Planning for the Next Attack? (1 Viewer)

Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!
Status
Please reply by conversation.

Roger

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 11, 2003
844
0
Well the last time King George W. Bush went on an extended vacation was in August 2001. Here, we have a brand new president who stole the election from Gore and what did this Skull and Bones member do? He took an unprecedented long vacation during his first year which he didn’t earn for five stinking weeks I believe which was the longest vacation by a president ever let alone one who didn’t earn such a long vacation since he was new not to mention going AWOL from the Air Guard back in the 60’s. During this same time all major TV network “news” anchors took the entire month of August off as well. This was IMO to plan the events that unfolded during 9/11 to make sure the team was on the same page.

Here is some good reading about the NeoCon group called Project for the New American Century.

America ‘Pearl Harbored’
http://www.americanfreepress.net/12_24_02/America_Pearl_Harbored/america_pearl_harbored.html
Fanatical Warhawks Drafted Blueprint for Bloody U.S. World Domination Years Ago

The cabal of war fanatics advising the White House secretly planned a “transformation” of defense policy years ago, calling for war against Iraq and huge increases in military spending. A “catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor”—was seen as necessary to bring this about.

Here is a more “mainstream” version:
Bush planned Iraq 'regime change' before becoming President
http://www.sundayherald.com/27735
By Neil Mackay

“A SECRET blueprint for US global domination reveals that President Bush and his cabinet were planning a premeditated attack on Iraq to secure 'regime change' even before he took power in January 2001.
The blueprint, uncovered by the Sunday Herald, for the creation of a 'global Pax Americana' was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice- president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), George W Bush's younger brother Jeb and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC).”

“lt refers to key allies such as the UK as 'the most effective and efficient means of exercising American global leadership'”
London Subway bombings?

Bush and the Neo-Cons just got another trade pact so what else are they planning for us this September during this long vacation?
A New World Order Police state IMO.

On 9/11 we had jumbo jets flying buck-wild around the country when the SOP for small planes or jets is for fighters to be scrambled as we all had seen during the unfortunate Payne Stewart incident. Did men with box-cutters stand down NORAD as well? Of course not, Dick Cheney did.

www.prisonplanet.tv
www.infowars.com

After this vacation is over be afraid, be very afraid.

Tam Dalyell, the Labour MP, father of the House of Commons and one of the leading rebel voices against war with Iraq, said: 'This is garbage from right-wing think-tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks -- men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the idea of war. Men like Cheney, who were draft-dodgers in the Vietnam war.
 
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!

Roger

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 11, 2003
844
0

Roger

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 11, 2003
844
0
korsjs said:
man would i love love love to comment on your post, but i will not talk politics on this site anymore.

Why not? Did I miss something?
 

kbohip

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 9, 2005
293
0
Colorado Springs
LMAO! Thanks for the laughs Roger. I really like the part about the liberal media being involved with W.:rolleyes: Seriously I think liberals give WAY too much credit to W. coming up with all of these sinister plans. The guy would have to be a genius to plan this out and we all know he's not.
 

korsjs

Welcome To SatelliteGuys
Supporting Founder
Jan 25, 2004
7,583
0
Land O Lakes, FL
Roger said:
Why not? Did I miss something?

no, you did not miss anything. i consider all satelliteguys members my friends and the last time i voiced how i felt, it kind of turned into a go back and forth thing between the republicans and demoncrats. i can get on quite a roll on these subject and would rather have not have arguments with my friends here.
 

Roger

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 11, 2003
844
0
kbohip said:
LMAO! Thanks for the laughs Roger. I really like the part about the liberal media being involved with W.:rolleyes: Seriously I think liberals give WAY too much credit to W. coming up with all of these sinister plans. The guy would have to be a genius to plan this out and we all know he's not.

There is not a dime's difference between the two and there is no difference between liberals or conservatives because they are controlled by the same international corporations and banking interest. The right vs. left is a false paradigm that fools the dumb public into thinking that there is a difference between the two and gives them the false perception that they have power when in fact our last choice was Skull and Bones member Bush against Skull and Bones member Kerry. Not to mention that votes don't count because Bush stole the election not once but twice.
 

Hart5150

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 27, 2004
3,271
156
GOVERNOR MIFFLIN
Roger said:
There is not a dime's difference between the two and there is no difference between liberals or conservatives because they are controlled by the same international corporations and banking interest. The right vs. left is a false paradigm that fools the dumb public into thinking that there is a difference between the two and gives them the false perception that they have power when in fact our last choice was Skull and Bones member Bush against Skull and Bones member Kerry. Not to mention that votes don't count because Bush stole the election not once but twice.

So Bush stole the election with the help of Kerry?
 

cdru

Just another yahoo
Supporting Founder
Dec 4, 2003
1,117
0
Fort Wayne, Indiana
Slightly off topic, but kind of related. Several of the posts above are what causes the rift between the two sites. Roger is a "refugee" from DBSTalk and should be welcome from wherever he comes from. He has always been on the extreme side of the conspiracy theorist. You don't have to agree with him. You don't even have to read his posts. If he bothers you, put him on your ignore list.

His posts are honest from his point of view. They aren't sarcastic. They aren't subversive or anarchist propaganda. They aren't trolls. Just agree to disagree and move on if you don't like his posts.

There is also not a problem with talking politics as long as everyone stays civilized. There can even be heated debate on a topic with both sides making strong stands for their beliefs. But the one thing that must remain at all costs is civility. It's only when the discussion turns to one big flame fest that the problems start popping up.
 

philhu

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 1, 2004
1,215
0
Cold Boston Area
Roger said:
Name one thing that isn't a fact in my post above, riffjim, instead of slamming what you don't understand or haven't researched?

Hart:


Check out these:
http://www.infowars.com/resources.html
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ and http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/archives/cat_911.html


Bush didnt steal the election. He won. After they counted absentee ballots, he won popular vote to by over 1.4 million votes.

Please leave your sarcastic sh*t out of the group unless you check your facts.
 

Geronimo

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 9, 2003
12,027
1,611
korsjs said:
no, you did not miss anything. i consider all satelliteguys members my friends and the last time i voiced how i felt, it kind of turned into a go back and forth thing between the republicans and demoncrats. i can get on quite a roll on these subject and would rather have not have arguments with my friends here.



Demoncrats? Is THAT a sarcastic post?
 

LonghornXP

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
I'm kinda between the lines but I must say that many things have been fishy about Bush.

One of the things that bothers me is Bush in that school when he was told about the attacks. I've studied psychology in such great detail and what he did doesn't make sense. Nearly all people in that situation would at the least do these two things.

1. Even if he stayed sat down he would demand one of his staff to tell him more. Even for a not so bright person curiosity alone would make him ask a few questions even if he stayed sitting down.

2. The most likely and common response is the person getting up and pacing back and forth or just standing up and asking questions or in some cases people do both of these things.

In these types of situations the Bush response was either one of two things below as being the most likely. Now if bush didn't meet any of these areas than he was that rare stat that differed from the other 98% of people studied.

1. A reaction of regret and uncertianty.
2. Or the more likely reason for this reaction is that he knew what was going on before this why he wasn't curious or wanting to know more.

That is the biggest thing that bothers me because that just isn't a normal response for something like this if he really didn't know. Even Bush would have had a few questions answered like how will this hurt my election next term for example. He would have asked something if he really didn't know what was going on.

Now as time went on he made that swing into Iraq while always saying to the public that Iraq was involved in 9/11 which it wasn't.

I think that Bush knew about a possible attack using planes and I think he left it be doing nothing and once it happened you see his reaction of regret because he know he was in big trouble. That is why I think he knew what and who did it even thought he didn't plan the attack. That was our problem he didn't take the threat seriously and it backfired on him. Once that happened he had the perfect chance to push himself into Iraq because without 9/11 he would never be allowed to enter Iraq. That is my view that Bush allowed an attack on US soil (not on purpose but indirectly) and because the damage was done he figured it can't hurt me anymore to get revenge for my dad. The problem now is that he again didn't expect this many problems dealing with Iraq which is why we are here in this situation today.

I wonder what other people think about this viewpoint.
 

LonghornXP

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Also as a side note I think that Bush wouldn't allow to committ another attack on this country unless he felt he had a great shot at putting all the US people under Marshall Law to take away more rights. Now with that said I think the chances of this occuring are about 1 percent but with any other president it would be zero percent but with Bush I wouldn't count him out from doing something stupid like this just for power and power alone. We must remember that this family is all about power and nothing less or more.
 
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!
Status
Please reply by conversation.

Users who are viewing this thread

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Latest posts

Top