PDA

View Full Version : Christian Cleric calls for Violence,,,Uh, wait!



AmPat
11-08-2010, 04:40 PM
SANAA: US-Yemeni radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaqi has called for the killing of Americans "without hesitation," in a video message posted on jihadist websites, US monitoring group SITE said on monday.

"Do not consult anyone in killing Americans," Awlaqi said in the 23-minute video, according to SITE.

"Killing the devil does not need any fatwa (religious edict)," he added.

"It's either us or you," Awlaqi said, addressing Americans in the video which first surfaced on October 23 when one minute of footage was posted on jihadist forums.

Speaking in Arabic, Awlaqi appears sitting behind a desk with a sheathed dagger in his belt. More of that Religion of Peace.:rolleyes:http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Yemen-cleric-calls-for-killing-Americans-without-hesitation/articleshow/6889983.cms

ironhorsedriver
11-08-2010, 08:45 PM
We need to send in the same SEALS who took out the Somali Pirates.

m00
11-08-2010, 10:22 PM
We need to send in the same SEALS who took out the Somali Pirates.

To what end? We just need pragmatic policy that prevents us from having to go over there, prevents them from coming here, and enables us to not trade with them in any way (especially for energy). Oh, and a working missile defense shield. One of these days they *will* get ICBM technology with nuclear warheads. We need subs in the gulf capable of rapid response to intercept them. Then its glass parking-lot time.

Rockntractor
11-08-2010, 10:24 PM
To what end? We just need pragmatic policy that prevents us from having to go over there, prevents them from coming here, and enables us to not trade with them in any way (especially for energy). Oh, and a working missile defense shield. One of these days they *will* get ICBM technology with nuclear warheads. We need subs in the gulf capable of rapid response to intercept them. Then its glass parking-lot time.

Or one clean .338 Lapua shot to the head.

m00
11-08-2010, 10:28 PM
Or one clean .338 Lapua shot to the head.

But it's not just this one guy, right? There's millions, if not hundreds of millions, of guys just like him world wide that will pop up in his place. There is a war against Islam, and if we think that taking out a random guy every couple of months will solve it they'll win.

Rockntractor
11-08-2010, 10:35 PM
But it's not just this one guy, right? There's millions, if not hundreds of millions, of guys just like him world wide that will pop up in his place. There is a war against Islam, and if we think that taking out a random guy every couple of months will solve it they'll win.

It is wise to try to keep them out but even then there are times when you have to go hunting.
As long as there are people there will be bad ones, we could wipe Islam out and someone else would take their place, it's never ending.

m00
11-08-2010, 10:38 PM
It is wise to try to keep them out but even then there are times when you have to go hunting.
As long as there are people there will be bad ones, we could wipe Islam out and someone else would take their place, it's never ending.

Yeah this is so true. It's why a self-sufficient energy and food policy are fundamental to our survival. As well as air tight borders and a missile defense shield. I can't see how anyone - right or left - can argue this.

Rockntractor
11-08-2010, 10:40 PM
Yeah this is so true. It's why a self-sufficient energy and food policy are fundamental to our survival. As well as air tight borders and a missile defense shield. I can't see how anyone - right or left - can argue this.

They sure try to and it defies common sense!

Constitutionally Speaking
11-09-2010, 05:32 AM
But it's not just this one guy, right? There's millions, if not hundreds of millions, of guys just like him world wide that will pop up in his place. There is a war against Islam, and if we think that taking out a random guy every couple of months will solve it they'll win.


Cut off the head and you kill the beast.


Take out the leaders and get rid of the radical clerics and you will go a long way to eliminating the problem.

Not the entire way, but a long way.

ironhorsedriver
11-09-2010, 08:15 AM
Why do you think that the old Soviet Union, or China now is not the target of terrorism? Because they will retaliate with force. When the bully keeps picking on you, you eventually have to strike back. If each and every time the US is threatened or attacked, we responded, I guaranty you we would be safer.

AmPat
11-09-2010, 08:39 AM
Especially if you make the strike horrific. I'll see your terrorism and I'll raze you a city. Don't occupy or rebuild, just kill the bastards where you find them. When I see a roach in my house I kill it, never for one moment thinking I can kill all of them.

marv
11-09-2010, 08:44 AM
So Awlaqi says to kill Americans without hesitation. Uhhhh, isn't he an American?

m00
11-09-2010, 11:42 PM
Cut off the head and you kill the beast.


Take out the leaders and get rid of the radical clerics and you will go a long way to eliminating the problem.

Not the entire way, but a long way.

But AQ is a "headless" organization. It's a freakin' franchise. There's no way to kill it, other than to starve it... and by starve it I mean stop buying oil. Stop using our tax-dollars for "aid." If a bunch of goat-herders want me to die, I got no problem with that (assuming we don't stupidly let them in the country). If a bunch of goat-herders with a well funded international terrorist organization want me to die... well that's a different proposition.

PoliCon
11-10-2010, 02:27 AM
Yeah this is so true. It's why a self-sufficient energy and food policy are fundamental to our survival. As well as air tight borders and a missile defense shield. I can't see how anyone - right or left - can argue this.

Right because shoving our heads in the sand and backing ourselves into a corner will of course work out well for us.

Odysseus
11-10-2010, 02:00 PM
So Awlaqi says to kill Americans without hesitation. Uhhhh, isn't he an American?
Yes, he is. Which means that it's okay to kill him without hesitation. If anyone (read: ACLU) objects, we can quote his directive.

But AQ is a "headless" organization. It's a freakin' franchise. There's no way to kill it, other than to starve it... and by starve it I mean stop buying oil. Stop using our tax-dollars for "aid." If a bunch of goat-herders want me to die, I got no problem with that (assuming we don't stupidly let them in the country). If a bunch of goat-herders with a well funded international terrorist organization want me to die... well that's a different proposition.
It's not headless, it's decentralized. There's a difference. The individuals are capable of destructive acts on their own (MAJ Nidal Hassan, for example), but they need guidance, both technical and doctrinal, and support. Without that, they are confined to individual acts of jihad, with no coordination. Dangerous, but not unstoppable.

AQ and its affiliates have leaders, and the harder you hit them, the less likely they are to hit back. Zawahiri fled Egypt when the government there cracked down on him and his Salifist group in the early 90s, and focused on exporting jihad to everywhere but Egypt. The problem is that the Saudis haven't been made to pay a price for their support for these groups. Without their financing, AQ and the Muslim Brotherhood would be completely inoperable. Punitive acts against the Saudis should include (but not be limited to) personal financial liability for acts of terror committed by Saudi nationals (the Bin Laden family should have been impoverished after 9/11, with all of their overseas assets confiscated by the US government as compensation). Similarly, any Saudi national caught financing a terror group should have their assets frozen if and when that group commits an act of terror. Also, the dirty little secret of the Saudi oil industry is that they don't run it. The drilling, pumping and refining is done by westerners, mostly Americans. If the Saudis continue to finance terror, we can shut down their oil exports, which will cost us, but cripple them. The issuing of visas to the US and allied countries should be tied into cooperation, with anyone who finances terrorism subjected to a ban on travel to the US, or on any carrier that does business with the US. Finally, anybody, anywhere, any time, who is caught financing terror groups and refuses to answer in a US court should be indicted in absentia and any time that they leave Saudia Arabia, subjected to arrest and extradition in any country that we have a treaty with. True, the Europeans will howl, but ultimately, they will buckle if we show that we mean it. A policy that impacts the Saudi elites' bottom line and confines them to their hellhole of a country will hurt them more than shooting at them.


Right because shoving our heads in the sand and backing ourselves into a corner will of course work out well for us.
No, but shoving the heads of those people who back terror into the sand, and holding them down until they swallow some, will work wonders.

AmPat
11-10-2010, 04:58 PM
Yes, he is. Which means that it's okay to kill him without hesitation. If anyone (read: ACLU) objects, we can quote his directive.

It's not headless, it's decentralized. There's a difference. The individuals are capable of destructive acts on their own (MAJ Nidal Hassan, for example), but they need guidance, both technical and doctrinal, and support. Without that, they are confined to individual acts of jihad, with no coordination. Dangerous, but not unstoppable.

AQ and its affiliates have leaders, and the harder you hit them, the less likely they are to hit back. Zawahiri fled Egypt when the government there cracked down on him and his Salifist group in the early 90s, and focused on exporting jihad to everywhere but Egypt. The problem is that the Saudis haven't been made to pay a price for their support for these groups. Without their financing, AQ and the Muslim Brotherhood would be completely inoperable. Punitive acts against the Saudis should include (but not be limited to) personal financial liability for acts of terror committed by Saudi nationals (the Bin Laden family should have been impoverished after 9/11, with all of their overseas assets confiscated by the US government as compensation). Similarly, any Saudi national caught financing a terror group should have their assets frozen if and when that group commits an act of terror. Also, the dirty little secret of the Saudi oil industry is that they don't run it. The drilling, pumping and refining is done by westerners, mostly Americans. If the Saudis continue to finance terror, we can shut down their oil exports, which will cost us, but cripple them. The issuing of visas to the US and allied countries should be tied into cooperation, with anyone who finances terrorism subjected to a ban on travel to the US, or on any carrier that does business with the US. Finally, anybody, anywhere, any time, who is caught financing terror groups and refuses to answer in a US court should be indicted in absentia and any time that they leave Saudia Arabia, subjected to arrest and extradition in any country that we have a treaty with. True, the Europeans will howl, but ultimately, they will buckle if we show that we mean it. A policy that impacts the Saudi elites' bottom line and confines them to their hellhole of a country will hurt them more than shooting at them.


No, but shoving the heads of those people who back terror into the sand, and holding them down until they swallow some, will work wonders.
Oh. You mean like TOTAL WAR. That thing we should be doing but are not.:mad:

Odysseus
11-10-2010, 09:27 PM
Oh. You mean like TOTAL WAR. That thing we should be doing but are not.:mad:

Total War sounds too warlike for our elites. We have to couch it in euphemisms so that they don't have to deal with the reality. For example, instead of saying that we're burning their cities down around them, which sounds much too hostile for liberals, we can make it sound like a humanitarian mission. "Build a man a fire and you warm him for one night. Set a man on fire and you warm him for the rest of his life." Doesn't that sound nicer? :D

ironhorsedriver
11-10-2010, 09:32 PM
Total War sounds too warlike for our elites. We have to couch it in euphemisms so that they don't have to deal with the reality. For example, instead of saying that we're burning their cities down around them, which sounds much too hostile for liberals, we can make it sound like a humanitarian mission. "Build a man a fire and you warm him for one night. Set a man on fire and you warm him for the rest of his life." Doesn't that sound nicer? :D

I like that, I may have to use it sometime.

PoliCon
11-10-2010, 10:28 PM
No, but shoving the heads of those people who back terror into the sand, and holding them down until they swallow some, will work wonders. my thoughts

Odysseus
11-11-2010, 12:36 AM
I like that, I may have to use it sometime.

Feel free. I put it up today as the "Thought of the Day" in the Commander's Update Brief and brought the house down.