Subject:
|
Re: Thank you, Britain.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 3 Oct 2001 11:44:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
472 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> 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.
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:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4268146,00.html
Scott A
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Thank you, Britain.
|
| (...) Thanks for the snide comment but which of those three choices were you going with? Calling him a failed politician isn't an answer either. Pick one of the above or show that I omitted one possibility and let me know what it is? (...) This was (...) (23 years ago, 4-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Thank you, Britain.
|
| (...) 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. (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
|
|
|
|
