I'd have to disagree and agree with your assertion. Some would certainly fit into the idiot category, in fact probably most.
Most of the 9-11 highjackers were middle class and in fact well educated. That could explain why the stupid ones aren't as successfull I guess. I forgot about the morons trying to get their deposit back LOL. Like putting a stick-up note on your own deposit slip ;)
Where do you come up with that stuff Allison. Use propaganda to make them give up?...Your not serious.
Not traditional propaganda you nitwit. Terrorism is a kind of propaganda campaign. That is to say it has the objectives of a propaganda campaign. As much as they can possibly hurt us, they could never hope to conquer or destroy us. So taking over the U.S. can't seriously be their objective, or they'd be killing themselves for nothing. They must be hoping for something more tangible. Like crabgrass says, they want us to stop meddling in their affairs. To that end, they need only demoralize, not defeat. To demoralize, they can attack just about anything.
As for Luv's question, well there's Israel for one. They'd love to see us stop supporting them. bin Laden also made specific statements about wanting U.S. troops out of Saudi Arabia. Obviously we've "meddled" in Iraq now and we're trying to create a pro-American government. Apparently they feel the goverments of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are really just American puppets. I don't know about lately, but it used to be pretty standard policy that when the price of oil started to rise, the U.S. would pressure countries like Saudi Arabia to produce more oil to get the price back down. You'd have to be pretty naive to think that America and American corporations don't exercise a lot of muscle internationally in order to promote American interests.
How was he wrong in saying that the war is a bad idea? Maybe because it wasn't a bad idea.
I think he's damn straight on that fact.... war is a bad idea anytime, in my mind. I dont know if I have the same reasons for saying so, or not... but one of the main reasons I think so, is because... plain and simple, ninja.... when theres a war.... people get killed.
Life can be hell and it has been that way throughout history. Sometimes you have to fight, ninja turtle!
Oh yes that is good strategy, underestimate the enemy.
An intelligent person isn't typically so easily manipulated into blind hatred. nonsense.The majority of terrorists are probably not very bright, listen to what others say more than they think for themselves, and can't accomplish much without a lot of direction. That wasn't what we were talking about. We were talking about the PLAN to hit the WTC.
As far as how we supposedly meddled in the ME's affairs.
Suppoting Israel is no doubt a thorn in the Jihaidiots side. It should be. We also have many times tried to broker deals that gave the Palestians a start. (Carter, Clinton, Bush11) Each time they blew it up, literally. We should be stalwart to Israel, they're the only democracy in that area.
As far as oil prices, Of course we have pull as any customer would. If one of your best customers calls and says your prices are too high of course you're going to do something to make them happy ie: buying more from Canada.
As for our other supposed meddling we were invited to be there by the Saudi's. We fought off an Iraqi offensive during the Gulf War. We were there by permission of the government. We adhered to local customs, We give aid, monetarily and militarily to the Saud's and we buy oil from them. What meddling bastards eh ? If that's considered meddling in their affairs I guess it shows how hollow and mindless their reasons are. Yet some still would like to negotiate or placate terrorists. Stunning.
Maybe I wasnt talking about speaking with the terrorists...
Theres always the option of having the leaders (and im talking about just the top guys... not a whole room full of people that have nothing to do with whats going on) of whatever two countries have the beef with eachother, sit down and try to squash that very beef.....
its kinda like werewolves/vampires.... if you stop the trouble, by going through the leader, eventually it'll trickle down, and stuff will be cool.
if you stop the trouble, by going through the leader, eventually it'll trickle down, and stuff will be cool.
You are fooling yourself. You can not, and we will not, put murders, rapist, and torturers on the same moral ground as yourself. When you do that, you lose. Anytime they want more, all they have to do is start again. Knowing you will back down. The best example of this is what is going on between Hamas and Israel. The only way you win is to wipe them out. Peroid. They set the rules, now we respond in kind. That is the ONLY way to win. Otherwise it will just go on and on.
What Iraqis Really Think We asked them. What they told us is largely reassuring.
BY KARL ZINSMEISTER Wednesday, September 10, 2003 12:01 a.m. EDT
America, some say, is hobbled in its policies toward Iraq by not knowing much about what Iraqis really think. Are they on the side of radical Islamists? What kind of government would they like? What is their attitude toward the U.S.? Do the Shiites hate us? Could Iraq become another Iran under the ayatollahs? Are the people in the Sunni triangle the real problem? Up to now we've only been able to guess. We've relied on anecdotal temperature-takings of the Iraqi public, and have been at the mercy of images presented to us by the press. We all know that journalists have a bad-news bias: 10,000 schools being rehabbed isn't news; one school blowing up is a weeklong feeding frenzy. And some of us who have spent time recently in Iraq--I was an embedded reporter during the war--have been puzzled by the postwar news and media imagery, which is much more negative than what many individuals involved in reconstructing Iraq have been telling us. Well, finally we have some evidence of where the truth may lie. Working with Zogby International survey researchers, The American Enterprise magazine has conducted the first scientific poll of the Iraqi public.
Iran Helped Bin Laden’s Lieutenant al-Zawahiri Escape
From DEBKA-Net-Weekly 123 Aug. 22
September 8, 2003, 8:33 PM (GMT+02:00)
Dr. Ayman Zawahiri on the loose for new terrorist operations
Iran consistently denies ever having sheltered or hidden Osama bin Laden’s top lieutenant and operations ace, Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri, in the group of al Qaeda leaders present in the country. This assertion is wide of the truth. The Islamic Republic did in fact hide the bespectacled Egyptian medical doctor for close on a year. He was granted sanctuary, a base of operation and finally provided with a safe getaway route – as discovered by DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s most reliable exclusive sources.
Two years after the September 11 terrorist horrors in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, Zawahiri’s importance as a linchpin and live wire of the al Qaeda network and badly wanted quarry of American special forces and intelligence agents.
His capture is as crucial to the United States global war on terror as the apprehension of Bin Laden himself or Saddam Hussein.
The Iranians looked after him very well. Last month, as the hunt drew near, they helped Zawahiri stay a step ahead of his pursuers and leave the country by a secret tortuous route. DEBKA-Net-Weekly learns that Iranian intelligence agents were personally ordered by Iranian intelligence minister Hojatoleslam Ali Younesi to spirit the wanted terrorist chief, disguised as an Iranian Shiite cleric out of his hiding place and across into Turkey. Travelers from Iran are not required to show passports at the Turkish frontier. An Iranian spy cell buried in Turkey waited for him and conducted him to one of their own safe houses. There he stayed for two or three days before moving on to an unknown destination.
Zawahiri is as intent on keeping al Qaeda’s terror campaign alive as of keeping his head down. Our al Qaeda watchers therefore point to his two most likely destinations: The Ferghana Valley, a lawless territory ruled by Al Qaeda that straddles Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and China; or the wild Pankisi Gorge badland on the Chechen-Georgian border. Iranian intelligence would be able to prepare the absconding terrorist mastermind’s welcome in the latter place through its active channels of communication with Chechen rebels and Saudi Al Qaeda fighters focusing on Chechnya and its environs. At the Pankisi Gorge, Zawahiri would have moved on to his next stop helped by many helping hands in his own movement.
Some made their escape there in late May, when Tehran plotted the flight of some of the al Qaeda perpetrators of the massive bombings in foreigners’ compounds in Riyadh on May 19. Flouting insistent Saudi and American demands to hand the wanted men over, Iranian intelligence gave them transportation and money to smooth their way as far as the Pankisi Gorge.
Reporting from exclusive sources in Tehran, DEBKA-Net-Weekly has learned that, a day or two after Zawahiri left Iran, a tense tug-o’-war took place between Iranian intelligence ministry officers and Iranian Revolutionary Guardsmen over control of a group of al Qaeda terrorists. They confronted each other at an airport in the northern Iranian city of Mahabad in Iranian Kurdistan.
Eight senior al Qaeda operatives were known to have been harbored in Tehran as recently as mid-August. Both the United States and Saudi Arabia, as DEBKA-Net-Weekly has reported, have a list of 60 names of Al Qaeda operations officers in the Islamic Republic.
Three of those terrorists were the prize fought over by the two armed Iranian factions.
A large Revolutionary Guards contingent was about to put them on an unmarked plane parked near a side runway with its engines running to extradite them to Saudi Arabia, the start of their deportation to their countries of origin, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Suddenly, the Iranian Guardsmen were surrounded by a larger contingent of Iranian intelligence ministry officers, who demanded custody of all three Al Qaeda men. A second group of officers had meanwhile boarded the plane and ordered the pilot to switch off the engines. At one point in the four-hour standoff, according to our Iranian sources, guns were drawn and threats made. But the officers from the Tehran ministry issued a 15-minute ultimatum to hand the terrorists over or else they would open fire. The Revolutionary Guards backed down.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s intelligence sources report that this was the third time Guards had been frustrated in attempt to send some senior Al Qaeda operatives back to their respective home countries.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s intelligence and counter-terrorism sources believe that one of the three terrorists was Saif al-Adel, number three in the Al Qaeda hierarchy and the group’s military commander. Last month, the CIA determined that al Adel, like Zawahiri an Egyptian national, had been in Iranian custody for some three weeks. They have been searching for him for ten years, since the “Black Hawk Down” incident in Somalia in 1993 in which 18 Americans were killed. He is suspected of having commanded a Al Qaeda unit fighting in Mogadishu at the time.
Now, he is named as mastermind of the Riyadh bomb blasts and was on the point of being flown out to Saudi Arabia when the Intelligence minister Younesi had managed to block the extradition while also spotlighting a deep division in the Islamic Republic’s ruling regime.
Shortly after the airport confrontation, we learn that Moshen Razai, chef de bureau of the still powerful former president Hashem Rafsanjani, sent an encrypted report on the incident to members of his faction in the Revolutionary Guards command. He posted it over his private, closed personal website, which DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s intelligence sources were able to access. At the end of the message, Razai wrote: “There are still elements within Iran’s intelligence services who are protecting Al Qaeda adherents and will do anything to prevent their extradition to Arab countries and thwart any progress towards better relations with them.”
Razai is himself a former commander of the Revolutionary Guards. His boss, Rafsanjani, is thought to be the most influential of any Iranian leader among the Guards.
The next move came about several hours later from Imad al-Parsa, a close associate of Rafsanjani and Razai. He summoned his own inner circle, including a large number of senior Revolutionary Guards officers and told them: “The same elements that executed the 1979 seizure of the US embassy in Teheran and took its diplomatic staff hostage, thereby foredooming Iran to bad relations with the West for a generation, are at work again.”
DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s Iran analysts learn from this episode that the attempt to use al Qaeda as an instrument of terror and bargaining chip to gain a respite to develop nuclear weapons has landed Tehran in hot water with regard to the regime’s internal cohesion.
The clerical leaders are now split down the middle.
It's the fucking military, not the cub scouts! I joined and signed up for the same shit they did. My contract said I may be required to pick up a gun and shoot the enemy in the face as they will probably do to me. I don't remember any clause in my enlistment contract that said there were any gaurantees I wouln't be killed. Heck, I was damn near killed during peacetime by a throttleman that wasn't properly following proceedure! If you are not willing to die for your country, why join the military?
I say enough have "Fried" already, especially in Bradley Tanks, Humvees and other U.S. made military-vehicles, all FILLED with U.S. servicemen and women.
Of course that's tragic but are you saying we should get out now ?
The people I talked to that are there don't think we should, as much as they hate being there and want to go home but they see the stakes and think we ought to finish our mission. We actually have a good chance at having a moderate middle eastern democratic government that can blossom across the ME. The mullahs and other Jihaidiots getting nervous and they're doing everything they can to derail it. Their power depends on an opresssed and igonorant populace. Creating a moderate state in that area is a tall order no doubt but to leave now or before we get them started down a path of their own we would be creating a power vaccum that the Iatohla's would be happy to fill. It would do a disservice to the Iraqi people. Iraq is key to that it has less to do on who we take out and more to do about who and how we leave it. Surrender would be sending the wrong signal and be the exact thing we did for years, it's what got us attacked 2 years ago today.
Of course that's tragic but are you saying we should get out now ?
I still don't think we should of gone in to begin with, at least not when we did and the way we did. But I don't think leaving right now is a good idea either, especially while Saddam is still possibly alive. If we left now, he could still possibly make a comeback.
I also agree it would be a great disservice to the Iraqis to destroy their government and then just leave with no one left in clear authority to pick up the pieces. We did that to Germany after WWI and that's a situation that could easily repeat itself as there are plenty of nutjobs in the area with rhetoric and guns waiting to try and take power.
At the same time though we need to work to undermine the perception that we're there as aggressors which will naturally provoke a defensive response. Only now is Bush starting to realize this and taking step towards that end such as by getting the UN more involved. I don't care what you think of the UN. America will be better off by making this seem like a world effort to help Iraq as opposed to an American effort to control it. Then those who still fight the progress will be seen as criminals instead of as freedom fighters and their support will dry up. But until that happens, leaving a vacuum behind would be a mistake.
I agree. We need the "un" in there, unfortunately, the "un" didn't want in in the first place. We used our resources to get things done and the "un" will just be a rubber stamp for us to keep using our resources. I would be truly shocked to see a "un" peacekeeping force comprised of a MINORITY of US troops.
The UN has a role. They say they want to help but the sticking point is who commands the forces. Someone has to be in charge of the military ops. The US wants to retain control of it's troops and Kofi wants someone else incharge. There's no way in hell we should be under orders from a Japanese general. We did most of the heavy lifting and know the lay of the land. Blue shell ops have a place but the problem is this.
No matter what you think of the UN like or dislike you have to face the fact that the UN is not designed for offensive operations needed to finish the military aspects of the job. There are still Saddamn loyalists and imported Jihaidiots who have to be dealt with, the UN can't do that. They can do some of the peace keeping duties and humanitarian tasks. And could play a vital role in say border patrols and infastructure. But they can't and won't actively pursue the bad guys. The politics involved when you get 40 nationalities and cultures together is difficult and innefficient. Yes they have a role that can be played, we can't however bend on this one. Allowing the military aspects to be run under the UN umbrella might be politically advantageous but from a practical standpoint it would be an unmittigated disaster.
Only now is Bush starting to realize this and taking step towards that end such as by getting the UN more involved. Here I think Bush is making a mistake. The UN is worthless.
America will be better off by making this seem like a world effort to help Iraq as opposed to an American effort to control it. Yes that must be why the UN headquarters in Iraq was bombed.
Something I found humorous from your article Allison:
A Frenchman, Jean-Charles Pogram, 45, a computer technician, said: "Everyone agrees on the principles of democracy and freedom, but the problem is that we don't agree with the means to achieve those ends. The United States can't see beyond the axiom that force can solve everything, but Europe, because of two world wars, knows the price of blood."
This is being spoken by a Frenchman who would be speaking German had we not brought our "force" to his country. How ironic.
Notice there were also people's who's views about America have improved as well.
Then of course there's that pseky little poll I posted about the Iraqi's.
The United States can't see beyond the axiom that force can solve everything, but Europe, because of two world wars, knows the price of blood."
And we don't know the price ? I guess none of our blood was spilled freeing their country of a scourge while many of their own collaberated with the Nazi's ? Of course there's WW2, Vietnam, Korea and the first Gulf War that they were also involved in or getting bailed out of (again) but I guess that escaped him. Other than that the myth of us somehow being a warmongering nation continues. Did we go to war after Beirut ? Nope. Did we go to war after the 93' WTC bombing ? Nope. Did we go to war after the USS Cole ? Nope, How about the Khobar towers ? Nope.
"This is being spoken by a Frenchman who would be speaking German had we not brought our "force" to his country. How ironic."
They had similar sentiment during the cold war and were sure that we really just couldn't wait to start a nuclear holocaust. No thanks to them once again the European continent is out from under the scourge of communism.
Frankly I care little what their opinion of us is. Any country that lets 15,000 of it's own countrymen die because the mercury dips above 90 hasn't much room to speak in matters of hummanity.
OK guys take your political hatts off for just a second and listen to this. I don't know why it struck me the way it did but something came back to me hearing it moreso than seeing images today.
I began those requests by offering brother Jethro, dinner, on me, and like three years ago, but he was pissing-his-pants scared, and would not even agree to stop the arguments long enough to let me buy him dinner.
Nice language fold. To begin with, I have a great deal of respect for Veterans like Luv and CSC. When they talk about THEIR experiences, it's insightful and interesting. They don't put anyone down because they "haven't served a day". They don't brag about their service time and they don't use the language that fold does.
Years ago I made one comment on a Veterans board. fold asked me if I had ever served. I said no and since then it's been "you don't know shit". I've donated to the local VFW and fold accused me of thumping my chest for doing so. At least the VFW was appreciative.
I'll admit it. I pimp fold to get him going. It's just that I can't stand the holy, been there done that better than you, i'm a Veteran you're not so you're scum, braggart, self-proclaimed expert on virtually every subject known to man, type of person. Their all over. Their a dime a dozen.
I will tell you this fold. Some day, when i'm able to, i'll tell you exactly what i've done and seen over my life. I can guarantee you that it's far more than you have EVER done or have EVER seen from the safety of the Kitty Hawk.
As far as fold's dinner invite, i'll be glad to take him up on that as soon as his attitude towards civilians improves. But truthfully, I doubt that will ever happen.
Nah man.... he doesn't have a holier than thou attitude... he just doesn't want people to talk shit about things they havent dealt with first hand.
What about the people that have had first hand experience with something but still don't know shit? Furthermore, if that is the right attitude no one but Jerry Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan (if he could) Bush I and Clinton should be allowed to criticize GW. Now isn't that nonsense?
Allison Wonderland 9/10/03 2:50pm
I'd have to disagree and agree with your assertion. Some would certainly fit into the idiot category, in fact probably most.
Most of the 9-11 highjackers were middle class and in fact well educated. That could explain why the stupid ones aren't as successfull I guess. I forgot about the morons trying to get their deposit back LOL. Like putting a stick-up note on your own deposit slip ;)
Where do you come up with that stuff Allison. Use propaganda to make them give up?...Your not serious.
Not traditional propaganda you nitwit. Terrorism is a kind of propaganda campaign. That is to say it has the objectives of a propaganda campaign. As much as they can possibly hurt us, they could never hope to conquer or destroy us. So taking over the U.S. can't seriously be their objective, or they'd be killing themselves for nothing. They must be hoping for something more tangible. Like crabgrass says, they want us to stop meddling in their affairs. To that end, they need only demoralize, not defeat. To demoralize, they can attack just about anything.
As for Luv's question, well there's Israel for one. They'd love to see us stop supporting them. bin Laden also made specific statements about wanting U.S. troops out of Saudi Arabia. Obviously we've "meddled" in Iraq now and we're trying to create a pro-American government. Apparently they feel the goverments of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are really just American puppets. I don't know about lately, but it used to be pretty standard policy that when the price of oil started to rise, the U.S. would pressure countries like Saudi Arabia to produce more oil to get the price back down. You'd have to be pretty naive to think that America and American corporations don't exercise a lot of muscle internationally in order to promote American interests.
How was he wrong in saying that the war is a bad idea? Maybe because it wasn't a bad idea.
I think he's damn straight on that fact.... war is a bad idea anytime, in my mind. I dont know if I have the same reasons for saying so, or not... but one of the main reasons I think so, is because... plain and simple, ninja.... when theres a war.... people get killed.
Life can be hell and it has been that way throughout history. Sometimes you have to fight, ninja turtle!
I assume that these people aren't stupid.
I think you assume wrong.
Oh yes that is good strategy, underestimate the enemy.
An intelligent person isn't typically so easily manipulated into blind hatred. nonsense.The majority of terrorists are probably not very bright, listen to what others say more than they think for themselves, and can't accomplish much without a lot of direction. That wasn't what we were talking about. We were talking about the PLAN to hit the WTC.
Life is what you make it, ninja.
So why make it hell, if you dont have to?
And no... you dont have to fight... theres always another option.
Terrorism is a kind of propaganda campaign. it is war.
And no... you dont have to fight... theres always another option.
yes you can let them kill you.
Will you open your fucking eyes?
Step back and breath..... once your done doing that, maybe you'll be able to see that fighting someone, just for fucks sake, isnt the only option.
And just because you dont want to fight someone, doesnt mean their going to straight up come and kill you.
Ever heard of two people sitting down and talking out their problems with eachother?
bodine should be planning a pre-emtive strike against his next door neighbor.
Allison,
Yuo don't need to occupy a country to destroy it.
As far as how we supposedly meddled in the ME's affairs.
Suppoting Israel is no doubt a thorn in the Jihaidiots side. It should be. We also have many times tried to broker deals that gave the Palestians a start. (Carter, Clinton, Bush11) Each time they blew it up, literally. We should be stalwart to Israel, they're the only democracy in that area.
As far as oil prices, Of course we have pull as any customer would. If one of your best customers calls and says your prices are too high of course you're going to do something to make them happy ie: buying more from Canada.
As for our other supposed meddling we were invited to be there by the Saudi's. We fought off an Iraqi offensive during the Gulf War. We were there by permission of the government. We adhered to local customs, We give aid, monetarily and militarily to the Saud's and we buy oil from them. What meddling bastards eh ? If that's considered meddling in their affairs I guess it shows how hollow and mindless their reasons are. Yet some still would like to negotiate or placate terrorists. Stunning.
OH!..I see now Allison. I must have been lacking in mind reading today. Sheeeeesh.
VJ, (news flash) you can't talk to a terrorist.
huh?
didn't the Reagan/Bush fellows in the basement not only talk to them, but trade them arms for hostages?
Maybe I wasnt talking about speaking with the terrorists...
Theres always the option of having the leaders (and im talking about just the top guys... not a whole room full of people that have nothing to do with whats going on) of whatever two countries have the beef with eachother, sit down and try to squash that very beef.....
its kinda like werewolves/vampires.... if you stop the trouble, by going through the leader, eventually it'll trickle down, and stuff will be cool.
if you stop the trouble, by going through the leader, eventually it'll trickle down, and stuff will be cool.
You are fooling yourself. You can not, and we will not, put murders, rapist, and torturers on the same moral ground as yourself. When you do that, you lose. Anytime they want more, all they have to do is start again. Knowing you will back down. The best example of this is what is going on between Hamas and Israel. The only way you win is to wipe them out. Peroid. They set the rules, now we respond in kind. That is the ONLY way to win. Otherwise it will just go on and on.
when theres a war.... people get killed.
When we weren't at war in Iraq, people were getting killed. Mainly innocent Iraqis.
When we weren't at war in Europe during WW II people were getting killed, mainly innocent Jews.
The point? Sometimes war and killing is the answer.
Joe Iraq
What Iraqis Really Think
We asked them. What they told us is largely reassuring.
BY KARL ZINSMEISTER
Wednesday, September 10, 2003 12:01 a.m. EDT
America, some say, is hobbled in its policies toward Iraq by not knowing much about what Iraqis really think. Are they on the side of radical Islamists? What kind of government would they like? What is their attitude toward the U.S.? Do the Shiites hate us? Could Iraq become another Iran under the ayatollahs? Are the people in the Sunni triangle the real problem? Up to now we've only been able to guess. We've relied on anecdotal temperature-takings of the Iraqi public, and have been at the mercy of images presented to us by the press. We all know that journalists have a bad-news bias: 10,000 schools being rehabbed isn't news; one school blowing up is a weeklong feeding frenzy. And some of us who have spent time recently in Iraq--I was an embedded reporter during the war--have been puzzled by the postwar news and media imagery, which is much more negative than what many individuals involved in reconstructing Iraq have been telling us. Well, finally we have some evidence of where the truth may lie. Working with Zogby International survey researchers, The American Enterprise magazine has conducted the first scientific poll of the Iraqi public.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110003991
Iran Helped Bin Laden’s Lieutenant al-Zawahiri Escape
From DEBKA-Net-Weekly 123 Aug. 22
September 8, 2003, 8:33 PM (GMT+02:00)
Dr. Ayman Zawahiri on the loose for new terrorist operations
Iran consistently denies ever having sheltered or hidden Osama bin Laden’s top lieutenant and operations ace, Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri, in the group of al Qaeda leaders present in the country. This assertion is wide of the truth. The Islamic Republic did in fact hide the bespectacled Egyptian medical doctor for close on a year. He was granted sanctuary, a base of operation and finally provided with a safe getaway route – as discovered by DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s most reliable exclusive sources.
Two years after the September 11 terrorist horrors in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, Zawahiri’s importance as a linchpin and live wire of the al Qaeda network and badly wanted quarry of American special forces and intelligence agents.
His capture is as crucial to the United States global war on terror as the apprehension of Bin Laden himself or Saddam Hussein.
The Iranians looked after him very well. Last month, as the hunt drew near, they helped Zawahiri stay a step ahead of his pursuers and leave the country by a secret tortuous route. DEBKA-Net-Weekly learns that Iranian intelligence agents were personally ordered by Iranian intelligence minister Hojatoleslam Ali Younesi to spirit the wanted terrorist chief, disguised as an Iranian Shiite cleric out of his hiding place and across into Turkey. Travelers from Iran are not required to show passports at the Turkish frontier. An Iranian spy cell buried in Turkey waited for him and conducted him to one of their own safe houses. There he stayed for two or three days before moving on to an unknown destination.
Zawahiri is as intent on keeping al Qaeda’s terror campaign alive as of keeping his head down. Our al Qaeda watchers therefore point to his two most likely destinations: The Ferghana Valley, a lawless territory ruled by Al Qaeda that straddles Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and China; or the wild Pankisi Gorge badland on the Chechen-Georgian border. Iranian intelligence would be able to prepare the absconding terrorist mastermind’s welcome in the latter place through its active channels of communication with Chechen rebels and Saudi Al Qaeda fighters focusing on Chechnya and its environs. At the Pankisi Gorge, Zawahiri would have moved on to his next stop helped by many helping hands in his own movement.
Some made their escape there in late May, when Tehran plotted the flight of some of the al Qaeda perpetrators of the massive bombings in foreigners’ compounds in Riyadh on May 19. Flouting insistent Saudi and American demands to hand the wanted men over, Iranian intelligence gave them transportation and money to smooth their way as far as the Pankisi Gorge.
Reporting from exclusive sources in Tehran, DEBKA-Net-Weekly has learned that, a day or two after Zawahiri left Iran, a tense tug-o’-war took place between Iranian intelligence ministry officers and Iranian Revolutionary Guardsmen over control of a group of al Qaeda terrorists. They confronted each other at an airport in the northern Iranian city of Mahabad in Iranian Kurdistan.
Eight senior al Qaeda operatives were known to have been harbored in Tehran as recently as mid-August. Both the United States and Saudi Arabia, as DEBKA-Net-Weekly has reported, have a list of 60 names of Al Qaeda operations officers in the Islamic Republic.
Three of those terrorists were the prize fought over by the two armed Iranian factions.
A large Revolutionary Guards contingent was about to put them on an unmarked plane parked near a side runway with its engines running to extradite them to Saudi Arabia, the start of their deportation to their countries of origin, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Suddenly, the Iranian Guardsmen were surrounded by a larger contingent of Iranian intelligence ministry officers, who demanded custody of all three Al Qaeda men. A second group of officers had meanwhile boarded the plane and ordered the pilot to switch off the engines. At one point in the four-hour standoff, according to our Iranian sources, guns were drawn and threats made. But the officers from the Tehran ministry issued a 15-minute ultimatum to hand the terrorists over or else they would open fire. The Revolutionary Guards backed down.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s intelligence sources report that this was the third time Guards had been frustrated in attempt to send some senior Al Qaeda operatives back to their respective home countries.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s intelligence and counter-terrorism sources believe that one of the three terrorists was Saif al-Adel, number three in the Al Qaeda hierarchy and the group’s military commander. Last month, the CIA determined that al Adel, like Zawahiri an Egyptian national, had been in Iranian custody for some three weeks. They have been searching for him for ten years, since the “Black Hawk Down” incident in Somalia in 1993 in which 18 Americans were killed. He is suspected of having commanded a Al Qaeda unit fighting in Mogadishu at the time.
Now, he is named as mastermind of the Riyadh bomb blasts and was on the point of being flown out to Saudi Arabia when the Intelligence minister Younesi had managed to block the extradition while also spotlighting a deep division in the Islamic Republic’s ruling regime.
Shortly after the airport confrontation, we learn that Moshen Razai, chef de bureau of the still powerful former president Hashem Rafsanjani, sent an encrypted report on the incident to members of his faction in the Revolutionary Guards command. He posted it over his private, closed personal website, which DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s intelligence sources were able to access. At the end of the message, Razai wrote: “There are still elements within Iran’s intelligence services who are protecting Al Qaeda adherents and will do anything to prevent their extradition to Arab countries and thwart any progress towards better relations with them.”
Razai is himself a former commander of the Revolutionary Guards. His boss, Rafsanjani, is thought to be the most influential of any Iranian leader among the Guards.
The next move came about several hours later from Imad al-Parsa, a close associate of Rafsanjani and Razai. He summoned his own inner circle, including a large number of senior Revolutionary Guards officers and told them: “The same elements that executed the 1979 seizure of the US embassy in Teheran and took its diplomatic staff hostage, thereby foredooming Iran to bad relations with the West for a generation, are at work again.”
DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s Iran analysts learn from this episode that the attempt to use al Qaeda as an instrument of terror and bargaining chip to gain a respite to develop nuclear weapons has landed Tehran in hot water with regard to the regime’s internal cohesion.
The clerical leaders are now split down the middle.
It's the fucking military, not the cub scouts! I joined and signed up for the same shit they did. My contract said I may be required to pick up a gun and shoot the enemy in the face as they will probably do to me. I don't remember any clause in my enlistment contract that said there were any gaurantees I wouln't be killed. Heck, I was damn near killed during peacetime by a throttleman that wasn't properly following proceedure! If you are not willing to die for your country, why join the military?
'Bill - Fold' 9/11/03 4:07am
Of course that's tragic but are you saying we should get out now ?
The people I talked to that are there don't think we should, as much as they hate being there and want to go home but they see the stakes and think we ought to finish our mission. We actually have a good chance at having a moderate middle eastern democratic government that can blossom across the ME. The mullahs and other Jihaidiots getting nervous and they're doing everything they can to derail it. Their power depends on an opresssed and igonorant populace. Creating a moderate state in that area is a tall order no doubt but to leave now or before we get them started down a path of their own we would be creating a power vaccum that the Iatohla's would be happy to fill. It would do a disservice to the Iraqi people. Iraq is key to that it has less to do on who we take out and more to do about who and how we leave it. Surrender would be sending the wrong signal and be the exact thing we did for years, it's what got us attacked 2 years ago today.
Of course that's tragic but are you saying we should get out now ?
I still don't think we should of gone in to begin with, at least not when we did and the way we did. But I don't think leaving right now is a good idea either, especially while Saddam is still possibly alive. If we left now, he could still possibly make a comeback.
I also agree it would be a great disservice to the Iraqis to destroy their government and then just leave with no one left in clear authority to pick up the pieces. We did that to Germany after WWI and that's a situation that could easily repeat itself as there are plenty of nutjobs in the area with rhetoric and guns waiting to try and take power.
At the same time though we need to work to undermine the perception that we're there as aggressors which will naturally provoke a defensive response. Only now is Bush starting to realize this and taking step towards that end such as by getting the UN more involved. I don't care what you think of the UN. America will be better off by making this seem like a world effort to help Iraq as opposed to an American effort to control it. Then those who still fight the progress will be seen as criminals instead of as freedom fighters and their support will dry up. But until that happens, leaving a vacuum behind would be a mistake.
I agree. We need the "un" in there, unfortunately, the "un" didn't want in in the first place. We used our resources to get things done and the "un" will just be a rubber stamp for us to keep using our resources. I would be truly shocked to see a "un" peacekeeping force comprised of a MINORITY of US troops.
The UN has a role. They say they want to help but the sticking point is who commands the forces. Someone has to be in charge of the military ops. The US wants to retain control of it's troops and Kofi wants someone else incharge. There's no way in hell we should be under orders from a Japanese general. We did most of the heavy lifting and know the lay of the land. Blue shell ops have a place but the problem is this.
No matter what you think of the UN like or dislike you have to face the fact that the UN is not designed for offensive operations needed to finish the military aspects of the job. There are still Saddamn loyalists and imported Jihaidiots who have to be dealt with, the UN can't do that. They can do some of the peace keeping duties and humanitarian tasks. And could play a vital role in say border patrols and infastructure. But they can't and won't actively pursue the bad guys. The politics involved when you get 40 nationalities and cultures together is difficult and innefficient. Yes they have a role that can be played, we can't however bend on this one. Allowing the military aspects to be run under the UN umbrella might be politically advantageous but from a practical standpoint it would be an unmittigated disaster.
So fold, the military man, wants to cut and run.
I have to point out another fold lie.
He states he saw a little girl on fire running down a road in Vietnam.
He has stated many times in the past that he was in the service during that war BUT never actually made it to Vietnam....hmmmmmmmmmmm.
Torp, I think he was referring to the picture on Time magazine I believe.
Step back and breath..... once your done doing that, maybe you'll be able to see that fighting someone, just for fucks sake, isnt the only option.
The U.S. is fighting anyone "just for fucks sake."
Only now is Bush starting to realize this and taking step towards that end such as by getting the UN more involved. Here I think Bush is making a mistake. The UN is worthless.
America will be better off by making this seem like a world effort to help Iraq as opposed to an American effort to control it. Yes that must be why the UN headquarters in Iraq was bombed.
Try this article: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=68&ncid=68&e=1&u=/nyt/20030911/ts_nyt/foreignviewsofusdarkensincesept11
So fold, the military man, wants to cut and run.
His position would be different if a democrap was in office.
As if the New York Times is an unbiased reporter of the news. I hope that article is in the op-ed section.
Something I found humorous from your article Allison:
A Frenchman, Jean-Charles Pogram, 45, a computer technician, said: "Everyone agrees on the principles of democracy and freedom, but the problem is that we don't agree with the means to achieve those ends. The United States can't see beyond the axiom that force can solve everything, but Europe, because of two world wars, knows the price of blood."
This is being spoken by a Frenchman who would be speaking German had we not brought our "force" to his country. How ironic.
Common Sense Conservative 9/11/03 11:31am
Notice there were also people's who's views about America have improved as well.
Then of course there's that pseky little poll I posted about the Iraqi's.
And we don't know the price ? I guess none of our blood was spilled freeing their country of a scourge while many of their own collaberated with the Nazi's ? Of course there's WW2, Vietnam, Korea and the first Gulf War that they were also involved in or getting bailed out of (again) but I guess that escaped him. Other than that the myth of us somehow being a warmongering nation continues. Did we go to war after Beirut ? Nope. Did we go to war after the 93' WTC bombing ? Nope. Did we go to war after the USS Cole ? Nope, How about the Khobar towers ? Nope.
"This is being spoken by a Frenchman who would be speaking German had we not brought our "force" to his country. How ironic."
They had similar sentiment during the cold war and were sure that we really just couldn't wait to start a nuclear holocaust. No thanks to them once again the European continent is out from under the scourge of communism.
Frankly I care little what their opinion of us is. Any country that lets 15,000 of it's own countrymen die because the mercury dips above 90 hasn't much room to speak in matters of hummanity.
I have to disagree Luv. fold wrote it exactly like he was there. Not from a picture in a magazine.
Majority Thinks U.S. Is Winning War Against Terrorism
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,97058,00.html
OK guys take your political hatts off for just a second and listen to this. I don't know why it struck me the way it did but something came back to me hearing it moreso than seeing images today.
http://www.tc.umn.edu/~pres0049/9-11-montage.mp3
Luv2Fly 9/11/03 3:10pm
Well worth listen to Rob.
Thanks
Thanks Luv.
Shut up boys! You never served so your opinion doesn't matter!
I began those requests by offering brother Jethro, dinner, on me, and like three years ago, but he was pissing-his-pants scared, and would not even agree to stop the arguments long enough to let me buy him dinner.
I do not recall such an offer.
Nice language fold. To begin with, I have a great deal of respect for Veterans like Luv and CSC. When they talk about THEIR experiences, it's insightful and interesting. They don't put anyone down because they "haven't served a day". They don't brag about their service time and they don't use the language that fold does.
Years ago I made one comment on a Veterans board. fold asked me if I had ever served. I said no and since then it's been "you don't know shit". I've donated to the local VFW and fold accused me of thumping my chest for doing so. At least the VFW was appreciative.
I'll admit it. I pimp fold to get him going. It's just that I can't stand the holy, been there done that better than you, i'm a Veteran you're not so you're scum, braggart, self-proclaimed expert on virtually every subject known to man, type of person. Their all over. Their a dime a dozen.
I will tell you this fold. Some day, when i'm able to, i'll tell you exactly what i've done and seen over my life. I can guarantee you that it's far more than you have EVER done or have EVER seen from the safety of the Kitty Hawk.
As far as fold's dinner invite, i'll be glad to take him up on that as soon as his attitude towards civilians improves. But truthfully, I doubt that will ever happen.
Nah man.... he doesnt have a holier than thou attitude... he just doesnt want people to talk shit about things they havent dealt with first hand.
As far as you not knowing shit?
You've proved that you know shit.... just not about the same shit that some other people do, and have had actual experiences with.
Nah man.... he doesn't have a holier than thou attitude... he just doesn't want people to talk shit about things they havent dealt with first hand.
What about the people that have had first hand experience with something but still don't know shit? Furthermore, if that is the right attitude no one but Jerry Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan (if he could) Bush I and Clinton should be allowed to criticize GW. Now isn't that nonsense?
Nice...
Well, i've dealt with more than fold could ever imagine.
Torpedo-8 9/12/03 4:41pm
Have you really?
Yes Sir.