« the return of asv radio: taking requests! | Main | radio sidebar/halloween requests »

October Turkey

Ladies and Gentlemen, Al-Qaeda's number two leader Ayman al-Zawahiri: [via Allah, who obviously had the same thoughts on this as me]
Oh, young men of Islam, here is our message to you. If we are killed or captured, you should carry on the fight. Don't betray God and His Prophet. Don't wait for the American, British, French, South Korean, Hungarian and Polish forces to enter Egypt, the Arabian Peninsula, Yemen and Algeria to start the resistance. "We should start the resistance from now. The interests of the Americans, English, Australian, French, Polish, Norwegian, South Korean and Japanese are everywhere. "All (these countries) participated in the occupation of Afghanistan or Iraq or Chechnya, or help Israel to survive.
I don't have the full transcript of his speech, but you get the gist of it. al-Zawahiri likes the pre-emptive strike idea so much, that he's using it for himself. His idea seems to be, "let's destroy the infidels before they can ever hope to eradicate radical Islam and our evil, murderous ways." Wouldn't it be a great thing if we caught - even killed - al-Zawahari before he could lead his band of thugs to make a pre-emptive strike on the U.S. or any of its allies or interests? On a terrorism level, it would be more important than capturing bin Laden. Zawahari is obviously leading the troops now. OBL is either dead or useless at this point. If we want to crush al Qaeda, we capture Zawahari. Capturing OBL would be important on a more cosmetic level. He is the face of terrorism, the man behind 9/11, a desipicable force hated by millions. While he may not be at the controls now and capturing him would not stop any events already in the planning stages, it would certainly be a victory for the United States and all of its citizens to see the man responsible for the death of 3,000 innocent people be brought to justice. Or killed. But would it? Would the capture of Zahawhari and/or bin Laden be cause for rejoice for everyone? I suppose that depends on when it happens. Say it happened today. Or sometime within the next 20 days.
..Ross Baker, a political science professor at Rutgers University, said the administration risks a backlash. "Producing a high-level al Qaeda leader would immediately invite suspicion about whether this person has been cooling his heels in a safe house some place," Baker said.
On a possible OBL capture before the elections, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said: "I think it would be outrageous, frankly, but you know, there's those kind of rumors out there." It would be outrageous if bin Laden were captured now. Not outrageous as in righteous, man. Outrageous as in outrage. And the possible future First Lady says: "I wouldn't be surprised if he appeared in the next month." I don't need to spell out to you what she meant by that. Go through any Democrat or leftist discussion board. They are terrified of a an "October Surpise" ruining the chances of their candidate. Terrified of bin Laden being captured. Imagine that. Take this idiot for example: "But a nuclear, biological, or chemical attack would be in Kerry's favor. This is because Bush has failed to support initiatives against non-proliferation, something Kerry strongly supports." In Kerry's favor? Is this how people are now judging the impact of a devastating attack on our country? How many people will be quietly saying "Yesssss!" if a biological attack occurs before the end of October? And don't tell me none. Do not insult my intelligence. You only have to read around a bit to know how true it is. Kerry at any cost. No, correct that. Bush out of the White House at any cost. That's how you explain the above idiocy spoken by that young college student. If, in the next two weeks, bin Laden was caught, Zawahiri killed and every insurgent in Iraq laid down their arms and declared their insurgency over, there would be a million tongues wagging the tale of the October Surprise, all mastered by that evil genius, Karl Rove. In Zawahiri we have a man who just issued a fatwa upon us. Yet capturing him would be seen as a bad thing to some people. Think about that. There are actually people worried right now that Zawahiri or OBL will be captured before November 2nd. While this guy is planning attacks against us, there are people who are crossing their fingers that he doesn't get caught because of what it will mean to "thier side." Maybe people like Albright and Heinz-Kerry need to be reminded that in this case, we should all be on the same side. If John Kerry himself were to march into Afghanistan right now, hunt down Zawahiri and kill him himself, I'd call him a hero. I still wouldn't vote for him, but he would be a freaking hero to me. If Bush were to do the same, some people would be dismayed. They'd start yelling about plastic turkeys. And that's all the capture of these men in the coming weeks would be to the anti-Bush crowd; a plastic turkey served to the American people. How very sad.

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference October Turkey:

» http://www.allahpundit.com/archives/001043.html from Allah Is In The House
Agence France Presse wants you to know that, because of our Iraq policy, Al Qaeda is now considering pre-emptive attacks. Meanwhile, three weeks after CBS tried to inject forged documents into the presidential campaign, and on the very day that... [Read More]

Comments

That's been the problem for those opposing President Bush or supporting the Democratic ticket: For them to succeed, catastrophe has to strike, the economy has to tank or bad things have to happen.

If bin Laden is captured on Nov. 1, there will be pockets of Americans who will be infuriated. That's saying something.

Dear Mrs. Albright:
Get your ass back in the attic, auntie.
Yours,
American Public

My prayer since Sept.11, 2001, is that we capture or kill Bin Laden or Zawahiri. Their prayer is,'God let us capture them, but make it after the Nov. election.' That sure says alot for the diehard demmy's character. Disgusting!!! Win, no matter what the cost.

Well, I certainly would applaud ANY useful stroke against the leaders of terrorism whenever it took place.

It would have been nice, for example, for it to have happened during the battle of Tora Bora.

Had it occurred then, and had the current President taken counsel with his brains rather than with something lower down, he probably would still have his 60+% approval rating and be poised for a landslide. And he would deserve it.

As it is, he could walk in the door tomorrow with every terrorist leader in manacles behind him, or slung over the horses as dead as Che Guevara and STILL not deserve re-election. Though he might just achieve it if he did.

Why?

Pick up your New York Times and read the following article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/03/international/middleeast/03tube.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5058&en=e62251c3dcb6c734&ex=1097380800&partner=IWON

Then guess why.

Joseph

I'm surprised you're here. Where are you posting from seeing the voter fraud investigations going on in places like Ohio? No indictment yet?

The NYTimes like Eleanor Clift's "stop those 'conservatives' from intimidating us!" Newsweek, are doing their own "October" [non]surprise...they are bound and determined to drag Kerry over the finish line even if it means not only being baldly partisan, but even lying (CBS's continued attempts at fraud).

Personally, I don't think Osama is still alive. And while I welcome a definitive conclusion (capture or his remains) at ANY time butman Jo_Ke is only interested in talk-talk while terrorists kill-kill. Jo_Ke wants to "reach out to the Muslim world" ... that phrase certainly gives me pause because the main issue the Muslim world has with us (and is the reason so much of it encourages or funds Islamists just like Saddam - who Kerry thinks should have been left in power - did) is Israel. Seeing how Kerry doesn't have a definitive position on any issue, a Kerry presidency would put Israel in danger, not to mention Americans and other kaffir everywhere.

Jo_Ke is a moral fool, and the Left are moral cowards (when it doesn't slip into moral depravity as evidenced by the whole "I question the timing" crappola).

Joeseph - I didn't get through the first page of the article you linked to before I realized that it was selectively leaving out information so I sent the following to Daniel Okrent at the paper.

-----

In your papers article here, you state that there was no evidence of hidden centrifuges -

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/03/international/middleeast/03tube.html?oref=login

"Today, 18 months after the invasion of Iraq, investigators there have found no evidence of hidden centrifuges or a revived nuclear weapons program. The absence of unconventional weapons in Iraq is now widely seen as evidence of a profound intelligence failure, of an intelligence community blinded by "group think," false assumptions and unreliable human sources."

Yet it seems that your paper has selectively forgotten this happened -

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/2020/iraq030626_nuclear.html

"U.S. intelligence officials have confirmed a former Iraqi scientist's claims that he buried nuclear weapons components in his rose garden in Baghdad. Hamdi Shukuir Ubaydi told CIA officials that he was ordered to bury a gas centrifuge used to enrich uranium — a necessary piece of equipment for developing a nuclear weapon — in order to be ready to rebuild Iraq's bomb program."

If bin Laden happens to be caught in October (assuming he's still alive), I'll be damn happy, but I'll also be suspicious as to whether or not he might have been caught earlier and kept on ice until an opportune moment arrived. Sure, sometimes things just happen fortuitously, but a lot of the time they don't. And I'd be just as suspicious if Al Gore were President, if John Kerry were President, if just about anyone but, say, Rudy Giuliani were President. (Rudy may be rude. He may be mean. He may not know when to shut the fuck up. He is a New Yorker, after all. But experience with him as mayor says to me that he does tell the truth, even when it's inconvenient. My experience with Bush, Gore, Kerry, Clinton, etc. does not say that to me.) Historically, leaders, whether of countries or corporations, have been known to pull crap like that in order to preserve their own power. This isn't the same as knowingly allowing thousands of people to die, which I do not suspect Bush did. There'd be really no physical harm to anyone by keeping bin Laden on ice until October. He'd be kept from planning or committing any terrorist acts.

So, yes, I'd be suspicious. Glad, but suspicious. Barring any evidence, I'd give the person in power the benefit of the doubt, but I would indeed be suspicious. I won't pretend otherwise, because that would be a lie.

Lesley

Anyone morally depraved enough to capture Bin Laden and "keep him on ice" until October would be morally depraved enough to have planted some WMD in Iraq to avoid the histrionics of the "Bush Lied, People Died" mendacity.

GW is pretty much WYSIWYG; not a botoxed, mantanned, magic-CIA-hat, manicured, "I want to kill terrorists, but first I have to get France's permission", cribnoted, empty suit Jo_Ke.

Seriously, after the debates, Kerry scares the crap out of me. The man has no grasp of the moral difference between the USA and terrorists.

Joseph
You're ignorant as well as foolish to believe DemocraticUnderground's talking points. At the time OBL was cornered in Tora Bora we had, max, 1,000 Marines on the ground and they were quite busy at the time. Just who in the American armed forces do you think were available, in country, to get him?

From Citizen Smash's website:

Presumably, he would have used American military forces, instead of “outsourcing” the effort to local warlords. But what forces where available in theater at the time? The first large contingent of conventional forces in Afghanistan, a brigade of 1,000 US Marines, arrived at an airstrip near Kandahar on November 25, 2001. That city, which had been the last stronghold of Taliban leader Omar, didn’t fall to anti-Taliban forces until December 7.

The only other US forces in Afghanistan at the time were Special Forces, and CIA paramilitaries. Their job was to help organize the various militias into a coherent force capable of defeating the Taliban, and to call in Coalition air strikes as required. It was this combination of Special Forces and local militia that had already driven the Taliban from the strategic city of Mazar-e-Sharif, the airbase at Bagram, and the capital Kabul.

The only US military on the ground at Tora Bora was a contingent of about two dozen Special Forces who were airlifted in to the area on December 2. Their mission was to coordinate the ground attack and to “laze” targets for US bombers. There is no way that these men could have taken Tora Bora without assistance – And the Marines in Kandahar already had their hands full. In any event, Tora Bora was completely overrun by December 12 – but not before the al Qaeda leadership escaped to Pakistan.

Joseph - try doing some research next time. Honestly, we won't think any less of you for it.

Kevin

"Had it occurred then, and had the current President taken counsel with his brains rather than with something lower down, he probably would still have his 60+% approval rating and be poised for a landslide. And he would deserve it."

Joseph, I think we all know which President used his "lower region" in the oval office.

Put down the koolaid and walk away.

And I'm sure there aren't any wingnuts out there hoping for a terrorist attack in Des Moines on October 29th so that America will rally around the president.

Ummmm, right. Lileks fantasizes about one every night right before the crane lowers his massive head onto his pilly-pill.

Angela, how nice to see you again.

I already lived through one terrorist attack, thank you. I'd really rather not go through another, no matter much rallying people will do.

As for your comment about Lileks, well. Everyone here knows you're a jerk, so it's not like we don't expect garbage to fall out of your mouth when you stop by.

How are things over at Oliver's place? Has his head exploded with hatred yet?

Ouch. Jerk? I've always fashioned myself to be a bit of a twat. Hey, look on the bright side, I'm not Wonkette.

Is Oliver's head exploding? About as much as you and your compatriots' heads will be exploding with hatred when President Kerry's in office. Honestly, though, I'm not a huge Willis fan. I only stop in there to joust with his wingnut stalkers. TBogg and alicublog are where it's at. Not as funny as Misha, mind you, but they got it going on.

Ok, twat it is. And you do have that Wonkette thing going for you, I'll give you that.

And I'm sure there aren't any wingnuts out there hoping for a terrorist attack in Des Moines on October 29th so that America will rally around the president.

I haven't run across any wingnuts who are disloyal enough to wish for an attack on America. But no doubt there are a few idiot who match your description...

Michele's examples include such notables as former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Senator Hillary Clinton, Therisa Kerry Heinz - and I hear its the talk of the town for DC Democrats.

A real parallel would be to find a Republican senator or Secretary of state who's hoping for an attack on US...

But even looking for that is to miss the point. Michele isn't a right wing nut who supports GW, fascism and burning welfare mothers at the stake and hopes that terrorists will cement right wing hegemony. She's a former Nader voter who wants to her country protected and who is voting for Bush because the majority of lefties have abandoned any serious attempt to protect their country because you're so partisan that you would compromize your own country's security in order to stay partisan. That's the charge you have to answer to.

Who is Angela and why does James Lileks get her panties in such a knot??

Oh, nevermind, rhetorical question.

If you really want to see tiny moonbat heads explode announce Osama's capture the day after Bush's re-election.

I think Zawahiri needs to seek Global approval before he can talk about preemptive strikes.

And know what, Angela, the only reason my head will be exploding if Kerry is in office will be because I'm the victim of one the ensuing slew of terrorist attacks that will take place, or because of being placed in a concentration camp in France.

... fashioned myself to be a bit of a twat.

And just in time for halloween, too.

wouldn't change my vote either way if they found both of those guys tomorrow. I'd probably go out drinking with some old military buddies, but I would still vote the same.

I think a lot of these people see their view as quite reasonable. After all, during WWII, we had to ally with Stalin to defeat Hitler. And today, they need to ally with Osama bin Laden to defeat Hitler; what's the diff?

"I'm surprised you're here. Where are you posting from seeing the voter fraud investigations going on in places like Ohio? No indictment yet?"

No, just plenty of new Democrats registered, and registered right. About 10 times more new registrations in the Democratic wards than in the Republican ones. And, wonder of wonders, in my county we are near total registration of the entire voting age population.

President Twitchy comes to visit us regularly too. But the local GOP still seems to be largely sitting on its hands, waiting for direction.

Were all hoping to see more of President Twitchy trying to "be Presidential" when John Kerry is speaking in the next debate.

Joseph, today's phrase is "dramatic irony". Look it up.

I imagine Michele keeps your posts around just so that she can showcase your bad personality and illustrate her point.

"registered right..."

BWAHAHAHAHA... [wipes tears]

funniest thing I've read today.

Democrats are on full-court press to cheat and Joseph is acting as if he's the only virgin at the orgy.

Michele,

HOW LOW ARE YOU GOING TO GO?

Your misquote of Secretary Albright is pathetic and disgusting. Secretary Albright wasn't asked about capturing bin Laden but about the Bush Administration manipulating such a capture as an October surprise.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you think the administration is capable of that kind of manipulation?

ALBRIGHT: Well, I hope not. I think it would be outrageous, frankly, but, you know, there's those kind of rumors out there.

Apparently, you're not above throwing out the plastic turkeys yourself in your quest to smear the left for political gain. Have you no shame?

Macswain

Albright's mendacity is on the same level as Dean the Scream's when he floated the "I'm not saying Bush CAUSED 9/11...but people are talking"

It's basic moral cowardice to attribute charges you want to make to anonymous "others."

If Albright truly doesn't think this kind of "surprise" is possible, then she should shut the f*ck up.

But then, I'm expecting the Left to pay attention to morality rather than dissing it.

Silly me.

sigh.

"I imagine Michele keeps your posts around just so that she can showcase your bad personality and illustrate her point."

Well, I'm afraid you'd have to ask her about that rather than me. She has never said anything to me that suggests I've violated her hospitality on her blog. And I would certainly apologise if she did so.

I would remark, however, that this IS just a blog comments page and you know no more of my "bad personality" than you do of my "bad breath".

I would concede that I both cultivate opinions that contradict those commonly expressed here, and am inclined to confront "dramatic irony" with straight-faced "comic irony" because I have a fondness for the style of the late George Burns.

But then, when so many of my good friends here have ambitions to be Gracie Allen, how can I, in all courtesy, refuse to feed them the straight lines?

Joseph I guess my problem is that I grew up in Canada and have somewhat different standards for what's acceptable than most Americans. You sure sound rude to me.

Anyway I may have misread you, I'm missing sleep and in a bad mood.

Well I guess we won't be seeing any corrections from Michele re her bogus smear of Madeline Albright. Why should anyone expect her to abide by the same standards she so viciously requires of others?

Indeed, who should complain about Michele when the likes of Condi Rice are allowed to lie in your face and then play dumb time & time & time again.

Standards don't apply to the Micheles and Condis here at ASV. Condi's clowning played a part in starting a war; but here the big story is how dopey Dan got snookered.

How very sad. Indeed.

Macswain

I find it outrageous, and I certainly hope it's not true, but there are rumors out there of your ephebophilia.

I'm not saying it, but people are talking.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you think Macswain is capable of flagrant coprophagy?

ALBRIGHT: Well, I hope not. I think it would be outrageous, frankly, but, you know, there's those kind of rumors out there.

Do you seen now what's wrong with this kind of statement, Macswain?

Come on, Sloan. You're assuming that MacSwain thinks in rational terms.

"Democrats are on full-court press to cheat and Joseph is acting as if he's the only virgin at the orgy."

One final update: registration closed yesterday in Ohio. Twenty thousand new voters registered here in Columbus just yesterday, as well as the same number, 20,000, up in Cleveland. Strongly Democratic counties both.

Columbus registered 118,000 new voters this year, bringing the total registered in my county to an extraordinary 837,000, up from 650,000 in 2000!

In Cincinatti, the Republican stronghold in the state, the new registrants for the year total about 65,000.

We've been on the ground in the prime Democratic wards since last winter. We want this one. It shows.

Keep tryin' to change the subject ... your "thinking in rational terms" argument is just another fake plastic tree.

I guess what we do know now, given Michele's appearance and her failure to correct the mispotrayal of the Albright quote, is that her smear was intentional. For a moment, I really thought Michele might have the moral courage to correct the quote as misstatement or misunderstanding.

I'm not being facetious when I say that it truly is sad that the level of debate by the host of this site has sunk to level of false demonizations of Democrats.

Macswain you're a jackass...

Michele's quote actually looks better as Albright seems to be condemning the rumors outright in Michele's quote. In the quote you provided, the "Well, I hope not" lends even more cred to Michele's position.

"ALBRIGHT: Well, I hope not. I think it would be outrageous, frankly, but, you know, there's those kind of rumors out there."