> It's difficult - to be fair, I think there's some reasonable chance > that bin > Laden's messages include coded instructions - this sort of thing was > common > in WWII and Laden is a student of history as well as a pretty good > tactician. To be honest, I was afraid someone would mention this "explanation" which was given by the White House. However, I don't understand it: why should there be a "coded instruction"??? I mean, Bin Laden's statements are not coded (depending if you consider the Arabic language to be a strange encryption ;-) and he's publicly saying "you will not be safe until the Palestinians feel safe and until you leave the country(ies) of the Muslims". Bush is saying exactly the same thing from his point of view "Bin Laden and Al Qaeda and all "terrorists" are not safe and we'll come after you". I mean, both parties are publicly saying they'll "get eachother". Imo there's no need for extra coded messages: all seems to be in it: mobilize and go for it. So imo claiming there might be coded messages in it, is a lame excuse. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not familiar with these "coded messages" so if something else is meant, pleas explain. -- Joeri Vankeirsbilck joeri@... Belway Productions - http://www.belway.com List-admin Logic-users/SoundD*ver-users/Logic-TDM
Message
Re: [L-OT] protecting freedom?
2001-10-12 by Joeri Vankeirsbilck
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.