Albright thinks Bush hiding bin Laden - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Jesus Pimp · 12-17-2003, 09:01 AM

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=36182

Quote:

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright told Fox News Channel analyst Morton Kondracke yesterday she suspects President Bush knows the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden and is simply waiting for the most politically expedient moment to announce his capture.

Kondracke made the announcement about what Albright told him backstage before an appearance on another Fox show on "Special Report With Brit Hume."

Kondracke was incredulous that a former secretary of state could believe something like that about a U.S. administration.

"She was not smiling when she said this," offered Kondracke, who believes Albright is serious about the conspiracy theory.

Madeleine Albright

Albright is on a media tour to promote her new book, "Madam Secretary, A Memoir."

She was mildly critical of Bush administration policy in Iraq on camera in later appearances on "The O'Reilly Factor" and on MSNBC's "Hardball With Chris Matthews."

"I'm one of these people that said I understood the 'why' of the war, but I didn't understand the 'why now' or the 'what next,'" she told O'Reilly. "I still have a lot of questions. And I think that we don't know, frankly, what the effect of Saddam's capture is on the general situation in Iraq. President Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld have, in fact, warned about violence still going on, and the effect within the rest of the Middle East of a prolonged trial or an execution or generally how he is treated."

It's pretty sad if it were true that the Bush Administration is using the capture of Osama and Suddam as publicity for his re-election campaign.

Liquor Dealer · 12-17-2003, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jesus Pimp
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=36182

It's pretty sad if it were true that the Bush Administration is using the capture of Osama and Suddam as publicity for his re-election campaign.

Santa Claus is gonna' bring him down the chimney on Christmas Eve. Do you honestly believe that the US has bin Lade in custody and are hiding this fact so it can be released at the last moment for political gain? This is about as much bullshit as Reagan and Iran having a delayed deal on the hostage release.

Jesus Pimp · 12-17-2003, 09:17 AM

Not in custody but they most likely know or have information where he is hiding.

Liquor Dealer · 12-17-2003, 09:33 AM

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,106012,00.html
WASHINGTON — Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright insisted Wednesday that she was just kidding when she wondered aloud whether the Bush administration is holding Usama bin Laden captive, waiting to break him out at the best political moment.

It was a "tongue-in-cheek comment and was not intended in any other way," Albright told Fox News.

Lokks to me like she stepped in sumthin'

Jesus Pimp · 12-17-2003, 09:54 AM

Ha ok

OFKU0 · 12-17-2003, 10:26 AM

I wouldn't be surprised in the least if what she said had some truth to it. Conspiracies theory are just that.Conspiracies. Matter of fact I won 100 bucks from a friend cuz as soon as I saw Bush in Bagdad, I said Saddam will be caught by Christmas.

I think the U.S knows exactly where Osama is and is just waiting for the opportune time to pick him up. Kinda like a drug sting. They want as many paticipants as possible especially Al-Queda.

If the U.S doesn't have a clue where he is then with all the technology and manpower, I would have to say that they are then as dumb as a bag of nails. Really a guy who needs kidney dialysis treatments riding around on a fucking camel. Yup.

Tophat665 · 12-17-2003, 10:40 AM

Albright is not McDermott. When Madeline Albright says something to this effect, even in jest, it makes McDermott look vaguely reasonable.

While I think she may have been expressing a rueful joke, I tend to think that a woman who's been the Secretary of State under a Democratic president would be particularly careful about this sort of thing when at the place where that president was most often reviled. Therefore, whether or not she thinks it's probable, I have got to think that there is some part of her that thinks it's possible. That says a lot to me about her opinion of Shrub and how much to inflate her public misgivings about the handling of the Iraqi debacle to arrive at an estimate of her private misgivings.

Still, time will tell.

Superbelt · 12-17-2003, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Liquor Dealer
Santa Claus is gonna' bring him down the chimney on Christmas Eve. Do you honestly believe that the US has bin Lade in custody and are hiding this fact so it can be released at the last moment for political gain? This is about as much bullshit as Reagan and Iran having a delayed deal on the hostage release.

Hostages taken 11/4/1979
Reagan Inaugurated 1/20/1981
Hostages released 1/20/1981

it was just an amazing coincidence that They were held for over a year and then released the same day Reagan was inaugurated eh?

Even his daughter provides evidence that he was working this in the back channels.

Liquor Dealer · 12-17-2003, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Superbelt
Hostages taken 11/4/1979
Reagan Inaugurated 1/20/1981
Hostages released 1/20/1981

it was just an amazing coincidence that They were held for over a year and then released the same day Reagan was inaugurated eh?

Even his daughter provides evidence that he was working this in the back channels.

I don't think I'd rely much on the daughter for info. Got even one more source?

Think about this - A do-nothing, turn the other cheek prez is going out of office - one is coming in who will rip your other cheek off! Which one do you want to deal with?

Ustwo · 12-17-2003, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Superbelt
Hostages taken 11/4/1979
Reagan Inaugurated 1/20/1981
Hostages released 1/20/1981

it was just an amazing coincidence that They were held for over a year and then released the same day Reagan was inaugurated eh?

Even his daughter provides evidence that he was working this in the back channels.

The Iranian's hated Carter and were terrifed of what Reagan would do. Reagan being an 'cowboy' and Carter being a 'pussy'.

Go figure they released them that day.

ARTelevision · 12-17-2003, 11:24 AM

We're in the middle of a global war on terrorism.
I expect my government to do what it does for strategic advantage. Psy Ops is less brutal than Special Ops.

All forms of advantage taken during wartime by smart governments are about strategic advantage.
Political advantage is a subset of strategic advantage.
This includes managing as much of the flow of information as possible and managing the timed announcement of whomever is in custody. I hope the government is not telling us exactly what information, assets, and resources it is in control of. If we know it - the enemy does too.

It's naive to think otherwise.

onetime2 · 12-17-2003, 11:29 AM

Yet another politician being stupid. If nothing else, she should have known better than to say something like this even jokingly.

Now as far as those who think it's true...Ummm, yeah that's it. And I suppose Bush will plant him alongside a bunch of wmds in the center of Baghdad a week before the election.

And as far as the whole Iranian hostage thing. Carter's efforts towards the end of his Presidency, before Reagan was sworn in, were increased exponentially trying to free the hostages. To claim it was all Reagan and the "fear he instilled" or his "backroom dealings" is crazy.

Superbelt · 12-17-2003, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Liquor Dealer
I don't think I'd rely much on the daughter for info. Got even one more source?

Think about this - A do-nothing, turn the other cheek prez is going out of office - one is coming in who will rip your other cheek off! Which one do you want to deal with?

Sure, I have Carter, Patty and author Robert Parry.

Quote:

"Another thing I kept quiet about was my horror at how the hostage situation was being discussed inside the Reagan camp. Since my contact with my father [Ronald] was limited, most of this was filtered through my mother [Nancy]. The phrase 'October Surprise' kept cropping up and was soon campaign rhetoric. The more I listened, the more I realized that they were actually dreading the thought that the hostages might be released--if it happened at a time they thought would be inconvenient for their election plans."
--Patti Davis (formerly Patricia Ann Reagan), The Way I See It

"[I] think the hostages' release...had to do with a deal, struck before the deal-maker was in office."
--Patti Davis (formerly Patricia Ann Reagan), The Way I See It

"The Iranian parliament was meeting and we had every information from Bani-Sadr and others that they were going to vote overwhelmingly to let the hostages go. And at the last minute on Sunday [two days before the election] for some reason they had adjourned without voting.... The votes were there, but the Ayatollah or somebody commanded them to adjourn."
--President Carter, interviewed in The Village Voice

"The CIA Old Boys were reeling. In the 1970s, exposure of their dirty games and dirty tricks made the Cold Warriors look sinister--and silly. Then, President Carter ordered a housecleaning that left scores of CIA men out in the cold. In 1980, the CIA men wanted back in and their champion was former CIA director George Bush. With Bush and Ronald Reagan in power, the old spies could resume their work with a vengeance. The temptation was to do to Jimmy Carter what the CIA had done to countless other world leaders--overthrow him."
--Robert Parry, Bush and a CIA Power Play, February 29, 1996

Superbelt · 12-17-2003, 11:43 AM

Yes they had reason to be afraid of Reagan too. And Reagan was so fearful he gave them 8 billion in siezed Iranian property after he was in office and gave them immunity to being prosecuted for the event

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0825448.html

Yes, Carter who was giving them nothing was the pussy, while Reagan who gave them billions plus immunity was the cowboy!

Sure

Sparhawk · 12-17-2003, 11:48 AM

Here's another way to look at Carter's handling of the Iranian Hostage Crisis:

Number of American Civilians killed: 0
Number of Innocent Civilians killed: 0

Sounds like a success to me...

edited so that I can still squeek out a point...

onetime2 · 12-17-2003, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sparhawk
Here's another way to look at Carter's handling of the Iranian Hostage Crisis:

Number of Americans killed: 0
Number of Innocent Civilians killed: 0

Sounds like a success to me...

You might want to up that number of Americans killed to 8 to include the failed rescue attempt.

Sparhawk · 12-17-2003, 12:22 PM

Ah yes, forgot about that, thanks.

onetime2 · 12-17-2003, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sparhawk
Ah yes, forgot about that, thanks.

No problem.

silent_jay · 12-18-2003, 04:00 PM

are politicians born with foot in mouth disease or do they pick it up along their careers? bush has no idea where osama is and hasn't since the failed attempt in Tora Bora what a year and a half ago. (not sure on the timeframe)

Phaenx · 12-18-2003, 04:37 PM

Well, you have to give them a little credit. The media watches them constantly, and there's an entire army of people waiting around for you to say something to tear you apart about.

That's not to say this statement wasn't stupid, it most definately was. If it was an off the cuff kind of thing, and wasn't a calculated incident meant to do harm to the Bush administration (which I don't think it was), you can't fault someone for being stupid once in a while.

silent_jay · 12-18-2003, 05:29 PM

agreed Phanex good point, everyone is entitled to screw up once in a while.

Tophat665 · 12-18-2003, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by silent_jay
agreed Phanex good point, everyone is entitled to screw up once in a while.

It's when they screw up consistently day after day for 3 years or so that you really have to wonder

kiwiman · 12-18-2003, 07:00 PM

It seemed like an off the cuff comment between two people.

If she had gone and said it on, say, Larry King, then there would be cause for alarm.

America knows roughly where Bin Laden is, Pakistanis are just making it quite tough to find exactly where. If they could have him now, why wouldn't they get him?

Saddam and Bin Laden in one week, what more of a boost do you need? Once they find the WMDs, there won't be much to complain about.

Ustwo · 12-18-2003, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by onetime2
You might want to up that number of Americans killed to 8 to include the failed rescue attempt.

Don't forget the marine killed when the hostages were taken.

silent_jay · 12-18-2003, 08:39 PM

true if she said it on a more credible news channel. was it fox who put geraldo in with the troops? hope someone got fired over that.

good point about the marine forgot that one

Ustwo · 12-18-2003, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by silent_jay
true if she said it on a more credible news channel.

Would you consider CNN to be credible?

silent_jay · 12-18-2003, 08:55 PM

not a big fan of CNN. how about you? I think CNN is one of the worst newscasts at least if you want to get different stories they seem to hit a lot of dead time where they need filler and then they bring in Dr. Gupta for some reason. I watch the BBC or the CBC most often not to say that either one of these are always credible, but a little better than CNN

onetime2 · 12-19-2003, 04:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ustwo
Don't forget the marine killed when the hostages were taken.

True, but I wasn't counting the initial action, just the response to the hostage taking.

silent_jay · 12-22-2003, 09:00 PM

there are no real "credible news agencis out there now there are so many that they compete for the same stories and you can go from channel to channel and basically see the same thing. the only reason i mentioned the BBC and CBC is because they give a different perspective on thing and they also have a lot more stories on parts of the world that might not be heard from otherwise.

12-17-2003, 09:17 AM	#3 (permalink)
Jesus Pimp The Original JizzSmacka	Not in custody but they most likely know or have information where he is hiding. __________________ Never date anyone who doesn't make your dick hard.

12-17-2003, 09:33 AM	#4 (permalink)
Liquor Dealer Super Agitator Location: Just SW of Nowhere!!! In the good old US of A	http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,106012,00.html WASHINGTON — Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright insisted Wednesday that she was just kidding when she wondered aloud whether the Bush administration is holding Usama bin Laden captive, waiting to break him out at the best political moment. It was a "tongue-in-cheek comment and was not intended in any other way," Albright told Fox News. Lokks to me like she stepped in sumthin' __________________ Life isn't always a bowl of cherries, sometimes it's more like a jar of Jalapenos --- what you say or do today might burn your ass tomorrow!!!

12-17-2003, 09:54 AM	#5 (permalink)
Jesus Pimp The Original JizzSmacka	Ha ok __________________ Never date anyone who doesn't make your dick hard.

12-17-2003, 10:26 AM	#6 (permalink)
OFKU0 Junk	I wouldn't be surprised in the least if what she said had some truth to it. Conspiracies theory are just that.Conspiracies. Matter of fact I won 100 bucks from a friend cuz as soon as I saw Bush in Bagdad, I said Saddam will be caught by Christmas. I think the U.S knows exactly where Osama is and is just waiting for the opportune time to pick him up. Kinda like a drug sting. They want as many paticipants as possible especially Al-Queda. If the U.S doesn't have a clue where he is then with all the technology and manpower, I would have to say that they are then as dumb as a bag of nails. Really a guy who needs kidney dialysis treatments riding around on a fucking camel. Yup. __________________ " In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard.

12-17-2003, 10:40 AM	#7 (permalink)
Tophat665 Minion of the scaléd ones Location: Northeast Jesusland	Albright is not McDermott. When Madeline Albright says something to this effect, even in jest, it makes McDermott look vaguely reasonable. While I think she may have been expressing a rueful joke, I tend to think that a woman who's been the Secretary of State under a Democratic president would be particularly careful about this sort of thing when at the place where that president was most often reviled. Therefore, whether or not she thinks it's probable, I have got to think that there is some part of her that thinks it's possible. That says a lot to me about her opinion of Shrub and how much to inflate her public misgivings about the handling of the Iraqi debacle to arrive at an estimate of her private misgivings. Still, time will tell. __________________ Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns. Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

12-17-2003, 11:24 AM	#11 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	We're in the middle of a global war on terrorism. I expect my government to do what it does for strategic advantage. Psy Ops is less brutal than Special Ops. All forms of advantage taken during wartime by smart governments are about strategic advantage. Political advantage is a subset of strategic advantage. This includes managing as much of the flow of information as possible and managing the timed announcement of whomever is in custody. I hope the government is not telling us exactly what information, assets, and resources it is in control of. If we know it - the enemy does too. It's naive to think otherwise. __________________ create evolution

12-17-2003, 11:29 AM	#12 (permalink)
onetime2 Junkie Location: NJ	Yet another politician being stupid. If nothing else, she should have known better than to say something like this even jokingly. Now as far as those who think it's true...Ummm, yeah that's it. And I suppose Bush will plant him alongside a bunch of wmds in the center of Baghdad a week before the election. And as far as the whole Iranian hostage thing. Carter's efforts towards the end of his Presidency, before Reagan was sworn in, were increased exponentially trying to free the hostages. To claim it was all Reagan and the "fear he instilled" or his "backroom dealings" is crazy. __________________ Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

12-17-2003, 11:43 AM	#14 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	Yes they had reason to be afraid of Reagan too. And Reagan was so fearful he gave them 8 billion in siezed Iranian property after he was in office and gave them immunity to being prosecuted for the event http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0825448.html Yes, Carter who was giving them nothing was the pussy, while Reagan who gave them billions plus immunity was the cowboy! Sure

12-17-2003, 11:48 AM	#15 (permalink)
Sparhawk Dubya Location: VA	Here's another way to look at Carter's handling of the Iranian Hostage Crisis: Number of American Civilians killed: 0 Number of Innocent Civilians killed: 0 Sounds like a success to me... edited so that I can still squeek out a point... __________________ "In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work." Last edited by Sparhawk; 12-17-2003 at 12:23 PM..

12-17-2003, 12:22 PM	#17 (permalink)
Sparhawk Dubya Location: VA	Ah yes, forgot about that, thanks. __________________ "In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

12-18-2003, 04:00 PM	#19 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	are politicians born with foot in mouth disease or do they pick it up along their careers? bush has no idea where osama is and hasn't since the failed attempt in Tora Bora what a year and a half ago. (not sure on the timeframe) __________________ Absence makes the heart grow fonder

12-18-2003, 04:37 PM	#20 (permalink)
Phaenx The Northern Ward Location: Columbus, Ohio	Well, you have to give them a little credit. The media watches them constantly, and there's an entire army of people waiting around for you to say something to tear you apart about. That's not to say this statement wasn't stupid, it most definately was. If it was an off the cuff kind of thing, and wasn't a calculated incident meant to do harm to the Bush administration (which I don't think it was), you can't fault someone for being stupid once in a while. __________________ "I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

12-18-2003, 05:29 PM	#21 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	agreed Phanex good point, everyone is entitled to screw up once in a while. __________________ Absence makes the heart grow fonder

12-18-2003, 07:00 PM	#23 (permalink)
kiwiman Crazy Location: New Zealand	It seemed like an off the cuff comment between two people. If she had gone and said it on, say, Larry King, then there would be cause for alarm. America knows roughly where Bin Laden is, Pakistanis are just making it quite tough to find exactly where. If they could have him now, why wouldn't they get him? Saddam and Bin Laden in one week, what more of a boost do you need? Once they find the WMDs, there won't be much to complain about.

12-18-2003, 08:39 PM	#25 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	true if she said it on a more credible news channel. was it fox who put geraldo in with the troops? hope someone got fired over that. good point about the marine forgot that one __________________ Absence makes the heart grow fonder

12-18-2003, 08:55 PM	#27 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	not a big fan of CNN. how about you? I think CNN is one of the worst newscasts at least if you want to get different stories they seem to hit a lot of dead time where they need filler and then they bring in Dr. Gupta for some reason. I watch the BBC or the CBC most often not to say that either one of these are always credible, but a little better than CNN __________________ Absence makes the heart grow fonder

12-22-2003, 09:00 PM	#29 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	there are no real "credible news agencis out there now there are so many that they compete for the same stories and you can go from channel to channel and basically see the same thing. the only reason i mentioned the BBC and CBC is because they give a different perspective on thing and they also have a lot more stories on parts of the world that might not be heard from otherwise. __________________ Absence makes the heart grow fonder