IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

6 Pages V  « < 4 5 6  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Al Gore Doesn't Accept The 9/11 Cover Up, So Why Do You?

colonial
post Jun 22 2007, 01:55 PM
Post #101





Group: Banned
Posts: 255
Joined: 27-December 06
Member No.: 377



QUOTE (Sue @ Jun 22 2007, 11:24 AM)
QUOTE
the moles in command at the Pentagon. Here they are:

Donald Rumsfeld
Paul Wolfowitz
Douglas Feith
Dov Zakheim
Richard Perle


In Loose Change 2 there is a quote attributed to Rumsfeld where he said something about a "missle" hitting the pentagon. IF this is true, then it leads me to believe that Rumsfeld, since he said the wrong thing, was out of the loop. This would make Rumsfeld guilty only of involvement in the cover-up (after he was told he's supposed to say "airplane" and not "missle") and not of being one of the planners/perpetrators.

Rumsfeld is kind of a moron, though. It could be that he just accidently slipped up.

I don't know if he were a total moron, after all,
1.) He had the wall that the missile impacted into, reinforced with concrete recently before the "attack"'.
2.) He was sitting in his office on the opposite side of the pentagon,
that just so happened to be at the diametrical opposite end of the impact. B)

This post has been edited by colonial: Jun 22 2007, 01:58 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
André
post Jun 29 2007, 11:21 AM
Post #102





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,702
Joined: 22-October 06
From: Montreal
Member No.: 133



QUOTE
Poll of Democrats reveals Gore could still steal the show


A presidential election poll suggesting Democratic voters would prefer former vice-president Al Gore to any of the declared contenders, including frontrunner Hillary Clinton, has highlighted continuing dissatisfaction among supporters of both main parties with the choice of candidates to succeed George Bush.

The poll, conducted in New Hampshire by 7News and Suffolk University, confirmed Ms Clinton's nationwide double-digit lead over her main rival, Illinois senator Barack Obama. The former first lady and New York senator attracted 37% support, against Mr Obama's 19%. John Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, was on 9%.

But if Mr Gore were to seek the Democratic nomination, 29% of Ms Clinton's backers would switch their support to him, the poll found. When defections from other candidates are factored in, the man who controversially lost to Mr Bush in the 2000 election takes command of the field, with 32% support.

Both the Democrats and Republicans will contest primary elections in New Hampshire on January 22.

Mr Gore has repeatedly denied he is planning a White House run. But the absence so far of a strong, unifying choice for the Democratic nomination, Mr Gore's enhanced reputation as an environmental campaigner, and deep Republican divisions are encouraging speculation that he may change his mind.

"I have not ruled out the possibility of getting into politics some time in the future but I don't expect to because I don't expect things to change," Mr Gore says in an interview in the July edition of Fast Company magazine. "If they did change, then I would feel differently."

David Terr, a political analyst at USAelectionpolls.com, said the 7News poll was based on a small voter sample and had a large margin of error. But it reinforced a pattern in the polls that showed Mr Gore gaining support nationally.

"His gaining six points in six months is ... just what he needs to justify running for the presidency," Mr Terr said. "He can say that the American people wanted him to run. So the image about him being a sore loser or desperate to become president or someone that is not a man of the people can be thrown into the trash."

"If Al Gore runs, Republicans should be very afraid," said one blogger on Politico.com yesterday. "As much as they like to make fun of him, no one can deny that he is the candidate that has the most appeal and ability to energise his base."

Mr Gore's rehabilitation is accelerating as America's political agenda steadily moves towards issues such as climate change that he has long championed.

"In what may be the greatest brand makeover in history, Gore is being hailed as a visionary who was right about everything from global warming to Iraq," writes Fast Company's Ellen McGirt. "At 59, he's an Academy award winner, a bestselling author, a frontrunner for the Nobel prize, and a concert promoter."

Mr Gore is likely to make headlines again with the Live Earth concerts on July 7. He has helped to organise the eight shows, to be held simultaneously around the world, to raise awareness and funds to combat global warming.

As Democrats struggle to measure the potential impact of undeclared candidates, similar imponderables are dogging the Republicans.

Analysts say the national lead held by Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor, could quickly disappear if, as expected, Fred Thompson, an actor and former Tennessee senator, steps in next week.

Another wild card is the undeclared but widely expected independent candidacy of the current New York mayor, Michael Bloomberg. If he runs, polls suggest Mr Giuliani would be the biggest loser. To complicate matters, Ralph Nader, the consumer activist whose third-party challenge dished Mr Gore in 2000, says he may also run as an independent.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/

Don't shoot the messenger...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Jun 29 2007, 12:31 PM
Post #103



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



Our beloved painter has raised the subject of the "Gore for pres. possibility", and how it ranks on the X axis of good/bad plotted against the Y axis of possible/improbable (my metaphor) ... and, while personally I enthusiastically support Ron Paul, I would be so much happier with Gore than with Hildebeast. You never know, Gore might even be the kind of guy to pull a fast one on his overloards like Kennedy tried to do.

dunno.gif wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
painter
post Jun 29 2007, 01:49 PM
Post #104


∞* M E R C U R I A L *∞


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 5,870
Joined: 25-August 06
From: SFO
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (Sanders @ Jun 29 2007, 08:31 AM)
Our beloved painter has raised the subject of the "Gore for pres. possibility", and how it ranks on the X axis of good/bad plotted against the Y axis of possible/improbable (my metaphor) ... and, while personally I enthusiastically support Ron Paul, I would be so much happier with Gore than with Hildebeast.  You never know, Gore might even be the kind of guy to pull a fast one on his overloards like Kennedy tried to do. 

dunno.gif  wink.gif

I think Gore is a genius -- that he knows exactly what he is doing and how to do it. He knows he won't declare unless he's sure the ducks are in line so that he can win. We haven't seen a man of this calibre anywhere near the WH in way more than a generation, IMO. I understand that he doesn't look like a revolutionary -- as Paul does -- but I believe that is part of the plan. Paul is great and I support many of his positions but I don't think he has a chance in hell of getting nominated, much less elected. If he ran third party (which I don't know that he would) and the choices were between him and just about anyone else, I'd vote for him in a heart-beat -- even if it meant Guiliana (or anyone of his ilk) -- or even "hildabeast" -- would reap the benefit. But if Gore is in the race my attitude is going to be fundamentally different because Gore is electable and he does represent a genuine opposition -- albeit not to the extreme as most of us would like.

I know many here do not share this view. I appreciate many of the concerns that have been raised regarding Gore but I've lived too long and fought this battle too long to not be willing to accept valid compromises that are steps in the right direction.

The NEOCON/corporate/MIC cabal is ready to implement the complete overthrow of our Republic -- and the consequence is going to be ugly and bloody -- and they don't give a sh*t. Gore understands the importance of infrastructural change and is capable of getting it implemented within the framework of the constitution. I appreciate Paul, Kucinich and Gravel and their willingness to speak out on issues important to us. However, I don't think one of them have a snow-balls chance. Gore does.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cary
post Jun 29 2007, 02:46 PM
Post #105


Ragin Cajun


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,691
Joined: 14-August 06
From: Baton Rouge, LA
Member No.: 5



You may well be right about Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel's chances of winning the 2008 race. But Ron Paul's campaign is growing like wild fire as people wake up to his campaign and who he is and what he represents. November 2008 is a long way off from here in terms of political changes in the social mood.

I wouldn't vote for Al Gore, cousin to George W. Bush, if my life depended on it. I respect your perspective and your wisdom Painter, but Gore is just one more thug in the cabal of ruling elite. If he runs, he's managed to scuttle Hildabeast behind the scenes. And with the uber rich of Ruppert Murdoch and now Warren Buffett backing her, I don't think he has much of a chance of doing that. The Clinton/Bush connection is strong and Gore is not on their level.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guinan
post Jun 29 2007, 03:25 PM
Post #106


Location: Netherlands


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,702
Joined: 15-October 06
From: Netherlands
Member No.: 72



I have the feeling that some of you are not seeing the time-table here.

If I were a US-citizen (which I'm not...) I would support Paul/Kuchinich/Gravel too at this point - and I certainly would NOT consider myself a Republican in any way shape or form.
In a few months time however, it will be clear who will be running the final race against whom.
Ideally Paul would be in on the race (actually, ideally all three of them would be in the race, but that's wishfull thinking at best!), in which case I would vote Paul over anyone else.
Should, however, the final choice be between Gore and any other Republican, I'm sure I would favour Gore, precisely because he is not endoresed by the 'elite' !
By that time, Paul, Kuchinch and Gravel will no longer be an option and I would prefer Gore over Ghouliani any day.

Now I am very much aware that this is a matter of internal US politics and that non-US-citizens have no say in the matter. I can't vote, but hey, I can root for the coming Prez who just might save this planet from self-destruction....

G.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

6 Pages V  « < 4 5 6
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 12th November 2019 - 07:15 PM