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.

 

NEWS: 1000's Of Tribesmen Protest Against Alleged US Zawahiri Air Strike

page: 7
7
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 03:42 PM
link   
If I had the $25million I'd pay it to be the one to pull the trigger. All three - bin Laden, Zawahiri, and Zarkawi.




posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
It's safer for all of us to have them dead.



People like Bin Laden desire to be a Martry, that is the best way to keep their cause going on after their death. If they rot in a prison, it won't help their cause after the first few years but the U.S. killing him? That will.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 04:40 PM
link   
The ambassador of Pakistan came forward to talk about the attack, also due to the demonstrations in Pakistan spreading the Pakistani leader had to come public and condemn the attacks.

I was all over MSNBC.

First it was only the demonstrations in the area of the attack but as the news are spreading in the nation they are now protest in other places in Pakistan.

Pakistan leadership has always walk a very thin line when it comes to what they do to keep US happy and what the people in the country feels about that.

Pakistani people has never been a friend of the US, only the government is.


[edit on 16-1-2006 by marg6043]



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 02:26 AM
link   
Funny, but I would have thought the New York Times might have been taken by some to be slanted properly to be taken as unbiased.
That being said, what news source would you consider unbiased? Maybe the newspaper of the particular town that was struck? Exactly who do you think had loafers on the ground, to get the straight scoop?



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Pakistani people has never been a friend of the US, only the government is.


[edit on 16-1-2006 by marg6043]


Yep, everyone one of them dislikes the United State's.


Viva La Stereotype!



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 12:43 PM
link   
It would appear that Pakistani Officials are now saying that 4 or possibly 5 Insurgents were killed in the attack in addition too the 17 civilians.



Pakistan says U.S. strike killed 4 or 5 terrorists


Four or five foreign terrorists died in the purported U.S. air strike aimed at al-Qaeda's No. 2 leader in a Pakistani border village, the provincial government said Tuesday



If the reports are true that would mean we got 1/3 of those that were invited to dinner and I hope they enjoyed the la bumba supreme we served them for desert



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 12:53 PM
link   
The Pakistani president will be addressing his nation this afternoon due to the still ongoing protest all over the country.



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots

If the reports are true that would mean we got 1/3 of those that were invited to dinner and I hope they enjoyed the la bumba supreme we served them for desert



that's what we need.

A 1/3 kill ratio of terrorists to innocent people. That'll win the War on Terror!



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Hey, at least our kill ratio is way better than the 1/30 or the 1/45 kill ratios the terrorists are gettin' in downtown Baghdad nowadays.

I say, if you lay down with dogs.......and damnation! Those fleas are hellfire!



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pyros
Hey, at least our kill ratio is way better than the 1/30 or the 1/45 kill ratios the terrorists are gettin' in downtown Baghdad nowadays.


The Terrorists set out to kill as many people as possible, not just soldies or United State's employees.

The Goverment shouldn't work like that, their purpose is to win the War on Terror which is not what the terrorists want. In fact, many of them do not seem to even desire the same thing.



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Ah, yes.... the NYT screws up again. The photo of the attacked building that was in the Times was taken down, and for good reason.
The photo was staged, and obviously no-one at the Times vetted the photo with anyone with even a minimum of military background.

The "missile casing" is not a missile at all.... it's used artillery shell. HA HA HA HA HA. A drone wouldn't even be able to get off the ground if trying to carry that thing... let alone fire it.

So, that leaves the question as to what really happened, and who/what damaged the building.



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 02:41 PM
link   
"One would prefer that he's[UBL] captured somewhere outside Pakistan. By some other people" - Musharraf

Pakistan is one bullet away from being a rogue nation w/nukes. Musharraf is our flimsy suspension bridge twisting above the lava and there have been continuous attempts to cut that bridge from their side. We allow him latitudes such as absconding a q khan from our interrogators. These tribal areas continue to welcome militant Uzbeks, Chechens, and taliban remnants but odds are a venturing westerner can only expect to get instantly fragged or taken hostage before ever meeting a friendly, let alone accessing the regions bestowed to their militant guests. In the aftermath of Tora Bora, "staying the course" should have been the logical pursuit of al-qa'ida, taliban, and their sympathizers with our full military might into these regions instead of the disingenuous but more lucrative Iraq diversion. Yeah the pashtuns would have fiercely resisted but we would very likely have zawahiri, omar, and ubl dead or alive by now instead of being taunted by their tri-monthly reality series, and the pashtuns returned to their former independence (be it with resentment). Terrain too tough? not for the Tillmans out there who hear the cries of our lost brothers & sisters. Stability? - What Stability? Some cautionary military pragmatists/strategists claimed a Pakistan coup de'tat would have ensued? HELL-O - unless these tribal regions have some secret air power/magic carpet or formidible arsenal/genie to counter I don't think their handfull of Kalashnikovs, AKs, RPGs, IEDs or rag-tag numbers would have mattered much in the inevitable capture of these top scampering scumbags and besides Musharraf has been a target regardless either way.

Now, currently, it is most unfortunate that innocent unwitting women & children are purposefully used as human shields by that smiling bearded guest & his mysteriously well-armed motley entourage so every effort should be made to target these death dealers when en route to their next refuge or while their convoy isolated instead of waiting to play residential rocket roulette by remote which only recruits more vengeful kinsmen to their withering cause.



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 03:17 PM
link   
That is my point, Pakistan is not more stable than Iran, I think Iran is actually more stable.

Pakistan leader and his affiliations with the US have the population very upset.

The leadership in that country can be change in hart bit, and then their nuclear power will be in the anti-American population's hand.



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
A 1/3 kill ratio of terrorists to innocent people. That'll win the War on Terror!


Check the numbers again.




Pakistan: Terrorists Killed in U.S. Strike

At least four foreign terrorists died in the purported U.S. airstrike aimed at al-Qaida's No. 2 leader in a Pakistani border village, the provincial government said Tuesday.

A statement, issued by the administration of Pakistan's semiautonomous tribal regions bordering Afghanistan, also said that between 10 and 12 foreign extremists had been invited to the dinner at the village hit in Friday's attack.


- 'At least' four foreign terrorists died
- 10-12 'foreign extremists' (terrorists) died

That accounts for anywhere from 14 - 16 + of the people
who died. That just leaves the abetters who invited the
terrorists - just one to three of them. Considering the
fact that these one, two or three people invited the
terrorists, knowing full well who and what they were,
they aren't exactly innocent.

The ratio is 17 - 0 . 17 guilty and 0 innocent.

Unless someone comes up with some bodies of children.
Haven't seen any yet. I'm sure if they were there, the
locals who are in bed with the terrorists would be sure
to parade them in the news. They haven't. So they
most likely aren't there.



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Re-read the article and pay a bit more attention on what it is saying, clearly if 17 terrorists were killed they would say that.

What they do say is:


A statement, issued by the administration of Pakistan's semiautonomous tribal regions bordering Afghanistan, also said that between 10 and 12 foreign extremists had been invited to the dinner at the village hit in Friday's attack.


Being invited, does not mean they attended. You are adding bits to the story.


Originally posted by FlyersFan
Unless someone comes up with some bodies of children.


Your own source says:


Eighteen residents, including women and children, were also killed in the strike, the provincial government said Tuesday.


Do not pick and choose...

[edit on 17/1/2006 by Odium]



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Sorry Flyers but the news in CNN are claiming that 4 to 5 terrorist were killed along with the 18 civilians.

I am not trying to contradict your story but I am starting to believe that it may be some cover up going on.

The bodies were buried by the locals but somebody took them for DNA testing the Pakistani government can not tell who.

I think this getting better by the hour.



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043


I am not trying to contradict your story but I am starting to believe that it may be some cover up going on.


Ya there is a cover all right literally, the ones that supported the insurgents dug holes immediately to cover up the evidence they were there or at least the majority of them. Then to make it look like it was only innocents they threw in some of them without giving them a dignified church service and burial. :shk:

Me thinks that is rule 19 of their training manual bury everyone killed immediately to cover up the fact there were insurgents involved.




[edit on 1/17/2006 by shots]



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 05:36 PM
link   
shots


Me thinks that is rule 19 of their training manual bury everyone killed immediately to cover up the fact there were insurgents involved.


Me thinks you thinks wrong. Burying the dead before a day has passed is religious custom.

It has nothing to do with terrorists.



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne


Me thinks you thinks wrong. Burying the dead before a day has passed is religious custom.

It has nothing to do with terrorists.


I do not buy it and their burial manual says they should be buried as promptly as possible, (In this case no time limit was stated) They also have other instructions like washing the body and praying to mecca which are part of their tradition that have to be met.

A Handbook of Muslim Burials

Traditions will of course vary from area to area.

Now from the sound of reports on the event they did not take anytime in burying them so I doubt they were all innocents or they all suddenly lost their religion which again I doubt was the case.



[edit on 1/17/2006 by shots]



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 06:26 PM
link   

from Odium
quote: Originally posted by shots

If the reports are true that would mean we got 1/3 of those that were invited to dinner and I hope they enjoyed the la bumba supreme we served them for desert



that's what we need.

A 1/3 kill ratio of terrorists to innocent people. That'll win the War on Terror!

Your statement should read "A 1/3 kill ratio of terrorists to total people killed". Those killed who harbored the terrorists were not innocent.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join