NJH wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
...


NJH wrote:

Please cite anything Bush ever said that characterized the Iraqi medical
staff as all "terrorists" and "thugs" and "evil-doers."


Oh, my bad--apparently the dumb bitch was captured by the Iraqi medical
staff.


No, but obviously she wasn't captured by terrorists either.


Does not compute. Every act the "insurgents" commit is referred to as a
terrorist act by the right-leaning media. When did they go from being
soldiers who aren't terrorists to committing "acts of terror"? At some
point you'll be forced to acknowledge the mountains of bull**** the
administration and the media has used to describe every situation that
occurs in Iraq.


If she had been,
I don't think there would be any more Jessica Lynch.


Now that's rich. Were Saddam's "death squads" busy that day?


When did she become "the dumb bitch," by the way?


It was a sarcastic way of referring to the fact that she wasn't killed
by "death squads" or "terrorists" and dumped in an unmarked grave, but
rather was found in an Iraqi hospital receiving proper medical treatment.


She wasn't driving, isn't
the one who took a wrong turn, wasn't responsible for getting ambushed, and
hasn't done anything else that I know of that would justify such
characterization.


Again, the comment didn't refer to her intelligence or anything she did,
but rather sarcastically referred to your refusal to acknowledge that
her being put in a hospital didn't quite make the Iraqis as monstrous as
your propaganda makes them out to be.


I wonder how many "insurgents" are battling the U.S.
right now just because the U.S. killed one of their family members as
"collateral damage."


Very few, if any.


Excellent use of the Ouija board.


Thanks, but I didn't even have to use supernatural means. Any other
instances in which you are driven to "wonder" about questions with pretty
obvious answers, I'll be glad to help you with.


Bull****. Let's see some proof that "very few, if any" of the
insurgents are out for revenge for family members killed as "collateral
damage." Let's see some accurate collateral damage figures while you're
at it. And then tell us where those WMDs are.


Saddam loyalists were so for many years before the U.S.

killed anyone there.


I see. So if "Saddam loyalists" exist, that supersedes anybody with a
simple revenge motif. Or is revenge only available to white people?


What, this is a racial issue now?


Of course it is.


Saddam and his followers were and are white people. What did you think they
were?


Semites.


Or is your submission to political correctness so complete that you just
have to throw in some snide remark about white people from time to time,
whether relevant or not?


You're skirting the issue. You can call it a religious issue if it
makes you feel better. Whatever way you slice it, they aren't given the
same latitude that the Bush administration gives themselves. I can't
believe you even argue this point. You should be apologizing an
infinite amount of times for the lack of WMDs and the lies about the
purchase of "nucular" material, none of which has anything to do with
terrorism in the first ****ing place. Then, you can finish it off with
more apologies for the Taliban being alive and well in Afghanistan, and
also give an honorable mention to the fact that Pakistan is most
probably as stronghold for terrorists too, with nothing happening there,
and then finish off your apologies with an explanation for why, if the
vast majority of terrorists committing the acts on 9/11 were Saudi,
nothing is being done in/to Saudi Arabia.