Right, just because Shrubb-ya and Blair lied to get congress to approve a war on Iraq so he could steal the oil, it doesn't mean that Saddam was a saint and that his human rights violations (read: torture, murder, rape, pillage) could be dismissed, and he didn't deserve to be forced off the throne. The Hussein bunch got what they deserved. Fuck'em. What's disturbing is that "we" put that motherfucker in power, and supplied him with the means to carry out his attrocies against his own people, we fueld the fires of the Iran/Iraq war by feeding both sides with weapons and intel, and so on. ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :25Kliters anthrax, 38K liters botulinum toxin, 500 tons of /|\ \|/ :sarin, mustard and VX gas, mobile bio-weapons labs, nukular /\|/\ <--*-->:weapons.. Reasons for war on Iraq - GWB 2003-01-28 speech. \/|\/ /|\ :Found to date: 0. Cost of war: $800,000,000,000 USD. \|/ + v + : The look on Sadam's face - priceless! --------_sunder_@_sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Bill Frantz wrote:

I think the evidence is strong that they were as bad as Sadam. If Sadam was an "enemy of the state", then they were too.

I also think that assassinate is the wrong word to use to describe what happens to someone when an army says, "Come out with your hands up", and instead they come out shooting.