World war 3 set up by the elites

[DirtClassic]

Do you be-leave what this guy is saying.......????...Pretty scary stuff.....

[Bubstr]

Ron Paul along with Dwight David Eisenhower gave us a heads up. Why didn't we listen? Why don't we listen now?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeCpLcjxOq4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

[racin6mod]

back when Bush/chaney were dead sent on going into Iraq The experts on the middle east said it would destabilize the region your video proves they were correct and that administration should have looked at the long term effects of going after Sudom . This part of the world has been at war for thousands of years. ww3 will only happen if Russia and/or china take a stand for Syria and that's not looking likely.

[Clayton_Wetter]

Another blame Bush for it? The truth is things may have gotten much worse if Iraq was not attacked.

Also the things going on now about Egypt and Iran are Bushs fault too right? MEGA ROLLEYES!!

[Bubstr]

Wouldn't it make is simple and easy to blame Bush or Obama. This has been going on longer than these two. The problem is bigger than these two. It encompasses the whole government and the system that runs it. The government is the single largest employer in this country. The military industrial complex is a large portion of this, plus a lot of civilian jobs. The military industrial complex eats and it needs war to feed it. You can vote republican or democrat till the cows come home and It isn't going to change a thing. As long as there are lobbyists in Washington nothing will change.

[t.nie]

I think it goes without saying that G Dub will not be treated kindly by history. His decisions and his deceptive use of information available to him to convince Congress to vote for his war and mislead this nation is now plainly obvious. Of course, there will be many who will choose to ignore his legacy and instead blame his successor, which is akin to what happened to the Jim Carrey character in "Fun with (not a nice word)(not a nice word)(not a nice word)(not a nice word) and Jane" where he gets the dream job only to find out he has been handed the keys to an empire on the verge of collapse due to the actions of those in power before him.

And if anyone is paying attention, it was a Conservative Supreme Court with Bush conservatives on it that rendered the Citizen's United decision which paved the way for all this unaccounted for and highly corrupting money pumped into our political system. No one running for office these days dares go against the big money people for fear of the victimization and smear campaign that will eliminate them from office. These days its not so much money supporting certain candidates that helps them get out their message as it is the bullying and abuse bestowed upon those who do not toe the corporate big money line.

We have a lot to thank Bush for. His influence will remain as long as his Supreme Court reigns.

Here is a great article summarizing how the Bush legacy in the Supreme Court will eff us up for generations, unless they die or remove themselves.

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/BushLeg...6597342&page=1

[Bubstr]

t.nie, Make no mistake about it. Congress did not vote for Bush's wars. Since the Presidential war powers act, they don't have to, even if the Constitution says that wars must be authorized by congress. Nice scam. Now they can't be held responsible. Is it just me or is there something wrong with a republic where one man can declare war. I believe we lost our republic.

[Clayton_Wetter]

There is another name called Obummer that could well go down in history right beside such names as Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Moa Zedong, Genghis Khan, Saddam Hussein, and Idi Amin. lol

[Clayton_Wetter]

Friday, October 11, 2002 Posted: 12:35 PM EDT (1635 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq.

Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133.

[t.nie]

t.nie, Make no mistake about it. Congress did not vote for Bush's wars. Since the Presidential war powers act, they don't have to, even if the Constitution says that wars must be authorized by congress. Nice scam. Now they can't be held responsible. Is it just me or is there something wrong with a republic where one man can declare war. I believe we lost our republic.

Oh, I believe Congress did vote on using force in Iraq, and based on the information they were given by the Bush Administration under the guidance of D ick Cheney, or shall we just call it the propaganda and misinformation they were provided, they really had no choice but to vote in favor of what Bush wanted.

In October 2002 Congress enacted the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Pub.L. 107–243 which authorized President George W. Bush to use force as necessary to defend the United States against Iraq and enforce relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions.

Now I don't know how Bush reasoned he was protecting the nation from Iraq any more than he could reason that nuking the moon would prevent the destruction of Earth, but we are talking about Cheney and Bush here, not exactly the most learned, intelligent or reasonable of men who have ever sat in the White House. The only thing those two excelled at were scheming, conniving and lying to get their own way, and that's about it.

On the other topic I say again, with the Supreme Court stacked with five conservatives and no real opportunity in sight to replace any of them while a liberal is in office, we are pretty much stuck with five of the crappiest, Orwellian-minded, idiotic Neanderthals to ever wear the robe. All in favor of the right wing ideology, all in lockstep with the most draconian ideals of society, idiots who will go so far as to declare corporate entities as "people" who get to flex their economic muscles and dominate our governance, owning our governing body and bending it to their will, at will.

[t.nie]

There is another name called Obummer that could well go down in history right beside such names as Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Moa Zedong, Genghis Khan, Saddam Hussein, and Idi Amin. lol

Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Khan, Hussein and Amin? Really?

I never knew Russian Health care was called Lenincare, or Stalincare. I never knew Hitler was a health care reformer, or that Mao changed the health care system in China, or that Genghis Khan, the greatest of all the Khans had a remarkable innovative Health Care system for the Mongol tribes he united, or that Saddam Hussein introduced a new health care plan to Iraq, or that Amin was even interested in health care reform for his nation.

Wow. Please, tell me more about the historical health care initiatives of Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Khan, Hussein or Amin... or please tell me about Obama's slaughter of thousands upon thousands of American people, you know, the one that never happened, so at least we can get some kind of idea why you are comparing history's most egregious despotic murdering leaders with a guy who "introduced a plan that was voted into law by Congress, upheld by the Supreme Court that changed the way a nation's people pays for health care."

[Clayton_Wetter]

We are not letting this stop at HealthCare. I truly beleive the only REAL reasons that you hate Bush Chaney is that they are in the Republican Party, that's how people are being brainwashed these days, and you sure got a triple rinse!!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rep. Tim Scott (R-Ga.) said on July 5 that if President Obama should invoke a clause in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution in order to bypass Congress and borrow beyond the debt limit, he would consider that an act worthy of impeachment. "This President is looking to usurp Congressional oversight to find a way to get it done without us. My position is that is an impeachable act from my perspective," Scott said at a Tea Party-related meeting. Rep. Pete Olson (R-Tex.) later told an interviewer that Scott's "is not a lonely voice," and that others are also discussing impeachment.

What Obama and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner are in fact doing, is using the threat of default, or of preventing default by using Clause 4 of the 14th Amendment, in order to protect London's and Wall Street's illegitimate debt. Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner have done everything in their power to oppose the Constitutional method of dealing with the debt—the restoration of Glass-Steagall—and are instead using the threat of default to ram through killer austerity, in violation of the Constitution's commitment to the general welfare.

This is but the latest in a long series of impeachable offenses committed by Obama:
•Most recent is his flagrant violation of the U.S. Constitution and the War Powers Resolution by deploying U.S. armed forces and conducting war against Libya without Congressional authorization or a declaration of war. Indeed, Obama has insisted that a United Nations resolution authorizing "humanitarian intervention" is a higher authority than the United States Constitution.
•Already in April 2009, Obama was engaging in actions to destroy the sovereignty of the United States, when, at the London G20 meeting, he agreed to actions, including the expansion of "Special Drawing Rights," which gave the International Monetary Fund increased power over the economy of the United States and other sovereign nations.
•Obama's shutdown and destruction of the NASA manned space flight program, on behalf of the British, was what triggered Lyndon LaRouche's first formal call for the impeachment of Obama, in February 2010.
•Obama's health-care plan, modeled on Hitler's T-4 policy, in its scheme to deny medical care and treatment to certain categories of people, constitutes a crime against humanity under the Nuremberg Principles to which the United States is bound by law and treaty.
•Obama's violation of the separation of powers, by means of unilateral executive actions, in violation of U.S. law including treaty law, has exceeded even that of George W. Bush and Cheney in many respects.
•He has continued the use of signing statements, and has made dozens of appointments of special "czars" and recess appointments, to circumvent Congressional oversight and the Senate confirmation process.
•He has expanded domestic surveillance and wiretapping, has continued the use of abusive detentions and interrogations of prisoners taken in the "war on terror," and he has expanded the use of targeted assassinations, including claiming the right to kill American citizens abroad without any due process.
•He has effectively legalized torture and prisoner abuse in violation of U.S. law and treaty obligations, by directing his Justice Department to cover up hundreds of cases of abuse and torture and even deaths, from the Bush-Cheney years.

[LITE-INN]

Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Khan, Hussein and Amin? Really?I never knew Russian Health care was called Lenincare, or Stalincare. I never knew Hitler was a health care reformer, or that Mao changed the health care system in China, or that Genghis Khan, the greatest of all the Khans had a remarkable innovative Health Care system for the Mongol tribes he united, or that Saddam Hussein introduced a new health care plan to Iraq, or that Amin was even interested in health care reform for his nation.Wow. Please, tell me more about the historical health care initiatives of Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Khan, Hussein or Amin... or please tell me about Obama's slaughter of thousands upon thousands of American people, you know, the one that never happened, so at least we can get some kind of idea why you are comparing history's most egregious despotic murdering leaders with a guy who "introduced a plan that was voted into law by Congress, upheld by the Supreme Court that changed the way a nation's people pays for health care."

I knew there was something I liked about Lenin ,stalin etc Obamacare is the biggest joke in the last 20 yrs if not more

[kidrock]

Oh yeah dirtclassic you are so right the elitist are at it again make no mistake about it and they could care which party is in power. They don't pick sides just the people that run them.

[buster83]

it is all about the black gold,and the US. showing it`s power but US is losing it`s power in the black gold country latest example is
Iraq.

[Bubstr]

it is all about the black gold,and the US. showing it`s power but US is losing it`s power in the black gold country latest example is
Iraq.

Black gold is just a side note. Make no mistake, this is about the military industrial complex. War America is the largest employer in this country. Over half of federal employees and the single largest private employer, who's sole consumer is you the tax payer. It is responsible for the biggest chunk of our national debt, over half. Second to only the interest charged on that debt.

Make no mistake about it. This is a powerful force politically as well as militarily. Point, What was the first thing excused from our recent sequester? Military spending. It seems spending more than twice the amount as any other country spends, just isn't enough. Also, make no mistake, all these wars and conflicts are about being on guard from fictitious invaders and weapon sales that is connected.

If Black gold was the reason for Iraq, why didn't an American Oil company get the contracts for that country? Are we fighting wars for international conglomerates now?

[t.nie]

Oh yeah dirtclassic you are so right the elitist are at it again make no mistake about it and they could care which party is in power. They don't pick sides just the people that run them.

Possibly the most insightful post I have ever read on 4m.net.

[t.nie]

We are not letting this stop at HealthCare. I truly beleive the only REAL reasons that you hate Bush Chaney is that they are in the Republican Party, that's how people are being brainwashed these days, and you sure got a triple rinse!!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rep. Tim Scott (R-Ga.) said on July 5 that if President Obama should invoke a clause in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution in order to bypass Congress and borrow beyond the debt limit, he would consider that an act worthy of impeachment. "This President is looking to usurp Congressional oversight to find a way to get it done without us. My position is that is an impeachable act from my perspective," Scott said at a Tea Party-related meeting. Rep. Pete Olson (R-Tex.) later told an interviewer that Scott's "is not a lonely voice," and that others are also discussing impeachment.

What Obama and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner are in fact doing, is using the threat of default, or of preventing default by using Clause 4 of the 14th Amendment, in order to protect London's and Wall Street's illegitimate debt. Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner have done everything in their power to oppose the Constitutional method of dealing with the debt—the restoration of Glass-Steagall—and are instead using the threat of default to ram through killer austerity, in violation of the Constitution's commitment to the general welfare.

This is but the latest in a long series of impeachable offenses committed by Obama:
•Most recent is his flagrant violation of the U.S. Constitution and the War Powers Resolution by deploying U.S. armed forces and conducting war against Libya without Congressional authorization or a declaration of war. Indeed, Obama has insisted that a United Nations resolution authorizing "humanitarian intervention" is a higher authority than the United States Constitution.
•Already in April 2009, Obama was engaging in actions to destroy the sovereignty of the United States, when, at the London G20 meeting, he agreed to actions, including the expansion of "Special Drawing Rights," which gave the International Monetary Fund increased power over the economy of the United States and other sovereign nations.
•Obama's shutdown and destruction of the NASA manned space flight program, on behalf of the British, was what triggered Lyndon LaRouche's first formal call for the impeachment of Obama, in February 2010.
•Obama's health-care plan, modeled on Hitler's T-4 policy, in its scheme to deny medical care and treatment to certain categories of people, constitutes a crime against humanity under the Nuremberg Principles to which the United States is bound by law and treaty.
•Obama's violation of the separation of powers, by means of unilateral executive actions, in violation of U.S. law including treaty law, has exceeded even that of George W. Bush and Cheney in many respects.
•He has continued the use of signing statements, and has made dozens of appointments of special "czars" and recess appointments, to circumvent Congressional oversight and the Senate confirmation process.
•He has expanded domestic surveillance and wiretapping, has continued the use of abusive detentions and interrogations of prisoners taken in the "war on terror," and he has expanded the use of targeted assassinations, including claiming the right to kill American citizens abroad without any due process.
•He has effectively legalized torture and prisoner abuse in violation of U.S. law and treaty obligations, by directing his Justice Department to cover up hundreds of cases of abuse and torture and even deaths, from the Bush-Cheney years.

Wow, Geithner hasn't been Treasury Secretary since when, March? February?

Still waiting on your "evidence" to back up your comparison of Obama to all those other guys who slaughtered thousands of their own people. Care to show me a body or two, maybe some proof Obama qualifies among the elites of despotic dictators, instead of just a politician who passed a law you disagree with (which was voted on by Congress and upheld by a severely biased Supreme Court too, I might add....).

[Clayton_Wetter]

Wow, Geithner hasn't been Treasury Secretary since when, March? February?

Still waiting on your "evidence" to back up your comparison of Obama to all those other guys who slaughtered thousands of their own people. Care to show me a body or two, maybe some proof Obama qualifies among the elites of despotic dictators, instead of just a politician who passed a law you disagree with (which was voted on by Congress and upheld by a severely biased Supreme Court too, I might add....).

We're getting there. If allowed to continue his plans you will see when the dust settles. In other words the goose isn't fully cooked yet.

[t.nie]

We're getting there. If allowed to continue his plans you will see when the dust settles. In other words the goose isn't fully cooked yet.

Ok. Finally an admission that everything you want people to think about this president is all in your own mind. We have to wait and see, "the goose isn't fully cooked yet."

Have you ever stopped and figured out that if the results aren't in yet, then the outcome could actually be very good, too? That we don't just have to look for the worst possible explanation and outcome and just presume that is what is going to happen?

Quite frankly, Terry, just admitting that the results aren't in yet and we have to wait and see how things turn out is about the most open minded, thoughtful and reasonable thing you have ever said on here. It shows that despite all your personal bias and hatred of the man, you are willing to concede that as of today, his agenda has not turned out to be slaughtering the nation's people, and there is a possibility things might just work out different than you are predicting.

I look forward to a few years from now when that goose is fully cooked. Then you can start eating your crow. lol