Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

North: U.S. Journalists Protecting Osama bin Laden
NewsMax.com ^ | 9/21/01 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

Posted on 09/21/2001 7:50:33 PM PDT by kattracks

U.S. reporters familiar with the whereabouts of terrorist ringleader Osama bin Laden, who killed at least 6,700 Americans in attacks on New York and Washington last week, are refusing to tell what they know to U.S. intelligence agencies, a former Reagan administration national security official charged Friday night.

"We know that there are American correspondents, people who work for news bureaus, both print and broadcast, who have interviewed Osama bin Laden," said former Marine Lt. Col. Oliver North, now a Fox News Channel consultant, in an interview on the network's "Hannity & Colmes."

"I asked one of them today, 'Have you talked to the CIA to tell them exactly where you were?'" North said. "And his answer was, 'No, I'm a journalist.'"

"I find that to be reprehensible," the former Reagan official added. "He's enjoying the blessings of this country but he won't tell the CIA where he interviewed Osama bin Laden."

North offered the troubling revelation after "H & C" co-host Sean Hannity asked him about the controversy over Cablevision's News 12 in New York, where station management currently prohibits newscasters from wearing patriotic symbols on-air.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:

War on Terrorism


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last

1 posted on 09/21/2001 7:50:33 PM PDT by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kattracks
It seems silly to me that the CIA never sent "journalists" in there to interview him. They must have. If not, what a joke!
2 posted on 09/21/2001 7:53:10 PM PDT by JeepInMazar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
And therein you have the answer to the question of why the Dems would not pass a declaration of war. Leaks become treason, failure to answer these questions result in jail time.
3 posted on 09/21/2001 7:56:12 PM PDT by gov_bean_ counter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Japan's Kyodo News Agency is reporting this hour - quoting U.S. and Pakistan government sources - that Taliban supreme leader Mullah Omar has fled Kandahar.
4 posted on 09/21/2001 7:58:54 PM PDT by HAL9000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JeepInMazar
Under American law, the CIA is barred from having agents pose as journalists and priests. Kind of silly, but that was part of the fallout from the radical left's takeover of the Democratic Party in the early 70's
5 posted on 09/21/2001 8:00:31 PM PDT by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Whack em in the knuts 14 times, then ask again.
6 posted on 09/21/2001 8:01:32 PM PDT by Waco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
I'm sure Osama hasn't moved from the spot where he was interviewed two months ago.
7 posted on 09/21/2001 8:07:14 PM PDT by Restorer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
Wow. I hope we wake up as a nation. This needs to change.
8 posted on 09/21/2001 8:07:26 PM PDT by JeepInMazar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: kattracks
Good Ole Ollie North almost got it right, but there is a large chance that the whole "reason" CNN reporters were ordered to leave Afghanistan was to aid and cover Osama's flight to "safety."

I wonder if the son of Laden will interview anyone while he poses as a journalist.

Moreover, I wonder if the reason that Air Force 1 code words were used by the terrorists on 9/11 was because someone in the press pool on that plane was treasonously providing our President's location to the assassins...

10 posted on 09/21/2001 8:09:20 PM PDT by Southack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JeepInMazar
It seems silly to me that the CIA never sent "journalists" in there to interview him. They must have. If not, what a joke! If I'm not mistaken I believe CIA operatives are banned from imitating journalists and missionaries.
11 posted on 09/21/2001 8:21:02 PM PDT by Grim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LLAN-DDEUSANT
He may have had. But he shredded those papers 14 years ago. Do you think there is the possibility Bin Laden might have changes his locations and M.O. in 14 years.

Or, are you one of those guys who figured Charles Lindberg should've sat out World War II and kept his mouth shut because he had a photo-op with the German Luftwaffe commander in 1934?

12 posted on 09/21/2001 8:27:25 PM PDT by Vigilanteman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Wouldn't matter anyways. most interviews were from last year or the year before last. He could be anywhere now.
13 posted on 09/21/2001 8:29:34 PM PDT by Bommer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
Thank you, Frank Church.
14 posted on 09/21/2001 8:30:53 PM PDT by SMEDLEYBUTLER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Bommer
..Wouldn't matter anyways. most interviews were from last year or the year before last...

They still could have told where he was, but journalists often settle for any conditions to get a story. I had wondered myself how some of these folks could interview him and not tell the authorities where he was.

15 posted on 09/21/2001 8:34:39 PM PDT by mafree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Kinda funny that the CIA wasn't tracking the journalists. That's not a high-end intelligence conclusion - tracking journalists and their stories. Even Saddam Hussein figured that out.
16 posted on 09/21/2001 8:35:15 PM PDT by SKYDRIFTER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LLAN-DDEUSANT
FFOR-RREAL? Oh, I get it... you were just being glib.

The spirit of Bernard Shaw is still carried within the hearts and minds of journalists everywhere! Men and women of objectivity and the steely resolve to bring us nothing but the truth! John Reed would be proud.

Ed

17 posted on 09/21/2001 8:35:31 PM PDT by niteowl77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
Kind of silly,

Is it? Have you considered the consequences if journalists were to disclose privileged information to the CIA, or if the CIA were to impersonate journalists or priests? Do you not realise that every real journalist and priest would then be a suspected spy, with his life in danger?

Apart from the fact that there's a practical benefit to be gained from the unhindered practice of journalism, it's profoundly immoral to endanger legitimate civilian non-combatants by hiding behind their innocence.

Please try to understand the reason civilised countries accept the execution of spies in wartime: not so much because they work by stealth, as because they endanger non-combatants (who would otherwise be cast into suspicion).

18 posted on 09/21/2001 8:39:20 PM PDT by Romulus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Romulus
BuMp for a fine explaination.
19 posted on 09/21/2001 8:44:14 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Grim
If I'm not mistaken I believe CIA operatives are banned from imitating journalists and missionaries.

And, apparently, journalists are banned from imitating Americans.

20 posted on 09/21/2001 8:50:20 PM PDT by LiberalBuster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

To: Romulus
Yes, I have considered it and it is quite worth the risk. BTW, if you can site me the name of just one journalist who was falsely executed as a CIA spy during the time that CIA agents were allowed to pose as journalists I'll donate a $100 to FR. If you can't, I'll expect you to donate a $100 to FR.
22 posted on 09/21/2001 8:58:51 PM PDT by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Romulus
One other point. Given that the entire job of a CIA agent is to pretend that he or she is not a spy, do you think CIA agents should be barred from posing as American businessmen or women because that might put the lives of real American business people in danger. And while you are at it, why restrict them from posing just as journalists or priests. Why not say they can't pose as embassy personnel because that would put the lives of real embassy personnel in danger. How about waiters or waitresses, or taxicab drivers, or doctors, or lawyers, or salesmen. In fact, just so that they don't put any other Americans in danger, why don't we bar CIA field agents from posing as anyone but CIA field agents. That way no one will be endangered because our enemies will be able to readily identify who is and is not a CIA field agent.

I hope the point has been made clear to you. Barring field agents from acting as journalists was nothing but a sop to the leftist dominated media during the 1970s. Simply put, there is nothing that should bar agents from posing as journalists and any rationale that attempts to justify such a restriction is logically ludicrous.

23 posted on 09/21/2001 9:12:07 PM PDT by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: JeepInMazar
Wow. Yep. Look what can happen when you don't pay attention. We all know darn well we knew something was up. The CIA says " we knew nothing " just like Schultz on Hogan's Heroes. Give me a break. Keep on the Hillary sour-faced thing. As we have found in the past relentless e-mails and phone calls force the networks to cover it. She made faces the whole time Pres. Bush made his speech.
24 posted on 09/21/2001 9:18:43 PM PDT by mirkwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
Journalists killed in the line of duty.
25 posted on 09/21/2001 9:25:21 PM PDT by Romulus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
You make a good argument but you're overlooking the fact that because journalists necessarily ask questions and dig for information (usually without any powerful sponsors in the host country), they're uniquely in danger, in a way that businessmen are not. As for diplomats, they're not endangered because willy-nilly they're all presumptive spies, are known as such, and thus place no innocent persons in danger. When their presence in the host country becomes obnoxious, they are easily identified and expelled.
26 posted on 09/21/2001 9:32:33 PM PDT by Romulus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
More killings of politically inconvenient journalists. All you have to do is a Yahoo search -- not that hard, really.
27 posted on 09/21/2001 9:35:38 PM PDT by Romulus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Romulus
That's not a response. Those were journalists that were killed after the law was passed in the 70's and there is not even a connection raised with respect to the CIA.

And by the way, please respond to my argument about why journalists and priests should have special protection over all other types of American workers. For your argument to hold any weight, it has to be applied to every class of American worker, which would mean that a CIA agent could never pose as anyone but a CIA agent (which would kind of defeat the purpose of having spies).

Come on, be a man and admit that this law which purports to protect journalists and priests above everyone else is ludicrous.

28 posted on 09/21/2001 9:38:38 PM PDT by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Romulus
You are ridiculous. You are just citing killings of journalists. How in the hell does that support your argument. Come on, try and be honest and admit that your position is silly.
29 posted on 09/21/2001 9:40:14 PM PDT by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
It's not a good idea for an government agency that often deals in covert operations to pay people to pose as journalists. The potential for abuse domestically is not worth the risk. I don't want my government telling journalists what to say, do you?
30 posted on 09/21/2001 9:43:36 PM PDT by independentmind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Romulus
Let me take a wild guess. Are you a journalist?
31 posted on 09/21/2001 9:43:55 PM PDT by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
Before that.
It was pretty well established by 1970 but I don't remember the time/place it became policy.
Had more to do with safety of the entire journalism trade than with liberal take overs.
News reports themselves are sources of intelligence and they dry up when the targets don't believe that they can be trusted.
In this case however.....
32 posted on 09/21/2001 9:48:04 PM PDT by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: independentmind
what are you talking about? We are talking here about field agents posing as journalists. How does that amount to the CIA telling journalists what to do and say. All it amounts to is the CIA telling an employee of theirs what to do and say. Finally, in case you aren'' aware of this, the CIA operates by law outside of the country. So what possible problem could you have with a CIA agent posing as a journalist outside of the United States. And if you do have a problem with that, then logically you must have a problem with CIA agents posing as anyone but themselves.
33 posted on 09/21/2001 9:48:06 PM PDT by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
No. Never was. Not related to one either, nor even friends with any. I'm arguing purely from a position of principle and citizenship. Imagine that!
34 posted on 09/21/2001 9:48:38 PM PDT by Romulus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: norton
I ask you, why should journalists be entitled to more protection than any other class of Americans. Either American journalists are Americans first, in which case they should be willing to accepts the supposed risks that go with a CIA agent posing as a journalist, just as American businessmen, and American pilots, and American mechanics, and any other profession you care to name puts up with these risks. OR, American journalists are not Americans first, in which case they have no right to complain.
35 posted on 09/21/2001 9:52:37 PM PDT by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Romulus
It is ridiculous for you to say that you are arguing from a position of principle and citizenship when you argument is resulting in the elevation of journalists and priests above all other classes of American citizens. Come on, that is horse manure and you know it.
36 posted on 09/21/2001 9:55:14 PM PDT by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
Posing as a journalist isn't very good cover if you don't in fact publish anything.
37 posted on 09/21/2001 9:56:17 PM PDT by independentmind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
please respond to my argument about why journalists and priests should have special protection over all other types of American workers.

I did, in #26.

Why don't you eplain what we have to gain from endangering legitimate journalists and priests? Because your proposal would make every foreigner a presumptive spy, it would only endanger innocent people, without producing new intelligence.

If jouirnalists should be required to put their lives (and those of their colleagues) at risk by reporting to their home governments, why should you and I get a pass? Maybe the government has a right to expose me (unknowingly) to nuclear radiation), and to test your resistance to bio-warfare agents. Maybe we're all the property of governemnt to dispose of as our masters please, eh?

None for me; thanks.

38 posted on 09/21/2001 9:58:23 PM PDT by Romulus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: independentmind
Only fools would believe that these journalists who get access to bin Laden are not blindfolded and driven around in such a manner that they don't know where the hell they are. Plus, bL would be there only temporarily anyway. He moved every two days even before this atrocity.
39 posted on 09/21/2001 10:02:51 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
I'd believe that ABC was hiding Bin Laden. I just got done watching a disgusting bit of anti-US propaganda on Nightline. They had a rep from the Taliban in Afg. who speaks ok English and totally botched the subtitles, possibly unwittingly. He expressed opinion that the subtitles expressed as fact. It's been a steady drumbeat day after day on this show of blame being affixed to US...

I am guessing Orwell predicted the media turning against the country the membners live in. Ted Koppel is a traitor. He's not Canadian, so I can say that. ABC better hope that war doesn't come to the streets, they will be, ahem, screwed.

40 posted on 09/21/2001 10:03:25 PM PDT by Benrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JeepInMazar
It seems silly to me that the CIA never sent "journalists" in there to interview him. They must have. If not, what a joke!

Yes, silly you. After the Church Commission in 1975, the CIA was explicitly forbidden (in law) to use journalist cover.

Now the journalists jump on the CIA for "dropping the ball".

41 posted on 09/21/2001 10:07:04 PM PDT by Travis McGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Romulus
I have to laugh at your childlike naivete.

Do you really think that cruel foreign despots and evil warlords give our journalists a "pass" because of this stupid law?

Did you not consider that there is no such law preventing the Russians, French, Israelis, British, Dutch, Bolivians, Chinese etc etc etc from using journalist cover? That the despots still consider all journalists to be spies?

Sometimes seemingly intelligent folks say such laughable things.

42 posted on 09/21/2001 10:12:45 PM PDT by Travis McGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Waco
Something similar to the old arab trick used to make a camel drink water?
43 posted on 09/21/2001 10:16:08 PM PDT by Not now, Not ever!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Isn't it amazing how these people hide behind the title of Journalists when they obviously don't know the basic rules of Journalism any other time? Objective reporting is not something we see anymore.
They should be taken to the room with the light and the dripping water and made to tell!
44 posted on 09/21/2001 10:21:25 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LLAN-DDEUSANT
North. He had Bin Laden personal locations in all those papers he shredded illegally, I am sure.

Yeah right and where's Hoffa?

45 posted on 09/21/2001 10:31:42 PM PDT by Taylor42
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
So what are you suggesting? Should journalists be compelled to serve the state, as Ollie suggested tonight? Who would benefit from such a state of affairs?
46 posted on 09/21/2001 10:35:32 PM PDT by Romulus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Restorer
LOL
47 posted on 09/21/2001 10:39:56 PM PDT by des
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Romulus
Who ever said that journalists should be forced to "serve the state"?

Prior to 1975 CIA field operatives were permitted to pretend to be journalists for obscure magazines. It was useful, it got access, it was a tool. Like pretending to be a salesman or field engineer. This is an SOP of EVERY other iintelligence service in the WORLD, except for our "pure as the snow by law" CIA.

Now, our talking heads condemn the CIA, which must spy with a hand tied. For pete's sake, they are not allowed to associate with nasty people any more! Then the media says "why didn't the CIA know what was going on in the terrorist groups?"

And they see no irony.

As far as the journalists who may have info on OBL but will not pass it on to the CIA, can you imagine a reporter stiffing the FBI about Japanese troop movements in 1942?

"IT'S A WAR!! GET USED TO IT!!"

48 posted on 09/21/2001 10:43:25 PM PDT by Travis McGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

Comment #49 Removed by Moderator

To: Travis McGee
Journalists are one of the biggest reasons Bush refuses to conduct a media-event war and he has told the WH media repeatedly that his adminstration will not disclose any details regarding times, places, or sources prior to any mission.
50 posted on 09/21/2001 10:53:40 PM PDT by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson