The Logic Lifeline

A logical approach to sorting out world events. Where logic, opinion and speculation are combined to produce a reasoned, but entertaining reading experience. The unofficial hometown conservative blog of Woodridge, Il

Thursday, June 08, 2006

al-Zarqawi gets virgin flames to lick his carcass

Congratulations to our armed forces for taking out Iraq's number 1 Al Queda terrorist. While his family spews the nonsense that he is in heaven, rest assured he finally has his virgins. Unfortunately for him they are virgin flames of hell. I wonder what his first thoughts were when he awoke to his eternal torment. Probably surprise at where he was first, then the realization that Bush finally got him.

So do I relish the thought of this creep in hell? No, I don't wish that on anybody. I make the point on this blog because of the constant drumbeat of the twisted promise of heaven and virgins to people willing to target and snuff out the life of innocent women, children and men. This warped promise never is challenged or denounced. It has lured several young men who feel they have no real future to throw their life away with the suicide vest. It needs to be challenged hard and across the board by the religious leaders in a position to do so. If others dreaming of celestial sexual reward were told enough times by enough people that they will instead awaken to the flames of hell, maybe they will pause long enough to change their mind.

As for Zarqawi's demise, I congratulate the special ops and others involved in the planning and execution of this hit. I heard of the news this morning when my radio alarm went off and I thought I was dreaming. I then heard it for real when I woke up and it was simply a great victorious feeling. It shows the fruits of staying the course and reveals the folly of critics who think getting these types can be done overnight.

While I had a great feeling, I wonder how many liberals had a sinking feeling in their stomach when they heard the news. I don't claim all or most did, but I know some did. What an existence dreading waking up to good news. They are the same ones who get giddy at anything that seems like bad news.

Goodbye Zarqawi. For all others scumbags who have escaped capture or death so far, your day is coming.


  • At 5:18 AM, Blogger FKAB said…

    Al Zaqarwi is not in hell. Nor is he anywhere for that matter.

  • At 7:04 AM, Blogger LASunsett said…


    Doesn't matter where he is, as long as he does not roam this earth.


    The liberals are hating this because it took Haditha off of the front page for a day. I love it. But, rest assured it will be back soon, in full force. The Bush is Satan crowd is a persistent bunch.

  • At 9:52 AM, Blogger All_I_Can_Stands said…

    blasphemer, I realize we differ on the existence of hell and all. My post was less a spiritual statement than to point out that this outrageous promise of heaven and virgins in exchange for murdering innocents goes unchallenged far too much. To simply state no they don't does not do the job either. I happen to believe the extreme opposite and that he has joined Saddam's sons and Hitler in the pit.

    Like LA I am satisfied he is no longer among us. So I am not twisting any arms on the hell thing. We can all agree he is gone and hopefully we can all be happy about it.

  • At 12:28 PM, Blogger Joe Smoe: American Citizen said…

    Good job, this SOB is in hell now.

    This scumbag maybe gone, but there will be others to take his place. In the overall big picture he and the other foreign fighters are just a small percentage of the insurgency.

    But nothing in Iraq will change as they are still working under the failed policies of know Mr. WMDs and we will be greeted as liberators??? The insurgency rages on in Bush's Cluster in the Desert.

  • At 8:52 PM, Blogger Malott said…

    I was listening to Bill Bennett's "Morning in America" and a guest said that the military had received 400 "tips" from Iraqis last year. This year they have already received 4000, including the one that got al-Zarqawi. This fact and the fact that Iraqis celebrated his death suggest to me that things will continue to improve.

    I also predict the one-sided coverage of the media will not improve.

    I agree that the "virgins" reward should be debunked, but since when have we ever had cooperation from the "Muslim Moderates" (if they exist) on things like this. Until Muslims stand up to the nut jobs, there will always be a war on terror.

    But for now we can celebrate a great victory and the death of a monster.

  • At 9:19 PM, Blogger FKAB said…

    Even though I do not agree with Bush's war OR the insurgency, I'm interested to hear what you, AICS, would do if your country were invaded. Would you roll out the red carpet, or would you fight back?

  • At 10:32 PM, Blogger SkyePuppy said…

    On Fox News the night the word came out that Zarqawi was still barely alive when our troops dug him out of the rubble, Mort Kondracke said one part of the news was the most satisfying: Zarqawi was alive just long enough to see and comprehend that he was killed by the Americans. Better he die that way than not knowing what hit him.

  • At 12:50 AM, Blogger All_I_Can_Stands said…

    blasphemer, a hostile enemy invading the United States in its current benign and even benevolent state is far different than when we invaded Iraq.

    However, I will bite on your analogy. If invaded, it would be an evil enemy attacking a good country. If our armed forces failed to repulse the attack and we found our military conquered I would not hesitate to engage the enemy from a militia type standpoint. I would not by any means begin attacking my own innocent people in order to think I was attacking the enemy.

    The insurgency from the start has not been simply a nationalistic force. They have attacked in non-conventional ways, attacked civilians, hidden among women and children like cowards, encouraged hostility between the different factions of Iraq and more.

  • At 12:51 AM, Blogger All_I_Can_Stands said…

    Skyepuppy, it gives me great pleasure to know that Zarqawi's last thought were borne of the knowledge that we got him.

  • At 1:05 AM, Blogger FKAB said…

    Benign and benevolent? BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

    But seriously for a moment, you're looking at the situation from an American point of view. American politics is so 'dumbed' down that the "War on Terror" that you've simplified it to the "goodies" and the "baddies." It has obscured the fact that America invaded another country without any substantial reason to do so. I don't like to use American terms, but the Iraqi insurgents are no more terrorists than the US Government.

  • At 7:34 AM, Blogger Malott said…

    As Rick said to Major Strasser in Casablanca, "Well there are certain sections of New York, Major, that I wouldn't advise you to try to invade."

    Blasphemer, we have been free for a long long time. It's become quite the habit in fact. I don't think we are conquerable... unless those on the Left get control and [let] it happen. (As in Europe)

    The Shiites in Iraq were anything but free. The Sunnis didn't have freedom either, though they had it better. Every day they spend living under the governance of men they've elected, the tighter their grasp of freedom will become.

    As long as your dislike for this country clouds your vision concerning the difference between the good in America and the bad of pre-war Iraq, I don't think you'll have the ability to absorb reality.

    The Sunni point of view or the radical-Islam point of view shouldn't concern this country which is fighting to preserve its way of life.

  • At 8:23 AM, Blogger All_I_Can_Stands said…

    It has obscured the fact that America invaded another country without any substantial reason to do so

    I am not saying this to insult, but I see the foundations of this statement as the dumbed down version of the politics of this war. I believe there were several substantial reasons to invade Iraq. I think if the UN and other members of the security council were not on the take in the Oil for Food scandal and "illegally" selling weapons and military consultation to Iraq they would have done the necessary job that might have prevented this war.

    We can re-argue the war if you wish or let it rest knowing we disagree on it.

    However, your painting of the insurgency as neutral at worst shows a glaring blind spot in your ability to see things objectively. I have conceded half of a point that if they had simply formed a militia type organization and felt the need to attack military targets exclusively I would not view them as terrorists.

    Their terrorist status comes when they both place civilians in danger and even their targeting of civilians. They place civilians in danger by operating among the civilian population where any strike against them is sure to snag a few in the process. Such cowardice truly makes me gag.

    By the way, I do appreciate the Aussie support in this war even if you are one against it.

  • At 4:14 AM, Blogger FKAB said…

    I think it's best not to continue debating the ethics of the war. I think it represents the typically American pro-war attitude, and you think it's about freedom and democracy. We clearly are not going to agree.

    I'm interested to know, Malott, what you mean by the "Left." What exactly will happen if this "Left" group manages to accede control of US politics? Surely anything that the Democrats (assuming this is who you are alluding to) will do if elected will not compare to the mess that Bush has inflicted. His policy has been about using fear tactics (terror alerts, etc), arbitrarily bombing countries, diverting attention from the original issues, and attempting to coerce the collective conscience into believing outright lies.

    My strong distaste for American politics arises from these things, Malott. You're accusing me because I choose to disagree with the propaganda machine feeding Newscorp, then I question your basis for this accusation. The American myopic world view dictates a black and white perception of the world. As I've said before: the goodies and the baddies, the evil commies (democrats) and the Godly Republicans.

    What happened on 9/11 was an evil thing, but I am afraid that it is being harnessed by your leaders to inflict harm on nations for completely wrong reasons. You say that Iraq wasn't a free nation before the invasion? Well, it isn't all sunshine and rainbows three years later. The soldiers aren't fighting for freedom and democracy, they're fighting just to stay alive.

    Oh, and another thing, since the American Government sent forces to Iraq because their leader was a despot, why hasn't Bush intervened in the conflicts in Sudan, Zimbabwe, East Timor, et al? I think I can guess the answer already (it starts with 'O' and ends in 'il').

    And AICS, I do not think that the Iraq insurgency are neutral. They're on exactly the same page as the Americans: they want to preserve their religion, their way of life, their country. Even though I despise fundamentalist Islam, it doesn't seem a very far divergence from the Christian fundamentalism. Please do not assume I am for the insurgency purely because I am against the Americans.

    By the way, I do appreciate the Aussie support in this war even if you are one against it.

    Thanks. Now, if you could kindly rally your Government to return the favour, by intervening in East Timor and the Solomon islands. Chaos has erupted in both countries, and Australian forces have been left to deal with the violence on their own. It's funny that no one wants to help out.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home