DUBAI (Reuters) - Osama bin Laden warned that al Qaeda was preparing new attacks inside the United States, but said the group was open to a conditional truce with Americans, according to an audio tape attributed to him on Thursday. It was the first purported tape by bin Laden since 2004. Al Jazeera television, which aired the tape, said it was recorded in December.
"The operations are under preparation and you will see them in your houses as soon as they are complete, God willing," said the speaker on the audio tape, who sounded
like bin Laden.
In the tape, bin Laden said al Qaeda was willing to "respond" to U.S. public opinion in favor of withdrawing troops from Iraq. He did not specify conditions for the truce, but indicated that it was linked to U.S. troops quitting Iraq. al-Reuters
Thursday, January 19, 2006
Bin Laden Knows He is Losing
A person like Bin Laden, who is willing to send suicide bombers to murder thousands of people, does not call for a truce if he is winning. With a truce, he is looking to rearm and regroup his forces. He knows he is losing and that he needs time. He'll be able to sway some members of the media and the Democratic party.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Do you even realise that there is going to be no winner in this 'war', and that judging by the massive debts being accumulated in America, the 2500 dead, and 70,000 seriously wounded American soldiers, it seems that Bin Laden is actually doing quite well.
Whilst you cannot condone the actions of Bin Laden, to condemn them when you have a record of killing millions of people in acts of terror - such as the US and UK have, does seem a little hypocritical.
Bin Laden is merely referring to the root cause of all this violence, and that is namely the military dominance enforced upon the Middle East, firstly by the British Empire, and since the Second World War by America.
Now as a Daily Mail reader you are of course in favour of the imperial ambitions of the US and the UK, and from reading some of your posts you really should try and open your mind at least a tiny fraction.
This blog is not purveying truth, it is simply repeating the ignorant views of the right wing westo-centric rulers of the world, something that is the purposeful, consistant, and eternal obsfucation of truth in pursuit of Western hegemony.
Point of fact - the US has a very serious military presence in the Phillipines, which was essentially a US colony.
Anon did not say that 9/11 was the fault of the US, merely that a War on Terror, as imagined in the Office of Special Plans (or whatever) will likely only act as positive feedback to the 'causes' of terror. Cause here, being distinct from justification, being used to describe a causative object.
More, anon say that one of the reasons we have a radicalised group of people in the middle-east (and beyond) is imperialism. This is not all the US. Moreover, saying that one of the causes is (bloody, murderous) imperialism does not equate to saying that it is the only cause, which is the implied assumption of your 'test'.
As for your 'ultimate retort' - which is nothing of the sort, prinicipally as you have misunderstood what anon has written - no-one would seriously cite Algeria without mentioning that contemporary Algeria is the product of brutal Western imperialism, in this case the French.
TC, you seem to be an utter simpleton. Why need historical events have a SINGLE cause? They, patently, have a multitude, a connexion between the material and the ideological. But you concentrate on the religion of the other, something that you, and the US, can do nothing about. Short of genocide. What you can change if yor own nation's interactions with other people.
More, the idea that historical causation dissolves over 30 years is an absolute joke, which would be funny if you were also an illiterate sufferer of degenerative mental illness. Are you really telling me that effects of colonialism are no longer detectable in contemporary societies? What utter bollocks.
Point of fact. US military advisors are present in significant numbers in the Phillipines. Why radical Islamist movements in the Phillipines? I never put it down to US presence, but then I hardly think that the US support for oligarchal dicatatorship has hardley helped engender a belief in peaceful politics amongst a easily dispised minority.
And here's the point; your use of al-Reuters betrays the stupid racism that is the core of your world view. The 'al' is an attempt to present Reuters as a tool of Arab disinformation. This is the direct equivalent of attributing your sources as 'The Jew York Times'.
The poet Robert Frost once said a "liberal is someone too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel."
The problem you have is that you are so consumed with self guilt that you do not place blame where it should lie. For example, before the British left Zimbabwe, it was an agricultural exporter. Now, people are starving and the government uses food as a tool to control people. Yes, Britian took Rhodesia's gold 80 years ago, but that shouldn't effect why Zimbabweans are be starving now. You are so consumed with self loathing that you excuse tyrants.
You anquish that the US buys oil from Arabia, but guess what, that keeps the Arab economies moving so they can buy things! If it were not for the West buying oil, conditions in Arab lands would drop substantially.
I use al-Reuters because Reuters is a British "news service" but consistently slants their "news" to side with the Arab street. They will put quotations marks around the word "terrorist" as if they are really not one. The enemy in Iraq are called "insurgents." They captioned a photo of a mother who's sons died being suicide bomber and called her sons "martyrs." They use the phrase "Al-Qeada in Mesopotamia" because they don't want less-than-keen readers to realize that Mesopotamia is really Iraq and that Al-Qaeda has connections to Iraq.
Post a Comment