Bin Laden offers Americans truce

[rmnunez]

Truce offer

"In response to the substance of the polls in the US, which indicate that Americans do not want to fight Muslims on Muslim land, nor do they want Muslims to fight them on their land, we do not mind offering a long-term truce based on just conditions that we will stick to. "We are a nation that Allah banned from lying and stabbing others in the back, hence both parties of the truce will enjoy stability and security to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan, which were destroyed by war. "There is no problem in this solution, but it will prevent hundreds of billions from going to influential people and war lords in America -those who supported Bush's electoral campaign– and from this, we can understand Bush and his gang's insistence on continuing the war." Addressing Americans again, he said: "If your desire for peace, stability and reconciliation was true, here we have given you the answer to your call."

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...1A9678D922.htm

[Osborn F Enready]

Man, don't these guys know the imperialist Americans don't deal with terrorists?

Either way it will probably be American dollars involved in the process.

[Apeman81]

Quote by: rmnunez Truce offer http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...1A9678D922.htm

I'm sure we can trust a radical Islamist to keep his word with an infidel.

This time.

[rmnunez]

I'd expect OBL is trustworthy, after all he comes from "a nation that Allah banned from lying and stabbing others in the back".

[Osborn F Enready]

LOL, I am not implying we should trust him, if that is what you meant.

[Chris]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Man, don't these guys know the imperialist Americans don't deal with terrorists? Either way it will probably be American dollars involved in the process.

Did you read the article or are you just guessing? If so Damn thats a Good guess! Spot on man!

From the article:

The White House said on Thursday that the US "does not negotiate with terrorists".

:eek:

[carriew]

I hate every second of this war. in my family(husband mother step parents father sisters ect.) I was the only one who didnt want to go there and start this war. my mother said and I quote "kill them all and let god sort it out" I think its a saying from vietnam war.

now according to her president bush is evil and we need to get out. I love how many people agreed with this then and are twofaced now!

now that we are there and started this ball a rolling we have to finish what we set out to do or we will look defeated and weak.



sometimes I wish I was not an americian.( I was born and raised here so I will never be accepted as anything but) Everyone hates us(for some good reasons I may add) and I for one am scared for myself and my children.

[Chris]

Quote by: carriew now according to her president bush is evil and we need to get out. I love how many people agreed with this then and are twofaced now!

Well I don't think thats it. I was in support of this war until March-2004.

Now you know I disapprove of us being there.

[carriew]

see thats what I mean.

people agreed and now we are there and now they want to leave and everyone else is the bad guy and wrong now? it makes no sense to me. but hell I did a flip also. I didnt want to go and now I feel as tho we must stay and finish.

I just dont accept people blaming others for thier own actions.(or opinions) if you knew the right facts first maybe you wouldnt need to change your mind. your opinion was either wrong now or then pick one they both cant be right! the only fact I knew about this war was that innocent people would die. moms and kids just like me and mine. that was why I was against it. I dont believe in violence at all. its always wrong to kill someone and 2 wrongs never ever make it right,

[thatoneguy00]

Hey We also call those poeple united states congress, It went through congess as the final decision process and it passed with republican and most democratic support. and to your post carrie with all do respect men have died too not just moms and kids. My prayers are for everyone not just a few

[Milton Bradley]

I think its too bad they don't attmpt to take the man at his word. His word has proven valid, for the most part, in my mind. Of course, he, and I agree on the fundamental reason for the conflict in the first place, so perhaps that exposes my bias, if it can be called bias.


Fundamentally, I am still of the belief that the government need to prove that Osamma is not an agent of my own government.


To put that last coment in context, let us remember that Manuel Noriega was a CIA Operative while he was President of Panama, and while we were invading Panama. If that is possible, then the onus is on the government since they have admitted to putting Osamma through the CIA school.


State Department Spooks created to seperate the fools from their money.

[carriew]

yeah I should not have left men out. anyone who is innocent doesnt deserve to die to further the agenda of others. men women and children.

[SteveA]

Quote by: carriew see thats what I mean. people agreed and now we are there and now they want to leave and everyone else is the bad guy and wrong now? it makes no sense to me. but hell I did a flip also. I didnt want to go and now I feel as tho we must stay and finish. I just dont accept people blaming others for thier own actions.(or opinions) if you knew the right facts first maybe you wouldnt need to change your mind. your opinion was either wrong now or then pick one they both cant be right! the only fact I knew about this war was that innocent people would die. moms and kids just like me and mine. that was why I was against it. I dont believe in violence at all. its always wrong to kill someone and 2 wrongs never ever make it right,

I was also one of the people that supported some actions against what I believed was legitimate information about possible accomplices or even some of the camps in Afghanistan ... to an extent simply for revenge, even if not 100% specifically for justice. I voted for Bush in 2000 and blew off a lot of warnings about him by assuming it was "liberal propoganda" ... apparently they knew what they were talking about.

It wasn't two faced to support some military actions in Afghanistan trying to capture or even kill if necessary possible accomplices for the 9/11. Obviously the military isn't a precise tool that only hits "the bad guys", so it seems understandable that some "innocent bystander" would probably get caught up in this as well, but that's just how reality is.

After this "War on Terror" began to result in wide scale military actions, including overthowing the government in Afghanistan, actions in the Phillipines and other countries, include of course the biggy - a war on Iraq including overthrowing that government as well. And we've worked to create new governments as well as make threats to Iran and Syria etc.

These have nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks and are simply destructive and destabilizing in relationships.

(Consider that likely Bush will find any democracy in the middle east unacceptable, when you look at the sentiments tend to be there and what the decisions of a true democracy would be ...)

It's not two-faced to support seeking justice for the 9/11 attacks and yet simultaneously oppose empire building. If anything, this administration has been the two-faced party from my view but of course some of the media at their beck and call want to paint anyone disagreeing with almost declaring war on the entire middle east because of the actions, we couldn't stop ourselves in the U.S. of a couple dozen people we let come here, as being two-faced. When it comes down to it, who was most responsible for stopping the 9/11 attacks? I'm not saying we did anything wrong, but we're partly to blame for allowing 9/11 to happen ... invading foreign countries and overthrowing governments for things those people had virtually no ability to stop at the time is ridiculous and a mindset that truly escalates problems, not resolves them.

Quote by: thatoneguy00 Hey We also call those poeple united states congress, It went through congess as the final decision process and it passed with republican and most democratic support. and to your post carrie with all do respect men have died too not just moms and kids. My prayers are for everyone not just a few

Good point. This is also the same Congress that claims they didn't read the Patriot Act and voted 100 to 0 for it in the Senate and we'll assume the same one that approved a new f'in national ID card with biometric data for everyone too.

[tinybear]

OK, let's pretend to negotiate, then kill him.

What? You're not suggesting we REALLY negotiate with a terrorist, are you?

[carriew]

what he proposed isnt exactly a negotion in my book. you leave us alone well leave you alone. negotation would be trying to get something above what they are willing to do themselves.

and I fully support going after terroists in a controled targeted campaign.. not the fiasco that is going on right now.

[tinybear]

"A controlled targetted campaign"? Like what, for instance? Could you be more specific?

[carriew]

no specifics. I just dont think that going after others governments will get us our terrosists. how could I be specific its not like I have any real knowledge of where these people are that I can send someone right over to get them lol.

like if someone on the 10 most wanted list lived in levittown (where i live a town of 50k+ people) and the fbi wanted to get him I hardley think they would blow up all of levittown. no you send people in to work undercover find out info and go after one person not the whole place.

thats about as specific as I can get

[gr8fuldaniel]

I question the validity of the tape.

Do you think this kind of talk will help OBL (provided hes alive) recruit soldiers?

More likely that WE would seek a truce. The Army just announced today they are raising the enlistment age to 40.

The bush numbers are tanking. Again. Worse than Nixon, who tapped political opponents.

Odd that 3 days ago they tried to pull the old Booga-Booga, but nobody bit the hook:

Link U.S.: 'Very high' chance of WMD terror strike Tuesday, January 17, 2006 Posted: 0843 GMT (1643 HKT) LONDON, England (AP) -- There is a "very high" probability that a terrorist group will strike using nuclear, chemical or biological weapons, a senior U.S. counterterrorism official said in comments published Tuesday. "I rate the probability of terror groups using (weapons of mass destruction) as very high," U.S. State Department counterterrorism coordinator Henry Crumpton was quoted as saying by the Daily Telegraph newspaper. "It is simply a question of time."

That didnt work so they had to bring the Ringer back from the dead.

Wanna prevent terrorism? Stop committing acts of terror!

[Apeman81]

Quote by: Milton Bradley I think its too bad they don't attmpt to take the man at his word. His word has proven valid, for the most part, in my mind. Of course, he, and I agree on the fundamental reason for the conflict in the first place, so perhaps that exposes my bias, if it can be called bias. Fundamentally, I am still of the belief that the government need to prove that Osamma is not an agent of my own government. To put that last coment in context, let us remember that Manuel Noriega was a CIA Operative while he was President of Panama, and while we were invading Panama. If that is possible, then the onus is on the government since they have admitted to putting Osamma through the CIA school. State Department Spooks created to seperate the fools from their money.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Man that's funny. Bin Ladin at his word.

You DO know that a staple of Islam is to offer a truce you expect to be declined just prior to launching attacks that are in the planning stage that you have no intent on not carrying out.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: Apeman81 HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Man that's funny. Bin Ladin at his word. You DO know that a staple of Islam is to offer a truce you expect to be declined just prior to launching attacks that are in the planning stage that you have no intent on not carrying out.

Yeah, sorta like Bush did before the inspectors went back in, 2003...