Osama Bin Laden's 'Letter to America' Goes Viral 21 Years Later – On TikTok
rollingstone.com
rollingstone.com
Substantive discussion about Bin Laden’s motivations and his stated reasons for the attack were generally absent, and even the top line of the reasons themselves was not repeated on cable news.
It appears the majority of these young people are just discovering for the first time that there was some stated reason at all, that terrorism is political (and usually not driven by like a supra political cosmological hate).
I think it’s a useful and clarifying thing for people to learn, and the vast majority learning about this now don’t support 9/11, obviously.
Bin Laden clearly displays homophobia and antisemitism as main justifications for his terrorism in this letter. He clearly hated the freedoms allowed to individuals in liberal democracies and claimed they were the causes of their alleged degeneracy. It was rooted in ignorance and religious fundamentalism.
So I don't really know what other justifications you have found in this letter that would make you think Bin Laden had "reasons" to do what he did beyond this, he wasn't fighting for his people first, he was a religious fundamentalist, if that's not "supra political cosmological hate", what is it?
Also, if people were learning this from this viral campaign it would be good... unfortunately it seems that they are more focused on the antisemitism part in it as it relates to the current Israelo-palestinian conflict. That is why it became viral right now, context matters, and it's really not looking like a "learning" opportunity if you check the comment sections where this is shared.
>As for the first question: Why are we fighting and opposing you? The answer is very simple: (1) Because you attacked us and continue to attack us
Followed by an extensive bulleted list of material grievances, chief amongst them the US support of Israel specifically in relation to Palestine. It couldn't be clearer: he objects to US actions in the Middle East.
There were lots of liberal western countries that didn't get 9/11ed, so "he hated our freedoms" lacks explanatory power if nothing else.
Have you?
> You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator.
> [...] the Jews have taken control of your economy, through which they have then taken control of your media, and now control all aspects of your life making you their servants and achieving their aims at your expense
> We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest"
And there's more of this all over this letter. Just because he mentioned a tit-for-tat rationalization first and addresses American's actions (does it really surprises you in a "Letter to America"?), it doesn't remove the ideology behind it. It's also very ironic to see this letter brought up by leftist/progressive people as a justification for "resisting" the way Hamas does (because that is what is happening on TikTok, maybe you haven't watched the videos and read the comments). Almost none of the values they claim to care about would be left if Bin Laden or the Hamas had it their way.
> There were lots of liberal western countries that didn't get 9/11ed, so "he hated our freedoms" lacks explanatory power if nothing else.
Are you trying to rewrite history that's not even 25 years old? London, Madrid, Paris (to mention only the largest) all had sizable attacks from Al-Qaeda or their sprouts after 9/11, they don't count unless it caused above 1000 deaths or something? With their limited means (relative to the undertaking), they have managed to struck the biggest target they could on 9/11 and cause the most death and destruction in any Western democracy in a terrorist act.
> that terrorism is political (and usually not driven by like a supra political cosmological hate).
What are the motivations of US school/mass shooters? So far, the answer has been 'mental health issues', but given the relatively sudden rise in the attacks (while weapons have been available for decades), 'mental health issues' seems 'hate our freedoms'-tier.
The people who are organising the terrorist activities have political goals. The people carrying out the terrorist activities have emotional goals.
If I had to guess school shooting have increased due to:
a. increased information flows due to social media. i.e. people are inspired by the actions of others. Social media is saturated with news.
b. increased mental health issues caused by social isolation in the modern world.
It sounds odd but some people when growing up mistake attention for love. So any solicitation of attention can be thought of as a underlying desire to be loved.
The British did not “hand over” Israel — the creation of Israel was a multidecade effort on the part of Jews since Hershel published his pamphlet in the late 1800s and the first meeting of the World Zionist Congress (1890.)
In the interlude, they tried a lot of stuff including simply offering the Sultan money for Israel, but I’ll skip to the British part…
A lot of lobbying and money was involved in getting the first Jew to ever be elected to British parliament also made the governor of “British Palestine” the year they got it from the Turks (1918.)
Thus marked the start of the “first Aliyah” where Jews around the world funded the purchase of land for young Jews to come and create Kibbutzes (self sustaining communities.)
Look up what they got up to in one of the first and largest Kibbutzes (manufacturing a lot of guns n ammo.) It’s a museum you can even tour today.
As Sun Tzu says, the pinnacle of war is to win without fighting and I see that so many people don’t really know about the creation of Israel, even though it is one of the most impressive feats of conquest (by Sun Tzus metric.)
If your comment was a reply to the parent of the parent it makes more sense in my mind.
If anyone else was taken aback by this, Disraeli and a couple before him had to take an oath affirming their Christianity before being seated and are bureaucratically regarded as converted. Although the first openly Jewish member to take his seat was Lionel de Rothschild in 1858, who was not Herbert Samuel, the person being referred to. Samuel was the first Jew to serve as cabinet minister and to lead a major party, though.
1896 - Herzl's pamphlet to Rotschilds[1] calling for an Israeli state in either Palestine or Argentina
1897 - First Zionist Congress calling for establishing a Jewish state in Palestine
1917 - British sign Balfour declaration in a letter to Rotschild promising a jewish state in Palestine [2]
1918 - British defeat ottomans and drive them out of the Levant with help of Arab partisans promising them an Arab State. The arabs were betrayed.[3]
So barely 20 years between First Pamplet and Congress and the Balfour declaration. Also note that British had already promised Palestine to the Jews before it even came to their possession.
I would add that in 1914 the population was 94% arab. By 1948 after the British flooded in Jewish migrants mainly from Europe and the Americas, the population became about ~65% + arab and 35+ Jewish. And the just-formed UN (mostly controlled by Western countries and their friends) handed over 60% of the land to the Jews with Palestine split into 2.
So for all intents and purposes "British handed over Palestine to Israel" seems to be an accurate summary.
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Judenstaat
[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration
[3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMahon%E2%80%93Hussein_Corres...
Note that this was occuring at the same time that zionist militants [1] (self proclaimed terrorists who would later become part of the IDF) were fighting the british authorities and even trying to align themselves with the Nazis.
Also worth mentioning that the zionists could never have defeated the Ottomans themselves.
I guess it comes down to what you consider "handed over".
Was there a concerted effort to create a state? Yes.
Did the British help them achieve this aim? Yes.
Here is an archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20230103153645/https://www.thegu...
For the even more curious, here is a bonus link containing material recovered from Bin Laden's compound: https://www.cia.gov/library/abbottabad-compound/index.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4W_P_Yxhnt0
It gives a sample of the content and the context surrounding it.
Since that is something leftists historically have always been very gullible on, eating up anything labeled "anti-imperialism" if it's associated with the west.
I mean for heaven sake you got leftists defending Russia in its imperialistic war against Ukraine (in fact I won't be surprised in 20 to 40 years time leftists will hail putin as a stanch anti-imperialist) and even Serbs in the Balkan wars.
Specifically because of how those wars are framed as "anti-imperialist"/influenced by us hegemony.
For instance Kyle kulinski hosting secular talk has talked about this letter as a stark "this is the real reason everyone hates us" because of the implied critic of us imperialism, back when this was all new.
Direct support would be people like hinkle.
Indirect would be people like chomsky, illhan Omar, news outlets like democracy now! and jacobin.[1]
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/07/04/us-politics-ukraine-rus...
The Guardian Deletes Osama Bin Laden's 'Letter to America'
Unfortunately, Israel and the US (principal waepons supplier to Israel) are right now making a massive demonstration of their oppression and brutalisation of Palestinians and thereby validating ObL's principal declaration.
Are you talking about US ? /s