Article

2004-02-28

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Lux 2004-02-28 6:06:51 AM|| || Front Page|| [5 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Tehran radio: the reason the 48 hour rule was invented in the first place, they also claimed that rummys visit to pakistan last week was related to the capture of Bin Hiding.

(BTW the report was not repeated in later broadcasts)

Posted by Evert Visser 2004-2-28 6:20:35 AM|| [http://chinditz.blog-city.com/] 2004-2-28 6:20:35 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Lux, beat me to it, but glad you posted it.
Dare we hope?!
(And if it's true, please let him be dead. The show trial of Saddam is one too many already.)

Posted by Jennie Taliaferro 2004-2-28 6:35:48 AM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-2-28 6:35:48 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 If there must be a show trial, let it begin . . . say, July 26-29, 2004.

Posted by Mike 2004-2-28 7:33:47 AM|| 2004-2-28 7:33:47 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 13:29 Pakistani Army spokesman Gen. Shaukat Sultan denies reports of Osama bin Laden`s capture as `wrong`

14:02 U.S. Dept. of Defense denies reports by Iran`s official IRNA news agency that Osama bin Laden has been captured

From Haaretz flash.

Posted by Evert Visser 2004-2-28 8:02:18 AM|| [http://chinditz.blog-city.com/] 2004-2-28 8:02:18 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 If it's true, we probably won't find out until he's named names; loose lips allow goons to give us the slip.

Posted by Korora 2004-2-28 8:12:57 AM|| [http://basementburrow.blogspot.com] 2004-2-28 8:12:57 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 I'm thinking he's gonna be in a cage on the stage of the Republican convention in Nooo York City!

Posted by Frank G 2004-2-28 9:32:50 AM|| 2004-2-28 9:32:50 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 I think he'll be a smudge on a slide in a lab.

Posted by Rawsnacks 2004-2-28 9:56:28 AM|| 2004-2-28 9:56:28 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 I tend to agree,that piece of shit was vaporized in Tora Bora last year. If they are reporting his capture, it might just mean they found a chunk bigger than a fingernail.

Posted by JerseyMike 2004-2-28 10:48:11 AM|| 2004-2-28 10:48:11 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 sorry..when you're old time flies, I meant the year before last.

Posted by JerseyMike 2004-2-28 10:53:19 AM|| 2004-2-28 10:53:19 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 I should've closed mine with /sarcasm, cuz I've long thought he was dead in Tora Bora. He's too much of an egomaniac to go this long without a taunting video tape. It's been in everyone's benefit to pretend he's still alive: AQ - because it helps rally the troops, and keeps them relevant; the US because as soon as he's confirmed dead, the Dems/Libs will say: "ok, that's it, the WOT is over, time to ratchet up the spending on social services at home, and start dismantling the military and intel agencies"

Posted by Frank G 2004-2-28 10:59:36 AM|| 2004-2-28 10:59:36 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 Bin Hiding! LOL!

well, I didn't see this post when I posted the other one, but according to the one from The Command Post, as of this morning, the Pentagon only denied that he had "been found a long time ago". That's not a denial in my book.

I agree with you, Frank. If he's found alive then it will really fuel the "Bush held him until the election" conspiracy theories. As if anyone, except the Bush Haters, cares.

On a brighter note, That Al Guardian, et al. are churning out the "Bush held him until the election" conspiracy theories, gives me great hope that Bin Hiding has been "captured" - dead or alive.

Posted by B 2004-2-28 11:55:00 AM|| 2004-2-28 11:55:00 AM|| Front Page Top

#12 I wanna hear that he died from "previous" injuries after a lengthy interrogation.

Posted by Laurence of the Rats 2004-2-28 12:27:33 PM|| 2004-2-28 12:27:33 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 Frank G> It's been in everyone's benefit to pretend he's still alive: AQ - because it helps rally the troops, and keeps them relevant; the US because as soon as he's confirmed dead, the Dems/Libs will say: "ok, that's it, the WOT is over, time to ratchet up the spending on social services at home, and start dismantling the military and intel agencies"

Frank G, that argument doesn't work unless you feel that the Democrats are a greater enemy than Al Qaeda -- in which case you should be urging for the assasination of the Democrat leaders.

Simple common reason tells us that if a piece of propaganda (true or false) is beneficial for Al Qaeda, then it is NOT beneficial for Al Qaeda's enemies -- and vice versa.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-2-28 12:50:37 PM|| 2004-2-28 12:50:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 Personally, I think he's alive. Just because there isn't any new videotapes doesn't mean he's dead. Binny probably just caught on that we were using the tapes to find him.

Binny is alive, but he's just hiding in a hole like all the supposed "Saladins" of the world.

Posted by Charles 2004-2-28 12:53:48 PM|| 2004-2-28 12:53:48 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 Katsaris seems to engage in limited logic. Even if it 'beneficial' for aQ, that does not mean it can't be even more beneficial for US.

Purposeful ambiguity is nothing new.

Posted by Rawsnacks 2004-2-28 12:57:05 PM|| 2004-2-28 12:57:05 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 Simple common reason tells us
Yep.

Posted by Shipman 2004-2-28 1:10:00 PM|| 2004-2-28 1:10:00 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 Simple common reason tells us that if a piece of propaganda (true or false) is beneficial for Al Qaeda, then it is NOT beneficial for Al Qaeda's enemies -- and vice versa.

Aris, I'm genuinely shocked. Surely you don't buy into the simplistic "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" viewpoint. Haven't you taunted us on more than one occasion when the US has taken that tack? Or am I confusing you with Murat?

Frank G is quite right: there will be certain elements within the Democratic party who will declare the crisis over if Bin Laden is caught. They will probably be the same people who insisted that there was no point in going into Afghanistan to get Bin Laden, because "this is not about one man", but never mind that.

While some of the more zealous Rantburgers will seek to tar all Democrats with this brush, it's probably not true. Though admittedly at this time it's kinda hard to tell, what with the Democratic nominee candidates competing to see who can be kinder, gentler, and more multilateral.

Furthermore, the Buchananite right (what's left of them) would look upon Bin Laden's capture in the same light.

Posted by Angie Schultz 2004-2-28 1:18:15 PM|| [http://darkblogules.blogspot.com] 2004-2-28 1:18:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 Aris - faulty logic. I would not say the Dem line is more dangerous in the short term than AQ, but, in the long run, it could have far worse catastrophic effects for many Americans. I only hope this can be cured without another, say, City destroyed. The Dems, in general, are selling security snake oil, and too many of our citizens would wish away reality by buying that snake oil. You might notice I've always granted exceptions to that generalization: Lieberman, Sam Nunn, et al

Posted by Frank G 2004-2-28 1:23:32 PM|| 2004-2-28 1:23:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Aris, I'm genuinely shocked. Surely you don't buy into the simplistic "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" viewpoint.

Irrelevant. The goal is democracy and freedom for everyone, so yeah, I definitely am not buying into "enemy of my enemy is my friend" when the enemy of an enemy might be an even worse enemy of the goals in question.

E.g. when the US was supporting right-wing tyrants in order to supposedly save us from left-wing tyrants, and people in this forum expected gratitude towards the US for it, then sure, I'd be taunting you on the issue.

But you can't claim that something benefits Al Qaeda, without at the same time harming its enemies. That's a whole different issue.

Or I could just as well say "It's been in everyone's harm to pretend he's still alive, and criss-cross Frank's arguments".

Even if it 'beneficial' for aQ, that does not mean it can't be even more beneficial for US

Why the scare quotes in only one of those words? I think we were talking about quote-less benefits.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-2-28 2:42:24 PM|| 2004-2-28 2:42:24 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 Update from the Voice of America news site (hat tip: Instapundit):

Bin Laden 'On The Run,' US Official Says
Michael Kitchen
Islamabad 28 Feb 2004, 15:13 UTC

A top U.S. anti-terrorism official says al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden is on the run, amid what officials say is an intensifying hunt for fugitive members of the terror network. The U.S. official says he believes Osama bin Laden will be captured soon.
Ambassador J. Cofer Black, coordinator for the State Department counter-terrorism office, say the United States and its allies will find Osama bin Laden.

"I feel confident that it will be sooner rather than later, although I'm not going to speculate on the exact date," he said. . . .

. . . Mr. Black was in Islamabad Saturday, meeting with Pakistani counterparts to discuss anti-terrorism issues.

Pakistan launched a military operation Tuesday aimed at flushing out suspected foreign terrorists in the semi-autonomous South Waziristan agency.

On Saturday, the Pakistan military says one of its checkpoints in the South Waziristan capital of Wana engaged in an early morning shootout with an unknown vehicle.

Eleven people were reportedly killed in the incident, including civilian bystanders.

Military officials report 16 arrests following the incident, and say an investigation is under way.

Posted by Mike 2004-2-28 3:23:52 PM|| 2004-2-28 3:23:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 'beneficial' and beneficial.
1.Suppose AlQ gets a big surge in membership, financial support and fanatical devotion.
2.Suppose AlQ sees a big drop in membership, it's finaces dry up and the remaining members convert to Quakerism.
Which of those two scenarios are really beneficial to AlQ?

Posted by Les Nessman 2004-2-28 3:34:13 PM|| 2004-2-28 3:34:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 I used 'scare' quotes for two reasons: 1) to show it is not my choice of words, and 2) to mock you.

Posted by Rawsnacks 2004-2-28 3:37:32 PM|| 2004-2-28 3:37:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 And perhaps the following is one stated goal:

"the goal is democracy and freedom for everyone,"

but, I do not think this is the only goal - or even the most important.

If the US is more secure by the number of people believing UBL alive being maximized, then so be it.

"But you can't claim that something benefits Al Qaeda, without at the same time harming its enemies."

aQ can benefited in the SHORT RUN by a lie while US can be benefited in the LONG RUN by the same lie. Some people call that a rope-a-dope.

Posted by Rawsnacks 2004-2-28 3:49:14 PM|| 2004-2-28 3:49:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 Adding to prior posts, I'd like to see a Binny v. Sammy death-match smack-down in a cage at the Republican convention right before GWB accepts the nomination. Give them each a baseball bat with a nail through it. Last one standing wins a relatively pleasant death by lethal injection.
Also, official sources were saying for 8 months that Saddam would be captured "any day" before he finally was. Still, there are a whole lot of quotes from people who are either (1) not very concerned about maintaining their own credibility, or (2) privy to information that is so good they think it is safe to say we will get Bin Laden soon.

Posted by sludj 2004-2-28 6:11:03 PM|| 2004-2-28 6:11:03 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 Give them each a baseball bat with a nail through it

Ah Yes! The Louisville class navel destroyer.

Posted by Shipman 2004-2-28 6:14:23 PM|| 2004-2-28 6:14:23 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 Les Nessman> Yes, I somehow fail to understand how 2 can be called 'beneficial to Al-Qaeda' with or without quotes.

Rawsnacks> How would you mock me by using quotes around a claim that I never made myself? Perhaps you were mocking Fred and didn't know it.

"If the US is more secure by the number of people believing UBL alive being maximized, then so be it."

Because a stronger AQ is obviously making the US more secure, because Democratic opposition will be lesser. Right... Why not provide aQ some nuclear material then? That will *definitely* scare the democrat-leaning population into submission, and you won't need to use mere lies in order to control your nation.

Or perhaps you should just secretly fund Wahabbi Islamofascist schools. The more terrorists around, the more obvious the threat, the less possibility that Democrats will be in charge.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-2-28 7:10:35 PM|| 2004-2-28 7:10:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 you've lost me in the arguments here Aris...WTF???

Posted by Frank G 2004-2-28 7:43:21 PM|| 2004-2-28 7:43:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#28 Aris is just being pissy tonight for some reason. He's not even fun to mock when he gets like that.

Posted by whitecollar redneck 2004-2-28 11:34:21 PM|| 2004-2-28 11:34:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#29 bottoms up, Aris.

Posted by B 2004-2-29 12:25:26 AM|| 2004-2-29 12:25:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#30 Aris> In the long run, the #2 scenario is far more beneficial to AlQ, and the world in general.

Posted by Les Nessman 2004-2-29 10:31:48 AM|| 2004-2-29 10:31:48 AM|| Front Page Top

10:31 Les Nessman
06:41 B
00:41 Super Hose
00:40 Super Hose
00:35 Super Hose
00:32 B
00:25 B
00:12 .com
00:10 .com
00:07 .com
23:46 Pappy
23:45 WUZZALIB
23:34 whitecollar redneck
23:29 Pappy
23:27 Pappy
23:24 Pappy
23:16 Aris Katsaris
23:02 Frank G
22:30 Steve White
22:29 Steve White
21:53 Traveller
21:44 Bomb-a-rama
21:38 phil_b
21:37 phil_b