What is the logical consequence of noting the fact that the terrorist groups that make a difference on planet Earth—such as Hamas and Hezbollah, the PLO, Colombia's FARC—are extensions of, respectively, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, and Venezuela? It is the negation of the U.S. government's favorite axiom. It means that when George W. Bush spoke, and when Barack Obama speaks, of America being "at war" against "extremism" or "extremists" they are either being stupid or acting stupid to avoid dealing with the nasty fact that many governments wage indirect warfare.
International relations professor Angelo M. Codevilla argues that
Osama bin Laden is not quite influential, not quite relevant, and probably dead.
(multipage version)
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane
on Mar 27, 2009 -
33 comments
CIA Gives Up on Bin Laden Search says a post full of links on Sploid, it was revealed yesterday (when no one was paying attention) that the CIA disbanded its Bin Laden unit one year ago. The post also links to news that the FBI has "no hard evidence" connecting Bin Laden to the 9/11 attacks.
posted by cell divide
on Jul 5, 2006 -
54 comments
Osama bin Laden,
littérateur and new-media star. A thought-provoking analysis of bin Laden's adept use of Koranic language and the Internet by Bruce B. Lawrence, an Islamic scholar at Duke who edited a new anthology of bin Laden's public statements called
Messages to the World. The Western media -- says the millionaire mass-murderer
formerly trained as a useful ally by the CIA via
Pakistan's ISI -- "implants fear and helplessness in the psyche of the people of Europe and the United States. It means that what the enemies of the United States cannot do, its media are doing!" Know thy enemy.
[via Arts and Letters Daily.]
posted by digaman
on Nov 3, 2005 -
57 comments
He's back: Bin Laden has released a new tape, where he attacks Bush, claims responsibility for 9/11, backhandledly backs Kerry and warns Americans to take responsibility for safety to themselves. But is it all an elaborate double bluff to make sure Bush gets in (and OBL stays as safe as he is now)?
posted by bonaldi
on Oct 29, 2004 -
123 comments
9/11 Panel: Bush White House Withheld Papers The commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks announced yesterday that it has identified 69 documents from the Clinton era that the Bush White House withheld from investigators and which include references to al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden and other issues relevant to the panel's work.
posted by Postroad
on Apr 8, 2004 -
8 comments
Debunking The Debunkers? A few days ago I had posted a piece asserting that the Saudi royals, along with members of Bin Laden's family , were given hasty approval to flee the U.S. directly after 9/11, with the highest clearance from top govt officials. That post was "shot down" by comments stating that Snopes noted the falsity of that claim. Now it seems Snopes has reneged and Google has removed cache items about the story. See for yourself what seems to be taking place.
posted by Postroad
on Sep 6, 2003 -
38 comments
Michael Moore is making a deal with Mel Gibson's Icon Prods. to finance
"Fahrenheit 911," a documentary that will trace why the U.S. has become a target for hatred and terrorism. It will also depict alleged dealings between two generations of the Bush and bin Laden clans that led to George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden becoming mortal enemies.
posted by archimago
on Mar 31, 2003 -
37 comments
Another Big Lie. "The great mass of people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one." Adolf Hitler (1889-1945), German dictator. Mein Kampf, vol. 1, ch. 10 (1925)" There are
Big Lies all around us. We seem to prefer to turn away from them, to dismiss the believers as harmless deluded fools. But doesn't that just make it worse?
posted by Cerebus
on Sep 5, 2002 -
28 comments
How Al Qaeda Slipped Away "American officials concede that there was a mass escape from Tora Bora—as well as a broader exodus by various routes into Pakistan and Iran—but insist that Al Qaeda now is crippled and too busy running to do much damage. “Perhaps we could have got them wholesale,” says one senior Defense official. “Now we’re doing it retail. In the end, it doesn’t make much difference. We’re getting them.”" We might want to take care of this
before we "invade" Iraq.
posted by owillis
on Aug 14, 2002 -
14 comments
Is the New York Times rewriting history? This link claims (and an archives search backs up) that the Paper of Record deleted a bin Laden-related story published two days before 9/11, and now redirects searchers to a story written on 9/12. The story isn't damning, but it does point out how much we knew about him before the event. Is it bad journalism? Bad politics? Extra points awarded for Orwell quotes.
posted by chino
on Feb 15, 2002 -
31 comments
A story that seems to be good news no matter what side of the 'war' you're on. The dragnet around Bin Laden is reported to be closing quickly, and currently stands, says the Sunday Times, at about 30 squares mile. So, what happens next? (via Plastic.com)
posted by Hildago
on Nov 18, 2001 -
13 comments
Naipul thinks the causes of Sept. 11 are religious, not American foreign policy. (NYT) "There is a passage in one of the Conrad short stories of the East Indies where the savage finds himself with his hands bare in the world, and he lets out a howl of anger. I think that, in its essence, what is happening.The world is getting more and more out of reach of simple people who have only religion. And the more they depend on religion, which of course solves nothing, the more the world gets out of reach."
posted by semmi
on Oct 27, 2001 -
36 comments
From a piece in the NYTimes today,
Home Front Is Minefield for President:
"The lesson we're learning," one administration official said today, "is that you can bomb the wrong place in Afghanistan and not take much heat for it. But don't mess up at the post office."Leave it to the White House to come away with exactly the wrong interpretation. But the facts are there, too -- most Americans are more concerned about the (relatively slight) risk of getting Anthrax than the rather significant risk that, if we screw up in Afghanistan, we might lose the current coalition against terrorism, Bin Laden, and any hope for "homeland security" for a long time to come....
posted by mattpfeff
on Oct 25, 2001 -
12 comments
Boeing's Memo to bin Laden Here's a little PowerPoint presentation making its way around the defense industry. A memo (supposedly) from Boeing's CEO, to Osama bin Laden discussing bin Laden's interest in Boeing's 757 and 767 commercial airliners and Boeing's desire to do a demonstration of some of their non-commercial products for Mr. bin Laden. It's summed up pretty nicely, Don't bother making an appointment for the demo, we'll just drop in.
posted by billman
on Oct 18, 2001 -
13 comments
Leaking troop movement? This new report says the U.S. has had special forces troops inside Afghanistan for
two weeks now. I understand "everything" is leaked in Washington, but shouldn't there be something sacred about the locations of troops?
posted by owillis
on Sep 27, 2001 -
30 comments
Bin Laden Denies attack was his. "I stress that I have not carried out this act, which appears to have been carried out by individuals with their own motivation." Maybe it was the guy on the grassy knoll again?
posted by mathowie
on Sep 16, 2001 -
47 comments
Russia not willing to help? Meanwhile, Nikolai Kovalyov, the former head of the Russian FSB security service, warned the US that an attack on Afghanistan would fail to capture Osama bin Laden, the alleged mastermind of the atrocities, and would backfire on the US. "In Afghanistan's mountainous terrain it takes a trainload of explosives to destroy three militants," he said. "The chance of hitting bin Laden is zero."
posted by rushmc
on Sep 15, 2001 -
17 comments
The problem with retaliation. "Don't get me wrong. If Bin Laden is indeed behind this, then he should be either killed or put on trial....still, how we go about bringing Bin Laden to justice (assuming, again, that this is his work) will massively influence how safe Americans are in the decades to come." The sanest analysis I've seen so far.
posted by lbergstr
on Sep 12, 2001 -
49 comments
