"I'm the Decider"

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Post Reply
Moddey Screbbagh
Posts: 104
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:56 pm

"I'm the Decider"

Post by Moddey Screbbagh »

have to admit, this is pretty damn funny:<br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://decider.cf.huffingtonpost.com/">"I'm the Decider"</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><br><br>http://decider.cf.huffingtonpost.com/ <p></p><i></i>
tigre63
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:43 am

Re: "I'm the Decider"

Post by tigre63 »

If you play that backwards you can hear 'Condi is dead'. <p></p><i></i>
greencrow0
Posts: 1481
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 5:42 pm

Re: "I'm the Decider"

Post by greencrow0 »

Yes, that's a <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>good</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> one! : )<br><br>GC<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Col Quisp
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 2:52 pm

Re: "I'm the Decider"

Post by Col Quisp »

That's sooooo great! Thanks for making my day! <p></p><i></i>
Moddey Screbbagh
Posts: 104
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:56 pm

letter in NYT today - interesting point

Post by Moddey Screbbagh »

letter-to-the-editor in today's NYT makes an interesting point, which makes sense to me:<br><br>(link may require sign in)<br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/20/opinion/l20dowd.html?_r=2&n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fLetters&oref=slogin&oref=slogin" target="top">NYT letter to the editor</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><br>To the Editor:<br><br>Re "The Decider Sticks With the Derider" (column, April 19):<br><br>There's a conundrum hidden within Maureen Dowd's column about the failure of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. It's one I've been puzzling over since the Bush administration began its drumbeat for war in Iraq.<br><br>There is now considerable evidence — from Richard A. Clarke, the former counterterrorism adviser, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and other former members of the administration — to support Ms. Dowd's statement that <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Mr. Rumsfeld "wanted to invade Iraq because he thought it would be easy."</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br>But if Mr. Rumsfeld and his colleagues truly believed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, how easy could the invasion be?<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Common sense suggests only one answer: We invaded Iraq not because we thought Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, but because we thought he didn't.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br><br>The administration would like us to think that it was simply mistaken about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein; but that's yet another lie, and perhaps the biggest one of all.<br><br>Jack Lechner<br><br>New York, April 19, 2006<br><br>The writer was an executive producer of "The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons From the Life of Robert S. McNamara." <br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Post Reply