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: CIA Chief: Excellent Idea Where Bin Laden Is

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 06:52 AM
link   
The CIA chief, Porter Goss, has claimed the US has an "excellent idea" where Osama Bin Laden is hiding. He goes further to say that the United States' respect for sovereign nations makes it harder to capture him. "I have an excellent idea where he is. What's the next question?" said Goss.
 



news.yahoo.com
NEW YORK - The director of the CIA says he has an "excellent idea" where Osama bin Laden is hiding, but that the United States' respect for sovereign nations makes it more difficult to capture the al-Qaida chief.

In an interview with Time for the magazine's June 27 issue, Porter Goss was asked about the progress of the hunt for bin Laden.

"When you go to the question of dealing with sanctuaries in sovereign states, you're dealing with a problem of our sense of international obligation, fair play," Goss said. "We have to find a way to work in a conventional world in unconventional ways."


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The United States respects sovereign nations? What happend to "youre either with us or against"? I have no illusion to the United States respect for sovereign nations.

[edit on 20/6/05 by subz]




posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 07:47 AM
link   
That's it, coffee all over my damn keyboard. Thanks Porter.

I wonder if they're laughing in Afghanistan?



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Sure, he has a good idea of wher he is. He's in Afghanistan, He's in Saudi Arabia, He's in Timbuku etc.
Does anyone realy explect that Osama will ever be caught? He is the terrorist version of the cure for cancer or the cure for the common cold



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 07:56 AM
link   
The only soverignity that Bushco respects is the soverignity of those countries who are standing on oil and cash. The next question I would ask is: What is your excellent idea of where OBL is hiding? Answer this publically and OBL would be forced to flee therfore making himself vulnerable to capture. They have the perfect chance to catch this man. A perfect trap. IF they were intrested in capturing OBL, they would use this as an advantage and spew forth to the world the truth about the 'excellent idea' of OBL's location.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 07:56 AM
link   
Kinda funny to see a statement about the US having respect for sovereign nations, when several sovereign nations like Canada, Italy and Sweden don't really see it that way. They are treating cases of "swifted away terror suspects" as kidnappings, changing laws to assert their authority over outside agents and so on.

The US is disrespecting sovereign nations constantly when literaly kidnapping people they call "terror suspects" to bring to Gitmo.

And as we all know by now, alot of these people are detained indefinatly with no charges brought against them and none to nearly no legal council.

How is this respecting sovereign nations? Kidnapping and detaining citizens of these nations without alowing them to have legal council or without them even being charged with any crimes?



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 08:38 AM
link   
I frankly don't believe this.

But then again, I believe little of what the US govt put out on the subject of terrorism, that can't be verified by secondary sources.

While there are schools of thought that advocate the 'non-apprehension' of this individual (for whatever political reasons).... the bulk of americanws would happily see the harboring of such and individual as tantamount to terrorist support.

There are some 30,000+ NYPD that would love to have the location provided, board buses and stage their own invasion, to string up this bastard.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 08:49 AM
link   
This is a complete ruse. If the United States knew where Osama Bin Laden was hiding and it was outside of Afghanistan or Pakistan, where the governments are condusive to the United States demands, they would kill him anyway.

Just take the assasination of 6 suspected Al-Qaeda operatives in Yemen in 2002 by a CIA Predator drone with hellfire missiles. The 6 people where driving in their car in the Yemeni province of Marib. All six were blown to pieces, no attempt to capture and try them with the crimes they were suspected of.


SANAA, Yemen (CNN) -- Six suspected al Qaeda members -- including an al Qaeda chief wanted in the bombing of the USS Cole -- were killed early Monday in Yemen when a CIA drone launched a "Hellfire" missile and struck the car they were traveling in, sources told CNN.

It was the first direct U.S. strike against Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network outside Afghanistan since the U.S.-led war on terrorism began after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Officials with the Central Intelligence Agency and Pentagon refused to discuss the report.

The sources who spoke to CNN said the Hellfire missile was launched from an unmanned Predator aerial vehicle. All six people in the car died, they said. (More on Predator)

U.S Kills Cole Suspects

Where is Yemen's sovereignty in this case? A foreign agency kills its citzens on its own territory for a suspected crime. Can you imagine if another country did this to Americans in America??? There would be rightfully justified outrage.

They were only "supected" terrorist also. Where is the justice that America stands for here? They were never charged with a crime, there was no proof issued that faced scrutiny by a jury or judge. They were just blown to kingdom come and the case of the Cole bombing closed. No more scrutiny over the incident, bad guys face "justice" return to loving your country and we'll keep you safe.


Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush refused to comment on the assassination. The Yemeni government were not shown to of authourised the assassination by the CIA in their country.

Why are they reluctant to show OBL the same treatment? Afterall you'd think the killing of OBL would be much more sought after than these 6 AL-Qaeda operatives ever were.

Completely fishy to me. Why kill the boogey man when your reaping the benefits of the fear he generates? The neo-cons money and power directly sprout from the fear OBL generates.

[edit on 20/6/05 by subz]



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 09:15 AM
link   
The wording you reported


...Goss said. "We have to find a way to work in a conventional world in unconventional ways."


this cryptic phrase, is 'setting aside' the policy of Your Either With Us or Against Us
-> the message acknowledges a strategy of making public OBLs sancturary location is not being considered
-> the message also alludes that pointing accusative fingers or outing a
country as a haven for international-terrorists, is not a workable option either.

? which brings us to speculate....
just what the term unconventional ways might mean in Goss' & the neocons playbook??



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Wasn't Iraq a sovereign nation?

Oh, I forgot, they had WMD and had a hand in 9/11 (according to a recent Bush statement). That's makes it okay not to respect sovereign nations.

My goodness, they're laughing more at the American public every day.

I feel revolted on your behalf my American friends.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 09:41 AM
link   
100 views, 4 no votes because its biased...

Thats atleast 75+ views where no one has voted. Come on people VOTE! Yes or No, its not hard.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 09:44 AM
link   
even though the subject made me want to hurl



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 12:13 PM
link   


100 views, 4 no votes because its biased...

Thats atleast 75+ views where no one has voted. Come on people VOTE! Yes or No, its not hard.


That's a helluva lot better than my last attempt at a news article... 13 views and 8 NO votes in the first 90 seconds.


Two each for Bias, Grammar, Repeat and Content. It wasn't any of those things of course, just the thought nazis up to their usual tricks.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 12:20 PM
link   
I agree with a lot of the above. There had been some strong words said about nations "harboring terrorists", some time ago... Before Iraq...

Now we are told that because of extremely high level of reverence the US is affording to every single nation's sovereignty, terrorist #1 and the most wanted man in the Universe will be spared.

The CIA chief did sound like an idiot, now didn't he.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Quite frankly, other than the dribble I'm sure was comeing out of his mouth... that information isn't completely off. Remember the best lies are told with a little truth.



The dozens of settlement ruins of the unknown to the civilization stretch east from Annau across the Kara-Kum desert into Uzbekistan and perhaps the northern part of Afghanistan. The area is 300 to 400 miles long and 50 miles wide.

- Ancient Writings - Discoveries
Source

I have had that information printed out since 10/2/2001. From the best open sources of information I could utilize at the time, still today havn't a more accurate clue as to where he might be. How ever according to my opinion that is the most probable. That is where I would hide if I was him, so that is where I would look first. But what do I know...



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 02:07 PM
link   
This has GOT to be propaganda.

Don't you figure SOMEONE in Al Qaeda has access to the internet or to this information?

"Hey Osama, the CIA says they know where you are."
"Ow crap, get my camel"



As if.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by thematrix

The US is disrespecting sovereign nations constantly when literaly kidnapping people they call "terror suspects" to bring to Gitmo.



I wish you would try telling that to my friend who is in the marines. It seems his unit was on the battlefield when they started to take fire from enemy combatants. They returned fire to these "innocent victims". Two US soldiers were killed in the battle. About 12 or so enemies were killed. Some of the enemies gave up when they knew they had no chance. They put their guns in the air and surrendered to the US forces. My friend wish he could have killed them all. He was so mad because he had lost a couple of his own. But none the less he along with his unit knew the right thing to do was to take them into custody. These guys were murderers and clearly the insurgent enemy, we hear so much about. But instead of death they got a second chance at life. They are now at Gitmo, my friend tells me thats where they were transferred to. They have their Koran in a cell and no doubt are planning on ways to kill more people when they get out, if they get out.

So think real hard about how you stick up for the enemy. I know our government hasn`t had a great track record with regards to special intelligence but the fact is they do have morals and do respect the lives of even those they capture killing our own. These people at Gitmo are the worst terrorists they find. In the scope of things I guess occasionally it could be possible to jail an innocent. Such is even true here in the US in our own prison system. But does that mean we let them all go? Of course not.

We have try our best to make the right decisions, but no one is perfect. In the beginning I know for a fact that some enemies that our troops rounded up, we were`nt actually sure if they were all enemies. One such case my friend tells me of involved some 25 fighters that holed up in a coffee shop shooting at are forces as they passed by. He said they returned fire and killed most of them but that about 7 remained that gave up. Among them were two men who said they were just innocent patrons of the coffee shop. They all went to Gitmo. After months of investigating the Us set these two men free since they were not found with any weapons and it was thought to be clear that they were innocent. All of those who were killed died with a weapon in their hands.

Funny thing is about three months after they were released one of the men was caught planting a bomb at a mosque near Baghdad. He was caught and he surrendered without incident and was sent back to Gitmo. The other man who was released was never heard from again and mabe was innocent.

These are the stories you will only get if you are lucky enough to know someone brave enough who serves my country well. I have heard numerous stories from him and his friends. He has served in iraq for almost two years now and has had a two week leave twice. It is then that I hear some of the most interesting stuff I have ever heard. Trust me our men in uniform for the most part (99.99%) are following the proper procedures and treating all with respect. Personally I don`t know how they do it.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 03:05 PM
link   
csulli:

It seems his unit was on the battlefield when they started to take fire from enemy combatants. They returned fire to these "innocent victims". Two US soldiers were killed in the battle. About 12 or so enemies were killed. Some of the enemies gave up when they knew they had no chance. They put their guns in the air and surrendered to the US forces. My friend wish he could have killed them all. He was so mad because he had lost a couple of his own. But none the less he along with his unit knew the right thing to do was to take them into custody.


You are talking about enemy soldiers who should be treated as POWs after capture. They are a MILITIA, and they were defending themselves from American soldiers.

They are NOT enemy combatants. They had NOTHING to do with 9-11. They are Iraqis who are fighting a FOREIGN OCCUPIER, not "terrorists".

Just like in Vietnam. The VC used guerrilla tactics to WIN the Vietnam War against the world's most powerful military at the time. They knew they would lose in a straight out battle, so they used "special tactics".

And YET, Vietnamese soldiers (even without uniforms) were captured as Prisoners of War.

No difference here. They are and should be treated humanely as POWs.

You yourself said these Marines were on the "battlefield". So were these men.

Let me ask you, are all US Marines killcrazy psychopaths?

Of course not, right?

So why do all these men AUTOMATICALLY become terrorists in your eyes? Is it racism? Propaganda? Please explain.

Bear in mind YOUR COUNTRY is the aggressor here. Nobody asked you to invade, but PLENTY have asked you to withdraw, and you have yet to.

You are now occupying a so-called Democratic country, while you rape their resources in the name of Freedom and Hailburton.


jako



jako



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 03:26 PM
link   
I cant believe there are still, so many people, that believe OBL, actually carried out the 9/11 attacks!

I really think that it was, certainly, other people who carried out the attacks, and not just alongside OBL. Really dont think he played a part in the attacks. OBL, a name for the MOVIE of 9/11 events, all part of the illusion the public needed to see, to believe.

I dont think, OBL, has actually claimed responsibility, i mean genuinely, footage that wasn't tampered with, i mean. I could be wrong though!?



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo

You are talking about enemy soldiers who should be treated as POWs after capture. They are a MILITIA, and they were defending themselves from American soldiers.

They are NOT enemy combatants. They had NOTHING to do with 9-11. They are Iraqis who are fighting a FOREIGN OCCUPIER, not "terrorists".




You are now occupying a so-called Democratic country, while you rape their resources in the name of Freedom and Hailburton.





jako




You can`t be serious. In both instances I explained that it was the combatant that was the agreesor. They were`nt defending an attack but provoking one with their own machine guns. And they are not Iraqi`s defending their country they are insurgents from Iran,Syria, Saudi Arabia to name a few countries. most of thos held at Gitmo are not and never were from Iraq. These terrorists who you call enemy fighters blow up the Iraqi civilians every day. They aren`t even fighting the US forces because they know it is easier to kill unarmed civilians. They are cowards.

The Iraqi government doesn`t want us to leave yet so I don`t care what anybody else says. We may have messed up for going there but thats more of a reason not to leave it in worse shape then it was to begin with. At least we got rid of Saddam, now we just have to make sure the population there can defend itself from these insurgents so that it doesn`t become a new safe havern for terrorists.

As for raping it for its resources, that is the most arrogant thing I have ever heard. They can barely even sell enough oil to keep their own economy going because of the TERRORISTS constantly blowing up their pipelines. The opposition to the American government and the propaganda is just rediculous. We are a rightous people and we will defend the world and leave it a better place for all our children, yours and mine. the world needs to be less anti and more pro. We need to stick together as a human race to rid our planet of the scum.



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by csulli456
We are a rightous people and we will defend the world and leave it a better place for all our children, yours and mine. the world needs to be less anti and more pro. We need to stick together as a human race to rid our planet of the scum.

oh wait a minute...you were being serious


And starting wars gives "all our children" a better place how? I really dont want to offend you for your support of your marine friends serving in Iraq. I think the US soldiers by and large are morally sound and comendable people. Thats more than can be said about their leaders and the reasons they were sent into harms way.

But if you insist on trying to claim that any one who dares fight back against the US army in Iraq is a terrorist I will have to challenge you on it. What you have said is pure arrogance and blind acceptance to your countries claim to righteousness. Thats, I find, to be unnacceptable.

The conflict in Iraq is a War. As such there are two sides fighting against each other. The other side is not compelled to just defend itself as you implied in your previous post. If they shot at the Marines with their machine guns they are not terrorists. They are fighting a War. If they started firing a machine gun in downtown LA they would still not be terrorists.

The U.S started a war in Iraq, the Iraqis did not declare war on the US first. The US invaded a sovereign nation. These are not open for discussion, they are unbiased facts

As such when the war started, those fighting for Iraq (there is no restriction on who can and who cannot defend the sovereignty of Iraq) can legally attack America including on its own soil. Bitter pill to swallow?

Well lets look at history for an example. When Germany was at war with Britain in WW2 Germany was the agressor. Did that mean that the War was confined to British territory? The attacked country, Britain, took the fight to those that attacked it.

Iraqis, if they could, can legally (under war conditions) attack Americans in America. Thank Bush for that. There was never a surrender of Iraqi forces. The Iraqi leader, Saddam, was captured but never signed an end to hostilities. The Americans unilaterally declared the hostilities over, that isnt how it works. They then installed their own Iraqi leadership, that is also not how it works.

You cannot start a war and then declare it over when you get what you want then cry foul when your own guys are still being killed!

I dont support the killing of any one but I cannot dispute that if you invade a country you should EXPECT to have your soldiers shot and killed! You cannot declare them terrorists unless you call your own Marines terrorists!







 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join