Of course there was no plan to 'catch' Bin Laden, nor is there one now. By now most of the world knows that 9/11 was a 'home made' event and Bin Laden is just fiction - someone to keep blaming. But the US terrorizing the entire world...that is real.

In view of the common sense deductions being drawn by many writing their comments here, and although we may only know half the truth we certainly are not all wrong, but one has to wonder what Obama is trying to accomplish, and who he thinks believes him, when he pretends to buy into the half baked Bush fantasy of 9-11, Al-Qaeda, and the capture or killing the great boogie-man Bin Laden.

Not a single strategist I have read has suggested that a “surge” in Afghanistan could contribute an iota to improving anything there let alone rendering bin Laden. Clearly cross border, badly coordinated and even unauthorized raids against the Taleban in Pakistan’s tribal areas has, if anything, the effect of increasing support for insurgents apposed to foreign and Pakistan forces.

So what I see is the worlds most important country, if for no other reason, in terms of military destructive capacity (nothing to be proud of), having a tremendous show election to change from a teedledi-di to a twidledi-dum administration trying to perpetrate the same fears, the same delusions, and the same lack of leadership; a “Titanic” where captain and officers keep repeating “full steam ahead!” while raiding the strong box, and heading for the life rafts themselves, paying only lip service to a global sinking in terms of Climate Change, Millennium Goals, international security and global economic melt down, just to name a few holes in the hull.

A broken and corrupt administration
A broken and corrupt legislature
A broken and corrupt rule of law
A broken and corrupt financial and banking system

The USA has become a dying country politically and economically, destroying itself by its own people being seduced again and again into self serving delusions, grabbing for the quick and easy fix of least pain, with as much thought and wisdom as heroin junkies and so they are led to their demise by the usual crew of sociopaths that have always been around ready to take their places at the head table of the infinitely hungry. This was the culture this great country would export with it’s 700 to 800 military bases worldwide providing global reach to its global dominance.

What the credit squeeze really means is that the banks don’t even trust each others’ paper lies any more, and once the world “feels” broke enough to satisfy the big boys that are left, they can buy it all back, and you for that matter, for just a song. But that is the next episode of lies and delusions…. Stay tuned!

Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."

I'm still not convinced Bin Laden was not and is not still either a CIA asset or a former CIA asset who became more privatized as a Bush/neo-con Dynasty asset. Personally, from the evidence I know about, I think 9/11 went down either one of two ways: (1) Bin Laden was in on it all the time and is protected as a necessary global arch-terrorist boogie-man, or (2) the neo-cons had just enough intell to know a major, politically useful "Pearl Harbor-like" attack was on its way; they ordered the military jets to stand down to let it in; and accentuated the terroristic effect of the plane strikes on the buildings (for U.S. domestic public consumption) by ordering their controlled, industrially perfect implosions while nearly 3,000 victims were still inside them.

I say this because I've seen the video and heard various architects comment on the inability of the burning plane fuel and building materials to create heat sufficient to melt the buildings' core metal support rods enough to allow such perfect implosive collapses and also because of this: After the first World Trade Center attacks in the early '90s, one of the terrorists back then said they "would come back to finish the job" on the World Trade Centers. Knowing this, I suspect the Clinton administration might have had those buildings rigged for controlled detonation so that, if bombed again, they would not keel over at angles that would compound the death and mayhem by striking other nearby crowded buildings and more heavily raining dangerous debris at angles down on the streets.

The original idea would have been to evacuate the buildings ASAP, then implode them straight down as only industrially pre-set detonations were most likely to do. I think Team Bush and their plants in the FBI or elsewhere knew about those Clinton-era precautions and, when the fires in the Twin Towers weren't ghastly or lethal enough, may have given the orders to "pull" the buildings while the people were still in them. That way it would be on the order of a Pearl Harbor-like event with thousands of deaths instead of a few dozen. If this seems too shocking to you then consider about how many other dupes and innocents Team Bush have murdered since with such serene impunity over the last 8 years.

It was and still is all about oil and oil hegemony. Only they've so screwed the economy and overextended the military they won't be able to afford annual half-a-Trillion dollar defense budgets much longer. It's a multi-polar world whether they like it or not and Putin has been shoving Bush Doctrine back up Team Bush's kiester at regular intervals this year just to drive that point home.

The question for all time on Bu$h the inferior and his administration is:

Which of the preventable disasters that happened on their watch were from deliberate planning, or pathetic incompetence, or political games, or spite for opponents, or incredible stupidity, or hypocritical pandering to the right wing, or Shotgun Dick's evil, or idealogical stubbornness, or negligence, or GREED?

I still think that Bu$h the inferior awed by the great Presidents in the past decided that his only chance for immortality was to be the worst. If true, he is the most successful person in the history of the world at reaching and exceeding his wildest dreams.

"rocyahsoul September 30th, 2008 11:46 pm

Well isn't this a convenient story because about a year ago I heard from a CIA whistle blower that Bin Laden was allowed to escape Afghanistan. The entire and exact air corridor he needed to exit Afghanistan was allowed him while the US was the air dominant force over Afghanistan."

That's been reported for many years already, although perhaps not with respect to the CIA whistleblower; and, BTW, the article doesn't mention such a person. The article says that CIA intell. had received information, but doesn't say that it's a CIA official, former or active, who provided the information for the public to be informed. Instead, the article says it's "former U.S. officials" who the information, for public purposes, has been obtained from.

The article says "New evidence from former U.S. officials reveals ...", and there are two things to note for differences, from "CIA whistleblower". You use the [singular], not plural, form, so what you wrote literally means only one person is blowing the whistle today. And the article only says "former U.S. officials", not "CIA whistleblower". The former officials could be from multiple depts or agencies, or the same, only one; the article doesn't specify any more on this.

"But this fable sounds nice, Bushies just too strapped in the first days of war to put anyone on hunting public enemy number 1."

I don't think you mean to be saying the following, but if you're saying that Rumsfeld and/or other officials of the Bush-Cheney cabal did not order U.S. forces to stay out of the air corridor leading to Pakistan and to deliberately and clearly let the Al Qaida leaders escape is fable, then you're grotesquely mistaken. You'd then need to provide links to resources supporting your fable as reality, instead of pretending to possess Godly knowledge vs many analysts' careful work and reporting.

So you should explain what is fable in all of this, to you, in your view.

"Bush Had No Plan to Catch Bin Laden after 9/11"

That's been known for years, variably perhaps, but still known; for anyone paying careful enough [attention]. But, and while the article strikes me as not being thorough, the information provided by the former U.S. officials being evidently incomplete, it's good to see that we finally get news or more news on this today.

"WASHINGTON - New evidence from former U.S. officials reveals that the George W. Bush administration failed to adopt any plan to block the retreat of Osama bin Laden and other al Qaeda leaders from Afghanistan to Pakistan in the first weeks after 9/11."

I don't recall it having been obvious, not as much anyway, over all of these years that any U.S. govt officials said the Bush-Cheney cabal really had no intention of trying to capture OBL; but maybe articles I read starting years ago did say the information was from U.S. officials, active or former.

There's something missing from the IPS article though; it doesn't say anything about the air-lift or -flight of Al Qaida (AQ) leaders through an air corridor between Afghanistan and Pakistan, a corridor that Rumsfeld had ordered U.S. forces to stay OUT of and which (I believe) is related to the assassination of Pat Tillman, whose unit (if I'm recalling correctly) was trying to enter the corridor to try to track down and capture OBL or him and other AQ leaders. Maybe Pat was sniped at another time though; I'd have to reread articles about the assassination of him to be sure. But there were articles starting years ago on the topic of the air-flight escape of AQ leaders and that some U.S. forces had witnessed the take-off and wanted to go after these AQ leaders, but were ordered to stand-down (sort of like Cheney did on the morning of 9-11, in ordering the stand-down of U.S. interceptor jets, f.e.!).

As for the planning to war on Iraq, instead of going after AQ leaders in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the IPS article also doesn't mention Cheney's energy (i.e., oil) task force meeting of (I believe) Jan. 2001 and during which Iraq was main or a very main focal point. They needed to war on Iraq not for Israel, but for Iraq's rich wealth in oil resources or reserves; Cheney had on his mind. The same Cheney who ordered the stand-down of U.S. military interceptors, so that the 9-11 attacks would happen; ya know, wanting some "fireworks" to happen in order to get the population of the U.S. to support war of aggression as if it wasn't aggression.

And another matter the article doesn't mention is that the FBI has no warrants for OBL with regards to the Sep. 11, 2001, attacks; the U.S. govt hasn't yet established any charges against OBL for that days attacks in the U.S. OBL should be No. Uno on the USA's Top Ten Most Wanted list and, yet, there are no charges against him for the 9-11 attacks at all; only bogus, empty, bs words from the Bush-Cheney cabal.

Etcetera.

Well isn't this a convenient story because about a year ago I heard from a CIA whistle blower that Bin Laden was allowed to escape Afghanistan. The entire and exact air corridor he needed to exit Afghanistan was allowed him while the US was the air dominant force over Afghanistan. But this fable sounds nice, Bushies just too strapped in the first days of war to put anyone on hunting public enemy number 1.

rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley

MiMiCcS,

You jumped to some conclusions about me, I agree there is a long list of suspects, I just wanted to find some common ground. The foundation of a new investigation is that the first one was a cover-up. Beyond that, I have my own theories, and I didn't mean to imply that all 911 conspiracies are absurd. I just didn't want to wind up debating someone who thought I was talking about holograms and the Illuminati.

I don't claim to know exactly what happened on 911 (I've read plenty of theories), although there are some prime suspects (who should have been interviewed under oath), but as you point out, we all clearly know who benefited.

The latest credit crisis proves that Bin Forgotten Laden, must have been advising Bush,since Bush has done more damage to America than any terrorist could have dreamed of. The Sheriff only has about three months left to bring him in dead or alive.

Paul Siemering

Doesn't it all seem like clowning in plain sight though? from the beginning they did not pretend they really knew anything, that all they had to do was holler Osama! al-Qaeda! Taliban! and no one would see them, what they were doing? And all of that "we're all goin huntin for Osama in Afghanistan" stuff- who did they think they were fooling? How many americans said to themselves oh right, and Osama's gonna sit in front of his cave waiting for the bombs to fall? then finally what a perfect hollywood ending to the dumbshow- "He's in Tora Bora! let's get him!"

Except of course there was nothing funny about it. all that craziness was in the end about murdering Afghanistan, and they are now in their 8th year of unrelenting mayhem and misery.

&YYY&

The key to success in power ,
Is faking it every hour.

Make up a story very bold,
To frighten into childhood when told.

Then interact with a pretend universe,
as if you believed all chapter and verse.

But a life of similitude can very rough,
When the real World decides to get real tough.

Of course, what occurred is well known for a damn well long time, I can see a pimple on an ants ass with Google Satellite, him needing dialysis and such, perhaps he's in the 'Otel Sofitel in Paris. He is absolutely not in The House of Saud, they cannot stand him. As a previous poster said, it was @ devil, Seytan in Turkish, he is nothing but a mercenary yet due to his Mythological Stature as a Supreme Mujihadeen we now are told, al Qaeda in Pakistan, al Qaeda in Afghanistan, al Qaeda in Iraq, al Qaeda in Iran, al Qaeda in N. Africa, al Qaeda is actually a Union, full bennies and all! Mean time we are Covert in Iran with the Jundallah murdering Persians, that occupant @ 1600 has decimated the World. His Terrorist talks for about four nanoseconds 1 or 2 times daily, enough so every village idiot is withdrawing all of their money from their banks, stock market is okey dokey though, perhaps bin Laden is a Day Trader?

BillofRights

After all the lies coming from this Congress and administration, can we set aside all the absurd theories about Sept. 11, and agree that whatever we were told about that day was not the whole truth?

Without descending into needless explanation of things we lack the evidence to fully understand, can we agree that the 911 commission blocked a full investigation into the events of 911?

The Cogito and the Demoniac – Andrew Mckenna "Violence and Difference", Illini Books pub.1992
I had to pull out the dictionary for this one - but its worth it:
p.55

Modern culture, which is synonymous with sacrificial crisis as the dissolution of differences (VS 188), translates religion unequivocally as poison, as an opiate that seeks to expel. The rationalist expulsion of religion is properly sacrificial, however, as the latter is defined by mistaking the effect of violence for its cause. According to Derrida’s reading, this is how philosophy treats (its own origin in) madness (the parenthetical phrase designating just what is expelled and veiled at once). Reason operates sacrificially, exposing madness to view while concealing its resemblance to it. It is just this paradoxical structure that Girard discovers in the narrative of the Gerasene demoniac in the synoptic Gospels (Mark 5; Luke 8; Matt.8).

Jesus is confronted by Geresenes who complain of a madman who is possessed by demons and inhabits the tombs, existing between the living and the dead. His indifference to living and dead, to the difference between them, constitutes the difference of this creature from the rest of the community. The demoniac is a phantom creature whose structural resemblance to writing as portrayed by Derrida is noteworthy: neither living nor dead, the madness of the demoniac embodies indifferentiation, the same crisis of difference that Derrida portrays when he invokes “the sense of krinein, the choice and division between the two ways separated by Parmenides in his poem, the palintrope in which logos is lost; the way of meaning and the way of non-meaning; of Being and of non-Being (PP 62).

Girard identifies this demoniac as a sacrificial victim: he is given to autolapidation, imitating in his own person the sacrificial practice of the community towards its victims; that is, he simulates the destiny allotted to victims, whose stoning incarnates the violence at a distance on which every community depends. He gives his name as “Legion”, whereby he bears witness to the unanimous, mimetic violence of the crowd: “In describing the unity of the multiple, the Legion symbolizes the social principle itself, the type of organization that rests not on the final expulsion of demons but on the sort of equivocal and mitigated expulsions that are illustrated by our demoniac, expulsions which ultimately end in the co-existence of men and demons” (The Scapegoat 182). When the demons ask Jesus that they not be expelled from the country, they are permitted to invade a flock of pigs, which subsequently hurl themselves over a cliff. The cliff symbolizes a classical locus of ritual execution; like Rome’s Tarpeian rock, it offers violence at a distance. The gregarious, that is, the unanimous, self-destruction of the pigs symbolizes the mimetic violence of the community. The demoniac is consequently found to be sane by the Gerasenes, who ask Jesus to leave their territory. The demons ask not to be expelled from the country for the same reason that the Gerasenes ask Jesus, on curing the demoniac, to leave the country: the community relies on the proximity of the demons for the perpetuation of its sacrificial order.

Reading this unsurprising article and the comments suddenly made me think for the millionth time how prescient and penetrating Kurt Vonnegut's work is.

Commenters here are likely to have read "Cat's Cradle", published in 1963. Among other things, it told the story of the Caribbean island of San Lorenzo, and a society founded by two castaways: Philip McCabe and Bokonon. The former became the island's dicator, while Bokonon became a fugitive rebel of sorts, except that he founded a religion rather than a militia. The religion was strictly forbidden, its practitioners threatened with capital punishment on a grotesque iron "hook".

Read this summary [excerpted from Spark's Notes] of the relationship between dictator McCabe and outlaw Bokonon and decide for yourself whether it speaks to the Unitard/bin Laden relationship:

"Julian explained that when McCabe and Bokonon took over the island, they quickly realized that no economic or legal reform would really raise the standard of living for the island's residents. Instead of confronting the truth, they decided to hide it, by providing the people with a religion, Bokononism, designed to provide comfort. The illegality of Bokononism was also by design; an illegal religion seemed more exciting to its practitioners. Rumors of executions began to circulate and Bokonon went into hiding. The lives of San Lorenzo's residents suddenly gained a meaning they could understand. However, both Bokonon and McCabe eventually went insane because the strain of playing their roles became too much. McCabe actually did execute a few people on the hook. Although it would have been easy, he never tried to capture Bokonon since, without him, McCabe's own role as tyrant would have been meaningless. ..."

i'll be darned. well, what time is the ball game on...

Stone September 30th, 2008 2:10 pm
Question: Can George be any more of a fu*kup or has he reached bottom?

The only way we’ll finally hit bottom with George Wanker Bush is when he dies. That is not likely to happen between now and the end of January. There is still a universe of fuckups this cretin, this moron, this imbecile, this strutting, swaggering, truculent, glory seeking punk, this batshit evil frat brat has yet to explore and inflict upon this country.

Of course they let Bin Laden go. Indeed, immediately after the 9/11 attack, at a time when no one in the US including senators and congressmen were allowed to fly, the White House protected the entire Bin Laden family by safely transporting them out of the country in a special aircraft. It seems that members of the Bin Laden family deserve greater protection than Americans. The bottom line is, no one in the Bin Laden family (including Osama) had anything to do with the 9/11 attack. The White House knows this since they are the ones who organized and supervised the 9/11 attack in the first place.

This has been my contention all along.

Bin Laden never was what he was reported to be. He is simply a very ancient tool to scare others into compliance with the agenda of the "teller of the tale".

Satan is mentioned by "name" in the KJRE eighteen times, two in the "Old" Testament, and the rest in the "New". Millions of Christians and Muslims believe in this all powerful, "countra to God's will---- "persona", and the Native American as well as other "primitive cultures" had trickster Gods/Spirits/Spooks/. Imaginary beings become more realistic when they have imaginary opponents. This is most helpful to the collectors of funds which are donated to finance the "fight"----cause God just ain't up to the task all alone and needs some help.

Seeing through the ruse is the challenge of the intelligent in order to overcome the power of the ignorant. Becasue most people are taught some form of "religion" as children, they are for the most part saddled with having to overcome those afflictions that come with such teachings; sometimes for life.
Others are simply not intelligent enough to overcome the ignorance that religion requires of the believer; and then you have the stage set for "Satan" aka Bin Laden and others, and so on.

So far the USA is behind on the intelligent approach.
If the bush administration had not been able to tie Bin Laden to 9/11, they would have had to invent "one" i.e. a "Satan". The "money rolled in" after 9/11 because so many people knew that "Satan"---Bin Laden was somehow behind it. This time instead of building a "mega church to the glory of God"---- the Bush administration made "mega war"---and besides "God was on his side".

"God needs some money---here's my address"

Then there are those who would call me "an agent of Satan" for even thinking these "contrary words"----and on the "payroll" for writing them.

Question: Can George be any more of a fu*kup or has he reached bottom?

They have never wanted to capture bin Laden. They need him out there as a symbol to frighten people. A hundred years from now, some future George Wanker Bush will still be claiming that he's hiding out in Pakistan and we're close, real close, to capturing or killing him.

Um, hello. They deliberately let him go, duh.

Who knows what we really thought RepublicanTroll, the FACT is that terrorism provided Dubya a license to steal with no expiration date.

What the hell is so enlightening about this?

Did we really think that "Terrorism" was the real incentive to go into war? Everything points to the fact that the Administration lied or misinformed the public, possibly even congress, into thinking Iraq was the important mission. Have gas prices dropped? Have we seen any of the oil money from Iraq? Why was Iraq so important?

"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts."
-- John Keats