or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › The downfall of Bush...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The downfall of Bush...

post #1 of 94
Thread Starter 
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0822329913/qid=1010621197/sr=1-15/ref=sr_1_79_16/102-1788842-1036149" target="_blank">http://www.amazon.com/exec/ obidos/ASIN/0822329913/qid=1010621197/sr=1-15/ref=sr_1_79_16/102-1788842-1036149</a>

The above book, soon to be published, affirms that the Bush administration had secret deals with the Taliban right after the new administration took office. The goals of these talks was to acquire permission to build an oil pipeline through Afganistan. A quote says, "Give us the carpet of gold [oil] or we give you a carpet of bombs."

The book gives factual proof of all of this, included diplomatic archival materials, and includes interview material from former FBI agents who resigned prior to 9-11 due to the Bush administration's light handed tactics with the teroroists and the Taliban, and taking a weaker stance than Clinton.

In fact, the book asserts from official records, that as late as August 2001, the Bush administration officials met with Taliban officials in Pakistan and were given a chance at the coordinates and time of Osama Bin Laden.then a wanted teroroist linked to the embassy bombings and the 1993 WTC bombings, plus a whole host Isreali terror attacksbut turned it down.

Some claim the current war on terorism in Afghanistan will be used as an excuse to build the central asia pipeline.

The Bush administration is currently denying all of it.

Look for a New York Times story on this shortly, and the mainstream media to pick it up.

Just imagine, if Al Gore were president, 9-11 might had never happened.

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Nostradamus ]</p>
post #2 of 94
Thread Starter 
Oops. I seemed to have posted this in the wrong forum. Please close this and move it to AppleOutsider.

:o

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Nostradamus ]</p>
post #3 of 94
With Enrongate and this Afghanigate, not to mention all the pay-offs to big campaign contributors like giving up on the MS case and all the big tax-cuts to big business contributors, this will go down as the most corrupt administration in history.
post #4 of 94
A corrupt administration that is doing one helluva good job bringing new stability to a war torn nation and reforming our education system, while at the same time releaving some of the tax burden from this nation's citizens. Don't say anything about the economy, I don't want to hear it. It was going bad at the end of Clinton's term.
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
post #5 of 94
Moving to AppleOutsider.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #6 of 94
[quote]Originally posted by G4Dude:
<strong>A corrupt administration that is doing one helluva good job bringing new stability to a war torn nation</strong><hr></blockquote>

War torn? Its not like want to say it was insignificant what happened on September 11. but your country is not war torn. Go look in Palestine, Israel, Afghanistan (no its not our current "campaign" but the last 20 years of constant war in the country internaal and with Soviet I am talking about) to name a few. Do you really fear new terror attacks? Fear them personally? Would we be able to get so hyped and talk about nothing else than Apples frontpage for whole week if your country was "war torn"?

I actually thought you were proud that the terrorist attack isnĀ“t affecting your lifes more than it does.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #7 of 94
Actually I was refering to war torn Afganistan
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
post #8 of 94
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>With Enrongate and this Afghanigate, not to mention all the pay-offs to big campaign contributors like giving up on the MS case and all the big tax-cuts to big business contributors, this will go down as the most corrupt administration in history.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yup. Bush is now returning to fund-raising to Florida and returning some favors.

<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/09/bush.fundraising/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/09/bush.fundraising/index. html</a>

Funny, isn't it? There were big gubernatorial and majoral races in other states that were far larger and tighter, yet Bush barely glanced at them. No, there is something special about Florida. It seems to me that this is "returning the favor" to his brother for election 2000.

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Nostradamus ]</p>
post #9 of 94
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by G4Dude:
<strong>Actually I was refering to war torn Afganistan</strong><hr></blockquote>

Oh gee, that seems hard. We wage the war, win, and then give peace?

Don't tell me about Afghanistan being war torn before 9-11; it was not . The Taliban ruled with an iron fist and the Northern alliance was a piddling opposition.

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Nostradamus ]</p>
post #10 of 94
Afganistan has been in ruins for like 20 years. know the facts before you criticise something. Another thing I don't understand is why do you always attack Bush? Ok, I believe you have established the fact that you don't think much of him but isn't what you are doing similar to wintel people going, "macs suck?" You people get pissed off when they do that but it is all right for you to come here and consistently bash our nations leader? If Al Gore would have won, I would have been upset but I sure as hell wouldn't have gone to the extremes that you do. Bush is our president for the next four years, live with it. It seems like liberals like to whine about everything political (one of the reasons I am a Republican). I know you are entitled to your opinion and all that crap, but it's just gotten old.

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: G4Dude ]</p>
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
post #11 of 94
[quote]Another thing I don't understand is why do you always attack Bush? Ok, I believe you have established the fact that you don't think much of him but isn't what you are doing similar to wintel people going, "macs suck?" You people get pissed off when they do that but it is all right for you to come here and consistently bash our nations leader? <hr></blockquote>

That's funny. The situation was reversed when Clinton was in power. Guess you can dish it out but you can't take it huh?
post #12 of 94
I don't dish it out. I quietly waited for Clinton's presidency to end. I didn't like him but he was our president so I supported him
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
post #13 of 94
[quote]Originally posted by G4Dude:
<strong>Another thing I don't understand is why do you always attack Bush?</strong><hr></blockquote>

For one, Bush's administration basically dropped the antitrust case against Microsoft.
post #14 of 94
[quote]Originally posted by qazII:
<strong>

For one, Bush's administration basically dropped the antitrust case against Microsoft.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes, that is one Bush policy that I am strongly against, good point
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
post #15 of 94
You people are in a pure fantasy land.
post #16 of 94
Scott, if any of this is true, then there is a huge problem for Bush. Just like there could be a huge problem for Cheney with Enron.
post #17 of 94
Ive heard these theories before. There is an ex-cop who has done a lot of digging on the subject ( <a href="http://www.copvcia.com" target="_blank">http://www.copvcia.com</a> , <a href="http://www.copvcia.com/stories/dec_2001/portland.html" target="_blank">http://www.copvcia.com/stories/dec_2001/portland.html</a> ).

I heard the guy speaking on the radio. He points out that several of the terrorist had been CIA trained and were on 'watch lists.' He also said that, judging from his experience in law enforcement, it would have been next to impossible for the CIA not to have know these people had come to the US multiple times for flight training.

The work on the oil pipeline had been suspended a year or so ago. Then, just a few days after 9/11, it started again.

I believe that this 'war' the US gov't is having now is a political ploy to assert US dominance in the middle-east. I think they knew that an attack was pending, but might not have known the specifics.

I dont think anyone (CIA or Usama bin Laden) expected the death count to be so high. It was a fatal error for UbL because the extremely high death toll has allowed Bush administration to move unchecked since Sept.

The most ammusing quote I have heard in the past few months came from a senior Bush admin official (sorry I forget who). He said 'This is the first peaceful transfer of power this region has had in hundreds of years, maybe ever.' Asshole, did you happen to notice all those bombs going off?

-edit-
One more thing...It seems unbelievable that the US gov't could allow something like 9/11 to happen, but there is precedent.

I has been proven by many people that the US gov't allowed the attack on Pearl Harbor to happen so the the US cuold enter the war. But, they underestimated the severity of the attack and the death toll. This seems a good parallel to 9/11 since the WTC disaster has been compared to Pearl Harbor many times.

[ 01-10-2002: Message edited by: Keda ]</p>
post #18 of 94
[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
<strong>Scott, if any of this is true, then there is a huge problem for Bush. Just like there could be a huge problem for Cheney with Enron.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Fantasy Land.


Enrongate? What a freaking joke. You read the LA Times? You shouldn't.
post #19 of 94
[quote]Originally posted by Nostradamus:

<strong>A quote says, "Give us the carpet of gold [oil] or we give you a carpet of bombs."</strong><hr></blockquote>

You've got to be joking. Sounds like some lib's bizarro-fantasy of the way conservatives talk behind closed doors.
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
post #20 of 94
roger_ramjet check out the other books this person has written. I get the feeling that this "author" is from the French tabloids.
post #21 of 94
Bush is really trying to start WWIII before 2004, for obvious reasons.

Besides that, I've heard he wants to make it illegal for girls to go to school in the U.S. It sure didn't help his twins.
post #22 of 94
Okay Gregg you lost me. Are you serious or sarcastic or over the top? I can't tell?


Here's an idea. Instead of "Enrongate" call it "WhiteEnron" or maybe "Enronwater".
post #23 of 94
Oh so the war in Afganistan was due to the fact that Bush wanted a oil pipeline?
[quote] I has been proven by many people that the US gov't allowed the attack on Pearl Harbor to happen so the the US cuold enter the war.<hr></blockquote> BS, pure BS, just like the "CIA hit" on JFK.
"Its a good thing theres no law against a company having a monopoly of good ideas. Otherwise Apple would be in deep yogurt..."
-Apple Press Release
Reply
"Its a good thing theres no law against a company having a monopoly of good ideas. Otherwise Apple would be in deep yogurt..."
-Apple Press Release
Reply
post #24 of 94
This Enron stuff is BAD NEWS. Even while the workers had their assets frozen (unable to sell the stock), the management was dumping 1.1 Billion in their own stock. You've got insider trading all over the place and people from Enron telling high ranking officials in the Republican party that the company is doing poorly, all while donating to their campaigns. Meanwhile, their own employees are watching their money go down the drain since it's tied to the Enron stock.

Here are some articles from today's New York Times. Make your own judgments from them.

<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/11/business/11ENRO.html" target="_blank">Enron Contacted 2 Cabinet Officers Before Collapsing</a>

<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/11/business/11AUDI.html" target="_blank">Enron Auditor Admits It Destroyed Documents</a>

<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/11/business/11PENS.html" target="_blank">Bush to Look at Employee Risks, but Experts Say Solutions Won't Be Easy</a>

Here's an interesting quote from this next article:
[quote]Although no one has suggested that Mr. Bush has done anything wrong, the connections between his presidency and Enron are uncomfortably close. The company's chairman, Kenneth L. Lay, has been a close friend of Mr. Bush for many years, and Mr. Lay and other Enron executives have contributed more money to Mr. Bush over his political career than anyone else, an amount exceeding $550,000. Mr. Lay contributed an additional $100,000 for the Bush inaugural committee.<hr></blockquote>

The article is<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/11/business/11ASSE.html" target="_blank">here</a>.

For those who think that the NY Times is just out to get Bush :

<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,42632,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,42632,00.html</a>
post #25 of 94
These Enron crooks should get what they have coming. At the very least their profit on the stock should be taken and used to help make the empoyee stock owners whole. I don't know how the insider stock trading laws work if the person works there. I think it's a given that the CEO would be an "insider" and own stock.

As far as I can tell there's no there there wrt to Bush and others. What does anyone think Bush did or didn't do. He says he never talked #s with the Enron people. Even if he did what's he supposed to do about it. Get on TeeVee and say "don't buy Enron".

Arthur Anderson got the wool pulled over their eyes. As far as we know no one outside of Enron that they was cooking the books until it was too late.

So what did Bush do that was wrong?
post #26 of 94
[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:

<strong>For those who think that the NY Times is just out to get Bush </strong><hr></blockquote>

Out to "get" him? I don't know. The Times certainly won't ever give Bush the benefit of any doubt. But that doesn't really matter anyway. There's no denying that something went terribly wrong at Enron and that Enron was a big player in Republican circles. Although it's also true that plenty of Democrats were "wired up" with Enron stock too. Former Clinton chief of staff Mack McLarty, for example, was also an Enron hire. Former Clinton Treasury Secretaries Lloyd Bentsen and Robert Rubin also had ties with Enron. Clinton officials helped Enron win contracts in India and in Indonesia.

For Bush so far there is nothing more than guilt by association. And it appears that when Enron CEO Ken Lay asked Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neil and Commerce Secretary Donald Evans for help <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28350-2002Jan10.html" target="_blank">none was forthcoming</a>. That said, there's no way Bush comes away from this without political damage and that is a subordinate concern to the thousands of workers whose retirements were destroyed in this debacle.

[ 01-11-2002: Message edited by: roger_ramjet ]</p>
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
post #27 of 94
[quote]Originally posted by Scott H.:
<strong>So what did Bush do that was wrong?</strong><hr></blockquote>Exactly what we need to find out. Let's appoint Al Gore as special prosecutor.
post #28 of 94
[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>Exactly what we need to find out. Let's appoint Al Gore as special prosecutor.</strong><hr></blockquote>

post #29 of 94
[quote]For Bush so far this is nothing more than guilt by association.<hr></blockquote>

That's basically what the quote I posted says. The question Bush will ultimately face is "How much did the President know, and when did he know it?"

I do hope that these Enron executives get what's coming to them. Unfortunately, there are so many people associated with them, that it's hard to find someone to take up the case against them due to the conflicts of interest. It will be interesting how to see this plays out.
post #30 of 94
[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
<strong>
The question Bush will ultimately face is "How much did the President know, and when did he know it?"</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well that's a more inflamatory way of approaching the matter. The question deliberately echoes Senator Howard Baker's question during Watergate - not very impressive scandal-mongering.
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
post #31 of 94
I'm just pointing out that like it or not, that's how the situation is going to be approached by the investigators and the media.
post #32 of 94
<a href="http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm" target="_blank">http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm</a>

FLASHBACK: CLINTON OFFICIAL MET WITH ENRON CHAIRMAN; $100,000 CASH DONATION TO DEMOCRATS TIMED TO PLANT APPROVAL
TIME MAGAZINE
SEPTEMBER 1, 1997

On Nov. 22, 1995 President Clinton scrawled an FYI note to chief of staff Mack McLarty, enclosing a newspaper article on Enron Corp. and the vicissitudes of its $3 billion power-plant project in India.


All politicians are dirty.
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
post #33 of 94
jhtrih, in referance to the Pearl Harbor stuff. This is not BS. In fact it is well document and considered 'proven' by people who study the subject. I know several teachers at the DIA (Defence Intelligence Agency) here in DC. Pearl Harbor has been one of their major studies.

They have told me of several things that virtually prove the administration knew. Japanese codes were broken, radar contacts were ignored, etc. Sorry I cant give all the details (I dont study the subject. If your really interested, I could find the details.
post #34 of 94
[quote]Originally posted by Scott H.:
<strong>quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by BRussell:
Exactly what we need to find out. Let's appoint Al Gore as special prosecutor.
---------------------------------------------------------------
</strong><hr></blockquote>OK, how about Alan Dershowitz then?
post #35 of 94
[quote]Originally posted by Scott H.:
<strong> </strong><hr></blockquote>

Scott, are you being sarcastic, or what?
post #36 of 94
Scott and Fran battling it out, how entertaining.

On subject:

This author is a buffoon and we will see how accurate his sources are when the book is released and we will see how it stands up to scrutiny. Sounds quite damning, of course, but that is how to sell copies.

I would like to echo Roger's assertion that the quote is just a little too "evil-doer" for belief.

Off subect:

Re: Enron.
Fran, you outdo yourself once again in a display that all you seemingly know comes straight from Tom Daschle the Weasel and his fellow slimeballs.

Whitewater was a waste of time, but this is even more a waste of time. There is no smoke and the pissy Democrats are screaming "FIRE!" At least there was a wisp of smoke when the pissy Republicans screamed "FIRE!" a few years back.

I'd just like to say this once and be on record:
NOTHING WILL COME AGAINST PREZ DUBYA IN THE ENRON "CASE".

Thank you, and goodnight.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #37 of 94
[quote]Fran, you outdo yourself once again in a display that all you seemingly know comes straight from Tom Daschle the Weasel and his fellow slimeballs.

Whitewater was a waste of time, but this is even more a waste of time. There is no smoke and the pissy Democrats are screaming "FIRE!" At least there was a wisp of smoke when the pissy Republicans screamed "FIRE!" a few years back.

I'd just like to say this once and be on record:
NOTHING WILL COME AGAINST PREZ DUBYA IN THE ENRON "CASE".

<hr></blockquote>

Where did I say anything about Bush facing any kind of action? I said that the media will try and find out if there was any connection to Bush and Enron- ie, How much did he know and when? If you actually bothered to read my posts occasionaly, you'd see that I never said that there would be any kind of action taken against Bush like the Republicans took against Clinton.

What I HAVE said, however, is that I hope the ENRON EXECUTIVES get what's coming to them. After what they did to their poor employees, they deserve all that's going to come too.
post #38 of 94
[quote]NOTHING WILL COME AGAINST PREZ DUBYA IN THE ENRON "CASE".<hr></blockquote>

That is quite probably true. And quite probably because many (maybe incriminating?) records have been destroyed (by (Arthur) Andersen) in the months prior to the company's collapse. Why would so many records be destroyed if there was nothing to hide, and who instructed Andersen to take this very non-standard accounting procedure?

It isn't hard to imagine, given a $60 million investigation budget and a keen-nosed special prosecutor that all kinds of stuff can be dredged up; the 'freely admitted' White House connections are suspicious enough as they stand.

<a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-011102enron.story" target="_blank">http://www.latimes.com/business/la-011102enron.story</a>
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
post #39 of 94
No, the bazaar cannot satisfy users. Neither can the cathedral. Nothing can satisfy users, because software is written to enable rather than satisfy, and because most users are mewling malcontents...
Reply
No, the bazaar cannot satisfy users. Neither can the cathedral. Nothing can satisfy users, because software is written to enable rather than satisfy, and because most users are mewling malcontents...
Reply
post #40 of 94
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:

<strong>That is quite probably true. And quite probably because many (maybe incriminating?) records have been destroyed (by (Arthur) Andersen) in the months prior to the company's collapse. Why would so many records be destroyed if there was nothing to hide, and who instructed Andersen to take this very non-standard accounting procedure?</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'd say it's probable that someone was trying to hide something but that doesn't mean it had anything to do with the Bush administration.

[quote]<strong>It isn't hard to imagine, given a $60 million investigation budget and a keen-nosed special prosecutor that all kinds of stuff can be dredged up...</strong><hr></blockquote>

By "stuff" I suppose you mean something that will find Bush in some way culpable. Actually it is hard to imagine. The adminstration let Enron fail. How are you going to talk your way around that rather large inconvenient fact? Compare this to what happened when Long Term Capital went bust during the Clinton administration. The Fed bailed out the money interests.
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › The downfall of Bush...