Why The Left Cried When Osama Died

Pages: 1 2

The death of Osama bin Laden has driven a stake into the heart of the Left, causing progressives to bleed and moan as their unholy alliance with radical Islam absorbs the devastating May 2 blow.

The radical Islamic half of the romance is in agony as it sheds bitter tears for the mass murderer. Indeed, Hamas, Hezbollah, the armed wing of Fatah, and tens of thousands of radical Muslims around the world have prominently displayed their sorrow and anger for the world to see.

The alliance’s leftist half is, meanwhile, also deeply grieving. The guru of the leftist political faith, Noam Chomsky, is responsibly leading the way. Having distinguished himself, among other intriguing ways, as a Jew who has traveled to Lebanon to embrace personally the leaders of Hezbollah, whose stated top priority is to rid the world of Jews, the M.I.T. professor emeritus has not disappointed the faithful, progressive flock. Furiously responding to the assassination of the Left’s idol, Chomsky fumed in his recent article: “We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic.”

The al-Qaeda leader’s killing is an outrage, in Chomsky’s mind, because Bush’s “crimes vastly exceed bin Laden’s.” Chomsky is outraged not only that the operation was clearly “a planned assassination, multiply violating elementary norms of international law,” but also that its victim had never been legally proven to be the perpetrator of 9/11. Undoubtedly, Chomsky’s Gulag Denial mindset continues unabated, for having shamelessly attempted to deny the Khmer Rouge’s Holocaust in Cambodia was clearly not enough to satiate Chomsky’s totalitarian odyssey.

Following in the leftist guru’s tracks, Glenn Greenwald fumed over at Salon.com that Americans were cheering and feeling patriotic that “someone just got two bullets put in their skull.” This is terrible in leftist eyes because that “someone” is not George W. Bush but rather America’s most wanted enemy-terrorist. Greenwald is also very upset that a question lingers over whether bin Laden really had to be killed and not taken prisoner instead.

Heaven forbid! A targeted assassination of the leader of al-Qaeda, a jihadist terrorist organization that has killed thousands of innocent American citizens. Oh, the unjustness of it all! One wonders whether Greenwald will be able to soldier on.

Meanwhile, Curtis Doebbler, a leftist “human rights” lawyer who teaches at a Palestinian university, grieves that the “West is now celebrating the death of someone who, however misled and wrong-minded, was a person who was willing to fight for the poorest and the most vulnerable people in the world to the very end of his life.” He continues: “That the US had to kill him in violation of international law makes all the more believable Osama Bin Laden’s claims of Western hypocrisy and the need for a better alternative.”

The “alternative” that Doebbler is dreaming of and that Osama had in mind? Well, it’s not that complicated: it’s what Islamists are offering leftists – and that which leftists are salivating over – in their unholy alliance: Sharia law.

Let’s also not be too confused over why “progressive” feminist Naomi Klein called out for bringing “Najaf to New York” in her infamous 2004 column in The Nation, in which she reached her hand out in solidarity to Muqtada al-Sadr and his Islamo-fascist Mahdi Army in the Iraqi Shi’ite stronghold of Najaf. Klein understands very well what bringing Najaf to New York means: the Shi’ite stronghold, where Muqtada al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army at one time ran their torture chambers and sowed their terror, replicated on America’s shores.

The list of leftists weeping over the death of Osama is endless: Dan Rodricks at the Baltimore Sun complaining that killing Osama is “not justice”; Laura Flanders at The Nation condemning the raid as “Americans seeking sense and getting vengeance”; former West German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt denouncing Osama’s death as “clearly a violation of international law”; and the terrorist-loving Code Pink’s Medea Benjamin unable to disguise her agony over at the Huffington Post, counseling us not to sink “into a false sense of triumphalism in the wake of Bin Laden’s passing.”

It is no surprise that members of the political faith are mourning over the death of Osama. The context for their grief is perfectly explained, as I have documented in United in Hate, by how much they celebrated 9/11. Let’s take a trip down memory lane to regain the picture. It is important to understand the Left’s sadness right now by briefly recreating the chilling scene of a decade ago.

September 11, 2001, clearly represented a personal vindication for leftists everywhere. The images of the innocent people jumping to their deaths from the Twin Towers evoked glee from them – as they clearly saw only poetic justice in American commercial airplanes plunging into American buildings packed with American citizens. For leftist believers, the jihadist terror war now promised to succeed where Communism had failed: to obliterate the capitalist system itself.

In the blink of an eye after the Twin Towers went down, leftists were beating their breasts with repentance for their own government’s supposed crimes and characterizing the tragedy that their nation had just suffered to be some form of karmic justice.

Immediately following the 9/11 attack, leftist academics led with a drum roll. The very next day after the terrorist strike, Chomsky exonerated the terrorists, stating that the Clinton administration’s bombing of the pharmaceutical plant in Sudan constituted a far more serious terrorist act and warning that 9/11 would be exploited by the United States as an excuse to destroy Afghanistan.

Leftist academics across the country echoed Chomsky’s themes, cheering the 9/11 terrorist acts, which they deemed a just retribution for America’s transgressions. History professor Robin Kelley of New York University stated: “We need a civil war, class war, whatever to put an end to U.S. policies that endanger all of us.” History professor Gerald Horne of the University of North Carolina asserted that “the bill has come due, the time of easy credit is up. It is time to pay.” Professor Eric Foner of Columbia University, the renowned Marxist historian, expressed his personal confusion about “which is more frightening: the horror that engulfed New York City or the apocalyptic rhetoric emanating daily from the White House.” Barbara Foley, a professor of English at Rutgers University, felt 9/11 was a justified response to the “fascism” of U.S. foreign policy. Mark Lewis Taylor, a professor of theology and culture at Princeton Seminary, thought the WTC buildings were justifiable targets because they were a “symbol of today’s wealth and trade.” Robert Paul Churchill, a professor of philosophy at George Washington University, rationalized that the terrorist attack was justified. “What the terrorists despised and sought to defeat was our arrogance, our gluttonous way of life, our miserliness toward the poor and its starving; the expression of a soulless pop culture . . . and a domineering attitude that insists on having our own way no matter what the cost to others.”

Of course, the infamous Ward Churchill, as we know, outdid all the others, blaming not only Bush and America but the “little Eichmanns” themselves for the attacks.

Churchill, Chomsky, and their kin on the academic Left were joined by prominent figures in the progressive culture at large. Norman Mailer stepped forward to opine that the suicide hijackers were “brilliant.” In his view, the attack was completely understandable, since “Everything wrong with America led to the point where the country built that tower of Babel which consequently had to be destroyed.”

Oliver Stone affirmed that he saw 9/11 as a “revolt” and compared the ensuing Palestinian celebrations with those that had attended the French and Russian Revolutions, while Susan Sontag held that the terrorist attack was the result of “specific American alliances and actions.” From the religious camp, Tony Campolo, a leading Christian evangelist who served as one of former President Clinton’s “spiritual advisers,” believed that 9/11 was a legitimate response to the Crusades.

The American flag, a hated symbol to the Left, also became a target. Novelist Barbara Kingsolver was incredulous that her daughter’s kindergarten teacher instructed the students to come to school the next day dressed in red, white, and blue. Nation columnist Katha Pollitt had the same reaction regarding her teenage daughter’s impulse to fly an American flag outside the family home. Pollitt told her that she could “buy a flag with her own money and fly it out her bedroom window, because that’s hers, but the living room is off-limits.” This was, Pollitt explained, because the American flag stands for “jingoism and vengeance and war.”

Pages: 1 2

  • Bob Akbar

    This is one of the most helpful articles I have read in quite a while. Now I understand that the Left love totalitarianism, any totalitarianism. They love the total control of others and will lovingly submit themselves to the Power. This clarifies a lot for me. The lovers of dark Power have been busy in many corners of the world. It’s enough to make you feel like you are caught up in a cosmic battle between freedom and affirmation, and bondage and denial. I’m just about ready to believe it. Let’s dig in for the fight.

  • Amused

    Oh , C'mon Jaimie , Noam Chomsky is in no large or small way representative of progressives , Democrats or the Left , and no Jaimie , the only ones filled with "glee on 9/11 were terrorists and anti-American arabs and muslims . Why do you create these narratives ? And no , again Jaimie , the only ones mourning bin Ladens death are the muslims . Americans do not "hate the American Flag " , and I suspect those whom you are refferring to, are the Democrats , who you percieve as progressive /Leftist / Commies /Socialists etc . For an intelligent man you make such absurd pronouncements .You have taken the " us against them " mentality to new heights . Recent polls indicate Obama's popularity /approval ratings are at 60% , are these all traitors ? Do they mourn bin Laden ? Hate the Flag , ? Were they filled with glee on 9/11 ? I think not .
    Mailer , Ward Chomsky , these are American abberations , and do not represent any notable demographic , no more than the crazy Christian group out of Kansas that harrasses mourners at military funerals /

    • ajnn

      I wish you were correct but Chomsky et al are not aberrations. Please note that Keith Olberman got over 1 million viewers every night. That means more than 1/2 million people identified with his pernicious silliness.

      • Amused

        Does Oberman HATE THE FLAG ? Was Oberman filled with GLEE on 9/11 ? Did OBERMAN MOURN Bin LADEN ? Get real dude , Oberman was the lefts mirror image of Hannity ….and can not be compared to such misfits as Ward , Mailer or Chomsky .Nor did Olberman take their positions . His sin was he disagreed with Republicans their ideology and policy . Which makes him nothing more or less than a dissenting American ….just like you but on the other side of the isle . BTW if you can refute what I just state ….please ..feel free …but not with your opinion but with proof .

    • LibertyMan

      Abberations? Really? Look who was just invited to the White House.
      http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/NJ-State-Pol

      Amused, me think you protest too much. Give me a break.

      • Amused

        Oh yea man , a blackman !!! and a rappoer no less !!!! Much worse has been invited to tyhye White house in parties past .

        • LibertyMan

          LOL…you ommit words like “Cop Killer” and an administration that has no problem with that. A little sociopathic of you. You sir, represent the abberation of extremism you were talking about.

      • sodizzy

        …and he's wearing a beige suit. That says it all to me. Snakes!

        I can see where Amused thinks we are off. These sneaky creeps will go to any lengths to fool the people and they do it all day long every day.

    • Angel

      The narrative never changes– you're and idiot, don't know what you're talking about. We are all American now.– So you have proclaimed and so it shall be. In typical fashion from the Left they ignore the truth and criticize with impunity. You have eyes but you cannot see. Oh, by the way that poll from AP is a bunch of bull. Here is a dose of reality for you, the Radical-in-chief is going down. He is going down in flames.

      • Amused

        That has yet to be seen fool . LOL….especially if Newt the philanderer runs . And what I stated was true , unless of course you can prove otherwise . To say or suggest that Democrats , and that's the generalization that jaimie impunes , is baseless . to say they cheered at 9/11, wept over bin Laden , or hate the flag , is ABSURD . And as I stated ,in now way do Chomsky , ward or Mailer rrepresent any meaninfull demographic in the U S . This is something only an imbecile like yourself would believe . Run along CHUMP .

        • Not A Loser Lefty

          You are be disingenuous. Jamie didn't say "democrats" he said leftists. The so called progressive left (about 20%) of the electorate may not "hate" the flag itself, but they sure did when conservatives were putting them up after 911, and they were crying over politicians, journalists and any body else wearing of US flag lapel pins. Back then progressive left magazines The Nation, The New republic all ran editorials about America's "blame" for 911…so while not literally openly cheering, its pretty obvious where they stood. If it were a football game they would be cheering. I do agree not all progresives are weeping over killing bin laden and that's because Obama, their messiah killed him. If Bush had done it, their weeping and calls for warcrimes tribunals would be deafening.

          • coyote3

            Let put it this way, "Amused" has always been a little mentiroso.

            That said, I've been given this some thought. Now, I am glad someone bumped UBL. However, that said, from what I understand we invaded a soverign nation, without their permission, and maybe more importantly without a congressional authorization, that is required for the executive branch to go on such excellent adventures. On top of that, we may have lit up a guy who had, or was, surrendering. We'll leave that part alone for a while, because there is still a lot of dispute there. The first part seems bad enough. I guess I have to ask if we would have done the same if UBL had been sitting in some hotel in a "mainstream" country? Would we have swooped into London, Mexico City, Ottawa, pick your city and county, bumped him and then dee dee mau?

          • trickyblain

            Coyote, I've been reading your posts for years now. You always have had a strict Constitutional interpretation. Except when a Republican started an unconstitutional war (well, maybe you did, but you never really said anything).

            Killing bin Laden would have been justifiable in any city, anywhere in the world, at any time. Of course we'll never know, but I feel strongly that Mr. Madison, Mr Jay and Mr. Hamilton would agree!

            I, for one, hope he was surrendering.

          • coyote3

            I don't know which war you are talking about, so it is kinda irrelevant. If you mean Iraq, congress authorized the action. Action pursuant thereto, are by definition, "constitutional" The executive branch does not have that power to invade another country, without authorization of congress. Killing Bin Laden has nothing to do with it.What you say is just bravo sierra, andt has been proven over and over.

          • trickyblain

            A strict interpretation gives Congress the sole authority to "declare war." There's nothing that says they can hand that power to the executive branch, and no war has been declared for over 50 years — according to a strict interpetation, all of them were and are unconstitutional. Thus, you seem to be very selective in your strict interpretations.

            Would the founders consider a half-day operation to eliminate an enemy of the US, who has declared war on it and killed thousands of US citizens an unlawful invasion? Pakistan or even Canada, I have serious doubts.

          • coyote3

            Actually, reading it again, your response was not even "responsive". My question is would we have done the same thing is UBL would have been staying in a "mainstream" country, take your pick, and that country was either ignorant of , or purposely ignoring his presence? There is no question that the executive branch does not have the power to invade another country, by itself.

          • trickyblain

            "about 20%"

            And you base that completely arbitrary number on….?

          • Not A Lefty Loser

            About 20% Americans identify as "liberal" as opposed to "moderate" or "conservative" and that number is not arbitrary as you know. Gallup poll June 2009 is one example, there are many others, its been consistent for a while in polling.
            http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/conservatives-s

      • The_Lord_Regent

        "We are all American now." Really. Amused and its ilk have consistently proven their anti-American nature. It sides with America's enemies foreign and domestic consistently. It no doubt hates the legal recognition of rights represented in the Bill of Rights, as all good Demokratic Partei komeraden do.

    • Bob

      "American abberations" yet you fail to critize them. You are little more than a useful idiot.

  • Mario

    Very well written article Jamie. SALUTE!

    • Jamie Glazov

      Thank you Mario, very much appreciated.

    • tagalog

      And "Na zdrovyeh," too!

  • Amused

    We'll see how American you guys are ….dissent essentially "American " , will it be abridged ? Simply for disagreeing with jaimie's assessment ?

    • ajnn

      huh ? what are you yalking about ?

  • Amused

    I guess so HUH ? Well Jaimie , Chomsky , Ward ,and Mailer are in no way representative of any meaninful demographic in the US.

  • Amused

    Nor did ANYONE I know of in this country , express "glee " on 9/11 ? Nor did I hear any " weeping " over bin Laden's death . Are you casting the aspersion that Democrats are the people you are denigrating ?

  • Amused

    Or is it ANYONE who does not hold exactly the views expressed here on this blog , of whom you are creating such a narrative ?

  • Amused

    Jaimie you btake isolated incidents and then broad brush half of Americans with it . Since polls indicate a 60% approval rating of Obama , that must mean that 60% oif Americans are traitors eh ?

    • kafir4life

      Actually….it is rather "amusing"………the 60% poll that you refer to was taken with a 3-1 dem to repub ratio. And no, I think the % of Americans that are "traitors" is much lower than 60%. The poll you refered to, was a small subset of Americans that was intentionally skewed in an attempt to alter reality.

      andd a hearty allahu snackbar to ya, amused! allahu snackbar.

      • sedoanman

        It's 28% — the percent of die-hard true believers.

    • welldoneson

      amused, you're obviously full of it.

  • tim heekin

    Obama'a 60% rating is a fraud as the sample was heavily laced with Democrats.

    • Amused

      Yea everythings a fraud , except of course the babble that spills nover in this thread . Grow up .

  • MLCross

    My only question is: when will leftists exchange the current "cool" mass murderer, Che for Osama. When will Osama t-shirts become the new hotness at ANSWER rallys? I bet it won't be long. Nothing gives you hip lefty street cred like mass murder and getting smoked by the U.S. army.

    • Amused

      Why dont you ask the Adminstrators here , because they were hawkling Che T-Shirts right on this blog . In the meantime genius , try to write a coherent statement .

      • welldoneson

        you urging others to write coherently? wow, you've really got some issues, fool.

      • MLCross

        It wasn't coherent? You seem to have understood it perfectly fine as evidenced by your ridiculous troll reply. Troll.

        By the way, you misspelled "administrators", GENIUS.

    • BS77

      Yeah I remember the leftist wack jobs crying and blubbering for Mumia Jamal, who killed Officer D Faulkner in Philadelphia…actually executed a helpless wounded cop who was pleading for his life…Oh how the leftist lawyers and rabble went on and on and on over how the "poor , downtrodden" Mumia deserved to be free. They worship Che, Mao, Castro….some of the worst piles of garbage in history…but that's the mental illness of the left. Now they are mourning Osama….a sick mass murderer who is thankfully terminated.

  • http://www.facebook.com/al-kidya Kim

    Very well written and researched article, Jamie.

    PS. I just herad on Fox News that the bin Laden family is going to launch a multi-billion dollar lawsuit against the US government..
    The counter suit against the bin Ladens should be multi-billions for damages and reparations for the families after the 9/11 attacks and overseas attacks perpetrated by Usama bin Laden and al Qaeda.

    • Mark McDermott

      "I just herad on Fox News…" just about sums up this article and most of the comments here. It was a terrible crime that occurred on 9/11 for so many innocent people to die however the thousands of children, 5 thousand a week for 8 years, for example who died as a direct result of US promoted UN sanctions on Iraq is equally a great crime. Or are these innocent lives not worth the same ? People around the world suffer daily kept in perpetual poverty and die as a result of US foreign policy and its because so many in America believe Fox News and the likes of the idiot who wrote this article that this is allowed to happen. Wake up people and learn the facts and don't take clowns like Jamie Glasov seriously and you'll be moving in the right direction otherwise God help us all. Reading Noam Chomsky with an open mind would be a good place to start.

      • Chiggles

        Chomsky pulls it all out of his@rse. I seriously wonder if he believes his own bullhsit; he strikes me as more of a grifter than anything else, laughing up his sleeve at the priveleged pukes, whose parents pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for them to lap up his swill., as he goes sailing on his yacht.

      • Kim

        Chomsky, that communist philosophical moron who did too much acid and smoked too much pot in the sixties? That Noam Chomsky?
        The only readers of his books were joles like Charlie Manson, Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dorn, and other radicals from the left and psychopathic.

      • SpiritOf1683

        9/11 wasn't merely a crime. It was the opening salvo of the Third Great Jihad aimed at the West ojn the 318th anniversary of the end of the Second Great Jihad, and the 304th anniversary of the Ottoman rout at Zenta. Treating 9/11 and other atrocities as 'crimes' instead of what they really are – acts of war – hamstrings the West. Saudi Arabia should have been invaded instead of Iraq as 15 of the 19 terrorists were Saudis, and they were taught to hate infidels by their fellow Saudis. And US troops should have entered Mecca and Medina, and thrown that black meteorite into the Marianas Trench.

    • ajnn

      such a lawsuit by the bin ladin family would be a HUGE legal error. it would open the door to a counter-claim against them.

      there are jurisdictional issues that protect them now.

    • welldoneson

      Kim, the reply to the bin laden's supposed lawsuit should be a squadron of A10s unloading everything followed up by leaflets saying "so sue us!"

  • Steve Chavez

    How many times over the years have I written this?: Thanks Jamie!

    "When the Wall fell, we cheered, our Communists cried. When the Twins fell, we cried, they cheered." Then I recently added: "When Osama died, we cheered, they cried!"

    Our American Communists, their fronts with many with ties to the Soviet KGB, were the MOST BITTER of all Communists when the Wall, the Iron Curtain, and the Soviet Union, a country they loved more than their own, fell! When the Twins fell, they saw Lady Liberty bend at her knees as they hoped she would FALL too! "We deserved it" they said! "Chickens coming home to roost," the Rev. and "uncle" to Obama, said! They then began their conspiracy theories that millions still believe due to their blind hatred of Bush, the CIA, and the world's pinata, Israel!

    "PUTIN'S REVENGE!" Our media, controlled by the Left, is portraying Putin as a good and cool guy. He plays the piano, rides horses shirtless, throws men twice his size to the ground, dances, and was recently on Larry King who has never met a Communist he didn't like! Putin was bitter too when we aided in the Soviet defeat in Afghanistan so now he, and our Communists, seek our defeat too in Afghanistan, Iraq (Cindy Sheehan/Code Pink/CPUSA aiding insurgents who are killing our soldiers), and the whole Middle East using proxies like Iran and Syria with the ultimate goal of destroying Israel!

    Can you imagine the tears flowing when Fidel dies? I can't hardly wait to see the sobs from Obama, Hillary, Hollywood, university professors, and Michael Moore! These Communist lovers will finally come out of the Closet to show their true ideals!

  • waterwillows

    It beggars belief what the lefties will do in their blind stampede of agenda. Be it PC, mulit culturism, climate change, the gay agenda or the imposed political education of the young.
    They have show themselves to be utterly ruthless, hard and mean spirited in the promotion of their socialis/marxist agenda.
    To defend a mass murderer, who was still in the process of planing to commit ANOTHER large scale murder of Americans, is dispictable to say the least. It shows them to be a people who will stop at nothing to achieve their delusional aims.
    The world is not big enough for both delusion and reality on a grand scale to live along side of each other. One must, and has to go. I'll bet on reality as having the staying power.

  • jacob

    TO "AMUSED" :

    What Mr. GLAZOW lists is just a minute sample of the pseudointellectual leftist
    and outright Communist scum infecting and corrupting with full impunity student
    minds at our higher education institutions….

    I wonder the reverse would be allowed should (GOD FORBID ! ! ) the shoe ever
    fall on the foot all that scum advocates for….

    • Fred Dawes

      Amused only needs to be loved as a good obama Boys he workers to helps the great leader to ruler to put us into some nasty little and senseless lefist communist state with thugs running that place once called the USA.

      • Amused

        Dawes , in your rant , you've lost the ability to construct a coherent sentence . Dont you read your tripe before you push the submit button ?

        • welldoneson

          amusing, you need to work on your own coherence, you've yet to make any sense at all yet choose to scold the least of your adversaries.

    • Amused

      So what your saying is ALL Colleges and Universities in the US are filled with Wards , Mailers and Chomskys. jacob , you got your head screwed on backwards .

      • welldoneson

        no, jacob did not say that, but I note that young people and lefties often misquote – or purposely misunderstand – in order to make some semblance of a counterpoint. helps us to understand just how ignorant they are.

  • http://apollospaeks.townhall.com ApolloSpeaks

    THE DEATH OF BIN LADIN AND OUR DEBT TO DONALD TRUMP

    Within 96 hours, from April 27th to May 1st, a frantic and desperate Barack Obama did two things to reverse the collapse of his failing presidency and restore his fading reelection hopes: he released a copy of his long form birth certificate (which he could have done in 2008) to silence Donald Trump and the gathering storm over his birthplace; then he ordered the raid on Osama Bin Ladin's Abbottabad hideout (which he could have done in October or November of last year) to stop Trump and right wing critics from pounding away at his ineffective and misguided leadership on foreign and domestic policy. Indeed, Donald Trump succeeded where Clinton, Gates, Panneta and others within the administration had failed. Trump blasting Obama for his weak, feckless. incompetent presidency, leading us into economic, strategic and military decline, is what finally worked in getting Obama to act-to move against the Abbottabad facility without confirmation that bin Ladin was inside.

    continued

  • http://apollospaeks.townhall.com ApolloSpeaks

    !Indeed, if Trump hadn't aggressively gone after Obama and hammered away at his failures the opportunity to capture and kill bin Ladin might have disappeared. For eventually bin Ladin's support group inside Pakistan's military and security services would have learned of the CIA operation and alerted bin Ladin who'd have fled the compound. That the CIA was able to keep its surveillance program secret for eight months was lucky for Obama and the nation, for it couldn't have gone on indefinitely. Indeed, every day that Obama stupidly delayed in ordering the raid was another day closer to losing bin Ladin.

    Click my name to read my other widely linked Townhall pieces on Obama the death of bin Ladin.

  • Andres de Alamaya

    I feel like Ike Eisenhower who once he made up his mind was full of indecision. How the left reacts to the Osama killing doesn't really interest me. I applaud sending a team into Pakistan which, I understand, Obama's team had to push him but with all the double talk about the execution of the effort, I no longer applaud. Personally, I believe in shooting first and asking questions later but I'm not a great believer in the Democratic process. While critical of Israel's often impractical and unrealistic devotion to fairness and Democracy, I have to remind myself of how they handled the Eichmann affair. They sent a team into Argentina to capture him, smuggle him out, try the s.o.b., and then hang him. My gut tells me that Osama was passé in their movement and killing him in this manner may only have served to give inspiration to wannabe terrorists. Capturing him, grilling him and trying him, might have been more effective from a PR standpoint. As for Chomsky, a killing and fast burial at sea might be most appropriate.

  • Patriotwork

    It is very interesting how much the immoral methodologies of the lefties and Muslims and the twisted rationales they use to justify them are alike.

    The Burial of bin Laden

    In the hours as the Muslin demand
    There's a splash and it sinks, they disband.
    There'd been a Muslim prayer
    In Arabic with care,
    So Allah could their words understand.

    Did it end as Osama would wish?
    For there's something in it Jewish.
    Like Jonah and the whale
    That marvelous old tale,
    But it isn't Jonah in the fish. –me

  • Cuban Refugee

    Thank you, Jamie, for the most well-written, informative piece I have read on the left's collective psychosis in recent memory. The limousine liberals in this country are of the same ilk as well-to-do Cubans who adored Fidel when he triumphed in revolution, became disillusioned when they saw him nationalize their assets, become a killing machine, and destroy a paradise on earth. It is such a shame that the deluded Shirley Maclaine did not remain prostrate at the altar of Mao — she might eventually have seen the light of true faith and reason. Those on the left in this country who still support the jihadists who are actively working to bring down our republic are blinded by an ideology that shouts, "Victory or Death!" I say: as they work shoulder-to-shoulder with those who hate freedom, let all the American traitors die trying …

  • Jim_C

    Aw, looky here: another "The left cried" pile of malarkey from FPM. That makes, what 5 in a week? LOL. Anything to deflect any credit away from Obama, I guess.

    • William_Z

      I do credit the president for continuing the Bush policy: Gitmo, keeping the Terrorists there, and using Enhanced interrogation, and using Cheney’s SEAL team. These are facts, which cannot be disputed as is the fact that there are a number of people on the left who, days and weeks after 9/11, reveled in the result of the terrorist attack, and this also is a fact. What is write in the above article really happed.

      • trickyblain

        The Bush policy was focusing resources on Iraq. Obama shifted focus to the near east region of Afghanistan/Pakistan. Bush had nearly eight years to tap bin Laden and failed, in no small part because he didn't "think about him very much." He was killed on he Obama's command. Those are facts.

        You are correct in that there were a "number" of those on the "left" that welcomed 9/11. But it would be moronic to claim that it is in any way a representative sample. And, of course, there were a "number" of those on the right that also cheered it and used it as fodder for religious screeds and paleocon isolationist hyperbole. But a representative sample? Not even close.

        • William_Z

          Intelligence is a resource and so was the financial backing being given to Pakistan during those eight years.  Yes, Bush failed to get Osama, but the intelligence apparatus was there and used and upgraded.   During the early portion of those eight years, Osama would’ve been most act and he accomplished no dramatic attacks, which decrease his creditability over time.   

          A small sample, yes, but to discount the extent of their forum to express their opinion is moronic, especially when it comes to someone like Chomsky.   

          • trickyblain

            The forum to express thier opinion? Do you think they should not have a right to that forum?

            I think most educated people on the "left" think of Chomsky as they do Marx. Perceptive in observation, yet grotesquely wrong in their conclusions and solutions.

          • William_Z

            Where in what I wrote did I even imply: "Do you think they should not have a right to that forum?"

            Read what I wrote, don't adlib.

          • trickyblain

            I asked a question based on this statement:
            "A small sample, yes, but to discount the extent of their forum to express their opinion is moronic, especially when it comes to someone like Chomsky."
            I'm not making accusations, just wondering why you think that their ability or effectiveness in expressing their opinions is, from what it seems that you are saying, problematic.
            And of course, no prominant Democrat pol (outside of possibly Kucinch) goes around agreeing with Chomsky's take on foreign policy.

  • JosephWiess

    WTF? Really? The Leftists want Sharia Law? They must really be nuts, since Sharia law means that feminist women would have to wear burqa's and stay at home, or face rape in the street. Their daughters would be honor-killed, and they would be lined up against the wall and shot for speaking out against men.

    Geez, wake up and get a brain, leftist. Nobody is stopping you from leaving and moving to the land where your infatutions live at? Move to Saudi, Move to Lebanon, move to Africa, move to Bahrain, move to Iran. Nobody is stopping you, and some would even pay for your one way ticket.

    • trickyblain

      "Really? The Leftists want Sharia Law?"

      No. They really don't.

    • Mike

      The left is attracted to things totalitarian in nature.

    • http://gigglycow.tumblr.com gigglycow

      Actually, Sharia Law is not about that at all. Sharia Law is based on the Quran. And the Quran does not make any references to honor killing, burqa, women being shot for speaking out against men. If not, I and so many other women would have been dead by now. The wearing of a burqa is specific to the Taliban in Afghanistan. Honor killing is practiced by a small minority of uneducated, male-dominant, feudal society in the Indian sub-continent, some parts of the Middle East (which in itself is so vast and covers conservative Saudi Arabi and capitalist Dubai). There is more to the Muslim world than just the Taliban, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

  • tanstaafl

    Apologies to Florence Reese –

    I’ve got news for you people
    From the land of your birth
    There are lies in the airways
    No room for the truth
    Whose side are you on?
    Whose side are you on?

    Now they’ll tell you this thing
    Then they’ll tell you that
    But don’t you question nothin’
    Your voice ain’t where it’s at
    Whose side are you on?
    Whose side are you on?

  • tanstaafl

    They’ll give you a pittance
    And take away your dreams
    Then they’ll want your votes
    Nothing’s ever as it seems
    Whose side are you on?
    Whose side are you on?

    They sold us to the Muslims
    There is no neutral there
    They’ll kill us and rape us
    And leave our bodies bare
    Whose side are you on?
    Whose side are you on?

  • tanstaafl

    They take away our freedom
    They take away our land
    Will you be their dhimmi
    Or will you be a man?
    Whose side are you on?
    Whose side are you on?

    I was born a free man
    I’ll never be their slave
    Let’s all stand together
    In the land of the brave
    Whose side are you on?
    Whose side are you on?

    • Amused

      Keep your day job tanstaafl . A poet you're not .

  • sedoanman

    Re: “That the US had to kill him in violation of international law…"

    Better go back to law school.

    The U.S. is allowed by international law to defend itself. OBL was breaking international law on several counts. 1) He was waging private war; 2) he was practicing genocide by killing Americans, an identifiable ethnic group.

    I'm sure there are other ways he was guilty.

    "There is no legal or moral equivalence in LOAC [International Law of Armed Conflict] between lawful combatants and unlawful combatants, or between lawful belligerency and unlawful belligerency (also referred to as lawful combatantry and unlawful combatantry).

    "Those combatants who operate outside the conventions of war have in the past been marked as 'highway robbers and pirates' and as such, are deemed UNLAWFUL COMBATANTS. [Just to show how old and un-original these tactics are, Article 82 of the Lieber Code, promulgated as General Orders No. 100 by President Lincoln, 24 April 1863, states: "Men, or squads of men, who commit hostilities, whether by fighting, or inroads for destruction or plunder, or by raids of any kind, without commission, without being part and portion of the organized hostile army, and without sharing continuously in the war, but who do so with intermitting returns to their homes and avocations, or with the occasional assumption of the semblance of peaceful pursuits, divesting themselves of the character or appearance of soldiers – such men, or squads of men, are not public enemies, and, therefore, if captured, are not entitled to the privileges of prisoners of war, but shall be treated summarily as highway robbers or pirates."]

    Punishment for those captured while engaging in such illegal participation historically has been very severe, NO QUARTER."
    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m6007/is_55

    • Fred Dawes

      Yes you are right but also the people who do not want to live under the mexican or other form's of government like some Nazi or ethnic communist state, ruled by some thug from mexico or red chinese or some phony like obama

    • Not A Lefty Loser

      Well done sedoanman..Our politicians, fair journalists and ourselves have to call these lefties out every time they assert their Orwellian "truths" in passing like "Violated Internatioanal Law" or "shredded the constitution" "Stole the election" "Bush Lied" We know these terms are ridiculous, but have to assume some people will take them seriously, because if they repeat these lies often enough – some people start to believe them. Conservatives have to counter punch every time these sneaks start with their "self evident" propaganda.

    • coyote3

      Completely incorrect. Bumping UBL is not where the problem occurred, but there is a big one. Let's see if you can spot it. It has nothing to do with enemy combatants, or international law, really.

    • Mahdi Al-Dajjal

      Indeed. When the Allies occupied Germany after WWII, acts of murder, sabotage, etc. continued for years against military members and their fuel depots, trucks, trains, etc).

      Under centuries-old rules of war, anybody caught participating in such acts against armed forces, or who gave aid and comfort to those performing in such acts, were hauled before a military tribunal, given an opportunity to explain themselves, and, if the tribunal wasn't wholly convinced of their complete innocence, convicted them on the spot as "Enemy Combatants" whereafter, they were immediately taken out into a courtyard, tied to a pole and executed by firing squad. No appeals, no excuses, no apologies.

  • Honest Patriot

    Have the decency to report accurately about Hezbollah. While many of us have no love lost for them the fact – noted in the article you linked to – is that they have NOT commented officially on Bin Laden’s death. The person who expressed sorrow is a FORMER Hezbollah member who broke ranks with the party and is now under an arrest warrant in Lebanon.
    Blanket demonization and failing to understand that there are human beings and ordinary people with normal aspirations behind any movement is itself “radical” to say the least, and possibly a deliberate propaganda tool by folks who are fanatics themselves (without realizing or admitting it) to perpetuate the brainwashing of the US public in some cases.
    Shame. Retraction and apology are in order.
    It makes the reader doubt any other statement the author makes.

    Quotes from the article you linked to:
    “Tufayli, a Shiite Muslim who split with Hezbollah in 1992 in protest against the party’s decision to participate in parliamentary elections, also noted his disagreement with the radical Sunni Al-Qaeda leader.”
    “In 1998, the Lebanese government issued a warrant for Tufayli’s arrest on charges of “attacking national security” after he called for civil disobedience against the state.
    He is believed to still be living in Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley, a lawless region in the country’s east.
    Hezbollah has not officially commented on the death of bin Laden, killed in a US raid on a mansion in the Pakistani town of Abbottabad, a two-hour drive from the capital Islamabad.”

  • Dan

    By throwing all leftists in the same camp you undermine your arguement. It makes your views sound as extreme as the objects of your mockery. Whatever happened to middle ground politics? When left meant a passion for social mobility, not the dribbling ravings of a lunatic (Chomsky) who gets his rocks off on being as controversial as possible.

    I consider myself a socialist but Chomsky is not my spokesperson.

    Burn in hell Osama, world hide and seek champion 2001 – 2011

  • Wiley

    Brilliant.

  • trickyblain

    Mr. Glasov, without diverting to one of the books by yourself of Horowitz, it would be most helpful to the sane folks if you would be so kind as to define "leftist." Most people on the "left" actually find Chomsky clownish — if they actually know who he is. How do explain, at various times, calling both Obama and Chomsky "leftists"? The logic of this, according to this article, would mean Obama is distressed by bin Laden's death. Even though he ordered it and called it "justice." Please provide these definitions because, as it stands, this article is perhaps the most insanely idiotic mess of twisted thought ever written.

    • Maxie

      I'll try to help out.
      Liberals: Focus on the Welfare State as in Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. Government as surrogate mother/father/provider

      Radical Left: Advocates of Authoritarian Collectivism aka socialism, communism, fascism. Focus on establishing heaven on earth via a presumably all-wise ruling elite. Inevitably totalitarian in nature. Chompsky fits in here. Read up on the Lurianic Doctrine to see the origins of this metaphysical belief system.

      Liberal's are too often the "useful idiots" (Lenin's term) of the revolutionary Radicals
      who easily manipulate them with emotional hyperbole: dog food eating Grandma's; starving school children, etc. which absolutely will happenif the government doesn't get more power and right now!!

      Therefore both fit under the Leftist label.
      If you've got a better explanation I'd love to hear it.

    • Maxie

      Tricky – I tried to send what I felt was a thoughtful. invective and sarcasm-free response but it was rejected. Too bad because you raise a good question which I've wondered about for some time (as a consevative). There seem to be certain words that immediately trigger rejection on this board for no good reason. Very annoying. Like the bad old days when words like 'embarrass' or assembly' would kick you off.

  • Fred Dawes

    Keep your eyes on what comes down in 3 weeks, obama is now working with some of the leadership of Al QAEDA Boys the ugly facts are about to be understood by us all.

  • TomG

    Here is what the late pretentious lefty literary hack Susan Sontag had to say about 9/11 in the New Yorker a few days after the terrorist attacks (full piece here: http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2001/09/24/01092…. Many people on the left feeel this way; it's not just the Chomsks and the Churchills.

    "The disconnect between last Tuesday's monstrous dose of reality and the self-righteous drivel and outright deceptions being peddled by public figures and TV commentators is startling, depressing. The voices licensed to follow the event seem to have joined together in a campaign to infantilize the public. Where is the acknowledgment that this was not a "cowardly" attack on "civilization" or "liberty" or "humanity" or "the free world" but an attack on the world's self-proclaimed superpower, undertaken as a consequence of specific American alliances and actions? How many citizens are aware of the ongoing American bombing of Iraq? And if the word "cowardly" is to be used, it might be more aptly applied to those who kill from beyond the range of retaliation, high in the sky, than to those willing to die themselves in order to kill others. In the matter of courage (a morally neutral virtue): whatever may be said of the perpetrators of Tuesday's slaughter, they were not cowards."

  • http://www.boycottscotland.com Eddie

    Ding Dong, osama bin laden is DEAD!

    • Fred Dawes

      this is a good thing.

  • http://www.boycottscotland.com Eddie

    The US is resisting islamofascism.

    Who's next?
    zawahiri?
    gahdan?

    Check out the Most Wanted Terrorists list at fbi.gov

  • http://islamsfatalflaw.blogspot.com/ BobSmith

    Thanks Jamie. Well Said.

    I have to wonder why so many leftists choose to live in western society. How can they stand it? If they were truly committed to the ideology they espouse, why live in a Western hell hole.

    How about moving to any place on the face of the earth where they can add to the utopian quest? And where would that be?

  • crypticguise

    I can totally understand the mindset of the totalitarian sociopathic adherents to Islamofascism. They are commanded to kill kafirs who do not submit. They may be crazy but they're not stupid.

    On the other hand, leftists like the GENIUS OF LINGUISTICS, Chomsky and his ilk are unfathomable. They are perfect subjects for ultimate assisted suicide. The Islamofascists would be more than happy to accomodate them I'm certain, should the circumstances be convenient.

  • http://nexusofassholery.blogspot.com/ Patrick_Ross

    I happen to have a few left-wing friends who celebrated Bin Laden's death as much as I did, if not more.

    • Fred Dawes

      be happy

  • Frank

    Unfortunately, for every Obama bin Laden ( no typo on my part) we kill, there are hundreds of neanderthal fanatics waiting to take his place and kill "infidels". Killing one at at a time does nothing.

    • sedoanman

      That's why we should have cut off his head, stuffed the mouth full of bacon, and sent the whole lot to OBL's successor.

      • Not A Lefty Loser

        Agreed we should have made a much bigger example of him..also I disagree with Frank that killing one at a time does nothing. You always shoot the Indian chief or the commanding officer in a war if you can..severely demoralizes the fighting force

      • trickyblain

        Wouldn't it be a better idea if we just killed his sucesssor? If we knew where to send him mail?

        You people crack me up.

        • Not A Lefty Loser

          No, if we knew his address this lame administration would send him a supoena and Eric Holder would have someone from his law firm represent him

          • trickyblain

            Right. Because he did that with bin Laden and all.

          • Not A Lefty Loser

            Didn't do that with Bin Laden because trump and his low polling shamed him into being tough

          • Amused

            Oh , B.S. and you know it .The only one Trump shamed …was himself . He got the B.C. shoved under his nose , his anti-China trade phony rant bit him on the arse when it was exposed that his own "signature clothing line " AS WELL AS his daughter's "signature jewelry line " …lol….are all MADE IN CHINA .
            To try an turn that into – "Trump shaming Obama into going in for bin laden " merely shows an utter lack of critical thinking on your part . But that's one of the main defects of most posters on this blog . The training for the mission and ALL the critical details ,before the actual operation , were going on long before Trump opened his big stupid mouth .

          • trickyblain

            Ok. He started the plannig for the operation seven months ago because he "knew" that Trump would start frothing up morons and he would have to do soemthing big.

          • Not A Left Loser

            Obama planned nothing. He seized an opportune moment by approving an ongoing operation that he perceived as helping him politically.

          • coyote3

            Well he doesn't have to worry about low polling anymore, it just go went down a few more notches.

          • Not A Left Loser

            Obama planned nothing. He just approved what our (still) patritoic CIA had going. His polsters saw Trump landing punches and green lit when handed to him because his approval rating was/is going into the toilet because he's perceived as a wuss.

            "Amused" your critical thinking is pathetic. You'd have us believe your weak lame Obama is some kind of Patton.The only war campaign he ever planned was strirring up lefty agitators in Chicago to disrupt good american capitalist businesses.

  • trickyblain

    Cool. Have a good night.

    • William_Z

      Sorry for the delay.

      You used the words ‘problem’ and ‘problematic,’ both of which I never used, or even implied. Now, I’ll put that aside. Next we’re dealing with a number of people who have and audience, either with a news agency or someone like Chomsky a following. He’s a linguist who has had material published on subjects beyond his educational background. He can and does have the right to do that, but it cannot be ignored that he has an audience with similar opinions, or else why would his books be published and purchased—someone with a similar ideology reads them.

      Simply put, there is a small sample of like minded people with an audience, so there must be a consensus of opinion broader than those people mentioned in the original article. That’s just common sense

      That's as clear as I can make it.

  • trickyblain

    Psycho alert!

  • trickyblain

    That's somehting you cannot know and will never know.

    Bush didn't get him because he was preoccupied with Saddam.

    • Not A Lefty Loser

      President Bush was preoccupied with keeping me and ungrateful people like yourself safe for 8 years and he still managed to set up the infra-structure that eventually caught bin laden. Thanks President G.W. Bush!

      And we can and do know how liberals are hypocrites with their double standards when its their guy who acts tough…Obama's Libya, Clinton's Aspirin Factory and of course..John Kerry reporting for duty!

  • Bob Akbar

    Lots n lots of leftists thot US deserved 911. Many I know. Many many in academia.

  • Amused

    Funny , that it would be a possible REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE , Ron Paul who's crying FOUL over the taking out of Bin laden . Ron says we should have "worked with " the Pakistani Government , and they would handed him over , just like they did with Sheik Kalid .
    Hey Jaimie , what do you call Ron Paul ? And as for the waterboarding of Kalid ? That didn't produce the info that was required to find Bin laden .

    • TomG

      Ron Paul is an unelectable,anti Israel, anti military grouch. Good anti-terror info was gained through intensive interrogation techniques. Your post is all about mindless, talking head bs.

      • Amused

        Get your facts straight imbecile ……the water boarding of Kalid , did not lead to knowing the whereabouts of bin laden .And as far as Paul goes / he carries weight along with his son in the Tea party , and that Tea Party is now the Republican Steering Committee …lol….good luck with that .

        • TomG

          Fact: Obama's C.I.A. director Leon Panetta told Brian Williams "I think some of the detainees clearly were, you know-they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of these detainees." That is, those techniques had success in the field and were a tactical part of tracking Osama. My point about Paul is not a fact, but an opinion. He's a long-time incumbent and the Tea Party is not uniformly on his side.

        • Not A Lefty Loser

          Too Bad Amused….everyday more and more evidence is pointing that waterboarding of Kalid did lead to Bin laden…you and your lefty dopes saying its not so doesn't make it a fact

  • Amused

    Spot on trickyblain : quote-

    Mr. Glasov, without diverting to one of the books by yourself of Horowitz, it would be most helpful to the sane folks if you would be so kind as to define "leftist." Most people on the "left" actually find Chomsky clownish — if they actually know who he is. How do explain, at various times, calling both Obama and Chomsky "leftists"? The logic of this, according to this article, would mean Obama is distressed by bin Laden's death. Even though he ordered it and called it "justice." Please provide these definitions because, as it stands, this article is perhaps the most insanely idiotic mess of twisted thought ever written. -end quote

    • trickyblain

      Thanks, Amused. Though the typos in my original post do vex me now that I see them…

      • Amused

        No problemo , the point was quite clearly made , and the number of "thumbs down " indicates it was right on target . The usual reaction to the truth around here .

    • Not A Lefty Loser

      It' more accurate to say Obama approved the plan than he "ordered" it. And if he isn't distressed, it's only because he thinks he benefits politically at this time, when Trump was making him look like a wuss and the economy is in the toilet . So yes Obama is still a leftist, just like Chomsky, Ayers, Pelosi, Reid, your buddy Michael Moore and he rest. If a Republican President had approved or ordered bin laden's asasination Mr O would be in public vocal distress.

      No one needs a definition of leftist, it is self evident to all those reading these posts except those who wish to purposely cloud the issue because they can't seem to accept they are on the same side as Chomsky.

  • ebonystone

    Chomsky fumed in his recent article: “We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic.”

    Chomsky is supposed to be an expert in languages, so he ought to realize just how ambiguous his remark is. Just who are the "we" and "ourselves" of whom he speaks?
    If by "we" he means himself and his fellow radical enemies of civilization and the West, then they would react by dancing in the streets and proclaiming that justice had been served by the elimination of a servant of "Big Oil".
    Or does he intend "we" to mean the American people, a group with whom Chomsky has never identified much?
    I think that the fact that Chomsky even makes a comparison between a freely and legitimately elected political leader and the chief of an international mob of murderers shows which "we" he means.

    • TomG

      Chomsky is an expert in Linguistics, not languages (big difference). Otherwise a good post.

    • trickyblain

      Ah, logic. and critical thought. We probably don't agree on much, but hard to argue this one. Nice post.

      W. H. Taft? I'm curious — why?

    • Fred Dawes

      most people would help it was bush and obama who allowed mass immigration to the USA OF Hispanic and mass numbers of muslims by the million a year it is now like a massive infestation that will kill us all in the end game of evil. and yes it is all about oil and oil is control of people and nations in the end game go check out Farid Ghadry.

  • Fred Dawes

    Bush never wanted bin laden

  • Len Powder

    The article exposes the mentality of the radical Left unadultarated. In their sick view, it is George Bush and Dick Cheney who should have bullets fired in their faces. It is their conviction that the US, Republicans, conservatives, the middle class, Wall Street bankers, corporate CEOs, oil companies, etc., are a greater evil than Al Qaeda, Islamists, Iran, Syria, Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin, to name but a few of their heroes. What most of us love and cherish they hate and despise with an unwavering passion. To them we are the problem and they are the solution. The sooner they exterminate us and our evil notions the sooner they can usher in their perfect Utopia. They will not disappear voluntarily. They must be driven out against their own malicious will by us!

    • Amused

      Seek professional counseling Len . Oh ….and just be carefull of who you try to "drive out "…that could put you in a world of trouble . So go get that counseling before you hurt yourself .

  • Ray Czar

    Hail to the Chief!–Barack Almighty!
    Hey all you lefties, one of your own made the call.

    Fact–B.O. hasn’t denied the assination!
    Fact–B.O. made sure the evidence–a hum- disappeared, the burial at sea.
    Fact–B.O. is solely responsible!
    Fact–B.O. takes full credit for betraying his own!
    And our leftist media are silent of the above facts and frame the whole issue
    away from the “one” solely to blame–the most divisive President in U.S. history!
    Progressives-ha
    Reap what you sow–look in the mirror and spin your hate back at yourselves!

  • Chris Smith

    Considering that not too many left-wing people I know of embrace radical violent religious fundamentalist ideologies, something tells me that the author completely misunderstands the issues he's discussing. Good riddance to Osama, and as a left-winger, here's hoping that the intelligence obtained by our guys helps us nab more top Al Qaeda personnel and puts an end to this terrorist organization for good and quickens the pace for us leaving Afghanistan.

  • comraderasputin

    Jamie,

    Keep doing what you do. These apologists are a threat to democracy almost as much as the law society.

    • Amused

      yea , an if they dont follow lock-step in your ideology , then "something " must be done about'em eh ? What a bunch of low brow facists . Dissent which is essentially AMERICAN , now is determined by the imbeciles as what ? A threat to democracy ? Maybe Jaimie and yourself , have not yet fully shaken off your Soviet ways huh ?
      Maybe we should send all these "apologists " to the Gulag .

      • comraderasputin

        Amused,

        Bin Laden's gone. Rejoice in his demise. There are people who thought he had the right to a "fair trial." Terrorism is an act of war. Terrorists require a military solution. This was a military solution. War is a different game with few rules. Lawyers seldom brave battlefields.

        The gulag reference shows your ignorance regarding Jamie's family.

        Crack a book that is not all pictures and you'd know that.

  • Amused

    Chris , it is not FACT you are arguing with , it is a mentality . To most people on this blog , anyone left of centere , cheered on 9/11 , wept at Bin Ladens death , it's memorized rhetoric . You look at the author , and what this alleged "editorial " is supposed to be about , and it becomes apparent . Proof of this of course is simply to read what Len Powder writes.
    People like this thrive on hatred and see percieved enemies virtually everywhere .The author makes his living feeding such misfits , for it is exactly this which they come here for . There is indeed a psychosis in such ranting as that of Len Powder , jaimie knows this , and feeds it , and perhaps is a victim of the same himself .

    • Not A Lefty Loser

      Amused would have loved the communist soviet union. They had those who disagreed with them labeled psychotic so they could institutiionlize them.

      Typical lefty – calls those he disagrees with Psychotic, haters, morons..but never addresses the arguments.