vpFREE2 Forums

Where's Our Resident Peacenik?

#41

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@c...>
wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>

wrote:

> > Well, because many of the misled critics are lined up saying

GWB

> > wanted 'the oil' or 'to finish daddy's job' the liberal answer

to

> that
> > is yes. But don't forget, the WMD issue isn't over and as I
> predicted
> > long ago, Syria has them and will make a mistake sometime in

the

> near
> > future.
>
> When pigs fly.

Well let's hope they don't. But these fanatics aren't your normal
criminals.

No, too bad were spending way too much effort in Iraq instead of
focusing on the real threats.

>
> And how many will die BEFORE we actually do something? You have

no

> idea what is going on in Sudan which is obvious from your

illogical

> statements.

You're partially correct. I don't keep up with Sudan, but I was

there

twice - in 1981 & 2002 and what I said is true.

Then explain why W found it more important to attack Iraq.

> About the same threat as Iraq was a couple of years ago. Show me
just
> ONE piece of evidence that Iraq was a larger threat. The facts

are

> conclusive. Sudan has much closer ties to terrorists than Iraq

ever

> had.

That's just it. I and others cannot disclose what is known to the
Gov't. -- at least up until the time my ties were severed. However,
as a layman it's easy to distinguish the terror threat of Iraq. For
starters, Saddam paid the families of Palestinian bombers.

Do you really think the US would go to war because of that? If that
is a reason to attack Iraq then why haven't we attacked Syria who has
done far more to support Palestinian bombers?

After 9-
11, Bush clearly said no country that supports or harbors

terrorists

will be spared. Is any more detailed information required in order

to

convince that he/Iraq supported terrorism?

Yes. It is not OUR Presidents' job to protect Israel. His job is to
protect the US. He is failing miserably in that job as we will
probably find out in the not too distant future.

>
> Excuse me!!!!!!!!!!!! This is OUR country, not Ws. The average
> citizen doesn't need to know specifics, but they should be made
aware of the issues.

I'm sorry, but there is so much going on that you & I will never
know. That's part of the security of what's going on.

Sorry, but that is just an old and tired excuse. It is meaningless
until such a time as facts are released to the public. Just about
every time this type of excuse is used it means that the gov't is
just plain not getting the job done.

> Then why did we invade Iraq? That is counter to this argument.

No. They supported terrorism and harbored terrorists. They still

do,

only on a much larger scale. The military is happy about this

because

we can exterminate them all that much quicker.

Exactly what you said a year ago. I don't see any military folks
smiling, do you? The fact is the war has CREATED a whole new batch of
terrorists JUST LIKE I PREDICTED.

> You've got to be kidding. Any threat from Iraq is OVER. There

would

> be no reason to keep it hidden IF THERE WAS EVER A THREAT. The

fact

W provides no information is proof that no threat ever existed.

The threat in Iraq is not from the country since we wiped out the
dictatorship, but from the terrorists who are there. Just like this
stupid wiretapping issue, there is much going on that IS hidden

from

you & I.

The terrorists that didn't exist UNTIL we invaded Iraq. Essentially,
you just said that we needed to go to war in Iraq to protect
ourselves from the terrorists that didn't exist until we attacked.
Are you for real?

>
> It's really hilarious that you'd make idiotic statements like

this.

> Do you really think anyone believes this BS?

The right people who are in charge of protecting us know these

facts,

and that's the only thing that's important. They're keeping an eye

on

Syria, in fact, my son is part of that strategy.

You really expect anyone to believe this BS?

>This sounds EXACTLY like your statements from last year when you
said we would SOON understand how W was dealing with the

insurgents.

Nothing happened then because nothing was planned ... "privy" or
otherwise.

Just like always, you want everything to happen NOW. The war should
be over, we should have our troops home, the terrorists should give
up, OBL should be captured. What a disappointment it must have been
to you when we found Saddam in hiding!

Not to me. However, I would MUCH rather it had been OBL. The real
problem however won't go away with the removal of Sadam or OBL. I
suspect we are past any hope of ever eliminating the terrorist
problem because we refused to look at the causes when something could
have been done.

>
> > That's what creates critics--little knowledge of
> > the facts.
>
> That describes you in a nutshell.

One problem---I'm not a critic.

Oh, but you are the worst kind. You criticize anyone who objectively
analyzes what is REALLY going on. You have no basis for your
criticsim other than blind support for the president.

#42

First of all, Hey Dick!! What's up?
John

Hi John, good to see you giving it to Singer again. You'd think he
would give up on his lies by now. Everything we've debated with him
over the last year has shown our positions to be right-on. He just
keeps on using the same old BS over and over again and somehow thinks
it makes sense. He should really go back and read last years posts
and think about what has happened since that time.

P.S. – Has anyone seen my Constitutional rights??

This is one area I haven't yet taken a position. I can see the need
to act quickly in todays' fast paced, technologically advanced
environment. Our forefathers could not have envisioned this. On the
other hand, the old saying that "absolute power corrupts absolutely"
is still true and checks and balances MUST be in place. I would hope
that a compromise is put in place that continues to protect our
constitutional rights while allowing fast response to terrorist
threats.

One possible solution is for after the fact approval that carries
weight. Any actions that are found to be the least bit questionable
would result in punishment of the offenders. Sure, it would create
some second thoughts in the intelligence community. Precisely what
should be going on all the time.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...> wrote:

#43

Your entire life is your nightmare. Hillary will never make it to the
White House. She's climaxing too early--something she never did with
Willy.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...> wrote:

You live in a dream world that is my nightmare. Not to worry,
Hillary will fix things after the 2008 election.

#44

Sorry, I don't understand your reply about the letter "A". Is this
Sesame Street?

Nope. you've lost touch with that reality long ago.

How do you sneak a scud into America??

Who said it was a scud? Chemo acting up again??

Plus I heard that weapons

storage facilities were ransacked by others before we bothered to
check on them when we invaded. Darn, oversight!!

You'll believe anything you 'hear' that helps ease the soreness of
being on the total losing side.

I read the 9-11 report, that's what it said. Prove me wrong, if you
can.

I read it and you're wrong. Must have been you're reading it in
between wondering how to kill yourself. The 'why' is apparent.

I've seen pictures, you are fuzzy all over without my posts.
What if is not how I would begin a truthful statement. Your
stupidity is giving me a headache.

So what's the medicine do if someone as normal as me can get to you??

You are right, I don't know for sure. I bled for this country and
have been decorated. I deserve to be here and try to right wrongs.
And w is wrong.

You bled yellow--nothing more, and don't ever forget that. You're the
cause of you'r brother's fate--don't ever forget that either. And
you're also the cause of his discomfort even now. But thanks to the
great GWB, he can rest a little easier as days go by.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...> wrote:

#45

So now you're rattled even more by the truth.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...> wrote:

OH MY GOD. Are you part of the ultra-secret Video Poker squadron??
You are pathetic. Professional gamblers aren't usually given
security clearances, and sent on black ops, especially if they are
drunks.

#46

No, too bad were spending way too much effort in Iraq instead of
focusing on the real threats.

Lots of people say that. Trouble is, who really knows unless you're
right in the middle of it all?

Then explain why W found it more important to attack Iraq.

I've done that many times.

> starters, Saddam paid the families of Palestinian bombers.

Do you really think the US would go to war because of that? If that
is a reason to attack Iraq then why haven't we attacked Syria who

has done far more to support Palestinian bombers?

Again, we protect Israel, and GWB clearly announced his anti-terror
intentions. Iraq just didn't listen.

Yes. It is not OUR Presidents' job to protect Israel. His job is to
protect the US.

His job is to protect us first, then honor the agreements with other
countries. There's just too many rich Jews in the US not to jump on
that anyway. That's just the way the world is. Like it or not.

He is failing miserably in that job as we will

probably find out in the not too distant future.

They've been saying that for 6 years now, and it's been 6 years of
frustration for those like you.

> I'm sorry, but there is so much going on that you & I will never
> know. That's part of the security of what's going on.

Sorry, but that is just an old and tired excuse. It is meaningless
until such a time as facts are released to the public. Just about
every time this type of excuse is used it means that the gov't is
just plain not getting the job done.

What else can you say about that which you don't know? I'm safe,
happy and prosperous, and my son is doing an honorable thing. To me,
that's a job well done.

Exactly what you said a year ago. I don't see any military folks
smiling, do you? The fact is the war has CREATED a whole new batch

of terrorists JUST LIKE I PREDICTED.

That's a wish that never came true on your part. Military folks never
smile until the job's complete. To say the war created a new bunch of
terrorists is the same as giving up. What would you have done--invite
OBL in for a negotiation? See how stupid your warped thinking gets??

The terrorists that didn't exist UNTIL we invaded Iraq.

100% wrong. What liberals won't do to make themselves feel better.

Essentially,

you just said that we needed to go to war in Iraq to protect
ourselves from the terrorists that didn't exist until we attacked.
Are you for real?

That's what you twisted it into meaning. When you accept the fact
that there were terrorists there before the war--and there were many--
you'll feel even better.

Not to me. However, I would MUCH rather it had been OBL.

Either-or. One at a time. Here's something you don't know or won't
accept as fact. there's a faction in Wash. that actually likes the
fact that OBL hasn't been caught yet, because it sends out word to
the rest of the fanatic leaders that they will live in fear of kill
or capture for the rest of their days. But don't be too surprised if
you see OBL killed a few months before the next election. You really
think we don't know where he is??

Oh, but you are the worst kind. You criticize anyone who

objectively analyzes what is REALLY going on. You have no basis for
your criticsim other than blind support for the president.

you're 'analysis' is based on theory (gee, what else is new?) and you
are not a fact-holder of any kind. At best you guess. I don't. Your
type are so easy to knock down because of your fear and sensitivity
for the enemy. The fact that you're alive today is because of the
efforts of a great President and not because you gambled on a move to
LV.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...> wrote:

#47

Let me guess what kind of feel-good/confidence-building these two
blind mice can offer each other! It's like watching Cindy "I piss on
my son's grave" Sheehan having a brain-dead chat with Micky Moore.

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...>

wrote:

>
> First of all, Hey Dick!! What's up?
> John

Hi John, good to see you giving it to Singer again. You'd think he
would give up on his lies by now. Everything we've debated with him
over the last year has shown our positions to be right-on. He just
keeps on using the same old BS over and over again and somehow

thinks

it makes sense. He should really go back and read last years posts
and think about what has happened since that time.

> P.S. – Has anyone seen my Constitutional rights??

This is one area I haven't yet taken a position. I can see the need
to act quickly in todays' fast paced, technologically advanced
environment. Our forefathers could not have envisioned this. On the
other hand, the old saying that "absolute power corrupts

absolutely"

is still true and checks and balances MUST be in place. I would

hope

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...> wrote:

that a compromise is put in place that continues to protect our
constitutional rights while allowing fast response to terrorist
threats.

One possible solution is for after the fact approval that carries
weight. Any actions that are found to be the least bit questionable
would result in punishment of the offenders. Sure, it would create
some second thoughts in the intelligence community. Precisely what
should be going on all the time.

#48

Personal insults with no facts. Standard singer fare.
John
P.S. – Has anyone seen my Constitutional rights??

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@c...>
wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...>

wrote:

>
> You live in a dream world that is my nightmare. Not to worry,
> Hillary will fix things after the 2008 election.

Your entire life is your nightmare. Hillary will never make it to

the

···

White House. She's climaxing too early--something she never did with
Willy.

#49

Chemo, what are you talking about?
Your insults are getting tedious, got any new material?
John
P.S. – Has anyone seen my Constitutional rights??

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@c...>
wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...>

wrote:

>
> Sorry, I don't understand your reply about the letter "A". Is

this

> Sesame Street?

Nope. you've lost touch with that reality long ago.

> How do you sneak a scud into America??

Who said it was a scud? Chemo acting up again??

Plus I heard that weapons
> storage facilities were ransacked by others before we bothered

to

> check on them when we invaded. Darn, oversight!!

You'll believe anything you 'hear' that helps ease the soreness of
being on the total losing side.

> I read the 9-11 report, that's what it said. Prove me wrong, if

you

> can.

I read it and you're wrong. Must have been you're reading it in
between wondering how to kill yourself. The 'why' is apparent.

> I've seen pictures, you are fuzzy all over without my posts.
> What if is not how I would begin a truthful statement. Your
> stupidity is giving me a headache.

So what's the medicine do if someone as normal as me can get to

you??

> You are right, I don't know for sure. I bled for this country

and

> have been decorated. I deserve to be here and try to right

wrongs.

> And w is wrong.

You bled yellow--nothing more, and don't ever forget that. You're

the

cause of you'r brother's fate--don't ever forget that either. And
you're also the cause of his discomfort even now. But thanks to

the

···

great GWB, he can rest a little easier as days go by.

#50

Again, what are you talking about. There is no truth in this reply.
John
P.S. – Has anyone seen my Constitutional rights??

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@c...>
wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...>

wrote:

> OH MY GOD. Are you part of the ultra-secret Video Poker

squadron??

> You are pathetic. Professional gamblers aren't usually given
> security clearances, and sent on black ops, especially if they

are

···

> drunks.

So now you're rattled even more by the truth.

#51

Facts: You ever heard of Hillary getting her rocks off with Billy? Your
Demo Pres. was too busy burying the cigar under the desk. Such pride--
Clinton, Kennedy & Kerry: Jacko, Whacko & Kracko.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...> wrote:

Personal insults with no facts. Standard singer fare.
John
P.S. – Has anyone seen my Constitutional rights??

#52

Yeah. You're ugly too.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...> wrote:

Your insults are getting tedious, got any new material?

#53

Ever heard of w doing anything sexual except trying to milk a male
horse. Jerk-off-o!!
John
P.S. – Has anyone seen my Constitutional rights??

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@c...>
wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...>

wrote:

>
> Personal insults with no facts. Standard singer fare.
> John
> P.S. – Has anyone seen my Constitutional rights??

Facts: You ever heard of Hillary getting her rocks off with Billy?

Your

Demo Pres. was too busy burying the cigar under the desk. Such

pride--

···

Clinton, Kennedy & Kerry: Jacko, Whacko & Kracko.

#54

From you that's a compliment.
John
P.S. – Has anyone seen my Constitutional rights??

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@c...>
wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...>

wrote:

···

>
> Your insults are getting tedious, got any new material?

Yeah. You're ugly too.

#55

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@c...>
wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>

wrote:

> No, too bad were spending way too much effort in Iraq instead of
> focusing on the real threats.

Lots of people say that. Trouble is, who really knows unless you're
right in the middle of it all?

Anyone with an IQ more than 1 digit.

>
> Then explain why W found it more important to attack Iraq.

I've done that many times.

No, but you've babbled nonsense "many times".

>
> > starters, Saddam paid the families of Palestinian bombers.
>
> Do you really think the US would go to war because of that? If

that

> is a reason to attack Iraq then why haven't we attacked Syria who
has done far more to support Palestinian bombers?

Again, we protect Israel, and GWB clearly announced his anti-terror
intentions. Iraq just didn't listen.

We have a treaty, however, that doesn't include invading a nation
that is NOT an imminent threat to Isreal

>
> Yes. It is not OUR Presidents' job to protect Israel. His job is

to

> protect the US.

His job is to protect us first, then honor the agreements with

other

countries. There's just too many rich Jews in the US not to jump on
that anyway. That's just the way the world is. Like it or not.

Still doesn't justify invading Iraq. If ONE scud had been fired then
it would have been completely different.

He is failing miserably in that job as we will
> probably find out in the not too distant future.

They've been saying that for 6 years now, and it's been 6 years of
frustration for those like you.

No, I haven't. I gave W the benefit of the doubt for the first couple
of years and he failed miserably.

>
> > I'm sorry, but there is so much going on that you & I will

never

> > know. That's part of the security of what's going on.
>
> Sorry, but that is just an old and tired excuse. It is

meaningless

> until such a time as facts are released to the public. Just about
> every time this type of excuse is used it means that the gov't is
> just plain not getting the job done.

What else can you say about that which you don't know? I'm safe,
happy and prosperous, and my son is doing an honorable thing. To

me,

that's a job well done.

No disagreement here. That does not translate into being safe in the
future and who knows, your wife could lose her job tomorrow and then
you wouldn't be prosperous either.

>
> Exactly what you said a year ago. I don't see any military folks
> smiling, do you? The fact is the war has CREATED a whole new

batch

of terrorists JUST LIKE I PREDICTED.

That's a wish that never came true on your part. Military folks

never

smile until the job's complete. To say the war created a new bunch

of

terrorists is the same as giving up. What would you have done--

invite

OBL in for a negotiation? See how stupid your warped thinking gets??

No, I would have pursued OBL in Afghanistan where he has been hiding.
All we have done in Iraq so far is overextend the military and create
more terrorists and anti-American sentiment throughout the world.

>
> The terrorists that didn't exist UNTIL we invaded Iraq.

100% wrong. What liberals won't do to make themselves feel better.

First of all I'm not a liberal, second, support your idiotic
statement with one or two facts for once in your life.

Essentially,
> you just said that we needed to go to war in Iraq to protect
> ourselves from the terrorists that didn't exist until we

attacked.

> Are you for real?

That's what you twisted it into meaning. When you accept the fact
that there were terrorists there before the war--and there were

many--

you'll feel even better.

It's been proven that the terrorists were NOT in Iraq. I realize you
NEED to hold on to this last thread of hope that your lover boy, W,
had a valid reason for the invasion. Sorry, it just isn't so. Check
the facts.

>
> Not to me. However, I would MUCH rather it had been OBL.

Either-or. One at a time. Here's something you don't know or won't
accept as fact. there's a faction in Wash. that actually likes the
fact that OBL hasn't been caught yet, because it sends out word to
the rest of the fanatic leaders that they will live in fear of kill
or capture for the rest of their days. But don't be too surprised

if

you see OBL killed a few months before the next election. You

really

think we don't know where he is??

Yes. Do you really think we do? Are you that naive? It would be a
major victory for W to capture or kill OBL. He would probably raise
his approval rating 20% immediately.

> Oh, but you are the worst kind. You criticize anyone who
objectively analyzes what is REALLY going on. You have no basis for
your criticsim other than blind support for the president.

you're 'analysis' is based on theory (gee, what else is new?) and

you

are not a fact-holder of any kind. At best you guess. I don't.

No, you make it up as you go.

#56

Ever heard of w doing anything sexual except trying to milk a male
horse. Jerk-off-o!!

The great GWB keeps his sexual exploitations behind closed doors
where they belong. I don't care if he's having three-somes with his 2
daughters. He has public dignity and your heroes don't even know the
words.

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@c...>
wrote:
>
> --- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...>
wrote:
> >
> > Personal insults with no facts. Standard singer fare.
> > John
> > P.S. – Has anyone seen my Constitutional rights??
>
> Facts: You ever heard of Hillary getting her rocks off with

Billy?

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...> wrote:

Your
> Demo Pres. was too busy burying the cigar under the desk. Such
pride--
> Clinton, Kennedy & Kerry: Jacko, Whacko & Kracko.
>

#57

3-somes with his daughters would bother me. But in reality it would
just be another in a long line of laws he has broken. Laura Bush's
rendition of w milking the male horse at the National Press Club
dinner last year was priceless. After all that time with the moron
she may have a career in comedy.
John
P.S. – Has anyone seen my Constitutional rights??

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@c...>
wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...>

wrote:

>
> Ever heard of w doing anything sexual except trying to milk a

male

> horse. Jerk-off-o!!

The great GWB keeps his sexual exploitations behind closed doors
where they belong. I don't care if he's having three-somes with

his 2

daughters. He has public dignity and your heroes don't even know

the

words.

> --- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111"

<rsinger1111@c...>

> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John"

<three2theroyal@y...>

···

> wrote:
> > >
> > > Personal insults with no facts. Standard singer fare.
> > > John
> > > P.S. – Has anyone seen my Constitutional rights??
> >
> > Facts: You ever heard of Hillary getting her rocks off with
Billy?
> Your
> > Demo Pres. was too busy burying the cigar under the desk. Such
> pride--
> > Clinton, Kennedy & Kerry: Jacko, Whacko & Kracko.
> >
>

#58

> Lots of people say that. Trouble is, who really knows unless

you're right in the middle of it all?

Anyone with an IQ more than 1 digit.

And you'll probably buy land for sale in the Everglades.

> >
> > Then explain why W found it more important to attack Iraq.
>
> I've done that many times.

No, but you've babbled nonsense "many times".

You just can't handle the truth so you avoid it.

> Again, we protect Israel, and GWB clearly announced his anti-

terror intentions. Iraq just didn't listen.

We have a treaty, however, that doesn't include invading a nation
that is NOT an imminent threat to Isreal

Again you're misled. Iraq was an imminent threat to US. Wake up and
stop letting the Cindy Sheehans of the world control you.

> His job is to protect us first, then honor the agreements with
other countries. There's just too many rich Jews in the US not to

jump on that anyway. That's just the way the world is. Like it or not.

Still doesn't justify invading Iraq. If ONE scud had been fired

then it would have been completely different.

The only reason you & I are still breathing today is because we did
invade Iraq. As it is, nothings secure yet, but thanks to the great
GWB we're on track to a safer future.

No, I haven't. I gave W the benefit of the doubt for the first

couple of years and he failed miserably.

The only thing he's failed at is border control. The election coming
closer will take care of that loophole.

> What else can you say about that which you don't know? I'm safe,
> happy and prosperous, and my son is doing an honorable thing. To
me, that's a job well done.

No disagreement here. That does not translate into being safe in

the future and who knows, your wife could lose her job tomorrow and
then you wouldn't be prosperous either.

Nothing translates into being 'safe' for the future. We can only work
towards that objective, and that's exactly the path we're on with
Iraq. If my wife loses her job tomorrow she remains prosperous. Ever
hear of twin 7-figure 401k's? Unlike you, we didn't take the money
out to make a sucker move to a messed up/immigrant infested state and
have lots of gambling money in our pockets. And unlike your wife did,
she doesn't work a job only a desperado could love.

> >
> > Exactly what you said a year ago. I don't see any military

folks

> > smiling, do you? The fact is the war has CREATED a whole new
batch
> of terrorists JUST LIKE I PREDICTED.
>
> That's a wish that never came true on your part. Military folks
never smile until the job's complete. To say the war created a new

bunch of terrorists is the same as giving up. What would you have
done--invite OBL in for a negotiation? See how stupid your warped
thinking gets??

No, I would have pursued OBL in Afghanistan where he has been

hiding.

The usual criticizm. and if you didn't get him? More 20-20 please.

> 100% wrong. What liberals won't do to make themselves feel better.

First of all I'm not a liberal, second, support your idiotic
statement with one or two facts for once in your life.

You talk like a bleeding liberal, and looks like I'm the ONLY one
providing any facts here. What else is new may I ask?

>
> Essentially, you just said that we needed to go to war in Iraq

to protect ourselves from the terrorists that didn't exist until we

attacked. Are you for real?
>
> That's what you twisted it into meaning. When you accept the fact
> that there were terrorists there before the war--and there were
many--you'll feel even better.

It's been proven that the terrorists were NOT in Iraq.

Well, here's your chance--as many liberals have had--to actually
prove something. but what's this? No proof? Tail wagging only?
Hmmmm.....

> Either-or. One at a time. Here's something you don't know or

won't accept as fact. there's a faction in Wash. that actually likes
the fact that OBL hasn't been caught yet, because it sends out word
to the rest of the fanatic leaders that they will live in fear of
kill or capture for the rest of their days. But don't be too
surprised if you see OBL killed a few months before the next
election. You really think we don't know where he is??

Yes. Do you really think we do? Are you that naive? It would be a
major victory for W to capture or kill OBL. He would probably raise
his approval rating 20% immediately.

Here's a flash Einstein. He's not up for re-election this year,
capish? His job going forward has been to strategize for the next
election to keep the weenies out of the White House, Senate, H of R,
etc. etc. Something that 'AP's" don't understand is true strategy.
Just like in video poker where you bazookas just keep banging away
aimlessly, so too do you look at capturing OBL as a wander through
the desert with a gun and a prayer. What do you think the
wiretapping's all about, Bozinski??? Does that give you any clues!?
Even the undermining that's going on isn't going to stop the strategy
from working.

>
> > Oh, but you are the worst kind. You criticize anyone who
> objectively analyzes what is REALLY going on. You have no basis

for

> your criticsim other than blind support for the president.
>
> you're 'analysis' is based on theory (gee, what else is new?) and
you
> are not a fact-holder of any kind. At best you guess. I don't.

No, you make it up as you go.

Ever hear of dicky the denyer?

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...> wrote:

#59

You mean kind of like how Hilary REALLY turned out?

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...> wrote:

3-somes with his daughters would bother me. But in reality it would
just be another in a long line of laws he has broken. Laura Bush's
rendition of w milking the male horse at the National Press Club
dinner last year was priceless. After all that time with the moron
she may have a career in comedy.

#60

That post had nothing to do with the Honerable Senator Clinton,m that
was classic moron Bush.
John
P.S. – Has anyone seen my Constitutional rights??

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@c...>
wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "John" <three2theroyal@y...>

wrote:

>
> 3-somes with his daughters would bother me. But in reality it

would

···

> just be another in a long line of laws he has broken. Laura Bush's
> rendition of w milking the male horse at the National Press Club
> dinner last year was priceless. After all that time with the moron
> she may have a career in comedy.

You mean kind of like how Hilary REALLY turned out?