| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
OT Texas Republicans
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... John Gaquin wrote: "thunder" wrote in message ....There is a major difference in having a belief, and acting on that belief. Yes -- that difference is called "courage". Not in Bush's case. In his case, it was pigheadedness, stupidity, and politics. Harry, I think you are going to find that your type of anti-Bush rhetoric will be the downfall of your and your party's attempts to oust him in the coming election. Personal attacks on people usually result in a backlash of support for them, particularly when they are perceived by many as an average guy trying to do his best in a very difficult situation. Harry Truman comes to mind. A better argument would include the identification of specific differences in policies and ideas for dealing with our global problems. Unfortunately, John Kerry has yet to identify any, other than to hand the problems back to the UN. If you recall, Bush tried this to no significant avail. Eisboch |
OT Texas Republicans
"Joe" wrote in message ...
Poor (FAS)kisser, never had a chance. Fried before birth. Have any evidence? Unlike you, I'm a man of conviction. You, on the other hand, talk the talk ONLY when hiding behind a newsgroup, AND an anonymous address. What a ****ing low life loser you are. Oh, and, hey, I thought you had added me to your blocked list. |
OT Texas Republicans
"NOYB" wrote in message news:zEifc.7017
Of course he lied. There were all sorts of reports available to Bush that indicated there were no WMD in Iraq. Don't worry Harry...we'll find the WMD's. Bush's comment about mustard gas recently found at a turkey farm in Libya should be proof that he hasn't given up the search. Oh, I think I get it! Bush invaded Iraq, because Libya has WMDs???? Every intelligence agency in the Western world knew Saddam had 'em. There were numerous reports before the war by Israeli intelligence (and others) that large convoys were leaving Iraq and heading to Syria. Although they haven't talked about it very much publicly, the Administration believes that Syria is hiding the WMD's. OH, so Bush didn't invade Iraq because Libya had WMD's, he invaded Iraq because Syria had them??? |
OT Texas Republicans
"Bill" wrote in message ...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c3dhc2g=.844e1d7c1ae2e7e90bbc8c284ef604be@108 1964749.nulluser.com... jim-- wrote: I suppose it is a bad thing, but certainly not on the level of a current Senator killing a young lady named Mary Jo Kopechne then running away from the accident. Or perhaps not on the same level as a POTUS having oral sex with an intern. Sins, indeed, but they pale in comparision to Presidunce Bush lying to get us into a war with Iraq, and causing the deaths of thousands of people, including many non-combatant civilians. Yea why don't you and Asskisser go to Iraq and live since you don't like this country so much. If Clinton had done his job we would not be in the mess we are now. You can say what you want about Bush But you can not deny the truth that this is all Clinton's fault. He should be the one saying he was sorry to the American people. You can not say Clinton didn't lied either, their are court recorders stating the facts. Or are you going to say the Judge Lied to. Everyone lies except for Democrats. Yea that funny that demo don't lie....ha ha ha Because it's our patriotic duty to get that lying piece of **** out of office, and back to not being able to find oil in Texas. |
OT Texas Republicans
"NOYB" wrote in message link.net...
What year did you live in Naples basskisser? Why? |
OT Texas Republicans
"jim--" wrote in message ...
I suppose it is a bad thing, but certainly not on the level of a current Senator killing a young lady named Mary Jo Kopechne then running away from the accident. Or perhaps not on the same level as a POTUS having oral sex with an intern. Yeah, what to hell is up with those people? Don't they know that your not supposed to ENJOY anything, even sex?? We probably should spend, oh, say, $57 million to find out WHY! Oh, wait, never mind, all ready has been done. |
OT Texas Republicans
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 22:02:07 +0000, NOYB wrote:
"thunder" wrote in message ... LOL, then he was clearly wrong, as there are no WMD. You sure about that? There's no way every intelligence agency in the Western World was wrong about their existance. I know that we'll find 'em eventually. I just hope that it's before the election. Unfortunately, I believe that it will require troops in Syria...and that won't happen until Bush's 2nd term. LOL, I don't think I could disagree with you more. First, *if* Bush is reelected, both he and the Army will still have their hands full with Iraq. I don't think even Bush is dumb enough to start yet another war. Second, no country would risk our wrath by accepting Iraq's WMD, *if* they existed. A terrorist network, perhaps, but no country. All of the WMD Iraq was accused of having, has a shelf life of 3-5 years. Why would Syria want WMD that is rapidly turning to goo. For a country, it is the capability to make WMD that is important, not the WMD itself. Let me once again state, Syria and Iraq are not allied. Syria sided with Iran in the Iran-Iraq War, and the US in the first Gulf War. Third, there were several intelligence sources that didn't believe Iraq was in possession of WMD capabilities when we invaded, including many agents in our own agencies. |
OT Texas Republicans
"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c3dhc2g=.0973c1468580f0f8aff7c61aa587d290@108 2031194.nulluser.com... And despite the fact that his formal education did not offer him the advantages Bush had, he could plainly and well, without butchering standard English. Thank you for providing your own example of "butchering standard English". |
OT Texas Republicans
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "thunder" wrote in message ... LOL, then he was clearly wrong, as there are no WMD. You sure about that? There's no way every intelligence agency in the Western World was wrong about their existance. I know that we'll find 'em eventually. I just hope that it's before the election. Unfortunately, I believe that it will require troops in Syria...and that won't happen until Bush's 2nd term. They are on a truck right now, being driven by a Halliburton employee, eh? Oh, so that's it. The Mehdi Army is attacking our convoys and killing civilians in a search for WMD's that we're trying to "plant". Do you guys actually believe your own bull****? |
OT Texas Republicans
"Gary Warner" wrote in message ... "NOYB" wrote in message ink.net... You sure about that? There's no way every intelligence agency in the Western World was wrong about their existance. Galileo and I had a good laugh over this... So you're into necromancy, eh? Since you mentioned Galileo, then perhaps his theory on abstract dynamics applies he the weapons are there, but they can't be observed under anything less than ideal circumstances (ie--Saddam didn't have 1 year to hide them; Syria would let our guys in to take a look; scientists watching the current insurgency are no longer fearful to reveal their existence, etc). In fact, I'd say invoking Galileo's name is a pretty dumb way to prove that something *doen't* exist. |
OT Texas Republicans
"thunder" wrote in message ... On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 22:02:07 +0000, NOYB wrote: "thunder" wrote in message ... LOL, then he was clearly wrong, as there are no WMD. You sure about that? There's no way every intelligence agency in the Western World was wrong about their existance. I know that we'll find 'em eventually. I just hope that it's before the election. Unfortunately, I believe that it will require troops in Syria...and that won't happen until Bush's 2nd term. LOL, I don't think I could disagree with you more. First, *if* Bush is reelected, both he and the Army will still have their hands full with Iraq. I don't think even Bush is dumb enough to start yet another war. Although some might perceive it as *another* war, it would *not* be another war. Rather, it would be just a continuation of the current one. Second, no country would risk our wrath by accepting Iraq's WMD, *if* they existed. A terrorist network, perhaps, but no country. I disagree. Syria was stupid enough to send military aid and terrorists to Iraq. They were also dumb enough to skirt the oil embargo, hide Saddam's money, and give sanctuary to many of the Baath Party officials from Saddam's regime (possible even Saddam and his sons initially). Of course, seeing how serious we were about making them the next target, they stopped supplying the military hardware, and threw out the officials. Perhaps they accepted the WMD, but later figured that either: a) turning them over would still not prevent a U.S. attack, or b) they could hide them effectively enough, and we couldn't find them unless we actually invaded Syria. I believe "b". All of the WMD Iraq was accused of having, has a shelf life of 3-5 years. Not the bioweapon cultures...and certainly not the technology on how to make them. Why would Syria want WMD that is rapidly turning to goo. The bugs from the bioweapons could be replicated easily and kept alive indefinitely...and the technology would never "turn to goo". For a country, it is the capability to make WMD that is important, not the WMD itself. Even David Kay speculated that Iraq shipped to Syria small quantities of WMD and the technology to produce them . Let me once again state, Syria and Iraq are not allied. Syria sided with Iran in the Iran-Iraq War, and the US in the first Gulf War. So? They also traded oil for cash with Saddam, and backed him with weapons when we invaded. Third, there were several intelligence sources that didn't believe Iraq was in possession of WMD capabilities when we invaded, including many agents in our own agencies. Are you talking about that pedophile that was part of UNSCOM? |
OT Texas Republicans
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... John Smith wrote: If Bush lied about WMD's, then so did all presidents going back to the late 80's and the majority of congressman, senators and the United Nations since the First Gulf War. You may not agree with Bush's decision to a preemptive strike, but no one can seriously believe he lied. It might make for a great campaign sound bite, but any rational person would know that is nothing more than politics to say Bush lied, since he was using the exact same intelligence that Clinton used when he stated Iraq had WMD. Of course he lied. There were all sorts of reports available to Bush that indicated there were no WMD in Iraq. Don't worry Harry...we'll find the WMD's. Bush's comment about mustard gas recently found at a turkey farm in Libya should be proof that he hasn't given up the search. Every intelligence agency in the Western world knew Saddam had 'em. There were numerous reports before the war by Israeli intelligence (and others) that large convoys were leaving Iraq and heading to Syria. Although they haven't talked about it very much publicly, the Administration believes that Syria is hiding the WMD's. Just watch. I heard it was Guildens mustard sauce... I'd believe mayo...but nobody puts mustard on turkey. |
OT Texas Republicans
In article %sffc.144028$JO3.84998@attbi_s04, "John Smith" wrote:
If Bush lied about WMD's, then so did all presidents going back to the late 80's and the majority of congressman, senators and the United Nations since the First Gulf War. You may not agree with Bush's decision to a preemptive strike, but no one can seriously believe he lied. It might make for a great campaign sound bite, but any rational person would know that is nothing more than politics to say Bush lied, since he was using the exact same intelligence that Clinton used when he stated Iraq had WMD. You are not talking with a "rational" or sane person here. You are talking to a putrid old yellow dog democrat. And when you get him on a good point he simply dodges the posting and comes back later to hit and run again. "Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c3dhc2g=.844e1d7c1ae2e7e90bbc8c284ef604be@10 81964749.nulluser.com... jim-- wrote: I suppose it is a bad thing, but certainly not on the level of a current Senator killing a young lady named Mary Jo Kopechne then running away from the accident. Or perhaps not on the same level as a POTUS having oral sex with an intern. Sins, indeed, but they pale in comparision to Presidunce Bush lying to get us into a war with Iraq, and causing the deaths of thousands of people, including many non-combatant civilians. |
OT Texas Republicans
In article , thunder wrote:
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 20:09:35 +0000, John Smith wrote: What about the past presidents, including Bill Clinton and the majority of congressman, including democrats and republicans who strongly believe Iraq had WMD? Where all of them incompetent? If they had invaded Iraq, yes they would have been incompetent. There is a major difference in having a belief, and acting on that belief. Before one puts lives at risk, it is prudent to be sure. Going to war is not an "Ooops, sorry!" proposition. To paraphrase, how would *you* ask a man to be the last to die for a mistake? Armchair quarterbacks are a dime a dozen. |
OT Texas Republicans
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... No wonder he was beaten by a dead man. The funny thing is...Carnahan's poll numbers didn't improve until after he died. I guess voting for the guy was the political equivalent of a "pity ****". |
OT Texas Republicans
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Neither Edison nor Einstein went into lines of work where oration was important. No, but James Madison and Thomas Jefferson...two people generally considered as poor speakers...did. Stephen Hawking can't even speak with the aid of a machine, yet no one thinks the less of him. It isn't important that he speaks normally. Bush is a politician, not a oood president. He is a terrible president. And he can't speak very well, either. = I expect a president of the us to be able to speak competently in public. Bush cannot. I expect people to tell the truth. Your side cannot. |
OT Texas Republicans
"Don White" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote in message ink.net... Don't worry Harry...we'll find the WMD's. Bush's comment about mustard gas recently found at a turkey farm in Libya should be proof that he hasn't given up the search. Every intelligence agency in the Western world knew Saddam had 'em. There were numerous reports before the war by Israeli intelligence (and others) that large convoys were leaving Iraq and heading to Syria. Although they haven't talked about it very much publicly, the Administration believes that Syria is hiding the WMD's. Just watch. Possible, but you would thing Israel would be very nervous of Syria having all those WMD and strike first. Which is precisely why Israeli jets buzzed Assad's palace several months ago. That was a warning. |
OT Texas Republicans
"basskisser" wrote in message om... "NOYB" wrote in message link.net... What year did you live in Naples basskisser? Why? Because Naples has changed since you were here. What year was that? |
OT Texas Republicans
Just last night Bush said something like, "We know Saddam had those weapons, we know because he used them on his own people." True enough. But that was HOW many years ago? 10? Does that mean he still has them? Does that mean that the best way to get them (if they are there at all) is to send our troops in to invade? Looks like Bush wasn't the only one who was confused?? "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 How many years later????? |
OT Texas Republicans
"NOYB" wrote in message ink.net... "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Neither Edison nor Einstein went into lines of work where oration was important. No, but James Madison and Thomas Jefferson...two people generally considered as poor speakers...did. Stephen Hawking can't even speak with the aid of a machine, yet no one thinks the less of him. It isn't important that he speaks normally. Bush is a politician, not a oood president. He is a terrible president. And he can't speak very well, either. = I expect a president of the us to be able to speak competently in public. Bush cannot. I expect people to tell the truth. Your side cannot. Both sides have liars and thieves. |
OT Texas Republicans
"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c3dhc2g=.0973c1468580f0f8aff7c61aa587d290@108 2031194.nulluser.com... Truman was no average guy. He was extraordinarily intelligent and capable. And despite the fact that his formal education did not offer him the advantages Bush had, he could plainly and well, without butchering standard English. I certainly agree that Truman was very intelligent and capable. My "average guy" comment referred to his reputation as a no nonsense, plain speaking, common sense type of person. GWB comes across a lot more like him than most of the other current crop of professional politicians (although I kinda like Bob Kerrey's style). Bush the other night said he was leaving to the UN the choice of picking who was supposed to be running Iraq on 30 June. It will never happen. Collectively, the UN couldn't get together to decide on a lunch menu. Eisboch |
OT Texas Republicans
On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 16:59:55 +0000, Henry Blackmoore wrote:
Armchair quarterbacks are a dime a dozen. LOL, and lying politicians? A rare breed, I suppose. |
OT Texas Republicans
|
OT Texas Republicans
|
OT Texas Republicans
In article , "jim--" wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c3dhc2g=.844e1d7c1ae2e7e90bbc8c284ef604be@10 81964749.nulluser.com... jim-- wrote: I suppose it is a bad thing, but certainly not on the level of a current Senator killing a young lady named Mary Jo Kopechne then running away from the accident. Or perhaps not on the same level as a POTUS having oral sex with an intern. Sins, indeed, but they pale in comparision to Presidunce Bush lying to get us into a war with Iraq, and causing the deaths of thousands of people, including many non-combatant civilians. How is your sockpuppet pal Creaky these days? And Harry Hope, how is he doing? Invite Creaky on your custom made 36 foot lobster boat lately? You know how a lot of men have names for their _____? Do ya think that "creaky" is actually a pet name for Harry's _____? Oh my! |
OT Texas Republicans
On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 16:56:05 +0000, NOYB wrote:
Although some might perceive it as *another* war, it would *not* be another war. Rather, it would be just a continuation of the current one. Yup, I'm thinking this War on Terrorism will surpass America's longest war, the War on Drugs, and with about the same success. I disagree. Syria was stupid enough to send military aid and terrorists to Iraq. They were also dumb enough to skirt the oil embargo, hide Saddam's money, and give sanctuary to many of the Baath Party officials from Saddam's regime (possible even Saddam and his sons initially). Of course, seeing how serious we were about making them the next target, they stopped supplying the military hardware, and threw out the officials. Perhaps they accepted the WMD, but later figured that either: a) turning them over would still not prevent a U.S. attack, or b) they could hide them effectively enough, and we couldn't find them unless we actually invaded Syria. I believe "b". Puhleese, judging from the amount of illegal aliens we have, we haven't done a very good job of policing our borders. Why are you holding Syria to a higher standard? A third world country unable to police hundreds of miles of desert wasteland, perhaps Bush should instruct Syria on establishing a Department of Homeland Security. Syria did try to seal it's border: http://www.guardian.co.uk/syria/stor...940947,00.html The bugs from the bioweapons could be replicated easily and kept alive indefinitely...and the technology would never "turn to goo". LOL, now you are sounding like the Bush administration. So now, it is not WMD, it is WMD related programs. Even David Kay speculated that Iraq shipped to Syria small quantities of WMD and the technology to produce them . Speculated? Reminds me of an old Bush quote, "There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, it's probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on ... shame on you. It fool me. We can't get fooled again." Just how many countries are you willing to invade over the same WMD, *without* ever having seen *any* of said WMD. The WMD is in Iraq. Whoops, no, it is in Syria. Whoops, no, it is in Iran. Whoops, no, it's in ... Try selling this somewhere else, I'm not buying. |
OT Texas Republicans
"Henry Blackmoore" wrote in message link.net... In article , "jim--" wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c3dhc2g=.844e1d7c1ae2e7e90bbc8c284ef604be@10 81964749.nulluser.com... jim-- wrote: I suppose it is a bad thing, but certainly not on the level of a current Senator killing a young lady named Mary Jo Kopechne then running away from the accident. Or perhaps not on the same level as a POTUS having oral sex with an intern. Sins, indeed, but they pale in comparision to Presidunce Bush lying to get us into a war with Iraq, and causing the deaths of thousands of people, including many non-combatant civilians. How is your sockpuppet pal Creaky these days? And Harry Hope, how is he doing? Invite Creaky on your custom made 36 foot lobster boat lately? You know how a lot of men have names for their _____? Do ya think that "creaky" is actually a pet name for Harry's _____? Only if creaky's last name is limpwood. Oh my! |
OT Texas Republicans
"P.Fritz" wrote in message ... "Henry Blackmoore" wrote in message link.net... In article , "jim--" wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c3dhc2g=.844e1d7c1ae2e7e90bbc8c284ef604be@10 81964749.nulluser.com... jim-- wrote: I suppose it is a bad thing, but certainly not on the level of a current Senator killing a young lady named Mary Jo Kopechne then running away from the accident. Or perhaps not on the same level as a POTUS having oral sex with an intern. Sins, indeed, but they pale in comparision to Presidunce Bush lying to get us into a war with Iraq, and causing the deaths of thousands of people, including many non-combatant civilians. How is your sockpuppet pal Creaky these days? And Harry Hope, how is he doing? Invite Creaky on your custom made 36 foot lobster boat lately? You know how a lot of men have names for their _____? Do ya think that "creaky" is actually a pet name for Harry's _____? Only if creaky's last name is limpwood. Would his first name be Lyle? |
OT Texas Republicans
Eisboch wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c3dhc2g=.0973c1468580f0f8aff7c61aa587d290@108 2031194.nulluser.com... Truman was no average guy. He was extraordinarily intelligent and capable. And despite the fact that his formal education did not offer him the advantages Bush had, he could plainly and well, without butchering standard English. I certainly agree that Truman was very intelligent and capable. My "average guy" comment referred to his reputation as a no nonsense, plain speaking, common sense type of person. GWB comes across a lot more like him than most of the other current crop of professional politicians (although I kinda like Bob Kerrey's style). I'm sorry, but I simply don't get that impression of Bush. To me, he seems inarticulate and simple-minded, without an abstract idea in his head. Interestingly, I always liked Bob Kerrey, too. Bush the other night said he was leaving to the UN the choice of picking who was supposed to be running Iraq on 30 June. It will never happen. Collectively, the UN couldn't get together to decide on a lunch menu. Eisboch Well, Bush did say he was leaving the choice of Czar of Iraq to a representative of the UN. However long we are involved there as we are, it will be known as Bush's Quagmire. |
OT Texas Republicans
"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c5msej$3cbkf$1@ID-. I'm sorry, but I simply don't get that impression of Bush. To me, he seems inarticulate and simple-minded, without an abstract idea in his head. Interestingly, I always liked Bob Kerrey, too. Why do you think anyone in this group really cares what you think? Anyone who makes up a story about a Lobster Boat, and then makes up an imaginary "buddy" to talk about it, obviously is not of sound mind. |
OT Texas Republicans
In article ,
Harry Krause wrote: John Smith wrote: If Bush lied about WMD's, then so did all presidents going back to the late 80's and the majority of congressman, senators and the United Nations since the First Gulf War. You may not agree with Bush's decision to a preemptive strike, but no one can seriously believe he lied. It might make for a great campaign sound bite, but any rational person would know that is nothing more than politics to say Bush lied, since he was using the exact same intelligence that Clinton used when he stated Iraq had WMD. Of course he lied. There were all sorts of reports available to Bush that indicated there were no WMD in Iraq. Bush and his fellow Bush-****ters made a conscious decision to ignore intel that didn't play into their rationale, and then went on to deceive the American public about it. The chickens are coming home to roost for Bush now. With any luck, the American voters will toss the ignorant, incompetent, lying son of a bitch out this fall. The weapons of mass destruction that Rumsfeld and others in the Reagan administration sold to Iraq did exist. In the 1980s and 1990s. But they were destroyed. See Scott Ritter's piece at http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0210-02.htm to get some first-hand reports of what was going on during the UNSCOM days. We've just shown ourselves to be suckers to Chalabi, willing to invade a country at the urging of those who wanted Hussein out for their own purposes. We should be very careful about believing Israel when it claims that their primary opponent is hiding the same mythical WMDs. |
OT Texas Republicans
In article , "Don" wrote:
"P.Fritz" wrote in message ... "Henry Blackmoore" wrote in message link.net... In article , "jim--" wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c3dhc2g=.844e1d7c1ae2e7e90bbc8c284ef604be@1 081964749.nulluser.com... jim-- wrote: I suppose it is a bad thing, but certainly not on the level of a current Senator killing a young lady named Mary Jo Kopechne then running away from the accident. Or perhaps not on the same level as a POTUS having oral sex with an intern. Sins, indeed, but they pale in comparision to Presidunce Bush lying to get us into a war with Iraq, and causing the deaths of thousands of people, including many non-combatant civilians. How is your sockpuppet pal Creaky these days? And Harry Hope, how is he doing? Invite Creaky on your custom made 36 foot lobster boat lately? You know how a lot of men have names for their _____? Do ya think that "creaky" is actually a pet name for Harry's _____? Only if creaky's last name is limpwood. Would his first name be Lyle? What's your pet name Don? |
OT Texas Republicans
"Henry Blackmoore" wrote in message link.net... In article , "Don" wrote: "P.Fritz" wrote in message ... "Henry Blackmoore" wrote in message link.net... In article , "jim--" wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c3dhc2g=.844e1d7c1ae2e7e90bbc8c284ef604be@1 081964749.nulluser.com... jim-- wrote: I suppose it is a bad thing, but certainly not on the level of a current Senator killing a young lady named Mary Jo Kopechne then running away from the accident. Or perhaps not on the same level as a POTUS having oral sex with an intern. Sins, indeed, but they pale in comparision to Presidunce Bush lying to get us into a war with Iraq, and causing the deaths of thousands of people, including many non-combatant civilians. How is your sockpuppet pal Creaky these days? And Harry Hope, how is he doing? Invite Creaky on your custom made 36 foot lobster boat lately? You know how a lot of men have names for their _____? Do ya think that "creaky" is actually a pet name for Harry's _____? Only if creaky's last name is limpwood. Would his first name be Lyle? What's your pet name Don? None that I know of, why? |
OT Texas Republicans
Harry Krause wrote: John Smith wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c5msej$3cbkf$1@ID-. I'm sorry, but I simply don't get that impression of Bush. To me, he seems inarticulate and simple-minded, without an abstract idea in his head. Interestingly, I always liked Bob Kerrey, too. Why do you think anyone in this group really cares what you think? Ahhh, **** for brains, but I don't really care...I've said that a million times here. Say...are you "Charles Stanley" in one of your other faked idents here, or just another newsgroup right-wing asswipe? krause, you're getting more rattled than usual. All this "not caring" must be tiring. -- Charlie |
OT Texas Republicans
In article , "Don" wrote:
"Henry Blackmoore" wrote in message hlink.net... In article , "Don" wrote: "P.Fritz" wrote in message ... "Henry Blackmoore" wrote in message link.net... In article , "jim--" wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c3dhc2g=.844e1d7c1ae2e7e90bbc8c284ef604be@ 1081964749.nulluser.com... jim-- wrote: I suppose it is a bad thing, but certainly not on the level of a current Senator killing a young lady named Mary Jo Kopechne then running away from the accident. Or perhaps not on the same level as a POTUS having oral sex with an intern. Sins, indeed, but they pale in comparision to Presidunce Bush lying to get us into a war with Iraq, and causing the deaths of thousands of people, including many non-combatant civilians. How is your sockpuppet pal Creaky these days? And Harry Hope, how is he doing? Invite Creaky on your custom made 36 foot lobster boat lately? You know how a lot of men have names for their _____? Do ya think that "creaky" is actually a pet name for Harry's _____? Only if creaky's last name is limpwood. Would his first name be Lyle? What's your pet name Don? None that I know of, why? Wrong Don. I directed that comment to Don "I love the UN" White. LOL |
OT Texas Republicans
Henry Blackmoore wrote in message nk.net... Wrong Don. I directed that comment to Don "I love the UN" White. LOL Need a program to keep up with the players...Henry? |
OT Texas Republicans
"thunder" wrote in message ... Just how many countries are you willing to invade over the same WMD, *without* ever having seen *any* of said WMD. The WMD is in Iraq. Whoops, no, it is in Syria. Whoops, no, it is in Iran. Whoops, no, it's in ... Try selling this somewhere else, I'm not buying. Buy whatever you like. However, the smart money says that time will tell that Syria did indeed accept a transfer of Saddam's WMD. In fact, don't be surprised when it's revealed that the "chemicals" that recently made their way to Jordan via Syria turn out to be VX...a WMD made by Iraq. BTW--did you notice that the noose around Assad's neck is tightening a little bit each day? Bush said to plan sanctions for Syria Pressure aimed at halting terror aid By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff | April 20, 2004 WASHINGTON -- President Bush plans to impose sanctions on Syria to pressure it to halt support for terrorist groups, sending a strong message to President Bashar Assad as foreign fighters continue to cross into Iraq from Syrian territory, senior governments officials said yesterday. The officials also said Jordanian investigators have reported that chemicals discovered in a foiled Al Qaeda plot in Jordan had been smuggled in from Syria. The White House has told members of Congress that as early as this week the president will implement the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act, passed overwhelmingly by both houses of Congress and signed into law in December. The law gives Bush new leeway to punish Syria economically and diplomatically for failing to act forcefully against terrorism. The sanctions could include prohibiting the sale of American products and US investment in Syria and restricting the travel of Syrian diplomats in the United States. It was not immediately clear yesterday which sanctions Bush would invoke. ''The word I have gotten from the administration is the president fully intends to implement it," Representative Elliot Engel, Republican of New York and a key sponsor of the legislation, told the Globe yesterday. Such a move is expected to increase anti-American sentiment in the region, already heightened over the war in Iraq and Israel's recent assassinations of two Hamas leaders, as well as Bush's support for Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to keep some West Bank settlements. Engel and others said the White House was waiting to take action against Syria after a series of meetings in Washington this month with Middle East leaders, including President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, Sharon, and King Abdullah of Jordan. Jordanian officials announced yesterday that Abdullah, who was scheduled to meet with Bush at the White House tomorrow, has postponed his trip until next month. ''I think there is something we might hear this week," said Theodore Kattouf, who served as Bush's ambassador to Syria until last fall and met with the Syrian president last week. He added, however, that recent developments could delay the move. Syria, labeled by the State Department as a sponsor of terrorism for its support of anti-Israeli terrorist groups such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Lebanese Hezbollah, has come under enhanced scrutiny in recent days. US forces have been battling with armed insurgents in western Iraq who are believed to have infiltrated the country through Syria. Five US Marines were killed Saturday in the western Iraqi town of Husaybah. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell told the Associated Press yesterday that he has asked Syria to beef up security on the border. ''It is in our mutual interest to deal with the problem," Powell said. ''It is not in Syria's interest to be seen as a base from which infiltrators can come across to kill innocent Iraqis or to kill coalition troops." The Syrian Embassy did not return calls yesterday seeking comment on the allegations. General Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Sunday that ''We know that the pathway into Iraq for many foreign forces is through Syria. It's a fact. We know it. The Syrians know it." Myers, speaking on CNN's ''Late Edition," said, ''The Syrians need to take this situation very seriously. They need to help us stop that infiltration of foreign fighters. It doesn't do their government any good." Meanwhile, Jordanian authorities announced Saturday that raids earlier this month uncovered an Al Qaeda cell in Jordan that was planning to detonate a huge chemical bomb at the headquarters of the Jordanian Intelligence Services, the US Embassy, and other targets in Amman. They said the raw materials could have killed as many as 20,000 people in gas attacks. ''There is evidence that it came from Syria into Jordan," Engel said of the chemical materials and explosives. ''The Jordanians believe that and I believe that." But Kattouf, who met with Assad last week, said Syria has little incentive to cooperate with the United States in policing its border with Iraq or other issues in the current environment, On border control, ''I believe last October the Syrians, through their ambassador, let it be known that they might be open to some cooperation," said Kattouf, president of America-Mideast Educational and Training Services, a private nonprofit organization in Washington. ''I conclude that some elements of the [Bush] administration are so anti-Syrian that they would prefer to issue public warnings rather than to open serious talks on the matter." The Syria Accountability Act called on Damascus to ''immediately and unconditionally halt support for terrorism, permanently and openly declare its total renunciation of all forms of terrorism, and close all terrorist offices and facilities in Syria." It also demanded that Syria pull its military forces out of neighboring Lebanon, which it has occupied for more than two decades. |
OT Texas Republicans
On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 01:36:51 -0400, NOYB wrote:
Buy whatever you like. However, the smart money says that time will tell that Syria did indeed accept a transfer of Saddam's WMD. In fact, don't be surprised when it's revealed that the "chemicals" that recently made their way to Jordan via Syria turn out to be VX...a WMD made by Iraq. LOL, again, Syria did not accept WMD from Iraq. It's a red herring, foisted to explain the lack of WMD in Iraq. Syria's relations with Iraq were tepid at best. This administration blew the intelligence on Iraq's WMD. As you have difficulty believing this, the final reason Syria would not accept Iraq's WMD is that it would be unnecessary. Syria's chemical weapons capability far surpasses Iraq's. It is considered to be the most advanced in the middle east. http://cns.miis.edu/research/wmdme/syria.htm http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/syria/ BTW--did you notice that the noose around Assad's neck is tightening a little bit each day? Personally, I think the Likud party should fight their own battles. |
OT Texas Republicans
NOYB wrote:
... However, the smart money says that time will tell that Syria did indeed accept a transfer of Saddam's WMD. In fact, don't be surprised when it's revealed that the "chemicals" that recently made their way to Jordan via Syria turn out to be VX...a WMD made by Iraq. You'll believe any fantasy as long as it's from a pro-Bush/Cheney source thunder wrote: LOL, again, Syria did not accept WMD from Iraq. It's a red herring, foisted to explain the lack of WMD in Iraq. Syria's relations with Iraq were tepid at best. And previous to the war, Syria was cooperating with US intel and counter terrorist ops. Why would the Bush administration claim Syria has WMD's unless it is really desperate to yet again turn a foreign policy success into failure. ... This administration blew the intelligence on Iraq's WMD. No, they didn't. Bush & Cheney were determined to invade Iraq and topple Saddam before the election, they just didn't mention it in their campaign speeches & promises. From their point of view, it has been a big success... lots & lots of money rolling in... and possibly a second term ... As you have difficulty believing this, the final reason Syria would not accept Iraq's WMD is that it would be unnecessary. Syria's chemical weapons capability far surpasses Iraq's. It is considered to be the most advanced in the middle east. http://cns.miis.edu/research/wmdme/syria.htm http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/syria/ BTW--did you notice that the noose around Assad's neck is tightening a little bit each day? Personally, I think the Likud party should fight their own battles. They seem to be doing OK. And hey, they're finally giving up some of the settlements... DSK |
OT Texas Republicans
In article , "Don White" wrote:
Henry Blackmoore wrote in message ink.net... Wrong Don. I directed that comment to Don "I love the UN" White. LOL Need a program to keep up with the players...Henry? No. I simply directed the comment at you and the wrong Don picked up on it. No confusion on my part, just yours. Thanks for playing! |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:55 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com