Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Perdogg

I'd say it's likely that we're still protecting the identity of a mole in Saddam's regime, and for good reason. The reason is so we can do this kind of operation again in the future. It's a tough job being the Prez; that's why we have a tough man in that job right now.


62 posted on 01/13/2006 10:54:12 PM PST by defenderSD (¤¤ In a battle of wits against a FReeper, the typical liberal is unarmed. ¤¤)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: All

Notice how you never hear a word from the MSM that Iraq probably was involved in a terrorist attack against the US before the invasion (besides the first WTC attack that we know was sponsored by Iraq). We may have learned about this from an informant in Saddam's regime or through some high-tech communication intercepts. Now if Clinton had invaded Iraq, do you think we would have heard about likely Iraqi involvement in terrorism against the US, even if Clinton decided to keep this information classified? I think we would have heard a lot about it from the MSM and Dems in congress. But with Bush in the WH, you hear absolute silence.


63 posted on 01/13/2006 10:59:50 PM PST by defenderSD (¤¤ In a battle of wits against a FReeper, the typical liberal is unarmed. ¤¤)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson