Bob Woodward's Newest Book Questions Bush Administration Honesty!!!

Well here is one more source questioning the Administration.

I'm sure it will be an intersting read

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15051776/

The subtitle in the MSN article is........

Can't wait to read it

 

OMG!!! This is exciting news!!! If it's about deception and Bush, then it *must* be honest before even reading it!

 

Has this thread been approved by Carl Bernstein if it has carry on posting

This should be worth reading!

 

Funny how people make money off of people.

 

Controversy Creates Cash

I'm absolutely intrigued by the idea that alex jones, dylan avery and other fruit baskets have exploited the concept to make huge sums of money off young angry white males with low IQs. It's easy money just waiting to be deposited into a bank account.

 

Yeh because giving away (that means free gtech) your ideas and videos on the internet is a gold mine

 

Those are lost leads yo! Come on, you know how the marketing works! Buy an imac, steal copyrighted video, lots of editing, create your own version, then set out to find facts to support your own version. Release a video that preaches a message that young angry white males with low IQs want to hear and draw them into the site where there are lots of ads, books to buy, premium memberships, etc.

The videos aren't the money pot. The videos lure in the gullible to the site to entice them into buying the real products.

It's really a clever marketing concept, wouldn't you agree? The "emotional" buy. What better way to make a dime, then off young, gullible and impressionable males who already make decisions based soley on emotion?

 

It's a really clever election campaign, wouldn't you agree? The "scare' them into it vote. What better way to gain a vote, then off the old, religous, conservative males who already make decisions based solely on prejudice, superstition and fear?

 

Yeah, it's called rap...lmao. j/k...sort of...

 

Create controversy.......make money!


And I thought conservative talk radio hosts did it for FREE!!!!!!

 

That must be why Air America is going out of business and stiffing customers for huge bills

 

Here are comments from June 2005 from a Republican Senator, Chuck Hagel. They seem to be relevant to this new book.

GTech.....is he treasonous? How about the fact that more and more of his colleagues are concerned? Are they becoming treasonous?


I'm trying to connect the dots here. Not being a loyal Republican....not agreeing with the administration. Are those the current grounds for being treasonous?

 

Why would he be treasonous? Did he meet with the enemies of our country during a war to discuss terms of surrender? Did he openly prosecute and convict fellow soldiers in a public forum without affording them a trial? Did he take action items from our enemies to use with an organization who was later thanked by a General of the Army we were fighting?

I suggest you need dot training I've never noted anything regarding loyalty to a party having to do with treason. Perhaps you missed my post about Lieberman?

Refresh mine and your memories here. Do you recall "loyalty to a party" as an item discussed regarding kerry's treason?

For someone who was once ready to prosecute the entire top leadership of the Bush administration over a supposed leak that we discovered was in part due to the leakee's ego and mistake for publishing paid details in "Who's Who," I find it disturbing that if Bush secretely met with enemies of our country to discuss terms of surrender (long before he ever became president) and then took action items home to work on behalf of our enemies, that you would want to prosecute him for treason.

One might think that "surrender and defeat" by any means necessary is the person's preferred platform. I don't get the impression you are about that. Are you?

 

I probably should have simply posted the Hagel quotes and not made reference to the "treason" thing. I left the post open for too many choices to respond to. I'd be happy to address the "traitor" thing later. I'd be happy to address the Plamegate thing later also.

No I am definately not a ....as you call it....a cut and run guy.

But I'm neither opposed to pulling out immediately, setting dates for pulling out, strengthening the forces for the long haul, or other as yet undefined strategies.

I'm for refiguring out how best to deal with the long term danger from fundamentalist Islamic terrorists and those that are anti-West, anti-US, anti-Israel.

Wish there were easy answers.

 

Don't we all....

Maybe if we all go kill ourselves then we wouldn't have to worry about them trying to kill us.

As far as Iraq goes, the quagmire that exists is that of all the terrorists coming into Iraq to make sure peace does not happen. We do need to set a time line but in secret to not allow the terrorists more motive to have an all out attack the day after our military is gone.

Funny thing is, when we do leave someone will claim victory just like hezbullah did.

 

I'm not so sure I'm unhappy with the flypaper situation anymore. If the released document is right and Iraq is the "cause celebre" of terrorists, thus causing them to go there. It seems to me, I'd much rather have them volunteer to killed there, then give them another target here to go after.

When they have greivances back to the crusades and use anything we say to incite death threats; then there is very little reasoning to be done. Any long term solutions HAS to come from over there. I forget who said it, but, terrorism will continue until they love their kids more than they hate us. I think that's pretty true.

 

Once again because GTech can't prove something wrong, he pulls the insult card.

It's getting boring. If his posting style is not that of an "angry white male with a low IQ", then I'm a happy meal.

 

Hello Happy meal.

Who is going to eat you? Are there cannibals in your area?

 

Totally agree with you on that one. If they want to huddle in one place, less will happen elsewhere allowing more people to live in peace.

 

What could I not prove wrong and who did I insult?

So to illustrate your point, you insult me? How does that work?