Skip to comments.Al Qaeda's Wet Dream - One Term
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 cows 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.
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.
Thats right, no we dont 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, lets 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.
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.
No truer words have been spoken (in the past 24 hours, anyway.)
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.
National security isnt important?
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.
That is a very good use of language, and accurately describes the ideologues who can't see beyond their own backyards.
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!
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.
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.
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.
Kinda reminds me of Larry Klayman without the charisma and without the judicial success.
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.
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.
Well, gee, past experience wouldn't have anything to do with that, would it?
Two consecutive terms of GWB would be nice, but Condi four years ahead of schedule would be OK too.
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.
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.
This is serious!
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?
Daschle?(that little fairy?)Gephardt? (maybe) Nadler? (puhhhleeze)Kennedy?(is he sober?)Preacher Joe L (ya right)Bwaney Fwank ($#%^&**)
No, aint gonna happen.
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.