I guess had we not taken Anwar Awlaki out with a drone strike, we could have released this report on his cavorting with hookers and let him be stoned to death by his own associates, right?
Well, maybe not.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/07/02/terror-leader-awlaki-paid-thousands-for-prostitutes-in-dc-area-documents-show/
So it appears that even while some folks "in the know" were embracing Awlaki as one of those moderate Muslims they deluded themselves over, he was paying big bucks to hookers.
The memo described in graphic detail the services rendered for Awlaki during that period. One prostitute described a December 2001 encounter where Awlaki paid $300, in order to watch "as she engaged in erotic behavior and stimulated herself.
I said:
The memo described in graphic detail the services rendered for Awlaki during that period. One prostitute described a December 2001 encounter where Awlaki paid $300, in order to watch "as she engaged in erotic behavior and stimulated herself.
"Hey, Charlie! Let's take a closer look at this picture."
But wait a minute!
On the eve of an infamous presentation Anwar al-Awlaki gave at the Pentagon in 2002, the Al Qaeda operative was busy preparing -- with a prostitute he paid $400 for at a Washington hotel.
It was one of more than a half-dozen liaisons Awlaki had with prostitutes between late 2001 and early 2002, while he was under FBI surveillance, according to documents obtained by Judicial Watch and reviewed exclusively by Fox News.
Maybe Fox is choosing its words carelessly here, but if, after 9-11, Awlaki was considered a moderate and was giving speeches at the Pentagon, why was he under FBI surveillance?
And if Awlaki was present at UC Irvine attending a benefit dinner for cop-killer H Rap Brown aka Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin two days before 9-11, I wonder what goodies the FBI has on that meeting.
Why Gary, are you saying that anyone who holds himself out to be a moderate is therefore exempt from any suspicion that they might be lying, and therefore it is entirely inappropriate to ever place them under any surveillance at all?
ReplyDeleteIts not uncommon for those who are most merciless in persecuting people for little sins like this to be deeply addicted to same. Some people have outlined that this may be why J. Edgar Hoover was so tough going after homosexuals. I suspect most of the most mysoginistic jihadis have some really kinky preoccupations of their own, and most likely blame women for it.