How to Stop the Suicide Bombings
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
- Replies 175
- Views 19K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | PHP 8.4 patch for vBulletin 4.2.5
- Status
Grace Seeker
IB Legend
- Messages
- 5,343
- Reaction score
- 617
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Christianity
I disagree with the war too. That wasn't my question. I'm just noting that you indicate you live within the USA, but point the finger away from you and at others. Example:
As one who also lives in the USA, it would be more appropriate for you to write: "heck, even our strongest allies disagree with us now."
We who live here cannot divest ourselves of some accountability. If we don't share in it, what sense does it make for others to be angry with us?
Last edited:
islamirama
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 4,194
- Reaction score
- 608
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
when i say you, i mean you americans, US government, supporters of war, of you as in your people.
why not include myself in it? becuase i'm not an american and i'm not one of you and will never be. You americans do a pretty good job of reminding anyone who is not black or white to remember that from middle school to real life. And if it was up to my i would not pay my taxes to be funded for illegal wars based on lies.
What are you doing to help pull these war criminals out? all you have done so far is defend them and their war crimes.
I defend the truth, you seem to be the one who is sucked into the lies. More than half the things you have posted on here is nonsense, or from some conspiracy theory site. The posts that you actually quoted legitimate objections to the war, I did not condone or defend. You are obviously a young kid who cannot dicern between real news and news that is made up for people to make a dollar. There will always be a market for people like you with prisonplanet and infowar and michael moore and so on, and that is why that information is published. I am not in a position to do anything to help our country out of Iraq right now, however I am a die hard republican but I did vote for some democrats in this last mid term election, which was big for me since I typically vote a straight republican ticket. What are you doing to help your people out of this mess, other than making sure that all blame is put on everyone else? You need to realize that your people are not blameless and entirely innocent, in fact they are the cause we are in the middle east right now
Grace Seeker
IB Legend
- Messages
- 5,343
- Reaction score
- 617
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Christianity
Well, a lot of "us" Americans would like to figure out ways to not pay taxes to fund lots of things. You say you are not an American, I suppose that means you were not born here. But if you are here legally, then you are still part of the system. And because you are part of the system, you can be part of the solution to such problems also. If we (yes, you and me) don't work iin appropriate ways to resolve the problem then we are as guilty of perpetuating it as those that you point fingers at for causing it in the first place.
I actually have some ideas as to how YOU could help stop the suiciide bombings (and the rest of the war), but it won't work if all you are interested in is pointing fingers at other people.
islamirama
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 4,194
- Reaction score
- 608
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Whether i'm born here, raised here or just moved here. I'm not american now will I ever be even if i say i am. Post 9-11 proved that fact to many Arabs and Asians who thougth they were nothing but americans.
I'm doing my part to end this occupation, what are you doing on your part? If you want the bombings stopped, pull the troops out and end this illegal occupation waged on lies and faulty intelligence reports. i'm making aware of the atrocities and war crimes these soldiers are committing, even if closeminded people like mtaffi will not listen and defend the actions of his troops no matther how wrong they are.
Really I am close minded??? OK here is one example of many where I have condemned illegal actions by my country and our troops, it can be found in teh Al Qaida in Iraq thread:
I dont deny any of those articles, yes there have been cases of torture, yes civilians have been mistreated, yes war is a disgusting travesty created by human kind and horrible things happen when it takes its course. I do not doubt or hesitate to agree that the US has done some injustices to the Iraqi people, I do not believe that it is right. I also dont doubt that the insurgency is also trying to remove troops but do no doubt for a second that they are doing a much better job at killing innocents and other insurgents than they are at killing our soldiers. I believe that if you could "poll" (since you have such an interest in such useless things) Iraqis, they would rather have US troops than the indiscriminate insurgents who blow up schools, mosques, and markets, full of women and children. The only thing that the US can say for these soldiers is that we are sorry for their mistakes. But it is war, and a war where you dont know if a civilian is in fact the enemy until he shoots at you.
I do not wish to antagonize you or irritate you islamarama I just wish to help you to see that your views are one sided and you can gain no true knowledge of anything unless you take in from an unbiased point of view. For each article you have posted above I could post one that shows different. Polls are garbage, dont waste your time. Look at every news agency, look at a biased toward muslim and look at a biased toward the US, then try and find one in the middle. Take all the information put it together swirl it around in your coffee and somewhere in there you will find the truth.
PLease lets see a post where your views are different, open minded or condemn the mindless killing of civilians in Iraq by insurgents... I would bet you cant find one
islamirama
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 4,194
- Reaction score
- 608
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
if by true knowledge you mean see the world thru your eyes then no thanks,i already can see fine from my own eyes. Polls are not garbage, polls show the opinions and believes of the people. If muslims in 25 countries think it's an illegal war, do you think you can convince them it's ok to invade iran also?
see there we have a problem, insurgents don't kill civilians. And you are combining more than one group together like your leaders. We have shias, sunnis and secterian violence. Secterian violence people are killing innocents, shia are taking revenge on sunnis for thier oppression under saddam. And sunni mujahideens are the ones fighting the kuffar troops who wan't to come back in body bags only.
It's use less to give you any videos or links, you probably didn't even bother looking at the long link of massacres in iraq i gave you. I don't expect much discussion with you as it's quite pointless.
Not thru my eyes but through both of your own, instead of just one that focuses only on the bad of the US and the "good" of your iraqi fighters
Right right, they have not killed a single civilian, that is why many of the tribes in Iraq are teaming with the US to take down the Islamic state of Iraq and the Al Qaeda in Iraq. That is why there are civilian deaths everyday claimed and caused by these groups. Please open that other eye
islamirama;738602 It's use less to give you any videos or links said:
islamirama
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 4,194
- Reaction score
- 608
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Inside the Mind of a ‘Suicide’ Bomber
Part I
2005-08-10, Yamin Zakaria, London UK
International Institute of Peace
“Terrorism is a reaction to STATE TERROR.” States keep pushing the people, until the people join and push back. Hamas was born after 1948, Hezbollah was born after 1982 and Al-Qaeda was born after 1991, undoubtedly effect always follows the primary
Human instinct leads us to find fault in others before we admit to our own; this is particularly true between two conflicting parties. Likewise we tend to exhibit envy and greed when looking at those who are more fortunate than us, instead of feeling grateful by reflecting on those who are less fortunate. Prophets of God throughout human history have provided guidance to channel and control human instincts, by inculcating higher ideals. The battle between these ideals and the debased desires of Kings, Pharaohs and other forms of tyrants, are narrated all the way through the Old Testament (Torah), the New Testament (Injeel) to the final revelation - the Holy Quran.
However, we live in a peculiar age where the tyrants present themselves as Prophets. They advocate instinct-based-behaviour, wrapped with words like ‘freedom’ and ‘free market’, as higher forms of ideals. They promote libertarian sexual practises, to resemble the beasts in the jungle; this is espoused as an expression of ‘freedom’. Similarly, instead of judiciously nurturing the human desire to generate and distribute wealth fairly, they encourage the society to operate on individualism, i.e. sheer greed; by creating the profit-maximising free-market economy, where individual human desire is paramount.
The tyrants continue the deception by obfuscating the merits of other civilisations with a thin layer of International law (as long as it serves them) and military aggression. A militarily powerful nation such as a superpower does not automatically possess the qualities of being a leading civilisation. Such powerful nations often impose an order through use of brute force, hypocrisy, and arrogance, rather than by projecting and applying higher ideals consistently. This is why modern day tyrants and their accomplices hypocritically pour scorn on the weapon (‘suicide’ bombings or martyrdom operations) of the weaker party fighting for survival – knowing that the weaker party does not have access to regular high-tech weapons.
When the armies of the tyrants pulverise humans and houses, with their missiles and bombs, it is called hunting ‘terrorists’ with an undeclared level of collateral damage, another word for dead women and children. When the oppressed retaliate with martyrdom operations, it is called terrorism. Exactly who is terrorising whom? Who lives in fear and terror - the inhabitants in Iraq, Palestine and Afghanistan or those in the US, UK, Italy and Australia? Who is delivering more terror, those dropping daisy cutters, cluster bombs and Napalm, or those shooting with outdated RPGs? Not only do the tyrants attempt to portray themselves as Prophets, full of virtue but the most powerful ones go even further, as they expect the world to see them as innocent victims, while in reality they kill hundreds of thousands, rape and plunder distant lands and litter the world with their military bases, and they are the innocent ones?
Then, the invading tyrants have the audacity to question the morality and the courage of the martyrs (cowardly, weak etc), who died defending their homes and families. How is it that invading soldiers, protected in their tanks and high-altitude planes, are absurdly portrayed as upright and courageous heroes? How is that courageous label reconciled when they are killing women and children, from inside armoured vehicles or 2 miles up in the cockpit of a $40 million jet fighter? The oppressors, from a safe distance, are using far more powerful (500lb, 1000lb etc) bombs, that are just as indiscriminate, as the little bombs (10lb, 30lb) used by the ‘suicide’ bombers? It is the masses in the West that are being brainwashed to believe it is morally acceptable to kill women and children with cluster bombs from F16’s, calling it collateral damage, yet it’s outrageous and immoral when death visits in a ‘suicide’ bombing?
Most certainly, there is an intense drive to project ‘suicide’ bombings as anything but retaliation; otherwise the West is in danger of confessing their crimes. Hence, they have resorted to a two pronged strategy; the first of which is to hire Muslim moderates who will issue some kind of dubious legal opinions (will be covered in Part III) with one track condemnation of martyrdom operations, secondly, they attribute martyrdom operations as entirely an internal phenomenon, totally unconnected to resisting foreign occupiers. Thus, they raise the following questions, to misdirect the public from the real causes of martyrdom operations, in an attempt to escape their own guilt:
1) Which Imam was responsible for brainwashing the bombers?
Many are accusing the Imams of brainwashing youth to undertake martyrdom missions. So ridiculous is this hysteria, you would think that they are confusing the Imams, with the mythical characters from fairytales, possessing magical lamps and flying carpets with the ability to hypnotise people! Imams are the most apolitical group in the Muslim community. They do not even refer to local political matters, let alone international affairs. If anything it is the mafia like Mosque committees, who have the power and persuasion; they function to stifle open discussions, many Mosques carry the usual sign “no political discussion or meeting without authorisation”, unless of course you happen to be a government representative on an election campaign wondering into the place.
Rationally, it is difficult for anyone to lecture others to engage in a martyrdom mission, as it is reasonable to suppose that the candidate must ask themselves why this person is not leading by example. Also, the sacrificing of ones life has such a complete finality, that it will always be an individual’s decision, therefore it can only be conducted by those who volunteer willingly.
2) Is it due to alienation?
People who are alienated do not blow themselves up along with others. It is the majority community that has deliberately constructed the problem of alienation to aid the assimilation of minority communities. The Muslims and the mainstream society will be alienated from each other, since the two communities adhere to different values and norms. This is mutual alienation is natural and expected. In any case, the idea that alienation would drive anyone to commit martyrdom operations is overly simplistic, defies human nature and commonsense. However, the sly, Machiavellian politicians and journalists are peddling this in desperation, again, to avoid discussing the real causes behind martyrdom operations.
3) Is it due to the promised virgins (‘Houris’)?
If a man wants to satisfy his carnal desires he is more likely to engage in self-indulgence rather than self-destruction. For a devout Muslim, this means getting married rather than get himself fitted for an explosive belt. There is no shortage of virgins in the Islamic world, where it is a virtue and not, as it is in the west, a source of shame. The point being that Muslim youth do not need to become martyrs to find virgins. Furthermore, translation of the word Houris is not the virgin women on earth, pleasures of heaven are described in the worldly language: nobody knows how literal or metaphorical these are. These are promised to all who enter paradise and martyrdom is not the only route to acquire these pleasures.
Such distortion of the terms and the facts by vicious Western media is also partly due to envy, as they cannot find virgins in their own community. It also shows the subconscious problem with their own sexuality, as according to their own religious beliefs sex is a necessary sin, but their desire is to practice it in excess, showing an ongoing internal conflict. So in describing Islam, they have transformed the Harems into brothels, Houris into lustful virgins. They see the four wives only in terms of sexual pleasures, ignoring the legal responsibility that comes with it, reflecting their sexually obsessed mindset, everything has to be analysed for its sexual utility. Also, making such accusations helps them to hide a collective guilt, as hypocrisy through adultery and pre-marital sex is rife, as monogamous man, like virgins, are a rarity.
4) Is it due to the indoctrination of hate?
Any physical resistance is terrorism and any intellectual resistance is now classified by another one of those politically charged terms, that are loosely defined - hate. As if the West was full of love and mercy, with their genocidal sanctions (1/2 million dead Iraqi babies) to the “shock and awe” campaign against a nation who had done no harm to them.
Let us be more precise, Muslims exhibit anger but not hatred, in contrast it is the West that exhibits hatred but not anger. Anger will always be expressed by the victims, and will be absent in the aggressor. What else does the West expect from those who they have orphaned, widowed or made childless? Such anger is a moral virtue; it is an outcry against, injustice and the initial aggression by the real mass murderers.
In contrast, hate is the result of inculcating ideas that are rooted in for example one group’s racial identity, and not a reaction to any political events. Societies built along racial identities lead to Xenophobia, Nationalism, Nazism, Racism and Fascism. This is why the foreigners are always hated, and it is this deep rooted hate, that caused the extermination of other races, something that was, and continues to be integral to the colonial West. Just ask the Aboriginals and the natives of South, Central and North America for verification of this truth. Ask the South Africans, who until recently, were under the yoke of White racial superiority, from Europeans and their descendents. And it is this hatred for others that caused the unprovoked abuse and torture in Abu-Ghraib and other US-run prisons.
Even as the bombs drop in the Islamic world, you do not see the Muslims resorting to using the equivalent pejorative terms like “sand-******s”, “towel heads”, “rag heads” to demonise an entire community or civilisation, because, their anger exists only against the criminal aggressors. Like Osama Bin Laden said: “why do we not attack Sweden”.
Of course anger will at times lead to retaliation, but that will be focused in terms of the time and place. We did not see martyrdom operations in the Islamic world 100 years ago, nor is there any kind of operation in the most densely populated Muslim countries like Bangladesh, Nigeria, and Indonesia at present. This is clear proof that martyrdom actions are not the product of the intrinsic values or teachings of Islam even if it is permitted by Islamic law.
The real reasons
Martyrdom missions by their nature are the weapons of the weaker party in the conflict, and the last resort, as the basic human instinct dictates that we preserve life! Therefore, in most cases martyrdom is used in defence/retaliation against the stronger enemy. It has to be defence/retaliation, because a martyrdom operation, at most, may halt a stronger advancing enemy. Martyrdom is not a tactic of an offensive group, as you cannot conduct an offensive conquest while sacrificing your soldiers, as you would soon run out of volunteers, and eventually will have no soldiers to maintain the conquered territories.
Some martyrs may have drawn inspiration from Islamic texts, to commit brave acts of retaliation against the aggressor. However, this inspiration sets in, only if, the prevalent political conditions provide the impetus to retaliate. I also use the word brave, not so much in terms of praise, but as a description of courage, after all you would have to have some level of courage to sacrifice your own life. Anyone doubting this really lacks intellect and this is exactly the point that Robert Fisk made, when the 9/11 pilots were described by Bush as cowards.
Most conveniently, what many people forget is some of the people who engaged in martyrdom operations, were not inspired by religion, but were in fact subscribers of secular ideologies, so this is not exclusively a religious phenomenon. One of the recent, but well-known Palestinian ‘suicide’ bombers was not a religiously devout woman. As an ambulance worker she had first hand experience of seeing Israeli aggression, which led her to commit a retaliatory action. The Syrian Socialist Party, a purely secular group, conducted ‘suicide’ attacks against the Israeli occupiers of Lebanon, as did the Tamil Tigers, in Sri Lanka, against the Sinhalese majority. All of this emphasises ‘martyrdom’ operations, are not the reserve of any specific religion, race or nation.
What impact images from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine have on individuals, no one can accurately predict, every individual has their own tolerance threshold; once crossed, this can drive people to retaliate. In denial, the politicians and journalists are trying to build another ‘missing-link,’ to mythical radical Imam as the instigators of martyrdom operations, just like the missing-link found in Blair’s ‘dodgy dossier,’ the 45 minute threat and the Niger link, confirming Iraq’s mythical WMD’s prior to the war! Asif Hanif from the UK, who carried out the martyrdom mission in occupied Palestine, was not involved with any radical group and had no radical Imam lecturing him.
The real solution lies in addressing the primary cause, which is State Terrorism of the colonial west. It is euphemistically hidden behind terms like ‘foreign policy’. These states unashamedly use their position and media spin, to label the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of innocents, as just - “foreign policy”! Unfortunately many of the headless Muslim moderates, have also adopted such terms like ‘foreign policy’ blindly, to describe the slaughtering of Muslims, while they resort to terms like murder for the 52 killed in the London bombings; Is murder in a uniform not murder? Are all human beings not equal?
.....................................................................................
Part II
Lies breed more lies; projecting falsehood as truth necessitates the creation of more lies. For example, to support the primary lie of Iraq ’s WMD capabilities, layers of false information were generated by the Anglo-US government. Similarly, to conceal their culpability - the British, US and Israeli governments have tried to divert their publics from the real reasons that shape the minds of ‘suicide’ bombers, through propaganda and blatant lies. I exposed most of those well-known, lies and propaganda in the previous article [Part 1]. In this article, I will analyse the more credible argument used against the ‘suicide’ bombers: the indiscriminate targeting of civilians.
While, the actions of ‘suicide’ bombers are made gratuitously violent by deliberately amputating them from their political and historical context; concurrently, the actions of state terrorists are sanitised by amplifying political and historical context, whilst marginalising the sufferings inflicted upon their victims. Consequently this helps their population to maintain their ‘conviction’ of innocence; and helps to project ‘suicide’ bombers as mindless terrorists, ‘cannot be negotiated with’, are ‘Islamo-Fascists’ etc. and state terrorism is justified as simply a reaction to that.
Accordingly, when the British, Israelis or Americans are killed by ‘suicide’ bombers, they are ‘innocent’ victims of terrorism. The killings of much larger numbers of civilians by an organised army in occupied Palestine , Iraq and Afghanistan are simply ‘defensive’ measures; their innocence is irrelevant, so shedding of their blood needs no justification, no matter how many hundreds of thousands die. This illusion created by the media is the exact opposite of reality because ‘suicide’ (martyrdom) operations in almost all cases are a response to the imposed wars and occupation by a more powerful enemy.
People understand that ‘suicide’ operations, by its nature are a retaliatory measure of last resort, simply due to its finality. Thus, the best efforts of the media and politicians have not been successful in projecting ‘suicide’ bombings as an act of naked aggression. Instead, the media has focused in demonising it for its usage against civilians instead of confining it to military targets. Let us begin to analyse the ‘suicide’ operations in the context of war.
‘Suicide’ Bombings are Indiscriminate
This is an irrational argument, as all bombs are indiscriminate; in fact the more powerful the bombs are, the more indiscriminate they are, ergo the nation that has dropped more bombs than any other in history, the US , is by definition the greatest indiscriminate killer. Bombs and missiles dropped from planes have the explosive power of hundreds or thousands of suicide bombers. Using ones body or a fighter plane to deliver the bombs are just different delivery means, and there is no inherent logic that dictates one method as more immoral than the other. However, the masses are swallowing the logic that, the methods of the ‘suicide’ bombers are immoral even though they may be only detonating a 50lb bomb in comparison to the ‘moral’ methods of using planes, dropping 1,000lb plus bombs on people! This is how absurd the propaganda machine has become.
Even if the dubious claims of using precision or smart bombs were true, it would still be immaterial, because the pilots are usually neither precise nor smart, when they unleash their bombs over Baghdad and Kabul as shown by frequent reports of bombs falling on wedding parties, families, civilian markets etc. They simply do not care and behave as if they are playing a video game. One of the ‘achievements’ of using high-tech weapons is that the soldiers are desensitised, being at a distant as they do not see the sufferings inflicted on their victims. If you desensitise soldiers who are already violent and xenophobic, the consequence is likely to be horrific. Such a mindset that is far more indiscriminate and insensitive to killings, at the wheel of a main battle tank, piloting a fighter bomber or manning a machine gun at a checkpoint, and is certain to be far more destructive than ‘suicide’ bombers!
We witnessed this murderous mindset during the 1991 Gulf War. The allied soldiers resorted to an orgy of killings on the road to Basra ; they even fought each other to take pot shots at the retreating Iraqi civilians and soldiers, who were complying with the UN resolutions. Also in the recent war in Iraq and Afghanistan , frequent reports of coalition forces wiping out entire families at check points, in their homes or wedding parties, etc. But anyway, who cares, we are not in the business of counting bodies, as has been said by a US General. The disgusting brutality of the Anglo-US forces in Abu-Ghraib and other prisons underline that indiscriminate mindset.
‘Suicide’ bombers mainly target innocent civilians.
Those who are constantly lecturing others about targeting civilians use powerful munitions that are bound to have high civilian casualties! Hence, there is very little merit in the claim by the Anglo-US-Israeli axis that they do not target civilians intentionally, while they continue using powerful indiscriminate bombs, that have resulted in the killing of tens of thousands more civilians than all of the suicide bombers combined. Indeed, such claims are not only laughable but one of the greatest hoaxes of this age! If avoiding or minimising civilian casualties was a genuine concern, nations would rush to prohibit the production, development and usage of the most powerful and indiscriminate bombs e.g. Nukes, Daisy Cutters, mini-Nukes, JDAMS and their equivalent, but they do not.
The Western and Israeli forces kill civilians using their long range weapons with ease, whereas the ‘suicide’ bombers cannot retaliate in the same manner, lacking the weapons and resources. Since the two opponents are not equal, the weaker party will be forced to be opportunistic, seeking a variety of targets with variable results, including unfortunately civilian casualties. The weaker and more resource hungry party must do this for its survival, as the only other choice it has is capitulation. So the methods of the ‘suicide’ bombers may seem to be more directed towards civilians, but this is a consequence of their lack of resources and not their intent, whereas the armies of the State Terrorists have an abundance of resources, intelligence and weapons, yet inflict far greater civilian casualties, by simple logic this imbalance leads us to a truth about the murderous nature of these states and who is the real culprit that targets civilians.
In fact, historically, the indiscriminate killing of civilians en masse was introduced with the arrival of Air Forces, by the Western powers. The needless destruction of civilian cities like Dresden , Cologne , Hiroshima , and Nagasaki are some prominent examples. All the suicide bombers combined, could not even match a fraction of the track record of the Westerns powers. If anyone is guilty of targeting civilians and by the quantitative measurement of the actual number of civilian victims, it is the West and its client states like Israel , that are infinitely guiltier than all the ‘suicide’ bombers combined, and that is FACT.
What constitutes military targets?
Now let us examine the distinction between military and civilian (non-combatant) targets. Why should the armed forces be exclusively targeted when it was the political establishment (civilians) in collusion with the mass media that usually initiates and authorises war? Even within the military forces, there are the soldiers sitting in their barracks or on holiday, are like non-combatants. What about the non-combat military personnel like doctors, cooks, cleaners, accountants and nurses? What about the commercial firms that supplies the lethal arms?
Therefore, the distinction between combatants and non-combatants is blurred in the context of warfare, as substantial sections of civilian life contribute to the war machine. Indeed, this was the conclusion of Sir Arthur “Bomber” Harris (Dresden, Cologne, Hamburg etc), and Harry Truman (Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Tokyo Raids) both targeted civilians en masse to sap the front line enemy forces effectiveness and would shorten the war, so this is very much a lesson learnt from the West.
It could be argued further, that if the legitimate political authority can become target then so can the source of that authority. This is especially true for democracy, as when it goes to war, that must be by the definition of democracy be the ‘peoples’ choice and hence responsibility. However, when the consequences of this choice visit upon the democracy, there is an immediate divorce between the people and the decision to go to war; suddenly the people are ‘innocent’.
In war, the entire nation is a legitimate target as they wage a war collectively as a nation. However, civilians or non-combatants are off limits only due to the nations accepting this convention during war. Armies would only target combatants in the battlefields in the past, away from cities and towns. That has clearly changed over the years especially with the invention of air raids from the First World War (WW1). Ironically the very nations that invented and practiced the targeting of civilians, as part of their war strategies, are now lecturing others about targeting civilians, of course that tends to surface only when their own civilians have been targeted, as Iraqi’s, Afghan’ etc do not count in their estimation!
Final argument for excluding civilians as a whole is that many of them are opposed to the war. However, the same could be said for those who serve in the armed forces, who are also opposed to the war. Thus, the armed forces as a whole should also be excluded by the same argument then you might as well surrender. Furthermore, why ignore those civilians who side with the war and helped to prop up the democratically elected governments who chose war. Could one not equally argue using the same logic of including the whole based on some? So the right to target all the civilians based on some who supported the war and re-elected the same leader of war. When a bomb is dropped by an allied Plane, does the bomb ask whether those underneath it are for or against the invasion, and separate the respondents? Such absurdity is not entertained by the West and neither is it entertained by those that resist them.
Are Civilians Innocent or Guilty?
It is argued that non-combatants in war should be avoided because they are innocent. This is not true; civilians are only excluded by mutual agreement between nations, like an international convention observed by nations. Warfare by its nature is reciprocal, one nation cannot unilaterally adhere to certain standards regardless of what the other one does, especially a war that is fought in self-defence.
Even, the usage of the term innocent or guilty is misleading, because, innocent and guilty is decided by certain laws that one is subject to. If any citizen committed a crime, then only the criminal could be punished not his entire family or tribe. In contrast, international relationships between nations are dictated by mutual agreement and conduct, not by any external laws. The use of the term “international laws” is also misleading, as often these so-called laws flow in one direction; used by stronger nations to subjugate the weaker nations. Otherwise, the US and its partners would have been tried for war crimes in Iraq by the UN.
Likewise on battlefield there is no principle that you seek the GUILTY soldiers only, i.e. those who have killed your troops. If an army approaches, you can pre-empt an attack by laying an ambush, kill all the soldiers without giving them an opportunity and/or take them prisoner. They can then be dealt with according to the prevalent international tradition and/or interests of the nation;the entire army is liable to attack anytime. The issue of innocence or guilt does not come into play, in war. Each nation sees the other nation in its entirety as the culprit, just as the allies did in WW2, the army is just the executive tool of war; both nations are fighting collectively as a nation and collectively they are a target, unless they have agreed to exclude a certain section of their societies.
No doubt, a nation is like a legal entity, as it forms treaties and contracts with other nations. Acts of the head of any state are binding upon the nation. As the heads of nations wage war or sign contracts, the entire nation are responsible collectively, it has nothing to do with individual innocence or guilt. Responsibility is collective in war and peace. Every citizen of a nation and every citizen of a member of an alliance is equally responsible and liable for the acts of the collective (nation or alliance), even if he was not involved directly or did not act personally. Only those who object strongly and separate themselves clearly are excluded from the collective responsibility.
Of course morally speaking, civilians and non-combatants should be off limits, but those who are lecturing on this issue are the worst violators, just examine their track record of civilian deaths! There is a simple solution, if you do not want your own women and children to be targeted, then don’t kill the women and children of other nations. It is the nation who attacks the civilian population first that puts its own civilians at risk, by making them a target of their victims. Clearly, it is the British and the US governments that targeted the civilians in Iraq first. As have the Zionists in occupied Palestine , and they still continue to arrive from Russia , Europe and the US with a license from ‘God’ to aid the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. When its most needed, that precious International ‘Law’ seems to have been misplaced, conveniently for the West, law is sidelined when it comes to the mighty oppressing the weak.
[1] http://www.americandaily.com/article/8664
Copyright © 2004 by Yamin Zakaria (06 September 2005)
Part I
2005-08-10, Yamin Zakaria, London UK
International Institute of Peace
“Terrorism is a reaction to STATE TERROR.” States keep pushing the people, until the people join and push back. Hamas was born after 1948, Hezbollah was born after 1982 and Al-Qaeda was born after 1991, undoubtedly effect always follows the primary
Human instinct leads us to find fault in others before we admit to our own; this is particularly true between two conflicting parties. Likewise we tend to exhibit envy and greed when looking at those who are more fortunate than us, instead of feeling grateful by reflecting on those who are less fortunate. Prophets of God throughout human history have provided guidance to channel and control human instincts, by inculcating higher ideals. The battle between these ideals and the debased desires of Kings, Pharaohs and other forms of tyrants, are narrated all the way through the Old Testament (Torah), the New Testament (Injeel) to the final revelation - the Holy Quran.
However, we live in a peculiar age where the tyrants present themselves as Prophets. They advocate instinct-based-behaviour, wrapped with words like ‘freedom’ and ‘free market’, as higher forms of ideals. They promote libertarian sexual practises, to resemble the beasts in the jungle; this is espoused as an expression of ‘freedom’. Similarly, instead of judiciously nurturing the human desire to generate and distribute wealth fairly, they encourage the society to operate on individualism, i.e. sheer greed; by creating the profit-maximising free-market economy, where individual human desire is paramount.
The tyrants continue the deception by obfuscating the merits of other civilisations with a thin layer of International law (as long as it serves them) and military aggression. A militarily powerful nation such as a superpower does not automatically possess the qualities of being a leading civilisation. Such powerful nations often impose an order through use of brute force, hypocrisy, and arrogance, rather than by projecting and applying higher ideals consistently. This is why modern day tyrants and their accomplices hypocritically pour scorn on the weapon (‘suicide’ bombings or martyrdom operations) of the weaker party fighting for survival – knowing that the weaker party does not have access to regular high-tech weapons.
When the armies of the tyrants pulverise humans and houses, with their missiles and bombs, it is called hunting ‘terrorists’ with an undeclared level of collateral damage, another word for dead women and children. When the oppressed retaliate with martyrdom operations, it is called terrorism. Exactly who is terrorising whom? Who lives in fear and terror - the inhabitants in Iraq, Palestine and Afghanistan or those in the US, UK, Italy and Australia? Who is delivering more terror, those dropping daisy cutters, cluster bombs and Napalm, or those shooting with outdated RPGs? Not only do the tyrants attempt to portray themselves as Prophets, full of virtue but the most powerful ones go even further, as they expect the world to see them as innocent victims, while in reality they kill hundreds of thousands, rape and plunder distant lands and litter the world with their military bases, and they are the innocent ones?
Then, the invading tyrants have the audacity to question the morality and the courage of the martyrs (cowardly, weak etc), who died defending their homes and families. How is it that invading soldiers, protected in their tanks and high-altitude planes, are absurdly portrayed as upright and courageous heroes? How is that courageous label reconciled when they are killing women and children, from inside armoured vehicles or 2 miles up in the cockpit of a $40 million jet fighter? The oppressors, from a safe distance, are using far more powerful (500lb, 1000lb etc) bombs, that are just as indiscriminate, as the little bombs (10lb, 30lb) used by the ‘suicide’ bombers? It is the masses in the West that are being brainwashed to believe it is morally acceptable to kill women and children with cluster bombs from F16’s, calling it collateral damage, yet it’s outrageous and immoral when death visits in a ‘suicide’ bombing?
Most certainly, there is an intense drive to project ‘suicide’ bombings as anything but retaliation; otherwise the West is in danger of confessing their crimes. Hence, they have resorted to a two pronged strategy; the first of which is to hire Muslim moderates who will issue some kind of dubious legal opinions (will be covered in Part III) with one track condemnation of martyrdom operations, secondly, they attribute martyrdom operations as entirely an internal phenomenon, totally unconnected to resisting foreign occupiers. Thus, they raise the following questions, to misdirect the public from the real causes of martyrdom operations, in an attempt to escape their own guilt:
1) Which Imam was responsible for brainwashing the bombers?
Many are accusing the Imams of brainwashing youth to undertake martyrdom missions. So ridiculous is this hysteria, you would think that they are confusing the Imams, with the mythical characters from fairytales, possessing magical lamps and flying carpets with the ability to hypnotise people! Imams are the most apolitical group in the Muslim community. They do not even refer to local political matters, let alone international affairs. If anything it is the mafia like Mosque committees, who have the power and persuasion; they function to stifle open discussions, many Mosques carry the usual sign “no political discussion or meeting without authorisation”, unless of course you happen to be a government representative on an election campaign wondering into the place.
Rationally, it is difficult for anyone to lecture others to engage in a martyrdom mission, as it is reasonable to suppose that the candidate must ask themselves why this person is not leading by example. Also, the sacrificing of ones life has such a complete finality, that it will always be an individual’s decision, therefore it can only be conducted by those who volunteer willingly.
2) Is it due to alienation?
People who are alienated do not blow themselves up along with others. It is the majority community that has deliberately constructed the problem of alienation to aid the assimilation of minority communities. The Muslims and the mainstream society will be alienated from each other, since the two communities adhere to different values and norms. This is mutual alienation is natural and expected. In any case, the idea that alienation would drive anyone to commit martyrdom operations is overly simplistic, defies human nature and commonsense. However, the sly, Machiavellian politicians and journalists are peddling this in desperation, again, to avoid discussing the real causes behind martyrdom operations.
3) Is it due to the promised virgins (‘Houris’)?
If a man wants to satisfy his carnal desires he is more likely to engage in self-indulgence rather than self-destruction. For a devout Muslim, this means getting married rather than get himself fitted for an explosive belt. There is no shortage of virgins in the Islamic world, where it is a virtue and not, as it is in the west, a source of shame. The point being that Muslim youth do not need to become martyrs to find virgins. Furthermore, translation of the word Houris is not the virgin women on earth, pleasures of heaven are described in the worldly language: nobody knows how literal or metaphorical these are. These are promised to all who enter paradise and martyrdom is not the only route to acquire these pleasures.
Such distortion of the terms and the facts by vicious Western media is also partly due to envy, as they cannot find virgins in their own community. It also shows the subconscious problem with their own sexuality, as according to their own religious beliefs sex is a necessary sin, but their desire is to practice it in excess, showing an ongoing internal conflict. So in describing Islam, they have transformed the Harems into brothels, Houris into lustful virgins. They see the four wives only in terms of sexual pleasures, ignoring the legal responsibility that comes with it, reflecting their sexually obsessed mindset, everything has to be analysed for its sexual utility. Also, making such accusations helps them to hide a collective guilt, as hypocrisy through adultery and pre-marital sex is rife, as monogamous man, like virgins, are a rarity.
4) Is it due to the indoctrination of hate?
Any physical resistance is terrorism and any intellectual resistance is now classified by another one of those politically charged terms, that are loosely defined - hate. As if the West was full of love and mercy, with their genocidal sanctions (1/2 million dead Iraqi babies) to the “shock and awe” campaign against a nation who had done no harm to them.
Let us be more precise, Muslims exhibit anger but not hatred, in contrast it is the West that exhibits hatred but not anger. Anger will always be expressed by the victims, and will be absent in the aggressor. What else does the West expect from those who they have orphaned, widowed or made childless? Such anger is a moral virtue; it is an outcry against, injustice and the initial aggression by the real mass murderers.
In contrast, hate is the result of inculcating ideas that are rooted in for example one group’s racial identity, and not a reaction to any political events. Societies built along racial identities lead to Xenophobia, Nationalism, Nazism, Racism and Fascism. This is why the foreigners are always hated, and it is this deep rooted hate, that caused the extermination of other races, something that was, and continues to be integral to the colonial West. Just ask the Aboriginals and the natives of South, Central and North America for verification of this truth. Ask the South Africans, who until recently, were under the yoke of White racial superiority, from Europeans and their descendents. And it is this hatred for others that caused the unprovoked abuse and torture in Abu-Ghraib and other US-run prisons.
Even as the bombs drop in the Islamic world, you do not see the Muslims resorting to using the equivalent pejorative terms like “sand-******s”, “towel heads”, “rag heads” to demonise an entire community or civilisation, because, their anger exists only against the criminal aggressors. Like Osama Bin Laden said: “why do we not attack Sweden”.
Of course anger will at times lead to retaliation, but that will be focused in terms of the time and place. We did not see martyrdom operations in the Islamic world 100 years ago, nor is there any kind of operation in the most densely populated Muslim countries like Bangladesh, Nigeria, and Indonesia at present. This is clear proof that martyrdom actions are not the product of the intrinsic values or teachings of Islam even if it is permitted by Islamic law.
The real reasons
Martyrdom missions by their nature are the weapons of the weaker party in the conflict, and the last resort, as the basic human instinct dictates that we preserve life! Therefore, in most cases martyrdom is used in defence/retaliation against the stronger enemy. It has to be defence/retaliation, because a martyrdom operation, at most, may halt a stronger advancing enemy. Martyrdom is not a tactic of an offensive group, as you cannot conduct an offensive conquest while sacrificing your soldiers, as you would soon run out of volunteers, and eventually will have no soldiers to maintain the conquered territories.
Some martyrs may have drawn inspiration from Islamic texts, to commit brave acts of retaliation against the aggressor. However, this inspiration sets in, only if, the prevalent political conditions provide the impetus to retaliate. I also use the word brave, not so much in terms of praise, but as a description of courage, after all you would have to have some level of courage to sacrifice your own life. Anyone doubting this really lacks intellect and this is exactly the point that Robert Fisk made, when the 9/11 pilots were described by Bush as cowards.
Most conveniently, what many people forget is some of the people who engaged in martyrdom operations, were not inspired by religion, but were in fact subscribers of secular ideologies, so this is not exclusively a religious phenomenon. One of the recent, but well-known Palestinian ‘suicide’ bombers was not a religiously devout woman. As an ambulance worker she had first hand experience of seeing Israeli aggression, which led her to commit a retaliatory action. The Syrian Socialist Party, a purely secular group, conducted ‘suicide’ attacks against the Israeli occupiers of Lebanon, as did the Tamil Tigers, in Sri Lanka, against the Sinhalese majority. All of this emphasises ‘martyrdom’ operations, are not the reserve of any specific religion, race or nation.
What impact images from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine have on individuals, no one can accurately predict, every individual has their own tolerance threshold; once crossed, this can drive people to retaliate. In denial, the politicians and journalists are trying to build another ‘missing-link,’ to mythical radical Imam as the instigators of martyrdom operations, just like the missing-link found in Blair’s ‘dodgy dossier,’ the 45 minute threat and the Niger link, confirming Iraq’s mythical WMD’s prior to the war! Asif Hanif from the UK, who carried out the martyrdom mission in occupied Palestine, was not involved with any radical group and had no radical Imam lecturing him.
The real solution lies in addressing the primary cause, which is State Terrorism of the colonial west. It is euphemistically hidden behind terms like ‘foreign policy’. These states unashamedly use their position and media spin, to label the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of innocents, as just - “foreign policy”! Unfortunately many of the headless Muslim moderates, have also adopted such terms like ‘foreign policy’ blindly, to describe the slaughtering of Muslims, while they resort to terms like murder for the 52 killed in the London bombings; Is murder in a uniform not murder? Are all human beings not equal?
.....................................................................................
Part II
Lies breed more lies; projecting falsehood as truth necessitates the creation of more lies. For example, to support the primary lie of Iraq ’s WMD capabilities, layers of false information were generated by the Anglo-US government. Similarly, to conceal their culpability - the British, US and Israeli governments have tried to divert their publics from the real reasons that shape the minds of ‘suicide’ bombers, through propaganda and blatant lies. I exposed most of those well-known, lies and propaganda in the previous article [Part 1]. In this article, I will analyse the more credible argument used against the ‘suicide’ bombers: the indiscriminate targeting of civilians.
While, the actions of ‘suicide’ bombers are made gratuitously violent by deliberately amputating them from their political and historical context; concurrently, the actions of state terrorists are sanitised by amplifying political and historical context, whilst marginalising the sufferings inflicted upon their victims. Consequently this helps their population to maintain their ‘conviction’ of innocence; and helps to project ‘suicide’ bombers as mindless terrorists, ‘cannot be negotiated with’, are ‘Islamo-Fascists’ etc. and state terrorism is justified as simply a reaction to that.
Accordingly, when the British, Israelis or Americans are killed by ‘suicide’ bombers, they are ‘innocent’ victims of terrorism. The killings of much larger numbers of civilians by an organised army in occupied Palestine , Iraq and Afghanistan are simply ‘defensive’ measures; their innocence is irrelevant, so shedding of their blood needs no justification, no matter how many hundreds of thousands die. This illusion created by the media is the exact opposite of reality because ‘suicide’ (martyrdom) operations in almost all cases are a response to the imposed wars and occupation by a more powerful enemy.
People understand that ‘suicide’ operations, by its nature are a retaliatory measure of last resort, simply due to its finality. Thus, the best efforts of the media and politicians have not been successful in projecting ‘suicide’ bombings as an act of naked aggression. Instead, the media has focused in demonising it for its usage against civilians instead of confining it to military targets. Let us begin to analyse the ‘suicide’ operations in the context of war.
‘Suicide’ Bombings are Indiscriminate
This is an irrational argument, as all bombs are indiscriminate; in fact the more powerful the bombs are, the more indiscriminate they are, ergo the nation that has dropped more bombs than any other in history, the US , is by definition the greatest indiscriminate killer. Bombs and missiles dropped from planes have the explosive power of hundreds or thousands of suicide bombers. Using ones body or a fighter plane to deliver the bombs are just different delivery means, and there is no inherent logic that dictates one method as more immoral than the other. However, the masses are swallowing the logic that, the methods of the ‘suicide’ bombers are immoral even though they may be only detonating a 50lb bomb in comparison to the ‘moral’ methods of using planes, dropping 1,000lb plus bombs on people! This is how absurd the propaganda machine has become.
Even if the dubious claims of using precision or smart bombs were true, it would still be immaterial, because the pilots are usually neither precise nor smart, when they unleash their bombs over Baghdad and Kabul as shown by frequent reports of bombs falling on wedding parties, families, civilian markets etc. They simply do not care and behave as if they are playing a video game. One of the ‘achievements’ of using high-tech weapons is that the soldiers are desensitised, being at a distant as they do not see the sufferings inflicted on their victims. If you desensitise soldiers who are already violent and xenophobic, the consequence is likely to be horrific. Such a mindset that is far more indiscriminate and insensitive to killings, at the wheel of a main battle tank, piloting a fighter bomber or manning a machine gun at a checkpoint, and is certain to be far more destructive than ‘suicide’ bombers!
We witnessed this murderous mindset during the 1991 Gulf War. The allied soldiers resorted to an orgy of killings on the road to Basra ; they even fought each other to take pot shots at the retreating Iraqi civilians and soldiers, who were complying with the UN resolutions. Also in the recent war in Iraq and Afghanistan , frequent reports of coalition forces wiping out entire families at check points, in their homes or wedding parties, etc. But anyway, who cares, we are not in the business of counting bodies, as has been said by a US General. The disgusting brutality of the Anglo-US forces in Abu-Ghraib and other prisons underline that indiscriminate mindset.
‘Suicide’ bombers mainly target innocent civilians.
Those who are constantly lecturing others about targeting civilians use powerful munitions that are bound to have high civilian casualties! Hence, there is very little merit in the claim by the Anglo-US-Israeli axis that they do not target civilians intentionally, while they continue using powerful indiscriminate bombs, that have resulted in the killing of tens of thousands more civilians than all of the suicide bombers combined. Indeed, such claims are not only laughable but one of the greatest hoaxes of this age! If avoiding or minimising civilian casualties was a genuine concern, nations would rush to prohibit the production, development and usage of the most powerful and indiscriminate bombs e.g. Nukes, Daisy Cutters, mini-Nukes, JDAMS and their equivalent, but they do not.
The Western and Israeli forces kill civilians using their long range weapons with ease, whereas the ‘suicide’ bombers cannot retaliate in the same manner, lacking the weapons and resources. Since the two opponents are not equal, the weaker party will be forced to be opportunistic, seeking a variety of targets with variable results, including unfortunately civilian casualties. The weaker and more resource hungry party must do this for its survival, as the only other choice it has is capitulation. So the methods of the ‘suicide’ bombers may seem to be more directed towards civilians, but this is a consequence of their lack of resources and not their intent, whereas the armies of the State Terrorists have an abundance of resources, intelligence and weapons, yet inflict far greater civilian casualties, by simple logic this imbalance leads us to a truth about the murderous nature of these states and who is the real culprit that targets civilians.
In fact, historically, the indiscriminate killing of civilians en masse was introduced with the arrival of Air Forces, by the Western powers. The needless destruction of civilian cities like Dresden , Cologne , Hiroshima , and Nagasaki are some prominent examples. All the suicide bombers combined, could not even match a fraction of the track record of the Westerns powers. If anyone is guilty of targeting civilians and by the quantitative measurement of the actual number of civilian victims, it is the West and its client states like Israel , that are infinitely guiltier than all the ‘suicide’ bombers combined, and that is FACT.
What constitutes military targets?
Now let us examine the distinction between military and civilian (non-combatant) targets. Why should the armed forces be exclusively targeted when it was the political establishment (civilians) in collusion with the mass media that usually initiates and authorises war? Even within the military forces, there are the soldiers sitting in their barracks or on holiday, are like non-combatants. What about the non-combat military personnel like doctors, cooks, cleaners, accountants and nurses? What about the commercial firms that supplies the lethal arms?
Therefore, the distinction between combatants and non-combatants is blurred in the context of warfare, as substantial sections of civilian life contribute to the war machine. Indeed, this was the conclusion of Sir Arthur “Bomber” Harris (Dresden, Cologne, Hamburg etc), and Harry Truman (Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Tokyo Raids) both targeted civilians en masse to sap the front line enemy forces effectiveness and would shorten the war, so this is very much a lesson learnt from the West.
It could be argued further, that if the legitimate political authority can become target then so can the source of that authority. This is especially true for democracy, as when it goes to war, that must be by the definition of democracy be the ‘peoples’ choice and hence responsibility. However, when the consequences of this choice visit upon the democracy, there is an immediate divorce between the people and the decision to go to war; suddenly the people are ‘innocent’.
In war, the entire nation is a legitimate target as they wage a war collectively as a nation. However, civilians or non-combatants are off limits only due to the nations accepting this convention during war. Armies would only target combatants in the battlefields in the past, away from cities and towns. That has clearly changed over the years especially with the invention of air raids from the First World War (WW1). Ironically the very nations that invented and practiced the targeting of civilians, as part of their war strategies, are now lecturing others about targeting civilians, of course that tends to surface only when their own civilians have been targeted, as Iraqi’s, Afghan’ etc do not count in their estimation!
Final argument for excluding civilians as a whole is that many of them are opposed to the war. However, the same could be said for those who serve in the armed forces, who are also opposed to the war. Thus, the armed forces as a whole should also be excluded by the same argument then you might as well surrender. Furthermore, why ignore those civilians who side with the war and helped to prop up the democratically elected governments who chose war. Could one not equally argue using the same logic of including the whole based on some? So the right to target all the civilians based on some who supported the war and re-elected the same leader of war. When a bomb is dropped by an allied Plane, does the bomb ask whether those underneath it are for or against the invasion, and separate the respondents? Such absurdity is not entertained by the West and neither is it entertained by those that resist them.
Are Civilians Innocent or Guilty?
It is argued that non-combatants in war should be avoided because they are innocent. This is not true; civilians are only excluded by mutual agreement between nations, like an international convention observed by nations. Warfare by its nature is reciprocal, one nation cannot unilaterally adhere to certain standards regardless of what the other one does, especially a war that is fought in self-defence.
Even, the usage of the term innocent or guilty is misleading, because, innocent and guilty is decided by certain laws that one is subject to. If any citizen committed a crime, then only the criminal could be punished not his entire family or tribe. In contrast, international relationships between nations are dictated by mutual agreement and conduct, not by any external laws. The use of the term “international laws” is also misleading, as often these so-called laws flow in one direction; used by stronger nations to subjugate the weaker nations. Otherwise, the US and its partners would have been tried for war crimes in Iraq by the UN.
Likewise on battlefield there is no principle that you seek the GUILTY soldiers only, i.e. those who have killed your troops. If an army approaches, you can pre-empt an attack by laying an ambush, kill all the soldiers without giving them an opportunity and/or take them prisoner. They can then be dealt with according to the prevalent international tradition and/or interests of the nation;the entire army is liable to attack anytime. The issue of innocence or guilt does not come into play, in war. Each nation sees the other nation in its entirety as the culprit, just as the allies did in WW2, the army is just the executive tool of war; both nations are fighting collectively as a nation and collectively they are a target, unless they have agreed to exclude a certain section of their societies.
No doubt, a nation is like a legal entity, as it forms treaties and contracts with other nations. Acts of the head of any state are binding upon the nation. As the heads of nations wage war or sign contracts, the entire nation are responsible collectively, it has nothing to do with individual innocence or guilt. Responsibility is collective in war and peace. Every citizen of a nation and every citizen of a member of an alliance is equally responsible and liable for the acts of the collective (nation or alliance), even if he was not involved directly or did not act personally. Only those who object strongly and separate themselves clearly are excluded from the collective responsibility.
Of course morally speaking, civilians and non-combatants should be off limits, but those who are lecturing on this issue are the worst violators, just examine their track record of civilian deaths! There is a simple solution, if you do not want your own women and children to be targeted, then don’t kill the women and children of other nations. It is the nation who attacks the civilian population first that puts its own civilians at risk, by making them a target of their victims. Clearly, it is the British and the US governments that targeted the civilians in Iraq first. As have the Zionists in occupied Palestine , and they still continue to arrive from Russia , Europe and the US with a license from ‘God’ to aid the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. When its most needed, that precious International ‘Law’ seems to have been misplaced, conveniently for the West, law is sidelined when it comes to the mighty oppressing the weak.
[1] http://www.americandaily.com/article/8664
Copyright © 2004 by Yamin Zakaria (06 September 2005)
Keltoi
IB Legend
- Messages
- 5,061
- Reaction score
- 463
True. The overwhelming majority of suicide bomb victims are Muslim. So there is something going on there that isn't so easily explained by pointing fingers at the U.S. or the U.K. Obviously the Western powers have their share of the blame for the present situation, but it is also obvious that there is something else at play here.
islamirama
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 4,194
- Reaction score
- 608
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Yea, we know what exactly is going on even when kuffard deny it!
"One young Iraqi man told us that he was trained by the Americans as a policeman in Baghdad and he spent 70 per cent of his time learning to drive and 30 per cent in weapons training. They said to him: 'Come back in a week.' When he went back, they gave him a mobile phone and told him to drive into a crowded area near a mosque and phone them. He waited in the car but couldn't get the right mobile signal. So he got out of the car to where he received a better signal. Then his car blew up.
"There was another man, trained by the Americans for the police. He too was given a mobile and told to drive to an area where there was a crowd - maybe a protest - and to call them and tell them what was happening. Again, his new mobile was not working. So he went to a landline phone and called the Americans and told them: 'Here I am, in the place you sent me and I can tell you what's happening here.' And at that moment there was a big explosion in his car."
Source
Khadduri's report went like this: "A few days ago, an American manned check point confiscated the driver license of a driver and told him to report to an American military camp near Baghdad airport for interrogation and in order to retrieve his license… we have forwarded your papers and license to al-Kadhimia police station for processing. …The driver did leave in a hurry, but was soon alarmed with a feeling that his car was driving as if carrying a heavy load, and he also became suspicious of a low flying helicopter that kept hovering overhead, as if trailing him. He stopped the car and inspected it carefully. He found nearly 100 kilograms of explosives hidden in the back seat and along the two back doors.
(2) On May 13, 2005, a 64 years old Iraqi farmer, Haj Haidar Abu Sijjad, took his tomato load in his pickup truck from Hilla to Baghdad, accompanied by Ali, his 11 years old grandson. They were stopped at an American check point and were asked to dismount. ….A minute later, his grandson told him that he saw one of the American soldiers putting a grey melon size object in the back among the tomato containers. "They intended it to explode in Baghdad …'.
Source
islamirama
I started to read the article and again after about 3 minutes of reading I see that you again submit a post that is totally bias to the situation. It is truly sad to see that you are so lost, to prove my point here is a truly objective article as to what is truly going on in the mind of a suicide bomber
Inside the Mind of an Iraqi Suicide Bomber
In a rare interview, a "terrorist" in training reveals chilling secrets about the insurgency's deadliest weapon
By APARISIM GHOSH / BAGHDAD
06/28/05 "Time" - - One day soon, this somber young man plans to offer up a final prayer and then blow himself up along with as many U.S. or Iraqi soldiers as he can reach. Marwan Abu Ubeida says he has been training for months to carry out a suicide mission. He doesn't know when or where he will be ordered to climb into a bomb-laden vehicle or strap on an explosives-filled vest but says he is eager for the moment to come. While he waits, he spends much of his time rehearsing that last prayer. "First I will ask Allah to bless my mission with a high rate of casualties among the Americans," he says, speaking softly in a matter-of-fact monotone, as if dictating a shopping list. "Then I will ask him to purify my soul so I am fit to see him, and I will ask to see my mujahedin brothers who are already with him." He pauses to run the list through his mind again, then resumes: "The most important thing is that he should let me kill many Americans."
At 20, Marwan is already a battle-hardened insurgent, a jihadi foot soldier in Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi's terrorist group, al-Qaeda in Iraq. Like the bulk of insurgents, he is a Sunni Muslim from the former ruling minority community. In his hometown, Fallujah, he is known for his ferociousness in battle and deep religiosity. Marwan asked his commander to consider him for a suicide mission last fall but had to wait until the beginning of April for his name to be put on the list of volunteers. "When he finally agreed," Marwan recalls, "it was the happiest day of my life." There are, he says, scores of names on that list, and it can be months before a volunteer is assigned an operation. But at the current high rate of attacks, Marwan hopes he will be called up soon. "I can't wait," he says, rubbing his thumbs with his fingers in nervous energy. "I am ready to die now."
Among the embittered population of Iraq, it's not hard to find young men who talk the terrorist talk, boasting of their willingness to serve as human bombs. It's hard to judge the speakers' sincerity. But the latest surge of suicide operations proves there is no scarcity of volunteers to become the most lethal weapon Iraq's insurgents have. Since May 1, Iraq has witnessed at least 129 suicide attacks, accounting for several of the estimated 150 U.S. fatalities during this period, including as many as six soldiers killed in an attack of their convoy near Fallujah last week. Most of the 1,200 Iraqis killed by insurgents since May 1 have died in suicide bombings. And yet, despite the frequency and deadliness of their attacks, almost nothing is known about individual bombers. Their identities have rarely been revealed and then only posthumously, on jihadist websites or carefully edited videotapes aimed at promoting the insurgent cause and attracting fresh recruits. Among the few who have been named, most are foreigners, many from Saudi Arabia.
While some suicide bombers in Iraq have left behind videotaped testimony, Marwan is the first to tell his story before carrying out such a mission. He spoke to TIME in Baghdad on orders from his commander. The interview was the result of weeks of reporting on such insurgents in the hope of learning more about the identities and motivations of those behind the scourge of terrorism in Iraq. A jihadist group passed word that it would send one of its recruits to meet with us. Marwan was unaccompanied; we were not provided with any information about where he lives, works or trains. And out of concern for the safety of TIME's staff, no attempt was made to track his whereabouts after he left. During a three-hour interview, he talked freely of his motivations but did not divulge any specifics about a prospective strike. He seemed articulate and candid, though he insisted on being photographed wearing a mask over his face to conceal his identity and chose a pseudonym, using the common Iraqi name Marwan and a historical one, that of Abu Ubeida al-Jarrah, a 7th century general who conquered Syria for Islam. The sincerity of his desire to make himself a "martyr" was attested to by several figures-- a member of his organization, al-Qaeda in Iraq; a Baghdad-area commander of an insurgent unit that provides logistical support for al-Qaeda bombers; and a Sunni imam who is sometimes brought in to counsel bombers during their premission spiritual "purification"--whom TIME consulted through Iraqis with contacts inside the insurgency. His account provides a rare glimpse into the mind-set and preparation of one aspiring suicide bomber.
Short, scrawny, his chin covered with wispy facial hair that makes him look younger than his age, Marwan doesn't stand out in the streets of Iraq. Few would notice his one distinguishing feature: outsize hands, heavily callused from use of his favorite weapon, the Russian-made PKC machine gun. Even his distinctive Fallujah accent is not uncommon amid the din of the Iraqi capital, where suicide bombings are most frequent. According to an informant close to several insurgent groups and a U.S. official familiar with rebel operations, small and nondescript fighters like Marwan are considered ideal bombers, since they can slip into crowds without attracting attention. He came to the meeting with TIME wearing a black short-sleeved shirt hanging over black trousers--a style favored by many Shi'ite Muslims--to blend in with the majority of Iraq's population.
Homegrown bombers remain rare, but U.S. and Iraqi military officials are backing away from previous claims that suicide operations are the exclusive preserve of foreign jihadis. "I won't be surprised if there are Iraqis out there who are following the example of foreigners," says Colonel Adnan al-Juboori, a spokesman for the Interior Ministry. Marwan claims he knows of 15 Iraqis who have blown themselves up this year, and he believes there are "hundreds of others" like him who are waiting for the opportunity. Last week al-Zarqawi's group announced that it had set up a separate brigade for Iraqi suicide bombers.
BIRTH OF A JIHADI Marwan's journey toward suicide murderer began just a few weeks after the fall of Saddam Hussein. Before the war, he had been one of Fallujah's privileged young men: his father's successful business earned enough--even during the difficult years when the West imposed economic sanctions on Iraq--to provide a good life for Marwan and his six brothers and four sisters. In high school, he was an average student but excelled in Koranic studies at the local mosque.
Unlike many other Sunnis in Fallujah, Marwan had little love for Saddam's Sunni-led regime. Yet once the dictator fell, he turned against the Americans. "We expected them to bring Saddam down and then leave," he says. "But they stayed and stayed." Insurgents approached disaffected Fallujis like Marwan and urged them to join the resistance against the Americans. Many signed up, including one of Marwan's older brothers. Marwan joined the insurgency in April 2003 when U.S. soldiers fired on a crowd of demonstrators at a school, killing 12 and wounding many more. Marwan, who took part in the protest, escaped unharmed, but the event proved decisive. He says that a few days later, he and a few friends collected grenades and small arms from a military site abandoned by the Iraqi army and mounted an attack on a building occupied by U.S. soldiers. "They shot back but couldn't hit any of us," he recalls. "It was my first taste of victory against the Americans."
Over the next year, Marwan says, he participated in dozens of assaults on U.S. troops who were struggling to subdue the city. Marwan says he became expert with machine guns, a skill that brought him to the attention of al-Zarqawi's group, then called Attawhid wal Jihad. Marwan's piety apparently impressed the foreign-led jihadis as well: in April 2004 he was approached by Attawhid's spiritual guide, Palestinian-born Abu Anas al-Shami. Marwan says al-Shami, reputed to be a powerful orator and motivator, had a deep impact on him. (Al-Shami was killed in a rocket attack by U.S. forces near Fallujah in late 2004.)
Like other Iraqis who have joined extremist religious groups during the insurgency, Marwan severed connections with his family when he joined up. He says he will call them once before his suicide mission to say goodbye. Even though one of his brothers fights for another insurgent group and other siblings help the rebels with money and shelter, he says they all believe he has gone too far. "My family are not happy with my choice," he says. "But they know they can't change my path."
For the deeply pious Marwan, his colleagues in Attawhid are now closer to his heart than his family or former friends. "The jihadis are more religious people," he says. "You ask them anything--anything--and they can instantly quote a relevant section from the Koran." Like them, Marwan works Koranic allusions into his speech. He has also embraced the jihadist worldview of one global Islamic state where there is, in Marwan's words, "no alcohol, no music and no Western influences." He concedes that he has not thought deeply about what life might be like in such a state; after all, he doesn't expect to live long enough to experience it. Besides, he says, he fights first for Islam, second to become a "martyr" and win acceptance into heaven, and only third for control of his country. "The first step is to remove the Americans from Iraq," he says. "After we have achieved that, we can work out the other details."
FROM WARRIOR TO "MARTYR" Marwan says waiting is the hardest aspect of a jihadi's transformation into a suicide bomber. Volunteers have to undergo a program to discipline the mind and cleanse the soul. The training, supervised by field commanders and Sunni clerics sympathetic to the insurgency, is mainly psychological and spiritual. Besides the Koran, he says, "I read about the history of jihad, about great martyrs who have gone before me. These things strengthen my will." One popular source of inspiration for suicide bombers is The Lover of Angels, by Abdullah Azzam, one of Osama bin Laden's spiritual mentors, which tells stories of jihadis who died fighting Soviet occupying troops in Afghanistan. And Marwan is listening to taped speeches that address subjects like the rewards that await warriors in heaven. In recent months, jihadist groups have also begun showing recruits lurid videos of successful suicide hits. A U.S. official in Baghdad who studies suicide terrorism says some volunteers even visit the sites of previous bombings for inspiration.
Marwan says would-be "martyrs" may use their waiting time to take care of business--paying off debts, resolving family matters, saying farewells. Some destroy any photographs of themselves; extremist Islamists regard pictures as a sign of vanity and therefore taboo. Others compile lists of the 70 people Islamic tradition says a "martyr" can guarantee a place in paradise. "I haven't got my 70 names yet--I don't think I know that many people," Marwan says, allowing himself a rare smile. Some dig graves for themselves and leave instructions on the way they should be buried--generally with simple headstones. Marwan says he won't need a grave: "If I am lucky, my body will be vaporized. There won't be anything left of me to bury."
When Marwan gets the call-up, he expects the final stage of his training to be far more rigorous. He anticipates spending his last days in near seclusion, probably holed up in a safe house with a few other bombers-to-be. For non-Iraqis, the isolation can serve a practical purpose, ensuring that they keep a low profile and avoid arousing suspicion with their foreign accents. But all the suicide candidates, he says, are expected to immerse themselves in spiritual contemplation and prayer, to free their minds of negative thoughts toward their fellow men--except Americans and their Iraqi "infidel" supporters. There will be no TV or music, says Marwan, who will have to give up his one addiction, cigarettes. In many ways, these steps mirror the self-purification that devout Muslims undergo before embarking on the pilgrimage to Mecca. "You give up your previous life," he says, "and start a new one."
According to TIME's contacts close to insurgent groups, the bombers have little or no say in planning their operations. The logistics--choosing targets, checking out the site, preparing the bomb-laden vehicles or vests--are left to field commanders and explosives specialists. It is not unusual for a bomber to be told about the details of a mission mere minutes before launching the attack. Marwan says he thought he was going on his operation when his commander sent him to meet TIME. Iraqi Interior Ministry officials claim they have evidence showing that many of the bombers are drafted involuntarily. They say their investigations of car bombings have discovered that some of the vehicles were rigged to be detonated by remote control, indicating that the drivers may not have been aware that they were about to be blown up. "In a majority of cases, you find hands chained to the steering column, so these were not volunteers," says al-Juboori, the Interior Ministry spokesman. But U.S. investigators who have looked into scores of cases believe coercion is rare. Navy Commander Fred Gaghan, head of the Combined Explosives Exploitation Cell, which has investigated more than 60 bombings in the past five months, has not found any evidence of fetters. "They don't need them, because they have plenty of volunteers who will do it willingly," he says.
Marwan says the occasional bomber may ask to be chained to the wheel to make sure he doesn't flinch at the last moment. "If you have any little doubt in your mind about your own ability to carry out the mission, you do that to make sure you don't lose your courage," he says. He scoffs at reports that some suicide bombers are intoxicated. "Those who go on these missions know that they are about to see their Creator," he says. "Do you think we would meet Allah in a state of drunkenness or drugged? It is unthinkable."
Toward the end of the cleansing period, a bomber may ask a fellow jihadi, one better versed in religious doctrine, to help with the final spiritual preparation. Marwan says he was asked to mentor a friend intent on martyrdom earlier this year. He expects his final weeks to be a period of euphoria rather than penance. "My friend was happier than I had ever seen him," Marwan says. "He felt he was close to the end of his journey to heaven." (The friend, he says, blew himself up two months ago at a checkpoint manned by Iraqi soldiers near Ramadi, capital of the turbulent Anbar province, and six were killed. "We made a pact that we would meet in heaven," Marwan says.)
"I AM A TERRORIST" Marwan seems certain he is on a "pure" path. Unlike many other insurgents, who reject the terrorist label and call themselves freedom fighters or holy warriors, Marwan embraces it. "Yes, I am a terrorist," he says. "Write that down: I admit I am a terrorist. [The Koran] says it is the duty of Muslims to bring terror to the enemy, so being a terrorist makes me a good Muslim." He quotes lines from the surah known as Al-Anfal, or the Spoils of War: "Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into the enemy of Allah and your enemy."
Then, as if embarrassed by his emotional outburst, he slumps back in his chair. He would like to understand Americans better, he says. He was arrested by U.S. patrols twice and detained for short spells, but because he speaks no English, he was unable to communicate with his captors. But this is a small regret, he says, of the kind he is determined to put out of his mind. "When you get ready for the final mission," he says almost to himself, "you can't think about the past. You only think about your future in heaven." But there is at least one aspect of the immediate future that Marwan does not want to contemplate: the collateral damage he may cause to fellow Iraqis. In the recent spate of bombings, many of the victims have been harmless bystanders. "I pray no innocent people are killed in my mission," he says. "But if some are, I know when they arrive in heaven, Allah will ask them to forgive me."
If he could choose, Marwan would like his operation to be a car bombing targeting U.S. soldiers or Iraqi security forces far from any civilians. But if he is ordered to strap on explosives and walk to his target on a downtown street, he will do so. "We don't get to choose the mission," he says. "That is up to Allah." In fact, the decision will be made by a field commander of al-Zarqawi's group. Marwan hopes he will be chosen for a high-profile hit, the dramatic, headline-grabbing kind that al-Zarqawi is said to direct personally. Although Marwan has never met the terrorist mastermind, he reveres him as a great Islamic hero.
Marwan says he doesn't think about his legacy or how others might regard him when he is gone. Unlike their Palestinian counterparts, Iraq's self-immolating terrorists are not celebrated and memorialized by family and friends. At best, Marwan might be profiled on one of the jihadist websites, but even there, his identity would be concealed to spare his family harassment by Iraqi authorities. "It doesn't matter whether people know what I did," he says. "The only person who matters is Allah--and the only question he will ask me is 'How many infidels did you kill?'"
From the Jul. 04, 2005 issue of TIME magazine
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9327.htm
I started to read the article and again after about 3 minutes of reading I see that you again submit a post that is totally bias to the situation. It is truly sad to see that you are so lost, to prove my point here is a truly objective article as to what is truly going on in the mind of a suicide bomber
Inside the Mind of an Iraqi Suicide Bomber
In a rare interview, a "terrorist" in training reveals chilling secrets about the insurgency's deadliest weapon
By APARISIM GHOSH / BAGHDAD
06/28/05 "Time" - - One day soon, this somber young man plans to offer up a final prayer and then blow himself up along with as many U.S. or Iraqi soldiers as he can reach. Marwan Abu Ubeida says he has been training for months to carry out a suicide mission. He doesn't know when or where he will be ordered to climb into a bomb-laden vehicle or strap on an explosives-filled vest but says he is eager for the moment to come. While he waits, he spends much of his time rehearsing that last prayer. "First I will ask Allah to bless my mission with a high rate of casualties among the Americans," he says, speaking softly in a matter-of-fact monotone, as if dictating a shopping list. "Then I will ask him to purify my soul so I am fit to see him, and I will ask to see my mujahedin brothers who are already with him." He pauses to run the list through his mind again, then resumes: "The most important thing is that he should let me kill many Americans."
At 20, Marwan is already a battle-hardened insurgent, a jihadi foot soldier in Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi's terrorist group, al-Qaeda in Iraq. Like the bulk of insurgents, he is a Sunni Muslim from the former ruling minority community. In his hometown, Fallujah, he is known for his ferociousness in battle and deep religiosity. Marwan asked his commander to consider him for a suicide mission last fall but had to wait until the beginning of April for his name to be put on the list of volunteers. "When he finally agreed," Marwan recalls, "it was the happiest day of my life." There are, he says, scores of names on that list, and it can be months before a volunteer is assigned an operation. But at the current high rate of attacks, Marwan hopes he will be called up soon. "I can't wait," he says, rubbing his thumbs with his fingers in nervous energy. "I am ready to die now."
Among the embittered population of Iraq, it's not hard to find young men who talk the terrorist talk, boasting of their willingness to serve as human bombs. It's hard to judge the speakers' sincerity. But the latest surge of suicide operations proves there is no scarcity of volunteers to become the most lethal weapon Iraq's insurgents have. Since May 1, Iraq has witnessed at least 129 suicide attacks, accounting for several of the estimated 150 U.S. fatalities during this period, including as many as six soldiers killed in an attack of their convoy near Fallujah last week. Most of the 1,200 Iraqis killed by insurgents since May 1 have died in suicide bombings. And yet, despite the frequency and deadliness of their attacks, almost nothing is known about individual bombers. Their identities have rarely been revealed and then only posthumously, on jihadist websites or carefully edited videotapes aimed at promoting the insurgent cause and attracting fresh recruits. Among the few who have been named, most are foreigners, many from Saudi Arabia.
While some suicide bombers in Iraq have left behind videotaped testimony, Marwan is the first to tell his story before carrying out such a mission. He spoke to TIME in Baghdad on orders from his commander. The interview was the result of weeks of reporting on such insurgents in the hope of learning more about the identities and motivations of those behind the scourge of terrorism in Iraq. A jihadist group passed word that it would send one of its recruits to meet with us. Marwan was unaccompanied; we were not provided with any information about where he lives, works or trains. And out of concern for the safety of TIME's staff, no attempt was made to track his whereabouts after he left. During a three-hour interview, he talked freely of his motivations but did not divulge any specifics about a prospective strike. He seemed articulate and candid, though he insisted on being photographed wearing a mask over his face to conceal his identity and chose a pseudonym, using the common Iraqi name Marwan and a historical one, that of Abu Ubeida al-Jarrah, a 7th century general who conquered Syria for Islam. The sincerity of his desire to make himself a "martyr" was attested to by several figures-- a member of his organization, al-Qaeda in Iraq; a Baghdad-area commander of an insurgent unit that provides logistical support for al-Qaeda bombers; and a Sunni imam who is sometimes brought in to counsel bombers during their premission spiritual "purification"--whom TIME consulted through Iraqis with contacts inside the insurgency. His account provides a rare glimpse into the mind-set and preparation of one aspiring suicide bomber.
Short, scrawny, his chin covered with wispy facial hair that makes him look younger than his age, Marwan doesn't stand out in the streets of Iraq. Few would notice his one distinguishing feature: outsize hands, heavily callused from use of his favorite weapon, the Russian-made PKC machine gun. Even his distinctive Fallujah accent is not uncommon amid the din of the Iraqi capital, where suicide bombings are most frequent. According to an informant close to several insurgent groups and a U.S. official familiar with rebel operations, small and nondescript fighters like Marwan are considered ideal bombers, since they can slip into crowds without attracting attention. He came to the meeting with TIME wearing a black short-sleeved shirt hanging over black trousers--a style favored by many Shi'ite Muslims--to blend in with the majority of Iraq's population.
Homegrown bombers remain rare, but U.S. and Iraqi military officials are backing away from previous claims that suicide operations are the exclusive preserve of foreign jihadis. "I won't be surprised if there are Iraqis out there who are following the example of foreigners," says Colonel Adnan al-Juboori, a spokesman for the Interior Ministry. Marwan claims he knows of 15 Iraqis who have blown themselves up this year, and he believes there are "hundreds of others" like him who are waiting for the opportunity. Last week al-Zarqawi's group announced that it had set up a separate brigade for Iraqi suicide bombers.
BIRTH OF A JIHADI Marwan's journey toward suicide murderer began just a few weeks after the fall of Saddam Hussein. Before the war, he had been one of Fallujah's privileged young men: his father's successful business earned enough--even during the difficult years when the West imposed economic sanctions on Iraq--to provide a good life for Marwan and his six brothers and four sisters. In high school, he was an average student but excelled in Koranic studies at the local mosque.
Unlike many other Sunnis in Fallujah, Marwan had little love for Saddam's Sunni-led regime. Yet once the dictator fell, he turned against the Americans. "We expected them to bring Saddam down and then leave," he says. "But they stayed and stayed." Insurgents approached disaffected Fallujis like Marwan and urged them to join the resistance against the Americans. Many signed up, including one of Marwan's older brothers. Marwan joined the insurgency in April 2003 when U.S. soldiers fired on a crowd of demonstrators at a school, killing 12 and wounding many more. Marwan, who took part in the protest, escaped unharmed, but the event proved decisive. He says that a few days later, he and a few friends collected grenades and small arms from a military site abandoned by the Iraqi army and mounted an attack on a building occupied by U.S. soldiers. "They shot back but couldn't hit any of us," he recalls. "It was my first taste of victory against the Americans."
Over the next year, Marwan says, he participated in dozens of assaults on U.S. troops who were struggling to subdue the city. Marwan says he became expert with machine guns, a skill that brought him to the attention of al-Zarqawi's group, then called Attawhid wal Jihad. Marwan's piety apparently impressed the foreign-led jihadis as well: in April 2004 he was approached by Attawhid's spiritual guide, Palestinian-born Abu Anas al-Shami. Marwan says al-Shami, reputed to be a powerful orator and motivator, had a deep impact on him. (Al-Shami was killed in a rocket attack by U.S. forces near Fallujah in late 2004.)
Like other Iraqis who have joined extremist religious groups during the insurgency, Marwan severed connections with his family when he joined up. He says he will call them once before his suicide mission to say goodbye. Even though one of his brothers fights for another insurgent group and other siblings help the rebels with money and shelter, he says they all believe he has gone too far. "My family are not happy with my choice," he says. "But they know they can't change my path."
For the deeply pious Marwan, his colleagues in Attawhid are now closer to his heart than his family or former friends. "The jihadis are more religious people," he says. "You ask them anything--anything--and they can instantly quote a relevant section from the Koran." Like them, Marwan works Koranic allusions into his speech. He has also embraced the jihadist worldview of one global Islamic state where there is, in Marwan's words, "no alcohol, no music and no Western influences." He concedes that he has not thought deeply about what life might be like in such a state; after all, he doesn't expect to live long enough to experience it. Besides, he says, he fights first for Islam, second to become a "martyr" and win acceptance into heaven, and only third for control of his country. "The first step is to remove the Americans from Iraq," he says. "After we have achieved that, we can work out the other details."
FROM WARRIOR TO "MARTYR" Marwan says waiting is the hardest aspect of a jihadi's transformation into a suicide bomber. Volunteers have to undergo a program to discipline the mind and cleanse the soul. The training, supervised by field commanders and Sunni clerics sympathetic to the insurgency, is mainly psychological and spiritual. Besides the Koran, he says, "I read about the history of jihad, about great martyrs who have gone before me. These things strengthen my will." One popular source of inspiration for suicide bombers is The Lover of Angels, by Abdullah Azzam, one of Osama bin Laden's spiritual mentors, which tells stories of jihadis who died fighting Soviet occupying troops in Afghanistan. And Marwan is listening to taped speeches that address subjects like the rewards that await warriors in heaven. In recent months, jihadist groups have also begun showing recruits lurid videos of successful suicide hits. A U.S. official in Baghdad who studies suicide terrorism says some volunteers even visit the sites of previous bombings for inspiration.
Marwan says would-be "martyrs" may use their waiting time to take care of business--paying off debts, resolving family matters, saying farewells. Some destroy any photographs of themselves; extremist Islamists regard pictures as a sign of vanity and therefore taboo. Others compile lists of the 70 people Islamic tradition says a "martyr" can guarantee a place in paradise. "I haven't got my 70 names yet--I don't think I know that many people," Marwan says, allowing himself a rare smile. Some dig graves for themselves and leave instructions on the way they should be buried--generally with simple headstones. Marwan says he won't need a grave: "If I am lucky, my body will be vaporized. There won't be anything left of me to bury."
When Marwan gets the call-up, he expects the final stage of his training to be far more rigorous. He anticipates spending his last days in near seclusion, probably holed up in a safe house with a few other bombers-to-be. For non-Iraqis, the isolation can serve a practical purpose, ensuring that they keep a low profile and avoid arousing suspicion with their foreign accents. But all the suicide candidates, he says, are expected to immerse themselves in spiritual contemplation and prayer, to free their minds of negative thoughts toward their fellow men--except Americans and their Iraqi "infidel" supporters. There will be no TV or music, says Marwan, who will have to give up his one addiction, cigarettes. In many ways, these steps mirror the self-purification that devout Muslims undergo before embarking on the pilgrimage to Mecca. "You give up your previous life," he says, "and start a new one."
According to TIME's contacts close to insurgent groups, the bombers have little or no say in planning their operations. The logistics--choosing targets, checking out the site, preparing the bomb-laden vehicles or vests--are left to field commanders and explosives specialists. It is not unusual for a bomber to be told about the details of a mission mere minutes before launching the attack. Marwan says he thought he was going on his operation when his commander sent him to meet TIME. Iraqi Interior Ministry officials claim they have evidence showing that many of the bombers are drafted involuntarily. They say their investigations of car bombings have discovered that some of the vehicles were rigged to be detonated by remote control, indicating that the drivers may not have been aware that they were about to be blown up. "In a majority of cases, you find hands chained to the steering column, so these were not volunteers," says al-Juboori, the Interior Ministry spokesman. But U.S. investigators who have looked into scores of cases believe coercion is rare. Navy Commander Fred Gaghan, head of the Combined Explosives Exploitation Cell, which has investigated more than 60 bombings in the past five months, has not found any evidence of fetters. "They don't need them, because they have plenty of volunteers who will do it willingly," he says.
Marwan says the occasional bomber may ask to be chained to the wheel to make sure he doesn't flinch at the last moment. "If you have any little doubt in your mind about your own ability to carry out the mission, you do that to make sure you don't lose your courage," he says. He scoffs at reports that some suicide bombers are intoxicated. "Those who go on these missions know that they are about to see their Creator," he says. "Do you think we would meet Allah in a state of drunkenness or drugged? It is unthinkable."
Toward the end of the cleansing period, a bomber may ask a fellow jihadi, one better versed in religious doctrine, to help with the final spiritual preparation. Marwan says he was asked to mentor a friend intent on martyrdom earlier this year. He expects his final weeks to be a period of euphoria rather than penance. "My friend was happier than I had ever seen him," Marwan says. "He felt he was close to the end of his journey to heaven." (The friend, he says, blew himself up two months ago at a checkpoint manned by Iraqi soldiers near Ramadi, capital of the turbulent Anbar province, and six were killed. "We made a pact that we would meet in heaven," Marwan says.)
"I AM A TERRORIST" Marwan seems certain he is on a "pure" path. Unlike many other insurgents, who reject the terrorist label and call themselves freedom fighters or holy warriors, Marwan embraces it. "Yes, I am a terrorist," he says. "Write that down: I admit I am a terrorist. [The Koran] says it is the duty of Muslims to bring terror to the enemy, so being a terrorist makes me a good Muslim." He quotes lines from the surah known as Al-Anfal, or the Spoils of War: "Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into the enemy of Allah and your enemy."
Then, as if embarrassed by his emotional outburst, he slumps back in his chair. He would like to understand Americans better, he says. He was arrested by U.S. patrols twice and detained for short spells, but because he speaks no English, he was unable to communicate with his captors. But this is a small regret, he says, of the kind he is determined to put out of his mind. "When you get ready for the final mission," he says almost to himself, "you can't think about the past. You only think about your future in heaven." But there is at least one aspect of the immediate future that Marwan does not want to contemplate: the collateral damage he may cause to fellow Iraqis. In the recent spate of bombings, many of the victims have been harmless bystanders. "I pray no innocent people are killed in my mission," he says. "But if some are, I know when they arrive in heaven, Allah will ask them to forgive me."
If he could choose, Marwan would like his operation to be a car bombing targeting U.S. soldiers or Iraqi security forces far from any civilians. But if he is ordered to strap on explosives and walk to his target on a downtown street, he will do so. "We don't get to choose the mission," he says. "That is up to Allah." In fact, the decision will be made by a field commander of al-Zarqawi's group. Marwan hopes he will be chosen for a high-profile hit, the dramatic, headline-grabbing kind that al-Zarqawi is said to direct personally. Although Marwan has never met the terrorist mastermind, he reveres him as a great Islamic hero.
Marwan says he doesn't think about his legacy or how others might regard him when he is gone. Unlike their Palestinian counterparts, Iraq's self-immolating terrorists are not celebrated and memorialized by family and friends. At best, Marwan might be profiled on one of the jihadist websites, but even there, his identity would be concealed to spare his family harassment by Iraqi authorities. "It doesn't matter whether people know what I did," he says. "The only person who matters is Allah--and the only question he will ask me is 'How many infidels did you kill?'"
From the Jul. 04, 2005 issue of TIME magazine
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9327.htm
Last edited:
islamirama
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 4,194
- Reaction score
- 608
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
do you honestly think i would read anyting you bring forth after seeing you defend your soldier's atrocities so blindly?
Kashnowe
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 117
- Reaction score
- 7
islamarama why are you living in usa if you are so disgusted? go back home if you hate 'us' so much.
recognize that every penny you spend here is taxed (unless you live in delaware
)and taxes go right to the government you are so opposed to.
recognize that every penny you spend here is taxed (unless you live in delaware
)and taxes go right to the government you are so opposed to.
islamirama
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 4,194
- Reaction score
- 608
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
islamarama why are you living in usa if you are so disgusted? go back home if you hate 'us' so much.
recognize that every penny you spend here is taxed (unless you live in delaware
why are you living in usa, go back to where you came from. This land belongs to the natives your ancestor killed in a genocide beyond scale. I laugh at the dumb americans who think they own this land and tell other's to go back home.
Every penny i make gov't takes some share, and there isn't even a law that says you have to pay taxes. That is out of my hand.
Kashnowe
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 117
- Reaction score
- 7
i appologize if my comment came across harsh. i did not mean it that way its difficult sometimes to set a tone when you are typing not speaking face to face. it was an honest question. i am curious as to why someone would be here if hey hated it so much. people who are born here don't fit that argument. you willfully boarded a plane and came here. so..........thats like if i got on a plane to egypt today to go live there and then spent the nex t5 years complaining about how much i hate it there......silly. just buy a ticket and go somewhere you are happy.
by the way i was born here in the usa so when you tell me to go home i will be going nowhere because i am home. makes sense huh. and i love my country and my freedom and i am proud to be an american. thank you very much.
and furthermore NOT ONE of my ancestors had anything to do with any genocide in this country. my great grandparents on both sides came to the usa from italy into ellis island around the turn of the century.
aaaand there most certainly is a law that says you must pay taxes.
islamirama
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 4,194
- Reaction score
- 608
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
it's alright, it is hard to sense a tone when talking online. But I"m sure you can understand my position as well for someone who grew up here and yet continuously being remind to "go back home" rather then being accepted as an 'american'. Like i said to someone else on here, i'll never be an american even if i'm born here. The arabs and asians who thought of themselves more american than anything found that out post 9-11.
As for my choice, a child doestn' have much of a choice as to where their parents take him. But don't worry, I can't wait to get out of this prison at first opportunity I get. And also like someone said, if the Americans get their behinds out of Muslim land, stop supporting the tyrants and protecting them, remove their military bases, and stop meddling in Muslim affairs, then Muslims won't see the need to come live here. As the saying goes "destory my home and i'll move in you", and we know very well US has too much love for oil to let go of all that.
Lastly, there is no law that states you have to pay taxes and in fact it is against the constitution to tax people. Check out this videos, they are quite an eye opener.
IRS Tax Is Illegal - No Tax Law Exists!!
No Law for US Income Tax (1/2)
No Law for US Income Tax (2/2)
The Secret of the Federal Reserve
Truth about Federal Reserve
Money Matters
Last edited:
Grace Seeker
IB Legend
- Messages
- 5,343
- Reaction score
- 617
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Christianity
islamirama if you have read my posts, I have never dissed anyone for being from some other country than the USA. I have never dissed anyone for being of a different ethnic background than me. I have never dissed anyone for being of a different belief than me. I have never even dissed anyone for being of a different value system than me or for disagreeing with me.
I am a descendant of people who came here as immigrants. I have children who are immigrants, children who are native born, and chidlren who live scattered in countries on 3 other continants. So, I welcome all, and I welcome you.
But I will diss people for approvinig of wanton, unrestricted violence -- that includes both my own government and others.
And I will question why people come and stay some place that they hate as much as you appear to hate the USA. So, why are you here? Were you born here, or made to move here by your parents? Did you come here to work or study in school? Have you immigrated here as a refugee? Have you always hated the USA, or is this something you've more recently come to feel?
I am a descendant of people who came here as immigrants. I have children who are immigrants, children who are native born, and chidlren who live scattered in countries on 3 other continants. So, I welcome all, and I welcome you.
But I will diss people for approvinig of wanton, unrestricted violence -- that includes both my own government and others.
And I will question why people come and stay some place that they hate as much as you appear to hate the USA. So, why are you here? Were you born here, or made to move here by your parents? Did you come here to work or study in school? Have you immigrated here as a refugee? Have you always hated the USA, or is this something you've more recently come to feel?
Last edited:
- Status