
Originally Posted by
Titus
I'm German..I don't trust politicians posing with children while leading their nations to a disaster, especially not if they turn out a liar -- or was it a lie that Bush claimed to have seen the Twin-Towers collapse on TV at a time when it was simply not possible, and did so two times in two different speeches, both accessable at the homepage of the White House?
Seriousley: If Bush would have been jogging or would have done something, say, 'unremarkable' during the attack, I would have bought the official story much easier. But he did sth remarkable: He was hanging out with children and reading a fairy tale to them. That was VERY remarkable. And then, while 'the nation was under attack' he CONTINUED for at least 20 minutes to read on, while he was meditating 'the fact, that America was under attack'...???
Polititians in general do many things every day that appear tidy and obvious but are in fact very dirty and harmful; that's why they notorically seek the company of children, to suggest our eyes that their aims would be comparably innocent. So maybe George W was in fact very lucky that he was with children that day and time, and his bodyguards very clever to leave him there.
But maybe also George W wasn't so lucky after all, but helped luck a little bit and was clever in the first place? Or at least his advisors..?
Just think about how different your eyes would have digestet 09/11 if
--George W would have been jogging (that's maybe the only harmless thing he can do during his day)
--He would have been in a conference or in his bureau in the White House
(while we all saw how he was 'in private', surrounded by innocence)
--He would have worn a uniform, surrounded by military
--He would have given some sort of lecture to a group of workers
or at least grown up people
..................................???
Bookmarks