Subject:
|
Re: Thank you, Britain.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 3 Oct 2001 11:33:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
454 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
> Most have yet to see any evidence (assuming it exists).
I addressed that in another post (it is deep in the "War" war). Lord
Robertson is either fooled by faked evidence, in on the gag, or the evidence
does actualy exist.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Thank you, Britain.
|
| (...) Well, that's good enough for me... lets bomb them! (not). What about the "evidence" NATO had when it bombed the Chinese embassy? Was it not duff? What about the "evidence" the USA had when it bombed Sudan? Was it not duff? See: (URL) A (23 years ago, 3-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Thank you, Britain.
|
| (...) I guess I should've put "conclusive" in there somewhere. A couple of excerpts from (URL) (free reg req) --- Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, in an interview today with The New York Times, said administrationofficials had been briefing (...) (23 years ago, 3-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Thank you, Britain.
|
| (...) Also: "Science can't make that choice for us, only the moral power of a world acting as a community can." But then from the same article: "This is a battle with only one outcome: our victory, not theirs," A rather naive view of battle. and: (...) (23 years ago, 3-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
118 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
