or
Join Now!
|
|
Home/Government/Politics
|
| Forum |
Ask A Question |
Question Board |
FAQs |
Search |
Return to Question Board
| Question Details |
Asked By |
Asked On |
| Text of excerpts from Osama bin Laden tape |
ETWolverine |
01/19/06 |
Al-Qaida leader appears to be addressing the American people
The Associated Press
Updated: 2:58 p.m. ET Jan. 19, 2006
The following is the text of the excerpts aired by Al-Jazeera television from a new audiotape from al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden. The excerpts were translated from the Arabic by The Associated Press.
Bin Laden appears to be addressing the American people:
My message to you is about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and how to end them. I did not intend to speak to you about this because this issue has already been decided. Only metal breaks metal, and our situation, thank God, is only getting better and better, while your situation is the opposite of that.
But I plan to speak about the repeated errors your President Bush has committed in comments on the results of your polls that show an overwhelming majority of you want the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. But he (Bush) has opposed this wish and said that withdrawing troops sends the wrong message to opponents, that it is better to fight them (bin Laden’s followers) on their land than their fighting us (Americans) on our land.
I can reply to these errors by saying that war in Iraq is raging with no let-up, and operations in Afghanistan are escalating in our favor, thank God, and Pentagon figures show the number of your dead and wounded is increasing not to mention the massive material losses.
....
And so to return to the issue, I say that results of polls please those who are sensible, and Bush’s opposition to them is a mistake. The reality shows that the war against America and its allies has not been limited to Iraq as he (Bush) claims. Iraq has become a point of attraction and restorer of (our) energies. At the same time, the mujahideen (holy warriors), with God’s grace, have managed repeatedly to penetrate all security measures adopted by the unjust allied countries. The proof of that is the explosions you have seen in the capitals of the European nations who are in this aggressive coalition. The delay in similar operations happening in America has not been because of failure to break through your security measures. The operations are under preparation and you will see them in your homes the minute they are through (with preparations), with God’s permission.
Based on what has been said, this shows the errors of Bush’s statement — the one that slipped from him — which is at the heart of polls calling for withdrawing the troops. It is better that we (Americans) don’t fight Muslims on their lands and that they don’t fight us on ours.
We don’t mind offering you a long-term truce on fair conditions that we adhere to. We are a nation that God has forbidden to lie and cheat. So both sides can enjoy security and stability under this truce so we can build Iraq and Afghanistan, which have been destroyed in this war. There is no shame in this solution, which prevents the wasting of billions of dollars that have gone to those with influence and merchants of war in America who have supported Bush’s election campaign with billions of dollars.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10927325/
---------
So, what do we have here? We have Bin Laden releasing a tape just days after the Pakistan attack in which a number of his highest-level supporters were killed. In the tape he makes two interesting comments. 1) That al Qaeda is planning a new attack on the USA, and 2) that he is willing to offer a truce to the USA under his conditions. And he tries to explain that the only reason that he hasn't attacked the USA yet is because his plans weren't yet complete, but as soon as they are, he will launch an attack against us.
What does this tell you?
What it tells me is that OBL needs to project an image of strength in order to bolster the flagging morale of his followers. That he is offering a truce under any conditions to the USA--- which he has lambasted in the past as "The Great Satan" and saying that we must be destroyed at any cost--- leads me to believe that HE is the one who needs a truce, and that HE is in trouble. Which doesn't mean that he won't strike at the USA if he can. He will certainly try, and he might succeed. Which would not be a sign that Bush is ineffective, just that no security measures can possibly be 100% perfect 100% of the time.
But what is to me the most interesting of all, is the fact that we now have a CREDIBLE THREAT FROM A CREDIBLE SOURCE of an impending attack against the USA. Should Bush bother getting wire-tapping warrants which will waste time and manpower, or should he just do what he has to do to protect the nation from a national security threat as authorized by the Constitution?
Comments please. |
Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 01/23/06 2:16 pm:
Hello Elliot:
>>>AS IT IS WRITTEN, not as you would wish it to be or as you would like it to be interpreted.<<<
You’ve got to be kidding. You talk a good story, but your full of hot air.
Please then, spin, I mean tell me what the following means? Or if it doesn’t mean what it says (AS IT IS WRITTEN), then what does it mean?
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.“
excon
Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 01/24/06 8:27 am:
Excon,
That means that in criminal cases, one cannot be searched without a warrant based on probable cause. Emphasis on CRIMINAL CASES. The 4th Amendment does not and never has applied to communications of the enemy during a time of war (or even during peacetime, come to think of it). The President does not need FISA court or Federal court approval to spy on an enemy. That authority is part of his presidential powers as granted in Article II section 2. That has always been the case. And unless a Constitutional Amendment is passed, that will ALWAYS be the case.
Let me ask you this: If the USA were invaded tomorrow by, say, Canada, would the President need Congressional or Court approval to listen in on communications of the enemy military taking place on our soil? Or would that fall under his Presidential war-powers authority?
During the Civil War, did Lincoln need Congressional approval to listen in on Confederate telegraph messages? No. He did it under his own authority as CnC. Did FDR need Congressional permission to listen in on Japanese communiques with Japanese-Americans before or after Pearl Harbor? Of course not. Did Eisenhower need Federal warrants to spy on Russian communications with spies here in the USA? Nope.
The entire concept of waiting for "probable cause" during a time of war is rediculous, and was certainly not neither the intent or the actions of the Founding Fathers. In wartime, especially a terrorist war, by the time you have obtained "probable cause" you've already been hit. How would you find out there is probable cause to listen in on a communication until AFTER the communication has taken place? You have to already be listening in in order to get the probable cause in the first place. That's why spying on the enemy is different in concept and goal from a criminal investigation. In a criminal investigation, you are trying to get information about something that already happened in the past. When spying, you are trying to gather information about something that is going to happen in the future. So the entire concept of probable cause has no application to military intelligence, and the assertion that it does is rediculous, and self defeating. That is why the President has always had the power to direct military and intelligence-gathering operations without approval of Congress or Federal Court warrants during a time of war or in the protection of National security.
As for FISA, I would argue that the law, which was written in 1978, is unconstitutional in its modern-day application. It limits the power of the President and grants extra authority to the Judiciary in a manner that is clearly unconstitutional and which disrupts the President's war-time powers.
And Congress knows this too. If they truly felt that Bush should only be wiretapping with warrants as in a criminal case, they would not be arguing that Bush should be going to standard Federal courts for the warrants, not the FISA courts. But they KNOW that these are not criminal investigations, and thus not subject to the provisions of the 4th Amendment. That's why they are trying to argue that Bush should have gone to the FISA court... which he clearly does NOT have to do.
Elliot
Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 01/24/06 9:26 am:
Hello El:
I'll make you a deal (which I'm sure you'll turn down). I say Bush acted illegally. YOU say he didn't. Both of us saying so, doesn't make it so.
Therefore, I suggest we wait until the final outcome of the investigation and the courts proceedings. I'll accept whatever the courts say.
I doubt that you will, however. Since you don't think the courts have jurisdiction in the matter, you won't accepet ANYTHING they say.
Then let's just agree to disagree.
excon Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 01/24/06 10:27 am:
Ex,
Actually, I think that the courts will rule that they don't have jurisdiction in the matter, and will let Bush's decision stand. That is how the courts have been ruling since the 1960's on this matter, including several rulings during the 90s, when the court was much more left-leaning than it will be once Alito is confirmed (and he will be). The courts have always been very protective of the President's constitutional wartime powers.
So I say that either SC rules in Bush's favor, or else they refuse to rule at all. Either of those outcomes preserve Bush's wartime powers, which is the same as saying "Bush was right".
So... we can let it lie for now until a final ruling is rendered.
Till then...
Elliot
|
| |
|
Your Options |
Additional Options are only visible when you login! !
|
|
|
|
