[Sean Osborne Lomax]

"Here's the latest semi-inside rumor I have heard today, paraphrased...

One of the unwritten rules of journalism is that if you hear something once, then its a rumor; hear it from two different sources, then its a fact."

Hmmm...


What about three (3) sources saying the same thing? And then a week later a fourth (4).

Then, within days, the Italian Foreign Minister reports directly to the US SECSTATE via phone call about just concluded talks with the government of Iran, then the President of Afghanistan, then a US Senator chimes in as well US Army field commanders in Afghanistan and others begin chiming in on the subject...

...which is about the "capture" of Osama bin Laden.

[milkncookies]

Sean, I hope it's proven you are right. But what is the "real" significance of this?
AQ has taken the "cell" metholodology of terrorism honed so well by Sinn Fein, and made it even better. Do you really think OBL intentionally kept himself "in the loop" on every little thing going on, knowing that if he were ever caught, it would probably compromise their entire operation?
Sure it will be a significant moral defeat, and yes, we will probably learn things we didn't know. But how much will we really learn?

[TexKat]

and then after Osama was captured he started talking about his purchase of suitcase nukes from Khan.

[freeperfromnj]

Do you think he's the big fish they are referring to in today's reported capture?

[Labyrinthos]

Sean, my friend, don't take things so personally. I hope your sources are 100% correct and OBL is, in fact, in custody. Some rumors turn out to be true, like Monica's blue dress; and some rumors turn out to be false, like Willy Clinton's love child. My problem has nothing to do with the trading of rumors -- hell I love a good juicy rumor as well as the next person -- but rather, my problem has to do with the presentation of a rumor as an absolute fact. Until I see OBL in a perp walk or read or hear an offical announcement from the Feds, rumors of his capture are just that.