Posted on 03/04/2005 6:59:45 AM PST by robowombat
Peter has been snorting alot more then powdered baby's milk.
Its convenient that all they mention was that he was "flashy" and "ruthless" but then vaguely hint that he was going to return Iraq to greatness through peaceful means.
God help us, he would've been worse than Saddam. Time to break out the videos of what he did to the athletes and common people of that poor country.
Sure Peter. What ever you say.............
Uday was just as bad as his old man.
When Bush wanted regime change, it was a bad thing;
And how did Baghdad gain this supposed access? Or was Arnett really a Fedayeen agent all along? Hmmm...
Or maybe worse. Uday thought Dad was going soft...
Whether this is true or not, I've always found it curious that the sons and father were in separate locations when cornered. Appears their "loyals" weren't so loyal after all.
Arnett should get a job working for Al-Jazeera or one of those other propaganda stations.
This Uday?
Sounds like we have an Iraqi 'Deep Throat' somewhere in Baghdad.
Bob Woodward must be proud.
Where's the BARF alert!
Geez!
First, I read a headline that Colorado College takes down DU and then I read this crap.
Maybe Uday told Michael Moore that he dreamt of a day where Iraqi kids would play with kites in the meadows.
FLASHBACKS -- This Iraqi man is receiving members of his family cut into pieces
and placed in six cotton bags.
These murders were approved by Annan and the UN for decades.
The actual tools used in Saddam's torturing chambers as approved by Annan and the UN for decades.
Baghdad - Iraqi Olympic Committee shows torture equipment
used by Uday before Iraq's liberation by America
In Baghdad, Iraq, an Iraqi Olympic Committee official
demonstrates a steel mask and other torture equipment at Al-Shaab Stadium, Saturday, July 24, 2004.
These torture devices were routinely used by Saddam Hussein's son, Uday,
to torture Olympic athletes whose performance failed to meet his expectations.
Only America stopped this torture. The mainstream media is silent.
Putz Arnett has no idea what he's talking about:
In that interview just days before Baghdad fell, he said the US war plan was failing. "Clearly, the American war planners misjudged the determination of the Iraqi forces," he said
Interesting that the Agence France-Presse article ends two sentences earlier than this one:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1514&u=/afp/iraqusudaycoup&printer=1
Uday and Qusay are eadday.
EVEN IF proven true that Uday was about to depose Saddam, it only serves to provide evidence that THERE WAS NO BENIGN FACTION which had the ability to change the regime in Iraq.
In what way, Mr Arnett, would America have been safer with this proven psycho at the helm of Iraq?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.