"Non-Mexican illegal aliens a U.S. security headache," from Reuters, with thanks to EPG:
WASHINGTON – Tens of thousands of people from countries other than Mexico illegally crossed the Mexican border into the United States last year, creating a growing security headache for U.S. authorities.Mexicans caught by U.S. border patrols trying to enter the country illegally are usually immediately returned to their native land.
But Mexico accepts only Mexicans, so any non-Mexicans are checked against government watch lists as a potential security or criminal threat. If their names do not appear, many are released on their own recognizance and told to appear at a deportation hearing often months in the future. The majority fail to show up for the hearing and are never seen again."The fear is of al Qaeda people sneaking across the Mexican border because it's become so much harder for them to get into the country by other means," said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, referring to the organization that carried out the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States. He noted that it took only 19 people to hijack the planes which destroyed the World Trade Center, damaged the Pentagon and killed almost 3,000 people.
U.S. authorities have since vastly tightened visa scrutiny and airport checks, especially for people seeking to enter the United States from the Middle East.
But law enforcement agents across the southwest border are alarmed that the United States is releasing thousands of non-Mexicans, said Rep. Solomon Ortiz, a Texas Democrat.
"Those released include individuals from nations the U.S. defines as state sponsors of potential terrorism or from those nations who have produced a large number of al Qaeda militants," he said. Experts believe that about 7,000 people who were not from Central America or Mexico were detained on the U.S.-Mexican border last year. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, an agency of the Department of Homeland Security, declined to give a breakdown of where all detainees were from.
All OT, All Jihad Related, All The Time!
(Yes! I have decided it is best to ignore defeatist-pessimists. They are welcome to post links from the Opposing viewpoint)
Campus Jihad (Notre Dame. That’s disappointing)
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=16936
Now I think everyone here can agree with these:
Why islamists hate us:
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=16914
Arab silence on Darfur
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=16939
The alternatives to the War on Terror:
http://techcentralstation.com/020805F.html
http://techcentralstation.com/020805C.html
http://techcentralstation.com/020805E.html
http://techcentralstation.com/020805D.html
And I thought Canada's rules were lax!
I think the U.S. in this case should copy Australia and detain such people until they are removed or proven to be legitimate refugees who are not a security risk.
If Mexico only accepts mexicans, how did these pukes get into Mexico in the first place?
If they come in here from Mexico, then that's how they should be sent back.....What a load of trash.
WTF?
Tens of thousands of people from countries other than Mexico illegally crossed the Mexican border into the United States last year, creating a growing security headache for U.S. authorities.
Yet we have 300 BILLION dollars to squander in Iraq?
Experts believe that about 7,000 people who were not from Central America or Mexico were detained on the U.S.-Mexican border last year.
The article states that 7 THOUSAND "Other Than Mexican"s have been detained at the border, and that is only last year? I think it is broadly assumed by the authorities that they catch only one-in-ten. That means that SIXTY-thousand made it through. And that's just last year. 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004.... a quarter million? Maybe they aren't all jihadis, but they could have been. Even if only 10% of them are jihadis, that means that there are 25 THOUSAND of them here.
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, an agency of the Department of Homeland Security, declined to give a breakdown of where all detainees were from.
I guess the GOPers figure that it's none of our damn business. I wonder why? Maybe "Judicial Watch" will get right on that.
Gary, "IF" the shit hits the fan, are you going to blame it on the liberals "in charge" in DC or the liberals "in charge" in Texas?
Gary I applaud you for refraining from bashing liberals today on your OT c&ps. Of special interest is the Arab Silence on Darfur. Remember, don't let the media get away with only citing the paltry-by-comparison hundred-or-so-thousand black African non-Muslims killed by white Arabian Muslims since the,(ahem!) "Violence began in Darfur last year". The REAL number to throw back at them is that TWO MILLION have been killed since 1990. (And of special interest to the "free palestine" crowd, less than 10,000 have been killed in Israel and "palestine" in the same interim.)
All in all, Gary, I must say that I can always get the truth about Islam at frontpagemag.com. I have been reading David Horowitz' essays on Islam and jihad for years. But really Gary, don't you think we all know about frontpage, nationalreview, and techcentral already?
The "enemy of my enemy is my friend" b.s. (the adage is attributed to Arabs, by the way) only goes so far. For instance, the KKK hate the Nation of Islam and vice-versa; rational people should hate them both.
David Horowitz has my support when it comes to Islam, Zionism, etc. but he can hang it up when it comes to abortion, gay marriage, etc.
BTW, concerning a recent post about Mike Moore.
HE made a movie that criticized Saudi Arabia. HE criticized Suadi Arabia in an interview. (I foget with whom. The interviewer said Saddam did support terrorism; he gave money to the families of suicide bombers in Israel. Moore said that Saudi Arabia does that more.)
He was critical of the Saudis in his Farhenheit 9-11, and brought up many disturbing facts about the coziness of the Bush family and the House of Saud.
Meanwhile Shoah Revisionist© Mel Gibson makes a snuff flick based on a twisted dream by a 19-century anti-semitic nun, and your side makes him into some kind of saint? Spare me.
Oh sure, F9-11 made the Bush cult of personality GOPers angry. But it also made the Saudis angry. And I think we all know who is funding jihadi terrorists all over the world, don't we?
The "enemy of my enemy" can also be my enemy.
WTF?
Tens of thousands of people from countries other than Mexico illegally crossed the Mexican border into the United States last year, creating a growing security headache for U.S. authorities.
Yet we have 300 BILLION dollars to squander in Iraq?
Experts believe that about 7,000 people who were not from Central America or Mexico were detained on the U.S.-Mexican border last year.
The article states that 7 THOUSAND "Other Than Mexican"s have been detained at the border, and that is only last year? I think it is broadly assumed by the authorities that they catch only one-in-ten. That means that SIXTY-thousand made it through. And that's just last year. 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004.... a quarter million? Maybe they aren't all jihadis, but they could have been. Even if only 10% of them are jihadis, that means that there are 25 THOUSAND of them here.
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, an agency of the Department of Homeland Security, declined to give a breakdown of where all detainees were from.
I guess the GOPers figure that it's none of our damn business. I wonder why? Maybe "Judicial Watch" will get right on that.
Gary, "IF" the shit hits the fan, are you going to blame it on the liberals "in charge" in DC or the liberals "in charge" in Texas?
Gary I applaud you for refraining from bashing liberals today on your OT c&ps. Of special interest is the Arab Silence on Darfur. Remember, don't let the media get away with only citing the paltry-by-comparison hundred-or-so-thousand black African non-Muslims killed by white Arabian Muslims since the,(ahem!) "Violence began in Darfur last year". The REAL number to throw back at them is that TWO MILLION have been killed since 1990. (And of special interest to the "free palestine" crowd, less than 10,000 have been killed in Israel and "palestine" in the same interim.)
All in all, Gary, I must say that I can always get the truth about Islam at frontpagemag.com. I have been reading David Horowitz' essays on Islam and jihad for years. But really Gary, don't you think we all know about frontpage, nationalreview, and techcentral already?
The "enemy of my enemy is my friend" b.s. (the adage is attributed to Arabs, by the way) only goes so far. For instance, the KKK hate the Nation of Islam and vice-versa; rational people should hate them both.
David Horowitz has my support when it comes to Islam, Zionism, etc. but he can hang it up when it comes to abortion, gay marriage, etc.
BTW, concerning a recent post about Mike Moore.
HE made a movie that criticized Saudi Arabia. HE criticized Suadi Arabia in an interview. (I foget with whom. The interviewer said Saddam did support terrorism; he gave money to the families of suicide bombers in Israel. Moore said that Saudi Arabia does that more.)
He was critical of the Saudis in his Farhenheit 9-11, and brought up many disturbing facts about the coziness of the Bush family and the House of Saud.
Meanwhile Shoah Revisionist© Mel Gibson makes a snuff flick based on a twisted dream by a 19-century anti-semitic nun, and your side makes him into some kind of saint? Spare me.
Oh sure, F9-11 made the Bush cult of personality GOPers angry. But it also made the Saudis angry. And I think we all know who is funding jihadi terrorists all over the world, don't we?
The "enemy of my enemy" can also be my enemy.
Sorry about the double post post.
This is the dirty little secret. The INS/Border Patrol is too slovenly and disorganized to deport all these people because it has to be done via airplane. Lots of flights would have to lined up along with proper security and other logistical hassles. Illegal alien Mexicans are simply bussed back to Mexico, which is easy as pie.
This could all be taken care of by establishing a tent city detention center out in the desert with a landing strip for airplanes. Make it the way sheriff Joe Arpaio makes his (photos)
kj~ Just as it was one person who nailed the Millenium Bomber, it could well be One person who screws up and something nasty gets thru. Or a computer error, or... (Remember 'Failsafe'? New York gets nuked because a bit of paper prevented a message from getting to the right people?)
As to FrontPage and these other sites: well of course many readers here probably go to them also, but if the links (related to the theme here, or at least I try to be sure of that) are handy right here... However if it is desired by many I will let it go.
A terrorist attack that originates from the Mexican border will be a devastating for Bush - and a dream come true for Dem's.
Please note I am only speaking in a political sense and not disregarding the pain of those effected by any attack...
"The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, an agency of the Department of Homeland 'Security'"
"Security?"
What a joke! Not funny though. No one's laughing.
There are several alternatives that come to mind in place of "catch and release." Only there are people getting paid to think deeply and come up with them.
What's-his-name's budget should maybe take a little from building up the infrastructure in his pet project nation and concentrate on hiring and paying the salary of people creative enough to come up with these alternatives.
Oh sure, F9-11 made the Bush cult of personality GOPers angry. But it also made the Saudis angry. And I think we all know who is funding jihadi terrorists all over the world, don't we?
The "enemy of my enemy" can also be my enemy.
Posted by: kj at February 8, 2005 10:47 AM
Correct answer: Yes, it is in two parts
1. The Saudi Arabian Government
2. The Mullahs in Iran
The Saudis must be put down, but who's going to do it? A damn Judge here just threw out a civil lawsuit against them over 9/11 because they're a foreign Government.
Problems for GOP and Dems both:
Saudi Arabia
CAIR
The Mexican Border
CAIR
Iran
CAIR
Syria
CAIR
American College Professors
CAIR
kj-
Tell me about all the great things Clinton did in the Nineties to deal with the Saudis and bin Laden? Was it not Clinton who had him signed, sealed and delivered from Omar al-Bashir but blew off taking him up on the offer?
Save your repetitive tripe for WhineOn.org - the fact of the matter is - and Moore, of course, omits this - is that ALL our presidents have been slack with the Saudis and their Wahhabi henchmen, Republican and Democrat alike.
What is amazing about you is that you bark about Bush not doing anything about the Saudis, but when he does do something about it, you piss and moan about "squandering" resources. I thought you were perceptive enough to understand that the invasion of Iraq was meant to deal not only with Iraq, but also Saudi Arabia and Iran (have you bothered to read about the historical relationship between the Shi'a and Wahhabis?).
So which way do you want it? Do something or not? You can't have it both ways.
Gary:
PLEASE keep posting the links. I believe that a few people who saw the previous discussion on an old thread asked that you continue also. Please don't allow yourself to be censored unless Spencer himself asks you to stop.
You might also want to forward a few of the articles to co-jet.
OT I know but as this is the latest thread on JW I thought I'd put this here hoping that both Robert and a majority of JW regulars would see this (and perhaps offer their thoughts). JW and DW have been almost daily reading matter for me over the last year or so. In that time I've alerted many friends to both sites and to the threat from islam in general. Some refuse to see any danger from islam , an equal number were concerned enough to start their own investigations into islam and the jihad and are, in turn, trying to spread warnings to their friends. The majority however, agreed there was a serious problem but confessed to being "too busy" or feeling "too powerless" to do anything about it. I spoke to three of those friends last night, got them to view JW's latest postings and asked for their opinions. Now, this may or may not be informative of wider public opinion, but here it is anyway.
All of them expressed profound unease at all the developments reported on JW and all three felt the same way, which can be summed up as follows ..
1)"If our police, media and heads of states refuse to deal with the problem of islam how can we ever fight it ?"
2) "If the muslims are breeding us off the planet and if even India is slowly becoming a muslim majority then surely the cause is already lost. How can you stop a tidal wave of demographics ?
3)" The news is so gloomy on almost all fronts that it seems there is no light whatsoever at the end of the tunnel"
4)"Much as we admire JW, isn't it merely documenting the end of the non-islamic world ?"
5)" We can't keep depressing ourselves by visiting JW ,
it makes us too angry and frustrated. Life's too short , let's just hope the Jihad won't effect us or our kids too badly".
Now although I disagree with most of what they said - I am an eternal optimist - if they are any reflection of the wider world, then maybe there might be some way that Robert or Hugh could maybe give us a monthly update on positive developments in the struggle against islam. I read somewhere that Saudi preachers are worried because tens of thousands of muslims are leaving islam each month in Africa , is this true ? I also read that 200,000 muslims in the Uk are now apostates - is that true ? Maybe some kind of overview on how the jihad is being resisted might restore my friends flagging spirits ? Does any of this make sense ?
LOVE LIFE - HATE ISLAM !!!
Mr. Spencer, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Warraq:
Here is a letter from an ex-Muslim that was posted by a writer for Chronwatch in an article at this link:
http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=12907&catcode=13
This letter is so powerful that I think you should run it as a separate thread. Having read the testimonies of dozens of Muslim apostates now, the letter in my opinion has the ring of truth about it:
Warning
I was born and raised as Muslim. My whole family is still Muslim. I know every genetic code of Muslim. I know Islamic brain. I live and breath with them. I am an insider. I left Islam when I understood that Islam is a sick and evil religion. Following are the Islamic message to the West.
To the infidels of the West:
Constitution for the new Islamic Republic of EU and USA is under construction.
We will fight the infidel to death.
Meanwhile American laws will protect us.
Democrats and Leftist will support us.
UNO will legitimize us.
CAIR will incubate us.
ACLU will empower us.
Western Universities will educate us.
Mosques will shelter us
OPEC will finance us
Hollywood will love us.
Koffi Annan will pass politically correct sympathetic statement for Jihadists.
Our children will immigrate from Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Indonesia and even from India to the US and to the other Western countries. They will go to the West for education in full scholarship. America is paying and will continue to pay for our children’s educations and their upbringing in state funded Islamic schools.
We will use your welfare system. Our children will also send money home while they are preparing for Jihad.
We will take the advantage of American kindness, gullibility, and compassion. When time comes, we will stab them in the back. We will say one thing on the camera and teach another thing to our children at home. We will give subliminal messages to our children to uphold Islam at any cost. Our children in America will always care more about Islamic Country’s interest than US interest.
We will teach our children Islamic supremacy from the very childhood. We will teach them not to compromise with Infidel. Once we do that from the very early age our children won’t hesitate to be martyr. We will take over the Europe first and then US will be the next. We already have a solid ground in the UK, Holland, Sweden, Spain, Italy, Germany, and now in the US.
Our children will marry Caucasian in Europe and in America. We will mixed with intricate fabric of the Western society but still will remember to Jihad when time comes. Who are we?
We are the “sleeper cells”.
We will raise our children to be loyal to Islam and Mohammad only. Everything else is secondary.
At the time of the real fight we will hold our own children as our armor. When American or Israeli troops shoot at us the world will be watching. Imagine,… Imagine the news in the world “Death of Muslim babies by infidels”.
We know CNN, ABC, CBS are broadcasting live. Al-Jazeera will pour gasoline on the fire. The news will spread like wildfire. “Americans killed 6 babies, 10 babies”. “Jews killed two women”,
Keep your Nukes in your curio cabinets. Keep your aircraft carrier or hightech weaponery in the showcase. You can't use them against us because of your own higher moral standard. We will take the advantage of your higher moral standard and use it against you. We won’t hesitate to use our children as suicide bomber against you.
Visualize the news flash all over the world, …Moslem mother is sobbing, ….crying. ….Her babies are killed by Jews and Americans, the whole world is watching live. Hundreds of millions of Muslims all around the world are boiling. They will march through Europe. We will use our women to produce more babies who will in turn be used as armor/shield. Our babies are the gift from Allah for Jihad.
West manufactures their tanks in the factory. We will manufacture our military force by natural means, by producing more babies. That is the way it is cheaper.
You infidels at this site cannot defeat us. We are 1.2 billion. We will double again. Do you have enough bullets to kill us?
On the camera:
We will always say, “Islam is the religion of Peace.”
We will say, “Jihad is actually inner Jihad.”
Moderate Muslim will say there is no link between Islam and Terrorism and the West will believe it because the West is so gullible.
Moderate Muslim all over the world will incubate Jihadist by their talk by defending Islam.
Using Western Legal system we will assert our Sharia Laws, slowly but surely.
We will increase in number. We will double again.
You will be impressed when you meet a moderate Muslim personally. As your next-door neighbor, coworker, student, teacher, engineer, professionals you may even like us. You will find us well mannered, polite, humble that will make you say, “wow, Muslims are good and peaceful people”, But, we will stab you in your back when you are sleeping as we did on 911.
There will be more 911 in Europe and in America. We will say, “We do not support terrorism but America got what it deserved.”
Muslims, CAIR, ISNA, MPAC and other international Islamic Organization will unite. We will partner with Leftist, ACLU, with Koffi Annan, and the UN, and if we have to then even with France. Fasten your seatbelt. The war of civilizations has just begun.
We will recite Quran and say Allah-Hu-Akbar before beheading infidels, as we have been doing it. We will video tape those and send it to all infidels to watch. They will surrender - ISLAM means surrender.
We will use your own values of kindness against you.
You are destined to loose.
Must be very depressing for you. Isn’t it?
Allah-Hu-Akbar
as we say just before beheading.
21st Century Islamic Warfare
Let's see the effectiveness of Islamic warfare.
Muslims Vs. the West.
THE RULE HAS CHANGED. There is new game in town.
Bill Clinton ordered 50 Tomahawks Cruise missiles costing $100,000,000 each to destroy $50 mud houses that belonged to Osama's family. What a stupidity? What a poor ROI (Return On Investment)
In return Osama's attack on the US.
Cost: 19 martyrs and less than $500,000.
Cost to the West: over 3,000 dead.
At least $1,000,000,000,000 (one trillion) dollars economical loss in one year. This includes the ripple effect.
Osama's ROI with respect to: life = 3,000/19 = 158 fold.
Dollar = $1 tr./500K = 2,000,000 fold
That is modern warfare. The West will loose.
Allah-Hu-Akbar.
Islam will rule the world. There is nothing you can do. Even if the per capita GDP of the world drops to half of its present level as a consequence of Islamic laws in place all over the world but still Islam will rule the word.
From your point of view we bring to the world to the dark ages, so be it. But still Islam wins, West looses.
Are you sure you want to play this game?
Jihad, ..Jihad...Jeeehaaad...
You are destined to loose.
Allah-hu-Akbar
SOTT
[Sight of the Truth]
Saudi Arabia's $100 billion investment over the last 3 decades on over 60 thousands Madrassas and school all over the Islamic world is finally paying off. While the West was busy inventing medicine, increasing life expectancy, elevating human suffering, decoding human gene to find cure for Cancer, heart disease etc, launching space shuttle, inventing internet, working on new laws/theory for human rights, developing better economical models for a more prosperous world, while ACLU was gaining control over common sense, while American ingenuity was benefiting the rest of the world, we Muslims were busy producing over 200 million out of 1.4 billion, Walking, Talking, Non-Thinking, West-Hating, Pre-Programmed, Suicidal, Parasitic, Terrorist Robots. You can't win. The Genie is out of the bottle.
We will use American’s kindness, fairness, compassion, freedom of speech and non-discriminatory policy against them. We will stab them in the back.
What are you going to do? You are doomed.
SOTT
[Sight of the Truth]
Tim--ex-Muslim
Son of Albion-
Hasn't the world always been largely composed of apathetic or "otherwise preoccupied" people? the important matters are usually left to the minority of people who care to do something about them, the rest get hauled along for the ride.
It is therefore unnecessary and unrealistic to expect the majority of people to respond to the threats we discuss here - what is necessary is informing and motivating the minority of people who both care and are willing and able to do something about it.
I'm not pessimistic about our prospects, either. I think that is born largely out of ignorance and confusion. People have a tendency to fear what they don't understand.
Mike, I completely agree. I believe we are in this struggle for the long haul but we will win. If my grand-children can grow up in a world where "jihad" is as outdated as bear-baiting then I will be happy. Having said that the three friends I quoted aren't especially apathetic , I just think the sheer weight of "bad news" has had the effect of grinding them down. I think during any war the majority of people need to at least think they are on the winning side. That although the going will be tough there will be final victory. During WW2 although the first two years were a series of defeats for the British there was always some morale-boosting news for people to cling to. Maybe that's what my friends and others like them need, a bit of morale boosting now and then. I think they know what is at stake but if everything they read seems (to them) "negative" then their enthusiasm to fight back against islam is dampened down.
Admiral-
That looks mighty familiar, and even if it isn't, we've seen that kind of talk before.
I bet Peleyo, Charles Martel and Jan Sobieski heard it as well...
Son of Albion-
I agree these times have a resemblance to the early years of WWII. Our adversary got a jump on us, knocked us on our heels, and we've been slow to react. However, we have begun to react, and inevitably we will prevail.
One of the reasons I believe we will prevail is that our enemy is arrogant. He's not as smart or as strong as he thinks he is. Let him think that, it will only hasten his demise.
Its way past due but all Mosques, Islamic Schools and Organizations in the US should be shut down with all executives of Islam returned to Saudi Arabia where they can practice their violence in a society that embraces their philosophy.
Just as Saudi Arabia exports terror we should export All Muslims. They are part of a Murderous CULT just like Charles Manson's of NO redeeming value what's so ever.
You can never ever trust a CULT member.
A terrorist attack that originates from the Mexican border will be a devastating for Bush - and a dream come true for Dem's.
God knows, the Reps would nevvvvver, EVER use a tragedy to further their political agenda.
Problems for GOP and Dems both:
Saudi Arabia
James Baker
George Herbert Walker Bush
Henry Kissinger
Grover Norquist
Saudi-American business ties
American college professors (funded by Saudis and their by-proxy "Middle Eastern Studies" department endowments.)
*********************************************
Mr. Spencer, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Warraq:
Here is a letter from an ex-Muslim that was posted by a writer for Chronwatch in an article at this link:
That's an old-ass hoax sent out to denigrate the liberals, of course. Like the "Hitlery snubs Gold Star Mothers" hoax.
Keep your Nukes in your curio cabinets.
Shyeah right. Tell that to Hirohito. Just be glad that the Twin Towers weren’t actually knocked over, like Bin Laden intended. If 50K Americans had been killed that day, there would have been a draft started that week. We could muster a twenty-MILLION man army in one year. You’d better HOPE we use the nukes instead. That’s a quick, obliterating death. If you don’t think so, read up on the history of Dresden. We’ll the same thing to Mecca if you push too hard. You’re going to find out the hard way.
Democrats and Leftist will support us.
Like James Baker preventing the 9-11 widows and orphans from suing the ass off Saudi Arabia?
ACLU will empower us.
The ACLU has one client: the US Constitution. That's why they support the KKK, NAMBLA, the NRA, Judicial Watch, NOW, and Rush Limbaugh.
Western Universities will educate us.
And everyone else that can pay the tuition.
Hollywood will love us.
Wait, I thought that "the Jews that control Hollywood" hated Muslims? That kind of doesn't make sense... it's almost as if this letter from "a former Muslim" is just something meant to piss the reds off...
Koffi Annan will pass politically correct sympathetic statement for Jihadists.
Because he, like the rest of the world, wants his piece of that sweet Saudi petrodollar pie.
We will partner with Leftist, ACLU, with Koffi Annan, and the UN, and if we have to then even with France.
But I thought the jihadis loooved France?
Bill Clinton ordered 50 Tomahawks Cruise missiles costing $100,000,000 each to destroy $50 mud houses that belonged to Osama's family. What a stupidity? What a poor ROI (Return On Investment)
Yeah, and he missed Bin Laden himself at his terrorist training camp by a couple of hours. We probably could have killed Bin Laden, but the Moonie-owned, right-wing Washington Times leaked to the whole world that our intelligence knew Bin Laden communicated with a satellite phone. Once Bin Laden knew that we knew that, he stopped using it, because Russia had just sent a major Chechen jihadi to Allah by homing a missile in on his satellite phone signal. But once the GOP-dominated media tipped Bin Laden off, his trail went cold. And the rest is… history. Meanwhile the right-wing media echochamber whined incessantly about Clinton “wagging the dog”. So, when Clinton did try to kill Bin Laden, he was wagging the dog and needed to knock it off. I know, I know. He was interested in fighting terror using “judicial means” instead of military means. That’s why all those Tomahawk missiles had only subpoenas in them, right?
What are you going to do? You are doomed.
When you and your inbred fellow jihadists cross the border into Israel, I’ll see you there. I’ll be the one with the M-60 in my hand and the yellow triangle sewn onto my breast pocket.
*******************************************
Tell me about all the great things Clinton did in the Nineties to deal with the Saudis and bin Laden?
Let’s see… he tried to get better fuel efficiency in cars so we could stop sending them so much money. He left our military bases there. He bombed the hell out of an Alqaeda-owned factory in the Sudan. He bombed the hell out of an Alqaeda training camp in Afghanistan.
Now YOU tell ME. What did Bush do to deal with the Saudis and Bin Laden, especially between his inauguration and 9-10? Besides give the Taliban 43 Million dollars in April 2001, of course. LOL.
Was it not Clinton who had him signed, sealed and delivered from Omar al-Bashir but blew off taking him up on the offer?
That’s a pack of lies, just like the “trashing of Air Force One” and the “vanalizing of the Whitehouse” and the “Hilary put crack pipes and tiny penis decorations on theWhite House Christmas tree” and the “Clinton Fathers Black Crack Baby; Kid Looks Just Like Him.” crapola. It SOUNDS good to people with an agenda, but where is the proof?
Think about it for just a minute. Do you really think that the Muslim Arab Jihadi leaders of Sudan would turn over one of their most generous benefactor, a Muslim Arab Jihadi (Bin Laden)? That makes about as much sense as a virgin having a baby.
Save your repetitive tripe for WhineOn.org - the fact of the matter is - and Moore, of course, omits this - is that ALL our presidents have been slack with the Saudis and their Wahhabi henchmen, Republican and Democrat alike.
So you admit that Bush, Bush Sr. and Reagan have been slack with the Saudis? Very good. You’re halfway there already. Save YOUR repetitive tripe for freerepublic.com – the fact of the matter is – that 911 happened on your guy’s watch, WELLLLL into his term - and the people responsible have gotten off scot free.
What is amazing about you is that you bark about Bush not doing anything about the Saudis, but when he does do something about it, you piss and moan about "squandering" resources.
What did he do? I pissed and moaned about him squandering 300 BILLION taxpayer (ohmigod!) dollars, while we can’t even protect our borders.
What DID Dub do about the Saudis? What? Can you name ten things? Can you name ONE thing? Have the Wahhabi preachers in our prison system been remanded and/or exported? Have any madrassas anywhere in the world been shut down? Bush have done nothing “about the Saudis”, NOTHING. To the contrary, he moved OUR military bases out of Saudi because they demanded it, and removed the only threat against THEM (not US) from power, namely Saddam Hussein. I say Reagan had the right idea when he ARMED Hussein; Hussein killed over a million Iranians for us. Bush Sr. should have LET Saddam have Kuwait, and then Saudi, like he said he would. But, he needed a war to look “tough”; alas most of us didn’t buy it.
I thought you were perceptive enough to understand that the invasion of Iraq was meant to deal not only with Iraq, but also Saudi Arabia and Iran…
Oh yeah, the Saudis sure are sad to see Saddam go… and so are the Kuwaitis, after all, Saddam and the Kuwaitis and the Saudis were BESTEST buds, weren’t they? LOL… what are you, like 13 or so? And Iran…. LOL… you’re kidding, right? Have you ever heard of the Iran-Iraq War? I guess Hannity and his Punk don’t talk about that much, eh? Yeah, I’m sure the Shi’ite Mullahs of Iran are angry now that the Sunni majority of Iraq is going to be voted out of power and dominated by … the Iranian Shi’ites of Iraq.
(have you bothered to read about the historical relationship between the Shi'a and Wahhabis?).
You are apparently—no; obviously—the one in need of some reading. If you think that the invasion and ultimately, the Shi’ite takeover and concomitant Sharia is going to adversely affect Iran or Saudi Arabai, you’re crazy.
So which way do you want it? Do something or not? You can't have it both ways.
I want the goddam pigfucking shiteating pedophile-worshippers that finance, support, and spread jihad all over the world to PAY!!! And I want the funding from our government to protect us and our allies, not wage some bullshit war in a hellhole wasteland that was no danger to us whatsoever. Do something, yes. But not just anything! Do something worthwhile! Shut down some of those madrassas. Get Bin Laden. Target the jihadis that kill Americans and our allies, not the crazy old fools (Saddam) that just kills jihadis (Shi’ites in Iraq and Iran) and the major funders of terror (the royal families of Kuwait and Saudi.)
I meant:
Yeah, I’m sure the Shi’ite Mullahs of Iran are angry now that the Sunni minority of Iraq is going to be voted out of power and dominated by … the Iranian Shi’ites of Iraq.
KJ
On the missed Sudan deal:
So President Clinton confirmed the Sudanese offer in a speech; but this confirmation was discounted by the Commission because Clinton later said he had "misspoken." Beyond Clinton's retraction, who is the authority for the proposition that the Sudanese offer never happened, and that there was "no chance" Sudan would have handed bin Laden over to the U.S.? Sandy Berger. Whom they interviewed in January 2004, while he was under investigation for removing documents from the National Archives. By that time, of course, he knew what documents were and were not in the Archives. Did Clinton know, too, so that, in April of this year, he knew it was safe to claim that he had "misspoken" when he acknowledged the Sudan offer?
And are we really supposed to take this seriously as an investigation?
the full article and more:
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/007242.php
http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm
http://prisonplanet.com/sudan_offered_to_arrest_bin_laden.html
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/sudanC.htm
http://www.nrbookservice.com/BookPage.asp?prod_cd=C6346
http://www.sudan.net/news/press/postedr/125.shtml
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/839304/posts
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040723-111413-2905r.htm
And:
http://www.angelfire.com/md2/Ldotvets/Bubba.html
(the above article contains links to many others on the same theme)
http://www.bluestarbase.org/stanley072404.htm
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35185
http://www.cabalofdoom.com/archives/000064.html
http://www.johnlaxmi.com/WWWhy/ClintonFiddle.htm
RICHARD CLARKE: Actually, I've got about seven points, let me just go through them quickly. Um, the first point, I think the overall point is, there was no plan on Al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration.
ANGLE: So, just to finish up if we could then, so what you're saying is that there was no — one, there was no plan; two, there was no delay; and that actually the first changes since October of '98 were made in the spring months just after the administration came into office?
CLARKE: You got it. That's right.
QUESTION: It was not put into an action plan until September 4, signed off by the principals?
CLARKE: That's right.
(entire interview here):
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,115085,00.html
http://www.neoflux.com/archive/data/2004/0323-100323.shtml
http://tvh.rjwest.com/archives/004983.html
However, to put us back on topic of illegal immigration:
http://www.wsws.org/news/1998/aug1998/ins-a20.shtml
http://www.dslextreme.com/users/surferslim/text1.html
Reagan didn't do too well, either...
http://www.nfap.net/researchactivities/articles/newsday061004.aspx
"He bombed the hell out of an Alqaeda-owned factory in the Sudan. He bombed the hell out of an Alqaeda training camp in Afghanistan."
Boy, that sure made bin
"He bombed the hell out of an Alqaeda-owned factory in the Sudan. He bombed the hell out of an Alqaeda training camp in Afghanistan."
Boy, that sure made bin
Hiccups, Mike?
So President Clinton confirmed the Sudanese offer in a speech; but this confirmation was discounted by the Commission because Clinton later said he had "misspoken."
Let's see the link. Not from freerepublic.com, not from frontpagemag.com, not from democratunderground.com, not from whineon.org (I like that one). Let's see a non-rabid wingnut site back that up, that Clinton said in a speech that he was offered Bin Laden, after the African embassy bombings, and turned him down. Let's see it. Even if he did "misspeak".
Meanwhile, I don't have to offer any proof as it is an indisputable fact of history that Reagan's and Bush's goons traded Stinger missiles TO Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Iran, etc. in exchange for money to fund a right-wing war in Nicaragua against peasant union organizers. Looong before Clinton was deposed over a little bj, Reagan was the first non-mob gangster in history to say "I don't remember" over and over again on the witness stand. Of course, the whole affair only involved the murder of 241 US Marines and 410,000 Central American civilians, so no big deal. In fact, the traitorous EX Marine Oliver North was sent to warm a seat in the Congress he lied to.
Furthermore, the Reagan and Bush administration heavily funded the Afghanistan warlords back in the eighties, and helped create the Islamic radicals that fostered the early Taliban in their madrassas. This is easily confirmed with the link YOU, GARY sent me as "proof" of Carter's alleged dhimmitude.
*******************************************
KJ: "He bombed the hell out of an Alqaeda-owned factory in the Sudan. He bombed the hell out of an Alqaeda training camp in Afghanistan."
Nazi: Boy, that sure made bin
What, you don't type much? What were you TRYING to say? That it made Bin Laden scared? Well, the Moonie Times warning scared him so bad that he had to stop using his satellite phone. We probably COULD have used his signal to erase him like the Russians did that Chechen pigf*ck, but lucky for Bin Laden, the Washington Moonie Times gave him ample warning.
Too bad Bin Laden got that warning, huh?
Too bad Bin Laden had to wait until 2001 for the WTC attack.
Too bad Bush took a month-long vacation on August 8 2001.
Too bad Condi Rice let Bush ignore the "Presidential Daily Briefing" entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US."
Say, are you the same Mike as the Mike Schneider that was trolling here a couple of weeks ago fantasizing about "burning down all of the public schools. Right. Now."?
kj posts of Clinton's "tough" measures against al-Qaeda and the Saudis in the Nineties:
"He bombed the hell out of an Alqaeda-owned factory in the Sudan. He bombed the hell out of an Alqaeda training camp in Afghanistan."
Bombed the Hell out of = lobbed a few Tomahawks at 'em and prayed they would go away, like the stains on Monica Lewinski's dress.
How effective were Clinton's initiatives against al-Qaeda and the Saudis? So effective they probably cost John Kerry the election.
Enough said.
Let's deal with the problems at hand from here on, shall we?
Sometimes this forum reminds of the council of Elrond from the Lord of the Rings. Robert can be Elrond, Hugh can be Gandalf. Keith Joy and Gary are the elves and dwraves wrapped up in petty arguing, while islam is the ring...
Truth is: Bush, Clinton, republican or democrat - nobody in government has the political will to enforce America's laws and guard the border from harmful intrusion.
Anybody that says it physically can' be done is talking bollocks. The iron curtain effectively insulated Eastern and Western Europe for decades.
I like trees... so I could be the elf. On the other hand I have a degree in geology...
Dwarves seem more right wing to me: practical, stubborn, suspicious, and unsophisticated.
Elves are more left wing: aloof, idealistic, and living in their own little world.
Makes a mockery of all the hi-tech security measures which were bought at great cost and which will be rendered useless if we continue to allow them infiltration, hate propaganda, the promotion of Islam in Universities (same thing) and leaves them free to pursue their subversive activities. The whole thing is a joke!
Is there any muzzie free zone left on the globe?
I almost forgot, Catherine can be Samwise. Stout heart and clumsy with words, but one of the good guys.
Nasseem is clearly gollum for obvious reasons.
Oh dear. Oh dear oh dear oh dear. Somebody left the backdoor wide open.
What...no more comments by math-no-humanity?
Defiantly a muslim troll....on the other thread he got totally upset about comments I made about how muslim "men" treat women and made a little threat about how i "shouldnt go there"
Upset about comments that hit too close to home, statements with undercurrents of threat...why not just wear a neon sign that says "im a muslim"
"No man is good enough to govern another man without the others consent....these United States Of America can never be destroyed from the forces outside its borders. If America falls it will fall from within. Brought down by apathy. When good people do nothing, anarchy reigns.
Abraham Lincoln
Hi all,
Mr. Albion is his gloomy self, promoting acopolyse et al.....get a grip man.
Usagirl....why is a muslim supporter a troll...do you not think thay have a valid POV?
Ignore them at you peril.
Someone said "Just be glad that the Twin Towers weren’t actually knocked over, like Bin Laden intended. If 50K Americans had been killed that day, there would have been a draft started that week. We could muster a twenty-MILLION man army in one year. You’d better HOPE we use the nukes instead. That’s a quick, obliterating death".
Well, th truth is you have enough weapons to kill all people in muslim countries many time over....but when an attach happens who do fight, who do you kill?
Most of the people living in muslim countries are law abiding citizens going about living day by day. Under this scenario...your weapons are blunt...they ARE a waste of money. True...you have a last resort...but how did you get to that last resort....why are you there?
Yon need to work with Islam...only Islam can turn off the jihad and the hate...for example bring in *some* parts of sharia law into your constitution. This is an important step.
The two most important countries to battle jihad is Saudi and Pakistan...and ofcourse they are friends of yours...an ally...so nothing much is gonna change there.
But as I live and breathe Pakistani air...I don't particularly want US nukes in the middle of that.
Status quo....name of the game.
And good morning to you too, Tokyo Rose.
Son of Albion:
Re demographics. A correspondent from India, where Hindus have had much more experience than we of the West have with Muslim demographic incursions, has the following outline for combatting Muslim infestation:
Demographic containment
> 1. Ban muslim immigration
> 2. Evacuate non-muslims from muslim countries to
> de-islamise non-islamic countries
> 3. Selective import of non-muslims
> 4. Encourage ban on abortion and raise fertility to at
> least replacement levels
> This means there is no demographic vacuum that can let
> in muslim immigrants
As this is one the later posts on this thread, and few will read it, I will not elaborate upon this at this time. I have details how this has been accomplished as well as some other methods used to halt the Muslim demographic weapon.
Per Naseem:
"Someone said "Just be glad that the Twin Towers weren’t actually knocked over, like Bin Laden intended. If 50K Americans had been killed that day, there would have been a draft started that week. We could muster a twenty-MILLION man army in one year. You’d better HOPE we use the nukes instead. That’s a quick, obliterating death".
Well, th truth is you have enough weapons to kill all people in muslim countries many time over....but when an attach happens who do fight, who do you kill?"
Given the Muzzie prediliction for blunt and cowardly weapons, such as the car bomb and the suicide bomb, does it really matter who we kill? As it does not matter to the Muslim whom they kill, why should it bother us?
Per Naseem:
"Yon need to work with Islam...only Islam can turn off the jihad and the hate...for example bring in *some* parts of sharia law into your constitution. This is an important step.
You can keep your pseudo-Abrahamic rock-worshipping paganism to yourself, thank you very much. I would sooner spend billions on defense than one sop of tribute or appeasement.
Cthulhu says "You can keep your pseudo-Abrahamic rock-worshipping paganism to yourself, thank you very much. I would sooner spend billions on defense than one sop of tribute or appeasement".
That is a real shame to see that...you have learned nothing....weapons & war cannot defeat Islam...that's been true for 1400 years and it will true for millenia....
Work with us here...a bit of give n take...help Islam to help you.
You know it's true...why do you constantly keep denying yourself of peace.
I propose a help Islamic day...to help yourselves. Those who participate get to be muslims for a day...and live like muslims..food prayer, Islamic studies etc...just sample it...you know it will help.
Per Naseem:
"Cthulhu says "You can keep your pseudo-Abrahamic rock-worshipping paganism to yourself, thank you very much. I would sooner spend billions on defense than one sop of tribute or appeasement".
That is a real shame to see that...you have learned nothing....weapons & war cannot defeat Islam...that's been true for 1400 years and it will true for millenia...."
We have not "defeated" because we have never sought to defeat Islam. Now, we have, on occasion, taken exception to the behavior of certain groups and taken them to task, from the pirates of Tripoli to the army of Iraq. Ever notice the Muzzies make better buccaneers and brigands than they do sailors or soldiers? Why is that, I wonder?
Naseem:
"Work with us here...a bit of give n take...help Islam to help you."
Much in the way the North African slave traders, the Pasha of Tripoli's pirates, Islamic terrorists from Arafat to Abu Nidal and Saddam Hussein's torturers were all here to "help" us. In the immortal words of Bill Cosby, "Riiiiiight."
Naseem: "You know it's true...why do you constantly keep denying yourself of peace."
The only peace your happy little death cult brings is the peace of the grave, as evidenced by your religions "enlighted debate" with Theo van Gogh -- say something you don't like, point out a truth you want to ignore and one of your little robotic fatwa followers will come like thieves and assassins.
Naseem says: "I propose a help Islamic day...to help yourselves. Those who participate get to be muslims for a day...and live like muslims..food prayer, Islamic studies etc...just sample it...you know it will help."
Islam will be nice to us if we be nice to it?
Gollum..gollum...
*drags back out of bed*
Ok... I know I am not feeling well when a thread here starts looking weird.
Naseem
I have a proposal for you, I will become a Moslem for a day if you first become a Jew for a day and then a Christian for a day.
What do you think?
weapons & war cannot defeat Islam
Posted by: Naseem
That which lives by the sword, will die by the sword.
Mohammadanism lives by the sword and by the sword Islam has been slain in Afghanistan and Iraq.
I'm still waiting on that link, Gary. The one that says Clinton turned down Bin Laden AFTER he killed Americans in the African embassies....
Nazi: kj posts of Clinton's "tough" measures against al-Qaeda and the Saudis in the Nineties:
"He bombed the hell out of an Alqaeda-owned factory in the Sudan. He bombed the hell out of an Alqaeda training camp in Afghanistan."
The latter missed Bin Laden by a couple of hours. If only the Moonie Times hadn't tipped of Bin Laden, maybe the next missile attack would have killed him, but oh well.
Bombed the Hell out of = lobbed a few Tomahawks at 'em...
But wait, I thought you said we sent FIFTY missiles? I thought you said he went overboard? And wasn't it YOUR side that whined and cried when he did bomb Alqaeda holdings? First, he bombed Alqaeda and you cry "Clinton is over-reacting and needs to knock it off!" Then Dub falls asleep at the wheel, WE get attacked, and you oink "Clinton didn't do anything." Then you meet a liberal that will fight back and you say "Clinton didn't do enough"?
What did Bush do that Clinton didn't do between the inauguration and 09-10-01? Oh yeah, he was "Tired of swatting at flies" and working on "a big, secret plan." Uh-huuuh.
Okay, I think see your game: always support the "R"s and always criticize the "D"s.
...and prayed they would go away, like the stains on Monica Lewinski's dress.
That stain is your Holy Cross. Without it, your side would be in the shitter just like they were before. Monica and Bin Laden are your Madonna and Child.
How effective were Clinton's initiatives against al-Qaeda and the Saudis? So effective they probably cost John Kerry the election.
No, the semen stain that you are fixated on cost him the election, just like it cost algore the election.
Enough said.
No, little man. I want an answer to my question. I have been answering monkey questions here for over a year, and want an answer from you:
What did Bush do that Clinton didn't do between the inauguration and 09-10-01?
Let's deal with the problems at hand from here on, shall we?
I'd love to. I never draw first, but I always draw first blood. You, Gary, et al. stop lying about liberals and I'll stop telling the truth about conservatives.
Don't "forget" to answer that question up there, like Gary "forgot" to post a link with his "Clinton-was-offered-Bin-Laden-by-Sudan-and-turned-him-down" claim.
By the way, Gary, that claim is seriously downgraded from the original meme sent out by the RNC on 09-12-01, namely that Clinton had been offered Bin Laden THREE TIMES by Sudan. (I'd still like to see rational argument about an Arab Muslim Jihadi arresting and detaining an Arab Muslim Jihadi in the lawless Shariatopia of Sudan, and then handing him over to The Great Satan. If Clinton even believed that, he must have been crazy or had his "attention diverted" at the time.)
Hey, I just saw my fellow Zionist over at cnn.com. David Horowitz says that Ward Churchill shouldn't be fired and doing so would violate his first ammendment rights. I don't think he should be fired either. I think that a 9-11 widow or orphan should enroll in every Ward Churchill class and take every opportunity to voice her own freedom of speech.
Keep track of activities on the border. Arizona seems to be ground zero.
http://azstarnet.com/sn/border/
kj
According to the 9/11 commission report,
in may 1997 the CIA was ready to capture OBL, the Clinton administration stopped the plan.
In Aug 1998 OBL bombs US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
CIA reports Dec 18, 1998 OBL might be traveling to Kandahar and could be targeted with cruise missiles. Clinton admin says NO, what if we had missed?
Feb 1999, and yet another chance to get OBL is passed on by President Clinton. The reason Billary gives, we may have killed a United Arab Emirates prince who by the way just so happens to be a known terrorist collaborator.
President Clinton said in 1997 or so that he would get all terrorist and those who collaborate with them, guess not.
President Clinton favored appeasing the Saudis and Pakistan along with attempting to bribe the local tribes more than he wanted OBL.
The illiberal’s call it diplomacy.
Didn’t scary Kerry bad mouth Bush for working with the local tribes to get OBL? Maybe he didn’t know that Billary was doing it first?
If President Clinton had the resolve the President Bush has, we wouldn’t be in this mess!
kj:
What I took issue with is your insinuation that Bush was any different than his predecessors vis a vis the Saudis and al-Qaeda prior to 9/11.
Did Bush do anything Clinton didn't do prior to 9/11? Obviously he did not - where did I say that he did?
As for this comment:
"If you think that the invasion and ultimately, the Shi’ite takeover and concomitant Sharia is going to adversely affect Iran or Saudi Arabai, you’re crazy."
That's your opinion, kj, and you're entitled to it, however, I'm not the only person who contends otherwise. The fact is, the Saudis are already preoccupied with Iraq - given the bloody history of the Shi'a and Wahhabi/al-Saud, I honestly don't think that's going to change, even after we pull our troops out of Iraq. I expect history to repeat itself. Crazy? Maybe, but crazier things have happened.
As for calling me a Nazi, or this nonsense:
"Say, are you the same Mike as the Mike Schneider that was trolling here a couple of weeks ago fantasizing about "burning down all of the public schools. Right. Now."?"
I'm willing to debate you on the merits of our own words and arguments, kj, but I'm not going to even begin to try and engage in a reasonable debate with you if you're going to call me a Nazi or hurl spurious accusations in my direction.
I forgot Nothing, you lying jackass leftist bastard. I am sick and I have no time for narrow minded bigots like you and yours. I stopped, but you apparently don't intend to. However I expected that from the likes of you. With the fall of islam will come the fall of scum like the DNC and all who believe in them.
And now I am back to bed.
According to the 9/11 commission report, in may 1997 the CIA was ready to capture OBL, the Clinton administration stopped the plan. In Aug 1998 OBL bombs US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
So what was the charge, fifteen months before he killed his first American? Why SHOULD have Clinton “let” the CIA capture him?
CIA reports Dec 18, 1998 OBL might be traveling to Kandahar and could be targeted with cruise missiles. Clinton admin says NO, what if we had missed?
“Might” be traveling to Kandahar? What should Clinton have done, bombed Kandahar? You guys went nuts when he bombed Milosevic. Remember when faulty intelligence led to "Clinton" bombing the Chicom embassy in Yugoslavia? And he should have bombed--what?--the whole goddam city of Kandahar?
Feb 1999, and yet another chance to get OBL is passed on by President Clinton. The reason Billary gives, we may have killed a United Arab Emirates prince who by the way just so happens to be a known terrorist collaborator.
Yeah, good idea. Another “might” have gotten Bin Laden, along with a “might” have killed UAE prince? You’ve got to be kidding. No, I guess you’re not. Again, when Clinton DID strike at Bin Laden and his holdings, you right-wingers soiled your Depends. The entire right-wing media echochamber was hooting and hollering with accusations of “wagging the dog”. Clearly, they were displeased with efforts to kill Bin Laden, and like I said before, you can find search their archives yourself, the Washington Moonie Right-Wing Times blabbed to the world that we knew he used a satellite phone. That’s why the CIA THOUGHT that Bin Laden MIGHT have been traveling to Kandahar. If Moonie had kept his big fat hogmouth shut, maybe the CIA would have KNOWN WHICH Kandahar house Bin Laden WAS staying in. But oh well, Moonie is an “R”, so big deal.
Doesn't Bush know that Bin Laden MIGHT be in Peshawar. Maybe he should bomb Peshawar. Oh wait, he might be in Lahore! Let's bomb Lahore! Weee! This is fun! What a joke.
As for a UAE prince being a known terrorist sympathizer, DUH. How many red-blooded men in that whole filthy peninsula do you think aren’t? Yet STILL the US Secret Service guards the Saudi embassy in DC? That doesn’t bother you? Of course not; Clinton can’t be blamed.
President Clinton said in 1997 or so that he would get all terrorist and those who collaborate with them, guess not.
Nice command of the language. Bush said the same thing, only when Bush said it we still were thinking that maybe 30,000 had been killed in the WTC. He also said he would get Bin Laden dead or alive, that he would ride herd on Arafat and Sharon to make peace (four years ago.) And he ignored the “Bin Laden Determined To Strike In The US” briefing on his unprecedented MONTH-long vacation after seven months of “work.” And he appointed an Inquisitor as Attorney General who was fixated on potheads, porno, and stopping the Oregon euthanasia law. But don’t worry. Ashcroft successfully imprisoned Tommy Chong and Martha Stewart. Just answer me this, GOPer: who prosecuted more terrorists, Ashcroft or Reno?
President Clinton favored appeasing the Saudis and Pakistan along with attempting to bribe the local tribes more than he wanted OBL. The illiberal’s call it diplomacy.
And what did the GOPers call it when Bush gave the Taliban 43 MILLION (taxpayer) dollars in April, 2001? What did the GOPers call it when Bush apologized to the Chicoms after they shot down our most sophisticated spy plane? What do the GOPers say every time W kisses that fat pimply Saudi Royal ass? What did the GOPers say when Dub fellated the Koran at his State of The Union address?
Didn’t scary Kerry bad mouth Bush for working with the local tribes to get OBL? Maybe he didn’t know that Billary was doing it first?
Yeah, because Clinton did it when 12 Americans had been killed in Africa. Dub did it when 3,000 Americans had been killed and 1/10 of the office space in downtown Manhattan had been destroyed. AND Bush had the backing of pretty-much the whole world to go into Afghanistan, depose the Taliban, destroy Alqaeda, and get Bin Laden. But the troops stood down at Tora Bora, and Bin Laden got away.
If President Clinton had the resolve the President Bush has, we wouldn’t be in this mess!
Liar. What should Clinton have done, bombed Iraq? LOL. If Bush had the intelligence that Clinton did, we probably wouldn’t have been attacked in the first place. Just like we weren’t attacked during the Y2K celebrations. Too bad for America, Bush and Ashcroft had other interests and just didn’t have time to protect us. But hey, the good news is that your side has parlayed the greatest American tragedy into some political capital, and now maybe you can at long last outlaw abortion or whatever you nutty cavemen dream and drool about.
**********************************************
What I took issue with is your insinuation that Bush was any different than his predecessors vis a vis the Saudis and al-Qaeda prior to 9/11.
No different for Saudi and al-Qaeda, but very different in terms of concentrating on important things like national security, following up leads, taking terrorism warnings seriously, etc. Bush is intellectually lazy and “right proud” of it. He was told as he entered the school house that day in Florida that the first WTC had been attacked. And he proceeded with his photo op. Then he was interrupted and told that the second tower had been hit. At this point, he couldn’t possibly think that it was an accident. What would an intelligent man have done? Dub spent seven more minutes reading to children while hundreds burned to death in Manhattan. Over one hour elapsed between the first tower being hit and the Pentagon being hit. Why didn’t Dub or Dick issue any orders, like “All planes off course are to be forced to land immediately or be shot down. All planes on course are to land immediately at the nearest airport.” It’s that simple. But no; since Dub is an “R” you monkeys fawn and gush over his “decisive leadership” and “bravery” to continue reading to a bunch of boogerpickers because he “didn’t want to scare the children.” Awwww.
Did Bush do anything Clinton didn't do prior to 9/11? Obviously he did not - where did I say that he did?
I didn’t say you did, monkey. You were the one fixated on the DNA stain on Monica’s dress. If you dislike Clinton, I was wondering if you liked Bush because 9-11 occurred on his watch.
As for this comment: "If you think that the invasion and ultimately, the Shi’ite takeover and concomitant Sharia is going to adversely affect Iran or Saudi Arabai, you’re crazy."
That's your opinion, kj, and you're entitled to it, however, I'm not the only person who contends otherwise.
Man, you’re nuts. Please tell me and why you think that the inevitable implementation of Sharia in Iraq is going to do anything but make the jihadis happy in Saudi and Iran. Please tell me. Don’t just tell me what you think, tell me why you think it. Dub doesn’t know shit about Islam or jihad or Sharia. The guy thought the Taliban was a rock group in 1999, remember? He just keeps saying “Freedom is on the march. Freedom is on the march.” You do know that the Shiites run Iran, right? And you do know that the Shiites constitute a majority in Iraq, right? Again, don’t just tell me why it will anger Iran or Saudi; tell me why it won’t make them happy. That should be even easier. The only formidable enemy the Saudis and the Iraniacs had was Saddam, and Bush GOT him, “dead or alive.” Meanwhile Bin Laden drops to his knocky knees fives times a day and thanks Allah for making Bush the president.
The fact is, the Saudis are already preoccupied with Iraq - given the bloody history of the Shi'a and Wahhabi/al-Saud, I honestly don't think that's going to change, even after we pull our troops out of Iraq.
Oops. You “forgot” to say something--anything!--about Iran. Oh yeah, the Saudis are reeeeal preoccupied with Iraq. They control EVERY Muslim nation, because the control access to the black meteorite in Mecca. And it’s one of the five pillars of Islam that you have to go to Mecca. Just imagine Malaysia or Lebannon or Pakistan REALLY cracking down on the Wahhabis and the madrassas in their countries. The Saudis could just say, “no more Malaysians (Lebanese, etc.) may make the pilgrimage to Mecca until we get our way. That means that all the Muslims there that hadn’t been to Mecca would not be allowed into heaven. And you know what that means…
That's why I say that terror starts in Saudi, and if it ever ends, it will end in Saudi Arabia. Lucky for them, James Baker is on THEIR side.
I expect history to repeat itself. Crazy? Maybe, but crazier things have happened.
Yeah, crazier things have happened. Like Gulf War One, where Bush Sr. sent 500,000 Americans to Kuwait to protect the Saudi and Kuwaiti royal families. Like Bush, Reagan, et al. selling Stinger missiles to Hezbollah AFTER they killed 241 US Marines in Beirut. Like Dub ignoring the warning that Bin Laden was determined to strike in the US. Like Dub letting a Muslim preacher go first at the 9-11 memorial day service in the National CATHEDRAL (not mosque). Like Bush consulting with Saudi Prince Bandar before Colon Powell when he decided to invade Iraq.
As for calling me a Nazi, or this nonsense: "Say, are you the same Mike as the Mike Schneider that was trolling here a couple of weeks ago fantasizing about "burning down all of the public schools. Right. Now."?"
I was only asking whether you, “Mike” and the other Nazi, “Mike Schnieder” were the same person. I didn’t realize that you were so sennnnnnsitive (Glenn Beck voice.)
I'm willing to debate you on the merits of our own words and arguments, kj, but I'm not going to even begin to try and engage in a reasonable debate with you if you're going to call me a Nazi or hurl spurious accusations in my direction.
It wasn’t an accusation, it was a question. If you aren’t that Mike, why didn’t you just say so? There was a Mike Schneider on this forum less than two weeks ago, and he said that we needed to burn down all the public schools in America. Right. Now. (Can anyone back me up here?)
As for calling you a Nazi, that’s just a little what we call here at JW “friendly ribbing.” If you want to get back at me, just call me a leftist loser or whatever. If you realize that as far as politics goes, you don’t have the truth on your side, you can use my insults as a way out of having to debate me. Like Omid is doing at Colgate College with Mr. Spencer.
You should get used to insults when you come here and whine about liberals, Clinton, Hitlery, etc. You may have noticed that I can definitely TAKE an insult, which reminds me….
**********************************************
I forgot Nothing, you lying jackass leftist bastard.
Well, I guess with your getting out of bed at 10 and going back to bed at 5, you probably don’t have much time to respond today. Cramps?
I am sick and I have no time for narrow minded bigots like you and yours.
No time? No time? You have time to find twenty links a day, and send ten messages a day, but no time to answer me? How convenient that is for you! Can I call you “Omid”? Or would you prefer “Professor Safi”? LOL. Get a load of this meat puppet. I ask him one simple question and he “doesn’t have time” to answer me.
I stopped, but you apparently don't intend to.
Yeah, I could see that you stopped when I opened this comments page and you gleefully trumpet your “YES! Off Topic, All the Time” blather. Just scroll up to the top of this page and see for yourself. And then, if you click on a frontpagemag.com link, you can see an ad at the top for Ann Coulter’s “How To Talk To A Liberal (If You Must)”. Of course the never-married-yet-over-forty Coulter has said publicly that the BEST way to talk to a liberal is with a baseball bat. Now that’s what I call compassionate. Anyway.
However I expected that from the likes of you. With the fall of islam
Oh yeah, we’ll see that any day now….LOL.
…. will come the fall of scum like the DNC and all who believe in them.
More eliminationist rhetoric? What a surprise. When you say “fall” of all of us, what exactly do you mean? Firing squad? Deportation? “Turner Diary” fantasies? Concentration camps? Secession? Maybe I should traipse over to freerepublic.com and see what those right-wingers think would be a good way to see the DNC “fall.”
And now I am back to bed.
Sweet dreams Gary.
Lest you accuse me of hating the combat troops (even though my side tried to get one elected president) when I said above "But the troops stood down at Tora Bora, I assume that you know that they did so under orders.
LOL... Just for the helluvit, I just went back and read one of Gary's links, the one called "prior_knowledge/clinton_let_bin_laden (etc.)". It fires right off with Clinton turning down Bin Laden, all right... in 1996! Years before he killed his first American. LOL. Yup, and FDR shoulda killed Hitler back in 1934, right? And Bush and Reagan shoulda killed Saddam back in the 80's, right? Gary, please stop. You're killing me... with laughter. Please get better soon. I need another good laugh.
Per KJ:
Lest you accuse me of hating the combat troops (even though my side tried to get one elected president) when I said above "But the troops stood down at Tora Bora, I assume that you know that they did so under orders.
Posted by: kj at February 9, 2005 09:39 PM
Calling John Kerry a combat soldier is a lot like calling Sam the Eagle from the Muppet Show a bird of prey... technically correct, after a fashion, but definately not something I would have relied upon to get elected... Kerry lost because the Democrats can't convinvce the American people that they are serious on the issue of national security.
So what was the charge, fifteen months before he killed his first American? Why SHOULD have Clinton "let" the CIA capture him?
Posted by: kj
Dear kj
Before 1997, The Clinton admin knew that OBL was financing terror against the US and had already declared war on the US. That is why the CIA was tracking him and planning to kidnap him. They had evidence he was behind attacks against US troops in Somalia and Aden in 1992 and 1993. So yes he should have let the CIA get him. By 1997 the Clinton admin knew that OBL was actively training fighters and seeking Nuclear weapons.
In Kandahar the CIA had been tracking OBL for over five days, he was staying at a few base’s outside the city, it was a clear and definitive time to strike. Clinton failed yet again.
Yon need to work with Islam...only Islam can turn off the jihad and the hate...for example bring in *some* parts of sharia law into your constitution. This is an important step.
Of COURSE it is an important step! I remember an old Arabic folk tale about the camel who wanted to come in out of the cold; it started with just the camel's nose under the door flap, and ended with the camel taking up the whole tent. Unfortunately, our brethren to the north seem to be willing to let the camel get his nose in the tent door. I trust we in the US will be more vigilant.
Naseem, the opportunities you offer are underwhelming....it seems I can give up being the free citizen of Judeo-Christian culture for a burkha and the opportunity to be treated like a doormat by some AK-47 wielding psychopath.
Gee, how can I possibly decide (heavy sarcasm)?
**Give me liberty, or give me death**
Treehugger
"Yon need to work with Islam...only Islam can turn off the jihad and the hate...for example bring in *some* parts of sharia law into your constitution. This is an important step. "
Here Naseem unwittingly admits that Islam is responsible for for turning on the jihad and the hate. Then she launches into her typical circular reasoning that adopting Sharia law into the constitution is "an important step."
Monkey:In Kandahar the CIA had been tracking OBL for over five days, he was staying at a few base’s outside the city, it was a clear and definitive time to strike. Clinton failed yet again.
So the CIA should have launched, what, about a thousand cruise missiles? Destroy "a few" bases on a the word of the CIA? How big were the bases? And we would have no way to verify that Bin Laden was dead, and the monkeys would have screeched and hurled their dung from their a.m. hate radio stations and conservative cable "news" outlets and on and on, accusing poor Slick Willie of "wagging the dog," like they did every time he did strike at Bin Laden.
Whatever you say Bar. The fact is that no matter what Clinton or any other democrat did, does, didn't, or doesn't do, you and your kind will ALWAYS find fault. And at the same time, no matter what Bush or any other republican did, does, didn't, or doesn't do, you will heap praise like the Personality Cultists you are.
John Kerry served with distinction as evidenced from the reports in his service record book. No one can "nominate themselves" for a medal, and only a military doctor can authorize a Purple Heart. And military doctors are specially trained to detect self-inflictors and malingerers.
Kerry received a Bronze Star and a Silver Star for his bravery and valor UNDER ENEMY FIRE. What you don't know is that he was actually nominated for TWO Silver Stars, one was downgraded to a Bronze Star on its way up the chain of command's approval (as often happens.)
Like I have said many times before, (and which no monkey has ever disputed, because they CAN'T) it wouldn't matter to you one whit if Kerry came home from Nam and didn't try to help bring the troops home. Al Gore did that and you hate him. It wouldn't matter if Kerry had earned not three, but FOUR Purple Hearts. Wes Clark did that and you hate him. It wouldn't matter if Kerry had gotten a leg blown off and earned the Medal of Honor. Bob Kerry (D-Nebraska) did that and you hate him. And it wouldn't have even mattered if he got THREE limbs blown off. Max Cleland did and you hate him.
But if Kerry had shit his pants at the draft physical like Ted Nugent did; or claimed that a pimple on his fanny medically disqualified him for service, like Rush Limbaugh did; or if he had gotten FIVE deferments, like Cheney did; or if he had "bad knees" like (football player?) Jack Kemp did, or if he had "better things to do" like Newt Gingrich, Trent Lott, Dan Quayle, Bill O'Reilly, etc. etc. etc. did; you'd be allllll over him. Like you were on Clinton.
The test is very simple for simple minds and/or emergencies requiring quick responses. If someone breaks into your home, you check to see if they are wearing a police uniform; if they aren't, fire until the clip is empty.
Likewise, when you hear a story about someone-anyone!-you check to see whether there is a "D" or an "R" after their name, and promptly use THAT and that alone to make you determinations.
Just admit it, and you'll feel much better.
kj
Is immaturity a requirement of the illiberal demo-rat party?
It seems to be a common trait among you illiberal demo-rats.
I never really did like Ted Nugent.
I do not hate Max Cleland or Bob Kerry or Wes Clark or Scary Kerry or Billary Clinton.
I do not like their policies.
What you continually fail to realize is having a difference in opinion does not mean you personally hate that person.
No one can "nominate themselves" for a medal, and only a military doctor can authorize a Purple Heart
I know at least on guy who got a Purple Heart for getting bit while receiving fellatio!
It must be a demo-rat thing!
I apologize to you kj, for thinking that you would actually read something.