Bin Ladin's Motives
My guess is that Bin Ladin released his recent tape because he thinks it will help Bush. It may bump off the news the deep do-do about Al Qa Qaa and other issues that hurt Bush and replace them with the bogus "Bush as strong leader against terror” theme that polls suggest helps Uncurious George among the gullible morons that comprise most of the electorate. Bin Ladin, I think, would prefer a Bush victory because the mess in Iraq helps Bin Ladin's cause and Bush will have a harder time disentangling the U.S. than Kerry would, given that Bush made the decision to start the war in the first place. This is all pure speculation, of course. Call it one of those "gut-instincts" that our faith-based President views with such favor.
comments powered by Disqus
Arnold Shcherban - 10/31/2004
First of all, the timing of the message is suspicious.
On one hand, he tells Americans that it doesn't matter who will become the President of the US, on the other hand he, being silent for quite long time, delivers the message just three days before the elections.
Moreover, three years after 9/11 attacks, after 4-5 previous post-9/11 speeches, he, all of a sudden,
decided to confess in details of his major role in ideological and technical planning of the attacks?!
Furthermore, some motives in the alleged Osama's message were so atypical of him that it drives me to a suspision thatthe message, as well, as Osama's figure itself were fake.
For example, his "praising" Bush for remained actionless in the school at the time of the Trade Towers attacks sounded identical to one of the anti-Bush election
propaganda campaign's arguments.
Osama, as he emphasized it earlier in his message, has no
illusions, about Kerry's Iraq policies, either.
Therefore, not only the mentioned praise, but also his alleged pro-Bush motive, has nothing to do with the logic - at the least - Bin Laden's logic.
Secondly, his alleged explanation of the motives behind
the 9/11 attacks and given commonality the details of the circumstances leading to the technical idea of the attacks is very close in spirit and phraseology to the already existing explanations (ascribed to Osama) we heard long ago and recently from some US anti-terrorism
Which, provided the suspisions hold water, leads to a question: who's behind the "Osama's message"?
- Did a historian who said he’s a victim of McCarthyism get the story wrong?
- Stephanie Coontz’s work on the history of marriage cited by the Supreme Court.
- NYT History Book Reviews: Who Got Noticed this Week?
- David Hackett Fischer wins $100,000 prize for lifetime achievement in military writing