Has U.S. threatened to vaporize Mecca?

World Net Daily ^ | 1-7-05

[hope]

to vaporize Mecca?

This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42272

Friday, January 7, 2005

---

---

Has U.S. threatened
to vaporize Mecca?
Intelligence expert says nuke option is reason bin Laden has been quiet

---

Posted: January 7, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

---

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

Why hasn't Osama bin Laden's terror network executed an attack on U.S. soil since 9-11?

Simple, says Dr. Jack Wheeler, creator of an acclaimed intelligence website dubbed "the oasis for rational conservatives": The U.S. has threatened to nuke the Muslim holy city of Mecca should the terror leader strike America again.

On his website, To the Point, Wheeler explains how the Bush administration has identified the potential of wiping Mecca off the map as bin Laden's ultimate point of vulnerability – the Damoclean Sword hanging over his head.

"Israel … recognizes that the Aswan Dam is Egypt's Damoclean Sword," writes Wheeler. "There is no possibility whatever of Egypt's winning a war with Israel, for if Aswan is blown, all of inhabited Egypt is under 20 feet of water. Once the Israelis made this clear to the Egyptians, the possibility of any future Egyptian attack on Israel like that of 1948, 1967, and 1972 is gone."

Wheeler says talk of bin Laden's Damoclean Sword has infiltrated the Beltway.

Writes Wheeler in his members-only column: "There has been a rumor floating in the Washington ether for some time now that George Bush has figured out what Sword of Damocles is suspended over Osama bin Laden's head. It's whispered among Capitol Hill staffers on the intel and armed services committees; White House NSC (National Security Council) members clam up tight if you begin to hint at it; and State Department neo-cons love to give their liberal counterparts cardiac arrhythmia by elliptically conversing about it in their presence.

"The whispers and hints and ellipses are getting louder now because the rumor explains the inexplicable: Why hasn't there been a repeat of 9-11? How can it be that after this unimaginable tragedy and Osama's constant threats of another, we have gone over three years without a single terrorist attack on American soil?"

Available only to subscribers of To the Point, Wheeler ends his column by explaining the effectiveness of the Mecca threat.

"Completely obliterating the terrorists' holiest of holies, rendering what is for them the world's most sacred spot a radioactive hole in the ground is retribution of biblical proportions – and those are the only proportions that will do the job.

"Osama would have laughed off such a threat, given his view that Americans are wussies who cut and run after a few losses, such as Lebanon in 1983 and Somalia in 1993. Part of Bush's rationale for invading Afghanistan and Iraq – obviously never expressed publicly – was to convince Osama that his threat to nuke Mecca was real. Osama hates America just as much as ever, but he is laughing no more."

Wheeler says bin Laden is "playing poker with a Texas cowboy holding the nuclear aces," so there's nothing al-Qaida could do that could come remotely close to risking obliterating Mecca.

Writes Wheeler: "So far, Osama has decided not to see if GW is bluffing. Smart move."

---

Subscribe to Wheeler's To the Point intelligence website and read insightful, clear analysis every day.

---

[Modernman]

So, the question here is simply are you going to strike at this evil and base religion and eliminate it from the world before it kills you, or are you going to wait for your own death, first, at their hands?

You're creating a false dichotomy. There are more options in fighting the WOT than wiping out Islam or surrendering. Only simple minds can't see that.

There is no forcing of choice of religion in Christianity. It's your choice. There are only consequences to your choice. You will simply live the consequences of your choice in the lake of fire, or with Jesus Christ -- your choice.

That's like a Mafia Don telling a business owner to pay protection or suffer an unfortunate fire. The choice is the business owner's, of course, but that doesn't mean it isn't forced.

And, to make a finer point on this. There is nothing here which says that Christians will place anyone in the lake of fire. There is nothing in the Bible which says that Christians will force conversions at the threat of death or the sword.

So, who throws you into the lake of fire if you deny Jesus? You're splitting hairs.

I advocate the government eliminate from the face of this earth, the religion which says we will kill Americans and we will force Americans conversion to Islam at the threat of the sword and your life. Go right ahead America -- finish off your enemies who threaten your existence!

I'll mark you down as supporting genocide, then. At least you're honest about your love of wholesale murder.

So, how does desiring to wipe out Muslims make you any different from Muslims and their desire to wipe out Jews and Christians?

[Modernman]

I see the voices in your head are still talking.

[wireman]

Dr. Jack's been smoking the good stuff again.

[Quix]

Not needed when all that was required was simply reading the evidence you provide!

[hinckley buzzard]

'Nuking Mecca won't accomplish anything, except alienate almost all the Muslims in the world.'

I'm not sure even I am ballsy enough to actually advocate this as a real possibility. However, if it were to occur, the consequence would be similar to Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.

It is the kind of crushing, un-rationalizable defeat necessary to clear the decks for a lasting peace. Remember, like the primitive, racist imperial Japanese, the Islamics are uncivilized magical-thinking barbarians. They would not have the cognitive sophistication to overcome such a spectacular repudiation of their crude pseudo-religious superstition-based "culture."

In short, the threat would work because the act itself would work.

[Star Traveler]

You said -- "Nonsense, of course. There is a difference between winning the WOT and wiping out millions of Muslims for sport, as you seem to propose."

There is no war on terrorism, because that war doesn't exist. The war exists against Islam, which is the foundation -- and Islamic people who decide to use terrorism as a tool to kill millions of Americans. Terror is only the tool for Islam. You seem to have missed that point.

You don't wage a war against guns (as some propose). You wage a war against criminal actions using guns. That's the "foundational" issue.

Now Islam is the criminal and the cause of the criminal actions. Terror is simply a tool which is used by the criminal religion of Islam, and the people who perpetrate these actions.

Furthermore, I don't recall advocating the purposeful slaughter of people who do not engage in direct military action against us -- for sport and for no other reason. I don't do that any more than the military engages in useless slaughter of innocents -- even though so-called "innocents" do get killed in military actions by our own military.

We have a military option and we take it. Military action kills innocents, always, as we engage in winning wars and military actions. We took it with Japan in the Second World War. It was the way to get to the bottom of all the military action. We took it and it's a done deal. We now have peace with Japan. A lot of so-called "innocents" were killed in the process of these military actions by the U.S. Military.

Do you advocate our government not taking military action against the enemies of the United States of America, simply because some innocents are going to be killed in these military actions? If so, you sound like a leftist.

Once again, I say, "Kill the religion of Islam by destroying all their symbols of legitimacy and allow that religion to collapse around the Islamics' necks when they see their religion is now worthless."

Regards,
Star Traveler

[Star Traveler]

You said -- So, who throws you into the lake of fire if you deny Jesus? You're splitting hairs."

Well, I'm not splitting hairs. It's the Bible which makes that clear. It's done at the Great White Throne judgement that we see in Revelation. It's the God of the universe who does it, who is the One described as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

There is nothing described as being done by Christians. This is wholly and solely God's judgement upon those who refuse to trust and believe in His Messiah, whom He sent.

If you choose not to have that faith and trust in His Messiah, then you're destined for the lake of fire. Not my words, but God's

Regards,
Star Traveler

[WesRM]

Ping

[broadsword]

Wallowing in religious bigotry and hate does not become conservatives.

Wallowing in the death cult that has vowed to murder Americans does not become real Americans, but it is obviously good enough for you.

Nobody doubts what you are any more.

[Star Traveler]

You said -- "I'll mark you down as supporting genocide, then. At least you're honest about your love of wholesale murder."

I don't recall that part. Perhaps you could show me something about genocide in my comments. And I don't recall wholesale murder either. Could you show me that?

I don't advocate wholesale murder any more than President Truman did by ending the war with nuclear weapons. We should avoid wholesale slaughter where we can. If we are to suffer millions of deaths of Americans, then we do what is necessary to stop as many of those millions of Americans from dying, by inflicting death on the other side -- if we must. If this stops it, it's saved millions of lives. The military and President Truman thought that way, and it certainly did save lives, while (at the same time) taking lives.

You also said -- "So, how does desiring to wipe out Muslims make you any different from Muslims and their desire to wipe out Jews and Christians?"

More "moral equivalency" that the Israeli's talk about all the time. When will this "moral equivalency" bit stop with the terrorists, versus those who are defending freedom. There is no moral equivalency between a terrorist taking millions of American lives and America taking lives to defend America! Are you a closet leftist?

I don't desire to wipe out Muslims. I seek to defend America against the enemy of Islam, which promotes terrorism as a tool of action to accomplish the goals of Islam. Those goals are the purposeful killing of millions of Americans (already stated by the Islamics and preached countless times in their own mosques). In the defending of Americans against murderous and evil hordes of Islamics -- there will be Muslims who get killed. That's the nature of warfare. And also, there will be innocents who get killed. That's another consequence of war. It's not a war that we started, though. However, it's a war which has been waged upon the United States (and Israel, too) for the last many decades. It's not a new war.

It's simply that many Americans are now waking up to it. It's time to put a total end to the religion of Islam by destroying all their so-called critical and important symbols which give the terroristic Islamics credibility in their own minds!

Regards,
Star Traveler

[Happy2BMe]

The Sauduction of Washington

http://www.sauduction.com

---

The Newsletter the Saud family and their Washington retainers love to hate.

---

"I summon my blue-eyed slaves anytime it pleases me. I command the Americans to send me their bravest soldiers to die for me. Anytime I clap my hands a stupid genie called the American ambassador appears to do my bidding. When the Americans die in my service their bodies are frozen in metal boxes by the US Embassy and American airplanes carry them away, as if they never existed. Truly, America is my favorite slave."

King Fahd Bin Abdul-Aziz, Jeddeh 1993

E-Mail Address - sauduction@sauduction.com

[Former Dodger]

But don't mind it if this my last and only response to you...your debating style is infantile and dirty (which leaves me with the clear impression that you are Muslim).

BINGO!

Over on the NY Muslim Group Held At Border thread (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1311164/posts)we have been thinking the same thing.Stick with it, my friend, don't let him get away with his contrarian Islamofascist apologist drivel!

[Happy2BMe]

BIG STICK OVER MECCA (NUCLEAR ONE AT THAT) - ping.

_______________________________________________________

Why hasn't Osama bin Laden's terror network executed an attack on U.S. soil since 9-11?

Simple, says Dr. Jack Wheeler, creator of an acclaimed intelligence website dubbed "the oasis for rational conservatives": The U.S. has threatened to nuke the Muslim holy city of Mecca should the terror leader strike America again.

[broadsword]

...which leaves me with the clear impression that you are Muslim

NOBODY doubts any longer that that jerk is an anti-American, traitor, Koranimal, pr__k.

[Happy2BMe]

Did you know this?

___________________________

"Israel … recognizes that the Aswan Dam is Egypt's Damoclean Sword," writes Wheeler. "There is no possibility whatever of Egypt's winning a war with Israel, for if Aswan is blown, all of inhabited Egypt is under 20 feet of water."

"Once the Israelis made this clear to the Egyptians, the possibility of any future Egyptian attack on Israel like that of 1948, 1967, and 1972 is gone."

[weenie]

Thx.

I don't understand why so many of the bright minds of FR get side-tracked into p!ssing contests with light-weight apologists when they could be working on the important issues...such as further defining the nature of the Islamic enemy and furthering the evolution of thought as to how to win this d@mn thing.

[weenie]

Hey, b, right...don't waste your time on that guy...his mind is closed and he simply wants to deflect us from more important work.

[Star Traveler]

In talking about Osama bin Laden in comparison to anyone who would advocate Christianity (or Judaism) in opposition to Islam -- you said -- "Yes - they are flip sides of the same coin."

This is the secular mind's answer. It's called moral equivalency -- or -- if you want, "religious eqivalency". It's the same type of stuff and material that "political correctness" is made out of, too.

Moral equivalency is the term that Israelis have given to the issue of killing terrorists and it not being equal to the Islamic action of killing any and all Israelis (and Americans, too).

And here you are, describing this as the "same coin" -- just opposite sides. Let's make it clear that this is exactly what the Israelis are talking about -- when they say, "There is no moral equivalency in killing terrorists!" [when this is compared to the killing of innocents for the sake of Islam and its legitimacy.]

I guess you believe in political correctness, all religions are equal, a dictatorship is just as valid as the form of government of the United States, and so on. In other words, another closet liberal and leftist.

Regards,
Star Traveler

[weenie]

I believe this is because we as a nation did not understand the nature of our enemy.

Yup...that's it. We need to get down to the truth about Islam...what it is and what it isn't. Then we need to develop a real plan...and attack its Achilles heel...

Every tough problem has an optimum solution...but, I fear, we haven't found it yet for the problem of Islam.

[weenie]

I don't understand why so many of the brightest minds of FR get side-tracked into p!ssing contests with light-weight apologists when they could be working on the important issues...such as further defining the nature of the Islamic enemy and furthering the evolution of thought as to how to win this d@mn thing.

I wrote this a few posts ago (it applies to you). You know what I mean.