Perhaps, but you can't prove it by that example, in which it is Bill O'Reilly who dodges the question
Dana On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:23:43 -0600, Russel Madere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That is to hide the fact that the Michael Moores of this world are big > hypocrites like the Bill OReillys. > > Russel Madere > Webmaster > 504.832.9835 > SunShine Pages by EATEL > www.sunshinepages.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 1:51 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: Chinagate - was (sam, I am not saying a word) > > why do you always bring up clinton when bush is criticized? I don't > have time to look at the links right nw -- though I may later -- but > isn't the point what bush is doing now? And possibly could be > prevented from doing if enough people paid attention? I am beginning > to suspect that this is the point. > > Talking head 1: blah blah blah fallujah > > Talking head two: blah blah blah blow job. > > As if that were an answer or something. > > Dana > > On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 10:43:40 -0800, Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Larry C. Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Pakistan and India have recently tested IRBM's that have fairly > > > accurate guidence systems. Moreover, both nations have nuclear > capable > > > fighter bombers. > > > > Where did they get the technology? > > China! > > Thank you President Clinton. > > > > > As for China, remember they were selling very accurate missle > systems > > > well before Clinton, remember the Silkworm? Funny how you blame > > > Clinton on this one (must be ancient news now. What? the well dried > up > > > - Its Clinton's fault) when the company that sold the technology to > > > China was a strong republican party supporter. > > > > > > But then again Clinton is a good scape goat for republican > apologists. > > > By blaming him it covers all sorts of lack of thinking. > > > > Lack of thinking, why are you always on the attack? > > > > Didn't the Scud missile replace the Silkworm? 150km range? Not much of > a threat. > > I'm talking about long-range guidance missiles capable of hitting the > > US from China while carrying multiple nuclear warheads. > > > > How China Won Rights to Launch Satellites for U.S. > > http://www.pulitzer.org/year/1999/national-reporting/works/051798.html > > > > Companies Are Investigated For Aid to China on Rockets > > http://www.pulitzer.org/year/1999/national-reporting/works/040498.html > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:143388 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
