You guys just don't understand at all...
This evidence won't be enough for the Democrats...
No evidence will be enough for the Democrats...
We could find videotape of Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein cuddling in bed as they discuss their plans for the attacks of 9/11 and that STILL wouldn't make a dent in the Democrat opinion on this matter...
This has nothing to do with reality...
This has nothing to do with the truth...
This has nothing to do with national security...
This is all about Democrats winning back political power "by any means necessary"
Man, you are so right. The level of "evidence" required by the Democrats in the terror war is about the same as what the OJ jury would have required to convict him - in other words, unattainable. Liberal Democrats seem always willing to give the benefit of any doubt to those who wish to attack us rather than to those trying their best to protect us.
Of course, the same liberals who think we don't have the "evidence" to actually do anything about the threat from the Islamofascists will be the first ones asking why nothing was done about the threat after a chemical or nuclear attack. Just as they place full blame on the new Bush administration for the Sept. 11th attacks while absolving the previous administration, which squandered 8 years doing nothing about the threat and limiting our intelligence capabilities because we wouldn't want to violate the civil rights of murderous alien terrorists.
I'd be happy if Bush would simply get his story straight.
Why did he invade Iraq? Was it WMD which were there, but aren't there, and we don't know -- or care -- where they went.
But correct me if I'm wrong. Is this about the "size" of Bush's excuses -- I mean REASONS -- for invading Iraq?
WHY BUSH INVADED IRAQ, By ALFIE
"Bush invaded Iraq as a part of the war on terror, which doesn't make sense because the government of Iraq had zero to do with the attack on America, Ha! LIE-BERALS! Except that perhaps maybe coulda woulds mighta WOO-WOOOOOOOO! [/green] Saddam evil dictator regime is no more hates our freedoms because the evil dictator used WMD which ("hey Karl, you got anymore toot hanging around?" America provided against his own people like we give a $hit and against his neighbors which we encouraged. Then Clinton zipper OH MONICA! Evildoers are no more Mission Accomplished 621 dead but that's good no that's bad except Hello, UN? However; having said that...
We have liberatred the people of Iraq who hate us because of our freedoms why we even Abu Ghraib rebuild tear down new prison not torture thumbs up (up where?) few bad apples not government policy we will defend mushroom clouds but Clinton said but Ollie North said but they will welcome us as liberators BANG BANG hello, UN?"
Did I get it right?
Now what could make more sense of Bush's policy than THAT?
- Alfie
So Glad I Get MY NEWS from FoxHenHouse Snooze!
No, you didn't get anything right.
First of all, small quantities of WMDs have been discovered. Admittedly the liberal press has tried to bury the news, but the truth is that a chemical shell from Saddam's arsenal was used about a month ago, about a week ago rocket engines from Iraq
that had been smuggled into Jordan were found, about three months ago Danish troops found small quantities of prohibited chemical agents.
Second, the war by terrorist did not begin with 911 and is not limited to OBL. Do you know who Mr. Klinghofer was, what happened to him, and where his murderer was fund (Abul Nidal). Also, Russian intelligence advised the United States before the invasion of Iraqi plots against the United States.
Finally, I realize you have to be incoherent in misrepresenting the war on terroris, because a straight-forward and accurate account would run contrary to your beliefs.
