Mohammed Fazi, beheader, and the other members of the Gitmo 5 *UPDATED*

UPDATE: It’s been Snoped and declared a fake.

UPDATE II:  That it’s a fake doesn’t mean these are good guys.  It’s entirely possible that Mohammad Fazl played a key role in 9/11.

In an earlier post, I showed a picture of Mohammed Fazi, one of the Gitmo 5, happily posed with several severed heads.  Someone asked a good question:  How do I know that’s actually Fazi?  I don’t.  However, someone put together this picture which does seem to lend credence to the claim that released terrorist Fazi is the same person who likes his men short, very short:

Mohammad Fazi and the Gitmo 5

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. says

    Terror is a strategic level resource. It’s not particularly useful on a tactical level. In point of fact, fear of an enemy makes people fight better tactically speaking as it forces people to kill or die, rather than run away (and die too).
     
    Terrorists focus on strategic level concepts because it is often the only way they can offset their tactical disadvantages in marksmanship, firepower, and training. And numbers too.
     
    The US is strategically weak, and this is merely part of an entire long list of strategic problems in US history. The US is strategically weak because people have gotten used to relying on tactical firepower as a crutch. However, for winning wars, strategy is a Higher Level Concept vs tactics. Meaning 5 successful strategies can overcome 50 failed tactics.

  2. qr4j says

    On the Cantor loss:  Generally I like Mr. Cantor.  I was very surprised to learn of his loss when I awoke this morning and checked Drudge before morning ablutions (i.e., actual bathing, not baptism or other ritualistic cleansing).
     
    I wasn’t aware that it was a low-voter turnout for that primary.  For some reason, I was under the impression that it was NOT a low-voter turn-out.  But I may be mistaken.  Either way, given the money Mr. Cantor had at his disposal ($5+ million) compared to Mr. Brat (~$200,000), Mr. Cantor’s supporters should have been able to overtake an upstart Tea Party type with ease.  But they didn’t.
     
    I am weary of the establishment.  Don’t get me wrong, I am a Republican.  Some in my family were Republicans even when they were left parentless back during the Great Depression with hardly more than the clothes on their backs.  My Great Aunt Neoma successfully fought off teacher unionization in Hannibal, MO, back in the 1970s.  She and her sister were grade school teachers who preferred freedom to teach over unions.  “We don’t need to be like Illinois!” or something of the kind was her battle cry.  (Hannibal is just across the Mississippi River from Illinois.)
    But my Republican affiliation has limits.  I cannot tolerate the arrogant, we-know-better-than-you attitudes of those in Washington and Springfield (I am an Illinois native).  I suppose that is why I find people like Sarah Palin so attractive even when I don’t always like their tactics.  I am tired of the BS.
     
    I also don’t like it Republicans who insist on party purity.  I’d rather have a leader who agrees with me 75 percent of the time rather than one who agrees with me 0 percent of the time.  I think Ronald the Great (as in Reagan) would agree.  He was POTUS when I was a kid.  I will always love and respect him.

  3. nacyy says

    Your logo says conservatives deal with facts but you post a picture of Mohammad Fazi then admit you don’t know if it’s really him or not. That should be your logo-conservatives draw conclusions from things they believe could be true but haven’t bothered to verify. BTW, it’s not Fazi.
     

    • says

      I had it presented to me as a fact. I confessed that I had no corroboration. When I had something that looks corroborative I passed it on. And now I’m passing on your completely uncorroborated statement that it’s not Fazi. Transparency us my thing.

      I’m a little unclear about how you think you’re in a position to scold me, when you’ve done exactly the same thing I did — except you appear to believe you’re correct whereas I was always willing to concede I was correctable.

      • nacyy says

        Sorry it came across thatway. My point was, if you say you deal with facts and then draw conclusions, why post the picture at all until you have verified that it is true. People see this stuff but don’t always see the correction a day or two later. Why not be sure of the facts first? 

Leave a Reply