Reply With Quote
Instead of erring on the side of caution I hope the administration doesn't act on any questionable intel in the future.
The informant's on CNN spilling his guts outs...
MURRAY WEISS and ZACH HABERMAN, NY PostOctober 11, 2005 -- The feds now believe that the tip about a supposed terror plot on the city's subways was nothing but a two-bit hoax, law-enforcement sources told The Post yesterday.
An informant — who is believed to be from Pakistan — had told authorities that three men in Iraq were plotting to bomb the subways via remote-controlled devices hidden in baby strollers and briefcases.
One source said the snitch has even admitted to interrogators he made it up. But authorities said they're now satisfied that the three suspects, arrested in Iraq last week, are not al Qaeda members, as the informant...
Hummm, how convieennieeenttt.
Instead of erring on the side of caution I hope the administration doesn't act on any questionable intel in the future.
"any questionable intel in the future"
The entire in Iraq, starting a ing war, was based on questionable intel. dubya, wofly et al wanted that war AS A MATTER OF POLICY before the 2000 pres election, no matter what, and didn't give a about the intelligence estimates, solid or shaky.
no joke
So you'd prefer to wait until a threat is 100% verifiable or the nation is attacked first before taking action?
that.
Everyone and their dog thought that Iraq had chemical and biological weaponry and was well along in their nuclear program. That included any number of intel services around the globe.
your incessant mindnumbing partisan drivel.
I stopped going out in the rain since the chances of getting struck by lightning are far greater than being killed by a terrorist attack.
You bunch of scared, bush-whipped pansies.
"you'd prefer to wait until a threat is 100% verifiable"
You said that, I didn't. Typical fault on your part.
It has become extremely clear that the WH did all to verify any intel, and just started the war as a matter of policy, not for intel reasons.
I don't care what EVERYONE thought about Iraq (what they think is not intel anyway, is it?).
I only care about what was thought by the assholes who actually started the ing war. And ALL they wanted to do was start the war, no matter whether the intel was verifiable or not.
As a typical ignorant, right-wing dubya-sucker, you make the basic mistake that being against dubya and all he represents is "partisan". ie, that I'm pro some other partisan . Big mistake, but so typical. Carry on, I seem to be getting your goat, so you want me to shut up.
This ain't dubya's sycophantic bubble here where posts are only the ones you agree with.
Review your own criticism in this thread, Dumbass:
The entire in Iraq, starting a ing war, was based on questionable intel.
It is clear that you cannot express a coherent thought while in a crystal meth induced partisan rage.It has become extremely clear that the WH did all to verify any intel, and just started the war as a matter of policy, not for intel reasons.
It was what various intel agencies "thought". RIF.I don't care what EVERYONE thought about Iraq (what they think is not intel anyway, is it?).
All you want to do is paint the current administration in a bad light, no matter what. BFD.I only care about what was thought by the assholes who actually started the ing war. And ALL they wanted to do was start the war, no matter whether the intel was verifiable or not.
My, my, someone's testy. I'm neither "right-wing" nor "left wing".As a typical ignorant, right-wing dubya-sucker, you make the basic mistake that being against dubya and all he represents is "partisan". ie, that I'm pro some other partisan . Big mistake, but so typical. Carry on, I seem to be getting your goat, so you want me to shut up.
With regards to ignorance you've cornered the market on that, copying and pasting from The New York Times notwithstanding.
Try again.
Neither is it your trailer park. Now shut the up already.This ain't dubya's sycophantic bubble here where posts are only the ones you agree with.
Wonder how you would have said the above without all the curse words? Ah, not possible. Another product of our education system.
MB, you're losing it, and I'm loving it. Go ahead and make my day.
Why do people act like cursing is something new here?
The only thing I've lost is my patience with the chunks of stupidity you've been spewing all all over this forum.
Nothing funnier than a social outcast acting like a
...or you following me around the forum like a lost puppy.
But, I know, you buy tickets and team gear. Congrats. That's impressive.
What he said.
Marcus Bryant isn't partisan because he says he isn't. ing liar. Like inpartisanship instantly equals credibility. I don't like democrats, but I ing hate republicans. So I am not partisan. Marcus Bryant hates Democrats, and always defends republicans. I guess you can say he's not partisan.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
