Al Qaeda's gonna come an' kill yore children
An' ah'm th' Protecterer.
Q: Mr. President, after the mistakes that have been made in this war, when you do as you did yesterday, where you raised two-year-old intelligence, talking about the threat posed by al Qaeda, it's met with increasing skepticism. The majority in the public, a growing number of Republicans, appear not to trust you any longer to be able to carry out this policy successfully. Can you explain why you believe you're still a credible messenger on the war?
DOOFUS McRETARD: I'm credible because I read the intelligence, David - ah'm th' Intellegence-readin' guy - and make it abundantly clear in plain terms that if we let up, we'll be attacked. And I firmly believe that... It's better to fight them there than here. And this concept about, well, maybe let's just kind of just leave them alone and maybe they'll be all right is naive. These people attacked us before we were in Iraq. They viciously attacked us before we were in Iraq, and they've been attacking ever since. They are a threat to your children, David.
Q: Mr. President, yesterday you discussed Osama bin Laden's plans to turn Iraq into a terrorist sanctuary. What do you think your own reaction would have been five years ago had you been told that towards the end of your term he would still be at large with that kind of capability, from Iraq, no less, and why -- can you tell the American people -- is he still on the run? Why is he so hard to catch? Please state your answer in the form of a complete run-around, you imbecilic twat.
PREZNIT MORON: I would say that five years ago, like I said, we're going to pursue him, and we are pursuing him. And he's hiding. My point is, is that -- I was making the point, Jim, as I'm sure you recognized, that if we leave, they follow us. And it's a danger to the American people. It's a danger to your children, Jim.
Q: Yo. Moments ago you said that al Qaeda attacked us before we were in Iraq. Since then Iraq has become much less stable; al Qaeda has used it as a recruiting tool, apparently with some success. So what would you say to those who would argue that what we've done in Iraq has simply enhanced al Qaeda and made the situation worse?
CRANKY McCRANKERPANTS: Oh, so, in other words, the option would have been just let Saddam Hussein stay there? Your question is, should we not have left Saddam Hussein in power? And the answer is, absolutely not. Saddam Hussein was an enemy of the United States. He'd attacked his neighbors. He was paying Palestinian suicide bombers. He would have been -- if he were to defy -- and by the way, cheating on the U.N. oil for sanctions program -- oil-for-food program... And he wanted to kill your children. So see, no. Phthththththth.
DOOFUS McRETARD: I'm credible because I read the intelligence, David - ah'm th' Intellegence-readin' guy - and make it abundantly clear in plain terms that if we let up, we'll be attacked. And I firmly believe that... It's better to fight them there than here. And this concept about, well, maybe let's just kind of just leave them alone and maybe they'll be all right is naive. These people attacked us before we were in Iraq. They viciously attacked us before we were in Iraq, and they've been attacking ever since. They are a threat to your children, David.
Q: Mr. President, yesterday you discussed Osama bin Laden's plans to turn Iraq into a terrorist sanctuary. What do you think your own reaction would have been five years ago had you been told that towards the end of your term he would still be at large with that kind of capability, from Iraq, no less, and why -- can you tell the American people -- is he still on the run? Why is he so hard to catch? Please state your answer in the form of a complete run-around, you imbecilic twat.
PREZNIT MORON: I would say that five years ago, like I said, we're going to pursue him, and we are pursuing him. And he's hiding. My point is, is that -- I was making the point, Jim, as I'm sure you recognized, that if we leave, they follow us. And it's a danger to the American people. It's a danger to your children, Jim.
Q: Yo. Moments ago you said that al Qaeda attacked us before we were in Iraq. Since then Iraq has become much less stable; al Qaeda has used it as a recruiting tool, apparently with some success. So what would you say to those who would argue that what we've done in Iraq has simply enhanced al Qaeda and made the situation worse?
CRANKY McCRANKERPANTS: Oh, so, in other words, the option would have been just let Saddam Hussein stay there? Your question is, should we not have left Saddam Hussein in power? And the answer is, absolutely not. Saddam Hussein was an enemy of the United States. He'd attacked his neighbors. He was paying Palestinian suicide bombers. He would have been -- if he were to defy -- and by the way, cheating on the U.N. oil for sanctions program -- oil-for-food program... And he wanted to kill your children. So see, no. Phthththththth.
No comments:
Post a Comment