Think about THIS!

Originally posted by Springer
Think about it... HE is hiding in a RAT HOLE somewhere while OUR LEADER is on a BRAND NEW Airforce One sipping the finest France has to offer. GET IT?!

PEACE...
m...

Lol, no, he was sipping the finest California had to offer.

good point pupp.....
but I dont think that was what springer was geting at.

Originally posted by PuPP
Springer, do you know why we REALLY invaded Afghanistan after Russia softened them up first?

Osama was never the real target.

Have you heard of the Caspian Sea pipeline?

Also, opium was a big reason since the evil ones have been making mega bucks from spreading drugs and their addictions throughout the populations for a long time.

Before 9/11 opium production was about 75 tons a year.

In 2002, opium production was up to 3400 tons a year.

No I don't GET IT...
Get this... Bush is a Liar, Clinton is Liar, and THEY both serve the same agendas and master(s).

Hmmm, had not heard that! Empirically though, to me it makes sense. In the years immediately after 9/11/01 it seemed that heroin became THE most available street drug out there...and shifted it's focus from rock stars to executives. I know that's not how it looks on COPS! On TV it's all homeless people on smack...but it was gaining disproportionate popularity among business movers and shakers for a while there AND their suburbanite kids. If nothing else, pot and coke intercepts in the War on Drugs were on the rise....but opium was getting through somehow.

Originally posted by PuPP
Also, opium was a big reason since the evil ones have been making mega bucks from spreading drugs and their addictions throughout the populations for a long time.

Before 9/11 opium production was about 75 tons a year.

In 2002, opium production was up to 3400 tons a year.

Well, that's a pretty HUGE jump. I'd like a link before I believe this. That's about a 50000% jump in production, and a bit hard to believe. If you have a link to a valid news source, however, I will accept your arguement.

Originally posted by PuPP
"The most important thing is for us to find Osama Bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."
~ George Bush Sept 13, 2001

"I don�t know where Bin Laden is. I have no idea and I really don�t care. It�s not that important. It�s not our priority."
~ George Bush March 13, 2002

Thats' so a Bushism...He needs to permanantly insert his foot in his mouth.

Here's a hypothetical question....

If Bush is not elected back into office and one of the 9 democrats steps into office(take your pick, I'm rooting for Clark) how long will he/she have to be in office for another attack to be their fault? Or are those out there that will always blame Clinton for not getting terrorism under control? Or Bush for taking out Hussein and not concentrating on OBL? Are our presidents really the ones out in the middle east traking down OBL with AK47s in hand? I know the title "Commander in Cheif", but are we taking it too literally?

You're right about taking responsibility mamaship...

Since this is an e-mail spam re-post, I'm reminded of the various "PRICELESS" ones spoofing Mastercard.

They all start with a few Bush extravagances...

~5 minute jet ride to proclaim MISSION ACCOMPLISHED - $77,000

~22 hour plane ride including enourmous troop adjustments and security for photo op with Turkey - $1.2 Million dollars

~Taking the entire month of August 2001 for vacation then blaming CLINTON for 9/11...

PRICELESS!!!

For some things there's taking credit, for everything else blame Clinton.



[Edited on 5-1-2004 by RANT]

"For some things there's taking credit, for everything else blame Clinton."







[Edited on 5-1-2004 by mamaship]

I cannot find a weblink to back up my statement completely. It seems there are many conflicting UN reports.

"About 3,400 tons of opium were produced in Afghanistan in 2002, making Afghanistan again the largest opium producer in the world"

www.atimes.com...

"As a result of the ban, areas of Afghanistan controlled by the Taliban produced a few hundred tons of opium, compared with 3,200 tons produced last year and 4,500 tons the year before"

opioids.com...

"An October United Nations report confirmed that the Taliban successfully eliminated opium production in Afghanistan with a ban in 2000 that was almost universally enforced. The feat was enormous: Before the ban, Afghanistan supplied 90 percent of Europe�s heroin"

www.finalcall.com...

Note: Now do you wonder why the taliban was targeted?

Originally posted by mamaship

If Bush is not elected back into office and one of the 9 democrats steps into office(take your pick, I'm rooting for Clark)

Personally, I'm voting for Lieberman, but if he can't get in, I hope Bush wins...

Originally posted by PuPP
Note: Now do you wonder why the taliban was targeted?

No, but I don't think it was for opium. I think it was for a show of strength, and what better target then the one the USSR attacked for 4 years and lost against? LOL And my bird seems to agree, he just started bobbing his head.

The USSR or Russia is run by the same bloodlines that rule America.

Afghanistan was softened up by the Soviets.

It's all about profits - profits from weapons and resources stolen after conquest. Drugs are merely an added bonus.

Mickey Mouse would be better than the dubby being in office for another 4 years.

seeing as this all started with an email i thought this one might liven up the bush debate a little!!




We Finally Got Our Frankenstein... and He Was In a Spider Hole! -- by
Michael Moore

December 14, 2003


Thank God Saddam is finally back in American hands! He must have really
missed us. Man, he sure looked bad! But, at least he got a free dental exam
today. That's something most Americans can't get.

America used to like Saddam. We LOVED Saddam. We funded him. We armed him.
We helped him gas Iranian troops.

But then he screwed up. He invaded the dictatorship of Kuwait and, in doing
so, did the worst thing imaginable -- he threatened an even BETTER friend of
ours: the dictatorship of Saudi Arabia, and its vast oil reserves. The
Bushes and the Saudi royal family were and are close business partners, and
Saddam, back in 1990, committed a royal blunder by getting a little too
close to their wealthy holdings. Things went downhill for Saddam from there.

But it wasn't always that way. Saddam was our good friend and ally. We
supported his regime. It wasn�t the first time we had helped a murderer. We
liked playing Dr. Frankenstein. We created a lot of monsters -- the Shah of
Iran, Somoza of Nicaragua, Pinochet of Chile -- and then we expressed
ignorance or shock when they ran amok and massacred people. We liked Saddam
because he was willing to fight the Ayatollah. So we made sure that he got
billions of dollars to purchase weapons. Weapons of mass destruction. That's
right, he had them. We should know -- we gave them to him!

We allowed and encouraged American corporations to do business with Saddam
in the 1980s. That's how he got chemical and biological agents so he could
use them in chemical and biological weapons. Here's the list of some of the
stuff we sent him (according to a 1994 U.S. Senate report):
* Bacillus Anthracis, cause of anthrax.
* Clostridium Botulinum, a source of botulinum toxin.
* Histoplasma Capsulatam, cause of a disease attacking lungs, brain, spinal
cord, and heart.
* Brucella Melitensis, a bacteria that can damage major organs.
* Clostridium Perfringens, a highly toxic bacteria causing systemic illness.
* Clostridium tetani, a highly toxigenic substance.

And here are some of the American corporations who helped to prop Saddam up
by doing business with him: AT&T, Bechtel, Caterpillar, Dow Chemical,
Dupont, Kodak, Hewlett-Packard, and IBM (for a full list of companies and
descriptions of how they helped Saddam, go to:
www.laweekly.com/ink/03/23/news-crogan.php )

We were so cozy with dear old Saddam that we decided to feed him satellite
images so he could locate where the Iranian troops were. We pretty much knew
how he would use the information, and sure enough, as soon as we sent him
the spy photos, he gassed those troops. And we kept quiet. Because he was
our friend, and the Iranians were the "enemy." A year after he first gassed
the Iranians, we reestablished full diplomatic relations with him!

Later he gassed his own people, the Kurds. You would think that would force
us to disassociate ourselves from him. Congress tried to impose economic
sanctions on Saddam, but the Reagan White House quickly rejected that idea
-- they wouldn�t let anything derail their good buddy Saddam. We had a
virtual love fest with this Frankenstein whom we (in part) created.

And, just like the mythical Frankenstein, Saddam eventually spun out of
control. He would no longer do what he was told by his master. Saddam had to
be caught. And now that he has been brought back from the wilderness,
perhaps he will have something to say about his creators. Maybe we can learn
something... interesting. Maybe Don Rumsfeld could smile and shake Saddam's
hand again. Just like he did when he went to see him in 1983 (you can find a
photo at: www.gwu.edu... )

Maybe we never would have been in the situation we're in if Rumsfeld, Bush,
Sr., and company hadn't been so excited back in the 80s about their friendly
monster in the desert.

Meanwhile, anybody know where the guy is who killed 3,000 people on 9/11?
Our other Frankenstein?? Maybe he's in a mouse hole.

So many of our little monsters, so little time before the next election.

Stay strong, Democratic candidates. Quit sounding like a bunch of wusses.
These bastards sent us to war on a lie, the killing will not stop, the Arab
world hates us with a passion, and we will pay for this out of our pockets
for years to come. Nothing that happened today (or in the past 9 months) has
made us ONE BIT safer in our post-9/11 world. Saddam was never a threat to
our national security.

Only our desire to play Dr. Frankenstein dooms us all.

not that i want anyone to think i support saddam but he didn't do it alone!

Mike Moore is awesome. He's not anti-American, anti-gun or anti-capitalism like naysayers enjoy asserting. He's a SKEPTIC!

Love this photo:


Rummy and Saddam 1983
Disgusting.

Thanks for the back up rant.

moore is a legend! always manages to say what i'm thinking, and loudly!

LAW is correct...Bush didn't "cover" it....as he got Saddam, not Bin Laden, and it's Bin Laden who has committed those acts (or his people)... Therefore, Bush hasn't covered jack!

He took us from a budget surplus, back to a deficit...

He's gotten so much egg on our international faces...that Americans travelling abroad claim they are from Canada!!!

He's got us ankle deep into WWIII and wading further and further out, every time he opens his trap....

He's made the office of presidency into a running joke with his "Bushisms"....

Glad to have you!
But, as you can imagine, this very thread topic has been "Drawn, measured and found wanting".
In other words, this very weak argument has been thoroughly debunked numerous times, especially by myself and a dozen other folks.
The fairy tale of Sudan hand overs & the Clinton Admin walking away is just that, a fairy tale.
The blame Clinton for 9/11 mindset/argument also rests next to it on the same shelf of cock&bull.

Do us all a bandwith favor, click this before you fall down the bunny hole like Dim Son did on 9/11:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Clinton - Bush ... Different Presidents, same agenda.

Amen.....

the two party system is the biggest con to the american people one side is a bunch of lying thiefing backstabbers and the other side is..... Oh wait thats BOTH sides