The Case Against George W. Bush

<blockquote>continues to regard all who refuse to drink the Kool-Aid (liberals, rationalists, Europeans, et cetera) as agents of Satan.</blockquote><p> Oh! Oh! That was beautiful! For those who don't remember the allusion, Jim Jones who was a cult leader who spiked kool-aid with Cyanide and had his 400+ followers drink it - look up 'Jonestown Guyana'.<p> <p>---<br>"History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme" Mark Twain <br />
"The greatest price of not participating in politics is being governed by your inferiors." Plato

Another diatribe against Bush, but when a sex-predator former President visits Canada fools line up to see him. Clinton did nothing with his presidency, to him it was just a better opportunity to chase skirts and have people fawn on him. Bush has been forced to actually do something with his presidency and whiners everywhere hate him for that, they like slimy but innocuous Clinton types that 'feel their pain'. Bush must be on the right track if all those nihilistic drugged-out multi-millionaire rock stars and Hollywood types are lining up against him. Go Bush!

I agree. Its easy to criticise when one has no responsibility. Bush has done the best with the information he has.

Looks like Bush is a combined intelligence and personality test, isolating those foolish, ignorant or mendacious enough to still support him, from more sensible people. This kind of low-brow crap may find an audience in America, but you're pissing in the wind trying to peddle such nonsense in a country like Canada, with a more educated and informed population.

Brett Mann

Right on.

You know Clinton's sexual decisions cost him dearly, and perhaps the women involved, but I fail to see the loss of life for those sexual indiscretions. I don't really think you can compare those actions with the price of thousands of civilians and military personal sent on a mission to seek and destroy. The problem is that people are preoccupied with the media surrounding the sex scandals which have been with us since time began, when they should be preoccupied with the destruction of countries, resources and human life, the toxins used to win the war on terror are threatening the existance of generations of people, I don't think Clinton's dallyings are on the same scale.

---
If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

There is perhaps no greater evidence of collective American stupidity than the persistant criticism of Clinton's idiotic sexual hangups while ignoring or apologizing for Bush's blatant lies and criminal abdication of the U.S. Constitution.

There is a pathology at work in America, deliberately fueled by the exploitation of fear by the Busheviks, and festered by the complicit silence of the corporate media.

As Dubya himself said yesterday, " [Our enemies] never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we'' (http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/s ... 52,00.html). Amen, Georgie boy. Just as 'nobody died when Clinton lied', people keep dying as long as Bush keeps lying.

-Randy from RI

Randy, do you think dubya's speech writers do this to him, or is it he just can't read ?

That was hilarious !!


---
"Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
Jim Callaghan
Minden, Ontario
705-286-1860
www.misterc.ca

Conclusion: They knew they were misleading America

In his March 17, 2003 address preparing America for the Iraq invasion, President Bush stated unequivocally that there was an Iraq-al Qaeda nexus and that there was “no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.”

In the context of what we now know the White House knew at the time, Bush was deliberately dishonest. The intelligence community repeatedly told the White House there were many deep cracks in its case for war. The president’s willingness to ignore such warnings and make these unequivocal statements proves the administration was intentionally painting a black-and-white picture when it knew the facts merited only gray at best.

That has meant severe consequences for all Americans. Financially, U.S. taxpayers have shelled out more than $166 billion for the Iraq war, and more will soon be needed. Geopolitically, our country is more isolated from allies than ever, with anti-Americanism on the rise throughout the globe.

And we are less secure. A recent U.S. Army War College report says “the invasion of Iraq was a diversion from the more narrow focus on defeating al Qaeda.” U.N. envoy Lakhdar Brahimi put it this way: “The war in Iraq was useless, it caused more problems than it solved, and it brought in terrorism.”

These statements are borne out by the facts: The International Institute of Strategic Studies in London reports al Qaeda is now 18,000 strong, with many new recruits joining as a result of the war in Iraq. Not coincidentally, the White House recently said the American homeland faces an imminent threat of a terrorist attack from a still-active al Qaeda operation in Afghanistan. Yet, the administration actually moved special forces out of Afghanistan in 2002 to prepare for an invasion of Iraq. Because of this, we face the absurd situation whereby we have no more than 20,000 troops in Afghanistan hunting down those who directly threaten us, yet have 140,000 troops in Iraq—a country that was not a serious menace before invasion.

Of course, it is those troops who have it the worst. Our men and women in uniform are bogged down in a quagmire, forced to lay down life and limb for a lie.

To be sure, neoconservative pundits and Bush administration hawks will continue to blame anyone but the White House for these deceptions. They also will say intelligence gave a bit of credence to some of the pre-war claims, and that is certainly true.

But nothing can negate the clear proof that President Bush and other administration official officials vastly overstated the intelligence they were given. They engaged in a calculated and well-coordinated effort to turn a war of choice in Iraq into a perceived war of imminent necessity.

And we are all left paying the price.

http://www.infoshop.org/inews/stories.p ... 04/1614046

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0804-11.htm

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/19465/

See the eye-popping graphic art that exposes the original Nazi-style salute to the U.S. flag with: "All in favor of a Pledge of Allegiance raise your right hand."
http://members.ij.net/rex/pledgewonschik.html

And read amazing arguments now before the U.S. Supreme Court for the first time ever debunking the "Roman" salute myth. Wonschik v. United States is bigger news than the Elk Grove case and is at the same url.

The graphic shows the original Pledge of Allegiance on the left and on the right it shows the salute of the National Socialist German Workers' Party. It explains that the pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. flag is the origin of the salute of the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

The Elk Grove court case was a blessing in disguise, by providing a temporary delay. It allows the fight to widen against the entire Pledge, not just two words. New court litigation is being spearheaded as a pro bono service to the public to liberate Americans from government pushing the totalitarian Pledge and government schools.

The Wonschik court case will be a blockbuster sequel to the Elk Grove case. The Elk Grove case led to scary discoveries about the Pledge's pedigree. It led to the historic news-breaking discovery that exposed the Pledge as the origin of the salute of the monstrous National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nazis). It is a myth that the Pledge's original straight-arm salute is an ancient Roman salute. http://members.ij.net/rex/pledgesalute.html

The history of the Pledge has been suppressed because it is so frightening. The Pledge was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy, a self-proclaimed National Socialist in the U.S., who wanted a government takeover of education to produce an "industrial army" for the authoritarian vision portrayed in his cousin Edward Bellamy's book "Looking Backward." The Bellamy cousins promoted national socialism worldwide for decades. Their acts resulted in racist and segregated government schools that lasted through WWII and into the 1960's, setting a horrid example for hate-spewing groups worldwide.

Another school year has started and a webpage is working to repeal laws that require teachers to lead a robotic chant of the Pledge of Allegiance in the oddball states where government schools are required by law to begin each day with the Pledge, after the ringing of a bell, like Pavlov's lapdogs of the state. http://members.ij.net/rex/pledge_lawyer.html

Another url helps students learn that the Pledge was written by a National Socialist and the rest of the Pledge's true terrifying history:
http://members.ij.net/rex/stopthepledge.html

For more mind-boggling photos and articles about the pledge see http://members.ij.net/rex/pledge2.html

The only website that provides the scary original speech given by Francis Bellamy for the debut of his Pledge of Allegiance is http://members.ij.net/rex/pledgespeech.html

There is also the only website that collects and displays true historic photographs of the original Pledge of Allegiance (with the straight-arm salute). http://members.ij.net/rex/pledge2.html

And fan mail praising the expose' of the totalitarian Pledge of Allegiance is at http://members.ij.net/rex/pledge_heart.html

I'm in total agreement, there is absolutely no comparison in the types of "lies" told by the 42nd and 43rd Presidents. Clinton had a fling, and "lied" about it, but did manage to balance the books, even produce a surplus for the taxpayers. Jr. lies about a multitude of things, WMD, 9-11, Al Quaieda, Sadam, etc. etc., and gets the Republican House and Senate to support two "Wars on Terror". Results, untold billions of dollars increased debt, untold numbers of American and British lives killed, and a complete reversal of sentiment, amongst the world's leaders. Now, you tell me, whose "lies" have had a greater detriment to the United States? And for those who are posting Pro-Bush sentiment, every wonder why they do it anomymously? At least the greatest number of Anti-Bush posts' authours include their signatures.


---
Life is a one way trip, make it a good one.

For many, many Americans, the pledge of allegiance may as well be changed back to the nazi form of since their media has de facto been taken over by their government and is acting as their propaganda ministry. Personally, when reading the history of Germany in the time leading up to and during WWII I could never understand how the German people followed along with Hitler and the Nazis and were so badly duped. However, in the time following 9/11, especially in the first year or two, I think we have a living example of how this happened.

Another 'Bushism':

Bush also said high taxes on the rich are a failed strategy because "the really rich people figure out how to dodge taxes anyway."

http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/vi ... s-virginia