The Osama Bin Laden Show
By Denise Best | Related entries in In The NewsHmmm … I wonder if Osama will be getting a % of the book sale profits for his endorsement?
Twenty-four hours after Osama bin Laden told the world that the American people should read the work of a little-known Washington historian, William Blum was still adjusting.
Blum, who at 72 is accustomed to laboring in relative left-wing obscurity, checked his emotions and pronounced himself shocked and, well, pleased.
“This is almost as good as being an Oprah book,” he said yesterday between telephone calls from the world media and bites of a bagel. “I’m glad.” Overnight, his 2000 work, “Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower,” had become an Osama book.
Now would this really be an endorsement in which to take great pride?
From Blum’s end of the conversations, you could tell the reporters were expecting him to express some kind of discomfort, remorse, maybe even shame. Blum refused to acknowledge feelings he did not have.
“I was not turned off by such an endorsement,” he informed a New York radio station. “I’m not repulsed, and I’m not going to pretend I am.” He patiently reiterated the thesis of his foreign-policy critique — that American interventions abroad create enemies.
You could almost hear the ticking of a stopwatch. These were Blum’s 15 American minutes, brought to him by a murderous zealot on the other side of the world who had named him to a kind of Terrorists Book-of-the-Month Club. The CIA duly verified the audiotape from bin Laden, and there it was: Blum had a bona fide book blurb from the evil one.
Given the sentiment expressed in his works, it shouldn’t be surprising that Blum shows no dismay in this “thumbs up,” from bin Laden.
Now Osama is going into Oprah territory with a book endorsement – could a Dr. Phil spinoff be not far behind?
This entry was posted on Saturday, January 21st, 2006 and is filed under In The News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
January 21st, 2006 at 3:13 pm
Maybe he could write a screenplay, and then hope for another 3,000 americans killed in a terrorist attack so he could get top billing at the box office. Yay!
January 21st, 2006 at 5:14 pm
Anyone want to bet that this Blum guy just got himself wiretapped? Being endorsed by OBL is bad enough, but embracing that endorsement?!? Wow. That’s Ward Churchill territory.
January 21st, 2006 at 8:22 pm
I used to write kid’s books. This is like getting an endorsement from a convicted child molester.
The author couldn’t help the endorsement and shouldn’t be blamed for it — but he should sure as hell be held responsible for accepting the endorsement.
January 22nd, 2006 at 12:14 am
Just because Bin Laden endorses a book does not mean the book is evil, or that his endorsement should be considered something to be ashamed of.
Regardless of what the Preznit says, Muslims and Al Qaeda don’t have us for our Freedom, they hate us because we continue to perpetuate a policy of global imperialism. The book is a critque on that.
I mean hell if Osama said he thought stealing was wrong would that mean we should take the opposite opinion and then also say that people who Bin Laden agrees with should feel ashamed?
January 22nd, 2006 at 12:14 am
*have=hate
January 22nd, 2006 at 10:50 am
I agree with the Disenfranchised voter about Muslims and Al Queda.
Michael & Allen: Don’t you realize that people are only motivated by chemical processes in their brains? That all conflicts are attributed to income distribution and class disparity? That morality and the free will to choose evil are mere superstitions long proven false by science? That man DOES live on bread alone and people only act violently out of frustration because they aren’t given enough bread by the capitalist pigs that hoarde it?
“Terrorism� and “Islamic Supremicism� are just racist terms used by neo-con zionist fascists (i.e. capitaliststs) so they can drum up support and conquer the worlds oil supply.
These “terroristsâ€Â? are actually the Revolution, fighting for social justice in the third world. How do I know that? Well isn’t it obvious – they are poor, exotic, and brown skinned. Bad guys can only be rich, white, or jewish. Where have you been for the past 1000 years?
January 22nd, 2006 at 10:51 am
Back me up on this Voter!!
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:47 pm
Sorry, I can’t do that Jimmy.
While I think the Muslim world and even people like Bin Laden do have legitimate cricticism’s of US policy, I do not think they are revolutionaries nor do I think their actions are jusitified.
I understand their issues with the US, and the west, but if they think the best way to go about spreading their message is by blowing up buildings and killing innocent people they are wrong and severely misguided.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:54 pm
Uh-huh.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:35 pm
Not sure what you are implying by that comment Calli, so how about you clarify what you mean by that post?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:53 pm
What issues against the U.S. do you sympathize with even though you believe their methods are misguided?
Is it that we give Billions of american’s taxpayer money in aid to Muslim countries like Egypt? or disaster relief in Pakistan or Indonesia?
or that America sheds blood and treasure to protect muslims in kuwait and Bosnia from holocaust, or Afghanistan from soviet colonization?
or that Americans buy Oil from muslim countries at prices greater than market value; in essence, the only source of income for otherwise impoverished nations?
or that Americans build military bases at the request of governments like kuwait and saudi arabia to protect them from Saddam Hussein?
or that through communications technology and globalization, ideas like democracy, equality for women, and religious pluralism are being broadcast to the muslim world from America?
I dont care if fascist terrorists don’t like what the infidel provides to muslims world-wide. They don’t like us involved in their affairs because we are kafirs; they should be ruling over us as dhimmis rather than trading with us or exchanging values and ideas with them. For every terrorist who is frustrated by U.S. foreign policy, there are 1000 more of their kin who benefit tremendously for America.
Do you think we should form our policies based on what’s best for fascist-terrorists, or for the everyday citizen of the islamic world? Or do you think the terrorists, in fact, represent all muslims so there is no difference anyway?
January 22nd, 2006 at 7:06 pm
Jimmy:
You realize some people don’t get when you’re yanking their chain, right?
January 23rd, 2006 at 12:36 pm
What’s frightening is that I thought Jimmy was serious in his first post–until I read it again and realized I was an idiot and he was being brilliantly sarcastic. Well done.
January 23rd, 2006 at 12:42 pm
I thought I had accidentally logged into DU for a few minutes there…
January 23rd, 2006 at 1:18 pm
Whats funny is that the DU or the Kos kids would probably award me a lifetime membership to “The Nation” if I posted those remarks there.
January 23rd, 2006 at 1:36 pm
Boy, I hope this really is happening:
http://www.imao.us/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/4043
That would be funny when that package came in the mail from Amazon.
January 23rd, 2006 at 2:28 pm
For some reason, the link doesn’t work.
From Frank J at http://www.imao.us
January 23rd, 2006 at 8:08 pm
Well done my ass. His post obvious tried to charaturize me as some sort of extremist and despite of Jimmy’s ridiculous implication that my thoughts were pro-terrorist, I demonstrated otherwise.
The mere fact that you people think criticism of the US foreign policy means you support terrorists shows how delusional you are.
With that said, my next post will address Jimmy’s claims that America only does good with its foreign policy.
January 23rd, 2006 at 8:24 pm
I also said their methods are wrong. I’m sick of your bullshit implication that I am a pro-terrorist.
How about the fact that the US is one of the LEAST generous nations in the world? While we probably give more than any other country, we are also the RICHEST country in the world.
Now using a real world example…let’s say a man who has 1000 dollars gives you a donation of 20 dollars. Another man who has a total of 20 dollars gives you 5. Who is more generous? Obviously the guy who gave the 5 dollars away.
We are one of the stingest nations in the world. That is a valid ciriticism.
Oh right, we did that because we wanted to protect muslims…Give me a fucking break. Just about all of our actions in the Middle East are not done for humanitarian reasons, they are done to protect our interests. Back during the Cold war it was to stop the USSR and now it is mainly oil.
How about the fact that we propted up dictators like Saddam and others in the region in order to secure our oil interests?
Excuse me? At the request of them? The vast majority of our foreign military bases are set up at OUR reuqest. Not theirs. On top of this, the request comes with “benefits” which is basically a legal bribe.
Typical bling American bias. Are you seriously suggesting that ideas such as democracy, euqality for women, and religious pluralism exist only in America?
Furthermore, how about the other side of globalization that you seem to ignore. The fact that American companies practice legal slavery in order to make a profit. Oh but lets not talk about that.
Fascist? Dude, you need to take a political science class. You are grossly misusing the term fascism. YOu obviously have no idea what fascism is all about.
And after reading I have two words for you: Fuck you.
What you need to realize is that you cannot defeat terrorism by dropping bombs on people. The only way to defeat terrorism is to erase the causes of said terrorism.
The mere fact that Al Qaeda and their ilk enjoy about 60% support across the Muslim board should show you that it’s not just the terrorists who are pissed off at us.
For centuries our policies towards the middle east have been extremely fucked up. Period. We supported vicious dictators, killers, and death squads when it supported out interests. Yet we love freedom and democracy right? Talk about hypocrisy.
There is absolutely no excuse for us to have 70 international military bases around the world. America was never intended to be an empire and people who think we should need to take a fucking look at history and get a god damn clue.
January 23rd, 2006 at 10:18 pm
Um, no. You’re mistaking effort for result. I don’t care about effort, motive, or anything of the sort. I only care about actions, because those are measurable.
The US gives more foreign aid than pretty much everyone else combined. So I really don’t care that Belgium is more generous as a matter of percentage of GDP.
Are you saying that we shouldn’t pay for the bases? Or that we shouldn’t ask for something? Also, as for who did the asking, do you have a source? (actually, does it matter? I’m not aware of any countries where we have bases and the locals want us to leave- can you name some?)
to what are you referring?
Now this is interesting – it’s a statement of opinion and preference which does not and can not have any basis in fact whatsoever: “intended to be” is not something which can be evaluated using facts. So the question is this – why does the idea that America is successful in the world, and projects American values (imperfectly, certainly…) in lots of places upset you?
January 23rd, 2006 at 10:20 pm
Sorry – I accidentally made it look like I was quoting the following block, when it’s my opinion:
Not too much oil in either Bosnia or Afghanistan, eh? That’s not to say that the US doesn’t act in its own interest – who exactly doesn’t act in their own interest? American foreign policy is far more complex than just being about oil.
January 23rd, 2006 at 11:33 pm
Of course you don’t. That’s why you are blind to the fact that it is a valid criticism that we don’t give shit compared to other nations.
Like I said, Even though the guy who had 1000 gave you a 20, the guy who gave you the 5 is much more worthy of praise and respect.
LOL! Are you serious?
Try just about every country in the Middle East. Two off the top of my head, Saudi Arabia and the UAE?
It isn’t opinion. I suggest you read the Constitution, the Founding Father’s thoughts on Empires, and specifically spreading Freedom and Democracy through military force, which they spoke against strongly, and the Oath of the military (here’s a hint, it says nothing of policing the world, it says to defend the US and the Constitution).
I agreed with the Afghan war. It wasn’t about oil, you’re right. But it definitely was about global positioning.
True. But one shouldn’t disregard other’s rights in order to act in their own interest. Which is exactly what we have repeatedly done.
It isn’t just about oil in the Middle East… But it is mainly about oil when cocerning the ME.
January 23rd, 2006 at 11:35 pm
Didn’t mean to bold that one section.
January 24th, 2006 at 9:58 am
“It isn’t opinion. I suggest you read the Constitution, the Founding Father’s thoughts on Empires”
You mean when Thomas jefferson said america was an “Empire of Liberty?” . . . look it up.
January 24th, 2006 at 8:41 pm
You call that a rebuttal?
Jimmy, do you know what it means to speak metaphorically?
That is what Jefferson was obviously doing when he said that unless you are making the claim that the US was an Empire at the time of it’s inception. You see Jefferson is talking in the present tense.
Now, if the position you wish to take is that Jefferson actually considered the US an Empire at its inception, I’d love to see you back that up with an argument…
January 25th, 2006 at 2:33 am
and by empire I mean in the literal sense.
January 25th, 2006 at 10:07 am
The Disenfranchised Voters dictionary:
Fascism: (n). 1) The free exchange of goods and services by rich, white or jewish people unrestricted by government. (see capitalism)
Empire: (n) 1) international capitalism where the wealthiest enterprises originated from a rich nation predominantly populated by white people or jews. 2) A country that colonizes others with military bases. example: Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore are colonies of the American Empire.
Islam: (n) A race of poor, exotic, brown-skinned people whos ancestral homeland is known as “Palestine”, which since 1948 was conquered by the jewish empire.
Evangelical Christianity: (n) An evil, white-supremicist ideology originating in the American empire that is bent on the destruction of all homosexuals and women’s rights. example: Prominant evangelical christians include George W. Bush, Pat Robertson, and Martin Luther King Jr.
Liberty: (n) The predominant inhibitory force against equality of man. (see fascism)
January 25th, 2006 at 7:46 pm
Jimmy–
An ignorant buffon who can’t back up his arguments. Instead he resorts to a tactic of characturizing his opponent as and extremist when they are actually a moderate. He implies they are pro-terrorist and he expouses phrases that the real poster never said in order to make his own extremist views look beign.
And Jimmy, don’t you dare lecture me about Liberty. You don’t give two shits about liberty if you strongly support this President.
January 26th, 2006 at 1:43 am
Why is it that some people (you know who you are) think they can’t get their ideas across without constantly resorting to [expletive deleted] and [expletive deleted]. Don’t they know that their audience’s reaction to weaponized words is that they’re substitutes for thought?
January 26th, 2006 at 9:24 am
Voter, How am I supposed to rebutt your arguements when you postulate around terms like “fascism” and “empire” without giving a clear definition of what those words mean? I figured I would articulate the meaning for you based on context of your positions.
Sounds like I made an accurate assumption of what your definition of empire is. I threw in the jewish thing because I can already assume you are a member of the Palestinian solidarity movement. Good news, Hamas won today!!
If I say that The U.S. shouldn’t form policy based on what fascist terrorists’ demands are, you reply by saying terrorists aren’t fascist. If I say American values are just; while good, decent people around the world benefit from American foreign policy way more than they are harmed, you say no because America is an empire. What does that mean? How about you write your own dictionary then.
January 27th, 2006 at 9:12 am
Blow it out your ass already Jimmy.
I’m not going to try to reason with someone who accuses me of being pro-terrorist.
Go Cheney Yourself.
February 1st, 2006 at 3:35 pm
View Here!!!!!!