Calling Bin Laden's Bluff

Islam

“Many factors have combined to mythologize Osama bin Laden. The ineptness of his enemies, for one: that we Americans have been incapable of capturing him does wonders for the fugitive’s status. The pulp-press bin Laden gets helps too. The title of CNN correspondent Christiane Amanpour’s documentary about the man—’In the Footsteps of Bin Laden’—is a play on an idiom that suggests reverence.

For her production, Amanpour even managed to dredge, among many other character witnesses, a swaddled female fan, who went into raptures over the arch-terrorist. Amanpour also labored bin Laden’s Scarlet-Pimpernel qualities—the manner in which he would materialize and dematerialize mysteriously for his spectacular cameos. This enhanced his elusive aura (although in reality, I’m sure perfectly prosaic things such as cars and camels were involved in schlepping him here and there).

But bin Laden is not what he is made out to be. A clue to his limitations came when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi ignored his request, via Ayman al-Zawahiri, to quit killing so many Shia in Iraq. And now two books, published earlier this year, and reviewed by Max Rodenbeck in the New York Review of Books, expose yet more frailties in bin Laden’s façade…”

Here’s the complete WorldNetDaily.com column, “Calling Bin Laden’s Bluff.”

Calling Bin Laden’s Bluff

Islam

“Many factors have combined to mythologize Osama bin Laden. The ineptness of his enemies, for one: that we Americans have been incapable of capturing him does wonders for the fugitive’s status. The pulp-press bin Laden gets helps too. The title of CNN correspondent Christiane Amanpour’s documentary about the man—’In the Footsteps of Bin Laden’—is a play on an idiom that suggests reverence.

For her production, Amanpour even managed to dredge, among many other character witnesses, a swaddled female fan, who went into raptures over the arch-terrorist. Amanpour also labored bin Laden’s Scarlet-Pimpernel qualities—the manner in which he would materialize and dematerialize mysteriously for his spectacular cameos. This enhanced his elusive aura (although in reality, I’m sure perfectly prosaic things such as cars and camels were involved in schlepping him here and there).

But bin Laden is not what he is made out to be. A clue to his limitations came when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi ignored his request, via Ayman al-Zawahiri, to quit killing so many Shia in Iraq. And now two books, published earlier this year, and reviewed by Max Rodenbeck in the New York Review of Books, expose yet more frailties in bin Laden’s façade…”

Here’s the complete WorldNetDaily.com column, “Calling Bin Laden’s Bluff.”

Updated: Rotten Reporting Again (About Those 650 Thou Dead in Iraq)

Iraq, Journalism, Media, The Zeitgeist, War

The Associates Press (via Rational Report) reports that:

A “controversial new study contends that nearly 655,000 Iraqis have died in the three-year-old conflict in Iraq—more than 10 times higher than other independent estimates of the toll.”

Dubya and his Oh-What-A-Wonderful-War contingent dispute these figures. And so they should.

The latest Lancet report has never claimed 655,000 civilian deaths total, but rather that, “An estimated 655,000 more Iraqis have died as a consequence of the March 2003 military invasion of Iraq than would have been expected in a non-conflict situation.”

What we have here, once again, is rotten reporting. When the first Lancet report appeared two year ago, mainstream press also fudged the facts. I think I was the only writer who made the necessary distinctions. I explained:

“In the final days of Saddam’s reign of terror, i.e., in the 15 months preceding the invasion, the primary causes of death in Iraq were natural: heart attack, stroke and chronic illness. Since Iraq became another neocon object lesson, the primary cause of death has been violence, according to the report.
Since March 2003, Iraqis have suffered from an excess of deaths, if you will. As Dr. Les Roberts, author of the study, told BBC News, ‘About 100,000 excess deaths, or more, have happened since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.’
According to the study, “The relative risk, the risk of deaths from any cause was two-and-a-half times higher for Iraqi civilians after the 2003 invasion than in the preceding 15 months. But ‘the risk of death by violence for civilians in Iraq is now 58 times higher than before the U.S.-led invasion.”

Update: My thanks to Bob Murphy and Sean Mercer for demanding further clarification: My point is non-ideological; I’d simply like to see accurate reporting. The 650,000 figure would include deaths due to a greater incidence of heart attacks, cancer, strokes, stress and displacement-related deaths, deaths associated with a lack of health care and potable water, etc. Thus, silly journalists build doubt into the report because they give the impression that this many people died directly because of the war. Rather, the figure represents both direct and indirect casualties of the invasion, which is why it’s believable.

It goes without saying that the report is a criminal indictment of the invasion. If not for the invasion, the leading cause of death in Iraqi would still be natural, as it was during Saddam’s suzerainty.

Axis of Illogic

Bush, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Politics

Don’t forget that at the time Bush was preparing to invade Iraq, he was giving North Korea room to maneuver freely on the axis of evil. While Iraqi palm dates were being subjected to strict trade embargoes, North Korean Scud missiles were allowed to safely reach their destinations: the jammed-with-Jihadist nations of Pakistan, Syria, Egypt, Iran, Libya and Yemen.

In 2002, a North Korean vessel was not allegedly—but actually—apprehended in the Arabian Sea, carrying 15 well-concealed Scud missiles. At the time of its invasion, Iraq was suspected of hiding a total of 60 Scud-variant missiles. While Bush was revving up for war with Iraq, North Koreans were sailing the seas in search for markets for the equivalent of a fourth of the entire Iraqi arsenal.

You see, North Korea didn’t and apparently doesn’t sell missiles to Al-Qaida. While Iraq might have. That’s an important distinction.

The weapons inspectors, who were criss-crossing Iraq before the invasion, were not allowed to finish their uneventful task (Bush threw them out so he could invade). At the same time, Bush exempted North Korea’s Yongbyon research base from inspections, but not before bribing the North Koreans with $95m.

So long as you understand that North Korea’s belligerence is ultimately all Clinton’s fault.