These rumors have surfaced numerous times before, so I'm cautiously optimistic (love that term). If he's caught, it would obviously be the biggest news since Sept. 11, 2001. I hope he's found soon--- every day that b*stard spends free is one less day he spends rotting in a dank prison somewhere.
I can in all honesty say it's not me. If you can find instances where I started these grindings, please remind me, because I recall none. I noted a long time ago that SJC always seemed to take shots at me, in spite of the fact that I had no ill feeling towards him whasoever. There was even a long discussion wherein he maintained that he simply was trying to help me over come my insecurities, whatever they were...At the time, while it seemed implausible, I even tried to give him the benefit of the doubt, but it has continued and if anything increased over time. The only positive is that the niggle of doubt I had about being correct in my interpretation of his posts towards me has long been put to rest. I don't know why, and have ceased to care. It seems to me that it should be obvious to others as well, but as Jackie isn't usually so idiotic,and in that others would obviously not be as aware of the autmoatic nature of his responses/comments towards me as I am, it seems to have gone unnoticed by many, or, as is the case here, thought to be mutual. My only objection to SJC is the fact and manner of his constant, sometims creepy objections to me or anything I post, or what he feels is the motivation for my posts, or what he feels about the length/frequency of my posts, or their tone, etc. etc. etc.
I hope he is caught in the interests of justice, but in the interests of security I feel that he has long since become a non-factor aside from as a symbol, and that aspect could and probably will be increased if he were to become thought of as a martyr. I have felt for some time that, were he not caught soon, he would make himself apparent somehow.
I hope he is caught in the interests of justice, but in the interests of security I feel that he has long since become a non-factor aside from as a symbol, and that aspect could and probably will be increased if he were to become thought of as a martyr. I don't know - I still see him as the inspiration of the movement. New recruits see Bin Laden as the savior, and believe that God is on his side, evidenced in the fact that he has managed to escape the most powerful country in the world. Take that away, and the question becomes "why would God turn from OBL?" in their minds. An Al Queda run by a bunch of random no-names doesn't have nearly the recruiting or motivational power as an Al Queda run by OBL, in my opinion.
But that's just my point; remember the people of whom we are speaking feel that the greatest duty is to give your life for your cause. As a symbol, Osama is, I think, his most potent as a martyr. Now, on the other hand, if we catch him and he is taken mildly as Saddam was, then that would be different, epending on circumstances. But if he is killed in a firefight with US troops, or whatever, I think it assures his status in a way that his limitations currently prevent him doing in a practical sense. I feel that, out of the loop of perations as he is, he has two potential roles for AQ in the future; the Old Man in the Mountain, and The Martyr. I feel that most of his and his organization's history shows that he would prefer and suit them best in the latter cause.
Until there is something more on the current search for bin Laden, here is a lengthy story about the search for him (pre 9-11). <a HREF="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59775-2004Feb21.html">A Secret Hunt Unravels in Afghanistan </a>
i don't believe it, it's too early. i have it on good authority karl rove has OBL's capture planned as this year's october surprise...
"According to a new poll, if the election were held today both Kerry and Edwards would beat George Bush by double digit margins. In fact, the White House are so worried they’re thinking about moving the capture of Osama bin Laden up to next month." --Jay Leno
i guess if this report is true then: 1) the americans are figuring out a way to capture him alive, bring him back to the states, put on a show trial in manhatten, and get bush re-elected. 2) OBL is making damn sure that if the americans DO eventually come in after him, he is going to die fighting, and take a whole slew of american GIs with him. quite a dilemma.
The only way I see him being taken alive is some sort of very complicated gassing operation or if, for some obscure reason, he relishes the opportunity to testify before a global audience. I think that a standard firefight results in his death, even if he's incapaciated, I'd assume that at least one of his followers who has orders to not let him be taken alive if he doesn't want to be would survie long enough to take care of it.
I doubt very seriously that he would get a public trial. There is no way in hell the US allows him a global platform to speak on. They will ban cameras in the courtroom for this one. IMO, the worst thing we could do is kill him..like has been commented on already...it would make him a martyr. We need to capture him alive, put him on trial, and let him rot in the deepest darkest cell inthe most maximum security prison in the country... I would rather have OBL captured and allow Bush to get the credit for his capture(and therefore get reelected)..than allow this scumbag to remain free for even one day longer.
Oh, I agree he wouldn't get it, just was supposing on his motivations. But if I were a betting man, I'd bet he'll be taken dead, never alive.
unfortunately....Im afraid this will be the case. dying in combat with the Great Satan would do more for his movement than almost anything other than another catastrophic attack on the US.
U.S. Denies Report of Bin Laden's Capture 7 minutes ago By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer TEHRAN, Iran - Pentagon and Pakistani officials on Saturday denied an Iranian state radio report that Osama bin Laden was captured in Pakistan's border region with Afghanistan "a long time ago." There have been reports that military forces believed they had identified bin Laden's general location and had him encircled, but Pakistani officials have denied any specific knowledge of bin Laden's whereabouts. The claim came at a time when Pakistan's army was hunting al-Qaida suspects in a remote tribal region along the border with Afghanistan, believed to be a possible hiding place for the al-Qaida leader. <b>Iran's state radio, quoting an unnamed source, said that U.S. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's visit to the region this week was in connection with the arrest. </b> Larry Di Rita, the chief Pentagon spokesman who traveled with Rumsfeld this week to Afghanistan, denied the report. "I don't have any reason to think it's true," he said Saturday. Lt. Col. Bryan Hilferty, a spokesman for the U.S. military in Afghanistan, also said he had no information to suggest bin Laden had been caught. "Things are going well, and we believe we will eventually catch all the leaders of al-Qaida, but I know nothing of that report," he said. In Washington, another U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, also denied Saturday that bin Laden was captured. The report was carried by Iran radio's external Pushtun service. The director of Iran radio's Pushtun service, Asheq Hossein, said he had two sources for the report that bin Laden had been captured. Iranian state radio quoted its reporter as saying the arrest happened a long time ago. <b>"Osama bin Laden has been arrested a long time ago, but Bush is intending to use it for propaganda maneuvering in the presidential election," he said. </b> Pakistani Army spokesman Gen. Shaukat Sultan also told The Associated Press that the report was not true. "That information is wrong," he said. A Pakistani official said previously that members of al-Qaida are being sought in the border region, although bin laden was not a specific target. Separately, Pakistani forces killed 11 people in an exchange of fire Saturday after a minibus failed to stop at a roadblock in a tribal region where the ongoing anti-terrorism operations have been taking place, an army spokesman told the AP. The shooting occurred a day after armed men and soldiers exchanged fire at a military compound in the region. Speaking to the AP in Tehran, Hossein identified one of the sources for the bin Laden report as Shamim Shahed, editor of the English-language Pakistani newspaper The Nation in Peshawar. Hossein said Shahed told him Friday night that bin Laden was arrested "a long time ago." But Shahed, who is The Nation's Peshawar bureau chief and not its editor, denied telling the Iranian radio station that bin Laden had been captured. "I never said this," Shahed said in a telephone interview with the AP's Islamabad bureau. "But I have for the last year been saying that he is not far away. He is within their (the Americans') reach, and they can declare him arrested any time." Hossein said he had a second source for his report that bin Laden had been captured, but he declined to identify him except to say he was "a man with close links to intelligence services and Afghan tribal leaders." Homayoun Jarir, son-in-law of Afghan warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, said he could not confirm the report. The Iranian news agency IRNA was first to report the capture of Saddam Hussein. IRNA also carried the state radio report about bin Laden's capture and said it had contacted a radio announcer at the Pushtun service who confirmed the news. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040228/ap_on_re_mi_ea/bin_laden&cid=540&ncid=716
I don't believe that report. Consider how many people would be involved in a capture of this sort. You could not keep that a secret for a long time. Plus, an Iranian news agency...please.
Sir Jackie on your first statement; I tend to agree with you. Just found the article interesting. And we know that all Arabs are pathological liars. Nice stereotype
If you want to accuse people, at least get your facts straight. Iran is not an Arab country. http://slate.msn.com/id/1008394/ And nice job putting words in my mouth. Just because I say that a state-controlled news agency in a country run by Mullah dictators might not be a credible source, you accuse me of stereotyping all Arabs as pathological liars? An apology would be in order.
I spoke out of turn and I apologize Sir Jackie. I respect your posts and normally agree with you on most issues. No hard feelings.
