Number one weapon of choise for terrorist.

[Remmah]

Video camera for information gathering. Go figure.


Man Accused of Videotaping Md.
Bridge

BALTIMORE (AP) - A man described as a
high-ranking Hamas operative was arrested
last week as he videotaped the Chesapeake
Bay Bridge, and he then was held as a
material witness in an unrelated case,
authorities said.

Ismael Selim Elbarasse of Annandale, Va., long suspected by authorities of
having financial ties to the Palestinian extremist group, was taken into custody
Friday, the U.S. attorney's office in Maryland said Monday. He was held as a
material witness in a Chicago terrorism case.



http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?flok=FF-APO-1110&idq=/ff/story/0001%2F20040824%2F1029848072.htm&sc=1110

[CarolynEC]

1. George Bush is the terrorists' #1 weapon of choice

1. Bush was told bin Laden was getting ready to hit America, but did nothing.

2. Bin Laden attacked us on our own soil, killing 3,000 people, and Bush failed to bring him to justice.

3. Bush had bin Laden cornered in Tora Bora, but let him walk away.

4. Bin Laden warned his followers that America was out to take over Arab states. Bush made the prediction come true.

5. Bin Laden wanted to splinter the West, pitting old allies against each other. Bush went right along with the plan.

6. Bin Laden boasted he would "cleanse the Islamic holy land of infidels." Bush complied by ordering US forces out of Saudi Arabia and urging Americans to flee the Saudi peninsula.

7. Bin Landen boasted he could bring down a superpower just like Russia in Afghanistan. Bush has us bogged down in Iraq, unable to get control despite all our military strength.

George W. Bush is the best thing that ever happened to Osama bin Laden. There's no question bin Laden benefits if Bush is re-elected: four more years of America playing into the terrorists' hands at every turn.

[FatSlob]

3. Terrorists like Bush?

That's a stretch. I know it is political season, but posts like that will be found by Freepers. The Freepers will use it to show "how wacky those Democrats are...they believe this stuff". Our board is read by the right wing. Remember that.

[Vladimir]

5. Thing is, unlike Nader fans, the terrorists

know that there are two options this fall - Bush or Kerry. And if I was waging war against the US I'd sure as hell prefer the Chimp to a decorated Vietnam War veteran as my enemy's CIC...

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Endangered Specie]

32. Makes you wonder, don't it?

[MrBenchley]

37. No, I think it couldn't be much clearer....

[FatSlob]

38. As would I,

That is our goal, to get Senator Kerry elected, right?

However, our country is very divided right now. Every little vote counts in places like Ohio, where I live. Equating Bush to a terrorist could very well cause a few undecideds to vote the WRONG WAY. We all know that there are right wing interlopers on DU, and that they read much of what we write. I bet that even the Bush campaign reads this. We are all aware of the number of interlopers that have been tombstoned out of the JPS forum. My fear is that a statement like "bush is a terrorist" or something like that will be taken out of context (not literally a terrorist) and used to sway just a few votes, which could have terrible consequences for us.

I see our goal as thus:

Democrat in the White House
Democrats in the Senate
Democrats in the House of Representatives
Democrats in the Governors Mansions
Democrats in the State Houses
and so on.

In Ohio, the realistic chances for us are:

Sending Ohio's Electoral College votes to Senator Kerry
Picking up a House seat or two
Picking up a few seats in the State House

I don't want to lose any of those chances. That is why I advise against language that can be used against us to sway the undecideds.

[MrBenchley]

40. "We all know that there are right wing interlopers on DU"

Wonder how we'd know....maybe they'd post crap praising the Second Amendment Caucus and attacking people like Carolyn Maloney and Dianne Feinstein...

[Vladimir]

42. If I believed that something said

in the gungeon of DU months before the election could influence jack-shit, I may well agree with you (I have worked in a small capacity on election campaigns before, and will be canvassing during the next general election here in the UK so I am not clueless about these things). But I don't, because the airwaves are already so saturated with every kind of lie, distortion and smear possible that I just do not see posts like this as mattering in the grand scheme of things.

[MrBenchley]

43. You will notice that our new friend

more than adequately backed up her assertion.

Would that RKBAers had that kind of underpinning to anything they say...

[FatSlob]

44. Please tell me more.

You've worked on elections, is there a point at which it would matter? Maybe I'm being overly cautious? Tell me what you think. (BTW, might be tomorrow before I respond. I have a meeting an hour away)

[Vladimir]

46. OK, I will try and elaborate

bear in mind that I am not holding up what is below as gospel. As I say, I have had some experience in election tactics, linked to the recent european/local elections in Britain, but there ought to be a few disclaimers here before I go on. A european election campaign here is run under proportional representation, so it is not a case of going head to head with another candidate. On the other hand, a local election is first past the post, but in this campaign there was an interesting amount of voting acording to national issues at the local level. What I mean is that many people voted for their town council in one way or another because of issues such as the war on Iraq. So it was a quite peculiar campaign. Having said all this, here are my thoughts...

The first decision is whether it will be enough to energise you base, or whether you have to appeal to the swing voters. For example, this summer the RESPECT coalition ran in Britain almost entirely on the platform of having opposed the Iraq war. I remember going to a hustings for the European elections, and their candidate wasn't interested in discussing any other issues. They were very very focused on getting the votes of the Muslim community in particular, and the anti-war community at large and portraying themselves as a protest vote. On a large scale this didn't work too well (though one should add that there were mitigating circumstances, like the inexperience of almost everyone involved with the campaign), but in certain specific wards with large Muslim populations, they won 20,30+% of the vote, enough that there is now talk of a possible general election challenge in these areas.

The counter-example in many ways is Labour, who ran a campaign based almost entirely on the premise that however bad they were, the opposition would be much worse. Labour faced enormous problems with energising their base and had a very hard time finding anyone to canvass for them. I know of more than one Labour party memeber and activist who was hoping that his own party would get a bloody nose. They recorded the worst result since something like 1900 in local elections for a sitting government. The only ray of hope for them was that the Tories gained very very little.

Is there a point to this? Well, the lesson here seems to me the following: when you are the incumbent, you can get by for a while by telling your activists that things will get worse with the other parties in power. But after a while, that will not be enough to energise them, and if you are seen to be doing a bad job it will not help you with anyone to go on about how evil and dangerous the opposition is - if people think that you have run out of good ideas they will be tempted to give the other side a chance. When you are the challenger however, things are a bit different. You can energise your base quite well by going on about how bad the other side is, because their anger can in this case be focused towards a specific goal - getting the opposition out of power. But to get after the independant, you need to have positive policies of your own. I know its a bit of a trivial point but...

So how does calling Bush an Osama-enabler or Kerry a commie going to play? It of course depends on where you do it. On DU, I think its more than acceptable to go on about how bad Bush is - it keeps everyone's focus on the job ahead, and while the site gets many hits, it is not comprable in its reach to things like Air America. This is, especially in areas like the gungeon, a site for activists first and foremost. Dean's campaign proved, IMO, that your worry has to be, first and foremost, the national and local media. The internet is there to energise your base, but compared to the 24h saturation talking point converage from the TV, radio and papers, DU will do little in the grand scheme of things to persuade voters one way or another. I take your point about your neighbors being turned off by that sort of comment, this is why you don't say it to them like that - you tell them how with Kerry he will do X, Y and Z to make them safer. But the two need to be combined - they need to feel that Bush is doing something wrong to be tempted to switch, but the they also need a positive direction to switch in.

As for how Bush's comments will play, I am an optimist. Kerry has the most energised base in years, and his swing voter appeal is potentially huge. If he doesn't carry this comfortably it will be because his campaign cocked up, not because activists used harsh language on DU or elsewhere.

[CarolynEC]

8. Tough shit on the Freepers

These are facts based on actual events.

[FatSlob]

39. Yes,

read my response above.

[Wickerman]

14. good advice

[CarolynEC]

16. Really?

[Wickerman]

18. Yes, one should be careful what one posts

We get the goll-darndest postings down here.

Ok, watch this

Diane Feinstein!!!

stand back!!!

[CarolynEC]

19. Well, I'm lost. Is that deep satire?

I hope you're not agreeing with FatSlob that we should avoid posting facts for fear of upsetting the wingnuts who may be lurking here?

[MrBenchley]

20. No...

Lunabush is just alluding to the fact that our "pro gun democrats" pretty much hate any Democrat anyone's ever heard of...like Dianne Feinstein.

[Wickerman]

21. Hang around here long enough and it will all become crystal clear

And the short answer is no, I have no intention of pleasing any Freeper lurkers - its hard enough pleasing this disparate group of Gungeon folks.

[CarolynEC]

22. Mysteries wrapped within enigmas wrapped within...

annoyances.

How about making it crystal clear to me now?

One poster leaps out to protect Bush from criticism, another drags in the Second Amendment, and now this "all in good time, Grasshopper" bit.

If there's a problem with the post, say so. If not, spare me the cloak-and-dagger routine.

[Wickerman]

23. You said it - the gungeon - "Mysteries wrapped within enigmas wrapped with

"Mysteries wrapped within enigmas wrapped within..."
annoyances.

"If there's a problem with the post, say so. If not, spare me the cloak-and-dagger routine."

Rest assured that if there was a problem with the post the moderation crew would've removed it - and the proper place to ask is actually through an alert.


That's the beauty of this place. Did Fatslob just tip his hand and reveal that he is, indeed a Bush* supporter? Well, I am inclined, after watching over 1k of his posts to offer that he isn't. Is he sincere in his statement that he wants to protect the good reputation of DU? Well, heck, since he has been here for 1k posts I would say his intentions are true.

However, I offer that it is good advice that should be heeded by all - particularly those that like to bash senator Feinstein down here. See, I used that as an example as we have some folks who are much more than willing to put the 2nd Amendment ahead of the Dem party. That may seem to be a reasonable activity - it is in the Bill of Rights, after all.

But, of course, many would argue that the 2nd AM is either outdated, overstated, misunderstood, or some other form of aberration. Many DO argue that, or some semblance or combination of. THAT is why we have this forum.

So, anyway, though under no obligation to do so, and even though you did not ask politely, that is my take on what the varying opinions offered in the wake of 'Slob's post meant. In essence, it sums up the gungeon.

In the future you might consider the fact that you catch more flies with honey, ya know? :)

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CarolynEC]

25. That's right. Snide putdowns are much preferred.

[MrSandman]

28. We do appreciate you...(blatant brownnosing)

:yourock:


:pals:

[Wickerman]

29. lol

you kill me, man

I think we should all gather 'round now and sing a chorus of Kumbiya...

:grouphug:

[FatSlob]

41. Carolyn you don't get it.

We don't want the Wingnuts to use it against us. For example, if I walked up to my undecided neighbors, Bob and Marlene, and said, "Bush is a terrorist", they'd think I was nuts. I would have lost all credibility with them and would not have their ear in persuading them to vote Democrat anymore. However, when I tell them about a wacky Freeper post on the Democratic Underground website where the interloper proclaims that John Kerry is really a communist, they think that those right wingers are assholes for invading DU and saying such tripe. As a guy in a swing state, I can tell you that I am worried about even the two votes of my neighbors, it is that close. Maybe I'm wrong, here. I'm not willing to take the risk, though.

[CarolynEC]

45. Believe me, FatSlob, I get it.

The wingnuts are going to do what wingnuts do, so stop being intimidated by them.

And... again... the FACTS indicate that Bush has played into the terrorists' hands. Facts, not wild, unsubstantiated claims.

If swing voters are still clinging to the "don't change horses" notion, they damned well need to hear about how Bush has not only failed to protect us from terrorists, but has actually placed us in greater danger.

[Columbia]

26. AGGGHHH!!!

:mad: :grr:

FEINSTEIN MAKE HULK MAD!!!

[Wickerman]

30. see? see?

watch out, hulk on the loose!

[Columbia]

31. Hehe

As someone who voted for her, I reserve the right to criticize her all I want. :evilgrin:

[Wickerman]

36. fair enough

you vote, you complain!

[Cronus Protagonist]

11. Don't censor yourself

The other side wins when we do that. Lay it all out and let's discuss the matter.

Swiftboat Veterans for Bush

JFK - Drop Bush Not Bombs! - FUCK BUSH
http://brainbuttons.com/home.asp?stashid=13

[CarolynEC]

13. Agreed. Way too much time has been spent...

... wondering how the right wing will react to what we say or do.

To hell with them all, let them wet their shorts over every little thing. I truly do not care.

And, as I pointed out to our esteemed colleague FatSlob, the case against Bush is based on facts, the record of events and and his response at each turn.

[TheRovingGourmet]

2. If the charges have any substance then it sounds like the

police are doing their job.

[Vladimir]

4. True, although one wonders why he was

stopped in the first place. If videotaping close-ups of landmarks gets you questioned by the police these days, I'm glad I ain't gonna be visiting the US anytime soon. Seems to me he was stopped for the crime of FWM - filming while muslim.

[TheRovingGourmet]

6. It sounds like they have been watching this guy for some time

so I hope he was not arrested for doing what anyone else could do without suspicion. It sounds like they are holding him on an unrelated charge so they may have been tailing him until they had what they needed, at least I hope so.

[Vladimir]

9. So do I roving, so do I

incidentally, what made you chose that name? My local kebab van is called the roving gourmet...

[TheRovingGourmet]

10. It is the nickname of the food reporter on a radio station that

I listen to and he covers all the local restaurants; plus, I was hungry at the time I signed up. :)

[Vladimir]

12. LOL

my other local kebab van is called - of course - Hussian's.

[Phantom_5C1]

15. No, I'm pretty sure...........

it's over-the-counter legally purchased assault weapons. :eyes:

[MrSandman]

17. Fifty caliber super sniper rifles

:argh:

[UpsideDownFlag]

47. well, see, he isnt including those. nt

[MrSandman]

27. The War on Terror...

Now it is "high placed" operatives and illegal Pakistani nationals. I recall my first visit to DC and the "No Photography" signs at Andrews.

Is this the future?

I do not think so. Has the Patriot Act been abused? Probably. It gives greater power than its predecessor(Cannot remeber the name) to the secret intelligience courts.

The connection of databases and now, the call to reform the ENTIRE intelligience bureaucracy in two months gives a central federal government entirely too much power. And Bush is bragging that to consolidate this power in the central government proves him to be better fit to lead than Kerry.

(Almost violated Godwin's Law)

I guess some leaders made the trains run on time. Didn't make them preferred leaders.

[Vladimir]

33. Hey we are going to agree on something

can't see any pigs flying though... shame.

One of the major reasons that I will not be visiting the USA any time soon (although it would help me professionally immensly if I did), is this whole fingerprinting and database business. Just doesn't make me feel very comfortable...

[MrSandman]

34. Most measures taken...(opinion)

Provide illusory security with increased justificatiion for control by the executive.

Esp: Alert levels.

P.S. Am I THAT disagreeable?

[Vladimir]

35. Nah, just haven't had a chance to

discuss anything other than guns with you before...

[UpsideDownFlag]

48. their "choise" may be a camera, but their weapons of "choice" is a AW.

[FeebMaster]

49. Sure it is. (nt)