Posted on 12/26/2001 12:38:08 PM PST by madrussian
LONDON (Reuters) - Osama bin Laden (news - web sites), the world's most wanted man, said on a video broadcast by al-Jazeera satellite television on Wednesday that the September 11 suicide attacks were intended to stop U.S. support for Israel.
``Our terrorism against the United States is worthy of praise to deter the oppressor so that America stop its support for Israel, which is killing our children,'' the bearded, Saudi-born fugitive said.
He added that the tape was being issued to mark about three months since the attacks on New York and Washington and two months after the United States began its bombing of Afghan targets.
The remarks indicated the tape was recorded in early to mid December.
Looking tired but calm, bin Laden was dressed in a clean, camouflage-patterned combat jacket. He sat against a cloth or canvas screen, his Russian-designed submachinegun propped beside him. There was no indication where he was when he recorded the video.
At the time when that war happened, it wasn't exactly a thing I was interested at that age, if you know what I mean.
Arafat must believe he may get a better deal, especially with the majority of the world voting for Israel's withdrawal.
Now the difference is in who believes what is a fair deal and if there is any overlap.
Can you say with a straight face that there is no offer in the world Arafat wouldn't take?
Israel is bold and cocky for only as long as America underwrites their wishes. Weaken that, and they may negotiate more willingly.
Now that you are finally sick of hearing about Middle East, you'll get better.
It was a pretty stupid thing to do on Sam's part. JimRob doesn't agree with SOME elements of Sam's agenda, but to simultaneously demand unfettered access to FR and insult JimRob as being less than patriotic is childish.
And even if I were a rabid supporter of everything Sam Francis wrote (I'll be honest: I'm not), I'd support JimRob in banning VDARE material. It sure as heck didn't help the cause VDARE espouses, and it really lowered my opinion of that site. One can be provocative without being gratuitously insulting.
"Most of the world" branded USA as a racist state and wants us to pay out reparations to blacks. So?
Can you say with a straight face that there is no offer in the world Arafat wouldn't take?
Arafat denies any Jewisn connection to Jerusalem. That speaks for itself.
Israel is bold and cocky for only as long as America underwrites their wishes. Weaken that, and they may negotiate more willingly.
Arafat is bold and cocky for as long as America restrains Israel. Note how he is trying to pretend to crack down on terrorists after we didn't restrain Israel in the past month.
If you were truly sick about hearing about the mideast, then you WOULDN'T POST INCESSANTLY ABOUT IT.
I do fear you are obsessesd (Veronica is merely paid).
LOL - that's not the only reason. I was given a link to some quotes on the site's forum - every other word is "negro", "spic" - wait - those are about the only two words used there.
I'm satisfied with "racialist," thanks very much.
Who voted for that? Africans? LOL!
Arafat is bold and cocky for as long as America restrains Israel. Note how he is trying to pretend to crack down on terrorists after we didn't restrain Israel in the past month.
Actually, I wouldn't mind if Israel went out and fought its war, if they could settle it that way in any reasonable way. But I doubt that would have solved the problem.
No sane person would call that appeasment. Have your heard of cause and effect? Let's change the analogy since you are having problem with this one.
Webster: Appeasement -- "Concessions usually at the sacrifice of principles".
I guess at this point I could start throwing insults like you do and call you a cornered lunatic, or I can let the above argument and anology stand on it's own.
However, if LE doesn't work in a bad neighborhood because they may get hurt, that would be appeasement of a major kind with serious present and future consequences -- freedom.
I don't share your vision of America being a world policeman. Especially when you have a choice of backing one thug over the other one.
Good LE only enforces the laws against thugery for reasons of public safety. Good foreign policy only fights for our short term and long term interests of safety -- that we may have a reasonable expectation to live in freedom today and in the future.
BTW, I don't shy away from statist cold war catch phrases such as "world policeman" that are thrown at reasonable ideas.
The Arabs have done even less for the Kurds who are their fellow Sunni Muslims. They continue to support Saddam Hussein even after he sprayed chemicals on women and children Kurds. It's okay with them since he's a Muslim.
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.