You've heard these rumors bubbling out of France that bin Laden's dead or the related ones out of Saudi intelligence that he's ill from a water-borne illness. You buying it? Tell us what you think.
Not buying it. If he's dead, we won't find out until after the elections anyway, because the GOP needs bin Laden to be alive and evil and building caliphates for another few weeks.
The prevailing confusion helps the GOP, unfortunately, because the GOP can now stand up and make some bold, definitive unfounded claims about bin Laden's ongoing power and evil intent. Cheney will create the truth for us, in case we're uncertain. Overly simple and false "clarity" is all the uninformed right-wing base needs for voting purposes.
"News" of bin Laden's death is greatly exaggerated. Of course, the reason for this (CIA) leak is to prod the evil old bird into making his pre-election endorsement of the Democratic Party. Bin Laden needs Bush to pump up recruitment, and Bush needs bin Laden to pump up turnout. This leak is Osama's cue. We can expect him to hit the airways by Halloween.
Roger Cressey said on NBC Nightly News that he doesn't believe the "single-sourced" report. He's an expert on the subject, I'm not.
It would be no suprise if the report were false. Likewise, it would be no suprise if the report were true.
The sons of the prophet are noble and bold, and quite unaccustomed to fear. But the bravest by far in the ranks of the Shah was Abdul Abulbul Amir
I think the news highlights the fact that Bush never made capturing or killing him a priority, and as a result, the locus of control of bin Laden's fate is in his hands not ours, which is the exact opposite of what Bush promised when he had that bullhorn in his hand.
I've been surprised by how many people I discussed the rumour with today who were confused as to either what typhoid fever is or that the disease still exists. If the theories regarding global warming prove true and the U.S. is beset with flooding and other catastrophes over the next decade or two, I suspect many will perish due to this lack of knowledge.
A) If bin Laden has perished due to disease then Bush has failed miserably in not bringing the criminal to justice.
B) If bin Laden is still alive and functioning in any sort of leadership capacity for al Queda then Bush has failed even more miserably for the potential danger which still exists.
I heard an American reporter on Australian radio Friday night saying Bin Laden's name is now mentioned only when every even second year comes along, i.e. presidential or mid term elections.
Also if Bin Laden is really dead, won't that be SOMETHING for President Bush to announce at the "right" moment?
my take on it, is to sit back and see what comes out in the next few days to a week.
I don't believe it, but I don't think it helps Bush either. Bin Laden dying of natural causes while a free man only reminds us of his failure to capture him when he had the chance.
My mother has kidney disease and is on dialysis 3 days a week. There is absolutely no way on earth that Bin Laden is on dialysis and still alive. No. Way. You just can't lug around a dialysis machine. Unless you have seen one in action, you just can't begin to understand how complicated they are and how debilitating they are. If he ever truly needed dialysis, then he is dead.
My (cynical) take comes from following French politics, where this week began the primary campaigns of the 07 Presidential election. Sarkozy, Interior Minister (and thus oversees DGSE, the intelligence operation that is the source for this report), had met with Bush and Rice just last week, then returned home to try to regain his position of front-runner. He's a guy who would have absolutey no compunction about monkeying around with intelligence for political gain, which he equates with trying to embarass CHirac and Villepin. Just as we saw Italy's intelligence and diplomatic services put at the disposition of Bush by Berlasconi for his own political benefit (or so he thought), Sarko might be trying the same trick here.
Hasn't anyone thought to ask a doctor whether it's plausible or likely that OBL could have died of typhoid?
I actually got the disease myself, years ago, in Pakistan. It was pretty unpleasant, but easily enough cured with a course of antibiotics (diagnosis was based on an on-the-spot blood analysis at a small clinic). So, for what it's worth, based on that it seems likely he could have got a case of typhoid fever treated, even in a very remote area, as long as he was able to get it diagnosed.
There is absolutely no way on earth that Bin Laden is on dialysis and still alive. No. Way.
The average time a patient in the US lives on dialysis is five years, and this with treatment in a hygienic dialysis center. This talk of portable dialysis is complete bullshit. As for recovery from a typhoid infection, he does have Dr. Al Zawahiri with him, doesn't he?
Here are the known knowns and the known unknowns:
He might be dead. (I'm less than totally convinced by the supposed recent video and audio recordings, and think it's still possible he's been dead since winter 2001.)
He might not be. (I see no reason to assume that he feels compelled to communicate on any schedule-- e.g. the 5th anniversary of 9/11-- that seems obvious to us.)
This will probably not be the last time his death is reported. One of them will be accurate. The rest won't. We may never know.
Lawrence Wright, whose new book The Looming Tower is very well researched, says the dialysis thing is false. So we should not assume he'd be doomed by that. On the other hand, he could well be somewhere so remote that antibiotics could not reach him in time, not to mention that antibiotic-resistant strains of typhoid have been reported in Pakistan. (That's assuming he's in Pakistan. Who knows? Thomas Pynchon was in Manhattan all that time he was assumed to be in hiding, Bin Laden could be in Iran, Saudi, some smaller emirate, who knows.)
Now my commentary:
1) Bush was right early on to say that it's not about catching one guy. Bin Laden's effectiveness as a leader has obviously been seriously degraded over the last five years, due to our efforts to make it harder for him to communicate and raise/disburse money; he functions now only as a symbol, not as someone planning and funding operations. The obsession with catching Bin Laden as opposed to fighting a broad-based organization is on the opponent's side, not Bush's. In recent months our side (broadly defined) has caught or killed a wide range of leaders in the field in countries ranging from Iraq to Turkey to Britain. That's far more important than making Bin Laden a martyr or holding an internationally televised trial with Ramsey Clark at his side.
2) How fitting if the man who sought to bring us all a 13th century world died of a 13th century disease.
The White House scrambles to figure out how deal with the intelligence agencies' report that the Iraq war has increased terrorism; Karl Rove focuses on how to turn a prospective confirmation of bin Laden's death into a US- managed assassination as a way to blank out the bad news about terrorism with "mission accomplished."
Meanwhile, the left is delighted to munch on tidbits tossed by an establishment media to keep them occupied with "what-ifs." We cooperate hungrily.
There are two news-streams flowing between now and election day:
In one, we see the real news: disaster in Iraq, Constitutional law-breaking in Congress, etc.
In the other, we see diversionary news: Osama is dead, Ahmadinejad is a punk, Chavez is a buffoon, Clinton caused 9/11, Democrats will raise your taxes, etc.
Keep your eye on the ball: if Osama is dead it doesn't change anything important. And/But it will give Bush and the rubber-stamp Republicans cover from being accountable for their record.
JohnW1141
Yes, bin Ladin is dead. He tripped over his dialysis machine and fell off the mountain. Show me the body. And isn't
it getting near time to kill alQaeda #3 again?
I have to agree with NJLawyer...all this speculation puts bin Laden's fate once again on the front pages and gives people a chance to assess whether President "Dead or Alive" really followed through on his promise to pursue this prime evil- doer. Had we spent $1/2 trillion seeking bin Laden, we'd have found him and prosecuted him by now...we have the wrong man in custody in Baghdad and an unsolvable mess on our hands thanks to the chicken warriors at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
I don't know what it means, but I can see how the spin will play things, so we need to be prepared. For some time, going back to at least Gore's warnings in the lead-up to war and certainly during the Bush vs Kerry debates, a way for the opposition to recapture the ground of foreign policy has been to say that the Iraq war meant dropping the ball on terrorism, not the fight to the finish that we must pursue or we're losers.
I can see, in the event of bin Laden's death, every time that comes up, the GOP candidate just shrugs and says, oh, bin Laden's dead anyway, so let's go after the real killers left. Port security can feel bloodless. Shoring up Afghanistan is "nation building." The idea of how Bush created a global, decentered pool of Al Qaeda sympathizers that rendered bin Laden, already weakened by financial seizures and fall of the Taliban, irrelevant will be "blame America first." America's feeling even less safe than ever will be either defeatism or, conversely, a reason to stick with the tough guys.
So we should start planning the opposition attack now. Any thoughts on how best to do it?
1) Bush was right early on to say that it's not about catching one guy.
The problem is we haven't caught the "one guy" OR made a dent in the overall terrorism problem.
Contrary to your notion that we've caught or killed a "wide range of leaders," the reality is there are an endless amount of "Number Two" and "Number Three" al-Qaeda guys, and reacting to the threat in the manner we have is not only futile, but has actually increased the overall threat exponentially.
When Bush's political opponents, me included, talk about bringing bin Laden to justice, it's really both a literal statement and a metaphor. We need to do much more to make our country and the world safer (that's the metaphor), and, personally, since I see the gaping whole in the NYC skyline everyday, I'd actually like to see the guy behind it brought to justice, martyr or not.
If we're fighting the threat smarter and more effectively, his martyrdom matters little.
Dissent Protects Democracy.
The most likely cause of death for OBL will be old age, unfortunately.
As an aside, some reports state that he's in the middle of nowhere, thus does not have medical help, other reports say he is rich, yet others say he needs dialysis, I'd guess that someone rich and who needs dialysis will have a medical team somewhere near.
Regs, Shaggy
Bin Laden's death shows the efficacy of the Bush approach, despite the doubters and naysayers.
You are OBL and I claim my $50,000,000,000
:-)
Regs, Shaggy
"The obsession with catching Bin Laden as opposed to fighting a broad-based organization is on the opponent's side, not Bush's."
Dude you need to focus. This guy openly claims to be responsible for the deaths of nearly 3000 people. In this country in recent years we have prosecuted people for killing a single person back in the 1960s. Bin Laden is not a symbol, he is not the head of an army opposing the United States, he is a cold blooded killer that needs to be brought to justice.
We are not at war. Not legally. Congress never declared war on either Afghanistan or Iraq. We would have been infinitely better off to treat all of this as a police action against specific individuals and organizations that had carried out or were planning to carry out crimes against the United States or its citizens. Instead we have allowed the megalomaniacs among us to metasize this into some sort of Global War on Terror, a Clash of Civilizations.
It is time to face some harsh facts. In taking his eye off the ball of targeting specific criminals to a messianic attempt to remake the world in American form with bombs and bullets Bush is edging every closer every day to destroying the Constitution and not incidentally the military that is sworn to defend it.
Just this week the Generals in charge of Afghanistan and Iraq admitted/claimed they each needed more troops to even hope to accomplish there missions. Just yesterday the spy community released a report saying the war on Iraq increases the terror threat. Sum that up and the clear conclusion is that we are losing this war.
Call that defeatism, call it unamerican, but me and some other people were trying to tell everyone that this would be the likely outcome before the first boy or girl came home in a box. This outcome was predictable because it was predicted.
You have implicitly bought into a narrative that has brought America into a potentially disasterous position. I don't know if we can even get out of this horrible bind at this point, but the first step is to recognize that you don't declare war on a mindset or a belief set. Instead you define criminal behavior and capture and prosecute those who violate that definition.
As soon as the words "I am truly not that concerned about him" (Bush referring to Bin Laden) I knew we were truly and well f'ed and if this were dKos I would add 'cluster' to that.
The rhetorical problem was never "Wanted: Dead or Alive" that was under the circumstances perfectly justified. The problem was when that morphed to "Bring em On!" We changed a campaign aimed at actual murderers into one that took on all potential murderers. That was folly, criminal folly, and anyone who has bought into that mind set needs to take some time to reconsider.
Here's irony: On domestic crime, conservatives argue that causes are irrelevant and only prosecution and certain sentencing matter. After an international crime, not even prosecution matters, only shooting at somebody. It's the apotheosis of "the usual suspects."
If he's not dead, he might as well be dead. It hardly matters at this stage.
Where there's dust in election year politics, somebody's beating the wind. Notice how we liberal rationalists take a wait and see position. Then imagine what MehlmanRove make of our non-excitement. Where's the wind coming from? Anybody's guess at this point, but I for one am certain this development/non-development can be spun as one more example of how out of the lockjaw mainstream we are not to be excited on the one hand, or very very afraid on the other.
He's as dead as King Arthur and Elvis, and has alreader been seen in several McDonalds ordering halalburgers.
... or, if he is really dead, the efficacy of water-borne illnesses.
Tom
... since we have already killed at least 22 alQaeda #2's.
Tom
al-Qaeda has always been a two-headed snake: bin Ladin, the symbol, and al-Zawahiri, the operational genius. Even if bin Ladin is dead, the operational infrastructure created and run by Ayman al-Zawahiri is still in place. For example, al-Qaeda in Iraq's new number one, Abu Hamza al-Muhajir (like al-Zawahiri, an Egyptian), is probably his man.
al-Zawahiri's string-pulling is significant because it appears that al-Qaeda, through bombings like the one yesterday in Sadr City, seems intent on doing what it can to push Iraq into full-blown civil war.
"One had seen in Jammu & Kashmir (J&K), where many Pakistani and other foreign jihadi terrorists operate, that the first indicator of the death of any foreign terrorist
due to natural causes came from his home country when the local intelligence received information about the
relatives holding a religious function to mark the death of the terrorist. Generally, reliable information about such religious functions being held in the home country are an important indicator of the death of the terrorist in a foreign land. Instances, where the relatives are told by a terrorist organisation to hold false religious functions to mislead the intelligence agencies and security forces are rare, but cannot be ruled out. "
I think it's a tactic - claim he's dead and, like the ending of a bad horror movie, produce him around election day to hopefully scare the beJesus out of everyone. I'm not talking about Al Qaeda.
It's my opinion based on nothing but the expediency of doing so, and the trail of what has gone on before.
The way magic works, is that a guy gets your attention focused on his fingers or something, then since you are so focused on that, he can run out back, grab a rabbit, run back in and wave it in the air. This is something like that, and it is a standard Republican operating method. While we are all thinking about, talking about, speculating about, writing about bin Laden, the Bush torture initiative will pass Congress intact. And, the death toll in Iraq will continue to climb. And, a few more Republican Congressmen will be indicted.
The beauty of this magic approach is that it works well as a step by step program too. Today, it's about whether bin Laden is dead. Tomorrow it will be about whether his "death" came about due to the enormous pressure Bush put on him, the next day it will be about who succeeds him, followed by a few analyses of how Bush has decimated the al Qaeda officer corps, etc. Of course, we can expect that when we all exhaust our discussions on this, the Constitution will be in shreds - who wouldda thought?
Hoppy in Sacramento
I have to say, it would be brilliantly ironic for America's Most Wanted Terrorist, who has been hunted for five years by the most powerful military force the world has ever seen, to be brought to his demise by one of "God's Microscopic Soldiers"!(typhoid)
BTW, it seems a little farfetched to believe that a guy who could orchestrate major terrorist operations all over the globe and has a best buddy who's a doctor can't get his hands on some cipro/ampicillin/amox, though he might have gotten a resistant strain, something we can call "A resistance fighter" brand of typhoid. (ah sweet irony)
It seems the worst thing that could happen for the Bush Regime would be for Osama to have died...without the boogeyman how will they keep the children safely locked in their rooms? I imagine if he is dead he'd quickly be reborn in the form OSBL 2006; a program with a deadly virus able to infiltrate all aspects of the Western world.
I don't think it's a stretch to suspect that OBL has in fact died, that the Saudis are waiting for the body for confirmation, and that under instructions from the U.S. they have made no announcements and had no intention of doing so, until circumstances could be created that made it plausible to seem that he was killed in action, i.e., he was brought down in the GBOT. Whoever controls the body controls the story. The French intelligence service leaked the story early to stymy this Rovian strategy for an October or near-October surprise. Now that Rove has been busted, the story may die down, but don't be surprised if OBL is soon announced to be a victim of Bush's GWOT.
"The report of my death was an exaggeration." Mark Twain's note to a London correspondent at the NY Journal, 1897.
Note on W.C. Field's grave marker. "I'd really rather be in Philadelphia."
Last week an Afghani acquaintance of mine said OBL was in northern Pakistan right at the Chinese border and because he's there neither Pakistan nor the US dares to go after him.
Having no clue as to the ins and outs of international intrigue, I have no idea what being at the Chinese border has to do with anything, nor does my friend. Maybe someone else does.
Habeus Corpus...
Or, to paraphrase a congress critter who shall remain nameless, show me bin laden's blue dress and I'll believe it.
Not buying it. If he's dead, we won't find out until after the elections anyway, because the GOP needs bin Laden to be alive and evil and building caliphates for another few weeks.
The prevailing confusion helps the GOP, unfortunately, because the GOP can now stand up and make some bold, definitive unfounded claims about bin Laden's ongoing power and evil intent. Cheney will create the truth for us, in case we're uncertain. Overly simple and false "clarity" is all the uninformed right-wing base needs for voting purposes.
September 23, 2006 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
"News" of bin Laden's death is greatly exaggerated. Of course, the reason for this (CIA) leak is to prod the evil old bird into making his pre-election endorsement of the Democratic Party. Bin Laden needs Bush to pump up recruitment, and Bush needs bin Laden to pump up turnout. This leak is Osama's cue. We can expect him to hit the airways by Halloween.
Ah, the comforts of an orderly universe.
September 23, 2006 10:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
water-borne illness
It was the Spinach.
---- Just say no to 0 ratings. Especially from petey, the ratings abuser.
September 23, 2006 10:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Roger Cressey said on NBC Nightly News that he doesn't believe the "single-sourced" report. He's an expert on the subject, I'm not.
September 23, 2006 10:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would be no suprise if the report were false. Likewise, it would be no suprise if the report were true.
The sons of the prophet are noble and bold,
and quite unaccustomed to fear.
But the bravest by far in the ranks of the Shah
was Abdul Abulbul Amir
September 23, 2006 10:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the news highlights the fact that Bush never made capturing or killing him a priority, and as a result, the locus of control of bin Laden's fate is in his hands not ours, which is the exact opposite of what Bush promised when he had that bullhorn in his hand.
September 23, 2006 10:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've been surprised by how many people I discussed the rumour with today who were confused as to either what typhoid fever is or that the disease still exists. If the theories regarding global warming prove true and the U.S. is beset with flooding and other catastrophes over the next decade or two, I suspect many will perish due to this lack of knowledge.
A) If bin Laden has perished due to disease then Bush has failed miserably in not bringing the criminal to justice.
B) If bin Laden is still alive and functioning in any sort of leadership capacity for al Queda then Bush has failed even more miserably for the potential danger which still exists.
September 23, 2006 10:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I heard an American reporter on Australian radio Friday night saying Bin Laden's name is now mentioned only when every even second year comes along, i.e. presidential or mid term elections.
Also if Bin Laden is really dead, won't that be SOMETHING for President Bush to announce at the "right" moment?
September 23, 2006 10:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
my take on it, is to sit back and see what comes out in the next few days to a week.
September 23, 2006 11:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't believe it, but I don't think it helps Bush either. Bin Laden dying of natural causes while a free man only reminds us of his failure to capture him when he had the chance.
September 24, 2006 2:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
My mother has kidney disease and is on dialysis 3 days a week. There is absolutely no way on earth that Bin Laden is on dialysis and still alive. No. Way. You just can't lug around a dialysis machine. Unless you have seen one in action, you just can't begin to understand how complicated they are and how debilitating they are. If he ever truly needed dialysis, then he is dead.
September 24, 2006 3:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
My (cynical) take comes from following French politics, where this week began the primary campaigns of the 07 Presidential election. Sarkozy, Interior Minister (and thus oversees DGSE, the intelligence operation that is the source for this report), had met with Bush and Rice just last week, then returned home to try to regain his position of front-runner. He's a guy who would have absolutey no compunction about monkeying around with intelligence for political gain, which he equates with trying to embarass CHirac and Villepin. Just as we saw Italy's intelligence and diplomatic services put at the disposition of Bush by Berlasconi for his own political benefit (or so he thought), Sarko might be trying the same trick here.
September 24, 2006 4:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hasn't anyone thought to ask a doctor whether it's plausible or likely that OBL could have died of typhoid?
I actually got the disease myself, years ago, in Pakistan. It was pretty unpleasant, but easily enough cured with a course of antibiotics (diagnosis was based on an on-the-spot blood analysis at a small clinic). So, for what it's worth, based on that it seems likely he could have got a case of typhoid fever treated, even in a very remote area, as long as he was able to get it diagnosed.
September 24, 2006 4:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
There is absolutely no way on earth that Bin Laden is on dialysis and still alive. No. Way.
The average time a patient in the US lives on dialysis is five years, and this with treatment in a hygienic dialysis center. This talk of portable dialysis is complete bullshit. As for recovery from a typhoid infection, he does have Dr. Al Zawahiri with him, doesn't he?
September 24, 2006 4:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here are the known knowns and the known unknowns:
He might be dead. (I'm less than totally convinced by the supposed recent video and audio recordings, and think it's still possible he's been dead since winter 2001.)
He might not be. (I see no reason to assume that he feels compelled to communicate on any schedule-- e.g. the 5th anniversary of 9/11-- that seems obvious to us.)
This will probably not be the last time his death is reported. One of them will be accurate. The rest won't. We may never know.
Lawrence Wright, whose new book The Looming Tower is very well researched, says the dialysis thing is false. So we should not assume he'd be doomed by that. On the other hand, he could well be somewhere so remote that antibiotics could not reach him in time, not to mention that antibiotic-resistant strains of typhoid have been reported in Pakistan. (That's assuming he's in Pakistan. Who knows? Thomas Pynchon was in Manhattan all that time he was assumed to be in hiding, Bin Laden could be in Iran, Saudi, some smaller emirate, who knows.)
Now my commentary:
1) Bush was right early on to say that it's not about catching one guy. Bin Laden's effectiveness as a leader has obviously been seriously degraded over the last five years, due to our efforts to make it harder for him to communicate and raise/disburse money; he functions now only as a symbol, not as someone planning and funding operations. The obsession with catching Bin Laden as opposed to fighting a broad-based organization is on the opponent's side, not Bush's. In recent months our side (broadly defined) has caught or killed a wide range of leaders in the field in countries ranging from Iraq to Turkey to Britain. That's far more important than making Bin Laden a martyr or holding an internationally televised trial with Ramsey Clark at his side.
2) How fitting if the man who sought to bring us all a 13th century world died of a 13th century disease.
September 24, 2006 5:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
The White House scrambles to figure out how deal with the intelligence agencies' report that the Iraq war has increased terrorism; Karl Rove focuses on how to turn a prospective confirmation of bin Laden's death into a US- managed assassination as a way to blank out the bad news about terrorism with "mission accomplished."
Meanwhile, the left is delighted to munch on tidbits tossed by an establishment media to keep them occupied with "what-ifs." We cooperate hungrily.
September 24, 2006 5:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
There are two news-streams flowing between now and election day:
In one, we see the real news: disaster in Iraq, Constitutional law-breaking in Congress, etc.
In the other, we see diversionary news: Osama is dead, Ahmadinejad is a punk, Chavez is a buffoon, Clinton caused 9/11, Democrats will raise your taxes, etc.
Keep your eye on the ball: if Osama is dead it doesn't change anything important. And/But it will give Bush and the rubber-stamp Republicans cover from being accountable for their record.
September 24, 2006 6:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
JohnW1141
Yes, bin Ladin is dead. He tripped over his dialysis machine and fell off the mountain. Show me the body. And isn't
it getting near time to kill alQaeda #3 again?
September 24, 2006 6:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have to agree with NJLawyer...all this speculation puts bin Laden's fate once again on the front pages and gives people a chance to assess whether President "Dead or Alive" really followed through on his promise to pursue this prime evil- doer. Had we spent $1/2 trillion seeking bin Laden, we'd have found him and prosecuted him by now...we have the wrong man in custody in Baghdad and an unsolvable mess on our hands thanks to the chicken warriors at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
September 24, 2006 6:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know what it means, but I can see how the spin will play things, so we need to be prepared. For some time, going back to at least Gore's warnings in the lead-up to war and certainly during the Bush vs Kerry debates, a way for the opposition to recapture the ground of foreign policy has been to say that the Iraq war meant dropping the ball on terrorism, not the fight to the finish that we must pursue or we're losers.
I can see, in the event of bin Laden's death, every time that comes up, the GOP candidate just shrugs and says, oh, bin Laden's dead anyway, so let's go after the real killers left. Port security can feel bloodless. Shoring up Afghanistan is "nation building." The idea of how Bush created a global, decentered pool of Al Qaeda sympathizers that rendered bin Laden, already weakened by financial seizures and fall of the Taliban, irrelevant will be "blame America first." America's feeling even less safe than ever will be either defeatism or, conversely, a reason to stick with the tough guys.
So we should start planning the opposition attack now. Any thoughts on how best to do it?
http://www.haberarts.com/
September 24, 2006 6:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
1) Bush was right early on to say that it's not about catching one guy.
The problem is we haven't caught the "one guy" OR made a dent in the overall terrorism problem.
Contrary to your notion that we've caught or killed a "wide range of leaders," the reality is there are an endless amount of "Number Two" and "Number Three" al-Qaeda guys, and reacting to the threat in the manner we have is not only futile, but has actually increased the overall threat exponentially.
When Bush's political opponents, me included, talk about bringing bin Laden to justice, it's really both a literal statement and a metaphor. We need to do much more to make our country and the world safer (that's the metaphor), and, personally, since I see the gaping whole in the NYC skyline everyday, I'd actually like to see the guy behind it brought to justice, martyr or not.
If we're fighting the threat smarter and more effectively, his martyrdom matters little.
Dissent Protects Democracy.
September 24, 2006 6:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
The most likely cause of death for OBL will be old age, unfortunately.
As an aside, some reports state that he's in the middle of nowhere, thus does not have medical help, other reports say he is rich, yet others say he needs dialysis, I'd guess that someone rich and who needs dialysis will have a medical team somewhere near.
Regs, Shaggy
September 24, 2006 7:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bin Laden's death shows the efficacy of the Bush approach, despite the doubters and naysayers.
September 24, 2006 7:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are OBL and I claim my $50,000,000,000
:-)
Regs, Shaggy
September 24, 2006 7:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
"The obsession with catching Bin Laden as opposed to fighting a broad-based organization is on the opponent's side, not Bush's."
Dude you need to focus. This guy openly claims to be responsible for the deaths of nearly 3000 people. In this country in recent years we have prosecuted people for killing a single person back in the 1960s. Bin Laden is not a symbol, he is not the head of an army opposing the United States, he is a cold blooded killer that needs to be brought to justice.
We are not at war. Not legally. Congress never declared war on either Afghanistan or Iraq. We would have been infinitely better off to treat all of this as a police action against specific individuals and organizations that had carried out or were planning to carry out crimes against the United States or its citizens. Instead we have allowed the megalomaniacs among us to metasize this into some sort of Global War on Terror, a Clash of Civilizations.
It is time to face some harsh facts. In taking his eye off the ball of targeting specific criminals to a messianic attempt to remake the world in American form with bombs and bullets Bush is edging every closer every day to destroying the Constitution and not incidentally the military that is sworn to defend it.
Just this week the Generals in charge of Afghanistan and Iraq admitted/claimed they each needed more troops to even hope to accomplish there missions. Just yesterday the spy community released a report saying the war on Iraq increases the terror threat. Sum that up and the clear conclusion is that we are losing this war.
Call that defeatism, call it unamerican, but me and some other people were trying to tell everyone that this would be the likely outcome before the first boy or girl came home in a box. This outcome was predictable because it was predicted.
You have implicitly bought into a narrative that has brought America into a potentially disasterous position. I don't know if we can even get out of this horrible bind at this point, but the first step is to recognize that you don't declare war on a mindset or a belief set. Instead you define criminal behavior and capture and prosecute those who violate that definition.
As soon as the words "I am truly not that concerned about him" (Bush referring to Bin Laden) I knew we were truly and well f'ed and if this were dKos I would add 'cluster' to that.
The rhetorical problem was never "Wanted: Dead or Alive" that was under the circumstances perfectly justified. The problem was when that morphed to "Bring em On!" We changed a campaign aimed at actual murderers into one that took on all potential murderers. That was folly, criminal folly, and anyone who has bought into that mind set needs to take some time to reconsider.
September 24, 2006 7:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here's irony: On domestic crime, conservatives argue that causes are irrelevant and only prosecution and certain sentencing matter. After an international crime, not even prosecution matters, only shooting at somebody. It's the apotheosis of "the usual suspects."
September 24, 2006 7:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
If he's not dead, he might as well be dead. It hardly matters at this stage.
September 24, 2006 7:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Where there's dust in election year politics, somebody's beating the wind. Notice how we liberal rationalists take a wait and see position. Then imagine what MehlmanRove make of our non-excitement. Where's the wind coming from? Anybody's guess at this point, but I for one am certain this development/non-development can be spun as one more example of how out of the lockjaw mainstream we are not to be excited on the one hand, or very very afraid on the other.
September 24, 2006 7:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
He's as dead as King Arthur and Elvis, and has alreader been seen in several McDonalds ordering halalburgers.
September 24, 2006 7:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
... or, if he is really dead, the efficacy of water-borne illnesses.
Tom
September 24, 2006 8:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
... since we have already killed at least 22 alQaeda #2's.
Tom
September 24, 2006 8:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
al-Qaeda has always been a two-headed snake: bin Ladin, the symbol, and al-Zawahiri, the operational genius. Even if bin Ladin is dead, the operational infrastructure created and run by Ayman al-Zawahiri is still in place. For example, al-Qaeda in Iraq's new number one, Abu Hamza al-Muhajir (like al-Zawahiri, an Egyptian), is probably his man.
al-Zawahiri's string-pulling is significant because it appears that al-Qaeda, through bombings like the one yesterday in Sadr City, seems intent on doing what it can to push Iraq into full-blown civil war.
September 24, 2006 8:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
An expert opinion is available here:
http://www.saag.org/%5Cpapers20%5Cpaper1964.html
"One had seen in Jammu & Kashmir (J&K), where many Pakistani and other foreign jihadi terrorists operate, that the first indicator of the death of any foreign terrorist
due to natural causes came from his home country when the local intelligence received information about the
relatives holding a religious function to mark the death of the terrorist. Generally, reliable information about such religious functions being held in the home country are an important indicator of the death of the terrorist in a foreign land. Instances, where the relatives are told by a terrorist organisation to hold false religious functions to mislead the intelligence agencies and security forces are rare, but cannot be ruled out. "
September 24, 2006 8:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's a tactic - claim he's dead and, like the ending of a bad horror movie, produce him around election day to hopefully scare the beJesus out of everyone. I'm not talking about Al Qaeda.
It's my opinion based on nothing but the expediency of doing so, and the trail of what has gone on before.
September 24, 2006 8:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
The way magic works, is that a guy gets your attention focused on his fingers or something, then since you are so focused on that, he can run out back, grab a rabbit, run back in and wave it in the air. This is something like that, and it is a standard Republican operating method. While we are all thinking about, talking about, speculating about, writing about bin Laden, the Bush torture initiative will pass Congress intact. And, the death toll in Iraq will continue to climb. And, a few more Republican Congressmen will be indicted.
The beauty of this magic approach is that it works well as a step by step program too. Today, it's about whether bin Laden is dead. Tomorrow it will be about whether his "death" came about due to the enormous pressure Bush put on him, the next day it will be about who succeeds him, followed by a few analyses of how Bush has decimated the al Qaeda officer corps, etc. Of course, we can expect that when we all exhaust our discussions on this, the Constitution will be in shreds - who wouldda thought?
Hoppy in Sacramento
September 24, 2006 9:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have to say, it would be brilliantly ironic for America's Most Wanted Terrorist, who has been hunted for five years by the most powerful military force the world has ever seen, to be brought to his demise by one of "God's Microscopic Soldiers"!(typhoid)
September 24, 2006 9:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
BTW, it seems a little farfetched to believe that a guy who could orchestrate major terrorist operations all over the globe and has a best buddy who's a doctor can't get his hands on some cipro/ampicillin/amox, though he might have gotten a resistant strain, something we can call "A resistance fighter" brand of typhoid. (ah sweet irony)
September 24, 2006 9:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
It seems the worst thing that could happen for the Bush Regime would be for Osama to have died...without the boogeyman how will they keep the children safely locked in their rooms? I imagine if he is dead he'd quickly be reborn in the form OSBL 2006; a program with a deadly virus able to infiltrate all aspects of the Western world.
September 24, 2006 9:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think it's a stretch to suspect that OBL has in fact died, that the Saudis are waiting for the body for confirmation, and that under instructions from the U.S. they have made no announcements and had no intention of doing so, until circumstances could be created that made it plausible to seem that he was killed in action, i.e., he was brought down in the GBOT. Whoever controls the body controls the story. The French intelligence service leaked the story early to stymy this Rovian strategy for an October or near-October surprise. Now that Rove has been busted, the story may die down, but don't be surprised if OBL is soon announced to be a victim of Bush's GWOT.
September 24, 2006 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
"The report of my death was an exaggeration." Mark Twain's note to a London correspondent at the NY Journal, 1897.
Note on W.C. Field's grave marker. "I'd really rather be in Philadelphia."
September 24, 2006 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Last week an Afghani acquaintance of mine said OBL was in northern Pakistan right at the Chinese border and because he's there neither Pakistan nor the US dares to go after him.
Having no clue as to the ins and outs of international intrigue, I have no idea what being at the Chinese border has to do with anything, nor does my friend. Maybe someone else does.
September 24, 2006 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Habeus Corpus...
Or, to paraphrase a congress critter who shall remain nameless, show me bin laden's blue dress and I'll believe it.
September 24, 2006 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
War of the Worlds all over again.
Tom
September 24, 2006 11:49 AM | Reply |