posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 09:27 AM
Iran is a possibility, but so is the possibility he is in Afghanistan and Pakistan, or is dead. But I find it very unlikely that if he is there, that
he is in collusion with the Iranian government and vice versa.
In fact, in a strange twist in terms of recent tensions between the US and Iran, Iran and the US have a common enemy in Bin Laden.
The group that you talk of in the source you supplied is indeed Sunni, but Iran is still not a safe area for Bin Laden. With a hostile government in
Iran who would be minded to catch Bin Laden or kill him, and that group which would attract unwanted attenion via its attacks, Bin Laden may find Iran
a little hot to be in.
"You do not mind if I ask for a source substantiating the above mention you have made? "
Bin Laden is extreme Sunni, Ahmadinejad is an extreme Shia.
They being friends would be like a Jewish Extremist and a Islamic Extremist being friends.
I advise looking up the history of the Sunni-Shia split in Islam arising from the question of the successor to The Prophet Mohammad.
This is found on the web, and in books and literature, and is full of bad blood, betrayal, and blood letting through the ages.
It's a long history, and I do reccomend it as interesting history to read up on.
"Furthermore, despite ideological differences, what do both have in common? Commonality is certainly a motivator for overcoming certain ideological
differences, thus allowing a partnership or understanding, of sorts, enough to allow those ideological differences to be set aside to obtain the
While you raise a valid point, in this case, America's history in relation to Islamic countries and vice versa and animosity gained is short and
brief compared to the sheer entrenched and mortal hatred that extremist Sunnis have for Shias over a thousand years, that goes to the root of which
branch is the true 'Islam' and to blood letting and betrayal. Such is the conflict here, entrenched as it is in conflicting ideology that has seen
what can be described as Islamic Civil Wars, that it can not be put aside in the face of a common 'enemy' like the US.
To extreme Sunnis, co-operation with any kind with Shias is akin to blasphemy and infidel behaviour in regards to that extreme Sunnis believe that who
they think is the true path of Islam descends from their choice of Succession to Mohammad and co-operating with Shias would be to accept the Shias and
their path instead, Shias being viewed as non muslims and usurpers for not following the Sunni belief of succession.
When Bin Laden declares muslims to 'Jihad', he does not mention Shias or Sunnis, as these names differentiate between the two Islamic paths, and as
Sunni extremists view Shias not being muslims, the word 'Shia Muslim' is heretic, an oxymoron, thus as Sunni Muslims are viewed as 'true muslims'
they are called simply, 'Muslims'.