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

18 answers

It won't be Bush. One of the reasons that many people think that CT's are kooks is because of those who put the blame on Bush. Yes, he was in on it, and yes he was all for it, but he did not master mind it. If you want people to take us a bit more seriously, talk about the globalist elite, and the New World Order, and the Illuminati, and post a few links, with the information, that they can look at and research for themselves. The Bush Administration was definitely involved, but they were all just puppets, following orders. *sm*

2007-04-11 21:59:53 · answer #1 · answered by LadyZania 7 · 0 0

Declare martial law FOR WHAT??!! You libs always ask such fantastic, unrealistic questions that are NEVER backed up with fact. Amazing ...

Besides, a bleeding heart liberal such as yourself should be THRILLED at the idea of all the guns being taken away.

However, President Bush will not declare martial law. He will not take away our guns. I challenge you to state ONE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT that the President has taken from you. Just one. And don't just say. "He took away my freedom of speech." Back up what you say.

Betcha can't do it ... because it doesn't happen.

Have a GREAT Army day!! Huah!!

2007-04-11 21:55:46 · answer #2 · answered by Outlaw 1-3 6 · 0 0

It is the advantage of the civilian population that they severely outnumber all combined branches of the military (which is already spread thin across the globe), and every local PD and misc. law enforcement organizations. If the larger percentage of the civilian population exercises their right to bear arms, this could eventually tip the balance of power. What you are suggesting would require a great number of the civilian population to actually organize, cooperate, and mobilize effectively. In our current state of social apathy, complacency, and individualism, do you honestly see this as a realistic expectation? Let's also factor in the fact that fuel and food costs, the so- called "mortgage crisis", and our wavering economy will have a negative impact on the civilian populations ability to do more than go to work and go home. It is indeed much easier to inflict martial law upon us all if we are trapped in our homes by higher costs, and trapped at work to earn our ability to meet those rising costs.

2016-05-17 23:39:57 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

What was the first "false flag?"

Think about it.....if Bush had this intention, he would simply bow to Congress and order an immediate withdrawal. That way, all of the defense against another terror attack would be shifted to our home front - that would necessarily mean more surveillance, more phone taps, etc...etc.....and a much better premise to initiate any type of Marshall Law.

2007-04-11 16:28:21 · answer #4 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 2 0

Keep up the good work Ugly Betty/Boom/Vato/Hippie/Crypto Jew Girl/Sgt BMF/Skip/Skipper/Surfer Dude/Ginger/Brenda/ Citizen of the New World/*/Lori/BurningBush/etc.! Millions, just like those you predicted for your Anti-Bush March, are being convinced daily by your unsupported and hysterical allegations!

You are a great American!

Wake Up America! Wake Up Before It Is To Late!

2007-04-11 16:30:20 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Actually, that's a tactic of the liberals and seditious in this country, not republicans. It's sad to me that so many patriotic Democrats have put up with such an attack on our rights to bear arms.

It's good to see you support that right!

2007-04-12 12:39:06 · answer #6 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 0 0

Has it ever occurred to you that Bush didn't have to pull a false flag. All he had to do was get thousands of Americans, who are determined to protect this country, to look the other way while OBL's boys did their thing? Maybe my foil hat is too tight too.
But at least this theory wouldn't have required AMERICANS to attack their own country. DADADADA...DA DADADADADA
DATS ALL FOLKS!

2007-04-11 16:18:15 · answer #7 · answered by Crystal Blue Persuasion 5 · 2 1

While I'm no longer a big fan of President Bush, I don't think he belongs to the political party that wants to take all our guns away.

2007-04-11 16:14:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 6 1

No, he'd be killed by "the base".

He knows better than to touch their guns, maybe all their rights, but the guns last. (Right before he declares martial law.)

2007-04-11 16:16:52 · answer #9 · answered by ScooterLibby 3 · 2 1

Your type has been saying that kind of crazy stuff for the last 3 or 4 years now and it still hasn't happened. If this administration wanted to conspire and trick the world don't you think they would have planted WMDs in Iraq by now. That would have been extremely easy to do.

2007-04-11 16:19:13 · answer #10 · answered by scarlettt_ohara 6 · 4 2

fedest.com, questions and answers