October Suprise: Coincidence or Conspiracy?
Recently, Joseph Cofer Black, the U.S. State Department coordinator for counterterrorism stated that “What I tell people, I would be surprised but not necessarily shocked if we wake up tomorrow and he's been caught " The 'he' he referred to was none other than Osama bin Laden.
Some people (often called 'conspiracy nuts') believe that the army/administration will announce in October that Osama has been captured. The whole idea is that the capture would certainly catapult Bush in the election. They claim that the army/administration either knows where Osama is now or hasn't tried to get him until near the election.
While many of these people are dismissed, a pro-conservative journal The National Review, in July, reported that "the administration significantly increased its pressure on Pakistan to kill or capture Osama bin Laden". (Though I won't register for the site...) My understanding is that the capture of an HVT (high-value target) was to be timed around the DNC. One can only assume, if true, that it would be to reduce DNC coverage. That was what happened;Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani was captured and it was reported during (or just after) the DNC.
What if Osama bin Laden is captured between now and the election? Would it be simply for political purposes? If he is captured, what would be the affect on the voter? Would it be a simple coincidence or a conspiracy?

11 Comments:
From Ben - an intelligent (self-described) "ultra-liberal":
I think it would be a bit of both (both coincidence and politics). Probably coincidence that it would happen in October but politics in that a major push for his capture hasn't been made until recently (he is referring here to the special "hunting" squads that captured Hussein and then were moved to Afghanistan this year). If it occurred it would probably be between now and sometime next year, not necessarily before the election.
The public would go Bush. If there was any [reasonable] proof that it was delayed then the public would go for Kerry.
I espect it to happen. If Bush does bad in the debates (the ones hes trying to duck) or his poll numbers go down. Right now it doesnt seem like he needs to. But, who knows, he may just want to trounce Kerry and don't these things take time anyway?
If it happens I don't think its because we know where Osama is. I mean can tehy really keep that a secret.
KT
PEZ says ...
I can tell you this: If there's an "October Suprise" I'll be voting against Bush. I might even join campaigns to "get out the vote." Me and alot of other cynical independents. The prob is that were outnumbered by the idiot independents who would probably just vote for Bush with a "He caught Osama, didn't he?" attitude.
I'm sorry, if I misspell a few words now. I just got up off the floor from falling odff my chair laughing! That is so Clintonesque! I can't get out another word...
i dont get it. what's so clintonesque?
if an october surprise happens its only because were pushing pakistan harder right now. is that a conspiracy? not to me. it's just smart politics. for all we know, osama could be captured in a few months after the election.
i think he's dead. thats why kawahiri(?) is talking not osama.
gregB
Sorry, I meant Senator Clinton's "vast right-wing conspiracy". I'm so sure we are keeping a satellite honed in on Osama's beedy little forehead, awaiting the most opportune moment to pounce! I never saw the news about the AKG guy. I wouldn't subscribe to the National Review either.
Happy "National Conspiracy Theory Day"!
Honestly, I would be extremely happy if Osama was captured. It speaks volumes about the division in this country when every good thing that happens has some sinister goal behind it.
PEZ says ...
Puh-leaz! Conspiracies abound! Why do you think I'm such a pessimist. Because anybody (Democrat or Republican but especially Republicans) will do anything they can to win. You really think that politicians care about people. No, they care about power. If we have an October Suprise it'll just reaffirm my suspicions.
PEZ - PEZ Eternally Suspicious
PEZ says ...
Hmm, what conspiracies could you possibly mean?
Cheney's 'secret' energy meetings conspiracy.
Bush's "let's not tell anybody the real cost of Medicare" conspiracy.
Ahmed Chalabi's "let's make something up so I can be King" conspiracy.
The "let's get Bush a cushy guard job" conspiracy.
The "let's make up lies about Kerry in Vietnam" conspiracy (which, ironically seems to come from both sides).
The "that 527 is NOT connected to us" conspiracies (also on both sides).
The "get out the vote campaign is non-partisan" conspiracy.
The "my [insert 527] is non-partisan" conspiracies.
The "I never had sex with that woman" conspiracy.
Watergate. Irangate. Whitewatergate.
Need I continue?
Neither party seems very concerned about OBL. They don't seem to bring him up. Was his name uttered a single time at the RNC? Meanwhile Bush spends a lot of time on the subject of Saddam. He's still talking about him...
I guess the emphasis relates to perspective. Anyone whose interest lies with apprehending those responsible for 9/11 is more likely to concentrate on seeing it through. Anyone whose interest lies in other areas will gravitate to those areas, as one might expect.
if i were a politician ...
and I were Bush i would keep focusing on saddam not obl. afterall, saddam has been caught.
and i were kerry, i wouldn't say a word about obl. what happens if i opened my mouth then the next day they captured him? i would definitely lose.
The other thing is that Bin Laden is the reason that Americans are invested in the war on terror in the first place. Catching him might undermine the administration's long-term policy objectives by bringing closure to 9/11 for most Americans. Nobody wants to fight a never-ending war, but if people feel like there's still some connection to 9/11 they'll tolerate it a lot longer. This lets the administration get away with power grabs in the middle east that have less to do with terrorism than business sense.
Post a Comment
<< Home