The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Bush/Cheney kept us safe from terrorists?

BostonPirate

Ijubbinatti
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Posts
14,470
Reaction score
40
Points
0
Location
Boston
well

They were Pres and VP on the day of 9-11 and they were warned by american intelligence that Osama was determined to attack.

its a little reality that republicans hate to think of and want to not acnowledge, but really?

The largest terror attack on american soil happened on Bush's watch.
 
Where does this crap come from?

The worst attack on American soil happened during Bush administration. Two wars, one based on lies and deceit killed thousands more Americans along with Iraqis and Afghanis.

Bush and Cheney were terrorists themselves.
 
history will judge Bush and Cheney very unkindly, they have already sank themselves and our country into oblivion.
 
Over four days in November 2008, terrorists systematically laid siege to sites frequented by foreigners in India's financial capital, Mumbai, killing nearly 200 and wounding another several hundred.

At least 5 Americans were among the dead.

My personal interest in this event was that I had originally planned to travel to Mumbai and to stay at one of the hotels that was attacked, but at the last minute changed my plans.

We now learn that US security personnel had been warned at least twice, by two of his three wives, that one of the men responsible for the attack was likely to be working with terrorists.



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/17/world/asia/17headley.html

Don't let me hear that the Bush administration "kept us safe" from terrorists, again.
This event appears to be yet another example of their incompetence.

Probably didn't think five lives were enough to make a fuss about.

Bush and Cheney were terrorists themselves.

That's a really stupid statement.

Unclean pegged Bush almost dead on. Cheney, though, was a ruthless adherent of Kissinger's realpolitik, and just didn't care about casualties, American or otherwise, so long as a reliable supply of oil could be secured.
 
That's a really stupid statement.

Unclean pegged Bush almost dead on. Cheney, though, was a ruthless adherent of Kissinger's realpolitik, and just didn't care about casualties, American or otherwise, so long as a reliable supply of oil could be secured.

Wrong.

Their politics of fear. "Keep them afraid."

They were terrorists themselves.
 
Wrong.

Their politics of fear. "Keep them afraid."

They were terrorists themselves.

A mere sideshow, and a means to an end. They would have used whatever would have worked, from fear to howling for blood to righteous anger -- it didn't matter.

Terrorists do acts to cause terror. Cheney and his patsy didn't care if anyone was terrorized or not; they just didn't care. If Iraq had gone down with zero casualties, or with a hundred thousand, it would have been no different to them -- the point was "securing the future" in terms of the world as a chess board.

The nice thing about a terrorist is you know how he's going to treat you. With the Cheney program, there was no knowing; he would change in an instant if it was convenient. The only people who were human to him were those in his power circles, and the enemy -- but the enemy just barely, just enough that he counted as an opponent to play against. The rest, all of us included, didn't even count as pawns; we were all just statistics to him.

Reading Kissinger and listening to him, and seeing the links with Cheney, chilled me. I've read Machiavelli, and while people think of him as ruthless, he still admonished the ruler to care for the people. Next to Cheney, Machiavelli was a good buddy advocating a quite benevolent sort of regime, even a compassionate one. Cheney makes Machiavelli look warm and comforting.

Back to the terrorist: he sees his targets as people; he wants to evoke emotion in them. But Cheney was even less human than that; terror was of no more interest to him than hunger or plague or mass celebrations -- all were mere tools to manipulate the statistics to reach the desired impetus.

So Cheney doesn't qualify as a terrorist at all, but not because he wasn't as evil, rather because he was and I presume remains seriously less human. He has work to do and progress to make to even rise to the moral stature of a terrorist.

So when I object to you calling him a terrorist, I'm not saying you're degrading him, I'm saying you're giving him credit not due, indeed ascribing to him a level of moral character he fails even to reach.
 
The same gang that lied ablout WMD and Iraq an 9-11.
 
The same gang that lied ablout WMD and Iraq an 9-11.

and wiretaps and torture

the list of lies is extensive.....

http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~richard/reflect/lies.html


"We can proceed with tax relief without fear of budget deficits, even if the economy softens." [Bush Remarks at Western Michigan University]


"Asked whether he had been arrested on anything 'after 1968,' the governor replied, 'No.' [Dallas Morning News]


Regarding his 1972 National Guard service in Alabama, "I was there on a temporary assignment and fulfilled my weekends at one period of time," Bush told a news conference. "I made up some missed weekends."


"We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories," Mr. Bush told Polish TV according to the Associated Press.
 
Back
Top