Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For someone with a name like "Historian Dude", I would expect you to know more about history and not just stick with name calling.
Your expectations are met on both counts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
How can you be so sure that Osama Bin Laden was not a CIA asset?
1. Because the folks who believe he was generally adhere to a whole suite of ideas that are so comprehensively disproved that the presumption must obtain that most if not all of their other ideas are equally bogus.
2. Because there is no evidence that he was. And as we all know, the burden of proof falls on the affirmative.
3. Because at the time when he would have actually been valuable to us as an operative, he was a complete nobody.
4. Because he was well known as virulently hating the US before long before he ever became the head of Al Qaeda.
They can repeat the official storylines over and over until they're blue in the face but the bare facts are that "Historian Dude" and others cannot claim with certainty that Osama Bin Laden was not originally funded by the CIA-in fact all of the evidence shows that it is extremely unlikely that he wasn't.
Nothing in that paragraph is obviously true. It is merely the same myth repeated ad nauseam in the conspirasphere. You may as well be barking about Area 51 and alien invasions.
Nothing in that paragraph is obviously true. It is merely the same myth repeated ad nauseam in the conspirasphere. You may as well be barking about Area 51 and alien invasions.
*Repeat of Post #30*
Please explain in great detail why anyone on this forum should take the word of "working class hero" or "historian dude" over the former British Foreign Secretary (and many others with credentials including countless authors, journalists and statesmen)
Former British Foreign secretary, Robin Cook said:
"Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan."
As his unclassified CIA biography states, bin Laden left Saudi Arabia to fight the Soviet army in Afghanistan after Moscow’s invasion in 1979. By 1984, he was running a front organization known as Maktab al-Khidamar – the MAK – which funneled money, arms and fighters from the outside world into the Afghan war.
What the CIA bio conveniently fails to specify (in its unclassified form, at least) is that the MAK was nurtured by Pakistan’s state security services, the Inter-Services Intelligence agency, or ISI, the CIA’s primary conduit for conducting the covert war against Moscow’s occupation.
The CIA, concerned about the factionalism of Afghanistan … found that Arab zealots who flocked to aid the Afghans were easier to “read” than the rivalry-ridden natives. While the Arab volunteers might well prove troublesome later, the agency reasoned, they at least were one-dimensionally anti-Soviet for now. So bin Laden, along with a small group of Islamic militants from Egypt, Pakistan, Lebanon, Syria and Palestinian refugee camps all over the Middle East, became the “reliable” partners of the CIA in its war against Moscow.
By the way, The CIA funded these terrorists 6 MONTHS BEFORE the Russians invaded Afghanistan.
Please explain in great detail why anyone on this forum should take the word of "working class hero" or "historian dude" over the former British Foreign Secretary (and many others with credentials including countless authors, journalists and statesmen).
Because all the actual evidence is on our side.
No need to take anybody's word on anything.
We all note that nothing in your "repeat of Post #30" says the CIA worked with OBL at all.
You haven't presented one iota of evidence or history. Apparently people need to take your word and your word alone in order to accept your argument. Apparently only workingclasshero is in agreement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude
We all note that nothing in your "repeat of Post #30" says the CIA worked with OBL at all.
Reading comprehension not your strongpoint? I'll try to find some Youtube videos or something for you but in the meantime, bolding the most basic sentence from above will have to do:
So bin Laden, along with a small group of Islamic militants from Egypt, Pakistan, Lebanon, Syria and Palestinian refugee camps all over the Middle East, became the “reliable” partners of the CIA in its war against Moscow.
Ignoring that the burden of evidence is on you guys, yes... I have. I'm just tired of repeating it to folks incapable of comprehending it.
Osama Bin Laden always expressed his violent hatred of the US... even before he was anything more than spoiled rich Saudi running off to Afghanistan to play jihaadi.
I presented historical evidence and direct quotes (from mainstream media nonetheless)-not only are you choosing to directly ignore that evidence but you refuse to present anything to support your argument.
So bin Laden, along with a small group of Islamic militants from Egypt, Pakistan, Lebanon, Syria and Palestinian refugee camps all over the Middle East, became the “reliable” partners of the CIA in its war against Moscow.
That provides no evidence of any ties between the CIA and Bin Laden. That they were both on the same side has never been disputed.
Moving the goal posts does not help your position.
Nothing in that paragraph is obviously true. It is merely the same myth repeated ad nauseam in the conspirasphere. You may as well be barking about Area 51 and alien invasions.
Uh . . . What evidence did the Government have that implicated Osama Bin Laden in the 9-11 catastrophe?
Was he the only Muslim that hated the U.S.?
We know that George Bush had nothing to do with it, because he was a thousand miles away at the time; but Bin Laden was even further away, giving Bin Laden an ever stronger alibi.
Alibi strength is inversly proportional to the distance from the event of the most likely suspect.
NSA can't tell you how Bin Laden was even notified of the event.
Well, they can, but they won't. (It would be soooo M bare-assing)
Many NSA employees bet short on certain airline stocks a week before the event.
Last edited by Hyperthetic; 03-03-2014 at 02:58 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.