It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Osama bin Laden mission agreed in secret 10 years ago by US and Pakistan

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on May, 10 2011 @ 01:28 AM
reply to post by thorazineshuffle

Because it happened 10 years prior, so there would be no need for a raid now if he was already dead. Or so it's said.

posted on May, 10 2011 @ 01:50 AM
i turned on the T.V. news to see if there was anything on this, as usual nothing.

does that mean that the story is false? or that they are just going to ignore this important piece of information?
i think i know which.

yet you would think that this would be mainstream news on the T.V. as it could mean everything that was reported days ago could infact just be a part of the plan outlined in this story.

posted on May, 10 2011 @ 07:29 AM
I would like to know who this "former US official" is. Without that, this article means nothing.

Having said that, if this is true, I'm not sure I see the problem. I think it's understandable that the US said, "Look, we suspect you are hiding OBL and if we learn of his presence in your country, we WILL come in and take him out."

Musharraf: "OK. And we'll act all upset that you came in, but won't retaliate."


Pakistan couldn't give up, capture or kill OBL because of backlash from OBL's friends and organization. If the gov't of Pakistan was seen as being complicit in his capture or death, they would fear reprisals. So, they pretend as though they know nothing, all the while appearing to 'protect" OBL, but willing to give him up at the same time. Who knows how much intel we got from the Pakistani gov't, while they pretend to be upset about the raid?

I think it's kind of an ingenious plan... if it's true.

edit on 5/10/2011 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 10 2011 @ 07:48 AM
If a deal like this was signed 10 yrs ago
by Bush then the implications mean that
the total war on terror was pre-planned
and executed. Thus giving credence to
the truthers objection to the official story
of 9/11.

It was all staged by multiple players.

But like Benevolent Heretic said, would love to know
who this source is and what is the agenda
for bringing it out now 10 yrs later ???
Is someone seeking absolution ???

edit on 5/10/2011 by boondock-saint because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 10 2011 @ 08:15 AM
OP great find. It seems The Guardian has some balls to print this.

I wonder if America & Pakistan did this agreement, in the aftermath Pakistan gets angry then America rejects the plan. Goes into Pakistan and Pakistan is all like WE HAD A DEAL then America could say lol what? I mean who'd believe that they did a deal 10 years ago?? only us conspiracy theorists... and who believes us.. right??
Now The Guardian had printed this we have evidence from a reliable source.

posted on May, 10 2011 @ 08:26 AM

Originally posted by Intelearthling

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by Intelearthling

From the excerpt you posted, it doesn't look like a deal at all, more like a threat. Do we know if this "deal" had a time limit? Was it only after bin Laden left Tora Bora?

From what I gather the article to say is that a deal was made without any time limit. If the United States was to find out that Osama was in Pakistan at any time, we would have the authorization to go into Pakistan and take care of business.

Of course there was the agreement that Pakistan would 'act' like they're upset in the aftermath to appease the Osama supporters.

This news could have a negative affect on the Pakistani government with their own people. This is going to be interesting on how it unfolds.

I can't help but wonder...if this is indeed the case, why didn't the Pakistani government just give up his whereabouts? They could just as easily protested five,or six years ago. And they could have probably cut a sweet deal for that info as well.

posted on May, 10 2011 @ 11:03 AM
If bin is dead due to this raid by the us then I think they had the right to go ahead how they did.Bin laden was a coward who prayed on normal people rather than the government,military these terrorist blow there selves up thinking there going to virgins does the karan not condem suicide.normal civilians should be allowed to kill terrorist and get knighted for it.who cares when and how he died well done USA

posted on May, 10 2011 @ 11:34 AM

Originally posted by Wetpaint72
I can't help but wonder...if this is indeed the case, why didn't the Pakistani government just give up his whereabouts?

Maybe they did... There's SO much we don't know going on behind the curtain. Who says Pakistan hasn't been feeding the US intel all along?

Maybe they HAVE cut a sweet deal.

posted on May, 10 2011 @ 12:20 PM
The rabbit hole certainly seems to get deeper.

It would have been good if they could name the sources and as they appear to be retired, then I can't really see a problem with naming them.

The smoke is beginning to clear and the mirrors cracking.

posted on May, 10 2011 @ 02:00 PM
reply to post by Intelearthling

Yeah but I thought it was common knowledge?

Bush said he got Paki permission back in the day, if anyone else remembers....

posted on May, 10 2011 @ 02:27 PM
I'm glad that I was not born in Pakistan or else there would be a possibility that my future will be in their hands. haha! lol

posted on May, 10 2011 @ 09:48 PM

Originally posted by mudbeed
reply to post by Intelearthling

Yeah but I thought it was common knowledge?

Bush said he got Paki permission back in the day, if anyone else remembers....

How is this common knowledge when the agreement was suppose to be a secret? Not too secret I guess.

If I recall, Bush got the supposedly cooperation of the Pakistanis aid in finding terrorist hideouts not to have our troops on their soil.

The deal didn't work out so good especially when it was our intelligence agency who tracked bin Laden and kept him under surveillance.

posted on May, 10 2011 @ 11:06 PM
Ok if this article is true, then why did did Pakistan shoot down a stealth helicopter? (one of the helos supposedly had mechanical problems and had to be blown up but HMMMM.) Did these 'misplaced' SEALS have room in the other helicopters? What was it again... 20 SEALS or 60+ SEALS? I can't find a straight answer.

I wonder what did Pakistan do to those helicopter parts? Sell it to the Chinese or or give it back to the USA?

Was the whole thing a ruse to add gravity to the situation? Like to add 'evidence' that they were actually there and the $ was getting serious and a helicopter had to be blown up... Oh yeah very serious stuff which makes it seem more real... Rite? Yeah hope you lean towards that opinion good citizen...

There are many other holes in this story like other posters have mentioned. Like the lone civilian tweeting when the helicopters were supposedly using EMP countermeasures. What happened there? Maybe the EMP stuff didn't work so well.

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 11:11 PM
Actually the article is not true according to Musharraf...

ISLAMABAD - Former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf denied Tuesday that his administration struck an agreement with the United States years ago to let American special forces kill or capture Osama bin Laden inside Pakistan.

The denial follows a report in a British newspaper that Washington and Islamabad reached a secret deal nearly a decade ago allowing the U.S. to conduct operations against bin Laden and two other top al-Qaida leaders on Pakistani soil.

"Pervez Musharraf has seen a media report, and let me make it clear that no such agreement had been signed during his tenure," said Musharraf's spokesman, Fawad Chaudhry. He said there was no oral agreement either.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in