al Qaida: 3 years after 9/11




 
--
Boots
 
September 12th, 2004  
Ironside
 

Topic: al Qaida: 3 years after 9/11


U.S. general says Bin Laden, al-Zawahri still issuing orders, al-Qaida linked to Kabul bombing

Saturday September 11, 2004

BAGRAM, Afghanistan (AP) - Three years after the Sept. 11 attacks, Osama bin Laden and his deputy are still issuing orders for attacks by al-Qaida, a top American commander told The Associated Press Saturday.

Maj. Gen. Eric Olson said that an al-Qaida linked group was suspected of a deadly car bombing at a U.S. security firm in the Afghan capital last month. He said the attack was a suicide mission.

``There are senior leaders of al-Qaida that are working through operatives in Afghanistan,'' Olson told The Associated Press in an interview. ``They are involved in planning and in some cases directing attacks inside of Afghanistan.''

Olson, the operational commander of U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan, said the military had no fix on the whereabouts of either bin Laden or al-Qaida No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahri. But the involvement of well-trained foreign fighters in attacks near the Pakistani border convinced him that the fugitive leaders were pulling the strings.

``What we see are their techniques and their tactics here in Afghanistan, so I think it is reasonable to assume that the senior leaders are involved in directing those operations,'' he said.

Olson spoke to AP after a ceremony at the main American base north of Kabul to mark the anniversary of the 2001 attacks, which sparked the U.S. campaign to oust the Taliban and drive al-Qaida fighters from Afghanistan.

THE SOURCE

And we're bogged down with a quagmire in Iraq.
Way to go Bush! NOT!
September 12th, 2004  
RnderSafe
 
 

Topic: Re: al Qaida: 3 years after 9/11




It's funny, I"ve seen that quote many times on far left sites.

"I don't know where he is. I have no idea and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."

That wasn't what he said, and anyone that has read the transcripts from the 13 March 2002 WH Press Conference knows better. I really am amazed at the bold lies that spread through the net like wild fire.

March 13, 2002 White House Press Conference Transcript

Quote:
<snip>And the idea of focusing on one person is really -- indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission. Terror's bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who has now been marginalized. His network is -- his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match.

He is -- you know, as I mention in my speeches -- I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death. And he, himself, tries to hide, if, in fact, he's hiding at all.

So I don't know where he is. Nor -- you know, I just don't spend that much time on him really, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well supplied, that the strategy is clear, that the coalition is strong, that when we find enemy bunched up, like we did in Shah-e-Kot mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did.<snip>
Let's try and use accurate sources, and not those willing to spread lies, little or big, to further their own personal agendas.
September 12th, 2004  
Ironside
 
Your link (I wanted to confirm it) leads to a posting a quote box.

None the less I will remove the image all together from my post.
It's not necessary for making my point.
--
Boots
September 13th, 2004  
RnderSafe
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
Your link (I wanted to confirm it) leads to a posting a quote box.
Oops, Link repaired.
September 13th, 2004  
Ironside
 
Well, thank you for giving me that. I won't be using that anymore. Though, I may make my own image and use this for his quote instead:

"So I don't know where he is. Nor -- you know, I just don't spend that much time on him really, to be honest with you."

That's equally as bad.

Of course he's suppose care more about sending our troops the supplies they need. Can't he walk and chew gum at the same time?

He should have though about armoring our humvees and soldiers before invading. And stop trying to blame Kerry for them not having it when they went in!

That's my opinion anyway.

Kerry will be better for our soldiers and for us veterans. I promise you that!
September 14th, 2004  
RnderSafe
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
Kerry will be better for our soldiers
I don't think so, in fact, as an active duty member - it scares me to think of what will happen if Kerry takes office.
September 15th, 2004  
Trevor
 
Kerry also lied about his purple heart. It was a self-inflicted wound.
September 15th, 2004  
Redneck
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor
Kerry also lied about his purple heart. It was a self-inflicted wound.
Source.
September 20th, 2004  
03USMC
 
 
Speaking as a vet I don't think Kerry will be better for me or the Country as a whole .
As for the servicemembers on active duty if Kerry is elected they better paint those K-pots blue cause they will end up bein the UN's go any where guys.
September 20th, 2004  
Airborne Eagle
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor
Kerry also lied about his purple heart. It was a self-inflicted wound.
From conflicting reports, we learn he was in action and his round caused secondary projectiles to hit him.

Not really what a lot of folks think of as a "self inflicted wound."

Link

A primary claim against Mr. Kerry by the Swift Boat Veterans is that Mr. Kerry's first Purple Heart awarded for action on Dec. 2, 1968 did not involve the enemy and that Mr. Kerry's wounds that day were unintentionally self-inflicted.
They charge that in the confusion involving unarmed, fleeing Viet Cong, Mr. Kerry fired a grenade, which detonated nearby and splattered his arm with hot metal.
Mr. Kerry has claimed that he faced his "first intense combat" that day, returned fire, and received his "first combat related injury."
A journal entry Mr. Kerry wrote Dec. 11, however, raises questions about what really happened nine days earlier.
"A cocky feeling of invincibility accompanied us up the Long Tau shipping channel because we hadn't been shot at yet, and Americans at war who haven't been shot at are allowed to be cocky," wrote Mr. Kerry, according the book "Tour of Duty" by friendly biographer Douglas Brinkley.
If enemy fire was not involved in that or any other incident, according to the Military Order of the Purple Heart, no medal should be awarded.
"The Purple Heart is awarded to members of the armed forces of the U.S. who are wounded by an instrument of war in the hands of the enemy," according to the organization chartered by Congress. According to regulations set by the Department of Defense, an enemy must be involved to warrant a Purple Heart.
Altogether, Mr. Kerry earned three Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star and a Silver Star.
A Kerry campaign official, speaking on background, told The Washington Times yesterday that the "we" in the passage from Mr. Kerry's journal refers to "the crew on Kerry's first swift boat, operating as a crew" rather than Mr. Kerry himself.
"John Kerry didn't yet have his own boat or crew on December 2," according to the aide. "Other members of the crew had been in Vietnam for some time and had been shot at and Kerry knew that at the time. However, the crew had not yet been fired on while they served together on PCF 44 under Lieutenant Kerry."
Mr. Kerry's campaign could not say definitively whether he did receive enemy fire that day.


Personally, it's a dead issue to me.