Pakistan Denies Bin Laden's In Country

(CBS/AP)  Pakistan on Wednesday rejected a claim by the U.S. intelligence chief that Osama bin Laden and his deputy were hiding in northwestern Pakistan, and that al Qaeda was setting up camps near the Afghan border.

Interior Minister Aftab Khan Sherpao, told The Associated Press there were no al Qaeda training camps in his country and U.S. officials had not provided any intelligence suggesting there were.

"We will act on any such intelligence, but so far they have not" provided any, he said.

Sherpao's comments came a day after Mike McConnell, the new U.S. intelligence chief, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that al Qaeda was trying to set up operations in largely ungoverned parts of Pakistan's northwest, along Afghanistan's eastern border.

"It's something we're very worried about and very concerned about," McConnell said. U.S. intelligence officials believe that bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, were trying to establish an al Qaeda base in the region, he said. McConnell noted the camps are in an area that has never been governed by any state or outside power.

U.S. officials fear bin Laden no longer has to rely on couriers for his communications, but can meet with his senior leaders face to face and plan attacks on the U.S., CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports.

On a visit to Pakistan on Monday, Vice President Dick Cheney met with President Gen. Pervez Musharraf to seek his aid in foiling an anticipated spring offensive by the Taliban and al Qaeda against coalition forces in Afghanistan.

Cheney was accompanied by Deputy CIA Director Stephen Kappes, suggesting that the U.S. officials were prepared to buttress their allegations about al Qaeda operations with intelligence data.

U.S. officials are concerned about a peace deal Pakistan signed with tribal leaders of the North Waziristan region in September. In that agreement, the tribes promised to respect the authority of the Pakistani government and curtail cross-border attacks by militants.

In return, Musharraf returned some of the tribes' weapons, released some prisoners and withdrew from posts inside North Waziristan.

At Tuesday's hearing, Lt. Gen. Michael Maples, head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said the tribes have not abided by most terms of the agreement. McConnell added U.S. intelligence believes al Qaeda's training and related capabilities increased as a result of the deal.

Musharraf's office confirmed that during the meeting, Cheney expressed concern that al Qaeda was "regrouping" in the tribal areas and that the vice president "called for concerted efforts in countering the threat."

Musharraf, his office said, told Cheney Pakistan was already doing all it could to fight the militants.

Sherpao insisted Pakistan was "fighting the scourge of terrorism in the best interest of Pakistan."

Musharraf is a key ally of the United States in its fight against Islamic militants.

According to Derek Chollet of the Center for Strategic Studies, U.S. options in Pakistan are nearing a dead end, even a disastrous end if Musharraf were to fall.

"We're one bad event away from this going down the tubes," Chollet told CBS News, "which is a dangerous position to be in, given how vital Pakistan is and Pakistan's stability is to U.S. interests, given the fact that Pakistan is a nuclear power."

[pakaal]

Sure. I leave with these excellent quotes of yours that we both agree on:

"i respect those that have given their lives for what they believe in."

"i personally think our armed forces and the other twelve nato nations have done a good job with minimal resources. i agree, we should have not invaded iraq, and should have focused on the job in afghanistan."

Have a good one, kid....

[pakaal]

"i explained to you how we went in and defeated the taliban and ive been hidin,s alqeada."

The Taliban is growing in number. Bin Laden is free. Al-Qaeda is growing in number. You don't seem to understand the meaning of the word "defeat".

Nor do you understand how to use the CBS "PUBLISH" button. Press once, wait. No need to repeat yourself by posting twice, your lack of understanding comes through crystal clear the first time.

Sorry kid, I hate to mock and run, but I gotta go soon. Any last rants?

[pakaal]

"sinkin in yet, oldman?"

What, that you continually refused to prove your arguments while I gave you answers to yours? Yep, got that early on - right about the second time you skirted the issue and I realized you were just blabbing on and weren't really able to answer.

[pakaal]

"boy i am sure glad we dont have to rely on english majors like you to fight. you think we are losing, dont you?"

Ooh, I guess that spelling comment did get ya. Sorry about that! And yes, increased attacks, loss of ground - we're still trying to recapture towns to the south, one of the Taleban strongholds) - only marginal security even in the capital, and rising death tolls indicate the situation is getting worse there, as in Iraq. We are losing. We can turn it around, but right now we're losing. And your best wishes for the troops, sincere though they are, don't change the reality of the situation.

"you care to talk more about how much you think ive been hidin is defeating us forces, than about how well we are doing."

It's called not letting a criminal mastermind escape justice to continue attacks, and not stubbornly sticking to "things are going well, things are going well" like you wish it to be.

"you throw out insults to start with then try to act like somekind of elitist english major."

I don't think I stopped the insults - are you missing some of them? Too subtle? At least you respond to them, as opposed to the facts.

[pakaal]

"then you keep repeating the same bonebrained request, doy?"

Only because you refuse to answer it! Not my fault you can't come up with the answer, that's all you, kid.

[pakaal]

"the first one to slur and use bad grammar was you clown."

Aww, did I hurt your feelings? Such thin skin. BTW, the sentence you quote from me doesn't appear to have any bad grammar. Perhaps you could enlighten me as to what part of this sentence:

Surprisingly, words fail me, although "despicable", "heartless", "pitiful" and "Unamerican" all came to mind.

...contains bad grammar?

As for slurs, you wrote that Bin Laden is overhyped by the media. That's an insult to the suvivors and families who went through that time. You're talking about a guy who's killed almost 3,000 people and is left at large - you can't overhype someone who's committed that kind of atrocity. Do you think we've talked about Hitler enough too, now that he's been dead for 60 year or so? Just wondering.

[pakaal]

"i am saying from a military perspective, ive been hidin has not achieved anything of substance in afghanistan."

and i am saying your so-called "military perspective" hasn't given me an answer about how you know Bin Laden hasn't been behind the Taleban activities against NATO and the civilian and troop casualties. How many times are you going to say something without giving evidence, kid?

[pakaal]

"but you still seem to want to claim they are defeating us in afghanistan. i asked you where have we lost a battle."

Since you're just cutting and pasting now, I might as well do the same:

*sigh* here we go again. You're equating battle with victory, so there's no proof to give. Heck, I really don't know if we've actually "lost any battles", so you tell me - prove we HAVEN'T lost any battles in Afghanistan. Just saying something is true doesn't make it true. So, go ahead and prove me wrong.

[pakaal]

"have asked you to come up with proof,first, which you still have not."

*sigh* here we go again. You're equating battle with victory, so there's no proof to give. Heck, I really don't know if we've actually "lost any battles", so you tell me - prove we HAVEN'T lost any battles in Afghanistan. Just saying something is true doesn't make it true. So, go ahead and prove me wrong.

"whats a matter, are you upset with me?"

Not at all, not at all! I've enjoyed your slurs, meanderings, lies - and bad grammar - immensely.

[pakaal]

"we invaded afghanistan to defeat the known enemies of the usa."

How old were you in 2001 kid? You don't seem to know that the reason we went to Afghanistan instead of, oh, say, Saudia Arabia where most of the hijackers came from, was because the guy who spearheaded the attacks - Osama Bin Laden - was there.

"hes cowering under a rock in the snow caps some place and the media is over hyping him."

Yeah, the media is overhyping the guy who killed 3,000 Americans. Keep repeating that, you're making my case for me. And you've got no evidence he's cowering ANYWHERE, so you can give up that little talking point as well.

"but as for you comming up with any proof he is beating us forces, you have failed misserably."

You mean other than pointing out we're still there and the situation is getting worse?