७ सप्टेंबर, २००७
"Liberate yourselves from the deception, shackles and attrition of the capitalist system."
So says Bin Laden, who has the audacity to still be alive. He's lecturing us, informing us that Islam requires his side to fight, so the only solution is for us to convert to Islam. We've liberated ourselves from "the slavery of monks, kings and feudalism," so now it's time to liberate ourselves all the way and convert to Islam.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
५४ टिप्पण्या:
Who wrote the speech? Paul Krugman? Michael Moore? Moveon.org?
he even worked in Global Warming
http://tomfaranda.typepad.com/folly/2007/09/who-wrote-bin-l.html
Hmm, he sounds like a Democrat (just replace Islam with benevolent government).
I thought he sounded like an Apple fanatic.
That was a very poor and biased story by the WaPo.
nothing in it speaks to:
1 what OBL said about Iraq being the main front in the war,
2. he expects more from the democrats and wants to know why they had not surrendered yet
3. wants the US to surrender, stop being a democracy and convert to Islam
4. Seems to think that a marxist, anti-israel, anti-war professor is our best hope as a leader.
That is correct....he's Mac...it's Al Gore that is PC.
Don't you think it's going to be just a little odd when the Democrat candidate says during the debate with the Republican candidate:
"We should get out of Iraq."
And the Republican candidate retorts:
"Wow, isn't that just what bin Laden told America to do? Exactly who are you working for Hillary?"
Freedom is slavery. Enslave yourselves to the Islamic Caliphate and be free!
Liberate yourselves from the deception and shackles of the Tim Gunn Show. Burqas for everybody, one size fits all.
bin Laden is dead. That is a fake beard. I detect an imposter. bin Laden knows about Noam Chomsky? Good grief!
By the way, where is Karl Rove?
Boy, that Noam sure has quite a fan club. He must be terribly proud.
Actually, he probably is.
He looks different. And he hardly appears to be the charismatic leader of a global movement. I'm not convinced it's actually him.
It's a bin Laden Muppet. I wonder who has their arm up its butt?
Osama bin Laden lives 7 years after killing thousands of Americans and others in New York City and our nation's capitol.
Bush said bin Laden was "Wanted Dead or Alive."
But still bin Laden runs free, probably in Pakistan, a country under military dictatorship and a close ally of Bush.
And Bush -- through word, deed and incompetence -- has inflated bin Laden's stature and profile and legend. Bush brags about how big our enemy al qaeda is. But he cannot get this man and does not devote the resources we need to hold him to account.
But Bush, the hero leader to the right wing (if tarnished), leaves the country unprotected from bin Laden.
Oh go blow it out your ass, Howard.
"But Bush, the hero leader to the right wing (if tarnished), leaves the country unprotected from bin Laden."
Unprotected? Perhaps you could point out the successful missions in this country against us since 9/11/01?
And isnt it your side that's always bitching about the governments abuse of the civil rights of enemy combatants?
Osama bin Laden lives 7 years after killing thousands of Americans and others in New York City and our nation's capitol.
Do I detect implied support for the death penalty in that sentence? :)
Not quite six years actually, since you are otherwis so accurate
1. Aren't Democrats even the slightest bit disturbed that Osama shares many of their talking points ...exactly?
2. A few weeks back, Amba (of ambivablog) was puzzled by my comment on Althouse that suggested a link between the left and islamofascism. And here it is, delivered by Osama himself, using the left's favorite cheerleader, Chomsky.
Can there be any doubt left?
I can't wait for the left's response, Pogo. Either they disavow St. Chomsky and his ilk or they throw in with UBL. Quite the delicious dilemma.
I doubt, highly, that he *shares* many talking points at all. But he (or his speech writers, etc.,) are passing bright and figured out that if they want to influence the United States that sticking with the lines "convert or die" is a bit of a non-starter.
So he gives a speech about "my pet goat" because it's in Moore's film. He chides the Democrats for not doing what they said they'd do because that's the anti-war rhetoric he hears.
Who better to figure out how to appeal to the American public than Americans? So he uses their words.
It's so blatant that it's almost funny. Still it shows, contrary to what anti-war sorts absolutely insist must be true, that the enemy *is* listening to our domestic squabbles.
I don't expect the usual suspects to stop insisting that it doesn't matter what Democrats say because so-and-so is just a Congressman or former vice-president or ran for president last time or just sucking up to his or her constituency so it doesn't matter because who'd listen?
The evidence that the enemy listens very closely, that Bin Laden or his speech writers listen very *very* closely isn't going to sink in.
If an aspect of war fighting that doesn't involve guns is admitted to exist a whole bunch of people will have no choice but to admit that their activities work for the other side.
Bin Ladin citing Chomsky is hilarious. Democrats must be praying that he doesn't cite their name in his speech.
I'll really start worrying when Osama starts defending transformational grammars against the charge of intellectual irrelevance.
"Professor Chomsky's approach has NOT been superceeded!"
On the other hand, maybe giving Bin Laden a tenured chair of linguistics would get him involved in vicious academic politics, and he would leave the rest of us alone.
"maybe giving Bin Laden a tenured chair of linguistics"
Theo, you are a cruel, cruel man.
And that is why TC is 45...and still single.
Hey, I did a minor in linguistics. After a year or two of that, getting beheaded starts to look like an option.
I also met Noam Chomsky at a lecture he did for our department. There's more than a little Bin Laden there.
Sometime later, I ran into the new chair of the linguistics department at a dinner party. He couldn't stop talking about how he was going to "get rid" of the deadwood tenured faculty.
As I say, Osama would fit right in.
Tom: I want to say one word to you—just one word.
Are you listening?
*Linguistics*
Well, now I can understand why Obama thinks invading Pakistan to get the guy is so urgent. Not that he is a threat to America, but because what comes out of his mouth is deeply embarassing to Democrats.
Though Obama caught a real break because his wife's Vogue interview came out today about how she banishes him from the bed if his daughters wish to "cuddle with Michelle" because he snores and is "Stinky".
If it hadn't been Binnie, the headlines would have been "Mr. Stinky", and various black men offering advice that since Barack was raised by white or Muslim people all his life, he has no idea about "Contro' yo' 'ho" when it comes to black women, and needs to be taught about "slapping they bossy bitches upside the head". Otherwise they "run" any black man's life, and make them the bitches - stinky or otherwise..
In fairness to the Democrats, Binnie also came up with a tax cuts for the rich program - true Islam limits taxes to 2.3% for billionaire fatcats. Binnie said it should be no more and wealthy people in America are badly overtaxed. Tthat must have Grover Norquist and other "Club for Growth" bootlickers to the Owner and Corporate Elites - the very, very wealthy - salivating for their own sort of Paradise.
Trooper York said...
And that is why TC is 45...and still single.
Did you see the "Scott Baio is 45 . . . and Single" series on VH-1. As celeb-reality goes I thought it was great. I especially liked the part where we discover that part of why Joanie broke up with him relted to Cha-Chi's insecurity about the size of his penis. Now that is great TV.
Yes and did you know that Chachi is Korean slang for dick...so when
Kim had Maddie over for drinks..she kept telling him "No
I am Joanie, not Chachi beloved leader"...just another multi-cultural mishap in our funny old world.
Cedarford, Democrats SHOULD be embarrassed by this, but they are beyond shame. They have not covered themselves with glory in this war. Even now they seek to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory as the surge is working.
The more airtime Bin Laden gets, the more obvious what a pathetic failure Bush has been as a President.
We have ZERO resources hunting for Bin Laden.
And we're spending $200 billion a year fighting a war against a country that never laid a hand on us.
Pathetic.
"We have ZERO resources hunting for Bin Laden."
Really?
How did you come up with that - any meaningful, reality-based references or citations for that statement, perchance?
Or did you just blow it out of your ass?
Aside from the question of resources or their lack, just what motivation does a Republican Administration have to capture the guy when he makes Giuliani campaign videos?
We have ZERO resources hunting for Bin Laden.
We have troops along the Afghan/Pakistani border hunting Al Qaeda now. That's where bin Laden is believed to be.
But in any case bin Laden isn't some James Bond supervillain. Even if we caught him and killed him tomorrow, the war on Islamic terrorism will still take decades to win.
Not to say that I necessarily agree with the argument, but it is definitely out there that the Bush war in Iraq is quite possibly the biggest recruiting tool for al Qaeda in the Mid East. So, couldn't bin Laden trying to "appeal" to the Democrat ideology be a ploy to get the American public to elect a Republican to continue the war? I can definitely see a parallel to the whole Karl Rove bashing Hillary situation: Is he talking about Hillary because the Republicans are scared of her, or because they are scared of one of the other candidates and think bashing Hillary will increase her chances of winning the primary and losing in the general election?
Except for the flat tax, he's just another Democrat.
But he doesn't realize the importance of the women's vote and will lose the primary, unless his wife comes through for him on TV.
I'm surprised with a 2% tax rate, Islamic per capita annual income isn't more than two sheep. It must be at the other end of the Laffer curve.
"unless his wife comes through for him on TV."
Which one? He's got an assortment.
bin Laden on taxes:
"Read my lips (sorry, about the beard being in the way), no new taxes above 2%."
"I can't wait for the left's response..."
You've seen the response, as demonstrated by A-Lib, our resident Squealer-wannabe. Stick fingers in ears, chant "BUSH SUCKS!" loudly and repeatedly.
Another in the just the punchline series...So President Clintion wants to acknowledge him after he hit the hole in one...so he starts cheering..A-noki-ama-chachi...A-noki-ama-chachi...and the Korean dictator looks at him and says "Waddya mean wrong hole."
Isn't it funny how Karl Rove gets invoked by the left -- and before him it was Lee Atwater -- as the villain responsible for any Republican success? It can't be the policies. They are stupid and wrong and benefit only the rich. Therefore, some evil but very smart God-like figure behind the scenes must be pulling strings to deceive and subvert.
This is the stuff of myth and fable, people.
Notice also that there is never much talk of these machinations when Democrats win. Further, can anyone possibly imagine a Karl Rove on Bin Laden's side? "Say this," Osama, "and act this way, and I will plant news media stories and use my strange evil smartness and cunning to subvert the good so that we can remain in power in these caves."
Seven Machos said...
Isn't it funny how Karl Rove gets invoked by the left
Well, since I seem to be the only one in this thread to mention Karl Rove, you must be talking about me. I mentioned his name only because the tape, picture and talking points of bin Laden to be a joke. So much of a joke that it must be the work of Evil Karl Rove, who, like you said, the left claims to be behind everything. Let me assure you, nobody is to the right of AllenS, nobody.
Allen -- I was just musing and riffing at no one in particular.
"So, couldn't bin Laden trying to "appeal" to the Democrat ideology be a ploy to get the American public to elect a Republican to continue the war?"
Excellent thought, if you wear a tin-foil hat.
The reality is, though, that the kill ratios are exceedingly in our favor; bin Laden CANNOT win a war of attrition; he can only win a war in which our political will is, like in Vietnam, sapped. Republicans, with few exceptions, resist the war against our political will; Democrats, very clearly, are bin Laden's hand-maidens to deliver political defeat at home. bin Laden wants the Democrats to win because he knows they won't fight him. Idiot Democrats and liberals (see comments above) suggest that somehow this will end if we were to capture/kill bid Laden.
This liberal Democrat notion that militant Islamic fascism can be accommodated, of course, is utter fantasy. Ann's statement " He's lecturing us, informing us that Islam requires his side to fight, so the only solution is for us to convert to Islam." is indicative of his view of us - that we're too weak to sustain the fight. Our response should be "You tell us that Islam requires your side to fight, so the only solution is for us to destroy you." No Democrat outside of Lieberman (and damned few Republicans, for that matter) would ever have the political courage to say that which is necessary.
Sometimes the simplest explanation is the truth. The anti-war contingent in this country, mainly on the left, some on the right, are playing into al Qaeda's hands, and can't handle that fact. Deal with it. bin Laden (or whoever that was in the video) knows his audience and is playing to it. Anyone who thinks the enemy wants us to stay in Iraq is trying to rationalize the unpleasant truth that their opinions put them on the same side as the enemy.
Seriously though, we could just admit we were wrong, apologize, and start the process of healing.
Are we wrong? Were we wrong?
Bin Laden and others like him have, for a decade or more, been attacking the US (and a whole bunch of other places) and have been propping the West and America in particular up as the enemy for ages. Not that we don't make mistakes but even when we do it's not out of hatred or maliciousness. Mostly it's just because we're *big* and anything we do has consequences, not all of which will be good.
Not to mention that "why they hate us" really does have as much to do with our decadent ways as anything else, which we export across the world simply by existing.
So Bin Laden and those like him rouse young men into seeking violent glory opposing us.
Who is supposed to apologize in order to start the healing?
Oh, gee, mr. suicide bomber. I'm soooo sorry that we tolerate gays and I'm soooo sorry that we have magazines with naked women in them, and I'm soooo sorry that your people like to listen to rock-and-roll and I'm soooo sorry that your women don't want to wear veils.
And I'm really truly sorry that oil revenue means that your leaders don't have to be responsive to the people because they're going to rake in the cash even if you are poor and starving and living in a slum.
And it's ALL MY FAULT. Waaaaaa!
Islam (or some non-trivial portion of it) wants to be apologized to for everything. Any time they get their panties in a wad we're supposed to grovel. Distribute soccer balls for free to kids in Afghanistan with flags of the world on them... we're supposed to grovel. Oh, how sorry we are! How at fault! The Saudi flag on a soccer ball means some kid kicking the written name of Muhammad across a dirty street.
And it's all our fault.
Insult Jesus. Insult G_d. Insult Buddah or any religion and that's free speech but insult Islam? That's offensive and free speech never gives the right to offend.
It would be very *very* good if leaders in the West simply said, "Enough."
"If Islam requires you to fight, then we are required to destroy you."
Pure, simple, and very true. And if they don't want to be destroyed then Islam can figure out how to accommodate the rest of us.
Not the other way around.
I should say that Bin Laden has *always* tried to get this conflict in the context of a holy war, a war against Islam.
Because Islam has a whole bunch of people who would rather just be left along to live their lives and that doesn't work very well for someone trying to get a holy war going in order to take over the world.
Not to say that I necessarily agree with the argument, but it is definitely out there that the Bush war in Iraq is quite possibly the biggest recruiting tool for al Qaeda in the Mid East.
The problem -- for al Qaeda -- is that while the Iraq war has encouraged a lot of borderline personalities to sign up for jihad, all they end up doing is going to Iraq and getting killed. Al Qaeda's burning through its pool of possible recruits awfully fast, and they're all getting fed right into the meat grinder.
That's bad for bin Laden, because bin Laden doesn't give a rat's ass about the Iraqis -- they're almost all Kurds and Shiites, both of which he hates. What he wants is America out of Iraq, for two reasons:
(1): An American defeat would breathe new life into the terrorist movement, just as the defeat in Somalia did. It would provide "proof" for bin Laden's old claim that America is a paper tiger.
(2): Al Qaeda's recruits would stop throwing their lives away attacking American troops, and be able to refocus their efforts on killing people who can't fight back.
Rev -
Well, it doesn't seem (to me) to be that big of a problem for al Qaeda that its members are dying, because hasn't that been one of the major goals of the group (that is, the rank-and-file members, not the leadership). Their main attacks usually consist of some sort of suicidal act. So (once again, I am not saying this is what I believe) if Iraq is their main source of recruitment, wouldn't the U.S. leaving have the effect of lowering the pool of suicidal idiots willing to bomb both innocent civilians and innocent soldiers? It is quite a stretch, but it doesn't seem like the large number of deaths of al Qaeda members in Iraq is exactly hampering their forces.
2) In response to your numbered item 1, it seems to me that the same Islamic moonbats who would believe that the U.S. withdraw signifies that al Qaeda is correct are those who are already predisposed to believing that. To the rest, it may signify that we are skittish and don't finish what we start, but I doubt that many people don't believe in our sheer military power.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा