The "bin Laden had given up on jihad" story flagged by Instapundit (via a piece by the American Interest) is certainly interesting, but is it supposed to be convincing? Are we to unflinchingly believe a comment made by the sister of one of UBL's still incarcerated wives? One comment can hardly negate the 'treasure trove' of intelligence that Obama himself grabbed out of bin Laden's lair after rappelling down a 40 foot rope in pitch darkness while barking orders to the SEALS (or whatever the final story was).
But OK then, if UBL had actually given up on jihad years ago (becoming a paper tiger for all practical purposes) that leaves Ayman Zawahiri as the real face of AQ, a man who is still at large despite the administration's promises that AQ's lieutenants have been "largely defeated". The funny thing is the administration may feel compelled to beat down the bin Laden story for political purposes but in doing so they may elevate Zawahiri and his threat, which they've already diminished for political purposes. There has to be some reason for the drones, partially secret prisons, lack of habeas, extra-judicial killings, GITMO and the like.
Then again, one could also look at binny's comment as he considered the war over and won by AQ, telling his progeny to attend the fine schools so they can come back and rule the newly-formed Muslim Spring countries springing up all over Arabia (the end-goal of the jihad thing all along).