Skip to main content

Dubbed the "Shi'ite Zarqawi" by some media who compare his taste for violence to that of the late Sunni al Qaeda leader in Iraq, Abu Deraa said such labels did not bother him: "We all know that the media who call me this name themselves created Zarqawi and the media are a mouthpiece for the occupation." "Have you ever seen me slaughter people like the criminals? Have you ever seen me make car bombs and place them in markets?" he said. "Have you ever seen me forcing families from their homes..? You have seen me resisting the occupier. "If someone who resists the occupation is a terrorist, then use whatever name you like -- God is watching from on high." Thursday November 16,2005 http://today.reuters.com

Abu Deraa "Father Shield" from fish market worker to Public Enemy Number One. Surrounded by death, three of his sons captured, another lost his hand in a raid. The reason I call attention to this particular article is because of the undertone. In fact, the US presence on the ground is the ONLY cause for such a broad insurgency. Here we have a local fishmonger joining the fray. Certainly, Al Anbar will be a hotbed for foreign fighters who will clash with what ever remnants the US decides to leave by in its so called "non-permanent" bases. In Baghdad, I believe and I ask you Kos folks to weigh in, that by leaving we reduce the tension in the neighborhoods and we force the Iraqi's to deal with internal strife. While for at least an interim period we maintain 3-5 launching points for rapid reaction force support. We need a plan. I look forward to THE plan.

Originally posted to Keuka on Thu Nov 16, 2006 at 08:01 AM PST.

Poll

Is it possible to be called a terrorist and really be a freedom fighter?

42%8 votes
36%7 votes
21%4 votes

| 19 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Freedom Fighter? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mikecan1978, jiffypop

    While I think our being there is adding to the violence, calling this man a freedom fighter is wrong, IMO.  He's a terrorist.

    Its just another day, and I'm still breathing...

    by Barbara Morrill on Thu Nov 16, 2006 at 08:07:06 AM PST

  •  If he attacks (0+ / 0-)

    military targets and not intentionally civilians he could be a freedom fighter.  Otherwise a terrorist.

  •  Sure. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    esquimaux

    I see Bush as a terrorist; other terrorists like Cheney see him as a freedom fighter.

  •  Drills to the skulls of humans = freedom fighter? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Samulayo, Mikecan1978, jiffypop, elie

    He's not a freedom fighter you idiot.  He's a fucking murderer.  He leads perhaps the most notorious death squad in all of Iraq. His preferred method of torture/death is to use a drill to the skull.

    OK, let me get this right, so if a person stops a bus, goes on board and separates sunni from shia, then executes one by one the sunni's, he's a freedom fighter?

    Every murderer or tyrant has some bullshit sob story.  I'm sure he'd be glad to see that people outside Iraq are buying his bullshit.

    Freedom fighters don't attack civilians.

    We have long made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the President when it comes to the rights of our citizens. - U.S. Supreme Court, 2004

    by RyneSandberg on Thu Nov 16, 2006 at 08:31:36 AM PST

  •  freedom is an objective; terror is a means. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eiron, elie

    A terrorist freedom fighter, then, is a possibility.  As a terrorist, however, she should be condemned.

    Terrorism is

    not hard to recognize; we can safely avoid postmodernist arguments about knowledge and truth. Terrorism is the deliberate killing of innocent people, at random, in order to spread fear through a whole population and force the hand of its political leaders. But this is a definition that best fits the terrorism of a national liberation or revolutionary movement (the Irish Republican Army, the Algerian National Liberation Front [FLN], the Palestine Liberation Organization, the Basque Separatist Movement, and so on). There is also state terrorism, commonly used by authoritarian and totalitarian governments against their own people, to spread fear and make political opposition impossible: the Argentine “disappearances” are a useful example. And, finally, there is war terrorism: the effort to kill civilians in such large numbers that their government is forced to surrender. Hiroshima seems to me the classic case. The common element is the targeting of people who are, in both the military and political senses, noncombatants: not soldiers, not public officials, just ordinary people. And they aren’t killed incidentally in the course of actions aimed elsewhere; they are killed intentionally.

    Michael Walzer, Five Questions About Terrorism.

    "My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." Carl Schurz

    by another American on Thu Nov 16, 2006 at 08:39:35 AM PST

  •  That's nonsense (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mikecan1978, jiffypop, elie, RyneSandberg

    A "freedom fighter" does not kill his own fellow citizens who are trying to teach schools, deliver food, and patrol the streets.

    •  Yes!.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      elie

      and doesn't drill holes into the heads of living humans, many as young as 14.

      We have long made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the President when it comes to the rights of our citizens. - U.S. Supreme Court, 2004

      by RyneSandberg on Thu Nov 16, 2006 at 08:46:48 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Indecency of war (0+ / 0-)

        War is not humane, if you stand in the fog of it, no morality binds you, rules of engagement shatter in the distance as you are lowered in to the combat zone, survival, fear, death are all you notice.

        •  What's your point? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          elie

          Soldiers (those who are not war criminals) do not kill civilians by drilling holes in their skulls.  they also do not kill teachers for "colloborating with the enemy."  

          And certainly there is morality even in war.  It may be brutal but it is not a license to kill, rape, and mutilate indiscriminantly (or more accurately, very discriminatly by targeting a specific ethnic/religious group).

    •  agree, what about a soldier (0+ / 0-)
  •  this looks suspicious (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mikecan1978, jiffypop, elie

    (just saying)

    the democratic party has taken back the legislature... now who will take back the democratic party?

    by danthrax on Thu Nov 16, 2006 at 08:47:57 AM PST

  •  What a heroic freedom fighter this man is (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mikecan1978, jiffypop, elie

    Abu Deraa's trademark method of killing is a drill through the skull rather than a sword to the neck, but his work rate is just as prolific as the former al-Qaeda leader's and shows the same diabolical artistry.

    In the past year, he and his followers are thought to have murdered thousands of Sunnis, their victims' bodies symbolically dumped in road craters left by al-Qaeda car bombs.

    "We are proud of leaders like Abu Deraa," said Hassan Allami, 25, a fighter with the Shia cleric Moqtada al Sadr's Mehdi army, which Abu Deraa quit earlier this year to form his own faction. "His drills destroy the crazy minds of the Sunnis."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/...

    One man's sick mass murdering terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    sigh.

  •  the whole (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jiffypop, PaulGaskin

    "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" argument is a valid and useful one to have, especially in a climate where the vice president says shit like "vote for democrats if you want the terrorists to win!"

    a good example?  the zapatistas in mexico.  this?  this is sick.  this man targets civilians for religious reasons. you undermine the legitimacy of your own question by even asking if it can be applied to this man.

    •  I don't think we know anything about this man (0+ / 0-)

      regardless of what the article says.

      Our media has been so used and abused by the Pentagon psyops team, I don't think any of us can claim we actually know anything about this man.

      Be the alien you want to see in the world.

      by PaulGaskin on Thu Nov 16, 2006 at 10:07:41 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  EXACTLY MY POINT THANKS!!!!!!! (0+ / 0-)

        You say tomatoe I say TOE MATO. My terrorist your freedom fighter your freedom fighter my terrorist.  PERSPECTIVE.

        •  not everything is relative (0+ / 0-)

          really.  there is such thing as right and wrong. generally, i put killing people in the "wrong" category.  would you seriously think i was anything but nuts if i were to claim that hitler is my hero for fighting for my freedom from jewish oppression? could you really just chalk that up to "perspective?"

          so abu deraa has been made a "freedom fighter" by circumstance.  his sons are captured and he lost his hand.  ok, so what of the people who have lost loved ones to his actions?  have we made them freedom fighters too?  what about bush, if i locked up jenna and barbara and blew up his hand, would that justify his actions.  great!  lets all go freedom fight eachother to pieces!

          surely osama bin laden is considered a freedom fighter by many.  but those people are WRONG. osama bin laden is a terrorist.  period, end of story.  and yes, the word terrorist will always have a politically convienient definition.  that is the nature of politics, international conflicts, and language itself.  none of this means that the defintition of terrorist is all relative and perspective.

          im not saying that this is not something you should be thinking about, or that you shouldn't think critically about what the media has told you about an enemy, or that you shouldn't try to understand the perspective of the other side.  im saying that if you are going to try to draw a distinction, then chose and example where there is actually a, well, distinction.  

          the only facts you provided in this diary were that his sons were captured and he has lost a hand.  well, many people have endured far worse in the history of the world and risen from the ashes to try to make the world a better place.  this man has stepped up to try to make the world a worse place.  he's no freedom fighter.

          •  purpose (0+ / 0-)

            for being on Kos may differ.  I am looking for feedback.  Thus I use a contrast and wait for opinion.  You have a very strong opinion and it makes sense. I am not the provider of news, rather the miner of opinion.

  •  Your diary low on facts. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elie

    And was not written very effectively. I have no idea about the specific guy you've brought up.

    You bring up an important question.

    It is true that most fighters in Iraq resist simply because they don't want to be occupied.

    It is true that Bush has been regularly accusing all who resist the occupation of being terrorists.

    It is true that if America were a small country which had just been invaded by a really large muslim superpower, Americans would fight the occupation just as the Iraqis are fighting occupation.

    Be the alien you want to see in the world.

    by PaulGaskin on Thu Nov 16, 2006 at 09:53:49 AM PST

    •  Actually, the article is interesting for another (0+ / 0-)

      reason: the story specifically cites an Iraqi who is aware of the Zarqawi psyop campaign.

      He seems to be aware of the mission objective of some US-backed forces to politically divide Sunnis and Shiites.

      Be the alien you want to see in the world.

      by PaulGaskin on Thu Nov 16, 2006 at 09:57:16 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'd like a link to the article, if possible. n/t (0+ / 0-)

        Be the alien you want to see in the world.

        by PaulGaskin on Thu Nov 16, 2006 at 09:59:19 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Sadr himself has called Zarqawi a CIA agent (0+ / 0-)

        that was brought to Iraq to justify the US presence and who was killing Shia at the behest of Washington.

        That said I would take anything these people say with a grain of salt.

        •  Zarqawi a CIA agent!?! HA! (0+ / 0-)

          Zarqawi had been a militant jihadist for 20 years before coming to Iraq to commit more jihad.  

          That's a ridiculous idea.

          We have long made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the President when it comes to the rights of our citizens. - U.S. Supreme Court, 2004

          by RyneSandberg on Thu Nov 16, 2006 at 10:25:27 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Zarqawi captured elsewhere and placed? (0+ / 0-)

            Is this a possible scenario?  Could the presence of the dead Zaqqawi after months of blaming a civil war on the presence of Al Qaeda he was killed an shown to be "captured." Some say he was never in Iraq.

            PURE SPECULATION AND NO FACTS TO SUPPORT.

    •  Paul, what would you do if (0+ / 0-)

      the war was in your neighborhood? Lets assume you can get no job and only the local militia can sustain supply lines.  You being of a certain age and religion according to the militia owe them your service.  Thus you participate.  You become your worst nightmare.  Yoou see and do things you could never of even imagined.  War is disgusting.  The line between freedom fighter and terrorist is PERSPECTIVE.

      These perspectives and the cultural undertones will lead to the greater understanding necessary to leave Iraq.  We in fact create a need for "freedom" whether you perceive it as such.  In fact men like him are forced to do more desperate things everyday in the fog of war.  Sad, but true.

      War is not moral it is more evil than the TV every depicts.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site