Osama Bin Laden's latest audio-tape suddenly attempts to show the Israel-Palestine conflict as the main reasons for al-Qaeda's 9/11 attacks. Can you guess why this sudden change in tune???
From FamilySecurityMatters.org:
In a 12-minute address on audio tape, al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, spoke to the American people on the eighth anniversary of 9/11. The tape was produced by the as-Sahab propaganda arm of the terror group and posted on various Jihadists forums on Monday night. His address, directed "to the American People," asserted that the main reason for the al Qaeda attacks on New York and Washington on September 11, 2001, was U.S. support for Israel as well as "some other injustices". Interestingly, Osama claimed the war between the two "nations," i.e the American nation and the Islamic "Umma," can stop if the White House eliminated what he called the "Israel lobby." He accused the latter of pushing for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Note that in this speech he doesn't mention the battlefields of Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Chechnya, he only targets U.S.-Israeli relations.
He begins by insisting that Americans needs to know the real causes for this war "which is costing you dearly in blood and wealth. The [past Bush-led] White House convinced you that this war [the War on Terror] is necessary for your security." The sentence used by bin Laden can also mean that what the Obama administration called the "war of necessity," in the past few weeks. Bin Laden asked Americans to hear "both sides" (a concept taken from American political discourse and rarely referred to in Jihadist literature).
While over-emphasizing the Israel factor – something unusual for him, actually – bin Laden reminded his audience that for two decades he had claimed that the main cause for his attacks is "America's support to its allies the Israelis." He added that there were also other injustices caused by the U.S., as well, but strangely refrained from citing them. Such an over-assertion is new in the al Qaeda narrative, for in most of bin Laden's previous speeches, including his declarations of war of 1996 and 1998, Israel was only one and not the main root cause for the terror he has unleashed since. His speeches during the fall of 2001 (all available online and in print) focused on the "evil nature" of American policies rather than only on the country's specific support for Israel. Hence, one can see a shift in al Qaeda's strategic communications. We'll come back to this point.
Bin Laden then went on to say that "our two Umma (meaning America and the Muslim world) are both victims" of one aggressor, that is in his words, those "who control the White House, particularly the Israel lobby and the multinational corporations." He endorsed two books for Americans to understand how these lobbies control the White House. "A book by a former CIA agent who apologized for his crimes as a hit man," which most likely is John Perkins' Confessions of an Economic Hit Man; and another book called The Israel Lobby, by professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt. He claimed that these two books "will give you the truth." Mearsheimer and Walt are thus becoming al Qaeda's main recommended authors.
Bin Laden also praised President Obama for having "admitted at last in his speech in Cairo, the existence of our people's miseries." He also praised "former President Carter's statements about the Palestinians during his last visit in Gaza, and particularly his statements on Israel's racism."
"Those who are stating from the White House that the war in Afghanistan is one of necessity, are like Bush; they represent the interests of the corporations." He declared that the authors of statements are the ones responsible for the war not the Mujahidin. "The White House is occupied by pressure groups," he said. "You Americans should liberate the White House from these groups instead of liberating Iraq." Pushing the drama, bin Laden added that "any leader [i.e., the president] of the White House is set on tracks he can't leave. This president has become like a train set to move in a particular direction. He must accept these pressures otherwise his fate (as president) could be like President Kennedy's or his brother (Robert)."
He called on Americans "to free themselves from the intellectual terror of the neo-cons and the Israel lobby." He asked them to review their alliance with Israel. "Is your security and well-being worth sacrificing for Israel's security?" He added that polls shows that Americans are opposed to wars and thus they must act against those "who threaten our security," meaning Israel.
Then the al Qaeda leader makes an offer: "We are ready to accept talking about ending this war." However, he believes that President Obama won't be able to meet that challenge. "Obama is a Mustad'aaf." In some of the media analysis in English the term was translated automatically as "Obama is weak." In fact such that translation is not accurate. "Istidaaf" means he has been rendered weaker. In other word he has been weakened – by forces around him – "Mustdaa'f" here means "victimized" or forced to act against his original intentions.
Bin Laden then goes on to explain how the weakening of Obama has been taking place. "He maintained the men of Bush and Cheney in power: Secretary Gates, Adm. Mullen and Gen. Petraeus." Bin Laden says "Obama can't stop the war with these men in charge."He should have appointed generals who were against the war like Gen. Sanchez and Admiral Fallon."
He tells Americans that if they can stop the war, "that is fine, if not the jihadists will continue this war of attrition as they did with the USSR for ten years leading to its collapse." This war you are waging "is already lost."
Then bin Laden goes on to claim that his war against the United States led to a major economic crisis and debts which in turn led to a financial meltdown. He thus claims the economic collapse of the U.S. as an act of war by the jihadists.
At first read, the speech aims to creating confusion among Americans by announcing that the war can be really come to an end by accepting al Qaeda's conditions. But among the many messages Bin Laden is sending, is also an attempt to create a division within the Obama administration by stimulating those he believes are anti-Israel to pressure the American president in order to curtail the influence of the so-called "Israel lobby" inside the White House and within the administration.
There is, without a doubt, a shift in al Qaeda's strategic communications. Bin Laden's advisers, some of whom appear to be operating from within the U.S. political culture, have convinced him (assuming it is voice on the tape) that it would be strategically preferable to single out one issue, the U.S.-Israel relationship and try to break it. That would putting the American public – and perhaps some inside the administration – under pressure. The offer from al Qaeda is that the entire War on Terror, as waged from al Qaeda's side, would come to an end if Washington would just let go of its alliance with Israel. That is why I stated that this tape from al Qaeda, unlike any previous one, takes a non-traditional approach. Finally, this approach could even suggest that a possible re-alignment has been taking place between various forces of jihadism in the greater Middle East.
This tape deserves more attention than the previous ones and more analysis will be added in the near future.
Dr Walid Phares is the author of The Confrontation: Winning the War against Future Jihad and the director of the Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a visiting scholar at the European Foundation for Democracy.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Citizen , September 18, 2009
But they forgot, that islam is a politicial ideology and using it mullahs and dictators or kings can easily control the masses by cursing some infidel countries or people.
The many mullahs, kings etc need israel to be in the map as they can channel there curse to it and the pious or fanatic muslims will be busy in attacking israel.
The dictators are safe till muslims attack others, so that they can enjoy with the countries money and have a good harem.
may be osama was thinking better to get a face saving deal and he can enjoy his last years with many women in his harem. While house of saud etc are ruling and channeling jihadists to the world, the poor osamas etc are fighting and dying for some imaginary heavan while kings and mullahs are getting women in this life.
written by balam , September 18, 2009
written by Someone , September 18, 2009
8 years after the attack he finally gives us the real reason behind the attack, and the reason were the ties the US has with Israel? First of all, why no warning before hand? I'm sure the US would've been a lot more willing to cooperate with him before he destroyed the WTC and killed over 3000 people. Secondly, why come up with the reason only 8 years after the attack. Why wait until the USA takes action against terrorist countries and operates in them for years before you give them the reason behind the attack? But most importantly, why attack the US rather than Israel itself. It makes zero sense. Kill 3000 Americans just for their country being allied to Israel, or kill 3000 Israeli's?
He's simply a filthy liar. He's trying to create (even more) turmoil from within the US by trying to tell the people that it's Israel's fault. He's trying to achieve the same result as with the Vietnam War, which was only "lost" because of lack of support from the homeland. He's trying to find another ally against Israel. It's amusing to see how one country with less than 20 million Jews can cause so much frustration against the Arab nations. He knows deep down inside that his Umma stands no chance against the united military force of the Western nations, even though he says the opposite. He's resorting to filthy tactics by charming the people who are not fighting and trying to get them to betray their soldiers who are fighting for the safety of the world. What a dirty coward. He's too pussy to become a martyr himself, so he abuses his daddy's wealth which was only achieved through living in an oil rich country, to send others to their ultimate end.
written by Walter Sieruk , September 18, 2009
written by saladin , September 18, 2009
This is just another piece of black propaganda,media disinformation etc,to revive the dwindling support for the "war on terror".
People in the "west",are suffering an economic depression,not seen since the 1930s.It is no wonder they`re becoming disenchanted with the "war on terror",which is rightly seen as a goldmine for the arms industry.People are begining to ask,"why should we spend our treasure and lifes blood on a futile war"?
To the fool who suggests the USA could have won the vietnam war,if only there was support from the "homeland".
I haven`t laughed so much in ages.This is why the anonymous fool will fail to understand the American defeat in Vietnam,as he/she will fail to understand the looming American defeat in Afghanistan.
written by friend to someone , September 18, 2009
written by Someone , September 18, 2009
The problem is that America has a lot more to lose than the insurgents from the hostile country. An enemy that's pushed into a corner is far more relentless and motivated than soldiers who barely know what they're there for and have families back home and tons of opportunities to pursue other careers.
Ho Chi Minh said it best "You can kill 10 of my men for every 1 of yours killed, and at those odds we will win the war". Even when the insurgents suffer major losses, it's no big deal to them as the emotional damage caused by the loss of one enemy soldier is far higher than the emotional damage caused by the death of 10 insurgents. On top of this, the unarmed citizens of the country that the insurgents fight for are also less likely to drop support for their cause as they are in the middle of the war and can see things happening all the time. You can't say the same about Americans who sit safely at home without care and only feel the deaths of close friends who die in the war on the other side of the world.
In terms of military power, USA easily steamrolls all over any Islamic country. But when you lack motivation to use that power, it's no wonder you're capable of losing. If America doesn't make the same mistake again of pulling out by public demand, then they will achieve victory.
Back when the Vietnam War occured, it was a totally new type of war to people and no one knew what to expect which lead to some bad decisions on the part of America, however with the Iraq/Afghanistan wars they have the baggage of Vietnam with them and they'll think twice before making the same mistakes. Right now, insurgents are getting their asses handed to them by Allied forces. In certain battles we're literally killing 10 or more of yours for every one of ours. Also, these wars are backed up by all NATO nations and America isn't facing the enemy alone, making it less likely for them to pull out.
You are the one being foolish for thinking that this is US based propaganda for reviving support for the war. Do you seriously believe those conspiracy theories? Please explain me how a video adressing the people of America, telling them that they're only suffering because America supports Israel, is supposed to raise support for the war among these people. If anything, it will lessen the support for the war. Also, don't these conspiracy theories think the jews are behind them and that America is a puppet of the zionists? Why would they shoot themselves in their feet by making the relations with Israel the core of the message? Not to mention that even when it's a goldmine for the arms industry, it still causes MAJOR financial losses to America itself. It's ridicilous to think that this message is made up by Americans. Even if it were made up, it's interesting to see how you can see the falseness in this "War of Terror" but not the falseness in the Qur'an and Muhammad, both of which are far more obvious in their deceit.
written by Saladin , September 19, 2009
It`s not just about military superiority and winning the fire fights.The information war(propaganda),is just as important,if not more so.
Right now(just like in Vietnam),the 'US is getting a bloody hiding in the war for public opinion.All polls show Americans want to withdraw from Afghanistan.After 8 long years,where they`ve seen their sons coming home in body bags,the US super power is no nearing to achieving it`s stated goal ie,the capture of Bin laden and the eradication of the taliban.
I`m sure a chicken hawk like you,would fight to the last drop of someone else`s blood,but your average beer bellied doughnut eating yank........nah!
Thats why you will lose this war in the end,pause for thought eh?
written by Someone , September 19, 2009
This war is different however, because now we know what happens when you pull back, thanks to what history taught us about Vietnam. As soon as the US withdrew from Vietnam, all the "work" they put in to liberate the country was set back in no time and South Vietnam fell to the communists. The exact same thing will happen if they pull out prematurely in Afghanistan, thus hopefully the people calling the shots will use their brains before pulling back the army and making all those "sons coming back in body bags" in vain. Hopefully, people will realise that you need to finish what you started.
Also, this time America is not alone. Pretty much every European country has troops in Afghanistan. On top of this, the losses the allied troops face are far from extreme. New technology is minimizing the amount of deaths faced on the allied side as much as possible. We have robotic drones flying in and taking out as much as 80 Taliban members in one attack without even risking a single soldier. This war is far less brutal than Vietnam and the USA has a much higher chance of achieving their goal than they had in Vietnam.
written by Saladin , September 20, 2009
Wouldn`t it be better for ordinary Americans(Joe sixpack),if their governments learned the lessons of the past.
lol