NBC: Bin Laden may have escaped in Tora Bora again.
NBC: Bin Laden may have escaped in Tora Bora again.
U.S. intel officials report that just last month, one of the world’s two most wanted men — bin Laden or his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri — was sighted in Tora Bora, Afghanistan. NBC’s Jim Miklaszewski reported last night:
U.S. intelligence and military officials tell NBC News overhead surveillance from an unmanned U.S. drone spotted a large al Qaeda security detail, the kind of protection that would normally surround al Qaeda’s Osama bin Laden or his number two Ayman al-Zawahiri.
Intel officials say there was “a high probability” that one of the two men was there. The coalition forces launched an assault for three days on the mountains of Tora Bora, but analysts said the response “was not quick enough to get him.” Military officials admit there were unidentified “planning and coordination problems.” Watch it:
In 2001, the U.S. similarly missed an opportunity to get bin Laden in Tora Bora because there were not enough troops and the U.S. relied on local forces who allowed bin Laden to escape.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
61 Responses to “NBC: Bin Laden may have escaped in Tora Bora again.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Bandar? It’s George. Could you tell Osama that he’d better leave the area because our Air Force has spotted him again. Yeah, I know. I know what I promised. I cut the funding. I dissolved the taskforce, fer chrissakes! What more do you want? Ok. Ok. I love you too. Bye. –click–
September 27th, 2007 at 11:21 amHe’s pretty much “impotent.” Let’s hope he doesn’t score some Vijihadagra.
September 27th, 2007 at 11:21 amIt’s all a shadow play, folks.
Osama bin Laden has been dead since December of 2001.
Ask yourself…who stands to gain from increased discussion of him?
September 27th, 2007 at 11:24 amGood Chance that Osama Bin Goldstein is dead, and doubles are being used to continue the myth.
September 27th, 2007 at 11:27 am
I’m confused and need bush to tell me how to feel and think. Do we want him dead or alive, or should we not spend time thinking about him?
September 27th, 2007 at 11:27 amEven bin laden’s head on a pike, won’t save the Republics in 2008.
September 27th, 2007 at 11:28 amPractice makes perfect. Keep trying! That is where the war on terrorism is. Take out as many of those vermin as you can. Eventually you’ll get the two leaders, and we’ll never have to hear from them again.
September 27th, 2007 at 11:29 amKing George the Dumb will never allow the capture of OBL for a myriad of reasons not the least of which is his tie to the Saudis. If OBL were caught or killed KGtD and the bushco would have no excuse for the continued occupation of Iraq and the theft of the Iraqi oil by the Saudis, et al. There is just too much money available for the crooks of the bushco to let anything upset the status quo for the next fifteen months.
September 27th, 2007 at 11:30 amGeorge Dubya and the gang that couldn’t shoot straight.
Yee ha!!
September 27th, 2007 at 11:31 am#8 Well-said, OxyCon….Frustrating, but it means the hunt is getting closer.
This report certainly puts to rest the candard that this administration has ceased hunting for Bin Laden.
September 27th, 2007 at 11:41 amEven bin laden’s head on a pike, won’t save the Republics in 2008.
Comment by helenahandbasket — September 27, 2007 @ 11:28 am
The Republicans do better with Osama alive than they do with him dead.
September 27th, 2007 at 11:41 amYea, right. And if you believe this, I have some land in Paraguay for sale.
Oops! The Bush Family already bought it. sorry.
September 27th, 2007 at 11:41 amGood post Clyde, Good morning Lady Z and all……I’m waiting for another old OBL tape…..Rove will resarect another one for chimpy any day now with word’s of the bushco failure and highlight crap for the reich to throw at the left…..It’s the new TV season and the reich want’s to keep up with a new series, pretty soon it will be refered to as the next segment of bush v ben, dead or alive……Blessings
September 27th, 2007 at 11:42 am“This report certainly puts to rest the candard that this administration has ceased hunting for Bin Laden.”
Comment by Exley
But reinforces the truth about Bush’s ineptitude.
September 27th, 2007 at 11:44 amMissed him again !!!!…means we are telling you that ‘he is not yet dead’.. So expect ‘more videos in the near future from ‘Bin hiding..’
September 27th, 2007 at 11:44 amBusch doesn’t want Bin Laden, he wants Iran.
∞
September 27th, 2007 at 11:44 amLIES! LIES! LIES!….. they disbanded the hunt for OBL…. they need OBL to pass $200 BILLION MORE on illegal occupation.
September 27th, 2007 at 11:47 amBin Clinton, Bin Bush and Bin Laden were all spotted in Florida playing golf. They were heard talking about how they all want Hitlary Clinton as prez. The were talking about how “we the sheeple” are clueless — they are continuously duped by the left-right paridigm in American politics. (Hitlary, W are the same). We must install Part II of the Clinton Dynasty to Power.
September 27th, 2007 at 11:48 amThis report certainly puts to rest the candard that this administration has ceased hunting for Bin Laden.
Comment by Exley — September 27, 2007 @ 11:41 am
Bawahahaha. The “canard” is that the administration has failed to provide the necessary resources to hunt for bin Laden. This report fails to put that “canard” to rest at all, Exley. As to whether or not it’s a “canard”, check the words of the Deciderer. He’s made it incredibly clear that bin Laden is not a priority. If you don’t believe him, who is there left for you to believe in?
September 27th, 2007 at 11:50 amIs it still a canard if the President himself says the hunt for bin Laden is irrelevant?
September 27th, 2007 at 11:51 am“This report certainly puts to rest the candard that this administration has ceased hunting for Bin Laden.â€
Comment by Exley
This report does not excuse Bush saying this:
“The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him.”
- G.W. Bush, 9/13/01
Then less than 6 months later, saying this:
“I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.”
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02
“I am truly not that concerned about him.”
September 27th, 2007 at 11:54 am- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden’s whereabouts,
3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)
He’s made it incredibly clear that bin Laden is not a priority. If you don’t believe him, who is there left for you to believe in?
Comment by gummitch — September 27, 2007 @ 11:50 am
I am so confused….is Bin Laden dead or not? Tripmaster has a website that says he is, after all…
I just can’t keep it straight - is Bush totally incompetent because he allowed Bin Laden to get away, totally duplicitous because he killed him but won’t let anyone know, or secretly a diabolical Balrog who blew up WTC himself and faked Bin Ladens involvement? Let’s choose a conspiracy theory and stick with it.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:06 pmHey trolls,
Come out from your caves and answer this question:
Why did Bush commit 15X the amount of troops to get Saddam than he did to get Bin Laden?
September 27th, 2007 at 12:06 pmEh. Osama is tucked up safely at home in his Saudi palace in the arms of his wives. He and his BFF Dubbie are just inseperable. Sweet!
By the way, what is a “candard”…?
September 27th, 2007 at 12:06 pmBy the way, what is a “candardâ€â€¦?
Comment by Leftside Annie — September 27, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
It’s a canard dipped in sugar. Sheesh. Like Duck a l’Orange.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:08 pmLet’s choose a conspiracy theory and stick with it.
Comment by Keltoi — September 27, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
You’ll have to go to a wingnut blog for that. Around here, we reject the Borg and encourage independent thought.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:09 pmHey trolls,
Come out from your caves and answer this question:
Why did Bush commit 15X the amount of troops to get Saddam than he did to get Bin Laden?
Comment by lefty — September 27, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
Because he is DEAD, Lefty! Didn’t you go to Tripmasters website? He died long before we even invaded Iraq - who knew?
September 27th, 2007 at 12:12 pm“This report certainly puts to rest the candard that this administration has ceased hunting for Bin Laden.
Comment by Exley”
and it also reminds everyone that it’s easy to avoid capture by the world’s most powerful country when most of their troops are 2 countries to the left of the one you’re hiding out in
September 27th, 2007 at 12:13 pmIt’s a canard dipped in sugar. Sheesh. Like Duck a l’Orange.
Comment by gummitch — September 27, 2007 @ 12:08 pm
In that case, what’s a petard?
September 27th, 2007 at 12:14 pmCan we hire a collection agency to find him? Apparently, our military and intelligence networks are not up to the task.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:14 pm26 - Ah! Thanks for letting me know. ;o)
And don’t you mean Dick a la Outrage…?
- A
September 27th, 2007 at 12:15 pm30 - A pe….. ah, I’m not going there. :o/
September 27th, 2007 at 12:16 pmIt’s all a shadow play, folks.
Osama bin Laden has been dead since December of 2001.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 27, 2007 @ 11:24 am
You’ll have to go to a wingnut blog for that. Around here, we reject the Borg and encourage independent thought.
Comment by gummitch — September 27, 2007 @ 12:09 pm
Er….okay, Mitch, maybe you better tell Trip, he isn’t likely to take it from me…..
September 27th, 2007 at 12:18 pmTinfoil Moment…………….
I’ll say and still do to the end that Osama is in Saudi - hangin with his royal buddies or certainly in their protection.
Still believe that “W” worked out a deal with the Prince the night after 9/11 on the Whitehouse balcony to never take him out as “favor” from the Bushies - the same night that he worked out flying all of them secretly out of the country so they could not be questioned.
Perhpas Osamas is here>
The Sultan of Brunei houses his family here, and the Saudi royal family (who bought houses as bolt holes in case the Gulf war turned pear-shaped) own a further 10 homes. Several residences hide behind towering brick walls, ultra-advanced security systems and what look like armed guards.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:20 pmEr….okay, Mitch, maybe you better tell Trip, he isn’t likely to take it from me…..
Comment by Keltoi — September 27, 2007 @ 12:18 pm
You miss the point (surprise!): he’s entitled to his opinion, I’m entitled to mine . . . we don’t require walking in lockstep. Like I said, wander off to the wingnut Borg if that’s what you’re looking for.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:25 pmThe Neocons insist that the private sector can do anything and everything better than the public sector, so why haven’t they sent Blackwater or KBR in to do the job?
So what would happen if bin Laden were captured alive? Check out the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted List and you’ll find bin Laden’s photo and a brief bio on the site. What you won’t find on the posting is any mention of involvement in the events of 9/11. The Bush Administration couldn’t possibly countenenace the possibility of capturing him alive, only for the world to discover that we don’t have enough evidence to charge him with anything related to 9/11.
We rarely hear any mention in the MSM of this, however, bin Laden was already wanted (which you’ll find on the FBI website) for involvement in attacks on two U. S. Embassies in Africa, BUT several reputable European news sources reported that in July, 2001, two months prior to 9/11, bin Laden spent two weeks in an American hospital in Dubai (of the United Arab Emirates, now home of Halliburton and home to two of the hijackers); that he was treated by an American surgeon, Dr. Terry Callaway (who refused comment when asked about this); was reportedly visited by the head of Saudi intelligence (remember, Saudi Arabia was the home of 15 of the 19 hijackers); and that on July 12, he was visited by a local CIA agent, Larry Mitchell. The European news agencies reporting the preceding included Le Figaro, The Guardian, London Times, Agence France-Presse, Radio France International,and Reuters. Why hasn’t the Bush Administration explained any of these inconvenient discrepancies?
Is finding bin Laden (assuming that he is still alive) a priority or not?
Let’s see what George W. Bush has had to say about the matter at varying times:
“The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him.” — G.W. Bush, 9/13/01 (reported on numerous sources, including http://www.seanhanity.com)
“I want justice…There’s an old poster out West, as I recall, that said, ‘Wanted: Dead or Alive,’” — - G.W. Bush, 9/17/01, UPI
“…Secondly, he is not escaping us. This is a guy, who, three months ago, was in control of a county [sic]. Now he’s maybe in control of a cave. He’s on the run. Listen, a while ago I said to the American people, our objective is more than bin Laden. But one of the things for certain is we’re going to get him running and keep him running, and bring him to justice. And that’s what’s happening. He’s on the run, if he’s running at all. So we don’t know whether he’s in cave with the door shut, or a cave with the door open — we just don’t know….” — - Bush, in remarks in a Press Availability with the Press Travel Pool, The Prairie Chapel Ranch, Crawford TX, 12/28/01, as reported on official White House site
“I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.” — G.W. Bush, 3/13/02 — Not sourced
“I am truly not that concerned about him.” — - G.W. Bush, responding to a question about bin Laden’s whereabouts, 3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)
Perhaps one of the trolls can make sense of all of this for us.
Trolls?
September 27th, 2007 at 12:28 pmYou miss the point (surprise!): he’s entitled to his opinion, I’m entitled to mine . . . we don’t require walking in lockstep.
Comment by gummitch — September 27, 2007 @ 12:25 pm
Ah! Gotcha. It just makes it hard to discuss the issue when we are working we such a wide variety of fact-sets. For example, if you really believe Bush blew up the WTC, it would be pretty hard to justify sitting behind a keyboard when you should be plotting a revolution or at the very least an assassination. Typing on TP if Bush did it is kinda like OJ looking for the “real murderer” on a golf course.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:29 pm#39 - Gee, Keltoi, I feel *exactly* that same way about Bush and his quest to smoke Bin Laden out of his cave….it’s ‘zactly like OJ looking for the real killer on the golf course…
(Paraphrasing the Chimpster) We must catch those terrorist killers…and now, watch this drive!
September 27th, 2007 at 12:35 pmbin ladin is dead. has been for years. Just another CIA operative from Saudi Arabia.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:37 pmIs it really ‘hunting’ when all you do is take pictures of him and then let him go?
September 27th, 2007 at 12:38 pm“Weekend at Binnie’s” seems to have gone into syndication on NBC and other corporate propaganda networks. The man died naturally back in December 2001.
All of the phony videos made since that have that Made in the USA logo at the far right corner of the screen. Joe Bob says, “Check it out…”
That most recent video allegedly of OBL had the pathetic freeze frame voice over… Is this the best that the Bushies can come up with? Oy Veh…
September 27th, 2007 at 12:39 pmIs it really ‘hunting’ when all you do is take pictures of him and then let him go?
Comment by raynman — September 27, 2007 @ 12:38 pm
Must be a new catch and release program for “endagered terrorists”.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:40 pmgreat post curmudgeon. I went to the FBI’s 10 most wanted website and there is no mention of 9/11. Here’s what they do have:
“USAMA BIN LADEN IS WANTED IN CONNECTION WITH THE AUGUST 7, 1998, BOMBINGS OF THE UNITED STATES EMBASSIES IN DAR ES SALAAM, TANZANIA, AND NAIROBI, KENYA. THESE ATTACKS KILLED OVER 200 PEOPLE. IN ADDITION, BIN LADEN IS A SUSPECT IN OTHER TERRORIST ATTACKS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD.”
How odd that the #1 enemy that has been portrayed by this adminstration as the one behind 9/11 isn’t accused of this crime.
Any suggestions why Keltoi?, Jake D.? Exely? anyone?
September 27th, 2007 at 12:43 pmFailure, fumble, bungle!
September 27th, 2007 at 12:48 pmWinston is working overtime these days, between his bouts of depression while drinking Victory gin. His incoming tube chatters incessantly since his promotion from ordinary history-making to the more envied creative newspeak desk. His chocolate rations have been increased to 30 grams a week, lucky duck.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:57 pmHow odd that the #1 enemy that has been portrayed by this adminstration as the one behind 9/11 isn’t accused of this crime.
Any suggestions why Keltoi?, Jake D.? Exely? anyone?
Comment by hellinabucket — September 27, 2007 @ 12:43 pm
I am guessing here, but my guess would be that if they ever capture him they have no intention of putting him on trial in civilian court. He would likely face a military tribunal, similar to what Khalid Sheik Muhammad is looking at. Obviously, a long stay at Gitmo would be part of it.
Is KSM mentioned in connection to 9-11, or is he likely off the list since we have him? And what is the statute of limitations on adding charges? It is likely academic since I really doubt we will ever take him alive.
September 27th, 2007 at 1:15 pmWhere is he now the Shadow Knows. Was Osama shopping for a new fake beard? This is becoming a joke as wasn’t this the reason all this started we were looking for Osama. The White House is so scared people are catching on to the lies now they let Osama get away while ABC reports it was Bill Clinton that let him get away. Osama is having the time of his life and is better protected then the US or even the President. The White House didn’t want the President of Iran to speak the truth and you know if Osama got to speak directly to the American people all the lies that the White House have told would come out. It’s better to keep Osama as the bogeyman so Americans can stay in fear.
September 27th, 2007 at 1:16 pmMilitary officials admit there were unidentified “planning and coordination problems.â€
Where the hell have I heard that term before??
Was it Iraq? or Afghanistan in 2002?
Hmmm.
September 27th, 2007 at 1:16 pmHowdy, Keltoi! Ready to meet my challenge now?
In case you have forgotten (again):
You asserted in an earlier post that Iran is attempting to develop nuclear weapons. I subsequently challenged you to back up that assertion. You’ve been ducking the question ever since.
Either substantiate your claim, or retract your statement. Your choice.
September 27th, 2007 at 1:20 pmHowdy, Keltoi! Ready to meet my challenge now?
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 27, 2007 @ 1:20 pm
**crickets chirping**
lmao
September 27th, 2007 at 1:56 pmYou asserted in an earlier post that Iran is attempting to develop nuclear weapons. I subsequently challenged you to back up that assertion. You’ve been ducking the question ever since.
Either substantiate your claim, or retract your statement. Your choice.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 27, 2007 @ 1:20 pm
Hey Trip,
I think we have beaten this horse quite dead. I gave you circumstancial evidence pointing to the likelihood that Iran desired acquiring nuclear weapons and were using their nuclear energy program as a facade. You did your best to poke holes in the circumstancial evidence as it is indeed, circumstantial. I refuted you, you refuted me, everyone else got bored, I suggested neither of us could PROVE our position unless we had perfect knowledge of what was going on in Iran, which we can’t have…ta-da.
I see no point in an Epistemological pissing match on the issue. I will retract my statement to this point - Iran MAY be seeking nukes. Can you make the same statement?
September 27th, 2007 at 2:16 pmHowdy, Keltoi! Ready to meet my challenge now?
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 27, 2007 @ 1:20 pm
**crickets chirping**
Comment by Wayne — September 27, 2007 @ 1:56 pm
Sorry, work raised its ugly head….
September 27th, 2007 at 2:18 pmIt really hurts to say this, but the French agree with me on Iran
http://www.breitbart.com/ article.php?id=070927120236.oda23s3q&show_article=1
September 27th, 2007 at 2:26 pmI will retract my statement to this point - Iran MAY be seeking nukes. Can you make the same statement?
Comment by Keltoi — September 27, 2007 @ 2:16 pm
Wayne, are your crickets asleep?
September 27th, 2007 at 2:38 pmIran “MAY BE” seeking nukes….?
And for this, we are going to nuke them first…?
Yeah, that makes sense.
NOT.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:52 pmIran “MAY BE†seeking nukes….? Iran “MAY BE†seeking nukes….?
And for this, we are going to nuke them first…?
Comment by Leftside Annie — September 27, 2007
Pssst….Annie! I never suggested we nuke Iran…..
September 27th, 2007 at 2:59 pmKeltoi sez:
The “evidence” you presented was nothing of the sort.
There’s no need to “poke holes” in what doesn’t exist.
And there you go again.
The difference between our two positions is tha tI am not the one who claimed that Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons. You, however, are the one who claimed that they were. See the difference?
So, you call the difference between the statements “Iran IS seeking nukes” and “Iran MAY be seeking nukes” an “Epistemological pissing match”??? Given this inability to distinguish between possibility and fact, it’s no wonder you’re such a cheerleader for the ongoing occupation of Iraq, and the upcoming invasion of Iran. Disappointing. Truly disappointing.
Well, at least I was able to wring a retraction from you, however grudging.
I’ve never stated otherwise. I’ve merely stated (correctly) that there is zero evidence for the development of nuclear weapons in Iran, and given the equipment they possess, it would be fantastically difficult for them to come up with the fissile material required for even one nuclear weapon in any reasonable time frame.
If you have evidence to dispute the above statement, please present it.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:07 pmKey question…in the future will there be a movie made with a scene where the CIA officer in the field is looking through the predators camera eye talking to Washington asking permission to shoot only to have the line go dead?
September 27th, 2007 at 3:08 pmI can’t read the thread!! All I can see are what appear to be the remains of hairs, that have been split so many times they’ve turned to a fuzzy, linty substance that obscures all else.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:52 pmTwo Minutes Hate is brought to you by the good folks at Ready! Fire! Aim! Security Services and Rovellian Frameworks. Remember: when we talk about war, we’re really talking about peace.
September 27th, 2007 at 4:11 pmBin Laden is a really good hider.
Also, Kerry called Bush out on during the third debate:
Bush replied:
White House transcript, with video, showing that Kerry quoted Bush accurately.
September 27th, 2007 at 10:00 pm