Al Qaeda in Iraq leader reportedly arrested

[Doomsday101]

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- The leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, was arrested in the northern city of Mosul, the Iraqi Defense Ministry spokesman said Thursday

CNN is working to confirm the information.

Mohammed al-Askari said the arrest of al-Masri, also known as Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, was confirmed to him by the Iraqi commander of the province. There was no immediate confirmation or comment from U.S. forces.

News of the arrest was also reported by Iraqi state television.

"The commander of Ninevah military operations informed me that Iraqi troops captured Abu Hamza al-Muhajir the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq," al-Askari told The Associated Press by telephone.

He did not have any further details nor did he say when the al Qaeda leader was arrested. According to unconfirmed reports, however, he was caught Thursday evening in the Tayran area in central Mosul, 225 miles northwest of Baghdad. Mosul is currently a major battleground for U.S. forces and al Qaeda.

Al-Masri took over al Qaeda in Iraq after Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed June 7, 2006 in a U.S. airstrike northeast of Baghdad.

U.S. officials said al-Masri joined an extremist group led by al Qaeda's No.2 official. He later joined al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan in 1999 and trained as a car bombing expert before traveling to Iraq after the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

[Dallas]

They will just promote his cousin/aunt/sister/burro.

Killing and arresting the leaders of these terror groups isn't going to stop much.

Still.....please continue to kill/arrest/blow them up.


Thank you

[Doomsday101]

They will just promote his cousin/aunt/sister/burro.

Killing and arresting the leaders of these terror groups isn't going to stop much.

Still.....pleae continue to kill/arrest/blow them up.


Thank you

Seeing that it was Iraqi troops who took him down is the best thing. I think many want to see Iraqi troops and their government taking on these roles more and more.

[Dallas]

Seeing that it was Iraqi troops who took him down is the best thing. I think many want to see Iraqi troops and their government taking on these roles more and more.


Very good point.

[iceberg]

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- The leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, was arrested in the northern city of Mosul, the Iraqi Defense Ministry spokesman said Thursday

CNN is working to confirm the information.

Mohammed al-Askari said the arrest of al-Masri, also known as Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, was confirmed to him by the Iraqi commander of the province. There was no immediate confirmation or comment from U.S. forces.

News of the arrest was also reported by Iraqi state television.

"The commander of Ninevah military operations informed me that Iraqi troops captured Abu Hamza al-Muhajir the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq," al-Askari told The Associated Press by telephone.

He did not have any further details nor did he say when the al Qaeda leader was arrested. According to unconfirmed reports, however, he was caught Thursday evening in the Tayran area in central Mosul, 225 miles northwest of Baghdad. Mosul is currently a major battleground for U.S. forces and al Qaeda.

Al-Masri took over al Qaeda in Iraq after Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed June 7, 2006 in a U.S. airstrike northeast of Baghdad.

U.S. officials said al-Masri joined an extremist group led by al Qaeda's No.2 official. He later joined al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan in 1999 and trained as a car bombing expert before traveling to Iraq after the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

and please ensure we move him to a penthouse suite in downtown boston close to his local Mosque. also ensure we give him plenty of government funded credit cards of which he's free to use as he pleases and that there are fresh rose petals in the bathroom at the start of every morning. make sure there is full internet connectivity at least of the FIOS stature and that he has (2) laptops and (2) desktops for his convenience, 1 desktop hooked to his home theater system we provide.

i'd hate for people to think we don't care about our prisoners.

[iceberg]

Seeing that it was Iraqi troops who took him down is the best thing. I think many want to see Iraqi troops and their government taking on these roles more and more.

Very good point.

since it was iraqi troops, our work is paying off and they're getting the hang of this. as soon as they do we can start coming home. it's that simple despite the politics and agendas.

[Vintage]

They will just promote his cousin/aunt/sister/burro.

Killing and arresting the leaders of these terror groups isn't going to stop much.

Still.....please continue to kill/arrest/blow them up.


Thank you

True. Which is why we also have to continue to seize assets/freeze bank accounts, etc....

And we do have to continue to work on our soft power. If we can get the disenfranchised on our side, it will destroy a lot of their recruiting power. One of the reasons why I believe dissolving the Iraqi army like we did was a bad idea. Left many jobless, and truly gave the impression we are an occupying force; not a liberating force.

Nothing we can do about that now... but it is worth keeping in mind so we don't repeat mistakes.

Disrupt their assets/funding, disrupt their organization, and disrupt their ability to recruit. All 3 are vital.

[iceberg]

True. Which is why we also have to continue to seize assets/freeze bank accounts, etc....

And we do have to continue to work on our soft power. If we can get the disenfranchised on our side, it will destroy a lot of their recruiting power. One of the reasons why I believe dissolving the Iraqi army like we did was a bad idea. Left many jobless, and truly gave the impression we are an occupying force; not a liberating force.

Nothing we can do about that now... but it is worth keeping in mind so we don't repeat mistakes.

Disrupt their assets/funding, disrupt their organization, and disrupt their ability to recruit. All 3 are vital.

very good point we continue to overlook.

[Brandon]

They will just promote his cousin/aunt/sister/burro.

Killing and arresting the leaders of these terror groups isn't going to stop much.

Still.....please continue to kill/arrest/blow them up.


Thank you

Terrorism will always be around, there is no point. al Qaeda are terrorists and our president is a terrorist.

[Vintage]

Terrorism will always be around, there is no point. al Qaeda are terrorists and our president is a terrorist.

Terrorism will ALWAYS be around. I agree.

But you can do things to severely impact their ability to carry out attacks. As I said... the two most important factors in fighting terrorists is curtail their sources of income and curtail their ability to recruit.

You do that by seizing assets/freezing accounts, etc.

And you do the other half by going after the same people the terrorists target: the disenfranchised.

We've done a good job of going after assets/freezing accounts. I think we've done a pretty poor job in our use of soft power to reach out to potential terrorist recruits.

[trickblue]

Terrorism will always be around, there is no point. al Qaeda are terrorists and our president is a terrorist.

:rolleyes:

[Dallas]

:rolleyes:


Elvis is everywhere.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Elvis is everywhere.

I swear I once saw Elvis working at a Burger King in Ft. Polk.

Only thing was, Elvis had a sex change.:laugh2:

Seriously this woman looked like Elvis. I would get my order and say..thank you, thank you very much.:laugh2:

[Dallas]

I swear I once saw Elvis working at a Burger King in Ft. Polk.

Only thing was, Elvis had a sex change.:laugh2:

Seriously this woman looked like Elvis. I would get my order and say..thank you, thank you very much.:laugh2:

So you are saying she left you ..............all shook up?


...ah hu hu! :p:

[BrAinPaiNt]

So you are saying she left you ..............all shook up?


...ah hu hu! :p:

I had a woman, way cross post, that was good to me, oh oh ya
She gave me burgers, when I was Hungry, she gave fries to eat as well

:laugh2:

[big dog cowboy]

I swear I once saw Elvis working at a Burger King in Ft. Polk.

Only thing was, Elvis had a sex change.:laugh2:

Seriously this woman looked like Elvis. I would get my order and say..thank you, thank you very much.:laugh2:
Oh snap!

:lmao:

[iceberg]

Terrorism will always be around, there is no point. al Qaeda are terrorists and our president is a terrorist.

really? did i miss him shout A JIHAD ON YOU!!! and lop off a head with a spoon cause it would hurt more?

[kristie]

I swear I once saw Elvis working at a Burger King in Ft. Polk.

Only thing was, Elvis had a sex change.:laugh2:

Seriously this woman looked like Elvis. I would get my order and say..thank you, thank you very much.:laugh2:

:lmao:

[Jordan55]

No confirmation as of yet, Can we waterboard him, Can we, Can we! :)

Abu Ayyub al Masri, al Qaeda in Iraq’s leader, reported captured in Mosul
By Bill RoggioMay 8, 2008 5:03 PM



The Iraqi military claimed Abu Ayyub al Masri, al Qaeda in Iraq’s leader, has been captured in the northern city of Mosul in Ninewa province. The US military has not confirmed the report of al Masri’s capture. Al Masri's capture would provide a potential intelligence boon on al Qaeda's network in Iraq and its connections to the international organization.

Defense Ministry spokesman Mohammed al Askari said al Masri’s capture was “confirmed to him by the Iraqi commander of the province,” The Associated Press reported. The person believed to be al Masri has been transferred to US custody for identification, according to Askari. Al Masri’s capture was also announced on Iraqiya Television, the state-run TV network, AP reported.

The Iraqi government has a history of announcing the capture of senior al Qaeda leaders, only to have to retract the statements. The Iraqi government had made several claims of wounding, killing and capturing both al Masri and Abu Omar al Baghdadi, the fictitious leader of al Qaeda’s Islamic State of Iraq, several times during 2007. The reports turned out to be false or cases of mistaken identity.

Al Qaeda in Mosul

Al Qaeda’s senior leadership is thought to be attempting to regroup in Mosul. US and Iraqi forces have killed several key al Qaeda leaders in Mosul over the past several months. Fourteen of the top 30 al Qaeda operatives who have been killed or captured in the past three months were al Qaeda leaders in Mosul, including three al Qaeda leaders from Saudi Arabia.

Al Qaeda in Iraq's last major ratline into Syria spans westward from Mosul into Tal Afar and the crossing point at Sinjar. The terror group is waging a brutal campaign to prevent the Iraqi Army and US forces from securing the province.


A map of al Qaeda's vision of the Islamic State of Iraq, taken from an al Qaeda video.

Background on al Masri’s rise to power and his Islamic State of Iraq

Al Masri was appointed the leader of the terror group in the summer of 2006 after US forces killed Abu Musab al Zarqawi, the infamous leader and founder of al Qaeda in Iraq. He quickly worked to undo the failures of Zarqawi, and attempted to unite the disparate Sunni insurgent groups and the Sunni tribes in the Sunni-dominated province. Zawahiri urged Zarqawi to "Iraqify the insurgency," but was ignored.

A close confidant of Ayman al Zawahiri, al Qaeda’s second in command, al Masri was a member of Egyptian Islamic Jihad, the group that folded into al Qaeda under Zawahiri’s leadership. Egyptian Islamic Jihad is a core element of al Qaeda and includes many former members of the Egyptian military.

Al Masri is officially listed as the minister of defense for the Islamic State of Iraq, according to a press release put out by the terror group in April 2007. But over the summer of 2007, it became known the Islamic State of Iraq was the invention of al Masri, who serves as the emir, or leader, of the group. Abu Omar al Baghdadi is actually a fictional character played by an Iraqi actor named Abu Abdullah al Naima. This information was revealed after the capture of Abu Muhammad al Mashadani, the former minister of information for the Islamic State of Iraq. Recently, an Iraqi police leader in Hadithah claimed Baghdadi was actually a former officer in Saddam Hussein’s army.

Al Qaeda established the Islamic State of Iraq in October of 2006 to put an Iraqi face on al Qaeda's operations in Iraq and unite the Sunni disparate elements of the insurgency. Al Qaeda claimed the Islamic State of Iraq comprises “Baghdad, Anbar, Diyala, Kirkuk, Salah al-Din, Ninawa, and ... other parts of the governorate of Babel.” The declaration of the Sunni Islamic State of Iraq followed the creation of the "Mutayibeen Coalition," which included six Anbar tribes, as well as three smaller insurgent groups. In mid-April 2007, Baghdadi named the ministers of the cabinet of the rump Islamic State of Iraq.

[sacase]

They will just promote his cousin/aunt/sister/burro.

Killing and arresting the leaders of these terror groups isn't going to stop much.

Still.....please continue to kill/arrest/blow them up.


Thank you

Yeah they can promote someone else, but they are not as competent as the guy capture or kill, so it makes them less efficent.

Props to the Iraqi's, they are finally "getting it"

[Cajuncowboy]

and please ensure we move him to a penthouse suite in downtown boston close to his local Mosque. also ensure we give him plenty of government funded credit cards of which he's free to use as he pleases and that there are fresh rose petals in the bathroom at the start of every morning. make sure there is full internet connectivity at least of the FIOS stature and that he has (2) laptops and (2) desktops for his convenience, 1 desktop hooked to his home theater system we provide.

i'd hate for people to think we don't care about our prisoners.

That must be in the Geneva convention.

:lmao2:

[Cajuncowboy]

Terrorism will always be around, there is no point. al Qaeda are terrorists and our president is a terrorist.

I agree.
Why kill the killers? I mean, that would be wrong. They should be allowed to run a muck. :rolleyes:

As for the last part of this ignorant statement.....

More proof that anyone, regardless of IQ, can have their voice heard.

[iceberg]

That must be in the Geneva convention.

:lmao2:

rest assured i don't want this war.

but i won't lose because it's not PC.

[Cajuncowboy]

rest assured i don't want this war.

but i won't lose because it's not PC.

I don't think anyone "wanted" this war. It's a case of it was thrust upon us by those that would harm us.

And The PC crowd would have us lose it if given the chance.

[burmafrd]

The real joke is that the PC crowd would be the next ones executed if the Jihad boys take over. Right after all those that fought them.

[Cajuncowboy]

The real joke is that the PC crowd would be the next ones executed if the Jihad boys take over. Right after all those that fought them.

So are you saying there is good in everyone???

[Jordan55]

The sad news, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, was not captured he still runs amuck among the masses, Hell I wanted to waterboard him before they outlaw it.

[BrAinPaiNt]

I don't think anyone "wanted" this war. It's a case of it was thrust upon us by those that would harm us.

And The PC crowd would have us lose it if given the chance.

No you are mistaken. People WANTED this Iraq war. That had nothing to do with 9/11 and going into Afghanistan.

[BrAinPaiNt]

The real joke is that the PC crowd would be the next ones executed if the Jihad boys take over. Right after all those that fought them.

The real joke is that you actually think the Jihad boys would actually take over the US.

Please.

[burmafrd]

No the real joke is Brain that you are completely oblivious to the threat they are. Just like most Libs it will probably take a bomb right in your home town for you to Get It.

[iceberg]

No the real joke is Brain that you are completely oblivious to the threat they are. Just like most Libs it will probably take a bomb right in your home town for you to Get It.

and you call others extreme and forceful in their nature.

bp is far from a "lib" and you'd know that if stereotypes weren't your main way of classifying people.

[BrAinPaiNt]

No the real joke is Brain that you are completely oblivious to the threat they are. Just like most Libs it will probably take a bomb right in your home town for you to Get It.

Jihad will never TAKE OVER the USA...they may attack it, they may hate it, they may try many things, but they will never TAKE OVER the US.

Either you are being silly or you just did not read the part I was replying to.

Thanks for playing.

[Jordan55]

Jihad will never TAKE OVER the USA...they may attack it, they may hate it, they may try many things, but they will never TAKE OVER the US.

Either you are being silly or you just did not read the part I was replying to.

Thanks for playing.

At this point, the threat is more the population south of border over running us, just joking!
But it's good to know that the good ole boys from West Virginia have the country's back.
The concern is not the jihadist taking over the country it's more the loss of innocent life that's at risk from an attack to everyday civilians using their barbaric means, I was actually at a military base the other day and the security was unbelievably tight, which it should be, but I'm thinking to myself.
Why would they bother to try to attack a military base, when they could cause more of an impact by hitting soft targets.
I believe Iraq, has shown they have no consideration for innocent people caught up in their qwest for jihad.

[BrAinPaiNt]

At this point, the threat is more the population south of border over running us, just joking!
But it's good to know that the good ole boys from West Virginia have the country's back.
The concern is not the jihadist taking over the country it's more the loss of innocent life that's at risk from an attack to everyday civilians using their barbaric means, I was actually at a military base the other day and the security was unbelievably tight, which it should be, but I'm thinking to myself.
Why would they bother to try to attack a military base, when they could cause more of an impact by hitting soft targets.
I believe Iraq, has shown they have no consideration for innocent people caught up in their qwest for jihad.

Ah but once again...I responded to his comment that they would take over...which is not going to happen. Did not say they would not attack or other things.

This is how people go to the extremes with things...they take the threat of attack and than grossly exaggerate to the fear tactics of they are going to take over.

Not buying it and not going to let that fly.

[burmafrd]

Maybe you ought to talk to the Romans about the Vandals and the Huns, etc. They never thought that these barbarians would beat them.
Those that forget history are doomed to repeat the mistakes.
Certainly its very unlikely- but for anyone to say its impossible is just plain STUPID.

[silverbear]

No the real joke is Brain that you are completely oblivious to the threat they are. Just like most Libs it will probably take a bomb right in your home town for you to Get It.

"Liberals are ALWAYS complaining."-- burmafraud

More complaints, burm??

[silverbear]

Maybe you ought to talk to the Romans about the Vandals and the Huns, etc. They never thought that these barbarians would beat them.
Those that forget history are doomed to repeat the mistakes.

You mean, the way we ignored the history of Vietnam, and invaded Iraq??

[Jordan55]

You mean, the way we ignored the history of Vietnam, and invaded Iraq??

If you want to make a comparison


May 1st, 2008 by Bruno Behrend
…it seems to be an act of wishful thinking


Democrats and the Killing Fields

Actually, the U.S. had won the war in Vietnam on the battlefield, just as the surge has done today in Iraq. Over Easter 1972, South Vietnamese forces, backed by U.S. airpower, crushed the last communist offensive, killing nearly 100,000 North Vietnamese troops.

The North was forced to sign peace accords in Paris recognizing the Republic of South Vietnam. The last 2,500 U.S. support troops went home. What they left was a fragile but sustainable peace, and an elected government in Saigon that was growing stronger every month.

But with 160,000 North Vietnamese soldiers still in South Vietnam, keeping the South free was going to require continued U.S. help, especially air support and military equipment if the North ever attacked again.

Democrats and American public opinion, however, had had enough. Much like Iraq today, the vast majority of South Vietnam had been pacified. Its government was taking on difficult but essential political changes, including land reform. The Democratic-controlled Congress, however, did not want to hear about success. They assumed failure in Vietnam would complete their rout of the hated Richard Nixon, who was already out of office thanks to Watergate, and position them for victory in the 1976 presidential election.

Meanwhile, the American public had been conditioned by the media to see Vietnam as a failed policy, and taught that America had gotten itself in the middle of a “civil war” which the Vietnamese had to sort out themselves. Once the last American troops left Vietnam, public opinion would never tolerate re-entry into a war widely seen as a blunder and endless quagmire.

In early 1975 the communists launched a massive attack. President Gerald Ford asked for $1 billion in supplemental funds to help the South Vietnamese, and Congress refused. They had already pulled the plug on the U.S.-supported government of Lon Nol in Cambodia. Ford had no choice but to order the evacuation of remaining U.S. personnel.

The article goes on to chronicle the loss of life and freedom that might have been averted if we just kept our promise of air support and supplies to South Vietnam. Some one needs to ask Barack Obama why he wants us to fail in Iraq. If he argues that we already have failed, at least we will have an honest debate on that point. If he loses that debate, and continues to argue for withdrawal before Iraq is stable enough, he needs to be asked again…

“Why do you want the US to fail in Iraq?”

Most Democrats are patriotic Americans who have different ideas than Republicans as to what is best for Americans. That is what politics is all about.

Some other Democrats and members of the left hate America with a passion, and want this nation to fail in most of its endeavors. Given Obama’s fellow travelers (Wright, Dohrn, Ayers, Farrakan, San Fran. funders, etc. etc.), it is fair to question which side he falls on.

I believe this article hits home:hammer:

[Jordan55]

Bear, Huffington's post is reporting that McCain, did not vote for Bush in 2000,
This might help in your voting process.:)

[silverbear]

If you want to make a comparison


May 1st, 2008 by Bruno Behrend
…it seems to be an act of wishful thinking


Democrats and the Killing Fields

Actually, the U.S. had won the war in Vietnam on the battlefield, just as the surge has done today in Iraq. Over Easter 1972, South Vietnamese forces, backed by U.S. airpower, crushed the last communist offensive, killing nearly 100,000 North Vietnamese troops.

The North was forced to sign peace accords in Paris recognizing the Republic of South Vietnam. The last 2,500 U.S. support troops went home. What they left was a fragile but sustainable peace, and an elected government in Saigon that was growing stronger every month.

But with 160,000 North Vietnamese soldiers still in South Vietnam, keeping the South free was going to require continued U.S. help, especially air support and military equipment if the North ever attacked again.

Democrats and American public opinion, however, had had enough. Much like Iraq today, the vast majority of South Vietnam had been pacified. Its government was taking on difficult but essential political changes, including land reform. The Democratic-controlled Congress, however, did not want to hear about success. They assumed failure in Vietnam would complete their rout of the hated Richard Nixon, who was already out of office thanks to Watergate, and position them for victory in the 1976 presidential election.

Meanwhile, the American public had been conditioned by the media to see Vietnam as a failed policy, and taught that America had gotten itself in the middle of a “civil war” which the Vietnamese had to sort out themselves. Once the last American troops left Vietnam, public opinion would never tolerate re-entry into a war widely seen as a blunder and endless quagmire.

In early 1975 the communists launched a massive attack. President Gerald Ford asked for $1 billion in supplemental funds to help the South Vietnamese, and Congress refused. They had already pulled the plug on the U.S.-supported government of Lon Nol in Cambodia. Ford had no choice but to order the evacuation of remaining U.S. personnel.

The article goes on to chronicle the loss of life and freedom that might have been averted if we just kept our promise of air support and supplies to South Vietnam. Some one needs to ask Barack Obama why he wants us to fail in Iraq. If he argues that we already have failed, at least we will have an honest debate on that point. If he loses that debate, and continues to argue for withdrawal before Iraq is stable enough, he needs to be asked again…

“Why do you want the US to fail in Iraq?”

Most Democrats are patriotic Americans who have different ideas than Republicans as to what is best for Americans. That is what politics is all about.

Some other Democrats and members of the left hate America with a passion, and want this nation to fail in most of its endeavors. Given Obama’s fellow travelers (Wright, Dohrn, Ayers, Farrakan, San Fran. funders, etc. etc.), it is fair to question which side he falls on.

I believe this article hits home:hammer:

You would...

Now, shall we tell the folks what the author is all about??

Here's a coupla paragraphs from a piece he wrote just today, that appears on the oxymoronically titled website "Extreme Wisdom"...

In the recent dust up between the Obama and McCain campaigns, the Obama camp howled about McCain’s assertion that Hamas wanted Obama to win, while the McCain camp complained about Obama’s use of the words “lost his bearings.” McCain, ever the gentlemen, graciously announced that he didn’t mind Obama losing elderly votes (which he will, based on that comment).

Of course, McCain’s assertion that Hamas wants Obama to win is now proven 100% true, as another Democrat gets the heave ho from a campaign for exposing the truth about allied interests. Obama was stupid, McCain was right.

Yeah, McCain is "ever the gentleman"... he has never, EVER been known to go off like a Roman candle... and of course "Obama was stupid" reveals exactly where this moron is coming from... he goes on to say:

Barack Obama’s Administration - should it come into existence - will be the most overtly “anti-American” administration in our history

Even the worst slack-jawed zealot that posts in here has never gone so far as to accuse Obama of being "anti-American"...

Of course, there's more of the same CRAP in the article you cite, and his revisionist history is quite laughable... yeah, we were "winning the war"... SURE we were... even he admits that at the time of the Paris peace accords, there were 160 THOUSAND North Vietnamese troops still in South Vietnam...

WOW, what a "victory"...

[silverbear]

Bear, Huffington's post is reporting that McCain, did not vote for Bush in 2000,
This might help in your voting process.:)

Except McCain denies that...

I must say, it's surprising that you're familiar with anything being reported on the HuffPo... you must have read some critical article about that piece on one of your favorite right wing websites...

One good thing comes from arguing with you righties, especially guys like you who cite articles to try to bolster your arguments... in the course of researching the claims you guys make, the backgrounds of the authors you cite, I get taken to some of the MOST fascinating websites...

Sick, but fascinating... Behrend is a first class nut job, and I sincerely hope you take everything that whacko says with a large grain of salt...

Other interesting little tidbits about your whack job author--

For a time, he worked for the notoriously conservative Hearland Institute as a "policy analyst"... the Heartland Institute has among its board of directors executives from ExxonMobil, Phillip Morris and General Motors... these are the organizations that largely finance the Institute...

This is the same organization that published a list of 500 scientists that it claimed disagreed with doubts about the reality of global warming... to date, at least 45 of the scientists listed have publicly stated that they did not know their names were on this list, and DISAGREED with the premise... some demanded to have their names taken off, and the Heartland Institute refused...

This gives you some idea of the intellectual integrity of that so-called "think tank", and anybody associated with it... their list is a fraud, plain and simple, but some folks like you on the right STILL cite it in arguments against the global warming crowd...

And I'm supposed to take the opinions of a guy who comes from this little cabal seriously?? I wouldn't trust him if he told me the sun was gonna come up in the morning...

You really ought to take a close look at the people whose opinions you apparently value, Jordan...

[silverbear]

Bear, Huffington's post is reporting that McCain, did not vote for Bush in 2000,
This might help in your voting process.:)

More seriously, Jordan, I've said before that I could easily vote for McCain, but for his ongoing, vigorous defense of the Iraq war... I don't agree with all of his other positions, but none of them really bother me... and balancing that out, I do believe him to be a man of integrity (an opinion tempered but not changed by his involvement in the long-ago Keating Five scandal) and decency...

But if we put McCain in office, the Iraq war will continue indefinitely, more thousands of our troops will die, for NOTHING... and we'll continue to go a**hole deep in debt trying to pay for this futile effort... so nope, until and unless he does a 180 on Iraq, I can't vote for him...

At the same time, if he does get elected, I won't be angry, the way I was when Dubya was reelected... I'm not that wild about Obama, anyway, he just happens to be on the right side (IMO) on the subject of the Iraq war...

[sacase]

Jihad will never TAKE OVER the USA...they may attack it, they may hate it, they may try many things, but they will never TAKE OVER the US.

Either you are being silly or you just did not read the part I was replying to.

Thanks for playing.

You might want to take a look around and see how much the Islam has increased in the US and the world in the last 10 years. Muslim extreamist present a significant threat to the US.

[SuspectCorner]

You might want to take a look around and see how much the Islam has increased in the US and the world in the last 10 years. Muslim extreamist present a significant threat to the US.

1) immigration has been a huge part of our country's heritage - a constant


2) Islam is the second largest religion in the world - and the fastest growing


3) Muslim extremists present a threat to the US


But to suggest that this should add up to - The US faces the likelihood of a domestic Jihad... is pretty silly.

Extremists account for a small percentage of the world's Muslims. You can say the same thing about any other major religion.

[sacase]

Look at what has happend to france and other european countries, they are beginning to have a signifiant percentage of their population shift towards muslim and it is causing serious problems.

[SuspectCorner]

Look at what has happend to france and other european countries, they are beginning to have a signifiant percentage of their population shift towards muslim and it is causing serious problems.

Interested... please provide links.

[SuspectCorner]

Hmmmm.... no links.

I guess I can now safely assume that Rumorsville is several towns back...