Unlike Bush, bin Laden keeps his word
- From: trudogg <trudogg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:02:05 -0500
Now that he's under pressure to defend his domestic spying program,
President Bush is suddenly very worried about Osama bin Laden. And
Bush says if we had any sense, we'd also be worried about bin Laden
and stop bitching about the loss of our Fourth Amendment rights.
"We're at war with an enemy that wants to hit us again," Bush warned
last week. "Osama bin Laden made that clear the other day, and I take
his words very seriously."
But that wasn't the case before Bush needed to justify the NSA bugging
of Americans, and before bin Laden gave him a convenient excuse for
doing that by issuing another threat in the heat of the controversy.
Bush hasn't given America's Enemy No. 1 the time of day since he
escaped from Tora Bora four years ago and made the tough-talking Texan
? who'd vowed to get him "dead or alive" ? look like a dime-store
cowboy.
Rewind to Jan. 17, 2002. Tom Brokaw asked Bush about the top
terrorist's disappearing act, and Bush shrugged it off by saying,
"Osama bin Laden is not my focus." He even stiffed the 9/11 mastermind
in his State of the Union speech.
Then a couple of months later, as the press reminded him of the
embarrassing failure, the president remained indifferent: "I don't
know where he is, and I truly am not that concerned about him."
In subsequent State of the Union addresses, bin Laden didn't even
warrant a single mention, upstaged as he was by Saddam Hussein. Even
after ol' Saddam was caught and shown to be more a threat to his
dentist than to any American, Bush kept jabbering about him. But not
bin Laden.
While it's debatable how serious the president is now about bin Laden,
he's not kidding when he says the al-Qaeda leader has made his threats
very "clear."
In fact, bin Laden doesn't bluff or make idle threats. He telegraphs
his every move and follows through on terror threats within months of
making them, which is more than can be said for Sheriff "Dead or
Alive" Bush, who's still hunting for the main 9/11 quarry going on
five years now.
Meanwhile, bin Laden has not only stated his plans to again attack the
United States but has issued three lists of allies to be attacked
either for assisting Washington in Afghanistan and Iraq or for helping
U.S. intelligence capture al-Qaeda members.
"In all cases, bin Laden indicated that these attacks would be
designed to make the countries rethink their support for America,"
notes Michael Scheuer, former head of the CIA's bin Laden unit, in his
book Imperial Hubris.
The first target list was issued on Sept. 28, 2001, the second on Feb.
11, 2003, and the third on Oct. 18, 2003. In that October tape, bin
Laden warned that Spain and Britain would be among six nations
targeted for their role in the Iraq war. "We reserve the right to
retaliate at the appropriate time and place against all countries
involved, especially the UK, Spain, Australia, Japan, and Italy," he
warned.
All told, 20 nations made bin Laden's hit list. "Of the 20 nations
al-Qaeda threatened, 18 have been attacked ? a 90 percent
correlation," Scheuer says.
His assessment included strikes on Bali, Casablanca, Istanbul, and
Madrid, but not on London, which came after his book was released. So
make that 19 nations hit out of 20 forewarned ? a 95 percent
correlation, making al-Qaeda at once the world's most effective terror
network and the most predictable.
Only, you'd never know it from this president, who engages in false
bravado about breaking "the back of al-Qaeda" instead of taking an
honest measurement of the enemy, who is still lethal and poised to
strike again.
Many terror analysts believe al-Qaeda will hit U.S. allies Italy and
Australia next, perhaps both within this year. And bin Laden, saving
the worst for us, has received the green light from a Saudi cleric to
use nukes against American cities, killing potentially millions. "The
real battle has not started yet," he warns.
Sure, it may be bluster. But given his proven track record, we can't
afford to take him lightly.
Yet instead of burying bin Laden, Bush has wasted a lot of time trying
to bury the political embarrassment of his escape by dismissing him as
impotent and "on the run." Of course, bin Laden never retired from the
terror business. On the contrary, he's been very active and is still a
dangerous threat to America ? something Bush is only now acknowledging
as he grasps for an excuse to continue abusing his power while
ineffectively fighting the war on al-Qaeda
Bin Laden is a man of his word. Bush, not so much. He's too busy
playing politics with your security.
Paul Sperry
Copyright 2006 Antiwar.com
Source: Antiwar.com
http://www.antiwar.com/sperry/?articleid=8469
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Unlike Bush, bin Laden keeps his word
- From: KS---
- Re: Unlike Bush, bin Laden keeps his word
- Prev by Date: ...Texas Delicacy
- Next by Date: At least Punxsutawney Phil doesn't lie about the weather
- Previous by thread: ...Texas Delicacy
- Next by thread: Re: Unlike Bush, bin Laden keeps his word
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
