why isn't al-qaeda endorsing bush a bigger issue?

[kispoko]

seriously.... i understand the "liberal media's" reticence to touch the story, but, why haven't *we* and like-minded individuals hit on it, and hit on it hard?


for those who were unaware, al-qaeda's military branch in europe actually took the step in endorsing bush after the madrid train bombings. reuters uk reported on the story, but only a smattering of links show up when it's googled....

isn't this the very thing that could pull the rug out from under this administration? what real argument could they have, when even those they're supposed to be fighting against prefer them in charge of doing so?

[hughee99]

1. Seriously?

Al-Queda is one of the few things that just about all Americans agree on... We don't like 'em. I'm sure that they know this. Do you really believe that they support *? Just let FOX spin this and they will turn it into an advantage for *.

[progressiveBadger]

2. Maybe Al-Queda figures...

that four more years of * will tear the country apart?

[Lorien]

5. They would be right

this country would destroy itself from within with four more years of *. They would just sit back and laugh as BushCo borrowed and spent away America's future, then crumbled like the Soviet union.

[kispoko]

4. yes, i do

i do believe they "support bush," per se.... why wouldn't they? he's been the greatest boon to recruitment for them, and has allowed them to regroup and become stronger by having taken the focus off of them..... and they now have easier access to killing our people as well by virtue of iraq having been opened up to them, not to mention what that's done for their 'message.'

i don't think they like bush in the sense one would think of when they endorse someone.... it's simply about not being able to find a leader more foolish than he, as they said, who provided all of the above and more.


so why hasn't this been hit on?

[gristy]

3. I'm pleased they don't report it. Why should they?

And no, "al-qaeda's military branch in europe" supporting chimpy is not "the very thing that could pull the rug out from under this administration". I mean, wtf would anyone care who they "supported"?

[Goldom]

6. because

a terrorist organization supporting bush doesn't exactly speak well for his anti-terror stance

[kispoko]

7. you're serious

-And no, "al-qaeda's military branch in europe" supporting chimpy is not "the very thing that could pull the rug out from under this administration". I mean, wtf would anyone care who they "supported"?


uhhhh..... you're serious?!

when the very people we're supposed to be fighting a war against would much rather have the present "commander" in charge than the alternative, doesn't that say the current strategy is not exactly getting things done, to say the least?

not paying attention to your enemies is about one of the foolish things you can do, if you're engaging in battle.


and yeah, i think people would care about *this*..... why do you not understand how big having the enemy officially endorse the status quo, especially when we've been told the status quo is what terra just hates, is?

[kispoko]

8. here

here's the original thread i saw it on right here at du:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1478142


some quotations:

-The terrorist group stated that it wished Bush to win because it was not possible to find a leader, "more foolish than you, who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom."


-The statement tells American voters that Abu Hafs al-Masri supports the re-election campaign of U.S. President George W. Bush: "We are very keen that Bush does not lose the upcoming elections."

Addressing Bush, it says: "We know that a heavyweight operation would destroy your government, and this is what we don't want. We are not going to find a bigger idiot than you."

The statement said Abu Hafs al-Masri needs what it called Bush's "idiocy and religious fanaticism" because they would "wake up" the Islamic world.

Comparing Bush with his Democratic party challenger, John Kerry, the statement tells the president: "Actually, there is no difference between you and Kerry, but Kerry will kill our community, while it is unaware, because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish infidelity and present it to the Arab and Islamic community as civilization."



if nothing, we have actual *proof* to counter right-wing fairy tales about the terrorists hoping bush is out of office.... aren't you tired of hearing that shit?

even if they do not have the capacity to comprehend and cogitate on the information given them (they don't, it will fucking befuddle them beyond imagination), they can be shown for the bullshitters they are about one of the most important issues facing us today.....

we're tired of their fairy tales being confused for facts, simply because they know no other way to operate..... so let's do something about it when these opportunities come up to counter that.

[kispoko]

9. ....

kick :kick: back up to the first page

[Stocat]

10. story is DOA

The story hasn't been followed up on because its apparently DOA...there is no such thing as the Abu Hafs al-Masri brigade, aside from one man and his fax machine.


Intelligence sources have consistently told CNN that the Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigade does not speak for al Qaeda, and there is question as to whether it exists at all beyond one person with a computer and a fax machine.

For example, this group claimed responsibility for the U.S. power blackout last summer, a claim that turned out not to be true.

Just last week it claimed al Qaeda was not behind a car bombing in Iraq, which many intelligence officials believe was the work of an al Qaeda-related group.

CNN consultant Paul Eedle in the past has suggested the Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigade may be more interested in waging a propaganda war than in truthfully revealing who is behind particular acts of terror.

http://robots.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/03/12/spain.blasts.alqaeda/index.html

[gristy]

11. Very interesting. And like I said...

No, "al-qaeda's military branch in europe" supporting chimpy is not "the very thing that could pull the rug out from under this administration". I mean, wtf would anyone care who they "supported"? :evilgrin:

[kispoko]

12. see, i had heard that

but the question remains, who then, was responsible for the bombing exactly? i have seen reports of morrocans being involved, but they had to have contacts in europe, and spain as well. i have also never seen any reliable information to separate the group from al-qaeda, and it's even more suspicious that they seemed to have worked in tandem with al-qaeda's known wishes to halt attacks against european nations for a period of time after the "message" was sent to spain.

the article mentions that the basque separatists were being investigated, and that's just total shit and i think has since been debunked officially. they were just as appalled as the spanish were.


but this was the reason i asked.... i don't exactly fully trust the intelligence sources alluded to in the article, nor cnn "consultants" but will consider them all the same. i would like to see this explored more

[kispoko]

13. hmmmm

al-jazeera article mentioning the group, but with interesting information on their namesake, apparently bin laden's named successor:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/D2D48F79-B330-40E3-A17D-B4CDD01EE1A0.htm


i wouldn't take it as a guy with a bit of boredom and a fax machine at all.

[kispoko]

14. .....

:kick: