Bin Laden dead or alive?

silverharp

I have no way of knowing and havnt really followed the story but the second article I have posted raises some interesting points if the facts back it up




Bin Laden 'cut off from al-Qaeda' (BBC Story today)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7728551.stm


OR


Osama bin Laden is Dead
Bob Moriarty
Archives
Nov 13, 2008
I'm pleased to see Barak Obama hit the ground running after his election on the 4th. The US needs change.
I'd like to see him announce the death of Osama bin Laden as one of his first official duties. Bin Laden often better known as bin Forgotten died in December of 2001. There is nothing I am saying that is news to anyone who has actually spent any time thinking.
Osama bin Laden had serous kidney disease that required him to have dialysis treatment twice a week. There aren't any dialysis machines floating around in the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan. A few months back a reporter finally asked the question that should have been asked years ago at a White House press conference.
How is it that a guy who was seriously ill seven years ago is getting treatment for end-stage renal disease in some cave in Afghanistan? The woman conducting the press conference panicked at the thought of answering that most basic question and immediately canceled the rest of the briefing.
The United States does not need a boogieman living in a cave in Asia. Osama bin Laden is dead. Barak Obama should be honest enough with the American people to declare him dead.
Here are the facts.
1. The last intelligence intercept of Osama bin Laden was on December 14 of 2001. He has not been heard from since.
2. President Bush and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld hinted in late December of 2001 that they knew Osama bin Laden was dead.
3. President Musharraf of Pakistan announced in January of 2002 that Osama bin Laden was probably dead of kidney disease.
4. President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan was quoted in October of 2002 as saying, "The more we don't hear of him, and the more time passes, there is the likelihood that he probably is either dead or seriously wounded somewhere."
5. But the actions of the US Military are the most telling. There isn't a single soldier, sailor or Marine tasked with chasing down Osama bin Laden, dead or alive. Because we know exactly where he is. He's dead. So the US military is either totally or absolutely incompetent or Osama bin Laden died years ago and we've been fighting the boogieman.
6. As early as July of 2002, even the FBI's counterterrorism chief was quoted as saying; Osama bin Laden is "probably" dead.
The US does not need a boogieman; we have real challenges ahead of us. We need a President who will not lie to us on a constant basis.

BenjAii

Didn't he pop up in a video during the 2004 US election threatening more strikes ?

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6173515&page=1

Though I think there is a lot of validity to this theory, if he was hiding out in caves on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border, it would be hard to imagine him surviving considering the high level medical care he needs to survive.

I can see this turning into a Lord Lucan thing in years to come ....

OS119

bin Laden may be dead, he may be alive - but his body has not been recovered or identified so in 'official' terms he's still alive.

rather more important, you make a fundamental error in confusing US Military and Intelligence actions in A'stan and Pakistan with any kind of police or law enforcement action. they are not, they are at war (good old fashioned war, engaging the enemy and killing him, not arresting him) with Al Quaida as it exists in that environment, they are targetting capabilities not personalities. much as they would quite happily see him swing from a rope, they believe that in real terms his existance makes no difference to AQ, its affiliates and its independent fan clubs ability or motivation to make war on the US - they see him as irrelevent, and they are sufficiently hard pressed not to waste wild goose chases on targets that for all their emotional value, have no military value.

BenjAii

I would say you are mischaracterising the "war on terror" in Afghanistan.

The US & Nato forces stated goal there is to support the democratic government until such time as it can support itself. The US forces there are the first to say they haven't the resources at the present time to deal with the Taliban/AQ effectively when they do engage them. Having achieved the Talibans overthrow the US diverted the bulk of its military resources elsewhere & allowed them to regroup.

It would also be a mistake to ascribe clear-headed focussed motivations to the US military in dealing with terrorism post-911.

The shambolic misadventure in Iraq, which was lest we forget, touted as the second front in dealing with terror shows the level of ineptitude there has been under Bush.

OS119 wrote: »

bin Laden may be dead, he may be alive - but his body has not been recovered or identified so in 'official' terms he's still alive.

rather more important, you make a fundamental error in confusing US Military and Intelligence actions in A'stan and Pakistan with any kind of police or law enforcement action. they are not, they are at war (good old fashioned war, engaging the enemy and killing him, not arresting him) with Al Quaida as it exists in that environment, they are targetting capabilities not personalities. much as they would quite happily see him swing from a rope, they believe that in real terms his existance makes no difference to AQ, its affiliates and its independent fan clubs ability or motivation to make war on the US - they see him as irrelevent, and they are sufficiently hard pressed not to waste wild goose chases on targets that for all their emotional value, have no military value.

RedPlanet

How credible are the reports that he has dialysis?

SkepticOne

He will eventually become a sort of "King in the mountain" figure. The important thing is not whether he is alive or dead but rather that the circumstances surrounding his death (if he is dead) or his whereabouts (if he is alive) are never fully known.

silverharp

RedPlanet wrote: »

How credible are the reports that he has dialysis?

I did a quick search , there seems to be alot on it, picked this at random

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/01/21/gupta.otsc/index.html

brianthebard

The United States does not need a boogieman living in a cave in Asia. Osama bin Laden is dead. Barak Obama should be honest enough with the American people to declare him dead.

The US absolutely does need a boogyman, its how imperialist states work. It doesn't matter if its Bin Ladin himself or Al Queda in general, or the next threat that they engage with. The important thing is that there is a "threat".

I reckon he is dead and dead a long time.

We are been fed a pile of lies since Bush got in so why should we believe that Bin Laden is still alive and pulling the strings. How many soldiers/civilians have been killed looking for this one man I wonder?

Theres more chance of finding him alive than there is of finding "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq.

Serenity Now!

BenjAii wrote: »

Didn't he pop up in a video during the 2004 US election threatening more strikes ?

Yes and later still. Each time with grey hair mysteriously gone and the videos going blank whenever current events were mentioned.

Bob Z

The Invasion of Afganistan was supposed to be to capture Bin Laden. But The Afgan Goverment offered to hand him over to Pakistan to an international court if they were given evidence of Bin Ladens guilt. But Pakistan under pressure from the US turned them down.

Obama said in an interview that the US had him cornered in some part of pakistan or afganistan(i cant remember which) but instead of sending in US troops they left to Pakistan troops.

Didnt Rumsfield say they didnt know if bin laden was alive or not.."He's alive or dead. He's in Afghanistan or somewhere else"


According to John Pilger the US had plans to invade Afganistan before 9/11

So its hard to believe the US Goverment were really serious about capturing him.

RedPlanet

silverharp wrote: »

I did a quick search , there seems to be alot on it, picked this at random

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/01/21/gupta.otsc/index.html

I'm not convinced.
Maybe the allegation that he has dialysis is black propaganda from the US, in an effort to stymie Bin Laden's popularity particularly at the time, in the region of Pakistan/Afghanistan. Who would rally around a figure head that has a terminal illness?

"Analysising pictures" in the manner the talking head from CNN in your link is an example of suggestive phsycology, he is telling us what to look for, then sure enough, we "see it".
I think a little more credibility is necessary to presume he has dialysis.
I don't know if he does or if he doesn't, i just am skeptical of these claims.
I read a book about the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden (long before 911) written by a Pakistani journalist that covers the rise of the Taliban however it never once mentioned dialysis by OBL, and so, i must question these claims particuarly when they come from the US.
They make the extra ordinary allegation, they must provide the extra ordinary proof.

silverharp

RedPlanet wrote: »

I think a little more credibility is necessary to presume he has dialysis.
I don't know if he does or if he doesn't, i just am skeptical of these claims.

your right it is claim and counter claim, maybe the point below again if the facts support is is good circumstantial evidence? contrast with the hunt for Saddam

5. But the actions of the US Military are the most telling. There isn't a single soldier, sailor or Marine tasked with chasing down Osama bin Laden, dead or alive. Because we know exactly where he is. He's dead. So the US military is either totally or absolutely incompetent or Osama bin Laden died years ago and we've been fighting the boogieman.

Serenity Now!

Bob Z wrote: »

The Invasion of Afganistan was supposed to be to capture Bin Laden. But The Afgan Goverment offered to hand him over to Pakistan to an international court if they were given evidence of Bin Ladens guilt. But Pakistan under pressure from the US turned them down.

That is a myth. The Sudanese govt offered to hand him over in the 90s but the offer was not taken up.

Interesting book on the subject of Afghanistan from the 70s, through to the power vacuum following the Soviet withdrawal and right up to Sept 10th 2001 is 'Ghost Wars' by the excellent Steve Coll.

noel farrell

i dont think it matters wheather he is dead or alive and he is most likely dead there are hundreds of bin ladens to take his place and the all hate the west and are ready to die for the cause what ever that is and lots of gob****es to follow them they will cary on regardless cheers :mad:

Bottle_of_Smoke

Serenity Now! wrote: »

Yes and later still. Each time with grey hair mysteriously gone and the videos going blank whenever current events were mentioned.

I think they said he'd dyed his beard/wearing a fake one. He mentions Sarkozy in this vid

Guess it could be an actor but looks a lot like him

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6984102.stm

bonkey

Serenity Now! wrote: »

That is a myth.

Not entirely.

The Taliban first offered to try bin Laden in an Islamic court (Oct 7, 2001), if they could be given the evidence against him to mount a case.

They then offered to hand him over (or to discuss handing him over) to a third-party (i.e. a third nation) for trial, if the US stopped its bombing campaign (Oct 14, 2001). They also made seeing the proof against him a contingency of the offer.

It wasn't, however, Pakistan who turned them down - as Bob Z suggests. It was the US. Bush's comments at the time (not sure if htey were in response to the first or second offer, or just made about the US' position in general) were to the effect that "There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty"

IRISH RAIL

Im pretty sure a guy who has an army of followers and a few million tucked away could easily buy a kidney dialisis machine and people who can use it etc.

jmayo

brianthebard wrote: »

The US absolutely does need a boogyman, its how imperialist states work. It doesn't matter if its Bin Ladin himself or Al Queda in general, or the next threat that they engage with. The important thing is that there is a "threat".

The US need to put a face to the evil Al Queda.
It is just the way it works.
You can't just have this entity and no face to it.
AQ don't need Bin Ladin but it does suit them also not to admit he may be dead.
After all he is the guy that the US can't catch.

IMHO a large part of the culture of the US runs on fear.
There is the fear of the evil foreigner terrorists trying to kill us, fear that the evil black man will come and rape our women, fear that the federal government will force us to have abortions, fear that the socialists in Europe and their green campaigning proxies in the US will stop us with our God given right to comsume everything etc.
There just seems to be a prevaling fear culture, thus the need to be armed to the teeth. The whole axis of evil played into this.

BTW Bin Laddin would probably get better care in a cave in Afghanistan than in some of our hospitals. Maybe he is waiting for a call back from the HSE :rolleyes:

nacho libre

Osama being the elvis of that part of the world suits both sides.

remember if enemies didn't exist they'd have to be invented or at least encouraged. how else could you justify enormous arms expenditures, and legitimize power projection abroad in the name of saving the world from Communism and now Islamistic fundamentalism.

bonkey

silverharp wrote: »

5. But the actions of the US Military are the most telling. There isn't a single soldier, sailor or Marine tasked with chasing down Osama bin Laden, dead or alive. Because we know exactly where he is. He's dead. So the US military is either totally or absolutely incompetent or Osama bin Laden died years ago and we've been fighting the boogieman.

The author seems to ignore the alternate possibilities that no-one is specifically tasked with looking for him (assuming thats true) because they don't care, or because they've exhausted all known leads.

Riddle101

No no no you've all got it wrong, Bin Laden isn't living in some cave in Afganistan at the White House sleeping in Lincon's Bedroom

I don't know what to think, i mean there have been many cases over the last year that prove to me that anything can happen, we've had a peadophile/rapist father wo kept his children in a basement for so many years and screwing his daughter and we have a black US president, anything is possible and theres a 50/50 chancer Bin Laden is either dead or alive, maybe the CIA already assianiated him but are pretending he's alive so that they can use him as the poster boy for the War on Terror. On the other hand he could be alive and well living someone only god knows where, maybe he's in Saudi Arabia, maybe some other Middle Eastern County or any country that sort of off the US's radar