spending it on projects that create almost no jobs etc.


Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by AceOfAces
I think the major reason our economy is fried right now is because of the Iraq war...we basically we're shelling out millions if not billions every month and it finally added up. We can blame the crisis on Bush seeing as how during his eight years things sharply declined....

I honestly want to see him go to trial. We let a criminal run our country for 8 years!

I personally believe Bush got off scott-free way too easy....The man is an idiot and a monster.

I love meeting people that feel he was a good man because then I really get an idea of how dilluted peoples minds are. This man stole our country and raped it essentially. America went from being a high-class woman to a cheap bar skank real fast thanks to that man...

Still wonder how he wasn't assassinated...


Yeah, sure. The housing bubble and predatory lenders convincing people to overextend themselves into subprime mortgages had absolutely nothing to do with the economy being the way it is. After all human beings are NOT greedy people. That is just a myth perpetuated by the media! And Congress approving the budget during the war, 2 of those years being a Democratic majority, should not be held accountable at all. No sir, it all falls on the shoulders of one man making the biggest financial disaster in history, felt all the way around the world. Because one man has THAT much power, by himself.

Ignorant.

[edit on 11-2-2009 by sos37]



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by midnightbrigade
 


That is just ONE very small part of why he should have been IMPEACHED!!


He destroyed the U.S. - yeah he should have been impeached, besides many other things besides that......!!!!!

All I can do is wish..........................



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 08:17 PM
link   
you don't empeach a president just because of bad performance, the american voter should have thought of that before they elected someone who has failed at everything he has ever tried.. bush was following what ant other democratic or republican president would do, they're both basically the same..it's not obama or bush, the problem is the american regime, the only way to get at the root cause of the problem, which is american militerism and imperialism-is to overthrow the government and create from scratch a more democratic system.

[edit on 12-2-2009 by ominous]



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hugues de Payens
Didn't call you a name Blue. And it certainly appears that the old adage is correct - truth is relative.


My bad, I assumed the "bubba" comment was a Kentucky joke.

I hear you, to each his own.



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hugues de Payens
My God people......he's not the prez anymore. Let it go.

How can you possibly say he was incompetent relative to 9/11?? Have we had another attack on our soil since 9/11/01? You think that's coincidence?


To be honest?

Yes.

I don't think more attacks were planned, at any point. I think they just wanted to cripple America with fear, not ram planes into us until we all die. Only one attack was necessary to scare us.

[edit on 13-2-2009 by sadisticwoman]



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by BluegrassRevolutionary

Originally posted by Hugues de Payens
Didn't call you a name Blue. And it certainly appears that the old adage is correct - truth is relative.


My bad, I assumed the "bubba" comment was a Kentucky joke.

I hear you, to each his own.


No sir not at all. My apologies for sounding that way.



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by midnightbrigade
He should have been Impeached on very common sense reasons. He was either incompetent, overly arrogant, or just plain apathetic about 9-11.


You can only impeach someone because they break the law.

- Incompetent? Yep. Not impeachable for it though.

- Overly arrogant? Yep. So are all of them. Especially Obama. Can we impeach him yet?

- Apathetic about 9-11? Nope. That was his launch off for the 'war on terror'. He definately wasn't apathetic. If he had been, then we wouldn't be all over the world like we are today.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join