Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 09/13/2005 5:05:01 AM PDT by jmc1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last
To: jmc1969
The site, which tends to publish unreliable biased news reports

No kidding.

2 posted on 09/13/2005 5:06:14 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

But there are/were no WMDs in Iraq ...

Pelosi said so.


3 posted on 09/13/2005 5:06:49 AM PDT by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

The knuckleheads have been making this threat as of late. Hopefuly untrue, but if it turns out to have substance, the response should be drastic.


5 posted on 09/13/2005 5:08:57 AM PDT by M1911A1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

Prayers for the good guys should this happen to be true.


7 posted on 09/13/2005 5:12:25 AM PDT by Quilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

I can't picture our military allowing a mortar attack to go on for 1 1/2 hrs. After the first round the source would have been targeted and fired on.


9 posted on 09/13/2005 5:14:17 AM PDT by Flint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

Breaking news from an unreliable site?..Hmmmm


13 posted on 09/13/2005 5:21:32 AM PDT by MEG33 (GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969
What do these Arabs consider a chemical weapon. A foreign substance that irritates the skin.. hmm powdered soap?
14 posted on 09/13/2005 5:22:28 AM PDT by badpacifist (grumpy comments always directed at post not the person posting info)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

What if you threw a chemical weapons attack and nobody was there to notice? Would it still cause skin blisters?


18 posted on 09/13/2005 5:33:49 AM PDT by green iguana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

A dozen Mohammeds eating beans and cabbage and then farting loudly in unison hardly constitutes a chemical attack.


24 posted on 09/13/2005 5:41:38 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

The mortar shells did contain some chemicals...the explosives that injured no one.


25 posted on 09/13/2005 5:41:38 AM PDT by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969
The site, which tends to publish unreliable biased news reports, celebrates it as the first chemical attack in Iraq."

Really!? What about Saddam and his henchmen Chemical Ali ... who were killing innocent civilians with chemical agents 20 years ago?

26 posted on 09/13/2005 5:44:35 AM PDT by BluH2o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

Iraq: Jihadist Group uses gullible and willing Media to spread it's pathetic Lies.


28 posted on 09/13/2005 5:45:23 AM PDT by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

I hope the story is WRONG. This would be unfortunate news. My thoughts are with our troops and the Iraqis.


30 posted on 09/13/2005 6:04:59 AM PDT by newzjunkey (CA Freepers, HELP Enforce Our Border: http://www.CaliforniaBorderPolice.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

WMD? They should have remained mum about such toys.

They had useful idiots in America believing that Saddam really did destroy all he had and that no rogue nation would sponsor their production or storage.


32 posted on 09/13/2005 6:20:29 AM PDT by weegee (The lesson from New Orleans? Smart Growth kills. You can't evacuate dense populations easily.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

This is impossible. There were no WMD's in Iraq. It was all a lie. Remember?


37 posted on 09/13/2005 6:57:51 AM PDT by VRWCmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

If these weasels have any chem weapons, they will use them on unsuspecting civilians. In that respect, a Baghdad attack makes sense.


38 posted on 09/13/2005 7:24:53 AM PDT by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

Wouldn't it be a gas if we announce that the only direct hit was on Saddam's cell?


41 posted on 09/13/2005 9:57:59 AM PDT by Go Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

A few cans of RAID and a potato gun hardly constitutes a chemical attack.


43 posted on 09/13/2005 10:05:12 AM PDT by reagan_fanatic (Proud member of the 21st century Christian Crusaders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jmc1969

Meanwhile, in another development in the Middle East, the Muslim propaganda outlet, al Jazeera, announced the sudden, complete disappearance of Damascus, Syria. According to al Jazeera, "We're not sure what happened, it just seems to have vaporized, replaced by shiny, black glass"...


44 posted on 09/13/2005 10:51:26 AM PDT by astounded (We don't need no stinkin' rules of engagement...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Allegra

ping... comments?


49 posted on 09/13/2005 2:19:56 PM PDT by BagCamAddict (Prayers for the victims of Katrina)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson