search results matching tag: zawahiri

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

  • 1
    Videos (4)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (0)     Comments (9)   

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Mark McCloskey, remember him? The terrified snowflake that pulled out guns and threatened peaceful marchers in the street walking past his house? Now running for senator, guess which party. Only one party thinks menacing peaceful protesters with death is something to applaud.
Well, he’s in trouble for claiming to be endorsed by Vanilla Ice and Yang Yang Twins (because of course he isn’t).

This you guy? This yor best? Thuggish violent liars prepared to say or do anything for power. It’s all the right has left.

How you liking Cruz showing off how anti military the right is by celebrating withholding earned medical benefits out of pure spite on the senate floor? Their “excuse” is utter nonsense lies, claiming that the bill was once discretionary spending (meaning at the whim of the current president) and has been CHANGED to mandatory spending. It’s a lie, not one word changed since they voted FOR it in June.
https://videosift.com/video/Jon-8482-s-Response-To-Ted-Cruz-8482-s-PACT-Act-Lies

How about Trump chumming up to the Saudi Royal family, now saying no one knows if they were involved in 9/11 (he had no doubts in 2016 whatsoever, but now they’ve invested hundreds of millions into Trump companies). He was outraged Obama didn’t release the classified 9/11 report, then when he had the secret report detailing their involvement Trump kept it secret (for favors and investments), Biden released it and Trump now pretends he’s never heard of it, doesn’t know if the Saudis are involved, protects them when they murder Americans, and is more than apply to help them try to destroy an American sports league miles from where the towers once stood. Must make you so proud as a patriot.

Fascism, theocracy, and anti Americanism has actually become the Republican Party platform. Only the TrueType totally insane could possibly see their actions, support them, and still think themselves as American patriots. History will judge you harshly, your families will too. Your legacy is treason.

Just to rub it in how much more competent Biden is, today ended the reign of al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri with no civilian casualties, something Trump promised and completely failed to do…so badly he gave up and agreed to surrender Afghanistan unconditionally.

Just to show how anti American and pro terrorist the right is, your talking heads like Carlson are trying to spin the killing of the mastermind of 9/11 as a bad thing that somehow makes us less safe, and are trying to blame Biden for Russia attacking Crimea and Ukraine.

Trump hosts the sponsors of 9/11 while Biden eliminates the perpetrators. Thanks Biden.

Scientology: "Psychiatry Caused 9/11 & Holocaust"

Al-Qaeda leader talks about Obama's victory

The Power of Nightmares part 1

siftbot says...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'bbc, zawahiri, sadat, reagan, cheney, rumsfeld, soviet union' to 'bbc, zawahiri, binladen, qutb, sadat, reagan, bush, cheney, rumsfeld, team b, soviet union' - edited by my15minutes

Hamas children's TV show wants to kill the Danish

bcglorf says...

>> ^Farhad2000:
Its pretty horrible what Hamas does with Al-Aqsa sometimes... but then what do you expect after 60 odd years of Isreal and most of the international community pissing down on the Palestinian rights and way of life? Gaza is a open air prision right now.
Am not at all surprised that its a Israeli affiliated group that is posting this on YouTube, just like MermiTV before it is completely slanted to support the Isreali side of the conflict.
What about showing how there was a collective punishment imposed on Gaza? The condition of check points? Curfews? Sniper towers? Random searches? Incursions? Segregation by roads and walls? New settlements in Palestinian territory... The Palestinian side of the conflict?
Or that after all the talk of pushing democracy in the Middle East, the rightfully elected government of the Palestinian people, Hamas was pushed aside in favor of pro-western, corrupt and politically inept Fatah? A stupid and unrealistic policy which did achieved nothing in the lauded Annapolis talks.
Even the former Mossad Chief Argues for Talks with Hamas:


"[B]y scorning politically active Islamic movements and denying their legitimacy, the United States is essentially signaling to the Middle Eastern public that electoral politics are a meaningless dead end—precisely the same message that this public hears from Al Qaeda. Last year, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden’s top deputy, issued a video that attacked the [Egyptian] Muslim Brotherhood for participating in elections, saying it played into America’s “political game” of “exploit[ing] the masses and their love for Islam”; in another video he criticized Hamas, saying that armed jihad, not elections, was the only way to liberate Palestine. If America refuses to engage with Islamist movements, however foreign or flawed their ideas may seem, al-Zawahiri’s antidemocratic rhetoric may be increasingly well received."

Kosovo got an independent state in less then a decade of the Serbian war, it was also a religious conflict, but since its in Europe, US, NATO and the international community gave enough of a shit to give it its own state in less then a decade. What of the Palestinian people?


Wow. Much of the world refused to recognize or support Hamas because it's founding constitution is based around the destruction of Israel. Here's some choice quotes:

Hamas is one of the links in the Chain of Jihad in the confrontation with the Zionist invasion...
it further relates to another link of the Palestinian Jihad and the Jihad and efforts of the Muslim Brothers during the 1948 War...
The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!


You start your post asking what to expect after 60 years of Israel stepping on Palestinian rights. Do you know nothing about the region, or are you just an anti-semite lurker? 60 years goes back to Israel declaring it's independence in 1948, where it accepted the UN mandated borders for independent Israeli and Palestinian states. Instead of accepting two separate states, the surrounding Arab nations, trained and allied with the nazis a few short years earlier, immediately declared war on Israel with the intent of wiping them off the map. They so outnumbered the Israelis and where so confident that the Palestinian people were urged to leave their homes to return in a few short days and claim both regions. The plight of the Palestinian people is on the heads of the surrounding Arab nations every bit as much as on Israel. But what do you see in the region? Propaganda like this about killing the Jews FIRST because of what the Danish did! While Israel(not the more populace surrounding Arab countries) is the single largest provider of aid to the Palestinian people.

Should Palestine be it's own state? Hell yes, it should have been 60 years ago. But if you want to blame that on Israel and the West then your ill-informed or racist.

I'm sorry, but taking a video clip like this and using it to rant about how bad Israel is goes so far beyond bad taste it makes me sick.

Hamas children's TV show wants to kill the Danish

Farhad2000 says...

Its pretty horrible what Hamas does with Al-Aqsa sometimes... but then what do you expect after 60 odd years of Isreal and most of the international community pissing down on the Palestinian rights and way of life? Gaza is a open air prision right now.

Am not at all surprised that its a Israeli affiliated group that is posting this on YouTube, just like MermiTV before it is completely slanted to support the Isreali side of the conflict.

What about showing how there was a collective punishment imposed on Gaza? The condition of check points? Curfews? Sniper towers? Random searches? Incursions? Segregation by roads and walls? New settlements in Palestinian territory... The Palestinian side of the conflict?

Or that after all the talk of pushing democracy in the Middle East, the rightfully elected government of the Palestinian people, Hamas was pushed aside in favor of pro-western, corrupt and politically inept Fatah? A stupid and unrealistic policy which did achieved nothing in the lauded Annapolis talks.

Even the former Mossad Chief Argues for Talks with Hamas:


"[B]y scorning politically active Islamic movements and denying their legitimacy, the United States is essentially signaling to the Middle Eastern public that electoral politics are a meaningless dead end—precisely the same message that this public hears from Al Qaeda. Last year, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden’s top deputy, issued a video that attacked the [Egyptian] Muslim Brotherhood for participating in elections, saying it played into America’s “political game” of “exploit[ing] the masses and their love for Islam”; in another video he criticized Hamas, saying that armed jihad, not elections, was the only way to liberate Palestine. If America refuses to engage with Islamist movements, however foreign or flawed their ideas may seem, al-Zawahiri’s antidemocratic rhetoric may be increasingly well received."

Kosovo got an independent state in less then a decade of the Serbian war, it was also a religious conflict, but since its in Europe, US, NATO and the international community gave enough of a shit to give it its own state in less then a decade. What of the Palestinian people?

America to the Rescue - The Daily Show

Diogenes says...

whoa, whoa, whoa... i never said that YOU said that the us aided the taliban - read more carefully -- i also was not the first to bring it up... jon did with his graphic innuendo at 3:25 in the vid - when my correction of this misinformation was subsequently challenged by nebosuke, i reiterated the mistakes in the initial premise - then you came in chiding me for not providing references

but if you check carefully, you'll see that what i said to you in regards to the taliban was prefaced with:

'your cites also continue to claim...'

and

'basically what your skewed sources are claiming...'

so, am i offbase? not at all - your cites did indeed misrepresent...

'Backed by Pakistan’s military intelligence, which in turn was controlled by the CIA, the Taliban Islamic State was largely serving American geopolitical interests.'

'These organizations or movements, such as the Taliban, often foment “opposition to Uncle Sam” in a way which does not constitute any real threat to America’s broader geopolitical and economic interests. Meanwhile, Washington has supported their development as a means of disarming social movements, which it fears may threaten US economic and political hegemony.'

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/americawarterrorism/americawarterrorism02.htm

so either you don't read your own sources, or you don't believe them -- nice

a. your cites, my cites - yeah, who cares? i at least carefully read both mine and yours -- what follows in this post should satisfy your need for a higher (both in number and quality) degree of sourcing than you've provided - speaking of which, bergen doesn't provide his sources because HE is the primary source -- your cites' quotings from the likes of abdel monem said ali and ahmed rashid are what are called secondary and tertiary sources -- finally, i think when you fully peruse the citations i'll provide, you'll see that the sourcing of the state dept webpage belies your opinion of it

b. lol - if you think i agree with you, then you are pretty dense -- you probably blame hurricanes on butterfly wings

c. 'And prior history notwithstanding, without the ISI's, and through them the US, insistance on bringing in Arabs to fight with the mujahideen there would LIKELY be no Al Qaeda.'

lol, again - what makes you think that the us and isi insisted on bringing in arabs to fight? you're very misinformed -- first of all, if they did insist, then why the hell didn't the arabs fight? heh --- what both the us and isi DID want was SUPPORT, re. cash and logistics

unfortunately, along with the cash, the arab states sent us their fundamentalist troublemakers and criminals given early parole to fight for islam in afghanistan, e.g. the folks who assassinated anwar sadat, etc -- the trouble came about after the afghans won and the arab states didn't want their 'jihadists' back - lol

but anyway, here are the cites and sources for you...

'Assess for me the role of Osama bin Laden and his fellow Afghan Arabs in the victory over the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
The Arab element of the ten year engagement in Afghanistan was fundamental to its success, but within the context of fund-raiser.'

'The Saudi Arabian government, and rich, wealthy princes ... contributed and matched dollar for dollar the US government's money in the Afghan war?

That was within the context of the program that CIA was managing. And that's the way it was funded. And that is known. Beyond that, you had Saudi Red Crescent and all forms of Gulf Arab organizations who were drawn to the only operative jihad at the time, a very major event within the world of Islam. And they were fund-raisers. And they brought additional moneys into the Afghan program, into the resistance from their own sources, and did good works.

They built orphanages, they built homes for widows of martyrs, and brought in, after the war turned to the advantage of the mujahedeen, some ... 20 to 25 million dollars a month. ... So in that regard, they played a very major role. Now, part of your question is what about the combat role. Minimal. There were some Arabs that fought with some mujahedeen groups, but not many. At any given time, inside Afghanistan, [there were] maybe 2,000 Arabs. ... But the people of Afghanistan fought that war, they bled, they died, they were driven out of their country. To suggest that others were engaged in the combat activity to any extent is just simply wrong.'

'Who were the Afghan Arabs?

Muslims from all over the world: North Africa, Persian Gulf, but from all over the world. Other than that, you had a rag tag bunch of Muslims that were taken from one jail or another, whether it's in Cairo or in Algiers or any other country in the Gulf, and put on an airplane and flown to go do the jihad with the fondest hope that they not come back. They didn't die in great numbers. They died in tiny numbers, and they did come back. And my bet is that even the Saudis were terribly happy to see the son Osama bin Laden go off to war. And some might have thought wouldn't it be nice if he didn't return.'

'Because so much of what we hear about Osama bin Laden comes out of his Afghanistan experience, I'm trying to get this straight, he was mostly a philanthropist and a financial contributor, and a minor combat figure, who happened to dabble in combat?

... I can possibly give him credit for having been present and accounted for at one major battle in ... Baktia Province in 1987. Beyond that, I simply cannot say that there is any war record at all. What I can say is that the hype that surrounds Osama bin Laden--most of it generated by the US media and backed up by statements that verge on hyperbole from the United States government--that this man was literally swinging through the valleys of the Hindu Kush with a dagger in his teeth and single-handedly driving out the Soviet army, this did not happen. The Afghan people did that. The Arab role in the combat situation on the ground was minimal to nonexistent, period. And to suggest otherwise is simply to either gloss over history or to create history for your own reasons.

I can imagine someone out there watching saying. "This is the CIA talking." You're not going to admit that you created the most dangerous public enemy in the world.

You bet I would. If I could look you in the eye and say, "Trust me, Osama bin Laden was my guy. If it wasn't for the CIA he wouldn't be anything then, he wouldn't be anything today," if I could say that with a straight face, I think that would speed up the process of removing Mr. bin Laden as a source of great, great concern for the United States. I can't say that because it's simply not true. You can find nobody who is familiar with the situation in Pakistan and Afghanistan in those years that would say bin Laden played any role other than the fund-raiser.'

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/interviews/bearden.html

'MILTON BEARDEN, AUTHOR; FORMER STATION CHIEF, CIA: That's what it was. It was a jihad, and it was a jihad for ten years. There were a million Afghans killed, a million-and-a-half wounded or maimed, and five million driven into exile. That's -- it's awfully close to 50 percent of the population of the country. So it was in fact a jihad, and our role was pretty much tandential to what everybody else was doing. The Afghans were doing the dying and the fighting. The Saudis and the Americans were paying the freight. The Chinese were ordinance. They provided an awful lot of weaponry. The Egyptians provided a lot of weaponry. And bin Laden and a lot of young Gulf Arabs and other Arabs came to do the jihad.

ADAMS: It was quite a cause for them.

BEARDEN: Of course, it was.

ADAMS: Did you meet bin Laden then?

BEARDEN: No, no. Bin Laden was one of many. Bin Laden is becoming a myth that I'm a little uncomfortable with. When bin Laden was in Peshawar in Pakistan where he spent almost all of the war, but he was a fundraiser. We are talking about money that came from Gulf Arabs in a given month could have been $20, 25 million in a given month.

ADAMS: Had you heard about this man, though, that had $250 million of his father's money from Saudi Arabia to bring to the cause?

BEARDEN: Had I heard of him? I knew bin Laden was out there. I knew that the Saudi Red Crescent was out there. I knew that all of the Red Crescent organizations of the Gulf Arab states were out there. But did I take a look and say that this tall thin ascetic-looking Saudi was special? No. To be perfectly frank, the money that they brought in relieved the United States and Saudi Arabia of going deeper into their own national treasuries for more money.'

'ADAMS: When the Gulf War starts and bin Laden says never has Islam suffered a greater disaster than this invasion, meaning the presence of U.S. forces there to defend Kuwait and to support Saudi Arabia, and you hear this, and you know these are the guys that you helped -- the CIA helped fight against the Soviet Union -- what do you think? What's your reaction at that time?

BEARDEN: Well, a couple of reactions. One, CIA, CIA as the executive instrument of the United States government, you know, three presidents beginning with Jimmy Carter were helping the Afghan people resist the Soviet invasion. It's a real stretch in my opinion to say we helped bin Laden or even cared about him. That he participated in it most certainly -- it was OK with us. It was his business and all that.

Now on the one hand, it was fundamentalist Islam that defeated the Soviet Union, and it set in play or set in motion the history that played out through 1989. November 9th, the Berlin Wall is breached, and it's all over.

Now that some of the Arabs that went to that jihad have remained problematic, sure. Am I shocked? Not really. You know, war brings strange allies together, doesn't it? I mean, if you had to worry about unintended consequences, then would we have ever helped Joseph Stalin deal with that other great acute evil, Adolph Hitler? Sure we would, even though 200 million people get subjugated for 50 years; and we spend our nation's treasure for half a century dealing with the Soviet Union.'

http://www.asms.net/facultymanaged/srou/osamabinladen/real%20Articles/Interview%20with%20CIA%20agaent.htm

'Most of the leadership and the whole ideology of Al Qaeda derives from Egyptian writer Sayyid Qutb (1906–66) and his progeny, who killed Anwar Sadat and were arrested in October 1981. President Mubarak generously allowed them to be released in 1984.

Many of the released men, harassed by the Egyptian police, migrated to Afghanistan. With the end of the Soviet-Afghan War, they continued on to jihad. These Arab outsiders actually did not fight in the Soviet-Afghan War except for one small battle at Jaji/Ali Kheyl, which was really defensive: the Arabs had put their camp on the main logistic supply line, and in the spring of 1987 the Soviets tried to destroy it. So they were really more the recipient of a Soviet offensive, but they really did not fight in that war and thus the U.S. had absolutely no contact with them. I heard about the battle of Jaji at the time, and it never dawned on me to ask the Afghans I debriefed who the Arabs were. They turned out to be bin Laden and his men at the Al-Masada (Lion’s Den) camp.

After the war, a lot of these foreigners returned to their countries. Those who could not return because they were terrorists remained in Afghanistan.'

http://www.terrorisminfo.mipt.org/Understanding-Terror-Networks-Sageman.asp

'REPORTER: Mr. Bin Ladin, tell us about your experience during the Afghan war and what did you do during that jihad?

BIN LADIN: Praise be to God, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds, that He made it possible for us to aid the Mujahidin in Afghanistan without any declaration for jihad. It was rather the news that was broadcast by radio stations that the Soviet Union invaded a Muslim country. This was a sufficient motivation for me to start to aid our brothers in Afghanistan. I have benefited so greatly from the jihad in Afghanistan that it would have been impossible for me to gain such a benefit from any other chance and this cannot be measured by tens of years but rather more than that, Praise and Gratitude be to God. In spite of the Soviet power, we used to move with confidence and God conferred favors on us so that we transported heavy equipment from the country of the Two Holy Places (Arabia) estimated at hundreds of tons altogether that included bulldozers, loaders, dump trucks and equipment for digging trenches. When we saw the brutality of the Russians bombing Mujahidins' positions, by the grace of God, we dug a good number of huge tunnels and built in them some storage places and in some others we built a hospital.'

http://www.anusha.com/osamaint.htm

'Was this the origin of al Qaeda?

Yes. al Qaeda wasn't an outgrowth of Adbullah Azaam's "Office of Services," as has been suggested elsewhere. al Qaeda grew in opposition to Azzam's organization, not out of it. Azzam's organization had been becoming something like an NGO, which provided education and the like. Bin Laden didn't want to do that. He wanted to fight the Soviets by forming his own group. But this is also an early example of an interesting trait of bin Laden's: He acts on impulse and doesn't follow good advice. Azzam didn't think the Arab jihadists in Afghanistan were all that important to the anti-Soviet effort. So Azzam wanted to pepper them among different Afghan units and use them as morale-boosters. Bin Laden didn't listen. And at the end of the day Azzam was right: It was the blood of Afghans that won the war against the Soviets, along with lots of money from the United States and Saudi Arabia.'

http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/31205/

'Peter, what is the--you talk a little bit in the book about this notion of blowback, the fact that the CIA really created al-Qaeda or the entire--this sort of Muslim fundamentalism network that we're now facing and more or less put lie to that, or at least minimized the impact of the CIA and say that Osama bin Laden had a bigger part in that.

Mr. BERGEN: Well, I mean, I--just for clarity's purposes, the CIA, you know, obviously had a big role in the Afghan resistance, $3 billion they supplied, but they were basically signing checks. And it's interesting--it's a widely held view on the left that somehow CIA was involved in the founding of al-Qaeda or helped bin Laden, and conspiracy theorists around the world believe this, but there's just no evidence for it. Surprisingly, there are very few things that the US government and bin Laden agree upon, but Ayman al-Zawahiri has released statements that there was no backing from the United States. Other people within al-Qaeda--there really is just simply no evidence for that. The real story is not that the CIA knew who--you know, was helping out bin Laden 'cause they had no idea who he was until about 1995 when they first set up a unit in--specially looking at him directly in January of 1996. So really the story is not one of CIA complicity in the rise of bin Laden; it's actually ignoring the problem before it was too late.'

http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=5151657

d. i have a very open mind, but it's also quite critical - i try to check the facts that i choose to believe very carefully, and if i ever see a source that intentionally tries to deceive, well, they lose all credibility with me - that's why all these CT nuts with their tongue-in-cheek logical fallacies and faulty syllogisms hold no truck with me -- if that means i have a closed mind, in your opinion, so be it - i'm more than fine with that

Mainstream Media Silently Screams for New 9/11 Investigation

Par says...

Well, if you'd actually bothered to read the article itself (as opposed to a selective quotation on a hard-left blog), you'd have probably seen the following:

The realignment reflects a view that Al Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was, intelligence officials said, and a growing concern about Qaeda-inspired groups that have begun carrying out attacks independent of Mr. bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Agency officials said that tracking Mr. bin Laden and his deputies remained a high priority, and that the decision to disband the unit was not a sign that the effort had slackened. Instead, the officials said, it reflects a belief that the agency can better deal with high-level threats by focusing on regional trends rather than on specific organizations or individuals.

Interview With a Turd, Mullah Mr. Anjum Chaudri

Farhad2000 says...

Justification for terrorism against other Muslims by militant Islamists, in particular against Muslim regimes they consider non-Islamic, is often based on the contention that the targets are apostates. Osama Bin Laden, for example, maintains that any Muslim who helps "infidels over Muslims" is no longer a Muslim. Opinions within the Muslim community vary as to the grounds on which an individual may be declared to have apostatized. The most common view among Muslim scholars is that a declaration of takfir (designation of a Muslim as an apostate) can only be made by an established religious authority. Mainstream Muslim scholars usually oppose recourse to takfir, except in rare instances.

Criticism of Islamic terrorism on Islamic grounds has been made by anti-terrorist Muslims such as Abdal-Hakim Murad:

Certainly, neither bin-Laden nor his principal associate, Ayman al-Zawahiri, are graduates of Islamic universities. And so their proclamations ignore 14 centuries of Muslim scholarship, and instead take the form of lists of anti-American grievances and of Koranic quotations referring to early Muslim wars against Arab idolaters. These are followed by the conclusion that all Americans, civilian and military, are to be wiped off the face of the Earth. All this amounts to an odd and extreme violation of the normal methods of Islamic scholarship. Had the authors of such fatwas followed the norms of their religion, they would have had to acknowledge that no school of mainstream Islam allows the targeting of civilians. An insurrectionist who kills non-combatants is guilty of baghy, “armed aggression,” a capital offense in Islamic law.

  • 1


Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists