377 Tons!!!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6323933/


Well, I think in tort cases that would be known as Criminal Negligence
wouldn't it? Counselors?

All I can figure is that prosthetics manufacturers must be big GOP
contributors.


g.c.

"George Cleveland" wrote in message
...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6323933/


Well, I think in tort cases that would be known as Criminal Negligence
wouldn't it? Counselors?

All I can figure is that prosthetics manufacturers must be big GOP
contributors.

Aww, give the president a break. All the troops were busy guarding the
ministry of oil, and Bush was too busy pretending to have a plan.

If he gets reelected, I suggest we start impeachment proceedings.

--riverman

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 08:10:12 -0500, George Cleveland
wrote:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6323933/


Well, I think in tort cases that would be known as Criminal Negligence
wouldn't it? Counselors?

All I can figure is that prosthetics manufacturers must be big GOP
contributors.

Have you been taking figuring lessons from Katiestar? You might not want to
fall into the same hole Kerry has fallen into (albeit his campaign seemingly
doesn't realize it yet, either). Of course, the Bush campaign (as opposed to the
administration) isn't helping itself with its responses, either.

I wondered how long it would take for someone to bring this up...IF 377 tons of
explosives are, in fact, missing, and there is some question about how much was
truly there, it appears it was missing prior to any coalition forces being able
to secure it. It seems there was an NBC crew "embedded" with a unit that went
to Al Qa Qaa in early April, and moreover, there are all sorts of (news and
military) reports about units at Al Qa Qaa in April 2003. But more importantly,
there's no way to know if the explosives were there prior to something like a
year before the war. The stuff was under UN/IAEA seal (essentially, a wire and
crimp), hadn't been "eyeballed" by them for some time before the war, and Saddam
regularly moved this stuff around (also in reports).

IMO, if there is negligence, it was the UN and IAEA for not insisting that this
stuff be secured better (or even destroyed). If the "Dems"/Kerry are now so hot
about this potentially dangerous stuff, why weren't they raising hell about
Saddam keeping, making, and having thousands of tons of this stuff with nothing
more than a wire and crimp on it? And then, there's El baradei - if you figure
he isn't playing politics with the timing and language, you're relying on those
figuring lesson from Katiemuskie again....

TC,
R

g.c.

CNN and NBC (whose reporters were imbedded with troops - no neo-cons here)
are reporting that the missing explosives were gone when troops arrived at
the depot http://www.lucianne.com/threads2.asp?artnum=178685

This leads to several questions:
how many more false "Bush Lied" stories does the NY Times, Washington Post,
LA Times, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, etc. are planned before the election?

How long until Kerry apologizes for blasting Bush and the military for the
biggest blunder of the war? (before or after he apologizes for outing Mary
Chaney?)

One more little note... Hundreds of copies of the NY Times with the huge
headline about the missing munitions mysteriously found their way to the
doorsteps of Floridians who don't even subscribe to this rag. Do you think
that the corrections to the story will make the front page or to the same
doorsteps? Not! The corrections to the story didn't even make the Times
today and if it is ever printed it will be buried on page 25.

One take: "Lacking Presidential wisdom, Kerry rushed to judgment and lied to
the American people about both President Bush and the American military -
yet again."


--
Thanks,
Mike

wrote in message
news
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 08:10:12 -0500, George Cleveland

wrote:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6323933/


Well, I think in tort cases that would be known as Criminal Negligence
wouldn't it? Counselors?

All I can figure is that prosthetics manufacturers must be big GOP
contributors.

Have you been taking figuring lessons from Katiestar? You might not want
to
fall into the same hole Kerry has fallen into (albeit his campaign
seemingly
doesn't realize it yet, either). Of course, the Bush campaign (as opposed
to the
administration) isn't helping itself with its responses, either.

I wondered how long it would take for someone to bring this up...IF 377
tons of
explosives are, in fact, missing, and there is some question about how
much was
truly there, it appears it was missing prior to any coalition forces being
able
to secure it. It seems there was an NBC crew "embedded" with a unit that
went
to Al Qa Qaa in early April, and moreover, there are all sorts of (news
and
military) reports about units at Al Qa Qaa in April 2003. But more
importantly,
there's no way to know if the explosives were there prior to something
like a
year before the war. The stuff was under UN/IAEA seal (essentially, a
wire and
crimp), hadn't been "eyeballed" by them for some time before the war, and
Saddam
regularly moved this stuff around (also in reports).

IMO, if there is negligence, it was the UN and IAEA for not insisting that
this
stuff be secured better (or even destroyed). If the "Dems"/Kerry are now
so hot
about this potentially dangerous stuff, why weren't they raising hell
about
Saddam keeping, making, and having thousands of tons of this stuff with
nothing
more than a wire and crimp on it? And then, there's El baradei - if you
figure
he isn't playing politics with the timing and language, you're relying on
those
figuring lesson from Katiemuskie again....

TC,
R

g.c.

Michael Zierdt writes:

CNN and NBC (whose reporters were imbedded with troops - no neo-cons here)
are reporting that the missing explosives were gone when troops arrived at
the depot http://www.lucianne.com/threads2.asp?artnum=178685

This leads to several questions:
how many more false "Bush Lied" stories does the NY Times, Washington Post,
LA Times, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, etc. are planned before the election?

How long until Kerry apologizes for blasting Bush and the military for the
biggest blunder of the war? (before or after he apologizes for outing Mary
Chaney?)

One more little note... Hundreds of copies of the NY Times with the huge
headline about the missing munitions mysteriously found their way to the
doorsteps of Floridians who don't even subscribe to this rag. Do you think
that the corrections to the story will make the front page or to the same
doorsteps? Not! The corrections to the story didn't even make the Times
today and if it is ever printed it will be buried on page 25.

One take: "Lacking Presidential wisdom, Kerry rushed to judgment and lied to
the American people about both President Bush and the American military -
yet again."


--
Thanks,
Mike


Screw 380 tons of explosives. They were gone before troops got there, and we
have taken over more than 4,000 tons of explosives/weapons.

What I would really like to know is why Kerry will not sign a DD-180 which
would release the military documents that he is hiding. He refuses to sign it.
Bush did. Why not Kerry. Why does Kerry's "discharge" occur during Carter's
first year in office, when his committmnt was up in 74? Why were his medals
reissued at the same date? Very curious. We will never know the truth about
this "hero" unless he signs the DD-180.

DaveLaCourse wonders:
Why does Kerry's "discharge" occur during Carter's
first year in office, when his committmnt was up in 74? Why were his medals
reissued at the same date?

thanks, Dave, for bringing in more tripe(the ****ing war ended 30 years ago),
all from a ultraconservative website out of Nevada. Very reliable. BTW, the
explanation is pretty obvious. Nixon's admin spent much effort trying to dirty
up the records of several antiwar Vets, Kerry included. It took legal effort on
Kerry's part to get the crap cleaned up(about 3 years). What really went down
is going to be hard to decipher, as most involved in the old Dirty Tricks
Ministry are dead, and Coulson refuses to answer questions on the matter.
Tom

"Tom Littleton" wrote in message
...
DaveLaCourse wonders:
Why does Kerry's "discharge" occur during Carter's
first year in office, when his committmnt was up in 74? Why were his
medals
reissued at the same date?

thanks, Dave, for bringing in more tripe(the ****ing war ended 30 years
ago),
all from a ultraconservative website out of Nevada. Very reliable. BTW,
the
explanation is pretty obvious. Nixon's admin spent much effort trying to
dirty
up the records of several antiwar Vets, Kerry included. It took legal
effort on
Kerry's part to get the crap cleaned up(about 3 years). What really went
down
is going to be hard to decipher, as most involved in the old Dirty Tricks
Ministry are dead, and Coulson refuses to answer questions on the matter.
Tom

Actually, Tom, Head "Rat ****er" (Nixon era Dirty Tricks Team") Segretti is
still alive and some say is still a dirty tricks consultant for Republican
campaigns. He's out of Sacramento I believe. PK probably has his number. :-)

Dave

Tom writes:

thanks, Dave, for bringing in more tripe(the ****ing war ended 30 years ago),
all from a ultraconservative website out of Nevada. Very reliable. BTW, the
explanation is pretty obvious. Nixon's admin spent much effort trying to
dirty
up the records of several antiwar Vets, Kerry included. It took legal effort
on
Kerry's part to get the crap cleaned up(about 3 years). What really went down
is going to be hard to decipher, as most involved in the old Dirty Tricks
Ministry are dead, and Coulson refuses to answer questions on the matter.
Tom

Why doesn't he sign the 180? Bush did. Don't you think it just a little
suspicious that his discharge papers and the reissuing of his medals occurs
when he has long since been discharged? You believe the 380 ton story. Why
don't you *at least* question what his motives are for hiding this info?

Tom writes:

thanks, Dave, for bringing in more tripe(the ****ing war ended 30 years ago),
all from a ultraconservative website out of Nevada. Very reliable. BTW, the
explanation is pretty obvious. Nixon's admin spent much effort trying to
dirty
up the records of several antiwar Vets, Kerry included. It took legal effort
on
Kerry's part to get the crap cleaned up(about 3 years). What really went down
is going to be hard to decipher, as most involved in the old Dirty Tricks
Ministry are dead, and Coulson refuses to answer questions on the matter.
Tom

Why doesn't he sign the 180? Bush did. Don't you think it just a little
suspicious that his discharge papers and the reissuing of his medals occurs
when he has long since been discharged? You believe the 380 ton story. Why
don't you *at least* question what his motives are for hiding this info?

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...

... Screw 380 tons of explosives. They were gone before troops got
there, and we
have taken over more than 4,000 tons of explosives/weapons.

Oh Goody! That's......um.......let's see now.....naught times naught is
naught, carry the naught......uh.......enough to kill roughly a thousand of
somebody's grandchildren!

What I would really like to know is why Kerry will not sign a DD-180 which
would release the military documents that he is hiding. He refuses to
sign it.
Bush did. Why not Kerry. Why does Kerry's "discharge" occur during
Carter's
first year in office, when his committmnt was up in 74? Why were his
medals
reissued at the same date? Very curious. We will never know the truth
about
this "hero" unless he signs the DD-180.

Why did Kerry serve in the military......and not Bush?

Oh, and you're a sick old woman.

Wolfgang