Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bin Laden: Attack on US to Stop Support for Israel
Reuters ^

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.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: islamicviolence
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 501-511 next last
To: teenager
You might want to ask that question to Subramerican. By his own admission he was cheering for Argentina.

Why don't you ask him yourself?

I take your screen-name as some sort of admission of naiveté so I won't be too hard on you. My point was that in international disputes not involving the United States, us* Americans are free to choose sides. My support of Great Britain during the Falklands War was based upon the morality of the situation as I saw it, rather than some allegiance to a foreign power as others might suggest here.

ML/NJ

* Darn. There I go again.

151 posted on 12/26/2001 1:59:10 PM PST by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
It's relevant to Israel-firster, judging from their denials before. If you are observant, they'll spin any situation to favor their cause.

You were the one who posted the original article, not some mythical "Israel-firster." You were also the one who cited bin Laden's grievances as reason to change our policies toward Israel.

You are spinning faster than anyone else around here.

152 posted on 12/26/2001 1:59:27 PM PST by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
"There are 3 walks: American, muslim and Israeli. I walk the American one."

The way you keep saying that, it's almost as if you think you can convince anyone of it.

153 posted on 12/26/2001 1:59:34 PM PST by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
Yes, if our country doesn't deserve to be attacked by the bastard -- and we don't -- then the only fault of our country and it's forereign policy is that we didn't appease the bastard enough. That is the argument that some here on this thread make.

The argument is actually different. You know that if you walk at night in a bad neighborhood, you can get mugged. Is that appeasement?

If I don't walk in a bad neighborhood because I may get hurt, that would be appeasement of one sort with small consequence. 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.

That is the argument.

154 posted on 12/26/2001 2:00:14 PM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Either/Or
Of course I knew you'd say that. The fact that the story has had limited circulation and the fact that it is playing on anti-Semitic sites, and the fact that CNN and other news organizations have NOT retracted the date of the pictures leads me to believe that the 1991 date is a complete fabrication. I can provide the URL of the site which is promoting this false story of 1991 (which in fact, it is claimed, shows the Pals dancing for their hero Hussein in Operation Desert Storm) operated by former members of the Spotlight.
155 posted on 12/26/2001 2:03:46 PM PST by Lent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: BrooklynGOP
Oh, please. He is just mitigating his damages. His group is already banned in all muslim states, and the only thing he can do to boost his image with them is to blame Israel. Funny how a year ago he made no mention of Israel.

I think this is very insightful, and accurate.

156 posted on 12/26/2001 2:05:09 PM PST by dlt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #157 Removed by Moderator

To: Either/Or
All I know is it is from the St. Petersburg Times and I have never seen a retraction. Is the St. Pete Times an anti-semitic publication?

Oh please. This stuff has been splashed all over the world, and of course there hasn't been a "retraction" everywhere that lie perched. The debunking of the lie has been widespread and available to all interested parties, though. Which leads me to believe that A: The St. Pete Times didn't find it worth its space to clarify this, or B: that you're a party singularly disinterested in anything conflicting with your pet myth. I tend to think it's B ;).

158 posted on 12/26/2001 2:06:53 PM PST by Cachelot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Either/Or
The CNN footage of the Palestinians dancing in the street was shot in 1991.

That's not what CNN says.

159 posted on 12/26/2001 2:07:13 PM PST by Alouette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

Comment #160 Removed by Moderator

To: Lent
Thanks for the Jane's post.

To throw a monkeywrench into some of the discussions here, when has Al-Qaeda ever attakced an Israeli target? They got embassies too, for example. What does that tell you about Osama?

161 posted on 12/26/2001 2:08:45 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: abwehr
This is going to be expensive. I guess we will have to give Israel some B-2's, F-117's and a nuclear powered aircraft carrier just so Osama can see we don't allow bearded savages to decide who we can support or not support.

I like your approach - whatever the SOB (or anyone like him) wants do the opposite, in spades.

162 posted on 12/26/2001 2:13:30 PM PST by Ancesthntr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Comment #163 Removed by Moderator

To: Either/Or
Reuters statement on false claim it used old video September 20, 2001 Posted: 4:04 PM EDT (2004 GMT)

Reuters rejects as utterly baseless an allegation being circulated by e-mail and the Internet claiming that it circulated 10-year-old videotape to illustrate Palestinians celebrating in the wake of the September 11 tragedies in the United States.

RESOURCES

CNN statement about false claim it used old video

Reuters welcomes a statement by the Universidad Estatal de Campinas-Brasil (UNICAMP), one of whose students was the author of the original e-mail, setting the record straight.

The videotape in question was shot in East Jerusalem by a Reuters camera crew on September 11 in the immediate aftermath of the attacks on the United States. The footage was broadcast by CNN and other subscribers to the Reuters video news service.

CNN on FALSE 1991 Story

164 posted on 12/26/2001 2:14:01 PM PST by Lent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: Lent
In the scheme of things, it's a moot argument.

They are still dancing. Figuratively.

Just last week one the networks interviewed Mid-east "Americanized" Islamic teenagers who have applied to come to the US for their studies and to a person they were glad for the attack on America.

Dancing fools and their FreeRepublic dance partners.

165 posted on 12/26/2001 2:14:45 PM PST by Sabramerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

Comment #166 Removed by Moderator

To: Sabramerican
Dancing fools and their FreeRepublic dance partners.

Gives new meaning to that show "Dirty-Dancing".

167 posted on 12/26/2001 2:18:05 PM PST by Lent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

Comment #168 Removed by Moderator

To: Logophile
You were also the one who cited bin Laden's grievances as reason to change our policies toward Israel.

Let's start over, since you seem to be confused. My position is really simple see if you can grasp it. The need for a change in policies was there before 9/11.

You are saying that now after 9/11 we should stick with the previous policies only because Osama doesn't want that. How more silly can it be?

As to why I posted this article, that's because, as I wrote, Israel-firsters were scared of people linking 9/11 and the support for Israel.

Say you have a friend who uses you, sets you up and then eggs you "you are my friend, aren't you gonna help me?" Is that really your friend?

169 posted on 12/26/2001 2:29:39 PM PST by madrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Either/Or
Not even one or two hours after the attack the major networks have prime footage of Palestinians celebrating in the streets.

Shall we expect your Zionist conspiracy theory to be made expressly or shall we leave it as a necessary implication of your post?

170 posted on 12/26/2001 2:30:30 PM PST by Lent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Either/Or
Either/Or: the Palestinian spokespeople went through a lot of gyrations and trouble to explain away the celebrations in the West Bank and Gaza on 9/11. To me, that is the best evidence that the celebration photos were taken on 9/11.
171 posted on 12/26/2001 2:31:47 PM PST by dlt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
WHY? Because Bin Laden is a Saudi! And a madly religious one. His version of the Koran forbids infidels on Saudi soil. Duhhhhhhhhh...

Wasn't John Walker saying that USS Cole got what it deserved because it shouldn't have been in a muslim port?

172 posted on 12/26/2001 2:33:43 PM PST by BrooklynGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
As to why I posted this article, that's because, as I wrote, Israel-firsters were scared of people linking 9/11 and the support for Israel.

Why would Israeli supporters be scared of an event that spoke for itself? We had a certain foreign poliy prior to 9/11, are you suggesting that our foreign policy is to be shaped by the demands of terrorists?

Say you have a friend who uses you, sets you up and then eggs you "you are my friend, aren't you gonna help me?" Is that really your friend?

How did Israel set us up? What's more, Israel is not saying "you are my friend, aren't you gonna help me", it's saying "you are my friend, aren't you going to let go of my arms and help me protect myself while I get beat on?"

173 posted on 12/26/2001 2:36:16 PM PST by BrooklynGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
If I don't walk in a bad neighborhood because I may get hurt, that would be appeasement of one sort with small consequence.

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. Say it's not a human neighborhood, but an animal one. Will you venture there if there is a danger of a grizzly attacking you?

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.

174 posted on 12/26/2001 2:36:16 PM PST by madrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

Comment #175 Removed by Moderator

To: BrooklynGOP
Israel doesn't want to compromise, and is using its lobby in America to shape American foreign policy. American involvement there is clearly not based on simply American interests.

And as for "friends", there are no friends in foreign policy. The whole characterization of the relationship as such is an emotional blackmail.

176 posted on 12/26/2001 2:40:40 PM PST by madrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
Israel doesn't want to compromise, and is using its lobby in America to shape American foreign policy.

Oh it doesn't? Then why did Israel give back the lands it conquered in war initiated by arabs and is even negotiating to give back more. The only condition being that arabs recognize Israel's right to exist? What about peace with Jordan? israel is supplying Jordan with drinking water for FREE as a condition of peace. That's some good faith, when Jordan should be the one trying to show good faith, since they have attacked Israel before.

American involvement there is clearly not based on simply American interests.

Clearly it is.. As you put it there are no friends in foreigh policy

177 posted on 12/26/2001 2:46:05 PM PST by BrooklynGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Either/Or
Fair enough. But do you really think that the Palestinians were the only people on this great earth that were celebrating the attacks?

Uh. I was glued to CNN for 72 hours straight, and they showed practically every muslims in different muslim states celebrating.

178 posted on 12/26/2001 2:47:16 PM PST by BrooklynGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
Let's start over, since you seem to be confused. My position is really simple see if you can grasp it. The need for a change in policies was there before 9/11.

If you believe that the United States should change some of its policies regarding Israel, simply state what those policies are and why they should be changed. Quoting bin Laden simply confuses the issue, and leads people to the reasonable conclusion that you agree with him.

You are saying that now after 9/11 we should stick with the previous policies only because Osama doesn't want that. How more silly can it be?

Actually, I never said such a thing. I simply objected to the idea that we should change our policies to appease a vicious thug like bin Laden.

As to why I posted this article, that's because, as I wrote, Israel-firsters were scared of people linking 9/11 and the support for Israel.

I don't know about the Israel-firsters (whoever they may be), but I am less scared than disgusted by people (such as Bin Laden and you) who try to use support for Israel to justify terrorist attacks on my countrymen.

Say you have a friend who uses you, sets you up and then eggs you "you are my friend, aren't you gonna help me?" Is that really your friend?

So now we are supposed to believe that Israel somehow "set us up" for the attacks on 11 September?

179 posted on 12/26/2001 2:47:34 PM PST by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: BrooklynGOP
Clearly it is..

I'd argue with that statement. Your honesty is refreshing. So we can dump the whole "abandoning our friend" routine from now on?

I guess next time Bush tells Sharon what to do and Sharon refuses, Bush can simply strong-arm Sharon, without being subjected to whining.

180 posted on 12/26/2001 2:50:18 PM PST by madrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
I'd argue with that statement.

But you are not...

So we can dump the whole "abandoning our friend" routine from now on?

Its not Israel per se. But us backstabbing the only democracy in the middle east, would definately do a great deal of damage to THE democratic leader of our planet.

181 posted on 12/26/2001 2:54:54 PM PST by BrooklynGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
"Siding and supporting doesn't necessarily include billions of aid and blocking UN resolutions supported by "other democratic allies".

Why is it that the OBL-cheering-section never objects to the billions more sent by the US to the Arab nations? A few billion to Israel, and they scream bloody murder. A few tens of billions sent to the Arabs, and suddenly they clam up like the cat that ate the canary.

How utterly transparent, yet, they strut about like little banty roosters, confident that no one can see through their little charade.

"Capisce?"

Oh, the irony.

182 posted on 12/26/2001 2:55:32 PM PST by Don Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
Israel doesn't want to compromise

Barak offered Arafat 97% of the West Bank, and Arafat refused without making a counter offer. That happened rather recently. So I ask you, why in the world did you type the word “Israel” rather than “Arafat” or the “Palestinians?” I can understand you saying that the Palestinians should not compromise because Israel should be wiped from the face of the map, and that you believe that their present policies maximize that prospect. That might be execrable and wrong, but is not irrational. What you typed above however is simply bizarre and detached from reality IMO.

183 posted on 12/26/2001 2:55:35 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
Either you missed my previous post or you had no answer to it....here it is again....

Regardless of ones stance on support of Israel one thing is certain.....the only reason there is any semblance of stability in that region is our support of israel. If we walked off the entire region would melt before the worlds eyes. Israel would probably be forced to nuke several countries to defend herself but in the long run with no world support she would be dismantled by the arab/muslim nations. Then we could watch them fight each other until someone like sadam contoled the whole region and with the economic power that brings watch him begin to spread his dominance throughout the world....you want on that Americ first island?

184 posted on 12/26/2001 2:56:15 PM PST by is_is
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
Aha, that's where you find the problem, can't be anti-Israeli (I'm not).

You aren't? You could've fooled me.

Oh, wait--you're just anti-semitic.

185 posted on 12/26/2001 2:59:31 PM PST by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Logophile
If you believe that the United States should change some of its policies regarding Israel, simply state what those policies are and why they should be changed. Quoting bin Laden simply confuses the issue, and leads people to the reasonable conclusion that you agree with him.

I already stated that.

"Quoting bin Laden" is used to refute the previous Israel-firsters' line of defence of Israel "not having anything to do with it". As expected, they fell back onto the second line of defence, which for an observant reader should tell something about their trying to spin this.

Actually, I never said such a thing. I simply objected to the idea that we should change our policies to appease a vicious thug like bin Laden.

That does sound silly, but that's not what I said.

I don't know about the Israel-firsters (whoever they may be), but I am less scared than disgusted by people (such as Bin Laden and you) who try to use support for Israel to justify terrorist attacks on my countrymen.

That's another misconception of yours. I'd refer you to excellent articles by Sam Francis on the subject. I can send you links when I find them.

So now we are supposed to believe that Israel somehow "set us up" for the attacks on 11 September?

Read my reply to Brooklyn above.

186 posted on 12/26/2001 2:59:38 PM PST by madrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: BrooklynGOP
Its not Israel per se. But us backstabbing the only democracy in the middle east, would definately do a great deal of damage to THE democratic leader of our planet.

You couldn't be straight for more than one post, LOL!

Cheap emotional blackmail is back!

187 posted on 12/26/2001 3:00:57 PM PST by madrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: tex-oma
Well.... if YOU are from California, it MUST be bad.

And to take it one step further, maybe Osama himself is from California. If not, perhaps we can all pretend he is. It would make things so simple for those of us who regard him as a completely irrational monster, a la Sesame Street, instead of a rational, sane leader of a political and military movement. But that's the ways of war!

188 posted on 12/26/2001 3:01:42 PM PST by Revolting cat!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
The billions sent to Arab nations are bribes designed to keep Israel-friendly regime in the office.
189 posted on 12/26/2001 3:02:50 PM PST by madrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Catspaw
And finally, the conclusion of every Israel-firster. LOL!
190 posted on 12/26/2001 3:03:48 PM PST by madrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
You couldn't be straight for more than one post, LOL!

What are you talking about? Can you imagine what kind of precedent it would set for us to walk away from a democracy and at the same time promote democracy in other parts of the world?

191 posted on 12/26/2001 3:03:53 PM PST by BrooklynGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
You, however, are a one-note Annie and have become very tiresome.

Cheers,
PB

192 posted on 12/26/2001 3:04:52 PM PST by Pharmboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Either/Or; tex-oma
Perhaps they have incorporated the new "Hate Watch" software into their programming? You got me, tex.

If you want to post articles from Sam Francis, be my guest. In fact, I want you too--see, it's not my site, but JimRob's, and he's the one who determines what stays & what goes.

Anyway, it'd thin down the posters on FR if you did post from SamFrancis.

193 posted on 12/26/2001 3:05:27 PM PST by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Torie
According to Israel, that was a great offer. The best they could offer, in other words. And why should I believe that?
194 posted on 12/26/2001 3:05:29 PM PST by madrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: is_is
Essentially, what you are saying is that America is Israel's hostage. Fair enough.
195 posted on 12/26/2001 3:07:15 PM PST by madrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: BrooklynGOP
So you are saying that Isreal is a totally unviable state and America has to maintain it.

Great offer.

196 posted on 12/26/2001 3:08:09 PM PST by madrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
Trying to deprogram you. Sorry about that, move along please.
197 posted on 12/26/2001 3:08:47 PM PST by madrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
What you are saying is that America is islam's hostage, and we have to do everything and anything to appease them.
198 posted on 12/26/2001 3:09:03 PM PST by BrooklynGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
No, you said Israel refused to compromise, not that their compromise was insufficiently generous. I say Arafat refused to compromise because he didn't make a counter offer, and hasn't offered squat. You are dumping on the wrong party on this issue. Admit it. And btw, what should Israel offer in order to get over the height of your adequately generous bar?
199 posted on 12/26/2001 3:09:15 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
So what you are saying is that you can't read and comprehend. Alrighty.
200 posted on 12/26/2001 3:09:34 PM PST by BrooklynGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 501-511 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson