Apr 27 2007

Bush vs Dems On al Qaeda

Published by at 11:51 am under All General Discussions,Iraq

We are starting to see the vast differences in approach to the war on terror between the Dems and Bush. First off, it is clear the Dems would have surrendered Iraq to al Qaeda years ago, giving Bin Laden his oil rich base of operations. Second, the Dems would have shutdown GITMO and provided all the terrorists ACLU lawyers after transferring these animals to the US. And finally, the CIA would not be used to interrogate enemy combatants to determine what plans are afoot to kill our people or soldiers. So when we see that the US has captured a top al Qaeda leader coordinating the Iraqi efforts with Bin Laden, it is important to understand how things would pan out under the Surrendercrats [in bold-italics]:

An Iraqi al Qaeda member accused of assassination plots against Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and other attacks was transferred by the CIA to the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo this week, the Pentagon said on Friday. [The ACLU defense council met with the alleged al Qaeda member after being flown from Iraq to Washington DC]

Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi was also accused of commanding al Qaeda’s paramilitary operations in Afghanistan and launching attacks on U.S. and coalition forces from Pakistan, the Defense Department said. [The ACLU defense maintains their client was not associated with any attacks on US or coalition forces in Afghanistan, that their client had never beend to Pakistan, and that he was a simple Muslim.]

Al-Hadi was detained trying to get back into Iraq to “manage al Qaeda’s affairs” there, according to Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman. [The ACLU defense also maintains their client was simply visiting business assocates in Iraq when he tried to enter that country. al-Hadi is believed to be one of the last defendants to be caputered in Iraq prior to the forced withdrawal of US forces from that country 2 years ago.]

With al-Hadi, the Pentagon is now holding 15 men it considers “high-value detainees” – a classification that indicates U.S. officials believe the capture had a significant effect on al Qaeda operations and the prisoner is capable of providing high-quality intelligence. [The ACLU is now representing 15 middle eastern businessmen accused of aiding al Qaeda by US military forces. It is expected their trials will last at least five years.]

The world under Democrat leadership would be one where terrorists are afforded more rights than their victims…..

4 responses so far

4 Responses to “Bush vs Dems On al Qaeda”

  1. scaulen says:

    Outstanding post, good comparison, and great news about a big fish that’s going to be singing pretty in soon.

  2. Soothsayer says:

    a big fish that’s going to be singing pretty

    Monica Goodling with immunity?

    Condi Rice under oath in the House?

    Alberto Gonzales in Round 2, Senate Judiciary Committee?

    Harriet Miers?

    Andrew Card?

    Which one will the singing fish be?

  3. MerlinOS2 says:

    Sooth

    Why do you quote only those you envy?

  4. scaulen says:

    SS:
    Your arguments are narrow and political, prime example of Democratic thinking.