It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Video shows first American suicide bomber in Syria (title)

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Just because he was American and wants to go to heaven is no excuse for taking lives of those who want to hang around a bit longer and die of old age. If there is a hell I hope there is a special room for him to reflect upon his actions. If not glad he did not get to kill more and died by his own hand. Evidently this child of his god grew up in Florida and went to a few different colleges before moving overseas. Was he radical before he left or was he radicalized once he arrived ? TPTB love dummies like this guy but usually they are brainwashed at an early age or have witnessed something that makes them want payback.. That I can understand although the current vernacular is blowback...


An al-Qaida-linked group fighting in Syria has released video of the first American to carry out a suicide attack in the country's civil war, showing him smiling and saying he looked forward to going to heaven.

The Nusra Front released the new video late on Friday. It shows an American citizen, Moner Mohammad Abu-Salha, 22, with other fighters before the 25 May attack that targeted several army positions at the same time. It said two of the other three suicide attackers in the assault in the government-held north-western city of Idlib were from foreign countries, including one who was identified as being from the Maldives.

www.theguardian.com...




posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 08:38 AM
link   
I think we sometimes think that these types are only the way they are because of the culture they were brought up in .The west seems to think that if we educated them like we do in the west this sort of stuff would not happen .We raise our own type of terrorist here and train them .When you consider the dark operations of the CIA and how they are creating whole groups around the world to kill innocent people , I see no difference other then the sophistication and the amount of money each group uses . We hear in the news that Russia is arming the rebels in Ukraine and that is a bad thing .It's so bad that some think it worth going to war over .

We hear how arms are being supplied to the drug cartel in the south and we need to invest more money on the war against drugs .We ship guns out and bring back drugs from all of these places around the world .The CIA does this .Nato is part of it .Our govt's. are involved in it . We create big banks just to handle the money being used . What kind of witch craft are they using to create such a monster . When will it end . Getting mad doesn't seem to be a option for all so I get sad . What waste we create . ETA vid

edit on 29-7-2014 by the2ofusr1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 08:46 AM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky

If they had an Air force they wouldn't need to sacrifice themselves. It doesn't really matter what country they are from, that is the ultimate sacrifice in war. To lay down your life for your friends. Desperate measures are called for to achieve the same results as a modern mechanized army.

The BS about 70 virgins in Heaven is BS propagated to make us think they are idiots. If one of our fighter pilots gets shot down bombing mud huts and dies then he is a hero.

What we see with so called suicide bombers is commitment to a cause. At least in this case. Younger less apt fighters are more drugged and indoctrinated to "push the button".

Flame on.
edit on 29-7-2014 by intrptr because: spelling



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 09:25 AM
link   
There is no vid on the link. I wanted to see this dumbass blow himself to bits.



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky

The one good thing about suicide bombers is they don't have a very long shelf life, thank God.

For those he killed:

Inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji'un



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

If it is "commitment" to the cause why is it never an Imam carrying the bomb? Are they not "committed" enough?


edit on 29-7-2014 by 200Plus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 09:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: 200Plus
a reply to: intrptr

If it is "commitment" to the cause why is it never an Imam carrying the bomb? Are they not "committed" enough?

Along those same lines, neither do our "leaders" subject themselves or their families to the front lines.



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 10:12 AM
link   
I will only be impressed by their brainwashing abilities when an American with the name of Joe Smith does the same thing. I can't imagine it is very hard to get a radicalized Muslim to do this.

Nonetheless, thanks for sharing OP. It certainly is humbling to see so many Americans and Europeans alike going over there to commit 'jihad.'



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

So everyone over the age of 30 is a "leader" in Islam (radical Islam of course). It is the young and dumb that blow themselves up, just as the young and dumb are used as cannon fodder in the West. The difference is, in the West the cannon fodder has a chance to survive.

I have seen a two star General put rounds down range. Granted he wasn't alone and I doubt he could hit the broad side of a barn. No one that high up in the terrorist hierarchy puts themselves in harms way.

Planner
Financier
Bomb maker
Carrier
Bomber

No connections up the chain and deniability down the chain. Armies do not have that luxury. Hamas bombs Israel and nobody can lay blame anywhere, Israel bombs Hamas and we all know exactly who to blame because there is a chain of command willing to shoulder that burden. Anything less is pure cowardice.


edit on 29-7-2014 by 200Plus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 10:29 AM
link   
Why not test a few of them in israel send a couple thousand there for r&d.



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: 200Plus


It is the young and dumb that blow themselves up, just as the young and dumb are used as cannon fodder in the West. The difference is, in the West the cannon fodder has a chance to survive.

The only difference is the resources and equipment. A bomber pilot from the west has the "luxury" of flying over the target at ten thousand feet and "pushing the button".

Comparing the two, who is the braver and who is the more cowardly? So the western pilot has a billion dollar jet pack strapped to his ass and a ton of training.

Diving on a target and pickling a stick of bombs is suicidal, imo. They know that and are prepared for it.

Difference is the western "bomb carrier" is intending to get away with it and escape any consequences. Intending to flee the scene, oblivious to the carnage he has caused or even if the intended target was destroyed.

The penultimate cowardly murderer is the drone pilot safely nestled in a air-conditioned trailer deep in the protective confines of the United States. After raining Hell Fire on foreign nationals thousands of miles away, he goes home every night to dinner and family.

How removed is that?

The bomb carrier in the ME steels himself for certain death and walks right into the target he intends to destroy and looks his intended victims in the eye as he hammers down. How intimate is that? How dedicated is that?

Not new either. Japanese Kamikazes did it too as their empire crumbled. So did the Viet Cong. Then theres the Moro of the Phillipines. Samurai warriors, etc., etc.

We tend to label this kind of activity as negative but the bombs have no conscience regardless of how they get there. Its impossible for me to make any higher ground moral distinction between the two.
edit on 29-7-2014 by intrptr because: spelling



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

I wouldn't defend the Air Farce myself. I am a ground pounder so I don't have those "luxuries" either.

I do not know why you would want to make a moral argument for killing and/or war to begin with. War is the ultimate failure of humanity. It is when we can no longer achieve a goal in a civilized manner that we go to war. When that happens the lowest man on the totem pole does the bleeding. There is no right, just lots of wrongs.

Western armies do not kill themselves to kill the enemy in war. Patton said it best "do not be willing to die for your country, let the other bastard die for his". We live with our actions for the rest our lives, however long that may be. We do not get instant release from survivors guilt, or release from the remorse of taking lives.

Do you think the radical Muslims never suffer PTSD? Do you think such a thing is above them or beneath them emotionally? Perhaps they blow themselves up to avoid such a thing, because they see it as a sign of weakness.



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: 200Plus


I do not know why you would want to make a moral argument for killing and/or war to begin with.

I'm not. Sorry if I gave that impression.


War is the ultimate failure of humanity. It is when we can no longer achieve a goal in a civilized manner that we go to war.

I thought wars were a money making venture. Conquest for resources and booty and a huge cash cow for the factories for war in the Military Industrial Complex. After all the false flags you still think they try to prevent wars?

I hold they periodically make war… on purpose.

but you re right ordinary people are the ones paying the price.



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join