Is The U.S. Serious About Finding Osama?
If the United States of America is serious about finding Osama bin Laden, it sure as hell has a funny way of showing it.
Eight years after allegedly masterminding the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, bin Laden is reportedly still hiding out in a cave somewhere in the border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan. And yeah, the second part of that theory is beginning to strain credulity in our book.
Don’t get us wrong – bin Laden is obviously one of the most skillful (and PR-savvy) asymmetrical warriors in modern history, but we refuse to believe that this is where America is after nearly a decade of “hunting” him.
Seriously, people … we live in an age of frighteningly advanced technology and no one has access to the latest “search and destroy” gadgetry quite like the U.S. military-industrial complex.
So WTF gives? Why hasn’t this cockroach been flushed out and squashed by the boot of American vengeance?
“You are waging a hopeless and losing war for the benefit of others, a war the end of which is not visible on the horizon,” Osama tells U.S. President Barack Obama in his latest audio message.
Bin Laden then calls Obama “powerless” in the war on terror(ism).
Kind of hard to argue that point, isn’t it?
Comments
By 1 + 1 = 3 on September 14th, 2009 at 11:18 am
Bush didn’t want to find him – would have had no reason to stay in Iraq over oil
By CNSYD on September 14th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
1 + 1 =3, I thought Bush was gone. What is the holdup know?
By silas on September 14th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Osama is probably shuffled betwixt China, Iran, Venezuela,Syria and Russia by KGB handlers…
By OnNoNotAgain on September 14th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Well, I’m not a hunter. But gosh, I’d find it hard to track a deer starting with eight-year-old spoor.
By rick on September 14th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
We’re not only not looking, we’re hoping we don’t find him. 8 years with this military and technolgy? Give me a break.
By silas on September 14th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
Gee, maybe we should’ve taken Sudan up on their offer to hand Osama over thrice–but Bill Clinton declined the offer…
By Buzz on September 14th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
Why find him and put an end to a very profitable war.
Didn’t Eisenhower warn us about the Military Industrial complex ? No ?
By madcock on September 14th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
You’re kidding right? George W. Bush spends EIGHT YEARS ignoring Osama Bin Laden, giving him free reign before and after the 9/11 bombings.
Then, when the Obama Administration, after less than EIGHT MONTHS in office has not yet captured him, you join arm in arm with the mass murdering terrorist to scoff at the US Government’s efforts.
What’s next? Are you gonna criticize Obama for failing in 2001 when he was an Illinois state Senator to object to the Bush Administration allowing Bin Laden’s brother to fly safely out of the country in violation of its ban on air travel immediately following 9/11?
Frigging traitor!!!!
By CNSYD on September 14th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
It is sort of like the old saw about criminals. If there were no crime then what would all the police, jailers, lawyers and judges do? So crime is essential to their wellbeing.
By dirtbogger on September 14th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
It’s good to see people are questioning this, now if they would look at all the footage of the collapse of building 7 and towers 1&2 and ask them selves how these were the first steel framed buildings in history to collapse due to fire and how did they turn to dust and fall at free fall speed into their footprint through the path of greatist resistance. that is impossible without secondary devices. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ArcMOkuoK0
By Patton on September 14th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Why doesn’t Osama go to Iraq or Afghanistan where all our troops are?
I think Osama is getting lucrative kickbacks from the U.S. war machine- probably hanging out with 99 virgins in the south of France.
By CNSYD on September 14th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
dirtbogger, I personally know the structural engineer who headed up the forensic team. The building performed as it was designed. The main area that could have been improved was the fireproofing material around the steel. It would not have prevented collapse but it would have given more time. Obviously a design criteria was not a 767 crashing into it. Even in simpler structures designs are based on time for people to exit.
By dirtbogger on September 14th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
CNSYD, 854 architects and engineers agree with me here is a link to their web site http://www.ae911truth.org/.
By dirtbogger on September 14th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
Oh and building 7 was not hit by a plane! As far as forensic’s, I do not see how since the steel was shipped to China before it could be tested for thermite (nano thermite has been found and documented in the dust however) oh and $600,000 spent on the investigating the collapse of 9-11 and $65,000,000 on Bill Clintons blow job, huh go figure. Odd how Bush was was reading to children when it happened as if to appear innicent.
By really???? on September 14th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
really dirtbogger. Did you see the devils face in the smoke too?
By dirtbogger on September 14th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
well (really) are you scared some one might actually go look at the links and learn the truth? why dont you challenge my facts– I wish to god I was wrong! I dare anyone to go look, I think the problem is most people are scared to look. And no I did not see a f’n devel in the smoke but I did see a sky scraper turn to dust mid air.
By CNSYD on September 14th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
dirtbogger, after you tell us where you got you engineering degree(s) and your professional license, then we will try to have a technical discussion with you. I assume you look under your bed before you get in it.
By SAY WHAT? on September 14th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
IMO we are serious about finding Osama, but Pakistan (where I beleive he is) is not. Osama probably gets daily warnings from the Pakistani security service as to threats to his safety.
By CNSYD on September 14th, 2009 at 8:21 pm
dirtbogger, I looked at your web site. I clicked on the list of “engineers and architects. What a bogus bunch. One says he is an “urban activist”. Really professional that one. Sort of like a witch doctor is a MD. I’ll put my faith in the qualifications of those professionally licensed and not your quacks.
By John on September 14th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
this new message from UbL is more false flag propaganda from the war party, it’s meant to discredit legitimate criticism of US foreign policy and silence opposition to the war … wake up america, your government is lying to you!
By Doyle on September 14th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
How long did it take to find Eric Robert Rudolf? He was in freaking North Carolina, and would still be loose if he hadn’t gone dumpster diving.
By K Trane on September 14th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Guess nobody has ever seen “The Hunting Party!”
By dirtbogger on September 15th, 2009 at 9:10 am
CNSYD, they are credentialed engineers and you know it, you are just trying to keep any one else from looking and learning for their self. Any body with half a brain that are willing to watch the collapse of building 7 will see that its an implosion. The only reason I believe what I beleve is I was trying to discredit someone else like you are now but after researching in depth I was converted without the slightist dout that 9-11 was an inside job. To any one else who is reading this go research in depth for yourself and do not let anybody tell you how to think, you will not be alone in you beliefs. People are waking up to our disturbing circumstances all the time. We are not the good guys in the middle east like we have been propagated! Go read the PNAC document which was drawn up before 9-11. and watch this movie well worth the time http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=zero&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv#
By dirtbogger on September 15th, 2009 at 9:26 am
Oh and the twin towers were designed to withstand an airplane impact, and dont forget the impire state building has been hit by a plane and burnt for several hours and did not collapse, did it have fire proofing, hell no it did not even have sprinklers!
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html
heres the owner of the wtc saying pull it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100
By CNSYD on September 15th, 2009 at 10:25 am
dirtbogger, the list of “engineers” you provided does not provide details of their qualifications much less whether they are real people or not. Were they professionally licensed they would have so stated. Perhaps they are smart enough to know that if they are not licensed and present themselves as such they are in violation of the law. Please enlighten me of the details wherein the towers were designed to withstand a direct hit by a 767. IRT the Empire state building, what were the specs of that plane vs those of a 767?
By CNSYD on September 15th, 2009 at 10:27 am
dirtbogger, I assume your conspiracy theories also include FDR’s involvement in allowing the attack on Pearl Harbor to occur.
By CNSYD on September 15th, 2009 at 10:29 am
dirtbogger, the owner of the WTC is the Port Authority of NY and NJ not the guy you claim. He is merely a lease holder.
By dirtbogger on September 15th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Not a lease holder, he is THE LEASE HOLDER and you have not offered up one bit of evidence that really supports the official conspiricy theroy, so the best you got is to try with your weak attempts to ridicule than to debate the free fall of building 7 or how the twin towers are blown to dust from top down If you want more facts go look for them I have provided enough data to keep you busy for hours. I have provided more than enough for someone to go and judge for themselves. Your main goal is obvious which is to keep any one else from going to look. Let the vidieos speak for themselves. Also the engineers credentials are provided if you search te site http://www.ae911truth.org/.
CNSYD what you are trying to do has already been established you have lost all credibility.
By dirtbogger on September 15th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
As far as planes go the towers were designed to survive an impact from a 707 the largest plane at the time. That was in the designers own words specifically. http://www.metacafe.com/watch/338148/wtc_designer_speaks/
By CNSYD on September 15th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
dirtbogger, only those engineers who have the designation of P.E. or S.E. are legally qualified to be in responsible charge. In a trial where they are to act as an expert witness they would have to have those designations or the other side would move to discredit their testimony. Some of these jokers are “computer scientists”. That is NOT an engineer. IRT the architects, I even saw landscape architects listed. A lot they would know about the structures. The point is that you can investigate all you want to. I don’t care. But your conclusions, if you take the blinders off, will lead you to the same conclusions as the legitimate team. BTW a 707 is not a 767. I suggest you contact Dr. Corley of Skokie, IL and get the real truth.
By dirtbogger on September 15th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
So no response about the designer of the towers even saying they should not have collapsed I am sure he had some kind of credentials.
By CNSYD on September 15th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
dirtbogger, let me know what Dr. Corley says. If you don’t know who he is then you have not done much original research. Was this designer a structural engineer or an architect?
By dirtbogger on September 16th, 2009 at 8:46 am
Dr Corley you mean the guy paid by the government to come to their predetermined conclusion yeah he’s credable–NOT. You know jet fuel is only kerosene, and how many metal workers use kerosene to cut insulated steel, I have never seen one. The black smoke also indicated that this was an oxygen starved fire. By the time the towers collapsed the fires were out. Why did all 4 coners of both buildings blow out evenly and the top come straight down instead of toppling over. While watching the vidieo’s of the collapse in slow motion you can actually see the concrete blowing out. Also NIST’s explanation of the building 7 was due to fire, not damage and it was not hit by a plane. That means it was the first steel framed building in history to collapse due to only fire. Look at the CCTV tower in china and then watch building 7 collapse. Btw the CCTV tower in China did not collapse, the intire thing was ablaze. Let the folks reading decide for themselves this is all to obvious.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFK1K91z4cc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W0N-qH0ac4
By OoglyBoogly on September 16th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
You don’t have to be an engineer or architect to know what happened. It’s obvious they were blown up. Just look at them explode for goodness sake! How the heck can anyone not see that!!! :shock:
By CNSYD on September 16th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
dirtbogger, jet fuel is not 100% kerosene. Exactly who then was responsible for the planting of all these internal explosives in several buildings? How could they carry this out completely undetected? Earlier attempts were easily traced via a rental truck. Do you personally know Dr. Corley? Have you discussed your theories with him? Perhaps you just relied on landscape architects and interns who signed your petition. BTW do you look under you bed every night for a boogey man?
By dirtbogger on September 16th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
CNSYD, I have discused facts with you, you just can’t offer any of your own except government paid Mr Corley doesent think it was an implosian and hes an engineer and this on time at band camp you sucked an engineers D___!
By CNSYD on September 16th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
dirtbogger, take time to learn the English language. I am an engineer. I will put my degree and experience up against yours. And yours is? Still afraid to contact Dr. Corley are you? Also you have not explained to me how this internal explosive planting was done and by whom.
By dirtbogger on September 16th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
If you are an engineer you would have provided facts in your arguement, you did not. I do not know how the bombs would have been implanted possiply during maintenance, wiring or networking upgrades, that sort of thing could have been going on, or maybe fire drills pest control who knows but its possible. Who was incharge of security? Thats an important question. Also I am sure this is getting to you if you are an engineer lets give you the benifit if the doubt. Does your study in thermodynamics not bother you at the fact of an oxygen starved kerosene fire could burn hot enough to weaken insulated steel? You would also know that heat rises and the cold steel below would have put up significant resistance to the semetrical collapse that occured at free fall speed. If you are an engineer, then this means you have some serious soul searching to do!
By CNSYD on September 16th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
dirtbogger, no soul searching for me. The WTC towers were externally supported structures not the type of support sytem you normally see in tall buildings. Once a floor gave way it overloaded the next floor which overloaded the next, etc. Was the steel properly insulated? I see you ignore the fact that jet fuel is not 100% kerosene. So what does your conspiracy theory say irt who was behind the whole operation? Who all knew about it before hand? If, as you imply, the US government was culpable, what was their motive? And how is the hell could a conspiracy this large be covered up? Someone somewhere is going to talk.
By dirtbogger on September 17th, 2009 at 8:45 am
Their motive can be found in the PNAC document that was drawn up before
9-11 I suggest you read it Dick Cheny and Donald Rumsfeld were part of this think tank. A complicit media helped Hitler’s rise to power and he tricked the people into giving up their freedom with false flag terrorism, this is well documented. You would be a fool to think it would never happen here, mater of fact their gamble is that you can not possibly believe that they could do such a thing. Oh you bring up the loony pancake theory, Newtons first law of motion tells us that an object at rest will remain at rest until acted on by an external force each time a floor would collapse it should have come to a stop and reaccelerate, and there would have been a pile of pancaked floors as an end result.
That is not what we witnessed, instead what we saw were two buildings turn to dust and fall at freefall speed. I can also not stress watching building 7 collapse enough and compare it to the CCTV tower. This conspiricy has not been covered up very well, it just not talked about by our media. Here are some high ranking military with the same conserns as mine! http://patriotsquestion911.com/
By dirtbogger on September 17th, 2009 at 9:45 am
I beg to differ on the support of the towers, you said it was externally supported, and it was, But the core columns were the main load bearing structures. They were ommitted in NIST’s report. Here are the prints.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/blueprints.html
By dirtbogger on September 17th, 2009 at 10:11 am
As a side note on the day of 9-11, I was not expecting a collapse, and when it did it looked like a controlled demolition to me I even said so out loud, but I did not think it was because I could not wrap my young nieave head around government sponsered terror! Just because you are not that evil does not mean that others are not that evil. Ye know not the harts of men in thine own country! I would also like to thank you for asking the questions many other folks will ask when waking from their slumber, whether you realize it or not you have assisted me in my main goal.
By CNSYD on September 17th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
dirtbogger, I learned about the support system for the towers many years before 9/11 during a visit and a tour. The core “columns” were for the elevators only. The design was to allow wide open spaces unobstructed by internal columns. I still would like to know how a conspiracy that would have to involve many people can be kept “secret”. Someone would talk by now.
By dirtbogger on September 18th, 2009 at 8:56 am
The core columns were the main load bearing structures you should be able to tell that from the prints. They are called core columns for a reason. It would have made since to Put elevators near the strongest construction member in respect to the distance that the elevator has to travel unobstructed. Were the core columns free standing? No, they were not. I am talking to you right now, as well as the people from the links that I sent you. The 1.5 – 2 million patriots in washington this past weekend hardly getting TV coverage should make you wander. I really do not want to how this can be suposedly kept secret, all I really will say when you except the painful truth that 9-11 was an inside job you will get the question in your mind; (what else?), and there is plenty that does not make it into the mainstreem. If you start objectively digging you will find out. You will also find out there are are a lot of dis-info out there. Have I not given you enough for you to question at least why have these theorys been debated in the media? Did you read the PNAC document?
By dirtbogger on September 18th, 2009 at 10:02 am
Also does it make since for only elevator shafts to make up 3/8 of the total foot print?
By CNSYD on September 19th, 2009 at 9:10 am
dirtbogger, the march in DC got little coverage because it accomplished naught. “We aren’t going to take it anymore” and “throw the bums out” don’t change a thing. There is a protest a week, maybe a day, in DC about something.
By dirtbogger on September 21st, 2009 at 9:22 am
I can’t argue with you about most of your last statement I actually agree, however you would think that 1.5-2 million people would get more media attention. Let me be just clear and frank i doubt the revolution will be televised, and make no mistake there is one coming.