Bush is still listening to the words of bin-Laden

. . . not the American people


"We must remember the words of the enemy. We must listen to what they say." --Bush at VFW yesterday:


It's always amazed me that Americans have tolerated Bush's insistence that they should "listen to the words of the terrorists" as he defends ignoring their own on Iraq. Bush wants us to accept bin-Laden's taunts that a withdrawal from Iraq would be a defeat for the U.S.. Obscenely, he uses the exact same reasoning as bin-Laden in arguing that America should continue on with his 'war' in Iraq. Bin-Laden says Iraq is the central front for his terror fight, Bush says Iraq is the central front for his terror fight.

Problem is, bin-Laden is in Pakistan hoping that his ploy to keep Bush bogged down in Iraq continues to work -- inflaming more and more anti-U.S. violence and recriminations with U.S. soldiers as targets. Bush is the perfect patsy. He's the type who folks like to egg on because of his predictable, foolish reaction. It's disgusting to hear him parrot bin-Laden's calculated nonsense.

Bush, in his VFW speech:

"Bin Laden has declared that "the war in Iraq is for you or us to win. If we win it, it means your disgrace and defeat forever." Iraq is one of several fronts in the war on terror -- but it's the central front -- it's the central front for the enemy that attacked us and wants to attack us again. And it's the central front for the United States and to withdraw without getting the job done would be devastating."

The collapse of the Trade Towers was a devastating act, rationalized by those who took responsibility for the atrocities in elaborate justifications of nationalism and religiosity. But, the violence amounted to nothing more than murder by the perpetrators and accomplices. Whatever they wanted the killings to accomplish didn't necessarily have to occur. In fact, with most of the world allied against the attacks, there was no ideological victory, power shift, or territorial victory for the terrorists which was allowed to materialize in their wake. The coalition of countries who supported the U.S. in their response helped invade Afghanistan and took away any permanent base of operations bin-Laden may have had there.

Yet, Bush has seemed intent on elevating bin-Laden's aspirations since the beginning of his failed campaign to hold on to his congressional majority -- holding up the terrorists' aspirations as some unfulfilled destiny. It's just a mere coincidence, I suppose, that the rebel leader hasn't been apprehended; in part, as a consequence of Bush's shift of the bulk of our forces and resources to Iraq in the middle of the pursuit.

Bin-Laden could very well be waiting out the chaos that he admits to have instigated, waiting to step out of the shadows and into his role as terror svengali to the masses. But he wouldn't have a thing to lord over if Bush hadn't followed his dare and invaded and occupied yet another Muslim-dominated country.

The question remains, why should the American people be swayed by the words of al-Qaeda thugs? Bush and his republican enablers continue to insist -- in their own words, as well as those of the terrorists-- and in their approval of appropriations to Iraq which far out weigh the resources directed to Afghanistan and the hunt for bin-Laden -- that fighting on one side of a multi-fronted civil war in Iraq is more important than directly stemming the influence and muckraking violence directed around the world by bin-Laden and his accomplices.

Certainly the dwindled 'coalition of the willing' didn't think Iraq was at the 'center' of their own security needs as they brought their own troops home. Iraq is important, only, to the political ambitions of Bush and the republicans who are desperate to remain in power; and who are using their support for the continued Iraq occupation as a representation of their commitment to keeping us safe and secure, while, at the same time, bashing Democrats and others opposed to the continued occupation as the reckless, unsafe ones.

The effect of the Iraq diversion on our safety and security was made abundantly clear by the collective efforts of the nation's intelligence community in the leaked National Intelligence Estimate from April 2006 which concluded that the Iraq occupation had actually made our country and the region less secure. By likening Iraq to the worldwide Muslim terror offensive the president did what Hussein could not; he bound Iraqis to the Muslim extremists. He practically invited them to join the battle there and ally with the forces that threaten our soldiers daily. "Bring them on" became the administration's mantra, and those Iraqis who would resist their bloody imperialism obliged; some individuals there banding together under the banner of al-Qaeda.

Instead of concentrating the nation's focus and attention on the root of the animosity toward the U.S. - the animosity which has been nurtured by the administration's neglect of al-Qaeda, and by the collateral and deliberate killings which flow out of his military occupation of Iraq - Bush is concentrating his efforts on stoking the ashes of fear from the 9-11 attacks to keep Americans cowed and yoked to his failed military campaigns; and he's using the obscene taunts of the fugitives that he let escape and run free for the entirety of the over five years which have passed since the attacks.

"Take the word of Osama bin Laden, or Mr. Zawahiri," Bush is urging Americans in his paranoid invitation to huddle in fear behind his bloody flag. Bush's own intelligence community has told him (again) that his Iraq occupation is threatening, not strengthening, the security of our nation by creating an atmosphere which is 'spawning' jihadists bent on harming Americans, our interests, and our allies in Iraq and elsewhere. Instead of changing course, Bush has decided to keep our troops in place as chaos and unrest threaten to engulf our over-deployed soldiers in the waves of recriminations against the regime they helped install and actively defend.

If Iraq is the center of Bush's terror war, then he's losing miserably. It's not 'success' in his 'war on terror' Bush is looking for in Iraq, it's whatever he thinks is left of his prestige which he's afraid will evaporate as our troops limp home. Trillions of dollars spent and tens-of-thousands of lives sacrificed after 9-11, and Bush has nothing to show for it; except for the ability of the entire team of liars, losers, and opportunists who convinced our nation into invading Iraq to avoid accountability for the distracting disaster there, and to maintain their positions of power and influence in this impotent, yet criminally destructive administration.

But, you don't have to take my word for it. If you want to know the mind of George Bush on Iraq, just "listen to the terrorists."


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

and Bush gave him everything he wanted.

Simple enough.

in the attempted defeat and takeover of America

The only question is which is which.

:shrug:

enablers

Wait, I do hear something!! The sound of derisive laughter from a cave on the Afghan/Pakistani border.

By Tony Jones
Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:04am


Abdul Bari Atwan is one of the only Western journalists to have interviewed Osama bin Laden, spending three days with him in the mountains of Afghanistan in 1996. He is the editor-in-chief of the London-based Arabic newspaper, Al-Quds Al-Arabia, and the author of The secret history of Al Qaeda.

ABC TV's Lateline presenter Tony Jones interviewed Mr Bari Atwan on the program last night.

TONY JONES: When you met bin Laden, he told you that his long-term plan was to "bring the Americans into a fight on Muslim soil". That must have sounded like madness at the time, but now we have Iraq.

ABDUL BARI ATWAN: It seems Osama bin Laden had a long-term strategy. He told me personally that he can't go and fight the Americans and their country. But if he manages to provoke them and bring them to the Middle East and to their Muslim worlds, where he can find them or fight them on his own turf, he will actually teach them a lesson. It seems the invasion of Iraq fulfilled Osama bin Laden's wish. That's why the Americans are losing in Iraq, financially and on a human basis, and even their allies, including Australia, are really losing patience, losing money, losing personnel, losing reputation in that part of the world.

TONY JONES: When bin Laden told you this back in 1996, the only thing he had that was close to what he was talking about was Bill Clinton's intervention in Somalia. Bin Laden was evidently extremely disappointed the Americans had pulled out?

ABDUL BARI ATWAN: Yes. He told me, again, that he expected the Americans to send troops to Somalia and he sent his people to that country to wait for them in order to fight them. They managed actually to shoot down an American helicopter where 19 soldiers were killed and he regretted that the Clinton Administration decided to pull out their troops from Somalia and run away. He was so saddened by this. He thought they would stay there so he could fight them there. But for his bad luck, according to his definition, they left, and he was planning another provocation in order to drag them to Muslim soil.

And it seems President Bush did not actually give him a lot of hard work to plan for this. Immediately after the bombardment of Afghanistan - which actually destroyed 85 per cent of Al Qaeda infrastructure, personnel, deprived them of a safe haven - after that huge success against Al Qaeda, President Bush made terrible mistakes when he sent his troop to invade Iraq, one of the most difficult countries to be invaded, to be occupied, the worst land for democracy, human rights. And we can see the outcome.


article and interview: http://abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/08/24/2013753.htm?section=world

One evening, I was walking down the street and saw a man bent over under a streetlight, looking for something. I approached him and asked him what he was doing. "I'm looking for a fifty-dollar bill I dropped," he replied. I told him I would help him look, and began searching with him.

After fifteen minutes of fruitless searching, it became clear that there was no bill to be found here, so I asked the man, "Where do you think you lost it?"

He pointed to a dark area in the next block. "Over there," he responded.

Exasperated, I asked him, "Then why are you looking here??"

"Because the light's better here."


Yeah, that's george
(that lyin' filthy piece-o'-sh1t)

its about what someone else has said. He can't even make a speech without reading it or quoting someone else.

think about what motivated him to quote 9-11 suspects words as gospel. Nothing he said satisfied him that he'd frightened Americans enough. Whoever thought of using bin-Laden to scare Americans into passivity and acceptance of WH imperialism is as much of an idiot as Bush is for listening to them.

He should play the video, then get on and say, "yadda, yadda, yadda" or "blah, blah, blah".

to prop-up his own twisted logic.

Nothing must thrill al-Qaeda more than to hear Bush read off passages of propaganda from the terrorists' own speeches and dispatches, except maybe the slick campaign commercial the republican party put out last October featuring the terrorist's words lovingly super-imposed against bin-Laden's smiling image.

"What is yet to come will be even greater," the announcer quotes bin-Laden as saying. "These are the stakes," is the hook; strangely reminiscent of the '64 'Daisy' ad Johnson ran in his campaign which featured a countdown to a nuclear explosion.

That's their promise to the American people. "For as long as Bush is president," as he has said, " they will continue to sacrifice lives and limbs in Iraq (where 16 of his intelligence agencies say our occupation is creating terrorists, not eliminating them) and continue to short-shrift the search for the leaders of the organization which is influencing other combatants with the example of their members' historic attack and the orchestrators' escape from justice.

For as long as Bush and his republican enablers hold the majority, our soldiers will continue to be killed at a rate of 2-3 a day in Iraq; over 80 American soldiers dead this month alone. Al-Qaeda has to be just loving it all. Why on earth would they want the relationship to end? In the face of Bush's retreat from the hunt in Afghanistan they've managed to expand the numbers of those who would associate themselves with them; right under our noses in Iraq, just by the fact of their resistance against our violently repressive military occupation.

You can't help but imagine any number of responses to the 9-11 attacks, which would focus directly on catching the perpetrators, that would not have embroiled our nation in an "ideological struggle" in Iraq, passed on to "future presidents." The thugs in the leadership of al-Qaeda have to be loving the gullible instincts of Bush and the republicans as their party of failure and fear rise to the terrorists' every utterance. All of their mutual support will pay off big if republicans manage to hold the majority and continue to enable the imperial presidency with impunity. Why would Bush and the republicans want to end the relationship?

Al-Qaeda *hearts* Bush and the republicans. The American fools give them life, meaning, and elevation. In return, the terrorist goons provide the fear for our leaders to exploit and lord over us. They are "two bodies with one soul inspired." Beloved and inseparable.

He clearly needs more speeches by terrorist leaders to fill his I-Pod so he can drown out the chorus of 'ENOUGH' from the American public.

...why don't you just join him?