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

Skip to comments.

We'll bomb you to Stone Age, US told Pakistan
The Times ^ | September 22, 2006 | Tim Reid

Posted on 09/22/2006 12:11:59 AM PDT by MadIvan

Musharraf reveals post-9/11 threat in book serialised by The Times

PERVEZ MUSHARRAF, the President of Pakistan, claimed last night that the Bush Administration threatened to bomb his country “into the Stone Age” if it did not co-operate with the US after 9/11, sharply increasing tensions between the US and one of its closest allies in the war on terrorism.

The President, who will meet Mr Bush in the White House today, said the threat was made by Richard Armitage, then the Deputy Secretary of State, in the days after the terror attacks, and was issued to the Pakistani intelligence director.

“The intelligence director told me that [Armitage] said, ‘Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age’,” President Musharraf said. “I think it was a very rude remark.” The claims come at the end of a week in which relations between the US and Pakistan have sharply deteriorated, and days ahead of the publication of President Musharraf’s memoir, In the Line of Fire, which will be serialised in The Times from Monday.

On Wednesday, President Bush, in an interview with CNN, said that he would not hesitate to authorise immediate American military action inside Pakistan if he had intelligence of Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts. Asked if he would give an order to kill the al-Qaeda leader, Mr Bush said “absolutely”.

President Musharraf was clearly angered by Mr Bush’s declaration that the US would act independently of his authority inside Pakistan.

“We wouldn’t like to allow that. We would like to do that ourselves,” he said. The President’s potentially incendiary claim of US threats comes at a particularly sensitive time between Washington and Islamabad, amid suspicion in Washington that Pakistan is not doing enough to curb a resurgent Taleban in Afghanistan, or in the hunt for bin Laden.

Before the 9/11 attacks Pakistan was one of the only countries in the world to maintain relations with the Taleban, which was harbouring bin Laden, and the Pakistani intelligence services had close relations with the Taleban regime.

In recent days Islamabad has vehemently denied US media reports that it has struck a deal with al-Qaeda and Taleban militants inside Pakistan, and even one report that it has assured bin Laden that if captured, he would not face prosecution. President Musharraf told the CBS 60 Minutes programme that when he was told of Mr Armitage’s threat, he reacted in a responsible way. “One has to think and take actions in the interest of the nation, and that’s what I did,” President Musharraf said.

Documents showed that Mr Armitage, who last night disputed the language but did not deny the claim, met the Pakistani Ambassador and the visiting head of Pakistan’s military intelligence service in Washington on September 13, 2001, and asked Pakistan to take seven steps.

President Musharraf told CBS that he was irked by US demands that Pakistan turn over its border posts and bases for the American military to use.

He said some demands were ludicrous, including one insisting that he suppress domestic expression of support for terrorism against the United States. “If somebody’s expressing views, we cannot curb the expression of views,” he said.

The official 9/11 commission report on the attacks, based largely on government documents, said that US national security officials focused immediately on securing Pakistani co-operation as they planned a response.

Within days of 9/11 President Musharraf cut his government’s ties to the Taleban regime in Afghanistan and co- operated with US efforts to track and capture al-Qaeda and Taleban forces that sought refuge in Pakistan. President Bush often praises Islamabad for being one of Washington’s greatest and most crucial allies in the war on terrorism.

President Musharraf also spoke about his embarrassment when informed at the UN in 2003 by George Tenet, who was then CIA Director, that Pakistani nuclear weapon technology had been passed to Iran and North Korea by the father of the Pakistani nuclear bomb, A. Q. Khan.

“[Tenet] took his briefcase out, passed me some papers. It was a centrifuge design with all its numbers and signatures of Pakistan. It was the most embarrassing moment,” President Musharraf told CBS.

He learnt then, he says, that not only were blueprints being given to Iran and North Korea, but that the centrifuges themselves — the crucial technology needed to enrich uranium to weapons grade — were being passed to them.

“[Khan] gave them centrifuge designs. He gave them centrifuge parts. He gave them centrifuges.

“[The shipments] were not done once. They must have been transported many times.”

STRAINED DAYS

# September 11, 2001. President Musharraf condemns attacks on the US as “brutal and horrible”

# February 2002. On a visit to the White House Musharraf says: “We reject terrorism . . . we will continue to fulfill our responsibilities”

# February 2004. Nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan accused of selling secrets. Musharraf denies knowledge of his activities

# December 2004. Bush says Musharraf is “a person with whom I’ve worked very closely over the past four years”


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: armitage; pakistan; richardarmitage; tacticalnukestrikes; terrorism; usa
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-73 next last
President Bush should not just threaten this with some countries - he should execute on it.

Let fear stalk anyone who dares raise their hand to the West.

Regards, Ivan

1 posted on 09/22/2006 12:12:00 AM PDT by MadIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DCPatriot; Deetes; Barset; fanfan; LadyofShalott; Tolik; mtngrl@vrwc; pax_et_bonum; Alkhin; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 09/22/2006 12:12:57 AM PDT by MadIvan (I aim to misbehave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Interesting, Armitage is sure getting a whole lot of press these days.
3 posted on 09/22/2006 12:15:05 AM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
President Musharraf said. “I think it was a very rude remark.”

Oh, did it offend your Muslim sensibilities Mr. Musharraf?

4 posted on 09/22/2006 12:15:18 AM PDT by beaversmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

5 posted on 09/22/2006 12:16:24 AM PDT by MinorityRepublican (Everyone that doesn't like what America and President Bush has done for Iraq can all go to HELL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; onyx; Mo1

Dickie Armitage supposedly threatened the President of Pakistan, after 9/11; so says the President of Pakistan.


6 posted on 09/22/2006 12:17:30 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jrooney

Another story about Armitage.


7 posted on 09/22/2006 12:17:31 AM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Good to see you posting again! Just read this in the Times. It reminded me of a comment made by a sensible woman in Afghanistan the other day. She said it made no sense to bomb Afghanistan and not bomb Pakistan. She wanted liberation and knew that Pakistan funds. fuels, trains and protects the Taliban and other Islamist groups.


Years ago the art of war included cutting off the supply train.
8 posted on 09/22/2006 12:18:25 AM PDT by vimto (Blighty Awaken!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

MARK!,MARK!,MARK!...RELEASE! BOMBS AWAY!!!


9 posted on 09/22/2006 12:19:23 AM PDT by dontpethesweatythings (Is the '06 election season over yet???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

Armitage is a loose cannon around members of the press, and presidents. I am glad he is gone. He caused a lot of damage for this administration.


10 posted on 09/22/2006 12:21:16 AM PDT by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

But but but ... I thought Dickie was against wars ??


11 posted on 09/22/2006 12:21:58 AM PDT by Mo1 (Hey McCain and Graham .... our soldiers signed up to dodge bullets not lawsuits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

Wow! Great post! I love some of these quotes.


12 posted on 09/22/2006 12:23:28 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

By my observation no bombing was necessary to put them back into the Stone Age.


13 posted on 09/22/2006 12:24:27 AM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mo1

Oh didn't you know...Dickie is all things to all people and an absolute superman! /sarcasm


14 posted on 09/22/2006 12:25:42 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All
We should've taken out Iran's Nuke-facilities
while their puppet was speaking at the UN.

Imagine that.

God Bless America,
Maxmax.
15 posted on 09/22/2006 12:29:24 AM PDT by MaxMax (God Bless America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
President Musharraf was clearly angered by Mr Bush’s declaration that the US would act independently of his authority inside Pakistan.

I wonder if he feels the same away about bin Laden acting indepedently of his authority inside Pakistan.
16 posted on 09/22/2006 12:30:19 AM PDT by dr_who_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MaxMax
We should've taken out Iran's Nuke-facilities while their puppet was speaking at the UN.

We wouldn't even have had to do it, all we had to do was allow the Israelis to handle it.

17 posted on 09/22/2006 12:31:01 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
We wouldn't even have had to do it, all we had to do was allow the Israelis to handle it.

That's easier said then done .. President Lunatic from Iran has nuke plants spread out all across Iran

He may be crazy .. but he's not stupid .. which makes him even more dangerous

18 posted on 09/22/2006 12:34:32 AM PDT by Mo1 (Hey McCain and Graham .... our soldiers signed up to dodge bullets not lawsuits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever

ooooooooh you stole my line. lol actually i was going to say, it would only take maybe one bomb to put them back in the stone age. :-/


19 posted on 09/22/2006 12:34:38 AM PDT by ferri (Be Politically Incorrect: Support the Constitution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
There is something to this story. Shortly before the Afghan campaign, Mushariff went public to the Pakistani, condemning the attacks on the US and disavowing the Taliban. This was broadcast here. While he didn't say who the messenger was, it was clear that Bush had read him the riot act. One statement he made stood out. (paraphrase) "Our very existence depends on our cooperation".

Beats me why he names Armitage as the messenger. The US already had a resident ambassador.
20 posted on 09/22/2006 12:41:30 AM PDT by BIGLOOK (Keelhauling is a sensible solution to mutiny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ferri

LOL.


21 posted on 09/22/2006 12:45:29 AM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: beaversmom

It was because of a lot of talk and no action that terrorism was allowed to grow in the 1990s. I remember reading a report where Uday Hussein said in March of 2003 that this President doesn't mess around he says what he means. This is what we need all these nations assume they can pay us lip service and get away with anything.


22 posted on 09/22/2006 12:49:34 AM PDT by LukeL (Never let the enemy pick the battle site. (Gen. George S. Patton))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BIGLOOK
Of course the US needed to give a threat. A great diplomatic maneuver considering that Mushie could have allied with the Taliban and have the support. One scenario is World War 3. Mushie mane the right choice.

BTW, Mushie did make a second speech to the country. One that went against America.
23 posted on 09/22/2006 12:50:08 AM PDT by endthematrix (“Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: All
"# February 2002. On a visit to the White House Musharraf says: “We reject terrorism . . . we will continue to fulfill our responsibilities”


Approximately a month after Rockefeller went to warn the neighborhood about mean President Bush and the same month that Joe Wilson went on his tea sipping venture to tag 'yellowcake'.
24 posted on 09/22/2006 12:50:45 AM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

One of my childhood Heros said that,,What-A-Guy,,From what
I had heard,,He was 12ft. Tall ! I saw Him on the Flight-Line at BAFB in 1955 or so,,All Farts-N-Darts and See-gar,
Looked just like anybodys ol' fat PaPaw,,,
HEY,PERV,,,His Bombers Are Rite Down The Road !
Wanna Be LAOS ?
ARC-Light,ARC-Brite !


25 posted on 09/22/2006 12:58:14 AM PDT by 1COUNTER-MORTER-68 (THROWING ANOTHER BULLET-RIDDLED TV IN THE PILE OUT BACK~~~~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
And? I mean, are we supposed to say that was evil? I am personally loving this! Fred Flintstone here they come as far as I am concerned. Of course I just finished watching UNITED 93 for the first time tonight and I am so angry all over again!
26 posted on 09/22/2006 1:00:02 AM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
In hind sight, it would of been wise if we had went ahead and occupied the border and locked it down. Even if it put President Musharraf in a bad spot. Its obvious he doesn't trust his Army and Intelligence Agencies;and so far what military action the Pakis have taken on has been somewhat inept and amateurish. But I don't blame Musharraf, he did the coup because of what his country had become and inherited a country that parts of it thought themselves pretty much self ruled instead of being beholden to Islamabad.
27 posted on 09/22/2006 1:02:20 AM PDT by neb52
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
Coincidence? I just watched United 93 tonight. Bought the DVD a week ago.......and waited.
28 posted on 09/22/2006 1:03:30 AM PDT by BIGLOOK (Keelhauling is a sensible solution to mutiny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan; Saberwielder
The recent deal between Pakistan and the Deobandis in Waziristan has caused a lot of pressure on Musharraf from the civilized word, now he is trying to get more accolade from the Deobandis by blaming Armitage for his earlier decisions. ("I had no alternative.") The question is; why is Musharraf doing this now?

We have to give him another suggestion he can't refuse...
29 posted on 09/22/2006 1:05:47 AM PDT by AdmSmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: endthematrix
Of course the US needed to give a threat. A great diplomatic maneuver considering that Mushie could have allied with the Taliban and have the support. One scenario is World War 3. Mushie mane the right choice.

Musharraf would have been fine with WWIII. He flew to Beijing to enlist Chinese support against the US, and got the back of their hand. What he feared was to go up against the US alone. Meanwhile the administration position was that "all options are on the table", which may have been directed towards Pakistan and China as much as it was against the Taliban. Pakistan was in no position to survive a nuclear war against India, let alone the US.
30 posted on 09/22/2006 1:25:36 AM PDT by Zhang Fei
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith
We have to give him another suggestion he can't refuse...

Too late now to threaten Pakistan with nuclear annihilation. Al Qaeda hasn't pulled off another successful attack against the continental US, let alone one on the scale of 9/11. Five years have passed since 9/11, dimming the rage that the average American (including many liberals) felt against terror sponsors. These kinds of threats are one-off deals occurring typically after major outrages. Unless another 9/11 happens on American soil, I don't see it being issued again.
31 posted on 09/22/2006 1:32:37 AM PDT by Zhang Fei
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
But it was up to Mushie to escalate the situation and chose not to. IMO, one pivotal moment in history. It would of set us back moderately without logistical help. But if he helped the Taliban...I don't know what the next play for Washington would have been? I doubt airstrikes any any population center. Mushie was our best man at the helm there, and had good recommendations from DoD.
32 posted on 09/22/2006 1:33:05 AM PDT by endthematrix (“Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: endthematrix
But it was up to Mushie to escalate the situation and chose not to. IMO, one pivotal moment in history. It would of set us back moderately without logistical help. But if he helped the Taliban...I don't know what the next play for Washington would have been? I doubt airstrikes any any population center. Mushie was our best man at the helm there, and had good recommendations from DoD.

I don't think he was threatened with conventional airstrikes. I believe he was threatened with nuclear annihilation. This is why he showed up ashen-faced at a press conference and said that Pakistan would have to change course - because its very existence was at stake.
33 posted on 09/22/2006 1:36:45 AM PDT by Zhang Fei
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

Every interview with musharraf i have read, i have noted he has made all kinds of apparently candid comments, in some cases quite open about problems he has had or things he has done or not done. this guy is next to death's door (not from the US so much as islamic elements in his own country) and apparently has done quite a bit despite multiple attempts to kill him.

i have no doubt the stone age language might well have been used. pakistan would not be allowed to be neutral in september 2001.


34 posted on 09/22/2006 1:37:36 AM PDT by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WoofDog123

in case my previous comment gave an erroneous impression, i know full and well that realpolitik rules any country's and presumably any dictators underlying motives (barring the megalomaniacs), but in spite of this musharraf has made a number of interesting comments that almost couldn't be made up (or at least had no apparent motive for such).


35 posted on 09/22/2006 1:41:49 AM PDT by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

has this appeared on the BBC yet? Would have thought they would be onto it like a shot.


36 posted on 09/22/2006 1:44:59 AM PDT by Mac1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei; Saberwielder
The suggestion should be:

"If you do not deliver we will assist the Balochis to establish an independent country with Western support under a nuclear umbrella"


http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?154951

Balochistan grand jirga calls for restoration of pre-partition status of the province
Friday September 22, 2006 (0326 PST)

KALAT: The ever grand jirga in the history of Balochistan has been held under Khan of Kalat after 130 years calling upon people of Balochistan to unite on one platform to seek restoration of pre-partition status of Balochistan besides condemning the killing of Nawab Akbar Bugti.
The jirga was held in Shahi Jirga Hall here Thursday. Over 95 tribal chiefs from Balochistan, Punjab and Sindh, tribal elders and Nawabs besides people in large number attended the jirga. Nawab of Kalat Mir Suleman Khan presided over jirga.

Chief of Chalawan, Sardar Sana Ullah Zehri, Chief of Sarwan, Nawab Aslam Raeesani, Mir Balakh Sher Mazari, Sardar Yar Muhammad Jamali, Sardar Akhtar Jan Mengal, Nawab Zulfiqar Ali Magsi, former chief minister Sardar Taj Muhammad Jamali, Sardar Aziz Ahmad Lehri and others participated in the jirga.

The speakers while addressing the jirga said there is no room left for Baloch nation to live in Pakistan now. Balochistan was an independent state and it was not part of united India. It was forcibly annexed to Pakistan and Baloch nation was divided in three provinces of Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan under a conspiracy. The border line of the province be abolished.

They underlined that the need is there that all the political parties and people of Balochistan are united under one flag to achieve this objective.

The speakers alleged the blood carnage is raging in Balochistan. The rulers are meeting out step motherly treatment to the province. Our political parties should get untied on one platform and work out strategy to challenge Pakistan-Balochistan annexation accord in international court of justice.

They demanded the people of Balochistan be give access to the resources of their province.

An interview of Nawab Akbar Bugti recorded by a Balochi radio was also relayed at the conclusion of jirga. This saddened the environment. Bugti said in interview that his war is for protection of sovereignty of Baloch nation and their rights. We are not anti development. The development is that which is in accordance with the requirement of Baloch nation. On the other hand government dubs establishment of garrisons and air fields as development, he added.
37 posted on 09/22/2006 1:51:19 AM PDT by AdmSmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever
By my observation no bombing was necessary to put them back into the Stone Age.

I think he meant bomb the UP to the stone age.

38 posted on 09/22/2006 2:04:43 AM PDT by Jeff Chandler (Peace begins in the womb.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith

Armitage interview conducted on April 19, 2002:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline////shows/campaign/interviews/armitage.html

"The evening of Sept. 11, and the following morning, you had emergency meetings. Was the president very clear that you were going to Afghanistan?

The president set the stage very early on. We had a good indication that it looked like things pointed to Osama bin Laden. It wasn't 100 percent, but as the president said the next day or the day after, the noose was tightening. He made it very clear that we would respond, and respond robustly to this. We hadn't determined the nature of our response. He gave us -- the different secretaries, secretary of state, et cetera -- word to go forth and to form a mighty coalition. We started the next morning.


The most important part of that diplomatic jigsaw was presumably Pakistan. Can you remember the moment when Pakistan was mentioned?

I don't remember it in that meeting. But we knew that [General Mahmood], the director of intelligence for Pakistan, was here as a guest of, as we say around here, "another agency of government," and we knew Pakistan was key.

I spoke to Secretary Powell and said I'd like to call this fellow in. I called him in at noon on Sept. 12. He was a visitor to the CIA, of course. I called him in and had a very short and, I think, hard-hitting conversation with him.

Can we go into that conversation?

He was immediately willing to cooperate. I explained to him that what I was going to be asking him, [what] we were formulating, and [that] it would, at a minimum, cause deep introspection for Pakistan. This would not be something that was negotiable; it was a black or white situation. The president had said, "You're with us or against us." The president was speaking out forcefully, not only against those who conducted operations of terror, but those who supported terrorism or allowed terrorists to exist, and to think carefully.

He pushed back a bit, saying that he wanted to talk about the history of U.S.- Pakistan relations. I interjected that I knew very well the history of Pakistan, General, but we're talking about the future, and for you and for us history starts today. That was the end of the meeting.


39 posted on 09/22/2006 2:20:07 AM PDT by endthematrix (“Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Armitage.

Colin Powell's mouthpiece, or so it would seem.

I've always been dubious of statements regarding why he wouldn't consider running for President.It seemed a smokescreen to prevent more thorough questioning.

It's time to ask, "What's he up to?"
40 posted on 09/22/2006 2:24:07 AM PDT by airborne (Fecal matter is en route to fan! Contact is imminent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
He said some demands were ludicrous, including one insisting that he suppress domestic expression of support for terrorism against the United States. “If somebody’s expressing views, we cannot curb the expression of views,” he said.

Unless they are Christians.

Isn't it Pakistani Muslims calling for the Pope to step down?

41 posted on 09/22/2006 2:27:40 AM PDT by airborne (Fecal matter is en route to fan! Contact is imminent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Let fear stalk anyone who dares raise their hand to the West.

This method has been effective throughout history....talking eventually leads us to the use of fear everytime...

42 posted on 09/22/2006 2:55:40 AM PDT by cbkaty (I may not always post...but I am always here......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beaversmom

Promises ,Promises


43 posted on 09/22/2006 3:32:24 AM PDT by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Where do the "presstitutes" get off by bestowing the title of president to every military dictator on the planet.

They are trying to give moral equivalence between our free elections and dictatorships. Disgusting!

44 posted on 09/22/2006 3:32:57 AM PDT by rawcatslyentist (If a monkey bangs away at a typewriter twice a week for ten years it could write an M. Dowd column.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

This ought to be good for Bush's ratings. He got what he wanted with threats.


45 posted on 09/22/2006 3:36:10 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

Right on, my sentiments exactly!!!!


46 posted on 09/22/2006 3:42:34 AM PDT by panthermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

Hey there, Haven't read anything from you in a while. When I was new on here, I remember you wrote that you weren't going to post anymore. I'm glad that you changed your mind.


47 posted on 09/22/2006 3:53:39 AM PDT by Shimmer128 (My beloved is mine and I am his. Song of Solomon 1:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

Armitage, not Bush, supposedly made the threat.


48 posted on 09/22/2006 3:59:10 AM PDT by Jedi Master Pikachu ( Microevolution is real; Macroevolution is not real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever

They have nuclear weapons (from stolen technology). They are developing, but they are not Stone Age level.


49 posted on 09/22/2006 4:00:29 AM PDT by Jedi Master Pikachu ( Microevolution is real; Macroevolution is not real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler; ferri

See comment 49.


50 posted on 09/22/2006 4:03:28 AM PDT by Jedi Master Pikachu ( Microevolution is real; Macroevolution is not real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-73 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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