The Bush Family/Nazi Connection

Last word...............................HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH oh man.

 

again, if she wants to take the word from the man who calls a war on genocide illegal, thats her prerogative. No one has charged mr bush with breakign any law as president of the united states. Just because Kofi ANNAN stated that does not make it so, it requires a court of law to find someone guilty, or are you striking down the very basis of our legal system?

Again, you might want to reread these posts and see when i jumped in. Numerous amounts of people linked this article of prescott bush and the nazi's to dubya

 

Guess what? Your right about the General Kofi Annan article, its not an official statement by an American court, obviously if Bush had been charged with illegal activity he would be impeached, and pardoned by the next president. No one is striking down the legal system, doesnt that sound silly? Do you really think we are saying that? Please. Sera used that article to show that the head of an international council that is widely respected finds what Bush is doing is illegal. He also thinks the war on genicide is illegal, in what context? im sure he isnt ssaying that people should be allowed to kill others enmass, but we arent really going to war over genocide, all we are doing in Sudan is giving monetary aide.

This is because his grandfather being a Nazi opportunist has a bearing on how I see him ethically as a president and a man (its a small point against him). I knew of this info in the last presdiential election. This is the topic at hand. Not the one point you wanted to win about General Kofi Annan.

 

Secretary General Kofi Annan Made the statement about kosovo since the US and nato went in without any UN approval because russia would not allow it. The UN isnt perfect, it fails. It failed in kosovo and it failed in iraq.

I didnt bring Secretary General Kofi Annan into this debate, so dont accuse me of wanting to win anything with him. Again, you compare someone who broke US law to someone who hasnt as president, thats kinda, unethical isnt it?

 

It's not illegal because Kofi says so.

It's illegal based on the international laws that the United States had a hand in creating.

 

Neither did I, but you sure are harpin on it.




Prescott Bush's ethics led to him being a Nazi opportunist. This has a bearing on how I see George Bush Jr. ethically as a president and a man (its a small point against him). I knew of this info in the last presidential election. This is the topic at hand.

 

Again, you compare someone who broke US law to someone who hasnt as president, thats kinda, unethical isnt it?

edit: this got real old fast, look, i'm not gonna sit here and lecture you anymore on why your character assement is fatally flawed..you can continue judging people how you want.

 

I dont know much about Kofi or the UN, just that we havent played nice with them in a while.

 

Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area,

Further recalling that its resolution 687 (1991) imposed obligations on Iraq as a necessary step for achievement of its stated objective of restoring international peace and security in the area,


http://www.un.int/usa/sres-iraq.htm


that sounds like authorization to me

from resolution 687 which put demands on saddam hussein.

7. Invites Iraq to reaffirm unconditionally its obligations under the Geneva Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, signed at Geneva on 17 June 1925, and to ratify the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction, of 10 April 1972;

8. Decides that Iraq shall unconditionally accept the destruction, removal, or rendering harmless, under international supervision, of:

(a) All chemical and biological weapons and all stocks of agents and all related subsystems and components and all research, development, support and manufacturing facilities;

(b) All ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometres and related major parts, and repair and production facilities;

9. Decides, for the implementation of paragraph 8 above, the following:

(a) Iraq shall submit to the Secretary-General, within fifteen days of the adoption of the present resolution, a declaration of the locations, amounts and types of all items specified in paragraph 8 and agree to urgent, on-site inspection as specified below;

(b) The Secretary-General, in consultation with the appropriate Governments and, where appropriate, with the Director-General of the World Health Organization, within forty-five days of the passage of the present resolution, shall develop, and submit to the Council for approval, a plan calling for the completion of the following acts within forty-five days of such approval:

(i) The forming of a Special Commission, which shall carry out immediate on-site inspection of Iraq's biological, chemical and missile capabilities, based on Iraq's declarations and the designation of any additional locations by the Special Commission itself;

(ii) The yielding by Iraq of possession to the Special Commission for destruction, removal or rendering harmless, taking into account the requirements of public safety, of all items specified under paragraph 8 (a) above, including items at the additional locations designated by the Special Commission under paragraph 9 (b) (i) above and the destruction by Iraq, under the supervision of the Special Commission, of all its missile capabilities, including launchers, as specified under paragraph 8 (b) above;

(iii) The provision by the Special Commission of the assistance and cooperation to the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency required in paragraphs 12 and 13 below;

10. Decides that Iraq shall unconditionally undertake not to use, develop, construct or acquire any of the items specified in paragraphs 8 and 9 above and requests the Secretary-General, in consultation with the Special Commission, to develop a plan for the future ongoing monitoring and verification of Iraq's compliance with this paragraph, to be submitted to the Security Council for approval within one hundred and twenty days of the passage of this resolution;

11. Invites Iraq to reaffirm unconditionally its obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1 July 1968;

12. Decides that Iraq shall unconditionally agree not to acquire or develop nuclear weapons or nuclear-weapons-usable material or any subsystems or components or any research, development, support or manufacturing facilities related to the above; to submit to the Secretary-General and the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency within fifteen days of the adoption of the present resolution a declaration of the locations, amounts, and types of all items specified above; to place all of its nuclear-weapons-usable materials under the exclusive control, for custody and removal, of the International Atomic Energy Agency, with the assistance and cooperation of the Special Commission as provided for in the plan of the Secretary-General discussed in paragraph 9 (b) above; to accept, in accordance with the arrangements provided for in paragraph 13 below, urgent on-site inspection and the destruction, removal or rendering harmless as appropriate of all items specified above; and to accept the plan discussed in paragraph 13 below for the future ongoing monitoring and verification of its compliance with these undertakings;

http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm


can you with a straight face say that saddam did all of that?

 

You have not said a single convincing thing stating why my character assement is fatally flawed, offered no evidince. I told about the psycology behind it and you called it conspiracy theory. Im done.

 

because you offer conspiracy theory.

As your 'evidence' you use PHYSICAL abuse..hello! thats different then the ethics shown in the work place, yet you somehow want to take it as the same.


Again, you havent shown anything unethical in how mr bush handles his businesses and presidency that would liken his character to granpappy bush, surely not anything that would compare to trading with the nazis!. You and others rely on sensationalism and hope that the comparison of a man who traded with the NAZIS will resonate badly against mr bush. It's a smear, and instead of relying on evidence, you rely on hearsay.

 

Moral development

Moral development also follows a pattern. In the early stages, the child simply tries to avoid punishment. An older preschooler proceeds through a very self-centered stage with decisions based on self-satisfaction and "what's in it for me" actions. In later stages, children develop a greater concern for being "good" and doing what is socially acceptable.

Now, If my grandfather liked peanut butter, and gave my father peanut butter all the time as kid and praised peanut butter, there are proven pyschological statistics that say the father has a greater chance of giving peanut butter to the son and liking it by example because it is acceptable, continuing the cycle. In that house it would be seen as socially acceptable to like peanut butter in their household.

Now, why is it so much of stretch to belive that some of the same values that allowed Presscott to justify his Nazi Oppurtunism may have been passed onto the son?

 

Moral development

Moral development also follows a pattern. In the early stages, the child simply tries to avoid punishment. An older preschooler proceeds through a very self-centered stage with decisions based on self-satisfaction and "what's in it for me" actions. In later stages, children develop a greater concern for being "good" and doing what is socially acceptable.

Now, If my grandfather liked peeing sitting down, and told my father to pee sitting down all the time as kid and praised peeing sitting down, there are proven pyschological statistics that say the father has a greater chance of passing on peeing sitting down to the son and liking it by example because it is acceptable, continuing the cycle. In that house it would be seen as socially acceptable to like peeing sitting down in their household.

Now, why is it so much of stretch to belive that some of the same values that allowed Presscott to justify his Nazi Oppurtunism may have been passed onto the son?

 

Yeah, whats so unethical about the president giving a no-bid contract worth billions to Halliburton, of which his VP is one of the largest shareholders...

Profiteering off of war...how ethical.

edit: lol duckandmiss, you crack me up. But you could explain this uing a thousand different words, and Magera wouldn't understand.

 

Here let me play the role of little bush.

Now, if my grandfather liked trading with the nazis and told my father to trade with the nazis all the time as a kid and praised trading with the nazis, there are proven pyshoological statistics that say the father has a greater chance of passing on trading with the nazis to the son and liking it by example because it is acceptable and continuing the cycle. In that house it would be seen as socially accpetable to like trading with the nazis in their household.

You're right, how could i ever think such a thing. Little bush thinks its acceptable to trade with the nazis!


then again, you havent proved that granpappy bush taught papa bush anything about trading with the nazis or anything unethical. You are just making an assumption.

 

This would be more like it:





Now, If my grandfather liked profiteering, and told my father to profiteer all the time as kid and praised profiteering, there are proven pyschological statistics that say the father has a greater chance of passing on profiteering to the son and liking it by example because it is acceptable, continuing the cycle. In that house it would be seen as socially acceptable to like profiteering in their household.


But I love how you like to nit-pick the details, megera, and spin everything off in your favor :sunglasse

Hey, Bush kinda does the same thing!

 

Now, if my grandfather liked to make lots of money by any means nessacary with the Nazis and told my father to make lots of money by any means nessacary with the Carlyle group all the time as a kid and praised to make lots of money by any means nessacary with the Nazis, there are proven pyshoological statistics that say the father has a greater chance of passing on to make lots of money by any means nessacary with any group, bad or not (Saudis)to the son and liking it by example because it is acceptable and continuing the cycle. In that house it would be seen as socially accpetable to like to make lots of money by any means nessacary with any group, bad or not in their household.

You're right, how could i ever think such a thing. Little bush thinks its acceptable to trade with the nazis! Why would you say something like this? It is unrelated again. He wouldnt think it was acceptable to trade with the Nazis, there arent anymore Nazis around meg . He would take the ethics from those actions not the exact action.

Your right, but the fact that I can make an assumption like that is enough. Of course it is an assumption because I dont have the resources to do phycological testing and observations of the family now do I? It is enough to know that there was an important family memeber that did something like that, and to see the pattern repeated later in the family.

 

but you havent answered my one question that is crucial to your point

What prescott bush did that was unethical was by violating US law and trading with an enemy we are at war with.

What exactly do criticize bush for that is anywhere similar? You can point to going to war illegally, but woh says its illegal? Kofi annan? some legal scholars? There are legal scholars who say it is legal under the reasons i posted to shaneX.

So what exactly has george w bush done that puts him in the same league as prescott bush?

 

It wouldn't matter what he tought or not.... if little G.W. Bush was around Granpappy Bush alot while he was growing up, he would see the things that Granpappy did and those behaviors, mannerisms, ethics, morals; they would all work their way into little G.W. Bush's brain and imbed themselves in the neural paths.

Granpappy Bush wouldn't have to teach a thing, kids are far more perceptive than you obviously give them credit for. Now, if G.W. grew up and got some other influences from friends, teachers, counselors, prison bunk mates; you can argue that, to an extent...

but the counter is going to be, by his current attitude, policies, and legislation... show more ways that G.W. Bush is DIFFERENT than his father, because it sure looks like he learned an awful lot from dear old dad, who in turn looks like he learned a whole lot from Prescott.

 

Its not crucial to my point meg, What Bush has done might not be illegal in the eyes of American Law now, but that does not make it unsavory. I think it looks fishy that the reconstruction contract went to Halliburton, I think that looks like profitteering, but its legal now so what can I do. Just because you find a way to make something legal does not make it right.

But I am not trying to make this point with my statement, this does not put him in the same league as Prescott, what it does do is make available the idea that Bush Jr was exposed to the type of thought and ethics that allowed Presscott to do what he did, and that makes a stronger possibility that Bush Jr. was influenced than if Prescott wasnt his Grandfather.


This is not a strong point against Bush, but I do see it as a negative, and Bush has a whole lot of negatives that keep adding up.