:: IslamistBlog ::

:: Monday, May 26, 2003 ::

Iran in the News and More Islamist militant assaults

Washington is accusing Iran of harboring Al Qaeda operatives. They say that intelligence agencies have intercepted conversations between individuals inside Iran with operatives outside Iran using cell phones and emails. The content of those intercepts are classified of course, but Washington claims that the conversations show prior knowledge of the attacks in Saudi Arabia and Morocco -- or even their organization and control. They are pressing the Iranian government to give up the Al Qaeda operatives. A whole bunch of stories relating to this are listed here:

CNN: Britain warns Iran on al Qaeda
MSNBC: Us suspends contact with Iran
FoxNews: Intercepts Show Senior Al Qaeda in Iran Played Role in Saudi Bombings
SMH: US halts talks with Iran amid al-Qaeda claim

Here are some interesting stories about life in Iran, or about Iranian politics:
BBC: Iranian reformists' plea gagged
BBC: Iran steps up net censorship
BBC: Bloggers unite to fight
Weekly Standard: Will bloggers liberate the Middle East?
BBC: Iran election 'an alarm bell'


Numerous threats and intelligence have caused the recent closings of western embassies and consulates in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and also in Norway. An attack was thwarted in Riyadh:

CNN: Gunman thwarted at U.S. consulate
CNN: U.S., Britain closing embassies in Saudi Arabia

It is suspected that the recent string of bombings was set off by a tape reputed to have been made by Osama bin Laden, who listed all the places where bombs subsequently went off (or, it is feared, are soon to go off). A brief quote:

True Muslims should act, incite and mobilize the nation in such great events . . . in order to break free from the slavery of these tyrannic and apostate regimes enslaved by America. Among regions ready for liberation are Jordan, Morocco, Nigeria, the country of the two shrines (Saudi Arabia), Yemen and Pakistan.

Halifax Herald: Bin Laden triggered bombings in tape

The full text of the tape: Message to the Iraqis, 2-11-2003 or thereabouts

The Islamist militants plan on establishing a Caliphate. To that end, they have to overthrow so-called apostate states and secular governments the world over. Strategically, the must move in the lands that are traditionally Muslim first. They have plans for the apostate regimes:

WorldNetDaily: Now Riyadh faces jihad
Arab News: Government Vows to Stamp Out Terrorism
Christian Science Monitor: Lebanon targets Islamic radicals


A little more on Islamist Methods III

The communication methods employed by Islamist militants are being constantly improved, and the electronic means of sending messages are apparently used less and less frequently, since Islamist operatives know that method of communication is subject to eavesdropping. But there is also code used within the missives themselves, electronic or otherwise, which is intended to communicate the necessary without being obvious. When Mohammad Atta communicated the date of the raids in New York and Washington to Ramzi Binalshibh, he used a cryptic formula. The formula was:

"Two sticks, a dash and a cake with a stick down."

At first even Ramzi Binalshibh wasn't sure what was being said.

This kind of encoded speech is making problems for the people trying to decode what is being communicated. And it is a requirement of all operatives as specified in the Al Qaeda Manual:

CNN: Al-Jazeera offers accounts of 9/11 planning
SHM: Cryptic al-Qaeda missives leave the CIA scratching its head

Two sticks, a dash and a cake with a stick down

Islamist militants study history. They study Islam. They study the history of Islam, the history of the Caliphate, and the history of Infidel invaders into what they call "Muslim lands." Islamists still haven't forgotten the Crusades (and they have now launched one of their own to install Shariah Law across the globe).

So it would be a nice question to ask: why 9/11?

It wasn't just a chance selection of day. It was targeted, just like the twin towers and the Pentagon themselves. September 11 was chosen as a day to send an Islamist message to the Infidel of lasting value and import. The motivation for selecting September 11 can be found in a document called the Sykes-Picot agreement, which effectively destroyed the last "Caliphate" to have dominated the Middle East:

Slate: What's Osama Talking About?

Mullah Mills
:: Mullah 6:46 PM [+] ::
...

The Islamist Self-fulfilling Prophecy

There is something bizarre and incredible about the Islamist ideology: it is both self-fulfilling and self-reinforcing. First and foremost they claim that the Quran orders them to attack the Infidel until the Infidel is eradicated, the Infidel's countries are destroyed, and a worldwide Caliphate is established. When Islamists pursue activities that would lead to that result, they naturally engender responses. History shows what one would expect from the people being attacked: at first there is confusion and a defensive posture is adopted (Carter's response to Khomeni during the US Embassy siege in Tehran); if the attacks persist long enough then the attitude of the victim escalates (Reagan's response to various bombings in Lebanon, which included shelling of Hizbullah positions); as the bombings continue and become ever brasher and more violent the victims move from what would be defensive counter-terrorism to aggressive interdiction (Clinton's cruise missle responses to the bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania); ultimately the response is a full military invasion -- as is the case with the Bush administration's reactive assault on Afghanistan and pre-emptive assault on Iraq. And viola, one of the main reasons Islamist propaganda uses to justify attacks on the Infidel is actually fulfilled: namely, that the Infidel is attacking and killing Muslims, and (ostensibly) destroying their way of life.

Self-fulfilling, self-reinforcing. In some ways it is a guerilla policy of amazing and confounding genius.

Keep in mind that Islamists have been launching attacks against the Infidel for many many years, declaring Jihad against them for many more years before that.

There is a BEGINNING to this story, and the beginning is essentially in the writings and musings of Islamist theorists during the early to late 20th century. Their writings naturally come from religious writings before them -- for with the Islamist precedence is all important. The Islamists from the 20th century are naturally enough inspired by religious writings from the 7th and 8th century, when Islam was spread throughout North Africa, the Near East, and even parts of Europe and China, by word and by sword.

The Islamist views the mere coexistence of Islam with secular governments as a threat and a violence against Muslims. Proclaiming this dire threat, they then lay out a plan and a methodology to counter the purported threat; that plan and their method is coming to fruition now, in the 21st century as bombs blow up and kill Infidel and Muslim alike in cities throughout the world on an almost weekly basis.

Here is a story with some statements by Imam Samudra that illustrate how their tactic of attacks on civilians inevitably leads to responses that they can use to justify ever more attacks -- in the name of ALLAH. Is this really what Islam wishes to bring to the world? I would hope not. But Imam Samudra, and his co-conspiritor Amrozi bin Nurhasyim state otherwise:
WorldNetDaily: Accused bombers: Terror ordered by Allah
local copy

Are you ready to live under Shariah Law? Imam Samudra and Amrozi bin Nurhasyim have it laid out for you, so, dig right in.

Mullah Mills
:: Mullah 9:18 PM [+] ::
...

More Anti-Islamist War reports

Some people condemn the US for a policy of open ended (ie never ending) war. It amazes me to no end that one could confuse themself so thoroughly.

A war sometimes happens whether you declare war on another country or group or not, or regardless of whether you acknowledge that war is being waged against you. I wonder if will take an atomic burst in a western city before some people are capable of understanding this point. Well, regardless of whether westerners want to accept that war is being waged against them, the Mujahideen go to camps to learn how to kill, how to build booby traps, how to plant mines, how to build fertilizer and military grade bombs, how to make nerve agents, chemical agents, and biological agents. And there are many reports of Islamists acquiring nuclear weapons (see entry on May, 10 for more info and links).

It is not a policy of perpetual war to defend yourself against perpetual attacks. Rather, it is a policy of necessary defense. If members of a band of killers repeatedly burst into your home and attempted to kill your children, and you stopped them with gun or club or ax, what would you say to someone who accused you of being a perpetually violent person?

Now for those with their heads still in the sand the Islamists have sent you some more "messages". They want you to hear what they have to say: convert to Islam, or be at war with the Islamic Nation (1).

Bombings planned for the Gulf,
Arab News: Al-Qaeda Plans Attacks in the Gulf
local copy

A bombing in Chechnya,
BBC: Chechnya hit by new suicide attack
local copy

And a bombing in a court room in Yemen for good measure,
Excite: Bomb Rips Through Yemeni Courtroom
local copy

It appears that the Islamists are mounting a "counter-offensive", striking what they strike best: civilians.

In other news some of the tourists kidnapped in Algeria have been rescued,
WorldNetDaily: 17 of 32 kidnapped tourists rescued
local copy

The very fact that Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei uses the word "surrender" regarding normalizing relations with the US underlines the warlike posture that the Islamist state has toward the US, which is proclaimed to be the enemy,
Al Bawaba: Khamenei: Restoring ties with the US means ''surrender''
local copy

IslamistWatch will eventually have some sections on Iran, the Iranian revolution, and in particular their Islamist creed of expanding the dominion of Shariah Law.

Mullah Mills


1) See Osama bin Laden's communique from 11-17-2002 (or thereabouts), where he writes:

What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?
(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.

...

It is to this religion that we call you; the seal of all the previous religions. It is the religion of Unification of God, sincerity, the best of manners, righteousness, mercy, honour, purity, and piety. It is the religion of showing kindness to others, establishing justice between them, granting them their rights, and defending the oppressed and the persecuted. It is the religion of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil with the hand, tongue and heart. It is the religion of Jihad in the way of Allah so that Allah’s Word and religion reign Supreme. And it is the religion of unity and agreement on the obedience to Allah, and total equality between all people, without regarding their colour, sex, or language.

...

And, after making a total of 6 more demands, he concludes with this:

If you fail to respond to all these conditions, then prepare for fight the Islamic Nation.





:: Mullah 4:39 PM [+] ::
...

Bomb for Bomb

You will be killed just as you kill, and will be bombed just as you bomb. Expect more that will further distress you.
--Osama bin Laden, 11-12-2002

The latest news in the Anti-Islamist War: bombings in Riyadh and in Chechnya -- Islamist style.

Bombings in Riyadh:
WorldNetDaily: Blasts hit Westerners in Riyadh
local copy

Washington Post: Blasts Hit Saudi City Before Powell Visit
local copy

UPI: U.S. cautions citizens after Saudi blasts
local copy


Bombings in Chechnya:
Yahoo: Suicide attack in Chechnya kills 40
local copy

The Islamist movement is not going to be easily defeated. While it makes perfect sense to oppose their infrastructure, units, operations, and any states that support them with military action, it seems unlikely that some kind of VT (Victory over Terrorism) Day is at hand. When things get bad enough, the movement can disperse into the populace. The mere fact that Al Qaeda (a loose term) can strike such blows in a totalitarian state like Saudi Arabia shows how difficult it is to track their shadowy operatives. The solution to the Islamist threat to secular democracy and all the people that live in such "godless" states is the rejection of the Islamist interpretation by large numbers of Muslims. At the moment, the Saudis are reaping just what they've sown: the Monarchy's own Wahhabist seedlings are coming up out of the ground to strangle the Crown Prince and his aspirations to continue ruling the greater part of the Arabian peninsula. If the Saud family manages to whack the Islamist weeds out of their garden, then they'd best get rid of the wahhabi clerics holding forth in Saudi mosques.

The government in Pakistan allowed the foundation of thousands of Islamist "schools" where Shariah Uber Alles is drilled into the minds of young people not old enough to question, nor probably inclined to debate, nor to just say no. So the same thing holds for Pakistan: it seems teetering on the brink of turning into an Islamist theocracy instead of an Islamic dictatorship. The difference between the two is perhaps only one of degree, but holding back Islamist rulers may be all that stays a nuclear conflagration on the Indian subcontinent. Last summer I watched in growing horror as the two nations India and Pakistan played nuclear brinksmanship. What would have happened if the Islamist firebrands had held their fingers above the nuclear trigger instead of Musharraf?

I have read extreme rhetoric by Islamists like Rafsanjani and editorials in arab papers calling for nuclear strikes against Israel, with the justification that it would be a minor setback for Islam but the ultimate defeat for Zionism. We can reflect Osama bin Laden's statement above as a mirror and say: let us rather hope the Muslim world isn't bombed as the Islamists wish to bomb the "infidels".

Mullah Mills


:: Mullah 6:37 PM [+] ::
...

Bin Laden Dead -- Again

I don't know how many times Osama bin Laden has died in news stories post Sept 11, but it might be fun to do a google search and see how many times his death is speculated on. Here's one of the latest stories on that:

Independant: Bin Laden died from wounds suffered in Tora Bora air raid, says Arab expert
local copy

It really doesn't matter if Mr. Bin Laden is dead or not. What counts and only what counts is whether Muslims in general accept or reject the Islamist interpretation of Islam. IslamistWatch has plenty of information about what that interpretation is and what it means.

Actually the following story also illustrates what the Islamist interpretation of Islam means in practice:
Reuters: Bomb Explodes in South Philippines, 13 Killed
local copy


More on Islamist Nukes

In my previous post I ranted a bit about Iraqi nuclear sites being essentially open to the public after the US-led invasion of Iraq.

Well now. It seems my concerns about availability of nuclear materials to the public sphere have been borne out, if the following news story has any merit whatsoever:
Washington Post: Seven Nuclear Sites Looted
local copy

I have to complain for a moment about the Bush adminstration's Iraq policy. This war was ostensibly fought to contain weapons of mass destruction. I think that was a secondary reason, even though it was spotlighted for public consumption. The main reason was to create a base that would slow or lead to sharp reversals for Islamist "terrorists" and Islamist oriented states like Iran.

The whole world was treated to an "embedded" view of the war. And after a phenomenal military success, the world was treated to a firsthand view of a complete and total lack of planning on the part of the victorious side of what to do after the other side collapsed. We had no constabulary force to keep order -- and now the US has to deal with Islamist-style militias which have sprung up all over southern Iraqi cities and in Baghdad to keep order. We had no significant humanitarian relief plan: and now we watch the Islamist militias distribute humanitarian relief. Those things can make a group quite popular, whereas the ones who can't do things are going to be disliked. The militias have declared themselves ready to fight the invaders if that's what their Mullahs demand.

Or withdraw -- their choice.

But the administration now has to deal with the very kinds of people it was trying to defeat, namely Islamist militia groups.

And the biggest fiasco of all, in my humble opinion, is that the places where the components for dirty bombs are in great quantity were left wholly unguarded and have now been looted, and who knows how much nasty material is making its way overland to the nearest Islamist weapons cache.

What an uncompromising flub. What good is a military victory if the very things it aimed to stop are actually advanced instead? To me it represents an unmitigated failure and is bound to hurt us, one way or another, in many ways and at some unpredictable time in the near or far future.

All right. Let's move on to ...

Islamist Methods III

Steganography. This is a very neat method of communicating incognito. Basically you hide either a cipher text or a plain text within another document (text, image, or other device). Let us take the case of an image. There are encryption programs available that will let you encrypt and hide a message within, for instance, a .jpg file. The internet is awash with .jpgs, particularly on porno sites. We've all seen the pictures at whatever adult site from time to time. Next time you're oogling one, consider this: that very provocative picture just might contain targeting information that is being conveyed from one Islamist operative to another. Or it might contain the date to strike. Or a location of a secret meeting, or any other thing that needs to be communicated clandestinely. And that, my loyal reader, is just the way Al Qaeda used the internet to help plan the Sept. 11th attacks.

Want to know more? Read this:
NYPost: 9/11 PLOT HIDDEN IN E-PORN
local copy

So if it's good enough for Al Qaeda you have to figure it ought to be good enough to cover your own secret communications needs.

Some steganography info:
http://www.sans.org/rr/steg/steganography2.php
http://www.jjtc.com/Security/cryptanalysis.htm

Some steganography programs:
http://steghide.sourceforge.net/
http://www.cotse.com/tools/stega.htm
http://www.jjtc.com/Security/stegtools.htm
http://www.cultdeadcow.com/details.php3?listing_id=431



:: Mullah 4:51 PM [+] ::
...

Islamist Nukes

There still continues to be a lot of speculation about whether or not a western city, particulary a US city, might be evaporated by a nuclear bomb detonated by an Islamist seeking martyrdom. A report in the Scotsman links Daniel Pearl's killing to information he had regarding the Islamist - Pakistan nuke connection.

The Scotsman: Pearl killed for exposing Pakistan al-Qaeda nuclear link
local copy

And here's one of the myriad older stories about Pakistanis sharing nuclear "secrets" with Bin Laden's organization:
Telegraph: Rogue scientists gave bin Laden nuclear secrets
local copy

Let us be clear about the Islamist intent regarding the USA and then their intent regarding nuclear weapons:
1)
from an interview with Time magazine:
America, the world's only superpower, has called you Public Enemy No 1. Are you worried?

Bin Laden: Hostility towards America is a religious duty. We hope to be rewarded for it by God. To call us Enemy No 1 or 2 does not hurt us. Osama bin Laden is confident that the Islamic nation will carry out its duty. I am confident that Muslims will be able to end the legend of the so-called superpower that is America.

****

excerpts from a radio interview with Mullah Omar reported by the Telegraph (local copy):

"The current situation of Afghanistan is related to a big cause - that is the destruction of America," he added.

"The plan is going ahead and God willing it is being implemented, but it is a huge task beyond the will and comprehension of human beings. If God's help is with us this will happen within a short period of time.

"Keep in mind this prediction. This is not a matter of weapons. We are hopeful for God's help. The real matter is the extinction of America. And, God willing, it (America) will fall to the ground."


2)
from an interview with ABCNews (local copy):
The U.S. has also said, in formal charges, that you are in a position to develop chemical weapons and try to purchase nuclear material for weapons. How would such weapons be used?
Bin Laden: This is a multi-dimensional question. It presupposes that I do possess such weapons, and goes on to ask about the way in which we will use them. In answer I would say that acquiring weapons for the defense of Muslims is a religious duty.

To seek to possess the weapons that could counter those of the infidels is a religious duty. If I have indeed acquired these weapons, then this is an obligation I carried out and I thank God for enabling us to do that. And if I seek to acquire these weapons I am carrying out a duty. It would be a sin for Muslims not to try to possess the weapons that would prevent the infidels from inflicting harm on Muslims. But how we could use these weapons if we possess them is up to us. (emphasis added by me, Mullah Mills, to italicize my point)

****

from an interview with Hamid Mir (local copy):
HM: Some Western media claim that you are trying to acquire chemical and nuclear weapons. How much truth is there in such reports?

OSB: I heard the speech of American President Bush yesterday (Oct 7). He was scaring the European countries that Osama wanted to attack with weapons of mass destruction. I wish to declare that if America used chemical or nuclear weapons against us, then we may retort with chemical and nuclear weapons. We have the weapons as deterrent.

HM: Where did you get these weapons from ?

OSB: Go to the next question.


Does it take a genius to put 1) and 2) together? If an organization like Al Qaeda acquires a nuclear arsenal then all that stands between them and the annihilation of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of Americans will be their ability to deliver the device to the chosen target. They will have to successfully evade the CIA, NSA, FBI, and other security apparatus that the US government has in place to stop such an attack. My Arabic is too weak to confirm it, however there are rumors in news stories about Islamist bulletin board chatter claiming that, to paraphrase, "the only way to kill Americans is with nuclear weapons". Such statements could hardly be surprising given the formal and well publicized information given in point 1) above. So we see that the will is already present, if not a precise plan of action.

There is also the lesser but still dangerous threat of dirty bombs. Iraq has tons of dirty bomb uranium sitting at their nuclear site, just waiting for a nice way to be used. I can't believe nobody in the press has brought this issue up. What's going on with that uranium waste dump? We need to secure that stuff and get it the hell out of Iraq. If nothing else was accomplished by invading that country, then at least the US should get that stuff out of circulation. A Ryder truck filled with Timothy McVeigh bombs wrapped with Iraqi waste Uranium would make for a rather nasty mess. So I say clean it up now in Iraq ... or we might well be cleaning it up later in a much worse scenario here in the US, or in London, or in Paris ...


On the positive side, a report in the Washington Post indicates that many intelligence analysts interpret the lack of any Islamist attacks against US or western interests during the Iraq war indicates that the Anti-Islamist war begun after September 11 has been more than just marginally successful.

Washington Post: Spy Agencies' Optimism On Al Qaeda Is Growing
local copy



:: Mullah 11:10 AM [+] ::
...

Islamist Methods II

This is a short update about the shootings in Fallujah, which I covered in the post (inaccurately) labeled 4-28-03.

In that post I ranted about the Americans shooting Iraqi demonstrators. I speculated that Islamists may have penetrated the otherwise legitimate demonstrations, or organized them with the intent of using them for their own purposes: namely to incite greater hatred against the "infidels" by causing Iraqi casualties. Here this short quote from a World Tribute story:

"Islamic sources based in London said a leading Al Qaida operative was also captured in Iraq on Tuesday. He was identified as Nizar Fadl Al Khalayleh, known as Abu Musab Al Zarqawi. Al Zarqawi, a Palestinian of Jordanian nationality, was said to have been responsible for a series of Al Qaida-linked attacks around the Middle East, including the assassination of U.S. Agency for International Development director Lawrence Foley in Amman in October 2002.

The sources told the London-based A-Sharq Al Awsat daily on Thursday that Al Zarqawi was captured in the Iraqi city of Faluja during a shootout with U.S. forces. The sources said the Al Qaida operative was seeking to organize insurrection against the U.S. military in the area. U.S. troops in Faluja have been battling armed Iraqi protesters over the last three days and more than a dozen Iraqis have been killed."

Word Tribune: Report: U.S. Special Forces may have captured Bin Laden
local copy

One might say, "Oh that's a crock. Why would Muslim's hurt other Muslims? It's a clear case of US aggression."

The shootings in Fallujah certainly happened during a military operation that can be characterized as US aggression. But however you characterize it, the idea that an Islamist would insert himself into a crowd and fire from it is not really all that surprising; nor is it surprising that an Islamist might have been behind organizing the demonstrations to begin with.



:: Mullah 10:33 AM [+] ::
...

Not an Anti-Muslim War

Not long after the twin towers collapsed clerics throughout the Muslim world declared that the coming war was a religious war. Most people I know didn't perceive the situation that way. Certainly I didn't. We thought such statements were absurd. The US government took pains to differ with the Islamist assessment. When the Taliban refused to hand over Osama Bin Laden and the US attacked Afghanistan, frantic communiques were issued from the Muslim cleric community to the effect that the United States was waging war against Muslims in general and therefore against the religion of Islam itself.

Voila, a religious crusade.

The administration denied that point repeatedly, and took pains to explain that the aim of the military operation was merely to remove the Taliban from power and capture or kill Osama Bin Laden and his cronies. That, they maintained, had nothing to do with waging war against Islam.

And yet average Muslims throughtout the Islamic world feel very much that military action aimed at removing terrorists (in Afghanistan and now to some measure in Iraq) is really a military action aimed against their religion.

Westerners shake their head at this and say, "Those people are being irrational".

In fact, the so-called "War on Terror" really is a war pitting the west against the "flower of Islam": it is fundamentally a war about how people should live their lives. Islamists offer us Sharia Law. The west offers us representative or direct democracy, and some kind of capitalist-based economic system. The differences between the two schemes are tremendous and absolutely unbridgeable.

Many years ago, when western culture began to penetrate the Muslim world, Islamist theorists immediately saw the threat to Islam. Anyone who wants to understand this can read all or portions of the book Milestones by Sayeed Qutb. The introduction of that book pretty much delineates the clash between western culture and Islam, and how Islam will be destroyed if western influence is not rejected forcefully. Qutb then goes on to elaborate, in the Jihad section, just how forceful western systems of laws are to be rejected. (All Islamist terror activity ultimately can be distilled to striking blows against "man-made law".)

Up until September 2001 most people in the west knew nothing about Islam, and certainly not the Islamist movement.

There is a simple key to understanding how an Islamist believes that western powers attacking Afghanistan or Iraq are therefore attacking all of Islam. Namely, Islam in general and Islamist theory in particular recognize no national boundaries between Muslims. To an Islamist, there is only the Islamic Nation. Everything else is called "Kufr" -- unbelief. Everywhere Muslim's live or have lived is considered to be part of the Islamic Nation by the hardcore Islamist. Bin Laden refers to these ideas in his November 17, 2002 communique to the American people. In that communique he makes clear that unless certain demands are met -- among them the mass conversion of America to Islam and the acceptance of Sharia law -- then America will be at war with the Islamic Nation -- a phrase he pointedly uses.

Most Muslims do not appear to be Islamists, or else the current conflict would be much wilder and much bloodier. And yet the argumentation and rhetoric of Qutb and Bin Laden strikes a chord of familiarity and sympathy with many, perhaps most, Muslims. Otherwise they would not believe that what seems to westerners to be a tightly directed anti-Islamist war is in actuality a war against all of Islam and an effort to destroy it.

If the Islamist warriors hadn't made such spectacular raids in New York and Washington in September 2001 there never would have been a US-led invasion of Iraq. Attacking Iraq, which has never been proved to have been complicit in the attacks, does not follow logically if you fail to take into account the larger conflict that is unfolding. For westerners this war will always be an anti-Islamist war. For the Islamist the war is Sharia Law vs. Democracy, and to an Islamist Sharia IS Islam.

One look at life under the Taliban, one look at what the Mullahs have done to Iran -- I have no trouble choosing what side to fight for.

Mullah Mills

:: Mullah 10:31 PM [+] ::
...