Bush Caused 9/11: Is he the WORST President Ever? YES!

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 1:27 pm

There is no doubt in my mind that Bush is the single worst example of a president we have ever had. He is actively destroying our country. Breaking our laws, and alientating our friends. Even our staunch allies despise us now, ask any of the Britons on this board.

His administration is bankrupting our country and his dirty, illegal war is killing our young men. Here's why I think that:

The Great Escape

How is it that two days after September 11, 2001, even as American air traffic was tightly restricted, a Saudi billionaire socialized in the White House with President George W. Bush as 140 Saudi citizens, many immediate kin to Osama Bin Laden, were permitted to return to their country? A potential treasure trove of intelligence was allowed to flee the country-- including an alleged al-Qaeda intermediary who was said to have foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks. Why did the FBI facilitate this evacuation, and why didn't the agency question the people on the planes? Why did Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of most of the hijackers, receive exclusive and preferential treatment from the White House even as the World Trade Center continued to burn?

Two Families, Deeply Entwined

The answers to these questions, and ones far more troubling, lie in the largely hidden relationship that began in the mid-1970s, when the oil-rich House of Saud struck out for America in the wake of the OPEC oil embargo and soaring oil prices. Saudi Arabia needed American military protection, access to American political power, and a place to invest its staggering cash flow, which within 5 years reached $16 million an hour. Like wildcatting oil drillers, the Saudis began prospecting among promising American politicians, including the Bush family. And with the Bushes, the Saudis hit a gusher- direct access to Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush, as well as to Secretary of State James Baker, Vice-President Dick Cheney, and the entire U.S. intelligence apparatus.

A Dangerous Liaison

What followed was an amazing weave of influence, strategic investment, socializing, and secret policy between the House of Bush and the House of Saud that arcs from the 1980s into the present day. The two parties conferred on war, oil, funding for Osama bin Laden's Afghan Arabs supporting the mujahideen in the Afghanistan War, illegal arms deals, banking, private matters, and much more. By the time George W. Bush was elected, the House of Saud had transferred an astonishing sum of money to the House of Bush in deals involving dozens of companies. The total? At least $1.4 billion in investments and contracts went to companies in which the Bushes and their allies held prominent positions. But the importance of the relationship goes far beyond money. More than any other country in the world, Saudi Arabia is responsible for the rise of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism that threatens America. Horrifying as it may seem, the secret liaison between these two great families helped trigger the Age of Terror and give rise to the tragedy of 9/11.

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 1:45 pm

lol. I voted for Ross! At least he made money with his companies, all Bush does is bankrupt us all, while his friends get richer.:wah:

minks · Post by **minks** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 1:48 pm

Wot? You mean it wasn't our fault??? Whoooweee what a relief, is he still builting the wall??

I am with Arnie on that statement, I think Bush is ....... but as for most americans I have met... I like em.

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 1:59 pm

ArnoldLayne wrote: Well THIS Briton does despise Bush but NOT America or its citizens.

Well thanks for that Arnold!:D

The sorts of allegations you highlight Jives, are the sort that Michael Moore claimed in his film Fahrenheit 911.

Yep, this is from the book that the movie was based on. But I've done lots of other research myself that supports it.

The thing that decided me on this pathetic excuse for a leader? When he sat motionless, paralyzed by fear for 20 minutes as our countrymen were dying. What a wuss!:mad:

Benjamin · Post by **Benjamin** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:28 pm

I agree that Bush is at least the worst president in the past 100 years. Why Kerry didn't bring up the Bush family ties to the bin Laden family is beyond me. That alone should have caused Bush to lose.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:42 pm

Jives wrote: There is no doubt in my mind that Bush is the single worst example of a president we have ever had. He is actively destroying our country. Breaking our laws, and alientating our friends. Even our staunch allies despise us now, ask any of the Britons on this board.

His administration is bankrupting our country and his dirty, illegal war is killing our young men. Here's why I think that:

The Great Escape

How is it that two days after September 11, 2001, even as American air traffic was tightly restricted, a Saudi billionaire socialized in the White House with President George W. Bush as 140 Saudi citizens, many immediate kin to Osama Bin Laden, were permitted to return to their country? A potential treasure trove of intelligence was allowed to flee the country-- including an alleged al-Qaeda intermediary who was said to have foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks. Why did the FBI facilitate this evacuation, and why didn't the agency question the people on the planes? Why did Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of most of the hijackers, receive exclusive and preferential treatment from the White House even as the World Trade Center continued to burn?

Two Families, Deeply Entwined

The answers to these questions, and ones far more troubling, lie in the largely hidden relationship that began in the mid-1970s, when the oil-rich House of Saud struck out for America in the wake of the OPEC oil embargo and soaring oil prices. Saudi Arabia needed American military protection, access to American political power, and a place to invest its staggering cash flow, which within 5 years reached $16 million an hour. Like wildcatting oil drillers, the Saudis began prospecting among promising American politicians, including the Bush family. And with the Bushes, the Saudis hit a gusher- direct access to Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush, as well as to Secretary of State James Baker, Vice-President Dick Cheney, and the entire U.S. intelligence apparatus.

A Dangerous Liaison

What followed was an amazing weave of influence, strategic investment, socializing, and secret policy between the House of Bush and the House of Saud that arcs from the 1980s into the present day. The two parties conferred on war, oil, funding for Osama bin Laden's Afghan Arabs supporting the mujahideen in the Afghanistan War, illegal arms deals, banking, private matters, and much more. By the time George W. Bush was elected, the House of Saud had transferred an astonishing sum of money to the House of Bush in deals involving dozens of companies. The total? At least $1.4 billion in investments and contracts went to companies in which the Bushes and their allies held prominent positions. But the importance of the relationship goes far beyond money. More than any other country in the world, Saudi Arabia is responsible for the rise of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism that threatens America. Horrifying as it may seem, the secret liaison between these two great families helped trigger the Age of Terror and give rise to the tragedy of 9/11.Help me out, perfesser. How does this prove Bush caused 9/11?

Bez · Post by **Bez** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:43 pm

Hey Jives...nobody over here dislikes you guys, OR holds you responsible for the iraq situation.....where did you get that daft idea from ?? I personally have a deep distrust of Bush, but I'm not 'qualified' to give an opinion on US politics...so I won't.

:-6 :-6 :-6

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:45 pm

Benjamin wrote: I agree that Bush is at least the worst president in the past 100 years. Why Kerry didn't bring up the Bush family ties to the bin Laden family is beyond me. That alone should have caused Bush to lose.Because they're frat brothers. You don't really think it would be different with Kerry, do you?

StupidCowboyTricks · Post by **StupidCowboyTricks** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:46 pm

ArnoldLayne wrote: Why was Bush so determined to stop Congress setting up an enquiry into 911 and then stop an independant commision ?

I'm just staggered that, not only did seem to have something to hide, he seemed to make that obvious by trying to stop people asking questions

The Saudi's by all accounts stifled inquiries into the events, including investigations into the Saudi highjackers. What have YOU got things to hide too ?

Answer that ACC

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:54 pm

StupidCowboyTricks wrote: Answer that ACCAnswers what? It's difficult to follow your train of thought sometimes. That's not a criticism, really more of an apology.

StupidCowboyTricks · Post by **StupidCowboyTricks** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:58 pm

Accountable wrote: Answers what? It's difficult to follow your train of thought sometimes. That's not a criticism, really more of an apology.

Originally Posted by ArnoldLayne

Why was Bush so determined to stop Congress setting up an enquiry into 911 and then stop an independant commision

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 3:05 pm

StupidCowboyTricks wrote: Originally Posted by ArnoldLayne

Why was Bush so determined to stop Congress setting up an enquiry into 911 and then stop an independant commision I thought you were referring to my comment about Kerry. I guess you are offering up this single sentence as "proof" that Bush cause 9/11??

The word is caused. CAUSED.

If you think President George bush is guilty of the treasonous murder of the thousands that died in the World Trade Center, show the proof and put him under the federal prison. I'll support hard evidence. Do you have any?

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 3:23 pm

Benjamin wrote: I agree that Bush is at least the worst president in the past 100 years. Why Kerry didn't bring up the Bush family ties to the bin Laden family is beyond me. That alone should have caused Bush to lose.

I LIKE this guy!! OK...you're no longer a newbie, Benjamin! I hereby promote you to inner circle ForumGarden Regular with all responsibilities and rewards there in!!:wah:

See you at Bothwells!

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 3:30 pm

Accountable wrote: Help me out, perfesser. How does this prove Bush caused 9/11?

No problem, by ignoring the rabid brand of Islam fostering and being taught in his friend's country, he allowed the festering infection to spread to worldwide proportions.

His inaction, due to his involvement with the Saudis led DIRECTLY to 9/11. He's so involved, in fact that he might have well as flown the plane himself.

Worse yet, instead of going after the Saudis for their involvement in 9/11 (which he couldn't so since they were his cohorts and partners in crime) he decided to pick another target.

Iraq.

That makes him responsible for both the development of radical islam, the consequence of 9/11, and an illegal war costing thousands of innocent American lives.

RAT is too good of a word for him. It's insensitive to real rats who are not that bad.:wah:

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 3:32 pm

Oh, and ACC....you're too smart to actually be on this idiot's side, so you must be playing the DEVIL'S ADVOCATE right now, correct?!!

LITERALLY!

ROFLMAO!!!:wah:

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 3:56 pm

Jives wrote: Oh, and ACC....you're too smart to actually be on this idiot's side, so you must be playing the DEVIL'S ADVOCATE right now, correct?!!

LITERALLY!

ROFLMAO!!!:wah:I take fellow citizens' accusing the Unites States' Commander-in-Chief of murder and treason very - very - seriously. It's not a political ball, it ain't a goddamn game.

Bush has screwed up, no doubt. He balked and withheld information, certainly. This latest about him spying on citizens without a warrant - my jury's still out. But if he's guilty of an impeachable/imprisonable offense, make the accusation & show the proof. I you ain't got proof, stop the slander & do more investigation.

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:02 pm

Sure thing, ACC! I've got enough proof to keep this thread running for days, and don't think just because I have no respect for this double-dealing criminal that I don't respect the office of the President. After all, I volunteered to give my life for my country!

I'll bring in my book this weekend sometime, see you then!:D

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:05 pm

Jives wrote: Sure thing, ACC! I've got enough proof to keep this thread running for days, and don't think just because I have no respect for this double-dealing criminal that I don't respect the office of the President. After all, I volunteered to give my life for my country!

I'll bring in my book this weekend sometime, see you then!:DI've seen nothing but conjecture so far.

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:10 pm

I have not read all the replies to this thread. I have shot straight down to make a reply. I have read some including Arnold's and Jives's reply to Arnold.

There was a documentary on TV early last year that showed the various world leaders from a behavioural psychological point of view in terms of their ability to exert their personal influence of power over the other leaders. It showed that Bush (the current President of America) was fully in control. There was only one person who Bush conceded to and that was our Queen Elizabeth. Ultimately, It shows that Bush was and still is in control. At the moment, he could even go for a fourth term unless someone finally wrestles the influence of power from him (or if he deputises someone to take over from himself).

It is ironical that I was watching a tape recording of a documentary last night about the plane where the passengers fought the terrorists and brought the plane down on unpopulated land. Today, you, Jives, bring this issue back up.

When the WTC was destroyed, it occurred to me that it was the one institution which was probably more powerful and influential than the Presidency. The WTC is a part of a worldwide financial network that is not affiliated to any one particular country. In fact, the whole system carried on regardless of the attack and if the terrorists thought that they could wreak havoc on the world's finances, then they had not done their research very well. The world's finances are not centralised to any one place.

I tend towards a conspiracy theory that was not covered in the film Fahrenheit 9/11 or any of the documentaries I have seen so far except for one minor detail. The destruction of the towers created a 'worldwide enemy'. One that could not be seen. What a fantastic opportunity that created for Bush.

I don't think Bush was paralysed by fear. In fact, he made sure that he was out of the White House when it all happened. He just waited.

All it then took was to sow the seed of the idea into the minds of the fanatics. There's a whole lot more to this than meets the eye and Michael Moorcock only revealed what he could legally get away with.

Bush is not only in control, he is after financial control of the world. He made the one mistake of thinking that we would believe that he would place children before the national security. But he was not in the White House and at least one of those two planes succeeded.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:16 pm

OpenMind wrote: [...]Bush is not only in control, he is after financial control of the world. [...]
Then he'd better have Sam Walton's family assasinated.

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:16 pm

Well said. Actually, I just posted this thread to aggravate Chippedbeef for his anti-liberal, anti-democrat thread blitzing.

But I truly am still convinced of his duplicity and of his astounding incompetence and immorality.

Like you said, one blow job and Clinton is impeached. Meanwhile, Bush gets away with declaring an illegal war, spying on Americans, ignoring the Saudi threat, and running a corrupt government!

Sheesh!:-2

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:18 pm

Jives wrote: Well said. Actually, I just posted this thread to aggravate Chippedbeef for his anti-liberal, anti-democrat thread blitzing.

But I truly am still convinced of his duplicity and of his astounding incompetence and immorality.

Like you said, one blow job and Clinton is impeached. Meanwhile, Bush gets away with declaring an illegal war, spying on Americans, ignoring the Saudi threat, and running a corrupt government!

Sheesh!:-2So he's both incredibly sinister and scheming, yet astoundingly incompetent?!? Make up your mind!

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:19 pm

Bez wrote: Hey Jives...nobody over here dislikes you guys, OR holds you responsible for the iraq situation.....where did you get that daft idea from ?? I personally have a deep distrust of Bush, but I'm not 'qualified' to give an opinion on US politics...so I won't.

:-6 :-6 :-6

Bez, there are no qualifications required for politics.

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:22 pm

Accountable wrote: I thought you were referring to my comment about Kerry. I guess you are offering up this single sentence as "proof" that Bush cause 9/11??

The word is caused. CAUSED.

If you think President George bush is guilty of the treasonous murder of the thousands that died in the World Trade Center, show the proof and put him under the federal prison. I'll support hard evidence. Do you have any?

Bush is highly unlikely to mastermind such a deed and leave a paper trail leading back to him.

StupidCowboyTricks · Post by **StupidCowboyTricks** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:28 pm

ArnoldLayne wrote: While I have read reams of apparant evidence it amazes me he hasnt been dragged before a court of law before now. Who is scared of what ? You impeached Clinton for lying about a blow job for crissake. Are the Bushes and the Saudi's too powerful ? Who's pulling who's strings

YES! It is a "well honed political conspiracy".

It all kind of started back with Gary Hart

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:31 pm

One thing that I have noticed is how PC has developed synonymously in both our countries and has intensified during the Bush/Blair reign. The WTC incident appears to be the fulcrum for these changes. We are no longer living in a full democracy any more.

Whatever our political bias, or our patriotic faiths, our governments are taking things beyond the political will of itheir electorates.

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:36 pm

Sorry, completely off-topic, but couldn't resist putting this in here!

George Bush goes to a primary school to talk about the war.

After his talk he offers question time.

One little boy puts up his hand and George asks him what his name is.

"Billy."

And what is your question, Billy?"

I have 3 questions.

First, why did the USA invade Iraq without the support of the UN?

Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more votes?

And third, whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden?"

Just then the bell rings for recess. George Bush informs the kiddies that they will continue after recess.

When they resume George says, "OK, where were we? Oh that's right -- question time. Who has a question?"

Another little boy puts up his hand.

George points him out and asks him what his name is.

"Steve."

And what is your question, Steve?"

I have 5 questions.

First, why did the USA invade Iraq without the support of the UN?

Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more votes?

Third, whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden?

Fourth, why did the recess bell go 20 minutes early?

And fifth, what the f**k happened to Billy?"

StupidCowboyTricks · Post by **StupidCowboyTricks** » Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:41 pm

Rapunzel wrote: Sorry, completely off-topic, but couldn't resist putting this in here!

George Bush goes to a primary school to talk about the war.

After his talk he offers question time.

One little boy puts up his hand and George asks him what his name is.

"Billy."

And what is your question, Billy?"

I have 3 questions.

First, why did the USA invade Iraq without the support of the UN?

Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more votes?

And third, whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden?"

Just then the bell rings for recess. George Bush informs the kiddies that they will continue after recess.

When they resume George says, "OK, where were we? Oh that's right -- question time. Who has a question?"

Another little boy puts up his hand.

George points him out and asks him what his name is.

"Steve."

And what is your question, Steve?"

I have 5 questions.

First, why did the USA invade Iraq without the support of the UN?

Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more votes?

Third, whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden?

Fourth, why did the recess bell go 20 minutes early?

And fifth, what the f**k happened to Billy?"

..........................................

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:31 am

Jives wrote:

Like you said, one blow job and Clinton is impeached.
It still and always will crack me up how you guys maintain that it was an innocent blow-job (THERE'S an oxymoron) that got this lying piece of excrement impeached. Damn, that really is a hoot.

StupidCowboyTricks · Post by **StupidCowboyTricks** » Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:33 am

BabyRider wrote: It still and always will crack me up how you guys maintain that it was an innocent blow-job (THERE'S an oxymoron) that got this lying piece of excrement impeached. Damn, that really is a hoot.

Do tell.

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:38 am

StupidCowboyTricks wrote: Do tell.
Do tell what, exactly??

StupidCowboyTricks · Post by **StupidCowboyTricks** » Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:52 am

BabyRider wrote: Do tell what, exactly??

Originally Posted by BabyRider

It still and always will crack me up how you guys maintain that it was an innocent blow-job (THERE'S an oxymoron) that got this lying piece of excrement impeached. Damn, that really is a hoot.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:54 am

BabyRider wrote: Do tell what, exactly??

SCT is alot of fun in the pointless threads, but isn't worth the effort when you get in over ankle-deep.

StupidCowboyTricks · Post by **StupidCowboyTricks** » Sat Jan 07, 2006 8:11 am

ArnoldLayne wrote: You wouldnt be poking someone in the ribs with that pointy stick would you ? :rolleyes:

You do notice he never answers me?

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sat Jan 07, 2006 12:58 pm

Any idea that Bush was behind the 911 bombings is absurd if only because it makes Osama and the Islamic fundamentalists co conspirators-it's ludicrous. This terrorism is about govt's in the middle east and the siutuation there. How much of the responsibility for that you can lay on the west would take a very long book. It's not about destroying Western democracy.

That Bush and his cronies took advantage of it is I think beyond doubt, that they are pursuing their own agenda and that it is not in the long term interests of the American people is rather moot. (I would argue that it is not) To get away with it they have to keep the american people believing in them. That the american people will eventually sort out the politicians is a foregone concluscion.

We have a similar problem with our politrical system with self seeking politicians in power with all the integrity and usefulness of a dead budgie in a **** factory, and a govt in power to which the majority of the people are actually opposed to. Yet out PM convinces himself he has a mandate to govern and ants to achieve what he set out to do and our pathetic parliamentarians sit on their hands and say nothing. (mixed metaphor but it's funny so I'll leave it)

TB won't last much longer, I reckon the labour pary is now in crisis and is haemorrhaging support at grass root level that it will take some gtime to get back. People don't vote because they are fed up, not because they don't care.

posted by bev

Hey Jives...nobody over here dislikes you guys, OR holds you responsible for the iraq situation.....where did you get that daft idea from ?? I personally have a deep distrust of Bush, but I'm not 'qualified' to give an opinion on US politics...so I won't.

I would echo the sentiment except I am not averse to commenting on US politics but find myself wary of doing so because the common response seems to be you are just being anti american with no attempt to counter or consider the arguement made.

Just for the record if any American wants to call TB a lying, two faced hypocritical wanker very few British people would think you were being anti-British but merely exercising the right of a free citizen to say what they like about a politician, just as most frenchmen don't assume jokes about Chirac mean and the EU we are anti-French or hate all europeans.

History will judge whether GW was good for America. At last he can't stand again for president. After Maggie thatcher and tony blair `maybe we should bring in legislation to limit the time a PM can remain in power.

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 1:58 am

StupidCowboyTricks wrote: You do notice he never answers me?
Kind of like you didn't answer me? Or should I say, EXACTLY like you didn't answer me???

I asked for clarification about your vague and obtuse "Do tell" and you simply quoted me again. What, EXACTLY are you missing that I need to explain to you??

StupidCowboyTricks · Post by **StupidCowboyTricks** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:49 am

BabyRider wrote: Kind of like you didn't answer me? Or should I say, EXACTLY like you didn't answer me???

I asked for clarification about your vague and obtuse "Do tell" and you simply quoted me again. What, EXACTLY are you missing that I need to explain to you??

It really isn't hard to figure out

Is it?:-2

You made the statement and I simply asked you to expound on it.

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:41 am

StupidCowboyTricks wrote: It really isn't hard to figure out

Is it?:-2

You made the statement and I simply asked you to expound on it.

No, you said, "Do tell" which could have meant 100 different things. I was not looking to get into a discussion about one of my least favorite people in the world, I was looking to poke fun at him. Was THAT hard to figure out? You know as well as I do the reasons behind what happened and they had nothing to do with a blow job.

StupidCowboyTricks · Post by **StupidCowboyTricks** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 9:09 am

BabyRider wrote: No, you said, "Do tell" which could have meant 100 different things. I was not looking to get into a discussion about one of my least favorite people in the world, I was looking to poke fun at him. Was THAT hard to figure out? You know as well as I do the reasons behind what happened and they had nothing to do with a blow job.

....................................:yh_ttth

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 10:23 am

StupidCowboyTricks wrote: ....................................:yh_ttth
And yet another brilliant response from Stupid. Is there anything you CAN'T do?? I am in awe.... :yh_eyerol

Apparently you don't actually have anything to say about this, so go ahead and get back to your "Who's who" book. I'm sure you're in there somewhere. Pfffft.