Bin Laden Brandishes Jihadi Threat against US in Iraq
I don't know why so many press commentaries keep saying that the new videotape from
Usama Bin Laden does not contain any threats.
It contains a clear threat: to escalate regional jihadi resistance against the US troops in Iraq.
(The text is here in PDF format.
Bin Laden, however, is not now and perhaps never has been a credible actor in Iraq. Most Iraqis are nationalists and would not want a Saudi telling them what to do. He made a big but perhaps unavoidable error in attacking the Shiites, and so denying his movement a nationalist platform. Al-Qaeda in Iraq is a small cult of hyper-Sunni bigots and serial murderers. Instead of playing Abdul Nasser, who attracted the allegiance even of many Shiite Arabs in his day, Bin Laden long ago chose to play the role of a cultist, a David Koreish with better explosives.
A lot of jihadis consider Bin Laden a jinx, since he brought ruin on the Arab Afghans, who were killed, captured or had to go to ground.
And, the Iraqi Sunni Arabs are from all accounts increasingly acting to exclude the foreigners from their struggle against the Shiite government. The main antagonist of the US in Iraq has all along been elements in the local Sunni Arab population.
Bin Laden is stuck in the 1980s intellectually, when he was used by one superpower (the Reagan administration) against another (the Soviet Union). That bipolar world is gone, succeeded by a period of unipolarism. Jihadis with $10 bn. in aid from the US and Saudi Arabia and a national cause are one thing. Jihadis with no superpower patron, no united nation, and little or no money just become terrorists.
Ironically, Bin Laden has adopted the jejune leftist rhetoric of his erstwhile Soviet foes, making everything into a conspiracy of some corporations. But instead of calling for the workers to unite and overthrow their chains, he ends by assuring us that a fundamentalist Muslim dictatorship would be benign.
Bin Laden is like a venomous snake, always dangerous, and you never want to underestimate a cobra if it is in striking distance. But Iraq isn't the Afghanistan of the 1980s and 1990s, and if Bin Laden thinks it is, he is very out of touch.
Labels: al-Qaeda
posted by Juan Cole @ 9/08/2007 12:15:00 AM
|
Facebook
18 Comments:
America looking for AlQ in Iraq is a huge success for AQ Pakistan.
Telling Team W 'come on' is brilliant.
US occupation is a cause celebre for jihadis, and dooms GWOT to accomplishing diddly squat on the diplomatic and law enforcement front.
You can see they cut off his funds. He even can't afford a decent camera..
come on, mister cole, stay believable.
Mr. Cole,
Why has there been no transcript? I want to see for myself, i can't believe ANY media now-a-days. So far, I have not heard any quotes (from the latest video) that are unreasonable, or that I have not said myself. Osama bin Laden is nothing more than a criminal(a crime boss is still only a criminal), who may or may not be responsible for 911, but our media, you included, make him out to be more. I understand why our government would want to make him out to be much more (fear leads to control), buy why do you? If his words are so dangerous to hear, why do you not dispute them? so far, (except for the call for jihadi - and that all depends on your definition of jihadi) what i have heard makes him sound a little like Randi Rhodes, and i don't consider her crazy ;)
also, are you sure the Arab Afghans still feel that way? with the Taliban resurgence, maybe more of them now see a long term benifit?
Rick
Every time someone asks me about Bin Laden I say the truth, that I never heard of him nor Al-Qaida before he was accused with 9/11. He was simply way out of my focus of interest, which is Syria and Syrian Nationalism. Agree with Mr. Cole on the strategic error of attacking Shia in Iraq and the rest, well said Mr. Cole.
I think on the anniversary of 9/11 he should come out clean, tell the truth as it is, that in fact there were no 19 hijackers and no 4 planes, that he did not finance the operation and most importantly, identify that mole that took a specific-particular video that appears to be a spy camera. It is the setting when he was sitting down on the floor in a house, receiving a just arriving Saudi visitor, he was faintly talking and gesturing about the plane attacking the tower. The identification of that individual is very crucial matter to complete our investigation of 9/11 of which we already have ruled t to be more of a Neocon-USG ops than Bin Laden’s Al-Qaida one. That person with the spy camera in our assessment is a Mossad linked individual that was wired with remote transmitter video cam, this person is ultimately linked to a group of Israelis and some Americans in Washington through this Israeli espionage and terror Agency Mossad and its hired underling. Investigating this individual may leads to the real perpetrators who possible have aided or even masterminded the whole attack, the real part and the already known fake parts. If the spy was in after the attack that close to Bin Laden, he must have been close to him before as well.
And Mr. Cole, on the upcoming memorial of this crime, can you please allow us to list links that can educate people and open their mind to see the truth. Let the individual evaluate the evidences available.
I read somewhere-- perhaps in Robert Fisk's book or one of his articles-- that the attack on 9/11 was not properly sanctioned by bin Ladin's sect of Islam because he did not first urge Americans to convert, a requirement under their interpretation of the Qu'ran.
According to the BBC's translation of whomever is speaking on this tape: "There are two solutions to stopping it. One is from our side, and it is to escalate the fighting and killing against you. This is our duty, and our brothers are carrying it out. The second solution is from your side. I invite you to embrace Islam."
There is a transcript:
http://counterterrorismblog.org/site-resources/images/SITE-OBL-transcript.pdf
But is it really Usama bin Laden? Why does it sound like he's quoting from the "liberal blogosphere?" Citing Noam Chomsky and Michael Scheuer, ranting about the corporatocracy, criticizing the Bush administration for not signing the Kyoto accord, etc. It seems like much of what he's saying is written specifically to be cited in ultra right-wing talking points as evidence that American liberals are in league with Usama bin Laden.
Does that strike anyone else as odd?
toasterhead,
thx for the link, but since i don't speak Arabic, i was hoping for a transcript that Mr Cole had read or knew to be fairly accurate.
and yes, it is very odd, that was my point in saying that i have said all of the same things i saw quoted so far.
Mr. Cole, was it a hollywood robot? or osama?
The press commentary on this statement simply demonstrates that the "experts" don't have a clue.
The spin is that there's nothing of intelligence value, nothing new, no threat... and the only significant thing is that he's dyed his beard.
(And the color of his beard is getting all the attention - SITE's "expert" says that Arab leaders always do this, and MSNBC's expert on Islamic culture says that they never do it, so it's very strange. In fact, anyone who knows about Islam - and that doesn't include any of the U.S. media "experts" - knows that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) encouraged men to dye their white hair, usually with henna, which makes it orangeish. Older men aren't supposed to use black, except in one situation - when they're fighting jihad, when it's better that the enemy thinks they're fighting strong young men instead of realizing that they're actually old men.)
My impression is that this statement is very significant. When people argue that Al-Qaeda has no business attacking American civilians, they can't say anymore that the civilians don't share the blame, since they have no say in the decisions, etc. He's pointing out that the American people elected these leaders (not just Bush, but going back to Kennedy and Truman), and that when they committed atrocities, they didn't hold them accountable. On the contrary, they re-elected them (Bush) and allowed them to be placed in positions where they could do more damage (e.g., Rumsfeld and Cheney).
The "liberal" label used in the U.S. - as in, why is he talking about Chomsky if he's not a liberal - has no meaning here. Islamic attitudes might seem "liberal" in some contexts and "right-wing" in others.
As usual, most news reports quote very little of what he actually says, since listeners might notice that, as someone wrote above, there are parts of it that might make sense to a lot of Americans.
He sounds more like a Democrat than a lot of Democrats, but so far left he might even be a communist, ranting about capitalists (love the JFK conspiracy), yet he and his family are capitalists, or used to be.
Certainly seems he is politically aware and has a good handle on US politics and current events. So he should know his video props up support for the War in Iraq and continuation of the Bush policies, and that this hurts Democrats. I guess that mean he wants to keep the Republicans strong. So it doesn't sound like Bush is hurting him too much, does it?.
He looks pretty good physically, clean clothes, eating well, trimmed beard and dyed. Life as a fugitive must be good. Seems he has that Kidney disease under control, must have access to good health care.
His offer to Americans to convert to Islam sets the stage for another 9/11 I suppose, the one Chertoffs gut says is coming.
Funny how we get the tape before any of the Arab stations can run it. Love to hear that story but I guess it has to be kept secret.
It may be a fake, produced by whomever wants us to believe he is still alive and a threat, or he is really alive but under our care in some prison and is reading from a script (guess that's what Rove has been working on in his retirement), or it is real and the transcript has been fudged.
Life used to be simpler when I could trust my government.
Dear Professor Cole
I find it curious that Bin Ladin should confuse the two Kennedy brothers.
Surely it was Bobby who split with Johnson on the Vietnam war and not John who authorised the assasination of Diem as President.
Dr. Cole:
Bin Laden is quoted as saying "I invite you to embrace Islam." Can you please tell us if this really is asking us to convert to Islam, or if perhaps it "only" asks us to tolerate, welcome and respect Islam. The former is unreasonable; the latter entirely reasonable and desireable to my mind. Translations from Arabic are notoriously ambiguous. Is it possible to be clear about this one?
Video ...hmm, strange beard
Thanks for posting this transcript which apparently all the major media providers have refused to post, just as they have refused to show us bin Laden's message in its entirety.
A small victory for freedom of information and democracy.
Yes, it is high time we recognize the so-called "Bin Laden" video as the fraud on the public which it obviously is. There are credible reports circulating that Bin Laden died several years ago in Yemen. After the US attack on Afghanistan, Bin Laden was spirited out of Afghanistan to his native Hadhramaut region of Yemen, where he later died of kidney failure surrounded by his close and extended family members.
The speed at which the corporate media accepted the obviously bogus "Bin Laden makeover" (with beard turning from gray to black) tape is amazing. However, considering the links between the neo-con disinformation machinery in Washington, DC and the corporate media, it may not be so surprising when put into context.
From the Wayne Madsen Report (http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/) website (registration req.):
"The so-called 'Osama Bin Laden tape,' was not only transmitted via the auspices of the Search for International Terrorist Entities (SITE) Institute, a Washington, DC-based research institute with links to Israeli right-wing Likud elements, but U.S. intelligence officials are now claiming that large portions of the 'Bin Laden' speech were written by Los Angeles native Adam Gadahn, born Adam Pearlman, (aka Azzam the American), the number three man in charge of Al Qaeda, whose grandfather, Carl K. Pearlman, was a member of the board of the Anti Defamation League (ADL), an important component of the Israeli Lobby in the United States.
Carl Pearlman, a prominent California urologist, was the chairman of the Orange County Bonds for Israel campaign and the United Jewish Welfare Fund.
SITE and an Israeli intelligence front operation in Washington, MEMRI (the Middle East Media Research Institute), are closely linked. MEMRI has been responsible for mis-translating several speeches made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad. SITE's director is Rita Katz, an Iraq-born Jew who moved to Israel after her father was executed by Saddam Hussein's government for spying for the Mossad. She emigrated to the United States from Israel in 1997. Katz worked for the US Treasury Department in its pursuit of Muslim charity funds in the United States in Operation Green Quest and as a consultant for the FBI. The main coordinator for Green Quest was the then-head of the Justice Department's Criminal Division, Michael Chertoff.
Katz once served as Research Director of the Investigative Project, another neocon outfit run by noted Arab and Muslim demonizer Steven Emerson, who was one of the first past the post to blame the 1995 Murrah Federal Building bombing on Arab terrorists.
The co-founder of MEMRI is Col. Yigal Carmon, a former Israeli military intelligence officer and adviser to Prime Ministers Yitzhak Shamir and Yitzhak Rabin. The other founder of MEMRI is Meyrav Wurmser, who is also employed by the Hudson Institute, a neocon think tank where I. Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, the convicted Bush administration perjurer and obstructor of justice, has taken up residence.
The delivery of the latest 'Bin Laden' video was reported by the Associated Press as follows: 'the 30-minute video was obtained by the SITE Institute, a Washington-based group that monitors terrorist messages, and provided to the Associated Press.' In the past, Bin Laden videos were sent to Al Jazeera and other Arab media sources directly.
The first news of the video's release came on the al-Sahab web site, where 'Al Qaeda' has previously posted messages."
Indeed, I'd love to hear your take on the offer of conversion... is this simply rhetoric, or is this a preface to another attack?
Just because Gadahn's grandfather was an ADL member Gadahn has to be an Israeli agent??
I was the one who posted the last anonymous post.
This Wayne Madsen post goes on tangents about how Gadahn's grandfather was an ADL member, and tangents about the operation of MEMRI, even though neither MEMRI nor Gadahn's grandfather had any involvement with this tape.
Madsen also says that the first news of this tape appeared on something called the "al-Sahab" website. That means that this tape existed before SITE mentioned it: SITE did not majically produce this tape out of nowhere. The description of SITE's agenda would raise suspicions of SITE mistranslating the tape, but Madsen seems to be arguing that SITE created the tape.
And what on Earth are these "credible reports" of OBL dying in Yemen?
- Inkan1969
Like some Tolkien trickster, Ring-rotted Bush has connived a not-too-bright nation into shoving its arm into a spun-up thresher-harvester: Iraq and Afghanistan, which have made it their hobby to shatter any Empire that dared tread their ground. Now that Shire sawbones have declared the case hopeless and amputation ineluctable, Bush and his Gang are jumping up and down screaming, Coward, Coward! What Emergency Responder worth his salt would hesitate to evacuate traumatized victims because it would be COWARDLY to do so? I ask you.
Enter Gandalf the warrior wizard (Petraeus) and his magical Counter-Insurgency manuscript. According to them, after umpteen years of daily microsurgery without anesthesia, the arm may be safely extracted from the spun-up thresher. Maybe. Let's set up a circus tent in the corn field and see.
Based on one prior case, the British Malaya Campaign of the 1950's. The British had total control of sea access; land access was blocked by other powers. This combined with Chinese strategic isolation from the theater of operations and geo-political powerlessness. The exact opposite of the day-in, day-out, in-your-face meddling practiced by Iraq's sovereign neighbors and the impossibility of sealing off Iraq's borders from modern arms shipments by the ton and technician reinforcements on demand. Picture General Petraeus shipping tens of thousands of Muslim militants back to Iran and Pashtunistan, the way the Brits shipped a million militant Malays of Chinese descent back to Communist Mainland China. There is no comparison.
It would probably do us more good to resolve all these ETA, Tamil Tiger, Pashtun, Palestinian, Kurd, etc., etc. problems, once and for all, than everything else anyone has done so far. Which would require the Great Powers withdraw and achieve strategic balance, neutrality and objectivity. But nooo; let's just shoot up Iraqi villages a bit less often! Sure; that'll work!
We are doing too little, too late, with the wrong people on both sides (both technically in terms of skill sets and geographically in terms of local familiarity). We are also processing these multiple problems serially, one after another in Crisis Mode, instead of addressing them in parallel on a holistic basis and from a standpoint of mutual respect and good will from the beginning. We are trying to put out a city-wide firestorm with a bucket of water here, a well-placed spit there, and a single fire battalion downtown with a detached company in another district, its brilliant commander and his new doctrine, the lot surrounded by firestorm. It's called reaping the whirlwind.
Thus we remain stuck in a Tolkien-like fairy tale/nightmare, except the forces of Mordor appear to be writing the script and directing the movie, and we are just reacting in panic. Thousands more innocents die, bleed and are aggrieved every day, while a few hundred well-placed sociopaths draw profit from this ongoing mess; and we are left to foot the butcher's bill.
There is a better way; one proposed nowhere else but here below these days. First, everyone goes back to his corner. Second, when they come back out, it is in search of world peace. Nothing more and nothing less. No compromise or quick or lengthy fix is possible otherwise; and climax military annihilation is likely in any other case.
General Petreaus: a good general does not parachute into Dien Bien Phu on Defeat Day minus ten; he prepares his ground, first. Your doctrine, fully matured, might have worked if implemented when the Marsh Arabs revolted under Bush I, assuming we had been smart enough to ally with Iran. Your doctrine is bankrupt without optimal preparation of the combat theater, first. Otherwise, you are just poking the tiger with a surgical scalpel instead of a blunt stick. A swordsman who lunges from the wrong foot is going to get stabbed, no matter how fine his style. Figure out what you are actually meant to protect, and protect that only; backing off all the rest, which is by definition expendable with minimal casualties on all sides. Return to the offensive only when you are good and ready. Defend what you've got with all your strength and resources in the meantime. Let them come at you and be killed in droves trying in the meantime. Raid them, arrest them, torment them mercilessly, make use of your strategic mobility against their pedestrian primitivism; but do not get bogged down holding static positions on the strategic defensive. Obey your own doctrine honestly, instead of getting your arm stuck in a threshing machine you never intended to engage to begin with. Own up and win, or stick to doing it wrong and lose. History does not show mercy to failed policies because of good intentions. You, of all people, should know that. Everyone should know that.
http://www.peaceworld.my100freemb.com/020TABLEOFCONTENTS.htm
Post a Comment
<< Home