Originally posted by Krypton
Not Jaish-e-Mohammed...
And? AND?!?!?!
Are you trying to say that Jaish-e-Mohammed is the only Kashmiri terrorist group?!
Even so, what the hell is your point?!?!
:conf: :conf: :conf:
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by George Smiley
My God you're impossible!
The point was that elements of the Pakistani regime have contact with and involvement with groups that carry out suicide bombings, and have used these groups to attack India.
You stated that as Bhutto was killed by a suicide bomb (leaving aside for the moment that she wasn't) the ONLY group responsible can be al-Qaida. That assertion is wrong
How do you know the Pakistani government carried out attacks in India such as the Indian parliament bombing, and not a terrorist group acting in its own interest.
My point is, let's not jump to conclusions by blaming Masharaff.
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by George Smiley
And? AND?!?!?!
Are you trying to say that Jaish-e-Mohammed is the only Kashmiri terrorist group?!
Even so, what the hell is your point?!?!
:conf: :conf: :conf:
Well, please name me another group in the Kashmir that has carried out suicide attacks.
Lesbianosaur
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
My point is, let's not jump to conclusions by blaming Masharaff.
Or al-Qaeda.
Omega_M
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Masharaff.
Musharraf
I've seen you misspell his name several times.
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by Lesbianosaur
Or al-Qaeda.
Well, aren't we all jumping to conclusions?!:happy2:
George Smiley
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Well, please name me another group in the Kashmir that has carried out suicide attacks.
Though the Pakistani authorities are concerned over the impact of the organisation on Pakistani youth which could, in the long run, lead to the Talibanisation of Pakistan with a Pakistani version of the Taliban possibly getting its finger on the nuclear button, they continue to use the Markaz and its Lashkar in their proxy war against India.
And for the record, nobody is blaming anyone. We are simply giving you information that means you cannot rule out Pakistani governmental involvement just because the attack used a suicide bomber. The ISI are involved in a number of Kashmiri terrorist groups (and other Islamist groups) and altho following 9/11 the ISI was supposed to sever its links with these groups, the ISI has been discribed as a state within a state and there are many rogue elements who have maintained the links (and considering these group's advantages to Pakistan in their conflict with India over Kashmir then the maintanance of these links may stretch a little further than rogue elements)
Anyway - facts are facts - and it is a fact that the Pakistani authorities have contact and influence over militant groups who use suicide bombers, and therefore, the fact a suicide bomber was involved in the attack on Bhutto does NOT rule out involvement by Pakistani authorities (as you are trying to suggest)
George Smiley
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Well, aren't we all jumping to conclusions?!:happy2:
No, actually. I think most people are trying to explore all avenues about who might have committed this act. You on the other hand are trying to tell us you know for a fact that al-Qaida did this and no authorities could be involved as a suicide bomber was involved.
I mean even if it was an Islamist group, that in no way means al-Qaida did this considering the amount of Islamist groups opperating in Pakistan (and Afghanistan and Kashmir)
shaolin_Z
LOL. WTF?!?! People still think "Al-Qaeda" actually exists? :conf: You guys do realize there's no "interconnected network" of "terrorists" that actually form any kind of organized group or structure? Are you also familiar with who coined the term "Al-Qaeda" for this imaginary group to begin with? Human stupidity and cognitive dissonance go hand in hand I suppose, but it never ceases to amaze me. ing retards.
George Smiley
quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
LOL. WTF?!?! People still think "Al-Qaeda" actually exists? :conf: You guys do realize there's no "interconnected network" of "terrorists" that actually form any kind of organized group or structure? Are you also familiar with who coined the term "Al-Qaeda" for this imaginary group to begin with? Human stupidity and cognitive dissonance go hand in hand I suppose, but it never ceases to amaze me. ing retards.
You're half right...
The first time the term 'al-Qaida' was used was by the Amercians who needed the name of an organisation in order to prosecute Osama Bin Laden over the 1998 Embassy bombings. However, Osama Bin Laden's group has since adopted the name and also claim they made it up.
Either way, "al-Qaida" does exist, just not in the way the Americans (and most people on here) try to make out. Osama Bin Laden (or probably more acuratly Zawahiri) brought together a number of terrorist groups in Afghanistan to train them up to fight the Russians. But these groups were not his to order, merely to help them along their way to fighting the Russians. Osama Bin Laden does however have a core group but this is about as relevant as any other Islamist group operating in the region. He certainly does not control these other groups but since 9/11 Osama Bin Laden has risen to fame as the "greatest" Islamist (especially to those with a global Jihadist vision, rather than the more common localised concerns). This has led to numerous unconnected groups claiming to carry out attacks in the name of "al-Qaida". This is a wet dream for the Americans who want to convince the world al-Qaida is global when its not
So al-Qaida, in the way the Americans want us to think, does not exist. There is, however, a famous Islamist group going by that name, and there is also the al-Qaida ideology that many groups adhere to
shaolin_Z
Well, you're right about that. More strategic planning to manufacture enemies, you know, in order to justify their foreign policy to the stupid masses while simultaneously serving as a mechanism to keep them in fear. It's analagous to "terrorists" and "al-Qaeda" in Iraq. We all know who to thank for both of those. I hope you don't think the Bush Amin and the NeoCons' imagination just coincidently happens to manifest on some level in reality. That's just a bit too convenient. Bush may appear to be daft, perhaps he's nothing more than a useful idiot, but the people who surround him are not.
EDIT: Here's a good example:
Straight from the horses mouth.
Lesbianosaur
quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
LOL. WTF?!?! People still think "Al-Qaeda" actually exists? :conf: You guys do realize there's no "interconnected network" of "terrorists" that actually form any kind of organized group or structure? Are you also familiar with who coined the term "Al-Qaeda" for this imaginary group to begin with? Human stupidity and cognitive dissonance go hand in hand I suppose, but it never ceases to amaze me. ing retards.
Oh, I don't know. Whether or not it is organized with any discernible command structure is debatable, but the fact that there is a transnational organization is not. Putting the Middle East aside for a moment, a new melding of several national and regional terrorist and separatist organizations in northern Africa under the common banner of al-Qaeda was organized much to the surprise of Western intelligence services. Many of these groups which posed little threat to Western interests are now receiving more attention as there appears to be significantly more resources pouring into their funding and more coordination between formerly disparate groups. To top it off, Zarqawi is alleged to have released a statement declaring the al-Qaeda Organization of the Islamic Maghreb to be the newest al-Qaeda subsidiary, and went so far as to claim a "blessed union" between the two groups. But we are seeing the movement operate in a wide swath of countries from desert states like Mali, Algeria, Niger, and Mauritania to, more significantly, Nigeria, Senegal, and the political void that is Chad.
