Intel Official: Bush Knows Where bin Laden Is Hiding But Chooses Not to Capture Him

[babylonsister]

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2007/07/14/intel-official-bush-knows-where-bin-laden-is-hiding/

Intel Official: Bush Knows Where bin Laden Is Hiding But Chooses Not to Capture Him
Posted by Jon Ponder | Jul. 14, 2007, 10:09 am

Apologists for Pres. George W. Bush routinely lay blame for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the Clinton administration, purportedly because they failed to capture Osama bin Ladin when they had an opportunity in the 1990s.

But since 2005, at least, the Bush administration has known the whereabouts of bin Ladin as well as the much of al Qaeda’s senior leadership, and yet the president refuses to send forces in to get them.

In congressional testimony earlier this week, intelligence officials admitted that bin Laden and his gang are in Pakistan and gaining strength, but that the Bush administration refuses to go after them because the Musharraf regime won’t give the United States permission to conduct operations in the region:

“It’s not that we lack the ability to go into that space,” said Tom Fingar of the office of the Director of National Intelligence. “But we have chosen not to do so without the permission of the Pakistani government,” Fingar told members of Congress who demanded to know why the U.S. did not take more decisive action against a known enemy.

It is bizarre that the Bush won’t go after bin Laden because he’s suddenly averse to invading a sovereign nation. A cynic might wonder if the reason he won’t send troops into Pakistan against the wishes of its leaders because there is no oil there.

snip//

Last week, Michael Chertoff, the Homeland Security Secretary, said he had a feeling in his gut that there would be an attack on the United States this summer. If the unthinkable does happen, it will be interesting to see how they manage to blame this one on Pres. Clinton.

[fazoolius_2006]

1. Not buying it.

If he knew where he was, don't you think he would go and get him to salvage his fall down the bottomless pit of approval?

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. No, it would mean the end of the eternal war

tehy need Goldsten alive at all costs.

[bananarepublican]

41. Attack Iran! The day after 'capture' bin Laden. MSM does the rest. n/t

[babylonsister]

6. So you'd prefer to believe the intelligence officers are lying? Why

would they say anything?

[tinrobot]

11. War is too profitable

If Osama was caught, the war would be over. Halliburton wouldn't like that.

[calimary]

36. I'd go with that one, too. After all, if we finally "git" Osama bin Laden,

there goes the last boogey-man. He's the human face on al Qaeda. He's the one easiest to wrap your brain around, especially if you choose to be of limited reasoning - because you've decided to bow down obediently to bush without question or doubt. I mean, think of it - that beard! That turban! Just look at that bastard! Easy stuff. Sinister and exotic and facial-haired - ooooooh... We're ALL neoCONS now, to quote a drooling, panting chris matthews. If bin Laden were caught, not all of America would roll over and go back to sleep but some of them would, making them that much less reachable for the manipulators at work here. Harder to scare people when there's nobody to scare them with. Others will ratchet up the hysteria by redirecting the terror-mongering to al Qaeda as a group, but that's more nebulous and faceless than a specific PERSON. Therefore, that's more difficult to wrap your brain around, it's not an easy link-up. Mind you, this also feeds into those who are visually oriented and process information visually - which is a majority of us, statistically. So bin Laden is far more useful to them while on the lam. Adds to his mystery and danger and ominousness. Puts him beyond our control and completely unpredictable. The unpredictable is also scary. People tend to fear what they don't know. As long as they can use bin Laden for their own purposes and benefit, they will.

[Richard Steele]

24. No, I don't. His presidency is about ill-gotten POWER, not approval.

And the Bin Ladens are old business partners of the B*shes
who help them maintain that power.

[thecrow]

27. Maybe he's saving that for right before he gets out of office

whenever that will be

[Bucky]

30. Also "no" because he's afraid to lose Pakistan; because we lack logistics & men

It would be a massive operation to get bin Laden in that maze of rocks and caves he's hiding in. We simply lack the personnel to go solo on this and something is holding back the rest of NATO who are in Afghanistan, too. I suspect Musharref is a lot more fragile than we've been thinking. And don't forget that as much as Musharref dispises India, it's be a thousand times worse if fundy Muslims take over the Pak military and its handful of nukes.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

33. NOPE. I'll tell you why. This "messiah's" mission is about concentrating power and wealth.

He and his neocon and dominion monguls are not only doing here but doing it globally.

Why should he worry about approval ratings? He's going to serve out the maximum two-term?

If anything, he is free to fuck things up at will in order to continue expansion of the imperial US corporate-Christofascist regime.

Besides, he and this regime are in bed with the bin Ladens and Saudis,...and keep it quite wet every damn bed (and I apologize for how gross that sounds but the relationship is that gross).

[ima_sinnic]

42. he couldn't care less about his "approval"

-- maintaining endless war is far more profitable than high approval.

Anyway, despite abysmal "approval," he's done everything and gotten everything he's ever wanted. "approval" isn't worth jacks**t.

In addition, I believe the only way he could "capture" OBL would be to exhume his grave. That guy has been cold for about 5 years now. All-in-all, bushit has it made by "keeping him alive" to drag out as needed to "make videos"--but he overlooks the fact that OBL also symbolizes his hugest most colossal FAILURES: first to prevent 9/11, and then to bring anybody to justice for it.

[Kokonoe]

43. I'ts not about approval or polls.

YOU DON'T MATTER.

[Zucca]

2. The explanation I heard was this...

Pakistan is a bit shaky as far as stability goes...Going in would possibly destabilize a country that has nukes. Pakistan cannot "grant permission" because it might promote civil unrest.

We should have gone in there instead of Iraq...without permission but with a STRONG ASSURANCE that we would be leaving as soon as we got Al Queda. Bush blew it completely.

[Cha]

18. busHITS blew it on purpose

and what you heard sounds more credible to me than some explanations..until furthur notice.

[Kagemusha]

3. This stuff is very badly worded. "in Pakistan" is not an exact location.

Pakistan is not a small place! Knowing he's in Pakistan and not going on a specific operation to snatch him, these things have nothing to do with each other. If you don't know which cave he's in, how the hell is the US going to send.. what? Hundreds of special forces into hostile tribal territory where Musharraf can do nothing to protect them because he just plain doesn't run that place? (and no central Pakistani government has?) How about an invasion of tens of thousands of troops, stomping through every bit of mountain without a clue? Based from where? Supplied how? And if they're not there with Pakistan's permission, will Pakistan, officially or unofficially, resist?

There's a huge, HUGE difference between knowing Bin Laden's general location and his exact whereabouts.

[robinlynne]

12. CIA agents have already said on film that they were ordered to look the other way

and let binladen leave afghanistan and go to pakistan. I saw it on a pbs documentary, can't remember which one. There were three roads and the army was ordered to close off 2 of them. Didn't anyone else see that film?

[Kagemusha]

14. That's not the point. You send troops to GPS coordinates, not "Pakistan".

The originally posted article was written in a way such as to imply that Bush knows Bin Laden's EXACT location and will not launch an operation to seize or slay him because it's "within Pakistan's territory". That's not my understanding of reality at all. My understanding is that knowing he is in Pakistan, without any narrowing it down at all, is not particularly helpful even if one had the full support of Pakistan's government, which the US most certainly would not. And my problem with articles like this is even more basic - the words used, like "whereabouts," strongly implies exact location, yet none of the details actually prove, or even assert, any such thing. And yet, what is being implied, but not said, is the very basis of the predictable moral outrage directed at the Bush administration.

Look, if people think he knows what cave Osama's in but just can't be bothered to lift a finger, they should flatly say so and let the claim stand or fall without any of this chaff.

[KittyWampus]

21. are you suggeting the whistleblowers here should report Osama's EXACT location

along with GPS postion?

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

34. OMG!!! *LOL* Reading that through this thread,...really tripped me up.

:rofl:

Scared ME!!! :rofl:

WHEW!!!!

[Kagemusha]

37. I guess you people want the same thing as Bill Kristol in this matter.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2917787&mesg_id=2917787

Front page news in Pakistan, it seems. I'm sure Musharraf loves seeing this in the papers.

[terisan]

5. George "We are going to smoke him out" Bush may have an "ungentleman's agreement" with Bin Laden nt

[texpatriot2004]

7. The * family is in bed with the Saudis. * NEVER intended to go

after OBL...ever! There is no way that I believe that the US Military can't find him, that is, if they wanted to, if they were ordered to.

"Look Elvis" says * while OBL and the gang get away.

I believe this official's testimony. It is all part of the * family master plan. The puppet masters are working with the "enemy" - they have been since before 9/11.

That is the ugly truth. That is the horror of it. IMHO

[Old and In the Way]

16. I'm betting the bin Laden's have George seriously compromised. Maybe Cheney, too.

He can't take out OBL without some kind of unwanted quid pro quo. The Bush-bin Laden family go back a loooong ways...no doubts they took out their own insurance policies when they started dealing with the BFEE.

Otherwise, going after OBL would have been a no-brainer. But Bush himself, almost 6 months to the day after 9/11, flat out told the American people he had no interest in getting him.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

35. Oh, hell yes Cheney is as "invested" as the Bushies, along with the neocons.

Cheney has the inside on the illegal arms shit, among other things.

These people are so DIvested of any sense of humanity or decency or conscience,...they can ONLY be cast into the category of "human evil".

[texpatriot2004]

39. I agree. I think that * knew on Sept. 11th that is why he sat there

after getting the news.

[JacquesMolay]

8. Thou shalt not speak ill of another rich person...

... that's why Bush never mentions him. I tell you, I think that the reason that the Western elites were so opposed to the Soviets for all of those years was really because they killed the Czar.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

9. Sort of the same reason they despise FDR. They feel he betrayed his own kind.

MKJ

[JacquesMolay]

10. good one, m8

...

[formercia]

17. and confiscated the properties of the Knights.

Old blood, long memories.

[snappyturtle]

13. K&R It's easier to keep the "fear factor" going with the boogey man loose! nt

[Sapphire Blue]

15. Did the Iraqi government give permission for the US invasion?

An invasion that had NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11 OR BIN LADEN?

[agincourt]

19. Bin Laden is in bed with the "conservatives"

They are attached by ideology. They worked together to bring down the Soviet Union when it was losing it's teeth and was actually a stabilizing force. Right-wing goons and Radical Islamacists will work together to kill American democracy and the public won't connect the dots. Any other presidency would not sleep at night until Bin Laden was skinned alive like a pig along with the rest of his ilk. Not this group, they had their media bungholes blame 9-11 on centrists and liberals while they went on a crony enrichment war. They struck the Taliban just enough to cover their ass politically, get rid of a few useful idiots but leave the big boys intact. How these assholes walk while Bin Laden prepares another attack I will never see. It's a disgrace.

[PoiBoy]

20. Never forget...

It's old news, I know.. but nevertheless relevant to the OP... IMO... the Reds are quick to blame Clinton, but they let this fact slide by under the radar...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2238254
<snip>
2 CIA officials tell us Washington –twice– declined to send the reinforcements they asked for when bin Laden was cornered in Afghanistan in 2001. By the time of the 2nd request by the CIA for troops, the special ops force could hear Osama on radio asking his followers for forgiveness for leading them to their imminent capture. It was that close.
<end>


...this from the transcript of the program CNN PRESENTS: In the Footsteps of Bin Laden
produced by Christiane Amanpour, CNN Chief International Correspondent.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0608/27/cp.01.html
<snip>
AMANPOUR: Gary Berntsen was the leader of the secret CIA paramilitary unit that had pursued bin Laden since he had fled Kabul. And now the CIA was sure it knew where he was, thanks in large part to a radio taken off a dead al Qaeda fighters.

BERNTSEN: We listened to bin Laden for several days using that radio, listened to his communications among him and his men. We listened to him apologize to them for having led them into this trap and having led them into a location where they would be having airstrikes called on them just relentlessly.

AMANPOUR: More than two weeks of bombing, solid intelligence, the U.S. had thrown its biggest bombs, its most sophisticated missiles, bunker busters, daisy cutters, at bin Laden, but somehow, some way, it wasn't enough.

BERGEN: The policy of using very limited number of U.S. Special Forces on the ground calling in airstrikes and a large number of Afghan ground troops worked brilliantly at overthrowing the Taliban, but at the battle of Tora Bora, it was a total disaster.

AMANPOUR (on camera): The plan was for Afghan and Pakistani soldiers to block any escape routes, but Osama bin Laden managed to slip away through the mountains. And the mission to capture or kill the al Qaeda leader failed. By most accounts, the main problem was not enough American soldiers on the ground.

BERGEN: By my calculation, there were more American journalists than American soldiers at the battle of Tora Bora, and that fact kind of speaks for itself.

BERNTSEN: In the first two or three days of December, I would write a message back to Washington, recommending the insertion of U.S. forces on the ground. I was looking for 600 to 800 Rangers, roughly a battalion. They never came.

AMANPOUR (voice-over): Also hunting bin Laden in Tora Bora, then Afghan militia leader, General Mohamed Zahir (ph).

(on camera) Do you have any idea how many American soldiers were at the battle of Tora Bora?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was not more than 50, 60, I think. There was not more than that at that time.
<end>


..and then there's this...

<snip>
Bernsten's urgent message followed a direct briefing on troop needs and a request, in-person to President Bush in November by Henry "Hank" Crumpton, who was then CIA officer in D.C. heading the Afghanistan effort. (Now Crompton is in charge of counterterrorism at the State Department.) Crompton had learned of a CIA troop request that was never forwarded by the Pentagon to the White House.
<end>

...this last statement is confusing to me because Crumpton states that he made the troop request in-person to Bush, yet later states that he learned of a CIA troop request that was never forwarded by the Pentagon to the White House. I would think it to be the other way around...

[Poiuyt]

22. Bush: "If you harbor terrorists, you are terrorists."

As part of a public relations offensive that has received extensive media coverage, President Bush declared in an August 31 speech in Salt Lake City that "e have made it clear to all nations that if you harbor terrorists, you are just as guilty as the terrorists, you are an enemy of the United States, and you will be held to account."

Bush's statement echoes claims he has repeatedly made in the years since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. On November 21, 2001, for example, Bush declared:

BUSH: We fight the terrorists and we fight all of those who give them aid. America has a message for the nations of the world: If you harbor terrorists, you are terrorists. If you train or arm a terrorist, you are a terrorist. If you feed a terrorist or fund a terrorist, you're a terrorist, and you will be held accountable by the United States and our friends.

more -

http://mediamatters.org/items/200608310005?offset=20&show=1

[HCE SuiGeneris]

23. I know!

Let's bomb Iran instead!

[Pastiche423]

25. Does anyone honestly believe OBL is still alive?

It was around March 2002 when little lord pissypants declared: "So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you."

There are several publications that have said OBL died in December 2001. He was a very ill man when 9/11 happened.

We lost a big boogeyman when we watched Saddam swinging from a rope. We MUST have a boogeyman to keep the masses in fear.

OBL = Emmanuel Goldstein

[leftchick]

26. and yet we will bomb the crap out of Iran very soon

because they do not have nukes.

[hootinholler]

28. Another Khan job. n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

29. Show of hands ..... how many here see this as a 'gee .... no shit?' statement?

How many here have suspected this from the time of Tora Bora.

[Harry Monroe]

31. It makes sense when you think about it

Bin Laden alive is more valuable to Bush than Bin Laden dead. If only for the "Fear Factor" of trotting out Bin Laden from time to time to play the "fear" card and keep US citizens in line. Kill Bin Laden and you've killed this Administration's boogyman and the monster under our bed.

[Harry Monroe]

32. To paraphrase FDR

"The only thing we have to fear is Bin Laden"

[kineneb]

38. Did anyone check the WH basement?

I bet that is where he *really* is...

[lonestarnot]

40. How bout the WH kitchen or laundromat?