A Terrrorist’s Son Speaks Up
January 20, 2008 – 8:45 amOsama bin Laden’s son has come forward with claims that he believes he can bridge the sociocultural gap that exists between the West and radicalized Islam. Â
First off – before I get too deep here – I find it completely offsetting that he refuses to renounce his father. Not only is Osama bin Laden responsible for thousands of American deaths, but he is also inherently deranged, as he seeks to force the world to “convert or die.â€? While Osama bin Laden’s son – Omar bin Laden – has patrimonial ties to this madman, I cannot see how renunciation is anything but a given. Â
They may not be terrorists, but sympathizers don’t fare much better on the morality scale.   Okay, so let me get this straight: Building a lasting peace between fascists is predicated upon the ability to change the Western mind? I see no mention of the radicalized Arab mind. What about those pesky terrorists who are itching so rampantly to participate in jihad – those men who would love nothing more than to give their lives so that they can spend eternity with a hateful god who supports death and destruction? And let’s not forget the virgins they’ll be offered for their sacrifices. It is utterly appalling and offensive that Omar bin Laden would claim that the West needs to change without even mentioning the need for readjustments to the hearts and minds of Islamists.Â
And that’s not all. Omar’s 52-year-old wife weighs in as well:Â
Negotiator? Changing the Western mind? Are you kidding me? What exactly are we negotiating? I’m wondering what these changes entail. After all, America is a nation where one can practice any religion – including Islam – without penalty. America is not structurally perfected, but when it comes to freedom and prosperity – we’re as good as it gets. So, what is it that they want us to do to accommodate their radicalism? Furthermore, it is in America’s – and the West as a whole’s – worst interests to simply negotiate with a group of people that holds no regard for human life.Â
Omar bin Laden claims that he was trained at an al Qaeda training camp in 2000, but that he decided he wanted to take a different route, so he left. Both he and his wife alluded to the fact that Osama bin Laden did not object to this change of heart.
But here is the most telling part of the AP story:Â
Right, but 90% of the Islamic world doesn’t subscribe to the radicalized thoughts and perceptions of the Islamists, so who is bin Laden truly protecting in his twisted mind – certainly not the thousands of innocent women and children who have been placed on the front lines to support his “cause.â€?  Omar proves – through his words alone – that he doesn’t really get the issues at hand entirely. Â
“My father thinks he will be good for defending the Arab people and stop anyone from hurting the Arab or Muslim people any place in the world.� – Omar bin Laden
Ironically, radical Islamic fascists have a knack for hurting their own people, so for bin Laden to truly fill the role his son claims he has so “valiantly� sought to fulfill, Osama would need to destroy his fellow terrorists (since he’s such a “defender� of the Arabs). Anyway, Omar and his wife are planning a bizarre horseback, peacekeeping mission throughout Africa. No matter what his fodder, his tone is that of blame and American surrender. Not only is it unfortunate, but also it’s disgusting to even consider. I’m sure the American left will love this one – although I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt – that is, until the comments start rolling in.

One Response to “A Terrrorist’s Son Speaks Up”
You meant to say alluded here: “Both he and his wife eluded”.
Why Billy, how kind of you to bestow your beneficence on us, the left, but how cruel of you to snatch it away before you read what we commenters have to say.
At least this rant is intelligible, a quality lacking in your previous ones.
First, you’re off base with your implication that all Islamic terrorists, or even all members of Al Quaeda, are Arabs.
In your last missive, you lectured us rather incoherently on “…a very important component of this war: The winning over of the hearts and minds of radical Islamic fascists.”
But here, you sneer, “Changing the Western mind? Are you kidding me?”
So right off the bat you establish your ‘diplomatic’ stance vis–à –vis “radical Islamic
fascists”.
If you truly want to win them over (to what, isn’t clear– surely not the politics of torture embraced by George W.?), you will have to approach these Jihadist warriors in diplomatic mode.
I’m sure that calling them fascists and telling them that they worship “…a hateful god who supports death and destruction…” will accomplish that admirably.
Since you show such aptitude for the subtle and nuanced arts of diplomacy, you should have got a job with our Department of State.
Or even better, since you have such penetrating insight into father-son relationships, perhaps you should have gone into global private equity investment.
If you’d had a job with the Carlyle Group on 9/10/2001, you might have been there when George H.W. Bush was rubbing shoulders with Osama’s brother.
Might as well keep it all in the family, eh?
By Vince Williams on Jan 20, 2008