Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Aljazeera: Bin Laden Tapes: Fact or Fiction? They Say Perhaps Fiction!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
nofoil Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 07:54 PM
Original message
Aljazeera: Bin Laden Tapes: Fact or Fiction? They Say Perhaps Fiction!
Edited on Thu Jan-26-06 07:57 PM by nofoil
Bin Laden tapes: Fact or fiction?
1/20/2006 9:00:00 PM GMT

In the past year, Zawahri has been issuing tapes, and Bin Laden has been careful not to appear

The audiotapes of OSAMA BIN LADEN have become an important medium between AL-QAEDA network and the outside world. If authentic, these tapes could enable BIN LADEN to convey his opinions to his enemies and followers, issue threats and even claim responsibility for terror attacks carried out by his group. It is obvious that the usefulness of such tapes cannot be questioned, but how can people be sure of their origin and authenticity? Little time is dedicated to such examinations. But an analysis can really influence the way we judge similar evidence in the future.

There is no reason whatsoever to believe that these audiotapes are authentic. While they are always followed by reports of scientific voice analyses, these studies have been invariably done by CIA experts. In fact, only one occasion was an independent analysis done. And while American officials were certain of the tape’s authenticity, Swedish scientists were convinced that it was fake.

Consider yesterday’s audiotape, in which BIN LADEN warned that AL-QAEDA is planning new attacks against the United States, but offered a conditional “long-term truce”, which the White House rejected. Hours after the tape's release, CIA officials said it is a “genuine message” from BIN LADEN. “Following a technical analysis, the voice on the tape is believed to be that of OSAMA BIN LADEN,” said a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) official. On the other hand, several experts doubted the tape's authenticity. “It was like a voice from the grave“, said Bruce Lawrence, a Duke professor, who analyzed more than 20 complete speeches and interviews of the AL-QAEDA chief for his recent book “Messages to the World: The Statements of OSAMA BIN LADEN.”

More at www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=10544

Sorry, edit is because I copied the URL incorrectly.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
adarling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. it has gotten to be ridiculous how much they use
a new tape of bin Laden everytime they want to take heat off a political situation that is burning their asses. It has become quite obvious i think to the public and such.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. The only reason the assholes in charge refused to
capture Osama when they had him, literally, in their hands, was to pull this everlasting war crap on America and the world. Since he won't pop up on command, faking the pop-up becomes necessary. What a surprise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Colors Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
3. I expect a black van to show up any minute, but ...

After reading that story, I just emailed the link to this article to Al Jazeera... maybe they can add to it:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dalaigh lllama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. very interesting read
But why would it not surprise me if that's how they made the tape...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
balzac Donating Member (157 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm all over that. Thanks for posting that.
Check out my analysis:

http://balzac.wordpress.com/

I'll be reading that from Al Jazeera. This is crap is FAKE!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. these fuckers shouldn't be able to get away with posing as al-jazeera
I think I'll start a propaganda site called thewashingtonpost.com to confuse people with. A shame the original does a much better job.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
balzac Donating Member (157 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 01:46 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. You're right, that was not THE Al Jazeera
Stupid copycat website. The real aljazeera is aljazeera.net The fake one - AlJazeera.COM got it wrong:

It was Swiss scientists, not Swedish. The Guardian has it:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/story/0,12469,851112,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. Except that aljazeera.com appears to predate the TV station
Domain name: ALJAZEERA.COM
...
Registrar of Record: TUCOWS, INC.
Record last updated on 31-Oct-2005.
Record expires on 13-Apr-2009.
Record created on 12-Apr-1996.

http://www.whois.sc/www.aljazeera.com


and they claim "Aljazeera Publishing is an independent media organisation established for more than 12 years delivering news and analysis to readers all over the world".

Al Jazeera has come a long way since it was launched in November of 1996 with more than 30 bureaux and dozens of correspondents covering the four corners of the world.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/bbing/stories/s977779.htm


Some people say it means 'island' or 'peninsula', especially the Arabian Peninsula, so it's not that surprising if 2 groups chose the same name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
7. Osama offering a truce, when you think about it, would hurt Democrats
Think about it. By throwing out such a statement, it makes Democrats look weak when they argue for a timetable for withdrawal or even for complete withdrawal because the tape makes Democrats look like they are acquiescing to terrorists. If true, it would be an ingenious if not brutal tactic against Democrats.

With the Osama tape serving as the arena ropes, the Republicans can then pin Democrats against the ropes and say, "Where you gonna go now!? You leave the ring, and you're giving into terrorists! You move off the ropes and towards me, and you are conceding that I was right all along!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fovea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. very good point
Why is Bin Laden, strangly helpful to the Repug cause?

One might argue that he is his father's son, after all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-28-06 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. Depends on how you look at it. See this Op-Ed by me:
Original Article at http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_060128_osama_bin_laden_and_.htm


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 28, 2006

Osama Bin Laden and his Latest Message: George W Bush and the US Missed a Tremendous Opportunity

Disappointing and Surprising

By Steven Leser, January 28, 2006

December 7th, 1941, at 7:55am Japanese Dive and Torpedo bombers and fighters show up in the skies over Oahu and Pearl Harbor. No war has been declared, no warning has been provided . By the time the attack was over, a full two hours later, over 2400 Americans lay dead and the bulk of the US Pacific Fleet was at the bottom of the harbor. Only three hours later, the Japanese struck at American installations in the Philippines in an attack that lasted over 20 full hours killing countless more. A little over four months later, the Japanese completed the conquest of the main island of the Philippines, Luzon, and marched the survivors of the defeated American and Philipino forces away from the Battan peninsula in a brutal march that came to be called “The Battan Death March.” Somewhere between 5000 and 11000 valiant American and Philipino soldiers died during the 60 mile march to Camp O’Donnell where additional horrific tortures awaited the survivors.

In the wake of these and other atrocities committed by the Japanese, many of which would today be called acts of terror and were later unequivocally determined by international courts of law to be war crimes and crimes against Humanity, the allies met in Potsdam on July 26, 1945 and articulated to Japan what was required of her to end the war. This declaration can be seen in its entirety on the website of the Japanese legislature, the Diet, at http://www.ndl.go.jp/constitution/e/etc/c06.html

When I first heard that Osama bin Laden had delivered a new message, and that message contained an offer for a truce of some sort, I wondered what our response would be. I would have been satisfied by 99.9% of the possible responses I imagined could be given by the President. What we DID say was completely unacceptable. Here was our opportunity to tell Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda, the rest of the World, and the American People what would be required of bin Laden and Al Qaeda to bring an end to the war. Here was out opportunity to fully lay out once again our differences, the issues we had with Al Qaeda and its supporters, and our vision for the Middle East and Asia Minor. We could have been as tough about it as we wanted to be. Look at the Potsdam Declaration. We were on the verge of totally annihilating the enemy, an enemy that had acted criminally on more than one occasion, but we offered a way out of war, a way that could in no way be called appeasement. Why couldn’t we have done that here? I know what most people will say, the chance of Bin Laden accepting such an unconditional surrender is minute, but that isn’t the point. The point is such and offer should have been made and not making it is a terrible mistake. You never know what the response might have been. It may have been a counter offer that was acceptable. There might have been no response, but the effort should have been made.

What did the administration do? They said that America does not negotiate with terrorists. Since when? Republicans set the bar for negotiating with terrorists and criminal states when they made the Iran-Contra arms for hostages embarrassment. Besides, as I have written, the response could have been similar to Potsdam. There really isn’t any negotiation implied in Potsdam. Summed up, it says, “Do this or be annihilated”. The administrations failure in its response to Bin Laden is disappointing and surprising. I’ve decided to include the entirety of the Potsdam Declaration below in this Op Ed piece because I think it is important to see what could have been done with honor and without appeasement. I encourage all who read this article to take a few minutes and read through it. I think it makes clear what a major opportunity was missed by this incompetent administration and President.
________________________________________________________________________

Potsdam Declaration







Proclamation Defining Terms for Japanese Surrender
Issued, at Potsdam, July 26, 1945



1 We-the President of the United States, the President of the National Government of the Republic of China, and the Prime Minister of Great Britain, representing the hundreds of millions of our countrymen, have conferred and agree that Japan shall be given an opportunity to end this war.


2 The prodigious land, sea and air forces of the United States, the British Empire and of China, many times reinforced by their armies and air fleets from the west, are poised to strike the final blows upon Japan. This military power is sustained and inspired by the determination of all the Allied Nations to prosecute the war against Japan until she ceases to resist.


3 The result of the futile and senseless German resistance to the might of the aroused free peoples of the world stands forth in awful clarity as an example to the people of Japan. The might that now converges on Japan is immeasurably greater than that which, when applied to the resisting Nazis, necessarily laid waste to the lands, the industry and the method of life of the whole German people. The full application of our military power, backed by our resolve, will mean the inevitable and complete destruction of the Japanese armed forces and just as inevitably the utter devastation of the Japanese homeland.


4 The time has come for Japan to decide whether she will continue to be controlled by those self-willed militaristic advisers whose unintelligent calculations have brought the Empire of Japan to the threshold of annihilation, or whether she will follow the path of reason.


5 Following are our terms. We will not deviate from them. There are no alternatives. We shall brook no delay.


6 There must be eliminated for all time the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into embarking on world conquest, for we insist that a new order of peace, security and justice will be impossible until irresponsible militarism is driven from the world.


7 Until such a new order is established and until there is convincing proof that Japan's war-making power is destroyed, points in Japanese territory to be designated by the Allies shall be occupied to secure the achievement of the basic objectives we are here setting forth.


8 The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out and Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and such minor islands as we determine.


9 The Japanese military forces, after being completely disarmed, shall be permitted to return to their homes with the opportunity to lead peaceful and productive lives.


10 We do not intend that the Japanese shall be enslaved as a race or destroyed as a nation, but stern justice shall be meted out to all war criminals, including those who have visited cruelties upon our prisoners. The Japanese Government shall remove all obstacles to the revival and strengthening of democratic tendencies among the Japanese people. Freedom of speech, of religion, and of thought, as well as respect for the fundamental human rights shall be established.


11 Japan shall be permitted to maintain such industries as will sustain her economy and permit the exaction of just reparations in kind, but not those which would enable her to re-arm for war. To this end, access to, as distinguished from control of, raw materials shall be permitted. Eventual Japanese participation in world trade relations shall be permitted.


12 The occupying forces of the Allies shall be withdrawn from Japan as soon as these objectives have been accomplished and there has been established in accordance with the freely expressed will of the Japanese people a peacefully inclined and responsible government.


13 We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces, and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction.



Authors Bio: Steven Leser is a freelance journalist specializing in Politics, Science & Health, and Entertainment topics. He has held positions within the Democratic Party including District Chair and Public Relations Chair within county organizations. His coverage of the Ohio Presidential Recount in 2004 was distinguished by actual interviews with Carlo Loparo, spokesperson for the Ohio Secretary of State, along with Supervisors of Elections of several Ohio counties. Similar efforts on other topics to get first hand information from sources separate Mr. Leser from many of his contemporaries.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Monkey see Monkey Do Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
11. NOT Al-Jazeera
Edited on Fri Jan-27-06 11:48 AM by Monkey see Monkey Do
but a site using the name, which often publishes anti-semitic articles. This is Al-Jazeera:

http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage

edit - really should read threads before responding as this has already been noted!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC