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.

 

Does Bin Laden's support for Kerry help or hurt the Kerry camp?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 07:50 PM
link   
RANT, I'd like to know what papers (besides the NYT and LAT) you are reading, because it is quite obvious, by both data and direction of funds and advertising/campaign efforts that Kerry-boy has a real problem. Swing states? You meant the swing states that Gore won decisively in 2000 like New Jersey? Michigan? Penna? New Mexico? Minnesota? And here's a shocker: Hawaii?

If Kerry is such a good closer and come from behind kinda guy (whole 'nother thread THERE), then why is he having to send operatives and campaign money, ads, and pundits into states Gore took in 2000?

Seems Kerry is in trouble to me. A close look at where the Democrats are spending there money, and the trend of local and State Dems to use their support of Bush in their own campaign ads is a much more clear indication of who's winning this thing than the 'skewed' polls.

edit: sp


Who'd have ever thought Cheney would be stumping in a Democratic stronghold like Hawaii??



[edit on 29-10-2004 by everlastingnoitall]




posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 09:42 PM
link   
.
Outsider,

Did Bin Laden personally tell you who he is supporting?

Your assumption could easily be interpreted as a smear tactic.

Why don't you wait till you have a FACT to report before posting such loaded thread subject line?
.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Personally I am not sure who it helps, I think.

All I know is after madrid, they KNOW they can influence elections.


Trigger? Well we shall see, but in my mind, When Bush wins, Osama will wish he was killed at Tora Bora.....The gloves come off.

If you are anywhere near Faluja, GET OUT NOW...that place will be hammered 48 hours after the election, reguardless of the outcome thereof.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Edsinger - you just illustrated the Bush strategy in an excellent fashion. In one line you said "Osama will wish he was killed in Tora Bora", and in the next you say "Those in or around Fallujah better get out".

Fallujah is in Iraq... is Osama there?

Bush's strategy indeed seems to be "Look out, Osama! You think you can thumb your nose at us, but if you keep on doing it we'll bomb the country where you're not!"



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Otts
Edsinger - you just illustrated the Bush strategy in an excellent fashion. In one line you said "Osama will wish he was killed in Tora Bora", and in the next you say "Those in or around Fallujah better get out".

Fallujah is in Iraq... is Osama there?

Bush's strategy indeed seems to be "Look out, Osama! You think you can thumb your nose at us, but if you keep on doing it we'll bomb the country where you're not!"


Ok let me explain it to you.....When Bush is elected, he is lame duck. No worries about re-election. He can hammer this war.

The warning about Fallujah is that we will attack that ANYWAY in the next few weeks and damn hard. Last major crossroads till elections in Iraq. Bush is going to hammer them in the next 2 months no matter the outcome.

Osama has just jihaded himself into a BIG TIME ass whooping.
( if Bush gets 4 more years, which I think he will)
[edit on 29-10-2004 by edsinger]

[edit on 29-10-2004 by edsinger]



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 10:06 PM
link   
You guys don't get it, do you? Bush is going to set the world aflame if he bombs Fallujah, which is considered a holy city in Islam.

But Bush seems set on getting even the peaceful Muslims pissed at him, so I guess the setting the world aflame part is inevitable.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Otts
world aflame if he bombs Fallujah, which is considered a holy city in Islam.


What?


No that would be Medina and Mecca and Jew..er nevermind, Atlanta is a Holy City also, it has 2000 Churchs....


There are mosques in all of the Middle Easts cities, if they dont wnat it destroyed, then why hold up there? Why not move to a lesser city. The US has tried its best NOT to destroy religious sites, look how Al Sadr handled that one.


[edit on 29-10-2004 by edsinger]



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 10:20 PM
link   
No matter how holy the city, how innocent the people, and how harmless a force might be battles will be waged. Wars are political and each battle another move in the game. Today it seams that wars are waged for money. Our stock markets and western way of life is far beyond our imature brains. We have far too much power for such tainted brains.

War is no good, we can all agree on that but there is one small problem with the idea of world peace. There are far too many people out there who think only of power, money, status.... Its all a big game. It always has been and always will.

Fallujah? check out this site. thenausea.com......... All the uncensored glory of warfare. You can click on any contenent and see pics of their "Bad moves on human kind." There are some updated articles and pictures about the whole Fallujah sittuation. This site is not for the weak minded.
The world we live in disguised from the actual hell that it is.....



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Trigger? Well we shall see, but in my mind, When Bush wins, Osama will wish he was killed at Tora Bora.....The gloves come off.

If you are anywhere near Faluja, GET OUT NOW...that place will be hammered 48 hours after the election, reguardless of the outcome thereof.

Edsinger, If Bush did get 4 more years, which i doubt, I would like to believe "the gloves come off". The last time we were hit, Bush sat in a classroom with kids and the towers burned, then his/our enemy lived to taunt him about it. I also have to aggree with the others on this board about OBL in Faluja.

I had just taunted a coworker about the classroom 1 hour before this hit the news. Needless to say his answer was the ditto, because he did'nt want to cause alarm or panic. I'm sorry Lame answer, here what a competent pres would have said.
" Mrs/Mr (teachers name) and kids, Please excuse me, I'm needed back at the office to attend to some important business, continue your reading you're doing great!" (in a warm tone).
No one freaks, his decision is respected and he can be in contact with heads of state and making preperations to do the job.

"Hitting Faluja to get osama is like looking for a Blue-Light Special in Walmart"

BTW, thats a slick looking avitor



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:31 PM
link   
So, again, hate to point this little tidbit out, but:

Bush= 7 minutes, and finishing a session with schoolchildren so as not to panic them, or worry them.

Kerry and the DNC leadership= 45 minutes, "unable to think" (to quote a candidate for President)

hmmm, calm, resolve, and no desire to worry kids versus an ineptness for thought process of any kind for almost seven times as long?
And this is a hard choice how?



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:34 PM
link   
edsinger - Al Sadr is not the invader. The U.S. is.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:35 PM
link   
this is a no brainer,if the terrorists hate bush more then he must be hurting them............get it.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by AlabamaCajun

I had just taunted a coworker about the classroom 1 hour before this hit the news. Needless to say his answer was the ditto, because he did'nt want to cause alarm or panic. I'm sorry Lame answer, here what a competent pres would have said.
" Mrs/Mr (teachers name) and kids, Please excuse me, I'm needed back at the office to attend to some important business, continue your reading you're doing great!" (in a warm tone).
No one freaks, his decision is respected and he can be in contact with heads of state and making preperations to do the job.

"Hitting Faluja to get osama is like looking for a Blue-Light Special in Walmart"



Look First osama is not in Faluja at all, the state of Iraqi elections are!

For the other stuff...just keep watching michael moore an known american patriot



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Otts
edsinger - Al Sadr is not the invader. The U.S. is.



Look ol Al Sadr didnt like saddam much, he is an opportunist thats it...a losing one I might add..



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:40 PM
link   
What are you guys TALKING about?

I am astounded that we are actually having a conversation like this. We need to rise up and demand real candidates.

I can't believe we have succumbed to their will so much.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:44 PM
link   
edsinger - have you ever considered that some of the Iraqi opposition, like al-Sadr, may actually not have been terrorists at the start, but parties that think the U.S. has overstayed its welcome?

Are all islamists terrorists?

Will the U.S. pound them all until the only Iraqis left are those waving little American flags?



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Otts
edsinger - have you ever considered that some of the Iraqi opposition, like al-Sadr, may actually not have been terrorists at the start, but parties that think the U.S. has overstayed its welcome?

Are all islamists terrorists?

Will the U.S. pound them all until the only Iraqis left are those waving little American flags?


no not all , but when they did what they did, they became them.

The #es are making a lay for power......overstayed its welcome. I just heard from a Congressman today, stood 15' from him, that the iraqi's that he met will be happy when we leave but their biggest fear is we will leave before the job is done..



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:52 PM
link   
And if the election in January were to produce a shi'ite government that wants the U.S. out?



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by outsider
Bin Laden specifically used his words carefully as to say it's up to you and not directly endorse Kerry (knowing it could indeed backfire), but I think what was clear is that he does not want people to vote for Bush (hence the only other viable candidate is Kerry), otherwise it would not have been released right before the election. If your unable to see that then your only fooling yourselves.

Or am I fooling myself & the fact that an election is a couple days away a coincidence?

The A/P has already released an article saying both Bush & Kerry are fired up about the tape allowing Kerry to distance himself from Bin Laden, but I still think it's clear who Bin Laden wants you to vote for.





[edit on 29-10-2004 by outsider]











The propagagnda you are proposing is total non-sence. If anyone was to get a kick-start ( or so they thought they would) out of Bin Laden's video, it would be Bush or so Bush hopes so.
IMO, Bush & Cheney had Bin Laden tucked away somewhere until it got down to the last few days before the election, then brought OBL out of hiding to make this video for them to put fear into the citizens of our nation, so they would vote for Bush.

I hope people are smarter than Bush, and doesn't vote for the man.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
The #es are making a lay for power......overstayed its welcome. I just heard from a Congressman today, stood 15' from him, that the iraqi's that he met will be happy when we leave but their biggest fear is we will leave before the job is done..


If you were really concerned about this, I would think you would reject both plans because they will only further enrage Iraq with ineffective and piss poor spending that is characteristic of current government.

Don't gloss over these things. What the government does overseas is NOT what nobel thoughts you think should happen.

They are not going to do what they say, not the way they say it anyway.




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join