It Is To Laugh! First Bush says he's not worried about Bin Laden.. now he says.....

Heheh, poor old Osama. Suddently from a man, who has strong bussines ties with Bush family become the no.1 looked guy on planet! I quess that he is a bit lonely, todays.
Last time he "demonstrated power" for western media he has ti hire his "army" (about 20 masked mens at best) and they are told to bring own weapons...
And yep, that was the almightly Al Keida, the other of terroristic network in at least 60 states, including very definitively out own, as Bush says

What nice phantom enemy. However what was overlooked is, that thanks to the overseas US actions, there is growing hatred for anything like US of A and this view of US as evil in the world that has to be eradicated is strangely supported by the US overseas policy so much, that sooner or later it bring the results...

Other than that, I feel sorry for Osama to being draged all around the world, when he is in fact sick and need medical attention - witch, conviently, the US of A is more that villing to give:
www.guardian.co.uk...

Now is not this beutifull? I mean - of course it is not proved at 100%, yet the boasting of the officer is great suggestion what normal guy would do - I mean I will oast about meeting like this as well

Need to update that story there trodas.
If you notice the date of the article, the meeting took place in July 2001 before September 11th 2001. The hunt was not on for OBL until after 9/11.
This story has been posted a few times on ATS.
I serious doubt that the US would be willing to give medical aid to OBL at this time or anytime in the future, unless of course he is behind bars

Originally posted by kenshiro2012
Need to update that story there trodas.
If you notice the date of the article, the meeting took place in July 2001 before September 11th 2001. The hunt was not on for OBL until after 9/11.
This story has been posted a few times on ATS.
I serious doubt that the US would be willing to give medical aid to OBL at this time or anytime in the future, unless of course he is behind bars

Ofcourse thats what you want us to think,oh its been discussed befor no need to bring it up again,ok what exactly was proven last time? Are you saying Bush is in no way responsible? Why should we not discuss the falability of this administration?

Ofcourse thats what you want us to think,oh its been discussed befor no need to bring it up again,ok what exactly was proven last time? Are you saying Bush is in no way responsible? Why should we not discuss the falability of this administration?

What I want you to think? I do not know where you get that. Trodas, presented the article in an attempt to state that the US was willing to give medical aid to OBL now. Unfortunately the article is 5 years old thus negating his / her argument.
What was proven last time? No a whole heck of a lot, other than prior to 9/11, OBL may have recieved assistance for the US all the way up to 7/2001 that is. Nothing more.
Am I saying that Bush is in no way responsible? To what? He may have been responsible for the "CIA" contacting OBL in July 2001 and offering medical assistance. This has not been proven either way though.
I am not asking for you not to dicuss the fallabilities of the Bush administration. What I do ask is if you attempt to present evidence to support your statments either for or against the Bush Adminstiration, present in the correct context. Trodas did not do that and I am sure that if take alook at the article which trodas has presented, you will quickly see how it did not support his / her argument.

Originally posted by vincere7

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
People need to wake up. This administration and Democrats and Republicans alike are lying through their teeth to keep this warfare state alive. And to keep OPEC from going with the Euro.

A tid bit - OPEC is on the defensive as they understand we have the pipeline to the Caspian sea and Iraqi oil, the second largest untapped reserves in the world. We have succesfully put OPEC in check and that was a goal with Iraq and Afghanistan. Gas prices are high not because of the "peak oil" scapegoat, or refineries, but due to OPEC's revenge on the US taking a Muslim nation. Few people do, but if you check out when we went into Iraq you will see OPEC cut production, and raised the price, why? lol, the answer was to regulate price index for the future. I have a bridge to sell you in Dubai if you believe that one.

If you know the history of OPEC then you know oil has always been used as a political tool and weapon, which is why we are in Iraq and will continue to be in Iraq. Terrorism is real and is why we are securing logistics.

Uh.. no. The Caspian Sea pipeline yielded not nearly as much as they had anticipated. Hence, Iran... and all those wet PNAC dreams...

We (the US government) are petrified that the the Iranian consortium will change their trading currency (dollars) to the Euro. There's your Iran war and Iraq war in a nutshell. It's not called WMD, its called keeping dollar hegemony in this cut-throat business of oil.

There's your war.

[edit on 1/27/06 by EastCoastKid]

First of all let me say that i like american people and have many great american friends...

.....IMO, nothing this president says inspires me with confidence. It seems the only time he seems to speak coherently is when his speech writers have prepared what he has to say and he has had the oportunity to practice rebuttals to expected questions from the press. He honestly strikes me as a man without an opinion of his own....any time he has the oportunity to change that perception he seems to step on his own toes and tread on his own tongue. If ever i have seen what could be called a puppet of the administration, then bush takes the cake.

My point? He's just regurgitating what his crafty advisors have fed him. Where as last time? we saw the real bush...absorbed in his real concerns and priorities. like lining his own pockets.

Play the music box and watch the monkey dance.

Thanks for the picture with Georgies exact words. Now, we can also add in there the chuckes and the head bobbing by the president and there you have it.

On tv, he looked straight at the camera and said "every American should fear Osama Bin Laden"

I repeat, this is why people do not trust him. Who could? This is one of the reasons I dont trust the man. Who can blame me????

No one
or
Noone as we tend to say around here.

Originally posted by TxSecret
Seems like Bin Laden showed up right on cue. (Seems like Bin Laden only shows up when he's 'needed').
Does anyone else pay attention to stuff like this?

CNN's Cafferty said the same thing. I couldnt find a (reputable) link, but it was something to the effect of: isn't funny how the last time we heard from bin laden was four days before the presidential election?

this has been said already, but i, too, find it really convenient that, when bush's poll numbers are okay, bin laden isnt even someone to worry about, but once those numers start slipping- poof!- out of nowhere appears a bin laden tape which was, incidentally, almost immediately vetted by our intelligence agencies. how could they have done all the voice recognition stuff during the same business day, but, meanwhile, can't figure out where al- zarqouiwi (sp?, of course) is lunching and whether or not they should bomb the crap out of whichever (seemingly random) place they choose.

my main concern, though, is that the bushies, feeling cornered, may actually orchestrate another attack, or allow another one to happen... whichever theory you susbscribe to. look at where i live.



[edit on 28-1-2006 by HarlemHottie]

To fear Osama bin Who is sheer absurdity. If you buy into that, than you probly think the boogie man lives under your bed, too.

BOO!

Anyone who does not believe that people in our government WILL sacrifice Americans for their agendas needs to read Operation Northwoods. Its a smoking gun, to be sure.

In his new exposé of the National Security Agency entitled Body of Secrets, author James Bamford highlights a set of proposals on Cuba by the Joint Chiefs of Staff codenamed OPERATION NORTHWOODS. This document, titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba” was provided by the JCS to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962, as the key component of Northwoods. Written in response to a request from the Chief of the Cuba Project, Col. Edward Lansdale, the Top Secret memorandum describes U.S. plans to covertly engineer various pretexts that would justify a U.S. invasion of Cuba. These proposals - part of a secret anti-Castro program known as Operation Mongoose - included staging the assassinations of Cubans living in the United States, developing a fake “Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington,” including “sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated),” faking a Cuban airforce attack on a civilian jetliner, and concocting a “Remember the Maine” incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage. Bamford himself writes that Operation Northwoods “may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government.”
Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba [includes cover memoranda], March 13, 1962, TOP SECRET, 15 pp.

www.gwu.edu...

Good job East Coast Kid....people should see that document.

Now, our government has already planned things simular to 9/11 in the past. There is no denying it. One of their strategies was to fly a plane over Cuba, shoot it down with a missle, and blame the Cubans as a pretext for invasion.

They have planned it before. What makes you think that the US government wouldnt stage 9/11 as a pretext for war in the middle east?

But then again, thats been the norm throughout history. The government staging an event to launch us into a phony war. Spanish-American war, WW1, WW2, Korean War, Vietnam War, Gulf War, War on Terror, the list goes on.

Originally posted by kenshiro2012

Ofcourse thats what you want us to think,oh its been discussed befor no need to bring it up again,ok what exactly was proven last time? Are you saying Bush is in no way responsible? Why should we not discuss the falability of this administration?

What I want you to think? I do not know where you get that. Trodas, presented the article in an attempt to state that the US was willing to give medical aid to OBL now. Unfortunately the article is 5 years old thus negating his / her argument.
What was proven last time? No a whole heck of a lot, other than prior to 9/11, OBL may have recieved assistance for the US all the way up to 7/2001 that is. Nothing more.
Am I saying that Bush is in no way responsible? To what? He may have been responsible for the "CIA" contacting OBL in July 2001 and offering medical assistance. This has not been proven either way though.
I am not asking for you not to dicuss the fallabilities of the Bush administration. What I do ask is if you attempt to present evidence to support your statments either for or against the Bush Adminstiration, present in the correct context. Trodas did not do that and I am sure that if take alook at the article which trodas has presented, you will quickly see how it did not support his / her argument.

Actually I apologize for sounding like I was attacking you. I read the article and what not and you have avalid point that it is nonsupportive of his argument. the article used alot of supposedlys and merely alluded to fact. I admit that I had not read the article befor I made the previous statements. So ummm...sorry. hey I admit that I like the president am fallible.

Its hard to argue with the truth. He said what he said, and he said he watnt worried about Bin Laden.

Imagine Kerry doing something like that.

"My fello 'Mericanz, you should be worrd bout Bin Laden and take what he says sersly...I do."



I saw the camera pointed at him shake on this note

To have a good lie, you have to be consistent in order to have the illusion of continuity. This, Bush lacks.

""But then again, thats been the norm throughout history. The government staging an event to launch us into a phony war. Spanish-American war, WW1, WW2, Korean War, Vietnam War, Gulf War, War on Terror, the list goes on. ""

Abosulutely right on the nail........................

as Winston Churchhill said............"nothing in history happens by accident"

and he ought to know..............as he planned with W. Wilson as they set up the Lusitanna to get sunk by the Germans with Americans on board to suck us into to WW1................

I believe it was Lord Chamberland who as assigned to "investigate" the incident and called the whole thing.....

...."A damn dirty business" and then refused to talk about it for the rest of his life.......

Wasn't it so convenient that 9/11 happened in time for us to use it for a loose excuse of WMDs to take out Iraq and set up a puppet government to switch Saddam's Euro oil trading back to America dollars???

and now this recent Bin Laden tape of immediate terror attack upcoming in the US, the Fed shutting down M3 reports at the end of March (measure repo of dollars to euros).........the IAEA now saying that Iran isn't 5 to 10 years away from nuclear weapons but is now a threat at the end of march.......Banks now stating to upper managment that safe deposite box precious metals will be held in check and time released by only homeland security personnel for major customers starting when?.......by the end of march....again!

So what convenient "terror attack" on our country this time will give us the excuse to go in and switch the Iran euro trading bource back to US do..........er excuse me........I mean take out those nulcear reactors?? as Cheney said we would do if a strike comes on US soil again........

Whom among America citizens this time does our government plan to have sacrificed to guard the greed of fiat dollars our Fed drives on the world through the protection of oil trade backing??

Talk about damn dirty business..............

Binladen and Bush's apparent flipfloping on the issue of Binladen are diversionary tactics to draw attention from real issues such as Iran and administration incompetence.