I call bullshit again. I have gotten tons of email and read tons of blogs and postings from liberals about this story.

Forward me some of the email: vincep1974@comcast.net

Remember that the Sudan is the same country that refuses to stop the genocide in Darfur.

Why resort to being disingeniune?

Stop lying about the left. There’s plenty of real stuff to criticize the left for. Your claim is false.

I look forward to being corrected

Remember that the Sudan is the same country that refuses to stop the genocide in Darfur.

Stop lying about the left. There’s plenty of real stuff to criticize the left for. Your claim is false.

Original #41: “I appreciate some of the responses to the comments in my #29 above, especially Pat’s in #36, though I disagree that Bush’s abandoning of his “bin Laden: dead or alive” approach did not make a difference. Vince in #30 had an interesting rebuttal in trying to claim that the Iraq folly is not Bush’s fault – sounds a lot like Rove the other day in his claim that the Dems “rushed Bush to war”, which is generating guffaws and profound disbelief the world over this weekend. Helio’s response in #31 contains a lot I agree with (giving the govt. too much unchecked power in domestic affairs and “being suspicious of a whole religion”), but I think we disagree that starting a needless, costly, bloody war of choice and life-long occupation of a country not associated with terrorism was the right strategy to fight terrorism. And Helio asks what the liberal approach would be. I refer you back to what I wrote about what I think will be the strategy of the new Democratic President – that’s what I hope the strategy will be.”

Of course, the catch 22 of the situation is that they need material possessions first before they can care about them. For poverty and despair have always been the victims the parasite of radicalism feeds from.

How can the Leftists turn a blind eye to this

Easy. There’s no money or gain of absolute power in actually caring about people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up3yuQDAWKQ

How can the Leftists turn a blind eye to this

http://www.bothinonetrench.com/index2.html

Both In One Trench:
Saddam’s Secret Terror Documents

About
In 2003 the United States invaded Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein from power. Subsequently, the U.S. government collected millions of the Iraqi regimes documents and media items.

These Arabic documents have been translated and for the first time reveal the secret support Saddam provided to Islamic terrorism.

Revealed
Transcripts from meetings in Baghdad showed the Taliban asked for help and Saddam’s regime agreed to assist them even as the Taliban provided safe haven and support to Usama bin Laden and al Qaeda while it plotted the attacks of September 11th, 2001.

These documents reveal that the Saddam regime had a long history of cooperation with Islamic terrorists and was a legitimate target in the Global War on Terror.

Broader Context
The story revealed in these pages shows that the United States was correct in accessing that Saddam Hussein was a threat because of his support to terrorism. The United States was right to remove Saddam Hussein from power and stay to fight al Qaeda in Iraq.

“Ray Robison…has a greater claim to authority than most” – The UK Guardian

possibly increasing our effort to eliminate bin Laden, maybe through nothing more than the flies-and-honey approach

“Possibly”?

In other words, THEY wouldn’t even prioritize “getting bin Laden”.

That comment really shows you the degree of contempt the Democrat Party has for voters. They honestly believe that they can bash Bush as incompetent for doing something, but then do the same thing themselves and claim it’s a brilliant plan.

by invading (and apparently permanently occupying) a SECULAR Arab state.

How secular can you be when your country’s flag reads Allahu Akbar and use the people’s money to build mosques?

Also, AQ stems from the ideas of the Muslim Brotherhood…

It’s the MB we should actually be fighting because imho the MB is even more dangerous than AQ.

The MB is very shrewd and it knows that it has as much of a chance to suceed via non-violent Jihad as it has via violent Jihad.

It could be argued that AQ made a big mistake attacking us when they did because the inflitration of the West isn’t deep enough yet for non-violent Jihad to work.

AQ’s decision does show the intelectual robustness and variance that the Jihadi ideology can generate… so even if Bin Ladin was killed in the 70s… i think eventualy a Bin Ladin would have come along and went along the same path….

This is the nature of Islam.

OK, so now we’re worried about self-determination for Iraqis?

Ah more of your inane analysis. So after reading what I wrote about your post , instead of defending yourself.. you’re going to come up with some nonsense statement like that?