-
New Mad Cow scare in US announced today
- Thread starter hippy_superstar
- Start date
New Mad Cow scare in US announced today
Well.... why haven't they caught Bin Laden if they can find Saddam whats the difference between finding him an Saddam. You guys changed my views I guess a civil war is possible but it will be horrible because I know alot of people and it would just be crazy to see them get killed when they aren't even involved in any of this. Well I guess its time to start training for melee and weapon combat it has gone this far and I don't see it stopping anytime soon since the news company's try to cover everything up.
cya,
SnakeyNew Mad Cow scare in US announced today
IMHO, Ghandi caused nothing to happen that wasn't happening anyway. The British empire was already collapsing under it's own weight. The Brits coulen't afford to keep the pressure on the Indians, and didn't have the will to be brutal enough to do what they needed to to keep their empire. If he had pulled what he did fifty years earlier, it woulden't have worked. Also, he was backed up by threat of force. There were Indians arming for the inevitable day when passive resistance failed. I think that the Brits left beacause of the cost that that war would exact on them rather than anything that Ghandi did. Perhaps a better way of putting it is to say that he showed the British his people's will, and they backed off beacause they knew what would happen if that will to passively resist would do when turned into a will to violence.
As I said it was their potential military power that gave them a stronger negotiating position. We would be as foolish to give up that final option as we would be to get violent right off the bat.New Mad Cow scare in US announced today
I believe that the militia groups will grow larger, gain more influence, and be taken more seriously after a certain event takes place. The event I'm referring to would be for "a smoking gun" to be discovered that indicates that the U.S. government somehow colluded with Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, or both. If proof (a group of credible whistle-blowers, a paper trail, etc.) is announced to the country, the situation will get much worse in a hurry. Many of the people who support Bush now would feel immensely betrayed by such a revelation (no pun intended). It won't be like the Clinton scandal. GW Bush will be fortunate if he is merely impeached.
This idea seems "way out" now but I have a very strong "hunch" that there is something that is "just not right" about the relationship between the Bush family, the Saudi royal family, and Saddam Hussein. I have been of the opinion (since the first Gulf War) that the U.S. and Iraq (Hussein) "arranged" to fight a war in order to gain influence in the Persian Gulf. The real targets of the war were the Gulf States (including Saudi Arabia) and Iran (indirectly).
If it can be proven that the U.S. went to war under false pretenses, the militias will receive a new influx of new, highly skilled members-- former military people who lost friends and have long memories.New Mad Cow scare in US announced today
dancho,
Try a google on Stanley Hilton and Michael Ruppert.
Hilton is the former chief of staff for Bob Dole and went to the Univ. of Chicago with Wolfowitz and Feith (two of the neocons in the Bush admin.). He currently has a suit filed in federal court suing Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell, Rumsfeld and some others for treason and mass murder surrounding the 9/11 incident. He's suing for $7 billion, and represents 400+ family members of 9/11 victims.
Ruppert is a former police detective and an investigative jouralist. He just published a book called "Crossing the Rubicon" In his book, he alleges that the 9/11 event was perpetrated by the Bush admin. and that Cheney was "at the controls" on 9/11.
I won't go into a long winded post about these gentlemen, but they've put facts together that point to 9/11 being an "inside job" and not too many people seem to notice or care. Do a google search on each of these guys, and see what you think then. No disrespect, just offering you some sources of information.
Saddam was a long time paid for CIA asset and was used by the US in the 80's to fight Iran. We gave Saddam his WMD back then, financed him and gave him US military hardware. He and Rumsfeld (as a former Sec. of Defense under Reagan) were big pals back in the 80's OBL is a long time paid for CIA asset. He's been to the US, been trained, armed, financed and supplied by the US govt. while he was fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. My guess is Saddam got turned into the bad guy in Gulf War I and got off his leash. My other guess is that OBL is still a part of the CIA organization. Good question, "Why haven't we been able to capture OBL?" The CIA visited him in the American hospital in Pakistan on 9/10/01. He was there for kidney treatments. They knew where he was on and after 9/11.
As far as going to war with Iraq under false pretenses, I think that has been fairly well established. No WMD's, no link to al Qaeda, no link to 9/11. Nothing, zippo. And this is from Bush's handpicked 9/11 commission. Is there outrage in the US? Yes, there's some, but most people are too complacent to care. A number of permanent military bases are being built in Iraq right now for the US military. A long term presence is planned. For what? Who knows, but an expanded war (or at least military action) in the Middle East would make sense.
Most of the people I know who support Bush, do so blindly, and are in total denial of the facts presented in the Hilton lawsuit and Ruppert's book. It's going to take something stronger that the truth about 9/11 to have them abandon their support of Bush. Maybe an economic crash would do the trick.
Anyway, thanks for the post. Just thought I'd throw my 2 cets into the mix and hope it illuminates what's going on.
CaryNew Mad Cow scare in US announced today
The evidence is strong but not quite strong enough. (Gazes into crystal ball) I foresee a situation where somebody like Colin Powell (for example) starts the ball rolling by revealing what they know. Then an "avalanche" of information will occur. I'm reminded of the effect of the "Pentagon Papers." Those documents caused an uproar, and indirectly led to the fall of Nixon (he was trying to stop such "leaks" when he formed the "Plumbers"-- and the "Plumbers" got caught breaking into the DNC office at The Watergate Hotel) (little history review for the kids).
My personal opinion is that Bush did not "master-mind" 9-11. I believe that it was a Saudi operation. Here's my reasoning (warning, the following is pure speculation, but if I can't speculate on The Time Travel forum, then I just don't know!)
Let's say the the first Gulf War was "cooked up" by Bush and Hussein as a kind of swindle, wherein the soldiers on both sides are sacrificed in order to intimidate and control Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. The evidence is strong that this was the case. The Iraqi army did not occupy Kuwait, they looted and destroyed it. The U.S. had SIX MONTHS to prepare for their offensive to re-take Kuwait. For SIX MONTHS, Saddam Hussein watched an enemy army grow in size and did nothing. When the fighting started, the Iraqi Army immediately RAN from Kuwait as fast as possible, leaving behind a "delaying" force that was so puny that it's presence had no effect at all. The only reason that Iraqi casualties were heavy was that there was only a few roads back to Iraq (and just one good one) and it became a shooting gallery for allied air power. Then, just as the allies are about to conquer Iraq, the war is "called off." I can't help but see GHW Bush giggling with diabolical glee at how well the plan worked (except for the un-anticipated problems with depleted uranium residue, faulty anthrax vaccine, and friendly-fire).
At the end of the first Gulf War, Saddam and his armies sit across the border, glaring at the people of the Arabian Peninsula. The U.S. and Britain can expect "full cooperation" from Kuwait (certainly) and Saudi Arabia (probably). If not, the Allied army can go home, leaving Kuwait and Saudi Arabia to the tender mercies of Saddam Hussein. Nice, eh? All the advantages of invading the oil rich gulf states with none of the disadvantages! It's brilliant! So cheap oil fuels a huge economic boom during the eight years while Clinton is smoking dope. Then the Saudis spend huge amounts of money to elect GW Bush. Why?
Fast forward to 9-11. The Saudi politely inform GW Bush that his father's chickens have "come home to roost" (to paraphrase Malcolm X). They tell GW that they will reveal the Gulf War deception, continue to attack the U.S., and do everything in their power to destroy Bush and, incidentally, the U.S.A., unless he agrees to THEIR plan.
The Saudi plan calls for U.S. attacks on Saudi Arabia's two worst enemies. Saddam Hussein is at the top of the list. The U.S.'s attack dog has to be put down. The Taliban in Afghanistan are also on the list. Many of these fundamentalists (like Osama Bin Laden) despise the Saudi royal family and intend to overthrow them.
So, before the dust of the two towers has settled, Afghanistan is invaded and preparations are made for an invasion of Iraq.
How's that for a nightmare conspiracy theory?
StarLord
Senior Member
New Mad Cow scare in US announced today
Darkwolf,
I see the point you are trying to make. My feeling is that because we have not been under some kind of govt. repression for the last 50 years, when that many Americans stand tall here I have the feeling it may go different than what happened in China.New Mad Cow scare in US announced today
I agree. But it might not. I'm kind of wary of protesting, it seems to me that the dissidents are kind of herding themselves into a mass where they could be easially rounded up or cut down as happened at Tieniman. Alot of the factors controlling wether this goes down are up to the government. If they really want to turn the country (world?) into a police state, they are going to have to show their hand when people start to protest. If they just let people protest, we'll have peace, and probably change.