   interesting analysis of Al Queda memo(political)
quote:So, Ya Think You’ve Got It Now?February 19, 2004 Eureka...Newsweek’s Christopher Dickey might be more “inclined” to trust the American government than to trust Al Qaeda terrorists.  Ya better be careful you poor little Dickey...common sense may start to taint your bias. The Kurdish militia recently captured Hassan Ghul, a Pakistani courier for the Al Qaeda network, carrying a CD-ROM containing a 17-page memo outlining a strategy to start an Iraqi civil war, kill Americans and...kill just about everybody else.  Ghul admitted that he was delivering the CD from Al Qaeda linked Ansar al-Islam operatives in Iraq to the "inner circle" of Al Qaeda''s leadership.   American officials believe the memo’s author to be Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian/Palestinian who is commonly believed to be the liaison between Iraq’s Ansar terrorist cell and Al Qaeda leadership (bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri).  Even Dennis Kucinich probably would admit that Ansar’s Zarqawi is operating in Iraq.  Unless of course he could get on Kerry’s good side by claiming that President Bush was detaining Zarqawi in John Ashcroft’s basement. Newsweek’s Dickey, in spite of his doubts about the memo’s authenticity, “Given the Bush administration''s record peddling bad intelligence and worse innuendo”, is “inclined” to agree (that the memo is authentic) with “Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, the military briefer at the five-o''clock follies in Baghdad”.  So, ya think Dickey realizes that he laces his articles with enough “innuendo” to win a Dartmouth power-booting contest? Starting from his premise that “the (peaceful?) religion of god is worth more than lives”, Zarqawi laments the realities that: (1) “that the country has no mountains in which we can take refuge and no forests in whose thickets we can hide.”; (2) “America did not come to leave, and it will not leave”; and (3) “There is no doubt that the space in which we can move has begun to shrink and that the grip around the throats of the mujahidin has begun to tighten. With the deployment of soldiers and police, the future has become frightening.”  So, ya think that Al Qaeda is actually operating in Iraq? And Zarqawi answers that question, “...we have been the keys to all of the martyrdom operations that have taken place ...Praise be to God, I have completed 25 [operations] up to now, including among the Shi`a and their symbolic figures, the Americans and their soldiers, the police and soldiers, and the coalition forces. God willing more are to come.”   Even though the Americans “are the most cowardly of God’s creatures” and the “Kurds... are a lump [in the throat] and a thorn whose time to be clipped has yet to come”, Zarqawi realizes that the Iraqi authorities “are the eyes, ears, and hands of the occupier, through which he sees, hears, and delivers violent blows. God willing, we are determined to target them strongly in the coming period before the situation is consolidated and they control arrest.”  So, ya still think this memo might be a fake? Shortly before and after the memo’s discovery, a wave of attacks commenced against the Iraqi people.  “Guerrillas shouting ‘God is great’ staged a brazen assault &#111;n the main police station here (Falluja) &#111;n Saturday, blasting their way inside, killing at least 15 police officers….”  A police officer wounded in the attack, Faris Ibrahim, “believed that at least some of the attackers were foreigners…the men were yelling in Arabic during the attack, but that the accent was strange…’It was not Iraqi Arabic’” In a shocking coincidence, the NYT’s reported that, “…the Americans have pulled back to their garrisons and given up many security tasks to the Iraqis.”  Prior to this report, Zarqawi’s memo prophesied that America “is looking to a near future, when it will remain safe in its bases, while handing over control of Iraq to a bastard government with an army and police force….”  So, ya think we have a plan going here?  Hoping that “whether they like it or not, many Sunni areas will stand with the mujahidin (Al Qaeda)”, Zarqawi weaves a demented strategy to kill just about everybody:  “we need to bring the Shi''a into the battle because it is the &#111;nly way to prolong the duration of the fight between the infidels and us”; “in what they call the Sunni triangle, the army and police are spreading out in these regions, putting in charge Sunnis from the same region…we have to fight them (my emphasis)”.   Let’s quickly recap.  Zarqawi wants to kill Americans, Kurds, Shi’as and Sunnis.  That would leave Al Qaeda as the last survivor.  But the geniuses at places like Newsweek and the NYT’s have been assuring people for months that Bush is a liar and there was no pre-war Iraqi-Al Qaeda link…thus, no Iraq-9/11 link.  Yet, Zarqawi believes that “with a directed media and a strategic action, there will be a continuation (my emphasis) between the Mujahidin inside and outside of Iraq”.  Ya think that something which never existed could be continued? Zarqawi knows the truth…” We have been hiding (in Iraq) for a long time.”  And with the hope of support from Upper West Side editorial boards, he anticipates that, “Perhaps we will decide to go public soon….”  And why not?  Zarqawi and his Al Qaeda buddies are, “…seriously preparing media material that will reveal the facts, call forth firm intentions, arouse determination, and be[come] an arena of jihad in which the pen and the sword complement each other.”  Maybe he should hire Jayson Blair as his press secretary. As Zarqawi so correctly notes, Al Qaeda has “nothing to win or lose in our situation”.  If Al Qaeda fails to foment anarchy in Iraq, “we can pack up and leave and look for another land, just like it has happened in so many lands of jihad…We will be &#111;n the roads again.”  So, ya think Zarqawi is a Willie Nelson fan? ’Nuff said…any person with common sense can tell that the Bush Administration’s Iraq policy has been and continues to be mostly correct…more correct than Clinton’s evaluation of what constitutes sex.  If Zarqawi is now finding it “extremely difficult to lodge and keep safe a number of brothers”, think how happy he would have been with Hussein as his benefactor.  So, ya think that killing rodents before they infest your house is a good idea? When the end of the day arrives, it’s a good bet that: Iraq’s WMD’s will be found; the Hussein regime harbored and supported elements of Al Qaeda; Hussein contributed to the 9/11 attack and that if we weren’t fighting Zarqawi et al in Iraq we would be fighting them in our backyards.  So, ya think that will send the doubting-Dems into a tailspin? When Zarqawi paraphrases Mary Jo’s last words to Teddy, he accurately sums up the liberals’ reaction to President Bush actually having been correct from the start…” By the Lord of the Ka`ba, [this] is suffocation”.  Even Zarqawi knows that “Democracy is coming, and there will be no excuse thereafter.” <hr height=1 noshade></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE><a href = "http://www.dansargis.org/">Link to article</a>i think the author makes some intersting points about the "continued relationship with al-queda", and the state of the terrorist insurgency today. the memo itself highlights the singleness of mind of the "resistance", and the utter lack of concern for the actual populace. not surprising, but also unlike the typical media portrayal either.   <font color = #00ff00>Dredd</font>________________________________________<font color = #ffff00>"To die with your sword still in its sheath is most regrettable" – Miyomoto Musashi </font>   
  Ugh, where did you find this piffle?quote:’Nuff said...any person with common sense can tell that the Bush Administration’s Iraq policy has been and continues to be mostly correct...more correct than Clinton’s evaluation of what constitutes sex. If Zarqawi is now finding it “extremely difficult to lodge and keep safe a number of brothers”, think how happy he would have been with Hussein as his benefactor. So, ya think that killing rodents before they infest your house is a good idea? This article was terribly written.  Nothing in it did anything to prove an Al qaeda link to Iraq before US troops came in to occupy.  In fact, the author leads us to believe (based on the way he quoted Zarqawi), that Al Qaeda is using the disorder under American occupation in Iraq to pull off attacks that they couldn''t have even attempted to pull off when Hussein was present.  They are trying to sow the seeds of anarchy, which is much easier done with the disorder we currently have the Iraq nation in.My common sense tells me that Al Qaeda hated Saddam, and hates the shi''a, as well as hating Americans.quote:“...we have been the keys to all of the martyrdom operations that have taken place ...Praise be to God, I have completed 25 [operations] up to now, including among the Shi`a and their symbolic figures, the Americans and their soldiers, the police and soldiers, and the coalition forces. God willing more are to come.” And if they could have pulled off these kinds of guerrilla attacks during Saddam''s reign, they would have.  But Saddam was much tighter on keeping his borders secure.  My common sense tells me that even though Al Qaeda operatives may have been in place in Iraq, the US''s attack made it much more easy for them to  commence their operations.  My common sense tells me this article is the perfect example of someone trying to rewrite history.  "Look, al qaeda in Iraq, al qaeda in Iraq, they MUST have always been here!"  Oh yay!Or could it possibly be, that al qaeda saw an opportunity in Iraq with Saddam weakened, not only to commence attacks against Saddam''s forces and the shi''as (whom al qaeda hate) but also upon the US and coalition forces (whom al qaeda hate).This article is a perfect example of why we should NOT have attacked Iraq when we did, and why we should have had a better plan for reconstruction and more support from other countries in policing the state while their new government forms. ;  saying ya all the time really destroys your credibility i just discovered. not that he needed any of that anyway... ;quote:Original post by Eelco  saying ya all the time really destroys your credibility i just discovered. not that he needed any of that anyway...   Do you know what else destroys credibility? Capitalization and spelling mistakes... ;  good thing then that im not that interested in your faith in me. not at all like what you would expect from someone writing a political essay. oh well...you make me curious though: i certainly dont dare claim there arnt any, but what spelling mistakes? i cant seem to find them, which makes it all the more a good learning opportunity. ;quote:Original post by Eelco  good thing then that im not that interested in your faith in me. not at all like what you would expect from someone writing a political essay. oh well...you make me curious though: i certainly dont dare claim there arnt any, but what spelling mistakes? i cant seem to find them, which makes it all the more a good learning opportunity.   I didn''t see any spelling mistakes in that particular post, but your posting history is full of those mistakes. I don''t really care whether you do either of those things (it''s nice, though), but you criticizing the article for saying "ya" is a little stupid when you make a good deal more (in only a few sentences). ;quote:but you criticizing the article for saying "ya" is a little stupid when you make a good deal more well, i was under the impression that the continued use of the word ya wasnt a spelling mistake, but intentional. besides i find the comparison between non-native quickly typed lounge posts and a political essay rather skewed.quote:When the end of the day arrives, it’s a good bet that: Iraq’s WMD’s will be found; the Hussein regime harbored and supported elements of Al Qaeda; Hussein contributed to the 9/11 attack and that if we weren’t fighting Zarqawi et al in Iraq we would be fighting them in our backyards. So, ya think that will send the doubting-Dems into a tailspin? but if you want any other reasons why i find this bull, just read this paragraph. it speaks for itself i think.   [edited by - eelco on February 19, 2004 5:22:24 PM];quote:So, ya think that killing rodents before they infest your house is a good idea?Is he actually saying Iraqis = rodents, or did I manage to get this out of context?   [My Image Gallery (WIP)][Greatest Tetris clone evar!][Return your stolen MP3s] ;quote:Original post by Eelco  quote:but you criticizing the article for saying "ya" is a little stupid when you make a good deal more well, i was under the impression that the continued use of the word ya wasnt a spelling mistake, but intentional. besides i find the comparison between non-native quickly typed lounge posts and a political essay rather skewed.quote:When the end of the day arrives, it’s a good bet that: Iraq’s WMD’s will be found; the Hussein regime harbored and supported elements of Al Qaeda; Hussein contributed to the 9/11 attack and that if we weren’t fighting Zarqawi et al in Iraq we would be fighting them in our backyards. So, ya think that will send the doubting-Dems into a tailspin? but if you want any other reasons why i find this bull, just read this paragraph. it speaks for itself i think.Look, if it''s valid for you to criticize the argument by criticizing the writing style of the author, then it''s ok for me to criticize your argument by criticizing your writing style. ;quote:Look, if it''s valid for you to criticize the argument by criticizing the writing style of the author, then it''s ok for me to criticize your argument by criticizing your writing style. if you leave out the context, youre damned right. 