Al Qaeda endorses Bush/Cheney 2004
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...c&e=2&ncid=721
No surprises here. Since Bush has been president, al qaeda (and others) have stepped up their activities; terrorist incidents in many parts of the world have skyrocketed.
The next few months will be fascinating to watch the two approaches on the "war on terror" battle it out:
In the right corner, there is the reactionary, unilateral Bush method, cherrypicking its terror groups while ignoring others, relying on brute force and military might, often going after unnecessary targets, thereby resulting in more anger, antagonism and alienation, while playing into the hands of terrorists (real appeasement), and giving them fodder for more attacks.
....and in the left corner there is the approach of for example France, Russia, Germany etc etc and now Spain, where the emphasis is on intensive and ongoing intelligence and police work via the security services, while cultivating friends and allies internationally so the whole world can go after *every* terror group, (and hopefully simultaneously actively preventing the type of conditions in nations that give rise to terror groups as well), rather than diverting attention from the real problems at hand by actions such as engaging in an oil war...which has done nothing but set back the "war on terror". Only today, another massive car bomb killed 28 in Baghdad.....
One day, someone at the head of a US administration will get around to addressing the real menace: Saudi Arabia. You can bet your ass that it will never, ever be Bush.
No surprises here. Since Bush has been president, al qaeda (and others) have stepped up their activities; terrorist incidents in many parts of the world have skyrocketed.
The next few months will be fascinating to watch the two approaches on the "war on terror" battle it out:
In the right corner, there is the reactionary, unilateral Bush method, cherrypicking its terror groups while ignoring others, relying on brute force and military might, often going after unnecessary targets, thereby resulting in more anger, antagonism and alienation, while playing into the hands of terrorists (real appeasement), and giving them fodder for more attacks.
....and in the left corner there is the approach of for example France, Russia, Germany etc etc and now Spain, where the emphasis is on intensive and ongoing intelligence and police work via the security services, while cultivating friends and allies internationally so the whole world can go after *every* terror group, (and hopefully simultaneously actively preventing the type of conditions in nations that give rise to terror groups as well), rather than diverting attention from the real problems at hand by actions such as engaging in an oil war...which has done nothing but set back the "war on terror". Only today, another massive car bomb killed 28 in Baghdad.....
One day, someone at the head of a US administration will get around to addressing the real menace: Saudi Arabia. You can bet your ass that it will never, ever be Bush.
Comments
Originally posted by Outsider
The question is, how can Bush spin this in his favor? Should be interesting.
He won't have to. 99.9% of America will never hear about this.
Originally posted by Outsider
The question is, how can Bush spin this in his favor? Should be interesting.
A vote for Kerry is a vote for the terrorists.
Originally posted by HOM
A vote for Kerry is a vote for the terrorists.
Cause, you know, he's such a flip-flopper that in the event of another terrorist attack on US soil he would just start wringing his hands and crying "What should I do?! What should I do?!"
Originally posted by HOM
A vote for Kerry is a vote for the terrorists.
You blind republican. They want bush to win because bush uses brute force and not thinking thats why bush went to iraq. So bin laden can't easily attack the un with most of its troops in iraq and the un defensless. Kerry would use his wisom to see wre the true threat was. Bin laden wuld have aharder time ataacking the un.
No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam.
George W. Bush
White House Press Conference
March 6th, 2003
After insisting for a week that it would force a vote in the Council, the White House has over the last few days waffled about its intentions Today, administration officials did not rule out the possibility that the three leaders would decide on Sunday to abandon the resolution altogether.
The New York Times
March 15th, 2003
The United States, Britain and Spain at the United Nations _ facing certain defeat in the Security Council _ announced they would withdraw their resolution setting a deadline for full Iraqi disarmament and authorizing war.
Knight-Ridder
March 18th, 2003
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/arc...07.html#002679
Originally posted by HOM
A vote for Kerry is a vote for the terrorists.
That is how they will spin it: the terrorists want Bush to win because they like war . . . and Bush will say "Bring It On" . . . . and Americans like Ahnold . . . and so they don't want to vote in some 'smarty-pants-sissy-face!' just because the Terrorists 'Say' that they want Bush to win . . . .etc etc . . .
BTW, of course they want Bush to win: he is proving their idiot-points, and so, are probably getting flocks of idiots
Originally posted by quagmire
You blind republican. They want bush to win because bush uses brute force and not thinking thats why bush went to iraq. So bin laden can't easily attack the un with most of its troops in iraq and the un defensless. Kerry would use his wisom to see wre the true threat was. Bin laden wuld have aharder time ataacking the un.
Um, it's called CONTEXT .
Originally posted by Messiahtosh
This simply goes to show that Al Queda wishes to confuse the American people. By saying this they make the dumb people vote Kerry, the smart people vote Bush, because the "smart" people will see through this and say, "Obviously they want Kerry because he's a softy on defense.'' Then again, it is possible that they truly want what they say they want...Nahh, they are terrorists.
Ooook. What are you? 14?
i wonder if terrorists might lie and murder innocent people.....
Originally posted by alcimedes
hmm.
i wonder if terrorists might lie and murder innocent people.....
Nope, it's a fact that terrorists cannot tell a lie.
Originally posted by Messiahtosh
This simply goes to show that Al Queda wishes to confuse the American people. By saying this they make the dumb people vote Kerry, the smart people vote Bush, because the "smart" people will see through this and say, "Obviously they want Kerry because he's a softy on defense.'' Then again, it is possible that they truly want what they say they want...Nahh, they are terrorists.
. . . . yeah . . .and and . . .they're thinking that people will say 'They want Bush to win but they are liars so they want Kerry to win' because they think we think they are liars and so they know we will think they really want Kerry but when its really Kerry that they want to win . . . because a vote for Kerry is a vote for . . . and um . . . . and those darn Democrats . . . golly I just want . . . um golly . . .and
Originally posted by HOM
A vote for Kerry is a vote for the terrorists.
How so?
Originally posted by dmz
At least none of this involves a ground war in Asia.
ROR
Locked
Fellowship