WHOO-HOO!! We killed the guy who trained the shoe-bomber!

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - WHOO-HOO!! We killed the guy who trained the shoe-bomber!

Posted: 1/18/2006 11:51:32 AM EDT

U.S. Strike Killed Al Qaeda Bomb Maker

ABC News has learned that al Qaeda's master bomb maker and chemical weapons expert was one of the men killed in last week's U.S. missile attack in eastern Pakistan.

Midhat Mursi, 52, also known as Abu Khabab al-Masri, was identified by Pakistani authorities as one of three known al Qaeda leaders present at an apparent terror summit conference in the village of Damadola.

The United States had posted a $5 million reward for Mursi's capture. He is described by U.S. authorities as the man who ran al Qaeda's infamous Derunta training camp in Afghanistan, where he used dogs and other animals as subjects of experiments with poison and chemicals.

"This is extraordinarily important," said former FBI agent Jack Cloonan, an ABC News consultant, who was the senior agent on the FBI's al Qaeda squad. "He's the man who trained the shoe bomber, Richard Reid and Zacharias Mousssaoui, as well as hundreds of others."

So he was the "master bomb maker" who trained the guy who was caught trying to ignite a shoe full of C4......... with a match.

I'm sorry but this just strikes me funny.

Posted: 1/18/2006 11:54:01 AM EDT

[#1]

Should have let him live. They might replace him with someone who's less of an idiot.

Posted: 1/18/2006 12:38:03 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted: Should have let him live. They might replace him with someone who's less of an idiot.

Why are you so culturally insensitive?

Don't you realize that a shoe bomb is Haji's version of a stealth bomber?

Posted: 1/18/2006 12:42:32 PM EDT

[#3]

Well, I thought this was an attack on innocent civilians. At least that's what I kept hearing, complete with an anti-US protest.

Posted: 1/18/2006 12:50:02 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
Well, I thought this was an attack on innocent civilians. At least that's what I kept hearing, complete with an anti-US protest.

http://blog.lewrockwell.com/lewrw/archives/009720.html

January 14, 2006
Pakistan
Posted by Lew Rockwell at January 14, 2006 09:10 PM

It is always useful to turn things around. Imagine a terrorist group that had targetted the Pakistani government, and killed lots of people in that country. There are such. The Pakistani CIA discovers, or thinks it does, that the #2 guy is hiding out in a small village in Nevada, and so bombs the place, lest he escape, killing lots of innocents. What would be the US reaction, whether the guy was there or not?

Of course, under American exceptionalism, the feds can bomb or assassinate in any country on earth, and it better not say boo. Notice that Iran's buying purely defensive weapons from Russia is considered an international offense, and another reason to attack.

Rome too considered any defense an agressive act.

Just putting that quote up for discussion to get your blood pressure up.

Personally I don't give a shit about the US bombing in pakistan. Go for it as far as I'm concerned. Especially if it's killing guys they know need to be killed.

Posted: 1/18/2006 12:54:07 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Well, I thought this was an attack on innocent civilians. At least that's what I kept hearing, complete with an anti-US protest.

Innocent civilians who worked at the Baby Milk Factory. Keep the facts straight

Posted: 1/18/2006 12:59:04 PM EDT

[#6]

I thought that guy had already been killed last year. Psy Ops needs to stop resuing news stories

Jk I have no proof that is true or false. I just thought he had already been killed.

Posted: 1/18/2006 1:07:10 PM EDT

[#7]

What the media and the rest of the Paki's don't seem to get is this.

If you invite terrorist to dinner, don't be suprised if you get whacked.

The message should be clear. Don't associate with, or allow yourself to be in the company of terrorists. You could get killed.

Even a goat herder can figure that out.

Posted: 1/18/2006 1:14:41 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:

January 14, 2006
Pakistan
Posted by Lew Rockwell at January 14, 2006 09:10 PM

It is always useful to turn things around. Imagine a terrorist group that had targetted the Pakistani government, and killed lots of people in that country. There are such. The Pakistani CIA discovers, or thinks it does, that the #2 guy is hiding out in a small village in Nevada, and so bombs the place, lest he escape, killing lots of innocents. What would be the US reaction, whether the guy was there or not?

Of course, under American exceptionalism, the feds can bomb or assassinate in any country on earth, and it better not say boo. Notice that Iran's buying purely defensive weapons from Russia is considered an international offense, and another reason to attack.

Rome too considered any defense an agressive act.

I guess ol' Lew didn't like us bombing France to get at the Nazis back in WWII.

Posted: 1/18/2006 1:25:04 PM EDT

[#9]

We had to kill him. You know, we did it for the Keds.

Posted: 1/18/2006 1:31:09 PM EDT

[#10]

"Keeps me some shoebombs...!"

Posted: 1/18/2006 1:36:10 PM EDT

[#11]

Hell's hot, ain't it, Abu.

Posted: 1/18/2006 1:44:18 PM EDT

[#12]

It is nice to know that 72 virgins will go unsatisfied.
He was not actualy in battle with the "infadels" just going to a dinner meeting.
Allah has his limits.

Posted: 1/18/2006 2:00:09 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, I thought this was an attack on innocent civilians. At least that's what I kept hearing, complete with an anti-US protest.

http://blog.lewrockwell.com/lewrw/archives/009720.html

January 14, 2006
Pakistan
Posted by Lew Rockwell at January 14, 2006 09:10 PM

It is always useful to turn things around. Imagine a terrorist group that had targetted the Pakistani government, and killed lots of people in that country. There are such. The Pakistani CIA discovers, or thinks it does, that the #2 guy is hiding out in a small village in Nevada, and so bombs the place, lest he escape, killing lots of innocents. What would be the US reaction, whether the guy was there or not?

Of course, under American exceptionalism, the feds can bomb or assassinate in any country on earth, and it better not say boo. Notice that Iran's buying purely defensive weapons from Russia is considered an international offense, and another reason to attack.

Rome too considered any defense an agressive act.

Just putting that quote up for discussion to get your blood pressure up.

Personally I don't give a shit about the US bombing in pakistan. Go for it as far as I'm concerned. Especially if it's killing guys they know need to be killed.

The difference is, we would gladly help the Pakistani's capture a terorist living in the U.S. The same can't be said of Pakistan.

Besides, if Pakistan thinks they can bomb a house in the U.S., I say come try it.American exceptionalism only exists because no one can stop us.

Posted: 1/18/2006 2:08:05 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:

January 14, 2006
Pakistan
Posted by Lew Rockwell at January 14, 2006 09:10 PM

It is always useful to turn things around. Imagine a terrorist group that had targetted the Pakistani government, and killed lots of people in that country. There are such. The Pakistani CIA discovers, or thinks it does, that the #2 guy is hiding out in a small village in Nevada, and so bombs the place, lest he escape, killing lots of innocents. What would be the US reaction, whether the guy was there or not?

Of course, under American exceptionalism, the feds can bomb or assassinate in any country on earth, and it better not say boo. Notice that Iran's buying purely defensive weapons from Russia is considered an international offense, and another reason to attack.

Rome too considered any defense an agressive act.

I guess ol' Lew didn't like us bombing France to get at the Nazis back in WWII.

Methinks ol' Lew would have fought FOR the Nazis in WW2...