October 19, 2003
I really, really hate Doonesbury.
I really, really hate Doonesbury. Why can't they at least put it in the political section, where it belongs? Take today's strip, for example:
"Question: Were there any terrorists in Saddam's Iraq?"
"Could be... Alqueda had branch offices in scores of countries including the US!"
That's right. But notice how he says terrorists=Al Qaeda. There are other terrorist groups, believe it or not.
"But read on!"
"The following rant is a public service message to an incredible 69% of Americans."
Better be careful; shouting at 69% of Americans as though they are idiots will only further damage your readership base.
"THERE IS no EVIDENCE OF A LINK BETWEEN SADDAM HUSSEIN AND 9/11! NONE! EVEN THE WHITE HOUSE ADMITS IT!"
BTW, if the picture doesn't load: This frame takes up most of the strip. First: Saddam did have links to Al Qaeda. He supplied them with money and probably weapons/supplies/loyal extremist followers. Therefore: Saddam--Al Qaeda--9/11. That's a link between Hussein and 9/11.
Zonker sez: "Don't take this clown's word for it! Read up on it!"
See what I said about offending your readership. Please do read up on it. Try looking at more than one source too: IndyMedia isn't the best source for unbiased commentary.
Duke's Bonus Fact: "15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi, not Iraqi!"
Oh, so 4 were Iraqi? Wouldn't that be (cue dramatic music: Dunh-Dunh-DUUHHHH) another link?
Bonus Warning: (president as an asterisk in a roman helmet): I'll be continuing to link them through innuendo
Hmm, let's see. At the begining of 2002, President Bush gave a State of the Union Speech. In it he said:
Our nation will continue to be steadfast and patient and persistent in the pursuit of two great objectives. First, we will shut down terrorist camps, disrupt terrorist plans, and bring terrorists to justice. And, second, we must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world. (Applause.)
...
Our second goal is to prevent regimes that sponsor terror from threatening America or our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction. Some of these regimes have been pretty quiet since September the 11th. But we know their true nature. North Korea is a regime arming with missiles and weapons of mass destruction, while starving its citizens.
Iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror, while an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom.
Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens -- leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections -- then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world.
States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world.
I'd hardly call that innuendo. He clearly stated why we were going in. Now Iraq is no threat, and possibly an ally if we handle its people well. I know you hate to see your political enemy doing well, but that 69% of Americans you're talking to actually like victory.
Even (especially) when it comes at a cost to the liberal agenda.
Posted by Blog Jones at October 19, 2003 02:12 PM