Death by Suicide Vest: The ghost & Islam

Jenny, age 25, lives in London, the central city of London. She married about six years ago, and gave birth to a son, Jimmy, who just turned five without a father. Jenny tells her son, Jimmy, that his father was killed by an Islamic terrorist with an explosive suicide vest, controlled by Aymal's father's friends in Pakistan.

That July, in 2007, Jimmy's father was sitting in a bus in London peacefully with four other men. A terrorist Islamic bomber, detonated a suicide vest bomb on the bus, killing all five men & many others.

Continued in the same vain....

It fails me Kathy as to why you are picking on the Free World &, by your omission, haven't mentioned fundamental the reason why this happens. Islamic Terrorist organizations. Are you praising the Islamic suicide bombers controllers, by your omission, & condeming the drone controllers?

It seems to me that you are in favour of what the Islamic terrorists do, but not in favour of the Free Worlds efforts to eliminate the cause of the problem.

Thank you Ms Kelly. This is an important article because we don't often read of the other side of the story - the impact of war on civilians.

I can't understand how a previous post sees this article as being in support of suicide bombers. Seems pretty clear to me Ms Kelly is speaking against all war and violence. Just because she is criticising US drone policy doesn't automatically mean she supports suicide bombers. I think that sort of either-or "with us or against us" thinking is what politicians rely on to justify tit-for-tat atrocities. Instead, someone in power needs to show some real strength and leadership and just STOP adding to the number of unlawful killings.

The UN's Philip Alston raises a powerful point which demands more attention than it's getting: "In a situation in which there is no disclosure of who has been killed, for what reason, and whether innocent civilians have died, the legal principle of international accountability is, by definition, comprehensively violated.” If the so-called 'leader of the free world' violates international law and continues to conduct a campaign of covert killings when it is known that many innocent civilians are being killed, we are left to wonder where humanity is headed.

M Fahy: Ms Kelly is speaking against all war and violence.

I have no problem with ending wars & violence. Unfortunately violence is an endemic part of war.

"Someone" has just got to stop deliberately killing innocent civilians in the name of their Religion or Political ambitions. It is easy to point the finger at a Government of a particular Country trying to protect it's citizens, as they are a visable entity. It is much harder to point a finger at a clandestine organization. Organizations that are hellbent on creating chaos & destruction on innocent civilians of any Country that doesn't share their view of their God.

M Fahy: In a situation in which there is no disclosure of who has been killed, for what reason, and whether innocent civilians have died.

I have never seen any disclosure from a terrorist Organization explaining why they had to unlawfully kill any particular innocent civilians in their random bombings. eg; London, Spain & the USA. M Fahy, I demand that you demand, an explanation of the Terrorist Organizations as to the reason each particular person had to die unlawfully in each of these places.

One of the reasons that the families of terrorists die with them is because they keep their families close. If they are killed so will be their families & they can capitalize on that & garner sympathy from such as yourself. Another reason is that they consider their wives & children to be chattles. They don't trust their fellow terrorists. Women left alone are prone to rape, then buried up to their necks & stoned, because they were unfaithful. As you would in any civilized society.

M Lahy: we are left to wonder where humanity is headed.

Left up to the likes of you & your fellow travellers. I say to a very bad place.

It is a sad fact that in armed conflict that civilians are caught in the cross fire, and that the only way to stop civilians being killed is to stop all warfare.

What the first poster was trying to say, somewhat inarticulately is that the huge difference between the Taliban and the US is that the US is at least trying not to kill civilians. That they make mistakes, and end up with civilian casualties still places them morally way ahead of those that set off car bombs in market places.

Anyone notices Syria recently?

Now that definitely is innocents.

Simplistic.

This is typical anti-war ( brought to us by Bin Laden ) rhetoric , nothing more.

Also, Reprieve’s Director Clive Stafford Smith should dream up an original quote , although he did have to go back almost 2000 years to plagiarize that one.

Also , I find it hard to accept that the Americams targeted 5 innocent men, having tea and bickies in a garden (in Pakistan ? ),and decided to wipe them out for the fun of it.

Maybe the quote should have been one of Pattons'

either

“No poor bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making other bastards die for their country.”

or

“May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't.”

Dear Jayb,

And it seems to me that you condone the killing of innocents and terror from the skies to fulfill you agenda. That is the terrorist mindset and you have portrayed it beautifully with your post.

Why should I think you are any better than those supporting London bombers?

See that was easy, and pretty damn lazy.

There are few things on OLO that tic me off more than the type of attacking drivel your first post delivered.

Pull your head in.

csteele it seems that bleeding hearts, radicals, ratbags, & greenies hate being confronted with the truth. It is so hard to argue against isn't it?

Others don't like drivel either, particularly the type you produce. Try pulling your own head in.

csteel: And it seems to me that you condone the killing of innocents and terror from the skies to fulfill you agenda.

Dear FOTT (Friends of the Terrorists) Kathy, M Fahy & csteel. I support the idea of freedom from terror by any means possible. It is easy to hold the Coalition Countries to account to the World Court, but how do you hold a terrorist Organization accountable to the World Court. These terrorist people are all civilians. They don't belong to any particular country. They don't belong to any recognized Armed Services of any Country. So you can't hold a particular country to account. Are they as innocent as you make out. They hide behind the fact that they are civilian, so when they get killed. Oops, another innocent civilian. I think not. Not to mention that the women & children haul the supplies for these people as well so they are involved whether we like it or not.

csteel, I take it that you too support Terrorists & their efforts to convert the Western World to Islam by any means possible (terror.) Does that make you a terrorist too? I wonder.... You don't seem to support the holding accountable of Terrorist Organizations. If you do please explain in your next post how you would go about holding the terrorists accountable to the World Court. I am, & I'm sure many others would be interested, in your solution. Oh, What's that I hear, "Not my job". Hmmm...Another empty vessel making a din.

Dear Hasbeen,

Let us see what we have here.

I am defending a lady who from my reading has the guts to work directly with the Afghani people, who has a strong commitment for non violent solutions, is a defender of the innocent, and is prepared to put her name to her articles. A brave and dedicated person.

You are striking a blow for a person who from behind a pseudonym has quite spitefully and unreasonably accused this lady of “praising the Islamic suicide bombers controllers” and of “being in favour of what the Islamic Terrorists do”.

The first part of his comment was perhaps excusable, the second was pure venom. From memory the last time I had a conversation with Jayb he was quaking in his boots about Burqua clad women. What I think has threatened and scared him this time was Ms Kelly putting names and faces to the innocent victims of the drones. It is far easier to hate those you don't know or recognise as people, and that applies to both sides. Notice in his last post how many times the six letters forming 'terror' are used.

So do we leave it there or is it to be a defender's defender vs a coward's coward?

Either way I'm far happier having it slung my way instead of hers so am quite prepared to get on with it.

There is of course an easy solution to all this. If the Taliban,
AlQueda etc, put on uniforms, don't hide in peoples houses etc
or other dirty tactics they have used, then clearly civilians would
be safe. As civilians in this part of the world are giving them
refuge, they will be the unintended victims of war.

American tactics have evolved as a response to Taliban/AlQueda
dirty tactics. The law of unintended consequences strikes once
again.

csteel, Wardan Province is a known Teliban stronghold. They are supported by 75% of the local people or else they will be stoned, beheaded, shot, burned alive or otherwise killed by the Teliban. This woman is a obviously Teliban supporter & you are supporting her. Therefore I can only assume you must support the Teliban, therefore possibly a terrorist or a supporter of terrorists & their methods of killing innocent civilians.

You have failed to answer any of the questions I posed to you & your fellow travellers.

Let me reiterate;
Do you consider these terrorists are just innocent civilians?
Would you hold a terrorist or their Organization accountable in The Wold Court?
How you would go about holding the terrorists accountable to the World Court?
Do you support the Wests conversion to Islam by any means possible?
What would be your solution to end the problem?

csteel: There are few things on OLO that tic me off more than the type of attacking drivel your first post delivered.

Is that because you can't handle the truth?

csteel: Jayb he was quaking in his boots about Burqua clad women.

I think, not. I see it's against the Law now. They are now required to lift the veil to identify themselves.

csteel: Ms Kelly putting names and faces to the innocent victims of the drones.

I notice there are 3500 names & faces on a shrine where the WTO stood. Is Ms Kelly sorry for what happened there?

I don't hate anybody, csteel, I didn't even hate the 2.5 people I've killed. It was their job to kill me It was my job to kill them at the time. That's the way it is. I'm even sure that the 2.5 didn't hate me either. We were both trying to stay alive, that's all. I tried to hate someone once, but I failed because I did love her once.

Please answer the above questions in a short frank manner. Yes & No would be good.

Dear Jayb,

I am more than happy to frankly and fully answer your questions, however inane they may well be, if you retract completely the slander you directed at Ms Kelly.

If not you can shove them where the sun don't shine my friend.

As to the 2.5 people you have killed, I have in my long experience met men who had actually killed other human beings, not one has ever bragged about it nor brought it up in casual conversation. It was only when they were exceedingly inebriated was it ever discussed. 

You sir are not that intoxicated.

I didn't see anything in the article to give support to what was done in New York, Washington, London, Madrid, Bali and other places. Those terrorist attacks are well known and received wide media coverage. The victims have been and will be remembered, those who carried out or orchestrated the attacks are where they have been identified mostly reviled as murderers (Abu Bakar Bashir is in jail).

What we don't generally hear of are the dead who were unfortunate enough to have their homes in a combat zone, those who've stayed at home and died there rather than annoying us by turning up on a boat at Christmas Island or settling their families into the misery of a refuge camp with no sign of a way out.

I've got no way of knowing if the individuals described here were in any way guilty, too much secrecy around those operations and the US government is working hard to get Julian Assange.

Deaths from the drones are not like conventional battle deaths where a soldier in the heat of battle and with their own life on the line might make a mistake and shoot an innocent who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. The operator is never at direct risk, the drones are rarely at risk, every firing should be beyond any doubt.

Their development may in the end haunt us all, their use in civilian airspace is currently heavily restricted but there is a big push to let law enforcement agencies in the US make far greater use of them. When the US goes that way how long before our government follows? How long before another layer of privacy for people who may be doing no legal wrong but perhaps irritating someone in government is gone?

R0bert

Csteele,

Your defence of Ms Kelly may very well be misplaced. She has only the word of the Afghani woman that the 5 men "Having tea" were actually doing so, and that none of them were involved in the insurgency.

The drones have been hugely successful in hitting the Taliban and the civilian casualties are by comparison far lower than conventional means. While the loss of civilian life is always a tragedy, this is the lesser of two evils.

Jayb1: This woman is a obviously Teliban supporter & you are supporting her. Therefore I can only assume you must support the Teliban.

I retract this statement as per csteels & Graham Youngs request.

Now can you please answer the questions you said you would be happy to answer.

Do you consider these terrorists are just innocent civilians?
Would you hold a terrorist or their Organization accountable in The Wold Court?
How you would go about holding the terrorists accountable to the World Court?
Do you support the Wests conversion to Islam by any means possible?
What would be your solution to end the problem of terrorists killing innocent civilians?

csteel: not one has ever bragged about it nor brought it up in casual conversation.

That wasn't a brag csteel, that was a simple fact of life that I accept. Guess I've always been different. I have always had a very relaxed attitude to most everything. I'm happy to discuss anything, even socially taboo subjects. I have never been influenced by what other people think of me personally. That's their opinion. Interesting book I discovered. "What Would You Do" by Mel Poretz. ISBN 0-449-90762-7. There are about 100 questions. Eg: Have you ever brought, worn & returned a new outfit, for which you had planned from the outset, to return after wearing. 3% of women answered, yes. Tell a stranger that his or her fly was open. etc. Worth a look at. Although most people would run a mile before answering most of the questions. I don't get drunk, 2.5 cartons of light beer/ year is about my limit.

I must have missed the announcement that there are now "rules" in "love and war".

Does the death and taxes thing still stand?

Dear Jayb,

I have not requested you retract anything you have said about me.

In fact I really don't give a rats what you sling my way, It isn't about me at all, I am just a relatively anonymous person on a web forum, pretty much fair game. The author is not.

I called on you to retract the slander you directed at Ms Kelly, specifically your referring to her as “praising the Islamic suicide controllers' and of “being in favour of what the Islamic Terrorists do”.

While I certainly think an apology to her would also be in order it is not a prerequisite.

Get it done and I will respond as agreed.

Dear Yabby,

I would never have thought an ad by a right wing GOP candidate might say something far better than I could about the situation in Afghanistan but here it is. Turn the sound up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKfuS6gfxPY

Dear SPQR,

Can we dissect your post a little.

Even if in the unlikely event Ms Kelly is being completely duped by the Afghani women why on earth should that negate my defending her from the slander Jayb threw at her?

The second point is evidenced by your words “and that none of them were involved in the insurgency”. When this drone program started it was all about decapitating the al Queada leadership, then about any member, then about decapitating the Taliban leadership no matter what the cost, now it is just anybody who is involved risks being bombed in their houses with their families.

“the recent campaign to kill Baitullah Mehsud offers a sobering case study of the hazards of robotic warfare. It appears to have taken sixteen missile strikes, and fourteen months, before the C.I.A. succeeded in killing him. During this hunt, between two hundred and seven and three hundred and twenty-one additional people were killed, depending on which news accounts you rely upon.”
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/10/26/091026fa_fact_mayer#ixzz1BCMp1PSe

This is a 200 plus post conversation we had last year on drones;

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4206

I'm happy to replicate some of it here if needed.

Well I expect that I will kicked off this forum shortly.

I asked Graham for an explanation of which part of my initial comment He felt was aggressive. To no avail. Just a threat.

Graham: Not interested in an argument John. If you are not prepared to treat the forum with respect I will suspend you.

I asked Graham if I to could receive an appology from csteel for her aggressive personal comments directed towards me. see below.

csteel: If not you can shove them where the sun don't shine my friend.

csteel: And it seems to me that you condone the killing of innocents and terror from the skies to fulfil you agenda. That is the terrorist mindset and you have portrayed it beautifully with your post.

Why should I think you are any better than those supporting London bombers?
See that was easy, and pretty damn lazy.
There are few things on OLO that tic me off more than the type of attacking drivel your first post delivered.
Pull your head in.

csteel: So do we leave it there or is it to be a defender's defender vs a coward's coward?

Naturally Graham, I expect that you have sent csteel the same warning.

Grahams reply: I haven’t sent csteel any warnings, and I don’t intend to at this stage.

I did inform Graham in light of the fact that I felt that the Form was somewhat biased in favour on left-wing greenie radicals although nowhere as bias as sites such as "GetUp." Meaning of course that if you supported a LWGR view you would be less likly to receive a bullocking than if you supported a democratic westernized viewpoint.

At no time did I feel I was being agressive & I can't find out where I was aggressive. I was standing up for the majority Western viewpoint which apparently is a no no.

Dear Jayb,

The words in my first post were to show you whatever you may think of Ms Kelly spewing those thoughts unedited on to an open forum was not only easy and lazy but unconscionable.

Have I over reacted by referring to you personally as cowardly? Most definitely, especially as I don't know you, I withdraw it and apologise.

I also withdraw the offer to answer your questions, I think we have both hijacked this particular thread for long enough and I for one would be more than happy if Graham were to expunge both our contributions here.

csteel: , I think we have both hijacked this particular thread for long enough and I for one would be more than happy if Graham were to expunge both our contributions here.

Agreed.

My object on my first post was only to point out that the media only pushes & makes a lot of noise about one side of the picture & it's usually anti-American. If the the drones cause colateral damage & some women & children are involved there is usually a large hue & cry about it. If The Teliban bomb a compound & 50 innocent women & children are killed injured then not much is made of it by left-wing radical greenie groups. Why?

If a drone takes out a target, then the inteligence on the target is researched to an extremely high degree before the order to fire is ever given. There are two people that control the drone & the ordinance & the order to fire is not given lightly. The decision to fire is not taken by the drone controllers themselves. It is given by the mission commander after very careful consideration of all the facts relating to that particular mission & the all clear is given. Do they have people on the ground spotting? Mostly, yes. & a spy in the sky tracking the bad guys for the mission, yes. Targets are never, I say again, never, random.
For a short video on what is involved go here.

http://www.military.com/video/aircraft/pilotless-aircraft/inside-a-predator-strike/877172052001/

What! nobody want to play with me anymore?

I sorry if I offended anyone.

I was brought up to search out & tell the truth. I guess in these times it gets frightening when fact & truth interupts the fantasy world some people like to live in, but, that's not my fault.

If I remember my ancient history & I do. The messenger always gets killed.

By the way, did anyone look up the Drone Simulation on Military.com. I thought that was very interesting.