DU jumps the Zarq.

Come on guys, be serious. A very bad guy died today. Yes, he was killed. He did exist, he was alive before today, and he is dead now, not sitting in a bunker with Osama, Mullah Omar (remember him?), Uday and Qusay and the passengers from flight 77.

And yet DU's response has unfolded with weary predictability.

Almost a year ago, four bombs exploded in my home city, killing dozens of people. One exploded directly in front of the apartment occupied by my parents- and brother-in-law, missing him by about 12 minutes. As the report published earlier this week shows, communications of all kinds failed almost immediately. It ttok hours for us all to account for all our family and loved ones. My partner was meant to fly to Madrid that morning to visit friends - obviously, she did not.

It was only 12 or 13 hours after the attack that I logged back onto DU and began to trawl through the threads about 7/7. I was shocked and horrified - offended, upset, incredulous that people could say in all seriousness the things they were saying.

The idea that Bushco had done the bombing emerged within minutes of the first report. Nothing was known, but people were happy to twist events to fit their own political cosmology.

For me, the last straw was a thread suggesting that Bushco had planned the bombings in order to divert media attention from Cindy Sheehan's protest at Crawford.

This stressed to me that some DUers had completely lost perspective. I had chuckled off the "Bushco did it!" responses to the tsunami. 7/7 punctured my comfortable little bubble and made me notice that the conspiracy fantasies are more than just "free thinking", they aren't "an entertaining diversion" - they turn real life, where people live and die and fight and lose and win, and where everything is complicated and confusing and often irrational, into some sort of computer game between this fantasy idea of a band of "truthseekers" against this fantasy idea of "an overarching pure evil nemesis". Politics, war, religion, the media, culture, everything gets twisted into this bizarre sub-Tolkien sport of good vs. evil.

Yes, there are conspiracies. Yes, the Bush administration is something special in the world of Bad. But for some, the reaction against Bush has become a sort of monomania, where everything, EVERYTHING, is either done by Bush for some secret purpose, done by Bush as a distraction from something else, or, in rare circumstances, NOT done by Bush, in which case the protagonist is first elevated to heroic status and then roundly vilified in an online version of a kill-the-leader cult.

It would all be so simple if everything was black and white. But hey! It's not. The world's in Technicolor. Every time one of these issues comes up, interesting, mature and valuable posters write off DU. I don't want anyone to leave, or be banned. All I want is for some posters here to realise that this place can be a self-reinforcing echo chamber, and that * isn't omnipotent. Given unilateral Republican control of all branches of government, with the country apparently at war and a compliant media at his back, he still polls worse than any other president.

That's no evil genius. And it indicates his team isn't the hot shit they're meant to be, either.

Anyway, flame if you must, I do not intend this to be personal and say it as a critical friend to you all.

:grouphug:

Every anonymous community will attract idiots and fools, DU included.....

goosesteppers, jackbooted thugs, and brownshirts.

Sincerely,
Matt Ethridge,
AKA motocicleta

Consider yourself ignored.....

How is the previous poster a goosestepper, jackbooted thug or a brownshirt?

al-Zarqawi was a rotten individual, who not only murdered U.S. troops but innocent people in Amman and he did whatever he could to promote a civil war among Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims. I certainly am not upset that he's dead.

I just don't agree with the trend around here to shame people who are outside of some definition of "mainstream thought" into silence. It seems to be a real fad right now.

Granted, my language was ridiculous. The point is still valid, even if the messenger is a fool.

I am not upset that he is dead, if he was who we were told he was, and if he is dead. I think there are some who have valid questions about those points, and I have been so beaten down by the inability of the Bush admin and the MSM to tell the truth that I believe our little anonymous bulletin board is a fine forum for bringing up alternative points of view. So sue me.

the trend here seems to be to question everything, which is good in a way. I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong, it's just what I've noticed. I don't think the OP is a nazi for agreeing with the official story. I'm inclined to agree with it, too. Even though I don't trust the MSM or this administration, I think that if they were going to show fake bodies, we would have seen those of bin Laden and al-Zawahiri long ago.

I think I was way out of line for suggesting any sort of nazi connection. I am absolutely the first to get pissy about people using the nazi line speciously; it was a weak intellectual moment for me.

I appreciate the input about the trends around here. I guess it just depends on which threads you're reading.

I suppose you're right about the fake bodies angle, but I am more suspicious about the possibility of fake villains rather than fake bodies. But who knows? I just want to come to DU and other message boards for more speculation and possible information rather than less.

Cheers

The "truth" may hurt some, but others will rejoice.

Thoughtful, well-said, and right on the money to my sensibilities.

Somtimes a Zebra is just a Zebra; and sometimes a dead terrorist is just a dead terrorist.

And good riddance to him .

This was a bad guy. I am glad that he won't be around anymore to orchestrate car bombings on innocent men, women and children. That bastards hands were red with blood and I don't actually think he cared who he killed, as long as the kill count was high.

I also agree that the Bushies are, above all else, incompetent. They are going down as are their lying friends in Congress. That's what I'm working toward.

Sometimes DU does 'jump the shark' on somethings. It's best then to take a break and then come back when the saner folks have had a chance to check in.

that seem to always jump to a conspiracy for any current major news event. It has been going on for years here. I just ignore them, let them have their paranoid fantasies.

edited to add I recommended as well, excellent post.

bush has truly put things out in public that were absolutely a lie. A good example was the gathering and listening to phone numbers and conversations without approval from the FISA Court and yet he clearly stated many months before that he only searched phones and conversations with approval from the Court. Whenever a story like this comes out the questions will be asked, like one newsman on MSNBC asked a question about the explosion and how powerful it was and the amount of lbs dumped on the building and how were they able to find Zarqawi in a recognizable condition, well, the fellow he asked never touched the subject but talked about how exact the bombing was. So those type remarks makes those of us that feel lied to far too many times question some of the pronouncements of this admin. Hell yes we are glad the man is gone. That's a no brainer. Why did we wait so long to get him? We Knew where his camp was before we started bombing that country. We either had poor intel or what intel we had bush choose to ignore. There are lots of questions and we need to keep asking questions.

As with everything else, it's not a black and white thing, as the OP seems to suggest.

The problem with an administration that has lied so much and so often is that you have to question everything they say.

We just didn't believe HOW. We all knew she was a good person, but we believed BushCo had a bad agenda.

We also believed that Pat Tillman died, but many of us were conspiring to debate the circumstances of his death.

We also believed that the case for War was a fabrication woven around some scary things with a factual basis.

Some good questions. Glad we asked.



To sum up: We believe Zarqawi was a BAD man. We also believe he is dead. But...
Many of us doubt he died WHEN and HOW the Lying Sociopaths of BushCo says he did, and we doubt that BushCo has accurately represented the exact nature of his part in this illegal war.

:tinfoilhat: Call us crazy, but I will be back to say "I told you so" in about 4-6 months.

Well said. Kicked and recommended.

Content is steller as well.

Kudos.

Glad you didn't lose anyone near and dear to you.

I had two near misses in the London bombings. They would have been on those trains had they not instinctually changed plans at the last minute.

Phew.

:evilgrin:

K&R'd

Sid

Ta mate.

:hi:

I have to say I have been feeling the same way as of late. At first I didn't care much, but then I realized how these theories can be used against us. That's when I started to care. Hopefully, people will understand that these are real people we are talking about not just a post on this forum.

Sometimes it seems like DU thinks that the Bush Administration is like some gaggle of comic book supervillains.

Good to see some sanity rear its head here once in a while.

But it's true! Didn't you see "The Decider" cartoons on Jon Stewart?


j/k Thought I'd throw in a speck of humor--only a tiny one, though.

by the DOD. Probably a bad guy died, but he was not the demon created by the Rumsfeldians to serve their political purposes.

The dead guy whose death is being trumpeted on American MSM is FAR more Emanuel Goldstein that Zarqawi.

"Critical" is also a good characteristic of intelligent thought.

As long as it's on the TEE VEE or their Government says it's true.

Hey did you hear there are WMD in Iraq.

'more myth than man'

How US fuelled myth of Zarqawi the mastermind
By Adrian Blomfield outside Fallujah
(Filed: 04/10/2004)

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the terrorist leader believed to be responsible for the abduction of Kenneth Bigley, is 'more myth than man', according to American military intelligence agents in Iraq.
Several sources said the importance of Zarqawi, blamed for many of the most spectacular acts of violence in Iraq, has been exaggerated by flawed intelligence and the Bush administration's desire to find "a villain" for the post-invasion mayhem.

Zarqawi fuels his ambition with the release of a video of the beheading of Nick Berg

US military intelligence agents in Iraq have revealed a series of botched and often tawdry dealings with unreliable sources who, in the words of one source, "told us what we wanted to hear".
"We were basically paying up to $10,000 a time to opportunists, criminals and chancers who passed off fiction and supposition about Zarqawi as cast-iron fact, making him out as the linchpin of just about every attack in Iraq," the agent said.

"Back home this stuff was gratefully received and formed the basis of policy decisions. We needed a villain, someone identifiable for the public to latch on to, and we got one."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/20...

From DUer Roland99
http://www.conjur.com/blog/2005/11/20/zarqawis-dead-again-3rd-times-a-charm-eh

Let’s see…

Lost a leg in 2002 (but US later changed their tune)
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FJ15Ak02.html

Killed in March 2004
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29777-2004Mar4.html

Came back to life to personally behead Nick Berg (post-Abu Ghraib photo release)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1136076/posts
(interesting as no one in that video appeared to be handicapped - Zarqawi had one leg amputated)
http://wais.stanford.edu/Individuals/nickberg.htm

Killed again in Oct. 2004
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/10-17a-04.asp

Seriously injured or killed in May 2005
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/10500
http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=Terrorism&loid=8.0.165740392&par=0

Zarqawi shot in chest/lung in May 2005
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4579885.stm

Killed and body in Falluja cemetery in June 2005
http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=Terrorism&loid=8.0.173437230&par=0

And now killed again in Nov. 2005

Baghdad imam says Zarqawi killed at beginning of US invasion
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/73570F02-EA07-492F-9E04-C080950DF180.htm

Backed up by this March 2004 article
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4446084/

And al-Qaeda in Iraq says Zarqawi is dead.

Why didn't you mention this in the OP this changes everything.

It's rock solid then.

Zarqawi is dead Again!

This is stunning. Where on earth did that organization get anything like a reputation
for telling the truth.

Is the real power of al-Qaeda their "Ethics Committee?"

When they're sworn in, do they agree to always tell the truth, no matter how much it hurts?

Is there a merit badge they get for "Tough Truth?"

Are they the ones who came up with the term TruthTeller?

Is one of their motto's, telling the truth is not having to say your sorry?

That logic about sums up the logic of this thread, ineffable.

Good research, excellent post.

Some people believe anything, some believe nothing. Both groups are well-represented at DU.

If we're concerned about the real status of Mr. Z, then take a gander at this link and stop falling for the soft-sell line with the outcome of diminishing vigilance and suspicion regarding the liars who
mis-rule this great country. Enough. I heard General Babtiste last night on cable. The host said, "Why did you quit?" He said that was a good question since his career ahead was even better than it had been but that "I was honor bound to tell the truth" about the calculated incompetence that has lead to so much harm.

Here's the link to the WP on a document found by DOD that shows they engaged in a "propoganda" campaign to prop up his image as a bad guy...


leftothedial is CORRECT.

I'm with you on this.

all across front pages of America...finally...the truth. So many lies, so often.

I was startled to see Tony Snow on a podium pitching this story with a picture of the
dead Z behind him. It was one of the most pathetic things I've ever seen. Oozed lies,
like his predecessors.

Here is a bifurcated headline. If you have those sunglasses from "They Live" you can see them
both. If not, you only see the top one:

REVILED TERRORIST ZARQUAWI KILLED
---------------------------------
BUSH HITS 25% IN NATIONAL POLLS

We can all take our pick. :hi:

well done

Thank you so much for this cogent piece. You explained brilliantly what I've been unable to spit out. kudos.

So thank you for saying it!

Kicked and rec'd!

and Bush say so?

Who says the video is fresh?

been confirmed by Al-Qaeda in Iraq. He's dead.

;-)

Frankly, this thread is part of the "weary predictability." Something happens, someone says it's a conspiracy, someone else says must everything be a conspiracy? Always lots of "DUers are so predictable," and "You know they're laughing at us, don't you?" Always lots of sweeping statements about people "falling for the latest distraction," etc.

You get to see the patterns, after a while. Doesn't mean the same side is always wrong OR always right. In fact, I love to hear both sides and weigh the value of the various arguments.

One day someone is going to write a fascinating book about the nature of online discourse.

Well, *I* think it's fascinating!

Gen. Kimmel said that 'Zarqawi was the best Psyops' the US had conducted so far. Sorry, but I will question everything told to us by this Administration.

Other military personel have stated aslo, that Zarqawi is more 'myth' than fact, and some worried that by using this tactic, of raising him to they status of super human Al Queda leader, it could backfire.

I have found much to back up that Zarqawi is not what we have been told, but absolutely NOTHING to back up any of the claims made by the Administration. Not even an Iraqi or US troop who ever saw him. I have found info on Jordanians who knew him, and thanks to the research of independent investigative journalists, prison guards who knew him while he was in jail, none of whom believed the stories from US.

WMDs! Al Queda Connection! 'Months, Weeks to end war'! 'This war will cost $40 Billion at most! 'Iraq sought Uranium from Niger'! The list is long, and the three year Zarqawi stories have been questioned by many reputable people, including top military personel. I trust nothing from these people anymore.

I aslo resent the charge that people who have good reason to question, and who back up their doubts with links and facts, should be called 'conspiracy theorists'.

I'm asking for proof that Zarqawi is who Bush and Rumsfeld claim his today, since Rummy himself contradicted this one year ago. I've NO proof of the Zarqawi tales, and plent of proof that this administration lies.

Their lies have consequences. Tens of thouands are dead as a result of their 'imminent threat' nonsense. Oh yes, and please know that some of us were victimized by terror attacks also, that doesn't give me any special knowledge, or any reason to be quiet and ask no questions. My neighbor died on 9/11 along with his partner. Between them they left several small children without fathers.


We owe it to the victims of Iraq, both Coalition troops, journalists and the Iraqi people to get to the truth and to not allow these liars to fool us again.

First, paint with broad strokes, to stoke the religious aspects.

Then, blame it on the Sunnis.

Ooops, have to get the Sunnis onboard with this new Government.

"Close the loop" with the first al-Qaeda/Iraq connection propaganda push.

So, we get Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

See, even if there wasn't al-Qaeda in Iraq before, there is now!

By November it will be the "Democrat" Party in Iraq!

"al-Qaeda in the Land of Two Rivers" is a little awkward. "Iraq" is the name for the area used in English for about 90 years.

There is an organization called Al Qaeda in Iraq (Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad), AQ in the land of the 2 Rivers.

There is also Ansar al Sunna and Ansar al Islam, these groups are not the same nor are are they just name changes but are comprised of different individuals with different goals. There are also small groups for example: 20th Revolutionary Brigade, the 1920 Revolutionaries, The Jihad of the Black Flag and small "criminal" bands who call their gang something or other.

This is one of the huge problems, which American military strategists can not get through their heads. The insurgency is not a top down, hierarchal Zarqawi as CinC with branches off to his groups like a standard Order of Battle line and block chart or a military structure like the US Army. Iraq is comprised of many small nebulous groups who sometimes have interaction between one another and sometimes operate completely autonomous and sometimes are a guy and his 2 brothers stealing gas from a local iraqi but claiming to be a big time "terrorist".

Complicating this is the fact that many names are used as cover or propaganda to fool US information gatherers or to scare poor local iraqis.

The best way to think about it is in terms of The Life of Brian.

DoD, Iraqis, and AQ all agreeing on something. That would be the three groups on the ground. The reports have come out slightly scattered, but most of the scatter can be seen as reporting on the same sequence of events with relatively little mental effort. All that's required is not assuming perfection--quite a reach, I know, given the level here.

But a few people that monitor websites from their base on the Lower East Side dissent.

Hey, that dissent is enough for me. Zarqawi lives. If he ever really existed.

If we stick to that level of criticism, I guess if not for River Bend we'd have no actual confirmation that there even was an Iraq. Now about all that propaganda about Mesopotamia ... and Egypt ...

I love DU, and visit frequently, but the "it's a distraction/it's a conspiracy" posts have evolved from comical to predictable to just frustrating.

We often accuse the right of seeing everything in black and white and blaming everything on the Clenis -- I see this same behavior on DU all the time now.

A few hotheads and conspiracy fans are, somewhat justifiably, sure this must be another Rove trick. I think they just got a guy they had been after for years, and one that was not very popular in Iraq, even among the Sunnis. I think you are overreacting; he's dead, we're glad.

And how many times has this guy been killed?

Your theory holds no more water than any of the rest. Well, maybe more than a few.

I'm just following what the BBC is saying. I'll go with "global broadcasting network with longstanding reputation of excellence" over "speculation on discussion board", thanks.

That's fine, Do what ya want to do.

I'm sorry that I don't possess the leadership abilities to just make stuff up.

My friend, the problem is that you virtually attacked the people who have questions about the whole matter. You were attempting to lead some to think one way or the other, or to shame others who thought differently than you.

Hey, it just seemed that way to me. You might not have meant it that way. No big deal.

And I have made every effort to attack no one. If it feels like an attack, I'm sorry, but I come from a work environment where we call it like we see it.

environment where we call it like we see it'? Well, that's funny, I come from an academic environment where we call it like we see it. I suspect some of us on the conspiracy side come from home situations where we call it like we see it. All of which means nothing.

I absolutely believe Zarqawi was killed. I also believe the whole psyops angle. I believe Zarqawi was sold out by the alleged Al-Qaeda, whoever the fuck they are. I believe I don't know crap about Zarqawi in any substantive fashion, and that there is a lot of stuff going on in Iraq that I don't understand, including precisely how important or unimportant Zarqawi was. Is this all contradictory? No.

Why? Because just like you point out in the OP, life is in technicolor. We hear one thing from the MSM, another from the BBC, and another from chat boards. Smart people take it all in and make their own educated decisions about what is right.

And one decision that I have made? That I have seen nothing from certain posters in the year 2006 that makes me think those posters have anything to offer us in terms of analysis of the situation. I have seen a boatload of information about why certain segments of DUers are full of doodoo; I have seen nothing that is helpful.

Take this latest screed: in my opinion, the threads about Zarqawi not being the boogeyman the US says he was are not only easily ignored (sorry guys), but also rather insignificant in the scheme of DU things (sorry again, but I think most would agree this is true). Yet here you are, Taxloss, trying to protect us from our conspiracy selves. It makes me wonder.

It makes me wonder why so many have the urge to shut down this most innocuous of habits. I suspect it is a completely benign reaction to hearing things one does not want to hear, but who the hell am I to come up with such a theory? More importantly, who the hell are you to tell us that what some people have spent a fair amount of intellectual and emotional energy on developing is some sort of embarrassment to DU?

I say the more discussion, the better, and the more people are shamed into discussing less, the worse.

The dismissiveness of some people when you don't believe their "feeling" is truly amazing. I had no idea we had so many psychic people here!

If these "masters of the world" have this much control over global events where everything from 9/11 to Hurricanes is controlled by them, why even bother resisting?

Radio 4's Today Programme (three hours long) is one of the best news shows, much more hardhitting than the TV news bulletins. That's where I hear news items about what other DUers call "conspiracy theories" but which is just in fact more in-depth analysis than other programmes are able to do.

The OSI was created shortly after September 11 to publicize the U.S. government’s perspective in Islamic countries and to generate support for the U.S.’s “war on terror.” This latest announcement raises grave concerns that far from being an honest effort to explain U.S. policy, the OSI may be a profoundly undemocratic program devoted to spreading disinformation and misleading the public, both at home and abroad. At the same time, involving reporters in Pentagon disinformation puts the lives of working journalists at risk.

<snip>

Tarnished credibility may be the least of the problems created by the OSI’s new plan to manipulate media-the plan may compromise the free flow of information that democracy relies on. The government is barred by law from propagandizing within the U.S., but the OSI’s new plan will likely lead to disinformation planted in a foreign news report being picked up by U.S. news outlets. The war in Afghanistan has shown that the 24-hour news cycle, combined with cuts in the foreign news budgets across the U.S., make overseas outlets like Al-Jazeera and Reuters key resources for U.S. reporters.

<snip>

Even if the PSYOPS officers working in the newsroom did not directly influence news reporting, the question remains of whether CNN may have allowed the military to conduct an intelligence-gathering mission against the network itself. The idea isn’t far-fetched-- according to Intelligence Newsletter (2/17/00), a rear admiral from the Special Operations Command told a PSYOPS conference that the military needed to find ways to "gain control" over commercial news satellites to help bring down an "informational cone of silence" over regions where special operations were taking place. One of CNN’s PSYOPS “interns” worked in the network’s satellite division. (During the Afghanistan war the Pentagon found a very direct way to “gain control”-- it simply bought up all commercial satellite images of Afghanistan, in order to prevent media from accessing them.)
<http://www.fair.org/activism/osi-propaganda.html>

~~~~~~~~~~

IT WAS astounding enough for Washington’s political elite: last month they discovered that the man at the heart of a scandal over the planting of US propaganda in Iraqi newspapers was a dapper but unknown 30-year-old Oxford graduate who had somehow managed to land a $100 million Pentagon contract.

<snip>

The big breakthrough came in June this year when the Pentagon awarded the Lincoln Group a contract worth up to $100 million over five years to support the US military’s “joint psychological operations”, known as “psyops”.
<http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-1958479,00.html>

~~~~~~~~~~

The U.S. military is conducting a propaganda campaign to magnify the role of the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, according to internal military documents and officers familiar with the program. The effort has raised his profile in a way that some military intelligence officials believe may have overstated his importance and helped the Bush administration tie the war to the organization responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

<snip>

The documents state that the U.S. campaign aims to turn Iraqis against Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian, by playing on their perceived dislike of foreigners. U.S. authorities claim some success with that effort, noting that some tribal Iraqi insurgents have attacked Zarqawi loyalists.

<snip>

For the past two years, U.S. military leaders have been using Iraqi media and other outlets in Baghdad to publicize Zarqawi's role in the insurgency. The documents explicitly list the "U.S. Home Audience" as one of the targets of a broader propaganda campaign
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/09/AR2006040900890.html>

~~~~~~~~~~

I do not doubt that al Zarqawi is dead but neither do I know it to be a fact. Those whose sole arguement consists of slandering others with the "conspiracy theory" meme should keep the above items fimly in mind. For anyone who stays informed, it should be very obvious the U.S. government engages in extensive propaganda campaigns.

Given that we supposedly knew exactly where he was why was it not preferable to attempt to arrest this man? Now we will know nothing.

Justice cannot be delivered in the form of a bomb. The home-owner's association is going to be pissed.

this was a very bad man, who was happy to boast of that fact, and who is now dead. Pardon my inability to weep bitter tears of sorrow.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2328170#2328267

Thread title: Bush: Zarqawi death may 'turn the tide' in Iraq (sabra's thread)

Who will Bush blame Iraq on then?

:evilgrin:

:crazy:

the worst bombing (in terms of deaths) of London since WWII happened because of President Tony's actions. It's nearly a year later and the fucker is still here :grr:

How he sleeps at night is beyond me.

I am so pissed & disappointed myself that I could not possibly have composed a post without feeling the need to lash out at the insanity called the "DU conspiracy nut" today. Thank you for putting things into perspective - I'm sure the angry conspiracy under every rock people are attacking you now. We'll just have to try to keep our chins up until this dies down :(

Some people are just plain idiots. Not much can be done about them. They'll believe what they want to believe, and should be either 1) ridiculed or 2) left to wallow in their folly. I suggest a mixture of both.

Terrorists exist. They should be killed whenever possible.

The government ought to be empowered to declare any human being on earth 'a terrorist' and having done so should then be allowed to execute that person without any formal legal procedures or oversight.

Have I got that right?

that terrorists do not exist and even if they did they shouldn't be killed?

We've decided again and again who gets killed...Viet Nam, Central America, Haiti,the Iraq embargo (it was children dying that time), and now Iraq proper. Note I left out Afghanastan and Serbia.

So people, in full command of their key boards but not their facts, can sit here and decidee who
gets killed when, at the same time, the say that the government and media are full of lies.

Must be a magical, mystical key board...a talking key board.

I'm sick of the death, waste, and diverted resources at a time when the world needs unity more than
ever. We would do well to re-read "1984" and, while we're at it, pick up "House of War."

No more mouthing off about killing people. It's the most serious act imaginable.

The Violent Deaths of a Few Individuals Are a Profound Victory.

Order me into battle atop a bank of computers...you are my leader and inspiration ;)

are you suggesting that there are no terrorists and that even if there were they shouldn't be killed?

Look, I'm quite aware of how serious an act killing people is. That's why I fully support killing people who want to kill me before they get the chance.

Edit: Spelling

to have it dealt by key board commandos. That's my objection. You truncate your logic to such extremes you've given yourself a philosophical wedgie!

Here's a question: Lets say that there are a whole bunch of people out there saying, "Kill x" with both you and I as members of "x." Do we simply launch a bunch of cruise missiles at the assembled and kill them all "before they get the chance" to kill us? How about assessing the degree of chance, or does the thirst kill 'em all policy have such a low threshold that any chance justifies killing those "who want to kill" us "x's?"

The United States foreign policy, despite our periods of aggression, has always either followed or said it followed a doctrine that EXCLUDED preemptive wars. In your case, we're beyond Prue emptimve wars, we're into preemptive killing, forget the war.

There was a reason that we avoided a doctrine of preemption; it's messy and helps realize the horror that it was intended to prevent, i.e., Iraq now has lots of willing terrorists due to the destabilizing effect of our invasion.

Where does it end? If it begins by simply calling for the death of those who mouth off and show their idiocy, we're in for a busy 21st Century.

and warmongers--terrorists themselves, really--that someone actually IS a "terrorist." if the s**t-stains "in charge" say that Cindy Sheehan is "a terrorist" will you be out for her head?

They're innocent and they're just as dead.

Enjoy, but please clean up the room after your party is over.

I feel no need to celebrate any f'ing thing today because there are many evil men of equal intellect and talent to al Zarqawi waiting in the wings. :hi:

:blush:

All the lies concerning the Jessica Lynch rescue really makes me question all DOD stuff..

"the ends justify the means" and although I hate to be a pain in the ass, I can't agree with it.

Means matter.

What the American government says and does, matters.

This guy was a bad guy? Do we know how, when and why reliably? Does this Goldstein deserve all the blood spilled to catch him?

Will the troops come home now?

It was interesting to read that in Iraq, responses to this death were as split as ours were: Some called him a hero, some where relieved "his evil" was gone, some saw him as a propaganda tool of the US government.


It really isn't so much that DU is an echo chamber (although it can be, as this thread demonstrates). It's more that most of us are having to sift through the propaganda to get at the facts. And sifting can be a messy process.

to the Bushists than dead.

Now who can they blame for how bad things in Iraq are? John Murtha maybe?

We don't know and can't know the facts from the fiction surrounding al Zarqawi.:applause:

Why should I jump on either bandwagon? If his death ends the insurgency (yeah right) then I'll adjust my opinion accordingly. However, WaPo even published an article saying this man was a pawn in a propaganda campaign to justify Bush's invasion of Iraq on the false premeses that al Queda in Iraq was responsible for 9/11 and the insurgency, both of which are highly doubtful, if not totally false.

The elaborate conspiracy theories constructed by some give far too much credit to the half-witted bozos running things.

Sure they're using it as a distraction. And, they're likely to get a temporary bump in the polls. But, that's as much due to the ignorance and gullability of the electorate as to some grand conspiracy of the MSM and the assorted criminals infesting the White House.

What did anyone expect? That the imBushcile was going to get up there and say, "We have scored a very insignificant victory against a small part of the Al-Queda organization by killing a man who has already been sidelined by that organization. And, while I have your attention, I wish to say, before resigning, that the attack on Iraq was a monumental blunder on my part, undertaken only to boost my poll numbers."

Very well said.

Better said and more personally relevant than any other such call to reason I've seen on DU. Thank you.

But DU has been a bit over the top today, even for me. I do think there is something to Zarqawi no longer being of use to the Al Qaeda organization and his own people turned on him.

Very nice rant.

great title

thanx TL for your sobering words ;)

A bad guy is gone but I have difficulty believing they didn't know where he was all along. We already know they chose not to pull the plug on him in 2002. Zarqawi is a bad guy but BushCo gave him credibility beyond his worth. Also, why wasn't he blown to bits when the building was sacked? He looks to be in pretty good shape to have been hit by an airstrike. Ok great he's gone but the problem persists can we move on now or does BushCo get to parade his body and proclaim some undeserved credit? The true accomplishment of Zarqawi's martyrdom remains to be seen.

I saw it when they started posting his name and face across tv screens just as the wmd conspiricy theory began to unravel, as the gullible masses were starting to realize Iraq had nothing to do with 9*11. He was osama's replacement as the new and improved boogie-man, and as such, it never was much of a stretch to suspect that he'd be the one trotted out eventually as the head-on-a-stick to the benefit of the Lord Bush. It is so obvious, to me. If some here, or elsewhere, demand I not hold these views, or at least not express them, then that's thier problem, not mine.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

because they felt he could aid their causes for war.

"Fucking" read this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1383795&mesg_id=1384002

Regardless of how he was portrayed by the US, this was still a horrible man who was happy to kill and torture, and whose presence in Iraq was solely to promote violence and hatred not only against the occupation forces but also between Iraqis. The US talked him up. But he was far, far more evil and dangerous than a street-corner thug.

To back this up? "But he was far, far more evil and dangerous." Let's see it.

Where all the radical Muslims are seen wearing jewelry?

Where the guy who claims to be al Zarq. wears a mask?

That one?

is in the drawer.

Wish you would leave it there.

He raised VALID issues.

What about the rocket raids on Jordan? And his status in the Arab press?

Do you think there really is a country called "Iraq", or is it a soundstage in Burbank, California?

2.) Rocket raids on Jordan sound real at first blush.

3.) The dying in Iraq ia all too real. Almost every statement of our reasons for being there and our exit plans are lies.

I don't want to watch it again. It turned my stomach.

I do recall that the video was of very poor quality, but before I heard anyone else say anything, I remember thinking, "Gee, this guy isn't bleeding." If his carotid artery or jugular was severed while he was still alive, he would have bled out like crazy. I can remember thinking, "This can't be real." Nick Berg did die, but the video made me question the circumstances of his death.

That said, I admit I'm no professional on what an actual beheading should look like. Also, the film quality was terrible.

I haven't been here all day, so I didn't read the "crazy conspiracy theories" that influenced the creation of this thread. As you know I tend to be skeptical and down-to-earth for the most part, but I wanted to share my observations of the Nick Berg beheading because it's the only thing I "witnessed" in this whole affair, even by proxy.

And now, if you'll excuse me, I may have to go lose my lunch over trying to recall the particulars of that video...

So he's a madman and killer and evil yet you really like his indy films? Please...

Why do you think I "like" them? I thought it was one of the most repulsive and evil things I have ever watched. Others here appear to have enjoyed going through it frame by frame.

The U.S conjured Zarqawai out of thin air.

-U.S. officials believe that Zarqawi trained others

-United States officials blame Zarqawi for over 700 killings

-According to the United States State Department, Zarqawi is responsible for the Canal Hotel bombing

-Zarqawi is believed by the former Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq to have written an intercepted letter to the al-Qaeda leadership in February 2004

-In 2004 Zaqawi alledgedly beheaded personally the British hostage Ken Bigley.

-On July 11, 2004, a group reportedly led by Zarqawi, claimed responsibility for a July 8 mortar attack in Samarra

-Believed to have coordinated the infamous second battle of "Al Fallujah"

-Zarqawi is believed to have masterminded the 2005 bombings in Amman

-On April 25, 2006 a video appearing to show Zarqawi surfaced

Each to his own, I suppose.

Timed to the second so as to give Bush/Rumsfeld a rebuttal to the Abu Ghraib photos.

Bin Laden used to play that role, but Bushco realized if they kept trotting Bin Laden out too much giving him too face time, it could backfire with a public response of "Why haven't we caught this guy yet?" They save Bin Laden for very special occasions.

Every time the * administration brings up some new boogeyman I always wonder what OBL's doing.

Death of Zarqawi: George gets his dragon

Wrong dragon dummy. (dubya, not you Jara sang)

have been getting for the Haditha massacre of last November, where 24 Iraqi civilians were killed by US marines, or the Ishaqi massacre, where another 11 were killed by US troops in March. "

That article, "George gets his dragon" is right on target!

Why did "Zarqawi" feel the need to cover his entire body and face in that and only that video?

And now he is dead. Oh some fat guy is dead. Clearly someone is dead. That's all I know.

do with anything?

sheesh, you can't be that gullible. Which one played "Zarqawi"?

Why did Abu Musab cover himself from head to toe while killing Berg?
He clearly didn't bother to do so in the recent video.
And now he is dead-I mean, that guy in the recent video is dead.

Thanks for providing an island of sanity for us today!

I've been away from DU most of the day because of what I read this morning on here about Zarqawi. I just wasn't in the mood for all the conspiracy theories today.

Now, I'll go back to enjoying the rest of my week. Hopefully, DU will be back to normal after the weekend.

..though. As tight as he and Saddam were, they could have put them into the same trial .:eyes:

...I just can't just jump for joy because another person get's killed. That's all the United States seems to do well anymore is kill people. Or torture them and THEN kill them. Or raze entire villages and desecrate the bodies.

I already had a belly full of all that shit it in the 60's. I took a trip to the slaughterhouse and came back a vegetarian. Sue me.

But hey, we killed someone who the corporate media kool-aid factory has told us was supposed to be a bad man. Excuse me if I don't get all patriotic and bow down to worship our mighty Military Industrial Complex, while meanwhile in Afghanistan, where the war on terror was supposed to be fought, the taliban warlords have regained control of much of the country, OBL is alive and well and funneling millions into the terrorist training camps out there, and the Afghan farmers have switched to growing poppies and manufacturing heroin and funneling the money to terrorist sleeper cells worldwide.

Woo-hoo he's dead, and we can still bomb the shit out of brown people. Good for us. We can't educate our children worth a shit anymore. All of our industry and manufacturing is getting shipped off to India, China and South America. Millions and millions of people are going without health coverage. But hey, let's all do a fucking happy dance because we managed to kill someone in the middle east that isn't going to make on good god damn bit of difference in the "war-on-whatever-it-is out there this month"

especially today this is the antidote that's sorely needed. :applause:

Jay

My post is a direct endorsement of the military-industrial complex. I relish death and destruction. I look forward to many happy years bombing the shit out of brown people.

On a more serious note: I know none of this is pleasant, but I hope you can see that my post was not intended to get people jumping for joy that a nasty Jordanian has joined the pile of dead Iraqis - it was intended to redress the tide of posts that soun conspiracy theories and misinfo around this news. It's not a time to tear the foil off the champagne, but it's also not a time to turn the foil into a fetching hat.

sociopath and known liar at face value.

YOU are free to look no further than whitehouse.gov for your news and info. It's so much easier that way, really, it keeps those worry creases out of your face and frees up your time and energy for so much more. Thinking and questioning are hard work!

I've found myself confused over the cheering posts and even more confused over the posts questioning the lack of cheering. Your post really crystallized it all for me. This country will be in a perpetual state of war for as long as the empire lasts and one "bad guy" dying while millions in this country still support and will continue to vote for dozens of bad guys who will continue to kill millions of innocents in the name of "freedom" is not much to be happy about.

I am glad he is not around to behead anyone else. He was a horrible evile person if the reports are true. But excited he's been killed? Not really. Rack up another dead brown person. How many more people will die at american hands because we want to flex our muscles?

Hope so...

:thumbsup:

I'm not seeing the jumping for joy in the OP.

I'm seeing a rational commentary on the sometimes bizarre, almost universally baseless theories that are in fact celebrated, yet rarely seem to acknowledge the fact that the individual who is dead also happened to be a complete sonofabitch. I'm not going to celebrate his death. I'm not going to cry over it either.

The other things you mention are valid points, but I think that *is* at least part of the point. People get themselves all worked up over bizarre nonsense regarding how or why this idiot the MSM throws in our face died, and we ignore the reality of what's going on.

The WaPo printed the Pentagon Powerpoint slides that prove as much.

What are we suppose to do, pretend that didn't happen?

that's it in a nutshell and stated perfectly.

I have not seen anyone here defending him. Have you?

What is being questioned, and IMO justly, is

-- The timing, to bolster *'s flagging poll numbers
-- The timing, in that it's taken this long to get this evil son-of-a-bitch. It's been 3 years since the invasion of Iraq alone, I would consider it a shame upon my administration to have taken all this time to get this man... yet they're crowing and nobody is questioning the long period of time, nor (to a lesser extent) that this is the 9th time, by most estimates, Zarqawi has been killed.
-- Will it really matter, given the extent of and vast reasons for unrest and insurgency in Iraq?
-- They're acting as if that was the entire reason we are in Iraq, so will this new "Mission Accomplished" now allow us to pull out? (I think we all know the answer to that one).
-- Most importantly: Where's Osama? Why isn't he 6 feet under? This September will mark FIVE YEARS (just considering 9-11 alone and not his other terrorist acts) and he's still breathing, while tens-to-hundreds of thousands of others, many innocent, have instead been 'liberated' -- from life.

There are many other good reasons for people to be skeptical, but the few listed above are the most bothersome for me.

With this administrations past record of misdirection and obfuscation, it would be crazy NOT to be suspicious.

As for your other points:

-- Bush's poll numbers have been flagging for years. There is nothing special about this week.

-- How long should it have taken? If he was captured on the day after the fall of Baghdad DUers would be saying it was too quick and a set-up.

-- Probably not. Almost undoubtedly not.

-- We're stuck there, are they're wrong.

-- I haven't a clue where Osama is.

I don;t see how any of those points make this killing at this time "suspicious".

lumps all of us who dare question this into the same category?

In any event, if those points alone don't at least make you wonder in the smallest bit, there is not room to elaborate enough to convince you.

Take care

excellent points MsMagnificent.

Yes, he was a very bad guy and yes, I do believe he's good and properly dead.

But so what?

The MSM is treating this as if it means Al Qaeda has been crippled by lopping off its head.

There was a time when Al Qaeda could have been crushed by decapitating it, but that time is long gone. Now if you could graph the power structure of AQ, it would look less like a pyramid and more like a cityscape. Killing any one man will not crush it, cripple it, or put it out of business.

Neither, by the way, will this absurd War on Terror.

The only way to neuter AQ now is to stop the support it's getting. Support that didn't exist until 2003 when we - and by "we" I mean GWB - gave millions of people who previously didn't give a rat's ass about us new reason to hate us. And that means cleaning up our act in the Middle East and the rest of the world. Not by "caving in" or by "negotiating with terrorists" blah blah blah, but by remembering how to be a good international neighbor.

(edit to correct typo)

:wtf:

when CAN you laugh?

statement suggesting that DU is a haven for tinfoilers is nothing I care to laugh off.

Whether that's a good or bad thing can be debated but the fact that the tin-foil hat contingent here is sizable can not.

Despite all the fuckups, screwups and general deception that led to this war can't we agree that the elimination of this guy is a good thing for our troops, the Iraqis and civilization in general?

This is a black and white question without shades of gray.

btw

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I think you forgot the "sarcasm" tag.

.

Very well said. I often find myself lately leaving here in disgust because it seems everything is a huge conspiracy theory........no matter how ludicrous.

I want more well thought out posts with rational and sane discourse.

...Iraqis and the death toll of US troops also continues to climb. It was a war based on complete and total lies fed to the American people. Intelligence was manipulated to promote an unwarranted invasion, and that rationale was used to get congress to back the war. Rove and dubya's minions are most likely spying on us right now on this very board and on millions of Americans as part of *'s domestic wiretapping program. After ramming the Patriot Act through congress, exploiting the terror of 9-11, and his continued campaign of hate and aggression, you ask some Duers:

"Come on guys, be serious. A very bad guy died today."

I think you need to get a clue. I seriously doubt that zarqawi died today as claimed. Our government has been taken over by fascists pigs who have subverted the voting process, attacked our constitutional rights and are using our own intelligence agencies against us. I don't believe a word of what they say, I don't care how many M$M organizations are spouting the party line. And there is a good reason for that. Because they LIE!!

responses here.

:tinfoilhat:

The OP was measured and well written. Lots of people agree with it. That hardly makes us naive dupes who buy into the bushco line or invaders from freeperville.

Just wondering ...

It's as if I logged onto a parallel DU, where many (many what?) have totally forgotten the history created about this man.

Why is this death the real one? Why are some DUers jumping for joy about the made-up death of a made-up boogeyman?

How dastardly of him to plant a completely rational and well written OP and then plant dozens of "pat on the back" posts that reflect the sentiments of a large number of DUers think about tin foil posts. :sarcasm:

When big events happen the tin foilers come out of the wood work. There are a ton on people even in this thread that you could not convince that Zarqawi is dead or that he or Alqaeda In Iraq even exist. They would rather follow their conspiratorial gut feelings and flame those that don't follow along.

I think there's a ton of people on this thread that have joined the latest fad: instead of pet rocks, this summer it's "oh posh, so many of you Duers are conspiracy nuts, I'm just ashamed to be seen with you in public" (cover mouth delicately).

I believe he is dead, but I don't give a crap whether he is or not. It clearly means next to nothing for the situation in Iraq, and I absolutely detest being told by my peers that I need to quit keeping an open mind.

reported (Radio 4 at least) that the intelligence services had a tape of Mohammed Sidique Khan in which he said he intended to build a bomb and yet they called off surveillence of him and reduced the terror preparedness level. Now the 7/7 report highlights the 'failures' of the emrgency services yet mentions nothing of the intelligence failures.

I don't give these people a pass on anything right now I'm afraid. If Zarqawi is dead then great, but I'm not jumping for joy just just because these incompetent and negligent have decided to blow up someone's house. They could've got him years ago. Aso apparently the team who hit Zarqawi were pulled off hunting for bin Laden. That's a political decision IMO.

Yeah. AGAIN.

How do we know THIS time is legit?

:D

Big events bring the tin foilers out of the wood work.

to remember is this: Zarqawi will be replaced. NO ONE is irreplaceable. Just think of the al-Qaeda as the mirror Trek universe, where people get promoted by killing their former superiors.

one of the beauties of DU.

If I want to take the MSM news at face value then I can just turn on the TV. DU has always been ahead of the curve on

*no WMD in Iraq
*Iraq War will happen no matter what the inspectors did
*sectarian violence/civil war will occur in Iraq
*there's more to the Pat Tillman/Jessica Lynch stories
*there's more to the Menenzez story (London tube shooting)
*there's more to come out about Abu Ghraib
*there's more to come out about Plamegate
*there's more to come out about NSA spygate

etc etc etc

Story after story the "conspiracy theorists" have said "I don't believe this bullshit" or "there's more to this than they're admitting" and so many times they've been right.

Some may seem whacko but this isn't an echo chamber, it's a sounding chamber, a place to brainstorm and connect new information.

DU would quite boring without the "conspiracy theorists" and "loony lefties" who so often turn out to be right when the real truth finally comes out.

". . .it's a sounding chamber, a place to brainstorm and connect new information."

This is exactly what keeps me returning to DU day after day. Many thanks to Skinner and everyone who donates for keeping this going.

:thumbsup:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

nor is it implied. Taxloss is talking about the people who think Zarqawi isn't dead. There's plenty of those. And insults like you end your post with get your posts deleteed. Just watch.

Yes, Zarqawi was an awful person. He's dead. I'm glad. Not jubilant. Just glad there's one less murderous thug in the world. That so many credible, non-U.S. based news services are reporting this gives it a high degree of certainty and I have no problem accepting it as fact. This is about as certain as it gets without actually being there. Continually jumping to conclusions about BFEE complicity in world affairs no matter how minor or discrete is inane and ultimately psychologically unhelpful.

Excellent post Taxloss.

I suppose it is easier, feels safer to remain in denial.

Thus the need to pile on, almost in relief, like being at a rally.

Three cheers for the death of the villain of the peice! :sarcasm:

yay for the OP to out the tin-foilers! huzzah for stupid-headed conformity in general!

Hot shit or not! That is not something that I will ever take pleasure in, no matter who the "suspected" target may have been.

End the Occupation!

Out of Iraq, NOW!

and enjoy the random death and killing!!!

get with the fucking program, nutcase. :sarcasm:

and isn't drowned out by the nonsense

I have some similar thoughts, but towards my own broad stroke painting of events at home.

But the world IS black and white, and we didn't ask for that, but had it spoonfed us by Bush and his 'either you're with us or against us'.
Tell me; don't 'they' use this to forward their case, painting it with broad strokes in white only? Do 'they' ask questions in public about wether this man actually is responsible for the long menu of crimes he's branded with? Is he not a cartoon character, painted out to be the Enemy, all Enemy and nothing but the Enemy - so help us God?

It is not us, it is 'them'. True, the US govt. wasn't behind the 7/7 bombings - if you talk planning and executing. But in the larger scenario; can you say that the London bombings was NOT a result of the Iraqi invasion? Would the bombings in Spain have happened if it wasn't for the Iraqi invasion, the build-up of Saddam during the 60/70/80's, the build-up and armament of the Al-Queda fetus during the 80's, the installation of the regime of the Shah of Persia, and so many other acts of aggression that they're too many to count? It's the cumulated anger of people long oppressed in combination with our own armament of would-be terrorists that has landed us in a situation where the Zarc's of the world is enabled and activated. It is the great white sharks of capitalism that is to blame, not a man doing the horrifying killings as a result of his own radicalization.

And just as his radicalization is a result of unfairness and a century full of completely ridiculous political posturing from OUR governments, so are the conspiracy theories a result of a lying, censoring US media that does not print or air FAIR questioning concerning the events the government put forward as their reason for going to war. Instead they suck up the mangled truth/lies/government conspiracy theories, from a government that has confessed publicly that they will be telling lies, and adds the simplicity of the 'evil axis' to ease it down our throats.

Sure, Zarchie was no saint. Sure, he deserved whatever he got, and was probably aware of the risk. But where did he come from, and who built him up to be a super enemy? The dollar went up today, and the oil prices went down. That tells us how big he was.
And who's the next bad guy? Ahmadinejad? Where did he come from, and who built him up to be a new super enemy?

In 2001 I watched a small demonstration in Tehran on the BBC, just a homemade Stars & Stripes and some candles. And a girl with lipstick, her hijab loosely around her hair, telling us how sorry she was for the dead Americans. It was a natural reaction to a horrible event.
Tomorrow she's the new super muslim enemy, because she responds like any sane person would to unfairness, violence and lies; with anger.
And so it goes, on and on. Because we forget the REAL technicolor; time and evil actions done during that time by our own happy, perfect democracies. If you read the DU that's the most prominent factor here; our own past and a willingness to dig and dig and never stop asking questions. Some questions seems silly and probably even obfuscates the real picture, but I can live with that as long as the heat is up.
In my head I have a bulging shelf where I put the LIHOP and the MIHOP and every strange event since 2001, filing them as they happen in the vain hope that some day the truth will be told, because I can't accept the 'answers' provided. But in the mean time I can ask crass questions, and the more that shelf bulge, the less I'm inclined to stop searching for cracks in the wall of lies they put up.

The difference between a conspiracy and the truth is basically wether or not the mass media reports it, as a mass, and makes enough noise about it for a long enough time period to disclose what's conspiratory and what's not.
But they don't, they suck up the signals from above and ignore the grass root's crave for answers, instead trying to rub our bellies, calm the tide.
You are a good man, Taxloss, and I understand the point you're trying to make. In a radicalized world there's no reward in being the devil's advocate, lol ;-) But it is still a sound and well proven medicine against groupthink, so thanks again for the timely reminder.

It's the cumulated anger of people long oppressed in combination with our own armament of would-be terrorists that has landed us in a situation where the Zarc's of the world is enabled and activated. It is the great white sharks of capitalism that is to blame, not a man doing the horrifying killings as a result of his own radicalization.

So some asshole builds a bomb and blows up some folks on a train, or market, or in towers, and that person has zero responsibilities for their actions???

Are these people less human than you and I? Surely you wouldn't find yourself blowing up someone else's kids because your were pissed off at some relative of theirs.

Why is it ok if others kill but bad when we do it? Why shouldn't both be bad? Oh - and one main difference I see is that, while we DO kill innocent people in a war, they are not (and should not be) the targets. Haditha (which, I don't see people here calling a fake and a conspiracy, because we don't want it to be of course) was wrong. Blowing up folks, beheading them, et al, because you can't hit the people with guns (so you go after the defenseless) is damned wrong.

In my head I have a bulging shelf where I put the LIHOP and the MIHOP and every strange event since 2001, filing them as they happen in the vain hope that some day the truth will be told, because I can't accept the 'answers' provided.

And, yet again, if it is our troops/people doing something bad (torture, killing, et al) we believe it in a NY minute. We don't analyze the photos, look for evidence that it was wrong, etc. Beheading? Well, look - there is white plastic chair from wal-mart's, and it is only propoganda - those folks wouldn't do something like that - but we would! So it must have been us. OH and IF they did do it, well it was our fault and they are not to plame (being less human than us, they get off the hook because we don't expect them to live by same morals others do).


I dunno. Sometimes things at DU scare the heck out me.

It's not wonder people don't think we support the troops (and I think most of us do, which is why we want them home!)...Troops accused of X? Hell, talk it up, show how fucked up americans are and how evil bush is. Someone else is accused of doing something bad? Don't believe it. Ever. Only we do bad things.

I DO share sentiments about how things unfold, how 9/11 has some questions unanswered, and so on. I am mystified though when I hear 'bush made it happen, damn he is evil' but then hear as well 'yeah, those guys hijacked the planes and did it all, but we had it coming, why should we be surprised?'

This post is awesome. :applause:

And yes - I do expect more from people grown up and educated by democracy, claiming to represent democracy, than I do from religious extremists.
And no - I don't blame the US troops, nor do I blame the American liberals or, for that matter, repub radicals.

Killing is bad, no doubt about that. By troops as well as 'terrorists'. But kick upwards instead, and put the blame on those sitting cool in their white house or their black cave. The pawns never was the reason for the king's plans.

You picked a bad example on proof by choosing a white plastic chair when you could be using the example of people in rubber gloves.

Hell, talk it up, show how fucked up americans are and how evil bush is

"Why do I hate America?" I dunno. I didn't think I were.

IMHO

:wtf:

I expected there to be many posts that Bush timed this to fix his sagging ratings... waiting to do the job until he needed the boost the most. Part of Bush's charm offensive we've been seeing lately. It would be easy for many people to believe that the timing was manufactured, based upon the extreme weariness of hear here on DU for the past 5 or 6 years, but I tend to not think that we would ever had let a chance go by to take him out.

That's what you're implying. What if 99% of these theories are wrong, and one is right? Well, it doesn't matter, because we have 100 more quality posters.

Anyway, most theories are just theories, with no substantial evidence. They harm nobody, so why are people so violently opposed to them?

And what about when there is evidence? More than once actual news articles from credible sources have been moved to the 9/11 forum, whether or not they have anything to do with 9/11. Just because that's the "kooky" forum where we put that crazy uncle that nobody wants to hear. But you know what? Every now and then, his harsh and wild views serve to make us notice some grain of truth that we would have missed.

The meticulousness of some truthseekers might be lacking, but they all are dedicated. Instead of writing them off, why not show them what's wrong with their approach?

Or are you just writing off their claims because they're unlikely? If so, you should hold yourself to the same high standards you apply to them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T68G-N176z4

Remember that?

This post is just a bit too convenient. Every thing we've been told regarding the justification for the Iraq War has turned out to be a lie, including WMD. In fact, your PM worked hand in hand with * to fabricate intelligence (much of which came off of the internet, old sources). There were no WMD in Iraq, that was a deliberate LIE. There were many others, the most laughable of which is that Iraq oil revenues would cover the cost of both the war and the occupation.

Now, you arrive and because "four bombs exploded in my home city," we're supposed to listen to your undocumented lecture. I guess because one plane crashed into the Pentagon in my city with a family member and friends near by, I can now give pronouncements that explain any major developments in the 911 story. I don't think so.

Here's a little piece from the Washington Post, not my favorite paper but correct on occasion, particularly when they're reporting on a leaked US Army Document.

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was the subject of a US Army propaganda campaign to exaggerate his importance. Now, it's not too much of a move off of that fact to conclude that there would be lies about his death, etc. Does the name Jessica Lynch ring a bell?

Comparing those who have reasoned doubts about Zarquawi to those who said that the US caused the tsunami is a cheap shot and belies any point you might be making. It's the same type of cheap shot public forums take because 1-2 members mouth off in that way.

Here's the story from the Post for those who exercise their right of free thought, free expression, and critical reasoning:

I "arrive"? I don't claim any special authority, I'm exercising the free expression you claim to be an exponent of. I asked, in what I thought were polite and measured tones, that DU considered that sometimes a cigar is a cigar. It's interesting that you apply such high standards to my post while excusing the "Holy shit! He's not dead!" crapola being spouted here - simply because your opinion differs. Sometimes stuff happens in the world tha isn't stage managed for the edification of the American public. Get used to it.

edification of the American public." Why such an extreme statement? If your point is to prove this to us, the embedded assumptions is that we're simpletons. Who on any point of our political spectrum thinks that "the world (is" stage managed for the edification of the American public?"

It's not impolite to challenge your argument and support, that's what debate is about. And it's not "evidence and support" to claim you used "measured tones" as a reason to accept your arguments. Much of what goes on around here, of a productive sort, is in measured tones, even if there's passion and intensity associated.

You, DUers in general, and this DUer all agree that everything in the world does not happen for our "edification."

You and I disagree that there's one bit of evidence in your Original Post that supports much of anything, particularly the swipe at DUers and the larger "American public."

I have some serious questions about any substantive announcement or statement that comes out of the White House or its designated spokes people or from the major * ally, Tony B and his minions.

There is enough evidence on their lack of candor and modes of deception to justify skepticism. Since the "Z" killing is a key element in their "master plan," as evidence by the document reported on by the Washington Post, then doubts are generated and healthy; doubt serves the goals of understanding and accuracy.

this OP stinks, and your response explains why better than I can.

Doubt good, shaming into silence not good. 'Nuff said.

:hi:

Excellent response autorank! :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

with a good cup of coffee and a :donut:

:hi:

THEY are forging ahead, according to plan.

The trifecta, perfect!!!

People on DU forget that Zarqawi is a TERRORIST who has killed Americans, Iraqis, and others indiscriminately. He's BEHEADED people with a knife, for pity's sake! He's not a nice guy. You who are so quick to criticize our intelligence people and soldiers have to realize that this was a big deal. Yeah, I don't like to see * bask in the glory of it, either. And, gee, some civilians may have been killed in the process of taking out Zarqawi and his buddies. But it's nothing compared to the number of Iraqis that he and his minions have killed, for no reason other than that they were Shia. Just remember those high-school kids on the bus, or the hostages that were beheaded.

Anything that gets our troops home faster is okay by me. And remember, this happened in JUNE, not late October. ;)

Quite a few at DU also haven't forgotten the massive amount of deliberate misinformation and outright lies about zarqawi by the bush* administration. Let's see, how many times has he been killed now?

Going from the death of Al-Zarqawi to the London bombing of 7/7 is about as valid a connection as Saddam Hussein was to 9/11.

You aren't claiming there is a causal relationship between the two, you're just using the emotional quality of the latter to preemptively silence any questioning that the public may have about the former.

Worked for Bush/Blair, seems to be working for you.

You're right, we shouldn't question authority. Our governments are infallible. We should just be happy he is dead and never consider the context of the overall war. That would be DoublePlus UnGood.

the cause, the circumstances that produced it.

really, what DOES 7/7 have to do with the killing of Zarqawi, anyway?

he's probably dead, but not in the way they're telling us. not at all.
he was handed over by "al Qaeda" in a tip-off--they wanted him gone and hoped for a martyr's death. in every way, once again, * delivers. it's a win-win for both teams of terrorists.

to use 9/11 (or 7/7) to stifle debate by appealing to us not to descrate the memories of the victims.

I see it as exactly the opposite. Let's find out exactly what happened and why these people died, not use them as pawns in some sort of geopolitical strategy.

a fantastic post. Thank you!

I always think it's "fantastic" when someone tells me to take anything *co says at face value, to shut up and not question anything.

suspicions. The problem lies with an administration and media that has provided reason for people to be suspicious.