Hello.
I need someone to revise this sentence, please, especially the part of "prior the last" - I am interested in referring back to the aforementioned suicide bomber, but without mentioning him again, or even giving him the respect of a pronoun. I want to refer to him as "that" or "it".
Do you understand what I mean?

I will update the other 3 sentences accordingly.

I see what you're trying to do, but I don't think you can get around using a personal pronoun in English. Anything else here just doesn't make sense. You're already using "his", so why the reticence about using "him"?

"A special taskforce managed to catch a suicide bomber downtown prior to him carrying out his evil plan."
"A special taskforce managed to catch a suicide bomber downtown just before he carried out his evil plan."

I agree with MethodGT. I would just make it "... before he could carry out...", which is less ambiguous than "... before he carried out...", though both are correct.

Sentence changed.

After thinking over it over and over, I concluded that no english structure and tense could ever correctly and fully correspond to all the nuances (you might keep trying, if you wish).

It's pretty amazing, 'cause the sentence looks quite trivial and simple.

Okay, but "carrying out" should be together: "prior to him carrying out his evil plan."

Corrected.

I never knew I could not split this kind of verbs (about other kinds, I did know).

Just a simple link about that matter (mainly for me - not for you): http://www.elanguage.com/searchtitle07ff.html

Instead of "prior to him* carrying" I suggest "prior to his carrying". Here's the rule: When a noun or a pronoun modifies a gerund (the ing form of a verb used as a noun), the noun or pronoun should be in the possessive.http://www.mtdesk.com/Possessiv...g+verbal+nouns

(I acknowledge that this grammar rule is often ignored by native speakers:)