podpolia

Powerline links to the AP wrapup on international commentary on the bin Laden tape. Generally consistant with my analysis of it, overall. Deacon also posts an account of meeting “Michael the Black Man.” I rather tend to agree with Michael's analysis on why certain segments of the Muslim population hate America.

Well.
Tommy Franks on Tora Bora (and Kerry's being full of fecal matter).
Also, bin Laden has come out against Bush (suprise, suprise. Hat tip LGF.)
Oddly enough, these remarks sound like something Kerry would say.
…and THIS is why we do not like Ed Rendell.

The true story of one of those Iraqis we're oppressing by freeing them from a murderous tyrant.

Kerry is preparing a cabinet. From what I have seen over the past few days, the Kerry camp seems eager to use the announcements about formation of a cabinet as a bludgeon to sway legal challenges to the election, if we have a repeat of the 2000 scenario. Many Democrats see Bush's appointment of a cabinet as a move by him to essentially 'seize power' by starting to lead before everything was decided. Kerry is attempting to do the same thing.
It makes you wonder… how would a fully-formed Kerry cabinet deal with a loss? It also leads to speculation on something possibly more unnerving… what if the lawsuits aren't resolved by January 20, 2005? If Bush retained the White House, Democrats would scream that he was seizing power. It does not help that major entertainment figures and others have been saying since September 11, 2001 that “Bush is going to seize power and not give it up when he should!” The same goes with Bush stepping aside (not resigning, but simply deferring power until the election results are decided, as many people hate Cheney even more than they hate Bush. True, both could step aside and yield to the President pro tempore of the Senate. However, depending on how the senate elections go, that might go to either party. If it stayed with the Republicans, Democrats would scream that Bush was out of the way, but the Republicans were seizing power. If Democrats controlled the Senate, Republicans would likewise be worried that the Democrats would not be willing to yield power back to Bush if the courts decided for him. No matter what happens, it does not look like a fun time.
Now, I do believe that any legal challenges will be solved by January 20th, provided there's no funny business with the courts. Probably the most worrying possibility would be either party doing what some of Gore's supporters wanted to do in 2000, and take the case back to the lower courts in Florida after the Supreme Court had decided against Gore. If the lower courts allowed it (which they might not — depending on how they viewed the legal issues involved) the case could theoretically have to work its way back up through the appeals process to the Supreme Court. Repeat as many times as the court system will allow it.
And this doesn't even move into the territory of a tied electoral college, a recess appointment of a replacement for Rehnquist as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, etc, etc, etc. It's interesting to speculate, but I hope none of it happens.

I am REALLY looking forward to November 2nd. I want to get this over with. I'm sick of having to care about it.

I stand corrected. He's not terrified by the prospect of Bush CHEATING, he's terrified by the prospect of what would happen if people thought he HAD.
Though, this being the Slate, you can imagine how people might tend to read it.

Fairly interesting as well. Once you get past the “oh no! Bush is going to cheat again and the world is DOOOOOOMED!” mentality.

Read this. NOW!
Hat tip: IMAO.

Everything you ever wanted to know about the Russian issue with Iraq. This link from the article is particularly interesting.

This may REALLY help Bush and Cheney. If it is actually true that al Qaeda has threatened violence if the US re-elects Bush, everything that has been said about a terror attack being more imminant under a Kerry administration is wrong. On the other hand, they're basically saying “elect Bush if you want us to be upset.” I think the American public is perfectly capable of picking up on that, and would be perfectly willing to vote the way al Qaeda doesn't want them to.
Does this explain why ABC has said virtually nothing about that part of the message, and allegedly did not even show that part of the tape to the CIA? It's worth pondering.

Now the Al-Qaqaa story has gotten even more interesting. One of the best bits disappears down to near the bottom of the article, where they start saying that some of the things supposedly shipped into Syria by the Russians included “chemicals used to make chemical weapons.” If they shipped out the raw materials, what are the chances that they or the Iraqis shipped out the finished product? And of course, the very last sentence in the article, “Officials believe the Russians also can explain what happened to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs.” Nothing like hiding one of the most important aspects of the entire story at the very end of the article.
In other news, the price of oil is down again. It's still above $50/barrel, but considerably lower than it was.
France is being France again; supporting terrorists — in this case, Yasser Arafat. Arafat is sick, seems to be likely to go to Paris for treatment, and believe it or not, the Israelis seem willing to let him back in. This suprised me, to some extent. I figured they would jump on the chance to keep him out. This is really an indication of how much they need a Palestinian head of state — even a corrupt and murderous one like Arafat — to make any kind of peace process work. DEBKAfile is saying that Arafat will be leaving for Amman at 6.30 AM on Friday. We'll see how this goes; I haven't seen anyone who's saying for sure what exactly he has, besides a generic “blood disease.”