TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Al Qaeda wants a TRUCE
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Al Qaeda wants a TRUCE

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,182153,00.html


Al Jazeera has a new audio saying attacks are coming by them within the U.S. and then say they want a truce.

I think we got 'em running scared.
post #2 of 20
Yeah right! They want a truce so we let our guard down so that they can give us another black eye. The only problem is, we arent that stupid. They are not going to disband... there will be now truce.
post #3 of 20
Pffftttt i wouldn't trust them as far as i could throw them!
post #4 of 20
Man, these people are really idiots. Threaten us, say that there will be more attacks, and then say "truce" in the same breath. Gimme a break!
post #5 of 20
No truce. Let's continue after them!!!!
post #6 of 20
Playing devils advocate...

I'm really wondering if we hit them hard on that last missile strike in Pakistan and he lost a few high members... maybe including #2. Now he maybe running scared since he knows that they maybe tracking him and the rest of the organization...

Something to think about... Remember, this is the same man that said he would never offer a truce to the Zionists...

I'm wondering also if this has anything to do with Iran and with the EU3 backing up the US.
post #7 of 20
no deals with the devil. They started this fight. we'll end it
post #8 of 20
I'd never trust them again...it's too costly a mistake if we are wrong.
post #9 of 20
Hmm...I say no
post #10 of 20
It's interesting that Faux left out the negative stuff said about Bush on the tape. This al Jazeera article explains the "truce offer" much better:
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...1A9678D922.htm
post #11 of 20
OK, great, so Bin Laden was bashing Bush too. Does that lend credence to him? No, of course not. Of course he hates Bush - he would have hated Clinton if he would have done something about Al Qaeda back then.

I don't understand how this message is any kind of logical, or why they might think we would agree. He starts out saying that they WILL attack the US, it's in the planning and there's nothing we can do to stop it. And then say that we should just agree to a truce to rebuild two countries over there where he is hiding. But they are still going to attack us. So what exactly is the offer? You guys leave our back yard, but we're still going to attack you. Sound fair?
post #12 of 20
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat
It's interesting that Faux left out the negative stuff said about Bush on the tape. This al Jazeera article explains the "truce offer" much better:
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...1A9678D922.htm
The article I read earlier on CNN didn't have anything about the truce offer in the article at all. Go figure. I don't think Fox had to print all the Bush hating rhetoric to get the point across.

As far as I am concerned Al Jazeera is nothing but a tool for the terrorists, pure and simple. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if AL Jazeera is owned by Al Qaeda.
post #13 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv
As far as I am concerned Al Jazeera is nothing but a tool for the terrorists, pure and simple. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if AL Jazeera is owned by Al Qaeda.
It's interesting to check out how they're reporting certain events, though, and they're the source for the other news services on this story. Of course, the Arabic story may have contained a lot more info, and I'd love to know if it has a different "twist". I suppose the Arabic site is pretty closely monitored by intelligence services the world over.
post #14 of 20
Thread Starter 
You are correct I am sure. They are under closer strict constraints.

The media ALL spins it anyway. It is so hard for a person to know what is really true.
post #15 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv
The media ALL spins it anyway. It is so hard for a person to know what is really true.
I very rarely weigh in on this topic and I'm sorry to hijack this thread... but I feel compelled to point out that journalists have a job. That is to report the news fairly and accurately. Yes, they make mistakes (Judith Miller and her fiasco in reporting WMD comes to mind) but they are human (how many of your co-workers never make mistakes?) and the deadlines and obstructions they face within the government make it difficult to obtain ALL the information needed to present the entire picture at once. Ask your local city council reporter. Hence, follow-up stories.

A print journalist myself, I am bothered by the waning faith the public has in their newsources. Every journalist I've worked with has a strong commitment to discovering the truth and reporting it fairly and accurately. Unfortunately, we are also the only profession to air our dirty laundry when someone does stray (which goes hand in hand with our commitment to telling the truth!) and that situation causes the public to distrust us more each time.

If you distrust "spun" news, you can thank your governments, big corporations and anyone else who has something to hide that should be reported.

Again, sorry to hijack. I felt it was a comment that needed to be made and I'd be happy to discuss this topic in its own thread.
post #16 of 20
No way do i trust them
post #17 of 20
I think Bin Laden's been reading the 'Terrorist's Manual' (okay, I did just make that up...but) and has got to the bit where it says 'today's terrorist is tomorrow's political leader'. Look what happened to IRA/Sinn Fein. Maybe it's true that he's getting a bit windy about his future - well, who cares? After what he's done I think he'll be lucky to reach old age.
post #18 of 20
Thread Starter 
I do NOT blame my mistrust on the media on the Government.
Dan Rather comes to mind.
They spin it whichever way they feel like to fit their agenda IMO.

In days past journalist were, for the most part, honorable but I don't feel that anymore. This all just MO.
post #19 of 20
It does all seem a bit suss as much as I would like to jump through hoops waving my arms and shouting `peace at last!!'. Perhaps if a `truce' is to be reached there needs to be a little proof of trustworthiness to begin with? It's pretty hard to just say `let's be friends' after everything that has happened, and expect the olive branch to be extended.

If there are genuine offers of peace in the making, I am all for it, but we have lost trust, and gained fear, and it will take a lot more than words to repair that, unfortunately.
post #20 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbw999
no deals with the devil. They started this fight. we'll end it
I agree. It is too late to be trying the truce card.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Al Qaeda wants a TRUCE