On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 19:36:59 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John Gaquin wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message news:gTWKc.5015


It seems that Mr. Wilson *lied* about who really sent him.

Virtually every aspect of Wilson's story has been discredited. About
the
only fact remaining is that he did, in fact, go to Africa.



Virtually every aspect of everything Bush has done since presuming
office has been discredited.

It's not Bush people who under investigation by the Justice Dept. for
stealing classified info from the 9/11 Commission reading room. What do
he
and the Clinton administration have to hide? We already know that their
leader-in-thief is a liar. Now we're learning that his closest advisors
are
crooked too...which really is no surprise.



Amazing timing, eh? And three leaks to CNN from the Bush White House.
Gosh...could it be political?

What I find more amazing is that the info he stole was related to Richard
Clarke's 1999 after-action report. We already know that Clarke is a liar.
And you know what they say about lying: if you tell the truth, you don't
have to remember the lies. It seems that Berger was getting the necessary
info so that Clarke and the Clinton administration could keep all of their
stories straight.

When it's revealed what was in the info that Berger illegally removed from
the archives, it will be a news story that will dwarf all other stories for
weeks.

Unfortunately, no it won't. The liberal press will see to it that the
story is squashed, probably by re-inventing another prisoner abuse
scandal, a ramping up of Iraqi insurgence stories, or through some
other deflection tactic.

It's no coincidence that the only stories they stick with are the ones
which cast a dim light on the Bush administration.

Why do we keep hearing about Bush's war time records, when Kerry's own
questionable actions both during (his whole 4 month tour) and after
the Vietnam war have been glossed over?

Why are the glowing praise from the few vets that Kerry served with
(And probably paid for), front page news, while the dozens of vets
with very negative accounts of Kerry's action, not even given a 2
minute time slot?

If it weren't for the internet, one might not even be aware of these
things......

Dave