I think thug-in-chief is not going to be interested. I think he is in a stupor, only this is of the cultist kind. He wants that imam of his out of that well, and he has seen that so far, all we have done is make empty threats. He is not going to stop, and sometimes I wonder, when he has his bomb, what are we going to do ? Our President made the 'axis of evil' speech a long time back. He should have attacked immediately after. THAT would have stopped NK as well. Oh well,

Posted by: arjun.sevak at May 16, 2006 12:26 PM

They could make me the poster boy for Islamophobia by now and I'd be smiling in the picture.

Bush continues to amaze me with his ignorance. The man isn't as stupid as some might suggest, but he certainly is ignorant of the most important points of our time. And that is not easily forgiven.

Posted by: Foehammer at May 16, 2006 12:49 PM

Oh, and by the way, this action clearly demonstrates a policy of appeasement. We are being lead by a Chamberlain Administration. They can try to word it anyway they like, but when you grant normal relations to Muslim states that are going to continue to produce enemies of the West, you are playing right into their hands. Make no mistake about it.

Posted by: Foehammer at May 16, 2006 12:52 PM

While on the subject of Libya, a few (probably inane) questions, since I haven't followed Libya since the 1987 retaliation for the bombing of the La Belle diskothek in Berlin

• Is the Green Book a potential substitute to the Quran
  
• Is the cult of Muammar something like the cult of Ataturk that has been used to supress Islam in Libya?
  
• Are projects like the Great Man-made River a distraction from Jihad, or practical taqiyya?
  
• Is Gaddafi really reformed after the 1987 bombing, which seemingly ended his flirtation with Abu Nidal, Iran and terrorism in general?

I supported the US bombing of Tripoli and Benghazi in 1987, but haven't known what to make of his subsequent policies. To what extent is Libya Islamic - as bad as Saudi Arabia, Egypt et al, or relatively mild, like Azerbaijan? Also, are there non Arabs, like Berbers in Algeria, or Infidels, like the Copts in Egypt?

Posted by: Infidel Pride at May 16, 2006 1:03 PM

Isn't it Libya that is holding a doctor and some nurses for supposedly giving the HIV virus to children? Some of the nurses said they were raped in jail. Apparently the jail standards are the same throughout islamic countries. Has Khadfi regained his sanity?

Why do we continue to have anything to do with muslim countries. Are there not other safe countries that have oil?

Posted by: freewoman at May 16, 2006 1:42 PM

"The man isn't as stupid as some might suggest, but he certainly is ignorant of the most important points of our time. And that is not easily forgiven."
Posted by: Foehammer at May 16, 2006 12:49 PM

The man isn't as stupid as some might suggest? ok, no comment. but i am just fed up with people not adressing the problem. Are you telling me that Bush is ignorant of what that freak really is? it's because he is fully aware of what he's doing, Bush, is very stupid.i'm sure all those who died once in a very safe flight attacked by Qaddafi's boyfriends, would now have been screaming : He'll do it again you moron, just upset him and you'll see. But they're dead.

I am sick of pretending that everything is fine, and it's just that our governments need to be aware of Muslim politics. It's Our people that are not to blame, they know little about Islam and much about the religion of peace. But i'm sure a guy with control of the CIA knows that this freak hasn't changed, he just got sick of sanctions. which gets me back to my main point : it's just dirty politics. both sides know what each are made of. Bush is not in for a cause, he's in for daddy's firms, and stupid hope of economical growth for his nation by bowing down to a despot like Qaddafi. Or maybe sending a message to Iran that everything could work out between us, if Iran did just what Qaddafi did. After all these years, some people still think anything but a rigid policy towards such despots could work. Another plane crash could refresh our memories, let's just sit back and wait.

Posted by: night_side_eclipse at May 16, 2006 1:46 PM

Why do we continue to have anything to do with muslim countries. Are there not other safe countries that have oil? Posted by: freewoman

freewoman

The main countries that do, and export it are

• Venezuela
  
• Russia
  
• Canada
  
• Mexico
  

Venezuela might as well be an Islamic republic, given the recent antics of Hugo Chavez. It would be one thing if he was just a Castro wannabe, but not content with that, one of the things Venezuela is said to be doing is hosting Islamic terrorists, and training them on how to pass off as Latinos. Given all the beligerent statements from him recently, he seems to be trying to force the US into taking him out forcefully, so that he can appear as a Simon Bolivar to his people.

Also, China has recently started increasing its demand for oil from Canada, who is happy to have a customer other than the US, and from Russia as well. They've also bought a majority stake in a major Kazakhistan oil company, beating India to the punch. So the demand is great, and if one constricts it to only the Infidel countries, some of which are allied to the enemies, one has a real shortfall.

But the biggest problem for the US is refining capacity. Even if with a magic wand the entire OPEC bloc became Infidel overnight, gas prices would remain what they are, due to the increased demand from China, India and the US itself, not accompanied by an increase in refining capacity.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at May 16, 2006 2:03 PM

I agree with night_side_eclipse ,bush is gunna ruin this country,he wants his brother geb to run for president,then his brothers son goerge b. bush?I figured for sure he was gunna be like daddy,one term then gone.Daddy had"Read my lips,No new tax's" baby bush has"islam is a religion of peice".All the bush's care about is all that suadie oil money.

Posted by: patriot4 at May 16, 2006 2:05 PM

Why do we continue to have anything to do with muslim countries. Are there not other safe countries that have oil?

Posted by: freewoman at May 16, 2006 01:42 PM

unfortunately, there are't. But if the west doesn't buy, who would? ok, if Japan choses the Gulf over the west, then maybe Japan. where would they get food or any form of electricity if it wasn't for our firms and technology? trust me, nowhere. They can't use Oil to put any pressure against us. the United Arab Emirates tried it before in 1967 if i've got my historical facts right, and the former president - Zayed - (dead now) said : " Arabic Oil isn't more precious than the Arabic blood." in support of Jamal Abdul Nasser's war against Israel. booo hooo, He went on for two weeks, and his nation started starving. So trust me, it isn't as bad as your government trys to tell you. The west just chose the easy way, because they're just not concerned. Why bother? As long as we get that Oil flowing, who cares how many women have to hide in moving tents? or how many old men marry 4 non adults? or how many have to be opressed in Islamic countries? i know Bush doesn't.

Posted by: night_side_eclipse at May 16, 2006 2:06 PM

I think you guys made a mistake. This article needs to be in the "Dhimmi Watch" section, not Dummy-Watch.

Posted by: MP at May 16, 2006 2:10 PM

We should drill for oil here, become independent, look for other ways for energy and put to use the refineries that have not been used in a while. If the Saudi's starve, oh well. If other countries we buy from throw a fit...oh well.

Posted by: freewoman at May 16, 2006 2:23 PM

Generally, the post is on topic,
The thug-in-chief is not going to relent. AND we do not know if he already has supplie d bombs to other jihadis. He is a maniac who hid himselves into a typical Western beard making us believe he is not a rabid. Be Very Afraid. I think his objective is to hand a nuke device into the hands of every jihadi in lands that are majority infidel populated (read U.S. and others, but the U.S. being the main). The remainder of infidels the mos can butcher anytime. This ain't no light comment. THIS is what he envisions - to exterminate all majority infidel populations, by nukes, and the rest can be butchered at rest, as in history.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at May 16, 2006 2:52 PM

Yes, well .. now its time to share nuclear secrets and transfer our technology so that Americans can benefit from Qaddafi's nuclear know-how!

Perhaps Qaddafi himself can manage our ports and oversee America's borders!

Besides, maybe we can prostitute his cheap labor so that we can fill all those jobs that American's just refuse to do; especially those R&D positions at places like Livermore, White Sands, and Fermi Labs!

What's good for Qaddafi -- has got to be good for America!

(Gawd ... I should run for President! With an idiotic platform like this, I've got to be a winner!)

Posted by: witness at May 16, 2006 2:55 PM

The american politics with the muslim countries is very depressing. Greetings

Posted by: Franze at May 16, 2006 4:18 PM

Qadaffi lacks the mettle of Ahmadinejad, and Libya is too weak to be a serious threat, or to stand up the American power. His days of blowing up airliners are over, and he rolled over as best as he could. We have much more dangerous enemies elsewhere. No one is under the impression Qadaffi is "on our side". He is simply a much smaller threat than Iran (and the Saudis), less so now that his nuclear program is gone. I wish he would suffer for the things he has done, but in the grand scheme Libya is defanged and our energies are best spent elsewhere, or in the case of the Bush Administration, misspent.

Posted by: Quijybo at May 16, 2006 4:39 PM

Perhaps a third F-111 should of been employed? It's not that GW "can't" understand, he doesn't WANT to understand. The "multipolarity" world view is more important to the Globalists than the rabble funding their excursions into oblivion. If Libya is now our "friend", and Venezuelan Chavez is visiting our "friend", does that make Chavez our "friend of a friend"? ...and if that is true, then can the logic be extended to the TIC also? Oligarchial Technocrats.

Posted by: SickBoy at May 16, 2006 6:10 PM