[marden]

Saddam to Hang

November 5, 2006 - 8:23PM

Saddam Hussein is sentenced to death by hanging for crimes against humanity.

The ousted president, visibly shaken, shouted out "Allahu Akbar!" (God is Greatest) and "Long live the nation!"

Four guards took him away with his hands held behind him after the sentence was read.

Saddam Hussein's half-brother, Barzan Ibrahim, has also been sentenced to death by hanging.

Earlier the Iraqi court cleared Baath Party official Mohammed Azzawi Ali of involvement in the execution of 148 Shiite villagers.

Chief Judge Raouf Adbul-Rahman called for defendant Azzawi to be brought into court first.

He was a Baath Party official in Dujail and is one of the lesser-known defendants.

The order in which the defendants were being called indicated Saddam would be last.

The chief judge also ordered former US Attorney-General Ramsey Clark expelled from verdict session.

Crowds gathered in the afternoon in the Sadr City district of east Baghdad outside the offices of one of Saddam's most implacable foes, radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr.

They demanded Saddam's execution, and while the rest of Baghdad was locked down by a total curfew, the Shi'ite population of Sadr City went about their business as normal in an area controlled by Sadr's Mahdi Army militia.

Meanwhile, 260 kilometres north of the capital in the Sunni town of Dawr, near Saddam's hometown of Tikrit, the mood was completely different.
According to a spokesman for the local joint security coordination centre, scores of Sunni demonstrators gathered to demand that Saddam be exonerated.

"They chanted 'With our blood, with our souls we redeem you Saddam'," said police spokesman Hamed el-Duri.

During his 24-year reign of terror, Saddam favoured his Sunni minority for top government jobs and persecuted the Shiite majority and the Kurds.
More than three and a half years after the president was deposed in a US-led invasion, the country is more violent and divided than ever, and today's verdict is expected to increase tensions.

"Saddam lived a hero and will die as a hero. The court was set up by his rivals, who became the judges in it. It is a historical farce," said Sheik Al-Nadawi, head of the Baigat group of tribes to which Saddam belongs.

AFP, AP

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/...661539031.html

Good that he got justice.

The violence resulting from the verdict?

Who knows?

[Zeeb]

Yes, Saddam was probably guilty of the charges and deserves what he gets. However, this is a hollow proceeding IMO. I'm waiting to see how nasty and brutal the next government of Iraq becomes as soon as their U.S. supervisors are gone. It's a much less stable government than when Saddam was under control and he never did anything any other middle east leader hasn't done and is doing. The U.S. doesn't care at all if a leader is a cruel tyrant as long as they cooperate.

[voodoo]

I couldn't care less about Saddam.

Where is Osama? When is he getting 'his justice'? This is all a farce and a boring one at that.

V

[Dork.]

I wonder if Fox will carry the execution live....

[Sky Captain]

I say bring Saddam here and let him run on the Democratic ticket.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain 

I say bring Saddam here and let him run on the Democratic ticket.

He'd win.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

I couldn't care less about Saddam.

Where is Osama? When is he getting 'his justice'? This is all a farce and a boring one at that.

V

I don't know, where is Osama? Certainly isn't producing any videos. Certainly isn't calling any shots that I'm aware of. He may as well be dead as far as I'm concerned.

A life holed up in a cave somewhere, constantly in hiding is pretty good justice to me. If he's not already dead.

[stevesnj]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

I couldn't care less about Saddam.

Where is Osama? When is he getting 'his justice'? This is all a farce and a boring one at that.

V

So true...hanging the one guy who had NOTHING to do with 9/11. What a red herring Saddam and Iraq are.

[DLQ2006]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

He'd win.

Yep, there's never been a totalitarian dictator that the left hasn't loved. Their heros of today are Chavez, Castro, and Hussein. Leftists like Ramsey Clark just want to defend the likes of Hussein because it's too late to save Hitler. Oh, what a big man he would be among his venal lawyer peers had he pulled off saving Sadam Hussein.

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

I don't know, where is Osama? Certainly isn't producing any videos. Certainly isn't calling any shots that I'm aware of. He may as well be dead as far as I'm concerned

He wasn't calling any shots you were aware of on 9/11 either until after he called them.

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

A life holed up in a cave somewhere, constantly in hiding is pretty good justice to me.

Osama was constantly hiding for years prior to 9/11 as well. What has changed about his life ?? Great justice

Originally Posted by Kevin 

He'd win.

Wait a sec, aren't you the one who rails on about how the Democratic government in the late 90s believed the same thing about Saddam that BushCo does. When did the switch occur and Democrats started loving Saddam ?? Both parties have a long history of opposition to Iraq after we spent the Reagan years supporting, supplying, and training them. The only difference is that Dubya was "smart" enough to declare an open, pre-emptive war that his father, Clinton, and the Republican majority Congress of the Clinton years considered to be a dumb idea ... seems best military estimates thought it'd become a quagmire. Thank God Rumsfeld has shown us otherwise.

[vmarks]

Before the session began, one of Saddam’s lawyers, former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, was ejected from the courtroom after handing the judge a memorandum in which he called the trial a travesty.

Chief Judge Raouf Abdul-Rahman pointed to Clark and said in English, “Get out.”

[DLQ2006]

[QUOTE=Krusty;3193611]

Osama was constantly hiding for years prior to 9/11 as well. What has changed about his life ?? Great justice

He was not hiding in caves in the years prior to 9/11. He was well protected and his movements were done in secret, but he wasn't limited to living in caves in Pakistan either.

When did the switch occur and Democrats started loving Saddam ??

Maybe it just seems that way when moonbats are lining up to go see their fantasy movie about Bush being assasinated while they criticize the death sentence of a madman who gassed his political opponents and threw them into ditches, or threw them down human shredders.

Maybe it just seems that way when the left has become moral relativists to the point that they can no longer distinguish between what Sadam did and the force that was used to stop him that took place only after an elected leader of the free world obtained the approval from a body of congress made up of over 500 elected leaders and it was voted on repeatedly in the UN. The moral equivalency that the Left has used repeatedly over the past 5 years to call Bush a murderer reminds me of the quote from William F. Buckley about the Soviet Union, except that today the left uses the same kind of mentality regarding the Islamofacists. "Drawing a moral equivalency between the U.S. and the Soviet Union is akin to a man who pushes an old woman in front of a bus and the man who pushes an old woman out of the path of the on-coming bus. Afterall, they both are pushing old women around."

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by stevesnj 

So true...hanging the one guy who had NOTHING to do with 9/11. What a red herring Saddam and Iraq are.

I don't know how many times I myself has had to say this, let alone many other people. Probably to you as well.

The war wasn't against just 9/11. It never was. Dig?

[DLQ2006]

Originally Posted by Krusty 

Both parties have a long history of opposition to Iraq after we spent the Reagan years supporting, supplying, and training them. The only difference is that Dubya was "smart" enough to declare an open, pre-emptive war that his father, Clinton, and the Republican majority Congress of the Clinton years considered to be a dumb idea ... seems best military estimates thought it'd become a quagmire. Thank God Rumsfeld has shown us otherwise.

This is a lie that has been repeated for so long that people that want to believe it do. What do you call Supporting, supplying, and training? Escorting their ships through international waters? The U.S. and Iraq were not allies. Iran was the bigger threat and them conquering Iraq and controlling that much more of the ME and oil money was not acceptable. Can you imagine the type of Iran we would be dealing with right now had they won the war against Iraq? The same kind of Iran we will be fighting if they roll over and rule Iraq in the near future, that's what kind. The kind that will have that much more oil money, international leverage, and resources to build up their nuclear weapon's program that they've been working on since the 80's. We would already be dealing with a well armed Iran with intercontinental nuclear delivery systems, instead of one still working on that. The Middle-east is really short of good guys. How nice it would be if we could just pick some countries over there that by doing so would never get us accused of dealing with despots, but all the Muslim nations are a mixed bag of despotic leaders and really, really despotic leaders.

[stevesnj]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

I don't know how many times I myself has had to say this, let alone many other people. Probably to you as well.

The war wasn't against just 9/11. It never was. Dig?

Okay then why are we putting 90% of the effort towards Iraq? Shouldn't we be 90% against those that attacked Americans and freedom? Sounds like you would rather agree with the current war in Iraq (that is failing) than the war to hunt down the group responsible. Hmm you must work for Halliburton but more sadly been brainwashed by President Bush. Seems like the hanging of Saddam is another win for Osama and Al quida since Saddam is the best we can do at slaying an evil tyrant.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by stevesnj 

Okay then why are we putting 90% of the effort towards Iraq? Shouldn't we be 90% against those that attacked Americans and freedom?

Um those people are dead are they not?

Sounds like you would rather agree with the current war in Iraq (that is failing)

Your opinion. Too soon to tell.

than the war to hunt down the group responsible.

Al-queda was attacked. They aren't nearly what they once were. They themselves admit this.

Hmm you must work for Halliburton but more sadly been brainwashed by President Bush. Seems like the hanging of Saddam is another win for Osama and Al quida since Saddam is the best we can do at slaying an evil tyrant.

Ad-hominem silliness.

[Dark Helmet]

Ok fine, how will this make anything better?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

Ok fine, how will this make anything better?

I am not all big on killing the guy. I think he needs to stick around for more whitey tighty shots.

But it was up to Iraq. Not me.

[Kevin]

Saddam sentenced to death - Conflict in Iraq - MSNBC.com



Iraqi policemen and soldiers chant slogans as they celebrate the guilty verdict against former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein on Sunday in the Shiite holy city of Najaf south of Baghdad, Iraq

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

I am not all big on killing the guy. I think he needs to stick around for more whitey tighty shots.

But it was up to Iraq. Not me.

Concur entirely. Although I have absolutely no idea what you mean by "whitey tighty shots". Are we talking "Bubba fun"?

[stevesnj]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Um those people are dead are they not?

If you think Al Quida is dead you need serious mental help!

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Your opinion. Too soon to tell.

I heard the insurgency is in its death throes.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Concur entirely. Although I have absolutely no idea what you mean by "whitey tighty shots". Are we talking "Bubba fun"?

I think he's talking about Saddam in his underpants.

[DLQ2006]

Originally Posted by stevesnj 

Okay then why are we putting 90% of the effort towards Iraq? Shouldn't we be 90% against those that attacked Americans and freedom? Sounds like you would rather agree with the current war in Iraq (that is failing) than the war to hunt down the group responsible. Hmm you must work for Halliburton but more sadly been brainwashed by President Bush. Seems like the hanging of Saddam is another win for Osama and Al quida since Saddam is the best we can do at slaying an evil tyrant.

This shows how little you know about what the military is doing as we debate this and what they have been doing since we invaded Afghanistan. Our intel units are constantly updating their list of targets. Targets that are part of a heirarchy of terrorists who are hunted down and killed or captured. The efforts of our special teams are part of a system that is well co-ordinated and an immense amount of resources are put into finding terrorists leaders as they work their way from the bottom to the top. Not just in Afghanistan but in Iraq.

Those supporting their Democratic leaders are laughing it up about how they will soon be in control of congress and will dismantle the Patriot Act and pull our troops out of Iraq. If they do take control of congress on Tues and of the Presidency in 08, they will make us weaker and then it's only a matter of time before the terrorists cells will pick themselves back up and start planning their next big attack on the U.S.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by subego 

I think he's talking about Saddam in his underpants.

Ahhh.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Ahhh.

Edit: Oh, never mind. I had a joke here, but I think it was too much of a stretch.

[DLQ2006]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

I couldn't care less about Saddam.

Where is Osama? When is he getting 'his justice'? This is all a farce and a boring one at that.

V

After the U.S. invaded Afghanistan but prior to going into Iraq, the mantra from the left was that we shouldn't have invaded Afghanistan. That it was really all about some pipeline deal that U.S. oil companies wanted so they could exploit the Caspian Sea Basin for oil and that our govt knew about 911 and allowed it to happen as to harness support for us invading Afghanistan. As soon as the war in Iraq broke out, a new angle sprung up from their rhetoric. From that time on, it's been that Iraq is a diversion from the real war on terror and why aren't we still going for Bin Ladin. Gosh, when the U.S was only going after Osama Bin Ladin, it was really just to get at the oil in the Caspian Sea Basin. Once our military was no longer singularly focused on capturing Osama and Al Quaeda in Afghanistan, this proved that they were never really after Osama afterall. I swear, the anti-war left's positions bounce around more eratically than a balloon in the room that is quickly losing all of its air.

[DLQ2006]

Originally Posted by Zeeb 

The U.S. doesn't care at all if a leader is a cruel tyrant as long as they cooperate.

I agree. The Democrats knew about the horrors in Nicaragua under the Sandinistas and they helped them. They knew about the killing fields in Cambodia and Chomsky (an icon of the left that is all the rave at Liberal universities) called the Khmer Rouge regime "the most advanced social experiment in history". They knew Stalin was killing millions of his own people and sending his political opponents to the gulags, and they loved him and still do. They know that the worldwide war against terror is about freedom vs Islamofascism and they want to make America weaker. Anyone who votes for the Democrats is part of that govt which supports cruel tyrants, even if they are too misguided to realize it.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

He'd win.

landslide.

[production_coordinator]

It's interesting how the liberals quickly change the subject to Osama as if the conservatives are happy that he hasn't been caught.

[subego]

Originally Posted by DLQ2006 

Those supporting their Democratic leaders are laughing it up about how they will soon be in control of congress and will dismantle the Patriot Act and pull our troops out of Iraq. If they do take control of congress on Tues and of the Presidency in 08, they will make us weaker and then it's only a matter of time before the terrorists cells will pick themselves back up and start planning their next big attack on the U.S.

Since you want to dump this all in the Democrat's lap, I'm going to ask you my question of the week:

How would you rate the administration and Republicans in general in their for their attempts to maintain the coalition they built in Congress to vote for the war?

The Democrats are the anti-war party. Why is it such a shock that even the people who voted for the war are anti-war? Politics is about give and take. What have the Republicans given the Democrats for going against the interests of their constituency? Should they lose reelection for not challenging the Administration because it's for their own good? For the good of the country?

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by DLQ2006 

After the U.S. invaded Afghanistan but prior to going into Iraq, the mantra from the left was that we shouldn't have invaded Afghanistan. That it was really all about some pipeline deal that U.S. oil companies wanted so they could exploit the Caspian Sea Basin for oil and that our govt knew about 911 and allowed it to happen as to harness support for us invading Afghanistan. As soon as the war in Iraq broke out, a new angle sprung up from their rhetoric. From that time on, it's been that Iraq is a diversion from the real war on terror and why aren't we still going for Bin Ladin. Gosh, when the U.S was only going after Osama Bin Ladin, it was really just to get at the oil in the Caspian Sea Basin. Once our military was no longer singularly focused on capturing Osama and Al Quaeda in Afghanistan, this proved that they were never really after Osama afterall. I swear, the anti-war left's positions bounce around more eratically than a balloon in the room that is quickly losing all of its air.

Two things:

1. The US was only one part of a grand coalition that attacked Afghanistan and failed to apprehend OBL as they should have, no matter the cost.

2. I'm a right wing christian conservative. Get that through your skull already.

V

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by production_coordinator 

It's interesting how the liberals quickly change the subject to Osama as if the conservatives are happy that he hasn't been caught.

YouTube - Bush "truly not concerned" about bin Laden!

It isn't that they are happy, they're just not concerned. Also, call me a liberal or left-wing again and I'll make it a point to call you a communist from now on. Deal?

V

[marden]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

YouTube - Bush "truly not concerned" about bin Laden!

It isn't that they are happy, they're just not concerned. Also, call me a liberal or left-wing again and I'll make it a point to call you a communist from now on. Deal?

V

You should know the value of subterfuge.

[Sky Captain]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Two things:

1. The US was only one part of a grand coalition that attacked Afghanistan and failed to apprehend OBL as they should have, no matter the cost.

2. I'm a right wing christian conservative. Get that through your skull already.

V

They as in the US, or the coalition?
Also, OBL hotfooted it to Pakistan. No matter the cost=attack Pakistan?

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Krusty 

He wasn't calling any shots you were aware of on 9/11 either until after he called them.

Wrong. The problem was not that we were unaware attacks had been planned. The problem was we didn't act. We didn't take the threat credibly enough.

Osama was constantly hiding for years prior to 9/11 as well. What has changed about his life ?? Great justice

I'm not sure about that. We've got an awful lot of footage of Osama. In fact, Osama was quite the photo-op type of guy then. Mmm, not so much now. He was active then. I haven't heard anything from him in quite some time. He's been rendered pretty much dead. Yes, all the justice I need, but then I'm not much for blood, guts, heads on platters, and all that sort of thing.

Do you make this stuff up as you go?

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by marden 

You should know the value of subterfuge.

Ahhh ... the Conrad Burns approach. Clever way to catch OBL. But if they're using subterfuge in the hunt for OBL why would we assume they didn't do the same and just make up some palatable sounding reasons to invade Iraq in the first place.

[freudling]

I wonder if Saddam inappropriate. Because if he does, his death is going to leave a lot of women upset.

[macintologist]

I think Osama should come to America and run as a Republican. They'd love him. He is ultra-conservative, he hates abortion, hates gay and gay marriage, hates civil rights, and is a social nazi.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Krusty 

Ahhh ... the Conrad Burns approach. Clever way to catch OBL. But if they're using subterfuge in the hunt for OBL why would we assume they didn't do the same and just make up some palatable sounding reasons to invade Iraq in the first place.

Aside from our being unable to do anything about the past and for that reason discussions of the past should have little bearing on future events, I must say that in your consideration of those past events you do so without:

1-Knowing whether there were or weren't WMD's...at the time. After the fact doesn't count.
2-Knowing about the real doubts of our WMD intelligence.
3-Regard to any possible danger to Israel.
4-Regard to any possible impact on world peace.
5-Knowing how our oil access would be affected.
6-Knowing how global leaders would react to our actions.
7-Regard to Saddam's oppression of the Iraqi people.
8-Recognizing that the containment was crumbling.
9-Recognizing that the US was committed to regime change (see: The US Iraq Liberation Act).
10-Regard to the multiple UN resolutions Iraq had ignored.
11-Appreciating the need to confront jihad on a second front, in the heart of the Muslim world.
12-Understanding the need for a convenient battle ground other than America or Afghanistan.
13-Appreciating the need for stability in the chronically volatile M.E. by introducing democracy.
14-Acknowledging the cooperation Saddam had shown radislamics.
15-Being aware of Saddam's history of attacking the US forces

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Do you make this stuff up as you go?

Yes. Didn't you just make stuff up when you said that OBL had received some sort of justice ? Read your OP, you just made up a story that he's probably living more in hiding than before which none of us know ... he could be kicked back in a mansion in Riyadh for all any of us know.

The only support you've given is that he's not making as many videos before ... which by the way, is false. 2006 has been his most prevalent year for video and audio tapes ... we just don't hear about them in the Western news media because its an embarrassment to us. So far, Al-Jazeera has released 5 OBL tapes in calendar year 2006, the last one being in September. Videos of Osama bin Laden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Kerrigan]

I think he should crucify himself at a Madonna concert.

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by marden 

Aside from our being unable to do anything about the past and for that reason discussions of the past should have little bearing on future events, I must say that in your consideration of those past events you do so without:

Besides your 15-point list, there are about 3000 other factors that I didn't give consideration to in my post. Unfortunately, every post can't be the equivalent of a PhD thesis which considers all possible influences for a particular event. It's a limitation of a web forum and hurts both sides as far as giving "complete" answers to any question. Such is life .... but you still haven't answered why we should consider the possibility that staying low-key on the search for OBL as subterfuge while not also considering at possibility that the whole "WMD/Freeing Iraqi people" explanation was just kool-aid fed to the masses to make us feel good about helping justify an invasion that may well have been carried out primarily for other reasons that aren't quite so shiny and pretty and easy to sell to the American populace.

In my opinion, if you are trying to discern a person or group's motivations when you are skeptical of what they say on face value, its a good idea to look at their actual deeds rather than what they say. Looking at the actual deeds in the lead up to war and the subsequent occupation, the Iraq venture looks a whole lot more like a strategic land-grab/regime change than a defensive effort to rid Iraq of WMDs or to free the people of Iraq.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by macintologist 

I think Osama should come to America and run as a Republican. They'd love him. He is ultra-conservative, he hates abortion, hates gay and gay marriage, hates civil rights, and is a social nazi.

Why would he run as a Republican when it's apparent his element is doing anything they can to get Democrats elected?

He's certainly not Christian right so that should probably dash his hopes of being Republican right? He doesn't hate abortion, he orchestrated the killing of countless pregnant women and children. Hardly consistent with a pro-life platform.

I doubt he hates gays any more than you do. I'd at least be willing to bet he wouldn't exploit their plight for nothing more than an argument on the internet.

BTW; I'm a Republican who happens to support the rights of gays to marry. You don't have a neat little box for that do you? Partisan quackery rarely accounts for anomalies like these.

I doubt he hates civil liberties any more than you. How would I know? I don't know really, other than the assumption that you are a democrat and as such could potentially be the most reprehensible of racist, bigoted, Northeastern, commie-libs ever known to man.

You know, the type who likes to chortle behind the wheel of his BMW thinking about those damned capitalist Republicans trying to reform welfare; telling your kids how you appreciate the little guy while locking your car doors because after all, you're heading through the... *hush... bad part of town.

Spare me.

[Sky Captain]

Naw, OBL for vice president.
Just to keep the powers in check.
Saddam as President and OBL as Vice president, the World™ will love is again!
Hell Bring up Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro for Speaker of the hOuse and Secretary of State!
Utopia I tell you!

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan 

I think he should crucify himself at a Madonna concert.

Or ask Sinead O'Connor to rip up his picture on SNL.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

I don't know how many times I myself has had to say this, let alone many other people. Probably to you as well.

The war wasn't against just 9/11. It never was. Dig?

Yes, but why have we not finished the job taking care of those who attacked us on 9/11?
Why is the Taliban still in power in Afghanistan? Why hasn't justice been meted out fully to those responsible for 9/11. I would have rather seen that task taken care of first before going after another bad guy.

So, tell me why going after Saddam was more important than finishing the job in Afghanistan first?

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain 

They as in the US, or the coalition?
Also, OBL hotfooted it to Pakistan. No matter the cost=attack Pakistan?

Umm, we went after Iraq, which was only minimally and incidentally realted to the attacks of 9/11, with no concern for the cost. So, why don't we go after those who were responsible for the attacks of 9/11 "no matter the cost"? If we found out that Pakistan was hiding Osama bin Laden the whole time we were looking for them then yes, we should invade Pakistan, take out OBL, and take out those in Pakistan who aided his evasion from capture. I fully support, and always have, seeking out and destroying those who attacked us on 9/11.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Krusty 

Yes. Didn't you just make stuff up when you said that OBL had received some sort of justice ?

No. I did say as far as I'm concerned, justice had been served and I'm saying it again. He's been rendered pretty much dead as far as I'm concerned.

Read your OP, you just made up a story that he's probably living more in hiding than before which none of us know ... he could be kicked back in a mansion in Riyadh for all any of us know.

One report I saw on ABC News claims Osama "won't even wear a watch, fearing U.S. authorities could use it to track him."

That's the kind of life I want brother. I want to know that someone has millions of dollars in reward for my head. I want every waking hour to be spent wondering if this is the hour of my capture.

The only support you've given is that he's not making as many videos before ... which by the way, is false. 2006 has been his most prevalent year for video and audio tapes ... we just don't hear about them in the Western news media because its an embarrassment to us. So far, Al-Jazeera has released 5 OBL tapes in calendar year 2006, the last one being in September. Videos of Osama bin Laden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Per same Wikipedia article you linked; However, no new video images of the al-Qaeda leader have appeared since October 2004. Are you reading the links you provide? I don't care about a couple friggin' audio tapes and some still-shots taken from God knows when. I know how much our Administration appreciates having this boogy-man around. I know he's a wanted man. Wanted men of his variety aren't usually kicking back in mansions anywhere. Hardly the stretch you're supposing.

Like I said, he may as well be dead.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Like I said, he may as well be dead.

I want to KNOW he's dead and I want to KNOW that all those in Afghanistan and Pakistan who supported OBL and the Taliban have been imprisoned or killed. Then we can focus our efforts on other bad guys in the world who are a threat to us.