A Pity: No evidence suggests bin Laden hurt by quake

[Breukelen advocaat]

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/world/3388801

Well, we can hope! It would be GREAT if bin laden was killed yesterday, on Oct. 9, 2005, which was the day that a suspected attack by terrorists on New York City subways did NOT happen, possibly due to al quada prisoners' squealing. Of course, some of those Moslems on the side of the terrorists will take it as the will of their god Allah - which will flip out more than a few of them, lol.

Oct. 9, 2005, 12:28PM
No evidence suggests bin Laden hurt by quake
By KATHERINE SHRADER
Associated Press
WASHINGTON â?? No evidence suggests that the deadly earthquake that rocked Pakistan on Saturday injured or killed the world's top terror leader, Osama bin Laden.
The quake shook the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan, where bin Laden is believed to be hiding. However, authorities at this point have no information indicating he's been injured or killed, said a U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the information's sensitivity.
Bin Laden guided the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks aimed at New York City and Washington.
U.S. hopes for bin Laden's death or capture were high in December 2001, when U.S. and Afghan troops surrounded a cave complex sheltering al-Qaida members in Afghanistan's Tora Bora region. But bin Laden escaped and is now believed to be living a relatively isolated existence to evade capture.
He was last seen publicly on a videotaped message before the November 2004 elections.
Bin Laden's public face is often his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, who may be hiding with him and is known for more frequent messages. In one last month, Zawahri called the London transit attacks "a slap to the face" of Britain.

Breukelen advocaat Reviewed by Breukelen advocaat on 10-10-2005. A Pity: No evidence suggests bin Laden hurt by quake http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/world/3388801 Well, we can hope! It would be GREAT if bin laden was killed yesterday, on Oct. 9, 2005, which was the day that a suspected attack by terrorists on New York City subways did NOT happen, possibly due to al quada prisoners' squealing. Of course, some of those Moslems on the side of the terrorists will take it as the will of their god Allah - which will flip out more than a few of them, lol. Oct. 9, 2005, 12:28PM No evidence Rating: 5

[eg420ne]

LOL, That is so propagandish, Boo, They like playing the fear card, better watch 4 osama. Lets keep the boogieman osama on the minds of the sheepple, while the appointed prez of ours says he's does not worry about where osama is. Watch out BA, Al CIA Duh going to get u.

[clembob101]

ive been to afghanistan and pakistan , they think of bin laden as a hero .. someone whos on there side.
1 mans terrorist is another mans hero.

[Breukelen advocaat]

LOL, That is so propagandish, Boo, They like playing the fear card, better watch 4 osama. Lets keep the boogieman osama on the minds of the sheepple, while the appointed prez of ours says he's does not worry about where osama is. Watch out BA, Al CIA Duh going to get u.

If I, or most anybody in New York, happen to run into him HE is the one that is going to have to worry about safety.

[Tholiak]

like the next day after, how would they even be able to get in and see if there is any "evidence"

[mikeandjenherbals]

Report: U.S. Must Reduce Dependence On Foreign Turmoil
December 19, 2004 | Issue 37â?¢46


WASHINGTON, DCâ??According to a Cato Institute report released Monday, the U.S. has become overly dependent on foreign turmoil for its conversations and media coverage. "The American people consume as many as 60 million barrels of crude speculation every day, using it for everything from driving discussions to heating up political debates," the report stated. "Unless we can dredge up domestic sources of turmoil, we may end up utterly dependent on the Middle East for conversational fuel."

[Breukelen advocaat]

like the next day after, how would they even be able to get in and see if there is any "evidence"

They wouldn't announce it so fast even if they did find the remains of the scumdog or any of his top lieutenants. He's either dead of still in hiding, like the filthy, cowardly subhuman, mangy cur that he is.

[pisshead]

you can also google "george bush not worried about bin laden"...so i wonder, i guess it just depends on what george bush says that day...if you're supposed to be afraid of goldstein or not...and no, i disliked kerry just as much...and i didn't vote for him...

http://www.issues2000.org/Archive/Bu...ar_+_Peace.htm

Does Bush Care About Osama Bin Laden?
In 2001, George W. Bush said that he wanted Osama bin Laden "dead or alive." In 2002 Bush said "I truly am not that concerned about him." During the third debate with John Kerry, when that second comment was brought up, Bush said "I just don't think I ever said I'm not worried about Osama bin Laden. It's kind of one of those exaggerations."

...the full context of Bush's second comment where he expressed his opinion that bin Laden had become irrelevant:

Q But don't you believe that the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead or alive?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.

But once we set out the policy and started executing the plan, he became -- we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we -- excuse me for a minute -- and if we find a training camp, we'll take care of it. Either we will or our friends will. That's one of the things -- part of the new phase that's becoming apparent to the American people is that we're working closely with other governments to deny sanctuary, or training, or a place to hide, or a place to raise money.

And we've got more work to do. See, that's the thing the American people have got to understand, that we've only been at this six months. This is going to be a long struggle. I keep saying that; I don't know whether you all believe me or not. But time will show you that it's going to take a long time to achieve this objective. And I can assure you, I am not going to blink. And I'm not going to get tired. Because I know what is at stake. And history has called us to action, and I am going to seize this moment for the good of the world, for peace in the world and for freedom.

We can see that this isn't a mistaken comment but, rather, part of a coherent position: Bin Laden doesn't have a government that can help him or as large of a support network, so we just aren't going to worry too much about him anymore. We don't completely ignore him, of course, and we still hope to catch him â?? but he's also not going to be the focus of our anti-terrorism, efforts, either.

Agree or disagree with it, that was his position on March 13, 2002 during a press conference where he justified the build-up to the war on Iraq.



Now, here is the transcript from the third debate between George W. Bush and John Kerry:

KERRY: Yes. When the president had an opportunity to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, he took his focus off of them, outsourced the job to Afghan warlords, and Osama bin Laden escaped.
Six months after he said Osama bin Laden must be caught dead or alive, this president was asked, "Where is Osama bin Laden?" He said, "I don't know. I don't really think about him very much. I'm not that concerned."

We need a president who stays deadly focused on the real war on terror.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President?

BUSH: Gosh, I just don't think I ever said I'm not worried about Osama bin Laden. It's kind of one of those exaggerations.

[Psycho4Bud]

When Captain Cave Man felt the earth shake he probably thought we dropped another M.O.A.B on his ass! His country is gone, a good share of his mindless followers dead, bank accounts seized..... AWWWWWWWW!!!

[mikeandjenherbals]

you can also google "george bush not worried about bin laden"...so i wonder, i guess it just depends on what george bush says that day...if you're supposed to be afraid of goldstein or not...and no, i disliked kerry just as much...and i didn't vote for him...

http://www.issues2000.org/Archive/Bu...ar_+_Peace.htm

Does Bush Care About Osama Bin Laden?
In 2001, George W. Bush said that he wanted Osama bin Laden "dead or alive." In 2002 Bush said "I truly am not that concerned about him." During the third debate with John Kerry, when that second comment was brought up, Bush said "I just don't think I ever said I'm not worried about Osama bin Laden. It's kind of one of those exaggerations."

...the full context of Bush's second comment where he expressed his opinion that bin Laden had become irrelevant:

Q But don't you believe that the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead or alive?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.

But once we set out the policy and started executing the plan, he became -- we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we -- excuse me for a minute -- and if we find a training camp, we'll take care of it. Either we will or our friends will. That's one of the things -- part of the new phase that's becoming apparent to the American people is that we're working closely with other governments to deny sanctuary, or training, or a place to hide, or a place to raise money.

And we've got more work to do. See, that's the thing the American people have got to understand, that we've only been at this six months. This is going to be a long struggle. I keep saying that; I don't know whether you all believe me or not. But time will show you that it's going to take a long time to achieve this objective. And I can assure you, I am not going to blink. And I'm not going to get tired. Because I know what is at stake. And history has called us to action, and I am going to seize this moment for the good of the world, for peace in the world and for freedom.

We can see that this isn't a mistaken comment but, rather, part of a coherent position: Bin Laden doesn't have a government that can help him or as large of a support network, so we just aren't going to worry too much about him anymore. We don't completely ignore him, of course, and we still hope to catch him â?? but he's also not going to be the focus of our anti-terrorism, efforts, either.

Agree or disagree with it, that was his position on March 13, 2002 during a press conference where he justified the build-up to the war on Iraq.



Now, here is the transcript from the third debate between George W. Bush and John Kerry:

KERRY: Yes. When the president had an opportunity to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, he took his focus off of them, outsourced the job to Afghan warlords, and Osama bin Laden escaped.
Six months after he said Osama bin Laden must be caught dead or alive, this president was asked, "Where is Osama bin Laden?" He said, "I don't know. I don't really think about him very much. I'm not that concerned."

We need a president who stays deadly focused on the real war on terror.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President?

BUSH: Gosh, I just don't think I ever said I'm not worried about Osama bin Laden. It's kind of one of those exaggerations.

pisshead I just figured if dipstick has you on ignore he will still see your post this way.