...well, blow me over with a feather....I sure hope I live long enough to see the demise of these two worthless human beings...Bin-Laden and Al-Zawahri.....

....of course others stand in line for the crown of terror....

....we must never give up...

...Ban Muslim immigration now...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 1, 2007 10:03 AM

He's not yet martyred,eh? A coward like that will never be martyred. He just gets other fools to martyr themselves while he hides like a rat in safety.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at March 1, 2007 10:09 AM

Undue significance given to Bin Laden, or for that matter Al Qaeda, or for that matter any particular set of terrorists, misses the point, or misses several points.

Terror is a weapon, an instrument of Jihad. It is a weapon sanctioned throughout the Qur'an and in the Hadith: "striking terror" in the hearts of Unbelievers is a common theme, and Muhammad demonstrated in his own works and days that he enjoyed "striking terror" in the hearts of his Infidel enemies, whether individuals, or entire tribes.

But terror is not the only or even the main worry. Da'wa and demographic conquest, and the employment of the "money weapon" (a weapon that we could make much less effective, had we in 1973 taxed our own use of gasoline and of oil, and plowed the revenues into other sources of energy, into mass transit, and into other ways to conserve oil -- but those in thrall to Saudi Arabia, and often paid directly or indirectly the Saudis, were not about to swerve from their baseless notion that Saudi Arabia would forever "moderate oil prices" -- something it was never interested in doing (it was only interested in maximizing the total return, over time, on its oil reserves) and in any case, the very idea did not make economic sense unless one assumed that Saudi Arabia could always control OPEC, but now there is no controlling OPEC just as there is no getting away from the Peak-Oil (only the year of that peak may be quarrelled over) problem, and also no avoiding noticing, any longer, that OPEC oil revenues fund, and will always fund, mosques and madrasas and campaigns of Da'wa world-wide, whatever the American government thinks or how much longer it continues to pretend that Islam itself is not a problem, but only "terrorism" practiced by those who have "hijacked a great religion."

We can't endure much more of this idicoy. Bush is clearly to be ignored. But what will follow Bush? Will it be more misunderstanders of Islam, this time not capable of the folly of Iraq, but capable of other follies, closer to home?

Posted by: Hugh at March 1, 2007 10:13 AM

Why dont they put out a video with Osama in it if he's fine as the jihadis keep saying over and over. We've heard audio but never seen video since the invasion of Afganistan. He might be alive but I believe in a diminished state of health or seriously injured from when he and the other brave leaders scurried off like rats from Tora Bora and left the matrydom to the average muhammad on the street. I guess they are not that eager to go to paradise yet! Cheney isnt afraid to appear in public in Pakistan, whats the matter Osama are you scared? You should be!!

Posted by: Poor Knight of Christ at March 1, 2007 10:23 AM

"what will follow Bush"

......nothing but bad news......

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 1, 2007 10:37 AM

I saw this report on many news sites last year that claimed he had died of illness based on information from French intelligence.

Please see the following links

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200609/s1747203.htm

http://www.saag.org/%5Cpapers20%5Cpaper1964.html

The second link is a analysis of a former Indian Intelligence official.

I personally believe that he has died. We haven't heard anything from him for a long time. Maybe that is not admitted by Pakistan because it has a lot to lose.

Again, i add a disclaimer. I do not agree with everything Mr Raman (the former Indian intelligence official) says.

Posted by: Ishwar at March 1, 2007 10:44 AM

I thank God we had Bush and not Gore or Kerry! Bush started out ok, but now he just isn't getting it. He isn't getting the fact that islam is NOT peaceful nor are all these 'moderate' muslims moderate. Do not let the infiltration of our government agencies by muslims continue!! It would be like letting the communists in during the Cold war. Oh, I forget - FDR and Truman did just that and laughed when told about it.

Sorry, I almost had a lapse of memory and thought that there were some who actually had a clue. Our Congress is pathetic.

Posted by: s_sgt7 at March 1, 2007 10:58 AM

Exactly what I was thinking!
And calling Congress pathetic is about the nicest thing anyone can say about it.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at March 1, 2007 11:03 AM

the chinese went back on their deal with AQ of last year. Osama moved out of their employ and territory not too long ago. and now Chinese stock market has crashed.
Hu met in Saudi on Tuesday, how convenient. wonder if the African deal is still on for China.
Arab papers are slamming chinese this week too...
connect the dots?

and Iran's prez is meeting in Saudi Saturday?
anyone want to speculate?

Posted by: sectionOne at March 1, 2007 11:10 AM

Apparently, bin laden is now the 'Yeti' of the islamic world.

Posted by: PrimaDhimmi at March 1, 2007 11:13 AM

Though Osama may yet remain physically undead, his soul is most certainly dead as demonstrated by the darkness of the acts he organizes, coordinates and or executes.

He will not evade eternal judgement.

Posted by: angryeagle at March 1, 2007 11:28 AM

It's not like the War with Islam is going to end until we actually admit what it is anyway.

Apparently we're starting to inch closer to the reality that I have been warning of for years. Mark your calendars kids, this should be an interesting tv viewing:

Koppel on Discovery : Our Children’s Children’s War

Posted by: Foehammer at March 1, 2007 11:31 AM

For all the Islamics reading this I found this amusing about bin Laden being alive.

First, bin Laden in the story is actually termed a failure as a leader, a coward in hiding and puts "others" in harms way for communication.

Second, bin Laden is not a martyr "yet". Well what is the turban head waiting for? Isn't martyrdom the dream of all Islamics? Isn't this what bin Laden calls a billion others to do?
What is hero bin Laden waiting for? An invitation? He doesn't have a bomb to strap on his chest? He doesn't have an AK 47 in a land of thousands of machine guns to ride his white horse up and have a True Grit John Wayne shoot out?

This Muslim brothers is hillarious. Your best spokesturban in Afghanistan literally calls bin Laden a failure, a coward and not a true Muslim in not seeking out martyrdom.......and all of you are calling him your hero.

Islam is a joke as your imams, clerics, ayawhatevers and shieks are all money grubbing, power mad blow hards sending dupes to die while they cower in luxury.

Come on Islam...demand your leaders strap on bomb....let's see how many will become martyrs or be exposed for ALL OF THEM ARE COWARDS!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Lame Cherry at March 1, 2007 11:35 AM

Who will follow Bush? I will bet it won’t be any card board cutout like Bush, Rice, Snow Chertoff and some others. Those we see hyped today probably will not be around in a year. Candidates will make huge blunders that will destroy their chances overnight. It is already happening. Why, because Americans do know what is going on and the candidates must speak the truth or they will be seen for what they are. There is very little wiggle room right now, they cannot pretend to be what they are not. Many of us who voted for Bush are not pleased, but not for the reasons you hear in the mmm. Who will it be, it might just be someone who thinks like Virgil Goode. There is no doubt it will be the most interesting election I have ever seen. It seems the islamists are trying mighty hard to keep binladen on our minds, who cares, we will get him eventually if he is alive. It was not all that easy to catch Bonnie and Clyde and they were right here in the good ole USA.

Posted by: tgusa at March 1, 2007 11:43 AM

that's why Ossama will strike before the end of Bush's office. the next guys won't be so nice. even though Cheney is a hard-on he's a wuss with too much economically invested to make the right move.

Posted by: sectionOne at March 1, 2007 11:46 AM

"It's not like the War with Islam is going to end until we actually admit what it is anyway"

Our occassional poster Naseem uses the term Wusslims....probably wussies would be more appropriate....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 1, 2007 11:49 AM

The lead in to this article is precious - Bin Laden is undead. George Romero and Roger Corman should collaborate on a movie.

Posted by: Pelayo at March 1, 2007 11:49 AM

Opinion Programming: the Ultimate Weapon

We can't endure much more of this idicoy.

Sure we can, and we will.

But you're right, because, over time, the we in your statement will become progressively more Moslem, and the great percentage of Infidels will somehow become progressively more hardened in their sympathies for both the Moslems among us and those in Dar al-Islam.

Bush is clearly to be ignored. But what will follow Bush?

That was settled in just a few days following September 11 that there no critic of Islam would be brooked.

This decision was collectively made by the journalists, opinion celebrities, elected leaders, permanent government officials, professors, teachers, preachers, and jurists who govern us.

That decision stands. Only Tom Tancredo holds out hope among major candidates in the USA and UK, and Sarkozy (maybe) in EUrabia proper.

Inevitably, Tancredo and Sarkozy will be marginalized as fools in the realm of public perception.

Change will only emerge after the Big Event has taken place, and then only maybe, given the powerful obfuscation tools developed since the mid-1960s.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at March 1, 2007 11:54 AM

We can't endure much more of this idicoy. Bush is clearly to be ignored. But what will follow Bush? Will it be more misunderstanders of Islam, this time not capable of the folly of Iraq, but capable of other follies, closer to home?

Posted by: Hugh

Bush is indeed to be ignored. His dirty slimy sellout SOWdi stooge self. He made a deal with the devil and is leaving civilisation to pay the price.

FEH!

Ps. My bet is the old camelgoat is dead.. Nasem's kidney didn't make it in time 'cross the mountain ranges. Maybe he was secretly a drunk and his vice did his kidneys in?

Posted by: scrualla at March 1, 2007 12:11 PM

... muslim cabbies are claiming 'religious freedom' by still refusing to take people who are carrying bottles of alcohol.

That is the charm of Islam. It enables Moslems to aggressively impose its terms and conditions on everybody else.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at March 1, 2007 12:15 PM

"He's not yet martyred."

Well, assuming he's even still alive--which I personally doubt at this point--he doesn't exactly seem to be trying to be martyred. Hiding in a cave or hole surely won't get him those 72 virgins.

Does anybody know when the last time was that even so much as a tape with Bin Laden's voice was released? It seems like it's been years, and his "second in command" Zawahiri has been the one appearing in all the videos for quite some time.

Posted by: staff_of_magius at March 1, 2007 12:18 PM

I say he's dead. No word since Sept 06?
How could he stay silent during the IC actions in Sudan?

I say we make a fuss and call him out.

BTW, I'm from Missouri- Show Me.

Posted by: xqqme at March 1, 2007 12:27 PM

Laden is just a tool, the enemy is Islamic idealogy that gulps down human blood and spews out hate

Posted by: Birbhadra at March 1, 2007 12:39 PM

Religious Freedom,
What we are seeing will be the beginning of the end for them. There is no constitutional right to drive a cab. They cannot push their religion on the rest of us, that is UN constitutional. I look forward to the many lawsuits that result from this. How much is this joke costing the people of Minnesota by the way? It just goes to show that if the islamists can’t kill you they will bleed you dry financially. This is a great thing in my opinion, they are coming right out and showing they intend to ruin our free country. Hundreds of islamist cabbies, the cab companies need a hard look given to them by the FBI, I smell a rat.

Posted by: tgusa at March 1, 2007 12:39 PM

I renamed my earlier link to make it more provactive and Digg-able:

The Truth About “The Long War” — The War with Islam

I also have included many poignant links to supporting pieces, the cornerstone of which is an an PowerPoint presentation from the U.S. military which details the "Long War" in stark black & white. It's a must read for JW posters, imho.

Posted by: Foehammer at March 1, 2007 12:43 PM

For what it's worth, bin Laden is almost certainly alive; the proof is that he isn't being celebrated throughout islamist circles as a glorious martyr of Islam, which will certainly happen when he dies.

If he is dead, then either:

1. None of his compatriots are able to ascertain his death, or exactly how he died, or where his body lies, in which case it would be a rather hollow martyrdom, as I understand their way of thinking.

or

2. He died in some unglorious way. In islam dying of a horrible disease is supposed to be equivalent to martyrdom (gee, then basically everyone that doesn't die by heart attack or by stepping in front of a train is a martyr?), so even if his liver killed him his death might be celebrated, and doubly so if his problem was exacerbated by the battleground.

Maybe he was caught with a heart attack in bed with a young boy, a bit unglorious perhaps. Or maybe he drank himself to death or died of an opium overdose, and they are still trying to spin it as martyrdom.

More likely his health is failing like Castro's and he is unsuitable for public appearances. They can't call him a martyr yet, and can't have him going around talking to people and looking weak in public so he's propped up on a grass mat somewhere in backwoods Pakistan on improvised life support while they figure out what to do with him.

Maybe the hope is he'll get well enough to strap on a bomb-belt, "give himself up" to the allies and take out a few kuffars while putting himself out of his misery and earning martyr status. I wonder if he has the guts to do it like some of those 12 year olds they brainwash into wasting themselves like this.

I'll wager that when he dies, we'll hear about it from them, if we don't see it ourselves.

Posted by: Archimedes2 at March 1, 2007 12:57 PM

We can't endure much more of this idicoy. Bush is clearly to be ignored. But what will follow Bush? Will it be more misunderstanders of Islam, this time not capable of the folly of Iraq, but capable of other follies, closer to home?

Posted by Hugh

More than likely it will be a reincarnation of Bill Clinton. That doesn't necessarily mean that Hillary will win, but it does mean that, barring a catastrophic attack, we will probably vote for the candidate who promises to make us all well. We're likely to choose butter over guns. The candidate who says he will spend American taxes "over here" instead of "over there" will win.

Clinton won with "it's the economy, stupid". He was able to divert all questions of his foreign policy preferences by coming back to that one theme. Odds are something similar will happen next year. Prevention isn't popular. Unless a city is blown up, people will see the Islamist threat as more of the "military-industrial complex" propaganda, all in an effort to get more funds that could go to "helping the poor at home". Fighting the Islamist menace doesn't lend itself to simple slogans and the obvious measures, like banning all Muslim travel to the US, are politically incorrect. The MSM won't stand for them and will bring down any candidate who tries to tell the truth.

Posted by: PMK at March 1, 2007 1:03 PM

"He's not yet martyred"

Not only is Islam the religion of peace -- NOT -- but it is the religion of martyrs -- DOUBLE NOT!!

Posted by: champ at March 1, 2007 1:25 PM

it's not Bush or an American president who decides the fate of the goat Ossama.
what the US needs to be concerned with is Homeland Security because of terrorism generated by Saudi funds, Saudi weaponry, Saudi leadership, Islamic ideology... etc.

if we focus too much on one person it empowers them more, eh? And of course, the US government does not know the enemy at all.

Posted by: sectionOne at March 1, 2007 1:28 PM

I’d love to know the name of this dem that will display even a small measure of rational intelligence in the coming campaign, and supremacists or any woman that has been tricked by every man that ever came down the pike don’t count. The mmm are not in control anymore in case you haven’t noticed, they are empty suits that have discredited themselves. This isn’t 1992 or 82 72 62… I know the dems are trying to get back to the good ole days but they don’t exist in this world anymore. In 92 there were 3 candidates, 2 reps and one dem, the reps divided and the dem won, you predict something akin to this PMK?

Posted by: tgusa at March 1, 2007 1:43 PM

”Apparently, bin laden is now the 'Yeti' of the islamic world.”

Bwahahahahahaha! As in: “We haven’t exactly caught him, just Yeti.”

From the Minneapolis Airport article posted by s_sgt7:

(Link: http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/breaking_news/16796944.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp )

Hassan Mohamud, a Muslim imam and adjunct law professor at William Mitchell College of Law, said the Muslim cab drivers are only trying to support their families, both here and in their strife-torn home country, and are being placed in an impossible situation.

There’s that old blame (the victim) game. The cabbies are not “being placed in an impossible situation”. They have placed themselves in an impossible situation. By promising to provide a public service according to government regulations, they have foregone the option of proscribing their services based upon their own religious notions. For the nonce we’ll disregard the fact that Islamic scholars have already determined that it is not haram for the cabbies to transport someone else who happens to be carrying unopened containers of alcohol.

"If we pass this (policy) it means cutting off the lifelines of thousands of people," Mohamud said.

They simply happen to neglect mentioning how it is they themselves who are “cutting off the lifelines” voluntarily and not otherwise. Same taqiyya, different day.

Airport director Steve Wareham said the policy should be viewed as a public safety issue. "Refusals of service can lead to customers wandering through lanes of traffic looking for another taxi," he said.

Perish the thought of actually cutting to the matter’s heart and explicitly describing how less than 100 people are attempting to hold a major air transportation facility hostage to their own arbitrary religious demands. Heaven forefend any possibility that the dictates of multiculturalism or [gasp] Political Correctness might be abrogated the least bit.

Abdifatah Abdi, who said he is counseling cabdrivers on legal issues related to the controversy, warned commissioners that instituting the penalty would set off a long legal battle.

“[A] long legal battle”? That sounds like a threat, especially when the court fight should be rather short when it is discovered that the cabbies are voluntarily breaching their own contract with the airport to provide a public service on the airport’s terms.

"This is a religious freedom issue, and it will not end here," Abdi said. "It will go to the courts, even the Supreme Court. The drivers will not relinquish their rights to be protected under American law."

The drivers have voluntarily elected to “relinquish their rights” and, as such, are not entitled to anything beyond a first hearing where they should be laughed out of court.

Back on topic:

And preserve us from such bovine fecal matter as “Our Children’s Children’s War” or “The Long War”. Soon enough the West is going to realize that Islam is entirely unjustified in siphoning off so much of this world’s resources in order for the West to gain a modicum of security from some Islamic fanatics. Every single day there is another 9-11 atrocity. Another 3,000 needless deaths from avoidable causes like famine, preventable diseases or political oppression; All which could be defeated with the vast funding being steered towards fighting terrorism.

Most important of all is that literally none of the tremendous wealth held by Muslim majority OPEC nations is being directed towards fighting terrorism. This glaring discrepancy must serve notice to the West about Muslim insincerity with respect to ending terrorism.

In an astounding sleight-of-hand, Islam has foisted its housecleaning obligations upon the West. Where is it written that we must delicately sort through the world’s Muslim population in pursuit of a tiny percentage of radicals that they voluntarily sequester and fund? We are under no such obligation and the sooner Islam is confronted with Total War as repayment for their perfidy, the more quickly all of this vile mayhem will end. No more walking on eggshells in the fight against Islam. It's long past tea for making omelets.

Posted by: Zenster at March 1, 2007 1:48 PM

Free exercise of religion is not according to Constitutional theory an absolute. It never has been. See the peyote case. See any number of cases. These people claim "their rights" under American law, man-made law, law made by mere mortals, and if they had a chance, they would undo that man-made law and replace it, as good Muslims, with something approximating the Holy Law of Islam, the Shari'a. The ease with which they exploit and manipulate Infidel societies and benefits of every kind, and the legal system, even as they would support all attempts to supplant that legal system, and the political institutions of this country, with something approximating what applies in the hells they came from (and they should be in a permanent state of gratitude for being allowed into this country, allowed to escape from their own hells at home, rather than working toward the establishment of a similar hell here, by incresing the power of the belief-system that helped to generate and retain that hell), astounds.

It would be as if someone fled Soviet Russia, and then came here, and started to work steadily toward establishing a Communist state based on the ideals and norms of -- Soviet Russia.

It makes no sense, save to the True Believer. And Believers in Islam are True Believers, or at least have the same practical effect as do True Believers.

Posted by: Hugh at March 1, 2007 2:08 PM

It would be as if someone fled Soviet Russia, and then came here, and started to work steadily toward establishing a Communist state based on the ideals and norms of -- Soviet Russia.

There were many such people who came to America. Back then, we called their types spies, seditionists and traitors. My, how times have changed, and not for the better.

Posted by: Zenster at March 1, 2007 2:26 PM

"I know the dems are trying to get back to the good ole days but they don’t exist in this world anymore. In 92 there were 3 candidates, 2 reps and one dem, the reps divided and the dem won, you predict something akin to this PMK?"

TGUSA,

Yes and no. Despite the Unity 08 movement, I don't see a third party dividing voters. I DO see Democrats saying this war is diverting money from America and if they are given the White House they will get us out. The farther we get from 9/11 with no attack on the US the more people believe we are not in danger. They see the methods that prevented attacks (like the listening program carried out by NSA) as dangers to our civil liberties. Unscrupulous politicians are willing to put our security at risk just to win an election. WE LET THEM.
We want everything to be comfy and cozy. We are not willing to make the necessary sacrifices to achieve victory. We want the benefits of freedom without paying the cost in defending the country. We want to be liked and so we won't call a spade a spade. We think that if the UN runs everything there will be no more wars. We think that if we just "talk" to our enemies then all problems can be solved. We think if we just show people we love them then they will love us back. That is the culture we have built for ourselves in the last forty years.
1992 has a lesson, but we won't learn it. The USSR fell apart and it looked like we were entering the age of Aquarius and that the world would be peaceful and nice. We didn't need to maintain an expensive security apparatus. We wanted a peace dividend. We chose people who promised us our milk and cookies. Like it or not, the majority of Americans voted against the GOP once it seemed the threat to our existence was gone. We put an enabler in the White House. He saw the growing threat from Islam and ignored it and so we did, too. We'll never know how things would have turned out if we had had a president who treated the first bombing of the World Trade Center (which could have killed 50,000 people) as an act of war and not as a crime to be handled by the Justice Department. Instead of a Churchill, we were led by a Chamberlain. It will happen again.
How many candidates are basing their campaigns on the need to rid the world of radical Islam or even making it one piece of their campaign? How many are even admitting that Islamists threaten the US? Can you name names? I can't.

Posted by: PMK at March 1, 2007 2:31 PM

Thank you Hugh...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 1, 2007 2:35 PM

Free exercise of religion is not according to Constitutional theory an absolute...

An even if it were, so what?

The staus of religion must have boundaries placed around it. When an ideology that claims religion status also endeavors into matters of governemnt, military, and jurisprudence, by common sense it must be reviewed for having its religion status revoked.

Who cares that Mohammed and his ideological progeny claim religion status? Given how immoral they are, how expensive, how dangerous, how predatory, we shouldn't give a rat's ass what these creeps call themselves.

Islam is an expansionist government-military ideology with a few trappings of a grotesquely malformed psudeo-relgion thrown in our faces to baffle us into submission.

In 7th century Arabic:

Islam = Submission

Islam = Surrender

Take your pick. Either is real, real bad.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at March 1, 2007 2:43 PM

Islam can probably be outlawed in the western democracies (of which the United States is one of only a few remaining and for how much longer Yahweh himself only knows)by dint of the fact that it teaches its followers to commit first degree murder and conspiracy to commit first degree murders on an unlimited scale.

Both committing first degree murder and conspiracy to commit first degree murder are capital crimes under US law. These laws are unlikely to change.

When it is shown that Islam can NOT be practiced without the committing of mass homicides (it CAN'T and NEVER COULD BE)and that homicide is an integral part of Islam's doctrines it should be relatively easy to dispose of it legally.

One obstacle will of course be the corporate lobby that is frightened of losing market shares in the Muslim world and will do what it takes to keep US policy friendly to the inimical Middle East even while its fanatical hordes scream "Death to America" on every torched, riot-ransacked street corner. Another obstacle will come from the Afro-American lobby which has large numbers of Muslims in the US (and commits a disproportionate share fo the nation's violent crimes). And of course there are liberal idiots like Jane Adams (last seen on OPRAH! spewing her lame liberal, pseudo-intellectual hypocritical spin-lunacy on unsuspecting audiences) who will verbally flay is as 'racists.' And then there is the US auto-industry which it seems will do ANYTHING to keep Americans driving obsolete gas-guzzlers.

WHAT IS LACKING HERE AND THROUGHOUT THE WESTERN WORLD IS THE COJONES TO STAND UP TO ISLAM'S HOMICIDAL IDEOLOGY. But it can be done. But will we do it before it is too late???

Posted by: pythagoras at March 1, 2007 3:03 PM

Free exercise of religion is not according to Constitutional theory an absolute...

An even if it were, so what?

The staus of religion must have boundaries placed around it. When an ideology that claims religion status also endeavors into matters of governemnt, military, and jurisprudence, by common sense it must be reviewed for having its religion status revoked.

Who cares that Mohammed and his ideological progeny claim religion status? Given how immoral they are, how expensive, how dangerous, how predatory, we shouldn't give a rat's ass what these creeps call themselves.

Islam is an expansionist government-military ideology with a few trappings of a grotesquely malformed psudeo-relgion thrown in our faces to baffle us into submission.

In 7th century Arabic:

Islam = Submission

Islam = Surrender

Take your pick. Either is real, real bad.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at March 1, 2007 3:05 PM

It looks like a big show. The one of the characters appears and disappeares several times, and public is intrigued all the time payning attention to it. In the same time somewhere other important thing happen that worth to be seen, but public thinks only about this character, that appeared again.

Posted by: Azan at March 1, 2007 3:22 PM

OBL not dead?

Prove it!

Posted by: credit man at March 1, 2007 3:24 PM

I doubt a glory hound like bin Laden could keep silent for more than 2 years while his second in command Zawahiri produces professional-quality tapes with subtitles.

Making threats, grandiose claims and generally spewing power-challenge bullshit makes the little men of Islam into big men. No way bin Laden would stay silent in his time of glory. It goes against Arabic cult-ure.

The dude's dead.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at March 1, 2007 3:43 PM

excellent point about legal systems and law.
The lazy Middle East needs to catch up with the rest of the world when it comes to law... in general.
is there an Islamic version of Law and Order on Arabic TV? maybe Boston Legal?
the general Islamic population is lacking in legal knowledge... that makes them dangerous.

Posted by: sectionOne at March 1, 2007 3:45 PM

Bin Laden is actually a الغول

Posted by: The Goobs at March 1, 2007 3:49 PM

Islam can probably be outlawed in the western democracies (of which the United States is one of only a few remaining and for how much longer Yahweh himself only knows)by dint of the fact that it teaches its followers to commit first degree murder and conspiracy to commit first degree murders on an unlimited scale.

Those aren’t the only reasons for banning Islam, pythagoras.

The staus of religion must have boundaries placed around it. When an ideology that claims religion status also endeavors into matters of governemnt, military, and jurisprudence, by common sense it must be reviewed for having its religion status revoked.

Revocation of Islam’s status as a religion protected by Constitutional rights is one of the first and most important steps towards having it banned within America’s borders. Sharia law must be exposed for the massive ongoing violation of human rights that it is and then shown as being inextricably connected with Islam. These measures will lay the groundwork for a Constitutional amendment that forever prohibits Sharia’s practice or even the possibility for a Muslim majority electorate to overturn said amendment and install Sharia in the USA.

Who cares that Mohammed and his ideological progeny claim religion status? Given how immoral they are, how expensive, how dangerous, how predatory, we shouldn't give a rat's ass what these creeps call themselves.

Protective coloration means zero when those who employ it march under false colors.

Islam is an expansionist government-military ideology with a few trappings of a grotesquely malformed psudeo-relgion thrown in our faces to baffle us into submission.

That’s some fine writing, Alarmed Pig Farmer. Keep up the good work.

Posted by: Zenster at March 1, 2007 4:00 PM

"Taliban official: bin Laden undead"

What????

bin Laden is a Zombie???

I love it!!!!!

Posted by: ThinkForYourself at March 1, 2007 5:31 PM

"He's not yet martyred"
Bin laden boy cannot be martyred, as you need to die in battle, and the old goat problably died of some
\infectious disesae brought on by too much dirty living conditions, not a warriors death to die in own's waste. that is how Binne died! he was full of it! LOL

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at March 1, 2007 5:41 PM

Regardless if Bin Laden get's killed or lives, it's not going to change the appetite the Islamics have for world domination ? If anything, it'll just feed more fuel to the fire.

Where's Justice in all of this ?

Posted by: Jeff at March 1, 2007 6:00 PM

"He's not yet martyred"

Reminiscent of Monty Pythons "How Not to Be Seen" skit, we should teach these maggots a solid lesson in "How Not to Get Pulverized". Each time the Taleban opens their pie holes about how the brave Lion of Islam™, bin Laden, still lives, we go in and Arclight the crap out of Pakistan and Afghanistan's border region with some merciless carpet-bombing.

I'll bet they'd stop any bragging about bin Laden before the Devil could get his shoes on.

Posted by: Zenster at March 1, 2007 6:09 PM

Here is a clip from the programme:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=100_1172769858&p=1

Posted by: kasper1062 at March 1, 2007 6:22 PM

We just need to be a little more patient before bin laden's next "appearance", because the taxidermist has a big job ahead of him.

Posted by: champ at March 1, 2007 6:23 PM

excerpt from John Lewis in The Objective Standard

"...The conclusion is inescapable. The road to the defeat of Islamic Totalitarianism begins in Tehran. America, acting alone and with overwhelming force, must destroy the Iranian Islamic State now. It must do so openly, and indeed spectacularly, for the entire world to see, for this is the only way to demonstrate the spectacular failure and incompetence of the Islamic fundamentalist movement as a whole.

This demonstration must embody the virtue of integrity—the unity of principles and practice. Intellectually, we must state our intentions and reasons openly, without hiding behind timid diplomatic-speak. Physically, we must act decisively, and with all the force we deem necessary, to eliminate the Iranian regime as quickly as possible, and with the least risk to American soldiers. Only when the world sees this demonstration of American resolve will America begin to see peace and security.

It is vital that Americans take this action for the right moral reasons, openly stated. We must not seek legitimacy for the removal of the Iranian Islamic State beyond the principle of our right to defend ourselves. To pretend that something more than this principle is needed would be to deny the sufficiency of the principle. To base our reasons on the alleged good of others, especially on any alleged benefits to the people of the Middle East, would be to accept a position of moral dhimmitude: the moral subordination of our right to life and self-defense to an allegedly higher principle. It would be to subordinate our lives to the lives of the ayatollahs—who would become our masters. If we cannot stand on the principle of our right to life and liberty against the Islamic Totalitarians’ claim that we must submit to the will of “Allah,” then we cannot claim the right to exist. America’s “weakness of will” is the jihadists’ great hope—as it was the hope of Japanese warriors—but it is something they cannot impose on us. Their only prayer is that we will accept it voluntarily. The price for doing so is our lives and the lives of our children. We must not submit.

To remove this cancerous Islamic State loudly and forthrightly will have immediate benefits. We would avenge the thousands of American terror victims since the 1960s. We would reverse the pitiful image we projected when Iranians stormed our embassy in 1979, and when we fled from Mogadishu and from Lebanon—actions that the Islamic Totalitarians claimed as evidence of our weakness. We could even reverse a tremendous injustice by un-nationalizing the oil companies in Iran—stolen from their owners in 1951—and placing them back into private hands, under government protection. Certainly guarding those facilities from a surrounding civil war—a legitimate protection of private property, backed by a credible threat of crushing force—would be a far better use of our troops than guarding a few blocks in downtown Baghdad from its own residents. The pipeline of money into Islamic jihad would be cut.

Most importantly, by ousting the regime in Iran, we would send a clear message to the world: Political Islam is finished."

http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2006-winter/no-substitute-for-victory.asp

Posted by: Madduck at March 1, 2007 6:56 PM

Osama must live. He is part of our plan.

A lot has been said about how the ill planed; a disastrous and unnecessary war in Iraq be ended. American people rejected the Neocons war policies in Iraq and as a result the conservatives were forced to leave both the houses of government; sadly defeated. Although conservative clout is diminished, still the executive power with all its might and vigour, remains in tact with their President; George W Bush. He is still sticking to Neocons guns to have his go against all the odds and wishes of people.
It is said that 'Democracy' can deliver, what ever is decided and desired by the people; and democratic governments do deliver and honour, people's wish in true colour and sprit. To what avail is then, American democracy; where people are getting the opposite of it and are totally being disregarded and ignored for their say? Except that, we are getting a disappointing rhetoric from the offices of president; escalation of Iraq war and no retreat from Iraq or Afghanistan.
What is this all about? What is at stake and what are the hindrances that even the earnest desire of people is being ignored. The situation demands that we need to strike the right cord to dig down and reach for the truth.
This may require us to explore that…here; it is a big game called Pax Americana in play. Pax Americana has its long term set goals to attain American global dominance by means of 'escalating and maintaining of espionage and covert operations' around the world. It is step by step, acquisition of lucrative lands, rich in world energy resources to full fill the hegemonic and American imperialistic designs. The prime target for the planned American century of Imperialism is to subjugate people and acquire their natural resources of rich lands situated in the Middle East, Iran , in the Islamic lands of Central Asia through Afghanistan, the Baltic region, and the countries under direct influence of Russia i.e. Georgia, Lithuania and Belarus. It is an enormous grand task for the crafty think tanks of United States, to plan and execute it for next many, many years to come. The think tanks like Neocons are busy as ever, carving the divisive policies to spread fallacy and create the webs of deceit to full fill their dream plans.
It started long before conservative came into power and occupied the offices in Washington. It was all going well till the time, Soviet Union was defeated by the US proxies' warriors, Mujahideen in Afghan war and Russian Empire collapsed. Resultant; United States became the sole super power in the world. The proven, proud warriors of Afghan war, Mujahideen were given free hand in Afghanistan to establish their own government with the financial grants from US and to eliminate the remnants of Russian influenced groups like Northern Alliance. They were also expected to carry out further escalations of war and take the fight inside the breakaway Russian states to ensure their further fragmentation. This will make the task for US easy for further exploitation of these fragile states at later stage.
It was an exceptionally smart US plan that they made Mujahideen, a devout Muslim force raised in the name of Jihad and to fight, in the name of Islam to dislodge an atheist occupier; Soviet Union, from an Islamic country- Afghanistan. This covert plan with out committing a single GI of US armed forces on ground, was serving American cause so well, that it can be graded as the most successful and unique covert operation ever conducted by a proxy in the world so successfully. On the other hand, Islamic forces were also very glad that they were using, a super power's resources, her tactics, weaponry and technology which they otherwise could never have the chance to lay their hands on. Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were the major players to come forward and lay their all possible resources and man power, gathered from all around the Muslim World in the name of Jihad and conduct this supposedly a 'sacred war'. Pakistan calling itself a fortress of Islam held a pillar like position in the entire conduct of Afghan war. It was an atrocious war for Muslim fighters but it progressed in leaps and bounds in terms of gaining advances in return, toward 'Pan Islamic' set goals. Goals to free all the subjugated Islamic Republics of Central Asia from Soviet Union and secure carve a strong Islamic block there. 'The Grand Islamic Block' extending from Western Sahara to Eastern Africa, to Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan; to all the Islamic states of Baltic Region, to Bosnia and Turkey; all located around a major hub of the Middle East. A fascinating dream was about to come true and the formation of an Islamic super block rich in energy and economic was in sight.
After the collapse of Soviet Union; America and its allies were celebrating their historic big achievement. It was a respite, a pause in war torn Afghanistan too. All the parties got a time to evaluate their positions. There was a requirement to form a government in Afghanistan and Taliban came forward to take over. US and its allies had continued - up till now to fund the Mujahideen and Taliban operations. On the new orders from Washington, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan agreed to further fund and support Taliban to do the subsequent jobs; to defeat the remnants of Russian-backed Northern Alliance with in Afghanistan and consolidate control over Afghanistan. From there move to destabilize the former Soviet Central Asian Republics on its borders and do the needful to facilitate the future exploitation by United States.
But the Taliban failed. It did not defeat the Russian-backed Northern Alliance. Instead of subverting Central Asia in businesslike fashion, it had indulged in blowing up statues of Buddha and terrorizing people who deviate from the Taliban's super-repressive interpretation of Islam. In fact, they had given a second thought to their indulgence, to act as US proxy for her future plans. Their achievement of a final victory as per their internal plan; to form a greater Muslim Block was close at hand and the combined forces drawn from all over the Muslim countries were also readily available in Afghanistan. They wanted now to go…their own way.
At the same time, Russia was also seen moving in the 'wrong' direction, from Washington's perspective. The completely controllable Yeltsin was replaced with President Putin, who seen resisting the U.S advances. Further more China and Russia signed a mutual defence pact. And despite immense European/U.S. pressure, Russian President Putin refused to be kicked around. This is the time that former Mujahideen commanders like Mullah Omer and Osama bin Laden emerged as self styled leaders at the international scene to resist US influence in the Muslim World… and Al Qaeda took a birth.
Just like the well laid out plans of mice, (of Tom and Jerry character); Neocons plans as of mice had gone awry. This made the Neocons desperate …and that is why the US decided to start moving fiercely … to attack its monstrous creation—Taliban. Muslim extremism in form of jihad was utilised by US earlier in Afghan war and why not; it could be used again… as future policy weapon.
The think tanks of Neocons were able to bring forth again a new divisive plan build around the known potential intensions of Al Qaeda; to resist all US activities in Muslim world in and around the Middle East. Very skilfully US incited Al Qaeda to move in and fell into 'well laid trap'. Al Qaeda fell in and carried out some dread full acts of terror against innocent civilian and got them selves labelled as 'terrorist' at global level. (Earlier Soviet Union was very successfully trapped in by US covert actions and was encouraged to invaded Afghanistan and got itself plunged in a war to get defeated and …met a death of its own Empire.) US had now planned to conduct their all future covert operations…riding on the wings of terror of Al Qaeda. The short sighted self styled Muslim mavericks, like Osama bin Laden and others had fallen prey to this new web of deceit and hence after, all the pre-emptive and covert operations around the world are being conducted (very conveniently) in the name of 'Global war on terror'. This war is widely being carried out against invisible, imaginary and fearsome extremist Muslim factions like; Al Qaeda.
It's a pity that Neocons were unable to sell such a bright covert plans to American public and are being negated. After the tragic incident of 9/11, the 'Global war on terror' was fiercely escalated. All the allies and others were given a ruling guide line; 'either you are with us or with the terrorist'. All along; may it be the invasion of Iraq, toppling of Saddam's regime, the despicable conduct of consolidation plan in Iraq or tackling the hurdle of Iran; the reoccupation of Afghanistan or the NATO operations being carried out to wipe out Taliban; the going for US is very, very tough. But the operation is being conducted, well to the 'letter and spirit' of the grand plan of the super power.
US has taken a fresh start from square one. Starting with the invasion of Iraq; it's supposed to be a well laid grand plan. This time, it must not go awry (like the last one). The current perilous situation in Iraq and hope to achieve a victory, seemingly against all the odds is must; (although it is being secured with great difficulty which was supposed to be a cake walk.) But the victory in Iraq is just a stepping stone and an important foot hold toward the planned major goals; to continue marching on the road through Iran, to Afghanistan, trekking around Turkmenistan and reaching the ultimate destination; Belarus (Russia). May it be Conservatives or Democrats in the house of power in Washington; this precious foot hold in Iraq ought not to be lost at any cost.
Hold your breath, Save your heart. On the long road to Belarus we will have to see many more lands, turning into Iraq… one after another.
And Osama must live. He is part of our plan.
--------------------------------
Love for all, Hatred for none

Posted by: A Khokar at March 1, 2007 7:36 PM

A Khokar --

You stated, "Love for all, Hatred for none". That is a flat out lie, because you do not know what love is if you support Osama. You also stated, "Osama must live. He is part of our plan". Plan for what? Let me guess -- to destroy our world as we know it?

Don't insult our intelligence by ending your comment by saying that you have "Love for all", because that simply is not true. You need to learn the true meaning of love -- and while you're at it -- learn the true meaning of peace also. Please use an English dictionary.

Posted by: champ at March 1, 2007 7:47 PM

Zenster said

Each time the Taleban opens their pie holes about how the brave Lion of Islam™, bin Laden, still lives, we go in and Arclight the crap out of Pakistan and Afghanistan's border region with some merciless carpet-bombing.

I am continually mystified about peoples' (including our Administration and members of Congress) fixation on what the Muslims in the Middle East think about us. It shows up in Iraq as a desire for the Iraqis to appreciate us and to want to emulate our democracy. It shows up in "Palestine" when we give foreign aid in order to "win hearts and minds". Why? And on the other side, it shows up sometimes when people here talk about forcing the Middle East to drop Islam (and presumably to start following something more acceptable, like Christianity), or as in this case, killing people for disagreeing with us. Again, why? Why does anyone care what they think, or how they treat each other? Personally, I don't care that they hate us. I don't care that they choose to follow shariah and stone each other for adultery, chop off each others' hands for petty theft, cook and serve each other goats with whom they have had carnal relations, avoid polio vaccines, or however else they choose to lead their miserable lives.

Our goal should be much simpler and much easier than taking on the task of transforming over a billion peoples' minds into our own image. Our goal should be to make ourselves safe from their onslaught. Period. That means controlling the number of Muslims living in our society, it means stopping them from transforming our society into an Islamic-based society. It means weaning ourselves off Islamic oil.

It means spending our money on ourselves, not giving it to them in the hope that then they'll like us. If we discover that they are arming themselves to attack us, then we attack them first and destroy them and their weaponry. And then leave. No rebuilding. How much would it have cost to have destroyed any places where Iraq might have been hiding WMD's? Not much, compared to occupying the country for years and rebuilding it at our expense while they are busy killing each other and our soldiers. Our soldiers' job is to protect our citizens, not to build a shiny new nation for the Iraqis.

If they want to put up OBL posters everywhere, and praise him, and name parks after him, fine. But if he makes an appearance in a parade, it's Daisycutter time, regardless of how many "vast majority of moderates" are also present cheering him on. Every time Hamas or Hezbollah hold one of their parades, with their mobile missile launchers and goosestepping soldiers, we should destroy every piece of weaponry on display.

But please, forget about getting them to agree that democracy is not a corrupt "kaffirocracy", or that women have equal rights to men, or that Jesus is not just another minor prophet, or that all people including Hindus (polytheists) have the same stature and worth as a Muslim. That's where we start to lose focus and go a little bit whacko. Because it's not going to happen. We become Don Qixotes, tilting against windmills. Whether it's Republicans or Democrats, and whatever good intentions are behind it, it's not going to work. It's not a productive way to spend our time and money.

Posted by: special_guest at March 1, 2007 8:05 PM

I thought A Khokar's conspiracy theory was kind of amusing. Right up there with aliens altering human genetics rather than excepting the messy business of evolution.

Of course, wild rants like that are all about confusing the mix of short-sightedness, unrestrained corporate greed, political correctness, and mediocre to poor level leadership that America has experienced most of the modern era -- with some kind of big "master plan".

Posted by: Abraham_Lincoln at March 1, 2007 8:16 PM

Whoops, should read "...ACCEPTING the messy business of evolution."

Posted by: Abraham_Lincoln at March 1, 2007 8:18 PM

For what it's worth. This man's importance is overstated; while he is a hero in much of the Islamic world, the jihad is not based on his personality, but on the ideology of Islamic supremacism.....Thank you Robert for that...What get's me is they put all the blame on the Sunni's...when the danger is Iran and the Shia...it has been for 26 years...here is a good link...Shiites Plan To Kill King Abdallah Bin-Abd-al-Aziz December 18th, 2007
Anti-Mullah reports on a Shiite plan to kill King Abdallah Bin-Abd-al-Aziz December 18th, 2007:

Anti-Mullah—Al-Furqan Website carries on its "Documents" page a posting by the "website supervisor" under the headline:

"Document: The Shiites will kill King Abdallah Bin-Abd-al-Aziz on this day of this year."

The posting says: "The Shiites have been talking about the killing of Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdallah Bin-Abd-al-Aziz in more than one of their books, to the extent that they mentioned the day, month, and year on which the custodian of the two holy mosques will be killed. ...
( someone posted there what is the harm in Muslims killing Muslims....The Shia are working hard for a nuke...if you can't see the harm in the Shia getting their hands on Mecca...you are not a jihad student. http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/

Posted by: storagemanager at March 1, 2007 8:28 PM

A. Khokar.

THANK YOU.

You have no idea how much I laughed as I read your post. I'm not sure which was funnier: the Tom and Jerry reference or the idea that the US would waste its time trying to get to Belarus. You really think the US had a "well laid trap" that al Qaeda fell into, that we tricked them into attacking bases, embassies and finally office buildings? I think you're projecting.

Not to worry. You're still funny.

Posted by: PMK at March 1, 2007 8:41 PM

Hugh asks, "What will follow Bush?" Try Rudy Gulliani. Look at it this way: Right after the Cold War ended we got blindsided by 9/11. Most people in power had no real knowledge of Islam, including Bush. Has Bush gone up the learning curve since then? I give him a C-.
Meanwhile, the public and at least some of our more nimble-minded leaders have gradually familiarized themselves with the situation. Sites like this one help.
I think Rudy is a smart, hard-working and no-nonsense kind of guy who can learn. And who knows, Hillary and McCain may have some intelligent things to say. We'll see.
This next go-around everyone should be a little better prepared. Some things take time.
Remember, when the Saudi's offered money after 9/11, Rudy wouldn't take it. Those guys hate him.
http://www.joinrudy2008.com/join/FTFform.htm

Posted by: jewdog at March 1, 2007 8:42 PM

"Hugh asks, "What will follow Bush?" Try Rudy Gulliani."

I hope not. As admirable as Rudy's performance was in the wake of 9/11, he has a major minus and it has nothing to do with the religious right.

He's for illegal immigration and New York is a sanctuary city. Anyone who isn't serious about securing our borders isn't serious about fighting the threats we face.

Posted by: PMK at March 1, 2007 8:52 PM

Rudy supports the path to citizenship program for illegals. I don't agree, but then, what mayor of NYC can be anti-immigrant and still be mayor of NYC?
On the other hand, Rudy is tough on crime and for a strong homeland security. As president he will see that our borders are secure.

Posted by: jewdog at March 1, 2007 9:26 PM

"This demonstration must embody the virtue of integrity—the unity of principles and practice. Intellectually, we must state our intentions and reasons openly, without hiding behind timid diplomatic-speak. Physically, we must act decisively, and with all the force we deem necessary, to eliminate the Iranian regime as quickly as possible, and with the least risk to American soldiers. Only when the world sees this demonstration of American resolve will America begin to see peace and security.

It is vital that Americans take this action for the right moral reasons, openly stated. We must not seek legitimacy for the removal of the Iranian Islamic State beyond the principle of our right to defend ourselves. To pretend that something more than this principle is needed would be to deny the sufficiency of the principle. To base our reasons on the alleged good of others, especially on any alleged benefits to the people of the Middle East, would be to accept a position of moral dhimmitude"

Hokey Smokes, Madduck! That's a great article, a real MUST READ for the folks here at Jihad Watch. Few times have I seen stated so concisely the moral validity of America's right and imperative to combat Islam, especially Iran. Thank you so much for posting it!

(Link: http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2006-winter/no-substitute-for-victory.asp )

From the linked article:

"Altruism leads to the same conclusion. To fight for our own benefit—to elevate our lives over those of our enemies—is almost universally condemned today as selfish and thus “immoral.” A moral war, according to altruism, is a war fought self-sacrificially, for the good of others, especially for the weak. It is only by a continuous policy of aiding others that we can rise to moral goodness. Even restrained, limited military action is wrong, if taken for our own benefit. In this view, a strong power is good only when it recognizes the moral claims of those in need—even enemies and their supporters. The route to peace is not through victory, since altruism (“otherism”) cannot abide the defeat of others. The “path to tomorrow” is through the sacrifice of our own wealth, values, and lives to the needs of others—even those who threaten us. Again, their freedom must be our goal—their prosperity must be our mission—if we wish to be “good.”

I'd venture to say that Ayn Rand would concur with such a self-immolative definition of "altruism". Curiously (not having read ahead), the author then goes on to cite Rand verbatim. I consider the author, John Lewis, to be somewhat optimistic with respect to eventually separating Islamic church and state. However, his resolute mandate that moral authority at all times oppose theological rule enables sufficient application of force to surmount all outcomes, regardless.

Read this article, folks. It will provide you with the highest caliber ammunition for arguing why, more than any other Nation, it is Iran that must be dismantled and subjugated by American force as both a demonstration to Islam and simply one of national resolve.

Posted by: Zenster at March 1, 2007 9:29 PM

Madduck, after further research into Dr. John Lewis, I now realize that the article you linked actually precipitated direct interaction between Lewis and this board.

(Link: http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/014739.php )

Incidentally, he has also published one of the finest, if not the finest, chronology of terrorism available:

(Link: http://www.classicalideals.com/chronology.htm )

For any of you seeking a comprehensive timeline of Islamic terrorism's origins, this is it. Due to my own belief that the Soviet Union served as midwife to Islamic terrorism:

(Link: http://www.globalpolitician.com/articledes.asp?ID=2141&cid=11&sid=64 )

... not to mention how Lewis' chart begins with this entry:

"1917 — Russian Revolution leads to nationalizations of private property."

It is extremely telling that Russia's largest historical role has consisted of an incessant and almost pathological post-Tsar campaign of triangulation against American interests.

In all truth, Dr. John Lewis is the closest I've seen to Absolute Moral Authority regarding the dismantling of Iran in particular, and quashing Islamic theocracy in general. I regret not having enough hats to take off (and I have many Stetsons, Akubras etc.), for this man's body of work. Every bit I've read has made complete sense, a rare thing indeed.

Again, Madduck, a great link and utterly apprpos in that, at present (hard as it might be to admit), neutralizing Iran far outweighs the importance of apprehending a renally-deficient upper class Saudi twit, even if he is an aspiring Hitler. Iran is champing at the bit to finish Adolph's homework and better that we pour sand in their clockworks right away.

Posted by: Zenster at March 1, 2007 11:25 PM

It's interesting that all of the senior figures in Islam talk about martyrdom and dying for Islam etc. But so very few of these people actually marty themselves. Mohammed, as I understand it, died in his bed, Osama hides and sends other muslims to martyr themselves. In the UK we have/had Abu Hamza deported to Beirut? As soon as the violence erupted there instead of martyring himself (as he advised all muslims to do) he whined about his human rights and demanded he be returned to the safety (for him anyway) of the UK. Why do they not practice what they preach? Why do they take such joy in the death of their own children and the innocent children of others, but are not prepared to do this themselves?

Posted by: DaveMate at March 2, 2007 6:18 AM

"Why do they take such joy in the death of their own children and the innocent children of others"

......they obey the Qur'an and follow the words of old MO......religiously.....

Ban Muslim Immigration.

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 2, 2007 6:42 AM

"Why do they take such joy in the death of their own children and the innocent children of others, but are not prepared to do this themselves?"

They probably say that they have a different role to play - that their skills necessitate their staying alive and that martyrdom is not what Allah has in mind for them. So they follow the will of Allah and spend their lives encouraging others to kill. They're still good Muslims, by their own definition.

Posted by: PMK at March 2, 2007 12:26 PM

bin Looney Tunes is back. Great.

Avoid him.

Posted by: pythagoras at March 2, 2007 1:05 PM

"Bin Ladens body lies amouldering in the grave".

Wont it be great to sing this little ditty.

Hes undead? is that like a little unpregnant?

Actually, he is dead in the fact that what he has sown, that and that only, is what he is going to reap!

Posted by: guide inside at March 2, 2007 4:51 PM

Zenster,,thanks for the additional Lewis links..
good stuff!

Madduck

Posted by: Madduck at March 2, 2007 7:14 PM