Osama's Message to America!

[ken_behrendt]

By now, the Western world has received the news that the bodies of the two American soldiers recently abducted in Iraq have been found. As soon as I heard that they were going to use DNA testing to identify them, I knew that had to mean that the bodies had been mutilated. So, they were either killed shortly after their capture and mutilated or they died from injuries sustained in the ambush and were then mutilated. Details have not been released yet, but, most likely, their heads and hands had been removed so that identification would take time and the media would prolong the story as long as possible.

This, no doubt, is revenge for the killing of al-Zarqawi earlier this month. Apparently, in that bombing Al-Qaeda's top religious leader in Iraq was also killed.

I suspect that the replacement for Zarqawi is now going to be targeting American soldiers and that we will hear of more atrocities like this in the future. All this designed, of course, to weaken the resolve of the West to continue the "war" against terrorism in the Middle East. It's an effective tool and can, over time, result in the change of government in a democracy needed to withdraw forces from the region.


Meanwhile, on the other side of the globe, the North Koreans have fueled up one of their new multi-stage ballistic missiles and are getting ready to fire it in the general direction of the west coast of the USA! We have a very limited anti-ballistic missile intercepter system which is now on hair-trigger alert and ready to try to shoot the North Korean missile down if it gets too close to the USA. Unfortunately, our system only scores a hit about 50% of the time so, if it is used, multiple anti-missiles will have to be employed.

I think that the North Koreans do not like all of the attention that Iran is getting lately as being the number one threat to the West. In other words, they're actually jealous and eager to get the media focused back on them again!


ken

[rlortie]

George Bush goes to a primary school to talk to the kids to get a
little PR. After his talk he offers question time. One little boy puts
up his hand and George asks him his name.
"Stanley," responds the little boy.
"And what is your question, Stanley?"
"I have 4 questions:

First, why did the USA invade Iraq without the support of the UN?
Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more votes?
Third, whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden?"
Fourth, why are we so worried about gay-marriage when 1/2 of all
Americans don't have health insurance?

Just then, the bell rings for recess. George Bush informs the kiddies
that they will continue after recess.
When they resume George says, "OK, where were we? Oh, that's right,
question time. Who has a question?"
Another little boy puts up his hand. George points him out and asks
him his name.
"Steve," he responds.
"And what is your question, Steve?"
"Actually, I have 6 questions.

First, why did the USA invade Iraq without the support of the UN?
Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more votes?
Third, whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden?
Fourth, why are we so worried about gay marriage when 1/2 of all
Americans don't have health insurance?
Fifth, why did the recess bell go off 20 minutes early?
And sixth, what the hell happened to Stanley?"

[ken_behrendt]

Ralph...

That's a good one and contains some interesting points.

First, why did the USA invade Iraq without the support of the UN?
Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more votes?
Third, whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden?"
Fourth, why are we so worried about gay-marriage when 1/2 of all
Americans don't have health insurance?

First, the Bush administration claims that it was authorized to use "whatever means necessary, including military" to get Iraq to comply with the various UN Resolutions it had ignored for many years.

Second, there was a recount of the votes in Florida and, even by the most liberal standards, Bush did get more votes than Gore in the disputed counties. The matter was ultimately decided by the Supreme Court along what appeared to be partisan lines, but Bush did "officially" win Florida anyway. As for the matter of Gore winning the popular vote, but losing the electoral vote is concerned, that can, unfortunately, happen under our present electoral system. Hopefully, this anomaly can be eliminated in the future so that whomever receives the most actual votes will be the winner.

Thirdly, it is true that Osama is still at large and a messianic figure to motivate the terrorists. However, I actually believe he would be more dangerous is caught or killed! I'm sure that he probably already has a successor "waiting in the wings" in the event that he is removed from the philosophical leadership of Al Qaeda.

Fourthly, it's has been reliably estimated that only about 40 to 50 million Americans currently do not have health insurance. That, of course, should be unacceptable to a country like the US which claims to be a leader in world affairs. I think this sad situation will change in the near future on a state by state basis as more states adopt the model now being tried in the state of Massachusetts. It would have been nice if Clinton had been successful in enacting universal government sponsored health insurance for all Americans, but his efforts were blocked by obstructionists in Congress. That situation, however, will, eventually, be ended once the Democrats again regain power in both houses of Congress. With the ever growing unpopularity of our involvement in the Middle East, that could begin to happen by as early as this November!



Well, the only new news out of the Middle East that I found of interest was that Iran has acknowledged that it received a package of incentives the halt their uranium enrichment program from the EU and is now "considering" the matter. However, it appears that they will not be able to either accept or reject the offer until this August at the earliest.

I predict that August will come and go and that they will still be "considering" the package. Then, maybe early next year they will declare that it is unacceptable for one reason or another. In the meantime, they will have their 6,000 centrifuges online and busily enriching uranium up to the minimum of 80% U235 needed for a nuclear weapon.

Now, I am wondering if, when they finally achieve that national goal, they will actually announce it to the world? Maybe, since they do not need to test the designs for nuclear weapons that they already obtained from Pakistan, they will just keep quiet about their possession of these weapons like Israel did with theirs and let the world continue to wonder whether or not they have "the bomb". That would, of course, be a very dangerous thing to do because if they were attacked by another country, then their sudden use of these weapons would lead to much higher casualty rates than might be achieved with conventional warfare.



ken

[digitaljez]

That would, of course, be a very dangerous thing to do because if they were attacked by another country, then their sudden use of these weapons would lead to much higher casualty rates than might be achieved with conventional warfare.

I am having a bit of trouble with this statement. You seem to be saying that if 'another country' - (Did you have anyone in mind ?) - attacked them it would be wrong if they had the means to put up an effective defence. You pass no judgement on the aggressor yet protest against their supposed (and as yet unproven) attempts to protect themselves.
Your sentence could be read as : When the US goes in to grab the oil fields it would be unfair if they find themselves stopped by nuclear defences.
The other problem is nuclear weapons make the area uninhabitable so there is no chance for American contractors to cash in on a bit of rebuilding.
I would not worry about it getting that far. The US will have made premptive attacks on the 'facilities' long before then. This time they will be using bunker busters so there will be no evidence left to prove the case one way or the other. They don't want to make that mistake again.

[ken_behrendt]

digitaljez wrote:

You pass no judgement on the aggressor yet protest against their supposed (and as yet unproven) attempts to protect themselves.
Your sentence could be read as : When the US goes in to grab the oil fields it would be unfair if they find themselves stopped by nuclear defences.

Actually, I condemn as immoral any attack by one government against another unless, in the consensus of opinion of some global authority like the UN, the attack is justified on some grounds. For example, I would have no qualms about any government that decided to attack Germany in an effort to stop the Nazi Party from enslaving as much of humanity as it could.

My concern is that as nuclear weapons slowly spread throughout the Third World, there is the risk that whenever a local war, no matter how minor, breaks out, the participants will immediately resort to the use of nuclear weapons to obtain a quick victory. The result, of course, could be the senseless loss of hundreds of thousands or even millions of lives. There was much concern that this would happen in the recent "dispute" between Pakistan and India over a portion of a small territory between them.

I do not consider "governments" as presently found in countries like Iran or North Korea to be responsible enough to possess and control such weapons. Even in the case of countries like the USA and the former Soviet Union, there were several occasions when nuclear armaggedon almost occurred and was stopped at the last minute by the safeguards both employed to control their weaponry. Would Iran have such safeguards? Would they be willing to settle disputes through the UN? From the delaying tactics I am seeing them using with regard to the latest package of incentives offered them by the EU, I do not think so.

As far as the US trying to "grab" Middle East oil fields is concerned, I do not see it happening. All of the oil which the US obtains from other countries is under their control and we have to pay for it...we do not get it for free and never have.

Even when a oil company operates in a particular foreign Third World country, they can only do so as guests of that country. At any time, the country can nationalize, either partially or completely, the company's facilities in that country and keep all of the oil revenues for themselves. Yes, oil companies often negotiate lucrative deals with governments for the oil they extract. But, those governments still get most of the oil revenue and the oil companies' investors should make some profit for the investment that they had to make to build and operate their facilities in the country.

Oil company profits are up because the price of oil is up globally and the oil company profits are a percentage of that elevated commodity price.


ken

[ken_behrendt]

They're been having a rather tense time over in the Middle East in the last few days. Several days ago, some Gaza strip "militants" managed to dig a tunnel and came up inside an Israeli border control tower. Several Israeli soldiers were then shot dead and the militants kidnapped another 19 year old soldier and are holding him hostage somewhere in Gaza.

In response, the Israeli Army now has 300 armoured vehicles massed near the souther tip of Gaza and is planning a major incursion that, no doubt, will result in dozens or even hundreds of deaths...most of whom will probably by innocent people who are just sick and tired of the continuous fighting between their extremist indoctrinated youth and the Israeli military. When and how will it ever end? I've seen basically the same kinds of news from that country for almost 40 years now!


Over in Iran, the top ayatollah (Amadinejad's boss) gave another "off the cuff" speech and announced that Iran will gain nothing from accepting the "package" of incentives offered by the West in exchange for them halting all enrichment of uranium.

Well, it looks like we really do not have to wait until August, at the earliest, for the Iranian "government" to "evaluate" the incentives being offered to them. They apparently have no intention of stopping their enrichment process and now must consider the acquisition of nuclear weapons as their nation's top priority.

In response to this informal speech, the US Stock Exchange's major index dropped by about 120 points and the price per barrel of oil began to edge upward again.



ken

[racer270]

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/download.php?id=2888

ken,
i am the guy in the white shirt and shorts in this picture.....!

tell me again what a plane crash looks like, i still remember it first hand !
8 city blocks.....! not a 16 foot hole.
and whats left is plain and bodys parts everywere...!!

[ken_behrendt]

Yes, racer, plane crashes can be very messy.

In the case of the jet that crashed into the side of the Pentagon building, I think that the multiple layers of concrete that the plane had to plow through served to contain the debris and fire. Thus, the wreckage and bodies would have been heated to even higher temperatures than if the plane had merely crashed into an open field.

Modern jets are rather flimsily made and use the minimum safe amounts of structural material in an effort to keep their weight to a minimum to improve air mileage for every pound of fuel they carry.

Before jumping to bizarre conspiracy theories to provide us with information, why not rely on the findings of the trained crash investigators from the FAA who investigate these things. Do any of them actually think that anything other than a jet plane crashed into the Pentagon? I do not think so.


ken

[digitaljez]

What puzzles is me is how the jet engines must have suddenly effectively started to travel backwards against their own thrust and inertia in order to have been swung back into the fuselage and sucked in with it.
That appears to be the pro 747 explanation of how the hole was only large enough to accommodate the fuselage and for the lack of external debris.
Where would the force to cause that have come from ? Is it conceivable that the wings are weak enough to be forced backwards yet strong enough to apply the leverage to overcome the force of two jet engines ?
Jet engines have been reported to have fallen off planes in normal flight. I would have thought that in a crash their power and inertia would have compelled them to continue in a straight line no matter what happened to the wings.

[ken_behrendt]

The idea that the jet's wings would have folded back against the fuselage so as to create a smaller entry hole does seem plausible to me. The wings on a jet are "swept back" a bit to start with so they are already in position to have forces applied to them during impact that would compress them against the fuselage. One must remember that the wings on a plane are primarily designed to be strongest in supporting the weight of the plane's fuselage and its contents. Next, they are strongest in resisting being pushed ahead of the fuselage by the thrust of the engines. They are weakest in resisting being compressed backward and inward toward the fuselage.

No...I still do not give any credence to claims that 9/11 was some sort of covert "inside" job that was designed to enrage Americans and have them authorize a general invasion of the Middle East. It was a real act of terror that was planned and carried out by real terrorists for their own political and religious reasons.



Poor Osama! I just saw on the BBC News that he is now "in mourning" for the death of his #1 man in Iraq, al-Zarqawi. I wonder if Osama was also in mourning for Nicholas Berg after Zarqawi decapitated him while he was still alive?



ken

[ken_behrendt]

Osama has released another audio tape, his forth this year, in which he praises Zarqawi and "mourns" his passing. I have, so far, been unable to obtain a full English translation of the new tape, but here is a article on it from CNN that contains English translations of some the sections relevant to the West:

(CNN) -- An audio message posted Friday on an Islamic Web site purports to be the voice of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, grieving over the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and taunting President Bush.

Al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian who masterminded hundreds of bombings, kidnappings and beheadings in Iraq, was killed June 7 in a U.S. airstrike north of Baghdad. He was al Qaeda's leader in Iraq.

On the tape, bin Laden addresses President Bush directly and demands that the U.S. return al-Zarqawi's body to his family in Jordan.

"I say to Bush, you should deliver the body (of al-Zarqawi) to his family, and don't be too happy. Our flag hasn't fallen, thanks be to God. It has passed from one lion to another lion in Islam," bin Laden says in Arabic.

"We will continue, God willing, to fight you and your allies everywhere, in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and Sudan, until we drain your money and kill your men and send you home defeated, God willing, as we defeated you before, thanks to God, in Somalia."

The U.S. government has never given a public accounting of what happened to al-Zarqawi's body after the autopsy.

"I say to your agent (King Abdullah) in Jordan, stop your tyranny. You have prevented Abu Musab from entering his homeland alive, don't stand in his way now."

Jordanian courts convicted and sentenced al-Zarqawi in absentia after he admitted to the November 11, 2005, triple hotel bombings in Amman that killed 60 people and injured scores, mostly Jordanians.

A CIA analysis has concluded the voice on the recording is that of bin Laden, according to a CIA representative.

Another section of the message says, "Our dear Muslim nation, we were deeply saddened by the passing of our loved ones, Abu Musab and his companions, but we were very happy that their souls have flooded these great battles as they were defending the Islamic law."

Al-Zarqawi was killed "following a hateful American raid," the al Qaeda leader says.

Bin Laden refers to al-Zarqawi as "one of our greatest knights and one of our best emirs (leaders)," and adds, "We were very happy to find in him a symbol and role model for our future generations."

In the message, bin Laden refers to al-Zarqawi by his given name -- Ahmed al-Khalayleh -- a sign of respect.

The audio message, which last 19 minutes, 32 seconds, is imposed over a split screen, with a still photo of bin Laden on one side and a video of al-Zarqawi on the other.

On Wednesday, the Web site, which often posts messages, statements and videos from al Qaeda, posted a note saying it was expecting a message "soon" from bin Laden.

The site posted a nearly identical notification last Thursday on behalf of al Qaeda's second-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahiri. The following day, a videotape was aired on the Arab network Al-Jazeera in which al-Zawahiri said he was grieving the death of al-Zarqawi.

The last audio Web site message purportedly from bin Laden was May 23, when he said that neither Zacarias Moussaoui nor any of the prisoners held at the U.S. Navy detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, had anything to do with the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

A federal jury sentenced Moussaoui to life in prison without parole for his connection to 9/11. He was not charged with direct involvement in the plot. The French citizen of Moroccan descent pleaded guilty to six counts of terrorism conspiracy related to the attacks.

It's obvious to me from what little I could find on his latest tape that bin Laden is anticipating a war against the West that will go on for "generations". He see himself as only one person in a long chain of leaders who will work to force the West out of all present or past muslim controlled lands. Note his reference to Somalia and Sudan. Apparently, the West will soon be required to extend its "war" on terrorism to these new lands with the same level of commitment as now exists in Afghanistan and Iraq. That's a LOT of new territory to invade and occupy...actually it's beginning to become a significant portion of the Earth's surface!

Will the West be able to "stay the course" with this "war" as the sailing gets progressively more difficult in the coming years? As I said, right now I would put the odds of it at about 50/50 with the key determinant being how the West handles the uranium enrichment "situation" over in Iran.


ken

[ken_behrendt]

Just when I thought we might not hear from Osama for a while...he releases yet another audio tape, his 5th this year, over this weekend.

I won't bother posting excerpts from it because it contains no direct threat to American soil. But, in it he does threaten that any Western power that tries to intervene with the Islamic theocracy that is now forming in Somalia will be subject to terrorist acts by Al Qaeda. Well, the US is already starting to get more involved in that country, but I think his hope is to isolate us so that the same Coalition partners fighting with the US in Iraq and Afghanistan will not also join in that coming conflict.

Aside from that, he is instructing his followers to focus their attacks specifically on Americans and warns the Shia in Iraq that they had better stop trying to help the Coalition suppress the Sunni insurgents. If not, then, even though they are muslims, they will be subject to further terrorists acts against them...like the car bomb over the weekend that killed 62 people in a crowded Baghdad market place and injured many more.

I think that Osama is releasing all of these recent audio tapes for a variety of reasons.

Firstly, he wants the world to know that he is firmly in control of Al-Qaeda.

Secondly, he is confident that the tapes can not be traced back to his present location.

Thirdly, he is getting bored spending all of his time being shuttled from one safe house to another and wondering when it will be blown up by a Hellfire missile fired from a Predator drone!


ken

[Sevich]

From the book, The Prophecies of Nostradamus

I read that arab muslims will have nothing short of 6 million tonnes of wepons of mass destruction when the time is ready for an invasion of western Europe via Grease, the Adriatic sea, Italy,Spain and France with a 50 million + militia (army)

This will happen because America will fall into some kind of calamity (nuclear explosions or a commet??) whereby islam will unite for an invasion into Europe.

Isreal will be cleansed of Jews and Christians

Not sure what will be of Australia in these (soon to be) horror times. I guess it will have enough work cut out for them just holding bach Indonesia with it's 180 million muslims from invading and musilmising the population.


I some how strongly feel that Georg Bush takes Nostradamus very seriously, to the point of invading Iraq in his belief that wepons of mass destruction are hidden and waiting for the time to be used for the Islamic invasion of Europe!!??


Nostradamus describes muslims (mohamedants) as having in their possession such weapons of destruction that he called it explosions brighter than the sun.

[ken_behrendt]

Sevich...

Interesting prophecies by Nostradamus. Generally, I put about zero % faith in prophecies because, if the past is any indication, rarely do any of them come to pass as predicted. Later people try to reinterpret the failed past prophecies in an effort to make them sound like they predicted whatever actually happened. People just seem to have a bizarre need to believe that some ascetic somewhere in touch with "higher" realities can divine the future for them.

But, I do believe that IF Al-Qaeda is ever successful in establishing another worldwide Caliphate, then one of their goals would be to try to recapture all past territories that were once controlled by the Ottoman Empire and that would include most of Spain and practically all of eastern Europe. Most likely, this would only be possible if they actually did manage to obtain nuclear weapons. But Pakistan did develop the first "Islamic Bomb" and, if the pro-West government there was ever threatened with a take over by radical jihadist types, then the West would have to intervene immediately to secure their nuclear weapons. The risk of them falling into the hands of the terrorists would just be too great to accept.

I fully expect the "war" on terrorism to continue to expand over the coming years. With each new effort to stop the terrorists in "their own backyard", the West is perceived as trying to destroy Islam and more and more "holy" warriors make themselves available for radical fundamentalist islamic indoctrination and terrorist training. Meanwhile the cost of oil rises and the West is forced to devote more of its economy and manpower to fighting the "war". Right now in the USA, the "war" is not really real to most citizens because we do not have compulsory military service or a draft. That could change in the next year or two and really galvanize the anti-war protesters into action and begin making this terrorist thing a reality for the average American citizen.


Today is the "Fourth of July" or "Independence Day" in the USA. This is probably our most important political holiday and, knowing Osama's obsession with numerology and the history of the USA, I am dreading that there could be a MAJOR terrorist attack on American soil today. This is the kind of day he would just love to launch a successful attack on. It will be warm tonight and there will be areas where thousands of people will be out in the evening to view various pyrotechic displays.

I would not be at all surprised if they have not been rushing to prepare a major attack for tonight...perhaps in Washington, D.C. where many will be viewing the fireworks from the Washington Mall area. And, even if such an attack does not come tonight, it might occur a few days later if they were unable to get everything prepared in time for a 4th of July attack. I really hope that I am wrong about all of this, but my "spider sense" has been tingling since the beginning of this month and I'm expecting something evil to come down the pike before this month is over.



ken

[Jon J Hutton]

Happy Fourth of July

We all hope you are wrong Ken,

I hate to say it but of all the countries that I was hoping would not rediscover PM ....China is way up there on the list......If the energy playing field were to be equal then it is all about who has the most people....I hope this guy tsueng is not for real but his theories are interesting.

JJH