"John H" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:43:26 -0500, DSK wrote:

You simply cannot see facts and admit that you might be wrong, can you
NOBBY?


NOYB wrote:
This occurred before Bush took office:

"The CIA's Afghan assets reported on about a half a dozen occasions
before
9/11 that they had considered attacking bin Ladin, usually as he
traveled in
his convoy along the rough Afghan roads. Each time the operation was
reportedly aborted. Several times the Afghans said that bin Ladin had
taken
a different route than expected. On one occasion security was said to be
too
tight to capture him. Another time they heard women and children's
voices
from inside the convoy, and abandoned the assault for fear of killing
innocents"


And you think that's a bad thing?

Considering that Bush & Cheney obliterated a square block of downtown
Baghdad trying... and failing... to Saddam, they probably wouldn't have
hesitated over a few women & children.

That's the point you're making, whether you know it or not... Bush kills
lots & lots of them evil rag-heads... who cares if they're really
terrorists or if they're women & children...

DSK

Bull****. Clinton was a typical liberal pussy when it came to taking
action. OK,
Bush destroyed a block with one bomb and missed Saddam. Clinton hit
*nothing*
worthwhile with 75 cruise missiles.


But what abount the empty tent and camel? Shouldn't that count for
something? LMAO


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."