Al Qaeda's Wet Dream - One Term

PipeBombNews.com ^ | June 4, 2002 | William A. Mayer, Editor & Publisher PipeBombNews.com

[Ben Ficklin]

Never underestimate the power and agenda of the media!

[Belial]

Are Bush's defenders milking the War on Terror for political gain? Obviously.

[johnqueuepublic]

Can I borrow your term coresider?

That is a very good use of language, and accurately describes the ideologues who can't see beyond their own backyards.

[johnqueuepublic]

Back it up.

[johnqueuepublic]

Did you fall for it when Clinton Milked Your Pain?

[WhiteGuy]

Ron Paul in 2004

[Hoosier Patriot]

Puh-lease. When election time rolls around if I determine that Bush is the best man for the job, he will get my vote again. If not, someone else will. Simple as that. The mere assumption that not granting Bush a second term will play right into the Al Qaedas plans is laughable.

[Grampa Dave]

John, please borrow and use coresider. I just came up with it today after reading your great thread, about the al Qaeda Wet Dream. Miss Marple has a great term to describe how GW does things behind the scenes, Stealth President. That drives the coresiders of the American Axis of Whining Weasels even more insane. They want GW to be a real Coresider and use tactical nuke weapons on people instead of stealth victories. Actually they just don't want him to have any victory. Each victory by GW makes the 3rd party coresiders more irrelevant.

Please feel free to borrow America's Axis of Whining Weasels which is what all of these so called coresiders are.

Thanks again for this great find! I have bookmarked it to bring out when the Coresiders of America's Axis of Whining Weasels trot out more anti GW Bravo Sierra!

[Tuor]

We are at war, start acting like it, those who fraudulently attack your Commander in Chief, attack your Nation, your family, and your way of life.

So, Bush can do whatever he wants because if we question any of his actions, we're attacking our country. Heh. How amusing.

Of course, we're not really at war, unless the Senate voted to declare war on someone and no one told me.

Tuor

[Grampa Dave]

Not as much as you coresiders are trying to milk it and savage GW. However, it ain't working, and you guys are becoming more irrelevant each day. Put some ice on it for the next 6+ years.

[caprock]

. . . you guys are becoming more irrelevant each day. Put some ice on it for the next 6+ years.

Well put!

[Belial]

You look pretty silly, with your fingers in your ears mouthing obvious propaganda and coming up with nonsensical jargon.

[swarthyguy]

We are at war, start acting like it, those who fraudulently attack your Commander in Chief, attack your Nation, your family, and your way of life.

Good unifying article. Now if we had a Declaration of War or even something to what Jefferson did against the Mediterranean Pirates as Ron Paul recommended against our enemies, a lot of this secondguessing, backbiting, and fingerpointing would cease.

[johnqueuepublic]

If we are not at war why did a bunch of ragheads try to use the WTC as a landing strip?

I like granpas term coresider, and ill bet that alot of them are supporters of that former tricky dicky speech writer BJBonehead.

America first my butt, these people just wanna party and poke at those who have to make the hard choices.

[johnqueuepublic]

Ron Paul has done exactly what?

Kinda reminds me of Larry Klayman without the charisma and without the judicial success.

[swarthyguy]

He asked for some kind of a formal declaration; not quite of war but specific to find osama and destroying alqaeda.

[Tuor]

Fine. Identify those responsible (which we seem to have already done) and declare war against them. What is so hard about that? All it requires is a vote by the Senate. Then I will happily say we're at war, and will cease being annoyed by all this Nation at War stuff that I keep hearing. Otherwise, it is merely a crime, one committed by foreign citizens, not a foreign government.

I think we should bring back Letters of Mark and put a chunk of money on the heads of the terrorists. Plus, make them targets of opportunity for any military unit. Plus, send off a *really good* specwar squad to sneak up on the SOBs and give them either outright dirtnaps or more ambiguous 'accidents'.

There is no Constitutional restriction on assasination that I am aware of, particularly once a Letter of Mark or a Declaration of War has been issued.

Why wont people use the Constitution to their advantage for once, instead of constantly whining on how it restricts them (I'm talking about politicians here).

$10,000,000 on bin Laden's head, and prices on those of his followers, would almost certainly have a result. Bin Laden would become a little more busy staying alive and a little less busy trying to find ways to blow up the US.

Tuor

[johnqueuepublic]

There is alread a huge reward for Bin Laden, I think it actually is 10M.

Traditionally a declaration of war was against a countty not a specific group, Jefferson and the pirates aside.

I really dont care whether it is declared or not it is defacto regardless.

[johnqueuepublic]

The restrictions on assasination came out of the Church (D) committe hearings in 1975, add to that the restrictions by Toricelli and you have a prescription for 9/11