English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTUzNmIyNDUyMmRjZTk0OTYwZTRhZTVmNzFkOGIwMGY=

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWJmZDdmYTNjZTAyMTEzNTA1YjhlYWEyZmMzODcwYjc=

and yet abu ghraib is still worse, and let me guess, this all wouldn't have happened if the great satan, errrrr bush weren't el presidente....................but yet, islamists were attacking us during clinton.............

2007-07-09 11:41:16 · 2 answers · asked by james_r_keene 2 in Politics & Government Politics

2 answers

I think it is disgusting that we can find articles in the NYT and stories on CNN that defend these heartless murderers. As it is said, those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

2007-07-10 02:20:36 · answer #1 · answered by gerafalop 7 · 0 0

The NYT won't make the story a priority, because that would be an admission on thier part that the war on terror is real, and it would give some credibility to Bush, which would be contradictory to thier liberal agenda.

2007-07-09 18:54:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

fedest.com, questions and answers