At the five-year break, Bin LadenS 1 : World 0.
As the world approaches the anniversary of the two infamous airplanes penetrating two tower buildings, one can evaluate and examine the winners and losers of the alleged "War on Terrorism" launched momentarily after the dreaded incident. In order to do so, it must be determined: “When the attacks were planned and eventually executed, what was the objective of whoever did it?” (ALERT: This is NOT an intro to another conspiracy theory).
Does anybody in their right mind think that a (relatively) arbitrary act of violence is a feasible way to achieve any short term substantial goals? The announced objective of the cave-dwellers who claimed responsibility for the attacks covered a wide range of impossible motives and “excuses”: from sudden concern about the Palestinians and a need to avenge their martyrs (the oldest trick in the book for any radical), to a call and an act of objection towards the American presence in the land of the holy shrines of Mecca and Medina (although it seems more viable if they would have targeted the American-installed royalty presiding over the shrines), and the ultimate ridiculousness of attempting to spread Islam in the land of infidelity (sounds like a very reasonable approach!!), among other alleged motives that appear and disappear according to necessity.
Despite the fact that the incident was carried out in the name of Arabs and Muslims, it ended up causing them the most damage and harm, on so many different levels, and that is the undisputable fact after five years. Hence, the motive for such an act had to be simpler than that advertised. In his tenure as the president of the
The self-proclaimed “land of the free” and the country that once welcomed new-comers to its shores with a statue announcing: “Give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free”, has been exposed and dramatically changed on one day. When it comes to
Abu Shreek is not worried about
Some of our countries main assets were “safety and tranquility”, and that should not be surrendered to anti-terrorism laws and internal-intelligence-lead anti-terrorism units that arrest random people from the safety of their homes under the cover of darkness. The objection to such drastic measures is not an endorsement for terrorism or whoever mental-retard that chooses to support it, neither it is a sign of lack of compassion to those who lost their lives. It is just a belief that if Abu Shreek was strip-searched before entering a movie theatre or detained with “terrorist affiliation” charge based on something he said, he would feel more violated than safe.