Is Osama a fan of left-wing blogs?

That's not limited to left, right, or even extremists. That happens anytime people are trying to gain an edge or advantage over someone else.

It happens running for PTA head, church offices, team captains, national politics, and international politics and war.

When it comes to the Islamofascists I don't think the traditional left to right spectrum we are used to in the West applies directly.

Probably not, not even sure when you apply left to right spectrum for the entire world it applies. But left does meet right when you go far enough to reach totalitarism, and it really doesn't matter that much how you got there then.

IMO.


Roger

click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

That's not what I'm saying. He's playing the left wing because they suit his purposes.

I'm not saying the lefties have the same ideology as he does; only that their wishes and desires coincide on certain points, vis-a-vis the West and the war on terrorism. As Gore Vidal said, ''the war on terror is like the war on dandruff.'' It suits al Qaida's purposes to have folks not committed to fighting them or who don't see them as a threat.

When it comes to the Islamofascists I don't think the traditional left to right spectrum we are used to in the West applies directly.

He's even more neo-con than the current administration, if possible.

Focus on a children's book, but ignore the essential thrust of the article. You have to admit he has a good point.

Happen to notice those "jihadists " in the recent lefty demonstrations? Who is on whose side?

But this writer obviously wasn't concerned with facts anyway, so I guess it doesn't matter.

by ONE WORD!!!!

Jeez! You gotta do better than that to dispute the premise of what he is saying!

.....to Michael Moore. He has done no such thing.

No, just a coincidence that they BOTH use the same rhetoric.

How about the OTHER references that you conveniently ignore? There's no doubt that Osama knows the western media and is using it to influence the West. And he's using the arguments of the left to appeal to the left.

That's the point of the article. Osama knows what the weakest link of the West is-- liberals.

Shrug, while I often disagre with Josh's viewpoints, I fail to see how More and Osama both using rhetoric that probably was copied by both of them from another source proves collusion.

Heck, the enemy of my enemy rule can even account for phraselogy coincidences.


Roger

click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

see my other post above.

If you're going to opine on something, shouldn't you have your facts straight? If he'd actually seen Fahrenheit 9/11 he'd know where that footage appears.

The basic premise of the article is solid. You can nitpick at the tiniest details all you want.

I saw it once, which is clearly one more time than this writer saw it.

That's not important (if you're right, which I doubt). What's important is that Osamsa is using the nonsesnse of the left to try to affect the way we act. He's found a natural, if unintended ally in liberals.

Do you really think Osama bin Laden is going to affect the way we act, regardless of who he references or quotes?

Fahrenheit 9/11 opens with footage from the 2000 elections and the Florida business. It doesn't even get to 9/11 until at least 15 minutes into the film, maybe later (it's been awhile since I saw it).

The larger point is that bin Laden did not reference Michael Moore as the writer suggested. He referenced some news footage that had been in circulation for some time before Michael Moore ever put it in his film.

that Osama sense the weakness of the West is its left wing. Of course he believes that what he says may affect what we do. And look, the nonsense from the left IS having an effect, which just happens to be the effect Osama desires.

Focussing on silly minutiae is ridiculous, Josh. Who gives a crap whether he saw Farenheit 9/11 ever, once or over and over. Who knows? He may own the DVD. IT DOESN'T MATTER!!!!!!!

The article's point is correct and undeniable.Enough already.

There ya go!

Now, you just have to decide who's definition of minutiae you will use.

Since it's your decision, I'm guessing you'll use your's

....why did the writer have to make stuff up in order to illustrate his point? Weren't there enough facts to back it up?

he got a few insignificant details wrong. Surely you understand that.

If his point is wrong, why don't you argue against THAT?

...that bin Laden has been making references to Michael Moore. He has not.

but it's become annoying. If you can't address the real issue instead of focussing on meaningless details, there's nothing more to say.

.....about "the Left" with at least one false statement. In fact, if you read his article he even basically admits it's a false statement.

So, to paraphrase him, "bin Laden is appealing to the Left, as evidenced by his making references to Michael Moore. OK, well not exactly."

is using the rhetoric, sources, literature, etc. of the current left. You can't squirm away from it with this silly nonsense.

Your objections are trivial in the extreme. Just be honest and admit it.