"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
... a government official said Friday.


Hehehe. One of the Democrat's "anonymous sources" again? Lemme
guess...that piece of trash Ben-Veniste? It's funny how your side makes
anonymous accusations as a way to test the waters...and it never goes
anywhere.

Nevertheless, it doesn't matter, because the White House is releasing the
PDB from August 6th, 2001.

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

... a government official said Friday.



Hehehe. One of the Democrat's "anonymous sources" again? Lemme
guess...that piece of trash Ben-Veniste? It's funny how your side makes
anonymous accusations as a way to test the waters...and it never goes
anywhere.

Nevertheless, it doesn't matter, because the White House is releasing the
PDB from August 6th, 2001.





You meant to say, of course, that the White House has gotten so much
pressure on this, it has to release the documents. And the documents, if
not doctored, will reveal that Presidunce Bush...knew.

"NOYB" wrote in message
. com...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
... a government official said Friday.


Hehehe. One of the Democrat's "anonymous sources" again? Lemme
guess...that piece of trash Ben-Veniste? It's funny how your side makes
anonymous accusations as a way to test the waters...and it never goes
anywhere.

Nevertheless, it doesn't matter, because the White House is releasing the
PDB from August 6th, 2001.

Ummm....they are "declassifying" it first, tooth-boy. "Releasing" could be
done in 5 minutes. "Declassifying", which means "cleaning it up", will take
longer.

Doug Kanter wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
. com...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

... a government official said Friday.


Hehehe. One of the Democrat's "anonymous sources" again? Lemme
guess...that piece of trash Ben-Veniste? It's funny how your side makes
anonymous accusations as a way to test the waters...and it never goes
anywhere.

Nevertheless, it doesn't matter, because the White House is releasing the
PDB from August 6th, 2001.


Ummm....they are "declassifying" it first, tooth-boy. "Releasing" could be
done in 5 minutes. "Declassifying", which means "cleaning it up", will take
longer.


Gotta love it.How many square inches of the document will be blacked out
or deleted in ways that don't show...

Love the comments about Ben-Veniste, one of the sharpest people in
Washington, D.C., and someone a bit more knowledgeable than a 32
-year-old dentist in Retirement City, Florida.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Gotta love it.How many square inches of the document will be blacked out
or deleted in ways that don't show...



Not much. Just saw it on MSNBC. Maybe a couple of names blacked out, but
the rest stood.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Gotta love it.How many square inches of the document will be blacked out
or deleted in ways that don't show...




Not much. Just saw it on MSNBC. Maybe a couple of names blacked out, but
the rest stood.

Eisboch


Ahh. I have it:


When XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX told XXXXXXXXX XXXX about XXXXX bin XXXXX"X plan
to hijack airliners, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

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

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Gotta love it.How many square inches of the document will be blacked out
or deleted in ways that don't show...




Not much. Just saw it on MSNBC. Maybe a couple of names blacked out,
but
the rest stood.

Eisboch


Ahh. I have it:


When XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX told XXXXXXXXX XXXX about XXXXX bin XXXXX"X plan
to hijack airliners, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

I am sure that's what *your* imaginary copy looks like. Fortunately, the
rest of the world can see the real thing.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Eisboch wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


Gotta love it.How many square inches of the document will be blacked out
or deleted in ways that don't show...




Not much. Just saw it on MSNBC. Maybe a couple of names blacked out,

but

the rest stood.

Eisboch


Ahh. I have it:


When XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX told XXXXXXXXX XXXX about XXXXX bin XXXXX"X plan
to hijack airliners, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


I am sure that's what *your* imaginary copy looks like. Fortunately, the
rest of the world can see the real thing.

Eisboch

You mean, what the Bu****es say is the real thing. Frnakly, I don't
believe any of them. They lie about everything.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

Ahh. I have it:


When XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX told XXXXXXXXX XXXX about XXXXX bin XXXXX"X plan to
hijack airliners, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Actually, as you well know now (and likely knew full well when you spewed
the above), the entire doc is just a touch over a page in length, contains
naught but general references, and only five instances of redaction, all of
them clearly blanking the name of some intelligence agency or operative.
So, you record is intact.

John Gaquin wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

Ahh. I have it:


When XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX told XXXXXXXXX XXXX about XXXXX bin XXXXX"X plan to

hijack airliners, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


Actually, as you well know now (and likely knew full well when you spewed
the above), the entire doc is just a touch over a page in length, contains
naught but general references, and only five instances of redaction, all of
them clearly blanking the name of some intelligence agency or operative.
So, you record is intact.



You guys are kinda dense, eh?