I mean, damn. All of this information was out there.
1 posted on
01/27/2005 5:32:43 AM PST by
rdb3
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-57 next last
To: mhking; Poohbah; Grampa Dave; jwalsh07; Howlin; Southack; Mo1; cyborg; farmfriend
This will leave you shaking your head in disgust.
2 posted on
01/27/2005 5:34:24 AM PST by
rdb3
(The wife asked how I slept last night. I said, "How do I know? I was asleep!")
To: rdb3
I mean, damn. All of this information was out there. Hidden amongst millions of other pieces of information.
3 posted on
01/27/2005 5:39:33 AM PST by
Rodney King
(No, we can't all just get along.)
To: rdb3
"Cover Up began as an effort to answer the two big unanswered questions left..."
I haven't read the entire piece yet, but I'm guessing the answer to the questions might be, "to protect Clinton."
Maybe no.
Whatever
4 posted on
01/27/2005 5:44:48 AM PST by
Maria S
To: rdb3
We are at greater risk than we know...
5 posted on
01/27/2005 5:48:09 AM PST by
Rutles4Ever
(This is my tagline.)
To: rdb3
6 posted on
01/27/2005 5:49:30 AM PST by
jamaly
To: rdb3; Calpernia; nw_arizona_granny
8 posted on
01/27/2005 5:50:50 AM PST by
Velveeta
To: rdb3
Now we know what Sandy Burgler was up to..
9 posted on
01/27/2005 5:55:08 AM PST by
cardinal4
(W's 3.5 million pop vote isnt a mandate, but algores .5 million is??)
To: rdb3
11 posted on
01/27/2005 5:56:51 AM PST by
Ditter
To: rdb3
Pretty interesting stuff. As to the following, however, "Nobody -- not even the FBI which had 1,000 agents on Long Island sent anybody to St. Louis to interview the K-9 officer whose name was Herman Burnett. Nobody from any of the New York media sent a reporter to talk to him." I seem to recall a picture of the K-9 officer in the papers showing him onboard a plane with his dog so somebody must have talked to him.
16 posted on
01/27/2005 6:02:00 AM PST by
Bahbah
To: rdb3
Most interesting. Thanks for posting this.
17 posted on
01/27/2005 6:03:12 AM PST by
jigsaw
(God Bless Our Troops.)
To: rdb3
18 posted on
01/27/2005 6:04:03 AM PST by
shekkian
To: rdb3
Thanks for the post! Beginning paragraphs are interesting. Bumping for read after work.
19 posted on
01/27/2005 6:04:28 AM PST by
PGalt
To: rdb3
To: rdb3
21 posted on
01/27/2005 6:06:34 AM PST by
redgolum
To: rdb3
Geez, maybe, just maybe, it wasn't Bush's fault!
23 posted on
01/27/2005 6:14:03 AM PST by
aShepard
To: rdb3
-that al Qaeda had an active cell in New York City as early as 1996 -- something that contradicts Condi Rice's testimony before the 9/11 Commission that they possessed no "actionable intelligence" of an al Qaeda presence on U.S. soil between the 1993 WTC bombing and 9/11;If all this was so buried at the time, how would she have known?
24 posted on
01/27/2005 6:15:42 AM PST by
SuziQ
To: rdb3
25 posted on
01/27/2005 6:16:07 AM PST by
philetus
(Zell Miller - One of the few)
To: rdb3
This is scary!
My question is, if these "watch bombs" are so easy to make, and so effective, why haven't they been used again? I have never seen anyone having their watch scrutinized while going through airport security.
After reading this, I will fly even less often in the future.
28 posted on
01/27/2005 6:33:23 AM PST by
basil
(Exercise your Second Amendment--buy another gun today!)
To: BartMan1; Nailbiter; Forecaster; stanley windrush
30 posted on
01/27/2005 6:41:44 AM PST by
IncPen
( When the liberals act like midgets, we can't help but look like giants... [ Q 1/20/05 ])
To: boxerblues
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-57 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson