It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Protests greet Bush's first speech as ex-president

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:03 PM
reply to post by Albertarocks

Bush certainly made his share of mistakes in office, but it will soon be VERY apparent (it already is to a lot of us - in fact it was never in question) that Bush has more class, intelligence, principles, common sense, and love of country in his little finger than Obama has in his entire body.

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:07 PM
[edit on 18-3-2009 by son of PC]

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:09 PM
I have never blamed Bush(really) he was an easily controlled puppet,anyone who can say that the president or much of the western politicians have much power when the massive all encompassing military industrial complex is at your back door and those who finance them ie the bankers print your nations money..we could blame our politicians for not standing up to these people,then again look at what happened to JFK.Is George Bush inherently evil? no,he is a coward though and that goes for most politicians who continue to obey their masters,the banking elite.

"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits." - Sir Josiah Stamp President of the Bank Of England

We should be throwing shoes and these people,not cowards like George Bush and his kin.If anything the bankers want you to hate him,divert attention away from the real show.Kinda off topic,i just dont like it when i hear people still blaming puppet politicans for the worlds ills.

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:10 PM
reply to post by The Last Man on Earth

I agree Iraqi boots would be best. I almost ordered some used combat boots for my BOB. They sell them used online and at the Army surplus stores for 22 bucks. I now see other uses for buying them. I doubt I'd get the chance to throw any though. I'd be considered a terrorist.

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:10 PM
I still don't get why all the anger is on one man.
America isn't a monarchy.
Everyone is focusing all their anger at Bush and not realizing that the problem still exists, and it doesn't lie on one man.
It just seems incredibly... what's the word... shortsighted.

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:13 PM

More then 100 people!

That must of been like-All of Canada!

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:16 PM
reply to post by Solomons

Exactly. Well said.
I don't think the majority understands the real problem.
Focusing all your anger at 1 man makes it seem as though the problem is fixed.

Yay. We got rid of 1 out of 109289845 corrupt politicians and business men. Let's still focus our anger on that 1 rather than the 109289845 who are still in office and running our country...

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:23 PM
reply to post by Solomons

Aren’t you contradicting yourself a bit? You start out by saying “he was an easily controlled puppet” and then end your comments saying “I just dont like it when I hear people still blaming puppet politicians” I agree that we should be throwing shoes and bankers, as well as Hedge fund managers and sub-prime mortgage brokers.

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:26 PM

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
Can someone explain to me what it is exactly that George Bush did that was so wrong? I just dont get the anger towards him. I can not think of one war crime he commited. Can someone please help me on this?

[edit on 17-3-2009 by justsomeboreddude]

How about the 930+ LIES he and his administration vomited out prior to ramming through the Iraq invasion debacle, for starters:

Pretty much right in front of the world's face for all to see.

Add on suspension of habeas corpus, sanctioning of torture, rendition, etc., etc.,...

A better question would be what War crimes and treason is he and his staff NOT guilty of.

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:33 PM
reply to post by Boogley

In that video you posted. Why do we put up with cops wearing masks to hide their identity. We never used to do this before the war on drugs. They use that as an excuse why they wear masks...its all about fear.

I wish our friends to the north would have thrown Bush in jail. He ruined our country and nearly the rest of the world. I am sure Obama will do the Coupe De Grace and send us all to hell.

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:37 PM

Originally posted by haika

Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen

Can the Canucks delve any lower into the deep reaches of absurdity, and pathetic childish ambitions?

I agree with you on that one but for an entirely different reason.
Why lower yourselves on inviting such an imbecile, resentful, evil man to Canada?

Good one

I almost feel sorry for him. It will likely be similar to this wherever he goes now.

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:43 PM
reply to post by TruthParadox

The CNBC’s “House of Cards” Documentary explains the financial crisis in laymen’s terms. It doesn’t put all the blame on Bush. My problem with Bush is why he didn’t keep Paulson on a leash. These are Bush’s buddies, you can easily follow the trail of corruption.

I would personally rather throw shoes at Paulson. I’ll bet he kept his blackberry nearby each time he spoke just to watch the DOW drop 200 points. I wouldn’t be surprised if he did it intentionally. He played unfair by using FEAR tactics to get his TARP money, then didn’t use it to rid the banks of toxic debt. I could use an Iraqi boot about now. Anyone who thinks Bush isn’t a major player is fooling themselves.

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:44 PM

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Everyone is focusing all their anger at Bush and not realizing that the problem still exists, and it doesn't lie on one man.
It just seems incredibly... what's the word... shortsighted.

You're half right. They are focusing their anger at this one man, because he's the only one in town. But the people up here (at least the protesters) are fully aware that it's Bush's masters more than Bush himself. This is more a protest against the masters than it is against GW.

But what the hell, if they don't protest Bush while they have the opportunity, they've missed the boat, right? So of course they're going to vent on this moron.

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:47 PM
If you really want to get your point across wouldn't snow shoes be more effective?

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:57 PM
reply to post by intrepid

Wooden shoes from Holland would be a better choice. Snowshoes would pick up to much wind resistance but a creative thought.

[edit on 18-3-2009 by wonderworld]

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 02:00 PM
reply to post by intrepid

You might be able to get a twist on the throw like a frisbee.

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 02:15 PM
reply to post by Albertarocks

I understand that.
I'm talking more about the general attitude against Bush.
Most (not all) seem to be extremely angry at Bush and yet ignorant of the majority that supported him. Many of the people who are still in office who voted in favor of Bush's actions.

Personally, I'm not all that pissed at anyone, because I don't think there is a true face of evil here as most people seem to think. It's just greed and corruption, and it's in no way limited to Bush.

I just wish people would put things into perspective is all...

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 02:18 PM

Originally posted by dariousg

Originally posted by sos37

1. How does one man who is not in the most powerful position in America start a war all by himself based on false information? Congress had the same intelligence info that Bush had when they made that decision together. Can you prove that the error on WMDs didn't come from the CIA and other members of the intelligence community? Can you prove that Bush purposefully manipulated the data or had the data manipulated?

The answer is no you can't and no you can't.

The answer to this one is actually quite simple. When he started the war it was a Republican held congress. No, not saying that they all signed off on this war. Just saying what the facts are.

Anyway, he used the same line of psychological warfare that was used on the people of this country. He used the 'bad intel' that was manipulated to make it LOOK like Iraq had WMDs.

Did HE do it himself? Nope. But if a company does something that is wrong and the CEO signs off on it as fact, only for it to turn out that it was baseless lies, who do you think gets in trouble? Well, first off it is the CEO. However, I'm sure he/she will make sure that everyone else along the lines that passed on this 'lie' would get in trouble too.

Well, that didn't happen. Why? Because the intel was good? Nope. Because he didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings? Nope.

He didn't pursue the people that passed on that bad intel because they were HIS MEN and WOMEN. His through and through. That's why nothing ever came of it.

There is so much more but I only have a small amount of time for lunch.

The answer to your second question is that he did not cause this economy to collapse. It just happened on his watch. Unfortunately people will only look at that instead of the underlying factors.

The same thing happened when Clinton left office. The tech bubble burst in April of Bush daddy's first year. Was it his fault? No. It just happened on his watch. I had to try to explain to my friends who were clamoring for Bush daddy's head that the economy is like the Titanic. It just doesn't turn on dime. It takes time. The bubble started to burst when Clinton was in office but it just took a while for it to hit home.

Edit: to remove some of the quote

[edit on 18-3-2009 by dariousg]

Okay, I can accept your response as well thought out. Thank you for that, by the way.
As for the war in Iraq, we do know the Intel was bad and yes, the CEO of a company suffers if the company goes kaput on his/her watch.

But just because he's the head of a country at a time when things go south (the 9/11 terror attack) and he does what he believes is right - is that a reason to hate the man? I can understand disliking him or wanting to name him the bad guy for being the man on watch when things went bad for America, but people have called Bush every nasty name in the book, threatened his life, wished him nothing but ill-will and many of those people are doing it just by reading other people's rants and raves on the internet! The internet isn't a court of law, and it sure isn't an un-biased media for presenting evidence!

What has to be proven though, is that Bush KNEW the intel was bad and was pushing it anyway to an un-knowing Congress. Did he? If that's the case, then yes, it was a criminal act. But think abou this - if you can prove that Bush knew the intel was bad, then how many other Senators knew the intel was bad? Did any or all of the Democratic Senators voting "Yea" on going to war know it also?

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 02:29 PM
reply to post by djvexd

So does that mean that any country's leaders that sided with him and sent troops and intelligence assets to participate in this "atrocity" should be labeled as such as well? Better line up Britian, Canada, France, Poland...etc. etc. I can tell you at the Hague during WW2 just following orders wasn't a defense.

No, actually Canada has nothing to do with American operations in Iraq. Canada is working in Afghanistan, yes. Iraq? No.

reply to post by TheAgentNineteen

lol Corrupt Liberal party? I live in Canada and the Liberals aren't any more or less corrupt than the conservatives. In fact, in comparison to American scandals the Canadian "scandals" are like the equivalent of stealing a pack of chewing gum.

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 02:32 PM

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
Funny thing is a thread like this smokes out the last of the defeated Neo-con's at ATS that cling ferociously to their precious Bush. If you only knew how pathetic that is, if you post to this forum your suppose to be at least trying to deny ignorance, isn't that this sites theme.

As for Canada they get it, welcome Obama with respect in Ottawa, curse and protest Bush in Calgary.

Actually, you're right. Threads like these do bring out the ignorant.

What's truly pathetic is that people such as yourself have not been able to prove, at all, that Bush was solely responsible for any of the things of which he was accused and yet you still lash out at those of us who stand fast in supporting the man until it is proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the man is guilty. What are you basing your opinion on? Blogs? Forums? Public opinion? News stories that spark emotional responses?

Where are your facts? Do you have memos or emails between Bush and cabinet members about how they are defrausing the public with faulty Iraq war intel? Do you have taped conversations from Bush talking about how he's going to go into Iraq and avenge his father's attempted murder by toppling Saddam's regime?

No. You've got what Keith Olbermann tells you to think. You've got what Jon Stewart tells you think. You've got what the mainstread media wants you to hear. You flow with the tide of "sheeple" who think it's cool to hate Bush because it's the right thing to do. God forbid you should have an opinion of your own and try to be a voice of true reason amongst a crowd of ignorants.

So I don't see myself as ignorant. I see myself as still supportive of an ex-president whom I believe did his best under extremely tough conditions, under excruciating criticism in which he never waivered. I know the facts around Bush. Apparently you don't. (snip)

Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 18-3-2009 by mrwupy]

<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in