Here's a
letter from a
mildly retarded enlightened reader of the
Boston Sunday Globe. In this drivel-laden whine, Tom Larkin of Bedford, MA espouses the genius of Richard
cha-CHING Clarke and lays out the "facts" as they exist in his tiny head.
THE WAR in Iraq is not a war on terrorism. It is a waste of resources. As Richard Clarke makes clear in his book, "Against All Enemies," the Bush administration does not understand terrorism ("It's hard to say war wasn't worth it," op ed, March 23). The facts are:
Are you sitting down?
Saddam Hussein was not an imminent threat to the United States. The enemy is religious terrorism.
Another confirmed case of Halliburton Ernie Syndrome (see post below). Wait, let me try...IMMINENT IMMINENT IMMINENT...NOW did Bush say it?
Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction and no means to apply them. The United Nations was effectively monitoring Iraq's threat to the world.
Wow! Holy MTV Attention Span, Batman! This dipshit said THREE sentences ago that Hussein was not a threat to the US, now he's a threat to the world - as if somehow that's a better situation. The only thing the UN was doing effectively was
siphoning funds from the Hussein regime through their "sanctions" and aiding and abetting the systematic torture and bodily mutilation policies of that nice man, who by the way HAD large quantites of WMD's as well-documented by the UN years ago. Obviously they just turned into pixie dust and vanished.
Saddam was a secular tyrant with no ties to Al Qaeda or any other religious terrorist group. Iraq had its own problems with religious extremists, as does almost every nation state.
Never mind that immediately following the FIRST Al-Qaeda attack on the World Trade Center, Saddam did everything short of laying a mint on the pillow for
Abdul Rahman Yasin, one of the prime suspects behind the attack. And try telling the relatives of the innocent people blown up in Israel by suicide bombers funded directly by Saddam Hussein, that he had NO ties to "any other religious terrorist group". Let me guess, you think suicide bombers killing babies are "militants" or maybe "freedom fighters". And people say our publis schools aren't failing us. I bet they churned out this knuckle-shuffler.
Those who study religious terrorism's cosmic, irrational world view would counsel against military attacks on Islamic nations because religious terrorism is not contained within national borders.
No, you fuckwit. Those who are profiting from terrorist-supporting Islamic nations counsel against military attacks. And "
not contained within national borders"? Where the fuck do you think these people come from, a giant floating raft in the middle of the ocean? outer space maybe?
Bush's preemptive, almost unilateral, invasion of Iraq fueled Islamic terrorist groups worldwide without addressing their threat.
ALMOST unilateral? That's quite impressive for a whining leftoid to actually admit that Operation Iraqi Freedom was a multi-national effort. Now explain how Bush's action fueled Islamic terrorists. What, has their mantra suddenly changed from "Death to America!" to "Death to America...twice!"
The United States squandered international goodwill after 9/11, and the opportunity to build international collaboration against the civilized world's common enemy -- religious terrorism.
Yeah, shame on us for pissing off the countries that support the crushing of freedom. We're, like, mean and stuff.
To paraphrase Pogo, on the battlefield of religious terrorism, we are defeating ourselves.
To paraphrase myself, you're a poorly-educated, leftist idiot. You wouldn't recognize reality if it smacked you in the head with a 2-by-4.
