Osama video

Thess · Post by **Thess** » October 29, 2004, 5:40 pm

Osama blames Bush for sitting in the classroom reading my pet goat before acting to save american lives, and says our security doesn't does not lie on who is the president.

I saw this on cnn, I have no words for the anger it brings me to seeing him looking in good health.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 29, 2004, 6:03 pm

From the little that's posted he doesn't seem to be endorsing either candidate.

Any thoughts on a terror attack happening between now and Tuesday? This is the most probable time for a terror attack to cause the most chaos. If the terrorist are at all currently capable of causing any sort of incident, it would be in the next few days.

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » October 29, 2004, 6:10 pm

wtf he claimed he likes freedon.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » October 29, 2004, 6:12 pm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3966741.stm

Correspondents describe Bin Laden's remarks in the video as the clearest admission yet that he was behind the 2001 attacks on New York and Washington.

Talk about breaking news...

noel · Post by **noel** » October 29, 2004, 6:15 pm

Thess wrote:I saw this on cnn, I have no words for the anger it brings me to seeing him looking in good health.

WTFever, Thess! Bringing Bin Laden to justice has been Bush's #1 priority for the last 3 years!!!

For you fucking idiots that think invading Iraq was more important than fighting terrorism, or think that invading Iraq has anything to do with fighting terrorism, I sincerely mean it when I say go fuck yourselves.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 29, 2004, 6:16 pm

Brotha wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3966741.stm

Correspondents describe Bin Laden's remarks in the video as the clearest admission yet that he was behind the 2001 attacks on New York and Washington.
Talk about breaking news...

Just need that bastard to mention something about Saddam helping!

Is there an entire transcript that can be posted here yet?

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » October 29, 2004, 6:18 pm

I can't find one. Been searching for about an hour. Sucks that I agree with something he said about US security depending on our policies not our president.

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » October 29, 2004, 6:51 pm

Right on schedual! Say what you will about Bin Laden, but he always follows the predicted timeline.

noel · Post by **noel** » October 29, 2004, 6:56 pm

Krimson Klaw wrote:I can't find one. Been searching for about an hour. Sucks that I agree with something he said about US security depending on our policies not our president.

Yeah my first thought when I read the main quote about our security not having to do with our president but instead our foreign policy was... Hmmm, that's pretty damn reasonable...

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » October 29, 2004, 7:16 pm

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm

Newsreader: A new message from Bin Laden to the American people about the reasons and resulats of the 9/11 attacks.

Newsreader 2: The head of AL Qaeda says the continuation of us policy will lead to the repetition of what happened.

Male presenter: The head of AL Qaeda organization directed a message to the American people and this video and audio apearence in this tape which Jezeera required for the first time for two years. In the beginning of his message, he spoke about the reasons why they chose the US to execute 9/11..

OBL: You American people, my speech to you is the best way to avoid another conflict about the war and its reasons and results. I am telling you security is an important pillar of human life. And free people don't let go of their security contrary to Bush's claims that we hate freedom. He should tell us why we didn't hit Sweden for instance. Its known that those who hate freedom don't have dignified souls.like the 19 who were blessed. But we fought you because we are free people, we don't sleep on our oppression. We want to regain the freedom of our Muslim nation as you spill our security, we spill your security.

Female presenter: Bin Laden spoke for the first time about the main reasons he thought of executing Sept 11 attacks, confirming that the Israeli operation in Lebanon was the first incident where he thought of it.

OBL: I am so surprised by you. Although we are in the fourth year after the events of sept 11, Bush is still practicing distortion and misleading on you, and obscuring the main reasons and therefore the reasons are still existing to repeat what happened before. I will tell you the reasons behind theses incidents.

I will be honest with you on the moment when the decision was taken to understand. We never thought of hitting the towers. But after we were so fed up, and we saw the oppression of the American Israeli coalition on our people in Palestine and Lebanon, it came to my mind and the incidents that really touched me directly goes back to 1982 and the following incidents. When the US permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon with the assistance of the 6th fleet. In these hard moments, it occurred to me so many meanings I cant explain but it resulted in a general feeling of rejecting oppression and gave me a hard determination to punish the oppressors. While I was looking at the destroyed towers in Lebanon, it came to my mind to punish the oppressor the same way and destroy towers in the US to get a taste of what they tasted, and quit killing our children and women.

Male presenter: Bin Laden considered in his message that the results of Sept 11 were successful in his opinion and as a reason of that, he said that the similarity between the administration of Bush the father and the arab regimes said Bush learned so much from them during his visits.

OBL: We didn't find difficulty dealing with Bush and his administration due to the similarity of his regime and the regims in our countries. Whish half of them are ruled by military and the other half by sons of kings and presidents and our experience with them is long. Both parties are arrogant and stubborn and the greediness and taking money without right and that similarity appeared during the visits of Bush to the region while people from our side were impressed by the US and hoped that these visits would influence our countries. Here he is being influenced by these regimes, Royal and military. And was feeling jealous they were staying for decades in power stealing the nations finances without anybody overseeing them. So he transferred the oppression of freedom and tyranny to his son and they call it th e Patriot Law to fight terrorism. He was bright in putting his sons as governors in states and he didn't forget to transfer his experience from the rulers of our region to Florida to falsify elections to benefit from it in critical times.

Female Presenter: Bin Laden considered the way Bush dealt with the first moments of Sept. 11, giving a good chance to the executors of Sept. 11 to complete it.

OBL: We agreed with Mohamed Atta, god bless him, to execute the whole operation in 20 minutes. Before Bush and his administration would pay attention and we never thought that the high commander of the US armies would leave 50 thousand of his citizens in both towers to face the horrors by themselves when they most needed him because it seemed to distract his attention from listening to the girl telling him about her goat butting was more important than paying attention to airplanes butting the towers which gave us three times the time to execute the operation thank god.

Male presenter: the final part of the message is that the security of the Americans depends on the policy that they execute despite the winner of the elections.

OBL: Your security is not in the hands of Kerry or Bush or Al Qaeda. Your security is in your hands. Each state that doenst mess with our security has automatically secured their security.

Female Presenter: In Bin Laden's message he approached other points. He pointed to the contradiction which considers oppression and killing of innocents a legal act. They formed an international law as bush the father did with the children of iraq according to bin laden. Bin Laden pointed to the millions of pounds of explosives dropped on Iraqi children as bush his son had done, as he said to remove an old agent and install a new agent to help instealing the oil of iraq. And bin laden said the events of 9/11 came as an answer to this oppression and said that if the answer to this oppression is considered bad terror, then we need to do it. And he stressed that he wants to deliver this message to the Americans in words and in deeds since the 9/11 events. He reminded Americans of a few warning messages through various news media like Time Magazine and CNN and other Arab and correspondents since 1996. He warned them of the conswquences of their countries policies. He talked abou t the damage Sept 11 caused the US economy and that it cost close to a trillion dollars. He talked about President Bush and that the emergency law requires more money.

END

Rivera Bladestrike · Post by **Rivera Bladestrike** » October 29, 2004, 8:07 pm

Obviously he is saying vote Kerry, cause we know our current, instinct based president will just be doing the same things as hes doing now. The president doesn't give a shit about muslims. Hes ignorant himself and his entire cabinent is as well. Kerry will at least avoid war at all costs as to avoid killing children and stuff. Hopefully more people hear of this video, the reasons are kinda long overdue. I think it would have impacted more had it been widespread around the time of the debates.

Kaldaur · Post by **Kaldaur** » October 29, 2004, 8:33 pm

Please, let's all have a happy moment where we unite under our hatred of this man and not another thread and candidate a or b...

noel · Post by **noel** » October 29, 2004, 8:34 pm

The fact that he's able to talk out of anything less than a hose clearly illustrates that just as in all of his previous employment, George W. Bush is STILL a collosal failure.

Kaldaur, I very respectfully disagree. GWB has said on multiple occasions that brining OBL to justice was his #1 priority. He failed. Miserably.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 29, 2004, 8:54 pm

Bush isn't a failure because Osama is still alive. Those bastards know how to hide well.

Everyone on this board is a failure because they should all be in the middle east hunting down Osama.

Do you think you can just snap your fingers and catch Osama? I'm sure they are actively looking for him. Covert operations are the best means of finding him. Our troops in Iraq would not be a factor in finding Osama so quit falling for the lame Kerry bullshit about Bush not trying to find Osama.

1,000 VVs to the person on this board that is stud enough to find Osama and not blame Bush for not finding him. Does Kerry have a magic Osama detector?

noel · Post by **noel** » October 29, 2004, 9:09 pm

Winnow wrote:Bush isn't a failure because Osama is still alive. Those bastards know how to hide well.

Bust stated that finding Osama was his number one goal. You'd think if this were the case, he'd devote his resouces to looking in the location where OSAMA is. I fully agree that 'those bastards know how to hide well', but if we'd devoted the resources to the war on terror that we did to the war on Iraq, we would have found OSAMA like we found Sadaam.

Everyone on this board is a failure because they should all be in the middle east hunting down Osama.

Riiiiiiiiiiight.

Do you think you can just snap your fingers and catch Osama? I'm sure they are actively looking for him. Covert operations are the best means of finding him. Our troops in Iraq would not be a factor in finding Osama so quit falling for the lame Kerry bullshit about Bush not trying to find Osama.

Our troops in Iraq wouldn't be a factor because they're in the wrong place fighting the wrong war when they should have been fighting terrorists and destroying terrorist camps. It has nothing at all to do with Bush vs. Kerry. Believe it or not, the alledged war on terror *cough*crusade*cough* that Bush started with the goal of bringing Osama to justice was started BEFORE KERRY WAS EVEN A DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE. It's not a motherfucking party issue or Kerry issue or election issue it's a FAILURE OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. You make the false assumption that me saying that the Bush administration failed is in some way an endorsement of Kerry. It's NOT. He will be extremely difficult to find... just like Sadaam was, but OH SNAP! we FOUND Sadaam because we were looking for him in the right place.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » October 29, 2004, 9:28 pm

Brotha wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3966741.stm

Correspondents describe Bin Laden's remarks in the video as the clearest admission yet that he was behind the 2001 attacks on New York and Washington.
Talk about breaking news...

Maybe because he has never admitted to being behind it? There has been very limited amounts of proof of it in fact. Not saying I don't think he was, because I do, but the evidence is limited.

Winnow wrote:Do you think you can just snap your fingers and catch Osama?

So much easier to snap your fingers and invade a complete unrelated country instead!

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » October 29, 2004, 9:33 pm

noel wrote:
Winnow wrote:Bush isn't a failure because Osama is still alive. Those bastards know how to hide well.
Bust stated that finding Osama was his number one goal. You'd think if this were the case, he'd devote his resouces to looking in the location where OSAMA is. I fully agree that 'those bastards know how to hide well', but if we'd devoted the resources to the war on terror that we did to the war on Iraq, we would have found OSAMA like we found Sadaam.
Everyone on this board is a failure because they should all be in the middle east hunting down Osama.
Riiiiiiiiiiight.
Do you think you can just snap your fingers and catch Osama? I'm sure they are actively looking for him. Covert operations are the best means of finding him. Our troops in Iraq would not be a factor in finding Osama so quit falling for the lame Kerry bullshit about Bush not trying to find Osama.
Our troops in Iraq wouldn't be a factor because they're in the wrong place fighting the wrong war when they should have been fighting terrorists and destroying terrorist camps. It has nothing at all to do with Bush vs. Kerry. Believe it or not, the alledged war on terror *cough*crusade*cough* that Bush started with the goal of bringing Osama to justice was started BEFORE KERRY WAS EVEN A DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE. It's not a motherfucking party issue or Kerry issue or election issue it's a FAILURE OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. You make the false assumption that me saying that the Bush administration failed is in some way an endorsement of Kerry. It's NOT. He will be extremely difficult to find... just like Sadaam was, but OH SNAP! we FOUND Sadaam because we were looking for him in the right place.

Where did Bush state that finding Osama was his number one goal? I'm not saying he didn't, I just remember him saying things like "we'll bring those responsible for 9/11 to justice," which we have been. We haven't devoted any resources to finding Bin Laden? This may come as a surprise but we invaded Afghanistan BEFORE Iraq and we STILL have special forces crawling all over the fucking mountains, unmanned drones, we've convinced Pakistan to send troops to the northern tribal region (which was a BIG deal), and we're doing a whole host of other things to find Bin Laden. You all make fun of Bush for his diplomacy (or lack thereof), but the fact is that while Clinton was in office Pakistan fully supported the Taliban.

Tommy Franks himself has said that nothing he needed in Afghanistan went over to Iraq. We're the United States of fucking America...we can fight two 3rd world countries at once without shortchanging either conflict.

You've been watching too many Osama videos if you think inserting the word "crusade" into what we're doing makes any sense at all.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » October 29, 2004, 9:41 pm

Fact #1: We haven't found Osama Bin Laden yet. That's pretty much indisputable at this point.

Fact #2: We have had a seriously hard time in Afghanistan. It doesn't get much coverage, but at least a month or two ago, the Taliban forces STILL had most of southern Afghanistan.

This suggests obviously that we have enough troops in Afghanistan.

-=Lohrno

noel · Post by **noel** » October 29, 2004, 9:46 pm

Brotha wrote:Where did Bush state that finding Osama was his number one goal? I'm not saying he didn't, I just remember him saying things like "we'll bring those responsible for 9/11 to justice," which we have been. We haven't devoted any resources to finding Bin Laden? This may come as a surprise but we invaded Afghanistan BEFORE Iraq and we STILL have special forces crawling all over the fucking mountains, unmanned drones, and we've convinced Pakistan to send troops to the northern tribal region (which was a BIG deal. You all make fun of Bush for his diplomacy (or lack thereof), but the fact is that while Clinton was in office Pakistan fully supported the Taliban.

Tommy Franks himself has said that nothing he needed in Afghanistan went over to Iraq. We're the United States of fucking America...we can fight two 3rd world countries at once without shortchanging either conflict.

You've been watching too many Osama videos if you think inserting the word "crusade" into what we're doing makes any sense at all.

I'll look for a quote, I believe he said OBL/Al-Quaeda was his #1 priority as as recently as the second (I think) debate.

Richard Clarke said in his book that our ground war effort in Afganastan was insufficient, half-hearted, and reluctant because the administration wanted to refocus on Iraq. We have never had anything close to the number of troops in Afganistan as we did in Iraq. I agree having Pakistan's assistance is huge, but saying Clinton was the reason Pakistan was fully supporting the Taliban is false. Clinton was actively working on Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and another country I can't recall regarding their relationship with the Taliban and arguably had a better mindset and level of attention toward terrorism than Bush ever has, even with his military commitment.

I mentioned the crusade word because Bush called it a crusade in one of his speeches. It was kind of a joke.

I am all for turning every known terrorist camp/facility into a sheet of glass, but invading Iraq has only helped the terrorists...

Actually, maybe you're right, we're America, so what the fuck do we care how many third world countries we needlessly destroy to meet our goals. After all, the people in third world countries aren't as important as Americans! They're almost not even people!

America...
America...
America, FUCK YEAH!
Coming again, to save the mother fucking day yeah,
America, FUCK YEAH!
Freedom is the only way yeah,
Terrorist your game is through cause now you have to answer too,
America, FUCK YEAH!
So lick my butt, and suck on my balls,
America, FUCK YEAH!
What you going to do when we come for you now,
it’s the dream that we all share; it’s the hope for tomorrow

FUCK YEAH!

McDonalds, FUCK YEAH!
Wal-Mart, FUCK YEAH!
The Gap, FUCK YEAH!
Baseball, FUCK YEAH!
NFL, FUCK, YEAH!
Rock and roll, FUCK YEAH!
The Internet, FUCK YEAH!
Slavery, FUCK YEAH!

FUCK YEAH!

Starbucks, FUCK YEAH!
Disney world, FUCK YEAH!
Porno, FUCK YEAH!
Valium, FUCK YEAH!
Reeboks, FUCK YEAH!
Fake Tits, FUCK YEAH!
Sushi, FUCK YEAH!
Taco Bell, FUCK YEAH!
Rodeos, FUCK YEAH!
Bed bath and beyond (Fuck yeah, Fuck yeah)

Liberty, FUCK YEAH!
White Slips, FUCK YEAH!
The Alamo, FUCK YEAH!
Band-aids, FUCK YEAH!
Las Vegas, FUCK YEAH!
Christmas, FUCK YEAH!
Immigrants, FUCK YEAH!
Popeye, FUCK YEAH!
Democrats, FUCK YEAH!
Republicans (republicans)
(fuck yeah, fuck yeah)

EDIT: JUST FOR STARTERS

"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."
- G.W. Bush, 9/13/01

"I want justice...There's an old poster out West, as I recall, that said, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive,'"
- G.W. Bush, 9/17/01, UPI

"...Secondly, he is not escaping us. This is a guy, who, three months ago, was in control of a county [sic]. Now he's maybe in control of a cave. He's on the run. Listen, a while ago I said to the American people, our objective is more than bin Laden. But one of the things for certain is we're going to get him running and keep him running, and bring him to justice. And that's what's happening. He's on the run, if he's running at all. So we don't know whether he's in cave with the door shut, or a cave with the door open -- we just don't know...."
- Bush, in remarks in a Press Availablity with the Press Travel Pool,
The Prairie Chapel Ranch, Crawford TX, 12/28/01, as reported on
official White House site

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)

BUSH: Jim, we've got the capability of doing both.

As a matter of fact, this is a global effort.

We're facing a group of folks who have such hatred in their heart, they'll strike anywhere, with any means.

And that's why it's essential that we have strong alliances, and we do.

That's why it's essential that we make sure that we keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of people like Al Qaida, which we are.

But to say that there's only one focus on the war on terror doesn't really understand the nature of the war on terror.

Of course we're after Saddam Hussein -- I mean bin Laden. He's isolated. Seventy-five percent of his people have been brought to justice. The killer -- the mastermind of the September 11th attacks, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, is in prison.

We're making progress.

But the front on this war is more than just one place. The Philippines -- we've got help -- we're helping them there to bring -- to bring Al Qaida affiliates to justice there.

And, of course, Iraq is a central part in the war on terror. That's why Zarqawi and his people are trying to fight us. Their hope is that we grow weary and we leave.

The biggest disaster that could happen is that we not succeed in Iraq. We will succeed. We've got a plan to do so. And the main reason we'll succeed is because the Iraqis want to be free.

I had the honor of visiting with Prime Minister Allawi. He's a strong, courageous leader. He believes in the freedom of the Iraqi people.

He doesn't want U.S. leadership, however, to send mixed signals, to not stand with the Iraqi people.

He believes, like I believe, that the Iraqis are ready to fight for their own freedom. They just need the help to be trained. There will be elections in January. We're spending reconstruction money. And our alliance is strong.

That's the plan for victory.

And when Iraq if free, America will be more secure.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 29, 2004, 9:54 pm

You haven't been listening to Bush or anyone else about the war on terror. It's not about one man. Osama, dead or alive, isn't going to change anything. That said, as I stated, covert operations and intelligence is the way we will find Osama. (or paying off another country that finds him). You choose to target one man and ignore the other work that's been done.

Raise your hand if you can confirm that Bush isn't using our intelligence and special forces to find Osama.

Note: Kerry would not be doing a better job in finding Osama. A million troops in Afghanistan won't help if he's not there. It's one man with a network to move him around. Get your heads out of your asses. The bitching Kerry is doing over Osama is all about campaign tactics. You're fucked in the head if you don't think Bush has our intelligence community and special military units searching for him.

I'm glad Bush is going to be reelected dispite people that that fall for election hype. On one hand you should be happy. You can continue to whine instead of have to fall into excuse mode for Kerry when you see that he sucks ass after the Bush hate blinders come off.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » October 29, 2004, 9:56 pm

Tommy Franks himself has said that nothing he needed in Afghanistan went over to Iraq. We're the United States of fucking America...we can fight two 3rd world countries at once without shortchanging either conflict.

Funny, yet both have been shortchanged bigtime.

noel · Post by **noel** » October 29, 2004, 9:56 pm

To put it succinctly:

We are the United States of America. If finding and capturing or killing Osama bin Laden had been our number one goal for the last 3 years, we would have found him, and killed/captured him. Though he is just one man, I believe that showing we had the ability to do that would have been a greater detterant to terrorism than any military action we could have taken. It's what should have been done, and it's what has not been done.

We have intelligence sattelites that can tell when people are taking a shit and how big it is. If it had been our priority, we could have captured him.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 29, 2004, 9:57 pm

noel wrote:To put it succinctly:

We are the United States of America. If finding and capturing or killing Osama bin Laden had been our number one goal for the last 3 years, we would have found him, and killed/captured him. Though he is just one man, I believe that showing we had the ability to do that would have been a greater detterant to terrorism than any military action we could have taken. It's what should have been done, and it's what has not been done.

We have intelligence sattelites that can tell when people are taking a shit and how big it is. If it had been our priority, we could have captured him.

I have a lot or respect for our intelligence but you've been reading too many Tom Clancy novels.

noel · Post by **noel** » October 29, 2004, 10:00 pm

Winnow wrote:You haven't been listening to Bush or anyone else about the war on terror. It's not about one man. Osama, dead or alive, isn't going to change anything. That said, as I stated, covert operations and intelligence is the way we will find Osama. (or paying off another country that finds him). You choose to target one man and ignore the other work that's been done.

Raise your hand if you can confirm that Bush isn't using our intelligence and special forces to find Osama.

Note: Kerry would not be doing a better job in finding Osama. A million troops in Afghanistan won't help if he's not there. It's one man with a network to move him around. Get your heads out of your asses. The bitching Kerry is doing over Osama is all about campaign tactics. You're fucked in the head if you don't think Bush has our intelligence community and special military units searching for him.

I'm glad Bush is going to be reelected dispite people that that fall for election hype. On one hand you should be happy. You can continue to whine instead of have to fall into excuse mode for Kerry when you see that he sucks ass after the Bush hate blinders come off.

You keep bringing up John FUCKING Kerry. Stop it. It has fuck all to do with Kerry. I'm not talking about Kerry. I haven't brought up Kerry. I'm talking about the Bush administration. Can you please try to stay on topic for 5 minutes? FUCK.

I also never said that Osama was in Afganistan at the moment. He WAS in Afganistan at one point, but instead of going in to get him, we spent weeks on airstrikes before we sent in ground troops, and OMFG he escaped.

I totally agree that fully supported Spec Ops teams and intelligence is the way to go, and I totally support vaporizing terrorists instead of playing nice with them. I also realize that Osama is one man, but he's a figurehead, and capturing him would be a deterant. I never said that capturing him would end the war on terror and I never even thought it.

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » October 30, 2004, 3:06 am

After all of these years of trying to understand why "they" hate us, it seems that "they" have paused and made an effort to explain. I seems important to him that we know his motivations. Why? Are we pressuring him so much that he's trying to figure a way to resolve the current situation? Is he trying to mess with our elections by this statement. Why does feel the need to explain himself to us?

I see a man who has for years been frustrated by an unfairness of life. He felt powerless for so long that it drove him into violent reaction. Yet now he wants us to understand him. Why?

Yes, he is a mass murderer, but what else could he do to make a change? He sure the hell couldn't go to the UN and petition the western world to stop treating unfairly the middle east. Life is unfair. People get screwed over all the time. He did the only thing he could think of to lash back the monster he saw.

I don't know what to think. I mean yes he needs to be captured to answer for the slaughter he caused. But on the other hand I think we should evaluate what we are doing to others. Are we screwing people over? If so why? Everyone deserves a fair shake in life. Are we a nation being honest and even handed with others? Hunting terrorists is only half the equation. We must strive personally to treat other nations fairly.

Words fail me. There is something here that I can't express, and I wager that it has something to do with the destructive effects of personal selfishness by both us and them.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » October 30, 2004, 3:24 am

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/ ... index.html

Mawafu · Post by **Mawafu** » October 30, 2004, 3:42 am

Clinton was actively working on Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and another country I can't recall regarding their relationship with the Taliban and arguably had a better mindset and level of attention toward terrorism than Bush ever has, even with his military commitment.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4540958/

According to that article Clinton had an opportunity to capture/kill bin Laden but didn't act upon it. For a guy who had such a better mindset and level of attention toward terrorism it sure seems he did fuck all about it.

Do I believe Bush has now fucked up in trying to capture/kill bin Laden? I can't say because I (like everyone else) have no clue what is going on behind closed doors. But based on our military's stationing at this time, sure it looks like it.

Do I think Kerry would do any better? I have no clue. No one knows. Arguing this crap is pointless because no one knows all the facts, just what they're shown on the nightly news. There is just too much shit that our government/military does that we have no clue about.

Crav · Post by **Crav** » October 30, 2004, 5:05 am

From the look and tone of the message along with the translations that I read it seemed like he was trying to reach the none radical Arabs in the Middle East, by this I mean those that have lost something because of the U.S. actions in Iraq and Israel's in Palestine. The people, who are not as extreme as his followers, yet feel that U.S. policy has wronged them in some way. This could probably also apply to those people who are being ruled over by monarchies like Saudi Arabia or dictatorships in Pakistan and are associated with the U.S.

Personally I find this very disturbing; our actions in the Middle East could turn a relatively small group of extremist into a movement that could gain popular support in each country in the region.

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » October 30, 2004, 8:09 am

Adex_Xeda wrote:After all of these years of trying to understand why "they" hate us, it seems that "they" have paused and made an effort to explain. I seems important to him that we know his motivations. Why? Are we pressuring him so much that he's trying to figure a way to resolve the current situation? Is he trying to mess with our elections by this statement. Why does feel the need to explain himself to us?

I see a man who has for years been frustrated by an unfairness of life. He felt powerless for so long that it drove him into violent reaction. Yet now he wants us to understand him. Why?

Yes, he is a mass murderer, but what else could he do to make a change? He sure the hell couldn't go to the UN and petition the western world to stop treating unfairly the middle east. Life is unfair. People get screwed over all the time. He did the only thing he could think of to lash back the monster he saw.

I don't know what to think. I mean yes he needs to be captured to answer for the slaughter he caused. But on the other hand I think we should evaluate what we are doing to others. Are we screwing people over? If so why? Everyone deserves a fair shake in life. Are we a nation being honest and even handed with others? Hunting terrorists is only half the equation. We must strive personally to treat other nations fairly.

Words fail me. There is something here that I can't express, and I wager that it has something to do with the destructive effects of personal selfishness by both us and them.

Holy fuck, I'm both shocked and impressed Adex.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · October 30, 2004, 8:35 am

Your security is not in the hands of [Democratic presidential nominee John] Kerry or Bush or al Qaeda. Your security is in your own hands. Any nation that does not attack us will not be attacked.

There is all the reason in the world to leave. We should back out now and we will be safe from the terrorists.

noel · Post by **noel** » October 30, 2004, 10:34 am

Interestingly he didn't even ask us to back out of Iraq. (I haven't had a chance to read the entire transcript yet so I might be wrong) He just asked us to examine our foreign policy and adjust it to be more [fair] to everyone including the middle east. Is our foreign policy unfair? Most likely yes. For a radical islamic fundie, his statement was pretty fucking reasonable and that's pretty fucking scary to me.

Adex, I agree with every single word of your posts.

Mawafu, I did some research. The reason why we didn't get Osama at that time is because the Joint Chiefs told Clinton that in order to capture Osama, we'd need to send a force large enough to invade a country. They rejected any single team (Delta/SEAL/etc.) plans to capture him, in favor of like a full scale invasion. Prior to 9/11, that type of action would have been nearly political suicide. Additionally, the people who were responsible for the '93 terrorist bombing were captured. I can't remember their names off hand, but I believe either Jordan or the Saudis captured them. I believe that these were the guys that the Saudis beheaded before we were able to interrogate them.

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » October 30, 2004, 11:04 am

Adex_Xeda wrote:After all of these years of trying to understand why "they" hate us, it seems that "they" have paused and made an effort to explain. I seems important to him that we know his motivations. Why? Are we pressuring him so much that he's trying to figure a way to resolve the current situation? Is he trying to mess with our elections by this statement. Why does feel the need to explain himself to us?

I see a man who has for years been frustrated by an unfairness of life. He felt powerless for so long that it drove him into violent reaction. Yet now he wants us to understand him. Why?

Yes, he is a mass murderer, but what else could he do to make a change? He sure the hell couldn't go to the UN and petition the western world to stop treating unfairly the middle east. Life is unfair. People get screwed over all the time. He did the only thing he could think of to lash back the monster he saw.

I don't know what to think. I mean yes he needs to be captured to answer for the slaughter he caused. But on the other hand I think we should evaluate what we are doing to others. Are we screwing people over? If so why? Everyone deserves a fair shake in life. Are we a nation being honest and even handed with others? Hunting terrorists is only half the equation. We must strive personally to treat other nations fairly.

Words fail me. There is something here that I can't express, and I wager that it has something to do with the destructive effects of personal selfishness by both us and them.

Im actually impressed Adex, for you to post this, and i cant agree more. Now we just need a pixie book version to explain this to Midnyte and Sirton. Who knows, they might actually learn something too

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » October 30, 2004, 2:04 pm

It's one thing to understand the other guy.

But when the other guy abducts the head of an aid organization who has devoted her life to helping the needy and threatens to cut her head off, it does little but motivate one to hunt the guy down.

Kaldaur · Post by **Kaldaur** » October 30, 2004, 2:34 pm

I liked your post Adex. It sums up to me everything that is wrong with what is going on. If I had a gun and bin Laden was right in front of me, I wouldn't hesitate. And yet, the US's foreign policy scares me sometimes. This situation needs to be examined more.

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » October 30, 2004, 2:49 pm

Adex, awesome man.... just awesome

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » October 30, 2004, 3:00 pm

Adex_Xeda wrote:It's one thing to understand the other guy.

But when the other guy abducts the head of an aid organization who has devoted her life to helping the needy and threatens to cut her head off, it does little but motivate one to hunt the guy down.

This injustice would motivate many of us to do things we normally would not do, hunt the guy down and kill him. Once pushed to such an extremes such radical acts do not seem radical anymore because we dehumanize the other side. Bear in mind we do not know this aid worker, we have no personal investment in her. Imagine if she was a member of your family.

That very same motivation works to create the fanaticism on the other side.

Until we stop the injustices we've been putting the middle east through for the better part of a century there is no winning the "War on Terror". Every innocent killed and injustice perpetrated has the potential to create new radicals to take the place of those we terrorists we kill. How many relatives of the 100k killed in Iraq have been pushed to fanaticism by this war?

IMO you have two options to win this war, genocide or changing foreign policy. Neither Kerry nor Bush seem to grasp this, or (more likely) they are unwilling to change policy and are accepting that terrorism will be the status quo, i.e. 9/11 was an acceptable loss.

Toshira · Post by **Toshira** » October 30, 2004, 3:08 pm

Winnow wrote: Everyone on this board is a failure because they should all be in the middle east hunting down Osama.

Yak, Yak. Lead the way. And since when are Pakistan/Afghanistan = "the Middle East"? I always thought Iran was sort of the eastern edge of the Middle East.

In other news, I agree with you Adex.

I am far, far more upset with the decisions of foreign policy makers of the last 50 years than I am with Osama. Revenge is nto my top priority, prevention is.

It's interesting to hear Osama through a translator. Sure doesn't sound to me like the man I've been told about, hell-bent on the destruction of America no matter the cost. He seems very rational and calculating.

Ahhh - we're only one generation away from seeing Osama image T-shirts on campuses the way we saw Che in the past...

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » October 30, 2004, 5:23 pm

Toshira wrote:
Winnow wrote: Everyone on this board is a failure because they should all be in the middle east hunting down Osama.
Yak, Yak. Lead the way. And since when are Pakistan/Afghanistan = "the Middle East"? I always thought Iran was sort of the eastern edge of the Middle East.

In other news, I agree with you Adex.

I am far, far more upset with the decisions of foreign policy makers of the last 50 years than I am with Osama. Revenge is nto my top priority, prevention is.

It's interesting to hear Osama through a translator. Sure doesn't sound to me like the man I've been told about, hell-bent on the destruction of America no matter the cost. He seems very rational and calculating.

Ahhh - we're only one generation away from seeing Osama image T-shirts on campuses the way we saw Che in the past...

Reasonable, he is not....

He would be the Islamic equivilant to our Jerry Falwell...now those two have almost an identical mentality

Toshira · Post by **Toshira** » October 30, 2004, 11:41 pm

I disagree. To me he seems more like most Americans, with an "eye for an eye" mentality.

We might call him extreme and murderous in his methods because he cannot use off-shore naval bombardments like we do - but would you call our leaders of foreign policy for the last 50 years, the men and women who have been responsible for the deaths of thousands more, extremists? Maybe not - but many do.

Liking him to Jerry Falwell is stupid. The only connection is that both, supposedly, are motivated by religion (although I would argue that Falwell is motivated by greed).

If I had lost someone in the towers, I would feel differently. I acknowledge the feelings of hatred that many of them must have towards OBL. However, I refuse to appropriate their grief and anger and use it as grounds to ignore his message - just as I refused to patronize the rampantly explotive vendors that decorated their shops with the colorful "NEVER FORGET" stickers in the days and months following 9/11 (oh, where are those stickers now)?

Read the transcript. He demands, among other things, that we stop being Israel's fuck-toy. It didn't seem that long ago to me that there was a thread on this board where many echoed that same sentiment.

Would I do what OBL says because he says to? No. Although I do believe the time of thinking "We're the fucking USA - we don't what we want and damn anyone who gets in our way" - will hopefully be over soon. Our foreign policy is pissing people off, it's time to start asking why.

Raistin · Post by **Raistin** » October 31, 2004, 12:29 am

uote:
Mar.08-May.15 > [•X] The Sudanese government later claimed that during the spring of 1996 it attempted to turn bin Laden over to America, but US authorities declined to take him. This story has been emphatically denied by George Tenet, Richard Clarke, and other senior US officials, and there seems to be no evidence to support it

Quote:
Sep.09 > [•X] The Clinton administration proposes anti-terrorism measures that would cost $1.1 billion, including $429 million for airline security suggested by a commission headed by Vice President Gore. Clinton has been urging fast action on anti-terrorism legislation since late July, but Congressional Republican leaders have balked. A National Research Council study published this year concludes that upgrading the nation’s aviation security system will lead to protests from passengers.

Quote:
Feb.12 > [•X] A panel chaired by Al Gore reports that US airport security is woefully inadequate and makes over fifty recommendations for improvements - in particular, it urges greater information sharing on suspected terrorists between the CIA, the FBI, and the airlines. Little is done. [nyt.Dec.30.2001 / maha]

==Mar.10 > [•X] In a New Republic article entitled ‘Hot Air’, commentator Susan Ellingwood mocks the Clinton administration’s attempts to improve airport security as an absurd waste of money.

Quote:
early.1998 > [•X] The CIA forms a team of 15 Afghan agents to track bin Laden’s whereabouts. He proves to be elusive, but the team is persistent and on at least two occasions it reportedly fires on convoys carrying bin Laden.

Quote:
May.22 > [•X] Two major antiterrorism directives are released by the White House: PDD-62 on general counterterrorism policy and PDD-63 on cyber-counterterrorism. Clinton publicly announces the directives in a speech at the Naval Academy in June. Richard Clarke is named National Coordinator of Counterterrorism

Quote:
Aug.14 > [•X] The CIA and the Pentagon present Clinton with strong evidence that bin Laden is responsible for the embassy bombings, is planning additional terrorist acts, and will be presiding at a top-level al-Qaeda conference in Afghanistan on Aug.20 (this last, erroneous piece of intelligence is probably provided by the Pakistani ISI). Clinton approves a counterstrike, though he’s aware he’ll be accused of trying to distract the public from the ongoing Lewinsky scandal. By now, the administration considers bin Laden “Enemy No. 1” and further intensifies the struggle against al-Qaeda. Eventually, Clinton will station submarines in the Indian Ocean prepared to launch missiles against bin Laden on short notice.

Quote:
Oct.12 > [•XX] The destroyer USS Cole is severely damaged by al-Qaeda suicide bombers at Aden - 17 American sailors are killed. FBI anti-terrorism expert John O’Neill leads a massive but largely unsuccessful investigation in Yemen. Possible links to high-ranking Yemeni government officials are not followed up, and there is no effective US retaliation for the Cole attack

Clinton did try and kill him.These are facts, not guesses.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 31, 2004, 12:44 am

Nice Osama lovefest going on in this thread. It turns my stomach.

Toshira · Post by **Toshira** » October 31, 2004, 1:05 am

Winnow wrote:Nice Osama lovefest going on in this thread. It turns my stomach.

Good - now you know how I feel about your constant Bush leg-humping.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 31, 2004, 1:15 am

Toshira wrote:
Winnow wrote:Nice Osama lovefest going on in this thread. It turns my stomach.
Good - now you know how I feel about your constant Bush leg-humping.

I'm not a Bush lover but with all the Bush haters here I can see how'd you'd be fooled by anyone not calling Bush satan.

I'd give Bush anal tongue darts before saying something nice about Osama.

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » October 31, 2004, 1:21 am

I would like clarification on what exactly Osama considers freedom to be.

Is the Taliban the example he holds?

Toshira · Post by **Toshira** » October 31, 2004, 1:27 am

Winnow wrote:
Toshira wrote:
Winnow wrote:Nice Osama lovefest going on in this thread. It turns my stomach.
Good - now you know how I feel about your constant Bush leg-humping.
I'm not a Bush lover but with all the Bush haters here I can see how'd you'd be fooled by anyone not calling Bush satan.

I'd give Bush anal tongue darts before saying something nice about Osama.

What? you can't even say he has a nice beard? Animal.

Denadeb · Post by **Denadeb** » October 31, 2004, 3:42 am

Isn't it Usama not Osama

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » October 31, 2004, 6:22 am

Denadeb · Post by **Denadeb** » October 31, 2004, 6:33 am

Actually yes it is
http://www.fbi.gov/mostwant/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » October 31, 2004, 9:41 am

You know, the interesting part is that if you go by the numbers then I bet more people have died due to US foreign policy than due to terrorists.

Rivera Bladestrike · October 31, 2004, 11:42 am

You kidding? It'd be 100x.

VeeshanVault

Osama video

Osama video

Re: Osama video