Croker Sack

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." — Henry Louis Mencken (1880-1956)

Saturday, October 30, 2004

Turning a Deaf Ear to Osama bin Laden

Much has been said about the possible effect of Osama bin Laden's recent statements on our November 2 election, but what Osama actually said seems to have been largely ignored.

Abandon Israel, and you will not be attacked again.

That was Osama's message in the videotape aired on October 29, 2004.

Osama probably revealed more about himself than he realized when he attempted to rebut President Bush's claim that the hateful moslems attack us because they hate freedom.

"Unlike what Bush says that we hate freedom, let him tell us why didn't we attack Sweden, for example," he said.

The answer lies in Osama's description of his motivation for attacking the U.S.

He said: "God knows that it had not occurred to our mind to attack the towers, but after our patience ran out, and we saw the injustice and inflexibility of the American-Israeli alliance toward our people in Palestine and Lebanon, this came to my mind."

The terrorists attacked the U.S., because the U.S. is an ally of Israel--one that has supported the Israelis in their efforts to defend themselves against the Arabs who have tried for more than 50 years to erase Israel from the map.

Sweden is not such an ally of Israel, nor has Sweden taken an active role in our responses to Osama's acts of war. So, of course Sweden was not attacked.

Now, in Iraq, the terrorists attack us and the Iraqis, because they want to prevent the establishment of a free republic. Instead, they want a moslem theocracy similar to what existed in Afghanistan and to what exists in Iran.

Osama's ideal of a moslem theocracy isn't compatible with a democratic republic; and he hates anything that stands in the way of imposing such a theocracy throughout the Arab part of the world--and then throughout the rest of the world.

Osama's use of the word "free" to describe the society that existed in Afghanistan under the rule of the Taliban and the society that exists in Iran under the mullahs seems to make no sense, but we have a historical example of such language usage to guide us. Recall that the names of countries suffering under communist dictatorships during the Cold War could be easily distinguished from their free counterparts. The communists always called their countries the "democratic republic of...." They were not democratic nor were they republics. But, it sure made it a lot easier to recognize, for example, which was East Germany and which was West Germany when their formal names were used instead of our colloquial names for them.

Osama uses the word "free" in much the same distorted way. Even assuming for the sake of argument that he believes what he says, his concept of freedom is nothing like ours.

Osama made another seemingly odd statement: "Your security is not in the hands of Kerry, Bush or al Qaeda. Your security is in your own hands. Any state that does not mess with our security has naturally guaranteed its own security."

To him, the alliance between the U.S. and Israel is a threat to the security of hateful moslems like Osama. Since they intend to continue their attacks on Israel and on Israel's strongest ally, the U.S. will continue to hunt the terrorists down rather than wait for them to attack us again.

Osama wants the people of the U.S. to require their political leaders to abandon Israel. That's what he means by claiming that neither President Bush nor Senator Kerry controls our security--neither man has promised to abandon Israel.

As for the part when Osama said that our security isn't "in the hands of...al Qaeda," Osama simply means that he and his terrorist allies will never stop attempting to impose their hateful moslem rule and to destroy Israel. Since they will not stop, we should not expect any change on their part which would remove the threat to our security. In a quite literal sense, then, our security is not "in the hands of" al Qaeda: So long as we stand in their way, they will behave like an unfeeling machine designed only to achieve the destruction of the U.S. and Israel.

So far, it appears that Americans are simply discussing how Osama's statements might affect our election, and that's a good sign. No one seems to think that it is within the realm of possibility that Osama's statements might affect our nation's policy.


We should never even consider abandoning Israel to its fate at the hands of its enemies, much less actually abandon the Israelis.

Throwing our friends to the wolves in an effort to save our own skins would never work. Wolves always get hungry again.


Update: 31 Oct. 2004-- The Middle East Media Research Institute has published a Special Alert No. 14, stating that the translation being used by the U.S. media is inaccurate. Osama bin Laden's statement actually was: "Any U.S. state that does not toy with our security automatically guarantees its own security."

According to MEMRI, there is an "Islamist web site" that explains the intent of this statement: Each state that votes for Bush will be considered an enemy, while each state that votes against Bush will not be considered an enemy of al Qaeda.

Interesting: Osama may think that the way to pressure our political leaders is to get people to think that "blue state" voters are voting for peace with al Qaeda. If that is what Osama meant, I wonder why he couldn't find a clear way to say it. Whether or not it is what Osama meant, I doubt Kerry would accept that as a valid interpretation of his mandate from the voters--if he wins the election.

"Hat tip" little green footballs

1 Comments:

Blogger millersam said...

Bush had three years to capture Bin Laden.

He didn't.

His failure.

He wasn't even that concerned about him.
So he said.

October 31, 2004 10:58 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home