maybe you should think about ,the cost of human life ,and how the U.S. gov,has treated there fellow man,also why has ,Mr Bush ,allowed Bin Laden to run free,could he be protecting his share of the Bin Laden Construction co.P/s like someone said !,''there's something fishey going on!.
2007-10-08 14:40:25 · 14 answers · asked by JOHN D 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Bush? your nuts!
1993 WTC bombed
1995 Saudi Arabia bombed 5 US dead
1996 Khobar Towers bombed 19 killed 200 US wounded
1998 2 US embassies in Africa bombed 224 killed
2000 USS Cole bombed 17 killed 39 US sailors injured
Bill Clinton promised to hunt down & punish those responsible, had he more than 3000 people from the 9-11 attacks would be alive today.
2007-10-08 14:54:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 3⤋
There is no doubt that this administration hasnt caught Bin Laden for a reason. It would slow progress in the war on terror. This war plan has been in the works for many years it was foretold in the Project for a NEW AMerican Century. BUt people do not read anymore so they wouldnt know these facts.
These uneducated answers come from the lying propaganda machine the TV. These idiots would follow hitler to the gas chambers. This Administration has committed more crimes than any ever! and you still have zombies following this madman. Take your blue pills and go back to sleep TV beleivers mr bush will make you safe, all he asks for in return is your freedoms. SUckers! These people are in fact commiting treason by following those that are treasonous.
2007-10-08 15:00:43 · answer #2 · answered by stephenmwells 5 · 3⤊ 6⤋
It wasn't meant to insult anyone, huh? I take it the question was worded much differently than this one, then.....right?
And no offense, really - but Yahoo DOES provide us with a "Check Spelling" feature. Future ranting will be better received if you'd use it.
2007-10-08 15:01:29 · answer #3 · answered by Jadis 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
how have you errored, let me count the ways
1) there is no question here
2)unless you are talking about neil, its president bush
3)hiding in caves is not running free
4)osama has nothing to do with his families company and has been completely excommunicated from them
5)nothing fishey going on (at least in anything that you mentioned)
2007-10-08 14:55:33 · answer #4 · answered by karl k 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
thank you 4 saying your sorry, and than you 4 the 2 points.
2007-10-08 17:49:29 · answer #5 · answered by Richie for da ben dan 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well then how could Clinton allow Bin Ladin to "run free" for 8 years even tho we had ample evidence that he was making war on us. You sound like another Lib that can't recall history before the year 2000, a very convenient memory.
2007-10-08 14:45:16 · answer #6 · answered by smsmith500 7 · 11⤊ 4⤋
This is meant to be humorous or just showing off your ignorance? To suggest that President Bush is "allowing" Bin Laden to just run free is baseless and silly. While they haven't nabbed him, they have managed to keep him out of action.
2007-10-08 14:47:19 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 4⤋
Bush didn't let Bin Laden go, he ran off in Pakistan and Pakistan is a sovereign ally. And it's war, people die, but it's for a great cause (combating terrorism).
http://www.truewordtoday.blogspot.com
2007-10-08 14:44:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 5⤋
Are you a good speller?Or just banana(Have you read "Have a nice day" )
2007-10-08 15:31:13 · answer #9 · answered by ak6702 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe you should stop trying to cheapen the loss of that American human life by tossing around those wacky theories about 9/11.
2007-10-08 14:48:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 5⤋