You say that Bush lied about the reasons to go to war in Iraq that he manipulated the intel about the weapons of mass destruction. That he was behind the 9-11 attacks and that he coodrinated people planting explosives in the WTC had planes flown into them and shot a missle into the Pentagon all without no smoking gun evidence. (The Youtube videos are not smoking guns they are unlaoded guns at best)
My question is if he did all of these things you say, why didnt he plant weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to prove his case and make his decision to go in look wise? if he was able to pull off the others this would be an easy task.
2007-09-05 04:09:40 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
becuase if he did they would have anounced finding them!
All presidents withhold files that congress wants, The clintons did the same thing. So this is nothing new
2007-09-05 04:44:19 · update #1
If Clinton can't keep a little Oval Office hummer a under wraps, Bush could never keep such a massive secret as 9-11. A plot like that could be revealed by any one person involved, and certainly at least one person would have had a twinge of conscience. It's impossible to maintain secrecy nowadays with everyone shooting for their 15 minutes of fame.
Bush didn't need to manipulate data about Saddam's WMD's. Let me ask you a question: didn't it seem a little odd that the first thing Nancy Pelosi did after becoming Speaker of the House was to race over to Syria as fast as she could? Syria??? Why Syria? And what does visiting a foreign country, any foreign country, have to do with her new duties?
Here's the answer.
Saddam knew he was going to get his butt kicked. However, he figured we'd attack, and leave after it appeared we had obliterated his offensive capability. He had his WMD's removed to Syria. Look at the links below. One of great interest shows a truck convoy headed to the Syrian border just days before our invasion.
Those WMD's are still buried in Syria. Bush has been negotiating with Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, and Pelosi knows that once the existence of those deadly weapons are proven, the democrats can kill '08 goodbye. Pelosi didn't just fly to Syria on a lark. She flew over there with desperation, knowing that Al-Assad and Bush might strike a deal. She wants to stop that from happening so Democrats can reclaim the White House.
This isn't some wide-eyed conspiracy theory. This is simple politics.
2007-09-05 12:07:16 · answer #1 · answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know that these theories are true but they hold currently about the same amount of reason and proof behind them as the widely accepted views about what happened on 9-11. There is a lot we don't know about our president and his administration. Dick Cheney has 1000s files that he refuses share with congress, we still don't know why some federal prosicuters were mysteriously fired by Gonzalez, and our President has tried to hide many unconstitutional things from us since he has been in office(i.e. spying on random citizens). Not only that but this administration has lied to the American people countless times about many things(this is all documented). So why wouldn't someone believe that the current version of what happened 9-11 is nonsense. All I know is that if it is ever found out that Bush and his chronies were responsible for it not only will they be done for but so will the evil republican party, period.
2007-09-05 04:28:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
How do you know he didn't?
2007-09-05 04:15:05 · answer #3 · answered by oldmechanicsrule 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋