Merged: Al Qaida endorses McCain

[Oliver]

No, I didn't make that up - even if he have to wait for OBL's
official endorsement :

Quote:

...Now with the news that Al Qaeda web sites are seemingly backing McCain for President, the Republican might want to reconsider that line of attack. And to be sure, John McCain should steer clear of touting "Osama the Terrorist" at his rallies.

As the Washington Post detailed Wednesday, Al Qaeda cadres see a McCain as the best bet to perpetuate the policies of President Bush they see bankrupting the United States and the West: "Al-Qaeda will have to support McCain in the coming election," said a commentary posted Monday on the extremist Web site al-Hesbah, which is closely linked to the terrorist group. It said the Arizona Republican would continue the "failing march of his predecessor," President Bush...


Full Source

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

For a second I thought this was a post from The Onion...well. If it's true this is certainly an interesting turn of events. Although conservatives will just spin it as a de facto endorsement for Barack Obama.

[Toke]

Well, AQ do want to see USA going down, and McCain is probably the best for that job.

He is also an continuation of bush which will be better at keeping the hate generated over the last 8 years going.

Great for requitment.

[Oliver]

Here's the Washington Post article:

Al-Qaeda Hails Financial Crisis
Washington Post, United States

[moon1969]

They probaly are scared of Obama since Obama will send more troops to Afghanistan and Pakistan.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by moon1969

They probaly are scared of Obama since Obama will send more troops to Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Why would that be scary for them?

[geni]

Originally Posted by Oliver

Why would that be scary for them?

Direct confrontations with US troops are not fun. The problem is that with US troops in that area there is a risk that memebers above the level of cannon fodder getting killed.

[Alferd_Packer]

Or even worse, Obama might actually bring about changes that negatively impact their support base.

[halfempty]

Hilarious. We're obviously winning the war on terror when top al-Qaeda brass have the time to weigh our presidential candidates and blog about the US election on their website. Keeping 'em on the run!

[thaiboxerken]

Originally Posted by halfempty

Hilarious. We're obviously winning the war on terror when top al-Qaeda brass have the time to weigh our presidential candidates and blog about the US election on their website. Keeping 'em on the run!

This makes absolutely no logical sense at all. Please re-read your post and try again.

[Thunder]

the war in Iraq is seen as a war against Muslims and Arabs.
the war in Afghanistan is seen as a war against the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and their extremist/fundamentalist supporters.

Obama wants to rev up the war in Afghanistan and end the war in Iraq.
McCain wants to let the war in Afghanistan drag on forever..as well as in Iraq.

If you were Al Qaeda..who would you want for President? I'd totally want McCain.

McCain is expected to continue the unilateralist cowboy tactics of Bush.
Therefore McCain fits very nicely with Al Qaeda's view of the USA.

[halfempty]

Originally Posted by thaiboxerken

This makes absolutely no logical sense at all. Please re-read your post and try again.

Should I have added the ?

[Ausmerican]

Originally Posted by thaiboxerken

This makes absolutely no logical sense at all. Please re-read your post and try again.

Ken I think your sarcasm meter is broken.

[thaiboxerken]

Originally Posted by Ausmerican

Ken I think your sarcasm meter is broken.

It breaks everytime I read a Cicero or MHaze post. Halfempty's post isn't far off from one of theirs, excepting that they would write something like that and sincerely believe it.

[Ausmerican]

Originally Posted by Kthulhut Fhtagn

Although conservatives will just spin it as a de facto endorsement for Barack Obama.

Already happening. They are saying that the Turrests are using reverse psychology and this means they really support Obama. Of course when Hamas said they supported Obama they really meant it.
So, just so everyone is clear;
If terrorists say they support Obama it means they support Obama.
If terrorists say they support McCain it means they support Obama.
I hope everyone is clear on that.

[pgwenthold]

The funny thing is, I just saw a letter in the local paper today that says we can't vote for Obama because he was endorsed by Hamas...

[Oliver]

Olbermann: Al-Qaida endorses McCain (Oct 22, 2008) Runs 6:25

Author Richard Clarke discusses the endorsement of John McCain by an al-Qaida connected Web site and whether it will affect the 2008 election.

[Gagglegnash]

Hi

Originally Posted by Ausmerican

Already happening. They are saying that the Turrests are using reverse psychology and this means they really support Obama. Of course when Hamas said they supported Obama they really meant it.
So, just so everyone is clear;
If terrorists say they support Obama it means they support Obama.
If terrorists say they support McCain it means they support Obama.
I hope everyone is clear on that.

Mmm... probably not.

All they want to do is to spread confusion and take the focus off themselves.

If they say that they support one candidate, then half the nation will say, "aha! we are right," and the other half will say, "aha! WE are right," and then spend so much time trying to spin it their way that the real issues are obscured.

You see, lying isn't telling a falsehood, although that's pretty close. It's putting out information that accomplishes your dishonest goals.

I see this as a two-edged sword, cutting both parties down and leaving everyone saying, "well, obviously...."

[leftysergeant]

Whoever they want to win, they NEED McCain to win in order to survive. They need a POTUS who is militarily incompetent and who will not take the advice of soldiers who actually learned what they were supposed to have learned from their years of military service and the lessons of history. Al Qaeda needs a POTUS who will fly off the handle and do stupid things that embarrass us as a nation. Al Qaeda needs a POTUS who will screw up everything that makes this country respectred by other nations.

Al Qaeda needs a POTUS who, if not as stupid as Bush, is at least half-wack.

Osama needs McCain.

[Tricky]

Originally Posted by pgwenthold

The funny thing is, I just saw a letter in the local paper today that says we can't vote for Obama because he was endorsed by Hamas...

Oh, you don't have to leave the forum to see that. BAC was railing about it recently.

[Gagglegnash]

Hi

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

Whoever they want to win, they NEED McCain to win in order to survive. They need a POTUS who is militarily incompetent and who will not take the advice of soldiers who actually learned what they were supposed to have learned from their years of military service and the lessons of history. Al Qaeda needs a POTUS who will fly off the handle and do stupid things that embarrass us as a nation. Al Qaeda needs a POTUS who will screw up everything that makes this country respectred by other nations.

Al Qaeda needs a POTUS who, if not as stupid as Bush, is at least half-wack.

Osama needs McCain.

You left off the, "well, obviously...."

[pgwenthold]

Originally Posted by Tricky

Oh, you don't have to leave the forum to see that. BAC was railing about it recently.

Of course, I'd have to take him off ignore first...

[Praktik]

Originally Posted by Ausmerican

Already happening. They are saying that the Turrests are using reverse psychology and this means they really support Obama. Of course when Hamas said they supported Obama they really meant it.
So, just so everyone is clear;
If terrorists say they support Obama it means they support Obama.
If terrorists say they support McCain it means they support Obama.
I hope everyone is clear on that.

Haha! The bankrupt logic of the conservative discourse on the Hamas and Al Qaeda "endorsements" is pretty clear for all to see. But on one level I DO think Hamas would prefer an Obama presidency, since compared to Al Qaeda they actually have a pretty big political stake in things and citizens to take care of. Al Qaeda can make the world burn without losing that much, though even I think they have as their goal not a Dark Knight Jokeresque version of anarchy and chaos, but rather the return of an Islamic caliphate in the ME of some form or another. These nuances aside, I think its fair to say that Hamas is a different beast than Al Qaeda with a lot more at stake politically in a peace process with Israel than Al Qaeda has at stake anywhere.

They'd rather deal with a President that is less the AIPAC wet dream, and while Obama has had to make it clear how much he loves Israel and how much he's going to protect them, we'll probably see a Clintonesque approach to the ME from him rather than say, a Michael Rubin approach.

That being said, a terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist in the eyes of the uneducated, and Hamas = Al Qaeda = Hizbollah = Muslim Brotherhood. So, a "real-world" corrective to the portrayal of the conservative Politburo you caricatured so amusingly above would have to be:

If Hamas says they would prefer Obama, they really mean it.

If Al Qaeda says they would prefer McCain, they really mean it.

I cringed everytime I heard of Obama referred to as the "Hamas candidate" because that was just so short-sighted. I mean, wouldn't America want a candidate that has more political leverage and influence over Hamas - a thorn in the side of one of its greatest and most crucial allies?

Isn't that a good thing??

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by moon1969

They probaly are scared of Obama since Obama will send more troops to Afghanistan and Pakistan.

in which fantasy universe?

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by fuelair

in which fantasy universe?

+1

I doubt that Osama or Ayman are concerned about US military
and special Forces - or for that matter ... death in general.

But they might fear Obama winning and restoring all the damage
Al Qaida was able to cause thanks to the US governments complete
derailment after 9/11.

[boloboffin]

You see who endorses McCain? Al Qaeda.

Guess who endorses Obama? Opie and Andy Taylor, and Ritchie and the Fonz.

Yes, that was Ron Howard suiting up as Opie and Ritchie one more time to ask you to vote for Obama. True, it looks like the Andy Griffith segment was shot with the actors against separate greenscreens (meaning, not on the same set with each other), but Howard, amazingly, still has got both of his old characters on speed-dial.

Well, it's worth looking at, anyway.

[Boo]

Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?
Morons.

Quote:

THE MAN, BARACK
All right — where is the Al-Qaeda endorsement? The battle of wits has begun. It ends when you decide and the people vote, and we find out who is right and who is dead.

MCCAINZINI
But it’s so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of Al-Qaeda. Are they the sort of terrorists who would give a poison endorsement to their own preferred candidate, or their enemy’s?

[He studies THE MAN, BARACK now.]

MCCAINZINI
Now, a clever terrorist would give the endorsement to his own candidate, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I’m not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the endorsement in front of you. But al-Qaeda must have known I was not a great fool; they would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the endorsement in front of me.

THE MAN, BARACK [with a trace of nervousness]
You’ve made your decision then?

MCCAINZINI
Not remotely. Because endorsements come from Australia, as everyone knows. And Australia is entirely peopled with criminals. And criminals are used to having people not trust them, as you are not trusted by me. So I can clearly not choose the endorsement in front of you.

THE MAN, BARACK
Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

MCCAINZINI
Wait till I get going! Where was I?

THE MAN, BARACK
Australia.

MCCAINZINI
Yes — Australia, and you must have suspected I would have known the endorsement’s origin, so I can clearly not choose the endorsement in front of me.

THE MAN, BARACK [very nervous]
You’re just stalling now.

MCCAINZINI [cackling]
You’d like to think that, wouldn’t you?

[stares at THE MAN, BARACK]

You’ve beaten my Plumber, which means you’re exceptionally un-retarded. So, al-Qaeda could have given the poison endorsement to your candidacy, trusting on your lack of retardation to save you. So I can clearly not choose the endorsement in front of you. But you’ve also bested my Alaskan, which means you must have studied past the third grade. And in studying, you must have learned that man is mortal, so al-Qaeda would have put the poison endorsement as far from your candidacy as possible, so I can clearly not choose the endorsement in front of me.

[As MCCAINZINI's pleasure has been growing throughout, THE MAN, BARACK's has been fast disappearing.]

THE MAN, BARACK
You’re trying to trick me into giving away something — it won’t work –

MCCAINZINI [triumphant]
It has worked — you’ve given everything away — I know where the endorsement is!

THE MAN, BARACK [with fool's courage]
Then make your choice.

MCCAINZINI
I will. And I choose –

[And suddenly he stops, points at something behind THE MAN, BARACK.]

MCCAINZINI
What in the world can that be?

CUT TO:

[THE MAN, BARACK, turning around, looking.]

THE MAN, BARACK
What? Where? I don’t see anything.

CUT TO:

[MCCAINZINI, busily switching the endorsements while THE MAN, BARACK has his head turned.]

MCCAINZINI
Oh, well, I-I could have sworn I saw something. No matter.

[THE MAN, BARACK turns to face him again. MCCAINZINI starts to laugh.]

THE MAN, BARACK
What’s so funny?

MCCAINZINI
I’ll tell you in a minute. First, let’s read — me from my endorsement, and you from yours.

[He picks up his endorsement. THE MAN, BARACK picks up the one in front of him. As they both start to read, MCCAINZINI hesitates a moment. Then, allowing THE MAN, BARACK to go first, he reads his endorsement.]

THE MAN, BARACK
You guessed wrong.

MCCAINZINI [roaring with laughter]
You only think I guessed wrong –

[laughing louder now]

– that’s what’s so funny! I switched endorsements when your back was turned. You fool!

CUT TO:

[THE MAN, BARACK has nothing he can say. He just sits there.]

CUT TO:

[MCCAINZINI, watching him.]

MCCAINZINI
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The most famous is, ‘Never get involved in a land war in Iraq.’ But only slightly less well known is this: ‘Never go in against a Republican when power is on the line!’

[He laughs and roars and cackles and whoops and is in all ways quite cheery until his campaign falls over dead.]

[THE MAN, BARACK, steps past the corpse, taking the blindfold and bindings off AMERICUP, who notices MCCAINZINI lying dead. THE MAN, BARACK pulls her to her feet.]

AMERICUP
Who are you?

THE MAN, BARACK
I am no one to be trifled with, that is all you ever need know.

[He starts to lead her off the mountain path into untraveled terrain.]

AMERICUP [a final glance back toward MCCAINZINI]
To think — all that time it was your endorsement that was poisoned.

THE MAN, BARACK
They were both poisoned. I spent the last few years building up an immunity to Republican ********.

from here:http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/13164.html




Boo

[Praktik]

"Never get involved in a land war in Iraq.."


lol, words to live by

[geni]

Originally Posted by Praktik

"Never get involved in a land war in Iraq.."


lol, words to live by

Not really. The british empire managed it quite well a couple of times. The trick is not to care about civilian casulties or the character of the person running the place (as long as they were anti-nazi it didn't really matter).

[Praktik]

I think we've probably read different histories of British involvement in Iraq.. EDIT: only read the first sentence... hehe from a purely imperial perspective, I suppose you could say it was successful. Still, if we look to the fact the consequences are really still playing out, that was short-term at best and a horrendous cost to Iraqi society.

[kallsop]

One nutjob on a forum says they support McCain and you "skeptics" are all over it. LOL.

Not Really

[leftysergeant]

Originally Posted by kallsop

One nutjob on a forum says they support McCain and you "skeptics" are all over it. LOL.

"Nutjob" was the first word that came to my mind regarding the post on PM.

McCain would be easier to convince to do something counter-productive to the Muslim world and breed more terrorists. If we are hit again, it would probably steer people away from McCain becausae they would realize how inept Republicans are at war and law enforcement.

Too much money spent on materiel and too absurd restrictions on the right of the people, not enough on training and strategies. Losers.

[leonAzul]

Just a quick, non-scientific survey…

al Arabiya seems to think it is a non-issue Link

al Hurra seems to validate the claim with this poll. Link

al Jazeera seems to be of the contrary opinion. Link

(I won't link directly to the graphics in this last link, but trust me, they are well worth the price of admission)

[leonAzul]

Originally Posted by Boo

Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?
Morons.


from here:http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/13164.html

Boo

Nice, very nice. That might even earn a TLA nomination, if it weren't second hand.

[gdnp]

Supposedly a password-encrypted web site that Al Qaeda uses for internal communication has endorsed John McCain.

Clearly, this is not an endorsement that McCain has sought, and I doubt many will hold it against him. I don't expect Obama to touch it, unlike the story was pushed by his opponenents when Hammas reportedly endorsed Obama. I don't see this as making much of a difference one way or another, except in one possible situation.

A major terrorist attack might shift support back towards McCain. Al Quaeda brought down the Spanish government with such an attack just before an election, and if they seriously want McCain, and have the capability, they might try the same thing here.

[Upchurch]

Originally Posted by gdnp

A major terrorist attack might shift support back towards McCain. Al Quaeda brought down the Spanish government with such an attack just before an election, and if they seriously want McCain, and have the capability, they might try the same thing here.

Certainly a bit of irony there. A terrorist attack on the US by a group that (allegedly) supports McCain will shift support towards McCain.

I'm glad that the Obama campaign is not making this an issue the way the McCain campaign has of similar issues. That is the kind of change I'm looking forward too.

I can't help but think back to how many posters on this board that have used some socialist party's endorsement of Obama to claim that Obama is a socialist. I wonder what they will say about this? (not really)

[Oliver]

Al Qaida endorses McCain
Oliver (22nd October 2008)

[MattusMaximus]

You know, I'm not sure a terrorist attack would necessarily give the win to McCain at this point. Obama has projected a calm, cool demeanor in regards to the economic crisis, showing excellent composure under fire, while McCain has acted erratically and like a loose cannon. How might their reactions to a terrorist strike be any different?

[T.A.M.]

I think if they legitimately wanted McCain in office, then they would publicly endorse Obama. They know McCain could then run with...

Bin Laden and his evil minions know that a President Obama will be easy on them, will be an easy mark for the next 9/11. They know they won't get that with a John McCain.

If they truly want McCain in Power, then why publicly endorse him? For this reason, you will NOT see a public endorsement of McCain by heads of Al Qaeda.

TAM

[Tricky]

Threads merged due to nearly identical subjects.

Posted By:Tricky