On 07 Jul 2003 02:16:39 GMT, jigsaw1695@aol.com (JIGSAW1695) wrote:

>Subject: Re: To Earl, John and Euro
>From: "Mr Q. Z. Diablo" satan@dodo.com.au 
>Date: 7/6/2003 8:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <Zb3Oa.261$Xx6.5600@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
>
>In article <db00711.0307060741.63d87770@posting.google.com>, tenwheels wrote:
>> "Euro" <vsd76@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:<15569788f8aa0670da898bbb44e45664@news.meganetnews.com>...
>>> "tenwheels" <danh@lexis-nexis.com>
>>> ??????:db00711.0307051347.17cb857c@posting.google.com...
>>> 
>>> > Mr. Q was suggesting a theocratic tyranny would be worse than Saddam's
>>> > secular tyranny.  Facts about analogous regimes are extremely
>>> > relevant.
>>> 
>>> Wrong. He envisaged that a theocratic tyranny would not necessarily be
>>> better than Hussein's secular tyranny,
>> 
>> Re-read his posting.  He specifically said a theocratic regime would
>> be worse than Saddam.
>
>...and I stand by that.  A secular dictator like Saddam targets (as he did)
>those who might oppose him.  A theocracy of the viciousness seen in Afghanistan
>might well be a great deal more capricious and equally destructive.  It might
>also represent a genuine threat to the West - something that Saddam was not.
>
>Mr Q. Z. D.
>===============================
>
>Are you denying that he was a threat to the Kuwaitie people? Are yuo denying
>that he was a threat to his people... particularly the minority Kurds? 
>
>Where do you think some of the support  for the terrorists who did 9-11 came
>from?


Afghanistan, you thick cunt.

w00f