I caught wind of this article over at
Orcinus and I believe it deserves a response. While I tend to stay away from freepers like rumprocket, this time I just can't resist. The article is entitled
Are Terrorists the Democrats' Biggest Fans? In this Dem trash piece rumpranger tries to make the argument that Democrats are trying to appease the terrorists because the terrorists support the "cumulative thumping" the Republicans received this election. The source of his discontent comes from a Washington Times article called
Al Qaeda gloats over U.S. election. In which a senior Al Qaeda leader in Iraq praises the US voters, not the Democrats, for punishing President Bush and the removal of Donald Rumsfeld. Here are some excerpts.
Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, in the first public statement by a senior al Qaeda figure since the vote, said in an Internet-posted recording that his group now had 22,000 armed fighters and reserves in Iraq and taunted Mr. Bush not to copy Mr. Rumsfeld and "flee the battlefield."
"We haven't had enough of your blood yet," he boasted. "We call on the lame duck not to hurry his escape the way the defense secretary did.
"We will not rest from our jihad until ... we have blown up the filthiest house -- which is called the White House," al-Muhajir said.
Calling Mr. Bush a "coward" and the "most stupid president" in history, the al Qaeda leader also said, "The American people have put their feet on the right path by ... realizing their president's betrayal in supporting Israel. So they voted for something reasonable in the last elections."
Assrocket then clips a comentary written by Walid Phares, a Senior Fellow with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies explaining some of the interesting characteristics of the tape and where translators and officials should be focusing their attention.
Al-Muhajir's audiotape: an important salad bowl
I see no point to appending this article to his story as it serves only distract readers from his original premise of "terrorists are delighted the Dems have won." I see nothing in Walid's article to suggest this line of thinking. But I am sure there is someone out there who holds arsemissle's point of view he can quote. And here she is Blonde Sagacity. Here are some highlights and feel free to visit her great site for more of the same.
Now I know some on the left got a bit ruffled when I posted about top terror leaders asking Allah for the Democrats to win, but how else can this MSM story be interpreted but as the pussification of America on the Muslim Street? It's not just the Republicans thinking that Dems in charge will now pull out of Iraq --Iraqis and Arab countries share the sentiment...
"...Outside observers saw the bloodshed in Iraq as the major driving force behind the Democrats' success.
"Voters have punished the Republicans. They are not happy with the way the leadership has handled the Iraq war," said Chandra Muzaffar, president of the Malaysia-based think-tank International Movement for a Just World.
"The Republicans lost in the election because the American voters are now fed up and bored with the war," said Vitaya Wisetrat, a prominent, anti-American Muslim cleric in Thailand. "The American people now realize that Bush is the big liar."
"Americans are bored with the war"..."bored". This is how we are perceived. An MTV country that wants their victories bloodless and before the next commercial...
The rise of terror as it is seen today took root when Jimmy Carter exposed his pliable backbone to the world. I can only pray that the newly elected conservative Dems reject more liberal policies that would be detrimental to all Americans...
(The terrorists will be happy to hear that the ACLU is calling for "war crimes" charges for Rummy.)
One thing jumps out at me right off the bat, who in the hell is she talking about when she says, "pussification of America..." ? Is she saying the Democrats are pussies? When is this blonde elitist snob going to realize it does not matter what the terrorists say in public, it's what the American people said in the voting booth that has brought us to this point. We have said no more war in the name of ideology. No more nation building. It's not that terrorists win if we withdraw; it is that we have no choice but to withdraw. The Republican led war machine has put us in a position that we have no other choice. Captain Ed leaves this statement and John uses it as a springboard to loopy land.
"The reality is that we cannot win the war on terror without the Democrats after these midterm elections. Rather than continue with antagonizing rhetoric, we'd better find ways to engage them rationally in this effort if we want to survive."
Armed and ready to do mental battle hindmissle fires his best effort at the topic.
Fair enough. But isn't a reasonable starting point for that engagement the fact that the terrorists are delighted that the Dems have won, and are convinced that the Dems' policies, as the terrorists understand them, will benefit the jihadis? Don't the Democrats have some obligation to face up to the fact that the prospect of our disengagement from Iraq--and if that isn't their "new direction," then what in God's name is?--is viewed with glee by the enemy?
Ooops and it's a miss. A reasonable person would probably use "these are terrorists making wild accusations that have no influence on foreign policy here in America" as a starting point. It would appear that the "jihadists" would disapprove of withdrawing from Iraq as stated above.
"We haven't had enough of your blood yet," he boasted. "We call on the lame duck not to hurry his escape the way the defense secretary did.
Maybe the enemy that he refers to as gleeful because the Republican war machine no longer has the support of the American people. Maybe the Democrats can bring something different to the region besides death and suffering. Perhaps the people of Iraq no longer see our presence in the region as a benefit. Maybe, just maybe, we could focus our limited resources on finally rebuilding Iraqi infrastructure instead of policing a civil war. Bumbomb continues...
I join with Ed in hoping that we can prevent the Democrats from delivering Iraq to the jihadis, but my estimate of their good faith is lower than his. The Democrats have staked everything, politically speaking, on the proposition that the Iraq war is a failure and a disaster. They have every interest in ensuring that our effort there does, in fact, fail. I think, in short, that the terrorists are reading the Democrats' intentions correctly.
I should add that by "the Democrats," I don't mean every rank and file member of that party, many of whom no doubt want America to succeed. I'm referring to almost all of the party's national leadership and the large majority of its elected officials.
Now the Democrats are delivering Iraq to the Jihadists. I would love for John to tell me what about this war is NOT a failure and disaster. This is where he shows his cards, "They have every interest in ensuring that our effort there does, in fact, fail." They being the Democrats and our being the Republicans? I thought the American people voted this last election and not just the democrats. In fact it has failed already hindrocket. Please give me one item; one good reason or one success that has taken place that is worth the lives of more than 200,000 people. (And that is a very conservative number)
The bottom line is this; we have created a situation in the Middle East that can not be solved by military power. We have left ourselves with no options. We have unlocked Pandora's box and now stare into the void we have created. There have been a number of mistakes, as is always the case when nation building, that we no longer have the will to pay for. We must take the high road and admit to them and offer our apologies to the Iraqi people. We must try and undo what President Bush has done by any means necessary. I leave it to the experts to choose the next coarse of action. Let us hope that the new leaders of Congress are more willing to listen to them.