A senior Syrian journalist reports Iraq’s WMD located in three Syrian sites. (Debka's latest)

Debka ^ | 5 Jan 03

[CWOJackson]

It's not that I blame your folks...it doesn't look like you're going to end up with a strong candidate to challenge the President. So I can understand how you will do anything to try and disrupt the conservative vote...but when you get this shrill it is a little unseemly.

The desperation shows through...

[JohnGalt]

Ummm, I don't waste my time with the Third Party candidadtes. I have stated numerous times that I believe Bush is a good man, and in these times, that is the best patriots can hope for.

The WMD dead enders are willing to risk the re-election with tin-foil theories about non-existant WMDs.

God's Speed, Jim Baker, Scourge of the WMD Dead Enders.

[CWOJackson]

"Ummm, I don't waste my time with the Third Party candidadtes."

Of course you don't...that would be why you constantly parrot the DEMOCRAT candidates in their BS about the President.

"I have stated numerous times that I believe Bush is a good man, and in these times, that is the best patriots can hope for."

Yes, every once in a while you do try to give yourself some cover...and 99% of the time you're on these threads parroting the Democrats.

Don't worry...as I said, I can understand your angst and why you're getting so shrill.

[JohnGalt]

Did you get this idea from the corporate thief Richard Perle and the expatriate pro-abortion disgraced speech writer David Frum?

To: akbaines
We will be fighting Germany and France both in the next war.

9 posted on 11/26/2003 9:11:32 PM EST by CWOJackson (Wal-Mart was behind the JFK assassination...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

[JohnGalt]

No, you are parroting the Democrats. You want a long stay in the Middle East, Bush wants the boys pulled out by June 2004.

CWOJackson, Hillary Republican.

That is why we call you phonycons. You don't even take the time to read current events to reshape your position to fit current talking points.

[CWOJackson]

LOL! This is almost as much fun as watching your democrat nominees debating...each one of them trying to our shrill the other on "Bush lied to us about WMD's". Except for Liberman that is.

I'm sure you folks aren't real thrilled that Liberman went of the reservation on that issue.

[JohnGalt]

I don't believe Bush lied about the WMDs. He simply was wrong in trusting the Clinton intelligence from incompetents in the CIA or schemers in the Office of Special Plans.

Baker is in the process of taking care of that mess.

The question after he through with those worthless cretins and the PNAC crowd starts looking for a new host, will you bolt with them or just do what some of your fellow travelers did and change your handle whilst pretending your are new sign-up?

[CWOJackson]

"I don't believe Bush lied about the WMDs."

You should say things like that jg...anyone familiar with your constant posting to the contrary could hurt themselves laughing so hard.

[JohnGalt]

No, I have been quite consistant in stating that while Clinton lied, Bush did not. No way would he have spent a billion dollars looking for non-existant WMDs, nor would Rummy have announced on national TV, that 'we know where they are' if they were lying.

Can you pull a post of mine where I said that Bush lied? I would be curious to see it.

[CWOJackson]

Poor jg...even when you're waffling you're putting your DNC spin into your comments.

"...he have spent a billion dollars looking for non-existant WMDs."

Yes, jg, we know you and the DNC keep saying the WMD's are non-existent...we've heard it over and over. Not a very good try there.

[JohnGalt]

That's just it, Bremer, a representative of this administration believes you, a WMD dead ender, is working to undermine the war effort.

Even in the age of the Internet, you government employees are still weeks behind.

[CWOJackson]

wiggle...wiggle...wiggle...wiggle

Even in this age of the internet your folks over at the DNC just can't seem to get it together.

[JohnGalt]

You can't even claim to be witty. I mean, it does not make sense to even suggest I am from the DNC.

While you were still sleeping on the job on the taxpayer dime, I was at the first FR gathering in Boston. I was one of 10 who were in the original weekly Firetalk (?) Chatroom meetings in the Summer of '97. People know me around here, and I may be many things, but I am not a socialist, and I am not from the DNC.

You on the other hand showed up after 'Impeachment.'

But it remains absolutely funny to me that even those who claim to be Bushbots are too lazy to follow the news and read the new talking points for their guy.

[CWOJackson]

LOL!

The DNC two-step. I've been enjoying watching your candidates doing their line dance. Trying to blame everything on Bush while trying to not appear to be crassly politically driven. "I support the troops but..."

Yes, people do know you around here...and that disturbs you doesn't it.

[Burkeman1]

This is getting embarassing. Bush and the administration have all but moved on past the phantom WMD's and did so weeks ago. Bush's own man in Iraq, Bremer is saying they don't exist. Stories like this and tin foil hat theories that Bush has them and is going to reveal them just before the election to embarass the dems are pathetic and hurt the GOP right now. Can't they even read and keep up with what the administration is now saying?

[PattonReincarnated]

I appreciate you thoughtful comments. Apparently I am one of those people that would like to see the UN dissolved. I think the UN is a leach on the world. There are absolutely zero services that the UN provides that existing organizations (e.g. Red Cross) could not provide. The UN only gets in the way of our war on terror. Basically when you have member nations that are friends of the terrorist that is what you can expect. If the US were to pull out of the UN then the UN would start being viewed as a worthless organization by most of the rest of the world. They only like the US for our money, and the wonderful feeling of opposing the sole super power in the world. Countries like Chad get a big kick when their vote counts just as much as the US in the general assembly. Since Security Council has nothing to do with security (due to the likes of France) this is what we end up with. The US should lead, not follow - certainly not follow the UN. Leading is best done by example and if the US was not in the UN that would be leadership to the rest of the world. I have no interest in world socialism and weakness on terror. What is needed to be a world leader is a clear vision - which the Bush administration does fairly well (could be better). There is no room for obfuscation in our vision: if you are a terrorist, or a nation that supports terrorists, then you are our enemy. We should not sit down at ANY table with an enemy and talk to them; unless it a table used to sign unconditional articles of surrender. The UN provides exactly the wrong table.