Bush Memos Emerges: God Wants to "Erase" Mid-East Enemies "Before a New Age Begins"

Originally posted by CreeWolf
So, where most countries in the Middle East routinely mix Politics AND Religion, do you think of them as "absolutely evil"?

The world is much more complicated than good versus evil.

To answer your question. It makes them dangerous and irrational.

Our country is heading more in the wrong direction each day it continues to turn its back on God. Even if God is NOT real, at the very least the concept gives people of this country SOMETHING or SOMEONE they hold themselves accountable to. Those who don't have any religion ultimately only have GOVERNMENT for guidance and positive influence.

Rather than fearing retribution from God why shouldn't government officials hold themselves accountable to the people they claim to serve? If they don't live up to these expectations, we, as citizens, should hold them responsible for their poor judgment and self-serving agendas. Thereby providing the "fear of retribution" you feel is necessary for good governance.

Or as a citizen do you not believe in having to uphold that part of your responsibility in our constitutional republic?

As for the rest of us, why shouldn't we look to science, philosophy (which includes parables often found in religious texts), the arts, and our own moral code for guidance in what's a very complicated world?

I doubt George W. Bush was a true Christian, but at least Government didn't grow and reach into my pockets as it has under Obama's administration!

Now you're trying to argue qualitatively which is more virtuous. World-domination and murder, for ideological reasons, to benefit the United States and the Christian God. Versus diplomacy and socialized government which in turn costs you money.

I'll let others cast the first stone.

This whole thread seems nothing more than an attack on Christianity. Like white males and Jews, its more and more acceptable to judge more harshly than ever.

No it's an attack on those who employ "belief" before logic and use it as rationale for murder.

[edit on 26-5-2009 by Xtraeme]

reply to post by liveandlearn


well be specific if you're going to say that the French gave us the Statue of Liberty...

it was actually given to us by the "French Grand Orient Temple Masons"...

www.freemasonrywatch.org...

just look at the plaque on the statue itself:

reply to post by JanusFIN


Absolute BS!

The republicans could not give a damm about religion. They were/are using, abusing and twisting religious texts as a pretext to enrich themselves at everyone else's expense. Millions have died, or will die, at their hands. By making themselves look as religious kooks its easy for them to hide their real motives and thus escape prosecution. After all you can't hang insane people, right?

This conspiracy is well documented throughout the internet, all it takes is a little searching and common sense. But common sense is not as common as most think. People are easily mislead by mainstream news, especially in the USA. It was bad enough for the neo-cons to STEAL the first election but to win a second shows utter ignorance from the masses and pure greed by our controllers.

Originally posted by mecheng
Have you guys heard of the "Scroll of Bush"?

www.templeinstitute.org...

www.powerofprophecy.com...
www.powerofprophecy.com...

President George W. Bush, visiting the nation of Israel, was presented with a rabbinical decree, the Scroll of Bush. The Scroll declared that he, Bush, is none other than the prophesied Gog, of the land of Magog; that is, Chief Prince of Meshech and Tubal.

I'm not a religious person but in the Scroll of Bush, the Rabbis declare BUSH as Gog! I don't get it.

Anyone have any ideas how this might tie together?

The way the scroll of Bush is referring to Gog is The Leader of the West. Obama is now Gog as he is now the Leader of the West.

Originally posted by Rockstrongo37
Personally I don't trust the word of the former French President, remember he was working on developing nuclear technology with Sadam and I believe that was the real reason he didn't want to work with Bush in taking Sadam down.

I don't know if I have to believe the story either. I am very suspicious.

But please don't fall into gross traps, you were told by your MSM about what is in your quote in order to discredit Chirac. There is no ground for this accusation.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by JanusFIN

 

The republicans could not give a damm about religion. They were/are using, abusing and twisting religious texts as a pretext to enrich themselves at everyone else's expense. Millions have died, or will die, at their hands. By making themselves look as religious kooks its easy for them to hide their real motives and thus escape prosecution. After all you can't hang insane people, right?

EC, you might be right there. The intriguing part to this pretense if that’s what it is, at least in the case of "W", is that it went back decades. So, we would have to believe that this ongoing religious act was carried out by a man that many consider a bungling buffoon or worse. In your estimation is Bush simply a controlled fool or is the idiot persona also part of the pretense?

Originally posted by Rockstrongo37
It’s difficult to know if this article is as accurate as we think it may be. The bias of the reporter has to be taken into consideration as well. Bush was a Christian but was he a "religious nut"? Personally I don't trust the word of the former French President, remember he was working on developing nuclear technology with Sadam and I believe that was the real reason he didn't want to work with Bush in taking Sadam down. This is a very sensational bit of news but it will be interesting to see if it actually turns out to be true. It seems there is a lot of second hand information and little actual documentation.

Rock, is the story a plant to reinforce Bush as being driven by religious fanatacism rather than simply a greedy warmonger?

You mentioned the French and the nuclear technology and I clearly remember reports at the time the war started that a number of European nations had side-deals with Iraq circumventing the sanctions. It might have been food for oil or food for future oil rights, something along those lines. Those nations obviously opted out of any involvement.

Germany and France - dismissed only days ago by Donald Rumsfeld as "Old Europe" - have come up with a comprehensive plan to avoid war by sending thousands of UN troops to take effective control of Iraq.

At the 11th Hour, "Old Europe" Unites to Stop Bush's War

This is a confusing topic as there is validation of a number of angles on this story at least via the Internet. Is Bush a religious fanatic, greedy warmonger, both or what? Was the religious angle an alibi?

This revelation really throws a wrench in the motor of those who have year-after-year espoused the standard secular NWO, war-for-oil domination, strictly corporate greed motivation of the neocons' illegal, trumped-up wars. Ever since I first read the story of what Bush told the Palestinian journalist in '03 (which I read about in '04, I think) about God Himself instructing him to go to war, I've known that at least Bush himself was/is primarily religiously motivated... NO differently than Osama bin Laden or whatever other zealous holy roller freak. True that among the neoCON power brokers as a whole, there were certainly other sinister motivations for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, but the Bush Jr. monkey (not to insult monkeys) is first and foremost a religious (not to be confused with spiritual) creepazoid.

reply to post by Miraj


You are right about people not following Jesus' teachings. You are actually supporting what Jesus said in Revelation 3. Jesus told John, in the book of Revelation, that last church period (time period leading up to the Gog and Magog war) would become "neither cold nor hot" meaning they, the church, are not trying to follow Jesus with their whole heart nor rejecting Him but basically believing but not living according to the Word (Revelation 3:15). Jesus gave a message to us saying "For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing, not realizing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked" meaning they have taken their focus off of Jesus and fallen to the their old ways (Revelation 3:17). You have made a great observation

Don't look at Christians to understand Christianity, look at Christ Himself for understanding. The only place you will find the truth of Him is in the Bible.

The way Christians act today is an indicator that the Gog and Magog war is soon to come also.

An article from a bad source, quoted from another bad source that can't be confirmed and has a blatant link to Chirac with absolutely no citation?

A visiting Liberal Professor at a Liberal University and people take his word for it?

Propaganda is the dissemination of information aimed at influencing the opinions or behaviors of people. As opposed to impartially providing information, propaganda in its most basic sense, often presents information primarily in order to influence its audience. Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or gives loaded messages in order to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. The desired result is a change of the attitude toward the subject in the target audience to further a political agenda.

Propaganda is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist.
—Garth S. Jowett and Victoria O'Donnell, Propaganda and Persuasion
Wikipedia on Propoganda.

ATS is in fact going downhill fast it seems. The good posts are so overwhelmed by the meaningless stuff its nearly impossible to even find the gems. One thing is for sure, if its a popular thread it is likely the Left and Right going at it with their respective Propaganda.

Could the radicals on the Left and the Right please square off heavily armed and get it over with so the rest of us can carry on?

32 flags, you have got to be kidding?

[edit on 5/26/2009 by Blaine91555]

Originally posted by Blaine91555
An article from a bad source, quoted from another bad source that can't be confirmed and has a blatant link to Chirac with absolutely no citation?

I agree Alternet is almost always a questionable source, but the one part I found interesting was,

The story has now been confirmed by Chirac himself in a new book, published in France in March, by journalist Jean Claude Maurice. Chirac is said to have been stupefied and disturbed by Bush's invocation of Biblical prophesy to justify the war in Iraq and "wondered how someone could be so superficial and fanatical in their beliefs".

Which I believe is in reference to this book: Si vous le répétez, je démentirai... : Chirac, Sarkozy, Villepin. It would be great if we could get a photocopy of the page.

[edit on 26-5-2009 by Xtraeme]

The source may not be solid but it does fit into the pattern.
His refusal and the crap he did in denying wiccan soldiers their pentacle on their graves.
CHRISTIAN EMBASSY - remember that scandal?
Non-christian soldiers having to file lawsuits because of blatant military discrimination.
Our military power structure getting called CHRISTOCRATS
Bush calling the war a crusade. Others in his administration calling it that.
The memo covers.

I personally think it probably did happen. There's enough there though, even without this, if one looks for it.
www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org...

Originally posted by Hemisphere

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by JanusFIN

 

The republicans could not give a damm about religion. They were/are using, abusing and twisting religious texts as a pretext to enrich themselves at everyone else's expense. Millions have died, or will die, at their hands. By making themselves look as religious kooks its easy for them to hide their real motives and thus escape prosecution. After all you can't hang insane people, right?

EC, you might be right there. The intriguing part to this pretense if that’s what it is, at least in the case of "W", is that it went back decades. So, we would have to believe that this ongoing religious act was carried out by a man that many consider a bungling buffoon or worse. In your estimation is Bush simply a controlled fool or is the idiot persona also part of the pretense?

He is neither a fool nor an idiot, just a dyslexic puppet.

Bush sr, in conjunction with other notable neo-cons was running the show the past eight years. It appears the neo-cons have hijacked the republican party in the last decade or so but in reality I don't think they are much different from mainstream conservatives.

The agenda is and has always been imperialism.

I guess I found the BDS forum. All you have to do with some people is say faith, god, or prophecy and they go crazy on you. One might recall the founders of America did so quite regularly, and before 1960 all the leaders of Europe as well. I do not belong to the church of atheism and so do not sing your anti-religious rhetoric. There are quite a few threads on ATS regarding last days prophecy so why so crazy that President Bush saw or believed in one.

Originally posted by Hemisphere
You mentioned the French and the nuclear technology and I clearly remember reports at the time the war started that a number of European nations had side-deals with Iraq circumventing the sanctions. It might have been food for oil or food for future oil rights, something along those lines. Those nations obviously opted out of any involvement.

Most european nations opted out of the second gulf war not because they condone imperialism but because they had outstanding oil and military contracts with the sadam regime. When a regime changes all prior contracts become null-and-void.

The first gulf war was much different since the objective was to drive iraq out of kuwait and protect kuwaiti oil reserves from falling to the "wrong hands". At that point it became evident he was getting too powerfull and had to go but they were scared of an iranian attack and thus the "invasion" stopped short of baghdad.


[edit on 26-5-2009 by EarthCitizen07]

I have no doubt about the source. This particular extract of the book was published in french news magazine L'Express.
I am sorry I don't have a copy of the book nor the magazine.
I can link to blogs that have a copy of the extract published in L'Express but it will prove nothing.
There is no doubt this story was published but the story remains questionable.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


So those europeans nations wisely thought that by opposing the USA, they were going to keep those valuable contracts. Because US would back off ? Or because Iraq would beat the US ?
It was certainly better to join in order to have a slice of the cake, don't you think ?
There was some conflicts of interests amongst many other reasons.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

He is neither a fool nor an idiot, just a dyslexic puppet.

Bush sr, in conjunction with other notable neo-cons was running the show the past eight years. It appears the neo-cons have hijacked the republican party in the last decade or so but in reality I don't think they are much different from mainstream conservatives.

The agenda is and has always been imperialism.

Exactly. Glad someone sees through the charade. GWB is not a smart or cultured person. He has a passing familiarity with Christian concepts and terminology and is from a place where dropping biblical references was a point gainer.

A rich kid beyond belief, but a bible belt redneck at heart.

Bush Sr was notably silent all these years. He may be the devil incarnate, but he's no fool. Putting in his dopey son in as general manager of the firm seemed like a great idea at the time. No one guessed how badly things could get derailed in only a few years.

Too bad there isn't a chance for really smart people with no baggage being elected as president.


Mike

reply to post by Manouche


Iraq beat USA? Never a chance!

To be honest I have no idea what transpired behind closed doors but obviously europe and usa disagreed about the war at a fundamental level. Maybe they couldn't reach an agreement on how to split the loot and then the europeans decided to give us a lecture on morality...

Of course, not a chance

So those europeans nations are stupid. They were going to lose their contracts anyway. And now the new contracts are all for american companies. And it's only a ten years illegal war.

You know, apart from France and Germany, most european countries did join the Coalition in Iraq actually. Only the very mean ones stood out