Who's the Terrorist?

[Mr. Carpenter]

Wikipedia is a leftist extremist website with a "Hate America First" agenda?

lol...

I was specifically referring to your "fromthewilderness" site, but that's OK, everyone knows that Wiki is a "user edited" site, and should only be trusted when the information therein has been confirmed by at least 2 credible sources.

Let us also not forget all of the times that Wiki has had to have it's articles purged or completely re-written when one of you moonbats got in there are flat out LIED.

 

[Mr. Carpenter]

Wow...do a little more reading and you find even more stuff you don't want to know about. Believe me Mr. Carpenter. We ALL wish it wasn't true..

And exactly what is your point? Nobody is denying that President Bush's company was invested in, in 1977, by the half-brother of UBL. Nobody is denying that Salem Bin Laden was not raised with UBL, and in fact hadn't even seen, or spoken to him in over 20 years BEFORE he invested in Bush's company, so again, WHAT'S YOUR POINT?

Is it your contention that if we were to discover that your half-brother, whom you hadn't seen or spoken to in over 20 years suddenly committed murder that we should hold YOU responsible?

 

[Sihouette]

Doing business with the enemy is nothing new to the Bush family. Much of the Bush family wealth came from supplying needed raw materials and credit to Adolf Hitler's Third Reich. Several business operations managed by Prescott Bush - the president's grandfather - were seized by the US government during World War II under the Trading with the Enemy Act.

On October 20, 1942, the federal government seized the Union Banking Corporation in New York City as a front operation for the Nazis. Prescott Bush was a director. Bush, E. Roland Harriman, two Bush associates, and three Nazi executives owned the bank's shares. Eight days later, the Roosevelt administration seized two other corporations managed by Prescott Bush. The Holland-American Trading Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation, both managed by the Bush-Harriman bank, were accused by the US federal government of being front organizations for Hitler's Third Reich. Again, on November 8, 1942, the federal government seized Nazi-controlled assets of Silesian-American Corporation, another Bush-Harriman company doing business with Hitler. ~link previous page

So Rense is now off-limits leftist lying propaganda group too, on top of wilderness and wikipedia? There are an awful lot of websites then conspiring to lie about the same thing. Have you taken your meds today?...lol..

I just had no idea the Bush family tradition is to consort with potent enemies of the United States. Who knew? Bush's in with the third reicht and the Bin Ladens..

 

[Mr. Carpenter]

So Rense is now off-limits leftist lying propaganda group too, on top of wilderness and wikipedia? There are an awful lot of websites then conspiring to lie about the same thing. Have you taken your meds today?...lol..

I just had no idea the Bush family tradition is to consort with potent enemies of the United States. Who knew? Bush's in with the third reicht and the Bin Ladens..

Sihouette, here's a little tip for you. If you expect to have your moonbattery taken seriously, instead of relying on Blogs, OpEds, MoveOn.org, Huffington, The Daily Kooks, and all the rest, why don't you try using some of the (albeit Leftist) mainstream sources? I'd even accept the New York SLIMES before I'd believe anything out of any of the sources you've cited to date.

As it stands right now, you've completely ignored, and even refused to address the fact that there is NO CONNECTION between UBL and the Bush's. All you're doing is trying to blow up a smoke screen to cover the fact that there IS a DIRECT, and very LONG relationship between Obama and Bill Ayers, a known and unrepentant terrorist, and it's not only not working, it's making you look damned silly.

 

[Andy]

Hold it. Am I actually hearing someone trying to say that the Bush and Bin Laden families have not been business partners for decades and call anyone who believe they have been are tin-foil hatted loons. If so, this honestly is the most ludicrous thing I've ever read on a political site.

You guys do know where GHWB was when the 9/11 attacks took place?

Granted I don't like the fact Saudi money went to Bush Sr. That said, the alternative was far worse. Not only did Clinton get money from foreign countries, but countries that are against the US. And not only did he take the money, but gave away US security in return. While Clinton sold off ICBM technology to China in exchange for money, China in turn gave that technology to Iran, which is putting not only the US, but dozens of other nations at risk.

In the end, the video is a far fetched assumption based rant. If Bush and the Binladen group had working relations with Osama, or had any real connection to 9/11, many of the international intelligence agencies would have picked up on it by now. It wouldn't be some rant video on the internet.

 

[Andy]

I was specifically referring to your "fromthewilderness" site, but that's OK, everyone knows that Wiki is a "user edited" site, and should only be trusted when the information therein has been confirmed by at least 2 credible sources.

Let us also not forget all of the times that Wiki has had to have it's articles purged or completely re-written when one of you moonbats got in there are flat out LIED.

I'd have to agree. I've discovered a number of articles that have been so overrun with half truth's and unverifiable garbage, it's hard to say Wiki can be completely trusted. Always check the cited texts, and verify that what they say it says, is actually what it says, and if it doesn't cite a source, don't assume it's true. Many times it isn't.

 

[Sihouette]

Granted I don't like the fact Saudi money went to Bush Sr.~Andy

NO! No! It's all lies.. half truths... Don't buy that gibberish Andy!!

Lol...

You'd think that if the information about the Bush family's alliance with Bin Ladens and the old Bush's alliance with nazis was false, the Bush family would be suing those websites to put an end to the "nasty rumors".

The facts are that they got their information from statistical reports and news-reporting back in the day. I know that stings, but that's how it is.

 

[Andy]

NO! No! It's all lies.. half truths... Don't buy that gibberish Andy!!

Lol...

You'd think that if the information about the Bush family's alliance with Bin Ladens and the old Bush's alliance with nazis was false, the Bush family would be suing those websites to put an end to the "nasty rumors".

The facts are that they got their information from statistical reports and news-reporting back in the day. I know that stings, but that's how it is.

Well perhaps if the people who were making such claims had good integrity, then maybe we would seriously consider the claims.

But since most truly are nothing more than partisan hypocritical hacks, why should anyone, let alone us thinking individuals, bother determining the truth of the points made, when the source of those points is already proven to be biased?

For example you have repeatedly talked about the corruption in government, the ties to BigOil, the evil law breaking rich people not paying taxes, or back room deals and such and so on. The first thing I'm going to do when you start spouting off about Bush is, ask the question: 'do you really believe that, or is it just partisan crap?'

Well let's see... Marc Rich was a very wealthy man, who failed to pay his taxes, committed treason and abandonned his country, ended up being the point man for the biggest international oil scandal to date, the UN Oil for Food scandal, yet was able to pass money to a sitting president who secured a presidential pardon for cash.

So here comes the question. Do you treat the Clintons the same way you do the Bushes? Of course not. Not only did you give the Clintons a free pass, but proclaimed the Clintons to be the preferred choice over Obama. Thus I am forced to conclude that you are nothing but a partisan hypocrite... but wait, maybe I'm hasty.

You also have spouted repeatedly about this supposed connection between Bush and terrorist. And again I ask, 'do you really believe that, or is it just partisan crap?'

So I look at Obama and Hamas a terrorist group, or Bill Ayres a terrorist, or Rashid Khalidi a spokesman for the PLO terrorist organization, or Gaddafi widely known for supporting black september which killed the '72 Israeli Olympics team, and for blowing up night club in germany where US military personal were killed.

Now, I have to ask my self, do you treat Obama's terrorist ties the same way you do with the terrorist concerns of Bush? No, of course not. You give Obama a complete pass on documented proven connections, compared to the loose simi-logical assumed connections of Bush.

I have no choice based on this evidence, but to conclude you are nothing buy a simple political hypocritical hack, and everything you bring up is suspect. What other choice have you given me?

You tell me Sih, why should I or anyone, bother to listen to your rants on Bush and Big(whatever), when you have been obviously hypocritical in every 'concern' you have? If you hear someone who obviously is saying one thing and doing another, do you trust their point of view? Of course not. So why should we trust yours? On what basis to you claim to be credible given this evidence above?

 

[Sihouette]

Well...to put it in prosaic terms you can understand....

When it looks like a fish, swims like a fish, smells like a fish and has gills like a fish...it probably is a fish.

Those facts about the Bin Laden/Bush association can be accessed. So it doesn't matter if you or any of your GOP clones here believe me, other people can check the facts for themselves. The facts apparently are there too about the nazi connections with the Bush's. I wonder how jews would now feel about voting republican in the last election? It would be like blacks voting for Clinton and finding his family was rich from KKK money.

Talk about a slap in the face.

 

[Andy]

When it looks like a fish, swims like a fish, smells like a fish and has gills like a fish...it probably is a fish.

So when it acts like a hypocrite, talks like a hypocrite, gives a pass to specific people while attacking others like a hypocrite, and posts of forums like a political hack job hypocrite, then it's probably just a hypocrite and I should ignore it? Good point.

Those facts about the Bin Laden/Bush association can be accessed. So it doesn't matter if you or any of your GOP clones here believe me, other people can check the facts for themselves.

Talk about a slap in the face.

Right, those facts he has a business connection to a legitimate group of international business people. See, the difference again is, one is a connection to people who are not terrorist, while ours is a direct connection to the actual terrorists. Yet you are more worried about a loose inference, then you are about documented connections to real terrorists.

The facts apparently are there too about the nazi connections with the Bush's. I wonder how jews would now feel about voting republican in the last election?

Apparently not as bad about a loose business connection, as they are about a present candidate with direct connections to Hamas, and a former member, and still supporter, of the PLO. But hey, what was I talking about? Oh right... hypocrisy.

It would be like blacks voting for Clinton and finding his family was rich from KKK money.

Like say complaining about BigOil, while voting for Al Gore who got rich off of stock in Oxy Petroleum, whom he arranged the sale of federal lands to for oil production? Didn't seem to bother you much did it? Now what was I talk about before... oh yes, hypocrisy.

 

[Sihouette]

Oh my yes, a lot of pigs, even nice ones, were fed at the $$ trough of BigOil..

No doubt about it. Many people may own oil stock via mutual funds and not even be aware of it consciously.

On another note: if you make lobbying illegal, then the Government of the People, By the People and For the People will once again reign, instead of the one we have now which is Of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations. Corporate welfare. Corporate socialism.

Yes, the "S" word applies to how "We" handle corporations...especially recently. Capitalism coddles not the people, but the soulless conglomerants of profiteerism. Trickle down is just a ruse to get us to believe we actually are taken into consideration in the Big $$ Picture. Which of course we are not under capitalism. Lowly workers are just numbers, manipulatable figures on a piece of paper.

This is why a government Of The People, By the People and For the People isn't compatible with pure capitalism. And if you think of our forefathers' definition, it does sound rather socialist doesn't it? They knew the marriage between socialism and capitalism was essential for our nation's wellbeing. And so we've seen that negative fruition played out recently.

 

[BigRob]

Oh my yes, a lot of pigs, even nice ones, were fed at the $$ trough of BigOil..

No doubt about it. Many people may own oil stock via mutual funds and not even be aware of it consciously.

On another note: if you make lobbying illegal, then the Government of the People, By the People and For the People will once again reign, instead of the one we have now which is Of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations. Corporate welfare. Corporate socialism.

Most lobbyists are not bad. I would be willing to bet almost anything you are connected to one in some way shape or form yourself.

Yes, the "S" word applies to how "We" handle corporations...especially recently. Capitalism coddles not the people, but the soulless conglomerants of profiteerism. Trickle down is just a ruse to get us to believe we actually are taken into consideration in the Big $$ Picture. Which of course we are not under capitalism. Lowly workers are just numbers, manipulatable figures on a piece of paper.

This is why a government Of The People, By the People and For the People isn't compatible with pure capitalism. And if you think of our forefathers' definition, it does sound rather socialist doesn't it? They knew the marriage between socialism and capitalism was essential for our nation's wellbeing. And so we've seen that negative fruition played out recently.

We always hear this every time there is a slowdown. In a year when it has turned around, it will have made no difference.

 

[Sihouette]

Lobbying has no place in Congress. Businesses should lobby citizens instead via the media. Each congressperson should have a secure website where people can weigh in on issues posted, according to how they think things should be run.

That is democracy. Congressional lobbying cuts the citizen out of the loop. In fact, it's an encumberance to the democratic process, for those puritans like me who think the majority should rule, and not money rule...

 

[PLC1]

Lobbying has no place in Congress. Businesses should lobby citizens instead via the media. Each congressperson should have a secure website where people can weigh in on issues posted, according to how they think things should be run.

That is democracy. Congressional lobbying cuts the citizen out of the loop. In fact, it's an encumberance to the democratic process, for those puritans like me who think the majority should rule, and not money rule...

The United States is not a pure democracy any more than its economic system is pure capitalism.

Pure ideologies hardly ever work in the real world, anyway.

The US is a constitutional republic, with the Constitution, not the word of the people, being the supreme law of the land.

 

[BigRob]

Lobbying has no place in Congress. Businesses should lobby citizens instead via the media. Each congressperson should have a secure website where people can weigh in on issues posted, according to how they think things should be run.

That is democracy. Congressional lobbying cuts the citizen out of the loop. In fact, it's an encumberance to the democratic process, for those puritans like me who think the majority should rule, and not money rule...

You know James Madison would strongly disagree with you.