His Propaganda Machine before 9-11 2001?
2007-09-13 04:51:37 · 20 answers · asked by john 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Don't you mean drive-by media Mr. Rush ?
2007-09-13 04:59:00 · answer #1 · answered by cjgt2 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Ummm... do you really think that Iraq has anything to do with 9/11? Just about everyone was for going into Afghanistan and taking out Bin-Laden (ooopssss... we got lost and went to Iraq). Liberals disagree about IRAQ. Sadam was not a nice guy, but he was just about the same as the hundreds of other dictators all over the world--he just happened to have OIL. And if you want to claim this is about freeing the Iraqi people, well, hand me that pipe brother, because you're high. There's no freedom in Iraq right now, and more terrorists now than before the war. So, really, it was good ol' W. and his cronies who've helped that piece of crap Bin-Laden. Despite all the evidence that points to the fact that Bin-Laden is hiding out in Pakistan, no one in the white house is suggesting we start putting greater pressure on Pakistan to bring him in or we'll invade. So let's talk about reality here. I'm NOT a pacifist. I'm all for taking out people who attack our country. There is NO evidence whatsoever that Iraq had ANYTHING at all to do with 9/11. Our troops aren't dying over terrorism. THAT is why we are against the war. Pull your stupid head out of your rear and pay attention!
2007-09-13 05:05:03 · answer #2 · answered by average person Violated 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
the biggest irony in this is which you pronounced "liberal media" in refference to a fox information tale. heavily. this is like calling Pol Pat a compassionate humanitarian. It purely does not bypass at the same time. fairly however i do no longer take any factors interior the liberal/conservative conflict approximately who'se extra of a doody head. It advance into in all threat an consumer-friendly typo.
2016-10-04 12:21:18 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He endorses an Islamic State in Iraq and regime change in Iran to a Sharia Islamic State. He is coming around to our President Bush's way of thinking, guys.
I think we have made enough amends by taking out his enemy Saddam and now focusing our attention on Iran. He would love to get his Saudi allied insurgents into Iran!
Maybe our President Bush can work with him again as our President Reagan and G. H. Bush did!
2007-09-13 04:59:34 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
WHO IS REALLY RUNNING?
FLIP
"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him." G.W. Bush, 9/13/01
Washington Post, 9/17/01, UPI: Bush said he wants accused terrorist leader Osama bin Laden "dead or alive.” “I want justice...There's an old poster out West, as I recall, that said, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive,'"- G.W. Bush, 9/17/01, UPI
AP, 12/14/01: President Bush pledged anew Friday that Osama bin Laden will be taken "dead or alive."
FLOP:
Capturing OBL no longer a priority:
G.W. Bush, 3/13/02: I don't know where Bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
2007-09-13 05:28:09 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
did he know you would play into his hands and start a war on muslims? No, but it was his plan. In fact FOX news and conservative media give Bin Laden what he wants. He wants a war, he wants you in the middle east making enemies being targets, and attacking innocent civilians so that they too join his cause against you. You're the one who's helped make him a martyr.
2007-09-13 05:02:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Bush was the one who failed to bring to justice the main culprit behind the deaths of 3,000 people in New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania, so who's done bin Laden the most favors here?
2007-09-13 04:56:38 · answer #7 · answered by tangerine 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
No.
But he probably also didn't realize that Republicans and Neoconservatives would use it as justfication for invading Iraq.
Taking out Irans #1 enemy in the middle east.
He was probably also surprised when we didn't do anything to secure our borders, and tried to sell our port security to saudis (where most of the terrorists were from).
2007-09-13 04:58:16 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
He knew that the Republicans would do such an incompetent job of trying to catch him.
2007-09-13 04:57:41 · answer #9 · answered by Mitchell . 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Um, by being the only people who still suggest he should be hunted down and killed? Talk to your commander in chief- ask him why he decidered to provide comfort and aid to America's most wanted enemy by calling off the search.
2007-09-13 04:56:47 · answer #10 · answered by Beardog 7 · 7⤊ 0⤋