Bombings in Yemeni mosques kill more than 130

[Lite Beer]

Bombings in Yemeni mosques kill more than 130
By AHMED AL-HAJ

ADEN, Yemen (AP) — Suicide bombers attacked a pair of mosques Friday in the Yemeni capital, unleashing monstrous blasts that ripped through worshippers and killed 137 people in the deadliest assault yet targeting Shiite rebels who have taken over large parts of the rapidly fragmenting nation. At least 13 children were among the dead.

A purported affiliate of the Islamic State group claimed responsibility for the bombings, which also wounded 357 people — raising the alarming possibility the extremist group has expanded its presence to Yemen after already setting up a branch in Libya. Earlier this week, the group claimed responsibility for a bloody attack on Western tourists in Tunisia that authorities said was carried out by militants trained in Libya.

If the claim is true — and the U.S. expressed skepticism — Friday's attacks would be the first by the Islamic State group in Yemen, adding a frightening new layer to the country's turmoil.

Shiite rebels known as Houthis have taken over the capital, Sanaa, and nine of the country's 21 provinces over the past six months, raising fears of a civil war tinged with sectarianism. The government of the internationally backed president, Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, has fled to the southern port city of Aden.

Yemen is already home to the most powerful branch of the al-Qaida network, which has been battling the Houthis for months. On Friday, al-Qaida militants seized control of a southern provincial capital, al-Houta, in the group's most dramatic grab of territory in years. However, it denied carrying out the mosque bombings, citing instructions from the terror network's leader, Ayman al-Zawahri, not to strike mosques or markets.

Friday's blasts left scenes of bloody devastation in the Badr and al-Hashoosh mosques, located across town from each other in Sanaa. Both mosques are controlled by the Shiite Houthis, but they are also frequented by Sunni worshippers.

Images from the scene showed a number of children among the dead. In footage from the al-Hashoosh mosque, screaming volunteers were seen using bloodied blankets to carry away victims as a small child lay among the dead on the mosque floor.

"Blood was running like a river," said one survivor, Mohammed al-Ansi, who said he was thrown six feet by one of the blasts at the Hashoosh mosque, where the floor was strewn with body parts.

The mosques were targeted by two suicide bombers each during midday prayers, when large crowds turn out to attend weekly sermons. The state news agency SABA put the toll at 137 dead and 357 wounded. Among the dead were 13 children, according to the Interior Ministry. A prominent Shiite cleric, al-Murtada al-Mansouri, and two senior Houthi leaders were also killed, the rebel-owned Al-Masirah TV channel said.

It also reported that a fifth suicide bomb attack on another mosque was foiled in the northern city of Saada — a Houthi stronghold.

In the Badr mosque, the first bomber was caught by guards searching worshippers at the gate, where he managed to detonate his device. In the ensuing panic, a second bomber entered the mosque and blew himself up amid the crowd, according to the official news agency SABA.

"I fell on the ground and when I regained consciousness I found myself lying in a lake of blood," one survivor, Ahmed al-Gabri, told The Associated Press. Two worshippers next to him were killed in the explosions and another died when one of the mosque's glass chandeliers fell on him, al-Gabri said.

Another survivor, Sadek al-Harithi, said the explosions were like "an earthquake where I felt the ground split and swallow everyone."

If Friday's bombings were carried out by Islamic State group supporters, it could be intended as a dramatic signal to al-Qaida, the group's rival — effectively a challenge over turf. That raises the possibility of intra-jihadi fighting as the two compete for recruits by showing who can unleash the worst bloodshed.

In its claim of responsibility, an alleged Islamic State affiliate calling itself "Sanaa Province" warned of an "upcoming flood" of attacks targeting the Houthi rebels. "The soldiers of the Islamic State ... will not rest until we have uprooted" the Houthis, it said. The claim could not be independently confirmed and did not give concrete proof of IS involvement.

The statement was posted on the same web bulletin board where the Islamic State claimed responsibility for Wednesday's deadly attack on a museum in Tunisia.

In Washington, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the U.S. had seen no indications of an operational link between the Islamic State group and Friday's attacks. He said the U.S. was investigating to see whether the IS branch in Yemen has the command-and-control structure in place to substantiate its claim of responsibility.

Earnest said it was plausible that IS was falsely claiming responsibility. "It does appear that these kinds of claims are often made for a perception that it benefits their propaganda efforts," Earnest said.

Late Friday, Bernadette Meehan, a spokeswoman for the White House's National Security Council, said the U.S condemns the attacks and also condemns airstrikes Thursday that targeted the Yemeni president. The airstrikes by forces loyal to Yemen's former president missed his palace and Hadi was unharmed.

In recent months, there have been several online statements by individual Yemeni militants declaring allegiance to the Islamic State group. The IS leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, formally accepted their oaths and declared a "province" of IS in Yemen in November.

He and his deputies in Iraq have vowed to strike against the Houthis in Yemen. That has raised questions whether direct operational links have also arisen. For example, in Libya, where IS also declared official "provinces," fighters and officials are known to have been sent from the group's core to build the local branch.

It also has fomented a rivalry with al-Qaida, with IS leaders mocking the terror network for failing to stop Houthi advances in Yemen. Al-Qaida has denounced the IS declaration of a caliphate in areas of Iraq and Syria under its control and accuses the group of "driving a wedge" among jihadis.

In a further sign of the country's chaos, al-Qaida's branch of the country took control of the southern city of al-Houta on Friday, Yemeni security officials said. Al-Qaida militants driving pickup trucks and flying black flags swept through the city, which is the capital of Lahj province. They took over the main security barracks, the governor's office, and the intelligence headquarters, which houses prisons with al-Qaida detainees, the officials said.

Most of the security forces in the city — loyalists of former President Ali Abdullah Saleh — surrendered to the militants without resistance. The militants killed 21 members of the security forces who resisted at the governor's office, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.

-- (c) Associated Press 2015-03-21

[Rancid]

Yemen, another US middle east success story after pumping in half a billion dollars of war material. Maybe the indiscriminate drone strikes failed to win hearts?

So the bombing outrage was against the faction that ousted the US puppet regime. The various Muslim factions are now killing more of each other than the West was. Which country was it again that suggested that policy?

[tartempion]

This has nothing to do with Islam religion.

[Credo]

It has even less to do with the US, but that hasn't stopped anyone.

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

When the top 5 members of the UN are also the 5 largest weapons manufacturers (arms dealers) on the planet, there is no incentive to ever stop the global war machine. They talk the talk, tell us what they think we want to hear, then they go and arm ever side to the teeth and play innocent. The next step is to keep fear alive so everyone buys into it.

The rich get richer and innocent civilians pay the ultimate price.

How is it that with all this (bogus) effort that goes into so called peace keeping that the world is in more turmoil than it has been since WW2?

[Credo]

Is somebody keeping the peace in Yemen?

Edited March 21, 2015 by Credo

[JingerBen]

This has nothing to do with Islam religion.

It has everything to do with "Islam religion."

The debacle in Yemen - and Libya - is the latest evidence that the US and its "allies" are being sidelined.

The new dynamic is between the Shiites led by Iran and the Sunnis led by the Islamic State.

American military involvement has been a disaster and has only made things worse.

[arjunadawn]

I spent some time in Yemen, in Saana, training their counter terrorism unit. Besides them being the most incapable bunch of men I had ever worked with; daily they stole equipment (though this was not unusual- Ali Baba and the 40 Theives- it was illustrative). It was such a mess. You see, the millions in explosives, bullets, weapons, guns, vests, armor, etc., that we were training them with to be a national CT asset were going to be left to them in any event. It was going to be their's, under the US State Department Anti Terrorism program (Dept Diplomatic Security).

What was obvious was a palpable antiquity to their thinking, their way of dealing with others, the society, the infrastructure... everything. It was only slightly more advanced than Kabul, placing Saana in roughly the 13th century. This was our partner. This was the limit of our intervention. We were a small team training groups of 20 or 30. How was that ever going to be enough to stem what was already a palpable threat, AQ in the Arabian Peninsula? The Iranian influenced takeover was likely green-lighted to counter AQAP.

Reading this above piece the US objects... Ha! the US objects because it needs to sustain the cognitive dissonance until it reaches a crescendo of incredulous outrage by all the people. As Obama continues to caliphate build he continues to tell everyone up is down and left is right. We all know this is nonsensical but our recourse seems so limited- and DAESH/IS et al advances. Soon, there will be contiguous swaths of land encircling US allies and Israel and non contiguous infections from Nigeria to Pakistan, etc. The US is directly facilitating this debacle under the premise of a bipolar middle east, Iran and a Caliphate. It will be in short time, not long, that those who agree with me will be vindicated, sadly. The US is building the caliphate intentionally.

[Docno]

This has nothing to do with Islam religion.

It has everything to do with "Islam religion."

The debacle in Yemen - and Libya - is the latest evidence that the US and its "allies" are being sidelined.

The new dynamic is between the Shiites led by Iran and the Sunnis led by the Islamic State.

American military involvement has been a disaster and has only made things worse.

If it were that simple--Sunni versus Shi'a--then ISIS wouldn't be going after westerners as well. The attack in Yemen was against mostly western tourists. And you have countless other attacks and hostage-takings targeting westerners. ISIS wants to set up a Sunni caliphate. That means Shiite Muslims are the enemy because they are seen as heretics but westerners who would refuse to submit to the caliphate are also the enemy.

Things don't get much more complex than this. In this conflict, Syria and Iran are the natural allies of the west, but few people want to get into bed with them. Then again, the western democracies had to ally themselves with the Soviets to defeat the Nazis, so there is a precedent. But then remember how things turned out after the common enemy (the Axis) was defeated... a vacuum was created which the former allies rushed to fill and in doing so became mortal enemies overnight. Have we learned our lessons?

[Credo]

This has nothing to do with Islam religion.

It has everything to do with "Islam religion."

The debacle in Yemen - and Libya - is the latest evidence that the US and its "allies" are being sidelined.

The new dynamic is between the Shiites led by Iran and the Sunnis led by the Islamic State.

American military involvement has been a disaster and has only made things worse.

If it were that simple--Sunni versus Shi'a--then ISIS wouldn't be going after westerners as well. The attack in Yemen was against mostly western tourists. And you have countless other attacks and hostage-takings targeting westerners. ISIS wants to set up a Sunni caliphate. That means Shiite Muslims are the enemy because they are seen as heretics but westerners who would refuse to submit to the caliphate are also the enemy.

Things don't get much more complex than this. In this conflict, Syria and Iran are the natural allies of the west, but few people want to get into bed with them. Then again, the western democracies had to ally themselves with the Soviets to defeat the Nazis, so there is a precedent. But then remember how things turned out after the common enemy (the Axis) was defeated... a vacuum was created which the former allies rushed to fill and in doing so became mortal enemies overnight. Have we learned our lessons?

I don't think the attack in Yemen was against tourists. I don't think there are a lot of tourists in Yemen these days.

ISIS is not a Shia vs. Sunni conflict, it is a a particular brand of Sunni with a particular ideology against everyone else, Shia, and other infidels.

[Bwanatickey]

Yemen , no oil there, so what is the problem.

Nervous neighbours.

[Steely Dan]

This has nothing to do with Islam religion.

It has everything to do with "Islam religion."

The debacle in Yemen - and Libya - is the latest evidence that the US and its "allies" are being sidelined.

The new dynamic is between the Shiites led by Iran and the Sunnis led by the Islamic State.

American military involvement has been a disaster and has only made things worse.

If it were that simple--Sunni versus Shi'a--then ISIS wouldn't be going after westerners as well. The attack in Yemen was against mostly western tourists. And you have countless other attacks and hostage-takings targeting westerners. ISIS wants to set up a Sunni caliphate. That means Shiite Muslims are the enemy because they are seen as heretics but westerners who would refuse to submit to the caliphate are also the enemy.

Things don't get much more complex than this. In this conflict, Syria and Iran are the natural allies of the west, but few people want to get into bed with them. Then again, the western democracies had to ally themselves with the Soviets to defeat the Nazis, so there is a precedent. But then remember how things turned out after the common enemy (the Axis) was defeated... a vacuum was created which the former allies rushed to fill and in doing so became mortal enemies overnight. Have we learned our lessons?

I don't think the attack in Yemen was against tourists. I don't think there are a lot of tourists in Yemen these days.

ISIS is not a Shia vs. Sunni conflict, it is a a particular brand of Sunni with a particular ideology against everyone else, Shia, and other infidels.

It is indeed a Sunni counterpart to the apocalyptic Shia end of world theologians who rule Iran.

So how does a policy of enabling the two of them and starting a nuclear arms race between them sound? What could possibly go wrong. According to the book of Daniel the antichrist will be seen in both Iraq and Libya, not that I'm religious, but who would fit the bill there?

[sirineou]

When the top 5 members of the UN are also the 5 largest weapons manufacturers (arms dealers) on the planet, there is no incentive to ever stop the global war machine. They talk the talk, tell us what they think we want to hear, then they go and arm ever side to the teeth and play innocent. The next step is to keep fear alive so everyone buys into it.

The rich get richer and innocent civilians pay the ultimate price.

How is it that with all this (bogus) effort that goes into so called peace keeping that the world is in more turmoil than it has been since WW2?

as counter intuitive as it might sound, percentage wise, as a percentage of the worlds population affected by violence, we are living in the most peaceful era in Human history.

"WEDNESDAY, JAN 15, 2014 08:50 AM EST

We’re living through the “most peaceful era” in human history — with one big exception The world at large enjoys unprecedented peace, according to a new study. But religious conflicts are on the rise"

http://www.salon.com/2014/01/15/were_living_through_the_most_peaceful_era_in_human_history_%E2%80%94%C2%A0with_one_big_exception_partner/

[NeverSure]

The one thing that deceived people have in common is that they don't know they are deceived.

How ANYONE could support Islamists in the face of the horror they present to the world can be understood by me only by that fact.

[sirineou]

The one thing that deceived people have in common is that they don't know they are deceived.

How ANYONE could support Islamists in the face of the horror they present to the world can be understood by me only by that fact.

"The one thing that deceived people have in common is that they don't know they are deceived."

How else would some one be deceived? in essence you are saying that the one thing that deceived people have in common is that they are deceived.

now let me ask you a question, is it possible that you are being deceived and you dont know it?

or is it that if you were deceived you would know it there fore you would not be deceived?

[Credo]

The one thing that deceived people have in common is that they don't know they are deceived.

How ANYONE could support Islamists in the face of the horror they present to the world can be understood by me only by that fact.

I am not sure who is supporting Islamists?

[Linky]

I don't support terrorists but I support Islamists against people that are too simple to know the difference.

[sirineou]

I don't support terrorists but I support Islamists against people that are too simple to know the difference.

I am an Atheist and have no love lost for religion, any religion, but I am inclined to agree with LInky

[NeverSure]

I don't support terrorists but I support Islamists against people that are too simple to know the difference.

Associated Press definition of Islamist:

"An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam."

So you support that and I believe you.

LINK

[sirineou]

I don't support terrorists but I support Islamists against people that are too simple to know the difference.

Associated Press definition of Islamist:

"An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam."

So you support that and I believe you.

LINK

You seem to have missed a crucial sentence

" "An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam. Do not use as a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals, who may or may not be Islamists."

[NeverSure]

I don't support terrorists but I support Islamists against people that are too simple to know the difference.

Associated Press definition of Islamist:

"An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam."

So you support that and I believe you.

LINK

You seem to have missed a crucial sentence

" "An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam. Do not use as a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals, who may or may not be Islamists."

I didn't miss it at all nor did I use it in that sense. I correctly quoted and called it:

"An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam."

Someone said he supported Islamists and I pointed out the definition according to the AP.

[sirineou]

I don't support terrorists but I support Islamists against people that are too simple to know the difference.

Associated Press definition of Islamist:

"An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam."

So you support that and I believe you.

LINK

You seem to have missed a crucial sentence

" "An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam. Do not use as a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals, who may or may not be Islamists."

I didn't miss it at all nor did I use it in that sense. I correctly quoted and called it:

"An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam."

Someone said he supported Islamists and I pointed out the definition according to the AP.

But he also said that he does not support terrorists, and the Ap definition also says

" Do not use as a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals, who may or may not be Islamists." a terrorist would fit that definition,

can some one engaging in un-Islamic behavior be an Islamist?

[simple1]

But he also said that he does not support terrorists, and the Ap definition also says

I don't support terrorists but I support Islamists against people that are too simple to know the difference.

Associated Press definition of Islamist:

"An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam."

So you support that and I believe you.

LINK

You seem to have missed a crucial sentence

" "An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam. Do not use as a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals, who may or may not be Islamists."

I didn't miss it at all nor did I use it in that sense. I correctly quoted and called it:

"An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam."

Someone said he supported Islamists and I pointed out the definition according to the AP.

" Do not use as a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals, who may or may not be Islamists." a terrorist would fit that definition,

can some one engaging in un-Islamic behavior be an Islamist?

Post removed to enable response.

You may like to have a read of the content at the URL below.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/qasim-rashid/calling-isis-unislamic-is_b_6730702.html

Also an analysis of the current Yemeni Civil War.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/21/Yemen-s-Civil-War-Forges-Unholy-Alliance-Between-al-Qaeda-and-ISIS

[sirineou]

But he also said that he does not support terrorists, and the Ap definition also says

Associated Press definition of Islamist:

"An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam."

So you support that and I believe you.

LINK

You seem to have missed a crucial sentence

" "An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam. Do not use as a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals, who may or may not be Islamists."

I didn't miss it at all nor did I use it in that sense. I correctly quoted and called it:

"An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam."

Someone said he supported Islamists and I pointed out the definition according to the AP.

" Do not use as a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals, who may or may not be Islamists." a terrorist would fit that definition,

can some one engaging in un-Islamic behavior be an Islamist?

Post removed to enable response.

You may like to have a read of the content at the URL below.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/qasim-rashid/calling-isis-unislamic-is_b_6730702.html

Also an analysis of the current Yemeni Civil War.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/21/Yemen-s-Civil-War-Forges-Unholy-Alliance-Between-al-Qaeda-and-ISIS

Removed post to allow response

Thank you Simple1

A comprehensive, to the point, linear progressive logic, following the facts, analysis of the issue by Rashid,

but I am afraid contains too many words, some of them big, and no pictures, Thus not useful against those who have no logic and never let the facts get in the way of a good argument.

[arjunadawn]

I spent some time in Yemen, in Saana, training their counter terrorism unit. Besides them being the most incapable bunch of men I had ever worked with; daily they stole equipment (though this was not unusual- Ali Baba and the 40 Theives- it was illustrative). It was such a mess. You see, the millions in explosives, bullets, weapons, guns, vests, armor, etc., that we were training them with to be a national CT asset were going to be left to them in any event. It was going to be their's, under the US State Department Anti Terrorism program (Dept Diplomatic Security).

What was obvious was a palpable antiquity to their thinking, their way of dealing with others, the society, the infrastructure... everything. It was only slightly more advanced than Kabul, placing Saana in roughly the 13th century. This was our partner. This was the limit of our intervention. We were a small team training groups of 20 or 30. How was that ever going to be enough to stem what was already a palpable threat, AQ in the Arabian Peninsula? The Iranian influenced takeover was likely green-lighted to counter AQAP.

Reading this above piece the US objects... Ha! the US objects because it needs to sustain the cognitive dissonance until it reaches a crescendo of incredulous outrage by all the people. As Obama continues to caliphate build he continues to tell everyone up is down and left is right. We all know this is nonsensical but our recourse seems so limited- and DAESH/IS et al advances. Soon, there will be contiguous swaths of land encircling US allies and Israel and non contiguous infections from Nigeria to Pakistan, etc. The US is directly facilitating this debacle under the premise of a bipolar middle east, Iran and a Caliphate. It will be in short time, not long, that those who agree with me will be vindicated, sadly. The US is building the caliphate intentionally.

I would like to clarify a statement I made above that does seem at first disparaging: "Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves." This positively looks biased and inappropriate. Why would someone say this unless painting with very broad brush? There are different perceptions about stealing and lying as there are in the West. One could say someone is "stealing" and "lying" but this is a Western value and misses the point. It is perfectly acceptable in tribal and later islamic culture to change your story, your position, indeed your word, treaty, etc., if a better opportunity comes along. Having said that there is actually not a whole lot of authority for stealing from other muslims; except perhaps from non muslims. So, this is the background, what is the observation?

It began in Saana when we noticed equipment missing (it was their equipment that we daily controlled for training and secured and accounted to teach them how and to ensure no theft). More than one, when confronted, would shrug shoulders, smile, turn the head and say (so their peers could hear) "Ali Baba." What? No kidding. Later, in Iraq, this same thing was repeated variously by numerous people who stole different things. For example, one day an automobile was leaving the gate (all vehicles had to be checked). We had noticed for some time 9mm ammo was missing but there were very few glocks out there yet and 9mm was expensive. A car came to the gate rattling and scratching like a belly-dancing hooker in a china shop. <deleted>? They had removed the tires and filled the tires with 9mm ammo, reset the tires and were rolling out with tens of thousands of rounds. When caught they said "Ali Baba!" and smiled. I have also heard this same thing in Jordan, UAE, and oddly enough in Rawalpindi! Go figure.

So, now there is a full scale projection of shia influence and the very next step will be seeding minority shia further in sunni GCC countries. There is certainly enough shia projection to now leverage the sunni, irrespective of them knowing exactly how this all came to pass- it is here. One of the things that will mitigate leverages the sunni toward an end they dont necessarily want will be the "shia spring" which will be shortly fomenting in GCC. Why would the sunni need to be leveraged? Well, they need to be a "mark" much the way a magician might dupe someone until the shia actually do acquire regional parity, not with the sunni, but with Israel. At that point the sunni will most certainly agree or unwittingly fall in line into the caliphate that is also being formed right beneath their noses, indeed, with their endorsement under the pretense its a counterweight to Iranian hegemony. The game that Obama is playing has horrific results. There is no way this can turn out well. None! All the pieces above will come to pass, but perhaps not in this sequence. It is stunningly obvious the goal is a bipolar middle east.

[siampolee]

Well after reading your posts and just how you were involved in training these people in the art of warfare I must ask a simple question.which needs a simple shortanswer, either yes or no.

No high blown rhetoric to divert away from the question just a short answer..

Do you not consider that your paymasters and indeed yourself and your fellow trainers( possibly unwittingly) have in some way whether you like to admit it or not have actually helped these people to further their own ends to the cost of others peoples freedoms religious and otherwise?

[Steely Dan]

Oh the Irony, the dead in the Yemeni Mosque were in the middle,of chanting death to America, death to Israel when they met the grim reaper at the hands of their co-religionists.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/03/yemen-at-time-of-mosque-bombing-worshippers-were-chanting-death-to-america

[Linky]

Oh the Irony, the dead in the Yemeni Mosque were in the middle,of chanting death to America, death to Israel when they met the grim reaper at the hands of their co-religionists.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/03/yemen-at-time-of-mosque-bombing-worshippers-were-chanting-death-to-america

Really? I mean really you believe that?

So who survived the bombing to say that is what they were chanting?

Do you realize muslims don't chant, they recite. The recital may sound like a chant or a song but it is the way the words are to be pronounced. But you knew that. ?

[Linky]

Oh the Irony, the dead in the Yemeni Mosque were in the middle,of chanting death to America, death to Israel when they met the grim reaper at the hands of their co-religionists.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/03/yemen-at-time-of-mosque-bombing-worshippers-were-chanting-death-to-america

Really? I mean really you believe that?

So who survived the bombing to say that is what they were chanting?

Do you realize muslims don't chant, they recite. The recital may sound like a chant or a song but it is the way the words are to be pronounced. But you knew that. ?

Many did...and yes it is chanting not reciting.

We are not talking koranic verses here, we're talking slogans

The Yemen is going into full scale civil war.

It was at manageable level for a number of years, banditry etc but the bombing is a game-changer

Potentially a false-flag but we'll never know.

Don't think it was a false flag, I have little doubt who it was.

So if they were 'chanting' death to America then what is the issue? Good riddance to them.

I don't apologise for terrorists being killed. But I don't like all Muslims being thought of as terrorists as that is not the case, it is a minor amount and usually from the Middle East.

The Bible has bad things in it but those Christians that don't follow it word for word are not thought of as bad Christians, they are thought of as good Christians.

But apparently on here that does not apply to Muslims.