Obama Lied: Taliban Did Not Refuse to Hand Over Bin Laden

Originally posted by JPhish
Impressme, with the information available to you, your conclusion seems justified . . . but remember, this news may be disinformation.

I have no evidence for this, it's just a hunch, but I'm more inclined to believe that OBL has been dead for a very long time; perhaps even before 9-11.

[edit on 12/6/2009 by JPhish]

i felt the same - very early on, in fact, and it was a gut feeling that pretty much convinced me that he had died soon after 9/11, from his kidney failure.

i worked as an RN for around 11 years and most of that time was spent taking care of patients with chronic illnesses and also terminal illnesses. kidney failure, usually from the damage done by the diabetic disease process, is one of the most common chronic AND terminal illnesses; unless a successful transplant takes place, patients have little to no hope for recovery. the disease process of renal failure causes so many systemic complications that, more often than not, prevent patients from undergoing a transplant operation even if a kidney is readily available (usually from a family member).

there is no way that anyone with ESRD (end stage renal disease) would be able to live without dialysis treatments 3 or 4 times every week. a remote mountain cave makes a good hideout, i'm sure - but only if a person is healthy. someone as ill as bin Laden would have been both severely compromised and uncomfortable. the electrical power required for hemo-dialysis would have given away any secret location in those Afghanistan hills, if it had even been feasible as far out as it was said bin Laden and his people were seeking cover from the terrorist-hunters allegedly sent out to capture them. and not only that, infection is a major concern for anyone in such a condition - an infection at the IV site can easily, and swiftly, become a full-blown systemic infection easily able to overpower the severely compromised immune system of any ESRD-affected patient.

there was much talk of bin Laden's kidney disease up until that point, but after the start of 2002, not much was said about it, ever again. it isn't something that just goes away.

that's my .02, according to what i know to be true, in general, about someone with Osama's particular illness...for whatever its worth.

BUT, here are some bits of probable evidence to back up our hunch and theory:

FOX News

Online Journal

What Really Happened

IOL.co.za

I believe he died early 2002 too, do you know if the Taliban has claimed that he did?

You would think it would help their case and they would not stop mentioning it but I do not recall them announcing it.

...then again our news is from the media so who knows if they dont just tell us what they want to hear.

Originally posted by Ridhya
I believe he died early 2002 too, do you know if the Taliban has claimed that he did?

sometimes they have:
freerepublic.com
current
The Times of India

and then there is the occasional *rogue* contradiction:
FOX News

but note that it is higher-ranking individuals who report bin Laden as dead, while the single alleged sighting of an alive bin Laden comes from a 'Taliban detainee.'
who knows what that's all about - probably just some attempt at diversionary tactics, for whatever reason

-------------------------------------------

You would think it would help their case and they would not stop mentioning it but I do not recall them announcing it.

....well, the people of Afghanistan, whether leaders or followers, have proven themselves as possessing a rather unique approach to life - they possess a fiery pride in their quest to be free and independent of others outside their country. in other words, i doubt they feel any need to, as you say, 'help their case.'

they probably see the situation from a perspective of which we can't even remotely conceive; much like our obsession with bin Laden is uniquely American.

remember, though, that the Taliban has been the actual government of Afghanistan, seeking to regain control, while Al Qaeda is a group without loyalty to any certain government or nation. the initial idea of the Taliban being in the position to 'hand over' bin Laden and his people was simply because it was believed they were within the boundaries of Afghanistan. the Taliban has no responsibility to the US, or anyone else, in regard to the activities or membership of Al Qaeda and therefore probably doesn't devote much, if any, attention to the issue since it literally isn't relevant to their quest to regain rule in Afghanistan.

reply to post by impressme

Oh come on! The Kenyan only lies when his lips are moving. I didn't see his lips move...

Besides if Bin Laden was dead his head will be pickled in a jar on Dick
Cheney desk........

Osama is dead, Osama is alive, IMO Osama is a 'code source' for private agendas. His name has usually "pre"ceeds or "post" ceeds tragedy. They honestly know 'we the people' are not buying this old story at this point. I still find amusing that 'Osama" Obama" is one to the trillianth power that two names would be almost identical.[With only b/s separating.]

It sounds to me like you believe everything you hear..... just because sombody says it's true, it doesn't mean it is... Have you not learned anything growing up? You have a sick sense of reality. You look for things and find what you want to find. It must suck living like that, and not understanding what is reality. Good luck, you'll need it!!!!!!

reply to post by BetweenTheLine


what would planning 1000 years ahead do??????? If it is a power struggle and they are planning that far ahead what is the point, they won't be around.... helllllllooooo, where do you people come up with all this stuff? Holy C$%P!

reply to post by Victoria 1
take your trolling someplace elsewhere

Politicians sell agendas not truths. The real control of politicians are the groups and organisations that sit behind and form the thought of the time. Allthough I am not sure there is a 1000 year agenda these people have a vast array of resources and oppurtunity to understand trends and how to manipulate the outcome.

The Cambridge Apostles, the Bloomsbury Group, Bilderbergers, CFR etc etc, you will see all the same names popping up in the right places. These guys set the agendas, the politicals sell it to the people. Read some Zbig if you want to get an inside into Obama. They will never tell you the truth but they will do whatever they want anyway as Maggie used to say "There is no other way"

I am sure there is a great amount of case work to suggest OBL could have been handed over, worked for the US, is dead etc etc but I fear that until they decide on the use for him and publish that throught the MSM we will never know and then spend another 40 years or so debating it.

Read Paul Waldman's "Fraud" George W. Bush Jr. has been documented in 262 lies in this book alone.

All politicians lie.

Some more than others.

reply to post by impressme


The reason Bin Laden was never handed over is that Osama Bin Laden is dead. Thats why no one can find him. He may six feet under ground.

reply to post by gnich

The reason Bin Laden was never handed over is that Osama Bin Laden is dead. Thats why no one can find him. He may six feet under ground.

I would not be surprised and there are evidences OBL may be dead.
I have read he died of kidney failure.

Originally posted by impressme

Where is bin Laden? Secretary Gates Says No Intel in 'Years'

Defense Secretary Robert Gates told me that the U.S. has not had any good intelligence on the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden in "years."
He also couldn’t confirm reports that a detainee in Pakistan had claimed that he had information on where bin Laden was earlier this year. He made the startling admission during my interview with him for "This Week" airing Sunday.
Here's the exchange:
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: "The Pakistani Prime Minister shrugged off any concerns about that this week, about whether or not he’d done enough to go after Osama bin Laden. He said he doesn’t believe Osama is in Pakistan. Is he right and do you think the Pakistanis have done enough to get him?"
DEFENSE SECRETARY ROBERT GATES: "Well, we don’t know for a fact where Osama bin Laden is. If we did, we’d go get him"
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: "What was the last time we had any good intelligence on where he was?
DEFENSE SECRETARY ROBERT GATES: "I think it’s been years."
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: "Years?!"
DEFENSE SECRETARY ROBERT GATES: "I think so."
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: "So these reports that came out just this week about a detainee saying he might have seen him in Afghanistan earlier this year, we can’t confirm that?
Gates: No."

You can watch the complete interview with Gates and Secretary Clinton Sunday on "This Week."

blogs.abcnews.com...

LOL, I believe the government was hoping OBL would just vanish into thin air, perhaps he did. Shushs, we are hunting OBL, shush
I think the CIA ran out of convincing lies.

If it was the reporter, I would have ended that interview when Gates said "I think so." Americans should feel very secure to know that we have a defense secretary that thinks rather then knows.

reply to post by impressme


Thats absurd, why would we want Bin Laden? He's not charged with any 911 crimes.