One reason Bush has no interest in catching bin-Laden is that the right loves it whenever bin-Laden (or his digitized facsimile) shows up. Here’s David Brooks talking on the McNeil-Lehrer Hour last night.
DAVID BROOKS, Columnist, New York Times: No, ludicrous. I mean, on one hand, he’s a malevolent guy who killed 3,000 Americans. But you read this thing, and it’s like he’s been sitting around reading lefty blogs, and he’s one of these childish people posting rants at the bottom the page, you know, Noam Chomsky and all this stuff.
You can’t help read it and not laugh at it, occasionally, because it is just absurd. It’s flying this way, and that way, weird conspiracy theories, and mortgages, global warming. He throws it all in there.
The one thing that leapt out — and Bruce Hoffman and the others mentioned this — was how Western it is. And a friend of mine, Reuel Gerecht, points out that there’s this argument that Western ideas never permeated into the Arab world, but in fact it’s all — I mean, a lot of the worst ideas from the West have permeated in, and he’s picked up Noam Chomsky, and he’s picked up some of the anti-globalization stuff. And that’s what infuses this.
Maybe Reuel Gerecht is writing Bin-Laden’s script. Ever think of that? Could be why it is so ‘western’, and tends to echo mainstream critiques of the Bush administration. No?
I’m beyond taking bin-Laden tapes at face value. I simply suspend belief when I see these things. They always show up at opportune times (like a couple days before the ’04 election, or before a vote on war spending) and they always say exactly what Dick Cheney wants them to say. And then tools like Brooks go out and say that bin-Laden sounds just like a Democrat.
It’s all a strange coincidence? Here’s a tip.
The U.S. military is conducting a propaganda campaign to overstate the threat to stability posed by the al Qaeda leader in Iraq, The Washington Post reported on Monday.
According to the article, Col. Derek Harvey, who served as a military intelligence officer in Iraq, told a U.S. Army meeting last summer: “Our own focus on Zarqawi has enlarged his caricature, if you will — made him more important than he really is, in some ways.”
“The long-term threat is not Zarqawi or religious extremists, but these former regime types and their friends,” Harvey said in a transcript of the meeting at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, the Post reported.
Harvey said at the meeting that, while Zarqawi and other foreign insurgents in Iraq have carried out deadly bombing attacks, they remain “a very small part of the actual numbers,” according to the newspaper.
Largely aimed at Iraqis, the Zarqawi campaign began two years ago and was believed to be ongoing, the Post said. It has included leaflets, radio and television broadcasts and at least one leak to an American journalist, the newspaper said.
Another military officer familiar with the program told the newspaper that the material was all in Arabic. But the officer said the Zarqawi campaign “probably raised his profile in the American press’s view,” the report said.
Zarqawi has a $25 million U.S. bounty on his head.
Officers familiar with the propaganda program were cited as saying that one goal was to drive a wedge into the insurgency by emphasizing Zarqawi’s terrorist acts and foreign origin.
“Villainize Zarqawi/leverage xenophobia response,” a U.S. military briefing document from 2004 stated, the Post reported.
Zarqawi was a myth created originally for Iraqi consumption, and later used here as the evil face of the insurgency. Bin-Laden, at least at this point, is probably no different. Think that’s wacky? Larry Johnson worked in the CIA. He said this:
Frankly it would not surprise me to learn that the person appearing as Bin Laden is someone else. What’s with the beard dye? Is Bin Laden buying Grecian formula for facial hair? This video just does not make sense in either a strategic or tactical realm.
In summary: I no longer trust anything the administration says about the war or the so-called war on terrorism. Video tapes can be doctored.
I totally agree with you Boo. It looks to me like OBL is a very young man for all of what he has been through and his age. Maybe he had a plastic surg. do a job on him..:o) I think this is a hoax.
I’d like to know which of the overnight services delivered the Grecian formula to Osama bin forgotten?
was it FedEx; UPS; DHL; and then outsourced to the local donkey. On the other hand looks more like a special ops job…. just in time to counter Petraeus’ non-report.
In Bush vs. Bin Laden world, you’ve either got to give up your beliefs and rights and side with Bush or stay true to your heart and side with a terrorist. Yeesh. All these folks are just nucking futs.
I agree. Don’t know if you’ve noticed, but every article on “The Tape” quotes two sources: U.S. intel, and the Site Institute. I’d feel a whole lot better seeing an analysis from a Middle Eastern source (still looking).
Indeed. You ever notice every time OBL gets dragged out, there is always a news story out within 36 hours or so that states the Feds “know” it’s him. Every time. Every time Bush must have a serious PR boost to cow the Dems, OBL magically shows and the “serious” Washington crowd is so eager to say that 1) OBL sounds like a “loony librul” and 2) The fact we haven’t caught him yet is irrelevant, and 3) You should fear.
When Bush needs a spokesman on the Warren Terrah, Osama is there. Every time. Bush has no credibility. Petraeus has little. But Osama, woo, there’s a guy whom you can trust. Suddenly his appearance means everything…and nothing depending on which winger you ask.
It’s all an illusion.
you can’t help read it and not laugh at it, occasionally, because it is just absurd.
so, i can’t help not laughing at it when i read it? is he sure he doesn’t mean i can’t help reading it and laughing at it?
the way he structures that sentense, nobody is laughing at it, because they can’t help reading it and then not laughing.
I’ve been studying bin Laden since ’96, as a part of my interest in the Middle East. While I have not finished translating the latest tape for myself (my Arabic isn’t that great), I have reached several conclusions. I have found that the “official” translations have tended to be sloppy in the past. So far, I can say about the current tape:
Osama bin Laden is just the Arabic translation for Emmanuel Goldstein.
Pax
boo: “Maybe Reuel Gerecht is writing Bin-Laden’s script. Ever think of that?”
Are you nucking futs?
Why would Bush or neocons want to fool everyone into thinking OBL is still alive? Don’t the Dems regularly taunt Bush for not catching him? If McChimpyBushhaliburton need OBL to scare us, then why would they write his script to make him sound so shallow and juvenile? Wouldn’t they have him making bloodthirsty threats?
Time to p*ss or get off the pot: do you think OBL is dead, or alive? If “dead” then you’ll have to stop the taunts about not catching him. If “alive”, then ask yourself whether —if Bush is putting out fake tapes that make OBL sound like an addled college kid to the entire world — why OBL doesn’t get a tape to his buddies at Al Jezeera and show his true self? and are you saying that ALL previous tapes purporting to show OBL are Administration fakes? If OBL hasn’t responded to them, isn’t that a sign that he’s taking the Eternal Sand Nap?
boo: “Could be why it is so ‘western’, and tends to echo mainstream critiques of the Bush administration. No?”
Are you nucking futs? Chomsky is mainstream? And just
how are references to mortgage failures, HIGH taxes that Islam would not allow, and the Democrats’ failures to do anything to stop the war criticisms of the Bush administration?
finally: none of you has considered whether it’s in AQ’s interest to offer fake tapes of an alive-and-kicking OBL in order to buck up his movement. Try using Occam’s Razor every now and then: it’s pretty sharp!
I doubt you are a regular reader of mine, but I don’t make comments about not catching bin-Laden. I don’t make comments about how we are wasting resources in Iraq that would be better used in Pakistan. And I can’t answer for people on the left that do make those arguments.
I don’t consider Pakistan/Afghanistan to be problem #1. Our main problem has to do with our foreign policies in the Arab world.
And even there, we spent two years discussing a figment of the DIA’s imagination, Zarqawi, rather than debating the insurgency. I won’t debate on the DIA’s terms. The most recent bin-Laden video was patched together by someone from the West, and it was not distributed through normal jihadi channels. It was not sent by courier to al-Jazeera. It’s a fake, and it doesn’t necessarily even look like bin-Laden.
Some of bin-Laden’s critiques mirror a far-left critique…much like A.N.S.W.E.R., but much more of it is just the same shit that people from Brent Scowcroft to John Warner to Joe Biden to Russ Feingold have been saying.
Are you playing into their hands? Absolutely.
Why would the intelligence agencies (or creative former officers) put these words in his mouth? Because they allow them to marginalize legitimate criticism.
“Maybe Reuel Gerecht is writing Bin-Laden’s script. Ever think of that? Could be why it is so ‘western’, and tends to echo mainstream critiques of the Bush administration. No?”
That’s what I wrote about, something YOU said.
Your reply ignores what I said, and instead informs me of things you DIDN’T say.
Can you defend yourself or not? do you have intellectual honesty, or don’t you?
If you do you will address what I SAID.
A troll that can SHOUT!
Cute.
I have addressed all of your points in the various comments I’ve made over the last two hours. You can see my comments by clicking here.
I’ll let a beltway insider comment on this.