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.

 

Dick Cheney may have killed Benazir Bhutto!!

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   
www.liveleak.com...

OMG! Bhutto assassinated by Cheney. No doubt she was a threat to Cheney's plans in Pakistan with its vast oil deposits and nuclear weapons that American needs badly. She was also a threat to Al Qaeda as well which Cheney helped invented.




posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   
naaaaaaaah ... I think there were enough nutters over there who were on the opposing side that Bhutto got assassinated without any 'help' from the USA. Cheney didn't need to get involved. That part of the world almost promised a Butto assassination sooner or later.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by deltaboy
 


of course
it allowed the puppet masters to keep their puppets in power and control the country




posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
www.liveleak.com...

OMG! Bhutto assassinated by Cheney. No doubt she was a threat to Cheney's plans in Pakistan with its vast oil deposits and nuclear weapons that American needs badly. She was also a threat to Al Qaeda as well which Cheney helped invented.


This story is being attributed to Wayne Madsen. I have no idea if he is full of it or not, having been aware of his tales for years. I have a strong hunch that his assertion is, indeed, a serious possibility. Good catch!



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:07 PM
link   
You mean he made the phoen call, or he actually pulled the trigger?

The first one would make more sense, and I would totally believe that.

If there is an anti-christ, it most certainly is Dick Cheney..

~Keeper



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Why would this surprise anyone? This kind of thing has been standard operating procedure for a very long time. I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it, but people who make those kind of decisions will never be held accountable.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:30 PM
link   
I'm sure Cheney wasn't thrilled to hear Bhutto say that Bin Laden was killed. She made that statement in November of 07, in December she was shot. Obviously I can't say whether or not Cheney got his hands dirty, but it's certainly not impossible.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
With all due respect to the late Mrs. Bhutto, I am pretty sure they weren't quail hunting when she passed. I think the USA would have gained a heck of a lot more access into Pakistan with her than without her. In fact if I am not mistaken, I am pretty sure she was trying to hire BlackWater as her private security force to protect her from Pervez Musharraf and his spy agency from giving away logistics to Al-Quaeda.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I don't think Cheney did it himself. He only shoots his friends in the face.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 06:00 PM
link   
There is no doubt that Cheney is one of the more ruthless American politicians in recent history. I've heard Cheney called almost every name in the book. One thing I've never heard him called is stupid.

reply to tothetenthpower


If there is an anti-christ, it most certainly is Dick Cheney..

I must however disagree on Cheney being Anti-Christ-like. Though Cheney is up there in intelligence, Definately fits the criteria in his desire for and accumulation of power. However, one thing Cheney lacks in such a degree as to not even be considered a contender in the running for AC, is Charisma. Lets face Cheney is very widely percieved to be an evil dude. I can't tell you the last time I heard anything nice about Cheney.

When I think Anti-Christ, I think Cheney's type of evil mixed with Obama's Charisma and popularity.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 08:15 PM
link   
One thing Cheney is, is tough. We can thank him for remaining attack-free for the 7 years after 9/11. We will never know the details; most of you don't want to know them. As odious as you may think he is, you are much better off with him for you than against you.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   
The only way Cheney killed Benazir Bhutto was if they were both bird hunting together.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 09:22 PM
link   
Revelations 13-12: And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.

The history of the acts of this beast contains in sum three things, hypocrisy, the witness of miracles and tyranny: of which the first is noted in this verse, the second in the three verses following: the third in the sixteenth and seventeenth verses. His hypocrisy is most full of lies, by which he abuses both the former beast and the whole world: in that though he has by his cunning, as it were by line, made of the former beast a most miserable skeleton or anatomy, usurped all his authority to himself and most impudently exercises the same in the sight and view of him: yet he carries himself so as if he honoured him with most high honour, and did truly cause him to be reverenced by all men.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
One thing Cheney is, is tough. We can thank him for remaining attack-free for the 7 years after 9/11.


So why doesn't the period leading up to 9/11 count against him? Who reset the clock to give him a free pass? I'd say the most monumental failure to protect the US happened under his watch. It's like saying he hasn't screwed up lately. Big stinkin' deal.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by jsobecky
 


Yes, He decided that he would not fund another black flag op so that uneducated patsies could not afford to go to tinker toy flight schools to learn to barely take off and land (thus allowing them to be blamed for executing flight maneuvers worthy of Top Gun fighter pilots in super sophisticated jumbo jets). Why if he had not cut off the CIA funding of flight worthy individuals, we might have had NORAD ordered to stand down again while a huge jumbo jet meandered around American airspace for several hours – unnoticed and tracked – executing a over 6 g perfect turn at 550 miles per hour to fly at tree top level PERFECTLY into the only section of the Pentagon that was largely unoccupied, and that JUST SO HAPPENED to be furthest from one of the main conspirators… A JUMBO JET that was not clearly filmed by ONE SINGLE SECURITY CAMERA out of over 250 that should have filmed it, and that not ONE SINGLE recognizable part remained of (little things like 20 ft diameter tungsten steel turbo fans). But then why would that matter? Like the Boeing engineer who helped design the plane stated – just before he had a heart attack – it was IMPOSSIBLE FOR THAT PLANE TO HAVE EXECUTED THAT TURN, experienced pilot or not, IT COULD NOT HAVE TAKEN THE STRESS LOAD. Hey, but what are such pesky facts like the laws of physics when fearless leaders like Cheney are involved? Pass the Grape Kool-Aid please?

[edit on 7/14/2009 by SGTChas]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by jsobecky
One thing Cheney is, is tough. We can thank him for remaining attack-free for the 7 years after 9/11.


So why doesn't the period leading up to 9/11 count against him? Who reset the clock to give him a free pass? I'd say the most monumental failure to protect the US happened under his watch. It's like saying he hasn't screwed up lately. Big stinkin' deal.



Originally posted by SGTChas
reply to post by jsobecky
 


Yes, He decided that he would not fund another black flag op so that uneducated patsies could not afford to go to tinker toy flight schools to learn to barely take off and land (thus allowing them to be blamed for executing flight maneuvers worthy of Top Gun fighter pilots in super sophisticated jumbo jets).


So one guy says it was Cheney's fault for not preventing 9/11, and the next guy says Cheney pulled off 9/11.

And they *both* disagree with me!

I just love ATS!


[edit on 15-7-2009 by jsobecky]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
One thing Cheney is, is tough. We can thank him for remaining attack-free for the 7 years after 9/11. We will never know the details; most of you don't want to know them. As odious as you may think he is, you are much better off with him for you than against you.


Actually you can go ahead and thank him for remaining attack-free for 7 years. Are you going to thank him for having 9/11 happen under his watch, which is the ultimate disgrace for an administration? 4 hijacks in one day and thousands dead? Are you going to thank him for all those deaths?

Lets get to the point? ARE YOU DONE MAKING SUCH STOOGE HEADED REMARKS?



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by jsobecky
One thing Cheney is, is tough. We can thank him for remaining attack-free for the 7 years after 9/11.


So why doesn't the period leading up to 9/11 count against him? Who reset the clock to give him a free pass? I'd say the most monumental failure to protect the US happened under his watch. It's like saying he hasn't screwed up lately. Big stinkin' deal.



Originally posted by SGTChas
reply to post by jsobecky
 


Yes, He decided that he would not fund another black flag op so that uneducated patsies could not afford to go to tinker toy flight schools to learn to barely take off and land (thus allowing them to be blamed for executing flight maneuvers worthy of Top Gun fighter pilots in super sophisticated jumbo jets).


So one guy says it was Cheney's fault for not preventing 9/11, and the next guy says Cheney pulled off 9/11.

And they *both* disagree with me!

I just love ATS!


Well, that is just a little disingenuous, isn't it? On the one hand, I am basically citing you as a Cheney apologist, while SGTChas is speaking in terms of the very Conspiracy Theory (as opposed to coincidence theory) that draws you to this conversation in the first place. You can't have it both ways, now can you?

Either by your measures....Cheney hasn't let the nation down lately... or by those who find him complicit in 9/11, you really have to stretch to say he has ever contributed anything of value to the American people.

The electorate seems to agree.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 



Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Well, that is just a little disingenuous, isn't it? On the one hand, I am basically citing you as a Cheney apologist,


And what? Am I supposed to go tit-for-tat playing the silly kid's game game of personal insults and name calling?


Buh-bye!


Troll alert!



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 



Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Well, that is just a little disingenuous, isn't it? On the one hand, I am basically citing you as a Cheney apologist,


And what? Am I supposed to go tit-for-tat playing the silly kid's game game of personal insults and name calling?


Buh-bye!


Troll alert!


My apologies! I really had no idea that you would view that as an insult. In my lexicon, an apologist is one who can be counted upon to come to the defence of a particular person or course of action in a consistent or predictable manner. To my experience, you are consistently in defence of Cheney and his policies. Does that observation make me a troll?



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join