Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » bin Laden surrounded?

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: bin Laden surrounded?
WmLambert
Member
Member # 604

 - posted      Profile for WmLambert   Email WmLambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A story broke last night in the Sunday Telegraph on the possible close to the bin Laden-hunting season. The article is the only one I've seen about it. Will see what goes down.

[ February 22, 2004, 02:24 PM: Message edited by: WmLambert ]

Posts: 1372 | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FIJC
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I have heard rumors claiming that the US is pretty sure that Bin Laden is currently holed up in Pakistan. Wouldn't that be interesting if we captured Bin Laden two weeks before the election? [Wink]
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mv
Member
Member # 462

 - posted      Profile for mv     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Unlike the reports we saw couple of years ago, this one *may* have some substance to it. There is an ongoing operation in border areas of Pakistan. Bin Laden may be the price Musharraf is paying for letting him get away with the Khan's scandal.
Posts: 1798 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tezcatlipoca
Member
Member # 1312

 - posted      Profile for Tezcatlipoca     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I need more than 1 newspaper to start supporting this claim. I would also need offical feedback from the government to make be believe that they do have Bin Laden surrounded.

Of course, it's not that I think they are lying, I just need more evidence. I knew that capturing Bin Laden would just be a matter of time. People say the world is a big place to hide in, but it has only been a few years since 9/11. Nazi's were still getting caught decades after WWII.

I would be estatic if they actually caught him alive. And did I also hear they might get Omar as well?

Posts: 1272 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
John L
Member
Member # 1411

 - posted      Profile for John L   Email John L   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Of course, it's not that I think they are lying, I just need more evidence.-Tez
This is the problem here. If you have the evidence, he is either captured or he has gotten away. The military does not want you to have more evidence, I would think. So you and a lot of folks are just going to have to live with more skepticism for a while. [Smile]
Posts: 885 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ron Lambert
Member
Member # 682

 - posted      Profile for Ron Lambert   Email Ron Lambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
How exactly is Osama Bin Laden "surrounded" or "boxed in" if he is in Pakistan? Who is physically surrounding him? Do we have American forces in Pakistan, and are they arrayed all around, blocking off all escape? Or are there Pakistani troops who comprise at least part if not all of the encirclement?

(1) Can we be certain that none of the Pakistani troops are Al Qaeda sympathizers who might let Bin Laden escape?

(2) Is there any possibility that Bin Laden might have an Internet connection, and read the item in the Sunday Telegraph, and be warned that he'd better skidaddle before the special forces swoop in?

I hope the report is true. If Bin Laden is captured or killed, and we have clear proof of either, then Bush's approval ratings will probably rise quite a bit, more than they did after the capture of Saddam Hussein. There is no doubt that Bin Laden is the one behind the attacks on 9/11.

Posts: 2645 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You realize that if they catch OBL, that the left will shriek that Bush timed this just for the elections. [Roll Eyes]
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ron Lambert
Member
Member # 682

 - posted      Profile for Ron Lambert   Email Ron Lambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And then after that has had play, they will ask "Why did this take three years?"
Posts: 2645 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FIJC
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
"(2) Is there any possibility that Bin Laden might have an Internet connection, and read the item in the Sunday Telegraph, and be warned that he'd better skidaddle before the special forces swoop in?"
I suppose that there is a possibility of a 5th column, but it seems unlikely at this point. On the otherhand, it is usually virtually impossible to pin the existence of a 5th column, as Frank Gaffney can no doubt tell you.

I have monitored the Sunday Telegraph ever since Ambrose Evans-Pritchard came onto their newspaper staff. Basically, it isn't unusual for this newspaper to print seemingly outrageous stories, and the newspaper is largely known as a broadsheet tabloid in Great Britain.

In Great Britain, the newspaper press is much different than in the United States--it is more often than not, interpetive journalism and objectivity is not one of the flagship goals. Tabloids are given much more credince than they are here. British newspaper reporters are really ballsy and aren't afraid to print anything. The Clinton White House hated the Sunday Telegraph with a passion, because the Telegraph printed even those stories deemed too sordid for the American press to print, and the stories always managed to leak back for the American press to report. As long as the American press wasn't the first to report it, they would report many stories that the Telegraph printed first, explicitly citing the Telegraph.

(Edited to fix link)

[ February 22, 2004, 05:46 PM: Message edited by: FIJC ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Enumclaw
Member
Member # 876

 - posted      Profile for Enumclaw   Email Enumclaw   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wandering off-topic...
quote:
As long as the American press wasn't the first to report it, they would report many stories that the Telegraph printed first, explicitly citing the Telegraph.
Which is, of course, a cop-out. If a story itself isn't good enough to be reported by a media outlet, then "other media outlets are reporting blah blah blah" isn't really news, either.

This cuts all ways, both for/against liberals and for/against conservatives.

As far as catching OBL, I'll believe it when I see it. So to speak. [Smile] The only lefties that say "Bush planned this" are going to be the stupid ones; there's been a lot of work and a lot of ground to cover prior to catching this guy. Even Saddam took a bit of luck; we were in the right area, sure, but basically we tripped over him.

Personally, I seriously doubt we'll take OBL alive. I think he'll resist arrest enough to get himself shot.

Paul

Posts: 1656 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Anonymous24
Member
Member # 1468

 - posted      Profile for Anonymous24   Email Anonymous24   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Of course Bush has been doing everything he can to get bin Laden, so I think its a moot point for the Dems to criticize him because we haven't captured bin Laden yet.
Posts: 1226 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FIJC
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
"Which is, of course, a cop-out. If a story itself isn't good enough to be reported by a media outlet, then "other media outlets are reporting blah blah blah" isn't really news, either."
Well, that depends on the story you are referring to. Sure, there were many pimp stories coming out about Clinton at the time and those were hardly relevant to the more serious allegations about him. The stories were only newsworthy because they sold many magazines, newspapers, and sent internet message boards raging for over 5 years with all sorts of fun conspiracy theories.

Anyway, it was Pritchard and the Sunday Telegraph that helped shed light to the Mena scandal. Soon after the Telegraph reported it, the Wall Street Journal sent their front-page editor, Micah Morrison, to investigate the allegations concerning Mena. And there is something to be said about Mena, otherwise Jim Leach would not have launched a full-scale Congressional investigation into the matter. Of course, what really has been said and found in the report we will probably never know. Word is the report is completed, but is currently sealed and will most likely stay this way. Perhaps the report implicates prominent Democrats and Republicans? I think so, out of sight, out of mind they say. For the most part, it has worked.

quote:
"This cuts all ways, both for/against liberals and for/against conservatives."
Of course it does.

quote:
"As far as catching OBL, I'll believe it when I see it. So to speak. The only lefties that say "Bush planned this" are going to be the stupid ones; there's been a lot of work and a lot of ground to cover prior to catching this guy. Even Saddam took a bit of luck; we were in the right area, sure, but basically we tripped over him."
Actually, I found this report interesting, because I had heard something of the same two weeks ago. But it didn't come from a newspaper.

quote:
"Personally, I seriously doubt we'll take OBL alive. I think he'll resist arrest enough to get himself shot."
If he is half the martyr he directs his cronies to be, he will. Then again, he was never willing to martyr himself before, and chose to flee and hide into the mountains after the Taliban was ousted from power. Sounds like a coward to me.

[ February 23, 2004, 11:55 AM: Message edited by: FIJC ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"And there is something to be said about Mena, otherwise Jim Leach would not have launched a full-scale Congressional investigation into the matter."

Is it your claim that there's something to anything that has a Congressional investigation launched about it? [Smile]

[ February 23, 2004, 12:20 PM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sancselfieme
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://www.ornery.org/forums/essays/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=002956

I am really starting to believe that UBL will be found about two weeks before the election and that these gradually increasing press releases are Bush's way of innoculating against possible accusations of planning the timing involved.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
drewmie
Member
Member # 1179

 - posted      Profile for drewmie   Email drewmie   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I hope we never officially get Osama.

Now before you kill me, hear me out. I think the best long-term situation would be if Osama died in obscurity. I would love it if he were killed, but we never found out about it. That way he's gone, but he never becomes a martyr. He becomes the Arab Jimmy Hoffa. In this way, we take the wind out of al Quaeda's sails without endangering ourselves further with goat herders seeking revenge.

Second best would be capturing him alive. That would horribly embarrass other "martyrs." Less people would be willing to sign up with a guy who doesn't put his money where his mouth is. However, I still think it's second best, since we don't want people taking hostages to demand his release.

[ February 23, 2004, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: drewmie ]

Posts: 3702 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Robertson, Ugly and Nohow
Member
Member # 1375

 - posted      Profile for Robertson, Ugly and Nohow   Email Robertson, Ugly and Nohow   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pakistan is denying that the US is giving them satelite photos and also denying that any American/British troops will ever be allowed to cross into Pakistan.

However, it does look like Pakistan is about to perform a large raid involving "thousands of troops" to capture Al Qaeda members and those sheltering them. It looks like Pakistan may finally be getting serious about the situation.

Posts: 450 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WmLambert
Member
Member # 604

 - posted      Profile for WmLambert   Email WmLambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Great link, RUN. Did you read between the lines when Federal Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed said the US has not provided any satellite pictures of Al Qaeda leaders including Bin Laden and Ayman Al Zwahiri? I'll bet they did send over some very clear maps with their locations noted. That way, the Pakistani troops don't have to interpret the pictures, it's already done for them.
Posts: 1372 | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ray Bingham
Member
Member # 1456

 - posted      Profile for Ray Bingham   Email Ray Bingham   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Madelyn Allbright thinks we already have Bin Laden, and that we're just waiting for the perfect moment to announce it to the world, just before the elections...

Personally I think Madelyn Allbright is a conspiracy-entrenched retard, but that's an ad hominem attack...

--Ray

Posts: 589 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Robertson, Ugly and Nohow
Member
Member # 1375

 - posted      Profile for Robertson, Ugly and Nohow   Email Robertson, Ugly and Nohow   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Good point, WmLambert. I'm not well practiced at gleaning truth from politician-talk yet. But here's another quote from the same newspaper you might like. This article deals specifically with the Sunday Express article. It mostly is just a rehash of the Sunday-Express, but it has this half-hearted attempt at denial at the end:

quote:
Director General Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) Major General Shaukat Sultan said no official report of such an operation had been conveyed.

Posts: 450 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That depends, pete, on whether he's caught next week, or 4 days before the election [Smile]
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FIJC
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
"Madelyn Allbright thinks we already have Bin Laden, and that we're just waiting for the perfect moment to announce it to the world, just before the elections..."
She claimed that the remark was made in jest after her quote stating this was plastered all over the news. I think she also redacted the quote after it made her look stupid too.

But anyone who covered or monitored the Foggy Bottom incident knows that Albright doesn't joke, especially where the press is concerned.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Where, exactly, did Albright make this statement? Because I saw her make it on The Daily Show, and it was pretty obvious there that she was joking. If there's another source to which she made the same comment, I'd like to know.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WmLambert
Member
Member # 604

 - posted      Profile for WmLambert   Email WmLambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
TomD, that was Mort Kondracke who reported Albright's remarks in the green room prior to his coming on air for Fox News.

BTW, I actually heard Kondracke's statement at the time - and he was utterly convinced she was dead serious about it. The conversation went on amongst the people there how Kondracke was considered by many liberals to be supportive of their views, and how Albright thought she had a kindred spirit to kvetch to.

The Daily Show comments were an attempt to rehabilitate her embarassment.

[ February 23, 2004, 05:36 PM: Message edited by: WmLambert ]

Posts: 1372 | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mv
Member
Member # 462

 - posted      Profile for mv     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
See also this.
Posts: 1798 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Robertson, Ugly and Nohow
Member
Member # 1375

 - posted      Profile for Robertson, Ugly and Nohow   Email Robertson, Ugly and Nohow   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Some more clues that the hunt for Osama is intensifying:

1) The Pentagon is transferring its Delta-SEAL commando task force (that were used to hunt for Saddam) to Afghanistan.

2) CIA director George Tenet was in Pakistan earlier this month and the Pakistan government reports that he came "to share information on Osama bin Laden".

3) The amnesty deadline given by Pakistan for tribals to hand over Al Qaeda operatives is now over

I think the most insidious time to announce he's caught would be the night that Kerry (or whoever) is chosen at the democratic national convention. It would take steal most of the nominee's press coverage and cause some emergency re-writes in the his acceptance speech.

[ February 23, 2004, 11:14 PM: Message edited by: Robertson, Ugly and Nohow ]

Posts: 450 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1