 | | Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
|
(...) I must remind the reader that no credible link has been shown to exist between Al-qaeda and Saddam Hussein, so any references to "{1,000s of AMERICANS} who died on {OUR} soil" are irrelevant to the issue of Dubya's decision to send thousands (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Core of weapons case crumbling
|
|
Core of weapons case crumbling (URL) Of the nine main conclusions in the British government document "Iraq's weapons of mass destruction", not one has been shown to be conclusively true. This one's a good redaction of the main issues. Quite short (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
|
(...) It is -- thanks for recognizing that. Too bad some of the rest of you are so mentally challenged. (...) Where is the QUESTION? A declarative statement is not a question. You stated: "I believe that the perceived threat was never from the Iraqi (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Y2K scam (was: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?)
|
|
(...) Hehe, I have to laugh every time I hear that. Sure there were probably con artists that sold back yard programs to "fix" PCs, but the Y2K "problem" was in fact a problem, in that a lot of money had to be spent to fix it. And fixed it was (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
|
(...) My reply to what? You snipped the context thankyouverymuch. Bad form. (...) Then pray tell why did you even reply to this post? (...) What a silly thing to say! As if providing "cites" bestows merit on a particular post. (...) Sorry, Richard, (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
