Saddam is evil, therefore we have the right to feed him to our pigs

[Tyler Durden]

James Donald wrote...

"There is ample evidence that the 'anti war' crowd is largely
pro Saddam"

This is a critical point, and it's one you fail to recognize over and over 
again.

Let me tell you a little story. There's this guy that lives down the 
block...I think he may be a Satanist or something, but I'm not quite sure. I 
know he's into some wierd stuff...I saw his wife with a black eye once, and 
his kids don't look so happy or healthy.

One day at the supermarket his cart crashed into mine. It may have been an 
accident, but I'm not quite sure. But the guy gave me an eye, so he's 
clearer a threat to me.

So what I did the other day was I broke into the guy's house...it was late 
and I took him by surpise so when he was coming down the stairs I shot him. 
His older son came at me with a baseball bat, so I had to shoot him too. 
When I finally got to the wife the ungrateful bitch started crying and 
begged me not to kill her..."DAMMIT, I'M HERE TO SAVE YOU YOU STUPID BITCH" 
I said to her, but she didn't seem to feel any better.

Actually, I'm typing this message from her house, because if I leave the 
cops'll get me and maybe some more of the guy's relatives will come, and 
then we'll be right back where we started. I've got no plans to leave here 
for at least 2 to 3 years. Funny thing is, though, every now and then when 
I'm coming down the stairs there will be tacks or nails or something at the 
bottom. I'm starting to get the idea they don't want me here!

Sometimes I wonder if I should have done this, but now that I look around 
this guy's house I can see all sorts of whips and books on Satanism. So it 
turns out I was right! I guess that means I did the right thing.

-TD


>From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd at echeque.com>
>To: cypherpunks at algebra.com
>Subject: Re: I am anti war.  You lot support Saddam
>Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 20:14:34 -0800
>
>     --
>James A. Donald
> > > > > You have just told us that poor little Saddam is a
> > > > > victim.
>
>Jamie Lawrence:
> > > > Incorrect. I said no such thing, and you're being a twit
> > > > by attempting to credit me with such statements.
>
>James A. Donald
> > > You were telling us that the USG's terrible mistreatment of
> > > Saddam is a great shame on the US, which whatever it sounds
> > > like to you, sounds to me very like "poor little victimized
> > > Saddam"
>
>Jamie Lawrence
> > I absolutely said no such thing. You are a liar.
>
>On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 11:18:51 -0500, message ID
>20031221161851.GE32589 at clueinc.net You said:
>: :	"I do care that the US fails to adhere to
>: :	international law."
>  implying that US treatment of Saddam violated international
>  law.
>
>You also said;
>: :	"knocking over a crippled tyrant."
>implying oh dear, that terrible big bully USA is kicking a poor
>little cripple in his poor little wheelchair, think of the poor
>little Saddam falling out of his wheelchair.
>
>These images are not appropriate to someone who claims to
>believe what you just claimed to believe, and you were not
>saying what you claimed you were saying.
>
>As the thread title says, I am anti war, you support Saddam.
>
> > Getting back to what we were talking about, here's a bit that
> > you didn't want to respond to:
> >
> > As it stands, you seem only capable of attempting to impute
> > motives to others that you imagine they might hold, based on
> > wildy improbable chains of cause and effect in philosophical
> > arguments and obscure cause and effect based on international
> > relations in the '60s, bundled together with some sort of New
> > American Century twine about how if we don't kill all the
> > "ragheads" (your words, not mine), we'll be enslaved or
> > worse.
>
>Liar:
>
>I did not suggest killing all the ragheads, and in other forums
>I have regularly argued against claims about Islam or arabs
>that would rationalize and justify such an action.
>
>There is ample evidence that the 'anti war' crowd is largely
>pro Saddam, evidence in this mailing list, considerably
>stronger evidence in the newsgroups, evidence in the streets,
>and in the editorials of the BBC and the telegraph, and
>evidence in your own utterances.  Let us discuss that.
>
>Dean at least has a legitimate excuse to be unhappy about the
>capture of Saddam, since it queers his chances in the election,
>but there are an awful lot of other people distressed about the
>capture and coming execution of Saddam.  What is your excuse?
>
>     --digsig
>          James A. Donald
>      6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
>      mOt6pyE37ffUkwFENPIfhLpsNbx8+c/AFA3bkXDp
>      471tnWs02/4wMvR80m7OjAktOd7+2SdPyl966jWqZ

_________________________________________________________________
Enjoy a special introductory offer for dial-up Internet access  limited 
time only! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup