I've been crying wolf for a couple of years now. Our day of reckoning is getting nearer. Hope you have food and shelter to last a year. When this happens, don't worry about driving to work. You won't have a job.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++



© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com



WASHINGTON – As London recovers from the latest deadly al-Qaida attack that killed at least 50, top U.S. government officials are contemplating what they consider to be an inevitable and much bigger assault on America – one likely to kill millions, destroy the economy and fundamentally alter the course of history, reports Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin (http://www.g2bulletin.com/). According to captured al-Qaida leaders and documents, the plan is called the "American Hiroshima" and involves the multiple detonation of nuclear weapons already smuggled into the U.S. over the Mexican border with the help of the MS-13 street gang and other organized crime groups.



Al-Qaida has obtained at least 40 nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union – including suitcase nukes, nuclear mines, artillery shells and even some missile warheads. In addition, documents captured in Afghanistan show al-Qaida had plans to assemble its own nuclear weapons with fissile material it purchased on the black market.

In addition to detonating its own nuclear weapons already planted in the U.S., military sources also say there is evidence to suggest al-Qaida is paying former Russian special forces Spetznaz to assist the terrorist group in locating nuclear weapons formerly concealed inside the U.S. by the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Osama bin Laden's group is also paying nuclear scientists from Russia and Pakistan to maintain its existing nuclear arsenal and assemble additional weapons with the materials it has invested hundreds of millions in procuring over a period of 10 years.

The plans for the devastating nuclear attack on the U.S. have been under development for more than a decade. It is designed as a final deadly blow of defeat to the U.S., which is seen by al-Qaida and its allies as "the Great Satan."

At least half the nuclear weapons in the al-Qaida arsenal were obtained for cash from the Chechen terrorist allies.

But the most disturbing news is that high level U.S. officials now believe at least some of those weapons have been smuggled into the U.S. for use in the near future in major cities as part of this "American Hiroshima" plan, according to an upcoming book, "The al-Qaida Connection: International Terrorism, Organized Crime and the Coming Apocalypse," by Paul L. Williams, a former FBI consultant.

According to Williams, former CIA Director George Tenet informed President Bush one month after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that at least two suitcase nukes had reached al-Qaida operatives in the U.S. "Each suitcase weighed between 50 and 80 kilograms (approximately 110 to 176 pounds) and contained enough fissionable plutonium and uranium to produce an explosive yield in excess of two kilotons," wrote Williams. "One suitcase bore the serial number 9999 and the Russian manufacturing date of 1988. The design of the weapons, Tenet told the president, is simple. The plutonium and uranium are kept in separate compartments that are linked to a triggering mechanism that can be activated by a clock or a call from the cell phone."

...snip

"The sky is falling, the sky is falling". Chicken Little said it all!

Well THAT is just friggin' great! While BuSh has diverted our attention and resources to "no-imminent threat" Iraq, he's left our back door unlocked........... AGAIN!!

GEE, where did those nukes come from? Iraq? NO, Russia!

GEE, who carried those nukes into the US?? Iraqis? NO, Al Quida!

When the fluck are you shrubbies going to wake up and smell the crap that GW has sold this country out??
:Bang

If you subscribe to this guys newsletter you can get the scoop. Al-Qaida started this OVER 10 YEARS ago while Clinton was in office. The Free World failed to get their hands around the nukes floating around that were available after the fall of communism. To think we could stop them from getting them into the United States is a joke. There was/is/never will be a way to stop them from smuggling them here.

I laugh at Barry's chicken little comment. How smug one must feel to not feel endangered by these 'terrorists'. People that have absolutely no qualms about strapping on a belt full of explosives and turning themselves into spaghetti.

If I was living in one of the major 'hit' zones, I'd be scared as heck. I would probably move. In my case I can only hope that my family is spared the 1st hit although who knows what will become of the United States after that. We will probably be too paralyzed to do anything. All of our power is located in Washington which I have argued is a stupid thing. Dating all the way back to the Cold War. Why do we have all our eggs in one basket?

Getting back to Barrry...Be afraid, be very afraid. It is not a matter of if, only a matter of when. No wonder they have been so quite. They are very patient. They will pull this off in a single day, within hours. It will become the day the Earth stood still.

Three words...Mutually Assured Destruction.

LGM-118A Peacekeeper MIRV with 10 Avco MK 21 re-entry vehicles each with a minimum yield of 300 Kilotons.

One on Mecca and one on Medina should make a point. They think we're Satan? Let's show em' what Hell looks like.

Really though...watch the movie "Dirty War". It should be required watching...

Really though...watch the movie "Dirty War". It should be required watching...Dirty Bombs are one thing. I am talking about the real thing. 20 Mile radius stuff. Unless we get really lucky, there will not be a Jack Bauer to save the day at the last second.

Al-Qaida has obtained at least 40 nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union – including suitcase nukes, nuclear mines, artillery shells and even some missile warheads. In addition, documents captured in Afghanistan show al-Qaida had plans to assemble its own nuclear weapons with fissile material it purchased on the black market.


Why need to build your own if you already have 40?


at least two suitcase nukes had reached al-Qaida operatives in the U.S. "Each suitcase weighed between 50 and 80 kilograms (approximately 110 to 176 pounds) and contained enough fissionable plutonium and uranium to produce an explosive yield in excess of two kilotons,"


And they havent used them in 4 years because..........?


to assist the terrorist group in locating nuclear weapons formerly concealed inside the U.S. by the Soviet Union during the Cold War.


Such weapons cannot be just placed and forgotton. They have to be maintained. The nuclear material will break down the other components before long from being in such close proximity.

The article is full of holes... Besides - whats the point? Even if its all true, there is nothing any of us can do about it or in preparation for it. Place the 40 nukes correctly, the whole country will be dead. The fallout will be carried east and will finish the job. Besides - if they only set off one or two - can you imagine how we would react? I know I would just start nukin everywhere I even imagined could be a threat. Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, Sudan, anywhere I thought terrorists might be.

Besides - if they only set off one or two - can you imagine how we would react? I know I would just start nukin everywhere I even imagined could be a threat. Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, Sudan, anywhere I thought terrorists might be.That's my point. It is going to happen. There are so many nukes now anybody with the cash can get them.

So if you are Bush and this happens in the next 3 years, what should he do?

How should America respond?

To me, this is not hypothetical. It is only a matter of when, not if.

How should America respond?



I dont worry about things I have no control over, its a waste of energy. I cant tell you how to respond because it would depend on exactly what happens. If a single nuke went off in NY, well that would have one response, if 40 went off all over the country, wont be any response, we'll be dead. Either way - its not something im prepared to spend time right now worrying about. I sure if something like this happens your buddy GW will run over to the middle east and collect all the oil, then land on an aircraft carrier somewhere and act like he actuall did something.

Typical of the left having no plan or anything to offer.

You guys have all the answers but like sKerry, it's all wrapped up in a secret plan. Put me in charge and then I'll tell you b.s.

What's wrong with knowing how to respond? The who/what/where/when/why. You complain about Bush and he had no plan to leave Iraq before entering and here we sit like deer blinded by the lights and it seems all the left is prepared to do is stand there and get run over by the car. This is precisely why the majority of Americans want the Republicans in charge of our security. They know we will do everything we can to keep this country safe. Not play russian roulette with our citizens lives.

Good question Joey. If they have them, why didn't they use them instead of flying airplanes into buildings?

I read an article that said Al Queda was targeting the major cheese producing centers of the country! Head for shelters, Bryan!

Besides - if they only set off one or two - can you imagine how we would react? I know I would just start nukin everywhere I even imagined could be a threat. Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, Sudan, anywhere I thought terrorists might be.
In case ya forgot, we were attacked. At least 2,985 people were killed in total. In addition to the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center itself, five other buildings at the WTC site and four subway stations were destroyed or badly damaged. In total, on Manhattan Island, 25 buildings were damaged. Communications infrastructure such as broadcast radio, television and two way radio antenna towers were damaged beyond repair. In Arlington, a portion of the Pentagon was severely damaged by fire and one section of the building collapsed. This was a deathmatch challenge by islamists who are funded by many nations in the middle east for religious war intent on wiping out all of the US. Bush begins chasing Bin-Laden around in circles while we have massive amounts of intelligence showing that Iraq is a) funding terrorism b) building WMDs c) killing their own innocent.

So, you would just start bombing every suspect country? Bush carefully planned a strategy and did not act until congress voted to go ahead with the plan. And now you blame him?
This is what you said you would do:
I would just start nukin everywhere I even imagined could be a threatand this is what you say when asked what Bush should have done:
its not something im prepared to spend time right now worrying about. I sure if something like this happens your buddy GW will run over to the middle east and collect all the oil, then land on an aircraft carrier somewhere and act like he actuall did something.
Do you really listen to the news? have you been sleeping the last three years? Because you are wrong about what Bush did in response -- completely wrong. And we know better. This is why conservative America has the power to rule... they know what they are doing, and you should be thankful that Bush has the intelligence an morals to act accordingly, and the stones to relentlessly resolve the issue.... and not flip-flop like the left.

Well.... you just shot all your credibility all to he|| again... Ya just make yourself look more like your avatar photo then Bush ever will.
But thanks for playing... and thanks for representing the whining, no solution libs perfectly. We see right through ya!

"The sky is falling, the sky is falling". Chicken Little said it all!

Interesting how Johnny and Barry had instant, knee-jerk, totally OPPOSITE reactions to your article, Monstermark. :slam

Only because there are about a million holes in it just like the security of the borders of this nation.

Only because there are about a million holes in it just like the security of the borders of this nation.

I kinda felt that way too after reading it, sounds like a load of BS to me, at least most of it. Not saying it couldnt happen, but that article doesnt make for a stong case.

That's my point. It is going to happen. There are so many nukes now anybody with the cash can get them.

I guess anyone but Iraq =p

I only wonder how many of those nukes will actually work, 30+ years of no service, and they were built by the russians, sorry to say but I've seen quite a few incompetant things they've done over the years...

Ah yes, The blood is starting to boil.

Let's try this exercise again. Let's pretend that the lefties are back in power. The year is 2008 and Hillary leads a sweep into power for the Dems, taking back the House and Senate and we are still filibustering the 3 vacant Supreme Court seats so liberalism is alive and well. You now have the finger on the nuclear button. Still playing along? Great.

Al-Qaida takes over a TV station, a Fox affiliate of course, and makes an ultimatum. Pull out of the Middle East or infidels will die. To prove they are serious, they will blow up one American city. The catch is we get to pick which one.

1) Which city do we pick?
2) What happens after they blow it up? ie: What do we do then?
3) Do we surrender to prevent any more casualties?

OK, guys on the left. I really need to hear your responses. This should be good. Play nice now. You always complain about the Bush Administration not having a plan, well here's your chance to play...Nuclear Confrontation.

Ah yes, The blood is starting to boil.

Let's try this exercise again. Let's pretend that the lefties are back in power. The year is 2008 and Hillary leads a sweep into power for the Dems, taking back the House and Senate and we are still filibustering the 3 vacant Supreme Court seats so liberalism is alive and well. You now have the finger on the nuclear button. Still playing along? Great.

Al-Qaida takes over a TV station, a Fox affiliate of course, and makes an ultimatum. Pull out of the Middle East or infidels will die. To prove they are serious, they will blow up one American city. The catch is we get to pick which one.

1) Which city do we pick?
2) What happens after they blow it up? ie: What do we do then?
3) Do we surrender to prevent any more casualties?

OK, guys on the left. I really need to hear your responses. This should be good. Play nice now. You always complain about the Bush Administration not having a plan, well here's your chance to play...Nuclear Confrontation.

Im assuming we are still in Iraq then. Sheesh!
For 1 id be pissed at Bush for not goin after Al-Qaida with full force, and instead choosing to go after Iraq. I dont call what we are doin today a all out war on Al-qaida, if we put the man power we have in iraq twards hunting them down we would have got alot farther then we have to date.

I wouldnt pick a city I dont think..... We actually fight al-qaida where we have intel they might be, with or without the countries approval (hopefully with). With how Al-Qaida is set up I dont think we could do much to them with nukes.

But I dont think I can come up with a good answer, this would be a tough one. I sure wouldnt want to be in charge if this happened =p Im curious what your answer would be to this MonsterMark.

But I dont think I can come up with a good answer, this would be a tough one. I sure wouldnt want to be in charge if this happened =p Im curious what your answer would be to this MonsterMark.I will be more than happy to voice my opinion. You can count on that. I think it is important to see what our friends on the left would do if placed in that position. After all, with all the criticisms we have heard about the Bush administration from the left, I have never heard a single suggestion about what they would do on any subject. Medicare, SS, environment, terrorism, you name it. I have never heard one little thing. Only negativity.
So let's give them a chance to play Nuclear Confrontation. (applause)

It's become painfully obvious that you don't listen to anything but that little voice in your head. We who oppose BuSh have offered many solutions. You have simply ignored them or you haven't seen them while wearing your BuSh goggles.

Try reading some of the oppositions posts once in a while.

It's become painfully obvious that you don't listen to anything but that little voice in your head. We who oppose BuSh have offered many solutions. You have simply ignored them or you haven't seen them while wearing your BuSh goggles.

Try reading some of the oppositions posts once in a while.

:I Thank you Barry. Took the words right off my keyboard.

I find it interesting that my sarcastic "opposite" reaction went right over fossten's head. Even IF the sky is really falling, BuSh still let this country down.

You know I read each and every one of them. Use the search function and drag them up and make me look the fool. You've been trying to do that for a year now with no success. Here's your chance. Give me something to chew on.

It's become painfully obvious that you don't listen to anything but that little voice in your head.I will admit in the past to having listened to that little voice in my pants.http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon10.gif

Little voice from a little fella?

Sometimes he acks like a turtle and sometimes he goes way out of his way to be noticed. Its strange. I thought I could control him but I can't. He did mention the other day that he thought it was unfair that the teabags were getting longer and he asked me if we could exercise more. I told him I would have to speak to the mrs. about that. http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon12.gif

Here is a good, albeit long read from an Iranian. He has the right idea though. Is the left listening?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



TIME TO HIT THE SUICIDE FACTORIES
by Amir Taheri
New York Post
July 8, 2005



July 8, 2005 -- 'WE have fulfilled our promise and carried out our blessed military raid in Britain after our mujahideen exerted strenuous efforts over a long period of time to ensure the success of the raid." This was how an Islamist group, using the al Qaeda brandname, announced its responsibility for the terror attacks that claimed nearly 40 lives in London yesterday.

Although the exact circumstances of the raid on London remain murky, one thing is certain: This was a suicide operation aimed at killing as many civilians as possible. That the raid came as the G-8 summit opened in Scotland is certainly significant, as is the fact that it was the first day of the Arabic lunar month of Jamadul al-Akhir, Prophet Muhammad's favorite season for organizing raids against the "infidel."

What do we do about people who are prepared to court certain death in exchange for killing others? The question has been asked by the Israelis for years and by the Americans since 9/11. It is now the turn of the British to ponder it.

The first thing to do is not to get impressed by the fact that an individual who has been brainwashed out of his or her humanity is ready to die in order to kill others. The only reasonable way to treat such individuals is as a new form of weaponry. And, like all other weapons that impress when first introduced, these suicide-killers will continue to terrorize and fascinate until we find an antidote.

Cyrus the Great used camels as a weapon when he conquered Babylon. Hannibal used elephants for his raid on Rome. The Islamist terror leaders who wish to conquer the world and convert entire mankind to their brand of "true Islam" have gone one better by using the human body as a weapon.

But like all others, this weapon is designed by some people, financed by investors, manufactured somewhere and deployed by leaders who can be identified and destroyed. These human weapons are designed and shaped by a constant flow of anti-Western propaganda from Arab satellite TV, the so-called Islamic associations and countless madarassahs (Islamic schools) -RD>and mosques throughout the world, including in London itself.

Go to any mosque in the West (let alone in the Islamic countries) on any Friday and you are sure to hear a litany of woes about how the "cross-worshippers" have allied themselves with the "plotting Jews" in order to destroy Islam, which, as God's final message, is the only true faith.

You will hear how the West is mired in corruption, its womenfolk exposing their midriff in public and its governments sanctioning gay and lesbian marriages. You will also hear how "the Crusaders" have invaded Muslim lands and are trying to impose their democratic system on Afghanistan and Iraq.

Such a discourse might leave most Muslims indifferent or even annoyed. But it is enough for it to seduce even 1 percent of the world's Muslims — that is to say a cool 13 million people — for everyone to be in trouble.

The deadly propaganda is reinforced by other means. The future terrorist is comforted by the fact that his or her fellow Muslims in the West use their bodies as an advertising space for their beliefs. In many Western cities, this comes in the form of al Qaeda-style beards and long shirts (qamis) for men and jet-black hijab (headgear) for women. (Not long ago, I saw a baby girl in a carriage wearing that prop of visual terrorism.)

The would-be suicide terrorist is also likely to be impressed by the self-styled Islamic theologians coolly debating the issue of whom to kill and how. Any viewer of Al-Jazeera, the satellite channel owned by the emir of Qatar, has seen its chief Islamist guru Yussuf al-Qaradawi insist that Islam allows the murder of unborn Israeli babies because they may grow up and join the army. In a recent visit to Mecca, I witnessed another self-styled guru, Sheik Safar al-Hawali, informing visitors to his home that it was "licit" to kill innocent Muslim women and children in Iraq if that led to "the defeat of the Crusaders and their apostate Muslim allies."

The would-be suicide-killer is also comforted by the sense of guilt manifested by many in the West. He has seen do-gooders from the United States in the streets of Arab Jerusalem apologizing to astounded Muslim passersby for "the Crusades" — which happened long before the United States came into being.

He may also note that he is treated with something bordering on deference by much of the Western media, which has banned the use of the word "terrorist" altogether, using, instead, such terms as "militants" or " resistance fighters."

And then there was the successful ghazva (raid) on Madrid last year, when the Islamists succeeded in changing the government of a major Western democracy with a single attack.

If the suicide-terrorists were weapons made of metal, the victims would certainly try to bomb places where they were made. But because these weapons are of human flesh, the assumption is that they can't be traced back to any specific locality. It is as if we were dealing with ethereal beings existing beyond the limits of reality.

The London attack was not the work only of the few individuals who carried it out. It was the bitter fruit of a faith that has been hijacked by a minority of extremists while the majority of its adepts watch with a mixture of awe and ill-concealed pride. The real fight against this enemy of humanity will start only when the so-called "silent majority" in Islam speaks out against these murderers and those who brainwash, train, finance and deploy them. Amir Taheri, an Iranian author and journalist, is a member of Benador Associates.

The London attack was not the work only of the few individuals who carried it out. It was the bitter fruit of a faith that has been hijacked by a minority of extremists while the majority of its adepts watch with a mixture of awe and ill-concealed pride.


From someone who'd know firsthand. Sounds familiar.

The world would be much better off if we would just nuke everything from the mediterranian sea to India. Hate to say it but it's true. These "people" (I use that term loosley) have caused nothing but trouble for thousands of years, and it's not going to change, ever.

The world would be much better off if we would just nuke everything from the mediterranian sea to India. Hate to say it but it's true. These "people" (I use that term loosley) have caused nothing but trouble for thousands of years, and it's not going to change, ever.

Geez, I hope your not serious....

Quote:
Originally Posted by crash
The world would be much better off if we would just nuke everything from the mediterranian sea to India. Hate to say it but it's true. These "people" (I use that term loosley) have caused nothing but trouble for thousands of years, and it's not going to change, ever.


:slam You really believe that?

Here is a good, albeit long read from an Iranian. He has the right idea though. Is the left listening?




We need to study the ways of the "Mujahideen" Understand Muhamad and what they term "Infidel". Really the best way to "Counter" Terrorist using this label are to understand these rights of way. I honestly believe we need to bring some "Sane" Mujahideen on board within the national security.

I was watching CSI - Las Vegas... Not a favorite, but this was an intriguing episode that featured a group of college wiz kids that figured a scheme to rip off a casino by playing roulette... Anyway, when the casino owner figured out who was beating him, he hired the guy to learn from him about the operation and how it was planned and executed so he could better build his defenses against such attacks and recognize these activities in the future.

We NEED to be doing the same... I realize it is unconventional, but we're not playing with conventional wisdom here. We need innovative means to beat these radicals. Don't get me wrong... I believe these folks need to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law... But instead of putting them in prison and letting them sit there while out tax dollars feed them. We should develop an undercover ring. Create a bogus escape plan for these individuals and create an Al-Queda or Mujahideen like organization led by "Iraqi, Pakistani, Afghani Americans" (Yes people, there are such a thing) that work with our National Security undercover. Its much like what we do on the war on drugs... Infiltrate the organization. With the right team in place we can begin to break some of these events. This is the only way to work this type of war... Events like what happened in London, Madrid, NY and DC are well coordinated events that take time, money and serious planning. To have "Operatives" in these organizations can at least help mitigate some of the damage. Tip offs, alerts, something that may help evacuation or anything to save lives. That is the only way to dig into this problem...


What was written below is despicable Crash... Your ignorance is abundant!
The world would be much better off if we would just nuke everything from the mediterranian sea to India. Hate to say it but it's true. These "people" (I use that term loosley) have caused nothing but trouble for thousands of years, and it's not going to change, ever.

Only because there are about a million holes in it just like the security of the borders of this nation.

I DO agree with you about border security. NO argument there, bud.

:I Thank you Barry. Took the words right off my keyboard.

I find it interesting that my sarcastic "opposite" reaction went right over fossten's head. Even IF the sky is really falling, BuSh still let this country down.

UM, nice try, but your post wasn't sarcastic, or you would have gone out of your way to make it obvious. Everybody knows that the typed word is ambiguous and needs clarity. So you are one of two things: A liar or a poor communicator.

Fossten,

You need to stop your personal attacks. They don't help you make your point and they are against the rules of the forum.

Fossten,

You need to stop your personal attacks. They don't help you make your point and they are against the rules of the forum.

You need to grow a skin.

How many would agree that since fossen joined his board the level of personal attacks and hatred have increased significantly?

How many would agree that his spewing adds nothing to the conversation?

MonsterMark. How about doing your job? If I have to play by the rules fossen should too.

How many would agree that since fossen joined his board the level of personal attacks and hatred have increased significantly?

How many would agree that his spewing adds nothing to the conversation?

MonsterMark. How about doing your job? If I have to play by the rules fossen should too.me sheds a tear

UM, nice try, but your post wasn't sarcastic, or you would have gone out of your way to make it obvious. Everybody knows that the typed word is ambiguous and needs clarity. So you are one of two things: A liar or a poor communicator.

OK, you're new(ish), I'll cut you some slack bud. Maybe "sarcastic" was a poor choice of words, "back-handedly oppertunistic" is probably more accurate. Whatever.

Now that Kbob is back ( :W ), maybe he'll give us are more accurate term to use for what I did. Regardless, I think you got my point. And DO take barry's advice, save the attacks, it makes you look weak-minded.

Now that Kbob is back ( :W ), maybe he'll give us are more accurate term to use for what I did. Regardless, I think you got my point. And DO take barry's advice, save the attacks, it makes you look weak-minded.I like you, Johnny. You can dish and receive. And I'll vouch for you that you are NOT a liar. You've owned up to your fair share of mistakes. And we've all communicated poorly from time to time (some more than others). Sooner or later things get out of hand for everyone here. That's part of the fun.

I've been reading these threads the last couple of weeks or so. And they've been very entertaining. Keep up the good work all on the right (Bryan, eL eS, fossten, etc.) and all on the left (Johnny, Phil, Barry, etc.). How boring this place would be without you.

Hopefully my next post will actually add to the conversation. I wouldn't hold my breath, though.

Man, I guess those of us in the middle don't get any recognition... :waving:

Actually I can see Johnny, Phil and Barry going "MIDDLE MY A$$!" :N

OK, you're new(ish), I'll cut you some slack bud. Maybe "sarcastic" was a poor choice of words, "back-handedly oppertunistic" is probably more accurate. Whatever.

Now that Kbob is back ( :W ), maybe he'll give us are more accurate term to use for what I did. Regardless, I think you got my point. And DO take barry's advice, save the attacks, it makes you look weak-minded.




I don't want to hear it. All you liberals ever do is attack people when you can't win an argument. Case in point, from the Hillary for President thread:

Johnny says,

"Jeezzzus Bryan, you should see a shrink. How you've twisted an bi-partisan initiative (that just so happens to be initiated by some Dems, who you've long bitched about being "part of the problem and not the solution"......... now they come with a proposal and you are still not happy) into some sick, twisted re-election campaign on the backs of "poor black kids" is disgusting.

Really, seriously. Get some help. "

That's a heck of a lot more personal than what I said.

Oh, and there are dozens more where that came from. What a band of hypocrites and thin-skins! You guys dish it out all day but cry when you have to take it.


Here's another one:

97silverlsc says:
"Bryan, I think you need an intervention!!! "

Sounds personal.

How bout this one, BARRY?
You said this:


"Bryan. Will you send your boys to die in Iraq?
Bryan,

Will you send your boys to die in Iraq? I know that they are still a little young to think about it but the Administration tells us we will be there for another 12 years. That ought to be about right to set them up to be killed by a road side bomb or beheaded by some fanatic. Are you willing to risk their lives in Iran or Korea? We'll see how supportive you are then.

I was under the impression that you were grooming your sons to be businessmen, not soldiers. Have you read that recruitment in all branches has missed their mark. How will you feel when the program that you supported reinstates the draft and your pre-law or med-student son is grabbed away from you to fight a battle in a land that we can't get out of because of GWB's mistakes.

Please, we've all heard enough about GWB's perfect record. It's not true and you know it. When your son (or sons) dies I think you'll change your tune. I don't think, in this case, that war was in order.

You've already admitted that this war was about oil. If we've commited to being there for another 12 years how will that work to our advantage? It won't. It only works to the advantage of GWB's biggest supporters and richest men and companies in the world. His butt-buddies are reaping (raping) huge profits while a large component of companies profits is going right to the Saudis and the other puppeteers.

Please take a look in the mirror for your sons' sake."

If that doesn't warrant getting booted off this board I don't have a thing to worry about.

I could go on and on.

Stop wasting everybody's time by manufacturing complaints. It makes you look thin-skinned and petulant (see dictionary).

:bsflag:

Oh, I found another one, BARRY:

Barry said to me:

"Mind your own business. Your opinion matters little in this discussion. In fact, from your frequent posts you opinion has no weight as you are the worst hater on this site."

Ooo! Personal!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8569229/

According to Barry, this would be more chicken little sky-is-falling talk coming from the Monster. http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon10.gif Will people finally understand that the #1 threat to the United States is our own sovereignty and that we must have the strongest military in the world to keep the peace! I hate to keep doing it but is so very important that we keep our eye on the ball and not lose focus, now more than ever.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++

Top Chinese general warns US over attack
By Alexandra Harney in Beijing and Demetri Sevastopulo and Edward Alden in Washington
Published: July 14 2005 21:59 | Last updated: July 15 2005 00:03
http://news.ft.com/c.gif
China is prepared to use nuclear weapons against the US if it is attacked by Washington during a confrontation over Taiwan, a Chinese general said on Thursday.
// http://globalelements.ft.com/c.gifhttp://globalelements.ft.com/c.gifhttp://globalelements.ft.com/c.gif
“If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition on to the target zone on China's territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons,” said General Zhu Chenghu.

Gen Zhu was speaking at a function for foreign journalists organised, in part, by the Chinese government. He added that China's definition of its territory included warships and aircraft.

“If the Americans are determined to interfere [then] we will be determined to respond,” said Gen Zhu, who is also a professor at China's National Defence University.

“We . . . will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian. Of course the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds . . . of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese.”

Gen Zhu is a self-acknowledged “hawk” who has warned that China could strike the US with long-range missiles. But his threat to use nuclear weapons in a conflict over Taiwan is the most specific by a senior Chinese official in nearly a decade.

However, some US-based China experts cautioned that Gen Zhu probably did not represent the mainstream People's Liberation Army view.

“He is running way beyond his brief on what China might do in relation to the US if push comes to shove,” said one expert with knowledge of Gen Zhu. “Nobody who is cleared for information on Chinese war scenarios is going to talk like this,” he added.

Gen Zhu's comments come as the Pentagon prepares to brief Congress next Monday on its annual report on the Chinese military, which is expected to take a harder line than previous years. They are also likely to fuel the mounting anti-China sentiment on Capitol Hill.

In recent months, a string of US officials, including Donald Rumsfeld, defence secretary, have raised concerns about China's military rise. The Pentagon on Thursday declined to comment on “hypothetical scenarios”.

Rick Fisher, a former senior US congressional official and an authority on the Chinese military, said the specific nature of the threat “is a new addition to China's public discourse”. China's official doctrine has called for no first use of nuclear weapons since its first atomic test in 1964. But Gen Zhu is not the first Chinese official to refer to the possibility of using such weapons first in a conflict over Taiwan.

Chas Freeman, a former US assistant secretary of defence, said in 1996 that a PLA official had told him China could respond in kind to a nuclear strike by the US in the event of a conflict with Taiwan. The official is believed to have been Xiong Guangkai, now the PLA's deputy chief of general staff.

Gen Zhu said his views did not represent official Chinese policy and he did not anticipate war with the US.

Additional reporting by Richard McGregor in Beijing
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/28cfe55a-f4a7-11d9-9dd1-00000e2511c8.html

According to Barry, this would be more chicken little sky-is-falling talk coming from the Monster. http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon10.gif Will people finally understand that the #1 threat to the United States is our own sovereignty and that we must have the strongest military in the world to keep the peace! I hate to keep doing it but is so very important that we keep our eye on the ball and not lose focus, now more than ever.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++

Top Chinese general warns US over attack
By Alexandra Harney in Beijing and Demetri Sevastopulo and Edward Alden in Washington
Published: July 14 2005 21:59 | Last updated: July 15 2005 00:03
http://news.ft.com/c.gif
China is prepared to use nuclear weapons against the US if it is attacked by Washington during a confrontation over Taiwan, a Chinese general said on Thursday.
// http://globalelements.ft.com/c.gifhttp://globalelements.ft.com/c.gifhttp://globalelements.ft.com/c.gif
“If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition on to the target zone on China's territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons,” said General Zhu Chenghu.

Gen Zhu was speaking at a function for foreign journalists organised, in part, by the Chinese government. He added that China's definition of its territory included warships and aircraft.

“If the Americans are determined to interfere [then] we will be determined to respond,” said Gen Zhu, who is also a professor at China's National Defence University.

“We . . . will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian. Of course the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds . . . of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese.”

Gen Zhu is a self-acknowledged “hawk” who has warned that China could strike the US with long-range missiles. But his threat to use nuclear weapons in a conflict over Taiwan is the most specific by a senior Chinese official in nearly a decade.

However, some US-based China experts cautioned that Gen Zhu probably did not represent the mainstream People's Liberation Army view.

“He is running way beyond his brief on what China might do in relation to the US if push comes to shove,” said one expert with knowledge of Gen Zhu. “Nobody who is cleared for information on Chinese war scenarios is going to talk like this,” he added.

Gen Zhu's comments come as the Pentagon prepares to brief Congress next Monday on its annual report on the Chinese military, which is expected to take a harder line than previous years. They are also likely to fuel the mounting anti-China sentiment on Capitol Hill.

In recent months, a string of US officials, including Donald Rumsfeld, defence secretary, have raised concerns about China's military rise. The Pentagon on Thursday declined to comment on “hypothetical scenarios”.

Rick Fisher, a former senior US congressional official and an authority on the Chinese military, said the specific nature of the threat “is a new addition to China's public discourse”. China's official doctrine has called for no first use of nuclear weapons since its first atomic test in 1964. But Gen Zhu is not the first Chinese official to refer to the possibility of using such weapons first in a conflict over Taiwan.

Chas Freeman, a former US assistant secretary of defence, said in 1996 that a PLA official had told him China could respond in kind to a nuclear strike by the US in the event of a conflict with Taiwan. The official is believed to have been Xiong Guangkai, now the PLA's deputy chief of general staff.

Gen Zhu said his views did not represent official Chinese policy and he did not anticipate war with the US.

Additional reporting by Richard McGregor in Beijing
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/28cfe55a-f4a7-11d9-9dd1-00000e2511c8.html

If someone told you straight up into your face that the 9/11 attack was on the way, nobody would have listened. Now that we know that it can happen, the weak people ignore it happening again.

If someone told you straight up into your face that the 9/11 attack was on the way, nobody would have listened. Now that we know that it can happen, the weak people ignore it happening again.
:I

Try and stay focused Bryan. The subject was not the potential threat of China using nuclear weapons. If you'd like to start a new thread on the subject I'm sure you'd get some comments.

Try and stay focused Bryan. The subject was not the potential threat of China using nuclear weapons. If you'd like to start a new thread on the subject I'm sure you'd get some comments.

I think he just got bored waiting for you, standing there with your mouth open, trying to think of something to say.

That must be it.

That must be it.

Barry, correct me if I am wrong, but your beef with Bush is an economic issue.

Your income went down, yadda, yadda.

One and the same to me as far as topics. Everybody is gunning for us and we are sitting ducks. Looks like Ronald Reagan was right when it came to Star Wars. Looks like we'll be needing a missile defense shield when China invades Taiwan, which will happen within the next decade.

Barry, correct me if I am wrong, but your beef with Bush is an economic issue.

Your income went down, yadda, yadda.No, he feels Bush has been less than truthful, among a dozen other things.

I just had another post removed here. What is with you guys. -lol-

I sent you a PM. Please feel free to contact me.

I don't want to hear it. All you liberals ever do is attack people when you can't win an argument. Case in point, from the Hillary for President thread:

Johnny says,

"Jeezzzus Bryan, you should see a shrink. How you've twisted an bi-partisan initiative (that just so happens to be initiated by some Dems, who you've long bitched about being "part of the problem and not the solution"......... now they come with a proposal and you are still not happy) into some sick, twisted re-election campaign on the backs of "poor black kids" is disgusting.

Really, seriously. Get some help. "

That's a heck of a lot more personal than what I said.



I was offering / suggesting genuine help, NOT launching a personal attack.

:ban

If someone told you straight up into your face that the 9/11 attack was on the way, nobody would have listened. Now that we know that it can happen, the weak people ignore it happening again.

Gents (and I use that term lightly for you and fossten), quit trying to put words / thoughts into the minds of us who do not subscribe to your school of right-winged-whackoism. Only the small minority of left-leaning whackos are "ignoring" these threats, the rest of us in the middle, libs, dems, lefties et-al fully appreciate the threats from other countries OTHER THAN IRAQ. And that is exactly WHY we are so PISSED at the BuSh administration. He's squandered our resources starting an un-necessary war in Iraq and has left us exposed to all those other threats.

I was offering / suggesting genuine help, NOT launching a personal attack.For you new guys, you will 'earn' your stripes with time and after you have takin a few beatings. Johnny has already endured what would be numerous trips to the hospital. Instead of going to see his lawyer, he just shows up back at the scene of the crime to do it all over. He reminds of the Brat Pitt character in Fight Club. Maybe that's why I like him. And I did offer to get Johnny a reverse-lobotomy, republican-style, to help him on the road to recovery.http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon12.gif

What's really strange is I like the guys from the left as much as I like the guys from the right, both sides for what they have to say. I know I couldn't survive without my lefties. Preaching to the choir just doesn't do it for me.

LOL, punching bags only smell like sweat, not like blood.
:Beer

LOL, punching bags only smell like sweat, not like blood.
:Beer

That's funny. Especially because the last punches that were landed were thrown by me. :waving:

More Chicken Little....from MonsterMark

Al-Qaida's U.S.nuclear targets
Captured documents, terrorists reveal bin Laden's preferred dates, places for 'American Hiroshima'


Posted: July 18, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

Al-Qaida's prime targets for launching nuclear terrorist attacks are the nine U.S. cities with the highest Jewish populations, according to captured leaders and documents.

As first revealed last week in Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, the premium, online intelligence newsletter published by the founder of WND, (http://www.g2bulletin.com/)Osama bin Laden is planning what he calls an "American Hiroshima," the ultimate terrorist attack on U.S. cities, using nuclear weapons already smuggled into the country across the Mexican border along with thousands of sleeper agents.

The series of attacks is designed to kill 4 million, destroy the economy and fundamentally alter the course of history.

At least two fully assembled and operational nuclear weapons are believed to be hidden in the United States already, according to G2 Bulletin (http://www.g2bulletin.com/)intelligence sources and an upcoming book, "The al-Qaida Connection: International Terrorism, Organized Crime and the Coming Apocalypse," by former FBI consultant Paul L. Williams.

The cities chosen as optimal targets are New York, Miami, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Chicago, San Francisco, Las Vegas, Boston and Washington, D.C. New York and Washington top the preferred target list for al-Qaida leadership.



Bin Laden's goal, according to G2 Bulletin (http://www.g2bulletin.com/)sources, is to launch one initial attack, followed by a second on another city to simulate the U.S. bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The optimal dates for the attacks are Aug. 6, the anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing, Sept. 11 and May 14, the anniversary of the re-creation of the state of Israel in 1948. No specific year has been suggested, however, this Aug. 6 represents the 60th anniversary of the Hiroshima attack.



The captured terrorists and documents also suggest smaller attacks may take place on American soil before the nuclear incidents. They may include some involving automatic weapons at schools and shopping malls, but will not include any airplane hijackings. Why? Because bin Laden does not want any failed efforts to overshadow "the success of Sept. 11." There will also not be any attacks on U.S. nuclear power plants. The rationale? The nuclear power plants can act as force multipliers when the weapons of mass destruction are detonated.



Another requirement dictated from the top at al-Qaida is that the attacks take place in daylight, so that the whole world will be able to see the images of a mushroom cloud over an American city.

One of the sources for the information is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the chief planner of the Sept. 11 attacks, who is now in U.S. custody.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45313

That's funny. Especially because the last punches that were landed were thrown by me. :waving:

When you finish patting yourself on the back for yet another task un-accomplished, you can kiss my arse.

Johnny, I noticed your living in fall-out land over their in NE Indy. After Joey is done glowing, I guess you get the radiation fallout. Better get your shelter built, but quick.

When you finish patting yourself on the back for yet another task un-accomplished, you can kiss my arse.

Okay, but you'll have to mark me a spot because it's all black-and-blue from my foot.

Okay, but you'll have to mark me a spot because it's all black-and-blue from my foot.

In your dreams.

And get your mind off my arse! What would your wife / girlfriend think about you dreaming of another man's arse? (or would you having a wife / girlfriend be a rash assumption on my part?)

Can we ratchet this down a couple of notches? The personal attacks have gotten out of hand. I'm as guilty as the next guy but this isn't much fun anymore. It is fair game to slam the subjects of our distaste but we solve nothing by slamming each other.

No one is right and no one is wrong. We are merely expressing opinions and by definition, an opinion can't be wrong or right.

Bryan and I both suggest that both sides take a breather and come back with sound arguments that can be discussed.

Wait a minute. I want to talk about Johnny's arse. Any pics?


This thread is starting:thread: to suck.

I call a Do-Over.

I must admit that this thread has sent chills down my spine. I don't know if al Qaida has nukes or not. But if any non-government entity could get them, it would be al Qaida. I think we're all in agreement that a nuke could be smuggled into the U.S. somehow. The ramifications of such an attack would indeed alter the course of world history. An attack of this magnitude could effectively end the U.S. as a major power on the world stage for several years at least, possibly decades. The rest of the world would feel the economic effects, but not nearly as severe as here at home.

I do, however, believe that an attack such as this would be the death knell of radical Islam. The entire world would mobilize and extinguish the threat, or else they will meet the same fate. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." Then after it is crushed, the power-brokers that remain will fight for what's left, perhaps a Europe vs. Asia scenario. And they'll be fighting for the oil in the middle east (go figure). And they thought the U.S. was the "great Satan". Wait until they meet an invading army from China that kills everyone in sight because they can't distinguish between a combatant and an innocent. To them, none will be innocent. And the chaos that will abound will help to facilitate the massive slaughter. Sound like Armageddon or the Apocalypse? You're right, it does. And that's why I'm worried.

Call me crazy if you want, but all of this is entirely possible, and some would even say probable. And the questions that will inevitably arise, "what could we have done to prevent it?" At this point in time, I'm not sure. Whatever we do to counter a possible threat may put us in a more precarious situation (Such as lining the planes up out in the open at U.S. bases in Hawaii to protect them against sabotage before 12-7-41. Unfortunately, that defense assured their destruction in the ensuing air raid.).

Your worries are well founded. However, I believe that domestic terrorism is a larger concern. As Tim McVay proved, material for high impact weapons can be obtained by just about anyone. Was that not just a roadside bomb? Any American citizen has the potential to lift another suitcase bomb and set it where they please.

If that were to happen then, I believe, the Muslim world would be blamed and that your scenario of eradication of Muslims would occur. That would be a shame. The non-radical majority of Muslims are peace loving as their religion has many of the fundamental beliefs as the rest of the world.

It does concern me that the number of terror attacks has increased dramatically since we attacked Iraq. Wrong or right, that action has triggered an anger in the Arab world.

Is there no middle ground that would leave them to their society and we to ours? Why do we have to spread Democracy? Why can't we perfect it here first?

Domestic terrorism doesn't have the funds or ability to obtain and/or construct nuclear weapons. A conventional explosive is one thing, nukes are another. It would take thousands of conventional explosives to equal one nuclear explosion. There simply is not a domestic group that rises to the level of threat that al Qaida does.

I agree that most Muslims are peace loving. But these radicals are pouring out of mosques where radicalism is preached. I was encouraged to hear the statement from the organized Muslim community in Britain not only condemning the attack in London, but the tactics involved as well. This is what it will take. We can only do so much. We need those that can influence to do just that, influence. Plainly say that a wrong IS wrong. If they won't do that, then IMO they can't blame us either.

In your dreams.

And get your mind off my arse! What would your wife / girlfriend think about you dreaming of another man's arse? (or would you having a wife / girlfriend be a rash assumption on my part?)

LOL

:Beer

For a lib you're pretty funny, Johnny. I think I'm gonna like you.

Can we ratchet this down a couple of notches? The personal attacks have gotten out of hand. I'm as guilty as the next guy but this isn't much fun anymore. It is fair game to slam the subjects of our distaste but we solve nothing by slamming each other.

No one is right and no one is wrong. We are merely expressing opinions and by definition, an opinion can't be wrong or right.

Bryan and I both suggest that both sides take a breather and come back with sound arguments that can be discussed.

:I I agree except for the part about no one being right or wrong. Actually, I'm right and you're wrong most of the time.

;)

Now, everybody lighten up and let's get back to it!