Not the Canadians?! How cruel and thoughtless! Who else could
tolerate us?
-jc
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 07:36 AM, Score, Robert wrote:
> Also if I remember correctly some of the 911 terrorist entered through
> canada, so we might as well bomb the hell out of canada, and while we
> are at it lets wipe logan airport off the map so that no more planes
> leaving that airport can be highjacked
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Hicks [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 7:33 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Iraq response & Constitution
>
> It seems to me that the Saudi's are more of a threat since they were
> the majority or the hijackers and funders of terrorism and since they
> don't have wmd's it would be prudent to attack them also since we
> already have troops there. SH is a bit of a shit but he's "our shit".
> Also we should take Kuait and get some of those gold toilet bowls.
> jh
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: John Callan
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 8:11 AM
> Subject: Re: Iraq response & Constitution
>
> If his old man got lambasted for not finishing the job when he had
> Sadam by the short and curlies...surely someone on the staff is smart
> enough to advise him not to get distracted. It may be that there are
> more than one adversary to deal with. And North Korea may be arguably
> a more significant threat. But that doesn't mean Sadam is not a
> threat. And if we must do this alone...or nearly alone...isn't one at
> a time better than all at once?
>
> -jc
>
> On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 06:31 AM, Jim Hicks wrote:
>
> So why isn't Mr. Bush going to attack N. Korea?
> Just too chicken shit? Chickenhawk = Chickenshit
> jh
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 7:14 AM
> Subject: Re: Iraq response & Constitution
>
> In a message dated 2/19/2003 6:53:27 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
> I heard at the time that Nam was all about oil cause in
> the gulf of Tonkin are oil reserves as large as the Saudi's.
>
>
>
> That's the only excuse the Peacenik appeasers can come up with. I
> guess if we were to attack an enemy in Antarctica it would be for the
> oil.
>
> Sign me,
> Dirty oil, baby killer supporter
>
|
