Aber beklecker nicht mein zofa!

Once again police not military stop the terrorists. Once again it shows that wars don't stop terrorism, arresting them does.

70 years is a long time for the Hun. They are itching to attack something. It's in their blood. This is only the tip of the iceberg.

Hmmm, with global warming maybe they'll want to try invading Russia again.

Officials said the solution of hydrogen peroxide, stored in a hide-out, could have been mixed easily with other additives to produce a bomb with the explosive power of 1,200 pounds of TNT.

"This would have enabled them to make bombs with more explosive power than the ones used in the London and Madrid bombings," Joerg Ziercke, the head of the Federal Crime Office -- Germany's equivalent of the FBI -- said at a joint news conference with Harms.

"Once again police not military stop the terrorists. Once again it shows that wars don't stop terrorism, arresting them does."

Posted by danni

I guess the Military hasn't stopped any terrorists according to you? Since police stopped this one, is terrorism over?

Cmon Danni.....

Yes Danni and it also means various forms of Patriot Act type legislation ie. wire taps, eavesdropping, security cams etc.

And even with all of that, all it takes is one to get thru and you can bet that will happen at some point.

I guess the Military hasn't stopped any terrorists according to you?

There is a pretty big military action going on right now to stop terrorism. Did it do a damn thing to stop these guys?

NOPE!

Danni, thanks for hitting it on the head.

Once again, the terrorists failed to get the memo that we're fighting them over there in Iraq, and they're out of bounds.

Foul! Time Out! All terrorists have to return to Iraq, those are the rules, Bush said so.


I guess the Military hasn't stopped any terrorists according to you?

Since we don't have martial law, it won't be the military stopping terrorism in the US.
35% peroxide solution is an industrial chemical, available everywhere. It's only police action and civilian vigilance that will stop domestic terrorism.


Yes Danni and it also means various forms of Patriot Act type legislation ie. wire taps, eavesdropping, security cams etc.

Nobody has a problem with that, all you need is a warant. According to the article, 300 cops have been folowing these guys since December, so I think they had plenty of time for that.
It's only the warrantless portion of the searches that's objected to. Why is that so hard to understand?

Only the nutcases support bombing Iran. Even conservative think tanks think it is stupid.

YEAH!

More proof that Police Work is the best diterent to terroism!

YEAH!

More proof that Police Work is the best diterent to terroism!


Posted by Redneckville at 2007-09-05 01:11 PM |


That's precisely why illegals are reported anytime and everytime they're arrested.

I can see why Israeli's would want anything but a nuclear Iran, and I also see why they would want us to pay for it (a war against Iran). Not that I agree with them, lol.

Jeff,

"Office of the Vice-President to roll out a campaign for war with Iran in the week after Labor Day."

I bet it dont happen. Then how are you going to explain your crazy liberal ideas.

Then how are you going to explain your crazy liberal ideas.

By calling you a Nazi for not believing.

Iran is not going to be allowed to posses nukes. End of story, it aint gonna happen. If they do press on with trying to acquire them they will be stopped. There really is no other choice.

Does anyone really believe that if they are not stopped from having weapons like that, they wont use them against anyone who does not bow down to islam?

"Poll: 71% of Israelis want U.S. to strike Iran"

Well then, what are we waiting for???

Oh, and if you disagree with them it's cuz you just hate Jews. Nazi bastard.

Good point Lee

Gee an insult from Danni, well now I guess its just time for all non libs to just go cry in the corner.

Does anyone really believe that if they are not stopped from having weapons like that, they wont use them against anyone who does not bow down to islam?

OK, I'll bite. No, I don't believe that.

But I do believe what you wrote sounds a lot like the sort of stuff that was being tossed around during the Cold War about the Russkies.

What you do is make it in their best interests not to use nukes and undermine the mullahs by making the people too comfortable to risk glassification. And you don't accomplish that goal by scaring the shit out the Iranian people.

well now I guess its just time for all non libs to just go cry in the corner.

No, its just time for America to stop listening to the discredited rantings of the insane who've already brought us the catastrophy of Iraq, trying to double down on our misery by wrongly portraying Iran as an immenent threat.

If you fear-mongers actually knew anything about Iran, you'd know two major things. One, the Grand Ayatollah already issued a fatwa in 2005 decreeing that Iran would NEVER BUILD, nor stockpile nuclear weapons because its against the teachings of Allah! Second, the Iranians are enriching uranium for two purposes, which they've openly stated over and over. Their oil reserves are running out as their population continues to explode. They already import gasoline at subsidized rates and this costs billions per month. THEY NEED THE ENERGY! And they also have great supplies of yellowcake which they seek to turn into enriched uranium fuel to sell on the open market.

Enriching uranium is the MOST EXPENSIVE, TIME CONSUMING way to produce fissile material. Plutonium is far more easily produced and is bomb ready. If Iran really wanted a bomb, they wouldn't be fooling around with enriching uranium, they produce plutonium instead! It takes many months and a non-stop supply of energy to run centrifuges in order to enrich uranium. As long as IAEA inspectors have access to Iran's production and accounts for its output, no one is in danger from an Iranian nuclear device.

Does anyone really believe that if they are not stopped from having weapons like that, they wont use them against anyone who does not bow down to islam?

Yes, me. For the same reason that Russia, China, India, Israel North Korea and Pakistan haven't nuked anybody.

If the crazy muslims in Pakistan haven't used their nuke to make everyone bow down to Islam, why is Iran going to?

Japan had Kamakazis, but they weren't willing to sacrifice all of Japan. Similarly Islam has suicide bombers, but they aren't willing to sacrifice all of their families and lands and nations.

If Iran uses a nuke, the Middle East ceases to exist as a populated area. I firmly believe that if a muslim nuke goes off in the West, that the war won't end until 1.3 Billion muslims are dead.

Mutual Assured Destruction will keep Iran from using a nuke.

Doc,

It's nice to see an honest and non-insulting responce.

These are the people that will strap a bomb to themselves or their own children, and detonate in a populated area full of innocent people. They use these types of weapons because they dont have anything better. Guess what will happen if they have a nuke?

You can rest assured that they will attempt to use it agains Isreal. In the Iranian eyes, Isrealies are not even people and should be exterminated. If they set one off in Isreal, that entire region could be glowing when Isreal is done.

Stopping Iran from getting that weapon is in the best interest of the entire world.

I see the cold war as a different set of sircumstances. The Russians did not have any desire to die for their religion or any other reason. So in that case the threat of a nuke retaliation was effective.

Norm,

You make a good point and I really hope you are right.

hydrogen peroxide??????

"hydrogen peroxide??????"

The called it the blonde bomb, and it came in...

...wait for it...

...a blonde bombshell.

You can rest assured that they will attempt to use it agains Isreal. In the Iranian eyes, Isrealies are not even people and should be exterminated. If they set one off in Isreal, that entire region could be glowing when Isreal is done.

You really need to go onto the "internets" for your information instead of regurgitating the dreck spewed by the ignorant pro-Israeli/zionist pundits. Iran has no animous toward the Israeli people, what they wish would disappear is what they perceive as a zionist government that persecutes Palestinians as well as Israelis in a senseless, divisive conflict that harms both peoples.

""Stopping Iran from getting that weapon is in the best interest of the entire world.""

I don't think anyone disagrees with that statement but how to go about preventing them from getting one is a subject of controversy. Consider that Pakistan does already have nukes, bombing Iran could very well be the cause of the fall of Mushareff which could result in terrorists actually getting their hands on existing nukes.
We certainly do not want another episode of "bomb first think later" which the Bush administration seems likely to do.

""Stopping Iran from getting that weapon is in the best interest of the entire world.""

Danni

JFK felt that way about Israel getting nukes & look how that turned out...no wonder everyone is so nervous over there!

What comes around, goes around.

The Russians did not have any desire to die for their religion or any other reason.
Posted by sickoflibs at 2007-09-05 01:40 PM | Reply

YEAH?!

God Damn! Not only are you really really ignorant, your ignorance is amplified by your absolute stupidity!

10,700,000 military killed
11,900,000 civilians dead
23,600,000 total dead in defending Russia from Germany
Umm, that's 13% of their entire population at that time!

Compared to the USA for the same duration of war


407,300 military killed
11,200 civilians killed
418,500 totals killed
That's less than 0.32% of the population at that time!

So I repeat!

God Damn sicko! Not only are you really really ignorant, your ignorance is amplified by your absolute stupidity!

Redneck,

You are one stupid son of a bitch. You are talking about WWII and defending their own country against Germany. Are you so damm stupid that you cant see the difference between that and the cold war?

Anyone who is defending their own country will fight except France and most liberals, and many people will die.

Now try to pull your head out of your ass and see what I am talking about.

The cold war was the Soviet Union and the U.S. in a nuke standoff. We both thought the other was going to attack, so having more and more weapons was a deterant.

During the COLD WAR the Russians did not want to fight us any more than we wanted to fight them. Therefor they were not strapping bombs to themselves to kill Americans. If you cant see the difference in my comment and your ass-o-nine statement then you truely are an idiot.

WOW,

Bani, what a bunch of horse shit. I suppose you also think that our Govt. blew up the World Trade Center. You should really stop listening to Rosie.

From SICOFLIBS links
""Today at the Holocaust-denial conference in Iran, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that Israel "will be wiped out soon the same way the Soviet Union was,""

Hey, Sickoflibs....how was the Soviet Union wiped out??? Their own people overthrew the government...right????

One of his other links doesn't even mention Ahmaindinihab or whatever his name is.

In none of them does he threaten to do anything to Israel.

SICKOFLIBS is a perfect example of how the people are being manipulated into believing that bombing is a logical choice in dealing with Iran.

Danni,

You would not see the truth if it was standing if front of you.

I never said that bombing Iran was the logical choice. I have no desire to see anyone bombed or innocent people killed. Unfortunatly sometimes that happens. It is going to be Irans choice but as I said earlier, Iran will not be allowed to have nukes.

"defending their own country against"
"cant see the difference between that and the cold war"

YEAH!

Umm, as a patriot myself ---- that's a great big NO! A war of attrition, a war of financial attributes, a war of resources and a war of ideas is a "war" that threatens a homeland nonetheless!

But I do appreciate the elaboration of your stupidity in this subsequent statement:

"Anyone who is defending their own country will fight except France"

Yes, that's the same France that our democracy is modeled after and the same France that fought, financed and enabled our (i.e. your) very own independence from England!

Oops!

And you are right, Iran and Seria did not provide weapons to Helbulah when they were fighting with Isreal. If you can remember back that far, it was not Isreal who started that war.

That was France of 200 years ago, nothing like what they have been since WWI.

As I recall, we have bailed France out a hell of a lot more than they ever helped us.

And you are right, Iran and Seria did not provide weapons to Helbulah when they were fighting with Isreal. If you can remember back that far, it was not Isreal who started that war.

And how did that war work out for Israel, Sicko? Who now has the strongest political party in Lebanon? Whoops!

"who've already brought us the catastrophy of Iraq, trying to double down on our misery by wrongly portraying Iran as an immenent threat."

And so bhy that I take it you mean every single Sunni Arab country in the Middle East since they are the ones who seem most concerned .... every one of the following countries are currently shopping for nuclear reactors:

Egypt
Saudi Arabia
Jordan
Emirates
Bahrain
Algeria
Morocco

and for those about to do their usually tap dance about how it must have something to do with Israel having nukes, I remind you that its been pretty much an accepted reality that Israel has had nukes for 30 years now and not one of these countries ever showed any inclination to go nuclear. Ahmadinejad says Iran is pursuing nukes and the entire Sunni region goes into action . . . and people here have the gall to peddle some line that the Iranians are not a threat?

call me crazy but I'd sooner believe those who live in the region and are Iran's neighbors that Tony Roma and the Leftie lot like JeffinDenmark who posts Israeli polls showing a majority in the country that has been threatened with extinction by Iranian rhetoric when its Jewish population isn't being marginalized by holocaust denial conventions or holocaust cartoon contests is in favor of bombing Iran ...

Under similar condition how many Americans do you think would feel exactly the same way ? 80% ? 90%?

As I recall, we have bailed France out a hell of a lot more than they ever helped us.

"As you recall," there wouldn't be an US if France hadn't supplied the colonists with people and materiel to defeat Britain in the first place!

And tell me SICKOFLIBS at what point do we determine it is time to bomb????
When Dick Cheney says so???

Wasn't he the guy who explained why we shouldn't invade Iraq back in 94????
Why would we trust him???

Damm, argueing with someone like tony is like punching yourself in the head. It gets you nowhere. You can show all the proof in the world and yet some of these idiots still wont believe the truth.

Your new name should be hadjiroma, you should be wearing a rag on your head just like the people that you believe in so much. In fact I bet you are an arab with a ratty beard and all. You really should release the tension on your rag because it is cutting off the blood flow.

Danni,

I am writing this very slow so even you can understand. "I never said we should bomb Iran" I did say the rest of the world is not going to allow Iran to have Nukes.

"there wouldn't be an US if France hadn't supplied the colonists with people and materiel to defeat Britain in the first place!"

Ok, there wouldnt be a France if the U.S. didnt bail them out in WWI and WWII. So by my count, they owe us one.

call me crazy but I'd sooner believe those who live in the region and are Iran's neighbors that Tony Roma and the Leftie lot like JeffinDenmark who posts Israeli polls showing a majority in the country that has been threatened with extinction by Iranian rhetoric when its Jewish population isn't being marginalized by holocaust denial conventions or holocaust cartoon contests is in favor of bombing Iran ...

I can't believe how much shit you're full of! Are you trying to imply that the other Arab nations want reactors soley because Iran is working on their completely legal right as a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty to have nuclear facilities and a nuclear energy program?

Post one freaking statement from a head of state indicating that they only want nuclear technology because of Iran, GZ! The countries want nukes because they realize thats the only thing keeping you warmongering, pants-pissing neo-cons from INVADING THEM BY FORCE, just like we did with Iraq and Afghanistan for whatever strategic reason we make up to justify breaking international law!
Might it be because of Kahn and his work in Pakistan? Naw, that couldn't be it could it? We've already caught him sharing technology with other nations. It HAS to be Iran, how pathetic!

The French still have 1100 troops in Afghanistan.

And I'm glad SICKOFLIBS doesn't support bombing Iran.

every one of the following countries are currently shopping for nuclear reactors:
Egypt
Saudi Arabia
Jordan
Emirates
Bahrain
Algeria
Morocco

Where did the 9-11 terrorists come from again?
So when do we start bombing these countries? Cause I'm a lot more worried about Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Yemen getting nukes than I am about Iran.
But again, MAD still applies.

Tony,

You really are a one sided asshole. Now look what you have made me do, stooping down to your level. Even if Iran had nukes, do you really think that we cant take them out in whatever sand dune they are hiding in?

The problem is not only that Iran will use them but they are very likely to sell them to other terrorist who would not hesitate to use them.

Your new name should be hadjiroma, you should be wearing a rag on your head just like the people that you believe in so much. In fact I bet you are an arab with a ratty beard and all. You really should release the tension on your rag because it is cutting off the blood flow.

Oh, because I actually seek the truth instead of listening to the same Greek chorus that has our military trapped in Iraq spout what a threat Iran is to our security, now I'm a Muslim sympathizer?

NO SIR, I'm a patriotic American, sick and tired of seeing my citizens fighting proxy wars to enrich those advocating such senseless conflicts! This nation is not threatened by Islam in the same sense we were threatened by the USSR during the Cold War. Its meaningless to try and compare things not comparable in the first place and its disingenuous to mock those who show you the error of your ignorance. What, is TIME magazine too radical for your tastes?

Obviously, YOU'RE the one lacking proper blood flow, not me. Just because you don't like the facts, condemn the messenger. Just like every other coward who backs sending other's children to death for the sake of their own insecurities and fears. GROW UP, the world isn't out to get you, its out to shape what you see as reality and turn it into your own nightmare. Educate yourself, don't let the propagandists do it for you!

Oh my God, 1100 troop? So you are saying that they have a whooping 1100 troops. BIG DEAL!!!!

Even if Iran had nukes, do you really think that we cant take them out in whatever sand dune they are hiding in?

Iran is what is left of the former Persian empire. They are a lot more sophisticated than people like you give them credit for.

You dont seek the truth, you seek your liberal agenda view. And yes, TIME magizine has a proven liber track record.

I dont back sending other people children you idiot. I was there for two tours and my son is there now.

How many trips have you maded?

Ness,

You are correct, they are mose sophisticated than we give them credit for. Even though they live in the 7th century they are not stupid. That is part of the problem. Stupid people can be excused for this dumb shit.

damm, my typing is worse than usual

The problem is not only that Iran will use them but they are very likely to sell them to other terrorist who would not hesitate to use them.

Nukes have fingerprints. If one ever goes off, everyone will know where it came from and who was behind it.

Its ludicrous to believe that Iran would start a nuclear conflict for no reason. Its equally ludicrous to think they'd give a bomb to terrorists knowing that they'd suffer the retaliation. The illogic of such positions only show you haven't thought this through. Legitimate governments of the Middle East have more to fear from extremism than we do, and they know it. Extremists don't want to control America, they want to control their own native lands and want America to leave them alone while doing so.

While no one ignores the fact that proliferation works in no one's interests, the nuclear genie is not going back into the bottle. Every nation is entitled to whatever nuclear energy infrastructure that they can support. We already have an international nuclear inspection apparatus in place thats never allowed a weapon into the wrong hands. Why not shore it up and use it for the purpose it was devised instead of sabre-ratling a country we currently have our armies on either side of?

Iran is what is left of the former Persian empire. They are a lot more sophisticated than people like you give them credit for.

They've hardened their facilities and moved many deep underground to keep conventional bombing at bay.

Sicko...

Thank you for your service, but I do not support the leadership that sent you there under false pretenses. I was not referring to you personally, I was referring to those in power who do not have loved ones in harm's way, and who now oopenly talk of cashing in once leaving the White House. I would gladly pay to see you speak about your experiences in this war, even though I don't agree with your conclusions, than I EVER would any former member of this government, who only had to look at the reasons for not invading Iraq in 1991 and becoming an occupier that have come full-force back upon us today.

They've hardened their facilities and moved many deep underground to keep conventional bombing at bay.

Because they know the UN won't do a damned thing about a US or Israeli attack upon their sovereign soil that violates international law and constitutes an act of war.

Tony,

We agree on the fact that we should not have been there in the first place. However, I do not agree that it was false pretences, at least not that President Bush lied to get us there. Most countries had the same intel. that we did and came to the same conclusion. Those also include both Clintons, Gore and many others. Ok, this is a moot point. We are there and now have to deal with it.

As far as the U.N. (still laughing) they are worthless. How many resolutions did they have on Iraq? How many times did they enforce them with Iraq? Honestly, I dont feel that the U.N. has any power and to be honest, we should have then set up shop somewhere else.

The U.N is like the parent that keeps threatening to spank the child but never does. It dont take long for that child to figure out they are a joke when it come to punishment.

Anyway, back to the origional thought, I dont necessarily like this Administrations actions either. But then again I didnt like President Clinton. However, I did do what I was told because he is the President and was elected by the American People.

Gotta get back to work.

Sicko...

The NIE had the CORRECT INTELLIGENCE, so the canard about "everybody had the same intel" is just false, as most everyone should now know.

Israel is one of the greater scofflaws when it comes to ignoring UN sanctions. Have we ever threatened to invade them for non-compliance? Why hasn't Israel ever signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty and abided by its dictates like every other nation with nukes; North Korea and Iran included?

Have you read the IAEA reports coming out of Iran? I have, and I find no information that moves me to believe that bombing their nuclear facilities is the only way to insure our security. I also understand that the President is a figurehead in Iran, not a decisionmaker like our President. The Grand Ayatollah and the Council of Ruling Clerics make the laws there and decide the policies of Iran, not the President. The former Iranian President, with the Council's blessing, tried to negotiate with Bush in 2003, but he was rebuffed, so Iran elected the most radical candidate they could find that would stand strong against what they perceive as the American war machine. We sometimes reap what we sow.

Its no secret that this Bush Administration has been abysmal when it comes to diplomacy. Therein lies many of the problems we're trying to deal with today. Its far easier to sit across the table from diplomats and negotiators and disagree than it is to commit armies and devastate nations because such meetings are never held and arguments never verbalized. Strength comes from wisdom more than it comes from war. We need to exercise much more of the former and stop relying on the latter.

As I recall, we have bailed France out a hell of a lot more than they ever helped us.

Posted by sickoflibs at 2007-09-05 02:43 PM |


Didn't they give us a statue or something?

""Didn't they give us a statue or something?""

Yeah, the one that has the saying...give us your tired, your poor.....

hmmmm....

maybe we should send it back.


Just a joke.

Didnt we give them freedom or something?

Twice?

Didnt we give them freedom or something?

Twice?

They helped to give US freedom...we helped them keep theirs and actually more times than just twice.

I did do what I was told because he is the President and was elected by the American People.

Gotta get back to work.

Posted by sickoflibs at 2007-09-05 03:26 PM

Fucking Drone.

Fucking dickhead, chickenshit coward

There I go again, lowering myself to the liberal name calling. Oh well, while I'm at it ITSME, go fuck yourself.

And I know we can be sure that "Abu Asar" most certainly has the best interests of America in mind when he writes his anti Semitic anti America rant that you actually have the gall to post here doesn't he "Mahmoud" Jeffindenmark?

Yeah .. we need to keep a lookout for the Crusader and the Jew

you know Jeff is they didn't have useful idiots like you, they'd need to invent them.

Now I'll let you go back and bend over for Abu,Khalil, Mahmoud and the rest of the gang.

I see Bin Laden is going to release a video message for the anniversary of 9/11.

Of course Tony Danni Bani Jeff itsme etall will continue to rationalize away any guilt/negativity from BL and place blame squarley on GW.

The dr left, blind as bats!

Proof positive that converting to Islam is the dumbest thing there is on planet earth.

Gosh, and here I thought that the terrorist threat was a figment of the rightists' imaginations. That's what the left's spokesmen have been telling me. Who? Well several politicians and, er, let's see. Uh, some guy named Michael Moore (among many others)?

If you can't trust the perception and organization of data by all-knowing leftists, to whom do you have recourse? This presents quite a quandary.

Oh! Wait! There was no terror plot against American interests interdicted in Germany. Of course. What's the refrain? "Bush lied." And this idea that there was a "real" plot, is also a lie, a plan to deceive us. Got it. Are the Germans complicit. It's confusing. How did "the Bush Administration" obtain the participation of the Germans in propagating "this lie?"

You can rely on the left to not be deterred by the contradictions to their model of the world that are presented by observable data. The left projects its imaginary constructs on the world and then pretends that these delusions reflect reality. The positions of the left are similar to convolutions of dying animals that are in agony, but nevertheless in denial.

If the left did not have the right to protect it, then the left would perish because of the onslaught of ignoble enemies it does not recognize as interested in its extermination (along with the rest of the Americans with whom they do not recognize their common cause). The mentality of King Canute's advisors, still exists.

We are beset by external groups with agendas antithetical to our well-being, and then also bear the burden of internal opposition to a rational response to those external groups.

We have the Islamics, the Chinese, the Russians, and also the Western Europeans, who despite their protestations are dependent on us and nevertheless despite denials, rely on us to serve as a protective shield. These Europeans are beginning to recognize this dependency, and also that their self-defeating actions and economic stagnation will destroy them. The demographic threat of the Islamics and their mild response to it, will culiminate in a Europe with burgeoning Islamic populations that endorses sharia for all.

Even now, several European countries enable sharia to be imposed on Islamics living among them. I suspect that eventually, the Europeans will find the use of sharia law proper for disputes between Islamics and non-Islamics, and then extend aspects of this code to non-Islamic disputes. Yielding sovereignty creates a very slippery slope.

Ho hum.

Posted by Bani at 2007-09-05 02:19 PM

I found Christopher Bollyn stuff fascinating...:>)


Christopher Bollyn Emerges: First Interview Since Being Forced Into Hiding

During the attack by police and government agents, Mr Bollyn's elbow was shattered. He was also tazered while agents held him to the ground, putting the full weight of their bodies on his head. Mr. Bollyn's only crime was being an investigative journalist who questioned the official story behind 9/11 and the links to the cabal who may have carried out the attacks.

www.nationalexpositor.com

The first report that I read indicated that three Palestinian youngsters had been killed by Israelis. The implication was that three innocents had been gunned down without any provocation. The article was "pregnant" through its omissions with a wide possible range of assumptions.

I can across another article in the Islamic media, extolling the three youths as "martyrs," who had armed themselves with automatic weapons and grenades and heroically attacked Israelis, slighting wounding one before they were killed during the course of the attack they initiated. Other Islamic publications also recited this elaborated view.

I introduce this example as the article in the "National Expositor" similarly seems to omit any context for the purported "assault" on Mr. Bollyn, which is presented in a format suggesting that was without any justification, let alone provocation.

Mr. Bani, do you have any idea as to why Mr. Bollyn was physically subdued? Were the agents just waiting flr the chance to launch an unprovoked and unjustified assault on the man? Unlikely. but the article does not present any context so that the insinuation can be examined

Was Mr. Bollyn "arrested?" If so, how was he in hiding? Was he in confinement, or was he released on bail or his own recognizance pending resolution of the charges? Considering his seemingly violent response to an attempt to question or detain him, and his assault on federal officers, it seems unlikely that he would receive an OR release. Did he post bail? Were charges dropped? The article is silent as to the reason for the presence of law enforcement officers and the attendant confrontation. At best, it's poor reporting. But it seems to be a deliberate attempt to mislead the uneducated and unsophisticated type of reader, who is likely to be attracted to such a dubious source for "information."

Just for your edification, federal officers do not materialize without at least a purported legal justification for their presence. This was not presented in the article, which omits the circumstances of the encounter. This is but another indication of poor journalism, or more likely an intent to misrepresent the nature of the incident by the source.

The article ignores reporting the asserted basis for the dispatch of the federal agents, and you post the statement that "Bollyn's only crime was being an investigative journalist who questioned the official story behind 9/11 and the links to the cabal who may have carried out the attack."

Really! Are you that gullible? Aren't you at all inquisitive? Or do you just accept statements that seem inane if they conform to your political beliefs?

Paranoia is a terrible thing to waste, Mr. Bani. It should encompass a broader spectrum, and should cause you to question such incomplete reporting as designed to arouse your ire on quite likely specious grounds. Do you think that such inept reporting represents an attempt to mislead and manipulate you? Are you vulnerable to such tactics? Hmm.

Mr. Bani, I went to Mr. Bollyn's website in an attempt to find some details regarding the incident. Mr. Bollyn's recapitulation of the event was interspersed with ruminations concerning the reasons that he was targeted by "the local" police. He seems to have both delusions of grandeur to warrant such a massive response to him by such an extensive array of responders, as well as delusions of persecution which he attributes to the scope of his enterprise and to his importance. It's quite a sad picture. He's a legend in his own mind, an important person on the international scene.

I certainly hope that you are not similarly situated. There is such a thing as psychotomimetic behavior and thought, which although bizarre does not have the underlying pathology, but instead has an alternative basis. So, if you adopt Mr. Bollyn's positions they may be due to a different etiology, and is not necessarily reflective of mental illness.

By the way, Mr. Bollyn's website also reflects some rather "unorthodox" expressions of Christian belief.

Please keep posting as you do present an interesting constellation of ideas. I'm trying to find an internal consistency for the range of your expressed beliefs. Unless you are "pulling peoples legs," dissimulating, it's indeed a complex assortment of beliefs that is worth analyzing.