I normally can't stand Tancredo, but he said the one thing that has actually made an impression on our little death-cult friends. And he hasn't backed down (and I hope he doesn't).
In any case, I think they wouldn't dare strike the Vatican, because they know it would then be an open war. They might make an attempt on the civilian population of Rome, however, because the left will then come forward and support them (as it did in Spain) and justify their attack as "political protest." Rome is very left-wing, and Islam and the left are hand in glove.
I hope you are right. I find it odd that this hasn't hit the news, because, if true, it is a major news story.
I like Tancredo for his stance on illegal immigratio. Namely, his willingness to skip the PC crap and tell it like it is. I have further warmed to him with his latest statement. Diplomacy is one thing, but our Ilamofacist enemy does not have anything to fear when diplomacy is so PC. If they thought that we might be willing to blow their holy site off the map, they MIGHT actually consider changing their strategy. You can be sure that there is a contingency already planned if XY or Z event were to happen.
Another major attack on the US will galvenize our moderates and change the attitude of many of our lefty friends. This FReeper thinks that AQ has not struck us again for that very reason. There will come a point where they won't care though and will hit with ferocity.
"In any case, I think they wouldn't dare strike the Vatican, because they know it would then be an open war."
Not sure I agree. Open war may be exactly what they want, drawing in all the muslims of the world to their fight.