Everyone is Al Qaeda in Iraq

[Doug]

DOUG
I noticed this a few days ago, a shift in the way the media was reporting the news in Iraq. Now a columnist gives the details:

===========
See here.

That the Bush administration, and specifically its military commanders, decided to begin using the term "Al Qaeda" to designate "anyone and everyeone we fight against or kill in Iraq" is obvious. All of a sudden, every time one of the top military commanders describes our latest operations or quantifies how many we killed, the enemy is referred to, almost exclusively now, as "Al Qaeda."

But what is even more notable is that the establishment press has followed right along, just as enthusiastically. I don't think the New York Times has published a story about Iraq in the last two weeks without stating that we are killing "Al Qaeda fighters," capturing "Al Qaeda leaders," and every new operation is against "Al Qaeda."

The Times -- typically in the form of the gullible and always-government-trusting "reporting" of Michael Gordon, though not only -- makes this claim over and over, as prominently as possible, often without the slightest questioning, qualification, or doubt. If your only news about Iraq came from The New York Times, you would think that the war in Iraq is now indistinguishable from the initial stage of the war in Afghanistan -- that we are there fighting against the people who hijacked those planes and flew them into our buildings: "Al Qaeda."

What is so amazing about this new rhetorical development -- not only from our military, but also from our "journalists" -- is that, for years, it was too shameless and false even for the Bush administration to use.

[Dardedar]

DAR
Oh, and did you see? We caught Al Qaeda's number two guy in Iraq again. We're winning!

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

It's the only thing they can think of to continue the myth that we are fighting the 9/11 perps - even the most ignorant of the RWs are semi, sorta, starting to concede that Iraq had nothing to do with it.

[Doug]

DAR
Oh, and did you see? We caught Al Qaeda's number two guy in Iraq again. We're winning!

DOUG
AGAIN??? That little bugger must be a regular Houdini. We seem to catch him every six months or so--whenever Bush needs a boost.

[Dardedar]

Eighty Percent Of Al-Qaeda No. 2s Now Dead

February 1, 2006 | Issue 42•05

The Onion

WASHINGTON, DC—The Pentagon announced Monday that 80 percent of Osama bin Laden's seconds-in-command have been eliminated. "Nearly 1,600 al-Qaeda leaders ranked number two have been wiped out," Lt. Col. Mark Allison said. "That leaves only 400 of Osama bin Laden's right-hand men in the organization." Following the apparent failure to kill bin Laden's No. 2 man Ayman al-Zawahri in a missile strike on a Pakistani border town on Jan. 13, American forces intensified the search for al-Qaeda second-in-command Ahmed Al-Zahnami, or, failing that, No. 2 man Amman al-Zaharani, or No. 2 man Ahmed al-Zafarani.

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

Afghanistan is getting really pissed off at the number of civilian "collateral damage" dead as a result of our missile strikes to take out these multiple No. 2s. About the only thing I can think of that Hogeye was right about is the immorality of using a missile to attempt to take a an individual, now matter how good or bad that individual might happen to be (and I'd prefer a trial and evidence of that before I actually offed the guy, much less surrounding folks who may or may not have ever heard of him in their now-shortened lives).

[cohen avshalom]

you forget one think-there are more then 1.3 billion Muslim-and the number will very soon higher then today.
for the muslim they dont afraid-to lose one million/
so you should change your approach, and you could be more safe if you will made them to be more educated-if the education is more penetrate to the population then you will have less problem with the people-the problem in thos country is that the education is almost dont exsist-and if you have regular education it will be apparently not possible because the price is more then people could pay.
only the radical education who is very inexpensive is passible.

cohen avshalom charly
israel/haifa
www.icarus5.com

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

Education is part of the problem, but so is poverty. Unless they are street people (and in America even street people can find workarounds), Americans just don't realize what poverty means. The worst they usually can relate to is the electricity being out for a few days because of winter storm damage or boil orders because of a minor breech in the water pipes. The idea of not just no electricity, but no water, no sewage system, little food and no way to cook it - all at the same time and going on for years - just doesn't compute. The fact that such conditions lead to dying in the homes and in the streets just doesn't compute. Short term, educated people will take freedom over a full belly. Long term, nobody will. Education and the security of water, food, and shelter (none of which can happen while dodging bullets or bombs) together is what will change the situation for 98% of the people of the world. The other 2% will always be trouble-makers, it's in their nature.

As to what happens when missiles are used to try and take down an individual - we would not only be P.O.'d, we'd declare war if anybody did that to us. That fact that we not only have more nuclear weapons than the rest of the world put together, we also have the delivery systems for said weapons, which they don't even if they have nuclear weapons, is the only thing that has stopped the countries we attack from doing just that (declaring war on us). And they may be rethinking that stance, since it doesn't seem to matter whether they declare war or not, they still get bombed (missiled?).

[cohen avshalom charly]

to Barbara Fitzpatrick

Education is part of the problem

this is not part-this is the main one-this is the only way to change thinks/
sometimes i think that we were all thinking in american eyes-and we were thinking that poverty is the resoon-poverty is thing that has all over the world.proverty is not resoon to this result.
hate is human-this is not probleam till you do something a bout this.
but the only way to change other is making more education-practical thinks-and learning language.
this people made the changing in the way of thought.they began the process-even if they think they dont-during the time they change not only they mind also other-you know --there are few way of thinking and not all the people think bad on the other-this is the second thoughts.

i am very sorry that my english is still not so good-but i am trying to improve here-somewho i am reading more good then i can express myself.

cohen avshalom charly
israel/haifa
www.icarus5.com

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

Cohen - you can't teach a starving person much of anything, except maybe hatred, if they are still healthy enough to hate. After a point they have no energy even for hate and it's total apathy until they die. First you feed, then you teach. If you feed, then teach/give methods of feeding themselves, and build/help build a secure living situation - you don't have to teach them not to hate you, they're already on your side. To keep them on your side after they are no longer hungry or in danger, that's the point where education comes in. (And your English is better than my ANYTHING else.)

[cohen avshalom charly]

Barbara Fitzpatrick-ok -i have nothing against they have food or other think-but without education-they will not change-they will hate everyone who is not (i -ago person first).
the 5 degree -made you right -first food-and...
but even small mount of food will make you pass this stage.

cohen avshalom charly
israel/haifa
www.icarus5.com