Islamic website shows beheading of American

[ebenz47037]

From MichaelSavage.com, there is a link to WorldNetDaily story about this and a link to the video of it. It is very disturbing stuff. So, now, when the libs in Washington and on the news complain about our use of force against the people who did this, what are we going to say?

Story .

Video.

 

[ebenz47037]

Actually, he's got pictures from the video up now due to so many requests for the video.

 

[Lucky]

Should we help people that don't want to be helped? :think:

 

[ebenz47037]

Thing is, Lucky, that the men who killed this man did so because they wanted their comrades released from prison. In other words, they kidnapped these men, hoping that America would do something they say they never do: negotiate with terrorists. And, from what I've heard on the radio all day, these killers were not Iraqis. They were AlQuada.

 

[Lucky]

Too bad Al Queda isn't a country...

 

[ebenz47037]

Originally posted by Lucky

Too bad Al Queda isn't a country...

True enough. But, this had nothing to do with our troops being in Iraq. Al Queda influence the Spanish elections by bombing a train. I'm guessing that they hope to do the same with us.

I mean, if you were an enemy of the US, who would you rather have the president be? John Kerry or GWB?

 

[Gerald]

Originally posted by ebenz47037
I mean, if you were an enemy of the US, who would you rather have the president be? John Kerry or GWB?

Actually, another major terrorist attack on US soil would be a boon to the Bush Administration.

They could invoke Emergency Powers and never have to worry about elections again.

For no longer than the duration of the National Emergency, of course...:noid:

To the credit of the other posters on this thread, I haven't seen calls to "out-barbarian" the barbarians, to pay them back with interest.

But then, BillyBob hasn't posted to this thread yet...

 

[cattyfan]

the perpetrators are saying this is in response to the pictures from the prisons.

let's compare: photos of someone naked with a dog leash and video of someone being beheaded.

somehow they don't seem comparable to me.

just another excuse for the terrorists to take another life.

 

[ebenz47037]

Originally posted by cattyfan

the perpetrators are saying this is in response to the pictures from the prisons.

let's compare: photos of someone naked with a dog leash and video of someone being beheaded.

somehow they don't seem comparable to me.

just another excuse for the terrorists to take another life.

And, on the radio, they said that at least two of the soldiers mistreated the prisoners because they had heard that Jessica Lynch had been raped while she was a prisoner. They were "getting revenge."

On top of that, this whole thing started (to begin with) because Al Queda used passenger planes as weapons against our country. We went after Al Queda and then after Hussein.

I've noticed that none of the "alphabet" news channels have been showing pictures of those three men who were killed by the mob in Iraq or of the beheading. But, they're quick to put up the pictures of the "torture" that our own soldiers are committing. They (the news stations) also quit showing pictures of the planes crashing into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.

I guess we're supposed to forget all of that and just blame our soldiers and government for everything. :think:

 

[ebenz47037]

Originally posted by Gerald

Actually, another major terrorist attack on US soil would be a boon to the Bush Administration.

They could invoke Emergency Powers and never have to worry about elections again.

For no longer than the duration of the National Emergency, of course...:noid:

To the credit of the other posters on this thread, I haven't seen calls to "out-barbarian" the barbarians, to pay them back with interest.

But then, BillyBob hasn't posted to this thread yet...

I don't think we should "out-barbarian" the barbarians. But, I think we should just bomb them and get it over with. To hell with diplomacy. We've been a door mat long enough!

 

[On Fire]

WARNING: still photos of beheading

http://pictures.albawaba.com/nickBerg.html

 

[Gerald]

Originally posted by ebenz47037
I don't think we should "out-barbarian" the barbarians.

With you so far...

But, I think we should just bomb them and get it over with. To hell with diplomacy. We've been a door mat long enough!

And then you apparently say the exact opposite. What's up with that?

Which "them" would you like to bomb? There's lots to choose from.

But remember, bombs cannot tell the difference between friend or foe, combatant or civilian.

 

[ebenz47037]

Originally posted by Gerald

With you so far...
And then you apparently say the exact opposite. What's up with that?

Which "them" would you like to bomb? There's lots to choose from.

But remember, bombs cannot tell the difference between friend or foe, combatant or civilian.

:chuckle: I kind of thought I would throw you there. :chuckle: The thing is that we've been in there trying to help Iraq rebuild. And, they thank us by killing the people that are sent to help them? I honestly don't think that the UN could do any better than we can. After all, look at what happened while there were restrictions on Iraq. That is why the UN wouldn't supprt us in going into Iraq.

I just look at it this way. If you're trying to help a dog that's got his foot caught in a spring trap, and he keeps biting you everytime you try to release him, you're going to have to eventually either give up or kill him to put him out of his misery. We may have to step back and look at this that way.

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by ebenz47037

On top of that, this whole thing started (to begin with) because Al Queda used passenger planes as weapons against our country. We went after Al Queda and then after Hussein.

Since we couldn't then, and still haven't now, taken out Al Queda, we went after Hussein. Do you ever get the feeling he was, and still is, just a scapegoat?

 

[ebenz47037]

Originally posted by Lucky

Since we couldn't then, and still haven't now, taken out Al Queda, we went after Hussein. Do you ever get the feeling he was, and still is, just a scapegoat?

Yeah. I thought he was a scapegoat when we first went into Iraq because I believed all the hoopla about there not being any weapons. He probably was a scapegoat then.

My opinion changed when I heard about his prisons and rape-torture rooms and the mass graves.

I'm one of those people who rarely, if ever trusts what the government tells me. So, when Bush said that Iraq was affiliated with Al Queda, I said, "Yeah, right! You just want to go after Hussein because he tried to have your daddy killed." But, after seeing everything I have on the news (and heard on the radio), I've changed my mind about him (Hussein).

I still don't necessarily believe that he had WMDs. But, a man who would torture his people that way should be removed from power. And, there are Iraqis who are happy about our removing him.

 

[Gerald]

Originally posted by ebenz47037
I just look at it this way. If you're trying to help a dog that's got his foot caught in a spring trap, and he keeps biting you everytime you try to release him, you're going to have to eventually either give up or kill him to put him out of his misery. We may have to step back and look at this that way.

So, do you think Iraq (the country, its people, the whole enchilada) is a mad dog caught in a trap?

 

[ebenz47037]

Originally posted by Gerald

So, do you think Iraq (the country, its people, the whole enchilada) is a mad dog caught in a trap?

Well, do you think that if we let a few live that they would not feel resentment at the fact that, even though all we killed were the terrorists, we bombed their nation?

Are we just supposed to sit here and twiddle our thumbs while the terrorists attack us on our own soil? And, if we react by taking it to their home (which we did), are we supposed to ignore their atrocities while exaggerating our own? Are we supposed to discipline our soldiers that we sent over there for doing what would come naturally with almost anyone?

 

[CryTears]

war is ugly.
how is one to know who it is behind the masks?
would it be possible that it is not 'terrorists' at all?
why was that guy over there in the middle of a war zone trying to get his business started?
did Iraq bomb the USA?

 

[ebenz47037]

Originally posted by CryTears

war is ugly.
how is one to know who it is behind the masks?
would it be possible that it is not 'terrorists' at all?
why was that guy over there in the middle of a war zone trying to get his business started?
did Iraq bomb the USA?

Cry, when the guy speaks with an Arabic accent and claims to be one of the leaders of Al Queda (I heard the tape on the radio. None of the news stations have said anything yet on television), are you just supposed to assume that it's a setup? I would think that anyone, no matter what his or her nationality that tries to terrorize any country by killing its people is a terrorist.

Who said anything about him being there to start up a business? Did you read the article I posted the link to? He went out there to help set the country back up on its feet.

From the above article:

Berg's mother explained he was in Iraq to help rebuild communication antennas.

"He had this idea that he could help rebuild the infrastructure," she told AP.

That was from his mother.

Who cares if Iraq bombed the US? I don't anymore. When this first started, I thought it was unfair that we had invaded them. But, since finding out what Sadam Hussein did to his own people, I have changed my mind.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by CryTears

war is ugly.
how is one to know who it is behind the masks?

I am guessing you think they are Jews in disguise?