The Panama Deception

1235710

Comments

  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    jlew24asu wrote:
    where is the confusion? I'll be happy to clear it up for you

    no need - i'm good
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    polaris_x wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    where is the confusion? I'll be happy to clear it up for you

    no need - i'm good

    doesnt appear that way but whatever. you can't dispute anything I said. which I guess does actually mean you're good. glad you learned something
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    America does not harbor terrorists

    So Luis Posada Carriles isn't a terrorist then? Blowing up an airliner and killing 73 people doesn't make him a terrorist? Or is just that he once worked for the CIA so therefore he's one of the good guys?

    we already went over this. Venezuela has a reason to consider America a target. besides the fact that their president is a fucking wackjob, they aren't that stupid to fight a war over this guy.

    Do you also think that most Arabs around the world have a reason to consider America a target due to it's full and unconditional support of Israeli terrorism for the past 40 years?
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:

    Do you also think that most Arabs around the world have a reason to consider America a target due to it's full and unconditional support of Israeli terrorism for the past 40 years?

    no. since you feel you are the only one who can ask questions around here...do you feel the Americans going to work on 9/11 were legitimate targets?
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    jlew24asu wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    where is the confusion? I'll be happy to clear it up for you

    no need - i'm good

    doesnt appear that way but whatever. you can't dispute anything I said. which I guess does actually mean you're good. glad you learned something

    i disagree with everything that you said - unfortunately, it is my opinion that someone of your belief system is not capable of understanding concepts beyond your scope ... instead of calling you pointless names - i simply chose to spend time discussing other topics ...

    it is sad that you actually think that you taught me something tho based on your comments but then again not surprising
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    polaris_x wrote:

    i disagree with everything that you said - unfortunately, it is my opinion that someone of your belief system is not capable of understanding concepts beyond your scope ... instead of calling you pointless names - i simply chose to spend time discussing other topics ...

    it is sad that you actually think that you taught me something tho based on your comments but then again not surprising

    well you've done nothing to add to the discussion expect ask pointless questions which I fully answered. but I can assume you somehow feel the Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11. which I'm proven false for you. so I'm glad you learned that today
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    jlew24asu wrote:
    well you've done nothing to add to the discussion expect ask pointless questions which I fully answered. but I can assume you somehow feel the Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11. which I'm proven false for you. so I'm glad you learned that today

    if you think so

    you can continue to bait but i'm not biting
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    polaris_x wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    well you've done nothing to add to the discussion expect ask pointless questions which I fully answered. but I can assume you somehow feel the Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11. which I'm proven false for you. so I'm glad you learned that today

    if you think so

    you can continue to bait but i'm not biting


    whenever you'd like to add to a discussion, I'm here. so far, you've offered nothing. good job
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited June 2009
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:

    Do you also think that most Arabs around the world have a reason to consider America a target due to it's full and unconditional support of Israeli terrorism for the past 40 years?

    no. since you feel you are the only one who can ask questions around here...do you feel the Americans going to work on 9/11 were legitimate targets?

    When did I say that I felt I was the only one who can ask questions?

    Anyway, were the Americans going to work on 9/11 legitimate targets? Clearly tor some people they were legitimate targets. Just as many Americans felt that the people of Afghanistan and Iraq should have been wiped out.
    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    whenever you'd like to add to a discussion, I'm here. so far, you've offered nothing. good job

    Very nice.
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    jlew24asu wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:

    well clearly the taliban are the stupidest people in the world as they gained absolutely nothing from the entire fiasco ... :roll:

    true, they aren't very bright for taking us on. but are you surprised by their arrogance? they honestly thought they could defeat us. while they do live on in remote regions, they could have easily avoided the US invading their country had barred OSL and el queda from their country to begin with.



    So, out of the blue, after we spent billions of dollars using their country as a battlefield, importing radical fighters from all over Islam, setting up resistance networks all across their country, teaching them the more militant side of Islam, a few bad apples from a whole bunch of bad apples decide to attack us on 9/11? what a shock.

    that's traditional history, never mind the 0 pieces of evidence tying OBL to the crime, never mind that very obvious and huge major detail.

    lets just say we used afghanistan in the past, for the past 30 years or so, for our own ends, and a few bit us back. still, that's no green light for us to invade. since when do the people of Afghanistan have to suffer for their very radical leader's mistakes? the logic is very fucked up.

    scenarios where US troop have just invaded a third world country (plenty of examples) like with afghanistan, have a few things in common. They make little sense given conventional ideology. Official pretexts vs reality. and that is always the case. Their take on reality is usually so far removed from reality its any wonder we're still around talking about any of this.

    and there are a plenty of examples of how official rhetoric and pretexts have nothing at all to do with reality, and in fact that is usually the case.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    edited June 2009
    jlew24asu wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:

    well clearly the taliban are the stupidest people in the world as they gained absolutely nothing from the entire fiasco ... :roll:

    true, they aren't very bright for taking us on. but are you surprised by their arrogance? they honestly thought they could defeat us. while they do live on in remote regions, they could have easily avoided the US invading their country had barred OSL and el queda from their country to begin with.

    you think the taliban were arrogant to think they could defeat the US, despite the fact that it wasnt them who orchestrated 9/11??

    seriously if you believe that, and i know that you do, then you have no clue what the purpose of terrorism is and therefore they have defeated you.
    Post edited by catefrances on
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    America does not harbor terrorists

    So Luis Posada Carriles isn't a terrorist then? Blowing up an airliner and killing 73 people doesn't make him a terrorist? Or is just that he once worked for the CIA so therefore he's one of the good guys?

    we already went over this. Venezuela has a reason to consider America a target. besides the fact that their president is a fucking wackjob, they aren't that stupid to fight a war over this guy.

    please explain to me how chavez is a wackjob???

    and of course the US wont go to war with venezuela even your government is well aware what a foolhardy adventure that would be.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:

    Do you also think that most Arabs around the world have a reason to consider America a target due to it's full and unconditional support of Israeli terrorism for the past 40 years?

    no. since you feel you are the only one who can ask questions around here...do you feel the Americans going to work on 9/11 were legitimate targets?

    When did I say that I felt I was the only one who can ask questions?

    Anyway, were the Americans going to work on 9/11 legitimate targets? Clearly tor some people they were legitimate targets. Just as many Americans felt that the people of Afghanistan and Iraq should have been wiped out.

    I asked if you felt they were legitimate targets
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    edited June 2009
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    no. since you feel you are the only one who can ask questions around here...do you feel the Americans going to work on 9/11 were legitimate targets?

    When did I say that I felt I was the only one who can ask questions?

    Anyway, were the Americans going to work on 9/11 legitimate targets? Clearly tor some people they were legitimate targets. Just as many Americans felt that the people of Afghanistan and Iraq should have been wiped out.

    I asked if you felt they were legitimate targets

    i know you werent asking me but i have to say that innocent civilians are never legitimate targets from our point of view. however when it comes to terrorism they are the target, otherwise terror really hasnt been instilled in the populace. if you think you are capable of being the target then terrorism has worked and is its ultimate goal. so i guess from a terrorist pov that makes them a legitimate target.
    Post edited by catefrances on
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    jlew24asu wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:

    well clearly the taliban are the stupidest people in the world as they gained absolutely nothing from the entire fiasco ... :roll:

    true, they aren't very bright for taking us on. but are you surprised by their arrogance? they honestly thought they could defeat us. while they do live on in remote regions, they could have easily avoided the US invading their country had barred OSL and el queda from their country to begin with.

    you think the taliban were arrogant to think they could defeat the US, despite the fact that it wasnt them who orchestrated 9/11??

    seriously if you believe that, and i know that you do, then you have no clue what the purpose of terrorism is and therefore they have defeated you.

    wow yet another one lacking comprehension skills. it makes no difference that they didnt orchestrate the attacks. they allow the group who did safe haven to operate and do all the orchestrating they pleased. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?

    and secondly, yes. The Taliban thought they could take on the US. they had no fear of us.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/se ... eptember11

    Defiant Taliban ready for war

    The Taliban's most senior body of clerics is poised to declare a holy war against the US if a last-minute plea from Pakistan today fails to persuade them to hand over the wanted Saudi-born dissident, Osama bin Laden.

    With fear growing throughout the region that the US assault is imminent, Afghan forces were massing at the Pakistan border near the Khyber Pass, ready to repel US ground forces and to retaliate against Pakistan should it help the US.

    http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asia ... an.denial/

    KABUL, Afghanistan (CNN) -- The leader of Afghanistan's ruling Taliban told his nation Friday to prepare for holy war amid concerns that the United States would target it for harboring Osama bin Laden.

    In a 17-minute radio address, Supreme Leader Mullah Mohammed Omar said the Afghan people should not be afraid and that he was not afraid of dying.

    Afghanistan had been invaded by great powers before, including Britain and Russia, and had withstood the assault, he said.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    jlew24asu wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    true, they aren't very bright for taking us on. but are you surprised by their arrogance? they honestly thought they could defeat us. while they do live on in remote regions, they could have easily avoided the US invading their country had barred OSL and el queda from their country to begin with.

    you think the taliban were arrogant to think they could defeat the US, despite the fact that it wasnt them who orchestrated 9/11??

    seriously if you believe that, and i know that you do, then you have no clue what the purpose of terrorism is and therefore they have defeated you.

    wow yet another one lacking comprehension skills. it makes no difference that they didnt orchestrate the attacks. they allow the group who did safe haven to operate and do all the orchestrating they pleased. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?

    and secondly, yes. The Taliban thought they could take on the US. they had no fear of us.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/se ... eptember11

    Defiant Taliban ready for war

    The Taliban's most senior body of clerics is poised to declare a holy war against the US if a last-minute plea from Pakistan today fails to persuade them to hand over the wanted Saudi-born dissident, Osama bin Laden.

    With fear growing throughout the region that the US assault is imminent, Afghan forces were massing at the Pakistan border near the Khyber Pass, ready to repel US ground forces and to retaliate against Pakistan should it help the US.

    http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asia ... an.denial/

    KABUL, Afghanistan (CNN) -- The leader of Afghanistan's ruling Taliban told his nation Friday to prepare for holy war amid concerns that the United States would target it for harboring Osama bin Laden.

    In a 17-minute radio address, Supreme Leader Mullah Mohammed Omar said the Afghan people should not be afraid and that he was not afraid of dying.

    Afghanistan had been invaded by great powers before, including Britain and Russia, and had withstood the assault, he said.
    yes i do understand that. i also understand that when it coems to terrorism the united states has a convenient loss of memory, because they have themselves been involved in such acts. it doesnt mean if i think they deserved what they got on 9/11(which i dont) but it gives me reference. it doesnt make me arc up and start waving the flag and denounce without regard anyone in central asia, who i point out were at one stage, when it was convenient for the US, armed by them in order to serve the greater good (whatever the fuck that was)
    i have watched the united states of america for a long long time, and there was a time when i was on board with their foreign policy so much that i would have happily had the bald eagle tattooed to my arse. but i was young and naive and easily led back then and i thought the sun shone out of washingtons arse. i thought they could do no wrong... clearly i am no longer of that opinion. i have come to my own conclusions from reading and forming logical connections. nothing happens in a void and when 9/11 happened i literally held my breath to see what would happen. i hoped that washington would take this opportnity to do some self evaluation but i was proved wrong by the bush adinistration nd their gung ho attitude towards retribution. they played right into the terrorists hands and now today we all have to deal with the bullshit. most of all the soldiers and their families.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    yes i do understand that. i also understand that when it coems to terrorism the united states has a convenient loss of memory, because they have themselves been involved in such acts. it doesnt mean if i think they deserved what they got on 9/11(which i dont) but it gives me reference. it doesnt make me arc up and start waving the flag and denounce without regard anyone in central asia, who i point out were at one stage, when it was convenient for the US, armed by them in order to serve the greater good (whatever the fuck that was)
    i have watched the united states of america for a long long time, and there was a time when i was on board with their foreign policy so much that i would have happily had the bald eagle tattooed to my arse. but i was young and naive and easily led back then and i thought the sun shone out of washingtons arse. i thought they could do no wrong... clearly i am no longer of that opinion. i have come to my own conclusions from reading and forming logical connections. nothing happens in a void and when 9/11 happened i literally held my breath to see what would happen. i hoped that washington would take this opportnity to do some self evaluation but i was proved wrong by the bush adinistration nd their gung ho attitude towards retribution. they played right into the terrorists hands and now today we all have to deal with the bullshit. most of all the soldiers and their families.

    ok so now the truth comes out. dont reference the fact that I proved to you that the Taliban were in fact defiant and thought they could take on the US. the US was ATTACKED on 9/11. going into Afghanistan and defeat those who attacked us was the only option.

    but yet chose to go on about some rant about how you really dislike the US and how naive you were to ever respect us. Who gives a fuck?

    although I will say war in Iraq was a mistake and wrong. the US is now paying a price for that mistake but hopefully on the right path to fix it
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    jlew24asu wrote:
    yes i do understand that. i also understand that when it coems to terrorism the united states has a convenient loss of memory, because they have themselves been involved in such acts. it doesnt mean if i think they deserved what they got on 9/11(which i dont) but it gives me reference. it doesnt make me arc up and start waving the flag and denounce without regard anyone in central asia, who i point out were at one stage, when it was convenient for the US, armed by them in order to serve the greater good (whatever the fuck that was)
    i have watched the united states of america for a long long time, and there was a time when i was on board with their foreign policy so much that i would have happily had the bald eagle tattooed to my arse. but i was young and naive and easily led back then and i thought the sun shone out of washingtons arse. i thought they could do no wrong... clearly i am no longer of that opinion. i have come to my own conclusions from reading and forming logical connections. nothing happens in a void and when 9/11 happened i literally held my breath to see what would happen. i hoped that washington would take this opportnity to do some self evaluation but i was proved wrong by the bush adinistration nd their gung ho attitude towards retribution. they played right into the terrorists hands and now today we all have to deal with the bullshit. most of all the soldiers and their families.

    ok so now the truth comes out. dont reference the fact that I proved to you that the Taliban were in fact defiant and thought they could take on the US. the US was ATTACKED on 9/11. going into Afghanistan and defeat those who attacked us was the only option.

    but yet chose to go on about some rant about how you really dislike the US and how naive you were to ever respect us. Who gives a fuck?

    although I will say war in Iraq was a mistake and wrong. the US is now paying a price for that mistake but hopefully on the right path to fix it

    of course the taliban were defiant. if you came to my door without evidence and said hand over your son, i would tell you to go fuck yourself. that is exactly what afghanistan did. so what do the US do??... the only thing the know how to do, they hit afghanistan with superior weaponry. those who were responsilbe for the vile acts of 9/11 were predominantly saudis.

    you know jlew. it tires me to have to explain to you(generally) how i personally do not hate the US but that i do detest the foreign policy of your government. youve totally dismissed anything ive ever said previously cause it doesnt fit your agenda. i never said i was naive to respect 'you', but i was naive to believe everything i was being fed by pro US government interests. but you know what.. i was a kid back then. i actually believed what my government and that of 'the greatest democracy on earth' told me. they wouldnt lie to me, surely. what purpose would that serve, my underdeveloped mind asked. i could so easily have come down on the side of your goverment but i didnt. and why is that? is it cause im a fool who knows no better and just hates the US for no reason??? hardly. my reasons are legitimate just like you think you think yours are. i shudder to think that young men and women are sent to sacrifice their lives for no reason other than the continuation of the capitalist/imperialist bullshit that we all have to stomach..
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    jlew24asu wrote:
    yes i do understand that. i also understand that when it coems to terrorism the united states has a convenient loss of memory, because they have themselves been involved in such acts. it doesnt mean if i think they deserved what they got on 9/11(which i dont) but it gives me reference. it doesnt make me arc up and start waving the flag and denounce without regard anyone in central asia, who i point out were at one stage, when it was convenient for the US, armed by them in order to serve the greater good (whatever the fuck that was)
    i have watched the united states of america for a long long time, and there was a time when i was on board with their foreign policy so much that i would have happily had the bald eagle tattooed to my arse. but i was young and naive and easily led back then and i thought the sun shone out of washingtons arse. i thought they could do no wrong... clearly i am no longer of that opinion. i have come to my own conclusions from reading and forming logical connections. nothing happens in a void and when 9/11 happened i literally held my breath to see what would happen. i hoped that washington would take this opportnity to do some self evaluation but i was proved wrong by the bush adinistration nd their gung ho attitude towards retribution. they played right into the terrorists hands and now today we all have to deal with the bullshit. most of all the soldiers and their families.

    ok so now the truth comes out. dont reference the fact that I proved to you that the Taliban were in fact defiant and thought they could take on the US. the US was ATTACKED on 9/11. going into Afghanistan and defeat those who attacked us was the only option.

    but yet chose to go on about some rant about how you really dislike the US and how naive you were to ever respect us. Who gives a fuck?

    although I will say war in Iraq was a mistake and wrong. the US is now paying a price for that mistake but hopefully on the right path to fix it

    of course the taliban were defiant. if you came to my door without evidence and said hand over your son, i would tell you to go fuck yourself. that is exactly what afghanistan did. so what do the US do??... the only thing the know how to do, they hit afghanistan with superior weaponry. those who were responsilbe for the vile acts of 9/11 were predominantly saudis.

    unreal. another person who thinks the US should have sat down and let the Taliban take its time and review our "evidence" that OSL was responsible. meanwhile, our cities burn with black smoke and empty shoes are found in the streets.

    but no no....we should give in to the Taliban's demands and let them take their sweet old time going over evidence. un fucking real.

    and again with the Saudi reference, I love it. so we should have attacked Saudi then? no? then why bring it up? you seem to be implying it was actually Saudi Arabia who is responsible, not the Taliban or el queda. the hijckers nationality is so fucking irreverent but it continues to be brought up. mind boggling. My guess is OSL picked these men and their ethnicity on purpose. simply so you can eat up. worked like a charm

    and I'm not talking about being defiant in the way you are. I'm talking about defiance in terms that they were ready to fight America head to head.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    jlew24asu wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:

    ok so now the truth comes out. dont reference the fact that I proved to you that the Taliban were in fact defiant and thought they could take on the US. the US was ATTACKED on 9/11. going into Afghanistan and defeat those who attacked us was the only option.

    but yet chose to go on about some rant about how you really dislike the US and how naive you were to ever respect us. Who gives a fuck?

    although I will say war in Iraq was a mistake and wrong. the US is now paying a price for that mistake but hopefully on the right path to fix it

    of course the taliban were defiant. if you came to my door without evidence and said hand over your son, i would tell you to go fuck yourself. that is exactly what afghanistan did. so what do the US do??... the only thing the know how to do, they hit afghanistan with superior weaponry. those who were responsilbe for the vile acts of 9/11 were predominantly saudis.

    unreal. another person who thinks the US should have sat down and let the Taliban take its time and review our "evidence" that OSL was responsible. meanwhile, our cities burn with black smoke and empty shoes are found in the streets.

    but no no....we should give in to the Taliban's demands and let them take their sweet old time going over evidence. un fucking real.

    and again with the Saudi reference, I love it. so we should have attacked Saudi then? no? then why bring it up? you seem to be implying it was actually Saudi Arabia who is responsible, not the Taliban or el queda. the hijckers nationality is so fucking irreverent but it continues to be brought up. mind boggling. My guess is OSL picked these men and their ethnicity on purpose. simply so you can eat up. worked like a charm

    and I'm not talking about being defiant in the way you are. I'm talking about defiance in terms that they were ready to fight America head to head.

    OMFG!! is not the US justice system founded on due process, of which concrete irrefutable evidence is a major factor??? if a country came knocking n the white house door and delivered the same demand that the US gave kabul, i am dead certain the bush administration would have laughed in their face and told them to fuck off.

    where did i say the US should have sat on their fat arse waiting for afghanistan to 'make up their mind'?? what is it exactly that they had to make up their mind about?? the US provided no evidence other then their own word and given their history thats hardly beyond reproach now is it???. the worst evidence you can have in regards to a crime scene is eye witnesses. so excuse me if the word of the USA wasnt taken as gospel. JFC im not saying al qaeda werent responsible for 9/11, all im saying is give me some fucking objective evidence.

    you and i are not on opposite sides here jlew. the events of 9/11 were beyond disgraceful, but it wasnt the first time a terrorist attack had happened(not even on US soil). i understand the scale was without precedent and that until that morning the US thought themselves invincible.

    as for the taliban being defiant in reagrds to them fighting america head to head well id have to say they were right about that wouldnt you cause the US is still mired in afghanistan with no obvious end. should not the events of the soviet invasion given the US some kind of heads up in that regard?? or did they think in their usual arrogant manner that their might could overwhelm everything???

    you know, were never gonna agree on this.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118


    OMFG!! is not the US justice system founded on due process, of which concrete irrefutable evidence is a major factor??? if a country came knocking n the white house door and delivered the same demand that the US gave kabul, i am dead certain the bush administration would have laughed in their face and told them to fuck off.

    where did i say the US should have sat on their fat arse waiting for afghanistan to 'make up their mind'?? what is it exactly that they had to make up their mind about?? the US provided no evidence other then their own word and given their history thats hardly beyond reproach now is it???. the worst evidence you can have in regards to a crime scene is eye witnesses. so excuse me if the word of the USA wasnt taken as gospel. JFC im not saying al qaeda werent responsible for 9/11, all im saying is give me some fucking objective evidence.

    first of all there was PLENTY of evidence. we had the names of the hijackers and their affilations to el queda. OSL is the LEADER of el queda. that right there is MORE then enough evidence. but you want "due process" with the Taliban? what the fuck is that?

    and you didnt say the US should have sat on their ass waiting for Afganistan. but you said we need to provide some heaping pile of evidence to the Taliban. what do you think they would do with this so called evidence? it would surely take them some time to go over this and decide if it was worthy right? what if they decided it wasn't enough evidence? or decided the US didn't prove its case. then what? hmmmm? please tell me.

    bottom fucking line is we had enough evidence to conclude the OSL and his network were responsible for the attacks. time for negotiation with the Taliban was over. I hope you understand now
    you and i are not on opposite sides here jlew. the events of 9/11 were beyond disgraceful, but it wasnt the first time a terrorist attack had happened(not even on US soil). i understand the scale was without precedent and that until that morning the US thought themselves invincible.

    I agree, thats partly why the attacks were successful. we let our guard down.
    as for the taliban being defiant in reagrds to them fighting america head to head well id have to say they were right about that

    really? cuz here you were singing a different tune
    you think the taliban were arrogant to think they could defeat the US, despite the fact that it wasnt them who orchestrated 9/11??

    seriously if you believe that, and i know that you do, then you have no clue what the purpose of terrorism is and therefore they have defeated you.

    ----
    wouldnt you cause the US is still mired in afghanistan with no obvious end. should not the events of the soviet invasion given the US some kind of heads up in that regard?? or did they think in their usual arrogant manner that their might could overwhelm everything???

    you know, were never gonna agree on this.

    that Taliban were in power for all of 2 week after the US came in. The Taliban and el queda no longer had safe haven to do as they pleased.

    sure, the Taliban hide in caves and blended into the civilian population. and also went into an inaccessible area of Pakistan. I agree, they can not be defeated in that sense. but we took away the Taliban's grip on an entire country as well as a free open place for el queda to operate.
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    jlew24asu wrote:


    OMFG!! is not the US justice system founded on due process, of which concrete irrefutable evidence is a major factor??? if a country came knocking n the white house door and delivered the same demand that the US gave kabul, i am dead certain the bush administration would have laughed in their face and told them to fuck off.

    where did i say the US should have sat on their fat arse waiting for afghanistan to 'make up their mind'?? what is it exactly that they had to make up their mind about?? the US provided no evidence other then their own word and given their history thats hardly beyond reproach now is it???. the worst evidence you can have in regards to a crime scene is eye witnesses. so excuse me if the word of the USA wasnt taken as gospel. JFC im not saying al qaeda werent responsible for 9/11, all im saying is give me some fucking objective evidence.

    first of all there was PLENTY of evidence. we had the names of the hijackers and their affilations to el queda. OSL is the LEADER of el queda. that right there is MORE then enough evidence. but you want "due process" with the Taliban? what the fuck is that?

    that isn't "more than enough evidence". due process is required, especially in cases that could lead to war. - more important in this case. thousands of innocent lives could have been saved.

    But the US prefers violence, it always has the upper hand in that game.

    and you didnt say the US should have sat on their ass waiting for Afganistan. but you said we need to provide some heaping pile of evidence to the Taliban. what do you think they would do with this so called evidence? it would surely take them some time to go over this and decide if it was worthy right? what if they decided it wasn't enough evidence? or decided the US didn't prove its case. then what? hmmmm? please tell me.

    here's where reality splits from your perception.

    The Taliban offered to give Bin Ladin up for trial pre-invasion, with 1 stipulation, that he not not be tried in US courts. that's it. we could have had him years ago, no invasion necessary, the end.

    They chose to invade instead, as usual.
    bottom fucking line is we had enough evidence to conclude the OSL and his network were responsible for the attacks. time for negotiation with the Taliban was over. I hope you understand now
    i would like to see or read about this evidence, if you can find it.




    that Taliban were in power for all of 2 week after the US came in. The Taliban and el queda no longer had safe haven to do as they pleased.

    sure, the Taliban hide in caves and blended into the civilian population. and also went into an inaccessible area of Pakistan. I agree, they can not be defeated in that sense. but we took away the Taliban's grip on an entire country as well as a free open place for el queda to operate.

    you're grouping the Taliban and Bin Ladin in the same boat, when reality doesn't support your perception. According to high level US officials, who have recently come out about this....the Taliban was tired of having this liability in their country, al-qaeda. They set up repeated meetings with US intelligence agencies and offered to hand over OBL BEFORE 9/11. The wanted nothing to do with him.

    Kabir Mohabbat is the guy coming out about all of this, ABC has done a story on him.

    "Mohabbat says the Taliban were flown to Quetta in two C-130s, [4 days after 9/11]. There they agreed to the three demands sought by the US team: 1. Immediate handover of bin Laden; 2. Extradition of foreigners in Al Qaeda who were wanted in their home countries; 3. shut-down of bin Laden's bases and training camps. Mohabbat says the Taliban agreed to all three demands."


    The US chose violence, all of the negotiating wore thin. They weighed their options, and realizing they could have ALL of Afghanistan, chose force. given US history regarding semi resource rich defenseless third world countries., its really no surprise they chose to invade.
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118

    that isn't "more than enough evidence". due process is required, especially in cases that could lead to war. - more important in this case. thousands of innocent lives could have been saved.

    what do you mean lead to war? war had already begun.
    But the US prefers violence, it always has the upper hand in that game.

    war was brought to us. the war was not started by us. its the Taliban and el queda who prefer violence. its all they know.

    here's where reality splits from your perception.

    The Taliban offered to give Bin Ladin up for trial pre-invasion, with 1 stipulation, that he not not be tried in US courts. that's it. we could have had him years ago, no invasion necessary, the end.

    They chose to invade instead, as usual.

    again, WE WERE ATTACKED. our country and citizens were at risk of dying. The Taliban was in no position to give us stipulations. they had a choice, either give Bin Laden and all his leaders to us unconditionally or be invaded. The Taliban made their choice.
    i would like to see or read about this evidence, if you can find it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PENTTBOM

    The investigators were quickly able to link the 19 men to the terrorist organization al Qaeda, by accessing their intelligence agency files. The New York Times reported on September 12 that: "Authorities said they had also identified accomplices in several cities who had helped plan and execute Tuesday’s attacks. Officials said they knew who these people were and important biographical details about many of them. They prepared biographies of each identified member of the hijack teams, and began tracing the recent movements of the men." FBI agents in Florida investigating the hijackers quickly "descended on flight schools, neighborhoods and restaurants in pursuit of leads." At one flight school, "students said investigators were there within hours of Tuesday’s attacks."[11] The Washington Post later reported that "In the hours after Tuesday’s bombings, investigators searched their files on [Satam] Al Suqami and [Ahmed] Alghamdi, noted the pair’s ties to [Nabil] al-Marabh and launched a hunt for him."[12]

    On September 27, 2001, the FBI released photos of the 19 hijackers, along with information about the possible nationalities and aliases of many.[13]

    On the day of the attacks, U.S. intelligence agencies also intercepted communications that pointed to Osama bin Laden.[14] It was quickly asserted that Osama bin Laden was responsible for the attacks, and other suspects were ruled out. Although he denied the attacks at first, Osama bin Laden has since admitted full and sole responsibility for the attacks.
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    jlew24asu wrote:

    that isn't "more than enough evidence". due process is required, especially in cases that could lead to war. - more important in this case. thousands of innocent lives could have been saved.

    what do you mean lead to war? war had already begun.

    war began when the US invaded Afghanistan. Not on 9/11. 9/11 was a terrorist attack, a crime, not an act of war.
    But the US prefers violence, it always has the upper hand in that game.

    war was brought to us. the war was not started by us. its the Taliban and el queda who prefer violence. its all they know.

    The Taliban and al-qaeda were not on the same team. The Taliban was apparen;ty so anti-Osama that they were going to lure him into a trap set by US intelligence officials. Yeah, they weren't working together.

    here's where reality splits from your perception.

    The Taliban offered to give Bin Ladin up for trial pre-invasion, with 1 stipulation, that he not not be tried in US courts. that's it. we could have had him years ago, no invasion necessary, the end.

    They chose to invade instead, as usual.

    again, WE WERE ATTACKED. our country and citizens were at risk of dying. The Taliban was in no position to give us stipulations. they had a choice, either give Bin Laden and all his leaders to us unconditionally or be invaded. The Taliban made their choice.

    The Taliban did not attack us. nor did the majority of people from Afghanistan. A few individuals inside that country committed a crime. that's it.

    there never is a good reason to invade, but you're setting the bar kind of low here on this one aren't you? what if some european's got together and contaminated LA's water supply or something and killed a bunch of people. using this precedent, the US has a perfectly legitimate reason to invade Europe.

    We, as a world community, need to make it harder to resort to violence, not easier. we are trying to avoid WW3.


    i would like to see or read about this evidence, if you can find it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PENTTBOM

    The investigators were quickly able to link the 19 men to the terrorist organization al Qaeda, by accessing their intelligence agency files. The New York Times reported on September 12 that: "Authorities said they had also identified accomplices in several cities who had helped plan and execute Tuesday’s attacks. Officials said they knew who these people were and important biographical details about many of them. They prepared biographies of each identified member of the hijack teams, and began tracing the recent movements of the men." FBI agents in Florida investigating the hijackers quickly "descended on flight schools, neighborhoods and restaurants in pursuit of leads." At one flight school, "students said investigators were there within hours of Tuesday’s attacks."[11] The Washington Post later reported that "In the hours after Tuesday’s bombings, investigators searched their files on [Satam] Al Suqami and [Ahmed] Alghamdi, noted the pair’s ties to [Nabil] al-Marabh and launched a hunt for him."[12]

    On September 27, 2001, the FBI released photos of the 19 hijackers, along with information about the possible nationalities and aliases of many.[13]

    On the day of the attacks, U.S. intelligence agencies also intercepted communications that pointed to Osama bin Laden.[14] It was quickly asserted that Osama bin Laden was responsible for the attacks, and other suspects were ruled out. Although he denied the attacks at first, Osama bin Laden has since admitted full and sole responsibility for the attacks.
    ?

    that's it?

    a million people slept in tents last winter because of a phone call?

    wonderful.
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118

    war began when the US invaded Afghanistan. Not on 9/11. 9/11 was a terrorist attack, a crime, not an act of war.


    wrong. this is absolutely false. America was attacked, you are correct. thats when the war began.

    But the US prefers violence, it always has the upper hand in that game.

    The Taliban and al-qaeda were not on the same team. The Taliban was apparen;ty so anti-Osama that they were going to lure him into a trap set by US intelligence officials. Yeah, they weren't working together.

    bullshit. if the Taliban were so anti Osama they would have never let him set up shop in the first place. and they would have no problem turning him over unconditionally. they choose not to and Mullah Omar wanted war and thought he could defeat the US

    The Taliban did not attack us. nor did the majority of people from Afghanistan. A few individuals inside that country committed a crime. that's it.

    thats it?! wow

    if it were all so simple in your tiny little head. The Taliban allowed el queda to thrive and then tried to set conditions when the US came knocking. again, they choose not to and Mullah Omar wanted war and thought he could defeat the US.

    and I love how you stick up for the Taliban as if they are some innocent entitny. are you aware that Pakistan is at war with them right now? do you have any idea who the Taliban even are? thats a serious question. we did the world a favor by removing them from power in 01.

    there never is a good reason to invade, but you're setting the bar kind of low here on this one aren't you?

    um no I'm not. War was brought to Americans shores. I'd say the bar is set really fucking high. although we certainly lowered come Iraq but thats a different story.
    what if some european's got together and contaminated LA's water supply or something and killed a bunch of people. using this precedent, the US has a perfectly legitimate reason to invade Europe.

    define a bunch of people? 10, 20, thousands? millions?

    "Europe" isn't a country. now say a bunch of French guys did this, gave their group a name, and were supported by the French government. this group was protected and allowed to train, prepare, and execute such attacks from within France. they executed this attack and planned others...France refuses to turn over and shut down the group. oh, and lets also pretend that the French government is a torturous extremist religious group who torture and kill those who oppose them.

    yea, its safe to say we'd do something about them and rightfully so.



    ?

    that's it?

    a million people slept in tents last winter because of a phone call?

    wonderful.

    nice job marginalizing guilt. you wanted evidence, there it is.

    and a million people slept in tents because the scum Taliban and el qeuda decided to take on the US. they weren't interested in what damage that would do to their own people. unfucking real how confused you are and how you can support the Taliban.
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    Are we really rehashing the start of an 8-year-old war here?

    OBL went on TV like they next day and confessed. He's continued to confess in the time since. The Taliban was harboring him, providing him safe haven. They knew what he was doing. They supported it, financially and philosophically. They might as well have flown planes into the WTC themselves.

    I don't understand what more "evidence" anybody needs.

    Now if you want to argue that, in spite of the massive amount of evidence that OBL was behind it and the Taliban supported it, that the U.S. STILL shouldn't have deposed the Taliban. Well, OK.

    But this line of "we should have waited for the Taliban to review the evidence" -- while OBL is standing there with his hand raised saying, "Yeah, it was me" -- that's pretty absurd.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    Are we really rehashing the start of an 8-year-old war here?

    OBL went on TV like they next day and confessed. He's continued to confess in the time since. The Taliban was harboring him, providing him safe haven. They knew what he was doing. They supported it, financially and philosophically. They might as well have flown planes into the WTC themselves.

    I don't understand what more "evidence" anybody needs.

    Now if you want to argue that, in spite of the massive amount of evidence that OBL was behind it and the Taliban supported it, that the U.S. STILL shouldn't have deposed the Taliban. Well, OK.

    But this line of "we should have waited for the Taliban to review the evidence" -- while OBL is standing there with his hand raised saying, "Yeah, it was me" -- that's pretty absurd.
    war should be the last resort....for the United States, too often, its the first. and fuck that. that needs to stop.

    one way to do that is to look at the facts, know your history.


    when you say "massive amount of evidence" and I ask for this evidence, will it be another wiki link? I have yet to see ANY of this massive amounts of evidence.

    by the way, not even a confession is enough to convict somebody, you need evidence. an intercepted call is not enough.

    now we're getting reports that the Taliban and al-qaeda weren't even working together. The Taliban offered Osama Bin Ladin to US intelligence agencies, a year BEFORE 9/11 and immediately after. That's not something a group harboring someone does. if you're harboring someone you kind of tend to protect them, by definition, not hand them over to their enemies. but they were ready to do so-ie not harboring.



    And nobody is suggesting the Taliban try OBL, that's insane. What was suggested was that he be handed over to an international court, at the Hague or something similar, for them to try him. Simple solution that doesn't involve killing thousands of innocent people and a country in ruined.

    That's an alternative to war, a very real solution that doesn't involve war.

    But the real point of all of this is something else.


    The Panama deception. its an example of how the US uses false pretexts to invade a country, like they have done in Iraq and Afghanistan since.


    There's always reasons for war, not enough to prevent it. and that's our foreign policy at work, it directs all conflict to force, where it has the upper hand.

    If you want to keep believing the lies they're telling us, they'll keep right on doing conquering the planet, and 5 years from now we'll be in some akistan or ekistan and the reasons will all be very legitimate and wonderful, but in reality we will have another destroyed country, thousands of innocent people killed and another country under the thumb of the US empire. Its been going on for 60 years.

    Nothing's changed. and it won't until people start educating themselves. WE have the power. We can end this at any time.
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    edited June 2009
    Are we really rehashing the start of an 8-year-old war here?

    OBL went on TV like they next day and confessed. He's continued to confess in the time since. The Taliban was harboring him, providing him safe haven. They knew what he was doing. They supported it, financially and philosophically. They might as well have flown planes into the WTC themselves.

    I don't understand what more "evidence" anybody needs.

    Now if you want to argue that, in spite of the massive amount of evidence that OBL was behind it and the Taliban supported it, that the U.S. STILL shouldn't have deposed the Taliban. Well, OK.

    But this line of "we should have waited for the Taliban to review the evidence" -- while OBL is standing there with his hand raised saying, "Yeah, it was me" -- that's pretty absurd.
    by the way, not even a confession is enough to convict somebody, you need evidence. an intercepted call is not enough.

    I have a feeling nothing would be enough for you. You've got a guy who already tried to blow up THESE EXACT SAME BUILDINGS a decade earlier, vowing to come back and finish the job, then comes back and finishes the job ... and brags about it to his followers. ... What more do you want?

    If the argument here is that OBL didn't orchestrate 9/11, we're done. There is no argument to be had. Other topics we won't be discussing: Whether the sky is generally blue, whether grass is generally green and whether gravity actually works.

    There is no point.

    I'm have much more respect for people who say, "You know what? Bin Laden did it. The Taliban harbored him. So what? Still did not justify war."

    I think those people are a tad too idealistic for the real world, but at least they have principles. People who believe bin Laden did not orchestrate 9/11 also must believe in the tooth fairy. They exist in a fantasy land. And I just don't speak their language.
    Post edited by slightofjeff on
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited June 2009
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I asked if you felt they were legitimate targets

    I answered your question.
    Post edited by Byrnzie on
Sign In or Register to comment.