• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Topic: Bush White House Suppressed Evidence

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    Bush White House Suppressed Evidence

    sponsored links


    ***Advertisments***
    http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/090904A.shtml

    Sen. Bob Graham, co-chair of House/Senate 9/111 investigation, asserts that the White House suppressed evidence of Saudi government ties to at least two of the 9/11 hijackers. His assertions are confirmed by a Republican senator.

    Graham also talks about a conversation with Gen. Tommy Franks, in which Franks told him of the quiet redeployment of important military resources from Afghanistan to Iraq some 14 months before Congress authorized Bush to act.

  2. #2

    Re: Bush White House Suppressed Evidence

    Figure I'll bump this to give you Bush supporters a chance to respond....

  3. #3

    Re: Bush White House Suppressed Evidence

    This crap is weaker than Moore's theories. Did you see him on Chris Mathews talking about this. Even Mathews practically dismissed him as a nut case.

    The S*H*I*T* you shovel on this forum Rob never ceases to amaze me.


    BTW...Gen. Tommy Franks (a longtime independant who has never supported a candidate publicly before in his life) is now openly campaigning for Bush's re-election.
    Regards,
    Brian W. Ralston

    Check out my new FREE iPhone App! Click Here!

  4. #4

    Re: Bush White House Suppressed Evidence

    Brian, have you read "The War on Freedom" or "The New Pearl Harbor"?
    I think not. Are you aware that most of the hijackers were Saudi? Are you also aware that they had legitimate US Visas inspite of the fact that they were on most wanted terrorist lists around the globe? You seem to know absolutely nothing about anything. It is common knowledge and has been reported in the NY Times and Washington Post that The Bush administration does not want certain details about Saudi Arabia dragged into the 911 debate. What exactly these details are is unknown. Brian, I'm afraid you are the king of ~~~it shovelers. Trouble is your ~~~it kills.

  5. #5

    Re: Bush White House Suppressed Evidence

    Your primary mistake, Nick, is to believe that this is a problem unique to Bush. Had it been Gore, or if it happened again with Kerry, the same thing would have taken place. How do I know? Because many of the very same people were involved in the OKC Bombing as 9/11 and that was under Clinton's watch. Not only did they get off scott free, but the feds actually covered for them to the point that most of the public thinks it was nothing but "domestic" terror! At least with 9/11 we know who pulled it off, more or less.

    Replacing Bush with Kerry will not get rid of the problem. The problem is rooted much deeper.

  6. #6

    Re: Bush White House Suppressed Evidence

    Quote Originally Posted by Brady Wright
    Your primary mistake, Nick, is to believe that this is a problem unique to Bush. Had it been Gore, or if it happened again with Kerry, the same thing would have taken place. How do I know? Because many of the very same people were involved in the OKC Bombing as 9/11 and that was under Clinton's watch. Not only did they get off scott free, but the feds actually covered for them to the point that most of the public thinks it was nothing but "domestic" terror! At least with 9/11 we know who pulled it off, more or less.

    Replacing Bush with Kerry will not get rid of the problem. The problem is rooted much deeper.
    The US is too heavily reliant on oil. So the basic problem will not be fixed under Kerry. But Kerry favors progress and alternative energy sources and would not have acted in the extreme and disastrous way that Bush did.

  7. #7

    Re: Bush White House Suppressed Evidence

    More Bush-isms --- enough to make any die-hard theocratic republican run for the hills ::

    http://www.falloutshelternews.com/BushHitlerLinks.html

    Lefist propaganda is simply more entertaining !!!!


    Anyone in Canada looking to hire a composer/sound designer ??? Don't know how much more of AmeriKKKa i can take :-(

  8. #8

    Re: Bush White House Suppressed Evidence

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Phoenix
    Brian, have you read "The War on Freedom" or "The New Pearl Harbor"?
    I think not. Are you aware that most of the hijackers were Saudi? Are you also aware that they had legitimate US Visas inspite of the fact that they were on most wanted terrorist lists around the globe? You seem to know absolutely nothing about anything. It is common knowledge and has been reported in the NY Times and Washington Post that The Bush administration does not want certain details about Saudi Arabia dragged into the 911 debate. What exactly these details are is unknown. Brian, I'm afraid you are the king of ~~~it shovelers. Trouble is your ~~~it kills.
    ut...ut....who let you out of your pen again? Here Nicky....Here Nicky.....

    Now...which one of these buttons calls your parents to come pick you up?.......
    Regards,
    Brian W. Ralston

    Check out my new FREE iPhone App! Click Here!

  9. #9

    Re: Bush White House Suppressed Evidence

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Phoenix
    The US is too heavily reliant on oil. So the basic problem will not be fixed under Kerry. But Kerry favors progress and alternative energy sources and would not have acted in the extreme and disastrous way that Bush did.
    What has oil to do with the OKC Bombing? What was Clinton's motivation?

  10. #10

    Re: Bush White House Suppressed Evidence

    Quote Originally Posted by Brady Wright
    What has oil to do with the OKC Bombing? What was Clinton's motivation?
    Clinton was busy - with the doors to the Oval Office locked and only groaning and giggling to be heard.

    the great white protector & boy from hope - sheeesh

Go Back to forum
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •