Okay, so the bin Laden tape is out and it’s time for the pundits to all start talking about it. Just like last time, the right has started their assault on the left because of supposed “connections” between bin Laden’s rhetoric and that of some on the far left. FOX News is leading the charge, beginning with the lovable Sean Hannity.

“He seems to adopt the exact same language being used by the hard left in this country,” Hannity says, “as he describes what’s going on in Iraq as a civil war. He actually used the term ‘Neocons.’ He talks about global warming. He demonizes capitalisms (sic) and corporations in this whole thing — very, very specific language. It seems to be coming from somebody who is keenly aware of the world situation and the battle and the conflict in America over this war, and even admonishing the Democratic Party for not ending the war.”

Now you can read the entire transcript of the thing for yourself, and for the record he uses the word “neoconservatives” as opposed to the more slang-ish “neocons”. While that seems like a tiny distinction, it tells me that Hannity didn’t actually read/listen and just took a few bullet points before yelling. No surprises there.

What really gets to me is that as soon as bin Laden starts talking, the right is so eager to put him in the same camp as the left. Now on any given issue, he’s probably going to side with the left or the right. If he says something like “the war is a failure”, he’s going to say something like what the left says. When he starts saying the country should be run as a theocracy, he’s with the right (albeit with a different religion).

One thing we know about Osama bin Laden is that he’s not a complete moron. He possesses a strong knowledge of history and world politics, and can put the ideas together very well. He’s not some idiot in a cave, though that’s where he tends to hide, he’s a very smart man and can obviously deliver a speech with the best of them. Read through, he evokes world leaders throughout the decades, even mentions Noam Chomsky.

Here’s a piece that’s being seized upon:

It would benefit you to listen to the poignant messages of your soldiers in Iraq, who are paying – with their blood, nerves, and scattered limbs – the price for these sorts of irresponsible statements. Among them is the eloquent message of Joshua which he sent by way of the media, in which he wipes the tears from his eyes and describes American politicians in harsh terms and invites them to join him there for a few days. Perhaps his messages will find in you an attentive so you can rescue him and more than 150,000 of your sons there who are tasting the two bitterest things:

And so forth.

Let me ask you all a question: do you honestly believe that Osama bin Laden gives two shits about American soldiers? Does he really feel bad for Joshua? When he speaks of mines devouring Americans, is that because he sympathizes with the plight of Americans and wants to save them from the hardship?

This is a man who killed 3,000 innocents on 9/11 and makes no bones about it (he mentions that earlier in the speech). A guy who has no problems killing people who were just going to work that day most likely doesn’t care about people who came with the express purpose of attacking him and his supporters. No, I don’t believe for a second that his supposed pleading for consideration for the soldiers is genuine.

So why mention it? Does he want the Iraq War to end so badly that he believes he can appeal to our sympathies?

Once again, bin Laden is not an idiot. For him to think he can get American politicians to say “hey, you know, that Osama guy’s got a good point, maybe we should take his advice!” would be like the KKK thinking they can get the NAACP to listen to them if they deliver a particularly eloquent speech. The man is aware that there is no way in hell America will ever consider his “advice” seriously.

Secondly, consider what the war in Iraq has done. Al Qaeda is arguably as strong if not stronger than it was prior to 9/11, they certainly have more members than before. Separate groups have combined into one larger entity (think the murderous Zarqawi linking with bin Laden whereas previously they hadn’t).

Bin Laden himself is in no danger of capture, if constant repetition of “the War on Terror is bigger than one man” and similar sentiments are anything to go by. The war has elevated his group from thugs to one-shot murderers to a force that is so powerful that the United States cannot defeat them even after six years of fighting. Our freedoms are being eroded, our soldiers are being killed, morale is at an all time low while worldwide anti-American sentiments are at an all-time high.

What does his rhetoric accomplish? Look back at Hannity et al’s comments. When he speaks, he both re-inforces the neoconservative line and makes the left look like fools by “agreeing” with them. Bin Laden’s periodic appearances help the right far more than they could ever help the left. There’s no way the man thinks his statements will be met with thoughtful consideration and careful debate.

So let’s say you’re Osama bin Laden. You know that anything you say will be vociferously disagreed with. If your statements align with an American politician, that politician will be seen as a fool and will be forced to distance himself from his own beliefs and explain why he certainly doesn’t agree with a terrorist like you.

What do you do?

Simple: you make sure that your speeches echo the party that poses the greatest threat to you. You marginalize those who could hurt your goals and make those who help you all the more adamant. Bin Laden doesn’t give a damn about Joshua or the American soldiers whose lives are being wasted every day in Iraq. He wants us to stay over there.

Osama bin Laden wants the radicals in Iraq to continue to fight. He wants the war between Sunnis and Shiites to rage. He wanted Saddam the infidel to be taken out. He wants America to be more and more hated. He wants our military to continue to wear down. I’m certainly not the first person to suggest that George W Bush was the greatest thing to happen to Osama bin Laden and perhaps terrorism in general.

Had the war started and ended in Afghanistan, truly eradicated Al Qaeda and then the troops came home, the message would be that if you attack us, you’re done for buddy. Our vengeance will be swift and terrible to use the Penzance lingo. Instead, we united the separate radical groups in the Middle East, overextended ourselves, and panicked to the point of giving up our rights and freedoms. You know, the ones he hates us for.

And that’s the lesson. Sean Hannity and the right is playing right into bin Laden’s hands. By screaming at the left for “agreeing” with him and redoubling their pro-war efforts, they’re giving bin Laden exactly what he wants. He has little to no personal stake in this war. We stand to lose far more by its continuation, not him.

All he’s had to do is remind us all that he’s there, and say a few things that seem to agree with the Democrats and bingo bango the United States starts sprinting toward that cliff. He doesn’t need to actually fight any more, just hide out and periodically record a big speech.

Although it’s worth saying that he isn’t a total nutcase. He’s occasionally insightful. But then, so was Adolf Hitler. So take that with a grain of salt.