OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

So far it's an unconfirm "Iranian" report,
but...................keeping our fingers crossed!!

Take care & well done.


K

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 21:28:17 +1100, K Smith wrote:


So far it's an unconfirm "Iranian" report,
but...................keeping our fingers crossed!!

Take care & well done.


K

Thanks, K!

Now I'm waiting to see how many congratulatory messages are posted by Harry,
jps, basskisser, et al. Should be interesting reading.

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 21:28:17 +1100, K Smith
wrote:


So far it's an unconfirm "Iranian" report,
but...................keeping our fingers crossed!!

Take care & well done.

One of the advantages of living in an earlier time zone I guess.:)

But yes, it's confirmed and of course in all the early Sunday news
reports here.

Steve

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

It's confirmed. (woot)

And may that put an end to thier insignificant rebellion.

- Darth Mollusk



"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 21:28:17 +1100, K Smith
wrote:


So far it's an unconfirm "Iranian" report,
but...................keeping our fingers crossed!!

Take care & well done.

One of the advantages of living in an earlier time zone I guess.:)

But yes, it's confirmed and of course in all the early Sunday news
reports here.

Steve

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:06:08 -0500, JohnH wrote:


Now I'm waiting to see how many congratulatory messages are posted by
Harry, jps, basskisser, et al. Should be interesting reading.

Capturing Saddam is a good thing, but I'd hold off on hanging another
"Mission Accomplished" banner until we see how it plays out in Iraq. I
would hope the attacks on Americans would taper off, but there is no
guarantee and there is still a long road ahead in Iraq.

Is anyone else surprised he was taken alive? I would have thought he
would have committed suicide before capture.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:06:08 -0500, JohnH wrote:


Now I'm waiting to see how many congratulatory messages are posted by
Harry, jps, basskisser, et al. Should be interesting reading.

Capturing Saddam is a good thing, but I'd hold off on hanging another
"Mission Accomplished" banner until we see how it plays out in Iraq. I
would hope the attacks on Americans would taper off, but there is no
guarantee and there is still a long road ahead in Iraq.

The people with brains (military in Iraq) have apparently been telling
reporters to "simmer down now". The insurgents are working with an agenda
that doesn't quite fit ANYONE'S guess, including ours or Saddam's. Read the
December 15th Time Magazine cover story. Near the end of the story is a
paragraph which the borg will interpret as left-biased, but 98% of what's
there seems factual.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:45:08 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Steven Shelikoff wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 21:28:17 +1100, K Smith
wrote:


So far it's an unconfirm "Iranian" report,
but...................keeping our fingers crossed!!

Take care & well done.

One of the advantages of living in an earlier time zone I guess.:)

But yes, it's confirmed and of course in all the early Sunday news
reports here.

This is such a yawner. It took all of Bush's horses and all of Bush's

Apparently the rest of the world doesn't agree with your assesment that
"This is such a yawner." You must be working for Dean/Gore now, since
he's the one that's most hurt by this news so downplaying it is in his
best interest. Lieberman seemed pretty excited this morning.

Steve

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

Is anyone else surprised he was taken alive? I would have thought he
would have committed suicide before capture.


Saddam is very much a coward. Always has been. Cowards don't commit suicide
unless overwhelmed with depression.

He probably expects to survive.

We have caught a hot potato. The US will want to try him at a US (only)
military tribunal, and the rest of the world will want a Nuremberg type trial.
Sticky diplomacy ahead, at a time when Colin Powell has been muzzled and nobody
else in the administration is up to the task.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

Gould 0738 wrote:

Is anyone else surprised he was taken alive? I would have thought he
would have committed suicide before capture.


Saddam is very much a coward. Always has been. Cowards don't commit suicide
unless overwhelmed with depression.

He probably expects to survive.

We have caught a hot potato. The US will want to try him at a US (only)
military tribunal, and the rest of the world will want a Nuremberg type trial.
Sticky diplomacy ahead, at a time when Colin Powell has been muzzled and nobody
else in the administration is up to the task.

Doesn't Fox News (ha!) already have the trial transcripts?


--
Email sent to is never read.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

Steven Shelikoff wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:45:08 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Steven Shelikoff wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 21:28:17 +1100, K Smith
wrote:


So far it's an unconfirm "Iranian" report,
but...................keeping our fingers crossed!!

Take care & well done.

One of the advantages of living in an earlier time zone I guess.:)

But yes, it's confirmed and of course in all the early Sunday news
reports here.

This is such a yawner. It took all of Bush's horses and all of Bush's

Apparently the rest of the world doesn't agree with your assesment that
"This is such a yawner." You must be working for Dean/Gore now, since
he's the one that's most hurt by this news so downplaying it is in his
best interest. Lieberman seemed pretty excited this morning.

Steve

Saddam has been out of power for seven months. It's nice that he's been
captured. But...now what, Steve? After his capture was announced, a car
bomb in Iraq took out 17 people.



--
Email sent to is never read.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

WaIIy wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:06:08 -0500, JohnH
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 21:28:17 +1100, K Smith wrote:


So far it's an unconfirm "Iranian" report,
but...................keeping our fingers crossed!!

Take care & well done.


K

Thanks, K!

Now I'm waiting to see how many congratulatory messages are posted by Harry,
jps, basskisser, et al. Should be interesting reading.

They are so immersed in hatred for everything Bush and anything
patriotic, there will be no positive comments.

Dean in '04 LOL


There is no connection whatsoever between true patriotism and the Bush
Adminstration. Bush and his crew are nothing but right-wing whores.

--
Email sent to is never read.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Gould 0738 wrote:

Is anyone else surprised he was taken alive? I would have thought he
would have committed suicide before capture.


Saddam is very much a coward. Always has been. Cowards don't commit
suicide
unless overwhelmed with depression.

He probably expects to survive.

We have caught a hot potato. The US will want to try him at a US (only)
military tribunal, and the rest of the world will want a Nuremberg type
trial.
Sticky diplomacy ahead, at a time when Colin Powell has been muzzled and
nobody
else in the administration is up to the task.

Doesn't Fox News (ha!) already have the trial transcripts?

I have 'em...right in the draw next to Bush's Yale transcript. If you want,
I'll send 'em both to you.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:52:10 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

WaIIy wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:06:08 -0500, JohnH
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 21:28:17 +1100, K Smith wrote:


So far it's an unconfirm "Iranian" report,
but...................keeping our fingers crossed!!

Take care & well done.


K

Thanks, K!

Now I'm waiting to see how many congratulatory messages are posted by Harry,
jps, basskisser, et al. Should be interesting reading.

They are so immersed in hatred for everything Bush and anything
patriotic, there will be no positive comments.

Dean in '04 LOL


There is no connection whatsoever between true patriotism and the Bush
Adminstration. Bush and his crew are nothing but right-wing whores.

The capture of Saddam is a good thing. The Bush administration is responsible.
Yippee. Can't wait to hear Dean. Gotta be fun to watch.

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

"WaIIy" wrote in message
...


Now I'm waiting to see how many congratulatory messages are posted by
Harry,
jps, basskisser, et al. Should be interesting reading.

They are so immersed in hatred for everything Bush and anything
patriotic, there will be no positive comments.

Dean in '04 LOL

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 17:28:31 +0000, Gould 0738 wrote:


We have caught a hot potato. The US will want to try him at a US (only)
military tribunal, and the rest of the world will want a Nuremberg type
trial. Sticky diplomacy ahead, at a time when Colin Powell has been
muzzled and nobody else in the administration is up to the task.

Yuh think? I'm thinking he'll be tried by Iraqis in Iraq. The Governing
Council is already calling for the trial. Justice may be quicker if left
to the Iraqis.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

"WaIIy" wrote in message
...

They are so immersed in hatred for everything Bush and anything
patriotic, there will be no positive comments.

Dean in '04 LOL

"Duh...yeah...what he said. Me think same thing."
-Wally

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:56:24 -0500, JohnH wrote:

The capture of Saddam is a good thing. The Bush administration is
responsible.

Are they? I thought he was captured by the 4th Infantry Division.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:56:24 -0500, JohnH wrote:

The capture of Saddam is a good thing. The Bush administration is
responsible.

Are they? I thought he was captured by the 4th Infantry Division.

Who ordered them to Iraq...or did they go on their own?

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

NOYB wrote:

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:56:24 -0500, JohnH wrote:

The capture of Saddam is a good thing. The Bush administration is
responsible.

Are they? I thought he was captured by the 4th Infantry Division.

Who ordered them to Iraq...or did they go on their own?



Oh...so, then, George W. Bush is personally responsible for the 10,000
non-combatant Iraqi civilians we killed recently?

I thought so. Glad you do, too.




--
Email sent to is never read.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

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

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:56:24 -0500, JohnH wrote:

The capture of Saddam is a good thing. The Bush administration is
responsible.

Are they? I thought he was captured by the 4th Infantry Division.

Who ordered them to Iraq...or did they go on their own?



Oh...so, then, George W. Bush is personally responsible for the 10,000
non-combatant Iraqi civilians we killed recently?

No. I put the blame for their deaths on the guy that used them as human
shields.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

NOYB wrote:

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

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:56:24 -0500, JohnH wrote:

The capture of Saddam is a good thing. The Bush administration is
responsible.

Are they? I thought he was captured by the 4th Infantry Division.

Who ordered them to Iraq...or did they go on their own?



Oh...so, then, George W. Bush is personally responsible for the 10,000
non-combatant Iraqi civilians we killed recently?

No. I put the blame for their deaths on the guy that used them as human
shields.



I'd say you were rationalizing, but, then, you're a conservative and
such deaths do not concern you.

--
Email sent to is never read.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

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

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

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:56:24 -0500, JohnH wrote:

The capture of Saddam is a good thing. The Bush administration is
responsible.

Are they? I thought he was captured by the 4th Infantry Division.

Who ordered them to Iraq...or did they go on their own?



Oh...so, then, George W. Bush is personally responsible for the 10,000
non-combatant Iraqi civilians we killed recently?

No. I put the blame for their deaths on the guy that used them as human
shields.



I'd say you were rationalizing, but, then, you're a conservative and
such deaths do not concern you.

The guy chose to hide himself and his weapons among his civilian population.
There was a recent report from an independent group that concluded that
"several hundred" (*not* thousands) Iraqi civilian deaths could have been
prevented by avoiding the use of certain types of munitions. However, they
also concluded the US went to great measures to avoid civilian casualties.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

NOYB wrote:

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

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

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:56:24 -0500, JohnH wrote:

The capture of Saddam is a good thing. The Bush administration is
responsible.

Are they? I thought he was captured by the 4th Infantry Division.

Who ordered them to Iraq...or did they go on their own?



Oh...so, then, George W. Bush is personally responsible for the 10,000
non-combatant Iraqi civilians we killed recently?

No. I put the blame for their deaths on the guy that used them as human
shields.



I'd say you were rationalizing, but, then, you're a conservative and
such deaths do not concern you.

The guy chose to hide himself and his weapons among his civilian population.
There was a recent report from an independent group that concluded that
"several hundred" (*not* thousands) Iraqi civilian deaths could have been
prevented by avoiding the use of certain types of munitions. However, they
also concluded the US went to great measures to avoid civilian casualties.



There also are reports from independent groups that upwards of 10,000
non-combatant Iraqi civilians were killed as a result of wounds or bombs
from US troops.

As far as Saddam hiding himself among civilians, you've obviously not
been to Washington, D.C., where the federal government is mixed in with
hundreds of thousands of civilians who have nothing to do with the
federal government. Yeah, I know...Saddam and other dictators
deliberately build themselves bunkers next to apartment houses. But,
then, there are federal buildings - possible targets - adjacent to
apartment buildings, townhouses, subway stations, et cetera.

The fact remains that Bush invaded Iraq for strictly personal political
reasons. If he hadn't been tanking in the polls, and desperate to draw
attention away from his adminstration's failure to capture the perps of
9-11, we never would have invaded.

BTW, what evidence is there - I mean real evidence - that Osama was
responsible for 9-11? Yes, I know Osama has made some oblique
references, and so have his followers, but what irrefutable evidence is
there that we really, truly know what persons really are responsible for
9-11?

We aren't about to invade Saudia Arabia.

--
Email sent to is never read.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

Harry Krause wrote:

1. We invaded Iraq because it had WMD it was going to use against us.
Where are they?

They just found one you dork.

But then again, the thousands upon thousands of human lives that saddam
took are worthless to you because you are a self-absorbed asshole, who
cares little for anything or anyone who doesn't futher your self interests.

-- Charlie


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

BTW, what evidence is there - I mean real evidence - that Osama was
responsible for 9-11? Yes, I know Osama has made some oblique
references, and so have his followers, but what irrefutable evidence is
there that we really, truly know what persons really are responsible for
9-11?

Good point. Perhaps Saddam was responsible for 9/11...and just used al
Qaeda mercernaries for cover.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

BTW, what evidence is there - I mean real evidence - that Osama was
responsible for 9-11? Yes, I know Osama has made some oblique
references, and so have his followers, but what irrefutable evidence is
there that we really, truly know what persons really are responsible for
9-11?

Good point. Perhaps Saddam was responsible for 9/11...and just used al
Qaeda mercernaries for cover.



And perhaps he was not. The previous deadly terrorist attack in the USA
was perpetrated by U.S. citizens. You do remember Oklahoma City, right?

Islamic terrorist groups seem quick to "take responsibility" for various
actions, and sometimes more than one group chimes in. The various
branches of the IRA used to do the same.

At some point we're going to need perpetrators and evidence that
satisfies civilian courts. "Military court" justice is an oxymoron.
Of course, the Bush-shippers just want to pretend they've caught the
real perps. That's one of the reasons we invaded Iraq in the absence of
real evidence.

--
Email sent to is never read.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

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

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

BTW, what evidence is there - I mean real evidence - that Osama was
responsible for 9-11? Yes, I know Osama has made some oblique
references, and so have his followers, but what irrefutable evidence is
there that we really, truly know what persons really are responsible
for
9-11?

Good point. Perhaps Saddam was responsible for 9/11...and just used al
Qaeda mercernaries for cover.



And perhaps he was not. The previous deadly terrorist attack in the USA
was perpetrated by U.S. citizens. You do remember Oklahoma City, right?

Sure. You do remember McVeigh's letter about why he bombed the Murrah
Federal building, right?
Here's an excerpt:
Additionally, borrowing a page from U.S. foreign policy, I decided to send a
message to a government that was becoming increasingly hostile, by bombing a
government building and the government employees within that building who
represent that government. Bombing the Murrah Federal Building was morally
and strategically equivalent to the U.S. hitting a government building in
Serbia, *Iraq*, or other nations.

There were also reports about Nichols and McVeigh meeting with a
"dark-skinned man" prior to the attack. This doesn't sound like the actions
of declared "white supremacists".

In addition, there were reports of Nichols travelling to the Phillipines and
meeting with Ramzi Yousef and his uncle, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.

Why is it beyond your belief that various terrorist countries and
organizations were working together to undertake a coordinated terrorist
assault against the US...specifically, its government?

The Clinton Administration decided to address terrorism as a criminal act,
and punish the perpetrators...rather than consider it a state-sanctioned
act. The reason? Because then it would mean having to find the country
responsible and going to war with them...something Clinton didn't have the
stomach to do.

Islamic terrorist groups seem quick to "take responsibility" for various
actions, and sometimes more than one group chimes in. The various
branches of the IRA used to do the same.

At some point we're going to need perpetrators and evidence that
satisfies civilian courts. "Military court" justice is an oxymoron.
Of course, the Bush-shippers just want to pretend they've caught the
real perps. That's one of the reasons we invaded Iraq in the absence of
real evidence.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

NOYB wrote:

The Clinton Administration decided to address terrorism as a criminal act,
and punish the perpetrators...rather than consider it a state-sanctioned
act. The reason? Because then it would mean having to find the country
responsible and going to war with them...something Clinton didn't have the
stomach to do.

Or it could be, that although he did enjoy an illicit blow job or two, Clinton
actually had the moral integrity to not become a terrorst himself. Bush could
not resist temptation, especially when it meant lots of profits for his &
Cheney's military industrialist cronies.

JohnH does not have an answer for the obliterating of an entire block of
downtown Baghdad, and everyone unlucky enough to be there at that moment, trying
to get Saddam. Do you?

Would you like to comment on the morality of Rumsfelds assassination program?

DSK

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

"WaIIy" wrote in message
...
( snip)

I don't mind you making fun of me, but when you mock the way an American
icon speaks, you've gone to far.

You have besmirched the memory of Tonto.

Tonto, an American? I don't think so. He was a Canadian, born in Brantford
Ontario.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

WaIIy wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 18:01:43 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"WaIIy" wrote in message
. ..

They are so immersed in hatred for everything Bush and anything
patriotic, there will be no positive comments.

Dean in '04 LOL

"Duh...yeah...what he said. Me think same thing."
-Wally


I don't mind you making fun of me, but when you mock the way an American
icon speaks, you've gone to far.

You have besmirched the memory of Tonto.


Jay Silverheels (not his real name) was a Canadian icon, not an American
icon, unless you are referring to North American, which I doubt, because
you dumfoch righties think America ends at the northern border of the USA.



--
Email sent to is never read.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 13:39:20 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

NOYB wrote:

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:56:24 -0500, JohnH wrote:

The capture of Saddam is a good thing. The Bush administration is
responsible.

Are they? I thought he was captured by the 4th Infantry Division.

Who ordered them to Iraq...or did they go on their own?



Oh...so, then, George W. Bush is personally responsible for the 10,000
non-combatant Iraqi civilians we killed recently?

I thought so. Glad you do, too.

Show me! Where do you come up with this stuff, Harry?

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 14:25:17 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

NOYB wrote:

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

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

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:56:24 -0500, JohnH wrote:

The capture of Saddam is a good thing. The Bush administration is
responsible.

Are they? I thought he was captured by the 4th Infantry Division.

Who ordered them to Iraq...or did they go on their own?



Oh...so, then, George W. Bush is personally responsible for the 10,000
non-combatant Iraqi civilians we killed recently?

No. I put the blame for their deaths on the guy that used them as human
shields.



I'd say you were rationalizing, but, then, you're a conservative and
such deaths do not concern you.

The guy chose to hide himself and his weapons among his civilian population.
There was a recent report from an independent group that concluded that
"several hundred" (*not* thousands) Iraqi civilian deaths could have been
prevented by avoiding the use of certain types of munitions. However, they
also concluded the US went to great measures to avoid civilian casualties.



There also are reports from independent groups that upwards of 10,000
non-combatant Iraqi civilians were killed as a result of wounds or bombs
from US troops.

As far as Saddam hiding himself among civilians, you've obviously not
been to Washington, D.C., where the federal government is mixed in with
hundreds of thousands of civilians who have nothing to do with the
federal government. Yeah, I know...Saddam and other dictators
deliberately build themselves bunkers next to apartment houses. But,
then, there are federal buildings - possible targets - adjacent to
apartment buildings, townhouses, subway stations, et cetera.

The fact remains that Bush invaded Iraq for strictly personal political
reasons. If he hadn't been tanking in the polls, and desperate to draw
attention away from his adminstration's failure to capture the perps of
9-11, we never would have invaded.

BTW, what evidence is there - I mean real evidence - that Osama was
responsible for 9-11? Yes, I know Osama has made some oblique
references, and so have his followers, but what irrefutable evidence is
there that we really, truly know what persons really are responsible for
9-11?

We aren't about to invade Saudia Arabia.

Where, Harry? Where are these reports of 10,000 non-combatant deaths you are
attributing to the US? Such bull**** coming from a Bay fisherman!

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:27:55 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

BTW, what evidence is there - I mean real evidence - that Osama was
responsible for 9-11? Yes, I know Osama has made some oblique
references, and so have his followers, but what irrefutable evidence is
there that we really, truly know what persons really are responsible for
9-11?

Good point. Perhaps Saddam was responsible for 9/11...and just used al
Qaeda mercernaries for cover.



And perhaps he was not. The previous deadly terrorist attack in the USA
was perpetrated by U.S. citizens. You do remember Oklahoma City, right?

Islamic terrorist groups seem quick to "take responsibility" for various
actions, and sometimes more than one group chimes in. The various
branches of the IRA used to do the same.

At some point we're going to need perpetrators and evidence that
satisfies civilian courts. "Military court" justice is an oxymoron.
Of course, the Bush-shippers just want to pretend they've caught the
real perps. That's one of the reasons we invaded Iraq in the absence of
real evidence.
What the hell do you know about military courts? Ever participated in a court
martial? Ever administered an Article 15? Ever conducted an Article 32
investigation? I didn't think so.

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

"DSK" wrote in message

.... Clinton actually had the moral integrity ....

WHOA!! Now there's an irony for the ages!

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

The fact remains that Bush invaded Iraq for strictly personal political
reasons.

That's not a 'fact', it's your mantra. In standard Dem/union tactic of the
past several years, you repeat the lie ad nauseam in the hope that after a
certain number of hearings, people will accept it as fact. And it works, up
to a point, because a fair percentage of the population is poorly educated
and/or just plain stupid (the Dem base). A mob of fools believing a lie
doesn't make it any less a lie, but as the saying goes, when the fools in
town are on your side, anything is possible.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 14:25:17 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

NOYB wrote:

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

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

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:56:24 -0500, JohnH wrote:

The capture of Saddam is a good thing. The Bush administration is
responsible.

Are they? I thought he was captured by the 4th Infantry Division.

Who ordered them to Iraq...or did they go on their own?



Oh...so, then, George W. Bush is personally responsible for the 10,000
non-combatant Iraqi civilians we killed recently?

No. I put the blame for their deaths on the guy that used them as human
shields.



I'd say you were rationalizing, but, then, you're a conservative and
such deaths do not concern you.

The guy chose to hide himself and his weapons among his civilian population.
There was a recent report from an independent group that concluded that
"several hundred" (*not* thousands) Iraqi civilian deaths could have been
prevented by avoiding the use of certain types of munitions. However, they
also concluded the US went to great measures to avoid civilian casualties.



There also are reports from independent groups that upwards of 10,000
non-combatant Iraqi civilians were killed as a result of wounds or bombs
from US troops.

As far as Saddam hiding himself among civilians, you've obviously not
been to Washington, D.C., where the federal government is mixed in with
hundreds of thousands of civilians who have nothing to do with the
federal government. Yeah, I know...Saddam and other dictators
deliberately build themselves bunkers next to apartment houses. But,
then, there are federal buildings - possible targets - adjacent to
apartment buildings, townhouses, subway stations, et cetera.

The fact remains that Bush invaded Iraq for strictly personal political
reasons. If he hadn't been tanking in the polls, and desperate to draw
attention away from his adminstration's failure to capture the perps of
9-11, we never would have invaded.

BTW, what evidence is there - I mean real evidence - that Osama was
responsible for 9-11? Yes, I know Osama has made some oblique
references, and so have his followers, but what irrefutable evidence is
there that we really, truly know what persons really are responsible for
9-11?

We aren't about to invade Saudia Arabia.

Where, Harry? Where are these reports of 10,000 non-combatant deaths you are
attributing to the US? Such bull**** coming from a Bay fisherman!

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

Seek and ye shall find, but not on any of your right-wing "news" sources.

--
Email sent to is never read.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

John Gaquin wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

The fact remains that Bush invaded Iraq for strictly personal political
reasons.

That's not a 'fact', it's your mantra. In standard Dem/union tactic of the
past several years, you repeat the lie ad nauseam in the hope that after a
certain number of hearings, people will accept it as fact. And it works, up
to a point, because a fair percentage of the population is poorly educated
and/or just plain stupid (the Dem base). A mob of fools believing a lie
doesn't make it any less a lie, but as the saying goes, when the fools in
town are on your side, anything is possible.



Oh? Which reason on the ever-growing list of the Bush Adminsitration
lies and mis-statements did you buy into? The WMD? The Nukes? The close
tie-in of Osama to Saddam? All of which have been debunked. Oh... I
know...Saddam was preparing to attack Topeka. No? Making Iraq safe for
western-style democracy? No?

Wait, wait, I have it! Saddam was a bad boy.

North Korea is a far greater threat to us than Iraq ever was. I don't
seen you dumb-boy POTUS wagging his finger at the North Koreans.

--
Email sent to is never read.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

The WMD? The Nukes? The close
tie-in of Osama to Saddam? All of which have been debunked.

No, they haven't been debunked -- merely not proven present day in the
cast-in-stone manner those on the left demand. The NBC weapons did exist.
That is documented. The nuclear program did exist. That is documented.
There was contact between AQ and Iraqi Intel. That is documented.


North Korea is a far greater threat to us than Iraq ever was.

Not so, because NK lends itself to several possible viable political
solutions. 1. That NK whacko has a documented history of making outrageous
demands and then backing off in order to get concessions. 2. Chinese
pressure may bear. China simply has too much to lose to allow this nut to
screw it up. I don't know what will work there, but there are still
diplomatic possibilities, which were exhausted in Iraq.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

Correction:

"John Gaquin" wrote


....The NBC weapons did exist.
That is documented. The nuclear program did exist. That is documented.

Should read:

.....the Bio and Chem weapons did exist.
That is documented. The nuclear program did exist. That is documented.

OT If True & confirmed about saddam, congrats to you all
 

Tonto IS an American and US icon even if the actor portraying the character
suffered the misfortune of being Canadian.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
WaIIy wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 18:01:43 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"WaIIy" wrote in message
. ..

They are so immersed in hatred for everything Bush and anything
patriotic, there will be no positive comments.

Dean in '04 LOL

"Duh...yeah...what he said. Me think same thing."
-Wally


I don't mind you making fun of me, but when you mock the way an American
icon speaks, you've gone to far.

You have besmirched the memory of Tonto.


Jay Silverheels (not his real name) was a Canadian icon, not an American
icon, unless you are referring to North American, which I doubt, because
you dumfoch righties think America ends at the northern border of the USA.



--
Email sent to is never read.