New New's on Usama Bin Laden!?!

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I wonder about the ethics of media airing giving publicity to such statements.

Over here used to have a broadcasting ban which prohibited IRA representatives from being interviewed on TV or radio (although it was permissible to report on statements they had issued).
 
financeguy said:
Over here used to have a broadcasting ban which prohibited IRA representatives from being interviewed on TV or radio (although it was permissible to report on statements they had issued).

If that is the case, it appears Al-Jazeera plays quite a different role than the medial in the UK.
 
MrsSpringsteen said:
I'm sure the next big threat will be the Super Bowl

One of these days he is going to be successful

The remind me of that Tom Clancey novel with Ben Afflek starring in the movie version "Sum All Fears." If they did attack the Superbowl.
 
i hate this shit.

i know it might be idle threats, i know that fear is a tactic, i know that i'm more likely to be hit on the head by a coconut, but when you're living smack in the middle of one of the most obvious targets in the US, it does make me, if not outright nervous, then just a little bit more irritable, especially as you walk around the streets and imagine a mass exodus, New Orleans-style, of people fleeing a chemical attack or something.

:angry:
 
financeguy said:
Over here used to have a broadcasting ban which prohibited IRA representatives from being interviewed on TV or radio (although it was permissible to report on statements they had issued).
Didn't they once tell Thatcher during an anonymous tip-off, "You have to get lucky every time. We only have to get lucky once."

Someone once told me this. I thought it was one of the most chilling threats ever.
 
Irvine511 said:
i hate this shit.

i know it might be idle threats, i know that fear is a tactic, i know that i'm more likely to be hit on the head by a coconut, but when you're living smack in the middle of one of the most obvious targets in the US, it does make me, if not outright nervous, then just a little bit more irritable, especially as you walk around the streets and imagine a mass exodus, New Orleans-style, of people fleeing a chemical attack or something.

:angry:


Exactly... Especially with all this Super Bowl talk. I live in the city it's taking place in this year. :|
 
yolland said:

Didn't they once tell Thatcher during an anonymous tip-off, "You have to get lucky every time. We only have to get lucky once."

Someone once told me this. I thought it was one of the most chilling threats ever.

It is, isn't it? And so very true.
 
My campus is surrounded by every branch of the military (including being 20 minutes from the largest naval port in the world), fighter jets are always flying over campus, so either that means I'm really safe or a target :shrug:


OBL doesn't scare me though, I bet I could beat him in a fight :madspit:
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:


such a great book... such a bad movie :tsk:
But it completely proves the contention that neo-Nazis are a much greater threat in the 21st Century than Islamic Terrorists :wink:

The change in tone is very interesting and I think it's a good sign that the old leadership has been decapitated, one part at least is the fact that the man has probably been alive and hasn't been able to get tapes out there. Also the language, no more of that "return to Andelusia" crap, no more complete restoration of the caliphate - offering a truce just shows his weakened position. Of course this does not diminish the threat, al-Zarqawi's organisation Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia has mounted overseas operations (the bombing in Jordan), there are just as many trained individuals with intent as ever and it is all very distributed.
Truces are permissible, not obligatory....Interests that justify making a truce are such things as Muslim weakness because of lack of numbers or materiel, or the hope of an enemy becoming Muslim...If the Muslims are weak, a truce made be made for ten years if necessary, for the Prophet (may Allah bless him and give him peace) made a truce with the Quraysh for that long, as is related by Abu Dawud....The rulings of such a truce are inferable from those of the non-Muslim poll tax; namely, that when a valid truce has been effected, no harm may be done to non-Muslims until it expires. -- Umdat al-Salik, o9.16
"My letter to you refers to the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan, and how to bring about its end. I did not intend to talk with you about this subject because for us, it's a closed matter. Only iron can defeat iron. Our situation, Allah be praised, is improving, while your situation is the opposite, but what brought me to speak are the repeated words of deceit by your president Bush, in his interpretation of the results of public opinion polls amongst you, which showed that the overwhelming majority of your public seeks to withdraw the forces from Iraq – but [Bush] opposed this and said that withdrawing the forces will convey the wrong message to the adversaries, and that it is preferable that we fight them on their soil rather than they fight us on our soil.

"I have an answer to these words of deceit, as follows: The war in Iraq is combusting without cessation, and the [military] operations in Afghanistan are in constant escalation in our favor, Allah be praised, and the Pentagon's numbers indicate an ongoing rise in the number of your killed and wounded, in addition to the huge material damage."

[...]

"... I say that the poll results please those of you who are wise, and that Bush's rejection of the results is a mistake, and that reality shows that the war against America and its allies has not remained limited to Iraq, as Bush claims, but rather Iraq has become a source of attraction and recruitment of qualified forces. On the other hand, the mujahidoun have, with Allah's help, succeeded time after time in breaking through all security measures taken by all the oppressing coalition countries. Evidence of this is the explosions you have witnessed in the capitals of the most important European countries that are members of this hostile coalition. Any delay in similar operations in America does not stem from lack of ability to break through your security measures. The operations are in the stages of preparation, and you will yet see them, in the heart of your homes, immediately with the completion of the preparations, with Allah's help."

[...]

"Based on the above, it can be clearly seen that Bush's words are false, but the words he evaded were the main results of the polls, which favor troop withdrawal, and [his lie] that it is better that we fight the Muslims on their soil and not that they will fight us on our soil.

"We have no objection to accepting a long-term cease fire under fair conditions which we will uphold. We are a nation forbidden by Allah to betray and lie. Both sides will benefit from such a cease fire, from security and stability, and we will build Iraq and Afghanistan which have been destroyed in the war. There is nothing wrong with this solution, except that it will prevent the flow of hundreds of billions [dollars] to influential individuals and to the merchants of war in America who supported Bush's election with billions of dollars."
 
yolland said:

Didn't they once tell Thatcher during an anonymous tip-off, "You have to get lucky every time. We only have to get lucky once."

Someone once told me this. I thought it was one of the most chilling threats ever.

It's funny you mention that because I had that exact same quote in mind when I was reading this thread. I didn't know where it was from, but I agree that it's chilling and true.

It's not the same as living in DC, but Atlanta's got the CDC which kind of scares me. I mean it's probably not a threat because I know someone that works there and apparently they keep all the smallpox and shit underground. Although to be honest, bombs in cars and restaurants and bars like they've got in Iraq right now scares me infinitely more than some prospect of nuclear war...the idea of a nuke destroying my city and killing us all doesn't particularly bug me. I figure they're planning something catastrophic for the next attack here which comforts me and scares me shitless at the same time.
 
The IRA lost their war. They achieved sweet F.A.

I do not doubt that what Yolland's friend said is true - I also do not doubt that if the IRA made that claim, it was largely bravado. In fact in the view of most Irish people who agree with national unity (and I include myself) their campaign SET BACK the cause of Irish unity, rather than advancing it!

Bottom line: terrorists are only chilling and scary if we convince ourselves that they are.
 
financeguy said:

Bottom line: terrorists are only chilling and scary if we convince ourselves that they are.

Maybe...but regardless of whether or not a certain group ultimately wins their "war," if you live in Baghdad at the moment there's a legitimate fear of just being caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. I know we should "let fear control us" etc etc...but I'd imagine in some situations it's not that easy.

btw financeguy, are you no longer networking with the yuppies? :(
 
I heard someone describe Bin Laden as a real life super-villain. He is untouchable, no one can find him, he resides in a mountain lair with thousands of minions who do his bidding and idolize him, he is evil and has world domination type plans.
 
AcrobatMan said:
if bush has gone after Osama as he did after Saddam he would have probably caught Osama instead of Saddam

then instead of iraq....after afghanistan, the next target should have been North Pakistan ( and northwest esp) instead of iraq

The mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan is a tad more difficult terrain to search than the the spider holes of Baghdad.
 
according to Star Jones it's all about, well..

Why hasn't the White House hired her? :hmm:

STAR JONES: TERROR WAR BATTLE OF BUSH, BIN LADEN EGOS
Fri Jan 20 2006 09:38:00 ET

Star Jones has told viewers that the war on terror is nothing more than a clash of male egos between President Bush and Osama bin Laden, the NEW YORK POST reports.

Yesterday, the co-host of ABC's THE VIEW told viewers during a discussion of bin Laden's latest audio tape:

"You know what? At some point, one of these men has to put it back in his pants and zip up the zipper."

She even suggested that Bush hold some kind of talk with the man behind 9/11.

"I won't trust him, but anything that gives me the opportunity to seek peace, I would at least check it out.

"People make deals with the devil all the time. We make deals with people we don't like," she said.

"You don't negotiate with terrorists," said Elisabeth Hasselbeck, the show's youngest host.

"You don't negotiate," Jones interrupted, "but I do think you figure out when there is a solution that's diplomatic that doesn't result in [loss of] human life.

"What do we have to lose to check it out?" Star said.

"You know what?" she then added, "At some point, one of these men has to put it back in his pants and zip up the zipper at some point."

"This isn't somebody whipping it out," shot co-host Meredith Vieira.

"You know what, I'm a little tired of posturing back and forth," Jones replied.
 
nbcrusader said:
The mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan is a tad more difficult terrain to search than the the spider holes of Baghdad.
Yes. Not to mention that for US/coalition forces to operate openly inside Pakistan's borders, as last week's events showed, is likely to court a nasty international (or worse, Pakistani domestic) incident. Any returns would not likely prove worth it in the long run.
 
Back
Top Bottom