'Today': Terrorists Attempting To Influence US Elections With Current Violence Wave

[GaryC 7]

Posted by Mark Finkelstein on October 19, 2006 - 08:06.

Amidst all the MSM reports about this being the deadliest month for US troops in Iraq in a long time, there was a stunning bit of candor today from NBC reporter Richard Engel suggesting this is not mere coincidence, but a conscious effort by the terrorists to elect Democrats.

At the end of his report on this morning's 'Today' on the situation in Iraq, having spoken with US soliders, Engel reported:

"They believe insurgents are intensifying attacks against American soldiers now in an attempt to influence November's mid-term elections."

Shouldn't it give Americans pause to consider that in the eyes of our men on the ground, our enemy wants to see the Democrats take power?

Perhaps George Soros will sponsor a new MTV series: 'Rocket-Grenade The Vote'.

http://newsbusters.org/node/8439

Yes, I know this is from a conservative site but what was said was what was said.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

...and in other news...

[GaryC 7]

Uh huh, so you really don't have anything to say except that you don't believe it then. Look at the curve of violence. It went up as the election draws near. The terrorist would love nothing more than to have the dems control things because they know that the dems want to cut and run and let them win.

[Marc and Olga 0]

Uh huh, so you really don't have anything to say except that you don't believe it then. Look at the curve of violence. It went up as the election draws near. The terrorist would love nothing more than to have the dems control things because they know that the dems want to cut and run and let them win.

You know, there is no proof that it will deminish after the elections regardless of which side wins.

Imagine, if you will a pot of water on the stove, does it instantaneously start to boil or does it start slowly and increase over time?

The Iraqis have held the belief that we would make Iraq a better place for them, that is partly what we promised them but 3 years after the wars end, they have receive little to none of what they had expected. Remember this thread?, the story that people who were qualified to aid in the reconstruction of Iraq were turned away/fired and replaced with under and unqualified people whose primary qualifications were...they supported Bush.

Maybe...just maybe the rise in violence is attributed to the rising frustration of the Iraqi people who are only now venting that frustration against the most available source of that frustration.

I would guess the reason the source is a conservative site is because they are scared and trying to blame everything on the upcoming elections and what the outcome may be!

I cannot wait to hear that Jon Stewart was right, North Korea timed their nuke test so the Dems would win! He was, of course joking...but it would not suprise me to hear it from an "official" source.

And after the elections I wonder how many times we will hear this "I didn’t lose the election; Foley lost it for me"

[kaydee457 13]

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to connect the dots. Of course they have increased the violence to attempt to affect the elections as they see the democrats as the likely party to hand them a victory over time.

Why you ask? Because the democrats, time and again, have demonstrated their willingness to just bail out of Iraq and Afghanisitan. The insurgents seem to be learning from past history.

They know, having referred to our history in Vietnam, that we will eventually cut'n run..........Or so is the democratic strategy.

[heishe 2]

This was on NPR too. It's not just conservative sources saying it. Apparently some of the terrorist organizations in Iraq are telling their followers to target Westerners specifically to influence the election.

I'm voting Democrat. It doesn't matter what the enemy wants. Nobody's gonna "cut and run;" I rather think the Democrats might do a better job of cleaning up this mess. It's the piss poor Republican administration that's caused this civil war in the first place.

And conservatives hate George Soros now? Good god.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to connect the dots. Of course they have increased the violence to attempt to affect the elections as they see the democrats as the likely party to hand them a victory over time.

Why you ask? Because the democrats, time and again, have demonstrated their willingness to just bail out of Iraq and Afghanisitan. The insurgents seem to be learning from past history.

They know, having referred to our history in Vietnam, that we will eventually cut'n run..........Or so is the democratic strategy.

Lulz, are you saying we should have stayed in Vietnam and Republicans would have done just that? And Democrats are bailing out of Afghanistan? The Department of Education just cut funding for Central/South Asian language study. Is that run by Democrats?

[Veiled Princess 1]

OH wow so if you vote democrat you must be a terrorist...

Wonder if that could fall under the "terrorist supporter " category or could possibly classify one as an "enemy combatant"?

[Jenn! 918]

I cannot wait to hear that Jon Stewart was right, North Korea timed their nuke test so the Dems would win! He was, of course joking...but it would not suprise me to hear it from an "official" source.

That was hilarious!

[Ban Hammer 13,340]

OH wow so if you vote democrat you must be a terrorist...

Wonder if that could fall under the "terrorist supporter " category or could possibly classify one as an "enemy combatant"?

supporter, as dems don't like guns, therefore they can't be classified as a combatant

[Elizabethnhenry 0]

Well it worked in the spanish elections..........candidate with terrorist hardline losing badly...doesnt have a prayer...train blows up...candidate without a prayer wins...

[GaryC 7]

OH wow so if you vote democrat you must be a terrorist...

Wonder if that could fall under the "terrorist supporter " category or could possibly classify one as an "enemy combatant"?

Not a terrorist supporter or an enemy combatant. I don't think any American really wants the terrorist to hurt us again. It's just when the terrorists watch our news and see the dems beating up on Bush over Iraq and the dems saying they want to cut and run who else would the terrorists want to win? It's not hard for them to figure out that they would have an easier time with dems controlling things. It's been stated very clearly that if the dems get back in power that they would set a date for pulling out. All the terrorist would have to do is hang back and wait for that date. Then they would have free reign to do what they want and turn Iraq into their new hang-out. They also know the more violence they can inflict causes Bush to loose popularity and by association Republicans in general. So the can and are affecting our politcal process to get what they want.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

If the terrorists are smart (all indications are that they are very smart), then yes, of course they will ramp up violence in the run up to the elections. How is this news?

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to connect the dots. Of course they have increased the violence to attempt to affect the elections as they see the democrats as the likely party to hand them a victory over time.

Why you ask? Because the democrats, time and again, have demonstrated their willingness to just bail out of Iraq and Afghanisitan. The insurgents seem to be learning from past history.

They know, having referred to our history in Vietnam, that we will eventually cut'n run..........Or so is the democratic strategy.

*ahem* please flip back a couple moe pages and read about WWII. Then tell me what Dems do during wars.

Daniel

:energetic:

[GaryC 7]

*ahem* please flip back a couple moe pages and read about WWII. Then tell me what Dems do during wars.

Daniel

:energetic:

That was then, this is now. The dems of 60 years ago bear no resemblance to the dems of today.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

*ahem* please flip back a couple moe pages and read about WWII. Then tell me what Dems do during wars.

That was then, this is now. The dems of 60 years ago bear no resemblance to the dems of today.

More than that, I think it depends on which Democrat we're talking about. The party has become one based almost solely on social issues, resulting in a large divergence within the party ranks on fiscal and foreign affairs issues.