Do you think they will show us all the "hard" evidence against Osama on CNN? I would like to see what the B*stard would say if confronted with his own video or exhibits of evidence.

I'd like to see that too. I'm sure we have a lot on him (evidence) but they should release a bit so the public/world knows too.

It would be nice to see, but we won't see all it for years. Certainly not until after the war on terrorism is over because the evidence could/would compromise our sources and methods. If they know how we know, there are things they can do and people they could eliminate to shut down aspects of our intelligence.

[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:
It would be nice to see, but we won't see all it for years. Certainly not until after the war on terrorism is over because the evidence could/would compromise our sources and methods. If they know how we know, there are things they can do and people they could eliminate to shut down aspects of our intelligence.

[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]<hr></blockquote>

I completely agree with you. But I think if we ever do capture Bin Laden and that could be soon, then the Feds should start to think about releasing at least some "hard" evidence on this guy. Remember, if we want to give him a fair and democratic trial we will have to show other countries exactly what he has done. Specially if he flees to one of them and is granted sanctuary. I have a problem with us invadeing one of our allies because they won't hand him over...with a "smoking gun" that wouldn't be something we have to think about. The last thing we need is another Panama.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by KHaN:


I completely agree with you. But I think if we ever do capture Bin Laden and that could be soon, then the Feds should start to think about releasing at least some "hard" evidence on this guy. Remember, if we want to give him a fair and democratic trial we will have to show other countries exactly what he has done. Specially if he flees to one of them and is granted sanctuary. I have a problem with us invadeing one of our allies because they won't hand him over...with a "smoking gun" that wouldn't be something we have to think about. The last thing we need is another Panama.<hr></blockquote>

We have released the evidence to our allies and they have accepted it, and actually Bin Laden has admitted it. Check out Ziroc's thread, it has a link to the story. There are also links to other stories debunking it.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:


We have released the evidence to our allies and they have accepted it, and actually Bin Laden has admitted it. Check out Ziroc's thread, it has a link to the story. There are also links to other stories debunking it.<hr></blockquote>

I have heard the same thing. To be honest, I'm not worried about what England thinks...they would go down fighting back to back to the last man with the U.S. IMHO. I'm saying release what you can on CNN that you don't think is a national security risk. So far I've seen nothing.

Kewl just saw Ziroc's link and I guess you can't get anymore "smoking gun" than some Joe confessing his guilt ON TAPE. LOL! Has anyome seen the actual footage on MSN or somewhere obtainable on the web?

[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: KHaN ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by KHaN:


I have heard the same thing. To be honest, I'm not worried about what England thinks...they would go down fighting back to back to the last man with the U.S. IMHO. I'm saying release what you can on CNN that you don't think is a national security risk. So far I've seen nothing.

Kewl just saw Ziroc's link and I guess you can't get anymore "smoking gun" than some Joe confessing his guilt ON TAPE. LOL! Has anyome seen the actual footage on MSN or somewhere obtainable on the web?

[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: KHaN ]<hr></blockquote>

I don't think you'll see it anywhere in anything other than transcript form or excerpts, because it's thought that he uses these taped messages to signal cells to action through some predetermined code(s).

To answer your original question: no, we should not see the evidence. In a democratic system, people have a right to a fair trial. If everybody gets to see the evidence before the trial, people will forge an idea of the man (not that we didn't yet [img]smile.gif[/img] ) and that's not what we want.

However, hopefully Bin will be executed when he is captured. Then, no trials, and no evidence for probably 20-25 years as these are national secrets that could be detrimental to the State best interest if they are release (for the reasons mentionned by Ronn before).

So, don't count on seeing any evidence anytime soon! [img]smile.gif[/img]

Edit: Could you explain to me why you think that because the Talibans are crushed that we should see the evidence about Bin Ladden? There's no operational link between the two! It's a fabrication to please the population and give them the idea that something is being done in responce to the 9-11 attacks. Instead of helping, it's actually infrindges quite a bit on our ability to deal with terrorism. Before we attacked the Talibans, we knew exactly where the bad guys were and what they were doing (we got plenty of warnings). Now, we've driven them in the shadows and we're like a blind man trying to fight off assaillants: swinging our arms madly but without effect because the assaillant can see what we are doing!

[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: Ryanamur ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ryanamur:
There's no operational link between the two(Osama and the Taliban)! It's a fabrication to please the population and give them the idea that something is being done in responce to the 9-11 attacks. Instead of helping, it's actually infrindges quite a bit on our ability to deal with terrorism.

Before we attacked the Talibans, we knew exactly where the bad guys were and what they were doing (we got plenty of warnings). Now, we've driven them in the shadows and we're like a blind man trying to fight off assaillants: swinging our arms madly but without effect because the assaillant can see what we are doing!

[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: Ryanamur ]<hr></blockquote>

The two are linked as has been proved by their initial actions and subsequent statements.

We did not know exactly where they were anymore than we did after the embassy bombings. Reacting to threats and warnings isn't as easy to do prior to actions. Lots of threats are made, but to figure out exactly what they mean is easier after the fact. Take the quote from the Taliban leader yesterday, it's an obvious threat, but what are they planning?

check out http://news.bbc.co.uk

particularly WAR VIEW sections entitled:

is this war lawful
and
it's like bombing sicily to try to beat the mafia.

i just popped on to the bbc site to check out the latest and found these two very illuminating sections without even trying - some very pertinent points are made on both.