Bush Tells Barnes Capturing Bin Laden Is ‘Not A Top Priority Use of American Resources’
Bush Tells Barnes Capturing Bin Laden Is ‘Not A Top Priority Use of American Resources’
Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes appeared on Fox this morning to discuss his recent meeting with President Bush in the Oval Office. The key takeaway for Barnes was that “bin Laden doesn’t fit with the administration’s strategy for combating terrorism.” Barnes said that Bush told him capturing bin Laden is “not a top priority use of American resources.” Watch it.
Bush’s priorities have always been skewed. Just months after declaring he wanted bin Laden “dead or alive,” Bush said, “I truly am not that concerned about him.” Turning his attention away from bin Laden, Bush trained his focus on Iraq — a country he now admits had “nothing” to do with 9/11.
Capturing bin Laden, as Rep. Nancy Pelosi recently pointed out, will not necessarily make America safer because it would come five years too late. Yet, capturing or killing the man responsible for 9/11 should remain a high priority.
More from The Carpetbagger Report.
Full transcript:
HOST: Alright Fred, you and a few other journalists were in the Oval Office with the President, right? And he says catching Osama bin Laden is not job number one?
BARNES: Well, he said, look, you can send 100,000 special forces, that’s the figure he used, to the mountains of Pakistan and Afghanistan and hunt him down, but he just said that’s not a top priority use of American resources. His vision of a war on terror is one that involves intelligence to find out from people, to get tips, to follow them up and break up plots to kill Americans before they occur. That’s what happened recently in that case of the planes that were to be blown up by terrorists, we think coming from England, and that’s the top priority. He says, you know, getting Osama bin Laden is a low priority compared to that.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
That would be Freddy “the Beatle” Barnes…
September 14th, 2006 at 1:59 pmWhy should Pres. Bush try to catch Usama bin Laden now? It’s his all-purpose exuse whenever he needs a politically expediant excuse for craping on the US Constitution or to scare Americans into voting for him.
Of course, the only campaign pledge he has ever kept is “lower taxes!” so why should Pres. Bush have to keep his word this one other time when he said “dead or alive”? He’s got a score of one promise kept, every single other promise broken, why change the score now?
September 14th, 2006 at 2:00 pmWell Trolls? what do you have to say about THAT little statement by your ‘leader’? and do you agree with him? Come on, spill!
September 14th, 2006 at 2:00 pmWho’s the flip flopper now?
First we wanted bin Laden, until we didn’t.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:04 pmFirst Saddam and bin Laden were bosom buddies, until they weren’t.
First Bush had political capitol, then…. oh wait, that one never happened…
Of course, the most important strategy to fight terrorism is to blame the Democrats.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:05 pm” Alright Fred, you and a few other journalists were in the Oval Office with the President”
Let me guess, all the journalists were from right leaning organizations? What an ass this Bush fellow is.
Biggist mass murderer in US history is not a top priority! That’s insane.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:05 pmCapturing Bin Laden would crush the spirits of millions of Muslims. I’m actually quite shocked they haven’t staged it.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:06 pmW has had the wrong priorities since August 2002 when he he started to move troops from Afghanistan to Kuwait in preparation for the invasion of Iraq.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:07 pmI just finished watching “Loose Change 911, 2nd Edition” lastnight. I believe it was suggested by a poster on TP. 1st, thank you for the suggestion, whoever you are. 2nd, if you haven’t seen it…..you must.
Just when I thought the Bush BS was at the worst it could get, the pit of my stomach now boils with anger rather than just disgust. It’s like he’s a 4 year old~”if I close my eyes, they can’t see me, heh heh” (imagine a weasle/pig animal noise).
Sorry for a little off topic, but it all boils down to the same thing at the end of the day. This whole world is screwed up because our Pres killed over 3000 Americans to go to war and F up the entire world while he’s at it.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:07 pmCatching Osama was NEVER a Chimpy priority.
Osama is the boogeyman and Chimpy needs him at large to scare the sheeple.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:12 pmOf course. Foiling terror plots as they occur is a much better use of resources than capturing the guy who’s allegedly responsible for all the shit in the first place.
But hey, the administration has to make some sort of excuse for not trying to catch him, seeing as how:
- he’s dead,
and
- keeping the rumour of him alive and operational out there somewhere keeps the American populace in a sheeplike state of fear, making them easier to control.
I fOsama did not exist, it would have been necessary for the administration to invent him.
Hang on….that’s exactly what they did isn’t it?
September 14th, 2006 at 2:12 pmtesting
September 14th, 2006 at 2:13 pmPlus, war’s good for business.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:15 pmHe also told this group of ass kisser that gasoline prices would be coming down, “Jest a heads up heh heh.” How you think he knows that? HMMMMMM?
September 14th, 2006 at 2:16 pmWhat I wouldn’t give to see him or Snow Job asked about that by the useless WH press corpse(that is NOT a misspelling).
You’re wrong, Mike Smith. Bush would look like a complete and total stud if He caught Osama.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:16 pmOh Ford! Where is my Soma?
September 14th, 2006 at 2:25 pmRe: “That’s what happened recently in that case of the planes that were to be blown up by terrorists, we think coming from England, and that’s the top priority.” It’s interesting the administration keeps bringing this up. The US had nothing to do with breaking that case. The Brits did it through their own intel, legally, with warrants.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:27 pmOSB is not a priority because , 1)the US can’t find him OR the other horrible thought is that 2)the Republicans have millions of reasons to prolong this war.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:27 pmIt is always wise to ask “Who benefits” when trying to answer a question.
Obviosly the republicans can gain more for keeping this conflict alive that ending it. When it becomes a political liability, we will be out of Iraq in no time.
So the democrats are saying we should put resources behind something that won’t help America? That seems like a bad idea. If catching or killing OBL won’t help America, why would we spend resources doing it?
September 14th, 2006 at 2:27 pmRe: “That’s what happened recently in that case of the planes that were to be blown up by terrorists, we think coming from England, and that’s the top priority.” It’s interesting that the administration keeps bringing this up. The US had nothing to do with breaking that case. The Brits did it with their own intel, legally, using warrants. Gee, what a novel idea.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:29 pmComment by Roger_Roger — September 14, 2006 @ 2:27 pm
This is when you’re really weak, roger. It’s important because Bush said it was. AND it would send a pretty clear message to Muslims. If they could even catch Zawahiri it would send chills throught the entire Muslim world.
Pelosi’s comments were pathetic.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:31 pmRoger,
September 14th, 2006 at 2:32 pm#19,
Who said it wouldn’t help America? bush? hahahahahaha. There you go believing in that sack of stupid again.
Bush can’t afford to have OBL captured … you NEVER remove your greatest marketing tool for fear
September 14th, 2006 at 2:33 pmI keep wondering why people refuse to see that
I like how Nancy Pelosi puts it:
Capturing bin Laden, as Rep. Nancy Pelosi recently pointed out, will not necessarily make America safer because it would come five years too late. Yet, capturing or killing the man responsible for 9/11 should remain a high priority.
That would be Bush, right? Let’s get on that. Maybe bring the “Sherrif” around?
September 14th, 2006 at 2:34 pmbut dubya’s got to repeat and install the name into every speech and talking point… only weeks ago, he avoided that name - now it’s every other word…
September 14th, 2006 at 2:34 pm“So the democrats are saying we should put resources behind something that won’t help America? That seems like a bad idea. If catching or killing OBL won’t help America, why would we spend resources doing it?”
Because he murdered 3000 people. Is that so hard to grasp? And when exactly did it become a bad idea? When Bush became president?
September 14th, 2006 at 2:34 pmIt seems a lot like Bush is offering the same approach to the war on terror that he criticized Kerry for, in other words, the idea that terrorism should mainly be combatted through intelligence and police work.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:36 pmSo Bush has told Barnes; Rice and Cheney have made similar statements. Two years ago, Bush was interviewed and said he just doesn’t care about OBL any more.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:37 pmBut did that stop the Reichwingers and fact-free Fox-TV from pouncing on Nancy Pelosi for saying that if OBL were caught, we wouldn’t be any safer.
Of course not - why pass up an opportunity to attack a Democrat?
When is the public going to see the hypocrisy and the double-speak we get from this regime - even the 30% who are brain dead should be able to see it.
IMHO Bush needs a bogeyman “out there” so he can continue to play the role of SuperBush and protect us from harm.
For all we know OBL is already dead and Bush is playing his sick-o version of “Weekend at Bernie’s.”
#19 Roger_Roger
So the democrats are saying we should put resources behind something that won’t help America? That seems like a bad idea. If catching or killing OBL won’t help America, why would we spend resources doing it?
You’re right. The guy blew up a couple of buildings in New York and one in Washington, but that was years ago. What we really need to do is go start another war somewhere. That would be the best use of our resources. It looks like Iran is next on the list.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:38 pmWhen Windbreaker Bush is on TV, preaching at us, he won’t shut up about Osama. When he’s hanging with Repeater Barnes, he lets it out that he’s not at all as serious as he pretends to be.
Bush-Bin Laden cahoots? They’re working some kind of a whipsaw here.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:39 pmHow many police chiefs would have their jobs - or their lives - if they decided it wasn’t worth their time or resources to pursue a mass murder responsible for the killing of 3000 people, especially when they know the general area the murderer is hiding?
September 14th, 2006 at 2:41 pmCould it be that the Bushes are being lenient on OBL because he is their favorite type of guy - a rich Saudi?
No, that couldn’t be true.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:41 pmRoger - because he killed 3000 Americans, perhaps?
To quote Humphrey Bogart in The Maltese Falcon:
Bin Laden killed 3000 of our citizens. Like Bogey says, we’re supposed to do something about that. It’s bad business to let the killer get away with it.
Because the next guy might get the idea that we’ll let him get away too, if catching him becomes more than mildly challenging. And that’s not a good impression to leave our adversaries with, is it?
September 14th, 2006 at 2:44 pmI do hope that Bush realizes that we do not have 100,000 special forces soldiers…
September 14th, 2006 at 2:47 pmI have a really good friend who thinks the Chimp is still doing a good job and did the right thing going to Iraq. And to this day we cannot discuss politics because there is no talking to her. None. She is the type of person who refuses to admit that she is wrong, and that’s what I believe Smush supporters’ problem is; complete bullheadedness. I’m afraid this 30% is here to stay, unfortunately.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:49 pmSo, in other words, the Bush administration policy is:
You can
- kill as many people as you like (such as 3,000 Americans),
- destroy as many buildings as you like (like 2 World Trade Centers),
- and cause as much widespread fear and panic as you like (every day after 9/11)
as long as afterwards, you go on vacation in the Poconos.
The W administration is pathetic.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:50 pmBush was for capturing or killing Osama before he was against it.
He’s a flip-flopper!
Bush is appeasing Osama just like that that durn Neville Chamberlain appeased th’ Nazis.
Why does Bush hate America?
September 14th, 2006 at 2:51 pmPUT THAT STATEMENT INTO A F#$%ING COMMERCIAL!!! NOW!!!
September 14th, 2006 at 2:52 pmBin Laden’s is the head of one of the largest and most deadly terrorist groups out there, he is a hero and a villian to millions, he is the Middle East Jack Bauer, and he knows more about what he has done then any terrorism expert you can name.
Capturing him wouldn’t stop terrorism, but you can bet your ass it would slow it down and weaken the organisation behind it. It would take out one of the most charismatic figures involved, it would heal a great big wound in America’s image, and it would be a blow for justice. It needs to be done.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:56 pmIF they captured Bin Laden then they wouldn’t have ANY excuses for “staying the course” in IRaq.
Bush already admitted he doesn’t care about Bin LAden. In Fact, Bush NEEDS Bin LAden to stay alive. Why? Because Bush needs that kind of Boogeyman to keep showing up conveniently just as BUsh needs him for a poll boost or to help the Republicans come election time.
The fact that Bush would rather use Bin Laden for political points, instead of stopping him as the enemy of AMerica who was behind 9/11 speaks volumes about what the was on terror is really about. Here’s a hint. It has nothing to do with terror or safety and everything about the neo-con agenda of nation building.
BUsh cares less about keeping America safe from terrorism and stopping Bin Laden than he does about McDonald’s and Walmart being able to open one more chain in another country.
September 14th, 2006 at 2:59 pmBased on what I have read and observed the United States is currently in the 14th staight year of incompetent presidential leadership in regards to the War on Terror (or what ever you want to call it ). Based on the
September 14th, 2006 at 2:59 pmrhetoric coming from our political leadership, it appears that we might see this record extended to 20 years???
Bush and Bin Laden are in league with each other.
They use each other for political gain and neither wants to end that sweetheart deal.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:01 pmIf the american people vote any of these stupid republicans back into office for another 4 years they are out of their freaking minds. Imagine Bush telling the press that OBL isn’t important and theres no need to send in more troops to even try to catch him. Bush is INSANE AND HE SHOULD BE IMPEACHED!!!!!!!
September 14th, 2006 at 3:01 pmBush and Bin Laden are co-dependent.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:02 pmWhat IS the top priority of the war on terrorism?
When are these jokers who call themselves reporters going to actually ASK THIS SHIT?
September 14th, 2006 at 3:03 pmPelosi is wrong, and obviously, so is Bush the Abomination. Cacthing OBL will make America safer, as he has proven himself to be particuarly good at organizing and motivating successful attacks against us. DUHHH. Of course we want to catch him before he unleashes another one. I don’t think anyone is suffering from the delusion that catching him would somehow undo 9/11, Jesus H. Christos, people!!!
But Bush’s statement that its not a high level priority. Read that a few times. Think about that. We all know it never was a priority. We all know that OBL and the Taliban played Bush and his idiot followers for suckers. We all know that Bush wanted to go into Iraq since the 90’s. We’ve all read the PNAC - and we know what is implied and stated explicitly therein.
How Bush remains in charge of this country is beyond me. Why a screaming horde hasn’t manually hauled him out of the Whitehouse and disposed of him properly, is a great mystery.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:04 pmyou NEVER remove your greatest marketing tool…
Comment by bubbajoebob — September 14, 2006 @ 2:33 pm
such as abortion and gay marriage… but especially abortion…
September 14th, 2006 at 3:05 pm.
His vision of a war on terror is one that involves intelligence to find out from people, to get tips, to follow them up and break up plots to kill Americans before they occur.
Isn’t this sort of what John Kerry proposed and was mocked for suggesting?
September 14th, 2006 at 3:06 pmJust another we can add to the list of Bush flip-flops on bin Laden.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:09 pmAmerica’s Least Wanted
So basically, President Bush is saying that bringing to justice the murderer of over 3000 American citizens is not a big deal. He simply wants us to just move on and fight his vanity war.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:10 pmBy the way, Barnes’s nickname is “Beadle,” which was given to him by John McLaughlin of The McLaughlin Group many years ago. Those of you lacking in theology might want to know that McLaughlin, a former Jesuit priest, gave Barnes the moniker because his role in the show is similar to that of a beadle in a Catholic church, that being to assist the priest in his sacramentary roles. Beadles make sure the candles are lit, the robes are clean, etc.
That being said: Barnes’s comments need to be transmitted everywhere. Bush’s remarks concerning bin Laden are worth repeating over and over again along with the line: “You think Democrats won’t keep you safe? How about a guy who doesn’t think the capture or death of Osama bin Laden is important?”
September 14th, 2006 at 3:12 pmRoger” It’s important because the chimp said it! Remember the ol western promise of bringing OSB back “dead or alive?” But thgen, you must be a cut and run Republican when it comes to action rather than talk.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:20 pmAnd if bush told barnes the moon was made out of green cheese, he’d believe that too…what a repub. sucker……
September 14th, 2006 at 3:22 pmQuote: “His vision of a war on terror is one that involves intelligence to find out from people, to get tips, to follow them up and break up plots to kill Americans before they occur.”
Using the word intelligence in any comment describing George Bush is sacrilege.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:25 pmSo Pelosi says this and is slammed. Bush says it and it’s a pragmatic war time decision? help me out Neo cons. Is this a flip or a flop?
September 14th, 2006 at 3:25 pm“That would be Freddy ‘the Beatle’ Barnes…”
Dear GOD, man! Stop the blasphemy!
That would actually be Freddy “The BEETLE” Barnes.
I’ve listened to the Beatles. I know the Beatles. Fred Barnes is no Beatle.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:30 pmDidn’t that British plot turn out to be more smoke than fire. Like nobody had passports, the liquids necessary for the plot were not found, no airline tickets has been purchased, etc.
The last I heard only about half of those rounded up had been charged. We need follow-up on this because the deadline for holding these people without charges has expired. Were they released?
Bush needs bin Laden as bogey man for the next electon as much as bin Laden needs Bush to help with recruiting more terrorists. While it may not be a marriage made in heaven it certainly helps both of them out so it is no wonder that there are no stepped-up efforts to capture or kill bin Laden. When you have a good thing going, you don’t kill the golden goose.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:31 pmSouthpaw: “I have a really good friend who thinks the Chimp is still doing a good job..” - - I’ve got one of those too and she’s also a woman, an otherwise intelligent successful woman. I just don’t get it.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:31 pmNot only is Bush ruining the nation rapidly, he’s keeping me from working. I am a fully qualified (yet not “highly qualified” ) teacher and his NCLB is screwing me along with the rest of the public school children with this Act.
Trolls are always saying that we speak and don’t act. I have an idea:
The next time the pres has a “uh…State of the…uh, State…Uh, you know, where I address the Nation” get-together, let’s go. Back me up. You all create a diversion, and I’ll gladly take one in the back to put my boot tip in his jacobs. I could go out like that….I would do cold hard time for life just to see his face get all red and him writhe around in pain for 5 minutes.
I don’t want him dead. Just want his balls to hurt.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:31 pmI’m sorry junior, I was busy throwing darts at your picture . . . .
September 14th, 2006 at 3:36 pmdid you say something?
#60 You might hit Karl Rove’s hand
September 14th, 2006 at 3:38 pmWhy is Bush backing off bin Laden?
I think Bush was told by Osama’s father that the oil would dry up if he killed his son. He may say he has no connection to his son but blood is thicker than water and a father never stops loving his son.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:38 pmWhy can’t we do both? Why is it so difficult to put together a special unit to find, kill or capture OBL in conjuction with HUM-INT? Oh, that’s right, Bush disbanded that unit…nevermind.
Regardless of OBL’s current influence or value to our “war on terror,” he was part of a conspiracy to commit mass murder. He was a key leader (along with KSM and Zawahiri) of a plot that killed 3000 people, injured hundreds more and caused billions of dollars in damage to property in the United States. For this, and this alone, he should be brought to justice.
The fact that Bush and his administration has been unwilling or unable to bring OBL to justice should be repeated over and over and over again until it’s seared into the minds of Americans, especially as they cast their ballots in November.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:42 pmCan you just imagine the front page headlines in all of the rightwing newspapers if John Kerry has said that 2 years ago!
September 14th, 2006 at 3:43 pmSouthpaw
My father likes Bush. His chief argument always seems to be “But you can bet Bush knows more about blah blah blah” rather then actually, you know, looking at what Bush has achieved. He seems infinitely impressed with the idea that Bush wants a place in history, and infinitely blind to the fact that for a president to get a good place in history, he has to actually achieve some good during his term of office. My bet is that Bush is going to get a LBJ in history, in that it will be defined by a war America will eventually lose, but without the vast advances in civil rights LBJ saw into action to redeem himself with.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:46 pmBush: Capturing Bin Laden is “Not a Top Priority”…
Because capturing Osama would derail Republican plans to exploit the memory of 9/11 every election cycle….
September 14th, 2006 at 3:50 pmBush knows that Osama didn’t do it, that’s why. What else makes sense? He’s afraid of chasing him? He doesn’t think the US public will approve of spending money and time to catch the “orchestrator of 9/11″? What else makes sense?
We used to use reason around here. D’int we?
September 14th, 2006 at 3:51 pm#19- Roger-Roger- So you’re saying that capturing Osama is a bad idea, and a waste of money? Fine then. But I don’t want to hear another F*CKING WORD from you or anyone else who will support GWB on this too, about how Bill Clinton didn’t take care of Osama when he had the chance. Especially when you are willing to give GWB a free pass for the same thing. We can spend 250 million an HOUR in Iraq, but this just isn’t in the budget? Whatf*ckingever. Just 3 days ago he was ‘honoring’ those who died on September 11th. Had he already had his cozy little chat with Fred? Sh*t, it doesn’t matter. We already knew GWB didn’t care about Osama, he said so. But now the families of the victims get to hear him say that it’s a “waste” of resources to find him. I’m sure they’ll understand. You are a JERK. Off with you,
September 14th, 2006 at 3:57 pmI hate to say it, but Bush is partially correct. This is because what we have done in Iraq have caused a far greater number of people to want to attack us. So now, we DO have a bigger problem, and thats the thousands, and thousands of people who have the exact same mindset as bin Laden.
I’d almost think of them as little bin Laden 2.0’s - just not as powerful in the region as he was.
September 14th, 2006 at 4:03 pmSo the democrats are saying we should put resources behind something that won’t help America? That seems like a bad idea. If catching or killing OBL won’t help America, why would we spend resources doing it?
Comment by Roger_Roger
flip flop flipper flopper flippity floppity smakada smakada smakada gum bumper
Yes indeed why does Bush spend so much time wasting his resources by repeating Osamas name and pasting his picture about ad nauseum?
September 14th, 2006 at 4:04 pmThe democrats don’t deserve to win if they don’t start slamming republicans on this stuff. You don’t just say Bush was wrong either. You have to attack their character. And it has to be vicious. It’s so easy, but these democrats are so pathetic at campaigns it makes me want to die.
September 14th, 2006 at 4:04 pmIt’s so easy, but these democrats are so pathetic at campaigns it makes me want to die.
Comment by keith
Its hard being an assclown!! =)
I mean you have to think up snarky untrue things all the time and trepeat it continually and all those damn lies is hard to remember..
September 14th, 2006 at 4:08 pmOn Iraq - a good offense trumps a good defense, or something like that. But when it comes to the real enemy, Bush wants to play only defense? More over at Angrybear at what a chickensh*t our President is.
September 14th, 2006 at 4:13 pmOf course Bush isn’t interested in killing Bin Laden. Bin Laden keeps making political commercials for Bush and his other Republican partners. Bush and these crazy with fear Republicans are out to scare Americans into giving up their way of life and the Constitution . They are trying to turn the nation into a bunch of bedwetting, wussies like themselves. Every two years Bush and the underground prince of darkness the VP put on their Halloween show with Bin Laden and Americans fall for it. Make no mistake Bin Laden is interested in destroying western democratic societies, but he and 10 billion extremist could not do that unless they have a fifth column actively working in the country. We are in extreme peril when the fifth columns reside in the Whitehouse, Congress and now the Courts.
September 14th, 2006 at 4:13 pmthe decider decided.
September 14th, 2006 at 4:17 pmI think I am going to have to agree with Keith at #72 here.
September 14th, 2006 at 4:19 pmOrdinarily I don’t want to reduce myself to the level of those miscreants at the RNC, but I think it is time for compromising.
It is time to blast these guys with nasty the same kind of words, insinuations, implications and ugliness that they spew against Democrats.
It’s time to fight back hard - and dirty - it’s time to get them out of government.
We can’t let them take our country where they are headed.
The media does not give Democrats equal time - the fairness doctrine is history - the Repugs get 85% of TV face time now. Well, if Democrats start throwing back some of the crap that has been thrown at them, I think the cameras would like to film that. It is time to get dirty and LOUD. It’s time to give back what we have been getting.
No more defense - it’s time for offense.
Unbeliavable. A murder of 3000 citizens and the president doesn’t care about the alleged main main behind the attack. Not that Bush ever really has cared about Al Qaeda. What a slap in the face of the 9/11 families. Perhaps this is the thank you from the neocons since they got their new pearl harbor. Bush quickly changed focus from Osama to Saddam.
September 14th, 2006 at 4:26 pmWhat a bunch of crap for Bin Laden to not be on the TOP of the list. Then again, Bush benefits when Bin Laden is able to terrorize. Fear-mongering is Bush’s tool and trade.
September 14th, 2006 at 4:29 pmThis may be the final nail in the coffin for the Republicans for the November elections. With this statement, Bush just lost the elections for all of them.
How is someone who killed 3,000 of our people NOT a top priority!?!
September 14th, 2006 at 4:31 pmWanted!…
Wanted? Not that much. Fred Barnes has the skinny on some thick head strategery strategy: “Here’s how President Bush explained this Tuesday: “This thing about . . . let’s put 100,000 of our special forces stomping through Pak…
September 14th, 2006 at 4:31 pm
September 14th, 2006 at 4:35 pmThe Case for Capturing Osama bin Laden
The Case for Capturing Osama bin Laden
September 14th, 2006 at 4:37 pmSuppose for the sake of argument Hezbollah/Iran/etc. today presents a clearer and more present danger to America than Osama and al Qu’aida. What would be a more forceful physical example to Hebollah’s/Iran’s/etc’s leaders of America’s resolve and determination to track down and bring to justice terorrists threatening America than the capture or killing of Osama bin Laden? Turn that on its head. What would be a more forceful physical example to Hebollah’s leaders of America’s lack of resolve and determination to track down and bring to justice terorrists threatening America than to fail to track down and bring to justice Osama bin Laden?
September 14th, 2006 at 4:38 pmLet bin Laden go? I thought Republicans were really big on deterrents…If we don’t fight them over there, we’ll be fighting them over here; the death penality is a deterrent, etc.
We are supposedly to tough to follow the Geneva Convention.
But not so tough on this one. 3,000 American’s killed, and Bush let’s ‘em go scott free. And all those tough militant conservatives kiss Bush’s butt on that…and everything else.
Talk about total surrender to terrorists…
September 14th, 2006 at 4:39 pmSo to Bush Bin Laden is not a priority in the War on Terror but Saddam Hussein is? Didn’t Cheney just say the other day that if he had a chance to go back in time to redo things he’d do exactly what he did in the first place? What a crock!
September 14th, 2006 at 4:40 pmI agree with the idea of slogan slamming the neocons. Every thread at TP should contain several and let’s see what sticks and effectively encapsulates the ridiculousness of BushCo. We also need to create slogans for the progressive movement as well.
Republicans: The “I’ve got mine” Party
September 14th, 2006 at 4:42 pmPatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC)
Republicans believe in THEM.
September 14th, 2006 at 4:47 pmDemocrats, believe in US.
Republicans: the ConServingTime Party
September 14th, 2006 at 5:02 pmDemocrats: If you love liberty, love a liberal
Rumsfeld was for Saddam Hussein until he wasn’t. Republicans flip flop more.
September 14th, 2006 at 5:05 pmThis ain’t news, Bush himself said in 2002 that he was not concerned with OBL. Christ, how Kerry managed to miss putting that statement all over the airwaves I’ll never know.
Clearly, we need to catch OBL as a form of deterent and example to other would-be OBLs, and we needed to do it four years ago. If Bush stood at ground zero on 9-12 and said, “The person who attacked us here will still be alive in five years” he would have been lynched. Instead, Cons kiss the Bush’s ass and protect him.
Now, IF we ever do capture or kill OBL, I don’t want to hear a goddamn thing from any Republican talking about how his capture is a “great victory on the war of Blah, Blah, Blah.” You’re on the record saying OBL don’t matter, so forget about claiming his capture as a victory, after all, he doesn’t matter.
September 14th, 2006 at 5:10 pmbin Laden = Goldstein
September 14th, 2006 at 5:10 pmWhat a great follow-up to his sickening exploitation of 9/11’s fifth anniversary. The MSM covers that spectacle in all its disingenuous glory, yet will surely give little or no attention to this. What a pathetic lot.
September 14th, 2006 at 5:11 pmConservatives start wars. Liberals finish them.
September 14th, 2006 at 5:23 pmSo let me understand. Bush is running around the country talking about bin-Laden said this, bin-Laden is the enemy, and yet capturing bin-Laden is just not his priority. WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE IT”S TOO LATE! DOWN WITH BUSH. DOWN WITH THE GOP. IT”S OUR ONLY CHANCE TO WIN THE WAR AGAINST THE TERRORISTS.
September 14th, 2006 at 5:27 pmI’m with trblmkr on this one. The snarky comment he made about the price of gasoline coming down just jumped out at me and grabbed me by the neck!
Jeebus! That cynical fuc*ing bastard! Not only does he manipulate the prices at the pumps before a big election, he admits to it and laughs about it with reporters. We are all in very deep sh*t.
The man has no soul. He views this country as one giant amusement park ride. He thinks of us as Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride and he’s been given all the E Ticket books he’ll ever need.
Whetever happens on the ride is of no consequence as long as he has a good time.
September 14th, 2006 at 5:33 pmBush is a sickening S.O.B. He trots out Bin Laden every time he wants to scare the conservatives into voting Republican every elections. Bin Laden must be capture or killed - that should have been project #1 to teach the terrorists that we mean what we say. Bush is like Bin Laden, obsessed with power and clinging to power, no matter how they get it. America is really the loser having Bush as its leader.
September 14th, 2006 at 5:35 pm[…] This is amazing. Osama Bin Laden is responsible for nearly 3,000 American deaths on 9/11, yet catching or killing him is “not a high priority” for George W. Bush in the war on terror? Bush also said “Bin Laden doesn’t fit with the administration’s strategy for combating terrorism.†[…]
September 14th, 2006 at 5:36 pmWatch out for an October surprise. They may already have him, or they know he’s dead. They’ve only held out telling about it in order to maximize the clout they’ll get. They will also make a big deal about keeping it under wraps to gather intel.
September 14th, 2006 at 5:42 pm#96- RB- That reminds me of something else he said. A reporter asked him what he thought of the prospect of Nancy Pelosi becoming the first woman to be Speaker of the House, if the Dems retake the House in November. His reply? “That’s not gonna happen.” Well tell us, ‘Ms. Dionne Warwick’, how do you know that? He seems pretty sure of himself, wonder why…?
September 14th, 2006 at 5:46 pmBUSH is SO full of SH*T I am amazed he’s not more tanned…
September 14th, 2006 at 5:51 pmHe truly is one of biggest A-holes in history,just like the other facsist war criminal HITLER,his grampa’s buddy.
IMPEACH-PROSECUTE-EXECUTE….it’s eventual
“Not A Top Priority”…
Here is all the evidence anyone will ever need to indict this president for failure, massive, unredeemable failure. His mindset is clear. Let no fact, no reality, no reason, no event intrude on his version of events. Osama bin Laden, the man responsibl…
September 14th, 2006 at 6:04 pmThe Bush regime doesn’t want to capture or kill bin Laden. If they did, at least half the people in this country would think the so-called War on Terror was finally over. And since the Rethuglicans need perpetual war and fear to maintain power, this would be the height of folly for them. bin Laden ought to come out of hiding and sun himself on the beach somewhere. He has nothing to fear from us.
September 14th, 2006 at 6:13 pmBin Laden is not the biggest mass-murderer in U.S. history.
That honor goes to Dick Cheney.
Bin Laden is a convenient name for a patsy, be he did not plan, nor execute, 9/11. That was an inside job.
Bin Laden has not been caught because he is an operative of the U.S, just as Bush is an operative of Saudi Arabia.
September 14th, 2006 at 6:41 pmWe have it all wrong! It’s part of his genius - He’s making UBL **THINK** he’s not interested, but he’s really secretly deployed a huge contingent of special forces and black ops guys that are hunting him like mad… He’s just trying to lull him into a false sense of security.
Yeah… right.
September 14th, 2006 at 6:45 pmDid you hear him say that chimpboy told him they want to fight terrorists a “new” way, one based on intelligence gathering and going after the cells……funny, that sounds an awful lot like the plan Kerry had in ‘04 for fighting terrorism……the same way the Brits found their (we’ll see) terrorist group (which, if they are bona fide terrorist, the Brits won’t have as much evidence against them because bushCo had them move in and arrest them too soon). Imagine if chimpboy had wanted to “fight” terrorism effectively back in ‘03 (actually, ‘01), imagine all the lost lives that would still be here. But then, we know Iraq has as much to do with fighting terrorism as Barbara Bush really felt empathy for those in the NO Superdome.
THIS CRIMINAL NEEDS TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
September 14th, 2006 at 6:57 pmI truly believe he will be, but it can’t come soon enough!!
Yes, of course!
Why go after the person who actually attacked America, when one can invade a completely different place and slaughter innocent people who had nothing at all to do with 9/11?
September 14th, 2006 at 6:57 pmYikes:
“So the democrats are saying we should put resources behind something that won’t help America? That seems like a bad idea. If catching or killing OBL won’t help America, why would we spend resources doing it?â€
Would you like to name one Democrat that has said that putting resources into finding OBL won’t help America? My guess is that you will say that Nancy Pelosi said that. But, that is not at all what she said. It gets pretty tiring reading all you trolls twising something a Democrat says into something entirely different. Why do you do that…Oh I know, because you are wrong, but you don’t have any facts to back up your beliefs.
September 14th, 2006 at 6:58 pm[…] At least that’s what George W. Bush thinks. He told Weekly Standard edito Fred Barns that you can send 100,000 troops to hunt down Osama bin Laden, but that’s not a good use of resources. Remember the good old days of “Dead or Alive”? Thinkprogress.org has the clip here. […]
September 14th, 2006 at 7:10 pmi should not even think he would lose a minute of sleep over this character bin laden. bin laden simply put is a figure head, and nothing more. he is someone bush & co. can pull him out of their closet of tricks whenever it is convenient. he serves no other purpose than for this administration and it’s supporters to keep amerika in fear. if he were capture then what? of course there is always another villain (i.e. iran, n. korea, cuba and venezuela), but that is far more taxing than that idiot and his merry band of thugs can handle.
September 14th, 2006 at 7:16 pmUBL IS DEAD. This is why they cannot (and will not) find him.
And, of course, it should not be a priority to look for him.
Bush brings up UBL only to keep the fear happening (like right before the primary elections.) I am sure we’ll hear a lot about him in October. We’ll even get more fake audio tapes from Al Jazeera.
September 14th, 2006 at 7:22 pmAnybody check to see if Freddy’s legs were sticking out from under Bush’s desk? This dude is so close to Bush, I wouldn’t be surprised to see another Lewenski going on.
Really Mr. Pres. I understand Mr. Pres. Oh yeahhh, Mr. Pres.
Give me a break. This guy and the people from Fox are so far up the President’s butt that it should be investigated…
September 14th, 2006 at 7:29 pmIs he or isn’t he looking for Bin Laden can someone in this Administration tell the truth. Here’s what Bush told American on 9/11 speech 3 days ago.
Bush delivered a message to bin Laden and other terrorists who are still on the run. “No matter how long it takes, America will find you, and we will bring you to justice,” Bush said.
Now Bush says he’s not looking. Cheney is clue less and says stupid things just to hear himself talk. Tony Snow is lying so much he starting to lie about the truth.
September 14th, 2006 at 7:34 pmBush’s top priority now is winning the war against the middle class.
September 14th, 2006 at 7:35 pmWhat happened to “stay the course”?
Oh, how silly of me. Tony Snow claims no one ever said that. Like no one ever said there was a connection between Saddam and Al Quaeda. But wait, Cheney, Condi and Snow say there was a connection. But Bush said no one ever said that.
WTF????????
Man, it must be tough out there to be a troll.
September 14th, 2006 at 7:38 pmDubya doesn’t have 100,000 troops to get Osama and his terrorists…because those troops are all stuck in Iraq.
Way to go, Chimpy.
September 14th, 2006 at 7:42 pmwe need to make this common knowledge to average people and hold the chicken MSM to getting this out and not just a small blurb.
September 14th, 2006 at 9:06 pmIf average people knew about this I think we’d be up in the elections.
Bush’s top priority is that every single one of our troops from Iraq and Afganistan comes home in a body bag. That’s when he will really be happy.
September 14th, 2006 at 9:15 pmBush is a filthy murderer.
Why would he want to capture ODL.? He and OBL have a deal I won’t come after you or try to stop you and yours if the event is Big like a Pearl Harbor. Deal? Deal.
September 14th, 2006 at 9:15 pmBush won’t be satisfied until every single one of the American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan comes home in a body bag.
September 14th, 2006 at 9:17 pmBush is the enemy.
I think we need to re-think this one.
At first glance this looks like just another typical Chimp outrage. “We don’t care about Bin Laden.”
But Bush is obviously lying! He does care a LOT about catching Bin Laden, he just doesn’t have a clue how to do it.
The reason he cares of course is that it would give him an enormous (if temporary) boost in his popularity. Capturing or killing Bin Laden would be the ultimate “October surprise” right before the election.
Believe it. If Bush could trot out Bin Laden’s withered corpse he would.
But the simple fact is that putting 100,000 troops in the Afghanistan/Pakistan border would cause tremendous havoc seven ways from Sunday, and would NOT guarantee that we could catch Bin Laden.
It WOULD overstretch the military that is already at the breaking point, it would lead to the collapse of the Pakistani government, etc., etc.
We just flat don’t know where he is because our intelligence has dried up. And it’s dried up because all the Muslims hate us.
Not hard to figure out.
So this is Bush saying “I never wanted those grapes, they’re probably sour anyway.”
September 14th, 2006 at 9:22 pm[…] Trouble is, President Bush doesn’t think bin Laden is important at all. Having previously said he wasn’t concerned about him, Bush has reiterated that bin Laden is not a priority. […]
September 14th, 2006 at 9:36 pm[…] But this same week, President Bush said this: Barnes said that Bush told him capturing bin Laden is “not a top priority use of American resources.†[…]
September 14th, 2006 at 9:51 pmBush cannot capture or kill O/UBL. That is not part of the deal.
September 14th, 2006 at 9:52 pmHonestly, if the US wanted to get Bin Laden they would have gotten him. Something is not right here. Something is not right anywhere when it comes to the 911 attacks, and the diverted war to Iraq. Bush and the Bin Laden family and son have cut a deal.
Bushco. and his daddy have a deal with Usama, I won’t come after you or try to stop you if the event is Big like a Pearl Harbor. Deal? Deal.
So Bush sees fighting terrorism as a law neforcement problem?
Isn’t that like what he has been saying it isn’t for 5 years?
September 14th, 2006 at 9:53 pmYo, Fred Barnes! It’s spelled T-R-E-A-S-O-N.
September 14th, 2006 at 9:56 pmWhen Bush or anyone in his cabal of corruption start downplaying something, then watch out, something’s up.
Okay, I have a question that “insiders” in Washington D.C. should be asking Bush administration officials: “Has Osama bin Laden been captured and is he currently in U.S. custody?”
What? Where’d I get this idea?
Well, some strange news and events have surfaced in the past 10 days that have made me think that the Bush administration is laying the foundation for an October revelation that bin Laden has either been captured or is verifiably dead…just before the November elections.
1) Bush closed down the CIA’s “bin Laden unit.”
2) Pakistan has apparently given up the search for bin Laden in the Taliban-controlled tribal areas in western Pakistan.
3) Bush closed down the secret interrogation/torture centers in eastern Europe and shipped al Qaeda prisoners to Guantanamo Bay. (One of the purposes of the interrogation centers was to learn bin Laden’s whereabouts from the prisoners).
4) News was leaked that Bush ordered several months ago that eastern Afghanistan be “flooded” with U.S. special forces units to hunt down and capture bin Laden. (I thought bin Laden was hiding in Pakistan?)
5) An Asian Times Online article stated that bin Laden was seen traveling in a lightly-guarded, relatively small convoy…in eastern Afghanistan. (And, reportedly, bin Laden’s kidneys are doing much better and he no longer needs dialysis).
6) On Monday night during a speech aired during the second half of an ABC smearumentary, Bush repeated his promise from almost five years ago to “get” bin Laden.
7) Over the past week, Bush administration officials have been repeating bin Laden’s name frequently, I guess to make up for the years they shied away from mentioning his name. (And now, per this Think Progress post, we learn that Bush doesn’t think that “getting” bin Laden is that high a priority anymore. Do you feel like you’re getting played for a sucker?).
8) This fact-challenged ABC smearumentary worked hard at planting in viewers minds that President Clinton didn’t “get” bin Laden, while downplaying any Bush administration culpability in the 9/11 attacks succeeding, along with any mention of the Bush administration not “getting” bin Laden before the 9/11 attacks either.
9) Per reports, bin Laden’s trail is “stone cold.” (Well, of course, it’d be “stone cold” if bin Laden’s in U.S. custody and being held in some super-secret location. But this does lay the groundwork nicely for a surprise announcement in October that bin Laden’s been captured).
Anyway, I would love to hear Helen Thomas (or anyone) ask Tony Snow (or any Bush official), “Has Osama bin Laden been captured?”, just to get their answer on record before October.
It is my feeling that Osama bin Laden was either captured, killed or turned in for the reward money sometime in the past several months. Also, there is one place where a disappeared prisoner could be held incommunicado: Diego Garcia in the middle of the Indian Ocean. Highly secure. Highly remote.
I just have a gut feeling that this is the October surprise that the Bush administration feels will assure that Republicans will retain control of Congress after the November elections.
Therefore, it is up to Democrats and any other freedom-loving, democracy-loving people to steal the Bush administration’s thunder, if at all possible, by at least implying that Osama bin Laden has been captured…and the Bush administration is hiding this information from the American people. And even if I’m wrong and bin Laden hasn’t been captured or verifiably killed, this one question repeatedly asked of the Bush administration would remind people before the November elections that Bush, and his fellow Republicans, still haven’t caught bin Laden, after allowing bin Laden to escape from Tora Bora.
It is time for Democrats to “go preemptive” on the Bush administration. If I’m right and October arrives with the Bush announcement that bin Laden’s been captured or killed, then it will be too late. Any reaction of Democrats to this news will be spun to make them appear to be soft on terrorists. The time for “preemptive” action by Democrats is NOW.
So, “Has Osama bin Laden been captured?” And if so, when did it happen and under what circumstances? And where is he being held?
September 14th, 2006 at 10:29 pmOsama bin-Forgotten!
September 14th, 2006 at 10:37 pmBush is playing his sick-o version of “Weekend at Bernie’s.â€
Comment by Marie
OMG Marie. lmao, I can just see SNL so doing a skit like this..Bush and Bernie clearing brush, bush and bernie bike riding across the pig farm crashing into cows and security agents, bush and bernie riding faulty Segways…
/snarkon
September 14th, 2006 at 10:39 pm[…] LINK […]
September 14th, 2006 at 10:52 pmDidn’t Bush say just last week that bin Laden was important again?
September 14th, 2006 at 10:59 pmDidn’t Bush say just last week that bin Laden was important again?
Comment by jurassicpork — September 14, 2006 @ 10:59 pm
Yeah he did, because he and his little dysfunctional alcoholic family happen to be running the country and appealing to the 30% of like minded Americans. They will change their mind about really big things at a moment’s notice.
September 14th, 2006 at 11:23 pmBeware October. Be ready for a Halloween surprise - OBL is coming, dead or alive.
September 14th, 2006 at 11:28 pmEven though much of the public will be skeptical and suspicious, it should still bring in enough votes to keep the Repugs in control for the next two years.
Thank God, we must be all democrats now! I have scrolled down the comments and I really have not seen one Neo Com fight back remark. I MAY BE WRONG BUT I think that people are really aware of the truth! America is on the wrong track. Torture is not a policy we condone, ever! America is about civil rights and protecting those rights. Stand storong against this Fasciast government!
September 15th, 2006 at 1:25 amWe need a new government.
September 15th, 2006 at 1:26 amI’ve been saying this for years. Osama bin Laden is just a recruiter for the sinister darker realms of the CIA that the PNAC manipulate daily. Whenever they need some terrorists or terrorist activity just call ol’ buddy Osama and he’ll deliver. Why else would they just let him go. Why else would they just say he isn’t important now. 3000 innocent Americans used simply for political fodder. George Bush is the lowest form of slime imaginable. Same goes for all the other neocons within and surrounding his administration. Scum!
September 15th, 2006 at 1:57 am[…] Despite telling the American public in his national address on 9-11 that “Osama bin Laden and other terrorists are still in hiding. Our message to them is clear: No matter how long it takes, America will find you, and we will bring you to justice,” in a recent meeting with reporters in the Oval Office, Bush said that “capturing bin Laden is NOT a top priority” for America in the war on terror. […]
September 15th, 2006 at 2:03 amWhy is there no more mention of the ABC/Disney phony docu-drama on TP? I know ABC already played it on TV, but now its being put on DVD to be sold in Wal-Marts, so the propaganda lies could infect more people now!
September 15th, 2006 at 2:41 amThink of the repercussions if we capture or kill OBL at this late date. You have to believe that it will trigger hundreds of terrorist attacks around the world. The time to have done it was when we overthrew the Taliban instead of moving to Iraq.
September 15th, 2006 at 8:59 amAlthough most of what is being done in this country are destroying it, nobody should be shocked by now. It should have been evident to most Americans long ago that the real influence on our policies is money - not terrorism- and outright fraudulent methods for stealing more of it. Americans need to start reading more than one source, change the station to something other than Fox Newtork, and use whatever skills they learned during their education to guess what all of this - the religious right, bankruptcy scams, corporate lending lies, etc - means for the future of this nation. Its not difficult to predict if paying attention.
September 15th, 2006 at 9:19 amOsama = Hitler Osama = not a top priority
which is it?
September 15th, 2006 at 9:28 amIt pretty much makes you start to believe in some of the 9/11 conspiracy theories. Bush doesn’t want to capture Bin Laden because HE WANTS AMERICANS TO KEEP DYING, IN LARGE NUMBERS. It is the Likud (and the pseudo-Likud Kadima) strategy in Israel. These guys will never do anything serious to stop terrorism — terrorist acts keep the public inflamed, keep them voting Republican/Likud, and keep the fear-mongering fascists in power perpetually.
September 15th, 2006 at 9:31 amNabbing Bin Laden: not such a high priority…
Forget Bush’s 9/11 anniversary speech. Catching Bin Laden is just not a priority for the administartion….
September 15th, 2006 at 9:40 amRE: 141 Eric,
September 15th, 2006 at 9:48 amI’d like to thank you for tossing the religious right in there, especially as the first of your “evil-doers”. As a Christian, I appreciate the hatred and more importantly, the association with greed and corruption. After all, that’s what Christ was all about… evil, greed, corruption, hatred, it was all in the Bible right? I’m sure I could think of a few groups to lump guys like you into, but I won’t… I just wanted to tell you how much I appreciate the insult!
Well the bin laden bush familes go back 70 years in saudi arabia. the bin laden’s did construction - the housing the oil workers stayed as well as other things - the bushies drilled the oil - or more accurately hired peasanst to do their kingly bidding.
the bushies/bin ladens are like the Italian Crime Families - they may be at odds from time to time over various issues, but they are always united on crime. It is true love. Bush doesn’t want to see that brown-eyed cutie Osama in jail, nevertheless dead. True love is hard to explain -hahahaha. the classic love/hate relationship.
September 15th, 2006 at 9:53 amPresident Bush, October 13, 2004; 3rd Presidential Debate. emphasis added.
September 15th, 2006 at 10:22 amIt is obvious that Bush regards ‘the war on terra’ as a matter for police investigation–a charge he frequently uses to accuse his critics of misunderstanding the level of force that is demanded.
It’s yet another example of the gap between his actions and his public rhetoric.
September 15th, 2006 at 10:28 amWas’nt the war with Afganistan a means to capture or kill Osama ?, Why all of the sudden give up?? Why would Bush have even started the war in the first place?
September 15th, 2006 at 10:35 amWell it´s nice of you to get insulted by someone tossing in religion but how could we not when all the bible belt loves bush and his god given mission to save the world. Churches and religion are being used to manipulate people and make their brains even softer….so yes christianity as a movement in the states sucks…..if christ would be alive today he would certainly not be a christian….
September 15th, 2006 at 10:36 amHey, Coachjason - welcome back! Haven’t heard from you in a few days …
September 15th, 2006 at 10:43 amAgreed. Why would we want to capture him? It makes little sense apparently since having him around makes it more convenient to instill fear. And apparently we DIDNT want to do anything before hand either..that famous memo that was ignored (purposly no doubt).
Also, the christians here talk about hatred of the religion that they hijacked to deliver pure hatred, intolerance, bigotry and praise for the allmighty dollar (tax cuts for the rich while eliminating programs for the poor.)
September 15th, 2006 at 10:56 am[…] read more | digg story […]
September 15th, 2006 at 10:57 amI do not want to find him. If we did then the Looney-Left would claim the war is over and want to dismantle the military. The existence of OBL is a constant reminder that Islamic-Fascist are out there and want us dead.
September 15th, 2006 at 11:15 amJoe, I understand you’re frustration with a lot of mainstream Christian leaders. Heck, I’m Catholic - so I know all about how religious institutions misuse their power. But you can’t make blanket statements about “Christians” anymore than you can make blanket statements about “Muslims” or Jews (and don’t even get me started on th’ damn Druids!).
Let me use my church as an example. I’m frequently pissed off by what the Pope says - especially the current Pope - but our local pastor is about as left leaning as the come, and so are most of the parishoners. By all means, criticize the Pope all you like. Criticize the institution of the Catholic Church, or its policies. But don’t equate the Church hierarchy or official doctrine with Catholics generally. And the same goes for all Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, etc.
So, Dobson, Pope Benedict, etc. - put ‘em right in the rhetorical cross-hairs. Me, Coachjason, Patriotic Liberal Christian, etc. - don’t sweep us up in your generalizations.
September 15th, 2006 at 11:1