OK then, so we all agree on these facts: OBL worked for the CIA, and the CIA created Al Queda. Good. Then we can proceed from there. I am not saying that the CIA EVER "turned on" OBL. He knew from the beginning that publicly, they were to be enemies. After all, we needed an antagonist with the USSR gone; commie fear was no longer sufficient to keep the people in line and the defense contracters making obscene amounts of money. So why would he come out and admit the complicity? That would only have gotten him killed for real, instead of being allowed to die of kidney failure.
OBL: "you guys tried to kill me several times before, why should i agree to this" CIA agent: "Hey you attacked the USS Cole so don't pretend it's not your fault" OBL: "I told you never to invade Iraq and put your dirty laundry in Saudi Arabia, which is our holy ground" CIA: "Hey Hussein's fault, blame him, are you going to play on or not?" OBL: "So i have your word that you will allow my men to do this and then allow me to publicly take responsibility for it?" CIA agent: "that is the plan but we have a deal on what will follow?" OBL: "as long as you guys put me in that mansion in Pakistan and assure me i will be safe, i don't care if you bomb Afghanistan to oblivion.. mullah omar is getting on my nerves anyway" CIA: "president bush assures you that he will keep his word and our Pakistani friends have the house prepared and ready" OBL: "what about the money transfer?" CIA agent: "It's all taken care off Osama" Then Obama betrayed him and killed him, breaking the pact between OBL, Pakistan and US.. i get it now..
Maybe something more like this: CIA: Nice job on the USS Cole, Clinton really needed a distraction in the news from all his scandals. OBL: Nice job pretending to try to kill me, you even had ME scared for a minute. CIA: So you'll attack the US, using the money and training we provided? OBL: lol. Do I really have a choice? CIA: Good point. But don't worry, we'll let you escape into Pakistan. Then after you die of natural causes, years later we'll shoot somebody with a beard and a towel on his head, claim it was you, and throw the body into the ocean before anyone can say differently. OBL: Just make sure that nobody shoots any missiles or anything at the planes. I'll need about an hour of unimpeded action. CIA: Don't worry. Dubya will just sit there reading his goat book until you're done. OBL: Death to America
i see, i'm convinced.. did we ever get any conversations recorded between bush, cheany, rumsfeld and CIA? cause i would really like to undestand what the reasons were... think you mentioned that the army was just in need of action? there was money to be made by defense contractors?
No, that was you who said the Army just needed the workout. My explanation was the blank check, getting to do whetever the hell they wanted "because 9/11", remember?
GWB: 'I really hate this Saddam guy, my dad should've gotten rid of him, i want him dead' Rumsfeld: 'We can't just go in there and take him out' Cheany:'i have an idea but not sure what you all will think about it' GWB: 'Speak' Cheany: 'We can use our greatest ally, OBL' GWB: 'pls go on...' Cheany: 'We can have him hijack planes or bomb a building' GWB: 'and how will this allow us to take Hussein out?' Rumsfeld: 'we can come up with evidence to link them' Cheany: 'and also those weapons of mass destruction' GWB: 'i'm liking the sound of this, so this will give us the blank check we need' Rumsfeld: 'get Tenet on the phone' Tenet: 'hello?' GWB: 'George, how's our friend Osama?' Tenet: 'not sure, he's dying..kidneys not doing so good' Cheany: 'Go meet with him and plan an attack on the US, it has to be something big' Tenet: 'WHAT?' GWB: 'you heard us and we've talked about this before, just go do it and get back to us with a plan' Tenet: 'your the boss, what about the FBI? Muller is the new kid on the block; GWB: 'keep this from him until i speak to him, this must be kept secret' Tenet: 'yes sir, i will have my special assignments team meet with OBL and al-Zawahiri to brainstorm and get back to you with a plan' GWB: 'thanks George, bye'...... GWB: 'So now we have a plan, once OBL and Tenet devise a plan and we make it happen, we'll get our blank check to take that bastar d Husseing out..Don, pls devise a plan for us to go into Iraq, plant weapons of mass detsruction in Sadam's back yard if you have to.. we may need this to unliaterally go in and topple him'
Oh goodie, another Guy Fawkes clone. I asked the other Guy Fawkes clone if he actually knew the history of Guy, and there was no response. I wonder if this one knows. Your contention is that the government killed thousands of its own citizens so that it could frisk grannies and listen to your calls for mommie to pick you up from the movies? Why? Why would anyone in a leadership position want to frisk people at the airport? What sense does that make? Corrupt politicians don't exercise power by hassling people. They don't care about people. They care about spending money on themselves. Besides, where is your evidence of this? All I see is you trying to connect a bunch of things you don't like to a common cause. There's a lot you couldn't tell us, apparently. Wait, so the CIA wanted a blank check to frisk grannies inside the US so they decided to attack America? Why would the CIA attack in a place where it has no jurisdiction? I don't know, therefore ALIENS! You don't understand the middle east or its politics one little bit. Al-Qaeda is not "basically a branch of the CIA." in the same way that our financial AID and support for Pakistan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, or any other country (North Korea) doesn't make them under our influence. Money doesn't drive what the (relatively small percentage) of fundamentalist people want. They want to do what they believe God wants them to do. These people have political power because they have money (Osama) and education. They are not the middle eastern rednecks and trailer trash you make them out to be.
Ah, the typical truther strategy of pretending people agree with their bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Grow up and get a life, FoN, because your claims are about as realistic as what one would expect to see on cartoon network. So Osama wouldn't turn on the CIA even after the US started picking off the leaders of Al Qaeda? Riiiiiight. Meanwhile nobody from the Al Qaeda leadership, a group you retardedly claim was created by the CIA, is going to mention that fact as they are killed off one by one. So what did Osama get out of this? Money? He sure couldn't spend it. Favors? Like what? What would be worth throwing your life away over? There is nothing the CIA could have offered him that would be worth the cost Osama saw in the years after 9/11.
I doubt that Guy Fawkes is going to respond to my post with any degree of lucidity, but if anyone else wants to take a shot, I'm really interested in why someone in power would want to justify "TSA groping" as the Fawkes clone asserts. TSA groping is a major hindrance to the economy of air travel. It slows the speed of business, makes it more difficult, and less desirable to travel by air. Air carriers lose lots of money due to TSA groping. What direct benefit does someone in power get from TSA groping that would require the murder of the people it's supposed to protect? What makes the risk of the failure of such a hair brained plot worth the rewards of this as of yet undefined benefit?
Off topic, but in the information age, do you really think people don't know the story of Guy Fawkes? He has his own holiday, FFS. TSA groping and warrentless wiretaps are merely symptoms of the "F*ck the constitution" attitude the US government has adopted, using 9/11 as justification. It isn't about any one thing they are doing; it's all of it. How many times have we been told that "9/11 changed everything", or "it's a new, post 9/11 world"? You don't seem to be able to see the forest for the trees.
So you realize that you're arguing against a religiously motivated terrorist attack against America using a catholic terrorist that tried to blow up Parliament for similar reasons as an avatar? You don't find that as ironic as I do? Do you also believe that Fawkes was a patsy, and that the conspiracy was really the work of Robert Cecil? How did I know you were just going to restate your position using different phrasing? It didn't make sense then. It doesn't make sense now. There's no political reason why someone would want to frisk a Grandma in an airport. What evidence do you have that anyone gains politically, financially, or in any capacity by frisking old ladies? You seem to be looking at a forest full of trees and seeing a bunch of fish.
Excuse me ,but what about the force of a jet travelling at near 500 miles an hour ,its called Mass times acceleration equals force ,i think it would weaken the floors it hit don't you.
Sure sounded like agreement to me. But hell, what does the agreement of anonymous internet posters mean anyway? "During the anti-Soviet jihad Bin Laden and his fighters received American and Saudi funding. Some analysts believe Bin Laden himself had security training from the CIA." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1670089.stm Yeah, I guess you missed it. HE WAS DYING ANYWAY, and he never spent one day in a jail cell.
I guess not. But I'm not trying to focus on avatars, because that's not what this thread is about. I restated by position because you tried to insert a strawman, and claim that my position was something else entirely. I never said there was a political reason to frisk granny. I said that granny's frisking is a consequence, a side effect, not the goal. The goal is an increasingly intrusive and totalitarian government, uninhibited by its traditional restraints. This will manifest itself in many ways.
This question was asked: What was the motivation for George Bush, Dick Cheaney, Condaliza Rice to perpetrate such an attack on the country? To which you responded: Haven't you heard? 9/11 "changed everything". It's not just about going to war. 9/11 gave the government a blank check. 9/11 has been used to justify everything from TSA groping to warrentless wiretaps to torture. Now that you realize how stupid killing your own people to grope old ladies sounds you are trying to change your position to this: Which again is equally as stupid. The U.S. government didn't need 9/11 to participate in Echelon, or to develop Able Danger. There's zero evidence that it was needed to grope old ladies or to listen to you order a pizza. What's incredible about the whole stupid idea is the logic that they are able to prevent 9/11 conspiracy leaks, but they're not able to prevent secret CIA prison leaks, wiretap leaks, gun running leaks, embassy security leaks, etc. How is the risk of trying to pull off a conspiracy to kill thousands of Americans to grope old ladies and listen to you have phone sex less of a risk than simply groping old ladies and listening to you have phone sex? Why the convoluted false attack? How does that makes sense to you at all, oh looker of trees in the forest?
Don't you realize that your argument is that (SOMETHING) was preventing the government from superstitiously expanding its authority, but that same (SOMETHING) didn't or couldn't prevent the planning and execution of an attack against thousands of Americans.
By the way, your basis for forming your opinions is what this thread is about. I think your choice of avatar says something about your position and I pointed that out. The Guy Fawkes phenomenon is a good allegory of the 9/11 movement. The vast majority of people who currently identify with him or use him as a symbol fancy themselves rebellious counter culturalists. That fact makes it clear that have very little understanding of what Guy Fawkes actually stood for and tried to do. Guy was a conservative Catholic that wanted to return to a Catholic rule of law. Guy's intent is seemingly the opposite of everything the counter culturalists stand for. It's why Guy was vilified for hundreds of years. The ideas behind Guy are ideas that people want to BURN every year. Instead they identify with him because of a fiction that was built around his name and the events he is famous for. It's a fiction that was created in order to push an agenda that had nothing to do with Guy's agenda. Likewise, the 9/11 movement has attempted to create a narrative surrounding the 9/11 attack, and they have very little understanding of what Al-Qaeda actually stands for and wants to do. Both fictions are idealistic polemics that have little foundation in evidence based reality. Both attempt to vilify "the man" Both completely ignore the fact that the actual perpetrators represent the opposite of everything they seemingly stand for. I see that avatar in this thread, and it makes me think you've been duped twice. Should I be surprised you don't see the irony?
I said they acknowledge them, trained them, and funded them, not that they created them. I know you'll say "splitting hairs" but it's not. I will again say that we were in league with OBL at one point, but there is a HUGE different between working alongside, and creating something. <snip, random link> I guess that depends on how you define a jail cell. Usama resorted to living in a house watching a little TV of himself. He wasn't the great commander he once was, he didn't have the freedoms he did before. I think it's amazing, and a testament to his cunning intellect that he was able to stay alive for a decade. Those 10 years on the run were not awesome for him by any means. He might not have been behind bars, but he definitely wasn't free.
In 2002, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf said bin Laden had kidney disease, and that he had required a dialysis machine when he lived in Afghanistan. That same year, the FBI's top counterterrorism official, Dale Watson, said, "I personally think he is probably not with us anymore." Now the CIA has produced a report saying that bin Laden has long-term kidney disease and may have only months to live, two U.S. officials familiar with the report told TIME. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1819280,00.html
