Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood: Al-Qaeda is an American-made organization

64 Responses to Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood: Al-Qaeda is an American-made organization

1. bARABie says:

   November 25, 2007 at 00:03

   paolo again, are you still pub­lish­ing zion­ist propaganda?

   http://barabie.wordpress.com/2007/03/28/like-i-said-uruknet-continues-to-publish-zionist-propaganda/
2. bARABie says:

   November 25, 2007 at 00:15

   paolo here is another

   http://barabie.wordpress.com/2007/03/27/is-uruknet-publishing-zionist-propaganda/
3. bARABie says:

   November 25, 2007 at 00:20

   Another one paolo

   http://barabie.wordpress.com/2007/03/24/uruknet-publishes-zionist-propaganda/
4. Victoria says:

   November 25, 2007 at 01:34

   @Newsdesk Helsinki Finland

   All that you’ve said about the occu­piers’ new strat­egy is absolutely cor­rect, except one thing: the new Al Qaeda/deviant Baath pup­pet work­ing with Allawi against the resis­tance in place of Al-Zarqawi is not Al-Douri but Younis.
5. NEWSDESK HELSINKI FINLAND says:

   November 25, 2007 at 03:22

   Some com­ments on issues taken up…

   1. @ Vic­to­ria, on “All that you’ve said about the occu­piers’ new strat­egy is absolutely cor­rect, except one thing: the new Al Qaeda/deviant Baath pup­pet work­ing with Allawi against the resis­tance in place of Al-Zarqawi is not Al-Douri but Younis.”

   This is what we hear from every­where, but we are Finns, so that we do not pos­sess any inside infor­ma­tion. There­fore we have to inves­ti­gate all issues (such as al-Douri vs. You­nis) our­selves from the begin­ning to the end. What comes to the al-Douri and You­nis, the con­clu­sions we’ve cho­sen to pub­lish so far are here:

   Here’s what we found out in the first round con­cern­ing al-Douri:

   IRAQ: The Orders-of-Battle and the Strate­gic Sit­u­a­tion of the Occu­piers of Iraq, the United States of Israel and Iran in Novem­ber 2007
   http://theunitedstatesofmonsters.blogspot.com/2007/10/iraq-orders-of-battle-and-strategic.html

   Unfor­tu­nately, we were able to con­firm the main the­sis of this arti­cle, that Al-Douri’s Jihad and Liberation’s a phony resis­tance front, some days later here:

   On the “Knights” of the “Brigades of the Jihad in the Land of the Two Rivers“
   http://theunitedstatesofmonsters.blogspot.com/2007/11/on-knights-of-brigades-of-jihad-in-land.html

   On the other hand, while inves­ti­gat­ing You­nis, we found out what you can con­firm your­self here:
   On Baath Party I: Hom­mage à Iraqi Army 5th Corps Head­quar­ters and the Al-Jihad and Reform Front
   http://theunitedstatesofmonsters.blogspot.com/2007/11/on-baath-party-i-hommage-iraqi-army-5th.html

   Noth­ing in the actions of You­nis hints to the direc­tion that he’d be a trai­tor of Iraq, Iraqi Peo­ple or Iraqi Resis­tance, but the opposite.

   As Finns we may do mis­takes, but in order to con­vince us, you need to show our analy­sis team the stuff you’re in pos­s­e­sion of (and we do not accept some out­dated links on, say, as has been the ten­dency around, to show an arti­cle describ­ing You­nis’ party’s antique nego­ti­a­tions with the U.S. Finland’s been in war after war and on that basis, it is no secret that in every war any­where a sit­u­a­tion where there are not at least some kind of nego­ti­a­tions (not mean­ing capit­u­la­tion, sur­ren­der, is a standard).

   So, I chal­lenge you, Vic­to­ria, to show your stuff detail­ing the sup­posed trea­son of You­nis rather than telling +/-. If you are able to pro­vide any­thing, I’ll per­son­ally pass that to other mem­bers of our analy­sis team.

   2. @ Bar­bie: If you refer with “paolo” to Paola Pisi, why don’t you just cut the crap.

   So far there’s been noth­ing show­ing her or Uruknet as traitors.

   In addi­tion to the 4 years of tak­ing care of the Iraq and the Iraqi peo­ple, the lat­est repost­ings of Uruknet, such as these (given here as Uruknet ver­sions so to underline):

   (1) Sheikh Hareth al-Dhari: Jerusalem is in Our Hearts
   http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m38490&hd=&size=1&l=e

   (2) AMSI: Al-Qaeda is an Amer­i­can cre­ation
   http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m38444&hd=&size=1&l=e

   (3) Jihad and Reform Front: State­ment regard­ing the clo­sure of the AMSI head­quar­ter and Radio
   http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m38401&hd=&size=1&l=e

   No enemy site would pub­lish stuff like this on a con­stant basis. Or then the enemy is far brighter than we expect.

   Be that as it may, it doesn’t mat­ter, because — and this quite unre­lated to the dis­cus­sion above — the U.S.-backing enemy is stu­pid. It has no balls. So, sooner or later the NDHF Analy­sis Team will dis­cover any deception.

   What comes to me (Edi­tor Louhi) and Paola (Pisi, Uruknet), we’ve been old friends and go long back, so we do not hes­i­tate to express out views about each other in a brute, harsh ways (often a stan­dard pro­ce­dure between us these days ;) but so far I’ve failed to pin­point any “trea­son” (in the seri­ous sense of the word).

   There are many things about Uruknet (espe­cially all what comes to the Baath and sup­posed bad advi­sors, of which we know­ing lit­tle just as about the party itself) I’m unaware of, but NDHF keeps its eyes open, not com­mit­ting to any­body except to the trusted Iraqi Resis­tance Forces (whether Armed or Polit­i­cal), whose cred­i­bil­ity we’ve been able to con­firm ourselves.

   It is also note­wor­thy that we Finns, and espe­cially we men (such as myself and the NDHF crew) are noto­ri­ous among other cul­tures for our bar­bar­ian way of express­ing our­selves, pre­fer­ring one-word-sentence con­struc­tions that admit­tedly clear some issues, but with the lack of pre­cise details also cause con­fu­sion. To show you what I mean by this, here’s an exam­ple of a mess I just made here in this site:

   3. Apol­ogy @ LadyBird

   Recently the NDHF web­mas­ter revealed me the details of attacks against the NDHF site by a party vis­it­ing the site Roads to Iraq and using the site as a sec­ond launch pad for such an assault.

   I made a men­tion of this yes­ter­day in a RtoI com­ment, but obvi­ously fail­ing to con­trol my emo­tions prop­erly my for­mu­la­tion left Lady­Bird with an impres­sion that I might have meant her (or the site Roads to Iraq) being behind this.

   The NDHF web­mas­ter explained me the details of the attack and it is DEFINITELY NOT the case that Lady­Bird or Roads to Iraq had any­thing to do with the attack, so that I APOLOGIZE for my incom­plete out­put con­cern­ing that, stat­ing explic­itly that

   §1. I pub­licly and most sin­cerely apol­o­gize Lady­Bird & Roads to Iraq crew for pass­ing such a hasty com­ment mak­ing such inter­pre­ta­tion even pos­si­ble: Any­one aware of the con­stant con­tri­bu­tions by Roads to Iraq for the cause of the heroic Iraqi Resis­tance, and its most valu­able asset, the Iraqi Peo­ple knows that putting forth such a claim would be utter non­sense, rather indi­cat­ing the belong­ings of those stat­ing such theses.

   §2. The rea­son for men­tion­ing the attack was sim­ply to explain that under cur­rent cir­cum­stances I’m not nec­es­sar­ily able to visit the site Roads to Iraq as often as pre­vi­ously, and espe­cially read and reply the com­ments there, because doing so will always expose the NDHF site to an attack. As our web­mas­ter is fully aware of the friendly posi­tion of Roads to Iraq because of my brief­ing in the sit­u­a­tion, we’re not capa­ble of defend­ing our­selves against such attacks, because this would require an intru­sion to the site Roads to Iraq, a friendly party, that we’re not even con­sid­er­ing of.

   §3. There­fore, if you note that I won’t be answer­ing any ques­tions or par­tak­ing the dis­cus­sion, the rea­son is very sim­ple: I haven’t seen them. In cur­rent cir­cum­stances I’ll visit Roads to Iraq only if not logged-in into NDHF (this pre­vent­ing the enemy of attack­ing accord­ing to the NDHF web­mas­ter), which causes sev­eral prob­lems: dur­ing any daily ses­sions I’ve a huge num­ber of wires open, and repost­ing them, because con­tain­ing vital intel­li­gence and other infor­ma­tion rel­e­vant to the Mujahideen broth­ers fight­ing in Iraq and Afghanistan is more rel­e­vant than any­thing, I can­not quit that to open the Roads to Iraq site and expose our site to attack­ers. As some of you know, we’re already cur­rently VERY HEAVILY attacked any­way, because par­tak­ing the Jihad, so that while immune, we must block routes dis­tract­ing our activities.

   We are resolved to com­bat with the Iraqi Resis­tance to the point the Vic­tory of our forces have been absolutely secured. After that, when our forces con­trol Iraq with their gov­ern­ment we pro­ceed with find­ing out ways how Fin­land and our gov­ern­ment is able to pro­vide the emer­gency aid chan­nels to those in need in Iraq.

   Spokesed­i­tor Louhi.
6. Victoria says:

   November 25, 2007 at 14:50

   @Newsdesk Helsinki Finland,

   I must say you in the counter-insurgency media wing do have a “way” with ladies ! (Paola and Ladybird) ;-)

   Your unc­tu­ous, flat­ter­ing man­ners remind me so much of two of your col­leagues who have since been exposed and banned as Al-Qaeda infil­tra­tors pos­ing as sup­port­ers of the national resis­tance: “ITMod­er­a­tor” of the now-closed patri­otic Iraqi web­site Iraq­Tun­nel and “Al-Firdaws” of the still work­ing anti-imperialist web­site Iraq-War, who had both started their not-so bril­liant “ide­o­log­i­cal hacker’s” careers by gain­ing the trust of the two unaware women admin­is­tra­tors, IRAd­min and Zoraida.

   This is a very dis­gust­ing male-chauvinistic behav­ior, besides dis­hon­est, which you should be ashamed of (if you have a con­science, that is…)

   As for your “chal­lenge”, you are nobody to chal­lenge me or any­one else. N-O-B-O-D-Y, understand ?

   That “title” the AMSI peo­ple in their naive gen­eros­ity wished to grant you, that you would be mem­bers of the Iraqi Resis­tance, is only sym­bolic. You are Finns, as you say, so you can’t really be mem­bers of the Iraqi Resis­tance, which is a nation­al­ist, not inter­na­tion­al­ist movement.

   Besides, you don’t fight. Any­one is good at typ­ing words from behind a com­puter screen. Again, as you say, resisters are the ones who fight. So you scrib­blers don’t qualify ;-)

   I know what I know about Izzat Ibrahim Al-Douri, the same that Pres­i­dent Sad­dam Hus­sein knew when he took the deci­sion to des­ig­nate him as his legit­i­mate suc­ces­sor at the head of the Baath Party and entrusted him with the task of orga­niz­ing the resis­tance to the invaders: that he is a man of prin­ci­ples, a pas­sion­ate, ded­i­cated old-school Pan-Arab Social­ist and, in his pri­vate life, a very pious, kind and com­pas­sion­ate Sufi.

   He sim­ply can’t have changed so much in so lit­tle time, I am sure of this, and His­tory will prove me right.

   Regards.

   Vic­to­ria
7. paola pisi says:

   November 25, 2007 at 18:34

   @Newsdesk Helsinki Fin­land. I have noth­ing to say to you, and you have noth­ing to say that I want to hear. Only one thing: You wrote: “What comes to me (Edi­tor Louhi) and Paola (Pisi, Uruknet), we’ve been old friends and go long back…” . THIS IS FALSE. i don’t even know your real name. The truth is that when you worked at iraqwar.ru web­site, you kindly offered to put a few arti­cles on uruknet–
   Then you dis­ap­peared for years and i even for­got your exis­tence. You emailed me again a few months ago, first ask­ing me to post two arti­cles of yours on Depleted Ura­nium (that i pub­lished), then try­ing to force me to post your arti­cles about Iraq (that i didn’t pub­lish). Some weeks ago I enjoined you not to email me any­more, just because you were accus­ing peo­ple with­out the slight­est evi­dence and offend­ing the mem­ory of the assas­si­nated Iraqi Pres­i­dent and the Iraqi mar­tyrs. And, as you well know, this account of the facts is very euphemistic.
   By the way, since i have noth­ing to hide, Paola Pisi is my real name. So I sup­pose that “Edi­tor” is your first name and “Louhi” your fam­ily name.
   Of course I post the AMSI state­ments and pieces, and i hold the AMSI in high esti­ma­tion, but the AMSI has noth­ing to do with you. By pre­tend­ing that the AMSI agrees with you, you are slan­der­ing the AMSI too.
   And I am not in need of your sup­port against “Barabie“‘s crazy accu­sa­tions. But I must say that prob­a­bly even the poor drunk Bara­bie is bet­ter than you are. At least, she is only a clin­i­cal case.
8. elena says:

   November 25, 2007 at 19:15

   Mit­ica Prof. Pisi !!!!!!!!!! :-)
9. Tariq says:

   November 26, 2007 at 00:39

   @NDHF:

   If there is some­one here who is (ab)using the President’s mem­ory, cap­i­tal­iz­ing on his pop­u­lar­ity, dis­tort­ing his mes­sage, putting in his mouth now that he is dead words which he never uttered while alive, in the des­per­ate attempt to give some kind of “moral legit­i­ma­tion” to a phony lib­er­a­tion strug­gle, in truth covert col­lab­o­ra­tionism, this is YOU.

   Sad­dam Hus­sein NEVER repu­di­ated the Baath Party to “turn to favor the Holy Jihad” as you claimed, sim­ply because the Baath IS ITSELF a Jihadi move­ment — in the pure, free, enlight­ened, Arab human­ist, Islamic Renais­sance mean­ing of the word “Jihad”, cer­tainly not in the lunatic-asylum mil­lenar­i­an­is­tic one as intended by the Franken­steins issued from the lab­o­ra­to­ries of Zbg­niew Brzezin­ski & Co.

   There is NO con­tra­dic­tion between Baath and Islam, you bunch of decay­ing and stink­ing theo­cratic car­casses, and the Pres­i­dent Mar­tyr of Iraq knew it and was, through­out his life and until his last breath, a true Baathist AND a true Mus­lim, and above all, a true HUMAN BEING.

   So by insist­ing on wag­ing this shame­ful, vile and cruel defama­tion cam­paign against the Party he believed in, you are IMPLICITLY insult­ing his fig­ure, ridi­cul­ing his feel­ings, ideals and val­ues, cheap­en­ing his cause, which was, is, and WILL BE that of mil­lions of Iraqis, edu­cated, self-aware, worldly-wise, enlight­ened, pro­gres­sive Iraqis who want a post-liberation SECULAR soci­ety that pre­serves the indi­vid­ual spir­i­tu­al­ity UNSULLIED from the filth of sec­tar­i­an­ism, big­otry and corruption.

   As for the lit­tle PARANOIAC, PERSECUTION-MANIACAL (Zion­ist Jewish-style) “trick” you played on the mem­bers of this forum:

   Hereby I the under­signed beat my chest in repen­tance and admit the hor­ren­dous truth, the whole truth and noth­ing but the truth: I DO NOT GIVE A DAMN ABOUT MANNERHEIM (WHOEVER HE WAS) NOR ABOUT FINLAND.

   Now that you have my writ­ten con­fes­sion, you should have the decency and humil­ity to be as much hon­est and con­fess, too, your truth: that YOU HATE SADDAM HUSSEIN, THE BAATH PARTY AND THE IRAQI PEOPLE, WORK FOR THE OCCUPATION AND ONLY POSE AS SUPPORTERS OF THE NOBLE AMSI AND THE HEROIC IRAQI RESISTANCE FOR STRATEGIC PURPOSES.

   But then you are nei­ther decent nor hum­ble and, as for hon­esty, you don’t even know what it means.

   My worst DIS­re­gards — and, God will­ing, farewell FOR GOOD.

   Tariq
10. Khudair says:

    November 26, 2007 at 01:17

    @Tariq:

    Leave the pile of dogshit called NDHF alone; if not stirred, it stinks less :-)

    Keep up the good fight.

    Salam.
11. NEWSDESK HELSINKI FINLAND says:

    November 26, 2007 at 09:03

    Var­i­ous:

    
    – I never said any­thing about repu­di­at­ing Baath.

    I referred to the very words of the Mujahid brother Hus­sein in his hand-written “tes­ta­ment” saying:

    “This is by the will of the Liv­ing Eter­nal God, and by His agents on earth, the heroic Mujahideen in glo­ri­ous, vir­tu­ous, mil­i­tant, jihadist Iraq. So God bless the heroic peo­ple of Iraq and God bless the jihad and the mujahideen.“
    http://uruknet.info/?p=m24800

    There’s lot more of the sort in the bril­liant analy­sis piece relinked above which the NDHF crew rec­om­mends to all want­ing to know the truth about the Mujahid brother Sad­dam Hussein.

    Typ­i­cal “Tariq” to pose as if a Sad­dam loy­al­ist and then pro­ceed with twist­ing the very words and ideas of Mujahid Brother Hussein.

    What comes to the Baath, is also note­wor­thy that though we repeat­edly make the same point that any dis­cus­sion about Baath is non­sen­si­cal before com­mit­ting either to the pro-U.S. or anti-U.S. branch of the Baath party, noth­ing of the sort emerges from the pseudo-Baathists swarm­ing at this dis­cus­sion, this obvi­ously hint­ing to the true belong­ings of the pro-U.S. baath party hijackers

    §2. Paola Pisi
    (a) On: “the AMSI has noth­ing to do with you.“
    – Rub­bish. AMSI’s a dear friend.

    There’s this ten­dency of peo­ple email­ing AMSI whin­ing about NDHF and pub­licly lying . Because of this we’re able to prove that we do not lie. We’ve already dealt with this issue on the com­ment sec­tions of the arti­cles to which we’ve attached a cou­ple of such emails from AMSI:

    Ba’ath Party state­ment about Istan­bul Con­fer­ence
    http://www.roadstoiraq.com/2007/11/06/ba%e2%80%99ath-party-statement-about-istanbul-conference/

    Ba’ath party 13th con­fer­ence: New resis­tance alliance front and state­ment about divid­ing Iraq
    http://www.roadstoiraq.com/2007/10/04/baath-party-13th-conference-new-resistance-alliance-front-and-statement-about-dividing-iraq/

    What comes to the rela­tion of AMSI and NDHF, much more impor­tant than any emails is that gen­er­ally the AMSI and NDHF as a rule share com­mon strate­gic analy­sis of the “big pic­ture” about the war. Thus, for exam­ple, at the begin­ning of this Autumn NDHF deliv­ered a gen­eral analy­sis of the U.S.-Iranian-Israeli war plot (the Iraq Study Group plan) which was reposted by AMSI:

    U.S. Defeat and Iraq Study Group “With­drawal” Plot
    http://heyetnet.org/en/content/view/1849/27/

    Soon after it was fur­ther trans­lated into Ara­bic by AMSI and pub­lished as well as you can ver­ify here:

    
    الاحتلال الامريكي وحكوماته المتعاونة معه

    
    29 /09 /2007 م 10:50 صباحا
    http://theunitedstatesofmonsters.blogspot.com/search?q=%22U.S.+Defeat+and+Iraq+Study+Group+%22Withdrawal%22+Plot%22

    Gen­er­ally speak­ing, the AMSI and NDHF report­ing coin­cide both with their con­tents and the tim­ing, most recently seen e.g. here:

    Some time ago NDHF chose to come out with the truth about Al-Qaida being an U.S. phony orga­ni­za­tion as reported here:

    IRAQ: On Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaida in Iraq
    http://theunitedstatesofmonsters.blogspot.com/2007/11/iraq-on-osama-bin-laden-and-al-qaida-in.html

    Our Analy­sis Team was not caught by sur­prise not­ing that within 7 days of our repost­ing the AMSI has cho­sen to come out with iden­ti­cal view, as reported here:

    AMSI: Al-Qaeda is an Amer­i­can cre­ation
    http://www.roadstoiraq.com/2007/11/21/amsi-al-qaeda-is-an-american-creation/

    These devel­op­ments are ulti­mately related to the recent AMSI raid, for which see our pre­lim­i­nary notice of us com­ing out with Al-Qaida-Osama-bin-Laden report­ing here:

    On the AMSI HQ Raid and al-Qaida con­nec­tion accu­sa­tions
    http://theunitedstatesofmonsters.blogspot.com/2007/11/on-amsi-hq-raid-and-al-qaida-connection_15.html

    (b) “By pre­tend­ing that the AMSI agrees with you, you are slan­der­ing the AMSI too.“
    – Delib­er­ate or not, this is dis­in­for­ma­tion. AMSI being the best-informed party con­cern­ing the Iraq war and other issues related to that, it is not AMSI agree­ing with NDHF, but NDHF agree­ing with AMSI. What comes to this, we are from far-away Fin­land and so, as AMSI put it in their email quoted above:

    “As far as we know they are vol­un­teerly work­ing for the cause of Iraq while doing some mis­takes owing to not hav­ing suf­fi­cient information.”

    In this sense the NDHF views are not nec­es­sar­ily iden­ti­cal with those of AMSI, espe­cially when the AMSI view is unknown to us (as e.g. the AMSI view of Al-Qaida was before we read that being iden­ti­cal with ours as well from the Roads to Iraq arti­cle above).

    §3. @ Vic­to­ria:
    
    – Every­thing con­cern­ing this is unknown to us except that Zoraida’s been doing excel­lent job recently, show­ing that whatever’s been there is over: cur­rently she’s cer­tainly not “unaware”, so dis­miss the com­ment for that part.

    (b) On: “Besides, you don’t fight. Any­one is good at typ­ing words from behind a com­puter screen. Again, as you say, resisters are the ones who fight. So you scrib­blers don’t qual­ify.“
    – The NEWSDESK HELSINKI FINLAND resists, hav­ing put forth the most detailed descrip­tion of the actions of the Jihad in Iraq in Eng­lish at the moment. There­fore the autho­riza­tion of AMSI rec­og­niz­ing the NDHF as a “Iraqi Resis­tance Faction”

    © The AMSI peo­ple in their naive gen­eros­ity wished to grant you, that you would be mem­bers of the Iraqi Resis­tance, is only sym­bolic. You are Finns, as you say, so you can’t really be mem­bers of the Iraqi Resis­tance, which is a nation­al­ist, not inter­na­tion­al­ist move­ment.
    – Non­sense. If there’s some­thing that AMSI’s not, its “naïve” (or “unaware” as sug­gested by another nick vis­it­ing this site pre­vi­ously). Under AMSI autho­riza­tion we are mem­bers of the Iraqi Resistance.

    I am Mujahid Louhi, work­ing with Mujahideen broth­ers Ilmari­nen, Perkele and Väinämöi­nen (the NDHF Webmaster).

    §4. @ Tariq, on “YOU HATE SADDAM HUSSEIN, THE BAATH PARTY AND THE IRAQI PEOPLE, WORK FOR THE OCCUPATION AND ONLY POSE AS SUPPORTERS OF THE NOBLE AMSI AND THE HEROIC IRAQI RESISTANCE FOR STRATEGIC PURPOSES.“
    – Our view con­cern­ing the Mujahid brother Hus­sein has already been stated above. Our view about the Baath party is iden­ti­cal with that of AMSI: already a year+ ago AMSI took pub­licly the view that

    “The United States and the Iraqi gov­ern­ment must agree to abol­ish all aspects of the cur­rent de-Baathification law and return Baathist offi­cials to their posi­tions in the gov­ern­ment and in the mil­i­tary;” (this AMSI view avail­able in the com­ment sec­tion of the arti­cle http://www.roadstoiraq.com/2007/10/20/the-americans-promised-to-recognize-the-iraq-resistance/)
    – We agree. How­ever, due to the recent Baath party split we deem the pro-U.S. baathist col­lab­o­ra­tors as part of the occu­pa­tion and so treat the trai­tors accord­ing to the offi­cial AMSI pol­icy as stated by Mujahid Harith al-Dari:

    “Who will coop­er­ate with occu­piers against Iraq will never serve the nation even a sin­gle part of it. ”

    http://theunitedstatesofmonsters.blogspot.com/2007/11/top-news-iraq-al-dari-al-quds-jerusalem.html
12. seymore says:

    November 26, 2007 at 10:30

    @Taria & @all

    There is no con­nec­tion nor com­prim­ise between the Arab Baath Party and Jihad for the sake of God. Tariq talks about how one can be a Baathist and a Mus­lim, yet by using the word *and* it should be clear to all that he has gone down the road of poly­the­ism (shirk) by asso­ci­at­ing another lifestyle, cul­ture, nation, and political/economic/legislative body beside that of God (through his mes­sage in the Quran and final mes­sanger, Muham­mad — the faith­ful car­rier of the Quran). He also talks about how enlight­ened and human­is­tic such a party would be, but take a close look at the most sec­u­lar and “free” nation on earth — the United States of Amer­ica, and you will see how dis­gust­ing and lost that cul­ture and those peo­ple have become on account of their sec­u­lar ide­ol­ogy. And they don’t even base their polit­i­cal ide­ol­ogy on ethnicity.

    A good expla­na­tion of how pan-arab nation­al­ism (and nation­al­ism in gen­eral) is against Islam, incom­pa­tiable with Islam, and a form of shirk — which is truly the worst sin a human being can ever com­mit, can be found within this page…

    http://islamqa.com/index.php?ln=eng&ref=97732
13. Tariq says:

    November 26, 2007 at 10:56

    @NDHF:

    “any dis­cus­sion about Baath is non­sen­si­cal before com­mit­ting either to the pro-U.S. or anti-U.S. branch of the Baath party”

    There are no two Baath, but the one and only OFFICIAL Baath Party fight­ing the occu­piers, back­ing, co-ordinating and inspir­ing all the patri­otic, nation­al­ist and Islamic forces in the Iraqi Resis­tance, and then a VERY SMALL, INSIGNIFICANT splin­ter fac­tion of rene­gades col­lab­o­rat­ing with the occu­piers, who have LOST their right to call them­selves “Baathists”.

    I belong to the FORMER (ANTI-U.S.) group — and NO, not as any sort of “tal­ent scout” ;-)

    Believe me or not, as you pre­fer. I won’t lose any sleep over you. My con­science is CLEAR before God and my Iraqi people.

    Now that I have “com­mit­ted” myself, I hope you will be sat­is­fied and give me and the other mem­bers of this forum a well-deserved rest :-)

    Thank you !

    Regards,
    Tariq
14. seymore says:

    November 26, 2007 at 10:59

    @Newsdesk

    Your accu­sa­tions (now span­ning many entries and many reports) against Qaidah al-Jihad are truly base­less and inac­cu­rate. You can make a point that the orga­ni­za­tion (the ISI) has been infil­ter­ated and framed for many things. I don’t dis­agree with that. But, if al-Qaidah can be infil­ter­ated, so can each and every fac­tion of the Iraqi resis­tance. Indeed, accu­sa­tions have been lev­eled at these other fac­tions for hav­ing recieved aid and influ­ence (or even been infil­ter­ated) by Saudi, Jor­dan­ian, Egyp­tion, and other for­eign intel­le­gence. And who do these coun­tries and their gov­ern­ments answer to??

    At the end of the day, while the Arab Baath Party is a legit­i­mate threat to Israel, no other fac­tion within the Iraqi resis­tance mat­ters. The excep­tion are those who call for a return to a Khal­i­fah, and this scares not just Israel, but all the major pow­ers of the world together. Strength comes through unity, and what bet­ter type of unity is there than the unity that tran­scends tribes and nations, col­ors and borders??

    So under­stand what this is, and under­stand what this means. The world in indebted to the Iraqi resis­tance, and depen­dant on Iraqi oil, but the cra­dle of civ­i­liza­tion is no longer the sole focus of the world. Oppressed Mus­lims every­where are wait­ing for the return of Islaam, and the deserts of Iraq (as well as the moun­tains of Khurasan) are our only hope!