bin Laden Endorses Kerry

Yes - if you are reasonable and have integrity in your arguments.

Which you usually do.

Sigh.

You acknowlege his post, yet maintain the attitude that his post questions?

Actually, I hate that stupid emoticon.

So - yes, there is crap and anger etc. around here aplenty at present. Usually I enormously respect Timber's presentation of views I deeply disagree with. However, if you bother to read my posts in this thread (have you?) I strongly disagree with his reasoning here - speaking of rationality.

Have you, Instigate, bothered to familiarise yourself with the objections to Timber's reasoning posted here, or are you just piling on to the side you support?

More than this, I find the covert and, in my view, deeply dishonest, association of kerry with terrorism on this, and other, threads here since the bin Laden tape was released, so outrageous that I can, and will, speak out against it despite my personal feelings for those normally exceptionally reasonable people who are promulgating it.

"Every state that doesnt play with our security will automatically guarantee its own security"

After an entire litany against Bush, Bin Laden makes this statement. There is insinuation there, an implied target. What could it be???? Here is what the experts think. If you can think of an institution, besides yourself, that is more qualified to interpret this, feel free to present it.

http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SA1404

Irrelevant. As I thought - you have either not read, or not understood, any of the bases for objection to this thread's title, or Timber's arguments.

BTW - are you in the habit of agreeing with bin Laden's opinions - IF the tape accurately reflects them, and is not, as is at least equally plausible, an attempt to sow dissension and confusion?

Having diligently studied all 9 (nine) posts by DLowan on this thread (2 on page 2, 2 on page 3, 5 on page 7) I find that:

1. DLowan makes no claim to knowledge of Arabic
2. DLowan does not dispute the translations by Arabic scholars and commentators posted here, however
3. DLowan feels that quoting them constitutes "intellectual dishonesty", and, further,
4. proposes alternative explanations - on the basis of "feelings" presumably since no other basis is given - such as possible wishes on the part of Bin Laden to cause confusion in the U.S. electorate.

Well great, DLowan. Perhaps you have "feelings" on subjects other than Arabic translations, such as geography, and feel the earth is flat? Telepathy is another of your skills, evidently, since you divined Bin Laden's true intent in making the statements he did make. If these are your bases for another (10th) post on this thread, please proceed - and don't wonder so few here bothered to read your previous 9.

Seems to me such vitriolic responses should follow "Bush has Bin Laden in custody and is waiting to parade him about on election eve"-- or "Bush was in on 911"...not an analysis presented by an actual comment of Bin Laden.

There has been plenty of idiocy presented on this forum. I think, dlowan, you were politically selective in your attack on Timber. There are some people who deal almost exclusively in ridiculous partisan conspiracies. You haven't jumped on them as personally.

Its not that you disagreed. Its how it meaures up. Don't think this thread should have elicited such a personal attack.

I think that this has been a long, hard fought election. I think that right now the country is extremely polarized, and that polarization has found its way on to A2K.

There are people who are extremely frustrated with both candidates, and I am seeing them taking out their frustrations on fellow members. What makes the issue more aggravating, is that, as of now, the election is a horse race. No one really knows whom the winner will be, and that is adding to members' anxiety.

Basically, whomever wins, wins, and we will be stuck with the guy for the next four years. As far as I am concerned, I am not pleased with either candidate.

We have all developed some wonderful relationships over the years, no matter what our political persuasion. Let us not let politics damage beautiful friendships!

I've long called timber on it when he posts something I disagree with -- he's a very good sport about it, and my disagreement is often vociferous.

I won't stop because it's election day, and still think these allegations (that Osama "endorsed" Kerry rather than saying that Bush, Kerry, doesn't matter) are silly at best.

From my perspective, even some of the cool people are acting surpassingly silly.

<shrug>

Phoenix - never mind the psychology, stick to facts: a Dutch filmmaker named Theo Van Gogh who spoke out against brutality of illegal Moslems in Holland was just murdered in Amsterdam. The killer was "taking out his frustrations" presumably?

Just the facts, ma'am. Thank you.

Yes. Maybe the liberals will try to ascertain why he hated van Gogh. I'm sure we'll all feel better knowing... What is needed here is more sympathy to the plight of those who murder.

Yep, that's some nice, reasoned, non-hyperbolic discourse.

-sigh-

(Theo Van Gogh was just murdered? Really? How awful.)

Would either of you mind pointing out how the allegation that Osama was endorsing Kerry is not silly?

Because he did.

HofT- I am not against honest argument. What I am against is the nastiness, and mean spiritness that I have been perceiving in the last few weeks. I believe that it is uncalled for.

The rabble rouser can scream and yell 'til doomsday, but what will happen with the election, will happen. The bottom line is what each person does today in the voting booth.

Why don't we take OBL's diatribe apart?

He says America's safety is in our hands. He's talking about the election. He blames 911 on the Bush family, and says his motivation for blowing us up in still present, because Bush is not telling the truth about the reason Bin Laden struck us in the first place.

Your safety is in your hands, he says. He means the vote. So, does he mean for us to vote for Bush, or vote for Kerry.

Its ridiculous for anyone to try to avoid the meaning of what he said.

Wow. Just no hope today, huh?

What we have is some monitored over the internet radical islamist commentators who mention a possible translation of "state". That does not seem convincing to me. Why? Not because of my knowledge of Arabic or lack thereof -- because of context.



He is saying very specifically, Kerry, Bush, doesn't matter, it's what you do as a country. If America doesn't play with our security, its security is guaranteed.

Deb, I think this is where the logic train is jumping the tracks. On the one hand you are denying that slams on Bush are Pro-Kerry, in the final days of an election campaign no less... but in the very next breath you are unable to discern between suggestions that "Bin Ladin is working for the same goal as Kerry" and some imaginary demonizing "association of Kerry with terrorism".

No one thinks Kerry backs Bin Ladin or has any association whatsoever terrorism whatsoever.




All morning I've been reading everything I get my hands on... including the transcript for a third time. I find Timber's explanation very, very plausible and will be surprised not at all when the next strike hits a State who's electoral votes go to Bush. I suspect it will be Florida, if we do indeed vote Bush (I will be). Imagine the credibility of having warned against Bush specifically to States... and then striking his next blow directly to one who didn't listen. This meshes perfectly with Nimh's interpretation of Bin Ladin's goals.

People listening in the ME will see that Bin Ladin did everything in his power to warn us away before attacking us. He can speak with great regret after he does. It is a brilliant strategy... not unlike 9-11 itself.

Let me note that I don't think the election will have any bearing what-so-ever on Bin Ladin's actions. He can always use "Kerry didn't change anything" for his excuse... but imagine how much more powerful his voice will seem after his self-fulfilling prophecy is realized and he attacks a Bush State.

Btw, I'm not in the habit of believing what Bin Ladin says. If I were, I'd consider joining his cause... because his argument is very, very compelling. However, credibility is something he needs and I am now convinced that he's come up with a brilliant strategy to expand it.