Thursday, April 13, 2006

al-Qaida No. 2 Says 'Enemy' Is Faltering

Just read a few lines of this article:

Al-Qaida's deputy leader Ayman al-Zawahri urged all Muslims to support insurgents fighting in Iraq "for the dignity of Islam" and said the "enemy has begun to falter," according to a video posted Thursday on the Internet.

"The Islamic nation must support the heroic mujahedeen (holy warriors) in Iraq, who are fighting on the very front line for the dignity of Islam," al-Zawahri said.

"And to my brother mujahedeen in Iraq, I say, Stay firm. Stay together. Your enemy has begun to falter, so don't stop pursuing him until he flees defeated," he said.

Is this the group of people you liberals want to "talk to" and "reason with?"
Are these the people you want running the middle east?
It is amazing how wrong you on the Left can be on this issue...if we "flee defeated" these Islamic extremist will run Iraq, and going together with other extremists. We are being mocked, told that we will run away scared...they know about the Democratic party.

This seems to be a standard response for the away from Iraq, run away from immigration, run away from social security.

Please GOP, be the adults in congress and understand what is happening. Al Qaida is waiting for the Liberals to defeat the United States...they know they can not do it. We need to fight for the people we said we would save...they trust us, and we are going to let the liberals betray them.


Jim said...

Once again, Game, you attempt to slander your oppositioin with a FALSE premise. You use this OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. There is nobody on the left, no democrat, no liberal who wants to "talk to" and "reason with" al-Zawahri. Nobody. It's a LIE to say that any liberal of any significance wants to "reason" with any terrorist. They want to kill them.

The left isn't running away from immigration any more than the right is. They are working to find a fair solution. Neither side can claim any righteousness over the other. To say otherwise is just another slander.

The left isn't running away from Social Security. They can read the SSA website like anybody else and see that minor adjustments will be sufficient to pay full benefits for decades to come. There is NOT ONE proposal by Bush or Republics that will do anything to solve even the claimed but misleading "problems" with Social Security. Hey, the Republics held both houses and the White House. Why didn't they pass Social Security "reform"?

The left is not running away from Iraq. They are rethinking a policy that was dreamed up by idealogues and is being carried out by an incompetent executive.

You can try to slime your opposition all you want. Every day they are being proven right.

The Game said...

Immigration situation stinks for everyone...both sides...

we have talked about the SS issue...many have commented agaist your claims...

And how is leaving Iraq not running away Jim? What do liberals want to do about Muslim extremists....where is the proof? Where is the loud outcry to kill terrorists? You can't get a pass on way.

I do not want to let your side get control and let Iran get nuclear weapons, and let the middle east turn into crap, and let illegal immigrants take over...

Jim said...

I suppose many have commented on my claims. Many have also burped coca cola up their noses. Nobody has successfully refuted what I have cited from multiple sources including the Social Security Administration website.

If you were stupid enough to walk into a fire and realized that it was hot, starting to burn your flesh off your bones, and no amount of pissing on it would do any good, would you "stay the course" or would you back away from the fire? If you backed away from the fire, would you be be a coward? Would you be cutting and running? Or would you be smart enough to rethink your original very stupid decision to walk into the fire?

You know Game, just because you don't read it or hear it, doesn't mean it hasn't been said. Every liberal and democrat in the country has said that the terrorists should be hunted down and killed. There is not one who has suggested we negotiate with terrorists or fanatics. To claim that Democrats want to negotiate with terrorists is just the same old slander.

The Game said...

YOu might actually be right Jim, Democrats might "say" they want to kill terrorist...but then they don't DO anything to kill terrorists...

I'll comment more on the next post...

Espella Humanzee said...

Jim has a selective memory. The many of the left, like Michael Moore, have lovingly called the insurgents Iraq's "Minute Men". Moore has openly wished for our troop's failure in Iraq. Just peruse DU or Kos for the hate for our soldiers.

The immigration will bite the left in the ass. Dems are openly trolling for votes at pro-illegal rallies. I seen the leaflets here in Dallas. Which means they are attempting voter fraud. "Brown" is the new "Black".

Don't you just love this "what, me?" from the left. Jim is the bast at playing the selective memory game. The left has stood in the way of every solution that was proposed for SS. It's not slimming when it's the truth.

Jim said...

What exactly are Republics doing to kill terrorists that Democrats are not, Game?

And Game, the Republics have proposed no solutions for Social Security. They have only proposed alternatives to Social Security -- alternatives specifically designed to destroy Social Security. Alternatives that will add trillions of dollars to the national debt while doing nothing to improve the solvency of Social Security.

The Game said...

man EH, you really threw the facts out there...we see that Jim has no response for you...

The Left is 100% against this war and fighting terrorists...many have come out (like fat ass) and basically cheer when Americans are killed because it furthers their makes true Americans sick

Jim said...

Game, you are so funny! Hilarious, really. Facts? There are no facts presented here but mine. Everything else is slimey lies.

Jason H. Bowden said...

"There is nobody on the left, no democrat, no liberal who wants to "talk to" and "reason with" al-Zawahri."

This is total bullshit. Endless talk is the modus operandi of the Democrat party. They think talk and reason will end Ahmadinejad's suicidal delusions. They would rather talk with Hussein in charge of Iraq than remove him from power. And with the terrorists trying to overthrow the democratic government in Iraq -- liberals just want to talk and reason with the terrorists, instead of doing the right thing, which is supporting Iraqi democrats.

If 5% of Iraqis voted in the last election, maybe I'd understand Jim's position. But come on -- 67% of them voted in the last election! It would be criminal to let this majority fight the jihadists and the Hussein loyalists alone.

But Dems think it is courageous to be intimidated by jihadist terror. In contrast, here's what the President had to say on September 11th:

"Our reliance is in the love of liberty which God has planted in our bosoms. Our defense is in the preservation of the spirit which prizes liberty as the heritage of all men, in all lands, everywhere. Destroy this spirit, and you have planted the seeds of despotism around your own doors." -- Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865), from Speech at Edwardsville, Illinois, September 11, 1858
Collected Works Volume III p. 95

Jim said...

Jason, again you attempt to smear the Democrats without presenting one shred of evidence.

Furthermore, you apparently lack the capacity to distinguish leaders of sovereign nations who may support terrorism from the terrorists themselves.

No Democrat advocates talking and reasoning with the terrorists. Terrorists have little or nothing to lose by continuing whatever terrorist activities they are engaging in. Democrats have always advocating hunting down and killing terrorists.

On the other hand, the median age of the population of Iran is 24 years old. They are young and connected to the outside world through cell phones, the Interenet and such. The country of Iran is an educated and relatively modern society. They do not live in desperation. They have much to lose if they become involved in a war with the US or Israel.

The political leader of Iran is a saber-rattler, much like our own leader. It is unknown how much power he actually has compared to the Imams.

In short where there is an interest in self-preservation, where there is a understanding of the consequences of action vis-a-vis the interests of the nation, there is leverage to find a political and economic solution to issues before a military one.

Now, Jason, do you believe we should attack Iran now?

Iraq last voted, what, 4 months ago? Yet they cannot seem to form a government. Many of the top military officers and civilian leaders have said there is no longer a military solution in Iraq. The solution is that the Iraqis must form a government that the people believe is worth working, fighting, and dying for. How many more glorious votes is that going to take?

You said, "But Dems think it is courageous to be intimidated by jihadist terror." This is an unsupportable, slanderous lie.

Jason H. Bowden said...

Jim --

You do believe we can talk and reason with Ahmadinejad. Don't pretend like you don't. The man believes he was appointed by Allah to lead the final jihad against the infidels to bring about the return of the 12th Imam. Mutually Assured Destruction is his GOAL. It doesn't matter to him or the Mullahs if Israel retaliates against Iran with the Samson option -- one bomb in Tel Aviv, and then Hamas, Syria and everyone else can move in and liquidate the remaining Jews living in Jerusalem and so forth..

This is what these people want to do. Don't be a Neville Chamberlain and claim we can reason with suicidal Hitlers. I believe it was Voltaire that remarked one can't reason a man out of what he wasn't reasoned into.

And don't get me started on Iraq. You guys want to abandon, yes, ADANDON the 67% of the Iraqi public who voted in face of violence in the elections. Why? Because the terrorists are killing people -- that is what your fire metaphor represents. If that isn't giving into terror, I don't know what is.

Jim said...

Uh, Jason, most experts agree that the insurgency in Iraq is only about 10% terrorists and non-Iraqis. That would mean that 90% of the insurgency are actually Iraqis who don't like what's going on in their own country.

Like many national leaders (like our own, for instance) Ahmadinejad may very well be saying things for effect. You know, like, "We can't wait for the smoking gun which may come in the form of a mushroom cloud."

If you will actually take some time to think through the ramifications of the several alternatives, you might realize that attacking Iran could produce results which would have catasrophic effects on US interests in the Middle East, not to mention the US itself.

Iran will not have nuclear weapons nor the ability to deliver them for some time. In the meantime, YOUR leaders are actually looking for ways to show Ahmadinejad that carrying out his threats against Israel and its allies is not worth it.

Jason H. Bowden said...


You do want to talk and reason with terrorists. This is not a "false premise" as you stated in your opening post, but a clear representation of your position.

A very large majority of Iraqis voted in the recent elections. There is no reason to let terrorists, homegrown or not, overthrow the nascent Iraqi democracy. That would be inconsistent with who I am as a person and who we are as a nation. Don't stab the Iraqis in the back just so you can gratify your hippie impulse to stab America in the back.

Ahmadinejad cannot be reasoned with. Not every human being acts solely on evidence and logic -- some are motivated by paranoid conspiracy theories, obsessive hatreds, a longing for a precapitalist medieval past, religious fanaticism, and a taste for murder and death. In Ahmadinejad's case, it is all of the above. To compare Bush to this guy is just another example of liberal lunacy.

Mark Steyn in his recent column really makes fun of your position--

"You know what's great fun to do if you're on, say, a flight from Chicago to New York and you're getting a little bored? Why not play being President Ahmadinejad? Stand up and yell in a loud voice, "I've got a bomb!" Next thing you know the air marshal will be telling people, "It's OK, folks. Nothing to worry about. He hasn't got a bomb." And then the second marshal would say, "And even if he did have a bomb it's highly unlikely he'd ever use it." And then you threaten to kill the two Jews in row 12 and the stewardess says, "Relax, everyone. That's just a harmless rhetorical flourish." And then a group of passengers in rows 4 to 7 point out, "Yes, but it's entirely reasonable of him to have a bomb given the threatening behavior of the marshals and the cabin crew."

Jim said...

Jason, you sometimes have something interesting and occasionally compelling to say. So, I'm sorry to be blunt, but I have to respond to this:

"Don't stab the Iraqis in the back just so you can gratify your hippie impulse to stab America in the back."

With don't be an absurd jackass! Anything else you have to say after that comment is ignored as it should be.