Mistranslation in Bin Laden Tape
 

This is an interesting development. Many arab translators are stating that the word "State" in Bin Laden's tape was mistranslated or misinterpreted to "Country" in the US media.

Could it be that Osama was directly threatening states that vote for Bush?

Here are the links to the coverage:
NY Post

And the Middle East Media link:
MEMRI

Scary. I know that Bin Laden is attempting to influence and intimidate, but it's interesting that the translation softens the intent considerably. I doubt many of the major news sources will pick this up. They may after the election. I won't hold my breath.

I'm not surprised -- "terror" is the primary weapon of the "terrorist," not bombs and guns.

What's interesting about this is that it would eliminate the places where terrorism would be most effective. Sure, I guess Houston or Oklahoma City could be targeted, but it eliminates the possibility of targeting New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago - the three most populous cities. Not to mention most other major cities out there. Fo this reason I find it hard to believe, because I think Bin Laden would be aware of what he is saying in that regard. If he really said that, or was being honest in saying that, he would be ruling out pretty much every single effective target available.

Doesn't matter whether or not you vote Kerry or Bush in bin Laden's eyes, you're still an infidel.

Makes it easy for those who claim they are going to leave the country if Bush gets in again. They can just stay in or move to a blue state.

Oh, by the way, you can't trust mass murders. They are going to hit where the people are in concentration. Those are the blue states.

Also, why are the blue states, by water? Is that just where the cities are?

you're crazy secretmethod... no one would EVER think of attacking my cozy home of OKC. wait... :eek:

my favorite terrorism analyst Mansoor Ijaz (the man has connections and insight in spades) spoke about something i thought had a lot of merit...

perhaps the reason bin laden released this tape so close to the election was because he was powerless to do anything else. maybe his infrastructure has been hurt so badly that he couldn't engineer another attack in time for the election making a video appearance the most influence he could muster at this particular time. now, hopefully this is on the right track and we won't have an attack in the near future... but if we don't i think such an explanation would be plausible.

Serious miscalculation.

We are not Spaniards.

There was some other speculation about this in a couple of other stories I read....basically saying that offering "truces" and "guarantees of safety" were signs of someone who was nearly beaten.

I am not sure what to believe...I just wish they would catch the bastard.

Took the words out of my mouth.

That is a great over-simplification of the issue. Maybe the Spanish election also had something to do with 90% of the Spanish population being against the attack on Iraq from the start?

Anyway, I agree this is very unlikely to have any favoruable impact for the Democrat Party, in as far as anyone paid attention, it would probably benefit Bush.

If he doesn't care one way or the other, why would he say that? What would he have to gain?

Of course I agree that this will have no real impact. It certainly doesn't affect my opinion.

I was responding to the comment that bin Laden would have al-Qaeda attack states that voted for Bush, only. That very sentiment is absolutely insane, as SecretMethod pointed out, that takes away some of the greatest targets of opportunity for al-Qaeda. al-Qaeda and its ilk do not care about your point of view, they barely care about their own people's point of views, their only aim is to be the instrument of your destruction or conversion, nothing else.

Give me a break.
Only a far right tabloid like the NY Post could call MEMRI "respected"
For more info on this organization, look at this article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/...773258,00.html

I don't buy this "mistranslation" bit at all.
Even if you do, you would be hardpressed to make the case that Bin Laden truly wants Bush to lose. As Larry Sabato pointed out on the O'Reilly Factor, Bin Laden may be evil, but he's certainly not stupid. Bin Laden knows that if he tells us not to vote for Bush, that's exactly what we'll do. Sabato point blank said that he thinks Bin Laden wants Bush to be re-elected and I tend to agree.

In the end, though, I'm not going to try to read Bin Laden's mind and frankly I don't care. He doesn't even deserve to still be alive, much less listened to. If you let Bin Laden influence your vote either way, you're just giving in to him.

Osama for Kerry. Not a surprise :D

I don't believe this claim of mistranslation.

Suddenly we're supposed to believe Bin Laden has respect for the principles and mechanisms of Democracy?

Yeah right! :rolleyes:

The term "state" is often used to describe the entire governmental body of a country.

**TO ALL TERRORISTS, AL-QUEDA ASSOCIATES and OTHER MISFITS**

I will not be voting for George W. Bush this year. However, I am still your enemy. My vote does not condone your actions or your views. I am your enemy, and if my Commander-in-Chief (whoever that may be) or the officers appointed beneath him see fit to send me to your country and shoot you, I will do so gladly, with honor and pride. I am your enemy.

Robert Fisk, a British journalist who has interviewed Bin Laden 3 times in the past says this tape represented his vote for Bush.
Robert Fisk: "Bin Laden's Vote is For George Bush"

Right... siting DemocracyNow.org as a source... problem number 1.

going along with what irate mentioned with the OK bombing... hitting anywhere in the heartland would be much more terrifying than new york. now that 9/11's happened, people who live in cities like that know it's a risk, but what was so scary about the OK bombing was that it CAN happen anywhere, even where you least expect. doesn't matter if it's a big city or small town... the idea that it's not safe anywhere is scarier than thinking it's only not safe in NY or LA.

No, citing Robert Fisk. You can listen to the interview yourself.

I suppose that your attitude would very largely depend on where you live. It doesn't scare me very much that a small town can be targeted. When I was living in Southern Oregon, in a town pop. of 26K, I felt very safe.

Now I live back in So. California. I live in between some of the largest concentrations of military establishements and shipping ports. A nuke (from N. Korea, no less) anywhere within 60 miles of me would pretty much wipe the US off the world's economic, cultural, and political map for a good while.

No offense to NY'ers or any heartland residents, but when your region produces the bulk of the world's cultural capital, sits within the top 5 of the world's economic capital by itself, and sways its nations political poles when it heaves a progressive idea into the public discourse, tangible threat speaks to me more loudly than abstract fear.


EDIT: if it's any consolation, the smog cover should deflect some of the fallout before it blows my way ;)

I understand what you're saying but nevertheless: if Osama were nearly that simple-minded he wouldn't bother saying anything at all.

My fondness for humor relating to Thomas Moore aside...it's a cheap shot, lebell. The Government chose to intervene in an war unpopular with the people BEFORE 3/11, and attracted the attention of militants who otherwise would have chosen other targets. The public rewarded that breach of their will, and utter incompetence, by choosing new leaders who would obey the public mandate.

What a pretty way of saying they caved in to terrorists.

I presume you're talking about the Spanish government caving in to Bush's fantastical misgivings.

Read the column.

I personally do not speak arabic, but I would think that it would be pretty obvious to all who did in which sense Bin Laden was referring to a "State."

Does anyone here have any knowledge of arabic?

Also, on a side-note...Bin Laden is now planning on "Bankrupting" the biggest economy in the world.

I had to chuckle when I read this.

Somebody kill this guy, please!!!

Linky

I did read the column. The only portion which is not entirely conjecture is this:

So I have to completely disagree that it would be "pretty obvious" that Bin Laden was referring to our Electoral College, which is what he would have to be doing if the term he used truly translates into a state inside the Union as opposed to a country or nation state.

So no, I simply do not believe that Bin Laden is suddenly going to officially recognize and base his future actions upon the methodology of democracy. In fact, I think it is laughable to suggest he would.

The sad fact is there ARE Americans that will beleive this....they will NOT stop to think that right now Osama can't do anything...he's stuck hiding in his cave....He's COUNTING on the fact that if Kerry gets in some of the "pressure" so to speak will be off and he can resume his acts of terror. He KNOWS if Bush is re elected he's still fucked and will have to stay in his cave for another 4 years

Actually I think most people seem to agree that he wants Bush to be re-elected. Whatever he may be, BL is not stupid. By condemning Bush he knows that the likely reaction would be to vote for Bush and support this person that has made him afraid and forced him to hide in a cave somewhere. (which at this point i'm not so sure thats what hes doing... its all speculation)

Did he mention what would happen to those states whose electoral votes are divided? He needs to be more specific.

considering the pressure has pretty much been off since the build up to iraq, short of kerry deciding to get troops out of afghanistan looking for him, i personally can't imagine any way for the pressure to be lower than it is. do you really think kerry would do that? i hope not... it would be political suicide for him to do, and he's not that stupid. (and i dont' see him starting another war to take our attention away.)

yes, I believe he would
http://www.11alive.com/specials/loca...?storyid=53198

What does your quote regarding withdrawal of troops from Iraq have to do with Afghanistan or bin Laden for that matter?

um if you read the what was quoted it was about both troops in iraq AND afghanistan

Not only did I read the quote, I saw the speeches where the quote comes from.

You're misunderstanding what he intends to do. Kerry claims he will eventually draw down troops in Iraq and beef them up in Afghanistan where they belong.


EDIT: this debate has been going on for almost a year. Kerry supported the action in Afghanistan. The only war these two disagree on is Iraq.

obiviously since I havent seen anything saying he wants to increase troops in afghanistan Im misinformed. I am not the type of person to "intentionally" misuse anything.

I will do research and see if I find anything that says what you are saying

my bad, I didn't mean to post such an abrasive post. I edited out the barbs in my post.

Thanks hon....I'm still looking and so far cant find anything other that what is on his own site about working with NATO but Im still looking :)

The full text of bin Laden's speech can be found on this thread:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=74642

If you read the sentence right before the one in question you find:

In light of this, I think he was using State to mean country.