View Full Version : Osama bin Laden dead (?)
Jaeger1980
09-23-2006, 04:11
French paper says bin Laden died in Pakistan
Sat Sep 23, 2006 8:54 AM BST
PARIS (Reuters) - A French regional newspaper quoted a French secret service report on Saturday as saying that Saudi Arabia is convinced that al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden died of typhoid in Pakistan last month.
L'Est Republicain printed what it said was a copy of the report dated September 21 and said it was shown to President Jacques Chirac, Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin and France's interior and defence ministers on the same day.
"According to a usually reliable source, the Saudi services are now convinced that Osama bin Laden is dead," the document said.
"The information gathered by the Saudis indicates that the head of al Qaeda was a victim while he was in Pakistan on August 23, 2006, of a very serious case of typhoid which led to a partial paralysis of his internal organs."
The report, which was stamped with a "confidential defence" label and the initials of the French secret service, said Saudi Arabia first heard the information on September 4 and that it was waiting for more details before making an official announcement.
Officials contacted by Reuters in Chirac's and Villepin's offices had no immediate comment.
A senior official in Pakistan's interior ministry said: "We have no information about Osama's death."
Saudi-born Bin Laden was based in Afghanistan until the Taliban government there was overthrown by U.S.-backed forces in late 2001. Since then, U.S. and Pakistani officials have regularly said they believe he is hiding somewhere on the rugged border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The last videotaped message released by bin Laden was in late 2004, but there have been several low quality audio tapes released this year.
http://today.reuters.co.uk/
Jack Moroney (RIP)
09-23-2006, 05:25
If the Phrench are convinced that this is true, they can only be keeping it quiet until they figure out whom within Al Queada they now have to appease.
The Reaper
09-23-2006, 08:31
I have been saying that for over a year.
At least, we should claim it, and make him raise his profile to prove otherwise, if he isn't.
TR
Roguish Lawyer
09-23-2006, 08:34
If the Phrench are convinced that this is true, they can only be keeping it quiet until they figure out whom within Al Queada they now have to appease.
LOL
Aoresteen
09-23-2006, 10:13
So what does Kerry do now? Does he claim that Bush can't find him because he is in a grave? Or does he say that UBL is still alive and demands that the Bush administration find him? :munchin
Don't expect the mainstream media to run the story as this would be good news for Bush. The NYT will want the body with three DNA tests and five verifications before that they will admit the UBL is dead. Then they will spin it that it is bad news because UBL wasn't taken alive so he could be put on trail as it is a law enforcement/criminal matter.
I'll take UBL dead anyway at all. :D
BMT (RIP)
09-23-2006, 11:56
Slick Willie Said he tried.
BMT
Jaeger1980
09-23-2006, 14:58
It doesn't make any difference to me if this SOB (Osama bin Laden) is dead or alive, as long as he is unable to encourage, plan, or execute further attacks. In this regard I give credit to the administration.
The Reaper
09-23-2006, 15:04
Slick Willie Said he tried.
BMT
Yeah, he said that he didn't have sex with Monica, too.:rolleyes:
Billy Waugh said in his book that he had eyes on OBL regularly and was denied the opportunity to act.
TR
BMT (RIP)
09-23-2006, 15:08
I agree with you TR!!! What goes around come's around and bite's you in the ass. Slick sure lost his cool on Fox.
BMT
Slick sure lost his cool on Fox.
BMT
He sure did. :D His comment about the President having 8 months...when he had 8 years was unbelievable.
Dead is dead...hopefully he is indeed burning in hell.
jasonglh
09-23-2006, 18:55
Slick Willie Said he tried.
BMT
As Yoda would say: "Do or do not, there is no try." But alas in Willie's case there are half assed efforts. Even if the current administration was not directly responsible for his death they have kept him on the run for 5 years now and that had to undermine his ability to lead, plan and execute.
Jack Moroney (RIP)
09-23-2006, 19:04
Dead is dead...hopefully he is indeed burning in hell.
Gypsy you are too hard on the lad, surely you would not deny him eternal bliss with his 72 virgin syphalytic camels:D
Gypsy you are too hard on the lad, surely you would not deny him eternal bliss with his 72 virgin syphalytic camels:D
Right! But Colonel, in that case is it not one and the same? :D
The Reaper
09-23-2006, 21:32
Gypsy you are too hard on the lad, surely you would not deny him eternal bliss with his 72 virgin syphalytic camels:D
Slick Willie or OBL?:D
TR
Jack Moroney (RIP)
09-24-2006, 05:19
Slick Willie or OBL?:D TR
I think for Clinton a eternal panicked, flailing, free fall while choking on the dust, debris and flaming ash of one of the twin towers should suffice.
incommin
09-24-2006, 05:32
I get the feeling that some people just don't like the ex prez!
Jack Moroney (RIP)
09-24-2006, 05:59
I get the feeling that some people just don't like the ex prez!
You mean the womanizing, prevaricating, cowardly, draft dodging, sax playing, self-annoited first black president of the United States? What gave you that idea?
NousDefionsDoc
09-24-2006, 06:38
I think the problem is point of view. Several administrations have had the view that terrorism is a law enforcement issue. Personally, I think this comes from Europhilia. Their whole program is centered on making a case, making an arrest and putting them in jail. To them, terrorism is a crime, not an act of war or even a tactic in war. It is a crime.
I also think they tend to be blind to the simple evil nature of some people.
Terrorists do not generally consider themselves to be criminals, they consider themselves to be at war. All you really have to do is look at how they name themselves - Red Army, Liberation Front this or that, Brigade this or that, etc. They think they are soldiers.
Many also still believe that the root cause is something other than the will to power - poverty, whatever. That myth was dis-spelled long ago, but they ignore it.
IMO, Clinton was confused. He said himself that when they consider taking the offer of Bin Laden "We didn't have anything on him." or words to that effect. He was looking at him from a crime and punishment view - not a war view.
I ask the question all the time: "What could Bin Laden be tried for in a US Court today?" AL says conspiracy would be fairly easy - I will defer to his expertise. But I don't want the son of a bitch tried for conspiracy. I want him KIA as the leader of the enemy in a time of war.
They are playing the game one way and some of our leadership tries to play an entirely different game. That is one of the reasons I like the current POTUS. He treats the enemy like the enemy - GITMO and all. Not like some criminal that needs to be understood to define the root cause. We know what the root cause of the GSJ is. We know what their objectives are. We know where it came from. And we know that there is no rehabilitation. They are not psychotic. They are at war.
You don't arrest Rommel, you invade his ass and push him off the African continent with tanks..
Does anybody know if we had a search warrant for Iwo Jima?
I'd rather smack my johnson with a hammer than deal with either Clinton for another four years. As for UBL, it would be nice if there was a grave to piss on, but then it would be much more fitting for him to be rotting in some no-name valley being picked at by the wildlife.:mad:
Roguish Lawyer
09-24-2006, 08:08
I think the problem is point of view. Several administrations have had the view that terrorism is a law enforcement issue. Personally, I think this comes from Europhilia. Their whole program is centered on making a case, making an arrest and putting them in jail. To them, terrorism is a crime, not an act of war or even a tactic in war. It is a crime.
I also think they tend to be blind to the simple evil nature of some people.
Terrorists do not generally consider themselves to be criminals, they consider themselves to be at war. All you really have to do is look at how they name themselves - Red Army, Liberation Front this or that, Brigade this or that, etc. They think they are soldiers.
Many also still believe that the root cause is something other than the will to power - poverty, whatever. That myth was dis-spelled long ago, but they ignore it.
IMO, Clinton was confused. He said himself that when they consider taking the offer of Bin Laden "We didn't have anything on him." or words to that effect. He was looking at him from a crime and punishment view - not a war view.
I ask the question all the time: "What could Bin Laden be tried for in a US Court today?" AL says conspiracy would be fairly easy - I will defer to his expertise. But I don't want the son of a bitch tried for conspiracy. I want him KIA as the leader of the enemy in a time of war.
They are playing the game one way and some of our leadership tries to play an entirely different game. That is one of the reasons I like the current POTUS. He treats the enemy like the enemy - GITMO and all. Not like some criminal that needs to be understood to define the root cause. We know what the root cause of the GSJ is. We know what their objectives are. We know where it came from. And we know that there is no rehabilitation. They are not psychotic. They are at war.
You don't arrest Rommel, you invade his ass and push him off the African continent with tanks..
Does anybody know if we had a search warrant for Iwo Jima?
That was brilliant, Coach.
brownapple
09-24-2006, 08:47
They are playing the game one way and some of our leadership tries to play an entirely different game. That is one of the reasons I like the current POTUS. He treats the enemy like the enemy - GITMO and all. Not like some criminal that needs to be understood to define the root cause. We know what the root cause of the GSJ is. We know what their objectives are. We know where it came from. And we know that there is no rehabilitation. They are not psychotic. They are at war.
Agree entirely.
NousDefionsDoc
09-24-2006, 09:38
Did you guys see the Clinton interview with the Fox guy (Wallace)? Clinton got pretty hot from the clip I saw. I think he's losing the plot.
The Reaper
09-24-2006, 09:47
Did you guys see the Clinton interview with the Fox guy (Wallace)? Clinton got pretty hot from the clip I saw. I think he's losing the plot.
Saw it, thought he acted like an ass. Wallace was not harassing him, but Slick Willie sure acted like it.
He blamed Bush for not doing in 8 months what he failed to do in 8 years.
Random cruise missile attacks do not constitute a plan for dealing with terrorism against the US.
Looked to me like he showed his true colors. Who is he to lecture anyone else?
TR
That was brilliant, Coach.
+1
NousDefionsDoc
09-24-2006, 10:03
Saw it, thought he acted like an ass. Wallace was not harassing him, but Slick Willie sure acted like it.
He blamed Bush for not doing in 8 months what he failed to do in 8 years.
Random cruise missile attacks do not constitute a plan for dealing with terrorism against the US.
Looked to me like he showed his true colors. Who is he to lecture anyone else?
TR
I 'specially liked the part where he called Richard Clarke the top man in the country for terrorism. What a clown.
Jack Moroney (RIP)
09-24-2006, 11:40
IMO, Clinton was confused.
You are very kind, but then you medicos are trained to be kind with the exception of giving gama globulin shots:D
He was no doubt confused, but when you surround yourself with psycophants and folks with the same moral fiber or general outlook you will never get the benefit of more than one point of view. Would you build your A-Team with the likes of which he built his cabinet? The DOD has/had many of his appointees in place with the same risk averse profile as their CINC so in addition to being confused he was also not being served by those that should have stepped up to the plate and laid it out in black and white. So while we cannot lay it all at the feet of Der Slickster, a commander is still responsible for all that his unit does or fails to do. Just my opinion.
Did you guys see the Clinton interview with the Fox guy (Wallace)? Clinton got pretty hot from the clip I saw. I think he's losing the plot.
For those who missed it, the transcript: http://newsbusters.org/node/7841. He's definately losing it.
NRO looks at what Clarke's book says about Clinton: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDM4N2E1MzU5ZjQ0YTA3YmJiYzEyYjQ2ZDBiNWJlYjE=
Quote from the article:
But Clarke’s book does not, in fact, support Clinton’s claim. Judging by Clarke’s sympathetic account — as well as by the sympathetic accounts of other former Clinton aides like Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon — it’s not quite accurate to say that Clinton tried to kill bin Laden. Rather, he tried to convince — as opposed to, say, order — U.S. military and intelligence agencies to kill bin Laden. And when, on a number of occasions, those agencies refused to act, Clinton, the commander-in-chief, gave up.
NousDefionsDoc
09-24-2006, 14:16
You are very kind, but then you medicos are trained to be kind with the exception of giving gama globulin shots:D
He was no doubt confused, but when you surround yourself with psycophants and folks with the same moral fiber or general outlook you will never get the benefit of more than one point of view. Would you build your A-Team with the likes of which he built his cabinet? The DOD has/had many of his appointees in place with the same risk averse profile as their CINC so in addition to being confused he was also not being served by those that should have stepped up to the plate and laid it out in black and white. So while we cannot lay it all at the feet of Der Slickster, a commander is still responsible for all that his unit does or fails to do. Just my opinion.
Excellent point Sir. It was indeed self-induced confusion. I did not mean to imply he wasn't at fault. Just that it is not just Clinton, but all those with the same mindset of which we must be wary. I have no doubt that Kerry and even McCain would do the exact same things.
The current POTUS has also, in my estiamtion, made the same mistakes at times. He kept Tenet and the FBI guy on far too long for example.
incommin
09-24-2006, 17:20
"I also think they tend to be blind to the simple evil nature of some people."
That's because too many people think that the human animal is basically kind until corrupted by an outside force. Even though history shows that man is a mean vicious animal only kept in check by laws, social values, and threat of bodily harm!
Jim
To para-phrase Fletcher from The Outlaw Josey Wales....
I don't want to hear Bin Laden dead...I want to see Bin Laden dead!!!
The guys like a frickin cat, always popping up when you least expect him to.
BMT (RIP)
09-24-2006, 18:38
Bill Clinton’s Excuses
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDM4N2E1MzU5ZjQ0YTA3YmJiYzEyYjQ2ZDBiNWJlYjE=
BMT
Jack Moroney (RIP)
09-24-2006, 18:56
Just that it is not just Clinton,
The current POTUS has also, in my estiamtion, made the same mistakes at times. He kept Tenet and the FBI guy on far too long for example.
Absolutely!
NousDefionsDoc
09-25-2006, 18:14
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/5378410.stm
British forces have killed a senior al-Qaeda fugitive in a raid on a house in the southern Iraqi city of Basra, security sources say.
Officials named the dead man as Omar al-Farouq, a top lieutenant of Osama Bin Laden in south-east Asia.
Farouq was captured in Indonesia in 2002 but escaped from a US military prison in Afghanistan last year.
Security sources say although he was hiding in Basra, al-Qaeda was not known to be actively operating in the area.
British military spokesman Maj Charlie Burbridge said Farouq, whom he called a "very, very significant man" had been tracked across Iraq to Basra.
He said about 200 troops surrounded the house, from where they came under fire.
A gun battle erupted and Farouq was killed in the exchange.
Maj Burbridge said there was apparently nobody else in the building and there were no further casualties.
Born in Kuwait of Iraqi parents, Farouq is believed to have joined al-Qaeda in the early 1990s and trained in Afghanistan.
He became a top lieutenant of Osama Bin Laden in south-east Asia and he is believed to have been planning a series of bomb attacks on US embassies there when he was arrested in Indonesia in 2002.
In what the BBC's Jim Muir describes as a considerable embarrassment for the US, Farouq and three others escaped from the US military prison at Bagram airbase in Kabul last year.
He even appeared in a video on an Arab TV station to boast about it.
Published: 2006/09/25 15:16:36 GMT
© BBC MMVI
Cincinnatus
09-25-2006, 23:17
Outstanding.