Hot on Osama's Trail [alive in Pakistan]

With Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in custody, U.S. and Pakistani officials say that Osama might not be far behind. Intercepted hand-written letters from bin Laden hint at his whereabouts.

U.S. and Pakistani intelligence services are reasonably hopeful that the arrest last Saturday of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, al-Qaeda's military planner, may flush terrorist chief Osama bin Laden out of hiding. For the first time since bin Laden eluded a U.S.-backed siege of his Afghan mountain stronghold of Tora Bora in December 2001, his hunters have been able to establish that he is still alive and probably hiding "somewhere in northern Pakistan"— a notion Islamabad has long been reluctant to admit. As one Pakistani intelligence official in Peshawar said, "We think that bin Laden will break cover after Mohammed's capture, and when he does, we stand a good chance of catching him."

The breakthrough in the hunt for bin Laden came with the arrest of al-Qaeda's military strategist Mohammed in the northern Pakistani city of Rawalpindi. A Pakistani official said that Mohammed, the logistical mastermind of the September 11th terrorist attacks in the US, was in recent contact with bin Laden. Once Pakistani intelligence officers had pin-pointed Mohammed's hideout, a two-story house in a quiet and well-guarded neighborhood inhabited by retired Pakistani army officers, they held off in arresting him for eight hours and tailed him through the bustling streets of Rawalpindi in hopes that he might be visiting bin Laden. However, Mohammed never made the contact with bin Laden, and rather than risk having Mohammed slip away, police and army commandos burst into his Rawalpindi safe house and captured him.

The certainty that bin Laden was hiding in Pakistan grew after the Pakistani intelligence services recently intercepted several hand-written letters from the al-Qaeda chief. Pakistani intelligence sources say the contents of these letters have been shared with the CIA. These sources say that bin Laden might have disappeared into Pakistan's northern tribal territory, across the mountain border with Afghanistan, or he might be hiding in the capital Islamabad or 20 miles away in Rawalpindi -right under the nose of the Pakistani armed forces and the government.

A Pakistan intelligence source told TIME that bin Laden's four wives and over a dozen children were probably given shelter in Iran by the zealously anti-American Revolutionary Guards. This source also claimed that bin Laden's lieutenant and ideologue, Egyptian doctor Ayman al-Zawahiri, had left the region on "an unknown mission" but had returned to Pakistan and was now believed to be hiding with his terrorist chief.

The trail leading to al-Qaeda's number three, Mohammed, began in the southern border town of Quetta. On Feb 13th, Pakistani intelligence services, backed up by the CIA, raided an apartment in a working class neighborhood where Mohammad had been hiding. Mohammed had left, but his comrade provided police with clues that led to Mohammed's new hideout in Rawalpindi. Trackers also located several internet clubs in Quetta where Mohammed sent coded messages to his terrorist cells in the US, Europe and Asia. This source said: "Now that we've captured Mohammed, we hope we can decipher the codes he used and break apart his global terrorist network."

The Saturday arrest of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, September 11 terror mastermind and brains of al-Qaeda, dealt a stunning blow to Democrats, who argued that Bush's pursuit of Saddam needlessly diverted attention from the pursuit of al-Qaeda.
How dare Bush divert FBI B-52 bombers, FBI aircraft carriers, FBI F-15 planes, FBI cruise missiles, FBI Bradley fighting vehicles, FBI Abrams tanks, and FBI artillery like that? What's Bush thinking, he's Commander-in-Chief or somethin'? Imagine -- just imagine -- how furious FBI's Robert Mueller must have been after seeing his USS Nimitz and Sailors quietly snuck away to the Persian Gulf!
The nation can only pursue one terrorist at a time, you see. (Tellingly, many Democrats, who say they don't defend Saddam, defend Saddam from charges of links to terrorism.)
The Democrats' 'Can't-Walk-And-Chew-Gum-At-Once' claim was, of course, an obvious ruse. Bush has this penchant for winning wars (see the Taliban) and Democrats have this penchant for worrying and fretting about Bush winning wars. Victory in Baghdad would make Bush all the more harder to unseat in '04, and Democrats know it.
The Kuwaiti-born Mohammed, whose rap sheet stretches back a decade to the first World Trade Center bombing, was set to launch a new wave of terrorist attacks, according to U.S. and Pakistan officials, whose pre-dawn raid of his home in Rawalpindi netted a treasure trove of laptop computers, cell phones, discs and documents detailing al-Qaeda finances, sleeper cells, safe houses, names, operational secrets, etc. Al-Qaeda -- which Democrats insist has no links to Baghdad -- was poised to launch attacks concurrent with U.S. military action in Iraq, in a show of solidarity with Saddam, whom Democrats insist has no links to al-Qaeda.
Experts say Mohammed's arrest will lead to bin Laden's arrest, but somehow I doubt that. (How do you "arrest" stain on the walls of caves in Tora-Bora? No "expert" has offered a clue, though Clonaid is reportedly working on it -- just as soon as the sect returns from a meeting with green little aliens at a volcano in Auvernge.)

Mohammed's capture sent shock waves all across the terror network.
"Nobody's safe now," former CIA officer Bob Baer told the New York Times, adding that "they're going to have to move. Everything they considered reliable is gone -- safe houses, sources of money and the rest."
Indeed, as news of Mohammed's arrest crossed the wires, DNC operatives were seen fleeing safe house headquarters in Washington D.C., Martin Sheen and Janeane Garofalo in tow.
The arrests, Rand Corp. director Bruce Hoffman tells the Times, "cuts the senior [al-Qaeda] leaders off from their conduit for orders to foot soldiers, and foot soldiers from guidance and planning and implementation of operations."
So now the 'Bush-Isn't-Doing-Enough-To-Hunt-Down-al-Qaeda-Because-He's-Too-Distracted-With-Poor-Saddam' Democrats are faced with the worst of both worlds: The prospects of U.S. victory in Iraq without their much-ballyhooed 'blowback' here at home.
To recap, the 'Can't-Walk-And-Chew-Gum' Democrats awoke Saturday morning to Bush walking Saddam off a steep cliff while chewing his buddy Mohammed to bits like Skoal out of a can.
The only glimmer of hope in an otherwise dismal weekend for Democrats was the '3-votes-shy' rejection by Turkey's Parliament of U.S. plans to deploy 62,000 troops along the border with Iraq -- opening a northern front against Saddam.
But the al-Qaeda arrests were too big a bombshell, too huge a story for the media to give it anything but wall-to-wall treatment. Pentagon war planners, in any event, told sources that even had Parliament's vote been final (the ruling Justice and Development Party is reportedly mulling resubmitting the request for a 2nd up-or-down), Plan B contingencies were already in place. Even timing of hostilities were unaffected, given extra troop deployments to the region for just such contingencies.
Meanwhile, media hearts went all aflutter in glee Tuesday morning after reports of a powerful explosion outside an airport in the southern Philippines city of Davao, killing at least 21 (one of them an American missionary) and wounding over 150 others (3 Americans were reportedly hospitalized.)
"The blast rocked the front of the terminal building, smashing windows and causing considerable damage," CBSNEWS reports, citing an unidentified airport security official.
Bush's enemies were hoping the Davao bombing, which president Arroyo condemned "as a brazen act of terrorism which shall not go unpunished," would put an end to the rosy afterglow of success after Mohammed's arrest in Pakistan.
Ha! So much for Bush's vaunted War on Terror, right?
Er, not so fast.
Muslim rebel bombings, kidnappings, extortion, murder-for-hire, mayhem and other religious activities (what Patty "Osama-Mama" Murray would call 'militant social activism') in the southern Philippines is 3 decades old, long predating al-Qaeda. And while the 'peaceful' Muslim terror group Abu Sayyaf has ties to 'peaceful' al-Qaeda, the latest Islamic 'peace' offensive began two weeks ago, with a deadly car bombing outside the airport in Cotabato City. Officials believe it was the magnanimous 'out-reach' work of a Muslim separatist group called Moro Islamic Liberation Front. The 'Reach-Out-And-Bomb-Someone-For-Allah' group yearns for a separate Islamicist hellhole, a la Iran.
Anyway, later events Tuesday brought Democrats more bad news, with the BBC reporting several arrests and interrogations, according to Arroyo spokesman Ignacio Bunye.
Next: Democrats claim al-Qaeda nabbing in Pakistan was White House stunt: "Mohammed" a GOP operative hired by Karl Rove to make Bush look good. Film at 11.

Meanwhile, Sen. Teddy Kennedy of Chappaquiddick blasted the Bush administration Tuesday, using a completely new line of attack: "We should not have a go-it-alone, rush-to-war policy!" Teddy told NBC's Katie Couric. The imminently fair and impartial Couric had asked, scrupulously avoiding loaded language, why Bush appeared "hell-bent (hell-bent, I tell ya!) on military action."
In Baghdad, dictator Saddam Hussein, whom liberals see as more legitimate than Bush because at least he won the popular vote (final returns showed Saddam got 150% of the vote in a highly competetive, though uncontested, national 'election last October), blasted Bush as "the despot of the century."
Kennedy, in a speech to the annual conference of the United Methodist Church, agreed with Saddam, blasting Bush as "a bully in the world school yard," who's "squandered too much good will of the world community because of his single-minded rush to war with Iraq."
Here Kennedy has, I must admit, a valid point. Only one thing isn't clear: Does Bush's 'hardline' on Iraq mean no more expressions of "good will" from the "world community" a la Mohamed Atta and the boys on September 11? We haven't had another terrorist attack on U.S. soil, so Kennedy, by golly, must be right.
Kennedy also said Bush failed to garner the "support of our people" in his rush to war.
"The reason for that lack of support is clear," said Kennedy. "The administration has not made a convincing case for war against Iraq..."
Underscoring the lack of public support for military action, a brand new Washington Post/ABCNEWS Poll backs up Kennedy's dispassionate observations, showing only a tiny fraction -- 59% -- of Americans favoring the use of force to remove Saddam Hussein, even without U.N. approval. An overwhelming 37% disapproved of such action, however.
Bush's job approval rating, moreover, appears to be slipping, from 60% two weeks ago down to a troubling 62% in the latest Post poll (conducted Feb. 26 - March 2, 2003).
In view of the lack public support, Kennedy is sponsoring a Senate resolution requiring bully Bush seek new Congressional approval before launching military action.
The measure has, surprisingly, garnered widespread backing in the GOP-controlled chamber, doubling its support in the 2 months since its introduction: Leaping from 1 to 2 co-sponsors. Sen. Robert Byrd (D-KKK) is the other co-sponsor. (He says his dog Billie would happily join the bandwagon, were he still alive.)
Kennedy is especially incensed that Bush appears willing to 'go-it-alone' with Britain, with Spain, with Italy, with Poland, with Bulgaria, with Romania, with Czech Republic, with Hungary, with Jordan, with Kuwait, with Bahrain, with Qatar, with Oman, with Israel, with Saudi Arabia, with United Arab Emirates, but without the support of the brave French. Nor Syria.

---------------------------------
Babs has finally had enough.
The highly respected geopolitical strategist and washed up Hollywood has-been has had enough with being called a "traitor".
"I've been grouped into this category," she wrote on her Homepage this week, adding she feels the "need to say something in response to these outrageous charges."
Treason is a very grave charge, she notes, and highly offensive. A charge that should not be leveled so blithely. Especially by Republicans who only want to poison the water, poison the air, poison school lunches, kill Grandmother, shred the Constitution and sell out the country to Big Oil and foreign interests!
How dare these GOP traitors hurl such a serious charge -- treason! -- like that?!
"I, for one," Babs declares, "am a patriotic American who loves this country."
Yep, and no doubt she gets warm and fuzzy about Republicans, too.
Babs continues: "It used to be in politics that there was a certain amount of class and eloquence. The debate was civilized even though there were strong disagreements over deeply important questions. But, as usual, the Republicans have resorted to name-calling and mean-spiritedness."
You tell 'em, Babs! Can't these GOP racists, bigots, polluters, gun-nuts and warmongers engage in civil debate for once?!
"It's interesting," she writes in closing, "how the actors that are criticized for their political activism always happen to be Democrats. The press does not criticize Republicans actors" like "Ronald Reagan..."
Oops...
Not only does poor Babs need spelling lessons, a remedial course in recent history wouldn't hurt either. She'd discover "the Republican actor Ronald Reagan" was a 2-term President.
Anyway, that's...
My two cents..
"JohnHuang2"

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.