That's it...

[johnpalmer]

What follows is a rage-filled rant. It was written under the influence of the following text.


But I can’t help grinning at the yelps of outrage from our liberal opinion-molders--the very same people who had nothing whatever to say about the genuinely ghastly physical tortures that Saddam Hussein inflicted on thousands of Iraqis over the years. At Abu Ghraib, by contrast, there are no allegations of physical torture. The pain was strictly psychological: having to strip naked, simulate sexual acts, wear hoods, and get hooked up to electrical wires that led to--nowhere. Oh, and chicks were on the torture teams, which to misogynist Muslim fanatics is a Very Bad Thing. But in all the photos I’ve seen, not a single pyramided body looks bloody, pained, or starved.



at http://www.iwf.org/inkwell/default.asp?archiveID=446

Let's forget the historical inaccuracy, because beatings, rape, and homicide are all being investigaged as we speak.

Let's just look at this talk about liberals not complaining about Saddam Hussein.



THAT IS IT!

I mean it!

I've read at least one lying conservative asshole who made this claim, and that's twenty five and a half too many. So, this is addressed to all of you commentators who are unworthy to be called "asswipes" because I wouldn't taint shit with your touch.

Shut your festering traps, you stink like prettied up burial chambers - you might recognize that latter insult from this guy you pretend to follow when you think it'll earn you points.

NOT ONE MORE WORD ABOUT HOW LIBERALS DIDN'T COMPLAIN ABOUT SADDAM HUSSEIN'S ABUSES!

Now, I know that the particular sanctimonious hypocritical shitheads who deserve to read this *won't*, but by god, I can not *believe* that *ANYONE* would pull this kind of crap.

Go to google. Now, right now, open a new window in your browser.

Now, key these into the search text-box.

rumsfeld iraq chemical weapons

Now, click the search button.

You'll notice that, interspersed with the new stories are some awfully old ones... about how Iraq was our friendly "not-Iran". About how a certain well-known person travelled to Iraq, and spoke to Saddam Hussien about his chemical weapons. You might even find references stating that he said stuff like how we publically had to condemn it, but privately, it's *their* country, so it's their business.

Anyone with a little memory might be able to add in knowledge about how we were quite friendly to Iraq UP UNTIL THE POINT THAT THEY INVADED KUWAIT.

Now, do you expect *ANYONE* to believe that Saddam Hussein started his abuses with the invasion of Kuwait?

Here's a more troubling question: *WHY* would Iraq claim that we gave a nod and a wink to their invasion of Kuwait? Let's pretend it was a lie; I can quite easily believe that we intended to say "if you seize the disputed territory, that's between you and Kuwait", never DREAMING that Saddam Hussein would consider taking the entire country, but let's just pretend that it's been proven that it's a lie.

Do you, from out of the blue, say that this completely uninterested country gave you a nod and a wink to invade? Or do you say that about a relatively friendly nation?

Saddam Hussein was a liar, make no doubt about it, but even a stupid liar tries to be plausible.

Would Saddam Hussein have even *bothered* to try that tactic *IF THE CONSERVATIVE ADMINISTRATION HAD BEEN CONDEMNING HIS ABUSES?* If a certain President Bush (Sr.) had been hammering on the mass graves and torture? If his predecessor hadn't been buddying up to Saddam?

You slimy, despicable motherfuckers, there are *no* words for the contempt I feel for you.