No doubt by now, you've heard that Usama bin Laden has released a new videotape today. At this time, I am unable to get a copy of the transcript, but it has been reported that UBL says that if we want to know why we're losing the war on terrorism, we need to read Michael Sheuer's book, Imperial Hubris.
===========
Update: Thanks to Danny for sending me a link to the transcript. They were still working on this when I originally posted.
===========
For those who don't know, Michael Sheuer was the head of the CIA's bin Laden unit, and has spent many years studying bin Laden and al Qaeda. His book, Imperial Hubris, argues that al Qaeda attacked America, not because of the 1st and 19th Amendments or Baywatch, but because of American foreign policy in the Middle East.
Just a few minutes ago, Neil Cavuto interviewed Michael Sheuer, asking him about being mentioned in the new UBL tape. Mr. Sheuer told Mr. Cavuto that the CIA has been telling politicians for 12 years that our foreign policy was causing these problems, and that he wasn't saying the policies were good or evil, but simply trying to understand the motivation of our enemies.
Sheuer then said that, "The nineteen men running for President, with the exception of Mr. Kucinich and Mr. Paul, are lying to the American people about this."
When former CIA analysts are telling us (on Fox News, no less) that our presidential candidates are lying to us, we have a serious problem. The question now is whether the American people, and specifically Fox News viewers, will take this message to heart, or whether they'll continue to stick their collective heads in the sand and chant the catechism, "They hate us for our freedoms."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Wouldn't it be nice to see those two get the nomination....
Anyway, here's and article that links to the transcript.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/new-obl-tape-ir.html
i look forward to your next post. :)
Hey, thanks for that! And yes, I'd love to see Kucinich v Paul in 2008. I guess we can all dream. :-)
Paul vs. Kuchinich? That would be nice, but I’ll go you one better:
Paul gets the GOP nomination. Kuchinich just barely loses the Dem nomination (perhaps to Hillary).
Paul sees no one in his own Party (with the possible exception of the sadly now-former Senator Hagel and let’s assume that Hagel’s disillusionment and wanting out of politics entirely extends to not accepting Paul’s offer) close enough to him to be his running mate, so he looks to the closest person available even if not from the same Party:
Paul / Kuchinich 2008!
There’s nothing in the Constitution that says that the Vice President has to be the same Party as the President (indeed, the Constitution doesn’t mention political parties at all, but that’s another rant).
Post a Comment