Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Al Qaeda's Wet Dream - One Term
PipeBombNews.com ^ | June 4, 2002 | William A. Mayer, Editor & Publisher PipeBombNews.com

Posted on 06/04/2002 9:20:43 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic

Al Qaeda's Wet Dream - One Term

By William A. Mayer, Editor & Publisher

June 4, 2002

A few weeks ago, agent provocateurs in the American press - via yet another convenient leak of an internal FBI document, provided by congressional Democrat fellow travelers - commenced the now only too familiar attack on President Bush.

Milking the opportunity, Time, Newsweek, the New York Times and the Washington Post have gone into an exquisite 3-card-Monty ruse about how “”Bush Knew” – of course absent any facts that would prove the allegation and ignoring Mr. Clinton's less than stellar stewardship of the military/intelligence apparatus charged with preventing terrorist incidents.

The disease has even affected the pointy heads at the Wall Street Journal who last week, in a fit of pique, mistakenly called for the resignation of FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III, over lapses in security, which in their wooly headed manner of thinking, somehow led to 9-11-01, despite the fact that Mueller had assumed the directorship only one week previous to the Islamic sneak attack.

This week, in a pincers operation, the New York Times - who now apparently touts its articles by feeding them first to Matt Drudge - is alleging that the Bush administration is back peddling - flip flopping - on “global warming” and by extension the Kyoto treaty. This is really Byzantine; the Times claiming that Bush is confounding them by not being as hard right as it has been alleging all along – oh well.

The Times lashes out at Bush by misrepresenting the “UN Climate Action Report 2002” [a 263 page - 5.7 MB Adobe file] - the lead-in paragraph:

“In a stark shift for the Bush administration, the United States has sent a climate report to the United Nations detailing specific and far-reaching effects that it says global warming will inflict on the American environment.”

If one takes even a few minutes to glance through the report one will see nothing of a “stark shift.”

What you will find is a thoughtful treatise on the complexities of climatology; it is no revelation nor is it capitulation that human activity has some bearing on the .6 degree C warming effect that may have been in play since 1900 – a single cow’s flatulence also has an effect – one, given the obvious spin intended by these sordid efforts disguised as journalism, possibly more salutary.

The intent here is to frame Bush as having caused 9-11 through inattention and, additionally, and having abandoned his core beliefs - thereby hoping to dishearten the conservative core of his support, a tactic which seems to be gaining traction.

The ultimate goal?

To destroy the Bush administration by any means and at all costs.

Aided in its effort to cast Bush in the worst possible light are a bevy of hot air devices, also commonly referred to as conservative radio talk show hosts [who shall here go unnamed - but you know who they are] who shifted into hyper-drive with wild crazy suppositions borne with sanctimonious scorn on the wings of their, undoubtedly superior, intellects – intellects, many of whom, having “risen” without the vexing influence of much formal education.

Lets cut to the chase.

Conservatives are on the verge of pissing away all that they have worked for, and they are doing so simply because they are reacting to headlines and stories contrived to sow internecine warfare. They are taking the bilge dished out by the DNC because, for some deep-seated pathological reason, Republicans and conservatives innately believe that their leaders will sell them out - it is almost a matter of faith. In this case they are making a preemptive strike and dropping their loyalty at the time when it is most desperately needed.

The formerly much feared conservative shock troops are now in a near autistic state of self-flagellation, which if not checked could well result in the demise of this movement and indeed this republic.

You heard me, the DEMISE of this republic – under what passes for Democrat leadership, this Nation has a less than 50-50 chance of surviving to 2010 – greenhouse gasses be damned.

Last week the Bush administration issued new surveillance guidelines allowing the FBI to monitor public Internet sites as well as attend church and political meetings to help prevent acts of terrorism.

The broadside from the ACLU was to be expected; the idiotic response on “civil liberties” grounds by the right - again driven by the lunatic element in talk radio - was not.

It was neither appreciated, called for, nor in any way justifiable.

Why now?

Ok we will tell you - the Islamic Jihad already has some version of the ATOMIC BOMB or are imminently close to having it or another similar psychologically devastating weapon of mass destruction – the actual mechanism is not that important.

That’s right, no we don’t have sources that close to the scene, but most anyone should be able to read the tea leaves.

The delivery of such a horrendous weapon, wielded against, let’s say the White House and/or Congress could conceivably throw us into a death spiral and ignite a worldwide thermonuclear exchange.

For some mysterious reason the so-called conservative movement has contracted an early onset of senile dementia - not only betraying their president in wartime but also abandoning their party when their poker hand consists of four aces.

The problem is not in the Bush administration abandoning conservative principles, the problem is that many self appointed leaders of conservatism - drawing from the Jessie Jackson/Al Sharpton playbook - are elevating their own agendas over that of this Nation.

The left would just as soon see a major commercial center nuked as lose in 2004, as long as they can lay the blame on the Republican Party.

Bottom line:

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.

Suck it up, gut it out and start standing up to the left [and gently – if possible – our lost sheep on the right] to do otherwise cedes the battle to the enemy.

That is simply unacceptable.

© PipeBombNews.com, all rights reserved.



TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bush; daschle; democratperfidy; mediabias; partisanship
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-97 next last
On a roll, I think.
1 posted on 06/04/2002 9:20:43 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
To destroy the Bush administration by any means and at all costs.

No truer words have been spoken (in the past 24 hours, anyway.)

2 posted on 06/04/2002 9:22:31 AM PDT by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
bump
3 posted on 06/04/2002 9:26:22 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
Thanks for a commonsense article!
4 posted on 06/04/2002 9:32:04 AM PDT by dvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
Bump...
5 posted on 06/04/2002 9:33:31 AM PDT by eureka!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
This guy can kiss my red white and blue butt.

I will NEVER vote for or against someone for national security reasons.

I will vote because the candidate is the best man for the job.

This piece is an insult to all Americans.

6 posted on 06/04/2002 9:34:07 AM PDT by Vladiator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
Great article. It ought to be required reading around here.
7 posted on 06/04/2002 9:39:29 AM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #8 Removed by Moderator

To: johnqueuepublic
this guy's writing style sucks.
9 posted on 06/04/2002 9:48:12 AM PDT by Exnihilo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic; miss marple, howlin, hc hutch, blackie, dixie chick 2000
An interesting article that appears to be right on target re our PPE ers!
10 posted on 06/04/2002 9:51:52 AM PDT by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
Darn right! Keep pinging me on this!
11 posted on 06/04/2002 9:56:35 AM PDT by hchutch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
Thanks, Grampa! Well worth the read!
12 posted on 06/04/2002 9:58:24 AM PDT by dixiechick2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rintense
Agreed. Since the talibannis were crushed, I've believed there won't be another large scale terrorist attack. The terrorists hoped for the same quagmire that the democrats and journalists (but I repeat myself) longed for. A quagmire that would work against the Bush Administration and in their favor. Another WTC scale attack would skyrocket Bush's popularity, probably into the 90s-his re-election being a certainty. Neither the terrorist, media nor democrats want this. So now the terrorists are content to sit back, watch and hope for the media to destroy Bush. Then after some demowimp like Gore or Lieberman or some other loser is in office in '04, they can attack again. And sit and laugh it up as Gore apologizes for America's bad foreign policy and asks the UN to make Al-qaeda and Bin Laden sit in the time-out chair.
13 posted on 06/04/2002 10:01:57 AM PDT by wny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vladiator
On earth, what the heck does that mean?

National security isnt important?

okfyne

14 posted on 06/04/2002 10:04:02 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rintense
Yep
15 posted on 06/04/2002 10:04:24 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dvan
Welcome
16 posted on 06/04/2002 10:04:49 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
Maybe required is a mite too strong, lol.
17 posted on 06/04/2002 10:05:31 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rightuvu
U are correctomundo, I think.
18 posted on 06/04/2002 10:06:07 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: wny
Time out chair - priceless!
19 posted on 06/04/2002 10:06:56 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dixiechick2000, johnqueuepublic; miss marple, howlin, hc hutch, blackie, rintense
Bookmark this and use it whenever the so called coresiders wants us to commit national suicide because their guy lost big time in 2000 and our guy is doing great in 2002!

These so called Core Conservatives can commit mass suicide if they want to, however, they are not pulling me along with them.

This is why they are so upset with the soccer moms and Jewish Americans coming over to GW. The soccer moms saw what happened on 9/11, and the Jewish Americans not only saw that, they know that every Jew is earmarked for death by the Islamic thugs. So these two groups are gathering around GW for the survival of their families. The coresiders are trying to make that choice appear to be evil. This makes them even more mentally ill.

The suicidal corers hate them for this and us since 9/12 for the same reasons.

20 posted on 06/04/2002 10:08:03 AM PDT by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Vladiator
Never underestimate the power and agenda of the media!
21 posted on 06/04/2002 10:09:51 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
Are Bush's defenders milking the War on Terror for political gain? Obviously.
22 posted on 06/04/2002 10:11:04 AM PDT by Belial
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
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.

23 posted on 06/04/2002 10:14:16 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Belial
Back it up.
24 posted on 06/04/2002 10:14:59 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Belial
Did you fall for it when Clinton Milked Your Pain?
25 posted on 06/04/2002 10:16:27 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
Ron Paul in 2004
26 posted on 06/04/2002 10:19:23 AM PDT by WhiteGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #27 Removed by Moderator

To: johnqueuepublic
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.
28 posted on 06/04/2002 10:24:37 AM PDT by Hoosier Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
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!

29 posted on 06/04/2002 10:26:15 AM PDT by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
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

30 posted on 06/04/2002 10:28:29 AM PDT by Tuor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Belial
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.
31 posted on 06/04/2002 10:29:02 AM PDT by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

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

Well put!

32 posted on 06/04/2002 10:41:06 AM PDT by caprock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
You look pretty silly, with your fingers in your ears mouthing obvious propaganda and coming up with nonsensical jargon.
33 posted on 06/04/2002 10:46:52 AM PDT by Belial
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
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.

34 posted on 06/04/2002 11:11:01 AM PDT by swarthyguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tuor
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.

35 posted on 06/04/2002 11:12:40 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: swarthyguy
Ron Paul has done exactly what?

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

36 posted on 06/04/2002 11:14:16 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
He asked for some kind of a formal declaration; not quite of war but specific to find osama and destroying alqaeda.
37 posted on 06/04/2002 11:20:05 AM PDT by swarthyguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
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

38 posted on 06/04/2002 11:30:02 AM PDT by Tuor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Tuor
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.

39 posted on 06/04/2002 11:38:45 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Tuor
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
40 posted on 06/04/2002 11:40:26 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
They are taking the bilge dished out by the DNC because, for some deep-seated pathological reason, Republicans and conservatives innately believe that their leaders will sell them out - it is almost a matter of faith.

Well, gee, past experience wouldn't have anything to do with that, would it?

41 posted on 06/04/2002 11:46:40 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
A good read, but who the heck are Pipe Bomb News?

Two consecutive terms of GWB would be nice, but Condi four years ahead of schedule would be OK too.

42 posted on 06/04/2002 11:49:39 AM PDT by Salman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vladiator
vote for or against someone for national security reasons

That's right. If a Democrat gets in instead of Bush in 2004, he might be far tougher on Alqaida and the others than Bush is. When military action is required, party doesn't matter at all.

43 posted on 06/04/2002 11:54:16 AM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

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

I really need to look up the history and legality of Letters of Mark, which, I believe, were placed on individuals.

Unlike you, I *do* care whether or not war has actually been declared. There are checks and balances in place regarding these things, and simply ignoring them out of expedience is not right or proper (or legal) IMO. Obviously, our government doesn't think so, but it should.

The idea the founding fathers had on war was this: the president would fight the wars, but could not declare them and could not sustain them: that was the job of the Legislative Branch.

It will not do for us to abandon our own laws, merely because they are inconvienent, in order to fight in a non-traditional war. One of the nice things about declaring war is that you have to identify an enemy, and once the enemy is defeated, the war is over. Perhaps this is why no war has been declared: we have no fixed enemy and the war will never end.

Tuor

44 posted on 06/04/2002 11:57:05 AM PDT by Tuor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Salman
You could go there and find out

http://www.pipebombnews.com

45 posted on 06/04/2002 11:59:16 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Tuor
With all due deference, I think you are losing sight of the big picture, what if the bad guys already have nukes? You want to fool around with technicalities and find out that your precious con rights are preserved but 3 cities got nuked in the process?

This is serious!

46 posted on 06/04/2002 12:01:25 PM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
??????

Tough as in Clinton allowing 4 attack by bin laden and doing nothing but throwina few cruise missiles at him 3 days after the Paula Jones grand jury testimony?

47 posted on 06/04/2002 12:02:51 PM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
Not talking about aberrations like that one. Talking about normal people.
48 posted on 06/04/2002 12:12:43 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
The last democrat that would have responded like you would want was probably LBJ and he has assumed room temperature.

Daschle?(that little fairy?)Gephardt? (maybe) Nadler? (puhhhleeze)Kennedy?(is he sober?)Preacher Joe L (ya right)Bwaney Fwank ($#%^&**)

No, aint gonna happen.

49 posted on 06/04/2002 12:16:21 PM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
Very well said, JohnQ! I am increasingly worried that the Limbaughs, Hannitys, Drudges, Kristols, et. al. of the chattering classes (along with the obvious Dem underhanded selective leak campaign) will stampede many to the right of center to abandon President Bush. It's not too difficult to do since far too many people do not use healthy skepticism when digesting media hype. Stampeding much of the base was successfully done before by Perot, Buchanan and various willing media shills, leading to eight years of the most negligent administration in our history.

It was under Clinton that Al Queda grew into the dangerous monster it is today, and when Pakistan acquired nuclear weapons technology from the Red Chinese. Bin Laden, himself, said on one of his videos that the nearly non-existant response from Clinton is what convinced him to undertake his bold stroke on 9/11/01. Bin Laden believed we were too weak to respond.

You are exactly right that the chatterers have their own agendas. In the case of talk radio hosts, probably to demonstrate independence from the Republican Party and show they can carp against Republicans just as easily as they can against Democrats. Controversy gins up ratings. In the case of Drudge, self-promotion. In the case of Kristol and his ilk, who knows.

Precisely because I am very fearful that a repeat of 1992 will lead to increased strengthing of radical Islam, late yesterday evening I posted this information about the media. I'm linking it to your thread because it is apropos your subject. A very important one, at that.

50 posted on 06/04/2002 12:18:08 PM PDT by Wolfstar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-97 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson