A surprising number are criticizing Obama’s decision to close Guantanamo

    Specifically being mentioned is Jamal al-Badawi, a former Yemen prisoner now being reportedly an al Qaeda leader. There is more to this story than meets the eye. He was never in Guantanamo, and was turned over to Yemen to face a death sentence, but escaped. Later Yemen made a plea bargain with some of al Qaeda to leave Yemen alone. As part of the deal he turned himself in and was subsequently released,
    When Obama announced the closing of Guantanamo January 22, 2009 and signed the executive order the next day, al Qaeda sent around an internet tape that Jamal al-Badawi was now becoming a top al Qaeda leader in Yemen. This made some have second thoughts about the wisdom of closing Guantanamo. No one seems to ask whether al Qaeda might prefers Guantanamo prison stay put, for propaganda purposes of portraying Uncle Sam as a bogeyman.

    Many revolutionary organizations demand good treatment of their captives, or capture hostages to be used as a bargaining chip for their release. Not Al Qaeda.

    When you talk of suspicions timing, most people only think of the Madrid commuter train bombing that vastly changed a Spanish election vote, and bin Laden on the internet goating President Bush for continuing reading the little goat to school kids right after the Twin Towers were attacked on 9/11, which increased Bush’s support among some angry Americans, that along with election irregularities helped Bush win in 2004.

    There has been other strange coincidences that are rarely noted. Republican Senate Leader Bill Frist was in charge of reviewing the additional Abu Ghraib photos Congress privately viewed. He was making a grim televised report and was going to call for bipartisan detention reform, but he never finished. He was cut off the air by news bulletin about al Qaeda posting Nick Berg being beheaded,

    Iraq held an election in 2005, bin Laden on the Internet demanded that Iraqi’s not vote. The vote in non Sunni areas was large and this was cheered as a little victory against al Qaeda. However in Afghanistan election workers quietly tend to disappear in the night where this cut down of people willing to vote in a significant way. Before bin Laden went on the Internet, there was a lot of antiwar organizing around the theme that the war in Iraq had nothing to do with fighting terror. After bin Laden made his demand, organizing around that theme slowed considerable.

    Right before the start of the Iraq War there were huge antiwar protests in Britain,
    I and a friend were watching live coverage of a huge British protest on TV with awe. Suddenly it was cut off the air by a news bulletin of a terror attack in Turkey,

    When the protest went back on the TV screen, my friend blurted out under his breath, “Why don’t they protest that”, meaning the terror attack. The peace movement was growing fast perhaps if the attack hadn’t occurred at that moment Britain might have hesitated and perhaps lead the to the US hesitating as well. Tom Fox a Quaker went to Iraq to declare peace. Instead of being cheered like Jane Fonda was during Vietnam, he was beheaded. Doctors Without Border’s physicians being beheaded in Afghanistan also cooled the antiwar movement, the opposite of what North Vietnam’s cheering the antiwar movement of accomplished. PS you won’t get different flavor of the periods I discussed without checking out the links.

    We forget that the Twin Towers was considered the financial capital of the world, bin Laden hoping to wound the US economy more than it did. In one attack in Britain, al Qaeda overplayed its hand relying on only doctors to conduct it. Cryptically warning three months earlier that “those who heal you will kill you”. Germany was crying because foreign super-skilled workers couldn’t work in Germany because of immigration laws. If the doctor’s attack had worked, many skilled scientists and others would have been sent home out of both Britain and the US which would be hard on the economy. Many years ago the peace movement dwelt on how incredibly expensive war and the military budget is. Today the war and the economic teetering is discussed as two separate issues, despite the fact that drone airplane and backup gear to prevent pilots from being killed costs millions dollars a piece.

    Whether or not they are correct, I believe that the bin Laden wing of al Qaeda believes that the total collapse of the dollar into junk currency would mean unconditional victory of their part. Al Qaeda is probably mistaken. When the US decided is wouldn’t play police against piracy, India took over. If the US were in collapse, China and Russia, unless they collapsed as well, wouldn’t let al Qaeda inherent Pakistani nukes.

    Bush and bin Laden both preferred to fight in Iraq rather than here in the US or in Pakistan. But al Qaeda being cornered and isolated by Obama surely will make al Qaeda want to attack. Though perhaps there are sleeper-cells hair triggered to go off just as soon as massive US troops go into Pakistan and they will patiently wait no matter how long it takes.

    RichardKanePA@aol.com, Google RichardKanePA

    Comments are closed.