S
Posted on 09/06/2004 1:04:58 PM PDT by FormerACLUmember
S
Use your email...ask your friends to keep passing this along.
You bet!
That's all we have to counter the MSM. Our email. I ALWAYS include the original link when I do that, so the recipient can go look for himself!
ROFL!
Frankly, I don't see the media "spiking" this aspect of the story.
It's more a matter of differing perspectives between the media and the public.
Anyone with strong familiarity of Al Qaeda and Chechnya understands that the "Chechen resistance" wouldn't even exist without Al Qaeda. The Chechen resistence is Al Qaeda and vice versa.
There aren't enough "separatists" in Chechnya to fill Texas Stadium, (even today) and there wouldn't be any at all if Al Qaeda hadn't been setting up the "resistance" for over a decade.
Anyone with strong familiarity on the topic who saw two commercial aircraft explode within four minutes of each other didn't even bother to ask if Al Qaeda was involved, it was simply that obvious.
SOP for Al Qaeda is simultaneous attacks, and an inferred claim of responsibility through some invented terrorist group that no-one's ever heard of before, but that uses names obliquely related to Al Qaeda and past Al Qaeda attacks. For example, "Abu Hafs Martyr's Brigade", refers to Mohammed Atef (alias Abu Hafs), Al Qaeda's top military planner, who succeeded Banshiri and completed the planning and execution of the African Embassy bombings when Banshiri was killed in a ferry accident, and who was killed in a US bombing raid during Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan.
The rising "furor" over Al Qaeda involvement in the entire series of recent attacks in Russia is of the same significance as the flap over whether ETA or Al Qaeda blew up the Spanish trains just before the election.
I'm not one to defend the media, but in this one case, they aren't exactly covering up this angle, they more seem to be just not over-emphasizing what appears to be obvious to them.
Once you accept that Al Qaeda wasn't only involved in, but was the prime planner, financier, and motivator for the entire string of recent Russian attacks, the door opens to ask much more interesting questions, such as:
1. Why did AQ target specifically Russia?
2. Why now?
3. Was the coincidence in timing between the string of attacks and the Republican National Convention simply a matter of random chance?
4. Is the string of attacks over for now?
5. If there was a correlation between the timing of the attacks and the Convention, why didn't Al Qaeda simply attack in America instead of Russia?
6. Overall, what was Al Qaeda's purpose and objective behind this string of attacks?
7. Have those objectives been met to Al Qaeda's satisfaction?
8. Is this string of attacks actually over now, or is Russia to expect still more?
Simultaneous attacks, at least in the past decade and to date, have always been Al Qaeda's handiwork. Dispensing with the entire "Was it Al Qaeda or (fill in the blank)" process allows us all to get to the meat of the implications that much faster, which then ties into the whole idea of getting inside their decision making loop.
Besides....if future events prove us wrong in attributing a future attack to Al Qaeda, what's Osama going to do about it, sue us? Declare war?
Heh.
I've had a plan for a long time, but everyone mad enough to want in is too mad to take what appears to be an ineffective route.
The major leftist media is wide open for a class action suit.
They have demonstrably (right on the front page) lied in documented ways that have demonstrably damaged a large number of people in material ways.
There are two key elements to making it happen.
One is to convince the lawyers that there is at least the possibility of a settlement or favorable verdict, because they will gamble, but not throw away their time for no return.
Two is to convince them that a large enough number of people feel thay have been materially damaged to drive the payoff up into ten to twelve figures. With left and right roughly balanced in America, that works out to 140 million plaintiffs and only ten bucks damage each.
We, on the other hand, win whether we get a verdict or not, because regardless of the outcome, the majors will have to tighten their editorial policy in light of the increased scrutiny and the incredible expense of discovery and their defense of what could end up a multi-billion dollar settlement.
Even the Adminsitration shouldn't have objections, as their hands are clean, no claims of Republican's trying to stifle the First Amendment can be laid.
All you have to do is talk it up until an attorney with the resources to gamble a bit picks it up and runs with it, the rest will take care of itself.
Al Queda has big plans for their John Kerry/Democrat Party electioneering, about 3-7 days before the Election Day, using their Spanish success story as a template.
2. Why now? Anytime is a good time when you least expect it.
3. Was the coincidence in timing between the string of attacks and the Republican National Convention simply a matter of random chance? The RNC was a diversion to this campaign of mass murder.
4. Is the string of attacks over for now? No.
5. If there was a correlation between the timing of the attacks and the Convention, why didn't Al Qaeda simply attack in America instead of Russia? We were ready, thanks to the Republicans. Russia is easier as a target.
6. Overall, what was Al Qaeda's purpose and objective behind this string of attacks? Terrorize the population and withdrawal from Chechnya. Spread Islam the only way it has ever been spread for 1600 years.
7. Have those objectives been met to Al Qaeda's satisfaction? A complete success.
8. Is this string of attacks actually over now, or is Russia to expect still more? More, much more.
You mean to say the MSM would actually cover up for Islamic terrorists who are probably planning something similar for the US? Wow, who wudda thunk it? You could knock me over with a feather.
The MSM must be destroyed. I lierally no longer watch TV and get my news from unbiased sources on the Internet.
Glad to see its become official breaking news now.
It's an important piece of info. And that is an amazing understatement. That this is not the main news story and instigation of a thousand op-ed and chattering head programs is lousy and stupid.
Cindy I think I missed you ... FYI ping to reference
A Discussion on FREEREPUBLIC.com regarding an AP article: "ARMED MEN SEIZE SCHOOL IN RUSSIAN REGION ON NORTH OSSETIA, REPORTS SAY" (September 1, 2004) (Note: Ongoing Updates) (Read More...)
TRINIDAD & TOBAGO EXPRESS: "RUSSIAN TERROR LINK - BWIA Jet on Islamic Website" (ARTICLE SNIPPET: "The image showing a BWIA Lockheed L 1011 Tri Star with the wing and fuselage exploding, was posted on August 25. It bears reference to Chechyna's 10-year war with Russia seeking independence. BWIA decommissioned the L 1011, along with three others, a few years ago. They have been replaced by the Airbus A340.") (September 6, 2004) (Read More...)
Well, I have no way of proving any one answer is more or less accurate than any other answer in this case, but I'd answer them differently.
1. Why did AQ target specifically Russia?
To prove they can attack a superpower at any time of their choosing.
2. Why now?
Timed to slightly lead and coincide with the RNC.
3. Was the coincidence in timing between the string of attacks and the Republican National Convention
simply a matter of random chance?
No, the attacks were timed to distract from the RNC.
4. Is the string of attacks over for now?
Yes, if the timing above is correct. It's a good test to determine intent. If there are more attacks in Russia in the near future, the theory doesn't hold water. From a stage manager's POV, the series was well scripted. A small attention getting first scene, two airline catastrophes to get the reporters into place and the pipeline opened, another pair of suicide bombers to keep the thread alive, and then the climax at the school, which followed the convention's climax by what, eight hours?.
I suspect the climax was expected to run live on the satnews channels, but the Russians shortstopped a lot of that action by putting the perimeter far enough away to prevent it. Nice move, for future reference.
5. ...why didn't Al Qaeda simply attack in America instead of Russia?
Too close to home sends large numbers of scared voters Bush's way. Counterproductive from the enemy's POV.
Our "readiness" is a lot like the coverage of a Patriot battery. Excellent point defense. Area defense still has a ways to go.
6. Overall, what was Al Qaeda's purpose and objective behind this string of attacks?
The ones you list,
"Terrorize the
population and withdrawal from Chechnya. Spread Islam the only way it has ever been spread for 1600
years."
are clearly near the top of the list. Is that list all inclusive, or did AQ try for multiple objectives beyond those you state. Time will tell.
7. Have those objectives been met to Al Qaeda's satisfaction?
If the main objective was victory in Chechnya, then the objectives are a long way off, probably much further than they might have been two weeks ago.
If the prime concern was to send a message to American voters, with other objectives secondary, well, the RNC is over, Bush got his bump, the window of opportunity to affect the election in that way has passed. That'd mean this string of attacks is over. Betting anything of value on that assumption carries a risk or two.
It may seem a bit egocentric to portray this as being "all about us", especially considering the pain this has caused in Russia, but the 3/11 attacks were "all about the Spanish election" and comparing the two, the US election is going to swing a lot more weight in determining AQ's future.
Ya think Pootie would like to join us in our fight against terrorism now?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.