Bring Me the Head of Osama bin Laden
Tuesday 15 July 2008

by: Steve Weissman, t r u t h o u t | Perspective


Osama bin Laden.
(Artwork by Mitchell Marco)
If Osama bin Laden consciously set out to lure the United States into an ever-widening, never-ending and militarily unwinnable war, President George W. Bush is providing exactly the war the bearded one wanted. Start with Iraq, where for all his talk of military success, Mr. Bush has just failed to get Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to accept a long-term Status of Forces Agreement. The Iraqis, it turns out, stubbornly insist on a timetable for withdrawing US troops and a commitment to block the Israelis from using Iraqi airspace to bomb Iran. Such are the political fruits of imperial adventure in a world that has long rejected colonial rule. Nor should it come as a surprise to hear our badly overstretched military brass echoing Barack Obama in Monday's New York Times. It seems that everyone in the know now wants to withdraw combat forces from the Iraqi quagmire to send them to fight the resurgent Taliban and opium-rich warlords in an Afghan morass.

Move on to Iran, where the New Yorker's Sy Hersh has caught Washington sponsoring what can only be called terrorist attacks within the country, while Mr. Bush now tells the Israelis to go ahead with their preparations for possible aerial strikes against Tehran's nuclear enrichment and other facilities.

On to Afghanistan, where the CIA's hand-picked Hamid Karzai has predictably failed to become a viable national leader, mostly because his fellow Pashtun tribesmen see him for what he is - the Afghan face of a foreign military occupation. US and allied casualties now surpass the monthly totals in Iraq, while our supposed friends in Pakistan's military intelligence are widely suspected of sponsoring last week's terrorist bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul.

And so to Pakistan, where the Pentagon is systematically destabilizing the newly elected and highly fragile civilian government, as the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln and its task force sit menacingly off the Pakistani coast.

Allahu Akhbar! What more could bin Laden want?

Of the four historically unpromising battlegrounds into which we have strayed, the Pakistani front remains the least understood and potentially most explosive. In a word, our increasingly intrusive military presence could easily trigger a full-scale civil war in the only Islamic country with a ready-to-go nuclear arsenal and the missiles to deliver them.

The current showdown began in January, when US Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden and then-chief of Central Command Admiral William Fallon flew to Pakistan to put the screws to the country's embattled military ruler, Gen. Pervez Musharraf. They wanted his blessing for US Special Forces to escalate combat operations in the country's Northwest Frontier Province, the semi-autonomous Pashtun lands that neither the Pakistani government nor the British Raj ever truly controlled. The Americans believed that Osama bin Laden had holed up in this ruggedly mountainous region after fleeing Afghanistan, and they wanted to flush him out.

Reportedly, Musharraf refused. He knew, as the Americans apparently did not, that more Yankee boots on the ground would deeply offend most Pakistanis and create a furious backlash from the stubbornly independent Pashtuns. But, needing to keep a semblance of US support, Musharraf gave his visitors what Newsweek called "virtually unrestricted authority" to launch unmanned Predator drones from secret bases near Islamabad and Jacobabad. The Predators each carry multiple missiles, which American controllers have sent hurtling down in increasing number upon suspected terrorists and whoever else gets in the way. Since January, the Predators have created some highly unpopular "collateral damage" among Pashtun families and Pakistani soldiers, while US-led troops in Afghanistan have claimed the right to fire into the region from Afghanistan in "hot pursuit" of fleeing Taliban fighters. Though all of the governments involved formally deny it, intelligence sources have openly admitted that American and British special forces are regularly crossing into Pakistan against the express wishes of the civilian government.

Paradoxically, this all looks like precisely the scenario for which Obama was widely criticized in the primaries, when he said, "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will." Having established himself as tough guy, Obama now talks more of the need to balance such military action with a long-range political agenda in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. But this kind of balancing seems to have escaped most of the Bush administration.

Why, then, their suddenly renewed interest in finding bin Laden after so many years of letting him run free? The answer is both simple and shabby. During Mr. Bush's short stay in London in mid-June, the Sunday Times reported that he had ordered his troops to capture bin Laden before the administration leaves office as a way to secure the Bush legacy. "If he [Bush] can say he has killed Saddam Hussein and captured Bin Laden, he can claim to have left the world a safer place," the Sunday Times quoted one US intelligence source. "Bush is swinging for the fences in the hope of scoring a home run."

Is giving bin Laden the martyrdom he craves worth destroying civilian democracy and risking a civil war in Pakistan? To George W. Bush and the hyper-military John McCain, the question is hardly worth asking.

http://www.truthout.org/article/bring-me-head-osama-bin-laden

Amen

Chop his head off and put it on a stake in the Kabul town sq.

Bring his body to NY so we can take turns pissing down his neck hole!

Just a suggestion!

Some political experts think that he is already DEAD . The US does not want to say he is dead because that means the end of the war on terror . So by saying he is alive , they find a pretext and attack any nation saying he is there or his group is there : satanic thinking at its best .
He was sick and needed two dialysis machines for his ill kidneys according to Musharraf .
Can a sick person live in such harsh conditions ?.

harsh conditions????
he's living in southern florida!!!!!

For one thing, I do not believe he is roughing it in the mountain caves as the story is told. Second the information about his health is sketchy too. And since the great burning shrub declared war on a war tactic, the war can basically go on and on as long as we have expendable lives to send. A true war on terror would require all nations and it would not center on any one nation or nations, as all nations are capable of terrorism, it is a warring tactic.

personally I think he died before the September 11th attacks which is why the Taliban in Afghanistan was unwilling (or unable) to turn him over to the US.

Got a better one. Bury him as you would wish to be buried, with dignity and honor, he is after all doing what he believes to be right reguardless of how you feel about it.

So... Bury him and close that chapter... Move on...
Life is a moving experience... Which way do you wish to move... Forward or in circles.

Burry him or not, either way there are still many with like beliefs who are just waiting to kill those who do not agree with their religious views. So Osama or no Obama we need to get rid of the radicals who wish us and the rest of the free world harm. If you ignore these people they will kill us here.

How can one person with two or three hundred followers be a danger to the USA who is the strongest power on earth ?.
How can an old sick man survive all the bombing of Afghanistan ?.
Saddam had more power than him and he was captured . What does this tell you ?.
It tells me the whole thing stinks to high heaven . Lies and propaganda do not change the facts of life .
Musharraf ,a former French defense minister , some French and international media said at one point that he is DEAD .

You will have to dig him up first ...

Not a pleasant thought
But he is reported to have died in 2001.

Major kidney problems and if you look at some photos of the guy, in the later ones, his skin is sallow and he is very gray and haggard; typical signs of renal issues.

How can that be when,

The CIA said its analysis indicated the voice was bin Laden's. It was the al-Qaeda leader's first public statement since December 2004 and ended his longest communications gap since the Sept. 11 attacks. (Past audio: Dec. 16, 2004 | May 6, 2004)

"My message to you is about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and how to end them," bin Laden began, addressing the American people. He said militant Islamists are winning the wars despite American technical superiority.

The Arabic-language TV network Al-Jazeera said the tape was made last month. It included references to the transit bombings July 7 in London and allegations in November that the Bush administration had contemplated bombing Al-Jazeera's headquarters. Attacks in Madrid in 2004 and London last summer, bin Laden said, show that al-Qaeda remains active.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-01-19-bin-laden-audio_x.htm

There have been several other tapes after 2001 that have been confirmed as that of bin Laden. Tapes where he mentions events that confirm they were recent when made.
The voice on many of these tapes were also confirmed to be bin Laden by several sources. Not just the CIA but also some news organizations.

I think (I may be wrong) that Bin laden is dead. I think Afghanistan would rather have America living in fear than rejoicing his death.

I think he is dead guys and gals. I honestly do.
If he is dead, Afghanistan can release the news anytime 2 years time 3, 5 or ten years time. To be honest whenever the hell suits them.

I think he died in around 2006.

Bin Laden is not the focus of the war in Afghanistan. Al Queda is and the Taliban. Bin Laden if dead is only a Martyr. He didnt even start the Al Queda terrorist group.

Ensuring the Afghan people have a future is the important thing!

Your right Beluschi. The tape was a fake!!

2nd Bin Laden Tape Claims First Tape Was Fake
by Scott Ott for ScrappleFace · No Comments
(2002-11-13) — A second audiotape surfaced today on which a voice claiming to be Usama bin Laden denies he recorded a tape released by al Jazeera TV earlier this week.
“It’s a fake. That was not me on the tape,” says the voice. “How could I have released that tape? I was killed in the bombing of the Tora Bora region. The maker of the earlier tape is an impostor. This is really me, and I tell you that I am no longer alive. Wait, let me get one of my 70 virgins over here to confirm my testimony.”
The audio breaks up and is unintelligible after that point.
U.S. military experts who have studied the second tape agree that the voice is Mr. bin Laden’s.
“I guess we were just wrong about the first tape,” said one unnamed expert. “This time it’s really him, and he must be dead. You gotta take the man’s word for it.”

http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=267

Come on now,,,
You've got to admit. That's funny!!

I know you've got a sense of humor somewhere in that British mind!!!!

No problem fanta, I hold my hands up I am not in no way educated enough on this issue to be in here. I was just leaving my opinion.

You closed with a very strong point!!
I better run, you guys would destroy me. I am not very political and this is a very heavy forum. But it is a good forum. Interesting views in it.

You're good!