| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
More on what was left out of virtually all reporting on the Osama video, from MEMRI. He is warning America to play the dhimmi and defeat Bush, or else:
The tape of Osama bin Laden that was aired on Al-Jazeera(1) on Friday, October 29th included a specific threat to "each U.S. state," designed to influence the outcome of the upcoming election against George W. Bush. The U.S. media in general mistranslated the words "ay wilaya" (which means "each U.S. state")(2) to mean a "country" or "nation" other than the U.S., while in fact the threat was directed specifically at each individual U.S. state. This suggests some knowledge by bin Laden of the U.S. electoral college system. In a section of his speech in which he harshly criticized George W. Bush, bin Laden stated: "Any U.S. state that does not toy with our security automatically guarantees its own security."The Islamist website Al-Qal'a explained what this sentence meant: "This message was a warning to every U.S. state separately. When he [Osama Bin Laden] said, 'Every state will be determining its own security, and will be responsible for its choice,' it means that any U.S. state that will choose to vote for the white thug Bush as president has chosen to fight us, and we will consider it our enemy, and any state that will vote against Bush has chosen to make peace with us, and we will not characterize it as an enemy. By this characterization, Sheikh Osama wants to drive a wedge in the American body, to weaken it, and he wants to divide the American people itself between enemies of Islam and the Muslims, and those who fight for us, so that he doesn't treat all American people as if they're the same. This letter will have great implications inside the American society, part of which are connected to the American elections, and part of which are connected to what will come after the elections."(3)
Another interesting aspect of the speech is the fact that while bin Laden made his specific threat to each U.S. state, he also offered an election deal to the American voters, attempting to influence the election by these means rather than influencing it through terrorist attacks.(4) This peace offer is a theme that follows up on his April speech directed to Europe, in which he offered a truce.(5) The Islamist website Al-Islah explains: "Some people ask 'what's new in this tape?' [The answer is that] this tape is the second of its kind, after the previous tape of the Sheikh [Osama bin Laden], in which he offered a truce to the Europeans a few months ago, and it is a completion of this move, and it brings together the complementary elements of politics and religion, political savvy and force, the sword and justice. The Sheikh reminds the West in this tape of the great Islamic civilization and pure Islamic religion, and of Islamic justice..."(6)
MEMRI has excerpts of Osama's remarks here.
Posted by Robert at October 31, 2004 7:47 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Failing to mount a terrorist attack on us, I guess he settled for a tape.
Posted by: Afrafaste![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at October 31, 2004 8:03 PM
And the reasons to Vote For Bush keep pouring in:
Why should we trust Kerry?
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/morris200410311242.asp
Our Troops vs. Kerry's Global Test (We would Lose):
http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200410291005.asp
It just keeps piling up.
Posted by: Gary at October 31, 2004 8:04 PM
This may help to make up some minds.
Posted by: Hugh at October 31, 2004 8:25 PM
Hugh and Gary:
I am pessimistic. For some strange reason, I believe Kerry will win.
I hope I am wrong, but if I am right -- then off to the secret plot of land I bought twenty years ago.
There I will dwell, raising my chickens and crops, to await the onslaught of anti-republicanism and anti-democratism.
Things will pan out for myself if I live a shorter lifespan than normal.
To tell the truth? I have always wanted this lifestyle, so bring it on!
Posted by: Moe's Foe at October 31, 2004 8:35 PM
The sentence in the MEMRI piece (link above) that I found most interesting was: "For the followers of the Al-Qa'ida ideology, this speech sends a regressive and defeatist message of surrender...."
Here is the full paragraph:
"Another conspicuous aspect of the tape is the absence of common Islamist themes that are relevant to the month of Ramadan, which for fundamentalists like bin Laden is the month of Jihad and martyrdom. Noticeably absent from the Al-Jazeera tape was his usual appearance with a weapon, and more importantly the absence of references to Jihad, martyrdom, the Koran, the Hadith (Islamic tradition), Crusaders, Jews, and the legacy of the Prophet Muhammad on the duty to wage Jihad against the infidels. For the followers of the Al-Qa'ida ideology, this speech sends a regressive and defeatist message of surrender, as seen in the move from solely using Jihad warfare to a mixed strategy of threats combined with truce offers and election deals."
Pilgrim
Posted by: Pilgrim at October 31, 2004 8:43 PM
In my view, Bush and Kerry are both global eliteist who have nothing to do whatsoever with American patriotism.
They both want to subvert the Constitution of the United States; they are both bent on destroying our national sovereignty to the authority of the UN; they both are bent on expanding treaties like NAFTA, GATT, LOST, promoting things like the ICC just to name a few items.
I don't like Bush because he is way to liberal for my liking -- I don't care what he claims about himself or what anyone claims for him; Bush is NOT a true patriot!
Kerry on the otherhand, is right there with Mao and Stalin from my perspective.
I wouldn't give a half-pint of spit for the best part of Kerry and Bush put together however, if this threat was real, it would actually persuade me to actually hold my nose and vote for Bush.
So, how can I be sure that this is not something hatched up by the neo-cons to snooker people like myself into casting a vote for Bush?
Posted by: witness at October 31, 2004 9:16 PM
Seams there are a few riots states co, wi, and an act of God in mi?
Iran today in their parliament after a meeting some stood a said death to America [USA]??
I would think that the people of Ohio would be steaming about the Democrats selling their Names and address to the Gardian??
Moe wouldn't have thought you would run away from a good fight??
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength,Wisdom,Sight and Courage to stay the course to Victory to Defeat ALL who Support them Open the Eyes of the World to thier Threat Amen
at October 31, 2004 9:29 PM
So, how can I be sure that this is not something hatched up by the neo-cons to snooker people like myself into casting a vote for Bush?
Posted by: witness at October 31, 2004 09:16 PM
One q? did 9/11/2001 happen or was it all made up?/
here is what benny boy said and I don't think this is the whole tape seams short not a full 18 min?
http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=312
10/29/2004
Osama bin Laden's Speech on the Eve of the 2004 US Elections
The following are excerpts from Osama bin Laden's speech on the eve of the 2004 US elections
Osama bin Laden: Oh the American people, I address these words to you regarding the optimal manner of avoiding another Manhattan, and regarding the war, its causes and its consequences. But before this, I say to you: Security is one of the important pillars of human life, and free men do not take their security lightly, contrary to Bush's claim that we hate freedom. Let him explain why we did not attack Sweden, for example. Clearly, those who hate freedom have no pride, unlike the 19, may Allah have mercy on them. We have been fighting you because we are free men who do not remain silent in the face of injustice. We want to restore our (Islamic) nation's freedom. Just as you violate our security, we violate yours.
But I am amazed at you. Although we have entered the fourth year after the events of 9/11, Bush is still practicing distortion and deception against you and he is still concealing the true cause from you. Consequentially, the motives for its reoccurrence still exist. I will tell you about the causes underlying these events and I will tell you the truth about the moments this decision was taken, to allow you to reflect.
I say to you, as Allah is my witness: We had not considered attacking the towers, but things reached the breaking point when we witnessed the injustice and tyranny of the American-Israeli coalition against our people in Palestine and Lebanon – then I got this idea.
The events that had a direct influence on me occurred in 1982, and the subsequent events, when the US permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon with the aid of the American sixth fleet.
In those critical moments, I was overwhelmed by ideas that are hard to describe, but they awakened a powerful impulse to reject injustice and gave birth to a firm resolve to punish the oppressors. As I was looking at those destroyed towers in Lebanon, I was struck by the idea of punishing the oppressor in the same manner and destroying towers in the US, to give it a taste of what we have tasted and to deter it from killing our children and women.
We had no difficulty dealing with Bush and his administration, because it resembles the regimes in our (Arab) countries, half of which are ruled by the military, and the other half are ruled by the sons of kings and presidents with whom we have had a lot of experience. Among both types, there are many who are known or their conceit, arrogance, greed, and for taking money unrightfully.
This resemblance began with the visit of Bush Sr. to the region. While some of our people were dazzled by the US and hoped that these visits would influence our countries, it was he who was influenced by these monarchic and military regimes. He envied them for remaining in their positions for decades, while embezzling the nation's public funds with no supervision whatsoever. He bequeathed tyranny and the suppression of liberties to his son and they called it the Patriot Act, under the pretext of war on terrorism.
Bush Sr. liked the idea of appointing (his) sons as state governors. Similarly, he did not neglect to import into Florida the expertise in falsifying (elections) from the leaders of this region in order to benefit from it in difficult moments.
We agreed with the general commander Muhammad Ata, may Allah have mercy on him, that all operations should be carried out within 20 minutes, before Bush and his administration would become aware. We never imagined that the Commander in Chief of the American armed forces would abandon 50,000 of his citizens in the twin towers to face this great horror alone when they needed him most. It seemed to him that a girl's story about her goat and its butting was more important than dealing with planes and their "butting" into skyscrapers. This allowed us three times the amount of time needed for the operations, Allah be praised.
Your security is not in the hands of Kerry or Bush or Al-Qaeda. Your security is in your own hands, and any (US) state that does not belittle our security automatically guarantees its own security.
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH HER GIVE THEM STRENGTH,WISDOM,SIGHT AND COURAGE TO STAY THE COURSE TO VICTORY TO DEFEAT ALL ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPOR THEM OPEN THE EYS OF THE WORLD TO THEIR THREAT AMEN
PS
and ask yourself about beslain in Russia was that made up??
at October 31, 2004 9:37 PM
I may not be able to stomach my voting for Bush but I hope my state does -- I'd love to meet bin laden up close and personal!
at October 31, 2004 9:42 PM
The choice still has to be made, witness. Which one is better suited to get this job done?
I don't believe that this is something hatched by 'neo-cons.' Or Masons, or Illuminati, or the Elders of Zion. Unless we are to believe they began this in 1924 with the fall of the Caliphate.
Posted by: Gary at October 31, 2004 10:11 PM
I am pessimistic. For some strange reason, I believe Kerry will win.
I hope I am wrong, but if I am right -- then off to the secret plot of land I bought twenty years ago
Posted by: Moe's Foe at October 31, 2004 08:35 PM
If Kerry wins it'd be a setback tactically but not strategically. Our electoral process precludes strategic screw ups. Sort of like a homeostatic response; if a president screws up too badly he quickly gets replaced. Further, a lot of our domestic security depends on the vigilance of people far removed from the presidency and the electoral process.
If Kerry should win (which I'd bet against), hopefully he'll appoint Cheney as secretary of state instead Clinton. Still....Clinton would be better as secretary of state than Kerry.
Posted by: Afrafaste at October 31, 2004 10:16 PM
The only circumstance in which a Muslim community is allowed to sue for a ceasefire is when the non-Muslim enemy has a significant military advantage. This principle is derived directly from the precedent established by Muhammad himself when he agreed to the terms of the Truce of Hudaybiyyah. It is the template upon which all Muslim "diplomacy" is derived and is the reason that no non-Muslim state can ever be embraced as a peer in the global community of nations. It dictates that no treaty of peace can ever exist between the Muslims (dar al-Islam) and the Infidels (dar al-Harb). It also limits the duration of any ceasefire to 10 years though some jurists have allowed for an extension of an additional 10 years but never more.
It is interesting to note that President James Madison was well familiar with the Truce of Hudaybiyyah as were the American diplomats and military leaders who were despatched to North Africa to deal decisively with the dey of Algiers during the second Barbary War.
Posted by: Hulegu Khan at October 31, 2004 10:35 PM
The Boggy Man surfaces ( the same one the Bush Boy has been unable to capture over the last three years ) to justify and salvage the Bush Administration. Yes Bin Laden is trying to influence the elections here in America....so that his partner in crime will not go down.
The next step in Al Queda's master plan , after Bin Laden secured a safe haven for him self with the cooperation of Pakistan and Bush himself, is to forment strong alination and a devision in the United States it's self. With Bush and Chaney doing a marvelous job of doing just that on behalf of Osama Bin Laden.
If Kerry does win , which he should , there has been laid down such a foundation of hatred and mistrust for him via millions of dollars spent in smear campaings and blatant distrotions of Kerry's positions, Osama will face an opponet more devided than ever.
The point of a terrorist attack is to influence the political climate. This tape has done just that and is a " October Surprise " as effective as a bombing would have been. Osama Bin Laden is trying to elevate himself from that of cult terrorist figure to that of a world geo-political player. As long as we have a President who refuses to take the neccesary steps to take him out, he will become not only the Boggy Man so needed for American politcal purposes but also the geo-political player he aspires to be.
Nossy
Posted by: Nostrodamus at October 31, 2004 11:23 PM
obl is part of the enemy, a general if you will, but the enemy is islamofascism.
And the war with islamofascism will go on long after obl has been sent to meet his virgins.
It is a struggle for a liberal such a myself to support Bush, but then it would have been equally hard for a liberal to support Churchill, a reactionary in some ways. Churchill was the right man for the job, and, at this time, Bush is the right man for the job.
As our Prime Minister, Trudeau, said on one occasion where the choice was less than perfect "hold your nose and vote for it ".
To my fellow liberals, lefties, women libers, intelligent drug law people, gay righters, right to choicers - this is one time that the responsible thing to do is " hold your nose and vote for Bush "
Posted by: dby at November 1, 2004 12:53 AM
OT if anyone is up
from NYT maybe Robert will post more tomorrow.
Ethnic Clashes Erupt in China, Leaving 150 Dead
By JOSEPH KAHN
BEIJING, Oct. 31 - Violent clashes between members of the Muslim Hui ethnic group and the majority Han group left nearly 150 people dead and forced authorities to declare martial law in a section of Henan Province in central China, journalists and witnesses in the region said today.
The fighting flared late last week and continued into the weekend after a Hui taxi driver fatally struck a 6-year-old Han girl, prompting recriminations between different ethnic groups in neighboring villages, these people said.
One person who was briefed on the incident by the police said that 148 people had been killed, including 18 police officers sent to quell the violence.
Chinese media have reported nothing about unrest in Henan. But a news blackout would not be unusual, as propaganda authorities routinely suppress information about ethnic tensions.
Although most Chinese belong to the dominant Han ethnic group, the country has 55 other groups, including several Muslim minorities and others who have ties to Tibet, Southeast Asia, Korea and Mongolia.
Ethnic Muslim Uighurs in China's northwestern region of Xinjiang have led sporadic uprisings against Chinese rule and authorities maintain a heavy police presence there to prevent an Islamic insurgency.
Catch that last line?
at November 1, 2004 1:16 AM
Bin Laden tape a set up? could be possible...hmmm
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/october2004/291004binladenappears.htm
i think that if either of these jerks gets elected as prez, we will be in the same hole we are in today....but with bush, we'll be a silenced, ignorant bunch of people in a hole for having been fooled a second time after 4 years. what a wonderful christian he tries to seem for standing up against abortion and gay marriage.....and at the same time killing 1,000 abiding US troops and 10,000 iraqi civilians
we get so disgusted when we here 200 ppl die in thailand, 300 people die in russia....while our own bully leader kills 11,000 people unjustly...11,000 !
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/09/07/iraq.main/
at least kerry can spell.
Posted by: LukeMan at November 1, 2004 1:24 AM
If Kerry wins, how effective will he be with a republican majority? And after 4 years people will be begging for Bush to run again.
Posted by: D' Artist at November 1, 2004 1:25 AM
Thanks to any and all lefties with the good sense to put aside the politics and recognize the threat we face, and vote to keep Bush in office. And to those out there who are one brick short of a full load, get your heads out of your asses. God! Do you people honestly think that Bush DOESN'T want to get Binnie boy? Do any of you with brains not hitting on all cylinders recall the D.C sniper? The abortion clinic bomber? And how long it took to catch them even though law enforcement all over the country was in the hunt. Damn, get some common sense!!!
Posted by: krkrjak at November 1, 2004 1:27 AM
"If Kerry wins, how effective will he be with a republican majority? And after 4 years people will be begging for Bush to run again."
Actually, gridlock is good in my book. Keeps the government in check. A lot of conservatives agree, especially after 4 yrs of Bush's spending "like a drunken sailor"
-----------------
The ASSama tape is real. He wants to influence are vote one way or the other.
1. Maybe he wants Bush to win, so he is using reverse psychology, taunting us into anger. Also putting the focus on terror helps Bush, better than people talking about the economy, etc.
2. Maybe he doesn't care Kerry or Bush, and wants the American people to turn against their government. Since Kerry administration will not radically depart from traditional US foreign policy, he wants to try to divide people from the government.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/040317/325/eotq9.html
WE WANT BUSH TO WIN
The statement said it supported U.S. President George W. Bush in his reelection campaign, and would prefer him to win in November rather than the Democratic candidate John Kerry, as it was not possible to find a leader "more foolish than you (Bush), who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom."
In comments addressed to Bush, the group said:
"Kerry will kill our nation while it sleeps because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish blasphemy and present it to the Arab and Muslim nation as civilisation."
"Because of this we desire you (Bush) to be elected."
The group said its cells were ready for another attack and time was running out for allies of the United States.
"Whose turn is it next? Will it be Japan or America, or Italy, Britain or Oslo or Australia?" the statement said, adding Pakistan and Saudi Arabia were also targets.
The group is named after Muhammed Atef, also known as Abu Hafs, a close bin Laden aide killed in the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan.
------------------
http://www.republicansforkerry04.org
http://www.bushrelativesforkerry.com/pages/1/
http://www.independentsforkerry.org/
http://anotherrepublicanforkerry.com/
at November 1, 2004 4:56 AM
Would the Republican Congress stop supporting a President Kerry in the War on Terror?
Remember how the GOP refered to Kosovo as "Clinton's War"
But considering the important of the War on Terror, will the GOP rally behind Kerry if necessary?
For instance, Iran is misbehaving. Kerry might have to preempt Iran's nuclear program.
Would the GOP support Kerry like the Dems authorized Bush vis a vis Iraq?
Should be interesting in seeing if the GOP is truly patriotic more than merely partisan.
----
Anyway, the message to ASSama should be:
No matter who wins, we're coming after you
Your days are numbered
I think people of ALL political parties should unite in the destruction of genocidal global jihad
Posted by: mega2004 at November 1, 2004 5:02 AM
Hudna, hudna, can you say hudna? Is Osama making a strategic withdrawal, or, is he drawing us in, lulling us to believe that "Terror is Taking a Holiday" by using taqiyya and kitmam?
No matter who wins we must pull together. The election will be over, now fight the war AND WIN!!!!
(I still hope Bush wins.)
Posted by: epg at November 1, 2004 5:25 AM
Election Day: Decision Time and the Islamist Terror Threat
November 1, 2004
Jeffrey Imm
http://www.unitedstatesaction.com
It is no surprise that America's arch-enemy, Osama Bin Laden, has appeared days before this Election Day, with more threats to USA. Bin Laden's latest rant is that why Bush is a bad president for the United States, that we will never be safe until we change our "policies", and that neither Bush nor Kerry will keep us safe from terrorism. Bin Laden's goal is to try to intimidate the American people (NOTE 1). One of the few things that I am proud of in this election season is that both Bush and Kerry rejected Bin Laden's attempts to inject himself in the election, although it is strange that Kerry needed a poll to determine his response (NOTE 2).
Nonetheless, for all of his posturing, Bin Laden has failed to attack the United States despite repeated threats (NOTE 3). Moreover, his offer of a truce to Europe that expired in mid-July, over three months ago ended with a whimper not a bang (NOTE 4). That is not to say that continued terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan is not continuing. But realistically, thus far, the terror attacks have been constrained to the Middle East.
That is not to say that terrorists could and may not attack on November 2, November 3, or at any time. America remains a very open nation, despite our Homeland Security progress. But the greatest danger is whether the United States of America and American leadership will truly continue to grasp the threat of Islamist Terrorism, and its nihilistic, "end-times", all consuming passion to destroy our nation and our citizens.
The challenge we face on Election Day is "who will take Islamist Extremist Jihad seriously"? Because of course it will still be with us long after the election is over. And all of the other issues pale in importance, if the terrorists destroy America.
I am grateful for John Kerry's recent statements this month that he "will hunt and kill the terrorists, wherever they are." (NOTE 5). However, finding references to this statement in other than a TV ad is difficult, and this position is NOT emphasized on his web site. If Kerry is elected President, I will certainly hope he will be tough on terrorists. I know that Armed Forces and the Homeland Security individuals that USA takes for granted to protect their safety will be looking for a signal from Kerry that he will be tough on terrorists.
But there is a difference between a last minute campaign statement and a perspective that is fundamental to your outlook in life, and is reflected in the actions you take in your life.
If I could elect anyone President, it would by Rudy Guiliani. While Rudy still struggles with the issue of political correctness on Islam, he made it clear how he really feels about Jihadists when he promised: 'If you catch this guy, Bin Laden, I would like to be the one to execute him.'(NOTE 6). Rudy has had that position for over 2 years, not two weeks.
When my family's survival is threatened and my countrymen are mass-murdered, I want a President who is going to stick up for us first, and will make terrorists live in fear.
So I am going to vote for George Bush on Tuesday. The past 3 years have really changed much of my life. Especially since I have been a life-long committed Democrat. But absolutely my country and my family comes first. Of all the things I have heard, Zell Miller put it best for me: "My Family is More Important Than My Party" (NOTE 7)
In 2000, I voted for Al Gore in 2000 (yes, I realize after hearing Gore talk these past 3 years, in retrospect how dumb that was).
President Bush is not perfect in my eyes, and he has a long way to go on getting serious about Homeland Security. But I think, political correctness comments aside, that President Bush does get it about the Islamist Extremist threat and Jihad; moreover he recognizes the ideological and long term struggle we face against Islamist terrorists. (NOTE 8)
While in Pennsylvania, President Bush called the war on terror "a mighty ideological struggle" between an American society of religious tolerance and Islamist militants who kill those with different beliefs. He said that the terrorists' "hearts are filled with evil," he said. "There is no peace treaty you can sign with these people. (NOTE 8).
If you believe this, then you need to vote for a President who accepts this as a key part of his world view. If you don't believe this, then you need to vote for someone else.
In the middle of a war threatening our nation's survival, the burden is really on the challenger to prove that they can (and will) do as good or better of a job in defending our nation and fighting our enemies as the incumbent president. I don't think John Kerry has convincingly made that case. I have tried to be fair. I have listened to everything he has had to say. I have studied his web site. I suffered through all three Presidential debates. But at the end of the day, when I have to think about my family's safety, I have to make a choice not based on partisan politics, but based on national security.
And I find John Kerry lacking in that vital life-or-death area.
My problems with John Kerry are:
1. John Kerry has stated that threat of terrorism is "exaggerated"; I heard him say this myself. (NOTE 9)
2. John Kerry views terrorists as a "nuisance". per his interview with NYT. (NOTE 10)
3. John Kerry seeks a "global test" for our decisions on national security (NOTE 11)
4. John Kerry views the United Nations as an answer, not a problem. (NOTE 12)
5. John Kerry thinks "law enforcement" will defeat Jihadists who are paramilitary soldiers. (NOTE 13)
6. John Kerry offered to provide Iran with nuclear fuel to test their intentions to build a nuclear weapon. (NOTE 14)
7. Out of 100 senators, 99 senators voted to support the Bioshield bill to protect us from biological terrorism. 1 senator (John Kerry) did not. He was just down the street that day. (NOTE 15)
8. John Kerry has a 20 year Senate voting record against national defense initiatives (including the current Iraq war funding). (NOTE 16)
9. John Kerry told Arabs that the Israeli wall was a threat to peace, in effect, saying Israelis don't have a right to defend themselves from terrorists. Moreover, John Kerry has recognized terror leader Yasser Arafat as a "stateman"; and Arafat has endorsed Kerry for President. (NOTE 17)
10. Regardless of the flip/flops on the current Iraq war (NOTE 23), in 1991, when Saddam Hussein was invading Kuwait, John Kerry voted against stopping Saddam Hussein then. (NOTE 18)
11. John Kerry has the illusion that France and Germany share our national values and interests in fighting terrorism. (NOTE 19)
12. John Kerry collaborated with the enemy (North Vietnam) in Paris during war time while he was a soldier, and was viewed as a hero by the Communist North Vietnamese. (NOTE 20) The reason this is so important is that at the time, John Kerry was a member of the armed services. If a soldier goes off and negotiates with Communists in Paris on his own, what does that say about his judgement and loyalty?
I could go on for pages like this, if it were necessary. Again, I think there are many areas where President Bush needs to improve. But I don't know how I could believe in good conscience that John Kerry is a person who will take terrorists and Islamic Jihad seriously. It does not matter that Theresa Heinz has funded groups that are anti-Israel for years (NOTE 21). It does not matter that John Kerry claims to be for oil conversation while he owns 2 SUVs (NOTE 22).
The point is at the end of the day, who views Islamic Jihad as a real threat, and who wants to look the other way? And if I view Islamic Jihad as the most serious challenge to this nation, how then could I logically vote for other than George Bush? Other issues, and life-time Democratic affiliation aside, November 2 is about my country's safety, about my family, and about the war that will be waged against us - whether we are in Iraq or not.
The Iraq war will continue regardless, and the battle for democracy (whether it was originally founded based on accurate intelligence or not) in the Middle East is of legitimate value to the United States national security. John Kerry is on every side of this issue, and literally changes whichever way the wind blows. (NOTE 23). This is a dangerous example for any commander-in-chief to show the rest of the world.
In addition to having the capability to recognize the reality of EVIL, it is imperative that a President represent the "Executive Branch" of government. Executives are not long-winded professors who study and debate every aspect of every issue indefinitely. Senators can afford to do that, since they basically do very little anyways. But Executives cannot afford this vacillation. They must be decisive. This is true whether you are a Project Manager, a President of a Corporation, a Manager at McDonalds, or President of the United States. There is the need for DECISIVENESS and STANDING BY YOUR DECISIONS.
George Bush has benefited from being a Governor of the State of Texas, and has had to be a person making Executive decisions, not a policy wonk. Executive - means to ACT - that is Execute - the law of the United States. Not study or debate it to death. And anyone who has ever been a manager for any length of time knows that much of the time - the tough decisions that you MUST MAKE - are often not between perfectly good and bad choices, but between bad and worse choices. Thats a reality.
In the case of Iraq, we have one of those situations. Since the US invasion of Iraq, yes some chemical weapons, nerve gas, have been found (NOTE 24). Have stockpiles been found like we expected? No. And that doesn't mean that haven't gone to Syria or elsewhere. But what was found was the capability and resources to make such weapons. Moreover, the UN itself found forbidden chemical weapons before the US went to war in Iraq (NOTE 25). Why else was one of the USA military's first discoveries to find rooms of chemical weapon "space suits" for use by the Iraqi military? A fascist, anti-American Iraq definitely would have planned to do damaged to the United States at some point. The USA stopped that or at least has ensured better intelligence to control the threat. It is a real accomplishment, despite the efforts of terrorists to try to undermine the Iraqi people and American people's morale.
And if there is any question as to the EVIL that was threatening our nation, I invite you to visit the grim and gruesome site of Iraqi Mass Graves at: http://massgraves.info/ There may be 300,000 to 400,000 dead children, women, and men in these fascist mass graves from the maniac fascist Saddam Hussein. He would have surely loved to add American families to such mass graves. (NOTE 26)
The Iraqi Mass Graves should be part of American education, just like the Holocaust. It is our moral duty to work to stop and end such EVIL. We shouldn't need an invitation from Adolf Hitler to do so.
We have been fighting maniac predator Jihadist killers around the world, who we know would do anything to ensure "Death to America". Those Jihadist terrorists were in Iraq, and as one of the remaining "states sponsoring terrorism", Iraq could and would have done anything to help add American bodies to those mass graves.
We know for a FACT that Saddam Hussein funded Palestinian terrorists to kill Israelis. Moreover, at the time we went to war in Iraq, Saddam had paid out $35 MILLION to "Palestinian" suicide bombers for the Intifada. Per the Palestinian Arab Liberation Front (PALF), Saddam's payments included:
-- $10,000 per terrorist family
-- $25,000 for family of a terrorist suicide bomber
-- $35m paid since September 2000 (NOTE 27)
Moreover, the remnants of Saddam's fascists and Jihadists seek to continue to sponsor terror from funds they get from drugs and their Arab masters (NOTE 27).
So when you look at all the skulls and skeletons in the Mass Graves from the slaughter of madmen, remember that is what the Iraqi Jihadists had planned for us and our families. These are the forces of EVIL (NOTE 28).
Perhaps I have taken this war on terrorism too personally. But when someone comes to kill your family - it IS personal. On September 11 - if it had been on a Saturday instead of a Tuesday, our daughter would have been a mile away from Ground Zero. On September 11, if I had not changed jobs, I might have been in the Pentagon on the day it had been struck. Anthrax attacks in DC and NYC, Ricin attacks in DC, and the Muslim snipers John Mohammed and Lee Malvo have also been a part of my life (NOTE 29) - not just in the newspapers - but at home.
Postal workers from the Brentwood DC facility moved to the Gaithersburg USPS near our home. The sniper Mohammed killed neighbors down the street from me. We had to wear bullet-proof vests to get gasoline in our cars two years ago. Our home was surrounded by helicopters day and night.
Riding on the subway with police guards, warnings as to bombs on the trains, our family in cities living in Orange Alert for the past two years. Our lives - surrounded by invisible enemies ready to strike and kill us any day, any time.
This has been our lives, and this will continue to be our lives as long as the Islamist Terrorist threat continues. But it is and has been a serious threat to the Washington DC, NYC, and the nation as a whole. Those who think they are "safe" are only as safe as the next attack.
As much as I believe in Homeland Security and the value of a strong Defense, it is vital that we have a strong Offense to keep these Jihadist predators on the run. This means the nation needs someone who takes the Jihadist threat seriously. This means the nation needs a leader who understands the meaning of EVIL and will treat it without negotiation, without hesitation, and with everything that we've got.
This nation needs a leader who will put the fear of God into the forces of EVIL that menace our nation, our families, our homes.
I need to vote for someone who will recognize the threat, and who understands in this world of moral relativism - that there is genuine EVIL in this world. That is why I have no other option than to vote for George Bush's re-election.
As a period of bitter political fighting draws to a close (hopefully), we must remember that our strength lies in our unity as a nation. On November 3, we must put our differences behind us, no matter what happens, and find a way back to a greater national unity of purpose and resolve to fight EVIL.
===========================================================
FOOTNOTES AND REFERENCES:
-----------------------------------------------
NOTE 1: Complete Transcript of Bin Laden Tape
From NBC News, courtesty of Robert Cox at The National Debate October 29, 2004 http://www.command-post.org/gwot/2_archives/016354.html
NOTE 2: Cheney: Kerry Took Poll on Bin Laden Tape
Associated Press, October 31, 2004 http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&ncid=696&e=3&u=/ap/20041031/ap_on_el_pr/cheney
NOTE 3: The Best Osama Could Do
New York Post, October 30, 2004 http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/32993.htm
NOTE 4: Terror truce purportedly from bin Laden passes in Europe with little notice July 15, 2004 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unitedstatesaction/message/7468
NOTE 5: Kerry Ad
Referenced at: http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=37354
NOTE 6: Rudy: It's personal
Let me execute Bin Laden, says Giuliani in new book
September 29, 2002 http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/22559p-21397c.html
NOTE 7: Zell Miller's speech
WorldNet Daily, September 1, 2004
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40267
NOTE 8: Bush ratchets up rhetoric in 'ideological' terror war Washingon Times, July 10, 2004 http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040709-103956-5807r.htm
NOTE 9: During January 29, 2004 Democratic debates, when asked if Bush overstated the threat of terrorism, Kerry replied, "I think there has been an exaggeration. They are misleading all Americans in a profound way."
Transcript: Democratic Candidates Debate in South Carolina Thursday, Janary 29, 2004
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/transcripts/debatetranscript29.html?nav=hptop_ts
Kerry says threat of terrorism is exaggerated
The washington Times, January 30, 2004 http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040129-115023-8966r.htm
Kerry turns blind eye to terrorism
Douglas County News-Press, February 5, 2004 http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=10904678&BRD=1585&PAG=461&dept
NOTE 10: "We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance," Kerry said.
The New York Times Magazine, October 10, 2004
Kerry's Undeclared War
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/10/magazine/10KERRY.html
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/political_usa/message/355
NOTE 11: Global Test
"But if and when you do it, Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons."
The First Bush-Kerry Presidential Debate September 30, 2004 http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004a.html
U.N. panel to frame guidelines on legality of pre-emptive strike
Washington Times, October 6, 2004
http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20041006-012158-7663r.htm
Our Troops vs. Kerry's Global Test
National Review, October 29, 2004
http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200410291005.asp
NOTE 12: United Nations' Comments
"I'm an internationalist. I'd like to see our troops dispersed through the world only at the directive of the United Nations." [John Kerry, 1971] http://www.watchblog.com/republicans/archives/001305.html
"Within weeks of being inaugurated, I will return to the U.N. and I will literally, formally rejoin the community of nations and turn over a proud new chapter in America's relationship with the world."
Kerry can't be serious Charles Krauthammer / Syndicated columnist, April 26, 2004 http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/text/2001912564_krauthammer26.html
"You don't help yourself with other nations when you turn away from the global warming treaty, for instance, or when you refuse to deal at length with the United Nations."
The First Bush-Kerry Presidential Debate September 30, 2004 http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004a.html
What Did John Kerry Really Say?
Intellectual Conservative, October 6, 2004
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3838.html
Help of Allies Among Three Key Themes
Washington Post, Wednesday, October 20, 2004 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46225-2004Oct19.html
Kerry's belief in working with allies runs so deep that he has maintained that the loss of American life can be better justified if it occurs in the course of a mission with international support. In 1994, discussing the possibility of U.S. troops being killed in Bosnia, he said, "If you mean dying in the course of the United Nations effort, yes, it is worth that. If you mean dying American troops unilaterally going in with some false presumption that we can affect the outcome, the answer is unequivocally no."
UN inspector 'took $104,000 Iraq bribes'
London Telegraph, October 6, 2004 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/06/woil06.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/10/06/ixportaltop.html
NOTE 13: "Democrat John Kerry outlined his plan to combat terrorism Friday that relies on stronger intelligence-gathering, law enforcement and international alliances..." Kerry outlines anti-terrorism plan day in Los Angeles speech
Associated Press, February 27, 2004 http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/federal/20040227-1053-ca-democrats.html
The Dems' 'First Responder' fakeout
Michelle Malkin, March 17, 2004
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/michellemalkin/mm20040317.shtml
NOTE 14: "Iran claims that its nuclear program is only to meet its domestic energy needs. John Kerry's proposal would call their bluff by organizing a group of states to offer Iran the nuclear fuel they need for peaceful purposes and take back the spent fuel so they cannot divert it to build a weapon."
John Kerry for President Web Site
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/strategy.html
Kerry would still supply Iran with nuclear fuel WorldNetDaily.com, October 2, 2004 http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40740
...and Iran's response:
Iran won't surrender nuclear capability
London Telegraph, October 3, 2004 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/03/uiran.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/10/03/ixportaltop.html
NOTE 15: BioShield gets OK for chem attack prep
CNN, May 20, 2004
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unitedstatesaction/message/6548
Kerry couldn't be bothered, (Jeffrey Imm)
Washingon Times, May 22, 2004
http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20040521-084241-8587r.htm
NOTE 16:
Kerry Voted Against The $87 Billion Supplemental Supporting Our Troops And Providing Resources Needed To Win In Iraq. (S. 1689, CQ Vote #400: Passed 87-12: R 50-0; D 37-11; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Kerry Voted Nay) http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00400
Kerry opposed key weapons
Washington Times, February 23, 2004
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040223-115221-2572r.htm
Kerry's Inner Dove
Washington Post, February 23, 2004 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63124-2004Feb22.html
Kerry's Record on Defense:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4741992 http://www.gop.com/RNCResearch/Read.aspx?ID=3936
- Sen. Kerry Voted Against B-1 Bomber
- Sen. Kerry Voted Against B-2 Stealth Bomber
- Sen. Kerry Voted Against F-14
- Sen. Kerry Voted Against F-15
- Sen. Kerry Voted Against F-16
- Sen. Kerry Voted Against AV-8B Harrier Vertical Takeoff And Landing Jet Fighters
- Sen. Kerry Voted Against AH-64 Apache Helicopters
- Sen. Kerry Voted Against Patriot Missiles
- Sen. Kerry Voted Against Aegis Air Defense Cruiser
- Sen. Kerry Voted Against Trident Missile System For U.S. Submarines
- Sen. Kerry Voted Against M-1 Abrams Tanks
- Sen. Kerry Voted Against Bradley Fighting Vehicle
- Sen. Kerry Voted Against Tomahawk Cruise Missile.
NOTE 17: Kerry's View on Israel's Fence: 'Legitimate' or 'Barrier to Peace'? CNSNews.com, February 26, 2004
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/political_usa/message/225
In October 2003, Kerry said Israel's unilateral construction of a security fence was "a barrier to peace." "I know how disheartened Palestinians are by the decision to build the barrier off the Green Line," he told the Arab American Institute National Leadership Conference. "We don't need another barrier to peace. Provocative and counterproductive measures only harm Israelis." http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/29/politics/main646435.shtml
In a 1997 book by Kerry "The New war", Kerry described "Arafat's transformation from outlaw to statesman." This book is out of print, and Kerry supporters plan to keep it out of print. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1093091/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1173313/posts
http://varifrank.com/archives/2004/09/breaking_my_no.php
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684846144/002-3997504-0039269
Kerry Praises Terrorist Leader Arafat as 'Role Model'
NewsMax, March 8, 2004
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/3/8/112126.shtml
Yasser Arafat endorses Kerry
WorldNetDaily, October 18, 2004
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40988
NOTE 18: 1991: Kerry Voted Against The Use Of Force In Iraq. (S. J. Res. 2, CQ Vote #2: Passed 52-47: R 42-2; D 10-45, 1/12/91, Kerry Voted Nay)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d102:SJ00002:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=102&session=1&vote=00002
If John Kerry had gotten his way in 1991, Saddam Hussein would still be in power today in Iraq, Kuwait, and possibly Saudi Arabia.
NOTE 19: Kerry said he would try to draw in countries to work in Iraq that opposed the war, such as Germany and France.
Our Oldest Enemy : A History of America's Disastrous Relationship with France John J. Miller http://www.oldestenemy.com/index.php
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0385512198/ref%3Dnosim/nationalreviewon/002-3997504-0039269
France, Germany won't send troops under Kerry, either
Daily News Brief, September 27, 2004
http://www.dailynewsbrief.com/news/archives/000647.php
Kerry says Franco-German troops unlikely
Washington Times, October 6, 2004
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20041006-011859-5099r.htm
John Kerry: Germany's Candidate
The Daily Standard, October 6, 2004 http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/775mzgmp.asp
French Going Wild For Senator Kerry In Election Fever
The New York Sun, March 15, 2004 http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib%3AArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2004/03/15&ID=Ar00104
The rage of Paris, but sour at home
Washington Times, March 18, 2004
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040318-112136-7499r.htm
Le Monde endorses Kerry in U.S. race
WorldNetDaily, October 30, 2004 http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41197
NOTE 20: Kerry met with representatives from "both delegations" of the Vietnamese in Paris in 1970, according to Kerry's own testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 22, 1971. "I have been to Paris. I have talked with both delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the Provisional Revolutionary Government." However, both of the delegations to which Kerry referred were communist. Neither included the U.S. allied, South Vietnamese or any members of the U.S. delegation.
Author: Kerry's Meeting With Communists Broke U.S. Law
NewsMax, May 20, 2004
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/5/20/91603.shtml
FBI Files Show Kerry Met With Communists More Than Once
CNS News, June 4, 2004 http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=\SpecialReports\archive\200406\SPE20040604a.html
Meeting with the enemy
Chapter 7, Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry http://www.learnedhand.com/kerryunfit7.htm
Kerry Honored by Vietnamese Communists http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=20040531140357545
Communist Vietnamese honor John Kerry, the war protestor, as a hero in their victory over the United States in the Vietnam War
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=20040604194804799
Another document ties Kerry to Hanoi
WorldNetDaily, October 28, 2004 http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41142
NOTE 21: Teresa Heinz Kerry: Bag Lady for the Radical Left
FrontPageMagazine.com, February 13, 2004 http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=12187
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/political_usa/message/212
57 Varieties of Radical Causes, Part II
FrontPageMagazine.com, September 17, 2004 http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15142
NOTE 22: Kerry says he doesn't own an SUV, or does he?
Associated Press, April 23, 2004
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/political_usa/message/267
NOTE 23: Kerry's Quotes on Iraq - all over the place - pick a day - you'll see a different position: http://www.archive-news.net/Articles/IR041003.html
http://www.kerrysenate.com/iraqtimeline.htm
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/29/politics/main646435.shtml
NOTE 24: Weapons in Iraq
Chemical weapon antidotes found in Iraqi base
US Marines say they have discovered drugs used by soldiers to counter chemical weapons and 3000 chemical protection suits at a hospital used by Iraqi forces in the town of An Nasariyah. NewScientist.com news service, March 26, 2003 http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993554
U.S. troops find signs of chemical readiness
Associated Press, April 5, 2003 http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030405-chem-readiness01.htm
Polish Troops Find Sarin Warheads in Iraq
London Guardian, July 1, 2004 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unitedstatesaction/message/7169
Suspect shells examined in Iraq (Mustard Gas)
BBC, January 10, 2004 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3386357.stm
Chemical Weapons Found In Iraq
Talon News, January 12, 2004 http://www.gopusa.com/news/2004/january/0112_danish_wmd.shtml
Nerve agents sarin and tabun -- area where they found storage area.. . People started to throw up and blister when the went into the room Reuters, April 07, 2003 http://www.command-post.org/archives/004459.html
Photographic Proof of Iraq's Weapons Violations
NewsMax, Oct. 23, 2003
Evidence of biological weapons found, says PM
The Age, June 17, 2003 http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/06/17/1055615741036.html?oneclick=true
Nerve Gas used in Northern Iraq on Kurds http://www.phrusa.org/research/chemical_weapons/chemiraqgas2.html
Saddam's WMDs
London Telegraph, December 12, 2003 http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=11290
Nerve Agent Sarin Identified in 1993 as Chemical Weapon Used Earlier by Iraq Against Kurdish Population http://www.phrusa.org/research/chemical_weapons/chemsaringas.html
http://www.phrusa.org/research/chemical_weapons/photos18.html
Winds of Death: Iraq's Use of Poison Gas against Its Kurdish Population Physicians for Human Rights http://www.phrusa.org/research/iraq/winds.html
Saddam's WMDs are in Syria
orldNetDaily, June 29, 2004 http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39182
NOTE 25: UN inspection teams find undeclared chemical warheads Associated Press, January 17, 2003 http://www.idsnews.com/story.php?id=14009
NOTE 26: 60 pages of the dead women, children, and men in Iraqi Mass graves Something that has never found its way into "mainstream news" Iraqi Mass Graves http://massgraves.info/
Iraqis uncover thousands in mass graves
CNN, May 14, 2003 http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/05/14/sprj.irq.main/
Mass Graves of Iraq: Uncovering Atrocities
Janury 2004 http://www.defendamerica.mil/specials/jan2004/atrocities012104.html
Iraq's Mass Graves Could Hold 300,000 victims
November 08, 2003 http://www.back-to-iraq.com/archives/000479.php
Iraq's Legacy of Terror: Mass Graves
Since the Saddam Hussein regime was overthrown in May, 270 mass graves have been reported. By mid-January, 2004, the number of confirmed sites climbed to fifty-three. http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/legacyofterror.html
Horrors of Iraq's mass graves
Shia News, June 24, 2003 http://www.shianews.com/hi/articles/politics/0000374.php
Victims of Chemical Weapons http://www.phrusa.org/research/chemical_weapons/photos18.html
NOTE 27: Palestinians get Saddam funds
BBC, March 13, 2003
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2846365.stm
Israel Ties Iraq to Palestinian Payments
The Washington Post, October 11, 2002 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A9795-2002Oct10¬Found=true
Post-Saddam militants fund Palestinian terror?
WorldNetDaily, September 29, 2004
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40670
NOTE 28
President Delivers State of the Union Address, 2002 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-11.html
"States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic."
NOTE 29
On John Muhammad: A Fifth-Column Footsoldier in War Against Infidel U.S.? Richmond Times-Dispatch, Oct 16, 2003 http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD%2FMGArticle%2FRTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031771573759&path=%21editorials%21oped&s=1045855935007
THE SNIPER - What You Won’t Be Told
Religious Freedom Coalition, November 1, 2002 http://www.rfcnet.org/news/?action=detail&article=62&category=17
John Allen Muhammad: hating America
October 31, 2002 http://www.townhall.com/columnists/larryelder/le20021031.shtml
Lee Malvo, Muslim Hatemonger
CNSNews.com, December 10, 2003 http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCommentary.asp?Page=\Commentary\archive\200312\COM20031210a.html
Representative Lee Malvo Prison Artwork http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/courts/cases/jpg/120303df65_016.jpg
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/courts/cases/jpg/120303df65_023.jpg
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/courts/cases/jpg/120303df65_031.jpg
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/courts/cases/jpg/120303df65_062.jpg
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/courts/cases/jpg/120303df65_068.jpg
====================================================================
at November 1, 2004 5:49 AM
Mega asks:
Would the Republican Congress stop supporting a President Kerry in the War on Terror?
Kerry: War? What war? 3000 people dying is just a 'nuisance.' We can deal with that happening once in a while. Just let law enforcement deal with it...
Remember how the GOP refered to Kosovo as "Clinton's War"
Ahhh yes. The unilateral war. Didn't even bother to go to the UN. Bombed the wrong side from 35,000 feet, and now islam has an even greater hold on the country. And let's not forget Clinton used Haliburton! 8 times, no less.
But considering the important of the War on Terror, will the GOP rally behind Kerry if necessary?
Again, Kerry asks, what war? I am too busy rebuilding the Gorelick wall and removing 1st Amendment rights from anyone who criticized me.
For instance, Iran is misbehaving. Kerry might have to preempt Iran's nuclear program.
By offering them what they need to build nukes? He's said as much. Don't you believe him?
Would the GOP support Kerry like the Dems authorized Bush vis a vis Iraq?
Was that before or after they claimed not to? Before or after they changed their votes (Kerry especially). Anyway, if it doesn't pass his 'Global Test'- and it never would- there won't be another war- and the islamofascists gain ground.
Should be interesting in seeing if the GOP is truly patriotic more than merely partisan.
Already looking towards the 2008 elections, eh?
at November 1, 2004 5:50 AM
Wow, I had no idea so many people were blinded by fear to the extent that we deny reality and embrace excuses and lies (that's all bush has offered us).
In the name of 'fighting terror', bush could probably come to each of our homes, rip out our beloved sons and daughters, and tell them that they are off to fight a noble and just war. oh wait he's already done that...
He said "Our nation enters this conflict reluctantly, yet our purpose is SURE. The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an OUTLAW REGIME that threatens the peace with WEAPONS OF MASS MURDER." (3/2003)
(For those who suffer from bush-lying amnesia, here's the transcript:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/19/sprj.irq.int.bush.transcript/
A month before and a month after bush claims that our purpose is oh so sure, US official weapons inspectors SHOUT that there are no evidences that prove his SURE objective of eliminating wmds. And for a year we fell deaf to these internal truths being shouted by our own fellow American inspectors, and finally were told that now International inspectors have proven that there are no WMDs....
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/may2003/wmd-m17.shtml
so what happened next. instead of being angry that we were lied to by our own 'leader' and feeling as if we no longer had a voice in our government's actions, what did we do? we COMPLETELY suck up his lies ONCE AGAIN about our 'revised' SURE purpose...."A war that was waged principally to overthrow a dictator who possessed 'some of the most lethal weapons ever devised' has evolved into a mission to rid Iraq of its 'weapons-making capabilities' and to offer democracy and freedom to its 25 million residents."
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0929-23.htm
This test performed by the administration on the american public has worked. Can a bunch of bullies convince millions of americans of any lie? obviously so. we had so much faith in our leaders that our children voluntarily became a party of the army that serves this country...and what respect and dignity have they been given? absolutely none. bush points the finger and our children die. all in the name of democracy.
What can be learned from all this? we, as americans, are psychologically on the decline. we have undermined our forefathers original establishment of a free nation, and have surrendered to fear at the hands of our own caniving leader, not some bearded turban-wearing guy thats still alive. wake up and dont be numbed to death by these rich, eletist monsters (administration) that have no shame in deceiving their own people. "The terrorist attacks September 11 were a massive failure of government, let’s not reward it by giving even more power and responsibility. That would only be to reward the guilty and punish the innocent."
give the terrorists no voice, no chance and no honesty: not your own people, bush. whether he is elected or not is indifferent to the amount of sublime decline we are ALLOWING ourselves fall into everyday...
http://www.yaf.com/clark_terror.shtml
As Ben Franklin observed long ago, he who gives up his freedom in exchange for security will get neither, and deserves neither.
at November 1, 2004 8:48 AM
I see the pessimists are still popping out of the woodwork with paranoid conspiracy fantasies.
Luke, you are about a year too late to make any impact here, except perhaps with Mega and kj. And Wednesday it shall all be rendered moot.
btw, the only thing we fear here is what small minds like yours will do if they gain power in the US.
Posted by: Gary at November 1, 2004 9:07 AM
what conspiracy theory? This is called a timeline of actual events that happened. Bush says one lie, follows it up with another, all documented, heard by all of us.
Things that happened are factual gary, not theoretical.
i guess logic like that makes me small-minded.
thanks for providing a real, valid, factual response: after all, insults and accusations were all i expected..
so well done for surpassing THAT expectation, haha
Posted by: LukeMan at November 1, 2004 9:31 AM
timelines are one thing; making things out to be lies and conspiracies are another. Despite Everything that has been made known in the past year, you continue to hold to the lies the Left tells you.
4 more years. And 4 more after that. It is that, or being sold out to the UN.
Posted by: Gary at November 1, 2004 9:54 AM
btw, why are you posting Waaaay back here? afraid the Big Guns, whom have just barely begun to put in today's appearance, are going to shred everything you have to say?
Posted by: Gary at November 1, 2004 9:58 AM
Sorry guys. I don't know Why I keep responding to trolls.
Posted by: Gary at November 1, 2004 9:58 AM
Bush and Kerry both attended Yale.
Guess whose grades were better?
That's right - George W. Bush.
Posted by: CGW at November 1, 2004 10:03 AM
And that's another thing. Isn't a massive campaign of lies, in order to further an agenda, a conspiracy? Or at least part of the definition.
CGW~ maybe that explains why GWB signed his Form 180- lay the truth out for all to see. It's the Smart thing to do.
Posted by: Gary at November 1, 2004 10:18 AM
I may not be able to stomach my voting for Bush but I hope my state does -- I'd love to meet bin laden up close and personal!
Posted by: witness at October 31, 2004 09:42 PM
Why do you think he is sexy??
We know you aint got any balls!!
Paer of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH THEM HELP THEIR PEOPLE TO BE WISE AND STAY THE COURSE TO DEFEAT ALL ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPORT THEM OPEN THE EYE OF THE WORLD TO THIER THREAT AMEN
GOD GIVE OUR FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT COURAGE AND STRENGTH TO DEFEAT THE ISLAMIC TERRORIST IN THIS FIGHT EASE THEIR HEARTS FOR WHAT THE ISLAMIC TERRORIST MAKE THEM DO AMEN
at November 1, 2004 11:17 AM
Posted by: jeffreyimm at November 1, 2004 05:49 AM
Gold star for the day!!!
I'm not worthy! I'm not worthy!!
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40267
ELECTION 2004
Text of Zell Miller's speech
'I have knocked on the door of this man's soul ... '
Posted: September 1, 2004
10:30 p.m. Eastern
2004 WorldNetDaily.com
Since I last stood in this spot, a whole new generation of the Miller Family has been born: Four great grandchildren.
Along with all the other members of our close-knit family, they are my and Shirley's most precious possessions.
And I know that's how you feel about your family also. Like you, I think of their future, the promises and the perils they will face.
Like you, I believe that the next four years will determine what kind of world they will grow up in.
And like you, I ask which leader is it today that has the vision, the willpower and, yes, the backbone to best protect my family?
The clear answer to that question has placed me in this hall with you tonight. For my family is more important than my party.
There is but one man to whom I am willing to entrust their future and that man's name is George Bush.
In the summer of 1940, I was an 8-year-old boy living in a remote little Appalachian valley. Our country was not yet at war, but even we children knew that there were some crazy men across the ocean who would kill us if they could.
President Roosevelt, in his speech that summer, told America "all private plans, all private lives, have been in a sense repealed by an overriding public danger."
In 1940, Wendell Wilkie was the Republican nominee.
And there is no better example of someone repealing their "private plans" than this good man. He gave Roosevelt the critical support he needed for a peacetime draft, an unpopular idea at the time.
And he made it clear that he would rather lose the election than make national security a partisan campaign issue.
Shortly before Wilkie died, he told a friend, that if he could write his own epitaph and had to choose between "here lies a president" or "here lies one who contributed to saving freedom," he would prefer the latter.
Where are such statesmen today?
Where is the bipartisanship in this country when we need it most?
Now, while young Americans are dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan, our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of the Democrat's manic obsession to bring down our Commander in Chief.
What has happened to the party I've spent my life working in?
I can remember when Democrats believed that it was the duty of America to fight for freedom over tyranny.
It was Democratic President Harry Truman who pushed the Red Army out of Iran, who came to the aid of Greece when Communists threatened to overthrow it, who stared down the Soviet blockade of West Berlin by flying in supplies and saving the city.
Time after time in our history, in the face of great danger, Democrats and Republicans worked together to ensure that freedom would not falter. But not today.
Motivated more by partisan politics than by national security, today's Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator.
And nothing makes this Marine madder than someone calling American troops occupiers rather than liberators.
Tell that to the one-half of Europe that was freed because Franklin Roosevelt led an army of liberators, not occupiers.
Tell that to the lower half of the Korean Peninsula that is free because Dwight Eisenhower commanded an army of liberators, not occupiers.
Tell that to the half a billion men, women and children who are free today from the Baltics to the Crimea, from Poland to Siberia, because Ronald Reagan rebuilt a military of liberators, not occupiers.
Never in the history of the world has any soldier sacrificed more for the freedom and liberty of total strangers than the American soldier. And, our soldiers don't just give freedom abroad, they preserve it for us here at home.
For it has been said so truthfully that it is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us the freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the soldier, not the agitator, who has given us the freedom to protest.
It is the soldier who salutes the flag, serves beneath the flag, whose coffin is draped by the flag, who gives that protester the freedom to abuse and burn that flag.
No one should dare to even think about being the Commander in Chief of this country if he doesn't believe with all his heart that our soldiers are liberators abroad and defenders of freedom at home.
But don't waste your breath telling that to the leaders of my party today. In their warped way of thinking America is the problem, not the solution.
They don't believe there is any real danger in the world except that which America brings upon itself through our clumsy and misguided foreign policy.
It is not their patriotism -- it is their judgment that has been so sorely lacking. They claimed Carter's pacifism would lead to peace.
They were wrong.
They claimed Reagan's defense buildup would lead to war.
They were wrong.
And, no pair has been more wrong, more loudly, more often than the two Senators from Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry.
Together, Kennedy/Kerry have opposed the very weapons system that won the Cold War and that is now winning the War on Terror.
Listing all the weapon systems that Senator Kerry tried his best to shut down sounds like an auctioneer selling off our national security but Americans need to know the facts.
The B-1 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, dropped 40 percent of the bombs in the first six months of Operation Enduring Freedom.
The B-2 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered air strikes against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Hussein's command post in Iraq.
The F-14A Tomcats, that Senator Kerry opposed, shot down Gadhafy's Libyan MIGs over the Gulf of Sidra. The modernized F-14D, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered missile strikes against Tora Bora.
The Apache helicopter, that Senator Kerry opposed, took out those Republican Guard tanks in Kuwait in the Gulf War. The F-15 Eagles, that Senator Kerry opposed, flew cover over our Nation's Capital and this very city after 9/11.
I could go on and on and on: against the Patriot Missile that shot down Saddam Hussein's scud missiles over Israel; against the Aegis air-defense cruiser; against the Strategic Defense Initiative; against the Trident missile; against, against, against.
This is the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of our U.S. Armed Forces?
U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?
Twenty years of votes can tell you much more about a man than twenty weeks of campaign rhetoric.
Campaign talk tells people who you want them to think you are. How you vote tells people who you really are deep inside.
Senator Kerry has made it clear that he would use military force only if approved by the United Nations.
Kerry would let Paris decide when America needs defending.
I want Bush to decide.
John Kerry, who says he doesn't like outsourcing, wants to outsource our national security.
That's the most dangerous outsourcing of all. This politician wants to be leader of the free world.
Free for how long?
For more than 20 years, on every one of the great issues of freedom and security, John Kerry has been more wrong, more weak and more wobbly than any other national figure.
As a war protester, Kerry blamed our military.
As a Senator, he voted to weaken our military. And nothing shows that more sadly and more clearly than his vote this year to deny protective armor for our troops in harms way, far away.
George Bush understands that we need new strategies to meet new threats.
John Kerry wants to re-fight yesterday's war. George Bush believes we have to fight today's war and be ready for tomorrow's challenges. George Bush is committed to providing the kind of forces it takes to root out terrorists.
No matter what spider hole they may hide in or what rock they crawl under.
George Bush wants to grab terrorists by the throat and not let them go to get a better grip.
From John Kerry, they get a "yes-no-maybe" bowl of mush that can only encourage our enemies and confuse our friends.
I first got to know George Bush when we served as governors together. I admire this man. I am moved by the respect he shows the first lady, his unabashed love for his parents and his daughters, and the fact that he is unashamed of his belief that God is not indifferent to America.
I can identify with someone who has lived that line in "Amazing Grace," "Was blind, but now I see," and I like the fact that he's the same man on Saturday night that he is on Sunday morning.
He is not a slick talker but he is a straight shooter and, where I come from, deeds mean a lot more than words.
I have knocked on the door of this man's soul and found someone home, a God-fearing man with a good heart and a spine of tempered steel.
The man I trust to protect my most precious possession: my family.
This election will change forever the course of history, and that's not any history. It's our family's history.
The only question is how. The answer lies with each of us. And, like many generations before us, we've got some hard choosing to do.
Right now the world just cannot afford an indecisive America. Fainthearted self-indulgence will put at risk all we care about in this world.
In this hour of danger our President has had the courage to stand up. And this Democrat is proud to stand up with him.
Thank you.
God Bless this great country and God Bless George W. Bush.
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strengt,Wisdom,Sight and Courage to stay the course to Victory to DEFEAT ALL Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Eyes of the World to their Threat Amen
at November 1, 2004 11:32 AM
Is LukeMan just another Troll blinded because he has his head in his ass or is he just another Bush hating radical left wing wacko dick head?
Posted by: krkrjak at November 1, 2004 2:09 PM
whoa krkrjak....touchy, touchy...
i guess that means there's some truth to what i said after all to make you and gary so defensive....
if i said that the sky was red, would you be so passionately defensive....
i think not. obvious misinformation triggers no thought and no reaction.
its the truth revealed that scares people into cursing and referring to trolls who have their heads in their asses....
and what left, what right? im not someone listening and following a group of people...im someone who is deeply hurt that some of my good friends are off to fight a war that so many defend, but few are fighting. if you really believe this whole facade bush keeps ranting about in order to divert our attention from his mistakes...why aren't you in iraq fighting so passionately as you speak?
oh yeah, i forgot, youre too busy posting messages online using insults and bad logic...i'm sorry but if bush's bully methods didn't work on me, yours certainly wont either....
let's all unite under our morality instead of calling each other liberals, lefties, conservative nuts, bla bla...lets get a check on our morality..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1340562,00.html
Posted by: LukeMan at November 1, 2004 9:11 PM
The war on Iraq has made moral cowards of us all:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1340562,00.html
at November 1, 2004 9:13 PM
Wrong analysis. It looks like OBL wants US states to secede from the union.
This idiot actually thinks the states conduct their own foreign policy.
How disgraceful that Bush & his henchmen try to use 9/11 and OBL for their own craven political purposes. Shame on you.
http://www.slate.com/id/2108954/
You Spoke Too Soon, MEMRI! A bit of evidence that supports MEMRI's "state by state" translation of Osama bin Laden's latest video, from a 2001 the description of a 1996 interview he gave to, yes, Robert Fisk:
"Intelligent - and eloquent in Arabic - bin Laden undoubtedly is. But his understanding of foreign affairs is decidedly eccentric. At one point, he even suggested to me that individual US states might secede from the Union because of Washington's support for Israel. [Emphasis added]"
In other words, it may not be that bin Laden's so in touch with American politics that he's reading RealCLearPolitics and counting up electoral votes. He may be so out of touch that he hasn't learned about the Civil War. ... This suggests that while MEMRI's translation may be accurate, the focus of both MEMRI and the NY Post on the current presidential election may be misplaced. Bin Laden may not be offering protection to a state that votes against Bush. He may not be talking about the election at all. He may be looking past the election and attempting to offer protection to states that secede, or follow their own foreign policies. ... P.S.: Note that this interpretation would both fit the translation and explain why bin Laden seemingly lumps Kerry and Bush together. He's not trying to get votes for either man. ... [Thanks to alert reader P.C.] 10:57 P.M.
Posted by: mega2004 [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 2, 2004 05:51 AM
at November 2, 2004 5:56 AM
"resolve"?
"dead or alive"??
Check this out:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v465/somnamblst/debate.gif
Wow.
Posted by: mega2004 at November 2, 2004 5:57 AM
Luke -
My comments in this posting are directed to you.
I notice that you "change the subject" and do not address any of the key comments that I made in my posting above. You claim the USA is to be ashamed of its involvement in the Iraq war. Did you see any of my footnotes? Here is a sampling of those on Iraq below. Did you ever see any of them? Do you think all the photographs, all the reporters, and the sources are liers or for George Bush? That stretchs anyone's credibility.
Jeffrey Imm
-------------------------------------
NOTE 24: Weapons in Iraq
Chemical weapon antidotes found in Iraqi base
US Marines say they have discovered drugs used by soldiers to counter chemical weapons and 3000 chemical protection suits at a hospital used by Iraqi forces in the town of An Nasariyah. NewScientist.com news service, March 26, 2003 http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993554
U.S. troops find signs of chemical readiness
Associated Press, April 5, 2003 http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030405-chem-readiness01.htm
Polish Troops Find Sarin Warheads in Iraq
London Guardian, July 1, 2004 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unitedstatesaction/message/7169
Suspect shells examined in Iraq (Mustard Gas)
BBC, January 10, 2004 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3386357.stm
Chemical Weapons Found In Iraq
Talon News, January 12, 2004 http://www.gopusa.com/news/2004/january/0112_danish_wmd.shtml
Nerve agents sarin and tabun -- area where they found storage area.. . People started to throw up and blister when the went into the room Reuters, April 07, 2003 http://www.command-post.org/archives/004459.html
Photographic Proof of Iraq's Weapons Violations
NewsMax, Oct. 23, 2003
Evidence of biological weapons found, says PM
The Age, June 17, 2003 http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/06/17/1055615741036.html?oneclick=true
Nerve Gas used in Northern Iraq on Kurds http://www.phrusa.org/research/chemical_weapons/chemiraqgas2.html
Saddam's WMDs
London Telegraph, December 12, 2003 http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=11290
Nerve Agent Sarin Identified in 1993 as Chemical Weapon Used Earlier by Iraq Against Kurdish Population http://www.phrusa.org/research/chemical_weapons/chemsaringas.html
http://www.phrusa.org/research/chemical_weapons/photos18.html
Winds of Death: Iraq's Use of Poison Gas against Its Kurdish Population Physicians for Human Rights http://www.phrusa.org/research/iraq/winds.html
Saddam's WMDs are in Syria
orldNetDaily, June 29, 2004 http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39182
NOTE 25: UN inspection teams find undeclared chemical warheads Associated Press, January 17, 2003 http://www.idsnews.com/story.php?id=14009
NOTE 26: 60 pages of the dead women, children, and men in Iraqi Mass graves Something that has never found its way into "mainstream news" Iraqi Mass Graves http://massgraves.info/
Iraqis uncover thousands in mass graves
CNN, May 14, 2003 http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/05/14/sprj.irq.main/
Mass Graves of Iraq: Uncovering Atrocities
Janury 2004 http://www.defendamerica.mil/specials/jan2004/atrocities012104.html
Iraq's Mass Graves Could Hold 300,000 victims
November 08, 2003 http://www.back-to-iraq.com/archives/000479.php
Iraq's Legacy of Terror: Mass Graves
Since the Saddam Hussein regime was overthrown in May, 270 mass graves have been reported. By mid-January, 2004, the number of confirmed sites climbed to fifty-three. http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/legacyofterror.html
Horrors of Iraq's mass graves
Shia News, June 24, 2003 http://www.shianews.com/hi/articles/politics/0000374.php
Victims of Chemical Weapons http://www.phrusa.org/research/chemical_weapons/photos18.html
NOTE 27: Palestinians get Saddam funds
BBC, March 13, 2003
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2846365.stm
Israel Ties Iraq to Palestinian Payments
The Washington Post, October 11, 2002 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A9795-2002Oct10¬Found=true
Post-Saddam militants fund Palestinian terror?
WorldNetDaily, September 29, 2004
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40670
at November 2, 2004 9:48 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)