September 29, 2005

Report: Taliban MIGHT Have al Qaeda Links

At least twelve people were killed in Kabul today when a mass-murderer on a motorcycle exploded himself in Afghanistan's capital city. You might have heard this in the news already, but look how New Zealand's Mail and Guardian is spinning the story. Here is the headline:

Kabul attack raises fear of al-Qaeda link to Taliban

What? Is this a joke? Ok, so maybe the headline is misleading. You know, like a typo or something. Sometimes headlines don't do a story justice. The only people who have any doubt that the Taliban were simply the institutionalized political wing of the Salafist jihad in Afghanistan also wear tin foil and believe that 9/11 was an 'inside job'. Let's go on to the story:

Afghan officials believe al-Qaeda has renewed its ties with the Taliban.
Renewed its ties? Again, what idiot actually thinks those ties were ever severed? Seriously? But at least the story admits that there were ties, you know, at one time.

The facts of the story actually get at what is really going on. What is meant is that the Taliban are now copying tactics used by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's al Qaeda in Iraq, and that foreign jihadis with ties to al Qaeda are entering Afghanistan in larger numbers.

In an interview published this week, a Taliban commander boasted he had trained in Iraq for several months and was now bringing his expertise home.

"I want to copy in Afghanistan the tactics and spirit of the glorious Iraqi resistance," Muhammad Daud told Newsweek.

Hours before Wednesday's blast, the Afghan intelligence agency, the NDS, told security groups that al-Qaeda had formed a new group, named Fedayani Islam (Sacrifices for Islam), and sent suicide bombers into southern Afghanistan, seeking "targets of opportunity".

As someone who has a bit of knowledge about this subject, let me state categorically that there is not a bit of difference between al Qaeda and the Taliban. Different organizations, yes, but with the same goals and who are now, and have always been, tied together. Further, al Qaeda and the Taliban never left Afghanistan. Why the hell do you think we've had troops in that country for over 3 years now? To make such a claim reveals a depth of ignorance so great that it is almost unfathonable.

Posted by: Rusty at 08:27 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 391 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Having unprotected sex with a dozen strangers at the shelter, might be bad for you. OH NOOOOOOOO!!!! Who would have though! OooOOooOOoHHhhHHHH the humaity....

Posted by: Filthy Allah at September 29, 2005 08:44 AM (5ceWd)

2 New Zealand has it's dingbats the same as America. Dingbatitus is a world problem. Not just a United States problem.

Posted by: greyrooster at September 29, 2005 08:49 AM (M7kiy)

3 Holy crap liberals are getting stupider, and bolder, every day. I say stupider not because I labor under the delusion that they don't know better; they do. Oh yes, dear heart, they know exactly what they're doing, and they know who's side they're on. (Clue: It isn't ours.) Liberals would love nothing better than to see our country a smoking, radioactive ruin, or at least the parts they have no use for, like the parts where white people live happy, productive lives, untrammeled by the vagaries of totalitarian socialist government. They explicitly, actively, and openly support our enemies at every turn, blissfully ignoring the fact that those same enemies, their ideological brothers-in-arms, would round them up for the headsman first, because the things that liberals stand for, i.e. promiscuity, homosexuality, drugs and booze, women's rights, (sorry, wymyn's rights), etc., are not really on the 'slamotards list of their favorite things. About the only two factors I can think of that liberals and 'slamotards have in common is a hatred of Western civilization, (though they don't hesitate to use the things made possible by it), and a tolerance for, and promotion of, pedophilia. I know a lot of people think that when I write "Liberals should all be taken out and shot!", that I'm just being inflammatory and facetious, but no, I'm dead serious. Envision, if you will, a castle. It's a big, beautiful castle, handed down for generations in trust to its builders' heirs, who are charged with its maintenance and defense. Now, the inhabitants of this castle can come and go as they wish, because there are many gates, and people from outside the castle can come live inside and enjoy its safety and comfort, where they are free to prosper. If they find life in the castle odious, they can leave at any time and find a place that suits them better. In the old days, people understood this, but now, it seems that many don't. We have among us, living in the castle alongside us, a significant group of malcontents who have never known life outside the castle, but who hear tales of other lands, and with this little knowledge, they compare these fantastical visions to their own lives within the castle walls. They believe that there are other lands, other castles, where the people are even more free, more happy, and more enlightened than those miserable inhabitants with whom they share space, and loathe for it. These malcontents, those of the castle who for one reason or another hate it, want to change things. They hate the castle walls for holding them in, though there are many gates through which they may leave freely. They hate those who are in charge of running the castle, though they are selected democratically from among the people. And they hate the people who live in the castle itself, calling them fat, stupid, lazy, greedy, unjust, etc., though they themselves live no differently than those they hate. Now, envision the grounds outside the castle crowded with people who want to get in. Many just want to live in peace and freedom so they can prosper, many just want to visit then go home, but many, too many, want to see if the castle might be taken over, since those charged with maintaining and defending the castle seem to be mired in one scandal after another, and cannot do their jobs. Many of these invaders come in, because they do not come as enemies, but as visitors, so they easily gain admission to the castle, but once inside, they begin undermining the walls, poisoning the wells, and storing weapons for their eventual takeover attempt. This isn't the worst part, though. The worst part is that those earlier mentioned malcontents, who hate the castle and its people, though they are part of it and them, are helping the enemies who seek to know down the castle's walls so that an invading army can sweep in and take over. They help them undermine the walls, they help them poison the wells, and they spread dissention and discontent among the people, making infalmmatory accusations of scandal and corruption against anyone who is not helping them to destroy the castle. There is a name for people who aid the enemies of their countrymen: Traitors. When people still lived in castles, and found some among them trying to undermine the walls and help enemies slip in through unwatched gates, they would take those people and hang them from the castle walls, so that all could see what becomes of traitors, and the enemies found to have slipped in would be sent home in small baskets, as a warning to further enemies. No castle was ever kept by letting traitors and enemies have the run of the place, and no castle was ever lost by hanging traitors and dismembering enemies. People don't live in castles anymore, but traitors and enemies have not changed, and the best methods for dealing with them have not changed.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at September 29, 2005 10:39 AM (0yYS2)

4 Over at the Belmont Club there is a semi-regular commentator who goes by IOTM. Essentially he is a troll and is not at all convinced the Taliban had a thing to do with 9/11. Therefore he views our intervention in Afghanistan as a bad thing. I called him a MoveOn nutter and do not bite on his flamebait anymore. MoveOn and CodePink are of the same mind.

Posted by: Marcus Aurelius at September 29, 2005 10:40 AM (twKqp)

5 ITOM Incarnation Of Tinfoil Moonbat ??

Posted by: Al Franken at September 29, 2005 02:28 PM (fl6E1)

6 oops - IOTM

Posted by: Al Franken at September 29, 2005 02:29 PM (fl6E1)

7 Dang that was me. Sheesh

Posted by: Oyster at September 29, 2005 02:30 PM (fl6E1)

8 Maximus, Are you saying that it is time for Squire Jesusland Joe to break out the Tewksbury axe and begin to hew at the necks of our enemies?

Posted by: jesusland joe at September 29, 2005 03:44 PM (rUyw4)

9 Yes, hewing is in order. Or stretching. We can have two lines.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at September 29, 2005 07:21 PM (0yYS2)

10 Comments may be said with light heartedness but I wonder if we have been talking to the Islamofacists in a language they understand. I think they do not take us seriously because of our tactics. To them, educated and conditioned to cruelity, our follow the rules and be kind and gentle methods show weakness. The idiots are used to having their hands and heads cut off for the smallest things. Anything else seems to be taken as we are not serious. Putting them in jail and feeding them well doesn't get the point across. They kill women for infidelity. How does jailing them for a few months for murder show we are serious?

Posted by: greyrooster at September 29, 2005 07:50 PM (M7kiy)

11 You're right rooster, our harshest measures so far seem to have no effect on them. I say we start burying the dead terrorists wrapped in pigskins, and make the captives wear pigskin jumpsuits.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at September 29, 2005 11:09 PM (0yYS2)

12 Impy - how's the new meds you keep hiding in the slippers and mixing with the friskies? Klanrooster - gotta lay off the wild turkey before you hurt yourself!

Posted by: Downing Street Memo at September 30, 2005 05:40 AM (A5eqb)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
27kb generated in CPU 0.0421, elapsed 0.2028 seconds.
119 queries taking 0.1744 seconds, 261 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.