July 22, 2005
Quick Update
Fox News just showed newly released pictures of the 4 perpetrators of yesterday's isolated incident in London. I'll link, or post when they get it up on the website.
***Update: CNN has them already, for you lazy bums out there I'll post them here in a minute.
***Update 2: Here ya go:

***Update 3: Fox has fuzzy close ups.
***Update 4: Fox is reporting via Sky News that the man shot this morning was NOT affiliated with yesterday's bombers.
Posted by: Vinnie at
10:05 AM
| Comments (31)
| Add Comment
Post contains 83 words, total size 1 kb.
1
CNN front page has the photos.
Posted by: Ariya at July 22, 2005 10:08 AM (noCGr)
2
Ooooooh. Four photos, eh. Well, that's conclusive!
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 10:10 AM (3D/yw)
3
Egad, Irish Catholics!!
Posted by: Brad at July 22, 2005 10:17 AM (pO1tP)
4
Perhaps they'll try to run from the cops, too, and save taxpayers the cost of expensive and farcical trials.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 10:19 AM (x+5JB)
5
YBP,
My Catholic friend. These men are 'suspects' and yet you are ready to have them killed. That's got to be worth at least 99 Hail Marys at your next Sacrament of Penance. I hope you don't hyperventilate during your recitation.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 10:53 AM (3D/yw)
6
Greg: Please rest assured that I only want them dead if they are truly guilty, just in case they try to blow up anyone else.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 11:08 AM (x+5JB)
7
YBP:'Please rest assured that I only want them dead if they are truly guilty, just in case they try to blow up anyone else.
We shall see if they are guilty. I'm glad you are willing to defer judgement. If I can't count on a fellow Catholic, who can I count on? Most on this blog seem to have already convicted these men.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 11:21 AM (3D/yw)
8
Greg: No, by all means, their guilt needs to be clearly establisged first--then turn them over to National Front HQ.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 11:29 AM (x+5JB)
9
They are clearly Norwegian Methodists, we can stop all the racist racial
profiling immediately.
Posted by: -keith in mtn. view at July 22, 2005 11:32 AM (vbPWL)
10
Does the guy in the lower right hand corner have a New York shirt on??
Posted by: Marty at July 22, 2005 11:33 AM (BeM7s)
11
It must go back to the atrocity of the Shrine of St Magnus, that Alfred the Great committed against King Haakkon the Old at Kirkwall in the Western Isles.
Posted by: -keith in mtn. view at July 22, 2005 11:38 AM (vbPWL)
Posted by: Mad Dog Vinnie at July 22, 2005 11:39 AM (Kr6/f)
13
well there to many liberials in the uk if it were up to me i would bring out an emergency law if we have proof your acting against the uk via masskilling you and your family will be deported too where u came from.It was stated that people that incite western hate would be exported but as this is a liberal country not to the country where they came from. wtf they and there family should be sent to the country where they came from see how quick they change their attitudes.
Posted by: noname at July 22, 2005 11:39 AM (eFuj0)
14
Yeah. I saw that "New York" shirt, too. I'm glad terrorists still maintain a hip sense of style.
Oh, that should be "suspected terrorists," Greg.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 11:44 AM (x+5JB)
15
That darker one in the lower left looks like one of those MacÂ’s from the north. Probably a Mcclosky or Mcmonigle, nothin but trouble.
Posted by: Brad at July 22, 2005 11:58 AM (3OPZt)
16
Brad: And yet you hear so much about how fair-skinned the English are.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 12:03 PM (x+5JB)
17
The blond Norwegians applied Just-For-Men to get the gray out and darken the hair, and Bain de Soliel self-tanner to disguise themselves as swarthy Black Irish.
Rreally it's all about the snow, Arabs don't have snow and the Norwegians do, and the Norgies want the oil to run their snow-blowers...
Posted by: -keith in mtn. view at July 22, 2005 12:13 PM (vbPWL)
18
any seen the video some did of the police tear gassing the house and sending in the police dogs.
Posted by: noname at July 22, 2005 12:16 PM (eFuj0)
19
any seen the video some1 did of the police tear gassing the house and sending in the police dogs.
Posted by: noname at July 22, 2005 12:16 PM (eFuj0)
20
YBP:
Could these men be Coal Miners?
Posted by: Brad at July 22, 2005 12:18 PM (3OPZt)
21
Yes, that's it Brad--hearty folk who work in the bowels of the earth just like in "How Green Was My Valley."
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 12:24 PM (x+5JB)
22
Anyone notice the New York sweatshirt on the guy on the bottom right?
Creepy.
Posted by: Labosseuse at July 22, 2005 07:15 PM (Xjv2p)
23
God, please let the moron greg die horribly, preferably in a fire. If you do, I will become a monk.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 22, 2005 07:24 PM (0yYS2)
24
The humorous part about Greg the traitor is that he is always wrong and yet continues with the same bullshit on every issue. This boy is one shit little shit.
Racial profiling probably wouldn't have any benefit here. Ya Right.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 22, 2005 07:46 PM (CBNGy)
Posted by: Mr. K at July 22, 2005 07:49 PM (yxgRs)
26
I'm still waiting for Gayrooster to fianlly admit he loves Black cock, yet hates himself for loving it so much that he has to put on a pointy white cap to hide in shame.....
Posted by: osamabeenthere at July 24, 2005 12:48 PM (perrS)
27
Apparently osamabeenthere is obviously another unhappy spearshucker who has to resort to the same language his nappy headed mama uses.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 24, 2005 05:44 PM (CBNGy)
28
Gayrooster, only you know about nappy head (in the giving aspect). I also love the fact that you think I'm black once I dig into you...drink another strong margarita and call me shaka zulu while you're at it.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at July 24, 2005 09:37 PM (perrS)
29
Black is where the mind is. And yours is so far in the jungle you will never find your way out. Black muslims stink. Shaka Zula was a great leader. He killed thousands of his own people. Thereby saving us from giving a lot more handouts than we are presently giving to people that hate us because we gave them civilization.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 25, 2005 03:31 AM (CBNGy)
30
never been there: In addition, I never figured you to be a black. Rather a raghead, black ass kisser. The worst kind. A normal white person. Definitely not.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 25, 2005 03:33 AM (CBNGy)
31
Hahahahaha...man, your head is so twisted around I'm surprised it hasn't fallen right off your red neck. Is it because I taunt your about being rammed up the ass by black cock that you think I'm a "black ass kisser"? You know I say these things because, well...it works! "Mission Accomplished!" So let me take a look inside your little racist pighead for second: If you say racists are made, not born...how did you become one, and a proud one at that?
Posted by: osamabeenthere at July 25, 2005 10:43 AM (perrS)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Oozing Rucksacks
From the
Courier-Mail:
OOZING rucksacks, harmless puffs of smoke and the failure of the latest apparent attempted bombings in London suggest a link between this week's attacks and the July 7 atrocities, experts said today.
The four bombs that apparently failed to explode on Underground subway trains and a double-decker bus yesterday bore similarities to the type of Al-Qaeda-style devices used in the suicide attacks earlier this month, which killed 56 people, explosives specialists said.
Witnesses spoke of seeing a lard-like substance oozing from one of the would-be bombers' backpacks after it failed to go off, suggesting the presence of an explosive mixture such as acetone peroxide which was used on July 7, the experts said.
That substance - made from household items such as sulphuric acid, hydrogen peroxide and acetone - deteriorates over time and becomes harmless if it passes its use-by date.
"If the bombers from July 7 and yesterday all loaded their rucksacks together two and a half weeks ago, you might expect a substantial amount of the explosive to have disappeared by this week," chemist Andrea Sella of University College London said.
I apparently am ill-supplied. To
my knowledge, there has never been any sulphuric acid in my house. My car battery, sure, but not in the house. In any event, it all sure seems amateurish.
Posted by: Mike Pechar at
08:10 AM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
Post contains 222 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Mike, if you've ever had drain cleaner in your house, you've had H2SO4, Sulphuric acid, in your house.
Posted by: Richard at July 22, 2005 08:35 AM (xFeJi)
2
Richard,
Oh. Didn't think that.
Thanks.
Posted by: Mike at July 22, 2005 08:41 AM (6krEN)
3
"Witnesses spoke of seeing a lard-like substance..."
Michasel Moore was on the premises, then???!
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 08:54 AM (x+5JB)
4
MWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Good one YBP. Almost did a spit take on that one. I wonder if they found a slime trail?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 22, 2005 09:26 AM (0yYS2)
5
Lard like substance, eh?
Did you know, Improbulus Maximus' favorite meal is circumtips and feti fried in lard?!
He's a sick bastard!
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 10:00 AM (3D/yw)
6
Achmed was a chemist
but Achmed is no more
what Achmed thought was H2O was H2SO4
Posted by: REMF at July 22, 2005 11:22 AM (aLiCo)
7
"There once was a bomber from Baghdad,
Who tried to blow up a synagag.
He lit up the fuse, as he eyed all the Joooos,
But he only blew up his gnads."
Okay, Keats I'm not.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 11:37 AM (x+5JB)
8
There once was a girl from Nantucket
Ooops. Wrong window.
Posted by: Oyster at July 22, 2005 04:14 PM (fl6E1)
9
not a slime trail, IM, a trail of half eaten twinkies and discarded wrappers
Posted by: THANOS35 at July 22, 2005 05:18 PM (9gFP6)
10
greg, I already know you live in Austin or thereabout, and you mentioned before that you are a biochemist. You wouldn't be hard to find, you know. Keep it up asshole.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 22, 2005 07:25 PM (0yYS2)
11
And you, my Gimpy friend are a barbarian.. There are many good psychiatrists in the phone book, please talk to one.
Posted by: Downing Street Memo at July 22, 2005 09:28 PM (ScqM8)
12
IM: You should know by now that anything Greg the traitor says is pure bullshit. He's probably a janitor. This asshole lies about everything and anything.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 25, 2005 03:35 AM (CBNGy)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
British Police Shoot Suicide Bomber
Police have shot a suicide bomber at the Stockwell Tube station in south London:
BBC—A man has been shot at Stockwell Tube station by armed police officers.
Passenger Mark Whitby told BBC News he had seen an Asian man shot five times by “plain-clothes police officers” with a handgun. [. . .].
The Brits have taken off their gloves folksÂ…
Cross-posted at OpinionBug.com
Update (7/22/2005 6:51am):
BBC: Scotland Yard confirms the man was shot dead
Update (7/23/2005 9:02pm):
The BBC says Scotland Yard has identified the man as Jean Charles de Menezes, a Brazilian electrician:
BBC—A man shot dead by police hunting the bombers behind Thursday's London attacks was a Brazilian electrician unconnected to the incidents.
The man, who died at Stockwell Tube on Friday, has been named by police as Jean Charles de Menezes, 27. [. . .].
Posted by: OpinionBug at
06:43 AM
| Comments (43)
| Add Comment
Post contains 145 words, total size 1 kb.
1
we got one of the bastards, 30,000 left....
Posted by: Bunker at July 22, 2005 06:44 AM (y/P3u)
2
They suspected he was a 'suicide bomber', yet there has been no mention of a bomb. Evidently, the 'frame a patsie squad' needs more time to plant the incriminating evidence.
The poor man was probably only 'guilty' of having dark skin.
Can you say,'police profiling, plus itchy trigger fingers, equals dead A-rab'. I knew you could!
Imagine that you're an innocent muslim living in England. Since 7-7 there have been hundreds of backlash hate acts directed at your people, including a man being beaten to death and a bomb scare directed at a mosque today.
You're at the tube. You see 3 men in plain clothes, one with a drawn gun running at you. What is the prudent thing to do? Run for your life!
That's what you do. You run into the tube and trip. Two of the pursuers hold you down by 'standing' on you with their knees. The third man then executes you, by pumping 5 shots into your head.
This was a coup d'etat of an innocent man, plain and simple.
If the police really thought he was a suspect, it would have served them well to take him alive. Think of the valuable information that could be tortured out of him.
On the other hand, if 7-7 and 7-21 were psyops, you want dead 'suspects'. Dead men tell no tales.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 06:52 AM (3D/yw)
3
Baffling??
First time I've heard of a suicide bomber running away.
Why not blow himself up ??
Very strange.
This was a staged incident by British Intelligence.
As for the Dud bombs yesterday, anybody walked round the area with Geiger counter??
Al Qaeda ain't that slack guys!
If they weren't dirty bombs then these tow incidents were staged by Briti
Posted by: Perpetrator Unknown at July 22, 2005 07:49 AM (NECGH)
4
Liberals/Conspiracists: Don't jump to conclusions (i.e., the guy was innocent) so fast.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 07:54 AM (x+5JB)
5
wel at least it stop immigrants coming to the uk, and i vote to boycott all muslin shops.
Posted by: noname at July 22, 2005 08:25 AM (eFuj0)
6
>>>"Evidently, the 'frame a patsie squad' needs more time to plant the incriminating evidence."
This is exactly how conspiracy nutjobs get where they are. The conclusion is reached beforehand and then the "evidence" is selectively filtered to support their conclusion. They are sick people.
In a city that's just been bombed twice, when the cops tell you to stop, you stop.
Posted by: Carlos at July 22, 2005 09:05 AM (8e/V4)
7
One witness, Mark Whitby, told BBC news the man appeared not to be carrying anything but was wearing a thick coat that looked padded.
Whitby said a young Asian man was shot five times after being chased into a train carriage by three men.
"As the man got on the train I looked at his face. He looked from left to right, but he basically looked like a cornered rabbit, like a cornered fox. He looked absolutely petrified," said Whitby.
"He sort of tripped but they were hotly pursuing him and couldn't have been more than two or three feet behind him at this time.
"He half-tripped, was half-pushed to the floor. The policeman nearest to me had the black automatic pistol in his left hand, he held it down to the guy and unloaded five shots into him.
"He looked like a Pakistani but he had a baseball cap on, and quite a thickish coat. It was a coat like you would wear in winter, a sort of padded jacket. It looked out of place in the weather we've been having."
Whitby said he had been about five yards away from where the incident occurred and was "totally distraught" by what he had seen.
Posted by: Dan at July 22, 2005 09:13 AM (lSkty)
8
I suppose you can run away if you want, but you'd better be quick. The bobbies don't have time for shenanigans under the present circumstances.
And here I thought I was a conspiracy nutjob. I can't even begin to keep up with these folks!
I understand it was in the mid-70s and this fellow was running around in a heavy jacket. Not illegal, but certainly suspicious.
Can we expect to see big protests from London's Muslim lobby if this fellow doesn't have an al Qaeda membership card in his pocket?
Posted by: Eman at July 22, 2005 09:14 AM (/GPjX)
9
oh well harrow road blocked off armed police there.
Posted by: noname at July 22, 2005 09:18 AM (eFuj0)
10
What if "sassy" terrorist sympathizer Dilpazier Aslam was running a social experiment? Wouldn't that be a shame?
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at July 22, 2005 09:47 AM (RHG+K)
11
Carlos:'This is exactly how conspiracy nutjobs get where they are. The conclusion is reached beforehand and then the "evidence" is selectively filtered to support their conclusion.'
Carlos,
Thanks for the insult, I won't respond in kind, even though you are equally guilty of jumping to conclusions.
A few points though.
1)'British Police Shoot Suicide Bomber'.
This 'conclusion is reached beforehand'.
2)'when the cops tell you to stop'
They weren't wearing uniforms. If men without uniforms and brandishing guns ran towards me, I'd run for my life.
3) When 2 of the 3 'cops' were on top of the man and another had a gun pointed at his head, the man was in custody. There is no justification for shooting him.
4)Furthermore, as he was in custody and if he really was a bomber, one would want to take him alive. He would have a wealth of information that is lost otherwise.
5)As Unkown Perpetrator stated, 'First time I've heard of a suicide bomber running away'.
And on a personal note Carlos, you and others are in the habit of selecting only the weakest point of my arguments and focusing entirely on that in your rebutals. That's a cheap trick coming from an intellectual such as yourself. For once, I'd like to see you make a more methodical and thorough responsive commentary. Focusing on the one at hand, are you incabable of deflecting the entirety of my comment? If so, you lose.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 09:48 AM (3D/yw)
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 09:49 AM (3D/yw)
13
Greg,
If you happen to stop at the U.K on your way back home, and happen to be confronted by the Anti-Terrorism squad, please --RUN FOR YOUR LIFE TOO!
Yet another 'innocent' lamb to the slaughter eh Greg? Just four more men setup by the Government, who are these people that carry rucksacks with bombs onto 3 subways and a bus, 2 weeks after the last attacks. I bet that was a hard sale.
It must be very easy in your hippy world greg, where every evil is perpetrated by the CIA, and Islam means 'peace'.
Posted by: dave at July 22, 2005 09:54 AM (DO6vD)
14
Apparently this bloke was being followed since yesterday evening as they thought he was the bomber from the Oval and wanted to see where he led them. He left his house in a big winter coat when it was over 30 degrees...they challanged him and he ran, straight for a tube station and onto a train. If you are and innocent then you deserve to be shot for being stupid, the day after the failed attempts.
Posted by: Britkid at July 22, 2005 09:55 AM (xuF60)
15
Perp Unknown If you read my post from yesterday you would know that all preliminary chemical biological and radioactive tests came back negative. We probably shoud wait to find out what really happened the fog has not lifted yet.
Murphy strikes again go Murphy. First crappy bombs and now this. I'm starting like old Murphy again.
Posted by: Howie at July 22, 2005 09:57 AM (D3+20)
16
Dave,
You lose. You failed address even one of the 5 points I made in my previous post.
Hopefully, Carlos will fair better.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 10:04 AM (3D/yw)
17
greg,
look at you getting all sensitive and hurt, that's adorable. Your argument was entirely speculative. It was a "what if" scenario. My response did not single out the weakest point of your comment, the whole thing was weak. You have no evidence to contradict the official Scotland Yard version. Don't be a nutjob.
It's not jumping to conclusions to accept the official version of the event at face value, unless and until evidence to the contrary is presented. None has been presented.
Posted by: Carlos at July 22, 2005 10:18 AM (8e/V4)
18
greg,
read this:
"I've seen these police officers shouting, 'Get down, get down!', and I've seen this guy who appears to have a bomb belt and wires coming out."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706787.stm
Posted by: Carlos at July 22, 2005 10:22 AM (8e/V4)
19
Greg:
There was a point? I just saw incoherent babbling. Did you forget to take your pills and don your protective headwear today?
Posted by: dave at July 22, 2005 10:51 AM (DO6vD)
Posted by: Jonathan at July 22, 2005 10:55 AM (ywZa8)
21
Dave,
There were 5 very lucid points at Posted by greg at July 22, 2005 09:48 AM, on this string. Take a stab at them.
By the way, do you always wish death upon those who disagree with you?
Naughty, naughty boy!
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 11:01 AM (3D/yw)
22
Carlos,
I read the report. It's strange that the police haven't made this point because if true, it is a very powerful point. As you probably know, witness accounts in a heated situation are notoriously unreliable. If the account is true, I admit it would provide justification for a shooting.
I had hoped you would comment on the 5 points I made at Posted by greg at July 22, 2005 09:48 AM. You know damn well that's what I was referring to. You are being evasive. Please do me the courtesy of responding to my 5 points. I hold you to a higher standard than the average commentor on this blog.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 11:16 AM (3D/yw)
23
I hope the police officer is ok and he doesn't have to go through any
counselling or anything.
He should be commended for his actions in taking down this sick terrorist murderer.
Well done.
Posted by: Brian at July 22, 2005 11:21 AM (n2sxj)
24
Brian,
You have already convicted this man, when he is but a suspect. Typical of those on this blog.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 11:24 AM (3D/yw)
25
Greg,
nothing you post these days is lucid, that is why you were banned remember?
I wish death to terrorists, and terrorist supporters. You have yet to come to the conclusion that most people whom possess cognitive thinking abilities: There are Islamic extermist terrorists, they do wish us harm.
It is however easier for you to believe it is a Government plot, planned and executed by 'shadow' Government agents.
Time to put down the 'Area51 watch' magazine Greg, and join the real world.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 11:25 AM (DO6vD)
26
greg,
1)'British Police Shoot Suicide Bomber'.
This 'conclusion is reached beforehand'.
Like I said, this is the official version and until and unless you have evidence to the contrary then you're jumping to conclusions.
2)'when the cops tell you to stop'
They weren't wearing uniforms. If men without uniforms and brandishing guns ran towards me, I'd run for my life.
This isn't a totally ridiculous point, but it's ignorant. You don't know what happenned. Yet you jump to conclusions.
3) When 2 of the 3 'cops' were on top of the man and another had a gun pointed at his head, the man was in custody. There is no justification for shooting him.
Dude, if they believe he has a bomb, with his finger on the trigger, then shooting him dead is the smartest possible thing they could have done.
4)Furthermore, as he was in custody and if he really was a bomber, one would want to take him alive. He would have a wealth of information that is lost otherwise.
What information could have been gathered from him if he had detonated his bomb???
5)As Unkown Perpetrator stated, 'First time I've heard of a suicide bomber running away'.
Because you've never heard of a suicider running away means they never run away? You're some kind of an expert?
Posted by: Carlos at July 22, 2005 11:28 AM (8e/V4)
27
they shot him, the cops were undercover but they do shout out police and put on met baseball caps, and other id. they dont just run after him, they give him a chance and when all else fails they shoot.
Posted by: noname at July 22, 2005 11:30 AM (eFuj0)
28
greg: "3) When 2 of the 3 'cops' were on top of the man and another had a gun pointed at his head, the man was in custody. There is no justification for shooting him."
And of course, during the course of this wild chase the cops were able to ascertain beyond doubt that his triggering device was inoperative.
The bobbies had already gone far beyond the call of duty by chasing him down. greg would have them take further risks, not only with their own lives but those of tube riders around them.
greg: ever spent any amount of time wondering if you're within range of an improvised explosive device? I have, while working for the TSA searching the bags of people the FBI had notified us about; not just folks on a watchlist mind you, but people we had been specifically warned about that morning.
An hour and a half with my guts in a knot wondering if I would even have time to perceive the flash of light. You wanted the cops to risk an explosion? Go fuck yourself.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at July 22, 2005 11:36 AM (RHG+K)
29
"Greg,
nothing you post these days is lucid, that is why you were banned remember?
I wish death to terrorists, and terrorist supporters. You have yet to come to the conclusion that most people whom possess cognitive thinking abilities: There are Islamic extermist terrorists, they do wish us harm.
It is however easier for you to believe it is a Government plot, planned and executed by 'shadow' Government agents.
Time to put down the 'Area51 watch' magazine Greg, and join the real world.
Posted by greg at July 22, 2005 11:25 AM"
Greg, are you talking to yourself?
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 11:40 AM (x+5JB)
30
Greg,
I am actually in London here.
The police have been following this terrorist since yesterday afternoon.
They've been watching his house,listening to what he's been saying with eavesedropping equipment,watching where he goes and who he talks to.
It was really warm in London this morning,(it's summertime)anything other than a short sleeved shirt is positively uncomfortable
and this man was wearing a heavy padded jacket.
several eyewitnesses also reported seeing a large holdall of the kind
used by the terrorists,near his body.
He also refused to stop when challenged by the police and vaulted over the barrier,although I am sure you will say he is simply a fare scammer.
Posted by: Brian at July 22, 2005 12:08 PM (n2sxj)
31
YBP,
No that wasn't me. I'm confused about it too.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 12:09 PM (3D/yw)
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 12:10 PM (3D/yw)
33
Carlos:'1)'British Police Shoot Suicide Bomber'.
Like I said, this is the official version and until and unless you have evidence to the contrary then you're jumping to conclusions."
Carlos,
You made some good points. However, on the most fundemental point you have completely blown it.
THIS IS NOT THE OFFICIAL VERSION. Police aren't saying that they shot a suicide bomber. They are saying they shot a SUSPECTED suicide bomber. Any discussion must be based on this foundation.
As far as the wire, it could have been an IPOD. There were many witnesses and only one mentioned a wire. Had the man been armed with a bomb, the police wouldn't be calling him a SUSPECTED bomber. They would damn sure have told us by now that THE MAN HAD A BOMB because they are coming under severe pressure from the London muslim community due to their shoot to kill operation mode.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 12:22 PM (3D/yw)
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 12:24 PM (3D/yw)
35
Dinner time. I'm heading to the Jewish Ghetto, where the best Roman cuisine is found.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 12:31 PM (3D/yw)
36
That was my post Greg, apologies evidently too much coffee, I placed "greg" in name, instead of addressing it as Greg:
(my never@emailme.com) was in email address, however.
Posted by: dave at July 22, 2005 01:03 PM (DO6vD)
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 04:01 PM (3D/yw)
38
OMG! Greg is admonishing someone who insulted
him or resoted to cheap tricks? oooh, oooh, my side hurts, I'm laughing so hard.
I know, shuck me. hahahahaha
Posted by: Oyster at July 22, 2005 04:22 PM (fl6E1)
39
I love Osama bin Laden and hope he kills you all. He is my sugardaddy and I like to smoke his mansausage, because it tastes just like my butt.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 07:28 PM (0yYS2)
40
Glad to see the Brits can still shoot. They seem to have given up on everything else British. Just looking at the people milling around in the background makes me sick. Is England still there? If it is, where do all the English live. Certainly, not London.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 22, 2005 07:50 PM (CBNGy)
41
When are you people going to understand that Greg the traitor has an agenda. He is against America and pro muslim. He's also full of shit about everything else he says/claims.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 22, 2005 07:58 PM (CBNGy)
42
It's so interesting to see everyone's response to this shooting now that it's reported that the person killed wasn't a terrorist and the limeys have apologized for the fuckup. Basically, Greg was right and all of you were completely wrong. Everyone but Greg was celebrating a scared and confused Brazilian getting killed in cold blood because some undercover cops were trigger happy. The guy didn't even have a criminal record. You're also calling Greg a traitor for telling the truth, having insight to the story and holding to American values like, oh...innocent till proven guilty? Anyone in here remember that one? Anyway, it's shocking to see how many in here condone a innocent guy getting pegged. How your minds would change if the tables were turned and you had plain clothed guys with guns yelling in a language you might not know very well while chasing you with guns in a foreign country.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at July 24, 2005 01:02 PM (perrS)
43
I love Osama bin Laden and hope he kills you all. He is my sugardaddy and I like to smoke his mansausage, because it tastes just like my butt.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 07:28 PM
I DIDN'T WRITE THIS SHIT. SOME FAGGOT LIKE FILTHY OR IMPROBULUS PROBABLY WROTE IT.
Posted by: greg at July 26, 2005 04:58 PM (/+dAV)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Forgive Me Blogfather For I Know Not What I Do
I was going to respond to
Rob's response to
Rusty's response, but that was before I went below the fold on Rusty's post. He addressed the same things I was going to there.
So, instead, and just for the sake of argument, I'll answer Rusty's challenge to come up with a logical reason not to retaliate against Mecca in the event of a nuclear attack on the U.S. Mind you, I have no problem with it.
The Nuke Mecca, Kiss Israel Goodbye Scenario:
Al-Qaeda, or a reasonable facsimile thereof, lights off a smuggled nuke or two in a major American city.
We nuke Mecca.
Pakistan nukes Israel. Out of existence. Would India care if the missiles were headed the opposite way?
Oh, I forgot, Pakistan is our ally. How much of an ally would they be if Mecca were a smoldering crater?
The Nuke Mecca, Kiss Israel, Iraq, and Afghanistan Goodbye Theory
Pretty much the same as above, except replace Pakistan with Iran. Let's face something here. We think we know how far along Iran is with their nuke program, but we sure as hell don't really know for sure. What we do know for sure is that they don't have missiles capable of reaching the U.S. yet, but they can damn sure put a hurting on our military, and wipe out Israel, with the ones they have. And I doubt they'd care, with Mecca gone, about their fellow Muslims in Baghdad and Kabul getting vaporized along with America's finest. Hell, they're sending them in now to kill their fellow Muslims.
The Why Nuke Anyway? Theory
If the U.S. is the recipient of a nuclear terrorist attack, it would be fairly pointless to nuke Mecca. The heart of Mecca is a rock. One that a couple of 2,000 lb. conventional bunker busters would vaporize with no problem.
But I would advocate unleashing nuclear Hell on the Tehran and Damascus.
Finally, I will seriously take issue with Rusty's use of the term MAD:
Everyone is approaching this as a tit for tat. They nuke this, we nuke that.
No, that's not what MAD is. Mutual Assured Destruction is just that. While Islamofascist scum may get off a nuke in one, two, or even ten American cities, they don't have anything even remotely resembling the nuclear power of the Soviet Union.
So the word "mutual" doesn't even apply here. The term should be IHOP. Islam's Holiest Obliterated Permanently.
I personally think that we should threaten to lay waste to it all. If even one American city suffers a nuclear attack, we waste Mecca, Medina, Qom, we hit Najaf (only because we worked so hard there) and the Al-Aqsa Mosque (nuking that would hurt Israel) with conventional weapons. And the aforementioned capitals.
Oh, and we nuke France too.
Yes I thought of that. First we pretend to cut and run, pulling our troops out of every single Islamic nation beforehand.
Wait...we need a place for the pulled out troops to go. So we don't nuke France, we invade France, and liberate it for the third time!
Posted by: Vinnie at
12:43 AM
| Comments (19)
| Add Comment
Post contains 533 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Mad Dog. I dont always agree with everything that is posted on this blog. Some of it provides food for thought, some of it is jingoistic poppy cock and some of it is just ill thought out rantings of a very sad individual. Yours are just offensive and do little to shed any light on the real issues.
I shant be coming back as would prefer to have an exchange of views with someone who atleast has a basic idea of what they are talking about. You, clearly do not
Posted by: Jd at July 22, 2005 03:45 AM (4PPsx)
2
BREAKING:
London Police shoot man dead in the subway.
They suspected he was a 'suicide bomber', yet there has been no mention of a bomb. Evidently, the 'frame a patsie squad' needs more time to plant the incriminating evidence.
The poor man was probably only 'guilty' of having dark skin.
Can you say,'police profiling, plus itchy trigger fingers, equals dead A-rab'. I knew you could!
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 05:08 AM (3D/yw)
3
One less to worry about tomorrow. A good safe place for a muslim is in a muslim country. Safe for all. Deport the bastards. England should be populated by Englishmen and people who have screwed up their own countries. The excuse makers in England including their stupid mayor have given the enemy (muslims) an easy target. They have allowed the threats to turn into reality.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 22, 2005 05:41 AM (CBNGy)
4
Using nuclear weapons is not an option. The aftermath affects everyone & everything on the planet. e.g. radioactive dust cloud kicked up and circling the planet.
Posted by: puzzled at July 22, 2005 06:38 AM (moq9v)
5
Am I the only one that thinks Vinnie's post might have been a little satirical or tongue-in-cheek?
Posted by: Hoodlumman at July 22, 2005 08:21 AM (1iJzK)
6
Ridiculous, why would Pakistan nuke Jerusalem?
Musharaff is already busy fighting Islamists and you think he'd risk wasting nukes on Jerusalem risking getting nuked by the US and letting India get the upper hand.
Dream on
Posted by: Ren at July 22, 2005 09:00 AM (a9tRx)
7
>>>"Using nuclear weapons is not an option."
Why not? We used them in Hiroshima, and we targetted the commies with those nukes for 50 years. What's this Liberal obsession with treating muslims with kid gloves?
Posted by: Carlos at July 22, 2005 09:12 AM (8e/V4)
8
Maybe Jd didn't put any weight on the part that said
"...a logical reason not to retaliate against Mecca...".
Personally, I think nuking Mecca is a bad idea. It won't work. I think that finding out who facilitated any future attack (ie. where the bombs came from, who financed them, etc.) and conventionally blast
them. Just picking random sites accomplishes little. As Lileks said "But do we really want to incinerate Tehran? YouÂ’ll probably find more people in Tehran who dearly love America than youÂ’ll find in Berkeley." Why alienate a possible future ally?
Whether or not Vinnie has a problem with such an idea of nuking Mecca, he had valid points on why not to. Unless of course Jd "wants" to bomb Mecca. I'm confused at this point at what he's upset about - bombing or not bombing or the tongue-in-cheek he missed. Perhaps he'll come back and clarify.
I don't agree with a lot of people here on many things they say. Some are totally ridiculous, others mildly so. But I'll keep coming back simply because I know how to pull my wadded panties out of my crack long enough to think and say a word or two of my own. But, this
"I'm never coming back here again" snit is silly. Just don't come back; it's simple. Saying so with ill explained indignation isn't going to cause anyone here to lose any sleep. I know I said recently that I was considering going elsewhere. But again, I tugged on my panties, sucked it up and figure that sometimes even I, being a nobody, am worth listening to.
Posted by: Oyster at July 22, 2005 09:12 AM (fl6E1)
9
May I propose another scenario: The Kiss the US Economy Goodbye Scenario.
Nuking (or even conventional bombing of) Mecca would instantly result in US isolation from the world. Not only would it be too dangerous to be an American abroad, but all the business conducted by those Americans would be undone.
The US is the center of the global economy, but it is not the absolute keystone to that economy. The world would suffer a recession, a depression, but it would not fold. Hundreds of thousands of American jobs, however, would fold.
There is well over $1 trillion of investments by Muslims in the US. Imagine those withdrawn overnight. ("We're going to freeze them," you say? Under what current law? How quickly do you think that law could be written and passed? Not as quickly as the stock market will move the money. People insulted by the act won't stick around waiting for "the right time" to sell out.)
And it won't just be the Muslim world that would react to a stupid use of force. You can bet that the US would be put under international boycotts and blocades.
We do, in fact, live in an interdependent world. That's one of the features--and costs--of globalization. Without imports, without exports, the US economy goes tits-up. So, unless you've got a government job, you'd better get that pair of shoes that will serve you well as you stand in the unemployment lines.
The idea is so stupid that it deserves its own corollary to Godwin's Law. "Anyone suggesting attacking Mecca to "get" the Muslims has lost the argument." And his mind.
Posted by: John Burgess at July 22, 2005 10:07 AM (wiywb)
10
John,
if the U.S. economy collapses the world economy collapses. Remeber, we buy most of what China makes.
Posted by: Carlos at July 22, 2005 10:10 AM (8e/V4)
11
jd: I can't tell you how I puffed with pride to know that I managed to offend you. Don't let the door hit you...etc etc
Hoodlumman: Half of it was.
Puzzled: What Carlos said
Ren: I believe that when nukes start flying, all bets are off. But, I don't necessarily disagree with you.
John: All theories are welcome.
I guess I could have saved space by saying "If we nuke Mecca, they'll nuke Israel." But what the hell fun is that? I'm here to have fun, baby.
Posted by: Mad Dog Vinnie at July 22, 2005 10:35 AM (Kr6/f)
12
What a completely moronic post.
Rusty should have never let other people start posting articles on his blog.
Quantity of posts over quality of posts- dilution theory.
Vinnie- I was going to just say that you suck, but let me change that to your posts have been really, really poor. You need to step up to the plate with some posts worthy of being on Rusty's blog.
Posted by: Col. North at July 22, 2005 12:21 PM (PX+vn)
13
Fake name, fake email, fake URL. Yup, those are the people I take advice from.
As for "stepping up to the plate" and "being worthy," I'll let Rusty make that decision.
Posted by: Mad Dog Vinnie at July 22, 2005 01:04 PM (Kr6/f)
Posted by: Howie at July 22, 2005 01:33 PM (D3+20)
15
Yes, someone who gets it. If a nuke hits the US then unleash something biblical on the Islamics. Not just Mecca but on every major city in every state that supports or succors these scum.
Posted by: Thomas Jackson at July 22, 2005 06:07 PM (hTthA)
16
Nukin's been looked into and found impractical.
That said, there's a bright future to be made in Specialty Chemicals.
Posted by: Nose at July 22, 2005 11:56 PM (M2CXw)
17
I have a better idea...drop Mecca Donald's cheeseburgers on them so they die of heart disease the American way. Maybe exploding bibles that scatter fire and brimstone shrapnel? Get Sinclair to take over the broadcasting there and pump FOX "news" at 'em. There are all sorts of solutions...nukes are too messy.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at July 24, 2005 05:38 PM (perrS)
18
Nuke France? You twat if it wasn't for the Frogs your neurotic country wouldnt exist. Hey you're right - nuke 'em.
Posted by: ENNISON at July 31, 2005 10:17 AM (pMLHq)
19
If there is a US city is nuked, do the following:
call an emergency session in the UN. The security council will agree to cordon off the Islamic world. First waste that black rock in mecca by a convention strike. Destroy all islamic tanks/planes/heavy armour. Secure oil assets of
all Islamic nations. Declare martial law, seal of the whole Islamic world. Spend oil money for the "well being" of the Islamic world. Occupy the Islamic world together with Europe, Russia, China, and India, untill the place is civillised enough to govern itself. This could take decades.
Believe me an American city nuked will get the rest of scared, Moscow, Delhi, Bangkok, London and even Copenhagen will be worried, hence the world will support measure to "deal" with places that breed terrorists. Let hope this scenario never comes to fruition.
Posted by: V Ramakrishna at September 11, 2005 11:29 PM (gJkE2)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Vacation Blogging Day 3
Started reading
Blowback by Brad Thor. Thanks to the good folks over at Atria books for sending it to me here at the Shackleford summer home on the beautiful banks of the Rio de Los Angeles gratis.
Read a chapter on the treadmill. Yeah, I know, freakin pathetic.
Argued with Hugh Hewitt. He e-mailed me saying to call him back and we'll duke it out again. Nice try Hugh, there's a reason I write. He'd clean my clock in a verbal debate. Hands. Down.
You know that the college town that I live in doesn't have talk radio? Seriously. The first day in town I asked a local where I could tune into Rush Limbaugh. He said, Rush Lim-who? And I'm not even a big Rush fan, but every podunck town gets Rush, right? Hell, I spent half of me drive through Missouri trying to find an AM station that wasn't Rush Limbaugh. Much of the day found me blubbering like a baby, so overjoyed by the fact that Dennis Prager was on.
High point of the day: Fox 11 in Los Angeles plays the Simpsons twice a night. Twice! With King of the Hill wedged between the two episodes!! Lawdy, how I do miss LA.
Posted by: Rusty at
12:33 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 214 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Bill Dautrive at July 22, 2005 11:02 AM (G95Uf)
2
My family has been in SoCal for over 120 years and none of us ever heard of "Rio Los Angeles". Can not find it on any of my maps. Where is it? Is it near the Patton estate? Near Pasadena? Kukomonga? Azusa?
Posted by: Rod Stanton at July 22, 2005 12:50 PM (Z6yVb)
3
^^That would be the Los Angeles River...maybe it isn't Atzlan yet, after all!
Actually the Simpsons is on three or four times a night! 1830, 1930, and then 2300 and maybe even something after that. I am not too sure, as my parents don't find that show as acceptable as I do...
Posted by: TheRoyalFamily at July 22, 2005 07:45 PM (Lrmfd)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 21, 2005
The Case for Nuking Mecca as a MAD Strategy
I understand that Rep. Tom Tancredo recently said that in the case of a WMD attack against the US by al Qaeda forces we should respond by nuking mecca. Since I have not been watching much TV or reading any blogs on my vacation, let me just respond to a couple of things Hugh Hewitt said on his show today and which I just did not have time to tell him on the air. He points us to
this screed by one of my heroes, Lileks, on his
blog today.
He also mentioned this post by DafyDD over at Captain's Quarters. It's really a silly post. Seriously. What his post really comes down to is he thinks the case for nuking Mecca is based on hatred of Muslims, what he calls "Moslem Derangement Syndrome."
I guess those that called for nuking Moscow in case they nuked us were really victims of "Russian Derangement Syndrome"??
He makes a good point that there are many who want to see Muslims dead. This is sick, just as he suggests. But trying to argue against the MAD strategy by trying to associate it with a bunch of racists is a straw man--something I see was noticed by Pierre LeGrand. It's like arguing that the war in Iraq is wrong because it is motivated by racism. Sure, there are some racists cheering for us in Iraq, but so what? Do not ascribe others sick motives to those wishing to deter the unthinkable from happening on our soil.
The second part of his post is equally silly. Nuking Mecca would not kill 1 billion Muslims. Last time I checked Mecca was little more than a medium sized tourist town. It would kill a lot of people. But so would taking out Moscow. Yes, very vary bad thing.
Nobody advocating the MAD strategy wishes to see any one dead. That's kinda the whole point of Mutual Assured Destruction. It deters.
The case for nuking Mecca, then, is very similar to the case for nuking Moscow. It is based on the notion that rational people would not dare start a nuclear Armageddon.
The only potential flaw in the case for nuking Mecca is the underlying premise of rationality. If Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda are rational, threatening to nuke Mecca would deter them from using WMD against the United States. If Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda are not rational, then the threat would have no deterrent effect.
That is a very debatable point, and one on which honest discussions are made.
As I pointed out in my original post on nuking mecca:
Let me make a couple of points first. One: I do not advocate using nuclear weapons. Two: I do not advocate killing Muslims or any other follower of any religion. Three: I do not imagine in any way possible the US government actually doing this--or even thinking it. Four: These are rudimentary thoughts. This post is used as a sounding board only. Much of what I say may be wrong and all is subject to revision. The purpose of this post is to start a conversation.
First point: Bill's major argument about deterring terrorists is well taken and mostly on the money. I think he's right, for the most part: you cannot deter these guys, only defeat them. And if incinerating Damascus were the only threat we could use to deter terrorists then certainly a MAD scheme would not work in this new Cold War we find ourselves in.
However, Mecca is not Damascus. It plays a central role in Muslim worship. Five times a day Muslims pray toward it. All Muslims who have the means are expected to make the Hajj--a pilgrimage to Mecca which revolves around the Kaaba stone. The Kaaba stone is really the reason Mecca is considered holy. Muslims believe the site was used for worship as far back as Adam and that the shrine around the stone was first placed there by Abraham (Ibrahim). There is a 12 mile zone around the stone that infidels are restricted from entering. It's that holy. No non-Muslims near it. In fact, without Mecca and the Kaaba stone, Islam would be very different.
Mecca, then, is quite unlike any other place in the world for Muslims. It is an entire city dedicated to Muslim worship. A place set apart. A holy place. It is an entire city that is thought to be the Temple of God.
Islamist terrorists also consider Mecca the holiest place in the world. It is central to their mode of worship. They face it when they pray. They too believe they must make the hajj. If we take them at their word, then the reason they commit terrorist acts is because they take their religious convictions so seriously. When they kill us, it is because they believe that this is what their God wants them to do.
So, ask yourself the question again: Can terrorists be deterred from using WMD against American targets?
Maybe they can. If Islamic extremists really love their religious institutions in the way that they claim they do, then pointing an ICBM at Mecca may not be the most irrational thing to do. They may not care if the rest of the world goes up in a nuclear mushroom cloud, as Bill points out, but Mecca is not the rest of the world. Would they really risk blowing up New York City if they believed the consequences of such an action would be a 30 kiloton nuclear explosion over the Kaaba stone? After all, the nuclear destruction of Mecca would end Islamic forms of worship as they presently exist.
If I might misquote Sting for a moment, "Is it such a crazy thing to do, if the Terrorists love their Mecca too?"
I usually read Froggy's blog, he's on my RSS feed, but thanks to Hugh again for pointing
this post out from Matt Heidt. Heidt makes many of the same points that David Atkins did last year in an editorial at WND. Here is how I responded to Atkins and I think many of the same points are valid criticisms of Heidt's post:
have numerous problems with the specifics of Atkins proposal--starting with the inhumanity of killing millions of innocent people because a handful of states support Islamic terrorists--but agree that MAD could be used to deter Islamic terrorism. It seems to me that a much more reasonable form of MAD would be to limit the target list to one city, Mecca. The terrorists really don't care if we nuke the capitals of Pakistan, Bangladesh, or Syria.
I see
Juliette makes many of the same points. I'm very late to this one, but it also looks like
Michelle Malkin has a pretty good roundup. Ok, back to lounging around the pool.
UPDATE: Rob at Say Anything responds here. Let me just make a couple of observations.
Is al Qaeda full of a bunch of madmen? No. No more than, say, the Kremlin was. The ideology of the Kremlin was mad, and the worldview shaped by that ideology was mad, but it was not irrational. It had a coherent internal logic. The MAD logic does not need sanity to work, what it needs is rationality.
more...
Posted by: Rusty at
08:37 PM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1857 words, total size 11 kb.
1
>>>"I guess those that called for nuking Moscow in case they nuked us were really victims of "Russian Derangement Syndrome"??"
Exactly. Tancredo is right. Targeting Mecca for destruction isn't about killing muslims-- it's about saving New York. We don't want to nuke Mecca anymore than we wanted to nuke Moscow, but MADD kept both parties from doing anything stupid. There's only one thing islamic terrorists really care about and that's their holy sites. Targeting Mecca will guarantee New York's safety.
This whole "moslem derangement syndrome" just shows how stupid and illogical these wannabe intellectual Libs are. We did the exact same thing to the Soviets, but these braniac Libs have already forgotten. They're OBSESSED with race.
Posted by: Carlos at July 21, 2005 08:44 PM (8e/V4)
2
Ok, back to lounging around the pool.
If you're at the pool with either a double-double or a carnitas burrito at hand, I will nuke the nine-oh-nine.
Posted by: Leopold Stotch at July 21, 2005 09:10 PM (l9XSL)
3
Got news for you, an ICBM contains 10 warheads and each one is 300 Megatons a far cry from a single warhead of 30 Kilotons. And that information is all that is de-classified. For example, no one really knows how much of a punch a Trident missile fired from a US Boomer submarine can carry. I think we should put together some tests and film the thing, then broadcast it all over the Muslim world in their own language. They simply have no idea just how destructive a single warhead can be and we have thousands upon thousands of these warheads and if need be can produce as many as we want.
Basically, there would a crater many miles across and perhaps as deep as 500 feet. There would be nothing left. When we stopped testing atomic weapons above ground, we continued testing for decades underground and I am sure the explosions were increased in size and magnitude. Apparently, we learned all we really needed to learn from those tests and super computers can now be effectively used to simulate atomic explosions.
BTW, I heard that the US has either just started up warhead production or is planning to do so very soon. Smaller tactical nukes could prove to be rather useful to avoid killing millions in a single strike. But I don't see the point, every single time the enemy is amassed in a large enough force to be confronted by the Army or Marines, they swiftly get their butts kicked and they end up scurrying away like cockroaches.
We still need to maintain MAD (mutually assured destruction) because of the Chinese and soon the North Koreans and perhaps the Iranians. Russia still has nukes and what happens if there is another collapse of government and a psychopath takes over Russia? It happened in Germany, Hitler rose up politically and simply eliminated the competition and took over.
Posted by: JBrickley at July 21, 2005 09:16 PM (OyXzs)
4
You do realise that Mecca has been destroyed before right? did it stop them then?
The Koran contains a prophecy that identifies the destruction of Mecca in the
final days, the days when they believe all will be converted or die. Yeah, radical Muslims believing America just started the prophecy, to kill all the none believers --
let's do that.
Posted by: dave at July 21, 2005 09:22 PM (DO6vD)
5
In his recent sequels to Enders Game (The Shadow of... Series) Orson Scott Card has as part of the background that in response to nuclear terrorism Mecca has been nuked. It seems that this did have the effect of mostly eliminating Islamic terrorism, but did not eliminate Islam - instead it was said that the blasts had vaporized the Kaaba, sending it's atoms into the atmosphere where they dispersed across the entire earth, spreading a blessing.
Interestingly, he posits that in order for Islam to reform, the central tenet that must be challenged is that apostasy is punishable by death - that until there can be ex-muslims, all other changes are cosmetic.
Posted by: Eric J at July 21, 2005 09:42 PM (5PRM2)
6
Rusty:
I have two commentaries on the issue of Mecca and nukes on my site as well as on Moonbat Central.
I would not make Mecca's Grand Mosque the target per se, but there are a host of targets in Mecca that should be taken down with conventional weapons in the aftermath of an Islamist WMD strike on the USA.
What we're witnessing here is a meltdown among pretend "conservatives" that are in reality moderates who yearn for MSM acceptance, salaries, and access to the "cool" crowd in Dc and NYC.
Posted by: Michael Calderon at July 21, 2005 10:03 PM (x6TjU)
7
You don't have to necessarily nuke Mecca to deface it. Just air-dropping a bunch of infidels, oh say a few thousand heavily armed infidels, should get the same effect. They would see it as poisoning the hallowed ground. That would sure get them in a snit.
And Lileks certainly has a point here:
But do we really want to incinerate Tehran? You'll probably find more people in Tehran who dearly love America than you'll find in Berkeley. How true!
Posted by: Oyster at July 22, 2005 06:49 AM (YudAC)
8
I think that the target of a MAD strategy is NOT Al Qeada. I may not work on them as planed, i.e. thay may actually welcome it.
The target of a MAD strategy should be the root cause of the Islamofacist philosophy, namely The Magic Kingdom. A clear announcement that Saudi Arabia (including Meccah) would suffer the response would cause the Saudis to rethink that whole "incitment to terror" policy they have been following for many years.
Posted by: Sinner at July 22, 2005 08:17 AM (f3h4P)
9
Hmm. Here's an alternate retaliation strategy: Bomb the hell out of every military installation in Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran and maybe Egypt. At the same time, explode a nuclear device somewhere in the middle of the Sahara.
Message: We can do more damage with conventional weapons than you can do with nukes. And this is what we could do if we decided to use nukes.
Posted by: Eric J at July 22, 2005 08:28 AM (hrQvk)
10
MAD won't work because they aren't rational from a normal point of view. They probably think Mecca is untouchouble, magically protected by the holy mudmaster Alluhah himself.
If they got over nukes no doubt they'd used them, but that time everybody in the US would be so pissed that nuking mecca and invading Saudi Arabia would make very much sence. Nobody would care what the Muslims would think, in fact they'd be persecuted indiscriminately. War would be proclaimed on Islam.
Posted by: Cognito at July 22, 2005 08:52 AM (a9tRx)
11
Thank you very much for the links Rusty and thanks for showing some much needed sense after all the hysterics.
Pierre Legrand
Posted by: Pierre Legrand at July 22, 2005 12:57 PM (znRfy)
12
Islam is in the heart, it is preserved in the heart. It will stay there till the day a muslim dies. The day America or anyone else bombs Mecca is the day muslims go to war against them. You can't even handle one Bin Laden, how can you handle billions of muslims...
Posted by: Khan at August 05, 2005 06:59 PM (lujqP)
13
The argument is basically flawed. If you notice Muslims pray facing the Qibla, they dont actually see it! IF its nuked they'll still face the same qibla (its not like geographically the qibla location will change!). So nuking mecca will basically turn lots of muslims in america turn against america, and lots of moderate americans against the government. Oh not to mention, the communists chinese and other smaller countries. So lets see.. you dont get any oil, everyone's against everyone else. The entire economic system breaks down! There is a global war.. and well it'll be fought on ur streets.. one day ur kid goes out playing and someone kills him (coz ur army killed his kid!)... and the war will be in ur living room.
I do not think its a geat idea to think what you are thinking. In fact it's based upon your own biased facts... did u go to college btw?

to have any idea about world cultures, religions etc

doesn't sound like it at all..
Posted by: MR E at October 20, 2005 07:12 AM (7YwPP)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Jawa on Hugh Hewitt
Just in case you were listening, yes, that was me on Hugh Hewitt this afternoon. And, yes, I think their is a strong case to be made that pointing nuclear weapons at Mecca would be a rational deterrent to the forces of Islam using WMD against the United States. I made that point last year
here and
here.
Posted by: Rusty at
07:55 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 66 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I heard you!
Surprised you didn't mention your blog. Or maybe you did but I missed it.
Posted by: Aaron's cc: at July 21, 2005 08:05 PM (ov6Vw)
2
Who the hell is Hugh Hewitt?
Posted by: Mad Dog Vinnie at July 21, 2005 08:14 PM (Kr6/f)
3
>>>"Who the hell is Hugh Hewitt?"
You need to get out more dude.
Posted by: Carlos at July 21, 2005 09:08 PM (8e/V4)
4
Since I didn't get an answer to my earlier comment, I ask again: does anyone advocate bombing the Islamic holy city of Jerusalem? If not, why not?
This would, like bombing Mecca, be a way of paying back the Islamic fundamentalists for their bombs in New York and London, but would it be wise?
I'm not necessarily opposed on moral grounds to threatening, or even bombing, Mecca or any other place. This is war, and people die in war. I just don't see how bombing Mecca would serve any purpose of ours, and I think it would more likely than not serve the purposes of our enemies. If any of you have a solid argument, based on evidence and experience, that this threat is likely to subdue, rather than embolden, the Islamic fundamentalists, I'm all ears.
Further, is there any good reason to believe that bin Laden and Zarqawi wouldn't be thrilled to see Mecca bombed by the Americans?
Posted by: Eman at July 22, 2005 12:08 AM (/GPjX)
5
That's because Jerusalem is not a holy city to Muslims in any real meaningful sense. It was not until after the Zionist movement until Muslims started really calling it a holy city on the cultural level. Mecca is much different than any of the other so called 'holy cities' (eg, Karbala) in that not even people of the book are allowed near it. It is an entire city like the Jewish Temple of old. No unholy thing allowed (this means you infidel dog). When Muslims talk of other cities as being 'holy' they don't really mean it in the same sense. More like, "a city which we hold dear to our heart that has some place of ancient interest."
Christians really have nothing to compare it to, for instance, no one thinks of the Vatican as a "holy city".
Of course bin Laden wouldn't love to see us bomb the place he considers so holy that no infidel foot can even touch it. These people take these things pretty seriously.
In some ways, and no offense to my Jewish readers, I see militant Islam in the same light as the fundamentalist Jews who thought that God would send a Savior to rescue the "holy land" and especially the temple from the control of those pesky infidel Romans. The Judaism today in many ways bears little resemblence to the politcal Judaism of 2k years ago precisely because their holy places were destroyed, they were forced to live under a political system that wouldn't allow them to stone people to death for blasphemy, and they realized that all that stuff about it being God's will to murder thousands of innocent women and children in Canaan may have a deeper meaning and that maybe God really didn't approve of all that.
So, Muslims can either learn that lesson on their own--to forget that whole world domination and religious law thing--(which many appear to have already done) or we will have to play the part of Rome, as we are doing today, and show them that Allah is not going to make them a single nation again.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at July 22, 2005 12:25 AM (6WGpK)
Posted by: Rod Stanton at July 22, 2005 12:52 PM (Z6yVb)
7
It's not just the things you advocate on this blog that trouble me, it's the reasoned tone you adopt as you try to justify the truly ridiculous.
Posted by: Professor Peter Von Nostrand at July 23, 2005 05:54 PM (REz6/)
8
Peter von nostil: Only thing ridiculous is your ridiculous posts. No one on your blog again. No wonder.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 25, 2005 03:42 AM (CBNGy)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
A New Convert To Islam?
***UPDATED***
After staying plugged into the news coming out of London so far, and especially after reading Richard's post about the splodeydope's weapon of choice, I think I have a clear picture of who is the mastermind behind today's isolated incident.

UPDATED WITH EXTREMELY SENSITIVE ANONOMOUSLY SOURCED INFORMATION.
The British Gov't has identified the above as one Abu Saheed Spesh al-Ed. They have also released a recorded cell phone conversation between him and one of the perpetrators of today's isolated incident:
Perp: Hello?
Spesh al-Ed: Do you have TATP?
Perp: Yes, we do.
Spesh al-Ed: YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY! I like TATP!
Perp:
Spesh al-Ed: Hey lady,
Perp: I am not a la
Spesh al-Ed: Do you have TATP?
Perp: I tell you this, we do.
Spesh al-Ed: YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY! I like TATP!
Spesh al-Ed: Hey lady
Perp: Sheik al-Ed! I am not a lady, you know this!
Spesh al-Ed: Do you have Semtex?
Perp: NO! We have the TATP! I tell you this already!
Spesh al-Ed: YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY! I hate Semtex!
Perp: Goodbye Sheik
Spesh al-Ed: Lady? YAAAAAAAAAY! He's going to die for Allah! YAAAAAAAAY! I like dying for Allah!
Posted by: Vinnie at
06:15 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 196 words, total size 1 kb.
1
My fondest wish is one of the bombs will get the Mayor of London. Never happen but I can dream.
Posted by: Rod Stanton at July 21, 2005 03:39 PM (Z6yVb)
2
So, this is either greg or DSM, could go either way.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 21, 2005 03:40 PM (0yYS2)
Posted by: yakup at July 21, 2005 03:58 PM (5BMwO)
4
It was not me. I don't play dress up like you Improbulus.
Here's the latest fashion trend in Italy, just for you, Improbulus. Women wear wrap around skirts over their designer blue jeans. The wrap starts about 6 inches down from the waist, so that you see the top 6 inches of their blue jeans.
Now go to town, you silly girl!
Posted by: greg at July 21, 2005 04:19 PM (3D/yw)
5
Oh, that's burn in hell bad! *giggle*
Posted by: Princess Kimberley at July 21, 2005 05:04 PM (LNA9X)
6
Of course it couldn't be you greg, how silly of me. The helmet isn't covered with TINFOIL. Please accept my apologies. I expected DSM to be, taller, but not so intelligent looking.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 21, 2005 05:56 PM (0yYS2)
7
I got so angry after hearing some liberal Californians say Bush and "his" war in Iraq are responsible for the London bombings, Part 1 & 2, that I made a wallet card to hand to disreputable people holding this opinion.
Hope it helps some of y'all who think terrorists are committing terrorists acts, and not GWB.
The card is here:
http://theshavedape.blogspot.com/2005/07/london-bombed-by-muslims-again.html
--Don
Posted by: Don Long at July 21, 2005 07:23 PM (b2Y3g)
8
Arm your cabbage patch kid with a bazooka and your teddy bear with a M-16 and waste that creep thing
Posted by: sandpiper at July 21, 2005 10:46 PM (ILvmZ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Rice Aides, NBC's Andrea Mitchell, Roughed Up By Sudanese
I know this sounds like a skit from Saturday Night Live, but apparently, it's true. From the
Associated Press:
NEW YORK -- Andrea Mitchell said she felt angry and humiliated after Sudanese bodyguards dragged her out of a room Thursday for questioning President Omar el-Bashir about his involvement in the country's violence.
Large, gun-toting guards painfully wrenched the 5-foot-3 Mitchell's arm behind her. She was freed after U.S. officials accompanying Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice complained.
"Can you tell us why the violence is continuing?" Mitchell asked, as a Sudanese official said "no, no, no, please."
"Can you tell us why the government is supporting the militias?" she asked.
After getting no reply from el-Bashir, she asked, "Why should Americans believe your promises?"
It was then that she was forcibly removed.
But don't worry. Later, Sudanese Foreign Minister Mustafa Osman Ismail phoned Condoleeza Rice to apologize.
Cross-posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.
Posted by: Bluto at
04:49 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Just another isolated incident from the ROP
Posted by: Mad Dog Vinnie at July 21, 2005 05:02 PM (Kr6/f)
2
Sudanese sons of bitches, by God, IÂ’m going to raise your short term interest rates tomorrow!
Posted by: Alan Greenspan at July 21, 2005 05:02 PM (3OPZt)
Posted by: Chrees at July 21, 2005 05:32 PM (ofjz/)
4
And here's the kicker. Mitchell was accosted
after the first apology. The Sudanese screwed around with Rice's entourage, Rice demanded an apology and got one, and Mitchell was removed from the room after asking questions about the Sudanese genocide.
Lovely people, those Sudanese. They actually act the way the US media thinks that the Bush administration acts in some alternate universe where US citizens have no rights and the McBushitleralliburton Corporation runs the show for Rove.
Posted by: lawhawk at July 21, 2005 06:41 PM (V9qRd)
5
You hit the nail on the head, LawHawk.
Posted by: Oyster at July 22, 2005 06:19 AM (YudAC)
6
The U.S. should take the high road and not whine too much about this.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 07:56 AM (x+5JB)
7
Sudan: Isn't that the country where the Muslims of the north and still enslaving the blacks in the south of the country? Question is are they doing the right thing or not.
If it wasn't our business to stop the genocide in Irag(liberal view) then why is the genocide in Sudan our business?
I will leave that answer for a friggin raghead hugging lib.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 25, 2005 03:48 AM (CBNGy)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
7/7 bombing investigation
Ussneverdock has some
really good stuff on the investigation into the 7/7 London bombings.Haroon Rashid Aswat has emerged as the figure that Scotland Yard have been hunting since he flew out of Britain just hours before the attacks which killed 56 people.
Aswat, 30, who is believed to come from the same West Yorkshire town as one of the bombers, arrived in Britain a fortnight before the attacks to orchestrate final planning for the atrocity. He spoke to the suicide team on his mobile phone a few hours before the four men blew themselves up and killed fifty-two other people
Good stuff man. Some of the information is circumstantial but that would not stop Greg would it.
Also dont forget to check out Michelle's posts today. She has in depth coverage of today's bombings as well as a good link to a greenpeace video that is well you just have to see it. Plus she's easy on the eyes.
Posted by: Howie at
01:09 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 165 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Heh. Aswad. Rush actually called him "Asswad" on the air today.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 21, 2005 03:41 PM (0yYS2)
2
Greenpeace is as mature today as they were 44 years ago. Some folk never grow up.
Posted by: Rod Stanton at July 21, 2005 04:08 PM (Z6yVb)
3
"Whoops, 'Plamegate' Back on Page One
Pundits predicted the White House gambit of moving forward a Supreme Court pick would knock Karl Rove's involvement in the CIA leak case off page one for days. That became "day," thanks to the Washington Post this morning."
"Okay, the Supreme Court wag the dog didn't work, let's try a bomb London wag the dog!" - White Horse Souce
Posted by: greg at July 21, 2005 04:14 PM (3D/yw)
4
Er, sousesethesesis, hic!
Posted by: greg at July 21, 2005 04:24 PM (3D/yw)
5
"China's new destroyers feature Aegis tech copied from U.S.
Special to World Tribune.com
EAST-ASIA-INTEL.COM
Thursday, July 21, 2005
China's military put its new guided missile destroyers on display last week, disclosing its two new warships that are equipped with Aegis-type battle management systems."
THANK YOU, ISRAEL!
Posted by: greg at July 21, 2005 04:29 PM (3D/yw)
6
Greg, why are you worried about China's ships with our technology? What you should be worried about are the nuclear weapons they can develop with the technology Komrade Klinton sold them, for which he should be shot.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 21, 2005 05:59 PM (0yYS2)
7
Klinton did suck, I agree.
Bush sucks and swallows.
Israel, has sold nuclear secrets to Russia and China (Pollard). They are likely behind this transfer of technology too.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 05:12 AM (3D/yw)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Not to be outdone, the IRA bombs London
Purely speculation, but as long as my wife is down for a nap with the baby on this sultry summer day, let me go ahead and speculate.
This could be a botched terror bombing, but it seems more likely that this was either an amateur copy-cat bombing by more of your friendly neighborhood ROPers....
or, maybe.....
The fact that only one person is injured. Again, pure speculation, but doesn't this seem more like the work of the IRA or one of its offshoots like The Real IRA? When the ROP strikes they are going for casualties, but when the IRA strikes it is political theater. Most of the time, the IRA is looking to do plenty of property damage with as few injuries as possible.
Plus, militant Irish Republicans aren't looking to meet 72 virgins in the afterlife. The bombers, from what I am hearing on TV, ran away.
Just a thought. I'm probably wrong. Ok, back to vacation.
UPDATE: Like I said, I'm probably wrong. This is a blog, remember?
Posted by: Rusty at
12:47 PM
| Comments (18)
| Add Comment
Post contains 187 words, total size 1 kb.
1
pure rubblish what a joke this article is
Posted by: graeme at July 21, 2005 01:01 PM (QB3fv)
2
the idea that the ira or the so-called real ira dont kill people right and al-qaeda doenst exist either
idiot
Posted by: Graeme at July 21, 2005 01:03 PM (QB3fv)
3
Now, if they ran away and into a pub, I would bet on the Irish.
Posted by: Wine-aholic at July 21, 2005 01:08 PM (Wsn+K)
4
Uh, yeah, like the IRA has to copy cat anybody!
Posted by: princesskimberley at July 21, 2005 01:30 PM (LNA9X)
5
not IRA but maybe right wingers trying to stir up greater anti-muslim sentiment...I think if it was al-qaeda it would have been lethal.
Posted by: Mr. K at July 21, 2005 01:38 PM (Ry/cV)
6
The IRA call in their bombs first. They'd certainly have claimed responsibility by now.
Posted by: Eric J at July 21, 2005 01:42 PM (hrQvk)
7
IRA generally calls in bomb attacks. Whether they are honest, lying, or fuck up in giving locations is another matter. But the camel fuckers never call shit in. I think if this wasn't a botched Jihadi attack it was done by amateur wannabe Jihadists. It was too small scale to be done by the usual suspects. Not large enough bombs. Or perhaps they are up to something testing British reaction for another plan that they have in mind. Something just doesn't seem right about this. But I'll put my money on no Irish Republican involvement.
Posted by: Mike at July 21, 2005 01:43 PM (8Bx+v)
8
graeme--I think your post is pure rubblish, too.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 21, 2005 01:58 PM (x+5JB)
9
Nah, leave the Micks out of it. The IRA's on a short leash these days. If it wasn't A-rabs then my guess would be Project Mayhem.
Posted by: Leopold Stotch at July 21, 2005 02:38 PM (7FyEu)
10
Well, if greg won't say it then, IT WAS THE JOOOOOOOS!
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at July 21, 2005 02:55 PM (RHG+K)
11
Definately not the IRA. I already gave my thoughts a couple posts down.
Posted by: Oyster at July 21, 2005 03:02 PM (fl6E1)
12
So lemme get this straight...if I become a...errr...."successful" blogger, whatever that is, I will have at least one person who comes by every day to leave JOOOOO-hatin' comments? [Sorry, just came from Ace of Spades, home of some more daily JOOO-haterz.]
Whew. A burden has been lifted!!! I shall now stop checking my site traffic and just judge the merit of my words on how many JOOOOOO haters stop by to say "hi."
Posted by: Feisty at July 21, 2005 03:04 PM (QBrm4)
13
Like I said before, how about re-arming the IRA and turn them loose against the jihadists. C'mon, it could be good fun!
Posted by: Venom at July 21, 2005 03:18 PM (dbxVM)
14
Rusty,
My brotha!
Welcome to the 'conspiratorial' club. I knew you could!
Bluto!
Shame on you.
Posted by: greg at July 21, 2005 03:44 PM (3D/yw)
15
Dammit Bluto, I have dibs on busting greg for his Kosher Konspiracy Kapers™. And yes, Feisty, you will know you've made it once the Black Helicopter™ crowd decides to camp in your crawlspace. If you don't eradicate them immediately, they will set up a colony, just like the hippies in South Park.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 21, 2005 03:51 PM (0yYS2)
16
"Bush sees London attacks as reason for Patriot Act
President Bush yesterday invoked the terrorist attacks in London as a compelling reason for Congress to renew the USA Patriot Act and for local governments to beef up security on mass-transit systems."
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20050720-102536-4094r.htm
Can you say, "wag the dog"?
Posted by: greg at July 21, 2005 04:34 PM (3D/yw)
17
May someone say this words to CIA, Fbi, Scotland yard etc...?
Appears clear that the new-islamic terror has two ways: the political and criminal way, as Al Qaeda etc.
In Europe there is an other situation: with the Al Qaeda connection, there is also the new islamic youth subculture. As the red terrorism of the '70, like italian red brigades and RAF in Germany. They work together. But the question of a possible big jump of the young eurabic terrorism, is not to ferget. Believe me: we have a new problem.
Paolo della Sala
Le guerre civili blog
http://leguerrecivili.splinder.com
Posted by: Paolo della Sala at July 21, 2005 05:18 PM (gOiqe)
18
Paolo,
Che Catzo dice?
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 05:13 AM (3D/yw)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Prime Ministers' News Conference
Here's a followup to the timely entries from Howie and Mad Dog Vinnie. British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Australian Prime Minister John Howard spoke. The following is a paraphrasing of the news conference.
(Blair) I met with the police commissioner. We just need to act calmly. We hope to get the rest of the transport system up and running as soon as possible.
(Howard) Australia sympathizes with and supports the British people. Terrorism is the enemy of all free people.
The response of emergency services in London and Great Britain have been quite remarkable.
Reporters to Blair:
Question: What would you say to those who would not want to go into London?
"It's important that we keep to our normal lives."
Question: Who is responsible?
"The police are best to let you know who is responsible. Terrorist attacks are meant to frighten people. It's important we react calmly."
Question: Do you feel your policies have put us in this position?
The people responsible for doing this are responsible for this situation.
The roots of this are deep. Terrorist attacks go back over 10 years. What they want us to do is say we're responsible. The people that carry out these attacks are the terrorists.
Update at 11:22 EDT
Investigators apparently have found that the explosive device used on the bus in today's event is similar to that which was used in the terror bombings on July 7.
From Sky News:
There has also been an incident on a bus in Hackney, East London.
Police are reportedly examining a rucksack left on the top deck.
Tube stations at Warren Street, Oval and Shepherd's Bush have been closed.
Chemical searches at all four sites have proved negative.
Armed police officers have entered University College Hospital in Bloomsbury close to Warren Street station.
An internal memo to staff at the hospital warned them to be on the lookout for a black male, possibly of Asian origin, about 6ft 2ins tall, wearing a blue top with wires protruding from the rear of the top.
Across London, a man was arrested at gunpoint by armed police at the gates of Downing Street.
In summary, the investigation continues and, from my perspective, it seems to be a botched operation on the part of the terrorists.
Companion post at Interested-Participant.
Posted by: Mike Pechar at
11:55 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 388 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Their guy got arrested in Pakistan and the other in Egypt is still being held last I heard (even though Egypt says he is innocent, they still held him). Without their guidance they probably tried to make do and go ahead with their limited knowledge and botched it.
Of course, it's just a guess.
Posted by: Oyster at July 21, 2005 12:26 PM (fl6E1)
2
More Explosions in London: Psy-ops in Progress
Watson and Jones| July 21 2005
"In the early confusion about what is actually happening in London, several things are already clear.
- This immediately stalls questions about the first bombing. The mainstream media were finally beginning to highlight the fact that the government's official story did not fit together. This takes those issues off the front pages.
- This further promulgates the fearmongering and creates a pliable public that is willing to accept draconian anti-terror laws. They are trying to turn us into Israel, with an alert or a bombing every fortnight.
- On the very day that the Patriot Act is due to be renewed, Bush can use the alert level to grease the skids and bully Congress into re-authorizing the bill.
Related: Bush sees London attacks as reason for Patriot Act
Some early reports from the scene of the incidents are very interesting.
BBC reported that one of the individuals' rucksacks exploded and he looked surprised and dismayed. Who is planting these devices in people's luggage? Or are these people copycats?
Sky News reported that Tony Blair was already in a crisis meeting in an underground bunker which overlapped with the alert. Another case of preparing to 'control' the chaos as it unfolded?
Sky News also reports Blair was set to meet with MI5 and MI6 as well as Secret Service later today. This suggests Blair's schedule was planned ahead of time to coincide with these incidents.
There are already 'Atta passport' type stories of Arabs planting the bombs and running away and being chased by members of the public. This immediately creates the psy-ops storyboard that this is the work of Al-Qaeda."
Posted by: greg at July 21, 2005 12:49 PM (3D/yw)
3
Question: Do you feel your policies have put us in this position?
Are you sure this wasn't a NYT reporter? Sounds more like an accusation than a question.
Posted by: Oyster at July 21, 2005 03:13 PM (fl6E1)
4
Uh Greg the UK doesn't have a Secret Service it has the Security Service also known as MI5, mind U I'm not saying you're fill of shit and don't know what you are talking about.
Posted by: Mike at July 21, 2005 07:43 PM (CEUV/)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
More News From London
Fox:Sky News TV reported that police were searching for a man with a blue shirt with wires protruding. Officers asked employees to look for a black or Asian male, 6 feet 2 inches tall, wearing a blue top with a hole in the back and wires protruding.
Scotland Yard said there have been two arrests, one at Downing Street and one at greater Scotland Yard, but officials are stressing the arrests may not be related. There will be a police briefing at 12:30 p.m. EDT.
Also:
There was also an incident at 10 Downing Street, where the British prime minister's offices are located. Two police officers trained their guns on a man before leading him off the premises; his shirt was unbuttoned in the front.
Suggestions are being made that this may be a "copycat" style incident.
Yup, just another isolated incident.
Posted by: Vinnie at
11:32 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 147 words, total size 1 kb.
1
"Sky News TV reported that police were searching for a man with a blue shirt with wires protruding."
Protruding from where? Ouch!
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 07:18 AM (x+5JB)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Four minor explosions reported in London
Sketchy reports are coming in from London that several minor blast have occured one on a bus and the rest in outlying areas of the London tube system.
The BBC is reporting the exposions were detonators only and lack the exposives needed to cause heavy damage. However there was some panic and there are reports of people being trampled trying to evacuate. Also reports of men threatening to blow themselves up and one man reported running from one of the trains just after the like I said minor explosion. The windows on the upper deck of one bus were blown out. Some lines have been closed. This attack came about midday in London. This is a developing story. Guest posters feel free to update this thread I will check back about 12:00 cdt. Also so far one minor injury had been reported.
Also see this story from sky news which has some more details including that police were also using chemical protection suits. It's not known at this time if that was just a precaution or if there was some other reason. I'm sure as the day goes by we will have a better idea of what has occured in London. My support goes out to all Brits.
Update:
An initial chemical search of all four sites has proved negative sky news is reporting.
The BBC reports that:
"Tests for chemical, biological and radiological weapons proved negative".
Posted by: Howie at
08:21 AM
| Comments (25)
| Add Comment
Post contains 249 words, total size 2 kb.
1
CBS says armed police entered a hospital, thoughts being
that a bomber injured by a detonator explosion sought refuge
there.
MPS says this is a serious event.
Posted by: Tim at July 21, 2005 08:39 AM (OmwdG)
2
MPS confirms four bomb explosions or attempted bomb explosions.
BBC says man injured at Warrent Street station may in fact be a bomber.
Posted by: Tim at July 21, 2005 08:50 AM (OmwdG)
3
Wait, wait, don't tell me... it was the damned Amish again, right? No? Well, must've been the JOOOOOOOOS then.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 21, 2005 08:50 AM (0yYS2)
Posted by: Princess Kimberley at July 21, 2005 09:41 AM (LNA9X)
5
Stupid muslims have nothing better to do.These terrorists are very dangerous until they are caught and put in slammer,then they cry like cornered weasels.They blame it all on west,and dont even know that wahbbism was taught before Israel and the U.S were even in existence,morons,these ragheads are a blight on civilization.(notice how they hate U.S.-Britain but live freely in those places and attend our universities)damn suicidal morons.
Posted by: philo at July 21, 2005 09:50 AM (yzz1Z)
6
dave listens to elevator music, while awaiting Gregs new theory of innocent muslim lambs implicated by American/UK/Israel threeway psyops!
Posted by: dave at July 21, 2005 10:06 AM (DO6vD)
7
Threeway psyops? I get all humid just thinking about it... Ooh, be-have!
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 21, 2005 10:38 AM (0yYS2)
8
Note to Spain:
Notice the Brits have not raised their hands in surrender like you and the Frogs?
Liberals always surrender.
Posted by: Ob Snooks at July 21, 2005 10:43 AM (yBHNA)
9
Actually Ob, while many, if not most, Brits are liberals, they are still Brits, and Brits don't go down without a fight. Maybe they will finally start waking up to the awful reality of the 1984 existence they've been living.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 21, 2005 10:56 AM (0yYS2)
10
This job is too amateurish to be an al CIA da operation. Everyone calm down!
Posted by: greg at July 21, 2005 11:02 AM (3D/yw)
11
Oh but greg what if they just made it look crude to throw you off dude. Sorry I could not resist.
Posted by: Howie at July 21, 2005 11:16 AM (D3+20)
12
"Amateurs," maybe. But terrorism, nonetheless. Some may want to downplay this. Pakistan's President might have some good
advice.
Posted by: California Conservative at July 21, 2005 11:39 AM (cnO1R)
13
The libs in England consider themselves English First and degenerate libs second. Unlike the filthy French and Spanish.
Libs in America will surrender when the USA is finally attacked again. Kerry will want to negotiate and call for "understanding"....Same with Pelosi, Reid, Klinton and the rest of the loonie left.
Thank God for Bush and his giant swinging balls.
Posted by: Ob Snooks at July 21, 2005 11:54 AM (yBHNA)
14
Howie,
You made a very good point. Coming on the heals of 7/7, a minor 'attack' has a much bigger impact than it would have otherwise. I'm going to stick with my contention that 7/7 was a pysop and that today's attack was a coordinated 'reinforcing' psyop.
Posted by: greg at July 21, 2005 12:22 PM (3D/yw)
15
greg:
I would expect no less of you my conspiracy loving poster. Have a good one.
Posted by: Howie at July 21, 2005 12:31 PM (D3+20)
16
Howie,
There's more. Everything said about 7-7 is total bullshit. Same goes for 9-11. Please read the following two BBC articles.
I. UK boy wrongly labelled as bomber
The boy confused with London bomber Hasib Hussain
Evidence showing that all three of the London bombers of Pakistani descent visited Pakistan last year has been thrown into doubt.
A photograph of a passport purporting to show bomber Hasib Hussain was in fact that of a 16-year-old British boy with the same name.
"I first saw my photograph on Channel 4 [news] and I was terrified," the boy told ARY.
"I didn't want people looking at me saying, hey, you are supposed to be dead," he told ARY, "or someone saying that there goes the London bomber."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4704427.stm
This reminds me of 9-11. Four of the supposed hijackers are still alive and yet the FBI still shows the pictures of the 4 men. Please read the following BBC article.
II. "Hijack 'suspects' alive and well
Waleed Al Shehri left the US a year ago, he says
Another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in the suicide attacks on Washington and New York has turned up alive and well.
The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.
Saudi Arabian pilot Waleed Al Shehri was one of five men that the FBI said had deliberately crashed American Airlines flight 11 into the World Trade Centre on 11 September.
His photograph was released, and has since appeared in newspapers and on television around the world.
Hijacking suspects
Flight 175: Marwan Al-Shehhi, Fayez Ahmed, Mohald Alshehri, Hamza Alghamdi and Ahmed Alghamdi
Flight 11: Waleed M Alshehri, Wail Alshehri, Mohamed Atta, Abdulaziz Alomari and Satam Al Suqami
Flight 77: Khalid Al-Midhar, Majed Moqed, Nawaq Alhamzi, Salem Alhamzi and Hani Hanjour
Flight 93: Ahmed Alhaznawi, Ahmed Alnami, Ziad Jarrahi and Saeed Alghamdi
Now he is protesting his innocence from Casablanca, Morocco.
He told journalists there that he had nothing to do with the attacks on New York and Washington, and had been in Morocco when they happened. He has contacted both the Saudi and American authorities, according to Saudi press reports.
He acknowledges that he attended flight training school at Daytona Beach in the United States, and is indeed the same Waleed Al Shehri to whom the FBI has been referring.
But, he says, he left the United States in September last year, became a pilot with Saudi Arabian airlines and is currently on a further training course in Morocco."
read more at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm
Posted by: greg at July 21, 2005 12:41 PM (3D/yw)
17
Ahh shows that not everything is always right no doubts about Atta right?? Since parts of him were found in NYC on a rooftop. hell I can't tell one arab from another either. Especially by names.
Posted by: Howie at July 21, 2005 12:53 PM (D3+20)
18
ah that settles it then, it must have been a CIA/Israel op, including auto-piloted planes using remote control, demolition and Israeli spy "furniture movers".
Wait. Doesn't that detract from the fact that if the Government did the operation, they would already know exactly whom was supposed to have died, who to blame, and whom to "disappear"?
Posted by: dave at July 21, 2005 12:56 PM (DO6vD)
19
Howie:'Ahh shows that not everything is always right no doubts about Atta right?? Since parts of him were found in NYC on a rooftop.'
Howie,
You sure about that bro? That's news to me. Do you have a citation for that?
As I recall, by some miracle, Atta's passport was found in immaculate condition 2 blocks from ground zero. I'm so sure! Can you say 'planted evidence'?
Posted by: greg at July 21, 2005 03:52 PM (3D/yw)
20
I'm not sure about my own ass right now. I've been being attacked attempts to send me viruses or is that virusi hell I don't know. I'm about to stop ever talking to anyone ever.
Posted by: Howie at July 21, 2005 04:01 PM (D3+20)
21
Obsnooks/Filthy/Earl Dittman/Angry Blackman:'Thank God for Bush and his giant swinging balls.'
You've got to be joking. The guy let a male whore spend the night at the Whitehouse, over and over, so he could watch Laura getting long-stroked. Who knows, maybe he let '8 inch cut' fuck him up the ass. He's bicurious, just like you and Earl Dittman.
Clinton was a piece of shit, but at least he wasn't a fucking Homo.
Posted by: greg at July 21, 2005 04:05 PM (3D/yw)
22
Greg how did you know I've been you know staying at the white house. All I can say is like mother like daughters I like. Jealous ???
It's a joke people.
Posted by: Howie at July 21, 2005 08:14 PM (D3+20)
23
Howie,
I'd bitch pork her too.
Posted by: greg at July 22, 2005 05:17 AM (3D/yw)
24
Greg: Uh, when are confessions held again over there?
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 07:17 AM (x+5JB)
25
Greg the traitor who claims to be a good catholic is once again back to the liberal thing of butt fucking and such. True colors are hard to hide.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 24, 2005 05:37 PM (CBNGy)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
On 'It's Not only about Iraq'
Islamic terrorism is all because of Iraq, right? So, the problem is simple, the Islamists are only carrying out a troops-out movement, they're only demanding nothing more than a withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq and justice for the Palestinians?
If you buy this line, you must have never asked yourself "if Al Qaeda cares so much about Iraqi civilians then why is it killing so many of them, including children, through suicide bombings?" Or "why did the Madrid cell that staged last MarchÂ’s train bombings continue to plan attacks, even after SpainÂ’s new government had begun withdrawing from Iraq?" Why the bombing of a nightclub in Bali?
We conservatives should avoid hiding our heads in the sand and thinking that Iraq has nothing to do with terrorism, because it does. As Jonathan Freedland suggests in his article appearing in the Bahrain Tribune Daily, "Iraq’s connection to the London bombers is the obvious one: it has served to anger and radicalise a generation of young Muslims across the globe." However, Freedland reminds those that think it's all about Iraq, that "those who monitor Islamism in Britain say that the big surge in growth of extremist groups came not after 9/11 or Iraq but in the mid-1990s – with Bosnia serving as the recruiting sergeant. In the same period Chechnya, Kosovo and Israel-Palestine all came into play – again predating Iraq."
Iraq has been used as a rallying point for a plan that al-Qaeda was following with or without Iraq, and the terrorism was already occurring long before Iraq. All of us on both sides of the political spectrum need to recognize the role of Iraq in terrorism, but by no means is it all about Iraq. And damn it, there is never an excuse for terrorism in the mind of a rational human being. But, of course, we're not talking about rational human beings, we're talking about Islamofascists - Muslim extremists seeking to force all non-believers into submission under Islamic domination and rule, and under Islamic law.
From Freedland we are offered a credible explanation of what the Islamofascists are after, one that even the anti-war/anti-American mentor, Juan Cole, agrees with. Freedland suggests that "central to al-Qaeda's ideology is the "reint in Spain, Morocco, north Africa, Albania, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Middle East, as well as Pakistan, Indonesia and the Philippines." Al Qaeda' agenda predates and goes beyond Iraq. It seeks to end all western presence in those lands it deems Islamic, and place those lands "under Islamist rule as part of the yearned-for caliphate." It seeks to have all of these lands (perhaps only part of Spain), under the rule of Islamic law and the caliphate.
Rule all these lands under Islamic law and a long yearned-for caliphate? As Freedland concludes, "What it adds up to is a more mixed picture than either Blair (or the Bush administration) or the anti-war movement has allowed. Iraq has played a key part – of course it has – in angering large numbers of young Muslims, pulling them towards an extremist message once confined to the lunatic fringe. But that message is not only about Iraq, Afghanistan or even the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza – and we delude ourselves if we think it is."
But you say that Freedland is wrong, and the anti-war left is right, it's all about Iraq. So let's hear what Juan Cole, an anti-war mentor, a liberal Islamist-loving, anti-American, U of Michigan professor, has to say about the matter in the following excerpts from his piece, "Bin Laden's Vision Becoming Reality:"
more...
Posted by: Richard@hyscience at
07:31 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1253 words, total size 8 kb.
1
If Al- Quaeda loves the Irarqi people, why are they killing so many of them? Because they love them to death.
Posted by: DWC at July 21, 2005 08:20 AM (Suv/B)
2
Yeah, muslims are full of love like that.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 21, 2005 08:52 AM (0yYS2)
3
Even Juan Cole can get something right once in a while. However, his dissertation is done with all the passion of a wet towel. Just facts and data is how he sees it. He doesn't seem to understand that we don't want a f***ing caliphate. That's why we fight.
He comes from the same mold as so many people in one respect. That being - he secretly thinks that no matter what happens, somehow he'll fare better than others for his wit and cunning. Everyone who wishes for communist rule, a caliphate or any of those social ideas that are put forward by every kook with a pencil thinks that it won't be as bad as it most certainly will be.
Juan Cole hasn't told us anything that we don't already know or couldn't learn elsewhere from someone who truly
understands more than just
some historical fact. Someone who doesn't separate these facts from
human philosophical history. For to do so is irresponsible.
Posted by: Oyster at July 21, 2005 11:43 AM (fl6E1)
4
Wretchard at the Belmont Club discussed this issue and I have seen other discussions as well.
The war in Algeria had much of the same Muslim on Muslim violence, in fact IIRC it was the majority of the violence.
The terrorists are trying to show two things to Ali Ahmed Mohd Fahed Abdulla Al-Calamansi (i.e. Joe Sixpack). First the coalition and the emerging Iraqi government can not fulfill a government's first priority. The protection of the citizenry from violence.
The second is if you cooperate this is what happens to you.
Posted by: Marcus Aurelius at July 21, 2005 12:39 PM (6rdFl)
5
It is truly amazing how many people have an IQ lower then mayonnaise.
Does no one realize that the reason the United States was attacked, was because of stereotypes religious extremists had of the western culture. It was all about not having tolerance for other cultures.
And yet it this thread we see both stereotyping and intolerance. Suicide bombers and terrorists are not a representation of the Muslim religion. The shear ignorance of so many is mind blowing. Do you criticize the Catholic religion when a catholic physco murders someone? Does that mean all Catholics are murderers ... of course it doesn't ... just like when a Muslim extremist blows someone up it does not mean all Muslims are terrorists.
If you still don't get it yet ... you are truly lost.
Posted by: IamCanadian at July 21, 2005 03:29 PM (dbvnL)
6
"Suicide bombers and terrorists are not a representation of the Muslim religion. The shear ignorance of so many is mind blowing."
You're referring to Moslems, right?
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 22, 2005 07:59 AM (x+5JB)
7
IamCanadian: Well I see Canadians are still dumb asses. Everyone knows that all muslims are not terrorists. We also know that all terrorists are muslim. You ignorance is mind blowing. When the rag head bastards that Canada is mindlessly importing start blowing canada up then you Cannucks have a right to say something. Until then shut up and tell your army to continue to hide from the terrorists muslims in Iraq. America and the Brits will continue the fight for the nutless others.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 25, 2005 03:57 AM (CBNGy)
8
why are you so scared of a few men? shows whose got the balls huh?
Posted by: i c at October 18, 2005 07:27 PM (8GSpT)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
The Face On The Milk Carton
She doesn't know who she is...do you?
"Her name is Sophia Marleen Michl, she is now in Germany with her relatives."
Thanks Linda
Posted by: Vinnie at
03:54 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Her name is Sophia Marleen Michl, she is now in Germany with her relatives.
http://www.snopes.com/photos/tsunami/lostgirl.asp
Posted by: LindaSoG at July 21, 2005 05:15 AM (UMgGR)
2
Good news! What a precious little girl.
Posted by: Oyster at July 21, 2005 11:23 AM (fl6E1)
3
Yeah, good news. I thought it was Improbulus' daughter and sister.
Sorry, that was crass, even by my very low standards. But I hate that that Improbulus!
Posted by: greg at July 21, 2005 03:56 PM (3D/yw)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Egyptian Duplicity: Vacation Post
In the time it took to write this post, Egypt could have denided that it's citzens were involved in at least three acts of terror. Becaus as we all know, Egyptians never are involved in terrorism. Especially not al Qaeda linked terrorism.
Lying pieces of shit.
Posted by: Rusty at
02:03 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Suicide bombers are reprehensible bastards, ye they keep coming and coming. Atta's dad said he would "do everything within his power" to promote it. What the hell happened?
Posted by: Downing Street Memo at July 21, 2005 06:34 AM (ScqM8)
2
Uh, DSM, did you just wake up and realize that muslims are trying to kill innocent people for no other reason than their sick religion?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 21, 2005 08:54 AM (0yYS2)
3
Not news - "Uh, DSM, did you just wake up and realize that muslims are trying to kill innocent people for no other reason than their sick religion?"
They have been at it for 1,100 years, And Bill Clinton and Gen W.Clark helped them .
Posted by: Rod Stanton at July 21, 2005 10:59 AM (Z6yVb)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Jawa Vacation: Day 1-2
Hey all, I made it to
Kalifornia. It's still here. Seriously. All of it. The land of my birth.
Kalifornia, uber alles (ten points for any punk-rocker-wannabe who can succesfully differentiate the major difference between the first version of the song just alluded to and the later remake).
Last night was spent at a Holiday Inn Express. Very nice. The pool was great and the people even more so for not laughing at my pasty-white skin. And you know the best part about staying at your average middle-class motor-lodge?
No European banana-slings around the water!!
Seriously, don't ever stay at a Hostel in the summer. Ever. The only thing worse than a twenty year-old German in a speedo and Birks are a 40 year-old German in a speedo and Birks.
Oh, and the difference between your upscale urban hotel and the hostel? The 40 year old German in the speedo and Birks is actually pretty thin, has a pony-tail, and has recently been bikini waxed.
If you're a red-state American, it's safer to stick with your freeway accesible motor lodge.
more...
Posted by: Rusty at
01:59 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 417 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I heard that song sang by a country group in Sherman, TX. I can no longer see that song's title without laughing my ass off as a bunch of cowboys trying to rap.
Posted by: Chad Evans at July 21, 2005 02:32 AM (Ievlo)
2
Dead Kennedys
The first "California Uber Alles" was about Governor Jerry Brown (always smiles but never frowns)
The second was about Emperor Ronald Reagan.
The Tricky Dicky Screwdriver:
1 part Jack Daniels
2 parts Purple Kool-Aid
And a jigger of formaldehyde we got from the jar with Hitler's brain in it we got in the back storeroom.
Posted by: Mad Dog Vinnie at July 21, 2005 04:02 AM (Kr6/f)
3
Sounds like DK - Jello Biafra went on to rip the Bushes big time!
Biafra even attacked himself on stage.. that's dedication!
Posted by: Downing Street Memo at July 21, 2005 06:42 AM (ScqM8)
4
I've spoken with Jello, and he's an intelligent but paranoid bufoon.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 21, 2005 07:29 AM (x+5JB)
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 21, 2005 08:44 AM (x+5JB)
6
You stayed at a Holiday Inn while on vacation? Hell, that's as American as apple pie!
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 21, 2005 09:01 AM (0yYS2)
7
How many rightISH/neocon bloggers are former punk rock kids? Seems like the percentage is way up there. Have you seen Dr. Frank's weblog (MTX)? Not too shabby.
Posted by: slickdpdx at July 21, 2005 10:55 AM (MjGRu)
8
The first version was the Party song of the Socia-st Labor Party 70 years ago. Hoyta Deutchland Morgan Die Welt! I read MY STRUGGLE decades ago when and undergrad. Mien Deutch ist gut nicht!
Posted by: Rod Stanton at July 21, 2005 11:06 AM (Z6yVb)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
What's Wrong With THIS Picture?
DENVER (AP) - A few weeks ago, two police cars and two animal control vehicles pulled up at the home of Stef'ny Steffan looking for her beloved 4-year-old pit bull, Xena. Seven officers hauled the animal off to the city shelter, putting her on death row. Xena became an outlaw after Denver won a court fight and reinstated one of the toughest pit-bull bans in the nation.
Since May, more than 380 dogs have been impounded and at least 260 destroyed - an average of more than three a day.
Can you name another animal that's been known to kill humans, is hunted by the authorities, when caught is locked up, but, despite its viciousness, doesn't get the death penalty, unlike these dogs?
Yup, you guessed correctly. The Wild Jihadi.
Shouldn't the dogs get the ACLU lawyers and the terrorists get put to sleep?
(note: I have no opinion on the pit bull ban in Denver. I don't live there)
Post crossed at I Am A Shameless Link Whore er Vince Aut Morire
Posted by: Vinnie at
12:50 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 183 words, total size 1 kb.
1
When will the dog pound come for Bush?
Posted by: Downing Street Memo at July 21, 2005 06:32 AM (ScqM8)
2
just like pitbulls, Muslim terrorists are born to kill...they both are vicious animals that love to kill, maim, and cause as much pain as possible on the victim of their attack...only thing is at least a pitbull will attack you from any angle while the terrorist would rather try and sneak up from behind and the pitbull will hang on, even if you beat its ass with a bat, it hangs on till either you or it is dead.....beat the hell out of a Muslim and you have to listen to them whine about how you are abusing and oppresing them....i think both are usless animals with no true purpose on this planet but i have more pity for the dog since its only an animal being an animal...the Mulsims are humans acting like animals
Posted by: THANOS35 at July 21, 2005 07:03 AM (9gFP6)
3
How about we send the ACLU to the gas chamber also.
Posted by: Improbuilus Maximus at July 21, 2005 09:05 AM (0yYS2)
4
American bull terriers are a dog and just that a dog. Actually shepherds bite more people. The problem is when some idiot gets one. Yes the dogs are intelligent and have a natural territorial and protective instinct. They work to please their master at all times. You don't need to "make it mean". In fact the worst thing you can do is put it on a chain and forget it. I've seen both extremes. Wonderful dogs that would never hurt a fly unless you like smack the master. Then you have a problem. Also I've seen ones that were just ruined. My advice love the dog like a child and teach it to obey not to attack. The dog itself is no problem they only do what they think the master wants. Kill the master. F@cking retards. A good bulldog will protect you at all times even if raised to be a big baby. they demand constant attention and love. If you do these things yo will have the best damn dog you ever had. let it sleep with you and never ever ever tease it. Play with the dog at least one hour a day and never use a chain.
Posted by: Howie at July 21, 2005 10:35 AM (D3+20)
5
A leash is fine even a choker if you need to for walks and trips to the vet. It takes about 2 minutes to train a good bulldog they are smarter than most people.
Posted by: Howie at July 21, 2005 10:37 AM (D3+20)
6
Howie: I have a wonderful Pitbull named Rocky. The people I purchased it from when a pup were dog fighters. I will not get into my thoughts on them. Area I live in has so many pits its actually dangerous. Not because of the dogs put because the people let them run loose at times.
Anyway, when I got Rocky everyone said he was too hot bred to ever be trusted around another dog, hog, cow, etc: How wrong they were. Rocky sleeps at my feet. Stays outside with my three other dogs and two cats all day. I have cattle, goats and hogs. Rocky and my other dogs will protect my livestock and my neighbors. As long as other dogs don't bother by animals Rocky doesn't bother them. He loves kids but is too strong for little ones. He will attack on command and he goes hog hunting with us every year.
You are so right. It's how you raise them. Rocky has never been chained or penned. He bullys my other dogs with stares even though they are much bigger than he. I think he knows he is king because he comes in at night.
In Slidell, La. It is now against the law to own a pit bull, American bulldog, Staffashire terrier, German Shepard, Doberman, Rockweiler, mastiff,etc:, etc: because people just didn't care for them correctly. A shame but they had many dog attacks. Mostly, from Dobermans, German Sheperds. But the damage from a pit bull is much worse as he doesn't stop. I love my pit but will not get another one when Rocky passes as now the insurance people are getting involved. Insurance companies want you to put your dogs and swimming pool in a ugly kennel. My experience with Rocky has been great.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 22, 2005 10:58 PM (CBNGy)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
175kb generated in CPU 0.1012, elapsed 0.3292 seconds.
136 queries taking 0.2747 seconds, 512 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.