![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() Enthusiast ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Joined Feb 22, '03 Currently Offline Reputation: 0 (0%) ![]() |
Bush and all his supporters, im sorry to say it are retarded. He has got to be the dumbest president on earth. dumb f* cker.
http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.ad...112005909990004 WASHINGTON (Jan. 12) - The search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has quietly concluded without any evidence of the banned weapons that President Bush cited as justification for going to war, the White House said Wednesday. The Iraq Survey Group, made up of some 1,200 military and intelligence specialists and support staff, spent nearly two years searching military installations, factories and laboratories whose equipment and products might be converted quickly to making weapons. White House press secretary Scott McClellan said there no longer is an active search for weapons. ''There may be a couple, a few people, that are focused on that'' but that it has largely concluded, he said. ''If they have any reports of (weapons of mass destruction) obviously they'll continue to follow up on those reports,'' McClellan said. ''A lot of their mission is focused elsewhere now.'' Chief U.S. weapons hunter Charles Duelfer is to deliver his final report on the search next month. ''It's not going to fundamentally alter the findings of his earlier report,'' McClellan said, referring to preliminary findings from last September. Duelfer reported then that Saddam Hussein not only had no weapons of mass destruction and had not made any since 1991, but that he had no capability of making any either. Bush unapologetically defended his decision to invade Iraq. Bush has appointed a panel to investigate why the intelligence about Iraq's weapons was wrong. 01-12-05 1157EST This post has been edited by Sh0gunkid8721: Jan 12, 2005 - 1:55 PM -------------------- Note to new members. Discussions such as the ones below are forbidden.
http://www.6gc.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=26310&hl= |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() Enthusiast ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Joined Feb 10, '03 From Connecticut Currently Offline Reputation: 11 (100%) ![]() |
QUOTE(jgreening @ Jan 13, 2005 - 4:10 PM) QUOTE If you noticed which states were red, they were southern and midwest. Whats your point? [right][snapback]233371[/snapback][/right] That theres alot more people of the faith in those areas opposed to northeast and far west. In my opinion it effects elections way to much considering it should have nothing to do with them. And I agree, Kerry wasnt a strong candidate. -------------------- |
![]() |
|
![]() Enthusiast ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Joined Dec 26, '02 From Alabama Currently Offline Reputation: 2 (100%) ![]() |
QUOTE(Supersprynt @ Jan 14, 2005 - 6:20 AM) QUOTE(jgreening @ Jan 13, 2005 - 4:10 PM) QUOTE If you noticed which states were red, they were southern and midwest. Whats your point? [right][snapback]233371[/snapback][/right] That theres alot more people of the faith in those areas opposed to northeast and far west. In my opinion it effects elections way to much considering it should have nothing to do with them. And I agree, Kerry wasnt a strong candidate. [right][snapback]233664[/snapback][/right] Well... it's a bit more complicated than that. People of faith tend to be a bit more conservative. Bush didn't push religion as much as his conservative nature. (Abortion is a key fact here) He didn't say 'god will smite thee' he put his opinions up as morally wrong. It's all conservative Vs. liberal these days. the fact that most religious people are conservative really is just an afterthought. |
![]() ![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: July 18th, 2025 - 12:23 PM |