On 19 Sep 2003 08:17:39 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

Actually..not so. Bush said there was no evidence that Saddam was
involved in 9/11. Period. There is plenty of evidence that Iraq has ties
to Al Quida etc.

But nowhere do you ever hear anything much about the
Saudis. Now *there*'s a conspiracy.

Yes indeed. and you are aware that the 3 uppermost princelings tied to
Al Quida seemed to have passed on to Mohammed, all nice and neatly.

;;; Clearly it was not a lie on his
part. Even if the information was later proven to be false, he acted on
it in good faith at the time.

So, hhm. Either he's a liar (not) or a dummy.

So Jim, if the probably best intelligence agency in the world tells you
that something is so.. and you believe it, then you are stupid?

Either way it bodes ill.

It means, either someone in "MI-6 screwed the pooch, or that it really
did happen and the media/Left is screwing the pooch.

Jim

Gunner

================================================= =
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
================================================= =



"If I'm going to reach out to the the Democrats then I need a third
hand.There's no way I'm letting go of my wallet or my gun while they're
around."

"Democrat. In the dictionary it's right after demobilize and right
before demode` (out of fashion).
-Buddy Jordan 2001