Posted on 09/23/2001 7:38:21 PM PDT by truther
On Tuesday evening, I saw a video entitled "Jihad in America," 1994, produced by Steve Emerson and only shown once on PBS. It was one of the most chilling things I have ever seen. There was footage of Islamofascist leaders talking about "cutting off hands and limbs" and "blood running in the streets" [of America]. Where or how this footage was obtained is unknown but Emerson showed how then (7 years ago) the Islamic radicals used the 501 (c)(3) foundations for funneling money to their radical groups and how they recruited terrorists from the mosques. In addition, it showed young boys (approx. 8 - 13 years of age) in "summer-camp" settings being brainwashed to hate and kill Jews and Americans!
One thing that was apparent in the video, too, was a conversation with the CIA person who had been in charge of arming the Afghans with $3 Billion in US aid to fight the Russians. Training the Afghans in warfare (conventional and/or terrorist tactics?) was part of the package. This went on under the reign of Bush I. The Afghans who were armed/trained are the same ones who are part of the Taliban today! The man from the CIA said they KNEW that the ones they were arming/training were radicals but, hey, they would worry about the consequences later!! We, in essence, bought the worst enemies money can buy!
This proves that Americans should not be giving any more foreign aid to anyone - friend or foe - as it will come back to bite us on the backside! Look at the Israelis, for instance. We sold them missiles for their protection and they used them against our ship, the U.S.S. Liberty! A man with whom I work was quoted by someone as saying, "Your friends come and go but you accummulate enemies."
Let's cut off clandestine aid being given through the CIA or any other agency. Hell, the $3 Billion given to Afghanistan could have been given to our own military for pay and other necessities. Now the Afghans think that, because they defeated one super-power (Russia), they can defeat us!
What worries me is Bush II in his speech talking about "bringing the terrorists to justice or justice to the terrorists." America does not, and should not, be involved in a war with a faceless enemy where we will alienate every Muslim in the world against us. Let's find the ones responsible for the terrorist attack and bring them to justice HERE in this country. Let's not give credibility to the wannabe world court (International Criminal Court - "ICC") which will be loaded with "judges" who can favor the terrorists and rule against the U.S. AND its soldiers. "Taking justice to the terrorists" is a form of revenge - mostly on an innocent populace - that the U.S. cannot defend. Bush II's brand of "justice" could be viewed, by Muslim judges, as a terrorist activity aimed at innocent civilians.
Let's remember, too, that the date of the bombing of the WTC is significant. September 11, 2001, was the 25th anniversary of the Camp David Accords. Just another bungled deed on the "legacy" blotter of Prez Jimmy Carter and another reason not to use foreign aid. If the stupid SOB had just kept his nose out of foreign affairs and spending U.S. taxpayer money in the form of foreign aid, this tragedy might not have occurred.
Let's invoke the Monroe Doctrine and not be involved in foreign wars or intrigues. Of course, the CFR wants everyone to be a globalist and forget about the Monroe Doctrine. If there is one thing that has happened because of the WTC tragedy, it is that Americans are finally wakening to the fact that we are Americans and not globalists. Perhaps now is a good time to discuss the reason for the Monroe Doctrine and why it should, once again, be invoked. If this is protectionism, so be it. I want to protect America and Americans for America's sake - so help me God.
Let us use this tragedy to bring our military home, seal our borders, throw out the troublemakers and illegal immigrants, get US out of the UN and the UN out of the US, and invoke the Monroe Doctrine. God bless you all.
Gee, everyone seems to know about the Logan Act today, LOL! Did you see the CNN poll? A quarter million or so mostly liberal voters and over 80% are against JJ meeting with the Taliban. The man needs more than "yes men" and fellow exploiters as friends. Like Clinton, Jesse doesn't have a clue about putting the nation before self-interest. We are shining the light on plenty of RATS these days. (^:
Leftist groups within the US regularly lobby Congress with pictures and tales of the starving, wounded and abused and these same groups with their media allies accuse the US of greed and push for redistribution of our wealth. It will take years to pull back from the role our nation's been appointed - as villain and debtor to a victimized world. We can not ignore the militant Muslims. They won't ignore us. With mass communication, transportation and the freedom we enjoy, we can't ignore those who seek to destroy us.
TheBritish SAS also originally trained Muslims who later turned militant. We were trying to keep the Soviet Union from overtaking Afghanistan and eventually gaining access to the deep waters of the Arabian Sea. It is a delicate balance, but we are stuck in the middle of an international mess whether we want to be or not. I think President Bush is doing an amazing job carefully building this alliance with the goal of destroying these cells. It will also reassure the leaders of these nations that our new President is a man of his word, and that he doesn't intend to have the US meddle in these country's internal affairs beyond cooperation in rooting out the terrorists, but if they do not cooperate, he will make good on his threats. There are barbarians at the gate.
Not if I don't watch CNN; which I don't under any circumstance.
I know you undestand, too. {g}
"A quarter million or so mostly liberal voters and over 80% are against JJ meeting with the Taliban."
That quarter million have suspect motives, I suspect; fear first & foremost with "Patriotism" either dead last, or totally out of the question.
IMO, that'd make this lot so unreliable as to be laughable.
Don't be looking for this gaggle to be anywhere around to lend their support when the time comes for the rubber to meet the road, Cowgirl. Don't.
NOT if it means they'll be expected to make any kind of sacrifice.
Their support for the nation is only slightly "out of phase" with their Lamestream media sycophants; & those Lamestream quislings are working 24 & 7 in a concerted effort at subverting the nation's cause, and resolve from every angle concievable.
As the subversion progresses, those poll numbers will shift accordingly. ~Just watch.
The traitorous Lamestream shall start, albeit slowly, with our POTUS' cabinet...attacking & dividing as they have already?
"President Refuses JJ Attempt At Peace; Powel & Rice Not Opposed"
~Sound familiar?
That CHEAP SHOT's only the beginning.
America's media, ALL forms, have proven time & again what they are (devote America-Hating Socialists), & whose side they're on; and that side is not that of America & her citizen-taxpayers. Period.
"The man [Rev Jackson] needs more than 'yes men' and fellow exploiters as friends."
Impossible. The word...never mind concept of "friend" doesn't exist for a snake. Never has, either.
"Like Clinton, Jesse doesn't have a clue about putting the nation before self-interest."
No truer words were ever spoken.
"We are shining the light on plenty of RATS these days."
Yes we are; as as is always the case with rodents?
There're thousands more beyond the one seen.
{*sounds* like AOL, kid. :o) }
"On Tuesday evening, I saw a video entitled 'Jihad in America,' 1994, produced by Steve Emerson and only shown once on PBS."
So what do you make of this, MP??
More Leftist-inspired Sin of Omission perhaps? (I *think* so...)
Was there any analysis of who was "In Charge" in the year of our Lord, 1994?
Any correlation between certain "policies" in force at the time the foundation blocks of terrorist activities were layed & then able to manifest on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001?
I suppose it was just too soon to show split-screen comparissons of the Sink Emporer approaching citizens in the streets of NY after the atrocity & pitching his lies to soothe Hilliary's constituencie's nagging consciouses??
"It was one of the most chilling things I have ever seen. There was footage of Islamofascist leaders talking about 'cutting off hands and limbs' and 'blood running in the streets' [of America]. Where or how this footage was obtained is unknown but Emerson showed how then (7 years ago) the Islamic radicals used the 501 (c)(3) foundations for funneling money to their radical groups and how they recruited terrorists from the mosques."
Think people will have enough horse-sense to employ the required arithmetic in a quest to determine who was ultimately at fault?
I'm not just talking abour Clinton here, either...I allude to the present day version of the Democrat's Liberalism & all that entails. Think they will be able to figure this out?
Of course, NOT if PBS has anything to say about it, eh?
PBS; "Educational TV," HA!
"In addition, it showed young boys (approx. 8 - 13 years of age) in 'summer-camp' settings being brainwashed to hate and kill Jews and Americans!"
Moreover, think our Jewish citizens, neighbors & friends will recognize the distinct flavor, similarity to the Hitler Youth camps/movements of 60 years past? Think they will?
"The man from the CIA said they KNEW that the ones they were arming/training were radicals but, hey, they would worry about the consequences later!! We, in essence, bought the worst enemies money can buy!"
Well yes; this is true.
I cannot nor will not deny this assertion; however, let's try to remember that hindsight's always 20/20. That to permit a kneejerk reaction, we'd be neglecting the *times* & circumstances of our support of the Taliban regime.
The focus was on The Evil Empire at that time; not peoples we thought were unable to present any kind of formidable threat to the United States. At that time the U.S. needed the fanatic Moslems to combat the communists, which they did; and of course, the concept of dog biting the hand that feeds it not altogether a surprise?
Then was then, now "is" now. Make no mistake about the meaning of "is," either because that too, was then Right?
The shifting sands of time & politics making strange bedfellows are a confusing hybred.
"This proves that Americans should not be giving any more foreign aid to anyone - friend or foe..."
I respectfully disagree; it means (to me) we must be a LOT more careful who we give what to.
We're a loving & generaous peoples.
Being taken advantage of, within reason, is the chance one always takes dealing with strangers.
When it comes to our nation's security on the other hand *chances* should NEVER be taken & that means arms & weapons of any kind to any but our MOST time-proven & trusted allies be permitted or else yes, "...it will come back to bite us on the backside!"
"Look at the Israelis, for instance. We sold them missiles for their protection and they used them against our ship, the U.S.S. Liberty! A man with whom I work was quoted by someone as saying, 'Your friends come and go but you accummulate enemies.'"
This is a touchy matter, the Israelis; those people are the only friends we have in that entire region.
Be careful not to cut off your nose in spite of your face, Miss Print. Be real careful.
"Let's cut off clandestine aid being given through the CIA or any other agency."
Now's a hell of a time to suggest that, kid; not when "clandestined" monies are precisely what'll be called for in an effort at finding out just what the Islamic nutjobs are up to. Just a hell of a time to suggest that...
"Hell, the $3 Billion given to Afghanistan could have been given to our own military for pay and other necessities. Now the Afghans think that, because they defeated one super-power (Russia), they can defeat us!"
What you say has some merit, IMO; however, we're again dealing with that damned hindsight again.
Remember the great Roanld Reagan's goal in defeating the Communists in the USSR was in an effort we ALL benefit from the-then described, Peace Dividend?
A huge military BUILD-UP wasn't absolutely necessary & as such those monies could be channeled into private enterprise for ALL our benefit.
While on the flip-side; NOR was letting our military & intelligence community deteriorate as badly as it had been left very *bright*, either.
But that's Liberals in Power for ya; nonetheless, & from *my* POV this whole subject's a double-edged sword.
"What worries me is Bush II in his speech talking about 'bringing the terrorists to justice or justice to the terrorists.'"
I'm sorry to hear you feel that way; however, we simply cannot be all things to all people all the time.
Whether "justice" is meted out here stateside, or, at the source of the animalistic behavior is of no consequence to this citizen-taxpayer.
That "justice" is meted out is the point, the only point I concern myself with now.
"'Taking justice to the terrorists' is a form of revenge..."
Yea. I'm afraid that's right. So be it. My conscious screams this nation let the punishment fit the crime; & frankly, there should be some dreadful HELL to pay for what has happened FIRST to them...later to those of our own charged with the constitutional responsibility of protecting us.
You're obviously not a military veteran or you'd know full-well someone's ALWAYS responsible for failure and success. It's the American way, Miss Print.
You should be very thankful "BushII" is running the show here, MissP; & not I.
"- mostly on an innocent populace - that the U.S. cannot defend."
NO, MsP; action(s) which you either cannot, or will not defend.
You cannot, will not speak for me, here. I will not permit that usurption of my rights in this Republic of ours. C?
"Bush II's brand of 'justice' could be viewed, by Muslim judges, as a terrorist activity aimed at innocent civilians."
I must be frank; I couldn't care less what these Muslim Judges, Mullahs or Saints say or do. Not anymore, I -am- sorry.
These Muslim judges had better mind their collective Ps & Qs; moreover, I WILL NOT PERMIT OUR NATION PLAYING JESTER TO THE CLOWN in this or any other worldly matter.
We're leaders, not followers; I'd suggest you understand the passion those of my cut harbor.
What you do, is of course your concern, choice, & right; let your conscious be your guide then?
Carter, Clinton, Camp David Accords...all in the past. Water under the bridge right now.
As an old fighter, I will take [you] on at the time we engage; NOT what happened the last time, nor what might happen the next time.
IF you & I meet on the battlefield & IF things go my way?
There isn't a next time to think about; only the memory of you.
That's how it works in my world, MsP.
Hopefully, our nation's going to adopt an attitude more in line with the one I use to govern my personal life; as they *appear* to have doe with budgets?
We can only pray.
"Let's invoke the Monroe Doctrine and not be involved in foreign wars or intrigues."
Capitol idea!!
Let us permit them to become very strong, & THEN bring the war to us? {/sarc}
Inasmuch as you should be thankful *I'm* not running things?
I'm giddy at the mere thought, neither are you.
"Perhaps now is a good time to discuss the reason for the Monroe Doctrine and why it should, once again, be invoked. If this is protectionism, so be it. I want to protect America and Americans for America's sake - so help me God."
I believe you; & opening up a dialog on the MD...the reasons our FF's created the policy & whether it should be enforced would be something I could get behind 101%.
ONLY to the extent you, I, & ALL others have our input, though because again, that's be the American way. Right?
"Let us use this tragedy to bring our military home, seal our borders, throw out the troublemakers and illegal immigrants, get US out of the UN and the UN out of the US, and invoke the Monroe Doctrine."
You've got it all figured out, do ya?
I can respect someone like you; just be advised I may not necessarily agree. OK?
I simply dislike using anything like what happened at the WTC for the reasons you stated.
Some of which made sense, some fairly outrageous.
But then again, as a conservative you have an inbuilt, natural appreciation for fierce individualism, a respect for differing opins, & the deabtes those qualities always beg, eh?
"God bless you all."
And may God bless you.
No problem, Landru, as long as they stay out of the way. Even Barbra S. would rather fly with Charlton Heston or Ted Nugent than Michael Moore or George Steponallofus right now. LOL!Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.