Col. Hunt just doesn't get it!

A few weeks ago I asked the question everyone should be asking George W. Bush.

Why did you decide to invade Iraq and let Osama go free?

And then I answered the question:

Dubya and Osama have a symbiotic relationship - each one is strengthened by the acts of the other. That of course makes it all the more important to ask the question.

Well apparently FOX's Col. David Hunt didn't get the memo or read MEJ.

America Could Have Killed Usama bin Laden — But Didn't

We know, with a 70 percent level of certainty — which is huge in the world of intelligence — that in August of 2007, bin Laden was in a convoy headed south from Tora Bora. We had his butt, on camera, on satellite. We were listening to his conversations. We had the world’s best hunters/killers — Seal Team 6 — nearby. We had the world class Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) coordinating with the CIA and other agencies. We had unmanned drones overhead with missiles on their wings; we had the best Air Force on the planet, begging to drop one on the terrorist. We had him in our sights; we had done it. Nice job again guys — now, pull the damn trigger.

Unbelievably, and in my opinion, criminally, we did not kill Usama bin Laden.

You cannot make this crap up; truth is always stranger and more telling than fiction. Our government, the current administration and yes, our military leaders included, failed to kill bin Laden for no other reason than incompetence.

The current “boneheads” in charge will tell you all day long that we are fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan to stop terrorists there so they do not come here. Nice talk, how about — just for a moment — acting like you mean what you say? You know walk the walk. These incidents, where we displayed a total lack of guts, like the one in August, are just too prevalent. The United States of America’s political and military leadership has, on at least three separate occasions, chosen not capture or kill bin Laden or Ayman al-Zawahri. We have allowed Pakistan to become a safe haven for Al Qaeda.

Now the wingers are upset but not with the Bush administration but because the military is afraid to kill people because they fear they will be put on trial for it. To quote Col. Hunt; "You cannot make this crap up".

The Cost Of Oil

Someone who's not a screaming lefty finally said it:

AMERICA’s elder statesman of finance, Alan Greenspan, has shaken the White House by declaring that the prime motive for the war in Iraq was oil.

In his long-awaited memoir, to be published tomorrow, Greenspan, a Republican whose 18-year tenure as head of the US Federal Reserve was widely admired, will also deliver a stinging critique of President George W Bush’s economic policies.

However, it is his view on the motive for the 2003 Iraq invasion that is likely to provoke the most controversy. “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” he says.

Greenspan, 81, is understood to believe that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the security of oil supplies in the Middle East.

Britain and America have always insisted the war had nothing to do with oil. Bush said the aim was to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction and end Saddam’s support for terrorism.

The war in Iraq of course has done nothing to increase the security of oil supplies and has in fact decreased security. When Republican Senator John Warner asked General Petraeus if Iraq policy had made the country more secure he would not answer. He wouldn't because the answer is no. Al-Qaeda is stronger now than it was prior to 9-11 in large part because of Dick Cheney's war for oil in Iraq.

Now I don't know if Osama bin-Laden is dead or alive but as Bruce Hoffman explained earlier in the week it really doesn't matter, Ayman al-Zawahiri is Scarier Than Bin Laden. The Telegraph supplies a few more details today.
Bin Laden sidelined as al-Qaeda threat revives

Osama bin Laden's deputy has seized control of al-Qaeda and rebuilt the terror network into an organisation capable of launching complex terror attacks in Britain and America.

Intelligence officials have told The Sunday Telegraph that bin Laden has not chaired a meeting of al-Qaeda's ruling shura, or council, in more than two years.

Instead, Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin Laden's nominal number two, is credited with rebuilding the terror network since the Afghan war in 2001.

Intelligence sources in Washington have revealed that Western spy chiefs were recently forced to revise dramatically their view that al-Qaeda was so depleted that it was little more than a cheerleader for extremists.

Instead, British and American intelligence agencies believe that a network of terrorist cells, funded, controlled and supported by al-Qaeda's central command, based in the lawless tribal areas of Pakistan, is in place again.

All of this occurred while George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were wasting American lives and treasure in an attempt to realize their dream of controlling the Iraqi oil fields. Because of their incompetence they have failed to do even that. Meanwhile al-Qaeda has rebuilt and reinvented itself to become an even greater threat.

Al-Zawahiri's task has been made easier because not a single prominent al-Qaeda leader has been captured since March 2006, nearly 18 months ago.

Citing information gathered by Pakistani intelligence, Bruce Hoffman, a member of the US Military Academy's Combating Terrorism Centre, said: "Bin Laden is the brand name but al-Zawahiri is the grand -strategist.

"He has taken control of al-Qaeda. Despite the new video [released this month], bin Laden has ceased to be a major force in decision-making and propaganda effort."

A window on the changing outlook on al-Qaeda came in July when a US government National Intelligence Estimate, concluded that the organisation had "regrouped".

Prof Hoffman said: "The idea that they were just a franchise for ideology was simply not true. While we were saying that al-Qaeda had been diminished and degraded, it was just wishful thinking."

What forced the re-evaluation was the plot last August to blow up 10 aircraft en route from Britain to the US. "That sent shock waves through the intelligence -agencies of both countries," said Prof Hoffman. "It was incontrovertible evidence that al-Qaeda was back, and that it was prepared to go after hard targets."

A former British intelligence officer said that al-Qaeda under al-Zawahiri's direction had promoted a new generation of leaders to the highest echelons of the shura, a group of about 20 to 30 leaders who govern operations, finance and religious fatwahs.

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney should be impeached for failing to protect the United States.

Some Thoughts On Osama (Updated)

Update
Well while I was sleeping it appears that both the right and the left have jumped on the fake tape bandwagon.
We have this from the Booman Tribune

Osama Bin Laden's widely publicized video address to the American people has a peculiarity that casts serious doubt on its authenticity: the video freezes at about 1 minute and 36 58 seconds, and motion only resumes again at 12:30. The video then freezes again at 14:02 remains frozen until the end. All references to current events, such as the 62nd anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombing of Japan, and Sarkozy and Brown being the leaders of France and the UK, respectively, occur when the video is frozen! The words spoken when the video is in motion contain no references to contemporary events and could have been (and likely were) made before the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

The audio track does appear to be in the voice of a single speaker. What I suspect was done is that an older, unreleased video was dubbed over for this release, with the video frozen when the audio track departed from that of the original video.

Even uber wingnut Michael Ledeen thinks it's fake:

Third, is it really Osama? As you know, I was reliably told something like two years ago that Osama had died. Nothing in this speech sounds at all like the “old” OBL. That man knew how to give a stemwinder, he used elegant language, his threats were blood-curdling, his calls to the faithful inspiring. This man talks like, well, a high school dropout. In fact it reads like an “Onion” spoof. And the sound is bizarre, at least on my IBM desktop. It sounds almost as if there was enough garble in it to make it difficult to match with voice prints of the “real” guy. I’m not convinced.

So who did it? Rick Moran has some thoughts:

It's it possible that this “tape” was manufactured by the Bush Administration and released just days before the Petreaus Report to Congress on Iraq in order to sway nervous Republicans into standing firm while reminding the American people that Iraq is part of the War on Terror?

The question has to be asked because it will probably be the number one topic of conversation on lefty blogs today. And the answer is a qualified no, it is not possible. One can accuse the Bush Administration of incompetence in many areas but you would think if they were going to run a fake video, they might have done a better job of manufacturing it so that some guy in pajamas sitting in his mother’s basement couldn’t expose them.

And al-Qaeda shutting down it’s various websites immediately after the tape’s release is an interesting tell as well. They wouldn’t want their sympathizers telling the world that the video is an obvious fake.

Yes, I suppose it is possible that the Administration ordered up the video for the Iraq debate. Anything is possible. But there is not one scintilla of evidence that points the finger at the Administration while logic and inference finger this as an attempt by al-Qaeda to stick their nose into the debate themselves – just as they tried to do with the 2004 election when they released the last Osama video.

Rick also questions the CIA:

Funny that the CIA concludes that it’s Bin Laden on the tape but never mentions – or perhaps didn’t catch – the freeze framed video. It is hugely significant because as Maschke points out, all of the topical references that “prove” the tape is recent are uttered when the “video” is in freeze frame.

If our government is going to release a tape showing that Osama is alive, one would think that this kind of little detail would be hugely important to point out to the press and the American public. If anything, this video chicanery buttresses the case that Osama has been worm food for a while.

Wheels within wheels: The CIA knows Osama is dead but doesn’t want al-Qaeda to know that we know. Why? Perhaps they have someone close to al-Qaeda’s inner circle. Not close enough to know where they are, but close enough that our intelligence people are kept abreast of a few things. Letting on that we know Osama is dead might expose that source to al-Qaeda.

And how about the idea that this is a speech that may have been written by some poor deluded leftist twit pretending to be a jihadist read by the world’s number one terrorist? Adam Gadahn may be a useful idiot to al-Qaeda but I hardly think they have grown so unsophisticated that they would be using him as Osama’s ghost writer – literally. Besides, CNN International is seen all over the world. If they want to copy leftist propaganda spouted here in the United States, they can do no better than use Ted Turner’s creation for that.

This fake was truly poorly done which would lead one to believe it was not done by either the US government or al-Qaeda. But how about some not too bright, not too talented freelancers who thought they might be doing the Bush administration a favor?


....End of Update......


Now I don't know if the latest bin-Laden tape is real or a fake although there are reasons to question it. One rather interesting thing happened this weekend - suddenly Osama is irrelevant again. Perhaps the Bush administration and the Republicans did some focus groups or something and they found that the Osama fear mongering is now a minus - people are wondering why the Bush administration let him get away. There is even an early attempt to create an alternate villain, Ayman al-Zawahiri. Of course they are both right, Osama is irrelevant and al-Zawahiri always was the greater threat. Of course the Bush administration let al-Zawahiri get away at the same time they let Osama get away.

Osama bin-Laden is nothing more than an icon, a figure head. He inspires and may well have been even more of an inspiration dead or in prison once Bush invaded and occupied Iraq.

Question

So who is that guy with the phony black beard?
Is it really Osama? Scott Adams thinks so:

I assume this new video is from the real Osama because a fake would do a better job matching the beard. In other words, the real Osama looks too fake to be an actual fake.

But then goes on to talk about how easy it would be for some government agency to create a fake Osama video. Why would they do you might ask - but if you did ask you have not been paying attention for the last six years. The headline in Time Magazine is
Bin Laden Fights to Stay Relevant.
It could just as easily read:
The Bush administration and the neocons fight to keep Bin Laden Relevant.
That would include keeping him alive even if he wasn't. Very few are questioning the authenticity of the tape. Steve Soto hints at it:

After previously talking up the war in Iraq, isn't it a little too convenient for the purported Osama in this videotape to now seemingly support ending the war in Iraq, and to bash Democrats for not living up to the promise of the midterm elections?

That kind of two-fer could have been written by any number of GOP operatives inside the Beltway or in Texas, especially on the 6th anniversary of 9/11 at a time when the White House will tie Iraq to 9/11 once again next week.

Now the CIA says it's real but they have gotten used to being told what to find before they analyze it. In addition to the appearance we have the content. It is unlike anything he has said before - he comes off sounding like a Vulcan mind meld of Karl Marx and Jerry Falwell with a dash of Al Gore thrown in. And of course there is the fact that it was not available on the sites where one would expect such things to be seen.

OK, after six years of the Bush administration I wear my tinfoil hat most of the time. As I said below:

Dubya and Osama have a symbiotic relationship - each one is strengthened by the acts of the other.

That still applies to Bush even if Osama is dead.
Update
David Brooks got the Talking points (or perhaps he's just an idiot)
Brooks: In His New Tape, Bin Laden Sounds Like He’s Been ‘Reading Lefty Blogs’

Last night on PBS’ The NewsHour, New York Times columnist David Brooks compared 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden’s latest video message to “lefty blogs,” saying the al Qaeda head is like “one of these childish people posting rants at the bottom of the page.” He then went to describe why he drew such a comparison:

You read this thing, and it’s like he’s been sitting around reading lefty blogs, and he’s one of these childish people posting rants at the bottom the page, you know, Noam Chomsky and all this stuff.

You can’t help read it and not laugh at it, occasionally, because it is just absurd. It’s flying this way, and that way, weird conspiracy theories, and mortgages, global warming. He throws it all in there.

And the wingnut blogosphere was quick to jump on this meme.

Brooks’ comments are part of an effort by prominent right-wing voices to try to tie Osama bin Laden to the left. At Hot Air, Allahpundit claimed bin Laden sounded like a “socialist icon,” invoking many of the same passages Brooks did. At Political Vindication, Uncle Seth the Noble went further, claiming bin Laden sounded like Daily Kos’ Markos Moulitsas:

It's enough to make my tinfoil hat go wild!
Update II
Steve Benen has some harsh words about Mr Brook's comments:

Brooks, supposedly one of the media's favorite "serious" grown-ups, is playing the same offensive game far-right activists have been playing for years: tying the 9/11 architect to the left. It's insulting and ridiculous, but Brooks' sentiment was echoed, aggressively, by the usual suspects.

And he repeats what I have said here over and over:

Having said that, it's probably worth noting, from time to time, that if Osama bin Laden were to sit down and write a gameplan for what he'd like to see the United States do since 2001, it would look eerily similar to the approach taken by the Bush administration over the last six years.

And Rove lives:

In this sense, Brooks' comments, and those from other far-right voices, are part of a classic Rovian strategy -- identify your rival's strength, and go after it vociferously. Indeed, the strident rhetoric and the nonsensical finger-pointing reeks of desperation, as if the president's political supporters hope that if they scream "OBL (hearts) Democrats" loud enough, no one will notice that Bush's presidency has been everything al Qaeda could have hoped for, and more.

It's kind of sad, when you think about it.

Sad indeed!

The Question Everyone Should Be Asking The Decider

Why did you decide to invade Iraq and let Osama go free?
New Videotape From Bin Laden; Al Qaeda's No. 1 Still Alive

Intelligence sources tell ABC News they believe the video message from Osama bin Laden is authentic, recently produced and evidence the al Qaeda leader is still alive.

According to government sources, an initial analysis of the tape indicates "a lot of chest thumping" and of course historical references "alluding" to the successful attack on New York.

And a CIA spokesman told ABC News, "It's quite possible this is a new video."

U.S. authorities earlier this morning said the tape's transcript is aimed at potential suicide bombers who he urges to carry out missions against the West.

The Bush administration has many failures but that Osama bin Laden is still free and alive has to be the biggest. At least a portion of the miserable Bush legacy will be that they let Osama get away - the "real enemy" get away. Not only did they let him get away the Bush administration has done everything Osama could have wanted him to do. The invasion of Iraq was the greatest thing that could have happened to increase the influence, power and recruiting of bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Some legacy you have there George.

Update
From the comments:

Please understand that NOT apprehending Osama is a key part of the Bush strategy. Osama has NEVER been bush's target. It is impossible to imagine that anyone can believe otherwise. If we really wanted him, we would get him. Our military is not incompetent. But Bush's criminal war would be ended if Osama was somehow eliminated. Bush and his mafia might be the vile criminals I believe them to be, but our military is definitely NOT of that ilk. So, I must assume that we have had Osama in our sights on more than one occasion and taking him out has probably been vetoed by the White House each time. It is a shame that no one from the military has stepped forward with the truth about this. Probably hamstrung by that 'Commander-in-Chief" title that all presidents have.

Of course he is absolutely correct and I have said as much here on more than one occasion. Dubya and Osama have a symbiotic relationship - each one is strengthened by the acts of the other. That of course makes it all the more important to ask the question.