Why are journalists making a big thing about his threat against civilians? (photo: when the bearded idiot used to make videos, too)
When covering the story all the major networks have led on the part of the cassette tape which threatens western citizens. The Los Angelis Times for instance:
“…he said members of the Western public shared responsibility for the actions of their governments because they "are renewing their allegiance to its rulers and master" — an apparent implication that civilians could be targeted.’
Two things: firstly, what is new in that? Al-Qaeda type lunacy has always targeted civilians. Look what they are doing in Iraq. Look what they did in New York on 9/11. Nothing new in that at all.
Secondly: the commentators are saying that this statement puts civilians more at risk. They imply that there is some connection between what Bin Laden says and atrocities that happen in the West against civilians.
But this is not so. Bin Laden in particular and al-Qaeda in general (whatever that is) had nothing do to do with the bombs in London, for instance. And Madrid?
Why do we constantly exaggerate the role of a man who lives in a cave, recording gibberish into a cassette recorder every now and then?
18 comments:
The press tends to focus on hardliners at the expense of other strands of Islam. Perhaps this is in part why someone like Abu Hamza became the face of Islam here in the UK rather than, say someone like Shirin Ebadi
We don't really know for sure if there is something called Al-Qaeda. Do they have a website?
Welcome Jams!
Shirin Ebadi is a good example (she won Nobel Peace Prize?) of all the Muslims and secular people from the middle east who are fighting against the nutters too.
Abu Hamza (hook handed panto villain) who seems to scare people to death, is just another nutter who is not really that scary at all.
Most of these jihandists are not a threat to anyone in the west - though they are a real menace to those in Egypt, Iraq, ....
I agree with Renegade - al-Qaeda is a figment of the Wests imagination. They are not some crack group of troops ready to attack us. They don't have that kind of orgamization. It's more of a brand name.
But that hasn't stopped Blair, Bush from bringing in authoritarian laws which are the real threat to 'our way of life'.
Not some nutter in a cave.
Looking for a massive organisation called Al Qaida would be a pointless waste of time as it doesn't exist in that form.
On the other hand Al Kaider does exist and and plies his trade as a furniture maker in Maine..... or at least he did soin 1999 according to the Boothbay Register!
:-) Arrest that man and sling him in secret gulags in Poland!
Can he share a cell with Al Nino who carried the can for his environmental namesake?
on that point, I'll get me coat!
And umbrella and wellingtons...
Lovers love, hater hate, terrorists terrorize...
But those Al Qaeda terrorists don't seem to terrorize you guys...
As long as you are more scared of Dubya than of Osama, all's well and fine...
Bush. Poor Bush. Hapless Bush. he's a worry becuase he is in a corner. Everything he tries goes wring. Already a lame duck, Iran is all he has got to look manly and is if he is doing something.
But all tbis talk about attacking Iran is just that: talk. He's shot his bolt.
Bin Laden is a massively important figure in the Muslim world.
This article shows that most Muslims think that the guy is a complete fruit cake. Headline is Spanish Muslims issue fatwa on bin Laden
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/03/11/wspan11.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/03/11/ixworld.html
We should unite and send the Tom Cruise of the Pakistani Caves a webcam. His last tape is not only hilarious: it is also delusional and very boring. 5 dollars here; a generous offer, as his last performance is worth less. But I have a good heart, and would like to help the news -and bloodthirsty public of the Western world. They seem to be lusting for their exotic terror-playboy. So, next action: a cam for Been Laden. Join me!
Yeah, a Laden-cam! In the cave!
You are completly right about bloodthirsty public of the Western world...he seems to feed our wildest fantasies and fears.
Some think he is the most dangerous man alive (which is clearly a ridiculous thing to think) others (armchair anti-imperialists) seem to see him as a bit of a 'freedom fighter'(even though he is indirectly - very indirectly - to blame for killing thousands of Muslims).
He is none of those things. He's just a loser in his cavge with his cassette recorder and his delusions.
So he does not become Has-been Laden, Red?
On a less flippant note both Hamas and the Sudanese Government seem to have put a lot of distance between themselves and his recent statement. Perhaps many in the Muslim world now see him as a liability rather than a hero
Osama is not the problem, merely a symptom. The root of the problem are totalitarian dictators like Saddam. Trying to uproot them will be a very costly and bloody enterprise, but it is the only way.
I know that democracy cannot be imposed by force (that's neo-cons costly blunder), but nothing forces us to tolerate totalitarian oppression. Instead of chasing after Wild Goose Osama, why not send one of those remote drones over Teheran for some surgical strikes against Ahmajiadan....
"Bin Laden was behind the biggest attack on US territory since Pearl Harbor. People who lost loved ones in 9/11 want him apprehended"
It's too bad the current President of the United States is not one of those people.
Now, now, Michael! Bush is not to blame for US foreign policy...he is just the bozo who takes (very bad) advice.
And Clinton would have reacted in the same panicky way that the Republicans did.
In fact, it was Clinton and Blair who maintained the sanctions that killed half a million Iraqi children...they were also the gruesome twosome that bombed Iraq regularly, bombed Serbian make-up ladies in television studios, bombed Sudan, Somalia ...etc....
George - "Bin Laden was behind the biggest attack on US territory since Pearl Harbor. People who lost loved ones in 9/11 want him apprehended"
Which is indeed true, of course. But Bin Laden had very little to do with that, at all. It's an action he appropriated, not initiated.
In general, we have overblown massivly the danger that he and al-Qaeda poses to us in the West. Apart from 9/11 - a one off spectacular - what else has there been? Nothing. In Europe 'al-Qaeda' has done nothing at all (Madrid is debatable).
But this won't stop our hapless, isolated leaders from trying to appear relevant, with a 'moral purpose' (that they don't have) by making new authoritarian laws that really are a danger to us.
Post a Comment