Subject:
|
Bush, a flawed evil genius?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 8 Jun 2003 08:37:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
204 times
|
| |
|
|
Perhaps my good friends here on OTD, who are against the war can help enlighten
my understanding, because I get a bit confused sometimes. From several of your
posts I have pieced together what I think you have been trying to tell me.
Bush was able to hatch a plan with the FBI and CIA to allow several terrorists
to attack the world trade center and pentagon on 9/11, or possibly we ourselves
bombed the pentagon for added effect. This was all done so that the FBI and CIA
both could usurp more power via the patriot act, which was already drawn up and
ready to sign before the attacks happened.
Then Bush and his rich pals in the oil industry came up with another secret
plan, whereby they would elaborate, and fabricate evidence against Sadam Hussein
in order to launch a preemptive war. The final results of this war would be huge
lucrative contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq. Bush was then clever enough
to convince Tony Blair, who is completely opposite of him ideologically, to go
along. Bush was so convincing that Blair not only to follow, but also to try to
convince other nations to join their coalition.
This war was executed with minimal loss of coalition life, with only the
occasional break to mock up scenes of hostage rescue, and statue destruction.
With the victory now sealed the coalition troops are merely left in Iraq to
humiliate and beat the remaining citizens who dislike our country.
All these plans successfully accomplished without any of the participants
spilling the beans about these secret plans. Not only that but Bush has been
successful in spinning it such that the majority of Americans support all these
actions, and his approval numbers are still high.
With all that done, you would think that Bush would have come up with a better
plan for planting the weapons of mass destruction. I mean Mark Furhman was able
to plant the bloody glove, why couldn’t those guys who mocked up the Jessica
Lynch rescue simply video tape a couple of barrels of flour and claim that it
was anthrax, or VX gas. They could fabricate an elaborate destruction of these
items and be fully justified in the eyes of the media.
Maybe Bush just didn’t think this through well enough, and maybe he just got
lucky on all that other stuff. So which is it? Is Bush just a sloppy subversive
genius, or are some of these claims just a bit exaggerated?
Scott C.
(Please don’t make me research all the links to the posts where people made
these claims)
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Bush, a flawed evil genius?
|
| (...) Either 9/11 was intentionally allowed to happen (doubtful) or the FBI once again dropped the ball on an important investigation. If a person or organization proves their gross incompetence (yet again) leading to massive loss of life, my first (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Bush, a flawed evil genius?
|
| (...) First, that there is a coalition of any consequences is laughable. Really it's just the U.S. and England. For my part, I think Blair is being dictated to by the power brokers in his country -- things *might* have been far different if Gore had (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
