Quote of the day - Mark Steyn

Osama is not Ho Chi Minh, and al-Qa'eda are not the Viet Cong. If you exit, they'll follow. And Americans will die - in foreign embassies, barracks, warships, as they did through the Nineties, and eventually on the streets of US cities, too.

Mark Steyn - 11-22-05

Khaled Abdul-Fattah Dawoud Mahmoud al-Mashhadani a/k/a Abu Shahid; Muntasir al-Jibouri; Abd Al Hadi; Al Zarqawi; Abu Laith al-Libi

Do you recognize the above names? You should. All of these men are Al Qaeda leaders killed or captured in Iraq by Coalition forces (except for Abu Laith al-Libi, who was killed in Pakistan). These are only some of the Al Qaeda fighters and leaders put out of action by the so-called "Bush war for oil" (or whatever other cutesy name the left is calling it now). To repeat, we are killing and capturing Al Qaeda. [For those of you who watch the "Today Show," Al Qaeda is the group that committed the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.]

All of these men would still be alive and well [and planning more attacks] if we had listened to Barack Hussein Obama and followed his advice at the start of this war.

These men will be replaced by other terrorists and terrorist leaders. Those terrorists will plan and plot more attacks. The United States will need to kill and capture them. Will Barack figure this out in time to stop the next wave of terrorist attacks? Does he deserve another chance to get it right? He can't simply throw the terrorists under the bus like he does with his supporters, family members, campaign workers, donors and advisors.

Or will he try to negotiate with them? Will there be a series of one-on-one meetings between Obama and the next group of Al Qaeda leaders? Will we see Al Qaeda visiting the White House over the next "8 to 10 years"?

Mike Ramirez 7-22-08

I was reminded of these dead Al Qaeda leaders when I saw this Mike Ramirez cartoon posted at Lucianne.com. This cartoon is not simply a picture of what "might have been." This cartoon depicts what will happen in Iraq and/or elsewhere if we entrust the war on terror to Barack Obama.

Congressman William Delahunt incites Al Qaeda

As if trying to prove my point from this post, Massachusetts Congressman Bill Delahunt expressed his support for Al Qaeda today:

Massachusetts Rep. Bill Delahunt made the remark Thursday while questioning David Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, during a House subcommittee hearing on interrogation policies. Addington said he couldn't discuss certain interrogation techniques because "Al Qaeda may watch C-SPAN," which was televising the hearing. Delahunt responded: "Right, well, I'm sure they are watching, and I'm glad they finally have a chance to see you Mr. Addington."

You can easily guess to which party Delahunt belongs.


As I wrote on Thursday:

The left views terrorists, criminals, illegal aliens, foreign enemies, etc. as little more than cannon fodder to use against its real enemy - average, taxpaying Americans. If we change our outlook and stop thinking of leftists as well-meaning or merely naive, we will no longer be surprised by each new leftist absurdity. We must get used to the idea that with each challenge that confronts America, we will face two enemies instead of one. The obvious enemy in front of us will be different in each conflict, but the second enemy standing behind us will always be the same.

Congressman Delahunt may wave the flag at campaign rallies, he may salute the flag or go through the motions of praying or saying the pledge or numerous other acts of faux patriotism, but when faced with a choice of the Republicans or Al Qaeda, Delahunt sides with Al Qaeda. Axis Sally was imprisoned for similar conduct. Delahunt and his party are not mere "clowns", as Michelle Malkin writes. This is far more deadly, and we had better treat it as such.

Quote of the day - Ann Coulter

It is unquestionable that Bush has made this country safe by keeping Islamic lunatics pinned down fighting our troops in Iraq. In the past few years, our brave troops have killed more than 20,000 al-Qaida and other Islamic militants in Iraq alone. That's 20,000 terrorists who will never board a plane headed for JFK -- or a landmark building, for that matter.

We are, in fact, fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them at, say, the corner of 72nd and Columbus in Manhattan -- the mere mention of which never fails to enrage liberals, which is why you should say it as often as possible.

Ann Coulter - June 11, 2008

Al Qaeda and Obama

Holger notes that March 12, 2008 may be remembered as "the day that Al Qaeda in Iraq may well have gotten Barack Obama elected to President of the U.S.A."

Regardless of his middle name or his ability to stop us from saying "Hussein," the fact remains that Obama is Al Qaeda's candidate.

Read it all.

Abu Laith al-Libi

If you don't know who Abu Laith al-Libi was, you are like most Americans. Abu Laith al-Libi was a top Al Qaeda commander. He was killed in Pakistan this week. "In some US intelligence circles, he is seen as al Qaeda’s No. 3."


Abu Laith al-Libi lamenting the death of Mullah Dadullah in this 2007 USA Today photo.






We should have been talking about the al-Libi's of the world for the past 6 years, instead of Valerie Plame, Katrina, Anna Nicole and other such white noise.

Quote of the day - USA Today

Iraq remains a violent place, but the trends are encouraging.

U.S. and Iraqi casualties are down sharply. Fewer of the most lethal Iranian-made explosive devices are being used as roadside bombs. In community after community, Sunni groups who were once in league with al-Qaeda have switched sides and are working with the U.S. forces.

On the Shiite side of Iraq's sectarian chasm, something similar is happening. About 70,000 local, pro-government groups, a bit like neighborhood watch groups, have formed to expose extremist militias, according to Stephen Biddle of the Council on Foreign Relations.


USA Today - December 13, 2007

Quote of the day - Daily Herald (Illinois)

"The Democrats, however, mostly ducked the hypothetical question of what they'd do as president if they pulled the U.S. out of Iraq and al-Qaida took over. . . "

Daily Herald - reporting on Democrat "debate" at Soldier Field in Chicago - 8-8-07

The latest leftist meme - Al Qaeda is not Al Qaeda; Abd Al Hadi; Al Zarqawi

The MSM/DNC has found a new meme.

President Bush has finally begun making clear arguments as to why we must continue the fight in Iraq against Al Qaeda. It is not merely so that we can "support the troops" or build democracy in Iraq or prevent a bloodbath or build stability in the middle east. The reason we must fight in Iraq is that we are fighting Al Qaeda:

"The facts are that Al Qaeda terrorists killed Americans on 9/11, they’re fighting us in Iraq and across the world and they are plotting to kill Americans here at home again. Those who justify withdrawing our troops from Iraq by denying the threat of Al Qaeda in Iraq and its ties to Osama bin Laden ignore the clear consequences of such a retreat."

NY Times quoting George Bush

Until President Bush began making that argument, the MSM/DNC was able to distract the American public with such irrelevancies as:

• The Plame affair;
• our inability to find many of Saddam's weapons;
• Cindy Sheehan;
• Halliburton;
• John Murtha's war record;
• the fact that Saddam and Osama bin Laden were two different people;
• Abu Graib;
• misrepresentations regarding Guantanamo;
• the election of 2000;
• Hurricane Katrina;
• The 9-11 Commission

[While some of these items have their own relevance, none of them justify retreat from Al Qaeda. For example, Katrina justifies a retreat from the swamp that is New Orleans, not a retreat from Al Qaeda or from Iraq.]

All of these stories attained "meme" status and helped the MSM/DNC make us forget that Al Qaeda attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001, destroyed lower manhattan and is being dismembered by U.S. forces around the world, including in Iraq. A steady diet of Plame/Sheehan/torture/Katrina/Halliburton/"selected not elected" stories for the past six years has allowed this country to forget that it is at war and who the enemy is.

President Bush has done the right thing by refocusing the issue on Al Qaeda. American forces have killed Al Qaeda leaders in Iraq and delayed Al Qaeda plans for worldwide jihad. We have known since 9-11 that we would have to destroy the Al Qaeda worldwide network. Such destruction will be expensive, bloody and time consuming. We have always known this. The only real question is what is the best way to accomplish this goal. Questions about who outed the non-spy Plame or the menu at Guantanamo or how many more Florida recounts we need to make Al Gore President, etc. distract from the war and accomplish nothing else.

By refocusing on Al Qaeda, President Bush has forced MSM/DNC to do the same. The MSM/DNC has responded with a new meme. They have desparately tried to differentiate Al Qaeda from "Al Qaeda in Iraq."

A recent Today show episode featured interviews with U.S. politicians that denigrated the Iraqi government, while the label beneath the visual image asked "Will Al Qaeda move into Iraq?" The implication being that Al Qaeda is not already there. The New York Times article that quotes President Bush is entitled "President Links Qaeda of Iraq to Qaeda of 9/11." The Times seek to prove, by mere implication, that these are somehow different groups that the President is trying to "link". The MSM/DNC will eventually employ the old leftist cold war tactic of refusing to acknowledge one's membership in an organization unless a membership card can be produced. Al Qaeda members are not likely to carry cards or other official proof of membership.

[The MSM/DNC spent a tremendous effort downplaying the D.C. snipers in 2002 once it became obvious that they were Islamists with sympathies for Al Qaeda instead of white rednecks. The MSM/DNC further made tremendous efforts to ignore the Islamic implications of the phrase "Ismail Ax" on the Virginia Tech shooter's body, despite providing painful details of every other aspect of the shooting. But denying that Al Qaeda is Al Qaeda is a new low for the MSM/DNC.]

While the MSM/DNC has argued that Al Qaeda was not in Iraq before we removed Saddam, such argument is false. In reviewing my tapes of the invasion from 2003, I noted that American forces destroyed an Al Qaeda base in Iraq on or about March 29th, 2003 (during the invasion). I have no further details because the NBC scrolling marquee was very vague. On April 1, 2003, the ABC scrolling marquee noted that a terrorist base was captured with "Al Qaeda manuals" and chemical weapons manuals. I do not know if those stories referred to the same bases. The MSM/DNC felt it was more important to cover other aspects of the war, such as Jessica Lynch or anti-war protests in the U.S. [To the MSM/DNC's credit, it did provide a great deal of coverage of major battlefield movements.]

Even if Al Qaeda did not occupy Iraq until after we removed Saddam, so what? Where would you rather fight Al Qaeda, in the mountains of Pakistan or in the flat lands of Iraq? The terrain of Afghanistan contributed to the downfall of the Soviet Union in the 1980's. By contrast, we have drawn Al Qaeda into the open by fighting them in Iraq. As long as we kill their members and leaders in Iraq, those members can not be used by Islam in the global war. If the U.S. has drawn Al Qaeda into Iraq, then President Bush is to be commended for that reason alone.

Zarqawi - Al Qaeda leader killed in Iraq.










My biggest concern in the immediate aftermath of 9-11 was the mountainous terrain of Afghanistan. The Afghan mountains dwarf those mountains even in the Western U.S. A Soviet style Afghanistan war, with no other fronts, was not an option. But an air war to liberate Afghanistan followed by a lengthy occupation of Iraq, in which Al Qaeda loses leader after leader while Al Qaeda soldiers die and the Iraqi army gains strength and experience is a far different matter. Four years after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Soviet losses amounted to five times the current level of U.S. casualties in Iraq. Fighting Al Qaeda in Baghdad is clearly a better option than fighting Al Qaeda in the caves of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

The only other option is to refrain from fighting Al Qaeda at all. That option would allow 9-11 to go unpunished. That option would invite more 9-11's. That clearly is the option we face if we withdraw from Iraq, either in September or at any time in the next few years. Should an Iraqi withdrawal take place, we would soon forget that 9-11 ever happened while we concentrated on socializing medicine and turning the U.S. into another version of the European countries that face rapid decline.

While this fate would not appeal to most Americans, it is a virtual utopia for the MSM/DNC. MSM/DNC cannot achieve its utopia unless it forces American capitulation in the war. Capitulation means, among other things, pullout from Iraq now before we kill more Al Qaeda. MSM/DNC cannot force a pullout unless it creates the impression that Al Qaeda is somehow different from "Al Qaeda in Iraq."

Abd Al Hadi - Al Qaeda leader behind the 7-7-05 London bombings killed in Iraq








To counter this meme, we must remember the following:

1) Al Qaeda attacked America and destroyed lower Manhattan on 9-11;
2) We fight Al Qaeda now in Iraq.

Now that America is on the verge of hearing the story expressed that simply, MSM/DNC is forced to separate #1 and #2. MSM/DNC has tried to separate those two items with irrelevant nonsense for the past four years, but now that President Bush is explicitly linking them together, MSM/DNC is forced to meet Bush' arguments with explicit denials instead of white noise. MSM/DNC always has a problem when it is forced to be explicit.

We should repeat points ## 1 and 2 at every opportunity.

Visit page added July 31, 2007

U.S. forces killing Al Qaeda in Baghdad; Abu Kaldoun; Doura

The Times Online (UK) reports additional success for American forces in isolating Al Qaeda forces in Baghdad:

The ground-breaking move in Doura is part of a wider trend that has started in other al-Qaeda hotspots across the country and in which Sunni insurgent groups and tribal sheikhs have stood together with the coalition against the extremist movement.

“They are turning. We are talking to people who we believe have worked for al-Qaeda in Iraq and want to reconcile and have peace,” said Colonel Ricky Gibbs, commander of the 4th Brigade, 1st Infantry Division, which oversees the area.

The sewage-filled streets of Doura, a Sunni Arab enclave in south Baghdad, provide an ugly setting for what US commanders say is al-Qaeda’s last stronghold in the city. The secretive group, however, appears to be losing its grip as a “surge” of US troops in the neighbourhood – part of the latest effort by President Bush to end the chaos in Iraq – has resulted in scores of fighters being killed, captured or forced to flee.

The left hopes that they can cut off funding for the war before we route Al Qaeda from Baghdad or kill any more operatives that will be needed in the next terror attack against New York or other American cities.

Regardless of the pros and cons of Saddam Hussein, the opportunity to kill Al Qaeda justifies continued American presence in Iraq.

Doura power plant H/T Global Security.org






-------------------------------------
previous Al Qaeda leaders captured in Iraq.

Khaled Abdul-Fattah Dawoud Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, a/k/a Abu Shahid; another Al Qaeda leader captured in Iraq

American forces have captured another Al Qaeda leader in Iraq. [Leftists stopped reading this post as soon as they saw the name "Al Qaeda."] That makes one more Al Qaeda leader that would still be fighting and plotting terror against the U.S. if we had pulled out of Iraq a few months ago (or never invaded in the first place).

The article from AP contained few details:

Khaled Abdul-Fattah Dawoud Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, also known as Abu Shahid, was captured in Mosul on July 4, said Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner, a military spokesman.

"Al-Mashhadani is believed to be the most senior Iraqi in the al-Qaida in Iraq network," Bergner said. He said al-Mashhadani was a close associate of Abu Ayub al-Masri, the Egyptian-born head of al-Qaida in Iraq.

Bergner said al-Mashhadani served as an intermediary between al-Masri and Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahri.

"In fact, communication between the senior al-Qaida leadership and al-Masri frequently went through al-Mashhadani," Bergner said.

"Along with al-Masri, al-Mashhadani co-founded a virtual organization in cyberspace called the Islamic State of Iraq in 2006," Bergner said. "The Islamic State of Iraq is the latest efforts by al-Qaida to market itself and its goal of imposing a Taliban-like state on the Iraqi people."

previous - Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi,
Al Zarqawi

Quote of the day - John McCain

This vote may win favor with MoveOn and liberal primary voters, but it’s the equivalent of waving a white flag to al Qaeda.

John McCain 5-25-07 - speaking about Senators who voted against funding of the war effort.