All about bin Laden
There's a 9/11 truth school of thought that says the US presence in Afghanistan was all about capturing bin Laden.
Read the back of David Ray Griffin's "Osama bin Laden: Dead or Alive?", for instance, and you'll find quotes like "tbe US's present military escalation in Afghanistan is said to be necessary to 'get Osama bin Laden'", and "if Osama bin Laden is dead, the US should not be using its troops and treasure to hunt him down".
And we've regularly come across similar views in web forums. Bin Laden was initially held entirely responsible, they say, in order to justify the attack on Afghanistan; but after that the US backed off and seemed to forget about him.
But is this true? Look at the evidence, and you'll see not. Right from the beginning the US and others were regularly saying that this was about far more than just one individual.
White House press briefings
The regular press briefings provide an opportunity for the White House to put their spin on events. And so, if bin Laden is to be personally blamed for the attacks then this is the place to do it. However, while he was named early on as a "prime suspect" the White House was quick to explain that they were after much more than just him.
September 13, 2001
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I can only say, in the President's words and as the President said, the U.S. will use all our resources to conquer the enemy. And anybody who chooses to be America's enemy will have to think about what that means.
...
Q Secretary Powell has said that bin Laden is the prime candidate for these terrorist attacks. Is that the view of the White House? And secondly, can you straighten out for us whether or not the administration intends to use military personnel as sky marshals, or in any other way, to secure civilian aircraft flights?
MR. FLEISCHER: On your first question, I think what the Secretary said was -- he was asked a question about is bin Laden a suspect, and he indicated yes. I don't think he said "prime," but I'd have to check the record on that. But he did indicate yes.
On the question of the military, Jim, I just -- I'll have to find out from the Department of Transportation. When you asked me this morning I tried to refer you to Transportation. I don't have that information here.
...
Q Ari, Secretary Powell is saying bin Laden is a prime suspect. Is the administration, the U.S. confident, or does the U.S. know of his whereabouts, where he is?
Whitehouse.gov (web archive)
September 15 2001
MR. FLEISCHER: I think the difference is the events of the last four days. America's footing has changed.
Q: How does it make us any more capable of routing them out than we were as of last Monday?
MR FLEISCHER: Because the nation is shifting from a footing - a peace footing to a footing based on preparations for things military. And that puts everything in an entirely different context of what our national capacity is to act.
Four days ago, there was no authorization from the Congress for a use of force. Everything has changed. And that has put America on a different footing. And as a result of that, America's ability to mobilize and act is increasing.
...
Q: Ari, we're embarked on an effort that puts pressure on leaders in a part of the world where our alliances, even the strong ones, such as with the Saudis, have weak points. We are endeavoring to go after fundamentalists who are, themselves, a large threat to the leadership of places like Saudi Arabia and Jordan.
I'm wondering whether we have - and if I can say parenthetically, we've had mixed success in getting help from the Saudis in things like the Khobar Tower bombing. Do we have, from the Saudis, from other Arab governments and from Western financial centers, a new, stronger commitment that we will be able to get at Osama bin Laden's finances, which are his real strength?
MR. FLEISCHER: Wendall, I think you really very accurately put your finger on a big picture question here. And that's why the President has referred to this as the new war of the 21st century - that it doesn't have borders, it can be nameless, can be faceless, can be shadowy.
The President, on January 20th, was aware, that that is the new type of threat America faces from international terrorism. And all the planning that's being done has taken those vagaries and complexities into account. And that's why the President, in his radio address today, is telling the American people that this will be long, this will be difficult, this will be complicated.
Only time will tell, is the answer to your question about the specifics of it and the type of cooperation we're going to get from others. And as I indicated earlier, different nations will contribute in different ways - some will do more, some will do less. Only time will tell. But it will be discernable, it will be measurable and we will know.
Q: Do I take by that, that as of now, in the short-term, at least, we don't have new commitments to choke off Osama bin Laden's financial network?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, you can't reach that conclusion. That's the type of information that we're not going to disclose as people cooperate in different degrees. You won't know, and neither will our enemies until the President is ready to make any type of announcement.
...
Q: Ari, hi. Two questions. What was the President's evidence today for naming bin Laden as a prime suspect?
MR. FLEISCHER: What was his evidence?
Q: This was the first day that he actually said bin Laden was a prime suspect. I'm wondering why he is saying that now?
MR. FLEISCHER: You know I can't reveal what his evidence is.Whitehouse.gov (web archive)
September 17, 2001
MR. FLEISCHER: The President's response will be, he will see what they say. But this is much bigger than that. The President has made it clear, the Vice President has made it clear, the Secretary of Defense has made it clear that this war on terrorism is bigger than any one person. The al Qaeda organization is a network that is represented in some 60 countries around the world, that exists beyond any one leader. And this war on terrorism is a war that the President said he is committed to taking throughout this organization that engaged in this attack on our country.
Q: And the Pakistani officials are saying that they told Afghan leaders, the Taliban, they had 72 hours to turn over bin Laden. Is that a U.S.-sponsored deadline?
MR. FLEISCHER: Anything involving, any specific actions that may or may not have been taken by our allies in this matter, I'm not going to get into. And let me try to shed a little light on the reason for that, because there have been many questions about what have you asked your allies to do, and I've indicated the broad areas.
We've asked our allies to cooperate with us in military areas, in financial areas, in economic areas, in political and diplomatic. And I understand why you want to know more. But for me to indicate to you anything more than that would also be an indication to our enemy about what concrete steps allies may be taking. And one of the easiest ways for them to get around any steps our allies may be taking is for them to know about them.
So I wish somehow there was a way that I could share this information with people here and with the American people. But, as you know, any answer I would give to that would also be directly provided to our enemy. And I will not do that.
...
Q Just to clarify, this is what the President wants to tell the American people, that this is the mastermind of this, this is the person who is responsible, and that he is worth, dead or alive, rather than being brought to a court of justice?
Whitehouse.gov (web archive)
September 18, 2001
MR. FLEISCHER: I think it's going to be a very complicated matter. With different states it's going to be more complicated. And I think the basic approach that we can look at is -- as I indicated yesterday, some nations are going to be able to do more, some nations are going to be able to do an awful lot. Other nations may be only able to do a little. But if that little is constructive, that little will proceed.
The approach of the government will involve both a carrot and a stick. And in different nations, the carrot may be bigger, in other nations the stick may be bigger.
...
Q: Thank you, Ari. On the international terrorism, I understand the President wants to change international tolerance for terrorism, but you listed a disparate group of terrorists in Northern Ireland, everyplace else. Does the President have any proof that these different terrorist groups are linked together in any way?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the al Qaeda organization is present in, as you've heard from the President, more than 60 countries, and its links are -- its links are amorphous, and that's one of the ways that terrorism has so successfully operated around the world. It's hard to tell where one group begins and another group ends often. But the President is making clear that as he approaches this, he's approaching it from a very broad and total sense. I think it's his judgment and the judgment of the planners that is the way to be most effective.
...
Q: We carried word of an intelligence report believed to be credible that Mohammed Atta, who was taken to be the ringleader of the 19 that were involved in the last Tuesday's attack, was seen meeting with the head of Iraqi intelligence in Europe earlier this year. Do you have any knowledge of that report? Do you have any knowledge of a connection to Iraq?
Whitehouse.gov (web archive)
September 19, 2001
MR. FLEISCHER: The President has said this is much bigger than any one person. This deals with all terrorist networks that contribute to this form of terrorism, and to those who harbor terrorism. The President has said that he sees in this an opportunity to do something for the next generations, so that people will not have to suffer these terrorist attacks that culminated in the attack on the World Trade Center.
Whitehouse.gov (web archive)
September 21, 2001
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, as I've been indicating on a regular basis, the President has said that the goals are broad, and that is to fight terrorism where terrorism continues, where terrorism persists, and where terrorism represents a threat to free people in the United States and everywhere. And, again, I just remind you that the al Queda organization is present in some 60 countries. And those who harbor and support terrorists are the targets of the President's action to protect our country. And there are nebulous lines about where some of these organizations begin and some end.
Whitehouse.gov (web archive)
October 2, 2001
http://web.archive.org/web/20011201220923/http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/10/20011002-11.html#Proof-binLaden
October 4, 2001
http://web.archive.org/web/20011201220922/www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/10/20011004-12.html
October 8, 2001
So that one person, that one tape, is not what this is about. This is an entire network of terrorists that has global reach and those who continue to harbor those terrorists who have carried out an attack on our country. And any statements made by one person, Osama bin Laden or otherwise, are not what the President is focused on. He's focusing on a multiple front effort that involves a series of actions to win this war on terrorism.
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm repeating what the President has said from the very beginning, that this is not just about one man. And I don't think that surprises anybody. This is about an entire network that has people in place in some 60 countries that presents a threat to the United States, that presents a threat to other nations around the world.
You've heard it said from the Vice President, from many people. And I said it just moments ago and I'll say it again: if Osama bin Laden is gone today, this effort will continue tomorrow. It's much bigger than any one person.
Q Going back to your repeated comment that the war is more about Osama bin Laden, is he still, is the President still --
MR. FLEISCHER: Not about
Q Not about Osama bin Laden, I'm sorry. Is he still, as the President put it, only recently on a wanted dead or alive list?
MR. FLEISCHER: There has been no change in how the President thinks about that matter.
Q So he still feels that he is wanted dead or alive?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President believes that on multiple fronts it is imperative for the United States and other nations around the world to take action, not only against one person, but against the entire network of terrorists. And that way we can help protect the world so these type of attacks don't happen again.
Q But, previously, he went out of his way to single this guy out.
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm shared with you the President's thinking.
Q But it also leaves some people to wonder, and some critics are saying, well, if you're not looking at Osama bin Laden, it's okay not to get him, but to get everybody else. Is he still -- yes, because it's taking -- first it was Osama bin Laden was the prime suspect. Now it's pulled back.
MR. FLEISCHER: The statements have been consistent from day one. Osama bin Laden is the prime suspect in the al Qaeda organization. That's always been said.
Q Is it clear that you want to have Osama bin Laden in custody, as well?
MR. FLEISCHER: Nothing has changed since I answered the question two minutes ago.http://web.archive.org/web/20011202140635/www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/10/20011008-6.html
The Blair Dossier
In early October 2001 the British government released a dossier assigning responsibility for the 9/11 attacks. The New York Times reported that this release was coordinated and approved by the US, who perhaps channeled the information through the UK to gain a little extra credibility:
The White House acknowledged today that it had coordinated and approved Britain's release on Thursday of details of the case against Osama bin Laden, even though it had declined, on national security grounds, to publish a similar accounting of the evidence against the suspected mastermind of the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center. ... One senior administration official said that within the Bush administration, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell had pressed for a public recitation of the evidence, which he had all but promised in a television appearance two weeks ago. Secretary Powell, two officials said, believed that the public version was necessary to help firm up the coalition of nations being cobbled together for the anticipated military actions.
Several of Mr. Bush's aides said they thought that the information carried more credibility around the world coming from Mr. Blair, rather than from Washington. It carries greater weight coming from someone in the European Union, where there is more concern about the nature of the evidence, one senior administration official said today. We don't believe the American people are clamoring for this. ... Much of the information in Mr. Blair's accounting was contained in a classified briefing that the United States has given now to all of its allies and even some states like Pakistan that traditionally receive no sensitive information from the United States, American officials said.
In London, British officials said that Mr. Blair, who traveled to Pakistan today, felt under political pressure to produce evidence as soon as possible to head off possible criticism that he had no real grounds for moving militarily against Mr. bin Laden.http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/06/world/a-nation-challenged-the-evidence-white-house-approved-data-blair-released.html
There's reason to believe that the US had at least some, and perhaps a great deal of input into the document, then. And here's what that said about the responsibility for the attacks:
...
63. Osama Bin Laden remains in charge, and the mastermind, of al-Qaeda. In al-Qaeda, an operation on the scale of the 11 September attacks would have been approved by Osama Bin Laden himself.http://www.counterpunch.org/dossier1.html
So: bin Laden has responsibility as the leader of al Qaeda, but the detailed planning, they believed, was carried out by someone else. Which is entirely consistent with the message we see elsewhere - the attack on Afghanistan was about more than just one man.
Presidential radio addresses
Every Saturday morning the sitting President of the United States delivers a radio address to the nation. This is Bush (or at least his writers) talking directly to the American people, without being filtered through the press, so if he wants to invoke bin Laden as an evil threat and justification for war then you'd expect him to do so here. But what did he actually say?
September 15, 2001
President Bush's first weekly radio address after the attacks came on September 15. He made no direct mention of bin Laden or al Qaeda.
This is a conflict without battlefields or beachheads, a conflict with opponents who believe they are invisible. Yet, they are mistaken. They will be exposed, and they will discover what others in the past have learned: Those who make war against the United States have chosen their own destruction. Victory against terrorism will not take place in a single battle, but in a series of decisive actions against terrorist organizations and those who harbor and support them.
We are planning a broad and sustained campaign to secure our country and eradicate the evil of terrorism. And we are determined to see this conflict through. Americans of every faith and background are committed to this goal.
Yesterday I visited the site of the destruction in New York City and saw an amazing spirit of sacrifice and patriotism and defiance. I met with rescuers who have worked past exhaustion, who cheered for our country and the great cause we have entered.
In Washington, D.C., the political parties and both Houses of Congress have shown a remarkable unity, and I'm deeply grateful. A terrorist attack designed to tear us apart has instead bound us together as a nation. Over the past few days, we have learned much about American courage -- the courage of firefighters and police officers who suffered so great a loss, the courage of passengers aboard United 93 who may well have fought with the hijackers and saved many lives on the ground.
Now we honor those who died, and prepare to respond to these attacks on our nation. I will not settle for a token act. Our response must be sweeping, sustained and effective. We have much do to, and much to ask of the American people.
You will be asked for your patience; for, the conflict will not be short. You will be asked for resolve; for, the conflict will not be easy. You will be asked for your strength, because the course to victory may be long.
In the past week, we have seen the American people at their very best everywhere in America. Citizens have come together to pray, to give blood, to fly our country's flag. Americans are coming together to share their grief and gain strength from one another.
Great tragedy has come to us, and we are meeting it with the best that is in our country, with courage and concern for others. Because this is America. This is who we are. This is what our enemies hate and have attacked. And this is why we will prevail.
Thank you for listening.Whitehouse.gov (web archive)
September 29, 2001
The radio address of September 29 focused on "progress made in the war on terrorism", however it didn't mention bin Laden or al Qaeda, instead focusing on a wide range of fronts.
In recent days, many members of our military have left their homes and families and begun moving into a place for missions to come. Thousands of Reservists have been called to active duty. Soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and Coast Guardmen are being deployed to points around the globe, ready to answer when their country calls. Our military families have accepted many hardships, and our nation is grateful for their willing service.
The men and women of the Armed Forces are united in their dedication to freedom and they will make us proud in the struggle against terrorism.
International cooperation is gaining momentum. This week, I met with the Prime Ministers of two of America's closest friends: Canada and Japan. Other countries, from Russia to Indonesia, are giving strong support as the war against terrorism moves forward. America is grateful to the nations that have cut off diplomatic ties with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which is sheltering terrorists.
The United States respects the people of Afghanistan and we are their largest provider of humanitarian aid. But we condemn the Taliban, and welcome the support of other nations in isolating that regime.
We have also launched a strike against the financial foundation of the global terror network. Our goal is to deny terrorists the money they need to carry our their plans. We began by identifying 27 terrorist organizations, terrorist leaders and foreign businesses and charities that support or front for terrorism.
We froze whatever assets they had here in the United States, and we blocked them from doing business with people, companies or banks in our country. Many governments and financial institutions around the world are joining in this effort to starve terrorists of funding.
This week I visited the headquarters at the FBI and the CIA. Their agents and analysts have been on the case around the clock, uncovering and pursuing the enemy. In the long campaign ahead, they will need our continued support, and every necessary tool to do their work.
I'm asking Congress for new law enforcement authority, to better track the communications of terrorists, and to detain suspected terrorists until the moment they are deported. I will also seek more funding and better technology for our country's intelligence community.
This week, we also took strong steps to improve security on planes and in airports, and to restore confidence in air travel. We're providing airlines with federal grants to make cockpits more secure through measures including fortified doors and stronger locks. And we're dramatically increasing the number of federal air marshals on our planes.
Americans will have the confidence of knowing that fully equipped officers of the law are flying with them in far greater numbers. I'm also working with Congress to put federal law enforcement in charge of all bag and passenger screening at our airports. Standards will be tougher and enforced by highly trained professionals who know exactly what they're looking for. To enhance safety immediately, I've asked governors to place National Guardsmen at security checkpoints in airports.
As all these actions make clear, our war on terror will be much broader than the battlefields and beachheads of the past. This war will be fought wherever terrorists hide, or run, or plan. Some victories will be won outside of public view, in tragedies avoided and threats eliminated. Other victories will be clear to all.
Our weapons are military and diplomatic, financial and legal. And in this struggle, our greatest advantages are the patience and resolve of the American people.
We did not seek this conflict, but we will win it. America will act deliberately and decisively, and the cause of freedom will prevail. Thank you for listening.Whitehouse.gov (web archive)
October 6, 2001
The radio address just before the Afghan war began stated that the Taliban "have much to fear". It refers to al Qaeda by inference, but makes no specific mention of bin Laden.
America is determined to oppose the state sponsors of terror. Yet we are equally determined to respect and help the men and women those regimes oppress. Our enemy is not the Arab world. Many friendly Arab governments are, themselves, the targets of extremist terror. Our enemy is not Islam, a good and peace-loving faith, that brings direction and comfort to over one billion people, including millions of Americans. And our enemy is not the people of any nation, even when their leaders harbor terrorists. Our enemy is the terrorists themselves, and the regimes that shelter and sustain them.
Afghanistan is a case in point. Its Taliban regime has made that nation into a sanctuary and training ground for international terrorists -- terrorists who have killed innocent citizens of many nations, including our own. The Taliban promotes terror abroad, and practices terror against its people, oppressing women and persecuting all who dissent.
The Taliban has been given the opportunity to surrender all the terrorists in Afghanistan and to close down their camps and operations. Full warning has been given, and time is running out.
The Afghan people, however, are the victims of oppression, famine and misrule. Many refugees from that unfortunate nation are on the move, and sadly, many Afghans are on the verge of starvation.
America respects the Afghan people, their long tradition and their proud independence. And we will help them in this time of confusion and crisis in their country.
America has long been the largest source of food and humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan. This week I announced an additional $320 million in aid to the Afghan people, to those within Afghanistan and those who have fled across borders. Despite efforts by the Taliban to disrupt these critical aid shipments, we will deliver food and seeds, vaccines and medicines by truck, and even by draft animals. Conditions permitting, we will bring help directly to the people of Afghanistan by air drops.
This aid will help Afghans make it through the upcoming winter. For the longer-term, I urge Congress to make funds available so that one day the United States can contribute, along with other friends of Afghanistan, to the reconstruction and development of that troubled nation.
Helping people in great need is a central part of the Jewish, Christian and Islamic traditions, as well as many other faiths. It is also a central part of the American tradition. Even as we fight evil regimes we are generous to the people they oppress. Following World War II, America fed and rebuilt Japan and Germany, and their people became some of our closest friends in the world.
In the struggle ahead, we will act in accordance with American ideals. We're offering help and friendship to the Afghan people. It is their Taliban rulers, and the terrorists they harbor, who have much to fear.
Thank you for listening.Whitehouse.gov (web archive)
October 13, 2001
By October 13 the first attacks on Afghanistan had begun. If this was all about getting bin Laden in particular, if that's the justification for this war, then you might expect it to be mentioned here. But once again, the name bin Laden doesn't appear in Bush's address.
In last weeks' radio address, I warned that time was running out for the Taliban to turn over the terrorists they shelter. They did not listen, and they are paying a price.
On Sunday, American and British forces launched strikes at terrorist camps and Taliban military targets in Afghanistan. Our men and women in uniform are performing as they always do, with skill and courage. And they have achieved the goals of the first phase of our campaign. We have disrupted the terrorist network inside Afghanistan. We have weakened the Taliban's military. And we have crippled the Taliban's air defenses.
American forces dominate the skies over Afghanistan and we will use that dominance to make sure terrorists can no longer freely use Afghanistan as a base of operations.
This campaign will not be completed in one attack. Our enemy prefers to attack the helpless. He hides from our soldiers. But we're making a determined effort to take away his hiding places. The best defense against terrorism is a strong offensive against terrorists. That work continues.
At the same time, we are taking further action to strengthen our protections against terrorism here at home. This week, I signed an executive order creating a new Office of Homeland Security. The Office is headed by a skilled and tested leader, former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge.
Governor Ridge is a decorated Vietnam combat veteran. He's an effective executive and he knows what we're up against, because his own state was one of the three where Americans died on September the 11th.
Governor Ridge is charged with coordinating a comprehensive national effort to protect our country against terrorism, to frustrate terrorists' plans, to help protect vulnerable points, and to prepare our response to potential threats. Tom Ridge will report directly to me, and he will have the full support of our entire government.
I understand that many Americans are feeling uneasy. But all Americans should be assured: We are taking strong precautions, we are vigilant, we are determined, the country is alert, and the great power of the American nation will be felt.
Our nation is grateful to so many Americans who are rallying to our cause and preparing for the struggle ahead: FBI agents, intelligence officers, emergency response workers, public health authorities, state and local officials, our diplomats abroad, law enforcement teams who safeguard our security at home, and soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen who defend us so far away.
Many others are asking: What can I do? Americans already contribute to the war on terror by their patience and patriotism, by their resolve and generosity.
Yet, I have one more task, one especially for America's children. I urge you to show the best of America, by directly helping the children of Afghanistan who are suffering from the oppression and misrule of their own government. Many are malnourished, many are starving.
Put a dollar in an envelope. Mark it, "America's Fund for Afghan Children," and send it here to the White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC, 20509-1600. Working with the American Red Cross, we will get that money to Afghan children in need.
This is something the children of America can do for the children of Afghanistan, even as we oppose the brutal Taliban regime. We will oppose their evil with firm justice, and we will answer their hatred with compassion for the Afghan people.
Thank you for listening.Whitehouse.gov (web archive)
Subsequent addresses
We checked a few more addresses, up to November 30, and found Al Qaeda rated one mention while the name bin Laden name didn't crop up at all. Plainly Bush was talking about him elsewhere, every day, but in terms of the Presidential radio addresses, and justifications for the Afghan attack, bin Laden didn't rate a mention.
Other media reports
Here's Rumsfeld on bin Laden and his importance:
Rumsfeld sounded a similar theme Tuesday on the CBS News Early Show.
"The al-Qada network is a broad, multi-headed organization," he said. "If bin Laden were not there, the organization would continue doing what it's been doing. So clearly the problem is much bigger than bin Laden."
Then why bother to seek the extradition of bin Laden? asked Early Show Anchor Bryant Gumbel.
"Well, clearly you begin on a journey with one step, and he would be one step," he replied Tuesday.
"We need to take this effort, this cause, this campaign to the root of the problem, and that's the terrorists and the countries that are harboring them," Rumsfeld said on CNN Wednesday.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/09/19/world/main311763.shtml
Obama
Is the Obama administration using bin Laden as a major reason to stay in Afghanistan?
It seems not.
MR. GIBBS: Did you want to come up here? (Laughter.)
Q -- said that he thought Osama bin Laden is probably dead. What is -- can you give us a status on what the administration believes about Osama bin Laden's whereabouts or --
MR. GIBBS: I don't have any information on whether he's dead or alive.
Q Is it still a priority to find -- I mean, would you describe sort of the level --
MR. GIBBS: I think it -- I think the President has talked about this. I think the President certainly believes that Osama bin Laden and others should be brought to justice. I think also the President has discussed and I think it's obvious with what's going on in Pakistan and Afghanistan now is that our focus has to be in addressing all of the security concerns, not just focusing on one individual.http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Briefing-by-White-House-Press-Secretary-Robert-Gibbs-5-8-09/
Gibbs doesn't insist that bin Laden must be alive, and yet again makes it clear that their objectives are about far more than focusing on a single person. And when confronted with a question asking specifically whether the "mission is still to catch bin Laden", he responds in just the same way:
MR. GIBBS: Well, obviously we would like to see Osama bin Laden captured and brought to justice. I think, as I've said before, our policy is broader than one person or one individual.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Briefing-by-White-House-Press-Secretary-Robert-Gibbs-6-29-09/
Conclusion
Bin Laden has been frequently singled out in many quotes and stories from Bush and other US government figures. In many cases the name is used as a shorthand for al Qaeda, though, as one US reporter's comment above makes clear: "it's long been no secret that Osama bin Laden and other terrorist organizations around the world have meant to do us harm on a massive and lethal scale." And for all the "bin Laden, dead or alive" and similar stories, the reality is that the US have said frequently, and from within days of the attack, that there's much more to their response than one man.
Bin Laden wasn't the reason why America invaded Afghanistan, then, and he's not the reason they're still present. As usual, the reality is far more complex than the 9/11 truth case would have you believe.