It’s been many years since the 9/11 attacks and America’s favorite boogieman Osama bin Laden is apparently still out there…Or is he? Nobody seems to know for sure, it seems.

U.S. National Security Adviser, James Jones, says bin Laden, believed hiding mainly in a rugged area of western Pakistan, may be periodically slipping back into Afghanistan as well. At the same time, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, says the U.S. has lacked good intelligence on bin Laden for a long time – “I think it has been years” – and did not confirm that he’d slipped into Afghanistan.

The failed hunt for bin Laden has been one of the signature elements of the global “war on terror” that George W. Bush launched after the Sept. 11 attacks. The principal explanations given by both the Bush and Obama administrations for not getting bin Laden is that they simply don’t know where he is.
“If we did, we’d go get him,” Gates said.

Jones, a retired Marine general, stressed the urgency of targeting bin Laden, and spoke of a renewed campaign to capture or kill him. Bin Laden had been allowed to operate in Afghanistan by his Taliban allies while allegedly plotting the Sept. 11 attacks. When U.S. forces ousted the Taliban from power in late 2001, bin Laden reportedly fled into Pakistan from what was generally described as a complex of caves in the Tora Bora area.

Asked whether the administration has reliable intelligence on bin Laden’s whereabouts, James Jones replied, “The best estimate is that he is somewhere in North Waziristan, sometimes on the Pakistani side of the border, sometimes on the Afghan side of the border.” He did not elaborate on the intelligence behind that estimate, nor did he cite a time period or describe more specifically bin Laden’s apparent border crossings.

Robert Gates in turn, said: that “we don’t know for a fact where Osama bin Laden is,” although he agreed that his likely hideout is in North Waziristan.

The U.S. has targeted North Waziristan and other areas on the Pakistani side of the border with drone-launched missile strikes, killing a number of militants as well as Pakistani civilians. The Pakistani army has undertaken an offensive against the Taliban in South Waziristan but it has not expanded it into North Waziristan.

Obama administration officials have often asserted, as did the Bush administration, that they believe bin Laden is being sheltered on the Pakistani side of the border, along with other senior al-Qaida leaders. But Jones’s assertion that al-Qaida chief may have slipped back into Afghanistan puts a new twist on the issue.

Senator John McCain said: “that knowledgeable people have told him that bin Laden ‘moves back and forth.’”
McCain did not elaborate, except to say that although bin Laden is not currently able to establish bases for training and equipping terrorists who would attack the United States, “I think it’s important to get him.”

Gates said he does not blame a lack of Pakistani cooperation for the absence of intelligence on bin Laden. “No, I think it’s because if, as we suspect, he is in North Waziristan, it is an area that the Pakistani government has not had a presence in, in quite some time,” he said.

During a visit to Pakistan in October, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton caused a stir by chiding Pakistani officials for failing to press the hunt for al-Qaida inside their borders. She said she found it “hard to believe” that no one in Islamabad knows where the al-Qaida leaders are hiding and couldn’t get them “if they really wanted to.”

A recent Senate report said bin Laden was unquestionably within reach of U.S. troops in the mountains of Tora Bora only three months after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, when American military leaders made the crucial decision not to pursue him with massive force.

Some Pakistanis believe that Osama bin Laden is actually a CIA agent.

Take a look at this video:

So, it appears that we are as much in the dark about bin Laden’s whereabouts, as we seem to be about what really and truly transpired on September 11, 2001. Lets just hope that our intelligence regarding both Afghan and Pakistani Taliban is more accurate, since nobody in his right mind wants the Afghan war to drag on forever.

Technorati Tags: afghanistan, al-qaida, bin laden, cia, clinton, gates, jones, Pakistan, Terrorism, US

While everybody is awaiting President Obama’s Tuesday evening speech on Afghanistan strategy to be broadcast out of the United Military Academy at West Point, we are still awaiting some definition of what it is that we are trying to achieve there. To the best of our knowledge nobody has defined either the Iraqi, nor the Afghan war’s mission objectives – not Bush and not Obama.

At least, the president is reportedly going to address his planned exit strategy. That’s better than nothing, but are we waiting for a few more ministers of the Karzai government to be indicted for corruption, before we withdraw the troops which – at a cost of $1 million per year, per soldier – are propping up his regime?

The mission objectives should of course be the absolute first thing to be addressed and that’s why we have decided to re-post this article, originally published here on November 3, 2009.

Since the original article was posted there have been some overtures by the Karzai government to engage “moderate elements” of the Taliban, so we stand corrected on that point.

______________________________________________________________________________________

While the Obama administration ponders whether to send tens of thousands of additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan, as General Stanley McChrystal proposed and as everybody is trying to figure out what impact the Afghan run-off election, which has never taken place will have on the overall situation there, we still haven’t really figured out what it is that we are trying to achieve there.

“A foreign army alone cannot beat an insurgency; the insurgency in Afghanistan requires an Afghan solution,” wrote General McChrystal. In view of that probably sound assessment, why would we need an additional 40,000 U.S. troops?

Lets first of all decide what is it that we are trying to achieve in Afghanistan. Is it hunting down the remains of al-Qaida and maybe finally catching up with Osama bin-Laden? Or maybe something that sells in Washington, DC, but it doesn’t sell in Afghanistan – a stable Karzai government? Or maybe we are trying to defeat the resurgent Taliban? Or are we trying to transform the Afghan society? Are we including Pakistan in our grand plan?

Speaking of the Taliban, we haven’t heard any proposals to include this group in possible talks about forming a coalition government. No doubt that this omission is a really big mistake.

As things stand, eight years into an occupation of Afghanistan even the military are saying that we have not achieved anything, but that the situation on the ground has in fact deteriorated. What in fact appears to be the main problem is not the remains of al-Qaida, or the Taliban itself, or even the rampant corruption among the ruling clique, but rather the militarization of the Afghan conflict.

The military “solution” is obviously not working in an environment as complex as the one in Afghanistan and Pakistan for that matter.

One cannot expect the average U.S. serviceman to understand the very complicated tribal, ethnic, or language problems of the country he, or she has been shipped to.

The actual solution to the problem staring us in the eye appears to be getting the foreigners out of Afghanistan, rather than increasing their number.

When in 2001-2003 troops were truly needed in Afghanistan, they got diverted to the insane invasion and occupation of Iraq.

To make a long story short: we don’t even know what problem, or problems that we are trying to solve in Afghanistan are and we are still talking about changing our military strategy and increasing the number of troops. What are those troops supposed to do there? What do we expect from them? What is their mission? Nobody seems to have an answer to any of these questions.

Our advice to the White House team is to first come up with a mission statement, to nail down what it is that we are trying to achieve in Afghanistan and whether getting involved in that country is really in the U.S., or the world’s interest.

Throwing more troops into the Afghan quagmire, without even having a clear objective is clearly not the way to proceed.

Technorati Tags: Afghan, al-qaida, election, mission, obama, objectives, Pakistan, politics, Taliban, war

There is one presidential accessory that seems to be sorely missing in Washington. I would like to propose the acquisition of the Official Presidential Crystal Ball.

It wouldn’t be very expensive. Considering the usual purchasing habits of the federal government, it shouldn’t set us back more that a few measly billion dollars, I think.

Since the war in Iraq is costing the U.S. taxpayers some $12 billion per month, and it has been many, many months of that already, a few more actually productive billions seems like a real bargain.

We could even issue each of the incoming presidents his, or her own crystal ball and as their terms in office end, the crystal balls could be displayed at the Smithsonian. Just imagine school children admiring the crystal balls of the different presidencies, with the teachers explaining the myriad, momentous decisions taken by the presidents with the help of their crystal balls.

Back in 2001, 2002 and 2003 President Bush could have easily seen that there were no WMDs in Iraq. That al-Qaida was not in Iraq at all, but rather in Pakistan and Afghanistan and that most of al-Qaida recruits, including Osama bin-Laden came from the land of his father’s buddies – Saudi Arabia. The advice of the crystal ball would have been without even the slightest shadow of a doubt more useful and certainly more accurate than the one that the neocons gave the president.

The president could also see, right in front of his eyes how ridiculous an idea it was to send everyone a $300 check and expect that this would cure the ailing U.S. economy.

He might also have been able to see that Vladimir Putin’s soul was not something worth writing home about. After meeting Putin in 2001 Mr. Bush famously said: “I was able to get a sense of his soul. “He’s a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country and I appreciate very much the frank dialogue and that’s the beginning of a very constructive relationship.” Geez, look at Putin’s Russia now, Mr. President. Don’t you wish that you had your own, presidential crystal ball in 2001?

When at a news conference one of the reporters mentioned the very real possibility of gasoline reaching $4 per gallon, President Bush responded: “That’s interesting. I hadn’t heard that”. That lapse probably wouldn’t happen if the president had his trusty crystal ball before him on the rostrum.

President Obama, in turn could gaze into his own crystal ball and see that the war in Afghanistan will last as long as foreign troops are present in that country.

Mr. Obama could also see that rewarding failure of the financial industry was not such a great idea. He might even see the logo of Goldman Sachs reflected in the shimmering crystal.

The president might also see that the Cap-and-Trade solution to the climate problems is not the right way to go about it and that he should work toward implementing a carbon tax.

The president should also see that he shouldn’t give up his efforts to reform the U.S. health care system – which has needed reforming for a very long time now – and that with enough persistance that goal might very well be achieved quite soon.

Technorati Tags: al-qaida, bush, iraq, Presidential Crystal Ball, putin, wmd

A great many people still believe in the official U.S. Government version of what transpired on September 11, 2001. At least as many seem to also believe in the existence of the Tooth Fairy and of the Boogie Man.

The latter has at least some connection to the Bush administration’s version of 9/11. Their Boogie Man’s name is Osama bin Laden and he was mightily pissed off about U.S. troops (including women) being stationed in Saudi Arabia, which he calls “the land of the holy places”.

There is no doubt that besides being an anti-Soviet fighter in Afghanistan bin Laden is also a terrorist, who does not like the U.S. and that he did conduct some terrorist operations against American targets, but the Boogie Man image was given to him not quite on the basis of his terrorist “accomplishments”, but rather as a convenient target for everyone to hate and therefore to support anything that the Bushies were doing.

To this day, despite all kinds of “investigations” and bipartisan commission reports there is no credible proof that bin Laden’s al-Qaida has actually conducted the 9/11 attacks on the U.S.

As a matter of fact, bin Laden himself has repeatedly denied having anything to do with those attacks. Why would he do that? Conducting such a successful terrorist operation would only increase his stature among his peers.

Nevertheless, on September 17, 2001 Osama bin Laden has issued the following statement: “The U.S. government has consistently blamed me for being behind every occasion its enemies attack it,” he said. “I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons.”I have been living in the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan and following its leaders’ rules. The current leader does not allow me to exercise such operations.”

Strange that he would issue such a denial days after the 9/11 events, but that in December 2001, a bin Laden “confession” tape was magically “found” in a house in Jalalabad, Afghanistan. That videotape has been played ad nauseam after the operations in Afghanistan have started. It featured a fat bin Laden laughing and joking about how he had carried out the 9/11 attacks. According to experts the video was also mistranslated, in order to manipulate viewer opinion and featured “bin Laden” praising two of the hijackers, except that he got their names wrong.

In that video “Osama ” also uses the wrong hand to write with and wears gold rings, a practice totally in opposition to the Muslim faith.

Despite the fact that the man in the video looks nothing like Bin Laden, the CIA stood by the video while many have declared it an outright fake.

In the meantime, the FBI’s press release of September 27, 2001 states: “The Federal Bureau of Investigation is today releasing 19 photographs of individuals believed to be the hijackers of the four airliners that crashed on September 11, 2001, into the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon, and in Stony Creek Township, Pennsylvania. The FBI requests the public’s assistance in obtaining more information about these individuals. It should be noted that attempts to confirm the true identities of these individuals are still under way. The FBI asks anyone who has ever seen or has information about these individuals to immediately contact the nearest FBI office or the toll free hotline number”.

Strangely enough the media, the CIA and others stood by the veracity of bin Laden’s “confession”, but the FBI stated: “It should be noted that attempts to confirm the true identities of these individuals are still under way”.

Still another “confession” by bin Laden was aired shortly before the 2004 U.S. elections, most likely contributing to the re-election of George W. Bush.

It is pretty amazing how despite utter incompetence exhibited before the 9/11 attacks, the Bush administration has been able to so very quickly and efficiently determine who conducted the attacks, along with their photos and names and to very efficiently connect the group with al-Qaida and bin Laden.

Lets not forget that Dick Cheney was running a completely separate chain of Command and Control via the Secret Service on the morning of 9/11, assuring the paralysis of the Air Force and its ability to intercept the hijacked planes.

It is also truly amazing how quickly and efficiently the lengthy Patriot Act was written and how fast it was signed into law (October 26, 2001).

We could go on and on, but it seems that anyone over the age of 6 and with an IQ higher than 85 should see the holes in the Tooth Fairy myth as well as in the official version of 9/11.

Technorati Tags: 9/11, al-qaida, Attacks, bin laden, bush, Cheney, cia, FBI, government, lies, neocons, official, patriot act, version

Patrick Leahy, the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman called for the establishment of a non-partisan “commission of inquiry” to investigate allegations of wrongdoing against former Bush administration officials in their prosecution of the so-called war on terror.

We think that this is a commendable initiative. The problem is that the idea hasn’t seemed to catch on for some reason.

The Right calls it a witch-hunt, the Left seems to consider it a cop-out and President Obama appears to wish that it would just go away, saying that he is “more interested in looking forward than in looking back.”

We are posting this new series of reports in conjunction with our friends at BadGalsRadio, who are just as interested as we are in finding the many unanswered questions in this issue.

__________________________________________________________________________

For the next week, we will focus on the Truth and how we may be forced to get it, from Dick and Dumber.  We’ve thrown our support behind the movement for a special prosecutor and it’s our humble opinion that we need to act now.

In Essence, to wait will be a national mistake. The crimes are still fresh, and in the minds of the people who were the victims, globally. The blood and reputation of America was spilled in the name of game; so why not see if Game Recognizes Game on the battlefield; of a Truth Commission.

Sen. Patrick Leahy has come up with an agenda and hopes to get the much-needed support of the U.S. citizens; in forming this court and investigating commission.  It is the right of the American people to have the truth about why these two liars could walk away; from such a huge mess.

President Obama must put his support behind Atty Gen Eric Holder’s formation of such a commission; in order to give it the credibility that it will need to remove the years of lies blockading the facts.

____________________________________________________________________________

What the hell is going on here? There’s a whole gallery of neocons that begs to be very thoroughly investigated. There are crimes galore to be probed. Unconstitutional and anti-American, not to mention anti-human rights peccadilloes to be probed, uncovered and to hopefully eventually end up as criminal indictments. If we are to continue being a country based on laws, this kind of an investigation is absolutely mandatory.

Senator Leahy, in turn told Time Magazine “It’s a lot easier to look forward if you know what happened in the past.”

As Leahy envisions it, the Truth Commission’s priorities would be to investigate the politicization of prosecution in the Justice Department under former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the wiretapping of U.S. citizens, the flawed and often manufactured intelligence used to justify the invasion of Iraq, and the use of torture at Guantanamo and so-called black sites abroad. The commission is to be modeled after one that investigated the apartheid regime in South Africa. The panel would have subpoena power but would not bring criminal charges. The South African commission also allowed those testifying to seek immunity from prosecution. That’s kind of too bad, as there are some, who definitively should be prosecuted.

The changing of long-standing policies and having the White House legal office issue de-facto permission for using torture, staining, to say the least the honor of the United States as a whole and so very unfortunately the honor of our armed forces, certainly deserves a thorough inquiry. There is little doubt that the enlisted men and women, who have become almost household names after the photos from the Abu Ghraib prison abuse orgies have surfaced, are not the only ones who should have been punished. How about the members of the Federalist Society – an association of mainly far-right attorneys who gained top positions in the Bush administration, particularly in the Justice Department and were instrumental in producing memos, that in fact changed the entire U.S. Government’s outlook on the Geneva Conventions and paved the way for the use of torture and the disgraceful at times treatment of prisoners, detainees and others labeled with the newly-invented “enemy combatant” category, but also high-ranking military and CIA officers, who have actually embraced those directives?

Remember the Nazi scumbags, who during the Nuremberg trials tried to excuse themselves by saying that “they were ordered to do it”? As we all remember those excuses didn’t work. Why should then somebody else use a similar excuse for the Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo excesses, or for outrages committed during the so-called extraordinary renditions?

That’s just one side of the coin, though. The manipulated “intelligence findings”, which allowed the U.S. to invade Iraq are another issue worthy of a thorough investigation.

Let’s not forget the quick, in the-middle-of-the-night approval of the voluminous Patriot Act, the illegal wiretaps and other kinds of domestic spying and on and on.

It certainly does seem like there is a whole lot worth investigating and clearing up here. Why is it then that there seems to be so little interest among the executive branch, Congress and the Justice Department? Why isn’t our new Attorney General Eric Holder lending support to Senator Leahy’s quest?

BadGalsRadio says:

_____________________________________________________________________

The Iraq War was not an American conflict - yet we are still paying for it as we live and breathe this moment. President Obama says that his goal is to bring the troops out of Iraq in 16 months, but why should he then move them into Afghanistan?  When will there be enough of this sectarian violence for oil?

______________________________________________________________________

Could it be that the people in power are afraid that a thorough digging through this mess might uncover some very messy skeletons?

Let’s take this issue a bit further. All the way back to September 11, 2001 as a matter of fact.

There are probably more conspiracy theories about 9/11 by now than about the Kennedy assassination and about Area 51, aliens and whether Britney Spears is wearing panties on a given day all put together.

Some are of course total crap, but others make at least some sense. If you have time, watch this video, which I have posted a few weeks ago. I’m sure that some of those arguments don’t hold much water, but others seem at the very least plausible and certainly intriguing. Just make sure you are comfortable, as it is almost 1.5-hours-long.

Let’s get back to the lack of interest and the seeming resistance to support Senator Leahy’s plans to create a commission of inquiry. Could it be that the people in high positions are either afraid to stir the hornet’s nest, or simply don’t want to see some of the details of what really happened on 9/11 to see the light of day?

All we know at this point is what was in the official version of the events. Namely, that Osama bin-Laden’s al-Qaida boys have planned and executed the attacks, using four hijacked airliners. Is that true, or false? And who are we to believe? We will abstain from quoting the numerous theories, suspicions, suppositions and presumptions that are floating around the world – the video alone should give you enough food for thought.

What we would like to finally see is for the U.S. as a country to come clean and discover (if it hasn’t been discovered already) what really and truly happened before, during and after that fateful day in September of 2001. And that is why we support Senator Patrick Leahy’s efforts to conduct an in-depth investigation of what has transpired during the past eight years. We owe it to ourselves, to the troops who have put their lives on the line in the name of the “war on terror”, to their families, to those who have vanished on September 11th and to their families as well.

________________________________________________________________________

BadGalsRadio has posted a follow up on this story. This time about the growing problem of rapes in the U.S. military. The Pentagon said it received 2,923 reports of sexual assault across the military in the 12 months ending Sept. 30 2008. That’s about a 9 percent increase over the totals reported the year before, but only a fraction of the crimes presumably being committed.

_________________________________________________________________________

Look here for other reports about the “war on terror”, about the newly-released revelations of torture and prisoner mistreatment and other issues.

Technorati Tags: 9/11, al-qaida, holder, investigation, Iraq War, lack of interest, Leahy, neocons, obama, resistance, truth commission