Science > Abortion > FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq
| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Gactimus" |
| Date: |
27 Oct 2004 04:02:41 PM |
| Object: |
FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush carelessly
and incompetently lost them.
.
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
27 Oct 2004 05:55:50 PM |
|
|
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George
Bush carelessly and incompetently lost them.
Translation: You're as clueless as ever.
But, hey, pretend you're a man and offer us a citation. Go on. I
say that you're a ***** who makes this ***** up as he goes along
(or, more likely, parrots right-wing talk radio).
Go on, prove me right by failing to support your claims.
You're chicken *****, just like AWOL Bush.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "kurttrail" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
27 Oct 2004 04:32:59 PM |
|
|
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly
and incompetently lost them.
Those 380 tons of explosives aren't considered WMDs, Rightard.
http://kurttrail.com/rightard/
http://kurttrail.com/ivoted/
--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
27 Oct 2004 04:08:11 PM |
|
|
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly
and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gactimus" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
27 Oct 2004 04:15:22 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on Iraq.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
27 Oct 2004 04:21:26 PM |
|
|
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:KdUfd.10510$233.5809@okepread05...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on Iraq.
Yea, I kind of figured that was what you were doing..:o)
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Fritzinger" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
28 Oct 2004 06:39:08 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message news:<2MOdnSty6KMRjR3cRVn-ig@comcast.com>...
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:KdUfd.10510$233.5809@okepread05...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on Iraq.
Yea, I kind of figured that was what you were doing..:o)
Too bad, you don't realize the explosives that were lost aren't WMD.
You really aren't helping my opinion of the intelligence or honesty of
the conservatives.
--
Dave Fritzinger
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
28 Oct 2004 07:17:06 PM |
|
|
"David Fritzinger" <dfritzin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b82925bb.0410281539.1fdbd958@posting.google.com...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:<2MOdnSty6KMRjR3cRVn-ig@comcast.com>...
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:KdUfd.10510$233.5809@okepread05...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on Iraq.
Yea, I kind of figured that was what you were doing..:o)
Too bad, you don't realize the explosives that were lost aren't WMD.
You really aren't helping my opinion of the intelligence or honesty of
the conservatives.
Dave, at one point I considered you a pretty intelligent person. One who can
be reasoned with and not allow his/her biases intefere.
Over the course of the past 2 weeks, my opinion of you has drastically
changed. You have shown yourself to be no better than other liberals who
just sit there and constantly attack, insult, name call, and jump to wild
assumptions or conclusions.
I had hoped you would be the one that was different. I am seriously looking
for any Democrat who is intelligent, not a bigot, not call everyone names,
fair on the issues, and not going to jump to stupid assumptions or
conclusions.
You really don't help my opinion at all of the intelligence or honestly of
democrats.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lars Tr?ger" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
29 Oct 2004 04:18:26 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message news:<-oWdnSiyrZjRFhzcRVn-uA@comcast.com>...
"David Fritzinger" <dfritzin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b82925bb.0410281539.1fdbd958@posting.google.com...
Too bad, you don't realize the explosives that were lost aren't WMD.
You really aren't helping my opinion of the intelligence or honesty of
the conservatives.
Dave, at one point I considered you a pretty intelligent person. One who can
be reasoned with and not allow his/her biases intefere.
Over the course of the past 2 weeks, my opinion of you has drastically
changed.
Whoa. If Shrubya finds out you admited you were wrong, you will be in
trouble. You are never supposed to do that.
Lars T.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
29 Oct 2004 04:29:08 PM |
|
|
"Lars Tr?ger" <Lars.Traeger@epost.de> wrote in message
news:2efef090.0410291318.5aa409ec@posting.google.com...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:<-oWdnSiyrZjRFhzcRVn-uA@comcast.com>...
"David Fritzinger" <dfritzin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b82925bb.0410281539.1fdbd958@posting.google.com...
Too bad, you don't realize the explosives that were lost aren't WMD.
You really aren't helping my opinion of the intelligence or honesty of
the conservatives.
Dave, at one point I considered you a pretty intelligent person. One who
can
be reasoned with and not allow his/her biases intefere.
Over the course of the past 2 weeks, my opinion of you has drastically
changed.
Whoa. If Shrubya finds out you admited you were wrong, you will be in
trouble. You are never supposed to do that.
Why?
I have seen Bush take full blame for his actions.
.
|
|
|
| User: "forge" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
29 Oct 2004 08:58:00 PM |
|
|
In article <6eSdnQi4YIccKB_cRVn-pg@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
I have seen Bush take full blame for his actions.
Oh please, please do give us one single example of this. In the debates
he was asked to name anything he'd done wrong and all he could say was
"uh, uh, uh, I, uh, well, I ain't happy about some appointments I made."
Come ON already.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
29 Oct 2004 09:04:13 PM |
|
|
"forge" <forge@diespammers.youneedageek.com> wrote in message
news:forge-69DE92.21580029102004@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
In article <6eSdnQi4YIccKB_cRVn-pg@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
I have seen Bush take full blame for his actions.
Oh please, please do give us one single example of this. In the debates
he was asked to name anything he'd done wrong and all he could say was
"uh, uh, uh, I, uh, well, I ain't happy about some appointments I made."
Come ON already.
He took full responsibility for what happened with the CIA.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-07-30-bush_x.htm
"I take personal responsibility for everything I say, absolutely," the
president said. Previously, he let CIA Director George Tenet and a national
security aide take blame for the controversy.
Now, we can move forward, since I provided you one single example.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lars Tr?ger" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
31 Oct 2004 10:40:10 AM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message news:<Kb6dnemmbqudax_cRVn-2w@comcast.com>...
"forge" <forge@diespammers.youneedageek.com> wrote in message
news:forge-69DE92.21580029102004@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
In article <6eSdnQi4YIccKB_cRVn-pg@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
I have seen Bush take full blame for his actions.
Oh please, please do give us one single example of this. In the debates
he was asked to name anything he'd done wrong and all he could say was
"uh, uh, uh, I, uh, well, I ain't happy about some appointments I made."
Come ON already.
He took full responsibility for what happened with the CIA.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-07-30-bush_x.htm
"I take personal responsibility for everything I say, absolutely," the
president said. Previously, he let CIA Director George Tenet and a national
security aide take blame for the controversy.
Now, we can move forward, since I provided you one single example.
So what are the consequences? You know, anything BUT words. He
certainly hasn't stepped down from his post, nor said he would do
anything different.
Lars T.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Snit" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
31 Oct 2004 10:43:21 AM |
|
|
"Lars Tr?ger" <Lars.Traeger@epost.de> wrote in post
2efef090.0410310840.eeeb3d3@posting.google.com on 10/31/04 9:40 AM:
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:<Kb6dnemmbqudax_cRVn-2w@comcast.com>...
"forge" <forge@diespammers.youneedageek.com> wrote in message
news:forge-69DE92.21580029102004@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
In article <6eSdnQi4YIccKB_cRVn-pg@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
I have seen Bush take full blame for his actions.
Oh please, please do give us one single example of this. In the debates
he was asked to name anything he'd done wrong and all he could say was
"uh, uh, uh, I, uh, well, I ain't happy about some appointments I made."
Come ON already.
He took full responsibility for what happened with the CIA.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-07-30-bush_x.htm
"I take personal responsibility for everything I say, absolutely," the
president said. Previously, he let CIA Director George Tenet and a national
security aide take blame for the controversy.
Now, we can move forward, since I provided you one single example.
So what are the consequences? You know, anything BUT words. He
certainly hasn't stepped down from his post, nor said he would do
anything different.
Clinton has taken responsibility for his affair with Monica in the same
way... he has said it was wrong.
I suppose that takes care of all that silly talk of perjury... I mean once
he has admitted it, he has taken full responsibility and nothing else should
have been done.
--
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law.
Roy Santoro, Psycho Proverb Zone (http://smallurl.com/?i=15235)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "kurttrail" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
29 Oct 2004 04:54:41 PM |
|
|
Osprey wrote:
"Lars Tr?ger" <Lars.Traeger@epost.de> wrote in message
news:2efef090.0410291318.5aa409ec@posting.google.com...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:<-oWdnSiyrZjRFhzcRVn-uA@comcast.com>...
"David Fritzinger" <dfritzin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b82925bb.0410281539.1fdbd958@posting.google.com...
Too bad, you don't realize the explosives that were lost aren't
WMD. You really aren't helping my opinion of the intelligence or
honesty of the conservatives.
Dave, at one point I considered you a pretty intelligent person.
One who can
be reasoned with and not allow his/her biases intefere.
Over the course of the past 2 weeks, my opinion of you has
drastically changed.
Whoa. If Shrubya finds out you admited you were wrong, you will be in
trouble. You are never supposed to do that.
Why?
I have seen Bush take full blame for his actions.
For what? Appointing people he couldn't control?
--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Fritzinger" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
29 Oct 2004 12:05:39 AM |
|
|
In article <-oWdnSiyrZjRFhzcRVn-uA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David Fritzinger" <dfritzin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b82925bb.0410281539.1fdbd958@posting.google.com...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:<2MOdnSty6KMRjR3cRVn-ig@comcast.com>...
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:KdUfd.10510$233.5809@okepread05...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on Iraq.
Yea, I kind of figured that was what you were doing..:o)
Too bad, you don't realize the explosives that were lost aren't WMD.
You really aren't helping my opinion of the intelligence or honesty of
the conservatives.
Dave, at one point I considered you a pretty intelligent person. One who can
be reasoned with and not allow his/her biases intefere.
Over the course of the past 2 weeks, my opinion of you has drastically
changed. You have shown yourself to be no better than other liberals who
just sit there and constantly attack, insult, name call, and jump to wild
assumptions or conclusions.
I had hoped you would be the one that was different. I am seriously looking
for any Democrat who is intelligent, not a bigot, not call everyone names,
fair on the issues, and not going to jump to stupid assumptions or
conclusions.
You really don't help my opinion at all of the intelligence or honestly of
democrats.
You are funny, Osprey. Not honest, but quite funny. I'm sorry that you
take it so hard that I have revealed your dishonesty for all to see.
And, you still haven't answered the point that the missing explosives
are not WMD. Oh, and you still haven't said anything about the lies I
showed from that Bush campaign, about Kerry's statement on how 9/11
changed.
As is obvious, my opinion of you has not changed. I had little respect
for you before, and our latest discussions have done little to improve
my opinion of you. You keep asking questions, but answer none yourself.
I suggest you learn something about actually supporting your opinion
before you return.
--
Dave Fritzinger
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
29 Oct 2004 08:32:26 AM |
|
|
"David Fritzinger" <dfritzinnospam@mac.com> wrote in message
news:dfritzinnospam-D342C9.19053928102004@orngca-news02.socal.rr.com...
In article <-oWdnSiyrZjRFhzcRVn-uA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David Fritzinger" <dfritzin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b82925bb.0410281539.1fdbd958@posting.google.com...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:<2MOdnSty6KMRjR3cRVn-ig@comcast.com>...
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:KdUfd.10510$233.5809@okepread05...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on
Iraq.
Yea, I kind of figured that was what you were doing..:o)
Too bad, you don't realize the explosives that were lost aren't WMD.
You really aren't helping my opinion of the intelligence or honesty of
the conservatives.
Dave, at one point I considered you a pretty intelligent person. One who
can
be reasoned with and not allow his/her biases intefere.
Over the course of the past 2 weeks, my opinion of you has drastically
changed. You have shown yourself to be no better than other liberals who
just sit there and constantly attack, insult, name call, and jump to wild
assumptions or conclusions.
I had hoped you would be the one that was different. I am seriously
looking
for any Democrat who is intelligent, not a bigot, not call everyone
names,
fair on the issues, and not going to jump to stupid assumptions or
conclusions.
You really don't help my opinion at all of the intelligence or honestly
of
democrats.
You are funny, Osprey. Not honest, but quite funny. I'm sorry that you
take it so hard that I have revealed your dishonesty for all to see.
And, you still haven't answered the point that the missing explosives
are not WMD.
Since when did I say they were??? I wasn't even involved in that post.
Oh, and you still haven't said anything about the lies I
showed from that Bush campaign, about Kerry's statement on how 9/11
changed.
You still failed to address many of my points. If you feel Bush lied, so be
it.
I can go to www.factcheck.org and pick up a few lies told by Kerry.
Would you like to explain his lies?
I will work on the ones you pointed out on Bush if you are willing to work
on the ones Kerry told.
Deal?
It is a political year, both are lying, both are exagerationg, both are
stretching the truth, both are telling you what you want to hear. Is it
right? No it isn't, but they are politicians. Kerry is lying, Bush is
lying.
Now, care to defend Kerry's lies?
As is obvious, my opinion of you has not changed.
As me tonight how much sleep I lost.
I had little respect
for you before, and our latest discussions have done little to improve
my opinion of you.
O.k. then, be an adult and don't respond to me any more. If that is what you
feel, I can't help it nor change your mind, nor should I even be bothered by
it.
I expect this ends our conversations from this point on, I don't expect you
to be willing to explain Kerry's lies.
Bye
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
28 Oct 2004 08:04:25 PM |
|
|
In article <-oWdnSiyrZjRFhzcRVn-uA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David Fritzinger" <dfritzin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b82925bb.0410281539.1fdbd958@posting.google.com...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:<2MOdnSty6KMRjR3cRVn-ig@comcast.com>...
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:KdUfd.10510$233.5809@okepread05...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on Iraq.
Yea, I kind of figured that was what you were doing..:o)
Too bad, you don't realize the explosives that were lost aren't WMD.
You really aren't helping my opinion of the intelligence or honesty of
the conservatives.
Dave, at one point I considered you a pretty intelligent person.
You don't have what it takes to make such a determination.
One who can
be reasoned with and not allow his/her biases intefere.
Kinda like you? :-)
Over the course of the past 2 weeks, my opinion of you has drastically
changed.
If Kerry said that he would be a flip flopper.
You have shown yourself to be no better than other liberals who
just sit there and constantly attack, insult, name call, and jump to wild
assumptions or conclusions.
The common denominator in those scenarios is YOU.
I had hoped you would be the one that was different. I am seriously looking
for any Democrat who is intelligent, not a bigot, not call everyone names,
fair on the issues, and not going to jump to stupid assumptions or
conclusions.
That is the definition of "Democrat."
You really don't help my opinion at all of the intelligence or honestly of
democrats.
So?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paulo Gomes Jardim" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
02 Nov 2004 04:36:57 PM |
|
|
On 28 Oct 2004 16:39:08 -0700, David Fritzinger <dfritzin@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:<2MOdnSty6KMRjR3cRVn-ig@comcast.com>...
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:KdUfd.10510$233.5809@okepread05...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on
Iraq.
Yea, I kind of figured that was what you were doing..:o)
Too bad, you don't realize the explosives that were lost aren't WMD.
You really aren't helping my opinion of the intelligence or honesty of
the conservatives.
It's hard to tell wich one is the brainless of those two.
The one who classify anything he seems to fit as an WMD, or the one who
attacked him for failing to understand his pathetic irony... :)
--
" Pallida mors aequo pulsat pede pauperum tabernas regumque turres." --
Horacio
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
27 Oct 2004 04:23:59 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:15:22 GMT, Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote,
akin to the neighing and braying of farmyard animals:
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on Iraq.
Actually, you were demonstrating your utter stupidity, since nobody's
claiming that the 380 tons of explosive that the Bush administration
decided not to secure are any sort of WMD.
Only that Bush and his underlings have managed to hand over 760,000
pounds of explosives to people unknown, and that a single pound of
those explosives is enough to bring down a 747 and kill everyone on
board, or kill a dozen Marines at a checkpoint. Let's see how you
defend that, shall we? I'm sure you'll invent something terribly
entertaining.
--
The difference between Iraq and Vietnam?
Bush had a plan to get out of Vietnam.
.
|
|
|
| User: "GreyCloud" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
27 Oct 2004 08:28:26 PM |
|
|
Adam H. wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:15:22 GMT, Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote,
akin to the neighing and braying of farmyard animals:
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on Iraq.
Actually, you were demonstrating your utter stupidity, since nobody's
claiming that the 380 tons of explosive that the Bush administration
decided not to secure are any sort of WMD.
Good. Then in that case, what's the big stink then?
Only that Bush and his underlings have managed to hand over 760,000
pounds of explosives to people unknown, and that a single pound of
those explosives is enough to bring down a 747 and kill everyone on
board, or kill a dozen Marines at a checkpoint. Let's see how you
defend that, shall we? I'm sure you'll invent something terribly
entertaining.
Got proof that anybody **handed** the explosives to anybody?
--
---------------------------------
Th3 G0ld3n Yrs Sux0r
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lars Tr?ger" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
31 Oct 2004 11:27:15 AM |
|
|
GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote in message news:<C9OdnaqO4ZkF1x3cRVn-jg@bresnan.com>...
Adam H. wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:15:22 GMT, Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote,
akin to the neighing and braying of farmyard animals:
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on Iraq.
Actually, you were demonstrating your utter stupidity, since nobody's
claiming that the 380 tons of explosive that the Bush administration
decided not to secure are any sort of WMD.
Good. Then in that case, what's the big stink then?
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/explosives-nitramines.htm
RDX is currently the most important military high explosive in the US.
Cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine, C3H6N606 (RDX), is second in strength
to nitroglycerin among common explosive substances. When compressed to
a specific gravity of 1.70, it has a confined detonation velocity of
about 27,000 fps. RDX is used as an explosive, usually in mixtures
with other explosives, oils, or waxes. It has a high degree of
stability in storage and is considered the most powerful and brisant
of the military high explosives. RDX is used as a base charge in
detonators and in blasting caps. RDX can be used alone or with other
explosives, including PETN.t RDX can be mixed with plasticizers to
make C-4, and the most common explosive combining RDX and PETN is
Semtex. RDX forms the base for the following common military
explosives: Composition A, Composition B, Composition C, HBX, H-6 and
Cyclotol. Composition A consists of RDX melted with wax; in
Composition B, RDX is mixed with TNT; and Composition C contains RDX
blended with a non-explosive plasticizer. Pure RDX is used in
press-loaded projectiles. Cast loading is accomplished by blending RDX
with a relatively low melting point substance.
Only that Bush and his underlings have managed to hand over 760,000
pounds of explosives to people unknown, and that a single pound of
those explosives is enough to bring down a 747 and kill everyone on
board, or kill a dozen Marines at a checkpoint. Let's see how you
defend that, shall we? I'm sure you'll invent something terribly
entertaining.
Got proof that anybody **handed** the explosives to anybody?
Hey, inuendo was enough to attack Iraq in the first place. Why should
Bush be held to higher standards?
And why don't you prove that the explosives HAVE NOT been used in
attacks against American soldiers and others in Iraq? Isn't it
convenient for ush that nobody ever checked where the insurgents got
their weapons?
Lars T.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "kurttrail" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
27 Oct 2004 09:45:19 PM |
|
|
GreyCloud wrote:
Adam H. wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:15:22 GMT, Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote,
akin to the neighing and braying of farmyard animals:
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on
Iraq.
Actually, you were demonstrating your utter stupidity, since nobody's
claiming that the 380 tons of explosive that the Bush administration
decided not to secure are any sort of WMD.
Good. Then in that case, what's the big stink then?
That they might be used to blow up US troops.
Only that Bush and his underlings have managed to hand over 760,000
pounds of explosives to people unknown, and that a single pound of
those explosives is enough to bring down a 747 and kill everyone on
board, or kill a dozen Marines at a checkpoint. Let's see how you
defend that, shall we? I'm sure you'll invent something terribly
entertaining.
Got proof that anybody **handed** the explosives to anybody?
--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
.
|
|
|
| User: "GreyCloud" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
28 Oct 2004 08:58:33 PM |
|
|
kurttrail wrote:
GreyCloud wrote:
Adam H. wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:15:22 GMT, Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote,
akin to the neighing and braying of farmyard animals:
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George Bush
carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on
Iraq.
Actually, you were demonstrating your utter stupidity, since nobody's
claiming that the 380 tons of explosive that the Bush administration
decided not to secure are any sort of WMD.
Good. Then in that case, what's the big stink then?
That they might be used to blow up US troops.
Moot point. The black market will see to that regardless.
--
---------------------------------
Th3 G0ld3n Yrs Sux0r
.
|
|
|
| User: "kurttrail" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
28 Oct 2004 09:48:18 PM |
|
|
GreyCloud wrote:
kurttrail wrote:
GreyCloud wrote:
Adam H. wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:15:22 GMT, Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net>
wrote, akin to the neighing and braying of farmyard animals:
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George
Bush carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on
Iraq.
Actually, you were demonstrating your utter stupidity, since
nobody's claiming that the 380 tons of explosive that the Bush
administration decided not to secure are any sort of WMD.
Good. Then in that case, what's the big stink then?
That they might be used to blow up US troops.
Moot point. The black market will see to that regardless.
And now Iran might just have a cheap supply of explosives that can be used
to trigger a nuke. But I'm sure you'll think that is moot too.
I hope some of it ends up in your neighborhood, and then we'll see how moot
you think it is!
--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
.
|
|
|
| User: "GreyCloud" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
30 Oct 2004 12:04:55 AM |
|
|
kurttrail wrote:
GreyCloud wrote:
kurttrail wrote:
GreyCloud wrote:
Adam H. wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:15:22 GMT, Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net>
wrote, akin to the neighing and braying of farmyard animals:
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George
Bush carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position on
Iraq.
Actually, you were demonstrating your utter stupidity, since
nobody's claiming that the 380 tons of explosive that the Bush
administration decided not to secure are any sort of WMD.
Good. Then in that case, what's the big stink then?
That they might be used to blow up US troops.
Moot point. The black market will see to that regardless.
And now Iran might just have a cheap supply of explosives that can be used
to trigger a nuke. But I'm sure you'll think that is moot too.
I hope some of it ends up in your neighborhood, and then we'll see how moot
you think it is!
Oh? What nuke? According to the news and Irans words, they don't have
one. My neighborhood isn't attached to some big city. I moved away
from that problem last year. I highly doubt anything will become of the
High explosives *****. Everyone knows how to make explosives, so
what is the big noise really about?... politics. Better start looking
over your shoulder to see what the real problem is, rather than lay
blame on the troops or start believing in rumours created by the news media.
--
---------------------------------
Th3 G0ld3n Yrs Sux0r
.
|
|
|
| User: "kurttrail" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
30 Oct 2004 12:15:02 AM |
|
|
GreyCloud wrote:
kurttrail wrote:
GreyCloud wrote:
kurttrail wrote:
GreyCloud wrote:
Adam H. wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:15:22 GMT, Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net>
wrote, akin to the neighing and braying of farmyard animals:
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:BI-dnZjKQq3pkB3cRVn-2g@comcast.com:
"Gactimus" <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:R1Ufd.10505$233.2991@okepread05...
Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction, but George
Bush carelessly and incompetently lost them.
You are saying that Saddam Hussein never had weapons of mass
destruction?
Even though several high ranking Democrats claim he did?
No, I was demonstrating the illogic of the Democrats' position
on Iraq.
Actually, you were demonstrating your utter stupidity, since
nobody's claiming that the 380 tons of explosive that the Bush
administration decided not to secure are any sort of WMD.
Good. Then in that case, what's the big stink then?
That they might be used to blow up US troops.
Moot point. The black market will see to that regardless.
And now Iran might just have a cheap supply of explosives that can
be used to trigger a nuke. But I'm sure you'll think that is moot
too.
I hope some of it ends up in your neighborhood, and then we'll see
how moot you think it is!
Oh? What nuke? According to the news and Irans words, they don't
have one.
YET!
My neighborhood isn't attached to some big city. I moved
away
from that problem last year. I highly doubt anything will become of
the High explosives *****. Everyone knows how to make explosives,
so
what is the big noise really about?... politics.
No I hope it ends up in your neighborhood because you deserve it for being
so naive.
Better start looking
over your shoulder to see what the real problem is,
In America, the problem is Bush and his merry band of NeoCon Chickenhawks.
rather than lay
blame on the troops
That would be Rudy Giuliani.
or start believing in rumours created by the news
media.
There are explosives that are missing in Iraq, and the main reasons for that
is poor planning and not puting enough troops on the ground.
--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
30 Oct 2004 01:05:10 AM |
|
|
In article <iYOdnWdOKYfJvh7cRVn-hQ@adelphia.com>, kurttrail
<dontemailme@anywhereintheknownuniverse.org> wrote:
My neighborhood isn't attached to some big city. I moved
away
from that problem last year. I highly doubt anything will become of
the High explosives *****. Everyone knows how to make explosives,
so
what is the big noise really about?... politics.
No I hope it ends up in your neighborhood because you deserve it for being
so naive.
Better start looking
over your shoulder to see what the real problem is,
In America, the problem is Bush and his merry band of NeoCon Chickenhawks.
rather than lay
blame on the troops
That would be Rudy Giuliani.
or start believing in rumours created by the news
media.
There are explosives that are missing in Iraq, and the main reasons for that
is poor planning and not puting enough troops on the ground.
While good points, the Bin Laden tape will be of most interest in the
next few days. This will probably finish Kerry's chances. Two things
are obvious. (1) The fact that Bin Laden spoke up after three years
just four days before the election will help Bush, and (2) Bin Laden
knew when he spoke out he would be helping Bush since Americans hate
Bin Laden so much.
The question I have is why does Bin Laden want Bush to win? I have two
possible theories. Firstly, he knows that Bush is good for terrorism
and especially his campaign to inculcate people in the middle east, or
secondly, he is actually trying to help Bush do to his close ties with
the Bush family. I think the first is most likely, but the second is a
real possibility.
.
|
|
|
| User: "GreyCloud" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
30 Oct 2004 12:37:06 PM |
|
|
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <iYOdnWdOKYfJvh7cRVn-hQ@adelphia.com>, kurttrail
<dontemailme@anywhereintheknownuniverse.org> wrote:
My neighborhood isn't attached to some big city. I moved
away
from that problem last year. I highly doubt anything will become of
the High explosives *****. Everyone knows how to make explosives,
so
what is the big noise really about?... politics.
No I hope it ends up in your neighborhood because you deserve it for being
so naive.
Better start looking
over your shoulder to see what the real problem is,
In America, the problem is Bush and his merry band of NeoCon Chickenhawks.
rather than lay
blame on the troops
That would be Rudy Giuliani.
or start believing in rumours created by the news
media.
There are explosives that are missing in Iraq, and the main reasons for that
is poor planning and not puting enough troops on the ground.
While good points, the Bin Laden tape will be of most interest in the
next few days. This will probably finish Kerry's chances. Two things
are obvious. (1) The fact that Bin Laden spoke up after three years
just four days before the election will help Bush, and (2) Bin Laden
knew when he spoke out he would be helping Bush since Americans hate
Bin Laden so much.
The question I have is why does Bin Laden want Bush to win? I have two
possible theories. Firstly, he knows that Bush is good for terrorism
and especially his campaign to inculcate people in the middle east, or
secondly, he is actually trying to help Bush do to his close ties with
the Bush family. I think the first is most likely, but the second is a
real possibility.
You may have hit the nail on the head there.
--
---------------------------------
Th3 G0ld3n Yrs Sux0r
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "kurttrail" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
30 Oct 2004 11:05:37 AM |
|
|
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <iYOdnWdOKYfJvh7cRVn-hQ@adelphia.com>, kurttrail
<dontemailme@anywhereintheknownuniverse.org> wrote:
My neighborhood isn't attached to some big city. I moved
away
from that problem last year. I highly doubt anything will become of
the High explosives *****. Everyone knows how to make
explosives, so
what is the big noise really about?... politics.
No I hope it ends up in your neighborhood because you deserve it for
being so naive.
Better start looking
over your shoulder to see what the real problem is,
In America, the problem is Bush and his merry band of NeoCon
Chickenhawks.
rather than lay
blame on the troops
That would be Rudy Giuliani.
or start believing in rumours created by the news
media.
There are explosives that are missing in Iraq, and the main reasons
for that is poor planning and not puting enough troops on the ground.
While good points, the Bin Laden tape will be of most interest in the
next few days. This will probably finish Kerry's chances. Two things
are obvious. (1) The fact that Bin Laden spoke up after three years
just four days before the election will help Bush, and (2) Bin Laden
knew when he spoke out he would be helping Bush since Americans hate
Bin Laden so much.
He thinks it will. I think he is wrong in that belief. Most Americans have
already mind up its mind, and those that are voting for Bush out of fear of
terrorism already made that decision long ago.
The question I have is why does Bin Laden want Bush to win? I have
two possible theories. Firstly, he knows that Bush is good for
terrorism and especially his campaign to inculcate people in the
middle east, or secondly, he is actually trying to help Bush do to
his close ties with the Bush family. I think the first is most
likely, but the second is a real possibility.
Because then he has an adversary that is almost as hated as he is around the
world. And in the Muslim world Bush is more hated than Osama.
--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: FINALLY, I now understand John Kerry's position on Iraq |
30 Oct 2004 11:35:37 AM |
|
|
In article <Zu2dnU6Y7b5SJh7cRVn-hA@adelphia.com>, kurttrail
<dontemailme@anywhereintheknownuniverse.org> wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <iYOdnWdOKYfJvh7cRVn-hQ@adelphia.com>, kurttrail
<dontemailme@anywhereintheknownuniverse.org> wrote:
My neighborhood isn't attached to some big city. I moved
away
from that problem last year. I highly doubt anything will become of
the High explosives *****. Everyone knows how to make
explosives, so
what is the big noise really about?... politics.
No I hope it ends up in your neighborhood because you deserve it for
being so naive.
Better start looking
over your shoulder to see what the real problem is,
In America, the problem is Bush and his merry band of NeoCon
Chickenhawks.
rather than lay
blame on the troops
That would be Rudy Giuliani.
or start believing in rumours created by the news
media.
There are explosives that are missing in Iraq, and the main reasons
for that is poor planning and not puting enough troops on the ground.
While good points, the Bin Laden tape will be of most interest in the
next few days. This will probably finish Kerry's chances. Two things
are obvious. (1) The fact that Bin Laden spoke up after three years
just four days before the election will help Bush, and (2) Bin Laden
knew when he spoke out he would be helping Bush since Americans hate
Bin Laden so much.
He thinks it will. I think he is wrong in that belief. Most Americans have
already mind up its mind, and those that are voting for Bush out of fear of
terrorism already made that decision long ago.
Yes, but, the race is very close and this will push the win to Bush.
Why is Bin Laden on Bush's side? It is something worth thinking about,
consider the close ties between the Bin Laden family and the Bush
Family.
The question I have is why does Bin Laden want Bush to win? I have
two possible theories. Firstly, he knows that Bush is good for
terrorism and especially his campaign to inculcate people in the
middle east, or secondly, he is actually trying to help Bush do to
his close ties with the Bush family. I think the first is most
likely, but the second is a real possibility.
Because then he has an adversary that is almost as hated as he is around the
world. And in the Muslim world Bush is more hated than Osama.
Oh - for sure. Bush is the poster boy for terrorism recruitment.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
