just wondered if we could agree on a source as authoritative.
dana
- Original Message -
From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:54:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sorry, I didn't. I think all the
Sorry, I didn't. I think all the major papers are
biased. I find most are biased to the left. I used to
read the NY Post and the NY Times to get both sides of
the story and decide for myself.
Now I rarely read the print version. I mainly read the
my.yahoo.com news feeds from Reuters and AP. I fin
Sam,
I think I asked you last week what newspapers you considered not
biased. If you answered me I missed it.
Dana
- Original Message -
From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 20:28:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL
wrote:
> Maddox cracks me up.
>
> Suspend all your "children are cute" mushiness and read his critiques of their drawings..
> - Original Message -
> From: Howie Hamlin
> To: CF-Community
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 5:45 PM
> Subject: Re:
Maddox cracks me up.
Suspend all your "children are cute" mushiness and read his critiques of their drawings..
- Original Message -
From: Howie Hamlin
To: CF-Community
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 5:45 PM
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
Bil O'Reill
)
>
> Judith
> - Original Message -
> From: "dana tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 5:00 PM
> Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
>
> > Sure you're right Misquoted a
I also like to take a few gulps of corona and a squeeze of lime along with that
- Original Message -
From: Judith Dinowitz
To: CF-Community
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 11:54 PM
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
This is a perfect example of why when you read an email
Hey, just what do you mean by this??? I'm getting angry!
- Original Message -
From: Judith Dinowitz
To: CF-Community
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 12:54 AM
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
This is a perfect example of why when you read an email discussion, you should
m: "dana tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
> Sure you're right Misquoted again eh?
>
> Dana
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
[Donations and Support]
--- "Larry C. Lyons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Given that the Washington Times is owned by Rev.
> Moon (of the Moonies
> fame) and has been caught more than a few times not
> only getting the
> story wrong, but fabricating elements of some of
> those stories, I put
> no credulance in the paper.
Given that the Washington Times is owned by Rev. Moon (of the Moonies
fame) and has been caught more than a few times not only getting the
story wrong, but fabricating elements of some of those stories, I put
no credulance in the paper.
The story on Roy Moore in the TFP was incorrect in a number o
--- "Larry C. Lyons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> dug a bit more on the paper its a right wing screed
> paper.
Yes, Dana mentioned that last week.
> Cover story
> was on how Judge Roy Moore was persecuted by the
> ACLU etc.
What's wrong with that?
> When I did
> a google search, the second it
dug a bit more on the paper its a right wing screed paper. Cover story
was on how Judge Roy Moore was persecuted by the ACLU etc. When I did
a google search, the second item to show up was a report on a libel
suit againt the paper.
As always, consider the source. This one appears not to be worth t
am Morris
> To: CF-Community
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 6:15 PM
> Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
>
>
> I'm sorry it upset you but it was something I saw
> on
> The O'Reilly Factor. Now let me point out I rarely
> watch him because I find him t
I can't find the full transcript. They started out
talking about the 85% poll of Canadians that don't
support Bush. It might have been the Toronto Free
Press poll.
She went on to say that it wasn't just Bush they
didn't like
Then she mentioned the 40% poll as
evidence, stating the parents are the
missed that I have to admit it *is* amusing. You're getting me in
trouble here lol. Really going now.
- Original Message -
From: Howie Hamlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 18:54:29 -0400
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED
It's a bit harsh but I kind of like the bingo card.
Regards,
Howie
- Original Message -
From: dana tierney
To: CF-Community
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
I am practicing kindness today and am not touching that with a 10-foot
I am practicing kindness today and am not touching that with a 10-foot pole :)
Outta here, the sun is still shining
Dana
- Original Message -
From: Howie Hamlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 18:45:37 -0400
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL
Bil O'Reilly, sock sniffer
http://maddox.xmission.com/c.cgi?u=bill_oreilly
- Original Message -
From: Sam Morris
To: CF-Community
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
I'm sorry it upset you but it was something I saw on
Th
ct: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> nice
OK, your getting annoying now.
I guess you're still upset over the Canadian poll.
I'm sorry it upset you but it was something I saw on
The O'Reilly F
--- dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> nice
OK, your getting annoying now.
I guess youre still upset over the Canadian poll.
I'm sorry it upset you but it was something I saw on
The O'Reilly Factor. Now let me point out I rarely
watch him because I find him too arrogant. I don't
think he
--- Won Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How about what we did with Japan or S Korea. We
> move in and get the IMF to
> pump money into Iraq. We build a democratic state
> as a foothold in the
> Middle East.
> Any investments into Iraq could be
> paid off with Oil at a
> latter date.
I do
nice
- Original Message -
From: Won Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 17:07:00 -0400
Subject: RE: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I never said that and never implied it. I continuously
>list multiple reasons for the war. Peo
>I never said that and never implied it. I continuously
>list multiple reasons for the war. People like you
>keep focusing on one item and say stupid things like
>Iraq wasn't involved with 9/11 so the war was not
>justified.
I never said Iraq wasn't involved with 9/11. I challenge you produce the
Sure you're right Misquoted again eh?
Dana
- Original Message -
From: Monique Boea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 08:19:27 -0400
Subject: RE: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
It was not wishful thinking. That is exactly what I mean
--- Won Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >You accused me of wanting to go to war. I was
> stating
> >that after what happened on 9/11 we couldn't sit
> >around and wait for the terrorists to attack. We
> need
> >to go look for them and if we find them ready and
> >willing to attack us, we need to
At 14:06 7/29/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>Interesting; I was lookign at this book at the bookstore. Can you tell
>me a little more about it?
I will reply off-list unless I get a request to post it to the list.
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
not notice.
rofl (busted)
Dana
- Original Message -
From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 10:22:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
What does that have to do wuth anything?
-sm
--- dana tierney <[
Interesting; I was lookign at this book at the bookstore. Can you tell
me a little more about it?
*The last text I read regarding this subject was from Sallie McFague. I
disagreed with many of her solutions but I strongly agreed with her
analysis of the problem. I highly recommend her book Mod
a
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:32:55 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
> To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Yes please.
>
> --- dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED
You want directions too?
It's in the October 2003 Kay Report. Google it, email
Mr. Kay and ask him the exact locations.
-sm
--- William Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But where are the facilities on the ground?
>
> I am by no means suggesting that we should have
> waited until Iraq had a b
At 19:48 7/28/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>The last resort is NUKES. War is simply the failure of diplomacy. The
>reality is that the West is already at war and has been at war with an
>array of non-state actors (like al Qaeda)- funded by states like Iran,
>Iraq, and Syria since at least 1993. We jus
the information.
-Original Message-
From: Marwan Saidi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 8:26 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: OReilly vs. Moore
Ok, thank you. I did hear about that, but I had misunderstood your post. I
took your post to assume that Jordan (as
ks for the link.
-Original Message-
From: Sam Morris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 6:29 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: OReilly vs. Moore
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,117414,00.html
--- Marwan Saidi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sam, this is n
It was not wishful thinking. That is exactly what I meant.
-Original Message-
From: dana tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 6:18 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
I'll take another look Gel, but I think this is wishful thinking on your
>You accused me of wanting to go to war. I was stating
>that after what happened on 9/11 we couldn't sit
>around and wait for the terrorists to attack. We need
>to go look for them and if we find them ready and
>willing to attack us, we need to do whatever it takes
>to stop them.
>
>I agree war is
>> my Irish is flaring up.
They have antibiotics for that.
-Original Message-
From: dana tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 5:55 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
ah I *did* misread it. Maybe I should take a break actually. B
>I believe that Libya's acquisition of nuclear technology came from Pakistan, and
>not N. Korea or Iraq.
>It was widely reported, giving the name of the scientist in Pakistan that had
>done the deed, and followed by the Pakistani government giving him amnesty for
>it.
That theory has lately been d
> Robert, that was the most succinct summing up of the situation until
> now that I've heard so far. Thank you.
>
> Judith
You are welcome. :-)
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
[Donations and Support]
Robert, that was the most succinct summing up of the situation until now that I've heard so far. Thank you.
Judith
- Original Message -
> The last resort is NUKES. War is simply the failure of diplomacy. The reality is that the West is already at war and has been at war with an array of n
; > couldn't get rid of
> > > > > > everything in a short period of time - you
> > could
> > > > > > try, but forensic science
> > > > > > would catch you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> &g
The UN had already examined all the sites that they knew were
manufacturing centers from the Iran-Iraq War. Nothing traces beyond
1998 were found. Nothing recent has been discovered, that cannot
already be accounted for. The chemical weapons were destroyed a long
time ago except for a few odds and
and would like to know
> > where you did. Thanks.
> >
> > Marwan
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sam Morris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 2:57 PM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: RE: OReilly vs. Moore
> >
At the same time, Iraq was secretly sending scientists to Libya to aid Qaddafi
in his quest for a nuclear bomb. U.S. electronic intelligence sussed out Libya's
intentions when they intercepted communications between Libya and the slave
state of North Korea regarding the sale of weapons technology.
And you are probably right.
But.
Do we accept an Administration leading a country to war by intentionally
misleading the voting public?
Would things have been different if they said it just like this, Saddam
is a danger...and he's a threat to us post 9/11...he's broken the UN
Sanctions...and
ly 28, 2004 2:15 PM
> Subject: RE: OReilly vs. Moore
>
>
> So let me ask you guys this, WHEN would you support a war?
>
>
> At what time is war "right"?
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
[Donations and Support]
yes please what? You want a link? LOL. You haven't read the ones I
have already posted :) Here:
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/news/072704_ns_convention.html
Dana
- Original Message -
From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:32:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re:
That quote proves that the original Bush claim that there "was a transaction"
was completely false.
However, the question you are answering was for evidence that there was
buildings, etc. ready and waiting, which was once speculated, but never were
found. Does this mean we are back to the traile
But where are the facilities on the ground?
I am by no means suggesting that we should have waited until Iraq had a bomb, but there is a huge difference between ramping up funding and telling scientists to be prepared for the possibility; and being close to producing a nuclear device.
Answer me t
your distinction... ya. Place it in the
> context of "why we are
> invading Iraq" though. Look at the previously posted
> link to the
> transcript.
>
> Dana
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 28 Jul
Yes please.
--- dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> are you questioning this? It's pretty well
> established as I understand.
>
> > > also confirmed he had them. Where did they come
> > from?
> >
> > Us.
> Nice try.
>
>
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscr
http://www.truthnews.net/world/2004070109.htm
The Senate Intelligence Committee -- a bipartisan
panel co-chaired by a Republican and a Democrat --
found that, far from disproving the Iraq-Niger story,
Ambassador Wilsons report was interpreted as
providing "some confirmation of foreign government
eviously posted link to the
transcript.
Dana
- Original Message -
From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:03:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
are you questioning this? It's pretty well established as I understand.
> > also confirmed he had them. Where did they come
> from?
>
> Us.
Nice try.
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
[Donations and Support]
NOT
-sm
--- dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> already refuted by Doug. As you say, read the
> thread.
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:49:38 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: Re: OReilly
--- dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> dad, daddy. big difference. I don't believe Howie
> meant "this is
> retribution" to be part of the quote.
>
> Me, I am talking about the quote for which I have
> already given you
> three sources.
>
> Dana
But Howie tied it to the quote!
What Bush
evidence leaves evidence.
> > > > > If you had a meth lab in your basement you
> truly
> > > > > couldn't get rid of
> > > > > everything in a short period of time - you
> could
> > > > > try, but forensic science
> > > > &
--- Marlon Moyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sam Morris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 4:28 PM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
> >
> > Well we know he h
>The nuclear weapons program was ready and waiting
That would be evidence of WMD I should think, so where is it? Still waiting to be found? I should think that if the buildings are "ready and waiting" they would have been found by now, no?
>All
>the scientist were on standby and the buildings wer
We also owe the Reservists medical benefits, which the current administration is
still denying them.
- Original Message -
From: Jerry Johnson
You've got to admit not everybody understands that is the risk when they sign
up for National Guard training. (Which is where most of the sold
The nuclear weapons program was ready and waiting. All
the scientist were on standby and the buildings were
ready and unchanged waiting for the inspections to
end.
-sm
--- William Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Maybe you can drive them to Syria. Do we know where
> >>Jordan got there WMD's?
>This idea and the fact that Bush LOST the popular vote in 2000 are
>lost on the general electorate. People just don't care and it's sad.
More to the point, the (national) popular vote does not determine the presidency. The DC insiders understand this, but in Dem circles the pros use the "we won
--- Won Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Either way, what does 9/11 have to do with my
> statements? If you read my
> email, I clearly pointed out that my disapproval of
> Bush is not that he
> went to war. My disapproval is they way he has
> treated American
> citizens. I also did not denou
Well now, do you have a relative serving in Iraq?
I do. My brother served in Iraq, he was a company commander in the 1st Armored Division. He was not part of the initial wave, but went in at the beginning of May 2003, shortly before Bush made his "end of major operations" speech. He was not part o
The explain why there are no traces when we know they
existed.
-sm
--- "Larry C. Lyons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> have a look at this link
>
> http://www.beiresources.org.
>
> Gives you some idea about my current job.
>
> larry
>
> On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:47:47 -0700 (PDT), Sam Morris
>
is, and would like to know
> where you did. Thanks.
>
> Marwan
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sam Morris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 2:57 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: RE: OReilly vs. Moore
>
>
> Maybe you can drive
- Original Message -
From: Monique Boea
For you all to be pumping out that liberal, equal rights craps all day (of
course unless we talk about Africa or what's going on in the US with people
of color, then you get awfully quiet), you have absolutely no respect for
other people's
Well now, do you have a relative serving in Iraq?
I do. My brother served in Iraq, he was a company commander in the 1st Armored Division. He was not part of the initial wave, but went in at the beginning of May 2003, shortly before Bush made his "end of major operations" speech. He was not part o
her look Gel, but I think this is wishful thinking on your part.
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Angel Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:45:24 -0400
> Subject: RE: OReilly vs. Moore
> To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
&
I'll take another look Gel, but I think this is wishful thinking on your part.
- Original Message -
From: Angel Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:45:24 -0400
Subject: RE: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I think sometime
Nor do I at the moment. But as always it's been a pleasure
- Original Message -
From: Andy Ousterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:44:56 -0500
Subject: RE: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Actually, the UN didn't proscribe ex
already refuted by Doug. As you say, read the thread.
- Original Message -
From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:49:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Are you saying all these are untrue?
1. Because Ir
l 2004 14:41:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Here it is again:
He was pointing out that his hatred is aimed as us and
offered that as proof. He never implied he went to war
because of it.
"But there's no doubt his hatred is mainl
Damn, my bad. That was WWI.
carry on.
-sm
--- "Larry C. Lyons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Where did you get that fantasy?
>
> larry
>
> On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:16:35 -0700 (PDT), Sam Morris
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I thought we provoked the attack so we would be
> > justified to go t
rything in a short period of time - you could
> > > > try, but forensic science
> > > > would catch you.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > By the same token if you had truly threatening
> > > > weapons program
the better to hug ya baby :)
Dana
- Original Message -
From: Andy Ousterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:30:33 -0500
Subject: RE: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
That's why we luv ya man! Now, if you were only a republican
why not, she said the same thing to me a month ago. Love Bush or leave the US.
- Original Message -
From: William Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:31:46 -0400
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Bush did not declare wa
sage-
> From: dana tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 4:18 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
>
> Nice answer to "getting quiet" ;)
>
> After for leaving the country, Monique ddi say it then denied saying
>
Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:23:01 -0400
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I _definitely_ like Catwoman! Its the movie I am not so sure about.
Jerry Johnson
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/28/04 05:00PM >>>
HEY! I kinda like Catwoman. Course I haven'
Are you saying all these are untrue?
1. Because Iraq supported terrorist
2. Iraq had WMD's and used them.
3. They hated the US and other terrorist hated the
US.
4. They were looking into nuclear weapons
5. We couldn't afford to have Saddam passing weapons
to other terrorist groups, which would
> -Original Message-
> From: Sam Morris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 4:28 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
>
> Well we know he had WMD's because he used them. The UN
> also confirmed he had them. Where d
I think sometimes when people get emotional, they type things that don't
quite match their meaning.
She's explained the motive behind the statement, and it is that in her
opinion if she thought something like that happened, it would mean the
America she knew and trusted had fallen and she would
Actually, the UN didn't proscribe exactly what the serious repercussions would
be. Since they already had an economic embargo, one could logically assume
that deposing Sadaam was the only serious repercussion left. The only
rational to delay was to increase international participation and I don't
e seen W make this
> statement with their
> very own eyes. Of course there are none so blind as
> those who will not
> see...
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:22:17 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: Re:
You've got to admit not everybody understands that is the risk when they sign up for National Guard training. (Which is where most of the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are drawn from.) They do learn pretty quick once the "machine" gets ahold of them during and after Basic though.
I have no prob
o. Here
> is yet another link:
>
> http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:17:14 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: RE: OReilly vs. Moore
> To: CF-Community <[EM
nesday, July 28, 2004 4:18 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
>
> Nice answer to "getting quiet" ;)
>
> After for leaving the country, Monique ddi say it then denied saying
> it. It's in the thread. I've already cut and pasted it once.
&g
can and, in my opinion, the real threat to the American
> way
> > of life I hold dear.
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: dana tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 4:33 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
&g
>Maybe you can drive them to Syria. Do we know where
>>Jordan got there WMD's?
Perhaps, but imagine the trucks it would take to move the _buildings_ that are required to house the equipment used to refine the nuclear materials necessary to make bombs.
Or would you go so far as to contend that the
That's why we luv ya man! Now, if you were only a republican
-Original Message-
From: dana tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 4:06 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
If you want absolute mindless certitude then you are ta
>Bush did not declare war based on hear say.
Bush, as President, did not declare war. Bush, as President does not have the power to declare war. Only Congress can do that.
>>If you beleive that then you should leave the country and never come back.
nice. Didn't think I'd read "love it or leave i
*lower head*
Oh geez...there goes the thread.
-Gel
^_^
hee hee hee.
-Original Message-
From: dana tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
HEY! I kinda like Catwoman. Course I haven't seen it yet... but since
evidence does not seem to be required in this thread
Dana
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 1
; would catch you.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > By the same token if you had truly threatening
> > > weapons programs, weapons
> > > programs like we were told they had, then some
> > > evidence would still exist.
> > &g
t; >
> >
> >
> > --- Howie Hamlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > You believe what you want to believe.
> > >
> > >
> http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0303-01.htm
> > >
> > > http://msnbc.msn
PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: OReilly vs. Moore
again...
If I thought ANY president went to war w/o just cause, or based on hear
say
then I would have absolutely no faith in our system, and would leave.
They are people who actually believe that bush was in with Bin Laden but
they still wake up
>I don't know what kind of world you live in but I live
>in a post 9/11 world. The enemy is relentless. We
>can't wait for another attack. We need to be prepared.
>If we find another terrorist group based in another
>country and ready to attack us should we wait for them
>to attack or prevent it?
>
Do you have an evidence or, purported evidence or hearsay to corroborate your opinion that evidence is not needed in this alleged thread?
- Original Message -
From: dana tierney
To: CF-Community
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
HEY! I
wrote:
> Because they are experts on every matter. Don't you know that?
>
> And their view is the only one that is right.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sam Morris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 4:48 PM
> To: CF-Comm
I _definitely_ like Catwoman! Its the movie I am not so sure about.
Jerry Johnson
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/28/04 05:00PM >>>
HEY! I kinda like Catwoman. Course I haven't seen it yet... but since
evidence does not seem to be required in this thread
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscripti
have a look at this link
http://www.beiresources.org.
Gives you some idea about my current job.
larry
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:47:47 -0700 (PDT), Sam Morris
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- "Larry C. Lyons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > You cannot hide traces of biological or chemical
> > wea
1 - 100 of 306 matches
Mail list logo
