|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
Richard Haut
millennium club
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 1128
Location: Nice, France
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2004 3:47 pm Post subject: bin Laden's words - read them |
    |
|
It has been rumoured that American media are being a bit timid about letting Americans known what bin Laden said.
Following is an excerpt from the speech by the al-Qa'ida leader, Osama bin Laden, addressing the American people in a video, parts of which were aired by al-Jazeera television last night, as translated by Reuters on:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/story.jsp?story=577546
O American people, I am speaking to tell you about the ideal way to avoid another Manhattan, about war and its causes and results.
Security is an important foundation of human life and free people do not squander their security, contrary to Bush's claims that we hate freedom.
It is known that those who hate freedom do not possess proud souls like those of the 19 [who attacked the US on 11 September 2001], may God rest their souls. We fought you because we are free and because we want freedom for our nation. When you squander our security we squander yours.
I am surprised by you. Despite entering the fourth year after 11 September, Bush is still deceiving you ... and therefore the reasons are still there to repeat what happened.
God knows it did not cross our minds to attack the towers, but after the situation became unbearable and we witnessed the injustice and tyranny of the American-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, I thought about it...
As I watched the destroyed towers in Lebanon [in 1982], it occurred to me to punish the unjust the same way - to destroy towers in America so it could taste some of what we are tasting and to stop killing our children and women.
We had no difficulty in dealing with the Bush administration because they resemble the regimes in our countries, half of which are ruled by the military and the other half by the sons of kings.
He [Bush] adopted despotism and the crushing of freedoms from Arab rulers and called it the Patriot Act, under the guise of combating terrorism ...
It never occurred to us that the commander in chief [Bush] would leave 50,000 citizens in the two Towers to face those horrors alone at a time when they most needed him, because he thought listening to a child discussing her goat was more important. [Mr Bush was visiting a school on 11 September 2001.]
Your security is not in the hands of [Democratic presidential candidate, John] Kerry or Bush or al-Qa'ida. Your security is in your own hands and each state which does not harm our security will remain safe.
_________________
Richard Haut has worked with the architectural profession for over 25 years and produces the weekly Richard Haut's Competitions, which has given architects details of many thousands of projects for which they can apply across Britain and Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
SDR
millennium club
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Posts: 1693
Location: San Francisco
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:57 pm Post subject: Osama's words |
|
|
Thank you, Richard. It would be interesting to know how many will take the trouble to read with an open mind and heart the words of an avowed enemy. The aggrieved, the self-righteous and the fearful are often unable to learn anything from what "the one on the other side of the fence" has to say. But I believe I've already heard an American journalist comment on the different tone of this new message. Perhaps a change in the international dynamic could ensue -- with a change in leadership? One can only "Imagine". . .
The daily paper in my city carried approximately the same portion of the message as did your source. I was hoping for the complete transcript. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SDR
millennium club
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Posts: 1693
Location: San Francisco
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2004 8:17 pm Post subject: Saudi Arabia today |
|
|
| And, some Americans have more information than others about the state of affairs today in Saudi Arabia. I stumbled upon a nine-month-old issue of the New Yorker magazine recently, and read as much of a rather long piece as I had time for, written by an English-speaking journalist who gained access to the country (after other efforts failed) when he was hired by the nation's most popular newspaper, to coach their small contigent of English-speaking newspersons. What he learned from his time in the city of Jeddah would be of interest to those wondering about American-Saudi relations. I will complete the article and summarise some of its contents here. Let it suffuce to say, for the moment, that the vast oil wealth of that nation is not being used to (even adequately) house, educate or employ the great majority of its citizens, and that for twenty-five years now the reversal of progress in those areas has coincided with a rise in the power of the most conservative element of the religious leadership there, dating from an unfortunate botched uprising during the annual pilgrimage to Mecca, in 1979. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Haut
millennium club
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 1128
Location: Nice, France
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
So what ?
The House of Saud (which took power in the fall of the Ottoman empire when there was no choice but to deal with the British) is far from perfect, nor is it popular.
One could call them outmoded, some of their practices unnecessarily barbaric - but that is none of America's concern, is it ?
I hardly think that America today is in a position to advise anybody on democracy or standards of conduct and legality.
_________________
Richard Haut has worked with the architectural profession for over 25 years and produces the weekly Richard Haut's Competitions, which has given architects details of many thousands of projects for which they can apply across Britain and Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kevin
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 1094
Location: Eugene, Oregon
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard Haut wrote: | The House of Saud (which took power in the fall of the Ottoman empire when there was no choice but to deal with the British) is far from perfect, nor is it popular.
One could call them outmoded, some of their practices unnecessarily barbaric - but that is none of America's concern, is it? |
It is a U.S. concern because this country continues to provide primary military security support for that regime.
| Richard Haut wrote: | | I hardly think that America today is in a position to advise anybody on democracy or standards of conduct and legality. |
Rather than answer that today, let's hold the question until Wednesday. Tuesday may tell if the U.S. democracy is allowed to register its veto of Bush administration policies in favor of violent empire, accelerated stratification of wealth, widespread corruption, and anti-democratic secrecy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Haut
millennium club
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 1128
Location: Nice, France
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
errrrr, I was under the impression that the Saudis refused to let American bases in Saudi Arabia be used in the attack on Iraq (my understanding is that while the infrastructure remains, US troops are either off or leaving Saudi soil - something that Osama has wanted for a long time).
I regret that waiting until your election is of only partial relevance.
Yes, it is possible - and to be hoped - that America will withdraw from its current position, attitude and conduct. If Bush wins, forget it. If Kerry wins, it is a possibility - but no more.
Perhaps Americans do not realise quite how bad the conduct of their government has been.
Current reports indicate that the world's largest nations have already started actions needed to defend both themselves and their allies against further US aggression - both military and financial.
_________________
Richard Haut has worked with the architectural profession for over 25 years and produces the weekly Richard Haut's Competitions, which has given architects details of many thousands of projects for which they can apply across Britain and Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Architorture
millennium club
Joined: 31 Jul 2004
Posts: 1376
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard Haut wrote: | errrrr, I was under the impression that the Saudis refused to let American bases in Saudi Arabia be used in the attack on Iraq (my understanding is that while the infrastructure remains, US troops are either off or leaving Saudi soil - something that Osama has wanted for a long time).
I regret that waiting until your election is of only partial relevance.
Yes, it is possible - and to be hoped - that America will withdraw from its current position, attitude and conduct. If Bush wins, forget it. If Kerry wins, it is a possibility - but no more.
Perhaps Americans do not realise quite how bad the conduct of their government has been.
Current reports indicate that the world's largest nations have already started actions needed to defend both themselves and their allies against further US aggression - both military and financial. |
but i was under the impression that many nations, especailly in europe, feared the US drawing its forces out of traditional positions...
since there is hardly a need for large bases in europe to defend against the soviet threat then US forces will be brought closer to home...which for some reason is no longer being considered isolationist, but instead being considered imperialistic...
somehow by concentrating forces the united states is being viewed as being more ready to strike in large waves from particular spots instead of the more traditional system of having bases spread out all over the world...
and with kerry we have to remember he intends to increase the size of the army by 50,000 soldiers...hardly a move you would consider to be a departure from imperialistic world policy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Haut
millennium club
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 1128
Location: Nice, France
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"which for some reason is no longer being considered isolationist, but instead being considered imperialistic... "
oh no, you aren't Imperialists - you haven't the skills.
take an Imperial example - the Ukraine. Ukraine was under the control of the Czar of All the Russias, under the Soviets, under the Nazis, and then under the Soviets again - and today it is a nation in its own right.
Which do you think that you are - the Czar ? Stalin ? Hitler ? No, in between was a period of fighting between the Whites and the Reds and in the middle, in Ukraine, was a man called Shimon Petlyura.
You are the same as Petlyura's band - in method, in ethics.
_________________
Richard Haut has worked with the architectural profession for over 25 years and produces the weekly Richard Haut's Competitions, which has given architects details of many thousands of projects for which they can apply across Britain and Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Architorture
millennium club
Joined: 31 Jul 2004
Posts: 1376
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| so the united states is not imperialistic...alright then, let's hope to never hear you say as much later on |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Haut
millennium club
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 1128
Location: Nice, France
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Imperialists do not kill children for money - they are not that stupid.
Imperialism, Empires, are intended to be long-term.
Even the former CIA-puppet Allawi has turned against you. You have virtually no allies, no friends.
And what does Bush want to do ? Drop more heavy ordnance on civilian areas of Fallujah and other towns, and then to attack Iran.
By building up levels of hatred against your own people, America has ensured that it will never be safe for them in the countries that you attack.
_________________
Richard Haut has worked with the architectural profession for over 25 years and produces the weekly Richard Haut's Competitions, which has given architects details of many thousands of projects for which they can apply across Britain and Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Architorture
millennium club
Joined: 31 Jul 2004
Posts: 1376
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
so the american presense in iraq is supposed to be permanent?
or even US involvement in the middle east is supposedly permanent?
well i can give you an end date for when the US will no longer wish to be involved in the middle east... the day that oil else where, or some other form of energy is more economically feasible will be the day the united states is no longer interested in the middle east...and since that day is more or less certain to arrive in the next 10-20 years that is about as permanent as US interest is in the middle east |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Haut
millennium club
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 1128
Location: Nice, France
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
exactly - if America had paid for the oil, there would not be over a thousand US dead and so many other casualties.
_________________
Richard Haut has worked with the architectural profession for over 25 years and produces the weekly Richard Haut's Competitions, which has given architects details of many thousands of projects for which they can apply across Britain and Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Architorture
millennium club
Joined: 31 Jul 2004
Posts: 1376
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
it is still going to get paid for...its not like the united states has commandiered the oil fields... the united states was looking to create an accessible oil supply...
something that saudi arabia was for a long time, but now and things turn for the worse in that country the US is looking for somewhere else to be the main stable supplier...
and actually we've been buying iraqi oil before and after the persian gulf war, just it happened to be pumped through kuwaiti lines...since they were slant drilling the iraqi oil fields...something iraq tried to get the UN to stop doing, but they wouldn't b/c the kuwaitis bribed the international community...but oh well |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Haut
millennium club
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 1128
Location: Nice, France
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Saudi oil supply was hardly an unstable source.
America could have bought oil from Iraq - and the power of that trade could easily have been used to open up conditions for Iraqis leading to a lifting of sanctions. Saddam would have had little choice - and anyway Rumsfeld was an old friend.
instead an estimated over 100,000 are dead - and America has no Iraqi oil supply (the pipelines and refineries are attacked incessantly) and has turned the formerly stable oil suppliers against them.
America will have to seize Iraqi oil by force (which is not working) or withdraw. And how many Iraqis will want to trade with Americans ?
the reason for this daft scenario is that it is an exact copy of Britain's policy in Iraq in the early 1920's (because America had overcharged the British Navy for oil ....).
_________________
Richard Haut has worked with the architectural profession for over 25 years and produces the weekly Richard Haut's Competitions, which has given architects details of many thousands of projects for which they can apply across Britain and Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SDR
millennium club
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Posts: 1693
Location: San Francisco
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 12:04 pm Post subject: Oil, etc |
|
|
| And will the great majority of Americans have to wait until after this election to learn the real story? And, when some of the miscreants' feet are eventually (or very shortly?) held to the fire, for their greedy and grasping misdeeds, will their blindly faithful suporters still howl, with them, of "partisan malevalence" as the motivation for their "persecution" (and, one hopes, prosecution)? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
