Fox News/New York Times: "Bin Laden is Dead"

Would someone go track down this sumbitch and find out if he really is dead or alive? Inquiring minds want to know.

The Bush administration, it seems, has kept Bin Laden alive for about seven years now, despite reports by the Fox news network that the alleged terrorist mastermind has been dead for years. On December 26, 2001, the Fox network reported that Osama bin Laden died of "serious lung complications" in mid-December of that year. If so, it means that Benazir Bhutto was correct to say that bin Laden is dead but it does not mean that she misspoke when she said that bin Laden had been murdered.

Via Daily Scare.

Bin Laben calls for more fighting against U.S. forces in Iraq

Oh great. Now there's a bin Laben too?

Yes I know its a typo. Hey, "b", "d"? Its a tiny typo.

Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, in an audio recording posted on Islamist websites Tuesday, called for intensified fighting against U.S.-led forces in Iraq.

The excerpts of the audio recording were aired by the Qatar-based Al-Jazeera television on Monday, said the websites.

According to the report, the al-Quida leader also called for a holy war against a proposed peacekeeping force in Sudan's war-torn region of Darfur and Western forces in the Arabian Peninsula.

Bin Laden, meanwhile, made a plea to Muslims to join the battle to drive out foreign forces from the region and plunge into war against rulers who facilitate their presence. [emphasis mine]

And bin Laden will keep up this rabble rousing as long as the US and others are in the region. Duh.

Via Xinhua.

Not to rub it in or anything, but...

The Impotent Terrorist

Several hundred deaths don't really count? For real? Just asking.

I've not killed anyone nor authorized any deaths in like forever. How impotent am I?

Never mind.

Just a reminder

Into thin air

How many years now you fucking incompetent president? Oh yeah, six years!

But of course he was the top priority. But Bush later said he was not. Sorry, but can't find the fucking news items in Google.

This is interesting.

President Bush and Vice President Cheney have publicly stated that the top-secret domestic spying program Bush authorized in 2002 could have thwarted the 9/11 attacks had the controversial, and possibly illegal, measure been in effect prior to the terrorist strike on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Bush's and Cheney's comments have gone virtually unchallenged by reporters covering the spying story and by a majority of Democratic lawmakers critical of the issue.

However, the reality is much different from what Bush and Cheney would have you believe. The fact of the matter is that the Bush administration ignored hard evidence from its top intelligence officials between April and September of 2001 about an impending attack by al-Qaeda on US soil. There's no chance that the National Security Agency's domestic wiretapping initiative would have saved the lives of 3,000 American citizens if an intelligence memo titled "Bin Laden determined to attack inside US" that President Bush received a month before 9/11 couldn't move Bush to take such threats seriously.

Since the New York Times broke the domestic spying story last month, the Bush administration has launched a full-scale publicity campaign aimed at convincing an unsuspecting public that the program is legal and has saved thousands of lives. It's the administration's attempt to control the news cycle.

But to suggest that the 9/11 attacks could have been avoided if the NSA had had domestic surveillance powers is outrageous.

Simply put, terrorism was not a priority for the Bush administration during the first nine months of 2001. As former Bush administration counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke told the 9/11 Commission investigating the attacks in 2004: "To the loved ones of the victims of 9/11, to them who are here in the room, to those who are watching on television, your government failed you."

Clarke served as a White House counter-terrorism official in three presidential administrations.

The truth is that the administration received warnings about al-Qaeda's intentions to use jetliners as bombs in August 2001, but it was too busy obsessing about a war with Iraq to take action. Although President Bush has maintained over the years that terrorism was his number one priority before 9/11, evidence suggests otherwise.

A little known article in the January 11, 2001, edition of the New York Times titled "Iraq Is Focal Point as Bush Meets with Joint Chiefs" confirms that the administration was more interested in toppling Saddam Hussein than dealing with the growing threat of domestic terrorism.

"George W. Bush, the nation's commander in chief to be, went to the Pentagon today for a top-secret session with the Joint Chiefs of Staff to review hot spots around the world where he might have to send American forces into harm's way," the Times story says.

Bush was joined at the Pentagon meeting by Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.

The Times reported that "half of the 75-minute meeting focused on a discussion about Iraq and the Persian Gulf, two participants said. Iraq was the first topic briefed because 'it's the most visible and most risky area Mr. Bush will confront after he takes office, one senior officer said.'" [emphasis mine]

How can someone decide the future of a nation and possibly the world in 37 minutes? Is this an idiot? Ya better bet your sweet ass he is.

Lengthy excerpt via Get Poor.

Ah, freedom

I'm still free. What about you suckers?

Muahaha!

Thank gawd Bush has his priorities right and is attacking brown people from the south.

Does Bush need Osama?

Does Bush need a bogieman like Osama?

Don't you ever wonder why the world's supreme super power after 5+ years can't find one man? Seems very curious to me.