NOOSE NO LONGER TIGHTENING!!

[mburbank]

After several years of headlines with some variation on the phrase "The Noose is tightening" around Bin Laden and a widespread rumor that we already had him and would announce the capture as an 'October Surprise', or good buddy and staunch ally, Pervez Mushariff describes the trail as 'cold' and that we have no idea at all where he is.

How long has it been, do you suppose, that the trail has been cold? 'Cause I'm thinking pretty much since Tora Bora. And you may recall when the heat was on during the election various administration officials made noises that they'd never ever been sure he was even there. So that would mean that the trail was pretty much cold the whole time.

Oh, also, today, Pervy told the British press that in hindsight, the invasion of Iraq has made the world less safe.

Oh, and Bush can't get his own party to sign off on a defense reorg bill he says he wants. I just want to say that again, can't get HIS OWN PARTY to do what he says he wants, which means he's either lying about what he wants, or he's a weak leader. I mean, that's his OWN PARTY, not the opposition or allies.

[ItalianStereotype]

I've always figured that we had no idea where he actually is. shit, I've heard reports that he's in both Iran and China.



at the same time

[Cosmo Electrolux]

I thinks he's in Athens Alabama posing as a youth minister in a baptist church.....and dating a skinny blonde whore named Dusty.

[Strapping Young Lad]

To believe that capturing bin Laden would ultimately make the world a "safer" place is as silly as thinking capturing Saddam would end all opposition against US forces in Iraq. Cut off an arm, two more will grow in its place.

[Emu]

I don't understand this mentality where people think that capturing Osama will suddenly turn the entire world into a bright, sunshiny place. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if he was already dead and has been dead for a while now, and the terrorists are using his scary image to keep us looking. If that happened, I think I'd have to laugh at the sheer stupidity of it all.

[rockets redglare]

Does the same hold true for the penis?
'Cause it would be pretty sweet to have two wangs.

[Cosmo Electrolux]

Originally Posted by rockets redglare

Does the same hold true for the penis?
'Cause it would be pretty sweet to have two wangs.

you're a fucking idiot.....

[ziggytrix]

Originally Posted by Emu

I don't understand this mentality where people think that capturing Osama will suddenly turn the entire world into a bright, sunshiny place.

It's not about that; it's about bringing the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks to justice.

[Emu]

I know, but a lot of people seem to think that Osama is the literal root of all evil and if we get him the terrorists will just go away.

[mburbank]

Actually, I'm guessing no one thinks that. I'm speaking msotly to what Ziggy said, that he's the guilty party and that capturing him would mean a whole lot more than killing Iraqis.

I'm also pointing out the irony of W's bold "We'll agits him dead or alive attitude" follwed by complete silence on the subject while we went after Sadaam, followed by a public statement that he wasn't worried about Bin Laden follwed by a denial of that in the debates. We also had literally a whole year of "Noose is tightening" commentary spoon fed to the press, when surprise, we had no clue where he was.

I think it would be productive as a message to NOT have the guy who pulled off 9/11 running around free making videos. I think the fact we can't catch him makes a big moral booster for people who want to attack us, a lesson that not only canb it be done, but you can do it and get away with it and we'll just bomb whoever is convenient. This also continues to paint us as a country uninterested in justice and motivated instead by whim, rage and convenience.

[mburbank]

Oh, and I also think if we'd caught Bin Laden back when we should have instead of tightening the noose around a place he wasn't, you wouldn't see Nasty Ass Republicans thumbing their nose at Bush over legislation he wants passed. Nosiree, bob. They know he was a man to reckoned with, and they wouldn't dare. They'd just say yessir and wet themselves, but they aint ascared a him nohow on account of the fact a skinny Arab bastard living in a cave can get one over on him.

[FS]

Looking back on things, it's still an amazing trick how Bin Laden got swapped with Saddam Hussein.

[ranxer]

amazing tricks abound in the good ol usa.
the switch went with barely a note of the resistance on the mainstream press. i'm still in shock that this administration can pull off all the crap they do without people seeing them as criminals.

the level of brainwashing is frightening.. god i hope its near its peak.

oh and i've sometimes wondered if bin laden might not have gotten a getoutof jail card from some westerners? of course there are 9/11 theories with some credit that have bin laden as a scapegoat or assigned a role in it by others. either way the administration has been working pretty hard to hid a ton of info on the subject.

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by mburbank

Oh, also, today, Pervy told the British press that in hindsight, the invasion of Iraq has made the world less safe.

So no noose is good news?

[Strapping Young Lad]

Originally Posted by ziggytrix

It's not about that; it's about bringing the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks to justice.

I wonder what Saddam Hussein was "brought to justice" for. If anyone suggests "war crimes," they are a friggin idiot, because Bush has committed more "war crimes" in his four years of office than Saddam has committed in his entire regime.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by mburbank

Actually, I'm guessing no one thinks that. I'm speaking msotly to what Ziggy said, that he's the guilty party and that capturing him would mean a whole lot more than killing Iraqis.

I think there's a more substantive reason behind it, too (not that capturing a murderer isn't substantive). Sure, capturing Bin Laden won't destroy Al Qaeda, but it will strike an incredible ideological blow to a movement that has become almost entirely driven by ideology.

Secondly, Bin Laden's business interests supposedly brought him profits somewhere in the BILLIONS range. Heck, he alone funded most of the military development in places like Sudan, as well as Afghanistan.

To my recollection, we've frozen "millions" of his dollars in various bank accounts. But there's more of it out there, and somebody has to have access to this cash. If we capture him, we might be that much closer to cutting serious funding from terrorism.

[FS]

Originally Posted by kellychaos

So no noose is good news?

"Get it sir!?"

[Vexation]

I think the fact we can't catch him makes a big moral booster for people who want to attack us, a lesson that not only can it be done, but you can do it and get away with it and we'll just bomb whoever is convenient.

Most of the leaders of Al-Qaeda, those very close to Bin Laden have been captured. And the last video tape sent, during the election, shows him guant(er) sick, and exhasuted. I wouldn't call the smack down and scattering of a entire terrorist group getting away free. I don't agree with Bush and his gun trotting, cowboyish policy, but I do agree with the military action taken right after 9/11.

I wonder what Saddam Hussein was "brought to justice" for. If anyone suggests "war crimes," they are a friggin idiot, because Bush has committed more "war crimes" in his four years of office than Saddam has committed in his entire regime.

Spoken as a puppet of the liberal media. Both sides of our political coin are in the shit, and it only happens that we get the "In God we Trust" side up these past years.
Bush is a moron, and has commited troops into a useless occupation. But he isn't a War Criminal like Saddam.
Read up some history on Saddam's rise to power. Look up a unbiased source. And then try to compare the idiot in office, and the idiot in the spider hole.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by Vexation

Most of the leaders of Al-Qaeda, those very close to Bin Laden have been captured. And the last video tape sent, during the election, shows him guant(er) sick, and exhasuted. I wouldn't call the smack down and scattering of a entire terrorist group getting away free. I don't agree with Bush and his gun trotting, cowboyish policy, but I do agree with the military action taken right after 9/11.

"Smacking down" known names doesn't mean a heck of a whole lot anymore. There was a good read in the most recent issue of Current History Magazine about the pre-Afghan war Al Qaeda and the post-Afghan war Al Qaeda.

Yes, there had been a lot of terrorist financing and training going on in Afghanistan, but much of it had been specified strictly for the purpose of waging civil war on the warlords and the Northern Alliance.

In the process of capturing and killing a lot of these leaders, we have discovered that Al Qaeda- Afghanistan had actually become a somewhat stagnant bureacracy, with its layers of paper work and procedures, such as specific forms for the purchasing of new tires for a hummer.

Now, we have scattered the monolith. In business lingo, we've essentially turned Al Qaeda in to a franchise. Al Qaeda the "structure" doesn't matter a whole heck of a lot now, because there will always be someone there to take on the mantle of "Al Qaeda." This is why killing underlings and capturing Osama may not matter as much now as it may have in the past......

[Vexation]

You make a good point. But franchises never have as much power as the monolithic powers. It took alot of organization to launch the 9-11 attacks. A couple years of planning and such. A franchise terrorist cell does not have the connections, or the wide spread terror web. The franchise hits will be smaller, and isolated.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by Vexation

You make a good point. But franchises never have as much power as the monolithic powers. It took alot of organization to launch the 9-11 attacks. A couple years of planning and such. A franchise terrorist cell does not have the connections, or the wide spread terror web. The franchise hits will be smaller, and isolated.

Point taken. But I think you hit the nail on the head-- it took two years to orchestrate the 9/11 attacks, and as numerous reports and at least two committees have revealed, a lot of what went down on 9/11 was preventable, and IMO, it was a lot like a lightning striking type of scenario (not that anyone here should get the blame for a murderous act that required sick imagination, but you get the point).

And I think you're right that the "franchise" hits will be smaller, but it'll all add up. In a way, it'll be more effective. There's only so much that I think registers with us as humans. A massive tragedy like 9/11 struck a chord all around the world. Smaller attacks, on the other hand, won't necessarily. A bombing in Istanbul, a murder in The Netherlands, a couple here, a couple there, doesn't ncessarily galvanize a response like a large scale attach will (and has).