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.

---

[Eurotwit]

ping

[ppaul]

[recalcitrant]

sheep to the right.
goats to the left.

looks like about right.

[DoughtyOne]

I'm not convinced your idea wouldn't work. I am also not convinced it would. You are expecting people to think rationally. "Allah said something totally wrong, so now I know Allah was full of it."

After watching the Palestinians follow a person who led them in the wildreness for fifty years, when there was an oasis to be had right under their feet, I'm just not convinced the subjects would come to the only conclusion you and I might.

The U.N., Europe, Russia, China, the whole Moslem world, even about half the U.S. populace would never respect this nation again.

We might be able to stiff the whole world today, but I see a time ahead when we're not going to be the top dog on the block. If we convince the world we are a paria state, I am not convinced that down the road we won't pay for it in ways we never thought possible.

I'm not saying I'd never buy into your plan, but it would take a catestrophic event to make it a viable option in my assessment. It would have to be done with the rest of the world's tacit approval. If not, we might just as will let the Islamics win. I think we'd lose in the long run anyway, due to massive disapproval of our actions.

[broadsword]

I HAVE read the Koran and am studying Arabic, because I want to know more and more about my country's enemy. I think you mixed up your post, my FRiend.

[Halgr]

Frankly, I've been telling my friends and associates that this will eventually be the final solution.

You all can speculate till the cows come home....LOL

[broadsword]

I'm not convinced your idea wouldn't work.

But it's NOT my idea, my friend. I just argued that point because you asked me to.

MY point is that we cannot win the hearts and minds of the seventh-century savages, and that I really don't care if they are offended or not. They are our enemies either way. I would prefer that there were NO Muslims at all in America, EVER! For the sake of every innocent human being on earth, I wish there were no Muslims anywhere.

I have been studying this problem in depth. this fight to the death is not going to come off easy for us, and it could go either way in the long run.

[blogbat]

"The U.N., Europe, Russia, China, the whole Moslem world, even about half the U.S. populace would never respect this nation again."

I think that is really rather telling about our "blue-state" friends, n'est ce pas?

[blogbat]

Indeed I have, it was meant to reply to the nut who accused you of not having read the Koran ;)

[APFel]

Nuclear weapons used in the time of war is geopolitical poison. It is a one-way ticket to becoming an instant international pariah. The "horrors" of a nuclear strike have become so mythical that the next nation to use one in the time of war (or peace), especially in a non-combat theatre (like Mecca) will face SERIOUS repercussions in the international domain. Geopolitical clout would dwindle to zero.

To even entertain such an idea is foolish. To put these foolish thoughts into the mouth of our president is treasonous. Cut the crap.

APf

[broadsword]

The U.N., Europe, Russia, China, the whole Moslem world, even about half the U.S. populace would never DONT respect this nation again NOW!

[Moderate right-winger]

I'm convinced we are already doing what we can to extinguish this threat, piece by piece, thanks to the political will of our leaders. But aside from the problem of Islamic fanaticism, we also face possible North Korean aggression. In that arena, our leaders had expressed no backbone whatsoever, except lip service.

[nyconse]

you think the Muslim are not already united against us?

[blogbat]

If China nuked India (less likely than other Asian scenarios right now), trust me, the world will do nothing more than offer a rap on the wrists.

[blogbat]

"The U.N., Europe, Russia, China, the whole Muslim world, even about half the U.S. populace would never DONT respect this nation again NOW!"

All the reason loyal Americans must be strong and hang together lest they...well, you know the famous quote.

[broadsword]

It is a one-way ticket to becoming an instant international pariah.

LOL! What are we NOW?

There is no unified "world community" or "world opinion" just a bunch of jealous, squabbling, selfish, ignorant little fish with a very few big fish and one great big shark in the water... uhm... that shark would be US.

[broadsword]

None survive when freedom fails:
Good men rot in filthy jails,
While those who cried, "Appease! Appease!"
Are hanged by those they tried to please.

[DoughtyOne]

You'll have to pardon me for thinking you had adopted this plan. Heh heh...

If we were just talking seventh century savages, there'd be far less downside to taking action that might be required. Sadly, we don't operate in a vacuum on this.

For the record (once again), I think we've been the biggest saps on the planet to allow Moslems to immigrate to the U.S., as if they were going to live side by side with the infidels in peace forever. They have been taught since birth by parents, relatives, friends, Imams and other clerics, teachers, their local media and politicians that Christians are infidels. Our sterling brain-trusts at a just about every level of government thought it was a great idea to diversify these folks into the U.S. mainstream. Yikes, what passes for intelligence these days.

I don't really care if there are Moslems on the planet, but I want them to live in peace. If they are not so inclined, and I'm not convinced they are, then I think all measures should be used to 'convince' them that's a better idea than taking us on. Timing is important to me on this.

[Darkwolf377]

I think it's pretty vague seeing how we've only heard one rumor about it. But I prefer a more direct approach: Dropping Ted Kennedy out of an airplane on a pre-selected target.

[broadsword]

I think we've been the biggest saps on the planet to allow Moslems to immigrate to the U.S., as if they were going to live side by side with the infidels in peace forever. They have been taught since birth by parents, relatives, friends, Imams and other clerics, teachers, their local media and politicians that Christians are infidels.

Couldn't have said it better myself, sir.

Gotta hit the sack, my friend. Good night, and God bless.