Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Wrong on Osama

[Vern Green <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

Well isn't this just peachy.

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/33124.htm

Now what do we do? Seems like I am safe at any rate since California
and New York are undoubtedly going for Kerry anyway.


On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 11:10:07 -0800, Vern Green <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
> Nice opinion piece. Not based in a lot of fact, but is a good sense of
> Dowd's opinion.
> 
> Hmm, I wonder, do you think it is possible that Kerry has a hidden
> deal with Osama, to come out like this and make Bush look bad, once
> the election is over and if Kerry wins, then the hostages are freed?
> Wait, sorry no hostages here, but could there be some help coming from
> the Kerry organization to keep Bin Laden free and producing these
> tapes?
> 
> The democrats believe it worked for Reagan, and you have already
> established with our discussion about Karl Rove that the democrats are
> quick to learn from these things. Maybe Kerry cut a special deal with
> Pakistan to stay off Bin Laden until he is elected.
> 
> OK OK so that is absurd, almost as absurd as Bush knowing there were
> no weapons in Iraq before the war.
> 
> On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 12:50:47 -0600 (CST), Mike Miller
> 
> 
> <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
> > On Sun, 31 Oct 2004, Vern Green wrote:
> >
> > > Now in light of this new video, it is a reminder that the war on terror
> > > is not over and when the American people think about safety and the war
> > > on terror, they are more likely to vote for Bush in my opinoin. The
> > > polls say so, if you can believe them.
> >
> >
> > Sure.  I'll let Maureen Dowd of the NY Times respond to your comment.
> > See below.  --Mike
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/31/opinion/31dowd.html
> >
> > New York Times
> > October 31, 2004
> >
> > OP-ED COLUMNIST
> >
> > WILL OSAMA HELP W.?
> >
> > By MAUREEN DOWD
> >
> > WASHINGTON -- Some people thought the October surprise would be the
> > president producing Osama.
> >
> > Instead, it was Osama producing yet another video taunting the president
> > and lecturing America.
> >
> > After bin Laden's pre-election commentary from his anchor desk at a
> > secure, undisclosed location, many TV chatterers and Republicans
> > postulated that the evildoer's campaign intrusion would help the
> > president.
> >
> > O.B.L., they said, might re-elect W.
> >
> > They follow the Bush strategists' reasoning that since President Bush
> > rates higher than John Kerry on fighting terror, anytime Americans get
> > rattled about Iraq and Al Qaeda, it's a plus for the president. And
> > Republicans can keep claiming that Al Qaeda wants the "weak" Democrat
> > elected, even as some intelligence experts suggest the terrorists prefer
> > that the belligerent Mr. Bush stay in power because he has been a boon to
> > jihadist recruiting, with his disastrous occupation of Iraq and his true
> > believer, us-versus-them, my-Christian-God's-directing-my-foreign-policy
> > vibe.
> >
> > The Bushies' campaign pitch follows their usual backward logic: Because we
> > have failed to make you safe, you should re-elect us to make you safer.
> > Because we haven't caught Osama in three years, you need us to catch Osama
> > in the next four years. Because we didn't bother to secure explosives in
> > Iraq, you can count on us to make sure those explosives aren't used
> > against you.
> >
> > You'd think that seeing Osama looking fit as a fiddle and ready for hate
> > would spark anger at the Bush administration's cynical diversion of the
> > war on Al Qaeda to the war on Saddam. It's absurd that we're mired in Iraq
> > - an invasion the demented vice president praised on Friday for its
> > "brilliance" - while the 9/11 mastermind nonchalantly pops up anytime he
> > wants. For some, it seemed cartoonish, with Osama as Road Runner beeping
> > by Wile E. Bush as Dick Cheney and Rummy run the Acme/Halliburton
> > explosives company - now under F.B.I. investigation for its no-bid
> > contracts on anvils, axle grease (guaranteed slippery) and dehydrated
> > boulders (just add water) .
> >
> > Osama slouched onto TV bragging about pulling off the 9/11 attacks just
> > after the president strutted onto TV in New Hampshire with 9/11 families,
> > bragging that Al Qaeda leaders know "we are on their trail."
> >
> > Maybe bin Laden hasn't gotten the word. Maybe W. should get off the trail
> > and get on Osama's tail.
> >
> > W. was clinging to his inane mantra that if we fight the terrorists over
> > there, we don't have to fight them here, even as bin Laden was back on TV
> > threatening to come here. The president still avoided using Osama's name
> > on Friday, part of the concerted effort to downgrade him and merge him
> > with Iraqi insurgents.
> >
> > The White House reaction to the disclosures about the vanished explosives
> > in Iraq was typical. Though it's clear the treasures and terrors of Iraq -
> > from viruses to ammunition to artifacts - were being looted and loaded
> > into donkey carts and pickups because we had insufficient troops to secure
> > the country, Bush officials devoted the vast resources of the government
> > to trying to undermine the facts to protect the president.
> >
> > The Pentagon mobilized to debunk the bunker story with a tortured press
> > conference and a satellite photo of trucks that proved about as much as
> > Colin Powell's prewar drawings of two trailers that were supposed to be
> > mobile biological weapons labs.
> >
> > Republicans insinuated that it was a plot by foreign internationalists to
> > help the foreigner-loving, internationalist Kerry, a U.N. leak from the
> > camp of Mohamed ElBaradei to hurt the administration that had scorned the
> > U.N. as a weak sister.
> >
> > In their ruthless determination to put Mr. Bush's political future ahead
> > of our future safety, the White House and House Republicans last week
> > thwarted the enactment of recommendations of the 9/11 commission they
> > never wanted in the first place.
> >
> > While pretending to be serious about getting a bill on reorganizing
> > intelligence agencies before the election, the White House never forced
> > Congressional Republicans to come to an agreement. So the advice from the
> > panel that spent 19 months studying how the government could shore up
> > intelligence so there wouldn't be another 9/11 may be squandered, even
> > though Dick Cheney's favorite warning to scare voters away from Mr. Kerry
> > is that we might someday face terrorists "in the middle of one of our
> > cities with deadlier weapons than have ever before been used against us,"
> > including a nuclear bomb.
> >
> > Wow. I feel safer. Don't you?
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > discussion mailing list
> > EMAIL:PROTECTED
> > http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Thanks
> F Vernon Green
> 


-- 
Thanks
F Vernon Green
_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion