Juarez Officials On Lookout For Suspected Al-Qaeda Terrorist

[Baja Margie]

From El Diario, by Ramon Chaparro:

http://frontera.nmsu.edu

[Nordic]

1. right, they can't even catch a major serial killer in Juarez

teenage girls have been slaughtered in Juarez for years now and they can't catch the guy. How're they gonna catch a terrorist?

[Baja Margie]

2. Yes, I know...

and the guys at Homeland on the Border are ringing their hands and cursing Bush for no new directives, training, plans, equipment. I would imagine several of these Terrorists are already in US, they just crossed either by walking, driving, or using a tunnel.

Thanks, Bush, from the wife of a Homeland Security employee.

[babylon_system]

3. There are no Terrorists trying to sneak into the USA

The terror hype is Bush/Cheney/Ridge/Ashcroft's way of tightening the screws on American public, siphoning tax dollars to their defense industry cronies, and demanding loyalty to our Great Warrior Leader keeping us all safe from the evil-doers and Bogeymen.

[Baja Margie]

4. Whatever, here you go:

http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/petertestimony021304.html



Gee, there must be some reason why Kerry wants to strengthen our Homeland Security and give them the tools they need to operate.

[babylon_system]

5. Same reason he has to support the Iraq war and other Bush crimes

He has to look strong to convince moderate/cross-over Repug voters that he's a tough on national security and not a wimp. Otherwise Bush will win because he will look like a stronger leader.

[Baja Margie]

6. Bush is a war criminal, and Kerry will have to clean up the mess,

but the Terrorist threat is a clear and present danger, those are the facts, and they clearly have not been addressed by this administration. If you are saying, which you just did, that Kerry's stance on strong security is just a ploy to gain votes, I disagree with you, and I feel that that is a completely unfair statement - something on the level of the swift boat smear campaign.

If that is what you believe,for me, it is pointless responding to you further. I feel that you have degraded John Kerry by your statement, I do not hold with your opinion.

[babylon_system]

7. Who invented the War on Terror? Bush regime

Who is really terrorizing the world and ruining millions of lives? The Bush regime and the $450 billion per year US military.

Why do we face animosity around the world and a growing but still miniscule militant "terrorist threat"? We earn the hatred because of our biased and violent US foreign policy that supports racist and repressive regimes around the world.

Bush claims that we are hated by people who hate freedom. Why does he tell such obvious lies? Because it would be unacceptable to explain the real reasons. The War on Terror is a Big Lie but it has become an accepted response instead of being seen for what it really is: a continuation of the same imperialist US foreign policy that generated violent resistance in the first place.

Kerry promises to fight a better more sensitive War on Terror because he is using the language of the Big Lie to present himself to the brainwashed electorate as a stronger warrior leader than Bush.

[Baja Margie]

9. You know, I wasn't going to reply to you

and I think maybe you should join the forces and Baja Blackie over on www.baja.net.com/

We all know what happened, we all know the world hates us, they have for quite some time now, we know what Bush did, there is no argument that "Bush is terrorizing the world and ruining millions of lives."
But, to assume that terrorism is at best a "miniscule " threat to the United States of America, you are mistaken. Perhaps you would like to explain the reasoning behind Clinton's 1998 air campaign against Iraq. Quite simply, it was based on information and satellite pictures and intelligence of Biological weapon deposits. Unknown at the time, directly after the US bombers hit, we apparently did a pretty good job of wiping these arsenals out. We didn't know how good a job we did, because we couldn't get our inspectors back in.

Further, Bin Lauden's appeal is to the masses of undereducated, poor and desperate - they honestly believe if they hit us, they will end up in Heaven with the vestral virgins. This is their objective, their goal,their life's work. Of course, bin Lauden's motivations are politically engendered. As we speak, Pakistan is training terrorists and sending them to Afganistan, typical Pakistan, a double-dealer. And, as we speak, more and more terrorists are joining the ranks because of Bush's slaughter-war, do you blame them? This morning, the head cleric called on the Shites to rise up and march. Granted, the USA and especially Britan, were Imperialists by carving up the Mideast helter skelter after WWII, and our almost total reliance on Arab Oil was a grand rape indeed, and did nothing to foster Democracy or a love for the West. Now, we have a powder keg situation. There is no argument that Bush created a mess ontop of a repungnent situation.

I feel you underestimate John Kerry. Repeatedly, he has called for a cutting of this umbilical cord of oil dependence. His projected policies will deter Terrorism, not assure the likelihood that they will continue and worsen, as is the case under Bush. He is not appealing to the electorate as a "stronger warrior leader" in the sense which you imply. A smart "stronger warrior leader" never really has to go to battle in the first place. In the words of General George S. Patton," A leader is a man who can adapt principles to circumstances." This is exactly what John Kerry will do.

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/homeland_security

[babylon_system]

11. Your big flag is very impressive!

I actually agree with alot of what you said but I disagree with a few points.

I don't believe that Clinton's bombing campaign against Iraq in 1998 was a good thing. Iraq never attacked the USA. Bombing Iraq was a cowardly and illegal act of war that stimulated widespread hatred of American arrogance that motivated 9/11 attackers. War atrocities committed by Democrats or Republicans are evil and wrong; they kill people, mutilate children and engender hatred and retaliation.

To imagine that Clinton's aerial bombardment of Iraq in 1998 wiped out a mystery WMD program and that's the reason why Bush the liar can't find WMDs is a new one on me! Trying to eliminate micro-organisms with bombs is pretty futile, ineffective and as stupid as bombing the aspirin factory in Sudan. A biological weapons program really only needs scientists. Lab facilities are easy to replace and common micro-organisms are easy to manipulate.

Your statements that bin Laden appeals only to poor losers who seek virgins in heaven is alot of brainwash propaganda. Bin Laden's militant ideology appeals to a vast swath of the Muslim world that is sick and tired of being abused and oppressed by decades of US/Israeli imperialism. The 9/11 attackers were all well-educated and from middle-class or even wealthy families. They were not poor and most were not very religious. Ziad Jarrah from Lebanon was even from a Christian family. His hatred for the US was a reaction to the US bombing of Lebanon under Reagan in the 1980s and US blind support for Israel. It's important to recognize that resistance to US imperialism is politically motivated, not religiously-based. But you can believe what you want.

I don't know why you pick on Pakistan's government, a staunch US ally these days, as "double-dealing", unless you are Indian, where those comments are common currency due to long history of government propaganda. Many Pakistanis do oppose US occupation of Afghanistan and are resisting US domination but it's not government policy.

Your comments about oil imperialism I agree with. About Kerry's plan to deter terrorism presumably by removing root causes, I hope you are right but do harbor doubts. Hopefully he will evacuate US troops from the Mideast but as a staunch supporter of Israel, it will be difficult for him to undermine the root cause of anti-American feeling in the Muslim world. I wish him luck, if he gets the opportunity.

[babylon_system]

8. Professor Lakoff explains it better than I can

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/08/25_lakoff.shtml

You've said that progressives should never use the phrase "war on terror" — why?

There are two reasons for that. Let's start with "terror." Terror is a general state, and it's internal to a person. Terror is not the person we're fighting, the "terrorist." The word terror activates your fear, and fear activates the strict father model, which is what conservatives want. The "war on terror" is not about stopping you from being afraid, it's about making you afraid.

Next, "war." How many terrorists are there — hundreds? Sure. Thousands? Maybe. Tens of thousands? Probably not. The point is, terrorists are actual people, and relatively small numbers of individuals, considering the size of our country and other countries. It's not a nation-state problem. War is a nation-state problem.

[Baja Margie]

10. Were did I say progressives should never use the phrase

"war on terror" ? Bullshit.


Terrorism is a nation-state problem, take a look at The Shining Path.
Terrorism comes in all colors and sizes, you are living in a dream world if you think not.

I'm done with you, go vote for Nader.

[babylon_system]

12. That was a question to Professor Lakoff in the article

"Were did I say progressives should never use the phrase"
I pasted poorly and you misunderstood.
You should read the article. It's interesting.

[54anickel]

14. Excellent read. Thanks for posting.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

19. Bingo! I adopt it immediately. It is the Struggle against Terrorists?

Good catch.

The War metaphor feeds the War on Poverty (partly won, long forgotten), the War on Cancer (partly won, going to new successes), the War on Drugs (Orwellian, perpetual) and the War on Terror (their term) (mega-Orwellian, perpetual).

When Kerry gets in (we're working on it), he'll need a new term. The "Struggle against Terrorists"? The "Anti-Terrorist Conflict"?

[nagbacalan]

13. They might bust Laura's donkey show..

[pinniped]

15. So uh, whatever happened to that "alleged" super terror mastermind...

Zaqcawi dude?

Did he link up with OBL and leave the planet or something?

What's up with this new "alleged" boogeyman? Did they find his travel itinerary or something?

[IndianaGreen]

16. There is a report that Adnan El Shukrijumah was sighted in Indiana

The man in this FBI picture has been identified by members of the Federal Protective Service as a match with a man that worked as a Defense contractor for a couple of months last winter:


Adnan El Shukrijumah

Here is another hot tip. This past Saturday, people were sighted inside a car taking pictures of a defense installation. Security personnel were able to see the license plate of the car before it drove away. A report was written about this incident. A check of the license plate number revealed that the car was reported stolen.

The local FBI office is investigating.

Adnan El Shukrijumah grew up in Florida where he got a college degree in computer technology. He can pass as Hispanic. His father is Saudi-Yemeni, and he spend time in the Caribbean.

The FBI is also looking for former Bloomington resident Adam Pearlman, a Jew that converted to Islam and now goes by the name of Adam Gadahn.

That is all!

[Nordic]

17. give me a break! That guy works at the 7-11 down the street from me

I can't imagine a more generic looking dude than that.

Throw a stick in LA you'll hit someone who looks like that.

[Baja Margie]

18. Pakistan is trying to help us ? Man, wake up and smell the

coffee !

First, you say there is no terrorism and the whole thing is bogus.

Second, you say in so many words that John Kerry is an political
opportunist and a liar.

Now, you say Pakistan is trying to help us. How about selling nuclear arms secrets and getting a pardon while USA looks the other way?

How about Bush flip-flopping and now wanting to sell Karachi F-16's ?

How about Pakistan support and training of the Taliban ?

How about Musharraf throwing peanuts our way, because he knows that if he really did help us , it would lead to civil war in Pakistan?

How about Bush throwing 3 billion dollars in aid to Musharraf to reform the radical madrassus and yet, Musharraf still has not complied, and yet he took the money ?

How about Bush pressuring Pakistan to come up with something,anything, to make Bush look better and as if he's got a grip on Terrorist issue.

How about all the dirty little secrets of Pakistan ?

Here, read it and weep:

http://terrorism.freeservers.com

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asuapcF/02/05/pakistan.nuclear/

http://www.paitamily.com/opions/archives/000528.html

http://hindutva.org/pakistan.html



I have no argument with the fact that Bush has played all of like an accordian inbetween the yellow and orange stages of threat conditions. The fact remains, however, 911 happened, and it could happen again. The victims of 911 were never appeased, and the rest of us left out there unprotected with the solid potentiality of becomming future victims. Terrorism has arrived on our shores, deal with it, don't dismiss it and revert to la-la land.