|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Apr 25, 2011 16:16:07 GMT -8
WikiLeaks: Al-Qaida Already Has Nuclear Capacity www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/WikiLeaks-GuantanamoBay-al-Qaida-terrorist/2011/04/25/id/393982?s=al&promo_code=C268-1U.S. authorities believe al-Qaida already has nuclear capacity and is ready to use it, new WikiLeaks documents detailing prisoner interrogations in Guantanamo Bay have revealed. And during questioning, 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed threatened the terror group would unleash a “nuclear hellstorm,” Britain’s Daily Telegraph reveals. WikiLeaks,Guantanamo Bay,al-Qaida,terrorist,nuclear,Khalid Sheikh Mohammed The Telegraph has reviewed the papers obtained by the WikiLeaks website. The newspaper promises more revelations throughout the week. The newspaper says “A senior al-Qaida commander claimed that the terrorist group has hidden a nuclear bomb somewhere in Europe which will be detonated if Osama bin Laden is ever caught or assassinated. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Apr 25, 2011 16:19:28 GMT -8
All the more reason for the United States to adopt the international French posture. If you want to make war, we will look the other way and accept your demands. Why fight? When there is Love and Good Food and Wine it is foolish to make war.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Apr 26, 2011 16:04:45 GMT -8
Joe, if you ever want to be serious, give us the WikiLeaks link instead of that ridiculously fascist website. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Apr 26, 2011 16:34:03 GMT -8
What is a ridiculously "FASCIST???" website? Is that any source which might publish something you don't like? Here's a link from the "fascist" website: tinyurl.com/3h65cp6Of course, if you don't like what they say, it must be "fascist". |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Apr 27, 2011 8:44:28 GMT -8
Joe, if you ever want to be serious, give us the WikiLeaks link instead of that ridiculously fascist website. =Bob Bob, I am having fun with that last years of my life. If it is really important to read the pertinent part of the Wikileaks story by itself, just Google it. The content will be the same regardless. As I posted years ago, I will post and present topics to try to bring viewership in. Fascist sites are as good as any other if the story is true. Fascist or ultra liberal sites in the links actually get more people to view the issue. You certainly do not want me to link to some namby pamby site, now, do you? Namby Pamby is boring to the point of nausea. Radical Right or Radical Left, that is the only way to fly. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Apr 27, 2011 13:13:04 GMT -8
What is a ridiculously "FASCIST???" website? Is that any source which might publish something you don't like? Here's a link from the "fascist" website: tinyurl.com/3h65cp6Of course, if you don't like what they say, it must be "fascist". No, it's that if it's published in Newsmax, it is, at best, highly questionable. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Apr 27, 2011 15:36:36 GMT -8
What is a ridiculously "FASCIST???" website? Is that any source which might publish something you don't like? Here's a link from the "fascist" website: tinyurl.com/3h65cp6Of course, if you don't like what they say, it must be "fascist". No, it's that if it's published in Newsmax, it is, at best, highly questionable. =Bob Why is that so? Is "Newsmax" a "fascist" website? They provided a link to the London Telegraph. Is the Telegraph run by a bunch of Hitler/Mussolini "fascists"? Or is it that you just don't like to hear what they have to say? Isn't the "fascist" epithet reserved for any source which might publish something that might be contrary to your pre-conceived opinion? I think it is. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on May 4, 2011 8:40:37 GMT -8
If they have a couple of bombs, the best use will not be to use it but present it for inspection within a city. Then tell the world they have another in an unspecified place and if anything happens to bomb #1, #2 will be used. Then blackmail the world.
Although I clearly remember that Saddam wanted everyone to think he had things he, apparently, didn't. When sources are what people tell you, they may be telling you want they want you to believe.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on May 4, 2011 10:31:29 GMT -8
No, it's that if it's published in Newsmax, it is, at best, highly questionable. =Bob Why is that so? Is "Newsmax" a "fascist" website? They provided a link to the London Telegraph. Is the Telegraph run by a bunch of Hitler/Mussolini "fascists"? Or is it that you just don't like to hear what they have to say? Isn't the "fascist" epithet reserved for any source which might publish something that might be contrary to your pre-conceived opinion? I think it is. If there's a link, I didn't see it. But that aside, what the Daily Telegraph reported was AQ could be on the verge of having nukes whereas News Max stated that the report was AQ already has them. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on May 5, 2011 10:18:49 GMT -8
Why is that so? Is "Newsmax" a "fascist" website? They provided a link to the London Telegraph. Is the Telegraph run by a bunch of Hitler/Mussolini "fascists"? Or is it that you just don't like to hear what they have to say? Isn't the "fascist" epithet reserved for any source which might publish something that might be contrary to your pre-conceived opinion? I think it is. If there's a link, I didn't see it. But that aside, what the Daily Telegraph reported was AQ could be on the verge of having nukes whereas News Max stated that the report was AQ already has them. =Bob The story is the same regardless of what site it comes from. I told you six years ago that Iran wanted to acquire nuclear weapons for terrorist purposes. They supposedly bought four hundred pounds of enriched uranium from the same source that Packistan acquired theirs. Unfortunately for Iran, they were fleeced by some highly corrupt Uzbekistanis. |
|
|
|
Post by ragin'aztec on May 6, 2011 21:54:49 GMT -8
I hope you're wrong Joe. I think if those al-Qaeda assholes had the nuke they would've used it already. Even while osama was still alive.
for NY, NY aztecs..........
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on May 7, 2011 8:56:30 GMT -8
I hope you're wrong Joe. I think if those al-Qaeda assholes had the nuke they would've used it already. Even while osama was still alive. for NY, NY aztecs.......... DUDE! At a time when there is so much Uranium and Plutonium contamination of Planet Earth, HEAVY METAL is so damn relevant. I applaud your choice in Music. May Metallica live for ever and ever, AMEN!. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on May 7, 2011 12:24:06 GMT -8
What is a ridiculously "FASCIST???" website? Is that any source which might publish something you don't like? Here's a link from the "fascist" website: tinyurl.com/3h65cp6Of course, if you don't like what they say, it must be "fascist". No, it's that if it's published in Newsmax, it is, at best, highly questionable. =Bob Any site that publishes common sense Conservative thought or the truth about liberals is highly questionable in the view of the burden on society lefties. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2011 12:27:45 GMT -8
Joe, if you ever want to be serious, give us the WikiLeaks link instead of that ridiculously fascist website. =Bob The only fascists around these parts occupy the White House. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on May 7, 2011 17:28:14 GMT -8
Joe, if you ever want to be serious, give us the WikiLeaks link instead of that ridiculously fascist website. =Bob The only fascists around these parts occupy the White House. Still watching Glenn Beck I see. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on May 7, 2011 18:04:22 GMT -8
Joe, if you ever want to be serious, give us the WikiLeaks link instead of that ridiculously fascist website. =Bob I don't know Newsmax from shinola so I don't know if this applies to them or not. But, generally, the problem with the extremist news sites and blogs (left or right) is that they spin the stories they report on to the point of serious distortion. I don't want the spin -- I want to read the original article, before someone has twisted it to fit a particular ideology. Some of the extremists on this board post the spin as if it were fact, rather than as someone's highly politicized opinion of what the facts mean or (in their opinions) should mean. I don't know if Newsmax is fascist or not. But I do know that anybody who doesn't post the link to the original material that they are reporting on, when it is available, is highly suspect. It's a huge red flag that says, "I'd prefer to spoon feed you my ideologically tainted version of the facts, and interpret them for you, than let you reach your own conclusions -- conclusions that might not agree with my ideology". For gawd's sake, never read any report that has been filtered through someone else's ideology if there is any way to read the original report instead. And if there isn't a link to the source when it exists, then chances are, you're being fed more ideology than fact and it should be avoided, lest the writer's ideology pollute yours. Your ideology should be your own -- a product of your own critical thinking. It should not be a product of someone else thinking ideologically, for you. Yoda out... |
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on May 7, 2011 18:58:49 GMT -8
Joe, if you ever want to be serious, give us the WikiLeaks link instead of that ridiculously fascist website. =Bob I don't know Newsmax from shinola so I don't know if this applies to them or not. But, generally, the problem with the extremist news sites and blogs (left or right) is that they spin the stories they report on to the point of serious distortion. I don't want the spin -- I want to read the original article, before someone has twisted it to fit a particular ideology. Some of the extremists on this board post the spin as if it were fact, rather than as someone's highly politicized opinion of what the facts mean. I don't know if Newsmax is fascist or not. But I do know that anybody who doesn't post the link to the material that they are reporting on, when it is available, is highly suspect. For gawd's sake, never read any report that has been filtered through someone else's ideology if there is any way to read the original report instead. And if there isn't a link to the source when it exists, then chances are, you're being fed more ideology than fact and it should be avoided, lest the writer's ideology influence yours. Your ideology should be your own -- a product of you thinking critically. It should not be a product of someone else thinking ideologically, for you. Yoda out... Geez Yoda, what a concept! Would be nice to approach each problem like this.... of course not all on here are capable.  |
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on May 7, 2011 23:10:16 GMT -8
That, "Fascist," term is thrown around rather cavalierly by some people.
My father in law grew up in a true fascist country. I think he'd mock the people here who throw that term around when talking about right wing newssites. They're hardly, "Fascists."
|
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on May 8, 2011 3:59:05 GMT -8
Geez Yoda, what a concept! Would be nice to approach each problem like this.... of course not all on here are capable. I suppose that there is an element of "Captian Obvious strikes again" at work here. But, while the right wing may rely on that extremist blogs, etc. more here than the left wing does, I meant the comment to apply to both extremes. Yoda out... |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on May 8, 2011 6:53:24 GMT -8
Joe, if you ever want to be serious, give us the WikiLeaks link instead of that ridiculously fascist website. =Bob I don't know Newsmax from shinola so I don't know if this applies to them or not. But, generally, the problem with the extremist news sites and blogs (left or right) is that they spin the stories they report on to the point of serious distortion. I don't want the spin -- I want to read the original article, before someone has twisted it to fit a particular ideology. Some of the extremists on this board post the spin as if it were fact, rather than as someone's highly politicized opinion of what the facts mean or (in their opinions) should mean. I don't know if Newsmax is fascist or not. But I do know that anybody who doesn't post the link to the original material that they are reporting on, when it is available, is highly suspect. It's a huge red flag that says, "I'd prefer to spoon feed you my ideologically tainted version of the facts, and interpret them for you, than let you reach your own conclusions -- conclusions that might not agree with my ideology". For gawd's sake, never read any report that has been filtered through someone else's ideology if there is any way to read the original report instead. And if there isn't a link to the source when it exists, then chances are, you're being fed more ideology than fact and it should be avoided, lest the writer's ideology pollute yours. Your ideology should be your own -- a product of your own critical thinking. It should not be a product of someone else thinking ideologically, for you. Yoda out... That is exactly why I like Drudge and Breitbart. Drudge is mostly just links to original content while Breitbart posts mostly videos. I like to use Newsmax or those kind of links just to spin up lefties. You see, a place like this with faceless people posting nonsense is more about having fun than trying to shape opinion or changing someone's mind. |
|
:format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(40)/discogs-images/A-18845-1164509294.jpeg.jpg)
