"Vote Democrat, Please" says terrorists

Apparently, terrorist leaders think everyone should vote Democrat.

Senior terrorist leaders interviewed by WND . . . say they hope Americans sweep the Democrats into power because of the party's position on withdrawing from Iraq, a move, as they see it, that ensures victory for the worldwide Islamic resistance.

The terrorists told WorldNetDaily an electoral win for the Democrats would prove to them Americans are "tired." . . .

"Of course Americans should vote Democrat," Jihad Jaara, a senior member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group and the infamous leader of the 2002 siege of Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity, told WND.

"This is why American Muslims will support the Democrats, because there is an atmosphere in America that encourages those who want to withdraw from Iraq. It is time that the American people support those who want to take them out of this Iraqi mud," said Jaara, speaking to WND from exile in Ireland, where he was sent as part of an internationally brokered deal that ended the church siege.

Ah, the sweet smell of propaganda. This guy needs to get with the program - Al Quaeda has no better recruiter than Bush, and would doubtless urge a vote right down the conservative ticket just to keep the recruit training program going. But in any case it's no surprise that a Palestinian would misunderstand the situation and think that leaving Bush in means we could either win the war, or keep a large troop level there for years. (And why that would not benefit the terrorists, I don't know. No one seems to explain that when they are sharpening up the knives for the Dems.) In reality, Bush is quite likely to cut troop levels severely.

Oh, and one guy from a Palestinian splinter group? Hardly "terrorist leaders". Didn't you lecture us on how incompetent the Palestinian groups were? But now the Kool-ade is worth drinking? I don't think so.

Not to mention the source. I guess I *could* start posting articles from some of the Communist Party sites, but really, why would they be any more credible?

http://www.snopes.com/religion/islam...
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/legalai...
(Funny how they are often passing on inflammatory and bias-edited pieces that morph into those nutbar emails you've probably gotten.)
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?... [This is a WND commentary on why we should leave Iraq...from 2003!]

lol. *I* thought it was funny. Given Pale's (accurate) comment about how Dems do scandals and the GOP does 'terror alerts', I thought I needed to put up a post to counter the non-story about the allegedly-gay evangelical.

But what about the timing on this JMJ?

If it was anywhere but WND, I would almost agree about the timing. But it is....

Oh man, for a moment I thought you were resurrecting an old thread. That's a bit of a fad lately it seems.

Bah. Johnny knows which buttons to push to get me to react. I guess Fridays are not my light-hearted-approach-to-life days lol. I so totally missed that Johnny was laughing at it.

"Vote democrat and the terrorists win!"

And here I thought irrationality in politics was a thing of the past!

"Vote democrat and the terrorists win!"

We don't need to even do that. The weak willed US public is already doing it.

I really don't care whether the terrorists win, I care whether America will win.

It is hard for me to vision a scenario that will paint an image of victory for the U.S.

We don't need to even do that. The weak willed US public is already doing it.

Because clearly the president does only and exactly what the public wants. Sorry, this mess is not the fault of a "weak-willed public". This one is in the President's lap.

Grayjedi wrote:

It is hard for me to vision a scenario that will paint an image of victory for the U.S.

Can someone please explain to me what "winning" is in the "War on Terror"? I don't see how anyone would "win" such an endless war, because it is not a war. There is no such thing as winning.

Now there is losing if the US public thinks the best way to "protect" itself is with despotism.

Elliottx wrote:

I really don't care whether the terrorists win, I care whether America will win.

I really like that statement

Can someone please explain to me what "winning" is in the "War on Terror"? I don't see how anyone would "win" such an endless war, because it is not a war. There is no such thing as winning.

It's very telling that not only is that question never answered, but that it is rarely asked. We often hear rhetoric about "Winning" (we do like to win) but who the hell knows what that means? I think it's a real shame too - a globally organized terrorist prevention program is a fantastic idea, but right now it's too firmly connected to the Iraq War, which is political suicide for many allied governments. We are fortunate many of our allies are so willing to help us with one, if not the other. I certainly don't think the public (either here or in Europe) is generally so forgiving.

Irongut wrote:
Elliottx wrote:

I really don't care whether the terrorists win, I care whether America will win.

I really like that statement :)

I cant comment to the win the war on terror. I think our blood debt would be paid by secretively taking down Osama. Instead of walking around the globe using a football field sized fly swatter, we should spend monies more strategically, build up our intelligence and address national security in a more targetted and covert matter.

I think a win for the American people though, would be one where our government is again focusing its resources on its citizenry, not on corporate lobby interests, not on a manifest destiny to spread broken democracies, not on identifying the cheapest potential labor markets internally and externally.

I guess my vision is one where a win for America would be one where policy is put in place that focuses on the middle and the poor, which makes up the majority of this country, and ensures its means something for my grandchildren to be Americans, other than they will be indebted from birth for supporting foreign actions and non-citizens reaping the benefits of our culture.

A win for America would be to realize that we are indebting ourselves financially to foreign nations that are not our friends, as we also offload sensitive information about our citizens to processing centers across the globe, whereever they sound the most american over the phone but cost the least.

I am so mad at myself right now though, because no matter how frustrated I am about our countries direction, I missed mid-term election voter registration and will pay the price. I suck.

How do you get a dumb kid to do what you want? Reverse Psychology.

Oh Noes! If America votes for those valiant Republicans we will fail for sure! -- Evil Terrorist

If the US Administration remains unchecked by either the House or Senate the Terrorists win.

Vote this Tuesday.

Terrorists win when you're scared! So vote Republican! Hey, wait a minute... Cognitive dissonance... Ow... brain freeze!

Mayfield wrote:
Grayjedi wrote:

It is hard for me to vision a scenario that will paint an image of victory for the U.S.

Can someone please explain to me what "winning" is in the "War on Terror"? I don't see how anyone would "win" such an endless war, because it is not a war. There is no such thing as winning.

Now there is losing if the US public thinks the best way to "protect" itself is with despotism.

Bingo. The irony is that the "War on Terror" is about as selfishly conceived as the "War on Drugs". The growth in an entire industry of "terror fighting" infrastructure ensures that we will be fighting real or imagined "terrorists" for the foreseeable future.

What Bush is really saying when he says "If you vote Democrat, the terrorists win" is that he spent a great deal of political capital creating a fictitious war against a fictitious enemy and he's going to be god-damned if he won't be the one who gets to reap the dividends.

Irongut wrote:

What winning would be for America.

My thoughts exactly Irongut.

Fox was running with the whole "the terrorists want democrats in power" story this morning. Not in a subtle way, either. One of the hosts asked some guest talking about the issue, "So you're implying that what Osama Bin Laden wants is a democratic victory in Congress, right?"

Funkenpants wrote:

Fox was running with the whole "the terrorists want democrats in power" story this morning. Not in a subtle way, either. One of the hosts asked some guest talking about the issue, "So you're implying that what Osama Bin Laden wants is a democratic victory in Congress, right?"

Desperate times call for desperate acts. Don't worry they will start running the "Librul Pelosi as House Speaker" scare "stories" in the afternoon.

Dear Republicans: You voted in a leftist corporate boondoogle that was sold as relief for seniors with prescription drugs, but really is just corporate subsidation. Congrats you are the exact same demons you have been running against for the past 12 years!

The OP was a joke, though, right? I mean, the guy's name is Jihad for crying out loud.

According to Reuters:

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Friday called U.S. President George W. Bush's defeat in congressional elections a victory for Iran.

Bush has accused Iran of trying to make a nuclear bomb, being a state sponsor of terrorism and stoking sectarian conflict in Iraq, all charges Tehran denies.

"This issue (the elections) is not a purely domestic issue for America, but it is the defeat of Bush's hawkish policies in the world," Khamenei said in remarks reported by Iran's student news agency ISNA on Friday.

"Since Washington's hostile and hawkish policies have always been against the Iranian nation, this defeat is actually an obvious victory for the Iranian nation."

So here's to hoping that the Democrats actually prove him wrong.

JohnnyMoJo wrote:

According to Reuters:

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Friday called U.S. President George W. Bush's defeat in congressional elections a victory for Iran.

Bush has accused Iran of trying to make a nuclear bomb, being a state sponsor of terrorism and stoking sectarian conflict in Iraq, all charges Tehran denies.

"This issue (the elections) is not a purely domestic issue for America, but it is the defeat of Bush's hawkish policies in the world," Khamenei said in remarks reported by Iran's student news agency ISNA on Friday.

"Since Washington's hostile and hawkish policies have always been against the Iranian nation, this defeat is actually an obvious victory for the Iranian nation."

So here's to hoping that the Democrats actually prove him wrong.

Agreed.

Dr.Ghastly wrote:
JohnnyMoJo wrote:

According to Reuters:

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Friday called U.S. President George W. Bush's defeat in congressional elections a victory for Iran.

Bush has accused Iran of trying to make a nuclear bomb, being a state sponsor of terrorism and stoking sectarian conflict in Iraq, all charges Tehran denies.

"This issue (the elections) is not a purely domestic issue for America, but it is the defeat of Bush's hawkish policies in the world," Khamenei said in remarks reported by Iran's student news agency ISNA on Friday.

"Since Washington's hostile and hawkish policies have always been against the Iranian nation, this defeat is actually an obvious victory for the Iranian nation."

So here's to hoping that the Democrats actually prove him wrong.

Agreed.

Thirded.

Ummm ... what? I don't share our governments penchant for villifying nations that don't kowtow to it so the fact that Iran will be more willing to work with us because the Democrats won is a good thing. What are they going to prove him wrong about? The man is similar to our own president in that they are nothing but blowhards who like to talk tough and who are in no way truly representative of the nation they lead. My belief is that taking a tougher stance with Iran only empowers the extreme minority to use fear and religious prejudices to bully the majority into actions which are not in their best long term interest. It's similar to what is being done in our country.
The only way the GWOT will be won is ... a) There are no more humans left. b) All people are equal in a utopian paradise where there is no want or need. Other than that it's a serious and dangerous waste of time and energy. My opinion ....

omg teh terorists one lol

Prederick wrote:
Dr.Ghastly wrote:
JohnnyMoJo wrote:

According to Reuters:

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Friday called U.S. President George W. Bush's defeat in congressional elections a victory for Iran.

Bush has accused Iran of trying to make a nuclear bomb, being a state sponsor of terrorism and stoking sectarian conflict in Iraq, all charges Tehran denies.

"This issue (the elections) is not a purely domestic issue for America, but it is the defeat of Bush's hawkish policies in the world," Khamenei said in remarks reported by Iran's student news agency ISNA on Friday.

"Since Washington's hostile and hawkish policies have always been against the Iranian nation, this defeat is actually an obvious victory for the Iranian nation."

So here's to hoping that the Democrats actually prove him wrong.

Agreed.

Thirded.

I'm with Yeti on this one... why would you hope that "hostile and hawkish policies" should continue against Iran? Doesn't it make more sense that maybe Iran and North Korea wouldn't be so interested in making nukes and testing missiles if it wasn't for those hawkish policies to begin with? Remember, Saddam was a check against 1) internal sectarian violence within Iraq and 2) a check against Iranian hegemony in the region. GWB clearly drew the line first with his infamous Axis of Evil speech, invading and occupying one of those countries and openly threatening another since then. Politics doesn't have to be zero sum you know, a win for the Dems can be a win for rational minded people everywhere and maybe a loss only for the most extreme neo-cons out there.
Let's just hope that the Dems are able to rescue the relationship with Iran and the rest of the Mid Eash to a point where they might be willing to help salvage some security in Iraq.

"This issue (the elections) is not a purely domestic issue for America, but it is the defeat of Bush's hawkish policies in the world," Khamenei said in remarks reported by Iran's student news agency ISNA on Friday.

He misses the point. Joe Nascar lin the voting booth oves hawkish policies, but only those that were "we win" as a result.