To all of you who say I just copy articles, here is my own words:

George Bush and James R. Bath both served in the Texas Air Nation Guard. This was proven with the records released by the Bushes in 2000.

In 1976 Bath became the Texas money manger for the Bin Laden family. He was in business with Salem Bin Laden, and other wealthy Saudi Businessmen.

James Bath invested in George W. Bush’s oil company, Arbusto. This is proven in the Schedule 4 spreadsheet showing a 50,000 investment by James Bath in George W. Bush’s Bush Exploration.

Reports from Time Magazine, “[E]arly 1980s tax records reviewed by Time [Magazine] show that Bath invested $50,000 in Bush's energy ventures and remained a stockholder until Bush sold his company to Harken in 1986.” Jonathan Beaty, A Mysterious Mover of Money and Planes, Time Magazine, October 28, 1991.

Which concludes Bush had business deals, and meetings with the Bin Laden’s and James Bath.

In the 1990’s George Bush served on the board of direction for CaterAir. This company was owned by Carlyle Group. His father also joined this company after losing the re-election. According to Carlyle, “Former President Bush was at one time the Senior Advisor to the Carlyle Asia Advisory Board but retired from that position in October 2003.”

What’s ironic is that the Bin Laden family invested in Carlyle in 1994. Since Bush was representing the Asia Board, George H.W. Bush met with the Bin Laden family in their headquarters in Jeddah.

Following the attacks to 9/11, the Bin Laden’s investment in the Carlyle Group became a struggle, and they finally stopped business because Clinton enabled the deals between the Bin Laden’s and America. Once George Bush JR. came in office, he took that act off, and they started doing business again with the Bin Laden’s.

The morning of September 11, 2001, the Carlyle Group was holing their annual international conference. Shafig Bin Laden, Osama Bin Laden’s half brother was there, and George Bush Sr. was also at the conference. The Carlyle’s spokesperson says the former President left before the terror attacks.

“What do George Bush, Arthur Levitt, Jim Baker, Dick Darman, and John Major Have in Common? (They all work for the Carlyle Group),” Fortune, March 18, 2002.

With all of that, it concludes that the Bush family did have involvement with the Bin Laden’s. From them investing in his business, to him dealing with them in the Carlyle Group and to Bush enabling the act Clinton put in place…to the day of September 11th.

That does show a clear involvement with the Bin Laden’s.

The morning of September 11, 2001, the Carlyle Group was holing their annual international conference. Shafig Bin Laden, Osama Bin Laden’s half brother was there, and George Bush Sr. was also at the conference.

Are you sure about this? I thought Bush was at a public school that morning.

Originally posted by Karankawa
Are you sure about this? I thought Bush was at a public school that morning.

His father, smart one. But they were both involved in that company.

The way the Bin Laden family escaped all investigation after 9-11 is just amazing. How comes it doesn't seem to be a bigger issue in US media ?

what exactly is the point of all this? another not so subtle hint that bush should be stripped of his office and cast into prison and the election handed to kerry no questions asked?

Originally posted by Travh20
what exactly is the point of all this? another not so subtle hint that bush should be stripped of his office and cast into prison and the election handed to kerry no questions asked?

No Trav...it's a not-so-subtle hint that Bush should be tarred-and-feathered and run out of town on a rail...honestly Trav, how do you come up with your ridiculous posts? :rolleyes:

Trav, do you have any thoughts about the Bin Laden/Bush business connection?

seriousy pagan, what is the point of the post? if its not some sort of indictment what is it? I dont have any thoughts on the bin laden/bush family connection. All I know is that Osama Bin laden, the bin laden we are most interested in, is on the run and innefective since 9-11, and hopefully soon will be caught and killed

I believe I read somewhere that Osama Bin Laden has like 50 siblings. Some are American.

But let's just ignore that. Instead, let's burn everyone at the stake who had anything to do with anyone with the last name of Bin Laden. In fact, let's take anyone with the last name of Bin Laden and put them in front of a firing squad. And their spouses. And their children. And their friends, and ESPECIALLY their business associates!

Originally posted by Travh20
what is the point of the post?

The point of this post, which you seem to not be capable to understand is the fact that we let the Bin Laden’s fly out of American on September 13th, when air space was starting to pick up. A hypothesis was already made that Osama Bin Laden was behind 9/11. Which concludes, the question, don’t you think we should investigate the very family of the person behind September 11th?

"The White House still refuses to document fully how the flights were arranged," according to a June 20, 2004, article by Phil Shenon in the New York Times.

Which all in all, seems quiet interesting if you ask me, knowing the background relationship these two families had. Although Richard Clarke has admitted to approving these flights, it seems ironic that they refuse to document fully how the flights were arranged.

It also draws attention to the fact that we took troops from Afghanistan and moved them to Iraq focusing to attention from Osama to Saddam. Putting 10 times the amount of troops in Iraq, when Osama is clearly in Afghanistan. And then Bush coming out and saying, “Frankly I don’t care what happens to Osama Bin Laden”….............

Many of our most recent Presidents family members, were "NOT" the type to be in the spotlight for there involvement in situations, but we are smart enough to leave well enough alone. Why would we put attention on family members of Osama Bin Laden , when its Osama Bin Laden that we are focused on. Not his family

Originally posted by jon_37920
Why would we put attention on family members of Osama Bin Laden , when its Osama Bin Laden they we are focused on. Not his family

Simple: If anyone could give you information regarding Osama Bin Laden, it would be his family. When a person commits a murder and is on the run, whom do they call in? Their friends and family…because they would have if any, more of an idea regarding the location and what this person is like. It’s simple. And it’s obvious that our Government would question the very family of the man behind 9/11. They were in our country, two days after the attacks. And yet, the Bush Administration lets them fly away…and yet they won’t release all the documents on who approved it and WHY.

ummmmm, you sound like a crazy person. should we detain his entire family indefinatly until they spill the bean as to where their crazy son is? I doubt he sends regular post cards. for someone pissed that we hold terrorists in GITMO you sure seem gung ho to hold a bunch of people who happen to have the name Bin laden.

Originally posted by Travh20
ummmmm, you sound like a crazy person.

I try my hardest.

Originally posted by Travh20
should we detain his entire family indefinatly until they spill the bean as to where their crazy son is?

There is a significant difference between "detaining the entire family indefinitely" and " not helping them to fly away from the USA two days after 9-11 without proper interrogation".

Originally posted by Overdose
Simple: If anyone could give you information regarding Osama Bin Laden, it would be his family. When a person commits a murder and is on the run, whom do they call in? Their friends and family…because they would have if any, more of an idea regarding the location and what this person is like. It’s simple. And it’s obvious that our Government would question the very family of the man behind 9/11. They were in our country, two days after the attacks. And yet, the Bush Administration lets them fly away…and yet they won’t release all the documents on who approved it and WHY.

Who is Osama Bin Laden?.....go to world news thread to get up-dated on who we are refering to !!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by jon_37920
Who is Osama Bin Laden?.....go to world news thread to get up-dated on who we are refering to !!!!!!!!!!

Let me make this easy for you:

Osama Bin Laden is related to the Bin Laden family (funny, I know). The Bin Laden’s were in the United States the day of, and 2 days following September 11th. Within that very night of 9/11 suspicion that it was Osama Bin Laden had grown. By the 12th, it was fairly obvious it was indeed Osama.

Which concludes we need to find him, and or get any information possible about his location. And who do you think would be the best people to ask? Maybe his own family members!

Let me say this again:
Whenever someone commits murder, who do they call in? The family members…because they know more about the location and or why the person would have committed this murder.

It’s naïve to assume that Osama’s family members would have no idea as to the whereabouts to him. And even if they didn’t know, don’t you think it would be in our nation’s best interest to at least sit down and question his family, instead of flying them out on the 13th?

they knew whre he was same as you or I, in afghanistan. how does that help? I guess you were expecting a strret address in Kabul?

Originally posted by Travh20
they knew whre he was same as you or I, in afghanistan. how does that help? I guess you were expecting a strret address in Kabul?

George Bush doesn’t seem to think so…because he’s sent 10 times the amount of troops to Iraq and forgotten about Osama.

Regardless, you do not send the family of the person who just attacked your country out of the US.

the only reason you say that is becasue it is what we did. if we kept them here a month and interrogated them you would be bitching that they were held without being charged r something along those lines. your to predictable overdose

Originally posted by Travh20
if we kept them here a month and interrogated them you would be bitching that they were held without being charged r something along those lines.

No actually calling people in to question them, is not breaking the law. You don’t have to “charge” someone to question them. Besides I would have supported questioning the very family of the man behind 9/11.

It’s the same when someone commits a murder. Their family members come in and are questioned. They are not “held” and they don’t need to be “charged” because it is a reasonable request to have them come in and be questioned.

Originally posted by Travh20
your to predictable overdose

I guess I am.

how long exactly are the family memebers of murders questioned ovedose? more then two days? do you want them availabe for questioning anytime you wish? its not like we dont know where these people are now. if we have questions we will ask. seriously, this is another fake issue cooked up to combat all the good news about the economy and iraq. However the post 9-11 handeling f the bin laden family panned out, you would have had something negative to say about it, end of story.

Originally posted by Travh20
how long exactly are the family memebers of murders questioned ovedose?

They are, I’m assuming, questioned until all the questions the police have are asked (scary I know!)

Originally posted by Travh20
more then two days?

Possibly

Originally posted by Travh20
do you want them availabe for questioning anytime you wish?

That would be nice, but it’s not probable. The Bin Laden’s were in America, the day of, and 2 days after 9/11. I’m sure you can question them within a 3-day time frame. And even if there is still more questions to be asked of the family of the person behind 9/11, I’m sure they would be willing to stay longer.

But I just am curious why the Bush Administration would approve the flights, to ship them out of America? I’m sure you could get some information from the Bin Laden’s, on regarding Osama. And even if they couldn’t, don’t you think it would be wise to at least try to get information out of them?

You say we knew where he was, in Afghanistan. But Afghanistan is a large country, and any information regarding where he would be at, isn’t such a bad idea. It would cut down the time of our search for him in Afghanistan. Anything would help, even if it were small. Which is why shipping the Bin Laden’s out of America, without questioning them is completely idiotic.

OK, overdose, how do you know what questions they asked them? what makes you think they were in recent contact with little Osama? the fact is you dont know, you are mearly criticizing the decision, no matter what it may have been. I have heard they sent them out for their own safety, surely you cant be agaisnt that can you?

Originally posted by Travh20
OK, overdose, how do you know what questions they asked them?

Maybe,
“Do you know if Osama is behind 9/11”
“Do you happen to know his ware bouts”?
“Who else do you think would be behind 9/11”?

You know, simple questions you would ask the family of any mass murderer.

Originally posted by Travh20
what makes you think they were in recent contact with little Osama?

I don’t know, maybe they could ASK them if they had recent contacts with Osama. If they do have information you may as well ask. If they don’t, it’s better then not asking at all. Better to be safe then sorry.

Besides it’s highly probable that his family members have some sort of information regarding him.

Originally posted by Travh20
the fact is you dont know, you are mearly criticizing the decision

Yes, I am. The decision to let his family members go, is just ridiculous.

OK knucklehead, let me ask again: HOW DO YOU KNOW THEY DIDNT ASK THEM THESE QUESTIONS????

HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT HTEY HAD ANY CONTACT WITH OSAMA RECENTLY??

WHY DO YOU INSIST ON BELIEVING THAT NOT ONE QUESTION WAS ASKED OF THEM?

WHY WOULD ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS HAVE NOT ALREADY BEN ASKED SINCE THEIR SON WAS TOP PRIORITY OF THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION?

wake the fuck up already

Originally posted by Travh20
OK knucklehead, let me ask again: HOW DO YOU KNOW THEY DIDNT ASK THEM THESE QUESTIONS????

They were flown out the 13th, and George Bush has never once stated any contact with them. So, no, they didn’t question them.

Originally posted by Travh20
HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT HTEY HAD ANY CONTACT WITH OSAMA RECENTLY??

Maybe we could have questioned them…to see if they had contact with Osama. But we didn’t, so we will never know.

Originally posted by Travh20
WHY DO YOU INSIST ON BELIEVING THAT NOT ONE QUESTION WAS ASKED OF THEM?

Show me the proof that they were questioned…and then I’ll agree with your stance. Until then, one must assume no questions were asked, since there are no reports showing there were questionings.

Originally posted by Travh20

wake the fuck up already


*wakes up*

you are hopeless. micheal moore says they were not questioned so I guess that makes it so. whatever.

Originally posted by Overdose
George Bush doesn’t seem to think so…because he’s sent 10 times the amount of troops to Iraq and forgotten about Osama.

Regardless, you do not send the family of the person who just attacked your country out of the US.

in a sense you are right. however, bush and the president of afghanistan have asked nato for help in afghanistan because there are a growing amount of insurgents. they were all at the summit it turkey......remember france bitched that they wont even help in afghanistan. even you OD, i know we have our differences, but you have to admit that france is being ridiculous and still want to be 'important'

Originally posted by Travh20
you are hopeless. micheal moore says they were not questioned so I guess that makes it so. whatever.

You know, if they were questioned, I’m sure the Right Wing would be all over it and say, “Look Mr. Moore they were questioned!” but that’s not the case.

Again, I would agree with you, if you showed me documentation that they were questioned. Until then, you must assume that they were not questioned.

Because I've yet to see anyone in the Bush Administration say they were questioned or a report regarding them being questioned. If you can find it, and give it to me, you win. Until then, you're the one that's hopeless.

Usually when there is no reference, quote or anything supporting them being questioned, they most likely were indeed not questioned. It isn’t that hard to comprehend.

Originally posted by no moore please
in a sense you are right. however, bush and the president of afghanistan have asked nato for help in afghanistan because there are a growing amount of insurgents. they were all at the summit it turkey......remember france bitched that they wont even help in afghanistan. even you OD, i know we have our differences, but you have to admit that france is being ridiculous and still want to be 'important'

If I do recall right Germany and France were giving us air support in Afghanistan. I’m not 100% sure on that, though. So actually the majority of the world was supporting us, after 9/11. Remember the ships of Germany and France hiring the American flags for us, when our ships would go by? Yes, they were all in support of what we were doing.

We asked Nato for help? Maybe so (link, if you could). But if Afghanistan was such a struggle for America…why did we send over 100,000 troops to Iraq? It just made things harder for us in Afghanistan.

Plus, we took money (300 million) from the Afghanistan fund and put it towards Iraq. Which further proves that if they were indeed having difficulties in Afghanistan, they shouldn’t have taken troops, and money away from Afghanistan.

They went about the problem incorrectly. If they were having troubles in Afghanistan, taking troops and money, and starting another war (which has been even harder) is not the way to solve the problem at hand. Which concludes we have a President who is a failure.

Originally posted by Overdose
If I do recall right Germany and France were giving us air support in Afghanistan. I’m not 100% sure on that, though. So actually the majority of the world was supporting us, after 9/11. Remember the ships of Germany and France hiring the American flags for us, when our ships would go by? Yes, they were all in support of what we were doing.

We asked Nato for help? Maybe so (link, if you could). But if Afghanistan was such a struggle for America…why did we send over 100,000 troops to Iraq? It just made things harder for us in Afghanistan.

Plus, we took money (300 million) from the Afghanistan fund and put it towards Iraq. Which further proves that if they were indeed having difficulties in Afghanistan, they shouldn’t have taken troops, and money away from Afghanistan.

They went about the problem incorrectly. If they were having troubles in Afghanistan, taking troops and money, and starting another war (which has been even harder) is not the way to solve the problem at hand. Which concludes we have a President who is a failure.

yes you are right about money . as for the NATO thing it was the talk of the town during the nato summit so ill give you a link some other time or another member can verify it. things in iraq havent gone as well as we hoped and since the france, germany, etc. are totally against us and wont give us money i think it is understandable to put more to aplace that we wont get help from the EU but take away from a place where the EU, etc. will help fund and send troops...just my thoughts

Why would they approve or help with this war? It’s completely unjust, and wrong. They were helping us in Afghanistan, because that was legitimate. We made a mistake going into Iraq…and the world knows it. Which is why the majority of the world will not help us, and I support them in doing so.

Originally posted by Overdose
Why would they approve or help with this war? It’s completely unjust, and wrong. They were helping us in Afghanistan, because that was legitimate. We made a mistake going into Iraq…and the world knows it. Which is why the majority of the world will not help us, and I support them in doing so.

well we are there and i think it was right. even if we did make a mistake isnt it right to help us and not let more people die? i dont think that is a good way to learn a lesson by just stranding us.

*note: my belief is that it wasnt a mistake

I didnt know france and germany were considered teh entire world, and they call us arrogant :rolleyes:

heres a list of the places you dont consider part of the world that are helping us:

Albania 71 non-combat troops in northern Iraq.

Azerbaijan 150 troops for law enforcement and protection of religious and historic monuments in Iraq.

Bulgaria 485 troops patrolling Karbala, south of Baghdad. An additional 289 are to be sent.

Central America and the Caribbean Dominican Republic (300 troops), El Salvador (360), Honduras (360) and Nicaragua (120) are assisting a Spanish-led brigade in south-central Iraq.

Czech Republic 296 troops and three civilians running a field hospital in Basra, and a small detachment of military police.

Denmark 406 troops, including light infantry, medics and military police. An additional 90 soldiers are being sent.

Georgia 69 troops, including 34 special forces soldiers, 15 engineers and 20 medics.

Estonia 55 troops.

Hungary 300 transportation troops.

Italy 3,000 troops.

Japan Delays a decision Thursday on sending troops to Iraq, citing security concerns after a surge in anti-coalition violence.

Kazakhstan 27 troops.

Latvia 106 troops.

Lithuania 90 troops.

Macedonia 28 troops.

Moldova Dozens of de-mining specialists and medics.

Netherlands 1,106 troops, including 650 marines, three Chinook transport helicopters, a logistics team, a field hospital, a commando contingent, military police and a unit of 230 military engineers.

New Zealand 61 army engineers for reconstruction work in southern Iraq.

Norway 156 troops, including engineers and mine clearers.

Philippines 177 troops.

Poland 2,400 troops, command of one of three military sectors in Iraq.

Portugal 120 police officers.

Romania 800 troops, including 405 infantry, 149 de-mining specialists and 100 military police, along with a 56-member special intelligence detachment.

Slovakia 82 military engineers.

South Korea 675 non-combat troops with more forces on the way. But Seoul will cap its force at 3,000 rebuffing Washington's request for additional soldiers.

Spain 1,300 troops, mostly assigned to police duties in south-central Iraq.

Thailand 400 troops assigned to humanitarian operations.

Ukraine 1,640 troops.

United Kingdom 7,400 troops, with an additional 1,200 planned.

The United States is in discussions with more than a dozen other countries about providing troops.

Originally posted by Travh20
I didnt know france and germany were considered teh entire world, and they call us arrogant :rolleyes:

heres a list of the places you dont consider part of the world that are helping us:

Albania 71 non-combat troops in northern Iraq.

Azerbaijan 150 troops for law enforcement and protection of religious and historic monuments in Iraq.

Bulgaria 485 troops patrolling Karbala, south of Baghdad. An additional 289 are to be sent.

Central America and the Caribbean Dominican Republic (300 troops), El Salvador (360), Honduras (360) and Nicaragua (120) are assisting a Spanish-led brigade in south-central Iraq.

Czech Republic 296 troops and three civilians running a field hospital in Basra, and a small detachment of military police.

Denmark 406 troops, including light infantry, medics and military police. An additional 90 soldiers are being sent.

Georgia 69 troops, including 34 special forces soldiers, 15 engineers and 20 medics.

Estonia 55 troops.

Hungary 300 transportation troops.

Italy 3,000 troops.

Japan Delays a decision Thursday on sending troops to Iraq, citing security concerns after a surge in anti-coalition violence.

Kazakhstan 27 troops.

Latvia 106 troops.

Lithuania 90 troops.

Macedonia 28 troops.

Moldova Dozens of de-mining specialists and medics.

Netherlands 1,106 troops, including 650 marines, three Chinook transport helicopters, a logistics team, a field hospital, a commando contingent, military police and a unit of 230 military engineers.

New Zealand 61 army engineers for reconstruction work in southern Iraq.

Norway 156 troops, including engineers and mine clearers.

Philippines 177 troops.

Poland 2,400 troops, command of one of three military sectors in Iraq.

Portugal 120 police officers.

Romania 800 troops, including 405 infantry, 149 de-mining specialists and 100 military police, along with a 56-member special intelligence detachment.

Slovakia 82 military engineers.

South Korea 675 non-combat troops with more forces on the way. But Seoul will cap its force at 3,000 rebuffing Washington's request for additional soldiers.

Spain 1,300 troops, mostly assigned to police duties in south-central Iraq.

Thailand 400 troops assigned to humanitarian operations.

Ukraine 1,640 troops.

United Kingdom 7,400 troops, with an additional 1,200 planned.

The United States is in discussions with more than a dozen other countries about providing troops.

including jordan which would be a monumental move for a change in the middle east...even thought their leader sucks(jordans)

japan will most likely send

Originally posted by no moore please
well we are there and i think it was right. even if we did make a mistake isnt it right to help us and not let more people die? i dont think that is a good way to learn a lesson by just stranding us.

*note: my belief is that it wasnt a mistake

How could you support this war! The world warned us, and told us not to go into Iraq. George Bush turned his back on the United Nations, left them, and went into Iraq anyway. He didn’t think through it, and he underestimated the amount of troops we would need. Hence, why we are in so much chaos in Iraq.

The world does not have to support something they don’t agree with. I wouldn’t want to be forced to support something I didn’t believe in. Bush has ruined our name around the world. We’ve never seen this much Anti-Americanism in Europe and in the Arab world.

The people in Iraq are living in hell…

Deformities in Iraq, because of Iraq war http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=3335 (reliable source on this site)
---------------
An expert report warning that the long-term health of Iraq’s civilian population would be endangered by British and US depleted uranium (DU) weapons has been kept secret.
http://www.sundayherald.com/40096
----------------
Hospitals still horrible
http://www.jordantimes.com/thu/news/news7.htm
----------------
Sewage plant ruined
http://www.jordantimes.com/wed/news/news8.htm
-----------
Uranium poison
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=3033 a huge concern on Iraqis health
---------------
Environmental Damages a Concern
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=42
-------------
Remains of toxic bullets litter Iraq
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=40
-----------------
Targeting Civilians
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-06/29/article06.shtml
The people of Iraq may have poorer health for generations as a result of the war, according to a report. Medical charity Medact says this year's conflict disrupted immunisation programmes and destroyed water systems, increasing levels of disease. Entitled Continuing Collateral Damage: the health and environmental costs of war on Iraq, the report estimates that between 22,000 and 55,000 people - mainly Iraqi soldiers and civilians - died as a direct result of the war.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3259489.stm
-------------------
Child sickness 'soars' in Iraq
The number of children in Iraq suffering from diarrhoea and related diseases appears to have risen dramatically in the past year, the United Nations Children's Fund (Unicef) said on Sunday.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2973564.stm
--------------
During and after the 2003 war, more than 3,000 schools were looted, destroyed or burned in southern and central Iraq - and 60 in Baghdad suffered bomb damage.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3846831.stm#education
-------------
Iraq's water and sanitation systems have suffered bomb damage, looting, power cuts and equipment shortages on top of years of neglect.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3846831.stm#education
-----------
Iraqi hospitals face supply shortages.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/8128112.htm?1c
-----------
Iraqi hospitals are filthy, and have shortages
http://www.freep.com/news/nw/hosp11_20040311.htm
------------
Hospitals bombed
http://www.command-post.org/2_archives/004249.html
---------
Hospitals bombed, again
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/5519904.htm
------------
Rockets hit Iraq hotel
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=11666
---------------
US demolishes homes
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0%2C4057%2C7942137%255E1702%2C00.html
-----------------
Electricity issues in Iraq
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0629-10.htm
----------------------
Basically this reports, which is official, if you read it, says the Iraqis are worse off.
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04902r.pdf
-------------------
We help “RE-BUILD” schools
http://islamabad.usembassy.gov/wwwh03101501.html

Originally posted by Overdose
How could you support this war! The world warned us, and told us not to go into Iraq. George Bush turned his back on the United Nations, left them, and went into Iraq anyway. He didn’t think through it, and he underestimated the amount of troops we would need. Hence, why we are in so much chaos in Iraq.

The world does not have to support something they don’t agree with. I wouldn’t want to be forced to support something I didn’t believe in. Bush has ruined our name around the world. We’ve never seen this much Anti-Americanism in Europe and in the Arab world.

The people in Iraq are living in hell…

Deformities in Iraq, because of Iraq war http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=3335 (reliable source on this site)
---------------
An expert report warning that the long-term health of Iraq’s civilian population would be endangered by British and US depleted uranium (DU) weapons has been kept secret.
http://www.sundayherald.com/40096
----------------
Hospitals still horrible
http://www.jordantimes.com/thu/news/news7.htm
----------------
Sewage plant ruined
http://www.jordantimes.com/wed/news/news8.htm
-----------
Uranium poison
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=3033 a huge concern on Iraqis health
---------------
Environmental Damages a Concern
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=42
-------------
Remains of toxic bullets litter Iraq
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=40
-----------------
Targeting Civilians
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-06/29/article06.shtml
The people of Iraq may have poorer health for generations as a result of the war, according to a report. Medical charity Medact says this year's conflict disrupted immunisation programmes and destroyed water systems, increasing levels of disease. Entitled Continuing Collateral Damage: the health and environmental costs of war on Iraq, the report estimates that between 22,000 and 55,000 people - mainly Iraqi soldiers and civilians - died as a direct result of the war.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3259489.stm
-------------------
Child sickness 'soars' in Iraq
The number of children in Iraq suffering from diarrhoea and related diseases appears to have risen dramatically in the past year, the United Nations Children's Fund (Unicef) said on Sunday.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2973564.stm
--------------
During and after the 2003 war, more than 3,000 schools were looted, destroyed or burned in southern and central Iraq - and 60 in Baghdad suffered bomb damage.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3846831.stm#education
-------------
Iraq's water and sanitation systems have suffered bomb damage, looting, power cuts and equipment shortages on top of years of neglect.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3846831.stm#education
-----------
Iraqi hospitals face supply shortages.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/8128112.htm?1c
-----------
Iraqi hospitals are filthy, and have shortages
http://www.freep.com/news/nw/hosp11_20040311.htm
------------
Hospitals bombed
http://www.command-post.org/2_archives/004249.html
---------
Hospitals bombed, again
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/5519904.htm
------------
Rockets hit Iraq hotel
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=11666
---------------
US demolishes homes
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0%2C4057%2C7942137%255E1702%2C00.html
-----------------
Electricity issues in Iraq
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0629-10.htm
----------------------
Basically this reports, which is official, if you read it, says the Iraqis are worse off.
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04902r.pdf
-------------------
We help “RE-BUILD” schools
http://islamabad.usembassy.gov/wwwh03101501.html

so russia telling us that sadam wass planning an attack on us is he world warning us not to go.....

i am not the only supporter either, lol!!!

http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=3592

When you add the totals of all of the soldiers from other countries it comes to 25,437...and we have 132,000.

That is not enough support from other countries around the world. We have 106,563 more troops in Iraq...when you calculate it out.

We have 106,563 MORE TROOPS IN IRAQ THEN ALL OF THOSE COUNTRIES TOGETHER.

So actually, it's not enough, nor what a "world coalition" would consist of.

But if you think this is enough, and we aren't taking almost the entire burden in Iraq, fine. Think that. I happen to think George Bush went back on his word, in getting enough military support in Iraq.

Originally posted by no moore please
so russia telling us that sadam wass planning an attack on us is he world warning us not to go.....

i am not the only supporter either, lol!!!

It’s ironic; they had all of these weapons and plans to attack the United States. Yet, we took out Saddam’s army fairly quickly, and none of the attacks or plans, that Saddam supposedly had, occurred. Oh and the weapons that he had, that were such a threat to us, were never used, against us. Don’t you think, if at all, they would be more keen on using their weapons and plans, since we started a war against them? If at all, that should have been the time they used the plans and weapons. They didn’t. That further proves that Saddam was never a threat.

Originally posted by Overdose
http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=3592

When you add the totals of all of the soldiers from other countries it comes to 25,437...and we have 132,000.

That is not enough support from other countries around the world. We have 106,563 more troops in Iraq...when you calculate it out.

We have 106,563 MORE TROOPS IN IRAQ THEN ALL OF THOSE COUNTRIES TOGETHER.

So actually, it's not enough, nor what a "world coalition" would consist of.

But if you think this is enough, and we aren't taking almost the entire burden in Iraq, fine. Think that. I happen to think George Bush went back on his word, in getting enough military support in Iraq.


OD i can understtand you are against the war, but you should still support it now that we are there. people are putting their lives in danger every second they are there and the answer isnt just to throw in the towel. both candidates know that

Originally posted by no moore please
OD i can understtand you are against the war, but you should still support it now that we are there. people are putting their lives in danger every second they are there and the answer isnt just to throw in the towel. both candidates know that

Why one earth would I support it now? I do not support the reasons for going, and I firmly believe we should not be in Iraq. I’m not just going to “give up” and blindly support it. I will argue the Iraq War until I pass out of exhaustion. I support the troops, but I’ll never support what we’ve done there or why we went. I have my reasons, as you have yours. I will debate you any day.

Originally posted by Overdose
Why one earth would I support it now? I do not support the reasons for going, and I firmly believe we should not be in Iraq. I’m not just going to “give up” and blindly support it. I will argue the Iraq War until I pass out of exhaustion. I support the troops, but I’ll never support what we’ve done there or why we went. I have my reasons, as you have yours. I will debate you any day.

i have this fight with idioteque all the time. we wont change each others opinion. however i think we both can agree on one thing: we want the war to improve for botht the iraqis ands the troops. too much death is bad....we all should pray to god for that

also, to say that the war is a lie and a scam does hurt the troops. it makes them seem like they are there doing nothing for a stupid cause and putting their lives at risk for nothing. even if ou think it is for nothing...you should make it important and realize that we are there and wish them the best.i just want you to know that most people in the war are shocked when theyn com back about how bad the media says it is and forgets all the good things that happen there (there are some OD)

1. I don’t support the war, and I’m sure as hell not going to support it now

2. I support them for putting their lives on the line. But that doesn’t mean I agree with their cause or why they are there.

Next, I have about 5 people who have come home from Iraq. All saying that this war is BS, Bush lied to them, etc. And they were die-hard Republicans before hand, who supported the war.

They understand that people support them and not the war. So, I will gladly keep having utter disgust for this war.

Originally posted by Overdose
1. I don’t support the war, and I’m sure as hell not going to support it now

2. I support them for putting their lives on the line. But that doesn’t mean I agree with their cause or why they are there.

Next, I have about 5 people who have come home from Iraq. All saying that this war is BS, Bush lied to them, etc. And they were die-hard Republicans before hand, who supported the war.

They understand that people support them and not the war. So, I will gladly keep having utter disgust for this war.

you live in portaland right?....

Portland, yes. Do you have AIM?

Originally posted by no moore please
[B]Remember france bitched that they wont even help in afghanistan. /B]

France has been helping in Afghanistan since the beginning. As Overdose said,we took part in the bombongs ; and we currently have french commandos near the pakistani border, who work closely with american troops.

Originally posted by Overdose
1. I don’t support the war, and I’m sure as hell not going to support it now

2. I support them for putting their lives on the line. But that doesn’t mean I agree with their cause or why they are there.

Next, I have about 5 people who have come home from Iraq. All saying that this war is BS, Bush lied to them, etc. And they were die-hard Republicans before hand, who supported the war.

They understand that people support them and not the war. So, I will gladly keep having utter disgust for this war.

OK MR cliche. you forgot to mention some fo your your best friends are muslim. they were all die hard republicans :rolleyes: sorry, but I really have to question anything you say thats military related. I have many friends in the military who were in or are in iraq now. not one of them gives the micheal moore response to anything. I just have a hard time believeing you were friends with any hard core republicans, let alone ones who fight in wars, and that convientley they sound like a micheal moore sound bite on demand. "I went to war as a republican, but now that I am back I feel betrayed and lied to. I am gong to vote for kerry!" cant argue with that! :rolleyes:

Originally posted by astrapol2
France has been helping in Afghanistan since the beginning. As Overdose said,we took part in the bombongs ; and we currently have french commandos near the pakistani border, who work closely with american troops.

no wonder we havet found osama yet!

sorry, I couldnt resist, just a joke.

Trav, I have no care if you don’t believe I have Republican friends who served in Iraq. It’s your choice to believe it or not. I’ve never denied I did support the Iraq war in the beginning. Nor that my Grandfather is now voting for George Bush. Or for that matter, everyone living in Kentucky, that is related to me, will be voting for GWB. But, again, Trav, I could careless if you believed me or not.

Originally posted by Travh20
the only reason you say that is becasue it is what we did. if we kept them here a month and interrogated them you would be bitching that they were held without being charged r something along those lines. your to predictable overdose

To his credit, George Stephanopoulos on ABC's This Week not only cited Cheney's evidence but effectively rebutted left-wing filmmaker Michael Moore about charges in his new film. One of the central claims is that the Bush family's relationship with the bin Laden family of Saudi Arabia led to members of the Saudi family being escorted out of the U.S. shortly after 9/11 before they were investigated for ties to al Qaeda.

Stephanopoulos made the key point that former counter-terrorism official Richard Clarke, a Clinton hold-over who has emerged as a critic of the Bush administration, made this decision. Clarke, then at the National Security Council, says the bin Ladens were screened for terrorist ties. George W. Bush had nothing to do with it. Hence, a key claim in Michael Moore's award-winning film falls apart.

of course the BIN LADEN FAMILY wa screened for terrorists ties and were asked more then their fair share of questions, any one who thinks other wise is a moron. anyone who thinks micheal moore would still be alive thumping his chest every chance he gets if all he said was true is an idiot too.

Originally posted by Travh20
of course the BIN LADEN FAMILY wa screened for terrorists ties and were asked more then their fair share of questions, any one who thinks other wise is a moron. anyone who thinks micheal moore would still be alive thumping his chest every chance he gets if all he said was true is an idiot too.

TODAY ONLY on MSN Homepage.

Exclusive: Bin Laden's brother speaks
July 9: In a preview of a "Dateline" interview, "Today" host Matt Lauer speaks with Osama Bin Laden's older half-brother, Yeslam.

Originally posted by jon_37920
To his credit, George Stephanopoulos on ABC's This Week not only cited Cheney's evidence but effectively rebutted left-wing filmmaker Michael Moore about charges in his new film. One of the central claims is that the Bush family's relationship with the bin Laden family of Saudi Arabia led to members of the Saudi family being escorted out of the U.S. shortly after 9/11 before they were investigated for ties to al Qaeda.

Stephanopoulos made the key point that former counter-terrorism official Richard Clarke, a Clinton hold-over who has emerged as a critic of the Bush administration, made this decision. Clarke, then at the National Security Council, says the bin Ladens were screened for terrorist ties. George W. Bush had nothing to do with it. Hence, a key claim in Michael Moore's award-winning film falls apart.

Have you seen the movie? Or do you just blindly follow what the attackers of this movie think? Because your accusation is completely wrong. I’ve seen the movie twice now, and it does not blame President Bush for the flights being flown out of America. It never once states that he approved these flights. It states that the White House approved them. Which is indeed true.

Now, although former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke has testified that he approved these flights, stating, "it was a conscious decision with complete review at the highest levels of the State Department and the FBI and the White House." Testimony of Richard Clarke, Former Counterterrorism Chief, National Security Council, before The Senate Judiciary Committee, September 3, 2003.

Which means that the White House, State Department and FBI all approved this. Which also means that people in the White House had to approve this and no wonder….

"The White House still refuses to document fully how the flights were arranged," according to a June 20, 2004, article by Phil Shenon in the New York Times.

I give up, going around and around with the same issue, not my style, have fun..........
http://pages.prodigy.net/hauxfan/Signs/Group_4/4.gifhttp://pages.prodigy.net/hauxfan/Signs/Group_4/3.gifhttp://pages.prodigy.net/hauxfan/Signs/Group_5/27.gif

Fair enough. :)