PDA

View Full Version : For Those Who Believe The BCE Story-Tale of 9/11 - Where The Hell Is YOUR Proof?



Hardrock69
10-24-2005, 09:17 AM
Where the Hell Is YOUR Proof?
Jesse, Editor - TvNewsLIES.org - October 2005

THE BACKGROUND

To this day, there has been no independent official inquiry into the attacks of September 11, 2001. The Kean Commission, with which most Americans are familiar, was based on the Bush/PNAC version of events. It was charged with probing the breakdown of intelligence prior to the attacks and making suggestions for improving communications among the competing agencies involved. The Commission, formed after more than a year of opposition by the Bush administration, did not…repeat...did NOT…investigate or report about the causes of the attacks.

Far more important – to this day there has not been a single piece of evidence presented to the public that corroborates the official government version of the most devastating attack in our history. Think about that. For more than four years, scores of credible experts have challenged the explanations offered by the Bush administration, and yet not a shred of evidence has been offered by the US government to support the official version of events they claim took place on that day.

Even more absurd is that fact that not a single official inquiry has attempted to respond to, discredit, or refute the questions that have been raised. On the contrary, both the American government and the complicit media have dealt with the every single challenge to the 9/11 explanations in two ways. They either totally ignore them or dismiss them out of hand as ridiculous conspiracy theories. Most of the well-researched and revealing findings by independent investigators are unknown to the vast majority of Americans.

THE BELIEVERS

Time and time again, when I come across close-minded Bush supporters, I witness the effects of an unexplainable phenomenon: a highly dangerous variation of HIV – a condition I call the Hypocrisy & Illogic Virus. Strangely, the most severe symptoms of this condition seem to manifest themselves during any and all discussions of the events of 9/11,

The disease is easily diagnosed by the appearance of two disabling features: the need to approach all issues of national importance with an air of shameful hypocrisy, and the absolute inability to use any form of logic during discussions of such matters

Collectively, people afflicted with this disorder approach 9/11 as one person. They all blindly believe what they have been told by their government. They all adamantly refuse to listen to any questions that have been raised about inconsistencies in the official version that simply don’t make sense. And if they engage in any dispute about these discrepancies, their arguments are illogical to an extreme, and they are simply unable to follow any rational argument to its conclusion.

The sad reality is that there is no way to convince these brain-washed believers that there may be something more to the story of 9/11 than what they have been told. That’s not too surprising, since most of these people still buy into the Bush/PNAC reasons for invading Iraq. They blindly accept whatever they are told and close their minds tightly to any other information, no matter how factual. They cannot be reached. There is simply no way. The disease is far too endemic to treat with any ordinary approach. They believe as they do, and that’s all there is to it.

So, let’s turn the tables and put the burden of proof on them!!!

I believe that I, and every single person involved in the independent 9/11 research community must ask one question of the people who still believe the official 9/11 story. We must demand that those who accept the Bush/PNAC explanation of the events of that terrible day answer a single question:

“WHERE THE HELL IS YOUR PROOF?”

You claim that the President and his handlers have told you the truth. You refuse to consider the information we show you that punches huge holes into the official version. You refuse to check out the information for yourself. You tell us what we have uncovered is false. Okay, we’ll buy that, we’ll concede that you’re right...and that all of us are wrong.

In fact, we’ll take it all back and admit the errors of our ways IF you do something first. Show us YOUR proof. Tell us why we should believe the story you have swallowed, and show us what you have to back up your claims! You’d better have something more than a borrowed smirk when you tell us we’re way out in left field. You better be ready to answer just one simple question:

Where the Hell is YOUR proof, true believers? Where the Hell is it?

THE BATTLE

I’m not sure why the independent research community has not yet taken this approach. Why does the burden of proof always fall on the researchers when the evidence they present is ignored? Why is it their burden to convince the non believers that there are legitimate questions about 9/11 that remain unanswered and hard evidence that we’ve all been fooled, big time?

The facts about 9/11 that has been uncovered are dismissed by people who apply unbelievably skewed logic to their opposing argument. They believe a story when the only proof they use to validate the story is the story itself. That’s it! All they know is what they have been told. News reports, video, witnesses, whistle blowers, their own eyes and even common sense contradict their beliefs. Still, these people continue to accuse the researchers of being either crazy or traitorous. What kind of convoluted reasoning has infected such a large segment of the nation?

This is a battle for truth. It’s not a debate over conflicting philosophies. It is a battle between those who are searching for facts and those who choose to deny that a search is necessary. How long do those in blinders have to be engulfed in flames before they believe an independent researcher who warns them of the increasing heat?

The level of denial and resistance can only be explained by understanding a very basic human response: sometimes truth is too painful for people to deal with. In this case, the perpetrators of 9/11 understood that most Americans could not permit themselves to consider the involvement of people within their own government in the dastardly attacks of that day. They could never allow themselves to even consider such a possibility, even though people within the administration had openly professed that just such an event would benefit their cause!

Those responsible for the tragedy clearly understood this aspect of human psychology. That is why they can hide in plain sight without fear of discovery, regardless of how much new evidence is uncovered, and regardless of how many legitimate questions are raised about their connection to the attacks.

As a result, the only effective battle cry at this point must be: Where the Hell is YOUR proof?

I take part in or observe countless discussions on 9/11; often in Internet forums. I read the posts and hear the responses of thousands of people who have not spent five minutes looking at the four years of evidence that has been uncovered by independent researchers. Amazingly, the same people feel fully qualified to dismiss new evidence with an insult or to present their own un-researched, amateurish conclusions. They know nothing about any information that might have been revealed while their heads were buried in the black hole of the mainstream media. But they constantly and vehemently insist that they do.

Without requiring a thimbleful of supportive evidence, these people continue to accept the official story of 9/11. That hypocrisy simply has to end just as our silence in the presence of that hypocrisy has to end. And it has to end now.

THE BLINDED

The ball now must be thrown to the nay sayers, the folks in blinders who believe everything they are told by the WH and its media mouthpieces. They must be held accountable for their unfounded beliefs by challenging them for convincing proof that we are wrong. There is no room here for even a fraction of the challenges that should be made. Still, we have to start somewhere, so let’s at least call for responses from the politically blinded to what follows:

*
Where the HELL is YOUR proof that PNAC’s call for a ‘catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor’ was only an unbelievably astounding and timely coincidence rather than a statement that should have raised reasonable suspicion?

In the late 1990’s members of the Project for a New American Century wrote a treatise in which they foresaw a strategic “transformation” of the U.S. military into an imperialistic force of global domination that would require a huge increase in defense spending. “The process of transformation,” the plan said, “is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor.” The members of this group, known as PNAC, were appointed to many high level positions in the new Bush administration. Only months after they came to power, the United States experienced a new Pearl Harbor. That has never been publicized or explained as anything other than mere coincidence.

* Where the HELL is YOUR proof that Al Qaeda actually planned and carried out the attacks of 9/11?

In 4 years I have not seen a single bit of proof that Al Qaeda was involved in those events. I have seen some snap shots of Arab men at an airport. I was told a slew of things about these men. I was told that the passport of one of the alleged hijackers miraculously floated to the surface of the rubble, unscathed by the heat that had obliterated thousands. I was told way too much about these men for me to believe that the story was not prepared in advance. Two days was not sufficient time for that kind of information to be uncovered and declassified by our government. Not only did that reek of black ops, but to this day almost nothing of what we were told about he nineteen hijackers has been verified. The tape of Osama bin Laden shown by the government raised questions about the actual identity of the man in the film. As a matter of fact, I watched the so-called confession I with a person whose native is Arabic. He told me that the English translation was misleading. While he rejoiced at their success, nowhere in the tape did Osama admit involvement in the attacks!

* Where the HELL is YOUR proof that Dick Cheney was NOT conducting drills on 9/11 that paralyzed Air Force responses to the real attacks?

There is irrefutable evidence that Dick Cheney was running a completely separate chain of Command & Control via the Secret Service on the morning of 9/11, assuring the paralysis of Air Force and its ability to intercept the hijacked planes. The Secret Service has the technology to see the same radar screens the FAA sees in real time. They also have the legal authority and technological capability to take supreme command in cases of national emergency. In fact, Dick Cheney was the acting Commander in Chief on 9/11. When publicly asked about the exercises, that involved simulated attacks by hijacked planes against the WTC, Cheney refused to comment, claiming the information was classified.

* Where the HELL is YOUR proof that Tower 7 collapsed as a result of the attacks?

I have not seen even a single computer model explanation as to how or why Building 7 collapsed in the exact same manner as the two Towers that were hit by airplanes. As a matter of fact Building 7, which sustained no impact at all, was not mentioned in the Kean Commission report at all. The FEMA report of the collapse remains inconclusive, unable to offer a reasonable explanation for the collapse. Larry Silverstein, owner of the complex publicly claimed he gave permission for Tower 7 to be ‘pulled,’ a fire department term for demolished. Demolition of such a building would have required weeks, if not months of preparation. No explanation has ever been given for this baffling anomaly.

* Where the HELL is YOUR proof that ‘put’ orders placed on the two Airlines involved in the attacks were mere coincidence?

I have never seen the names of the people who placed those orders. I don’t know that their identities have been uncovered of if they have been questioned. I have not seen anyone vindicated of any foreknowledge of 9/11 after making investments that would only pay off if the specific airlines involved were to experience a drop in stock prices.

* Where the HELL is YOUR proof that Porter Goss knew nothing about $100,000 that was wired to Mohammed Atta?

I cannot fathom why the person who was sitting with Porter Goss (our current CIA Director) on the morning of 9/11, and who had wired Mohammed Atta $100,000 just prior to the event, was never investigated. This could be the smoking gun of smoking guns (if you believe that Atta was involved) that has been covered up from the start.

* Where the Hell is YOUR proof that Donald Rumsfeld did not organize an illegal military group that would “provoke terrorist attacks which would then require ‘"counter-attack" by the United States?

Here’s what I know: In the Los Angeles Times, military analyst William Arkin described a secret army set up by Donald Rumsfeld, similar to those run by Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger and which Congress outlawed. This "super-intelligence support activity" was designed to bring together the "CIA and military covert action, information warfare, and deception". According to a classified document prepared for Rumsfeld, the new organization was known as the Proactive Pre-emptive Operations Group, or P2OG. It was formed to provoke terrorist attacks which would then require "counter-attack" by the United States on countries "harboring the terrorists". Doesn’t that sound exactly like what happened on 9/11?

That’s all I have room for, so I’ll sit back and wait for someone to send me some proof, assuming that a single person out there knows where the Hell it is.

THE BOTTOM LINE

The bottom line is simple: I have not seen anything at all that makes me believe the official story of 9/11, which, when considered on its own merits, is so implausible as to be considered a bad joke. Anyone who reads David Ray Griffin’s book, The 9/11 Commission Report Omissions and Distortions, needs to go no further than the first chapter before this becomes crystal clear. At that point it becomes very difficult to decide whether to laugh at the ridiculous nature of the official story or to scream with disbelief that the American public still buys into it.

So, once again, I ask the people who refuse to explore the findings of the independent research community, - the only real investigation into the events of September 11th 2001 - where the Hell is YOUR proof?

To those of you who will try to discredit and ridicule this article on forums or in calls to right wing radio, I say this: Research the events of 9/11 in depth, come up with YOUR proof that the official version is credible, or just shut up!

You have a helluva lot of research to do before you are qualified to intelligently debate the events of 9/11 with anyone who has spent more than four years in the independent research effort. Don’t bother to cite official sources to back up your points, since most of them have been debunked. Try to understand that you can not use the authors of the official version to support their own validity. It’s a dumb tactic.

The researchers have done a great deal of valid work. They have been trying to attract your attention so that you can examine it for yourself. They are not asking you to take their word for anything…they just want you to look at and think about what has been uncovered. Do it for your own good, not theirs. Stop arguing against their credibility until you have seen what they have seen, and until you know what they know. Do some homework, then come and talk, but be prepared to show us where the Hell you found YOUR proof, and why we should believe you.

Once again, keep in mind that THE KEAN COMMISSION DID NOT CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION INTO 9/11! It was not their assignment! They were tasked with making recommendations to improve national security based on the official story. They were not asked to find out what happened. They went in with an official account of the events, and were asked to make their recommendations based on what the Bush/PNAC administration wanted the public to believe happened on that day.

Independent researchers are the only people who have investigated the events of 9/11. They have uncovered and presented mountains of evidence that totally expose the official account for what it is; a cover-up, nothing more.

If anyone takes the time to really examine that evidence - and I repeat - evidence, he or she will find something very disturbing yet highly probable. The material that has been amassed strongly suggests complicity in the events of 9/11 by rogue elements within American and foreign governments. But the evidence does NOT point directly to a government conspiracy.

It does however, point to direct involvement by several key members of the Bush/PNAC administration, acting on their own, outside the rule of law, without participation in any mysterious governmental conspiracy. Their motives have been clearly established and published by the culprits themselves and evidence of their involvement has been clearly established by independent research.

There is nothing more to be said. The information is out there for the taking. The books have been written, the speeches have been made, the documents have been posted, the documentaries have been produced and the truth has been told. That is as far as anyone doing independent research can go. All that remains is for the believers to respond.

So bring ‘em on! Let’s see if those who swear to the lies they have been told can convince anyone, even themselves that the official version of 9/11 explains to the nation and the world what really happened on that day.

So, where the Hell is YOUR proof, true believers? We’re all waiting to see.

http://tvnewslies.org/html/where_the_hell_is_your_9_11_pr.html

FORD
10-24-2005, 09:29 AM
Fixed those annoying formatting codes ;)

Hardrock69
10-24-2005, 09:48 AM
Cool. I had not noticed...got busy with work...

BigBadBrian
10-24-2005, 10:34 AM
http://www.blacksheepinn.com/images/New%20Photos%200505/CTPile.jpg

knuckleboner
10-24-2005, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by Hardrock69
Where the Hell Is YOUR Proof?
Jesse, Editor - TvNewsLIES.org - October 2005



to this day there has not been a single piece of evidence presented to the public that corroborates the official government version of the most devastating attack in our history.


ummm....wrong.

bin laden admits role in 9/11 attacks. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3966741.stm)

DrMaddVibe
10-24-2005, 10:45 AM
This should be good...

Same dribbling baboons throwing their bones in the air to see what stays up in the sky...when it slams them on their head they make up another tale to tell and throw up the same bones!

Kinda like beating a dead horse...its not going to run any faster!

FORD
10-24-2005, 10:52 AM
Originally posted by knuckleboner
ummm....wrong.

bin laden admits role in 9/11 attacks. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3966741.stm)

And you really believe that blurry figure in a conveniently released (last weekend before the election) video was the real Bin Laden??

Granted, it was a better casting job than the short fat guy they had in the October 2001 fake video, but not convincing enough. You can tell by observing Fake Osama #2 at the podium that he is nowhere near as tall as the real Bin Laden.

DrMaddVibe
10-24-2005, 10:55 AM
And Santa Claus at the mall is nowhere near as fat as the guy that slinks down your chimney, eh ford?

FORD
10-24-2005, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
And Santa Claus at the mall is nowhere near as fat as the guy that slinks down your chimney, eh ford?

I don't have a chimney. if Santa wants to try fitting through the vent pipe of my natural gas furnace, he's welcome to give it a shot, but I really wouldn't recommend it.

Shouldn't you be evacuating or something?

DrMaddVibe
10-24-2005, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by FORD
Shouldn't you be evacuating or something?

Why?

If you don't know where I live then don't pretend to know!

Perfectly safe, here.

Try looking up my ip again, like you did before when you thought I was someone else...nothing but a blustery day with scattered rain.

Try throwin' more bones!

Cathedral
10-24-2005, 11:49 AM
Let me get this straight, Democrats can be trusted and Republicans cannot?
Ok, i'll have a dose of what y'all are having.

Does it even occur to any of you lib's that you make the Bush Admin. much more powerful than they are?
I mean c'mon, if even 1/3 of everything you all have accused this Administration of is true, it makes you look powerless and stupid that the wool could be so effeciently pulled over your eyes.

But maybe, just maybe it's because of your Liberal Wool Suits?

I say what i have always said, if you can prove any of your claims then prosecute the people involved.
But every day that passes without any charges being pressed makes your party look weak and disabled.

The Republicans got your golden boy impeached over a blow job but the best y'all can do is make accusations that have no proof to back it up...that to me is a crippling problem that needs to be addressed if your going to win back any power at all.

And don't think that everyone who has turned on this administration is going to vote for a Democrat in 08 either.
Bush may be a tool, but he's just one bad example who's days are numbered.

I can tell by most news reports that Democrats are sitting back waiting for power to be handed back to them. well, that won't happen unless they earn that power.
The White House will not be simply handed back to you due to the failures of Bush and his cronies, that is what we call an error in judgement.

Personally, I don't believe a fucking word any politician says. it's stupid to even think that is possible if you want the facts.

Vote Rice in 08'... ;)

knuckleboner
10-24-2005, 12:00 PM
Originally posted by FORD
And you really believe that blurry figure in a conveniently released (last weekend before the election) video was the real Bin Laden??

Granted, it was a better casting job than the short fat guy they had in the October 2001 fake video, but not convincing enough. You can tell by observing Fake Osama #2 at the podium that he is nowhere near as tall as the real Bin Laden.

the article said there was no evidence. that was clearly evidence.

not all evidence turns out to be factual. but it's evidence, nonetheless; and in direct contradiction to what the article stated.



(and, although it's besides the point, yes, i do believe that was bin laden. if the entire al qaeda group was a fabrication, than there would be no need for a "fake" bin laden. the cabalists could just trot out their real bin laden puppet. on the other hand, if the group is real, but this tape fake, wouldn't the real group have responded?)

Cathedral
10-24-2005, 12:07 PM
Originally posted by knuckleboner
the article said there was no evidence. that was clearly evidence.

not all evidence turns out to be factual. but it's evidence, nonetheless; and in direct contradiction to what the article stated.



(and, although it's besides the point, yes, i do believe that was bin laden. if the entire al qaeda group was a fabrication, than there would be no need for a "fake" bin laden. the cabalists could just trot out their real bin laden puppet. on the other hand, if the group is real, but this tape fake, wouldn't the real group have responded?)

It's Rothtober, witch hunts are abundant this time of year.

FORD
10-24-2005, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by knuckleboner
the article said there was no evidence. that was clearly evidence.

not all evidence turns out to be factual. but it's evidence, nonetheless; and in direct contradiction to what the article stated.



(and, although it's besides the point, yes, i do believe that was bin laden. if the entire al qaeda group was a fabrication, than there would be no need for a "fake" bin laden. the cabalists could just trot out their real bin laden puppet. on the other hand, if the group is real, but this tape fake, wouldn't the real group have responded?)

Whatever Al Qaeda is in reality has been greatly exaggerated by the BCE, because the PNAC agenda needs a boogeyman to sell their global war against the Phantom Menace. If the "real" Al Qaeda is a bunch of freaks living in caves in Pakistan, chances are they never saw the fabricated tape.

The real Osama is likely dead by now. Probably from kidney disease, though the possibility exists that he might have been killed in Afghanistan in 2001, with the death concealed because Osama is worth more as a phantom boogeyman than a dead martyr to an organization which is mostly fictional. Same with Max Towelheadroom (a.k.a. Hopalong Zarqawi) for that matter, who is credited with leading the entirely fictional "Iraq branch office" of Al Qaeda.

LoungeMachine
10-24-2005, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by Cathedral
Let me get this straight, Democrats can be trusted and Republicans cannot

:D

Well said, Cath.

Welcome to our side ;)


As to Rice, she may be in the Oval office before '08 :D


Cheney "steps down" for *cough* "health reasons" and Shrub elevates Condi to VP

Winter of '06 the Impeachment Hearings begin..........


Condi sworn in in early '07

:D

FORD
10-24-2005, 12:31 PM
Which is the ONLY way the RepubliKKKan party will ever put a black woman in the White House - by accident.

Cathedral
10-24-2005, 01:40 PM
It's official, we have no candidates to choose from that are worth a damn on either side.

But what is a President really?
Nothing more than a mouth piece for the corporate yard dogs.

Rice is still saying she won't run anyway, so who knows who will be pleading for the nomination at this point.

That said, your local elections are somewhat more important since they are elected as a direct result of the voting. Not decided by the electorate.

Keeyth
10-24-2005, 03:56 PM
O.K. we've never had a black president. We've never had a woman president. What in the heck makes you think the first woman to be elected is going to be a black woman?????? Don't you think that's a HUGE leap?? Even in these P.C. times, that's like jumping the grand canyon in a go-kart!

Besides, I'd hate to be president Bush if Rice were the VP. He'd be assasinated inside of a week! Like Chris Rock said, the black man who did it would be the all time greatest hero to his race ever. Even in prison.

knuckleboner
10-24-2005, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by Cathedral

That said, your local elections are somewhat more important since they are elected as a direct result of the voting.

absolutely!!!!


i've worked for a local official or 2 in my time. trust me, there are good ones out there.

if more people supported the good ones at the local level, when you can really see their actions and characters, then it'd be easier to get better candidates moving up the ladder.

unfortunately, people often ignore the local elections. (and the primaries) and wind up voting in the general presidential election, but complaining about the lack of quality candidates.

:(

Hardrock69
10-24-2005, 04:43 PM
IF I could trust that the candidate who was a black woman was honest (it is almost impossible to trust anyone running for public office), I would WANT a Black Woman.

Who is more lethal, more serious, more deadly and more likely to kick your fucking ass than a pissed off black lady?

Hillary would be seen as a pussy. Even though she has one and likes to get it licked by her lesbian friends.....


ONE THING BUSH AND HIS PACK OF KLOWNS HAS GOING FOR THEM (take note you NeoCon Fantasy Fairies Elvis, BBB and Warham):

Despite the fact they are engaged in CRIMINAL Activity, and cannot be trusted as much as one would trust an angry puff adder, Third World nations around the world see the BCE as a pack of gun-toting, shoot-first, ask-questions-maybe-never pack of Neo-Con nut-jobs, and will not dare to try to start shit, or Chimp might send his troops to invade their country and start killing off more brown people in great numbers.

Other countries are AFRAID of Chimp, as he is unpredictable, a liar, and is ruthless.

Therefore we currently have a rep as a powerful country who will fuck you up without thinking about it.

The only person who I think should run for President who I do NOT think would be a pushover, and whom I WOULD trust right now would be Colin Powell.

He is a career soldier, who obeyed his superiors, became Chief Of Staff of the Armed Forces, and who resigned from Chimp's Regime after only one term as Secretary Of State.

Nobody on Earth would want to fuck with him, as he would really be likely to go bomb the shit out of them.

The thing is, he would not make up a bunch of fucking lies to justify the war. He is that most dangerous of motherfuckers....he will not attack you if you are not really deserving of it, but if you fuck with him, watch out!

President Powell is coming to kill your ass to death!!!

I would trust him, because he was never a corrupt politician.

Too bad he has said he has no interest in running.

I would vote for him in a heartbeat.

knuckleboner
10-24-2005, 04:59 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Whatever Al Qaeda is in reality has been greatly exaggerated by the BCE, because the PNAC agenda needs a boogeyman to sell their global war against the Phantom Menace. If the "real" Al Qaeda is a bunch of freaks living in caves in Pakistan, chances are they never saw the fabricated tape.

The real Osama is likely dead by now. Probably from kidney disease, though the possibility exists that he might have been killed in Afghanistan in 2001, with the death concealed because Osama is worth more as a phantom boogeyman than a dead martyr to an organization which is mostly fictional. Same with Max Towelheadroom (a.k.a. Hopalong Zarqawi) for that matter, who is credited with leading the entirely fictional "Iraq branch office" of Al Qaeda.


i won't quibble that the al qaeda threat has never been exaggerated. i certainly believe that it has been in iraq. (iraq is a bunch of hooligans who wish to have control in iraq. al qaeda is a bunch of hooligans that want control in the middle east. while the 2 goals are not incompatible, they are not interchangable, either.)

but that doesn't mean that al qaeda as a whole is nonexistant. it didn't take the manhattan project to crash 4 planes. it took 19 men, several sets of box cutters, flight training, plane schedules and some GPS equipment. simple stuff.

a really small, relatively insignificant group, that had just 1 leader, funded with millions of dollars, could do it.


and eventually, that group is going to take credit for it. after all, they did it for a reason. a reason like somebody looking like bin laden articulated in that tape. and a reason that al jazerra aired. the group has seen this tape. or they've heard about it. they have yet to oppose it.

Warham
10-24-2005, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by Cathedral
Let me get this straight, Democrats can be trusted and Republicans cannot?
Ok, i'll have a dose of what y'all are having.

Does it even occur to any of you lib's that you make the Bush Admin. much more powerful than they are?
I mean c'mon, if even 1/3 of everything you all have accused this Administration of is true, it makes you look powerless and stupid that the wool could be so effeciently pulled over your eyes.

But maybe, just maybe it's because of your Liberal Wool Suits?

I say what i have always said, if you can prove any of your claims then prosecute the people involved.
But every day that passes without any charges being pressed makes your party look weak and disabled.

The Republicans got your golden boy impeached over a blow job but the best y'all can do is make accusations that have no proof to back it up...that to me is a crippling problem that needs to be addressed if your going to win back any power at all.

And don't think that everyone who has turned on this administration is going to vote for a Democrat in 08 either.
Bush may be a tool, but he's just one bad example who's days are numbered.

I can tell by most news reports that Democrats are sitting back waiting for power to be handed back to them. well, that won't happen unless they earn that power.
The White House will not be simply handed back to you due to the failures of Bush and his cronies, that is what we call an error in judgement.

Personally, I don't believe a fucking word any politician says. it's stupid to even think that is possible if you want the facts.

Vote Rice in 08'... ;)

Excellent post, Mr. Cat. I concur.

Warham
10-24-2005, 05:10 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
:D

Well said, Cath.

Welcome to our side ;)


As to Rice, she may be in the Oval office before '08 :D


Cheney "steps down" for *cough* "health reasons" and Shrub elevates Condi to VP

Winter of '06 the Impeachment Hearings begin..........


Condi sworn in in early '07

:D

You liberals always were good for daydreaming.

BigBadBrian
10-24-2005, 05:18 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Whatever Al Qaeda is in reality has been greatly exaggerated by the BCE, because the PNAC agenda needs a boogeyman to sell their global war against the Phantom Menace. If the "real" Al Qaeda is a bunch of freaks living in caves in Pakistan, chances are they never saw the fabricated tape.

The real Osama is likely dead by now. Probably from kidney disease, though the possibility exists that he might have been killed in Afghanistan in 2001, with the death concealed because Osama is worth more as a phantom boogeyman than a dead martyr to an organization which is mostly fictional. Same with Max Towelheadroom (a.k.a. Hopalong Zarqawi) for that matter, who is credited with leading the entirely fictional "Iraq branch office" of Al Qaeda.

This reminds me of a thread to post. (http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28875) :)

Cathedral
10-24-2005, 05:26 PM
Originally posted by Keeyth
O.K. we've never had a black president. We've never had a woman president. What in the heck makes you think the first woman to be elected is going to be a black woman?????? Don't you think that's a HUGE leap?? Even in these P.C. times, that's like jumping the grand canyon in a go-kart!

Besides, I'd hate to be president Bush if Rice were the VP. He'd be assasinated inside of a week! Like Chris Rock said, the black man who did it would be the all time greatest hero to his race ever. Even in prison.

Hmmmmm, good points as usual, but the country is ready for both, and how convenient that one possible candidate is both female and black.

Problem is that i don't see anyone who can beat Hillary besides Rice.
If she doesn't run we'll have a new Democrat President in '08, and it will be Hillary Clinton.

Keeyth
10-24-2005, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by knuckleboner

it took 19 men, several sets of box cutters, flight training, plane schedules and some GPS equipment. simple stuff.



If you believe that, you ARE the simple stuff. :rolleyes:

Oh, and I've got some ocean front property to sell you... ...in South Dakota.

Warham
10-24-2005, 05:31 PM
Originally posted by Keeyth
If you believe that, you ARE the simple stuff. :rolleyes:

Oh, and I've got some ocean front property to sell you... ...in South Dakota.

Remember the old adage...KISS.

Keeyth
10-24-2005, 05:31 PM
Originally posted by Cathedral
Hmmmmm, good points as usual, but the country is ready for both, and how convenient that one possible candidate is both female and black.

Problem is that i don't see anyone who can beat Hillary besides Rice.
If she doesn't run we'll have a new Democrat President in '08, and it will be Hillary Clinton.

You would really vote for Rice??? To me, she is one of the most evil and corrupt of the Bush administration. I almost half hoped you were joking. See literally seethes with evil in my opinion...

Warham
10-24-2005, 05:32 PM
Yeah, she's right up there with Hitler, huh?

:rolleyes:

Keeyth
10-24-2005, 05:34 PM
Originally posted by Cathedral


Problem is that i don't see anyone who can beat Hillary besides Rice.


I seriously doubt Rice could beat anyone in the Presidential election. Those Red states are made up of a LOT of Red-necks too. I just don't see it happening...

Keeyth
10-24-2005, 05:36 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Yeah, she's right up there with Hitler, huh?

:rolleyes:

More like she's straight ******-with-a-badge for lack of a more PC term...

Keeyth
10-24-2005, 05:36 PM
knee-gur?? :D

Warham
10-24-2005, 05:37 PM
Hillary's not as popular as you might be wantin' to believe.

Keeyth
10-24-2005, 06:01 PM
I don't think Hilary is popular at all. I would be very surprised if she became the first woman president at this point. If the democrats can't do better than her, then I agree they are in trouble for the next election.

diamondD
10-24-2005, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by Cathedral
Hmmmmm, good points as usual, but the country is ready for both, and how convenient that one possible candidate is both female and black.

Problem is that i don't see anyone who can beat Hillary besides Rice.
If she doesn't run we'll have a new Democrat President in '08, and it will be Hillary Clinton.


What about Rudy G? Or John McCain? I think either one can really give her a run for her money.

Satan
10-24-2005, 08:25 PM
Originally posted by diamondD
What about Rudy G? Or John McCain? I think either one can really give her a run for her money.

If the BCE totally disintegrates and they no longer control the party (as they have since Eisenhower) then Rudy or McCain might get in. Or if the BCE is deliberately passing on an election like they did in 1996. But they would only do that if they knew the candidate wouldn't win (i.e. Dole)

Giuliani is pro-choice and is known to have close friends who are gay (whom he lived with when his marriage was on the rocks) so he would be unacceptable to the religious right. They aren't all that crazy about Catholics anyway.

And they hate McCain as much if not more, despite all the BCE ass he has kissed in recent years.

George Allen is probably the ideal GOP candidate for 2008. Dumb enough to be a BCE puppet if they're still ruling the party, and lame enough to lose the election if they aren't.

DrMaddVibe
10-24-2005, 08:28 PM
6 "ifs"!

Way to go ford.

Satan
10-24-2005, 08:29 PM
The election's 3 fucking years away. It's ALL "ifs" right now!

DrMaddVibe
10-24-2005, 08:31 PM
IF a frog had wings it wouldn't bump it's ass when it hopped too!

Warham
10-24-2005, 08:37 PM
Why is George Allen dumb? I can't wait to hear this.

He definately doesn't go along with the BCE lines, because he actually suggested that Bush meet with Cyndi Sheehan, much like McCain did.

LoungeMachine
10-24-2005, 11:14 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Why is George Allen dumb?

Dropped on his head as a child ?

Fed paint chips?

How should we know why he's dumb?

He just is.

:cool:

LoungeMachine
10-24-2005, 11:15 PM
Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
IF a frog had wings it wouldn't bump it's ass when it hopped too!


wow.

Did you write that?

:rolleyes:

Warham
10-24-2005, 11:17 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Dropped on his head as a child ?

Fed paint chips?

How should we know why he's dumb?

He just is.

:cool:

Yeah, I guess I could've waited to hear that.

Cathedral
10-24-2005, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by Keeyth
You would really vote for Rice??? To me, she is one of the most evil and corrupt of the Bush administration. I almost half hoped you were joking. See literally seethes with evil in my opinion...

It is far too early for me to predict who i'll vote for.
All i'm saying is that to beat Hillary our best shot is Condi at the moment.

But the rednecks would pose a problem there for sure, that much is true.
So the question then becomes, could she win without the redneck vote?

I know one thing, the true rednecks won't go Democrat so they'll have some thinkin to do while chewing tobacco on the front porch.

I'm waiting to see who steps up to the plate before i put much thought into it.
But i plan on disecting the shit out of their records and no more ill spoken "Uh uh" dudes for me.

Warham
10-24-2005, 11:36 PM
Hillary can be beat regardless of Rice running.

I think McCain and Guiliani could both beat her if either won the Republican primary. But I don't want either of those two.

Cathedral
10-24-2005, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by diamondD
What about Rudy G? Or John McCain? I think either one can really give her a run for her money.

If they run, sure they will, and my vote would go to Rudy in a heart beat.
John McCain? Mmmmmmmmmm, i'm not so sure about that guy and the kind of Prez he'd make to be honest.

Hillary is not as popular as most believe, but she is a polarizing figure and she has name noteriety, though i hate the name, lol.

It's a tough one to call really, but i'm sure it will be more than entertaining at least.

Cathedral
10-24-2005, 11:40 PM
Originally posted by Satan
If the BCE totally disintegrates and they no longer control the party (as they have since Eisenhower) then Rudy or McCain might get in. Or if the BCE is deliberately passing on an election like they did in 1996. But they would only do that if they knew the candidate wouldn't win (i.e. Dole)

Giuliani is pro-choice and is known to have close friends who are gay (whom he lived with when his marriage was on the rocks) so he would be unacceptable to the religious right. They aren't all that crazy about Catholics anyway.

And they hate McCain as much if not more, despite all the BCE ass he has kissed in recent years.

George Allen is probably the ideal GOP candidate for 2008. Dumb enough to be a BCE puppet if they're still ruling the party, and lame enough to lose the election if they aren't.

But the point is we don't want any more puppets in office and that my friend is what we all as a nation need to come together to change.

And by "My Friend" I mean Ford, not the Satan dude, lol.

vheddyrmv8
10-24-2005, 11:43 PM
I don't think it should be more about beating the other canidate as opposed to actually find someone worthy of being president. I personally would hate to have either in office, I don't like either of them.

diamondD
10-24-2005, 11:59 PM
When's the last time you haven't had to hold your nose when voting for President?

FORD
10-25-2005, 12:55 AM
Originally posted by diamondD
When's the last time you haven't had to hold your nose when voting for President?

The Washington State Democratic primary caucus, 2004.

I proudly voted for the man that I still believe would be the best President of anyone currently known to us, Howard Dean :cool:

DrMaddVibe
10-25-2005, 06:21 AM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
wow.

Did you write that?

:rolleyes:

Rough boy, too tough to fall in love
I never break down, always seem to hurt someone
I turn and tried to run too late, she's breakin' me down
It's over when I see her face, you know I can't find my way out
Chorus:
Emergency, the first time love's got a hold on me
Emergency, a state of emergency
Shot down in the web of a modern girl
You take your chances, when the fear inside is real
I turn and tried to run too late, she's breakin' me down
It's over when I see her face, you know I can't find my way out
chorus
(Solo)
Emergency, the first time love's got a hold on me
Emergency, into you helplessly
Emergency... (repeats out)

Did you help write THIS?

Gee-Zusssss!

Warham
10-25-2005, 07:04 AM
Originally posted by FORD
The Washington State Democratic primary caucus, 2004.

I proudly voted for the man that I still believe would be the best President of anyone currently known to us, Howard Dean :cool:

Yuck.

DrMaddVibe
10-25-2005, 07:39 AM
In the end he voted for Kerry!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

diamondD
10-25-2005, 08:13 AM
Originally posted by FORD
The Washington State Democratic primary caucus, 2004.

I proudly voted for the man that I still believe would be the best President of anyone currently known to us, Howard Dean :cool:

I know you jump on any chance to slobber over that loser, but I'm talking about the final election.

Dean is dead, get used to it. Stop telling other people to face reality when you can't face it yourself.

Hardrock69
10-25-2005, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Yeah, she's right up there with Hitler, huh?

:rolleyes:

Yes she is:
http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=732871

FORD
10-25-2005, 01:24 PM
Originally posted by diamondD


Dean is dead, get used to it.

Dean isn't dead, and neither is the Democratic party. Now the Republicans, on the other hand...... ;)

diamondD
10-25-2005, 04:55 PM
Go ahead, trot him back out there. Not even the Diebold BS will be able to explain the pounding he'll get.

b1c2
10-25-2005, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Dean isn't dead, and neither is the Democratic party. Now the Republicans, on the other hand...... ;)

C'mon now...you don't REALLY believe that do you?
And as for McCain, he supports the gay marriage ban in AZ so he is crossed off my list.