They almost got me.

[LiberalsAreBabyKillers!]

I have to admit. I almost thought for a while that it was time to pull out of Iraq (only kinda), despite my knowledge of how we are really winning, despite what the media says, and my support of the cause. Then a friend sent me a video of one of the Americans who were beheaded, and know I am 300% behind the war. We need to be more unconvenctional and ruthless. We should take prisoners only for torture. We need to be barbaric to these bastards, we should literally fry them alive, skin them, pry off their fingernails, draw and quarter them, disembowl them, put hem into a woodchipper feet first. Despite my usual merciful philosophy, I thin that we should show no mercy to these barley human things. I can't even descirbe my hate, KILL 'EM ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Madcowhunter]

Yes, kill them all, don't torture them, just to torture them.

After what our POW's suffered in World War 2 and Vietnam, I don't see how you can support ruthless torture. It's a waste of time, if you're going to kill them, kill them.

I would support torture like loss of your hand or legs, or an enourmous beating. But it isn't worth the risk, it can only have bad outcomes. Bush adminstration would be damaged heavily again, not the mention the soldiers who participated would at a minimum face a life sentence in prison.

[Bumblebee]

I've always believed that the beheadings of our Americans should have been shown for all adults. I saw all the beheadings, I could have watched Daniel Pearl, but by then I couldn't take it anymore. They didn't just chop off their heads, they sawed them off. I still have vivid images of them. On top of it, they made it like a little movie for each individual with their name as the star.
If it was shown to all, maybe not so many on the left would have such sympathy for the terrorists.

[Madcowhunter]

I don't think you are reffering to me, but just in case, I'm nowhere near the left, and I don't have sympathy for terrorists. We can call them a different species, not human, because they are sick and brutal, and we have no reason to feel sympathy for them.

LiberalsAreBabyKillers, Americans are different, we are human, and we deserve sympathy, and we are the best damn country in the world. Anyone who thinks we should participate in this sick practice, has something wrong in their head. It's easy to say, we should skin and them such, but who is going to be the one to do all this? You?

Now I'm about as conservative as they come, but I cannot stand and support this torture. And I would loose my respect for soldier who does it. We ARE NOT Islamic terrorists, we are a free nation on a mission to spread humanity and freedom across the globe, understand? We're trying to end this torture.

[Bumblebee]

I don't think you are reffering to me, but just in case, I'm nowhere near the left, and I don't have sympathy for terrorists.

No MCH, I was referring to LABK.

[Madcowhunter]

I've always believed what we are doing in Iraq is right, the longer we stay. The more terrorists fall into a death trap.

[Wadi66]

Al-Qaeda chiefs reveal world domination design
By Allan Hall
Age Correspondent
Berlin
August 24, 2005

Page Tools
Email to a friend Printer format
THE al-Qaeda master plan to take over the world and turn it into an Islamic state has been revealed for the first time.

For a new book, Jordanian journalist Fouad Hussein interviewed top lieutenants of the terrorist network, including the mastermind of many atrocities in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Al-Zarqawi — al-Qaeda's Second Generation is published only in Arabic, but could be translated into English.

Hussein says al-Qaeda views its struggle as a long-term war with seven distinct phases.

Phase one is the "awakening" in the consciousness of Muslims worldwide following the September 11, 2001, suicide attacks. The aim of the attacks was to provoke the US into declaring war on the Islamic world and thereby mobilising the radicals.

Phase two is "Opening Eyes", the period we are now in and which should last until 2006. Hussein says the terrorists hope to make the "Western conspiracy" aware of the "Islamic community" as al-Qaeda continues to mould its secret battalions ready for battle.

Phase three, "Arising and Standing Up", should last from 2007 to 2010, with increasingly frequent attacks against secular Turkey and arch-enemy Israel.

Phase four, between 2010 and 2013, will see the downfall of hated Arab regimes, including Saudi Arabia and Jordan. Oil suppliers will be attacked and the US economy will be targeted using cyber terrorism.

Phase five will be the point at which an Islamic state, or caliphate, can be declared — between 2013 and 2016.

Phase six, from 2016 on, will be a period of "total confrontation". As soon as the caliphate has been declared, the "Islamic army" will instigate the "fight between the believers and the non-believers" that has so often been predicted by al-Qaeda's leader, Osama bin Laden.

Phase seven, the final stage, is described as "definitive victory".

Hussein writes that in the terrorists' eyes, because the rest of the world will be so beaten down by the "One-and-a-half billion Muslims", the caliphate will undoubtedly succeed. This phase should be completed by 2020, although the war should not last longer than two years.
The link that was provided for this article requires registration. I already have too much mail.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/war-on-terro...l?oneclick=true (http://www.theage.com.au/news/war-on-terror/alqaeda-chiefs-reveal-world-domination-design/2005/08/23/1124562861654.html?oneclick=true)

[shotdrops286]

I read that world domination thing a few days or so ago. It didnt really surprise me much. Fanatical religous zealots usually try to take over the world to impose their religous ideaologies

[Mr. Glass]

Just curious.... but i keep hearing how all these people on the left support terrorism....

can anyone explain how they get to that point of reasoning?

I've looked for a very long time and I haven't found anyone who is mainstream left / liberal that actually supports terrorists or acts of terror. I may not be looking in the right places....

Anyone have an example where a liberal supports terrorists through their speech or action? And if it's an action, please explain how you've come to interpret said action as support for terroists. Unless it's really obvious like "well this guy dave lets these guys from AQ live in his house" ....

-Doug

[shotdrops286]

For his part, ex-President Clinton suggested that the best way to prevent terrorists from discouraging economic growth in the Middle East was to offer businesses looking to invest there terrorism insurance.

"So I would just like to ask that you consider setting up some sort of insurance structure where, for a modest fee, an entrepreneur could participate in pooled insurance so that if something happened because of a terrorist act they could be made whole. Then I think we’d have a lot more success in getting venture capital in there."--Clinton

Even though they try and kill us we should set up terrorist insurance????

[LiberalsAreBabyKillers!]

I don't REALLY support torture, it's just an overwhelming gut instinct that comes over me when I see things like this. However, we do need to, in some way, be more ruthless.

[Madcowhunter]

I agree, we go way to easy on them.

[Bumblebee]

Just curious.... but i keep hearing how all these people on the left support terrorism....

can anyone explain how they get to that point of reasoning?

I've looked for a very long time and I haven't found anyone who is mainstream left / liberal that actually supports terrorists or acts of terror. I may not be looking in the right places....

Anyone have an example where a liberal supports terrorists through their speech or action? And if it's an action, please explain how you've come to interpret said action as support for terroists. Unless it's really obvious like "well this guy dave lets these guys from AQ live in his house" ....

-Doug
You really don't have to look, it's right in front of you.
I'll try and explain it this way: They direct their anger toward our country while the terrorists plots to kill and maim the innocent. They make a mockery of responsible free speech while thousands of young men and women fight desperately to preserve our safety. Take Cindy Sheehan, instead of honoring her son's sacrifice she is inspired to comfort an evil enemy. moveon.org, Michael Moore, and all of the hard left have been using her to sound off for them.
They clearly do not understand the challenge we face as a nation. It is their thinking that have led us to where we are today.

Decades of appeasement to these haters of everything we hold dear has cost thousands of American lives from Beirut to New York and in dozens of other forgotten places.

[Android]

I don't REALLY support torture, it's just an overwhelming gut instinct that comes over me when I see things like this. However, we do need to, in some way, be more ruthless.
More ruthless? Hell, this is a war and we need to do what ever it takes to be one up on this scum. If it hurts Howard Deans feelings or the Media wants to slant it then who cares. Once we win then we can worry about Howard the Coward and the rest of them.

I agree, we go way to easy on them.
Madcowhunter, you got that right again. Lets see, the terrorists will film themselves jumping on a bound up prisoner and slitting his throat like a ====ing pig, hacking off his head like they are enjoying it because their God "told them too". But its us who are the barbarians because somebody somewhere is rumored to have pissed on the quran. Who brings it up? The enemy? NO! Our weenie senators and cry baby media that's who. ====ing got me going again. Tell me why we are the "dogs"? Screw them, they are the animals here. We need to put bullets in each and every one of um.
Glass, I see where you are coming from, no, I don't think that the left are people that support Terrorism, well in the Congress anyway. At least what I can prove for now. But how can anyone deny the fact that they sure want to go easy on these same people that are targeting us? Seems to a lot of us they are more concerned for the treatment of the terrorist we have in captivity than the people of ours getting blown up. I tell you what, politicians like that are not getting any more popular with our military either.
Now, anyone here know how to win a war without a 100% support from home? Because I need to hear it.

[Mr. Glass]

You really don't have to look, it's right in front of you.

Hrm... interesting little slip there.... this forum is actually what's right in front of me.



I'll try and explain it this way: They direct their anger toward our country

Well, the first question that comes to mind is: Why are they angry?



while the terrorists plots to kill and maim the innocent.
This has gone on for thousands of years. Man has always held man in contempt, what's your point?



They make a mockery of responsible free speech while thousands of young men and women fight desperately to preserve our safety.
This is a matter of perception. I understand where you're comming from, and in part I agree, but I also can see where the other side is comming from. There's a lot of emotional and factual support that this war is an exercise in American Imperialism. A lot of people, myself included, feel that the troops are being intentionally put in harms way for far too little comfort and security. Furthermore, he war in Iraq has only angred our enemies further and made a bad situation even worse. These are indisputable claims, but not inclusive, and not the whole truth.



Take Cindy Sheehan, instead of honoring her son's sacrifice she is inspired to comfort an evil enemy.

Ok, you lost me here.... how is she comforting the enemy? By being critical of our federal government during a war, or by boarding and training terrorists in her back yard? In what way does she actual COMFORT the enemy?



moveon.org, Michael Moore, and all of the hard left have been using her to sound off for them.

That's like saying Bin Ladin and aljazeera.com speak for the whole of the middle east. It's just waay too assumptive to be considered valid, and from experiance I know this to be untrue. Of course, anyone, on either side, who pays too much attention to just one media source could be lead to think that.




They clearly do not understand the challenge we face as a nation. It is their thinking that have led us to where we are today.

Think about this for a second.... just because you say it or believe it does not make it true. Truth is in facts and reason. I can just as easily say that YOU are the problem, that you do not understand the nature of the challenge we face, and that it is Conservative thinking that got us in the mess we're in today.

What do you really know about what Liberals and high ranking Democrats actually know anyways? Are you qualified to speak for everyone? Can you read minds?... sure you're entitled to your opinion, but I'm looking for solid facts and proof, not misguided sentiment and emotional rhetoric. WHO does not understand the challenge, why do they not understand it?



Decades of appeasement to these haters of everything we hold dear has cost thousands of American lives from Beirut to New York and in dozens of other forgotten places.

Again, perception and logical fallacy. This whole Correlation implying causation thing again. You see american apeasement as the cause of the problem... but following that logic it could jsut as easliy be the placement of a rock, or the absence of a child from school on a certain day that leads to America being attacked.... there's no evidence or proof to support your claim.

So your OPINION is that appeasment leads to these attacks.... sure you're entitled to that, it sounds nice, it blames someone besides yourself, and you can sleep sound at night knowing you're not one of "them" (the appeasers)

But, can you accept my opinion that they're attacking us because our government is attacking them? For decades the US has meddled in the affairs of middle eastern nations. We've robbed them of their oil (fair and square, just like we took this country from the Indians), we've unilaterally supported Isreal through their own terror campaigns and wars. We've sanctioned and oppressed millions of people for the acts of a very few, which has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths over the years..... that's why they're mad at us....

not because some mom in texas can't let go of her dead son.



The US plays nasty propaganda games, and this administration has turned the game on it's own people. Are you falling victim to that maybe?

anyways...

-Doug

[Wadi66]

Glass, you think they're angry because we invaded Iraq. And you think our being there has made matters worse. If you realized and accepted the FACT that they have been preparing for this war for a long long time and were just waiting for us to respond, then you would have a different view. They simply were NOT GOING TO STOP until their objective was met. They've been taking pot shots at us trying to provoke us. Finallly they got a response they wanted.

I would be one of the first to admit that we've meddled in affairs over there, but everything has been for the purpose of twarting the spread of communism.

[Bumblebee]

Oh this is great Mr. Glass. I put up one little paragraph and you come out with all your b/s questions and answers.

You ask why are they angry? Then you say I lost you because of what I said about Cindy Sheehan. Then come out with your so called an analysis.

Then you ask what do I know about liberals. I live in a city full of liberals not to mention many old friends who are liberals. I don't discuss politics with them, I learned a long time ago, that it's useless. I can answer why they're angry, it's a lot of things. It started with Clinton's impeachment to Gore losing the election to Bush, and the Republicans winning the majority. Not to mention the hatred they have for this president. They are so blind with it that they criticize the way he walks and talks. I cound go on with more idiotic things they say forever, but I don't need to, we've all heard it before.

You asked how Cindy Sheehan is comforting the enemy.
I can't believe you asked such a question. Unfortunately, shallow and irrational ones, such as Cindy Sheehan, will continue to put the lives of our sons and daughters in danger by aiding and abetting an enemy who sees propagandizing in the mass media as its main weapon in a war it could otherewise not win, standing on its own miserable and evil justification of radical Islam. She and the hard left have joined forces with an evil you neither understand nor apparently have tried to comprehend. The war will go on because to end it now would dishonor the sacrifice of all of our fellow countrymen who have died in the cause of fighting terrorism.

You can see it and hear them everyday, and you don't need to come out with your "cute" remarks about all you see is your forum in front of you.

[Schmitty27]

The global domination thing is kinda funny for me. Just seems like a piece of propaganda to lose even more support for the war by showing that we are falling right into their trap. But if there is any truth to it, we better make a call to MI6. James Bond has been awfully succesful with these type of people.

[Wadi66]

The global domination thing is kinda funny for me. Just seems like a piece of propaganda to lose even more support for the war by showing that we are falling right into their trap.You think their desire for global domination is propaganda? And that we fell for their trap?

[RightisRightLeftisWrong]

The global domination thing is kinda funny for me. Just seems like a piece of propaganda to lose even more support for the war by showing that we are falling right into their trap. But if there is any truth to it, we better make a call to MI6. James Bond has been awfully succesful with these type of people.

Unfortunally James Bond is a liberal well Peirce Braslon how ever you spell it. too lol but we should Call XXX.

But I mean seriously why cant we just pull all are troops and just Nuke the Middle east back to the stone age and turn the sands to glass. I mean give them warning like "You have 3 days to evacuate." Its just a shame that part of the world is the oldest place IN THE WORLD and its the worst place TO BE right now. Maybe the only way to stop terrorism is to fight terrorism with terrorism, kinda like fighting fire with fire.

[Wadi66]

But I mean seriously why cant we just pull all are troops and just Nuke the Middle east back to the stone age and turn the sands to glass. I mean give them warning like "You have 3 days to evacuate." In the first place, the insurgents we're fighting aren't from Iraq, for the most part. Second, we aren't there to commit genocide. Third, if we gave them 3 days notice, you can bet the terrorists would leave to fight again another day somewhere else.

[Schmitty27]

I can't see anything that really strikes me as a large mobilization. Obviously they are getting their fighters from different areas. And somehow they'd have to get the word to all these fighters scattered over such a large area. They'd have to have some sort of training. I know they've been trained before but that's been in guerilla warfare. I doubt the majority of terrorists have been trained to fight a true war. They don't have the technology to manage logistics the way we and really they don't have great technology period. Plus if they plan on making an attack in Turkey or Israel they'd have an unbelieveable number of countries coming to get them. These terrorists have yet to show me they could fight a real war. If they think they can set a couple of roadside bombs and send a screaming idiot with a bomb strapped to his back into a building and dominate the world they're seriously mistaken. I think they did this to make us think they have a card up their sleeve and we'll move some troops out or somehow lose attention in Iraq. They're losing ground and they are looking to do anything to take it back.

[Bumblebee]

I read that their plan is to breed as many children as possible in this country, as well as all other countries over the world. I read it years ago.

[Wadi66]

You might find this interesting.

September 16, 2005, 8:33 a.m.
Terrorism’s New Operating System
Reforming our thinking.

Fears raised by Los Angeles's power grid failure earlier this week, this time because of an error in city utility work, was a stark reminder of how the national psyche has become attuned to the potential for terrorism to wreak havoc on our major population centers. The outage took place almost exactly 24 hours after a former southern California native turned al-Qaeda fanatic, Adam Gadahn, took to the airwaves and threatened Los Angelinos as the next victims of the terrorist group's wrath.

America should not be so sanguine about these seemingly idle threats from Islam's lunatic fringe.

Britain's response to the London terror attacks in July provides an even clearer example of the present misperceptions in counterterrorism circles about who the enemy is and how it operates. When authorities there investigating the simultaneous strikes against London's transport hubs learned the attackers were British-born, middle-class Muslim youth, their analysis focused on unraveling the domestic tentacles of what was perceived as a homegrown terror network. An understandable response, but misconceived.

Prior to the 9/11 attacks against the United States, terrorist groups like al Qaeda had well-understood hierarchies with operating systems that functioned much like the human central nervous system. These groups needed little state support because they were essentially states within the states that harbored them.

Four years and two wars later, having suffered the destruction of much of the physical infrastructure and basing areas that Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq offered, al Qaeda and its affiliate terrorist networks have evolved their global operating system into an airborne virus capable of infecting concentrated cells of disaffected followers to carry out by proxy the orders of their hidden masters. Citizens and residents of targeted countries who are able to lie dormant longer and at a fraction of the cost of transplanted cells are the new weapons of choice.

Couriers carrying handwritten notes or memorized messages from the likes of Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi have been caught in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Jordan, and Turkey during the past four years. A suspected London bomber even appeared on video with al-Zawahiri three weeks ago. The terror masters would like us to believe that state sponsorship with its highly organized logistics, funding, weaponry, and intelligence are still unnecessary support structures in the continuing expansion of their global terrorist enterprise.

Not likely.

What if terrorism's global operating system has evolved into a much more sophisticated nexus — untraceable state sponsorship acting in concert with highly intelligent, well-trained, and carefully chosen foot soldiers who Western analysts would never conceive as partners? What if its new operating software is like the AIDS virus, constantly mutating from one nameless, faceless protocol address to another, transmitting its deadly code without need for regeneration or further direction, and with the necessary but well-camouflaged logistical and planning support states can offer?

Imagine that a state seeking to redress strategic imbalances in the quantifiable military threats it faces from larger powers trains a new, heretofore completely unknown battery of terror masters. They move as businessmen and women, as mothers with families, as low-level functionaries in embassies — in short, as people not worthy of intelligence monitoring by the West's traditional antiterror infrastructure.

Imagine further that having successfully moved from the state's nerve center to the localized target country, these infecting agents quietly observe and learn the personality traits, habits, weaknesses, and strengths of a community of naturalized or born citizens who periodically gather in mosques, local eateries or other communal meeting places — in sum, places where the unsuspecting proxy cell members would not know they are being "vetted" for future service as terrorists. Once willing local proxies are identified, they are injected with a viral code of highly specific intelligence data about potential targets, methods of attack, how to assemble and deploy locally the weapons required to carry out their deadly missions and a philosophically sustaining message from the messianic figures who inspire them from afar.

The foreign agent then disappears, untraceable and unlikely to ever be seen again in the infected environment, or to even be used by the state sponsor for future missions. The newly formed terrorist cell structure to which the infecting agent gives rise proceeds to either execute its mandate as a super cell, or gives rise to sub-cells with specific but insulated instruction sets that enable long-term multiple attack scenarios to materialize. Each super cell breaks the link to the sub-cell it gives rise to once the instructions and inspiration have been passed on — no forensic evidence to tie one cell to another, no traceable links, no fingerprints.

The sponsoring state achieves its critical objective — redressing the strategic imbalance through destabilizing acts of terror — while remaining fingerprint-less in the crimes it conceives and supports. It infects enough local cells to insure sustainability of the enterprise over a long period of time, while also insuring that if one cell fails in its mission, another is standing by to carry on. The local proxies achieve whatever dubious objectives they have — fulfilling a jihadist mission in pursuit of some misguided concept of paradise, or just causing chaos, death and mayhem.

Failure to recognize that such may be the imagination of terrorism's strategic planners, whether they sit in Teheran, Damascus or on a yacht in the Mediterranean, is to foresee our doom in their hands. That our enemies know enough about our societal weaknesses to conceive such self-perpetuating measures demonstrates how urgent the need for reform in our counterterrorism thinking is.

The key to combating the newly evolving terror strategy lies in fusing advanced technology with the same type of low-tech human-intelligence framework adopted by our enemies to subvert us. There is an urgent need at a national level to develop and incorporate a new generation of cyber-protection systems that guard our critical infrastructure (so-called Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition [SCADA] Systems) like the Los Angeles power grid from gifted militant hackers, some sitting afar and some closer than we'd like to admit.

The new soldiers of our frontline defenses must include Imams trained under government mandate to spot the infecting agents, including the hackers who breed among us. The new corps of imams must also move rapidly to prevent invective from filling their mosques and sanctuaries so as to give rise to groupings of people susceptible to terrorist manipulation.

We must imagine how the least likely terrorist alliances are the most likely to rise up against us — Shiite mullahs working with Sunni fanatics, or Baathists with Islamists, for instance — and then craft strategies based on raw data collected by human beings, not just computers and satellites, to unravel their plans. This requires urgent rethinking at an interagency level in our government about the distribution of intelligence resources on inanimate data collection systems. We need many more human spies — period.

We must adopt effective international standards for tracking would-be terrorists from the early stages of their transformations, whether at Pakistan's Madrassah schools or in southern California's universities, by installing technologically innovative systems like fingerprint I.D. that register and catalogue masses of faceless, nameless people — enabling us to track them right to our shores.

And we must be ruthless in compromising the intelligence and military industrial complexes of the states that seek to dismember us, whether through expert computer hacking or advanced surveillance airships that can monitor the most sensitive communications of the terror masters and their corps of transmitters, so we know who or what the enemy really is.

Time is no friend of societies infected with terror's new fatal viral operating system.

— Mansoor Ijaz, chairman of Crescent Investment Management, negotiated Sudan's offer of counterterrorism assistance to the Clinton administration in April 1997 and co-authored the blueprint for a ceasefire of hostilities in Kashmir between Muslim militants and Indian security forces in the summer of 2000.

http://www.nationalreview.com/ijaz/ijaz200509160833.asp

[Schmitty27]

That does raise some interesting points, and I can see it that if it is true we might have some trouble on our hands. I don't think we should ever put our feet up and think everythings alright and wait to be attacked again, I just don't think we need to be up in arms about this.