Gee, a "new" poster who signs up and immediately attacks President Bush with more gusto than she attacks terrorism...
Posted on 07/12/2006 2:28:54 PM PDT by LSUfan
According to one NYPD intelligence officer, who spoke on condition of anonymity, the terrorists believe if they can hurt the American economy that more people -- with the help of many Democrats and some Republicans in collusion with the mainstream news media -- will turn against the Commander-in-Chief and his plan of taking the fight to the enemy.
New York cops love President Bush. They endorsed him and they support him. So perhaps that detective's analysis is a bit biased.
But I wholeheartedly agree with that detective. The terrorists know that the Democrat Party leadership -- either as willing accomplices or useful idiots -- will continue their daily assault on President George W. Bush and the war on terrorism. The terrorists know that their friends in the news media -- who provide them with useful intelligence by printing leaked classified information on counterterrorism programs -- will harp on the doom and gloom stories should a terrorist attack cause harm to the US economy.
(Excerpt) Read more at chronwatch.com ...
Huh. I don't think that detective is biased at all. I think he is right on the money.
Al Queda has obviously looked at it and said: "The North Vietnamese did it...we can too..."
But they don't have Dan Rather and Walter Cronkite today, and...we don't get all of our news from SEEBS...
We LET Vietnam play out the way it did. Those of us who care stood back and let it happen.
We WILL NOT let it happen again.
There's no coincedence that the muzzies statements often mirror dnc talking points.
They're probably on the mailing list.
Sorry Al Queda, we're not pussies like the Spaniards.
Yeah. THAT really pissed me off. And Spain was my favorite European country before that. (not counting England, of course, but I somehow don't see them as Euroweenies)
Just looking at the war on terror from a detached perspective, the Islamofascists would be fools not to use the Democrats and the American left to undermine the war. I've already seen lots of subtle psych ops from their side - the idea that the American military is filled with trigger-happy rapists, the attempts to inflate humilation of prisoners with someone cutting of the head of an innocent man with a rusty knife, the constant insinuation that any battle with Islam is a racist Crusade by evil white Europeans. In many ways, the Islamofascists have learned well from both Lenin and Hitler in shaping and forming public opinion. The best so far was the letter from Osama himself using sloganeering from the Democrats before the 2004 election. My liberal relatives in New York told me just this past week that the letter was just a plant from the CIA to make the liberals look bad. Of course, my liberal relatives will tell me that they're against terrorism - they're just not willing to support the current wars against it or stand up and say anything against it. LOL
NYT=PRAVDA
The Democrats and MSM are al-queda's last hope.
Gee, a "new" poster who signs up and immediately attacks President Bush with more gusto than she attacks terrorism...
Knock off the THREADJACKING.
"my liberal relatives will tell me that they're against terrorism - they're just not willing to support the current wars against it or stand up and say anything against it."
Guess they won't be buying any of the liberals' cookies at the bake sale. Boy, that'll show 'em.
I think liberals are inherently against the phrase "stand up" no matter how it is applied.
Just my opinion.
Al Queda has obviously looked at it and said: "The North Vietnamese did it...we can too...Same Soviet source of propaganda management training. :')
Yup...you got that right. Reagan was right...evil, evil Empire.
This was a letter I wrote to the Editor of the Boston Globe in the couple weeks leading up to Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. Needless to say, they didn't print it.
But if I may say so, I thought it captured the essence of the liberal stance on the War on Terror, particularly the last two paragraphs:
To the Editor of The Boston Globe:
During the last weekend, hundreds of thousands of people around the world took to the streets in demonstration against a prospective US military action against the current Iraqi regime. This is a seeming indication of solidarity against war, and one must wonder if there are any voices out there advocating military action. If so, they are not seen on the streets, carrying signs and shouting slogans. But I know that there are voices out there advocating military action, because I am one of them. And there are others like me, many others. Why are we not on the street demonstrating for war?
The fact is; nobody really wants war. That is why my voice and others like it do not echo in the street. How could anyone in their right mind go out in the street shouting “Bomb Iraq Now”, carrying signs and linking arms as they walk down the street? How can anyone be ‘for’ an action that will probably result in young Americans being killed and maimed in battle, not to mention death and destruction to innocent Iraqis and the Iraqi servicemen who serve against their will? How can we pump our fists in the air, grin, and say: “Let’s Roll”? The truth is: we can’t.
Those of us who have thought this through, and would approve of military action against Iraq, do so with a heavy heart. We agree to shoulder the quiet, grim, unpalatable burden of understanding the consequences of such an action. If there is death and devastation, we know we must carry the moral responsibility for the outcome. We accept the risk that our calculus is wrong, and that our hearts and hands will be stained with the blood of those who may suffer wrongly as a result. Nevertheless, we are willing to accept this burden; and this is why:
In the 1930’s, the world watched and debated as Nazi Germany rose to power. As Germany planned, plotted and executed each step in their march to domination of Europe, the rest of the world watched, debated, wrung their hands, and proffered diplomacy as a solution. Nazi Germany lied, and the rest of us were relieved to accept the lies. France and England, who had lost an entire generation in the First World War, were determined to avoid war at all costs. In those countries, many believed that there was nothing worth going to war over. It would be Peace at all Costs. As we found out millions of lost and shattered lives later, Germany had no intention of living in Peace, no matter how good intentioned the diplomacy was, and it ended up Costing the rest of the world a great deal. Appeasement and words will not deter aggression from those to whom appeasement is weakness, and words are tools to further their ends. This, history has taught us.
Now, we have come full circle. As it was with Adolf Hitler, the world is again faced with a dictator who believes that the weakness of his enemies is the public opinion of their own people, and that any diplomatic efforts are merely words to be turned to his own use. But there is a difference. This regime has weapons that have the capability to kill untold numbers in a variety of horrible ways, while leaving very little evidence pointing to the source. Iraq has used these same weapons in a political fashion to murder their own citizens in an attempt to control them, as well as tactically against a neighboring country in a war of aggression. Iraq has shown no restraint in employing these weapons. Use of these weapons against people in other countries, including the United States, is only as far away as a truck ride across the Iraqi border.
We must not repeat the mistakes of the 1930’s. We now know that there are things worth fighting for. Our safety, and the safety of others around the world is one of those things. So, those of us who feel that war is appropriate, accept the moral burden with eyes wide open. Likewise, those who oppose war should do the same. In the event of another large scale attack by a terrorist group with weapons supplied by Iraq, will those who now oppose action against Iraq bear the moral responsibility, or will they lift their voices above all others in a demand for the scalps of those in our government who did not act?
After World War II, there were few people to be found who admitted to supporting appeasement; those who did admit it mostly regretted it, and lived the rest of their lives in shame. But all of those people, whether they admitted it or not, bore the stains on their hands of the millions who died due to the failure of the rest of the world to take a stand when it still mattered. Right now, we can still take a stand and make a difference. Right now, what we do still matters. If we shirk our responsibility, if we fail to stand up and be counted while we have the chance, are we prepared to share the fate of those who appeased Nazi Germany? It is well to heed the lessons of history.
Best to give your backing and money to countries that support us.
Poland hasn't gotten nearly the recognition and increased trade it should have.
I couldn't agree more strongly.
Nice letter.
Yeah...the Boston Fishwrap didn't think so...:)
I guess that means it IS good...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1663551/posts?page=7#7
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1663551/posts?page=20#20
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.