> >From what I've read, Al Quaeda wants Bush to win, because a
>continuation of this administration will further ostracize the world
>from the US. But this bit about Khan, isn't this the "mole" that was
>outed by the US government?
>
>http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2696327&l=49794
>
>I am always suspect of any source info coming out of the Washington
>Times, even when they hit a homerun.
I agree:
"Four days later, the Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades, a group claiming affiliation with Al Qaeda, sent a bombastic message to the London newspaper Al-Quds al-Arabi, avowing responsibility for the train bombings. "Whose turn will it be next?" the authors taunt. "Is it Japan, America, Italy, Britain, Saudi Arabia, or Australia?" The message also addressed the speculation that the terrorists would try to replicate their political success in Spain by disrupting the November U.S. elections. "We are very keen that Bush does not lose the upcoming elections," the authors write. Bush's "idiocy and religious fanaticism" are useful, the authors contend, for they stir the Islamic world to action."
http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/040802fa_fact
'course, you have to take this with a grain of salt, as the article indicates. Al Q can't really be considered one monolithic entity.
Kelley
"We're in a fucking stagmire."
--Little Carmine, 'The Sopranos'