Interpreting Bin Laden's message
Monday, November 1st, 2004 - 1:59pm
An interesting article on National Review today:
Quote:
The Middle East Media Research Institute is a pretty reliable outfit. Their latest report, if accurate, is an absolute bombshell:The tape of Osama bin Laden that was aired on Al-Jazeera(1) on Friday, October 29th included a specific threat to "each U.S. state," designed to influence the outcome of the upcoming election against George W. Bush. The U.S. media in general mistranslated the words "ay wilaya" (which means "each U.S. state")(2) to mean a "country" or "nation" other than the U.S., while in fact the threat was directed specifically at each individual U.S. state. This suggests some knowledge by bin Laden of the U.S. electoral college system. In a section of his speech in which he harshly criticized George W. Bush, bin Laden stated: "Any U.S. state that does not toy with our security automatically guarantees its own security."
The Islamist website Al-Qal'a explained what this sentence meant: "This message was a warning to every U.S. state separately. When he [Osama Bin Laden] said, 'Every state will be determining its own security, and will be responsible for its choice,' it means that any U.S. state that will choose to vote for the white thug Bush as president has chosen to fight us, and we will consider it our enemy, and any state that will vote against Bush has chosen to make peace with us, and we will not characterize it as an enemy. By this characterization, Sheikh Osama wants to drive a wedge in the American body, to weaken it, and he wants to divide the American people itself between enemies of Islam and the Muslims, and those who fight for us, so that he doesn't treat all American people as if they're the same. This letter will have great implications inside the American society, part of which are connected to the American elections, and part of which are connected to what will come after the elections."(3)
Another interesting aspect of the speech is the fact that while bin Laden made his specific threat to each U.S. state, he also offered an election deal to the American voters, attempting to influence the election by these means rather than influencing it through terrorist attacks.(4) This peace offer is a theme that follows up on his April speech directed to Europe, in which he offered a truce.(5) The Islamist website Al-Islah explains: "Some people ask 'what's new in this tape?' [The answer is that] this tape is the second of its kind, after the previous tape of the Sheikh [Osama bin Laden], in which he offered a truce to the Europeans a few months ago, and it is a completion of this move, and it brings together the complementary elements of politics and religion, political savvy and force, the sword and justice. The Sheikh reminds the West in this tape of the great Islamic civilization and pure Islamic religion, and of Islamic justice..."(6)
Is what MEMRI is saying is accurate, bin Laden promised no attacks against states that vote for the guy running against Bush. And this is what he means by, "Your security is not in the hands of Kerry or Bush or Al-Qa'ida. Your security is in your own hands, and any U.S. state that does not toy with our security automatically guarantees its own security."
Perhaps this was a much more explicit campaign ad than we originally thought.
"It's so much easier to suggest solutions when you don't know too much about the problem." - Malcolm Forbes
I think Bin laden is underestimating the unity America can bring to the table.
Unfortunately, if I slash my wrist with my lightsaber it cauterizes instantly. - PurEvil on emo Star Wars plots.
I am glad Johnny hasn''t concluded it with the jubilant and cheesy ""if bin Laden hates Bush, then apparently Bush is doing the right job!""
The whole interpretation of bin Laden''s threat (if you can call that a threat), is a total B.S., I think. The record of the attack on World Trade Centers in the anti-Bush, Democratic stornghold New York goes too much against the grain for that.
Xbox Live tag Gorilla800lbs
I don''t buy that interpretation, but it is interesting.
The attack in New York happened before the Bush Doctrine, the invasion of Afganistan, the invasion of Iraq, etc. Bush was not on Bin Laden''s radar as anything special until after Bush responded to 9/11.
"It's so much easier to suggest solutions when you don't know too much about the problem." - Malcolm Forbes
Exactly. Which is a way of saying that the 9/11 attacks were aimed not directly at Bush (or his image) but at the American public at large. Which is again what bin Laden seems to be threatening with on his new tape, as it boils down.
Perhaps the [corrupt liberal] media is reading too much into this. Bin Lanen must be understanding voting matter not too well if this is what they''re concluding from this tape. The rah-rah pro-Bush electorate will only be additionally energized by this ""threat"", demanging even more force to be used in whatever conflict their President chose (or chooses) to initiate. Likewise, the dyed-in-the-wool left will only find a reinforcement of their argument that despite whatever Bush claims, he has no idea how to handle the issue of terrorism, latest home video from the alive-and-well Bin Laden being an example. The ""swamp"" will swallow both interpretations and will vote (or not vote at all) based on the last moment impulse anyway.
Xbox Live tag Gorilla800lbs
I honestly don''t care what Laden has to say. The fact that he''s showing up a few days before the election only underscores (to me anyways) the fact that we failed to capture him.
This is kinda like looking for meaning in ""Mein Kampf"" or some other lunatic''s ravings.. who cares we know what his goals are. He wants to kill US citizens as much as possible to stop us from exerting influence throughout the world.
I am surprised the National Review would waste their time with this crap.. they are really reaching here.
Playing WoW as: Vilius (70 NE Druid)
“The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable.” John K Galbraith
FoxNews has been reporting this all morning as bonefide fact, and I have a really, really hard time buying into this.
Morrolan wrote:
No, the fact that Bin Laden shows up a few days before the election after being in hiding for three years, and risk the chance of being caught underscores his desire that Bush be unseated as President.
The reason he attacked New York is because it is the economic center of the United States. You weaken a capalist nation by striking at its economic infrastructure. That son of a bitch cost us a million jobs and a trillion dollars.
Bin laden is unable to send a bomb to influence the election, so he sends a tape. We''ll see if his statement influences this election one way or another.
No one seems to remember that Bin Laden hit us repeatedly during the Clinton Administration. What did Clinton ever do to deserve that? He wasn''t even the President during the first Gulf War and showed no interest in capturing Bin Laden.
I'm bringing sexy back!
Lawyeron is right, and the earlier speculation I posted seems to be wrong.
From CNN:
"It's so much easier to suggest solutions when you don't know too much about the problem." - Malcolm Forbes
Well he certainly has the Democrat party talking points down.
I was curious on Friday why they wouldn''t air his entire statement. It is obvious that Al Jazeera did not want to have this statement viewed as an effort to influence the American election, one way or another.
Now that it is out, rightly or wrongly, Al Quaida will view a Kerry win as a victory for them. You''re right, who care''s what they think. However, this ""victory"" will reinvigorate them after a bloody three year battle with America.
I'm bringing sexy back!
""He also said al Qaeda has found it ""easy for us to provoke and bait this administration."" ""
So he wouldn''t want the easy target to get re-elected? I agree that in the end it probably doesn''t matter one way or the other to him who holds the office but I do not think he sent the tape to try and unseat Bush. It''s more about getting to say his piece at an opportune moment. Bush gave him the legitamacy he needed ... so maybe he figured a terror October surprise was an appropriate gift in return. Who knows?
"An inglorious peace is better than a dishonorable war." Twain
Why would anybody believe that?
I guess we will have to wait and see what Kerry does when he wins.
Bush had little experience with foreign affairs and other things you guys laud him for and you say he did well. Why is it that it is auto win if Kerry wins?
I don't think I've ever said this sentence before, but man would I love to hump that butterfly.-- KrazyTaco
One phone call and you're melting like butter over my kettle pop. -- Edwin to Mex
2005 GWJFFL2 Champion
Lets examine this from a different perspective.
Bin Laden returns to the stage after an extended period of time, a few days before the US Presidential election. The timing is hardly up for debate here. I think the fact that Bin Laden is a mass murderer is shadowing the fact that he is being underestimated in a big way here.
Bin Laden is hardly stupid. He was trained by the CIA during the Soviet invasion as a resistance leader, his family owns/owned one of the largest and most successful construction firms in Saudi Arabia and he made immense sums of money in a suit by doing the same line of work.
The mere fact that he suddenly arrives back in the spotlight and begins to talk the economic impact of the war on the united states, comments that Bush learned corruption from the Saudi''s and placed his son in power by frauding the election as a power grab is little more than a subversive means to influence the mind of the voters. He even says ""Hey, leave us alone and we will leave you alone"" ""We want freedom, Bush says we hate it""
So our war on his brand of terrorism (nevermind he attacked us) is causing us to be insecure (apparently appeasement is the only way to be secure in which case, you give up any hope of it) and Bush is ""misleading"" the public.
To think he isn''t trying to sway the outcome is a farce. He certainly has a lot to say about the US in terms of security issues, misinformation, the choice we made and where we are headed to be simply ""showing back up"". I don''t believe this is a coincidence. He speaks far too directly. Influence doesn''t have to direct, it can be simple doubt and his mere presence is enough to make some people question how we are doing in the war. Close lection so far, any little nudge can be a benefit.
Crazy? Yeah, a fool or one that doesn''t pay attention to the elections and the American public''s influences? No.
"We do not come in peace, we come ahead of peace to secure it's arrival by force of arms"
I don''t get how he said that he (as in Modjaheddeen ""we"") ""bankrupted"" Russia in Afganistan. That would never be possible without US bankrolling the Modjaheddeen lock, stock, and barrell, and without the willingness of Pakistan to cooperate. And besides likes of himself, we bankrolled lots of other scum elsewhere at the same time. Certainly, our credit cards have much higher spending limits than his message wants to make us believe.
Sure, though, we may feel the pinch of interest payments.
Xbox Live tag Gorilla800lbs