Daily Archive

Reuters:

Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden accused Washington of plotting to take control of Iraq’s oil and urged Iraqis to reject efforts to rebuild a U.S.-backed national unity government there…

…”America seeks, alongside its agents in the region, to create an allied government … that would accept in advance the presence of major U.S. bases in Iraq and give the Americans all they wish of Iraq’s oil,” he said in the 56-minute recording…

Mr Bin Laden sounds absolutely convinced.  And that is readily understandable.  Apparently, he has been catching up on his back issues of the London Review of Books. 

“Oil theft” was not the only matter he puts forward in this latest Al Qaeda, multi-headed “position paper”.  Alas, though, he failed to delve into this recent issue:

…Bin Laden did not mention accusations al Qaeda was behind Thursday’s assassination of Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto. A Qaeda-allied militant leader has denied involvement…

He was, however, willing to note this one:

Bin Laden took a swing at Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Iran-backed Lebanese Hezbollah group, for accepting the expansion of a United Nations force in Lebanon after the Shi’ite group’s war with the Jewish state in 2006.

The peacekeepers sent to Lebanon after the war were there to “protect the Jews”, said bin Laden…

Yes, those pesky Jews, aiming to divide sneakily, as always.  Next, Reuters helpfully reminds readers that Mr Bin Laden’s “school” of religious thought might influence his views on Mr Nasrallah’s group, owing to how Mr Bin Laden’s . . .

…group belongs to a school of Islam that sees Shi’ite Muslims as heretics…

Evidently Reuters thinks it is factually relevant editorially to note how one group of believers labels another’s method of worship as heretical.  But we’ll let that slide.  After all, in trying to juggle so many other nuanced, intellectual plates simultaneously, it is perhaps unsurprising that Reuters dropped one. 

Next, following on from Mr Bin Laden’s suggestions on UN peacekeeping improvements, another humanitarian issue — a major Reuters concern, as we know – thankfully made it onto the address’s agenda:

…Bin Laden accepted responsibility for civilian casualties in al Qaeda attacks but he argued that the enemy used Muslims as human shields…

Lastly, Reuters informs us that on economic issues:

…Bin Laden also said Muslims were losing money to “unjust” policies by countries that link their currencies to the weak U.S. dollar…

…He urged supporting militants so they can “preserve your oil and wealth and protect your money that is slipping between your fingers due to the unjust and arbitrary dollar pegs“…

However, discussing “dollar pegs” is unlikely ever to enrapture most audiences.  FDR knew over 70 years ago that, when speaking on banking, one had to make the subject easily grasped by all listeners.  Indeed, it almost seems Mr Bin Laden hadn’t noticed by now, that his group’s emphasis on unfocused commentaries on too wide a variety of issues appears not to be working. 

That being so, and if he can’t hire a new speechwriter, he might try to find some new means of garnering attention? He could try the Putin approach? Or perhaps the high-visibility girlfriend?

_____________________________

Mr Bin Laden’s numerous policy re-suggestions are hardly the only ones out there.  As New Year approaches, we may all be a bit mentally drained by always having to re-address the same, familiar, dizzying array of opinions from everyone.  Regardless, take heart: there are numerous underreported, underpontificated-upon issues out there, of course.

By that one doesn’t mean The Observer/Guardian’s finally coming to the realization on Sunday that President Bush Wilson actually had a point after all (…the West has a clear interest in seeing democracy spread … The belief that democracy is the best form of government is unarguably true…).  Rather, in case you were unaware, recently The World’s Greatest Newspaper Daily Express has added a necessary new, informational vehicle: The Princess Diana inquest page.  Also, The Daily Hysteria Mail has been out in the fore, tackling, shall we say, under-covered questions, such as “Can Keira Knightley keep her clothes on?“