Has U.S. threatened to vaporize Mecca?

World Net Daily ^ | 1-7-05

[hope]

to vaporize Mecca?

This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42272

Friday, January 7, 2005

---

---

Has U.S. threatened
to vaporize Mecca?
Intelligence expert says nuke option is reason bin Laden has been quiet

---

Posted: January 7, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

---

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

Why hasn't Osama bin Laden's terror network executed an attack on U.S. soil since 9-11?

Simple, says Dr. Jack Wheeler, creator of an acclaimed intelligence website dubbed "the oasis for rational conservatives": The U.S. has threatened to nuke the Muslim holy city of Mecca should the terror leader strike America again.

On his website, To the Point, Wheeler explains how the Bush administration has identified the potential of wiping Mecca off the map as bin Laden's ultimate point of vulnerability – the Damoclean Sword hanging over his head.

"Israel … recognizes that the Aswan Dam is Egypt's Damoclean Sword," writes Wheeler. "There is no possibility whatever of Egypt's winning a war with Israel, for if Aswan is blown, all of inhabited Egypt is under 20 feet of water. Once the Israelis made this clear to the Egyptians, the possibility of any future Egyptian attack on Israel like that of 1948, 1967, and 1972 is gone."

Wheeler says talk of bin Laden's Damoclean Sword has infiltrated the Beltway.

Writes Wheeler in his members-only column: "There has been a rumor floating in the Washington ether for some time now that George Bush has figured out what Sword of Damocles is suspended over Osama bin Laden's head. It's whispered among Capitol Hill staffers on the intel and armed services committees; White House NSC (National Security Council) members clam up tight if you begin to hint at it; and State Department neo-cons love to give their liberal counterparts cardiac arrhythmia by elliptically conversing about it in their presence.

"The whispers and hints and ellipses are getting louder now because the rumor explains the inexplicable: Why hasn't there been a repeat of 9-11? How can it be that after this unimaginable tragedy and Osama's constant threats of another, we have gone over three years without a single terrorist attack on American soil?"

Available only to subscribers of To the Point, Wheeler ends his column by explaining the effectiveness of the Mecca threat.

"Completely obliterating the terrorists' holiest of holies, rendering what is for them the world's most sacred spot a radioactive hole in the ground is retribution of biblical proportions – and those are the only proportions that will do the job.

"Osama would have laughed off such a threat, given his view that Americans are wussies who cut and run after a few losses, such as Lebanon in 1983 and Somalia in 1993. Part of Bush's rationale for invading Afghanistan and Iraq – obviously never expressed publicly – was to convince Osama that his threat to nuke Mecca was real. Osama hates America just as much as ever, but he is laughing no more."

Wheeler says bin Laden is "playing poker with a Texas cowboy holding the nuclear aces," so there's nothing al-Qaida could do that could come remotely close to risking obliterating Mecca.

Writes Wheeler: "So far, Osama has decided not to see if GW is bluffing. Smart move."

---

Subscribe to Wheeler's To the Point intelligence website and read insightful, clear analysis every day.

---

[Nesher]

Chemist geek fails to realize that it's not religious bigotry when you're telling the truth about a satanic cult disguised as a "religion"

[FBD]

I don't believe ANYTHING from World Nut Daily anymore, and I don't believe this story either.

Not that the idea doesn't have some merit as a deterrent.

But the Bush administration is way too moderate in it's tone about Islamo- fascism to even remotely suggest something like this is in their policy

[broadsword]

All Muslims are liars? Way to generalise!

If they don't lie to the infidel, then they are certainly not "virtuous" Muslims, because the Koran makes it a "virtue" to lie to the infidel to further the cause of Islam against us. I don't blame you for believing their lies, they are well-practiced in the art.

But it's time to wise up, or do you intend to wait until the last infidel throat is slit.

[broadsword]

There are many who don't yet perceive this as an epic struggle, a civilizational mano-a-mano. The enemy does...

Human civilization had better wake up real soon and get as serious about its survival as the seventh century savages are about our annihilation!

[broadsword]

Not only would it be seen as an attack against Islam...

No! Noooo! Oh, dear God, NOOOOOO! Then the Muslims would stop loving the great satan and blessing us with their holy sacrament of bloodthirsty violence and terror!

[Happy2BMe]

I agree. No way we would cut off hour nose to spite our face with Saudi oil.

[Once-Ler]

Freedom of thought obviously didn't include the monarchists' thought. The Founders also accepted slavery --- so you can't claim they were completely politically correct multiculturalists like the liberals we see today --- and the only "religion" they could completely accept is Mohammad's.

You extrapolate a lot from my comments pointing out that the Founding Fathers DID know about Islam. I never claimed the Founding Fathers were multiculturalists or they completely accepted Islam. Other freepers have pointed out that the Founding Fathers did not exclude Islam from the 1st ammendment.

[Fred Nerks]

"If an AMERICAN said that, it would be from the loony left!!!"

This is something I am still trying to understand. I think it's simply a matter of history and culture. Not owning a gun in this country doesn't make one an anti-gunner.

There are two reasons why one might want to own a weapon; defense and hunting, correct? Well, in Oz, so far, we don't know who to shoot (yet) and the wildlife is either protected or too tough to eat!

Come on over for a while, after you have been here a few weeks you will understand, I guarantee.

[Boazo]

we don't know who to shoot (yet)From that article,I would say that it won't be long!

[Fred Nerks]

"from that article"

And that's the point. That article was first printed in The Australian, our major newspaper, established by none other than Rupert Murdoch whom you know as the prime mover behind FOX NEWS. The problem is identified, no one is screaming about 'profiling' and we all know what's going on. The aussies re-elected John Howard by a larger margin than the previous for reasons of security, not social issues (as the Left tries to claim) The Leader of the Opposition made a huge mistake promising to 'bring the troops home from Iraq by Christmas' -
I would say that our society is not anywhere as divided as yours in the US...when it comes to the matter of security, because we are well informed (our press does print both sides of an issue) we aren't left and right, not conservative and liberal, we are all on the same side, we are all Australians! (Well, most of us - enough to make a difference, anyway.)
The rabid Left exists of course, but marginally so, and I ask you to consider - our entire population of 20 million or so is spread out over the entire continent...Australia is accused of being twenty years behind the times; perhaps our 'today' is more like the US once WAS.

[dennisw]

Mr Pontificator:

Once more for you, we are talking about obliterating Mecca and Medina after a large scale terror attack on US soil. If Muslims detonate a nuke in NYC or Chicago are you in favor of nuking Mecca?

YES or NO?

[Boazo]

Sounds good to me Fred.Talk to you again I hope.

[GGpaX4DumpedTea]

"...can we call the Times photographers and editors to stand within a couple hundred feet..."

Which "Times"?
__New York Times
__Los Angeles Times
__Time Magazine
__Times of London
__All of the above

[af_vet_1981]

Yes

because unlike others, I am not a shill for Islamic terrorists ...

[Chemist_Geek]

No

because unlike others, I am not a bigoted homicidal maniac terrorist who kills or wishes to kill innocents...

[dennisw]

Waste 'em if they attack us with large scale terrorism. Nukes or bio/chem weaponry. Waste Mecca. Waste Medina. Waste Qom.

[Chemist_Geek]

Waste Mecca. Waste Medina. Waste Qom.

Deliberately kill millions of innocents.

Yeah.

[dennisw]

Correct. After they kill our innocents we kill theirs.

[Chemist_Geek]

Correct. After they kill our innocents we kill theirs.

You're no better than the terrorists, you know.

You, and your bretheren here on FR in that belief, disgust me.