Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BREAKING: Ilyas Kashmiri ‘killed’ in US drone attack [Osama bin Laden's replacement]
Dawn ^ | June 4, 2011 | Dawn

Posted on 06/04/2011 1:32:36 AM PDT by James C. Bennett

PESHAWAR: According to a BBCUrdu report, Ilyas Kashmiri, a Pakistani terrorist leader with ties to al Qaeda, was among those killed in the latest drone strikes in South Waziristan.

The report quoted locals as saying that Kashmiri was killed in the strike that killed at least nine militants.

Kashmiri was the chief of the Harkatul Jihad al-Islami (HJI), an organisation affiliated with al Qaeda.

He is widely believed to have masterminded the attack on the PNS Mehran naval base in Karachi.

A government official in Peshawar told BBCUrdu that although he had been receiving information regarding the death of Kashmiri in the drone strike, he could not confirm the information.

Moreover, an official in South Waziristan told BBCUrdu that a US drone attack targeted a group of armed militants 20 kilometres from Wana bazaar.

The official said the attack killed nine people and injured three others.

Moreover, the official said that those killed in the attack were believed to be militants from Punjab.

Locals and witnesses told BBCUrdu that Kashmiri had also died in the drone attack.

Witnesses said Kashmiri had arrived in South Waziristan from the Khyber tribal region.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 20100806; 313brigade; alqaeda; alvi; amirfaisalalvi; assassinationplots; chicagocell; cousinbob; davidcolemanheadley; davidheadley; drone; eo13224; executiveorder13224; firstworld; fwis; harakatuljihadislami; hasanabdal; headley; hji; huji; ilyaskashmiri; individuala; isi; islam; kashmiri; kinsman; kinsmanil; lashkaralzil; mickeymouseproject; mmp; mohammadkashmiri; mumbaimassacre; northernproject; pakistan; rana; sdgt; southwaziristan; swaziristan; tahawuurhussainrana; tahawuurrana; waziristan; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-115 next last
To: Pan_Yan
DId we fly in a muslim outreach team to wash the body and perform a 30 minute burial blessing & unverifiable disposal immediately after?

Sorry. Had to adjust to my take.

41 posted on 06/04/2011 5:31:06 AM PDT by taraytarah (Cain's the ticket ! All aboard !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

It works for me.


42 posted on 06/04/2011 5:36:39 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bill1952

Have always thought with Saddam it was, as usual, a case of follow the money. That many Americans must have had a lot invested in him and the old Iraq given some of the vehement opposition to taking him down. Or, maybe they wanted to see Israel destroyed. One or the other I think.


43 posted on 06/04/2011 5:44:06 AM PDT by John W (Natural-born US citizen since 1955)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South

We were already at war with Iraq and had been for ten years. W ended that war by Conquering Baghdad and killing Saddam.

Iraq is the center of peace in the region. Iraq is center to the containment of Iran

The containment of Al Queda is but a part of the whole.


44 posted on 06/04/2011 5:48:26 AM PDT by bert (K.E. N.P. N.C. D.E. +12 ....( History is a process, not an event ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

later


45 posted on 06/04/2011 5:49:30 AM PDT by Skooz (Gabba Gabba we accept you we accept you one of us Gabba Gabba we accept you we accept you one of us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

Great news!


46 posted on 06/04/2011 6:06:43 AM PDT by bayouranger (The 1st victim of islam is the person who practices the lie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

“But a fax from the militant group he was heading — Harakat-ul-Jihad al-Islami’s feared “313 Brigade” — confirmed Kashmiri was “martyred” in the strike at 11:15 p.m. Friday in South Waziristan tribal region. It vowed revenge against America.”

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/06/04/official-says-top-al-qaeda-operative-killed-in-pakistan/?test=latestnews

As for it being a tagline, he said a lot about a large subject in few words.....again, even if it is too large.


47 posted on 06/04/2011 6:15:54 AM PDT by Puckster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

Good..... maybe he and Osama will share the same cave in hell!


48 posted on 06/04/2011 6:17:10 AM PDT by jakerobins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

What happened to the top of his head.
Oh, never-mind....


49 posted on 06/04/2011 6:27:31 AM PDT by vox_freedom (America is being tested as never before in its history. May God help us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP

TBP, time for you to mourn again - this time, it’s your friend, Illyas Kashmiri.


50 posted on 06/04/2011 6:28:37 AM PDT by indcons (Lurker mode off)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puckster

It’s probably well past time to spread the false rumor (which will catch on like crazy among the paranoid Muzzie nutjobs) that their word for “martyr” means “shit head” in English.


51 posted on 06/04/2011 6:40:50 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Thanks Cincinna for this link -- http://www.friendsofitamar.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Puckster

Of course, they would then declare a fatwa against English.


52 posted on 06/04/2011 6:41:25 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Thanks Cincinna for this link -- http://www.friendsofitamar.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

I think this call for a toast tonight yes we can be happy!


53 posted on 06/04/2011 6:43:06 AM PDT by angcat (DEAR GOD PLEASE SAVE US!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett
Please, just no more White House speeches. We all know who gets the credit and who doesn't.

54 posted on 06/04/2011 6:47:30 AM PDT by Genoa (Luke 12:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv
“It’s probably well past time to spread the false rumor (which will catch on like crazy among the paranoid Muzzie nutjobs) that their word for “martyr” means “shit head” in English.”

I had to do this yesterday and now you force me to play FR PC cop on you also.

We need to extend all respect to the non-infidels.

Some call them “Towel Heads”, others “Rag Heads”, and to correct the nomenclature, we all need to get on the same page with the reality, which is, they don't wear a towel nor a rag, in fact, they wear a little sheet on their heads, so the proper nomenclature is...........................”Little Sheetheads”?!

So, once again, “GOT IT”?????

55 posted on 06/04/2011 6:48:08 AM PDT by Puckster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

First replacement sent to meet his virgins.

Next!


56 posted on 06/04/2011 6:48:26 AM PDT by bgill (Kenyan Parliament - how could a man born in Kenya who is not even a native American become the POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South
You are wrong on all accounts - Especially Iraq but also with regard to Pak - The whole idea of Pred/Reap attacks started during the GWB years - So did DA Ops within Pak - So did the placement of fusion cells inside Pak - So did all the logistics that allowed future Ops inside Pak to happen (including the UBL Op).

You clearly have very little idea what you are talking about - Amateurs talk tactics, the professionals talk logistics, logistics, logistics. And all the logistics that allowed the Ops running today in Pak (both Pred/Reap and DAs) are from those very logistics put in place during GWB years.

As for the refocus on Pak regions (by Obama) that is only possible because of the success elsewhere provided via the leadership of GWB. Furthermore if you think Iraq was a some type of counterweight to a terrorist supporting / expanding Iran. That is foolishness. Saddam and Iran had their issues but hurting the West was not one of them.

57 posted on 06/04/2011 6:49:24 AM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

Cue the “He blowed up real good” guys.


58 posted on 06/04/2011 6:56:47 AM PDT by savedbygrace (But God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bill1952

I beg to disagree. Al Queada attacked the United States and under the Constitution it was the duty of the Commander in Chief, with the assent of Congress, to find and eliminate the attackers in order to defend the homeland. Iraq did not attack the United States and represented no threat to the homeland.

We have become an imperialist nation selectively intervening militarily in undeclared wars where our imperial President defines a “strategic interest”. Note the word “selectively”. It could be argued we have or had a strategic interest in eliminating the communist state 90 miles off the Florida coast but we did not invade Cuba. We also did not invade Venezuela which poses more of a strategic threat than Iraq. We also did not invade Iran which had taken direct action against US citizens.

The Constitution does not provide for the President to invade countries at will because he defines a “strategic interest” or wants to establish a democratic government. If George Bush had followed the Constitution and asked for an actual declaration of war from Congress for the purpose of regime change it would have likely been voted down. The skirting of the Constitutional requirement by Truman (Korea), Johnson (Vietnam), Reagan (Grenada), Bush I (Iraq), Clinton (Kosovo), Bush II (Iraq and Afghanistan), Obama (Libya) has resulted in the loss of tens of thousands of US lives as well as the draining of our national treasury. Obama is thumbing his nose at Congress today over Libya because his predecessors got away with violating their oaths of office and not getting the declaration of war before committing troops to combat.

I’m a strict constructionist when it comes to interpreting the Constitution and the document is very clear with respect to going to war. If one has any doubts about the meaning, read the Federalist Papers or the transcripts of the debates at the ratifying convention. It was never contemplated the chief executive would have the power to engage in multi year wars based on his definition of “strategic interest” without obtaining the consent of Congress.


59 posted on 06/04/2011 6:57:12 AM PDT by Soul of the South (When times are tough the tough get going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

Now serving number 3.

60 posted on 06/04/2011 6:57:24 AM PDT by Walmartian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-115 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson