| How to Join | Member's Area | Private Library | Search | Sanctuary | Login | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main Forums | Discussion | Tech Talk | Mature Content | Archives |
A home without a wall, |
|
|
||||||
| How to Join | Member's Area | Private Library | Search | Sanctuary | Login | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main Forums | Discussion | Tech Talk | Mature Content | Archives |
A home without a wall, |
|
|
|
||||||
| The Alley |
|
Adolf Bush |
|
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan 
|
“Reviewer: Shawn Mccullion (Nashua, NH): In "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11" David Griffin collects research from international and homeland conspiracy theorists and molds them into one complete book of questions of 9/11. Griffin, and the others he calls "critics", pose possible theories of a governmental wide conspiracy that includes the FAA, FBI, CIA, NMCC, NORAD, Secret Service, the presidential cabinet, WTC workers, NYC police, military personnel, Pentagon officials, TV commentator Barbara Olsen (who was listed as a passenger on Flight 77) and her husband Solicitor General Ted Olsen, eyewitnesses, fighter pilots launched from Air Force Bases after the attacks, the media, the 9/11 Commission, Osama bin Laden, Congress and the President of the United States (just to name a few). Griffin in the end intimates the ultimate question: Did President Bush help plan the 9/11 terrorist attack? Whether you are a believer of a possible 9/11 conspiracy or not, one should look no further of the validity of David Griffin's book than in the introduction. Griffin writes, "And, although I have repeated only evidence that seemed credible to me, I have not independently verified the accuracy of this evidence. As the reader will see, this evidence is so extensive and of such a nature that no individual -- especially no individual with very limited time and resources -- could check out its accuracy." Say what you want about President Bush, but I do think the president deserves at least an effort from his pundits to "independently verify the accuracy" when intimating he is a serial killer 3,000 times over.” The New Pearl Harbor I caught part of an interview with the author on public radio. He speculates the Bush administration perpetrated the attacks to both initiate the process toward war with Saddam and to increase Bush’s popularity and chances for re-election. If you look at the reviews on the site you’ll find that there are at least a few who are firmly convinced that it was Bush and not Bin laden behind the attacks. [This message has been edited by Alicat (02-22-2005 12:32 AM).] |
||
| © Copyright 2005 John Pawlik - All Rights Reserved | |||
Mistletoe Angel 
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
Let me say first, as deep as my divides are with Bush and his administration, I truly don't believe Bush actually planned out nor intended anything that had to do with the September 11th attacks. He probably is guilty of irresponsibility prior to 9/11 in taking those 56 threat memos seriously, etc, but I find it extreme and unfair to suggest he purposely staged the 9/11 attack to carry out his own agenda and for political gain. And those who think that don't reflect my opinion. I don't have anything against Bush for that. What I have against Bush and his team is the mass irresponsibility and deception after 9/11. I don't know exactly how much he was involved with architecting the war in Iraq, etc. but he was the one who gave the word to commence war and so he's guilty for the losses and prices produced from this. I believe Bush is guilty for violating Article VI of the Constitution citing that "treaties are the supreme law of the Land." In violating the Geneva Conventions, for instance, that is a serious offense, and personally I find that alone to be a great case for impeachment. With that said, let me also say I personally am uncomfortable with the title of this thread, as I feel somehow it is designed to try and paint those like myself into a corner if we disagree with Bush or find him guilty of a war crime as though we think Bush = Hitler or he's a fascist. I'd rather not think or talk of these comparisons, as I find bringing back those instances of bad blood only bring back and draw more blood now. All I know is I know what he's done, he knows what he's done, and that's just what it is. That's all I'm going to say here. And if this thread goes in the direction that I fear it will go in, this is my last word here. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" |
||
|
LeeJ Member Patricius
since 2003-06-19
Posts 13296 |
Nothing that the government would do after JFK would surprise me in the least. I've concluded that politicians are only interested in themselves, and no longer work for the people. As to the validity of this...one should make certain of the evidence, if any, before making a statement as such...this is a very very dangerous accusation... I don't agree with Bush's administration, but then, I don't agree with many of the politicians today...and whats worse is this country gets in deeper and deeper, more in debt and less intellecually informed, and it doesn't seem to cause even the slightest blink in society's eyes....????? The corruption going on is an insult to American intellect....and all we do is close our eyes. No John, nothing would surprise me...but in the same...these kind of accusations must be backed by some pretty solid and firm evidance...in my book... And whats all this hype going on about the tapes? Did Bush "try" marijuana when he was just a kid? Who cares....this is the stuff that gets my dander up...that people actually buy this stuff, and thrive on it, without ever thinking about the irresponsible courses they took when they were young...and if by now, your priorities haven't extremely changed since then, well, your one in a million. What I'm saying is, this is and insult to the intellegence of the American people. I don't care if he tried dope....when he was "How old" and the proof in the pudding should be exactly what he said on the tape...He wanted to set example, and he didn't want to lie about what he did....because he didn't want some kid saying, "Daddy, Pres. Bush tried dope, I think I will to" That has got to say something about his character....and shame shame shame on anyone who thinks otherwise about this subject...period. hmmmmm, now, I feel much better and apologize to everyone for getting off the subject, especially you John. and let me add, I'm an independent who did not vote for Bush.... |
||
|
bbent Senior Member
since 2001-01-07
Posts 521Alaska |
i agree with Lee on all the above and don't believe dubya had anything to do with the attact on 911 but have no doubt theres plenty of other crap bein done behind our backs by extreemly corupt politicians and there corporate buddies... as long as the subjects been expanded,i heard this on tv just a few minutes ago."what do bush and clinton have in commom?... they both enjoyed rolling fatties." [This message has been edited by bbent (02-24-2005 05:10 AM).] |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
Yes, Lee, exactly. I don't care at all about the Doug Wead tapes. I don't care that he probably smoked marijuana and cocaine. I find it a bit absurd why Bush would candidly and sharply bash Gore for doing the same, but I wouldn't care less what drugs or booze he took. This is simply a distraction, a red herring, from the far more important issues regarding character in our leaders. Anyway, those few Amazon reviewers have every right to their opinion. I personally find that opinion that Bush actually and intentionally helped design the blueprint for a 9/11 disaster that claimed thousands of lives extreme, and if anyone is actually that heartless anywhere in the world, that's just disgusting beyond all means. You'll need an extreme amount of feasible evidence to back up some accusation like that. And I don't think it's there. It's similar to that idea a Democratic congressman has right now that Karl Rove was behind the scheme of the CBS memos to discredit and bring down a news network. I was flipping between channels and noticed that on Hannity & Colmes yesterday and quickly I saw that segment, and obviously that guy had nothing to back up his argument. And it's absolutely clear that Karl Rove has been behind so many dirty tricks throughout his career, but the greatest folly of all behind journalism is coming in and making your thesis without a case. There's plenty of things I find absolutely reasonable to accuse Bush of. But the only thing I consider him guilty of before 9/11 was simply the irresponsibility in not taking the threats as seriously as he could perhaps. And indeed I can understand how few, if no one, could have ever anticipated such a tragic day like this abruptly happening to our nation, and that those 56 memos were just another round of scare-tactics, spam or bluffing. Before September 11th, when I was outside the political circle, whenever I saw him on the news, I didn't see him as anyone special, but I had nothing against him. I was actually supporting Bush in the days following 9/11 (About 9 in 10 Americans were) until I learned of how he was going to respond to the tragedy. It was all just wishful thinking I suppose that the lesson we would have all learned from that was to walk out into the sun through the settling dust, ash and fog united for a peaceful cause, so indeed I may have been naive to believe that. But then again when I see where his approval used to peak and how it has skimmed virtually in half since then, that also tells me something. I was only one of many who had those sentiments. And when you shove all those away with the "Either you're with us or against us" rhetoric, that's not the true spirit of democracy and America. The colors are interwoven together on the flag, and are symbolic of the need for those from all corners to have a voice in the same forum. This just isn't the case right now and that's where much of my negative perspective towards Bush is generated, sided with my anti-war philosophy. Unilateral aims and missions to the world only widen the problems and relations domestically. And I criticize him for the irresponsibility in acknowledging the issue of our polarized nation, as well as not committing himself to bring that "forum" together. It's the post-911 climate, not the pre-911 climate, where I am critical of Bush. Simple as that. And I can tell you anyone who dares to challenge Bush in a pre-911 climate is marching through marshy waters. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
