jawa.mee.nu

December 04, 2006

Jihad Media Battalion Report: Fighting Zionist Robots!

Pay attention to the animated banner above, brought to you by the cyber jihadis from the al Qaeda in Iraq front of The Jihad Media Battalion. Make sure to let it scroll through. Notice the claim that the insurgents got two "robot soldiers"? They also claim to have killed two "Mossad" agents. I. Kid. You. Not.

In addition, they claim to have killed 326 "Crusaders". Actual number of US deaths in November? 70.

Part of the video shows the downed F-16 that the Jihad Media Battalion's parent organization, The Islamic State in Iraq, claims to have destroyed with a Soviet made surfact-to-air missile. The only problem? The video has the Associated Press watermark on it. Meaning the cyber jihadis downloaded the video from the internet. Even I have the original video without the watermark on it.

If the jihadis from The Islamic State in Iraq had actually shot down the plane, then shouldn't the Jihad Media Battalion--one of the official media organs of that group (the other being al Fajr) have a copy of the original video? Not some video that they pirated from an AP report.

The last funny from the video is that it shows an image of a "spy plane" "shot down" by the Army of Ansar al Sunna. The "spy plane" is actually a model airplane. The consensus among those in the military I have spoken to is that the mujahideen had actually found a child's toy, not a "spying aircraft" as is claimed.

The thing that is not so funny about this piece of propaganda is that it will be taken seriously by Islamists around the world. One of the reasons that Sunni insurgents are able to recruit is because these fighters actually believe this type of propaganda. One of the major themes of the cyber jihad is that far more Americans are killed than the US officially reports. These reports go from the insurgents to the Arab and Islamist media and are then consumed by a public eager to believe that the Great Satan is being defeated everywhere they fight.

People tend not to fight when they believe there is no hope for victory. As long as we continue to allow such propaganda to be spread by the cyber jihadis, then winning the war on terror will be much more difficult.

So, on the one side, terrorists use this propaganda to boost the morale of their own supporters. The flip side to this is that the same propaganda is used to demoralize those in the West willing to stand up to their Islamofascist agenda.

Notice this grab from the video. It's in English. Meaning the target audience is you.

Message: You've already lost, now go home so we can begin the serious work of establishing a base for the coming Caliphate.

Posted by: Rusty at 02:24 PM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 474 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Don't you know?

AP has first dibs on Terrorist media, to better demoralize the west. Later the Al-Q can use the footage for their own sites.

Just havin a joke.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 04, 2006 04:24 PM (2OHpj)

2 About establishing the 'Caliphate'

I've been thinking about the grand strategic benefits of allowing a 'Caliphate' to be established.

Right now the enemy is decentralized, but what if they weren't?

Any thought on where we might go with this?

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 04, 2006 04:27 PM (2OHpj)

3 I think they're referring to drones when they write "robot soldiers." At the rates they're claiming, America would have run out of them years ago.

Of course, If you told your average Middle Easterner that America was using Terminator Mark IVs against baby Iraqis, they would believe it. A truly stupid people.

Now we know where guys like puddlePuke get their Iraq stastistics

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 04, 2006 05:42 PM (bLPT+)

4 They stumbled across a couple of robosapien toys and instantly thought about surrendering until the robots called them dude. They grabbed them attempted to rape them and were confounded by the lack of a butthole. They then blindfolded them, shot and beheaded the toys all the while screaming Allah Akbar!

Posted by: SeeMonk at December 04, 2006 05:48 PM (n4VvM)

5 "Actual number of US deaths in November? 70."

Is that better?

Posted by: 18A at December 04, 2006 06:14 PM (hEQzl)

6 I'm sorry, but I'm not sure I can expect anything more from a whole society of inbreds. Seriously. If you still think the "redneck South" is a bunch of inbreds, you obviously haven't seen too many Bedouins.

Posted by: RepJ at December 04, 2006 06:36 PM (rqlgb)

7 18A:

Tell us all how much you love American soldiers and Marines.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 04, 2006 07:27 PM (bLPT+)

8 If I had a website I would really like to set up a counter with some rapidly advancing huge number on it (like the deficit I guess) and label it Islamotards Sent to Hell by US Soldiers in Iraq. It would have just as much meaning as the crap on that site and be much more amusing.

Posted by: Buzzy at December 04, 2006 10:44 PM (CXz7T)

9 You first. And then prove it.

Posted by: 18A at December 04, 2006 10:44 PM (LxyIe)

10 We don't want shit like 18A loving us. Assholes like him are the least of the reasons why I joined.

Posted by: Max Power at December 05, 2006 12:32 AM (PM8kH)

11 Max Power:

Don't worry about it. Little 18A hates you, but he would never have enough balls to say it to your face.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 05, 2006 02:38 AM (bLPT+)

12 18A:

Prove I made a comment here. Prove you exist. Prove I exist.

Fucking moron.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 05, 2006 02:39 AM (bLPT+)

13 I think I know what the A in 18A stands for. The next letter is s.

Posted by: Greyrooster at December 05, 2006 06:43 AM (ezJiI)

I also bet that they are getting the 1068 Al Mahady Army number from the car bombs they set off in marketplaces.

Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at December 05, 2006 08:47 AM (oC8nQ)

15 Bedouins are actually pretty great and mostly peace loving folks. Many serve in the IDF for example. And almost all of them will welcome anyone to their homes and share what little they have.

Posted by: Raphael at December 07, 2006 01:06 AM (KN0GJ)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

December 02, 2006

Cyber Jihad: Giving Up Before We've Begun to Fight

Tom Allard has an extensive article about the rise of the cyber jihad and the internet as a tool for planning, recruiting, and disseminating terrorist propaganda. For those of us interested in winning this war, it's a must read.

The only problem? The experts who claim we cannot fight the cyber jihad have given up before we've even begun.

So there are 5,000 radical Islamist websites now. That's too many websites to shut down, say the experts. Wrong. Try killing upwards of 30,000 jihadis in Iraq at this very moment. Yet we are engaging the enemy wherever we can.

Hmmm, let me see.....which is tougher? Killing 30,000 jihadis or taking down 5,000 websites? And, yeah, for each one we take down another will pop up. But for every terrorist we kill, so does another. The fact that the fight will be tough does not mean it shouldn't be fought.

You do the math. Biggest problem? The compaints that it is difficult to find the cyberterrorists behind the internet jihad. Why is that a problem? Because it tells you we're still in law enforcement mode. We should be on a war footing. And that means treating the internet as both a tool of war (like a gun) and a space where that war is fought (a battlefield). First rule of combat: deny your enemy space to operate. Second rule: the fewer the weapons they have, the better.

Still, read it all. Here are some excerpts: MORE BELOW more...

Posted by: Rusty at 08:47 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 767 words, total size 5 kb.

1 So if we treat the internet as part of the battle space in our war against islamic extremists, then taking out 5,000 websites is not a real big issue.

All you need to do is identify the site, scavenge it for intelligence material and propaganda, and then perform the tried and true method to take down a site...

DDOS

I think I may have said this in some of the other comments threads here. But why don't one of you guys organize a group of us who could pull this off?

Posted by: newyank at December 02, 2006 09:12 PM (l1tqC)

2 I seriously doubt that anyone is going to come out in the open to organize a group that engages in DDOS since it violates a number of laws and cyber jihad, in and of itself, is not acknowledged as part of the battlespace yet. It certainly needs to be though.

Citizens can however use hosters own TOS rules to force them to take down websites and there are other means not normally considered illegal as of yet that waste a good deal of their bandwidth.

Posted by: Buzzy at December 02, 2006 11:42 PM (CXz7T)

3 I'm sure our FBI would spend more time trying to get our guys than theirs.

Posted by: Randman at December 03, 2006 12:23 AM (Sal3J)

4 I'm all for doing something, but I'm not a computer whiz. I'm OK with a can of paint. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

Anyway, I think it's OK to entertain the idea that something seemingly innocent, like a can of paint, could somehow become dangerous in the right hands.

Or put another way, how do we control the flow of information? What if what they do leaves bright yellow foot prints? What if the signs they use to navigate are wrong? What if their windows are painted over?

I'm being vague for a reason, but I hope not to vague. Nor do I really know what can be done with computers.

I guess what I'm trying to say is the obvious 'come up with something new'

During the Spanish civil war, tank advances were stopped with pie plates and bedsheets. What are our equivalents? How can we be surprising and effective.

Ethiopeans turned a tankette over with their hands, and killed another tankette crew with a sword. Computers are machines, but we are fighting the men behind them. They are vulnerable, if we just figure out how.

I know what my can of paint is for, but do you?

I you can think of a way for a Montana guy to help, let me know. Waiting to lose is stupid.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 03, 2006 03:22 AM (2OHpj)

5 Start putting them in Guantanamo and let the cyber jihadi think twice if a website's worth it.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 03, 2006 08:44 AM (8e/V4)

6 I have never stood behind the idea of using 'privateers' to attack Jihadi's online and I believe blackflag will back me up on this -- I will go to jail before any jihadi will.
Computer security professionals have gone to jail for good intentions, for example 'Max Vision' who created a worm that would patch an exploitable condition [e.g would deny script kids the ability to break into computers] was indicted and served jail time because they said his code would have allowed him access into the same machines he had protected -- even though there was not a single piece of evidence that he ever did access any machine his worm patched.
He didn't receive his Jail time immediately however, it only came when he told the F.B.I he would not wear a wire to talk to a friend, then once he could no longer be used to entrap and gather information on other hackers he went to Jail, that is why none of the professional computer analysts, and programmers are doing a damn thing about the cyber jihad, because as the old saying goes 'The road to hell is pathed with good intentions.

Posted by: davec at December 03, 2006 09:42 AM (yaQM4)

7 A lot of what CIA field ops do would also get them into hot water if it weren't for their projects being classified by the government.

Another thing to consider is these websites could be used a good sources of intelligence by the people trying to protect us from the islamic extremists.

Perhaps the best we as average citizens can do it simply report offensive websites to the companies that host them.

Maybe these guys could use some more help:
http://haganah.org.il/haganah/

Posted by: newyank at December 03, 2006 10:20 AM (l1tqC)

8 OK.

Well I do feel kind of useless about the cyberjihad. When I was a kid we used to think it was going to be a nuclear war, and we would have Chinese and Russian communist invading through the ashes.

My childhood friends and I thought of ways to fight back if they ever came this far. Being young, we had all sorts of imaginative ideas.

Later, when I was hanging around waiting for the police state to become a reality, I built upon the more practical tricks with older 'kids'. Not everything will work in every situation, but the variety of ideas was cool. We weren't any of us Mcgiver, or anything, but that wasn't the point.

We kept thinking of ways to win.

Against whoever. Using useless junk, that the ATF couldn't regulate. Computers are way past where I ever thought I would be going.

Now the enemy isn't the foriegn commies, or even the ATF (they still stink as an agency) We have the Islmaofascists, and 'Marxists Without Borders'.

I don't know how to fight them directly.

But I've been compiling information anyway. I don't spell as well as I used to, but I think I can write OK, but would anything I write make a difference?

I really want to be involved in a positive way.

I'm tired of waiting to lose.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 03, 2006 08:04 PM (2OHpj)

9 #6 Davec: Isn't Congress permitted to grant "Letters of Marque"? Perhaps this is a power that needs to be resurrected for use in fighting the battle in cyberspace (not that I'd expect the Dems to do so)?

Posted by: irish19 at December 04, 2006 12:37 AM (BVgVr)

10 Rusty, you keep calling for cyber warfare. But oddly, you always neglect to specify exactly how you would carry out this type of operation. You admonish those that cry "Nuke Mecca" as not having a plan for afterwards. The same could be said about your counter-cyber-jihad.

You say "take the sites out" but dont say how or what we will do afterwards. What about people who criticize mypetjawa? Would they be next targets?

Cyber warfare is no substitute for a real bomb. The US is under constant cyber attack from abroad by people who dont like our ideas too. So what? You wanna really mess with us? Fly a plane into our financial center.

Jihadis ideas are wrong. It is the idea of jihad that needs to be defeated, not necessarily web servers that host writings about those ideas.

Posted by: BelchSpeak at December 04, 2006 10:42 AM (RnY/N)

11 All talk of cyber-war is useless, because the only thing muslims understand, what with their little, unevolved proto-brains, is blood and gore. We should burn them out of their homes and businesses, and slaughter them like rats when they run out with their asses on fire, and then they might understand.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at December 04, 2006 01:25 PM (Oew5j)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

November 22, 2006

Fighting Jihadis From the Comfort of Your Living Room

Did you know you can fight the jihadis without ever leaving your living room? That goes double for you fat asses still living in your mother's basement. It's true.

Should you accept your mission to become a member of the 101st Fighiting Keyboard Batallion, you will find yourself spending hours and hours chatting to wanna be terrorists from around the world. You will become accustomed to hearing praise for acts of terror. You will become numb to beheading snuff films.

More importantly, you will spend much less of your time surfing for free porn.

Below are a couple of interesting stories. First is one about a UK based private intel organization called Vigil. As you know, I've become acquainted with one of its members who feeds me all sorts of stuff that I get to break way before the MSM 'breaks' it.

For instance, this story from the Observer (reposted by Chad) reveals that convicted al Qaeda terrorist Abbas Boutrab visited the Dublin airport in a dry bombing run. The Observer then relates how Omar Bakri Mohammed 'last week' had urged followers to bomb the Dublin airport.

Bakri Mohammed actually said this some time ago. It was only last week that the British press finally reported it. I'm looking at my copy of the Bakri speech and it was sent to me by a member of Vigil on August 10th.

The point? There is a whole lot more that you can be doing. And you don't even have to join the CIA to do it!

How do you start? Well, let's not get ahead of ourselves here. I would tell you.... but then I'd have to kill you. more...

Posted by: Rusty at 01:56 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 512 words, total size 3 kb.

Is the Great Satan Trying to Kick You Out?

Yo, got a beef with the man and you wanna stay and play it out? Is the man trying to send you packing just because of a few links to "freedom fighters?" Yo, Muslim Voice can teach you how to game the system and get your props: more...

Posted by: Bluto at 11:24 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 185 words, total size 1 kb.

November 20, 2006

6 Middle Eastern Men Removed From US Airways Flight

Witnesses said the men were chanting "Allah, Allah, Allah" as they were taken off the plane. From 5News KSTP: more...

Posted by: Bluto at 11:56 PM | Comments (20) | Add Comment
Post contains 309 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Damn them. Damn those pesky Jews.

Posted by: Vinnie at November 21, 2006 01:37 AM (/qy9A)

2 Did the pilot bother to slow the plane down before removing them? If so, what a waste of jet fuel.

Posted by: Stewed Hamm at November 21, 2006 04:26 AM (ypZk0)

3 They shouldn't be allowed in our country. They shouldn't be allowed in our country. They shouldn't be allowed in our country. Doesn't it appear obvious by now. OUTLAW ISLAM IN AMERICA

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 21, 2006 04:57 AM (Mgy1K)

4 These guys think they're being "watched". So their answer is to
behave overtly suspiciously so that even if they weren't being watched,
they are now? And then likely call CAIR to sue for one's own
self-fulfilling prophesy.

I don't care if these guys were lily white and freckled. That's
suspicious behavior for anyone and there is no justification for it.

"...this was a kind of peaceful civil disobedience that should be encouraged,..." Ah yes, spread fear and suspicion peacefully.

Idiots.

Posted by: Oyster at November 21, 2006 05:37 AM (YudAC)

5 "Khaled and his friends were pretty unhappy about it, and while in New York, they came up with a plan to "teach a lesson" to the passengers and crew."

If people start acting this way and then NOT commiting terrorism, then actions will not be suspicious. Good work.

Posted by: actus at November 21, 2006 07:51 AM (NV0dI)

6 The only problem is ... when you belong to a group that is known for criminal activity, and you begin acting like them ... you are thought to be one of them. If you don't like it, then change. That was not civil disobedience, that was deliberately taunting behavior. Even the NFL has cracked down on taunting. It certainly wasn't peaceful ... it was terrorism, since it caused a state of terror in others around them.

Posted by: feed up at November 21, 2006 08:34 AM (Lji6T)

7 I read this sometime ago and bookmarked it. Here are some excerpts.

The Plight of moderate Muslims, a people without a religion
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/shroder/040901
America is embracing a religion that is said to promote peace as many moderate Muslims happily practice it. But as Yale professor and military historian Mary Habeck points out, this "peace" is only the first phase of Islam. The "method of Muhammad" largely known by Middle East Islamists is to spread Islam peacefully at first but always including covert groups of "true followers" who will use violence against those who will not accept it.

Bin Laden believes he is following Muhammad's footsteps. He did not hijack a religion, he just took it seriously.

But the plight of the moderate Muslim is grave. As America slowly admits the enemy is true Islam, every effort must be made to embrace the moderate Muslim, not persecute them. The answer is not to blind our eyes and try to convince ourselves that moderate Muslims represent true Islam. They don't.

So as America wakes up to our enemy's identity, pray for protection of moderate Muslims. They bought a belief without substance, a way of life without a Savior. Embrace them, love them and share His holy light with them. But at the same time, do not allow public schools to lead your sons and daughters to their plight. (and please pray I don't lose my temper in a courtroom defending my sons religious freedom. I can't believe what they're teaching).
__________________________
I don't want to cherry pick. You have to read the whole thing to get the point.

Posted by: No Fear at November 21, 2006 09:29 AM (ZQepB)

8 Sorry, I copied and pasted. I have no idea why the huge text. Jeeez.

Posted by: No Fear at November 21, 2006 10:00 AM (ZQepB)

9
I don't care if these guys were lily white and freckled.

This is most defiantly part of a campaign by the religion of perpetual
victimhood. Probably had a seminar on it at their Iman conference right
after the How to Beat Your Wife meeting.

Posted by: Randman at November 21, 2006 10:04 AM (Sal3J)

10 What I don't understand is when they were told to leave the aircraft they refused. An American would have been arrested and charged with a crime. We let these animals get away with to much. (1) They shouldn't be in America. (2) when they break our laws they should be severely punished. I'm for deporting any that break our laws regardless of how small. OUTLAW ISLAM.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 21, 2006 10:40 AM (I+yOi)

11 Its pretty simple guys, they refused to get off the plane when asked.

Had they gotten off the plane, I'm sure the airline would have put them up & placed them on the next flight after the cops were done.

But people who don't get off when asked by the airline deserve being stranded.. and put on the no fly list.

Posted by: Joe Bob at November 21, 2006 11:01 AM (cYBtu)

12 All this could end overnight if muslims helped in the war on islamic terror. Until they do, they'll all be suspect.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 21, 2006 11:03 AM (8e/V4)

13 No fear,

good post. I agree 100%,

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 21, 2006 11:06 AM (8e/V4)

<gasp> Thankyou JC.

Posted by: No Fear at November 21, 2006 11:49 AM (ZQepB)

15 <gasp>

Don't gasp. I'm more than happy to give a Liberal credit when he says something sensible. I wished it happenned more often.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 21, 2006 03:59 PM (8e/V4)

16 Bluto -

I think the wrong article was referenced. The article from KSTP, was a positive article about how muslims and other groups are discriminated against.

Here is the entire article that you referenced.

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) - The police report listed the incident as "Security-Other," but some saw the detention of imams at the airport here as another case of "Flying while Muslim" - the sense that Muslims come in for extra scrutiny when they fly.

In the most recent case, six Muslim scholars were taken off a US Airways flight to Phoenix after a passenger reported overhearing them criticize the U.S. in Iraq and speaking angrily near the gate. The men said they had been praying.

The flight's captain ordered the men off the plane, and they were interrogated by the FBI and the Secret Service. They had to fly a different airline out of town on Tuesday after US Airways refused to let them on any of its flights.

It was just the latest in a line of incidents involving passengers who were Muslim or, in some cases, just not Caucasian. In August a flight from Amsterdam to Mumbai was escorted back to the airport by F-16 fighters because a group of Indians on the plane had a large number of cell phones, notebook computers and hard drives, and refused to follow the crew's instructions, authorities said.

Dr. Shahid Athar avoids bringing Arabic literature with him when he flies to avoid raising the suspicions of airport screeners. Athar, head of medical ethics for the Islamic Medical Association of North America and a professor at Indiana University School of Medicine, still prays before he flies. Generally quietly, in a corner. He said he has never had any run-ins with airport security.

"In this country, there was a time that Catholics were profiled, and they were stereotyped and discriminated (against), and Jewish people. It looks like it is our turn now," said Athar, who has written and lectured on Muslim interaction in the West. "We need to learn from their experience not to give in on this type of thing."

The scholars "thought that they are living in a society which is free, a society of believers, where prayer is something good to do," he said. Unfortunately, though, passengers "thought Muslims were supposed to pray before they blow up things."

"Unfortunately, this is a growing problem of singling out Muslims or people perceived to be Muslims at airport, and it's one that we've been addressing for some time," said Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations. The group planned to file a complaint over the incident, Hooper said.

The six scholars had been in Minneapolis for a conference of the North American Imams Federation. Those taken off the plane included Imar Shahin, the group's president.

"It's discrimination," he said. He called for a boycott of US Airways.

Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said Tuesday that the group has been "receiving more reports of 'flying while Muslim' and racial profiling incidents."

An airport police report said a US Airways manager said three of the men had one-way tickets and no checked baggage. A passenger told police the men were praying and making critical comments about the war in Iraq. Some of the men also asked for seat belt extensions even though a flight attendant told police she thought they didn't need them.

The police report said the flight's captain had already decided he wanted the men off the plane after the passenger passed him a note pointing out "suspicious Arabic men."

An airport police officer and a Federal Air Marshal agreed that the combination of circumstances was suspicious, and eventually asked the men to leave the airplane. The police report said they got off the plane without incident.

"The police came and take us off the plane in front of all the passengers in a very humiliated way," Shahin said. "I never felt bad in my life like yesterday. It was the worst moment in my life when I see six imams, six leaders in this community, humiliated."

The Department of Homeland Security's Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties said in a letter Tuesday it "has opened a review of this matter, as it relates to the actions of employees of this Department."

It also said the department will coordinate with other government agencies with the authority to review the conduct of airline and other government employees.

DHS spokesman Russ Knocke said that office "will routinely review incidents that involve allegations that involve mistreatment of individuals in the Arab and Muslim community."

Shahin eventually booked flights on Northwest Airlines - to Phoenix for five of the imams from the Phoenix-Tempe area and to Los Angeles for the sixth, who was from Bakersfield, Calif.

"May Allah the God forgive everyone who did this," Shahin said before going through the security checkpoint on Tuesday in Minneapolis. "We are doing this because we want America - the America we love and the America we came for. Forgiveness, tranquility, self-control, freedom of practicing your faith."

US Airways Group Inc. issued a statement saying it was interviewing crew members and ground workers to find out more about what happened.

"We are always concerned when passengers are inconvenienced and especially concerned when a situation occurs that causes customers to feel their dignity was compromised. We do not tolerate discrimination of any kind," the airline said.

In Phoenix, CAIR spokeswoman Bushra Khan said the US Airways flight crews should take "sensitivity training" and learn the difference between Muslims and radical Islamic terrorists.

"The fact that this very small group (terrorists) has hijacked our religion is not going to deter us from speaking out," Khan said. "Prayer is not a suspicious or criminal activity."

Associated Press Writers Martiga Lohn in Minneapolis and Natasha T. Metzler in Washington contributed to this story.

(Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)"

But, good job at trying to spin this article as a negative against muslims.

But, you did convince your fellow posters, since they will believe about anything negative about muslims, without any proof, and will be too lazy to actually check out the story on their own.

"Its pretty simple guys, they refused to get off the plane when asked.

Had they gotten off the plane, I'm sure the airline would have put them up & placed them on the next flight after the cops were done.

But people who don't get off when asked by the airline deserve being stranded.. and put on the no fly list.
Posted by: Joe Bob"

Yeah, Joe Bob, in your simple mind, everything is simple (black and white).

I'm sure that most people would just get up and walk off a plane, when asked, and miss their flight without a fuss, knowing that they have done nothing wrong.

Joe Bob - you must be black, hispanic or muslim, so you know what it's like to be discriminated against, and know how to act in the same situation, right?

"What I don't understand is when they were told to leave the aircraft they refused. An American would have been arrested and charged with a crime. We let these animals get away with to much. (1) They shouldn't be in America. (2) when they break our laws they should be severely punished. I'm for deporting any that break our laws regardless of how small. OUTLAW ISLAM.
Posted by: Greyrooster"

So much for freedom of religion and religious tolerance.

We know that you don't understand this, as you don't understand most things, so why don't you just stop trying?

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 22, 2006 06:33 AM (cbfpu)

17
Yeah, Joe Bob, in your simple mind, everything is simple (black and white).

piddle,

if you're a Liberal, everything is equivalent, i.e., the same, one color, monochrome (talk about simple minded).

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 22, 2006 07:36 AM (8e/V4)

18 Puddleduck: I understand that you are a lying commie. Maybe that doesn't count. It's so obvious. Once again, screw you punk!

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 22, 2006 01:32 PM (I+yOi)

19 You all are attacking a religion for the actions of a few. You say that muslim extremests are just those who follow the religion literally, but what then about christian extremests? What about the 52% of americans who believe that jesus will literally come back, and the 15% who believe that he will literally come back in our lifetimes. These muslims were taken from the plane for praying, yet the article mentions specifically a man (i assume christian) who was praying on the plane, and he didn't get removed or detained. RACIAL PROFILING IS PURE AND SIMPLY RACISM. In my mind, you are all just as bad as hitler.

Posted by: VT at November 22, 2006 02:19 PM (1EIYh)

20 A FEW. You mean a few hundred million don't you?

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 26, 2006 10:16 PM (aghaS)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Germany's Terrorist Catch and Release Program

Germans arrested six people they say were involved in a plot to bribe a Frankfurt airport employee to plant explosives on an El Al plane.

The story sounds like a victory for Western security until you get to this part:

The six, who could face charges of belonging to or supporting a terrorist organization, were temporarily detained Friday, but five of them were released Saturday after questioning. The remaining suspect was kept in custody over an unrelated matter.
Under German law, authorities must release suspects after a maximum of 48 hours unless they have enough evidence to convince a judge that they can be held in long-term investigative custody.

D'OH!

Posted by: Bluto at 01:33 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.

November 17, 2006

Google: Yes we help al Qaeda, so what?

I received an e-mail from Blogger, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Google. It seems they don't think it's a big deal that they are providing free hosting to al Qaeda.

Thank you for your note. Blogger is a provider of content creation tools, not a mediator of that content. We allow our users to create blogs, but we don't make any claims about the content of these pages. In cases where contact information for the author is listed on the page, we recommend you working directly with this person to have this information removed or changed.

So, contact the site owner is their response.

Since al Qaeda in Iraq is the site owner, I'm thinking that if I had their e-mail address that writing a letter of complaint would be kind of way down on the priority list. more...

Posted by: Rusty at 02:13 PM | Comments (37) | Add Comment
Post contains 156 words, total size 1 kb.

1 And how do you contact Google? They've somehow hidden the "Flag as inappropriate" button which takes a Blogger site out of the search engine when several people flag it...

Posted by: Michael Hampton at November 17, 2006 02:50 PM (FVbj6)

2 Rusty,
Did you see that the "Juba Online" site is now preceeded by a Blogger "Content Warning" page? You may have to clear your cookies to see it though. The second time I opened the page the warning didn't appear.

Happily, "Juba Sucks" still seems to work just fine.

Posted by: Mike the Marine at November 17, 2006 03:59 PM (Wl3J8)

3 "For the past eight years, the Anti-Defamation League of Bâ€™nai Bâ€™rith has tried unsuccessfully to pass its Orwellian federal â€˜anti-hateâ€™ bill. It has failed largely for one reason: Republican control of Congress,â€ writes Pike. â€œRepeatedly, Republican opponents of their hate bill, such as Rep. Roy Blunt and Sen. Bill Frist have been able, with Republican congressional backing, to block passage,â€ but now, with Democrats in control of Congress, â€œsuch freedom-saving clout no longer exists. ADLâ€™s federal thought crimes bill, â€˜The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act,â€™ will be reintroduced soon after January 1. Since no Democrat in Congress has ever voted against the hate bill, it will pass.â€

And the winner is...
ISRAEL!

Posted by: Greg at November 17, 2006 04:14 PM (v7DMp)

4 It's a two-headed coin.

Posted by: Greg at November 17, 2006 04:16 PM (v7DMp)

5 Yep, I got the same exact form letter in regards to the juba-online blogspot site. Shortly after, they put the warning up. I'm fortunate enough to have my own website and don't rely on Google for anything (even my ads are gone). I would encourage everyone using Google ads, Blogger blog software, Youtube, etc. to make the switch to other alternatives. Why support a company that so blatantly supports terrorism?

Posted by: Vonski at November 17, 2006 04:23 PM (aJDow)

6 I think it's time to let the FBI know that Google is violating Federal law by providing material aid to a recognized Foreign Terrorist Organization. Apparently, facilitating terrorists isn't considered "evil" at Google.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 17, 2006 04:39 PM (vBK4C)

7 My view is that the more information that we can monitor the better. Even if it is propaganda it still has intel value to us. And I am glad that it is being hosted by an American company, better that they have to use one of ours.

Posted by: John Ryan at November 17, 2006 05:03 PM (TcoRJ)

8 I have the exact same letter from when I wrote thme about the juba online. We were able to chase alboraq media and the jubaonline.com around the net a bit. The providers were cooperative. But they let them back once the complainst subsided. Never any luck at all with google.

Posted by: Howie at November 17, 2006 05:10 PM (D3+20)

9 Rusty,

Sorry to be OT, but I thought I should bring this to someone's attention. Or maybe you all know already, who knows. If so, I apologize.

Thanks to NoFear, I was directed over to a forum this afternoon. I found an interesting thread titled "Puddleduck has evolved!"
http://forum.newshounds.us/viewtopic.php?t=11670&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

I guess they're proud of themselves for coming over here and fooling you all by posting as conservatives. They're still doing it, and if you check the forum, you'll find more posts related to Jawa and the commenters here. They've come purely to make trouble, not to debate. Fact is, I'm tired of it.

Like I said, you may know about this already, but some of your readers may not. Or maybe they do.

Look, I'm a regular reader who mostly lurks. I like to read the stuff here and agree with a lot of what is posted. But it's hard for me to go through the comments because all of the crap that goes on. Maybe I should just read and not do comments, but I do like to hear how others with my view feel about things. I'm even willing to hear other sides if they're brought in a reasonable way. But this trolling just to cause trouble rubs me the wrong way.

My opinion? Stop responding to these fools. They'll eventually go away.

I thought I'd post the link because maybe some of you didn't know you were being played with by a bunch of folks who are too damn proud of themselves. They needed to be busted, so I'm doing it.

And again, thanks to NoFear, who pointed me in the direction of his/her "buddies".

Posted by: Kelly at November 17, 2006 07:20 PM (jfHrV)

10 A) So what, B) I'd rather know where they are and what they're saying, C) Way to be on the wrong side of the censorship debate once again...

Yet those who would take down your hate-filled site "demonstrate that they are against freedom" (paraphrase of your words).

Spare us any comment to the effect that you are not neutral in our wars. The principle of free speech means nothing unless it applies to those voices you hate.

I don't pretend that this is easy, and I wrestle with it every time the issue of Skokie or Hate Speech comes around. Relative to these sort of important principles it doesn't seem like you're up to wrestling with much of anything these days, and instead see a black and white world of your own creation.

Posted by: Professor von Nostrand at November 17, 2006 10:12 PM (Ys915)

11 Von Nostril, a terrorist group that has murdered thousands of Americans is using Google's Blogger software and webhosting to communicate with each other. I'd never thought, until this moment, that you were actually mentally retarded.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 17, 2006 10:34 PM (vBK4C)

12 Professor von Nostrand, are you a professor at Berkley?

Posted by: Job at November 17, 2006 10:48 PM (/xJCl)

13 Kelly : " I thought I'd post the link because maybe some of you didn't know you
were being played with by a bunch of folks who are too damn proud of
themselves. They needed to be busted, so I'm doing it."

I think it's great that you busted them. I linked over and they do think they are too clever by half.

For their own sake, they should be called on it because what impressed me was the vacuousness in their comments, even in their own environment. Bottom line is that they don't have much to say. They feed on others' conviction and sincerity. They are very shallow and they need mypetjawa to feel important.

If they weren't so annoying, I would feel sorry for them.

Posted by: Heroic Dreamer at November 17, 2006 11:23 PM (bF+Yg)

14 Dread, As with you and the KKK, I am more comfortable when these people take to the public sphere where they can be monitored from a safe distance. And as, with you and the KKK, I don't expect that they realize that's actually what is being accomplished.

Funny.

Posted by: Professor von Nostrand at November 17, 2006 11:33 PM (Ys915)

15 Kelly, thanks! It seemed the most likely probability, but it is nice to know for sure.

Now ...

Professor Von Nostrand, this is not a free speech issue. The enemy is never guaranteed any of the rights that lawful citizens are. Any rights guaranteed an enemy, are in the form of mercy extended. Total war is the natural, normal form of war. There is no such thing as a "Just War", only wars you win, and wars you lose. God loves an Islamist, because sin in Gods name is rewarded in heaven.

By trying to extend mercy to an enemy that doesn't respect it, we are helpiing to defeat ourselves. The Islamists realize this, so why don't we?

Hosting of the CVC site may be a surveillance issue. If so, then the CVC site serves a purpose, until the details get blown by the NYT. Speaking of the enemy ...

Free speech is protected to help us maintain the rule of the people, and the free exchange of ideas in good faith. It is not meant to be protected for those who wish to destroy us, and our government. They do not act in good faith.

What are you a professor of? Not Ethics, or History, I'll bet.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at November 18, 2006 12:28 AM (2OHpj)

16 Greg and Von Nostril will never get it right. Von Nostril cannot be a professor in America. Has to be bullshit.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 18, 2006 06:08 AM (R6qo5)

17 I don't get it; how is is that wiretapping and other domestic spying methods are OK in a case of terrorism. But when the terrorists start a blog where they FREELY disseminate their propaganda, we demand that the host take it down?!?

Is this so they can just put up another website somewhere using a proxy domain or something and out intelligence simply needs to find it again?

Isn't it better to know your enemy than to force them out of the public arena so that you have no idea what they could be planning?

Posted by: "Pink Eyed" Jim at November 18, 2006 09:06 AM (QBzHJ)

18 Rusty, thankyou for your reponse to my post You said," They've come purely to make trouble, not to debate. Fact is, I'm tired of it."It's interesting the topic here is free speech. Your a need a lesson in research. I have done nothing but debate here. Even one of your own said I use reasoned thought. For the most part I have been respectful. My father, who was a Republican taught me call em as I see em.
I am not here to disrupt. I will not speak for anyone else. Yeah, we all like to have fun but my invitation to Jesusland Joe was sincere. For the most part you all seem to have a warped view of what a liberal is. JJ has treated me well, I have stood my ground and he has his. But I have left with a greater respect for the example he has shown . I wish I could say the same for you.
I knew what I was doing when I posted the link. I even pointed out the link you sited. I have hidden nothing, and I have been nothing but honest.
Yes there have been insults on that link, but nothing compared to here. Even directed at me, before anyone knew who I was or where I stand.
I wish honest debate to balance my view of the world. I cannot do that if I only listen to one point of view. If you freeze me out, we all lose. Imo, you are being paraniod at worst. Ignorant at best.
JJ my offer still stands. I'll go back and copy it here, lest you missed it on the other thread.

Posted by: No Fear at November 18, 2006 09:13 AM (ZQepB)

19 JJ, this is what I posted yesterday.

25 I'm glad JJ. I have known hunters in the past who claim they kill for the sport of it=== While we are off the subject. I have a proposal for you. suggested idea or plan: a suggestion or intention, especially one put forward formally or officially. Not the other kind of proposal. I really don't need to be told to go find puddleduck and have him fuck me in the ass. What I propose is this. Come to my forum. Talk to them like you do to me. "Reasonable thought". (Yes I saw that, thankyou.) There are so many really intelligent people there, and some assholes too. Just like here. Exchange ideas. Communicate with them just like you do with me. Change your nick if you like, just say something to let me know you were there. I can't always be on-line, I'm busy too, but I'll private message you, pm if you will, and then check back. Let me know what you think. Hey, what do you really have to lose? www.newshounds.us Go to the tab Forum at the top of the page and register. Or not. It's up to you.

Posted by: No Fear at November 17, 2006 11:45 AM

It's my hope that you do. And NO. I am not trying recruit you to the Dark Side. It's a sincere invitation.

Posted by: No Fear at November 17, 2006 11:48 AM

27 Or just raise hell, that's fun too. Puddleduck is there. As a matter of fact he's devoted several threads to mypetjawa. Curious? Hmmm?

Posted by: No Fear at November 17, 2006 12:03 PM

28 <sigh> Go to the top of the page where it says forum. Hit that tab, register and your in.

Posted by: No Fear at November 18, 2006 09:21 AM (ZQepB)

20 I misread,sorry Rusty, I should have been speaking to Kelly. It's early. My only excuse for the error.

Posted by: No Fear at November 18, 2006 09:24 AM (ZQepB)

For the record, I didn't post one the site you posted Kelly.

Posted by: No Fear at November 18, 2006 09:32 AM (ZQepB)

22 1 And how do you contact Google? Posted by: Michael Hampton at November 17, 2006 02:50 PM =======================================
http://www.google.com/support/bin/request.py?contact_type=cf_noresponse

Posted by: No Fear at November 18, 2006 09:52 AM (ZQepB)

23 I really shouldn't be surprised that the Professor of Appeasement would
defend yelling fire in the crowed theater as freedom of speech. His
reading of our constitution as requiring free speech for active
terrorist organizations who use that speech to direct murder and
torture of people is very telling.

Posted by: Randman at November 18, 2006 09:55 AM (Sal3J)

24 Yelling fire in a crowded theater is Not freedom if speech. Randman re-read this please. It is a valid point, whether you acknowledge it or not.===================================
The principle of free speech means nothing unless it applies to those voices you hate. I don't pretend that this is easy, and I wrestle with it every time the issue of Skokie or Hate Speech comes around. Relative to these sort of important principles it doesn't seem like you're up to wrestling with much of anything these days, and instead see a black and white world of your own creation.

Posted by: Professor von Nostrand at November 17, 2006 10:12 PM

Posted by: No Fear at November 18, 2006 10:04 AM (ZQepB)

25 Thanks again for your so very typical presumptuous deceleration of what
I wrestle with but that does not change the fact that you are defending
the rights of an organization that actively murders our troops and
civilians around the world. This is not a political group that wishes
changes through the ballot box but rather through the violence. They
should not be afforded the same free speech as others. Have you ever
considered human shield work?

Posted by: Randman at November 18, 2006 10:19 AM (Sal3J)

26 Von Nostril - perhaps you could supply a reason for linking moi to the KKK? I didn't think so. Did you know that the US Constitution is a covenant with the citizens of America; not Foreign Terrorist Organizations? I didn't think so.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 18, 2006 10:42 AM (vBK4C)

27 "The principle of free speech means nothing unless it applies to those voices you hate."

There was a time when there greatest fear in this country came from Malcom X and MLK. You couldn't turn a corner and have someone say BOO, and not see a black man.
It's what this country feared. But only through communication did most of us understand what bigotry was.
Now we are faced with another challange. If we do not allow ourselves to hear other points of views, we will always live in fear. Always fail to find peace. And always be destined for war.
I don't want this for my children. Listening and communicating is not the same as opening ourselves up for slaughter.

Posted by: No Fear at November 18, 2006 10:42 AM (ZQepB)

28 No Fear, I in no way was referencing you, except for the fact that you led me over there and opened my eyes. I've never said that you're here to make trouble. As a matter of fact, I've seen your points and how you debate here and have no issue with it.

If you go back and reread my comment you'll see I wrote, "I'm even willing to hear other sides if they're brought in a reasonable
way. But this trolling just to cause trouble rubs me the wrong way." I don't mind one bit if someone comes over here to debate, but from what I read yesterday, PuddleDuck, his friend CaffeenMan and a few others came over here simply just to TROLL, not debate. That's where I run into the problem.

Believe it or not, I gave them the benefit of the doubt at the start. I believed they had one shred of credibility. Then I read those threads yesterday and things changed in my mind.

And yeah, your people are as nasty as the ones over here can be. I've read the threads. Some people are all obsessed with calling each other assfuckers for some reason.

Me? I prefer not to go that route.

I'll say it again. I have no issue with you or anyone else with an opposing view, who comes here to post honestly what they think and are willing to listen to the other side. It would be damn closeminded of me if I didn't want to hear what the other side had to say, which is why I read what you post and am interested in it.

I"ve written far too much, I think you get my point.

Posted by: Kelly at November 18, 2006 12:35 PM (jfHrV)

29 NoFear: this is not a question of free speech. This is as if Roosevelt allowed Josef Goebbels to have a radio show in the US during WWII and to use it slip secret messages to his agents. I'm frankly astounded that this simple concept is proving so very difficult for you libbys to grasp.

Maybe it's just a reflexive reaction that you all believe that you should disagree with anything said by anyone to the right of Michael Moore?

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 18, 2006 12:35 PM (vBK4C)

30 Google used to be my home page as I usually began web surfing with a search. But since they have gotten in bed with China and have no qualms about censorship I decided to return the favor and have decided to censor Google in my house.

I use Google only as a search site of last resort and that need rarely arises.

My search sites are AltaVista and Windows Live Search.

I find it amazing how many companies build their corporate empires on the back of Americans then turn around and stick it to those very same people who created their greatness.

The only proper response is to send them packing.

Bill Gates complains about a lack of skilled technical workers in the U.S. but Microsoft was built on the back of Americans. Thanks Billy-boy. Oh, by the way - your welcome.

Of course if Bill invested 1.1 billion dollars into Americans as he has into India I guess their might be more skilled Americans.

The common vernacular is "biting the hand that feeds you." It is amazing how many people who head great companies stumble at this point.

Google will go the way of the NYT. Falling stocks. Wanna have some fun? Post these messages in investor forums.

Posted by: Matt Ahern at November 19, 2006 05:45 AM (X0KjK)

31 Kelly
Thankyou for that. Enough said on that issue. I hope.
Whew.

Posted by: No Fear at November 19, 2006 09:26 AM (ZQepB)

32 Mr. Dread,
I'm frankly astounded that this simple concept is proving so very difficult for you libbys to grasp.
Maybe it's just a reflexive reaction that you all believe that you should disagree with anything said by anyone to the right of Michael Moore?
====================
I get your point. It was not lost on me.
Free speech was and is one of mine. The more important point I was trying to make is :Listening and communicating is not the same as opening ourselves up for slaughter.
Who invited Michael Moore into this? I agree with some of the things he has to say. He makes good points frequently. But he cherry picks. He chooses to ignore any point of view other than his own. I do that myself in order to make a point sometimes. But so do you sir.

Posted by: No Fear at November 19, 2006 09:45 AM (ZQepB)

33 Doesn't this site link to terrorist videos?

Posted by: actus at November 19, 2006 04:41 PM (NV0dI)

34 No fear: I was going to take a peek at your site. Then you said puddleduck was there. Enough said.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 20, 2006 09:03 AM (R6qo5)

35 NoFear: this is not a "free speech" issue. The people who set the site up are Al Qaeda in Iraq terrorists. If they were US citizens who support AQI, then you would have a point, but then I would remind you that Tokyo Rose was convicted of treason.

The Constitution does not say that we are required to allow our enemies to freely disseminate propaganda and communicate with each other in order to coordinate attacks. If it did, we would deserve to live under a Caliphate for being too stupid to survive.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 20, 2006 11:47 AM (vBK4C)

36 OT: Re: Puddleduck - I am instinctively suspicious of anyone who claims to be a veteran, either Con or Lib, as there is absolutely no way to confirm or refute such claims. Many seek to buttress arguments from authority by claiming to be veterans. Often, they are weak debaters seeking an advantage, as I believe is the case with Puddleduck.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 20, 2006 11:49 AM (vBK4C)

37 What I am getting out of this thread is that a lot of people are agry about the abuse of speech, yet concerned with protecting it.

Trolls abuse it! Our enemies abuse the availability of it in our national arena!

I see that others like No Fear really do want to attempt communication with people who have a different view than their own.

I have a bad temper off line, and I retype a lot of stuff before posting because of that temper. I know I could tyope a lot of mean things, and I catch myself, then I type something weaker, and it ends up becoming to weak to bother with. About then I can remember what I really wanted to say. I try to be coherent, and calm.

I want to exchange ideas, even with those I may disagree with. I enjoy No Fear, and those who can seek polite exchange. I would like to see more of the same.

I am politically independent, leaning to the right on some things, and hard right on others. Sometimes I can see a good idea on the left.

I vote Republican out of desperation, not preference. I wish there was a third party.

BTW I also ramble ...

Enemy proaganda should be used to monitor our enemies, or it should be blocked. Polite opinions from patriotic Americans, held, and shared in good faith should be respected.

Thats what I get out of this thread.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at November 20, 2006 09:37 PM (2OHpj)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

November 16, 2006

Google Hosts al Qaeda Website

The Google owned Blogger network is hosting an al Qaeda linked website. The website, The Caliphate Voice Channel, appears to be part of the growing media arm of the al Qaeda umbrella organization which once called itself The Mujahidin Shura Council.

That group recently changed its name by declaring itself The Islamic State of Iraq.

You can see the al Qaeda linked website here.

If you do visit the website, you will see several of the posts link to various translations of the Global Islamic Media Front's latest installment of the Voice of the Caliphate news program. In it, al Qaeda forces declare that they are winning the war in Iraq. You can see this bit of terrorist propaganda with English subtitles here.

Does Google know that it is hosting a terrorist website? A website from the same group that beheaded Shosei Kodai and Nick Berg? Probably not as of this writing. But I just e-mailed them about it.

Keep your fingers crossed that they will do the right thing, but don't hold your breath.

UPDATE: Howie reminds me that the Baghdad Sniper Juba website is still online. Oh, and it's also still hosted by the Google owned Blogger network. But so is the Juba Sucks website.

UPDATE 11/17/06: Blogger just e-mailed me. It was your typical "we are not responsible for the content" yada yada yada. Read: Yeah, we're helping al Qaeda, go jump in a lake you fascist censorship Nazi!

Posted by: Rusty at 03:13 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 247 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Maybe some of the trolls who comment here can go over there and encourage those scumbags.
Thanks for the heads up.

Posted by: Dick at November 16, 2006 04:11 PM (XlQVK)

2 Hmm thier site seems to be a bit slow. That's nice. Really nice.

Posted by: Howie at November 16, 2006 04:28 PM (D3+20)

3 Thanks Rusty for being on top of this.
This is the next move, the current MSM has paved its way and put up
direction signs. MSM open for business in terror proliferation.
Why? because it will sell more news, its a synergistic loop you see.
The MSM reports sensationally on terror news and then encourages them.

Posted by: NortonPete at November 16, 2006 04:52 PM (fVuwW)

4 John Ryan, these guys didn't get your message about the Caliphate. You might want to clue them in, and with Google on board, maybe this Caliphate thing is catching on. Who's next, Pelosi?

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 16, 2006 05:06 PM (8PoNP)

5 They most likely don't care. They would just say say say freedom of speech.

Posted by: Rose at November 17, 2006 12:04 AM (W8Hp7)

6 I'm not good at translating but one sentence on their site caught my eye.

"Puisse Allah accepter nos bonnes actions."

I think this means that Allah is a puisse but doesn't have a bone in his nose. It may be some kind of Muslim code or maybe I should stop trying to translate.

Posted by: Mike at November 17, 2006 06:00 AM (R8DdP)

7 Some of the writing styles on their site seem very similar to some of our lib posters here. Coincidence?

Posted by: Randman at November 17, 2006 10:56 PM (Sal3J)

8 Time to hit the following link:
https://tips.fbi.gov/

Let the FBI know what is happening.

Posted by: Rat Bastard at November 18, 2006 10:54 PM (e9LK+)

9 Blogger does know too. This is what they said when when I reported it.

Hello,

Thank you for your note. Blogger is a provider of content creation tools,
not a mediator of that content. We allow our users to create blogs, but we
donâ€™t make any claims about the content of these pages. In cases where
contact information for the author is listed on the page, we recommend you
working directly with this person to have this information removed or
changed.

Sincerely,
The Blogger Team

Posted by: Rose at November 21, 2006 07:51 PM (W8Hp7)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

November 14, 2006

Feingold and Democrats to Block Terrorist Surveillance

Russ Feingold (D-Cheesehead), writing in the loony leftist Huffington Post, says that intercepting calls to and from terrorists in the United States is bad, really bad:

There are a lot of bad bills that the Republicans may try to ram through, but here's the worst of the worst - a bill to legalize the President's warrantless wiretapping program. The White House is desperate to enact this bill, which allows the government to spy on American citizens, on American soil, without a warrant.

Yeah, like, it's just awful that we're not willing to give international terrorists a fair chance to kill as many of us as possible. I give Feingold extra style points for the way he pretends that NSA agents are actually climbing telephone poles by using the archaic term "wiretapping."

More at Gateway Pundit. Via Stop the ACLU.

Posted by: Bluto at 11:17 PM | Comments (32) | Add Comment
Post contains 144 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Wiil Feingold still be around after Jack names the criminal dim in the Senate?

Posted by: Scrapiron at November 15, 2006 01:11 AM (rqlgb)

2 Of course the Democrats wants the wire-tapping bill to fail !
Otherwise, someone might listen in on all the sick liberal phone sex that goes on...

Posted by: Darth Vag at November 15, 2006 01:25 AM (HSkSw)

3 There is already a legal means for Bush to intercept calls between the US and elsewhere.

Why doesn't he just use the FISA court, which was set up for this purpose?

Bush's explanation for not using the FISA court - it's just too much trouble to obey the law.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 15, 2006 03:51 AM (qBTkS)

4 "Otherwise, someone might listen in on all the sick liberal phone sex that goes on...
Posted by: Darth Vag "

I think you are confusing the Democrats with the minority party.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 15, 2006 03:54 AM (qBTkS)

5 "And when the terrorists attack you know they'll blame it on Bush.
Posted by: Buzzy"

Again, you are confusing the Democrats with the minority party.

When, not if, the terrorists attack, again, the Democrats will put the blame where it belongs - on the terrorists.

Unfortunately, we can't go back and undo all of the many mistakes that President Moron has made, that have created a more dangerous world.

Currently, Bush is ranked as the second most dangerous man in the world, Osama still being number 1.

But Bush is trying harder and he still has 2 more years to fuck things up even more, before he leaves.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 15, 2006 04:03 AM (qBTkS)

And when the terrorists attack you know they'll blame it on Bush.

Posted by: Buzzy at November 15, 2006 04:34 AM (+sYX1)

7 By piddledick's lefturd logic, because all the world's lefturds and
muslims, i.e., America's enemies, hate Bush, then they must be right.
Simply more evidence that a good lefturd is a dead one.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 15, 2006 07:20 AM (v3I+x)

8 "Why doesn't he just use the FISA court, which was set up for this purpose? Bush's explanation for not using the FISA court - it's just too much trouble to obey the law."

Hey puddleduck, the FISA court has issued something like 8,000 warrants in 10 years. There are over 300,000 suspected terrorists. DO explain how the court handles that number of people?

This all deals with cross border traffic. When you enter the US, you can be searched with a rubber glove, and no warrant is needed. It is trickery to let people believe that their cross border phone communication is sacred yet all their belongings with them are not.

What do you think the government is listening for anyway? You give yourself too much inportance within this machine.

Posted by: Fred Fry at November 15, 2006 08:03 AM (JXdhy)

9 The secular socialist progressive Democratic party has gone out of its way to villify anyone and everyone except the terrorists. When Hezbollah crosses into Israel, kills and kidnaps soldiers we hear them cry as one with their Islamofascist brothers that Israel should not respond with violence. As Shia terrorists and Sunni terrorists alike kill thousands of newly free Iraqis we hear that US troops will be withdrawn in 4 to 6 months. We all heard the drivel about a new course in the war under the Democrats, it's surrender, it's about giving American rights to terrorists who never set foot in this country, it's about the control of international law over the laws of our own nation.

Posted by: Buzzy at November 15, 2006 08:29 AM (CXz7T)

10 Max, you need to join an anger management program. Get back on your meds guy.

Posted by: No Fear at November 15, 2006 09:33 AM (ZQepB)

11 The Democrats will very soon change their minds about using these tactics, which I believe to be constitutional. When Lebanon falls to Hizb'Allah, and massive missle attacks are a daily occurance in Israel, there will be a change of heart on all but the Leftist wing of the Democratic Party.

The ME is now about to enter the meltdown stage. Hizb'Allah is poised to take over Lebanon, Syria and Iran are spoiling for a military confrontation with Israel, and events could easily deteriorate into full scale war.

The radical Islamists see the outcome of the recent elections here in the US as permission to proceed, and that is what they are about to do.

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 15, 2006 10:08 AM (8PoNP)

12
When, not if, the terrorists attack, again, the Democrats will put the blame where it belongs - on the terrorists.

ROFLMAO!

You really do live in a fantasy world.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 15, 2006 10:15 AM (8e/V4)

13 piddle,

your comments indicate you know nothing about FISA or about how the NSA collects information. If you were a serious commenter I'd try to enlighten you.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 15, 2006 10:17 AM (8e/V4)

14 President Wilson and FDR would call the dems cowards and traitors if they were here.The dems have not always been cowards and terrorist excusing panty waist like they are now.

Posted by: Randman at November 15, 2006 10:18 AM (Sal3J)

15 If you were a serious commenter I'd try to enlighten you....said Carlos.

Exactly, Carlos, puddleduck is nothing but a troll. He never offers anything other than invective, and should just go to Kos or Indymedia where he can participate in a circle jerk.

People like NoFear, tbone, and other liberals who post here(even the good professor on some days) at least offer reasoned thought. You can discuss differences that don't deteriorate to name-calling. Are you listening, puddleduck? Look at some of the other commenters from the liberal side and learn.

And yes, I have resorted to name-calling, but I know better. And have tried to improve. So can you, puddleduck. Or go to an echo chamber like Kos.

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 15, 2006 10:37 AM (8PoNP)

16 "any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. " - G.W. Bush

It's called the 'Patriot Act' not the 'Destroy the American Way of Life Act'. I mean that's gotta be a good act, right? Why else would they call it a Patriot Act?

Posted by: tbone at November 15, 2006 10:53 AM (HGqHt)

Are we talking about the Patriot Act? Or the interception of communications which originate in a foreign country?

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 15, 2006 11:04 AM (8PoNP)

18 Thanks JJ, I do try to better my opinions. However, I'm only liberal about some things - terrorists aren't one and that's why I love the Jawa (I danced in the streets of NJ the day we attacked Afghanistan). I also think this board can use some Liberal balance or IMax and a few others would tip you all into the drink.

Posted by: tbone at November 15, 2006 11:06 AM (HGqHt)

19 I think the Intern'l intercept is a part of the Patriot Act?

Posted by: tbone at November 15, 2006 11:07 AM (HGqHt)

20 Bush's explanation for not using the FISA court - " it's just too much trouble to obey the law."

Here is another infamous McChimpyBush quote: " The constitution? It's just a goddamn piece of paper! "

Posted by: Last laugh Larry at November 15, 2006 11:07 AM (Dd86v)

21 At any rate, we definitely have fun Bush quotes to last a lifetime!

Posted by: tbone at November 15, 2006 11:11 AM (HGqHt)

22 Just when I compliment some of the liberal commenters, up pops Larry with an attempt to prove me wrong. Damn.

Larry, meet puddleduck. You two are made for each other. You will probably take your last gasp in the embrace of a duck.

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 15, 2006 12:16 PM (8PoNP)

23 joe,

that's not how I read Larry's comment. I might be wrong though.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 15, 2006 01:39 PM (8e/V4)

24 Thanks for the backup, Fred -

"Hey puddleduck, the FISA court has issued something like 8,000 warrants in 10 years. There are over 300,000 suspected terrorists. DO explain how the court handles that number of people?"

For President Moron, it's just two much trouble for him to obey the law, so he broke it and then admitted it, only, after he got caught.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 16, 2006 04:17 AM (qBTkS)

25 No Fear -

"Max, you need to join an anger management program. Get back on your meds guy.
Posted by: No Fear"

He and the others just can't help it.

They have developed an extreme case of PESD (Post Election Stress Disorder) over the last week.

They don't seem to be having much fun, anymore.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 16, 2006 04:22 AM (qBTkS)

26 Sorry, JC, I misjudged you -

"piddle,

your comments indicate you know nothing about FISA or about how the NSA collects information. If you were a serious commenter I'd try to enlighten you.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos "

My apologies. I didn't realize that you worked at the NSA and had a Crypto clearance.

But as I cautionary note, watch what you say.

Loose lips sink ships.

I really don't want you to reveal any classified information, here, just to attempt to prove your points.

The terrorists are reading this blog, and for you to reveal this information would be considered to be treason.

Now, you wouldn't want any of your buds to think that you were a traitor, would you?

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 16, 2006 04:30 AM (qBTkS)

27 Oh, no, tbone -

President Moron couldn't have lied to the American people.

Let's just say he "mislead" the American people, again.

""any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. " - G.W. Bush

It's called the 'Patriot Act' not the 'Destroy the American Way of Life Act'. I mean that's gotta be a good act, right? Why else would they call it a Patriot Act?
Posted by: tbone "

Bush knew the law and chose to break it.

And JJ -

"Are we talking about the Patriot Act? Or the interception of communications which originate in a foreign country?
Posted by: jesusland joe"

Both

BTW - The Patriot act does not say that a warrant is no longer required from the FISA court, but President Moron has interpreted the Patriot Act and the US Constitution to mean that he no longer has to obtain a FISA warrant.

Here's some light reading for you -

Sufficiency of FISA

On the December 19, 2005, U.S. Dept. of Justice Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs, William Moschella, wrote a letter to the Chairs and Ranking Members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, defending the NSA program:

As explained above. the President determined that it was necessary following September 11 to create an early warning detection system. FISA could not have provided the speed and agility required for the early warning detection system. In addition, any legislative change, other than the AUMF, that the President might have sought specifically to create such an early warning system would have been public and would have tipped off our enemies concerning our intelligence limitations and capabilities. Nevertheless, I want to stress that the United States makes full use of FISA to address the terrorist threat, and FISA has proven to be a very important tool, especially in longer-term investigations. In addition, the United States is constantly assessing all available legal options, taking full advantage of any developments in the law.

Fourteen constitutional scholars and former government officials[23] wrote a response dated January 9, 2006 to the Department of Justice letter, and transmitted it to Chairs and Ranking Members of the House and Senate concluding that "the Bush administration's National Security Agency domestic spying program... appears on its face to violate existing law." [12]

An excerpt from their letter:

In conclusion, the DOJ letter fails to offer a plausible legal defense of the NSA domestic spying program. If the Administration felt that FISA was insufficient, the proper course was to seek legislative amendment, as it did with other aspects of FISA in the Patriot Act, and as Congress expressly contemplated when it enacted the wartime wiretap provision in FISA. One of the crucial features of a constitutional democracy is that it is always open to the Presidentâ€”or anyone elseâ€”to seek to change the law. But it is also beyond dispute that, in such a democracy, the President cannot simply violate criminal laws behind closed doors because he deems them obsolete or impracticable.

[edit] Wiretapping without warrants and FISA emergency authorizations

On January 20, 2006, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee along with lone co-sponsor Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) introduced S. Res. 350, a resolution "expressing the sense of the Senate that Senate Joint Resolution 23 (107th Congress), as adopted by the Senate on September 14, 2001, and subsequently enacted as the Authorization for Use of Military Force does not authorize warrantless domestic surveillance of United States citizens." An excerpt of the proposed Leahy-Kennedy resolution follows: [24] [25]

Whereas Congress created the FISA court to review wiretapping applications for domestic electronic surveillance to be conducted by any Federal agency;

Whereas the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 provides specific exceptions that allow the President to authorize warrantless electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes (1) in emergency situations, provided an application for judicial approval from a FISA court is made within 72 hours; and (2) within 15 calendar days following a declaration of war by Congress;

Whereas the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 makes criminal any electronic surveillance not authorized by statute;

Whereas the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 has been amended over time by Congress since the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States;

Whereas President George W. Bush has confirmed that his administration engages in warrantless electronic surveillance of Americans inside the United States and that he has authorized such warrantless surveillance more than 30 times since September 11, 2001;

On January 27, in response to growing criticism, the Department of Justice released an informal four page document titled The NSA Program to Detect and Prevent Terrorist Attacks - Myth vs Reality defending the NSA program. It argued that "he NSA activities described by the President are consistent with FISA" on the grounds that:

* FISA expressly envisions a need for the President to conduct electronic surveillance outside of its provisions when a later statute authorizes that surveillance. The AUMF is such a statute.
* The NSA activities come from the very center of the Commander-in-Chief power, and it would raise serious constitutional issues if FISA were read to allow Congress to interfere with the Presidentâ€™s well-recognized, inherent constitutional authority. FISA can and should be read to avoid this.

However, the authorization granted by President Bush to the NSA apparently uses neither FISC approval nor the one-year foreign surveillance authority granted by FISA. Instead, the administration argues that the power was granted by the Constitution and by a statutory exemption, as is advocated by the Unitary Executive theory using the interpretation of John Yoo et al. He argues that the President had the "inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information."

Article II of the Constitution of the United States of America makes the President "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States," and also mandates that he "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed", where "the Laws" refer to federal statutes passed by Congress. Article I vests Congress with the sole authority "To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces" and "To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof." The president is an officer of the government of the United States, so is subject to Congress's sole authority to make all laws for carrying the powers of the president into execution, while the president is specifically charged with the duty to take care that those laws be faithfully executed.

One court has said that the President's Commander-in-Chief authority extends to the "independent authority to repel aggressive acts... without specific congressional authorization" and without court review of the "level of force selected." Campbell v. Clinton, 203 F.3d 19 (D.C. Cir. 2000). Whether such declarations apply to foreign intelligence has been examined by few courts. It is also uncertain whether the allegation that surveillance involves foreign parties suffices to extend law governing the president's military and foreign affairs powers to cover domestic activities. The Supreme Court voiced this concern in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, ruling that "a state of war is not a blank check for the President when it comes to the rights of the Nationâ€™s citizens."

The Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan research arm of the Library of Congress, released a detailed report on January 5, 2006 regarding the NSA electronic surveillance of communications, titled "Presidential Authority to Conduct Warrantless Electronic Surveillance to Gather Foreign Intelligence Information" and concluding that[26][27][28]

From the foregoing analysis, it appears unlikely that a court would hold that Congress has expressly or impliedly authorized the NSA electronic surveillance operations here under discussion, and it would likewise appear that, to the extent that those surveillances fall within the definition of â€œelectronic surveillanceâ€ within the meaning of FISA or any activity regulated under Title III, Congress intended to cover the entire field with these statutes. To the extent that the NSA activity is not permitted by some reading of Title III or FISA, it may represent an exercise of presidential power at its lowest ebb, in which case exclusive presidential control is sustainable only by â€œdisabling Congress from acting upon the subject.â€ While courts have generally accepted that the President has the power to conduct domestic electronic surveillance within the United States inside the constraints of the Fourth Amendment, no court has held squarely that the Constitution disables the Congress from endeavoring to set limits on that power. To the contrary, the Supreme Court has stated that Congress does indeed have power to regulate domestic surveillance, and has not ruled on the extent to which Congress can act with respect to electronic surveillance to collect foreign intelligence information.

Duty to notify Congressional leaders and Congress

Under the National Security Act of 1947, Â§501-503, codified as 50 USC Â§413-Â§413b, [29] the President is required to keep Congressional intelligence committees "fully and currently" informed of U.S. intelligence activities, "to the extent consistent with due regard for the protection from unauthorized disclosure of classified information relating to sensitive intelligence sources and methods or other exceptionally sensitive matters." For covert actions (which are specifically defined in Â§413b(e)(1) not to include intelligence gathering activiities), the President is specifically permitted to limit reporting to the so-called Gang of Eight. [30]

According to Peter J. Wallison, former White House Counsel to President Ronald Reagan: "It is true, of course, that a president's failure to report to Congress when he is required to do so by law is a serious matter, but in reality the reporting requirement was a technicality that a President could not be expected to know about. Lawyers and laws have always made distinctions between violations of law that are malum prohibitum (wrong because prohibited) and those that are malum in se (wrong in themselves); reasonable and moral people are expected to know what is malum in se, but not necessarily what is called malum prohibitum. While ignorance of the law is no excuse, there is always a lighter punishment for violating a rule that is malum prohibitum..."

The administration contends that with regard to the NSA surveillance program, the administration fulfilled its notification obligations by briefing the Gang of Eight. Eight key members of Congress (thirteen individuals in this case between the 107th and 109th Congressional Sessions) have been briefed on the NSA program more than a dozen times (but they were forbidden from sharing information about the program with other members or staff):

* Speaker of the House: (Dennis Hastert (R-IL))
* House Minority Leader: (Dick Gephardt (D-MO); Nancy Pelosi (D-CA))
* Chair and Ranking Member of House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence: (Porter Goss (R-FL); Peter Hoekstra (R-MI); Jane Harman (D-CA))
* Senate Majority Leader: (Trent Lott (R-MS); Bill Frist (R-TN))
* Senate Minority Leader: (Tom Daschle (D-SD); Harry Reid (D-NV))
* Chair and Vice Chair of Senate Select Committee on Intelligence: (Pat Roberts (R-KS); Bob Graham (D-FL); Jay Rockefeller (D-WV))

On January 19, the Department of Justice issued a report outlining the legal basis for the program.[32] "These NSA activities are lawful in all respects," Gonzalez said in a letter to Senate leaders in releasing the Justice Department's 42-page legal analysis[33].

On January 18, 2006, the Congressional Research Service released a report, "Statutory Procedures Under Which Congress Is To Be Informed of U.S. Intelligence Activities, Including Covert Actions". [34] [35] That report found that "ased upon publicly reported descriptions of the program, the NSA surveillance program would appear to fall more closely under the definition of an intelligence collection program, rather than qualify as a covert action program as defined by statute", and, therefore, concluded there was no specific statutory basis for limiting briefings on the terrorist surveillance program to the Gang of Eight:

If the NSA surveillance program were to considered an intelligence collection program, limiting congressional notification of the NSA program to the Gang of Eight, which some Members who were briefed about the program contend, would appear to be inconsistent with the law, which requires that the "congressional intelligence committees be kept fully and currently informed of all intelligence activities," other than those involving covert actions.

However, the report goes on to note that limited disclosure is also permitted under the statute "in order to protect intelligence sources and methods," noting in its concluding paragraph:

The executive branch may assert that the mere discussion of the NSA program generally could expose certain intelligence sources and methods to disclosure, thus making it necessary to limit the number of those knowledgeable of the program in order to reduce the risk of such disclosure occurring.

Thus, although the specific statutory Gang of Eight notification procedure for covert action would not seem to apply to the NSA program it is not clear if such limited notification procedure intended to protect sources and methods is prohibited. Additionally, should the sources and methods exception apply it will require a factual determination whether it should apply to disclosure of the program itself or only to specific sensitve aspects.

As discussed below in "Propsed FISA Amendments", the administration has argued that it did not seek FISA amendment to accommodate the NSA program because getting such an amendment would "have been difficult, if not impossible" without disclosing "the nature of the program" and that such disclosure would likely have harmed national security. Whether avoiding disclosure of the "nature of the program" also justifies limited disclosure under the National Security Act is unclear.

Fourth Amendment

In 2002, the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review (Court of Review) met for the first time and issued an important foreign intelligence opinion, In Re Sealed Case No. 02-001. The Court of Review examined all the significant appellate decisions. They noted all the Federal courts of appeal having looked at the issue had concluded that there was such constitutional power. Furthermore, if there was such power, "FISA could not encroach on the president's constitutional power." However, In Re Sealed Case "[took] for granted" that these cases are correct. Furthermore, professor Orin Kerr argues that the part of In Re Sealed Case that dealt with FISA (rather than the Fourth Amendment) was nonbinding dicta and that the argument does not restrict Congress's power to regulate the executive in general.[36]

In In Re Sealed Case No. 02-001 the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review [13] ruled, "Even without taking into account the Presidentâ€™s inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance, we think the procedures and government showings required under FISA, if they do not meet the minimum Fourth Amendment warrant standards, certainly come close. We, therefore, believe firmly, applying the balancing test drawn from Keith, that FISA as amended is constitutional because the surveillances it authorizes are reasonable."

The balancing test from Keith referred to above is a legal test that asks whether the primary use of the warrantless search or tap to collect foreign intelligence as per presidential authority or was the primary use of the warrantless search or tap to gather evidence to use in a criminal trial.

There may be significant legal problems should information gathered under President Bush's authorization be used in criminal trials. Ordinarily, the Fourth Amendment protects the "right of the people to be secure... against unreasonable searches and seizures". It continues that "no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause". A number of cases have found that authorization for surveillance under FISA did not violate the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment is couched in reasonableness. Courts have long recognized exceptions from the warrant requirement for "special needs" outside "the normal need for law enforcement." It is not superfluous to note, however, that the American Bar Association's position, a bipartisan organization, as stated by ABA president Michael Greco on the program DemocracyNow! (7-26-06)[14] is that:

"...the ABA's position is there's no reason to do drastic surgery on FISA. That bill, enacted in 1978 to address abuses by the then administration of spying on Americans, has some very important safeguards in it. It requires that, before someone is spied on, that a warrant be gotten by the Justice Department or by the prosecution or the prosecutors. Any amendment to FISA -- and some of these bills, including the Specter bill and others, would eliminate that requirement of a warrant, and in doing that, damage, fatal damage, would be done to the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. And we can't afford to have one of our Bill of Rights so easily dismissed. The Fourth Amendment requires that there be a warrant issued and that there be probable cause existing before someone is spied on. Any bill that Congress enacts must continue to have those two Fourth Amendment protections."

In In Re Sealed Case, the court recognized foreign intelligence surveillance is different from surveillance used for criminal prosecution. In addition, courts have rejected arguments under the Due process or the Equal protection clauses. This is not clearly the case for authorization given to the NSA by the President. Other cases have allowed the use at criminal trial of evidence obtained incident to authorized FISA.

Courts have only addressed this issue with respect to authorized surveillance of foreign powers, their agents and those communications incident to such surveillance. The courts have never specifically addressed whether it is reasonable to use evidence gained from broad warrantless surveillance, which may more broadly cover the communications of US persons. The National Security Act of 1947[37] requires Presidential findings for covert acts. SEC. 503. [50 U.S.C. 413b] (a) (5) of that act states: "A finding may not authorize any action that would violate the Constitution or any statute of the United States."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_controversy

The Patriot act does not authorize anyone to conduct wiretaps, without a court order, although President Moron has interpreted it to be so.

If President Moron didn't agree with the FISA law, why didn't he just ask congress to change it, instead of just breaking it and then saying the he was complying with the law?

Lying to congress about a national security issue should be grounds for impeachment, even worse than lying about a blowjob.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 16, 2006 06:02 AM (qBTkS)

28 "At any rate, we definitely have fun Bush quotes to last a lifetime!
Posted by: tbone"

Talk about the "gift that keeps on giving".

I'll probably be receiving the "Bushisms" desk calendar for Christmas for several more years, as there is much more material that can fit into just one year.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 16, 2006 06:07 AM (qBTkS)

29 No Fear -

"PD, I just get frustrated when all I read from a poster are his violent comments. It doesn't led to open dicussion."

If you can't refute the messenger's comments, then kill the messenger.

Problem solved.

They learned from the best - Moron #1 (the HMIC).

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 16, 2006 06:13 AM (qBTkS)

30 PD, I just get frustrated when all I read from a poster are his violent comments. It doesn't led to open dicussion.

However, I still think that max and n.a. have serious problems. I can understand name calling, it comes from frustration, I have gone down that road, but constant threats? <sigh>

Posted by: No Fear at November 16, 2006 06:26 AM (ZQepB)

FEINGOLD is the coauthor of the infamous CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM he should be voted off the planet

Posted by: sandpiper at November 16, 2006 05:02 PM (O2c+K)

Only an islamocrat needs to cut and paste.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 17, 2006 12:50 AM (R6qo5)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

November 12, 2006

Conyers Wants to Make America Safe for Islamists

What happens when you empower an aging political hack whose sole qualification for public office is his skill at race-baiting? Nothing good.

From Investor's Business Daily:

Congress: The likely new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee says he's just fighting bigotry in leading a Democrat jihad to deny law enforcement key terror-fighting tools. But he is in the pocket of Islamists.
John Conyers, son of a leftist Detroit union activist, represents the largest Arab population in the country. His district includes Dearborn, Mich., nicknamed "Dearbornistan" by locals fed up with cultural encroachment and terror fears from a steady influx of Mideast immigrants.
Conyers, who runs an Arabic version of his official Web site, does the bidding of these new constituents and the militant Islamist activists who feed off them. They want to kill the Patriot Act and prevent the FBI from profiling Muslim suspects in terror investigations. They also want to end the use of undisclosed evidence against suspected Arab terrorists in deportation proceedings.
And the 77-year-old Conyers has vowed to deliver those changes for them.

Via Stop the ACLU.

Posted by: Bluto at 11:53 PM | Comments (24) | Add Comment
Post contains 186 words, total size 1 kb.

1 There was an Iraqi parade in Dearborn after the invasion. Some people unfortunately only see races but of the over 100,000 Arabs living in MI the only terrorist to come out was McVeigh. BTW, I've never heard any of my friends and family from Dearborn call the city Dearbornistan - guess actual accounts don't fit into your hysterics here. Ask a Dearborner what they think is the real threat to them and their livelihood and you'll hear a tirade about all that Chinese crap you buy everyday. Yes, YOU. Wake up @$$holes. The terrrorists aren't the threats you wish they were - y'all remember Communists? Anyone?

Posted by: tbone at November 13, 2006 09:44 AM (HGqHt)

2 I'm sure the families of 9/11 will be comforted to know that the terrorists aren't a threat.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 13, 2006 10:20 AM (vBK4C)

3 Nah, those terrorists pose no danger. Let's see, airliners crash into the WTC, destroy them, kill 3,000 people, cause 10's of billions of dollars in damage, and they are nothing. That's cause for relief, tbone.

And I also don't discount the danger of cheap foreign labor, either, nor the threat of China, but both Republicans and Democrats support these ill-advised trade deals, or perhaps you have a selective memory, as Clinton was responsible for several of these deals. And they make me sick, I'll tell you, and what I buy at Wal-Mart is usually made in America, if you must know. I try to always buy American, or if not American, at least No. American. I always try to dodge China, but to tell you the truth, it's getting to be impossible.

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 13, 2006 10:26 AM (8PoNP)

4 Is there any story on this board where you could actually not be intellectually lazy by using 9-11 to justify anything and everything? At what point did I mention Dem or Rep? Your single-mindedness is impressive please switch off the GOP autopilot in your head and try thinking for yourselves.

Posted by: tbone at November 13, 2006 11:18 AM (HGqHt)

5 Is it "intellectually lazy" to point out to someone who says that black is white, in the most obvious way available, that he's mistaken? I understand why you're upset; no one likes to make a really, really, really boneheaded assertion only to have it flung back in his face. If it bothers you that much, you should stop making boneheaded assertions, tbone.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 13, 2006 11:30 AM (vBK4C)

6 You forgot to mention 9-11. Funny how you don't mention OBL though, a bit selective and defensive aren't we? Keep living in your fantasy of terrorists out to getcha - oh and you might want to brush up on your Cantonese.

Posted by: tbone at November 13, 2006 11:39 AM (HGqHt)

7 Haven't heard from OBL lately, tbone, have you? Yeah, keep discounting terrorism, but when something really bad happens that these terrorists are responsible for, you will blame everyone but the one who should be blamed. Don't ever criticize someone for being vigilent.

As for the Chinese, did you not read my comment?

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 13, 2006 11:43 AM (8PoNP)

Your argument is based on something 'really bad' happening. What is really bad? You scream for sensationalism but ignore the creeping death - that is intellectually lazy. You ignore the real threats to you at your own peril, I might add.

Posted by: tbone at November 13, 2006 11:52 AM (HGqHt)

9 So terrorism is no threat at all? Is that what you are saying, tbone? And the only threat is China? That's pretty one-dimentional thinking if you ask me, and a monetary threat is much different than a violence threat, tbone. That is why someone who commits armed robbery is given a much longer sentence than someone who commits identity theft. You have a chance to recover from a financial disaster, but not from a violent death. Now who's intellectually lazy? I think it's you, tbone.

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 13, 2006 11:59 AM (8PoNP)

10 Yeah well, think again. Then think three times. Terrorist under bed VS Chinese Commie most favored trading partner with a billion slave laborers taking down and owning our economy? Better think four times.

Posted by: tbone at November 13, 2006 12:08 PM (HGqHt)

11 tbone, are you retarded? It's not a "fantasy" when the body parts are still being pulled from Ground Zero five years later.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 13, 2006 12:23 PM (vBK4C)

12 Bluto, Would that have occured on 9-11?

Posted by: tbone at November 13, 2006 12:44 PM (HGqHt)

13 tbone, are you an imbecile? You have one opinion, and it is not subject to discussion, so why post here? Others have admitted there is more than one danger facing America. Is that all you see?

This blog is and has always been dedicated to the threat of terrorism and radical Islam. There are other blogs that are dedicated to the threat of China. Go post on them. And quit changing the subject.

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 13, 2006 12:51 PM (8PoNP)

Can't take a little realism here? I'm trying to stimulate some grey matter. Why don't you have your minions just ban and delete me? Bluto, How sensational. If you can't see the body parts I guess it isn't much of a story. I mean body parts, not like you couldn't see as much bloodshed and gore on any day on any US highway. We better hurry and sell out what's left of the US before the terrorists draft your niece and rape your Grandma. I'm trying to save this country one scared little girl at a time. Sorry if you don't like it.

Posted by: tbone at November 13, 2006 12:59 PM (HGqHt)

15 Dude, "realism" means facing up to the fact that there are people who want to kill us. What planet have you been living on for the past five years? Wake up Pollyanna.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 13, 2006 01:04 PM (vBK4C)

16 tbone, "realism" also means that we're looking at members of Congress who will be ascending to more powerful positions come January, rolling over to appease those who may very well be in cahoots with a very active and violent enemy.

You're focused on the Chinese, and that's fine. However, you may have picked an improper forum to air them.

Besides, to think that the Chinese are a more dangerous foe than islamists is just nutty. At least the Chinese have souls, or sorts.

Personally, I welcome our new Cantonese overlords and hope to high hell that they bring enough crab rangoon for everyone!

Posted by: yo at November 13, 2006 01:12 PM (fkcf6)

17 Sorry if y'all are so obtuse. I am commenting here on an article about what Dearborners think with what Dearborners actually think. When you see manufacturing being decimated, Big Three plant closings every month with thousands laid-off, thousands are jobless while the Chinese are having record growth. No new R and D, no new factories, no new investments... terrorists are not real high on the list of priorities for Dearborn. You can thank the Repubs and Dems for that. Sorry if you cannot see the corollary.

Posted by: tbone at November 13, 2006 02:30 PM (HGqHt)

18 No, tbone, I'm sorry you can't see. Most people in the US are working if they want to, and most people are doing pretty well, compared to the Chinese, incidentally, who are some of the poorest people in the World. You need to get real, pal.

Are they an economic threat? Most here have said they are, but economic threats are one thing, and terrorism is another. Can you be this fucking stupid, can you not read, can you not reason, can you not think, can you not expand your mind, can you not do anything?

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 13, 2006 04:58 PM (8PoNP)

19 Go ahead and call me names, as I stated, I am from Dearborn AND I got to watch with my own eyes from across the river when the towers fell so I feel I have some authority on the subjects of this post - at least enough to argue your feeble points. Well JJ, so glad most people in the US are working well (I'll trust your statistics whatever those may be), thought we were talking about Dearborn not Jesusland. Please don't call me stupid when you are the one with a straight face telling me I'm better off than a Chinese person. Incidentally, you are right about one thing, I should stop posting on this board because I know there is absolutely NO way of me or you or Dr S. actually dying from a terrorist attack - sorry to burst your paranoid sensationalist bubble (I'm sure you will get to see an accident on your way home from *work* - possibly from Bluto's Road Rage).

Posted by: tbone at November 13, 2006 05:33 PM (HGqHt)

Yep, go away, tbone, you are hopeless.

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 13, 2006 06:04 PM (8PoNP)

21 JJ, I think I'll stick around just for you. There is hope yet for the boy...

Posted by: tbone at November 13, 2006 06:16 PM (HGqHt)

22 To state the obvious, tbone, the fact that you own a computer and are on the internet means you are better off than 90% of the Chinese population. The vast majority of Chinese are extremely poor.

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 14, 2006 12:09 AM (8PoNP)

23 Well, tbone, if you're among the 4.1% who aren't working, why don't you talk to your congressman, John Conyers? Maybe he could come up with something for you to do that's more productive than trolling blogs and getting your ass figuratively kicked on a regular basis.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 14, 2006 11:23 AM (vBK4C)

24 That's one diference between us Bluto, I come here to share and sharpen my wits and opinions not kick ass - figuratively speaking.

Posted by: tbone at November 14, 2006 03:06 PM (HGqHt)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

November 08, 2006

In a Nutshell (Updated)

Even Iraqis know that we have a history of abandoning allies under pressure from Democrats:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - The United States ambassador sought on Wednesday to reassure Iraqis that U.S. policy would not dramatically alter after Democrats seized control of the U.S. House of Representatives in midterm elections.
In a videotape distributed by the embassy Wednesday morning, the Afghan-born envoy said President Bush "sees success (in Iraq) as imperative for American's national interests."
But some Iraqis voiced hope that the Democrats would be able to change U.S. foreign policy.

Nice how the AP writer tries to sugarcoat it with the "some Iraqis voiced hope." Unfortunately, "some Iraqis" are al Qaeda supporters who want American foreign policy changed to make it easier for their friends to fight for the Caliphate.

The folks in the mainstream media, who succeeded in convincing enough voters that killing terrorists in Iraq is not as good as leaving them free to attack us here, are looking forward to good times. After all, 9/11 was a ratings bonanza for the Press. The next one will be, too.

Update: Via Larwyn, a commenter at JustOneMinute has produced a list of al Qaeda allies: more...

Posted by: Bluto at 08:36 AM | Comments (49) | Add Comment
Post contains 1262 words, total size 9 kb.

1 Exactly how are Iraqis going to make it to US soil? Why do you hate the troops so much? You don't think we can stop anything headed this way?

How would they get a few million troops over here? Oh... you mean suitcase bombs? Another 9/11 that Bush chose to ignore all warning signs of? Yeah, I guess if the president is a moron or complicit then anything can happen. But to win a war you need troops on the ground and there's no way they're getting here. They'll drown in the ocean.

But hey, if you want to do your part, there are lots of ways to fight the fight in person. Enlist. Work for Halliburton. Check out the DangerZone website for all kinds of jobs where you can pitch in and stop the bad guys.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061108/ap_on_el_ge/eln_election_world_view

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 09:45 AM (eNwl1)

2 Cafeenman: switch to beer...it'll make you smarter and you sure could use it....... Depressingly, the MSM was the biggest winner yesterday. And, they will not suddenly resort to telling the truth when they can lie so effectively.....They can fool enough of the people, enough of the time.

Posted by: n.a. palm at November 08, 2006 09:53 AM (9eahu)

3 Cynical but true. Every word.

the mainstream media/establishment media/old media/elitist media is the worst enemy our country has--and by far the most dangerous. The terrorists don't have a snowball's chance in hell of beating us, but the media traitors can convince the gullible public to surrender. Today's election was another step towards submission to islam.

When the next terrorist bomb goes off on American soil, let's hope it's in DC, New York City, Massachusetts, or the Bay Area.

On the upside, the Dhimmiecrats will behave and perform so poorly in the next two years that they'll lose their House majority in 08,and more importantly, the Presidency. America was looking to buy ideas and sanity, but they got empty slogans and rabid political correctness. After the inevitable attempts to flee from Iraq, appease implacable terrorists, gut national security, increase abortions, raise taxes, wallow in power, and impeach every Republican possible, they'll realize their mistake and flush it.

To everyone who thought they were helping the country by voting Dhimmie, enjoy the next two years in Hell, assholes.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 09:56 AM (bLPT+)

4 2 Cafeenman: switch to beer...it'll make you smarter and you sure could use it....... Depressingly, the MSM was the biggest winner yesterday. And, they will not suddenly resort to telling the truth when they can lie so effectively.....They can fool enough of the people, enough of the time.

Posted by: n.a. palm at November 08, 2006 09:53 AM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Way to address the topic. I'm sure you can find a good beer thread on some forum someplace.

So how do you expect the our enemies to reach US soil?

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 09:57 AM (eNwl1)

5 To everyone who thought they were helping the country by voting Dhimmie, enjoy the next two years in Hell, assholes.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 09:56 AM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Thanks Jeff. I'm going to enjoy every minute of it. Thanks for succumbing to mainstream american values.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 09:59 AM (eNwl1)

6 PS. If you don't like the way things turned out, remember that America didn't vote for Dems. She voted against your corrupt GOP. Maybe next time they won't be in the cookie jar so much.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 10:02 AM (eNwl1)

7 QueenMan:

Exactly how are the Dhimmiecrats going to keep terrorists from making it to US soil? Why do you love the terrorists so much.

Another Clinton and Congress enabled 911? Yeah, I guess if the Dhimmicrats are morons and compicit--and they are--anything can happen. To kill civilians all you need are a few terrorists here in the states, and laws that prevent us from stopping them. The Dhimmies have given us both. They'll give us a lot more in the next two years.

There are lots of ways you can aid the terrorists besides joining Hamas, the PA, Hizb' allah, or Al Qaeda. If you voted Dhimmie you already helped.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 10:03 AM (bLPT+)

8 If you really believe that shit Jeff, you're either mentally retarded or morally deficient. I'm guessing the latter since you can type a coherent sentence.

Maybe if you stopped thinking of ways to insult people who don't agree with you and being a major part of the problem you might actually be able to participate in being part of the solution. Think about it. Or just come back with a moronic personal attack. Your choice bro.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 10:06 AM (eNwl1)

9 QueenMan:

The Dhimmies didn't win the Senate, and they don't support mainstream values. If they did, they would win every seat, every time, you stuttering moron. President Bush represents American values, which is why he won twice in a row, and still has veto power over a Congress that doesn't suffer from a 3/4 Dhimmie control.

Americans didn't vote against the Republicans, they voted for the Establishment Media's indoctrination.

So how do you expect our enemies (your allies,) to be expelled from American soil? The Dhimmies consistently vote to give them free reign.

Close your mouth. Kerry needs to zip up his pants.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 10:11 AM (bLPT+)

10 QueenMan:

The Dhimmies didn't win the Senate, and they don't support mainstream values. If they did, they would win every seat, every time, you stuttering moron. President Bush represents American values, which is why he won twice in a row, and still has veto power over a Congress that doesn't suffer from a 3/4 Dhimmie control.

Americans didn't vote against the Republicans, they voted for the Establishment Media's indoctrination.

So how do you expect our enemies (your allies,) to be expelled from American soil? The Dhimmies consistently vote to give them free reign.

Close your mouth. Kerry needs to zip up his pants.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 10:11 AM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

OK, I take it back. You are mentally retarded and apparently incapable of actually arguing a point. Too bad. You lose. America wins.

If you're that interested in my sex life, why don't you stop by and find out in person?

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 10:15 AM (eNwl1)

11 QueenMan:

"Maybe if you stopped thinking of ways to insult people who don't agree with you and being a major part of the problem you might actually be able to participate in being part of the solution."

Spoken as a true hypocritical, projecting leftist. The left is the source of every problem inflicting this country, and the next two years will see them multiply. Only a moral reprobate could celebrate today's dire election results. The party of slavery, Jim Crow, and Nazi appeasement strikes again. Their first order of business will be to introduce sharia legislation.

Peace be upon you, Dhimmie.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 10:20 AM (bLPT+)

12 QueenMan:

Only a traitor could say America won by electing the party that voted against the Patriot act, monitoring terrorist communications, terrorist profiling, tracking Middle Eastern visitors, maintaining Club Gitmo, killing terrorists in Iraq, etc.

Thanks for the offer, but you can save your blow jobs for the Dems you support. Not that you even bothered to vote.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 10:25 AM (bLPT+)

13 The left is the source of every problem inflicting this country

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 10:20 AM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

and the next two years will see them multiply.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Only a moral reprobate could celebrate today's dire election results.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The party of ... Nazi appeasement strikes again.

Which Bush was it that funded the Nazi war machine? Prescott, right? Dubya is continuing a fine tradition. He appreciates your support.

Do you have any other tired talking points or is that all you've got?

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 10:28 AM (eNwl1)

14 QueenMan:

Only a traitor could say America won by electing the party that voted against the Patriot act, monitoring terrorist communications, terrorist profiling, tracking Middle Eastern visitors, maintaining Club Gitmo, killing terrorists in Iraq, etc.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

I don't know anyone who did those things. I know a lot of dems who voted against spying on Americans, illegal and immoral detentions, torture, etc. Get your facts straight please.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Thanks for the offer, but you can save your blow jobs for the Dems you support. Not that you even bothered to vote.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 10:25 AM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Thanks again for your interest in my sex life. You seem obsessed with it. And yes, I did vote to save my country. Fortunately a lot of people agree with me. By the way, regarding your previous nutty comment about mainstream america, you might want to look up Bell Curve and try to grasp the concept. Since you've claimed to be mainstream for many years, when did ALL american vote your way? LOL!!!

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 10:32 AM (eNwl1)

15 The Dims and the media ran a better campaign but the Repubs made it
easy on them. Once the Dims get through redistricting you can kiss
Congress goodbye for a long time. I think the big message is that you
can enculturate out the warrior spirit of any people just as the Euros
have done. Just think of the fierce Vikings and now picture the
metroman Swede of today. We are going down that road as well. Time to
get our man purses. What type do you carry CafeeBoy? (you notice the Dems have the same class in winning that they have in losing)

Posted by: Randman at November 08, 2006 10:34 AM (Sal3J)

16 Time to get our man purses.

Posted by: Randman at November 08, 2006 10:34 AM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Lead by example. I haven't seen much class coming from the right. Slander, lies, personal attacks, etc. If that's class you can keep it.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 10:38 AM (eNwl1)

17 Cafeenman,
Rumor has it that the Dems have sent a shipment of snorkels to the terrorists. Expect an invasion by sea in the next two weeks.
We're DOOMED, DOOMED!

Posted by: Greg at November 08, 2006 10:41 AM (v7DMp)

18 "If you really believe that shit Jeff, you're either mentally retarded or morally deficient." - best argument that Cafeenman, who claims to believe in logic, has been able to muster. C-man and his fellow trolls come to Jawa courtesy of News Hounds, one of the idiotic BDS sites that believe the media is conservatively biased. Don't expect anything resembling reality from these folks.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 08, 2006 10:43 AM (vBK4C)

19 Good job, Dread Pundit Bluto. You have discovered our nefarious secrets!

PS. How did Santorum do? I really like that guy except for the part where he's against having sex with turtles.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 10:45 AM (eNwl1)

20 PS. Do you guys even have an argument? What is it? I mean besides that we hug terrorists and shit like that? Do you have anything reality based?

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 10:46 AM (eNwl1)

21 C-man: just be glad this isn't a liberal blog like firedoglake. Otherwise your IP would be posted. If you haven't seen the arguments it's because you've been too busy typing LOL, or "...having sex with turtles..."

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 08, 2006 10:50 AM (vBK4C)

22 17 Cafeenman,
Rumor has it that the Dems have sent a shipment of snorkels to the terrorists. Expect an invasion by sea in the next two weeks.
We're DOOMED, DOOMED!

Posted by: Greg at November 08, 2006 10:41 AM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

But don't terrorists melt in water?

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 10:52 AM (eNwl1)

23 Dread Bandit Bluto - These are what you consider to be "arguments"?

"Cafeenman: switch to beer...it'll make you smarter and you sure could use it....... Depressingly, the MSM was the biggest winner yesterday. And, they will not suddenly resort to telling the truth when they can lie so effectively.....They can fool enough of the people, enough of the time.

Posted by: n.a. palm at November 08, 2006 09:53 AM"

Telling me what to drink? Claiming the MSM isn't honest?

"the mainstream media/establishment media/old media/elitist media is the worst enemy our country has--and by far the most dangerous. The terrorists don't have a snowball's chance in hell of beating us, but the media traitors can convince the gullible public to surrender. Today's election was another step towards submission to islam."

"When the next terrorist bomb goes off on American soil, let's hope it's in DC, New York City, Massachusetts, or the Bay Area."

followed by a dire prediction of how the dems will perform.

OK, so the argument here is about the elitist media being our worst enemy. I suppose we could argue about that but the idea is so inane, what's the point? And then wishing for America to be bombed so we have something to blame the dems for? How traitorous is that? And what's his argument going to be if it doesn't happen? Bush saved the day, right? So if there is a bomb it's the dems fault. If there's not a bomb, then it's Bush's fault.

I only visit this place to raise the average IQ about 75 points.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 10:58 AM (eNwl1)

24 C-man: just be glad this isn't a liberal blog like firedoglake. Otherwise your IP would be posted. If you haven't seen the arguments it's because you've been too busy typing LOL, or "...having sex with turtles..."

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 08, 2006 10:50 AM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Pretty fucked up thing to do I admit. Never have been to firedoglake. Frankly about the only thing I have in common with liberals is mutual disgust for the corrupt GOP. Maybe one day we'll have some true conservatives running for office so I can vote for somebody I want to win instead of voting against who I dislike the most. I doubt it will ever happen since corruption seems to be a fundamental trait of all politicians. Even so, some do less harm than others.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 11:00 AM (eNwl1)

If you're really a conservative you have a duty to stop being a purist while the threat exists, and vote for people who will meet the threat. Otherwise you just give the appearance being another liberal troll.

Spend some time actually reading more of this blog than the comments and you'll see that the arguments have been laid out repeatedly.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 08, 2006 11:10 AM (vBK4C)

26 Good luck with your War of Terror!

Posted by: Borat at November 08, 2006 11:15 AM (v7DMp)

27 You know dread, of all the people here, you're one of two who actually made any sense. Most folks here have told me what my views are, what my sexual orientation is, and posted a lot of other nonsense about me just because... I wonder what's wrong with them and certainly don't take it personally.

The truth is I normally vote for dems because the GOP has been extremely corrupt for as long as I can remember. I actually like conservative values more than liberal values but I've yet to see a real conservative run for office. What actually happens is that they scam the taxpayers to make themselves and their cronies rich.

Dems are probably just as corrupt but they aren't running around the world inflicting their values on other people's bedrooms and foreign sovereign governments. If I had my way, we would completely pull out of the middle east. Not just iraq but everywhere. They can have at it and if they kill each other off that's their problem to resolve. If the Iraqis didn't want Saddam in power that was their problem - not ours.

The only "liberal" blog I hang out at is newshounds and I've had it out with them many times over things like abortion and entitlement programs. So my choices are voting for the definitely corrupt who harm America at their whimsy for their own personal gain or voting for people who are trying to help America but aren't very good at it.

Maybe you don't think the GOP is all that bad, but it is. I have no loyalty to any party and have a pretty good bullshit detector.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 11:22 AM (eNwl1)

28 I forgot to mention that turtles have feelings too.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 08, 2006 11:29 AM (eNwl1)

29 Isolationism might have been a choice before 9/11, well, not really; it wasn't even a choice post-Pearl Harbor. "Fortress America" just doesn't cut it any more. As far as comparative corruption, that's a dead heat, the Dems are just better at selective prosecution as a political tactic. Examples: Foley vs. Studds and Reynolds; Delay's "ham sandwich" indictment in Texas.

Personally, I'm pretty close to Rusty politically - a post-9/11 libertarian.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 08, 2006 11:35 AM (vBK4C)

30 Libertarian, my ass.

Posted by: Greg at November 08, 2006 11:43 AM (v7DMp)

31 I'm a loser
And I lost someone who's near to me
I'm a loser
And I'm not what I appear to be

Although I laugh and I act like a clown
Beneath this mask I am wearing a frown
My tears are falling like rain from the sky
Is it for her or myself that I cry

I'm a loser
And I lost someone who's near to me
I'm a loser
And I'm not what I appear to be

What have I done to deserve such a fate
I realize I have left it too late
And so it's true, pride comes before a fall
I'm telling you so that you won't lose all

I'm a loser
And I lost someone who's near to me
I'm a loser
And I'm not what I appear to be

Posted by: Carl R. at November 08, 2006 11:49 AM (v7DMp)

32 Cafeenman:
One of the possible ways that Iraqi terrorists may get to the U.S soil is directly in the hands of the Democrats now. If they choose to gut the funding for the War, thus bringing the troops home prematurely they will create a humanitarian crisis comparable to the south Vietnamese "boat people" as violence between Sunni and Shia Muslims erupts.
Among the refugees will be terrorists. The question is will they turn their back on the past, or become "sleeper cells"?

Posted by: davec at November 08, 2006 12:40 PM (QkWqQ)

33 Where do you all place Bush I's 1991 abandonment of the Shia rebellion he encouraged in this brilliant annalysis? Was the first Bush a Democrat? I forget.

Posted by: Professor von Nostrand at November 08, 2006 12:42 PM (Bwpq7)

34 QueenMan:

Constant projection only works on other 'tards. You need to come up with a better retort than: No I'm not, you are!"

I notice a bit of reticence about slavery and Jim Crow, not to mention the fact that so far the Dhimmies only represent a majority in the House--the least influential part of our government.

Prescott Bush voted against WWII? Only in the left's "history" book. The same one with fake-but-accurate National Guard memos and Valerie Plame "outing" smears, and WMD denials. The Dems had to be dragged kicking and screaming into a war with the Nazis, and if it weren't for the attack on Pearl Harbor, they wouldn't have opposed Imperial Japan at all. Contrast that to the cowardly, power-mad traitors today, who wont even fight back after 911, and even go so far as to submit to the jihadis. Dhimmiecrats, all.

"I don't know anyone who did those things. I know a lot of dems who voted against spying on Americans, illegal and immoral detentions, torture, etc. Get your facts straight please."

Yes, and up is down, and the left is right. Adjust the controls on your tinfoil hat, space cadet.

Less than 50% of eligible Americans are registered to vote, and less than 60% of them have ever bothered to do so. Usually less than 50%. Again, your empty boasts about Mainstream America being mainstream Democrat because they put Dems in control of the House only, are ridiculous. Why don't they control everything?

Again, despite my "obsession," I'm going to have to decline your offer of a BJ. Your mouth must be sore after fellating the entire DNC anyway.

You're obviously immune to the truth, so the only reson I refute your nonsense with facts is to ridicule you. As a short bus rider, I'm sure you're used to it. Try to remember to wit until it stops moving before you step off. That first step is painful when you forget, and you don't want to lose what little mental capacity you have.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 12:55 PM (bLPT+)

35 Attention all moonbats: The next two years will be the shortest in Democrat history. For America, they will be the longest ever.

With Rumsfeld being forced out, the terrorists are dancing arm in arm with the left.

Enjoy it while it lasts, traitors.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 12:57 PM (bLPT+)

36 Greg:

The Dhimmiecrats sent the terrorrists fast track visas. They used them to destroy the World Trade Center on 911. They don't need snorkels.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 01:05 PM (bLPT+)

37 Professor:
United Nations Security resolutions 660 called for Iraq to withdraw their military back from Kuwait:

2. Demands that Iraq withdraw immediately and unconditionally all s its forces to the positions in which they were located on 1 August 1990

Resolution 678 states:
use all necessary means to uphold and implement resolution 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security.

This was the resolution that authorized use of force to remove Iraqi forces from Kuwait, please note it says nothing about removing Saddam Hussein from power. Resolution 660 was fulfilled by the coalition, by destroying the Iraqi military and the surrender by Saddam Hussein.
Were you for America acting unilaterally then by overstepping the bounds of the resolution?

Calling people to overthrow their leader (much like we have done to Iran numerous times) comes with no guarantees we will assist, or give aid.

Posted by: davec at November 08, 2006 01:08 PM (QkWqQ)

Caffeenman: Please quit reposting what others say. We can read them the first time as well as you.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 08, 2006 01:19 PM (dk0ga)

39 The democrats have said if they are in control they will bring our troops home from this terrible Bush war in Iraq. OKAY! LET'S SEE THEM DO IT. Anyone wish to bet?

Why do I feel we will attack Iran within the next two years? You guys under 28 yrs old can get ready for the draft.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 08, 2006 01:22 PM (dk0ga)

40 QueenMan:

If you really liked conservative values more than left-wing dementia, you wouldn't espouse the left's talking points everytime you posted a comment, and you sure as Hell wouldn't use "News Hounds" to form an opinion.

You're not only a fanatical leftist, but an inveterate liar. The two are inseperable, so that comnes as no surprise. I've never seen a leftist admit to being a liar, infiltrating troll or otherwise.

Conservatives don't accuse the Republicans of entering our bedrooms with Gay "marriage" laws, condoms in school, lowering the age of legal consent, "cultural" protections for female genital mutilation by muslims, protections for women who make false rape accusations, or special privileges for homosexuals, child molesters, and cross dressing perverts. They sure as Hell don't espouse cowering in our homes from the jihadis, and calling the police after they chop our heads off.

The idiot Quotient did indeed spike 75% with your last comment.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 01:25 PM (bLPT+)

41 Greyrooster:

You're right. The Dhimmies don't have the 3/4 majority necessary to cut 'n run, and they don't have the Constitutional authority to prevent the President from removing deposing the mullahs.

They do have the power to thoroughly disgust most of the idiots who voted for them with their upcoming Republic witch-hunts, obstructionism, Dhimmitude, taxation jihads and other antics.

Anybody who voted Dhimmie deserves a visit from a gang of masked head-choppers shouting the peaceful chorus of Ollie Akbar!.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 01:33 PM (bLPT+)

42 Jeff:
Please stop saying that anyone who voted Democrat deserves to be killed, the Republic has spoken, and really the Republicans have nobody to blame but themselves at this point for the swing in political power in this country.
Crying in your cornflakes at this point serves nothing, let us just hope that the Democrats do not withdraw funding for the war, and this pushes Iraq in the direction of fighting harder for their own security.

Posted by: davec at November 08, 2006 01:51 PM (QkWqQ)

43 Anybody hear Murtha's comments this morning about how they don't intend
to cut funding "as long as the troops are there"? However, if
Murtha has it his way that will be in short order. Think of all
those people there who have sacrificed as much or more than even we for
the dream of freedom. God help them.

Posted by: Oyster at November 08, 2006 02:45 PM (I+VdL)

44 Davec:

Please don't think my suggestion that all people who voted democrat should be killed was serious, and if you do think it was serious you can fuck right off. By telling me what I say you dound like a Democrat.

The Republic has not spoken. Roughly 50% of eligible vioters are registered to vote in this country. The percentage of those who bothered to do so have spoken.

Te Republicans got plenty of support for their loss from the Establishment Media. Quite frankly, they couuldn't have done it without them.

My comment cannot be construed as crying by any stretch of the imagination, and as I wrote, the Dhimmies don't have the 2/3 majority (3/4 was a typo,) necessary to withdraw funding from the Coalition or anything else. They're sure to try, so it's up to the Republicans to provide a sane counter.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 04:44 PM (bLPT+)

45 The Republic has not spoken. Roughly 50% of eligible vioters are registered to vote in this country. The percentage of those who bothered to do so have spoken.

regardless, the voice is clear is it not? the Republicans became punch drunk on the wine of power, and the people are unhappy with the leadership, and have decided to punish the Republican party -- to me, and most people here that is like jumping out of the frying pan - into the fire, but the Republicans took no measures to correct it, I am interested to see all these "plans" that the Democrats have talked about, perhaps when it becomes apparent they have none -- and the Republicans try harder to fix their own party we can salvage the mess in '08.

Posted by: davec at November 08, 2006 05:01 PM (QkWqQ)

46 Jeff:The Dhimmiecrats sent the terrorrists fast track visas. They used them to destroy the World Trade Center on 911. They don't need snorkels.

Yeah, right. Cave dwellers like the imbecile Massaui (sp) defeated the US air defense for 2 hours running. Sure thing! Time to have an INDEPENDENT 9-11 investigation.

Posted by: Greg at November 08, 2006 05:38 PM (v7DMp)

47 Davec:

Republicans snubbed their base and lost, but the voice we heard was the people who didn't vote. 70 million people voted out of a population of 300 million. A much wimpier turnout than in 2004. The people who stayed home cost the arrogant but weak republicans a victory.

You're right about democrat "plans." Empty slogans don't qualify. How are they going to "do things differently in Iraq?" They don't even have goals, much less plans to accomplish them.

Every asshole who stayed home yesterday gave us two years of Hell.

I'm still not sure how the elections can be finalized already, but what the Hell.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 09, 2006 02:39 AM (bLPT+)

48 Greg:

Anti-schizo drugs are your friends. Nobody "defeated" air defense, and fast track visas were issued to all nineteen 911 terrorists.

When the nurse gives you your pills, don't spit: swallow. I know you have a lot of practice. (Just think of justin Timberlake without a shirt.)

Yes, it's time to have another independent 911 investigation. Preferrably by the most squirrelly moonbat organization possible. Start paving the way for a Dem rout in 08.

Thanks for living down to my expectations, dill-rod. Remember to stand on the curb when your short bus comes--not in the street with your eyes closed.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 09, 2006 02:46 AM (bLPT+)

49 That was the Dem's push from the start:
If you're disgruntled at the Republican's don't vote!
That's why they started by undermining what they believe to be the Republicans power base the "religious right" by a November surprise that Foley was gay, and a pederast followed by Ted Haggart scandal etc.
It's very possible people did stay home to punish the Republicans, couldn't face voting for either.

I hope they can live with the fate they made.

Posted by: davec at November 09, 2006 01:54 PM (QkWqQ)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

November 06, 2006

Troops: Cutting and Running Would be Devastating

Ever wonder why the DNC never seems to be anxious to count military absentee ballots?

From the Washington Post:

FORWARD OPERATING BASE SYKES, Iraq - For the U.S. troops fighting in Iraq, the war is alternately violent and hopeful, sometimes very hot and sometimes very cold. It is dusty and muddy, calm and chaotic, deafeningly loud and eerily quiet.
The one thing the war is not, however, is finished, dozens of soldiers across the country said in interviews. And leaving Iraq now would have devastating consequences, they said.
With a potentially historic U.S. midterm election on Tuesday and the war in Iraq a major issue at the polls, many soldiers said the United States should not abandon its effort here. Such a move, enlisted soldiers and officers said, would set Iraq on a path to civil war, give new life to the insurgency and create the possibility of a failed state after nearly four years of fighting to implant democracy.

If Democratic leaders needed any more reason to get their lawyers busy trashing military absentee ballots, there was this:

The soldiers declined to discuss the political jousting back home, but they expressed support for the Bush administration's approach to the war, which they described as sticking with a tumultuous situation to give Iraq a chance to stand on its own.

Tomorrow, I'll be supporting the choice of the folks putting their lives on the line to protect us.

Posted by: Bluto at 03:52 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 241 words, total size 2 kb.

Incapable of Cut and Run when schooled in Slash and Burn, Troops ask: can we try Snip and Saunter?

Posted by: OBL at November 06, 2006 05:24 PM (HGqHt)

2 Anti-war soldier bloggers have been shut down. Others report
being muzzled regards the press. Zogby's Poll of soldiers, however,
released in February, showed much more negative attitudes.

Posted by: Ken Hoop at November 06, 2006 05:55 PM (DZbll)

3 Every blog I've seen commenting on this article has had scads of
liberals citing Zogby's poll. I don't trust polls, I don't cite
polls and if I did, Zogby would be the last.

Posted by: Oyster at November 06, 2006 06:19 PM (YudAC)

4 Good to hear the troops are happy to stay and fight. I hope more voters will be doing what you are Bluto.

Thanks to the troops for bringing that scumbag saddam to justice.

Posted by: Mathewk at November 06, 2006 06:20 PM (pVHqF)

5 Ken, most of my friends either are in or were in Iraq (most infantry, some armored; ranging from PVT to Major) and their primary gripe is they can't wack Al Sadr and his goons in their own nest; that they have to wait for them to come out. Secondary to that more needs to be done on interdiction of supplies from Iran/Syria. Tertiary is that deserts suck and anyone actively chosing to live in one is insane.

None have ever said we need to pull out, just shift tactics.

I have a hard time trusting polls, especially after this one my 172 SBCT buddy said they gave him. Where it was reported in the news they said something like 90% of troops wanted to pull the military out of Iraq, but the closest question to pulling out was "Do you want to go home?" As my buddy put it, "Who the hell DOESN'T want to go home? [Some things about wanting to play videogames and watch porn that I won't repeat here]. We got a job to do first though."

Posted by: Ranba Ral at November 06, 2006 06:52 PM (VvXII)

6 My son says he has never met a marine that felt we should pull out. In fact, 100% feel it would be a mistake. 3000 have died. To pull out when victory is within sight would be disrespectful to those who gave their all.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 06, 2006 10:56 PM (0AdXP)

7 How can this story be true? Perfesser Von Nonsense assured everyone here that everyone thinks the Coalition's mission is a monstrous failure, and he would never lie about something so serious. He's a John kerry patriot.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 07, 2006 02:13 AM (bLPT+)

8 Ken Poop:

No doubt the soldiers are lying and Zogby is accurate.

Here's a statistic for you. Zogby is a propaganda outfit that tailors its poll results to match a desired outcome 100% of the time. According to Zogby, the Democrats won the elections by large margins in 2000, 2002, and 2004.

The National Enquirer is more accurate.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 07, 2006 02:21 AM (bLPT+)

9 Zogby is a filthy arab rug merchant who got his start by printing
restaurant guides. His research consisted of asking people where he
could get a bite to eat while he was pitching his flea-infested
carpets. He is an arab, and thus not one word he says can be trusted,
because to arabs, lying is second only to breathing.

A good arab/muslim/lefturd is a dead one.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 07, 2006 08:53 AM (v3I+x)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

November 05, 2006

Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West

The News Buckit has posted both full and abridged versions of the Fox News special "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West" to Google video and YouTube. The full version, posted to YouTube, is in eight parts. The first part is below.

Go to News Buckit for links to the other seven installments. And hurry, YouTube is a jihadi-friendly environment, and is likely to find a reason to pull them.

Posted by: Bluto at 05:36 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 77 words, total size 1 kb.

November 02, 2006

Democrats Pick Up Important Endorsement

The Democratic congressional slate has gained a huge endorsement.

Terrorists prefer Democrats:

The terrorists told WorldNetDaily an electoral win for the Democrats would prove to them Americans are "tired."
They rejected statements from some prominent Democrats in the U.S. that a withdrawal from Iraq would end the insurgency, explaining an evacuation would prove resistance works and would compel jihadists to continue fighting until America is destroyed.
They said a withdrawal would also embolden their own terror groups to enhance "resistance" against Israel.
"Of course Americans should vote Democrat," Jihad Jaara, a senior member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group and the infamous leader of the 2002 siege of Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity, told WND.

I'd like to say that this is shocking, but it isn't.

Via little green footballs.

Posted by: Bluto at 06:08 PM | Comments (179) | Add Comment
Post contains 136 words, total size 1 kb.

1 LOL (I only laugh so I don't cry).

Sadly, this won't stop anybody who's already made up their mind. Partisan politics trumps love of country, and common sense.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 02, 2006 07:46 PM (8e/V4)

2 Not shocking to me. I've been saying the same thing for years. A vote for the Islamocrats is a vote for terrorism.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 02, 2006 08:23 PM (cNF2m)

3 You left out one of Jaara's quotes; here, I'll put it back for you:

"Bush
is a sick person, an alcoholic person that has no control of what is
going on around him. He calls to send more troops but will very soon
get to the conviction that the violence and terror that his war machine
is using in Iraq will never impose policies and political regimes in
the Arab world."

Posted by: Gleep! at November 02, 2006 09:40 PM (a7sMc)

4 And what is your point, Gleep? That you wish to spread the propaganda of the enemy. We already knew that. You are transparent.

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 02, 2006 09:58 PM (rUyw4)

5 Gleep,

that was virtually indistinguishable from the Liberal talking points. I guess now we know why they're endorsing the Dems.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 02, 2006 10:10 PM (8e/V4)

6 This American jihadi is rooting for the DNC.

Posted by: Cate at November 02, 2006 10:27 PM (v40KC)

7 I'm surprised that Bin Loser hasn't come out with his Democrat endorsement video yet. Maybe he is worm food after all.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 02, 2006 11:39 PM (bLPT+)

8 Cate:

Not that American intelligence agencies possess any intelligence, but the NIE conclusions were the opposite of what you portray them as. The NIE states that leaving Iraq would be disastrous, and cause increased terrorism around the world.

Misquoting the NIE without being called on it has been a boon to dhimmicrats. It's a wonder more moderates and conservatives don't do so.

Read it and weep.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 02, 2006 11:51 PM (bLPT+)

9 And what is your point, Gleep? That you wish to spread the propaganda of the enemy.

Well then, Bluto is spreading the same propoganda due to the fact this quote was taken from the same "interview." You just happen to like the one he picked a little better than the one I chose.

Posted by: Gleep! at November 03, 2006 02:00 AM (a7sMc)

Big surprise.

If you read Robert Kagan in WaPo, it begins by saying "the whole world" will be happy at Republicans losing. The Guardian says that too. I suppose, in their own way, they are acknowledging that terrorists are rooting for Democrats too.

Posted by: promachus at November 03, 2006 03:02 AM (0LXaW)

11 Why wouldn't the jihadi's want the dem's to win? They take the easy way out every time. Makes it easier for their "peaceful inner struggle" to establish the worldwide caliphate. I have faith that we will soon wake up and take steps. Unfortunately the cost in lives and property will be vastly greater than all the wars fought, in the last two hundred years, combined. The reality of the whole situation that is unfolding, is being skewed by the desires of the liberal elite, and the media that they control. They believe that all problems are easily solved with talk and good will. They do not have a grasp on what the common man faces day to day. Such is the hubris of the rich. Anyway, I'm drunk. I'll post this anyway.

Posted by: REMF at November 03, 2006 05:48 AM (7RMSi)

12 So the terrorists agree with most Americans and the rest of the world?

So what?

The KKK endorses the Republican party. I don't hear any fuss over that.

Bush has put America and our soldiers in harms way, for no good reason, giving us no good options to complete the mission, and get out.

Unfortunately, our choices are:

1. leave the country in chaos now and save American soldiers lives or

2. leave the county in chaos later, with many more American soldiers being killed.

Do you really hate our soldiers that much that you want to see them stay there and die, when either way, the outcome for Iraq is going to be the same, whether we stay or not because of Bush's big blunder?

At one time, there may have be a chance, even after Bush's initial blunder to go into Iraq, but now, after he and Rumsfeld have made so many errors, especially by failing to capture the "hearts and minds" of the Iraqi people, there is very little hope left for a successful outcome.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 03, 2006 06:16 AM (fMHQi)

13 Who is the biggest threat to world peace?

If you guessed OBL, you'd be right.

But you might be surprised at who is number 2.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1938433,00.html

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 03, 2006 06:22 AM (fMHQi)

14 I do not want my daughter to be REQUIRED to wear a hijab. The rest of the world is making policy because of FEAR of muslim reaction. People are AFRAID of muslims. And so are you puddleduck. And rightly so. The lives lost so far is a drop in the bucket compared to the number that jihadists will make us spend defending our way of life in the future. They will not stop!!!! Even if you get your wish, puddle. They WILL NOT STOP!!!

Posted by: REMF at November 03, 2006 07:52 AM (7RMSi)

15 Time to get out the elephant gun.

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at November 03, 2006 09:14 AM (Dd86v)

16 Compete.com's blog has a posting about popular political blog site traffic, including Little Green Footballs. There are some pretty interesting trends in there if you want to check it out.

Link: http://blog.compete.com/index.php/2006/11/03/moonbats-wingnuts-dailykos-michellemalkin-huffingtonpost-littlegreenfootball/

Posted by: Andy at November 03, 2006 11:16 AM (wEiPb)

17 The whole world will be happy at the GOP losing. Freepers are the minority. People with common sense outnumber them 100:1.

Just because right-wingers been wrong about everything they have claimed doesn't mean those who don't agree with them sponsor or support terrorism in any way. Some of us would simply like to have leadership that is effective in quelling terrorism rather than BushCo which fans the flames.

You people need to get a grip and stop mindlessly following your messiah, Dubya, and learn to think for yourselves.

The first step to recovery is to force yourselves not to jump out of bed every morning for your daily brain-washing of Turd Blossom Talking Points (tm).

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 11:59 AM (eNwl1)

18 Always a pleasure listening to a commie in the morning.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 03, 2006 12:18 PM (cNF2m)

I love the smell of desperate lefty trolls in the morning...

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 03, 2006 12:43 PM (vBK4C)

20 There are more freepers than Leftards-- almost twice as many:

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 12:48 PM (8e/V4)

21 Ahhh.. commie, troll, clinton, [insert dem here] did something worse way back long ago, loves terrorists, hates america, has sex with donkeys, desperation (really? LOL!!!!!!!).... ad infinitum.

That's your reply? You have nothing substanative? Any five year old could come up with a better reply than you. Try this one, for example: "You're a nasty bottom!"

Fortunately, many Americans are way ahead of you on the get a clue curve as will be evident on Nov 8. But they're all faggots, right? Yep. YOUR country has been taken over by them which will be painfully obvious to you when you feel that stinging on your backside next week. The majority of Americans don't agree with you. How does that make you feel? Maybe you should set up some couples counceling or move into a group home until you feel better.

And don't forget to take your meds as prescribed.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 12:51 PM (eNwl1)

22 20 There are more freepers than Leftards-- almost twice as many.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 12:48 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Another zinger. You guys are brainiacs I tell ya. I forgot that the world's population ends at the US borders. If it didn't then you'd find that freepers make up about 0.02% of the world's population. About 80% of everybody doesn't agree with you which includes over half of the US population. You can stop crying about it already. It's inevitable. You can't do anything about it. You're going to lose and better people are taking those seats. It took a while for americans to get over the emotional blow of 9/11 but bush cried wolf too many times while not doing anything of significance to stop it from happening again. America has recovered enough to realize he's a failure. You were wrong. Admit it or not you have to get over yourselves eventually.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 12:55 PM (eNwl1)

23 REMF -

"I do not want my daughter to be REQUIRED to wear a hijab."

So send her to Iraq to fight the Muslims there, so she won't have to wear a hijab over here.

Posted by: Puddleduck at November 03, 2006 01:02 PM (F+9W9)

24 If it didn't then you'd find that freepers make up about 0.02% of the
world's population. About 80% of everybody doesn't agree with you
which includes over half of the US population.

CafeeMan,

80% of the world's population doesn't vote in our elections or give a shit about our country's well being. So the only majority that counts is the freeper majority.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 01:02 PM (8e/V4)

25 That's what's fundamentally wrong with you... well more than that, but you can't do math and the freeper majority is what, the most freepers that agree about something?

ALL freepers make up less than 50% of the US population and the freeper majority is probably about 99.9% of the freeper population since you never have an independent, non-Rove-approved thought.

So in the interest of honesty and integrity, how about freepers making a list of mistakes made by the bush regime. I'm interested in hearing what, if anything, they've done wrong. As of now, you have no credibility simply by refusing to admit error every step of the way.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 01:07 PM (eNwl1)

26 ALL freepers make up less than 50% of the US population

That's true, but we're still almost twice as many as you are ;-)

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 01:12 PM (8e/V4)

27 and what am I exactly? How are you doing with that list? You could have posted two dozen items on it already.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 01:21 PM (eNwl1)

28 and what am I exactly?

Why, a Leftard, of course. And you are a fairly tiny minority of the American people-- 17% by last count. It's why Leftard politicians run towards the right during election season (but govern from the left when they win). Your America hating ideology is unnaceptable to the vast majority of people in America, which is why Liberalism is forced to be a stealth ideology. Sometimes you let slip though (see John Kerry).

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 01:34 PM (8e/V4)

29 Why, a Leftard, of course.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 01:34 PM
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Wrong! Way to make an ignorant assumption though. If everyone who doesn't like Bush is a "leftard, of course" that would put about 67% of Americans in that class. Either way your (ha) argument doesn't work.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 01:41 PM (eNwl1)

30 Man, thanks for the laughs, guys.
We'll see who laughs on the seventh.
Get your passports ready.
Wait.
Where will you all go?
France?
Canada?
Switzerland?

or, and this is just a hunch...to that cozy little shack in Montana you've had your eye on for a while now.

cheers!

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 02:24 PM (4pujD)

31 France is nice. They have American cheese and everything (although they call it freedom cheese now).

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 02:30 PM (eNwl1)

32 mmmm.
freedom cheese.

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 02:31 PM (4pujD)

33 Damn I'm trying to decide if I should send Freedom Fries or Freedom Cheese to my former Congressman Ney, who just became someone's freedom bitch in prison.

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 02:34 PM (Gqho2)

34
Such derision!

If you leftardians had read the Koran, and I'm surprised you have not, you'd find that it is implicit in it demonification of the USA and that all Americans must die, or convert to the religion of Islam.

Do you believe this is some sort of lie, a big joke perpetrated by the Muslims? Since birth, each and every Muslim is indoctrinated with the ideology that all Jews and Americans must die, straight from their holy scriptures. If they can get a Jewish American, that would no doubt bring them bonus virgins.

It's not hysteria, it's dire warning. Bush has been working tirelessly to protect, but even that may not be enough. Surely, for the sake of safety and that of your children, you can see that removing the amendment limiting terms in office is necessary.

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 02:34 PM (311gq)

35 Wait, the US was in existence when the Koran was written?
Tard? You're calling *us* tards?

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 02:36 PM (4pujD)

36 Oooo

What's next Clinton was president when Matthew wrote the Beattitudes for the Bible?

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 02:37 PM (Gqho2)

37 Caffee,

it's not that you don't like Bush that makes you a Leftard, it's the anger and hate about Bush that makes you a Leftard. Gives you away every time. Only jihadis hate Bush more than you people do.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 02:40 PM (8e/V4)

38 That would be silly.

The Gospel of Matthew was the introduction of Jesus. Clinton would be much more satanic in nature.

The Koran tells of how a large corrupt state will attempt to slay Muslims in their holyland. It does not specifically mention the USA. It does specifically mention how Mohammed will stricken all the dogs of Jerusalem. Though, I don't believe that that is a proper literal translations.

If it was up to you liberals, we'd now be wearing turbans and playing mahjjong.

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 02:43 PM (311gq)

39 And what moves you Carlos, to be a yellow chickenhawkard sitting behind a computer instead of putting your skin in the game?

Why don't you put some of that energy into your pussydom blanket and actually join the fight?

Here Kitty Kitty kitty......

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 02:44 PM (Gqho2)

40 lol

"Since birth, each and every Muslim is indoctrinated with the ideology that all Jews and Americans must die, straight from their holy scriptures. If they can get a Jewish American, that would no doubt bring them bonus virgins."

Soooo, this *wasn't* in the Koran?

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 02:46 PM (4pujD)

41 It was metaphorical, spawn of satan!

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 02:47 PM (311gq)

42 If it was up to you liberals, we'd now be wearing turbans and playing mahjjong.

CP

Nah, were were too busy serving in the PERSIAN GULF I war, until, H.W. refused to open up the gates of hell.

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 02:47 PM (Gqho2)

43 37 Caffee,

it's not that you don't like Bush that makes you a Leftard, it's the anger and hate about Bush that makes you a Leftard. Gives you away every time. Only jihadis hate Bush more than you people do.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 02:40 PM
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Jesusland - You're still wrong but then you're the one spewing the hatred and calling names. Bush has wasted lives, our environment, our reputation, our constitution, our money, our civil rights and everything else he could put his hands on. What's not to love about the guy?

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 02:50 PM (eNwl1)

44 chickenhawkard

The overwhelming majority of people in the military are conservative (which is another reason you Libs loathe them even though they are risking their own skin for your ingrate hides).

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 02:51 PM (8e/V4)

45 Actually, Dee, I didn't serve in the Gulf war. I enlisted a year too late. But I was in time for Kosovo.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 02:51 PM (eNwl1)

46 patently false.
why am I surprised?
And why do you hate so much?

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 02:52 PM (4pujD)

47 Funny, Jesus. I was in the military and I consider myself to be moderate to conservative. Bush isn't a conservative. As I mentioned he WASTES everything he can. Isn't waste the opposite of conserve? It's not too late for you to board the clue train.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 02:52 PM (eNwl1)

48 You're still wrong but then you're the one spewing the hatred and calling names.

LOL.

Yes, I'm the big name caller on this blog.

Your wasted life isn't Bush's fault.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 02:53 PM (8e/V4)

49 The overwhelming majority of people in the military
are conservative (which is another reason you Libs loathe them even
though they are risking their own skin for your ingrate hides).

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at Novemb

try again dipshit.........

Why don't actually join like most of us did an find out what the military is really like?

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 02:53 PM (Gqho2)

50 who are you talking to Keg? I think the posts are out of sync.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 02:53 PM (eNwl1)

51 Nah I bet I can prove I have a extensive list of bad words to call people.

I learned them first hand when I had to put punks like you in jail.

Here kitty kitty kitty.........

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 02:54 PM (Gqho2)

52 Your wasted life isn't Bush's fault.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 02:53 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Jesus would be ashamed of how you exploit his name.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 02:54 PM (eNwl1)

53 to Jesusboy.
I respect your service.
the only service that Jesus boy has done is the self kind, I suspect...

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 02:54 PM (4pujD)

54 Now George The Great has to clean up the mess left by Bush senior who had been seduced by the liberals into giving up on Saddam. If we got Saddam then, we wouldn't have had to get him now. We wouldn't have needed to babysit the ragheads in the region and 9/11 would have never happened. When Bush Senior handed things over to Clinton, he assumed Clinton would have taken over the job. He had 8 years to remove Saddam and his funnelling of money to Al Qaeda operatives in the Sudan. The Sudanese government tried to be a world player and hand Osama over, but Clinton refused. Look where trying to cooperate with the US got the Sudan now? The Islamofacists will stop at nothing to bring down westernized nations and those who cooperate with them.

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 02:55 PM (311gq)

Will you marry me, Keg? If you're a boy like me that makes it all the better, but I suppose if you're a girl I could do that too as long as I can have boys on the side. I imagine us on long moonlit nights strolling hand in hand around the neighborhood teaching little children to be homosexual. While I consider myself to be somewhat conservative, I'm not conservative enough to join in the orgy with the children unfortunately.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 02:56 PM (eNwl1)

56 54 Now George The Great has to clean up the mess left by Bush senior who had been seduced by the liberals into giving up on Saddam. If we got Saddam then, we wouldn't have had to get him now. We wouldn't have needed to babysit the ragheads in the region and 9/11 would have never happened. When Bush Senior handed things over to Clinton, he assumed Clinton would have taken over the job. He had 8 years to remove Saddam and his funnelling of money to Al Qaeda operatives in the Sudan. The Sudanese government tried to be a world player and hand Osama over, but Clinton refused. Look where trying to cooperate with the US got the Sudan now? The Islamofacists will stop at nothing to bring down westernized nations and those who cooperate with them. CP
Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 02:55 PM
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

WOW! The bullshit is really starting to flow now! Gulf War I ended prematurely due to LIBERALS! We HAD to get Saddam NOW! It's CLINTON'S fault! Saddam FUNNELED money to his arch enemy, Al Qaeda! And he still says "islamofascist." ROFL!!!!!!!!

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 02:58 PM (eNwl1)

57 No, HW was advised by Brent Scrowcroft, the wise General who told him you would open up the gates of hell between the Sunnis and the Shias if you go to Baghdad.

CP why are you such a pussy an not join the military to learnhow to kill and be killed.

Hey if a woman like me can survive combats zones, and have medals on my walls, then you can too?

Why must you be such a coward and send other people children out to die for your sociopathic wants? Is that CP for Circumsized Pussy?

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 02:59 PM (Gqho2)

58 Yes I will marry you, Caf, and we'll corrupt as many children with our hedonistic, american-hating liberal ways as possible.

George the Great?

Ragheads?

jesusboy, why are you so filled with vitriol?

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 03:00 PM (4pujD)

59 CP - You don't even have to enlist. You can do your part to support the troops and american ideals while being a civilian. Here's where to start: http://www.dangerzonejobs.com/artman/publish/index.shtml

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:01 PM (eNwl1)

60 58 Yes I will marry you, Caf, and we'll corrupt as many children with our hedonistic, american-hating liberal ways as possible.

George the Great?

Ragheads?

jesusboy, why are you so filled with vitriol?
Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 03:00 PM
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
I just spunked in my sister's panties.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:02 PM (eNwl1)

61 @Dee
CP...
hmmm
crapped pants (when thinking about enlistment)
copious peeing (again...when thinking about enlistment)
cowardly pansy (again.......)

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 03:02 PM (4pujD)

62 @CaffeenMan
if it's not your brother's pants, you might just be a liberal...

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 03:03 PM (4pujD)

63 If it's your brother's pants you just might be an evangelical conservative christian.

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:06 PM (Gqho2)

64 Believe me. There are issues to why I am not able to serve in Iraq right now, but you libtards would name call and insult if I shared them. I'd at least try and protect us against these evil jihadists. Still, I defend any way I can.

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:07 PM (311gq)

65 Dude the chances of you being hit by a jihadist is 300,000 to 1.

You have better chances of driving down the road and getting hit by a drunk driver. Which 1 out of 370.

Way the fuck up you idiot.

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:09 PM (Gqho2)

66 Tell that to victims of 9/11

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:11 PM (311gq)

67 Awwwww.

CP has a cyst on his ass like Rush Limbaugh....

Poor baby.....

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:11 PM (Gqho2)

68 Rush is more of a man than you'll ever be!

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:13 PM (311gq)

69 64 Believe me. There are issues to why I am not able to serve in Iraq right now, but you libtards would name call and insult if I shared them. I'd at least try and protect us against these evil jihadists. Still, I defend any way I can.

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:07 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Man, if I had a nickle for every time I heard this from a freeper: "I really, REALLY WANT to serve, but I can't for [insert medical excuse here]."

Career Pussy (CP) - how about you drop the libtard nonsense and other name calling. You have a valid reason for not being a patriot? Tell us. Please, I'd like to think the best of you but if you hold back information then I wonder what you have to hide.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:14 PM (eNwl1)

70 I feel such compassion for you, CP, sitting at your desk, with that horrible cyst, calling us libtards and leftards and whatnot.
Are you doing okay? Can I order you another pizza? That'll give you strength to keep fighting the good fight.

Oh, and tell it to Oklahoma City you fucking idiot. Last I checked? McVeigh was one of you.
Nice.

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 03:14 PM (4pujD)

71 Awwwww.

CP has a cyst on his ass like Rush Limbaugh....

Poor baby.....

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:11 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Rush is more of a man than you'll ever be! CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:13 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

I hope so!

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:15 PM (eNwl1)

72 Dee - how's that sex change coming along?

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:16 PM (eNwl1)

73 Tell that to victims of 9/11

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:11 PM

Don't tell be about terrorism. You're talking to someone who watched the IRA bombing in Britain, the bombing in Irael all my life. I wa sin the Army Unit the 198th single Brigade in Ft. Knox Ky that was put on immediate orders when Ghadafi bombed the discoteque in Germany, that was a well know US military hangout in April of 1986.

Don't give me your bullshit on terrorism. I lived in it and I trained in it.

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:16 PM (Gqho2)

74 Fine. If you must know, I was born with extra toes. I think it's offensive that I cannot serve my country because of a birth defect., but I do what I can by supporting good, honest candidates like George Allen or Rick Santorum. I'll be at a Allen pep rally this weekend, if any of you want to apologize to me in person.

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:20 PM (311gq)

75 I'm more woman than you could ever handle, and more man than you'll ever be or Rush could ever be.

I have a DD214. and I have a gold police shield, all with a 38 C bra size.

I proved what I could do for my country by putting my own blood on the line and swearing an oath to that Constitution.

You're just a chickenhawk keyboarder. You will never know the weight and the scale of swearing that oath to uphold and protect that Constitution like I have.

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:21 PM (Gqho2)

76 Are you a member of NAMBLA?
I totally bet you are.
Extra toes? Get 'em removed and go serve, you fucktard.

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 03:21 PM (4pujD)

77 Dude, my brother is deaf in one ear and he was a Marine.

I had a curve in my neck and I was in the Army.

My brother has a weak left arm and he's was a 101st Paratrooper.

My cousin is a diabetic and he's in Iraq right now.

Keep up the bullshit.

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:23 PM (Gqho2)

78 Yeah. Like I'd be a ACLU supported NAMBLA member like you liberal baby killers.

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:23 PM (311gq)

79 While Bush is clearly against the constitution of the US,
it is also true that the Jihadists are as well...Jihadists hate the
liberals of this country (and Europe) more than they hate the
conservatives, at least conservatives have similar social
agendas. The Jihadists want the dems to win because it means the
US will become more fractured and make it more difficult to fight them
around the world, which is true, good or bad. Either way, dems or
reps, the constitution of the US will continue to be shat upon for
various reasons...

Posted by: Roy at November 03, 2006 03:24 PM (9WAJi)

80 Fine. If you must know, I was born with extra toes. I think it's offensive that I cannot serve my country because of a birth defect., but I do what I can by supporting good, honest candidates like George Allen or Rick Santorum. I'll be at a Allen pep rally this weekend, if any of you want to apologize to me in person. CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:20 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Why does anyone need to apologize to you?

Ranger says I have to call people liars on the spot. I'm calling you. If you don't know that Allen and Santorum are fundamentally corrupt then you are willfully ignorant. You simply can't not know. You're a liar.

Sorry about the extra toes. Check out that link I provided. I'll bet somebody there needs warm bodies and toe-count is probably not a consideration.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:25 PM (eNwl1)

81 Why do you hate America so much?

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:26 PM (311gq)

82 78 Yeah. Like I'd be a ACLU supported NAMBLA member like you liberal baby killers.

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:23 PM

What the fuck?!? Here you are calling us anti-american and bashing John Kerry for bashing the troops and you go and call us former soldiers, "Baby Killers"?!?! So not only do you not serve, but you disrespect the armed services who have provided security for you for hundreds of years. The forces who have allowed you to have the freedom to say anything you want? The ACLU who has ensured that the working class has a safe, fair working environment? What the fuck is wrong with you????

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:27 PM (eNwl1)

83 RE: Rick Santorum...

http://www.reason.com/news/show/34704.html

His ideas on Freedom are scary

Posted by: Roy at November 03, 2006 03:29 PM (9WAJi)

84 Oh sure. You're all for free speech except when someone exercises their right.

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:29 PM (311gq)

85 No

Posted by: Roy at November 03, 2006 03:30 PM (9WAJi)

86 Yeah. Like I'd be a ACLU supported NAMBLA member like you liberal baby killers.

Wow Baby Killers That's is soooooo

sooo 60's.

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:31 PM (Gqho2)

87 Hey even I was on Rush's and the ACLU's side when it came to his medical records.

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:32 PM (Gqho2)

88 Nobody told you to shut up. I'm exercising my right to tell you that you are not only a liar, but a coward as well. Additionally, you are very disrespectful to people who are far better than you are. I think that you're fucked up for what you've said, but you certainly have the right to say them. But if you want to prove you have two nuts, try getting in a soldier or marine's face and tell him he's a baby killer. Stand up for your convictions in person instead of from a keyboard.

Coward.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:32 PM (eNwl1)

89 CP, why do you hate America so much?

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 03:33 PM (4pujD)

90 Who is this 'America' everyone keeps talking about?

Posted by: Roy at November 03, 2006 03:35 PM (9WAJi)

Horse with no name = America

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:35 PM (eNwl1)

92 I do my bit. Far more than most liberals, in the taxes I pay. Paying for people to tell us how much they have this country. I get up every morning at 6 and work my business selling vitamins, and some lazy ass comes along and takes my money so they can wake up at noon and go by drugs!

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:36 PM (311gq)

93 I think the new spelling of it is Amuricka. They spell it like how Bush speaks it.

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:36 PM (Gqho2)

94 mmm, I love horses...i can understand why some people dont like them though...

Posted by: Roy at November 03, 2006 03:36 PM (9WAJi)

95 VITAMINS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:37 PM (Gqho2)

96 Christ
Vitamins.
seriously?
will you post a shot?
we need a new one to Blat.

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 03:38 PM (4pujD)

97 paying your taxes is 'doing your bit'? I dont think that counts
if your forced to pay your taxes...maybe if you gave the gov't money
voluntarily...

Posted by: Roy at November 03, 2006 03:38 PM (9WAJi)

98 #8 Jeff,

The link wasn't to any commentary or blog of mine. The link goes to the blog of an American born professor from Kent State University who advocates jihad against this country. Interestingly, he changed his blog's name to "American Jihadi" after I posted this comment so I guess he's reading...

Howdy, doc.

Posted by: Cate at November 03, 2006 03:39 PM (v40KC)

99 92 I do my bit. Far more than most liberals, in the taxes I pay. Paying for people to tell us how much they have this country. I get up every morning at 6 and work my business selling vitamins, and some lazy ass comes along and takes my money so they can wake up at noon and go by drugs! CP

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

The epitome of lazy thinking. "Go by drugs?" You mean they just say no and walk on by so that the drugs are there for you?

Goob! I know you! You're the lazy piece of shit chickenhawk vitamin salesman who poses as a patriot yet has never contributed anything to this great country. Oh, wait! Sorry, I forgot about your vitamin sales - making America better pill by pill. Chump.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:39 PM (eNwl1)

100 Yes. I've been in the Top 50 sellers of vitamins for 3 years running. What's your claim to fame?

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:40 PM (311gq)

101 Just a legalized Drug Dealer....

Posted by: Roy at November 03, 2006 03:41 PM (9WAJi)

102 Now now...
he annoints doors with CRISCO
I wonder if Jesus would approve of partially hydrogenated fat...

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 03:41 PM (4pujD)

103 Well, it's really hard to beat vitamin sales. I mean the fame, fortune, slutty women... it's all there.

All I can say that I have done is my duty as a soldier who earned several awards and medals and also earned an honorable discharge.

Currently, I work to save lives in a mental health crisis unit. It's nothing compared to what you have done. I mean what is saving American lives compared to pushing unnecessary pills on stupid people with too much (or not enough) money.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:43 PM (eNwl1)

104 I can assure you, I am not this "goob" of which you speak.

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:43 PM (311gq)

105 BTW, Jeff, I couldn't agree more about leaving Iraq. It would be a huge mistake. My husband is a 20 year army officer - just retired in October and I was an Army brat before I became an army wife.

You don't need to sell me on why we're there.

Posted by: Cate at November 03, 2006 03:43 PM (v40KC)

106 There are more than, what...2,000 dead troops that would say otherwise.
@Cate...Why ARE we there? we're spreading freedom?

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 03:46 PM (4pujD)

107

Why are we there Cate?

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:46 PM (eNwl1)

108 Yeah. Stupid people wanting to improve their health. Doesn't matter to me. I have a few SUVs that I can pick and choose from. What has your business gotten you?

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:47 PM (311gq)

109 Funny, Jesus. I was in the military

Yeah, sure you were. Plenty of Leftards have made that claim and then been exposed as poseurs.

Jesus would be ashamed of how you exploit his name.

"Jesusland" is what you Libs call the Red states. I wear the tag with pride. That's why it bugs you. LOL.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 03:48 PM (8e/V4)

110 106 There are more than, what...2,000 dead troops that would say otherwise.
@Cate...Why ARE we there? we're spreading freedom?

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 03:46 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

We've freed nearly 3,000 Americans and nobody knows (50K - 150K Iraqis) from their mortal shells. The right wing wants us to finish them all off. When the world declares us to be monsters they'll blame the liberals like some are blaming Clinton for not getting Saddam the first time.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:48 PM (eNwl1)

111 And why exactly would it be a bad idea to leave Iraq?

Posted by: Roy at November 03, 2006 03:48 PM (9WAJi)

112 We're there so we don't have to fight them here. Duh!

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:48 PM (311gq)

113 Keg, Cafeen, Dee, Puddleduck, and all others:

Wow...I was wondering where everyone was today...

Why is it that no matter what site you go, its always the ones who DONT serve that are so in line with this president?

A vitamin seller? Did we just find where Blat has been hiding at all these months?!?

Posted by: jay davis PsD at November 03, 2006 03:48 PM (CAVPy)

114 What has your business gotten you? CP
Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:47 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Respect. Unlike you, I don't worship money. I honor integrity.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:49 PM (eNwl1)

115 I would rather fight them here...

Posted by: Roy at November 03, 2006 03:50 PM (9WAJi)

116 Hippy

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:50 PM (311gq)

117 Well Cate.

Enjoy it because your kids will be in Iraq too.

My kid will never go. Her father and I have enought National defense medals on our walls as it is.

But then I'm still pissed that I was forced to participate in illegal activity on behalf of HW Bush in Honduras and the Iran Contra Scandal.

It's not fun trying to keep honor by helping the Hondurans, and loading cocaine from Carlos Mendes Airstrip near San Pedro Zulu, and putting it on military airplanes to be shipped off to unknown places, because there was no legal manifest made for it.

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:51 PM (Gqho2)

118 It's always amazing to me how insecure you people are.
do I give a flying fat rat's ass that you (in theory...) have SUV's?
Three to choose from? Up-armor them, cut your fucking toes off and get there, boy!!!!!
Put up or shut up!!!!!
Do you live in Minnesota?
Is this the same sick fuck that beat Angie baby?
Get a new MO, dickhead.
Nobody cares about what fucking lies you tell on the Internets.

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 03:51 PM (4pujD)

119 112 We're there so we don't have to fight them here. Duh! CP
Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:48 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Oh yeah. I forgot about that boat load of Iraqis coming over here to cause pandomonium and havoc. Why do you disrespect our armed forces so much? Why don't you have faith that our navy and air force with their very capable weapons systems could take out anyone on the way here? I don't think they could ship over 500,000 million Iraqis without us noticing. And that wouldn't even be enough to defeat us. But not a single one would land on this soil. Retard.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:51 PM (eNwl1)

120 Hey but you all think illegal activities on felonist are fine and dandy.

So much for the Rule of Law party.....

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:52 PM (Gqho2)

121 Funny, Jesus. I was in the military

Yeah, sure you were. Plenty of Leftards have made that claim and then been exposed as poseurs.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 03:48 PM

Please show us where you exposed anyone.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Jesus would be ashamed of how you exploit his name.

"Jesusland" is what you Libs call the Red states. I wear the tag with pride. That's why it bugs you. LOL.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

It bugs me? I don't care what you do in Jesus' name. You still make him cry though. I wonder why you think that's funny.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 03:48 PM

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:53 PM (eNwl1)

122 Those Iraqis are very shifty.

They make their way here by way of the Dominican Republic.

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:54 PM (311gq)

123 So when are the GOPers here going to design the new 51st State Flag for Iraq?

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:54 PM (Gqho2)

124 122 Those Iraqis are very shifty. They make their way here by way of the Dominican Republic.

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:54 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

OK, now I know you're a leftie being sarcastic. LOL

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 03:56 PM (eNwl1)

125 I've designed one. It's a camel superimposed on a star.

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 03:57 PM (311gq)

126 "Jesusland" is what you Libs call the Red states. I wear the tag with pride. That's why it bugs you. LOL.

Ohio is Jesusland. So that's why I have a formal handwritten letter of apology like I requested via Judges order from my GOP Governor, when Taft became the first Governor ever to be convicted of crimes while in Office.

Hallelujah!!!!!!!! Sweet Jesus God All Mighty!

RAmen Flying Spaghetti Monster!

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 03:57 PM (Gqho2)

127 Ramen...

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 03:59 PM (4pujD)

128 I've designed one. It's a camel superimposed on a star.

I figure a needle with a camel being squeezed through it would be more appropriate.

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 04:00 PM (Gqho2)

129

It's always amazing to me how insecure you people are.
do I give a flying fat rat's ass that you (in theory...) have SUV's?
[END QUOTE]

Yeah. It also gives me an opportunity to proudly display many a magnetic ribbon. How many ribbons do you have? How do you show support for the troops?

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 04:00 PM (311gq)

130 I think they are not used to anyone with an opinion other then right wing talking points over here. The beginninng of this thread was full of posts. Now they seem to have left these two alone...

Posted by: jay davis PsD at November 03, 2006 04:02 PM (CAVPy)

131 Here's my magnetic ribbon....

<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KmsOIjzQ1V8"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KmsOIjzQ1V8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed>

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 04:03 PM (Gqho2)

132 damn no embed coding allowed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmsOIjzQ1V8

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 04:03 PM (Gqho2)

133 Ribbons made in China?
ROFLMAO
I give to the troops.
I support them. I don't support this administration.

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 04:05 PM (4pujD)

134 I support the troops by actually knowing some of them and staying in touch. I could support magnetic sticker manufacturers though and abandon my brothers in arms.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 04:06 PM (eNwl1)

135 ok, I worked all night. Saved the lives of a couple young ladies. Now I must sleep. Keg, Dee, Jay - have a good one.

CP - I hope you're one of us because you're not very good at being one of them.

Jesus - Don't get hit by a truck too hard or anything.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 04:07 PM (eNwl1)

136 or a bus...

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 04:08 PM (4pujD)

137 Take it easy Cafeenman...I am on my way out too. Gotta run through some last minute things with the godson for his big day. Ladies, have fun with these freepers...none seem bright enough to really pose an intellectual threat

Posted by: jay davis PsD at November 03, 2006 04:10 PM (CAVPy)

138 none seem bright enough to really pose an intellectual threat

Posted by: jay davis PsD at November 03, 2006 04:10 PM

Yeah! So you don't need us manly men around to protect you and your honor. Give 'em hell.

Later jay.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 04:12 PM (eNwl1)

139 I support the troops in quite a few ways.

One important one is supporting those polititians who actually voted in the best interests of the troops.

Who's part of the A Team and whose in the FTroop? Check it out!

Posted by: Dee PbD at November 03, 2006 04:12 PM (Gqho2)

140 Where'd Jesus boy get to?
selling some vitamins to older ladies?
Puts gas in the SUV, don't it????

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 04:34 PM (4pujD)

141 Well yes.

If we tried to power our SUVs with older ladies, you libtards would scream bloody murder.

CP

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 04:36 PM (311gq)

142 http://forum.newshounds.us/viewtopic.php?t=11670

Posted by: NHK at November 03, 2006 04:37 PM (9WAJi)

143 right on.
here's another link for you, although CP is well aware of his fame...
http://forum.newshounds.us/viewtopic.php?t=3310
cheers,
keg

Posted by: Keg at November 03, 2006 04:44 PM (4pujD)

144 CommieMan:

Political Correctness doesn't exist outside of the West. More than 5 billion people out of a world population of 6 billion are conservative--including your paleolithic pals in the islamic world. That's a fact.

The moonbat left makes up a tiny but overly vocal minority in America. If you retards made up anything close to a majority, Ward Churchill would be the Premiere of the Socialist Collective of America, and we'd all be speaking Spanish.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 03, 2006 06:23 PM (bLPT+)

145 Keg:

When The Dhimmicrats fail to take control of Congress on the seventh, we humans will indeed be laughing. You rejects will be crying in your kool-aid and demanding a recount because of "rigged" voting machines that failed to count the millions of dead people, pets, wetbacks, and imprisoned felons who voted on the Dhimmiecrat ticket.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 03, 2006 06:27 PM (bLPT+)

146 Why are we there??? You have to ask?

Because we're practicing for when we take back San Francisco, Minneapolis and New York City, moron.

Posted by: Cate at November 03, 2006 06:30 PM (v40KC)

147 Dee PBD:

Why don't you stand up for your convictions and go to Iraq as an Al Qaeda member? Fight for the terrorists you defend in cyberspace? Die at the hands of the American military you so despise. Well, coward? Put your undoubtably grotesque ass were your big mouth is? (Yes, I know you're a woman. Either that, or a flaming faggot.)

Tell us agian how you were in the military. Which one? The Girl Scouts or Dykes on Bikes??

Cops are the biggest pussies in the country, and the most incompetent slugs to ever leave a slime trail across a real man's path.

Sunnis and shiites both are entering hell at a rate of 93 a day on average, thanks to Coalition soldiers. (That's the old figure, acrually. After the recent offensives by the Coalition, the figure is undoubtably higher.) No children are serving in the US armed forces.

3000 people were murdered by terrorists on 911 at your 300,000 to 1 odds. Take a math course, asswipe.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 03, 2006 06:54 PM (bLPT+)

148 Cate:

I'm sorry that I misjudged your intentions. With all the moonbats flying around in here, I mistook your comment as an endorsement for the American Jihadi. My mistake. All the best to you and yours.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 03, 2006 06:57 PM (bLPT+)

149 Jay Davis PissDrinker:

President Bush is overwhelmingly supported by the military. They enjoy being allowed to kill terrorists. Why is it that pussies overwhelmongly suffer from BDS?

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 03, 2006 07:01 PM (bLPT+)

150

CommieMan, Piddlepiss, Keg, Dee Punk Dyke Bitch, and Jay Davis Pee Drinker:

I'm suitably impressed with your collective ferocity. You're all tough as nails in granite.

Niggers, please. If you really are the bad-asses you pose as, print your real names and addresses. Heroes like you won't be afraid to do so.

Fucking pussies. You're all lucky this conversation isn't taking place in the real world.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 03, 2006 07:12 PM (bLPT+)

151 Ah yes, threats from behind a keyboard. Well done.

Secondly. Have any proof of what you say? Since "Liberal" governments are primarily socialist or communist, as you conservatives like to point. How many governments fall under that definition? Where is your proof of military support of Bush? Provide it. Certainly it won't include generals.

So often I find Freepers like to say this and that, but never have anything to back it up. No factual information. Here's your chance, freeperboy.

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 07:31 PM (m9IYH)

152 146 Why are we there??? You have to ask? Because we're practicing for when we take back San Francisco, Minneapolis and New York City, moron.

Posted by: Cate at November 03, 2006 06:30 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

You're 20 year military officer husband must be so proud that he has given so many years to defend freedoms that you would like to take away in one fell swoop just because somebody doesn't agree with you. Moron.

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 08:52 PM (eNwl1)

153 151 Ah yes, threats from behind a keyboard. Well done. Secondly. Have any proof of what you say? Since "Liberal" governments are primarily socialist or communist, as you conservatives like to point. How many governments fall under that definition? Where is your proof of military support of Bush? Provide it. Certainly it won't include generals. So often I find Freepers like to say this and that, but never have anything to back it up. No factual information. Here's your chance, freeperboy.

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 07:31 PM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

They don't have any need to post this stuff called "proof" since they can make up facts on the fly. In the polling I did while I was in the service only one person admitted to voting for Bush. Everyone else overwhelmingly voted for Gore. Doesn't mean anything since it's just maybe fifty people I asked in person.

Jeff, when Bush cums do you spit or swallow?

Posted by: CafeenMan at November 03, 2006 08:54 PM (eNwl1)

154 Whew! The children are all tucked into bed finally! Dang! What a mess they left behind! Well, I might as well get started, but first my coffee. It's going to be a long night ....

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at November 03, 2006 08:57 PM (Dd86v)

155 Jeff 's a pussy, a true Nebraska Cornholer.

Posted by: Fuck You, Bergholz at November 03, 2006 09:40 PM (a7sMc)

156 That's one hell of a coffee. Fine Venezuelan coffee.

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 09:57 PM (m9IYH)

157 Can we get back to the 38 C bra ? Nothing else gathered my attention.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 03, 2006 09:57 PM (cNF2m)

158 I hope you're not talking about Limbaugh's.

Posted by: CP at November 03, 2006 10:00 PM (m9IYH)

159 I think he meant yours, CP.

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 03, 2006 11:36 PM (rUyw4)

160 CafeeMan,

80% of the world's population doesn't vote in our elections or give a shit about our country's well being. So the only majority that counts is the freeper majority.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 01:02 PM
=========================

The only thing that counts?

That's like if the hokey pokey really was what it's all about...

Posted by: Dot Calm at November 04, 2006 03:13 AM (hnrcu)

161 Cafeenman: You remind me of some at this time two years ago. On Nov. 8th you will find wish side is the 70%. Rebublicans will win again. And you guys will say it was a rigged election. Same shit. Over and over. You guys just don't get it.

Frigging left says they wish to win the war on terror. What's your plan? Tell me a better way. Bush is doing exactly what the Clintons, Kerry and other democrats said he should do. Take the war to Iraq. One man doesn't make these decisions. To say he does is a lie. You claim 70% of Americans are against the republican dominated government. THEN WHY THE FUCK TO THEY KEEP ELECTING THEM. You claim the world hates us. THEN WHY THE FUCK DO THEY CONTINUE TO COME HERE? Perhaps others appreciate America more than you anti-American government types.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 04, 2006 08:43 AM (cNF2m)

162 Jesusland. Oh. Ow. That hurt so very much. I've been mortally wounded by your eviscerating wit.

Prior to 2003, what did Iraq have to do with the war on terrah? You see the problem here. No one has a problem with the so-called war on terror, or removing terrorists from moving about freely, but Iraq was not supply terrorists, nor a great deal of terror funding (unless you have FACTUAL information otherwise). Iraq has been a colossal waste of human lives, money and resources and most of all, time. There is not a huge amount of Al Qaeda operatives in Iraq? Why would there be? Terrorists don't fight conventional wars, never have. Maybe you believe they're stupid, but then those stupid people took down two buildings and almost 3000 lives. The truth is that about 90% of what the US is fighting in Iraq is Iraqis. You know this, though you'll likely deny it.

Bush's "stay the course" has not made things safer from terrorism, it's the contrary, even by documents released by his own administration. A blind devotion to this administration is foolish and dangerous. Admittance of being wrong is no sin, nor is accepting the fact that maybe, just maybe, the critics were right about Iraq.

Now, in response I fully expect insults and other emotion based responses, we've come to expect nothing else from the right. They cannot prove anything about their stance so they go with straw man arguments or insults. Don't let me down!

Posted by: CP at November 04, 2006 10:03 AM (m9IYH)

163 CP:

What I wrote was only threatening if you're a complete pussy, which is apparently what "CP" stands for.

Yes, communist countries are known for their political correctness. North Korea, Cuba, and China (which isn't really a Marxist country,) are hedonistic wonderlands that worship "multiculturalism," feminism, homosexuality, minority rights, and progressive thought.

Political Correctness is a Western disease. This particular brain disorder doesn't exist outside of the West.

"liberalism" is not a synonym for leftism, it's an antonym. Nobody is more intolerant and regressive than the fascist hypocrites who comprise the left. The only people who espouse classically liberal ideas are the neocons and other so called conservatives.

The majority of soldiers vote Republican. For every whiner who suffers from BDS, there are 10 who don't. For every failed retired general or mass murderer like Wesley Clark, there are 10 generals who don't bash their former commander in chief. By all means, produce a BDS general that's fit to shine the boots of Tommy Franks. When Bush greets the troops, he's cheered. When Kerry and the other America last buffoons in the Dhimmiecrat party greet them, they're jeered. It's all on film. Do your own fucking research.

Only retards use bywords like "freeper." That's brecause they have no real argument, and can only promote their failed leftist agendas by lying about them.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 04, 2006 11:22 AM (bLPT+)

164 Cafeebman:

Leftists invented making up "facts" on the fly. Just look at all the manufactured Bush scandals we've been subjected to since 2000. Projection is also a tried and true leftist standard.

What service were you in? The sex worker's industry? You sure as hell weren't in the military.

Your tale about polling is about as believable as Ketchup Kerry's Cambodia fables. I'm not surprised that only one in 50 "soldiers" you know voted for Bush. Bigots like you never associate with people who don't share your warped ideology.

Since when is homosexuality an insult? I guess you strongly oppose gay marriage. Either that, or you're just another leftist hypocrite (is there any other kind?) who only supports homos when it's convenient to your arguments.

By the way, maybe you can tell Cate and the rest of us one freedom you've lost since Bush became President? Certainly not the freedom to make an ass out of yourself.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 04, 2006 11:39 AM (bLPT+)

165 CP:

Saddam Hussein ran terrorist training camps and provided $25,000 rewards to Psuedostinian human bombs. He had the capability to provide WMD to terrorist groups. (Unless you have FACTUAL information otherwise.)

The entire Middle East is a breeding ground for terrorists, and Bush has begun to change the conditions that breed it. Iran and Syria are now hemmed in on all sides by American forces due to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, which any under-achiever with a map can see.

The mission in Iraq has indeed been "a colossal waste of human lives, money and resources and most of all, time"--for the terrorists. Al Qaeda has declared that Iraq is their central battleground in their losing war against the West. Would you care to distort their position some more, or are you starting to realize just how full of shit you are?

You sound proud of what Al Qaeda did on 911. Just like Ketchup Kerry, you cant help letting what you really feel slip out like a shart. Al Qaeda has been decimated for what it did on 911, and terrorists in general are being greased at an unprecedented rate, so yeah, the terrorists are stupid.

Provide documentation for your ridiculous 90% figure of Iraqi terrorists. I though Iraqis weren't interested in terrorism? I guess the Coalition should only kill non-Iraqi terrorists.

To say that terrorism han't been reduced flies in the face of reality. The NIE confirms this unequivically. It also states that America doesn't "stay the course" in Iraq, the results will be disastrous. You should try reading the document before you try to quote it.

The critics of the mission in Iraq have been proved wrong about everything since day one, starting with the predictions of massive US casualties. Only a fool can still espouse the cut n' run, hide your head in the sand approach to islamic imperialism.

Projecting the left's deceit and reliance on ad hominems and overwrought emotion is a standard Marxist ploy. It only works on other morons. It doesn't work on the moderates you left-wing extremists mischaracterize as "the right." The "strawman argument" phrase is another favorite of the left. You retards don't even know what that means. If you did, you wouldn't misuse it so consistently.

Have yourself a nice cry this Tuesday.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 04, 2006 12:04 PM (bLPT+)

166 See now, you missed the point. I asked >YOU< to provide factual information, and you did not. I cannot provide FACTUAL information because you cannot prove a negative. Reload and try again. Though, it's what I expected. As I stated, you cannot back up anything with facts only fantasy and foundless subjective opinion. If, indeed, Iraq was material to 9/11, then prove it. If going after terrorist states was the objective, why not Saudi Arabia or UAE? No, that would mean disagreeing with the GOP and Bush. You MUST agree with them, they're your party and anything else would be heresy, and independant view.

Nevermind. I won't waste time trying to debate someone who cannot answer simple questions. I'll spend my time debating those who actually capable of critical thought. I don't think that occurs here. Only conjecture, lemming like mentality and a muted view of the world at large with a US can do no wrong absurdity. What makes things even worse is that I am apparently more concerned with American than yourself, and I'm not even an American. Of course, I don't get FOX either.

Posted by: CP at November 04, 2006 12:45 PM (m9IYH)

167 CP:

Do your own fucking research. Let me know when you locate a politically correct country outside of the West.

You cannot back up anything with facts. You spew only fantasy and unfounded subjective opinion.

Nobody ever claimed Iraq was material to 911, idiot. Like the rest of the islamic world, it's material to worldwide instability and terrorism.

Only an utter moron would suggest imposing a regime change in Saudi Arabia before Iraq. Afghanistan was first because the Taliban were harboring Bin Laden. Iraq was second because Saddam had violated the ceasefire imposed by America after the Gulf War, and because he violated a slew of UN sanctions. I've already described the territorially strategic importance of Iraq. After the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, America now has Syria and Iran hemmed in on all sides by battle hardened troops. Saudi Arabia is also hemmed in. There were precedents for instituting a regime change in Iraq, and Afghanistan was harboring the maggott responsible for 911. Even so, the invasion of these countries was vehemently opposed by the American left and the shit-eating international community. If America had tried to topple the regime in Saudi Arabia or the UAE first, the opposition would have been far greater.

This is axiomatic to all but the terminally stupid. If you weren't so dense, I wouldn't have to draw you a map.

Your comments about me mindlessly following Bush and the Republicans is just more Marxist projection. You leftist mutants have opposed every action taken by America to protect itself and the civilized world after 911, even though you used to praise Democrat Bill Clinton for doing many of the same things. Why? Because Karl Marx and your America envying bigotry do all of your thinking for you. American leftists let the Democrat party do all their thinking, and all they think about is gaining power.

Critical thought from a hopeless leftist. That's an abject impossibility. Take your anti-American ignorance and shove it up your ass. It's not my fault you cant afford FOX News, but it does explain why you're so indoctrinated in leftism.

Enjoy the flagrant innacuracies and vile propaganda of Al Jazeera, The CBC, the BBC, or whatever worthless "news" outlet you watch.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 04, 2006 05:05 PM (bLPT+)

168 "America now has Syria and Iran hemmed in on all sides by battle hardened troops."
----------------------------------
You heard it here first, folks.
The lean army of Cheney/Rumsfeld are going into Syria and Iran next. Then Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
Is Pakistan somewhere in the plan?
Is it too late to buy Halliburton stock?

Posted by: JB3 at November 04, 2006 06:47 PM (Ja1vM)

169 is it just me.....

or are all these guys are dying over which of gods prophets(sic how ever you spell it) was the real one???

God is god no,matter which crazy fool decides he is the embodyment of....

p.s. non beliver here!! of all religion... deal with it...

Posted by: sol at November 04, 2006 11:30 PM (VFilb)

170 What happened to the 38 C hooters?

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 05, 2006 12:47 AM (cNF2m)

171 JB3:

I guess you did hear it here first. The mullahs in Iran and Baby Assad in Syria will be toppled before Bush's term ends in2009. You can wait until then to start crying.

As far as Haliburton stock goes, if its good enough for Noam Chumpsky, its good enough for a leftie like you.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 05, 2006 09:27 AM (bLPT+)

172 Sol:

Being an atheist is nothing to be proud of. Atheism has contributed nothing to civilization. Nothing. No charity, no fellowship, no moral guidelines, no humility, no comfort and no wisdom.

Atheists did murder 150 million to 200 million people in the last century. Quite an accomplishment.

I wish cirrhosis of the liver worked faster. We'd have less Scotties in the world. Go watch a train, dumb-ass.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 05, 2006 09:40 AM (bLPT+)

173 God help whoever has to deal with Jeff Bargholz on a daily basis. It ain't us!

Posted by: Gleep! at November 05, 2006 10:19 AM (a7sMc)

174 If you don't like dealing with me, don't comment about me. Idiot. Go get hit by a train.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 05, 2006 01:51 PM (bLPT+)

175 "That would be silly.

The Gospel of Matthew was the introduction of Jesus. Clinton would be much more satanic in nature.

The Koran tells of how a large corrupt state will attempt to slay Muslims in their holyland. It does not specifically mention the USA. It does specifically mention how Mohammed will stricken all the dogs of Jerusalem. Though, I don't believe that that is a proper literal translations.

If it was up to you liberals, we'd now be wearing turbans and playing mahjjong.

CP

Posted by: CP "

Damn, how did the Muslims know, back then that the GOP would try to take over the world, or destroy it, trying?

BTW - we're still playing majjong.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 05, 2006 04:35 PM (fMHQi)

176 Dee and Keg -

I'll see your Ramen and raise you a meatball.

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 05, 2006 04:58 PM (fMHQi)

177 "What happened to the 38 C hooters?
Posted by: Greyrooster "

Still looking for free lingerie to wear, GayWussie?

Posted by: PuddleDuck at November 05, 2006 05:06 PM (fMHQi)

178 PuddleFuck:

You're still playing with ma dong? Try not to bite when you're done, just smile when the flavor changes.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 06, 2006 02:10 AM (bLPT+)

179 fwtpz nsvudho qmnyi tjoibvndh qkslm zvocielng mlgnoiwd

Posted by: aqmukrjb roas at January 31, 2007 06:11 PM (uDDgQ)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

November 01, 2006

Wikipidia for Spies

Perhaps I haven't been giving U.S. intelligence agencies the credit they deserve. For the wonkish at heart, the epistemelogically inclined, and for admirers of Hayek alike---read on.

UPDATE: Michael Hampton has related thoughts on the program. more...

Posted by: Rusty at 03:11 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 192 words, total size 2 kb.

October 26, 2006

Because You Asked For It (Updated)

Update: DhimmiTube has yanked the video, apparently because it offends the delicate sensibilities of the YTers to see terrorists actually paying for their crimes.

This Hamas propaganda video has been on YouTube for a month. As Hamas is a recognized Foreign Terrorist Organization, YouTube may actually be in violation of US law for allowing it to remain.

I've uploaded my video (about 32 megs) to FILESEND. It can be downloaded at this URL: http://www.filesend.net/download.php?f=7c22a86e4da62c6191daf0405ad7687d - downloading the video is free, and you are welcome to do so.

The name of the file is nightmare_001. I am definitely not suggesting that those of you with YouTube accounts download the file, and add an extra credit screen to the beginning or the end to disguise the nature of the video, and then upload the video to YouTube. Oh no, I would never suggest anything like that.

Well, at least a couple of you did in the "It's a Bird, It's a Plane" post comments. So, here are more Islamist terrorists getting their reward at the hands of American troops. God rot their vile souls.

Update by Howie:Google Copy of Blutos Vid. Just in case.

Posted by: Bluto at 08:52 PM | Comments (50) | Add Comment
Post contains 198 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Bluto,
Still trying to link 9-11 to Iraq?
Retard.
We ain't buyin' and you and your ilk will soon be relegated to the dust heap of history.

Posted by: Greg at October 26, 2006 12:24 PM (19GwZ)

2 You stupid sack of traitorous leftie shit. The AQ in Iraq commander ADMITTED to 4,000 AQ dead in Iraq. That means at least four times that many actually died.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 26, 2006 12:41 PM (vBK4C)

3 Bluto, this was AWESOME! What a morale booster! More like this please!!

Posted by: HDCVax at October 26, 2006 12:45 PM (N7o67)

4 And, just in case you were wondering, yes I do question your patriotism, but not your loyalty to America's enemies.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 26, 2006 12:46 PM (vBK4C)

5 HDCVax: Never fear, several Jawas are working on more.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 26, 2006 12:53 PM (vBK4C)

6 â€œCAMP PENDLETON, Calif. - A Marine pleaded guilty Thursday to charges of assault and obstruction of justice in the death of an Iraqi civilian last April.â€

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061026/ap_on_re_us/marines_iraq_shooting

Assault? More like murder.

Posted by: Greg at October 26, 2006 12:57 PM (19GwZ)

7 Go, Bluto, Go!!! Hey, is there a video of Rachel Corrie getting pancaked? hahaha!!! We need videos of lefty traitors getting killed as well as jihadis

Posted by: Stan the Infidel in Indonesia at October 26, 2006 01:01 PM (5/SNl)

8 Bluehole:"You stupid sack of traitorous leftie shit. The AQ in Iraq commander ADMITTED to 4,000 AQ dead in Iraq. That means at least four times that many actually died"

There, there Princess, of course, your logic is impeccable. And how is this related to 9-11?

Posted by: Greg at October 26, 2006 01:02 PM (19GwZ)

9 Stan,
God stopped listening to you a long time ago.
Perhaps your geographical move from Canada to Indonesia was a misguided attempt to find stupid people who would listen to your demonic sermons.

Posted by: Greg at October 26, 2006 01:05 PM (19GwZ)

10 Bluto,
I tried the video and I get the following message from You Tube

"This video has been removed due to terms of use violation"

I suspect this filthy piece of excrement Greg al-jihadi may have had something to do with it.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at October 26, 2006 01:15 PM (vixLB)

11 Thanks, Greg, for proving to anyone who had any doubts that you actually are a traitor. Why don't you follow your heroes Azzam the American and Johnny Walker Linde and put your beliefs to more practical use for the Jihad? That way, we might get to give YOU a starring role in one of these videos. Coward.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 26, 2006 01:17 PM (vBK4C)

12 Well, well, it didn't take DhimmiTube long to show where their allegiance lies. There were no "terms of use" violations in the video. That's the excuse the DhimmiTubers use when something displeases their jihadi masters.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 26, 2006 01:19 PM (vBK4C)

13 Bluehole,
Q: Why don't you parachute into Iraq and fix things?
A: 'Cause you're a chickenhawk.

Stan the phony preacher man,
Do you slather on the blood during your masturbatory fantasies of carnage? Jesus has abandoned you for Rachel Corrie.

Posted by: Greg at October 26, 2006 01:36 PM (/+dAV)

14 Anyone else got the video on the web?

Posted by: 6pence at October 26, 2006 01:38 PM (CwVm0)

15 This Greg is not the same Greg who supposedly works for the Gov is it?

Posted by: SeeMonk at October 26, 2006 01:41 PM (7teJ9)

16 I do. It's a cinamatic triumph for the ages!
Two thumbs up Bluehole, waaaay up.

Posted by: Greg at October 26, 2006 01:44 PM (/+dAV)

17 Greg works at a Wendy's in Scranton Pennsylvania.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 26, 2006 01:52 PM (vBK4C)

18 Bluehole is on da welfare.

Posted by: Greg at October 26, 2006 02:11 PM (/+dAV)

19 Yeah, Greg, perhaps so, but he will be punished if found guilty, while your jihadist murdering bastards will keep on murdering with you egging them on. You don't deserve to be wasting the oxygen on this planet, Greg.

Posted by: jesusland joe at October 26, 2006 02:32 PM (rUyw4)

I still have your e-mail info Greg. You sent me a bunch of stuff on 7 WTC. Why don't you STFU before I send it to your employers. You were a much more pleasant person to talk with before. Somehow I doubt this is the same Greg. You strike me more as the pre-grad libturd type who is still suckling off his mommie tit while he/she hates on the world. That will change the first time you pull a 5 figure paycheck only to see half of it go to the gov. Then you will be begging the conservatives to take you in.

Posted by: SeeMonk at October 26, 2006 02:58 PM (7teJ9)

21 5 figure? Try to think big, Chipper.

Posted by: Greg at October 26, 2006 03:01 PM (/+dAV)

22 Children, please! Greg's just an antagonistic douchebag. Don't sweat the small people.

A 6 figure income, though? How do you feel 'bot them tax cuts?

And as far as I can tell, no one has attached Iraq to 911, though there are heaps and heaps of evidence that Iraq/Hussein supported AQ.

Regardless, the real question is if CNN will show terrorist snipers knockin' off American soliders as being news-worthy, why isn't a video showing American snipers returning the favor equally worth airtime?

Posted by: yo at October 26, 2006 03:32 PM (fkcf6)

23 Greg's a student at UT-Austin. He's still sucking mommy and daddy's tits, and the only six figures he sees are on the cheer line at UT football games. He probably delivers pizza for Dominos, if he even has the motivation to do anything other than "troofer" blogging. I doubt it, myself. He is a true loser if there ever was one, and the only thing he has in his life is the internet.

Posted by: jesusland joe at October 26, 2006 04:42 PM (rUyw4)

24 Student? I wish, those were the days.

Posted by: Greg at October 26, 2006 04:48 PM (/+dAV)

25 Video pulled by DhimmiTube. :-(

I recommend pulling vids off DhimmiTube with FLV Lossless Converter and self hosting.

Posted by: Henry at October 26, 2006 05:49 PM (fVPXf)

26 Greg
I want you to know, and I hope you appreciate ...

How much I don't like you. "There would be skid marks in front of the skunk!" Know what I mean?

Any 8 year old could write a report about why AQ attacked the WTC, and how Iraq relates to that attack. That is, if they had a teacher, instead of a party commissar! As for Bluto, I have absolute faith that his vid would have been a work of art had the jihadiwhore dickweeds at YouTube not removed it!!!

I would like to insult you, but I can't go that low.

USA all the way! In spite of Greg ...

Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 26, 2006 07:06 PM (2OHpj)

27 To Max

Isn't it a great ability to give some a virtual kick in the butt? Without having to worry you will get some on you?

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 26, 2006 07:11 PM (2OHpj)

28 Id give money to see it if I had any! I am sure its awesome!

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 26, 2006 07:15 PM (2OHpj)

29 Some pictures from greg's last family gathering:

http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/787635/2/istockphoto_787635_monkey.jpg

http://turbulence.unze.ba/archives/new/monkey.jpg

http://www.syntaxpolice.org/pics/londonSweden/small/londonZoo/monkeyCage.jpg

http://animalliberationfront.com/Practical/Entertainment/captivemonkey2.jpg

Posted by: Max Power at October 26, 2006 07:24 PM (kKA2t)

30 Dang, I didn't get to see it. Is it on IFilm? If so you can link to it from there to replace the YouTube link.

Posted by: Wearyman at October 26, 2006 07:29 PM (4tfP8)

31 Yep, I'd very much like to see it too, please.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at October 26, 2006 08:08 PM (vixLB)

32 Lefties who hate will believe and say anything as long as they think it justifies their hate.

Posted by: RepJ at October 26, 2006 08:23 PM (TKuws)

33 Greg,
I hope you die in a housefire. While dying of stomach cancer. While having your feet eaten off by a badger. Ciao.

Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at October 26, 2006 10:58 PM (CtVG6)

34 Good video. Let the bastards rot in hell.

Posted by: Subvet at October 26, 2006 11:53 PM (DNVxw)

35 Kudos to you Bluto. Thanks for fighting the good fight. That is excellent!

Posted by: Richard H. at October 27, 2006 12:00 AM (/xUS1)

36 Greg: Who the hell is we?

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 27, 2006 01:44 AM (eqF9P)

37 Awesome video! More please!

Posted by: heroyalwhyness at October 27, 2006 06:40 AM (MAPKL)

38 hey nice work man. i love the video. Gob Bless America Forever....keep up the good work my friend. plz make more and more videos like this and put them all over the internet. i love it. death to the insane muslims...i would babtize my son with the blood of a muslim, who has been killed by a americanm. it would b a honor. Dont tread on me Son! God Bless America God Bless the troops, God save the Commander in Chief. hit us we will hit u back 100 fold muslim filth! keep up the good work american soilders fighting muslim terror, you are my heroes...

Posted by: hank at October 27, 2006 07:35 AM (pU0SG)

39 PAY BACK! I love it. yes Greg I would murder the murderers. With pride. Same as I would a rabid god. Just something a man has to do. You wouln't understand.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 27, 2006 07:54 AM (ckgG5)

40 Of cource they pulled it!. When I first started to clip I was under the impression due by the music that this one was putt together by a Jihadi. later on in the clip the type of choosen music made sence!

Posted by: Dan at October 27, 2006 08:08 AM (ILHet)

I'm praying for you Greg!

Posted by: Stan the Infidel in Indonesia at October 27, 2006 09:05 AM (yyH7u)

42 BTW Greg, anytime one of Satan's minions is defeated I feel happy. Jesus hasn't abandoned me and He didn't abandon Rachel Corrie either right up until her death. She made a choice and she chose to abandon Him. She listened to Satan instead and lost her life for it. Moral relativists, secular humanists and other leftwing moonbats are doing the work of Satan. Aand apologizing, sympathizing and being a useful idiot for the pagan moon god worshipping Satanic cult of Islam is not the way to the Father either. Do I feel sad for them? Yes. But I also rejoice when another tool of Satan isn't there anymore to influence others not to choose the right path.

Posted by: Stan the Infidel in Indonesia at October 27, 2006 09:48 AM (yyH7u)

43 Bluto,
I especially liked the statistic near the end "50,000 Jihadi's dead"
Sweeeeeet
They must be running out of virgins in terrorist heaven. Ha ha ha ha ha

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at October 27, 2006 10:19 AM (vixLB)

44 have a look at the whack comments about this video on youtube.

amazing how strong the brainwashing is......

Posted by: Jonathan at October 27, 2006 11:05 AM (8t+ja)

45 Greg:

The terrorists linked themselves to Iraq, shit for brains. Niether Bluto or President Bush transported them there.

Now that they're there, Coalition forces are greasing an estimated 97 "terrifying" jihadi "warriors" on a daily basis. The 50,000 minimum figure is actually very....conservative. In all liklihood, more than 100,000 have been offed, according to morgue and battlefield counts. (Your butt-buddies at Iraq Body Count calls them "civilians" as a euphemism for terorists.)

Islam will join leftism on the dust heap of history, which is a step up from the toilet bowl they inhabit now.

Bluto is right. If you're going to use juvenile labels like "chicken hawk, show us the strength of your pussified convictions and travel to Iraq to oppose the Coalition. Al Qaeda is always looking for a few good subhumans. You might make it to bluto's video collection. Almost famous is better than anonymous.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at October 27, 2006 01:42 PM (bLPT+)

46 Hank:

Still full of shit, I see. Substitute "Americans" with "muslims," "troops" with "terrorists," and President" with "Bin Loser," and your comment would be believable, you quisling worm.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at October 27, 2006 01:46 PM (bLPT+)

47 Demonic music. How do you fight them without becoming like them, or worse?

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 27, 2006 03:51 PM (Dd86v)

48 Thanks for your persistance Bluto

I finally got to see it, and I look forward to viewing another broadside from the 'Dread Pundit'!!!

Nothing like seeing the enemies magazine go up

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 27, 2006 05:12 PM (2OHpj)

49 Um, Last Gasp Larry...I 'm pretty sure that Rob Zombie's music is banned in most Muslim countries.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 27, 2006 07:32 PM (vBK4C)

50 rightly so, Bloot, rightly so ....

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 31, 2006 08:32 AM (Dd86v)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Iran, Hezbollah Charged for Argentine Bombings

(Buenos Aires, Argentina) Argentina has made an international call for action against former leaders of the government of Iran and the leadership of Hezbollah. It's about time.

Iran is accused of organizing attacks against the Argentine Jewish Mutual Association (AMIA) charities group and the Israeli Embassy which claimed more than 100 lives and wounded hundreds more. Hezbollah is accused of carrying out the attacks.

The Argentine prosecutor demanded international arrest warrants for:

- Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, former Iranian President,
- Hojatoleslam Ali Fallahian, former Iranian Minister of Intelligence and Security,
- Ali Akbar Velayati, former Iranian Foreign Minister,
- Major General Mohsen Rezai, ex-Supreme Commander, Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC),
- Major General Ahmad Vahidi, former Commander of the IRGC Qods Force,
- Mohsen Rabbani, former cultural attache at the Iranian embassy in Buenos Aires,
- Ahmad Reza Asgari, AKA Mohsen Ranjbaran, former Iranian embassy official in Buenos Aires,
- Imad Fayez Mugniyeh, AKA Imad Fayez Moughnieh, headed the Shiite Lebanese Hezbollah overseas operation.

According to Argentine chief prosecutor Alberto Nisman, "We have proven that the decision to attack the AMIA headquarters on July 18, 1994 ... was a decision made by the highest authorities in Iran's government at the time." A 21-year-old Hezbollah bomber, Ibrahim Hussein Berro, a Lebanese citizen, was positively identified as the man who drove the explosives-packed van to the Jewish center on July 18, 1994.

The 300,000-strong Argentine Jewish community has been loudly demanding justice for over a decade for the 1992 embassy bombing and the 1994 Jewish center bombing. All along, the investigations of the terrorist acts were allegedly marred by corrupt police and government officials. In particular, former Argentine leader Carlos Saul Menem was allegedly funneled $10 million in a Swiss bank account by Iranian intelligence to cease the investigations into the attacks.

Response from Iran via IHT.com:

Iranian state TV news said Thursday that Argentine prosecutors had "repeated their baseless accusations" of Iran's "meddling" in the 1994 explosion, but the newscaster did not say that Rafsanjani or any other Iranian official had been named.

Iranian TV did not cover the Argentine chief prosecutor's remarks and no Iranian newspapers were published today due to an Islamic feast.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 01:03 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 368 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Justice at last! Hats off to the Argentines!

Mike,
In addition to the direct identification of the culprits, this ruling is very significant for the following reasons. Each one of the mother-f**kers in the Islamic Republic has stashed away many millions of dollars in foreign countries so that after the fall of the regime their progeny can live in comfort. This includes a multi-billion (that's right billion with a 'b') dollar project in Canada by the Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani's clan alone. Now, court cases such as this one can be used to freeze these assets and/or compensate the victims families and governments.
On this note, I wished right after 9/11 the U.S. government had frozen the assets of Saudi Arbia and used the funds to compensate victims and fund GWOT.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at October 26, 2006 02:31 PM (vixLB)

2 This is interesting to me for one big reason. Argentina and Venezuela are allied. Venezuela and Iran are allied. However, Iran and Argentina don't seem to be allied. This cannot make Chavez happy. His little bloc of horrors is showing it's secular weaknesses already. Could there be a big payoff in the future? Hard to imagine that when you consider the case revolves around a Synogogue and joooooos. We all know how much Amaddinnermunchkin hates da jooooos.

Posted by: SeeMonk at October 26, 2006 02:52 PM (7teJ9)

3 I only hope and pray that they experience real justice.

Posted by: Jack at October 26, 2006 03:32 PM (rryop)

4 George Bush should be watching this!

America should take a stand under his leadership and eradicate the country of Iran in one fell swoop.

Total destruction of the Iranian government, complete eradication of all iranian citizens, and a total wipeout of the country itself.

It is time America shows the terrorists who is boss.

Posted by: Bill Bradford at October 26, 2006 04:21 PM (DCZ7U)

5 Jack,
You're right it ain't true justice until the terrorist Mullah bastards are punished measure for measure.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at October 26, 2006 05:31 PM (vixLB)

6 Is there any corroboration for that list of accused individuals? Iranfocus is an Ã©migrÃ© group, and I tend to take such groups with salt. But I know Mugniyeh and Rafsanjani are named by the Argentines.

Posted by: Vancouver at October 27, 2006 03:55 AM (oMAN4)

Posted by: Lurking Observer at October 27, 2006 10:18 AM (/ZD7V)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

October 23, 2006

The World Gave Us Four Days

Not including the British, of course, who have, for the most part, been staunch allies. The rest of the world gave us four days of support following the al Qaeda terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. It was a dead heat between the French and the Russians over who would squirt in their pants first.

This story from the September 15, 2001 issue of the Guardian documents the cowardice (and, as we learned later, the Europeans and Russians were motivated by venality as well) and how Tony Blair immediately rose to meet the historic challenge:

Tony Blair is unequivocal that Britain should participate fully in the expected US military action. He told a packed Commons, recalled to emergency session yesterday: "Murder of British people in New York is no different in nature from their murder in the heart of Britain itself. In the most direct sense, therefore, we have not just an interest, but an obligation to bring those responsible to account."
But France signalled that it would not automatically support military action. "Our humane, political and functional solidarity [with the US] does not deprive us of our sovereignty and freedom to make up our own minds," the French prime minister, Lionel Jospin, maintained. [spoken like a true, mincing nancyboy. Enjoy your Islamist riots while Paris burns, pussies.-Bluto]
Russia, which initially offered enthusiastic support, was adamant that it would not participate in any "revenge'' attacks. The Russian defence minister, Sergei Ivanov, said there was no chance of the US being allowed to launch attacks from the former Soviet republic. [The Russians found out what was what when Islamists butchered their children in Beslan three years later.-Bluto]
One of the reasons that several European foreign ministries are growing anxious is that the possibility is gaining credibility of a second Gulf war against Iraq to finish off the job begun in 1991 by toppling the Iraqi president, Saddam Hussein.

Of course, the UN oil for food scandal explained all too clearly why these greedy bastards were "growing anxious."

Anyway, I just thought you might like to be reminded that "Nous Sommes Tous les AmÃ©ricains" (We Are All Americans) lasted exactly four days.

Posted by: Bluto at 10:39 PM | Comments (56) | Add Comment
Post contains 330 words, total size 2 kb.

October 16, 2006

Odor In The Courts

In case you missed it. pro-jihad, full-blown moonbat attorney Lynne Stewart was sentenced to a whopping 28 months in prison for aiding "the Blind Sheik" by, um, passing along orders he issued from his prison cell to his friends in jihad.

Linda, who has been relentless on this subject, is going to write one last letter.

You can too.

Stein hoist: Oh, pretty much everyone.

She should have gotten life for the ugly alone.

Posted by: Vinnie at 09:19 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 78 words, total size 1 kb.

1 She should be executed. This woman has spent an entire career defending criminals and terrorists. Nothing legally wrong with that (maybe morally) except for the fact that she has totally crossed the line here into the realm of treason, and she should be marched to a gulag somewhere and eliminated. Oh wait...the cancer will do that for us. Nevermind. Karma coming full circle is a beautiful thing.

Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at October 16, 2006 10:41 PM (CtVG6)

2 Looks like a Huskers cheerleader...

Check out those whiskers !

http://lindasog.com/pics/stewart_lynne.jpg

Posted by: Darth Juevos at October 16, 2006 11:00 PM (HSkSw)

3 Judge SNAFU"D this one. Advise rope, tree, horse and treasonous lawyer and treasonous judge. Firing squad would be to nice.

Posted by: Glenn M. Cassel, AMH1(AW), USN,RETIRED at October 16, 2006 11:10 PM (rilLN)

4 About the same amount of time Abu Bakr Ba'asyir got. At least she won't get her sentence reduced on Muslim holidays. Don't they still hang people for treason? She should be on death row and can console Adam when he's caught and returned to the US.

Posted by: Stan the Infidel in Indonesia at October 16, 2006 11:14 PM (HvGtx)

5 The judge was another Bill Clinton ACLU appointee. Notice how he said Stewart has done a "great service to our country" by representing the worst filth on the planet. Of course he was going to tap her on the wrist.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 16, 2006 11:30 PM (8e/V4)

6 50 years ago this manish thing would've been executed, but now treachery is the patriotic American duty.

I agree with Jack. The cancer thing is the silver lining. And I say that as someone whose lost several family members to it and watched his best friend die of it in 2nd grade.

Posted by: Ranba Ral at October 17, 2006 01:35 AM (VvXII)

7 Trackback is broken tonight. We have this liberal judge's biography over at RightLinx...

Lynne Stewart Gets The Book Thrown at Her

Posted by: McCain at October 17, 2006 02:59 AM (7dtns)

8 This "judge" should be impeached.

Posted by: MCPO Airdale at October 17, 2006 08:38 AM (3nKvy)

9 Justice for all who aid terror?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/10/10/cuba.airlinebombing.ap/index.html

Posted by: Smith. at October 17, 2006 09:40 AM (06Exb)

10 I was absolutely floored when she only got 28 months instead of the 15 yrs called for. This woman is so ugly I understand the need for the veil. A real live pig.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 17, 2006 04:04 PM (Igoub)

11 I really do look forward to the collapse of order in our society, so
that we can gratuitously kill scum like her and all other lefturds.
Just think; the cops won't be able to protect their precious lefturds,
and we'll have the safari of a lifetime.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 17, 2006 07:33 PM (v3I+x)

12 My gun cabinet is a glorious thing to behold.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 17, 2006 08:32 PM (Igoub)

13 My gun is a glorious thing to hold.

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 19, 2006 01:00 PM (Dd86v)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

October 12, 2006

Brit Muslim Convert Confesses to Dirty Bomb, NYSE Plots (Updated)

An Indian-born, British convert to Islam pleaded guilty to plotting to blow up the New York Stock Exchange and set off a radioactive dirty bomb in the United Kingdom.

From Reuters:

LONDON (Reuters) - A Briton arrested amid a massive U.S. security alert two years ago admitted in a London court on Thursday to plotting to blow up financial targets in the United States and carry out "dirty bomb" attacks in Britain.
Dhiren Barot, a Muslim convert, admitted to plotting to blow up the headquarters of the New York Stock Exchange, International Monetary Fund, World Bank, Citigroup and Prudential in Washington, New Jersey and New York.
"Explosions at these premises were clearly designed to kill as many people as possible," said prosecuting lawyer Edmund Lawson.

At the time, Democrats didn't seem to be too happy with Barot's arrest:

Because three years had passed since Barot had visited his potential targets, and he was under tight British surveillance at the time, some Democrats accused the Republican-led administration of overstating the immediacy of the threat.

Perhaps that accounts for the deafening silence from US media today about Barot's confession.

Update: The terrorist is an author.

Posted by: Bluto at 10:05 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 199 words, total size 2 kb.

October 06, 2006

MSM Finally Notices Online Jihad at YouTube, Google

The New York Times has finally taken note of the activities of those who support Islamist Jihad (including some traitors right here in the US):

LOS ANGELES, Oct. 5 â€” Videos showing insurgent attacks against American troops in Iraq, long available in Baghdad shops and on Jihadist Web sites, have steadily migrated in recent months to popular Internet video-sharing sites, including YouTube and Google Video.
Many of the videos, showing sniper attacks against Americans and roadside bombs exploding under American military vehicles, have been posted not by insurgents or their official supporters but apparently by Internet users in the United States and other countries, who have passed along videos found elsewhere.

Of course, it wouldn't be the Gray Lady without a strong whiff of sympathy being shown for the cyber jihadis:

At a time when the Bush administration has restricted photographs of the coffins of military personnel returning to the United States and the Pentagon keeps close tabs on videotapes of combat operations taken by the news media, the videos give average Americans a level of access to combat scenes rarely available before, if ever.

And the Times completely blows the coverage of videos being removed from YouTube, failing to note that most of the censorship is falling on the heads of those who have been countering the Islamist propaganda:

Their availability has also produced some backlash. In recent weeks, YouTube has removed dozens of the videos from its archives and suspended the accounts of some users who have posted them, a reaction, it said, to complaints from other users.

The reporter doesn't mention, and probably doesn't know, that the "other users" are the cyber jihadis themselves, and most of the videos being removed are pro-American.

Posted by: Bluto at 08:44 AM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 288 words, total size 2 kb.

1 The reporter doesn't mention, and probably doesn't know, that the
"other users" are the cyber jihadis themselves, and most of the videos
being removed are pro-American.

Exactly.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 06, 2006 09:13 AM (8e/V4)

2 Ya think? Absolutely. The NY Times has long since abdicated their right to publish anything. Shut em down. P.S. They're losing money by the barrel these days. GREEEEAAAAT!

Posted by: n.a. palm at October 06, 2006 09:40 AM (ITYPH)

The NYT is the Mouth piece of the terrorist, why are we surprised!!! I don't buy their rag EVER. That's the best way to hurt them. Them and Air America are in deep financial trouble....woooohhooooo Big Surprise. The American people are smarter than they think.

Posted by: Patrick Scarry at October 06, 2006 10:22 AM (SZy+Y)

4 The reporter more than likely doesn't know because they are clueless at the NYT.

Posted by: Big White Infidel at October 06, 2006 11:56 AM (koWs9)

5 Yeah, showing the American people the actual violence in Iraq is totally treasonous propaganda designed to lessen morale, under the thinly veiled pretense of "informing the public." N.A. Palm said it best when he said the NYT has "abdicated their right to publish" - damn straight! If it doesn't support the president, ban it!

Let's all enlist today and show them we're not afraid to put our asses on the line for what we believe in: Freedom! I hear it's really a lot easier to enlist nowadays, since this anti-American propoganda has scared a lot of Americans out of fighting.

PS. I thought AAR was supposed to be out of business already, does anyone know why it is taking so long? Ditto for the NYT and the Nation magazine.

Posted by: Rhyleh at October 06, 2006 01:28 PM (Q+ifs)

6 Rhyleh, videos from US soldiers showing "the violence in Iraq" are routinely deleted, after being flagged by jihadis.

What we're talking about here are videos produced for propaganda purposes by al Qaeda, Hizballah, Hamas.

I know you're new here, put try to keep up.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 06, 2006 05:05 PM (vBK4C)

7 Gosh, really, because I thought were supposed to hate the NYT and the MSM in general for talking about anything that shows the so-called "costs" of war, especially the demoralizing impacs on "human life" and "dignity."

Posted by: Rhyleh at October 06, 2006 05:26 PM (Q+ifs)

8 You really are new, aren't you? We post scenes of Iraq violence and terrorist murders on Jawa all the time. Maybe it's the context; we don't try to insinuate that we're losing, the MSM does. Thanks for linking to Iraqbodycount. It helps the readers who aren't familiar with you know that your heart is with the jihad.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 06, 2006 06:00 PM (vBK4C)

9 Bluto writes, "Thanks for linking to Iraqbodycount. It helps the readers who aren't familiar with you know that your heart is with the jihad."

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Cause of course you're a jihadist if you consider Iraqis human beings.

Posted by: Rhyleh at October 06, 2006 07:31 PM (Q+ifs)

If you considered Iraqis human beings you would support their liberation from Saddam. Even brown people deserve liberty. Closet racist.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 06, 2006 08:14 PM (vBK4C)

11 That's hilarious, given the US supported Saddam and put him in power in the first place! Here's Rumsfeld shaking Saddam's hand.

But if you're going after me for inconsistency, I imagine you must support the overthrow of the regimes in Saudi Arabia and China too, right? I do, but your heroes in the Bush administration don't. Are they racists? Or is that their committment to freedom only coincides where there's profit to be had?

Also, do you care to explain how killing people liberates them?

Posted by: Rhyleh at October 06, 2006 10:05 PM (Q+ifs)

12 Rhyleh, give me proof that the US put Saddam in power, or shut your piehole. You are lying, and I'm calling you on it. Put up or shut up.

Posted by: jesusland joe at October 06, 2006 11:12 PM (rUyw4)

13 Ryleh,

yes, the U.S. "made" Saddam, yet at the same time no WMDs. Leftwing logic is amazing.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 07, 2006 12:28 AM (8e/V4)

14 Leftwing logic?

No such thing. That would require ideological consistency, principled support of liberation from tyranny, non-partisan advocacy of free speech...

You know - concepts inconceivable to our resident trolls here.

Posted by: Good Lt at October 07, 2006 08:30 AM (lvyez)

15 Rhyleh, if you want to promote enemy propaganda, you'll be more
effective at it if you don't use those "idiotic" "scare quotes", you
stupid lefturd moron.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 07, 2006 09:15 AM (v3I+x)

16 Rhyleh wins!

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 10, 2006 12:02 PM (Dd86v)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

September 28, 2006

Teddy Kennedy Promises Democrats Will Gut National Security Measures if Elected

Teddy Kennedy, erupting after passage by the House of a bill to approve NSA surveillance of international calls between Americans and suspected terrorists, and passage in the Senate of the bill to authorize detention, interrogation, and trials of enemy combatants:

"In 40 days, we can put an end to this nonsense."

In forty days, given Democratic majorities in the Senate and House, we can put an end to five years without a terrorist attack on American soil. We can put an end to terrorists being aggressively questioned about upcoming attacks and the whereabouts of their cronies. We can put an end to thousands of terrorists dying in Iraq, instead of Manhattan.

Take the Bloviator from Massachusetts at his word. When he says that using legal means to protect Americans from terrorism is "nonsense", he means what he says.

Majority Leader John Boehner summed it up well:

"To always have reasons why you just can't vote 'yes,' I think speaks volumes when it comes to which party is better able and more willing to take on the terrorists and defeat them."

Pic of Moby Ted.

Posted by: Bluto at 10:56 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 192 words, total size 1 kb.

AQ in Iraq Leader Admits to 4,000 Dead Terrorists

From the Associated Press:

The new leader of al-Qaida in Iraq said in an audio message posted on a Web site Thursday that more than 4,000 foreign insurgent fighters have been killed in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. It was believed to be the first major statement from insurgents in Iraq about their losses.
"The blood has been spilled in Iraq of more than 4,000 foreigners who came to fight," said the man, who identified himself as Abu Hamza al- Muhajir _ also known as Abu Ayyub al-Masri _ the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq. The voice could not be independently identified.

If this putz admits to 4,000 dead jihadis, count on the real figure being much higher.

In any case, that's a minimum of 4,000 babyhunters who won't be coming to Manhattan to meet Allah.

Here's a picture of one of them, reportedly felled by a fifty caliber sniper rifle. If your stomach is strong, click on the second update below the image for an unblurred view.

Posted by: Bluto at 10:21 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 177 words, total size 1 kb.

September 27, 2006

Democrats Reluctant to Give Up Battle for Terrorists' Rights

The Associated Press reports that Republicans are moving ahead with legislation to satisfy Supreme Court requirements for terrorists to be detained, interrogated, and tried:

WASHINGTON - Republicans on Wednesday cleared procedural hurdles in the House and Senate on the way to giving President Bush authority to detain, interrogate and try terrorism detainees before military commissions.

The AP also notes that Democrats, who have been fighting tooth and nail to obstruct the legislation are finally seeing the writing on the wall:

While bowing to the inevitable, Democrats continued to criticize the bill. Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, the senior Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said defendants still won't be able to confront some classified evidence against them while allowing evidence obtained through torture.

Oh my, so sad, go cry.

Why don't we just use the Durbin rules for terrorist interrogations.

Posted by: Bluto at 02:57 PM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 145 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Included in the bill is a provision to retroactively protect Bush and his minions from War Crimes.
Politikal Pork.

Posted by: Greg at September 27, 2006 03:18 PM (/+dAV)

2 167 Democrats in the House vote to deny the right of America to detain and question terrorists. Says a lot about the party, doesn't it?

Posted by: MCPO Airdale at September 27, 2006 05:05 PM (3nKvy)

3 I say we should retroactively prosecute the Democrats for war crimes in World War 2 and see what you have to say then.

Greg, considering the tactics LEGALLY used, I endured FAR FAR WORSE in
my Fraternity. Now the things that were ILLEGALLY USED ended in
the people doing it being PROSECUTED.

Just wondering, since you obviously didn't pledge any Frat's, did you
perhaps follow up on your convictions by holding a protest at your
ultra liberal college accusing the Fraternities of War Crimes? If
not I am going to simply say, with ample justification, that you are
picking and choosing when to be offended according to your political
leanings.

Posted by: Naieve at September 27, 2006 05:06 PM (+PWjE)

4 It's too bad the plane that hit the pentagon didn't hit the house and senate instead. Maybe then these guys would get the "picture".

Posted by: n.a. palm at September 27, 2006 06:21 PM (DSoJs)

5 Naieve, when I attended the University of Wisconsin, I chose not to join a fraternity for what I felt were some pretty legitimate reasons: pledges were typically populated by those who had little other recourse in forming friendships; their insecurity too often played itself out in compensatory arrogance and pink Izod shirts; and they were always up for a rousing bukkake session with their "brothers," none of which interested us heterosexuals. You didn't attend the University of Wisconsin, did you?

Posted by: inkwell at September 27, 2006 06:28 PM (Xhg7X)

6 "167 Democrats in the House vote to deny the right of America to detain
and question terrorists. Says a lot about the party, doesn't it?"

They did no such thing. So, you are lying and/or leaving out the entire truth.

Says a lot about you, doesn't it?

Posted by: Angryflower at September 27, 2006 07:16 PM (Bss6w)

7 "and they were always up
for a rousing bukkake session with their "brothers," none of which
interested us heterosexuals. You didn't attend the University of
Wisconsin, did you?"

Sorry, not that kind of Fraternity. Mine was more interested in
women, which is why I joined, and I had ALOT of fun, with no gay antics
as you suggest. There is something to be said for being able to almost
exclusively populate your parties with women at a rate of three or so
women to each man... I was more referring to the being forced to
stay up all night, getting screamed at, stupid tasks and such to
throughly humiliate us, loud music blaring all the time and such.
You know, like the things legally being done by our government, not the
gay antics of Abu Ghraib which were PROSECUTED.

Posted by: Naieve at September 27, 2006 08:06 PM (+PWjE)

8 So that dead Iraq guy in the bathtub packed in ice we've all seen in the photos, the one where no one was ever prosecuted, he was probably forced to stay up all night and then yelled at to death. I see. Any comment on the fact that these legal tor ... er, interrogations have probably done as much damage to the US mission in Iraq and put as many US service people in danger as an Al Queda recruiting poster?

Posted by: grinnel at September 27, 2006 09:30 PM (Xhg7X)

9 Sure, grinnell, there were no beheadings or anything like that at all before Abu Ghraib, and the media lied about 9/11 - it actually occurred after the invasion because every jihadi in the world loved America before George W. Bush was elected President, twice.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at September 27, 2006 10:56 PM (vBK4C)

10 The media lied about 9/11? You lost me.

As for George W. Bush, you are correct, he was elected President, twice. Much like Bill Clinton was elected President twice -- though I believe he won both times by clear margins and was never actually placed in office the first time by Supreme Court caprice. Oh yeah; he can also actually form sentences and his own opinions. Plus he likes fat chicks. But that's another story.

Posted by: grinnel at September 28, 2006 12:11 AM (Xhg7X)

11 "So that dead Iraq guy in the bathtub packed in ice we've all seen in
the photos, the one where no one was ever prosecuted, he was probably
forced to stay up all night and then yelled at to death. I see. Any
comment on the fact that these legal tor ... er, interrogations have
probably done as much damage to the US mission in Iraq and put as many
US service people in danger as an Al Queda recruiting poster?"

How many times have you read about deaths from Fraternity
pledges? And are you sure no one was prosecuted on that death?
BTW, when was the last time we had an enemy who actually followed the
Geneva Conventions? Our soldiers are beheaded and their bodies
dragged through the streets, they are at no more danger than they were
when it happened under Clintons watch in Somalia, or the Hanoi Hilton
in Nam. Go find another strawmans arguement.

Anyways as to your Clinton Glorification, go threaten ABC's freedom of
speech some more. Then come back and tell us how the SUPREME COURT OF
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA HAS NO RIGHT TO FOLLOW THE LAW BECAUSE IT
GOES AGAINST A DEMOCRAT.

Clinton was/is/always will be a used car salesman trying to make you happy with the Lemon he sold you.

Let me guess, "The Path to 9/11" was all one big lie, huh?

Posted by: Naieve at September 28, 2006 08:02 AM (+PWjE)

12 jonny

Posted by: jonny at September 28, 2006 08:51 AM (QbGjZ)

13 Casey?

Posted by: Naieve at September 28, 2006 09:15 AM (+PWjE)

14 TIMMAY!

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at September 28, 2006 10:06 AM (v3I+x)

15 Sorry Naieve, but the argument is simple...

Those rules are what make us better than them.

Posted by: tbone at September 28, 2006 12:42 PM (HGqHt)

16 Are these the same demacraps who want to prevent our GIs from voting?

Posted by: sandpiper at September 28, 2006 03:09 PM (h6CK1)

17 "Sorry Naieve, but the argument is simple...

Those rules are what make us better than them."

What rules?

The intentionally vague rules that can pretty much be interpreted any
way people want, like the N Viets declaring our POW's war criminals and
torturing to their hearts content?

HOW DARE BUSH TRY TO DEFINE WHAT THE RULES ARE AND GIVE OUR MILITARY
AND INTELLIGENCE APPARATUS A CLEAR SET OF GUIDELINES TO FOLLOW, HOW
DARE BUSH!!!

Posted by: Naieve at September 30, 2006 10:36 PM (+PWjE)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

September 26, 2006

Letter Captured After Zarqawi Bombing Shows Friction Within Al Qaeda

CENTCOM has released the translation of a letter to Zarqawi found in the rubble of his safehouse after his death.

The letter takes Zarqawi to task for the brutality of his terrorist efforts and laments losing the hearts and minds of many Muslims who, in the words of the letter-writer, "...are ignorant and simple, and upon whom the afflictions of stultification, misguidance and corruption pile...". more...

Posted by: Bluto at 02:08 PM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 404 words, total size 3 kb.

1 But but but Bush is a failure! We're not causing this invincible foe any damage! The real damage is to my "civil liberties."

Fascists!

-Greg / tbone off

Posted by: Good Lt at September 26, 2006 02:35 PM (lvyez)

2 So Greg's a Truther / Loose Changebot, huh? That explains it.

Actually, that fraud lied about his deployment, his reason for dismissal, his service, etc. I can play the linky-link game too.

He's a liar and a fraud. Even Veterans For Truth doesn't believe him.

Jesse Macbeth redux. Nice try, though. We ain't buying that high-school level bullcrap.

Posted by: Good Lt at September 26, 2006 02:41 PM (lvyez)

3 I question your cognitive ability to grasp facts not told to you by Alex Jones and his whack pack. THATS PROOF YOU'RE INSANE.

BOOOOOYYYAAA!!

Posted by: Good Lt at September 26, 2006 02:42 PM (lvyez)

4 I'll bet.

Just like Plamegate, except even the leftwing media doesn't take your 9-11 denier garbage seriously. There's a reason for that. You're morons.

But keep flailing away at the frayed ends of sanity. I'm cooking up some popcorn to munch on while you kick and scream.

Posted by: Good Lt at September 26, 2006 02:54 PM (lvyez)

5 Good Lt :
Some of the 'troofer' quotes on those URL's re: Depleted Uranium were some of the funniest stuff I've read in a long while.

Good stuff.

Posted by: davec at September 26, 2006 03:37 PM (QkWqQ)

6 Even funnier is that people like Greg have adopted that mouthbreathing lunacy as their defacto religion.

A world of pure imagination.

Posted by: Good Lt at September 26, 2006 03:40 PM (e0VVt)

7 Point?

Posted by: Good Lt at September 26, 2006 04:09 PM (e0VVt)

8 Is he like the new scion of the Truther cult or something?

Posted by: Good Lt at September 26, 2006 04:10 PM (e0VVt)

9 How does any of that relate to the Zarqawi letter?

Northwoods and Tonkin? Both Democrat plans. Thanks for reminding us just how despicable you Rats are.

Posted by: efuseakay at September 26, 2006 04:27 PM (yHb0A)

10 Greg may actually be a libertarian, but that doesn't mean he can't still be an idiot.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at September 26, 2006 04:53 PM (v3I+x)

11 code red

Posted by: Greg at September 26, 2006 05:41 PM (PnoGS)

12 Code red? Does that mean it's time to climb into your transmogrifier,
(that is what you call the refrigerator box covered with aluminum foil,
isn't it?), and warp into an alternate dimension or something?

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at September 26, 2006 11:33 PM (v3I+x)

13 Greg - did some research on your pal Lauro Chavez. Seems he has an ax to grind with the military. Something about benefits. Also found out he never held a Top Secret clearance.

The owners of Domin-8 Enterprise Solutions weren't that thrilled with him posting the company name all over his extortion attempts.

Got something else for me?

Posted by: Max Power at September 27, 2006 01:14 AM (aMi4b)

14 No, since my posts are being deleted.

Posted by: Greg at September 27, 2006 08:27 AM (/+dAV)

15 Didn't think so chickenshit...

Posted by: Max Power at September 27, 2006 03:44 PM (aMi4b)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

443kb generated in CPU 0.1256, elapsed 0.1688 seconds.
56 queries taking 0.0777 seconds, 830 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

December 04, 2006

December 02, 2006

November 22, 2006

November 20, 2006

November 17, 2006

November 16, 2006

November 14, 2006

November 12, 2006

November 08, 2006

November 06, 2006

November 05, 2006

November 02, 2006

November 01, 2006

October 26, 2006

October 23, 2006

October 16, 2006

October 12, 2006

October 06, 2006

September 28, 2006

September 27, 2006

September 26, 2006

Recent Comments