PDA

View Full Version : Nat'l Security Ground Zero Imam Says U.S. Worse than al-Qaeda


petegz28
08-23-2010, 06:06 PM
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=38673


:facepalm:

HonestChieffan
08-23-2010, 06:21 PM
you racist

orange
08-23-2010, 07:09 PM
:facepalm:

So you're saying we haven't killed any Muslims?

petegz28
08-23-2010, 07:23 PM
So you're saying we haven't killed any Muslims?

JFC, Orange, don't be an idiot. How many of us have have died protecting Muslims? How many Muslims have died protecting us?

Oucho Cinco
08-23-2010, 07:24 PM
So you're saying we haven't killed any Muslims?

How many has aq killed? How many died during the insurgent attacks? How many killed themselves?

Personally I don't think comparing the numbers is valid. They kill indiscriminately and we attempt to target enemy combatants.

We are not trying to end their lifestyle but are trying to maintain our way of life.

orange
08-23-2010, 07:34 PM
We are not trying to end their lifestyle but are trying to maintain our way of life.

Over there...


I'm guessing a lot of them don't understand why we're "trying to maintain our way of life" over there...

Which is the Imam's point.

stevieray
08-23-2010, 07:37 PM
Over there...


I'm guessing a lot of them don't understand why we're "trying to maintain our way of life" over there...

Which is the Imam's point.

while they maintain and further their way of life over here?

Brainiac
08-23-2010, 07:43 PM
So you're saying we haven't killed any Muslims?

So you're saying the US is worse than Al-Quaida?

orange
08-23-2010, 07:47 PM
So you're saying the US is worse than Al-Quaida?

No - and neither did the Imam, despite the lying thread title.


"We tend to forget, in the West, that the United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than al-Qaeda has on its hands of innocent non Muslims,"


You doubt that? We've killed hundreds of thousands in Iraq alone. al-Qaeda can't touch that.

BigMeatballDave
08-23-2010, 07:48 PM
So you're saying we haven't killed any Muslims?JFC You obtuse motherfucker. You cannot be this dense. :rolleyes:

orange
08-23-2010, 07:50 PM
JFC You obtuse mother****er. You cannot be this dense. :rolleyes:

No, YOU'RE the obtuse mother****er. Answer the simple question - have we killed any Muslims in the Middle East? Or are you too dense?

BigMeatballDave
08-23-2010, 07:52 PM
No, YOU'RE the obtuse mother****er. Answer the simple question - have we killed any Muslims in the Middle East? Or are you too dense?You're splitting hairs, assbag.

petegz28
08-23-2010, 07:52 PM
No - and neither did the Imam, despite the lying thread title.


"We tend to forget, in the West, that the United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than al-Qaeda has on its hands of innocent non Muslims,"


You doubt that? We've killed hundreds of thousands in Iraq alone. al-Qaeda can't touch that.

We've killed 100's of 1'000's in Iraq? You're full of shit. We aren't the ones popping off IED's in markets and etc. We actually helped the fuckers attacking us now in the 80's when the Russians were trying to take them over. You're out of your fucking skull.

Hog Farmer
08-23-2010, 07:57 PM
I learned every single thing I need to know about Al Qaeda, Islam and Muslims on September 11th 2001

BigMeatballDave
08-23-2010, 08:01 PM
I learned every single thing I need to know about Al Qaeda, Islam and Muslims on September 11th 2001While I get what you're saying, I can't lump in all Muslims with Al Qaeda.

Oucho Cinco
08-23-2010, 08:04 PM
Over there...


I'm guessing a lot of them don't understand why we're "trying to maintain our way of life" over there...

Which is the Imam's point.

I guess you don't remember the warning that the president gave those that harbored or funded the terrorists? We are coming, if I remember correctly. It's just too bad we couldn't go for all of the terrorists that were involved with the attacks on the U.S. And if I remember the time line correctly they attacked us first and claimed their holy jihad.

What were they doing here on 9/11? Just a Tuesday outing?

Hog Farmer
08-23-2010, 08:04 PM
While I get what you're saying, I can't lump in all Muslims with Al Qaeda.

You might as well, they all read the same friggin book !

Oucho Cinco
08-23-2010, 08:06 PM
No - and neither did the Imam, despite the lying thread title.

"We tend to forget, in the West, that the United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than al-Qaeda has on its hands of innocent non Muslims,"
You doubt that? We've killed hundreds of thousands in Iraq alone. al-Qaeda can't touch that.

We have killed hundreds of thousands in Iraq? I need some links with evidence of the numbers. We did not go in and kill indiscriminately as they have done all over the globe.

chiefsnorth
08-23-2010, 08:08 PM
So you're saying we haven't killed any Muslims?

God damn America, eh Rev.?

Saul Good
08-23-2010, 08:10 PM
Why do people accuse liberals of supporting the enemy?

orange
08-23-2010, 08:11 PM
We've killed 100's of 1'000's in Iraq?

Key points of the study include the following:

* An estimated 654,965 additional people died in Iraq between March 2003 and July 2006.

* Between March 2003 and July 2006, households attributed 31 percent of deaths to the coalition.

http://www.jhu.edu/~gazette/2006/16oct06/16iraq.html


What's 31% times 654,965?

[edit] I get 200,249. Four years ago.

orange
08-23-2010, 08:13 PM
I guess you don't remember the warning that the president gave those that harbored or funded the terrorists? We are coming, if I remember correctly. It's just too bad we couldn't go for all of the terrorists that were involved with the attacks on the U.S. And if I remember the time line correctly they attacked us first and claimed their holy jihad.


Al-Qaeda wasn't in Iraq. That was just another lie from the Bushies, like the looming mushroom clouds.

Oucho Cinco
08-23-2010, 08:14 PM
Why do people accuse liberals of supporting the enemy?

All you have to do is read some of their diatribe to see that they do.

Hog Farmer
08-23-2010, 08:16 PM
Key points of the study include the following:

* An estimated 654,965 additional people died in Iraq between March 2003 and July 2006.

* Between March 2003 and July 2006, households attributed 31 percent of deaths to the coalition.

http://www.jhu.edu/~gazette/2006/16oct06/16iraq.html


What's 31% times 654,965?

[edit] I get 200,249. Four years ago.


Not enough !

Oucho Cinco
08-23-2010, 08:17 PM
Al-Qaeda wasn't in Iraq. That was just another lie from the Bushies, like the looming mushroom clouds.

Prove it.

From what I've read in the Newspapers there were training camps in Iraq. Not sponsored by Saddam, but with his knowledge. That was proven and the comments by the President stood the test. We came.

As for all of the deaths in Iraq, I'm sure there was some collateral damage and loss of life, but the numbers you are talking of are right out of your ass. Those fighting against the U.S. in Iraq were responsible for the majority of those deaths, but dont' take my word for it. Check it out yourself.

The Johns Hopkins article does not, nor can it, identify who killed those people. Your interpretation of the article only focuses on the nasty Americans that were fighting the phantom bad guys.

patteeu
08-23-2010, 08:17 PM
Well, I guess a slap in the face is a form of "outreach", but IMO it's not really the kind we should be embracing... unless by "embracing" we mean focusing a portion of our FBI's investigative capacity on this operation.

Hog Farmer
08-23-2010, 08:17 PM
Why do people accuse liberals of supporting the enemy?

Because liberals and welfare recepients voted in Obama.

BigMeatballDave
08-23-2010, 08:21 PM
Key points of the study include the following:

* An estimated 654,965 additional people died in Iraq between March 2003 and July 2006.

* Between March 2003 and July 2006, households attributed 31 percent of deaths to the coalition.

http://www.jhu.edu/~gazette/2006/16oct06/16iraq.html


What's 31% times 654,965?

[edit] I get 200,249. Four years ago.So, the country you live in is worse than Al Qeada?

Hog Farmer
08-23-2010, 08:24 PM
So, the country you live in is worse than Al Qeada?

No. If Al Qaeda had the means to kill every person in the United States they would do it . they're just too stupid .

patteeu
08-23-2010, 08:25 PM
No - and neither did the Imam, despite the lying thread title.


"We tend to forget, in the West, that the United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than al-Qaeda has on its hands of innocent non Muslims,"


You doubt that? We've killed hundreds of thousands in Iraq alone. al-Qaeda can't touch that.

Hundreds of thousands of innocent muslims? What's your source?

Hog Farmer
08-23-2010, 08:26 PM
Hundreds of thousands of innocent muslims? What's your source?

According to icasualties.org (http://icasualties.org/Iraq/IraqiDeaths.aspx), the number of Iraqi civilians killed by all sides in the conflict is less than 50 thousand. And they admit that they can't verify the number nor, I submit, can they verify that they're all innocents.


Either way, the goats are much happier for this!

orange
08-23-2010, 08:27 PM
Hundreds of thousands of innocent muslims? What's your source?

http://www.jhu.edu/~gazette/2006/16oct06/16iraq.html

Right here, in this thread. BEFORE you posted your question. :hmmm:

vailpass
08-23-2010, 08:30 PM
Orange is making his way to the top of the "most likely to get fragged if he was leader of a Chiefs Planet platoon" list.

Saul Good
08-23-2010, 08:33 PM
http://www.jhu.edu/~gazette/2006/16oct06/16iraq.html

Right here, in this thread. BEFORE you posted your question. :hmmm:

The Johns Hopkins Gazette is your source on Iraqi war deaths? Impressive.

Oucho Cinco
08-23-2010, 08:34 PM
http://www.jhu.edu/~gazette/2006/16oct06/16iraq.html (http://www.jhu.edu/%7Egazette/2006/16oct06/16iraq.html)

Right here, in this thread. BEFORE you posted your question. :hmmm:Did you even read the article you posted? The numbers were outrageous as well as not having any way, other than speculation, of defining who died by what, when or by whom.

BigMeatballDave
08-23-2010, 08:35 PM
http://www.jhu.edu/~gazette/2006/16oct06/16iraq.html

Right here, in this thread. BEFORE you posted your question. :hmmm:Awesome. Further proof that you're a fucking moron.

orange
08-23-2010, 08:36 PM
"What complicates the discussion, intra-Islamically, is the fact that the West has not been cognizant and has not addressed the issues of its own contribution to much injustice in the Arab and Muslim world."

That's really radical. First you note to a room full of academics why the U.S. has a hard selling job in the Middle East, next thing you know, you're building IEDs in the basement of your "Victory Mosque."

Brainiac
08-23-2010, 08:37 PM
Is anyone else starting to think that Orange hates America?

patteeu
08-23-2010, 08:39 PM
Key points of the study include the following:

* An estimated 654,965 additional people died in Iraq between March 2003 and July 2006.

* Between March 2003 and July 2006, households attributed 31 percent of deaths to the coalition.

http://www.jhu.edu/~gazette/2006/16oct06/16iraq.html


What's 31% times 654,965?

[edit] I get 200,249. Four years ago.

iraqbodycount.org puts the documented civilian death to all violence in Iraq at between 97,363 and 106,246. This includes deaths due to insurgent violence as well as violence initiated by the coalition. Furthermore, the coalition includes not only the US, but also our Iraqi and British allies among others.

If we use your Johns Hopkins study's 31% on the iraqbodycount.org numbers, we get something like 32,000. So we have a range of somewhere between 32,000 and 200,000 civilian deaths due to coalition violence (which, btw, includes the iraqi security forces and other allies like the British). IMO, "hundreds of thousands" was a bit of an exaggeration based on the evidence.

Oucho Cinco
08-23-2010, 08:39 PM
Is anyone else starting to think that Orange hates America?


I'm beginning to wonder if he is a Muslim here to assimilate us. Mohammad Orange?

orange
08-23-2010, 08:39 PM
The Johns Hopkins Gazette is your source on Iraqi war deaths? Impressive.

The Johns-Hopkins Gazette reporting on a study published in The Lancet - a peer-reviewed medical journal.

Both Johns-Hopkins and The Lancet have pretty high credibility - MUCH HIGHER than anonymous posters on ChiefsPlanet, if you can believe that.

So YES, I stand by that as my source. You got it.

Saul Good
08-23-2010, 08:39 PM
"What complicates the discussion, intra-Islamically, is the fact that the West has not been cognizant and has not addressed the issues of its own contribution to much injustice in the Arab and Muslim world."

That's really radical. First you note to a room full of academics why the U.S. has a hard selling job in the Middle East, next thing you know, you're building IEDs in the basement of your "Victory Mosque."

Let's go to a battered women's shelter and analyze how the women there might have been responsible for having been beaten. Maybe they burned the roast.

Oucho Cinco
08-23-2010, 08:40 PM
The Johns-Hopkins Gazette reporting on a study published in The Lancet - a peer-reviewed medical journal.

Both Johns-Hopkins and The Lancet have pretty high credibility - MUCH HIGHER than anonymous posters on ChiefsPlanet, if you can believe that.

So YES, I stand by that as my source. You got it.

You are not the Knight in Shining Armor standing in the firing line for the Muslims, you are just a retard wearing a tin foil hat.

Saul Good
08-23-2010, 08:41 PM
The Johns-Hopkins Gazette reporting on a study published in The Lancet - a peer-reviewed medical journal.

Both Johns-Hopkins and The Lancet have pretty high credibility - MUCH HIGHER than anonymous posters on ChiefsPlanet, if you can believe that.

So YES, I stand by that as my source. You got it.

Good. Medical journals are an excellent source for this type of information. I also like Highlights magazine, but I'm not in a juvenile dentistry office often enough to be up on the latest goings on.

patteeu
08-23-2010, 08:42 PM
Is anyone else starting to think that Orange hates America?

Nah, he doesn't hate America. He may not love her enough, but he doesn't hate her. If it's any comfort to you, he was a strident opponent to Obama during the democrat primary season, but now look at him. He's flexible. I'm sure that when he posts on radical islamist message boards he takes America's side.

orange
08-23-2010, 08:42 PM
You are not the Knight in Shining Armor standing in the firing line for the Muslims, you are just a retard wearing a tin foil hat.

Don't you have the latest panic screed from muslimsaretakingoveramerica.com to post?

Saul Good
08-23-2010, 08:42 PM
Nah, he doesn't hate America. He may not love her enough, but he doesn't hate her. If it's any comfort to you, he was a strident opponent to Obama during the democrat primary season, but now look at him. He's flexible. I'm sure that when he posts on radical islamist message boards he takes America's side.

Only when he's playing devil's advocate.

Oucho Cinco
08-23-2010, 08:43 PM
Don't you have the latest panic screed from muslimsaretakingoveramerica.com to post?

I don't visit your home website, but if you want to post some stuff from there, feel free. Use some glue for that tin foil hat, it gets windy where you have your head stuck.

patteeu
08-23-2010, 08:45 PM
Al-Qaeda wasn't in Iraq. That was just another lie from the Bushies, like the looming mushroom clouds.

Neither of those was a lie from the Bushies.

orange
08-23-2010, 08:46 PM
Nah, he doesn't hate America. He may not love her enough, but he doesn't hate her. If it's any comfort to you, he was a strident opponent to Obama during the democrat primary season, but now look at him. He's flexible. I'm sure that when he posts on radical islamist message boards he takes America's side.

Only when he's playing devil's advocate.

I tend to puncture balloons. I'm a committed Anti-Hysterian.

It just so happens that all the recent Hysterical posts here have been by right-wingers. Most of the leftists don't come around anymore.

Oucho Cinco
08-23-2010, 08:47 PM
Neither of those was a lie from the Bushies.

I think he is ignoring the satellite pictures that were printed in the NYTimes. You know, the ones of the AQ training camps? I think there were 4 of them in one cluster.

Oucho Cinco
08-23-2010, 08:48 PM
I tend to puncture balloons. I'm a committed Anti-Hysterian.

It just so happens that all the recent Hysterical posts here have been by right-wingers. Most of the leftists don't come around anymore.

Does it hurt your back trying to carry the load of the lying left?

patteeu
08-23-2010, 08:55 PM
http://www.jhu.edu/~gazette/2006/16oct06/16iraq.html

Right here, in this thread. BEFORE you posted your question. :hmmm:

Yeah, I hadn't finished by then. I also didn't realize that a couple of people had already called you out on your bogus exaggeration.

patteeu
08-23-2010, 08:57 PM
The Johns-Hopkins Gazette reporting on a study published in The Lancet - a peer-reviewed medical journal.

Both Johns-Hopkins and The Lancet have pretty high credibility - MUCH HIGHER than anonymous posters on ChiefsPlanet, if you can believe that.

So YES, I stand by that as my source. You got it.

It was a survey in a warzone. No matter how peer reviewed it was, it's based on some pretty unreliable data.

petegz28
08-23-2010, 08:58 PM
Islam can kiss the fattest part of my ass. They are nothing even close to "the religion of peace". They are hellbent on domination, intolerance and backwards thinking and they will kill all unmercifully who they deem to be an offensder of their "religion". Any "religion" in this day and age that supports the beating, stoning and unmerciful killing and murdering of women and innocent people is nothing to be praised, respected or tolerated. If they didn't hide behind the word "religion" we would have cast them out as beasts and murderers long ago.

And here the Left, those who supposedly champion women's rights and equal treatment and tolerance, supports an organization that is the most brutal in the world to women. HA!

stevieray
08-23-2010, 09:09 PM
Is anyone else starting to think that Orange hates America?
no, I'm starting to wonder if he is an enemy of the US.

...a liberal from Denver who lives in the DC forum of a Chiefs board....:doh!:

notorious
08-23-2010, 09:33 PM
I believe that the US has killed more Muslims then AlQueda has killed innocent non-muslims.


Think about it......Desert Storm, and the recent war has been a bloodbath on Iraq's side when it comes to military deaths. They were probably Muslims, and that is probably a higher body count then innocent civilians lost to AlQueda.

Duck Dog
08-23-2010, 11:09 PM
We've killed hundreds of thousands in Iraq alone. al-Qaeda can't touch that.

Sweet.

Duck Dog
08-23-2010, 11:12 PM
Don't you have the latest panic screed from muslimsaretakingoveramerica.com to post?

Here ya go, Mooj. Alah snackbar!

http://patriotupdate.com/stories/read/4658/Minnesota-Under-Attack-From-Sharia-Law-

BigMeatballDave
08-23-2010, 11:34 PM
I believe that the US has killed more Muslims then AlQueda has killed innocent non-muslims.


Think about it......Desert Storm, and the recent war has been a bloodbath on Iraq's side when it comes to military deaths. They were probably Muslims, and that is probably a higher body count then innocent civilians lost to AlQueda.Correct on all counts. No one is denying this fact. However, we didnt set out to kill Muslims. Whereas, a large amount of Muslims are hellbent on the destruction of everything non-Muslim. Do you see the distinction? Orange doesnt seem to, or refuses to...

notorious
08-23-2010, 11:50 PM
Correct on all counts. No one is denying this fact. However, we didnt set out to kill Muslims. Whereas, a large amount of Muslims are hellbent on the destruction of everything non-Muslim. Do you see the distinction? ...

A military death is a hell of a lot different than a civilian death. If they want to make up statistics about civilian deaths over in the Middle East than I say it's par for the course.


I am about to the point where I say **** em'. Eventually we are going to get leadership in office that calls their bullshit exactly as it is and all of this pussy PC bullshit is going to end.



I can't imagine what Reagan would have done with these asshats.......

orange
08-24-2010, 12:07 AM
I can't imagine what Reagan would have done with these asshats.......

You mean besides retreat?

http://underthehill.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/beirutattacktime103183.jpg

orange
08-24-2010, 12:21 AM
Correct on all counts. No one is denying this fact. However, we didnt set out to kill Muslims. Whereas, a large amount of Muslims are hellbent on the destruction of everything non-Muslim. Do you see the distinction? Orange doesnt seem to, or refuses to...

... C.I.A. - Mosaddegh ...
...we didn't light the fire...

patteeu
08-24-2010, 12:31 AM
You mean besides retreat?

The lesson learned by Reagan from Lebanon, despite the Ron Paul misquote that BEP clings to, was that we should only get involved in the Middle East if a vital national interest is at stake and if our troops are allowed the freedom of action to properly defend themselves. He concluded that neither was the case in Lebanon, but after 30 years of anti-west jihad emanating from the region, a war in Iraq, and the game-changing 9/11 attacks, IMO it's likely that he'd conclude, as many of his foreign policy disciples have concluded, that vital interests are at stake.

orange
08-24-2010, 12:33 AM
Here ya go, Mooj. Alah snackbar!

http://patriotupdate.com/stories/read/4658/Minnesota-Under-Attack-From-Sharia-Law-

History of Kosher Certification
In the U.S.A., the kosher certifying agencies with which we are familiar did not start until the 1920’s and 1930’s, but their development can be traced back over 200 years. The need for kosher supervision in the United States dates back to Colonial times. As early as 1660, a Jew from Portugal applied for a license to sell kosher meat in New Amsterdam. The first recorded complaint was in 1771 against the Shochet Moshe. In 1774, the widow, Hetty Hays, complained that her shochet (ritual slaughterer) was selling non-kosher meat. This led to the first court license revocation against a kosher butcher in 1796. As Jewish communities developed in the United States, they originally followed the European pattern of having community appointed shochtim. By this method, the shochet could easily be removed if he did not follow the strict guidelines set down by the community leaders. This method changed drastically in 1813, when the schochet, Avraham Jacobs, became the first independent schochet in the United States. He was followed by many more. Unfortunately, this change led to a rapid decline in the standard of kosher meat. In 1863, a group of laymen and shochtim got together to try to form a kashrus organization that could control this situation. Regrettably, they were unsuccessful. It was not until 1897 that the shochtim themselves banded together to form a union called "Meleches Hakodesh." Their goal was to improve kashrus standards, as well as the wages of shochtim. By 1918, kosher products started finding their way into the American market. Abraham Goldstein, a chemist, was highly instrumental in both importing these products as well as in convincing domestic companies (such as Sunshine Biscuit Co.) to become certified kosher. In 1924, the Union of Orthodox Rabbis (O/U), which had been established in 1892, decided to enter the field of kashrus. Mr. Goldstein was appointed as its first director. During the "food revolution" of the past 50 years, as more and more products are prepared in company plants and not in private kitchens, the "O/U" has been active as a non-profit organization in the kosher certification of these products. Mr. Goldstein continued to head the O/U from 1924 until 1935. Feeling a need for another certifying agency, he started the O/K Laboratories. Today, the O/U, headed by Rabbi Menachem Genack, and the O/K, headed by Rabbi Don Yoel Levy, reliably certify many thousands of products and ingredients that we have become accustomed to using daily. As the complexity of manufacturing processes and the need for kosher certification has increased, so has the number of agencies and individuals interested in meeting this need. This has led to the rise of newer certifying agencies, such as VHM, the Chaf K, Kehilloh, Star K and others. Furthermore, individual rabbis have entered this field, often using their own kosher symbol or even just a plain "K" to designate a product’s kosher status. This has caused a great deal of confusion. When there were only two or three certifying agencies, it was easy for consumers to judge their reliability. But today, it may take a great deal of detective work to ascertain the standard that a particular rabbi is using. Consequently, many people prefer to rely on only the well-known certifying agencies, rather than risk the chance that a product may not meet their personal standard of kashrus. The O/U, O/K, Star-K and Kof-K are the largest relied upon kosher agencies in the world today.

http://www.kosherquest.org/symbols.php


1660! Talk about "not assimilating!"

HonestChieffan
08-24-2010, 07:17 AM
Orange, are you anti-jew?

BigMeatballDave
08-24-2010, 07:31 AM
Orange, are you anti-jew?It would appear he's anti-non-muslim.

Chief Henry
08-24-2010, 08:27 AM
I tend to puncture balloons. I'm a committed Anti-Hysterian.

It just so happens that all the recent Hysterical posts here have been by right-wingers. Most of the leftists don't come around anymore.

Its because they are afraid to admit they voted for Obama and democrats and the country has turned to shit since the 2006 elections when the dems started running the congress and the senate.

notorious
08-24-2010, 08:34 AM
There are leftists, and then there are socialists.

ForeverChiefs58
08-24-2010, 08:43 AM
They can't have it both ways.

I thought all the muslims we had killed up to this point had suposedly hijacked the religion of peace, but were not true to islam or the real muslim population? If they weren't true muslims then they shouldn't count. If that is the case then Ql-queda has killed more.

If all muslims are the same, terrorists, moderates all have same thing in common, they read the same manual etc. then USA has killed more. America Fuck Yeah! Whoo Hoo! Were winning! Only a billion more to go!
:thumb::clap::clap::bang::bang::bang:PBJPBJ:toast::toast:PBJ:bravo::bravo:

orange
08-24-2010, 01:07 PM
Orange, are you anti-jew?

It would appear he's anti-non-muslim.

The question is: how is "Halal" different from "Kosher?"

Why is one perfectly acceptable, and the other - according to the FAUXNEWS asshat in Duck Dog's link - is going to destroy America?

p.s.
"not assimilating!"
That's Duck Dog's asshat's line - not mine. Hence the quotes.

Hey, Duck Dog. At least you know one person looked at your post. Too bad there weren't more.

Pants
08-24-2010, 01:09 PM
I guess you don't remember the warning that the president gave those that harbored or funded the terrorists? We are coming, if I remember correctly. It's just too bad we couldn't go for all of the terrorists that were involved with the attacks on the U.S. And if I remember the time line correctly they attacked us first and claimed their holy jihad.

What were they doing here on 9/11? Just a Tuesday outing?

Iraq was not harboring AQ, you fucking dumb fuck.

patteeu
08-24-2010, 01:24 PM
Iraq was not harboring AQ, you ****ing dumb ****.

Iraq harbored, funded, and worked collaboratively with radical islamist terrorists.

Iowanian
08-24-2010, 02:17 PM
Orange the kind of girl who would lick the unwashed left palm of an al queda donkey pimp.


The more Orange posts, the more she appears to be a black panther.

Bwana
08-24-2010, 02:38 PM
Orange the kind of girl who would lick the unwashed left palm of an al queda donkey pimp.


The more Orange posts, the more she appears to be a black panther.

This

Pants
08-24-2010, 02:38 PM
Iraq harbored, funded, and worked collaboratively with radical islamist terrorists.

Sadam was too busy posturing for Iran and keeping his country in check to prevent dissent from the million sects comprising Iraq. Do you have a link to an article which describes aforementioned support of radical islamist terrorists? I'd like to read it. Thanks, pats.

Inspector
08-24-2010, 02:40 PM
IMO, all deaths that have resulted in the war that was started by the terrorists are the sole responsibility of the terrorists. Doesn't matter what nationality they are or religion they practice. The terrorists are responsible for the death.

If a bank robber is in a shootout with the police and a bullet fired by the policeman hits anyone, it is the bank robbers fault. At least that's the way I see it.

Duck Dog
08-24-2010, 02:42 PM
The question is: how is "Halal" different from "Kosher?"

Why is one perfectly acceptable, and the other - according to the FAUXNEWS asshat in Duck Dog's link - is going to destroy America?

p.s.

That's Duck Dog's asshat's line - not mine. Hence the quotes.

Hey, Duck Dog. At least you know one person looked at your post. Too bad there weren't more.

Awsome. Alah Snackbar, Mooj.

Cave Johnson
08-24-2010, 02:51 PM
Prove it.

From what I've read in the Newspapers there were training camps in Iraq. Not sponsored by Saddam, but with his knowledge. That was proven and the comments by the President stood the test. We came.

As for all of the deaths in Iraq, I'm sure there was some collateral damage and loss of life, but the numbers you are talking of are right out of your ass. Those fighting against the U.S. in Iraq were responsible for the majority of those deaths, but dont' take my word for it. Check it out yourself.

The Johns Hopkins article does not, nor can it, identify who killed those people. Your interpretation of the article only focuses on the nasty Americans that were fighting the phantom bad guys.

Paraphrasing Daniel Moynahan, you're entitled to your opinions but not your facts.

"The camp has been examined by U.S. Marines, and intelligence analysts do not believe it was used by al-Qaeda. Some of these analysts believe it was actually used for counterterrorism training, while others believe it was used to train foreign fighters overtly aligned with Iraq. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence concluded that "Postwar findings support the April 2002 Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) assessment that there was no credible reporting on al-Qa'ida training at Salman Pak or anywhere else in Iraq. There have been no credible reports since the war that Iraq trained al-Qa'ida operatives at Salman Pak to conduct or support transnational terrorist operations."[61]"

So, in conclusion, F off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein_and_al-Qaeda_link_allegations

SNR
08-24-2010, 02:56 PM
Oh Jesus fucking Christ.

Orange: In the 2000s, the US military has killed more Muslim civilians while attempting to hunt down terrorists than Muslim terrorists have killed non-Muslims


Everybody else: BAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH! U HAIT MERICA

Cave Johnson
08-24-2010, 02:57 PM
Sadam was too busy posturing for Iran and keeping his country in check to prevent dissent from the million sects comprising Iraq. Do you have a link to an article which describes aforementioned support of radical islamist terrorists? I'd like to read it. Thanks, pats.

Dude, I'd have better luck teaching my dog to talk than convincing Pat there was no connection between AQ and Iraq.

Pants
08-24-2010, 03:09 PM
Dude, I'd have better luck teaching my dog to talk than convincing Pat there was no connection between AQ and Iraq.

LOL

Didn't the Administration say the reason for invading was to prevent Saddam's WMD arsenal from ever being used? I didn't realize the reason to invade Iraq was to snuff out all those AQ terrorists being harbored there.

Pants
08-24-2010, 03:10 PM
Oh Jesus ****ing Christ.

Orange: In the 2000s, the US military has killed more Muslim civilians while attempting to hunt down terrorists than Muslim terrorists have killed non-Muslims


Everybody else: BAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH! U HAIT MERICA

LMAO

Otter
08-24-2010, 03:13 PM
I tend to puncture balloons. I'm a committed Anti-Hysterian.

It just so happens that all the recent Hysterical posts here have been by right-wingers. Most of the leftists don't come around anymore.

Sometimes when I look in the mirror I'm Batman! Where did you buy yours at?

patteeu
08-25-2010, 07:08 AM
Sadam was too busy posturing for Iran and keeping his country in check to prevent dissent from the million sects comprising Iraq. Do you have a link to an article which describes aforementioned support of radical islamist terrorists? I'd like to read it. Thanks, pats.

A 2008 Pentagon study (http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/iraqi/index.html) based on captured Iraqi documents came to this conclusion:

Abstract: Captured Iraqi documents have uncovered evidence that links the regime of Saddam Hussein to regional and global terrorism, including a variety of revolutionary, liberation, nationalist, and Islamic terrorist organizations. While these documents do not reveal direct coordination and assistance between the Saddam regime and the al Qaeda network, they do indicate that Saddam was willing to use, albeit cautiously, operatives affiliated with al Qaeda as long as Saddam could have these terrorist–operatives monitored closely. Because Saddam’s security organizations and Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network operated with similar aims (at least in the short term), considerable overlap was inevitable when monitoring, contacting, financing, and training the same outside groups. This created both the appearance of and, in some ways, a “de facto” link between the organizations. At times, these organizations would work together in pursuit of shared goals but still maintain their autonomy and independence because of innate caution and mutual distrust. Though the execution of Iraqi terror plots was not always successful, evidence shows that Saddam’s use of terrorist tactics and his support for terrorist groups remained strong up until the collapse of the regime.

Among the collaborative connections between Saddam and radical islamist groups described in the report was a venture involving the Egyptian Islamic Jihad (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_Islamic_Jihad) in the 1990s. The EIJ was the islamist organization run by al Qaeda #2, Ayman al Zawahiri, and was one of the two main entities that merged to form modern day al Qaeda.

In June 2001, Al Qaeda and Egyptian Islamic Jihad merged into an entity formally called jamaa'at Qa'idat al-Jihad,[5] with leadership of EIJ "comprises the majority" – six of nine seats – "of al Qaeda's ruling council (shura)."

Consequently it often considered synonymous with Al-Qaeda, (for example by the U.S. Treasury Department),[38] although some refer to it as a separate organization with al-Zawahiri as its leader and global jihad's main ideologist.

So while it may be technically accurate to claim that there was no collaborative relationship between Saddam and post-merger al Qaeda specifically, the truth is much muddier than that. The overlapping interests, relationships and the ties were there and Saddam was actively engaged in radical islamist terrorist activity that paralleled and overlapped with that of al Qaeda up until the fall of his regime and the potential for collaboration with al Qaeda proper was much greater than dismissive critics admit.

The Mad Crapper
08-25-2010, 07:21 AM
Oh Jesus ****ing Christ.

Orange: In the 2000s, the US military has killed more Muslim civilians while attempting to hunt down terrorists than Muslim terrorists have killed non-Muslims


Everybody else: BAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH! U HAIT MERICA

Did you know Kunta Kinte was a muslim?

:drool:

patteeu
08-25-2010, 08:12 AM
Dude, I'd have better luck teaching my dog to talk than convincing Pat there was no connection between AQ and Iraq.

The connections have been well established. The question of collaboration is more murky as I've just described. Maybe what you're thinking of is a direct connection to the 9/11 plot, which isn't even close to what I said.

BucEyedPea
08-25-2010, 08:18 AM
Pittsie right there was no collaborative connection between AQ and Iraq. It's just another one of those Noble Lies being forwarded. Notice how pat has to overgeneralize the enemy as radical islamist terrorists. Keep it nice and vague. That way we directly fight those who do their dirty work in Beirut or Israel which has nothing to do with Saudi's of 9/11.

There's no connection with Iran either. They are enemies and they have arrested AQ agents. We did Iran a BIG favor going into Afghanistan and breaking up those camps. We also did Iran a favor in bringing down SH. They're folks are in power there now.

So guess who really HAITS America?

InChiefsHell
08-25-2010, 08:41 AM
Orange the kind of girl who would lick the unwashed left palm of an al queda donkey pimp.


The more Orange posts, the more she appears to be a black panther.

Orange is a chick? Wow...

BucEyedPea
08-25-2010, 08:59 AM
Orange is a chick? Wow...

No orange is a man. A heterosexual man.

InChiefsHell
08-25-2010, 09:03 AM
I'm confused...

ForeverChiefs58
08-25-2010, 10:24 AM
No orange is a man. A heterosexual man.

You two are a couple. That actually explains a lot. Please for the sake of all humanity do not breed. I have an even better idea. The both of you can go full speed into a flamming AIDS cactus tree that has antifreeze inplace of sap.

Jilly
08-25-2010, 10:36 AM
Its because they are afraid to admit they voted for Obama and democrats and the country has turned to shit since the 2006 elections when the dems started running the congress and the senate.

It's really because the minute anyone disagrees with the overwhelming majority, they get piled on like flies on shit. It's just a disgusting display of humanity and a waste of time, so I tend to just read and stay away. Not sure why people can't just have civil discussion anymore.

SNR
08-25-2010, 11:06 AM
Did you know Kunta Kinte was a muslim?

:drool:I'm too lazy too use google. Who?

Radar Chief
08-25-2010, 11:12 AM
I'm too lazy too use google. Who?

"Roots".
Kunta Kinte was tied up and beat with a bull whip until he accepted his slave name Toby Reynolds.

SNR
08-25-2010, 11:13 AM
It's really because the minute anyone disagrees with the overwhelming majority, they get piled on like flies on shit. It's just a disgusting display of humanity and a waste of time, so I tend to just read and stay away. Not sure why people can't just have civil discussion anymore.It's an impulsive irrational reaction so many people take when somebody asserts that the US government has horribly misused the military in the past 50 years. It's even worse this time because it's an imam doing the talking. The only answer is this guy is obviously full of shit and there's no way that there can POSSIBLY be a hint of truth to what he's saying.

Radar Chief
08-25-2010, 11:14 AM
I'm confused...

I think that’s just Iowanian dropping the gender smack.

SNR
08-25-2010, 11:14 AM
"Roots".
Kunta Kinte was tied up and beat with a bull whip until he accepted his slave name Toby Reynolds.And he was a Muslim, huh?

Still not understanding what SHTSPRAYER's going for

patteeu
08-25-2010, 11:18 AM
Pittsie right there was no collaborative connection between AQ and Iraq. It's just another one of those Noble Lies being forwarded. Notice how pat has to overgeneralize the enemy as radical islamist terrorists. Keep it nice and vague. That way we directly fight those who do their dirty work in Beirut or Israel which has nothing to do with Saudi's of 9/11.

There's no connection with Iran either. They are enemies and they have arrested AQ agents. We did Iran a BIG favor going into Afghanistan and breaking up those camps. We also did Iran a favor in bringing down SH. They're folks are in power there now.

So guess who really HAITS America?

So which is it? Am I telling a "Noble Lie" or am I being forced to "overgeneralize" (presumably to avoid lying)?

The fact is that I was right and and Pittsie's implication that there was "no connection" between al Qaeda and Iraq was wrong. While you falsely suggest that he was right, you yourself modify the premise by adding the word "collaborative" to at least remain on arguable ground (by technicality) even though it's pretty misleading given the ties and collaborations that have been documented.

And finally, our war is not only with card carrying al Qaeda members who were connected to 9/11, but with all of those who ally with or share a similar anti-western ideology as al Qaeda whether they take their marching orders from Osama bin Laden, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Mullah Omar or any of numerous other unsavory characters.

Radar Chief
08-25-2010, 11:19 AM
And he was a Muslim, huh?

Still not understanding what SHTSPRAYER's going for

Got me. :shrug:
I think its an attempt at a joke but I’m not finding any humor in it.

ForeverChiefs58
08-25-2010, 11:19 AM
This is a small list of the al Qaeda in Iraq leaders killed or captured just from January to May of 2010.

May 3, 2010: Iraqi police captured Abu Abdullah al Shafi, the top leader of Ansar al Islam, during a raid in Baghdad.

April 23, 2010: Iraqi forces captured Mahmoud Suleiman, al Qaeda's top military commander for Anbar province.

April 20, 2010: Iraqi forces killed Ahmad Ali Abbas Dahir al Ubayd, al Qaeda's top military commander for northern Iraq.

April 18, 2010: Iraqi and US forces killed Abu Ayyub al Masri, the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, and Abu Omar al Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State of Iraq, during a raid in the Thar Thar region.

April 6, 2010: Iraqi security forces detained al Qaeda in Iraq's emir of Mosul and the emir of eastern Mosul.

March 24, 2010: Iraqi troops killed Bashar Khalaf Husyan Ali al Jaburi, al Qaeda's emir of the city of Mosul.

March 23, 2010: Iraqi soldiers killed Abu Ahmad al Afri, al Qaeda in Iraq's economic security emir.

March 18, 2010: Iraqi troops killed Khalid Muhammad Hasan Shallub al Juburi, al Qaeda in Iraq's top emir in northern Iraq.

March 2010: Iraqi troops captured Manaf Abdulrehim al Rawi, al Qaeda in Iraq's emir for Baghdad.

Jan. 22, 2010: Iraqi and US forces killed Abu Khalaf, al Qaeda in Iraq's most senior foreign fighter facilitator. Based out of Syria, Khalaf reorganized al Qaeda's network after it was severely disrupted by Iraqi and US forces during extensive operations in 2007 and 2008.

Jan. 16, 2010: Iraqi security forces detained Ali Hussein Alwan al Azawi, a senior al Qaeda in Iraq operative who was involved in the first major suicide attack in the capital, in the summer of 2003.

Jan. 5, 2010: Iraq security forces killed Abu Na’im al Afri, the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq's northern operations.

patteeu
08-25-2010, 11:20 AM
It's really because the minute anyone disagrees with the overwhelming majority, they get piled on like flies on shit. It's just a disgusting display of humanity and a waste of time, so I tend to just read and stay away. Not sure why people can't just have civil discussion anymore.

Don't worry, we elected Barack Obama to bring us all together. He's probably just biding his time.

ForeverChiefs58
08-25-2010, 11:23 AM
Pittsie right there was no collaborative connection between AQ and Iraq. It's just another one of those Noble Lies being forwarded. Notice how pat has to overgeneralize the enemy as radical islamist terrorists. Keep it nice and vague. That way we directly fight those who do their dirty work in Beirut or Israel which has nothing to do with Saudi's of 9/11.

There's no connection with Iran either. They are enemies and they have arrested AQ agents. We did Iran a BIG favor going into Afghanistan and breaking up those camps. We also did Iran a favor in bringing down SH. They're folks are in power there now.

So guess who really HAITS America?

WTF? :shake: :spock::doh!: Wrong again.


Taliban commander linked to Iran, al Qaeda targeted in western Afghanistan
By Bill RoggioAugust 21, 2010


Coalition and Afghan special forces teams killed six Taliban fighters and three civilians during a raid yesterday that targeted a known Taliban commander who is linked to senior al Qaeda and Taliban leaders and aids foreign fighters entering Afghanistan from Iran.

The raid took place in the district of Pusht-e Rod in Farah province, along the border with Iran. The target was a "a Taliban foreign fighter facilitator" who is "known to traffic foreign fighters and weapons from Iran and associate with senior Taliban and Al Qaeda leadership," ISAF stated in a press release. Afghan police claimed that Taliban leaders Mullah Malik and Mullah Joma Khan were killed in the fighting.

The combined special forces teams tracked a vehicle carrying Taliban fighters in the district and engaged the fighters as they dismounted. An air weapons team engaged the Taliban fighters, which caused the truck, which appears to have been carrying homemade explosives, to detonate. Six Taliban fighters were killed and an unknown number were captured by the ground team. A woman and two children were also reported killed during the fighting.

Earlier, on Aug. 5, ISAF and Afghan forces killed Sabayar Saheb, another "Taliban logistics and foreign fighter facilitator," during a raid in Pusht-e Rod. The combined force found an AK-47 and Iranian money on Saheb.

Farah province is a known haven for al Qaeda and allied terror groups, and is a main transit point for foreign fighters and Iranian aid flowing into Afghanistan. The presence of al Qaeda cells has been detected in the districts of Pusht-e Rod, Balu Barak, and Gulistan; or three of Farah's 11 districts, according to an investigation by The Long War Journal. ISAF has reported on five raids in Farah against al Qaeda-linked cells this year.

Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps - Qods Force has tasked the Ansar Corps with aiding the Taliban and other terror groups in Afghanistan. Based in Mashad in northeastern Iran, the Ansar Corps operates much like the Ramazan Corps, which supports and directs Shia terror groups in Iraq. [See LWJ report, Iran's Ramazan Corps and the ratlines into Iraq.]

On Aug. 6, 2010, General Hossein Musavi, the commander of the Ansar Corps, was one of two Qods Force commanders added to the US Treasury's list of specially designated global terrorists for directly providing support to the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan.

Al Qaeda is known to facilitate travel for its operatives moving into Afghanistan from Mashad. Al Qaeda additionally uses the eastern cities of Tayyebat and Zahedan to move its operatives into Afghanistan. [See LWJ report, Return to Jihad.]

Background on Iran's covert support for the Taliban

For years, ISAF has stated that Taliban fighters have conducted training inside Iran, with the aid of the Qods Force, the special operations branch of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. As recently as May 30, 2010, former ISAF commander General Stanley McChrystal said that Iran is training Taliban fighters and providing them with weapons.

"The training that we have seen occurs inside Iran with fighters moving inside Iran," McChrystal said at a press conference. "The weapons that we have received come from Iran into Afghanistan."

In March 2010, a Taliban commander admitted that Iran has been training teams of Taliban fighters in small unit tactics. "Our religions and our histories are different, but our target is the same — we both want to kill Americans," the commander told The Sunday Times, rebutting the common analysis that Shia Iran and Sunni al Qaeda could not cooperate due to ideological differences.

Background on known Taliban commanders who work with Iran's Qods Force

In recent years, the US military has targeted several Taliban commanders in western Afghanistan who are known to receive support from the Qods Force.

On July 16, US and Afghan forces killed Mullah Akhtar, a Taliban commander in Farah province, and several of his fighters, during a raid on a training camp used by foreign fighters. Akhtar "had close ties with Taliban and al Qaeda senior leaders," ISAF stated in a press release. He "was responsible for arranging training for foreign fighters from Iran and helped resolve disputes between militant networks." Intelligence officials also told The Long War Journal that Akhtar was closely tied to the Qods Force.

Another Iranian-linked Taliban commander is Mullah Mustafa, who operates in Ghor province. The US military said Mustafa commands more than 100 fighters and receives support from Iran's Qods Force. ISAF thought it killed Mustafa in a June 9, 2009, airstrike in a rural area in Ghor, but Mustafa later spoke to the media and denied reports of his death.

Ghlam Yahya Akbari is yet another Taliban commander who has worked closely with the Qods Force. He served as a commander in Herat province. Akbari, who was known as the "Tajik Taliban," claimed to operate more than 20 bases in Herat and boasted of having more than 600 fighters under his command. He facilitated the movement of foreign fighters, or al Qaeda, from Iran into Afghanistan, and helped them transit to the battlefields in Helmand and Kandahar. Akbari was killed in a special operations raid in Herat in October 2009. Samihullah, Akbari's replacement, has even closer ties to al Qaeda and continues to facilitate the movement of al Qaeda fighters from Iran into Afghanistan.

Prior to the fall of Mullah Omar's regime in late 2001, Khirullah Said Wali Khairkhwa, the former Taliban governor of Herat province who is currently in US custody at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, served as the Taliban's liaison to Iran. Khairkhwa "was present at a clandestine meeting in October of 2001 between Taliban and Iranian officials in which Iran pledged to assist the Taliban in their war with the United States," according to documents from the US government’s unclassified files on Gitmo detainees. According to one document, he met with Hizb-i-Islami-Gulbuddin leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and Ayman al Zawahiri.

Hekmatyar, who runs one of the three largest Taliban-linked insurgent groups in Afghanistan, is also closely linked to Iran. He was backed by the Iranians during Afghanistan's civil war in the 1990s, and sheltered inside Iran from 1996 to 2002, under the care of the IRGC.



Read more: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/08/taliban_commander_li_2.php#ixzz0xdSVGZ9w

chiefsnorth
08-25-2010, 11:26 AM
It sounds from the title of this thread like the Imam might be a poster here. Reveal yourself!

Dylan
08-25-2010, 12:25 PM
STFU

Tuesday, Aug 24, 2010 18:50 ET

U.S. funds restoration of global Islamic sites

$6 million earmarked for 55 countries part of effort to reach out to the Muslim world

By Associated Press
The good-will tour of the Middle East by the imam behind the proposed mosque near ground zero is just part of the U.S. government's efforts to reach out to the Muslim world.

This year, the Obama administration will spend nearly $6 million to restore 63 historic and cultural sites, including mosques and minarets, in 55 nations.

Under a program established by Congress in 2001, the State Department will fund at least five projects in as many countries to the tune of $271,000.

Those include the 16th century Grand Mosque in Tongxin, China, and the 18th century Golden Mosque in Lahore, Pakistan.

http://www.salon.com/news/islam/index.html?story=/news/feature/2010/08/24/us_restore_islam

ForeverChiefs58
08-25-2010, 01:15 PM
Pittsie right there was no collaborative connection between AQ and Iraq. It's just another one of those Noble Lies being forwarded. Notice how pat has to overgeneralize the enemy as radical islamist terrorists. Keep it nice and vague. That way we directly fight those who do their dirty work in Beirut or Israel which has nothing to do with Saudi's of 9/11.

There's no connection with Iran either. They are enemies and they have arrested AQ agents. We did Iran a BIG favor going into Afghanistan and breaking up those camps. We also did Iran a favor in bringing down SH. They're folks are in power there now.

So guess who really HAITS America?

Besides you and orange?

State Department: Iran supports Taliban, Iraqi militants
By Thomas JoscelynAugust 6, 2010


The State Department released its Country Reports on Terrorism for 2009 on Thursday. The analysis, which details terrorist events in the previous calendar year, was supposed to be provided to Congress by April 30. But this year the report was not published until August.

As expected, Iran “remained the most active state sponsor of terrorism” in 2009. In particular, Tehran continues to sponsor terrorists who kill American servicemen in Iraq and Afghanistan.

According to the State Department, Iran trains and arms the Taliban, does the same for Iraqi militants targeting US forces, and provides safe haven for al Qaeda members. The State Department does not use the term 'safe haven' to describe Iran's sheltering of al Qaeda leaders and members, however.

Much of the State Department’s reporting on Iran remained unchanged from the year before -- with one noteworthy difference. Only in its reporting on the relationship between the Iranian regime and al Qaeda did this year’s report differ substantively from last year’s analysis.

Iran’s Qods Force, which is part of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), is “the regime’s primary mechanism for cultivating and supporting terrorists abroad,” the State Department noted. Among other terrorist organizations, the Qods Force continues to support the Taliban. This year’s report states:

Iran’s Qods Force provided training to the Taliban in Afghanistan on small unit tactics, small arms, explosives, and indirect fire weapons. Since at least 2006, Iran has arranged arms shipments to select Taliban members, including small arms and associated ammunition, rocket propelled grenades, mortar rounds, 107mm rockets, and plastic explosives.
This language is nearly identical to that which appeared in the report for 2008. What the State Department didn’t say is that Iran also allows the Taliban to move foreign fighters through Iran to Afghanistan, where they fight Coalition forces. There is also evidence that the Iranians are helping the Taliban and al Qaeda execute suicide attacks by, among other things, providing explosives and other components used in suicide vests.
There was a change in the State Department’s language regarding the nexus between Iran and al Qaeda, however. Here is how the State Department’s latest report describes the relationship (emphasis added):

Iran remained unwilling to bring to justice senior al-Qa’ida (AQ) members it continued to detain, and refused to publicly identify those senior members in its custody. Iran has repeatedly resisted numerous calls to transfer custody of its AQ detainees to their countries of origin or third countries for trial; it is reportedly holding Usama bin Ladin’s family members under house arrest.
Here is how the State Department summarized the relationship in its report on 2008 (emphasis added):
Iran remained unwilling to bring to justice senior al-Qa’ida members it has detained, and has refused to publicly identify those senior members in its custody. Iran has repeatedly resisted numerous calls to transfer custody of its al-Qa’ida detainees to their countries of origin or third countries for trial. Iran also continued to fail to control the activities of some al-Qa’ida members who fled to Iran following the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.
Both descriptions are incomplete and do not reflect the totality of collusion between the Iranian regime and al Qaeda. But last year’s report noted that Iran “continued to fail to control the activities of some al-Qa’ida members” – that is, they are allowed to operate on Iranian soil.

This year, the State Department dropped that language and only noted that some of Osama bin Laden’s family members are “under house arrest.”

It is not clear what was behind the change. We do know that the Iranians did not hold all of Osama bin Laden’s family members under house arrest. Saad bin Laden, for example, left Iran for northern Pakistan in late 2008. Moreover, al Qaeda members supposedly under “house arrest” in Iran have continued to operate, holding planning meetings and engaging in various other nefarious activities.

The State Department avoided using the phrase 'safe haven' in either analysis. But by refusing to identify, transfer, or 'bring to justice' al Qaeda members, that is precisely what the Iranian regime is providing al Qaeda.

Finally, the State Department included a lengthy paragraph on Iran’s support for terrorists in Iraq. It is mostly unchanged from the year before (emphasis added):



Despite its pledge to support the stabilization of Iraq, Iranian authorities continued to provide lethal support, including weapons, training, funding, and guidance, to Iraqi Shia militant groups that targeted U.S. and Iraqi forces. The Qods Force continued to supply Iraqi militants with Iranian-produced advanced rockets, sniper rifles, automatic weapons, and mortars that have killed Iraqi and Coalition Forces, as well as civilians. Iran was responsible for the increased lethality of some attacks on U.S. forces by providing militants with the capability to assemble explosively formed penetrators that were designed to defeat armored vehicles. The Qods Force, in concert with Lebanese Hizballah, provided training outside of Iraq and advisors inside Iraq for Shia militants in the construction and use of sophisticated improvised explosive device technology and other advanced weaponry.

There is one change in the paragraph above from the version that appeared in last year's analysis. Last year, the State Department said that Iran was responsible for "some of the lethality of anti-Coalition attacks." This year's report says that Iran is "responsible for the increased lethality of some attacks on U.S. forces." It is not clear what was driving the word change.

The bottom line is that Iran is still supporting the Taliban in Afghanistan and militants in Iraq in their attacks on civilians and US-led forces.



Read more: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/08/state_department_ira.php#ixzz0xdsx3yLC

mlyonsd
08-25-2010, 01:17 PM
It sounds from the title of this thread like the Imam might be a poster here. Reveal yourself!

The Imam is busy off on a state sponsored $16,000 trip to the ME. Look for the poster that's been missing two weeks and is the first to boast about the awesome goat on a stick they just had.

Jilly
08-25-2010, 02:21 PM
STFU

Tuesday, Aug 24, 2010 18:50 ET

U.S. funds restoration of global Islamic sites

$6 million earmarked for 55 countries part of effort to reach out to the Muslim world

By Associated Press
The good-will tour of the Middle East by the imam behind the proposed mosque near ground zero is just part of the U.S. government's efforts to reach out to the Muslim world.

This year, the Obama administration will spend nearly $6 million to restore 63 historic and cultural sites, including mosques and minarets, in 55 nations.

Under a program established by Congress in 2001, the State Department will fund at least five projects in as many countries to the tune of $271,000.

Those include the 16th century Grand Mosque in Tongxin, China, and the 18th century Golden Mosque in Lahore, Pakistan.

http://www.salon.com/news/islam/index.html?story=/news/feature/2010/08/24/us_restore_islam


let's keep that part in perspective

Jilly
08-25-2010, 02:24 PM
Don't worry, we elected Barack Obama to bring us all together. He's probably just biding his time.

Obviously. :thumb:

ForeverChiefs58
08-25-2010, 03:02 PM
let's keep that part in perspective

That they declare war on us, have their brain about 15 centuries in the past and in the sand, responsible for the worst attack on US soil, kill thousands of our innocent civilians as well as thousands of our soldiers and thousands more of our allies troups. So, naturally, we are going to THEN spend millions fixing up their place of worship where they love to hide weapons and bombs, and impliment a big outreach so they don't get their feelings hurt. Brilliant.

Jilly
08-25-2010, 03:23 PM
That they declare war on us, have their brain about 15 centuries in the past and in the sand, responsible for the worst attack on US soil, kill thousands of our innocent civilians as well as thousands of our soldiers and thousands more of our allies troups. So, naturally, we are going to THEN spend millions fixing up their place of worship where they love to hide weapons and bombs, and impliment a big outreach so they don't get their feelings hurt. Brilliant.

I mean, let's keep it in perspective that Congress decided to do this program in 2001.

BucEyedPea
08-25-2010, 03:42 PM
Besides you and orange?

State Department: Iran supports Taliban, Iraqi militants
By Thomas JoscelynAugust 6, 2010


The State Department released its Country Reports on Terrorism for 2009 on Thursday. The analysis, which details terrorist events in the previous calendar year, was supposed to be provided to Congress by April 30. But this year the report was not published until August.

As expected, Iran “remained the most active state sponsor of terrorism” in 2009. In particular, Tehran continues to sponsor terrorists who kill American servicemen in Iraq and Afghanistan.

According to the State Department, Iran trains and arms the Taliban, does the same for Iraqi militants targeting US forces, and provides safe haven for al Qaeda members. The State Department does not use the term 'safe haven' to describe Iran's sheltering of al Qaeda leaders and members, however.

Much of the State Department’s reporting on Iran remained unchanged from the year before -- with one noteworthy difference. Only in its reporting on the relationship between the Iranian regime and al Qaeda did this year’s report differ substantively from last year’s analysis.

Iran’s Qods Force, which is part of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), is “the regime’s primary mechanism for cultivating and supporting terrorists abroad,” the State Department noted. Among other terrorist organizations, the Qods Force continues to support the Taliban. This year’s report states:

Iran’s Qods Force provided training to the Taliban in Afghanistan on small unit tactics, small arms, explosives, and indirect fire weapons. Since at least 2006, Iran has arranged arms shipments to select Taliban members, including small arms and associated ammunition, rocket propelled grenades, mortar rounds, 107mm rockets, and plastic explosives.
This language is nearly identical to that which appeared in the report for 2008. What the State Department didn’t say is that Iran also allows the Taliban to move foreign fighters through Iran to Afghanistan, where they fight Coalition forces. There is also evidence that the Iranians are helping the Taliban and al Qaeda execute suicide attacks by, among other things, providing explosives and other components used in suicide vests.
There was a change in the State Department’s language regarding the nexus between Iran and al Qaeda, however. Here is how the State Department’s latest report describes the relationship (emphasis added):

Iran remained unwilling to bring to justice senior al-Qa’ida (AQ) members it continued to detain, and refused to publicly identify those senior members in its custody. Iran has repeatedly resisted numerous calls to transfer custody of its AQ detainees to their countries of origin or third countries for trial; it is reportedly holding Usama bin Ladin’s family members under house arrest.
Here is how the State Department summarized the relationship in its report on 2008 (emphasis added):
Iran remained unwilling to bring to justice senior al-Qa’ida members it has detained, and has refused to publicly identify those senior members in its custody. Iran has repeatedly resisted numerous calls to transfer custody of its al-Qa’ida detainees to their countries of origin or third countries for trial. Iran also continued to fail to control the activities of some al-Qa’ida members who fled to Iran following the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.
Both descriptions are incomplete and do not reflect the totality of collusion between the Iranian regime and al Qaeda. But last year’s report noted that Iran “continued to fail to control the activities of some al-Qa’ida members” – that is, they are allowed to operate on Iranian soil.

This year, the State Department dropped that language and only noted that some of Osama bin Laden’s family members are “under house arrest.”

It is not clear what was behind the change. We do know that the Iranians did not hold all of Osama bin Laden’s family members under house arrest. Saad bin Laden, for example, left Iran for northern Pakistan in late 2008. Moreover, al Qaeda members supposedly under “house arrest” in Iran have continued to operate, holding planning meetings and engaging in various other nefarious activities.

The State Department avoided using the phrase 'safe haven' in either analysis. But by refusing to identify, transfer, or 'bring to justice' al Qaeda members, that is precisely what the Iranian regime is providing al Qaeda.

Finally, the State Department included a lengthy paragraph on Iran’s support for terrorists in Iraq. It is mostly unchanged from the year before (emphasis added):



Despite its pledge to support the stabilization of Iraq, Iranian authorities continued to provide lethal support, including weapons, training, funding, and guidance, to Iraqi Shia militant groups that targeted U.S. and Iraqi forces. The Qods Force continued to supply Iraqi militants with Iranian-produced advanced rockets, sniper rifles, automatic weapons, and mortars that have killed Iraqi and Coalition Forces, as well as civilians. Iran was responsible for the increased lethality of some attacks on U.S. forces by providing militants with the capability to assemble explosively formed penetrators that were designed to defeat armored vehicles. The Qods Force, in concert with Lebanese Hizballah, provided training outside of Iraq and advisors inside Iraq for Shia militants in the construction and use of sophisticated improvised explosive device technology and other advanced weaponry.

There is one change in the paragraph above from the version that appeared in last year's analysis. Last year, the State Department said that Iran was responsible for "some of the lethality of anti-Coalition attacks." This year's report says that Iran is "responsible for the increased lethality of some attacks on U.S. forces." It is not clear what was driving the word change.

The bottom line is that Iran is still supporting the Taliban in Afghanistan and militants in Iraq in their attacks on civilians and US-led forces.



Read more: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/08/state_department_ira.php#ixzz0xdsx3yLC

lies

Cave Johnson
08-25-2010, 03:43 PM
This is a small list of the al Qaeda in Iraq leaders killed or captured just from January to May of 2010.

May 3, 2010: Iraqi police captured Abu Abdullah al Shafi, the top leader of Ansar al Islam, during a raid in Baghdad.

April 23, 2010: Iraqi forces captured Mahmoud Suleiman, al Qaeda's top military commander for Anbar province.

April 20, 2010: Iraqi forces killed Ahmad Ali Abbas Dahir al Ubayd, al Qaeda's top military commander for northern Iraq.

April 18, 2010: Iraqi and US forces killed Abu Ayyub al Masri, the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, and Abu Omar al Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State of Iraq, during a raid in the Thar Thar region.

April 6, 2010: Iraqi security forces detained al Qaeda in Iraq's emir of Mosul and the emir of eastern Mosul.

March 24, 2010: Iraqi troops killed Bashar Khalaf Husyan Ali al Jaburi, al Qaeda's emir of the city of Mosul.

March 23, 2010: Iraqi soldiers killed Abu Ahmad al Afri, al Qaeda in Iraq's economic security emir.

March 18, 2010: Iraqi troops killed Khalid Muhammad Hasan Shallub al Juburi, al Qaeda in Iraq's top emir in northern Iraq.

March 2010: Iraqi troops captured Manaf Abdulrehim al Rawi, al Qaeda in Iraq's emir for Baghdad.

Jan. 22, 2010: Iraqi and US forces killed Abu Khalaf, al Qaeda in Iraq's most senior foreign fighter facilitator. Based out of Syria, Khalaf reorganized al Qaeda's network after it was severely disrupted by Iraqi and US forces during extensive operations in 2007 and 2008.

Jan. 16, 2010: Iraqi security forces detained Ali Hussein Alwan al Azawi, a senior al Qaeda in Iraq operative who was involved in the first major suicide attack in the capital, in the summer of 2003.

Jan. 5, 2010: Iraq security forces killed Abu Na’im al Afri, the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq's northern operations.

Of course AQ is in Iraq now.

Go back to eating paste and let the adults talk.

patteeu
08-25-2010, 03:47 PM
lies

:LOL:

http://wordincarnate.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/head-in-sand.jpg

Cave Johnson
08-25-2010, 03:48 PM
The overlapping interests, relationships and the ties were there and Saddam was actively engaged in radical islamist terrorist activity that paralleled and overlapped with that of al Qaeda up until the fall of his regime and the potential for collaboration with al Qaeda proper was much greater than dismissive critics admit.

So Iraq and AQ weren't actively collaborating, contrary to the 2002-2003 propaganda. They just knew the same people.

Glad we wasted 4,500 lives and $2T on that.

BucEyedPea
08-25-2010, 04:05 PM
Fool me once shame on you
Fool me twice shame on me

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q5rbRg5Beb4?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q5rbRg5Beb4?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

alpha_omega
08-25-2010, 04:11 PM
Jeez, this thread is still going on? I thought for sure it would be dead by now.

patteeu
08-25-2010, 04:12 PM
So Iraq and AQ weren't actively collaborating, contrary to the 2002-2003 propaganda. They just knew the same people.

Glad we wasted 4,500 lives and $2T on that.

1. The Bush administration repeatedly disclosed the fact that they didn't have proof of active collaboration during the 2002-2003 time period. If you were hearing/reading otherwise, you were listening to your news through a distorted filter.

2. We didn't invade Iraq on the belief that active collaboration was taking place although the possibility of such collaboration was one of many factors involved in the decision. The possibility of future collaboration, especially collaboration involving WMD, was far more important to the decision. This concern has been vindicated by the extensive interactions between Saddam and radical islamists exposed by captured Iraqi documents.

3. Because of our invasion, Saddam will never acquire WMD and, more importantly, he will never collaborate with radical islamists who would love to use those weapons against us. That alone makes Iraq a success. But beyond that, we have the chance now to influence the direction of Middle East political progress by planting a population-respecting government in the heart of the terrorist swamp amid all the repressive governments that are the norm in the region.

orange
08-25-2010, 04:13 PM
Jeez, this thread is still going on? I thought for sure it would be dead by now.

It's the currently active tentacle of the continually mutating Mosque octothread.

SNR
08-25-2010, 04:23 PM
It's the currently active testicle of the continually mutating Mosque octothread.FYP

BucEyedPea
08-25-2010, 04:36 PM
It's the currently active tentacle of the continually mutating Mosque octothread.

Pretty much.

ForeverChiefs58
08-25-2010, 05:48 PM
lies

CNN full of lies too? Seriously this is old news that everyone else already knows, esp the ones over there fighting RIGHT NOW. You really should try to pull your head out of the sand.


U.S. details Quds Force's 'lethal support' to Taliban


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Quds Force, the elite unit of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, provides "lethal support" to the Sunni-dominated Taliban for use against U.S. and NATO forces, according to information in the new U.S. sanctions imposed on Iran.

The Quds Force is the "Iranian regime's primary instrument for providing lethal support to the Taliban," and it "provides weapons and financial support to the Taliban to support anti-U.S. and anti-coalition activity in Afghanistan," the Treasury Department alleged Thursday in announcing economic sanctions against the Quds Force and other Iranian military and financial entities.

Iran is a predominantly Shiite nation and is known to support Shiite fighters in Iraq, where Shiite and Sunni Muslims have been at odds in recent years, and in Lebanon.

In the past, the U.S. military has said the Quds Force also supports the Taliban, the Sunni movement that once controlled Afghanistan and still harbors the al Qaeda terror movement. The Treasury Department statement, however, laid out specific details of that alleged support to justify designating the Quds Force as a supporter of terrorism.

"Since at least 2006, Iran has arranged frequent shipments of small arms and associated ammunition, rocket propelled grenades, mortar rounds, 107 mm rockets, plastic explosives, and probably man-portable defense systems to the Taliban," the statement said.

The Treasury statement also says the Quds Force "has had a long history" of backing Hezbollah's "military, paramilitary, and terrorist activities, providing it with guidance, funding, weapons, intelligence, and logistical support."

The Lebanese Shiite group runs training camps in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley and "has reportedly trained" more than 3,000 of the group's fighters at Revolutionary Guard training facilities in Iran, the Treasury Department alleged.

The statement further alleges that the Quds Force provides roughly $100 million to $200 million in funding a year to Hezbollah and has helped the group rearm after the war in Lebanon with Israeli forces.

The Treasury Department says the Quds Force provides "material support" to two Palestinian groups -- Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command.

The Quds Force is one of five branches of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The others are Ground Forces, Air Force, Navy and Basij militia.

The Revolutionary Guard Corps "runs prisons, and has numerous economic interests involving defense production, construction, and the oil industry" and "has been outspoken about its willingness to proliferate ballistic missiles capable of carrying" weapons of mass destruction, the Treasury Department says.

orange
08-25-2010, 06:06 PM
CNN full of lies too?

Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps

...

Since at least 2006



Are you an idiot or what? This has NOTHING to do with Al Qaeda not being in Iraq in 2001!

LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE YOU'VE POSTED.

Radar Chief
08-25-2010, 06:13 PM
CNN full of lies too?

Well duh. Of course they are. They're part of the same NeoCon cabal as Cheney and Bush. Scott Ritter told her so personally.
What are you, new here or something? ;)

ForeverChiefs58
08-25-2010, 08:09 PM
Are you an idiot or what? This has NOTHING to do with Al Qaeda not being in Iraq in 2001!

LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE YOU'VE POSTED.

You are the only idiot. I was responding to your girlfriend saying iran has nothing to do with anything and we did them a favor in afghanistan, blah, blah, blah. Next time pay attention butt muncher.

Dylan
08-26-2010, 01:42 AM
The mosque is not going to be built at ground zero.

-------------------------------------------

An Excerpt by Charles Leaf:


No Answers from Developer of Mosque Near Ground Zero

El-Gamal rose from waiter to real estate mogul

While Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf has dominated headlines about the proposed cultural center and mosque near Ground Zero in lower Manhattan, developer Sharif el-Gamal, 37, is actually the central figure behind the project.

Yet just a few years ago, el-Gamal was waiting tables in some fancy Manhattan restaurants.

Naturally, we wanted to talk to Sharif el-Gamal to learn more about the man and his plans, but apparently he didn't want to meet us. We made repeated requests for a sit down interview with him, left him multiple voice mail messages and he never returned any of our calls. We even went to his office and talked to colleagues, but we were turned away. He left us with no choice. We had to go find him.

http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/beliefnet/no-answers-from-mosque-developer-20100824

Aired this morning on Good Day New York:

<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" id="video" width="480" height="400" data="http://www.myfoxny.com/video/videoplayer.swf?dppversion=2397"><param value="http://www.myfoxny.com/video/videoplayer.swf?dppversion=2397" name="movie"/><param value="&skin=MP1ExternalAll-MFL.swf&embed=true&adSrc=http%3A%2F%2Fad%2Edoubleclick%2Enet%2Fadx%2Ftsg%2Ewnyw%2Fnews%2Ffaith%5F1%2Fdetail%3Bdcmt%3Dte xt%2Fxml%3Bpos%3D%3Btile%3D2%3Bfname%3Dno%2Danswers%2Dfrom%2Dmosque%2Ddeveloper%2D20100824%3Bloc%3Ds ite%3Bsz%3D320x240%3Bord%3D120920371894558400%3Frand%3D0%2E09066106792566591&flv=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Emyfoxny%2Ecom%2Ffeeds%2FoutboundFeed%3FobfType%3DVIDEO%5FPLAYER%5FSMIL%5FFEED %26componentId%3D133148043&img=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia2%2Emyfoxny%2Ecom%2F%2Fphoto%2F2010%2F08%2F24%2F20100824elgamalDPP%5Ftmb0004%5 F20100824223303%5F640%5F480%2EJPG&story=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Emyfoxny%2Eco

Dylan
08-26-2010, 01:53 AM
<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" id="video" width="480" height="400" data="http://www.myfoxny.com/video/videoplayer.swf?dppversion=2397"><param value="http://www.myfoxny.com/video/videoplayer.swf?dppversion=2397" name="movie"/><param value="&skin=MP1ExternalAll-MFL.swf&embed=true&adSrc=http%3A%2F%2Fad%2Edoubleclick%2Enet%2Fadx%2Ftsg%2Ewnyw%2Fnews%2Ffaith%5F1%2Fdetail%3Bdcmt%3Dte xt%2Fxml%3Bpos%3D%3Btile%3D2%3Bfname%3Dno%2Danswers%2Dfrom%2Dmosque%2Ddeveloper%2D20100824%3Bloc%3Ds ite%3Bsz%3D320x240%3Bord%3D361488971380134400%3Frand%3D0%2E5414967043593692&flv=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Emyfoxny%2Ecom%2Ffeeds%2FoutboundFeed%3FobfType%3DVIDEO%5FPLAYER%5FSMIL%5FFEED %26componentId%3D133148043&img=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia2%2Emyfoxny%2Ecom%2F%2Fphoto%2F2010%2F08%2F24%2F20100824elgamalDPP%5Ftmb0004%5 F20100824223303%5F640%5F480%2EJPG&story=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Emyfoxny%2Ecom%2Fdpp%2Fnews%2Fbeliefnet%2Fno%2Danswers%2Dfrom%2Dmosque%2Ddev eloper%2D20100824" name="FlashVars"/><param value="all" name="allowNetworking"/><param value="always" name="allowScriptAccess"/></object>

ForeverChiefs58
08-26-2010, 06:26 AM
El-Gamal is an American Muslim reportedly born to a Polish mother and an Egyptian father. He was raised in Brooklyn.

Today, el-Gamal's company, Soho Properties, owns the building where arguably the most controversial mosque in the world will be built. He bought the old Burlington Coat Factory building at 45 Park Place, two blocks from the World Trade Center site, for $4.8 million in cash in 2009.

We asked him where he got the money to put down on the property, but he stayed silent when we approached him.

His newfound notoriety was an extraordinary leap from his not-too-distant days as a waiter at Serafina, a trendy Upper East Side eatery, and at Michael's, an upscale celebrity-filled restaurant packed with a veritable who's who in media.

El-Gamal's former restaurant bosses and co-workers told Fox 5 that the young and opportunistic el-Gamal thrived on the buzz from bumping elbows with marquee names and relished the opportunity to schmooze the high dollar clientele.

"Customers would come in and ask for him, he had his regulars," said Cosmo Sammarone, a Serafina waiter.

El-Gamal left Serafina in 2002 and started selling real estate. But in just a year, he went from broker to business owner and launched his own real estate company, Soho Properties, in 2003. Records show he is the president and chief executive officer.

A long-time associate of his says el-Gamal isn't quite who he seems to be. The associate asked Fox 5 to protect his identity because he fears retribution.

"I was pretty much in shock when I saw him on the news as the developer," the associate said. "What I can say about Sharif is nothing good.

He said el-Gamal liked living in the fast lane, meeting celebrities in the restaurants were he worked, and partying with them at nightclubs.

"Very persuasive, master manipulator," he said of el-Gamal.

Today, el-Gamal's holdings included at least four buildings in Manhattan, including the site near Ground Zero, one in Chelsea, and two residential buildings in Washington Heights, where tenants seem to like him.

Records show el-Gamal bought the Washington Heights properties in 2007 for a little less than $3 million each.

Ken Brandman, president of N.Y. Commercial Real Estate Services, knows el-Gamal well. He, too, was a bit surprised to hear el-Gamal is the developer in the mosque near Ground Zero.

"I don't think he has a lot of money," Brandman said. "I'm sure he didn't buy it with his own money."

Soho Properties bought the site for the mosque for $4.8 million in cash. Just four months later, with Manhattan's real estate market collapsed, el-Gamal made an even bigger deal.

With credit super tight, and prices plummeting, he paid $45 million for a 12-story commercial building in Chelsea that sold three years earlier for $31 million.

"It seems like a lot of pay in a downturn, considering it went for considerably less during the boom," said Stuart Elliott, the editor of Real Deal magazine.

El-Gamal, the waiter turned mogul, plunked down another $5 million as down payment on the Chelsea building.

"Something's up with that deal," Ken Brandman said. "Unless someone gave him a lot of money, or he won the lottery, than somebody else put up the money."

Fox 5 News has learned that el-Gamal did have help from a man named Hisham Elzanaty. Mortgage documents show that Elzanaty is the guarantor on the $39 million loan el-Gamal's company secured to buy the building.

We repeatedly asked El-Gamal where he raised the money, where it was coming from, but he refused to answer our questions and run from us. He also did not answer the question of whether he would consider relocating the mosque.

The Mad Crapper
08-26-2010, 06:51 AM
LMAO at moonbats and their cognitive dissonance.

The Mad Crapper
08-31-2010, 08:17 AM
One can never go wrong deferring to the penultimate voice of reason, Thomas Sowell...

The proposed mosque near where the World Trade Center was attacked and destroyed, along with thousands of American lives, would be a 15-story middle finger to America.

It takes a high IQ to evade the obvious, so it is not surprising that the intelligentsia are out in force, decrying those who criticize this calculated insult.

What may surprise some people is that the American taxpayer is currently financing a trip to the Middle East by the imam who is pushing this project, so that he can raise the money to build it.

The State Department is subsidizing his travel.

The big talking point is that this is an issue about "religious freedom" and that Muslims have a "right" to build a mosque where they choose. But those who oppose this project are not claiming that there is no legal right to build a mosque near the site of the World Trade Center.

If anybody did, it would be a matter for the courts to decide -- and they would undoubtedly say that it is not illegal to build a mosque near the site of the World Trade Center attack.

The intelligentsia and others who are wrapping themselves in the Constitution are fighting a phony war against a straw man. Why create a false issue, except to evade the real issue?

Our betters are telling us that we need to be more "tolerant" and more "sensitive" to the feelings of Muslims. But if we are supposed to be sensitive to Muslims, why are Muslims not supposed to be sensitive to the feelings of millions of Americans, for whom 9/11 was the biggest national trauma since Pearl Harbor?

It would not be illegal for Japanese Americans to build a massive shinto shrine next to Pearl Harbor. But, in all these years, they have never sought to do it.

When Catholic authorities in Poland were planning to build an institution for nuns, years ago, and someone pointed out that it would be near the site of a concentration camp that carried out genocide, the Pope intervened to stop it.

He didn't say that the Catholic Church had a legal right to build there, as it undoubtedly did. Instead, he respected the painful feelings of other people. And he certainly did not denounce those who called attention to the concentration camp.

There is no question that Muslims have a right to build a mosque where they chose to. The real question is why they chose that particular location, in a country that covers more than 3 million square miles.

If we all did everything that we have a legal right to do, we could not even survive as individuals, much less as a society. So the question is whether those who are planning a Ground Zero mosque want to be part of American society or just to see how much they can get away with in American society?

Can anyone in his right mind believe that this was intended to show solidarity with Americans, rather than solidarity with those who attacked America? Does anyone imagine that the Middle East nations, including Iran, from whom financial contributions will be solicited, want to promote reconciliation between Americans and Muslims?

That the President of the United States has joined the chorus of those calling the Ground Zero mosque a religious freedom issue tells us a lot about the moral dry rot that is undermining this country from within.

In this, as in other things, Barack Obama is not so much the cause of our decline but the culmination of it. He had many predecessors and many contemporaries who represent the same mindset and the same malaise.

There are people for whom moral preening has become a way of life. They are out in force denouncing critics of the Ground Zero mosque.

There are others for whom a citizen of the world affectation puts them one-up on those of us who are grateful to be Americans, and to enjoy a freedom that is all too rare in other countries around the world, even at this late date in human history. They think the United States is somehow on trial, and needs to prove itself to others by bending over backwards. But bending over backwards does not win friends. It loses respect, including self-respect.

Dr. Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and "Applied Economics" and "Black Rednecks and White Liberals."

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=38771

The Mad Crapper
08-31-2010, 03:39 PM
http://www.moonbattery.com/islamic-rage-boy-happy.jpg

ROYC75
08-31-2010, 03:52 PM
Muslim like to build around a location of a battle that was won. It's their way of saying, In Your Face, We came, We kicked your *** and now we are forever leaving our mark.