The Panama Deception

Options
12467…14

Comments

  • WaveCameCrashin
    WaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    like I said....the average ago of people on this board in 1989 is about 5. and I'm probably being generous, many were probably not even born yet. but sure, lets all have a very important discussion as to what the America media was doing at the time :roll: no one cares.

    Feel free to f**k off at anytime. No one here is asking you to show an interest in this or any other thread. You're a troll. I'm surprised the mods are being so lax lately.

    I agree. I didnt know telling people to fuck off was allowed

    Hey jlew, why do you even wast your energy on this gutter rat ? He obviously does this to get attention.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    prfctlefts wrote:
    Hey jlew, why do you even wast your energy on this gutter rat ? He obviously does this to get attention.

    Looks like you've made a friend Jlew. How cute. :lol:
  • WaveCameCrashin
    WaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    Why dont you go post on the huffington post or the daily kos you would fit right in with all those loons
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    prfctlefts wrote:
    Why dont you go post on the huffington post or the daily kos you would fit right in with all those loons

    Sure, whatever you say. In the meantime feel free to contribute something intelligent to this thread topic anytime.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I answered your questions

    Let's see if you can stretch your imagination far enough to consider this concept: You say that the Taliban had everything to do with 9/11 because they harbored the very people who planned and executed the attacks on America?

    yes. yet, you can't seem to stretch your imagination around the fact that its true.
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Therefore is it fair to say that the U.S government had everything to do with the bombing of the Cuban airliner and the bombings in Havana because they harbored and continue to harbour the very people who planned and executed these attacks?

    if Venezuela wants to declare war on the US for "harboring" this guy, they can sure as hell try. personally, I'd like to see him extradited.
  • WaveCameCrashin
    WaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    Byrnzie wrote:
    prfctlefts wrote:
    Why dont you go post on the huffington post or the daily kos you would fit right in with all those loons

    Sure, whatever you say. In the meantime feel free to contribute something intelligent to this thread topic anytime.

    Maybe you should do the same
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    prfctlefts wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:
    prfctlefts wrote:
    Why dont you go post on the huffington post or the daily kos you would fit right in with all those loons

    Sure, whatever you say. In the meantime feel free to contribute something intelligent to this thread topic anytime.

    Maybe you should do the same

    Touche!
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    if Venezuela wants to declare war on the US for "harboring" this guy, they can sure as hell try. personally, I'd like to see him extradited.

    But you didn't want to see Bin Laden extradited? You preferred to see a whole country bombed and thousands killed.
    Why do you apply these different standards?
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    if Venezuela wants to declare war on the US for "harboring" this guy, they can sure as hell try. personally, I'd like to see him extradited.

    But you didn't want to see Bin Laden extradited? You preferred to see a whole country bombed and thousands killed.
    Why do you apply these different standards?

    no, I wouldnt prefer that. Bin Laden wasn't going to be extradited. we were attacked and a war was started. negotiating was not an option
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Bin Laden wasn't going to be extradited.

    Bin Laden was going to be extradited. He would have been extradited under the same terms that anybody is extradited; you provide a modicum of proof supporting the extradition request.
    jlew24asu wrote:
    we were attacked and a war was started.

    You were attacked by some Saudi Arabians so you started a war against Afghanistan - a war which had been on planned for years before 9/11 as was proven above.

    jlew24asu wrote:
    negotiating was not an option

    Not an option for a rogue state that has no regard for international law.
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    jlew24asu wrote:

    no, I wouldnt prefer that. Bin Laden wasn't going to be extradited. we were attacked and a war was started. negotiating was not an option
    the US "won't negotiate with terrorists". regarding Saddam and Desert Storm "Won't negotiate". regarding Afghanistan it was something similar.

    they never negotiate. its SOP.





    according to this guy


    "Kabir Mohabbat is a 48-year businessman in Houston, Texas. Born in Paktia province in southern Afghanistan, he's from the Jaji clan (from which also came Afghanistan's last king). Educated at St Louis University, he spent much of the 1980s supervising foreign relations for the Afghan mujahiddeen, where he developed extensive contacts with the US foreign policy establishment, also with senior members of the Taliban."


    Osama bin Laden was offered up "unconditionally" by the Taliban before the invasion.


    What's been reported on in mainstream is that Osama was offered up to an international arab court to try him for 9/11. The US could have had him then, instead destroyed a country.....familiar plot.



    point is Osama was offered up to be tried for 9/11, the US preferred to invade.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Bin Laden wasn't going to be extradited.

    Bin Laden was going to be extradited. He would have been extradited under the same terms that anybody is extradited; you provide a modicum of proof supporting the extradition request.

    no he wasn't. you can trust your friends the Taliban all you want but they were not going to extradite anyone. but that is besides the point. one that you have a really hard time understanding. War was already started, time for negotiating ended.
    jlew24asu wrote:
    we were attacked and a war was started.
    Byrnzie wrote:
    [
    You were attacked by some Saudi Arabians so you started a war against Afghanistan - a war which had been on planned for years before 9/11 as was proven above.

    you've proved nothing. and the hijackers decent is as irrelevant as my grandmother being from Italy. Saudi Arabia did not harbor them or support their actions. El queda was responsible. their base of operations was in Afghanistan and those in power, the Taliban, allowed them to train and plan attacks against America.

    jlew24asu wrote:
    negotiating was not an option
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Not an option for a rogue state that has no regard for international law.

    again, we were attacked by el queda. war had started. the rules of your beloved international law grants us full rights to protect ourselves as a nation when attacked.
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    jlew24asu wrote:
    again, we were attacked by el queda. war had started. the rules of your beloved international law grants us full rights to protect ourselves as a nation when attacked.

    which then makes 9/11 a legitimate course of action by your logic ... america has been "attacking" foreign sovereign countries for years ...
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    polaris_x wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    again, we were attacked by el queda. war had started. the rules of your beloved international law grants us full rights to protect ourselves as a nation when attacked.

    which then makes 9/11 a legitimate course of action by your logic ... america has been "attacking" foreign sovereign countries for years ...

    no we haven't
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    no he wasn't. you can trust your friends the Taliban all you want but they were not going to extradite anyone. but that is besides the point. one that you have a really hard time understanding. War was already started, time for negotiating ended.

    Did you give the Taliban a chance to prove whether they were going to extradite him? No. Therefore your statement "no he wasn't" doesn't hold any water.

    jlew24asu wrote:
    you've proved nothing. and the hijackers decent is as irrelevant as my grandmother being from Italy. Saudi Arabia did not harbor them or support their actions. El queda was responsible. their base of operations was in Afghanistan and those in power, the Taliban, allowed them to train and plan attacks against America.

    I proved that a war in Afghanistan had been planned for years before 9/11. The documentary record is clear about this. It's not disputed. The articles I posted prove this. It helps if you read them as opposed to just throwing out empty statements.

    jlew24asu wrote:
    we were attacked by el queda. war had started. the rules of your beloved international law grants us full rights to protect ourselves as a nation when attacked.

    So according to your logic America is now a valid target for attack because you harbour Cuban terrorists? Or do different standards apply to Americans?
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    no he wasn't. you can trust your friends the Taliban all you want but they were not going to extradite anyone. but that is besides the point. one that you have a really hard time understanding. War was already started, time for negotiating ended.

    Did you give the Taliban a chance to prove whether they were going to extradite him? No. Therefore your statement "no he wasn't" doesn't hold any water.

    yes. we told the Taliban to give him to us. they wanted to negotiate.

    jlew24asu wrote:
    you've proved nothing. and the hijackers decent is as irrelevant as my grandmother being from Italy. Saudi Arabia did not harbor them or support their actions. El queda was responsible. their base of operations was in Afghanistan and those in power, the Taliban, allowed them to train and plan attacks against America.
    Byrnzie wrote:
    I proved that a war in Afghanistan had been planned for years before 9/11. The documentary record is clear about this. It's not disputed. The articles I posted prove this. It helps if you read them as opposed to just throwing out empty statements.

    again, you've proved nothing. the war was not planned prior to 9/11. we were attacked from elements within Afghanistan first.

    jlew24asu wrote:
    we were attacked by el queda. war had started. the rules of your beloved international law grants us full rights to protect ourselves as a nation when attacked.
    Byrnzie wrote:
    So according to your logic America is now a valid target for attack because you harbour Cuban terrorists? Or do different standards apply to Americans?

    valid target for who, Venezuela? sure, based on this guy, they can make this case. but they are smarter then that.
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    jlew24asu wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    again, we were attacked by el queda. war had started. the rules of your beloved international law grants us full rights to protect ourselves as a nation when attacked.

    which then makes 9/11 a legitimate course of action by your logic ... america has been "attacking" foreign sovereign countries for years ...

    no we haven't

    well ... this would explain your position on so many topics
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    yes. we told the Taliban to give him to us. they wanted to negotiate.

    They didn't want to negotiate. They wanted some evidence. Just as if a foriegn government wanted to extradite an American citizen you would ask for evidence. But then I suppose different standards apply to Americans, right?

    jlew24asu wrote:
    he war was not planned prior to 9/11. we were attacked from elements within Afghanistan first.

    Yes it was. The evidence is there for everyone to see. The fact that you choose to ignore it makes no difference. It''s still there.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    yes. we told the Taliban to give him to us. they wanted to negotiate.

    They didn't want to negotiate. They wanted some evidence. Just as if a foriegn government wanted to extradite an American citizen you would ask for evidence. But then I suppose different standards apply to Americans, right?

    I'll say it again, WE WERE ATTACKED. it was no secret who was responsible. we didnt have time to present them with everything they required, have them analyze it, and have us wait for them to accept it or not. war had already started.
    jlew24asu wrote:
    he war was not planned prior to 9/11. we were attacked from elements within Afghanistan first.
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Yes it was. The evidence is there for everyone to see. The fact that you choose to ignore it makes no difference. It''s still there.

    your so called evidence doesn't prove anything
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    polaris_x wrote:

    well ... this would explain your position on so many topics

    and this..
    polaris_x wrote:
    america has been "attacking" foreign sovereign countries for years ...

    as well as calling America an "extremist" nation explains your position on so many topics. what the fuck is your point?

Categories