• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Response?

loomixguy

Well-known member
Since those wonderful folks (ISIS) who worship the same God (Allahu Akbar!)as Old Taqiyya have beheaded an American journalist and put it on YouTube (later removed), how should OT's boy respond? ISIS is threatening to behead another American captive if the bombing doesn't stop.

My guess is he'll use his executive powers to grant full amnesty to all the illegals here, have his boy Holder prosecute the cop who defended himself in Ferguson, MO, to the hilt, and grab an extra week of golf and vaycay for himself. Oh, and stop the bombing, wring his little hands, and let his Muslim brethren continue to run amuck in the Middle East.
 

Traveler

Well-known member
Looks like another US journalist just lost his head to the deal. The religion of peace.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/08/20/james-foley-reportedly-killed-by-islamic-militants-in-iraq-us-investigating/
 

Steve

Well-known member
another sad story of how evil radical islamist are..

I am thinking we are using the wrong size of bombs..

find a camp near the Syrian border.. hit then hard in Iraq.. and when they regroup at the camp... drop the largest conventional bomb we have...
 

jigs

Well-known member
Loomix old pal...should my life end as a beheading at the hands of those scummy filthy muslim bastards, I hope that you avenge my death with a harshly worded short speech, and then grab 18 holes of golf in my honor....

as you golf, please feel free to tell people how whitey has held down the black man for hundreds of years...make no references to the fact that 90% of murdered blacks are killed by blacks... that would be racist....


and don't be wearing any damned husker clothes during this either....
 

Steve

Well-known member
48565_999496.jpg
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
DOJ investigating Foley death


By JONATHAN TOPAZ | 8/21/14 10:32 AM EDT Updated: 8/21/14 10:56 AM EDT



The Justice Department has begun an “open criminal investigation” into the killing of photojournalist James Foley, Attorney General Eric Holder said on Thursday.

Speaking at a news conference in Washington to announce a $17 billion settlement with Bank of America, the attorney general was asked about Foley. “The Justice Department is actively pursuing justice in this case. We have an open criminal investigation,” Holder said, adding later that the department will “vigorously” proceed with the probe.
------------------------------

“[T]hose who would perpetrate such acts need to understand something,” Holder said. “This Justice Department, this Department of Defense, this nation — we have long memories and our reach is very wide. We will not forget what happened, and people will be held accountable, one way or the other.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/james-foley-investigation-doj-110221.html#ixzz3B2uYChdt

Personally- I think Obama's response is the correct one... Treat this as the criminal act that it is...

I'm not sure if I agree that it is our responsibility to investigate and prosecute it tho- since it is crimes committed in a foreign country... Again we are trying to be policemen to the world...

If we think we can go around being policeman for every US citizen that decides to take off to a foreign country we will bankrupt ourselves... I feel bad this fellow got murdered- but we have murders happening every day in our own streets... And Foley knew quite well ahead of time of the dangers of going to that part of the world...

It just like if Whitewing got murdered in Venezuela- are we supposed to investigate and prosecute his murderers... Or those US citizens that relocate their business's to China or India to save on costs and taxes... Do we still owe them a responsibility to be their keeper... :???:

Those folks have to accept the responsibility that when they leave our shores they lose the umbrella of protection provided by the U.S. government...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
backhoeboogie said:
Oldtimer said:
Personally- I think Obama's response is the correct one... ...

I don't think any of us would expect anything different. Except maybe you adding that this was dubya's fault.

So what do you believe is the proper response :???: Should we invade some foreign country :???: Should we start bombing some sovereign nations capital :???:

Should we invade Great Britain :???: Maybe bomb London - eh :???:

Hunt is on for suspected British jihadi in James Foley execution video


By Laura Smith-Spark and Erin McLaughlin, CNN

updated 8:59 AM EDT, Thu August 21, 2014

London (CNN) -- An international manhunt is under way for the fighter shown in a video of the beheading of journalist James Foley -- and its focus is on Britain.

The Islamic State militant on the video has his face covered, except for his eyes. But he has what sounds like a distinctly British accent.

UK media reports are rife with speculation about where he's from. Linguistics experts say his accent indicates he is from southeast England or London, perhaps the capital's East End.

As details of the cold-blooded execution of Foley emerged, British Prime Minister David Cameron interrupted his summer vacation to head a meeting of the government's emergency committee, known as COBRA, in London.

Speaking to the media, he condemned the killing as "a murder without any justification" and said that while the man has not been identified, "it looks increasingly likely that it is a British citizen."
 

Brad S

Well-known member
I reject your misunderstanding this was a run of the mill crime. Certainly murder is criminal, and this case involves murder, but that is the limit of the value of a 2 digit iq. This was committed by a waring faction as an attack on the US.
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Operators operating operationally. Armed, equipped, and given Cart Blanche to do whatever is necessary.

Like Old Taqiyya, those calling the shots in DC are rank amateurs when it comes to handling situations like this.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Brad S said:
I reject your misunderstanding this was a run of the mill crime. Certainly murder is criminal, and this case involves murder, but that is the limit of the value of a 2 digit iq. This was committed by a waring faction as an attack on the US.

Like I said- what country attacked us? Who should we invade in retaliation? Since they are fairly certain this is a British citizen- and we can prove it- do we attack Great Britain?

We can't go around babysitting every American that goes to a foreign country...
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Brad S said:
I reject your misunderstanding this was a run of the mill crime. Certainly murder is criminal, and this case involves murder, but that is the limit of the value of a 2 digit iq. This was committed by a waring faction as an attack on the US.

Like I said- what country attacked us? Who should we invade in retaliation? Since they are fairly certain this is a British citizen- and we can prove it- do we attack Great Britain?

We can't go around babysitting every American that goes to a foreign country...

And we can't let groups of religious zealot thugs go around beheading Americans. You wipe the phuckers off the face of the earth.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Against Another Pointless War

Searching the world for monsters to destroy will only end up destroying us.


Andrew Napolitano | June 19, 2014



As we watch the collapsing government in Baghdad surrounded by a highly disciplined and serious force of Sunni-oriented fighters that has taken control of the most populous third of the country, we must, in John Adams' words, resist the temptation to slay the world's monsters. This time around, the monsters are the Sunni—who ran the government of Iraq in the Saddam Hussein years and who are the ancient and persistent enemy of the Shia, who run the government today.


The political and military force that is aiming at Iraq's capital calls itself the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Its fighting force consists of about 8,000 men, yet it has marched through Iraq quickly. Last week, as ISIS forces approached the capital, a half-million Iraqi civilians got out of their way and tens of thousands of Iraqi security forces dropped their American military gear and Iraqi military uniforms and fled. The Iraqi army—which the U.S. decimated 10 years ago—cannot defend the current Iraqi government, which is as corrupt, authoritarian, anti-democratic, and untrustworthy as Saddam's was, yet far less competent.

There is a lesson in this, and it reveals the power of religious fanaticism when resisted by unprincipled political force. ISIS fighters are motivated by a hatred of American invaders and their Iraqi defenders and an embrace of fundamental Sharia principles, which are anathema to Judeo-Christian principles. These ISIS fighters truly are monsters—they have crucified and decapitated deserters, traitors, captives, recalcitrants, Christians, and Jews—and many Iraqi soldiers would rather join or walk away from them than resist them. The U.S.-trained Iraqi soldiers by and large view themselves as defending a temporary and inconsequential government. The ISIS fighters view themselves as being on a triumphal crusade.

Complicating this is the affiliation that many of the political forces in ISIS have with the rebels fighting against President Bashar al-Assad of Syria. And adding to the politics-makes-strange-bedfellows aura of this mess is the offer of the Quds fighters from Iran's Revolutionary Guard—which the State Department considers to be a terrorist organization—to help defend Baghdad, relying on American air power to assist it. It is almost inconceivable that we could fight side-by-side, or bombs protecting boots, with the aspect of the government of Iran that both President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama have characterized as anathema to U.S. interests, and that has sworn to destroy Israel.

Hence, Obama's dilemma is daunting. He is on record as saying that the war in Iraq was "dumb"; that the government there is secure and its forces are well-trained; that the rebels fighting Assad are freedom fighters who deserve American military support; and that the American troops he brought home from Iraq are not returning on his watch.

Should he send troops back to Iraq to defend the government we installed when we toppled Saddam? Should American lives and tax dollars be spent in another pointless effort to bring democracy to a culture that has persistently rejected it? Should we take sides using our military in what is essentially an ancient religious civil war? Is the national security of the U.S. even remotely affected by the outcome of the current Iraqi civil war?

Since Bush persuaded Congress and the American people in 2003 that an appropriate response to 9/11 somehow was an invasion of Iraq, that country's stability has been undermined by the U.S., and it is now ripe for the sectarian violence that is devouring it. The stated purpose of the Iraq war was to root out weapons of mass destruction, which we now know did not exist there. Then the stated purpose became regime change, because Saddam tried to kill the elder President Bush. The other stated purpose of the war was our thoughtless embrace of the fanciful Bush doctrine, which was basically the rebranding of the discredited Wilsonian nonsense that we can use force to spread democracy.

That, too, failed profoundly.
In the process, 5,000 Americans died; 45,000 Americans were injured; 650,000 Iraqis died; 2,000,000 Iraqis fled the country; a half-trillion dollars in Iraqi assets were destroyed; and we borrowed a trillion dollars to invade and occupy Iraq (and another trillion to invade and occupy Afghanistan), which we still owe to the people who loaned it to us. Al-Qaida, which was not present in Iraq before 2003, is now openly there along with ISIS, its sister organization that is about to conquer the most politically important parts of the country.


America is no safer because of the Iraq war, but we are weaker. Our relationships among the people in the Middle East are far less sanguine, we have planted three generations' worth of hatred, distrust, and lust for vengeance among Middle Eastern youth, and we have a crushing war debt. We also have American cash and military hardware, including expensive and lethal Stinger missiles, now in the hands of ISIS.

We are witnessing the contemporary incarnation of the old Sunni/Shia/Kurd rivalry that has persisted in what is today called Iraq for 1,000 years, and will persist until the country returns to its pre-modern sectarian borders and each ancient group has its own land.

There is no bona fide American national security interest in jeopardy because of the persistent Iraqi civil war, and we have no lawful right to choose a side and assist it militarily. But the American military-industrial-neocon complex wants more war. We must resist them. We should gather all Americans in Iraq, take what moveable wealth is ours and come home—and stop searching the world for monsters to destroy, as that will end up destroying us.


Read more: http://reason.com/archives/2014/06/19/america-must-leave-iraq-alone#ixzz3Al6PNBPs



There is no bona fide American national security interest in jeopardy because of the persistent Iraqi civil war, and we have no lawful right to choose a side and assist it militarily. But the American military-industrial-neocon complex wants more war. We must resist them. We should gather all Americans in Iraq, take what moveable wealth is ours and come home—and stop searching the world for monsters to destroy, as that will end up destroying us.


Well we will have to agree to disagree...On this one, Judge Napolitano and I agree-- we should stay out of it.... The terrorists would like nothing better then to taunt us into sending in troops and invading more countries... They know that not only will that help them recruit more thug followers- but as Al Quaeda said in their captured handbooks is the only way they can defeat us- by bankrupting the country...

The money the war hawks and military industrial-neocon complex want us to spend in the Mideast could better be spent in the US building our own infrastructure, providing more education opportunities, or even trying to find cures for ALS or cancer...
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Well we will have to agree to disagree...On this one, Judge Napolitano and I agree-- we should stay out of it.... The terrorists would like nothing better then to taunt us into sending in troops and invading more countries... They know that not only will that help them recruit more thug followers- but as Al Quaeda said in their captured handbooks is the only way they can defeat us- by bankrupting the country...

The money the war hawks and military industrial-neocon complex want us to spend in the Mideast could better be spent in the US building our own infrastructure, providing more education opportunities, or even trying to find cures for ALS or cancer...

Don't worry fatman. America won't need to invade any foreign countries to fight islamic terrorists. Soon enough America can fight them right at home in the good ole US of A.

But you keep up the watch on those evil tea partiers. 'k.
 

Traveler

Well-known member
Obama refused to do the minimum required to keep Iraq secure, and lied about the US having to totally pull out, that we couldn't protect what we'd accomplished. Obama looks the other way, and plays golf and attends commie fundraisers while our southern border is being invaded by undetermined numbers of who knows what, basically leaving us more vulnerable than we've ever been. He sure is great at sitting around with his finger up his ass while things go to hell like we've never seen.

Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), the highest-ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, told Oklahoma City FOX affiliate KOKH 25 that because of the threat of groups like ISIS “we're in the most dangerous position we've ever been in as a nation.”
“[ISIS], they're crazy out there, and they're rapidly developing a method of blowing up a major US city” he said.
Inhofe also criticized President Barack Obama’s handling of the ISIS threat, saying “he's going to have to come up with something that we're going to do, because they're holding another hostage in place, and the problem is, the president, quite frankly, he says all these things and he never does them.” And expressed support for the NSA’s surveillance programs, arguing “you have to have an intelligence process going on to stop attacks on America.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/08/21/Inhofe-ISIS-Rapidly-Developing-a-Method-of-Blowing-up-a-Major-US-City
 

Traveler

Well-known member
Whitewing said:
Oldtimer said:
Well we will have to agree to disagree...On this one, Judge Napolitano and I agree-- we should stay out of it.... The terrorists would like nothing better then to taunt us into sending in troops and invading more countries... They know that not only will that help them recruit more thug followers- but as Al Quaeda said in their captured handbooks is the only way they can defeat us- by bankrupting the country...

The money the war hawks and military industrial-neocon complex want us to spend in the Mideast could better be spent in the US building our own infrastructure, providing more education opportunities, or even trying to find cures for ALS or cancer...

Don't worry fatman. America won't need to invade any foreign countries to fight islamic terrorists. Soon enough America can fight them right at home in the good ole US of A.

But you keep up the watch on those evil tea partiers. 'k.
:agree:
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
What the faux judge doesn't comprehend is that sending operators after these Muslim MFr's isn't invading any country. It's running the targets down and eliminating them, wherever they may be. Any legitimate government shielding or protecting them will get what they can expect. A worldwide manhunt is what is called for, and the only real forces capable of it is either American Special Operatives or members of the Israeli Mossad. If given absolute authority and autonomy it could be done in a short amount of time. No rules of engagement should apply when hunting terrorists.

All these people understand, fear, or respect is swift and blinding violence. If they are spending their days and nights pi$$ing their pants that they will be killed by the Americans, they won't have time to behead journalists...or anybody else.
 

Traveler

Well-known member
loomixguy said:
What the faux judge doesn't comprehend is that sending operators after these Muslim MFr's isn't invading any country. It's running the targets down and eliminating them, wherever they may be. Any legitimate government shielding or protecting them will get what they can expect. A worldwide manhunt is what is called for, and the only real forces capable of it is either American Special Operatives or members of the Israeli Mossad. If given absolute authority and autonomy it could be done in a short amount of time. No rules of engagement should apply when hunting terrorists.

All these people understand, fear, or respect is swift and blinding violence. If they are spending their days and nights pi$$ing their pants that they will be killed by the Americans, they won't have time to behead journalists...or anybody else.
Damn right! But with the golfing Nancy Boy in the Whitehouse, probably ain't gonna happen.

The history of decapitation and the religion of peace.

http://www.meforum.org/713/beheading-in-the-name-of-islam
 
Top