White House fails to get Al Qaeda in 2005
So much for the "war on terror," theme that this White House uses.
A secret military operation in early 2005 to capture senior members of Al Qaeda in Pakistan’s tribal areas was aborted at the last minute after top Bush administration officials decided it was too risky and could jeopardize relations with Pakistan, according to intelligence and military officials.
But the mission was called off after Donald H. Rumsfeld, then the defense secretary, rejected an 11th-hour appeal by Porter J. Goss, then the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, officials said. Members of a Navy Seals unit in parachute gear had already boarded C-130 cargo planes in Afghanistan when the mission was canceled, said a former senior intelligence official involved in the planning...read on
Do you think all the William the Bloody Kristol's of the right wing will opine on this failing? I think not. Everything is always Bill Clinton's fault.
can somebody explain why pakistan is a no-touch zone?
isn't osama there?
wtf is going oon?
Ain't this the same story that was in Path to 9-11 the reichwing always likes to use?
The "War on Terror" is a fraud.
Impeach and Incarcerate.
Hopefully ABC has a docu-drama about this soon.
"Damn it! You weren't supposed to actually CATCH HIM! What's wrong with you idiots!" - Donald Rumsfeld.
Pakistan has the bomb. (Iran and N. Korea have been paying attention, by the way.)
Musharef is holding the reigns on a very unstable regime with only his personal charisma and influence in the military to keep things together. If he slips, you've got a high potential for immediate escalation with India and/or the NATO forces in Afghanistan. And, Pakistan has the bomb. Things could get very ugly, very quickly.
The real problem is that Bush and co. think that they can delay this disintegration indefinitely, and they don't have an effort going toward a more stable government, nor a backup plan for the eventual catastrophe. Of course, no one could anticipate that the Pakistani military dictatorship could take a violent turn... (Right, Condi?)
ysbaddaden @ 2:
No, in that one, Sandy Berger put a gun to Jack Bauer's head and told him to let the terrorists go. Oh, and he said he was doing it because he's Jewish, and he hates Jesus.
christian @ 1:
I meant #6 as a response to this - in case it seemed to be floating without context.
This isn't Bill Clinton's fault but is actually Jimmy Carter's fault since he was the President during the failed mission to rescue the hostages during the Iranian hostage crisis.
Dont forget tora bora! Missed Im there too!
almost 6 yrs......many chances missed.
Well, you nailed it.
Here it is.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjVkODc0YzJhMWUwMmI4Yjc5OWJmZjNkNTE...
Old Billy @ 7:
What, no Sydney Bristow? Oh that's right, no one watched that show.
...and 2006. And 2007. Not forgetting 2002,3,4.
bob @ 9:
And Ray Gun left the hostages in Lebanon to rot for seven years.
Kind of Biblical, if you'll pardon the expression.
Bottom line is he is apparently out there in the mountains somewhere and as long as he is, bush can remind us that he hates our freedoms and wants to kill all of us. If he had been captured, who would be the terror poster boy?
christian @ 1:
bob @ 9:
Carter was flying was the C-130s or the helicopters.....remind us.
pissed off patricia @ 15:
Howard Stern?
How many times do I have to tell you people? Osama is worth more to these bastards ALIVE!!
stevo @ 19:
Very true. Of course he is.
BOOOO! LOOK! OSAMA!!! (soundtrack from Jaws playing in the background).
So in terms of the otherness of Bush's actions and public personality, what would you expect:That he wear a hair shirt. He could sit on a pointed stick. But the problem with the hair shirt is that after a while, you get used to it, it becomes comfortable. Even a pointed stick... We dwellers of base reality know that there's one prime technique in the real world (that is, not influenced by Tryptophans) for dealing with that disconentedness - keeping yourself alert so that if the information flys by, you're there with it. I suppose another one is shock, but the difficulty with that is... if there's no shocks, maybe you sleep on. If you become reliant on external shocks anyway, you lose your own powers of initiative. Another other one is to build in shocks to your own system, like a challange where you regularly set yourself some particular challenge which requires of you that you go beyond what you're able to reasonably respond to, like self-imollation.
Q: If we talk about being in Bush's reality construct as being in the presence of something other, it's reasonable to assume that there's ways to be able to make yourself 'available' to music like you'd be able to make yourself 'available' to ESP.
The books I've read on the pathology of sociopaths and persons suffering from Aspereger's Syndrome that they never quite get to the subtly that people typically are interested in. The qualitative aspect of their logic is raw, as if chapped from over-abuse, which ironically is just the opposite. In a sense, their delusion is the cup that holds the wine of silence and deep troubled thoughts. Normally, we fill it with the Coca Cola or popular opinion, or something equally as palatable yet unassuming. With Bush it's the bitter piss of a miserable childhood and more than likely, chronic bed-wetting and masturbation. So you always have this conjunction between the real and the uncoordinated, quality and decay, the ineffable and the base and odorous. But one can train oneself to be in a position when the wind blows, you respond to it. Perhaps.
I don't believe the part about being sensitive to mushmouth musharif. I think they were thinking that if they hurt al kaline, then they would have an excuse to end the war, though of course, the war has nothing to do with all kaline and everything to do with killing people and/or torturing people in front of their families or bombing people's neighborhoods, all in the name of the 'war on terraahhhh'!
then again, our CIA has been outsourced for three years at least and what really credible intel has been drummed up since colin powell's finger paintings at the UN? and please tell me, would the CIA even give a schitt what intel they gave the shrub after plame was outed and her network destroyed? are they still using doug feith for 'ANALysis' of intel?
inquiring minds want to know!
Just goes to show that the war on terra is a massive fraud.
Let's see, we capture to top Al-CIA-Duh people, then there'd
be no excuse to invade the world. They don't really WANT to
capture those people, after all, every STATE needs it's enemy.
Afghanistan to Iraq has never been about Al Qaeda or Osama bin Laden. It's been about Gas pipelines and OIL.
Bush didn't go after Osama; his original intent and efforts were to remove the Taliban from Afghan Government and get a pipeline to India. Why else would Bush claim he cared nothing about finding Osama after taking over Afghanistan and Karzai signed a deal to allow the Gas pipeline through?
OIL, GAS, and who is in Control of it is all Bush cares about!
ysbaddaden @ 18:
michael moore!
Sweet. Soon Osama will be taking over Pakistan and relieving Musharraf of his nukes...THEN there'll be some good clean fun just in time for the '08 elected president to prove that while Bush was in office, no terror attacks happened.
No one "missed" anybody. It is not in the interests of the corporatocracy to catch Bin Laden.
Clinton and Carter had it all wrong. We do NOT want to stop Al Qaeda.
A respectful request; I wish it was easier to glean the meaning of the roundup links from the context. For example, in this one, the link "bloody Kristol" says nothing to indicate that the linked article is all about how pissed off the White House is about the NYT's editorial about pulling out of Iraq. That's a great article and very soul-satisfying and I almost missed it because there was no clue provided. Many thanks.
bob @ 9:
I strongly recommend you read Mark Bowden's book "Guests of the Ayatollah"
to get the accurate, factual events as to the hostages during the Iranian crisis
which occurred in Nov. 1979. Using "sling shot" attacks on Carter is inaccurate.
Do some historical reading(and not hysterical comments) before you open your
mouth....instead, open you eyes and read factual documention.
I'm beginning to think that maybe Osama... was here (in USA) with his family and freinds... (Bush family),(on sept 11th 2001) ...and flew outta here on one of those 747 planes... (that left on sept 12th) ...that carried all of the Bin Laden/Carlisle group (to safety in Saudi Arabia),(Osama,s homeland)....when and whilst other (Americans) languished (stranded) in airports across the country...
.....and has been living in relative peace and quiet (w/several wives)at a nice palace/bunkhouse at one of the many Bin Laden family compounds.
with a couple of (made in America) kidney dialasis machines not far away.
Doggiebobo @ 29:
Oops! I forgot the :) again.
Che's lounge said.
White House fails ____ (the seemingly never-ending fill in the blank)
Bob #31:
Yeah, a smily face would have been appropriate. But "some" uninformed
people do not know the facts and unfortunately don't take the time to lean.
Sorry if I came on soooooo strong..
milquetoast @ 30:
Hey. Anything is possible.
This administration does not want Bin Laden caught. If he is not killed in his cell, he will sing on the stand. I wish Bin Laden would write a book telling how much the Bushies pay him and what things they pay him for. He and his family have been such good friends with the Bushies for so long that it would be a Bush family biography.
BaScOmBe @ 25:
Howard Dean?
The story of the aborted raid, following July 2006 revelations that the CIA had previously disbanded its Bin Laden unit, gives lie to one of the central tenets of the so-called Bush Doctrine: no safe havens for terrorists.
For the details, see:
"The Pakistan Raid: So Much for 'No Safe Havens.'"
mark @ 36:
Can you, or anyone, tell me the last time there were supposedly "recent photos"
of Bin Laden??? I do not recall seeing any within last 14 + months. Is he still alive?
the day we bring osama, taliban, and al quida to justice will be a day when we will finally be granted a release from the pain that was 911. It breaks my heart and the pride I have for my country when our 'leaders' us that pain and fear to manipulate and shape us into hate-mongers and blind marchers. These are truly dark times.
Angry One @ 38:
I prefer Ritchie Havens.
This crap about more and more republicans changing their minds about Iraq is just that CRAP. They are saying this and at the same time saying they probably won't vote for change because that would look like they sided with the Dems. WTF? Hey assholes. Forget sides. Lives are at stake.
This makes me so mad.
White house fails.... etc etc... This is getting to be a recurring theme don'tcha think??? BTW, not such a hot job on it in 03, 04, 06 or 07 either... Just for the folks at home keeping score... Never mind the hearts and flowers bit... Never even got off the ground.... Maybe the pr flaks in Bush world can come up with a failed white house model... and the folks down in Crawford could sell it to the rubes passin thru who somehow, someway, still think George is still some kind of rockstar.... I hear they could use some help with their little failing tourista industry......I say, PFFFT............JD
Doggiebobo @ 39:
The primary reason I posed the above question is because I have less than ZERO
confidence in what this admin. tells us about Bin Laden, for as we ALL know, they
distort, misrepresent and lie about everything. Is Bin Laden just a "Boggie Man"
continuing to be used by bush, et.al. to keep the "terriorist threat" and scare tactics
in the forefront. I certainly don't know if he is alive or dead, but sure would like to
see some evidence that he is still alive.
Blaed said'
Is this where boosh got his codpiece?
http://www.thevannoys.com/Glen/CDs/Alice%20Cooper/Alice%20Cooper.jpg
mcjoan at dkos states "It seems that America's fight against al Qaeda requires authorization from Pakistan's government".
America in no way requires authorization from Pakistan's government to fight al qaeda. But you sure as shit do if you want to fight al qaeda on Pakistan soil. Believe it or not, some countries might actually hate it if the US waltzed into their country thinking you can do whatever the fuck you want, whenever you want, even if Osama Bin Asshole is there. You either get an OK, or pass on your intel and let the country harboring him take care of it. If said country happens to be a rather volatile military dictatorship with nuclear weapons, well then some restraint here was probably a good idea.
I know you want to get Bin Laden, but try and keep in mind you're not the only country on the planet ok?
The same reichwingers who want to rename everything after Reagan want to rename San Andreas fault for Bill Clinton.
I am not wholly aware of the circumstances involving this supposed raid. I highly suggest reading "Ghost Wars" by Steven Coll. It is an excellent, objective study of US/CIA involvement with Afghanistan from 1979 until Sept. 10th, 2001. One of the key points about the book was when Gen. Schoen remarked how many at the Pentagon had a feeling that a 'Tom Clancey' type approach would work (Spec Ops, night vision, etc) in capturing bin Laden. He commetns how Spec Ops don't go in unless extremely reliable intelligence is given (where is the target, for how long will he be there, who is with him, etc.) It wouldn't surprise me if a similar situation occured with unreliable intelligence.
Don't get me wrong here. I want Osama, al Zawahiri and others captured/killed. But what sort of repercussions would have been involved in the MSM and blogs with a botched attack (women/ children dead, lots of SEALs/ Rangers dead and No bin Laden).
I don't question the incompetence of the Bush Admin and hope for impeachment of both Bush and Cheney.
My comments are biased both by Coll's book and the fact that my brother is an Army Ranger. Knowing this, I want my brother to go and kill/ capture bin Laden and others but I want it to be done right. No unnecesary civilian deaths. That is how Spec Ops work. No one dies, they get the job done. Thjis might seem like a pipe dream but it is my bias.
Ramone @ 47:
I swear that concept just makes some people's heads explode...
Ramone said,
America in no way requires authorization from Pakistan's government to fight al qaeda. But you sure as shit do if you want to fight al qaeda on Pakistan soil. Believe it or not, some countries might actually hate it if the US waltzed into their country thinking you can do whatever the fuck you want, whenever you want, even if Osama Bin Asshole is there. You either get an OK, or pass on your intel and let the country harboring him take care of it. If said country happens to be a rather volatile military dictatorship with nuclear weapons, well then some restraint here was probably a good idea.
I know you want to get Bin Laden, but try and keep in mind you're not the only country on the planet ok?
Where were you before we invaded Afghanistan or Iraq !!!!(America coulda used you!)
What if a country does'nt have nuclear weapons (like Iran) should we then not exercise so much restraint?
(I'm just curious)
Are troop movements why they have to spend so much time digging latrines?
ysbaddaden @ 52:
Well, Haliburton contractors actually doing the latrine digging...getting somewhere in
the neighborhood of $100,000 per pee hole.
ysbaddaden @ 37:
Michael Jackson!
Do you think all the William the Bloody Kristol’s of the right wing will opine on this failing? I think not. Everything is always Bill Clinton’s fault.
If the repugnant cons would not have been so obsessed with Bill Clinton's penis, we wouldn't be where we are now.
Anyone who still doesn't understand that the Bush Crime Family hearts the bin Laden family needs to do a little reading. He'll never be brought to justice as long as the Boy King is allowed to rule. Impeach and Remove.
Janet @ 42:
the primaries and the 2008 elections are coming and the repugs will pretend as hard as possible to be opposed to boooosh to try to make themselves more electable.
i have said it before and it is worth repeating here and now. in my humble opinion, the "war time president" and his advisers must certainly realize that in the minds of most Americans, if we capture osama the war is over. bush made that the main goal at the beginning of all of this. it seems to be the only logical reason why bush and his incompetent fools would repeatedly let osama walk away. (tora bora and now this report). we all know that dead or alive was the mission and getting the people that attacked us was the goal. get osama and the goal is achieved, certainly an inconvenience when you have other nations to attack as part of your neocon lunacy.
every cowboy movie i have seen ends when the bad guy is captured and the script writers for bush must know that.
They weren't caught because the higher ups are PROTECTING Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. With them being caught the fraudulent "War on Terror" ruse vanishes. Believe me, the White House echelon is in bed with these terrorists all the way.
"War on Terra? War on BullShit is more like it.
BaScOmBe @ 54:
Jesse Jackson!
Doggiebobo @ 53:
You mean the hole in my wee wee is worth a hundred grand?
IMPEACH this is direct evidence that the shit-for-brains and darthfartwad never intended to capture osama binladen. why the bush family and cheney's are so deeply in bed with the benladen family and the saudis. bush/cheney are the true "enemy combattants" of the usa, the us constitution and the American people.
I'm glad the SEAL's wer spared having to go into that clusterfuck. But I really do not believe that Bush, who has been a long time benefactor of the Bin Laden family's largesse, is ever going to risk biting the hand that feeds him. And the last neocons want is for the badguys to get caught. Without an every-living boogeyman to flaunt in our faces, they'll never beable to maintain the campaign of fear that has thus far been so successful in enabling them to establish their much desired police state. As long as the neocons hold power or have access to it, they will do whatever is necessary to create a boogeyman. If Biin Ladin hadn't come along to lay claim to various acts of terror in order to solidify his credentials among his constituency as a man of effectiveness, the neocons would have had to create someone like him. They'll never capture or kill bin Ladin unless, they've got his replaced selected and ready to go.
You have to understand Rummy's point of view though - he would have personally lost millions in income from any loss of arms sales to Pakastan. And you know that's more important then capturing criminals and stuff like that.
John,
This is a great video:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/9/175344/8323
Please post it.
I blogged about this as it broke too... and say the same thing: The O'Reilly's of the world will remain mute... But if Bill comes back on TV you can bet they'll be asking the same old question: why didn't YOU get 'em.
bob @ #9 and follow up postings on "bob's" posting.
Actually it's not Clinton's or Carter's fault. You see the present gang in Iran is a product of the Ayatollah, remember him. And the Ayatollah , he was a product of the Shah of Iran , remember him. And the Shah was a product of what? Three guesses. I'll give you the answer you do not have to guess . The Shah was a product of a CIA orchestrated coup in Iran in 1953, to protect American and British oil interests in Iran. Who was the President of the USA in 1953?
Is it Eisenhower's fault? No. You see , the British occupied Iraq in 1917 and hung around till 1932 and quite literally got their ass kicked. You should read some of those accounts.
And was the British intrusion into Iraq at that time the first time they got fucked up in this area of the workd? NO. They did it before in the late 1800's in Afghanistan.
The question is why do western powers continually want to stick their nose into the Middle where they have a batting average of 0.010 ?
And in closing . The Bin Laden family is very rich and momma bin Laden would not want one of her son's done in. Osama is not dead.
OH , and do not forget Reagan and the exploits of Rumsfeld and Ollie North during the Iran/Iraq war.
Let me understand this...the White house intervenes to save Libby and everybody understands and accepts that Libby might have the goods on the Administration or that he was doing the Administration's bidding. Okay, I got it.
But missions get called off to go after Al Quida and nobody can admit the truth. Everybody has to play dumb. Everybody has to wail "why don't the Preznit get these guys! Why Why Why??!?!?!
The cognitive dissonance of the Main Stream Blogosphere is killing me.
OBL was publically working for the U.S. after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan...OBL NEVER STOPPED working for a certain U.S. political faction. Why is this so hard for C+L to accept ?
Do the research honestly and you will convince yourself if you have any taste at all for reality and factual evidence.
Well said Schrodingers kitty.... And all too sadly true....JD
59 Paul Sack Says: They weren’t caught because the higher ups are PROTECTING Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. With them being caught the fraudulent “War on Terror” ruse vanishes. Believe me, the White House echelon is in bed with these terrorists all the way.
That comment makes me DAMN MAD...that you can make a comment like that as only an opinion and get away with it, but start talking physical evidence like how I doubt 100 stories can fall into dust in only 10 seconds without the assistance of explosives, and it disappears down the Memory Hole.
I was out running around taking care of some things and that gave me a chance to listen to the Randi Rhodes show between stops. She was talking about how the CIA is now farming their work out to private contractors. She asked if the private contractors would be true to America or true to the CEO of the corp and their stock holders.
This is one of the most disgusting things that this administration has come up with. If this does not open the door for impeachment then what does? Our country has been victimized by the corporations using our government for their own capitalistic conquests in other countries for way to long. This just made it 100 times worse.
I do not know if Bin Laden is still out there. Considering that he is a republican stooge, I suppose he will show up at strategic times in the next election cycle. Where is he? He probably is living in Saudi Arabia with the rest of Bush's pals.
Events within this tard admininstration seem to be occuring at frightening rates and terrifying velocities, threatening to spin out of control, just like you and me. I find myself strangely impelled to hug pillows, chant mantras, and probe for breeches in what has been, up to now, my impenetrable fortress, a frame of reference that the Diggers gave to me free of charge back in those rather idyllic, stupid, days of yore. Befuddled by life’s ill-timed, truant, and what I hope is malingering karma, listening to the honeyed, Old Grand Dad soaked strains of Charlie Rich tossing around the idea of who will the next GOP bobo be, as I wipe my weekend-induced, furrowed brow, contemplating yon weekend’s bitter yet persnickety insistence that I not rest easy nor enjoy chemical related abandon without proper genuflection towards god, goofy, and Saint Mick. As Dopey George further bungles what most of us could have faked in our sleep, Dank Dick delights as his lap-dog George has discovered the sensory delights of chewing on shoes, socks, and used underwear, all in the clear light and piss-yellow hue of the main stream media.
I am going to have to save that article as now whenever the right wing idiots do their 'But Clinton!' routine, I can show this as to Bush and all the other Republican's commitment to fighting terrorism.
I can totally understand why Bush shows such reluctance in going after Bin Laden; it would make their family get-togethers very awkward if George did kill Osama.
Didn't "The Path to 9-11" have exactly this very scenario? I swear, this has Rove Strategy written all over it. If your candidate is a draft dodging AWOL coward, call your decorated opponent a coward. If your plan to win the election is to steal it, accuse your opposition of voter fraud. If your plan to secure the nation from terrorist threats is a failure, make movies showing how it was all Clinton's fault.
Yes, the mighty USA. We go after little countries w/no weapons and lots of oil. And they are still beating us! In turbans using modified gasoline cans. God forbid we THREATEN PAKISTAN who has nukes & is training & harboring Al-Qaida even as we speak. Sickening. War on Terror, yeah right.
F-OBL anyway. How do we even know he orchestrated 911 w/the way all those guys love to brag, and w/the way our govt. has covered up & lied about this whole war deal. Does Osama really matter now? Bush obviously didn't think so in 2002 just 6 months after 911. There are like 2000 terrorist groups worlwide, HELLO. Al-Qaida. Just a shield name to hide behind. Why were 15 of the 19 911 hijackers SAUDI NATIONALS???????????????? Al-Qaida? What? Wake up folks.
Jen Forrester @ 77:
He didn't orchestrate jack s..t. Like I said earlier, it would be nice to see how much the Bushies are paying him and for what.
I wonder who is brain washing these people to kill themselves? People that are truly crazy are unreliable to do any thing. Bush sr ran the cia. It makes sense that the Bushies have the resources to get people to fly into buildings or kill them selves with bombs.
My first reaction after 9/11 was that it would take some one like the cia or kgb of the 007 crowd or isreal secret service to pull this off.
Of course not...after all Karl Rove said it was a sovereign nation...oops...so was Iraq...ah...but Pakistan wasn't threatening to convince OPEC to trade Oil in Euros...like the 'ultimate evil in the universe Hussein' (once a chummy buddy propped up by GHWBush's CIA)...
Getting the boogeyman would cause the public to drop the 'urgency' of the 'war on terror' (a.k.a. worldwide geopolitical energy endgame - war on terror tested better with soccer moms)...and the world record breaking industry windfall profits of the military industrial complex, Big Oil, & private mercenary corporations would suffer...and because they bankrolled the election & theft of the presidency...they will not be denied...
Comments are closed on this entry