MarkH: I have a question for you. Why would you post something that annoying? All you're doing is making yourself look like a moron, and letting people know that they're getting to you. Are those the reactions you were going for?

Pretty arrogant, eh? Anybody who doesn't agree with you not only has excrement instead of cranial matter, but s/he doesn't see reason? I take umbrage. I take extreme umbrage!

(pauses, considers the sourse)

Oh wait, no I don't. You are more interested in taking down Dubya than the welfare of the Iraqis. You wouldn't give a crap about them if it didn't suit your purpose, or you would be talking about what we need to do over there instead of how Georgie was wrong, Georgie sucks, Georgie screws goats and worships the devil, bla, bla, bla. What drives you is not your concern for your fellow man, it's your distaste concerning your fellow men who happen to be Republicans. (And I'm not giving the GOP a free pass either. A lot of the stuff they did concerning Clinton was completely unnecessary)

You have your eye not on Iraqi welfare, but on Election Day 2004.

While this in and of itself is normal and isn't such a bad thing, it means that you and MarkH can't get up on your soapbox and whine and cry and scream about the big bad conservatives with any measure of moral authority.

The articles posted listing some of the positive things happening in Iraq make a good point-not everything going on there is bad, as much as Democrats and the Arab Street want it to be. Tonight, those of you who live in a big city, go turn on your local news. Are you hearing about all of the good deeds, the projects completed, the work that got done? No, you're hearing about murders and rapes and robberies. That doesn't mean that that's all that went on. Most people at this point would laugh and agree with me.

So, why would the nature of media coverage change when it comes to Iraq, especially considering that the media is and was against the war and Dubya?

I don't take anyone too seriously who harps on the bad and ignores the good and vice versa, because that person most likely has an agenda.

The truth is probably in the middle of Lizard Fish and JP5.

Sorry, I have this problem: Calling it like it is.

It IS the irony of morons looking at two antiquated shells and justifying the war that is completely idiotic. I cannot help that reality; I can only report it. Who knows, maybe the impossible will happen and one of them will THINK, instead of remaining a BushZombie.,

__________________
"What does a former president's son know about the Iraq war anyway?"
-- GW Bush when asked about Ron Reagan's negative comments, 6/25/2004.
www.BushZombie.com

Jesus, that was fast.

Anyways, I don't think that anyone was saying that a few shells were worth the war effort. What I got out of this was that people were using the materials in these shells as evidence that there are more banned substances out there, we just haven't found them yet.

Sounds a lot more reasonable when you look at it like that, doesn't it? But that wouldn't be good for your political agenda.

When someone starts yelling, "You have egg on your face," that the "Weapons have been discovered!" and "Now let's see what those Democraps have to say," I'd call that "justification."

IMHO, of course.

__________________
"What does a former president's son know about the Iraq war anyway?"
-- GW Bush when asked about Ron Reagan's negative comments, 6/25/2004.
www.BushZombie.com

...could you possible narrow down the location of the truth? That is one wide spectrum to look for the truth in...

Lol what-EVER.

Yes, those sarin cannisters were old. Let's see if anything else shows up. I doubt it.

let's have a looksee where the US are putting their old chemical weapons....

http://www.politicalforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=1486

__________________
"They misunderestimated me."
--George W Bush

Completely out of line.

__________________
"What does a former president's son know about the Iraq war anyway?"
-- GW Bush when asked about Ron Reagan's negative comments, 6/25/2004.
www.BushZombie.com

We don't know how old they were yet. They are still testing for that.