Posted on 10/27/2004 2:44:48 PM PDT by RedLightBob
Question to the Liberal Senator from Mass:
You and your cronies (aka MSM) have been quick to blast this administration and accuse it of negligence for not accounting for 380 tons of a weapons cache out of a total 400 THOUSAND TONS of known weapons that HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY capture/destroyed.
Obviously, both you and Al Gore have problems with doing math.
These 'missing' weapons amount to less then 0.1 percent of all captured weapons. In otherwords, the coalition forces have accounted for 99.9% of all known weapons.
Mr Senator. Please tell the us why a 99.9% success rate represents failure, carelessness, or negligence?
Otherwise, would you kindly SHUT THE F#@K UP!
One other question Senator.
If the weapons were actually missing prior to the invasion (more probable) would you have advocated that we should have GONE IN SOONER? How do you square that one?
If you can't, would you (and your friends) kindly SHUT THE F#@K UP!
Thank you Senator.
Great post!
I think one of your friends wrote this post.
Well, you're not taking any chances, are you, YC?
Cuz you know everyone is my friend!! ;-)
He needs to quit worrying about the 380 and sign the 180.
I'm SURE EVERYONE is most DEFINITELY your FRIEND. Of course they ARE!
Well, I may not always succeed, but I usually try, Your Cuteness!! ROFL ;-)
WE've all been thinking these two questions. It apparently took less than 4 hours for the Kerry campaign to put their anti Bush ad together after the NY Times headline.. Now big a deal would it be to put this monologue in an ad, NOW?
The only reason Kerry believes the explosives were there is because El Baradei says they were there. But then El Baradei is a scumsucker who works for the same UN that claims there is no corruption in the Oil for Food program. My guess is that El Baradei knows the high explosives were not there in February as that is the only logical reason why the "inspection team" would not have checked on the "impounded" weapons. In short, my guess is El Baradei was, like so many other UN "inspectors", on the take from Saddam Hussein.
Right to the point.
Nice!
Why is it that these weapons which we cannot find were there but all the WMD's which we cannot find were not there?
I don't really know.
But maybe a paraphrase from Rumsfeld will help clear things up a bit:
There are known knowns - things we know we know.
There are known unknowns - things we know we don't know.
...And then there are unknown unknowns - things we don't know we don't know.
Is it any clear now?
Absolutely PERFECT!!!
I may have a better response to your question - with another open question to K.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1260827/posts?page=1
Nine vanities? You are a real bonfire!
Egg-zackley!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.