http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1036571,00.html?
2007-06-01 15:11:25 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Total fraud.......... to get oil barons into the whitehouse anyone can check the facts, Cheney, Condi, Bush 1 and 2, all........ oil playaz for ExxonMobil , Chevron Texaco and Halliburtons.
If bin Laden takes over and becomes king of Saudi Arabia, he'd turn off the tap," Roger Diwan, a managing director of the Petroleum Finance Company, a consulting firm in Washington, told Banerjee. "He said at one point that he wants oil to be $144 a barrel - about six times what it sells for now." And Saudi Arabia, the Times reminds us, is Osama bin Laden's Enemy No. 1: "Mr. bin Laden has long made clear that his ultimate goal, more than wreaking havoc in the West, is toppling the Saud family. And Saudi Arabia would be a crucial target for anyone seeking to cut deeply into the world oil flow."
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1018-10.htm
2007-06-02 01:33:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The "war on terror" is totally bogus. The phrase itself reminds me so much of the Doublespeak used in George Orwell's novel, 1984. It's a sham.
9/11 was an inside job as justification to go to war with the Middle East and take over the oil over there. The global elite (Illuminati) frequently use human emotion (especially fear and anger) as an instrument to advance their goals of global dominion. Sure, there is a war going on in Iraq and people are fighting and dying, but there is no real enemy. And they're using the "war on terror" as an excuse to wield power over people and take away our civil liberties. Notice how they continue to pass more and more repressive laws under the guise of protecting people from "terror"?
2007-06-02 10:08:15 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Only if you dismiss the thousands of Innocent men, women and children that have been slaughtered by the terrorists, the acts of war and the events of 9/11 - and, of course, an ideology of hatred and domination so strong that the followers are willing to strap shrapnel laden bombs to themselves and detonate them in market places and crowds to further their demented objectives - then you might consider it bogus - but, again, only after you have completely ignored these and other tactics in the past.
2007-06-01 15:41:08 · answer #3 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm certain that the very name "war on terror" is bogus. Terror is a tactic, not an opponent. One can no more make war on terror than on flanking movements or marksmanship.
2007-06-01 16:14:43 · answer #4 · answered by gunplumber_462 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's a total fraud.
http://thefilter.ca/articles/canada/war-on-terror-looks-like-a-fraud/
2007-06-01 21:48:50 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
We are in the same deep **** we were in Vietnam. Look up "policy of containment", or "The Truman Doctorine" or "The dominoe theory" and you'll see that Bush is doing to same thing with the "war on terrorism." Someone needs to buy him a history book b/c we are in almost the same situation now.
2007-06-01 16:08:24 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
No what I do think is Bogus is the idea of those Islamic nut jobs attacking us again. That is what is Bogus.
2007-06-01 16:09:03 · answer #7 · answered by bhopefull 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
NO
We are AT WAR with terrorists and not really a standing army. It is a broad term that aptly describes the conflict we are engaged in.
2007-06-01 15:31:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋