Chief of the leak meaning George Bush...
Murderer meaning the orchestrated terror attacks of 911.
Serial Killer meaning his illegal war in Iraq.
What do you think?
2007-03-07 12:34:57 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
NO. I think that you are wrong. I think that no matter how much you may want this to be true it very simple isn't?
2007-03-07 14:19:27 · answer #1 · answered by Mother 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."
"Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star",
May 7, 1918
I think you need to back your words up, or be called out for outright lying. Where is your proof? I want well regarded citations, too. Not some loosechange.org quacks. Give me plausible citations.
2007-03-07 20:47:09 · answer #2 · answered by sjsosullivan 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
You use terms like serial killer to describe an illegal war. They are not quite the same thing. He is guilty of starting an illegal war but I wouldn't necessarily call him a mass murderer.
I don't understand your chief of the leak reference. It was Cheney's office that leaked Plame's name if that is what you are talking about, not Bush's.
Murder with respect to 9/11 and accusing him of orchestrating 9/11 isn't quite true either. He did not orchestrate 9/11. He may have let it happen but he neither planned nor orchestrated it.
2007-03-07 20:45:51 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
You make liberals look bad first of all.
Ridiculous name to call the President, apparently you are too young to know this thing works.
He did not orchestrate the terror attacks on 9-11 he is merely the puppet used to push the agenda for the New World Order.
The war was technically not illegally and was necessary to further facilitate the New World Order.
I think it doesn't matter one bit because nothing will change.
2007-03-07 20:45:44 · answer #4 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Mmmmm... one little flaw in your theory. If it was Bush who orchestrated 9/11, then why in the world did the counter-terrorism group under Clinton's administration want to ambush and take Bin Laden in '98? It certainly couldn't be because they believed that he could, and would attack the US & its interests... (sarcasm - rolling my eyes)... maybe the Clinton administration dropped the ball by not carrying it through... but we all know its not pc to say that anyone else besides Bush could have made a mistake, huh?
2007-03-07 21:26:44 · answer #5 · answered by steddy voter 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think those views are a tad extreme.
"Chief of the Leak" is hilarious, but just shows his incompetence.
One cannot be impeached for mere incompetence.
I think he was in no way directly responsible for 9/11. I don't believe any of the government 9/11 conspiracies out there. However, the fact that there was some intelligence warnings that were ignored by higher ups shows fatal flaws in the intelligence system, and more incompetence on the part of government leaders by proxy.
The war in Iraq was a big, colossal mistake that everyone else (World leaders, Democrats, liberal Republicans) would have tried to talk him out of, but there was no way he would listen. More lame excuses about flawed intelligence, and a system that he SHOULD have already fixed after 9/11. Major incompetence.
And certainly, the flawed response by his new "Department of Homeland Security" to hurricane Katrina proved his restructuring of emergency response after 9/11 just did not work. More incompetence.
But again, incompetence is just not an impeachable offense.
PS Don't blame me, I voted for Kerry.
2007-03-07 20:52:55 · answer #6 · answered by userafw 5 · 1⤊ 4⤋
How did he leak anything? Sources?
Murderer? Islamofacists flew planes into the building and ADMITTED IT ON VIDEO
Last I checked, Islamofacists are shooting everyone over in the Mid East, not Bush.
2007-03-07 20:43:02 · answer #7 · answered by bigsey93bruschi54 3 · 10⤊ 0⤋
I think that Bush is Chief of the leak.
I do NOT think he orchestrated or was remotely involved in the 9/11 attacks.
2007-03-07 20:38:05 · answer #8 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋
This is ridiculous. You need to get out of Michael Moore conspiracy 101 thinking.
2007-03-07 20:45:09 · answer #9 · answered by ALASPADA 6 · 8⤊ 0⤋
No and I think you are consumed with unhealty hate.
2007-03-07 23:57:04 · answer #10 · answered by nobsallowed 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋