{"id":1414,"date":"2004-11-04T16:21:44","date_gmt":"2004-11-04T23:21:44","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2004-11-04T16:21:44","modified_gmt":"2004-11-04T23:21:44","slug":"re-whats-up-cnn","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2004\/11\/04\/re-whats-up-cnn\/","title":{"rendered":"Re: What&#8217;s Up, CNN?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>In response to <a href=http:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/comments.php?id=P1404_0_1_0>Brad Biggers&#8217; letter<\/a>, Sandra writes:<\/p>\n<ul>In fact, the Al-Jazeera transcript of the entire (18 minute) speech is incorrect and wrongly omits the word &#8220;not&#8221; from the following<br \/>\nsentence:<\/p>\n<p><i>&#8220;This is due to many factors, chief amongst them that we have<br \/>\n(not) found it difficult to deal with the Bush administration in light of<br \/>\nthe resemblance it bears to regimes in our countries&#8230;&#8221;<\/i>  <\/p>\n<p>CNN correctly includes the word &#8220;not&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>Why is this sentence correctly translated by CNN?  A couple of reasons:-<\/p>\n<p>1.      All other translations published, including those done by The Guardian,<br \/>\nThe Independent, etc., all include the word, &#8220;not&#8221; in the sentence, thereby<br \/>\nmaking the Al-Jazeera transcript the odd one out; but more importantly, it is clear from Osama&#8217;s speech that he is stating that the Bush administration is easy to deal with, viz:-<\/p>\n<p>a) He states that his war\/attack on America has been successful, &#8220;As for its<br \/>\nresults, they have been, by the grace of Allah, positive and enormous, and<br \/>\nhave by all standards exceeded expectations.  This is due to many factors,<br \/>\nchief among them, that we have (not) found the Bush administration difficult<br \/>\nto deal with&#8230;.&#8221;  One can hardly leave out the word &#8220;not&#8221; and still see<br \/>\nsense in that sentence as the chief factor for success could hardly have<br \/>\nbeen the difficulty of the US administration;<\/p>\n<p>b) OBL goes on to state a familiarity with the Middle East regimes, which<br \/>\nresemble the first Bush administration, so again the implication is that<br \/>\nthe US administration was familiar to Al-Qaeda and thus was not found<br \/>\ndifficult to deal with;<\/p>\n<p>c) Further, OBL states, &#8220;All that we have mentioned has made it easy for us<br \/>\nto provoke and bait this administration&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>Seems like he is clearly stating that Al-Qaeda can read the Bush<br \/>\nAdministration well and do NOT find it difficult to deal with.  Most<br \/>\nprobably the Al-Jazeera transcript was simply a misprint at that point.<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In response to Brad Biggers&#8217; letter, Sandra writes: In fact, the Al-Jazeera transcript of the entire (18 minute) speech is incorrect and wrongly omits the word &#8220;not&#8221; from the following sentence: &#8220;This is due to many factors, chief amongst them that we have (not) found it difficult to deal with the Bush administration in light [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[676],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-1414","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","tag-antiwar-movement"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"meta_box":{"disable_donate_message":"","custom_donate_message":"","subtitle":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1414","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1414"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1414\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1414"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1414"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1414"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=1414"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}