Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If The Left is so buddy-buddy with Al Quaeda, then why has Obama's administration presided over way more senior leader Al Quaeda assassinations than Bush ever saw - including the killing of Osama Bin Laden?
Does not compute... please try again, thanks.
Absolutely, and when one writes about whose side one is on, we have to think about who in the U.S. fell into al Qaeda's trap.
From "Against All Enemies", by Richard Clarke:
Quote:
Page 246: Attacked Iraq. "It was as if Usama bin Laden, hidden in some high mountain redoubt, were engaging in long range mind control of George Bush, chanting 'invade Iraq, you must invade Iraq.' "
If Obama did what Bush did, sanrene would be arguing that Obama is an al Qaeda operative.
If you think about it loony leftists like Olbermann and the MSNBC moonbats have much in common with radical Islamic extremism so naturally Al Quaeda would mourn their brethren media allies in the U.S. whose sole purpose is to spread Dhimmicrat propaganda to the masses.
This really is telling how closely aligned the Left is on issues/propaganda, represented by MSNBC/doberman, with radical extremists/terrorists like AQ.
There is a reason they liked MSNBC and hated Fox News.
You can still catch Keith's show M-F on Current TV.
Umm....it's not MY claim, but AQ's claim, according to the documents released to Ignatius by the obama administration.
There is a good reason MSNBC is watched by both the far Left and AQ.
At the moment, it's not AQ's claim.
Its the claim of David Ignatius, who claims to have exclusive access to some documents recovered from bin Laden's compound. Guess his past friendliness to the CIA has given him better access then others in the media.
But lets take David at his word that only he has seen the letters...........
If you had read the original Washington Post opinion piece, any mention of the media was on the second page, as the article was about the bin laden plot to kill President Obama, and not about MSNBC.
Adam Gadahn, a U.S.-born media adviser, even discussed in a message to his boss what would be the best television outlets for a bin Laden anniversary video. “It should be sent for example to ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN and maybe PBS and VOA
Gadahn wanted to play all of the networks off each other to al-Qaeda’s best advantage. All of Them. Well just those they though would give fair/balanced coverage.......which wasn't Fox (the only thing AQ and I agree on!!!)
But as he (David) said in the article "Rupert Murdoch’s network, with its saturation coverage of the war on terror, did more to elevate bin Laden’s profile than any other news outlet".
In the letter, the media adviser focuses on “how to exploit” the 10th anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001, on television. He worries that CNN “seems to be in cooperation with the government more than the others,” though he praises its “good and detailed” Arabic coverage. “I used to think that MSNBC channel may be good and neutral a bit,” he continues, but then notes the firing of Olbermann.
That was the only mention of Olbermann/MSNBC - "good and neutral a bit". Not exactly a radical endorsement.
I know, hard to admit one of the most frothing, radical leftists is the favorite of the terrorist group, AQ.
Nice of you to speak so highly of yourself.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.