Osama in October, what a surprise!
 

Well as expected something with Osama Bin Laden had to rear it's head before election day. According to him 9/11 was just a retributive act for the invasion of Lebanon in 1982. If you read the transcript closely, you notice Osama gives Bush credit for taking so long to respond to the attacks, even mentioning the goat book. This could be the true October surprise, if used well by Bush's opponents. This begs the question: What came first international terrorism, or the war on terror? I know it sounds strange, but if Osama is telling us in essence, the truth then 9/11 shouldn't have been a prelude to international war and in many ways we have created a situation that supports and fuels the creation of more terrorists and more terror plots. How many Osamas have we made now? All of the US's meddling and profit seeking has doomed us to a life of perpetual fear, gloom, and paranoia. I hope the greedy, power hungry elite, like the bed that they have made for everybody in this country. Like Osama said, no one is more responsible than ourselves (the public of the US). We hand over too much to our so called leaders. We need to take control of our own lives, and take control out of the government's hands. It's no longer our government, it belongs to some company somewhere, it's just a store front and place to launder the tax payer's money. How long will we be the ready hand maids of this misled, and corrupt machine?

-Walrus

Agreed on all fronts- Yet you think the above lose sleep at night? They'd be happier to saw off all of our bed-posts showing without a doubt who is BOSS. :D Assuming we all have beds in the first place.

Waiting for someone to say that Sept. 11 was really in fact Reagan's fault...

At the current rate I'd estimate forever, give or take a plus or minus eternity or two. Complacency + Apathy = Life in the US today.

I don't see anything changing except for the worse, unfortunately.

That depends on the pay and benefits......and options. :vikingsmi

September 11th was really in fact Reagan's fault.

How's that? :)

There are so many people to blame, we'd get tired of pointing our fingers after a while.

What's frightening is Bin Laden's tone. Like Bush in debates 2 and 3, he has toned down his rhetoric to appeal to moderates. If he can paint himself as the reasonable one and Bush as the strident anti-muslim crusader, he could pick up sympathizers among moderate muslims, the kind who have jobs in the establishment.

Hell, the bastard almost has MY sympathy, right now. I am so enraged over this whole fiasco. I guess Osami took Bush's comment to heart about how Bush hadn't heard from him lately and he wasn't really too concerned about Bin Laden. Nice to know that Osami cares, after all. Bush sure as hell doesn't. "Mommy, please, can I kill 5,000 people and go free? The president lets Osami do it!"

Fortunately, I don't work for the establishment. As far as I'm concerned, the "establishment" has perpetuated a far worse betrayal of the American people than Bin Laden ever did. At least Bin Laden is openly our enemy. Bush pretends to be on the American side.

You seem to be a stickler for facts and citing references, marichiko. I'm not going to get into a big pissing match with you about your liberal views of this country, of which we are on completely opposite poles, but your estimate of 5,000 deaths on 9/11 is a little high. I believe it was actually something like 2,752 , not that number's any better when you're talking about deaths. I wont even touch the part about your 'sympathy' for a terrorist because you said "almost", but you were correct in one point, it is fortunate that you don't work for the establishment.

I stand corrected, 404, that's why I'm a stickler for cites. If I don't look it up, I usually don't remember it right. For some reason, 5,000 has stuck in my mind as the number, but 2,752 is every bit as awful. :mad:

I would imagine you'd be a little confused about now Mari. After all, bin Laden has co-opted the language of your moonbat hero Michael Moore. And if anyone other than bin Laden said exactly what he said, you'd be stamping your feet up and down in orgiastic agreement.

w00t you GO boy! Tell that mean Mr. Bush! Tell it like it IS!

I doubt it was accidental, either. Rich is probably right. On the bright side, most moderates probably won't forget the things he has said and done before, no matter how reasonable he tries to act now.

I was being sarcastic when I wrote that Bin Laden almost has my sympathy. Actions really DO speak louder than words. A man who master-minded the murder of 2,752 people (thank you, 404) is hardly a moderate no matter what language he uses in an attempt to justify his actions. Throw all the rheoric aside and what do you have?

Bin Laden killed 2,752 innocent people.

Bush invades Iraq, another 1,000 plus Americans in our military die, along with 1,000's of innocent Iraqi civilians. No WMD are discovered and Bin Laden remains at large, getting a tan. Bin Laden then resurfaces on the eve of our national election to reveal himself as healthy and relaxed somewhere deep in hiding.

Bush supporters expect me to have faith in their fearful leader after this series of catastrophic events, and countless deaths to no proven end.

What I see are two men who are each responsible for the deaths of thousands of people. Bush has actually caused us more harm than our enemy did while at the same time doing no harm to Bin Laden.

Sorry that I can't feel "orgiastic agreement" over this.

Yes, we know, Bush lied, blah blah blah shut the fuck up before I put a fucking nail in my head.

One great thing about the end of the election is that I will have to put up with fewer PATHETICALLY SIMPLE interpretations of the events of the world.

I'm not saying I'm always right or have all the answers. But christ on a fucking cracker already.

Sometimes, less is more. People are sometimes too damned analytical for their own good.