Op Ed: Modern jihad recruitment predates 9/11

GWBushThe claim on this and other sites by some commenters is that the ‘War on Terror’ actually created an environment for jihadists to be recruited and radicalised.

Of course, this has to have some serious merit. But what is behind this radicalisation, and why do the imams and jihad generals use it as a pretext for recruitment?

Is it simply a matter of revenge for US attacks on Mid East soil, or is it taking advantage of the fact that the US has seen fit to take the war to the enemy, albeit in a disputed manner in regard to where and when the counter offensive should have taken place and why?

Are the opponents of the response to the 9/11 atrocities (for there was more than one on the day the twin towers were brought down) saying that there was no Islamic militance before this momentous series of events? Are they claiming that the US was responsible for subsequent recruitment of jihadists and mujahideen?

Terror before 9/11
The fact is that militants were engaged in an ongoing jihad long before 9/11. This event was really the last straw for the US in a series of terrorist attacks on a variety of targets in a number of different locations. In fact the militants were carrying out jihad and terrorist attacks in so many places it has been almost impossible to document all of the events.

Even if you limit the terror to the time of the creation of the modern State of Israel in 1948, you would need pages and pages of a website to document the number of small and large scale atrocities attributed and claimed by Islamic terror squads.

For some journalists and left wing commentators 9/11 and G W Bush’s response marks the beginning of the counter-intefida as he announced the ‘War on Terror’, which ushered an all out offensive on militant targets, using very controversial pretexts, but which sought to take the offensive from US soil.

War on Terror
Of course, terrorists had already declared war. A warfare, not against men of war, that is, the regular military of any given state, but against those who are generally accepted as not engaged in war, the innocent bystander, the student in the café, the housewife on the bus with her two children, the people in the market place buying their fruit and vegetables, the workers in hotels going about their daily jobs.

The terrorist’s warfare was one of fear for all the population, as they ripped apart trains and tubes, buses, market stalls, shop fronts, anywhere where civilians gathered and with maximum impact, and often a second device primed to explode as survivors panicked and ran towards its deadly inevitability.

This was a the warfare of cowards who, when discovered and pursued, hid in schools and hospitals using the weak and vulnerable as human shields.

But this warfare did not begin with G W Bush. In many ways he is one of the victims of a large scale offensive which has been in motion for decades, and which has claimed the lives of countless non-combatants, Muslim and infidel alike, in almost every continent.

A pawn of jihad
G W Bush is not responsible for the increase of recruitment amongst young men, or the radicalisation. His response to the 9/11 attacks and others that led to that day was anticipated. It was played for.

Had he not responded, the militants would have done something else to press his button, or the buttons of succeeding Presidents, to create the environment they desired for retaliation or affirmative response.

Bush may have made mistakes as he tried to solve a difficult and complex problem in as short a time as possible, but it is evident that, in terms of overall modern conflict since the mid-twentieth century, he was a pawn in the hands of the jihadists.

I could point you to a site which has documented almost all terror events by Islam since 1960. It is too extensive to produce here. The sheer volume of atrocities is shocking. I won’t add it here because it is a useful tool and I don’t want it to fall into the wrong hands and be belittled by people who deny that a real and present threat exists, nor to make myself seem hysterical about it. I am not. I’m sure you could research it and locate it for yourselves, anyway.

But there are some things which are being said by commenters stuck in a time-warp who are not facing the reality of the history of jihad, and who have made the violence of 9/11 a political football, making it the focus and central point of the war, to the extent of rewriting history, playing right into the hands of the jihadists, and failing to see that there is a trail of destruction which predates 9/11 considerably.

Tools of jihad
Jihadists have been recruiting for  decades. Each conflict and terror event yields its own supply of recruits to be radicalised. It is a systematic process of escalation. The actual identity or politics of the leader of the response to each terror attack is immaterial to the cause. He or she is just a tool to use in the game of terror.

But the media, being parochial and one-sided politically, will always see the leader of the response as the burden bearer. This is not wrong, particularly, but if the politics of the leader does not match the politics of the commentator the focus will be on the contrasting politics and not on the required response.

This short-sightedness leads the commentary down rabbit holes which take the real issue of how to stop the radicalisation of youth, and how to locate the perpetrators, including the ringleaders, away from a unified and concerted effort to track down those responsible for the real atrocities.

Yes we hate war. We loath combat. There is nothing fair, or right or just about war. But sometimes we are thrust into it by elements who have no interest in justice or fairness. War is always deadly and destructive. We should use it only as a very desperate last resort, if at all.

However, we must lay aside polarising political differences to solve this problem and make a direct and concentrated effort to put into place a war cabinet which prosecutes war, or a peace cabinet which resists war, one or the other, which should include moderate, conscientious Muslim leaders, with the mandate to track down and diminish or eliminate all threats to the well being of the world’s population.

But we must resist trying to lay the blame at the feet of those, like Bush, who have genuinely attempted to solve it, and, in his case, largely and shamefully without the help of a indecisive or fearful world community. If we do not work together, there will be more recruits, more radicalisation, and more terror, regardless of who leads the nation or the world in a counter-offensive.

We should pray God that our enemies are rooted out.

67 thoughts on “Op Ed: Modern jihad recruitment predates 9/11

  1. Steve – rhymes with naive. Yes we should pray God that out enemies be rooted out – the ones which hide in our own hearts and minds. Are you really that naive Steve? As I watched the buildings burning on 9/11, my immediate response was to ask Jesus what my immediate response ought to be.

    He said, “Pray that Muslims have personal encounters with me in the devotions”. A few years later, I met folk who work in Saudi Arabia and double as missionaries – they told me Jesus told them the exact same strategy for getting to Muslims who were READY to convert. You see Steve, it is the Spirit of God which leads men to redemption – God root out, (destroy?) our enemies?

    Are you for real, are you a Christian? I know that George Bush is not and that he is a liar. Just Google image search “George Bush Lubovitch” and see who he really serves, and if you want to get really mixed up, research the links of Mormonism to Mohammedanism and the Mormons who infested the Bush administration and the actual origins of what you think is your religion and that of the Mohammedans and you will find that their book, that of the Mormons and the Christian Bible have been leavened so much so that you end up with people who think that they are NT believers being fooled by such as that which is posted above and showing their true OT roots and beliefs.

    Its not about us and them Steve, or who goes to heaven and who to hell. Read what its says that your valid response to enemies ought to be by the book Steve. Love your enemies, do good to those who despitefully use you, turn the other cheek – just like George and Richard “King Dick” Cheney, the real president of America in the Bush admin. Naive Steve, very naive.

    Besides, the real war of terror is to be seen in Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan etc. I am shaking my head in dismay right now Steve – who is this god of war you serve? Thor? Odin? Shiva? Jehovah?

    Or is the Prince of Peace? Whoever wrote this above article is plainly an enemy of the Cross of Jesus or a complete moron. or maybe just a Mormon….

  2. I wrote it, Ian. It is my opinion following on from discussions on other threads which you were not involved in.

    This will be the last contribution on this thread from you that is conspiratorial or whacky in content. I am considering whether to edit your comments at all or leave them for now.

    I won’t have irrelevant waffle or unrelated drivel every few comments from you, so if you contribute keep it to the point and cut out the conspiracy theories or I will moderate your comments.

    In short, control yourself or be sorted.

  3. The article is actually about who is responsible for recruiting and radicalising militant Islamists.

    Of course they should be rooted out. They should be exposed. Jesus said that every secret thing would be revealed and every hidden thing known.

    It is you that equated rooting out with murder. That was so that you could make your own argument stronger. I merely stated that they should be rooted out, that is, made known, drawn out from their cover, so that they could be removed from society, not from life.

    I am not talking about the moderate Muslim who can be won to God by a visitation, and many have in various places. I am talking specifically about violent, radicalised militants whose only aim is to cause death, mayhem and destruction on a manic scale.

    The question asked in the opinion piece is who is responsible for their radicalisation, and what can be done about it. I’m not interested in some illogical treatise on whether G W Bush is a Mormon or not. It has nothing to do with the questions I am posing.

    Of course we pray for their souls, but there are wheat and tares in the field according to Jesus and the tares will be removed.

  4. Thirdly, Ian, it’s not about Ian Williams and what God says to Ian Williams.

    I couldn’t give a monkeys what you think God says to you if you have no other means but an obscure blog of telling the relevant people, that is, the world government leaders, their affairs you have such spiritual insight into.

    It’s of no use to anyone at all if you just want to rave on in your secluded workshop in the middle of nowhere, content that you’re the only man on planet earth who has an inkling of what is going on spiritually or politically, yet, amazingly, God regularly drops in to give you the low down on current affairs for no particular reason but your own personal gratification, enlightenment and satisfaction.

    It makes no sense for God to tell one individual so much and not send him out into the world to warn, edify or rebuke them.

    If you think you’re so in touch with God and current affairs of the mind and soul why don’t you set up a world tour as the Amazing Prophet Ian and warn everyone about all the judgment, catastrophe, cataclysm and wrath which is coming on the earth, and leave this blog to get on with the mundane business of arguing until we’re blue in the face about interesting anomalies and contradictions of faith and spirituality.

    Or, if you want to be part of the general blog feel, why don’t come down from your otherworldly clouds of delusion which cause you to be so far out in terms of how much you and God have conversed for the last few years that we really can’t hear you very well, and join in on a less eclectically ethereal level?

    This is not the Ian Williams show.

  5. By the way Steve, when I asked Jesus what to do and prayed that prayer, I saw as in a vision a Muslim man meeting Jesus who appeared to him. Has Jesus ever appeared to you Steve? By the tenor and tone of this article, I would warrant not…

    I was talking with Jesus once and said, “Lord… as I began to frame a question and was interrupted with “Why do you call me Lord and yet do not do the thing that I say?” He was talking about His One Commandment to Love one to another, even as He first loved us. Love is the greatest thing and money the least.

    I love you enough to tell you that this article is a load of antichrist deception. This is why I think for the most part that you guys think I don’t know what i am talking about, cos you most plainly do not…but then my older brother is a senior political journalist and my sister a highly educated Communist Psychologist and both were school prefects so I grew up with politics and learned that even though people may be highly educated, that they can be complete idiots too when it comes to understanding Spirit.

    I suppose George (and that monster Clinton before him) was doing Iraq a favor by stealing all their nasty oil and killing off their children, after all, they slaughter them by the millions in the charnel houses called family planning clinics (George Orwell would be impressed).

    2. And I looked and there appeared a white filly, and the one riding on it has a bow, and a wreath was given him, and he emerged to conquer wherever he may conquer.
    3. And as he opened the second seal, I heard the second life form saying, that said, “Come.”
    4. And [there] emerged another filly [that was] red, and to the one riding it was given the power* to [eradicate] peace from the earth and so that they would slaughter each other, and he was given great powers.

  6. The article is just an opinion, Ian. It is a point of view posted to stimulate conversation amongst a group o bloggers!

    There is no deception about it. It is a commentary on current and historical events.

    It has nothing to do with the seven seals, judgments or antichrist deception.

    It is about who is responsible for recruiting, radicalising and releasing Islamic militants into our streets to murder innocent people.

    You’ve been told twice now and warned. Please stick to the topic.

  7. Look, Ian, if you like I’ll compose a special, dedicated Ian Williams post and you can talk to yourself about yourself and what God is telling you to your heart’s content on any subject which takes your fancy at the time.

    But please show some respect to the people who take the time to put together posts and try to stay on thread on topic and discipline yourself.

  8. The CIA has stage managed the radicalization of Islam to create yet another straw man, like Nth Korea is a straw man. I would be more concerned about who is about to collapse the Banking system to institute a world govt. Political conspiracy is endemic, and has been since Adam was a cowboy…

    Funny thing is, I have an Israeli friend who explained to me that they see the Muslims as their brothers and they have no real beef with them, it is Christians they despise – but he also called the Palestinians “dogs” and said that they do not see them the same way as they do the Arabs. He does not see me as a Christian but a lost sheep of Israel on account of the fact that i could speak into his heart and tell him things that could only have been by the Spirit of God, so to him I a not a Christian but a fellow Jew.

    It is punishable by death for a Goy to read the Talmud. The Jews gave you your religion just as they did the Mormons and Muslims. They are masters of deception, which is why Paul warned about their influence – I mean, who should know like Paul should know already? Pharisee of the Pharisee?

    But they got in and they messed with the scriptures and they pretty much rule and run the world along with some rich white folks. But it is they who say that they are Jews and ARE NOT and do lie These are the real enemies of the Cross of Jesus, the dogs of the circumcision, the messengers of satan, these are they of whom Paul warned with tears.

    Here is a faith challenge for you Steve: ask the holy Spirit to show you everything that you believe that is a lie or not the truth – lay it all you know on the altar and I will too and let’s invite Jesus to burn up all that is not of Him. Agreed?

    Cabal, an association between religious, political, or tribal officials to further their own ends, usually by intrigue
    Conspiracy (civil), an agreement between persons to deceive, mislead, or defraud others of their legal rights, or to gain an unfair advantage
    Conspiracy (crime), an agreement between persons to break the law in the future, in some cases having committed an act to further that agreement
    Conspiracy (political), the overthrow of a government

    Hmmm, sounds just like what some (powerful) people do….

  9. This has nothing to do with the post, Ian. Nothing. It is just your latest thought lines. And no I will not be manipulated by your foolish challenge. It’s no better than a Mormon asking if you have a burning feeling in your bosom.

    I will remove your comments if you do not say something specific on the topic in the post.

    Last warning.

  10. Steve what perturbed me was the injunction to pray to root out our enemies. Did not Jesus say that a man’s enemies shall be they of his own household? That He prepares a manna-feast for us in the presence of our own (inner) enemies? A quick topical read of the Gospels and New Testament amply illustrate the attitude Jesus maintains toward His and our enemies.

    Paul was warning with tears a mere 20 or so years from Jesus having ascended to the Father of wolves in sheep’s clothing who would twist and change and pervert the gospel from a message of freedom to one of enslavement to Judaism. Islam is merely modified Babylonian Judaism, as is much Christian theology, and Babylonian Judaism is to the husband wife relationship of Christ and His congregation as a BJ is to making love.

    I utterly agree with you Steve, that those who have instigated, encouraged and fomented Islamic Jihad ought to be rooted out – but I think that you will find that they are either Satanic Semitic Serpents, and or Wealthy, White and Worldly. To establish just who is behind this, look at the end results and ask yourself, in the sage words of Dr Michael Parenti, “Simply ask yourself, who benefits?” – who is the beneficiary in the matter – who gains? Look at Libya post Gaddafi or Iraq post Saddam…and then perhaps ponder what America may look like post Obama…

    To quote James:
    4. Do you not know that adulterers whose compassion is only for this world, represent enmity towards God? If thus some people wish to be compassionate towards this world, then they are the enemy of God.

    And Steve, I should hate to be banned or blocked, as I have learned so much through this forum. The Bible is like that, it is a book of blunders, balls-ups and bounders – so that we may learn thereby.

    By the way, an Israeli I know was chosen for special training as he looked so Arabic – his name is Amir which is Arabic for Prince. He speaks fluent Arabic and knows all their customs and mores – and he deliberately travels Emirates as he loves being treated like an Arab prince. He can switch to being an Arab in a heart beat, and he could kill you with his bare hands just as fast if he really wanted. Will the real enemy please stand up so we know who we are really fighting?

    What you guys do not get is the whole story is one story – that it is indeed all about Israel and Jesus – that it is the end of the age and that it is all coming to a Head. That in the end it is merely the story of a feuding family of half-brothers, Isaac and Ishmael, and the siblings Esau and Jacob, and that all the rest is merely a sideshow to the main event.

    And you might want to study the connections between the so-called 9/11 highjackers and the Mormon Church. I can give you the links if you like. And what about that suicide bomber training facility in Cuba – Guantanamo?

  11. I don’t want it to fall into the wrong hands and be belittled by people who deny that a real and present threat exists, nor to make myself seem hysterical about it

    An really great article Steve, well written, however you’re decision not to publish evidence of the mass of jihadist atrocities pre-9/11 is dissapointing. Makes it difficult to respond.

    Having said that, I agree with you, jihad and terror attacks were occurring it seemed at an almost weekly pace in places all over the world where US interest were to be found.

    What I disagree with is that it is primarily because of Islam (not that this is your claim in the article, but you have claimed it elsewhere), but rather that Islam is used as a tool by radical politics. It is about power and money, not faith, although the ordinary foot soldier is taught to believe it is.

    This is much more sinister.

    This can also be found in western communities however the Christian faith is used. It seems however that our western society has developed an intolerance for violence that the Arab world has not.

    Returning violence is not the answer.

    Bringing people to justice…within the bounds of our justice systems, paying due respect to the law and sovereignty of other nations…is vital; for the US and for all other nations wishing to be free from terrorism as a means for political change.

  12. But we must resist trying to lay the blame at the feet of those, like Bush, who have genuinely attempted to solve it,

    IU think that is a naive view of what GWE Bush was trying to do – he was protecting US interests – he cared not one little bit about trying to ‘solve’ the issues. His actions and the actions of all those who fight fire with fire actullay turn up the heat.

    I think this article actually does open up an interesting conversatoin about wether or not it can be said that there is a peculiarly ‘Christian’ response to terrorism, and what that would be?

  13. I’ll give the web address on the understanding that I don’t hold to all their views or methodology, but the interest point for me was the well documented timeline of militant terror events. It is a highly controversial site, and, again, I stress, not reflective of my own views, so, rather than go to the front page, I’ll point you to the pages with the timeline, which is quite an eye opener.


    I also didn’t want this to be a distraction to the main points made in the opinion piece.

  14. Well, why not, Greg. The whole continuity of the discussion has been hijacked anyway.

    But if you’re not shocked at the level of activity since 1960 you’re practically a dhimmi already.

  15. Would that site have included western sponsored terrorism such as by the Mujihadeen against the soviets which has spawned the chechen war.

  16. I dunno, but this would be hilarious if it wasn’t so serious!


    Since last Sunday, May 19, rioters have taken to the streets of Stockholm’s suburbs every night, torching cars, schools, stores, office buildings and residential complexes. Yesterday, a police station in Rågsved, a suburb four kilometers south of Stockholm, was attacked and set on fire.

    But while the Stockholm riots keep spreading and intensifying, Swedish police have adopted a tactic of non-interference. ”Our ambition is really to do as little as possible,” Stockholm Chief of Police Mats Löfving explained to the Swedish newspaper Expressen on Tuesday.

    ”We go to the crime scenes, but when we get there we stand and wait,” elaborated Lars Byström, the media relations officer of the Stockholm Police Department. ”If we see a burning car, we let it burn if there is no risk of the fire spreading to other cars or buildings nearby. By doing so we minimize the risk of having rocks thrown at us.”

    Swedish parking laws, however, continue to be rigidly enforced despite the increasingly chaotic situation. Early Wednesday, while documenting the destruction after a night of rioting in the Stockholm suburb of Alby, a reporter from Fria Tider observed a parking enforcement officer writing a ticket for a burnt-out Ford.

    When questioned, the officer explained that the ticket was issued because the vehicle lacked a tag showing its time of arrival. The fact that the vehicle had been effectively destroyed – its windshield smashed and the interior heavily damaged by fire – was irrelevant according to the meter maid, who asked Fria Tider’s photographer to destroy the photos he had taken. Her employer, the parking company P-service, refused to comment when Fria Tider contacted them on Wednesday afternoon.


  17. Well lets face it ,you would have to disassociate yourself with Muhammad and his words to get out of this mess.A highly controversial site?,mehhh.Seems more like Islamic teaching simply speaks for itself.They just don’t want you to know it.

  18. Are the opponents of the response to the 9/11 atrocities (for there was more than one on the day the twin towers were brought down) saying that there was no Islamic militance before this momentous series of events? Are they claiming that the US was responsible for subsequent recruitment of jihadists and mujahideen?

    No, we weren’t and I stated explicity that we weren’t saying that in the previous thread. It is a lot easier to argue against something when you setup a fictional opponent’s argument first.

    What I did say was that the incidence of Terrorist attacks has increased 8-fold since the War on Terror, and that this was predicted by security agencies including the CIA before the “War” began. As the wars wind up the rate of attacks is dropping to approximately pre-war levels. The War on terror has been a complete failure on its own terms.

    Apart from this, there are a few other problems. Firstly “Terror” is not an enemy that you can attack, it is a criminal act or tactic. If you declare war on terror you will be continuously at war, for terrorism will always be used.

    Secondly terrorism is a subjective term – one man’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter. All nations including the US have used and supported terrorism at some stages of their history. There is no generally agreed definition of terrorism.

    Thirdly calling it a war plays right into the hands of the misguided terrorists. They love to think they are soldiers in some war, instead of criminals. These attacks should be handled by Police and security forces as criminal acts.

  19. @Steve. Not sure if you know, but the Muslims in Sweden have made lots of attacks on Jews in Sweden.
    Jews were also post-war immigrants but they didn’t cause any problems. Many of them are leaving Sweden now though.

    Hopefully someday Bones, Greg and Wazza can convince more Muslims that Islam is a religion of peace.
    Some of them haven’t got the message yet.

    But that no doubt is the fault of the Swedes – they forgot to teach Islam as well as grant visas, provide education and welfare payments. Silly old Swedes!

  20. So, wazza, you’d send in police to arrest dead people who fly aircraft into high rise buildings!

    one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter

    Yeah, right, like this one…

    The police are dealing with this case. Over 500 investigators following up the leads.

    In the US, after 9/11, they appointed Homeland Security.

    Most terror acts are dealt with by civil authorities in most nations.

    It is the poor administration of multiculturalism in some cities which is causing the bulk of present problems. There needs to be a better outworking of integration, but if the people are not willing and want to form enclaves isolated from the rest of society it is always going to be an issue. Leadership is required.

  21. @Wazza. You may be right about the merit of the use of the term “war on terror”.

    But police and security forces didn’t stop 9/11. I also agree that countries need to continually judge the best way to prevent terror – and invading and occupying a country won’t always be the best.

    But, Obama is basically claiming that while that terrorism is not completely defeated, terrorist groups have lost a lot of their effectiveness. And that’s after a lot of terrorists have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    You see terror attacks have increased 8 fold. But you don’t know what they would have been like without military intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq. Are you aware than many plans were thwarted because of what was stopped in Afghanistan?

    9/11 didn’t happen because of…the US response to 9/11!
    Perhaps the US should have believed that 9/11 was an inside job or the work of Mossad, and not gone after al Queda or Osama?

    And all the Bush bashers are either ignorant or too young to remember Bill Clinton and his dealings with Osama and Hussein.

  22. “What I did say was that the incidence of Terrorist attacks has increased 8-fold since the War on Terror, and that this was predicted by security agencies including the CIA before the “War” began. As the wars wind up the rate of attacks is dropping to approximately pre-war levels. The War on terror has been a complete failure on its own terms.”

    So ….has the CIA said what the level of attacks would have been since the “War on Terror” if the US just thought. “Well maybe they are freedom fighters, and lets first spend two years checking to see if the World Trade Center was blown up by ……a fringe group within the CIA? Cheney’s secret bunch of evil engineers?”

    Thousands of terrorists have been killed, their organizations crippled. You need to prove that the terrorists would have just given up, or started being nice with your….strategy, which you still haven’t mentioned.


    I object to the portrayal of Bush as some evil man who deliberately lied and was after oil only.
    Unless Bones and Greg are now prophets like Ian and know everything.

    And your man Obama is still using drones. And boasted about killing BIn Ladin. I don’t see that the Muslims are any more in love with Obama than they were with Bush.

    But I don’t see any attacks on him.

    But enough politics. I’ve read great accounts of Muslims who found Christ. the one about Arafat’s bodyguard is a good read, and gives a lot of insight into the attitudes between Muslims in different countries.
    spoiler – The Muslims in the Middle East don’t love their Palestinian brothers the way you liberals imagine.

    Preach the gospel to Muslims before they get radicalized and preach to Catholics, Anglicans and nominal Christians before they convert to Islam.

    Someone who receives Jesus and is living for him won’t strap bombs to himself and target innocent women and children.

  23. I’d agree with you that the term ‘war on terror’ was misplaced, and I thought so at the time. I brought it out in the opinion piece because it reflected the emotive atmosphere of the time, when people were looking for some way to express their dismay at what had just taken place on US soil.

    It was as if the entire Western world, if not everyone, had been violated, and there was a strong urge by most people for decisive leadership on the issue. That leadership should have come from the UN, but the US was persistently thwarted and frustrated by the reluctance of the world community to act or make a decision of any kind.

    But the terror was present long before 9/11. It was just such a significant event that it became a rallying point for many people.

    Probably the shame of it all was that the world didn’t act sooner.

  24. And all the Bush bashers are either ignorant or too young to remember Bill Clinton and his dealings with Osama and Hussein.

    Actually I remember his Dad and Rumsfield selling Hussein WMDs and military hardware to be used on his own people.

    And don’t mention the Mujahadeen. Wow didn’t that come to bit them on the arse.

    Or Israel’s support of Hamas over Fatah.

    Or the west’s support of Islamic groups to bring down secular Arab governments.

    Maybe some people are too ignorant or too young to remember that.

  25. This isn’t so old.

    Chechen Terrorists and the Neocons

    The revelation that the family of the two suspects in the Boston Marathon bombings was from Chechnya prompted new speculation about the attack as Islamic terrorism. Less discussed was the history of U.S. neocons supporting Chechen terrorists as a strategy to weaken Russia, as ex-FBI agent Coleen Rowley recalls.

    By Coleen Rowley

    I almost choked on my coffee listening to neoconservative Rudy Giuliani pompously claim on national TV that he was surprised about any Chechens being responsible for the Boston Marathon bombings because he’s never seen any indication that Chechen extremists harbored animosity toward the U.S.; Guiliani thought they were only focused on Russia.

    Giuliani knows full well how the Chechen “terrorists” proved useful to the U.S. in keeping pressure on the Russians, much as the Afghan mujahedeen were used in the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan from 1980 to 1989. In fact, many neocons signed up as Chechnya’s “friends,” including former CIA Director James Woolsey.

    For instance, see this 2004 article in the UK Guardian, entitled, “The Chechens’ American friends: The Washington neocons’ commitment to the war on terror evaporates in Chechnya, whose cause they have made their own.”

    Author John Laughland wrote: “the leading group which pleads the Chechen cause is the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya (ACPC). The list of the self-styled ‘distinguished Americans’ who are its members is a roll call of the most prominent neoconservatives who so enthusiastically support the ‘war on terror.’

    “They include Richard Perle, the notorious Pentagon adviser; Elliott Abrams of Iran-Contra fame; Kenneth Adelman, the former US ambassador to the UN who egged on the invasion of Iraq by predicting it would be ‘a cakewalk’; Midge Decter, biographer of Donald Rumsfeld and a director of the rightwing Heritage Foundation; Frank Gaffney of the militarist Centre for Security Policy; Bruce Jackson, former US military intelligence officer and one-time vice-president of Lockheed Martin, now president of the US Committee on Nato; Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute, a former admirer of Italian fascism and now a leading proponent of regime change in Iran; and R. James Woolsey, the former CIA director who is one of the leading cheerleaders behind George Bush’s plans to re-model the Muslim world along pro-US lines.”

    The ACPC later sanitized “Chechnya” to “Caucasus” so it’s rebranded itself as the “American Committee for Peace in the Caucasus.”

    Of course, Giuliani also just happens to be one of several neocons and corrupt politicians who took hundreds of thousands of dollars from MEK sources when that Iranian group was listed by the U.S. State Department as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO). The money paid for these American politicians to lobby (illegally under the Patriot Act) U.S. officials to get MEK off the FTO list.

    Down the Rabbit Hole

    Alice in Wonderland is an understatement if you understand the full reality of what’s going on. But if you can handle going down the rabbit hole even further, check out prominent former New York Times journalist (and author of The Commission book) Phil Shenon’s discovery of the incredible “Terrible Missed Chance” a couple of years ago.

    Shenon’s discovery involved key information that the FBI and the entire “intelligence” community mishandled and covered up, not only before 9/11 but for a decade afterward. And it also related to the exact point of my 2002 “whistleblower memo” that led to the post 9/11 DOJ-Inspector General investigation about FBI failures and also partially helped launch the 9/11 Commission investigation.

    But still the full truth did not come out, even after Shenon’s blockbuster discovery in 2011 of the April 2001 memo linking the main Chechen leader Ibn al Khattab to Osama bin Laden. The buried April 2001 memo had been addressed to FBI Director Louis Freeh (another illegal recipient of MEK money, by the way!) and also to eight of the FBI’s top counter-terrorism officials.

    Similar memos must have been widely shared with all U.S. intelligence in April 2001. Within days of terrorist suspect Zaccarias Moussaoui’s arrest in Minnesota on Aug. 16, 2001, French intelligence confirmed that Moussaoui had been fighting under and recruiting for Ibn al-Khattab, raising concerns about Moussaoui’s flight training.

    Yet FBI Headquarters officials balked at allowing a search of his laptop and other property, still refusing to recognize that: 1) the Chechen separatists were themselves a “terrorist group” for purposes of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act’s (FISA) legal requirement of acting “on behalf of a foreign power” and 2) that Moussaoui’s link to Ibn al Khattab inherently then linked him to bin Laden’s well-recognized Al Qaeda group for purposes of FISA (the point in my memo).

    This all occurred during the same time that CIA Director George Tenet and other counter-terrorism officials — and don’t forget that Tenet was apprised of the information about Moussaoui’s arrest around Aug. 24, 2001 — told us their “hair was on fire” over the prospect of a major terrorist attack and “the system was blinking red.”

    The post 9/11 investigations launched as a result of my 2002 “whistleblower memo” did conclude that a major mistake, which could have prevented or reduced 9/11, was the lack of recognition of al Khattab’s Chechen fighters as a “terrorist group” for purposes of FISA.

    As far as I know, the several top FBI officials, who were the named recipients of the April 2001 intelligence memo entitled “Bin Laden/Ibn Khattab Threat Reporting” establishing how the two leaders were “heavily entwined,” brushed it off by mostly denying they had read the April 2001 memo (which explains why the memo had to be covered up as they attempted to cover up other embarrassing info).

    There are other theories, of course, as to why U.S. officials could not understand or grasp this “terrorist link.” These involve the U.S.’s constant operating of “friendly terrorists,” perhaps even al Khattab himself (and/or those around him), on and off, opportunistically, for periods of time to go against “enemy” nations, i.e., the Soviet Union, and regimes we don’t’ like.

    Shifting Lines

    But officials can get confused when their former covert “assets” turn into enemies themselves. That’s what has happened with al-Qaeda-linked jihadists in Libya and Syria, fighters who the U.S. government favored in their efforts to topple the Qaddafi and Assad regimes, respectively. These extremists are prone to turn against their American arms suppliers and handlers once the common enemy is defeated.

    The same MO exists with the U.S. and Israel currently collaborating with the Iranian MEK terrorists who have committed assassinations inside Iran. The U.S. government has recently shifted the MEK terrorists from the ranks of “bad” to “good” terrorists as part of a broader campaign to undermine the Iranian government. For details, see “Our (New) Terrorists, the MEK: Have We Seen This Movie Before?”

    Giuliani and his ilk engage, behind the scenes, in all these insidious operations but then blithely turn to the cameras to spew their hypocritical propaganda fueling the counterproductive “war on terror” for public consumption, when that serves their interests. Maybe this explains Giuliani’s amazement (or feigned ignorance) on Friday morning after the discovery that the family of the alleged Boston Marathon bombers was from Chechnya.

    My observations are not meant to be a direct comment about the motivations of the two Boston bombing suspects whose thinking remains unclear. It’s still very premature and counterproductive to speculate on their motives.

    But the lies and disinformation that go into the confusing and ever-morphing notion of “terrorism” result from the U.S. Military Industrial Complex (and its little brother, the “National Security Surveillance Complex”) and their need to control the mainstream media’s framing of the story.

    So, a simplistic narrative/myth is put forth to sustain U.S. wars. From time to time, those details need to be reworked and some of the facts “forgotten” to maintain the storyline about bad terrorists “who hate the U.S.” when, in reality, the U.S. Government may have nurtured the same forces as “freedom fighters” against various “enemies.”

    The bottom line is to never forget that “a poor man’s war is terrorism while a rich man’s terrorism is war” – and sometimes those lines cross for the purposes of big-power politics. War and terrorism seem to work in sync that way.

    Coleen Rowley is a retired FBI agent and former chief division counsel in Minneapolis. She’s now a dedicated peace and justice activist and board member of the Women Against Military Madness.

  26. Yeah well I blame the Roman Catholic popes declaring crusades on Saladin, or something…

    …or did Mohammed have anything to do with it when he sacked Mecca?

  27. I mean, how far back do you want to go, Bones?

    “a poor man’s war is terrorism while a rich man’s terrorism is war”

    Ol’ Bin Laden wasn’t exactly broke, was he!

    That is one of the great fallacies put out by the inventors of the ‘neocon’ tag. ‘Neocon’. Hilarious!

    But you know it was never the fault of Islamic fundamentalists.

    Blame the US. Blame the neocons.

  28. US is supporting terrorism in Iran. I suppose that’s good terrorism.

    ‘Our (New) Terrorists’ the MEK: Have We Seen This Movie Before?

    By fast forwarding 30 years and changing one vowel, (MAK to MEK) we see history repeating almost exactly. There’s ample evidence that Iranian MEK terrorists, “our new terrorists,” are responsible for conducting assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists. U.S. officials confirmed the charges leveled by Iran’s leaders as well as the fact that the killings and bombings in Iran were financed, trained and armed by Israel’s secret service. In an exclusive report, NBC reported that:
    The group, the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, has long been designated as a terrorist group by the United States, accused of killing American servicemen and contractors in the 1970s and supporting the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran before breaking with the Iranian mullahs in 1980. The attacks, which have killed five Iranian nuclear scientists since 2007 and may have destroyed a missile research and development site, have been carried out in dramatic fashion, with motorcycle-borne assailants often attaching small magnetic bombs to the exterior of the victims’ cars. — From NBC Rock Center exclusive report February, 2012

    In April of this year, Seymour Hersh reported in the New Yorker article “Our Men in Iran” that members of MEK were also being trained in Nevada by U.S. Joint Special Operation Command for covert actions to topple the Iranian government.

    The following comments are from former U.S. security experts Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett’s excellent analysis of the highly politicized flip-flop, “By Delisting the MEK, the Obama Administration is taking the Moral and Strategic Bankruptcy of America’s Iran Policy to a New Low”:

    US policy change on banned Iranian group came after extraordinary fundraising operation to transform its image. Only a few years ago, US authorities were arresting pro-MEK activists. To the US government, the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran (MEK) was a terrorist group alongside al-Qaida, Hamas and the Farc in Colombia. The MEK landed on the list in 1997 with American blood on its hands and by allying itself with Saddam Hussein along with a long list of bombings inside Iran.

    But the organisation is regarded very differently by a large number of members of Congress, former White House officials and army generals, and even one of the US’s most renowned reporters, Carl Bernstein. They see the MEK as a victim of US double dealings with the regime in Tehran and a legitimate alternative to the Iran’s Islamic government.

    That difference is in no small part the result of a formidable fundraising operation and campaign to transform the MEK’s image led by more than 20 Iranian American organisations across the US. These groups and their leaders have spent millions of dollars on donations to members of Congress, paying Washington lobby groups and hiring influential politicians and officials, including two former CIA directors, as speakers.

    In a highly sensitive political game, MEK supporters have succeeded in pressing the state department into removing the group from the list of terrorist organisations after winning a court order requiring a decision to be made on the issue before the end of this month. But its supporters were forced to tread a careful path so as not to cross anti-terrorism laws.

    Only a few years ago, the US authorities were arresting pro-MEK activists and freezing the assets of front groups for “material support for a terrorist organisation”. Now members of Congress openly praise the group in apparent contradiction of the anti-terrorism legislation many of them supported. Nearly 100 members of the House of Representatives backed a resolution calling on the US government to drop the MEK from the terrorist list.


  29. In case you’ve forgotten, the Boston bombings weren’t that long ago. I was surprised to hear they were Chechen given the US support for Chechen Independence.

    But you can’t tame a savage dog when you’ve trained it to be savage.

  30. I am critcal of Obama continuing (and expanding) the drone attacks. He has made many ex-judicial killings, including one US citizen and for that I condemn him. He has failed to close the festering hole in the US moral conscience that is Guantanamo, even though he said he would. He has explicitly stated that he makes the decisions to kill the terrorists himself, which while honest is a very poor example to set to the rest of the world. By unilaterally deciding to invade, torture and kill enemies the US has given every tin-pot country the implicit right to do the same.

    The cycle of violence has so much history that we can never say who started it. Afghanistan has been the target of so many invasion attempts since the time of Caesar that it now largely defines itself as a nation that is constantly at war with outsiders. The British got their arses thoroughly kicked in the 19th C and will now leave having achieved nothing of any consequence except giving its confused thugs something to rally around, and its confused politicians a fear to campaign around.

    Obviously the cycle didnt start with 9/11. The US supported the Taliban and Saddam when they thought they could advance their interests, against the Soviets and Iran. Im not saying the US and Britain are the cause of all the problems, just that you have to go back hundreds of years to analyse all the causes.

  31. So what you’re saying then is that it wasn’t all Bush’s fault after all.

    Your problem is, Bones, that your sources are always US neolibs (you like that one?), and you will always get a US perspective on everything because, if you’ve ever been to the US, you will know that most US citizens know diddly squat about the rest of the world, only about their own world, that is, the US.

    So most of your reports come from the neolib side of the political divide that is cocooned under the stars and stripes.

  32. I dont have evidence that the US government knew about or helped the terrorists on 9/11

    But they certainly did on the the first 9/11 . Sept 11 th 1973 they supported the Pinochet coup in Chile. A ruthless dictator and terrorist was given support and comfort by the US to the tune of $10M

    The US has no moral authority to condemn terrorism. The country was started by terrorists and it has supported terrorists for most of its history.

  33. Terrorism is a political weapon.

    It’s been used by the US and will continue to be used to support US interests.

    That’s a fact. .

    I look forward to your denials that the US isn’t supporting MEK (one of the terrorist organisations that Hussein was supposedly harbouring = surprise, surprise), Chechen rebels, Mujahadeen.

    Oh but it was so long ago is the mantra.

    Someone once said “You reap what you sow” and “If you live by the sword….”

  34. Well there you go. It wasn’t all G W Bush’s fault after all. It goes way back when. But it’s all the fault of the US of A. The Islamists were the unwitting pawns of the imperial aims of the American continent.

    Mohammed himself was radicalised by a Sioux Indian from Minnesota financed by the CIA (Combined Indian Activists), who persuaded him to raid Mecca rather than declare peace.

  35. Of course Steve, unable to provide a coherent argument or find a spurious scripture, has to rely on the old self-denial and stick his fingers in his ears and put his undies on his head.

    The US will support anyone who they think serve US interests. Even Al Qaeda.

  36. I don’t think you can accuse me of hiding anything, Bones.

    You’re just yaddayaddaing about neolib opinion pieces which rely heavily on its own self-promoting reincarnation of history.

    The article was actually saying Bush was not responsible for recruitment and radicalisation of jihadists, that they already existed, and would use any event, including 9/11, to further their cause amongst those they could draw into their net. Everything you and wazza have said so far confirms this.

    You really are naive if you think that US use of this group or that group was responsible for their formation in the first place. backing ay terror organisation against another is fraught with danger, but it doesn’t make anyone but the terror group responsible for its formation. That they have used the US to further their aims in not disputed.

    In fact, that was the entire point of the article. To demonstrate the exploitation of any and all action of the West in the furtherance of the cause of jihad.

  37. I never said that Washington was responsible for recruitment of terrorists. I said the War on Iraq was based on a lie.

    It’s funny that Clinton was impeached for getting a blowjob from a consenting adult. Yet Bush condemns thousands to die based upon lies is feted as a hero.

    We can see the priorities of Americans.

  38. Yeah, no one denies that jihadists existed before Dubya Bush. If you want to claim victory on that point, go ahead.

    The US however after 9/11 attacked the wrong country, on a trumped up pre-text and ended up making the world even more unsafe and prone to terrorist attacks. Wouldn’t you agree?

  39. Well why is it a matter of condemnation of this US act or that US act? Do you really think they are seeking to dominate world affairs or protect their own interests? I think the latter. Maybe they go about things bullishly.

    The American way has always been to nuke ’em first and ask questions later. John Wayne on steroids. None too subtle, I must admit, and often creating a bigger mess than before. But on other occasions, definitely useful allies to have around in a conflict.

    The fact has been for many years that Islam has been divisive, where other religions have managed, for the most part, to coexist, even if there are occasionally tensions. Pakistan, anyone? They have seen the US as the great satan, the great supporter of their mortal enemy Israel, the main reason they have been unable to wipe Israel from the face of the map.

    So of course the US is targeted, and will be, until some weak President backs down from any support of Israel, which probably won’t happen any time soon, although Obama showed signs of weakness early on.

  40. “By Delisting the MEK, the Obama Administration is taking the Moral and Strategic Bankruptcy of America’s Iran Policy to a New Low”

    Okay, so now Obama is an evil man too. And as Wazza, says you have to go back hundreds of years etc etc.

    It’s really easy to sit back with hindsight and look at all this and blame countries for backing bad people or changing their minds later – but that’s life!.

    Sometimes the enemy of your enemy is your friend – at a point in time. And later people change sides.
    That’s always happened. The Japanese learned military strategy from the Germans and then fought on the British side against their former teachers in WW1. Then things changed next time didn’t they?

    Will you attack the US and England for being allied with Russia in WW2?
    It was lucky for England that Hitler decided to attack Russia – great news. But that doesn’t mean the British or the US or me as a Christian supported their terrible rapes when they came back into Berlin.
    And then the Russians later ….etc etc.

    So, yeah. What can you do? If things go badly where I live, Japanese might be on the side of US defending against China – a generation after the US wasn’t happy with the Japanese killing and maiming in China.

    Yes, it’s endless. But going back centuries doesn’t really help anything. Unless you want the US and Britain. to become enemies again.
    Re chechen and the Afghanistan and Russia etc – yeah, so what have we learned? The US didn’t want the USSR getting stronger and pushing into more countries. They were a little nasty remember. So now, we have the taliban. All you can say is that we have learned that no, lots of Muslims don’t like the USSR or the US or anyone. They are incredibly difficult to deal with aren’t they.

    But the US will get criticized no matter what. Do nothing and if Muslims are slaughtering people, everyone says “Why isn’t the US doing anything?” Help the Muslims fight against the USSR when they are invaded (for what reason?) but then if they later harbor terrorists who attack the US, the US can’t do anything?
    If the US doesn’t do anything supporting the Arab spring, they get attacked. But later if dictators are overthrown then we find that the new guys are worse than the people they deposed.

    But on this site….all you hear is how terrible the US is. Even though they saved your butts in WW2, and Europes.

    I wouldn’t want to be President of the US and I don’t know which of you lot I’d vote for and think could solve the worlds problems anyway. I think Bush did what he thought was honestly in the interests of the US (and Greg, that’s what Presidents of the US sometimes think about…), and I think Obama while bashing Bush and getting elected has realized once becoming Commander in Chief that the world suddenly won’t start loving the US, and that maybe they did get some good info from the people in Gantanamo Bay.

    But here’s what I don’t understand. Do you guys really think you are helping the terrorists and future terrorists of this world by filling the internet with the sins of the Christian Church, and Pastors and pasting reams of info about how evil the US is, and how people who blow people up are wrong…BUT – maybe could be called freedom fighters and are made that way because of the US?

    This beheader —was born in the UK in a hard working Catholic family. He wasn’t a poor downtrodden Muslim from Nigeria. He wasn’t bombed in Afghanistan, and he wasn’t kicked off his land in Palestine. He liked soccer and had lots of white British “mates”. he even got into University. What percentage of the world’s population go to University and live in student accomodation. So, he wasn’t oppressed. He probably; knew nothing about world affairs and politics or the history of WW1 or 2 let alone US geopolitics and the intricacies of international relations that we twice his age and education are learning everyday.

    But, he converted to Islam and joined the wrong crowd (I have no problem admitting that he didn’t go to the main mosque and hang out with the regular joe muslims in England). But then what happened. Over years his sole information about Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel the US etc was from extreme anti-US sources. And no doubt watched lots of jihad youtubes. And slowly got more and more into a narrow world.

    In the end he still had courage and he still had some moral framework. He wasn’t afraid to die, and was willing to keep his killing to a soldier and police – and no he didn’t kill the women when he could have, and while other more extreme people would have.

    But, if you read this website and C3 watchers and groupsects, you’d be forgiven for thinking that charismatics, pentecostals, mega churches were the real enemy in this world. If he was thinking about exploring Christianity and came here, he would have just read all about how sinful Pastors are and concluded that there were no answers in churches. But, would he and Drummer Rigby really have been worse off if he had joined C3? Even if he did tithe? Even if he did buy DVDs of HIllsong worship?

    It really beats me why so much time is spent on the evils of Pringle and Houston as if they are the biggest problem in the world.

    I don’t see any Catholic or Anglican churches booming and getting young people in. If that guy had joined a mega church do you really think he’d have cut someone’s head off? even if the theology wasn’t as intellectual or perfect as you think?

    So, how many people have we shared the gospel with lately? Brought any tough young guys to The Lord recently? Seen any young guys looking for a cause come to know Christ and start trying to live a purpose driven life. Man even if that listened to Hillsong worship on his ipod on his way to a Joyce Meyers conference after hearing Osteen give him tips for his best life, he and his parents, and Drummer Rigby and family would be better off.

    But if everytime that guy looked at the internet all he was confronted with was how evil Bush and UK policy was and how fake and hypocritical churches were and how badly done by Muslims all over the world are, well, maybe it’s no surprise he decided to become a terrorist…I mean freedom fighter….I mean -well, someone who thought he was doing good in the world by beheading a soldier in broad daylight in the country his parents came to hoping to give him a better life.

    It’s a crazy world. and an even crazier internet.

  41. Great rant, Q! If the only thing young men like this are radicalised into is giving their tithe, worshiping God, praying in tongues, having a successful life, being part of a church-attending family, and being friendly with workmates and neighbours the world would be a safer place!

  42. @wazza. I don’t know that it’s true that the world is more dangerous. We can’t prove either way because this isn’t a chemistry experiment.
    I’m not opposed to regime change – I think it would be great if the poor people of North Korea could be liberated from that ratbag family. Where the US gets it wrong is overestimating what it takes after you land the troops on the ground. As soon as victory was declared in Iraq, I thought it was premature.

    If I were running things….here we go, I would be doing things more Obama’s style. Unlike you, I support him with his use of drones. Use the least amount of money, with the least amount of risk to your own soldiers. Pay elite soldiers mega bucks and give them the best resources you have to pinpoint the exact people who have or will wage attacks on your own country. If that means that in doing that, sometimes innocent people will be killed, then that’s what it might take. But spending trillions on supporting tens or hundreds of thousands of troops in a foreign country only to leave and see it all go up in smoke again can’t be the best policy – though Hillary Clinton and many democrats thought it was at the time, and they are probably smarter than me.
    I think that if there is a united country that is totally smashed you can rebuild something – like was done in Germany and Japan – and look at the peace there’s been for the last 70 years. But you can’t just occupy a country like Iraq and Afghanistan where competing groups have the potential to keep bombing you for decades.

    Just like Bush wasn’t just some evil guy who enjoyed killing people for the fun of it, I think Obama is trying to do the right thing with his approach I can’t see that the US has the option of not trying to kill any terroistsa tall. do you?

  43. @Bones. re Rios Montt. I didn’t know anything about him until you mentioned him. Based on the little that I’ve read (no deeper than Wikipedia), it sounds like you are right in condemning evangelical’s support of him.
    But I don’t know enough about it, and don’t know enough about what they actually knew about him and whether they knew what he was doing – and how responsible he was for the worst. I’ve tried to see articles from Christian websites on the news but haven’t found anything. Which like you said, could possibly be very telling.

    If he is guilty as charged, and I have no reason to doubt that, I think Christian leaders who supported him should make public statements. Sure. (I’m no Pat Robertson fan btw).
    Bill Clinton apologized over the US support of his regime and that seems fair – from what I’ve read.

    Sometimes Christian leaders get deceived. And are probably easily deceived. But I’m glad I don’t have to make public statements on issues like that with so little knowledge. another reason why I like anonymity. I see that he is appealing his sentence and would be interested to hear his defence.

  44. @Ian. re your Naive Steve and praying for Muslims comment.

    I totally agree that we should be praying for Muslims.Keeping love and praying that they meet Jesus. I’m all for that.

  45. It’s really easy to sit back with hindsight and look at all this and blame countries for backing bad people or changing their minds later – but that’s life!.

    Professor William Odom, formerly President Reagan’s NSA Director wrote:

    As many critics have pointed, out, terrorism is not an enemy. It is a tactic. Because the United States itself has a long record of supporting terrorists and using terrorist tactics, the slogans of today’s war on terrorism merely makes the United States look hypocritical to the rest of the world.[21]

    I mean if it was an Iranian scientist beheaded and disembowelled on the streets of Tehran by the MEK, it wouldn’t be so bad.

  46. We now have the ludicrous situation where we (Australia) and the US are at war with Al Qaeda in Afghanistan while the US is funding Al Qaeda in Syria.

    Rand Paul: Senate Is Arming Al-Qaeda and Rushing to War in Syria

    “This is an important moment. You will be funding, today, the allies of al Qaeda.”

    That was the declaration Senator Rand Paul made on May 21 during a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Paul’s comments were directed at his colleagues, nearly all of whom voted to send arms to Syrian rebels.

    Senators Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) co-sponsored the bill that authorizes “critical support to the Syrian opposition through provision of military assistance, training, and additional humanitarian support.”

    There’s some nasty and sickening stuff happening in Syria that makes London look like a picnic. Syria is a secular state which is pro-Iranian and supports Hezbellah. This is all about destabilising Iran.

  47. “I mean if it was an Iranian scientist beheaded and disembowelled on the streets of Tehran by the MEK, it wouldn’t be so bad.”

    First, thanks for no swearing and insults. Seriously.

    Okay, I am opposed to desecration of bodies – beheading, disembowelling, dragging bodies naked through streets etc. I think it’s barbaric, and wouldn’t support it at all.
    Second, let’s use your example and take it as a true parallel. If an Australia Muslim couple migrated to Iran, and their son grew up with Iranian friends and later got subsidized university education, converted to Christianity, started railing on street corners that beheading Iranian soldiers or nuclear power plants was the will of Jesus, and then beheaded and disembowelled an Iranian soldier, or a nuclear scientist, or a seciry guard working at the power plant – can you imagine how Iranians would react?\

    On the other hand, if Obama (said on this website to be a mainline Christian – but I don’t think his religious is iimportant) ordered a drone strike or special forces assault on a plant producing nuclear weapons which was likely to be used against as US ally or passed on to terrorist allies (and also given Iranian leaders hate speech against Israel and about the holocaust etc), I wouldn’t necessarily condemn him.

    I’d see a difference. I think it was okay to try to assassinate Hitler. I don’t think it was good or Godly of people to be involved in the desecration of Mussolini’s body.

    If I were a citizen of Iran and opposed the conflict that Iranian troops were sent to I’d leave the country.
    I wouldn’t stay there enjoy their freedom, kindness, police protection, education system and then cut someone’s head off.

    But if I did and I started talking about Jesus, I’d be smart enough to realize that the Christians in Iran wouldn’t be gaining in popularity.

    So, I’m not against assassinations or regime change in some cases. Neither am I against police shooting murderers if that’s the only or best way to stop them from killing more people.

    I’m glad I’m not the one who has to make that call though.

  48. “There’s some nasty and sickening stuff happening in Syria that makes London look like a picnic.”

    London should be a place for picnics – why not?
    The man who was beheaded didn’t go to Afghanistan and just blow up people for the fun of it. Neither is your nephew or whoever. I’m sure Americans, Australians and British troops there try as much as possible to hunt and kill terrorists without innocent civilians being hurt. And that makes the job incredibly difficult.

    As for Syria, at the moment the sickening stuff is Syrian on Syrian violence.
    But I don’t know enough about it to comment. I’m not confident at all that the people who overthrow the govt will be any better than the current govt. I think they’d probably be worse.
    I don’t know what Australia’s position is, but put it this way – I won’t be sending donations to the rebels to support their cause.

  49. For what it’s worth Rand Paul is a republican and there are more Democrats than republicans in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

  50. I’d see a difference. I think it was okay to try to assassinate Hitler.

    They would agree. Except they think Hitler is on your side. So killing a British soldier would be like killing a member of the SS. But then you would think that’s pretty sick. But then the terrorist knows what’s been happening in Iraq/ Afghanistan. This is the moral quagmire of justified assassinations and support for terrorists for political aims.

  51. No you’re missing the point. The man who killed the British soldier was a British citizen was educated in Britain. Everyone I know is against that. Except for some super radicalized Muslims. Maybe you’re thinking of joining them?

    And I realize that while Britain saw Germany as the enemy, but Germany saw Britain as the enemy so that some Nazi’s would think it’s okay to assassinate Churchill..etc etc. Yes, the bad guys think they are good guys. That’s a given.

    I don’t think anyone is helping the good people of London by saying that terrorists and freedom fighters are the same and who the bad guy is depends on your perspective.

    Hitler was a bad guy. The guy who beheaded the soldier was a bad guy.
    The soldiers who are defending normal citizens in Afghanistan and killing terrorists are good guys.
    I think that big guy who got the VC is a good guy and did good work. I don’t think he needs to be told he’s guilty because he killed “freedom fighters”.

    Overly simplistic?


    But I understand what you are saying about Syria.

  52. I won’t be sending donations to the rebels to support their cause.

    That’s a shame, I was going to start a trust account for donatoiuns to flow into and use that to help the less fortunate rebels…of course the admin involved would be quite hefty, however I’m certain that at least 20c in every $2 would reach the target community!

  53. The guy who beheaded the soldier was a bad guy.

    I just saw a video of a kid trying to hack off a Syrian soldier’s head. He’s now being supplied by the US.

    They must be freedom fighters now and the good guys.

    We’ll be calling them terrorists when they turn, as most savage dogs eventually do.

  54. The Age 31/5/2913: Iraq violence death toll more than 500

    BAGHDAD: A series of bomb explosions in Baghdad and the northern Iraqi city of Mosul killed at least 16 people and wounded dozens in the latest eruption of violence rattling the country, officials said.

    Iraq is facing its most relentless wave of bloodshed since the 2011 US military withdrawal, deepening fears that the country is heading back toward the widespread sectarian fighting that pushed it to the brink of civil war in the years after the invasion.

    More than 500 people have been killed in May.

    April was Iraq’s deadliest month since June 2008, according to a United Nations tally that put last month’s death toll at more than 700.

    Most of Thursday’s blasts went off in Baghdad.

    Car bombs killed four in the north-eastern Shi’ite neighbourhood of Binouq, and three died in a bombing at a market selling spare car parts in central Baghdad, according to police.

    Police officials also said a roadside bomb exploded on a police patrol in the largely Shi’ite central commercial district of Karradah, killing three people there.

    The Karradah blast shattered glass and twisted metal signs on several storefronts, and left the stricken police unit’s modified Ford pick-up truck charred and mangled.

    “What have these innocent people done to deserve this?” asked witness Sinan Ali. “So many people were hurt. Who is responsible?”

    In the largely Sunni neighbourhood of Azamiyah in the capital’s north, a car bomb struck near a military convoy, killing three people, including two soldiers, according to police. Another 14 people were wounded in that attack.

    Hospital officials confirmed the casualties.

    In the northern city of Mosul, two police officers said a suicide bomber killed three when he blew himself up on a federal police checkpoint. Mosul is a former insurgent stronghold, located about 360 kilometres north-west of Baghdad.

  55. @Wazza, So the Americans have gone and now the adherents of the so called “religion of peace” are murdering fellow Muslims? How does that come about?

    Maybe the Americans should have stayed?

    But anyway, 500 in one month. Terrible.

    But then again – I was just looking at Wikipedia and what life was like in Iraq under that poor man who Bush was so cruel to.

    “According to The New York Times, “he [Saddam] murdered as many as a million of his people, many with poison gas. He tortured, maimed and imprisoned countless more. His unprovoked invasion of Iran is estimated to have left another million people dead. His seizure of Kuwait threw the Middle East into crisis. More insidious, arguably, was the psychological damage he inflicted on his own land. Hussein created a nation of informants — friends on friends, circles within circles — making an entire population complicit in his rule”.[9] Other estimates as to the number of Iraqis killed by Saddam’s regime vary from roughly a quarter to half a million,[10][11] including 50,000 to 182,000 Kurds and 25,000 to 280,000 killed during the repression of the 1991 rebellion.[12][13] Estimates for the number of dead in the Iran-Iraq war range upwards from 300,000.[14]
    Other atrocities [edit]
    During the 1991 rebellion, several “dungeons” were liberated, revealing “disoriented and confused” inmates that believed Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr was still the president.[15] Of nearly 2 million refugees created by the 1991 crackdown on dissent, it is estimated that 1,000 died every day for a period of months due to unsanitary and inhumane conditions.[16] The destruction of Shi’ite religious shrines by Hussein’s regime has been called “comparable to the levelling of cities in the Second World War, and the damage to the shrines [of Hussein and Abbas] was more serious than that which had been done to many European cathedrals.”[17] Methods of torture used by Hussein’s regime included assault with brass knuckles and wooden bludgeons; electric shocks to the genitalia; scorched metal rods being forced into body orifices; the crushing of toes and removal of toenails; burning off limbs; lowering prisoners into vats of acid; poisoning with thallium; raping women in front of their family members; burning with cigarette butts; the crushing of bones; the amputation of ears, limbs, and tongues; and the gouging of eyes.[18] After the 1983-88 genocide, some 1 million Kurds were allowed to resettle in “model villages”. According to a U.S. Senate staff report, these villages “were poorly constructed, had minimal sanitation and water, and provided few employment opportunities for the residents”

    That guy was a human weapon of mass destruction.

    Read the above carefully, and run through some of those numbers.

    So the conclusion is that when there was a Muslim dictator in Iraq, there was murder and mayhem and rape etc. With him out of the way, the religionists of peace are killing each other. 500 a month.

    Yes, keep me away from large populations of Muslims.

    I love Jesus – the Prince of Peace. Let’s pray the Muslims would turn to Jesus. Both dictators, and the common ordinary ones.

  56. So, Wazza, let’s pray that the good people of Iraq can live together peacefully without blowing themselves and others up.
    How do you think Australia should help them?

    btw, as far as I can tell, the suicide bombings and the 500 who were killed had NOTHING to do with European comic books or Palestine or the Jews.

    So, what can be done? Any ideas? Maybe you can go there and talk to them. Offer your services as an educator? Start a company so they have employment? hmmmmm

    I know, how about an Islamic bookstore like the one in Australia?

    If you’re not up to it, I suggest you sponsor Greg. He can go and explain to them the correct interpretation of the Koran.

    And Bones can give them history lessons and teach over coffee and weed in the Democratic Underground Cafe/Salon he opens.

    You just better tell Greg that he might have to wait a while before he starts conducting gay weddings in Bones’ cafe there.

    Yep, that’s it. Greg, Bones and Wazza can start a cafe /gay wedding chapel in Iraq.

    Bon Voyage!

  57. So, Wazza, let’s pray that the good people of Iraq can live together peacefully without blowing themselves and others up.
    How do you think Australia should help them?

    By blowing them up?

    No, only the good evangelicals do that, us evil liberals start bookshop-cafes where we conduct evil gay weddings and séances,

  58. There are no evangelicals in Iraq blowing people up.

    I repeat. How do you think Australia should help them? Given the Iraqi’s were living under the vicious rule of a thug who murdered people in cold blood, and he’s gone – what is YOUR solution for them now
    that Muslims Iraqis are killing each other.


    PS. I don’t think gay weddings or seances will help. But, if you can’t think of anything else.

  59. Well Australia, being a party to the illegal invasion should pay them reparations, obviously.

    Not only for the loss of life and property, but also for de-stabilising a government that we had no business interfering in.

  60. The evangelical leaders gave Bush their blessing to blow Iraq up. Check out the Land letter.

    One of the aims was to attract Terrorists to the area so we could blow them up there, instead of in the US. This was an argument that Steve made on this blog.

    But the strange thing is, the more you blow up Terrorists the more Terrorists appear. Its like some weird game of Asteroids.

    Now there are a heap of Terrorists in Iraq blowing each other up. And you are asking me what the solution is? Not to have been there in the first place – but now that its done, apologise and make amends.



    Thursday’s announcement followed a series of urgent meetings at the White House this week that revealed deep divisions within the administration over U.S. involvement in Syria’s civil war. The proponents of more aggressive action – including Secretary of State John Kerry – appeared to have won out over those wary of sending weapons and ammunition into a war zone where Hezbollah and Iranian fighters are backing Assad’s armed forces, and al-Qaida-linked extremists back the rebellion.

    Aren’t we at war with al qaeda?

Comments are closed.