| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Budikka666" |
| Date: |
15 Aug 2007 03:27:34 AM |
| Object: |
Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney from
April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would be a bad
idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire" and he
claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were worth losing
to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his brain rot
out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration two-faced
liar?
Budikka
.
|
|
| User: "GoDrex" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 08:58:16 AM |
|
|
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney from
April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would be a bad
idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire" and he
claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were worth losing
to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his brain rot
out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration two-faced
liar?
Budikka
well this was before Pearl Har... I mean 9/11 changed everything.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 09:57:49 AM |
|
|
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney from
April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would be a bad
idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire" and he
claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were worth losing
to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his brain rot
out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration two-faced
liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and a field
in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed things,
Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
“It takes a truly twisted perspective to see a man who commits private
sins while arguing in public for virtue, and choose to take issue with
the latter."
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 10:25:54 AM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney from
April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would be a bad
idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire" and he
claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were worth losing
to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his brain rot
out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration two-faced
liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and a field
in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed things,
Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 12:23:02 PM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney
from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would be
a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire" and
he claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were worth
losing to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his brain
rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration
two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and a
field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed
things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is what
the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an operational
relationship, but the events of 9/11 did change the calculations about
the need for the invasion.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
“It takes a truly twisted perspective to see a man who commits private
sins while arguing in public for virtue, and choose to take issue with
the latter."
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 12:30:38 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney
from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would be
a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire" and
he claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were worth
losing to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his brain
rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration
two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and a
field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed
things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is what
the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an operational
relationship, but the events of 9/11 did change the calculations about
the need for the invasion.
No, the 9/11 commission concluded that there was no
evidence connecting Iraq to al-Qaida. Iraq never
responded to requests for weapons or training. There's
no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague. There was no evidence of a collaborative
relationship.
So, no. There doesn't seem to have been an operational
relationship.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 01:22:05 PM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:RKadnSUbndrdpV7bnZ2dnUVZ_qHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney
from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would
be
a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire"
and
he claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were worth
losing to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his brain
rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration
two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and a
field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed
things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is
what
the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an operational
relationship, but the events of 9/11 did change the calculations
about
the need for the invasion.
No, the 9/11 commission concluded that there was no
evidence connecting Iraq to al-Qaida.
No, that is not what the 9/11 commission concluded.
Iraq never
responded to requests for weapons or training.
That is not true.
There's no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague.
That is not true. The CIA could not *confirm* the evidence that was
provided by Czech intelligence.
There was no evidence of a collaborative
relationship.
That is not true.
So, no. There doesn't seem to have been an operational
relationship.
So no, IAAH is lying. Again. Still. As always.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
“It takes a truly twisted perspective to see a man who commits private
sins while arguing in public for virtue, and choose to take issue with
the latter."
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 01:55:12 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:RKadnSUbndrdpV7bnZ2dnUVZ_qHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney
from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would
be
a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire"
and
he claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were worth
losing to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his brain
rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration
two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and a
field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed
things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is
what
the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an operational
relationship, but the events of 9/11 did change the calculations
about
the need for the invasion.
No, the 9/11 commission concluded that there was no
evidence connecting Iraq to al-Qaida.
No, that is not what the 9/11 commission concluded.
Yes, it is.
Iraq never
responded to requests for weapons or training.
That is not true.
Show otherwise, then. The 9/11 commission thinks it is
true.
There's no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague.
That is not true. The CIA could not *confirm* the evidence that was
provided by Czech intelligence.
IOW, it was hearsay, no more.
There was no evidence of a collaborative
relationship.
That is not true.
Show your evidence. The 9/11 commission thinks it is true.
So, no. There doesn't seem to have been an operational
relationship.
So no, IAAH is lying. Again. Still. As always.
Blah, blah. The 9/11 commission shot you down months
ago, Freddy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 08:05:02 PM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in news:WeqdndC-
0L6O0V7bnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:RKadnSUbndrdpV7bnZ2dnUVZ_qHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with *****
Cheney
from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq
would
be
a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire"
and
he claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were
worth
losing to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his
brain
rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration
two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and
a
field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed
things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is
what
the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an operational
relationship, but the events of 9/11 did change the calculations
about
the need for the invasion.
No, the 9/11 commission concluded that there was no
evidence connecting Iraq to al-Qaida.
No, that is not what the 9/11 commission concluded.
Yes, it is.
No, it is not.
Iraq never
responded to requests for weapons or training.
That is not true.
Show otherwise, then. The 9/11 commission thinks it is
true.
No, they do not.
There's no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague.
That is not true. The CIA could not *confirm* the evidence that was
provided by Czech intelligence.
IOW, it was hearsay, no more.
IOW, the Czech intel service reported it, the CIA couldn't source it
because they didn't have the resources in the region. But we know that
they were severely lacking in sources in the region, so their inability
to confirm anything from Iraq is no reason to discount anything.
There was no evidence of a collaborative
relationship.
That is not true.
Show your evidence. The 9/11 commission thinks it is true.
No, they do not.
So, no. There doesn't seem to have been an operational
relationship.
So no, IAAH is lying. Again. Still. As always.
Blah, blah. The 9/11 commission shot you down months
ago, Freddy.
No, they did not.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
“It takes a truly twisted perspective to see a man who commits private
sins while arguing in public for virtue, and choose to take issue with
the latter."
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 08:22:47 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in news:WeqdndC-
0L6O0V7bnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:RKadnSUbndrdpV7bnZ2dnUVZ_qHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with *****
Cheney
from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq
would
be
a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire"
and
he claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were
worth
losing to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his
brain
rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration
two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and
a
field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed
things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is
what
the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an operational
relationship, but the events of 9/11 did change the calculations
about
the need for the invasion.
No, the 9/11 commission concluded that there was no
evidence connecting Iraq to al-Qaida.
No, that is not what the 9/11 commission concluded.
Yes, it is.
No, it is not.
Wrong.
Iraq never
responded to requests for weapons or training.
That is not true.
Show otherwise, then. The 9/11 commission thinks it is
true.
No, they do not.
SHOW OTHERWISE. If you do, it'll be the first time.
There's no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague.
That is not true. The CIA could not *confirm* the evidence that was
provided by Czech intelligence.
IOW, it was hearsay, no more.
IOW, the Czech intel service reported it, the CIA couldn't source it
because they didn't have the resources in the region. But we know that
they were severely lacking in sources in the region, so their inability
to confirm anything from Iraq is no reason to discount anything.
And that makes it hearsay, idiot.
You're actually saying that hearsay that has no
confirmation is reliable, are you?
There was no evidence of a collaborative
relationship.
That is not true.
Show your evidence. The 9/11 commission thinks it is true.
No, they do not.
Wrong.
So, no. There doesn't seem to have been an operational
relationship.
So no, IAAH is lying. Again. Still. As always.
Blah, blah. The 9/11 commission shot you down months
ago, Freddy.
No, they did not.
Oh, they did.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 09:27:16 PM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:Faudnd2nhsl2O17bnZ2dnUVZ_saknZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in news:WeqdndC-
0L6O0V7bnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
<...>
There's no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague.
That is not true. The CIA could not *confirm* the evidence that was
provided by Czech intelligence.
IOW, it was hearsay, no more.
IOW, the Czech intel service reported it, the CIA couldn't source it
because they didn't have the resources in the region. But we know
that they were severely lacking in sources in the region, so their
inability to confirm anything from Iraq is no reason to discount
anything.
And that makes it hearsay, idiot.
No, it does not.
Hearsay is when an individual repeats something that another individual
told him. This is a well-sourced report from Czech intelligence that our
own CIA was in no position to confirm.
You're actually saying that hearsay that has no
confirmation is reliable, are you?
No, sorry, you don't get to redefine the dictionary.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
“It takes a truly twisted perspective to see a man who commits private
sins while arguing in public for virtue, and choose to take issue with
the latter."
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 09:56:45 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:Faudnd2nhsl2O17bnZ2dnUVZ_saknZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in news:WeqdndC-
0L6O0V7bnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
<...>
There's no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague.
That is not true. The CIA could not *confirm* the evidence that was
provided by Czech intelligence.
IOW, it was hearsay, no more.
IOW, the Czech intel service reported it, the CIA couldn't source it
because they didn't have the resources in the region. But we know
that they were severely lacking in sources in the region, so their
inability to confirm anything from Iraq is no reason to discount
anything.
And that makes it hearsay, idiot.
No, it does not.
Yes, it does, since hearsay is unverified information
heard or received from another. Try a dictionary some
time, Freddy.
Hearsay is when an individual repeats something that another individual
told him. This is a well-sourced report from Czech intelligence that our
own CIA was in no position to confirm.
So, it wasn't confirmed, so it wasn't actually evidence.
You're actually saying that hearsay that has no
confirmation is reliable, are you?
No, sorry, you don't get to redefine the dictionary.
And you don't get to call it evidence when it isn't.
Too bad, so sad, Freddy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
16 Aug 2007 08:34:56 AM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:x7idneaYYpNtIV7bnZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:Faudnd2nhsl2O17bnZ2dnUVZ_saknZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in news:WeqdndC-
0L6O0V7bnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
<...>
There's no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague.
That is not true. The CIA could not *confirm* the evidence that
was provided by Czech intelligence.
IOW, it was hearsay, no more.
IOW, the Czech intel service reported it, the CIA couldn't source
it because they didn't have the resources in the region. But we
know that they were severely lacking in sources in the region, so
their inability to confirm anything from Iraq is no reason to
discount anything.
And that makes it hearsay, idiot.
No, it does not.
Yes, it does, since hearsay is unverified information
heard or received from another. Try a dictionary some
time, Freddy.
Correct, but that definition does not apply to this case. Our CIA is not
the only people who can verify information.
Hearsay is when an individual repeats something that another
individual told him. This is a well-sourced report from Czech
intelligence that our own CIA was in no position to confirm.
So, it wasn't confirmed, so it wasn't actually evidence.
Our CIA isn't the only source of confirmation in the universe.
Quite the contrary, it appears.
You're actually saying that hearsay that has no
confirmation is reliable, are you?
No, sorry, you don't get to redefine the dictionary.
And you don't get to call it evidence when it isn't.
Too bad, so sad, Freddy.
You aren't the Great Arbiter Of All Truth.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
“It takes a truly twisted perspective to see a man who commits private
sins while arguing in public for virtue, and choose to take issue with
the latter."
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
16 Aug 2007 08:40:54 AM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:x7idneaYYpNtIV7bnZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:Faudnd2nhsl2O17bnZ2dnUVZ_saknZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in news:WeqdndC-
0L6O0V7bnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
<...>
There's no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague.
That is not true. The CIA could not *confirm* the evidence that
was provided by Czech intelligence.
IOW, it was hearsay, no more.
IOW, the Czech intel service reported it, the CIA couldn't source
it because they didn't have the resources in the region. But we
know that they were severely lacking in sources in the region, so
their inability to confirm anything from Iraq is no reason to
discount anything.
And that makes it hearsay, idiot.
No, it does not.
Yes, it does, since hearsay is unverified information
heard or received from another. Try a dictionary some
time, Freddy.
Correct, but that definition does not apply to this case. Our CIA is not
the only people who can verify information.
But since the information was unverified (doesn't
matter who COULD have done it), it remains hearsay!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
16 Aug 2007 09:25:07 AM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:ytudnXJ6jv53zlnbnZ2dnUVZ_oLinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:x7idneaYYpNtIV7bnZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:Faudnd2nhsl2O17bnZ2dnUVZ_saknZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in news:WeqdndC-
0L6O0V7bnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
<...>
There's no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague.
That is not true. The CIA could not *confirm* the evidence that
was provided by Czech intelligence.
IOW, it was hearsay, no more.
IOW, the Czech intel service reported it, the CIA couldn't source
it because they didn't have the resources in the region. But we
know that they were severely lacking in sources in the region, so
their inability to confirm anything from Iraq is no reason to
discount anything.
And that makes it hearsay, idiot.
No, it does not.
Yes, it does, since hearsay is unverified information
heard or received from another. Try a dictionary some
time, Freddy.
Correct, but that definition does not apply to this case. Our CIA is
not the only people who can verify information.
But since the information was unverified (doesn't
matter who COULD have done it), it remains hearsay!
Wrong.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
“It takes a truly twisted perspective to see a man who commits private
sins while arguing in public for virtue, and choose to take issue with
the latter."
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
16 Aug 2007 12:39:44 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:ytudnXJ6jv53zlnbnZ2dnUVZ_oLinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:x7idneaYYpNtIV7bnZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:Faudnd2nhsl2O17bnZ2dnUVZ_saknZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in news:WeqdndC-
0L6O0V7bnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
<...>
There's no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague.
That is not true. The CIA could not *confirm* the evidence that
was provided by Czech intelligence.
IOW, it was hearsay, no more.
IOW, the Czech intel service reported it, the CIA couldn't source
it because they didn't have the resources in the region. But we
know that they were severely lacking in sources in the region, so
their inability to confirm anything from Iraq is no reason to
discount anything.
And that makes it hearsay, idiot.
No, it does not.
Yes, it does, since hearsay is unverified information
heard or received from another. Try a dictionary some
time, Freddy.
Correct, but that definition does not apply to this case. Our CIA is
not the only people who can verify information.
But since the information was unverified (doesn't
matter who COULD have done it), it remains hearsay!
Wrong.
Jesus, learn to read, Freddy. Unconfirmed IS hearsay.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
16 Aug 2007 01:34:10 PM |
|
|
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in news:0JKdnTD1OKl-
FlnbnZ2dnUVZ_jCdnZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:ytudnXJ6jv53zlnbnZ2dnUVZ_oLinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:x7idneaYYpNtIV7bnZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:Faudnd2nhsl2O17bnZ2dnUVZ_saknZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in news:WeqdndC-
0L6O0V7bnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
<...>
There's no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague.
That is not true. The CIA could not *confirm* the evidence
that
was provided by Czech intelligence.
IOW, it was hearsay, no more.
IOW, the Czech intel service reported it, the CIA couldn't
source
it because they didn't have the resources in the region. But we
know that they were severely lacking in sources in the region,
so
their inability to confirm anything from Iraq is no reason to
discount anything.
And that makes it hearsay, idiot.
No, it does not.
Yes, it does, since hearsay is unverified information
heard or received from another. Try a dictionary some
time, Freddy.
Correct, but that definition does not apply to this case. Our CIA
is
not the only people who can verify information.
But since the information was unverified (doesn't
matter who COULD have done it), it remains hearsay!
Wrong.
Jesus, learn to read, Freddy. Unconfirmed IS hearsay.
Wrong.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
“It takes a truly twisted perspective to see a man who commits private
sins while arguing in public for virtue, and choose to take issue with
the latter."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Yang, AthD h.c" |
|
| Title: Fred's "Proof" Iraq Tied to AQ: Because Fred Says So |
16 Aug 2007 12:47:53 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:56:45 -0400, IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:Faudnd2nhsl2O17bnZ2dnUVZ_saknZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in news:WeqdndC-
0L6O0V7bnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
<...>
There's no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague.
That is not true. The CIA could not *confirm* the evidence that was
provided by Czech intelligence.
IOW, it was hearsay, no more.
IOW, the Czech intel service reported it, the CIA couldn't source it
because they didn't have the resources in the region. But we know
that they were severely lacking in sources in the region, so their
inability to confirm anything from Iraq is no reason to discount
anything.
And that makes it hearsay, idiot.
No, it does not.
Yes, it does, since hearsay is unverified information
heard or received from another. Try a dictionary some
time, Freddy.
Fred, making ***** up again? I'm shocked!
Hearsay is when an individual repeats something that another individual
told him. This is a well-sourced report from Czech intelligence that our
own CIA was in no position to confirm.
So, it wasn't confirmed, so it wasn't actually evidence.
Ah, that "well sourced" report. The same "well sourced" report that
led Fred to believe that Bush is hiding Saddam's WMD and Iran is on
the verge of truning America into an Islamic theocracy, presumable
with some sort of supervirus.
Gee, I wonder why no one find Fred credible?
You're actually saying that hearsay that has no
confirmation is reliable, are you?
No, sorry, you don't get to redefine the dictionary.
And you don't get to call it evidence when it isn't.
Too bad, so sad, Freddy.
Fred's idea of "evidence", because he says so.
--
Yang
a.a.#28
"I can hardly wait for your head to explode when the Repubs hold onto
both houses of Congress this November. And Yang can quote me on that."
-Fred Stone, 6/14/2006
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Syd M." |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 02:16:19 PM |
|
|
On Aug 15, 1:30 pm, IAAH <i...@dodgeit.com> wrote:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <i...@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney
from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would be
a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire" and
he claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were worth
losing to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist atwww.scienceblogs.comasks, "Did his brain
rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration
two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and a
field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed
things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is what
the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an operational
relationship, but the events of 9/11 did change the calculations about
the need for the invasion.
No, the 9/11 commission concluded that there was no
evidence connecting Iraq to al-Qaida. Iraq never
responded to requests for weapons or training. There's
no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague. There was no evidence of a collaborative
relationship.
So, no. There doesn't seem to have been an operational
relationship.
Jeeze.. Is Stoned Fred still trying to push this Iraq-al-Qaida
connection?
Talk about flogging a dead horse.
No matter how many times it's been explained...
PDW, shaking his head..
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian E. Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
30 Aug 2007 06:07:18 PM |
|
|
In article <1187205379.907132.257820@
50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>, Syd M. said...
Jeeze.. Is Stoned Fred still trying to push this
Iraq-al-Qaida connection?
'Love' means never having to say you're sorry.
And in Bush's America, 'conservative' means never
having to say you were wrong.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
30 Aug 2007 07:49:13 PM |
|
|
Brian E. Clark <reply@newsgroup.only.please> wrote in
news:MPG.214117b3eb5022d298a9b8@216.196.97.136:
In article <1187205379.907132.257820@
50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>, Syd M. said...
Jeeze.. Is Stoned Fred still trying to push this
Iraq-al-Qaida connection?
'Love' means never having to say you're sorry.
And in Bush's America, 'conservative' means never
having to say you were wrong.
Apparantly "liberal" means never having to actually be right, as long as
you scream loud enough and long enough.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"To abjure violence it is necessary to have no experience of it.” - George
Orwell
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Hatter" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 12:38:17 PM |
|
|
On Aug 15, 1:30 pm, IAAH <i...@dodgeit.com> wrote:
Fred Stone wrote:
IAAH <i...@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney
from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would be
a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire" and
he claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were worth
losing to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist atwww.scienceblogs.comasks, "Did his brain
rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration
two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and a
field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed
things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is what
the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an operational
relationship, but the events of 9/11 did change the calculations about
the need for the invasion.
No, the 9/11 commission concluded that there was no
evidence connecting Iraq to al-Qaida. Iraq never
responded to requests for weapons or training. There's
no evidence that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in
Prague. There was no evidence of a collaborative
relationship.
So, no. There doesn't seem to have been an operational
relationship.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
you are telling Fred His religious leaders...the mouthpeices of the
Republican party...are wrong. He will fight you tooth and nail for
your heresy.
Hatter
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tim McGaughy" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
15 Aug 2007 11:51:18 PM |
|
|
in article Xns998D8856CF29Efreddybear@216.151.153.48, Fred Stone at
fstone69@earthling.com wrote on 8/15/07 12:23 PM:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney
from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would be
a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire" and
he claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were worth
losing to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his brain
rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration
two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and a
field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed
things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is what
the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an operational
relationship,
*****. The leaders of Al Qaeda actively disliked Saddam. He couldn't have
ordered them to wipe their asses after they took a dump.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Yang, AthD h.c" |
|
| Title: Re: Invading Iraq Is a Stupid Thing to Do - ***** Cheney |
16 Aug 2007 02:08:19 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:51:18 -0500, Tim McGaughy <teekem@ispwest.com>
wrote:
in article Xns998D8856CF29Efreddybear@216.151.153.48, Fred Stone at
fstone69@earthling.com wrote on 8/15/07 12:23 PM:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney
from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would be
a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a quagmire" and
he claims that "not very many" American soldiers' lives were worth
losing to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his brain
rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush administration
two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and a
field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed
things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is what
the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an operational
relationship,
*****. The leaders of Al Qaeda actively disliked Saddam. He couldn't have
ordered them to wipe their asses after they took a dump.
By Fred's definition, Bush had "operational relationship" with Al
Qaeda, since he hung with with the binLaden clan.
--
Yang
a.a.#28
"I can hardly wait for your head to explode when the Repubs hold onto
both houses of Congress this November. And Yang can quote me on that."
-Fred Stone, 6/14/2006
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Yangie-poo is a Stupid Person To Be |
16 Aug 2007 08:38:13 AM |
|
|
"Yang, AthD (h.c)" <eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in
news:but7c3t42malufttqtueqrd4voejbfijka@4ax.com:
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:51:18 -0500, Tim McGaughy <teekem@ispwest.com>
wrote:
in article Xns998D8856CF29Efreddybear@216.151.153.48, Fred Stone at
fstone69@earthling.com wrote on 8/15/07 12:23 PM:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney
from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would
be a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a
quagmire" and he claims that "not very many" American soldiers'
lives were worth losing to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his
brain rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush
administration two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and a
field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed
things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is
what the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an
operational relationship,
*****. The leaders of Al Qaeda actively disliked Saddam. He
couldn't have ordered them to wipe their asses after they took a dump.
By Fred's definition, Bush had "operational relationship" with Al
Qaeda, since he hung with with the binLaden clan.
Yangie-poo doesn't know his ***** from a hole in the ground.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
“It takes a truly twisted perspective to see a man who commits private
sins while arguing in public for virtue, and choose to take issue with
the latter."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Yang, AthD h.c" |
|
| Title: Fred's "Evidence" For Saddam's Link to AQ? Because He Said So |
16 Aug 2007 09:03:52 AM |
|
|
On 16 Aug 2007 13:38:13 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
"Yang, AthD (h.c)" <eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in
news:but7c3t42malufttqtueqrd4voejbfijka@4ax.com:
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:51:18 -0500, Tim McGaughy <teekem@ispwest.com>
wrote:
in article Xns998D8856CF29Efreddybear@216.151.153.48, Fred Stone at
fstone69@earthling.com wrote on 8/15/07 12:23 PM:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with ***** Cheney
from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading Iraq would
be a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as "creating a
quagmire" and he claims that "not very many" American soldiers'
lives were worth losing to take out Saddam during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his
brain rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush
administration two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and a
field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that changed
things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is
what the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an
operational relationship,
*****. The leaders of Al Qaeda actively disliked Saddam. He
couldn't have ordered them to wipe their asses after they took a dump.
By Fred's definition, Bush had "operational relationship" with Al
Qaeda, since he hung with with the binLaden clan.
Yangie-poo doesn't know his ***** from a hole in the ground.
Yangie-poo knows that you got your ***** handed to you in 2006.
Oh, and where's your "well documented" source that Saddam is connected
to Bin Laden. Would that be the same "well documented" source that
"porved" Bush is hiding Saddam's WMD?
--
Yang
a.a.#28
"I can hardly wait for your head to explode when the Repubs hold onto
both houses of Congress this November. And Yang can quote me on that."
-Fred Stone, 6/14/2006
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Fred's "Evidence" For Saddam's Link to AQ? Because He Said So |
16 Aug 2007 09:26:09 AM |
|
|
"Yang, AthD (h.c)" <eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in
news:08m8c3lvs7ijp60t34ll5jalfhm570hhkm@4ax.com:
On 16 Aug 2007 13:38:13 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
"Yang, AthD (h.c)" <eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in
news:but7c3t42malufttqtueqrd4voejbfijka@4ax.com:
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:51:18 -0500, Tim McGaughy
<teekem@ispwest.com> wrote:
in article Xns998D8856CF29Efreddybear@216.151.153.48, Fred Stone at
fstone69@earthling.com wrote on 8/15/07 12:23 PM:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with *****
Cheney from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading
Iraq would be a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as
"creating a quagmire" and he claims that "not very many"
American soldiers' lives were worth losing to take out Saddam
during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his
brain rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush
administration two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and
a field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that
changed things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is
what the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an
operational relationship,
*****. The leaders of Al Qaeda actively disliked Saddam. He
couldn't have ordered them to wipe their asses after they took a
dump.
By Fred's definition, Bush had "operational relationship" with Al
Qaeda, since he hung with with the binLaden clan.
Yangie-poo doesn't know his ***** from a hole in the ground.
Yangie-poo knows that you got your ***** handed to you in 2006.
Oh, and where's your "well documented" source that Saddam is connected
to Bin Laden. Would that be the same "well documented" source that
"porved" Bush is hiding Saddam's WMD?
Yawn. Go read the last six years of arguments, Yangie-poo. I'm tired of
repeating citations for assholes like you.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
“It takes a truly twisted perspective to see a man who commits private
sins while arguing in public for virtue, and choose to take issue with
the latter."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Yang, AthD h.c" |
|
| Title: Re: Fred's "Evidence" For Saddam's Link to AQ? Because He Said So |
16 Aug 2007 09:30:19 AM |
|
|
On 16 Aug 2007 14:26:09 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
"Yang, AthD (h.c)" <eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in
news:08m8c3lvs7ijp60t34ll5jalfhm570hhkm@4ax.com:
On 16 Aug 2007 13:38:13 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
"Yang, AthD (h.c)" <eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in
news:but7c3t42malufttqtueqrd4voejbfijka@4ax.com:
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:51:18 -0500, Tim McGaughy
<teekem@ispwest.com> wrote:
in article Xns998D8856CF29Efreddybear@216.151.153.48, Fred Stone at
fstone69@earthling.com wrote on 8/15/07 12:23 PM:
IAAH <iaah@dodgeit.com> wrote in
news:TtqdnYkab6iZhl7bnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in
news:1187166454.878108.154550@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
http://tinyurl.com/yvcrql
"This streaming video shows part of an interview with *****
Cheney from April 15th, 1994, where he discusses why invading
Iraq would be a bad idea. He refers to invading Iraq as
"creating a quagmire" and he claims that "not very many"
American soldiers' lives were worth losing to take out Saddam
during the Gulf War."
So , as GrrlScientist at www.scienceblogs.com asks, "Did his
brain rot out of his head?" or is he just another Bush
administration two-faced liar?
Budikka
There was a series of events in New York City and Washington and
a field in Pennsylvania that happened on a day in 2001 that
changed things, Buddyboy. I wonder if you remember them.
I wonder if you remember that Iraq had NOTHING to do
with those events, Freddy, and that those events did
not make an invasion a better idea?
Iraq did not have had *operational control* of al Qaeda (which is
what the 9/11 commission concluded), though they did have an
operational relationship,
*****. The leaders of Al Qaeda actively disliked Saddam. He
couldn't have ordered them to wipe their asses after they took a
dump.
By Fred's definition, Bush had "operational relationship" with Al
Qaeda, since he hung with with the binLaden clan.
Yangie-poo doesn't know his ***** from a hole in the ground.
Yangie-poo knows that you got your ***** handed to you in 2006.
Oh, and where's your "well documented" source that Saddam is connected
to Bin Laden. Would that be the same "well documented" source that
"porved" Bush is hiding Saddam's WMD?
Yawn. Go read the last six years of arguments, Yangie-poo. I'm tired of
repeating citations for assholes like you.
911 Commssion Report or something out of Fred's *****. Gee, I wonder
which is more credible?
--
Yang
a.a.#28
"I can hardly wait for your head to explode when the Repubs hold onto
both houses of Congress this November. And Yang can quote me on that."
-Fred Stone, 6/14/2006
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Fred's "Evidence" For Saddam's Link to AQ? Because The 911 Commission Said So |
16 Aug 2007 01:00:33 PM |
|
|
"Yang, AthD (h.c)" <eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in
news:4sn8c3holq326de6gb7698e4mo7epoqbc2@4ax.com:
911 Commssion Report or something out of Fred's *****. Gee, I wonder
which is more credible?
911 Commission Report is just fine with me, Yangie-poo.
But read the whole thing, not the New York Times summary.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
“It takes a truly twisted perspective to see a man who commits private sins
while arguing in public for virtue, and choose to take issue with the
latter."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Yang, AthD h.c" |
|
| Title: Re: Fred's "Evidence" For Saddam's Link to AQ? Because The 911 Commission Said So |
16 Aug 2007 06:35:59 PM |
|
|
On 16 Aug 2007 18:00:33 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
"Yang, AthD (h.c)" <eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in
news:4sn8c3holq326de6gb7698e4mo7epoqbc2@4ax.com:
911 Commssion Report or something out of Fred's *****. Gee, I wonder
which is more credible?
911 Commission Report is just fine with me, Yangie-poo.
But read the whole thing, not the New York Times summary.
Sure, where does it say that Saddam has "operational relationship with
Al Qaeda", right next to teh part where it says Bush is hiding it?
"I certainly did enjoy the day [September 11, 2001]. Our enemies have
chosen to hide behind women and children, and *they* are responsible
for the deaths of those innocents, not us."
- Fred Stone
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/8276bfdc4474e164
--
Yang
a.a.#28
"I can hardly wait for your head to explode when the Repubs hold onto
both houses of Congress this November. And Yang can quote me on that."
-Fred Stone, 6/14/2006
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Loser Yangie-poo says: "My strawmen prove everything!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
16 Aug 2007 07:17:56 PM |
|
|
"Yang, AthD (h.c)" <eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in
news:0rn9c3t7naqupk65tmunarf41litjklc27@4ax.com:
On 16 Aug 2007 18:00:33 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
"Yang, AthD (h.c)" <eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in
news:4sn8c3holq326de6gb7698e4mo7epoqbc2@4ax.com:
911 Commssion Report or something out of Fred's *****. Gee, I wonder
which is more credible?
911 Commission Report is just fine with me, Yangie-poo.
But read the whole thing, not the New York Times summary.
Sure, where does it say that Saddam has "operational relationship with
Al Qaeda", right next to teh part where it says Bush is hiding it?
When you got something besides strawmen, Yangie-poo, let us all know,
OK?
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
“It takes a truly twisted perspective to see a man who commits private
sins while arguing in public for virtue, and choose to take issue with
the latter."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
