The theory of gravity must give them a lot of trouble as well. Drop something, it falls down. Consequences for actions. If you capitulate to a mass murderer, he kills you. Where do people get the idea that all you have to do to stop a monster is smile at it?

Nuanced understanding? I think we understand these fiends rather well. To defeat or even survive people as relentless as these, you have to be just as if not more relentless in your response.

Al Qaeda invites you to convert or die.  Then, once those messy logistical issues are out of the way -- voila!  Religion of peace!

And we all like peace, right?  Which, I suppose, is why the BBC is urging appeasement.

ALL YOU…

SCHEUER: Yes, sir. We certainly have to kill more of the enemy. That’s the first step.
O’REILLY: Any way we can?
SCHEUER: Anywhere we can, whenever we can, without a great deal of concern for civilian casualties. As I said, war is war. The people who got killed when they were hosting Zawahiri to dinner were not the friends of the United States.

We need a Truman decision to help win this war on terror. We need to take the backbone out of the terrorists, demoralize them, gain worldwide suport in finding all of the terror leaders.
HOW?? The TRUMAN DECISION. NOT atomic, but world changing attacks against the ENEMY and ALL who help them in any way.
Same result as August 1945, save millions of people around the world from dying slowly over decades and kill these terrorists where ever they are. Two weeks of massive bombings and its over. Warn them, then do it!
If we dont? We’ll wait 10 years and then have to do the same damn thing after countless innocent people around the world have died from terrorists. Plus, they just might get WMD soon. Do we want that problem?

Europe’s first moon probe has completed it’s mission. So, what else is there to do with it than to litter the lunar surface with it’s remains. Mmm, hmmm. The European Space Agency’s (ESA) unmanned SMART-1 spacecraft ended its three-year mission……

BBC urges appeasement……

Looks like Mr. Scheuer’s mind needs a good scrubbing!

What a collossal professional failure, who can’t shut up!

Little Green Footballs

Islamists, leftists, and the BBC all agree: it’s time to appease Al Qaeda.

And Inayat Bunglawala, media secretary of the radical front group known as the Muslim Council of Britain, is right there to second the motion: Tim…

“…The irony is that America initially presented the invasion of Iraq as a lethal stike against al-Quida. It ended up presenting Bin Laden with a jihad he could only dream of.”

And if we hadn’t invaded Iraq, Afghanistan would have presented him a jihad. Or if we invaded Saudi Arabia it would have presented him a jihad. Or Syria. Or if we had just stayed home our weakness would have presented him the opportunity for a jihad.

It is really hard to give these fools the benefit of the doubt, and assume they really are just fools, rather than the despicable rat bastards they seem.

Either this journalist doesn’t remember why we invaded Iraq or he thinks we’re all so stupid we can’t even remember recent history. And that last line – “It ended up presenting Bin Laden with a jihad he could only dream of.” – oh no! By defending ourselves we always seem to just play right into the hands of our enemies. I guess we should all just convert to the Muslim faith right now.

And we’re supposed to believe that Bin Laden is a sympathetic character who is fighting against the authoritative governements of the middle-east? So, Bin Laden’s object is to institute limited government and constitutional republicanism? Ha, ha, ha! Oh my goodness.

And pay special attention to his comment in the clip, in which he advocates appeasement while scoffing at the suggestion that he’s advocating appeasement.

I don’t know that he actually “advocated” it.. sounds more like he was making a prediction on what will happen. Listen again to what he said. He said was “we will see American policy change….” “…because it’s not in America’s interests to remain as exposed as we are in the Middle East..” I may not agree with this hypothetical policy change, but it certainly sounds like he’s stating what Washington politicians will do as a result of caving in to polls. I don’t know, maybe I’m missing something.

I vaguely remember seeing this guy on FNC before and I don’t remember him being some kind of appeasing liberal type, but those quotes at Wikipedia you directed us tell a different story… but there are others too. By the way, I don’t know anything about this guy off the top of my head so I’m not defending him, just adding to the conversation here:

O’REILLY: I’m bringing it up to be – to show the Islamic world and those Muslims who are watching us right now, the inconsistency of their thought that, if there was a – you know, a God that was actually wanting them to do whatever, how could he possibly want them to…
SCHEUER: No, I don’t quite follow it, sir, because I — as much as I’d like to believe that human life is sacred in all instances, war, whether it’s conducted by Americans or by British or by Chinese or by Muslims, war is just war. And it kills innocent people. And that’s the way it is.
O’REILLY: But there’s a way to wage it. And the way that the al Qaedas are waging it is by killing civilians. They’re not waging war in a conventional way, as you know. Now…
SCHEUER: Well, they are waging war in the conventional way that we waged war until 1945, sir, which is the last war we’ve won. Once we stopped waging war in the American fashion, we haven’t won a war since….
O’REILLY: Is there anything we can do to win it?
SCHEUER: Yes, sir. We certainly have to kill more of the enemy. That’s the first step.
O’REILLY: Any way we can?
SCHEUER: Anywhere we can, whenever we can, without a great deal of concern for civilian casualties. As I said, war is war. The people who got killed when they were hosting Zawahiri to dinner were not the friends of the United States.
O’REILLY: All right, Mr Scheuer, always a pleasure to talk with you.

And he NAILS this one:

“Clarke’s book [Against All Enemies] is also a crucial complement to the September 11 panel’s failure to condemn Mr. Clinton’s failure to capture or kill bin Laden on any of the eight to 10 chances afforded by CIA reporting. Mr. Clarke never mentions that President Bush had no chances to kill bin Laden before September 11 and leaves readers with the false impression that he, Mr. Clinton and Mr. Clinton’s national security adviser, Sandy Berger, did their best to end the bin Laden threat. That trio, in my view, abetted al Qaeda, and if the September 11 families were smart they would focus on the dereliction of Dick [Clarke], Bill [Clinton] and Sandy [Berger] and not the antics of convicted September 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui.”[9]

The webmaster’s blog-within-a-blog. Continuously updated, newest items at the top. 17:36 Video: BBC urges appeasement 15:16NATO Presses Advantage Against Taliban The new offensive against the Taliban remnants in Afghanistan, Operation Medusa, has deal…

Allah’s got the BBC “Let’s Give Appeasement A Chance” video. Of course no one admits they’re advocating appeasement. No, not appeasement. Merely surrendering to the enemies’ wishes and subcontracting American foreign policy to Al Qaeda. And of co…