OT - JSB - what do ya' think of...

I'm delighted that we have such a glowing example of an ally in the Middle East. I wish I wasn't too busy to turn on the TV right now. Is the White House chimp commenting on it yet?

I don't know. Unless someone finally explains to him, and others at the top, the significance of this tragedy, I suspect we'll hear nothing more than canned platitudes.

It was an al-qaeda attack. The more reason GWB is a great president. These bastards would be here killing us if it were not for GWB and the war on terrorism, specifically islamic terrorism and the culture of death.

I wish there was some way we could get Bush on the ballot again in 08, he'd win hands down.

If the war in Iraq is stopping AQ, why have they managed to strike in Great Britain, Spain, Pakistan, Bali, Algeria and Morocco?

Have we here in the U.S. been attacked post 9/11?

Your answer will be no. Why? Because we are fighting them in their own space and we have spent the money here at home to strengthen our security. Many say it was a waste of money and blame GWB, but they will never acknowledge the fact that we here in the U.S. have not been attacked post 9/11. Other countries have, why? Because they have thought it was not worth the expenditure to strengthen their homeland security as we have, they snickered and joked about the U.S. and our efforts. The most famous person here in the U.S. to be assassinated by a radical islamic was Bobby Kennedy, way back in 1968. There have been numerous attacks and hi-jacking over the years. This didn't start with us going into Iraq. If you think that what happened in Pakistan today can't happen here again you are badly mistaken. If we keep up the current level of security, chance are greatly reduced. More needs to be done, IF we can get the lazy, politically corrupt congress to get off their asses and approve the money that President Bush requests.

This is not a sound-bite war. It's a long term war. We need disciplined leaders who won't knuckle under from political pressure.

I need more of your help to understand this. We're fighting AQ in Iraq. Members of AQ have slipped out of Iraq to attack that list of other countries. As long as they were out and travelling, why didn't any of them attack us here on U.S. soil?

I don't understand. Help me.

I'm sure President Cheney and Vice President Wolfowitz will handle things just fine. dbu, however, will wonder why I mentioned Wolfowitz, since dbu has no clue about why Wolfowitz is still kicking around.

You don't want to understand. I can't help those who do not have a desire to understand or their thinking has become warped and corrupted. You sir, need a new hard drive in your head.

No, really. I want to understand. Let's take it a step at a time. We know that AQ has attacked in Great Britain, Spain, Pakistan, Bali, Algeria and Morocco. So, this means they've managed to get some of their people out of Iraq. The people have physically left Iraq and gone to other countries to attack.

Is this conclusion correct?

Ya' think? Now, do a little reading and find out which Muslim faction Al Qaeda wants to remain in power. Then, check out which one Bhutto belonged to.

Get back to us on that one.

Now, this is really funny.

First of all, I read all that, probably before you did. But, timing isn't important. What's funny is that you're suggesting I'm badly informed. Meanwhile.....

YOU are the guy who still to this day believes that the government of a city like Oakland somehow has jurisdiction over TSA, a federal agency. You never did finish explaining that ill-informed view. Instead, you take advantage of the fact that my questions usually appear in threads that are loaded with messages, and you can pretend you didn't see them.

Let's talk about how badly informed you are, you pathetic little child. Explain your Oakland theory to us.

I never said we wouldn't have another, I said "chances have been reduced" by quite a bit IF we maintain our current posture and make it even better, which is not likely in the current political atmosphere with the dimmies trying to block everything that Bush does, for purely political gain. They the dimmies will pay at election time. Mark my words.

What do you mean by "current posture"? Our military presence in Iraq?

I couldn't believe it, but I don't know why. They've been trying to kill her since she went back to Pakistan, and they finally succeeded.

Question is, was it the Taliban (she was Pro-US) or the current government (she wanted to share power with What's-His-Name, the current PM...)

That's a *bit* of a stretch...

But I believe you are correct about them not attacking us here, 'cause they're too busy over there...

Taliban? Maybe. Al Qaeda-backed Taliban? More likely. Al Aqaeda idiots? Most likely.

You say "current government" - OR - Al Qaeda? I don't see much difference. At the very least, Musharraf's "democracy" enables unbridled Al Qaeda presence inside the Pakistani borders.

BTW, Hachi, what about my VIN being "JT"?

Because those governments suck-up to Muslims. Listen to the BBC and find out how.