|
|
Blog Feeds
Anti-Empire
The Saker Indymedia Ireland is a volunteer-run non-commercial open publishing website for local and international news, opinion & analysis, press releases and events. Its main objective is to enable the public to participate in reporting and analysis of the news and other important events and aspects of our daily lives and thereby give a voice to people.
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Voltaire NetworkVoltaire, international edition
|
Code Red: Checnyha - Saudi - Morocco national |
miscellaneous |
news report
 Sunday May 18, 2003 01:38 by hunter - pfln
 Is this the beginning of a new phase in the 'war on terror'? So the invasion of Iraq is a victory in the war on terror Mr. Bush? It has been a significant step forward in the crack-down on Islamic etxremists? It has broght us closer to world peace has it? Tell that to the victims and prepetraters of the recent wave of suicide bombings around the globe. According to Moroccan interior minister, Sahel: " These are the well-known signatures of international terrorists." Well personally I would say they bear all the hallmarks of terrorism, period. The past week has seen at least four high profile suicide attacks (or as they have now begun to be known 'homicide bombings') in the Muslim world. On Monday Chechnyan independence fighters staged an attack on the Russian federal security HQ in Nadterechny, a northern Chechnyan region. Two men drove an explosive laden truck into the government building. The bombing left over 40 people dead, and over 200 injured. Strike one. Tuesday: The people of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, wake up to the news that "Bin Laden is back". And given the current state of affairs in the middle east I'm sure many cheered. Actually in truth, it was the people of Britain who woke up to the news "Bin Laden is back" thanks to The Sun - who I'm pretty sure told us all that the invasion of Iraq would lead to a _decrease_ in terrorism. In all four explosions rocked the Saudi capital, in three different Western housing complexes. In all, these attacks, which accroding to Colin Powell "bear all the hallmarks of Al-Queada", 29 people died, and many more were injured. Although the initial Offical US figure was 91 dead. It also believed that warnings of imminent attacks were issued, but ignored by Saudi officials. Of course we can never be sure about things like this. Wednesday: Another suicide attack near Gudermes, in Chechnya. This time killing 14 people and injuring many. The target was Akhmad Kadyrov, the head of the Moscow-backed Chechen administration. The attackers failed to get their man. So we roll on to Saturday: In Casablanca, Morocco, the Belgian consulate, a Jewish community centre and a Spanish restaurant are targets in a series of apparently co-ordinated attacks. Up to 40 people were killed, and in the region of 100 injured. Al-Qeada? Well, the way I see it is, whether it was the loose 'Al-Queada' grouping, or some other co-thinkers, it does not matter to the broader picture. Unfocus from the explosive details of the picture, and take in the whole breath-taking vista. In face of all the evidence to the contrary, the war on Iraq has been 'won'. No 'weapons of mass destruction' have been found, no links to Al-Qaeda have been found [1], and it seems to be repression as usual in Iraq. Yet the one outcome of this war that we can be 100% sure of, as we have four undeniable proofs in front of us, is that it has not, repat not, resulted in a reduction of 'international terrorism'. In fact, it has increased it. Twofold. After the Afghan assault, we had the Bali bombings, and an attack on a US ship (if I remember correctly). After the Iraq invasion we have four in one week. Were these attacks internationally co-ordinated by 'terrorist masterminds'? Except in the case of Chechnya I would say not. Rather, I would suggest that these are simply the opening salvos in the new phase of the 'war on terror' - the hunted strike back. A scenario, many on both the right and the left put forward as a certain outcome of this war. We have been proved right, and I take no glee in saying that. The war on terror is a failure. The war on Iraq has been proven to be a failure (only of course if you actaully accept the junta 'rationale' for going to war in the first place - I don't). How about addressing the problems which actually lead to terrorism? You know... exploitation, poverty, oppression, those old ditties that just won't go away? Sorry what's that Mr. Bush, did you say something about terrorist oil plots? Oh no, sorry 'Foil terrorist plots' - my mistake.
|
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (11 of 11)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11Unless of course, you count the 'revalations' in the Sunday Telegraph, which whether true or not, only show us what the BBC told us before the war. In an MI5 document, leaked to the BBC, they say that in the past IRaq and Al-Qeada had made gestures towards each other, but nothing came of it thanks to their ideological differences, ie they cant stand each other.
Hunter you are an ass.
On Tuesday there was a bomb attack in Chechnya that killed about 50 Russian soldiers only a very short time before the Riyhad attack that , apart from the attackers, killed mostly Vinell employees . Not surprising you missed that since it and the Saudi attack were quarantined from each other in the media. Play down the cross-continental capabilities of the enemy and all that.
You didn't mention that series of 19 bomb attacks on Wednesday(?) in Pakistan that raked havoc on Shell and Caltec petrol stations. Maybe that wouldn't be good for their shares opening Monday. Give the big shareholders time to offload a few million before the media lets the little investors know the stock is falling due to their customer outlets closing in Asia and ar East?
You also missed yesterdays attack on settlers in the occupied territories or this mornings attacks in Israel. Or was this article written sometime early yesterday for Sunday morning publication? A suspicious type like me would wonder such things. You seem so concerned for Israel I wonder you mention neither and the article being written earlier seems like the only explanation.
There were also two Norwegian ISAF soldiers shot in Afghanistan but maybe you might not classify that on as "terrorism" , I don't know. I mean if anyone is killing any of "our guys" anywhere in the world they simply must be "terrists", right?
Yes, you were lied to. If you believed your leaders when they said that occupying Afghanistan and Iraq and having repressive laws and security measures in the "homelands" would end "terrorism".
They haven't stopped lying you know! Have you read the latest opinion poll?
If you are attacked, the logic of these arguments seems to be, to do nothing because to respond will only enrage the attackers further. This is non-logic. If the people who commit these terrorist atrocities are even just a bit more crazy than Hunter and James McKenna, then they are just accidents waiting to happen anyway, or rather, ticking bombs: nothing will stop them except being killed or imprisoned. The battle is joined already, so the best method is to fight it with all means available right from the outset.
Since all this terrorism is islamic in origin, I personally would recommend severing all direct transport links with Muslim countries, preventing the ingress of people from those countries, and the severing of all but the most necessary trade links. Link them all stew and fester in their own, backward, medieval, anti-Semitic juices.
I resent having to follow you around the world having to put right your idiocy.
so Avi and the rightwing Israeli establishment and US jewish lobby whom he so excellently represents recommend severing all ties with the Islamic states.
Saudi Arabia 265.3 billion barrels of crude.
Iraq 115 billion barrels of crude
Kuwait 98.8 billion barrels of crude.
Iran 96.4 billion barrels of crude.
UAE 62.8 billion barrels of crude.
Libya 30 billion barrels of crude.
Nigeria 41.1 billion barrels of crude.
Algeria 12.7 billion barrels of crude.
that leaves only Norway China Russia Mexico Venezuela and the USA with reserves of over 10 billion barrels of crude.
Combined non islamic reserves of crude:
191.5 billion barrels of crude.
if Iraq is considered a US territory now, the US crude reserves jump from 22 billion to 137 billion barrels.
120.000 barrels were lost with the Prestige.
Now Avi, after cutting trade with the oil rich nations, you may perhaps think about ending the concrete trade?
do you need figures on the reserves/production of concrete ingredients? (another islamic state speciality)
Because of the activities of Islamic terrorists, Muslim countries, apart from a select few such as Kuweit, Iraq, Qatar, Bahrein, have become such a threat and frankly such a frickin' bore that there really is nothing they have that we can't learn to do without.
By the way, if you don't like my posts, don't read or respond to them: there is no requirement -it's all quite voluntary.
hence no mention of the attacks in the occupied territories.
and thanks for the info about the (real) second Chechnyan attack, and Pakistan. I heard nothing of either of these. Mind you its hardly surprising given the media's cock-sucking.
I actually wanted to say some more stuff at the end, but I was distracted hence end is quite weak.
And if we are annoying avi then we must be doing something right ;)
iosaf do you really follow avi around or what? does he post on other indys?
What is the source for your production of oil per country figures? What is the exact breakdown of production for the US?
Avi have you been employed to contribute to this site? I'm simply amazed at the volume of your posting... any plans to set up Avi-media.ie?
I'm glad the war on terror has been won now we can all read stories about the peace process in the holylands now.
Just love the way any time muslims attack theyre called Islamic terrorists/extremists.of course wed be completely wrong to call a psycho war monger preaching about how god will be behind them(with a neon cross behind him) a catholic terrorist/extremist!how could we even think twice about calling George Bush a a terrorist?dont you remember why he killed all those iraqis???to liberate them,of course. thats why theyre living without food water basic medical supplies and electricity!and then theres his pal sharon, hes not a terrorist either.the only reason he murders innocent palestinians constantly is because theyre not actually innocent.as a matter of fact theyre all terrorists.you know why..its cos theyre muslims!
and Avi hopefully next time the "islamic terrorists will actually do their job properly!
Chechen Warlord Says He Was Behind Attacks
http://www.latimes.com/la-fg-briefs20.2may20,0,7532739.story
CENTCOM blackout on Pakistan
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_21-5-2003_pg1_7
The timing of these terrorist attacks is just beautiful for the Bush Cabal.
Iraq war over, disaster all around. Iraq faded from the media. In comes War on Terror.
Also it is well known the USA intends to seize the oil fields of Saudi. These attacks
just happen to make the section of the Saudi government, that the USA does not support weaker.
The plan is to destablize Saudi, then the Marines will be called in to save the day and of
course secure the oil fields.
It is pretty obvious to me that all of these terrorist foot soldiers are being controlled by
double agents, who are ultimately directed for the benefit of the US. It's the War of Terror,
not War on Terror, directed by the US on all of us.
Wake up folks and look at the patterns, timings, benefits and motives.