It's always so sad when a murderous butchering dictator gets misunderstood.
ROTFLMAO.......LOL....hahahahahahaha.... ahhhhhh, LOL.....those paper reporters, they are a hoot.
THIS IS TOO FUNNY!!!!!!
I'm remembering that song from the 1970's, "OH, LORD, PLEASE DON'T LET ME BE MISUNDERSTOOD!"
"In the months leading up to the Iraq war, Saddam Hussein did try to cooperate with United Nations inspectors"
Bull. He was just stringing them along. This was just the latest in a pattern of attempts to stall action by the UN.
I don't believe a single word the Times says on this subject.
The NYT.....Batboy Central...
FMCDH(BITS)
Gosh, even Hans Blix was complaining about Saddam's restrictions.
More NYTimes revisionism.
The New York Times is attempting to revise history... It isn't enough to just attack the President; they have to justify their attacks by making it look like history was different than it actually was. They need to make the Iraq war look like an unnecessary war. If they can’t do that, then in the end Bush was right to invade and all of their pathetic reporting turns out to be just a bunch of crap.
Poor guy. I mean, except for the gassings and the genocide and the torture and the mass executions and the government-sponsered rape programs, what did Saddam do that was so wrong?
OMG. Maybe he can be Hillary's running mate huh?
HeeHee!!these guys are a hoot!!!http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:b-Wp5EcKGaQJ:209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1000696/posts+NYT+stalin+misunderstood&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2&client=opera mash here for more!
I would say it's a classic.
You poke sand up a wildcat's butt, and when he turns on you in fury, you try to say, "I've quit.....let's call it off......I don't really want to fight...."
Good luck with that!
Yes he did indeed. He misunderstood because of the false sense of support he thought he had from all those "hire-a-mob" leftist nuts there were protesting the USA instead of the United Nations and Iraq before the war began. Instead of carrying signs saying "Open Up To The UN Inspectors".. there were signs that read "Bush, the Number One Terrorist".
They blame Bush for the War. As stupid as Saddam was... I have and always will blame the liberals for the Iraqi War. And deep down inside, I think they actually wanted it.
So the production of missiles in violation of U.N. mandated range limitations was Saddam's method of cooperating? Yeah, right.
Uh?
As I recall reading, Saddam did an eleventh-hour switcheroo, with our buddies the Russian's helping move the WMDs to Syria. Also remember the many delays in holding Saddam accountable by our chums in the U.N. Clearly, this is the polar opposite of trying "to cooperate".
However, my Freeper friends, rather than argue with the pitiful fiction in the NYT piece, let's look at the larger picture - - the objective of the NYT mendacity.
I suspect very strongly that the political officers at the NYT want further to weaken our President (and our country). By pretending that Saddam was trying to cooperate with the U.N., they may add another propaganda prop, but the big picture isn't Saddam, it's (and I can't think of a better word) subversion.
Tag Line Alpha
Democrats - - the party of blames, lies, accusations, and subversion. The once great party of Roosevelt now chooses Stalin.
.
The Slimes - a big player in the Culture of Treason.