Will the next President bring in the head of Osama?

"Wanted Dead or Alive" said former president George W Bush once upon a time.

Now we face the reality TV series where Osama's son, and his elder British wife camel-trek across North Africa in search of a soulful reunion.

Got this HBO? A Gold Mine.

 So once upon a time, a brilliant but deranged son of a billionaire Saudi construction company owner, orders a terror attack upon the symbols of American power.  And Succeeds!!

The planet's most sophisticated surveillance and intelligence system somehow cannot crack the final secret code. (Where art thou Dan Brown?)

Then his erstwhile and fanciful son, perhaps an empty sell-out to "western cultural decadence", or a true journier on the path of enlightenment, undertakes to find his father and seek reconciliation with George W Bush.  Can CNN come along?

Ladies and Gentlemen of DKOS:

Horrifying events took place in the streets of Manhatten. You were informed of their cause. You have been aroused to seek revenge and justice for the blind mayhem and murder in those streets.
Weren't you?

I ask which of the following makes any sense at all:

1. ignore the overall co-operativeness between families Bush and bin Laden and assume the best efforts of a military-intelligece super-power have been tested and defeated.

2. Osama bin Laden is on the verge of being taken. Forget any notions of October surprises before elections. And you thought it was 2004?  2006?

3. No one gives a good god damn. If his son re-unites with him in the deserts of Algeria it will make good tv. Most of Osama's confessions to his son will  be "translated", but the script shown in America will be vigorously rejected by scholars of Arab linguistics.

4. Modern motion pictures have got you so used to the notion of master-mind super-criminal-terrorists that you half prefer them alive. Hell what's a Part IV for?

If America IS the America I grew up to love and admire, the America that sought justice ..... then...then... THEN:

1. it either admits to itself, it has been successfully humiliated before the world wide audience. It surrenders. Criminal masterminds with a "Fortress of Solitude" can retire for a while and contemplate their return to action.

2)consider the possibility that Osama bin Laden is dead.
Has been. His resurrected appearances has been staged for your delight.

3)Osama is who we believe him to be. A jihadist.

4. Osama is who we knew him to be. A CIA asset.

5. Something so elusive.....something so special... something so.....imaginary

that NO DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT  seem to give a GOOD GOD DAMN.

Why is that??

Are the Democrats thirsty for the "iffy" Muslim vote in key Michigan districts?

Is there nothing to criticize in the Bush plan.. to hunt him down.. smoke him out...?
Because W tried so harrrrrrrrrd..... after cancelling the CIA 's bin Laden office?

OR.. is there something they aren't telling us?

For god's sake. You and I both know that the most awful crime committed on the soil of the U.S.A. has gone unatoned.
If I was running for President I would swear up and down on every occasion that this awful murderer will in fact be brought to justice.

Did Hillary, Barak, or John promise you that?
I didn't hear it.

Did we get soooo very over it that it doesn't matter?

To you? To me?

Or:

Are we simply afraid to admit to ourselves ... that it's more complicated than that.

Did we ..... mmmm deserve, somehow...historically to be hit...HARD..murderously hard. Claiming innocents?

Did we quietly admit to ourselves that the intelligence community... psy-ops..false flags... make more sense but we can't discuss it?

Did we demand justice for the victims of 9/11?

Do we ask it of any candidate for president...be they GOP or Democrat?

Why not?

What are we NOT TALKING ABOUT?

( Dedicated to memory of the victims of 9/11 about whom no one seems to expect political accountability. )

•  if it baffles your mind

  that the murderer (is he?) of 3000 peaceful New Yorkers hasn't been brought in.... and nobody cares.. then throw a tip in.

  by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:04:20 AM PDT

  •  I am actually a lot more baffled

    how the murderer of 1,000,000 Iraqis (or is it only 150,000?) will get to retire to a life at the Carlyle group or traveling around making speeches in front of rich white people in between trips to his ranch for huntin' and fishin'.

    by tiggers thotful spot on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:06:38 AM PDT

    •  I'm a _lot_ more baffled

      at why people aren't more put off by this diary - it's a big Giuliani Pie.

      Recipe:

      Crust: combine caps lock with bombast and self-righteousness.

      Filling: a soft core of racism. Just whip together some B movies with a touch of Glenn Beck and -- voila! How do we know, after all, that Keith Ellison (with the help of those Michigan muslims) hasn't been...

      pulling the strings all along?

      The only way to be sure is a head on a pike. Whatever.

      by scardanelli on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:34:00 AM PDT

      •  you dont read very deeply?

        I set out some logical options. I am sort of glad that you did not detect my leanings. It's not the ones you fear.

        by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:01:00 AM PDT

•  I knew it!

  If I just hung in there long enough a CT would be born.

  Did we quietly admit to ourselves that the intelligence community... psy-ops..false flags... make more sense but we can't discuss it?

  Nice try, where's ya tip jar?

  by MajorFlaw on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:04:57 AM PDT

  •  why Major Flaw..

    isn't the capture and bringing Osama bin Laden to justice an issue in this campaign? Why?

    by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:10:33 AM PDT

    •  Because we can't even stop occupying a people

      who had nothing to do with Osama bin Laden?

      by haruki on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:11:39 AM PDT

      •  What is it that you are objecting to?

        Your Major Flaw is that you try your best to de-rail any diary I write.
        Wouldn't any sane person think that the unresolved murder of 3,000 New Yorkers would still be an issue left open from the last 6 years of Bush?
        Why isn't he called on it?
        Which excuse above that I offered comes closest to yours? You seem to have one.

        by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:17:06 AM PDT

        •  We've murderd a cool million since then...

          ...who had nothing to do with Osama. Does this mean we should surrender Bush's head on a plate?

          Your bloodlust won't bring those dead New Yorkers back. About the only thing it does is give the Bush administration (or any future ones) more leverage to invade countries in search of Waldo Osama. It's a canard. Meanwhile, the occupation continues, the US goes longer without healthcare, our kids get left behind by NCLB, etc.

          But hey, we've got to get that white rhino!

          by haruki on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:22:23 AM PDT

    •  It probably should be.

      My concern was with:

      psy-ops..false flags... make more sense

      How 'bout that part?

      by MajorFlaw on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:22:05 AM PDT

      •  that was one of 5 logical options

        Major Flaw. Your Major Flaw was to not notice that I expressed no preference for any of the 5. They are equally appalling.
        Object to the other four options if you will.

        by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:26:42 AM PDT

        •  If you wanna ask a serious question I'm game...

          but when you start out with:

          Your Major Flaw was

          I'm a gonna tell you to go...

          Nah, that didn't work so well the last time ;-)

          by MajorFlaw on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:29:13 AM PDT

•  Revenge is /so/ Bush administration.

  I'd rather stop throwing away dollars on foreign occupations and trophy hunts and start, you know, fixing things within our borders. Not nearly as flashy as calling for heads, but a lot more beneficial to future generations.

  by haruki on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:07:34 AM PDT

  •  the search for bin laden

    may or may not be real?

    The implications of either option are telling.

    IF real... we suck.

    If not real... why?

    by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:19:13 AM PDT

•  America's Plight Is Defined by Corporatists

  not terrorists.

  Terrorists are a real threat, they kill almost 10% the number of people on purpose that our doctors kill by accident, and we need to protect ourselves appropriately.

  A lightning rod will save your life more likely than a national war on terrorism.

  by Gooserock on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:09:55 AM PDT

  •  Not an existential threat-nt

    by cjallen on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:19:50 AM PDT

  •  You wanna tell that to the widows,,,

    doctors are more dangerous?

    There comes a time in poker where you call.
    I think there is a bluffer at the table.

    by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:27:28 AM PDT

•  I simply ask

  by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:11:26 AM PDT

•  I simply ask...

  why America's MOST WANTED is not an issue in the campaign. What conspiracy doesn't include him?

  by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:13:07 AM PDT

•  It would be wrong to promise that

  I don't want someone making promises they can't necessarily deliver.  Any realist has to know that by now we might not catch bin Laden.  He might already be dead; if he is, he's surely made sure we'll never confirm it.  If he is alive, which is likely but far from certain, he could easily make himself impossible to find.  

  Our best hope is to have a President who makes it a top priority and knows how to subvert bin Laden's clout in the tribal regions where he's hiding.  We need to make an effort to turn the locals against him.  

  We're most likely to catch him if he tries to reassert some influence over al Qaeda's organization; if he takes the risk of becoming active in their affairs.  Then we have a good shot.  But if his only goal is to hurt our pride by not getting caught, it may be impossible to find him.

  That's not to say we shouldn't try.  Only that a candidate shouldn't promise it, because we know it's a promise nobody can be certain they'll keep.

  by Troutnut on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:15:50 AM PDT

  •  the most profound failure of the Bush

    administration...
    John Kerry outlined the failures at Tora Bora during debates 4 years ago.
    Isn't it time to ask how CIA NSA DIA ONI Navy Seals Spec Ops ... fail?

    by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:20:39 AM PDT

    •  Well, I wasn't saying we never had a chance

      I agree that Bush failed miserably in his attempt to catch bin Laden, when he did have a chance, and the next President should try much, much harder.  But that chance may not come again.  Let's hope it does, but not promise it.

      by Troutnut on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:47:32 AM PDT

      •  failed? past tense?

        You agree then... no one is even trying?

        by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:41:15 AM PDT

  •  well.. at least you take one of the options..

    that for the time being he has out-smarted a military-intelligence super-power.
    It's certainly a possibility.
    Tito survived Hitler.

    by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:38:48 AM PDT

    •  Not really out-smarted

      Say he's living in a hut in some slum in a city or large rural village in Pakistan, one of hundreds of thousands?  Or, say he's living in a cave nobody else has found and stocked up on supplies for the rest of his life?  Practically any wily person can avoid being found if they make it a high enough priority; it doesn't mean they out-smarted the people trying to find them, just that they started out with a pretty easy goal.  I think our hopes rest on him putting a priority on running al Qaeda again, which will require him to become more visible.

      by Troutnut on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:52:08 AM PDT

      •  that's the longest way to saying

        he did outsmart us... or at least is out-smarting us.

        by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:43:08 AM PDT

•  You can't be serious.

  NO DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT  seem to give a GOOD GOD DAMN.

  Why is that??

  Are the Democrats thirsty for the "iffy" Muslim vote in key Michigan districts?

  Aside from the bad grammar and obnoxious caps, I appreciate here the suggestion that Muslims in Michigan aren't worth consideration. And that they secretly support bin Laden. Really the best of what the Democratic party stands for, that.

  It's a shame that bin Laden has evaded justice. But if it catches up with him, I hope it won't happen in a way that just exacerbates racism and the stereotyping of American Muslims and Arabs as potential terrorists. Thanks for the offensive rant, though.

  by scardanelli on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:24:31 AM PDT

  •  the michigan comment

    was deliberately ... provocative.  I am quite sure the answer is NO.
    I would like to think that it's " a shame" that bin Laden has evaded justice.
    I worry that it's more than a shame.

    by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:32:08 AM PDT

    •  It's just plain offensive.

      As is the bloodlust.

      by scardanelli on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:35:05 AM PDT

      •  LOL

        Opponent of the death penalty here. Blood lust is not my motivation. Not even close.
        I WOULD like the two political parties to discuss the issue of bin Laden at large... but no cable news station sees fit to ask.

        by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:40:51 AM PDT

        •  Maybe cable news

          is just looking for a dramatic frame this good.

          Please, could you go into more detail about the camel trek?

          I think a camel trek would make a great backdrop for the next big story about how the pansy Bush administration has let them get away with it.

          If you really care about any of these issues, please think a bit about how you write next time.

          by scardanelli on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:52:28 AM PDT

          •  check Huffington Post....?

            One of Osama's sons... who live in Britain and married a Brit, is gathering sponsors for a journey across North Africa...( and into the Mid-East?) to find his dad. To talk. To reconcile. To bring him and W to talk.
            Too absurd you say? Nahhhh welcome to the new century.

            by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:55:16 AM PDT

•  the options?

  Please suggest some I may have overlooked.

  But premise 1.
  The fate of bin Laden is not a campaign issue. Lots of good reasons.

  premise 2. The fate of bin Laden has not been a major issue or topic for years. We just expect a new tapes.

  so ?

  a) we're getting over it?
  b) we believe there are international complications that prevent nabbing him?
  c) he is great at hiding?
  d) he is not seriously being hunted?

  Someone better tell the 9/11 widows which it is. And why.

  by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:52:10 AM PDT

•  I get it,,,,

  most people responding think he is good at hiding.

  I hope it's that simple.

  by BWildered on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:21:46 AM PDT

•  Bringing in Bin Laden

  Would be the ultimate slap in the face to the Bush legacy and Republicanism in general.

  For 8 years, Bushco hemmed and hawwed about not having found him.  Their responses ranged from "we're not sure where he is" to "we don't even care about him anymore".

  A Democratic president would finally give the Dems that ever-elusive "strong on defense" street cred that they've been falling all over themselves to get back since LBJ.  Politically, the Dems would be running the table as the stewards of a strong economy and now defense - leaving the GOP solely dependent on abortion, gay marriage, and tax cuts to get elected.  Ladies and germs, that spells permanent minority status for the cons.

  Aside from all the political reasons to push hard to grab OBL, it really is absolutely necessary for the collective American psyche that we arrest that piece of shit and put him down like a mad dog for his crimes.  I would support all efforts to get him - even sending small numbers of special agents or equipment into a foreign country to get him (what country is going to complain about that?)

  by The Crusader on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 04:49:33 AM PDT