I once wondered if the al Qaeda would plot to target the Chunnel. Turns out my questions were right. From the UK Observer (via Jihad Watch):…

The History of Islamic Jihad Against Humanity

Prophet of Doom: A Doctrinal Study of Islam

For example, the English and French peoples could rise up and lawfully protect their countries, if they were deputized to require any and all muslims to swear before Allah and the Prophet that the Ninth Sura’s contents are Satanic verses. They could be authorized to require muslims to prove their peaceableness by ripping the Ninth Sura out of every copy of the Koran they have handy. Of course, they’d have to be given a chance to ritually cleanse their hands first.

The questions of the penalty for refusal and of some use to which to put the waste paper would have to be settled, I admit. However, readers may enjoy thinking up their own proposals regarding these details, so I’ll do my part to promote individual initiative by leaving that to them.

The news comes as the Conservatives expressed fresh concerns that Britons determined to martyr themselves in the name of jihad are being released into the community because police lack powers to prosecute them.

I wouldn’t complain about their being released, if they were being released to me.

So far it’s failed to pass, but Mark is probably correct that it’s only a matter of time.

I love the Patriot Act and I don’t think the Brits are heading anywhere bad. In fact, I admire their flexibility.

Flexible principles are abandoned principles. The UK already is a surveillance state (with pervasive warrantless electronic monitoring of citizens’ activity). The next step is allowing said surveillance to be used to prosecute people. You know, to make sure terrorists aren’t set free. Flexibility. See, if the government can watch everyone all the time, people will be less likely to commit crimes, and when they do, they’ll be swiftly brought to justice. It’ll be marketed to the proles with phrases like “for our children’s future” and “building safer communities.”

They might even work flexibility in there.

They’ve already taken the first step toward ensuring that patriots that object won’t be able to resist: citizen disarmament. Additionally, citizens in the UK have lost freedom of speech. Not heading anywhere bad? How would you feel if the First and Second Amendments were axed? Here’s something that requires flexibility: grabbing your ankles.

We should respond with aerial attacks on the oil pipelines that ship all the oil out of Iran and into China. Besides, not only would this cripple Iran’s economy, but the Chinese would then face the same oil crisis that the West does. And that might not necessarily be a bad thing. Anybody have a better idea?

Iran’s weakness is refining capacity. Bomb what refining capacity that they have, and they have great difficulties in moving things around.

I’m all for helping china get into the same boat as the rest of us, but I’d like to see Iran suffer first.

2) Oil is their stength but also their weakness. There will come a point when the other 4 billion people on earth will become tired of being held hostage by this crew of nuts, thugs and dangers to public sanitation who happen to sit over so much of the world’s oil. I can’t think of a more profitable conversation to have with China than one that invites them along with India, the USA, Japan, and the EU to simpy take the damn oil.

3) Merry Christmas all.

Allah reports that Jihadis are planning to blow up the Chunnel, the tunnel between England and France. That’s crazy talk, obviously. Everyone knows France opposed the Iraq war making it completely safe from future insane-Muslim attacks…….

Then, on the other hand, who could subjugate or control millions of Jihadists better than billions of Chinese people?

Of course, this approach would bring about global depression– with the American economy in the tank as well. But you already knew that, right?

Yes, I understand that and agree. That’s why it would never get that far. China is only going to alter their stance when it financially benefits them to do so. A military action on the oil supplies feeding China would be taken as an act of war, and possibly cause them to strengthen their position with our enemies.

But simply cutting off all financial dealings with any country which does business with terrorist nations would be a diplomatic move that would be easy to defend, which would force them to change allegiance. Same with France. Same with Russia.

I don’t believe it’s likely they’ll simply ignore it and press on as usual, which is why I don’t believe it would lead to any world wide depression.

But we all know this will not happen. Our government is just as corrupt as any of these others, and our leaders have proven to be just as willing to base their political decision on personal finances. This is the real reason we fail to do what’s needed to win this war.

Report: English Channel Tunnel a Terror Target The tunnel beneath the English Channel that connects Britain to France is a Christmas terror target of Islamic terrorists, according to a report published Sunday. The plot, which was first uncovered by the…

Of course, this approach would bring about global depression– with the American economy in the tank as well. But you already knew that, right?

I think you’re wrong about that for one reason and one reason alone: greed.

Those nations would never let it actually happen. They always do what is in their financial interest. Which is why they backed Saddam.

The U.N., the French, The Russians, and the Chinese would all suffer greatly if we suddenly said “we’re sick of it” and cut off all financial aid and business negotiations.

Gregor on December 24, 2006 at 3:14 PM

Of course, this approach would bring about global depression– with the American economy in the tank as well. But you already knew that, right?

Yeah, let’s piss China off. This would most likely be the absolute WORST move we could make.

Which is exactly why I asked if someone else had a better idea. Then, on the other hand, who could subjugate or control millions of Jihadists better than billions of Chinese people?

I love this idea and I’ve never understood why we continually feel it’s necessary to dump money into our enemy’s pockets. The U.N., the French, The Russians, and the Chinese would all suffer greatly if we suddenly said “we’re sick of it” and cut off all financial aid and business negotiations. Suddenly, I believe these governments would start to lean our way when making political decisions regarding terrorist nations.

Gregor on December 24, 2006 at 3:14 PM

It makes no sense to me either. This sort of philosophy is common among people when dealing with individual conflict on a social scale as well.

One person comes into a group of friends. First they settle themselves in and establish themselves as a friend in the group. They then attack another individual whom they dislike. When the person retaliates and defends themselves you’ll often see this whole “UN” mentality where the victim defending themselves is labled a trouble maker, and the person who created the problem in the first place uses that ideology to remove the victim from the circle of friends completely.

It’s a psychological ploy. It uses the apathy of a group of people to empower an attacker to destroy, eliminate, or paralyze their victim.

It’s pretty effective. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen it done in my office, social circle, and/or online.

It’s really sad how much we enable vicious, violent, malicious people in the name of “keeping the peace”.

It’s really very sad to think that the French would rather be anti-American than pro-French. Afterall, we both face the same threat and all they can do is ban religious headwear, block meaningful sanctions against Iranian extremists, and hide in their homes when their cars are burned.

When they declare war, and the UN starts whining pull all of our funding, and ask them if they’d prefer we act more like the “Palestinian victims” and start randomly firing rockets into civilian areas, and remind them that our rockets are often armed with nuclear warheads.

I love this idea and I’ve never understood why we continually feel it’s necessary to dump money into our enemy’s pockets. The U.N., the French, The Russians, and the Chinese would all suffer greatly if we suddenly said “we’re sick of it” and cut off all financial aid and business negotiations. Suddenly, I believe these governments would start to lean our way when making political decisions regarding terrorist nations.

They want to bomb the Chunnel? Fine. We should respond with aerial attacks on the oil pipelines that ship all the oil out of Iran and into China.

Yeah, let’s piss China off. This would most likely be the absolute WORST move we could make.

I realize that Allah hates it when anyone suggests that we nuke Mecca, and that’s why I’m not going to suggest that we actually do it. But the “threat” that we will retaliate by doing exactly that in response to the next terror attack … just might have a profound effect in turning Muslim opinion against terror groups.

The simple reality is that we’re not going to win this war by battling it out with insurgents on the ground. We now see Somalia calling for all Muslims to join the jihad in Ethiopia and the response is indicative of what we face. As the war goes on, it seems there are unlimited supplies of brainwashed, brain dead, Islamic zombies willing to give up their life for their warped cause.

The only “good” to come of this would be the opportunity for us to use it as an excuse to reduce the Islamic male population.

Hate that reality all you want, but we’re not going to win this war without it getting extremely ugly.

Anybody have a better idea?

Yeah, add Syria to the list, and hit their ports, factories, and military installations as well. Then seize any ship that’s in or out bound to or from Iran. Sink any ship that’s Iranian and confiscate the rest.

When they declare war, and the UN starts whining pull all of our funding, and ask them if they’d prefer we act more like the “Palestinian victims” and start randomly firing rockets into civilian areas, and remind them that our rockets are often armed with nuclear warheads.

When Al Jazeera starts broadcasting their propaganda declare them an enemy of the state and start targetting their various offices, and arrest every one of their reporters we can get our hands on. Slap the NYT with a 500k dollar fine for publishing classified information the first time, 1m for the second, and tell them in no uncertain terms that they’ll do jail time in Gitmo if they do it again. Do the same with the rest of the papers.

Fine Reuters for it’s Dr’d photos, and prosecute them, the AP, the NYT and anyone else who has participated in their habitual purposeful public deception for Sedition, and have their editors jailed.

After all of that’s done tell Afganistan and Pakistan that they have one month to produce Bin Laden before we go in and find him ourselves, and any resistance to our efforts in any part of their countries will be met with desimation of their military forces.

After Bin Laden is captures publically hang him in the middle of Times Square, and shoot his henchmen while he’s dangling.

Some how I think Russia will STFU after that, and China will quit with the waffling over dealing with north korea, but instead we’re stuck with this limp wristed Foriegn policy and a bunch of PC idiots who’re going to get us all killed.

Yay for spineless whelps encouraging people to blow us up. Some body please make it stop.

Is Australia taking in US refugees? Someone’s going to have to eventually.