Terrorists Will Be Pissed if We Vote Bush…

DRUDGE REPORT 2004?

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU OCT 28, 2004 17:02:35 ET XXXXX

TERROR TAPE WARN OF BUSH, CHENEY CONSEQUENCE; ABC WITHHELD PORTIONS FROM CIA

**Exclusive**

ABCNEWS withheld portions of an alarming new al Qaeda videotape which warns the next terror attack will dwarf 9/11 from the CIA when they submitted the video for analysis, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

The CIA and FBI late Wednesday authenticated the tape, federal sources tell DRUDGE. ABCNEWS has been informed of the government’s standing.

“What took place on September 11 was but the opening salvo of the global war on America and that our Lord willing, the magnitude and ferocity of what is coming your way will make you forget all about September 11,” the man, whose face is covered by a headdress, warns in the video. “After decades of American tyranny, now it’s your turn to die.”

ABCNEWS submitted portions of the video threat to the FBI and CIA on Monday for analysis, top government sources tell DRUDGE, after obtaining the tape from a source in Pakistan.

A top goverment source said from Washington that ABC withheld the final 15 minutes of the tape from the CIA — the portion of the tape where the man warns of retribution for Americans electing Bush and Cheney.

MORE

“You are guilty, guilty, guilty. You’re as guilty as Bush and Cheney. You’re as guilty as Rumsfeld and Ashcroft and Powell…,” the man states.

He goes on to warn of an upcoming horror: “The streets will run with blood,” and “America will mourn in silence” because they will be unable to count the number of the dead.

One ABC source, who demanded anonymity, said Thursday morning, the network was struggling to find a correct journalistic “balance” before airing any story on the video.

“This is not something you just throw out there while people are voting,” the ABC source explained.

Developing…

———————————————————–
Filed By Matt Drudge
Reports are moved when circumstances warrant
http://www.drudgereport.com for updates
(c)DRUDGE REPORT 2004
Not for reproduction without permission of the author

Particularly interesting is this part:

A top goverment source said from Washington that ABC withheld the final 15 minutes of the tape from the CIA — the portion of the tape where the man warns of retribution for Americans electing Bush and Cheney.

So, is one to speculate that if Kerry is elected nothing will happen?

Kinda makes you wonder why the terrorists prefer Kerry. And before everyone starts battering me for saying so, look at their words. Look what they’re saying.

There has to be a perception in how Kerry will deal with them as opposed to Bush.

It’s Madrid all over again folks.

But hey, since some of you think that fear is just paranoia and that we really aren’t targets all the time, I’d love for them to step right in and reassure us that nothing is actually wrong and we’re all safe.

Come on guys. Buck up. Dispute the terrorists saying they’re going to kill us.

Dispute that people are a bit scared in this country.

Tell everyone it’s all paranoia and we have nothing to worry about.

Come on tough guys! Where are all of you now?

This entry was posted in Unfiled. Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://nonannystate.blogspot.com The Other Mike S

    First, this is a win-win for the terrorists. I guarantee you, they want Bush to remain as president. He is their recruiting poster boy. If he wins, they still have their poster boy, and will have many, many more recruits to be canon fodder. If Kerry wins, they can claim they altered the election just as they claim they did in Spain.

    Secondly, I have a question about the report: They say the CIA/FBI authenticated the tape. What was to authenticate? That it was a tape of a nut threatening the US? Big deal, they’re a dime a dozen.

  • David

    Terrorist organizations want Bush and Cheney re-elected. Under the Bush administration the US is playing into the hands of those who mistakenly think that acts of terror will promote their cause.

    With Bush and Cheney at the helm the US is making more enemies than they can kill.

    The occupation of Iraq will not bring stability and “democracy” to the Middle East, nore do Bush & Cheney want it to. It brings chaos and division and lets the US and Britain expand their corporate interests at the expense of real economic development and self determination.

    If the people in the US dump Bush and Cheney it will open a window of opportunity for the next President to find a solution.

    This is not by building a broarder coalition with more countries, more soldiers and more weapons to crush the Iraq resistance, but by entering into dialog with all sectors within Iraq to restore genuine self government.

    If the US continues to believe that an all out military solution to crush the opposition is the only solution, then that window of opportunity will be lost along with many thousands of innocent lives.

  • Alan H.

    Doeas anyone really believe that the terrorists will drop their arms and fall in line if the President is voted out of office? They hate America, not the sitting President. This particular President is troublesome for them because he is taking the battle right to them, but their hatred of us will not stop under a Kerry presidency.

  • http://www.insignificantthoughts.com Vinny

    David, that’s not what they’re saying, so maybe it’s time you read something.

  • pete from astoria

    David, remember 9/11/01? President Bush was only in office for several months at the time. Remember the Khobar towers bombing in 1996, remember the US embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998, remember the bombing of the USS Cole in October of 2000, remember the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center? Who was the president then? What was our policy towards terrorism back then? People like you don’t seem to get it! This is an enemy that hates our VALUES! They wont accept any concessions short of the US turning into an Islamic state! Should we do that David? Should we do whatever the terrorist want to appease them? Should we make our women stay at home and have their entire bodies covered when out they go outside? How should we make the Islamo-facist terrorists happy David? What should we do so they won’t hurt us anymore? Should we elect the government they would prefer? Should we get on our knees and beg them no to hurt us? I can’t believe that this far along after 911 we still have people with your mindset telling us that we make more enemies by killing our enemies. I don’t know where you live, but my family and I were all in New York on 9/11/01. I live about four miles from ground zero. My wife at the time worked about a half mile from the WTC. She and her co-workers saw the second plane hit live and in person. Wake up David and join reality!

  • http://nonannystate.blogspot.com The Other Mike S

    Alan: No, they won’t drop their arms regardless of who is voted into office. My point is, it is more beneficial to them to have Bush in office, as he is “the great satan” that has invaded a middle eastern country, apparently for no valid reason. If you’ll notice, there was not a lot of pissing and moaning about us entering Afganistan (sp) from anyone other than the Taliban/Al Qaeda. That’s because it was a legitimate exercise of our right to self-defense.

    Very different story in Iraq. It was pre-emptive. Not that that is always bad, but when done on such a large scale, you need to be absolutely certain that you’re right. Bush has been proven wrong.

    Pete: We don’t do anything to appease them. Nothing. We go after them just like Israel is now going after the leaders of Hamas. Small, quick strikes that have devistating effects. A massive, localized invasion is basically useless (to our ends) against an enemy that is widely disbursed (physically and command structure-wise). It is very useful to the Islamofacists as a propaganda tool. “See the imperialistic Americans soiling our lands”, blah, blah, blah.

    Bush screwed the pooch on this one, badly.

    BTW, I lay the vast majority of the blame for 9/11 at the feet of Clinton. He gutted our intelligence orgs and turned a blind eye whenever we were attacked.

  • http://www.insignificantthoughts.com Vinny

    Whoa, Mike, I love ya man, and you know that, but one of your quotes has just earned you a slap:

    If you’ll notice, there was not a lot of pissing and moaning about us entering Afganistan (sp) from anyone other than the Taliban/Al Qaeda. That’s because it was a legitimate exercise of our right to self-defense.

    I’ll give you a chance to either clarify, retract, or admit you were kidding before I tear that one to shreds.

  • http://nonannystate.blogspot.com The Other Mike S

    Tear away.

  • http://www.insignificantthoughts.com Vinny

    Okay. Let’s start with NION:

    The Not In Our Name project was initiated at a meeting in New York City, on March 23, 2002. The meeting was called for by a letter that proposed ways to strengthen and expand resistance to our government’s course in the wake of September 11, 2001.

    The meeting adopted the proposal – and the Not In Our Name project was born.

    They were born out of the Aghanistan war. Maybe you’ve heard of ANSWER?

    SEPTEMBER 29, 2001

    The A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition organized the first national demonstration against war and racism following September 11 on September 29, 2001, which brought 25,000 people into the streets of Washington DC and 15,000 in San Francisco.

    The A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition gained prominence because the Coalition from its earliest days after September 11, 2001 provided a principled and activist orientation to organize political resistance through mass action, and created a forum for people of conscience to speak out when so many others were silent. Many of the national organizations that constitute the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition Steering Committee were those groups in the anti-globalization movement who – after September 11 and in the most difficult circumstances when people in the Untied States were subject to a carefully orchestrated round the clock campaign to create a war fever – initiated a strategy and mass mobilizations to counter the Bush Administration’s endless war drive, its so called war on “terrorism.”

    The Coalition has since then worked to build an anti-racist, peace and social justice movement. The A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, thus, had initiated the mass anti-war movement in the United States. A central characteristic of the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition’s organizing strategy has been to work in partnership with the Arab American and Muslim community and other sectors in U.S. society who have been traditionally ignored. This has helped to create a truly multi-national anti-war movement.

    Or how about the protests around the world following the bombing raids in Aghanistan?

    Or if world protests weren’t enough, how about protests right here in New York, where 3,000 of our citizens were killed.

    If you want to make the case that people were more behind the Aghanistan war, you would be right. However to make the statement:

    If you’ll notice, there was not a lot of pissing and moaning about us entering Afganistan (sp) from anyone other than the Taliban/Al Qaeda. That’s because it was a legitimate exercise of our right to self-defense.

    You would have to completely ignore the multiple organizations that sprung forth from that war, the thousands of people protesting, and so on.

    What you said is flatly false.

  • pete from astoria

    The same night of the September 11th attacks, I was walking through my neighborhood when I noticed some hastily printed notices attached to telephone poles and mailboxes. They read “STOP THE HATE” along with some fine print on the bottom of the page. (Needless to say it was quickly torn to shreds) I don’t remember what group or organization was responsible, but they were probably the precursors to the ANSWER and NION groups. The point is that the same day 3000 of our citizens were slaughtered, these idiots were urging WE, THE PEOPLE WHO WERE ATTACKED to “stop the hate”. There are people in this country that will not support any military action at any time for any reason.

  • http://www.insignificantthoughts.com Vinny

    It’s funny how people use the number of protestors as a barometer as to whether something was or wasn’t the right thing to do.

    How quickly we forget that Afghanistan, which was clearly the right thing to do, was scorned immediately upon discussion.

  • http://nonannystate.blogspot.com The Other Mike S

    Sorry Vinny, I’ll stand by my comments. They were originally qualified as “not a lot” and I don’t think you’ve even approached refuting that. Anything that any administration does will bring some sort of protest.

    NOIN didn’t meet, according to your post, until we were already in Afghanistan. For 5+ months.

    We generally had wide support around the world and in the US for our retaliation in Afghanistan. The wide spread dissent towards going into Iraq was quite another matter. Put it in perspective: SF had 15000 people in Afghan protests and over 10 times that for Iraq. And it was sustained. I’d guess that NY was similar in both numbers and intensity.

  • http://nonannystate.blogspot.com/ The Other Mike S

    First, this is a win-win for the terrorists. I guarantee you, they want Bush to remain as president. He is their recruiting poster boy. If he wins, they still have their poster boy, and will have many, many more recruits to be canon fodder. If Kerry wins, they can claim they altered the election just as they claim they did in Spain.

    Secondly, I have a question about the report: They say the CIA/FBI authenticated the tape. What was to authenticate? That it was a tape of a nut threatening the US? Big deal, they’re a dime a dozen.

  • David

    Terrorist organizations want Bush and Cheney re-elected. Under the Bush administration the US is playing into the hands of those who mistakenly think that acts of terror will promote their cause.

    With Bush and Cheney at the helm the US is making more enemies than they can kill.

    The occupation of Iraq will not bring stability and “democracy” to the Middle East, nore do Bush & Cheney want it to. It brings chaos and division and lets the US and Britain expand their corporate interests at the expense of real economic development and self determination.

    If the people in the US dump Bush and Cheney it will open a window of opportunity for the next President to find a solution.

    This is not by building a broarder coalition with more countries, more soldiers and more weapons to crush the Iraq resistance, but by entering into dialog with all sectors within Iraq to restore genuine self government.

    If the US continues to believe that an all out military solution to crush the opposition is the only solution, then that window of opportunity will be lost along with many thousands of innocent lives.

  • Alan H.

    Doeas anyone really believe that the terrorists will drop their arms and fall in line if the President is voted out of office? They hate America, not the sitting President. This particular President is troublesome for them because he is taking the battle right to them, but their hatred of us will not stop under a Kerry presidency.

  • http://www.insignificantthoughts.com/ Vinny

    David, that’s not what they’re saying, so maybe it’s time you read something.

  • pete from astoria

    David, remember 9/11/01? President Bush was only in office for several months at the time. Remember the Khobar towers bombing in 1996, remember the US embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998, remember the bombing of the USS Cole in October of 2000, remember the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center? Who was the president then? What was our policy towards terrorism back then? People like you don’t seem to get it! This is an enemy that hates our VALUES! They wont accept any concessions short of the US turning into an Islamic state! Should we do that David? Should we do whatever the terrorist want to appease them? Should we make our women stay at home and have their entire bodies covered when out they go outside? How should we make the Islamo-facist terrorists happy David? What should we do so they won’t hurt us anymore? Should we elect the government they would prefer? Should we get on our knees and beg them no to hurt us? I can’t believe that this far along after 911 we still have people with your mindset telling us that we make more enemies by killing our enemies. I don’t know where you live, but my family and I were all in New York on 9/11/01. I live about four miles from ground zero. My wife at the time worked about a half mile from the WTC. She and her co-workers saw the second plane hit live and in person. Wake up David and join reality!

  • http://nonannystate.blogspot.com/ The Other Mike S

    Alan: No, they won’t drop their arms regardless of who is voted into office. My point is, it is more beneficial to them to have Bush in office, as he is “the great satan” that has invaded a middle eastern country, apparently for no valid reason. If you’ll notice, there was not a lot of pissing and moaning about us entering Afganistan (sp) from anyone other than the Taliban/Al Qaeda. That’s because it was a legitimate exercise of our right to self-defense.

    Very different story in Iraq. It was pre-emptive. Not that that is always bad, but when done on such a large scale, you need to be absolutely certain that you’re right. Bush has been proven wrong.

    Pete: We don’t do anything to appease them. Nothing. We go after them just like Israel is now going after the leaders of Hamas. Small, quick strikes that have devistating effects. A massive, localized invasion is basically useless (to our ends) against an enemy that is widely disbursed (physically and command structure-wise). It is very useful to the Islamofacists as a propaganda tool. “See the imperialistic Americans soiling our lands”, blah, blah, blah.

    Bush screwed the pooch on this one, badly.

    BTW, I lay the vast majority of the blame for 9/11 at the feet of Clinton. He gutted our intelligence orgs and turned a blind eye whenever we were attacked.

  • http://www.insignificantthoughts.com/ Vinny

    Whoa, Mike, I love ya man, and you know that, but one of your quotes has just earned you a slap:

    If you’ll notice, there was not a lot of pissing and moaning about us entering Afganistan (sp) from anyone other than the Taliban/Al Qaeda. That’s because it was a legitimate exercise of our right to self-defense.

    I’ll give you a chance to either clarify, retract, or admit you were kidding before I tear that one to shreds.

  • http://nonannystate.blogspot.com/ The Other Mike S

    Tear away.

  • http://www.insignificantthoughts.com/ Vinny

    Okay. Let’s start with NION:

    The Not In Our Name project was initiated at a meeting in New York City, on March 23, 2002. The meeting was called for by a letter that proposed ways to strengthen and expand resistance to our government’s course in the wake of September 11, 2001.

    The meeting adopted the proposal – and the Not In Our Name project was born.

    They were born out of the Aghanistan war. Maybe you’ve heard of ANSWER?

    SEPTEMBER 29, 2001

    The A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition organized the first national demonstration against war and racism following September 11 on September 29, 2001, which brought 25,000 people into the streets of Washington DC and 15,000 in San Francisco.

    The A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition gained prominence because the Coalition from its earliest days after September 11, 2001 provided a principled and activist orientation to organize political resistance through mass action, and created a forum for people of conscience to speak out when so many others were silent. Many of the national organizations that constitute the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition Steering Committee were those groups in the anti-globalization movement who – after September 11 and in the most difficult circumstances when people in the Untied States were subject to a carefully orchestrated round the clock campaign to create a war fever – initiated a strategy and mass mobilizations to counter the Bush Administration’s endless war drive, its so called war on “terrorism.”

    The Coalition has since then worked to build an anti-racist, peace and social justice movement. The A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, thus, had initiated the mass anti-war movement in the United States. A central characteristic of the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition’s organizing strategy has been to work in partnership with the Arab American and Muslim community and other sectors in U.S. society who have been traditionally ignored. This has helped to create a truly multi-national anti-war movement.

    Or how about the protests around the world following the bombing raids in Aghanistan?

    Or if world protests weren’t enough, how about protests right here in New York, where 3,000 of our citizens were killed.

    If you want to make the case that people were more behind the Aghanistan war, you would be right. However to make the statement:

    If you’ll notice, there was not a lot of pissing and moaning about us entering Afganistan (sp) from anyone other than the Taliban/Al Qaeda. That’s because it was a legitimate exercise of our right to self-defense.

    You would have to completely ignore the multiple organizations that sprung forth from that war, the thousands of people protesting, and so on.

    What you said is flatly false.

  • pete from astoria

    The same night of the September 11th attacks, I was walking through my neighborhood when I noticed some hastily printed notices attached to telephone poles and mailboxes. They read “STOP THE HATE” along with some fine print on the bottom of the page. (Needless to say it was quickly torn to shreds) I don’t remember what group or organization was responsible, but they were probably the precursors to the ANSWER and NION groups. The point is that the same day 3000 of our citizens were slaughtered, these idiots were urging WE, THE PEOPLE WHO WERE ATTACKED to “stop the hate”. There are people in this country that will not support any military action at any time for any reason.

  • http://www.insignificantthoughts.com/ Vinny

    It’s funny how people use the number of protestors as a barometer as to whether something was or wasn’t the right thing to do.

    How quickly we forget that Afghanistan, which was clearly the right thing to do, was scorned immediately upon discussion.

  • http://nonannystate.blogspot.com/ The Other Mike S

    Sorry Vinny, I’ll stand by my comments. They were originally qualified as “not a lot” and I don’t think you’ve even approached refuting that. Anything that any administration does will bring some sort of protest.

    NOIN didn’t meet, according to your post, until we were already in Afghanistan. For 5+ months.

    We generally had wide support around the world and in the US for our retaliation in Afghanistan. The wide spread dissent towards going into Iraq was quite another matter. Put it in perspective: SF had 15000 people in Afghan protests and over 10 times that for Iraq. And it was sustained. I’d guess that NY was similar in both numbers and intensity.