Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

New Evidence Shows Bush Had No Plan to Catch bin Laden After 9/11

By Gareth Porter, IPS News. Posted October 7, 2008.


Mere weeks after 9/11, the Bush administration was too busy planning to invade Iraq to follow through on its mission in Afghanistan.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Gareth Porter

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

New evidence from former U.S. officials reveals that the George W. Bush administration failed to adopt any plan to block the retreat of Osama bin Laden and other al Qaeda leaders from Afghanistan to Pakistan in the first weeks after 9/11.

That failure was directly related to the fact that top administration officials gave priority to planning for war with Iraq over military action against al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

As a result, the United States had far too few troops and strategic airlift capacity in the area to cover the large number of possible exit routes through the border area when bin Laden escaped in late 2001.

Because it had not been directed to plan for that contingency, the U.S. military had to turn down an offer by Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf in late November 2001 to send 60,000 troops to the border passes to intercept him, according to accounts provided by former U.S. officials involved in the issue.

On Nov. 12, 2001, as Northern Alliance troops were marching on Kabul with little resistance, the CIA had intelligence that bin Laden was headed for a cave complex in the Tora Bora mountains close to the Pakistani border.

The war had ended much more quickly than expected only days earlier. CENTCOM commander Tommy Franks, who was responsible for the war in Afghanistan, had no forces in position to block bin Laden's exit.

Franks asked Lt. Gen. Paul T. Mikolashek, commander of Army Central Command (ARCENT), whether his command could provide a blocking force between al Qaeda and the Pakistani border, according to David W. Lamm, who was then commander of ARCENT Kuwait.

Lamm, a retired Army colonel, recalled in an interview that there was no way to fulfill the CENTCOM commander's request, because ARCENT had neither the troops nor the strategic lift in Kuwait required to put such a force in place. "You looked at that request, and you just shook your head," recalled Lamm, now chief of staff of the Near East South Asia Center for Strategic Studies at the National Defense University.

Franks apparently already realized that he would need Pakistani help in blocking the al Qaeda exit from Tora Bora. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told a National Security Council meeting that Franks "wants the (Pakistanis) to close the transit points between Afghanistan and Pakistan to seal what's going in and out," according to the National Security Council meeting transcript in Bob Woodward's book Bush at War.

Bush responded that they would need to "press Musharraf to do that."

A few days later, Franks made an unannounced trip to Islamabad to ask Musharraf to deploy troops along the Pakistan-Afghan border near Tora Bora.

A deputy to Franks, Lt. Gen. Mike DeLong, later claimed that Musharraf had refused Franks' request for regular Pakistani troops to be repositioned from the north to the border near the Tora Bora area. DeLong wrote in his 2004 book Inside Centcom that Musharraf had said he "couldn't do that" because it would spark a "civil war" with a hostile tribal population.

But U.S. Ambassador Wendy Chamberlin, who accompanied Franks to the meeting with Musharraf, provided an account of the meeting to this writer that contradicts DeLong's claim.

Chamberlin, now president of the Middle East Institute in Washington, recalled that the Pakistani president told Franks that CENTCOM had vastly underestimated what was required to block bin Laden's exit from Afghanistan. Musharraf said, "Look, you are missing the point: There are 150 valleys through which al Qaeda are going to stream into Pakistan," according to Chamberlin.

Although Musharraf admitted that the Pakistani government had never exercised control over the border area, the former diplomat recalled, he said this was "a good time to begin." The Pakistani president offered to redeploy 60,000 troops to the area from the border with India but said his army would need airlift assistance from the United States to carry out the redeployment.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: iraq, al qaeda, dick cheney, afghanistan, war on terror, osama bin laden, george w. bush, donald rumsfeld, pakistan, centcom, pervez musharraff, tommy franks

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
So What..
Posted by: Captainmagic on Oct 7, 2008 5:13 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in any gods name are any of us doing in Afghansistan....Let me be a little bit clearer...Apart from the amerikans desire for other countries oil so that they can save themselves...what on this earth are we,(the real world) doing in that country.

There is no logical reason at all.

Maybe we should be going of to their weddings or birthday parties to show we care about their plight...oh, hang on a minute there...that could be a bit dicey...or maybe we could just leave them alone...works for us!!

Captain OUT

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: So What.. Posted by: MyLeftFoot
"no plan to catch bin Laden"
Posted by: hurricane hugo on Oct 7, 2008 8:48 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
umm...NO SHIT.

jdfu!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "no plan to catch bin Laden" Posted by: CosmoViking
Well, obviously
Posted by: rickiey on Oct 8, 2008 8:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lets face it. He's an over six foot tall guy on kidney dialysis.

With respect to catching Bin Laden, the Bush Administration either failed to plan, or planned to fail.

TO be honest, I'm not sure which.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Osama's roomservice?
Posted by: MisterWu on Oct 8, 2008 4:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've alway assumed that this ex C.I.A asset is being held in a Las Vegas penthouse waiting the timely release of his next video.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Osama's roomservice? Posted by: TheProphet
Hello? Evidence was already presented when attention away from Osama was directed towards Iraq for
Posted by: maxpayne on Oct 9, 2008 12:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Big Oil. Go figure !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BinLaden is myth
Posted by: weathered on Oct 9, 2008 4:28 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
all wrapped up like a hollywood icon.

Please see all MSM for exactly what they are, an accomplice to the crimes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A little History on the Bin Ladens and the Bushs
Posted by: Maxemum on Oct 9, 2008 4:53 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
House of Bush, House of Saud: The Secret Relationship Between the World's Two Most Powerful Dynasties

Synopsis

Newsbreaking and controversial -- an award-winninginvestigative journalist uncovers the thirty-year relationshipbetween the Bush family and the House of Saud andexplains its impact on American foreign policy, business,and national security.

House of Bush, House of Saud begins with a politicallyexplosive question: How is it that two days after 9/11,when U.S. air traffic was tightly restricted, 140 Saudis,many immediate kin to Osama Bin Laden, were permitted toleave the country without being questioned by U.S. intelligence?

The answer lies in a hidden relationship that began in the1970s, when the oil-rich House of Saud began courtingAmerican politicians in a bid for military protection, influence,and investment opportunity. With the Bush family, the Saudishit a gusher -- direct access to presidents Reagan, George H.W.Bush, and George W. Bush. To trace the amazing weave of Saud-Bush connections, Unger interviewed three former directors ofthe CIA, top Saudi and Israeli intelligence officials, and morethan one hundred other sources. His access to major players isunparalleled and often exclusive -- including executives at theCarlyle Group, the giant investment firm where the House ofBush and the House of Saud each has a major stake.

Like Bob Woodward's The Veil, Unger's House of Bush, Houseof Saud features unprecedented reportage; like Michael Moore'sDude, Where's My Country? Unger's book offers a politicalcounter-narrative to official explanations; this deeply sourcedaccount has already been cited by Senators Hillary RodhamClinton and Charles Schumer, and sets 9/11, the two Gulf Wars,and the ongoing Middle East crisis in a new context:Whatreally happened when America's most powerful political familybecame seduced by its Saudi counterparts?


The New York Times
Unger's best pages tell how, in the days of panic and recrimination after Sept. 11, Prince Bandar managed to spirit prominent members of the Saud and bin Laden families out of the United States on chartered aircraft. Beginning on Sept. 13, when private aviation was still restricted, some 140 Saudis, including about two dozen of the bin Ladens, were flown to Europe. "Didn't it make sense," asks Unger rhetorically, "to at least interview Osama bin Laden 's relatives?" — James

Taken from the Barnes and Noble Book Review House of bush, House of Saud

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Israel's FedEx to America Posted by: weathered
Shocking!!
Posted by: andyi99 on Oct 9, 2008 4:56 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Surely no one still thinks Bush ever had any intention of catching OBL!? Let's see...member of big $$ Saudi family...Saudis control most of US oil...OBL's US relations flown out of country on US-charter jet after 9/11? What would a reasonable person think?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Angry Liberal
Posted by: wonderblob on Oct 9, 2008 5:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When are we going to accept the fact that OBL and the whole Al Qaida gang are a creation of the CIA neocon corporate government media complex? We have had a coup people. We have been swindled. The evidence is overwhelming. The ruling class has won and we are left with corporate slavery.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Angry Liberal Posted by: Maxemum
» I agree! Posted by: TheProphet
Evidence linking the invasion of Afghanistan
Posted by: Maxemum on Oct 9, 2008 5:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Investigative Reporting: 9-11 To Big Oil - Which Facts Behind Afghanistan Invasion And 9-11 Attacks?

Immediately after 9/11 president Bush declared war to Afghanistan. This article shows the role of Afghanistan in pipeline projects which determine US' control over oil and gas in Afghanistan's neighbouring countries.

Bush said the attacks of 9/11 were the reason to invade Afghanistan.

This article shows that preparations for this war took place well before. In 2000 the neoconservatives said they needed some catastrophic and catalysing event. They said so at the time of the developments of unmanned aerial vehicles striking with pinpoint accuracy.

http://www.masternewmedia.org

IT'S ALL ABOUT OIL!
1998 Unocal Statement:
Suspension of activities related to proposed
natural gas pipeline across Afghanistan

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alive or Dead,
Posted by: Last Chance on Oct 9, 2008 5:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Osama bin Laden was the "indispensable enemy", Bush's excuse for virtual dictatorship over this nation he has so thoroughly bankrupted.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

imagine that
Posted by: willd4change on Oct 9, 2008 5:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and it only took you 8 years to relize they weren't reallllllly lookin for him.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bin Laden dead for years...
Posted by: MyLeftFoot on Oct 9, 2008 5:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
he died in 2001. it was reported in newspapers in Pakistan. this article is a pantload. google 'Tim Osman' for more info.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Capture Bin Ladin?
Posted by: ProgressiveManiac on Oct 9, 2008 5:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've always suspected that the Bush administration has never been very interested in capturing bin Laden. For one thing, having him somewhere out there has allowed him to serve as a bogey man to scare the American people.

And suppose by some accident we had captured him? Would we have to put him on trial? A trial could be seriously embarrassing because evidence would have to be presented, and according to the FBI there is no evidence linking bin Laden to the 9/11 attacks. No, a trial would not be a good thing.

Of course we could just lock him away in Guantanamo, but that would cause an uproar not only among the U.S. population but, more significantly, among the bin Laden family and this family is still quite close to the Bush family.

No, it seems better to just let Osama bin Laden stay at large.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

W. Or Mac in '00 We'd Be At least in the Same Mess
Posted by: Purple Girl on Oct 9, 2008 5:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mac has proven he is not only a cheerleader for CheneyCorps Global aspirations, But a major Player.
Recent Reviews of Exactly what Mac has been doing in the Congress/Senate has provided a 'Flashback' to those things which are adversely effecting US Now.
Start with Mac's affiliation witha anti Communist group who basically provided aid and comfort to Bin Laden and AQ in the early '80's.Once These 'Freedom Fighter' (per Mac @ 2nd Pres Debate) ran the USSR out of Afhanistan (which contributed to the USSR Financial collapse), They began planning attacks On US (WTC '93).
Of course that was not the only nefarious associations for Mac, He also provided the ways & means for Keating to begin the economic fleecing process of America. The mere appearance of Phil Gramm over the right shoulder of Mac clearly indicates, Mac Continued to Sold His Office to Big Finance (Wall Street)AFTER KEATING 5. Phil Gramms Legislation deregulating Both Banking & WallStreet IS the Cause of this easily foreseeable meltdown in our Financial Markets and thus our Economy.
Then of course we have Mac as Spokeman to push the invasion into Iraq. Not only following all his scripted talking points,but even given the 'Ringer' Scoop...'Anthrax came from Iraq's Saddam Hussein'- mere days after the Attacks. Interesting it has been reported that the 'Signature' of this Anthrax Compound Was Indictative of being a US Military strain, almost immediately.
And Which Candidate's Pants were on fire First to Pre-emptively Strike Iran? Mac. Hillary shocked nearly every REAL Democrat by parroting Mac's fanatsy- Infact she did not mince words...OBLITERATE IRAN. This was a clear indication Hillary was working for the same Group as Mac. But in Hindsight, Mac was not her Co Worker, he was one of her Bosses.
Mac KNOWS Where all the bodies are buried in from this Administration, because he has helped Bury them for Cheney Corp for Decades. Infact He may be the Top Undertaker for this Organized Crime Sydicate .
There is no Doubt this admin has intentionally allowed this Dialysis patient to wander free the entire time.But much like Palin,W is far too Stupid to comprehend Just How much HE has been Used as a scapegoat for things which have been in motion for decades.
Frankly when it comes to being punished for High crimes, I'd skip W.,Just to save a noose for McCain.
McCain has provided enough concrete evidence of not only Complicity in a Conspiracy to undermine US, but has been a Master Planner of it!
Funny how 'Projection' appears to work on the dim witted and gullible. Mac Claims Obama is responsible for the Economic melt down - yet we see Gramm whispering in his ear. Mac claims Obama's attached to Fannie mae- Yet Rick Davis is jumping through hoops for Mac in this stage act.Mac Claims Obama has Terrorist Connections- yet He has No Degree of separation with Bin laden.By the Way Is it One of the Palm Islands which is referred to as "Hell"? Do You wipe your feet before you enter, or remove your shoes Mac? He States Repeatedly "I know How to Get Bin laden" What True American would keep such Information to themselves all these years???And What is his motivation- just Bluster, or Arrogance, Or Ambition, Or Just another 'Double Speak' Phrase from the 'Ministry of Truth'.None are Admirable Excuses.
Mac is Up to His Neck In the Economic Crisis, Oil Crisis and the Illegal Invasion which has CAUSED BOTH ( the Two Punch method of bringing down an 'Empire')
Why are we hearing 'Traitor' in Mac's rally's- he planted them there to dull the Effect of the Word.So when REAL COGNIZANT Americans finally start Legitimately Idenitfying McCain as Such, the Koolaid drinkers will think It Just a Volley back Response,not the God's Honest Truth!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why would Bush want to catch a CIA operative?
Posted by: PakiBoy on Oct 9, 2008 8:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bin Laden was a CIA operative. Only dumb Americans don't know this fact.

So why would Bush want to catch a CIA operative?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Early Afghanistan Pilots Refused Permission to Take Out Bin Laden
Posted by: jaidae on Oct 9, 2008 10:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the early days of the Afghanistan war, there was a clear and unambiguous report on CNN (and elsewhere)- sort of a 'human interest' piece about the experience of the troops - which reported that "at least twelve times" planes had reported that they had found exactly where Osama Bin Laden was hiding. The crews of these aircraft had to wait to receive 'special authorization' to deviate from their given mission, in order to take out Bin Laden, and this authorization had to come from their commanders in the US.

When pilots asked for permission to vary their missions for this reason, their requests were met with non-response, stalling or communications 'confusion' - all resulting in the authorization coming too late to be actioned.

The MSM story was being presented as a growing and ironic 'frustration' among those in the aircraft who assumed that 'getting Bin Laden' was exactly what they were there to do!

This was not a big story, but within a day or two, these stories were pulled from every news outlet... and have never been mentioned again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

madmax
Posted by: mikmojo06 on Oct 9, 2008 11:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Last week, on Sixty Minutes a Delta Force commander (just yards away from bin-Laden) said his request to block, capture and kill bin-Laden was denied by unnamed superiors. All the rest seems like smoke and mirrors.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Try Bush....
Posted by: tap17x on Oct 9, 2008 4:00 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.....for TREASON. Since he's obviously guilty of aiding and abetting the enemy, as well as not defending the Constitution, we can skip the trial and just hang the motherfucker.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Neocons wanted to overthrow govts. of Syria and Iran
Posted by: Garvagh on Oct 9, 2008 4:26 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The idiot in the White House may not have even realized he was a dupe of the neocons wanting to overthrow the governments of Syria and Iran, as well as Iraq, as part of their scheme to "protect" Israel and enable it to keep much if not all of the West Bank and the Golan Heights. The US has squandered more than $1 trillion on their vicious scheme that is contrary to the national interests of America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BIN LADEN IS DEAD
Posted by: brianct on Oct 9, 2008 6:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bin Laden has not been seen or heard of since late 2001 (except for those dodgy video and audio tapes).
bin laden is dead

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yadayadayada
Posted by: gellero1 on Oct 9, 2008 6:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So all the Generals in Afghanistan are stooges of politicians??

I doubt it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "Stooges of the politicians" Posted by: wonderblob
Osama morphed into Saddam and now into Obama bin biden
Posted by: David Baker on Oct 9, 2008 6:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Osama disappeared and turned into Saddam. Now he's Obama's evil twin Obama bin biden - the one the republicans keep attacking for terrorism and the like. Unfortunately many many American voters ARE that stupid.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

New Evidence Will Show
Posted by: Larry Sinclair on Oct 9, 2008 8:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that I sucked off Obama while he was toking on a crackpipe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Lrf8DbrJH0

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

george
Posted by: mopar1938 on Oct 12, 2008 9:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am to understand that a marine sniper had OBL in his sights and was refused by the powers to be to let him take him out. I would have just popped him and paid for the bullet, now arrest me for the murder of a murderer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

not necessarily news to me
Posted by: whealeydj on Oct 12, 2008 9:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that incomptent arrogant ideologues in Bush Cheney administration screwed up in any chance to capture Osama Bin Laden. I am not really sure Pakistan could have or really wanted to capture or kill Bin Laden. part of problem is that Afghanistan/Pakistan border region is really Pashtunia; the "border" was determined by limit of British Empire in 19th century to completely conquer Pashtunia.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THE REAL REASON THEY DIDN'T WANT BIN LADEN WAS THAT THEY WERE
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Oct 12, 2008 10:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
working together. We may never know the relationship between Bin Laden and the CIA. But it sure did work out to give Bush what he wanted.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]