Man. Somebody on the anti-war side better get to work pushing that “these so-called ‘captured’ documents are all CIA / Chalabi plants, and are, like, so totally worthless” meme. And quickly!
Otherwise, the “official” narrative that Bush Lied might just unravel—and well before the November elections.
OPEN THREAD!
Open thread???
How do you keep your glasses so clean?
<a href=”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Kwiatkowski “ target=”_blank”>Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski </a>(Ret.) a leading voice from the “isolationist†cum libertarian right who resigned from the Pentagon’s Near East-South Asia Policy Department at the onset of the Iraq war was on C-SPAN earlier this week.
She said the following:
And also:
More here
Another reThuglican plot to mislead the ignorant sheeple of Jesusland.
Jeff, you are so transparent. In your semiotic ramblings pertaining to but not pertainst with the master-slave dialectic, of latterday and not the boorish early Teutonic philosophy, of course, we find the appropriate paradigm for your neo-chauvinistic discourse—as it nontrivially coheres with a second-degree deviation to the Christoban Lobby that usurps the egalitarian impulses found therein.
We take this conclusion, therefore, as self-evident.
Now be good neocons, and fight your dreaded wars for blasphemy and oil.
Ahmed Fucking Chalabi. Of course, Ahmed Fucking Chalabi. Muhahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahaha
Yay! Open thread. Hmmmm…where to begin.
Ooooo! Bellybutton lint!
I’m a little suspicious that the translation comes from a Freeper, so I’ll withold judgment on this particular document. Nevertheless, what all of the documents released thus far, as well as what we knew before the war and saw confirmed post invasion, tells us is that Saddam supported terrorism and hated America. Only a liberal couldn’t see a threat therein.
Yet more lies fabricated by the Pentagon’s PR & Public Communication Department, and sheepishly relayed by the “Meekly Standard†of neo-independent journalism…
Funny how after their Iraq debacle, the Neocons haven’t stopped peddling the tall tale of Saddam’s alleged “connections†with OBL: the Leninist thugs of Washington are decidedly obsessed with Saddam and the Baath party…even after they’ve been rendered inoffensive- assuming they ever posed a threat to America any other country.
Bush, Cheney & Co. have always lied about the nature of the Iraqi regime, repeatedly accusing Saddam Hussein of being an Islamic fundamentalist in cahoots with Osama Bin Laden and the Taleban: unfortunately, after having been bombarded with fabricated infomercials produced by Israeli “Middle-East expertsâ€Â, the American public eventually came to believe exactly what the Neocon wanted: that Saddam was kind of a later days bloodthirsty Saracen, on the verge of conquering the Infidel pastures of Wyoming and Oklahoma!
Yet, as we now know, the truth is otherwise: there never were any “links†between the Baath party and Al Qaeda, no spooky “secret meetings†in Vienna or Prague or “somewhere in Eastern Europe†between “Saddam’s diplomatic envoy and Bin Laden’s righthand man†as Vice-President Dick Cheney had alleged on numerous occasions
In Fact, Saddam Hussein was a staunchly secular Arab nationalist, a disciple of professor Mitchell Aflaq, the French-educated Orthodox Christian philosopher. And, if anything, Christian minorities and women were generally overrepresented in Saddam’s government: Vice-President Tareq Hanna Aziz was actually Catholic and so were Saddam’s Chief of Staff and many of the senior civil servants working at the presidential palace.
Unlike the Bush-appointed pro-Iranian Islamist thugs now ruling Iraq, Saddam Hussein was a relatively Westernized Arab head of state who protected women’s rights and enforced affirmative action programs in favor of Iraq’s tiny Christian minority. “Old Europe’s†foreign policy establishment viewed the Iraqi Baath party essentially as a strong bulwark against both Persian-Khomeinist fundamentalism and Wahhabi-Afghan terrorism.
The Israelis and Washington’s Neocons thought otherwise: now we have to deal with <a href=”http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2006/03/muslim-clerics-call-for-execution-of.php “>the strictures of Sharia Law</a> in Afghanistan, the rise of Hamas and the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) which they have deliberately brought to power…
To this day I still don’t understand why more wasn’t made about Salman Pak.
According to a former captain in the Iraqi army, who was never really debunked, Salman Pak was made up of-
A Jet Fueselage to train highjackers. (or “counter-terrorists” teams, depending on how gullible you are)
A lab for training people how to make chemical weapons.
Bunks to house “foreign arab fighters”.
The link to the Frontline Interview of Sabah Khodada, a captain in the Iraqi army from 1982 to 1992, who stated the purpose and make up of Salman Pak was explicitly to train foreign arab terrorist groups, now states that
Notice they don’t state which US official, who probably wants nothing to do with this story now. They also use sources from the NYT to try and negate the testimonies.
<a href=”http://www.tortlaw.com/images/Salman Pak terror facility.jpg” target=”_blank”>Look at this picture</a> of Salman Pak and tell me you don’t think the US is better off without Saddam around.
I can’t trust the New York Times to not lie about there freaking turkey recipes and you want me to believe them on National Security issues?
BUSH IS TEH SUXOR
Herr Doktor,
I hear the trains ran on time in Saddams Iraq too, yes?
Just like that dubious analysis of Bush’s TANG papers done by notorious Freeper Buckhead?
Or how about MoDowd’s “ellipsegate”? That was broken by a Freeper hours before Sully posted the story.
I’m a Freeper. Does that make my opinions or research less credible?
I guess you are comfortable with the left dismissing your opinions because you post at that insane neocon Goldstein’s webiste?
Jeff, Doc. Vega…he’s adorable.
Can we keep him, hunh?
Yeah, well, whatever. You can keep showing the world your so called “facts”, but the majority know the neo-con Iraqi misadventure is a quagmire.
I mean, aren’t you reading captain Jew-hater’s mideast memo posts? These days the poor Iraqi’s don’t even have enough electricity to run an industrial size plastic shredder nor light the disco balls in the rape rooms.
And kites, don’t forget about all the kite flying.
Oh for the peaceful days of Saddam……sigh.
Why waste our time with the charade, TomB. You’re a goosstepping Bush-Kultist-Nazi. Fess up.
Remember the Iran-Iraq war and the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait were just filmed in Hollywood by the same people who faked the moon landings.
I haven’t goosestepped in at least a month.
My jackboots are in for repair.
And you know who’s fault that is, right?
H-A-L-L-I-B-U-R-T-O-N.
Cheney and his evil, moron Mis-Leader of Chimpvania made gazillions of Imperial Credits for his Crusading Imperialist Army in Mess-o-potamia.
DAMNIT! I clicked on the bad professor’s link and got treated to some nasty stuff. He is so intelligent though, and his arguements have so much merit with absolutely no credible response, I guess I’ll have to learn to spell “Amerikka” like him and hate those evil goddamned motherfucking sons of pigs and apes (he’s an anthro professor, so although he doesn’t write this typical libel it fits with everything else on his site) JOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!! I would ask him to read Dershowitz’s fisking of the David Duke endorsed Harvard paper by the two nitwits, but what would be the point? As Confucious might say, he who insults others dishonors himself enough, don’t join him.
In the great words of one Walter Sobchjeck: Anti-fucking Semite.
Saddam Hussein was our ALLY! ALLY! ALLY!!!
Hussein for the Nodel Prize! He’s a Hero of the People! Hussein, Old Uncle of Iraq, Lion of Baghdad, Master of Lower Kurdistan, King of Tikrit, Sultan of Samarra!
WE LUV YOU SADDAM! Saddam will ROCK YOUR FACE!!!
Doh!
I nailed VldV on his factual flip-flops here a week or so ago (simultaneously with peterargus). At first he told us we shouldn’t believe Georges Sada because Iraqi Christians wouldn’t ever be in a position to know secrets, and now he’s cutting and pasting the same stuff he put up that contradicted that position on the 25th.
Doc, you have no credibility left here. Piss off, ‘kay?
I nominate Doc Vega for the first annual Protein Wisdom Walter Duranty “A Few Broken Eggs” Award.
De La Vega is obviously being ghost written by Hamas.
Oh, a doctor fight! You guys have nails? Rarrrr.
First, it’s actually Walter Sobchak not “Sobchjeckâ€Â
Second, it’s quite ironic that you’d quote from Joel Coen’s masterpiece: “The Big Lebowski†is actually in many ways a parody of George H. Bush’s theatrical militarism <i>“you have to drawn a line in the sand dudeâ€Â.</i>
Third, I detest “anti-Semitism†and all forms of bigotry for that matter…but what I hate even more are the sterile ad-hominem slurs brainwashed drones of your ilk typically use to avoid addressing the issues: why not engage in constructive discussion of the facts instead of throwing mud on the messenger?
For a change.
Anyhoo, I guess it’s true that “hypocrisy is a kind of homage which vice renders to virtue†as a famous Gallic libertine thinker once said!
I know, Neocons hate “old European†literature too.
In this, as in the fields of unabashed expansionism and battlefield Barbary, they are the true brothers in arms of the Muslim Brotherhood…
Shorter VdlV: “I detest bigotry. See? Some of my favorite film directors are joooooooooooos.”
I say they’re meaningless and I’m smarter than any of you! Dolchstoßlegend! Weltanschauung! Schadenfreude!
First of all, anybody who defends Saddam Hussein comes to the discussion already pre-muddied. And smelly too.
Second, you have yet to make a point addressing the actual post, just more changing the subject and repeating the same tired old memes.
Priceless.
Dr Vic,
I read somewhere that the peace loving Uncle Saddam served free PIE on Thursdays too. Am I to believe that is not true? Oh the horror…..
I just got done showering after spending a few minutes over at Dr. Vic’s site. You might be interested to know that he is just cutting and pasting stuff from his posts in the comments. Also he’s nuts.
Now what was all this about pie?
Yet more lies fabricated by the Pentagon’s PR & Public Communication Department
Did you prove the document isn’t authetic then dr. dumbass?
In Fact, Saddam Hussein was a staunchly secular Arab nationalist
Why?
Because he’s citing Winkipedia, dammit!
Hilarious.
She said the following:
And what does that have to do with these documents?
Oh, you’re trying to change the subject.
I forgot.
Sorry.
In Fact, Saddam Hussein was a staunchly secular Arab nationalist
Which kind of like being animal lover…you love to pet them and eat them at the same time.
Too classic.
It’s pretty bad when the actual derangement is worse than the parody. Wonder if Dr. V is some kind of agent provocateur?
In order to swiftly win a debate with a ‘Bush lied’ parrot, always debate them on principle. Here is a tactic to doing that and winning the debate in 2 sentences.
Damn, that’s good stuff. I am definitely going to use “Chimpvania”.
Later F. Nietzsche (the tertiary syphillis years) and Dr. V’s current posts…odd similarity there.
Throw enough mud on a message that stinks to high heaven like a fresh turd, chances are some of it will get on the messanger…
Oh, but it’s perfectly okay for brainwashed drones of your ilk to do it, huh?
Quite frankly, I find this blatent ilkism appalling.
Blatant ilkism will not be tolerated from ilkists like your lothesome ilk!
Gaawwwd, that is a boorish, tiresome word.
Here is an article that has nothing whatever to do with the topic at hand but which I’m promoting on every blog known to me.
Dr. Vic is bleeding – making him the winner.
Face-to-foot style, how you like that, huh?
All in favor of a moratorium on the word “ilk” and its ‘ilkish’ derivations of the same ilk, such as milk, bilk, silk, ilkish, ilkation, ilkopoly and eighties rappers Run DMC for their jam “You be Illin’”*?
I vote, “aye”.
*there’s a silent ‘k’ in there somewhere.
AYE!
As a general rule, people who actually use the word “ilk” take themselves and their pet conspiracy theories waaaayyy too seriously.
Major John, sir, use of Chimpvania is strictly prohibited by Copyright Law, Section 32, paragraph, eh, B.
I quote from memory:
And I think we’re all perfectly clear on the likely legal recourse, my vast rightwing conspiracy, my krypteia if you will, to enforce the dictat of Rightwing death squads under the regime of Lord Cheney and his ChristoTerror Knight Darth Shrub.
Motion is seconded. The ‘ayes’ have it.
the I-L-K letter sequence is hereby banned on pain of endless, pedantic derision of the aforesaid signees to this writ.
I would like to make a motion that Jeff be required to link lesbian porn a la Ace once every week.
Plame-Gate…Fitzmas…moronia…where’s actus?
Seconded!
.
…and their ilk.
Regards,
Ric
The link of Doc Vega’s had a sentence about a political appointee who was “pro-Israeli”. Pro-Israeli in parenthesis, for to show us the true nature of our NeoCon overlords in the Bush White House.
So 2002.
Nee! Neeee! Neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Neeeee Neeee!
Why am I picturing Donald Sutherland pointing and making a goofy face in the remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers?
The latest document that is an actual order from Saddam for “suicide’ attacks on the U.S. six months prior to 9-11-01 will be a barn burner as soon as the President releases the supporting documents. You know he didn’t release all of it at once. If I were one of the dim-wit politicians I would walk around looking to the sky. There is a 5,000 pound elephant up there somewhere and it’s going to smash someone or a lot of someones. LMAO at the dummies that knew better for the past five years but keep calling the president a liar. Soon the dim-wit lying liars will be made public in a big way. I can already hear the whoosh as they go down the comode.
Vercingetorix,
It’s well-known that people react differently to aging, according to personality.
Some people become so rigidly ossified in their habits as to become painfully, even life-threateningly, uncomfortable with behavior outside what they consider the norm.
On the other pole there are those whose wide-ranging experience over a long and interesting life has rendered them able to tolerate, even enjoy, behaviors and patterns of thinking that diverge enormously from their standard. Still, even the most cosmopolitan will be healthier, better able to cope, if they can relax in the company of the like-minded: people with whom they might disagree, even forcefully disagree, but whose thought-patterns and behavior, and the beliefs and assumptions from which they spring, are compatible to their own.
In other words
.
.
.
.
.
.
You never outgrow your need for ilk.
Regards,
Ric
Has anybody ever seen de la Vega and Charlie Sheen together, Miss Lane?
Allright, who broke Vercingetorix?
While I, for one, agree with your assessment indubitably, Rick Locke, I fail to see what manner of kinship you deign to support so strongly with your enthrallingly riposte of type and caste akin to manner–indeed, of a very tribal interdependence–of kindred spirit between a Man and his fellows of the same confession.
While I commend the essential soul of your reply, if not the identity, the very archetype, or Platonic truth with which you connect us to your prose, I must disagree, my friend on one point.
For as the tides grind nations like high cliffs into effusive sand, so does the very form of Men become shivered with time. Friends become estranged, lovers turn or fade or vanish. Memory, pleasant though the strolling palaces may be through the halls of experience, this too must change, if not rot and decay, but then become more elaborate with a Man’s vanity, a Man’s shame.
So I tender to you this epistle, of substance and schema, of my praise for your school of philosophy.
But as Men, born adult from the sires of childhood experiences, we must forgo the pleasure of fashion long since passed. There is a time to reminiesce on forgotten glories, a time to lock the vault and forget.
And certain words of ilk, like Men, must pass into history, respected, credited perhaps, but with dignity when time has come and gone, and fad fled.
Respectfully,
Chief of the Averni, Sworn Enemy of Rome,
Vercingetorix
… nnngh… gaaaah…. … AUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!
Vegas, those bastards.
Not to interrupt the very entertaining discussion (I always know where to go to stimulate my brain and humor), I find it off that this would be said of a man who very expertly manipulated religion in attracting support for his cause among Muslims. Many Muslims throughout the world saw the attacks on Iraq, beginning with Gulf War I, as an attack against a rising/powerful Muslim state. Saddam’s calls for jihad, while rejected by most governments, appealed to many levels of Muslim society.
Now, why would a decidedly secularist use jihad and other religious propaganda to drum up support for his cause?
Because he long ago read the writing on the wall that Dr. V still refuses to see.
Why did Henry of Navarre convert to Catholicism?
Wrong second link. Try this one.
Or not. Not sure why that’s not working, maybe this will:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Bartholomew’s_Day_Massacre
Bezuhov – point well taken, but Henri’s conversion came in 1593, long after the Huguenot Massacre, as a part of his strategy to soothe the tensions left over from the Wars of Religion. Remember that famous bon mot of his, “Paris is well worth a Mass.” Granted, though, that he did manage somehow to talk his way out of suffering the same fate as his friend de Coligny at the time of the Massacre; granted, also, that his very public conversion four years after his coronation had a lot to do with his being a disciple of Jean Bodin and the Politiques.
Graduate School, heavy helpings of equal parts Annales historians and Natalie Zemon Davis – it leaves a scar, it does.
And yes, I realize that Henri didn’t go through the official coronation ceremony until 1598 (Old Style) – I was referring, far too loosely, to the fact that he was de facto monarch of France going back to 1589.
Sucks to be mi*k. The kids will be bummed.
Nice work, Doc.
Doc,
Yeah, my spelling sucks.
Walter is based on director John Milius of “Red Dawn” and “Conan” fame, along with HBO’s “Rome.”
Walter is the theatrical one with regards to his military background, not the sedate, calm, prudent and presidential George 41, whose lines in “The Big Lebowski” amount to: “This will not stand. This, ah, aggresion against Kuwait” (at least it’s very, very close to that). You think that is a parody of George 41’s theatrical militarism? I have an idea for you, read the making of “The Big Lebowski” by the storyboard artist. Read some interviews, and reviews for that matter. As an aside, I’d like to know your thoughts on what the Coen’s were trying to say about Ronaldus Maximus Reagan when they had Nick Cage’s character in “Raising Arizona” talk about that “son-of-a-bitch” Reagan in the White House? I am glad someone that would steal a child doesn’t like Reagan, I see humor in that portrayal of a totally unique character. What do you see?
“The Big Lebowski” is great, but Fargo and Miller’s Crossing are more appropriatley called the Coen’s “masterpiece,” depending on opinion. Singularity will prove this point in precisely 9.76 years.
Joel and Ethan make all their films in equal parts, so to claim “The Big Leboski” is Joel Coen’s movie is not entirely accurate. 50% accurate is much closer. How do you sleep at night, what with you being 50% accurate and being proven to be only 50% accurate by someone of my ilk? Your ignorance is truly astounding. But even that can’t match your hypocrisy:
“what I hate even more are the sterile ad-hominem slurs brainwashed drones of your ilk typically use to avoid addressing the issues”
followed shortly by:
“I know, Neocons hate “old European†literature too”
I consider that a sterile, brainwashed-mind type of slur, which easily could have been made by a drone.
have we confirmed the documents are blank? the left would have a field day with that.
Yeah, given my moniker, I had a chuckle at the Old Euro Lit shot. New generations are a bitch, Doc.
As for Henri converting after the massacre, that’s my point. Saddam sees the Islamicists get cranking in the merciless killing business and decides it would be prudent to be the shredder feeder rather than the feedee.
I don’t get it. Years after a war is started premised on unsupported conjecture about ‘terrorism’ so a plutocracy can defend its oil interests and the US dollar, someone supposedly finds a document which is translated by someone and… if we take that to be true… we’re supposed to ignore the fact that it is a post-event discovery?
Yah, I suppose it exonerates the perpetrators because they knew that one, single document was there all along and that it alone was the proof of their hullabaloo. Yah. Mmm hmmm.
That was really all you needed to say.
I don’t get it.
Yah. We figured that out.
That was really all you needed to say.
I thought the Mmm hmmm part was pretty good too, B Moe.
Yep, Romerican. And if we had found WMD’s that wouldn’t prove anything either because we (and just about everyone else in the world including congressional Dems) “thought” he had them. Just because he turned out to have them doesn’t prove a thing because they were found out after the fact!!
Certainly even you can see how rediculous that is.
The liberal media ignored Saddam’s atrocities for years. Now they even retrospectively praise him as a strong leader who kept the country out of their new most-dreaed scenario—a civil war. As if a civil war were worse than living under the iron boot of a sadist and psychopath. As if fighting freely (if with deadly consequences, make no mistake) were better than oppression and borderline slavery.
This is what it’s come to: the press will side with anyone if that person opposes Bush. They’ll take the word of a hack and liar like Joe Wilson over pages of incontrovertible proof from the CIA that Saddam was attempting to restarta his nuclear program. They’ll take the side of genocidal maniac like Saddam if that maniac is an ememy of Bush. I believe that if Hitler were around, and was a thorn in the Bush administration’s side, the media would describe the Nazis as merely “insurgents” and tacitly support their aims.
Gosh, I caught Dr. V’s first little rant herein and so was aware that he was aboard, but when the second one came around – the one that started, “Yet more lies…” – I thought it was a Jeff parody – not even of Dr. V himself, but just of somebody nuts. Wow.
And then, I was surprised to discover that he actually responded to the other comments – all this time I’d thought he was in fact a drone, whaddaya call ‘em, one of those comment-generators or whatever I’m supposed to be on the lookout for. And then, he calls others “brainwashed drones” in the context of denouncing ad hominem arguments – I need another cup of coffee.
Vercingetorix, that was a thing of beauty. I’ll have “But as Men, born adult from the sires of childhood experiences, we must forgo the pleasure of fashion long since passed” in my head all day now.
Maybe I’m just a red stater who fails to understand proper nuance but I can’t believe the argument is becoming “we set up Sadaam”.
I mean, why would we need to set up Sadaam ? Sadaam did a pretty good job setting himself up over the last 15 years.
non-sequitor alert
Like so much that happens on the Left, the original idea is there, but it’s the lack of follow-through that makes them, well, effete and unworthy of serious consideration.
Witness the ‘Manshake’ google-bomb bit. The one with the trackbacks and the chuckle-chuckle by the various lights of the Left.
Well, the Liberal Avenger has succeeded in making his blog the first entry for ‘manshake’.
Proteinwisdom shows up on page two, in a post that references the LA’s genius.
Well played, LmanshakeA.
Well played.
.
Where is those “pages of incontovertible proof?” I would like to see that.
Where is those “pages of incontovertible proof?†I would like to see that.
For starters:
Ring a bell?
Why don’t you chill the hell out and thicken that skin a wee bit. We need independant verification of a document from a non-partisan outlet before we can rightly claim its veracity. It’s nothing against the Freeps per se, but human nature is what it is, and one’s own bias can’t be denied(which incidentally, is precisely the problem we conservatives have with most media outlets). Would you expect an objective observer to trust a translation of a document from a Kossack that says Saddam was working hard to end all WMD programs and become a good international citizen? I should hope not, but it cuts both way.
Here’s a little tip: tread lightly and your panties won’t bunch up in a wad quite so often.
What I hate is self-important lefties who can’t be arsed to follow the threads, like the one where Jeff and posters discussed their fondness for Restoration Comedies.
But you know how it reeeeeally is in leftyland. If the Jane Austen doesn’t have a decal on Jeff Gordon’s NASCAR ride, we’re lost…
CM, if you had been following things, which you obviously haven’t, you would know that “jveritas” has been laboriously translating the documents since they were released, and he has a good trackrecord for accuracy…
…even for an eeeeeeeeevil Freeper.
and I don’t wear panties. I wear official Freeper neocon boxers.
Are you kidding, I’m jveritas’s friggin’ biographer. In fact, I keep track of everyone who uses the Internet on a daily basis. Doesn’t everyone? Of course, so I can totally understand why you’d get snotty about that. I mean, who doesn’t know all about the guy who comments at Free Republic under the handle “jveritas”? He’s better known worldwide for his work on linguistics than Noam Chomsky!
Look, I’m sure jveritas is a good man with a good heart who knows Arabic better than Mohammed, and he deserves credit for his work. Nevertheless, everyone has some bias and no one can be totally objective. So, until there is some independent verification of the document in question I’m not running down to the local socialist bookstore to rub it in their faces.
No, we neocons are eeeeeeeevil. You erstwhile isolationist Freepers are just the Johnny-come-latelies to the cause of projecting freedom worldwide through force.
Romerican’s comment, with some others here, reminds me of why I just don’t much care about what might be in the released documents.
Whatever is found, will be ignored or dismissed. To those convinced this war was unnecessary, nothing short of an actual large-scale attack by Iraq would have justified this war. Since that didn’t happen, nothing will retroactively convince them.
To the folks I argue with, the bar to justify preemption is set at “metaphysical certitude.” Since absolute accuracy and absolute specificity are, I gather, hard to come by in intelligence, they’d basically prefer that we wait until attacked, then hit back.
They deny this, but I don’t know another conclusion to draw. That’s why Afghanistan was “the good war”; that’s why they think they’ve really got us when they point out that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq had nothing to do with the Sept. 11 attacks.
Of course Saddam didn’t do the 9/11 attacks. He wanted to, but was beaten out by the Evil Chimpsky. I know this because that guy from “Two and a Half Men” said so.
Flashback Productions
in association with
Long Dong Pictures
present:
ENTER THE ‘DILLO!
“The…best…kung-fu movie…in decades!”
— Chuck Schumer
“I’m…glad…I saw…it.”
— Diane Feinstein
got those quotes off their huffpo blogs, I take it?
Nah, I just made ‘em up – just like the studios.
Just wait for the sequel.
TEN TOES OF DEATH
With Chow Yun Fat and Adam Sandler…
I’m thirsty. Can I have a glass of … er … milf?
That doesn’t sound too darn bad, McGhee!
Charlie Sheen gambled and cheated his way out of Denise Richard’s bed- if that doesn’t basically classify him a moron, unworthy to be listened to about ANYTHING, especially politics, I don’t know what does.
Course, what do you expect from the son of an actor who played the president and apparently thinks he is the president
(BTW, if you haven’t picked up Michael Crighton’s book on global warming, one of the “stars” is an obnoxious actor who played the president on TV- great great slap Gasbag Martin).
Also, for the sake of clarification, I’ll say that I believe, and have long believed, that Saddam was connected with terrorism. And like another commenter said, a single document isn’t likely going to change anyone’s mind one way or the other at this point. Those who don’t wish to acknowledge Saddam’s very obvious links to numerous terrorist groups are never going to admit it, not at least until after Bush has left office. To completely overturn such an important tenant in liberal dogma could create such a crisis of dissonance in already unhinged leftist minds as to provoke a complete break with reality.
Witness Doctor V.
I find it interesting that when talking about Saddam, a secular homicidal goon, and AQ, Islamic homicidal goons, so many folks focus on the secular/Islamic difference and totally ignore their are their mutual homicidal goonship.
That has a nice ring to it. You could almost name a doctrine that very same thing.
Heck, if the Nazis and Commies could cooperate (“After you, Herr Molotov.” “Oh please, after you Tovarisch von Ribbentrop”)…
noah, I think you made a good point. Thanks!