That bunch is hardly "Paddy's Apostles." They used to spend their time attacking Buchanan before they moved on to Tancredo.
Someone else called them the La Raza Coyotes, which is amusing and pretty accurate.
well, some of them spout St. Paddy's spiel when it suits them.
a case of "strange bedfellows" perhaps?
In any case, I think the immediate reprisal nuking of Mecca would be an incorrect policy.
1. I think it would be better to target Medina (literally "the city of the prophet"), as it was there that Mohammed declared war on the entire world some 1350 years ago, beginning the subsequent uninterrupted imperial ambition of Islam.
2. I think we should give formal notice of imminent nuclear eradication, and give them one full week from the conclusion of the announcement to evacuate the city.
3. I think we should then stack-nuke it, starting with airbursts and ending with deep-penetrators.
4. I think we should make it explicitly clear that any subsequent Islamic WMD violation of the "second chance" this policy grants the Ummah to keep its damned Black Stone will be repaid with the instant and unannounced stack-nuking of the Kaaba enclosure and Mecca as a whole (including ALL the traditional pilgrimage features).
5. I think this should be public policy.
6. I think this policy should make it explicitly clear that we do not *desire* to do this, but assuredly SHALL do this, without fail, should we ever come under WMD attack by any Islamic entity.
7. I think this policy should make it explicitly clear that, in this war against trans-national Islamicists, the onus of cooperation rests upon the Ummah as a whole. If they want to keep their fetishes, they need to play ball... or we will definitely ram the bat up their collective arse.
Such a policy used to be called "nuclear deterrence"