Reply With Quote
Claims? My conclusions, you mean. I consider we havent even touched on the OP. Consider yourself a very poor debunker. Take your ego with you on the way out.
Yes, your assertion failed miserably.
Consider your thread debunked until you can actually back up your claims.
Claims? My conclusions, you mean. I consider we havent even touched on the OP. Consider yourself a very poor debunker. Take your ego with you on the way out.
Heard that one before. That you seem to think it led directly to the Bushes running everything is hilarious.
Bushes are simply working for the interests with $$$$, as they were then. The common thread is not their control, but their involvement, even after the Bush family name should have been .
But why is this not in the history books?
Your claim is the Bushes now control everything.
I asked what they now control.
You failed to come up with even one thing.
What is there to touch? Some claims were made. Doesn't sound like anything else was done about it. If there was, let me know about it.I consider we havent even touched on the OP.
I did fine. Consider yourself a very poor concluder.Consider yourself a very poor debunker.
Personal attack fail, hypocrite.Take your ego with you on the way out.
OK then, Chump.
Just because you read it online somewhere a few days ago doesn't mean the history books won't touch it; it just means that you haven't read the relevant books yet.
Common mistake.
suggestions?
And I was talking about school books.
OK then, Parker2112.
You are still here?
Actually, the story is true. But the tie in with my previous posts about the Fed, and the most significant implication, is that Wall St. interests even then wanted control over the federal govt., and the Bush family was involved with those interests.
So, lets tally up the score here:
1. The story is a matter of Congressional record.... Wall St tried a coup.
2. Bush family was involved in the coup attempt.
3. Decades later we see the Bush family control everything from the CIA, the Vice Presidency, and the White House three times.
4. Decades later, we see Wall St. has complete control of our elected officials, our economic policies, our tax policies, our livelihoods, etc, etc.
Chump, youre way too smart to think this weak "debunking" amounts to more than the lint between my toes. And the fact that you expect to cross the line on arrogance and hot air says alot. Youre losing a step?
Yes.
--Make a short list of recent threads you've started.
--Go to a library to find material that backs up your ridiculous conclusions.
--Check back with us all in a year or two.
Thanks!
Actually, the story is true. But the tie in with my previous posts about the Fed, and the most significant implication, is that Wall St. interests even then wanted control over the federal govt., and the Bush family was involved with those interests.
So, lets tally up the score here:
1. The story is a matter of Congressional record.... Wall St tried a coup.
2. Bush family was involved in the coup attempt.
3. Decades later we see the Bush family control everything from the CIA, the Vice Presidency, and the White House three times.
4. Decades later, we see Wall St. has complete control of our elected officials, our economic policies, our tax policies, our livelihoods, etc, etc.
"Decades later..." is a piss-poor way of connecting the dots. If they are dots.
(Check your braincase, Parker: the gaping hole in your syllogism may have just eaten your brain for a snack.)
The Businessmen's Plot is of more literary than historical significance IMO. Mostly it's a dray-horse for wagon-loads of dreck like this thread.
What does the Bush family control now?
RG, you have already preven to be the biggest on this entire forum. Who in the tout's their ing signature as a win on a ing RIP thread?
Your chicken ery knows no bounds. You should be very used to having your posts responded to with GTFO and GFY by now.
Read the OP. then when you can tell me how this bull relates to that in any way whatsoever, I will answer it.
If you are just going to flat out run away from your claims when asked to back them up, you shouldn't make them in the first place.
Brave Sir Robin.
thats a loser. why the even teach history? Whats the significance of exposing future generations to stories from the past?
If this attempt to unseat an elected president is not worth teaching then tell me what is.
You rebut the OP from the only angle available, even if it doesnt apply?
What a weak strawman attempt.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
