Islamic Army in Iraq threatens attacks in US: website

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/focusoniraq/2005/January/focusoniraq_January15.xml§ion=focusoniraq

DUBAI - The Islamic Army in Iraq, one of the main armed groups fighting US forces in the war-torn country, threatened to carry out attacks inside the United States in 2005, in a statement posted on a website Monday.

This year “will bring woes on America. The mujahedeen (holy warriors) have prepared big surprises for your sons outside America and a big surprise for you inside America,” said the statement whose authenticity could not be confirmed.

The mujahedeen “will take the battle from inside our country (Iraq) to yours,” the statement said.

The shadowy Sunni Muslim group has claimed a number of attacks and killings of hostages in Iraq, including an Italian journalist and two Pakistanis.

more

[Cooley Hurd]

1. That sucks...

If this happens, then there will be no one to blame except the chimp.:grr:

[insane_cratic_gal]

8. I wish that were true Cooley

Unfortunately your forgetting the motto of freepers.

It's Islamic terrorist(not insurgent) spoon fed to them through Fox, Savage, Limbaugh. They will only spoon feed them some more bullshit. They will keep eating it because these people cater to their egos and their fucked up sense of right and wrong. They tell them they are correct and everyone else is wrong. Again Chimp will use some bullshit Rovian mind control "attack on freedom" while infringing upon more of your rights.

Do not underestimate the bullshit the right wing radio preaches. If you want to change the minds of Americans you need to remove them first.

[GoBlue]

50. Holy Sh*t you cracked it.

"If you want to change the minds of Americans you need to remove them first. .

But insane_cratic_gal just how do we go about removing American minds?

[insane_cratic_gal]

57. I should of been more clear

Remove the righwing Propaganda machine. Fox. Hannity, O'reilly, Limbaugh. Needs to be removed. I wasn't suggesting lobotomy, but now that you mention it. ;)

The division in this country has always been there, but a(nd it's only my opinion) with the onslaught of the spoon fed ego stroking machine that is Murdoch.

It lies to the people whom watch it, they in turn watch it because they feel better with the lie. They need justification for the war, for 9/11 to hate anyone that is non-american. And fox gives it to them. They bought into the pride machine, "America under attack. Flag waving twist on patriotism. They had this fever pitch of feeling superior over other countries.

Rural based America is uncomfortable with having no one to blame. They need simple answers, to simplify their lives. Terrorists bad/ America good. It's never that simple. Do you know how little understanding people have of the Middle East Culture? They know next to nothing about Palestine/Israel conflicts. (except good/bad) they don't get the gray areas on Fox news. They get one side that is it and it's all they seem to want.

The backward regression in this country seems to be craving 1950's all over again. They had communist a well defined enemy. Remember this is right before social issues exploded onto the scene. It was chaotic trying to sort through their own belief systems.

Now here we are, times are different, but are they really? Social agenda is on the move again. War, Suppression, social security, taxes, shitty economy. Chaos, it's coming again, and they know it.. for now they are content with the bubble.

I'll stop blabbering now. I should defined my argument better.

[NYC]

78. Clever analysis.

...It lies to the people who watch it, they in turn watch it because they feel better with the lie...

Helps explain why they would watch that stuff. I knew they engaged in wilfull ignorance, but you stated this clearly.

[Drifter]

39. Welcome to the "Decade of Terror"

Brought to you by the US Government, a paid subsidiary of Halliburton.

Cheers
Drifter

[bowens43]

2. If it happens it's because of the actions of the US..

Certainly , if our nation was invaded we would attack the invaders homeland.

[Brundle_Fly]

11. if it happens

it is allowed under the NATO rules of engagement.

you cannot attack another country unless you are attacked.

[LynnTheDem]

12. Under international law, it's legal for Iraq to attack the USA.

America attacked Iraq first. Iraq had done NOTHING to America or anyone else when they were invaded & occupied by foreign invaders.

Ain't life under bush a total bitch.

[Brundle_Fly]

14. so then is it termed "terrorism?"

or is it defending their motherland?

[LynnTheDem]

17. From the US viewpoint, "terrorism" of course!

-When we illegally invade & occupy a nation, it's "defending the motherland".

-When Hitler did the exact same thing, it was "the supreme crime".

-When Iraq fights off the invaders, they're "terrorists".

-If Iraq were to legally attack the USA, it would be "terrorism".


USA does anything = good.

Anyone else does anything = bad unless USA says = good.

And USA wonders why they hate us.

Hmmmmmmm. Gee I wonder. :eyes: lol!

[lebkuchen]

20. One big reason people voted for Bush was because it hasn't happened

twice. Yet.

[Pam-Moby]

3. See what a ignorant

thoughtless President has gotten us into!!!

[merwin]

42. He's not thoughtless! He thinks about 'My Pet Goat' daily! Still trying

to understand it I guess.

[Benhurst]

4. Why are they so filled with hate for us?

Sure we bomb them; but haven't they ever heard the old song "You Only Hurt the Ones You Love"?

We're only doing what's good for them.

[no_hypocrisy]

5. Karma Blowback.

"We'd rather fight them over there than over here."

Nice work, guys.

[jimshoes]

6. This message brought to you

by bushco inc. Creators of the neverending war.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[meti57b]

9. so much for the "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them

in our streets" either/or argument.

[Just Me]

10. Fuels feeding the fires,...

,...PNAC imperialists continue the war-wheels across Muslim-dominated countries which fuels further terrorism which fuels the world war sought by PNAC imperialists.

The "Prince of Darkness" will ignore the cries of children.

[bemildred]

13. That would be a really stupid thing to do.

Such an action would only shore up support for Bush and his war.
In fact, I would expect the US government to instigate something like
this to get support for the draft up if the Eyerakis are not cooperative
enough to do it on their own.

[rodeodance]

15. so will we finally begin to secure the cargo ships???

[bemildred]

46. Nah, too expensive.

And politically, like I said, a bit of violence in the "homeland" is
just the thing, keeps the Rubes is a state of panic.

[LynnTheDem]

19. I don't think a lot of Iraqis really care about that now.

If you'd lost your entire family, your business, your home, your country, everything you ever had, to foreign invaders, would you care or would you want the invaders to suffer and hurt as they've done to you?

What did the USA do after the Pearl Harbor attack?

Why expect Iraq to do any differently than what we did and would do? 911 may have been "another Pearl Harbor", but it sure as fck wasn't Iraq who did it.

[bemildred]

47. Probably not.

I'm just pointing out that such a course may not be the quickest
way to end the occupation.

[frictionlessO]

16. what if the terrorists go legit!?

We all know that insurgents/guerillas are titles that add a bit more legitamacy to those opposed to our occupation. My friends and I debate often that if major terror networks stopped targeting civilians and went exclusively for government/military targets, then we would lose this war in a short period of time.

They'd recieve overwhelming support from a large part of the world population many fence sitting governments would secretly back them. Recruitment efforts would be in every lil dustbucket town across Asia, Africa and many parts of Europe.

ANyone else have arguments yea or nay about this?

[donkeyotay]

32. Yes, why do the terrorists attacks seem to hit civilians so often?

Could it be that they do not have the wherewithal to attack hard, ie military, targets? So, if this terrorist insurgency cannot, for the most part, even effectively attack American troops in Iraq, why should we believe they can pull off an attack here?

I think the level of threat posed by the people that we have pissed off so bad that they live for revenge is actually not very great, for their desperation has limited military value.

They strap explosives to themselves or to cars, often exploding before they reach their targets. They don't appear to have the sophistication to, for instance, drop a nukular weapon on an American city like Cheney and company where talking about... before the election.

[Nihil]

43. Suggestion: Check the casualty lists

The US/UK ground forces and assorted mercenaries seem to have been
hit quite effectively in Iraq ... especially considering that the
"terrorists" (= "freedom fighters" for more honest people) have only
a fraction of the military capability of the invaders.

I'm glad that you think that the desperation of a suicide bomber has
so little military value. Consider this: If just one student in a
major US city found that he'd lost everything he held dear due to
yet another random missile attack in an Iraqi city, the damage that
could be done by a single vehicle bomb in that city could suddenly
be appreciated by Joe Public a whole lot more than it currently is ...

[Politicub]

69. That's the terrorism part of terrorists

re: why they attack civilians. They feel successful when they keep the public in a state of panic. Civilians are the easiest target to achieve this goal.

They may not have the sophistication to drop a nuclear bomb on a city, but it isn't beyond the imagination that they could rig together a dirty bomb and set it off during rush hour at a communter train station, for instance.

[neweurope]

18. Just who is this "Islamic Army"? Who helped them set up their web site?

Who wants to be crowned soon? Who needs a draft? Who wants to set PATRIOT II in action?

Who has been suspected - by some... - to have something to do with 9/11?

The most useful question to ask is always: Who would profit the most?


---------------------------


Remember Fallujah!

[geek tragedy]

21. They are terrorists, not the Minutemen. These are not freedom fighters.

They are the bad guys.

Shame on anyone who sides with them.

[truth2power]

22. Was that sarcasm? I don't understand.

If my family were killed by FOREIGN INVADERS...if my country were decimated and my city had headless corpses in the streets being eaten by dogs, my rage would be limitless!

If I chose to fight the invaders, by any means possible, I would not consider myself a terrorist.

WE are the invaders!

[geek tragedy]

24. They kidnap and murder journalists and hostages.

"By any means possible" is the motto of the terrorist.

These are religious nutjobs, not Iraqi nationalists. They kidnapped FRENCH journalists. Why? Because all Westerners are infidels to these bastards.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/01/03/news/politicus.html

Religious, fundamentalist terrorists. Case closed.

[NNN0LHI]

25. Reuters Cameraman Shot Dead While Filming in Iraq

http://foi.missouri.edu/jouratrisk/dana2.html

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Reuters cameraman Mazen Dana was shot dead on Sunday while filming near a U.S.-run prison on the outskirts of Baghdad, the U.S. military said.

Eyewitnesses said Dana, 43, was shot by soldiers on an American tank as he filmed outside Abu Ghraib prison in western Baghdad.

His last pictures show a U.S. tank driving toward Dana outside the prison walls. Several shots ring out from the tank, and Dana's camera falls to the ground.

The U.S. military in Iraq said an investigation was under way and had no immediate information on whether U.S. forces fired the shots that killed Dana, a Palestinian.

"Coalition forces engaged an individual in the vicinity of the Abu Ghraib prison," Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman told Reuters in Washington.

"The individual was later identified as a reporter. The individual was evacuated to the 28th combat support hospital and pronounced dead on arrival," he said. "The incident is under investigation."

more

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=255312

Report: U.S. Marine Kills Wounded Iraqi

NEW YORK Nov 15, 2004 — A U.S. Marine shot and killed a wounded and apparently unarmed Iraqi prisoner in a mosque in the former insurgent stronghold of Fallujah, according to dramatic pool television pictures broadcast Monday. A Marine spokesman in Washington said the shooting was under investigation.

The shooting Saturday was videotaped by pool correspondent Kevin Sites of NBC television, who said three other previously wounded prisoners in the mosque apparently also had been shot again by the Marines inside the mosque.

more

[geek tragedy]

26. Not at all the same thing.

And you know it.

But I'll provide pictures to illustrate the point:







http://www.smh.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1076779842799_2004/02/15/350_falluja,0.jpg

[truth2power]

28. And how is it different, really?

Thanks to NNN0LHI for posting those articles. No one is blameless, here. But, obviously, the American Occupiers have been killing journalists and other innocents all along. If they are terrorists then, so are we.

Not to reduce this to a cliche, but...we started it.

[geek tragedy]

29. Journalists are sometimes mistaken for combatants during combat situations

Especially camermen, whose equipment can look like RPG's or other types of rocket launchers.

Read the article: They kidnapped the French journos because the French are viewed as infidels and enemies, in part for their presence in Afghanistan.

One of the French hostages held by the terrorists mentioned in the original post said that:

"Little by little, we realized came to discover that we were really on planet bin Laden."

"'Our objective,' the jailer went on . . . 'is to overthrow all the Arab rulers, and to return to the caliphate from Analusia to the border with China.'"

They are your enemies, whether you like it or not.

[NNN0LHI]

49. Did you forget who invaded who here? Did Iraq invade the USA?

And I would like to show you some pictures but our military won't let reporters in to see what they are doing. Why is that do you think?

Don

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IRIN/121b671d950efc3ac031b54b55118d85.htm

IRAQ: Death in Fallujah rising, doctors say

<snip>"The US troops are saying that soon Fallujah will be rebuilt. I believe that this city won't offer a minimum of living conditions until another year has passed. I am still searching for what they have been calling democracy," Muhammad Kubaissy, a civilian from Fallujah, told IRIN. His home and two shops were destroyed in the fighting.

"They came to bring us freedom, but all Iraqis are now prisoners in their own homes," he added.

"It is impossible to live in Fallujah. There is no water, electricity or sewage treatment. Even hospitals cannot afford the minimum of security for all families of the city. We don't have enough medicine and you can feel the bad smell of bodies in the air," al-Iyssaue added.

Residents of Fallujah have been asking the Iraqi government to allow journalists and TV reporters to enter the city in order to show the reality.

The government will only allow journalists to visit with a special identity card, saying it is for their own safety. Many journalists have been turned away from Fallujah after not receiving authorisation from US-troops guarding the city.

"We need someone here to show the reality of Fallujah. Even when some journalists are here they are being followed by the Marines. We need someone to help us. The world should see the real picture of Fallujah," Sheikh Abbas al-Zubeiny told IRIN.

[jokerman93]

41. Our own leaders

Our own leaders are arguably religious nutjobs and criminals as well. I guess it must come down to the "American" brand name winning the Crusades. Have you been paying attention? All "Islamists" are infidels, terrorists and heathen to the anointed corporate armies of Bushco. Ask any Bush supporter. They'll TELL you that.

</semi-sarcasm>

[leftynyc]

54. I agree with you in that

not all the people fighting against us have the excuse of losing their homes and families to US bombing. I understand that the person responsible for the mess tent bombing was a medical student from Saudi Arabia. What exactly was his excuse?

[geek tragedy]

70. That's what people need to get past.

People in the West tend to view insurgent movements throught the prism of nationalism. What they don't get is that tribe and religion matter much more to a lot of people than colonial-era maps.

The group in question here has proclaimed France as the home of infidels and the enemy of Islam.

If someone can tie that to France's stand on the Iraq invasion, I'd love to see it.

[yinkaafrica]

23. I don't think they can pull it off

They have the willingness but lack the resources.
They would have hit us by now if they could have.

[leftchick]

27. ya think?

There are an Millions of Muslims in the world that Hate ameriKa because of bush*. I suppose there may be a wealthy one or two as well. :eyes:

[candy]

30. There are millions of Muslims that hated us long before Bush

was president. Where the hell have you been?

[Jesus H. Christ]

31. And now there are millions more. And for good reason.

And millions of other people to boot.

[leftchick]

36. I would not say millions more likely thousands back in 2000...

with bushco* the numbers have grown into many millions. Indeed, it is not just Muslims that hate us now but the whole fucking world!
Where have YOU been? :eyes:

[yinkaafrica]

58. Why do you think they don't hit us on a regular basis?

It would be very easy for those living here, yet they
all chose not to retaliate. I don't have the answer. Actually, I find it quite perpexling.

[Sterling]

75. Good question

nt

[drdtroit]

60. I've been traveling the globe

unlike yourself obviously. Bush and his cartel have swayed the way the world views us by 180°. Once the great benevolent superpower we have been reduced to the biggest terrorist nation on the planet. Check it out.

[yinkaafrica]

63. No doubt. So why don't they fight back.

I don't think anyone has the answer.
I do not.

[Occulus]

65. Which Bush?

And what was it the first Bush did again? That's before he became President, by the way.....

....this family has had their hands in it for a long time. A very long time. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if everything for several decades has been a personal grudgematch at its roots.

But then, I'm a cynic these days...

</semi-semi-sarcasm>

[yinkaafrica]

56. By and large, the wealthy ones don't care

The poor ones have had two years to hit us.
Not one incident in two years.
These blustery people have no resources
or they would have hit us long ago.
Ya think :)

[drdtroit]

61. Or perhaps one must reassess who facilitated 9/11. n/t

[yinkaafrica]

62. No investigation will ever be allowed! None

I would bet my life that Cheney has all the details.
Every time he thinks about it he cracks into an evil broken
grimace. He pulled off 'the ultimate deal.'

[Ezlivin]

33. Bring 'em on!

Our brave leaders will be standing ready with weapons in their hands.

Right?

Right?

Uh, where'd you go, George?

[imabadman]

34. Actually, that wouldn't be very smart from a strategic standpoint.

An attack inside the US would change public opinion regarding this war. Furthermore, any new attack would have to have an impact > or = to the that of 9/11 attack; otherwise, it would make the Islamists look inept and weak.

So, I don't think we will see the type of dastardly acts that Israel has had to endure for so long.

And I hope that I am right.

[Bridget Burke]

35. An attack would work very well--for Bush.

It would tie his "War on Terror" in with the totally illegal invasion of Iraq. It would be a great impetus for passing Patriot IV or whatever is next. We would be encouraged to rally 'round our Popular Wartime President & would be considered traitors for mentioning the economy, the environment, health care or education.

And we'd definitely need a draft.

[imabadman]

52. Huh...?

Are you suggesting that the United States will attack the United States?

If so, you are even more cynical than I am.

You are also out there beyond the realm of reality.

[Occulus]

66. no, he's saying they'll USE an attack as they did 9/11.

Don't forget what- who was it, Thompson? somebody who escapes me ATM, anyway- said about another attack possibly being the end of the Constitution and the imposition of martial law. I can definitely see that, as well as forced conscription. I think that may be what all these little empty camps in the US we see pictures of now and again may be for... those who don't serve, buhbye. :tinfoilhat:

on edit: I'm very comfortable, given world history, with the "idea" of FACTIONS WITHIN the United States attacking the United States. It's happened before, to other countries, and to make the claim that "it can't happen here" is just plain laughable. Also given the Tuskeegee experiment (which admittedly was medical in nature but still only demonstrates the mindset quite well of "some Americans" being 'better' than other Americans) as well as slavery, and yes, I can completely see one sick and twisted set of minds ordering things like this. Our most recent example (that I can remember) of exactly this was, of course, Hitler. Power such as a world leader wields does not exist in a vacuum; there are always many other 'enablers' surrounding any corrupt and violent leader who believe exactly as he does. That's not even a conspiracy; it's a proven fact, over and over again, throughout history.

If you don't like using Hitler as an example of this mindset, you could just use _____________. Go ahead; pick any, as there are several to choose from.

It's a topic I absolutely hate talking about, because being the realist I am I know for certain that it is possible such a leader could somehow get elected here as well. When stressed, however, by both national and international events, would * become that kind of leader? I don't know.

But I would really like to know, preferably beforehand. I think we all would.

[NYC]

80. General Tommy Franks.

That's who said it. An interview in the magazine, Cigar Aficionado.

[neweurope]

37. I'm very much afraid that you will see just one. They need the draft.

After another attack nobody would oppose the draft nor anything else...

[imabadman]

53. If you too are suggesting the United States will attack the United States,

see the above post.

[yinkaafrica]

59. If that ploy would work, Bush would have at it

I am still not convinced Bush's hands are not
dirty with 911 blood.

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

79. this is exactly right-Rove's warming us up to expect the "event"

One more event is all it takes.
We are sooo close,

one medium sized event and we get:

un-opposed Chimp support
a draft
news blackouts
U.S. invasions of new countries
protest restrictions (outlawed)
home invasion searches and "disappearings"-no phone call
strict curfews
martial law
patriot act III

and best of all
PERMANENT CHIMP

forever and ever

[lovuian]

38. Ok People lets face it America is at war with Iraq

This is Wartime and things are ugly in War time!!!

I think we should allow all ilegal Immigrants to have drivers licenses

Bush can't have a Nation at War and yet every immigrant come in and have a party too

It doesn't work that way!!!

[giant_robot]

40. And how much do you want to bet that a blue state will bear the brunt

of such an attack? There is no justice.

[Florida_Geek]

44. I am betting on DC or Texas

While DC is very blue, I think Texas is the main target.

[giant_robot]

55. Texas? Really?

My reasoning is that terrorists target population-dense areas to maximize casualties, and most population-dense areas are blue. I'm not criticizing, just curious how you came to that conclusion.

[Florida_Geek]

64. bin Laden hates bush

and where would you hit Bush that would hurt him the most. In a state he loves. (or says to love).

Dallas /Houston are not small cities.

[neweurope]

71. Bin Laden hates Bush? Are you sure? Oh well, I used to hate somebody

I worked for, once...

-----------------


Remember Fallujah!

Bush to The Hague

[dannynyc]

45. I thought a vote for Bush . . .

would guarantee the insurgents stayed in Iraq instead of coming to the US. I heard so many times, "We can fight them there or fight them here."

I guess the flaw in the argument is it is depedant upon a finite number of insurgents. Because insurgents are being recruited so easily, there are enough to start exporting to the US.

It's only a matter of time . . .

I wonder how the reich wing will spin this . . .

[LynnTheDem]

51. That also depends on insurgents being as stupid as the rightwingnuts

to obey what Dear Leader says; "Stay in Iraq so we can fight you there & not here".

Of course, BEFORE bush's illegal invasion of Iraq, there were no terrorists & insurgents in Iraq wanting to attack us.

Now bush is offering up American sitting ducks on a silver platter in Iraq; COME AND GET EM! shouts bush. Thinking this will attract every "evildoer" in the world to go to Iraq, thus keeping the pristine streets of the US of A pristine.

Problem with this? Well, saying yer "liberating Iraq" while making Iraq the "fly-paper" for the world's evildoers, so you can muss up Iraq's streets instead of your own, might just make you look like a stupid ignorant sick little motherfucker of a hypocrite in the eyes of the world (and the Iraqis).

And the other wee problem is whether all terra-ists are really so stupid as rightwingnuts. Coz one would think a terra-ist would realize that while the cats are away fighting them evildoers in Iraq, the big fat lazy overfed mice are wide open, unguarded, unprotected and free for the taking, right here in the USA.

WE attacked THEM; by all laws of war, THEY have the legal right to attack us back. And they haven't. That the Iraqis have NOT, after 2 years, attacked the USA shows just how WEAK and NO THREAT Iraq was.

Pretty fucking hilarious now, ain't it, ignorant freeping rightwingnuts, all bush's bullshit about Iraq. Still scawed siwy of the big bad Iwaq?

You will be when your asses are drafted to go die for your bush-god.

[SheepyMcSheepster]

48. but it's better to fight them over there than over here......erm wait, eom

[clem_c_rock]

67. Probably the most pathetic thing I heard all day

When do we reach a point where we start relizing that 95% of this terrorism shit is fabricated to make the public accept the PNAC agenda.

You could never have a more effective public opinion tool than staged terrorism. Hitler profited mightily from that concept.

Proof that things have deteriorated so badly, these folks really getting this desparate? Can't the media challenge anything like this?

[Canuckistanian]

68. "We brought the fight to them"

Aren't you glad the grownups are in charge?

[Sterling]

72. Well if they want more bombs over bagdad this is the way to get em.

I hope these guys are smart enough not to give PNAC more of a mandate.

Can you imagine what it would be like for Muslims here if there were a series of attacks here like they are suggsting? It's bad enough already.

Somehow I think attacks here only help Bush, not the "terraists".

[blueheeler]

73. Bush and Sauds

The Bush families ties to oil and power with the Saudis more than likely contributed to 9-11. Any takers that they will be involved again?

[NYC]

81. You mean like the Saudi who blew up the U.S. mess tent

in Iraq?

[jmatthan]

74. Ideal excuse for Bush malAdministration

to start the Concentration Camps!!

It is just around the corner -

so be prepared as they will finally come FOR YOU TOO!!!

Jacob Matthan
Oulu, Finland

[fedsron2us]

76. The Power of Nightmares.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2876040

[imenja]

77. k