Patterico's Pontifications


Some Cheery News for You

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 12:05 pm

Something to brighten your day:

Urgent news from Abu Dawood, the newly appointed commander of the al Qaeda forces in Afghanistan:

Final preparations have been made for the American Hiroshima, a major attack on the U. S.

Muslims living in the United States should leave the country without further warning.

Have a nice day!

P.S. Meanwhile, the editors of the L.A. Times are worried about civil liberties and Bush’s alleged overreaching.

12 Responses to “Some Cheery News for You”

  1. What we should do is turn IRAN into aburning wastland reduce it to a big bay

    krazy kagu (5006b4)

  2. Do you think if we were to catch the guy in charge Shaajwhatever that Graham and McCain would allow us to interogate him,or are we to just die.McCain is dangerous to our health.

    jainphx (b937e4)

  3. Shorter Patterico:

    Bush has really screwed up Afghanistan, so he must be right with respect to dismantling Constitutional protections.

    Kimmitt (80218d)

  4. IIRC, such a warning is in accord w/an Islamic teaching that absolves the killers for killing Muslims as well as Infidels.

    ras (a646fc)

  5. Response to Kimmitt: There are none so blind as those who will not see…YOU!!

    Florence Schmieg (02cb5b)

  6. Does it make sense that if this is a real threat that they would broadcast it like this? I wonder just how real this is.

    [They broadcast 9/11 with about the same level of specificity. — P]

    Jackie Warner (41f17a)

  7. Jackie, are you a blithering idiot?

    Seriously, I try to refrain to such incendiary words for the most part, but GRAB A BRAIN.

    As other people here are pointing out, Al Quaeda has made it their modus operandi to warn first (which is a religious duty under the Qur’an so, yes, it DOES make sense) and attack later.

    That doesn’t mean this warning or attack is real and will be carried out. Although something like it will be one day according to most experts.

    But think, or, if you’re not good at this, read. This is what they do.

    Christoph (9824e6)

  8. Christoph, so what’s you’re plan in response to all this? Let me guess . . . it has something to do with killing lots of people, and giving the government near-unlimited powers in order to fight terrorists. Am I right? And anyone who doesn’t immediatly agree with killing lots of people and giving the government unlimited power is a “blithering idiot,” I imagine.

    Phil (88ab5b)

  9. Phil, I don’t suggest we kill lots of people every time there is a rumour.

    Although if there is a strike, yes. I propose a decidedly unproportional response.

    But the blithering idiocy of his statement isn’t his proposed response or proactive action because he didn’t offer any. It’s, “Does it make sense that if this is a real threat that they would broadcast it like this?”

    At least he phrased it as a question so I may have been overly harsh on him EXCEPT for the seriousness of the subject. It was a rhetorical excess designed to provoke thought… Patterico’s response to his comment equally on point and more adroitly made.

    The point stands though. To say it “doesn’t make sense” when Islamic law and Al Quaeda SOP call for exactly that is a bit misguided.

    And when it comes to nukes or dirty bombs going off in your nation’s capital and largest city, forever altering human history, perhaps upsetting the western world, and destroying your nation to see a tyrannical worldwide religious order rise in its stead… well, misguidedness is unacceptable.

    If necessary, to prevent all that, I propose massive force à la WW2.

    To you that will be an anethema, but the difference between yourself and Jackie is that he merely asked a question from a position of ignorance, but with the desire and openness to learn, and you are on the wrong track altogether.

    In war, I propose killing lots of people until the enemy begs for peace. Yes, that’s the plan.

    Christoph (9824e6)

  10. i join the times editors in worrying about civil liberties and bush’s overreaching.
    there’s a bright side to this story. abu dawood is urging all muslims to leave the united states. are there muslim blogs (in english) we can go to and spread this mutually beneficial advice?

    assistant devil's advocate (c6012c)

  11. As someone who is OLD ENOUGH to remember the conditions of life in the former Soviet Union and East Germany, let me clue you in – our civil liberties are doing just fine under President George W. Bush. Where they would NOT do fine is under sharia law. And YES, to those idiots who think we can reason with them, they HAVE SPECIFICALLY AND EXPLICITLY said that we will convert to their faith or die.

    Do you not UNDERSTAND that we are in a war against a fanatic and evil philosophy that wants to rule the world? Does it not shake your completely myopic worldview just a bit when Muslims riot and burn things and threaten death to others simply because they perceive that they have been insulted – as in the current nonsense with the Pope? It is NOT and never has been the religion of peace and I for one do not wish to be politically corrected to death!

    The only piece of good news is that they are suggesting that Muslims leave the U.S. Now if could just get the illegals to join them!

    Gayle Miller (855514)

  12. The religion of peace YEAH SURE what a load of malarkey

    krazy kagu (557722)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1356 secs.