Dec 20 2006
US Attacking Al Qaeda, While Zawahiri Attacks Democracy
The news out today that Al Qaeda’s number two is upset at signs of democracy in Palestine is interesting. It reinforces the view that it is not Bush that caused Al Qaeda to attack the US (since 1991) but freedom. Zawahiri also was quite clear in reminding Democrats and spineless Reps that if they want to surrender Iraq they must talk to Al Qaeda and not these regional puppet regimes. Too funny. Maybe Sen Nelson should go and meet with Zawahiri, and complete is transformation into the modern Neville Chamberlain. He can tell Zawahiri we admit that we over reacted to 9-11 and that all we want is for his people to run the ME in a way that doesn’t make it hard on Congress to face the voters every two years. And while Democrats and other surrender-at-all-costs types are working to lose in the ME, the effort continues apace to destroy Al Qaeda one terrorist at a time – as we just captured the Al Qaeda leader in Mosul. So which path does America prefer: surrender or success? Well only the truly clueless would get the answer to that one wrong.
you should at least read them,
Where is that required?
It doesn’t seem to do you any good, most of them are in English and you are having a hell of a time interpreting them into French, then trying to explain them in English. Just write them in French, they would make more sense that way.
http://tailrank.com/941655/Sen-Gordon-Smith-R-OR-Calls-Bush-s-Iraq-Policy-a-Dereliction-and-Deeply-Immoral
as the Senator said, you’re wanting them to stay in Iraq and follow Bush policy is “immoral.”
you should at least read them,
“Where is that required?”
it’s required for serious political commentary but no one could mistake your commentary for serious…
“You can interpret that into French as: it’s a quotation.”
It’s not a quotation of me,which is what you claimed,lying senile boy.
Who was that Senator? bet it was one of your liberal guys. I didn’t check your liberal rag link
By the way, I have no problem with American troops being in Iraq. I have a problem if they get hurt, but unlike you, the price of freedom ain’t free. I spent my time, in uniform, in many, many foreign countries and with all kinds of conditions. I felt like it was an honor and wouldn’t have had it any other way. It is an all volunteer force and they are doing what they volunteered to do, and I’m sure the majority of them would not have it any other way.
unlike some C. S. cowards I’m wasting my time talking tol
You’re not ignoring me, as you vowed to do, senile boy. Only
piling on inanities and wrongly defined words and , if we were public figures, libel.
“and I’m sure the majority of them would not have it any other way.”
The Zogby Poll of US soldiers in February showed 73% wanted to call it quits and exit Iraq by December 2006 if Iraq was not pacified…it’s worse than ever and you’re wrong again…
http://www.zogby.com/NEWS/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075
72% wanted out ,that is.
but you want them to stay and be killed for what they conceded in the poll would be a no-win proposition if not successful by this month…
you’re anti-troop and anti-American.
just an old superannuated specimen who doesn’t relate to today’s servicepeople, or empathize with him.
you should be ashamed of devaluing their lives and their opinions
The poll also shows they do not share your view that they helping keep America “free” by being in Iraq–but you could care less, you know better.
Ken you said:no one could mistake your commentary for serious…
Unlike what you write which they would not even mistake as commentary. Just lies.
People that have served their country in uniform are not anti-troop or anti- American, but you know what, when you say it it takes on a whole new meaning because since EVERYONE (except Gil) that reads what you say is wrong, know that you are just as wrong on that.
But coming from a CS coward like you, it’s an honor.
Keep on dazzling us with your display of ignorant BS
For Enforcement
“People that have served their country in uniform are not anti-troop or anti- American, but you know what, when you say it it takes on a whole new meaning because since EVERYONE (except Gil) that reads what you say is wrong, know that you are just as wrong on that.”
Didn’t you call the hero Jack Murtha all of that and worse? You’re
a hypocritical s.o.b. but semility excuses it I suppose.
http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Ask_this.view&askthisid=129
Let’s take advantage of the senile boy’s praise of the military
by referencing him to CONSERVATIVE General William
Odum who has opposed the war and has called for the troops’
exit since 2003, saying the war in unwinnable. In the past
the senile boy has called even military who aggressively opposed
the war “liberals” if not traitors. Let’s see if the senile boy can
summon up a modicum of respect for conservative General
Odum whose opinions are typified in the above 2005 interview.
Conservative General Odom’s arguments must have impressed
FE, no response for a day.