What actual evidence is there that Osama Bin Laden is still alive?
June 16, 2010 3:54 PM Subscribe
What actual evidence is there that Osama Bin Laden is still alive?
The news today is full of stories of an American, Faulkner, who evidently was captured by Pakistani police as he was engaged in a one-man hunt for Bin Laden. This story from the New York Times also adds:
Just Monday, Mr. bin Laden put out yet another audio speech, this one on his imprisoned confederate, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. It’s his 27th since 2001.
This brought to mind a story I read last year, in the conservative Weekly Standard magazine. The author, Angelo M. Codevilla, is no lightweight -- he is a "professor of international relations at Boston University ... was a Foreign Service officer and served on the staff of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee between 1977 and 1985. He was the principal author of the 1980 presidential transition report on intelligence."
In the year-old story, Codevilla argues fairly convincingly (to this layperson) that there is no evidence to suggest Bin Laden is still alive, and quite a few reasons to think he is not. He maintains, for example, that the audio recordings are simply not Bin Laden, but someone who sounds similar to him. (And if you're Bin Laden, and you want to get a message out, then why audio and NOT video? You could easily take the video in a room with featureless walls giving no evidence of your location.)
Has there been anything to suggest otherwise in the past year? When was the last time the world saw someone who was indisputably Bin Laden referencing recent events on video?
- AJ
The news today is full of stories of an American, Faulkner, who evidently was captured by Pakistani police as he was engaged in a one-man hunt for Bin Laden. This story from the New York Times also adds:
Just Monday, Mr. bin Laden put out yet another audio speech, this one on his imprisoned confederate, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. It’s his 27th since 2001.
This brought to mind a story I read last year, in the conservative Weekly Standard magazine. The author, Angelo M. Codevilla, is no lightweight -- he is a "professor of international relations at Boston University ... was a Foreign Service officer and served on the staff of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee between 1977 and 1985. He was the principal author of the 1980 presidential transition report on intelligence."
In the year-old story, Codevilla argues fairly convincingly (to this layperson) that there is no evidence to suggest Bin Laden is still alive, and quite a few reasons to think he is not. He maintains, for example, that the audio recordings are simply not Bin Laden, but someone who sounds similar to him. (And if you're Bin Laden, and you want to get a message out, then why audio and NOT video? You could easily take the video in a room with featureless walls giving no evidence of your location.)
Has there been anything to suggest otherwise in the past year? When was the last time the world saw someone who was indisputably Bin Laden referencing recent events on video?
- AJ
The best evidence probably is under wraps at the CIA and Pentagon. Considering he was sick way back before 9/11/01, I'd say he's dead. Or so sick that he'd do his cause more damage by appearing in front of a camera.
It never was about Bin Laden it was about the idea of a single boogieman leading a international terrorist org.
-BH
posted by birdherder at 3:59 PM on June 16, 2010 [5 favorites]
It never was about Bin Laden it was about the idea of a single boogieman leading a international terrorist org.
-BH
posted by birdherder at 3:59 PM on June 16, 2010 [5 favorites]
Does this count? It's from last week.
Osama bin Laden and top aides are hiding in Sabzevar, Iran
posted by andoatnp at 4:04 PM on June 16, 2010
Osama bin Laden and top aides are hiding in Sabzevar, Iran
posted by andoatnp at 4:04 PM on June 16, 2010
Best answer: If this Wikipedia list is exhaustive, the last video taken of Osama bin Laden was released on September 7, 2007. He references Sarkozy and Brown as leaders of their respective countries, although apparently the video freezes when he does so, so it's not a lead pipe cinch. Before that, you'd have to go back to the 2004 video that surfaced in the last days of the U.S. election campaign.
posted by Johnny Assay at 4:09 PM on June 16, 2010
posted by Johnny Assay at 4:09 PM on June 16, 2010
What actual evidence is there that Osama Bin Laden is still alive?
I know that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence ... but if it could be conclusively proven he were dead, it likely would have been leaked and/or announced by someone. At this point, there's no compelling reason for a foreign intelligence agency to keep it hushed up. For example, if he were dead, it'd be likely that the Pakistani rulership would know about it, and they could use it to their advantage to extract dollars and assistance from the Americans, and to get them to stop shooting at their people with drones. So would the Russians and Iranians enjoy this, to throw sand in American eyes. The Saudis would love him dead, too.
Moreover, no one wants to make a conclusive claim that he's dead, at the risk of being proved conclusively wrong.
No one says he's dead. Ergo, he's still alive.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 4:12 PM on June 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
I know that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence ... but if it could be conclusively proven he were dead, it likely would have been leaked and/or announced by someone. At this point, there's no compelling reason for a foreign intelligence agency to keep it hushed up. For example, if he were dead, it'd be likely that the Pakistani rulership would know about it, and they could use it to their advantage to extract dollars and assistance from the Americans, and to get them to stop shooting at their people with drones. So would the Russians and Iranians enjoy this, to throw sand in American eyes. The Saudis would love him dead, too.
Moreover, no one wants to make a conclusive claim that he's dead, at the risk of being proved conclusively wrong.
No one says he's dead. Ergo, he's still alive.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 4:12 PM on June 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
Osama bin Laden and top aides are hiding in Sabzevar, Iran
Osama bin Laden and the Arab, Wahhabist followers of Al Qaeda are not going to hide in Shiite, Persian-dominated Iran. Not a chance in hell - and the Iranian government would never allow them to anyway: it's already facing enough international pressure over its nuclear program. Giving Bin Laden a safe haven would just give the US more ammo to attack.
Bin Laden is dead, but he's useful politically, so the US is keeping him alive in spirit to scare people shitless and justify the current military campaigns and the erosion of our civil liberties. For fuck's sake, the dude was on dialysis back in 2001 - it's kind of hard to hide when you need critical treatment like that.
But his image is great propaganda, so he'll be "alive" for some time to come.
posted by Despondent_Monkey at 4:23 PM on June 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
Osama bin Laden and the Arab, Wahhabist followers of Al Qaeda are not going to hide in Shiite, Persian-dominated Iran. Not a chance in hell - and the Iranian government would never allow them to anyway: it's already facing enough international pressure over its nuclear program. Giving Bin Laden a safe haven would just give the US more ammo to attack.
Bin Laden is dead, but he's useful politically, so the US is keeping him alive in spirit to scare people shitless and justify the current military campaigns and the erosion of our civil liberties. For fuck's sake, the dude was on dialysis back in 2001 - it's kind of hard to hide when you need critical treatment like that.
But his image is great propaganda, so he'll be "alive" for some time to come.
posted by Despondent_Monkey at 4:23 PM on June 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
Even jihadis want to be on CNN, so I think someone would spill the beans if bin Laden were dead.
posted by lukemeister at 4:27 PM on June 16, 2010
posted by lukemeister at 4:27 PM on June 16, 2010
Response by poster: Johnny -
Those links are great! Not much to say about the 2004 video -- it's probably old enough to be a moot point anyway -- but that 2007 video is something else. By which I mean, if Wikipedia is to be believed:
All references to current events, such as the 62nd anniversary of the US atomic bombing of Japan, and Sarkozy and Brown being the leaders of France and the UK, respectively, occur when the video is frozen. ... The words spoken when the video is in motion contain no references to contemporary events and could have been made before the US invasion of Iraq.
So to me, I wouldn't say the tape's authenticity is "not a lead-pipe cinch" -- I'd say it's almost certainly fake.
Obviously, IANAMOTIC (I Am Not A Member Of The Intelligence Community)!
posted by Alaska Jack at 4:33 PM on June 16, 2010
Those links are great! Not much to say about the 2004 video -- it's probably old enough to be a moot point anyway -- but that 2007 video is something else. By which I mean, if Wikipedia is to be believed:
All references to current events, such as the 62nd anniversary of the US atomic bombing of Japan, and Sarkozy and Brown being the leaders of France and the UK, respectively, occur when the video is frozen. ... The words spoken when the video is in motion contain no references to contemporary events and could have been made before the US invasion of Iraq.
So to me, I wouldn't say the tape's authenticity is "not a lead-pipe cinch" -- I'd say it's almost certainly fake.
Obviously, IANAMOTIC (I Am Not A Member Of The Intelligence Community)!
posted by Alaska Jack at 4:33 PM on June 16, 2010
Best answer: Sounds like a classic conspiracy to me - lack of evidence, feel good conclusion, questionable "common sense" reasoning, etc. You have no evidence he died recently and every so often the conspiracy theorists are, again, proven wrong when he releases yet another audio tape. Not to mention, his random death is unlikely thus the onus of evidence is on your friend.
As far as the argument that its just as easy to send a videotape as an audio tape goes, well, I call short-sighted wishful thinking on this. Producing and editing audio is much easier than video especially when youre hiding from the world's most powerful military. It also important to know that some of these recordings are for his own people, not necessarily the west, and being audio, is a lot easier for his 'troops' and sympathizers to hear on the radio than trying to find a TV.
There is great propaganda value to bin laden being dead for the US, yet I don't see Obama announcing his death. I guess the conspiracy theorists can just say "No way man, dude, like its best if he's alive for the military industrial complex!!!" Or some other bong water talk. In reality, Obama would be guaranteed a reelection win if he killed bin laden.
Of course he may be dead and your friend will be "right" but only coincidentally so. He hasnt debunked the audio recordings or produced any proof. He'll be like a broken clock, right twice a day.
It perfectly logical to think that Bin Laden is alive. There isn't any evidence to the contrary and considering his vast wealth and resources, he can probably manage his health issues for a while longer.
posted by damn dirty ape at 6:03 PM on June 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
As far as the argument that its just as easy to send a videotape as an audio tape goes, well, I call short-sighted wishful thinking on this. Producing and editing audio is much easier than video especially when youre hiding from the world's most powerful military. It also important to know that some of these recordings are for his own people, not necessarily the west, and being audio, is a lot easier for his 'troops' and sympathizers to hear on the radio than trying to find a TV.
There is great propaganda value to bin laden being dead for the US, yet I don't see Obama announcing his death. I guess the conspiracy theorists can just say "No way man, dude, like its best if he's alive for the military industrial complex!!!" Or some other bong water talk. In reality, Obama would be guaranteed a reelection win if he killed bin laden.
Of course he may be dead and your friend will be "right" but only coincidentally so. He hasnt debunked the audio recordings or produced any proof. He'll be like a broken clock, right twice a day.
It perfectly logical to think that Bin Laden is alive. There isn't any evidence to the contrary and considering his vast wealth and resources, he can probably manage his health issues for a while longer.
posted by damn dirty ape at 6:03 PM on June 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
Even jihadis want to be on CNN, so I think someone would spill the beans if bin Laden were dead.
I imagine the power vacuum, opportunist killings, and all around chaos would be obvious to western intelligence.
posted by damn dirty ape at 6:05 PM on June 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
I imagine the power vacuum, opportunist killings, and all around chaos would be obvious to western intelligence.
posted by damn dirty ape at 6:05 PM on June 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
I imagine the power vacuum, opportunist killings, and all around chaos would be obvious to western intelligence.
There you have it. If Bin Laden is dead, who is the new leader of Al Qaeda?
posted by drjimmy11 at 6:14 PM on June 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
There you have it. If Bin Laden is dead, who is the new leader of Al Qaeda?
posted by drjimmy11 at 6:14 PM on June 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
Best answer: I asked a similiar question a while ago, but didn't phrase it as well as AJ did, so thanks for asking this question :)
What it comes down to whether you approach this via inclusionary or exclusionary principles, i.e. you either ask is he dead, or is he alive.
A lot of the questions above seem to say there is no evidence that he is dead, therefore he is alive. But there is also no (recent) evidence that he is alive, so therefore he is dead. Its like arguing about whether unicorns exist.
So the next step is - which is more probable? An abscence of evidence for death, or an abscence of evidence for living?
I personaly think he is dead, because-
a) there were several claims he died during heavy (daisy-cutter) bombing in Tora Bora. The area is remote, the use of caves and the decentralised nature of Al Qaeda mean that his death could easily have gone unnoticed.
b) I don't think he (or his supporters) would be able to pass up an oportunity to make a video discussing any of the many events that have happened recently (Obama's election, the GFC). And with video cameras even in mobile phones, he wouldn't lack the means to make a video.
(Of course, all this is dependant on you not accepting the recent audio tapes as valid evidence. But I think that audio is as authentic as an Elvis sighting)
posted by spongeboy at 11:59 PM on June 16, 2010
What it comes down to whether you approach this via inclusionary or exclusionary principles, i.e. you either ask is he dead, or is he alive.
A lot of the questions above seem to say there is no evidence that he is dead, therefore he is alive. But there is also no (recent) evidence that he is alive, so therefore he is dead. Its like arguing about whether unicorns exist.
So the next step is - which is more probable? An abscence of evidence for death, or an abscence of evidence for living?
I personaly think he is dead, because-
a) there were several claims he died during heavy (daisy-cutter) bombing in Tora Bora. The area is remote, the use of caves and the decentralised nature of Al Qaeda mean that his death could easily have gone unnoticed.
b) I don't think he (or his supporters) would be able to pass up an oportunity to make a video discussing any of the many events that have happened recently (Obama's election, the GFC). And with video cameras even in mobile phones, he wouldn't lack the means to make a video.
(Of course, all this is dependant on you not accepting the recent audio tapes as valid evidence. But I think that audio is as authentic as an Elvis sighting)
posted by spongeboy at 11:59 PM on June 16, 2010
1) If Bin Laden is dead, but the intelligence community doesn't have incontrovertible proof of that fact, then announcing his death would be a political risk.
2) If Bin Laden is dead, and Al Qaeda has a new leader, it would make a lot of sense for him to keep his identity secret.
3) Given that Al Qaeda, as far as we know, is a pretty cellular organization, one would expect a very small number of people to know anything about the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden, and more importantly, EXPECT to know anything.
That said, it's really just a lot of speculation. We're not going to know the truth about this for a good long time, if ever.
posted by bardophile at 12:08 AM on June 17, 2010 [1 favorite]
2) If Bin Laden is dead, and Al Qaeda has a new leader, it would make a lot of sense for him to keep his identity secret.
3) Given that Al Qaeda, as far as we know, is a pretty cellular organization, one would expect a very small number of people to know anything about the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden, and more importantly, EXPECT to know anything.
That said, it's really just a lot of speculation. We're not going to know the truth about this for a good long time, if ever.
posted by bardophile at 12:08 AM on June 17, 2010 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: Damn, dirty ape:
Believe it or not, I agree with you to a certain extent. I'm emphatically not a conspiracy theorist, and understand how this kind of thing so easily lends itself to such tomfoolery. It seems self-evident to me, as it does to you, that the U.S. would have FAR more to gain by announcing and proving his death than by pretending he is still alive to "justify the current military campaigns and the erosion of our civil liberties" as a previous commenter claims.
I'm going to take a moment, however, to play devil's advocate here. (WARNING: This is VERY long. Understand that I'm just writing to help myself articulate the issues here; I'm not actually emotionally married to this whole subject.)
every so often the conspiracy theorists are, again, proven wrong when he releases yet another audio tape.
The evidence that the tapes are actually bin Laden is that the CIA says they are. If the linked article is correct, some reasonably respectable authorities dispute this analysis. I personally wonder how solid "voice analysis" is. Solid like, for example, a polygraph?
Not to mention, his random death is unlikely thus the onus of evidence is on your friend.
Not sure what you mean here by "random death." As far as likelihood goes, allow me to stipulate that Bin Laden would be more likely to come to a sudden end than you or I. Most obviously, there is the dialysis. But even beyond that, he is a highly visible leader of a violent organization in a relatively lawless land. Those types tend to have relatively shorter life expectancies.
(as an aside, not sure who you're referring to as my "friend")
As far as the argument that its just as easy to send a videotape as an audio tape goes, well, I call short-sighted wishful thinking on this. Producing and editing audio is much easier than video especially when youre hiding from the world's most powerful military. It also important to know that some of these recordings are for his own people, not necessarily the west, and being audio, is a lot easier for his 'troops' and sympathizers to hear on the radio than trying to find a TV.
Respectfully, I don't find this persuasive.
(a) Bin Laden is (or was) a multi-millionaire; he can afford a MacBook and iMovie. And we already know Al Queda has webmasters who *can* produce videos just fine.
(b) Many of his supposed audio recordings are clearly intended for the west.
(c) Let's posit for moment that OBL is alive.
(c1) I can see certain advantages to a strategy in which he were alive but wanted us to think him dead. However, this is clearly not what is happening: If it were, Bin Laden wouldn't be sending out audio tapes -- he would be sending out nothing. So throw that out the window.
(c2) The next obvious strategy would be to prove he was still alive. This strategy also has its advantages. But he hasn't done it, despite that fact that it would be trivially easy.
(c3) The strategy he has chosen -- sending out periodic tapes claiming he is alive while offering no proof -- is the only strategy that doesn't seem to offer any real advantages for him.
There is great propaganda value to bin laden being dead for the US, yet I don't see Obama announcing his death. I guess the conspiracy theorists can just say "No way man, dude, like its best if he's alive for the military industrial complex!!!" Or some other bong water talk. In reality, Obama would be guaranteed a reelection win if he killed bin laden.
Completely agree.
Of course he may be dead and your friend will be "right" but only coincidentally so. He hasnt debunked the audio recordings or produced any proof. He'll be like a broken clock, right twice a day. It perfectly logical to think that Bin Laden is alive. There isn't any evidence to the contrary and considering his vast wealth and resources, he can probably manage his health issues for a while longer.
I can certainly see your point. OTOH, the world hasn't had conclusive evidence he is alive since at least 2004 (some would say October of 2001). Occam's Razor might therefore suggest he is dead.
posted by Alaska Jack at 12:39 AM on June 17, 2010 [1 favorite]
Believe it or not, I agree with you to a certain extent. I'm emphatically not a conspiracy theorist, and understand how this kind of thing so easily lends itself to such tomfoolery. It seems self-evident to me, as it does to you, that the U.S. would have FAR more to gain by announcing and proving his death than by pretending he is still alive to "justify the current military campaigns and the erosion of our civil liberties" as a previous commenter claims.
I'm going to take a moment, however, to play devil's advocate here. (WARNING: This is VERY long. Understand that I'm just writing to help myself articulate the issues here; I'm not actually emotionally married to this whole subject.)
every so often the conspiracy theorists are, again, proven wrong when he releases yet another audio tape.
The evidence that the tapes are actually bin Laden is that the CIA says they are. If the linked article is correct, some reasonably respectable authorities dispute this analysis. I personally wonder how solid "voice analysis" is. Solid like, for example, a polygraph?
Not to mention, his random death is unlikely thus the onus of evidence is on your friend.
Not sure what you mean here by "random death." As far as likelihood goes, allow me to stipulate that Bin Laden would be more likely to come to a sudden end than you or I. Most obviously, there is the dialysis. But even beyond that, he is a highly visible leader of a violent organization in a relatively lawless land. Those types tend to have relatively shorter life expectancies.
(as an aside, not sure who you're referring to as my "friend")
As far as the argument that its just as easy to send a videotape as an audio tape goes, well, I call short-sighted wishful thinking on this. Producing and editing audio is much easier than video especially when youre hiding from the world's most powerful military. It also important to know that some of these recordings are for his own people, not necessarily the west, and being audio, is a lot easier for his 'troops' and sympathizers to hear on the radio than trying to find a TV.
Respectfully, I don't find this persuasive.
(a) Bin Laden is (or was) a multi-millionaire; he can afford a MacBook and iMovie. And we already know Al Queda has webmasters who *can* produce videos just fine.
(b) Many of his supposed audio recordings are clearly intended for the west.
(c) Let's posit for moment that OBL is alive.
(c1) I can see certain advantages to a strategy in which he were alive but wanted us to think him dead. However, this is clearly not what is happening: If it were, Bin Laden wouldn't be sending out audio tapes -- he would be sending out nothing. So throw that out the window.
(c2) The next obvious strategy would be to prove he was still alive. This strategy also has its advantages. But he hasn't done it, despite that fact that it would be trivially easy.
(c3) The strategy he has chosen -- sending out periodic tapes claiming he is alive while offering no proof -- is the only strategy that doesn't seem to offer any real advantages for him.
There is great propaganda value to bin laden being dead for the US, yet I don't see Obama announcing his death. I guess the conspiracy theorists can just say "No way man, dude, like its best if he's alive for the military industrial complex!!!" Or some other bong water talk. In reality, Obama would be guaranteed a reelection win if he killed bin laden.
Completely agree.
Of course he may be dead and your friend will be "right" but only coincidentally so. He hasnt debunked the audio recordings or produced any proof. He'll be like a broken clock, right twice a day. It perfectly logical to think that Bin Laden is alive. There isn't any evidence to the contrary and considering his vast wealth and resources, he can probably manage his health issues for a while longer.
I can certainly see your point. OTOH, the world hasn't had conclusive evidence he is alive since at least 2004 (some would say October of 2001). Occam's Razor might therefore suggest he is dead.
posted by Alaska Jack at 12:39 AM on June 17, 2010 [1 favorite]
If the US felt at all sure he was dead, they would announce that officially and try and use it politically.
posted by xammerboy at 7:20 AM on June 17, 2010
posted by xammerboy at 7:20 AM on June 17, 2010
There is no case without a body.
posted by jasondigitized at 4:56 PM on June 17, 2010
posted by jasondigitized at 4:56 PM on June 17, 2010
But the body is rotten and gone if bin Laden died in a cave eight years ago. And what political advantage is there to revealing that, it that's the case? The intelligence community would have to admit that it was duped for years, and that the great enemy al Qaeda was so ineffective that for half a decade or more it was run by a ghost.
Nobody will announce bin Laden's death unless they catch him in the act of dying. Unless he's alive now, he'll "live" until people start to forget about him.
posted by fantabulous timewaster at 11:07 PM on June 21, 2010
Nobody will announce bin Laden's death unless they catch him in the act of dying. Unless he's alive now, he'll "live" until people start to forget about him.
posted by fantabulous timewaster at 11:07 PM on June 21, 2010
Facts: 19239239239423 Conspiracy theory believers: 0
posted by damn dirty ape at 6:43 AM on May 2, 2011 [2 favorites]
posted by damn dirty ape at 6:43 AM on May 2, 2011 [2 favorites]
« Older The right to control an ex's dating habits? | Does anyone remember the rest of a short poem by... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
- AJ
posted by Alaska Jack at 3:57 PM on June 16, 2010