what, exactly, did bin laden do again?

[skjpm]

All we know is that he cheered from the sidelines. What's the point of capturing him? Is he directly involved in anything?

Since Bush is friends with the Bin Ladens, maybe he just picked one and said, "Can we use him as our bogeyman?" It could be that Osama volunteered to be poster boy, and has basically been in on the scam since the beginning, pretending to hide out, and waiting for his cue to get "captured."

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. There's still a possibility

he had a hand in 9/11.

Hard to tell, though. This Admin has coughed up so many lies on so many things now, I can't see the truth anymore. :( (Which, I am sure, was the plan all along.)

[cthrumatrix]

20. Let's FIRST examine the Bush / Bin Laden multi-year business

relationship....educate America ...tell them how these two familes are long time friends. I dare you.

[NicoleM]

2. On 9/11, my first thought when I heard what was happening

was "Osama bin Laden." We don't know if he's still directly involved in anything, because we can't find him. But I think it's pretty clear that there is an al Qaeda and he is the leader of it and they do want to kill a lot of people, including Americans. I don't believe that al Qaeda will fold up like a tent if we catch OBL, but I do think we should try to find him.

[Devils Advocate NZ]

9. Actually, you are wrong...

there is no such organisation as "Al Qaeda". "Al Qaeda" was the name of a base in Afghanistan run by Bin Laden (and funded by the CIA) to train Arabs to fight against the Soviet occupation forces.

After that, Bin Ladin did not have an organisation as such but maintained links with various Islamic terrorist groups, which were refered to as the "Bin Ladin Network". In 1998, Shaykh Usamah Bin-Muhammad Bin-Ladin, Ayman al-Zawahiri (amir of the Jihad Group in Egypt), Abu-Yasir Rifa'i Ahmad Taha (Egyptian Islamic Group), Shaykh Mir Hamzah (secretary of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Pakistan), and Fazlur Rahman (amir of the Jihad Movement in Bangladesh) released a statement proclaiming themselves to be the "World Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Jews and Crusaders".

Bin Ladin and his followers have NEVER refered to themselves as "Al Qaeda" and as such no such organisation EVER existed. As I said, the only "Al Qaeda" ("The Base") that ever existed was a CIA training camp run by Bin Ladin in Afghanistan.

Read through this page from 1998:

http://usembassy-australia.state.gov/hyper/WF980824/epf112.htm

Do you notice something missing there? How about the fact that "Al Qaeda" is not mentioned even ONCE? Now ask yourself, why does Bush blame a non-existant terrorist organisation for the September 11 2001 attacks?

By the way, for bonus points, and for those who believe the Kosovo war was justified, have a close look at the following sentence from that page:

The bin Ladin network supports terrorists in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya, Tajikistan, Somalia, Yemen, and now Kosovo. It also trains members of terrorist networks from such diverse countries as the Philippines, Algeria and Eritrea.

Now ask yourself this question: Which side was the US supporting in Bosnia and Kosovo? If you answered "the Muslims", give yourself one point, then ask yourself this question: Which side was Bin Ladin supporting in Bosnia and Kosovo? If you answered "the Muslims" give yourself another point, and then ask yourself this question:

Why was Bin Ladin supporting the same side as the US in Bosnia and Kosovo even after he supposedly declared jihad against the US?

If you answered "because Bin Ladin works for the CIA" give yourself a thousand points...

[ArkDem]

3. Have you actually been to New York City

and seen a hole where the World Trade Center was? It may never have happened!

[skjpm]

5. Was the hole in NYC directly caused by Bin Laden?

No, Mr. Worley, I haven't forgotten. But wouldn't our resources be better spent on finding the people who actually orchestrated the attack?

[KFC]

15. Believe me, the people who actually carried it out are dead.

I don't think any parachutes were spotted.

Bin laden organized and funded the attacks. Afterwards, he even laughed about some of the hijackers not knowing ahead of time that it was a suicide mission.

[SpiralHawk]

19. How about a fact or a link, KFC ?

You seem pretty sure of yourself. Time to put up, or pipe down.

[cirej2000]

21. So if Bin Laden is captured...

We need to have damage control in place just in case, right?

C'mon DUers, let's be real. He's behind Al Qaeda.

If he's captured and we start saying that he's not Al Qaeda or he's not important...I'll jump to the moderates! I don't thank that Mr. Dean would suggest such a ridiculous notion. The day he does is the day I support Clark!

[leesa]

23. You are repeating something that is not known

We have never had any proof other than Iraq style unfounded allegations. Bush promised us proof...Tony Blair was supposed to release the "White Papers which were supposed to prove OBL did 911 beyond a shadow of a doubt. He never produced it.
Did OBL do it? No one knows and that is the point. We are calling for his head and we bombed innocent Afghanistan for ten months without any investigation of the crime and no concrete proof offered.
There is Faaaar more circumstantial proof that Bush was involved than OBL.

[Monte Carlo]

4. He supplies al-Queda with the money and the public face.

He's not the brains of the outfit, so I don't think he personally planned the WTC and Pentagon attacks. But he most certainly pushed them along. Bush and his antics aside, bin Laden is no innocent.

[rman]

11. and where does OSB get all this money?

from Bush family business partner the Bin Laden family

[DuctapeFatwa]

6. He has served the CIA faithfully for 27 years

He has been directly involved in all his assignments for his employer.

[SpiralHawk]

7. To this day I have seen no evidence that bin Laden

had involvement in 9/11. Nor have I ever seen a report that he was claiming involvement or responsibility.

What evidence has the Bush Administration shown to the American people? I'd like to consider it.

I'm prepared to believe bin Laden is culpable (BFEE LIHOP or not), but I would at least like to see evidence of his guilt.

These wars are getting mighty expensive -- not just in terms of money we are spending to enrich Halliburton and all the rest -- but also in terms of our international credibility and standing. Mighty expensive.

Shouldn't we have some evidence before ChimpCo keeps on wildly spending all our wealth chasing "evildoers" without hard evidence of their "evildoing."

[DuctapeFatwa]

8. Bush said "No need for evidence, we know he's guilty"

He said it live, on TV seen by the world, and with those 8 words did greater and more irreparable damage the the US than a thousand planes in a thousand buildings.

[Loonman]

10. Who do you think it was? Santa Claus?

Jesus Christ....

[radwriter0555]

13. It was 19 lunatics. Bin laden said he didn't do it. He would have

gladly taken credit if he had. He's never denied his deeds in the past. What would be the point in denying it if he DID it?

[loudnclear]

14. I believe as you do. And no one can really believe TV videos or photos

It's just too easy to fabricate them. I think Bin Laden is dead from kidney failure. However, somone has picked up his mantle and is following the US play. If we want a boogey man they will give it to us.

These people never deny anything that would help their cause. But you can take it to othe bank if they claim responsibility.

[salin]

30. I believe that his assertions

were intentionally ambiguous. Guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one.

[radwriter0555]

12. WHEN HE WAS ALIVE he declared he had nothing to do with the orchestration

of 9.11/ He was PROUD of it.

My personal belief is that he is dead now, and probably has been since about December of 2001.

If serves the bush regime to believe he's alive, since they need a boogie man.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

16. who?

[mmonk]

17. Anybody who funds, trains, or directs

people who kill innocents because soft targets are easy or induces fear deserve to be taken out. What goood purpose is it in killing non combatants? What good do they bring to our earth? Why am I having this conversation?

[Devils Advocate NZ]

18. How many innocents did Clark kill in Serbia and Kosovo?

How many innocents have been killed in Iraq?

In fact pick any US backed regime in Central and South America... How many innocents were killed in those nations? How about Viet Nam?

Does the School of the Americas (operating now under a different name) still offer lessons in "Death Squads 101" and "Political Murder For Fun And Profit"?

Bin Ladin is only carrying out his CIA orders...

[mmonk]

22. disingenuous I hope

Yes, Clark decided that we must attack innocents. The whole plan was not to engage militarily with the Serbs, but to seek out and destroy innocent people.

Crawl back into your hole where apologists for murdering anarchists dwell.

[Devils Advocate NZ]

26. He bombed civillian facilities intentionally.

He is an unindicted war criminal...

Everyone keeps talking about how great he was for carrying out a "war" without incurring any casualties, but they always ignore how he actually did that: By ordering his bombers to fly so high that they couldn't tell the difference between a tractor load of Albanian refugees, and a Serbian tank. How masterful.

In fact there are some indications that US bombers may have killed almost as many Alabanians as the Serbs are accused of having killed, and if you add in Serbian civillians then the numbers killed by US bombs outweight the numbers supposedly killed by the Serbs.

It doesn't help that Osama bin Ladin and Clark were both helping the KLA to fight the Serbs. I mean isn't Bin Ladin meant to be the most evil terrorist on Earth? Don't believe me? Then perhaps you will believe the State Dept:

The bin Ladin network supports terrorists in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya, Tajikistan, Somalia, Yemen, and now Kosovo. It also trains members of terrorist networks from such diverse countries as the Philippines, Algeria and Eritrea.
http://usembassy-australia.state.gov/hyper/WF980824/epf112.htm

Notice the date of that document, 1998, the year before the US attack on Serbia. So at that time, the US KNEW that Serbs in Kosovo were being attacked by terrorists linked to Osama bin Ladin. Makes you wonder why they chose to support the terrorists huh?

[mmonk]

28. Guilt by association

You are free to hate Clark if you like. The Bin Laden network supports terrorism though, and Wes Clark does not. Would you answer the question about what good it is to leave the Bin Laden network alone? Feel free to leave out your moral relativism.

[Devils Advocate NZ]

34. Clark doesn't support terrorists? Then why did he support the KLA?

The KLA is a muslim fundamentalist terrorist organisation that is linked to Osama bin Ladin. Clark assisted the KLA by bombing Serbia for fighting the KLA. Now tell me again that Clark doesn't support terrorists?

As for leaving the bin Ladin network alone, what makes you think they aren't already? Bin Ladin is now, and always has been a CIA asset. He does the dirty jobs that the CIA can't directly get involved in.

Haven't you ever wondered how bin Ladin manages to always disappear? The supposedly most wanted man in the world, and the US can NEVER pin him down and capture or kill him? Could it be because his CIA handlers always ensure that he has enough time to depart the scene before they carry out one of their shows?

Haven't you ever wondered why Clinton refused to accept the hand over of bin Ladin by the Sudanese? Haven't you ever wondered why Bush refused to accept the hand over of bin Ladin by the Taliban?

Haven't you ever wondered why the Saudis merely banished him rather than putting him on trial, or handing him over to the US?

Bin Ladin is CIA - or more precisely he is Bush/CIA.

[mmonk]

31. Also

I won't mention the fact Clark preferred to bring in ground troops to limit civilian casualties but who's request was denied because it would interfere with you character assassination with Clark and your moral relativism claims and other sick and hateful intentions.

[jokerman93]

24. I thought it was an establsihed fact that

the nineteen 9/11 operatives were Saudi.

That's Saudi Arabia. I've never believed OBL or "Alqueida"(sp) was the perp. OBL was the boogey man, but then Bush had the Iraq tie-in he needed to pull off.

Enter SH -- substitute boogeymen -- more easily exploited.

[rucky]

25. Charles Manson didn't kill anybody either

should he be free?

[arcane1]

27. don't you mean Goldstein?

:evilgrin:

[spindoctor]

29. The prosecution would not stand a chance in court

Providing they can find an unbiased jury, of course.

There is only circumstancial evidence against Bin Laden. The video that was released as the smoking gun, the undisputable evidence that Bin Laden was the mastermind behind the attack, only reveals that he had prior knowledge of the event.

Other than that, I (personally) have never seen conclusive evidence. We have a mighty big lynch mob out there, so it is probably useless to point out that we are supposed to concider people innocent until proven guilty, but objectively I have never seen proof that OBL is guilty as charged.

Call me silly, but I like to see proof...real proof, especially when statements are brought to life by an Administration that is notorious for spreading lies and insinuations.

[xtreme69]

35. Umm...he confessed...on video

The only place the prosecution would stand a chance is in Syria. The guy confessed, on video, too being complicit in the act. What more do you need exactly?

Click me too stop the conspiracy!

[stickdog]

32. You mean *gasp* the Bin Ladens were like the Hinckleys? (nt)

[skypilot]

33. Have you seen this??

I know alot of people don't trust Rense.com but I think that these photos are very telling. Do a word search on "fake Osama video" and see what's out there.

http://www.rense.com/general18/face.htm