[lit-ideas] Re: If you can't beat 'em ...

  • From: JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 17:58:47 EDT

From time to time I check out the Bushisms site to see what our leader is  up 
to.  I haven't looked at it since my old computer died, I broke a  contact, 
and I broke a foot, all in the space of a few weeks.  Today I  decided it was 
high time I found out what had been going on in my absence.
On Sept 6, 2006, in an interview with Katie Couric, George W. Bush  said:  
"You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to  the war on 
I have no words.
Julie Krueger

========Original  Message========     Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: If you can't beat 
'em ...  Date: 10/3/2006 4:47:18 P.M. Central Standard Time  From: 
_aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)   To: 
(mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)   Sent on:    
This isn't too much of a stretch from the plan  they invaded Iraq with. 
Woodward called it like a game of pickup basketball,  with the same or
higher level of violence than you're proposing, what with  Iraqi beaters and
the many millions of tons of bombs they dropped on the  population, killing
an awful lot of civilians along the way.  Likewise  we had/have our
contracts (fatwas) on all the al Qaeda leaders that we  grew.  Woodward says
that if it wasn't so tragic it would be straight  out of Saturday Night
Live.  The only thing they're missing is the  walruses.  What the heck.  No
walruses?  Flowers will do  instead.  Certainly armor and military equipment
was not on the  list.  Maybe that's where the snowblowers come in ...

>  [Original Message]
> From: Eric Yost  <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To:  <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 10/3/2006 1:56:38 PM
>  Subject: [lit-ideas] If you can't beat 'em ... 
> Maybe the best  response to bombers and Pope-mad plane 
> hijackers is not to (a)  intervene militarily or (b) isolate 
> them until modernity catches up  with them? Maybe the best 
> response is a quid pro quo?
>  We should start training martyrs. Certainly we have enough 
> heroin  addicts to train as martyrs in exchange for a fix. If 
> not we can use  robots.
> One suicide mission worth considering is piloting a 767  full 
> of snowblowers and walruses directly into the Kaaba in Mecca  
> during the Haj. Wait until it's really full, as the 9/11 
> guys  did, and then bang! (The snowblowers and walruses would 
> add exotic  debris to the scene.)
> Governors and local mayors should have the  ability to enact 
> their own fatwas against Muslim misbehavior. They  should 
> also be encouraged to seek out and use weapons of mass 
>  destruction. Get some priest to say it's okay, and you have 
> all the  religious justification you need.
> And of course we have a lot of  bombs over there. We should 
> use these indiscriminately on the general  populations. Just 
> spin a wheel of chance and hit the winner. Televise  it too.
> This is exactly the kind of behavior that should please  the 
> "moral equivalence" crowd. In fact let's go out of our way 
>  to establish that point. Following every terrorist incident, 
> we could  air-drop leaflets proclaiming, "That's right. We're 
> no better than you  are, just better armed."
> After a lot of jaw-dropping global  disgust and horror, many 
> would yearn for the gentle days of  Bush-Cheney.
> Well okay, maybe not ...
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To  change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest  on/off), visit  www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

To  change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest  on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: