13 Responses to “al Qaeda Releases Message for Obama”

1. J. Harden Says:
   November 19th, 2008 at 11:00 am

   Al Qaeda should know this kind of thing will have NO effect on President Obama. It is the same kind of racial politics he was forced to sit through Sunday mornings at Trinity United Church of Christ. In fact, I’m pretty sure that being a “house-negro” is the same as chasing “middleclassness.” Obama is no stranger to this kind of hard-edge racial politics — Al Qaeda would be wise to recognize that S. Chicago is to racial politics what the Torra Borra is to terrorists. Bring it….

2. BlueInAz Says:
   November 19th, 2008 at 11:13 am

   The message would be the same no matter who the incoming president is. Different insults perhaps. People who live in hate see and speak only hate.
   Fear tactics WILL NOT work under an Obama admin. I am happy that we will have a leader that is willing to talk with world leaders and rebuild our aliances. Strength in numbers.

   As far as the guy in the video…
   Shave and a hair cut, two bits!

3. whatthe? Says:
   November 19th, 2008 at 11:24 am

   Tell that al Qaeda doctor that my family and I will not use his services in the future and I recommend people to boycott this doctor’s services….if that sounds rediculous, it’s basically tit-for-tat, if you follow me. bwaaaahahaha!!!

4. kranky kritter Says:
   November 19th, 2008 at 11:36 am

   Honestly JH, there really isn’t and shouldn’t be anything al quaeda could say that we should let drive our foreign policy. Unless it’s “we give up.”

   Outside of that, nothing they say should have any affect on Obama. Fact is, al quaeda and other terrorist groups practicing 4th generation warfare (read the sling and the stone) are just playing a propagandistic PR game. The things they say are almost always geared towards fostering ongoing support from the muslim general public.

   This was said because Al Quaeda wishes to make it clear that they stand ready to keep fighting against the infidels. That’s the only useful counter they can make in response to Obama’s change mantra, which is to declare that for muslims in the middle east, NOTHING has changed.

   Only fools could have ever thought that Al Quaeda would respond to the election of a new president by baking brownies and promising to change their wicked ways.

   Here’s the thing: If and when the United States draws down its presence in Iraq and/or Afghanistan (regardless of who is sitting in the oval office), Al Quaeda will declare victory against us as proof of concept, and describe a revised version of the enemy. Count on it. You can set your watch by it.

   This really does not need to be understood in the context of Obama, his background, or the nature of the chosen words. The most useful context to understand them in is the context of the practice of 4th generation warfare.

5. Well Well well... Says:
   November 19th, 2008 at 11:42 am

   This makes me really happy, actually. If Al Qaeda is pissed at Prez Obama, he must be on the right side of the fence. I guess this shuts up all the racist folk claiming he was Muslim and whatnot, huh? (Hooray!)

6. Pineapple1 Says:
   November 19th, 2008 at 11:58 am

   It amazes me how our press continues to go above and beyond to find everything negative to report in relation to Obama. I am sure most of the American people are sick and tired of this negative commentary. Let’s find some constructive items to discuss such as rebuilding this economy. Enough of this negative reporting. It does not, and will not help our economy.

7. MarMar Says:
   November 19th, 2008 at 12:08 pm

   this man is a hypocrite. talking about “judge an you shall e judged.” interesting how these old morrons can convince so many young people to kill themselves. true we like oil, but we REALLY dont like violence. the more of these petty attacks we see, the longer we will stay. just policy, not one I agree with.

8. a Says:
   November 19th, 2008 at 12:13 pm

   These terrorist groups are a bunch of hiding cowards!!

9. George Mauer Says:
   November 19th, 2008 at 12:33 pm

   Want an explanation? Here it is:
   Al-Zawahiri used to be intelligent and relevant. After years of torture at the hands of the Egyptian military, on the run, in war, and just plain growing old, he’s grown just a tad crazy.

   He was for a time provocative and made enough interesting points to rally people to his cause however despicable. Now he’s the crotchety uncle who you shouldn’t take seriously anything he says.

   Explanation completed.

10. J. Harden Says:
    November 19th, 2008 at 12:34 pm

    Honestly JH, there really isn’t and shouldn’t be anything al quaeda could say that we should let drive our foreign policy. Unless it’s “we give up.”

    Agreed and I don’t think anything in my comment suggested any different. But let’s not be naive about the tactical intelligence of radical Islam — which thrives on a racial disharmony/mistrust/hatred to advance its radical agenda — very much like Trinity United Church of Christ.

    This really does not need to be understood in the context of Obama, his background, or the nature of the chosen words. The most useful context to understand them in is the context of the practice of 4th generation warfare.

    Well, what I found of 4th generation warfare is the following, Krank:

    Fourth generation warfare (4GW) is combat characterized by a blurring of the lines between war and politics, soldier and civilian, peace and conflict, battlefield and safety. The military doctrine was first defined in 1989 by a team of American analysts, including William S. Lind, used to describe warfare’s return to a decentralized form. In terms of generational modern warfare, the fourth generation signifies the nation states’ loss of their monopoly on combat forces, returning in a sense to the uncontrolled combat of pre-modern times. The simplest definition includes any war in which one of the major participants is not a state but rather a violent ideological network. While this term is similar to terrorism and asymmetric warfare, it is much narrower. Classical examples, such as the slave uprising under Spartacus or the assassination of Julius Caesar by the Roman senate, predate the modern concept of warfare and are examples of the type of combat modern warfare sought to eliminate. As such, fourth generation warfare uses classical tactics—tactics deemed unacceptable by the preceding generations—to weaken the advantaged opponent’s will to win.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_generation_warfare

    Using that definition to “understand them in…the context of the practice of 4th generation warfare” it is in fact necessary to understand it in “the context of Obama, his background, or the nature of the chosen words.” You can’t remove 4th generation tactical warfare from the histories & personalities of the combatants on both sides of the conflict.

    By the way, Krank: “The most useful context to understand them in is the context of the practice of 4th generation warfare.” Am I to assume that the same is to be said of the Weather Underground and Bill Ayers? Is it propaganda, yes, of course, but do they mean every word of it: Yes, they do.

11. kranky kritter Says:
    November 19th, 2008 at 2:21 pm

    Using that definition to “understand them in…the context of the practice of 4th generation warfare” it is in fact necessary to understand it in “the context of Obama, his background, or the nature of the chosen words.” You can’t remove 4th generation tactical warfare from the histories & personalities of the combatants on both sides of the conflict.

    I am not sure how much sense it makes to discuss this in terms of an abstract argument about how much context matters. You can always argue that context always matters in a political battle. But that is really only relevant here insofar as your goal is to win an argument and not to better understand what Al Quaeda is trying to achieve with these statements.

    The thing I am driving at here is that from the PoV of Al Quaeda, what matters is that America is still America the infidel. The name and even the policies of our President are minor details. In a sense, you seemed to me to be suggesting that the excerpted quoted was “about” Obama. Now the subject of the statement is Obama. But the goal they are trying to achieve via this statement really has nothing to do with who Obama is personally.

    If you read more about 4GW as practiced, you find out a lot about what types of specific goals are emphasized and how they find ways to win. As I said before, the real message behind this statement was not a message for Americans, but for muslims. And the message is that for muslims nothing has changed. Obama is merely the newest tool of the infidels, who wish to continue their dominance and oppression over the muslim world.

    Al quaeda does NOT want muslims to share in any sense of renewed hope for a fair and brokered solution to middle east strife. They would not want this regardless of who our new President was. Don’t be distracted simply because he called Obama a house NI66A. That Obama is black and from Chicago really aren’t important to how America faces Al Quaeda.

    Al Quaeda (and Ahmadinejad of Iraq, and others) will try to find ways to spin our feelings about Obama to their advantage. This is why we must be careful about taking their statements at face value. Instead of reacting to what they say, we have to think carefully about what they are trying to get us to do by making a given statement. If anything, that really sums it up. Set aside the content of any statement, and ask what they are trying to get us to do by making that statement, whether it is simply to react angrily, or to think ill of potential allies, or to increase sympathy, or whatever.

12. blackoutyears Says:
    November 19th, 2008 at 4:38 pm

    Ah, yes. I’ve been waiting for a trenchant discussion of how Obama’s church equals al-Qaeda. Nice to know we’re still cranking out perspective and common sense on the right.

13. Sound Doc Says:
    November 21st, 2008 at 6:55 pm

    Doing a double-take, I am puzzled as to why this flea, Ayman al-Zawahiri,

    thinks his opinion means diddly-squat to anyone in the west.

    Someone in his lifetime must have lied to him and told him he is special.

Leave a Reply

Related Posts:

• What is This “Al Qaeda?”
• Stay The Course
• Al Qaeda’s 2nd-In-Command Dead?
• Who Do You Trust? Apparently Not Romney.
• Pakistan Releases Terrorists.
• McCain and Obama Begin the Iraq Debate
• Ruh-roh
• Maybe It was the Same Guy
• Michael Ware: Don’t Pull Out Of Iraq
• Bush: al Qaeda Wasn’t In Iraq Before War? So What?