...and you're just like a punchine bag without a lifeline.
the difference here is, i'm sitting with a proof copy of "journey of the jihadist: inside muslim militancy" while you're just referencing it like the asshat you are. if you want to discuss it, then come back once you've read the fucking book. that way, when i counter with a reference to gerges of my own, you won't think it's putting words in your mouth, and you might actually get the punchline.
in the meantime, this is what a lazy google search turns up from the natinal review crowd:
Quote:
http://www.nationalreview.com/commen...rris072103.asp
Militant Islam. Gerges consistently downplays the threat of militant Islam in general and Osama bin Laden in particular. One year before 9/11, he found that Osama bin Laden was "exceptionally isolated," and "preoccupied mainly with survival, not attacking American targets." He also ridiculed "exaggerated rhetoric" in Washington about the Bin Laden threat. Al Qaeda was no longer more than a "shadow of its former self," Gerges had the misfortune of writing, as bin Laden was "confined to Afghanistan, constantly on the run," and, "hemmed in by the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt." Not just that, but his "resources are depleting rapidly." Gerges drew the bizarre conclusion that the U.S. government must have its reasons for "inflating his importance." Six months before 9/11, Gerges publicly ridiculed what he called "the terror industry" — his term for specialists voicing concerns about militant Islam — for fomenting an "irrational fear of terrorism by focusing too much on far-fetched horrible scenarios."
|
Threaded Mode
