Bin Laden: What Bruce Willis is Talkin’ ‘Bout

CNN - Osama dead or aliveI wasn’t aware that Bruce Willis was such a gung-ho Iraq war supporter, what with his comments about the media not doing enough to cover the “good” news in Iraq. But we have to give him some props for straying from the party-line that seems to ignore Bin Laden (and company) and the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan — in order to offer some additional bounty cash:

Actor Bruce Willis has offered $1 million to anyone who turns in al-Qaeda terror leaders.

The patriotic “Die Hard” star will pay out for information on the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden, Aymen Al-zawahiri or Abu Musab Al-zarqawi, the alleged brains behind the 9/11 atrocity.

The open bounty on Osama’s head is a reported $50 million, however authorities have been quick to arrest any private citizen trying to go and, you know… actually catch him.

Personally, I think there’s a void here begging to filled with a reality TV series covering the hunt for Al Qaida militants on the Afghan/Paki border.

7 Comments
  1. Good for Bruce from not only supporting our troops and bring attention to the lack of true reporting by mainstream press while highlighting the great reporting by Michael Yon but also for walking the talk by backing it up with his only $. Good to see someone in the spotlight is thinking and not just towing the Hollywood party line! Good for you Bruce!

  2. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,131866,00.html

    Note, this is June 2001 – 3 months before 9/11

    In the language of advertising, Bin Laden has become a brand — a geopolitical Keyser Soze, an omnipresent menace whose very name invokes perils far beyond his capability. To be sure, his threat is very real. Bin Laden is a financier of considerable means who maintains a network of loyalists committed to a war of terror against the U.S. And he has put his money, connections and notoriety to work in attracting a far wider web of pre-existing Islamist groups to his jihad against Washington.

    If Bin Laden didn’t exist, we’d have to invent him

    The administration doesn’t want to capture Bin Laden. To do so, would mean that Americans might actually start demanding some of their freedoms back that they easily gave up for protection in the “War On Terror” TM.

    The government needs a boogeyman. Bin Laden, still “on the loose”, allows the neo-cons to keep their budgets large and their kickbacks enormous. They have no souls

  3. Rick’s opinion is shared by some ground troops here in Iraq, that either we know where he is and are containing him or have already done him in and waiting for a political expediency to tell the world the news. I do believe there is a legitimate war on terror, but am suspect at how are government is going about it.

    What was the stated villain from Orwell’s 1984, Rosenberg? Bin Laden is needed as a reason for limiting freedoms. David Boaz of Cato has studied how after wars or crisis our freedoms have not returned to pre-war levels. Sites like this are important to remind people about where we are supposed to be.

  4. Nehemiah,

    Thank you so much for the insight. I’m glad at least some troops consider the possibility that Bin Laden might already be in a jail somewhere, already dead, or already contained for a Bush “Get out of impeachment free” card.

    Even though I don’t know the true attention from Willis, at least he’s bringing the light back onto this issue. Right now, the administration still uses 9/11 as their pretext for curbing all natural God given rights, while phrases such as “Osama Bin Laden” or “Saddam-Osama connection” have been cast aside.

    You also bring up another great point. That once freedom is taken during a crisis, it is damn hard to get it back from the government willingly. Most often, there needs to be quite an uproar. That’s why I am adamantly opposed to give them any new powers, cause we’ll never get those rights back.

    Hope all is well with you in Iraq.

    -Rick

  5. Nehemiah,

    From a vet to someone still at ground zero, please let me express my appreciation for the position in which your posterier end currently resides.

    Like most Libertarians, I have no opposition to a real war on terror. Let’s take out the bastards who caused 9/11.

    My opposition is to this Orwellian War on Eastasia Terror with no real attempts to get to the bottom of the situation or resolve the foreign policy issues which made it likely to occur.

  6. Steve…

    “Like most Libertarians, I have no opposition to a real war on terror. Let’s take out the bastards who caused 9/11.”

    Careful, there are laws (well, edicts) against threatening the life of the (p)resident, and you are posting under your real name too. Although I suppose “take out” could mean a legal execution following a war crimes trial after impeachment….

    Nehemiah,

    “What was the stated villain from Orwell’s 1984, Rosenberg?”

    Emmanuel Goldstein.

%d bloggers like this: