If they’re not negotiations, what’s the point?
mojo on July 12, 2007 at 12:01 PM

A “talk” without a negotiation is basically a tea party.

And those have a point – to let your friends know that you appreciate them.

DIE PUMPED FULL OF PIG’S BLOOD AND BACON BITS!

What a waste of bacon bits.

Although, I agree, the Black Jack Pershing methodology would be a nice addition to the condition.

Ted Kennedy
Chuck Schumer
Russ Feingold
Barack Obama

Not making any assertions about the people or the school ..

Just sayin’ …

We already stated our demands to Bin Laden:

SURRENDER UNCONDITIONALLY OR DIE.

Worked with the previous, secular Nazis.

Works just as well with theocratic nazis.

SURRENDER OR DIE.

Guess they don’t teach WW II history at Hah-vahd?

profitsbeard on July 11, 2007 at 10:22 PM

Since this enemy doesn’t have much of a problem with “Or die,” perhaps we should make the terms:

SURRENDER UNCONDITIONALLY OR DIE PUMPED FULL OF PIG’S BLOOD AND BACON BITS!

Essentially we would be changing our terms from one’s they understand, “Be in Hell or Be a Martyr,” to Be in Hell or we’ll put you there, Islamofascist *expletive deleted*!

SURRENDER UNCONDITIONALLY OR DIE.

Worked with the previous, secular Nazis.

Works just as well with theocratic nazis.

SURRENDER OR DIE.

Guess they don’t teach WW II history at Hah-vahd?

Then we blow his jihadist POS head off.

The only thing bin Laden and his jihadist douchebags understand is treachery and violence. We won’t be rid of them until we play the same dirty game, lying to those fanatical zealots, killing them indiscriminately, and sending Islam forward into the Stone Age.

Now she’s an oxymoron.

The real issue here is the MSM and the Left refuse to listen to what the muslims say. They merely impose their private fantasy of what the muslims say.

Spiegel: Then was the failed suicide attack in Britain a humiliating experience for the terrorists involved?

Richardson: Absolutely. It is humiliating to come away from a suicide attack still alive. Interestingly, in the instance of a failed attack, terrorist groups try to mitigate the humiliation by destroying the video suicide notes before they can reach the public.

Really? How do you know this?

If we could find splits within the organization of al-Qaida, we could play them off of each other for our benefit, isolating the most radical elements. Some people say that setting up talks with terror groups would grant them too much legitimacy. But, in my view, declaring war on a terror group is actually the most effective way of granting legitimacy.

So, let me see if I have this straight: Treating a terrorist leader as a head of state and formally accepting his list of demands will DIS-credit him, make his organization have LESS legitimacy, and get all his lieutenants to challenge his leadership?

Oh yeah, that’s a hell of a plan there, toots.

You know, if his foreign policy positions were as vulnerable as you imply, you’d debunk them instead of engaging in smear tactics. No, non-interventionism (not “isolationism”, another oft-told lie) isn’t susceptible to such attacks because it is a completely valid position with many pros to offset the cons.

It’s not that it’s valid or non-valid. It’s that it’s completely unrealistic. Go ahead and roll up the drawbridge and see where it gets you. But be thorough about it: no exportation of American culture, which is decadent and an incitement in itself to the mujahedeen. No foreign trade since that requires an American presence on holy Muslim soil, and which is also an “occupation” of a sort. No foreign aid to any “apostate” Muslim regime, which includes the Karzai government — a regime installed by a war which the great man himself voted for, I’ll remind you. No criticism either of any jihadist ends or means — that’s straight off of Adam Gadahn’s checklist.

So like I say: roll up the drawbridge. There’s nothing “heretical” about it. It’s simply untenable.

despite the bouquets tossed at Ron Paul by the media after he scolded Giuliani at the debate for not listening closely enough to the enemy

Ron Paul’s point was that we don’t have to invent reasons as to why Al Queda attacked us, they told us why in bin Laden’s fatwa. This constant insinuation that Ron Paul wants to open up dialog with terrorists and accommodate them is a disingenuous smear.

You know, if his foreign policy positions were as vulnerable as you imply, you’d debunk them instead of engaging in smear tactics. No, non-interventionism (not “isolationism”, another oft-told lie) isn’t susceptible to such attacks because it is a completely valid position with many pros to offset the cons. Because it isn’t your position, it is clearly heretical; therefore you viciously attack it.

Sounding like a low-budget B-movie that’s coming soon to your local theater–or in this case, England: “I Married The Son Of Osama!” Update: Maybe Osama Jr. and the new missus could facilitate Harvard’s proposed negotiations with dear old dad…….

“We can’t win. We don’t have a chance. Resistance is futile and only makes our opponents more hostile. Therefor let’s forfeit the game, cancel the season and eliminate the football program.”

Harvard terrorism expert [italics added]

I know that Allahpundit’s very point is to hold this Harvard terrorism whatsit and her opinion up for scorn. So let me pour all my contempt on “experts.” In most cases, I prefer to call such people “specialists,” to connote their narrowness.

It seems higher learning is high on learning, or smoking. ☺

As for her assertion that public diplomacy could be an effective way to combat the impression of the USA as an imperialist power, she may be on to something. I think we should “entertain” UBL very publicly, yes; we should play him the Star Spangled Banner using 2,000 pound JDAM GBU-31/B’s.

OT: is something wrong with RFK Jr? Watching him on fox right now and he sounds terrible. No disrespect if he has health issues, but he sounds really bad. anyway…

He has some condition that causes spasms in his vocal cords. I use to think he ruined them from too much coke, but it appears to be a nondrug related medical condition.