Osama's Misplaced Rant
Posted on 01/21/2006 5:18:21 PM PST by FairOpinion
The former chief of the CIA’s Osama bin Laden unit says bin Laden’s “truce” offer comes from a long-established Muslim tradition of warfare -- sending a clear signal to the United States that an al Qaeda attack is more than likely.
Twenty-two-year CIA veteran Michael Scheuer, who wrote “Imperial Hubris: Why the West Is Losing the War on Terror,” says bin Laden has offered his final warning before launching his next strike.
“Warning your enemy before you attack him is very much a tradition in Islam from the prophet to the times when Saladin was fighting the Crusaders, he would warn them, he would offer them a truce, he would try to go the extra mile before attacking him,” Scheuer said on “The O’Reilly Factor” Thursday.
“So I think it's very important that we understand the context in which bin Laden is speaking,” Scheuer continued, “because I've heard other people today already saying that he's offering a truce because it's a sign of weakness, because we're beating him. And I think that's pretty far from the truth.”
Following Al-Jazeera’s disclosure of the tape yesterday, several bin Laden experts -- including journalist Richard Miniter on Human Events Online -- dismissed bin Laden’s latest message as nothing more than a bid to reassert himself as the world’s preeminent terrorist.
I asked two experts on the Middle East and Islam their thoughts about Scheuer’s assertion. They cited historical parallels to Scheuer’s contention.
Robert Spencer, director of Jihad Watch and author of “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades),” told me: “Traditional Islamic theology actually does support the idea that Osama was asking for a truce because he perceives weakness in his ranks.”
Spencer pointed me to a passage (below) from “Umdat al-Salik (Reliance of the Traveller),” a Shafi'i Sharia manual endorsed by Al-Azhar University in Cairo as conforming to the "practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni community." Here’s what it says:
“Truces are permissible, not obligatory. ... Interests that justify making a truce are such things as Muslim weakness because of lack of numbers or materiel, or the hope of an enemy becoming Muslim. ... If the Muslims are weak, a truce may be made for ten years if necessary, for the Prophet (may Allah bless him and give him peace) made a truce with the Quraysh for that long, as is related by Abu Dawud. ... The rulings of such a truce are inferable from those of the non-Muslim poll tax; namely, that when a valid truce has been effected, no harm may be done to non-Muslims until it expires.”
A second scholar, Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum, told me: “Bin Ladin has a history of making threats he did not carry out -- for example, versus Israel after the execution of Ahmed Yassin. It is more useful to see his tape as an attempt to stay relevant than in the tradition of Muslim warfare.”
It's also standard to offer a truce when someone is kicking your ass.
What we were discussing.
[The actual Islamic tradition is to offer a truce when you've been beaten and need time to regroup, re-arm, and plan for the next offensive. See "Arafat".]
Correct. Now is the time to liberate Iran after which the Saudis will have to do our bidding or we will just give the Saudi oil fields to the Shiites as well as Iraq and Iran.
Well, Mr. Scheuer, since you were still working for the goverment then, before you wrote you book and took the money, how is it that YOU missed the "signal" before 9-11 -- and what the HELL was the offer?
I think this is the time...but the Saudi's (Wahabbist's) and the Twelvers (Mahdi Shiites) are basically the same.
If the Administration doesn't understand the religious aspect of this war...they cannot understand the MO of the enemy.
Jimmah Cahtah would have called it a diplomatic breakthrough.
Ping
Thanks for the ping RR.
"If you give up now, I'll stop beating your fist to a pulp with my face."
Thanks, Cindy
This is something we have been discussing on the TM.
Most all of the so called experts have really been down playing this.
I fear it is a big mistake.
The nut-case is tossing red meat to the MSM and the lib-weenie bloc, hoping for backlash against GWB.
Bin Laden is tired, scared, and grasping for straws. I bet he hears the footsteps getting closer. We are going to smoke his a$$ soon.
Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.
Bin laden did not offer a truce, he said he would accept a truce offered by the USA, which we are not offering.
That an offer of truce is a harbinger of a coming attack---it's counter-intuitive, and that's not to say it's invalid, but in this case I think it's wrong. More likely bin Laden is in contact with some other party that has assured him they are preparing an imminent attack on America, and a spectacular one at that; and he believes them, because he wants to believe them. Bin Laden is a fanatic, and fanatics are the easiest people to fool.
I think he was a one-trick pony, and is regarded as such even in his own shrinking circle. He and al Qaeda can never follow their own act of 9/11. Otherwise we'd hear from him every week, and he'd be taking credit for spectacular terrorist triumphs every month.
Think about it. One scratchy audio tape after a year of oblivion. Is that the signature of a world-beater?
They do survive; like roaches you can exterminate 90%, they survive and they do intend harm and they do continue to stir up fools and patsies in the Arab world. But they are in retreat. Clearly in retreat.
It's been over four years since they sucker-punched us. The Bush Doctrine is working, working very well. Bin Laden is begging for mercy the way devils always beg, by making it sound like an offer of clemency.
I don't think that AQ has what it takes (right now) to do a major, 911 style attack on the USA.
That's not to say it can't cause trouble, and lots of it, provided they have enough agents willing to sacrifice their lives on the ground.
Provided you have the agents in place, just how difficult is it to rig 10 or 12 suicide bombers all around the USA to detonate during lunch hour or evening rush hour in a half dozen major cities?
Follow it the next day with 10 or 12 suicide bombers in another half dozen cities.
The day after that, repeat.
That's only about 30-36 agents - granted they can only do that trick once. Say they go to that well every day for a week. Then start doing every other day. Then every three days. Mix it up.
That would really freak out most people in the USA, and given conventional methods we really couldn't stop it, could we?
Does AQ have enough good, loyal soldiers to keep something like that up?
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.