Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Obama facing grave threat

According to the Sydney Morning Herald, Bin Laden is planning another hit on the USA.

Osama bin Laden is planning an attack against the United States that will "outdo by far" September 11, 2001, an Arab newspaper in London has reported.

I wonder why an Arab paper in London is first with the news?

The warning, on the front page of an Arabic newspaper published in London, Al-Quds Al-Arabi - and reported widely in the major Italian papers - quotes a person described as being "very close to al-Qaeda" in Yemen.

He says he remains in contact with current chiefs of the organisation in Yemen and that, only six months ago, bin Laden sent a message to all jihad cells in the Arab world, asking them not to interact with their governments or local political parties and to deny any request for mediation or formal talks. (My emphasis).

Of course, talking to these freaks is one of the things Obama wants to do. Quite what it is he will say to them is beyond me. What is apparent is that Obama's victory is seen as a sign that the will of the USA is weakening. Bin Laden might be a deranged psychopathic murderer, but he isn't an idiot. He sees the opportunity and he will seize it - I would if I were him.

Once again, the disgraceful treatment of George Bush's term as President has opened the door to our enemies. For the last seven years Bin Laden and his cronies have been on the defensive - now they sniff the chance to hit back once more.

Eventually, I hope, the media will realise that you can not be "balanced" in a war you are actively involved in. You either support our side or you will encourage our enemies. If our media had reported the war in 1939-45 the way they do now we would have lost. Talking of which, there is no such thing as an "illegal" war, either - just illegal acts within a war.

I know some people say that war can be illegal under "international law", but I don't believe in international law. All it really is is a collection of treaties, pacts and loose alliances which any nation can break unilaterally at any time - and many frequently do. Besides, law without a method of enforcing it is meaningless and there are no means by which international law can be enforced.

The UN? Do me a favour! Apart from the fact that the UN has no force of its own the body itself has no legitimacy as it is not a democratic institution. All it really does is horse trading with various nations doing deals behind closed doors to ensure protection from UN sanction in return for various favours.

There is only one thing we need to say to Bin Laden and the rest of our enemies. There are millions of Moslems in our lands - one attack at any time by anyone and you'll be having to cope with your own massive wave of immigration.


Anonymous said...

Should such an attack actually occur it will not be seen as a test of the new president's mettle.

It will be seen as a result of Bush's policies; a variation of the "it's the last guy's fault" excuse. Don't be surprised at how long Bush will be used as an excuse for poor performance or catastrophic event. Bush will prove to be a convenient scapegoat for all of Obama's failures.

Here in Ontario, Canada the current sitting premier, Dalton McGuinty, it still blaming the last guy, Mike Harris, eventhough Dalton is on his second consecutive majority government.

Stan said...

I agree that it will seen as a result of Bush's policies - though tose policies have been in place for 7 years without any new attacks on US soil, but any fresh attack will certainly be a test of Obama's mettle.

I know the feeling about how those in government always blame the previous administration. People still blame Thatcher for most of the problems in Britain today and she left office nearly 20 years ago!