Troops almost captured bin Laden

US forces in Afghanistan came so close to discovering Osama bin Laden in the winter of 2004-2005 that his supporters were on the verge of killing him to prevent his capture, a US magazine reported Sunday.

Bin Laden’s entourage, ordered to kill the Al-Qaeda chief and themselves to avoid capture, were about to take the drastic action using a special code word when nearby US troops moved off in a different direction, Newsweek magazine said in its latest issue on sale Monday.

“If there’s a 99 percent risk of the sheikh (bin Laden) being captured, he told his men that they should all die and martyr him as well,” Newsweek quoted Egyptian Al-Qaeda operative Sheikh Said as telling Taliban official Omar Farooqi.

The near-miss by US forces occurred on the lawless border area between Afghanistan and Pakistan, the magazine reported.

In its cover story on the six-year-old search for bin Laden, the mastermind of the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, Newsweek also said the intense US search for him has made little progress in several years.

“There hasn’t been a serious lead on Osama bin Laden since early 2002,” Bruce Reidel, a retired CIA South Asia expert, told the magazine.

“What we’re doing now is shooting in the dark in outer space. The chances of hitting anything are zero,” said an unidentified intelligence official.

The publication also reported that US security officials believe Al-Qaeda is still planning dramatic attacks on the West comparable to 9/11.

11 Responses to "Troops almost captured bin Laden"

  1. JerryG  August 28, 2007 at 12:50 pm

    It should be noted that in his book “The Hunt for Bin Laden: Task Force Dagger” the conservative-minded author, Robin Moore, clearly details two occassions on which U.S. Special Forces has a bead on OBL and on both occassions were told to stand down! Go figure!

  2. Steve Horn  August 27, 2007 at 1:02 pm

    And I almost hit the powerball in 2005 – the results are the same – bupkiss – nada – nothing.

  3. www.nazilieskill.us  August 27, 2007 at 1:34 pm

    Of course Bin Laden denied that he has anything to do with 911, though he admitted to it later on. I think he was picked as a particularly tall member of the Mossad. Or maybe he and Bush shared brewskies in the White House. Or maybe he is just a simple dupe or a fall guy. I do know that the Bush crime family is total filth and capable of any sort of duplicity. The media opens the door and drives the getaway car.

    John Hanks, Laramie, Wyoming

  4. Helen Rainier  August 28, 2007 at 8:03 am

    John,

    I’m more and more skeptical about OBL’s actual involvement with 9-11 for one very primary reason:

    OBL does appear on the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted Terrorist list. However, upon reading through WHAT he’s wanted for, 9-11 is not on that list.

    The reason, according to the FBI is there is simply either not enough or no corroborating evidence to support that claim.

    Considering that there was no criminal scene investigation ordered by Bush — which is highly suspicious — I have to believe the FBI’s explanation.

    Also, one needs to consider why Bush stonewalled the formation of a 9-11 Commission for so long if there wasn’t something underhanded going on.

    I wish, more than anything, that I could trust the current characters in the government, but when their own actions point to unscrupulous behavior, it’s natural to have serious doubts. They have done too much to impeach their own credibility.

  5. mojibyrd  August 27, 2007 at 1:57 pm

    Bin Laden serves the need..

    We all know Bin Laden had nothing to do with the 9-11 attacks, but you all in the media certainly like to trump up this b.s. when it serves your needs…as for the article, it is amazing how they can supposedly find out all this information, even that he was to be killed than captured, but cannot find Bin Laden himself….plus with all the high tech weaponry and the fact that the Bush administration is spying on every american citizen, but yet they still tell us they cannot find Bin Laden…yeah right, it just pays better to keep up this bogus terrorism b.s. for Bush and all those looking for a handout of billions of dollars.

  6. Wayne K Dolik  August 27, 2007 at 4:03 pm

    We let the Bin Laden’s get away so often in recent history it’s laughable. If you all believe this story I got a slightly used bridge in Minnesota I want to sell you.

  7. Rosie  August 27, 2007 at 5:06 pm

    Rosie

    You can call me “Rosie”, but am I the only one who thinks this 9/11 attack could have been planned and carried out by people in the white house? It sure did help them win the election in 2004. Wonder what will happen in September of 2007?

  8. bryan mcclellan  August 27, 2007 at 6:11 pm

    Yeah ,and if I had jam up my ass I’d be a jelly donut.How much did smirko and his WH propaganda machine pay for this line of bull?Newsweek should be ashamed,smirk said years ago he was not concerned with OBL because he had his dirty little war in full swing to get his daddies (Iraqi) oil. Rosie, check out infowars.com,you will find yourself not alone.

  9. Doreen  August 27, 2007 at 10:04 pm

    You’ve got it right on mojibyrd. And Rosie, I’m wondering the same.

    Impeach, Indict, Imprison.

    DC on 9/15!!! Go to ANSWER website.

    Doreen

  10. SEAL  August 28, 2007 at 1:22 am

    That information could only come from someone who could stand right next to bin Laden and touch him. No matter who he gave that info to he would have been snatched up and carted off to the waterboard just for starters. All he would have heard is where is bin Laden right now? Where is his hideout? Who else is with him? Where are they? And so on until he broke, which he would. You can break anyone.

    He would be introduced to a whole new world of electricity, needles, intense light beams and many other modern miracles that leave no marks on the body. He would expeience bone and sciatic nerve pain. Sleep would be history.

    I laughed at the Bushco explanation of their new interrogation techniques. We started torturing people during the second world war and perfected it over the years. I know that for a fact.

    This article has to be bullshit. It makes no mention of where that info came from. Are we to believe that Newsweek can get closer to them than the CIA,MILINTL,etc.? That they have an informant in bin Laden’s camp?

    If they could get this kind of info the CIA would have Newsweek in custody and they would find out how much the first amendment means to this government while they were gasping for air. They would cough up the name in 5 minutes.

    I’m really tired of having my inteligence insulted by these amatuers.

  11. ianwest  August 28, 2007 at 7:14 am

    Well, in his play Stuff Happens David Hare reckons that British special forces were once on the verge of capturing Bin Laden but were called off by the Americans. No idea whether that’s true or not, but it’s not hard to imagine reasons why (capturing Bin Laden might, in the minds of some, signal and end to the WoT and Bush’s free hand to do just whatever the hell he likes; if captured Bin Laden might expose embarrassing info about the links between the Bin Laden and Bush families; if killed he would become a martyr to inspire tens of thousands.. )

    Ian Westbrook
    Apocalypse Times
    “The man who laughs has not yet been told the news”
    http://www.apocalypsetimes.blogspot.com/

Comments are closed.