Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Osama bin laden has a twin brother

  1. #1

    Osama bin laden has a twin brother

    Amazing!
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,393
    Oh. I thought you meant his other brother.

    [img]http://www.john-kerry.com/kerry.jpg[/img]

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    US
    Posts
    244
    Bin Ladens brother(s)? Why dont you ask the man who is supposed to be leading the people of the USA

    [URL=http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/bin_laden_ties.html]Bush Bin Laden connections[/URL]

    Republican= Lies stupid infintile childish name calling(mini me, John Kerry)

    Non-Republicans=Truth


    Hmm something just doesnt seem right

    [URL=http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/02/06/saudi.htm]15 of Hijackers are Saudi[/URL]
    [IMG]http://images.bigghurtt.com/bush_saudi.jpg[/IMG]


    [IMG]http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Sections/Newsweek/Components/Photos/050426_050502/050427_FinemanBush_wide.hlarge.jpg[/IMG]

    [IMG]http://www.pissedonpolitics.com/BushSaudi2.jpg[/IMG]
    [IMG]http://thinkprogress.org/wp-images/upload/thumb-cheney_saudi1.jpg[/IMG]
    [IMG]http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/globalconnections/mideast/images/thumb/thumb_resource_5_lg.jpg[/IMG]

  4. #4
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=Renaissance10]



    Hmm something just doesnt seem right

    [/QUOTE]


    they'll drink to that:

    [IMG]http://img.thefreedictionary.com/wiki/e/e5/Great_Leader_Comrade_Kim_Jong_Il_(122).jpg[/IMG]

    oh- btw: here's a few gems you forgot....

    [IMG]http://www.saudi-us-relations.org/photos/images2005/leaders/leaders-05-0001.jpg[/IMG]

    [IMG]http://saudiembassy.net/Publications/MagFall96/images/20ab.jpg[/IMG]
    Last edited by Come Back to NY; 10-09-2006 at 08:01 PM.

  5. #5
    You have a great sense of humor.... non-Republicans = truth... LOL:)

    Look, if you want to say Republicans lie, you are right. But so do ALL politicians......... particularly those whose last names are Clinton. Or Sharpton. Or Rangel. Or Pelosi. And to be fair, Foley and Nixon.

    I am pretty sure most politicians, regardless of party, enter the fray with good intentions. then, when they want to get a positive piece of legislation passed, the lifelong pols explain to them that in order to get the bill passed, the newbies are going to have to play ball on the bigger issues. Eventually, the rookies compromise and soon they are aligned with the old guard. This happens with both parties.

    So what are we left with? Neither party dares to deceive so much that they lose their base entirely.............. otherwise the lifers are voted out. So look at the platforms. As for me, I would rather go for smaller gov't, less welfare to those able to work, no abortion on demand (though I'd rather have none, maybe we can work something out on limited), at least a public respect for faith, lower taxes, less socialism and to take the fight down the terrorsits throat.

    But hey, if you prefer big gov't, increased taxes, compromise with terrorists, an agenda that smacks of socialism, a society where personal freedom not only outweighs but condemns personal responsibility, a place where turtle eggs are protected and fetuses can be killed legally in a way that if you did it to a puppy you would end up in jail, and a party in power that is backed by the same groups that want "In God We Trust" off the dollar bill and "Under God" out of the pledge and protects chlid pornographers in the name of freedoms and would want schools to be able to counsel your teenage daughter (without your knowledge) to have an abortion, then vote the Dems in.

    Either way, power corrupts and they are all, to one degree or another corrupt.

    If you find a way to get an honest guy who is not beholden to the influences that provide the astronomical $$$$ it takes to get elected, let me know.
    Last edited by JCnflies; 10-09-2006 at 09:14 PM.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    US
    Posts
    244
    Clinton was just following in the footsteps of Bush Sr. and basically doing normall diplomatic relations with those photos,, Bush Sr. is business partners with the Saudi family and who knows who else,,, Bush Sr, set the stage for 9/11 and all the crap going on in the mid east when he decided to protect his business interest in 1990 buy putting troops in Saudi Arabia in the first place

    Show me some proof of Clinton having some business dealings with the Saudis or any of our enemys or familys of our enemys

    And despite all the overblown media garbage with North Korea,, I have yet to see the big Deal,, they have nukes,,we have nukes,, lots of countries have nukes,,, is this Kim guy a nut? Probably but, why should it be our responsibility to get rid of them

  7. #7
    Smaller gov't? The GOP? You are kidding right?


    [QUOTE=JCnflies]You have a great sense of humor.... non-Republicans = truth... LOL:)

    Look, if you want to say Republicans lie, you are right. But so do ALL politicians......... particularly those whose last names are Clinton. Or Sharpton. Or Rangel. Or Pelosi. And to be fair, Foley and Nixon.

    I am pretty sure most politicians, regardless of party, enter the fray with good intentions. then, when they want to get a positive piece of legislation passed, the lifelong pols explain to them that in order to get the bill passed, the newbies are going to have to play ball on the bigger issues. Eventually, the rookies compromise and soon they are aligned with the old guard. This happens with both parties.

    So what are we left with? Neither party dares to deceive so much that they lose their base entirely.............. otherwise the lifers are voted out. So look at the platforms. As for me, I would rather go for smaller gov't, less welfare to those able to work, no abortion on demand (though I'd rather have none, maybe we can work something out on limited), at least a public respect for faith, lower taxes, less socialism and to take the fight down the terrorsits throat.

    But hey, if you prefer big gov't, increased taxes, compromise with terrorists, an agenda that smacks of socialism, a society where personal freedom not only outweighs but condemns personal responsibility, a place where turtle eggs are protected and fetuses can be killed legally in a way that if you did it to a puppy you would end up in jail, and a party in power that is backed by the same groups that want "In God We Trust" off the dollar bill and "Under God" out of the pledge and protects chlid pornographers in the name of freedoms and would want schools to be able to counsel your teenage daughter (without your knowledge) to have an abortion, then vote the Dems in.

    Either way, power corrupts and they are all, to one degree or another corrupt.

    If you find a way to get an honest guy who is not beholden to the influences that provide the astronomical $$$$ it takes to get elected, let me know.[/QUOTE]

  8. #8
    [QUOTE=Renaissance10]Clinton was just following in the footsteps of Bush Sr. and basically doing normall diplomatic relations with those photos,, Bush Sr. is business partners with the Saudi family and who knows who else,,, Bush Sr, set the stage for 9/11 and all the crap going on in the mid east when he decided to protect his business interest in 1990 buy putting troops in Saudi Arabia in the first place

    Show me some proof of Clinton having some business dealings with the Saudis or any of our enemys or familys of our enemys

    And despite all the overblown media garbage with North Korea,, I have yet to see the big Deal,, they have nukes,,we have nukes,, lots of countries have nukes,,, is this Kim guy a nut? Probably but, why should it be our responsibility to get rid of them[/QUOTE]

    Clinton traded nuclear secrets to China for a big donation to the Democratic party. Look it up.

    It is our responsibility to protect ourselves, that's it.

    If you think Clinton wasn't in on something with the oil chiefs, then I guess you think Hillary Clinton making 100K in a day from a commodities deal on Tyson Chickens (home state = Arkansas) was an accident. Oh, and it was another unfortunate series of events - you know the whole whitewater thing her buddy refused to testify about and went to jail over and a whole bunch of honest Americans lost their life savings over. And let us not forget the FBI files on all of the Republicans having her fiongerprints on them and being found where she had the access after she denied ever having seen them. Pure fabrications and coincidence.

    Those Clinton's are upstanding Americans alays being framed by the Right Wing Nut Jobs. If you believe that I have some land to sell you in Arkansas.........

    Do you really think it is only the Republicans who are self-serving here?

  9. #9
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=JCnflies]Clinton traded nuclear secrets to China for a big donation to the Democratic party. Look it up.

    [/QUOTE]


    donations?? ....did you mention donations??

    [QUOTE][B]Saudis, Arabs Funneled Millions to President Clinton’s Library.[/B]

    LITTLE ROCK, ARK. - President Clinton’s new $165 million library here was funded in part by gifts of $1 million or more each from the Saudi royal family and three Saudi businessmen.

    The governments of Dubai, Kuwait, and Qatar and the deputy prime minister of Lebanon all also have donated $1 million or more for the archive and museum that opened last week.

    Democrats spent much of the presidential campaign this year accusing President Bush of improperly close ties to Saudi Arabia. The case was made in Michael Moore’s film “Fahrenheit 9/11,” in a bestselling book by Craig Unger titled “House of Bush, House of Saud,” and by the Democratic presidential candidate, Senator Kerry.“This administration delayed pressuring the Saudis,” Mr. Kerry said on October 20. “I will insist that the Saudis crack down on charities that funnel funds to terrorists... and on anti-American and anti-Israel hate speech.”The Media Fund, a Democratic group whose president is a former Clinton White House aide, Harold Ickes, spent millions airing television commercials in swing states with scripts such as, “The Saudi royal family ... wealthy ... powerful ... corrupt. And close Bush family friends.”

    Perhaps as a result, the Saudi donations to the Clinton library are raising some eyebrows. Mr. Unger said he suspects that the Saudi support may have something to do with a possible presidential bid by Senator Clinton in 2008.

    “They want to keep their options open no matter who’s in power and whether that’s four years from now or whatever,” the author said. “Just a few million is nothing to them to keep their options open.”
    [/QUOTE]

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us