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

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

You were right about how the Democrats are now mostly defined by social issues, so aren't they sort of a mixed bag in terms of priorities? Who knows if we would be willing to elect a military Dem?

It is possible with a Democratic President. But for 2006 through 2008, there will not be one but there might be a Democratic Congress and/or Senate. At that level, individual inclinations recede into the background and the leaders of the party tend to have more sway. Do you actually see Pelosi and Rangel going along with more money for the military? Not a chance.

pssst. both sides of the aisle play the pork barrel game. so, these two would definitely go along for more money for the military as long as some of it wentto their districts.

Daniel

:energetic:

[GaryC 7]

This is the guy that will hold the purse strings if the dems get back in power. Do you really think he will let us stay in Iraq one minute longer than he can help?

Powerful lawmaker Charlie Rangel has provoked the ire of the Anti-Defamation League by likening U.S. military action in Iraq to the Holocaust of World War II.

The Iraq war "is the biggest fraud ever committed on the people of this country. ... This is just as bad as the 6 million Jews being killed," the 74-year-old Harlem Democrat insisted during a Monday radio appearance on the WWRL-AM morning show with Steve Malzberg and Karen Hunter. "The whole world knew and they were quiet about it because it wasn't their ox being gored."

When interviewer Malzberg challenged Rangel's analogy, the congressman replied: "I am saying that people's silence when they know things terrible are happening is the same thing as the Holocaust."

Yesterday, after Malzberg sent me an audiotape of Rangel's appearance, ADL President Abraham Foxman responded: "It is so outrageous that a leader of Congress would compare one thing to the other. Sometimes we say it's ignorance. Charlie Rangel is not ignorant. Charlie Rangel has been there."

On the radio show, Rangel also suggested that proponents of military action - namely Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Rumsfeld's former deputy Paul Wolfowitz and Pentagon adviser Richard Perle - don't worry about the Americans in Iraq because they're "black and poor white soldiers" from "the lower economic class."

"They had a plan to put our kids in harm's way long before 9/11," Rangel said. "Because it's not their kids ... that's exactly why. They go and pick a fight, and then say, 'I'll hold your coat.'"

Foxman retorted: "It is so outrageous that I think he owes an apology not only to the families of the victims of the Shoah, but he also owes an apology to the soldiers who are fighting for freedom.

"If the world had recognized the evil of Hitler early enough - just like we're confronting the evil of terrorism and fundamentalism now - then maybe the 6 million wouldn't have died."

http://www.nydailynews.com/10-08-2003/news...3p-271348c.html

[Carol&Marc 0]

Our last Dem president, Clinton, did more to try to fight off the terror threat than the Bush administration ever planned to do before 9/11. There's a Democrat putting more of a priority on terrorism than the Republicans intended to.

stop, you're gonna send me to the hospital with hysterical laughter

YEAH, can you say BLACK HAWK DOWN Clinton what a guy! Cigar anyone

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

About time someone comes up with this "OSAMA WOULD VOTE DEMOCRAT" #######. Bush has been his best friend thus far helping him keep the stream of recruits going and even growing stronger. Honestly, though, has anyone really expected anything but yet another pathetic attempt by the burnt out Republicans to use the fear of terrorism to retain control of the Congress? I sure haven't. Was waiting for that one. Same as two years ago. And two years before that.

Often times, the answer is much simpler and much more obvious than one thinks. As such, maybe the surge in violence is simply due to a failed policy in Iraq. Just maybe...

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

I must be on the ignore list for a number of posters.

Daniel

:energetic:

[GaryC 7]

This is your typical left reaction and who is driving the election. It just shows you where we will go if the dems get back in power.

Bring Them Home Now (BTHN)--the name is an allusion to the 1960s anti-war demand regarding U.S. troops in Vietnam--is an organization of military families, veterans, active duty personnel, reservists, and others who are opposed to the war in Iraq. Based in St. Louis, Missouri, BTHN claims to have been "galvanized to action by George W. Bush's inane and reckless challenge to armed Iraqis resisting occupation." The group itself is "a campaign of Military Families Speak Out."

BTHN's stated mission is to convince the American government to immediately abandon "the occupation of Iraq and other misguided military adventures," removing all U.S. troops from the war zone and leaving Iraqis to hammer out a political resolution among themselves. BTHN's three principal activities include: (a) maintaining a website that provides news and commentary about Operation Iraqi Freedom; (B) sponsoring rallies and protests against the Iraq War; and © initiating anti-military-recruitment efforts.

According to Bring Them Home Now, the Bush administration led the U.S. into war by deliberately deceiving the American public through the use of scare tactics and lies about the severity of the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, and about the possibility that the Iraqi dictator maintained ties to al Qaeda. BTHN asserts that by going to war against Iraq, the U.S. "spit in the eye of the UN and world public opinion." "The bottom line," the group adds, "... is that our own troops are being used not to defend the people and the Constitution of the United States as they swore an oath to do, but to satisfy dreams of empire and seize control of oil supplies."

Bring Them Home Now maintains that the Bush administration is inflicting psychological harm onto American troops by forcing them to kill innocent people in Iraq; and is exposing those troops, without just cause, to the physical dangers inherent in Iraq's scalding desert heat, stores of depleted uranium, and terrorist ambushes. Says BTHN, "the reconstruction of Iraq cannot take place under U.S. military occupation . . . Much of the chaos and violence in Iraq right now is in direct response to the military occupation."

Though BTHN voices compassion for the U.S. troops who are serving under difficult conditions in Iraq, it also frequently alleges that they are committing heinous war crimes on a regular basis. Under a March 22, 2006 headline that read "Is Occupation Entering My Lai Phase?" -- a reference to a 1968 massacre where U.S. soldiers killed hundreds of unarmed Vietnamese civilians -- BTHN posted an article reporting an unsubstantiated claim that American troops had murdered 11 innocent people in cold blood during a March 15 raid on a house 60 miles north of Baghdad. BTHN did not mention that the raid in question was designed to capture an al Qaeda member who was taking refuge therein.

A member organization of the After Downing Street anti-war coalition, Bring Them Home Now has not published a list of its leaders nor a documentation of its finances. The group is a subsidiary of Veterans For Peace (VFP), which collects donations to BTHN. Bring Them Home Now is sponsored by five leftist organizations: Iraq Veterans Against the War, Citizen Soldier, Military Families Speak Out, Vietnam Veterans Against the War, and Veterans for Peace.

http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/groupPro....asp?grpid=7134

This is why we must stay and fight.

Al-Qaida Expects America to Cut and Run in Iraq

NewsMax.com Wires

Wednesday, Oct. 12, 2005

WASHINGTON -- In a letter to his top deputy in Iraq, al-Qaida's No. 2 leader said the United States "ran and left their agents" in Vietnam and the jihadists must have a plan ready to fill the void if the Americans suddenly leave Iraq.

"Things may develop faster than we imagine," Ayman al-Zawahri wrote in a letter to his top deputy in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. "The aftermath of the collapse of American power in Vietnam - and how they ran and left their agents - is noteworthy. ... We must be ready starting now."

Senior U.S. military commanders have said that Iraqi security forces are improving significantly and some U.S. forces could return home early next year. Yet skeptics have raised concerns about whether such statements simply let the insurgency know how long they must wait for the U.S. to leave.

In a letter taking up 13 typed pages in its English translation, al-Zawahri also recommended a four-stage expansion of the war that would take the fighting to neighboring Muslim countries.

"It has always been my belief that the victory of Islam will never take place until a Muslim state is established ... in the heart of the Islamic world," al-Zawahri wrote.

The letter laid out his long-term plan: expel the Americans from Iraq, establish an Islamic authority and take the war to Iraq's secular neighbors, including Lebanon, Jordan and Syria.

The final stage, al-Zawahri wrote, would be a clash with Israel, which he said was established to challenge "any new Islamic entity."

The letter is dated July 9, and was acquired during U.S. operations in Iraq. It was written in Arabic and translated by the U.S. government. The Pentagon briefed reporters last week on portions of the document, but the full text was not available until Tuesday.

In a statement, the National Intelligence Director's office said the letter "has not been edited in any way" and its contents were released only after it was clear no military or intelligence operations would be compromised.

House Intelligence Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., said his committee is reviewing the letter, but he cautioned "against reading too much into a single source of intelligence."

In his letter, al-Zawahri, a Sunni, devoted significant attention to al-Zarqawi's attempts to start a civil war with the rival Muslim Shiite sect, the majority that now dominates the new Iraqi government. Ultimately, al-Zawahri concluded that violence, particularly against Shiite mosques, only raises questions among Muslims.

"This matter won't be acceptable to the Muslim populace however much you have tried to explain it, and aversion to this will continue," he wrote.

Al-Zawahri was also critical of the Taliban, which was toppled in the 2001 U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan, because, he said, they did not have the representation of the Afghan people. He said students of the Taliban retreated to their tribes.

"Even the devout ones took the stance of spectator," al-Zawahri wrote.

Contrasting that, he saw fearlessness in battles waged in the Iraqi cities of Fallujah, Ramadi and Al Qaim.

At times, the letter got personal. Al-Zawahri said he tasted the bitterness of America's brutality, noting that his "favorite wife's chest was crushed by a concrete ceiling" during an apparent U.S. attack. His daughter died of a cerebral hemorrhage.

To this day, he wrote, he did not know the location of their graves.

The letter then switches to the court of public opinion.

"More than half of this battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media," he wrote. "We are in a media battle in a race for the hearts and minds of our umma," or community of Muslims, he wrote.

The line is an apparent reference to a phrase - "hearts and minds" - often used by President Bush.

© 2005 The Associated Press

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2...11/211825.shtml

[Ban Hammer 13,340]

ok, so far I see zero examples of Dems actually cuttin & runnin.

all I see is exagerated claims of what might happen.

ergo, bunch of hot air.

Daniel

:energetic:

how's this?

[Carol&Marc 0]

ok, so far I see zero examples of Dems actually cuttin & runnin.

all I see is exagerated claims of what might happen.

ergo, bunch of hot air.

Daniel

:energetic:

good one Charles

Will the Mainstream Media Cover the Story of Murtha and Clinton on Somalia?

Posted by Noel Sheppard on November 22, 2005 - 01:16.

Around twelve hours ago, NewsMax broke a story about Rep. John Murtha (D-Pennsylvania) having urged former President Clinton to remove U.S. troops from Somalia in 1993:

“Clinton took the advice and ordered the withdrawal - a decision that Osama bin Laden would later credit with emboldening his terrorist fighters and encouraging him to mount further attacks against the U.S.”

At this point, a Google news search identified only a handful of media sources – including Rush Limbaugh, The American Thinker, and Village Soup – as having picked up this story. Yet, there are a number of articles from September 1993 that appear to confirm the NewsMax story, so many so that one has to wonder if and when any mainstream press outlets are going to report this.

http://newsbusters.org/node/2919

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

Surely this is one of those chicken and egg type situations -- the war has fuelled terrorism in iraq -- something from that liberal rag The Economist:

THE war in Iraq has “made the overall terrorism problem worse.” Many Islamist extremists consider it to be the first front of a total war against Islam. It has galvanised jihadists, becoming their “cause célèbre”, and it has contributed directly to increasing recruitment of violent Islamist terrorists. The terrorist threat is now more acute than it was before the September 11th attacks on the United States.

These blunt conclusions, leaked last week to the New York Times and the Washington Post, are part of a classified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on global terrorism trends. Such estimates are the consensus opinion of 16 government agencies, including the CIA, FBI, State Department and all four branches of the armed forces. They are hard to dismiss by any but the wilfully dim-sighted. “Stating the obvious”, one leaker said. But it has never been obvious to the Bush administration.

So if terror attacks are influencing the election -- well they wouldn't be if we weren't there in the first lace

Edited October 20, 2006 by robinklake

[Saddle Bronc 124]

...So if terror attacks are influencing the election -- well they wouldn't be if we weren't there in the first lace

A mistake on your part here--as the following took place BEFORE Bush Jr. went into Iraq:

1. WTC attack
   
2. Nairobi/Dar-es-Salaam embassy bombings 1998
   
3. attack on USS Cole
   
4. 9-11 attacks
   

All of the above planned and executed by al-Qaeda (also note that #'s 1 and 2 occured while Bush Jr. was TX governor and BEFORE he even decided to RUN for president)!

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

...So if terror attacks are influencing the election -- well they wouldn't be if we weren't there in the first lace

A mistake on your part here--as the following took place BEFORE Bush Jr. went into Iraq:

1. WTC attack
   
2. Nairobi/Dar-es-Salaam embassy bombings 1998
   
3. attack on USS Cole
   
4. 9-11 attacks
   

All of the above planned and executed by al-Qaeda (also note that #'s 1 and 2 occured while Bush Jr. was TX governor and BEFORE he even decided to RUN for president)!

and you fail to make these 'points' link back to Iraq.

It has been shown that alquaeda was a moot point in Iraq prior to our invasion of Iraq.

Daniel

:energetic:

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

...So if terror attacks are influencing the election -- well they wouldn't be if we weren't there in the first lace

Not really as I was talking specifically about Iraq and not terrorism as a whole

[Carol&Marc 0]

...So if terror attacks are influencing the election -- well they wouldn't be if we weren't there in the first lace

A mistake on your part here--as the following took place BEFORE Bush Jr. went into Iraq:

1. WTC attack
   
2. Nairobi/Dar-es-Salaam embassy bombings 1998
   
3. attack on USS Cole
   
4. 9-11 attacks
   

All of the above planned and executed by al-Qaeda (also note that #'s 1 and 2 occured while Bush Jr. was TX governor and BEFORE he even decided to RUN for president)!

We better get out of there so we can have peace and harmony again! Just like on 9/11 BEFORE WE WENT!

Edited October 20, 2006 by Carol&Marc

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

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.

Nonsensical partisan rhetoric. Keep reaching and preaching...the American public is hearing you.

[Marc and Olga 0]

...So if terror attacks are influencing the election -- well they wouldn't be if we weren't there in the first lace

A mistake on your part here--as the following took place BEFORE Bush Jr. went into Iraq:

1. WTC attack
   
2. Nairobi/Dar-es-Salaam embassy bombings 1998
   
3. attack on USS Cole
   
4. 9-11 attacks
   

All of the above planned and executed by al-Qaeda (also note that #'s 1 and 2 occured while Bush Jr. was TX governor and BEFORE he even decided to RUN for president)!

Since it has been STATED, I'll ask... How was Iraq involved in ANY of those events?