On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 18:04:39 -0400, "gonefishiing"
wrote:

Family Sailor,
actually i think it is the liberals that are unwittingly the terrorists

there is plenty that points to the *possibility* that WMD's found their way
to Syria

--actually it is not liberalism ........it is infantile narcissism,
sometimes affected by ritilan deprevation.
don't confuse the two---they are very different.
gf.

Oh, well if it was "possible", then by all means start a war. I guess
there isn't much difference than saying that someone "might" have the
intent to develop WMDs so we need a preemptive war to stop someone
from a future action that is possible in an imaginary sort of way. If
imagined future events are the standard, then it is hard to say that
anyone is ever wrong.

Your honor, I had to shoot the bitch or she might have gotten mad,
bought a gun and shot me someday.






"FamilySailor" wrote in message
...
Huh? Bush said that there were WMDs. There are none. He
said Iraq was an iminent threat. It wasn't. Those were lies. What
"IS" are you talking about?

OK, what is a weapon of mass destruction. Is saran (sp?) gas a weapon of
mass destruction?
Is putting out a hit on the George Bush a threat to America? Is firing
missiles at American fighter pilots a threat? All you need is one and it
was
not a lie. There are many more, but no liberal will ever be satisfied,
because it does not suit their political Bush hating agenda. What if the
weapons were shipped out of the country, say in just a hand full of
trucks,
would that mean he still lied. What if that is the facts! Maybe you don't
really know enough to be qualified to accuse the man of being a liar.
Maybe
those who have them don't want you to know they have them and they laugh
their ass off at the liberals who yell "Bush LIED! There are no weapons of
mass destruction!" I know either way, I never accused anyone falsely. I
never accused Clinton either, it is not my place, I wasn't there. From our
position it is all hear-say.