Posted on 06/09/2002 6:36:20 AM PDT by freeperfromnj
CAIRO (Reuters) - A statement claiming to be from al Qaeda spokesman Sulaiman bu Ghaith has warned the United States it would face more attacks, which could involve non-conventional weapons.
The statement was carried Sunday on a Web site, www.alneda.com, which has in the past issued statements that claimed to be from Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda and news on Afghanistan, where the group was based.
"We are still at the beginning of the road," Bu Ghaith said in the statement. "The Americans have not yet suffered from us what we have suffered from them."
He said the United States had killed, directly or indirectly, thousands in Iraq, Palestinian territories, Afghanistan, Sudan, Philippines, Bosnia and Kashmir.
"So we have the right to kill four million Americans, including one million children, displace double that figure and injure and cripple hundreds of thousands," he said.
"We have the right to fight them by chemical and biological weapons so that they catch the fatal and unusual diseases that Muslims have caught due to their (U.S.) chemical and biological weapons," he said.
It was not clear when the statement in Arabic was posted on the Web site, to which access is often difficult.
The comments were made in the third of a series of articles headlined "Under the Shadow of Spears."
Bu Ghaith, a Kuwaiti-born cleric, emerged as an al-Qaeda spokesman after the September 11 attacks on the United States. Kuwait has withdrawn his nationality.
The United Sates accuses bin Laden and his al-Qaeda network of masterminding the attacks that killed about 3,000 people.
In the second article earlier this month, Bu Ghaith warned the United States to get ready for another attack.
U.S.-led coalition forces are still hunting for the remnants of Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan, after launching an offensive in October that ousted Taliban from power.
Wait just a minute....wasn't Bosnia that little place the USA helped to get its independence from the legitimate MULTI-CULTURAL govt. in Belgrade....you know so they could set up an islamic republic right at the foot of Europe????
hey....the USA helped the muslims in KosovO as well, at the expense of Serbs and other non-albanians who were living in terror because of radical islamic albanians/kla. klintoon didn't want slobo to crack down on those poor islamics who just loved to kill, kidnap and rape Serbs/Romas/Turks/Bosniaks/Croatians who owned land that they wanted in order to form greater albania...YET ANOTHER ISLAMIC STRONGHOLD in Europe.
Interesting calculus. President Bush is focused on crushing the nests of terrorists around the world and preparing to take out those regimes which will develop and provide WMD to them. The latter has the side benefit of beginning the draining of the swamp where these monsters gestate. How far do we have to go? That's up to the people in the societies growing the terrorists. If they evade our defenses and strike the homeland again, our society has to restructure to expedite the crushing of the enemy, i.e. go on a total war footing.
BTW, if this communique is verified as coming from al Qaida, Bush or a high official should go on prime time TV and read it to the American people. This will steel our resolve and put our "allies" on notice that we will do whatever is necessary.
Thing is, I don't think Radical Islam is that sophisticated, sans Saddam. It's a bunch of people like that dopey shoe bomber. Not that they can't do a significant amount of damage, even with people like that -- the shoe bomber could have taken down that plane. But the really big stuff is probably beyond them. Read up on the original WTC attack. A bunch of stumblebums were recruited by someone much more sophisticated -- and definitely not a radical Islamist -- who went by the name of Ramzi Yousef. I doubt bin Laden, if he is still alive, could organize the proverbial piss-up in a brewery. He has money, he makes good videos, he is willing to live in a cave and fulfill the Arabs' fantasies of what a messiah looks like, but I see no evidence that he is also some sort of military mastermind. Hussein, in contrast, is very sophisticated, he's a survivor, he loves technology, loves way-out plots and super-weapons, and he's actually organized. His pretensions to being the new Saladin aren't actually that unrealistic, given the shambolic state of the Arab world.
Why nuke Mecca or Medina if the terrorists aren't there? Responding tit for tat isn't justice, just barbarism. If they actually managed to nuke a US city I would support using WMD's on the terrorists in turn. However, I'd like to use WMD's that have a practical use and provide a strategic advantage. Using nerve gas on cave complexes and such that are well away from civilian centers where they could harm innocents.
Your mistake is you aren't recognizing the real danger of the threat. Perhaps due to the press.....
They will not move when they have 1 nuke, or 2 nukes.
When they have 20, we'll hear from them.
We're still catching up.
You have to realize that they aren't ALL camel humpers. Some of their leaders have had Western training, and have LONG experience fighting.
9/11 was merely Round 1.
I absolutely assure you, that if they can position weapons as a danger to us, Israel, or even nations like Saudi Arabia or Eqypt... they'll use them.
It doesn't matter if it takes 10 years.
My point is this... we know they intend to kill us - we have proof. We know they are trying to get better weapons.
If a city has to be nuked, as much as I hate leftists - I'd rather it be Mecca than NYC.
I'd imagine you'd drop your opposition, if they pull off the 7/4 never gas attack.
At some point, given this climate - we have to take responsibility for World organization. We're too big a target. Do we honestly want sheep herders to control world politics, and the world economy? Mere CITIES in the US produce and do more than these little pissant nations could dream of.
If the choice is a Western Empire, or Muslim one.............
If it takes nuclear weapons to prevent these Jihadists from hijacking the global economy.. then all I need to know is which city is first.
You are severely underestimating the threat.
I am a reluctant hawk. I don't think we have done much good from Vietnam, to Somalia. Even so, we're faced with another round of the Crusades, whether we want to admit it or not. They foolishly think that they can NOW challenge Western hegemony. I think we should give them the fight they want now.. on our terms. Rather than later on theirs.
I keep seeing this. I have seen it for months. But it's still wrong and VERY simplistic - no offense.
Actually put yourself in their shoes.
If a nuke is set off in NYC for example - there will be great damage and death. World economy will tank. But the recovery WILL happen, and WILL happen relatively soon... BECAUSE..
We'll turn many choice sections of the MidEast into glass. No doubt.
So their game is over. No more playing. They let off their 'big' firework - and any Arab nations not OWNED by the US will be working to rediscover fire.
That's not strategic at all, and makes no sense. Some of you keep assuming our enemies are idiots. They have DECADES of combat experience.
Why fire off only one weapon or one attack when you could do something much worse. Imagine European capitals, Russian cities and several American cities in flames.
They aren't playing Jihad to lose. They want WORLD DOMINATION of their theological fascism.
It may very well come down to a MASSIVE invasion of the MidEast - or even limited first strike use of nukes to take out strategic targets.
Regardless of our disagreements with this government - I'd say we're facing something that is scaring the shit out of the powers that be.
We've had rumors here of nukes stopped on our soil, by the good guys. If not true - in time it will be. <
Attacks not over, wow, who would have thought?
A warning? Hey, Al Queda, raise your stinking head, and it will be over!
Yes, it's perfectly bloody obvious that the anthrax came from the 9-11 boys, and has been since the first case came down less than a mile from Mohammed Atta's favorite airstrip. All the polite, publicly-acceptable red herring stories -- the mountain stream, the "criminal but not terroristic" pissed-off celebrity, the race-war fomenting militias, the rogue scientists, the "Beltway cowboy" contractors, the CIA plot, etc., -- have been pure bulls*t to divert attention from the fact that Saddam has us by the short and curlies.
Like the intact Cherokee, Maumee, Potowatami, Naragansett and Seminole regimes we left behind a hundred years ago?
Sometimes genocide is a policy tool. Sometimes it works (USA vs. AmerInds, Turks vs. Armenians, Spanish vs. Arawaks). Sometimes it doesn't (Germans vs. Jews, Hutus vs. Tutsi's, Serbs vs. Albanians, Serbs vs. Bosnian Muslims). Genocide is and should always be the last resort. That said, if this Islam vs. USA crap can't be resolved any other way and it comes down to "this planet ain't big enough for the both of us", I'm for us, not them.
The problem with nukes is that the fallout is not so easy to contain. Biological warefare is much "cleaner."
Because the anthrax came from a state: the sophistication of the weaponization process tells you that. If the anthrax came from the state, then the ultimate sponsor of 9-11 was a state. States can't run and hide, unlike terrorists. Any state sponsor of an act on the scale of 9-11 could not hope to survive, without some serious back-end security built in to the plan. The anthrax is the back-end security.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.