"Mark Browne" wrote in message

Hypocrisy Seen in U.S. Stand on Iraqi Arms
Mideast: Officials say .....

Now there's a reliable source....


"Mark Browne" wrote in message news:by%

Sounds good to me; it does dovetail rather nicely with what I have
personally experienced when traveling in the middle east.

Did all your cab drivers and busboys assure you that there were no NBC
weapons?

I, too, have spent a substantial amount of time working in the mid-east,
including Irag, Iran, and Afghanistan. There is no doubt in my mind that
there has been connection between AQ and most of the countries in the
region. There is also no doubt in my mind that there will never be any
proof of same.

JG

John Gaquin wrote:

"Mark Browne" wrote in message

Hypocrisy Seen in U.S. Stand on Iraqi Arms
Mideast: Officials say .....

Now there's a reliable source....


"Mark Browne" wrote in message news:by%

Sounds good to me; it does dovetail rather nicely with what I have
personally experienced when traveling in the middle east.

Did all your cab drivers and busboys assure you that there were no NBC
weapons?

I, too, have spent a substantial amount of time working in the mid-east,
including Irag, Iran, and Afghanistan. There is no doubt in my mind that
there has been connection between AQ and most of the countries in the
region. There is also no doubt in my mind that there will never be any
proof of same.

JG



Let's see...

No provable connection to the terrorist network...
No weapons of mass destruction...
No proof Iraq was involved in 9-11...
No Osama...


And we're spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars in Iraq that
would be far better spent in the U.S., or, even to help the truly
impoverished people of the world...


Wow...we're sure lucky we have a smirking chimp in the White House.


--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

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

"Mark Browne" wrote in message

Hypocrisy Seen in U.S. Stand on Iraqi Arms
Mideast: Officials say .....

Now there's a reliable source....


"Mark Browne" wrote in message news:by%

Sounds good to me; it does dovetail rather nicely with what I have
personally experienced when traveling in the middle east.

Did all your cab drivers and busboys assure you that there were no NBC
weapons?

I, too, have spent a substantial amount of time working in the mid-east,
including Irag, Iran, and Afghanistan. There is no doubt in my mind that
there has been connection between AQ and most of the countries in the
region. There is also no doubt in my mind that there will never be any
proof of same.

JG



Let's see...

No provable connection to the terrorist network...
No weapons of mass destruction...
No proof Iraq was involved in 9-11...
No Osama...


And we're spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars in Iraq that
would be far better spent in the U.S., or, even to help the truly
impoverished people of the world...


Wow...we're sure lucky we have a smirking chimp in the White House.


Secretary of State Colin Powell today regarding the cost of the war on terrorism: We
will endure whatever costs it takes to win this war. It will certainly be cheaper in
the long run and result in less civilian loss of lives than to have to relive another
9-11.

That is our resolve. Like it or not Harry.

In article , |3ill|3o
wrote:

Please, DO NOT post off-topic discussions to a divorce support group!


This was crossposted to 4 groups:
alt.support.marriage alt.support.divorce misc.survivalism rec.boats

Why are you crossposting this to misc.survivalism?

Are you one of those fagboys or lesbians who need to be gutted and
burned?



--Tim May

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 21:07:39 -0700, Tim May
wrote:

In article , |3ill|3o
wrote:

Please, DO NOT post off-topic discussions to a divorce support group!


This was crossposted to 4 groups:
alt.support.marriage alt.support.divorce misc.survivalism rec.boats

Why are you crossposting this to misc.survivalism?

S/he answered your question in the part you neatly snipped. And you
call me a nitwit. Chuckle.


Are you one of those fagboys or lesbians who need to be gutted and
burned?

Why do you care? Trying to get a date?
Sue - among the honored 30




--Tim May

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 22:17:02 +0000, Jim - wrote:


Secretary of State Colin Powell today regarding the cost of the war on terrorism: We
will endure whatever costs it takes to win this war. It will certainly be cheaper in
the long run and result in less civilian loss of lives than to have to relive another
9-11.

I would suggest this ignores the *innocent* civilian lives lost in Iraq
and Afghanistan. Then, they are only ragheads, and the killing continues.


That is our resolve. Like it or not Harry.

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 04:05:01 -0400, thunder
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 05:09:33 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:

What is really scary, other than your IQ, is that no WMD's were found!
Where did they go? IS a known fact he had them, even your beloved Clinton
believed the fact, especially the proven fact he used them on his own people
as well as Iranians. Which country is the holder of the weapons now? They
scary fact is that zero has been found. Means that there was a very
complete transfer out of the country.
Bill

Possibly, another explanation is that the UN inspectors were correct in
their estimation that up to 98% of the weapons were already destroyed.

Then they should have been able to point to where they were
destroyed at.

Also, you may want to consider that the weapons he had in the 1990s are no
longer weapons. They do have a shelf live.

biological, maybe. Chemical? Who knows.

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:10:01 +0000, rickb308 wrote:

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 04:05:01 -0400, thunder
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 05:09:33 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:

What is really scary, other than your IQ, is that no WMD's were found!
Where did they go? IS a known fact he had them, even your beloved Clinton
believed the fact, especially the proven fact he used them on his own people
as well as Iranians. Which country is the holder of the weapons now? They
scary fact is that zero has been found. Means that there was a very
complete transfer out of the country.
Bill

Possibly, another explanation is that the UN inspectors were correct in
their estimation that up to 98% of the weapons were already destroyed.

Then they should have been able to point to where they were
destroyed at.

UN Inspectors have verified much of the destroyed weapons. The sticking
point has always been the verification/documentation of the remaining
weapons. There is much information on the internet about this, or do you
actually believe that Iran would accept Iraq's WMD? The same weapons that
they had seen first hand in the Iran Iraq War, a war that cost the
Iranians 1/2 million people.



Also, you may want to consider that the weapons he had in the 1990s are no
longer weapons. They do have a shelf live.

biological, maybe. Chemical? Who knows.

Iraq was known to produce three nerve agents, sarin, tabun, and VX. Sarin
and tabun have a shelf live of five years. It is not known that Iraq ever
stabilized VX.

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:56:51 -0400, thunder
wrote:

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:10:01 +0000, rickb308 wrote:

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 04:05:01 -0400, thunder
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 05:09:33 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:

What is really scary, other than your IQ, is that no WMD's were found!
Where did they go? IS a known fact he had them, even your beloved Clinton
believed the fact, especially the proven fact he used them on his own people
as well as Iranians. Which country is the holder of the weapons now? They
scary fact is that zero has been found. Means that there was a very
complete transfer out of the country.
Bill

Possibly, another explanation is that the UN inspectors were correct in
their estimation that up to 98% of the weapons were already destroyed.

Then they should have been able to point to where they were
destroyed at.

UN Inspectors have verified much of the destroyed weapons. The sticking
point has always been the verification/documentation of the remaining
weapons. There is much information on the internet about this, or do you
actually believe that Iran would accept Iraq's WMD? The same weapons that
they had seen first hand in the Iran Iraq War, a war that cost the
Iranians 1/2 million people.

Thinking more along the lines of Syria or Libya.


Also, you may want to consider that the weapons he had in the 1990s are no
longer weapons. They do have a shelf live.

biological, maybe. Chemical? Who knows.

Iraq was known to produce three nerve agents, sarin, tabun, and VX. Sarin
and tabun have a shelf live of five years. It is not known that Iraq ever
stabilized VX.

Known. Key operating word.

If we had "known", we would have gotten Saddam. We would have
"known" where he was. Thanks to budget cuts, and not being able
to hire "thieves", our humint assests were mighty thin on the
ground. We don't "know" everything they did.

Hell, we didn't "KNOW" that they buried 30 fully armed MIG
fighters in the sand. We found those by accident. And we admitted
they were found by accident. Would have been easy to claim we
knew where THEY were.


Rick Bowen
TSRA Life Member
NRA Member

Without the 2nd Amendment,
the rest are just suggestions.