Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mossad1967

You know what I hate about that Drudge teaser and what some others are saying about it on other boards? Even if alot of the info is old, it does not detract from its relevance one iota since al qaeda preps years in advance for a variety of hits (some of which they go through with while others are deepsixed). The fact that some info is old is actually more telling and sober in the eyes of the intel community -- and us TMers. 911 was the result of years of planning and the next major hit will follow suit.

I know that it is the GWB bashers in the media and on the other boards that are dissing the threat as usual. Drudge seems to prefer kerry, I wonder why? His freewheeling stance on what was once traditional marriage?


88 posted on 08/02/2004 7:31:06 PM PDT by Donna Lee Nardo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]


To: Donna Lee Nardo

What's really disturbing to me is that we can't even agree among ourselves on FR that the threat is real and (has the potential of being) imminent. We have people on every thread yelling "it that's true, then why haven't they struck yet?" - no matter what we post, whether it be suitcase nukes, terrorists crossing the Mexican border, raising the threat level, etc.

So if Freepers are chanting "there's nothing to worry about" - how do we expect the 90% of the country who has their heads in the sand to wake up?

It took years to plan 9-11. This surveillance data is either old or it's not, but either way it isn't irrelevant simply because of the date the info was aquired.

But it DOES prove that the "why haven't they struck yet?" mantra is rediculously false logic. They will strike when they are ready, and not before. It may be tomorrow, it may be years from now. But the fact they haven't struck yet doesn't mean they can't, or that they won't, or that they don't have every intention of doing so - and inflicting as many casualties as possible (in lives, money, infrastructure, commerce, psyche, morale, etc.).


91 posted on 08/02/2004 7:37:55 PM PDT by BagCamAddict (I support my Troops and my President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies ]

To: Donna Lee Nardo; Mossad1967
This will be the new dem mantra:

1) WHAT WMD's in Iraq?!?!?
2) Saddam had no ties with Al Quada whatsoever?!?!?
3) WHAT threat level?!?!?!!?
4) BUSH LIED!!?!?!?!!?!!!

Etc.

And, no matter what facts you present, the democratic leadership and the mainstream national and international media will just keep on shrilling their "Spin".

Tom Ridge said Sunday there was MORE than one source. Condaleeza Rice said yesterday that there was MORE than one source. Bush said there was multiple sources. That should just end any "discussion of relevance".

But, it won't, will it? The dems are going to do everything in their power to undermine national security, because they think it might help Kerry get elected ... until we all go back to sleep, sing Kum Bay Yaaa! Remember -- even if you're dead you can still vote democrat ;)
229 posted on 08/03/2004 4:19:34 AM PDT by Tilly (I'm not paid to be stressed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson