Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: Tab
Owned, Morgaged, Foreclosed.
I'm gonna spread my crap all over this thread just like AnyMal.
AnyMal, it's my turn!
Poser
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Where'd they all go?Originally posted by: Tab
PoserOriginally posted by: totalcommand
I'm gonna spread my crap all over this thread just like AnyMal.Originally posted by: Tab
Owned, Morgaged, Foreclosed.
AnyMal, it's my turn!
For that matter, where is the proof that AnyMal isn't a fabrication of some vast right wing conspiracy's automated bullsh8 generator? The only proof we have is "his" posts on a screen. :laugh:Originally posted by: totalcommand
lol.
AnyMal, where is the proof the memos are fabricated? They exist now.
Where is this proof? Do you have the original of that proof? Or just the content? I can't find it anywhere
Originally posted by: Harvey
For that matter, where is the proof that AnyMal isn't a fabrication of some vast right wing conspiracy's automated bullsh8 generator? The only proof we have is "his" posts on a screen. :laugh:Originally posted by: totalcommand
lol.
AnyMal, where is the proof the memos are fabricated? They exist now.
Where is this proof? Do you have the original of that proof? Or just the content? I can't find it anywhere
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Wow, deja vu.
Any one show up with the pudding yet?
Ssshhhh. Let them think they've actually found something.
Do you have originals of the proof? I don't just want the verified content posted here, I really need the full thing. Please???Originally posted by: Ozoned
Really, I missed it? Which post has it?Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Wow, deja vu.
Any one show up with the pudding yet?
I can't believe you haven't seen the pudding.
Typically, you're looking at it from the wrong direction. The documents don't have to be proven to be fabrications. They need to be validated as real. Feel free to do that. I haven't seen it happen yet.Originally posted by: totalcommand
There's your pudding Ozoned! More chocolaty sweet B.S. from the cons.
maybe you can help me out, Chicken
I'm looking for this proof that the memos are fabricated. I can't seem to find the proof anywhere.
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Typically, you're looking at it from the wrong direction. The documents don't have to be proven to be fabrications. They need to be validated as real. Feel free to do that. I haven't seen it happen yet.Originally posted by: totalcommand
There's your pudding Ozoned! More chocolaty sweet B.S. from the cons.
maybe you can help me out, Chicken
I'm looking for this proof that the memos are fabricated. I can't seem to find the proof anywhere.
Now can you explain the prescience of the Guardian? Kindly tell us all how an article in September 2004, long before the DSM ever appeared on the scene, can claim they are genuine? Or are you willing it's yet another case of the left grasping at straws?
I really need originals. Can you help me find them? Please???? At this point, the entire British government acknowledges that the memos and ensuing documents are genuine. Even the Whitehouse hasn't claimed they aren't. The shoe's on the other foot. It's now up to you and the rest of the neocon BS'ers to prove they aren't, just because, without it, nobody's going to believe you. Prove it, or STFU.
Actually, in this case, we don't have to grasp at straws. Even according to that most neocon right wing BS sources, Fox News, Straw's got a fine grasp of the situation without help from anyone else. :laugh:
Want a cookie to go with all that pudding?
The DSM is from July, not March. What your linking to is one of the Whitehall memos, which has been out since before the Guardian article and is nothing new.Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Typically, you're looking at it from the wrong direction. The documents don't have to be proven to be fabrications. They need to be validated as real. Feel free to do that. I haven't seen it happen yet.Originally posted by: totalcommand
There's your pudding Ozoned! More chocolaty sweet B.S. from the cons.
maybe you can help me out, Chicken
I'm looking for this proof that the memos are fabricated. I can't seem to find the proof anywhere.
Now can you explain the prescience of the Guardian? Kindly tell us all how an article in September 2004, long before the DSM ever appeared on the scene, can claim they are genuine? Or are you willing it's yet another case of the left grasping at straws?
Haha, I was hoping you'd fall into some pwnage.
From the guardian article:
"The Foreign Office yesterday acknowledged the documents were genuine but stressed they were only a snapshot of thinking at a particular time. Nor did they reflect the changes that took place over the following 12 months, in particular referring the issue to the UN, which the White House did at Mr Blair's behest, though it failed to get a second security council resolution authorising war.
Mr Blair has consistently said publicly he supported President George Bush in the war because of the threat posed by Saddam's alleged WMD rather than because of a desire for regime change.
But Sir David Manning, then Downing Street foreign policy adviser, now UK ambassador to Washington, discloses in one of the newly emerged documents, a memo on March 14 2002, that at the time the main issue for Mr Blair was regime change. "
And one of the downing street memos, dated March 14th 2002...posted on AP's site....http://hosted.ap.org/specials/dowdoc/manning020314.pdf
PWNED!
Now, I can't seem to find that proof of fabrication anywhere (sniff).
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
The DSM is from July, not March. What your linking to is one of the Whitehall memos, which has been out since before the Guardian article and is nothing new.Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Typically, you're looking at it from the wrong direction. The documents don't have to be proven to be fabrications. They need to be validated as real. Feel free to do that. I haven't seen it happen yet.Originally posted by: totalcommand
There's your pudding Ozoned! More chocolaty sweet B.S. from the cons.
maybe you can help me out, Chicken
I'm looking for this proof that the memos are fabricated. I can't seem to find the proof anywhere.
Now can you explain the prescience of the Guardian? Kindly tell us all how an article in September 2004, long before the DSM ever appeared on the scene, can claim they are genuine? Or are you willing it's yet another case of the left grasping at straws?
Haha, I was hoping you'd fall into some pwnage.
From the guardian article:
"The Foreign Office yesterday acknowledged the documents were genuine but stressed they were only a snapshot of thinking at a particular time. Nor did they reflect the changes that took place over the following 12 months, in particular referring the issue to the UN, which the White House did at Mr Blair's behest, though it failed to get a second security council resolution authorising war.
Mr Blair has consistently said publicly he supported President George Bush in the war because of the threat posed by Saddam's alleged WMD rather than because of a desire for regime change.
But Sir David Manning, then Downing Street foreign policy adviser, now UK ambassador to Washington, discloses in one of the newly emerged documents, a memo on March 14 2002, that at the time the main issue for Mr Blair was regime change. "
And one of the downing street memos, dated March 14th 2002...posted on AP's site....http://hosted.ap.org/specials/dowdoc/manning020314.pdf
PWNED!
Now, I can't seem to find that proof of fabrication anywhere (sniff).
So congrats. Your ignorance just pwned :roll: yourself.
I really need originals. Can you help me find them? Please???? 
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: Harvey
For that matter, where is the proof that AnyMal isn't a fabrication of some vast right wing conspiracy's automated bullsh8 generator? The only proof we have is "his" posts on a screen. :laugh:Originally posted by: totalcommand
lol.
AnyMal, where is the proof the memos are fabricated? They exist now.
Where is this proof? Do you have the original of that proof? Or just the content? I can't find it anywhere
Dang I didn't think about that.
Yes. AnyMal, I demand an original copy of you in this thread. I can't find you anywhere
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
The DSM is from July, not March. What your linking to is one of the Whitehall memos, which has been out since before the Guardian article and is nothing new.Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Typically, you're looking at it from the wrong direction. The documents don't have to be proven to be fabrications. They need to be validated as real. Feel free to do that. I haven't seen it happen yet.Originally posted by: totalcommand
There's your pudding Ozoned! More chocolaty sweet B.S. from the cons.
maybe you can help me out, Chicken
I'm looking for this proof that the memos are fabricated. I can't seem to find the proof anywhere.
Now can you explain the prescience of the Guardian? Kindly tell us all how an article in September 2004, long before the DSM ever appeared on the scene, can claim they are genuine? Or are you willing it's yet another case of the left grasping at straws?
Haha, I was hoping you'd fall into some pwnage.
From the guardian article:
"The Foreign Office yesterday acknowledged the documents were genuine but stressed they were only a snapshot of thinking at a particular time. Nor did they reflect the changes that took place over the following 12 months, in particular referring the issue to the UN, which the White House did at Mr Blair's behest, though it failed to get a second security council resolution authorising war.
Mr Blair has consistently said publicly he supported President George Bush in the war because of the threat posed by Saddam's alleged WMD rather than because of a desire for regime change.
But Sir David Manning, then Downing Street foreign policy adviser, now UK ambassador to Washington, discloses in one of the newly emerged documents, a memo on March 14 2002, that at the time the main issue for Mr Blair was regime change. "
And one of the downing street memos, dated March 14th 2002...posted on AP's site....http://hosted.ap.org/specials/dowdoc/manning020314.pdf
PWNED!
Now, I can't seem to find that proof of fabrication anywhere (sniff).
So congrats. Your ignorance just pwned :roll: yourself.
Perhaps you better check your own knowledge?
All these memos, both new and old, were collected by one single reporter, Michael Smith. Collectively, all of them are called the Downing Street Memos. (Do you even know what Downing Street is???)
Your ignorance and B.S. would have us believe that Michael Smith fabricated some memos, but not others. Clearly, you're full of sh!t.
PWNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now, I can't seem to find that proof of fabrication anywhere (sniff).
Miss you? Hah!!! I wasn't aiming at you. I didn't want to splatter all that... ummm... pudding all over the forums. :shocked:
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
The DSM is from July, not March. What your linking to is one of the Whitehall memos, which has been out since before the Guardian article and is nothing new.Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Typically, you're looking at it from the wrong direction. The documents don't have to be proven to be fabrications. They need to be validated as real. Feel free to do that. I haven't seen it happen yet.Originally posted by: totalcommand
There's your pudding Ozoned! More chocolaty sweet B.S. from the cons.
maybe you can help me out, Chicken
I'm looking for this proof that the memos are fabricated. I can't seem to find the proof anywhere.
Now can you explain the prescience of the Guardian? Kindly tell us all how an article in September 2004, long before the DSM ever appeared on the scene, can claim they are genuine? Or are you willing it's yet another case of the left grasping at straws?
Haha, I was hoping you'd fall into some pwnage.
From the guardian article:
"The Foreign Office yesterday acknowledged the documents were genuine but stressed they were only a snapshot of thinking at a particular time. Nor did they reflect the changes that took place over the following 12 months, in particular referring the issue to the UN, which the White House did at Mr Blair's behest, though it failed to get a second security council resolution authorising war.
Mr Blair has consistently said publicly he supported President George Bush in the war because of the threat posed by Saddam's alleged WMD rather than because of a desire for regime change.
But Sir David Manning, then Downing Street foreign policy adviser, now UK ambassador to Washington, discloses in one of the newly emerged documents, a memo on March 14 2002, that at the time the main issue for Mr Blair was regime change. "
And one of the downing street memos, dated March 14th 2002...posted on AP's site....http://hosted.ap.org/specials/dowdoc/manning020314.pdf
PWNED!
Now, I can't seem to find that proof of fabrication anywhere (sniff).
So congrats. Your ignorance just pwned :roll: yourself.
Perhaps you better check your own knowledge?
All these memos, both new and old, were collected by one single reporter, Michael Smith. Collectively, all of them are called the Downing Street Memos. (Do you even know what Downing Street is???)
Your ignorance and B.S. would have us believe that Michael Smith fabricated some memos, but not others. Clearly, you're full of sh!t.
PWNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now, I can't seem to find that proof of fabrication anywhere (sniff).
AnyMal, here is the connection above. Please provide me with ORIGINAL copies that show the memos were fabricated. PLEASE!??
What are you saying? original copies of what?
Originally posted by: Harvey
Miss you? Hah!!! I wasn't aiming at you. I didn't want to splatter all that... ummm... pudding all over the forums. :shocked:
Now, you still haven't provided solid 3D hard evidence that you are real, and your posts aren't the product of some massively parallel artificial stupidity software.
Originally posted by: AnyMal
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
The DSM is from July, not March. What your linking to is one of the Whitehall memos, which has been out since before the Guardian article and is nothing new.Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Typically, you're looking at it from the wrong direction. The documents don't have to be proven to be fabrications. They need to be validated as real. Feel free to do that. I haven't seen it happen yet.Originally posted by: totalcommand
There's your pudding Ozoned! More chocolaty sweet B.S. from the cons.
maybe you can help me out, Chicken
I'm looking for this proof that the memos are fabricated. I can't seem to find the proof anywhere.
Now can you explain the prescience of the Guardian? Kindly tell us all how an article in September 2004, long before the DSM ever appeared on the scene, can claim they are genuine? Or are you willing it's yet another case of the left grasping at straws?
Haha, I was hoping you'd fall into some pwnage.
From the guardian article:
"The Foreign Office yesterday acknowledged the documents were genuine but stressed they were only a snapshot of thinking at a particular time. Nor did they reflect the changes that took place over the following 12 months, in particular referring the issue to the UN, which the White House did at Mr Blair's behest, though it failed to get a second security council resolution authorising war.
Mr Blair has consistently said publicly he supported President George Bush in the war because of the threat posed by Saddam's alleged WMD rather than because of a desire for regime change.
But Sir David Manning, then Downing Street foreign policy adviser, now UK ambassador to Washington, discloses in one of the newly emerged documents, a memo on March 14 2002, that at the time the main issue for Mr Blair was regime change. "
And one of the downing street memos, dated March 14th 2002...posted on AP's site....http://hosted.ap.org/specials/dowdoc/manning020314.pdf
PWNED!
Now, I can't seem to find that proof of fabrication anywhere (sniff).
So congrats. Your ignorance just pwned :roll: yourself.
Perhaps you better check your own knowledge?
All these memos, both new and old, were collected by one single reporter, Michael Smith. Collectively, all of them are called the Downing Street Memos. (Do you even know what Downing Street is???)
Your ignorance and B.S. would have us believe that Michael Smith fabricated some memos, but not others. Clearly, you're full of sh!t.
PWNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now, I can't seem to find that proof of fabrication anywhere (sniff).
AnyMal, here is the connection above. Please provide me with ORIGINAL copies that show the memos were fabricated. PLEASE!??
Are you refering to .pdf above? What exactly does it prove? What makes it an "authentic" document?
. Please help me. I can only find proof that they are real . I only see senseless B.S. by conservatives, no ORIGINAL copies of the proof of fabrication .
Facebook
Twitter