Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Baptist in Richmond, Apr 6, 2007.
Well, at least he is consistent.......
This information is not inconsistent with what VP Cheney said.
Are you sure about that?
And you believe Cheney, right? :laugh:
There is nothing in this report that says they were not in Iraq.
From the Weekly Standard at: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/527uwabl.asp
From the Washington Times at: http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040624-112921-3401r.htm
And these are conveniently overlooked by the left.
The Weekly Standard and the Washington Times? Why don't you quote Fox News! :laugh:
Cheney is still a liar, in spite of what you say!
Isn't it funny how Randy Rhodes' opinions end up, almost verbatum, slammed up on this board ? Sheeesh ! Can't these guys think for themselves ?
Some of the best news outlets available. Do you for some reason find CNN more credible? The facts are Cheney is not lying and is in fact saying the same things Democrat leaders said previously. There was a connection and the United States is safer because of the war on terror including the Iraq front.
I'll admit that I have only listened to Rhodes a couple of times, but the last I did I heard her say that Uzbekistan bordered Russia. It must be hard to pretend to talk politics and not know basic geography. :laugh:
OK, here is a CNN link
While most of this article slams the idea of an Iraq connection even the left has to admit
No one is saying Iraq was soley responsible or that Saddam had any information beforehand about 911. But there were many links, contacts, and shared support.
There is also NOTHING that would indicate that the VP is correct. Quite the contrary, there is NOTHING that supports his contention.
Can't speak for everyone, but I can't listen to Randi Rhodes. I would, if I could get an XM signal at work. Remember: I listen to Rush, followed by the local guy on right after him that is perpetually complaining about seemingly everything.
I have an XM2GO, so I will tape Randi Rhodes next week. Let's see how much of her discussion ends up on the board. I have already established that Rush Limbaugh's talking points end up here, so let's see what happens with Randi...... perhaps you are right as well.
"Many links, contacts and shared support?"
If that were the case, then it shouldn't be this hard to establish links between AQ and the former regime.
I don't think so......
Remember: UBL and SH hated each other.
On an unrelated note, you were in my thoughts yesterday, and I was compelled to stop what I was doing (at work) and pray for you. I trust that all is well.
Your tree-hugging left-leaning Brother-in-Christ,
BiR (who is enjoying his day off)
You have stated that his opinions end up here, but have failed to show any of us where we parrot his words.
Anyhoo, just having some fun with you. Good luck with Rhodes, even my most liberal friends describe her as a shreaker. Long on lungs, short on brains.
Making claims with no evidence and establishing truth are two completely different things. What you have engaged in is the first. What you have failed to do is the second.
I've never listened to Randy Rhodes, but I have tried to; I was unable to download her podcasts. I imagine some other liberal talk show host mentioned it. I could have heard it from Ed Schultz, Ron Reagan, Bill Press, Dave Ross or someone else. Either way, it's the truth.
This is still a lie!
I have done more than simply state it, Bro. Curtis: I have demonstrated it. I am under the impression that you listen to Rush - are you denying that his talking points end up in this discussion?
Well, I taped her this afternoon - I was hoping you could show me where her talking points are on this board. I am a little let down by that.
Regards - Happy Easter to you and yours,