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.

 

Al-Qaeda group claims Iraq Attack

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Al-Qaeda group claims Iraq Attack


news.bbc.co.uk

A militant group linked to al-Qaeda has said it carried out four connected suicide bombings in the Iraqi capital on Tuesday that left scores dead.

The Islamic State of Iraq posted the claim on a website used by militants, news agencies reported on Thursday.

The attacks on government-run buildings in Baghdad killed at least 127 people and wounded 400, according to police sources.

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates arrived in Baghdad on Thursday.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   
Has anybody noticed that we haven't heard of a direct al-Qaeda attack in years, but it's always an "al-Qaeda linked group" or a "group with ties to al-Qaeda". How extraneous are these groups from one another? With this logic, we could most certainly label to the Bush administration a "group with ties to al-Qaeda!" Meanwhile, the actual headline of this BBC news article would, at a glance, lead you to conclude that al-Qaeda was personally responsible for the attacks.

Where is the real al-Qaeda?

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 10-12-2009 by Someone336]



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 08:32 AM
link   
If ANY group wished change for their country were genuine then they shouldn't target civilians or targets NEAR civilians.
And as a poster said before a group 'linked' to Al-Qaeda? Yeah right pull the other one its got bells on.
They're ALWAYS linked, it never IS Al-Qaeda. Just another excuse to stay in Iraq instead of letting Iraqis sort themselves out.



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Al Qaida exists but they've always been smart enough not to have a permanent operational headquarters or formal chain of command. This left them flexible, harder to detect, more intimidating.

Initially it was just a list, as the Arabic name implies. A list of rerrorists and organizations willing to co-opeate with each other and share resources.

Bin Laden was more or less CEO of al-Qaida from the 90s up to 9/11. The fundinf came from the Saudi royal family but their condition was he operate outside the country and do nothing to compromise their regime.

In Augist 1998 Al-Qaida merged with Zawahiri's Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Zawahiri runs the show since bin Laden dies years ago.

Particularly in Iraq new terrorist groups appear and disappear with new names. Most are fronted either by the mainline Al-Qaida, or dummy ephemeral organizations for one operation - usually funded bty the Saudis or Iranians.

Al-Qaida has inspired a lot of devotees and copycats. So it's hard to tell when someone uses the name whether they are getting instruction from Zawahiri or are independent.

Usually Al-Qaida focuses on one country at a time and moves a lot of their forces there. Indonesia, Yemen, and other places have housed them.

They keep loose and hard to pin down. That's one of their stregths.

They are very real. They just don't have a headquarters with an email address, offices and secretaries like Westerners want them too.


M



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 10:06 PM
link   
The Islamic State of Iraq?.. those dudes are bogus, literally.

According to the US military "ISI" is "a virtual organization in cyberspace.." and "..an actor with an Iraqi accent is used for audio recordings of speeches posted on the Web"

"To make their fictional leader appear credible, al-Masri swore allegiance to al-Baghdadi and pledged to obey him, which was essentially swearing allegiance to himsef..."

Sounds asinine enough to be the CIA... Clowns In Action

www.foxnews.com...
BAGHDAD — The Islamic State of Iraq, an umbrella terror group affiliated with Al Qaeda in Iraq, is led by a fictional character designed to mask that group's foreign influence, a captured terror leader has revealed to U.S. interrogators.



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by GovtFlu
 



BURNETT: Well, he's not a tactical commander or anything like that. What the U.S. military authorities say about Mashadani is that, last year, he created a bogus-front organization called the Islamic State of Iraq, which has its own Web site. And along with the front organization, they say that Mashadani created a fictitious leader of the Islamic State of Iraq, a guy named Umar al-Baghdadi who's actually an actor and not part of the organization at all.



Bergner said that al-Mashhadani and al-Masri had used an Iraqi actor to put a local stamp on their foreign-run organization, by co-founding "a virtual organization in cyberspace called the Islamic State of Iraq in 2006."

In Internet postings, the Islamic State of Iraq has identified its leader as Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, a name indicating Iraqi origin, with the Egyptian al-Masri as minister of war. There are no known photos of al-Baghdadi.

Bergner said al-Mashhadani had told interrogators that al-Baghdadi is a "fictional role" created by al-Masri and that an actor with an Iraqi accent is used for audio recordings of speeches posted on the Web.

"In his words, the Islamic State of Iraq is a front organization that masks the foreign influence and leadership within al-Qaida in Iraq in an attempt to put an Iraqi face on the leadership of al-Qaida in Iraq," Bergner said.


Al-Qaida in Iraq Figure in Custody

How utterly surreal
. A fictional organization that exists only in cyberspace taking credit for bombings? Secretive foreign influence? From who?

From wikipedia:


Abu Abdullah al-Rashid al-Baghdadi (ابو عبدالله الراشد البغدادي) (also known as Abu Hamza al-Baghdadi and Abu Omar al-Qurashi al-Baghdadi)[1][2] is the nom de guerre of the person purported to be the leader (or emir) of the former Mujahideen Shura Council (also known as the "Council of Freedom Fighters,"[3] the "Consultative Council of Mujahedeen,"[2] and the "Council of Holy Warriors"),[4] an umbrella organization composed of eight groups that oppose the United States' military presence in Iraq, and purported to be the head of the Islamic State of Iraq.

The Interior Ministry of Iraq claimed that al-Baghdadi was captured in Baghdad on March 9, 2007,[5] but it was later said that the person in question was not al-Baghdadi.[6] On May 3, 2007, the Iraqi Interior Ministry said that al-Baghdadi was killed by American and Iraqi forces north of Baghdad.[7] However, in July 2007, the U.S. military reported that al-Baghdadi never actually existed.[8] The detainee identified as Khaled al-Mashhadani, a self-proclaimed intermediary to Osama bin Laden, claimed that al-Baghdadi was a fictional character created to give an Iraqi face to a foreign-run terror group, and that statements attributed to al-Baghdadi were actually read by an Iraqi actor.[9]


With names like the "Council of Freedom Fighters", this has started sounding like a bad Tom Clancy novel or James Bond movie.

[edit on 11-12-2009 by Someone336]



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by GovtFlu
The Islamic State of Iraq?.. those dudes are bogus, literally.

According to the US military "ISI" is "a virtual organization in cyberspace.." and "..an actor with an Iraqi accent is used for audio recordings of speeches posted on the Web"

"To make their fictional leader appear credible, al-Masri swore allegiance to al-Baghdadi and pledged to obey him, which was essentially swearing allegiance to himsef..."

Sounds asinine enough to be the CIA... Clowns In Action

www.foxnews.com...
BAGHDAD — The Islamic State of Iraq, an umbrella terror group affiliated with Al Qaeda in Iraq, is led by a fictional character designed to mask that group's foreign influence, a captured terror leader has revealed to U.S. interrogators.


Maybe the people who operate al-Qaida are smart enough not to be easily detected by functioning as a virtual operation. And maybe they know more about themselves than Wikipedia, Fox News, guys on conspiracy forums, etc.



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Someone336
Where is the real al-Qaeda?


In Virginia. The CIA headquarters.

Al-Qaeda is a front created by them.



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by GovtFlu
The Islamic State of Iraq?.. those dudes are bogus, literally.

According to the US military "ISI" is "a virtual organization in cyberspace.." and "..an actor with an Iraqi accent is used for audio recordings of speeches posted on the Web"

"To make their fictional leader appear credible, al-Masri swore allegiance to al-Baghdadi and pledged to obey him, which was essentially swearing allegiance to himsef..."

Sounds asinine enough to be the CIA... Clowns In Action

www.foxnews.com...
BAGHDAD — The Islamic State of Iraq, an umbrella terror group affiliated with Al Qaeda in Iraq, is led by a fictional character designed to mask that group's foreign influence, a captured terror leader has revealed to U.S. interrogators.


Maybe the people who operate al-Qaida are smart enough not to be easily detected by functioning as a virtual operation. And maybe they know more about themselves than Wikipedia, Fox News, guys on conspiracy forums, etc.



Or maybe the people who operate al-qaida are computer nerds in Langley Va... or jenna bushs alter ego.. or we just don't know.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by GovtFlu


Or maybe the people who operate al-qaida are computer nerds in Langley Va... or jenna bushs alter ego.. or we just don't know.


There are two types who claim expertise on al-Qaida and terrorist organizations.

One is people who have worked in the field for years, traveled to or lived in the Middle East, speak Arabic, Farsi, Pashtu - interfaced with agencies, gone through files, interviewed captured terrorists, studied documents, transcripts, etc.

Then there are guys in their mothers' basements gathering factoids and unsubstantiated stories from conspiracy sites and Youtube who feel their knowledge and understanding is deeper.

So it comes down to which set of experts you feel have a better handle on things.



[edit on 12-12-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by GovtFlu


Or maybe the people who operate al-qaida are computer nerds in Langley Va... or jenna bushs alter ego.. or we just don't know.


There are two types who claim expertise on al-Qaida and terrorist organizations.

One is people who have worked in the field for years, traveled to or lived in the Middle East, speak Arabic, Farsi, Pashtu - interfaced with agencies, gone through files, interviewed captured terrorists, studied documents, transcripts, etc.

Then there are guys in their mothers' basements gathering factoids and unsubstantiated stories from conspiracy sites and Youtube who feel their knowledge and understanding is deeper.

So it comes down to which set of experts you feel have a better handle on things.



[edit on 12-12-2009 by mmiichael]

Ah yes, trust the experts.. like the ones who read through papers, interfaced and knew iraq had WMDs. How many of the experts you believe in have been subject to a voidire process?.. any? chances are your experts are from 4th Army PSYOPS group staffed the National Security Council's Office of Public Diplomacy.

US official described OPD as a "vast psychological warfare operation of the kind the military conducts to influence a population in enemy territory."

What is the standard to be an expert? in my world ONLY someone who has passed voidire in their field of expertise.. is considered an expert. Old retired military dudes with spare time or members of the CFR / tri-lateral com on msm cable news are shills.

As a matter of fact I do officially declare that I am a "sex and drugs expert".. I have interfaced, stuck my face in places to more closely examine them, used my tool to test different theories, I have read papers (dirty magazines), looked at porn, done field research at strip clubs. I can speak pimp, drug dealers / users, hooker, stripper, slut, ho and skank dialects.

Reminds me of jeff foxworthy:

If the .gov & msm like you're rhetoric, you could be an expert, or if you mow your lawn and find a car full of terrorists, you could be a redneck expert..lol

So called experts are all over the place belching out their alleged expertise.. believing them "just because they're experts" would make one an expert in being felony stupid.

www.fair.org...



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by GovtFlu


Ah yes, trust the experts.. like the ones who read through papers, interfaced and knew iraq had WMDs.



My point was missed. I polarized conspiracy site commonest self-proclaimed experts. People who have worked in the field, done primary source research, traveled and interfaced with their their subjects.

As opposed to the guys in basements who have read all the conspiracy site factoids and Youtubes.

When you are rushed into a hospital for a life saving operation do you want the experiences surgeon or the Internet guy who tells you modern medicine is a scam run by Big Pharma and that you should only seek natural cures?

By the way there were WMDs but not ones the govt wanted to talk about. Sensitive area of international warfare blocked from the media. Saddam Hussein had labs working on biological warfare. Lethal viruses, something similar to bubonic plague, a lot of nasty stuff rarely discussed in the press. His patrons at the time, the Russians, had a convoy transport the materials and equipment to Syria just a week before the invasion.

A sort of international accord not to discuss biological weaponry. Most advanced countries keep up as a preventative preparatory measure. Some ugly players have arsenals for future use.

A hot potato in that no one can predict what the fallout will be when these things are unleashed. They may end up harming to the source more than the hoped for victims.

Muslim countries are reluctant to use biologiclas on principle. Saddam H was a psycho who had no concern. He used mustard gas on Kurds and probably biologicals.

Bottom line, there were WMDs but the US and other civilized countries downplay their existence and lethal nature for fear of alarming the public and showing their hands. A lot goes on we aren't told about. There's no law saying governments have to tell the public everything related to national and international security.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Someone336
 


This is old news my friend... It may have just happend but this is old news. MANY attacks are claimed by them but very rarly does MSM pick up on it.

Even though they claim this attack and it killed 100+ civilians im sure somone will say some way some how bush pulled the trigger, a soldier was holding the gun, and everyone in the government was in on it. PAAAALLEEEASSSEEE!!!



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Al-qaeda carried out the attack and killed more than 100 of its muslim fellas to make sure that US forces stay there as long as the oil exists in iraq.

Russians Win First Prize Over Iraq Oil


The biggest prize at Iraq's second oil fields auction has been won by a consortium led by a Russian private oil giant.

Lukoil and Norway's Statoil ASA were awarded rights to develop the 12.9 billion barrel West Qurna Phase 2 field in the Basra region.


Sky news

Even the Russians are enjoying the loot.

Can't remember them commiting any soldiers to 'war on terror'.

Maybe they are being paid to shutup about the whole 'war on terror' HOAX.




[edit on 12-12-2009 by merkava]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by GovtFlu
Ah yes, trust the experts.. like the ones who read through papers, interfaced and knew iraq had WMDs.

By the way there were WMDs but not ones the govt wanted to talk about. Sensitive area of international warfare blocked from the media. Saddam Hussein had labs working on biological warfare. Lethal viruses, something similar to bubonic plague, a lot of nasty stuff rarely discussed in the press. His patrons at the time, the Russians, had a convoy transport the materials and equipment to Syria just a week before the invasion.


At the end of the day all these WMDs given to islamic countries and dictators trails back to US and Russia.

So whose ultimately at fault?

Do you really not think that the war in iraq was for oil and to make israel feel cosy in ME? Seriously?



[edit on 12-12-2009 by merkava]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by merkava
Do you really not think that the war in iraq was for oil and to make israel feel cosy in ME? Seriously?


Considering that in 1991 the Saudis royals invited the US and allies to their own soil as a base of operation to fight Saddam in his invasion of Kuwait and lining tanks on the Saudi border, it really can't be argued why the US went there.

You might recall in that brief war Yasser Arafat gave his support to Saddam, essentially.

The Saudis also told the US and Britain to stop short of taking Saddam out completely hoping for a spontaneous Iraqi people overthrow. A big mistake in hindsight.

Saddam violated the terms of his being allowed to stay in power by flying in prohibited zones. Terms he had agreed on. He was selling oil at deep discount in violation of the totally corrupted UN 'oil for food' program up until the more recent invasion. The reason France and Germany went berserk as Saddam owed them a fortune for promised oil and they were concerned his being eliminated would mean they wouldn't collect.

The disruption to the oil industry and pricing was the primary reason Saddam had to go. Add that he was a lunatic that made the entire region unsafe. He had invaded Iran, was working on biologicals, and was enacting genocide on the Kurds in the north of Iraq.

The US and Britain also went into Iraq and Afghanistan to corner Iran sending a clear signal of their intent.

Israel is out of the equation in the world of oil economics. The Saudis have been dictating for the US their Middle East policies for decades.

Unavoidable in this environment, the usual conspiracy BS from Jew haters and Muslim apologists always trying to forward simple-minded arguments like the US going into Iraq to keep Israel company.

King Abdullah has been deciding what the US and Britain do in the region since the 90s, King Fahd before him. No maybes on this statement.


M





[edit on 12-12-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by merkava
Do you really not think that the war in iraq was for oil and to make israel feel cosy in ME? Seriously?


King Abdullah has been deciding what the US and Britain do in the region since the 90s, King Fahd before him. No maybes on this statement.


And the funny thing is its from King abdullahs country where most of the Big terrorists and terrorist funding comes from.90% of all the terrorists around this globe are funded by saudis.

-Osama the king terrorists was form saudi.

-Most of the 9/11 hijackers were from saudi.

-The worlds most strickest sharia is found in saudi.

-Wahabi extremist ideology originates from saudi.

So it would have made more sense that instead of attacking afghanistan or iraq, US should have dropped the BOMB on Saudi and democrize it straight after 9/11.

Or was israel getting scared of this which iran is doing at the moment?


Saddam Hussein has paid out thousands of dollars to families of Palestinians killed in fighting with Israel.

Relatives of at least one suicide attacker as well as other militants and civilians gathered in a hall in Gaza City to receive cheques.

"Iraq and Palestine are in one trench. Saddam is a hero," read a banner over a picture of the Iraqi leader and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat at the ceremony.

With war looming in the Middle East, Palestinian speakers condemned the United States and Israel, which dismissed the ceremony as support for terrorism. Thursday, 13 March, 2003, 11:43 GMT


BBC



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by merkava
And the funny thing is its from King abdullahs country where most of the Big terrorists and terrorist funding comes from.90% of all the terrorists around this globe are funded by saudis.

-Osama the king terrorists was form saudi.

-Most of the 9/11 hijackers were from saudi.

-The worlds most strickest sharia is found in saudi.

-Wahabi extremist ideology originates from saudi.

So it would have made more sense that instead of attacking afghanistan or iraq, US should have dropped the BOMB on Saudi and democrize it straight after 9/11.

Or was israel getting scared of this which iran is doing at the moment?


You seem to want to reduce the complexities of political science and international relations to the level of a video game.

If the US bombed every place they were in conflict with there would either be no Russia, Korea, etc – or no US.

The Saudi component isn’t simply that they are the Bad Guys. Abdullah and his family contingency support terrorism out of cultural religious beliefs. The last thing they want is the US seriously damaged. They’d be toast 5 minutes after.

Bin Laden and a number of prominent Saudi princes want radical change in the way the country is ruled. They are strongly anti-Western. There is an ongoing power struggle within the country – so many mixed signals and activities.

Again you fail to comprehend. The current situation in Iraq is more like Phase 2 of what happened in the 90s when Iraq unsuccessfully tried to take over Kuwait and threatened to go into Saudi Arabia. Saddam was given a reprieve but then failed to comply with the agreed terms. He sort of invited the US back into his country. By 2003 the whole world, including Europe, the Saudis, even Iran agreed - it was time for him to go.

Afghanistan you won’t comprehend, but much of it has to do with the Taliban, reneged agreements on security for a pipeline to the West, and many other factors. The hope is there actually will be an elected stable govt in Afghanistan one day that represents the people of the country.

Other factors, primarily in compromising Iran which is actively destabilizing the region.

Try reading some real material by knowledgeable people on what’s going on in the Middle East beyond dopey conspiracy sites. You’ll be heartbroken to find the whole world does not revolve around the US-Israeli connection.


[edit on 13-12-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by mmiichael
 


Blah, blah, blah, blah.

I like how you assume that we've never read anything on terrorism beyond 'conspiracy sites'. But, obviously you have, making you some kind of world authority on al-Qaeda.


Afghanistan you won’t comprehend, but much of it has to do with the Taliban, reneged agreements on security for a pipeline to the West, and many other factors. The hope is there actually will be an elected stable govt in Afghanistan one day that represents the people of the country.


I'm assuming you're referring to the UNOCAL pipeline deal with the Taliban. But not one word about Enron, Kissinger, Maurice Greenberg, etc. I wonder why...

What gives you the elitist attitude to determine what a person will comprehend or not? Since you blather on about the works of 'knowledgeable people', should we assume you have impressive credentials? Or are you just dedicating to ensure that hierarchies exist, that a man is a lesser individual than those around him?



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by merkava


You seem to want to reduce the complexities of political science and international relations to the level of a video game.


Would make things easier ya know!



If the US bombed every place they were in conflict with there would either be no Russia, Korea, etc – or no US.


Well the US does bomb every place that are not capable to defend themselves or are weak.Russia and N.korea AKA china are countries that US will never mess with.



The Saudi component isn’t simply that they are the Bad Guys. Abdullah and his family contingency support terrorism out of cultural religious beliefs. The last thing they want is the US seriously damaged. They’d be toast 5 minutes after.


I agree that the upper crust of Saudis love US and the guards they provide.But the extremist wahabi ideoligy and terrorism has direct link to Saudi.If US is really serious about terrorism than they should start nippin it in the bud.



By 2003 the whole world, including Europe, the Saudis, even Iran agreed - it was time for him to go.


Europe didn't have a choice and Iran would obviously be happy because iraq war has made it alot stronger.Didn't you hear tony blairs recent revelations about how london was ready for the war whether WMDs existed or NOT.I think soon he will also reveal the true reasons behind the war before he decides to commit suicide (assasinated).



Other factors, primarily in compromising Iran which is actively destabilizing the region.


It only wants nukes, if israel can have them than why can't iran? Pakistan didn't go mental nuking india when they acquired nukes even though they have been enemies for decades.Israel knows if iran gets nukes, it will be game over for the little bully.



Try reading some real material by knowledgeable people on what’s going on in the Middle East beyond dopey conspiracy sites. You’ll be heartbroken to find the whole world does not revolve around the US-Israeli connection.


It's not bad to think out the box.Looking at things from different prespectives can help alot sometimes.I wouldn't say ATS is a 'dopey' conspiracy site as we have balanced amount of members who agree and disagree on things.And trust me we have plenty of knowledgeable people here.I have seriously learnt alot from here.






[edit on 13-12-2009 by merkava]




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join