<$BlogRSDUrl$>

10/29/2004

 

Bin Laden Vid


Osama bin Laden is evidently not dead, what with a new Al Jazeera vid in which he talks about relatively recent events.

No one is using this politically, but OBL backs one of Kerry's points: Bush is stupid and slow to repair. The 9-11 attacks, he said on the vid, would have been less severe had President Bush been more alert.

Oh, the White House will respond. BC04 will not.

8 comments

8 Comments:

Does anyone seriously think that the 9/ll attacks would have been any different under any other president or that just by being more 'alert' Bush could have made it less of an attack? What would they have done, flown smaller planes into the WTC? They planned them for years, they followed their plan and their was no way anyone could have seen it coming.

By Blogger Phlint, at October 29, 2004 at 7:36 PM  

Phlint is absolutely right!

By Anonymous Anonymous, at October 30, 2004 at 1:42 PM  

When I hear Osama bin Laden, I also hear the President on March 13, 2002 say in response to a question about the status of bin Laden:

You know, I just don’t spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. I’m more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well-supplied . . . And, again, I don’t know where he is. I, uh. I, uh. I’ll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him.Well, the President may not be worried. But I am. My family lives in a potential target city. I think he should have spent time worrying and doing something effective about bin Laden.

And then there’s the comment about supplies. Why was it those Guard troops refused their orders?

By Blogger Gary, at October 31, 2004 at 1:38 AM  

Gary... Osama bin Laden is JF Kerry's bogeyman. He helped direct some terrible actions, but you (pl) have to remember that the terrorist threat is not JUST ONE MAN. OBL by himself is some guy getting dialysis in a cave. Your real concern should be, and the President's is, not Osama bin Laden qua OBL; rather, it are the terrorists who are very real threats today.

Eliminating OBL is not going to make you or your family one whit safer.

Kerry seems to be unable to think beyond the bogeyman. It requires conceptual thinking, and he just can't seem to pull it off.

We'll get bin Laden, but he should not frighten you now.

By Blogger Mark Kilmer, at October 31, 2004 at 8:34 AM  

Huh? OBL is just a bogeyman? An imaginary monster used to frighten children?

It seems to me that he has provided funding and vision and organizing principles for al Qaeda. While funding continues to flow from many of our mid-east allies, catching him will hurt al Qaeda. It will reduce their magnetism among Islamic militants as their single worldwide symbol will no longer be effective. The organization will also lose effectiveness as its visionary and head is no longer in charge.

Will others rise up to take his place? Sure. But, with each head we chop off, the organization will become less effective. The longer we let OBL be in charge, the more attractive al Qaeda is to radical Muslims.

Sorry, I can't see any argument for the President not paying much attention to OBL.

By Blogger Gary, at October 31, 2004 at 9:28 AM  

Gary... You ought not to be a Qaeda-centric. The war on terror is a lot larger than that, and al Qaeda themselves have done very little of late. There are terrorist acts committed by groups "reportedly linked to" al Qaeda, but that's it.

He does not fund most of even al Qaeda's terror. Very little, actually. They get it from States and like-minded individuals, but the real threat is the funding for other global terrorist groups.

You can call al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden public enemy no. 1, and that's fine. They were the ones who hit us hard three years ago. However, terrorists groups have changed since 9-11. Their circumstances have been changed.

John Kerry is an intellectually stunted man, and the views he's spouting are so backwards that they are dangerous. You personally should not limit yourself to his views. Kerry should be surpassed with a little thought.

By Blogger Mark Kilmer, at October 31, 2004 at 8:28 PM  

GWB on 9/13/01: The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him.On 3/13/02: I truly am not that concerned about him.While you might not find such a change of position disturbing, I do. Especially since mid-east allies and moderates are pro-terror::

65% of Pakistanis view bin Laden favorably as do 55% of Jordanians (compared to 7% and 3% respectively for George Bush).

46% of Pakistanis believe suicide bombings are justifiable against Americans and westerners in Iraq as do 70% of Jordanians.

This says to me that bin Laden plays an important symbolic role in attracting people to become terrorists.

While there are many aspects to anti-U.S. terror, there are three central things we can do to reduce it:

1) Decapitate al Qaeda repeatedly. My bet is that they are more popular than Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. Weakening them will reduce their credibility as well as the image of terrorists worldwide.

2) Create peace in Iraq. We have effectively moved in the opposite direction since before the day Tommy Franks ordered his commanders to get ready to pull 110,000 troops to be replace by foreign troops (where was he coming from?).

3) Take an active role in creating peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

By Blogger Gary, at November 1, 2004 at 2:42 AM  

My apologies. It looks like out the 9/13 quote I offered is a fraud. I can't find a reference to bin Laden by the President before 9/20. And I can't validate the quote in any newspaper or on the White House site.

I stand by my point though. Bin Laden's popularity and ability to elude us attract new terrorists. Capturing him will reduce his symbolic importance and show that terrorism is not a productive path to resolving political issues.

By Blogger Gary, at November 1, 2004 at 9:10 AM  

Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?