intresting find there was another video where he said pentagon was hit with a missile. is he slipping in his old age
He didn't say Pentagon was hit with a missile. He said Terrorists have ability to hit buildings with missile. There is a difference in both....
Dude, Stop reading between the lines, Read the full article.. Here I'll do your work Now if you can read, understand and comprehend, He said Terrorists CAN use techniques like Plastic knives, Flight and missile.. CAN doesn't equate to DID. He didn't say - "Terrorist Used techniques like yada yada yada.." He said - "Terrorists CAN use techniques like yada yada yada" A 4th grader can differentiate between two, but conspiracy theorists do not have brain for 4th grade even.
Whatever jackass. He plainly said "Here we're talking about" speaking specifically of the events of 9/11
those words in any context out of his mouth makes me want to know more. just look at Gonzalez these people are not very straight and more important, they don't care what people think of them.
so gonzalez is now related to what happened on 9/11? You people hate the bush admin so much that you will blame anything on them....I'm surprised you haven't blamed the bridge collapse or the trapped miners on Bush.
Yes, I do want to know more too.. I want to know what are we up against exactly. But taking words out of context isn't helpful by any means. How is that related to 9/11 ?
Its not...this is the typical liberal agenda...comment on the subject, and then insert another random thing to try and tie the two together, all the while blaming the whole thing on Bush....The drive-by media does this everyday.
1. You apparently don't understand the definition of the word 'agenda' (which is pretty cute considering how often you use it). A term you could have used is "mode of operation" among several others. 2. You are extremely partisan and hostile; how do you expect to be taken seriously? 3.
I understand that.. I have seen them trying that in other threads, where they tried to divert threads into same anti-America, anti-Bush blah blah.. Even the thread not even remotely related to US or Bush.. 1. Agenda: The official work plan. Probably Not official but thats their work plan, Hi-jack every thread with some random Anti-Bush, Anti-America comments. 2. I'd not speak for him. 3.
You all need to hit the books. 1. Agenda: A list or program of things to be done or considered: "They share with them an agenda beyond the immediate goal of democratization of the electoral process". As you can see, the word 'agenda' applies to the motives and goals, not to the means used to achieve them. Good try though. 2. Considering you are unable to aptly speak for yourself, good. 3. (I figured two ownings in one thread deserved that crazy face).
so when someone presents definitions that fit, you change it, because it doesn't fit your definitions? what kind of agenda is that?
So we've graduated from double-talk to triple-talk, eh? I'll see to it that you're sent a certificate.
tusk tusk tusk... Do you deny that Agenda = The official work plan. let see - a·gen·da /əˈdʒɛndə/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[uh-jen-duh] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun, formally a plural of. agendum, but usually used as a singular with plural. -das or -da. a list, plan, outline, or the like, of things to be done, matters to be acted or voted upon, etc. So how the use of the word Agenda is wrong by D16man here.. You have an Agenda of spreading anti US rumors here... And and you can be happy about getting owned twice.
You're still entirely wrong. You said it best in your definition: "matters to be acted upon" - not the actions themselves. Regardless, this is like teaching English to a rock - I'm not likely going to get very far. As far as me "spreading anti US rumors here", I really have no idea what you mean. I discuss current events and call 'em like I see 'em. I don't spread anything and I never indulge in gossip or rumors. And finally I have to point out that your use of "tusk tusk tusk" is also humorously incorrect. I would assume that you mean to "tisk", which is still not a word. A tusk can be found on an elephant. Class dismissed
Do you deny the dictionary definition ? If I'm wrong then Dictionary is wrong that is ofcourse written by people with much better knowledge of English than you. I cant see anyone calling 'Actions' as 'Agenda', however the 'Actions' of few people got questioned, that suits to their agenda. As like your Agenda in this thread is, trying to project yourself superior than everyone else including dictionary. Which is, being reflected by your 'Actions'. That is an example of the word 'Agenda' in real life usage... Please continue to try and prove yourself superior than everyone else, including dictionary..