You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Intel Official: Bush Knows Where bin Laden Is Hiding But Chooses Not to Capture Him [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-14-07 12:41 PM
Original message
Intel Official: Bush Knows Where bin Laden Is Hiding But Chooses Not to Capture Him
Advertisements [?]
Edited on Sat Jul-14-07 12:57 PM by babylonsister
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2007/07/14/intel-official-bush-knows-where-bin-laden-is-hiding/

Intel Official: Bush Knows Where bin Laden Is Hiding But Chooses Not to Capture Him
Posted by Jon Ponder | Jul. 14, 2007, 10:09 am

Apologists for Pres. George W. Bush routinely lay blame for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the Clinton administration, purportedly because they failed to capture Osama bin Ladin when they had an opportunity in the 1990s.

But since 2005, at least, the Bush administration has known the whereabouts of bin Ladin as well as the much of al Qaeda’s senior leadership, and yet the president refuses to send forces in to get them.

In congressional testimony earlier this week, intelligence officials admitted that bin Laden and his gang are in Pakistan and gaining strength, but that the Bush administration refuses to go after them because the Musharraf regime won’t give the United States permission to conduct operations in the region:

“It’s not that we lack the ability to go into that space,” said Tom Fingar of the office of the Director of National Intelligence. “But we have chosen not to do so without the permission of the Pakistani government,” Fingar told members of Congress who demanded to know why the U.S. did not take more decisive action against a known enemy.

It is bizarre that the Bush won’t go after bin Laden because he’s suddenly averse to invading a sovereign nation. A cynic might wonder if the reason he won’t send troops into Pakistan against the wishes of its leaders because there is no oil there.

snip//

Last week, Michael Chertoff, the Homeland Security Secretary, said he had a feeling in his gut that there would be an attack on the United States this summer. If the unthinkable does happen, it will be interesting to see how they manage to blame this one on Pres. Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC