Is Osama Reading Left-wing Blogs?
598776
Of course he doe's, and I bet he adores Gen. Murtha. He flames the terrorists and insurgency.
687723
Because liberals know that it ISN'T easy to find Osama.  Nor do they want him found, because they share so many of his views.  Not only that, but according to liberals, 9/11 was President Bush's fault, not Osama's.  They never have a bad word to say about Osama.  Both liberals and Osama hate America and doubly hate President Bush.  Osama's continued freedom, combined with his thumbing his nose at the President, delights liberals.  If Osama wrote a book and announced that he was making an appearance at Barnes & Noble for a signing session, liberals would be lined up for miles to meet him. Remember: the liberal's fundamental desire is never to solve a problem, but rather to create a costly government program to institutionalize and perpetuate the problem.
973738
But the staement isn't true.  It also ignores reality.\n\nPolitics was very different in the 80's when everything did (and had to) boil down to West vs. Communism.  The fall of the Soviet Union changed everything.  Supporting Hussein was not a good thing, but it was justifiable.\n\nThe US never supported bin Laden., so you have a major problem there.\n\nMusharaff...what's the choice.  Show me that there is an alternative to supporting him.  Unless you support US forcing regeime change in Pakistan too?
694230
Red herring. This was 30 years ago and it doesn't explain why Osama hates the US now, or why Bush didn't go all out to find and kill him after he plotted the murder of thousands of Americans.
669946
In his latest audiotape which was released on January 19th, Osama ben Laden had declared: "If you [Americans] are sincere in your desire for peace and security, we have answered you. And if Bush decides to carry on with his lies and oppression, then it would be useful for you to read the book _Rogue State', which states in its introduction ... " He then goes on to quote the opening of a paragraph (which appears actually in the Foreword of the British edition only, that was later translated to Arabic), which in full reads:\n "If I were the president, I could stop terrorist attacks against the United States in a few days. Permanently. I would first apologize -- very publicly and very sincerely -- to all the widows and the orphans, the impoverished and the tortured, and all the many millions of other victims of American imperialism. I would then announce that America’s global interventions -- including the awful bombings -- have come to an end. And I would inform Israel that it is no longer the 51st state of the union but -– oddly enough -– a foreign country. I would then reduce the military budget by at least 90% and use the savings to pay reparations to the victims and repair the damage from the many American bombings and invasions. There would be more than enough money. Do you know what one year of the US military budget is equal to? One year. It’s equal to more than $20,000 per hour for every hour since Jesus Christ was born.\n"That’s what I’d do on my first three days in the White House. On the fourth day, I’d be assassinated."\nThe stunning victory of the Islamic Resistance Movement Party Hamas in the Palestinian elections underlines the central contradictions in the Bush administration's policies toward the the Islamic World. Hamas' stunning victory underlines the contradictions, hypocrisies and double-standard in Bush's Mideast policies.\nDemocracy depends not just on elections but on a rule of law, on stable institutions, on basic economic security for the population, and on checks and balances that forestall a tyranny of the majority. Elections in the absence of this key societal context can produce authoritarian regimes and abuses as easily as they can produce genuine people power. Bush is on the whole unwilling to invest sufficiently in these key institutions and practices abroad. And by either creating or failing to deal with hated foreign occupations, he has opened our minds to the fact that only militant Islamist movements that gain popularity because of their honest credentials is only the way forward.
945930
No, it sems quite right-wing to me. The posters seem to be convinced that the BBC is irredeemably liberal/leftwing and pick up on any trivial point which seems to them to support their view, without trying to consider the bias (if any) of the BBC site as a whole.
428813
The Positive roles were too numerous to list here, every thing from faith based actions to the fall of the iron curtain. About the only negative ones were from the wackoes on the extreme ends of the bell curve. This current "war against terrorists" started in the twentieth century by a right-wing (as opposed to the left-wing atheists) bunch of religious fanatics that have trashed the Koran. At the same time, the "lefties" have trashed Christmas, Halloween, Easter, the sacrament of marriage,, etc. etc.
1032463
Can't answer that, have tried to access this site but it is filtered by my works firewall!\nHas far-right implications though.
687100
I'm sure there will be several posts to suggest that the recent violence in Iraq this month, and certainly during April, are evidence of a brewing civil war in Iraq, but the reality based upon fact, is simply not there.\n\nSati al-Husri, considered the 'father of modern Iraq,' purported before his death that there would be struggles within the frame of the Iraqi State because of the religious factions existing within her borders.  This is a fundamental issue, and the West has come to recognize it all too well.  \n\nHowever, despite Iraq's cultural/religious inequity, Sati taught his children and grandchildren, that Sunni Muslims of which sect he belonged, could equally coexist with the Shi'a and Kurds. There was no conflict in his family's inner circle.  He proved that enlightened intellectual thought could countermand extremist ideology without compromising religious piety.\n\nBut although al-Husri's ideas are easy to agree with, especially from a Western point of view, they are not so easy to implement, especially in the current climate of terrorism.\n\nThe underpinning to all of the conflict in Iraq is not a brewing civil war among its Muslim factions, but rather an insurgency that cannot see the value of peace in the Middle East.  They tend to look through their extremist eyes with a 'jihadi' philosophy.  The insurgents will attempt to insight the Iraqi people into warring with each other.  This is not for the gain of the Iraqi people; it merely creates the atmosphere of unsettled violence for them. And the insurgents could care less about an Iraqi unified state either. Instead, they want their terrorist agenda to move forward...at all costs.\n\nTo that end, they will foment unrest, spatter the media with words of 'Civil War,' and create a masterful stroke of using the West against itself.  Fortunately, the Iraqi people are resolved to follow Sati al-Husri's example:  Freedom of speech and expression, freedom of religion, and freedom of commerce are the seeds to grow an independent state.  Violence and terrorism have no place in such a united country.  Democracy is the manifold weapon against al-Qa'ida and the Taliban, and the insurgents simply can't stand it.\n\nAs to the $4.00 gallon of gas, I doubt this will come to fruition, much as the media seems to hope it will.  We cannot discount those politicians who have a stake in the November elections either.  They seem to throw out this vague threat as though it were a weapon.\n\nThere is no doubt that we may come close to the mark in some sections of the country, especially over the summer months. But Americans in general will not accept this increase, and the government knows it.  So do the oil companies and our allies producing oil.  It is not in their best interests to price themselves out of the market.  There will likely be caps before the $4.00 per gallon rate is reached.  After all, once again, this is an election year.  Politicos have a reason to make sure the voters are looking at their names with favor. The first place the voter’s feel the pressure of Washington is at the pump.  You may be assured that the first place Washington will compromise is also at the pump.
848290
Bush or Osama?\nBut dear, they are financial partners.\nkiss
204255
Fools, don’t you mean Osmama bin forgotten. Bush has such close ties with Osama’s family that he will never be found. And if he is it wont really be him. Do you think we actually caught Sadamm- LOL. Right a man worth billions upon billions is hiding in a hole unshaved ungroomed and stinkin.
591151
osama's little al qaeda has helped american and british interests more than any othe party.so yeh ,this guy is no arab,he was born in arabia but was raised in the land we cal america.of course they know.
563619
Osama is there or not only God Knows.But there are many Osamas Fighting for injustice,fighting for freedom fighting for peace in the Afghanistan.The media is controlled by US.So they show everything in one or other way favouring USA.So we cannot see the ground reality.Usama alone cannot do anything.
1131816
Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi, \nthe former Taliban ambassador-at-large. \nwho is now studying at Yale, also played a cameo role in Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9-11" cleverly constructed propaganda attack against President Bush. \n\nTo be honest with you its the first time i have heard about this story. Seems to me that Yale has made a bit of a Blunder. But i dare say that he is being watched very carefully. like the old saying goes "Better the devil you, know than the devil you don't"\nAnd i would also like to think if the UK Prime Ministers son attends Yale he will have full Protection.\n\nHey crazy D. \nWho the hell made you god. that you can just insult people on this site when ever the mood takes you. Does your Mother know that you are messing about with her computer. maybe instead of being such an asshole you should take your medicine and go beddy bye's.
1033130
To Loubean: He ain't in Afghanistan, he's in Pakistan. Where were you? Watching Faux News, probably.\n\nTo bungiebabe: Since when do we care about what other countries say? We're America, dammit! So you'd stand back and let Osama strike us again just 'cause another country is hiding them and calls invasion a "no no"? But if Clinton or another so-called "socialist" put the safety of our country before the rules, you'd call him reckless. \n\nThe Cancervative Party, none for all and all for the rich! Ain't ya proud to be an American?
448161
a couple of points...\n\nA. anyone who says 9-11 is a retard... osama is in Pakistan... not Iraq... I know it's hard for you to wrap your mind around... but there is more than one country in the middle east... cite the link of 9-11 to Iraq... oh that's, right there aren't any \n\nB. See, defense contractors make a lot of money when we go to war... then if they make trillions, they give trillions to those that support the wars, like Republicans... also if we go to war in the middle east, the instablity it causes dirves up oil prices, so they make money and donnate more too... and our president may have some ties to oil as well?\n\n\nrfjanssen... simple question... why doesn't Bush do something about Osama... he's in Pakistan... he's "picked" on us? is he just a pansy?
47895
The CIA claims it is Osama.\n\nAnd it's a big world out there. It's not like he's staying in a Motel 6 somewhere.