Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (9254)	1/7/2002 11:32:32 AM
From: Mephisto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

yes, I understood that no one would really turn him over. If they wouldn't turn him over for $25 million, they wouldn't turn him over for $5 million. Al Qaeda was powerful. Any country that turned over Bin Laden would have trouble with Al Qauea. Also, bin Laden spread a great deal of money around these countries. From everything that I've read, it goes against the grain of the culture to turn someone in. We have seen an example of this recently. A tribe in Pakistan that rarely sees strangers will offer hospitality to anyone who asks. A couple of Taliban soldiers came through and several herdsmen turned them over to the Pakistan army. The village elder was furious and said that he would burn the herdsmen homes, their vegetable gardens, destroy their trees and either kill or remove their animals. These people are suspicious of Pakistan army as well. Also, anti-American feelings are high. What I do recall reading from one source is that earlier on in the Clinton administration, Washington didn't have proof about Bin Laden and the bombings on the African embassies. Look at the proof we have recently offered to the world over the bombings of the world trade center and most people in many countries refuse to believe Bin LADEN had anything to do with the destruction of the world trade centers. Even the Saudis have refuse to acknowledge Bin Laden's part until recently. You would definitely need names of Washington sources to support the theory that Clinton didn't want Bin Laden. From everything I've read Washington has wanted Bin Laden for a very long time. Catching him has eluded us although I believe that he could be dead.

To: TigerPaw who wrote (9254)	1/9/2002 3:57:48 PM
From: Mephisto	Respond to of 93284

And someone on this thread mentioned that there was a problem with the proof of Bin Laden's deeds when Clinton was PRESIDENT. I saw General Tommy Franks on the Jim Lehrer News Hour last night, and I heard him say that there he did not possess documented proof that Bin Laden was behind the Sept. 11 attacks, although he later said in the interview that he believed, like the rest of us, that Al Qaeda was involved. I've given the reference so you can read the transcript of the interview for yourself. A problem with the transcript. The date should be 2002 but, I checked the transcript and it said 2001 GEN. TOMMY FRANKS: The head of the U.S. Central Command discusses recent al-Qaida captures and the latest in the war on terrorism. Excerpt from The Jim Lehrer News Hour January 8, 2001 The al-Qaida network JIM LEHRER: Have we found enough that makes you able to conclude that, hey, this really was where this - this really was the main base of al-Qaida, this is where Osama bin Laden and his people were calling the shots as much as they were? GEN. TOMMY FRANKS: My honest answer is no. What we have found is a number of places where we believe terrorist control activities have taken place inside Afghanistan. But to be able to pick one and say, this is the one, no, Jim, we haven't found that. JIM LEHRER: Did they - you don't have any evidence that they controlled something outside of Afghanistan from Afghanistan? GEN. TOMMY FRANKS: I'm not sure I understand - JIM LEHRER: Well, let's talk about September 11. Have you found anything on the ground that is directly ties somebody - anybody on the ground in Afghanistan to what happened here on September 11? GEN. TOMMY FRANKS: I have not - I have not seen evidence of this direct tie to which you made reference, aside from the film that I think was widely publicized, which I think each American has to decide whether he believes that bin Laden was truly behind this thing on the 11th of September, as indicated in that film. pbs.org