WHY BIN LADEN WANTS HOME DELIVERY OF THE NEW YORK TIMES

7.11.06 | Mia T

[Mia T]

ping

[Stallone]

You are hilarous.

A graphic for your viewing pleasure.

[Mia T]

ping

[A message]

Oh Mia, if wasn't so darn true it would be funny.

Your " Why Bin Laden wants home delivery of the New York Times" is a classic.

[no-s]

heheh...that's really good. shorten it up a bit and stick it in you-tube/google video etc...I have friends who read the NYT and they need an ironic whack to the brain to get the point....

[Mia T]

It's tragic. :(

[A message]

yes it truly is :-(

[nopardons]

bttt

[Mia T]

;)

[Mia T]

thanx :)

[nopardons]

Welcome, as always. I LOVE your stuff! :-)

[Cindy]

Thanks for the ping, MiaT.

[Mia T]

thanx, Cindy. :)

[A message]

This phrase underscores clinton's failure to understand that:

* a terrorist war requires only one consenting player

Something you wrote earlier( and is in your links) that bears repeating.

When our enemies call it a Jihad. It is a Jihad.

When our enemies say we are at war. We are at war.

War and Jihad only require one side to prosecute it. It is up to the other side whether they want to defend themselves. The liberals dont seem to understand this and the NYTimes is traitorous paper that seeks for our side not to defend ourselves.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

TOP SECRET DOCUMENTS

[Mia T]

Exactly. The clintons and The Left don't get it... or CHOOSE not to get it

Clearly, the impeached ex-president treated terrorism not as war but as a law enforcement problem, which, by definition is defensive, after-the-fact and fatally-too-late.

He appears not to understand that when terrorists declare war on you…and then proceed to kill you… you are, perforce, at war. At that point, you really have only one decision to make: Do you fight the terrorists… or do you surrender?

Critical to the understanding of the clintons' (and the left's) inability to protect America from terrorism is the analysis of clinton's final phrase, "though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America."

"I did not bring him [Osama bin Laden] here... though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America."

This phrase is clinton's explicit rejection of both bin Laden's repeated declarations/acts of war and the (Bush) doctrine of preemption to fight terror.

This phrase underscores clinton's failure to understand that:

• a terrorist war requires only one consenting player
  
• the War on Terror is global and irreducible, the Left's postmodern posture notwithstanding.
  
• defining bin Laden's acts of war as "crimes'' is a dangerous, anachronistic, postmodern conceit (It doesn't depend on what the meaning of the word "war" is) and amounts to surrender
  
• preemptive action, and even more so, preventative action, serve a necessary, critically protective, as well as offensive function in any war on terror.

The sorry endpoint of this massive, 8-year clinton blunder was, of course, 9/11 and the exponential growth of al Qaeda.

WHY DID BILL CLINTON IGNORE TERRORISM?
Was it simply the constraints of his liberal mindset, or was it something even more threatening to our national security?
by Mia T, 8.18.05

also see:
The Left's Fatally Flawed "Animal Farm" Mentality
(Why America Must NEVER AGAIN Elect a Democrat President)
by Mia T

.

[Mia T]

In the caldron of conflict and resolution that is government, it matters not much from which little parochial corner we pluck our leaders. What matters--what matters most--perhaps in the end what matters only--is character.

According to the author, "Do I desire security or glory?" is one of the "complicated" questions a president must ask.

The author fails to understand that a president who needs to ask himself that question is in the wrong job.--Mia T]

by Mia T, 7.07.06
ON PEGGY NOONAN ON HILLARY CLINTON SENDING MEN TO WAR
(IT RUNS IN THE FAMILY)

 

ALBRIGHT INDICTS CLINTON FOR TERRORISM FAILURE (and doesn't even know it)
by Mia T, 4.28.06

ALBRIGHT: 'Bin Laden and his Network Declared War on the United States and Struck First and We Have Suffered Deeply'



MISSING CLINTON AUDIO! 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?'
(+Albright-Fulbright-Nobel TERRORISM revelations)

HEAR CLINTON! 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?'
by Mia T, 4.24.06



READ MORE

[Mia T]

Hoisted by their own petard, so to speak. ;)