Mail this PageAnother Press conference. I just put some of it on and Bush is very nasty to the press while yucking it up. People are dying in Iraq. He goes on these long tangents about liberty. When a reporter tries to cut in and ask a question-he gets pissed.
Why is Bush trying to show that he can stand before live questioners, unlike his past? He has been appearing, for years, only in front of well screened questioners, if taking any questions at all, only giving the rare press conference. Now we have him day after day, before audiences presumed to be asking the tough questions. Bush has ignored bad polls in the past, so this is unlikely to be the reason. He is known to resent being questioned on his policies, becoming enraged when challenged, so presumably would not deal with this voluntarily. If voter fraud so easily put him back in the White House in 2004, could not this be presumed to work in 2006, keeping his Republican majority in the Congress? And certainly, where talk of impeachment is being mentioned even in the major media, the current Congress will not even contemplate a censure, much less impeachment. He has avoided personal responsibility for 911, for the failures in Iraq, and for Katrina, and refused to change the tight cabal around him in the White House throughout all challenges. Why not simply continue to stay snug in the White House until the opportunity to declare himself President for life, to declare martial law, emerges? What would force this arrogant man off the booze and in front of the line of fire?
We have stated that the Puppet Master wanted Kerry in 2004, and set about a decapitation process to isolate Bush and his cohorts and make them
irrelevant both within the US and the world. But this process has, to date, not forced Bush into the line of fire, defending his policies. If funds are cut
off from the Federal Reserve, and China and other countries buying US bonds refuse to invest in the mounting US debt, the US can simply print
money, go banana republic, and has planned for some time to do this, so the existing financial threats are not what has incited this change. We have
described the hierarchy being the Puppet Master over the Puppets he installs into political power and as corporate heads, then the comfortable class
and below that the working class. Bush defied the Puppet Master during the 2004 election, and anticipated financial punishments, as well as the
infighting the Puppet Master is famous for and never loses when a fight is engaged. Is the current press in Bush to sell his policies to counter an
anticipated attack from the Puppet Master? What has been neglected, in discussion of the Puppet Master and his Puppets, are increasingly restless
groups who have received promises from Bush, which now seem threatened. Bribery has been the means by which Bush gained cooperation for his
agenda. What happens when a bribe is not paid, as promised?
Beyond the Puppet Master and the bribed hordes being promised what Bush cannot deliver, are those in power who put him into the running for the
2000 election. The Puppet Master may have to approve any candidate, but the selection process is more complicated. Do you suppose that the
Puppet Master simply reached down and selected Putin to lead Russia? Putin beat out competitors, based on who was to gain if he was in power.
Those who put Bush into the White House in 2000 arranged for Cheney and Rumsfeld to be part of the administration, and set this Bush crowd on
their agenda. They are concerned about their position in the near future, and are strong arming Bush. He has been given an ultimatum - either push
up your polls and show leadership, or anticipate being taken down by a number of means. Everyone assumes Bush has an agenda, when he is only
the front for an ambitious interest group. Look to the military industrial complex, the contracts given to Halliburton, the cart blanche to the oil
industry to reap immense profits, the relaxing of pollution controls, and allowing cheap labor into the country without constraints. Who stands to win
re this? Certainly not Bush or his administration, per se.
As Hitler showed, he was manipulated by those who stood behind him, outside of the public view. These hands are almost always secret, unknown
to the public, and highly ambitious. This group hopes to recoup their losses, seeing the state of affairs under Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld. They
see the press for public awareness on voter fraud, and understand that the Puppet Master could easily outmaneuver them on voter fraud, putting
Bush at risk after the 2006 elections. In fact, those in charge of running elections in the states may outmaneuver voter fraud, putting in safe guards
and paper trails, given the public sentiment and exposure in the press regarding the dangers of electronic voting without a paper trail. They cannot
count on control of the US government for long, given the state of affairs. Bush will not change the tight cabal around him out of insecurity, his
insecure personality, and will not dump Cheney or Rumsfeld. In any case bringing in new blood risks the newcomers knowing the dirty secrets that
Bush and those close to him hold tight. Thus, with every resignation, they compress closer around Bush, shuffling assignments if necessary, Rice
taking Powell's position as Secretary of State, for instance, and her assistant taking hers at NSA. Bush seems unlikely to win in future, is rigid and
will not change, and thus the group who has a vested interest in the Bush agenda succeeding is alarmed.
Where the Puppet Master does not plan to assassinate Bush, given the choices in ascension, preferring decapitation, the vested interest group
behind the scenes is desperate and does not want the Puppet Master's plan to succeed. They would lose all, in a decapitation that negates any
influence over matters that Bush can assert as President. An upset, a changing of the guard, such as they might attempt, will hardly change the public
perception that all is well in Washington. In fact, it will show the manipulation behind the scenes, and make the public even more suspicious of any
activity in Washington. Would Cheney be a better President? His polls are at 18% approval, vs 36% for Bush. Would taking them both out reassure
the public and gain cooperation among those in Washington already revolting from White House rule? This is likely to alarm, and create an impasse,
in Washington, decapitation come early. There are few choices available to this vested interest group, but the status quo is alarming, thus threats and
ultimatums have emerged. Assassination, heart attack or a stroke, mental breakdown, all these are cards on the table, per the edict that has been
given to Bush by this vested interest group. Bush is thus mustering a show of strength, all the while looking angry and deadly serious, as for him this
is a deadly serious matter!
- Signs of the Times #1568
- Bush Defends Decisions on Iraq War [Mar 21] http://apnews.myway.com/ 'President Bush said Tuesday the decision about when to withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq will fall to future presidents and Iraqi leaders, suggesting that U.S. involvement will continue at least through 2008. Acknowledging the public's growing unease with the war - and election-year skittishness among fellow Republicans - the president nonetheless vowed to keep U.S. soldiers in the fight. He also stood by embattled Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld. The news conference marked a new push by Bush to confront doubts about his strategy in Iraq.' [and from another] http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ [Mar 18] 'A bitterly divided electorate gives President George W. Bush an approval rating of only 36 percent in the latest NEWSWEEK poll, matching the low point in his presidency recorded last November. His image as an effective leader in the war on terror is tarnished, with less than half the public (44 percent) approving of the way he's handling terrorism and homeland security. Despite a series of presidential speeches meant to bolster support for the war in Iraq, as well as the announcement of a major military offensive when the poll was getting under way, only 29 percent of the people questioned approved Bush's handling of the situation in Iraq. Fully 65 percent disapprove. The way the president has dealt with issues at home hasn't brought him much support either. His approval ratings for the handling of energy policy (28 percent) and health care (28 percent) were new lows, while approval on the economy (36 percent) mirrored his overall rating.'