Has anyone been to www.abovetopsecret.com?



Wurm said:
Exactly. I'm glad that at least someone here is starting to "get it".

If one looks at this logically, and realizes as we now know that BushCo had intended/planned/hoped on invading Iraq even before they usurped power in '00, it is not inconsistent then that they would need a catalyst, an excuse, to go after Iraq. 9/11 was that catalyst.

Further, if you read the Neo Con's own writings from their "Project for a New American Century", you'll see that they've stated as far back as 1997 that they needed a "new Pearl Harbor" event as a smokescreen for the invasion of the Mid-East. It's there in plain black & white:

(p. 51, PNAC white paper, REBUILDING AMERICA'S DEFENSES - Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century.)

So it appears that they manufactured just such an event: 9/11. The problem has been that the corporate Main Stream Media has been complicit in the cover up from the git.

What is more, judging from the Bushes past behavior and associations with criminal enterprises, it is well within their realm of conscience and ability to aid & abet something like the 9/11 attacks. To wit:

> Prescott Bush's (GWB's grandfather) involvement in illegal war profiteering with the Nazis during WWII. His operations were shut down by FDR.

> George H. W. Bush's involvement in the Iran-Contra affair, and the October Surprise.

> GWB's atrocious record as businessman/enterpreneur, and later, his equally disgusting record as Gov. of Texas.

...and that's before we even discuss Cheney's abominable record.
I have never been on a covert mission, nor have I even had knowledge of one. I have never been involved in a conspirecy at the national level. I have never even been involved in a conspirecy on a local level..... And in 1996 I forgot to vote.
But I do have close relatives in the Federal government , that includes the US Justice Department , Secret Service, and a non-blood relative that worked for the CIA. None of my relatives had top-secret clearence or was involved in any conspiricies that did not involve screwing me out of the X-mas gifts from my grandmother.

Wurm, have you ever met any top ranking government officials that are capable of pulling off the events you write about in these threads ??? What scares me about government people is that they seem so incapable of doing much of anything let alone pulling off a internal strike on 9/11.
In an earlier thread you made a point of describing your military record and responsibilities. And yet here you are, on a internet site, a cycling internet site , telling all these dark secrets of the Bush's criminal enterprise. Proper military protocal is not handling things as important as what you are telling us through a internet site.
True, I am here in this thread also. It is a way of passing time between the World's which finished wonderfully and the GP Zurich. And I am willing to bet that a few other members are here for the same reason too....
In order to pull off a cospirecy as large as 9/11 from an American government official position there had to be cooperation from many others. And anytime a secret passes from one person's lips to another there lies a chance for the secret to be exposed.
Do you honestly believe this stuff that you write about? I studied advertising at a university that had an excellent business school. We were told that propaganda is all about the perception of a half-truth blended in with a another half truth to make a whole truth.
Bush's Iraq project has left me with a bad feeling. I voted for him. And I believe that Kerry was no solution to much of anything either domestically.
As an American I am unhappy with our politicians in general. I believe we have allowed past politicians to make fools of us. We accept bad politicians in this country. We accept it as "business as usual."
I do not believe any country is better then any other. Each country has it's own agenda and needs to cater to the well being of it's citizens. And hoefully a country can do this without conflict with another nation.
Can you tell me what you think is good about this country?
 
Lim, Hypno, et al -

Here's just one example of the U.S. creating or attempting to create a crisis in order to justify war:
OPERATION NORTHWOODS
In 1962 the Pentagon and the CIA were desperate for a war with Cuba. How desperate? Desperate enough to plan attacks against American bases, equipment and personnel. Desperate enough to dress up American trained Cubans as Communists to make the attacks on American bases. Desperate enough to manufacture an airplane that looked like a Russian MiG to shoot down an American airliner.

Why?

"The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere."

And you think that the United States wouldn’t do this or worse to control the largest remaining untapped oil reserves in the world, along with more than half of the world’s heroin trade?

Click here to read the documents for your self.
Then you have the Lusitania during WWI, Pearl Harbor in 1941, The Gulf of Tonkin incident, and more. There is clear evidence of the same m.o. going back to the USS Maine incident to start the Spanish-American War.
 
Lim -

Afghanistan was another ruse. Here's the "short" version:

The two claim that the US government's main objective in Afghanistan was to consolidate the position of the Taliban regime to obtain access to the oil and gas reserves in Central Asia.
They affirm that until August, the US government saw the Taliban regime "as a source of stability in Central Asia that would enable the construction of an oil pipeline across Central Asia" from the rich oilfields in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan, through Afghanistan and Pakistan, to the Indian Ocean. Until now, says the book, "the oil and gas reserves of Central Asia have been controlled by Russia. The Bush government wanted to change all that."
But, confronted with Taliban's refusal to accept US conditions, "this rationale of energy security changed into a military one", the authors claim.
"At one moment during the negotiations, the US representatives told the Taliban, 'either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs,'" Brisard said in an interview in Paris.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/oil.html There are several interesting links on that page.

...and more from some forgotten news reports:

Bush Given Invasion Plan Two Days Before 9/11 (Updated 4/3/03; see end)
In the context of misleading statements from White House spokesman Ari Fleischer and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice about the degree of US foreknowledge of the 9/11 events, MSNBC.com/news has revealed that detailed plans for the US retaliation against al-Qaeda and the Taliban reached the White House for Bush's signature on September 9, two days before the attacks.

In the words of MSNBC

`President Bush was expected to sign detailed plans for a worldwide war against al-Qaida two days before Sept. 11 but did not have the chance before the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, U.S. and foreign sources told NBC News.

`The document, a formal National Security Presidential Directive, amounted to a "game plan to remove al-Qaida from the face of the Earth," one of the sources told NBC News' Jim Miklaszewski.

`The plan dealt with all aspects of a war against al-Qaida, ranging from diplomatic initiatives to military operations in Afghanistan, the sources said on condition of anonymity.' In many respects, the directive, as described to NBC News, outlined essentially the same war plan that the White House, the CIA and the Pentagon put into action after the Sept. 11 attacks. The administration most likely was able to respond so quickly to the attacks because it simply had to pull the plans "off the shelf," Miklaszewski said.'



Update: 4/3/03:

This story is partially corroborated by Bob Woodward's Bush at War, pp. 35-36. He confirms that National Security Presidential Directive #9, after being vetted by NSC Advisor Condoleezza Rice in the White House, was "ready to go to the president on September 10." This was a plan to "eliminate" al Qaeda by going "on the offensive" against the Taliban. On September 4 the deputy secretaries of defense and state "approved and recommended a plan [to this effect] that would give the CIA $125 million to $200 million a year to arm the [Northern] Alliance."

Woodward is silent about MSNBC's claim that the National Security Presidential Directive (NSPD) ranged upwards to include "military operations in Afghanistan." Indeed, on page 32 he writes that "the [US] military had no plan" for Afghanistan at all. But this latter claim is incredible: the Pentagon has plans "on the shelf" for invading any country in the world, including (it has been said) Canada.


http://ist-socrates.berkeley.edu/~pdscott/qf911.html
 
Here's the more complete story of Bush/Cheney vis-a-vis A'stan:

Afghanistan, the Taliban

and the Bush Oil Team



by Wayne Madsen
democrats.com, January 2002

Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), globalresearch.ca, 23 January 2002



According to Afghan, Iranian, and Turkish government sources, Hamid Karzai, the interim Prime Minister of Afghanistan, was a top adviser to the El Segundo, California-based UNOCAL Corporation which was negotiating with the Taliban to construct a Central Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline from Turkmenistan through western Afghanistan to Pakistan.

Karzai, the leader of the southern Afghan Pashtun Durrani tribe, was a member of the mujaheddin that fought the Soviets during the 1980s. He was a top contact for the CIA and maintained close relations with CIA Director William Casey, Vice President George Bush, and their Pakistani Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) Service interlocutors. Later, Karzai and a number of his brothers moved to the United States under the auspices of the CIA. Karzai continued to serve the agency's interests, as well as those of the Bush Family and their oil friends in negotiating the CentGas deal, according to Middle East and South Asian sources.

When one peers beyond all of the rhetoric of the White House and Pentagon concerning the Taliban, a clear pattern emerges showing that construction of the trans-Afghan pipeline was a top priority of the Bush administration from the outset. Although UNOCAL claims it abandoned the pipeline project in December 1998, the series of meetings held between U.S., Pakistani, and Taliban officials after 1998, indicates the project was never off the table.

Quite to the contrary, recent meetings between U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Wendy Chamberlain and that country's oil minister Usman Aminuddin indicate the pipeline project is international Project Number One for the Bush administration. Chamberlain, who maintains close ties to the Saudi ambassador to Pakistan (a one-time chief money conduit for the Taliban), has been pushing Pakistan to begin work on its Arabian Sea oil terminus for the pipeline.

Meanwhile, President Bush says that U.S. troops will remain in Afghanistan for the long haul. Far from being engaged in Afghan peacekeeping -- the Europeans are doing much of that -- our troops will effectively be guarding pipeline construction personnel that will soon be flooding into the country.

Karzai's ties with UNOCAL and the Bush administration are the main reason why the CIA pushed him for Afghan leader over rival Abdul Haq, the assassinated former mujaheddin leader from Jalalabad, and the leadership of the Northern Alliance, seen by Langley as being too close to the Russians and Iranians. Haq had no apparent close ties to the U.S. oil industry and, as both a Pushtun and a northern Afghani, was popular with a wide cross-section of the Afghan people, including the Northern Alliance. Those credentials likely sealed his fate.

When Haq entered Afghanistan from Pakistan last October, his position was immediately known to Taliban forces, which subsequently pinned him and his small party down, captured, and executed them. Former Reagan National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane, who worked with Haq, vainly attempted to get the CIA to help rescue Haq. The agency claimed it sent a remotely-piloted armed drone to attack the Taliban but its actions were too little and too late. Some observers in Pakistan claim the CIA tipped off the ISI about Haq's journey and the Pakistanis, in turn, informed the Taliban. McFarlane, who runs a K Street oil consulting firm, did not comment on further questions about the circumstances leading to the death of Haq.

While Haq was not part of the Bush administration's GOP (Grand Oil Plan) for South Asia, Karzai was a key player on the Bush Oil team. During the late 1990s, Karzai worked with an Afghani-American, Zalmay Khalilzad, on the CentGas project. Khalilzad is President Bush's Special National Security Assistant and recently named presidential Special Envoy for Afghanistan. Interestingly, in the White House press release naming Khalilzad special envoy, no mention was made of his past work for UNOCAL. Khalilzad has worked on Afghan issues under National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, a former member of the board of Chevron, itself no innocent bystander in the future CentGas deal. Rice made an impression on her old colleagues at Chevron. The company has named one of their supertankers the SS Condoleezza Rice.

Khalilzad, a fellow Pashtun and the son of a former government official under King Mohammed Zahir Shah, was, in addition to being a consultant to the RAND Corporation, a special liaison between UNOCAL and the Taliban government. Khalilzad also worked on various risk analyses for the project.

Khalilzad's efforts complemented those of the Enron Corporation, a major political contributor to the Bush campaign. Enron, which recently filed for bankruptcy in the single biggest corporate collapse in the nation's history, conducted the feasibility study for the CentGas deal. Vice President Cheney held several secret meetings with top Enron officials, including its Chairman Kenneth Lay, earlier in 2001. These meetings were presumably part of Cheney's non-public Energy Task Force sessions. A number of Enron stockholders, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, became officials in the Bush administration. In addition, Thomas White, a former Vice Chairman of Enron and a multimillionaire in Enron stock, currently serves as the Secretary of the Army.

A chief benefactor in the CentGas deal would have been Halliburton, the huge oil pipeline construction firm that also had its eye on the Central Asian oil reserves. At the time, Halliburton was headed by **** Cheney. After Cheney's selection as Bush's Vice Presidential candidate, Halliburton also pumped a huge amount of cash into the Bush-Cheney campaign coffers. And like oil cash cow Enron, there were Wall Street rumors in late December that Halliburton, which suffered a forty per cent drop in share value, might follow Enron into bankruptcy court.

Assisting with the CentGas negotiations with the Taliban was Laili Helms, the niece-in-law of former CIA Director Richard Helms. Laili Helms, also a relative of King Zahir Shah, was the Taliban's unofficial envoy to the United States and arranged for various Taliban officials to visit the United States. Laili Helms' base of operations was in her home in Jersey City on the Hudson River. Ironically, most of her work on behalf of the Taliban was practically conducted in the shadows of the World Trade Center, just across the river.

Laili Helms' liaison work for the Taliban paid off for Big Oil. In December 1997, the Taliban visited UNOCAL's Houston refinery operations. Interestingly, the chief Taliban leader based in Kandahar, Mullah Mohammed Omar, now on America's international Most Wanted List, was firmly in the UNOCAL camp. His rival Taliban leader in Kabul, Mullah Mohammed Rabbani (not to be confused with the head of the Northern Alliance Burhanuddin Rabbani), favored Bridas, an Argentine oil company, for the pipeline project. But Mullah Omar knew UNOCAL had pumped large sums of money to the Taliban hierarchy in Kandahar and its expatriate Afghan supporters in the United States. Some of those supporters were also close to the Bush campaign and administration. And Kandahar was the city near which the CentGas pipeline was to pass, a lucrative deal for the otherwise desert outpost.

While Clinton's State Department omitted Afghanistan from the top foreign policy priority list, the Bush administration, beholden to the oil interests that pumped millions of dollars into the 2000 campaign, restored Afghanistan to the top of the list, but for all the wrong reasons. After Bush's accession to the presidency, various Taliban envoys were received at the State Department, CIA, and National Security Council. The CIA, which appears, more than ever, to be a virtual extended family of the Bush oil interests, facilitated a renewed approach to the Taliban. The CIA agent who helped set up the Afghan mujaheddin, Milt Bearden, continued to defend the interests of the Taliban. He bemoaned the fact that the United States never really bothered to understand the Taliban when he told the Washington Post last October, "We never heard what they were trying to say... We had no common language. Ours was, 'Give up bin Laden.' They were saying, 'Do something to help us give him up.' "

There were even reports that the CIA met with their old mujaheddin operative bin Laden in the months before September 11 attacks. The French newspaper Le Figaro quoted an Arab specialist named Antoine Sfeir who postulated that the CIA met with bin Laden in July in a failed attempt to bring him back under its fold. Sfeir said the CIA maintained links with bin Laden before the U.S. attacked his terrorist training camps in Afghanistan in 1998 and, more astonishingly, kept them going even after the attacks. Sfeir told the paper, "Until the last minute, CIA agents hoped bin Laden would return to U.S. command, as was the case before 1998." Bin Laden actually officially broke with the US in 1991 when US troops began arriving in Saudi Arabia during Operation Desert Storm. Bin Laden felt this was a violation of the Saudi regime’s responsibility to protect the Islamic Holy Shrines of Mecca and Medina from the infidels. Bin Laden’s anti-American and anti-House of Saud rhetoric soon reached a fever pitch.

The Clinton administration made numerous attempts to kill Bin Laden. In August 1998, Al Qaeda operatives blew up several U.S. embassies in Africa. In response, Bill Clinton ordered cruise missiles to be launched from US ships in the Persian Gulf into Afghanistan, which missed Bin Laden by a few hours. The Clinton administration also devised a plan with Pakistan's ISI to send a team of assassins into Afghanistan to kill Bin Laden. But Pakistan's government was overthrown by General Musharraf, who was viewed as particularly close to the Taliban. The CIA cancelled its plans, fearing Musharraf's ISI would tip off the Taliban and Bin Laden. . The CIA's connections to the ISI in the months before September 11 and the weeks after are also worthy of a full-blown investigation. The CIA continues to maintain an unhealthy alliance with the ISI, the organization that groomed bin Laden and the Taliban. Last September, the head of the ISI, General Mahmud Ahmed, was fired by Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf for his pro-Taliban leanings and reportedly after the U.S. government presented Musharraf with disturbing intelligence linking the general to the terrorist hijackers.

General Ahmed was in Washington, DC on the morning of September 11 meeting with CIA and State Department officials as the hijacked planes slammed into the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Later, both the Northern Alliance spokesman in Washington, Haron Amin, and Indian intelligence, in an apparent leak to The Times of India, confirmed that General Ahmed ordered a Pakistani-born British citizen and known terrorist named Ahmed Umar Sheik to wire $100,000 from Pakistan to the U.S. bank account of Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker.

When the FBI traced calls made between General Ahmed and Sheik's cellular phone - the number having been supplied by Indian intelligence to the FBI - a pattern linking the general with Sheik clearly emerged. According to The Times of India, the revelation that General Ahmed was involved in the Sheik-Atta money transfer was more than enough for a nervous and embarrassed Bush administration. It pressed Musharraf to dump General Ahmed. Musharraf mealy-mouthed the announcement of his general's dismissal by stating Ahmed "requested" early retirement.

Sheik was well known to the Indian police. He was arrested in New Delhi in 1994 for plotting to kidnap four foreigners, including an American citizen. Sheik was released by the Indians in 1999 in a swap for passengers on board New Delhi-bound Indian Airlines flight 814, hijacked by Islamic militants from Kathmandu, Nepal to Kandahar, Afghanistan. India continues to believe the ISI played a part in the hijacking since the hijackers were affiliated with the pro-bin Laden Kashmiri terrorist group, Harkat-ul-Mujaheddin, a group only recently and quite belatedly placed on the State Department's terrorist list. The ISI and bin Laden's Al Qaeda reportedly assists the group in its operations against Indian government targets in Kashmir.

The FBI, which assisted its Indian counterpart in the investigation of the Indian Airlines hijacking, says it wants information leading to the arrest of those involved in the terrorist attacks. Yet, no move has been made to question General Ahmed or those U.S. government officials, including Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, who met with him in September. Clearly, General Ahmed was a major player in terrorist activities across South Asia, yet still had very close ties to the U.S. government. General Ahmed's terrorist-supporting activities - and the U.S. government officials who tolerated those activities - need to be investigated.

The Taliban visits to Washington continued up to a few months prior to the September 11 attacks. The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research's South Asian Division maintained constant satellite telephone contact with the Taliban in Kandahar and Kabul. Washington permitted the Taliban to maintain a diplomatic office in Queens, New York headed by Taliban diplomat Abdul Hakim Mojahed. In addition, U.S. officials, including Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs Christina Rocca, who is also a former CIA officer, visited Taliban diplomatic officials in Islamabad. In the meantime, the Bush administration took a hostile attitude towards the Islamic State of Afghanistan, otherwise known as the Northern Alliance. Even though the United Nations recognized the alliance as the legitimate government of Afghanistan, the Bush administration, with oil at the forefront of its goals, decided to follow the lead of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and curry favor with the Taliban mullahs of Afghanistan. The visits of Islamist radicals did not end with the Taliban. In July 2001, the head of Pakistan's pro-bin Laden Jamiaat-i-Islami Party, Qazi Hussein Ahmed, also reportedly was received at the George Bush Center for Intelligence (aka, CIA headquarters) in Langley, Virginia.

According to the Washington Post, the Special Envoy of Mullah Omar, Rahmatullah Hashami, even came to Washington bearing a gift carpet for President Bush from the one-eyed Taliban leader. The Village Voice reported that Hashami, on behalf of the Taliban, offered the Bush administration to hold on to bin Laden long enough for the United States to capture or kill him but, inexplicably, the administration refused. Meanwhile, Spozhmai Maiwandi, the director of the Voice of America's Pashtun service, jokingly nicknamed "Kandahar Rose" by her colleagues, aired favorable reports on the Taliban, including a controversial interview with Mullah Omar.

The Bush administration's dalliances with the Taliban may have even continued after the start of the bombing campaign against their country. According to European intelligence sources, a number of European governments were concerned that the CIA and Big Oil were pressuring the Bush administration not to engage in an initial serious ground war on behalf of the Northern Alliance in order to placate Pakistan and its Taliban compatriots. The early-on decision to stick with an incessant air bombardment, they reasoned, was causing too many civilian deaths and increasing the shakiness of the international coalition.

The obvious, and woefully underreported, interfaces between the Bush administration, UNOCAL, the CIA, the Taliban, Enron, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, the groundwork for which was laid when the Bush Oil team was on the sidelines during the Clinton administration, is making the Republicans worried. Vanquished vice presidential candidate Joseph Lieberman is in the ironic position of being the senator who will chair the Senate Government Affairs Committee hearings on the collapse of Enron. The roads from Enron also lead to Afghanistan and murky Bush oil politics.

UNOCAL was also clearly concerned about its past ties to the Taliban. On September 14, just three days after terrorists of the Afghan-base al Qaeda movement crashed their planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon, UNOCAL issued the following statement: "The company is not supporting the Taliban in Afghanistan in any way whatsoever. Nor do we have any project or involvement in Afghanistan. Beginning in late 1997, Unocal was a member of a multinational consortium that was evaluating construction of a Central Asia Gas pipeline between Turkmenistan and Pakistan [via western Afghanistan]. Our company has had no further role in developing or funding that project or any other project that might involve the Taliban."

The Bush Oil Team, which can now rely on the support of the interim Prime Minister of Afghanistan, may think that war and oil profits mix. But there is simply too much evidence that the War in Afghanistan was primarily about building UNOCAL's pipeline, not about fighting terrorism. The Democrats, who control the Senate and its investigation agenda, should investigate the secretive deals between Big Oil, Bush, and the Taliban.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/MAD201A.html
 
limerickman said:
But are you seriously suggesting that 9/11 was orchestrated by the Americans ?
Now to answer your question: my strong belief is, based on everything I've seen thus far, is that the Bush admin. knew about the impending attack, or was aware of the plans of an attack like 9/11, well before it occurred, and did everything in its power to make it or allow it to happen.

I am not sure as to what level or amount of assistance and/or complicity they were involved, because there isn't enough corroborating evidence yet to draw a totally clear conclusion. There still are MANY unanswered questions, which is why I advocate a serious and independent special prosecutor being named, with no budget limits or statutes of limitation, and with all of the subpoena power that a special prosecutor would have.
 
wolfix said:
Wurm, have you ever met any top ranking government officials that are capable of pulling off the events you write about in these threads ??? What scares me about government people is that they seem so incapable of doing much of anything let alone pulling off a internal strike on 9/11.
In an earlier thread you made a point of describing your military record and responsibilities. And yet here you are, on a internet site, a cycling internet site , telling all these dark secrets of the Bush's criminal enterprise. Proper military protocal is not handling things as important as what you are telling us through a internet site.

Since you asked the question, yes, I have met "high-ranking officials" in the gov't, as well as a few from places such as Israel, Turkey, and other European countries. For obvious reasons, those individuals will remain nameless. Therefore, yes, I KNOW that an inside operation such as the attack on 9/11 can be pulled off successfully - and according to the actual facts, it was - especially on pain of death to yourself and your family members. With the money and influence that the Bush people wield, their long-standing political and corporate connections, AND their history, it is well within the realm of probability. From what I've seen over the years, I wouldn't discount the abilities of any very determined cabal, whether "officially" outside OR inside the gov't.

When I earlier had brought up my military service, it was in response to Flappy's initial horn-tooting about his military service - as IF his time in the Navy suddenly lent credibility to his positions, (it did not). Otherwise, I doubt I would have ever mentioned my service on this site.

As for my postings about political subjects here on CF, I can tell you that I'm politically active on several other non-cycling sites as well. It so happens that I also enjoy road cycling too.
 
i have often been astonished at the apparent slips made by the bush admin in regards to knowing of, alerting to and preventing of indicators leading up to these attacks.
this esp given the fact that the bush dynasty family and friends biz has long been reliant on the "intelligence" branch of the gov't/corpporate/military alliance, and has an insider presence in this branch of the substantive
(as opposed to the symbolic version presented to the public)
us government. at the very least it would be the result of such incompetence that it would cast even greater doubt as to the relative suitability to office as possesed by bush. perhaps he is, as an engineer friend of mine said,
"dumb as a post". this alone is considerable impetus for impeachment.
i found it noteworthy in the recent "bicycling" magazine article where the editor rides with bush, bush relayed how it was rice who revealed to him the situation in the balkans. such an admission of ignorance and reliance can only be termed as pathetic. imagine if the world picture of bush is so limited in other regards...how can a president have a viable foreign policy if he has no knowlege of these matters, save at the behest of his handlers?
it is unthinkable to a portion of the us voting public bush supporters that anything like this could be a possibility, in fact bush has long had the support of those who belive that bush, as a purported christian, can not or would not do any wrong, as this would be contrary to the good teachings thereof. this is the church-state connection bush exploits to save his soul, if not his ass.
you know, the duped "family value" republican voters.
"he must know things we don't" is often stated by such people of this view.
but we must note this is an administration that has shown such disregard for the very nation it supposedly represents in the way of abandoning of years of hard-won environmental progress, increasing the poverty sector, balooning the national deficit, allowing collusion of not only special interest groups but corporate interests to be put in priority over the populus, to increase the weaponry of all types (the us continues to be wmd leader!) and so on...
given this record of bush furthering this agenda at the expense of his own peoples and nation, we must be open minded to examine all possibilties in connection with the compilation of research posted here.

there is motive and oppurtunity, enough to go on.

as for special prosecutor, who could swing it without indebted ties of influence? i think back to the 9-11 comission, weak to the core in terms of effectivenes, no supeona power, ended up recommending the boys just play together nice or some cr@p. this seems to be were things left off.

Wurm said:
Now to answer your question: my strong belief is, based on everything I've seen thus far, is that the Bush admin. knew about the impending attack, or was aware of the plans of an attack like 9/11, well before it occurred, and did everything in its power to make it or allow it to happen.

I am not sure as to what level or amount of assistance and/or complicity they were involved, because there isn't enough corroborating evidence yet to draw a totally clear conclusion. There still are MANY unanswered questions, which is why I advocate a serious and independent special prosecutor being named, with no budget limits or statutes of limitation, and with all of the subpoena power that a special prosecutor would have.
 
MountainPro said:
Is Zapper actually banned or has he just written that below his name himself?
What happened? It’s been a while since I’ve logged on. Did slimerickman finally get Zapper banned? It seems all of Zappers posts have been deleted but none of limerickman’s retorts have. Someone fill me in...
 
Bikerman2004 said:
What happened? It’s been a while since I’ve logged on.
You've got a lot of make-up reading to do. Better get started or you'll get buried...

;)
 
Wurm said:
You've got a lot of make-up reading to do. Better get started or you'll get buried...

;)
I've read through some of this but most or all of zappers posts are gone...What did he do?
 
Maybe I'm "special"? :p Or maybe it's the kind of names you call people? :confused:
 
Wurm said:
Maybe I'm "special"? :p Or maybe it's the kind of names you call people? :confused:

No, you are just a 'tard. As in a Carlos Mencia "de de de". Someone who acts retarded but in reality, is just mentally lazy, not impaired.

Someone who ignores facts because they do not fit his "plan".
 
bring on the facts, then. they are subject to scrutiny, though.

just a heads up for you.




QUOTE=Weisse Luft]
Someone who ignores facts because they do not fit his "plan".[/QUOTE]
 
The Monkey Man's Cheering Section doesn't deal in facts and reality. That's why the only thing they know is 'attack the messenger'.
 
Wurm said:
The Monkey Man's Cheering Section doesn't deal in facts and reality. That's why the only thing they know is 'attack the messenger'.


Your "buycott" was proven patently ineffictive. Then your fabricated story on the BBC reporters was proven wrong.

Your deflections have no merit. You are a shill. A Carlos Mencia "de de de".
 
Weisse Luft said:
Your "buycott" was proven patently ineffictive. Then your fabricated story on the BBC reporters was proven wrong.

Your deflections have no merit. You are a shill. A Carlos Mencia "de de de".

"proven patently ineffictive"? "your fabricated story on the BBC reporters was proven wrong."?? How so? Just because you said so?? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: Typical Air Amateur lack of skills, knowledge, or credibility, replaced with bluster and hot "luft". LMAO! (BTW - learn how to spell "ineffective".)

I haven't seen the evidence of any of your claims of "proof" on either case. Wishful thinking on your part, yes.

If you have anything that resembles actual fact, please let us know. :p
 
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/10/07/051007131357.nstalu7a.html
The White House has denied that US President George W. Bush said God told him to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, as a new BBC documentary is expected to reveal.



"That's absurd. He's never made such comments," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Thursday.

The documentary series set to be broadcast later this month in Britain claims Bush made the claim when he met Palestinian leader Mahmud Abbas and then-foreign minister Nabil Shaath in June 2003.

And read on:

http://www.hoovers.com/oil-&-gas-re...tion/--HICID__1260--/free-ind-factsheet.xhtml