Bush had Bin-Laden In His Sights, But He Pulled Away To Invade Iraq

[bigtree]

from WaPo: September 10, 2006; Page A01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/09/AR2006090901105_pf.html

"On the videotape obtained by the CIA, bin Laden is seen confidently instructing his party how to dig holes in the ground to lie in undetected at night. A bomb dropped by a U.S. aircraft can be seen exploding in the distance. "We were there last night," bin Laden says without much concern in his voice. He was in or headed toward Pakistan, counterterrorism officials think.

That was December 2001. Only two months later, Bush decided to pull out most of the special operations troops and their CIA counterparts in the paramilitary division that were leading the hunt for bin Laden in Afghanistan to prepare for war in Iraq, said Flynt L. Leverett, then an expert on the Middle East at the National Security Council.

"I was appalled when I learned about it," said Leverett, who has become an outspoken critic of the administration's counterterrorism policy. "I don't know of anyone who thought it was a good idea. It's very likely that bin Laden would be dead or in American custody if we hadn't done that."

Several officers confirmed that the number of special operations troops was reduced in March 2001."

[BurtWorm]

1. This is the subtext to the PT9/11 controversy

that, astonishingly enough, is not being talked about enough. The outrage of the the film is not just that it lies about the Clinton administration's culpability--which is certainly outrageous--but that it totally iognores the very real culpability and neglect of the Bushists.

[Cleita]

2. Oh puleeze.

Bush had to let bin Laden off because his family and the bin Laden family are super good buddies. This is the reason that there is no outrage that we are letting Pakistan give Osama safe haven. Come on! We have been had!

[bigtree]

3. incompetence doesn't cover for the way bin-Laden was allowed to escape

Bush was informed that bin-Laden was a threat, several times. He was told where to find him - even an offer to turn him in by the Taliban - but the administration pulled back.

I think Pakistan's president would turn bin-Laden in, but the tribes, villagers, and residents can/will shield bin-Laden effectively for years. Now Pakistan's army has agreed to stand down from some of the areas controlled by the Taliban. Not hard to imagine bin-Laden finding refuge there. The problem has always been the will to catch him wasn't there before the attack, and vanished with Bush's 'not concerned' statementssix months after the 'hunt' began.

[BurtWorm]

4. I think Cleita is taking as fact that Bush let bin Laden go

because they are essentially "buddies" as she put it. A more likely take, in my view, is that bin Laden is worth more to the Bushists as a living threat than as a dead bit of history. I tend to agree with your view, based on what I've read of the situation, that it's partly because the US lacked the will for whatever reason and partly because Mushareff lacks the political strength to exert control over that part of Pakistan.

[bigtree]

5. yep, there's that symbiotic relationship

both partners in their respective protection rackets; stirring up chaos and claiming to protect and defend their followers.

Cleita is on to something though. Incompetence couldn't/doesn't explain away the manner in which bin-Laden has been repeatedly allowed to escape and remain free.

[BurtWorm]

8. There is undoubtedly a Bush-bin Laden link.

It was actually Salem bin Laden, Osama's older half-brother, who invested in Bush's failed oil company (and lost his life in a mysterious helicopter crash in Texas) in the 1980s. Actually, Bush's former best buddy James R. Bath brought the two together. I don't know how well they knew each other. I think their father had some association with the Carlyle group, as well. If you wanted to find a conspiracy there, there's certainly plenty of grist.

[bhikkhu]

9. Only the second time I've read of Salaam bin Laden

the first was shortly after 911, in the Indiatimes, where a detailed article talked about GWB's first big oil venture, partnered with Salaam. And then the Carlyle connection, where the Bin Laden family and GB senior were (or are) heavily involved.

[BurtWorm]

11. Google James R. Bath

and all sorts of sickening info comes up.

[bhikkhu]

12. and it goes without saying, I might add,

that if a democrat were in office, with such a connection, and following such an incident, the only end of media and right wing outrage would be the departure of that hypothetical democrat from office.

[BurtWorm]

13. It does go without saying

but bears repeating, nevertheless.

:toast:

[bigtree]

10. yep, there's that

and there's the 40 some Saudi nationals and bin-Laden family and relatives flying out of the country after the attacks while the rest of our fleet was grounded.

The Carlyle relationship has a lot of ink, mileage. Now, Baker is back, workin it for GW. . .

[Justice Is Comin]

6. It just cracks me up.

Fifty million dollar bounty dead or alive, and no one will say shit where he is.

[RandiRhodesArchives]

Except for Pakisan!

Our new buddies in the "war on terror"? With friends like that...

Just the way Duhbya holds hand with any Saudi royalty, isn't it just BEYOND creeeeeeeepy?!!!!?!?

[bigtree]

15. that is creepy

he's got Baker holding their (hands) now

[Cleita]

7. They know where he is. We don't know where he is.

I think he's dead and they know it. The people who are being given sanctuary by Musharref know he's dead, but it's to their best interest to go along with the charade.

[bigtree]

14. Dead would be my suspicion as well

but his specter is just as effective, for both Bush and for those who rally and muckrake under bin-Laden's name

[The Count]

16. Any of your clients named Bin Laden? Kissinger was asked and resigned

response from the chairmanship of the 911 Commission Jr bestowed on him - see 911 Press forr truth on google.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1016720641536424083&q=press+for+truth