G8 Terrorists in London

[pabull]

I don't say a whole lot, but here goes. Before I get into this subject, I want all you "love your brother", "stop the killing", bleeding heart liberals to take note and listen to reason!!...(if that's possible) :/

To all that are against the war on terror, you wonder WTF we're fighting for. This should make it clear. If your twisted LIBERAL minds haven't noticed, this act of OVERT TERRORISM occured in England. The reason for this is simple.....

THESE COWARDS WILL NOT F##K WITH THE UNITED STATES!!!!

Why is that you ask? ...It's because we actually have the BALLS to go after these THUGS!!
These terrorists are no different than the Rodney King rioters.

In that scenario, all that was neccessary to stop that **** was the authorization of deadly force.

Those terrorist cowards are hitting US allies in hope that the US will back down. Well guess what??....

Tony Blair is calling for some terrorist ASS!!

I hope to GOD this barbaric, savage incident renews America's resolve to squash these raghead mother f##kers!!

This is what is killing the war on terror... too many tree-hugging, bleeding heart LIBERALS, (take note Miss dyke Remember and others), are having their way in Congress. "Oh..we can't bomb the Mosques that these *******s are hiding in"..."OH.. we cant let our troops (heroes) do their jobs"... "OH...what about the humanity"......BULL****!!!

These "murderers" that you fight so hard to protect and understand, could give 2 ****s about your "love". They would kill you just as quick as anyone!...(and laugh while doing it).

It's high time that the "LIBERAL" community, as well as the rest of the world, wakes the f##k up!!!

Just like the Rodney King "natives", all these people understand is VIOLENCE!! They will back down once they know that we are badder motherf##kers than they are. How come you
"live and let live" people do not understand this??

Our prayers, (although "LIBS" don't practice this), go out to our Allies in crisis.

(BTW, I DO have a personal stake in this. I have my only child going to the Navy as a SEABEE. Yes, he could very well end up over there.) I hope that if he does go over there, HE TOASTS AS MANY TOWELHEADS AS POSSIBLE.

Thanx for hearing me out. I just feel that this HAS to be said. Have a nice day.

[Edited by pabull on 07-07-2005 at 12:09 PM]

[tonys]

I agree with almost everything noted in that rant,
but, why does it have to go back to:
liberal this, and liberal that?

There are certain people with liberal ideas that go a little too far with their "compasion for the criminals" ideology,
and the same can be said for a small portion of conservatives who go a little to far with "live your life according to some book written by a small group of drunken Scribes"...

Anyhow, is it possible to want a clean environment to live in AND kill every islamic fundamentalist on the face of the earth? or, is that a little too far 'out there'?

[tonys]

and, I wish your son "happy hunt'n"!!!
(take no prisoners)

[pabull]

I agree that there are zealots , both conservative and liberal.

But it just seems that the major players in the "anti-war" camp are the radical libs. (i.e. Nancy "queers are great" Pelosi, and Ted "I don't know HOW my car went off the bridge" Kennedy and Hillary "I never went to any of the 9/11 victims funerals" Clinton). I'm sorry if I was quick to label all of you as such. But this is a subject that pisses me off, (terrorism), and should not be ignored or taken lightly. This is some serious ****.

[Edited by pabull on 07-07-2005 at 12:52 PM]

[bootlen]

Originally posted by tonys
I agree with almost everything noted in that rant,
but, why does it have to go back to:
liberal this, and liberal that?

There are certain people with liberal ideas that go a little too far with their "compasion for the criminals" ideology,
and the same can be said for a small portion of conservatives who go a little to far with "live your life according to some book written by a small group of drunken Scribes"...

Anyhow, is it possible to want a clean environment to live in AND kill every islamic fundamentalist on the face of the earth? or, is that a little too far 'out there'?

================================================== =========

Got some names with those "conservatives"? I'll have a little heart-to-heart with'em.

[tonys]

I can draw on one example of a so-called conservative (or, a person who gives one wit th conservative ideas a bad name)

shortly after 9/11, they had 3 'religious' leaders on the TV to discuss how Christians, Jews, and muslims can find some way to co-exist (easier said than done)
While the jewish and muslim dude presented some reasonable approaches, the Christian Evangelical - Jerry Farwell starts spouting off about how anyone who does not follow in the footsteps of Jesus Christ is LOST, and the whole process can not go any further (paraphasing here)

the two other 'leaders' looked at each other in disbelief.
only a few days after 9/11, and this FUNDAMENTALIST still believes in a "his way, or no-way" attitude...as a result...we are all truly DOOMED.

[bootlen]

Originally posted by tonys
I can draw on one example of a so-called conservative (or, a person who gives one wit th conservative ideas a bad name)

shortly after 9/11, they had 3 'religious' leaders on the TV to discuss how Christians, Jews, and muslims can find some way to co-exist (easier said than done)
While the jewish and muslim dude presented some reasonable approaches, the Christian Evangelical - Jerry Farwell starts spouting off about how anyone who does not follow in the footsteps of Jesus Christ is LOST, and the whole process can not go any further (paraphasing here)

the two other 'leaders' looked at each other in disbelief.
only a few days after 9/11, and this FUNDAMENTALIST still believes in a "his way, or no-way" attitude...as a result...we are all truly DOOMED.

================================================== ========

1) I don't see the correlation with your previuos post.

2) You know of another "way"?

[bb]

Originally posted by tonys
I agree with almost everything noted in that rant,
but, why does it have to go back to:
liberal this, and liberal that?

Because the tree-hugging,kumbaya singin' LIBERALS (that's how they vote) are the one's saying that "We are running gulags" Nazi style tactics etc. etc. etc. Oh Yeah, [said in the gayest voice you can think of] "We have to stop making THEM mad at us. They are only going to attack us even more.

There are certain people with liberal ideas that go a little too far with their "compasion for the criminals" ideology,
and the same can be said for a small portion of conservatives who go a little to far with "live your life according to some book written by a small group of drunken Scribes"...

I agree, well with part

Anyhow, is it possible to want a clean environment to live in AND kill every islamic fundamentalist on the face of the earth? or, is that a little too far 'out there'?

[/b]We have to change their way of thinking with the idea of freedom. All these people know is fighting. It will take a LONG time but as freedom spreads and the young get older, maybe,just maybe their ideology of living to die will change to dying to live.[b]

[Edited by bb on 07-07-2005 at 08:05 PM]

[bb]

Pabull great post. Glad to hear one more pissed off enough American. Wish their were 50% more!

God be with your son.

[hvacmd2002]

Originally posted by pabull
"
(BTW, I DO have a personal stake in this. I have my only child going to the Navy as a SEABEE. Yes, he could very well end up over there.) I hope that if he does go over there, HE TOASTS AS MANY TOWELHEADS AS POSSIBLE.


[Edited by pabull on 07-07-2005 at 12:09 PM] [/B]

With all due respect. I thought SEABEES built houses. Do they have guns now?

[pabull]

Originally posted by hvacmd2002

Originally posted by pabull
"
(BTW, I DO have a personal stake in this. I have my only child going to the Navy as a SEABEE. Yes, he could very well end up over there.) I hope that if he does go over there, HE TOASTS AS MANY TOWELHEADS AS POSSIBLE.


[Edited by pabull on 07-07-2005 at 12:09 PM]

With all due respect. I thought SEABEES built houses. Do they have guns now? [/B]
Yes, they carry guns. The SEABEES are the construction battallion. They do everything from build and blow up buildings, to constructing roadways and bridges. They must go through advanced combat training as they can and do work in "hot" zones. Ask a marine how important they can be....:)

[rob10]

Originally posted by tonys
I can draw on one example of a so-called conservative (or, a person who gives one wit th conservative ideas a bad name)

shortly after 9/11, they had 3 'religious' leaders on the TV to discuss how Christians, Jews, and muslims can find some way to co-exist (easier said than done)
While the jewish and muslim dude presented some reasonable approaches, the Christian Evangelical - Jerry Farwell starts spouting off about how anyone who does not follow in the footsteps of Jesus Christ is LOST, and the whole process can not go any further (paraphasing here)

the two other 'leaders' looked at each other in disbelief.
only a few days after 9/11, and this FUNDAMENTALIST still believes in a "his way, or no-way" attitude...as a result...we are all truly DOOMED. IMO NUKE the crap out of the middle east and be done with it!!

[refrigeration mafia]

Originally posted by pabull
... I want all you "love your brother", "stop the killing", bleeding heart liberals to take note and listen to reason!!...

... squash these raghead mother f##kers!!

These "murderers" that you fight so hard to protect and understand, could give 2 ****s about your "love". They would kill you just as quick as anyone!...(and laugh while doing it).

... all these people understand is VIOLENCE!! They will back down once they know that we are badder motherf##kers than they are.

Our prayers, (although "LIBS" don't practice this), go out to our Allies in crisis.

I hope that if he does go over there, HE TOASTS AS MANY TOWELHEADS AS POSSIBLE.


Ah you must be the 'VOICE OF REASON'.

John 14:24 - He who does not love me does not keep my words; and the word which you hear is not mine but the Father's who sent me.

1 John 4:8 - He who does not love does not know God; for God is love.

[caosesvida]

Its a very sad thing for the people who are directly affected by this, my prayers go out to them. Giving due respect for the dead and injured, at least for one day might be appropriate, before bringing personal politics into the matter.

[remember]

pabull,

you are acting out like an emotional cripple.

you are forgetting reality.

you may wish, america is powerful enough to just stomp out terrorism. but it isn't.

and the blind fury of your perspective, the flailing around you are advocating. just makes it easier to pick of american soldiers.

you are not looking at what is happening.

the attack in london, is no great caper.

setting off four bombs.... big deal.
it would have been harder to get the explosives, than to carry out the attack.

and remember, they think this was @ 40 lbs total in all four bombs.the military "let dissapear" 380 tons/760,000 lbs of cemtex, high explosive from iraq.that is added to all the other stuff floating around these days.


this type of attack is impossible to stop. except by luck.

it also had more real shock value, than real damage.( not to belittle those people's lives, but putting them into perspective)

this is also probably not al-queada, but an al-queada inspired group.


pabull, you don't realize how ineffectual your effort is when force is applied incorrectly, at the wrong place and in the wrong way.

you are ranting,but you are the type of emotional casualty, the terrorists need to know they are being effective. someone losing it, like you are.

and liberals ,(who ever they are) are not everyone who opposes this war.

the people with better military judgement outthere, oppose this war.

idiots who are overconfident in american abilities, believed this war was do-able.and now that logic has created a less safe world, with a strengthening of al queada like movements who are being better trained in the urban enviroment of iraq, than afghanistans rural training camps ever could have.
our country is being driven to a fiscal mess. with trade policies making things even worse. and energy supplies being put in jeopardy. with no alternatives being persued, in seriousness..


it is not that liberals are soft on terrorism.

some people just cannot stand behind ineffectual leadership, that makes problems worse.
the conservatives are just so bad at judgeing the outcomes of their actions, they are buffoons.
someone kept saying, go into iraq. and everything will eventually be ok.... and that was just a fairy tale from the get go. and now we have a mess, where we have to stay to do something, and figure which of the lesser evils can we manage,to live with.

all because of the knee jerk patriotism of idiots.

and the futility of your ignorant rage, is obvious these days.

you really need to start thinking, about what we need to have happen.

and your blind faith, and talk of a war on terror, is just getting us further and further from the goals here.

[James 3528]

What can I say? You're an idiot.

[refrigeration mafia]

Originally posted by James 3528
What can I say? You're an idiot.

You seem to be rather closed minded James. Don't you know that a mind is like a parachute? It can only work properly when it is open. I think that you are doomed to hit the earth like a rock.

[James 3528]

Originally posted by refrigeration mafia

Originally posted by James 3528
What can I say? You're an idiot.

You seem to be rather closed minded James. Don't you know that a mind is like a parachute? It can only work properly when it is open. I think that you are doomed to hit the earth like a rock.

No really..she is a idiot. And well...I think you're in the same boat.

[Special Ed]

Where to start....


Originally posted by remember
the military "let dissapear" 380 tons/760,000 lbs of cemtex, high explosive from iraq.that is added to all the other stuff floating around these days.

What do you mean by that? Are you seriously implying that the U.S. Military "allowed" all that HE disappear? Look who's being illogical now....



al queada being better trained in the urban enviroment of iraq

And so are we. We're getting better trained in urban combat as well. But I guess that fact would've never have occurred to you, would it?




it is not that liberals are soft on terrorism.

Oh, you mean like President Clinton was when he simply turned down an offer by the Sudanese gov't. to turn over bin Laden to us?


someone kept saying, go into iraq. and everything will eventually be ok.... and that was just a fairy tale from the get go.

Again, proof that you believe that not only do you think that you have complete control over your future but also that you think you can do a better job than those who are already doing the job.

I pity you.

[refrigeration mafia]

Originally posted by James 3528
I think you're in the same boat.

Quite the dilemma. There are sharks in the water, the boat has a hole in it and is taking on water. There appears to only be ONE life jacket. Can you swim?

[Edited by refrigeration mafia on 07-10-2005 at 07:33 PM]

[Special Ed]

Mafia, I don't think you get it....

James is saying you're in the same boat with Remember. And, yes, that boat does have a hole in it & it's sinking fast.

The question you should be asking is, "Can you swim?"

[refrigeration mafia]

Originally posted by special ed
"Can you swim?"

Don't worry about me. I can walk on water. LOL.

[Special Ed]

Yeah, right! LOL!

:D

[geerair]

Originally posted by special ed
What do you mean by that? Are you seriously implying that the U.S. Military "allowed" all that HE disappear? Look who's being illogical now....Rummy allowed it by not employing adequate security forces to protect weapons stockpiles. One of the many disastrous decisions made by Rummy.



Oh, you mean like President Clinton was when he simply turned down an offer by the Sudanese gov't. to turn over bin Laden to us?Republican urban legend.

[Special Ed]

Originally posted by geerair
Republican urban legend.

Not urban legend. Urban fact, & you know it. Another example of denial.

[geerair]

Originally posted by special ed

Originally posted by geerair
Republican urban legend.

Not urban legend. Urban fact, & you know it. Another example of denial. Well ed, let's see what the folks who investigated these claims, who had all of the intelligence, documentation and witnesses about these claims have to say:
"Former Sudanese officials claim that Sudan offered to expell Osama Bin Laden to the United States. We have found NO RELIABLE EVIDENCE to support the Sudanese claim."

9/11 Commission


Ed, you have got to stop listening to conservlican sources. They are lying to you.

[James 3528]

Geer is on to another lie clinton told.

[geerair]

Awwwwww......your cherished myth is dead. Don't despair, you can always make up others. Hey I know, how about the one where Clinton and his staff tore up the White House? Oh Hell, I just remembered, Bush himself said it never happened. Well another one of your beloved myths bites the dust.

Try again.

[remember]

special education,

those missing high explosives are just one of the many public screw-ups of the bushies in iraq.


if it was just some stockpile that went missing it would be one thing.

but when that story broke, it was accompanied by tv news footage taken of the stockpile as an intrest piece with some embedded reporters.

when the stockpile turned up missing..... and then the footage came out, of soldiers being there, when the explosive was there.


and then the FACT...

that the explosive was NO LONGER THERE.

that is something the military gets to OWN as a screw up.
not necessarily the ones who moved on, but the chain of command dropped that ball, BIGTIME.


380 TONS, 760,000 pounds of high high explosive.



that is a big deal, and a big screw up.


we invaded that country to do something about the stockpiles of WMD.... remember?



so why did they just leave it there?
were they called away to gaurd all those other piles of weapons they found?were the back up crews who should have come along and dealt with that;busy? with all those other WMD's they found.


that is a glaring case of incompetence.


so, forty pounds blowing up in london, would be the smallest fraction of how much explosive is now on the black market.



another bush action, making the world more dangerous.

[pabull]

Originally posted by remember
special education,

those missing high explosives are just one of the many public screw-ups of the bushies in iraq.


if it was just some stockpile that went missing it would be one thing.

but when that story broke, it was accompanied by tv news footage taken of the stockpile as an intrest piece with some embedded reporters.

when the stockpile turned up missing..... and then the footage came out, of soldiers being there, when the explosive was there.


and then the FACT...

that the explosive was NO LONGER THERE.

that is something the military gets to OWN as a screw up.
not necessarily the ones who moved on, but the chain of command dropped that ball, BIGTIME.


380 TONS, 760,000 pounds of high high explosive.



that is a big deal, and a big screw up.


we invaded that country to do something about the stockpiles of WMD.... remember?



so why did they just leave it there?
were they called away to gaurd all those other piles of weapons they found?were the back up crews who should have come along and dealt with that;busy? with all those other WMD's they found.


that is a glaring case of incompetence.


so, forty pounds blowing up in london, would be the smallest fraction of how much explosive is now on the black market.



another bush action, making the world more dangerous.

Your posts and responses remind me of "Aunt Jemima's" pancakes.... all fluff, no substance.
Everything you say is typical liberal BS. You are twisting fact to suit your own needs.
I challenge you, as I challenge all of you so-called "free-thinkers", to come up with a solution. It seems that all you can do is "armchair quarterback". If you think you are right, don't just criticize, (we all can do that), offer a VIABLE solution.
If you cannot...then SHUT THE F##K UP!!
We all would appreciate it..... :)

BTW Nomember, if you ARE in the trade...please find another vocation. (they're are too many screw-ups in it as it is).

[bb]

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by special ed


[QUOTE]Oh, you mean like President Clinton was when he simply turned down an offer by the Sudanese gov't. to turn over bin Laden to us?Republican urban legend.




Hardly.

"Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan," Clinton explained to a Feb. 15 Long Island Association luncheon.

"He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start meeting with them again.

"They released him," the ex-president confirmed.

"At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.

"So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have," Clinton explained. "But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan."

The Democrap Shuffle

Saturday, July 10, 2004

AMANPOUR: You mentioned what you could or might have been able to do. Sometime in 1996 you spoke to a group of people in Long Island about this whole issue of Sudan, was Sudan ...

CLINTON: That was in 2001 ...

AMANPOUR: OK. Was Sudan asked to extradite [bin Laden]? Did you miss the opportunity to have him extradited?

CLINTON: And I miss ... what I said there was wrong. What I said was in error. I went back now and did all this research for my book and I said that we were told we couldn't hold him, implying that we had a chance to get him and didn't. That's not factually accurate.

Here's what is factually accurate. In 1996 and before then, when we found out about bin Laden, we had first thought he was a financier of terrorism but not a ringleader. In the beginning. When he took up residence in Sudan after having been ejected from Saudi Arabia, it is true that at some point during that period, there was some discussion in the Justice Department casting a doubt on how long we could hold him ... on the question of had he committed, or did we have evidence that he committed, an offense against the United States.

But that was never part of the question about whether we could get him. When he left, the idea that the Sudanese offered to hand him over to us is just absurd. The idea that they told us when he was leaving, and he was landing in the Gulf and we could get him at another airport, is absurd, and the idea that they tried to give him to us instead of giving him to Afghanistan is just not true. I have now gone back and reconstructed all the records, read all the documents, and that is just not true.

[Edited by bb on 07-14-2005 at 09:41 PM]

[bb]

http://www.imagewiz.net/usr/hvac1/12769_OsamabinLadenBillClinton.jpg

[bobby7388]

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by special ed

Originally posted by geerair
Republican urban legend.

Not urban legend. Urban fact, & you know it. Another example of denial. Well ed, let's see what the folks who investigated these claims, who had all of the intelligence, documentation and witnesses about these claims have to say:
"Former Sudanese officials claim that Sudan offered to expell Osama Bin Laden to the United States. We have found NO RELIABLE EVIDENCE to support the Sudanese claim."

9/11 Commission


Ed, you have got to stop listening to conservlican sources. They are lying to you.


This from a man who still believe's the Warren Commission's report is rock soild.

If I throw a stick will you go away?

[geerair]

Originally posted by bb

Originally posted by geerair
[B]
Originally posted by special ed


[QUOTE]Oh, you mean like President Clinton was when he simply turned down an offer by the Sudanese gov't. to turn over bin Laden to us?Republican urban legend.




Hardly.

"Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan," Clinton explained to a Feb. 15 Long Island Association luncheon.

"He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start meeting with them again.

"They released him," the ex-president confirmed.

"At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.

"So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have," Clinton explained. "But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan."

The Democrap Shuffle

Saturday, July 10, 2004

AMANPOUR: You mentioned what you could or might have been able to do. Sometime in 1996 you spoke to a group of people in Long Island about this whole issue of Sudan, was Sudan ...

CLINTON: That was in 2001 ...

AMANPOUR: OK. Was Sudan asked to extradite ? Did you miss the opportunity to have him extradited?

CLINTON: And I miss ... what I said there was wrong. What I said was in error. I went back now and did all this research for my book and I said that we were told we couldn't hold him, implying that we had a chance to get him and didn't. That's not factually accurate.

Here's what is factually accurate. In 1996 and before then, when we found out about bin Laden, we had first thought he was a financier of terrorism but not a ringleader. In the beginning. When he took up residence in Sudan after having been ejected from Saudi Arabia, it is true that at some point during that period, there was some discussion in the Justice Department casting a doubt on how long we could hold him ... on the question of had he committed, or did we have evidence that he committed, an offense against the United States.

But that was never part of the question about whether we could get him. When he left, the idea that the Sudanese offered to hand him over to us is just absurd. The idea that they told us when he was leaving, and he was landing in the Gulf and we could get him at another airport, is absurd, and the idea that they tried to give him to us instead of giving him to Afghanistan is just not true. I have now gone back and reconstructed all the records, read all the documents, and that is just not true.

[Edited by bb on 07-14-2005 at 09:41 PM] Remains a Republican urban legend. As the 9/11 commission stated there is no evidence that Sudan ever offered Bin Laden to the U.S. Sorry try again.

[bb]

.

[Edited by bb on 07-14-2005 at 11:30 PM]

[geerair]

Bumping your post doesn't rehabilitate it. Sorry, try again.

[bb]

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by bb

Originally posted by geerair
[B]
Originally posted by special ed


[QUOTE]Oh, you mean like President Clinton was when he simply turned down an offer by the Sudanese gov't. to turn over bin Laden to us?Republican urban legend.




Hardly.

"Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan," Clinton explained to a Feb. 15 Long Island Association luncheon.

"He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start meeting with them again.

"They released him," the ex-president confirmed.

"At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.

"So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have," Clinton explained. "But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan."

The Democrap Shuffle

Saturday, July 10, 2004

AMANPOUR: You mentioned what you could or might have been able to do. Sometime in 1996 you spoke to a group of people in Long Island about this whole issue of Sudan, was Sudan ...

CLINTON: That was in 2001 ...

AMANPOUR: OK. Was Sudan asked to extradite ? Did you miss the opportunity to have him extradited?

CLINTON: And I miss ... what I said there was wrong. What I said was in error. I went back now and did all this research for my book and I said that we were told we couldn't hold him, implying that we had a chance to get him and didn't. That's not factually accurate.

Here's what is factually accurate. In 1996 and before then, when we found out about bin Laden, we had first thought he was a financier of terrorism but not a ringleader. In the beginning. When he took up residence in Sudan after having been ejected from Saudi Arabia, it is true that at some point during that period, there was some discussion in the Justice Department casting a doubt on how long we could hold him ... on the question of had he committed, or did we have evidence that he committed, an offense against the United States.

But that was never part of the question about whether we could get him. When he left, the idea that the Sudanese offered to hand him over to us is just absurd. The idea that they told us when he was leaving, and he was landing in the Gulf and we could get him at another airport, is absurd, and the idea that they tried to give him to us instead of giving him to Afghanistan is just not true. I have now gone back and reconstructed all the records, read all the documents, and that is just not true.

[Edited by bb on 07-14-2005 at 09:41 PM] Remains a Republican urban legend. As the 9/11 commission stated there is no evidence that Sudan ever offered Bin Laden to the U.S. Sorry try again.

The commission was partizan to Clinton. Maybe they should have looked in Sandy Berger's pants.

9/11 Report Concludes Clinton 'Misspoke' on Sudan Offer

How convenient :rolleyes:

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/22/142223.shtml

[geerair]

Originally posted by bobby7388

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by special ed

Originally posted by geerair
Republican urban legend.

Not urban legend. Urban fact, & you know it. Another example of denial. Well ed, let's see what the folks who investigated these claims, who had all of the intelligence, documentation and witnesses about these claims have to say:
"Former Sudanese officials claim that Sudan offered to expell Osama Bin Laden to the United States. We have found NO RELIABLE EVIDENCE to support the Sudanese claim."

9/11 Commission


Ed, you have got to stop listening to conservlican sources. They are lying to you.

This from a man who still believe's the Warren Commission's report is rock soild.

If I throw a stick will you go away? Never said it was rock solid. I said it is the best explanation. If I give you some reading glasses will you go away?

[geerair]

Originally posted by bb
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/22/142223.shtml [/B]Still no evidence. Sorry try again.

[bb]

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by bb
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/22/142223.shtml Still no evidence. Sorry try again. [/B]

No thanks. Tired of feeding introverted trolls.

[geerair]

Originally posted by bb

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by bb
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/22/142223.shtml Still no evidence. Sorry try again.

No thanks. Tired of feeding introverted trolls. [/B]Yeah, trying to find credible evidence for myths must be exhausting.

[bb]

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by bb

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by bb
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/22/142223.shtml Still no evidence. Sorry try again.

No thanks. Tired of feeding introverted trolls. Yeah, trying to find credible evidence for myths must be exhausting. [/B]

Yes your right. It's hard to prove Democrat backpeddling.

[Special Ed]

See, that's the problem with us Americans. Instead of finding solutions we're too busy trying to find someone to blame for all our shortcomings. This should not be the case. If we lose this war it won't be because we lack the know-how or ability but, rather, because we're too busy fighting amongst ourselves.

This is absolutely crazy! Every time I watch the news (which is rare for a reason) all I hear is Reid, Pelosi & Kennedy trying to discredit the President by being nothing short of obstructionist. It seems to me that each time the President takes a position on an issue, be it Iraq & foreign policy or domestic issues, the Dems seem to try to find the position that is as far from the President's as is humanly possible. If you're going to disagree with something don't do it just to be argumentative but do it on principle & because of a conviction you may hold. Democrats claim Republicans are playing "partisan politics" but it seems to me that the Dems are more guilty of that charge.

In summary, I think these arguments amongst our esteemed leaders are unproductive & evidence that Americans have taken their eyes off of the ball. We need to re-gain our focus before we, as a country, drop the ball altogether.

[remember]

now special ed,

your last post is commendable, in the sense that I agree with you. our division against each other, distracts us from the real matters at hand.

but.....



as much as I hate the spineless democrats... they can't go along with bush on anything because the country would be even more screwed than it is now.


and the reason we may lose this war, is precisely because we are unable to win it. not that we are fighting ourselves.


there is no possible way to win a war on terror.
the president gaurenteed us to lose another war, by making this thing a war.


a war on whom....
butterbean even said... we don't know who all the alqueada members are.

a nation state can have a war with another nation state.

but a war with a few people, isn't a real war. it is a metephorical war.

and labeling it a real war..... gaurentees a loss.

we can't even define our enemy. how can we fight... whoever it is.
they have no home ground... so all these collateral casualties are just the once innocents who are now ripe recruits for whoever it is we are fighting.




this london thing seems to be a perfect example...


now britian wants these people to be part of al-queada.

but the explosives they used were homemade.
which means anyone could make them.no need to be connected to the black market even.

and there was no technical expertise here.

the run of the mill fireworks show takes more expertise than these four bombs going off.


which means these four were most likely, independants.
just another four out of the woodwork. with homemade explosives.the proverbial needle in 10,ooo haystacks.

the impossible find. the inevitable few that will get thru..


this kind of thing can't be stopped.
hell the irish and the isreali's were bombing the brits before. now it is someone else.



the real picture is for republicans and establishment freaks to stop being such sissies, and not get so rattled everytime an attack happens. making them react without any real thought of the outcome.


we are in a war on terror, because of the pansies who allowed our way of life to be put on hold because 19 people hijacked four planes and crashed them.



these pansies saying we need the military.....even though they don't have an objective for that military.



if they at least went after bin laden...in a rational way.
they might have been successful.


and I could tell you what to do.

I could even tell you what would have worked.

now we have bad choices, and even the best course of action is going to cost us now.

because of the ineptness of the bushies and the spinelessness of the democrats.


you are right.
our bickering as the ship fills with water, is doing us no good.

[tonys]

Egypt: Chemist Has No Links to al-Qaida

CAIRO, Egypt - Egypt said Tuesday that a detained chemist wanted by Britain for questioning about the London bombings had no links to the July 7 attacks or to al-Qaida.

Government spokesman Magdy Rady said in a statement that a Cabinet meeting Tuesday reviewed an Interior Ministry report that "made clear that there is no link between Egyptian chemist Magdy el-Nashar with al-Qaida or the (London) bombings."

El-Nashar, who obtained a doctorate from Leeds University in England, was detained last week by Egyptian authorities at the request of the British government, which suspects he had links to some of the four bombers, three of whom are from Leeds.

Egypt's leading pro-government newspaper, Al-Ahram, quoted a senior security official as saying el-Nashar's innocence was revealed in questioning.