"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
DSK wrote:
Not sure how your Funk & Wagnels defines insurgents...but I went to
Google and entered "insurgents" + "iraq" in the search engine.
Google says there are over 2 million hits.
NOYB wrote:
That's because the news media continues to propagate a lie about who
these terrorists really are.
You mean, the "lie" that actually happens to be how it is in the real
world?

Funny, you seem to have avoided any references about how many foreign
fighters are in the Iraq insurgency. Why do you keep running away from
factual references, and keep returning to propagandizing?


... If they called them "foreign terrorists", it would be admitting
that Bush is absolutely correct when he says that Iraq is the
frontline on "the global struggle against violent extremism" (fka
"the war on terror").

OTOH if the Bush-Cheney cheerleaders admit the facts that the Iraq
insurgency is not on it's last legs, and that only a very small
minority of foreigners have entered Iraq to fight America, then they
would also have to admit the Bush-Cheney Administration's failure to
actually fight terrorism and the long string of lies leading us into
war in Iraq.

So, keep spinning & dodging, NOBBY! Maybe you'll be rewarded with a
nice cushy appointment, or maybe you'll have to wait for your reward in
Heaven.

DSK





The Bushbots are no longer fighting a War on Terrorism. The White House
has a new term. I kid you not.

You're citing the NY Times again. Just last Friday, in his speech
calling for the renewal of the Patriot Act, Bush used the phrase "war on
terror". So I'm not really sure where the NY Times is getting its info
from.




That's right. Not only am I a card-carrying member of the ACLU, but...I
also get the Sunday NY Times delivered to my home.

Hey, it's your money. If I'm going to spend money on paper, it's on
Charmin. It's much more comfortable than the NY Times...and about as useful
if you're looking for accurate reporting.