🚀 go-pugleaf

On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 11:00:12 -0400, Slim <slim@pickins.com> wrote:

>On 2007-07-06 06:41:29 -0400, Mike Smith <mws@wt.net> said:
>
>> On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 01:13:19 GMT, Al Giazirra
>> <thatsme@realitalianlastname.com > wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 01:57:53 GMT, Mike Smith <mws@wt.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 20:22:43 -0400, Slim <slim@pickins.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 2007-07-04 10:12:12 -0400, Joeseph P. Blow <jpblow@gmail.com> said:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Now you're claiming Iraq was a threat to our nation and _THAT's_ why
>>>>>> bush attacked?
>>>> 
>>>> Here ya go, moron... Get someone to explain this to ya...
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Bush: Saddam was not responsible for 9/11
>>>>> Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
>>>>> Tuesday September 12, 2006
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> "I am often asked why we are in Iraq when Saddam Hussein was not 
>>>>> responsible for the 9/11 attacks," Mr Bush said. "The answer is that 
>>>>> the regime of Saddam Hussein was a clear threat.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Liberals ARE this stupid.
>>>> 
>>>> Mike Smith
>>> 
>>> Stupid for posting what that president said or stupid for actually
>>> remembering it?
>> 
>> No, dumbass. Can't you follow a thread?  No one claimed Iraq was
>> responsible for 9-11. The buffoon is arguing about nothing in
>> dispute... That's what's stupid...
>
>from the March 14, 2003 edition - 
>http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html
>The impact of Bush linking 9/11 and Iraq
>American attitudes about a connection have changed, firming up the case 
>for war.
>By Linda Feldmann | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
>WASHINGTON - In his prime-time press conference last week, which 
>focused almost solely on Iraq, President Bush mentioned Sept. 11 eight 
>times. He referred to Saddam Hussein many more times than that, often 
>in the same breath with Sept. 11.
>Bush never pinned blame for the attacks directly on the Iraqi 
>president. 

See what I mean folks... Slim's just stupid.

Mike Smith