Dave wrote:
On Thu, 07 Sep 2006 11:55:28 +1000, OzOne said:

You don't read much do you?

Here are just a few articles.
http://www.buzztracker.org/2005/11/03/Washington.html

Are reports such as the following your basis for saying the administration
denied the existence of such prisons?

"National security adviser Stephen Hadley would not comment on the accuracy
of a Washington Post report that top al Qaeda suspects were being held for
questioning "at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe."

If not, you'll have to be more specific. I'm not willing to go through your
lengthy compiliation of articles in search of a needle in your haystack.

Dave,

It's after the article were Bush tell Al Queida when and where we are
going to capture Bin Laden. And before the one were Rummy discloses the
flight path of all UAV's for the next 6 mo.

Joe

Dave wrote:
On 7 Sep 2006 08:51:02 -0700, "Joe" said:

It's after the article were Bush tell Al Queida when and where we are
going to capture Bin Laden. And before the one were Rummy discloses the
flight path of all UAV's for the next 6 mo.

IOW, another figment of the Dems' fertile imaginations?

I think so Dave...

Democrapic hot air.

I wonder if the dem party will ever get a clue, they have the biggest
loser's spouting the craziest **** I ever heard. Jon keeps saying vote
the same unless you want change...change to what???, some bloted loser
screaming the sky's falling, a mommas boy vietnam vet who tossed his
metals and respect over the fence a long time ago, the WHOOOO WAAAAAAA
guy, miss Hilliary blowjob, who is leading this pack? M, Moore or the
Chicks with dicks?

Amazing they are ****ed we captured the terrorist and detained the
terrorist and deprived them of the American judicial system.

Joe

In article .com,
Joe wrote:
I wonder if the dem party will ever get a clue, they have the biggest
loser's spouting the craziest **** I ever heard. Jon keeps saying vote
the same unless you want change...change to what???, some bloted loser

Change to someone not lying about why we're in Iraq for one thing.

I really am amazed by these bible-thumping wackos. These politicians,
when elected, put their hand on the bible and swore to uphold the US
Constitution. They didn't put their hand on the Constitution and swear
to uphold the bible.

screaming the sky's falling, a mommas boy vietnam vet who tossed his
metals and respect over the fence a long time ago, the WHOOOO WAAAAAAA
guy, miss Hilliary blowjob, who is leading this pack? M, Moore or the
Chicks with dicks?

You can claim all day and all night that Kerry and Murtha was/is a
traitor, that Hillary is a dike, Bill getting a blow job in the
White House was a very bad thing, that Moore is running the left-wing
media, and for GOD SAKE don't by a Dixy Chick album, but that doesn't
change the fact that they economy is still weak, the environment isn't
important, that global warming isn't a problem, and that we are
actually safer by not being allowed to bring a tube of toothpaste on a
plane in carry-on.

So, if you believe that we're better off now than before Bush took
office, you should vote accordingly. If you believe that the
Republican party has been hijacked by fruitcakes, then vote them
out. The choice seems pretty simple to me.

Amazing they are ****ed we captured the terrorist and detained the
terrorist and deprived them of the American judicial system.

Sorry to burst your bubble Joe, but even Bush is bringing them in
front of a US court. The bad news (thanks to Bush) is that they may
get off scot-free because of lack of admissible evidence.

--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 8 Sep 2006 11:48:15 -0700, lid (Jonathan Ganz) said:

they economy is still weak

Jon, you've been saying that since 2002, and you've been wrong throughout
the entire period. Even the Dem pols are too embarrassed to trot out that
fair tale any more. Instead they're crying that their voters didn't get
enough of the bigger pie and the other guys got too much.

What are you smoking, anyway?

The economy is weak. Many economists think we're headed back to a
resession, especially given the weak manufacturing, the layoffs, and
the real estate situation. If you want a job, you can certainly get
one in your choice of fast food chains. Crime is up, in a large
measure due to increasing poverty.

I don't smoke.


--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 8 Sep 2006 12:41:47 -0700, lid (Jonathan Ganz) said:

Jon, you've been saying that since 2002, and you've been wrong throughout
the entire period. Even the Dem pols are too embarrassed to trot out that
fair tale any more. Instead they're crying that their voters didn't get
enough of the bigger pie and the other guys got too much.

What are you smoking, anyway?

The economy is weak.

A stopped clock is at least right twice a day.

Are you attempting to be witty? So far, you haven't shown any evidence
to support the notion that the economy is other tnan weak.


--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 8 Sep 2006 12:59:21 -0700, lid (Jonathan Ganz) said:

The economy is weak.

A stopped clock is at least right twice a day.

Are you attempting to be witty? So far, you haven't shown any evidence
to support the notion that the economy is other tnan weak.

Yawn.

So, I guess you're unable. Ok, no problem. The economy is weak, and
that notion is supported by many economists.


--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 8 Sep 2006 13:33:58 -0700, lid (Jonathan Ganz) said:

The economy is weak

And you continue to insist it has been so since 2002?

For the most part, yes. There have been blips, but nothing
substantive. Hiring for high tech seems to have come up a bit, for
example, but certainly not dramatically. There is much weakness in
that sector. Even the Fed doesn't think the economy can stand another
interest rate hike at this point.


--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 14:08:29 -0700, Jonathan Ganz wrote:


For the most part, yes. There have been blips, but nothing
substantive. Hiring for high tech seems to have come up a bit, for
example, but certainly not dramatically. There is much weakness in
that sector. Even the Fed doesn't think the economy can stand another
interest rate hike at this point.


Globalization coming home to roost?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5303590.stm

In article ,
thunder wrote:
On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 14:08:29 -0700, Jonathan Ganz wrote:


For the most part, yes. There have been blips, but nothing
substantive. Hiring for high tech seems to have come up a bit, for
example, but certainly not dramatically. There is much weakness in
that sector. Even the Fed doesn't think the economy can stand another
interest rate hike at this point.


Globalization coming home to roost?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5303590.stm

Fortunately, I'm not particularly affected, especially lately.


--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

.... Even the Fed doesn't think the economy can stand another
interest rate hike at this point.



Dave wrote:
You're definitely smoking something, Jon.

What a nice logical rebuttal. No ad hominem here, no sir!

... Do you think rates have been
raised over the last year to stimulate the economy?

Of course not. They've been raised so that the Fed can
induce people to lend them more money.

DSK