Subject: The History of Hussien (for shitcunt)

From: zosodada@aol.com (Zosodada)
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Date: Sat, Mar 29, 2003 6:08 PM
Message-ID: <20030329180827.23252.00000197@mb-fh.aol.com>

28 April 1937 Saddam Hussein was born in Tikrit, Iraq.
1940'Äôs Saddam alleged to have murdered a school teacher who may also have
been his cousin.
c. 1950-55 Hussein is a teenage hoodlum/gang member kind of like the character
in the Grand Theft Auto videogames.
1956 Hussein joined the Arab Baath Socialist Party.
1959 Hussein attempts to assassinate the Prime Minister of Iraq with a gang of
young guns-for-hire.
25 February 1960 Sentenced to death for assassination attempt. Escaped.
1962-1963 Hussein studied law in Cairo.
1963 Elected to the Baath Party.
14 October 1964 Hussein was arrested by then current regime.
1967 Hussein escaped from prison.
July 1968 Hussein participated in a coup to overthrow Iraq's and the regime.
1 June 1972 Hussein nationalized all of the oil companies in Iraq..
11 March 1974 Hussein helped to implement the 'ÄúAutonomy Law'Äù for Iraqi
Kurdish citizens. Kurds ousted from homeland.
16 July 1979 Hussein elected as the President of Iraq; begins executions of all
political rivals, beginning with 17 men; theirbodies were left to rot hanging
in a public square.
4 September 1980 Hussein initiated a war with Iran as he the oil-reserves in
Iran.
1982 Former President Bakr died mysteriously. Hussein likely involved. Begins
development of the 'ÄúDoomsday Gun'Äù
1987 Biological weapons program at Al Salman; The effects on larger animals,
including sheep, donkeys, monkeys and dogs, were studied within the laboratory
and inhalation chamber, as well as in the field. Initial weapons field trials
were conducted in early 1988. Studies of scale-up production were initiated on
botulinum toxin and anthrax.
1987-1988 Hussein launched the Anfal Campaign against the Kurds. An estimated
180,000 Kurds disappeared and 4,000 villages were destroyed.
March 1988 The Kurdish town, Halabaja, was gassed. At least 5,000 people were
killed and about 10,000 were injured.
1988 Kurdish villages on the Turkish border were gassed. Thousands of people
died. Uday Hussein clubs his father'Äôs valet to death with a club at a party
for Suzanne Mubarak, first lady of Egypt.
1989 15 or 16 production runs of anthrax were performed at Al Salman, producing
up to 1,500 litres of anthrax, which was concentrated to 150 litres.
1990, Hussein develops program to develop an additional delivery means, a
biological
weapons spray tank based on a modified aircraft drop tank. The concept was that
tanks would be fitted either to a piloted fighter or to a remotely piloted
aircraft to spray up to 2,000 litres of anthrax over a target.
2 August 1990 Hussein attacked Kuwait.
16 January 1991 GWI begins
February 1991 GWI ends. Hussein orders Kuwati oil wells set aflame.
1993 Hussein breaks peace terms. The US bombed Iraq as a result.
1995 Two sons-in-law defect to Jordan; then begged forgiveness. Hussein
welcomed them back and immediately killed them both.
1996 both were dead. October 1998 Hussein failed to comply with the united
Nations inspectors. This action led to a four-day bombing raid by the US.
16-19 December 1998 Hussein ousts UN weapons inspectors.
2000 It is reported that Hussein has used humanitarian funds to presidential
palaces and for other personal possessions (e.g., 2000 Sony Playstations)
March 2003 Hussein, a socialist, calls for 'Äújihad'Äù against the US.
'Äú 'Äú Republican Guard cuts out tongue of suspected rebel; leaves
him tied to pillory in public square.
Iraq violates Geneva convention, photographing prisoners of war; military
wearing civilian clothes, &c.

Saddams Death Toll
Iranians (Iran-Iraq war) 750,000
Kurds 250,000
Kuwaitis 1,000

A bibliography

S/1995/864 - Report of the Secretary-General on the status
of the implementation of the Special Commission's plan for the ongoing
monitoring and verification of Iraq's compliance with relevant parts of section
C of Security Council resolution 687 (1991) 11 October 1995

The Demonic Comedy; Some Detours in the Baghdad of Saddam Hussein by
Paul Roberts

Republic of Fear; Samir el-Khalil (kanyan Marika) 1990

Saddam'Äôs War: the Origins of the Kuwaiti Conflict; Bulloch & Morris
1991

Federation of American Scientists. Online. http://www.fas.org/
Dossier on Iraq'Äôs Special Weapons http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/

Saddam Hussein. Online.
http://top-biography.com/9004-Saddam%20Hussein/index1.asp.

Biography of President Saddam Hussein: President of Iraq.
Online.
http://www.uruklink.net/iraq/bio.htm.

Biography of President Saddam Hussein, President of the
Republic of
Iraq. Online. http://www.uruklink.net/iraq/bio.htm.

Biography of Saddam Hussein of Tikrit. Online.
http://www.iraqfoundation.org/research/bio.html.

Howard Kurtz. "Off Camera, Saddam interviewed Rather." Los
Angeles Times-Washington Post News Service

http://www.gulf-news.com/Articles/news.asp?ArticleID=78789
War with Iraq. Cnn.com

Various TV biographies by the BBC, Discovery Channel, CNN &c.

Eat my Canuck cunt.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: The History of Hussien (for shitcunt)
From: "Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgenius.com>
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Date: Sun, Mar 30, 2003 10:51 AM
Message-ID: <300320031051199137%stang@subgenius.com>

In article <20030329180827.23252.00000197@mb-fh.aol.com>, Zosodada
<zosodada@aol.com> wrote from deep in Canada in a lilting, womanly
tone, to Iceknife:

>
> Federation of American Scientists. Online. http://www.fas.org/
> Dossier on Iraq'Äôs Special Weapons http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/
>
>
> Saddam Hussein. Online.
> http://top-biography.com/9004-Saddam%20Hussein/index1.asp.
>
> Biography of President Saddam Hussein: President of Iraq.
> Online.
> http://www.uruklink.net/iraq/bio.htm.
>
> Biography of President Saddam Hussein, President of the
> Republic of
> Iraq. Online. http://www.uruklink.net/iraq/bio.htm.
>
> Biography of Saddam Hussein of Tikrit. Online.
> http://www.iraqfoundation.org/research/bio.html.
>

You went to all this trouble -- for a guy who can honestly say, right
out in public, "I've been making sure radio talk show hosts know the
facts," on the same day that he says, "I've haven't heard anything all
that bad about Saddam Hussein."

I had been hoping that Iceknife must be kidding or playing a reverse
bulldada role. Nobody could be that ignorant, yet hubristic,
SIMULTANEOUSLY.

But I was reminded that the reason many people sound so confident in
their views is because they haven't allowed their views to become
cluttered by information from conflicting sources. When you read
material from all over left, right, and center, some things start to
appear more complex and blurry, rather than simple and easily
delineated. That causes the old pain between the ears.

Folks who are not really all that sure of themselves can at least feel
VERY sure of SOMETHING, as long as they avoid reading or hearing what
they didn't already agree with. And I don't mean CNN vs. NPR.

In the actual words of Iceknife:

"I've never seen any testimony by anyone reliable, or by a large
number of people, that Sadam Hussein is a monster. ... I'm not saying
it's not out there, just that I've never seen a trace
of it. ... There's no reliable journalists on the ground that aren't in
bed with the military. ..."
....
"His regime certainly seems less repressive than almost any other in
the region."

Those are Iceknife's own words. Take it from there.

I guess if you hate the U.S. gov't enough, anything said by anybody who
also hates the U.S. gov't becomes true, and everything said by the
gov't becomes, necessarily, a lie. If they lied to you about pot
because they want to sell whiskey, then therefore they must be lying
about Saddam because they want to sell oil. If you don't know any
Iraqis and they never lied to you, then they must be all nice folks.
The SIMPLE explanation.

The term for this is "knee-jerk," that is, a reflexive reaction, mostly
unconscious. Extremists of every kind do it. Even us pathetic
endangered middle of the road extremists do it.

I'm not the biggest fan of the government myself, but every now and
then, a word uttered in their official publications ALSO happens to be
true outside of their official publications. Perhaps it's by accident,
but it does happen.

I do know some Iraqis, and I have even set foot outside of this
country. (I have even lived outside of this country while living IN
this country.) I scour alter.net every two or three days and I listen
to Rush every week or two. I read my mom's right wing journals and my
wife's left wing journals. I am bombarded DAILY with leftist email from
numerous lists and individuals, and I am lightly strafed with right
wing mail from, well, fewer sources. Although I swore off the news for
a couple of years, May 1999 to September 11 2001, I now again pay close
attention to both leftist and rightist news, and also to the
"mainstream" news.*

All have an obvious slant, and my self-appointed job is to sort it all
out and make up my fucking mind for my fucking self.

The mind I made up this week says that we never should have been
dragged into this in the first place, but we ourselves (the U.S. that
is) set the process in motion 30 years ago partially out of fear of
Communism. We should have cleaned up the mess we made a long time ago,
but hindsight is golden. It's going to be a lot worse now but, after
considerable reviewing, I'm currently of a mind that we SHOULD finish
cleaning up the mess we made. In other words we should remove the Baath
Party from control of Iraq. The U.S.A. put them there and now we have
to get them out. I don't blame other nations for not wanting to help.
But I don't see them lining up to try to STOP us either.

I also know that the people of the world have as short a memory as
Americans do. That's a REAL fuckin' short memory. Proof of that spews
from this newsgroup hourly. So I am not particularly afraid of
"America looking like a bully forever." Anybody with more guns and
money than anybody else is always going to look like a bully whether
they are bullies or not.

Plus, some bullies are more equal than others, and that's only natural.

YOU TOO CAN DEPEND ON DOBBSCO MUNITIONS.

P.S. -- for a touch of irony here, my wife has been a fairly well
known, active Cleveland "peace activist" for many years. However, she
works a regular job. A very regular job. ALL of her co-workers are
heartily pro-Bush now, even the ones who used to hate him. I, on the
other hand, am immersed in the SubGenius Internet World which tends
towards the largely "liberal" and "peacenik" as opposed to
"conservative" and "warmongering". Of course, being a SubGenius, I'm
going to be intrigued by the UNFAMILIAR rather than the familiar. I've
been hearing blanket antiwar yammerings my whole life and the dopier
and more shrill it gets, Iceknife-style, the more clearly I can
sympathize with the blockheads' points on the other side. Not that I
AGREE with them. But I can sure see why one set of stupid assholes can
point at another set of stupid assholes and quite accurately say, "What
a bunch of stupid assholes."

LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT. If you love it, kick its ass and get it to clean
up its act. Of course, you might have to clean up your OWN act first.

*I am told that the media is controlled by liberals. I am told this
every time I turn on the radio.

--
4th Stangian Orthodox MegaFisTemple Lodge of the Wrath of Dobbs Yeti,
Resurrected (Rev. Ivan Stang, prop.)
P.O. Box 181417, Cleveland, OH 44118 (fax 216-320-9528)
A subsidiary of:
The SubGenius Foundation, Inc. / P.O. Box 204206, Austin, TX 78720-4206
Dobbs-Approved Authorized Commercial Outreach of The Church of the SubGenius
SubSITE: http://www.subgenius.com
For SubGenius Biz & Orders: call toll free to 1-888-669-2323
or email: jesus@subgenius.com
PRABOB

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: The History of Hussien (for shitcunt)
From: rev dode <dode(pee)@tystie.com>
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Date: Sun, Mar 30, 2003 1:30 PM
Message-ID: <3e8728af$0$4843$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com>

Rev. Ivan Stang wrote:

>
> The mind I made up this week says that we never should have been
> dragged into this in the first place, but we ourselves (the U.S. that
> is) set the process in motion 30 years ago partially out of fear of
> Communism.

This is just bloody typical! You Americans have to claim the credit for
everything! It was the us or at least the English that fucked up that
corner of the world, the best you can claim is your governments suffer from
a complete inability to learn from our history. I guess we can let you off
as apparently neither have we.

Dode

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: The History of Hussien (for shitcunt)
From: "Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgenius.com>
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Date: Sun, Mar 30, 2003 2:02 PM
Message-ID: <300320031402265595%stang@subgenius.com>

In article <3e8728af$0$4843$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com>, rev dode
<dode(pee)@tystie.com> wrote:

> Rev. Ivan Stang wrote:
>
> >
> > The mind I made up this week says that we never should have been
> > dragged into this in the first place, but we ourselves (the U.S. that
> > is) set the process in motion 30 years ago partially out of fear of
> > Communism.
>
> This is just bloody typical! You Americans have to claim the credit for
> everything! It was the us or at least the English that fucked up that
> corner of the world, the best you can claim is your governments suffer from
> a complete inability to learn from our history. I guess we can let you off
> as apparently neither have we.
>
> Dode

I had noticed earlier that you were taking credit for destroying the
Middle East's slack. I was gonna let that pass, but... The
anti-American stuff I read had the CIA helping to put the Baath Party
in, in the first place...

Oh... "HELPED."

God damn it, Bond gets ALL the glory AND all the pussy, and his poor
neglected CIA counterpart is once again The Spy Who Got Left Out in the
Cold, driving the motorboat that's towing 007 and the babe safely off
into the sunset, after the nukular threat has been once again averted.
(UNTIL NEXT TIME!!)

And see, I can't even remember the NAME of the CIA guy.... shit... he's
in a lot of the stories as a side character. I guess my grasp of
history isn't that good after all. Why just last month I got the early
Asimov robot-cop novels confused with the early robot short stories.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: The History of Hussien (for shitcunt)
From: rev dode <dode(pee)@tystie.com>
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Date: Sun, Mar 30, 2003 4:14 PM
Message-ID: <3e874f3a$0$29611$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com>

Rev. Ivan Stang wrote:

> And see, I can't even remember the NAME of the CIA guy.... shit... he's
> in a lot of the stories as a side character. I guess my grasp of
> history isn't that good after all. Why just last month I got the early
> Asimov robot-cop novels confused with the early robot short stories.
>

Felix Leiter, probably one of the very few factoids that remain stuck in my
brain after becoming bon obsessed in my mid (spurting) teens. I have the
same terrible trouble with John Sladeks Roderick and "The Mole".

Dode

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: The History of Hussien (for shitcunt)
From: "ICEKNIFE" <icNOekSPAMnife@lmi.net>
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Date: Sun, Mar 30, 2003 4:53 PM
Message-ID: <joOcnWf-PcAN-hqjXTWc3g@lmi.net>

"Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgenius.com> wrote in message
news:300320031402265595%stang@subgenius.com...
> In article <3e8728af$0$4843$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com>, rev dode
> <dode(pee)@tystie.com> wrote:
>
> > Rev. Ivan Stang wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > The mind I made up this week says that we never should have been
> > > dragged into this in the first place, but we ourselves (the U.S.
that
> > > is) set the process in motion 30 years ago partially out of fear
of
> > > Communism.
> >
> > This is just bloody typical! You Americans have to claim the
credit for
> > everything! It was the us or at least the English that fucked up
that
> > corner of the world, the best you can claim is your governments
suffer from
> > a complete inability to learn from our history. I guess we can let
you off
> > as apparently neither have we.
> >
> > Dode
>
> I had noticed earlier that you were taking credit for destroying the
> Middle East's slack. I was gonna let that pass, but... The
> anti-American stuff I read had the CIA helping to put the Baath
Party
> in, in the first place...
>
> Oh... "HELPED."
>
> God damn it, Bond gets ALL the glory AND all the pussy, and his poor
> neglected CIA counterpart is once again The Spy Who Got Left Out in
the
> Cold, driving the motorboat that's towing 007 and the babe safely
off
> into the sunset, after the nukular threat has been once again
averted.
> (UNTIL NEXT TIME!!)
>
> And see, I can't even remember the NAME of the CIA guy.... shit...
he's
> in a lot of the stories as a side character. I guess my grasp of
> history isn't that good after all. Why just last month I got the
early
> Asimov robot-cop novels confused with the early robot short stories.

Felix Lightner.

My favorite was when he was played by Joe Don Baker.

YEAH, BUFORD PUSSER TO THE RESCUE!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: The History of Hussien (for shitcunt)
From: talysman <talysman@globalsurrealism.com>
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Date: Sun, Mar 30, 2003 3:05 PM
Message-ID: <wk4r5kzko6.fsf@globalsurrealism.com>

"Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgenius.com> writes:

> In the actual words of Iceknife:
>
> "I've never seen any testimony by anyone reliable, or by a large
> number of people, that Sadam Hussein is a monster. ... I'm not saying
> it's not out there, just that I've never seen a trace
> of it. ... There's no reliable journalists on the ground that aren't in
> bed with the military. ..."
> ....
> "His regime certainly seems less repressive than almost any other in
> the region."
>
> Those are Iceknife's own words. Take it from there.

his regime *was* less repressive than almost any other in the region.
sure, if you were saddam's in-law, your chances of making it past
age 40 were pretty slim... and he did arrest anyone who protested
against the ba'ath regime.

but we're talking about a region that is spiraling further back into
religious extremism... and one country lead by a nutcase obsessed with
restoring the glory of babylon. saddam wanted iraq to be *modern*.
iraq was the most western of the arab nations, at least until saddam's
failed military expansion and international sanctions destroyed it.

the only country in the region that could claim to be more modern or
less oppressive would be israel -- but israel is only less repressive
if you're a jew (christians and arabs in israel have it way better
than palestinians, but they are still second-class citizens.)

the thing about ICEKNIFE's post is that it mainly uses the concept
of saddam-as-monster in the extreme sense. sure, if you're looking
for *any* justification of anti-saddam propaganda at all, you are
going to find that the bush administration is at least 10% truthful
about saddam. but ICEKNIFE is (rightly or wrongly) insisting that,
if you call some dictator a monster, there'd better be evidence of
something like massive cannibalism or a Final Solution.

it's not that saddam isn't a bad man; it's that he hasn't lived down
to his reputation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: The History of Hussien (for shitcunt)
From: "ICEKNIFE" <icNOekSPAMnife@lmi.net>
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Date: Sun, Mar 30, 2003 5:41 PM
Message-ID: <4b2dnQLUUMFc7xqjXTWcog@lmi.net>

"talysman" <talysman@globalsurrealism.com> wrote in message
news:wk4r5kzko6.fsf@globalsurrealism.com...
> "Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgenius.com> writes:
>
>
> > In the actual words of Iceknife:
> >
> > "I've never seen any testimony by anyone reliable, or by a large
> > number of people, that Sadam Hussein is a monster. ... I'm not
saying
> > it's not out there, just that I've never seen a trace
> > of it. ... There's no reliable journalists on the ground that
aren't in
> > bed with the military. ..."
> > ....
> > "His regime certainly seems less repressive than almost any other
in
> > the region."
> >
> > Those are Iceknife's own words. Take it from there.
>
> his regime *was* less repressive than almost any other in the
region.
> sure, if you were saddam's in-law, your chances of making it past
> age 40 were pretty slim... and he did arrest anyone who protested
> against the ba'ath regime.
>
> but we're talking about a region that is spiraling further back into
> religious extremism...

Back? Howso? The Wahhabis have only held dominance in Saudi Arabia.
They're late-comers to the mix, since they were formed in the 18th
century, and generally not well regarded by other Moslems. The popular
media in America likes to pretend that the Shiites are the source of
all the trouble, but perhaps that's because of interlocking
directorships. The Wahhabis placed the Saud family on the throne in
the 30's. There're no major media outlets in the US that don't share
interlocking directorships with big oil concerns, so we never hear
about the Wahhabis on the news.

For those who don't know about Wahhabism, read up, and you'll find
that it's the primary source of violent fundamentalist Islam. But of
course, we don't dare say anything bad about our favorite despots in
the region, even though they're really by far the worst of the bunch.

> and one country lead by a nutcase obsessed with
> restoring the glory of babylon. saddam wanted iraq to be *modern*.
> iraq was the most western of the arab nations, at least until
saddam's
> failed military expansion and international sanctions destroyed it.

Second most western, I'd say. Turkey is an Islamic nation. Atatuk's
forced westernizing reforms saw to that. I understand why he did it,
the reasons were sound at the time, but they could and should have
been relaxed long ago.

> the only country in the region that could claim to be more modern or
> less oppressive would be israel -- but israel is only less
repressive
> if you're a jew (christians and arabs in israel have it way better
> than palestinians, but they are still second-class citizens.)
>
> the thing about ICEKNIFE's post is that it mainly uses the concept
> of saddam-as-monster in the extreme sense. sure, if you're looking
> for *any* justification of anti-saddam propaganda at all, you are
> going to find that the bush administration is at least 10% truthful
> about saddam. but ICEKNIFE is (rightly or wrongly) insisting that,
> if you call some dictator a monster, there'd better be evidence of
> something like massive cannibalism or a Final Solution.
>
> it's not that saddam isn't a bad man; it's that he hasn't lived down
> to his reputation.

More or less. I look at those around him, and can only come to one
conclusion... we're really just stealing oil, setting up a staging
ground, and eliminating the financial support of the Palestinians.

I stopped being pro-Israel when I came to discover first hand that
the darker you are, the worse you get treated there. Christians in
Israel have no problems as far as I know, as long as they're American
or European. This is by no means limited to Christains and Arabs, it
also encompasses Jews. The Ashkenazim treat the Sephardim like crap,
they both treat the Yemenite Jews like shit, and all of them pick on
the Falasheh (sp?) the Ethiopian Jews.

All my life various Jews have said to me "we have the same right as
others to be wrong. You have no right to hold us to a higher
standard." BULLSHIT! What the fuck? If it's not a higher standard, why
adhere to it? Why fight and die for it? If the love of Torah and
Talmud and unending debate and discovery of their meaning aren't a
higher standard, they might as well be the collected works of Rod
Fuckin' McKuen.

Saddam is certainly as bad as most of his neighbors. Problem is, that
doesn't distinguish him from his neighbors, so I have to discard the
whole "liberation" argument as 11th hour proaganda. I think what has
some people here confused is that as a Jew who's made the trip, I've
had first hand exposure to the atrocities of many of his neighbors.
That's why, when people start in about Israel, I get disgusted. Israel
sucks, but nowhere near as much as almost all their neighbors. Because
terrorism has never really worked (as far as I know) at any time, in
any country, I can only assume that people who know this are
manipulating things for their own benefit, or terrorists are
frustrated monkeys just too damn stupid to be allowed to live.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: The History of Hussien (for shitcunt)
From: talysman <talysman@globalsurrealism.com>
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Date: Sun, Mar 30, 2003 9:14 PM
Message-ID: <wkfzp4cmgm.fsf@globalsurrealism.com>

"ICEKNIFE" <icNOekSPAMnife@lmi.net> writes:

> "talysman" <talysman@globalsurrealism.com> wrote in message
> news:wk4r5kzko6.fsf@globalsurrealism.com...
> > iraq was the most western of the arab nations, at least until
> saddam's
> > failed military expansion and international sanctions destroyed it.
>
> Second most western, I'd say. Turkey is an Islamic nation. Atatuk's
> forced westernizing reforms saw to that. I understand why he did it,
> the reasons were sound at the time, but they could and should have
> been relaxed long ago.

turkey isn't an *arab* nation, however.

for the audience: neither is iran.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: The History of Hussien (for shitcunt)
From: "ICEKNIFE" <icNOekSPAMnife@lmi.net>
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Date: Sun, Mar 30, 2003 3:46 PM
Message-ID: <dJadnfEMXunnxRqjXTWcog@lmi.net>

"Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgenius.com> wrote in message
news:300320031051199137%stang@subgenius.com...
>
> You went to all this trouble -- for a guy who can honestly say,
right
> out in public, "I've been making sure radio talk show hosts know the
> facts," on the same day that he says, "I've haven't heard anything
all
> that bad about Saddam Hussein."

"I've never seen any testimony by anyone reliable, or by a large
number of people, that Sadam Hussein is a monster. I don't doubt it,"

That's NOT "I haven't heard anything all that bad about Saddam
Hussein". Don't put quotes around shit you make up. It makes you look
like an aged spin doctor - agit-prop for the LAST century.

I wrote "Had some really excellent success sending documentation to
radio
talkshow hosts who are (or were) sitting the fence about this
administration and the war. Not conspiracy stuff, strictly mainstream
press, Congressional Record, and the actual public writings of the
people responsible for this mess."

That's NOT "I've been making sure radio talk show hosts know the
facts,", not even CLOSE. Your implication is that I've said I'm
sending THE facts, i.e. ALL the facts. I don't know all the facts,
I've made it clear what I'm sending. I never made any attempt to
pretend I did have all the facts, or was giving anyone the whole
picture. On the other hand, there are pertinent facts surrounding this
administration that the media has glossed over, under reported,
skipped, and outright lied about.

Funny thing is, I didn't even knock your opinons or position, you're
just telling lies and misrepresenting my view because of a personal
beef. That's beaneath even you, Stinky.

> I had been hoping that Iceknife must be kidding or playing a reverse
> bulldada role.

I seriously doubt you ever hoped anything about me except that I'd go
away.

> Nobody could be that ignorant, yet hubristic,
> SIMULTANEOUSLY.

There is no such thing as hubris. The gods are ASSHOLES. I learned
that from *you*.

> But I was reminded that the reason many people sound so confident in
> their views is because they haven't allowed their views to become
> cluttered by information from conflicting sources. When you read
> material from all over left, right, and center, some things start to
> appear more complex and blurry, rather than simple and easily
> delineated. That causes the old pain between the ears.

Again, for those in the cheap seats, I draw my conclusions from what
I've researched, not what has been fed to us. I mistrust the left as
much as the right. The reason I haven't seen anything reliable about
Hussein is because I wasn't looking. My curiosity is somewhat idle in
this regard because I really don't see what his level of relative
villainy has to do with SHIT. When did we first hear anything about
"liberating" Iraq? Is this like when we liberated Nicaragua? Are we
now going after China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia? The argument is
preposterous. I just wanted to know to what extent it was true, and
you blew it into support for Sadam.

> Folks who are not really all that sure of themselves can at least
feel
> VERY sure of SOMETHING, as long as they avoid reading or hearing
what
> they didn't already agree with. And I don't mean CNN vs. NPR.

Avoid? Not all of us are rabid media craphounds, Stinky. Some of us
only know what we're looking to find out about, and as I said, I
didn't (and don't) consider how awful Hussein is to be relevant to our
invading Iraq, because we didn't do it for that reason.

> "His regime certainly seems less repressive than almost any other in
> the region."

> Those are Iceknife's own words. Take it from there.

Those are my words, out of context. Now dispute what I've said, with
facts. Spare me your endless bitching, I don't CARE if your ass hurts,
your ass ALWAYS hurts, and it's really YOUR problem.

> I guess if you hate the U.S. gov't enough, anything said by anybody
who
> also hates the U.S. gov't becomes true, and everything said by the
> gov't becomes, necessarily, a lie. If they lied to you about pot
> because they want to sell whiskey, then therefore they must be lying
> about Saddam because they want to sell oil. If you don't know any
> Iraqis and they never lied to you, then they must be all nice folks.
> The SIMPLE explanation.

The reductem ad absurdem is yours, not mine. Pot was one obvious
example among thousands I could have used. Using the lies we've
already discussed in connection with current events would have been
redundant. My comments were made to indicate that I have no reliable
sources. I went to the Amnesty International sites and didn't find
what I was looking for. I consider them a reasonably reliable source.
That's why I asked for links that confirmed it. I *WANT* to say he's a
monster, so I'm not being a hypocrite when I say that he's as bad as
Bush. I know some of what Bush did, I need SPECIFICS about what Saddam
has done. That clear enough for you? I want BOTH of them to stand
trial for war crimes, and I want FACTS (not your squishy feeeeelings)
to support that opinion, or I'll have to abandon it as unsupportable.

Neither do I hate the government (Bush isn't the government), nor do
I consider the enemy of my enemy to be my friend. The enemy of my
enemy is usually just another violent idiot.

A liar is unreliable, so everything they say has to be
double-checked. That's what I'm doing. Not that you'd give a shit,
because it doesn't fit your knee-jerk hatred of me, but I've already
found reliable words and pictures by Kurds that convince me Saddam IS
a monster. It's wise to examine both the espoused agenda *and* where
the money goes in any situation. The Kurds have only ever (to my
knowledge) been trying to live - they're not after the oil, or
hegemony outside their own community, or anything else important to
anyone else. They use aid given them to support their rank and file,
and there don't seem to be any Kurdish warlords ruling with iron
fists. Until I see something to contradict that view, that's the view
I'll consider reliable. If anyone has evidence to the contrary, please
let me know, post links.

> The term for this is "knee-jerk," that is, a reflexive reaction,
mostly
> unconscious. Extremists of every kind do it. Even us pathetic
> endangered middle of the road extremists do it.

Your knee-jerk hatred of me is no still excuse for using the old
political dodge of misrepresenting my views, no matter what color
plastic box you attempt to confine EITHER of us to in classic grossly
over-simplified fashion.

> I'm not the biggest fan of the government myself, but every now and
> then, a word uttered in their official publications ALSO happens to
be
> true outside of their official publications. Perhaps it's by
accident,
> but it does happen.

It happens every time something is published or said by this
administration. Mixing fact and lie requires some truth be uttered in
every statement. Just a spoonful of sugar helps the bullshit go down.

> I do know some Iraqis, and I have even set foot outside of this
> country. (I have even lived outside of this country while living IN
> this country.) I scour alter.net every two or three days and I
listen
> to Rush every week or two. I read my mom's right wing journals and
my
> wife's left wing journals. I am bombarded DAILY with leftist email
from
> numerous lists and individuals, and I am lightly strafed with right
> wing mail from, well, fewer sources. Although I swore off the news
for
> a couple of years, May 1999 to September 11 2001, I now again pay
close
> attention to both leftist and rightist news, and also to the
> "mainstream" news.*

I read mid-right and mid-left nonsense just to see what they're
selling. Having worked for journalists, I know what a bullshit game
the big media is in this country. When I was a kid, over 200 companies
controlled the major media; today that number hovers around 20
companies. Corporate crime reporting stopped in the 80's, and has yet
to resume to any real degree in this country. Read the
Project:Censored lists for the last several years. Having seen
characters like Rush Limbaugh several times, and seeing that they were
basically always saying the same things, I don't feel obligated to
keep up with the extremeists on either side. International Answer is
as full of shit as any right wing group, and I don't read their crap
either. The so-called "mainstream news" is mostly owned by
multinational corporations, so it may be prevalent and dominant in the
field, but that hardly makes their motives or methods centrist,
moderate, or fair and reasonably unbiased.

I like the BBC and other British and yes, Canadian news sources,
because they're a good deal less co-opted by corporate interests.

> All have an obvious slant, and my self-appointed job is to sort it
all
> out and make up my fucking mind for my fucking self.

> The mind I made up this week says that we never should have been
> dragged into this in the first place, but we ourselves (the U.S.
that
> is) set the process in motion 30 years ago partially out of fear of
> Communism.

Earlier. Big Lie Theory started being formally used in the US in the
50's, during the McCarthy era, but there are deeper aspects. As a
child I thought that the reservation system must be based on Hitler's
concentration camps. Imagine my horror when I found out the reverse
was more likely. In press statements he made prior to the Olympics,
Hitler professed admiration for the way we (America) had dealt with
Native Americans. From there we can look back to the root of Big Lie
Theory in America. It's called The Doctrine of Manifest Destiny, and
has been used to commit acts of genocide against the native population
of this continent for over 400 years.

After WWII, we saw the import of members of the Nazi propaganda
machine to work for our government as anti-communisim agit-prop
authors and social engineers.

> We should have cleaned up the mess we made a long time ago,
> but hindsight is golden. It's going to be a lot worse now but, after
> considerable reviewing, I'm currently of a mind that we SHOULD
finish
> cleaning up the mess we made. In other words we should remove the
Baath
> Party from control of Iraq. The U.S.A. put them there and now we
have
> to get them out. I don't blame other nations for not wanting to
help.
> But I don't see them lining up to try to STOP us either.

One of the first things GW did was raid the presidential archive of
some of his father's writings and related material. There's no
question we made this mess, and no one has suffered for it as much as
the Kurds (unless it's the Iraqis themselves). My huge problem is, any
reasonable person who meant to use the UN correctly with a real UN
peacekeeping force could have removed Saddam, and the Iraqi people
*would* have greeted them with open arms. Our leadership is following
a manual that was written over 50 years ago, and it shows. No urban
population in history has ever been bombed into submission, but it was
in the manual. Bombed to death, sure. Hiroshima. Nagasaki. But never
submission. The authors of the manual never bothered to mention that
it didn't work on Londoners, and it hasn't *ever* worked on anyone
else.

> I also know that the people of the world have as short a memory as
> Americans do. That's a REAL fuckin' short memory. Proof of that
spews
> from this newsgroup hourly. So I am not particularly afraid of
> "America looking like a bully forever." Anybody with more guns and
> money than anybody else is always going to look like a bully whether
> they are bullies or not.

Are you afraid of us losing our position at the top of the food
chain? Are you afraid of the E.C. walking off with half our trade
partners? Are you afraid the current adminstration will reinstate the
draft and your son will be called? I am. Seriously, I fear for all
young americans, ESPECIALLY subgenii, including your kids. We need
good folk like your children HERE. ALIVE. Let Bush pay for his
father's sins; it's not something he has a right to risk anyone else
over.

> LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT. If you love it, kick its ass and get it to
clean
> up its act. Of course, you might have to clean up your OWN act
first.

LOVE IT OR *FIX* IT. The first step in seeking justice is to find the
truth. I can't find the truth unless I ask people I respect (at least
intellectually) to help me find the data, particularly when it's
buried under mountains of lies. That means I ask subgenii... make of
that what you will.

*****

IT'S THE STUPIDITY, STUPID!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: The History of Hussien (for shitcunt)
From: zosodada@aol.com (Zosodada)
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Date: Sun, Mar 30, 2003 9:22 PM
Message-ID: <20030330212232.08680.00000167@mb-fc.aol.com>

stang << You went to all this trouble -- for. . . >>

No, not really. I've heard the question asked quite a few times. It was good
practice for me, I haven't written a thing since 2001 until recently. Rusty
wrists.

stang <<The mind I made up this week says that we never should have been
dragged into this in the first place, but we ourselves (the U.S. that
is) set the process in motion 30 years ago partially out of fear of
Communism. >>

Right. Sponsoring Afgan rebels &ht.

<<We should have cleaned up the mess we made a long time ago,
but hindsight is golden. It's going to be a lot worse now but, after
considerable reviewing, I'm currently of a mind that we SHOULD finish
cleaning up the mess we made. In other words we should remove the Baath
Party from control of Iraq. The U.S.A. put them there and now we have
to get them out. I don't blame other nations for not wanting to help.
But I don't see them lining up to try to STOP us either. >>

Well, our stalwart pals in the UK, Italy, Spain, AU, &c. seem to want to help,
but the Kurdish genocides should have been cause enough for war. Milosevic's
bullshit was cause for war -- didn't hear a lot of complaint about that.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: The History of Hussien (for shitcunt)
From: nenslo <nenslo@yahooX.com>
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Date: Mon, Mar 31, 2003 3:16 AM
Message-ID: <3E87F96C.2F26AB1@yahooX.com>

talysman wrote:
>
> "Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgenius.com> writes:
>
> > In the actual words of Iceknife:
> >
> > "I've never seen any testimony by anyone reliable, or by a large
> > number of people, that Sadam Hussein is a monster. ... I'm not saying
> > it's not out there, just that I've never seen a trace
> > of it. ... There's no reliable journalists on the ground that aren't in
> > bed with the military. ..."
> > ....
> > "His regime certainly seems less repressive than almost any other in
> > the region."
> >
> > Those are Iceknife's own words. Take it from there.
>
>
> the thing about ICEKNIFE's post is that it mainly uses the concept
> of saddam-as-monster in the extreme sense. sure, if you're looking
> for *any* justification of anti-saddam propaganda at all, you are
> going to find that the bush administration is at least 10% truthful
> about saddam. but ICEKNIFE is (rightly or wrongly) insisting that,
> if you call some dictator a monster, there'd better be evidence of
> something like massive cannibalism or a Final Solution.

Iceknife is statements are a popular form of fallacious reasoning
which I would call "Argument from Ignorance" as an expansion on
"Argument Extension." "I haven't seen any proof of the most extreme
interpretation of my opponent's views. I'm not saying proof doesn't
exist, but its existence is very unlikely. Therefore the entire
argument is suspect." He also creates nebulous criteria for
acceptable evidence and classifies all existing sources as unreliable.
All in all, a masterfully incoherent statement. As it is written,
"You can't argue with THAT kind of logic."

Back to document index

Original file name: The History of Hussien (for shi - converted on Monday, 21 July 2003, 13:45