[DC Bound]

Bin Laden accepted these criticisms and in mid-2002 began a series of speeches and actions to remedy the shortcomings and satisfy his Islamist critics before again attacking in the United States.

The author would have strengthened his claims if he would have given evidence of the above. The article is premised on the immanency of the next attack due to a "speech cycle"--but the evidence seems to conflict with itself a bit. He compares the present round of speeches to the ones before 9/11, arguing they are the same. Then he cites the criticism Bin Ladin endured from Muslims to show the new speeches are different. Then he assumes this proves the next attack is near. The logic is unimpressive. Thus, like you, I am leaning toward the latter--they just want to keep us on our toes.

[hflynn]

DCI Porter Goss's testimony before Congress on February 16 that Soviet nuclear material could be in al-Qaeda's hands is a troubling coda to speeches by Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri in late 2004. Bin Laden's October 30 speech was treated by the media as an attempt to influence the election.

Porter Goss never said nuclear material could be in al-Qaeda's hands. Goss said he could not assure the American people that the missing nuclear material had not found its way into terrorists' hands.

It was FBI Director Robert Mueller who confirmed new intelligence which suggests al Qaeda is trying to acquire weapons of mass destruction.