A thread for anone who says there are MUSLIMS we can work with!

busybody..

Literotica Guru
Joined
Jul 28, 2002
Posts
149,503
Once a jihadist. . .


It appears that the suicide bomber of our CIA post in Afghanistan was a trusted CIA informant who had been recruited to infiltrate senior al-Qaeda circles. Although he had a track record as a supporter of jihad, he had gained the trust of his CIA handlers (as well as the Jordanians with whom he worked) by providing "actionable intelligence" during several weeks of undercover work along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. That, reportedly, is why CIA staff made the fatal mistake of permitting him inside the compound without subjecting him to a thorough search.

If true, this tragic episode confirms that our intelligence community has no reliable way of determining which one-time jihadists are likely to engage in future terrorism. Yet, the U.S. has released terrorist detainees on the theory that "careful screening" had determined they are not a risk to engage in terrorism after their release.

Unlike the suicide bomber in Afghanistan, the detainees had taken no meaningful action that reasonably could cause us to trust them. And unlike that bomber, who no doubt was rewarded by the CIA, the detainees clearly had no reason to be grateful to the U.S. After all, they were our prisoners for the better part of a decade.

The degree of self-delusion associated with concluding that terrorist detainees pose little or no risk of post-release terrorism is difficult to fathom.

There is certainly such a things as a former jihadist; there may even be a few among the ranks of our long-term detainees. But, as the recent Afghan bombing reminds us. even our most capable intelligence officers aren't capable of reliable distinguishing them from their hard-core peers.

That's why the government should release no long-term detainee unless ordered to a judge and unless all appeals have been exhausted. And if long-term detainees released by court order subsequently engage in terrorism, we should call out the judges who ordered their release.
 
How a Double Agent Lured Seven CIA Operatives to Their Deaths
Suicide Bomber Al-Balawi Convinced Americans He Was the 'Golden Goose'
By BRIAN ROSS, NICK SCHIFRIN, NASSER ATTA and LEE FERRAN
Jan. 5, 2010 —


As the CIA mourns its dead from a devastating suicide bombing in Afghanistan, the questions grow about how professional spies could have been so taken in, failing to spot a double agent and letting a bomber into their midst.

Some 13 CIA operatives, including private contractors from the company once known as Blackwater, had gathered to hear the informant's report when the bomb went off. Among the nine people killed were seven CIA operatives, the informant, and a Jordanian intelligence officer, a cousin of Jordan's King Abdullah, who had been the liaison between the informant and the CIA.

The suicide bomber, who killed some of the CIA's top al Qaeda hunters, lured the agents to the meeting by claiming he had just met with Ayman al-Zawahiri, this country's most wanted terrorist after Osama bin Laden, sources told ABC News.

The informant-turned-bomber, a 32-year-old Jordanian doctor named Humam Khalil Muhammed Abu Mulal al-Balawi, had been recruited by Jordanian intelligence to get information on Zawahiri.

The promise of getting a bead on Zawahiri prompted one of the CIA's top analysts to travel last week from Kabul to the remote CIA listening post at Forward Operating Base Chapman in the middle of Taliban country near the Afghan-Pakistan border. The CIA outpost at Camp Chapman is the nerve center in the hunt for Osama bin Laden.

Al-Balawi had been to Chapman previously and because of the information he was promising, CIA officers told Afghan guards to allow him past the first of three checkpoints without searching him. The bomber was actually escorted around the checkpoints, and the officers also told the guards to vacate the area, sources told ABC News.

When al-Balawi detonated his bomb, he assassinated seven CIA operatives and wounded six others. He also killed the Jordanian intelligence officer who recruited him out of a Jordanian prison cell.

Said Bob Baer, a former CIA case officer, "It is sort of a grim calculation but normally when you meet an asset like this you have one, maybe two people. So I think people are going to point out inside the agency that they shouldn't have 13 people there."


The Life of a Double Agent
In his early life al-Balawi lived in a refugee camp near Zarqa, Jordan, the same town that spawned infamous insurgent leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi. Al-Balawi studied medicine in Turkey at the expense of the Jordanian government and was a straight-A student, sources said.

Al-Balawi, who became a doctor and worked at a clinic in a Palestinian refugee camp near Zarqa, was extremely active online and in jihadist chat rooms and was arrested several times by the Jordanian authorities.

He was last arrested over a year ago by Jordanian intelligence, and was thought to have been flipped by the Jordanians while in prison to support U.S. and Jordanian efforts against al Qaeda and al Zawahiri specifically.

Zawahiri founded al Qaeda with bin Laden and the two men have been at the top of the CIA's hit list since Sept. 11, 2001. The U.S. has posted a $25 million reward for each of them.

The double agent doctor played his role to the hilt, telling the CIA he needed to attack the U.S. on al Qaeda websites so he could establish his credibility with other terrorists.

Some precautions were obviously taken, like having the Jordanian official handling the informant be present for the meeting, essentially vouching for his reliability.

Said Bob Baer, "They are outsourcing intelligence and they are having to go to the Jordanians and ask them for help getting into al Qaeda because we simply cannot, as blond haired blue eyed Americans, cannot get into these camps."

In reality, al-Balawi was sincere about the extreme messages he posted on al Qaeda websites. "He demanded violence against the United States in the most brutal way," said Jarret Brachman, the author of "Global Jihadism: Theory and Practice." "He was rabidly pro al Qaeda."

Al-Balawi was a constant presence on on-line jihadist forums, said Brachman, and was widely respected. "Within the most elite forums he was on the most elite list of authors."

For U.S. intelligence, said Brachman, he was a "golden goose," a "trophy asset."

The death of so many officers, and the failure to identify a double agent, said Bob Baer, is likely to make the CIA gun-shy for quite some time. "They are going to look at every walk-in, as we call it, as a potential suicide bomber. Everybody is going to be vetted 10, 20 times."

"It's going to be impossible to get outside the wire," said Baer. "It has been a huge setback for intelligence collection in Afghanistan."

The Jordanian intelligence officer who handled al-Balawi, Sharif Ali bin Zeid, was a member of the royal family. He was buried with a royal funeral that was attended by the king and queen of Jordan.

While the U.S. and Jordan mourned their deaths, a Web site from al-Balawi's tribe described him today as a hero and said it was the most devastating attack against the CIA in the last 30 years.
 
where is poop??????????:mad:

You and I have been over this same ground a million times. There is no way to predict the future.

There are millions of Muslims who will NEVER become mass murdering terrorists. It is AGAINST their BELIEFS. They were INNOCENT yesterday. They are INNOCENT today, and they will be INNOCENT for every tomorrow that they live.

Killing them simply because of their physical resemblance to others among their religion who adhere to a murderous doctrine which they do NOT share is genocide. It is insanity. It is the EXACT same barbaric behavior that the Jihadist practices.

"Killing them all" is not a justifiable response of war. It is murder.

HOWEVER......NONE of what I have just said is an argument against this portion of the article which you quoted:

The degree of self-delusion associated with concluding that terrorist detainees pose little or no risk of post-release terrorism is difficult to fathom.

There is certainly such a things as a former jihadist; there may even be a few among the ranks of our long-term detainees. But, as the recent Afghan bombing reminds us. even our most capable intelligence officers aren't capable of reliable distinguishing them from their hard-core peers.

That's why the government should release no long-term detainee unless ordered to a judge and unless all appeals have been exhausted. And if long-term detainees released by court order subsequently engage in terrorism, we should call out the judges who ordered their release.​

I agree with that statement. I'll even go you one better. I don't believe anyone currently imprisoned for a terrorist act should be given parole. Period. I don't care how good their behavior is while in the slammer. Terrorists should serve their full sentences.

As for the bomber who betrayed the CIA agents, I have to cut the agents themselves some slack. They have a dangerous job. If we are going to reject your stupid philosophy of "killing them all" and restrict ourselves to just killing the bad guys, then obviously we have to know who the bad guys are.

In answer to your question "How can we tell?" It is the CIA's job to find out. It is dangerous, but they undertake it willingly. They and the Special Forces covert attack squads are the real heroes of this war.

Nobody is asking you to TRUST all Muslims. I don't TRUST them either. But mistrust and suspicion is a far cry from murder.

Look at it this way. Once upon a time, terrorism was not a common practice. Muslims and Jews might have hated each other, but killing was reserved for declared war and perhaps border skirmishes.

If you saw a Muslim walking down the street, you might not assume he would be your friend, but you certainly did not assume he was a terrorist.

Now after 9/11 every Muslim is a terrorist. It's nuts. It simply is not true.

Muslims have NOT brought guilt upon themselves. Terrorists have brought suspicion upon ALL other Muslims. There is a difference.

But I would agree that our survival requires us to be suspicious. Pat down searches and body scanners are only a fraction of what we SHOULD be doing.

But what we should be doing does not include murder based on ignorance.
 
If they'd been selected at random I'd agree that some of them might be innocent and will be "INNOCENT for every tomorrow that they live."

But I doubt the detainees were selected at random. I have a hunch that someone predicted that they'd be violent at some point in the future, or had information about others who would be. Or maybe they were violent in the past or present. They weren't detained just for the hell of it.
 
If they'd been selected at random I'd agree that some of them might be innocent and will be "INNOCENT for every tomorrow that they live."

But I doubt the detainees were selected at random. I have a hunch that someone predicted that they'd be violent at some point in the future, or had information about others who would be. Or maybe they were violent in the past or present. They weren't detained just for the hell of it.

NO, no, no! Please don't misunderstand me. When I speak of "innocent Muslims," I am talking about the general population within the global religion. NOT detainees.

I suspect there have been people who were erroneously detained who were guilty of absolutely nothing. I DO NOT believe that number is more than a handful.
 
Well, I cannot agree that anyone can predict who will be "innocent" in the future.

After all, I'm presently innocent of the crime of not paying a federal fine for failing to buy health insurance, but in the future I may not be innocent of that "crime." ;)
 
DUMMY!

Nobody is asking you to TRUST them. I don't TRUST them either. But mistrust and suspicion is a far cry from murder.......being wrong could mean the deaths of hundreds, maybe thousands


Look at it this way. Once upon a time, terrorism was not a common practice. Arabs and Jews might have hated each other, but killing was reserved for declared war and perhaps border skirmishes....100% incorrect

If you saw a Muslim walking down the street, you might not assume he would be your friend, but you certainly did not assume he was a terrorist......None of the TUBE bombers were seen as TERRORISTS beforehand, nor the 9/11 guys.Or for that matter this latest on, or the 9/11 guys


Now after 9/11 every Muslim is a terrorist. It's nuts. It simply is not true........True


Muslims have NOT brought guilt upon themselves. Terrorists have brought suspicion upon ALL other Muslims. There is a difference.........True, But NO MUSLIM CUNTRY, no LARGE MUSLIM ENTITY REFUTES or FIGHTS BACK AGAINST THE TERRORISTS, In fact, they HIDE em, support em and fund em

But I would agree that our survival requires us to be suspicious. Pat down searches and body scanners are only a fraction of what we SHOULD be doing.......Israel doesnt do any of it, we should do what they do

But what we should be doing does not include murder based on ignorance.......Ignorance of WHAT?
DUMMY!
 
Last edited:
NO, no, no! Please don't misunderstand me. When I speak of "innocent Muslims," I am talking about the general population within the global religion. NOT detainees.

I suspect there have been people who were erroneously detained who were guilty of absolutely nothing. I DO NOT believe that number is more than a handful.

polls show that upwards of 50% or more of many MOOSEFUCK CUNTRIES inhabitants believe the TERRORISTS are the way to go

Worldwide, the numbers are almost 50%................(btw, a skewed poll, cause what we define as TERRORISM, they dont)...........which means upwards of 600 million!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WANNA KILL US!
 
DUMMY!

Nobody is asking you to TRUST them. I don't TRUST them either. But mistrust and suspicion is a far cry from murder.......being wrong could mean the deaths of hundreds, maybe thousands


Look at it this way. Once upon a time, terrorism was not a common practice. Arabs and Jews might have hated each other, but killing was reserved for declared war and perhaps border skirmishes....100% incorrect

If you saw a Muslim walking down the street, you might not assume he would be your friend, but you certainly did not assume he was a terrorist.......Or for that matter this latest on, or the 9/11 guys


Now after 9/11 every Muslim is a terrorist. It's nuts. It simply is not true........True


Muslims have NOT brought guilt upon themselves. Terrorists have brought suspicion upon ALL other Muslims. There is a difference.........True, But NO MUSLIM CUNTRY, no LARGE MUSLIM ENTITY REFUTES or FIGHTS BACK AGAINST THE TERRORISTS, In fact, they HIDE em, support em and fund em

But I would agree that our survival requires us to be suspicious. Pat down searches and body scanners are only a fraction of what we SHOULD be doing.......Israel doesnt do any of it, we should do what they do

But what we should be doing does not include murder based on ignorance.......Ignorance of WHAT?
DUMMY!
One of your best posts.

I'm not mad at you any more. :kiss:
 
POOP

Listen up

dont you of all people fall for the useless word

IGNORANCE!

:mad:
 
A fine line needs to be trod.

Detain those that are legitimately a threat and keep them as long as they are a threat (could be a very long time). By legitimately I mean some kind of proof. I won't define what I mean by 'proof' because it may well not be the same as in a criminal prosecution.

Ultimately there still has to be an element of innocent until proved guilty. Contravening laws and human rights is what these guys want. They will use it as a recruiting tool as was done in Northern Ireland. As we know we can't detain or kill every single terrorist or potental terrorist. To attempt so will also just prolong their campaign.

At the moment there is a substantial part of the muslim world that want nothing to do with these fundamentalists. Unless we want to turn those that are wavering or further fundamentalise regimes (Pakistan being a case in point) then a moderate approach is required.

What I say will be unpopular but these guy are not going to fade away and we will not be able to detain and eliminate them all. At some point in the future and as inconceivable as it sounds there will be a form of dialogue to halt this. I hasten to add I can not see this happening any time soon.

In the mean time we need to hold tight and promote good intelligence, effective operations against identified targets and a progressive foreign policy.
 
Well, I cannot agree that anyone can predict who will be "innocent" in the future.

After all, I'm presently innocent of the crime of not paying a federal fine for failing to buy health insurance, but in the future I may not be innocent of that "crime." ;)

I specifically said that it is not possible to PREDICT. I am agreeing with you.

But the FACT that MOST people will NEVER commit a crime is not so much a prediction as it is an acknowledgment of of the overwhelming probability. Theoretically, it is possible that we will all become criminals tomorrow. But the probability that we will not is so high, that I am comfortable referring to it as FACT.

Wouldn't you be as well?
 
In a WAR

There is NO SUCH thing as INNOCENT until proven GUILTY, (not all soldiers of a given enemy want to be there and believe in what they are doing, yet we kill em all)

If we are at WAR, act like it, if not, DONT!
 
At the moment there is a substantial part of the muslim world that want nothing to do with these fundamentalists. Unless we want to turn those that are wavering or further fundamentalise regimes (Pakistan being a case in point) then a moderate approach is required.

at least 600 million are PRO TERROR!
 
Bottom line:

While its true, that NOT ALL MUSLIMS are terrorists or will turn to terror

The fact that its IMPOSSIBLE to tell who will turn to terror..........

the fact that there is a greater than 50% chance that one out of every 2 will turn to terror....

the fact that for them, they have to be right ONCE

we have to be right EVERY TIME

the fact they have said they will attempt to NUKE US and KILL as many as possible

We cant NOT ACT

There is NO ALTERNATIVE but the MASS EXTERMINATION OF MUSLIMS

Certainly the isolation of them and the treating of them as DISEASED ANIMALS that must be quarantined

PS, isn't that how MOOSE SHITS TREAT EACH OTHER?
 
In a WAR

There is NO SUCH thing as INNOCENT until proven GUILTY, (not all soldiers of a given enemy want to be there and believe in what they are doing, yet we kill em all)

If we are at WAR, act like it, if not, DONT!

What about Americans who have converted to Islam? Or maybe the ones that are thinking about it?

OR... lets kill ALL the Americans because some of them my convert and we just can't wait until they do.
 
What about Americans who have converted to Islam? Or maybe the ones that are thinking about it?

OR... lets kill ALL the Americans because some of them my convert and we just can't wait until they do.

how many converts are there in JAIL now for terror related acts NOW?

a dozen or so!

YES, KILL EM ALL!
 
polls show that upwards of 50% or more of many MOOSEFUCK CUNTRIES inhabitants believe the TERRORISTS are the way to go

Worldwide, the numbers are almost 50%................(btw, a skewed poll, cause what we define as TERRORISM, they dont)...........which means upwards of 600 million!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WANNA KILL US!
Assuming your numbers are accurate, my dispute with you is what you would do with the other 50%.

By your own admission, HALF of the entire Muslim world does NOT believe in terrorism. But you want to kill them anyway as a "proactive" measure.

Such a philosophy is crazy. It is immoral.
 
how many converts are there in JAIL now for terror related acts NOW?

a dozen or so!

YES, KILL EM ALL!

But we can't WAIT for them to commit terror related acts!

We don't know who the next one will be, so we have to kill everybody!
 
Back
Top