PDA

View Full Version : Document found in Zarqawi safehouse.



IceColdBrewski
06-15-2006, 11:16 AM
Describes their situation as "bleak."


By The Associated Press
Text of a document discovered in terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's
hideout.

The document was provided in English by Iraqi National


Security Adviser Mouwafak al-Rubaie:

___

The situation and conditions of the resistance in Iraq have reached a point that requires a review of the events and of the work being done inside Iraq. Such a study is needed in order to show the best means to accomplish the required goals, especially that the forces of the National Guard have succeeded in forming an enormous shield protecting the American forces and have reduced substantially the losses that were solely suffered by the American forces. This is in addition to the role, played by the Shi'a (the leadership and masses) by supporting the occupation, working to defeat the resistance and by informing on its elements.

As an overall picture, time has been an element in affecting negatively the forces of the occupying countries, due to the losses they sustain economically in human lives, which are increasing with time. However, here in Iraq, time is now beginning to be of service to the American forces and harmful to the resistance for the following reasons:

1. By allowing the American forces to form the forces of the National Guard, to reinforce them and enable them to undertake military operations against the resistance.

2. By undertaking massive arrest operations, invading regions that have an impact on the resistance, and hence causing the resistance to lose many of its elements.

3. By undertaking a media campaign against the resistance resulting in weakening its influence inside the country and presenting its work as harmful to the population rather than being beneficial to the population.

4. By tightening the resistance's financial outlets, restricting its moral options and by confiscating its ammunition and weapons.

5. By creating a big division among the ranks of the resistance and jeopardizing its attack operations, it has weakened its influence and internal support of its elements, thus resulting in a decline of the resistance's assaults.

6. By allowing an increase in the number of countries and elements supporting the occupation or at least allowing to become neutral in their stand toward us in contrast to their previous stand or refusal of the occupation.

7. By taking advantage of the resistance's mistakes and magnifying them in order to misinform.

Based on the above points, it became necessary that these matters should be treated one by one:

1. To improve the image of the resistance in society, increase the number of supporters who are refusing occupation and show the clash of interest between society and the occupation and its collaborators. To use the media for spreading an effective and creative image of the resistance.

2. To assist some of the people of the resistance to infiltrate the ranks of the National Guard in order to spy on them for the purpose of weakening the ranks of the National Guard when necessary, and to be able to use their modern weapons.

3. To reorganize for recruiting new elements for the resistance.

4. To establish centers and factories to produce and manufacture and improve on weapons and to produce new ones.

5. To unify the ranks of the resistance, to prevent controversies and prejudice and to adhere to piety and follow the leadership.

6. To create division and strife between American and other countries and among the elements disagreeing with it.

7. To avoid mistakes that will blemish the image of the resistance and show it as the enemy of the nation.

In general and despite the current bleak situation, we think that the best suggestions in order to get out of this crisis is to entangle the American forces into another war against another country or with another of our enemy force, that is to try and inflame the situation between American and Iraq or between America and the Shi'a in general.

Specifically the Sistani Shi'a, since most of the support that the Americans are getting is from the Sistani Shi'a, then, there is a possibility to instill differences between them and to weaken the support line between them; in addition to the losses we can inflict on both parties. Consequently, to embroil America in another war against another enemy is the answer that we find to be the most appropriate, and to have a war through a delegate has the following benefits:

1. To occupy the Americans by another front will allow the resistance freedom of movement and alleviate the pressure imposed on it.

2. To dissolve the cohesion between the Americans and the Shi'a will weaken and close this front.

3. To have a loss of trust between the Americans and the Shi'a will cause the Americans to lose many of their spies.

4. To involve both parties, the Americans and the Shi'a, in a war that will result in both parties being losers.

5. Thus, the Americans will be forced to ask the Sunni for help.

6. To take advantage of some of the Shia elements that will allow the resistance to move among them.

7. To weaken the media's side which is presenting a tarnished image of the resistance, mainly conveyed by the Shi'a.

8. To enlarge the geographical area of the resistance movement.

9. To provide popular support and cooperation by the people.

The resistance fighters have learned from the result and the great benefits they reaped, when a struggle ensued between the Americans and the Army of Al-Mahdi. However, we have to notice that this trouble or this delegated war that must be ignited can be accomplished through:

1. A war between the Shi'a and the Americans.

2. A war between the Shi'a and the secular population (such as Ayad 'Alawi and al-Jalabi.)

3. A war between the Shi'a and the Kurds.

4. A war between Ahmad al-Halabi and his people and Ayad 'Alawi and his people.

5. A war between the group of al-Hakim and the group of al-Sadr.

6. A war between the Shi'a of Iraq and the Sunni of the Arab countries in the gulf.

7. A war between the Americans and Iraq. We have noticed that the best of these wars to be ignited is the one between the Americans and Iran, because it will have many benefits in favor of the Sunni and the resistance, such as:

1. Freeing the Sunni people in Iraq, who are (30 percent) of the population and under the Shi'a Rule.

2. Drowning the Americans in another war that will engage many of their forces.

3. The possibility of acquiring new weapons from the Iranian side, either after the fall of Iran or during the battles.

4. To entice Iran towards helping the resistance because of its need for its help.

5. Weakening the Shi'a supply line.

The question remains, how to draw the Americans into fighting a war against Iran? It is not known whether American is serious in its animosity towards Iraq, because of the big support Iran is offering to America in its war in Afghanistan and in Iraq. Hence, it is necessary first to exaggerate the Iranian danger and to convince America and the west in general, of the real danger coming from Iran, and this would be done by the following:

1. By disseminating threatening messages against American interests and the American people and attribute them to a Shi'a Iranian side.

2. By executing operations of kidnapping hostages and implicating the Shi'a Iranian side.

3. By advertising that Iran has chemical and nuclear weapons and is threatening the west with these weapons.

4. By executing exploding operations in the west and accusing Iran by planting Iranian Shi'a fingerprints and evidence.

5. By declaring the existence of a relationship between Iran and terrorist groups (as termed by the Americans).

6. By disseminating bogus messages about confessions showing that Iran is in possession of weapons of mass destruction or that there are attempts by the Iranian intelligence to undertake terrorist operations in America and the west and against western interests.

Let us hope for success and for God's help.




http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/06/15/D8I8LJBG0.html

2centsworth
06-15-2006, 12:35 PM
Have to wonder if that is real or not. If it's real, then that is an amazing discovery.

fyatuk
06-15-2006, 01:11 PM
Have to wonder if that is real or not. If it's real, then that is an amazing discovery.

You have to wonder with the usage of "bogus" in it. You'd think it would be translated as "counterfeit", "false", or even "fake" instead of a slang term like "bogus".

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 01:17 PM
Psy ops. Just like the whole al-Zarqawi situation.

IceColdBrewski
06-15-2006, 01:22 PM
Have to wonder if that is real or not. If it's real, then that is an amazing discovery.


Considering that they've conducted close to 500 raids since the Zarqawi hit, I tend to believe that they did find a ton of crucial information.

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 01:27 PM
Considering that they've conducted close to 500 raids since the Zarqawi hit, I tend to believe that they did find a ton of crucial information.

The raids were from houses Zarqawi was staying in before he got dead, but it's all in the same 'web' of safehouses.

IceColdBrewski
06-15-2006, 01:33 PM
Iraq Using 'Treasure' of al-Zarqawi Info
Jun 15 7:54 AM US/Eastern
Email this story

By KIM GAMEL
Associated Press Writer


BAGHDAD, Iraq


Iraq's national security adviser said Thursday a "huge treasure" of documents and computer records was seized after the raid on terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's hideout, giving the Iraqi government the upper hand in its fight against al-Qaida in Iraq.

National Security Adviser Mouwafak al-Rubaie also said he believed the security situation in the country would improve enough to allow a large number of U.S.-led forces to leave Iraq by the end of this year, and a majority to depart by the end of next year. "And maybe the last soldier will leave Iraq by mid-2008," he said.



Al-Rubaie said a laptop, flashdrive and other documents were found in the debris after the airstrike that killed the al-Qaida in Iraq leader last week outside Baqouba, and more information has been uncovered in raids of other insurgent hideouts since then.

He called it a "huge treasure ... a huge amount of information."

When asked how he could be sure the information was authentic, al- Rubaie said "there is nothing more authentic than finding a thumbdrive in his pocket."

"We believe that this is the beginning of the end of al-Qaida in Iraq," al-Rubaie said, adding that the documents showed al-Qaida is in "pretty bad shape," politically and in terms of training, weapons and media.

"Now we have the upper hand," he said at a news conference in Baghdad. "We feel that we know their locations, the names of their leaders, their whereabouts, their movements, through the documents we found during the last few days."

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, meanwhile, pressed forward with his initiative to crack down on violence in Baghdad. Government forces fanned out across Baghdad for a second day, setting up checkpoints and frisking motorists.

Al-Maliki has promised the crackdown would not target any ethnic or sectarian group.

Gunmen killed an engineer and kidnapped another, and a detergent factory worker was shot to death as he was headed to work elsewhere in western Baghdad, police said, but no major violence was reported in the capital, a day after al-Maliki's major security operation was launched.

Elsewhere, however, gunmen stormed a Sunni mosque near Tikrit, killing four people and wounding 15, including a fundamentalist Sunni cleric who has spoken out against the killing of Iraqis as part of the insurgency.

In addition to announcing the security crackdown, al-Maliki opened the door Wednesday for talks with insurgents opposed to the country's political process as part of a national reconciliation initiative, but he said any negotiations would exclude terrorist groups. The plan could include a pardon for some prisoners.

A senior White House official said the Iraqis have indicated that they are looking for "models" in national reconciliation. Another official said al-Maliki had inquired whether Bosnians or South Africans might be able to provide expertise.

"There is also a space for dialogue with insurgents who opposed the political process and now want to join the political process after offering guarantees," al-Maliki said. "But on the other hand we are not going to negotiate with the criminals who have killed the innocent."

A top al-Maliki adviser told The Washington Post the plan could include pardons for those who had attacked U.S. troops. Adnan Ali al- Kadhimi told the Post "there is a patriotic feeling among the Iraqi youth and the belief that those attacks are legitimate acts of resistance and defending their homeland. These people will be pardoned definitely, I believe."

The security crackdown in Baghdad includes a curfew extended by 4 1/2 hours _ from 8:30 p.m. until dawn _ and a weapons ban. The government did not say how long the crackdown would last and declined to give precise numbers about checkpoints and troops.

Operation Forward Together, involving 75,000 Iraqi army and police forces backed by U.S. troops, began Wednesday at a crucial time _ one day after Bush visited Baghdad to reassure Iraqis of Washington's continued support and exactly a week after al-Zarqawi's death in a U.S. airstrike.

During Bush's visit, Iraq's Sunni Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi asked him for a timeline for the withdrawal of foreign forces from Iraq, the president's office said.

"I supported him in this," President Jalal Talabani said in a statement released Wednesday. Al-Hashimi's representatives could not immediately be reached for comment Thursday.

Bush made it clear that a U.S. military presence _ now at about 132,000 troops _ would continue, although he stressed the fate of the Iraqis was in their own hands.

Al-Hashimi also said there were "promises to free about 3,500 detainees" by June 26, the statement from Talabani's office said. That number that would be above the 2,500 to be freed as part of a bid by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to soothe Sunni Arabs over allegations of random detentions and maltreatment at the hands of the Shiite-led government.

More than 450 detainees were being released Thursday as part of al- Maliki's national reconciliation efforts, according to the U.S. military.

Many Baghdad residents were hopeful about al-Maliki's efforts, although some were clearly impatient as they waited for 15 minutes or more to get through the checkpoints.

"The reconciliation plan should exclude those responsible for bloodshed of the Iraqi people," resident Abdul-Sada Ali told AP Television News. "It is a very good step by Mr. Nouri al-Maliki."

The security operation was al-Maliki's first major action since his new government of national unity was sworn in on May 20, and a week after he gained the consensus he needed from Iraq's ethnic and sectarian groups to fill three key posts _ defense, interior and national security.

___

Associated Press writers Sameer N. Yacoub and Qais al-Bashir contributed to this report.






http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/06/15/D8I8KL7G1.html

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 01:51 PM
Iraq's national security adviser said Thursday a "huge treasure" of documents and computer records was seized after the raid on terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's hideout, giving the Iraqi government the upper hand in its fight against al-Qaida in Iraq.

National Security Adviser Mouwafak al-Rubaie also said he believed the security situation in the country would improve enough to allow a large number of U.S.-led forces to leave Iraq by the end of this year, and a majority to depart by the end of next year. "And maybe the last soldier will leave Iraq by mid-2008," he said.

Wishful thinking if he thinks that we'll be gone by 2008, you've heard Dubya, 'he's the decider'. Hard to believe that they would find documents out of the house al-Zarqawi was in if you've seen the pics. Which begs the question, if they knew where al-Zarqawi was, and they knew that the people with him and the documents he possessed were valuable to the overall war on terra, then why didn't the Americans and their Iraqi counterparts raid the place instead of bombing it to hell?

Yonivore
06-15-2006, 02:00 PM
Wishful thinking if he thinks that we'll be gone by 2008, you've heard Dubya, 'he's the decider'. Hard to believe that they would find documents out of the house al-Zarqawi was in if you've seen the pics.
Hard for you to believe maybe. But, while there was extensive damage to the building, small things such as thumb drives, papers, hard drives (protected by computer housings), etc...are quite durable and recoverable. Even after a couple of 500 pount bombs.

Which begs the question, if they knew where al-Zarqawi was, and they knew that the people with him and the documents he possessed were valuable to the overall war on terra, then why didn't the Americans and their Iraqi counterparts raid the place instead of bombing it to hell?
Because it's harder to spot two high-altitude bombers than it is to spot a column of artillery and infantry, you imbecile.

And, it appears they've made the most of the treasure trove (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAQ_RAIDS?SITE=7219&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-06-15-08-25-20).


American and Iraqi forces have carried out 452 raids since last week's killing of terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and 104 insurgents were killed during those actions, the U.S. military said Thursday.
In addition to the dead terrorists, 759 were captured, which no doubt will lead to more raids. Significantly, 143 of the raids were carried out solely by Iraqi forces.

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 02:04 PM
Hard for you to believe maybe. But, while there was extensive damage to the building, small things such as thumb drives, papers, hard drives (protected by computer housings), etc...are quite durable and recoverable. Even after a couple of 500 pount bombs.

A hard-drive would not survive that bombing and thumb-drives are even less durable.

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 02:06 PM
Because it's harder to spot two high-altitude bombers than it is to spot a column of artillery and infantry, you imbecile.

And, it appears they've made the most of the treasure trove

:rolleyes

Here we have a chance to gain meaningful intelligence into the insurgency and the U.S. destroys a large part of that evidence because they are worried about getting into a fight? Your selling, but I'm not buying.

How do you know they didn't already have this 'treasure trove' of information?

Yonivore
06-15-2006, 02:28 PM
:rolleyes

Here we have a chance to gain meaningful intelligence into the insurgency and the U.S. destroys a large part of that evidence because they are worried about getting into a fight? Your selling, but I'm not buying.

How do you know they didn't already have this 'treasure trove' of information?
Okay, you win. Besides, I don't have a tin-foil hat with which to combat you.

I think the sheer number of raids, kills, and captures following on the heels of the bombing would be enough to convince you they gained meaningful intelligence...but, I guess I'm wrong.

Yonivore
06-15-2006, 02:29 PM
A hard-drive would not survive that bombing and thumb-drives are even less durable.
Zarqawi survived it.

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 02:31 PM
Zarqawi survived it.

Unless he was never in the house to begin with, but then again, if CNN/Faux didn't say it, it never happened, right?

Yonivore
06-15-2006, 02:34 PM
Unless he was never in the house to begin with, but then again, if CNN/Faux didn't say it, it never happened, right?
See, I don't have your equipment. We use ours for wrapping leftovers and lining baking sheets and stuff.

01Snake
06-15-2006, 02:38 PM
:rolleyes

Here we have a chance to gain meaningful intelligence into the insurgency and the U.S. destroys a large part of that evidence because they are worried about getting into a fight? Your selling, but I'm not buying.

How do you know they didn't already have this 'treasure trove' of information?

Once again, Dan HAS to try and make a negative out of a positive. Face it, we blew the piece of shit up and now have a bunch of useful info to use in killing more of them.

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 02:39 PM
See, I don't have your equipment. We use ours for wrapping leftovers and lining baking sheets and stuff.

Like I said, if CNN/Faux didn't say it, then it never happened.

:rolleyes

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 02:41 PM
Once again, Dan HAS to try and make a negative out of a positive. Face it, we blew the piece of shit up and now have a bunch of useful info to use in killing more of them.

Eh, we already know that the whole al-Zarqawi thingy was a psy-ops program to help put a face on the insurgency for American TV consumption, so why should the demise of Zarqawi be any different?

Spurminator
06-15-2006, 02:44 PM
Like I said, if CNN/Faux didn't say it, then it never happened.

:rolleyes


As opposed to your view, which is if they say it and al Jazeera disagrees... it never happened.

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 02:45 PM
As opposed to your view, which is if they say it and al Jazeera disagrees... it never happened.

I don't read al-Jazeera. I just have a brain and use it.

01Snake
06-15-2006, 02:46 PM
Eh, we already know that the whole al-Zarqawi thingy was a psy-ops program to help put a face on the insurgency for American TV consumption, so why should the demise of Zarqawi be any different?

Why is it that you, and some others WANT the US to fail in Iraq? Anytime something positive happens, you discount it as a political move. So quick to note EVERY negative and ignore the positive.

Honestly, why do you WANT the US to fail in Iraq?

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 02:56 PM
Why is it that you, and some others WANT the US to fail in Iraq? Anytime something positive happens, you discount it as a political move. So quick to note EVERY negative and ignore the positive.

Honestly, why do you WANT the US to fail in Iraq?

Nobody wants us to fail in Iraq, but when you see a train wreck about to happen, you just have to say something. The U.S. has lost the moral authority to properly conduct this war and no matter how many Zarqawi's we kill (there are many) or how many dollars we spend (we'll spend trillions) it's still not gonna erase the damage done by Abu gharib, the indiscriminate bombing of Iraqi towns, rendition, and the many, many incidents where innocent Iraqi have died for simply not understanding English or driving too aggressively near an American vehicle.

Spurminator
06-15-2006, 03:02 PM
I don't read al-Jazeera. I just have a brain and use it.

No, you just link articles from their website to combat American Media propaganda about dead terrorist leaders.

Gerryatrics
06-15-2006, 03:02 PM
Nobody wants us to fail in Iraq

Uhhhhh... no, of course not, nobody here wants to see the US fail in Iraq...

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 03:06 PM
No, you just link articles from their website to combat American Media propaganda about dead terrorist leaders.

No, for better or worse, I try and get to the truth, which is more than I can say for the M$M.

Spurminator
06-15-2006, 03:12 PM
And you trust al Jazeera for the truth more than the MSM... depending on which side of the story they report.

Gerryatrics
06-15-2006, 03:14 PM
"Truth" is a code word for "Whatever makes the United States of America and/or Conservatives look bad, regardless of how untrustworthy the source is".

Spurminator
06-15-2006, 03:18 PM
Of course, if the MSM has documents showing a Republican Presidential candidate may have skipped Military duty in 1970, that's a different story. In that case, it's the independent media and bloggers who are wrong.

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 03:21 PM
Yeah, because the M$M and the WH never spin Dubya...

:rolleyes

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v159/tjwash/whatever.jpg

Spurminator
06-15-2006, 03:25 PM
Uh, okay... So, back to the topic of MSM vs. al-Jazeera...

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 03:39 PM
Uh, okay... So, back to the topic of MSM vs. al-Jazeera...

How are they any different?

Spurminator
06-15-2006, 03:47 PM
You tell me... You're the one who trusts one and not the other.

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 03:55 PM
You tell me... You're the one who trusts one and not the other.

Really? Show me were I place absolute confidence in the reporting by al-Jazeera.

Spurminator
06-15-2006, 03:58 PM
I never used the words "absolute confidence."

I believe the following displays a "trust" of al-Jazeera over American Media:

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1020509&postcount=64

Spurminator
06-15-2006, 04:01 PM
Wait, nevermind, my mistake... I forgot you thought that was a different al-Jazeera. :lol Point retracted.

xrayzebra
06-15-2006, 04:08 PM
Like I said, if CNN/Faux didn't say it, then it never happened.

:rolleyes

Warden to all his shift leaders. Keep a sharp eye on Nbadan and double
his suicide watch. He has had some really troubling news lately. You know
how close he came the last time something like this happened, when Dan
Rather's reports proved to be all hogwash. Go ahead and double his
Reynolds wrap. That normally keeps him pretty busy making all the new
hats.

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 04:10 PM
Wait, nevermind, my mistake... I forgot you thought that was a different al-Jazeera. :lol Point retracted.

What's amazing is that you can't draw a distinction between al-Jazeera and al-Jazeera international, but you can draw a distinction between CNN and Faux which get many of their reports from the same source - the AP.

Then again, you've never shown that abstract thinking is your niche.

Spurminator
06-15-2006, 04:25 PM
I know how the Media works, thanks. I don't remember ever arguing that the news reported by Fox News and CNN is different.

I also know that Fox News doesn't link to CNN's website on their home page.

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 04:27 PM
I know how the Media works, thanks. I don't remember ever arguing that the news reported by Fox News and CNN is different.

The point is that two news outlets can get their 'facts' from the same agency and still present them differently.

Spurminator
06-15-2006, 04:29 PM
Yes, but that agency is their only affiliation.

A better comparison would be NBC and MSNBC.

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 04:32 PM
Yes, but that agency is their only affiliation.

A better comparison would be NBC and MSNBC.

Only if MSNBC hired a bunch of French reporters and news editors.

Spurminator
06-15-2006, 04:41 PM
It would still be a closer relationship than Fox and CNN.

Nbadan
06-15-2006, 05:28 PM
It would still be a closer relationship than Fox and CNN.

Not if you've seen CNN lately.