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

Since Nixon to Reagan/bush to Bush the usurper the true agenda of everyone has been subverting the checks and balances of the Constitution to create an imperial presidency that favors corporate and not social interests. This is based on the fallacy that capitalism is the best system when its flaws like the flaws of Communism are FATAL to social interests in the long run.
sooo what can we do to stop the traitors leading us down the primrose path to a corporate fascist hell

2007-12-27 09:12:10 · 14 answers · asked by bimma b 2 in Politics & Government Military

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20040116.html
http://www.democracynow.org/2006/1/6/an_imperial_president_bush_claims_right

Blackwater and other contractors as well as CIA/NSA operative have been fomenting terrorism with individual acts of terrorism that are then blamed on one faction or another. The propagation of terror serves the people whom bush represents as it allows the consolidation of power in the hands of the executive.
to the people here who think you can belittle truth and its messengers you are traitors or dupes.
and to the top contributor...the imperial presidency has NOTHING to with Imperialism do you know how to use a dictionary?

2007-12-27 14:49:10 · update #1

you uneducated fools do realize that Bhutto was Mushareff's OPPONENT and not considered reliable by bushcheney and their ilk. The lack of protection given her despite requests is suspicious and Fox is already trying to spin like it was the norm!!!
Mushareff is OUR puppet and we want him in power to continue our bidding. bushcheney have no interest in catching bin laden as that removes their bogey man!!
Bush is only a figurehead to the same extent reagan was...bush's brain damag is from is substance abuse and reagan was just nucking futs and as talking heads they were required to stick to a script....it was always funny when they went off script to like when bush said Mandela was dead!!!
YOU HAVE BEEN UTTERLY FOOLED BY TRAITORS and the innane "answers" here speak to the power of corporate propaganda in the US

2007-12-27 16:15:27 · update #2

does no one realize that bin laden is CIA operative?

2007-12-28 04:27:02 · update #3

14 answers

The death of B. Bhutto is a defeat for the US because they were backing her to become the next president of Pakistan.

2007-12-27 09:23:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

i don;t think so. I think it was more likely to be either a Muslim extremist faction trying again since the first one failed or possibly a Hilliary Clinton inspired one so she could claim to being Bhutto's great friend and point out how they are so much alike to help her in her Presidential bid. The latter is about as likely as Bush and the US government doing it. The main players I see in trying to lead the US people down a primrose path are those candidates trying to disarm the American people so that they will have absolute control and no fear from the public-same path used by Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, and every other dictator in the world-you can't be in absolute control if the citizens are armed.

2007-12-27 17:32:30 · answer #2 · answered by GunnyC 6 · 4 2

For all his faults, Bush has no hidden agenda. He is honestly trying to do something to keep the animals living in the Middle East from continuing slaughtering each other. Unfortunately that is very difficult, as the tragic killing of Ms. Bhutto - one of the few people actually trying to do something to help the situation - shows.
The Taliban and Al Qaeda don't have a hidden agenda - they have very expressly and openly said that their goal is worldwide domination, and putting to the sword every person who disagrees with them, including you! Sound good!
I'll take Coca Cola and McDonalds anyday!

2007-12-27 17:27:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

Oh, get real.

The Conspiracy Theory cr@p is getting a bit old, don't you think? How can Bush be both the stupidest man alive and also the most brilliant conspiracy planner at the same time?

Give it a rest. There are plenty of home-grown factions in Pakistan that wanted her dead. The US doesn't have to be involved in this travesty for it to happen.

2007-12-27 17:20:21 · answer #4 · answered by Dave_Stark 7 · 7 1

Wouldn't you love to know who sold the most stocks short recently. Hoping the constitution can withstand current dim wit.
Completely agree with you unchecked capitalism is as bad as unchecked communism. Vote for progressive free marketers, and hold on for ruff ride until market forces work their way through economy.

2007-12-27 17:37:25 · answer #5 · answered by Mister2-15-2 7 · 1 3

i dont know
im just so sad shes dead
i dont even know her and im sad
sad for all those teens and kids in that country that are gonna have very hard times ahead
her kids
and to the cowards that killed her its only fair to say they are pussys , cowards, afraid, weak, dumb, and have **** in their heads instead of brains. because if you think you are so brave by killin someone at least stay there , but the shooter killed himself, prooving to the world and comfirmin to himself that he is weak and afraid

2007-12-27 17:21:37 · answer #6 · answered by Eliana Lombay 2 · 1 1

So you think that we would kill the person we were supporting as the next president of Pakistan?

Did you think about this at all before you wrote it?

2007-12-27 18:20:46 · answer #7 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 3 1

Wow, I can't believe it took so long, I mean its been 12 hours since she was assinated, but the roots to yet another US/Bush "Conspiracy Theory" has taken foot.

2007-12-27 18:28:03 · answer #8 · answered by Think for yourself 6 · 3 2

The truth is she was killed for taunting a tiger. Don't moon a tiger and you won't get mauled.

2007-12-27 19:57:23 · answer #9 · answered by Philip L 4 · 1 1

OK, if capitalism is so flawed, what system do you suggest??
Also, your thought process is more about conspiracy theory than logic.
BTW you left Clinton out of the mix. Why?? He was as much of a capitalist as the named. Perhaps, it's because you like him, and Democrats in general.

2007-12-27 17:21:34 · answer #10 · answered by amazin'g 7 · 4 4

fedest.com, questions and answers