No Bush? No 9/11. No War!
By Loren Adams, Aug 31, 2003
What if Bush hadn't have seized the White House in 2000? Many parrot partisan talking points: "Just think what would have happened after 9/11 if Gore would have been president." Same old, same old. Tired, whiney macho deceitful rhetoric from wimpy hypocrites.
Well, just think what wouldn't have happened if the duly elected President of the United States would have rightfully been sworn into office? Think what wouldn't have happened if Bush and his radical right-wing extremists wouldn't have laid siege - usurping the constitutional authority of the electorate?
Immediately upon being inaugurated, George Bush canceled a long list of international treaties - including the Kyoto Protocol, 1972 ABM Treaty, and the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
In so doing, he gave a clear signal to the whole world that his Administration was determined to seize power, not only over the United States, but upon the international scene as well. This signal was missed by most Americans who paid little attention to current events other than reality TV and gossip tabloids. How can Bush force others to follow rules when he doesn't
Unfortunately, Osama didn't miss the point. Bush inflamed the world-wide terrorist network to action. Just seventeen days after Bush's inaugural (January 20, 2001), Ariel Sharon rode into power. What was Bush's response to Sharon's attacks on Palestinians?
He praised Sharon and christened him the "Man of Peace" in the Middle East ( Bush: Sharon A 'Man Of Peace' (washingtonpost.com) - extolling Israel's Prime Minister after he had desecrated Muslim holy places CBC News - Sharon desecrates Muslim holy place), reignited the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to a new high, bulldozed hundreds of Palestinian homes, fired missiles into Arab villages killing hundreds of innocent civilians, and discarded the pro-peace precedents of predecessors who negotiated in good faith with Palestinian counterparts.
Terrorism is contemptible no matter what form - whether suicide bombings committed by desperate Palestinians or state-sponsored terrorism committed by Israel using American weapons to pulverize villages, massacring harmless villagers. Why is America forced to take one side or the other?
Why can't the U.S. truly be the "honest broker" [as so claimed] between the two so that a long-term settlement can be reached? Why? Because Bush knows where his bread is buttered and is incapable of acting on principle, but rather must act for the sake of political expediency. Follow the money to Bush's heart, friends. There you will discover what inspires the man!
American fundamentalists and corporate moguls decide Bush's direction and they've now got a lock on the nation.
Ariel Sharon is no man of peace! But Bush designated him the honorary title both in 2001 and 2002. For the whole world to see and terrorists to become totally enraged.
To add fuel to the fire, Bush gave unconditional support to Israel - no matter how many military incursions inflicted upon the Palestinians, no matter how many illegal settlements constructed on stolen Arab lands.
Not only did George Bush agitate the passions of terrorists world-wide, he discarded Clinton's plans to combat terrorism. Sandy Berger's research and blueprints to eliminate Osama bin Laden were canned when Bush first arrived. Sandy Berger's strategies to combat terrorism )
Why? Bush had nothing but aversion for his predecessor - just like Ariel Sharon had nothing but disgust for his predecessor. The common denominator for both is that they're fear mongers and war mongers. And they followed leaders more reasonable and balanced, and so they despised former leaders much more capable.
George Bush came into office with the hidden agenda set by his closest advisors in the PROJECT FOR A NEW AMERICAN CENTURY (PNAC - 1997) to attack Iraq, create a new strategic base for the U.S. in the energy-rich Middle East, and engage the military might of the United States in a series of subsequent wars to introduce the world to a new America - an empire which demands pre-eminence for at least one-hundred years. (Out of Their Own Mouths - US Empire and Unilateralism - Global Policy Forum)
Therefore, Bush went immediately about the business of destroying long-established international treaties and dissolving the foreign policy of stability perfected through global commerce and socio-economic and educational interaction. In their place would rise his policy of militancy and intimidation - alienating both friend and foe in its wake.
The world now hates the U.S. government worse than at any other time in history - the direct product of the Bush Administration and a lasting legacy never to be expunged [like his four D.U.I.s and TX Air Nat'l Guard AWOL] from Mr. Bush's record.
George Bush was also connected with the bin Laden families of Saudi Arabia - spanning decades of financial entanglements. Beginning in 1976, Salem bin Laden, brother of Osama, was George's primary investor in Bush's first failed business, Arbusto Energy of Midland, Texas.
Four of Bush's business ventures failed, but the bin Ladens inexplicably invested at each step despite losses. There was obviously more to the arrangement than met the eye, although Bush's father was at first congressman, then CIA Director, and later Vice-President of the United States - plus had close ties with Saudi royalty through oil company connections and later political interests. (Bush & Bin Laden - George W. Bush Had Ties to Billionaire bin Laden Brood)
Bush's contempt for Clinton was only one influencing factor to disband Sandy Berger's anti-bin Laden project. The other one was more compelling: The close ties between the Bush and bin Laden families. In brief, the U.S. let its guard down on Bush's watch.
There is also a logical explanation why Bush smothers 9/11 investigations - and not for "national security" reasons. Bush's prime motive is to cover his own ass, not to defend and protect the American people. (BBC: Jan. 2001 -- After elections, US intelligence agencies are told by Bush to back off investigating the bin Ladens and Saudi Royals. 11/6/01)
The August 6, 2001 intelligence memo to Bush (while on month-long Crawford vacation) warning of Al Qaeda terrorists soon to hijack airliners, crashing them into buildings was somehow bleeped from the congressional 9/11 report. (The August 6, 2001 Intelligence Briefing to Bush: WARNING of terrorist attacks with hijacked planes ) "National security reasons," Bush lamely explained.
The report about Bush lifting flight restrictions on September 13, 2001 to allow the bin Laden families to fly from the United States to Saudi Arabia is also somehow censored. ( The Bushes And The Bin Ladens: HOW BUSH LIFTED THE FLIGHT RESTRICTION TO ALLOW BIN LADENS TO FLY TO SAUDI ARABIA ) "National security"? Yeah, right. CYA, George.
If there wouldn't have been a Bush occupying the White House in 2001, there wouldn't have been a 9/11 - nor an invasion of Afghanistan - nor an attack on Iraq - nor 1997 pre-planned incursions into Lebanon, Syria, Iran and North Korea. All these were "hot spots" before, but now they are major eruptions - costing America blood and billions. The survival of the nation is at stake, friends.
When will America wake up to the truth?
For more details, write to: Mr. Loren Adams at LAdams727
© Copyright 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 by MikeHersh.com and identified authors. MikeHersh.com invites you to broadcast any material at this site, provided you identify the source as MikeHersh.com. All print, Internet, email and other summaries, excerpts or other written reproductions must include this blurb and a link to http://www.MikeHersh.com.