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.

 

If President Obama is lying about killing OBL to get re-elected :-

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Actually I did not say Obama did not have him killed. I don't know about it. I have seen no evidence. The conflicting information is understandable given it was breaking news. The same with Bush when he was in office. I don't think Bush was walking around lying all the time like the Left contends. I think people yap a lot about what they don't know in the government (having worked there for a while). After watching what happened to Bush, Obama's people should have shut up about the details until the fog had cleared and he knew the exact facts.

As I stated, I was disagreeing with the contention that he'd wait until October if it was for political gain. He needed the public's attention off their gas tanks and grocery bills. Politics - wanting to improve his dropping polls - is why he overplayed his hand and fell into the false infomation trap.




posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


I have to admit that I am not an American citizen. But my impression is that Republicans and Democrats are different people with clear different policies. Like Conservative and Labour in my country.

It is utterly inconceivable to me that a Conservative Prime Minister here in the UK would cover up mass murder by a Labour leader. A Conservative PM here would think Christmas had come early if the Labour leader got a parking ticket.

And, my impression is that your president has more power than our PM. The POTUS is head of state and CinC armed forces but our PM isn't.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Judge_Holden
reply to post by wcitizen
 




It will be the subsequent (faked) reprisal attacks that will happen closer to the 2012 elections. Those are events which again and again have proven to rally support for a failing president.


Is that a guarantee? If so, would you be willing to make a friendly wager? Notice I said friendly...



I think it's clear that it's a theory, but I should have made that more explicit - especially here on ATS


Lol. The only reason I'm not prepared to make a friendly wager is that I suspect there's a lot of infighting going on behind the scenes with regard to this incident...so things may not go as planned. It's just a personal hypothesis I have. But if not, I'm expecting a lot of hype and fearmongering about terrorist reprisals, about thwarted terrorist attacks, and maybe even a bomb somewhere (God forbid) if they feel that is necessary to increase popular support for the president.
edit on 5-5-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by ANOK
 


I have to admit that I am not an American citizen. But my impression is that Republicans and Democrats are different people with clear different policies. Like Conservative and Labour in my country.

It is utterly inconceivable to me that a Conservative Prime Minister here in the UK would cover up mass murder by a Labour leader. A Conservative PM here would think Christmas had come early if the Labour leader got a parking ticket.

And, my impression is that your president has more power than our PM. The POTUS is head of state and CinC armed forces but our PM isn't.





Try asking the current PM to release the information regarding the paedophile investigations which allegedly implicated top Labour officials, and which were buried by Tony Blair. See if he complies.

They all work for the same puppeteers.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by signal2noise
If he were lying, he'd have saved this for Octover 2012.


It will be the subsequent (faked) reprisal attacks that will happen closer to the 2012 elections. Those are events which again and again have proven to rally support for a failing president.


Surely reprisal attacks, faked or otherwise, are not going to help President Obama get re-elected.

Isn't the first duty of a President to ensure the safety of the American people ?

To kill OBL next year would clearly have been the optimum time.

I think the biggest absurdity out there is to suppose that Bush/Cheney would have organized an attack that made them look ineffectual idiots.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by ANOK
 


I have to admit that I am not an American citizen. But my impression is that Republicans and Democrats are different people with clear different policies. Like Conservative and Labour in my country.

It is utterly inconceivable to me that a Conservative Prime Minister here in the UK would cover up mass murder by a Labour leader. A Conservative PM here would think Christmas had come early if the Labour leader got a parking ticket.

And, my impression is that your president has more power than our PM. The POTUS is head of state and CinC armed forces but our PM isn't.





Try asking the current PM to release the information regarding the paedophile investigations which allegedly implicated top Labour officials, and which were buried by Tony Blair. See if he complies.

They all work for the same puppeteers.


You will have to give me some sources on this because this is the first I have heard of it.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by ANOK
 


I have to admit that I am not an American citizen. But my impression is that Republicans and Democrats are different people with clear different policies. Like Conservative and Labour in my country.


I was born and raised in England, left when I was 25. I was very involved in politics in the late 70's, early 80's, the Thatcher years mostly, but also Callaghan before that. I know the British political system better than I do the American one. This is where I learned the game. It's not that different to the US, except in the US terms are a little twisted and confused, and it took me a while to understand that.

Anyway if you only pay attention to the insignificant issues then yes you will see change, but the system itself that exploits and steals from us never changes. Things have changed in the sense that they can't force you to work more than 40 hrs etc., but those sort of changes are brought about by people, and often unions, not government. Oh they'll take the credit because it's them that ultimately implement the change, but they would not do it without pressure from the outside.


It is utterly inconceivable to me that a Conservative Prime Minister here in the UK would cover up mass murder by a Labour leader. A Conservative PM here would think Christmas had come early if the Labour leader got a parking ticket.


Only because you don't realise they both work for the same side ultimately.


And, my impression is that your president has more power than our PM. The POTUS is head of state and CinC armed forces but our PM isn't.


He's not my president. I didn't say he has no powers, you have to realise what drives everything is economy, and those who own the economy have the ultimate power. They have the power to control the president, and how he uses his power. Politics is not the cut and dry, black and white, system they present it as. It is an internal struggle for power, and 'we the people' are generally a second thought, pawns, exploited for the wealth required for the power to control. The president, or prime ministers job is to make sure the two worlds don't clash, and we the people remain in the illusion that we are a part of the system, and not just exploited labour.


edit on 5/5/2011 by ANOK because: i am



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


Interesting that you are from the UK yourself. I don't actually agree with you that all political leaders are constrained by economics, banks and industry.

You remember Margaret Thatcher, was she a lady who bent to external pressures ? or did she have a pretty firm idea of where she wanted to go and Argentina and IRA had better get out of the way.

But I am getting off the subject. If Bush/Cheney were guilty of 9/11 I cannot understand why President Obama didn't expose them when he took office.



posted on May, 6 2011 @ 03:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by signal2noise
If he were lying, he'd have saved this for Octover 2012.


It will be the subsequent (faked) reprisal attacks that will happen closer to the 2012 elections. Those are events which again and again have proven to rally support for a failing president.


Surely reprisal attacks, faked or otherwise, are not going to help President Obama get re-elected.

Isn't the first duty of a President to ensure the safety of the American people ?

To kill OBL next year would clearly have been the optimum time.

I think the biggest absurdity out there is to suppose that Bush/Cheney would have organized an attack that made them look ineffectual idiots.


See this article about an ex-Clinton Aide who publicly stated that Obama needs an event similar to the Oklahoma bomb attack to reconnect with voters.

www.rawstory.com...

The government use terror threats to scare the people, who then rally round the President who asserts that he will protect the people and pursue the perpetrators. It's a known tactic.

Bush used this same strategy just before the election for his second term when his ratings were extremely low. He rolled out a video of a (fake) Bin Laden spouting terrorist threats - and it truly did have the desired effect.

I'm afraid only gullible people still believe these days that the government is there to ensure the safety of the American people....and sadly there are still millions of these, despite all the evidence to the contrary.



posted on May, 6 2011 @ 03:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


If they are really guilty of what?
If you are talking about what I think then isn't your answer obvious.

If they are guilty of that then wouldn't you think anyone that got elected is pretty much part of the same racket?



posted on May, 6 2011 @ 04:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1



You will have to give me some sources on this because this is the first I have heard of it.


You might want to start by reading this article by Michael James.

www.rense.com...

Of particular interest are the comments by Lord Burton.



posted on May, 6 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by ANOK
 


Interesting that you are from the UK yourself. I don't actually agree with you that all political leaders are constrained by economics, banks and industry.


Then I must have experienced it from a different direction than you.


You remember Margaret Thatcher, was she a lady who bent to external pressures ? or did she have a pretty firm idea of where she wanted to go and Argentina and IRA had better get out of the way.


This is true but neither negates what I said. Thatcher was definitely not working for the people. Look what she did to the miners, the steel workers and ship builders. She destroyed the working class.


But I am getting off the subject. If Bush/Cheney were guilty of 9/11 I cannot understand why President Obama didn't expose them when he took office.


Because he has no reason to. You can't get past this left/right black and white view of politics. Obama is working for the same agenda, the only thing that changes is how public perception is controlled. Think about how pissed off people get with every president, if that pres was not changed then people would get so angry they might start thinking of doing something radical like revolution. Fool the people into thinking a new pres/PM brings a new agenda, then people will be appeased enough to not want to up-rise against them.

You just have to have to look at history to understand this. The pendulum swings from dems to cons, as people get pissed at one the other becomes popular, and so the cycle of illusion goes on but nothing ever really changes. If you think it does then you are not paying the attention you think you are.

Thatchers destruction is still being felt...


Margaret Thatcher: still guilty after all these years

It is 30 years since Margaret Thatcher entered No 10, setting in motion a revolution that would destroy the quasi-socialist political consensus of the postwar decades and, after much strife, turn Britain into the country it is today: riven, atomised, debt-stricken, hugely unequal, its prosperity excessively dependent on financial services, its public spaces degraded, and its towns, at least at night, the preserve of the binge drinker and the brawler.

www.newstatesman.com...

Don't know how old you are but I lived through that bitches rein, I saw what she did first hand.


edit on 5/6/2011 by ANOK because: i am



posted on May, 6 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link   
Hi all. I'm from Australia and this morning on a local radio station which is pretty popular, the leading host anounced that he was becoming a "conspiracy theorist". It was once again an oportunity to make fun of people who choose to think for themselves rather than just toe the official line. The hosts of this radio show then took listeners calls, and what really took me by surprise was the amount of ignorant people out there. only a couple of people had sound theories regarding the death of OBL, and those people quickly got dismissed as nuts.
It actually frustrates me when I see so many "sheeple". I discuss current events with my colleagues at work, and again I get frustrated, when all that seems to known is the scores of the latest football game.




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join