Thursday, August 10, 2006
Hastert Issues A "Bold" Message
Via Hotline On Call, here's a not-so-subtle message from House Speaker Denny Hastert on why a vote for Democrats will kill you (and the bold face of the type is in Hastert's original message):
A number of great successes. Must be vigilant in fighting the GWOT. Sometimes you have to give up freedom in order to remain free.
Ahh, yes, the midterm election season is in full swing. And remember, a vote for Ned Lamont and like-minded Democrats is a vote for more terrorist attacks.
What I'd like to know is, if the Iraq war is making us safer in the war on terror, as the administration and the ruling Grand Old Party continue to say, why do we continually have to disrupt terror plots in Europe and in the United States?. I thought we were fighting the terrrorists over there so we don't have to fight them here. It seems to me, however, that the Iraq war just keeps creating more and more terrorists and more and more terror plots. Some have been disrupted (like this one.) Some have not (like 7/7 and 3/11.) But eventually one of these plots - maybe with planes, maybe with a dirty bomb, maybe with something else - is going to slip by the authorities and strike Americans here at home as it struck Londoners last year. And we will find that the terrorists involved were in large measure radicalized by the Iraq war/Gitmo/Abu Ghraib/Haditha etc. And George Bush will try and tell us that we must finish the mission in Iraq (whatever the mission is these days) so that we don't get hit by terrorists again. But never once will the administration, the ruling Grand Old Party members in the Congress or the administration apologists in the media explain why if we are being so successful in the war on terror, we seem to be creating as many (or more) terrorists than we are arresting and/or killing.
"The disruption of this terror scheme follows a number of great successes that America and its allies have had against those looking to do us harm. Today's victory serves as a vivid and shocking reminder that we must always be vigilant in fighting the Global War on Terror. Freedom is never free, and we must never be complacent in defending it."
A number of great successes. Must be vigilant in fighting the GWOT. Sometimes you have to give up freedom in order to remain free.
Ahh, yes, the midterm election season is in full swing. And remember, a vote for Ned Lamont and like-minded Democrats is a vote for more terrorist attacks.
What I'd like to know is, if the Iraq war is making us safer in the war on terror, as the administration and the ruling Grand Old Party continue to say, why do we continually have to disrupt terror plots in Europe and in the United States?. I thought we were fighting the terrrorists over there so we don't have to fight them here. It seems to me, however, that the Iraq war just keeps creating more and more terrorists and more and more terror plots. Some have been disrupted (like this one.) Some have not (like 7/7 and 3/11.) But eventually one of these plots - maybe with planes, maybe with a dirty bomb, maybe with something else - is going to slip by the authorities and strike Americans here at home as it struck Londoners last year. And we will find that the terrorists involved were in large measure radicalized by the Iraq war/Gitmo/Abu Ghraib/Haditha etc. And George Bush will try and tell us that we must finish the mission in Iraq (whatever the mission is these days) so that we don't get hit by terrorists again. But never once will the administration, the ruling Grand Old Party members in the Congress or the administration apologists in the media explain why if we are being so successful in the war on terror, we seem to be creating as many (or more) terrorists than we are arresting and/or killing.
Comments:
<< Home
Okay, the jury was out. What I'm seeing around the traps makes it hard to swallow another terrorist crisis.
I can accept that they are out there and planning, but even the UK police said they didn't swoop because a threat was immenent. Unless it was a political threat.
I can accept that they are out there and planning, but even the UK police said they didn't swoop because a threat was immenent. Unless it was a political threat.
I'm not up on this one C, so you may be right.
As far as the post goes.... Bingo! Damn dude, that is the whole point! Here is a quote from your clip...
The disruption of this terror scheme follows a number of great successes that America and its allies have had against those looking to do us harm.
But Iraq is not one of those successes, and that is what is at issue. It is as if there is no distinction between domestic surveillence and efforts to disrupt terrorist plots, and far-flung military adventures that do nothing to make us more safe at home and instead create wanna-be al-Qaida everywhere. The homespun terrorist in the end will prove even more deadly than the foreign one.
By engaging in profit ventures masked as wars of liberation, we have rallied the discontent to a fever pitch. We just made about 4 million new enemies (well, 3, lets face it, at least 1 million already were) in Lebanon by allowing this abomination of a bombing campaign (no pun intended).
Let us be clear. If we take the next step and take on Iran, we take on the whole Shi'a world and possibly the whole Muslim world.
All we are saying is that Lieberman is out because of his unmitigated support of this unfruitful war.
How does that translate into being soft on domestic terror prevention?
As far as the post goes.... Bingo! Damn dude, that is the whole point! Here is a quote from your clip...
The disruption of this terror scheme follows a number of great successes that America and its allies have had against those looking to do us harm.
But Iraq is not one of those successes, and that is what is at issue. It is as if there is no distinction between domestic surveillence and efforts to disrupt terrorist plots, and far-flung military adventures that do nothing to make us more safe at home and instead create wanna-be al-Qaida everywhere. The homespun terrorist in the end will prove even more deadly than the foreign one.
By engaging in profit ventures masked as wars of liberation, we have rallied the discontent to a fever pitch. We just made about 4 million new enemies (well, 3, lets face it, at least 1 million already were) in Lebanon by allowing this abomination of a bombing campaign (no pun intended).
Let us be clear. If we take the next step and take on Iran, we take on the whole Shi'a world and possibly the whole Muslim world.
All we are saying is that Lieberman is out because of his unmitigated support of this unfruitful war.
How does that translate into being soft on domestic terror prevention?
Good point, it was a political threat to the GOP, cartledge. Thus the arrests. Keith Olbermann said TIME Magazine reported the administration claimed they had picked up terrorist chatter this week that worried them and so they urged the Brits to make the arrestds and announce them.
A cynic might say they asked for the arrests to get a leg up on the November midterms. I guess you and I are cynics, eh?
pt, you said it better than I - "By engaging in profit ventures masked as wars of liberation, we have rallied the discontent to a fever pitch. We just made about 4 million new enemies (well, 3, lets face it, at least 1 million already were) in Lebanon by allowing this abomination of a bombing campaign (no pun intended).
Let us be clear. If we take the next step and take on Iran, we take on the whole Shi'a world and possibly the whole Muslim world."
That's it - completely crystallized. Luckily Dems seem to be on the attack on this and wasted no time pointing out a) the politicization of the arrests b)the Iraq war is undercutting our efforts in the war on terror and creating more terrorists.
Let's see how this plays out with the electorate. I hope people are skeptical enough to see through the bullshit.
A cynic might say they asked for the arrests to get a leg up on the November midterms. I guess you and I are cynics, eh?
pt, you said it better than I - "By engaging in profit ventures masked as wars of liberation, we have rallied the discontent to a fever pitch. We just made about 4 million new enemies (well, 3, lets face it, at least 1 million already were) in Lebanon by allowing this abomination of a bombing campaign (no pun intended).
Let us be clear. If we take the next step and take on Iran, we take on the whole Shi'a world and possibly the whole Muslim world."
That's it - completely crystallized. Luckily Dems seem to be on the attack on this and wasted no time pointing out a) the politicization of the arrests b)the Iraq war is undercutting our efforts in the war on terror and creating more terrorists.
Let's see how this plays out with the electorate. I hope people are skeptical enough to see through the bullshit.
Now I am getting curious at to what these - great successes that America and its allies have had against those looking to do us harm - are.
We'd better go and find them.
Post a Comment
We'd better go and find them.
<< Home
