Osama bin Laden is dead

[margrace]

Scott, I happened across a quote that I'm finding rings very true on these pages. It's by George Jonas at the bottom of my posts. What do you think?

How about "There are none so blind as he who will not see"

[Drea]

I like this one -- "It's never too late to give up your prejudices".

So very true for today when the propaganda machine is operating at capacity.

It is never too late to read, analyze and THINK for yourself.

It is never too late to turn off the propaganda.

It is never too late to be a real human being.

It is never too late to stop blaming everything on an "enemy'' you know nothing about.

It is never too late to look the other person in the eye and apologize for being an ass.

It is never too late!

Edited August 7, 2007 by Drea

[ScottSA]

Scott, I happened across a quote that I'm finding rings very true on these pages. It's by George Jonas at the bottom of my posts. What do you think?

It's true...although I think it's sometimes not so much stupidity as an inability to apply logic to situations.

[ScottSA]

ScottSA - I would recommend that you and I no longer address one another and if we find ourselves posting on the same thread please attempt to keep your rebuttles on topic and not the character of the poster.

I recommend that you start posting like an adult instead of "LOL" some valley "LOL" girl in a chatroom "LOL!" And I mean that in some seriousness, since your flippant and unsubstantiated claims, coupled with your vacuous gagmewithaspoonisms, amount to jamming.

By the way, what's a "rebuttle?"

[White Doors]

I like this one -- "It's never too late to give up your prejudices".

So very true for today when the propaganda machine is operating at capacity.

It is never too late to read, analyze and THINK for yourself.

It is never too late to turn off the propaganda.

It is never too late to be a real human being.

It is never too late to stop blaming everything on an "enemy'' you know nothing about.

It is never too late to look the other person in the eye and apologize for being an ass.

It is never too late!

You should take some of your own advice. You denegrate people of faith on these forums everyday.

Edited August 7, 2007 by White Doors

[Drea]

He can't rebutt a topic so he insults the posters.

All he has is his opinion developed from the propaganda he eagerly swallows. So everything he types is rote and means nothing.

"Muslims baaaaaaaaaaad ... a'cause the guvment told me they are and I beleeve my tee vee is the trooth like the bible".

added: People of faith are not protected from insults... too bad your god won't strike me down eh. LOL

I slam all faiths equally by the way. They are all shams. Realize it. Get over it. Get on with your life.

Edited August 7, 2007 by Drea

[ScottSA]

Not to "slam" yo," but care to explain what you are talking about?

[buffycat]

Not to "slam" yo," but care to explain what you are talking about?

Hey, Scott - I know this is off-topic and for that I apoligise to the thread starter - but - is that you in the picture on your profile?

You look so familiar, it's scary.

[GostHacked]

But we do have many conflicting reports when it comes to Osama bin Laden. Is he dead? Is he alive? Some reports show us he died in 2001. Some say he died in 2004. So do we really know for sure? If he is dead, that is not known worldwide. Much can be gain by saying the boogieman is still alive and wants to hurt us at any time. If he is dead, another one can be created to take his place. With the pace at which the US is taking out top level Al-Queda operatives, it really could not be far off until they get Osama. Osama does/did need dialysis often enough that he probably has a medical team with him. A small one at that since he travels light and mostly unannounced. If he is dead, who can the powers that be, be made to be the next boogieman?

So, if he is dead... how can that play out globaly with respect to the attitude towards the war on terror.

If he is alive.... why the hell is he not dead yet?

[ScottSA]

You look so familiar, it's scary.

No, that's a picture of Brad Pitt. Why do you ask?

[kuzadd]

But we do have many conflicting reports when it comes to Osama bin Laden. Is he dead? Is he alive? Some reports show us he died in 2001. Some say he died in 2004. So do we really know for sure? If he is dead, that is not known worldwide. Much can be gain by saying the boogieman is still alive and wants to hurt us at any time. If he is dead, another one can be created to take his place. With the pace at which the US is taking out top level Al-Queda operatives, it really could not be far off until they get Osama. Osama does/did need dialysis often enough that he probably has a medical team with him. A small one at that since he travels light and mostly unannounced. If he is dead, who can the powers that be, be made to be the next boogieman?

So, if he is dead... how can that play out globaly with respect to the attitude towards the war on terror.

If he is alive.... why the hell is he not dead yet?

So many good questions.

Is he dead?

-Voice last picked up 2001 in Tora Bora, as reported by pentagon. (The US extensively monitored OBL)

-Numerous reports of his death around the Dec.2001 period inc. an obituary.

-No new tapes from Binladen (except apparently ones that can't be verified, are audio only and this latest, which is old footage, unless OBL has found the fountain of youth(lol))

-OBL was a man in poor health, walked with a cane and required dialysis, even prior to 9/11.

-Last linked visavis actual evidence to a crime committed nearly 20 yrs ago

-Is not wanted in connection with 9/11

-suspect tape that links 9/11 to Osama , which is interesting to note that the FBI, doesn't even buy into this crock of baloney tape, as to this day, Osama is still not wanted for 9/11, despite his "confession" tape, which one would think would be good enough??

It seems to be known in the Muslim world that he is dead, Karzai, Mushareff, even Bush and Rumsfeld, don't seem to give him much thought. Do they know he is dead, that's why they don't worry about him?( They would certainly be privy to that type of info)

Then we have to think of Osama the CIA agent,

Osama who was in Kosovo,( inc. issued a passport) fighting along side the troops , armed and supplied by America/NATO.

Osama who fought at the behest of the US , against Russia, in Afghanistan.

Osama was quite the right hand man of the US.

If he is alive, why isn't he dead?

That isn't really plausible that he is alive, With the technology available, if this man made a phone call , (landline, cell or satellite phone, sent a fax, an e-mail) anywhere in the world it would be picked up.

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/process/echelon.htm

Echelon would take care of that. For one! Osama's voice would be able to be picked, as his voice has been extensively recorded.(apparently it is quite distinct, plus the keywords he would be using!)

I am , in the "he is dead" camp myself. Dead but still useful!!!!

If he is alive, he is alive? (how the hell is that possible) At the will of , and with the blessing of the US, that is the only possible reason for him to still be alive

[ScottSA]

Dead but still useful!!!!

You lefties keep harping on this "useful" line, but it's really just trying to jam the facts into some cockamamy theory you have about the WoT being some big plot. Bush long long ago said that the WoT will not end with OBL's death, and the administration has repeatedly re-enforced this. At no time has OBL been used as a "booga booga," as one of our less illustrious posters has said. Has he been demonized by the press? Sure. Used by various factions as a figurehead? Absolutely. But he is certainly not "useful," nor is he being "used" by the admin to make up the WoT. Islam and its tens or hundreds of killings a day are quite capable of scaring most sane people all by themselves.

Edited August 8, 2007 by ScottSA

[kimmy]

Certain types of people like to talk about the "fake Osama!" video.

They like to "prove" that it's fake by posting the same collection of screen-captures that they say show it is obviously not the same guy. "A fat black guy," as one buffoon described it before his death in a tragic collision with the Ban Van.

However, anybody with an IQ over about, probably 60 or so, who looks at their collection of "photographic proof" of the "fake Bin Laden" in the tape, will notice that these screen-captures are of amazingly low quality. They are low-quality Jpeg screen-captures of a low-quality Youtube video which was badly vidcapped from a low-quality VCR recording.

Higher-quality video captures of the video are available; I found them myself on a "Truthie" website where the author combs through the video frame-by-frame looking for inconsistencies. When compared to these better-quality video captures, two things immediately become obvious about the ones Truthies prefer to talk about:

-edges have been blurred, either on purpose or through incompetence.

-contrast level has been changed, either on purpose or through incompetence. Highlights have been made more visible; dark colors have become darker.

The higher-quality video captures make it clear that the low-quality video captures the Truthies like to show have been simply put, altered. Whether they've been altered intentionally for dishonest purposes, or whether they've been altered through sheer incompetence, the one simple unavoidable conclusion is that they've been altered. Not real. Fake. You can't use fake evidence to prove *anything*.

Now, one can certainly still doubt whether the video is authentic... but the "fat black guy" stuff is just an utter lie.

And, while the Truthies love to talk about the 2001 Osama video, they seem to seldom mention the 2004 Osama video.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Osama_bin_Laden_video

...the one that was authenticated and broadcast by Al Jazeera, not US networks.

-k

[kuzadd]

kimmy:

Certain types of people like to talk about the "fake Osama!" video.

such as yourself?

"However, anybody with an IQ over about, probably 60 or so, who looks at their collection of "photographic proof" of the "fake Bin Laden" in the tape, will notice that these screen-captures are of amazingly low quality."

actually speaking for myself of course, I only find it is the people with the iq's of 60 or so that believe, the "official" conspiracy.

Anyone with a higher iq and the inclination to think for oneself, question authority, instead of bow to authority and hasn't succumbed to the massive scale of terror propaganda, is asking questions.

Gosh Kimmy, why doesn't the FBI want OBL for 9/11, if all his "tapes" are so "credible".

They would have the evidence, and yet, the reason he is not wanted for 9/11 is apparently a lack of evidence, despite the tapes. Now what does that tell any thinking person about the tapes?

It tell's me the tapes are not credible pieces of evidence.

But then I have an above average IQ!

re:2004 tape , Kimmy, who verified it?

was it done independently?

or by the people who brought us the phony Iraq intel?

Interesting the 2004 tape according to wiki is the first acknowedgement by OBL of the 9/11 attacks:

The tape also contains bin Laden's first public acknowledgement of al-Qaida's involvement in the attacks on the U.S.,

YET: wrt the 2001 tape which was told to us was the first admission by OBL of a connection to 9/11

""For those who see this tape, they'll realise that not only is he guilty of incredible murder, he has no conscience and no soul, that he represents the worst of civilisation," said President George W Bush. "

http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/12/14/ret.b...ex.html?related

Bush: Tape a 'devastating declaration of guilt'

"It is preposterous for anybody to think that this tape is doctored," he said during a brief photo opportunity with the prime minister of Thailand. "That's just a feeble excuse to provide weak support for an incredibly evil man."

So which is the first admission Kimmy?

which tape is the fake?

One?

Two?

Both?

Neither?

Oh and one more thing, the timing of the 04 tape was SO perfect for Bush, eh?

wiki:

"The 2004 tape boosted the popularity of American President George W. Bush. President Bush opened up a six-point lead over his opponent Senator John Kerry in the first opinion poll to include sampling taken after the videotape was broadcast."

How lucky for Bush, timing and all!

But then Alquaeda has long been there for the US, anyway, so it appears nothing's changed,

Like I said , if Binladen is alive it is most defintely with the full blessing of the US.

Edited August 9, 2007 by kuzadd

[White Doors]

Amazing how the hatred of Bush can blind you to logic isn't it?

[kuzadd]

Amazing how the hatred of Bush can blind you to logic isn't it?

remember, the weak, smear which is a summary in 3 words, of your post.

Answer the questions I posed,please and thanks?

demonstrate logic, for me.

You know actual credible imput?

or continue to live by the 3 words, as you so choose to do, regularily.

oh and duly noted the irony in your " patrolling for trolls" motto.

Edited August 9, 2007 by kuzadd

[kimmy]

kimmy:

such as yourself?

You were the one who brought it up.

actually speaking for myself of course, I only find it is the people with the iq's of 60 or so that believe, the "official" conspiracy.

Anyone with a higher iq and the inclination to think for oneself, question authority, instead of bow to authority and hasn't succumbed to the massive scale of terror propaganda, is asking questions.

I find that most "truthies" go about repeating the same claims over and over without actually researching them or sometimes even understanding them.

It seems to me that going about repeating dubious claims made by shoddy sources is a poor way to prove what a "free thinker" one is.

Gosh Kimmy, why doesn't the FBI want OBL for 9/11, if all his "tapes" are so "credible".

They would have the evidence, and yet, the reason he is not wanted for 9/11 is apparently a lack of evidence, despite the tapes. Now what does that tell any thinking person about the tapes?

It tell's me the tapes are not credible pieces of evidence.

Red herring.

But then I have an above average IQ!

I can tell by your grammar, spelling, and punctuation.

re:2004 tape , Kimmy, who verified it?

was it done independently?

or by the people who brought us the phony Iraq intel?

Al Jazeera certainly seemed to believe it was credible.

Interesting the 2004 tape according to wiki is the first acknowedgement by OBL of the 9/11 attacks:

YET: wrt the 2001 tape which was told to us was the first admission by OBL of a connection to 9/11

""For those who see this tape, they'll realise that not only is he guilty of incredible murder, he has no conscience and no soul, that he represents the worst of civilisation," said President George W Bush. "

http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/12/14/ret.b...ex.html?related

Bush: Tape a 'devastating declaration of guilt'

"It is preposterous for anybody to think that this tape is doctored," he said during a brief photo opportunity with the prime minister of Thailand. "That's just a feeble excuse to provide weak support for an incredibly evil man."

So which is the first admission Kimmy?

which tape is the fake?

One?

Two?

Both?

Neither?

Did you read your own article? The 2001 tape, despite what Bush says, doesn't actually contain an admission of al Qaeda involvement. He claims having prior knowledge of 9/11, and says that "we asked them to go to America." He doesn't say who "we" were, and he doesn't say that "they" were asked to go to America for any purpose at all.

By contrast, the 2004 tape talks in specifics.

So, sorry, you have not spotted a "gotcha". There's no contradiction.

Oh and one more thing, the timing of the 04 tape was SO perfect for Bush, eh?

wiki:

"The 2004 tape boosted the popularity of American President George W. Bush. President Bush opened up a six-point lead over his opponent Senator John Kerry in the first opinion poll to include sampling taken after the videotape was broadcast."

How lucky for Bush, timing and all!

But then Alquaeda has long been there for the US, anyway, so it appears nothing's changed,

Like I said , if Binladen is alive it is most defintely with the full blessing of the US.

Bush's critics have pointed out that he has been a dream come true for Bin Laden and his followers. He's hardened much of the Muslim world against America. Many people recognize how useful Bush has been for OBL's cause. Seems natural that OBL would want such a useful tool to win reelection.

-k

Edited August 9, 2007 by kimmy

[kuzadd]

You were the one who brought it up.

I find that most "truthies" go about repeating the same claims over and over without actually researching them or sometimes even understanding them.

It seems to me that going about repeating dubious claims made by shoddy sources is a poor way to prove what a "free thinker" one is.

Red herring.

I can tell by your grammar, spelling, and punctuation.

Al Jazeera certainly seemed to believe it was credible.

Did you read your own article? The 2001 tape, despite what Bush says, doesn't actually contain an admission of al Qaeda involvement. He claims having prior knowledge of 9/11, and says that "we asked them to go to America." He doesn't say who "we" were, and he doesn't say that "they" were asked to go to America for any purpose at all.

By contrast, the 2004 tape talks in specifics.

-k

"you were the one who brought it up"

"Certain types of people like to talk about the "fake Osama!" video."

Therefore you qualify!

Since you CHOOSE to discuss it. Lost on you though, isn't it?

actually, I don't see the confession tapes as a red herring, why would you.?

The confession to a crime, along with substantiating evidence, hmmm, sounds like a conviction to me.

Confessions are useful for convictions in numerous courts, particularly if they can be bolstered, which according to the official story, along with the confession tapes, one would think that would be enough for the FBI, to have enough evidence, to put Osama's crime of 9/11 on the most wanted list.

Oh yes there is a contradiction, read what I said, not what you think is there, which is a huge problem, IMO.

I said "wrt the 2001 tape which was told to us was the first admission by OBL of a connection to 9/11"

though he did not name specifics, he certainly gave away enough to make the point did he not?

Certainly enough for the Bush regime to promote it as such, and people to believe it as such.

So again, which was the first admission tape kimmy?

01 or 04??

specific or vague, they both made the connections.

Who verified the tapes?

The people who gave us the cooked intel kimmy?

were the tapes independently verified?

"It was good enough for AlJazeera,"

Is a red herring kimmy,though I prefer bunch of baloney!

You should know better, then that.

The BS about wmd's was good enough for the mainstream media, and where did that get anyone. lol!

Edited August 9, 2007 by kuzadd

[kuzadd]

So, in summary kimmy's "appeal to authority" is all it takes.

The Bush regime say's the tapes are real, and "authenticates" them , whatever that exactly means.

Therefore they are real, because the Bush regime say's so, and they were "authenticated" by underlings of the Bush regime.

Well that's enough for me, I am a convert! NOT!

lol!

OBL is dead, if he isn't he is alive, with the blessings and knowledge of the US.

[White Doors]

Prove it.

If it's that obvious, prove it.

[GostHacked]

Whoa... buttons are back, emoticons are back. Sweeet.

Now.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258817,00.html

"I was responsible for the 9/11 operation from A to Z," Mohammed said in a statement read Saturday during a Combatant Status Review Tribunal at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Mohammed's confession was read by a member of the U.S. military who is serving as his personal representative.

Answer me this. If you look on the FBI's most wanted list, and in regards to 9/11. The site will plainly show (unless the FBI incompetent at updating simple websites) that Osama has no link to 9/11. This KSM dude admitted to it, also because he was the mastermind of the 1993 WTC truck bomb attack.

How does all this get pinned on Osama?? If the FBI does not clearly show Osama is part of 9/11 then what is Osama really wanted for?? Now just don't discard this and say I need to be put into a straight jacket for my BSD (Bush Derrangement Syndrome).

If the FBI site is the truth, then Osama is not part of 9/11 and all reports since then about Osama are false.

If the FBI site is lying, then major news media is telling the truth. Even at that point Bush would be telling the truth.

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.pdf UPDATED NOVEMBER 2001

So really , ask yourself these questions. Is the FBI just lazy in not telling us why he is really wanted for? Or are they telling the truth, and cannot find anything substantial to say Osama was part of the 9/11 attacks.

http://www.september11news.com/2003KSM.htm

KSM is not even on the FBI's most wanted list.

KSM masterminded 9/11, but not on the FBI most wanted list.

OBL is NOT the mastermind behind 9/11 but is wanted by the FBI for OTHER terror attacks.

Does this confuse anyone else?? OR AM I JUST CRAZY WITH BSD???

When the next tape comes out of Osama (with video, not some new found audio tape) then we can scrutinize it against what we already know and have seen. I doubt you will EVER see another NEW video from OBL.

[bush_cheney2004]

So really , ask yourself these questions. Is the FBI just lazy in not telling us why he is really wanted for? Or are they telling the truth, and cannot find anything substantial to say Osama was part of the 9/11 attacks.

Who cares if the site is updated or not...Usama was wanted long before 9/11. The FBI doesn't owe you anything, unless you bring in Usama...that's worth $50 million, which also has not been updated from $25 million. So sue 'em.

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

[kimmy]

If the FBI site is the truth, then Osama is not part of 9/11 and all reports since then about Osama are false.

If the FBI site is lying, then major news media is telling the truth. Even at that point Bush would be telling the truth.

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.pdf UPDATED NOVEMBER 2001

So really , ask yourself these questions. Is the FBI just lazy in not telling us why he is really wanted for? Or are they telling the truth, and cannot find anything substantial to say Osama was part of the 9/11 attacks.

http://www.september11news.com/2003KSM.htm

You and your little buddy have been making a big deal about the fact that OBL is not on the FBI "Most Wanted" list for 9/11. Must bean something, right? Maybe the FBI is sending their own little "Truthout!" via the Most Wanted List? Maybe they're rebels? Whistleblowers?

A little research (very little research, in fact) uncovers the fact that the FBI "Most Wanted" list only if they have been charged by a prosecutor or indicted by a Grand Jury. 9/11 is not mentioned in charges against OBL on the Most Wanted list because he has never been formally charged with 9/11.

"oooh, ooh," I hear you say. "Surely it must mean something that no prosecutor or grand jury has charged or indicted OBL."

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe they don't have enough evidence that that he was personally involved, or maybe they're saving it for when he's actually apprehended, or maybe there are specific reasons that he has not been charged.

Does it matter? Only kooks dispute that Al Qaeda was behind 9/11, and OBL is (was?) the founder, leader, and figurehead of Al Qaeda.

Nor was the invasion of Afghanistan specifically to apprehend OBL. It was undertaken to attack Al Qaeda.

KSM is not even on the FBI's most wanted list.

KSM masterminded 9/11, but not on the FBI most wanted list.

The "Most wanted list" is for fugitives. Since KSM has been imprisoned in "Gitmo" for four years, I don't think he qualifies.

OBL is NOT the mastermind behind 9/11 but is wanted by the FBI for OTHER terror attacks.

Correct.

Does this confuse anyone else?? OR AM I JUST CRAZY WITH BSD???

BSD? uh... Bovine Spongiform Diencephalitis?

-k

[kimmy]

"you were the one who brought it up"

"Certain types of people like to talk about the "fake Osama!" video."

Therefore you qualify!

Since you CHOOSE to discuss it. Lost on you though, isn't it?

I don't *like* to talk about it, but I can't allow such BS to stand unchallenged.

actually, I don't see the confession tapes as a red herring, why would you.?

The red herring is the FBI Most Wanted list, for reasons I just explained to GostHacked.

The confession to a crime, along with substantiating evidence, hmmm, sounds like a conviction to me.

Confessions are useful for convictions in numerous courts, particularly if they can be bolstered, which according to the official story, along with the confession tapes, one would think that would be enough for the FBI, to have enough evidence, to put Osama's crime of 9/11 on the most wanted list.

(see above.)

Oh yes there is a contradiction, read what I said, not what you think is there, which is a huge problem, IMO.

I said "wrt the 2001 tape which was told to us was the first admission by OBL of a connection to 9/11"

I choose to discuss what the article actually says, not what you say the article says. I have no interest in indulging your reading comprehension problems.

The lawyer interviewed in the article contends that the closest the 2001 tape comes to a confession is the part where bin Laden says "we asked each of them to go to America."

That's far from a direct confession.

though he did not name specifics, he certainly gave away enough to make the point did he not?

Certainly enough for the Bush regime to promote it as such, and people to believe it as such.

So again, which was the first admission tape kimmy?

01 or 04??

The 2004 tape contains the first direct confession. The 2001 tape contains no such confession, though coyly hints at it.

What's your point, btw?

Who verified the tapes?

The people who gave us the cooked intel kimmy?

were the tapes independently verified?

"It was good enough for AlJazeera,"

Is a red herring kimmy,though I prefer bunch of baloney!

Al Jazeera isn't a red herring, for two reasons:

* They wouldn't have broadcast the tape if they didn't believe it was authentic.

* While truthies like to claim that US media are government puppets, they have a harder time saying that about Al Jazeera.

So there you go. I think the Arab world's leading media voice is a more credible judge of the tape's authenticity that you are. Any good reason why I should take your word for it (or some half-baked conspiracy website's word for it) over the Arab world's top media outlet?

-k

Edited August 10, 2007 by kimmy

[kuzadd]

* They wouldn't have broadcast the tape if they didn't believe it was authentic.

* While truthies like to claim that US media are government puppets, they have a harder time saying that about Al Jazeera.

So there you go. I think the Arab world's leading media voice is a more credible judge of the tape's authenticity that you are. Any good reason why I should take your word for it (or some half-baked conspiracy website's word for it) over the Arab world's top media outlet?

-k

Al Jazeera , and I knew why you used it as you assumed it would be more credible as opposed to US media.

It's still bogus.

It's irrelevant who plays the tape, the only relevant point is wether the tape is authentic or not.

AlJazeera may have assumed it was credible, but that still didn't necessarily make it so.

Did Aljazeera have it authenticated or did they take the word of someone? If so who?

The US intelligence authentication process?

Did they have it independently authenticated?

How did Aljazeera get the tape?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6363306/#storyContinued

“We received it in Pakistan. ... Somebody dropped it yesterday at the gate,” Zaidan told The Associated Press. “The guard brought it to me along with other mail. It was in an envelope, I opened it and it was a big scoop.”

Zaidan said he immediately transmitted the tape to Al-Jazeera’s headquarters in the Persian Gulf nation of Qatar."

Who dropped the tape off? "Someone"

was that "someone" verified?

That someone could have been, anyone, who was it?

of course it was a scoop, and Al Jazeera ran with it, what media wouldn't, it's totally sensational! Ups the ratings! Ensuring higher rates for advertising. You see Aljazeera regardless of where it is based, is there to make money, same as any western media outlet.

It's interesting that you would think it would work any other way?

it still doesn't make the tape authentic, does it Kimmy?

no, it doesn't.

that said:

I notice as always Kimmy you, resort to smear, and that shows , as always "kimmy's weakness"

I am sorry , I missed the "half-baked conspiracy website" that kimmy was referring to ?

In which post of MINE was that?

It was in NONE, yet, you fall into the tactic of name calling and demonization.

When I see that, I see, weakness. Since that is exactly what that indicates.

Edited August 10, 2007 by kuzadd