Are we ever going to get ahead of the TERRORISTS?

ASPCA4EVER

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2009
Messages
2,555
Location
Land of the JAYHAWKS-ROCK CHOCK Jayhawk, KU
Yemen’s Chaos Aids the Evolution of a Qaeda Cell
articleLarge.jpg
Karim Ben Khelifa
Members of Yemen's Counterterrorism Unit trained near Sana last year under the watch of an American Special Forces instructor.

By STEVEN ERLANGER
Published: January 2, 2010
SANA, Yemen — Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has rapidly evolved into an expanding and ambitious regional terrorist network thanks in part to a weakened, impoverished and distracted Yemeni government.

Skip to next paragraph Multimedia

Graphic
Internal Conflicts and the Growing Influence of Al Qaeda
While Yemen has chased two homegrown rebellions, over the last year the Qaeda cell here has begun sharing resources across borders and has been spurred on to more ambitious attacks by a leadership strengthened by released Qaeda detainees and returning fighters from Iraq.
The priorities of the Yemeni government have been fighting a war in the north and combating secessionists across the south. In the interim, Al Qaeda has flourished in the large, lawless and rugged tribal territories of Yemen, creating training camps, attacking Western targets and receiving increasing popular sympathy, Yemeni and American officials say.
Al Qaeda’s growing profile in Yemen became clear after a Nigerian man, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23, was able to overstay his visa here by several months, connect with Qaeda militants and leave this country with a bomb sewn into his underwear.
In his weekly address on Saturday, President Obama for the first time directly blamed Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula for the bombing attempt and said that fighting the group would be a high priority. “In recent years, they have bombed Yemeni government facilities and Western hotels,” he said, adding, “So as president, I’ve made it a priority to strengthen our partnership with the Yemeni government.”
The core of the group here is still thought to be small, perhaps no more than 200 people. But the group has the important advantage of being part of a larger, regional structure, having merged a year ago with the Saudi branch of Al Qaeda to form Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. And it has been able to originate fairly sophisticated operations here, in Saudi Arabia and now on an airliner headed for Detroit.
Though Yemen played an early role in Al Qaeda’s history — it is Osama bin Laden’s ancestral homeland, and it was the staging ground for the 2000 attack on the American destroyer Cole — the key chapters in the story of Al Qaeda’s rise here have been written recently by leaders who were released from detention at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, escaped from Yemeni prisons or were drawn to shelter here by common cause and ideology.
Those men have transformed and reoriented a weak local Qaeda cell that had made a kind of peace with the government after 2003. In the year since the Saudi and Yemeni branches merged, Al Qaeda has taken full advantage of the government’s preoccupation with the rebellions, building support from the tribal structures and traditions in Yemen’s poor and lawless territories.
One big moment came in February 2006, when 23 imprisoned men suspected of being members of Al Qaeda escaped from a high-security prison, reportedly with the aid of some Yemeni security forces. All but three or four of the men were eventually recaptured or killed by Yemeni security forces. But one prisoner, Nasser al-Wuhayshi, became leader of the Qaeda cell in Yemen and moved to reorganize it, focusing it on attacks against nearby Western targets. Another prisoner, Qassim al-Raimi, became the military commander.
The next year, Mr. Wuhayshi found a deputy and, perhaps, a rival for leadership, Said Ali al-Shihri, 36, a Saudi citizen. He was released from six years’ detention in Guantánamo Bay in December 2007 to a Saudi-run rehabilitation program. He disappeared from Saudi Arabia and emerged in Yemen, and he is considered by many to be the rising star of the local movement. Mr. Shihri had traveled to Afghanistan in 2001 and was apparently wounded there, and he was captured crossing back into Pakistan in December of that year.
Another Guantánamo detainee, also captured in Pakistan in 2001 and released to a Saudi rehabilitation program, is Ibrahim Suleiman al-Rubaysh, 30, a Saudi who also disappeared and is now described as the mufti, or theological guide, to Al Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula.
Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born, English-speaking Internet imam of Al Qaeda here, returned to Yemen, his family’s home, in 2004. He was arrested in 2006 on security charges and was released in December 2007 after 18 months in prison. He then went to Britain and is believed to have returned to Yemen last spring.

< for the rest of this story>

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/03/world/middleeast/03yemen.html?th&emc=th
**********************************
Maybe we are going about this all wrong...maybe we need to get a currently captured terrorist to set down {for money} and explain to our anti-terrorist CIA/FBI/International Security Agency...JEEZ LOUISE, even the mom & pops of the world; just exactly how well the master minds behind this systemic spread of Al Qaeda mindset is so pervasive and why it works so well! Because the ability for our intelligence agency to always be behind the 8ball and playing catch up with our ability to understand this group...well it seems like were playing at the game of 'COPS & ROBBERS' and they are highly proactive and running rings around us:rolleyes:
 
Werbung:
The CIA used to take care of all this and as they had their own ways of raising funds it didnt cost the tax payers.

Thank Jimmy Carter for screwing that up.
 
The CIA used to take care of all this and as they had their own ways of raising funds it didnt cost the tax payers.

Thank Jimmy Carter for screwing that up.

You might need to justify that with a LINK...cause I was thinking that this agency has always had 'SPEICAL FUNDING' under the same budget line item that the Secret Service gets their FUNDS FROM?

But prove me wrong and I'll get my facts straight ;)
 
Uranium ? Like the US brought that there ? Spare me.

If you had read the article you would have learned that the US uses depleted uranium for bullet cores. This uranium is vapoized as it burns through armor plating and is thus widely disseminated.

How can you expect us to take you seriously when make fool of yourself like this?
 
If you had read the article you would have learned that the US uses depleted uranium for bullet cores. This uranium is vapoized as it burns through armor plating and is thus widely disseminated.

How can you expect us to take you seriously when make fool of yourself like this?

But seriously...how do we make our PR better globally and undermine the terrorists ability to sell their propaganda to the poorest of the poor and recruit {whether by volunteer or by force} new members for their war machine?
 
If you had read the article you would have learned that the US uses depleted uranium for bullet cores. This uranium is vapoized as it burns through armor plating and is thus widely disseminated.

How can you expect us to take you seriously when make fool of yourself like this?


When your article refers bombardment with DU I know its nonsense. Military use is as ammunition, mainly for its armor piercing capability. It is also weakly radioactive. There is far greater exposure for those usig it in ammunition or other alpplications than being near targets. Besides, if you are close enough to a target for any exposure, who cares ?

Perhaps you should educate yourself before pointing fingers ? I've known about DU for decades while you see to have just discovered it.
 
When your article refers bombardment with DU I know its nonsense. Military use is as ammunition, mainly for its armor piercing capability. It is also weakly radioactive. There is far greater exposure for those usig it in ammunition or other alpplications than being near targets. Besides, if you are close enough to a target for any exposure, who cares ?

Perhaps you should educate yourself before pointing fingers ? I've known about DU for decades while you see to have just discovered it.

The article notes that we have used about 1600 tons of deplete uranium, yes it's used in bullets which burn through armor plate. Burning uranim spreads out and cools into dust which blows around in the wind. The fact that it's not highly radioactive doesn't change the fact that if you inhale it you are far more likely to get cancer. Even our soldiers are coming back contaminated with it and fathering deformed babies. We know a lot about radiation and the effects it has on people.

I'm curious why you are arguing with me when you obviously haven't even read the article. Instead or relying on Wiki for knowledge you really should look things up in REAL encyclopedias or journals.

Your idea that it's far more dangerous for those using the bullets than for people near the targets shows that you don't know what you're talking about. Once the bullets have been fired and burned the uranium is spread around in an easily eaten or inhaled form, thus it is far more dangerous than when contained in magazines or ammo boxes.

One does not need to be anywhere near the target to get contaminated with the uranium as it blows in the wind. So the civilians, women and children, and animals who are killed are meaningless? Can you understand why people hate the US? You haven't got the compassion of a dung beetle for the suffering of the people who have never harmed us at all. Does this attitude make you a Compassionate Conservative?
 
But seriously...how do we make our PR better globally and undermine the terrorists ability to sell their propaganda to the poorest of the poor and recruit {whether by volunteer or by force} new members for their war machine?

Until we stop empire building and trading on the misery of others all the PR in the world will not help us. Look at dogtown's posts, he neither knows nor cares that we are polluting a country with a poison that will remain dangerous for millenia, he doesn't give a damn about all the innocent people, the deformed babies, or the generations of people who will struggle with our uranium poisoning of their country. All he cares about are Americans aborting babies, slaughtering the already living ones is irrelevant. Just like Ron Reagan they seem to believe that life starts at conception and ends at birth.
 
Until we stop empire building and trading on the misery of others all the PR in the world will not help us.

Yes, but how can we maintain a world hegemon status and not be accused of empire building? Surely you can agree that we benefit more from that status than we are hurt by it?

Additionally, even if we completely ended any form of military presence abroad, we would just be accused of the same thing in economic terms. Those who do not want to like us will always find a reason, no matter what we do.

Look at dogtown's posts, he neither knows nor cares that we are polluting a country with a poison that will remain dangerous for millenia, he doesn't give a damn about all the innocent people, the deformed babies, or the generations of people who will struggle with our uranium poisoning of their country. All he cares about are Americans aborting babies, slaughtering the already living ones is irrelevant. Just like Ron Reagan they seem to believe that life starts at conception and ends at birth.

According to the World Health Organization:

"A recent United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) report giving field measurements taken around selected impact sites in Kosovo (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) indicates that contamination by DU in the environment was localized to a few tens of metres around impact sites. Contamination by DU dusts of local vegetation and water supplies was found to be extremely low. Thus, the probability of significant exposure to local populations was considered to be very low."

Given this, I think it is highly debatable if US munitions that used DU are a significant cause of any of the things you are attempting to contribute to them.
 
Yes, but how can we maintain a world hegemon status and not be accused of empire building? Surely you can agree that we benefit more from that status than we are hurt by it?

Additionally, even if we completely ended any form of military presence abroad, we would just be accused of the same thing in economic terms. Those who do not want to like us will always find a reason, no matter what we do.



According to the World Health Organization:

"A recent United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) report giving field measurements taken around selected impact sites in Kosovo (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) indicates that contamination by DU in the environment was localized to a few tens of metres around impact sites. Contamination by DU dusts of local vegetation and water supplies was found to be extremely low. Thus, the probability of significant exposure to local populations was considered to be very low."

Given this, I think it is highly debatable if US munitions that used DU are a significant cause of any of the things you are attempting to contribute to them.



Exactly, and that's the alarmist WHO.
 
Frankly I'm more concerned with this:
http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/ghana804/video/video_index.html

then I am with D.U. but then again we seem to be a culture of 'out of sight out of mind' and dump it all where ever you want to as long as it's NOT IN MY BACK YARD/NEIGHBORHOOD :mad:

So because we aren't being the global police for toxic waste dumping we aren't ever going to win or get ahead of this war on TERRORISM :confused:
 
Werbung:
Read this article and then ask yourself why people in other countries hate the US. How can we ever get ahead of the terrorists when we behave like this? We are making enemies faster than we can kill them.

http://us.oneworld.net/article/368472-cancer-the-deadly-legacy-invasion-iraq

Who is Really Distorting Islam?
You and oeople like you...

“All of us recognize that this great religion (Islam), in the hands of a few extremists, has been distorted.” —Barack Hussein Obama

“Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all!”—Ayatollah Khomeini

While we now know that a young Obama rebelled against his mother and attended Koran classes, he clearly didn’t attend nearly enough of them. Or the Harvard genius is back to playing dumb.


According to Obama,you, and so much of the political establishment, the Koran is being distorted by a “few extremists” somewhere who are trying to convince the billion peaceful Muslims, that it actually promotes violence. But first a few obvious questions.

How many exactly is a “few”? Are we talking about a few dozen, a few thousand, a few million? Naturally Obama and the Islam apologists never really address that question. Because it is a rather inconvenient question. Since Muslims are defined by religious streams and mosque attendance, it should be easy enough to come up with a realistic figure.

We could start with the population of Saudi Arabia, which ranks at some 25 million. That is quite a “few” extremists right there. Then there’s Pakistan with a population of 166 million. That’s a few more, right there. Of course officially both countries are allies of the United States and have nothing to do with terrorism. Even when it’s funded by their own governments.

So let’s move on to a slightly more definitive figure. In 2006, the Palestinian Arabs held an election. 440,000 of them voted for Hamas. A terrorist organization. In the 2009 Lebanon election, a coalition that included Hezbollah and the Baath Party won over 800,000 votes. So certainly we know that there are more than 1 million “misunderstanders” of Islam out there. And that’s out of a tiny portion of the Muslim world.

But as to the next question, is the vast majority of Muslims and their mosques and clergy are peaceful, then how can those who “distort its vision” ever be a real threat? If there is nothing of violence in Islam, then what exactly can they do? Re-edit the Koran? Insert verses that don’t exist there. But when asked about Jihad, even Barack Hussein Obama is forced to backpedal and say, that it has a lot of meanings in Islam. But if Islam is peaceful, then how could there be a non-peaceful meaning at all?

“Well, the phrase jehad has a lot of meanings within Islam. It is subject to lot of different interpretations.”—Barack Hussein Obama

“Jihad means the conquest of all non-Muslim territories. Such a war may well be declared after the formation of an Islamic government worthy of that name, at the direction of the Imam or under his orders. It will then be the duty of every able-bodied adult male to volunteer for this war of conquest, the final aim of which is to put Qur’anic law in power from one end of the earth to the other.”—Ayatollah Khomeini

Islamic apologists love to hide behind phrases like “Jihad has many meanings”
We could also say that “Mein Kampf” has many possible meanings and interpretations in German. It could refer to a struggle getting out of bed in the morning, or the struggle to promote world conquest and genocide.

The Koran is fairly straightforward about these things. It uses Jihad to clearly and unambiguously mean fighting non-Muslims. To pretend otherwise, is like pretending that Mein Kampf was probably written about Hitler’s struggle to get through art school.

Nazism wasn’t built on Hitler’s art school efforts, and Islam wasn’t built on Mohammed rising early to pray to the dunes. They were both built on war and conquest. Without war and conquest, Islam would have been nothing more than another obscure cult of interest only to National Geographic photographers. With Jihad, it became a horrifying wave of terror and death that destroyed cultures, subjugated peoples and turned daily life into a horror for countless millions.

“We affirm that Hindu or Muslim or Christian or Jew or any other religion; we all need to treat each other with respect and dignity”—Barack Hussein Obama

“Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends. They are but friends and protectors to each other.”—Koran 5:51

Here Obama is arguing with the Koran. And it is impossible to win an argument about the nature of Islam with the Koran.

Obama and you might like to pretend that the Koran is about how snowflakes, puppies and unicorns… but it’s a xenophobic creed which actively promotes hate toward non-Muslims. Islam does not pretend that non-Muslims are the equal of Muslims, not legally or socially. It imprisons them in ghettos, treats their lives as worthless and enslaves them at will.

The best evidence of this is the status of non-Muslims in the Muslim world. While the number of Muslims in the West continues to grow, the number of Christians and Jews in the Muslim world continues to shrink. Most Jews have fled the Muslim world. They are even fleeing Western countries with large numbers of Muslim residents. The Vatican recently held a synod to discuss the vanishing Christian communities of the Middle East.

If Islam were tolerant, then it would play host to thriving Christian, Jewish, Bahai and Zoroastrian communities. Instead it has put the boot down on them. Not because a few extremists in a cave hijacked a tolerant religion, but because this is the real face of Islam. This is what Islam has always been like.

“The overwhelming majority (of Muslims) want peace, justice, fairness and tolerance.”—Barack Hussein Obama

“Convert to Islam, and then you will be safe, for if you don’t, you should know that I have come to you with an army of men that love death, as you love life.” —Caliph Abu Bakr, Mohammed’s Successor

Who is really distorting Islam? Is Barack Hussein Obama correct that Islam’s vision is being distorted by a few men in caves somewhere, or is Obama the “distorter” of Islam?

Even a brief reading of Islamic history makes the answer all too obvious. It is not Al Qaeda that is distorting Islam, but Obama. And not Obama alone. Liberal elites in the West have firmly dedicated themselves to misrepresenting and distorting Islam, in order to continue Islamic immigration into the West. To filling America, Europe, Canada, Australia and all the rest up, until every little boy is named Mohammed, and every little girl has to cover her face, or have acid thrown in it.
It does not take a genius to simply look at the Muslim world, and compare the average level of human rights in it, with the average level of human rights in Christian and Jewish countries, and come to some rather obvious conclusions.

But while liberals assail Judaism and Christianity, condemn America and Israel, their choirs of academics and politicians sing the praises of Islam. If you believe them, then there is nothing wrong with Islam. Just a few black sheep like Al-Awlaki and some bigoted Islamophobes in America. But if that’s the case, then why is the Muslim world so ugly? Why does it mistreat women and minorities? Why does it have the state sponsored murder of gay men? Why does it send Christians to reeducation camps? Why does it adopt the Mein Kampf as a second Koran and preach the murder of Jews?

There is only one answer. There is something rotten in Islam. And for all the mis-information that Obama may pour into our ears, it is people like you and our president who are distorting Islam. IMO..

Regards
Doug
 
Back
Top