imprimatur toughly insist:opium rehearsals doxycycline http://www.real-estate-shop.com/doxycycline.html

Think Progress »…

But not only has George Bush failed to make our rail lines more secure, he still has no plan for making our rail lines more secure and actually wants to decrease their security.

Well if spending more money on railway security would “make you feel” better well hell that’s good enough for me, here’s a blank check. The premise of this thread is, Bush hasn’t spent enough money or moved hazmat traffic where the libs think he should have and they are trying to scare you with Madrid and now London’s tragic mass transit bombings that have nothing to do with the report that was linked and will not be solved by throwing money at the problem. How about throwing some more money at border enforcement? Surveillance of terror suspects? Those things I could get behind.

Public safety requires more than that spreadsheet provides.

Did his strategy work? ”

Uh, London is not “here”. Sounds like you need to buy an atlas.

When did Bush say there would be no terrorist attacks ever again anywhere in the world? Put up or shut up.

So this BS report invokes the Madrid bombings, then says nothing about passenger train safety?

“First and foremost, the federal government should approve the District of Columbia’s rail and truck hazardous material or “hazmat” exclusion zone rather than continue to fight it. Second, it should undertake a national review and identify other major cities where similar re-routing options exist. Third, it should encourage localities to enact a broader set of physical security initiatives, particularly regarding railway sidings and private track hazardous material storage. Fourth, the country needs a genuine homeland security partnership, not a rivalry, one based on better communication, coordination and action. Finally, the federal government needs a comprehensive hazardous material strategy that looks at the supply and demand for hazardous materials and encourages changes in manufacturing and operating processes that should reduce the volume of toxic, explosive and lethal substances on the nation’s railways.”

First of all, most cities are built around railways and hazardous materials include the fuel you all use in your cars and natural gas to heat homes and operate many power plants. The idea you are going to remove hazardous materials from population centers is ludicrous. So shall we move all the gas stations to the country side? build new tracks around all our cities and move all our refineries? And when the cities grow shall we just move them again? This boils down to another case of “Bush Derangement Syndrome” and a greenie agenda masking itself as a strategy in the GWoT. You are clueless as usual.

So then you agree the premise of this whole thread is flawed because Think Progress is just complaining about a subject they know nothing about? The report sited is bitching about hazmat exclusion zones and TP tried in vain to link that to the London bombings. I’m not qualified to discuss railway safety issues but you are qualified to criticize railway safety? So what is the correlation between hazmat exclusion zones and homicide bombers? If you think the feds and local law enforcement are not watching the nations railways, why don’t you got out to the nearest railway and take some photos of the trains or act suspiciously near some tracks and you will find out how wrong you are. Trains hauling hazmat and military equipment are under surveillance, passenger lines are watched as well. I’m just glad we agree Think Progress was just complaining to hear it’s self complain, was not qualified to comment, and linked a report totally unrelated to homicide bombings of passenger trains out of ignorace of the subject: )

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8497845/

It’s really only a question of how long before reality intrudes and makes their disengeuous lies painfully apparent to everyone.

AFter 9/11 Bush was charged with one thing: make sure it doesn’t happen again. He accepted the task and chose a strategy to accomplish that. Ever since the invasion of Iraq any criticism of Bush’s policy has been met with, “It must be working — we haven’t been attacked again.” Well, now we have.

Bush’s stated policy is one of fighting them there so we don’t fight them here. His theory is that the terrorists are being drawn to Iraq, therefore they won’t come here. The whole invasion is predicated on the notion that we are on the offensive, that we are wiping them out to prevent another attack.

Did his strategy work?

1) Put words in your opponents’ mouth; rearrange or deliberately misinterpert what they say — or just flat out lie.

2) attack your opponent for what YOU said he said. This way you never have to defend you position. Very few listeners are skilled debaters, they will accept whatever you say if it “sounds sorta like” what the other guy said.

See Susan above. She never stated that the first WTC bombing, Khobar Towers, Cole attacks, etc. were Bush’s fault. But once the EDs put those words in her mouth, they can attack her endlessly for them — and their mouth-breathing followers will cheer them for slamming another liberal.

http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/1002

http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/

Look Poppy! I presidented all by myself!

Mission accomplished!

Only Dumbya! Let Dumbya do it! Even Poppy wasn’t that Dumb! He never took the bait! Until Maggie told him to grow a pair!

The 1993 World Trade Center bombing – Bush I’s fault. And Reagan’s, too…
The 1996 Khobar Towers bombing – Bush I’s fault.
The 1998 African embassy bombings – Bush I’s fault.
The 2000 USS Cole attack – Bush I’s fault.

There, I fixed it for ya!