he's baack from the dead and ready for jihadi!

dukkha

Verified User
"Carry on your #Jihad while I hide.
While the Pigs of AnimalFarm hoard the millions swiped from Group treasury, DIE DOGS."
- Abū Bakr al-Baghdadi
++

A speaker who sounds like the IS leader seems to refer to recent North Korean threats against Japan and the US.

He also talks of battles for IS strongholds like Mosul, which was regained by Iraqi forces in July.

Baghdadi, who has a $25m (£19m) US bounty on his head, has not been seen in public since July 2014, leading to much speculation about his fate.

The last time he appeared was to preach at the Great Mosque of al-Nuri in Mosul after IS overran the city and a "caliphate" was proclaimed.

Asked about the audio, a spokesman for US forces fighting IS, Ryan Dillon, said "without verifiable evidence of his death, we have continued to assume that he is alive".

A defence department spokesman told the BBC: "We are aware of the audio tape purported to be of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and are taking steps to examine it. While we have no reason to doubt its authenticity, we do not have verification at this point."

The militant Sunni Muslim group IS, which earned notoriety for its brutal violence towards civilians and prisoners, has been steadily pushed back in Iraq and Syria this year.


The 46-minute recording was posted by a website with links to the group and is the first such speech to appear since November.

As well as Mosul, the speaker refers to battles in Raqqa and Hama in Syria, and Sirte in Libya, saying the bloodshed would not be in vain. He also talks of Russian-brokered peace talks on Syria. Much of the tape consists of religious references.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Charlie Winter, an analyst at the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation at King's College London, said he believed the recording was of Baghdadi.

"He has quite a recognisable voice and a recognisable way of speaking and it clearly, to me, is him", he said.


Asked about the importance of the IS leader, he said: "He's a symbolic figurehead, and for that reason he is important, but the group over the last few years has cultivated a cult of the institution of caliphate rather than a cult of personality around Baghdadi. So if he goes the organisation will remain and they will just appoint a new caliph."

Less than a handful people would know his whereabouts, Hassan Hassan of the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy wrote in a recent article for BBC News.

That makes it hard for the US, which has dedicated special forces constantly on the look-out for him.

In June, Russia reported that it was "highly likely" Baghdadi had been killed in a Russian air force strike on Raqqa on 28 May, and an Iranian official asserted he was "definitely dead" shortly afterwards.

However, claims of his death had been made before
and the reports were treated with scepticism by US officials.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-41435183
 
"A cult of institution centered around the caliphate instead of a cult of personality centered around al-Baghdadi".

I agree with the writer. The ideology of radical Islam has always been more important than its leading exponents. That's why getting bin Laden was more for retribution than anything. There's always a replacement in the wings that's ready to step up.

Even groups like ISIS will be outlived by the ideology they espouse. It's going to be a long struggle.
 
"A cult of institution centered around the caliphate instead of a cult of personality centered around al-Baghdadi".

I agree with the writer. The ideology of radical Islam has always been more important than its leading exponents. That's why getting bin Laden was more for retribution than anything. There's always a replacement in the wings that's ready to step up.

Even groups like ISIS will be outlived by the ideology they espouse. It's going to be a long struggle.

How long before liberals blame Trump for "letting al-Baghdadi escape while he tweeted" ?

We should have some fun by starting a pool.
 
"A cult of institution centered around the caliphate instead of a cult of personality centered around al-Baghdadi".

I agree with the writer. The ideology of radical Islam has always been more important than its leading exponents. That's why getting bin Laden was more for retribution than anything. There's always a replacement in the wings that's ready to step up.

Even groups like ISIS will be outlived by the ideology they espouse. It's going to be a long struggle.
fdds-long-war-journal-logo.png

https://www.longwarjournal.org/
 
Aren't invaders from Mexico already using them to violate our airspace?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/08/19/drone-used-in-mexico-to-smuggle-13-pounds-meth-into-us-police-say.html
 
"A cult of institution centered around the caliphate instead of a cult of personality centered around al-Baghdadi".

I agree with the writer. The ideology of radical Islam has always been more important than its leading exponents. That's why getting bin Laden was more for retribution than anything. There's always a replacement in the wings that's ready to step up.

Even groups like ISIS will be outlived by the ideology they espouse. It's going to be a long struggle.

Hey, that is exactly what President Obama said, "it's going to be a long struggle," generational, ironic how suddenly a lot of conservatives are now recognizing and endorsing his thoughts and policies
 
Hey, that is exactly what President Obama said, "it's going to be a long struggle," generational, ironic how suddenly a lot of conservatives are now recognizing and endorsing his thoughts and policies

I don't see an endorsement of Obama's utterances anywhere in this thread, anchovies.

I also don't see any evidence that your little god allegedly made this supposed statement.

Cite it, or bite it. :rofl2:
 
Hey, that is exactly what President Obama said, "it's going to be a long struggle," generational, ironic how suddenly a lot of conservatives are now recognizing and endorsing his thoughts and policies
that's a pretty safe attribution by Obama on the Long War. I mean it's obvious enough.

The problem with Obama is he didn't hit ISIS when it was nascent- crossing into Iraq.
A simple strafing would have done a lot.
That of course and his refusal to blame Islam itself for "radical Islamic terrorism"
 
I don't see an endorsement of Obama's utterances anywhere in this thread, anchovies.

I also don't see any evidence that your little god allegedly made this supposed statement.

Cite it, or bite it. :rofl2:

"Now, it will take time to eradicate a cancer like ISIL"

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/10/politics/transcript-obama-syria-isis-speech/index.html

Now so I have to explain the metaphor?

Cracks you up how this one requests documentation, the king of generalizations wants proof, beautiful
 
that's a pretty safe attribution by Obama on the Long War.


I knew it was, and Obama wasn't wrong when he said that. I'm trying to teach anchovies some basic rules of debate.

BTW, anchovies, now you can say you saw an endorsement of what Obama said in this instance.
 
Hey, that is exactly what President Obama said, "it's going to be a long struggle," generational, ironic how suddenly a lot of conservatives are now recognizing and endorsing his thoughts and policies

I was saying it when Obama was a junior state senator from Illinois.

Back then liberals were searching for a 'root cause'.
 
That was before his dismissive "JV" remark. Do you think liberals like to quote that one these days?

Nope lol.

But 16 years after 9-11 they still think there's a root cause to radical Islam. That's like saying there's a 'root cause' to Nazism or Communism.

They've spent 16 years looking for something that's not there.
 
Back
Top