Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Why the US had it wrong about bin Laden's hideout

Wed May 4, 2011 4:59 PM EDT
politics, us, about, bin-laden, wrong-about
Matt Apuzzo , Associated Press

A photographer takes a photo of the sealed gate into the compound and a house where al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden was caught and killed late Monday, in Abbottabad, Pakistan, on Tuesday, May 3, 2011. Local residents showed off small parts of what appeared to be a U.S. helicopter that Washington said malfunctioned and was disabled by the American commando strike team as they retreated, while Pakistan's leader on Tuesday denied suggestions that his country's security forces had sheltered Osama bin Laden. (AP Photo/Anjum Naveed)

Advertise | AdChoices

WASHINGTON — The dramatic raid on Osama bin Laden's compound in a Pakistani suburb this week capped a decade-long manhunt, but it also revealed just how wrong the U.S. had been about where the world's most wanted terrorist was hiding.

Time and again, the nation's top national security officials told each other and the world that their best intelligence suggested that bin Laden was living along the mountainous, ungoverned border of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

"I have an excellent idea of where he is," CIA Director Porter Goss said in 2005.

"I believe he is in the tribal region of Pakistan," Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell said in July 2007.

"This is a man on the run from a cave," White House homeland security adviser Frances Townsend said two months later.

"All I can tell you is that it's in the tribal areas. That's all we know, that he's located in that vicinity. The terrain is very difficult. He obviously has tremendous security around him," CIA Director Leon Panetta said in June 2010.

In reality, bin Laden was living comfortably in the bustling town of Abbottabad, known for its good schools and relative affluence. He was living in a walled compound in a military town, hundreds of miles from the mountainous, lawless tribal regions. There were no heavily armed security guards, as some intelligence officials assumed there would be. Thanks to a satellite dish, which officials believe was for television reception only, bin Laden would have been able watch American security forces chase him around the wrong part of the country.

"I was surprised that Osama bin Laden was found in what is essentially a suburb of Islamabad," former national security adviser and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Tuesday as news of the daring pre-dawn helicopter raid dominated the news.

America's belief that bin Laden was hiding on the Pakistani frontier was based on two assumptions, former intelligence officials said. The first was that bin Laden would stay close to his devotees for protection, and al-Qaida has thrived in the tribal areas of North and South Waziristan. The second was that if bin Laden had ventured into more civilized areas, his presence would be noticeable, first by locals and then by Pakistani and U.S. intelligence services.

But bin Laden realized that there are two primary ways the U.S. catches terrorists: from electronic surveillance and spies. And for years, he managed to distance himself from both.

He kept phone and Internet lines out of his house. Rather than employ legions of armed guards whose patrols could be noticed by satellites, he surrounded himself with high walls and only his most trusted aides. The U.S. could interrogate his foot soldiers and managers all it wanted. He'd still be safe.

Soon, the idea of bin Laden hiding in a cave become part of his mythology. And with so little intelligence coming in, the CIA's best analysts continued to say bin Laden was probably in the tribal regions. Occasionally there were indications to the contrary, but they were never anything solid.

In 2007, for instance, when bin Laden issued a video, some in the CIA's Counterterrorism Center believed his face did not show the strain of someone who had endured years of airstrikes, moving furtively across rough terrain, former senior intelligence officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss secret intelligence.

In hindsight, they were right. By then, bin Laden had likely been living in Abbottabad for roughly two years, with easy access to groceries and medicine.

But at the time, that hunch didn't prove anything. Bin Laden would be well fed, protected and cared for, even along the hostile border with Afghanistan, the analysts concluded. With no reliable informants and no electronic surveillance, there was simply not enough to change the prevailing wisdom. Some in the Counterterrorism Center believed bin Laden was hiding in Dir, a far-flung town on Pakistan's northern border.

"There were many of us who felt increasingly that the Waziristan leads were drying up rapidly," said Rob Dannenberg, the Counterterrorism Center's former chief of operations. "As our technical and human coverage increased in that part of the world, as challenging as it might have been, I think a lot us of felt that it wasn't feasible that he was going to be able hide in that type of environment."

Goss said he was always confident that bin Laden was in northern Pakistan but never had any indication he was in a densely populated area so far to the east.

"It was not the circumstance I thought was the likely one. It was further down the list," Goss said in a telephone interview Wednesday. "That fact, to me, needs more explanation."

U.S. officials have raised questions about whether their Pakistani counterparts knew, or should have known, that bin Laden was hiding in a town that's home to the country's military academy. Pakistan officials have flatly denied that and say they, too, were caught by surprise.

"It is shockingly embarrassing," former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf told MSNBC on Wednesday.

While the CIA was wrong about the location of bin Laden's hideout, it was absolutely right about how the U.S. would someday get the terrorist mastermind. CIA officers believed for years that bin Laden's vulnerability was his reliance on couriers. In fact, sometime in 2006 or 2007, the agency all but stopped chasing reported bin Laden sightings, which had always been dead ends, and made the couriers the primary focus of their hunt, a former senior intelligence official said.

It was around that time that the CIA had learned the true identity of a trusted courier known by the nom de guerre Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti. Piecing together intelligence gathered from captured terrorists over the course of several years, the agency was confident that if it found al-Kuwaiti, it could be the best shot at finding bin Laden.

Finally, in the middle of last year, al-Kuwaiti was caught on a wiretap. He was far from bin Laden's compound, but it was enough to put the CIA on his tail. Last fall, he unwittingly led the agency to bin Laden's doorstep.

When President Barack Obama announced bin Laden's death, former officials said the years of fruitless searches were wiped away.

"People in the agency aren't used to seeing their work in a favorable light on Page One," former CIA Director Michael Hayden said Wednesday. "After this kind of work, this painstaking attention to detail, it's really heartening for them to see the reward for it on the battlefield, and the reward in the minds and heart of the countrymen."

Goss said he got a courtesy call on Sunday, cryptically telling him to watch the news that night. He said it was clear what was about to be announced.

"My feeling was it was certainly worth the wait," he said.

___

Follow Matt Apuzzo and Adam Goldman at http://twitter.com/mattapuzzo and http://twitter.com/reporterwdc

© 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Matt Apuzzo 's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: United States , Pakistan , Washington DC
  • Public Discussion (25)
Paul Lucero

So Seal Team Six killed how many people and on who's orders were these unarmed people killed?

QUESTION AUTHORITY!

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Photographs acquired by Reuters and taken about an hour after the U.S. assault on Osama bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad in Pakistan show three dead men lying in pools of blood, but no weapons.

The photos, taken by a Pakistani security official who entered the compound after the early morning raid on Monday, show two men dressed in traditional Pakistani garb and one in a t-shirt, with blood streaming from their ears, noses and mouths.

The official, who wished to remain anonymous, sold the pictures to Reuters.

None of the men looked like bin Laden. President Barack Obama decided not to release photos of his body because it could have incited violence and used as an al Qaeda propaganda tool, the White House said on Wednesday.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/photos-show-three-dead-men-bin-laden-raid-194758961.html

  • 2 votes
Reply#1 - Wed May 4, 2011 5:25 PM EDT
spg64-1292127

Wow big surprise a guy who screams about President Obama being born in Keyna is now going to start screaming about OBL's demise being wrong.

Some how it is hard to take you seriously!

As for the article

I think it is interesting that a research group at UCLA announced that there was an 89% chance of OBL being holed up in Abbottabad in 2009. Obama is an academic I can see how a push to start looking more seriously at areas like Abbottabad could have come out of this White House.

  • 2 votes
#1.1 - Wed May 4, 2011 11:53 PM EDT
Rhep

So some guy that sells the picture claims there were no guns.

Might he have moved them because he knew the picture would sell for more?

I can see how a push to start looking more seriously at areas like Abbottabad could have come out of this White House.

It didn't. The article even says the CIA started looking mainly at couriers a long time ago, back when Bush was still president.

    #1.2 - Thu May 5, 2011 1:53 AM EDT
    Reply
    Paul Lucero

    A 2004 BBC article entitled "Al-Qaeda's origins and links", the BBC wrote:

    During the anti-Soviet jihad Bin Laden and his fighters received American and Saudi funding. Some analysts believe Bin Laden himself had security training from the CIA.[3]

    In a 2006 InDepth piece on Osama Bin Laden, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation published that,[4]

    Bin Laden apparently received training from the CIA, which was backing the Afghan holy warriors – the mujahedeen – who were tying down Soviet forces in Afghanistan.

    An article in Der Spiegel, in 2007, entitled "Arming the Middle East", Siegesmund von Ilsemann called Bin Laden "one of the CIA's best weapons customers." [5]

    According to author Steve Coll,

    Overall, the U.S. government looked favorably on the Arab recruitment drives. ... Some of the most ardent cold warriors at [CIA headquarters at] Langley thought this program should be formally endorsed and extended. ... [T]he CIA "examined ways to increase their participation, perhaps in the form of some sort of international brigade" ... Robert Gates [then-head of the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence] recalled. ... At the [CIA's] Islamabad station [station chief] Milt Bearden felt that bin Laden himself "actually did some very good things" by putting money into Afghanistan.[6]

    Robin Cook, Foreign Secretary in the UK from 1997–2001, and Leader of the House of Commons and Lord President of the Council from 2001-2003, believed the CIA had provided arms to the Arab Mujahideen, including Osama bin Laden, writing, "Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan."[7]

    In conversation with former British Defence Secretary Michael Portillo, two-time Prime Minister of Pakistan Benazir Bhutto said Osama bin Laden was initially pro-American.[8] Prince Bandar bin Sultan of Saudi Arabia, has also stated that bin Laden appreciated the United States help in Afghanistan. On CNN's Larry King program he said:[9]

    Bandar bin Sultan: This is ironic. In the mid-'80s, if you remember, we and the United - Saudi Arabia and the United States were supporting the Mujahideen to liberate Afghanistan from the Soviets. He [Osama bin Laden] came to thank me for my efforts to bring the Americans, our friends, to help us against the atheists, he said the communists. Isn't it ironic?

    Larry King: How ironic. In other words, he came to thank you for helping bring America to help him.

    Bandar bin Sultan: Right.

    According to Iranian state-owned Press TV, FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, who has been fired from the agency for disclosing sensitive information, has claimed the United States was on intimate terms with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, using them to further certain goals in Central Asia.[10]

    According to author David N. Gibbs "a considerable body of circumstantial evidence suggests ... direct Agency support for Bin Laden’s activities."[11] Both Bin Laden and the CIA "held accounts in the Bank for Credit and Commerce International (BCCI)."[11] "Bin Laden worked especially closely with Gulbuddin Hekmatyar"[12] who Gibbs calls "the CIA’s favored Mujahiddin commander".[11] Gibbs quotes Le Monde as saying bin Laden was "recruited by the CIA" in 1979,[11][13] Associated Press as saying a former bin Laden aide told them that in 1989 the U.S. shipped high-powered sniper rifles to a Mujahiddin faction that included bin Laden,[11][14] and Jane’s Intelligence Review as stating Bin Laden "worked in close association with U.S. agents" in raising money for the Mujahiddin from "vast family connections" near the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.[

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA-Osama_bin_Laden_controversy

    • 2 votes
    Reply#2 - Wed May 4, 2011 5:36 PM EDT
    Bob-118

    That the U.S. provided training and equipment to the Mujahadeen is common knowledge (Dan Rather of 60 Minutes imbeded with them). The CIA gave them explosives training, Stinger shoulder fire anti-aircraft missiles and large caliber machine guns that could be man-carried on mountain trails and powerful enough to shoot down armored Soviet Hind helicopters. Anti-Soviet hawks in congress saw an opportunity to engineer the defeat of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan via ObL and the Mujahadeen; we succeeded.

    IMO, Osama bin Laden was never a friend of the U.S. He played the Infidels like a fine violin and our deeds have returned to haunt us.

    • 3 votes
    #2.1 - Wed May 4, 2011 10:57 PM EDT
    Reply
    Mac-295039

    Why would you leave unsecured weapons in the open and laying around? After combat mission I have been on, if enemy combatants were killed you would disarm them and remove the weapons form the scence so other would be insurgents wouldn't get a weapon from the recently dead insurgents. The reporter states that he was there after an hour of the departure of American military personnel. Why would they leave weapons in the first place? If the compound was total hostile and enemy combatants had been armed and had fired on you in the first place, then you kill those with weapons and remvoe the weapons from the immediate area. Bin Laden took a round to the forehead and half of his head was gone. Sooner or later they'll release the pictures because they'll have a countless stream of conspiracy theorists out there thinking that Bin Laden is alive like Hitler had made it to Brazil after WW2. Because there is no picture of a dead body then therefore it never happened....

    The administration does not want to appear to "gloat" to much on this due to the sensitivity this issue will bring with moderate Muslims who must attempt to curb the radical Islamist voice in check. That follows the same idea as to why the US didn't kill Saddam Huessin and allowed the Iraqi government to hang him, dismember his body, adn then beheaded it. Because if we had hung Saddam then it would be viewed with disdain in the Middle East regardless if they hated Saddam or not. It is a whole different world over there in the Middle East and their ideas are not always the same as ours.

      Reply#3 - Wed May 4, 2011 5:44 PM EDT
      Paul Lucero

      OBL worked for the CIA!

      Look it up! Remember Pat Tillman!!!

      Jane’s Intelligence Review as stating Bin Laden "worked in close association with U.S. agents" in raising money for the Mujahiddin from "vast family connections" near the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.[

      • 1 vote
      #3.1 - Wed May 4, 2011 6:26 PM EDT
      j-bird-2923980

      Dude...lay of the video games it's screwin with your mind...

        #3.2 - Wed May 4, 2011 6:51 PM EDT
        Paul Lucero

        J-Bird@@@

        I guess reading your comment leaves one to wonder if you have any critical thinking skills? My son plays video games, and I do not want him to be another PAT TILLMAN! Loosen your helmut bro one day you will be a civilian and living on the GOvernments dollar and you will not like it either!

        Suck up bad data spew it out and try thinking for yourself instead of letting your devoted MSM do it for you!

        • 1 vote
        #3.3 - Wed May 4, 2011 9:50 PM EDT
        spg64-1292127

        Paul,

        What are you screaming about! Yes OBL worked with the CIA back in the 1980s we all know this, but what does that or Pat Tillman have to do with this article. Go back to studying your Kenyan Birth certificates.

        We took years to find OBL because GW Bush dissolved the CIA and US Military mission to find him in 2005. President Obama made it a major priority and they tracked him down and finished it!

        • 3 votes
        #3.4 - Thu May 5, 2011 12:05 AM EDT
        j-bird-2923980

        Well Paul...I can see from the your writings that you are a half bubble off, short a sandwich for the picnic a brick shy of the proverbial full load son. Now those are just opinions no different than your own mental meanderings, meant only for perusal, evaluation being unimportant. I dont watch MSM? Or Fox, I do my own research and come to my own conclusions, I have reached a conclusion about this vine....

        • 1 vote
        #3.5 - Thu May 5, 2011 2:30 AM EDT
        Reply
        Mac-295039

        CIA field officers had limited access to the various tribal factions that made up the mujhadeen back during the Soviet invasion. Bin Laden came from a extremely wealthy family who had direct ties with the Saudi Royal family.

        Bin Laden construction is one of the top firms in SA. He followed the general call for jihad to support those in Afghanistan. He had little formal military training, but he had money, he had countless years in general construction, road pavement, and installation building. He had connections with many Saudi royal family members who were sympathetic to the Afghan cause.

        Pakistan had overall control of arms, ammunition, training, communication equipment, and targeting. The US was matched dollar per dollar by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan is a supporter of the Wahhabist doctrine. So the same song and dance about how the CIA had trained Bin Laden "personally" is false. He received the same general training as the other recruits sought from Pakistan ISI field Officers. Who did the ISI select to receive the bulk of weapons? Those elements which were the most anti-Russian/anti-western, and those who could be controlled by Pakistan as a proxy force against their potential enemy:India.

        • 2 votes
        Reply#4 - Wed May 4, 2011 5:50 PM EDT
        Paul Lucero

        See the document about OBL working for the CIA at this location!

        http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread342338/pg1

        Meeting Riconosciuto and Gunderson at the hotel were two representatives of the mujahadeen, waiting to discuss their armament needs. One of the two was named "Ralph Olberg." The other one was called Tim Osman (or Ossman).

        "Ralph Olberg" was an American businesman who was leading the procurement of American weapons and technology on behalf of the Afghan rebels. He worked through the Afghan desk at the U.S. State Department, as well as through Senator Hubert Humphrey's office. Olberg looked after the Afghanis through a curious front called MSH - Management Sciences for Health.

        The other man, dressed in Docker's clothing, was not a native Afghan any more than Olberg was. He was a 28-year-old Saudi. Tim Osman (Ossman) has recently become better known as Osama Bin Ladin. "Tim Osman" was the name assigned to him by the CIA for his tour of the U.S. and U.S. military bases, in search of political support and armaments.

        • 1 vote
        #4.1 - Wed May 4, 2011 6:27 PM EDT
        j-bird-2923980

        Yeah...and your point is? Bin Laden, the Shah, Pinochet, Noriega, Samosa on and on and @!$%#in on we create despots, then we killem thats foreign policy.

          #4.2 - Thu May 5, 2011 10:26 AM EDT
          Reply
          katlin

          so why was obama lying to us for the past 2 yrs with this war in Afghanistan when in fact he was in pakistan being sanctioned and us giving pakistan millions in aide money ??......why was obama, nan, and hilary saying that killing osama was "irrelevant" ...?....

          now when obam want's the country to take their focus off his lousy handling of the economy and foreign policy he now comes up with this stunt...

          • 1 vote
          Reply#5 - Wed May 4, 2011 9:34 PM EDT
          Paul Lucero

          He was also a Diamond runner for the Israelis and thier intelligence services! OBL was sick and dying and was used for and by many!

            #5.1 - Wed May 4, 2011 10:53 PM EDT
            j-bird-2923980

            Better yet, why did "W" lie for 8 years, or his predecessor. This manner of empowering half wits to ride herd on other half wits has been the core of U.S. Foreign policy for over two hundred years. We spend millions of tax dollars and often the lives of many of our military to create favorable atmospheres for U.S. business interests only to have to go back, eliminate the nut we conspired with and find a new candidate that will still embrace U.S. business interests. The least we could do is send a "bill" to U.S. business so that they pay directly for this country's efforts on their behalf.

            http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler

            • 1 vote
            #5.2 - Thu May 5, 2011 11:37 AM EDT
            SH-2000

            now when obam want's the country to take their focus off his lousy handling of the economy and foreign policy he now comes up with this stunt...

            You call the removal of a cold blooded killer who was responsible for the deaths of nearly 3000 Americans on our soil and thousands others world wide, a "stunt" ???

            Wow, that is beyond ungrateful, it is truly disgusting, incredibly stupid and you should be embarrassed.

            That is by far the most offensive thing I've read in my years on this site. Pitiful!

            • 1 vote
            #5.3 - Thu May 5, 2011 5:33 PM EDT
            Reply
            MLCook

            The debate about where OBL might be or even if he was still alive mirrors the similarly serious question of whether WMD's exist and if so, where?

            In war, theories are many and facts are few. Enemies have a disconcerting way of generating falsehoods and encouraging you to believe them.

            My feeling at the moment is that al Qaida is pretty beat up. They lost a lot of their most dedicated fanatics fighting the US in Iraq. The terrorist organization had little or no presence in Iraq, but as soon as George W. invaded Iraq looking for WMD's and trying out a regime change of an ugly dictator (not unlike Obama's more on-again, off-again campaign vs. Col. Qadhafi) the al Qaida leadership realized they had to flow into Iraq and fight the USA there.

            So they did, and they lost. I am not claiming that George W. was a genius for finding a battleground where the nebulous, unlocatable al Qaida would come out and fight, but that's the way it worked out.

            Truly, there is a God. The almighty can make a genius out of "W" and a patriotic warrior out of Obama, all because God actually is in America's corner, Amen!

              Reply#6 - Thu May 5, 2011 9:17 AM EDT
              Bob-118

              ML #6 - “Obama's more on-again, off-again campaign vs. Col. Qadhafi”

              Is it your opinion that the present civil unrest turned revolt in Libya is a campaign instigated by President Obama?

              How did you arrive at that conclusion?

              • 1 vote
              Reply#7 - Thu May 5, 2011 11:18 AM EDT
              j-bird-2923980

              Bob I dont think our President conspired to create revolution in Libya. I am heartily disappointed that he chose to engage us in this action. Wholesale genocide goes unanswered in other parts of the world and we choose to lend weaponry to a country whose leader was fostered by us so that we can in unison with other "world powers" control who Quadafhi's successor is. This is unacceptable foreign policy, that has gone unchanged for over two hundred years.

              • 1 vote
              #7.1 - Thu May 5, 2011 11:55 AM EDT
              Bob-118

              j-bird #7.1 - "...we can in unison with other "world powers" control who Quadafhi's successor is." It is a worthy goal except for the possibility that too much Western influence in the eventual outcome may not be well-received by Arab nations; too little influence by the West might leave Libya in the control of radical Arabs. It's a delicate situation.

              "This is unacceptable foreign policy, that has gone unchanged for over two hundred years." This long-standing mindset of our government provides an answer, at least in part, to the rhetorical question of "Why [do] they hate us?" To many, America is seen as an imperialistic power.

              • 1 vote
              #7.2 - Thu May 5, 2011 12:39 PM EDT
              j-bird-2923980

              Bob; it is not our business and we forego altruism for business. If "Business" is our concern then the pink fingered corporate office poques need to ruck up. This is wrong, who succeeds Qhadafhi is not our business, Samosa,Noriega, Hussein, Pol Pot, Pinochet, Ho Chi Minh and dozens more, where or more importantly when, does this @!$%# stop.

                #7.3 - Thu May 5, 2011 12:55 PM EDT
                Reply
                MLCook

                Did anyone notice that Canada swung overwhelmingly to the Conservative Party in Monday's election?

                The Canadians already have much lower corporate tax rates than the USA plus no debt crisis.

                The Canadians will always have affordable gasoline and diesel because they know how to make those fuels from oil shale, coal, or natural gas.

                The Canadians are admittedly involved up to their necks in all three of Obama's wars, but that is mainly because Canada is still at heart part of the British Empire and the British are a warlike people.

                • 1 vote
                Reply#8 - Fri May 6, 2011 5:20 AM EDT
                Bob-118

                MLC, what do swings in Canadian politics, corporate tax rates, fuel prices and fossil fuel resources have to do with Osama bin Laden's hide-out?

                • 1 vote
                #8.1 - Fri May 6, 2011 8:49 AM EDT
                Reply
                Leave a Comment:
                You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                Newsvine Privacy Statement
                As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                FUN STUFF:
                • Leaderboard |
                • E-Mail Alerts |
                • Top of the Vine |
                • Newsvine Live |
                • Newsvine Archives |
                • The Greenhouse
                COMPANY STUFF:
                • Code of Honor |
                • Company Info |
                • Contact Us |
                • Jobs |
                • User Agreement |
                • Privacy Policy |
                • About our ads
                LEGAL STUFF:
                • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com