Usama Bin Ladin goes to bat for John Kerry. Why?

Thanks Lash. I was trying to avoid arguing the points of pro/anti Bush... but somehow it must have come out that way anyway. If I had been trying to argue it that way, it would have come out very similar to your post. :wink:

Re: Usama Bin Ladin goes to bat for John Kerry. Why?

I may have missed the link on one of the 20 pages that have piled up since you posted this, but the transcript is over at CNN.

http://www2.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/29/bin.laden.transcript/

Hope that helps.

Well, true, soz, but we could all just go fact looking and have no discussion here, couldn't we?

We have a quite a hardy group of Kerry supporters here--and I was sure at least some of you would be happy to detail your chosen candidate's superior plan to fix Iraq. And, discuss why his policy is better.

It makes one think you either don't know his policy, or don't think it's very good.

Anyhoo-- I'm getting really bad at honing in on what turns out to be a sidebar. Was just interested in nimh/OBill discussion.

Just a wild guess on my part here -- but could it have something to do with your title? I admit that when I read "Usama Bin Ladin goes to bat for Kerry -- why?", I did fail to notice your efforts to avoid points of pro/anti Bush. But I'm sure this was just because I wasn't paying enough attention.

Not true Sozobe. Look back through and you will see me prodding him to give me something that he hadn't… and more importantly, you will see me not disputing what he gave me. I'm not moving the goal posts here. You've seen me argue many times before. Had I been trying to say Nimh was wrong about his reasons; some of my posts would likely have grown as long as pages on this thread have been. I was seeking a perspective on Kerry that I couldn't grasp. I still can't. Long ago Fox had asked Nimh to explain why Kerry would be worse for Bin Ladin than Bush. If Nimh had been able to convince me that was so, that would be an important development. Possibly important enough for me to vote for Kerry. I have the same respect for you if you'd like to give it a shot.

Oh yeah, and I have read John Kerry's website.

Maybe it's partisan perception. I immediately saw OBL's remarks as anti-Bush immediately preceding an election--and it morphed into pro-Kerry.

For the Dems to be waxing conspirically about Bush having OBL locked in a dungeon somewhere, and releasing footage of him for their own political expediency--makes one think they see the OBL tape as expressing some pro-Kerry vibe, as well, doesn't it?

Im with Squinney on this one...
This thread is giving me a headache..
But since I have a big mouth I cant stay out.

Now please understand... first off.. I am not very well educated in my political standings.. I am one of those Democrats who just are a democrat because I want to.. simple as that.

This thread caught my attention because

1) The main question I got from seeing this thread is ' Why would Bin Laden be behind Kerry?
Well.. My first thought was quite simple.
It is an ass-backwards way for the Republican party to get votes. Think about it,
If the so called enemy was supporting the other side, then who would get the last minute 'sway vote?' ..

Then I read OCB's comments about wanting people to explain thier like for Kerry in hopes that he could understand WHY people do. Then I realized what this thread was really about.

My opinion.. ( 2 cents with change )
Elections are popularity contests.
But given the situations we have seen in this last 4 year term , I personally hate the ground Bush walks on.
BUT .. and this is a big butt.. I would vote republican... maybe
Because, in my little mind, Bush created this problem.. Bush has to fix it. I dont truly believe that anyone can come in at this point in time and make things better. Noone can repair the damage we have done to other countries, repair the damage done to OUR country or begin to buff off this recession we have seen except for the one who created it.
Granted, with Bush back in office we are subject to anything else he has up his sociopathic sleeves, a Democrat isnt what is needed right now. Democrats are good for one thing.. the economy. Repubicans are good for creating/establishing relations.
My opinion is that Bush needs to fix our reputation with the countries we have invaded in his little game of army men. To ask another person to step into this place and try to fix things I think is asking for more trouble then we can handle as a country. I know this is WAY OFF THE SUBJECT but.. as I said before.. it is just my little opinion.

Nimh..... I love your insight! Always have.

I chose the title to provoke discussion... and provoke it it did. In retrospect I wish I had chosen something slightly less provocative because it did prove to be a distraction. Some of his points were very Michael Moorish but that really wasn't the most significant reason for starting a thread.

That's a fair question. Speaking as one current Dem who has read the transcript of the Osama Bin Laden tape, my answer is "no, I don't see him expressing some pro-Kerry vibe". Perhaps you can point me to some quotes from the transcript where he does seem to communicate such a vibe to you?

I don't know how to translate a vibe--but here I go--

If two guys are having a fight, and you walk up, and you start hitting one of the guys, you are, in effect, on the other guy's side.

Maybe not ideologically, maybe not in spirit, maybe not by design, even... But, effectively.
-------------
I will now go and see if I can extricate the vibe.

How about this one Thomas? Would you say this is Pro-Bush or Pro-Kerry?

Yeah. That's not an OBL complaint, that's a Dem talking point via Micheal Moore. An American political argument. (Pro-Kerry.)

Going back to transcript.

The tape was actually 18 minutes in length. Al Jazeera censored it to show 6 minutes. Has anyone actually read the entire 18 minute transcript?

Lash - regarding the comment you made about Kerry putting more troops on the ground. I thought I heard him say this as well, but tonight he told Tom Brokaw "no, I don't think we need more troops on the ground".

Thomas--

The whole thing was a personal attack on Bush--dragging his father into it--practically blaming 911 on the Bush family, and he said 'since Bush was misleading the nation about the reasons for the AQ attack, AQ's motivation was still intact.

I don't see how it could be viewed as anything but an election eve attempt to get Bush voted out of office.

Had it been a smear on Kerry, reasonable people would see it as an attempt to keep Kerry out of office.

I took it as "Oh, my G-d. We were shocked any US president would just sit and allow his country to be attacked. We expected more resistance. We expected to be shot down or something. Anything. But, certainly not to just sit in a classroom."

That's certainly not pro-Bush. But, doesn't make it pro-Kerry, either. Just a statement of his surprise at the way it played out.

Yeah. Bush should have jumped in a fighter jet and blown them out of the sky, like any other self-respecting President would.

Just Wonders-- Thanks for the update on Kerry's flip-flopping. Unbefukkinglievable. He's actually had four flips and a flop on this one CRITICAL issue.

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/33063.htm

Officials said that in the 18-minute long tape - of which only six minutes were aired on the al-Jazeera Arab television network in the Middle East on Friday - bin Laden bemoans the recent democratic elections in Afghanistan and the lack of violence involved with it.

On the tape, bin Laden also says his terror organization has been hurt by the U.S. military's unrelenting manhunt for him and his cohorts on the Afghan-Pakistani border.

A portion of the left-out footage includes a tirade aimed at President Bush and his father, former President George H.W. Bush, claiming the war in Iraq is purely over oil.

The tape also sparked some concern that an attack aimed at disrupting Tuesday's election may be planned.

But those who have seen the tape have said there was no specific information regarding an attack

Squinney, it's possible he was trying to think a move ahead; and that by attacking Bush, people would think he's afraid of Bush and consequently vote for Bush.

It's possible that he really doesn't give a rat's ass who gets elected and he just thought as long as he was at it, why not throw some pot shots at the incumbent.

But let's not pretend that that was anything but a slam on Bush's competence or lack thereof. Bill Maher accused him of plagiarism for crying outside.

Just a quick comment whilr I am on hold at work - and I haven't read this thread for a while - so I do not know where discussion has gone in the meantime.

Where I am (and mebbe Nimh??) - there is no corollary to your president - the leader is the person elected by the ruling party (who got most seats in parliament in the last election). This leader can change during the life of a parliament.

There is increasingly some sort of cult of personality around party leaders - borrowed from you (sadly, I think) - and our elections are becoming increasingly "presidential" as we say.

However, mainly people vote on the platform and policies of the party - the leader is important and can shape governments - but the policies are what one decides on - and what one has, or has not, allegiance to.

The Bush/Kerry thing, fought as sharply as you guys are fighting it, is quite alien to me.

Your Dems are a wishy washy sort of minorly mebbe slightly left of centre - or slightly to the right - for most of us.

I would generally be more in favour of their policies than I would of repubs - mainly on social issues - if I lived in the US.

I am also generally more in favour of Dem foreign policy.

So - since he is a Dem, I would support Kerry, more than likely, because of his PARTY affiliation - that is that party's policies are likely to be more palatable to me than Republican ones.

Because of Bush's behaviour as president, I see him as extraordinarily damaging - so I would likely support almost anyone but bush - but, I also tend to support kerry because his party policies are more simpatico - remember, the personality thing is just not as important to me as it is to you guys - and I do not have as clear a sense of either candidate's personality as you guys do - or think you do (through the clouds of spin, and your personal prejudices).

What does attract me about kerry, as opposed to bush, is that my knowledge of his history tells me he is able to look at the actions of the US and condemn them if he believes they are wrong - see Vietnam and Iran Contra.

This (which fuels the hatred of many of you) added to my general greater (if small) attachment to democrat policies over republican ones makes me support kerry - not simply cos he is anyone but bush (I would NOT support Perot, or any other candidate whom I regarded as worse than bush) but also because I am very attracted to what appears to be his ability to confront the realities and effects of American policy, and to take corrective action where it is wrong. This indicates to me greater integrity and sophistication -vs Bush's (to me frankly terrifying) "I am right and good and America is right and good no matter what the evidence".

Rightly or wrongly, those are my reasons for seeing Kerry as a better candidate.

Anyone but Bush is cetainly in there, because of my estimation of what Bush has done while in power - but other factors are in there too - and, as I said, I would NOT support a worse candidate than Bush.