Curveball

It’s curious that Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi aka “Curveball” – the loopy informant relied upon so heavily by the Bush administration to bolster their case for war against Iraq – has now suddenly reappeared in the news. For those of us who weren’t entirely comatose during the previous decade, the revelation that this unstable character was completely full of shit isn’t exactly news.

It is however highly amusing that he’s apparently been fired quite recently from several fast food joints in Germany because of his pathological lying. The man was deemed unfit to work at Mickey D’s, but his creative imagination helped to kill several hundred thousand innocent Iraqis. What a deeply strange and perverted world we inhabit.

15 Comments

Filed under George W. Bush, Iraq War

15 responses to “Curveball

  1. I’ll give you a chance to read my mind, Red. What topical snark do you suppose I’m tempted to venture about this pathetic, lying sack of shit?

  2. Might it have something to do with the recent media blitzes by Bush and Rumsfeld to promote their fairy tales? That would be my immediate guess, but you may have a more clever topical connection up your sleeve.

  3. No, it’s far less clever…and far more parochial. I wasn’t even thinking of the malarial return of Cheney/Rumsfeld.

    I was just thinking that the pathologically mendacious Curveball should expect an invitation to Cabinet real soon.

  4. Fred from BC

    Might it have something to do with the recent media blitzes by Bush and Rumsfeld to promote their fairy tales?

    Speaking of fairy tales…”several hundred thousand innocent Iraqis”? Really?

  5. What’s your figure, Fred?

    I’ve heard everything from a low of 100,000 to a over a million.

    Maybe I should have just said “a lot”…

    But back to my original question, please tell me what your forensic tally of the civilian dead in Iraq is.

  6. SF: I’m sure Rafid would blend right in with the mendacious bag of weasels that passes for the federal cabinet.

  7. Oh geez Red, there’s no such thing as an innocent Iraqi… Or that’s where I am assuming Fred was going.

  8. Roland

    Over 120,000 war dead have been identified and acknowledged by the Iraqi government installed by the USA after the invasion. Obviously, that figure represents the absolute minimum, especially seeing as that same Iraqi government is trying to pay pensions for over half a million war widows.

    Let’s not forget another 150,000 war amputees or severe burn victims who are considered unable to work.

    There are still, in round numbers, more than a million Iraqis living as refugees in Syria and Jordan. Another million in Iraq have been displaced from their pre-war homes.

    All this evil, thanks to Bush and Blair, the dear leaders of the “rational, secular, enlightened, democratic West.”

    I’ll never forget that Harper and Ignatieff both thought the invasion of Iraq was a good idea, too.

  9. Not to mention their support for the multi-billion dollar fiasco in Afghanistan…

  10. Fred from BC

    What’s your figure, Fred?

    I’ve heard everything from a low of 100,000 to a over a million.

    Maybe I should have just said “a lot”…

    Maybe you should have.

    Accepted numbers from reputable sources would put the number at roughly 98 to 110 thousand (Iraq Body Count, Associated Press, WikiLeaks, etc). 150,000 would include combatants, according to IBC…but nowhere near a MILLION, sorry. These numbers also don’t break down to specify how many have been killed so far by ‘insurgents’.

  11. Fred from BC

    All this evil, thanks to Bush and Blair, the dear leaders of the “rational, secular, enlightened, democratic West.”

    Evil? As in Saddam Hussein evil?

    Clearly I’ve stumbled into a far-left environment here where dogma and sloganeering are given more weight than facts and reason. Being a conservative (a real one, not a fake one like ‘Red Tory’ here), I’m just too inherently ‘evil’ for this place, I think….

  12. Fred from BC … ANOTHER uneducated moron who thinks he knows what “conservatism” is. The problem is, hehas sucked at the teat of US Culture for too long and is confused as to what such terms actually mean.

    Does he even know what “Classical liberalism” or neo-lilberalism is ?

    Does he understand & comprehend the foundations of conservatism – from Hooker to Churchill – as a reaction against the liberalism of the French Revolution, the Physiocrats, and the Mills ?

    Does he know anything of the eternal political divide – going back to antiquity – of the universalists & particularists ?

    Or is he all about the warmed-up neo-liberal pap that is Reaganism ? A pap that is long past its sell-by date.

  13. Fred — I never said “near a MILLION”… I said several hundred thousand. There is a significant difference, you know. Considering the various accounts being bandied around, I don’t think that was overstating the case. But hey, if you want to minimize the number of dead for your own self-serving reasons… well, knock yourself out.

  14. Roland

    Fred in BC,

    While I am indeed much more Red than Tory, nevertheless you don’t have to be a leftist to think that starting a war is an evil thing to do.

    The worst deeds of Saddam were the two wars he started, against Iran, and later Kuwait. The Iran-Iraq War claimed, by some estimates, nearly a million lives. The Kuwait War killed many thousands and set fires that took months to extinguish.

    GW Bush and the Americans who re-elected him in 2004 are, I am afraid, also quite deeply tainted by their choice of war. In a more just world, their country would have been hammered hard by comprehensive sanctions for what they did in 2003.

    I opposed the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 for the exact same reasons I opposed the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990. In both cases a larger and more powerful state invaded a smaller and weaker state, for entirely spurious reasons, resulting in enormous unnecessary suffering.

    I think that Saddam outscores, say, Tony Blair on the scale of evilness. Many other statesmen in history, of course, would score higher than both of them put together. We can debate the respective scores. But both Blair and Saddam score high enough to merit the adjective, “evil.”

    No one should hesitate to apply the word “evil” to Bush or Blair, even if it does feel awkward to describe our close ethnic and cultural kin in such fashion. But facts are facts.

  15. TofKW

    I opposed the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 for the exact same reasons I opposed the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990.In both cases a larger and more powerful state invaded a smaller and weaker state…

    I oppose it on much simpler grounds, both violated the only reason for the United Nations’ existence.

    People forget what it’s there for. The UN wasn’t created to promote democracy, or combat diseases, or some Utopian ideals. There wasn’t much all the nations could agree on post-1945, but they knew these unilateral invasions needed to end to prevent future world wars.

    I oppose the US invasions of Iraq and NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia just the same (a civil war is no reason to attack a sovereign country and violate the UN’s only real rule) regardless of what Milosevic was doing. And yes I consider Clinton as much a war criminal as Bush Jr.

    If there is a Hell, Saddam and Milosevic are in a special area I’m sure (both for killing their own citizens), but Clinton and W will be going there too.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s