Conquer Club

America created bin Laden?

I mean, look, people in the US are brainwashed about a lot of things, but... I mean, c'mon.

thegreekdog wrote:America created bin Laden?

I mean, look, people in the US are brainwashed about a lot of things, but... I mean, c'mon.

Uhh.. you do know that bin Laden used to be on the CIA payroll, don't you? You know that al-Qaeda first got their weapons and equipment from the US so they could fight the Soviets in the 1980's, don't you?


Read:
http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/603

radiojake wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:America created bin Laden?

I mean, look, people in the US are brainwashed about a lot of things, but... I mean, c'mon.

Uhh.. you do know that bin Laden used to be on the CIA payroll, don't you? You know that al-Qaeda first got their weapons and equipment from the US so they could fight the Soviets in the 1980's, don't you?


Read:
http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/603

I knew that the United States provided weapons to the Afghanis to fight the Soviets. I didn't know bin Laden was on the payroll or that we gave the weapons directly to Al Qaeda.

Well, clearly it's our fault.

That reminds me of when the French helped us in the American Revolution and then 20 years later we bombed one of their buildings and killed thousands of their citizens.

To the OP.


My guess is thumbscrews and eyelash pluckings, one hair at a time. He'd be singing in minutes.

thegreekdog wrote:
That reminds me of when the French helped us in the American Revolution and then 20 years later we bombed one of their buildings and killed thousands of their citizens.

Didn't know about this event - Was this before or after the Louisiana purchase?

radiojake wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:
That reminds me of when the French helped us in the American Revolution and then 20 years later we bombed one of their buildings and killed thousands of their citizens.

Didn't know about this event - Was this before or after the Louisiana purchase?

Before. They sold us the Louisiana Territories to placate us.

thegreekdog wrote:Well, clearly it's our fault.

No it was not... it was USA government's fault...

people can't be lamed for the actions committed by their greedy and aggressive governments.. the major problem with Ben Laden was this.. he blamed American people for paying taxes to their government (the so called his nemesis). and you don't want to think his way.

It is time to leave that terrorist behind. Humanity needs people to set their valuable minds free of all governments' bullshits.

and remember, USA government will come up with a new enemy in few years just because it cannot afford a no enemy status. it is needed to scare American people and justify some wars. by that time, I hope people get more aware!

thegreekdog wrote:

radiojake wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:
That reminds me of when the French helped us in the American Revolution and then 20 years later we bombed one of their buildings and killed thousands of their citizens.

Didn't know about this event - Was this before or after the Louisiana purchase?

Before. They sold us the Louisiana Territories to placate us.

Were you being sarcastic? ... [confuzzudled]

Wasn't the primary reason was due to their need to raise funds after/during their Revolution?

thegreekdog wrote:

radiojake wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:America created bin Laden?

I mean, look, people in the US are brainwashed about a lot of things, but... I mean, c'mon.

Uhh.. you do know that bin Laden used to be on the CIA payroll, don't you? You know that al-Qaeda first got their weapons and equipment from the US so they could fight the Soviets in the 1980's, don't you?


Read:
http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/603

I knew that the United States provided weapons to the Afghanis to fight the Soviets. I didn't know bin Laden was on the payroll or that we gave the weapons directly to Al Qaeda.

Well, clearly it's our fault.

That reminds me of when the French helped us in the American Revolution and then 20 years later we bombed one of their buildings and killed thousands of their citizens.

Yah huh Michael Moore said so

BigBallinStalin wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

radiojake wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:
That reminds me of when the French helped us in the American Revolution and then 20 years later we bombed one of their buildings and killed thousands of their citizens.

Didn't know about this event - Was this before or after the Louisiana purchase?

Before. They sold us the Louisiana Territories to placate us.

Were you being sarcastic? ... [confuzzudled]

Wasn't the primary reason was due to their need to raise funds after/during their Revolution?

I was being sarcastic. I was showing my incredudility (sp?) at Pirlo's and radiojake's theories through sarcasm.

thegreekdog wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

radiojake wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:
That reminds me of when the French helped us in the American Revolution and then 20 years later we bombed one of their buildings and killed thousands of their citizens.

Didn't know about this event - Was this before or after the Louisiana purchase?

Before. They sold us the Louisiana Territories to placate us.

Were you being sarcastic? ... [confuzzudled]

Wasn't the primary reason was due to their need to raise funds after/during their Revolution?

I was being sarcastic. I was showing my incredudility (sp?) at Pirlo's and radiojake's theories through sarcasm.

Oh you so silly, TGD!


*Incredulity (sounds right)

ben.cleuch wrote:Ask Tom Clancy, he wrote about it in his last book. Killed the man wit a massive heart attack and brought him back. Once was enough when you know there are not loads of virgins waiting for you.

Sorry, Star Trek did that first. Amok Time.

Pirlo wrote:what do you know about terrorism and terrorists, my friend? I lived in this guy's neighbored for 10 years. and guess what, we attained the same school. but in different times of course because he was way too old for me. terrorists come to that neighbored and I saw them how they recruit and brainwash teenagers. all they need are ignorant kids. it is so easy to recruit an extremely poor and ignorant kid whose parents are jobless and probably alcoholic.

And here, I thought devout Muslims were not in favor of alcohol.

Regardless..

Pirlo, no one is dancing because a middle eastern city got bombed; no one is dancing because some innocents got hurt.

We're dancing because a big mean bad guy who had fun every year since 9/11 taunting Americans with tapes showing just how much of a crazy psycho he could be, is gone.

And, I'm dancing because my President chose NOT to bomb, but instead, to target just the man and those who were directly protecting him.

He's dead, end of story.

Friend is in the SEAL's, confirmed dead, along with everyone that got in their way.

Okay, that's one less stupid rumour, I'm off to ruin another sensless thought.

AWAAAAAY!

stahrgazer wrote:
And, I'm dancing because my President chose NOT to bomb...

Are you sure about that?

DirtyDishSoap wrote:He's dead, end of story.

Friend is in the SEAL's, confirmed dead, along with everyone that got in their way.

I have a friend who believes that he impregnated an alien from Goldilocks... It does not mean it is true.

Does your friend have any hard evidence, like a pic on his mobile during the raid? I can find someone who would pay ~£50K for such picks, and this would be a conclusive proof...

Actually I believe that Osama is dead by now, he either died during interrogations or was shot after revealing all he knew. Rest in Hell

radiojake wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:America created bin Laden?

I mean, look, people in the US are brainwashed about a lot of things, but... I mean, c'mon.

Uhh.. you do know that bin Laden used to be on the CIA payroll, don't you? You know that al-Qaeda first got their weapons and equipment from the US so they could fight the Soviets in the 1980's, don't you?


Read:
http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/603

That's true.
Bin Laden was funded and armed by the US to fight the Russians in Afghanistan.
In a sense, Bin Laden has always acted consistently.
He has always fought against those who he believes are attacking Muslim states.

So whether Bin Laden is a freedom fighter or a terrorist depends on who is doing the labelling, and when they are doing it.
To the US, Bin Laden was a freedom fighter while fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.
And yet, he becomes a terrorist only because his enemy has changed, not the battle, (from his point of view) which is anyone who attacks Muslim states

And btw, its Abbottabad.
Its easy to remember.
Abad means "place of" or something similar.
And Abbott was a British Army Major who served in Afghanistan about 1850ish.

crustykev wrote:

radiojake wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:America created bin Laden?

I mean, look, people in the US are brainwashed about a lot of things, but... I mean, c'mon.

Uhh.. you do know that bin Laden used to be on the CIA payroll, don't you? You know that al-Qaeda first got their weapons and equipment from the US so they could fight the Soviets in the 1980's, don't you?


Read:
http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/603

That's true.
Bin Laden was funded and armed by the US to fight the Russians in Afghanistan.
In a sense, Bin Laden has always acted consistently.
He has always fought against those who he believes are attacking Muslim states.

So whether Bin Laden is a freedom fighter or a terrorist depends on who is doing the labelling, and when they are doing it.
To the US, Bin Laden was a freedom fighter while fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.
And yet, he becomes a terrorist only because his enemy has changed, not the battle, (from his point of view) which is anyone who attacks Muslim states

And btw, its Abbottabad.
Its easy to remember.
Abad means "place of" or something similar.
And Abbott was a British Army Major who served in Afghanistan about 1850ish.

I usually agree with this argument, except that Osama was funded by the CIA to attack occupying military forces, not civilians. Switching from attacking occupying military forces to civilians could be construed as switching from "freedom fighter" to "terrorist," inasmuch as the definition for "freedom fighter" is quite vague, I would call his actions against the Soviets more irregular warfare than terrorism, as we usually reserve the term terrorists for those who kill civilians.

radiojake wrote:

stahrgazer wrote:
And, I'm dancing because my President chose NOT to bomb...

Are you sure about that?

She probably is sure, although she's wrong.

Perhaps she hasn't seen the news regarding Libya or the continuing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Or perhaps she's talking about the president ordering a surgical strike on Osama rather than bombing his compound.

stahrgazer wrote:

Pirlo wrote:what do you know about terrorism and terrorists, my friend? I lived in this guy's neighbored for 10 years. and guess what, we attained the same school. but in different times of course because he was way too old for me. terrorists come to that neighbored and I saw them how they recruit and brainwash teenagers. all they need are ignorant kids. it is so easy to recruit an extremely poor and ignorant kid whose parents are jobless and probably alcoholic.

And here, I thought devout Muslims were not in favor of alcohol.

Regardless..

Pirlo, no one is dancing because a middle eastern city got bombed; no one is dancing because some innocents got hurt.

We're dancing because a big mean bad guy who had fun every year since 9/11 taunting Americans with tapes showing just how much of a crazy psycho he could be, is gone.

And, I'm dancing because my President chose NOT to bomb, but instead, to target just the man and those who were directly protecting him.

who said they are devout? I told you, the only thing required is IGNORANCE.

I also have no problem with people dancing because an asshole was killed ... if Ariel Sharon the terrorist died, some people in my city may dance. who knows!

I posted in this thread to say that Pope makes some sense.. then someone asked to explain stuff. I told him I did/do NOT care about the dude and only Americans are obsessed of him. this shows how strong and influential the media is.

The bastard is dead. The world is a slightly better place without that lunatic running around. The ONLY people denying this are Pakistanis. Even Al Qaida (spelling off, I know) admits he's dead.

crustykev wrote:

radiojake wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:America created bin Laden?
I mean, look, people in the US are brainwashed about a lot of things, but... I mean, c'mon.

Uhh.. you do know that bin Laden used to be on the CIA payroll, don't you? You know that al-Qaeda first got their weapons and equipment from the US so they could fight the Soviets in the 1980's, don't you?

Read:
http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/603

That's true.
Bin Laden was funded and armed by the US to fight the Russians in Afghanistan.
In a sense, Bin Laden has always acted consistently.
He has always fought against those who he believes are attacking Muslim states.

So whether Bin Laden is a freedom fighter or a terrorist depends on who is doing the labelling, and when they are doing it.
To the US, Bin Laden was a freedom fighter while fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.
And yet, he becomes a terrorist only because his enemy has changed, not the battle, (from his point of view) which is anyone who attacks Muslim states

Yes...and yet, no. In bin Ladin's fight against Russia, it was a defensive fight against Russia's military. A wholly different mission spec than his fight with the U.S.

crustykev wrote:And btw, its Abbottabad.
Its easy to remember.
Abad means "place of" or something similar.
And Abbott was a British Army Major who served in Afghanistan about 1850ish.

I did not know that was where the "Abbott" portion of that name came from. Interesting. And surprising, that the name survived, given that.

DirtyDishSoap wrote:Friend is in the SEAL's, confirmed dead, along with everyone that got in their way.

"GERONIMO,.... *silence*

Geronimo EKIA."

Woodruff wrote:

crustykev wrote:

radiojake wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:America created bin Laden?
I mean, look, people in the US are brainwashed about a lot of things, but... I mean, c'mon.

Uhh.. you do know that bin Laden used to be on the CIA payroll, don't you? You know that al-Qaeda first got their weapons and equipment from the US so they could fight the Soviets in the 1980's, don't you?

Read:
http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/603

That's true.
Bin Laden was funded and armed by the US to fight the Russians in Afghanistan.
In a sense, Bin Laden has always acted consistently.
He has always fought against those who he believes are attacking Muslim states.

So whether Bin Laden is a freedom fighter or a terrorist depends on who is doing the labelling, and when they are doing it.
To the US, Bin Laden was a freedom fighter while fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.
And yet, he becomes a terrorist only because his enemy has changed, not the battle, (from his point of view) which is anyone who attacks Muslim states

Yes...and yet, no. In bin Ladin's fight against Russia, it was a defensive fight against Russia's military. A wholly different mission spec than his fight with the U.S.

crustykev wrote:And btw, its Abbottabad.
Its easy to remember.
Abad means "place of" or something similar.
And Abbott was a British Army Major who served in Afghanistan about 1850ish.

I did not know that was where the "Abbott" portion of that name came from. Interesting. And surprising, that the name survived, given that.

I'm not a cheerleader for Bin Laden.
But the US media only portrays one point of view, and is selective and almost always pro-US in the point of view it does portray.
If Bin Laden was posting here, he would say that attacks on Muslim States killed tens if not hundreds of thousands of Muslim civillians.
So from Bin Laden's point of view, the Twin Towers is payment in kind.

crustykev wrote:If Bin Laden was posting here, he would say that attacks on Muslim States killed tens if not hundreds of thousands of Muslim civillians.
So from Bin Laden's point of view, the Twin Towers is payment in kind.

And I would counter with the following question - what attacks on Muslim states by the United States killed tens if not hundreds of thousands of Muslims?