It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Iran Denies Reports of Bin Laden Capture

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 10:41 AM
link   
Iran has denied reports cited by Internet sites that suggested authorities apprehended Osama Bin Laden near the border with Pakistan.
 




Drudge
"This information is wrong and bin Laden has not been arrested by our security forces," government spokesman Abdollah Ramezanzadeh said at a weekly press briefing.

Some Iranian Internet sites quoted American officials as saying the Al-Qaeda leader, who has a 25-million-dollar US bounty on his head, had been arrested two weeks ago by Iranian forces.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The capture of Bin Laden would complicate matters in the Middle East further, with Bin Ladens capture being the ultimate goal in the war on terror it is unclear how the Bush administration would respond to him being apprehended by a state that may be in the target sights in the near future.

[edit on 21-2-2005 by Nerdling]




posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 10:44 AM
link   
I'm sure Iran is actively pursuing the capture of Osama Bin Laden for the simple reason of killing the CIA proxy leader of Al Qaeda.

[edit on 21-2-2005 by syntaxer]



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 10:45 AM
link   
If it did happen I wonder if the Iranians would claim the bounty on his head.


Thats Mr Ayatollah... A-Y-A-T...



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 10:46 AM
link   
I mentioned this exact what-if in another thread. If they really did get him, you can bet your arse the bombs are gonna start dropping on Iran immediately. Shock and Awe part II.

Peace



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Another Source: News.com.au

Same story, verbatim.

Nicely timed and just more propaganda in my opinion.



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Here's the real question, Nerdling:
Why would Iran admit to having Bin Laden in the first place?




seekerof



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Is it me or is because I just woke up but I swear I saw a similar headline months ago, about Bin Laden being captured in Iran.



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nerdling
If it did happen I wonder if the Iranians would claim the bounty on his head.





My question exactly.


Also, wouldn't bin Laden's capture end the "war on terror"? ...Oh shoot, I forgot. Now we're into a war on nukes.

I just can't keep up.


Good work Nerdling.

.



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 10:58 AM
link   
I'll believe it when I see it. We've been here before more than once.

NEWS: Iranian Radio Reports Bin Laden Captured, US Denies

Unconfirmed Reports Of Osama's Capture.

NEWS: Osama Escapes Latest Capture Attempt



[edit on 21-2-2005 by kegs]



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Here's the real question, Nerdling:
Why would Iran admit to having Bin Laden in the first place?


Well, it could be like Syntaxer says... They want to capture one of the CIA's most valuable employees. Iran could use him as a bargaining chip in an agenda of perceived peace, or other behind the scenes deals' to be made...

Maybe they just want the 25 mil, and the bragging rights associated with his capture... They could write a NYT best seller about it...



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 11:00 AM
link   

as posted bysoficrow
Now we're into a war on nukes.

(emphasis added)

The correct expression would be violation(s) of the non-proliferation treaty, soficrow. An explanation can be readily and easily found with any decent search engine.



seekerof

[edit on 21-2-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 11:04 AM
link   
It would be prudent to remember that the USA is also breaching the non-proliferation treaty terms with the development of nuclear bunker busters and other nuclear devices.

You can't uphold something you're openly breaching.



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 11:10 AM
link   
it's interesting how it's almost exactly 1 year since reports of an Iranian Bin Laden capture.

thanks for searching up those links Kegs


If Bin Laden is alive, I must say he is one of the luckiest individuals in the world. He survived bombings on Tora Bora, living in the mountains with kidney problems, manages to stay unnoticed even though thousands were involved in a manhunt from him, if he was in the Pakistani mountains recently, then he even managed to escape the floods and avalanches, he's reportedly been captured several times, yet he never really surfaces and on top of all of that he still manages to put an audio or videotape every couple months, this dude is something else.



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Stirring The Publicity Pot

This is the kind of thing I'll believe when TV screens around the world are showing footage of Osama being taken into custody and led around in shackles.

And even then, I'll reserve some skepticism.

As has been deftly demonstrated above, this sort of thing is hardly a new phenomenon.

Still, I am forced to wonder who is spreading these rumors, and what they intend to gain by doing so. In particular, I wonder about the timing of this.

I'm sure the answers to these questions are all very interesting ones, and probably none of them forthcoming anytime soon.



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Iran just went fishin, think they caught something?



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 11:35 AM
link   
With all the good intentions, the non-proliferation treaty is not worth the paper it's written on.
And while i'm at it, put the Geneva Convention into the recipe.

Cook for a decade or three on 'simmer' and when cooked serve liberally. Season to taste with a small sprinkle of 'u.n.' and garnish with a branch of the Coalition tree.

Note: Be careful when choosing which branch of the Coalition tree. If it's not ripe, it will ruin the whole feast.



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nerdling
It would be prudent to remember that the USA is also breaching the non-proliferation treaty terms with the development of nuclear bunker busters and other nuclear devices.

You can't uphold something you're openly breaching.


Nerdling?
Are you sure that the U.S. has nuclear bunker busters and other devices within its inventory? Last I read, the U.S. was "researching" these weapons and their uses verses your assertion that the U.S. already has them. Been reading too much of the Washington Post?

Here's what the Washington Post says:


Yet last week Congress approved further research on nuclear bunker busters, weapons that can penetrate deeply into the ground before exploding, and "mini-nukes," weapons with explosive yields below five kilotons.

We Keep Building Nukes For All the Wrong Reasons

As such, till they are built and incorporated within the U.S. nuclear arsenal, there is no violation of the NPT.


Getting back to your topic, again, I assert, why would Iran admit to having Bin Laden anyways. The ransom to them would be a non-issue.



seekerof



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 11:46 AM
link   
It’s quite simple, a story is leaked, spread that Iran has captured Ben-Laden to put the kybosh on Bush’s trip to Europe that he hoped would drum up support for his War of Terror.



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 12:52 PM
link   
I doubt they captured him. He's a muppet (muslim puppet, get it :lol
on someone's hand. Probably eating a fig, sitting in a directors chair in an Israeli production studio, getting his makeup done by a guy wearing a yamukah.


Seeker
If the US doesn't have illegal nukes, biological and chemical weapons, why do they have such an enormous black budget hidden from the scrutiny of the peoples representatives? Why does the US point the finger so often, usually homophobes have some issues themselves..
Rumsfeld actually lacks any sense of irony, I think it's a disease he's had his whole life. He actually asked congress if he could use chemical weapons during the initial invasion of Iraq, you know, back when we were looking for illegal chemical weapons.


I think the current administration is actually a multi-faceted scapegoat. These are old men who are doing their duty for the organizations that made them powerful and insured their wealth. They are paying a debt by wearing a devils mask. Of course, the last administration was the same, and the one before that, and before that. JFK was opposed to the very people now in power, he thought they were criminaly insane, and he planned to expose them to the American people. Northwoods happened after all..it just came a little late.



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
As such, till they are built and incorporated within the U.S. nuclear arsenal, there is no violation of the NPT.


I was unaware that Iran had a functional nuclear arsenal. If not, how are they violating the NPT?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join