"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
oups.com...
From: - view profile
Date: Thurs, Feb 16 2006 12:37 pm
Email:

Um, nob, here's how you do it:

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialRe...20060202a.html

Um, Shhhhhit, I did it the way I wanted it done. You do it any way you
want, but you have shifted to a different topic entirely. I'm ponting to
recordings and you are pointing to hearsay.
Why?

A second-hand account which has never come up before even though the
author served as spokesman for the US-backed interim PM just when
bushie and crew need to shore up Iraq support seems just a bit suspect.
I'd say that it would be stupid to swallow this one whole.

Don't you agree?


I'd say if the rcordings are genuine and the voices confirmed, then it is to
be believed, don't you agree?

And since when does heresay qualify as 'evidence?'

Since when do the actual words of the person in question, not constitute
evidence?

The claim is that there exists recordings of Saddam Hussein discussing ways
to attack America with weapons of mass destruction. There is confirmation
that it is in fact his voice