Watch and listen for a shift in the media preparing the public for a fight with Satan #1: Saddam Hussein. They are already laying the groundwork: This job was too big even for Bin Laden, Bin Laden is Saddam’s puppet and fall guy.
In http://www.stratfor.com/home/0109121930.htm, Stratfor suggests the strategy employed by Israel after the Munich massacre of 1972. In a long and mostly silent war, Israel decapitated and destroyed most terrorist groups they thought to be connected with the Munich massacre.
As has been repeatedly mentioned today in the media, the US public may not have the patience necessary for such a silent action.
Note that Stratfor, which is rumored to enjoy close access to the Intelligence Community, also recommends to go after the state sponsors. In http://www.stratfor.com/home/0109120120.htm Stratfor says: “Topping the list of potential state sponsors are Afghanistan and Iraq.”
Stratfor rules out Iraq’s direct involvement, because “the fact that Washington probably long ago penetrated Iraqi operational capabilities in the United States, including any and all diplomatic traffic, makes the possibility that such an operation was carried out without any advance warning less than likely.”
The theory may therefore go that Bin Laden or one of his cells did Saddam’s dirty job. Two enemies for the price of one. NATO support guaranteed. Bring in Russia and China who would like nothing more than Islamic extremism heavily curtailed. A deal which is hard to resist.
We all know the real perpetrator was Gary Condit. He concocted the whole terrorist attack as a means of diverting attention away from his Missing Intern Scandal.
Well, is there any actual evidence of Iraqi involvement? Even if we adopt that website’s “war, not criminal justice” approach, I would think we’d still want to act based on facts, not speculations or suppositions. If we find evidence of Saddam’s involvement, we’ll add him to The List.
As far as evidence goes, we have (at least as far was we know and are told) as much on Bin Laden as we have on Saddam. This is (as we are told) war with an (as yet) unseen enemy. It’s not “Burden of Proof.”
Saddamm is applauding the attacks, but is not taking responsibilty. A group out of pakistan is now taking responsibility, but we haven’t confirmed it yet.
All hands are pointing to bin laden. He did in fact say about 3 months ago that “there would be an unprecedented” attack on america. It probably took even longer to plan. Just cause there was great precision in the attack doesn’t mean any military is involved. People can do anything when they have the time and the devotion, which these terrorists did.
Well, “we” meaning “the general public” doesn’t know anything about Bin Laden or Saddam, but we are being told that there is evidence to link this to Bin Laden (intercepted communications between members of Bin Laden’s group and “links” between suspected hijackers from the passenger list and Bin Laden’s organization) Granted, that’s still kind of thin–at least what we’re hearing is still kind of thin–but it’s more than we’re hearing about Saddam.
Look, I don’t have the foggiest idea who has done it. This is a thread about where we are guided to, what we are being prepared for, what is fed to us, what is said and what isn’t. Also, this is a thread about terrorists and their customers. Any terrorist of consequence (excluding whackos) is a killer for hire. And they are usually hired by governments who can’t afford an outright war. If there is evidence to link this to a terrorist, then you have to pierce the veil and find the people who hired him. If you want to stop terrorism, then you have to dissuade customers from funding terrorism. Terrorists like to wrap themselves into an ideology, or a belief. It’s a sales device. They are killers for hire.
See, I don’t know that this is necessarily true. Or I guess it depends on your definition of “whacko”. If by that you mean “True Believer”, then I think the evidence is that Osama Bin Laden is in fact a genuine believer in his cause (or a “whacko” if you prefer). Certainly there have been earlier terrorists who were quite mercenary, but we can’t assume that they all are.
I don’t think “Killers for hire” would turn their weapons on themselves.
It’s very important to remember that these [killers] went willingly to their own deaths. For something they * believe* in. They were not the ‘cowards’ that we, for lack of a better word, call them.
People like them are enemies of our way of life. Calling them names, de-humanizing them, is not the way to defeat them.
“Know your enemy”.
Peace,
mangeorge
When I say “This attack was perpetrated by faceless cowards,” I do not refer to the hijackers themselves. It’s unclear to me if they are cowards or not – if their belief system assures them of instant entry to Paradise for this kind of death, and they truly bought that belief, then they risked nothing - except, perhaps, failure in their mission, and the consequences thereof.
I refer instead to the person or people behind the attack - the ones that assured their human tools that they would achieve Paradise and sent them off to kill tens of thousands. Those puppet masters, the ones behind the scenes… those are the faceless cowards that I mean.
If it someone like Bin Laden, he’s certainly not “faceless”. And probably not a coward, either. Any person taking an significant stand face a major risk of being killed (take the recent example of Massoud). Cowards don’t make it to the top, at least not in policies, and especially in this kind of policies.
Puppet masters are certainly convinced, intelligent and brave. You could probably call them “heartless”, but certainly not “faceless cowards”. You’re underestimating them.
Saddam Hussein is making it apparent that while he did not personally direct this attack, he is the principal ideologue behind the movement which led to this attack. He is cheering it on from Baghdad.
I know that he isn’t a traditional ‘fundamentalist’. But personally I think religion is secondary. (Reportedly, one of the hijacking ‘martyrs’ ran up a quite a liquor tab) This is a deep hatred of the ‘West’, and it’s democratic values.
In World War II, the Allies didn’t wage war merely against Germany, Italy, and Japan. War was waged on the ideology of fascist militarism. The enemy today is another ideology, one of ‘pseudo-religious’ fanaticism and anti-Israeli, anti-American hatred.
Bid Laden is by no means a puppet to anybody. He is a VERY wealthy man who has one key thing. Patience. He waits.
To many he is a hero NOT for killing people but for getting BACK at the USA.
What is stunning people is how the attack was carried out. Our administrations have been warning us about rouge nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.
This was done with ordinary things a knowledge of converting stored enery into kentic (or did I get that backwards) plus DETERMINATION and PATIENCE.
This man is not psychologically disturbed. Any nut or weirdo would be thrown out of his group as a security risk. He isn’t seeking to take over the US or destroy us, he is seeking to expose and humuliate us for his own personal use.
Hussein is using the people of IRAQ. But he WANTS to be a leader. To LEAD the Arab nations. Bin Laden doesn’t care about that. It is a personal thing.
Hussein sees him self as a protector of a country and Bin Laden is the protector of Islam. (remember his first enemy was Russia)
And people will die for gods more quickly then they will for congressman and dictators.
I’m sorry, they did. Ideology comes after the war started or as a preparation of war. It gives war a meaning. The war against Germany was waged because they were stupid enough to start one. Italy was attacked because they were stupid enough to join. Japan was annihilated because they attacked the US. General Franco, a fascist just as bad as Mussolini, lived in peace and power until he died of natural causes. During the Cold War, we supported countless dictators, as long as they were “ours.” It may sound heartless or cynical, but if we would have waged war to save all oppressed people of this world from heinous ideologues, we would all be dead.
Also, you don’t become bullet-proof, or a hero, just because you can talk people into blowing themselves and others up. Japan had thousands of Kamikaze types, half of Okinawa committed suicide, and what good did it do them? Hitler turned the gun (and some cyanide for good measure) against himself - did that make him invincible, or a hero? You don’t win by dying for your country or a cause. You win by staying alive.