|
Osama bin Who?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| MisterOpus1 |
Don't ask the CIA.
Or this Administration for that matter:
| quote: | July 4, 2006
C.I.A. Closes Unit Focused on Capture of bin Laden
By MARK MAZZETTI
WASHINGTON, July 3 — The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday.
The unit, known as Alec Station, was disbanded late last year and its analysts reassigned within the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, the officials said.
The decision is a milestone for the agency, which formed the unit before Osama bin Laden became a household name and bolstered its ranks after the Sept. 11 attacks, when President Bush pledged to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice "dead or alive."
The realignment reflects a view that Al Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was, intelligence officials said, and a growing concern about Qaeda-inspired groups that have begun carrying out attacks independent of Mr. bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.
Agency officials said that tracking Mr. bin Laden and his deputies remained a high priority, and that the decision to disband the unit was not a sign that the effort had slackened. Instead, the officials said, it reflects a belief that the agency can better deal with high-level threats by focusing on regional trends rather than on specific organizations or individuals.
"The efforts to find Osama bin Laden are as strong as ever," said Jennifer Millerwise Dyck, a C.I.A. spokeswoman. "This is an agile agency, and the decision was made to ensure greater reach and focus."
The decision to close the unit was first reported Monday by National Public Radio.
Michael Scheuer, a former senior C.I.A. official who was the first head of the unit, said the move reflected a view within the agency that Mr. bin Laden was no longer the threat he once was.
Mr. Scheuer said that view was mistaken.
"This will clearly denigrate our operations against Al Qaeda," he said. "These days at the agency, bin Laden and Al Qaeda appear to be treated merely as first among equals."
In recent years, the war in Iraq has stretched the resources of the intelligence agencies and the Pentagon, generating new priorities for American officials. For instance, much of the military's counterterrorism units, like the Army's Delta Force, had been redirected from the hunt for Mr. bin Laden to the search for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed last month in Iraq.
An intelligence official who was granted anonymity to discuss classified information said the closing of the bin Laden unit reflected a greater grasp of the organization. "Our understanding of Al Qaeda has greatly evolved from where it was in the late 1990's," the official said, but added, "There are still people who wake up every day with the job of trying to find bin Laden."
Established in 1996, when Mr. bin Laden's calls for global jihad were a source of increasing concern for officials in Washington, Alec Station operated in a similar fashion to that of other agency stations around the globe.
The two dozen staff members who worked at the station, which was named after Mr. Scheuer's son and was housed in leased offices near agency headquarters in northern Virginia, issued regular cables to the agency about Mr. bin Laden's growing abilities and his desire to strike American targets throughout the world.
In his book "Ghost Wars," which chronicles the agency's efforts to hunt Mr. bin Laden in the years before the Sept. 11 attacks, Steve Coll wrote that some inside the agency likened Alec Station to a cult that became obsessed with Al Qaeda.
"The bin Laden unit's analysts were so intense about their work that they made some of their C.I.A. colleagues uncomfortable," Mr. Coll wrote. Members of Alec Station "called themselves 'the Manson Family' because they had acquired a reputation for crazed alarmism about the rising Al Qaeda threat."
Intelligence officials said Alec Station was disbanded after Robert Grenier, who until February was in charge of the Counterterrorist Center, decided the agency needed to reorganize to better address constant changes in terrorist organizations.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/04/w...=rssnyt&emc=rss |
Lovely.
Don't worry. I'm sure we'll here of him again when our Administration tells us to start worrying about him again.
If only we could bring back those lovely color coded warnings again..... |
|
|
| josh4 |
| what happened to the color coded warnings? |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Don't ask the CIA.
Or this Administration for that matter:
Lovely.
Don't worry. I'm sure we'll here of him again when our Administration tells us to start worrying about him again.
If only we could bring back those lovely color coded warnings again..... |
blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind hate.blind |
Goodness, are you okay? Perhaps a little self-reflection would be beneficial at this juncture?
I'm sorry to rile you up in such a tiff. Do you, by chance, not share the same concern that I have about cutting the program that hunts down and catches the man that actually attacked us on 9/11?
Gracious, I sure hope so..... |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Do you, by chance, not share the same concern that I have about cutting the program that hunts down and catches the man that actually attacked us on 9/11? |
I'm sure we all do but somehow I don't think cutting one dedicated program will suddenly stop the hunt.
If anything, it's hinting at yet another notch for the good guys.
Why waste resources if the same goal can be achieved in the end anyways? |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Goodness, are you okay? Perhaps a little self-reflection would be beneficial at this juncture?
I'm sorry to rile you up in such a tiff. Do you, by chance, not share the same concern that I have about cutting the program that hunts down and catches the man that actually attacked us on 9/11?
Gracious, I sure hope so..... |
if this isn't blind hate, why are you so convinced this shutting down of Alec Station is the end all be all of Government's pursuit.
i'm not even convinced you think he exists.
wtf do you want us to believe Opus? that we're not hunting him anymore?
is your party's next president gonna get a pass from Opus on this? will we be witness to such indignantcy then? |
|
|
| Purple |
| Osama's health has detoriated in recent times. He will die of illness anyhow someday. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
if this isn't blind hate, why are you so convinced this shutting down of Alec Station is the end all be all of Government's pursuit. |
It's a lovely ploy of you to set up a straw man and beat it down in complete chest-thumping victory.
The problem is examining what exactly you are attacking in the first place.
I'm not convinced in the slightest that shutting down this station is the end of hunting down bin Laden by our gov't. The question really is why the necessity to shut it down in the first place? What the hell is the point? Consolidation, FFS? That's really done our Homeland Security and CIA intelligence a load of good.
| quote: | | i'm not even convinced you think he exists. |
Oh pashaw, of course you know I think he exists. Osama bin Laden, AKA Ann Coulter/Michelle Malkin/Sean Hannity/Mike Church/Michael Reagan/Horowitz/RedState.org/FreeRepublic.com/Rush Limbaugh/etc.
| quote: | | wtf do you want us to believe Opus? that we're not hunting him anymore? |
Well I'm guessing we are still hunting him to a certain degree. The question is to what degree, how far will they go? Knocking out a unit that had specific orders for hunting him down leaves open many unanswered questions.
| quote: | | is your party's next president gonna get a pass from Opus on this? will we be witness to such indignantcy then? |
Hard to say what my party's nominee would do about invading another country that had nothing to do with the country and terrorist group that actually attacked us. Guess time will tell if and when that day occurs. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
It's a lovely ploy of you to set up a straw man and beat it down in complete chest-thumping victory. |
shut up
| quote: | | I'm not convinced in the slightest that shutting down this station is the end of hunting down bin Laden by our gov't. |
thank you. lets be a little more ambiguous next time
| quote: | | The question really is why the necessity to shut it down in the first place? What the hell is the point? Consolidation, FFS? That's really done our Homeland Security and CIA intelligence a load of good. |
i'll answer those questions with a question. after some 10 odd years, have we caught Bin Laden?
| quote: | | Well I'm guessing we are still hunting him to a certain degree. The question is to what degree, how far will they go? Knocking out a unit that had specific orders for hunting him down leaves open many unanswered questions. |
let me guess those questions lead you nowhere else but to bash the administration because no one spoon feeds you ?
| quote: | | Hard to say what my party's nominee would do about invading another country that had nothing to do with the country and terrorist group that actually attacked us. Guess time will tell if and when that day occurs. |
i'll save you the trouble. your party would have never invaded Afghanistan. they can't even invade Ohio.:D |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Oh pashaw, of course you know I think he exists. Osama bin Laden, AKA Ann Coulter/Michelle Malkin/Sean Hannity/Mike Church/Michael Reagan/Horowitz/RedState.org/FreeRepublic.com/Rush Limbaugh/etc.
|
Either your fingers are typing too fast for your brain or are we witnessing the worse comparison from you ever?
I'm not even sure where you're getting at with this since they're diametrically polar ends of thought.
Unless of course I'm supposed to dig out that dusty tin foil hat and imagine Osama is actually some ghostly computer animated Max Headroom of terrorism; the creation of some neo-cons (god I love that word) to push their oil agenda.
Somehow I don't picture you in that shallow gene pool...;) :p |
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
The CIA closes Alec Station after TEN years of watching Osama.
The FBI doesn't have any hard evidence against him for 9/11.
The Mossad doesn't see him as a threat to Israel.
So what's got everyone's panties in a bunch?
| quote: | MURDER OF U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; CONSPIRACY TO MURDER U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; ATTACK ON A FEDERAL FACILITY RESULTING IN DEATH
USAMA BIN LADEN
Aliases: Usama Bin Muhammad Bin Ladin, Shaykh Usama Bin Ladin, The Prince, The Emir, Abu Abdallah, Mujahid Shaykh, Hajj, The Director
DESCRIPTION
Date of Birth Used: 1957 Hair: Brown
Place of Birth: Saudi Arabia Eyes: Brown
Height: 6'4" to 6'6" Sex: Male
Weight: Approximately 160 pounds Complexion: Olive
Build: Thin Citizenship: Saudi Arabian
Language: Arabic (probably Pashtu)
Scars and Marks: None known
Remarks: Bin Laden is left-handed and walks with a cane.
CAUTION
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.
REWARD
The Rewards For Justice Program, United States Department of State, is offering a reward of up to $25 million for information leading directly to the apprehension or conviction of Usama Bin Laden. An additional $2 million is being offered through a program developed and funded by the Airline Pilots Association and the Air Transport Association.
SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ARMED AND DANGEROUS
IF YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION CONCERNING THIS PERSON, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI OFFICE OR THE NEAREST AMERICAN EMBASSY OR CONSULATE. |
| quote: | On June 7, 1999, bin Laden became the 456th person listed on the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list, following his indictment along with others for capital crimes in the 1998 embassy attacks. Years later, on October 10, 2001, bin Laden topped the initial list of the FBI's top 22 Most Wanted Terrorists, which was released to the public by the President of the United States George W. Bush, in direct response to the attacks of 9/11, but which was again based on the indictment for the 1998 embassy attack. Bin Laden was among a group of thirteen fugitive terrorists wanted on that list for questioning about the 1998 embassy bombings. Bin Laden has not been formally indicted, and evidence has not been mentioned that he was involved, in the United States criminal justice system for the September 11, 2001 attacks; he is officially still only a suspect in 'other terrorist attacks throughout the world'. Bin Laden remains the only fugitive ever to be listed on both FBI fugitive lists.
Wikipedia: Osama bin Laden |
| quote: | On September 20 2001, the Taliban offered to hand Osama bin Laden to a neutral Islamic country for trial if the US presented them with evidence that he was responsible for the attacks on New York and Washington. The US rejected the offer. On October 1, six days before the bombing began, they repeated it, and their representative in Pakistan told reporters: "We are ready for negotiations. It is up to the other side to agree or not. Only negotiation will solve our problems." Bush was asked about this offer at a press conference the following day. He replied: "There's no negotiations. There's no calendar. We'll act on [sic] our time."
On the same day, Tony Blair, in his speech to the Labour party conference, ridiculed the idea that we could "look for a diplomatic solution". "There is no diplomacy with Bin Laden or the Taliban regime... I say to the Taliban: surrender the terrorists; or surrender power. It's your choice." Well, they had just tried to exercise that choice, but George Bush had rejected it.
Dreamers and idiots
Britain and the US did everything to avoid a peaceful solution in Iraq and Afghanistan |
| quote: | FBI says, ‘No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11'
Editor's note: Paul V. Sheridan earned his master's in business administration from the Johnson School at Cornell in 1980. He is a former member of the Alumni Executive Council, Alumni Interviewer Network and a frequent visitor to Ithaca and the Cornell campus. Sheridan has made an exhaustive research of FBI documents relating to the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks in the United States. He recently brought attention to the FBI's Most Wanted Terrorist Web page for Osama Bin Laden, pointing out that it makes no connection between Bin Laden and the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
A thought provoking e-mail circulated through Internet news groups in June, and was sent to the Muckraker Report by Paul V. Sheridan (Winner of the 2005 Civil Justice Foundation Award), bringing attention to the FBI's Most Wanted Terrorist web page for Osama bin Laden.
In the e-mail, the question is asked, “Why doesn't Osama bin Laden's Most Wanted poster make any direct connection with the events of Sept. 11, 2001?” The FBI says on its bin Laden Web page, http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm, that Osama bin Laden is wanted in connection with the Aug. 7, 1998 bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya. According to the FBI, these attacks killed over 200 people. The FBI concludes its reason for “wanting” bin Laden by saying, “In addition, bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorists attacks throughout the world.”
The Muckraker Report contacted the FBI headquarters on June 6 to learn why their bin Laden's Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Osama was also wanted in connection with 9/11. The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, chief of investigative publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on the Bin Laden's Most Wanted Web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama Bin Laden's Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”Surprised by the ease with which this FBI spokesman made such an astonishing statement, I asked, “How was this possible?” Tomb continued, “bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11.” I asked, “How does that work?” Tomb continued, “The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice then decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”
It shouldn't take long before the full meaning of these FBI statements start to prick your brain and raise your blood pressure. If you think the way I think, in quick order you will be wrestling with a barrage of very powerful questions that must be answered. First and foremost, if the U.S. government does not have enough hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11, how is it possible that it had enough evidence to invade Afghanistan to “smoke him out of his cave?” The federal government claims to have invaded Afghanistan to “root out” bin Laden and the Taliban. Through the talking heads in the mainstream media, the Bush administration told the American people that Osama bin Laden was Public Enemy Number One and responsible for the deaths of nearly 3,000 people on Sept. 11, 2001. Yet nearly five years later, the FBI says that it has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.
Next is the bin Laden “confession” video that was released by the U.S. government on Dec. 13, 2001. Most Americans remember this video. It was the video showing bin Laden with a few of his comrades recounting with delight the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks against the United States. The Department of Defense issued a press release to accompany this video in which Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld said, “There was no doubt of bin Laden's responsibility for the Sept. 11 attacks before the tape was discovered.” What Rumsfeld implied by his statement was that bin Laden was the known mastermind behind 9/11 even before the “confession video” and that the video simply served to confirm what the U.S. government already knew; that bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
In a Dec. 14, 2001 BBC News article reporting on the “9/11 confession video” release, President Bush is said to have been hesitant to release the tape because he knew it would be a vivid reminder to many people of their loss. But, he also knew it would be “a devastating declaration” of bin Laden's guilt. “Were going to get him,” said President Bush. “Dead or alive, it doesn't matter to me.”
In a Dec. 14, 2001 CNN report regarding the bin Laden tape, then-New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani said that “the tape removes any doubt that the U.S. military campaign targeting bin Laden and his associates is more than justified.” Senator Richard Shelby, R-Ala,, the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said, “The tape's release is central to informing people in the outside world who don't believe bin Laden was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks.” Shelby went on to say, “I don't know how they can be in denial after they see this tape.” Well, Senator Shelby, apparently the Federal Bureau of Investigation isn't convinced by the taped confession, so why are you?
The Muckraker Report attempted to secure a reference to the U.S. government authenticating the bin Laden “confession video,” to no avail. However, it is conclusive that the Bush Administration and U.S. Congress, along with the dead stream media, played the video as if it was authentic. So why doesn't the FBI view the “confession video” as hard evidence? After all, if the FBI is investigating a crime such as drug trafficking, and it discovers a video of members of a drug cartel openly talking about a successful distribution operation in the United States, that video would be presented to a federal grand jury. The identified participants of the video would be indicted, and if captured, the video alone would serve as sufficient evidence to net a conviction in a federal court. So why is the bin Laden “confession video” not carrying the same weight with the FBI?
Remember, on June 5, 2006, FBI spokesman, Rex Tomb said, “The FBI has no hard evidence connecting Osama bin Laden to 9/11.” This should be headline news worldwide. The challenge to the reader is to find out why it is not. Why has the U.S. media blindly read the government-provided 9/11 scripts, rather than investigate without passion, prejudice or bias, the events of Sept. 11, 2001? Why has the U.S. media blacklisted any guest that might speak of a government sponsored 9/11 cover-up, rather than seeking out those people who have something to say about 9/11 that is contrary to the government's account? And on those few occasions when a 9/11 dissenter has made it upon the airways, why has the mainstream media ridiculed the guest as a conspiracy nut, rather than listen to the evidence that clearly raises valid questions about the government's 9/11 account? Why is the Big Media Conglomeration blindly content with the government's 9/11 story when so much verifiable information to the contrary is available with a few clicks of a computer mouse?
Who is it that is controlling the media message, and how is it that the U.S. media has indicted Osama bin Laden for the events of Sept. 11, 2001, but the U.S. government has not? How is it that the FBI has no “hard evidence” connecting Osama bin Laden to the events of September 11, 2001, while the U.S. media has played the bin Laden-9/11 connection story for five years now as if it has conclusive evidence that bin Laden is responsible for the collapse of the twin towers, the Pentagon attack, and the demise of United Flight 93?
No hard evidence connecting Osama bin Laden to 9/11. ... Think about it.
Freelance writer / author Ed Haas is the editor and columnist for the Muckraker Report at http://teamliberty.net. The guest column was reprinted in The Ithaca Journal with permission from Haas.
Originally published June 29, 2006
|
| quote: | In September 2001, an American request for the Israelis to share their information about Osama bin Laden went unanswered. At first, the Americans thought the Israelis were for some reason hiding their information. It was, however, only after heads of the secret intelligence service (Mossad) and the military intelligence service (Aman) went to Washington in person that the American administration learned the extraordinary inside story about what was going on.
The reason why the American request went unanswered was that the Israelis did not have any substantial raw intelligence information about Bin Laden and his friends. And the reason for this is that Israel was not on Bin Laden's hit list. And since Bin Laden was not threatening Israel, the Israelis did not threaten him. He was never on the annual list of Islamist extremists issued by the espionage and security services.
This sleepy Israeli approach towards Bin Laden has of course been changed. True? Wrong. Until this week, and regardless of the Kenya attack on Israeli tourists in November, Bin Laden is still not Israel's top priority for intelligence coverage.
Israel's spymasters still think that even after Kenya, Bin Laden has bigger and less-protected targets than Israel to attack. The Israeli secret services' second reason is that, regardless of their worldwide reputation, they are overloaded with work and cannot stretch beyond their main target: espionage on Arab armies, Palestinian groups and Iran.
Osama bin who? - Jane's International Security News |
USED WITHOUT PERMISSION FOR NON COMMERCIAL EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
some of Americas most notorious mob bosses, from Capone to Gotti, walk the streets for years untouched because the FBI doesn't have enough evidence, until one day...
why would the FBI voluntarily expose all their techniques and resources to try him in abstentia with no guaranties of an indictment much less a conviction? not only that, a warehouse full of circumstantial evidence does not guarantee a damn thing other than utter humiliation when acquitted. especially when the stakes are this high.
look at Saddam's trial. they knew they wouldn't be able to guarantee conviction on a myriad of abuses and crimes due to lack of evidence but decided to go with the one thing they knew that had the best chance. still no guarantees to this day. |
|
|
|
|
