Horror: Terrorists used mentally disabled women in Baghdad mass homicide

posted at 2:10 pm on February 1, 2008 by Bryan

There are differing accounts on how many were killed that Baghdad attack today, but CNN reports an unspeakably awful and cruel aspect to the attack: The terrorists use remotely-triggered bomb vests that they had put on mentally disabled women, one of whom suffered from Down Syndrome. They were unwitting and unwilling bomb carriers.

The bombs killed at least 98 people and wounded more than 200 at two popular pet markets on the holiest day of the week for Muslims, authorities said.

In both bombings, the attackers were mentally disabled women whose explosive belts were remotely detonated, Gen. Qasim Atta, spokesman for Baghdad’s security plan, told state television.

An aide to Atta said that people referred to the bomber at central Baghdad’s al-Ghazl market as the “crazy woman” and that the bomber at a second market had an unspecified birth disability.

“Demonic” is right.

“By targeting innocent Iraqis, they show their true demonic character,” said Lt. Col. Steve Stover, spokesman for the Multi-National Division-Baghdad.

“They care nothing for the Iraqi people; they want to subjugate them and forcefully create a greater Islamic sharia state,” he said, referring to Islamic law.

The use of mentally disabled bomb carriers isn’t new; it’s happened before in Iraq. The use of women in these attacks isn’t new either, nor is detonating the bombs against the carrier’s will. In Chechen Jihad, Yousef Bodansky reports on the Beslan massacre in much detail. According to Bodansky, there were several Black Widow terrorists involved, and after an accidental explosion might free hundreds of the child hostages being held inside that school, the Black Widows refused orders from their male counterparts to shoot the fleeing children. The Black Widows were wearing bomb vests, and the male terrorists responded to the refusal to shoot the children by detonating those bomb vests. That of course killed the Widows and everyone near them. I have no sympathy for the Black Widow terrorists, but I bring all of this up to point out the true brutality at work in the jihad. It’s ghastly.

I also bring all of this up in the hope that liberal readers might finally extract their craniums from their backsides and realize that whatever you think of Bush, he’s not the problem. He didn’t start the war and he’s not the cause of the jihad. Animals of the type who would blow up innocent mentally disabled women to kill scores of other innocent people cannot be reasoned with. There’s nothing to talk over with people like that. They live in a state of violent depravity that puts them beyond reason barring some massive change in their own minds. We infidels aren’t going to make that chance by playing nice. We have to defeat them.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Early on young men strapping on the suicide bombs made it look like the jihadis were full of true believers. The lack of jihadis that will do suicide bombings makes it look like they’ve lost a lot of intensity. I think this signals a new phase in the war.

snaggletoothie on February 1, 2008 at 3:34 PM

These are Michael Moore’s Freedom Fighters and Minutemen.

Never let him live that statement down

Techie on February 1, 2008 at 3:36 PM

snaggletoothie on February 1, 2008 at 3:34 PM

Good observation. I agree.

TX Mom on February 1, 2008 at 3:37 PM

The lack of jihadis that will do suicide bombings makes it look like they’ve lost a lot of intensity. I think this signals a new phase in the war.

New Mohammed cartoon ? Jihadist to heaven “Stop with the virgins we are running out of Jihadists”

William Amos on February 1, 2008 at 3:37 PM

Saddam Hussein was wicked. But never so wicked enough to keep us from using him and feting him when we thought convenient. But then he became a burden and we got rid of him and opened wide the nation of Iraq to every form of evil the planet has ever known — including blowing up the most innocent Iraqis, the handicapped.

Apologists for this blunder of a war admit that “mistakes were made.” Well, isn’t that big and open minded of them. I’m sure the families of those women are at peace knowing that such admissions by Americans have been made.

We tend to think that by admitting mistakes, things will naturally get better. They won’t. You will understand this if you avail yourself of dispatches other than Michael Yon’s, or the latest talking points from AEI.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 3:39 PM

No words indeed. Demonic somehow even seems too kind to describe an act like this. Barbaric is an understatement too. We’ve run out of words to truly describe their unspeakable acts. The only thing I can hope for is that this provokes enough outrage around the world that more countries will join together and hunt down these sub-rodents and eviscerate each and every one of them.

scalleywag on February 1, 2008 at 3:40 PM

Oops. Screwed the quotes thing up. Don’t mean to suggest that BKennedy would ever think similarly as I.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 3:31 PM

I wouldn’t lower myself to that level. Only two kinds of people are so backward-looking that they ask “who stared the war in Iraq” as if it solves anything or makes a salient point: Liberals and Stormfront’s Merry Troofers.

BKennedy on February 1, 2008 at 3:41 PM

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 3:39 PM

Where would you have preferred “every form of evil the planet has ever known” to go instead?

Chuck Schick on February 1, 2008 at 3:43 PM

I have noticed a disturbing crassness and vulgarity in a number of new Hot Air members.

DrMagnolias on February 1, 2008 at 2:51 PM

Hey now, there are plenty of us old-timers who are crass and vulgar. Having said that, there are always lines to not cross, but I don’t think those who posted the jokes deserved bannings…they don’t call for further acts, they don’t wish-substitute public figures for the victims…they’re just in poor taste.

On the topic at hand, I’m not quite appalled, but disappointed that there isn’t any thought given in the comments to the location of these bombings instead of just the method. It’s particularly bad for many reasons…there are likely to be children at such a market, even if there are no animal lovers in this thread.

James on February 1, 2008 at 3:45 PM

Demonic
Barbaric

Satan/Allah
Lucifer/Mohammed

All want to create hell on earth so not a dimes worth of difference between them.

Islam is getting the repect it deserves.
NONE

Bicyea on February 1, 2008 at 3:46 PM

Snake307 on February 1, 2008 at 3:03 PM

My job is working with the mentally disabled, so I’m gonna join the pile.
You’re an a$$hole. It’s no different than making fun of children forced to do these horrific things. They’re not “dummies” or “not so smart”, they’re mentally disabled.
No one’s equating you to a jihadist, but you’re still a dick and you should be banned.

SouthernDem on February 1, 2008 at 3:46 PM

Saddam Hussein was wicked. But never so wicked enough to keep us from using him and feting him when we thought convenient. But then he became a burden and we got rid of him and opened wide the nation of Iraq to every form of evil the planet has ever known — including blowing up the most innocent Iraqis, the handicapped.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 3:39 PM

I don’t recall the US throwing him a party…

He was only an ally in the sense that he antagonized Iran, and kept them in check from gaining dominance in the region; in that, he had US support. He became a burden when he invaded another ally of the US, and refused to leave; things when downhill from there. And keep in mind that initially, the evil was unleashed by his own followers (Saddam Fedayeen).

Frozen Tex on February 1, 2008 at 3:55 PM

I wouldn’t lower myself to that level.

Dude, you’re already there! Earlier in this thread you advocated “extermination.” That would be nice, but how do you suppose such a thing is possible without “exterminating” hundreds of thousands of other innocents? Or is it your abhorrence for the death of innocents is selective? I mean, remember that the war on terror is (in the words of another member here) “a nebulous thing” and there is really no way to fight this thing short of killing lots of innocents.

This is fourth generation war (google it).

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 3:59 PM

There are few, if any, Hot Air members who would disagree significantly with the majority of your statement; however, the object of your joke was not the terrorists, but the mentally disabled women they murdered and used as murder weapons. Such joking smacks of moral callousness.

DrMagnolias on February 1, 2008 at 3:24 PM

Moral Callousness. Isn’t that about as bad as lying to the mentally disabled, tricking them into doing something like this? Why I apologize. I had no idea my joke would be anything as horrific as tricking the mentally disabled, or perhaps giving them no choice, and sending them out to slaughter ninety innocents and wounding another two hundred innocent people. I do sincerely apologize. Does everyone feel better about 90 people dying now that I’ve apologized? I’m sure that victims of this attack and their families must feel warm and fuzzy now. Stupid.

My mother was a nurse and worked for 35 years with the mentally disabled. The point of the joke wasn’t ever to mock the disabled, but instead to show how low the terrorists have grown, using children, and the disabled, to carry their war out. Instead you and the rest are upset at the joke. Fine, be upset with me.

My job is working with the mentally disabled, so I’m gonna join the pile.
You’re an a$$hole. It’s no different than making fun of children forced to do these horrific things. They’re not “dummies” or “not so smart”, they’re mentally disabled.
No one’s equating you to a jihadist, but you’re still a dick and you should be banned.

SouthernDem on February 1, 2008 at 3:46 PM

So petition for me to be banned. Everyone write Allahpundit, Bryan, and Michelle Malkin and demand that I be banned immediately for my callous humor. I’ve hurt your feelings, and that can’t be tolerated.

It’s take the emphasis of the story from the ninety that were killed, the two hundred wounded, and the abuse of the mentally disabled and put it on political correctness. That’s asinine. It’s as stupid as requiring our troops to forgo ammunition manufactured in Israel because it might make the enemy angry. It’s as stupid as the idea if we weren’t there, they wouldn’t be angry and would leave the great satan alone.

Please take the time to demand that I be banned. If you accomplish that, I’m almost certain that we’ll all live in peace and harmony tomorrow. We’ll all wake and the birds will be singing and the flowers will be blooming.

Snake307 on February 1, 2008 at 4:01 PM

Frozen Tex on February 1, 2008 at 3:55 PM

I guess that’s kind of my point. There is all this moral outrage here over barbaric behavior mixed with a defense of our stupid and aberrant relations with these same people over the years! I mean, you poke a hornet’s nest and you’re going to get stung!

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:08 PM

Snake307 on February 1, 2008 at 3:03 PM

My job is working with the mentally disabled, so I’m gonna join the pile.
You’re an a$$hole. It’s no different than making fun of children forced to do these horrific things. They’re not “dummies” or “not so smart”, they’re mentally disabled.
No one’s equating you to a jihadist, but you’re still a dick and you should be banned.

SouthernDem on February 1, 2008 at 3:46 PM

I’ll ditto that. There are some things civilized people just don’t do, and to make such a crass joke in the face of pure depravity crosses the line. Maybe I’m a bit sensitive because I have a daughter with Down syndrome, but as far as I’m concerned Snake and others like him are lower than a slime mold.

nobaloney on February 1, 2008 at 4:09 PM

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 3:59 PM

and there is really no way to fight this thing short of killing lots of innocents.

As opposed to how we fought it for the decade prior- with sanctions that killed 100,000-120,000 of them a year for 10 years instead? As a comparison, the Iraq Body Count site has less than 90,000 dead civilians over FIVE YEARS of war.

Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price–we think the price is worth it.

–60 Minutes (5/12/96)

Where’s your outrage now?

This is fourth generation war (google it).

I know what fourth generation warfare is so Ill pass. Looks like you’ll have to keep googling yourself.

Chuck Schick on February 1, 2008 at 4:09 PM

Frozen Tex wrote: He [Saddam] became a burden when he invaded another ally of the US, and refused to leave; things when downhill from there.

Yeah, and that just reminded me: it was Bush I’s ambassador, April Glaspie, that helped trigger the invasion. Incompetence? My loathing for family political dynasties grows daily.

Feedie on February 1, 2008 at 4:09 PM

Dude, you’re already there! Earlier in this thread you advocated “extermination.”

Yup, a Stormfront Merry Troofer. Look you foolish little conspiracy theorist, not only did I not advocate extermination, I said it was too good for the scum who pull this crap. These vermin don’t deserve to continue in the mortal coil, but as it stands they have information and the only way to make them talk is to use their twisted, backwards religious nuttery against them.

You can’t put these psychopaths anywhere, they are a danger to themselves and everyone around them. They are less than human because they have forfeited their humanity. Far better for them to be dead then to be plotting another bombing using the mentally ill as both human sheilds and unwitting weapons.

That would be nice, but how do you suppose such a thing is possible without “exterminating” hundreds of thousands of other innocents?

I would rather see hundreds die to catch and kill these boundless murderers then to retreat and have them kill thousands upon thousands more, unchallenged by wimps and weenies like Ron Paul and his band of isolationist losers who think we can make all the world’s problems go away by pretending they aren’t there.

Or is it your abhorrence for the death of innocents is selective? I mean, remember that the war on terror is (in the words of another member here) “a nebulous thing” and there is really no way to fight this thing short of killing lots of innocents.

This is fourth generation war (google it).

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 3:59 PM

The enemy uses human shields and hides behind women and children, you shrinking coward. Of course innocents are going to die in the process, these vermin hide behind them. They want us to be swayed by the shedding of innocent blood so they can continue their killing spree. The people who are putting innocents in danger is not us, it is them. The US does not employ human shields. The US does not hide behind the skirts of women and the trousers of children.

The terrorists are relying on weak-kneed isolationists like you and your racist hero Stormfront who surrender at the first sign of blood. Who weigh the cost of pursuing those who seek to murder millions in their megalomaniacal goals against the cost of a few thousand innocents that they use as hostages and shields, and view the former as too great a sacrifice.

BKennedy on February 1, 2008 at 4:10 PM

Baphomet on February 1, 2008 at 2:13 PM

Too bad McCain is anti-torture. I’m sorry, anyone this evil deserves to be tortured.

hollygolightly on February 1, 2008 at 4:17 PM

Apologists for this blunder of a war admit that “mistakes were made.” Well, isn’t that big and open minded of them. I’m sure the families of those women are at peace knowing that such admissions by Americans have been made.

We tend to think that by admitting mistakes, things will naturally get better. They won’t. You will understand this if you avail yourself of dispatches other than Michael Yon’s, or the latest talking points from AEI.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 3:39 PM

Just curious, do you advocate redeployment of our troops or winning?

Leonidas Hoplite on February 1, 2008 at 4:20 PM

Snake307 on February 1, 2008 at 4:01 PM

I have never requested anyone at Hot Air be banned–it is really not my place, as a guest here, to instruct the hosts whom to allow. If, however, I were inclined toward instructing others here, I might suggest you change your name to “Straw Man,” as it seems to be your preferred method of argumentation.

DrMagnolias on February 1, 2008 at 4:20 PM

Ah, Drum is here, blaming America first. “Yes, yes, those men did it–but if it weren’t for the US, they wouldn’t have. It’s all our fault, man!”

That’s just stupid.

And these men are evil.

Vanceone on February 1, 2008 at 4:23 PM

And these men are evil.

I agree. And so are a thousand gangbangers in south central LA, and it only takes one stupid blunder on behalf of the authorities to set them off on a binge of destruction. In the case of Iraq, we made the stupid blunder and this is blowback.

Is there ever a time when you might concede that America IS at least partially to blame? Or are we always God’s chosen who can do no wrong?

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:28 PM

Just curious, do you advocate redeployment of our troops or winning?

Leonidas Hoplite on February 1, 2008 at 4:20 PM

Not sure what you mean by “redeployment.” If you think I’m a lib who’d just love to send them to Darfur instead of Iraq, you’re wrong.

I’d “redeploy” them back to the US.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:31 PM

I’d “redeploy” them back to the US.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:31 PM

You’d surrender. Enjoy your dhimmihood.

Leonidas Hoplite on February 1, 2008 at 4:33 PM

Just curious, do you advocate redeployment of our troops or winning?

Leonidas Hoplite on February 1, 2008 at 4:20 PM

Also, describe for me what “winning” will look like? Will it take one hundred years as John McStrangelove expects? Will there be more wars tied to this one? Call me a pessimist but I see the only victory being of the pyrrhic sort.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:35 PM

In the case of Iraq, we made the stupid blunder and this is blowback.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:28 PM

Of course! Remember how great it was before we invaded Iraq? al Qaeda had given up the life and were all getting communication degrees at Florida State.

Chuck Schick on February 1, 2008 at 4:36 PM

Demonic… Barbaric… Typical

Opinionnation on February 1, 2008 at 4:41 PM

Also, describe for me what “winning” will look like? Will it take one hundred years as John McStrangelove expects? Will there be more wars tied to this one? Call me a pessimist but I see the only victory being of the pyrrhic sort.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:35 PM

Go read the following and get back to me:
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&EAN=9780760328682&itm=3

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&EAN=9780760324073&itm=1

Leonidas Hoplite on February 1, 2008 at 4:42 PM

Of course! Remember how great it was before we invaded Iraq?

Chuck Schick on February 1, 2008 at 4:36 PM

Actually, I do. We had most of the world (including Iran and other Muslims in the ME) in sympathy and solidarity with us in light of what happened to us on 9/11. We also had much support for the idea of going after al Qaeda.

So, what happened?

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:45 PM

Go read the following and get back to me:

Leonidas Hoplite on February 1, 2008 at 4:42 PM

Thanks, I will (really).

Now you go and read anything by William Lind. Also read Chalmers Johnson’s three recent books: Blowback; The Sorrows of Empire; and Nemesis.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:47 PM

Actually, I do. We had most of the world (including Iran and other Muslims in the ME) in sympathy and solidarity with us in light of what happened to us on 9/11. We also had much support for the idea of going after al Qaeda.

So, what happened?

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:45 PM

The Euroweenies remembered they were Euroweenies and bailed out on us.

Go ahead Drum, grovel at France and Germany’s feet for them to love us again.

btw. before they get you to kiss their rear you might want to remember they were part of Saddam’s Oil for Food scheme.

BKennedy on February 1, 2008 at 4:52 PM

Actually, I do. We had most of the world (including Iran and other Muslims in the ME) in sympathy and solidarity with us in light of what happened to us on 9/11. We also had much support for the idea of going after al Qaeda.

So, what happened?

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:45 PM

Ill ignore the word “Iran” above as I assume it must be a typo.

As for the rest of it, we went after al Qaeda. The current and former commanders of AQII were in Iraq the year before we were. And we’re still dealing with them there. If you’ve paid attention, they’ve been awfully effective in causing havoc and resisting coalition forces. Fortunately we have them confined to Iraq to do all their normal business.

Imagine had we played the Clinton card and left them, once again, in a lawless part of the world?

Chuck Schick on February 1, 2008 at 4:53 PM

Leonidas Hoplite on February 1, 2008 at 4:42 PM

Also, you seem to like military strategists, have you read any Martin van Creveld? Pretty interesting.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:56 PM

BKennedy on February 1, 2008 at 4:52 PM

Dude, I actually had in mind various Muslim countries (you would have noticed had you read my reply).

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:58 PM

I’ll ignore the word “Iran” above as I assume it must be a typo.

Chuck Schick on February 1, 2008 at 4:53 PM

No typo. A million of them hit the streets of Tehran expressing sympathy for Americans after 9/11.

But lets go ahead and nuke em. What the f*ck.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 5:00 PM

Now you go and read anything by William Lind. Also read Chalmers Johnson’s three recent books: Blowback; The Sorrows of Empire; and Nemesis.

I don’t read fiction. You may as well add Chomsky and Zinn to that list of complete utter crap.

Oh, and I am a professional historian, so I know of what I speak.

PimFortuynsGhost on February 1, 2008 at 5:02 PM

Also read Chalmers Johnson’s three recent books: Blowback; The Sorrows of Empire; and Nemesis.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:47 PM

These look interesting. We’ll discuss in the future.

Leonidas Hoplite on February 1, 2008 at 5:03 PM

Leonidas Hoplite on February 1, 2008 at 4:42 PM

The second book (The Sling and the Stone) sounds excellent and is exactly what Lind writes about. The question, though, is whether or not Americans are up for that sort of warfare. They aren’t presently. Maybe in the future, but certainly not now.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 5:05 PM

In the case of Iraq, we made the stupid blunder and this is blowback.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 4:28 PM

Are you retarded?

Our invading Iraq has created blowback for… Iraqis? I was under the impression that “blowback” had to, you know, blow back. Those legitimate grievances against people grocery shopping in Baghdad just get more nuanced every day.

Lehosh on February 1, 2008 at 5:06 PM

Oh, and I am a professional historian, so I know of what I speak.

PimFortuynsGhost on February 1, 2008 at 5:02 PM

Oh, I’m sure you are and I’m sure you do and I’m sure it’s a pretty feeble product you peddle in light of your stupid reply.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 5:07 PM

I agree. And so are a thousand gangbangers in south central LA, and it only takes one stupid blunder on behalf of the authorities to set them off on a binge of destruction. In the case of Iraq, we made the stupid blunder and this is blowback.

So, we ought to just tiptoe around people like this and hope that they’ll just keep on doing what they do best, and what, never notice us? Never decide one day that they don’t like the type of hat or pants we’re wearing? This sounds like you belong in a large herd. You go around hoping that the carnivores won’t get you because they’ll get someone else first.

4shoes on February 1, 2008 at 5:10 PM

Lehosh on February 1, 2008 at 5:06 PM

You’re right, my mistake. Blowback must cross a specific number of miles of sea before it’s considered such. No matter that the innocent people being destroyed are those very people George Bush has been promising to liberate for 5 years.

Some liberation.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 5:10 PM

No typo. A million of them hit the streets of Tehran expressing sympathy for Americans after 9/11.

But lets go ahead and nuke em. What the f*ck.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 5:00 PM

The people, yes. Not the Iranian dictatorship, which is where all the usefulness comes from when you’re trying to prevent things like nuclear proliferation and counter-terrorism.

The people still support us. I have friends with family over there.

The reflexive tripe about how we are radicalizing otherwise completely good honest Muslims with the Iraq War becomes less and less true with each passing day. The more these scum are forced to strap explosives to disabled women and send them into unarmed markets, the more they show they’ve lost in Iraq. And by extension, everywhere else.

Chuck Schick on February 1, 2008 at 5:11 PM

So the Terrorists are using not so smart bombs?
Snake307 on February 1, 2008 at 2:11 PM

Lord I apologize but that’s funny right there, I don’t care who you are.

Buttercup on February 1, 2008 at 5:13 PM

You’re right, my mistake. Blowback must cross a specific number of miles of sea before it’s considered such. No matter that the innocent people being destroyed are those very people George Bush has been promising to liberate for 5 years.

Some liberation.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 5:10 PM

You ignored my post above.

Less innocent people have died in 5 years of war than one year of sanctions under Bill Clinton. The sanctions continued right up until the war.

Where’s your outrage now?

Chuck Schick on February 1, 2008 at 5:13 PM

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 3:39 PM

Ah..yes of course…twould have been better if we had left well enough alone and then:

1. The women could have been raped repeatedly over months or years by Saddam Henchmen! before;
2. Being shot in the back of the head and put in an unmarked grave!
3. Saddam could still be in violation of multiple UN resolutions (any one of which was sufficient for us to resume the military froce from the first gulf war!) each of which were particularly related to the mational interests of the US.
4. Thats right war never accomplished anything (except beating down Fascism, Naziism, Communism, Imperialism etc).
5. Nope…before you go there we are not imperialists…the japenese were in WWII. They stole resources (we haven’t seen a barrel of free oil from IRAQ, they raped the populace in large measure, we have not, They torture (as defined by the Geneva convention…we have not…I am appalled at the number of people who haven’t read the Geneva Convention but always bring it up. How come we have to abide by it (and we do) but no one else (who is a signatory, must? Hmmm

RedLizard64 on February 1, 2008 at 5:14 PM

Oh, I’m sure you are and I’m sure you do and I’m sure it’s a pretty feeble product you peddle in light of your stupid reply.

Better to be called feeble and stupid by someone apologizing for scum and blaming America for all that is wrong.

You know nothing about me, my academic credentials, or my professional reputation.

You, on the other hand, obviously delight in attacking the civilized world and barbarians causing it ill.

PimFortuynsGhost on February 1, 2008 at 5:14 PM

Drum

Blowback? Your fault? You had it coming?

You feel bad on behalf of Islam? I nominate you to personally deliver your apologies to Osama.

You are an excellent agent of Islam Drum, whether you know it or not.

BL@KBIRD on February 1, 2008 at 5:15 PM

“Some liberation.”

There is an onus on the ones that are liberated to participate in the process. They have been and are being given everthing at their disposal to be liberated from the yolks of radical Islam. Whether they choose to do so or not afterward is not our fault nor our responsibility. However, since we have provided them with the freedom to make this choice, we have once again show ourselves to be the most rightous nation on the planet.

rayvet on February 1, 2008 at 6:01 PM

Even after this, liberals still don’t get it. Will they ever? Or, will they continue to be whiny, appeasing, defeatist snivelers forever? Probably.

Travis1 on February 1, 2008 at 6:15 PM

BL@KBIRD on February 1, 2008 at 5:15 PM

Hate to break it to you, bud, but you “spread democracy throughout the Middle East” to defeat “terror” people aren’t a whole lot better than the blame America first Ron Paul folks. You’re both delusional.

Islam is the real issue here, not Islamofascism, radicalism, extremism, or terror. It’s not even about al Qaeda, the Taliban or Hezbollah, but rather the ideology of the religion they follow. Ron Paul certainly doesn’t understand this; unfortunately, neither do the Bushites.

Why I don’t support our democracy mission in Iraq and Afghanistan.

2Brave2Bscared on February 1, 2008 at 6:17 PM

You know nothing about me, my academic credentials, or my professional reputation.

PimFortuynsGhost on February 1, 2008 at 5:14 PM

Indeed, and you didn’t balk to remind that you’re a professional! Wow! A professional! Sort of the like the professionals who teach in the public schools! Neat. What came to mind, actually, was Jim Carrey running off the edge of the terminal while screaming, “It’s OK, I’m a limo driver!”

If you’re going rely upon your position as a badge of authority and a reason to be taken seriously, you might want to back it up with a serious reply, instead of dismissing two scholars of impeccable credentials as liars.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 6:19 PM

Less innocent people have died in 5 years of war than one year of sanctions under Bill Clinton. The sanctions continued right up until the war.

Where’s your outrage now?

Check the archives, dude. I’ve thrown that one out at least twenty times. I figure enough of you have heard it to not need to be reminded of it.

So basically, you’re willing to admit that we f*cked Iraq all through the Clinton years, but now what we’re dong is a good thing? That might make sense if what we’re doing now were premised on something different from what the Clinton sanctions were premised on. But there is no difference. The sanctions were geared toward the removal of Saddam and so was Gulf War II. Both are abject failures that have hurt those intended to have been helped.

But as for “less people having died,” I’m tempted to throw out some statistics about that, but I’ll spare myself the grief of seeing another Bush apologist who probably claims to be a conservative (conserving What? one wonders) ignore the facts, reclining upon “the surge is working.”

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 6:29 PM

The people, yes. Not the Iranian dictatorship,

Chuck Schick on February 1, 2008 at 5:11 PM

Yeah, the people! What do you think this thread is about, Einstein? We go after the leaders and but end up opening the gates of hell only to witness the innocent suffer.

This is OK to you? I know it’s not our guys that are doing this, but it is OUR war. Fifteen years of innocent people dying because we want to help them by removing evil? This is the best America can offer?

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 6:35 PM

Check the archives, dude. I’ve thrown that one out at least twenty times. I figure enough of you have heard it to not need to be reminded of it.

So basically, you’re willing to admit that we f*cked Iraq all through the Clinton years, but now what we’re dong is a good thing? That might make sense if what we’re doing now were premised on something different from what the Clinton sanctions were premised on. But there is no difference. The sanctions were geared toward the removal of Saddam and so was Gulf War II. Both are abject failures that have hurt those intended to have been helped.

But as for “less people having died,” I’m tempted to throw out some statistics about that, but I’ll spare myself the grief of seeing another Bush apologist who probably claims to be a conservative (conserving What? one wonders) ignore the facts, reclining upon “the surge is working.”

Facts would be a good evolution for you. All you’ve done so far is spew bilge.

Now they have a shot at not getting slaughtered by Saddam or by the failures of Oil for Food. That’s not a massive improvement for those people? What planet are you on?

Chuck Schick on February 1, 2008 at 6:48 PM

Yeah, the people! What do you think this thread is about, Einstein? We go after the leaders and but end up opening the gates of hell only to witness the innocent suffer.

This is OK to you? I know it’s not our guys that are doing this, but it is OUR war. Fifteen years of innocent people dying because we want to help them by removing evil? This is the best America can offer?

See above. And thanks for the Einstein comparison.

Chuck Schick on February 1, 2008 at 6:50 PM

2Brave2Bscared

I don’t advocate “spreading democracy” in the middle east. That is pearls before swine. I advocate the undoing of the ideology called Islam. This means the repatriation of practicing Muslims in the west to Islamic countries in which they will feel more comfortable, if Muslims choose to sincerely leave Islam at this time, they should be welcomed to stay in the west. I advocate strict blockade of movement outside of Islamic lands for Muslims. I advocate overt kinetic pressure to deter Islamic aggression where ever it emerges. I don’t mind killing flies with sledge hammers.
I want Islam exposed to the sunshine and fresh air of wide spread understanding of what it is among non Muslims.

We do waste time, blood and treasure with Bushes naive approach of turning Muslims into voters.

What I want is not going to happen in the present atmosphere of the world. Things need to degrade at a steeper angle for such initiatives to be contemplated. But Islam works hard every day and they may turn us that way yet with their own outrageous acts.

BL@KBIRD on February 1, 2008 at 7:01 PM

The Palestinians were dancing in the street and passing out candy to their children when they got the news about 9/11. There were celebrations all over the muslim world.

Mulligan on February 1, 2008 at 7:18 PM

Remember folks, these are the Minute Men of Michael Moore’s utopia. Be nice. Or Michael Moore will eat more of your puppies.

Montana on February 1, 2008 at 7:38 PM

There’s nothing to talk over with people like that. They live in a state of violent depravity that puts them beyond reason barring some massive change in their own minds. We infidels aren’t going to make that chance by playing nice. We have to defeat them.

Well said, Bryan.

p40tiger on February 1, 2008 at 8:24 PM

I heard the news reports coming in through the night,
hoping this wasn’t going to get started up again.
With a lull lately in cars spontaniously going ka-boom,
it shows what,and why we fight against this islamofaschist
nutcases,it sure will be a glorious day when this 1000 year
war by Islam stops against the WORLD!

canopfor on February 1, 2008 at 8:29 PM

N.O.W. is upset about what this week? hint-these Demonic executions and forced suicide of WOMEN doesn’t qualify for NOW’s efforts.
.
Berzerkely? They like crazy women, but ONLY the anti-military Code Pink Witches who fight against the only group that can stop these terrorists, our MILITARY.
.
The MSM, where are they on this topic?
Oh yeah, snow in Jordan and Jerusalem, blizzards and extreme cold across majority of our nation, but the EARTH IS TOO HOT, GLOBAL WARMING and all, to do much else.
.
Screwed up priorities for the most part, save our friends here…

THANKS BRYAN and Hotair.com.

shooter on February 1, 2008 at 10:04 PM

I also bring all of this up in the hope that liberal readers might finally extract their craniums from their backsides and realize that whatever you think of Bush, he’s not the problem.

Thanks for trying Bryan, but it’s hopeless. Have you ever met one of the A**holes? Weed, dude, and where is my latte?

AUINSC on February 1, 2008 at 10:41 PM

I also bring all of this up in the hope that liberal readers might finally extract their craniums from their backsides

Thanks for trying Bryan, but it’s hopeless. Have you ever met one of the A**holes? Weed, dude, and where is my latte?

AUINSC on February 1, 2008 at 10:42 PM

Wow, looks like some glitchage in the HA comment code.

AUINSC on February 1, 2008 at 10:43 PM

Where is N.O.W. when they should be expected to responded? Curiously silent I see.

I’m truly sickened by this – Downs Syndrome women as targets? Man, there is a TRULY special place in hell (and Allah has nothing to do with it) for these sub-humans.

MsUnderestimated on February 2, 2008 at 1:55 AM

I want John McCain and John McCain’s temper at the Oval Office. I would have no other person directing the global fight against these animals than him.

Baphomet on February 1, 2008 at 2:13 PM

We need to be willing to go ‘Jack Bauer’ on these monsters, and McCain’s afraid to waterboard them!

clark smith on February 2, 2008 at 2:23 AM

This will stop happening once we leave.

Chuck Schick on February 1, 2008 at 3:31 PM

No Chucky it won’t. It will stop when our boys place bullets in their heads or JDAMS between their legs. It started on our soil September 11, 2001, though most experts agree it really started earlier. This is a war of annihation between Western civilization and Islamofacism.
Now for all you moral-relitivism-can’t-we-all-just-get-along-we-must-be-to-blame-Bush-lied-we-need-to-talk-to-them Liberal cowards, do you think these “people” wish to talk? No, they want us and our way of life dead and will do anything to accomplish that.
There is evil in this universe, and these “people” are its disciples. You confront it and kill it or it devours you. We have done it before: Hitler, the Japanese, Commies…..we can and must do it again.

Oh, and Snake307: some gallows humor is funny but to make fun of mentally disabled women who were duped into having their lives ended shows your lack of intelligence as well as a lack of respect for them. Freedom of speech is wonderful because it reveals the intelligence, or lack thereof, of the speaker. Comments like yours lack substance or humor and as such deserve no place in this form. AP, Bryan, Malkin….ban the jerk!

Bubba Redneck on February 2, 2008 at 3:08 PM

Bubba Redneck on February 2, 2008 at 3:08 PM

OK, OK. It was a joke!

Chuck Schick on February 2, 2008 at 6:27 PM

I’ll ignore the word “Iran” above as I assume it must be a typo.

Chuck Schick on February 1, 2008 at 4:53 PM

No typo. A million of them hit the streets of Tehran expressing sympathy for Americans after 9/11.

But lets go ahead and nuke em. What the f*ck.

Drum on February 1, 2008 at 5:00 PM

Odd, I don’t recall this. Perhaps I missed it through all the “Death to America” and “Death to the Great Satan” signs and shouts. Did they write “Sorry the Great Satan got Wacked” or “Our Condolences to the Evil Americans” on the back of their signs? Did they not burn a very poor rendition of our flag?

Saddam thought he could bluff us with NBC weapons programs. His bluff was called. Libya read the tea leaves and came clean and even “Mr. Ronley” up in North Korea may be coming clean about his nuclear projects. The mullahs in Iran would be wise to do the same. However, they, like liberals, are not known for acting logically.

About 2500 years ago the Greeks gave the Persians a bloody nose, twice no less, for attempting to subjugate them. The Persians learned their lesson and have not been back since.

Bubba Redneck on February 3, 2008 at 12:50 AM

Comment pages: 1 2