Hunting Al Qaeda Where?

Hunting Al Qaeda Where?

http://www.atlargely.com/2007/01/hunting_al_qaed.html

Larisa Alexandrovna
1/9/2007

From the Washington Post:

"A U.S. Air Force AC-130 gunship attacked suspected al-Qaeda members in southern Somalia on Sunday, and U.S. sources said the operation may have hit a senior terrorist figure.

The strike took place near the Kenyan border, according to a senior officer at the Pentagon. Other sources said it was launched at night from the U.S. military facility in neighboring Djibouti. It was based on joint military-CIA intelligence and on information provided by Ethiopian and Kenyan military forces operating in the border area."

I find myself asking once again, Why Now?

Why is Somalia is getting bombed? I know the answer being provided, that we are hunting Al Qaeda. But we know that this administration is not remotely interested in hunting down Al Qaeda. Consider who our key ally is in the region or at least one of our key friends in the region and then tell me with a straight face we are hunting Al Qaeda and we are doing it now because it was suddenly needed.

If this administration wanted to genuinely hunt Al Qaeda, would they not start with Pakistan and would they not have started six years ago?

Let me first say that it is accurate that there are some terrorist cells in Somalia, perhaps some Al Qaeda elements as well. But in the last six years of the Bush administration's war of error and neglect, the rise in terrorism in general has been shockingly high and has spread beyond the region we have targeted. More importantly, the terrorism of "now" and the terrorism of September 11 is still being largely enabled by US "friends" while the US goes terror hunting in areas and against nations that are comparatively benign. No, I don't mean that some terrorists are okay (for the right wing spin cycle that will no doubt garble what I am saying). What I mean is, one does not attack the haystack instead of looking for the needle.

Pakistan is so involved with Al Qaeda elements and other terrorist organizations that they brazenly continue to harbor Osama (remember him?) and protect Taliban leaders.

In fact, it was Pakistan who birthed out the Taliban, trained, funded, and armed the regime. It was Pakistan who helped birth out Al Qaeda and then trained, protected, funded, and armed them as well. And while US is hoping to start yet another war - this one with Iran - over worries of WMD, it has been Pakistan who has been the most aggressive prolifirator, selling arms to Iran, North Korea, Lybia, and anyone with a wallet.

Pakistan is also directly and intimately connected to the attacks of September 11. Remember that day?^ I know, it is difficult to recall something so tragic when we are in a war with a country that has nothing to do with that tragedy whatsoever.

The few funding routes that were traced (not that our other ally the UAE would allow us heathen to touch their banking records in order to track down the murderers behind the murder of nearly 3,000 American souls) showed that Pakistani intelligence,the ISI, transfered money directly to the lead 911 hijacker, Atta. The transfer was carried out by Omar Sheikh Mohammad, an ISI agent on the orders of then ISI head, Lieutenant-General Mahmoud Ahmed.

It was also Omar who assassinated US journalist Danny Pearl. Yet this administration welcomed their leadership and intelligence officers with open arms and continue to do so. Hunting Al Qaeda? Hardly!

The London bombing suspects were directly tied to Pakistan as well. Bombings in India too are tied to Pakistan. Remember, India is the largest democratic nation and are we not supposed to be spreading democracy?

Yet in the first effort since September 11, to actually go after Al Qaeda, our leadership decides to bomb Somalia?

What about Pakistan's new found friendship with the Taliban, again?

Aside from all of that, Al Qaeda has become the catch-all phrase for every terrorist organization, when the actual Al Qaeda organization was hardly ever that large to begin with. Let's be clear, there are organizations that are far more dangerous, far more ingrained, far bigger in numbers, far better funded, and far better capable of carrying out massive murder. Al Qaeda is not the same thing as the Muslim Brotherhood, the Nazi Muslims as they are known because of their close ties to Hitler. Nor is Al Qaeda the same thing as Gray Wolves, the Turkish neo-fascist terrorist organization that should be also of concern. Why are they not? Perhaps because both groups get their support and funding from our "friends." Yet all terrorist organization, no matter who they are or who is sponsoring them are being called Al Qaeda.

But even if we are actually hunting Al Qaeda, that particular organization, and if this administration is actually serious, then why did it take six years to bomb a country that may have some Al Qaeda elements? Why now? And why Somalia and not Pakistan? Why Iraq and not the UAE?

If anyone believes for a moment that this administration actually is interested in rooting out Al Qaeda, then these are probably the same people who believe that Saddam Hussein attacked us on September 11. Ignorance is understandble given the corporate propaganda war that has been waged against this country and its citizens. Willfull stupidity, however, is unpardonable.

Yes, we are winning the war of terror and doing it in a way that shocks the heavens and awes the most cynical among us.

But why now, again, why now? I suspect it has something to do with the timing of a certain speech tomorrow. After all, one needs to point to success at something before they can ask for more resources, do they not?

In tomorrow's speech on why we need to increase more deaths in Iraq, the President will no doubt claim two victories in the war of corruption, greed, and unimaginable abuses of power.

He will say that the execution of Saddam Hussein - for which by the way, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice gave the green light (you probably missed that with all the news of gas leaks and bombs in Miami), and he will point to our victory in bombing the hell out of Somalia where Al Qaeda terra-istas are plotting their next big attack on America.

As you hear these words, ask yourself how credible and how honest this President is in wanting to take out Al Qaeda. Ask yourself that and ask yourself why we need more troops in Iraq? I assure you the President will make reference to Al Qaeda fighters in Iraq, when the reality is that we are in a civil war and the majority of fighters are Iraqis.

"It was also Omar who assassinated US journalist Danny Pearl."

Wasn't KSM recently declared the murderer of Daniel Pearl?

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/sho...25&postcount=1

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/l...n/15755132.htm

On Thursday, Time posted an item on its Web site reporting that administration officials want to charge Mohammed with Pearl's January 2002 murder, in which Pearl's throat was slit. The killing was captured on a grisly videotape.

"One former U.S. national security official tells Time there is no doubt that KSM personally wielded the knife that killed the Wall Street Journal reporter," the report said.

It's possible the Administration doesn't want to bring attention to Omar Sheikh. The first suspect in the Pearl murder, and alleged "paymaster" of 9/11.

Although, Omar himself said that he "didn't (physically) take part in the actual events (murder of Pearl)."

Did everyone catch W's (speechwriter's) masterful rhetorical sleight of hand, in which he referred to BOTH al Qaeda and Sunni insurgents (as being active especially in Anbar province) and subsequently just said "they they they"? So, who was he talking about at any given time. "Al Qaeda in Iraq" or Sunni insurgents? Sunni insurgents or al Qaeda in Iraq? Hard to say -- just the way he likes it, I'm sure.

Funny you should mention the mentionings of Al Qaeda...

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14117

I redded everything I thought was "fear mongering" using the 9/11 attacks as ammuniation. Among other things.