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.

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.




"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.

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.

Come on... get real. Bu**** made all sorts of claims as to why
we should attack Iraq. So far, none of them have any credibility.
You can dance all you want, but the fact remains that the American
people were mislead by the current administration in the White House.

As you know, none of the things you mention now were mentioned
prior to the invasion as a reason for the invasion... except possibly
that "he tried to kill my daddy."

Bush lied about the reasons for war. That's a fact. If you think that's
yelling, you need to get a new hearing aid.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"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.

This guy is incredible. If you can't defend yourself, attack liberals.
You are stoooopid!

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"gonefishiing" wrote in message
...
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.




"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.

On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 13:38:46 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:

Good point, but Clinton didn't lie about why we were going to Bosnia.
Bush lied. That's the criminal aspect.


President George W. Bush did not lie about anything. Reports now show
that the intelligence on Iraq was exaggerated.

All you liberal whackos who screamed, "Bush lied," owe him an apology.

BTW, WMDs have been found.





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

Bush lied about Iraq. He had it on his agenda from the very
beginning. He lied about his reasons for going to war and
didn't bother to follow up with the intelligence services. For
all of Clinton's faults, he did do that. A couple of shells don't
match the tons of wmds that Powel and others claimed were
there.

Fishboy and you make a great pair.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 13:38:46 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:

Good point, but Clinton didn't lie about why we were going to Bosnia.
Bush lied. That's the criminal aspect.


President George W. Bush did not lie about anything. Reports now show
that the intelligence on Iraq was exaggerated.

All you liberal whackos who screamed, "Bush lied," owe him an apology.

BTW, WMDs have been found.





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

Come on... get real. Bu**** made all sorts of claims as to why
we should attack Iraq. So far, none of them have any credibility.

Except for the WMD bit name a couple more.
S/V Express 30 "Ringmaster"
"Trains are a winter sport"

The main reason we went to Iraq is Iraq refused for 12 years to meet UN
resolutions. WMDs were another issue.
S/V Express 30 "Ringmaster"
"Trains are a winter sport"

hey ganz-------i didn't attack liberals, in fact i didn't attack, i merely
poked fun at infantile narcisists..and your offended!....(wink)

and actually you were right when you stated saddam was the antithesis of
terrorism
an interesting addition, but it never answered the question i asked
nor did felton.
instead you just simply blindly defend your position and attack, deflect
questions and assume everyone else is doing the same.

but you'll never understand that so forget i was here, if you can.

if it makes you feel important---yeah your still kf'd--just not on my
laptop.........