Bin Laden's Back, and There's Gonna Be Trouble

At breakfast this morning, I asked Mrs. F if she'd heard about the Bin Laden tape from yesterday, and she hadn't cos it wasn't on Cracks (she's pretty busy these days, so doesn't get to see much news). That got me motivated. I've recently wondered if what I put up on this blog is useful, or just another reverberation in the blogging echo chamber. But I just need to look a little deeper and get back to finding multiple connections that help broaden the different aspects of a story.

Anyhoo, enough about me. Yes, Bin Laden's back with a tape delivered to and broadcast by Al Jazeera yesterday:

The al-Qaida chief made the proposal in an audiotape broadcast by the Aljazeera satellite television network, and authenticated by the CIA, in which bin Laden warned of pending attacks in the "heartland" of the United States.

But he also offered a "long-term truce" if Washington withdrew its military presence from Iraq and Afghanistan - the latter his former safe haven until US forces ousted his Taliban allies after the September 11 attacks.
[...]
Asked about bin Laden's truce offer, Cheney told Fox News Channel that it sounded like "a ploy" and that "this is not an organisation that is ever going to sit down and sign a truce. I think you have to destroy them. It's the only way to deal with them."

The WaPo notes that the tape has been authenticated and adds a bit more color:

U.S. intelligence analysts have judged the tape to be authentic, an intelligence official said. Bin Laden speaks in a low voice; the sound quality is generally poor.

It is the first time since December 2004 that a recording of bin Laden's voice has surfaced. The intervening 13 months was the longest stretch of silence from bin Laden since before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States.

During that period, bin Laden's prominence in Islamic radical circles had been eclipsed by that of two other figures: his Egyptian deputy, Ayman Zawahiri, and Abu Musab Zarqawi, the Jordanian fighter and insurgent leader in Iraq.

[...]

While some analysts said bin Laden's reluctance to make himself more visible could be a sign of health problems -- his last videotape was aired in October 2004, days before the U.S. presidential election -- others surmised that he was more worried about his security.

[...]

Al-Jazeera reported that the 10-minute tape was made in December, but the network did not offer specifics. The recording, however, contains a number of clues.

For instance, bin Laden refers to an alleged plot by the Bush administration to bomb al-Jazeera's headquarters in Qatar, which received coverage in British newspapers in late November. (The White House has denied any such plot.)

He also mentions antiwar sentiment in public opinion polls and comments by Bush that it is better to fight terrorists abroad so Americans do not have to face them at home.

And that's where the trouble starts back on the homefront. Chris Matthews of MSNBC's Hardball program made a very interesting connection to Bin Laden's comments; here's Tim Grieve over at Salon's War Room:

Matthews listened to the al-Qaida leader and declared: "He sounds like an over the top Michael Moore here, if not a Michael Moore."

Crooks and Liars has the video, and John Kerry, of all people, has the response: "You'd think the only focus tonight would be on destroying Osama Bin Laden, not comparing him to an American who opposes the war, whether you like him or not," Kerry said in a statement his office released Thursday night. "You want a real debate that America needs? Here goes: If the administration had done the job right in Tora Bora we might not be having discussions on 'Hardball' about a new Bin Laden tape. How dare Scott McClellan tell America that this administration puts terrorists out of business when had they put Osama Bin Laden out of business in Afghanistan when our troops wanted to, we wouldn't have to hear this barbarian's voice on tape. That's what we should be talking about in America."

What set Matthews off, apparently, was bin Laden's attempt to drive a wedge between the American people and their president on Iraq. On the tape released Thursday, bin Laden says that Bush is putting Americans at risk of future al-Qaida attacks by ignoring polls that show that a "majority of your people are willing to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq."

Matthews may not like bin Laden's characterization of the disconnect between Bush and the country he leads, but bin Laden is actually pretty close to correct on what the polling shows. While Bush's approval ratings on Iraq have ticked up slightly from their lows of last fall, a Gallup poll released earlier this month had a plurality of Americans favoring a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops. The question was asked in a way that was fairly friendly to Bush's "stay the course" view -- "Which do you think is better for the U.S.: to set a timetable for removing troops from Iraq and remove them regardless of whether the U.S. goals are achieved by that time, or to keep a significant number of troops in Iraq until the U.S. achieves its goals there, regardless of how long that takes?" -- but 49 percent of the public answered "withdraw" while 47 percent said "stay."

In the same poll, 53 percent of the public said things are going "moderately badly" or "very badly" for the United States in Iraq. No one likes hearing that assessment from bin Laden, a man responsible for murdering nearly 3,000 Americans long before Bush launched his folly in Iraq. But that doesn't mean that it isn't true -- or that Michael Moore could be the only one who thinks so.

But it gets worse. Here's John "Five in the Noggin" Gibson, FoxNews biggest idiot (in a very close race with a lotta horses) with his Word from yesterday (hat tip to Daily Kos diarist georgia10):

But the far lefties ought to pay attention to the other things he said. He was quoting our own far left and Europe's as they have cheered the polls showing Americans support for the war waning, that some Americans want to pull out from Iraq.

That's the basis for bin Laden's truce offer. He is talking to America's far left and saying, "You know what. We're on the same side. So why don't you work on that hardhead George W. Bush?"

Bin Laden told us Thursday that our far left has been working for him. It's their poll results he quotes.

Bin Laden told us that our secret wiretapping program is something we should keep up. He's got people here already and he's got more coming and they are planning to blow us up.

In the War on Terror, a bin Laden tape is the far left's worst nightmare because it reminds Americans the war is real.

Yepp, Bin Laden's back, and we're starting to eat our own again. And I agree with Georgia10's assessment:

This is exactly the dialogue bin Laden wants. Every time Gibson decries the "far lefties" as agents of terrorism, a suicide bomber thinks he won't die in vain. Because you see, their purpose is to destroy our nation by turning it against itself. What joy they take when propagandists like Gibson and Tweety [ed note - that's Chris Matthews' snarky nickname in the Lefty blogosphere] marginalize half the American people. How delighted bin Laden must be, chuckling away in his cave as he hears Limbaugh on his satellite radio claiming the left is sabotaging the War on Terror and bringing on the destruction of America.

Why do such spin and lies please our enemies so? Because every time Bush's minions lie in this manner, it takes away attention from the real problems with the War on Terror and the war in Iraq. Focusing on the lie that the left is somehow conspiring with Al Qaeda deflects attention away from the true shortfalls in our national security.

Bin Laden's tape triggered, on cue, a flurry of anti-liberal sentiment, instead of a critical analysis of our nation's security. He made a threat against our homeland, but the always useless "color coded threat level" didn't budge. Yet instead of asking why the defunct system is still in place, Gibson & Co. are laughing at how Bin Laden quoted withdrawal polls.

And all this self-defeating rhetoric could get even worse, with CNN announcing this week that it was hiring conservative radio host Glenn Beck as a commentator. John Aravosis over at AmericaBlog reminds us of one of Beck's rants from May of 2005 (transcript from MediaMatters):

BECK: Hang on, let me just tell you what I'm thinking. I'm thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I'm wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out -- is this wrong? I stopped wearing my What Would Jesus -- band -- Do, and I've lost all sense of right and wrong now. I used to be able to say, "Yeah, I'd kill Michael Moore," and then I'd see the little band: What Would Jesus Do? And then I'd realize, "Oh, you wouldn't kill Michael Moore. Or at least you wouldn't choke him to death." And you know, well, I'm not sure.

Hi-freakin'-larious.