Saddam Hussein Is Guilty

10:05 am EST November 5th, 2006 | News | 10 Comments

Great.

Can we go home now?

Topic:

Related Posts

«
»

10 Responses to “Saddam Hussein Is Guilty”

  1. Dugger says:
    November 6, 2006 at 8:19 am

    What about your fellow leftists? is the verdict ‘great’ for leftist Ramsay Clark?? Is the Victory great for the leftist “human shields”. C’mon now, show a little sensitivity to your fellow man (Bush haters).

  2. Nimrod Gently says:
    November 6, 2006 at 11:49 am

    Oh, God, shut up.

  3. LMMatthews says:
    November 6, 2006 at 11:58 am

    Yes, yes,yes rightwing nutjobs. It’s absolutely wonderful that we deposed a foul dictator and he’s now being sentenced to death, even though the reason why we invaded a sovereign nation still isn’t clear. No doubt he’s a bad guy and Irqis are much better off without him, but one question I can’t help but ask…..

    How is it that we can find the leader of a country in a hole under a farmhouse, but we can’t find the guy we’re supposed to be looking for in the first place?

    In short, that’s nice but WHERE IS OSAMA? Could we stay on task here please people?

  4. Dugger says:
    November 6, 2006 at 12:24 pm

    Hey Nimmer, does it hurt to remember left wingers like Democrat Ramsay Clark and human shields. How about leading Liberal intellectual Sean Penn. I bet he’s not happy with Saddam’s dirt nap prescription either.

  5. factcheck says:
    November 6, 2006 at 1:33 pm

    How about Osama? You know the one that killed 3,000 Americans that you don’t seem to care about?

  6. Dugger says:
    November 6, 2006 at 2:19 pm

    Well, fatcheck, if your concern were for huamnity in general, and it were one or the other, would it have been a better idea to get rid of Saddam or OBL? Hint: Saddam caused many, many more deaths, but maybe you have a better criterium.

    And if you think life is important, but you paln on apologizing to Pres Bush for his service to mankind – support him for the Nobel. Can we count on you? Becasue if he had gone after OBL, exclusively, then many more would be dead. You don’t want more dead, right?

  7. BD says:
    November 6, 2006 at 3:10 pm

    The attempts to make spin conservative gold out of this straw sentence are funny. There are entire seasons of Law & Order able to trot out more surprising verdicts than this one.

    What’s more suprising is Dugger’s sudden concern for all of humanity, much less the lives of Iraqis. I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure that it was Dugger who, not long ago, was claiming that the important thing in the entire mess is that at least Americans are safer. For him to suddenly shed crocodile tears over Iraqi civilians is a little chilling.

  8. Dugger says:
    November 6, 2006 at 3:54 pm

    Oh, I do think insofar as the analysis of the Presidient or of Rummy,etc., is concerned, American deaths are more important, but of course progressives have voiced more concern about total deaths and then I have merely shown that Bush has saved a lot more total lives by taking out Saddam. Choose your poison. Total deaths: Saddam was worse. US deaths”: less than any other ‘war’ by far.

    Three’s room for honet debate, but the criteria you guys set up, kills you every time. Same with the specious ‘lie’ argument.

  9. S says:
    November 7, 2006 at 10:32 am

    Dugger | Nov 6, 2006 3:54:08 PM
    “Three’s room for honet debate …”

    LoL … the stolen scotch is back!

  10. Duros62 says:
    November 7, 2006 at 1:02 pm

    but you plan on apologizing to Pres Bush for his service to mankind – support him for the Nobel

    You make it sound like Bush was sitting on the bench at Saddam’s trial.
    You know it was the Iraqis themselves that convicted him, right?

    Bush getting a Nobel, comedy gold, man.