Peaceful Mosque? Legitimate target? It depends who you ask…
Al Jazeera interviewed some locals and a ‘Human Rights Watch’ organization. Can you guess what they had to say?
Some of it was predictable stuff…
Americans are bad people. They had bad intel or – worse – bad motives for destroying this building. It was a ‘peaceful mosque’. During prayer.
Horrible people, those Americans. Right?
They continue to paint their picture of heartless, stupid or simply blundering Americans, this way:
“Our analysis reveals that contrary to US statements, the building targeted was a functioning, recently built mosque containing a large prayer hall, several auxiliary functions and the Imam’s residence,” according to Forensic Architecture. —Al Jazeera
But they kept talking. And they pushed it just a LITTLE too far.
“Even if there were armed group members in the mosque, understanding the nature of the targeted building and the pattern of life around the building would be crucial to assess the risk to civilians and take necessary precautions to minimise civilian casualties,” HRW’s report said.
What’s that?
Even if there WERE armed group members??
That’s an interesting point to add as an afterthought halfway through your article, don’t you think?
Four witnesses that researchers at Human Rights Watch spoke with estimated there were 300 people attending a religious lecture at the mosque when the attack began.
‘attending a religious lecture’.
Considering there is ZERO division between Islam’s religion and politics, how would radicals attending a ‘religious’ lecture be any different from Nazis attending a ‘political’ one?
Would a Nazi rally be a legitimate target? If so, why not this? You’re not singling it out for its religious leanings so much as its violent political ones.
From that same article:
Pentagon spokesman Eric Pahon said at the time of the strike that US surveillance of the target area indicated evening prayers had concluded before the attack.
He said the building that was struck was a “partially constructed community meeting hall” that al-Qaeda leaders used to gather and “as a place to educate and indoctrinate al-Qaeda fighters”.
Keep in mind, we’ve seen ‘mosques’ used as a front or cover for militancy elsewhere:
HEY, POLLYANNA: Check Out The WEAPONS Cache Just Confiscated At MOSQUE
PATRIOTS: Look What Was Found Inside A DAMN Mosque
ALLAHU AK-BOOM: Watch What Russian Cops Do To A Mosque Filled With…
Maybe that explains the responses we had to the question in THIS article:
QUESTION: ISIS Puts Hit On 1000s Of U.S. Churches – Should We Return The Favor?
Can you name a SINGLE other religion with a reputation for using their houses of worship as weapons dumps? No, you probably can’t.
And that’s EXACTLY why the ‘peaceful mosque’ — in a country where entire cities have been reduced to rubble and ash — carries so little weight.
So, which side do YOU Believe? Al Jazeera and a Human Rights watchdog group? Or the Pentagon?
