So...
-You cannot prove that Bill Clinton lied.
no more than you can PROVE he was telling the truth... You know.. like how Bush was telling the truth about MOBILE CHEM LABS... hehehehe... that's gotta be like salt in your wounded vagina.
-Thus, you cannot prove that we did NOT know the weapons were there in 1998.
w-w-w-what about your OWN intel that condi was busy waving around like a doomsday preacher? I don't guess you were awake the day they covered double negatives in engrish class? Like I;ve said before.. I CANT PROVE THAT YOU DON'T LOVE SUCKING COCK EITHER.. must be true then, eh?
-Therefore, you have nothing to challenge the argument that we -did- know they were there in 1998.
Sure I do. The TOTAL LACK of evidence that he hit anything even remotley proven to be a chem lab or WMD facility.. hell, the ONLY ******* thing that became significant then was the aspirin factory in sudan. After all, had CLINTON hit anything of relevance in Iraq then SURELT Powell wouldn't have retracted himself and SURELY pre-9/11 cheney wouldn't have claimed Iraq to be such a non-threat, eh?
We knew, in 98, about as much as we knew about MOBILE CHEM LABS, as it turns out. You know, that pesky ******* HINDSIGHT thing?
Your pretzel logic is fun to watch though.
-And thus, since you CAN prove that you destroyed something you used to have, your 'impossible condition" argument fails.
Not that you'll ever admit it.
Work on that cognitive process you've got there, dude. You might be slightly ARTISTIC! hehehehehe...
But, hey, ill give you a chance to throw down the DOUBLE WAMMY and PROVE that we KNEW BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT that Clinton hit nuke labs in 98, which PROVED that Saddam had them when the bush machine was running up the war. Hell, I remember when Saddam wanted to DEBATE the WMD part with Bush when one of the MSM anchors interviewed him. Can you guess what kind of a giant ***** your president turned out to be? hmm... I guess it would take a few extra scooby snacks to get people like you to swallow the hook, line AND sinker if he had to actually FACE who he was ACCUSING with PROOF beyond the rabid foam on your lips..
For real.. if YOU are so confident that there were WMDs in iraq then let's see YOUR evidence beyond trying pull a Clinton and deflecting the argument.
Have a good day, junior. Let me know when you have somethng substantial to say. I won't hiold my breath.
Like I said, you can be a giant walking ***** about proving YOUR accusation about WMDs but, since we both know you can't, I'll stick around and laugh at you for all of a sudden being Clintons little champion as if it's not obvious what kind of a strawman you are running to hide behind.
Indeed, mr. mobile chem lab... Let ME know when you want to peek out from behind that skirt you are hiding behind. I"VE posted emough evidence to cast three shades of doubt but, apparently, you think it's my job to prove something in which your entire position is predicated upon.
Again, i'm sure you were gone that day in debate class.
