Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Taro who wrote (217766)	2/6/2005 8:16:07 AM
From: Taro	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1570988

Marking Down Bin Laden By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN Published: February 6, 2005 few weeks ago it was reported that the Bush administration was considering doubling the reward for the capture of Osama bin Laden from $25 million to $50 million. I totally agree with readjusting the reward for bin Laden's capture, I just think the Bush team has the number totally wrong. The U.S. should announce that it is lowering the reward for bin Laden from $25 million to one penny, along with an autographed picture of George W. Bush. At the same time, it should reduce the $25 million reward for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the chief terrorist in Iraq, to one pistachio and an autographed picture of Dick Cheney. Don't get me wrong. Bin Laden and Zarqawi have murdered thousands of people. I want them brought in dead or alive - and preferably the former. If I thought $100 million would do it, I'd be for it. But these megarewards clearly are not working, and in many ways they are sending the totally wrong signals. First, both of these guys are obviously megalomaniacs, who think the world is just hanging on their every word and waiting for their next video. All we are doing is feeding their egos, and telling them how incredibly important they are, when we not only put a $25 million bounty on their heads, but in the case of bin Laden, double the figure. We are just enhancing their status on the Arab street as the Muslim warriors standing up to America, and only encouraging other megalomaniacs out there who might have similar fantasies to follow suit. We should be doing just the opposite - letting these two losers know that we don't think they are worth more than a penny or a pistachio. But there is an even more important issue of principle at stake. We should not be paying Iraqis or Arabs or Pakistanis to get rid of their problem. Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi are a curse on their civilization. Their capture will have meaning or real value to them, to us and to the world, only if it is done by Arabs and Muslims for the sole purpose of purging their civilization of these two cancer cells. Also, if bin Laden's or Zarqawi's own neighbors turn them in for nothing, it will have a much greater deterrent effect on others. After all, what story would you rather read after bin Laden's capture? "Osama bin Laden was apprehended this morning after villagers turned him in to local police. The villagers collected the $50 million reward and then fled their country in ski masks, not wanting anyone to know their identities." Or, "Osama bin Laden was captured this morning after villagers tipped off local police. One of the villagers, Ahmed Mohammed Ahmed, told reporters: 'This man sullied the name of Islam, a religion of mercy and compassion. There is a special place in hell for him. I will dance on his grave.' " What I would do with the $75 million we have budgeted as rewards for bin Laden and Zarqawi is use it instead to sponsor an essay contest for high school students in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Syria and Egypt. The contest entry form would say the following: "In 2,000 words, write an essay on one of these two topics: 1. Why do you believe the Arab-Muslim world is fully capable of achieving democratic, representative government and how do you envisage it coming about through peaceful changes inside your country, without any American or other outside help. 2. Write an essay about the lives of any of the great medieval Arab or Muslim mathematicians, scientists or philosophers and how their innovations helped to shape our world today." The winners would be awarded visas and four-year scholarships to any accredited university in America to which they could gain acceptance. The winning essays would be posted on the Web in English, Arabic, Urdu, Farsi and French. What do you think would make America more secure? Rewarding one person for turning in bin Laden or putting thousands of young Arabs and Muslims through American schools? Maybe we could even call them the "Bin Laden Scholars." I sort of like the idea of bin Laden sitting in a dark cave somewhere, composing his latest nutty video message, and suddenly learning that all the reward money we were devoting to killing him will go instead to killing his ideas - and to bringing young Arabs and Muslims closer to America rather than pushing them farther away. I know the 9/11 families want justice and closure when it comes to bin Laden. So do I, and I can't think of any better punishment than having him turned in one day by one of his neighbors in return for a penny or a pistachio.

To: Taro who wrote (217766)	2/6/2005 12:53:51 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1570988

For me and probably everybody else that would be fine. When speaking of anti-semitism the no confusion should be possible but when I always had a problem when people say Semites and only mean the Jewish sub-group of them. Don't forget how all you liberals attacked MM for using Muslims, when in his context it was quite clear to anybody honest to himself and the thread that he meant FIs only. I don't agree. Its not common to use the term Muslim and mean only the fundamentalist Muslims. It is common to use the word anti Semitism and mean only the Semites who are Jewish. Until his clarification, I believed MM meant all Muslims........and honestly, I think he did. I think only recently has he rethought his position and decided he means only fundamentalist Muslims and not all Muslims. ted