Saddam wants to crush your head!
September 12th, 2006 by Atomictumor
CNN:
Angry Hussein: ‘We will crush your heads’
This picture courtesy of too much time on my hands…
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, September 12th, 2006 at 12:43 pm and is filed under Rambling.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
September 12th, 2006 at 4:31 pm
Since the current president’s poppa turned a blind eye to the
death by chemical weapons of 180,000 people, then isn’t Saddam
forced to crush some other head instead?
And where did he get the biological poisons for those weapons?
Bet they NEVER bring that up in the trial.
If he gets 3 or 4 execution sentences, shouldn’t they just
decide to stop the trials and execute him? Save a lot of time and money.
September 12th, 2006 at 8:18 pm
Thats what always puzzled me about saying WMDs instead of nukes. I mean, duh, he had chemical bombs. We knew that in the 90s.
And the current poppas boss, as lauded as he was, sold ol Saddam a whole buncha goodies in the 80s. They all kinda forgot that too.
September 12th, 2006 at 9:10 pm
“Thats what always puzzled me about saying WMDs instead of nukes.”
The better to stampede the proletariat. These guys aren’t interested in the truth. They’re interested in winning elections. Sadly, lots of folks were fooled. Many still are.
September 12th, 2006 at 11:50 pm
Kuwaitis were Iraq’s proletariats? Other than Kurd’s were political slaves, a long shot to proletariat, but Kuwait Joel? I understand the WMD misinformation, but I do not get WMD having a singular meaning to some while others define WMD holding true to the meaning of the words individually.
http://www.mauitime.com/story.aspx?story_id=1546
Weapon of Mass Destruction
Why locals say FU to DU —the ‘Agent Orange of this War’
By Anthony Pignataro
“For the generals who run the Pentagon, depleted uranium is a true weapon of mass destruction. Not because it’s a nuclear, biological or chemical warhead demanding international treaties, but because it kills enemy soldiers and tanks better than anything the world has ever seen. “
WMD=Serious Destruction by Militia
September 12th, 2006 at 11:51 pm
Sorry, I was in a hurry. That last one was mine.
September 13th, 2006 at 7:23 am
I think Joel was referring to the American proletariat, duder.
I also think unlikely that we’d see much in the way of depleted uranium attacks in the US. It’d be too expensive, and too rare. Scrutiny is too high, and I don’t know that they’d want to blow their whole wad on something that might not even make it in the country.
Its more likely that they’ll use IED combos like the Gatorade bombs they were allegedly gonna blow up those planes over the Atlantic with. Cheap, readily available ingredients, easy to make, scalable.
If WMDs don’t have a singular meaning in this case, why the talk at all? Yeah, he had em. Clinton and Daddy Bush knew about em, because I knew about em back then.
Why the dog and pony act over Iraq? They were trying to sell us on nukes.
September 13th, 2006 at 7:58 am
You’re right, AT. It was a reference to the American proletariat and had nothing whatsoever to do with Kuwait. Similarly, AAC, we’ve discussed your promiscuous use of the term ‘WMD’ to include every conceivable weapon down to number two pencils.
I really can’t discuss issues with you, AAC, because your, er, ‘versitile’ use of the English language makes it impossible for you to understand me and for me to understand you. When you’re ready to revert to more standard usage, perhaps we can talk again.
September 13th, 2006 at 10:05 am
And who are the American Proletariat?
At your house would you stand behind armored armies who are fighting an enemy that has armor piercing bullets? The common definition of war all of a sudden takes on a new look, if you were lucky to survive. I believe your closed mind Joel, is the same way our officials thought before 9-11 and Pearl Harbor.
I do not want singular thought becoming status quo again. Why must we sit comfortable with a people we thought were educated when experience and history shows us differently. I’m sorry you think our educated officials are the best. Last I heard only half of the country thinks like you.
When are we going to clone General MacArthur to help our nation secure itself? Or are we going to just take it that we know what you are talking about because you want to pinpoint WMD and not have a meaning for mass destruction that goes beyond what our parents and we have learned to know by living it. Tell me what is more? Tell us how you minimize and title the effect of a NON-WMD while life and nation is falling quicker than the educated rulers calculated?
You surely believe the WTC towers had fire suppression, but it succumbed to fire. That is what I am trying to say. You can use all of your education to fight over an anagram; I know that you have left something out of the formula, and that is collective input by all.
September 13th, 2006 at 10:13 am
What?
September 13th, 2006 at 10:18 am
Oh, would King George III think the quill was a WMD? Our forefather’s thought it was when it came to our sovereignty.
September 13th, 2006 at 10:36 am
WTF?
September 13th, 2006 at 11:24 am
What do you call the fall of The Twin Towers that can relate to a war scenario?
September 13th, 2006 at 12:11 pm
I will happily agree to WMDs being defined by you and others once there is a word or phrase that can describe the toll and intent of destruction as it really was. Not to be mongering, but destruction that can be. Terrorist, sure, but to classify 9-11 as the same action by Timothy McVeigh is debasing to the intentions created by Osama.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:31 pm
“Terrorist, sure, but to classify 9-11 as the same action by Timothy McVeigh is debasing to the intentions created by Osama.”
Both are terrorists. Both incidents were acts of terrorism. It doesn’t diminish the enormity of these crimes to concede that they didn’t involve WMDs. I’m not interested in sematical word games. If you need a new word to describe the truck used by McVeigh or the planes used by al Qaeda (other than, you know, “truck” or “plane”), invent one.
September 14th, 2006 at 12:48 am
Look at Timothy, a different goal and schematics. Osama is fighting us on the same level as we stand legally and obviously as destructive as us legally. Tim was on a level that could hardly pull it off without someone else thinking. Who is who, or should I treat all people the same? When we do catch him, is he going to get death like Timothy? I will continue to use WMD as an adjective because WMD is a phrase left to the definer and not you. Go ahead and cry about it now. I sure could use some more of your henpecking.
September 14th, 2006 at 5:29 am
ACC: “I will continue to use WMD as an adjective because WMD is a phrase left to the definer and not you.”
Humpty-dumpty (in ‘Through the Looking Glass’): “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.”
Grown-ups learn to use the rules of language to communicate effectively. Children often make up their own words and new meanings for words on their way to mastering the language of adults. Which one are you, AAC?
September 14th, 2006 at 9:49 am
Sure, Humpty Dumpty had his kings to put him back together again. Why was that?
If language fails to fit reality does Humpty Dumpty fall or has historians been placed sole negotiators on dialect? I find myself a revolutionist more than a proletariat. I wonder what historians were thinking when Bill Gates chose windows as a name to his Trojan horse program?
September 14th, 2006 at 9:51 am
Now I have to step in, because its coming more to my territory… Windows may suck (and thats debatable), but it ain’t a trojan.
September 14th, 2006 at 10:29 am
Friggit, I’m so lost in who is who with my wife’s name and mine here. I’m just going to let Joel do his thing. All posts by Atomic Citizen in this thread are by AAC. Sorry Joel for being confusing. And Atomictumor, I was not talking about the program rather its name.
When I am at work and always have used the word windows for a home. I can see someone like you saying no the windows will go here. You know plasma and the computer thing in everything from farm tractors to kitchen refrigerators. I see how it can be confusing to Joel and the others, but I sure do hope that terrorists of 9-11 and Japan can never be simply a terrorist like Eric Rudolph. Radical Islam, Radical Christianity, Radical Politicians, all the same word Radical, but we the educated people can understand that the context is different, and the non-educated will always take it out of context.
I am done with this for good. Letting it be.