Limbaugh detained at Palm Beach airport

El_Kabong

Purple Hawk wrote:

Why are you obsessed with this non-story?


http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york060303.asp

When you come up with EVIDENCE of lies, get back to me.

You may scoff at the source, but you know as well as I do, if there was REAL evidence, al-Dean et, al. (al-Durbin, al-Feingold, al-Kennedy) would actually make some headway into impeachment proceedings.

ahhhh, so bush mispoke and didn't mean an iaea report, he meant a report that was put out 2 days after he made the claim, riiiiiight

Bush"... a report came out ..." that implies past tense, your article states the report was issued on Monday AFTER he made the statement that Saturday

wow, that was clever w/ the al-'s in front of the dems names! too bad the dems are a worthless party who have no backbone

Purple Hawk

El_Kabong wrote:

ahhhh, so bush mispoke and didn't mean an iaea report, he meant a report that was put out 2 days after he made the claim, riiiiiight

Bush"... a report came out ..." that implies past tense, your article states the report was issued on Monday AFTER he made the statement that Saturday

wow, that was clever w/ the al-'s in front of the dems names! too bad the dems are a worthless party who have no backbone

don't you people make a life (not a living) out of calling W a bumbling fool who has trouble speaking his own name? why is it so hard to believe he made a mistake in citing a bureaucratic agency?

But at least we agree that the Dems have no backbone!

El_Kabong

Purple Hawk wrote:

don't you people make a life (not a living) out of calling W a bumbling fool who has trouble speaking his own name? why is it so hard to believe he made a mistake in citing a bureaucratic agency?

But at least we agree that the Dems have no backbone!

b/c i don't believe a thing any of them have to say.

also-

Bush: "a report came out of the Atomic -the IAEA- that they were 6 months away from developing a weapon. I don’t know what more evidence we need.”

your article: "It was in fact the International Institute for Strategic Studies [IISS] that issued the report concluding that Iraq could develop nuclear weapons in as few as six months...the IISS had finished a report, which was released the Monday after Bush's Saturday statement, which said Iraq could "assemble nuclear weapons within months if fissile material from foreign sources were obtained."


first we have the issue of past tense vs future tense. a report came out...released 2 days AFTER the claim

then there's the issue of saying they 'WERE 6 months away' from developing a weapons vs 'IF material from foreign sources were obtained' he's saying they ARE, the actual futuristic report says it's POSSIBLE. do you really not see the difference in those 2 statements? easpecially at that time after 9/11 and them talking about mushroom clouds, then saying 'hey, they ARE 6 months away from having a nuke what more evidence do we need?', mobile weapons labs that they KNOW where they are, the bullet-proof evidence linking them to al-qaeda and 9/11, the faulty niger intel...drilling for fear