Who's the Terrorist?

[Mr. Carpenter]

First of all, saying that someone is brain dead because they don't agree with your point of view is not debate. It is intellectual laziness of the worst kind, and confirms that the speaker has no valid argument.

Are you completely brain damaged or what? She doesn't HAVE a point, she doesn't HAVE an argument, she doesn't HAVE any proof, she doesnt HAVE any evidence, therefore she doesn't HAVE AN ARGUMENT TO REFUTE! She's blatering on some totally incomprehensible gibberish and tin-foil hatted conspiracy theory, and as with all such conspiracies, the only people who defend such nonsense (like you're doing) are also NOT WORTH WASTING ANY TIME ON!

Second, I didn't say that Bush had ties with Bin Laden, only that the ties between Obama and Ayres were just as tenuous.

And I suppose any ties between you and close associates of yours is "tenuouos"? Obama's entire political career started in Ayers LIVING ROOM! They've served on several committees together. Obama handed out MILLIONS OF DOLLARS that was funneled to him THROUGH AYERS! Tenuous? You need to buy a new dictionary, and READ IT.

There, Mr. Carpenter, that's how you dispute someone's argument. Instead of saying that they're an idiot for not seeing your point of view, you use fact and logic instead. You try it.

No PLC1, that's how you dispute a RATIONAL persons argument. However, NONE of the barking moonbats are rational to begin with, so I'm not interested in wasting the effort. I've tried that time and time and time again, and all they do is ignore the facts and evidence and go off on some other wild tangent. They're a complete waste of time, and I treat them accordingly.

 

[Sihouette]

lol...

up is down, black is white, round is square and George W. Bush wasn't in business with, nor longtime family associates with the Bin Laden family.

I love how when the GOP gets caught with its hand in the cookie jar they:

1. Try to laugh off their accusors as if it is a trivial matter..

2. When their accusors shine deeper light on their culpability they quickly try to change the subject

3. When that light won't fade nor leave its target, they try the fake diversion debate and run off pages so the original "bust" will be lost on previous pages.

4. And when that fails they resort to "never-never land" posts like the one above. WHERE THEY USE LOTS OF CAPITALS, ATTACK CREDIBILITY!! AND USE LOTS OF EXCLAMATION POINTS!!

5. During #4 they will also try to link others who support the uncovering as "looney-by association" if they even dare to give the accusor any nod for a job well done, a great scoop.

*********

Like clockwork I watch them do it here and many other places the GOP has moles camped out...

Suffice it to say that none of it erases the fact that Bush and the Bin Ladens go way back and that they did effectively conspire to funnel american money to Iraq and away from alternative energy development. In other words, given where we're at now, whether they in pursuit of their greed and "capitalistic rights" realized it or not, they are guilty of bringing this country to its knees. Osama for outright terrorist acts and Salem for getting that stupid grifting cowboy Bush to assist him in ransacking our economy and national security.

 

[GenSeneca]

Suffice it to say that none of it erases the fact that Bush and the Bin Ladens go way back and that they did effectively conspire to funnel american money to Iraq and away from alternative energy development. In other words, given where we're at now, whether they in pursuit of their greed and "capitalistic rights" realized it or not, they are guilty of bringing this country to its knees. Osama for outright terrorist acts and Salem for getting that stupid grifting cowboy Bush to assist him in ransacking our economy and national security.

So Bush (In America) teamed up with the Bin Ladens (of Saudi Arabia) and conspired to funnel money to Iraq (While OBL was in Afghanistan), all to avoid spending Defense Money on Alternative Energy....

How exactly did the Bin Laden Family (in Saudi Arabia) and their estranged son Osama (in Afghanistan), or Bush (in the US) for that matter, get their hands on the money we spent on military and infrastructure in Iraq?

The first WTC bombing took place under Clinton... Was HE in on it too????

 

[BigRob]

lol...

up is down, black is white, round is square and George W. Bush wasn't in business with, nor longtime family associates with the Bin Laden family.

I love how when the GOP gets caught with its hand in the cookie jar they:

1. Try to laugh off their accusors as if it is a trivial matter..

Well it is a trivial matter until you back it up with real evidence.

2. When their accusors shine deeper light on their culpability they quickly try to change the subject

I did not do this.

3. When that light won't fade nor leave its target, they try the fake diversion debate and run off pages so the original "bust" will be lost on previous pages.

4. And when that fails they resort to "never-never land" posts like the one above. WHERE THEY USE LOTS OF CAPITALS, ATTACK CREDIBILITY!! AND USE LOTS OF EXCLAMATION POINTS!!

I did not do this.

5. During #4 they will also try to link others who support the uncovering as "looney-by association" if they even dare to give the accusor any nod for a job well done, a great scoop.

I did not do this.

Suffice it to say that none of it erases the fact that Bush and the Bin Ladens go way back and that they did effectively conspire to funnel american money to Iraq and away from alternative energy development. In other words, given where we're at now, whether they in pursuit of their greed and "capitalistic rights" realized it or not, they are guilty of bringing this country to its knees. Osama for outright terrorist acts and Salem for getting that stupid grifting cowboy Bush to assist him in ransacking our economy and national security.

None of this has any factual basis. You somehow went from a brother of Bin Laden invested money to a vast conspiracy to bring the downfall of the US between Bush and the Bin Ladens.

There is no evidence of this to back up your assertion. You further claim that the Bin Ladens conspired with the Bush family to send money to Iraq. That claim not only makes no sense, it is just not true, and you continue to present no evidence.

You then somehow post some garbage that the "GOP" is "running" from the evidence. (which you never posted)

 

[PLC1]

Are you completely brain damaged or what? She doesn't HAVE a point, she doesn't HAVE an argument, she doesn't HAVE any proof, she doesnt HAVE any evidence, therefore she doesn't HAVE AN ARGUMENT TO REFUTE! She's blatering on some totally incomprehensible gibberish and tin-foil hatted conspiracy theory, and as with all such conspiracies, the only people who defend such nonsense (like you're doing) are also NOT WORTH WASTING ANY TIME ON!

Posts like the above aren't worth wasting a lot of time on, either. Shouting isn't the same as presenting facts and logic, and saying that the other person is incomprehensible is not an argument.

And, if you'll read my post, I didn't defend her points of view.

And I suppose any ties between you and close associates of yours is "tenuouos"? Obama's entire political career started in Ayers LIVING ROOM! They've served on several committees together. Obama handed out MILLIONS OF DOLLARS that was funneled to him THROUGH AYERS! Tenuous? You need to buy a new dictionary, and READ IT.

No more tenuous nor any more close than the Bush/Bin Laden ties. Associations either count, or they don't.

No PLC1, that's how you dispute a RATIONAL persons argument. However, NONE of the barking moonbats are rational to begin with, so I'm not interested in wasting the effort. I've tried that time and time and time again, and all they do is ignore the facts and evidence and go off on some other wild tangent. They're a complete waste of time, and I treat them accordingly.

So, how would one dispute your argument, it not being rational and all?

 

[Mr. Carpenter]

Posts like the above aren't worth wasting a lot of time on, either. Shouting isn't the same as presenting facts and logic, and saying that the other person is incomprehensible is not an argument.

And again, you have failed to comprehend the fact that they're not interested in making an argument, all they're interested in is engaging in their "drive-by TROLL and SPAM postings". If you've been around as long as I have, then you know that even trying to engage them in an intellectual discussion is completely futile, because they won't.

No more tenuous nor any more close than the Bush/Bin Laden ties. Associations either count, or they don't.

Someone investing in a company is not an "association", sitting around having coctails, accepting money from them, and sitting on boards of directors IS an association. As I said before, if you can show that UBL sat in President Bush's LIVING ROOM and that UBL wrote him a check, AFTER declaring his Fatwa against America, THEN you'd have a point, but as it stands, there is no "association". I suppose you're not familiar with the concept of "degrees of separation"?

So, how would one dispute your argument, it not being rational and all?

I wasn't making an "argument", I made a statement. Huge difference. Oh, and one last thing, if I were really interested in your opinon about my posting style, I'd have asked for it. I'm not, so keep it to yourself.

 

[Sihouette]

Hey Mr Carpenter, two questions:

1. Do you think the Bin Ladens are longtime associates of the Bush family?

2. Do you believe Salem Bin Laden and Dubya were in business together?

(Remember, I gave links to credible sources who say the answers to both questions are "Yes".)

Careful now, you're credibility is at stake..

 

[Mr. Carpenter]

Hey Mr Carpenter, two questions:

1. Do you think the Bin Ladens are longtime associates of the Bush family?

2. Do you believe Salem Bin Laden and Dubya were in business together?

(Remember, I gave links to credible sources who say the answers to both questions are "Yes".)

Careful now, you're credibility is at stake..

First of all, you are no judge of my "credibility". Unlike you, and the other members of your "tin-foil hat Brigade", I don't rely on half-truths, inuindo, and flat out fabrications, I rely on the facts and evidence.

Secondly, No, Slaem Bin Laden and PRESIDENT BUSH (you're so in the tank that you can't even muster the consideration to refer to the President of the United States by his formal title) were NOT "in business together", since Salem Bin Ladens name is NOWHERE on the licenses, articles of incorporation, or anywhere else as a party to the business other than as an investor.

Thirdly, your entire trainwreck of thought refuses to acknowledge the fact that UBL was DISOWNED by his family because of his radical association and activities. Remember now, there is no "corruption of blood" under American law. You cannot be held guilty for something that another member of their family did, and this is the nail in the coffin of your entire argument.

UBL did NOT do business with President Bush, Obama DID do business, for over a decade with Bill Ayers, and unlike Salem Bin Laden, William Ayers not only DID attack America, he is totally unrepentant for doing so. At least the Bin Laden family has extended an apology for the actions of UBL, where is Bill Ayers apology?

And lastly, your "sources" are NOT credible to anyone with any shred of intellectual honesty. They are slander merchants with a "Hate America First" agenda, and are suitable only for their sycophants.

 

[PLC1]

I wasn't making an "argument", I made a statement. Huge difference. Oh, and one last thing, if I were really interested in your opinon about my posting style, I'd have asked for it. I'm not, so keep it to yourself.

OK, fair enough. I'll leave you alone in your belief that anyone who disagrees with your point of view is somehow mentally challenged.

For the amusement of others who may not share your opinion on that matter, I'd like to post a cartoon that appeared in the paper this morning. It made me think of you.

No need to respond. This is for the rest of the HOP devotees:

 

[Mr. Carpenter]

That's cute PLC1. What you've neglected to account for is the fact that I AM right, and your tin-foil hatted loons are the morons.

 

[Frolicking Dinosaurs]

Hold it. Am I actually hearing someone trying to say that the Bush and Bin Laden families have not been business partners for decades and call anyone who believe they have been are tin-foil hatted loons. If so, this honestly is the most ludicrous thing I've ever read on a political site.

You guys do know where GHWB was when the 9/11 attacks took place?

 

[BigRob]

Hold it. Am I actually hearing someone trying to say that the Bush and Bin Laden families have not been business partners for decades and call anyone who believe they have been are tin-foil hatted loons. If so, this honestly is the most ludicrous thing I've ever read on a political site.

You guys do know where GHWB was when the 9/11 attacks took place?

Again, being business partners with a side of the family that disowned Osama Bin Laden is not a big deal. It certainly does not prove anything Sil is trying to make it prove.

It would be like Obama being business partners with a cousin of Ayers who has disowned him.

 

[Mr. Carpenter]

Hold it. Am I actually hearing someone trying to say that the Bush and Bin Laden families have not been business partners for decades and call anyone who believe they have been are tin-foil hatted loons. If so, this honestly is the most ludicrous thing I've ever read on a political site.

You guys do know where GHWB was when the 9/11 attacks took place?

Ahh, another heavy investor in Reynolds Wrap!

They are not now, nor were they then, business partners, they DID however have several investments in common, specifically in the Carlisle Group, and those interests were severed in October of 2001. Perhaps you're not clear on what the term "business partner" means?

I take it you're refering to the meeting in the Ritz-Carlton, in Washington D.C. on September 10, 2001? Contrary to the tin-foil hat conspiracy theories, former President Bush was not in attendence on the 11th.

Frankly, anyone who gives any serious credence to these conspiracies is suffering from a severe case of B.D.S., and needs professional psychological help.

 

[Sihouette]

It is often those who suffer so grievously from mental health issues that seem to see them so often in others...

And lastly, your "sources" are NOT credible to anyone with any shred of intellectual honesty. They are slander merchants with a "Hate America First" agenda, and are suitable only for their sycophants.~ Mr. Carpenter

Wikipedia is a leftist extremist website with a "Hate America First" agenda?



You poor thing. All you have left to defend Bush's galavanting with the Bin Laden's is just name-calling and intellectual rabies. The whole world (including wikipedia) is out to get you and your "right" GOP extremist friends right?

lol...

 

[Sihouette]

Wow...do a little more reading and you find even more stuff you don't want to know about. Believe me Mr. Carpenter. We ALL wish it wasn't true..

President Bush recently signed an executive order to freeze the US financial assets of corporations doing business with Osama bin Laden. He described the order as a "strike on the financial foundation of the global terror network."

"If you do business with terrorists, if you support or succor them, you will not do business with the United States," said President Bush.

He didn't say anything about doing business with a terrorist's brother - or his wealthy financier.

When President George W. Bush froze assets connected to Osama bin Laden, he didn't tell the American people that the terrorist mastermind's late brother was an investor in the president's former oil business in Texas. He also hasn't leveled with the American public about his financial connections to a host of shady Saudi characters involved in drug cartels, gun smuggling, and terrorist networks.

Doing business with the enemy is nothing new to the Bush family. Much of the Bush family wealth came from supplying needed raw materials and credit to Adolf Hitler's Third Reich. Several business operations managed by Prescott Bush - the president's grandfather - were seized by the US government during World War II under the Trading with the Enemy Act.

On October 20, 1942, the federal government seized the Union Banking Corporation in New York City as a front operation for the Nazis. Prescott Bush was a director. Bush, E. Roland Harriman, two Bush associates, and three Nazi executives owned the bank's shares. Eight days later, the Roosevelt administration seized two other corporations managed by Prescott Bush. The Holland-American Trading Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation, both managed by the Bush-Harriman bank, were accused by the US federal government of being front organizations for Hitler's Third Reich. Again, on November 8, 1942, the federal government seized Nazi-controlled assets of Silesian-American Corporation, another Bush-Harriman company doing business with Hitler.

Doing business with the bin Laden empire, therefore, is only the latest extension of the Bush family's financial ties to unsavory individuals and organizations. Now that thousands of American citizens have died in terrorist attacks and the nation is going to war, the American people should know about George W. Bush's relationship with the family of Osama bin Laden...

Source: http://www.rense.com/general14/bushsformer.htm