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.

 

WAR: New al-Zarqawi Tape Surfaces on the Internet

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 09:09 PM
link   
A recording purported to be by Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has been posted on the Internet. In the taped statement he assures victory of the insurgents in Iraq but conceded it will take some time. He also claims that his top aide, Omar Hadid, had been killed in the U.S. led attack on Fallujah. U.S. officials had thought Hadid escaped the fighting in Fallujah. Zarqawi denounced the upcoming January 30th Iraqi elections as well as attacked Shi'ite religious leader Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani for working with the coalition. Intelligence agencies have not yet verified the authenticity of the recording.
 



www.msnbc.msn.com
BAGHDAD, Iraq - The most feared terrorist leader in Iraq called on his followers Thursday to show patience and prepare for a long struggle against the Americans, saying in an audiotape posted on the Internet that “ferocious wars ... take their time” but that victory was assured.

The authenticity of the tape could not immediately be verified. It appeared before President Bush was sworn in for a second term that begins under the shadow of a continuing insurgency in Iraq.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Zarqawi seems to be getting desperate after losing his Fallujah stronghold. The latest bombings have been lethal to Iraqi police and civilians but, with the exception of the December suicide attack in Mosul, have left coalition forces relatively unscathed. The success or failure of the January 30th elections will be the major indicator of what happens going forward in Iraq.

Related News Links:
www.voanews.com
seattlepi.nwsource.com
www.reuters.com

[edit on 20-1-2005 by TrickmastertricK]




posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 09:26 PM
link   
This guy is gettin old. Always the same ol same ol. I mean, whenever we leave Iraq, they will call it their victory. Ive had it with these people. Biggest bunch of ingrats Ive ever seen.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Ungrateful? Why? You can only be grateful if you ask for something and its given to you- Those people didnt ask to be freed (if you can call it that)
whats your point?



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
Ungrateful? Why? You can only be grateful if you ask for something and its given to you- Those people didnt ask to be freed (if you can call it that)
whats your point?


WRONG! those 40% didnt, cuz they were "loyal" to Saddam, the other 60% are pretty darn glad we're there...see for yourself
Pictures the Media DOESNT want you to see



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 09:41 PM
link   
What you talkin' about Willis?


dgtempe, who and what are you addressing?



seekerof



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77Zarqawi seems to be getting desperate after losing his Fallujah stronghold. The latest bombings have been lethal to Iraqi police and civilians but, with the exception of the December suicide attack in Mosul, have left coalition forces relatively unscathed. The success or failure of the January 30th elections will be the major indicator of what happens going forward in Iraq.


I presume this thinking is that it is necessary to avoid elections now at all cause because:

Once they take place, the insurgents put their arms down, place their tails between their legs and walk away, because elections have more power than arms.

That they do so also because elections in the name of democracy will cause them to cower and run away.

That they do so because elections in the name of democracy actually are in the name of democracy.

That they do so because they know the election the current elect must call within a year or so of having ratified a constitution, will always find people marching to the polls, and by that virtue the election was a success for democracy.

That they do so because once one election takes place, henceforth the country marches peacefully into obscurity.

That tyrants never run for office disguised as pacifiers and ultimately usurp democracy.

Someone forgot to mention to the U.S that as with the British and Hussein, theirs is just a dream.

What then will be the excuses a year from now when these insurgent activities have not cooled?

[edit on 1/20/05 by SomewhereinBetween]



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 09:49 PM
link   
Spliff, loyal to Saddam?? who? people like me? LOL


*shakes head*

Hi, Seekerof, its been a long agonizing day for some of us
Good to see your avatar, though
I must go put some ice on my forehead and forget my Bush memories of today. *sigh*



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Somewhereinbetween,

My thinking is that if the elections are successful with a high turnout that will show that Iraqi citizens are dedicated to building a new democratic government. With their own elected officials in power writing a new constitution I feel the citizens will feel invested in the process and fight harder against the terrorist rebels, exposing them and giving them no safe harbor.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 09:59 PM
link   
Okie dokie, dgtempe, no biggie. Hope you feel better.


Further signs of desperation by Zarqawi?
Zarqawi says Israeli, Jordanian troops involved in Fallujah assault

Now, I can understand Jordon being named, despite the validity of the claim Zarqawi asserts of Jordanian participation in the Fallujah offensive.
Jordan indicts al-Zarqawi - 17/10/2004

But to name Israel and the allegation he asserts, thats quite another motivation, but then again, we all know why, right?


Strange that there was no reports of wounded or killed Jordanians or Israelis, huh?





seekerof



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 10:08 PM
link   
I have been saying this for awhile now to some here in passing, but I think something Huge is going to be going down in the Middle East very soon. This was before all the Syria, Iran talk came out on a more public fashion. Something is up, and it seems that Israel my play the biggest part in it. Whether they are the ones attacking or being attacked, I have no clue.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Somewhereinbetween,

My thinking is that if the elections are successful with a high turnout that will show that Iraqi citizens are dedicated to building a new democratic government. With their own elected officials in power writing a new constitution I feel the citizens will feel invested in the process and fight harder against the terrorist rebels, exposing them and giving them no safe harbor.
Fair enough. My thinking is that there are many reasons why Iraqis would want to show up at the polls:

Your explanation;

If they want at least a say in the process they feel they must vote;

To speak out against a puppet regime;

To back the current officials;

To hope for a secular government.

To elect a Shia controlled government;

To elect a sunni controlled government;

To ensure a voice from each of the three factions, Kurds; Sunni and Shia.

Conversely, they may not care if they feel that they will have no impact;

It is too dangerous:

The vote will be fixed;

Whatever the government, it means nothing until the occupiers leave.

You see, it is never cut and dried, and while it is wonderful to envision others whose lives and country you do not share as having your ideals, history does not support this view.

Currently the Iraqi people are powerless! If I were an Iraqi, I would encourage everyone to vote, just to get the occupiers of the country, or at least call them on their promise to get out. After that, whether they leave or not, the die is cast, and the truth behind the whole invasion will be known. What follows next is dependent on the path the country takes.



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 01:26 AM
link   
The U.S. government has agreed to withdraw all troops on request of the Iraqi government as part of returning sovereignty. If the new Iraqi government requests the U.S. and coalition members to withdraw after the elections, they will. However, I doubt this will happen since most Iraqis don't support the insurgency, it is mainly made up of foreign terrorists and Saddam loyalists.

[edit on 1/21/2005 by djohnsto77]



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 09:22 AM
link   
HEY, just because certain groups of people didn't support Sadam does NOT mean that they want the friggin USA to "Liberate" them. Oh did I say liberate? I meant to say invade..... Lets think about this, do all the non-supporters of President Bush want China to "Liberate" them??? I don't think so. Team America @#$# YA!



posted on Jan, 21 2005 @ 10:45 AM
link   


I presume this thinking is that it is necessary to avoid elections now at all cause because:

Once they take place, the insurgents put their arms down, place their tails between their legs and walk away, because elections have more power than arms.


I would actually think quite the opposite, I believe the fighters will be completely unfazed by elections because they're main priority is fighting the coalition to get them out of their country, and as long as Iraq has a leader that sides with the US the fighting will continue.

I seriously doubt fighting will 'end' or 'fade out' simply because some other US-Biased cabinet takes control. You will most likely see more people swelling the ranks of the fighters when the Shia's win in a landslide because of large parts of the Sunni's boycotting the election.

The Sunni's will feel cheated, and they will fight, for the reason that they know the US has not been able to train anywhere near the amount of Iraqi National Guard or Police required to secure the country for their own escape, and the current amount IG is wavering.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join