[Pete]

If we look at recent history, we must assume that the terrorists would be highly motivated to upset our elections by attacking us. That is what they did in Spain and it paid off for them. [Keep in mind that they attacked Spain before the election so the next few days are probably more likely than election day - just my IMHO]

As an aside, the recent heat up of attacks in Iraq are meant to effect our election. Not only is that a logical conclusion, it has been confirmed by the terrorists themselves. So, it is not really a matter of speculation.

My point is really this. Authenticating the video doesn't really seem to add much to the discussion. We already know they want to attack us before the election. Think of it from the opposite position. Could anyone really argue that they don't want to attack us before the election?

[Smogger]

My point is really this. Authenticating the video doesn't really seem to add much to the discussion. We already know they want to attack us before the election. Think of it from the opposite position. Could anyone really argue that they don't want to attack us before the election?

Refocuses the political discussion on the War on Terror, which is where it should be focused, which is why the MSM wants to bury this story as soon as possible. They did a pretty good job of burying it yesterday and Freepers hardly made a peep.

[ctdonath2]

Authenticating the tape makes it evidence. It may not tell us much about what's going to happen when (though it might), but there are at minimum subtle clues that can be analyzed and acted on; one tiny hint somewhere in the image or audio may help us find this creep and his crew.

If the tape was not authenticated, then it most likely is not worth spending time studying.

[xkaydet65]

Authenticating the video ends ABC's self censorship. The biggies at ABC are fearful of releasing the video because it contains lines that claim the threatened attacks are punishment for having voted for Bush because of Bush's actions in Afghanistan and Iraq and other operations that have disrupted Al Queda. So they used authentication as an excuse not to release it.

ABC fears thatAmericans will NOT react as did the Spanish, but will, instead, get mad and return the President to office. Al Queda believes the opposite. I think ABC has a better handle onAmerica's reaction But by withholding the tape, they keep Kerry in the game, which is what alQueda wants.

[Aquinasfan]

If we look at recent history, we must assume that the terrorists would be highly motivated to upset our elections by attacking us.

If the terrorists fail to deliver any kind of attack on American soil prior to the election, we can be sure that Bush has seriously, if not fatally, damaged Al-Qaeda.

[johnny7]

The way I see's it, these sand-monkeys have done a good job of waiting as long as they have. Crazed fanatics would have struck us again and again as the Palestinians do in Israel.

But even the most diciplined of aggressors cannot contain ALL of their impassioned followers. It worked in Madrid but they knew Spain verrry well. They have lived among Spaniards for centuries! With us... it's a roll of the dice... as far as they know.

What's my point? Quite simply, I believe that they will at least try. Want me to pick a day?

Monday.

[spacejunkie]

the fact that the tape specifically mentions GWB being the cause of their intent to attack clearly shows me it is being used SOLELY to sway voters and not necesarily to propel their religious agenda.

I don't minimize the threat one iota but I do see this for what it is.

[milford421]

Isn't Kerry trying to do just that?

[sphinx]

Could anyone really argue that they don't want to attack us before the election?

I imagine they've weighed the political implications carefully. One the one hand, most analysts believe that an attack would anger rather cow Americans. Advantage Bush.

On the other hand, an attack would give Kofi & Friends at the UN an opportunity to pass a really tough resolution denouncing terrorism (except against Zionists and Zionist sympathizers), thus validating Kerry's approach.

Tough call.

[Garattler]

I agree. I'll only add that they want to destroy us today as they did hundreds of years ago and as they will hundreds of years from now. Who is it going to be, us or them?

[quant5]

"[Keep in mind that they attacked Spain before the election so the next few days are probably more likely than election day - just my IMHO]"

I disagree. I believe it highly likely if an attack occured it would be on election day itself. The elections are part of freedom in America the same as the right to fly or trade at what once was the world trade centers. Al Queda attacked the trade centers in 1992, with the most liberal president ever. To me, it does not matter to Al Queda who is president.

Kerry voted to send troops to Afganistan and Iraqi. I am sure they hate him just as much as Bush. For that matter, they hate all of us. We are all infidels to them and must all perish.

[SeaBiscuit]

"We already know they want to attack us before the election. Think of it from the opposite position. Could anyone really argue that they don't want to attack us before the election?"

I've struggled with that question quite a bit. Not sure they would want to attack before the election as they did in Spain. For this reason: Unlike Spain, America would most likely rally behind GWB if the terrorists attacked, I doubt the public would rally behind skerry. The terrorist may think that as well, so if they wanted to affect our election then the 'threat' before the election makes sKerry's claim that we are no safer under Bush would win big votes for skerry.

I think they will attack after the election if GWB wins, just as they did on 9/11 as their way of 'paying America back for electing Bush'.

anyway, how I'm leaning with this.