|
It's hard to find a major intelligence agency that didn't know that an attack was "imminent", or that didn't flag it with the white house.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2013 14:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 1, 2024 07:50 |
|
|
I personally cannot blame anyone for questioning the official story, or any official story. We are constantly lied to and manipulated explicitly, nobody can argue the propaganda machines that run 24/7 do not promote an agenda, strangely similar to the agenda of the richest and most exploitative elements in the international stage. Furthermore; the intelligence services of the world knew 9/11 was going to happen and gave warnings which were not heeded, but lets not forget that the eventual boogeymen in all of this (bin laden, saddam) worked directly for the USA. On a personal note, I dont give a gently caress who did it, the problems with this world were the same before the towers came down - a broken global economic system, an archaic ideology of nations and borders, the wealth and resources of the world are used for the benefit of the few and until those are fixed we will just continue to kill each other until the party is over. /rant
|
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2013 02:07
|
|
Mr. Funny Pants posted:This is far from undisputed. Wiki has a good summary of both sides of the allegation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA-Osama_bin_Laden_controversy In a 2004 BBC article entitled "Al-Qaeda's origins and links", the BBC wrote: 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.[1] Robin Cook, Foreign Secretary in the UK from 1997–2001, believed the CIA had provided arms to the Arab Mujahideen, including Osama bin Laden, writing, "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." His source for this is unclear Like I said in my post, we live in such a tangled web of information, just what the gently caress is the truth nobody knows. e: http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=0228, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA%E2%80%93al-Qaeda_controversy Also we all know who gave saddam the weapons to fight Iran and the future ramifications of that support. a whole buncha crows fucked around with this message at 12:49 on Sep 23, 2013 |
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2013 12:46
|
|
computer parts posted:It's almost as though during a gigantic war against someone people will make poo poo up for page hits. What are you getting at? Re: That is sort of my point, it is ignorant to believe anyone would know the entire workings of clandestine groups, dedicated to secrecy, working for favourable outcomes for... a whole buncha crows fucked around with this message at 13:19 on Sep 23, 2013 |
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2013 12:56
|
|
Mr. Funny Pants posted:If you'd said something like, "Many people think we helped Bin Laden," I wouldn't have bothered. However, you posted it as though we should take it for granted that it happened. We did aid his organisation, which he was in a primary position as a saudi 'sheep' (Syrian slang  ) basically a cash cow for the Mujahideen, do take it for granted, it happened. wikipedia posted:"U.S. government financial support for the Afghan Islamic militants was substantial. Aid to Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, an Afghan mujahideen leader and founder and leader of the Hezb-e Islami radical Islamic militant faction, alone amounted "by the most conservative estimates" to $600 million. Later, in the early 1990s, after the U.S. had withdrawn support, Hekmatyar worked closely with bin Laden.[90] In addition to receiving hundreds of millions of dollars in American aid, Hekmatyar was the recipient of the lion's share of Saudi aid.[91] There is evidence that the CIA supported Hekmatyar's drug trade activities by giving him immunity for his opium trafficking, which financed the operation of his militant faction" My semantics are bad but most people are smart enough here to realise when I say he worked for the USA, I mean the interests of such, not that he had working hours and a contract. The argument is for questioning, for example do we listen to Robin Cook when he said Al Qaeda never existed and is a demon we created or not? This was my foreign secretary in parliament. After the London bombings the police commissioner had this to say; "Al Qaeda is not an organization. Al Qaeda is a way of working ... but this has the hallmark of that approach." Which makes a lot more sense in that we are fighting an ideology, not a group of super villains. Bin Laden himself states it better than anyone; quote:"... this matter isn't about any specific person and... is not about the al-Qa`idah Organization. We are the children of an Islamic Nation, with Prophet Muhammad as its leader, our Lord is one... and all the true believers [mu'mineen] are brothers. So the situation isn't like the West portrays it, that there is an 'organization' with a specific name (such as 'al-Qa`idah') and so on. That particular name is very old. It was born without any intention from us. Brother Abu Ubaida... created a military base to train the young men to fight against the vicious, arrogant, brutal, terrorizing Soviet empire... So this place was called 'The Base' ['Al-Qa`idah'], as in a training base, so this name grew and became. We aren't separated from this nation. We are the children of a nation, and we are an inseparable part of it, and from those public demonstrations which spread from the far east, from the Philippines, to Indonesia, to Malaysia, to India, to Pakistan, reaching Mauritania... and so we discuss the conscience of this nation." So what am I actually getting at here? We cannot even get a clear picture about the enemy, the lines are blurred across generations, countries, alliances etc etc etc. This drives the conspiracy mindset when it is nigh impossible to clarify and our own media is as confusing as Alex Jones. Without being a conspiracy theorist we should all be able to see that crashing planes into buildings has been used to eradicate freedoms and privacy from the people under attack, create a perpetual war around the globe, finance a huge intelligence network now used against drug dealers to journalists, complete back door access to the internet, electronics and countless other infringements upon the law and protections given to people in the name of a war on terror. When we are told there were warnings, unheeded, to the same institutions that have seen a massive expansion in capability both legal and practical many people will ask the question and be unsatisfied with the answer when they see the attacks used by the people protecting them to instead take away from them. I have said a couple of times now, it doesn't matter who did what - anyone can see there is a severe problem with the generated reaction of the west, this creates our conspiracies.
|
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 1, 2024 07:50 |
|
|
Who are you working for Sergg? lol, actually thankyou I know how difficult it is piecing all the names and dates together.
|
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2013 13:12
|
|