| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| Zark justifies killing civilians |
| 2005-10-08 |
| IRAQ'S al-Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi says militants are justified under Islam in killing civilians as long as they are infidels, according to an audio tape attributed to him today. "Islam does not differentiate between civilians and military (targets) but rather distinguishes between Muslims and infidels," said the man on the tape posted on the internet, who sounded like Zarqawi. "Muslim blood must be spared ... but it is permissible to spill infidel blood," the speaker said. The comments appeared a day after the Pentagon said it had obtained a letter to Zarqawi from al-Qaeda's second in command, Ayman al-Zawahri, saying tactics being used such as bombing mosques and killing hostages might alienate the Muslim masses. "In this letter, he talks about believing that the eventual governance of Iraq must include the Muslim masses, and that they are at risk of alienating those," Pentagon spokesman Brian Whitman told reporters in Washington yesterday. Today's tape was posted on a website which usually carries statements and video tapes from al-Qaeda's wing in Iraq. The speaker said the concept of Jihad (holy struggle) was coming under distorting attacks by "the enemies of Islam" trying to portray it as a tool "for spreading bloodshed and destruction". "Many Muslims have been affected by this campaign and they began shying away from using this term (jihad) for fear of being accused of terrorism. They instead replaced it with the term resistance. "This has tarnished Jihad and its supporters and led to the inclusion of factions that have nothing to do with Jihad such as the rejectionist (Shi'ite) Hizbollah, Fatah movement and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine," he said, referring to the Lebanese and Palestinian guerrilla groups. "All this has been done under the pretext that whoever defends his country against the enemy and fights an occupier is involved in resistance. But Jihad is much deeper than that." |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #17 I resist the first-use of nuclear weapons. It will only grant license to nuclear retaliation. We have sufficient non-nuclear weapons to do the job. Fuel air bombs can produce nuclear-level blasts without the radiation. As Mrs. Davis has noted, making a publicized Christmas list of Pakistan, Iran, North Korea and other proliferators who will all receive the kiss-of-death at the first nuclear terror attack is a d@mn fine start. If we are hit with a nuclear attack first, then it's no-holds-barred. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2005-10-08 23:59 |
| #16 Sterilization! Think of all the Nigerian spam opportunities! |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-10-08 23:35 |
| #15 Orkin Duud - Um, you wanna think about it for a minute or two? I'm sure a reason (for sterilizing a large number the infected areas is preferable to destroying them) will come to you. Er, I hope so, anyway. [insert Final Jeopardy jingle here] |
| Posted by: .com 2005-10-08 22:35 |
| #14 Neutron bombs? Why bother to spare the nest? |
| Posted by: Orkin Man 2005-10-08 22:12 |
| #13 Zen - I hear you, believe me. I'm thinking there should be a Presidential finding, secret, of course, (as almost all of them are until their consequences come to light), reversing the ban on neutron weapons and firing up several production lines. Think of them as bug zappers designed for killer bugs. Implacable barbaric alien killer bugs - and carriers of a virulent infectious form of insanity. Fits the facts. Eradicate. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-10-08 22:06 |
| #12 Why are we hesitating, shedding the blood of our own, spending our treasure, risking everything? .com, prepare yourself for a gruesome picture. Few people I've met have been able to wrap their minds around this little notion of mine. I say that all two thousand of the American lives lost so regrettably in Iraq have been absolutely worth it, if only to make our world aware of the gleeful abandon with which Muslims slaughter their fellow Muslims. The outside world needs to purchase a clue with respect to how, once these fanatics are done murdering each other, we are the next on their dance card. If the world can bear witness to Islam's internecine savagery and not comprehend the implications in store for all non-Muslims, it is doomed to destruction. Very soon it is going to become necessary to make an example of some terror supporting nation. I am relieved to know that America possesses sufficient non-nuclear weapons to reduce an entire country to ruins in a few short hours. Once an entire nation has perished as a result of its leaders' perfidy, only then will others take pause. Nothing I have seen to date dictates otherwise. At some point a whole lot of people are going to have to die to make clear the consequences of supporting terrorism. I see few other ways of persuading Islam as to what awaits its unchecked fanaticism. This about as close as I can get to "fry 'em up." |
| Posted by: Zenster 2005-10-08 16:58 |
| #11 Is Zarqawi in a spat with Zawahri? The Zawahri letter, if true, was most interesting. He seems to acknowledge that terrorism against the Iraqi Shia is counter productive and that Zarqawi should concentrate on anti American attacks, then do what he can caliphate-wise (In arab-sunni areas only?) This should make Turkey VERY upset and tend to further drive Turkey toward the forces holding Iraq together. Assad too, will be less than thrilled about learning about his coming redundancy due to the coming Levent Caliphate. Once again, like in SA and pakland, al-queda leadership is getting ready to shit where it eats. It's no wonder that Zarqawi doesn't want to go that route. But as it is now, Zarqawi's forces are getting their asses handed to them. They seem to screwed either way. Indeed, as it has been noted many times, Zaqawi himself may already be dead. What worries me more than the noisy enemy (al-queda) in the west is the quiet enemy (Iran) in the east. |
| Posted by: Dave 2005-10-08 14:52 |
| #10 Interesting commentary by Wretchard. |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2005-10-08 12:03 |
| #9 "Muslim blood must be spared..." And what happens when it isn't? He and his cohorts have killed Muslims. Who's he gonna answer to? Oh, yeah, I keep forgetting, he is God incarnate... |
| Posted by: jules 2 2005-10-08 10:05 |
| #8 We are all aware, I presume, that 90% (more or less) of the terror and war in the world today is due to Islam and/or Arabs (i.e. dysfunctional "states" with one or both of those "features"). Check the map links: Western Hemisphere, Eastern Hemisphere, World. Of course, the map will change as they continue to come West to engage us on our soil. Why are we hesitating, shedding the blood of our own, spending our treasure, risking everything? We don't wanna feel bad. The constitutional vote is coming in Iraq. If it's torpedoed, I will consider our efforts to give them a chance to join civilization - as peers - a noble, but failed, experiment. At that point, well, we need to get over it. I think we'll have given them a good shot at the gold ring - more than they deserved for their own efforts. That failure would indicate clearly that they don't get it - and will simply revert to form - with the new circumstances our efforts have created. We can leave some arms behind for the few who have gotten off the asses and tried - the Kurds definitely meet the criteria. The Kuwaitis and a few others sorta "get it", at the dictator / monarch level, not at all certain about their populations. Those that aren't current threats might be bypassed, for now, but they'll probably just become Islamic jihadi cesspools in the future, when the heavy work of sterilizing the active nests is done. In the large view, there is nothing in either Islam or Arab culture, in their entire histories, worth one drop of the blood of Freedom's Warriors, but we had to try. I'm prepared to feel bad, now. Really really bad. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-10-08 09:12 |
| #7 "Islam does not differentiate between civilians and military (targets) but rather distinguishes between Muslims and infidels," Do the Iraqis walk around with badges that tell the brave devout bomber who not to murder? Seems to me they look for crowds in non-Sunni areas and go boom. The solution is to take the gloves off, kill them all, remove the cancer. |
| Posted by: BrerRabbit 2005-10-08 08:07 |
| #6 2b, I think you are referring to the where several of his advance guard were stopped at a checkpoint. The vehicle Zarqawi was riding in turned around and soldiers gave chase. Zarqawi was supposedly let out at an underpass and the driver continued on and was captured, along with Zarqawi's laptop. Soon after several key Zarqawi lieutenants were captured. That was the closest known op Zarqawi came to capture. There was also a rumor Zarqawi was wounded and evacuated to Syria for treatment. I don't know if that was ever verified. |
| Posted by: ed 2005-10-08 03:53 |
| #5 That's why you always cut off the head after you shoot 'em, Paul. Did no one here learn anything from Highlander? |
| Posted by: Dan Darling 2005-10-08 03:49 |
| #4 "I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to make sure" That'll kill him... |
| Posted by: Tony (UK) 2005-10-08 03:37 |
| #3 he's dead. Once again, didn't we all read that he was shot and died ...back around May or Nov? And how may other terrorists have 'died' only to come back again? If Zarqawi is dead who is the emir of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, and why is Zawahiri giving advice to a dead man? |
| Posted by: Paul Moloney 2005-10-08 03:32 |
| #2 he's dead. Once again, didn't we all read that he was shot and died ...back around May or Nov? said the man on the tape posted on the internet, who sounded like Zarqawi. Today's tape was posted on a website which usually carries statements and video tapes from al-Qaeda's wing in Iraq. The speaker said the concept |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-10-08 02:05 |
| #1 "This has tarnished Jihad and its supporters and led to the inclusion of factions that have nothing to do with Jihad such as the rejectionist (Shi'ite) Hizbollah, Fatah movement and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine," he said, referring to the Lebanese and Palestinian guerrilla groups. I don't know - if I was in Hizbollah, Fatah, or the PFLP - I wouldn't take that kind of crap off a bunch of AQ punks! I'd send some of the boys around to have a talk with Zarq. |
| Posted by: DMFD 2005-10-08 00:32 |
