Posted by Curt on 27 December, 2007 at 6:59 pm. 12 comments already!


You know things are bad with the media when Osama bin Laden is releasing a new video in which he rails against how Al-Jazeera “misrepresented” what he had said in a earlier tape:

An Islamist website said it would carry a new recording from al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden about “foiling plots” in Iraq.

The website said the 56-minute recording would also be about the Islamic State in Iraq, an al-Qaeda linked group in the country.

It did not say when the video or audio recording, produced by al-Qaeda’s media arm As-Sahab and entitled “The Path to Foiling Plots in Iraq”, would be posted.

Al-Qaeda messages have been often released within three days of their announcement on websites.

“May God expose the cover-up by Al Jazeera, the channel of the infidels,” said the website, which is often used to issue messages from al-Qaeda.

It was not clear whether this meant bin Laden would speak about a controversy in which his supporters have accused the popular news channel of misrepresenting his comments on Iraq.

Some Islamists have said Al Jazeera misrepresented bin Laden’s views by airing excerpts of comments he made in October that insurgents had made mistakes in Iraq because of fanaticism.

Kinda curious timing to release it on the day his group assassinated Bhutto don’t ya think? 

On the assassination itself Bruce Riedal states the obvious:

It was almost certainly the work of al-Qaeda or al-Qaeda’s Pakistani
allies. Al-Qaeda has been trying to kill Ms. Bhutto for decades. She
has been the target of assassination attempts by al-Qaeda before. They
were most likely responsible for the attack on her when she first
returned to Pakistan. Their objective is to destabilize the Pakistani
state, to break up the secular political parties, to break up the army
so that Pakistan becomes a politically failing state in which the
Islamists in time can come to power, much as they have in other failing
states where al-Qaeda knows its chances for success are higher.

And Mark Steyn reminds us of some facts that should of been obvious, but wasn’t:

Benazir Bhutto’s return to Pakistan had a mad
recklessness about it which give today’s events a horrible

her last spell in power, Pakistan has changed, profoundly. Its
sovereignty is meaningless in increasingly significant chunks of its
territory, and, within the portions Musharraf is just about holding
together, to an ever more radicalized generation of young Muslim men
Miss Bhutto was entirely unacceptable as the leader of their nation.
“Everyone’s an expert on Pakistan, a faraway country of which we know
everything,” I wrote last month. “It
seems to me a certain humility is appropriate.” The State Department
geniuses thought they had it all figured out. They’d arranged a shotgun
marriage between the Bhutto and Sharif factions as a “united”
“democratic” “movement” and were pushing Musharraf to reach a deal with
them. That’s what diplomats do: They find guys in suits and get
’em round a table. But none of those representatives represents the
rapidly evolving reality of Pakistan. Miss Bhutto could never have been
a viable leader of a post-Musharraf settlement, and the delusion that
she could have been sent her to her death. Earlier this year, I had an
argument with an old (infidel) boyfriend of Benazir’s, who swatted my
concerns aside with the sweeping claim that “the whole of the western
world” was behind her. On the streets of Islamabad, that and a dime’ll
get you a cup of coffee.

And lastly is the news that Ron Paul blames the US for the assassination (big shocker there!) and also said that al-Qaeda has reason enough to be annoyed with us.

And here is he is blaming us again one more time along with his usual schtick that we funded and armed OBL.  Complete and utter nonsense.

Bryan taking him to task:

But in Ron Paul’s world, all problems are the result of the US taking
action. Any action. Anywhere. Against anyone, doing anything. In the
case of Pakistan, he says we should cut off aid to our “puppet” in
Pakistan and make sure not to march in there with troops. There is, of
course, at most a neglible possibility that we’ll send troops into
Pakistan to do anything beyond taking on al Qaeda or securing the
nukes. India might, but even that’s highly unlikely. And never mind
that Pakistan’s history with democracy is sketchy, to say the least.
Should we not have attempted to work with Musharraf against al Qaeda,
Patriot Paul? Paul also tosses out the canard that we supported Osama
bin Laden. Someone really needs to disabuse him of that notion one of
these days. Someone should bone him up on the history of al Qaeda as
well. It didn’t form because we support Musharraf, as Paul seems to

Disabuse him of that notion?  Hell, it’s hard enough getting to him through his wall of twoofers and neo-nazi’s. 

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x