English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

23 answers

can see you read newspapers and listen to the tv and radio,now try reading between the lines,for the answer to your question is in there

2006-07-27 22:45:50 · answer #1 · answered by archaeologia 6 · 1 0

Yes, George Bush is/was irrelevant to whether 9/11 started?

2006-07-27 10:59:57 · answer #2 · answered by cognito44 3 · 0 0

Most people cannot imagine the lengths the ruling elites will go to, to increase their power, money, and control.

Dubya's puppeteers policies are not new :-

“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
Hermann Göring(Nazi) 1946 Nuremberg Trials

The US. Government has lied about many wars. The increase of troops in Vietnam was based on an attack in the Tonkin Gulf that never happened. Some say that Roosevelt knew about Pearl Harbor and let it happen to get support to join World War Two. The Spanish-American War (Remember the Maine!) was also based on a hoax.

Not to mention the numerous covert wars that they lied about. Iran-Contra, the overthrow of Mossadegh in Iran, Allende in Chile, Arbenz in Guatemala. Also the war in Panama, against someone who was on the payroll of the CIA. Cuba as well. The Bay of Pigs invasion was supported by the CIA, and the people who invaded were trained by the CIA in Guatemala.

As for 9/11 this is the origin of the plan:-
"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."
David Rockefeller: Statement to the Untied Nations Business Council in September 1994

"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with other around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." David Rockefellers memoirs (2002)

and this is what Dubya's puppeteers had to say in 2000;-
"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor"
Project for the New American Century (2000)


Which brings into question 9/11/(2001), which was never investigated properly, and has been hijacked in order to enact Dubya's agenda and the subsequent illegitimate wars.
The 9/11 documentary Loose Change 2nd edition is available free on Youtube:-


Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGEb40o17yE&search=loose%20change%202nd%20edition

Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOVWBQKUpsU&search=loose%20change%202nd%20edition

Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtV1uxYnu0w&search=loose%20change%202nd%20edition

Decide for yourselves people ;)


I do agree with Dubya on one thing:-

"I think one way for us to end up being viewed as the ugly American is for us to go around the world saying, "We do it this way. So should you."
"I think the United States must be humble and must be proud and confident of our values, but humble in how we treat nations that are figuring out how to chart their own course."
George W. Bush - 2nd presidential debate Oct 11th 2000

2006-07-27 11:38:54 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Probably, dont forget this wasnt the first time the WTC was attacked. It was bombed in 1993 by Islamist terrorists. However, and this is only opinion, I believe that Bush's conservatism and the administrations foreign policy were like a red rag to a bull for Islamist extremists and may have accelerated the rush to afflict harm on the West.

2006-07-27 11:07:10 · answer #4 · answered by mrogynist 2 · 0 0

Absolutely. Remember, he had been in office only a few months when it happened. The plan had been in the works for years. It does not matter one bit to the terrorists who the president is. I do believe that our response may have been different if we had a different president.

Don't blame Bush for 9/11. Blame the terrorists.

2006-07-27 11:00:19 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Of course. That whole thing was not planned JUST during the time President Bush was in office. Those terrorist were learning to fly, setting up their plans, saving money. They did not do that all in the space of 9 months.

For that matter, Asama tried to have Clinton assassinated, bombed the basement of the TC, and attacked the USS Cole, all during the Clinton years.

2006-07-27 10:59:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No, the terrorist made it very clear the reason they did 9/11 was because of what BUSH senior had done and it was retaliation on the Bush's for that.

2006-07-27 11:05:29 · answer #7 · answered by politicallypuzzeled 3 · 0 0

Yes. The terrorists had been planning the attacks long before Bush got into office.

2006-07-27 10:56:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Conpiracy theorists and their trained parrots would have us believe that the president actually planned and funded the attacks as an excuse to start the war(s). If that were the case, then, no, perhaps not.

I don't give our president credit for having the smarts to have planned that far ahead.

So, in my OPINION, yes, it may very well have happened, since the planning that went into it seemed to have taken a few years to complete.

2006-07-27 11:02:13 · answer #9 · answered by Vince M 7 · 0 0

hard to say for sure.
I really cant say for sure.
i do not believe the president was involved in 9/11......

things to think about though.........

But the Taliban were in Texas visting why?
The Taliban got millions of dollars from the US government for herion farms cutting supply. (less supply because they needed to drive up the price)

What about that gas pipe line that they fianally got to build through that country?

who said a carpet of bombs or carpet of gold? in refrence to what?

Osama has never been charged (i am serious) never charged, even though we know it was him....in connection with the attacks...why?

2006-07-27 11:02:50 · answer #10 · answered by nefariousx 6 · 0 0

Maybe, Maybe not. The oval office & FBI ignored, or at least didin't act on, reports that implied what was going to happen, but I don't know if McCain or Gore would have either.

2006-07-27 10:59:23 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers