Clean, Space Shuttle mission ! Liberals bummed out.....

On 17 Jul 2006 09:37:45 -0700, in a place far, far away,
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such
a way as to indicate that:

So, you giving Bush a golf clap for it coming off ok?

I'm not, but I can guarantee that there would be some Bush-deranged
loons (possibly even in this very thread) who would blame him it it
hadn't.

"GatherNoMoss" wrote in message
ups.com...

My opinion of Liberals is so poor....So convinced am I of their
degenerate character...
that I do believe that Liberals are dissappointed that this Space
Shuttle mission was
a success.
Another dead shuttle crew would have fit their political ambitions
quite nicely.
Something else that was "Bush's" fault.


You are clearly insane!

~e.


This is what happens when you adopt an "end justifies the means"
attitude as the
radical Leftist have.

Go ahead Lefties, protest...express your indignation.
I KNOW you people. You've dominated the US media for decades.
You taught me the true meaning of "cynical".
Cynical as in " selfishly or callously calculating ".

wrote:
GatherNoMoss wrote:

My opinion of Liberals is so poor....So convinced am I of their
degenerate character...
that I do believe that Liberals are dissappointed that this Space
Shuttle mission was
a success.
Another dead shuttle crew would have fit their political ambitions
quite nicely.
Something else that was "Bush's" fault.

This is what happens when you adopt an "end justifies the means"
attitude as the
radical Leftist have.

Go ahead Lefties, protest...express your indignation.
I KNOW you people. You've dominated the US media for decades.
You taught me the true meaning of "cynical".
Cynical as in " selfishly or callously calculating ".


So, you giving Bush a golf clap for it coming off ok?

- Richard Hutnik


This is rocket science - far beyond the Shrub's capabilities.

GatherNoMoss ) wrote:

: My opinion of Liberals is so poor....So convinced am I of their
: degenerate character...
: that I do believe that Liberals are dissappointed that this Space
: Shuttle mission was
: a success.
: Another dead shuttle crew would have fit their political ambitions
: quite nicely.
: Something else that was "Bush's" fault.

You act like Bush deserves credit for a successful shuttle mission. Do you
think he also deserves blame for the shuttle loss in 2003? How about
Reagan in 1986?

: This is what happens when you adopt an "end justifies the means"
: attitude as the
: radical Leftist have.

Nope, 'ends justifies the meens' is a right-wing tenet. Example: Shoot
them all and let God sort it out.

: Go ahead Lefties, protest...express your indignation.

Why? Just to make you happy?

: I KNOW you people. You've dominated the US media for decades.

Because they know how to read and write and you don't?

: You taught me the true meaning of "cynical".

You chose it on your own. As Lincoln stated, "people choose they're own
level of happiness".

: Cynical as in " selfishly or callously calculating ".

Sorry that you are defined in terms of your enemies. I don't agree with
you but I certainly don't think much about it. You on the other hand don't
agree with me and seem to be obsessed by it. If being obsessed with
anti-liberalism is the new conservatism, then I want no part of it. Don't
tell we what you aren't, tell me what you are, if anything...

Eric

Another Hezbollah Jihad Democrat Terrorist ) wrote:

[...]

: The Times recalled that Arkansas supported Clinton's husband when he ran for
: president in 1992 and 1996, but then went for George W. Bush in 2000. Just
: 46 percent of Arkansas voted for then-Vice President Al Gore in that
: election, and four years later the percentage of votes for the Democratic
: candidate fell, with 44 percent backing Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts.
: Although the state's two senators are Democrats, Arkansas has been
: increasingly seen as a Republican stronghold at the presidential level.

46% and 44% is not a 'stronghold'. The NRA has managed to convince enough
dumb Arkansasans that if the Democrats win the presidency, then they'll
lose their guns. Some stronghold... I guess you'll be hoping that
enough folks from Arkansas stay dumb.

Eric

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 17:42:54 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
(Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

Another Hezbollah Jihad Democrat Terrorist ) wrote:

[...]

: The Times recalled that Arkansas supported Clinton's husband when he ran for
: president in 1992 and 1996, but then went for George W. Bush in 2000. Just
: 46 percent of Arkansas voted for then-Vice President Al Gore in that
: election, and four years later the percentage of votes for the Democratic
: candidate fell, with 44 percent backing Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts.
: Although the state's two senators are Democrats, Arkansas has been
: increasingly seen as a Republican stronghold at the presidential level.

46% and 44% is not a 'stronghold'.

46% and 44% are what the *Democrats* got, you moron.

Rand Simberg ) wrote:
: On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 08:47:39 -0600, in a place far, far away, Joe
: Strout made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
: way as to indicate that:

: Indeed, making stuff up is more the current administration's specialty
: -- such as WMD

: Which, it now turns out, existed.

None did Rand even the Republicans now admit that! Why do you continue
with the lie?

: a connection between Iraq and 9/11

: Now you're the one making things up.

You edited his sentence out of context, unless you're claiming that a
connection between Iraq and 9/11 did exist other than the desperate
attempt by this adminsitartion to do so in order to cover up the WMD
mistake.

Still taking the party line and claiming not to be a Republican, Rand?

Eric

Rand Simberg wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 15:28:09 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Bernard
Spilman" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

Indeed, making stuff up is more the current administration's specialty
-- such as WMD

Which, it now turns out, existed.

Then where the **** are they? If they are there, then produce them.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...063001528.html

Those are old, degraded munitions from the Iran-Iraq
war. The stuff you keep under your sink is likely more
lethal now. Do you really think this motly collection of
long lost and misplaced, filled & unfilled leftovers from
a messy 20yr-old war are the same "WMD's" that Bush
and his people have been warning against since 2002?

Might I also refer you to this excerpt from the March
2005 "Addendums to the Comprehensive Report"
regarding Iraqi WMD's:
http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/Duel.../Addendums.pdf
Pages 21-22, (or maybe 17-18 depending on the version
of Acrobat Reader):

****
Residual Pre-1991 CBW Stocks in Iraq

ISG assesses that Iraq and Coalition Forces will
continue to discover small numbers of degraded
chemical weapons, which the former Regime mislaid
or improperly destroyed prior to 1991. ISG believes
the bulk of these weapons were likely abandoned,
forgotten and lost during the Iran-Iraq war because
tens of thousands of CW munitions were forward
deployed along frequently and rapidly shifting battlefronts.

· All but two of the chemical weapons discovered
since OIF were found in southern Iraq where the
majority of CW munitions were used against Iran in
the Iran-Iraq war.

· As the Coalition destroys the thousands of conventional
munitions at depots around the country the
possibility exists that pre-1991 vintage chemical
rounds could be found mixed in with conventional
munitions at these locations.
-ISG identifi ed 43 bunkers and depots where the
Coalition is in the process of destroying conventional
munitions and that were suspected of being
associated with the pre-1991 WMD programs.
However, ISG believes that any remaining chemical
munitions in Iraq do not pose a militarily signifi cant
threat to Coalition Forces because the agent and
munitions are degraded and there are not enough
extant weapons to cause mass casualties. However,
if placed in the hands of insurgents, the use of a single
even ineffectual chemical weapon would likely cause
more terror than deadlier conventional explosives.

· Since May 2004, ISG has recovered 41 Sakr-18
CW rockets and eight Buraq CW rockets. Coalition
military explosive experts doubted the rockets
could be effectively launched because the physical
state of the munitions was degraded from years of
improper storage.

· Since 2003, insurgents have attacked Coalition
Forces with two CW rounds (not including attacks
with riot control agents) that ISG judges were produced
by Iraq prior to 1991. Neither attack caused
casualties and ISG believes the perpetrators did not
know the rounds contained CW agent because the
rounds were not marked to indicate they contained
CW agent and they were used no differently than
insurgents had employed conventional munition
Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs).

· The mustard round used by insurgents as an IED
near Abu Ghurayb Barracks on 2 May 2004 contained
agent degraded to such an extent to be ineffective.

· There continues to be reporting that indicates terrorists
and insurgents possess chemical or biological
weapons, although there is no evidence
indicating that they have obtained "functional"
CBW weapons or agents from the former Regime's
programs. An insurgent captured in Fallujah stated,
"If we had chemical weapons, we would have used
them."

Iraqis seeking rewards have added toxic chemicals to
unfi lled pre-1991 chemical munitions to fool Coalition
Forces into believing that they had found CW
munitions.

· Polish Forces recovered 41 Sakr-18 rockets in June
and July 2004. Of the rockets tested one contained
residual sarin, fi ve contained petroleum and a pesticide,
and the remainders were empty. ISG believes
that the Iraqis who provided the rockets added the
pesticide because we have no previous reporting
indicating that Iraq weaponized pesticides.
ISG has not found evidence to indicate that Iraq
did not destroy its BW weapons or bulk agents.
However, even if biological agents from the former
program do remain they probably have signifi cantly
decreased pathogenicity because Iraq never successfully
formulated its biological agents for long-term
storage.

· According to a former Iraqi BW researcher, Iraq
was not able to acquire drying technology because
of sanctions.
****

Do you and your fellow lying-ass Bush defenders
really think that weapons which "were likely abandoned,
forgotten and lost during the Iran-Iraq war because
tens of thousands of CW munitions were forward
deployed along frequently and rapidly shifting
battlefronts" are the same weapons Bush and his
people have been claiming all along to be an urgent
threat, hence justifying the pre-emptive invasion? .


Another ****ing Bush liar with more lies, yawn.

Another victim of Bush-derangement syndrome, yawn.

No -- it's much more likely you're just another gullible,
dumbass victim of Toostupidtovoteitis.


a connection between Iraq and 9/11

Now you're the one making things up.

Correct! any connection between 9/11 and Saddam was made-up.

Bush never made such a connection, other than to point out that 9/11
meant that we could no longer wait until threats became imminent.

Bush and his crew constantly implied there was a
connection to the point that an awful lot of people
were fooled into thinking there was:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...oll-iraq_x.htm
http://www.zogby.com/NEWS/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075
(Check what our troops in Iraq believe about Hussein)


More lies from the incompetent liar Bush.

No, just more Bush derangement from you.

And this point, "Bush derangement" means "A strong
belief that Bush didn't lie despite overwhelming
evidence to the contrary, often accompanied by
drooling and sticking head in sand."

-BC

On 17 Jul 2006 10:49:28 -0700, in a place far, far away, "BC"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:


Rand Simberg wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 15:28:09 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Bernard
Spilman" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

Indeed, making stuff up is more the current administration's specialty
-- such as WMD

Which, it now turns out, existed.

Then where the **** are they? If they are there, then produce them.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...063001528.html

Those are old, degraded munitions from the Iran-Iraq
war.

They were part of what Saddam was obligated to turn in as fulfillment
of the UNSC resolutions. His continuing failure to do so was the
primary justification for his removal, per those resolutions.

The stuff you keep under your sink is likely more
lethal now. Do you really think this motly collection of
long lost and misplaced, filled & unfilled leftovers from
a messy 20yr-old war are the same "WMD's" that Bush
and his people have been warning against since 2002?

No. I'm simply disputing the continuing lie that there were no WMDs
in Iraq.

Another ****ing Bush liar with more lies, yawn.

Another victim of Bush-derangement syndrome, yawn.

No -- it's much more likely you're just another gullible,
dumbass victim of Toostupidtovoteitis.

That seems quite unlikely.

a connection between Iraq and 9/11

Now you're the one making things up.

Correct! any connection between 9/11 and Saddam was made-up.

Bush never made such a connection, other than to point out that 9/11
meant that we could no longer wait until threats became imminent.

Bush and his crew constantly implied there was a
connection to the point that an awful lot of people
were fooled into thinking there was:

Except that the administration repeatedly and explicitly said that
there was *no proven connection*. They can't help what clueless
people like you choose to infer, despite those statements.

More lies from the incompetent liar Bush.

No, just more Bush derangement from you.

And this point, "Bush derangement" means "A strong
belief that Bush didn't lie despite overwhelming
evidence to the contrary, often accompanied by
drooling and sticking head in sand."

No, I called it right the first time.

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 17:47:14 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
(Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

: Indeed, making stuff up is more the current administration's specialty
: -- such as WMD

: Which, it now turns out, existed.

None did Rand even the Republicans now admit that!

No, they don't. Kay said that there were no stockpiles. He never
said there were no WMD.

Why do you continue
with the lie?

It isn't a lie, you moron.

: a connection between Iraq and 9/11

: Now you're the one making things up.

You edited his sentence out of context, unless you're claiming that a
connection between Iraq and 9/11 did exist other than the desperate
attempt by this adminsitartion to do so in order to cover up the WMD
mistake.

No, I didn't.

Still taking the party line and claiming not to be a Republican, Rand?

Just because I happen to agree with some things that Republicans
believe doesn't make me a Republican, you moron.