Article

2003-11-21 Europe

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Dragon Fly 2003-11-21 6:06:14 AM|| || Front Page|| [11128 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Analysts Say New Bombings in Turkey Suggest a Revival of Turkish Terror Groups

-as they say, what we do without analysts

Posted by mhw 2003-11-21 6:27:45 AM|| 2003-11-21 6:27:45 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 People stare blind on the IBDA-C and AL Qaeda claims, who are supposed to bomb Turkey because they donât like secularism !?!!!! Hell did they realise that after 80 years of secularism in Turkey, does that make sense?

I donât believe a word of it, I rather suspect some terror organisations who copy the Al Qaeda attack in the US, namely with a few suicide bombers a major collateral damage. In this case the PKK is a much more realistic suspect than the Al Qaeda, since the PKK who has diminished since the capture of their leader Abdullah Ocalan has a bigger interest in spectacular attacks to prove they are not beaten yet. The IBDA-C and Al Qaeda phone call claiming of the bombings seem less realistic, especially the IBDA-C.

Posted by Murat 2003-11-21 7:55:56 AM|| 2003-11-21 7:55:56 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Murat, you REALLY can't let go of your desire to pull an Armenia on the Kurds, can you?

The more evidence of the attacks being the work of Islamists, the more you'll work yourself into a frenzy. It's gonna be fun watching you spin.

BTW -- England has been secular for MUCH more than 80 years, yet Muslims from England have carried out suicide bombings, and call for an Islamic state in England. The US has been secular since the Constitution was ratified, and yet we have Islamists calling for sharia.

What makes you think Turkey is immune?

Posted by Robert Crawford 2003-11-21 8:32:03 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2003-11-21 8:32:03 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 why would PKK target Synagogues? Makes no sense.

Why would AQ target Turkey - cause its a target they can hit - theyre attacking wherever they can. And Turkey is adjacent to AQ operational headquaters in Iran.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-11-21 8:33:16 AM|| 2003-11-21 8:33:16 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 If it was the PKK, trying to prove they're not beaten yet, wouldn't they make it public?

If not, they should fire their publicist. He's doing a crappy job.

Posted by RussSchultz 2003-11-21 8:42:59 AM|| 2003-11-21 8:42:59 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 why would PKK target Synagogues? Makes no sense.

Well there are no proofs the PKK did it, neither there are proofs the Al Qaeda did it. No proofs yet, only a few shady claims made by telephone that could be anyone. But the PKK did suicide bombings in Turkey before, be it with smaller bomb attacks. A few weeks ago some PKK members suspected of being suicide bombers had been caught and some PKK took some judges hostage few days ago in an Istanbul court:
Judges taken hostage in Kurd court protest .

It makes much more sense to suspect, read I underscore suspect, the Kurdish PKK who has diminished in power since their leader terrorist Abdullah Ocalan. They could copycat the AL Qaeda in bloody collateral damage attacks to emphasise they have not been beaten yet despite the loss of their leader. I say staring blind on the IBDA-C and Al Qaeda could be misleading, but on the other hand after the bombings in Saudia Arabia possible too, operations and investigations to catch the responsible are continuing, we have to await the results.

Posted by Murat 2003-11-21 9:05:40 AM|| 2003-11-21 9:05:40 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 "They could copycat the AL Qaeda in bloody collateral damage attacks to emphasise they have not been beaten yet despite the loss of their leader."

If theyre trying to do that, shouldnt they claim responsibility?

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-11-21 9:28:53 AM|| 2003-11-21 9:28:53 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 Murat, you didn't answer the question of why the PKK would carry out attacks "to prove they are not beaten yet" (YOUR WORDS!) and then fail to claim responsibility.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2003-11-21 9:29:39 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2003-11-21 9:29:39 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 Not every terror attack is claimed, the terror attacks in Afrika where never claimed by Al qaeda either. The PKK could await the reactions first and then decide whether or not to claim the attack. At the moment nothing is clear and every terror organisation is a suspect, we have no steadfast proofs to leave out the PKK and accept the Al Qaeda as the sole perpetrator.

Posted by Murat 2003-11-21 10:03:02 AM|| 2003-11-21 10:03:02 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 Robert Crawford aka Berxwedan use your real name please and be honest to tell everyone that you are a PKK symphatizer. If you don't I will link your post from the KM site.

Posted by Murat 2003-11-21 10:23:43 AM|| 2003-11-21 10:23:43 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 Let's remind ourselves what the targets were again shall we, Murat? A British-based bank, and the British Consulate. You'd have a stronger argument if you tried to blame this on the IRA rather than the PKK...

Posted by Bulldog 2003-11-21 10:26:19 AM|| 2003-11-21 10:26:19 AM|| Front Page Top

#12 Not every terror attack is claimed, the terror attacks in Afrika where never claimed by Al qaeda either

They weren't?

Posted by BMN 2003-11-21 10:27:56 AM|| 2003-11-21 10:27:56 AM|| Front Page Top

#13 "At the moment nothing is clear and every terror organisation is a suspect, we have no steadfast proofs to leave out the PKK and accept the Al Qaeda as the sole perpetrator."

If all you're saying is that we cannot say at this point that its 100% certain that PKK was NOT involved, Id have to agree with you. But thats not saying very much.

At this point I'd give the following probabilities
AQ and local affiliates without PKK:65%
AQ with cooperation of PKK:20%
PKK alone:10%
Other:5%
This assumes the Synagogue bombings and the bombings at the British sites are linked. Which appears to be the case.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-11-21 10:29:08 AM|| 2003-11-21 10:29:08 AM|| Front Page Top

#14 No proof Murat. Haven't the Turkish authorities figured out who planned and carried out this terrorist attack. As well as the fact that these people travelled to Iran, Pakistan, Chechnya, and Bosnia.

Does the PKK operate out of these areas? It seems like you're wishing for something that's not true.

Posted by Daniel King 2003-11-21 10:31:54 AM|| 2003-11-21 10:31:54 AM|| Front Page Top

#15 Robert Crawford aka Berxwedan use your real name please and be honest to tell everyone that you are a PKK symphatizer. If you don't I will link your post from the KM site.

What the hell are you talking about? Anything you THINK you have about my "real identity", post it. Seriously; out me. Go for it. It'll be fun.

BTW -- you still haven't explained why a group trying to prove it hasn't been beaten would not claim responsibility.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2003-11-21 10:33:49 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2003-11-21 10:33:49 AM|| Front Page Top

#16 From AP

'Hurriyet quoted police sources as tentatively identifying the two bombers in Thursday's attack as Azad Ekinci, 27, and Feridun Ugurlu, whose age was not immediately known. The pair had been named in earlier Turkish newspaper reports as having links with the synagogue bombings.

Hurriyet said Ekinci and Ugurlu traveled to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates on Oct. 28 and identified Ekinci as a schoolmate of one of the men suspected in the synagogue attacks. Earlier reports said Ekinci had traveled to Iran, received military and explosive training in Pakistan between 1997-99 and fought in the breakaway Russian republic of Chechnya '

Does the PKK usually receive training in Pakistan? Do PKK people usually fight in Chechnya?

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-11-21 10:39:58 AM|| 2003-11-21 10:39:58 AM|| Front Page Top

#17 Yes Bulldog but who where the victims? One Brit and how many Turks? I understand the Amerikan paranoya of Bin Laden and his Al Qaeda, but that shattered organisation with lost Taliban roots in Afghanistan is much less capable than what the PKK can do in Turkey, the investigations will proof.

Posted by Murat 2003-11-21 10:43:19 AM|| 2003-11-21 10:43:19 AM|| Front Page Top

#18 Liberal hawk, I don't know, for Iran,Iraq, Lebanon and Syria I can say definitely yes, Pakistan and Chechnya is a question mark

Posted by Murat 2003-11-21 10:46:59 AM|| 2003-11-21 10:46:59 AM|| Front Page Top

#19 Smoking the strong stuff today, eh, Murat?

Posted by Bulldog 2003-11-21 10:53:10 AM|| 2003-11-21 10:53:10 AM|| Front Page Top

#20 Murat? You still out there?

I thought you were going to expose me. C'mon, I wanna see what you think you've got!

Posted by Robert Crawford 2003-11-21 10:53:14 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2003-11-21 10:53:14 AM|| Front Page Top

#21 "but that shattered organisation with lost Taliban roots in Afghanistan is much less capable than what the PKK can do in Turkey"

all evidence is that while the central organization is shattered, the cells and affiliates are still quite active. Do you think the PKK is responsible for the Riyadh bombings? The bombing in Jakarta in August? And while the leadership in Pakistan - Zawhiri and Bin Laden - are probably isolated, the AQ leadership in Iran - Said el Adel, Saad Bin Laden, and probably Zarqawi - are probably easily able to keep in contact with cells in Saudi, Iraq, and Turkey.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-11-21 10:54:56 AM|| 2003-11-21 10:54:56 AM|| Front Page Top

#22 "Liberal hawk, I don't know, for Iran,Iraq, Lebanon and Syria I can say definitely yes, Pakistan and Chechnya is a question mark"

Well, the guys in question didnt go near Lebanon, Syria or Iraq as far as we know at this point. Ive never heard of a PKK connection to Pakistan and Chechnya - I HAVE heard of AQ connections to Pakistan and Chechnya - so until I see evidence otherwise, I suspect this is AQ or an affiliate, NOT PKK.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-11-21 10:57:03 AM|| 2003-11-21 10:57:03 AM|| Front Page Top

#23 Jeez, gross, it's like watching someone pull the wings off a bottle-fly.

Posted by Shipman 2003-11-21 12:04:46 PM|| 2003-11-21 12:04:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 Robert Crawford

England hasn't been secular for much more than 80 years: it was only toward the end of 19th century that the last discrimanation against catholics were abolished.

Of course that does not mean Murat is right: tyhe islamists hate the secular nature of Turkey and consider Mustafa Kemal as an arch-traitor.

Posted by JFM 2003-11-21 12:43:53 PM|| 2003-11-21 12:43:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 IIRC limits on catholics (and Jews) voting and holding office in England were dropped in the 1820's. Only remaining legal restrictions on non-Protestants (aside from the kingship itself) were admission to Oxford and Cambridge. Am i wrong?

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-11-21 12:54:52 PM|| 2003-11-21 12:54:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 Robert Crawford England hasn't been secular for much more than 80 years: it was only toward the end of 19th century that the last discrimanation against catholics were abolished.

True, not much longer.

I'm still waiting for Murat's expose'. I want to find out who I really am, dammit!

Posted by Robert Crawford 2003-11-21 12:59:50 PM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2003-11-21 12:59:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 What I find interesting as I listen to this thread is the clear picture that emerges of Murat's fear of the PKK.

I too think that you downplay Islamacist terror activity, Murat. But I understand the insecurity that many Turks have about the PKK and about the wider question of Turkish identity as your country moves away from a strictly enforced secularism in laws and culture.

Posted by rkb 2003-11-21 1:27:25 PM|| 2003-11-21 1:27:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#28 Murat, Liberalhawk:
I know this has been addressed before by you guys, but what are the odds of some faction of the PKK and AQ working together on something? Actually, this begs the question; what is Al Queda? Is it really an organization at this point or is it more like a brand name used by different groups with similar (if not the same) goals?

Posted by Secret Master 2003-11-21 1:45:18 PM|| [www.budgetwarrior.com] 2003-11-21 1:45:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#29 I can't stop thinking that Iran is the main bank roller in this. They have the most motive I believe. Nukes, a destabilized SA, funding Kurdish fundies, A secular Turkey that is opposite their ideal.

The whole alphabet soup of islamomurder/drug runner/freedom fighter has a freind in Iran. Turkey should call a spade a spade. Take out the mullocracy in Iran, pogrom SA imans and you'll have a good handle on the problem. Turkey must step up to the challenge. They must take a lead, they'll have no better ally than the US. And Turkey could have a major impact on the reformation of the RoP. Murat, your at war!

Posted by Lucky 2003-11-21 2:01:05 PM|| 2003-11-21 2:01:05 PM|| Front Page Top

#30 Murat - Yes the PKK is still a danger - but what you are saying is that there are no islamists in Turkey.....because of secularism for 80 yrs...... Your a bit off base. There is, was and will be danger of islamists in Turkey. But because you have a military deeply secular is the only reason you have had 80 yrs of securlism.

And remember Al-Queda is more of an ideology , especially since it base in Afganistan was destroyed and any country actively supporting could very well be the next country with GI's in country.

Posted by Dan 2003-11-21 3:29:03 PM|| 2003-11-21 3:29:03 PM|| Front Page Top

#31 liberalhawk

It was only in 1872 that Irish Catholics then British subjects were allowed property rights, it was only in 1919 that British Catholics were allowed to let money to the Church for masses being told for them after their death. So until 1919 the UK was not fully secular.

Posted by JFM 2003-11-21 5:43:33 PM|| 2003-11-21 5:43:33 PM|| Front Page Top

04:35 DEBBI PILAND
11:55 Bulldog
08:00 Shipman
07:52 Shipman
01:57 Jeff
01:54 Jeff
01:38 Atomic Conspiracy
01:25 Val
00:15 Korora
00:13 Lu Baihu
00:07 Robert Crawford
23:48 Fred
23:45 Fred
23:35 NotMikeMoore
23:35 Anonymous
23:33 Charles
23:31 NotMikeMoore
23:30 Frank G
23:26 Frank G
23:17 Anonymous2U
23:17 NotMikeMoore
23:13 Chuck
23:11 NotMikeMoore
23:10 rkb