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.

 

To all Bush supporters

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2004 @ 10:48 PM
link   
Osama being saved for last.....

OMG! Why bring Osama in now? No. This will happen as soon as its necessary and not a moment before. The illusion of Osama running around caves in the wild gives ths "terror war" the backdrop it needs in order to continue on and on and on....

He's fine and being cared for...by Bush




posted on Aug, 12 2004 @ 10:51 PM
link   
Dear Osama: The check is in the mail, drawn on the usual CIA account. Dad says hi and thanks you for the coffee beans you sent. Dubya



posted on Aug, 12 2004 @ 10:58 PM
link   
BUSH IS AN AGENT OF ISRAEL


the rabbi, rc planes, and 9-11

The Mastermind Behind 911?
Stephen St. John - APFN June 10, 2004

With regard to Blueridge's reference to remote control of 9/11 flights,
please check out System Planning Corporation of Alexandria, Virginia.
www.sysplan.com

System Planning Corporation designs, manufactures and distributes highly
sophisticated technology that enables an operator to fly by remote control as
many as eight different airborne vehicles at the same time from one position
either on the ground or airborne. For those looking for an extraordinarily
interesting hobby, please see photos and specs of this hardware (about the
size of a small refrigerator)at www.sysplan.com/Radar/CTS Just be sure your
mom doesn't catch you causing havoc with the airlines.

Also, System Planning Corporation markets the technology to take over the
controls of an airborne vehicle already in flight. For example, the Flight
Termination System technology could hijack hijackers and bring the plane down
safely. The Flight Termination System can be used in conjunction with the CTS
technology that can control up to 8 airborne vehicles simultaneously. see
www.sysplan.com/Radar/FTS Unfortunately, these systems as of yet are not able
to prevent lyrics such as "When you get caught between the moon and New York
City"!

The possibility of nefarious use of these brilliant technologies developed
and deployed by Systems Planning Corporation certainly deserves careful
consideration in any full and impartial investigation of what actually took
place on 9/11.

In the context of 9/11 it also needs to be pointed out that Rabbi Dov Zakheim
was Chief Executive Officer of System Planning Corporation's International
Division until President George W. Bush appointed him Undersecretary of
Defense and Comptroller of the Pentagon. Not long before Rabbi Zakheim rose
to power over the Pentagon's labyrinthine, bottomless accounts, he
co-authored an article entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy,
Forces and Resources for a New Century" which was published by The Project
for a New American Century in September 2000, exactly a year before 9/11; in
this article, on page 51, it is stated that "the process of transformation,
even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent
some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor"!

Voila! 9/11!

Well, there you have it! Motive, means and opportunity all rolled into one
and existing between Rabbi Dov Zakheim's ears. The motive was that a false
flag intelligence operation would trigger a response by the USA that would
be good for the Zionist state. The means consisted of the aforementioned
remote control of airborne vehicle technologies as well as the nurturing,
creative accounting at the Pentagon to pay for such an operation. The
opportunity was Zakheim's closeness to the Command/Control/Communications in
our nation's capital and its interwoven cousin network of psychopathic
Zionist Neo-Cons all hell-bent on provoking a war with Saddam Hussein.

Unfortunately, it seems that the 9/11 commission is not looking in this
direction when it ought to be.
disc.server.com...

Courtesy News Watcher and www.libertyforum.org

Rabbi Dove Zakeim

Postscript

In March this year, Rabbi Dov Zakheim resigned from his position at the
Pentagon. Although he refused to tell journalists the exact reason for his
departure, he hinted that his job as the Pentagon's chief financial officer,
controlling the flow of hundreds of millions of dollars, was exhausting.

Full aljazeera report:
Pentagon finance manager resigns
english.aljazeera.net...
tm

Also see:
Electronically Hijacking the WTC Attack Aircraft
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=206



posted on Aug, 12 2004 @ 11:20 PM
link   


This says it all.



posted on Aug, 12 2004 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe



This says it all.


What does this say? That some cartoonist has a sense of humor? If I'm not mistaken, didn't some of the first attacks take place during the Clinton administration. Is Clinton one of the people under the bag?



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 12:55 AM
link   
So you are saying that the U.S. is only capable of doing one thing at a time? Would you feel better if all U.S. agencies and projects shut down in order to hunt for OBL? Good chance OBL is in Pakistan. Would you like us to invade Pakistan even though their prime minister has been an ally of sorts? Like Saddam he is probably buried in a hole somewhere but that doesent mean we arent looking for him...chill out.



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 01:03 AM
link   
Elementary.

Read caption under photo.



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 01:11 AM
link   
I've read the caption. What are they sorry for? I could post my own picture of a political cartoon (Kerry and Ted Kennedy with the caption "Botox and Detox"), but what does it mean?



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmilici
My question is this, Why didn't Bush finish his job with Bin Laden before starting a war with Iraq? Afterall, Bin Laden is the "culprate"(sp) of 9/11, not Saddam.

Before you answer this understand that this thread might get a little heated. I have no desire to offend anyone but understand I started this thread to see what "the other side" is thinking. Our views will differ.


First, why assume that only Bush supporters support the war in Iraq? Or that Bush detractors do not support the war in Iraq? You are painting with too broad a brush. There are certainly more than "two sides" in this issue.

To answer your question using your "two-sided" mindset: "To get to the other side". The other side of what, you ask? The other side Iran from Afghanistan. Look at a map and consider that taking Iraq puts U.S. and coalition forces in an extreme advantage with respect to Iran, compared with NOT invading Iraq. Without Iraq, coalition forces could only project land power from Afghanistan, which would be a logistic nightmare due to lack of infrastructure. Putting our Naval forces in the Persion Gulf without securing Iraq would mean defending them on an even broader front. There are more advantages that a little map study will reveal when considering other allies in the region and logistics. (Note also that there are more than two "sides" to Iran.)

UBL is just one man and his importance was de-emphasized in Bush's 2002 State of the Union Speech. While capturing or killing UBL is important, doing either will not end the war on terror. Recall Bush told us that this is going to be a long, long war. And he put three countries in the crosshairs in his "Axis of Evil" : Iraq, Iran, N. Korea. I'm not sure he even said Usama bin Laden's name in that speech. Well, one country down, two to go.

So why Iran? This thread already brings out reasons, but also the 9/11 Commission report and other news items on this website. And Iran is pivotal and conflicted internally. You might say Bush wanted to put Iran between Iraq and a hard place. (Somebody had to say it.)

I think Kerry understands these points, by the way, and that is why he has been careful not to commit to troop withdrawl in Iraq without some very specific conditions (which are vague enough to be denied or explained away when folks from the "other side" try to figure out why we are still in Iraq in 2008 and Kerry is up for re-election.)

"Other side", indeed. If you limit your political thinking to only two sides the way the media wants to portray it, then you are not thinking, you are cheerleading. Politics is not a football game.



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 01:40 AM
link   
ok, as long as my picture bothers you sooooo much, here's explanation.

Vote for Bush and nation gets screwed again. Plain and simple.

I suppose you want me to type a two page dissertation on this, however it is late and the post IS self explanatory. Worry about something else!
There;s a hell ofalot to worry about out there.

capice??? get it???

I trust the rest of the posters will see the sense of humor in this


Go on with your life.



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 01:50 AM
link   
"Afterall, Bin Laden is the "culprate"(sp) of 9/11, not Saddam. "

15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia, but we attack Iraq. Does anyone here doubt that if 15 of the 19 hijackers were North Korean, we would be attacking North Korea right now instead of Iraq?



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 02:02 AM
link   
only 5 of the hijackers took part in the actual hijacking. The rest are alive and living nicely overseas.



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 03:30 AM
link   
I agree that the liberation of Iraq was probably a strategic move to prepare for an Invasion of Iran. However I also think an added benefit was to use Iraq as a flashpoint to draw terrorists from the middle east into Iraq, thereby diverting them from the United States.
Between Iran's recent test of thier improved Shalab 3 missile, and there progress on the nuclear front I have no doubts that the fundamentalist regime there must be eliminated. I think however that before we can take on Iran we must supress the insurgency in Iraq which is probably why the Coalition forces are making such a massive strike on Al Sadr. If my hypothesis is correct then we should begin to see concerted efforts by the Coalition to stamp out the insurgency leading up to the Iraqui elections followed by an invasion of Iran sometime early next year. News reports of intensive training of the Iraqui defense forces by, and with , the U.S. forces would seem to bear out this theroy.
In order for a two pronged attack on Iran to be a viable option the Iraqui defense forces would need to be able to "cover the backs" of the U.S. forces by keeping Iraq quiet while they shift thier attention to Iran. In addition the troop deployments in Afghanistan would need to be reduced so an announcement of either The new Afghani army taking over security duty or some type of mutual defnse treaty between the Afghani government and the tribal leaders in rural Afghanistan would also be further observations which would bear out this theroy.
The fact is that the U.S. strategy for the middle east seems to be shaping up to be a very cunning plan. By removing the governments of Iraq and Iran, the U.S. removes two of its worst and most long enduring enemies in the middle east while at the same time creating flashpoints which would divert a large majority of those with terrorist tendancies into an area where thier terrorism does not cost the lives of American civilians. It also (as the situation in Libya has shown) intimidates those not in the direct line of fire into complying (at least publicly) with U.S. policies. In the long term the presence of two democratic governments in the center of the middle east should have a stabilising effect on an area who's resources are unfortunatly, greatly needed to insure the national security of the United States.
If bush Is re-elected (One can only hope and vote) then by 2008 I would expect to see Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq, all having democratic governments with constitutions based on the U.S. constitution, participating in free elections and providing for thier own security. (as well as ours)



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 06:53 AM
link   
Sorry for the lack of posts. I only have a short time to actually post during the day.

First of all this is not a two sided debat like many seem to think. I am asking Bush supporters beecouse those are the ones who need to defend him on his decision to focus his attentions in other countries. Those are the ones that will be voting for him. Second I am not saying do one thing at a time. Nobody except for maybe two posters actually picked up on my hint that maybe we are changing the focus from OBL to Iraq then Iran then Syria because there might be alternate explanations for 9/11 that we are not supposed to know. By all means I am open minded, I am not saying that thbere is, I am just saying the official story does not add up. And know that we changed focus to Iraq that helps add credance to my feeling/decision of the story not adding up. Along with the fact that I still have not seen any proof to support the "official story"

Another thing, what on this earth gives us the right to nation build. That is probably what got us into this mess in the first place. Along with giving Isreal 4 billion a year pluce military weapons so they can defend themselves against people who's only defence is to strap a bomb to themselves(I do not support that either, but I can understand the why). Nation building is also what Bush said we wouldn't do right after 9/11. Hey what are we doing then? We are acting like G_D.

Non of these countries we invaded are better off. Did you know since we took over afghan the poppy trade has started again? Did you know heroin is made from poppy?

Why is it we seem to be going after all the easy countries. Oh wait so we can stratigackly place ourselves to take over more countries. Well you know what, I am tired of war. I am tired of seing and hearing about our troops being blown up. I am tired of seing video's of beheadings. I am tired of nation building. This country was not built on nation building and pre-emptive strikes. My constitution is against that. We need to bring the perps of 9/11 to justice.

Let's not forget the families of the victims either. Those are the one's who need justice. They are the one's we need to catch the perps for. The majority of them did & still do not want any more war. They just want answers. Like we is OBL(if he is really responcible)? Or Why wasn't there an official criminal investigation done? Why werent there any forensics done on the steal before it was taken to Asia for melt down jusst DAY'S after it was carted off from ground zero.

A friend of mine was burnt 70% of his body from 9/11, he barely survived. He is 100% completely against the war in Iraq. He also told me that he always talks with other survivors and they pretty much feel the same that he does. These are also people that need justice.

I am not a saddam lover & I do not support what he has done in the past. As a matter of fact I do think he needed to be taken out of power. But we could have waited a year even two. He was no threat. He could not launce anything against us, no drones no missels. And you know what? If he attacked a neighbor country like Isreal let him. Isreal has a military that is/was 20 times stronger than Saddam's army and an attitude to go with it. They would have done just fine.

I feel like we are acting like arragant foolish americans by defending Bush this way. Bush is not only isolating us with his "you are either with us or against us" crap he is changing the attitudes of americans. We are no longer a country of compassion. We are a country of let's get them. No longer are you innocnet till proven guilty you are guilty until proven innocnet. On that note I shall stop for know. This post is long enough. I will leave you with this, I love my country and if the time arises I will die for my country. America is beutiful, lets leave it that way.



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmilici
Sorry for the lack of posts. I only have a short time to actually post during the day.

First of all this is not a two sided debat like many seem to think. I am asking Bush supporters beecouse those are the ones who need to defend him on his decision to focus his attentions in other countries. Those are the ones that will be voting for him. Second I am not saying do one thing at a time. Nobody except for maybe two posters actually picked up on my hint that maybe we are changing the focus from OBL to Iraq then Iran then Syria because there might be alternate explanations for 9/11 that we are not supposed to know. By all means I am open minded, I am not saying that thbere is, I am just saying the official story does not add up. And know that we changed focus to Iraq that helps add credance to my feeling/decision of the story not adding up. Along with the fact that I still have not seen any proof to support the "official story"

Another thing, what on this earth gives us the right to nation build. That is probably what got us into this mess in the first place. Along with giving Isreal 4 billion a year pluce military weapons so they can defend themselves against people who's only defence is to strap a bomb to themselves(I do not support that either, but I can understand the why). Nation building is also what Bush said we wouldn't do right after 9/11. Hey what are we doing then? We are acting like G_D.

Non of these countries we invaded are better off. Did you know since we took over afghan the poppy trade has started again? Did you know heroin is made from poppy?

Why is it we seem to be going after all the easy countries. Oh wait so we can stratigackly place ourselves to take over more countries. Well you know what, I am tired of war. I am tired of seing and hearing about our troops being blown up. I am tired of seing video's of beheadings. I am tired of nation building. This country was not built on nation building and pre-emptive strikes. My constitution is against that. We need to bring the perps of 9/11 to justice.

Let's not forget the families of the victims either. Those are the one's who need justice. They are the one's we need to catch the perps for. The majority of them did & still do not want any more war. They just want answers. Like we is OBL(if he is really responcible)? Or Why wasn't there an official criminal investigation done? Why werent there any forensics done on the steal before it was taken to Asia for melt down jusst DAY'S after it was carted off from ground zero.

A friend of mine was burnt 70% of his body from 9/11, he barely survived. He is 100% completely against the war in Iraq. He also told me that he always talks with other survivors and they pretty much feel the same that he does. These are also people that need justice.

I am not a saddam lover & I do not support what he has done in the past. As a matter of fact I do think he needed to be taken out of power. But we could have waited a year even two. He was no threat. He could not launce anything against us, no drones no missels. And you know what? If he attacked a neighbor country like Isreal let him. Isreal has a military that is/was 20 times stronger than Saddam's army and an attitude to go with it. They would have done just fine.

I feel like we are acting like arragant foolish americans by defending Bush this way. Bush is not only isolating us with his "you are either with us or against us" crap he is changing the attitudes of americans. We are no longer a country of compassion. We are a country of let's get them. No longer are you innocnet till proven guilty you are guilty until proven innocnet. On that note I shall stop for know. This post is long enough. I will leave you with this, I love my country and if the time arises I will die for my country. America is beutiful, lets leave it that way.



They are not getting tortured, have freedom of speech, etc....................

Things were not easy when we had to rebuild japan after we nuked it.



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmilici
What about the fact that going to war with Iraq really did not help fight the war on terror, or catch OBL. It actually helped out the terrorist by creating a minimum of 20,000 more terrorists? The war on terror is supposed to stop terror, not add more.


Sure it helped fight the war on terror. The terrorist training camps in Iraq have been destroyed. The $$$ pipeline from Saddam to Hamas has been destroyed. Massive amounts of terrorist intelligence has been collected which has led to finding terrorists and terrorist connections in other parts of the world (Syria for example). The war in Iraq didn't create 20,000 more terrorists. R U referring to the 20,000 enemy forces that Iran sent into Iraq to fight the Americans? Those aren't newly created terrorists. Those are forces Iran is sending illegally into Iraq to destablize the country. The religious leaders in Iran don't want a free Iraq because they know that as soon as Iraq is free and stable, the youth of Iran will want the same thing in Iran. Out with the theocracy, in with democracy.

The war on terror IS on it's way to stopping terror. It will take a long time. It in no way makes more terrorists. Not at all.



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 07:07 AM
link   
jmilici - I understand you weariness of war I share it too. But when a task is truly necessary it must be done no matter how weary we may be of doing it. Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, are all places which support, succor, and create terrorists. That is what gives us the right to nation build. The actons of the leaders of these countries and thier support for terrorists who attack us makes them our enemy. Not because we want them to be enemies but because they want to be our enemies. Is there any difference between the hitman and the man who hires him to kill? Is there any difference between the armed robber and his fence?
As long as theological or secular dictators hold sway in the middle east there will be terrorists striking U.S. soil. Only by removal of the conditions which lead to terrorism will terrorists be stopped. Yes things in both Afghanistan and Iraq are bad, but things are getting better. You don't change 5000 years of warfare, brutal dctators and trbial slaughters in a few months. It will take time for democracy to take hold but once the people there taste true freedom for the first time, they will never let it go.



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 07:20 AM
link   
I do understand your argument mwm1331. But I think we as a peaple need to move past that type of thinking. We need to look at the roots, cause of it all. Why do yhey hate us. It is not because we are free it our policies. It's our unwavering support for isreal and no one else. We need to fix the problem at the roots, not in the branches(not a good analogy but it works). Taking over other countries is not the answer. It just pisses more people off and doesn't solve anything. Fighting never solved anything. Especially since no matter how big and bad someone is, there will always be someone bigger and badder.

Using terms like "axis of evil" creates hatred, causes terrorist.. With Bush I do not feel any safer. His rhetoric is that of an 8th grader that is just going to piss more and more people off. Eventually the bully gets bullied themselves. I know becouse I was once a bully. We need to leed by example. No I do not thik we will ever stop terrorism, even with my method but this world will be lot better place than where it is now.



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 07:24 AM
link   


The terrorist training camps in Iraq have been destroyed.


I suppose flyersfan that you believe that there is a Saddam - Al Queda connection? Even though that has been proved to be false.



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmilici
what on this earth gives us the right to nation build.

Non of these countries we invaded are better off.

Let's not forget the families of the victims either. The majority of them did & still do not want any more war

Bush is not only isolating us with his "you are either with us or against us"


1 - We are defending America and the world, even if people don't understand that they are being defended. That's what is happening. We have a God given right to defend ourselves. Saddam was pumping huge amounts of $$$ into terrorism. He had terrorist training camps complete with Boeing 727s to train hijackers. He had $$ going to Hamas. and so on. We do have a right to stop him.

Let's say for a moment that we weren't just defending ourselves. Let's say that we went into Afghanastan and Iraq just to liberate people. That would have been the right thing to do as well. Just as Germany didn't do anything to us directly in World War II, we had an obligation to stop them because eventually they would have directly done something AND the millions being killed in the concentration camps demanded international justice happen. (However, the Taliban and Iraq were directly responsible for terrorism against America and our international friends.)

2 - none of the countries are better off? Of course they are. Women in Afghanastan are no longer beaten for taking their children to the doctor without a man in tow. Women are no longer beaten for leaving the home without a burka. Women can go back to their jobs as doctors and teachers instead of being prisioners in their homes for the past five years under the taliban. Female children can go back to school and learn to read and count again. Boys can go to school and learn more than just the Qu'ran, they are now being taught to read other books, science, and math once again - this had been stopped during the taliban rule. The terrorists are either dead or on the run and they no longer suck the money out of the locals. The munitions dumps that were hidden in mosques and school yards by the taliban are gone, so children and families are no safer in school and in the mosque for prayer time. The Taliban had a system of stealing female children for gang rape and then dumping them out on the street afterwards. Parents couldn't do anything to save the children. Now that has stopped. OF COURSE Afghanastan is better off.


Iraq is also much better off. No more mass murders and ethnic cleansing. Hundreds of thousands murdered. Kurds ethnically cleansed. Maiming. Rape rooms where tens of thousands of women were brutalized, sometimes in front of their husbands and fathers. Munitions that were stored in schools and in mosques are being cleared out, making it safer. No more threat of war with Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Iran at the whim of Saddam. No more torture or imprisionment for the athletes by Uday (or was it his sadistic brother Qusay?). Electricity is on all around the country instead of just being stable in Bagdad. Oil is flowing at a much higher rate and more efficiently. Americans have rebuilt schools, hospitals, the water system, the electrical system, and the pipelines and made everything more efficient. And .... the people are now getting the money that they were supposed to be getting. Saddam isn't stealing billions of $$ anymore from them. The oil for food program with the UN is gone, and so is the corruption of Koffi Anans son stealing $$$ from it as well as Saddam. Of course Iraq is better off.


3 - The 9/11 families are against the war in Iraq? I have never heard this before. Provide the data please. I don't buy it, but even if a high number did not believe in the war, it doesn't change the necessity of it.

4 - Bush didn't isolate us. There are 45 countries in the 'Coalition of the Willing'. That's larger than any other coalition in the known history of the world. France, Germany and Russia had their own reasons for not wanting to join in the liberation of Iraq. It was all $$$$. They had their own illegal $$$ deals going with Saddam and they thought more of the $$$ than they did of the people of Iraq. Even if G.W. did isolate us by going to war against enemies of America ... that wouldn't be a reason not to go. What, you want us not to do something out of fear of not being popular? So the western world will like us, but the Muslim radicals will still hate us. They would destroy us, but by golly ... the western countries would like us as we were destroyed.



[edit on 8/13/2004 by FlyersFan]




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join