I’ve been to Turkey – a secular-progressive Islamic country. And yes, I kissed the ground of the USA when I came back.

Methinks the libtroll doth protest too much.

Regards,
Peter H.

I went, quite deliberately, so that I could get to know an Islamic country. In preparation, I studied the Arabic language, Muslim history, and (in English) parts of the Koran.

Calling “racist”, like calling “fascist”, is one of the many hand-waving (or subject-changing) tactics of the arrogant, stupid and ignorant leftist who has lost the argument.

As NDT points out often and rightly: the real racists are the people like Chet who – by their own admission – are quite happy with vicious, Pol Pot-style dictators and bloodbaths in the Middle East, whether by leaving Saddam in power, or (since that is no longer possible) withdrawing from Iraq prematurely and so putting al Qaeda in power there.

Mhm….Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Jordan here.

And considering where I spent September 12, 2001, you might want to seriously rethink your statement.

Aside from the fact that Islam is a religion, not a race.

If “no”, what should be done with them? I see two choices: 1) Put them on the next vehicle bound to from whence they came or 2) Detain them. I would take option 1: It’s cheaper. However, since #2 was chosen – and it doesn’t seem unreasonable (and they might be being processed for asylum – the article doesn’t say) – what should be done with their 9 year-old child? I see four choices: 1) send the child to the final destination, alone; 2) send the child back, alone; 3) treat the child as a foster child and try to find temporary placement (which may be a bit difficult in Puerto Rico if the child speaks neither English nor Spanish); or 4) detain the child with its parents. Number 4 doesn’t look so bad, now, does it?

Put your feelings about “locking up a child” aside and think it through.

Prove that Saddam Hussein harbored al Qaeda and I’ll support the war against Iraq.

That’s the demand of an insane child, as I have just showed above (post held in moderation). Because al Qaeda is unquestionably in Iraq TODAY. You should support the Iraq war TODAY.

But – having said that – click here for one proof.

In other words: At the time in late 2002, Congress, using the same intelligence that the intelligence community gave to the President, stated emphatically that members of al Qaeda were known to be staying in Iraq.

That would be a formal resolution which a majority of Democratic Senators voted for – including Senators Rockefeller, Clinton and Kerry. Do you doubt their word?

I could offer lots, LOTS more. I could go on quite a long time! But I’ll leave it there for now. Because Chet, as we established some time ago, “I cannot prove anything to you, [as you are] rather closed off to real arguments.”

Of course this is a safe bet on my part, because you can’t prove the above.

–Chet

It would be silly chest-thumping, if it weren’t so insincere. Picture a drug dealer saying “I was just about to throw all this stuff out and go legitimate, when you raided me.” It’s that level of protest.

We know, because we’ve been through it before. In the latest incident, some of those folks claimed as late as 11-12/2006 that they wanted troop increases in Iraq. They turned on the idea the second Bush proposed it, a month or so later.

In the shower I happened to think on what it would look like, if a Bush / Iraq war critic really wanted to win in Afghanistan. Their remarks might look like this:

I always thought invading Iraq was a mistake, simply because we should have first finished the Taliban / al Qaeda remnants that fled to Pakistan. Of course, we would have had to (or we must still) invade Pakistan, and that is a very sticky proposition, I admit.

Unlike Iraq, Pakistan was/is sovereign. They haven’t attacked four of their neighbors and aren’t under U.N. control. They are a nuclear power, and their military would really fight an invasion. So I can see the difficulty with pushing them, or invading them. But still, I think we should have concentrated on that first. Maybe we can still persuade Pakistan to invade their own Taliban / al Qaeda areas.

Now that we are in Iraq, al Qaeda is too, and clearly we have to beat them. We can’t let them take over Anbar or Diyala as an al Qaeda state, because then we would have to re-invade later, at a much greater cost in lives.

So I was against going into Iraq, but OK, I’m in favor of winning there now. And maybe, in the time it takes us to do that, we will figure out how to somehow deal with the Pakistan problem as well?

I ask you: Do the remarks of the lower case clan / Ian / Chet / Daily Kos bear any resemblance to that?

That’s basically what I’ve said to Chet before! LOL Maybe he learned it from me? With this difference: I’ve said it, in the past, after actually engaging his arguments and actually providing valid information in support of my points. It’s an important difference.

And what is the “elite establishment” Bruce? Halliburton? Bechtel?

–Chet

Regards,
Peter H.

And I cannot prove anything to you, because, well, you and most of the people on the blog seem rather closed off to real arguments.

That was in response to my asking him to prove that he isn’t rooting against America.

I think his response speaks for itself. Another typical liberal dodge. Did they all learn that from Clinton?

Sad, so sad that these people are so brainwashed by the Elite Establishment.

P17.3 The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:

(1) “Kill the one who sodomizes and the one who lets it be done to him.”

(2) “May Allah curse him who does what Lot’s people did.”

(3) “Lesbianism by women is adultery between them.”

007.80 We also (sent) Lut: He said to his people: “Do ye commit lewdness such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you?

007.081 “For ye practise your lusts on men in preference to women : ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds.”

007.082 And his people gave no answer but this: they said, “Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!”

007.083 But we saved him and his family, except his wife: she was of those who legged behind.

007.084 And we rained down on them a shower (of brimstone): Then see what was the end of those who indulged in sin and crime!

Chet, the cult of islam will murder you for being Gay…..

wake up………..quit being PC for your PCness will be the cause of your death.

The Texican.

Qur’an 8:12 “Your Lord inspired the angels with the message: ‘I will terrorize the unbelievers. Therefore smite them on their necks and every joint and incapacitate them. Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.”

Qur’an 8:52 “They denied and rejected the revelations of Allah, and Allah destroyed them, punishing them for their crimes: for Allah is strict, severe in punishment.”
Qur’an 8:59 “The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them.”

Qur’an 9:5 “When the sacred forbidden months for fighting are past, fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”

Qur’an 9:73 “O Prophet, strive hard [fighting] against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be harsh with them. Their abode is Hell, an evil refuge indeed.”

Qur’an 33:60 “Truly, if the Hypocrites stir up sedition, if the agitators in the City do not desist, We shall urge you to go against them and set you over them. Then they will not be able to stay as your neighbors for any length of time. They shall have a curse on them. Whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain without mercy—a fierce slaughter—murdered, a horrible murdering.”

Qur’an 47:4 “Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; at length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: until the war lays down its burdens.”

Now, remember, folks, this is what Chet claims (emphasis mine):

I have made patently clear that, in my view, we should crush al Qaeda — in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Iraq has nothing to do with that…..Being against al Qaeda does not require that I mindlessly support the catastrophe in Iraq which has never had anything whatsoever to do with the war on terror.

Now, as we find out today:

A senior Taliban commander said in remarks broadcast on Friday that the Afghan Islamist group was sending fighters to Iraq to support anti-U.S. insurgents.

“Travel from and to Iraq is at a peak currently … if any mujahid wants to carry out an operation in Iraq he can travel.”

Logic would suggest that, if they are dumb enough to come to Iraq to try to get a shot in at our troops, that we return the favor, rather than running off; after all, that then means one less of them goes back to Afghanistan. And if we kill one of their Iraqi members, that’s one less to go TO Afghanistan.

But leftists like Chet don’t deal in logic. They claim they want to fight al-Qaeda, but then attempt to sabotage every attempt to do it, such as in Iraq.

Whose side are they on, anyway?

Cal –

You stated:

“Hundreds of al Qaeda fled from Afghanistan to Iraq and were harbored there, straight after the fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2001.”

–>Prove that Saddam Hussein harbored al Qaeda and I’ll support the war against Iraq. You specifically used the word harbored, which implies that an official governmental entity is responsible. No such claim has ever been made, not even by Bush. So, prove it: You can’t do it, can you?

“Because Chet: they are connected.”

–>Keep telling yourself that, Cal. If al Qaeda is in Iraq now, it’s because Bush threw our troops into a cauldron. That doesn’t mean there ever was a real connection between Saddam’s Iraq and al Qaeda.

–Chet

In the years since, al Qaeda has continued to pump vast resources – tens of thousands of fighters and more – into Iraq. Such fighters are being captured or killed daily. (Chet, that’s a good thing.)

Such fighters for al Qaeda in Iraq are foreigners – i.e., non-Iraqi Arabs – many of whom would otherwise have travelled to Pakistan / Afghanistan, as they did throughout the 1980s and 90s.

If the U.S. were to retreat prematurely from Iraq, permitting an al Qaeda-led bloodbath there and basically the establishment of an al Qaeda-led state: even our allies in Afghanistan would instantly bail on us – some fleeing for their lives – as they grasp our total unreliability.

Yet, Chet says with a straight face anyway, “Iraq has nothing to do with [Afghanistan].”

Astounding. Words fail in describing such cluelessness.

The cluelessness undermines Chet’s claim to be in favor of victory in Afghanistan. Because Chet: they are connected. Victory in one, DOES depend on victory in the other. Get real. Get a clue.

I have made patently clear that, in my view, we should crush al Qaeda — in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Iraq has nothing to do with that. Neither does a 9 year old Iranian boy rotting in a US jail. THAT is what side of the war I’m on Bruce. Being against al Qaeda does not require that I mindlessly support the catastrophe in Iraq which has never had anything whatsoever to do with the war on terror.

An al Qaeda sympathizer? You’re a sad joke, Bruce. You have a flimzy mind and you do not deserve to live in a democratic society.

Ban me all you want. That’s always been the way intimidated, small minded people maintain control.

–Chet

[GP. Ed. Note:  I specifically did not ban, nor edit this comment, even though it violates .... as this commenter often does.... the community terms of conduct.  I thought his comment should remain to highlight a typical liberal reaction when one challenges them with facts.  Very Daily Kos, no?]

1 – You “hate” the President.

2 – You won’t pick a side because it isn’t a football game.

No bro, it is the future of your nation. I think it is quite obvious who you want to win. I may ban you from this site for being an al-Qaeda sympathizer. The evidence is becoming overwhelming despite your cute attempts to seem moderate.

You wrote: “There is no Koranic equivalent to ‘turn the other cheek’ and ‘love your enemies.’ Just in case you weren’t too familiar with the so-called religion of peace.”

My reply: Who cares? The word “homosexual” is never uttered in the King James bible, yet it’s used by fundamentalist Christians to demonize us. I think you believe Islam is *inherently* an evil religion (despite historical and contemporary evidence to the contrary). You and others don’t even bother to distinguish between moderate versions of Islam and Wahabiism. Which is fine by me: I love it when conservatives are exposed as racists.

–Chet