• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US Closing Embassies in Mideast for a Day amid Possible Qaeda Threat.....

And no, it's not really all the better.

The nuclear situation. Or did you think it was a coincidence that I names them with the countries I did, in response to your statement about North Korea's nuclear capability. What did you think we were talking about? Or did you not even know that South Africa was a nuclear nation at one point?

And here you are talking about crime and poverty. Are you starting to see why I think talking to you is a waste of time?
 
Lol...uh....no.

:lamo .....Get back to me after ya check out Brzezinski and Lil Timmy. ;)

Y4TrI.gif
 
The nuclear situation. Or did you think it was a coincidence that I names them with the countries I did, in response to your statement about North Korea's nuclear capability. What did you think we were talking about? Or did you not even know that South Africa was a nuclear nation at one point?

And here you are talking about crime and poverty. Are you starting to see why I think talking to you is a waste of time?

I think that it's all you can do to avoid having to talk to the points.
 
Ah I see
icon_cyclops_ani.gif
No knowledge of what the Democrat Brzezinski himself has admitted to and on MSNBC as well as on NBC.

Was Osama Bin Laden a CIA operative code named, "Tim Osman"?

Osama Bin Laden was a contract operative of the CIA and was recruited long before 9/11.

Osama Bin Laden traveled to the United States and toured military bases and the White House. He used a CIA code-name, “Tim Osman”, and was looking for help against the Soviets.
http://www.orlingrabbe.com/binladin_timo…

Osama Bin Laden was officially recruited into the CIA in 1979. His activities were backed by the CIA, which, like him, had an account at BCCI Bank.
FAIR: Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting

Bin Laden’s group of Afghans received backing from the CIA.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BR…
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Afghan…

Bin Laden’s CIA ties became well-known in April 1998, when MSNBC exposed his connections to the Agency.
Bin Laden comes home to roost | NBC News

The Papist-controlled US Government has claimed that it broke it’s ties with Bin Laden long before 9/11. However, an FBI insider said that Bin Laden was employed by the CIA until the very day of 9/11.
The BRAD BLOG : Ryland: A Sibel Edmonds 'Bombshell' - Bin Laden Worked for U.S. Until 9/11

There is some evidence to support her story. In July 2001 (Two months before 9/11), French media reported that a local CIA chief met with Osama Bin Laden at an American hospital in Dubai.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/nov…

There is absolutely no doubt that Osama Bin Laden and his associates are CIA. Thus, they are subservient to the Papist Crime Network. The CIA is a front operation for the Jesuits/Vatican.

Was Osama Bin Laden a CIA operative code named, "Tim Osman"? - Yahoo! Answers

"Uhm"
glasses12.gif
.....like as in. So much for Conspiracy Theories. :shock: See the one thing they could never get round.....was the pictures of him here touring in the US and on US Army Bases.

None of that is true.
 
Perhaps they do, but our interventionism fuels anger and hatred against the West, and that plays right into the propaganda and recruitment of terrorist organizations.


No, it's not the interventionism, it is our culture. The recruitment of terrorists is done on the image of the West as a free, open, tolerant society that is anathema to Radical Islamic doctrine and a threat to Islamic expansion.
 
None of that is true.

Sure it is Sherman.....its even in Bin laden Bio and they have records of him with the CIA. It was known as Operation Cyclone. ;)

From Hero to Exile

But Osama would have little chance to use his degree. When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979, Osama joined the Afghan resistance, believing it was his duty as a Muslim to fight the occupation. He relocated to Peshawar, Afghanistan, and using aid from the United States under the CIA program Operation Cyclone, he began training a mujahideen, a group of Islamic jihadists. After the Soviets withdrew from the country in 1989, Osama returned to Saudi Arabia as a hero, and the United States referred to him and his soldiers as "Freedom Fighters."

Yet Osama was quickly disappointed with what he believed was a corrupt Saudi government, and his frustration with the U.S. occupation of Saudi Arabia during the Persian Gulf War led to a growing rift between Osama and his country's leaders. Bin Laden spoke publicly against the Saudi government's reliance on American troops, believing their presence profaned sacred soil. After several attempts to silence Osama, the Saudis banished the former hero. He lived in exile in Sudan beginning in 1992.

Osama bin Laden Biography - Facts, Birthday, Life Story - Biography.com


0ad54b_90f77a2279258035a95c6741919d8461.jpg_srz_374_273_75_22_0.50_1.20_0.00_jpg_srz


0ad54b_1eeafc38beb0120f3f341f69540598c4.jpg_srz_450_290_75_22_0.50_1.20_0.00_jpg_srz


When Osama Bin Ladin
Was 'Tim Osman'
Michael Riconosciuto & Ted Gunderson's 1986 Meeting with
'Tim Osman' (Osama bin Laden)

Michael Riconosciuto and Tim Osman (Osama bin Laden)
 
No, it's not the interventionism, it is our culture. The recruitment of terrorists is done on the image of the West as a free, open, tolerant society that is anathema to Radical Islamic doctrine and a threat to Islamic expansion.

No, I don't think that it's a cultural thing, I think it's a "we've been bombing and messing with the are for over 60 years" sort of thing. If people were up in our business, bombing our cities, deploying troops, making us do what they want for decades on end, we'd be pretty pissed too. So much so that if we were unable to solve this diplomatically, we would start engaging in terrorism.

Maybe some don't like us for our culture, but the level of success terrorists have had at waging their war and recruiting is heavily influenced by our own interventionism in the region.
 
Sure it is Sherman.....its even in Bin laden Bio and they have records of him with the CIA. It was known as Operation Cyclone. ;)

From Hero to Exile

But Osama would have little chance to use his degree. When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979, Osama joined the Afghan resistance, believing it was his duty as a Muslim to fight the occupation. He relocated to Peshawar, Afghanistan, and using aid from the United States under the CIA program Operation Cyclone, he began training a mujahideen, a group of Islamic jihadists. After the Soviets withdrew from the country in 1989, Osama returned to Saudi Arabia as a hero, and the United States referred to him and his soldiers as "Freedom Fighters."

Yet Osama was quickly disappointed with what he believed was a corrupt Saudi government, and his frustration with the U.S. occupation of Saudi Arabia during the Persian Gulf War led to a growing rift between Osama and his country's leaders. Bin Laden spoke publicly against the Saudi government's reliance on American troops, believing their presence profaned sacred soil. After several attempts to silence Osama, the Saudis banished the former hero. He lived in exile in Sudan beginning in 1992.

Osama bin Laden Biography - Facts, Birthday, Life Story - Biography.com


0ad54b_90f77a2279258035a95c6741919d8461.jpg_srz_374_273_75_22_0.50_1.20_0.00_jpg_srz


0ad54b_1eeafc38beb0120f3f341f69540598c4.jpg_srz_450_290_75_22_0.50_1.20_0.00_jpg_srz


When Osama Bin Ladin
Was 'Tim Osman'
Michael Riconosciuto & Ted Gunderson's 1986 Meeting with
'Tim Osman' (Osama bin Laden)

Michael Riconosciuto and Tim Osman (Osama bin Laden)

Bin Laden never received any US military assistance or intelligence support and he never met with any of our officers or political representatives. This is a fiction.

The US gave financial assistance to Afghan anti-Soviet militants via ISI and occasionally through independent routes which was a condition of the compact with Pakistan which took on considerable risk by allowing their Soviet occupying neighbors to be attacked by militants trained in their territory. That funding was then used to purchase weapons, munitions, medical equipment, food, trucks, etc which was funneled to a variety of groups some representing the Afghan government in exile, some went to Hekmatyer, the Islamic Dawah Group (which is now a political party), etc. The umbrella group which received the lions share of support was called the Islamic Unity of Afghanistan Mujahadeen and consisted of a variety of Islamist, Traditionalist, and Nationalist groups many of whom have reemerged as political parties in Afghanistan today, others yes have become part of the network of opposition forces such as Hekmatyer's forces.

However the US never had more than a half dozen field agents in Afghanistan and NW Pakistan, it kept its touch to a minimum, and funding channels were rarely chosen by the US. Nor did any direct support ever go to al-Qaeda or the Taliban, the former mostly fought on funds raised from their own charitable groups. Which was true of most Arab groups that went to Pakistan and Afghanistan.

To reiterate, the US did not fund or support the Taliban or al-Qaeda, and to be specific it is unlikely that any US funding ended up in the hands of al-Qaeda since like most small Arab groups they did not receive heavy patronage from Pakistan's ISI or from Rabbani's Afghan group, and instead supported themselves with Arab donations and familial largesse. As for the Taliban it is important to note that it was a new group, it drew from rank and file fighters from many disparate organizations but began as a small group, and came into contact and conflict with many of the existing groups in Afghanistan.

We barely knew who Bin Laden was, he was just one more Arab dilettante who left his family to take advantage of his fortune to set up shop in the country.
 
No, I don't think that it's a cultural thing, I think it's a "we've been bombing and messing with the are for over 60 years" sort of thing. If people were up in our business, bombing our cities, deploying troops, making us do what they want for decades on end, we'd be pretty pissed too. So much so that if we were unable to solve this diplomatically, we would start engaging in terrorism.

Maybe some don't like us for our culture, but the level of success terrorists have had at waging their war and recruiting is heavily influenced by our own interventionism in the region.

We've been much more heavily involved in Asia, Latin America, and Africa than we ever were in the Middle East. Yet the reaction is completely different. I think it is hard to make the case that this is merely a reaction to our foreign policy. Moreover even if it is a reaction to our foreign policy it is not necessarily an indictment of our actions. Their reaction is not the standard by which such policies are evaluated.
 
Bin Laden never received any US military assistance or intelligence support and he never met with any of our officers or political representatives. This is a fiction.

The US gave financial assistance to Afghan anti-Soviet militants via ISI and occasionally through independent routes which was a condition of the compact with Pakistan which took on considerable risk by allowing their Soviet occupying neighbors to be attacked by militants trained in their territory. That funding was then used to purchase weapons, munitions, medical equipment, food, trucks, etc which was funneled to a variety of groups some representing the Afghan government in exile, some went to Hekmatyer, the Islamic Dawah Group (which is now a political party), etc. The umbrella group which received the lions share of support was called the Islamic Unity of Afghanistan Mujahadeen and consisted of a variety of Islamist, Traditionalist, and Nationalist groups many of whom have reemerged as political parties in Afghanistan today, others yes have become part of the network of opposition forces such as Hekmatyer's forces.

However the US never had more than a half dozen field agents in Afghanistan and NW Pakistan, it kept its touch to a minimum, and funding channels were rarely chosen by the US. Nor did any direct support ever go to al-Qaeda or the Taliban, the former mostly fought on funds raised from their own charitable groups. Which was true of most Arab groups that went to Pakistan and Afghanistan.

To reiterate, the US did not fund or support the Taliban or al-Qaeda, and to be specific it is unlikely that any US funding ended up in the hands of al-Qaeda since like most small Arab groups they did not receive heavy patronage from Pakistan's ISI or from Rabbani's Afghan group, and instead supported themselves with Arab donations and familial largesse. As for the Taliban it is important to note that it was a new group, it drew from rank and file fighters from many disparate organizations but began as a small group, and came into contact and conflict with many of the existing groups in Afghanistan.

We barely knew who Bin Laden was, he was just one more Arab dilettante who left his family to take advantage of his fortune to set up shop in the country.

What Intel doesn't haven't the information Sherman? What Military? You can look it up from the Russians Side of the story too. Even Bin Ladens own family acknowledges it. Saudia Arabia Acknowledges it and most of all. Brzezinski himself admits to it.....and says he would do it all over again. The CIA doesn't admit or deny any of it. Especially after NBC and MSNBC and those liberals and progressives busted it out.

Especially when going after both Bush one and Bush two over the Neo-Cons and any dealings with him or AQ. Course one can look thru the MB and any documentation they are holding as well.
 
What Intel doesn't haven't the information Sherman? What Military? You can look it up from the Russians Side of the story too. Even Bin Ladens own family acknowledges it. Saudia Arabia Acknowledges it and most of all. Brzezinski himself admits to it.....and says he would do it all over again. The CIA doesn't admit or deny any of it. Especially after NBC and MSNBC and those liberals and progressives busted it out.

Especially when going after both Bush one and Bush two over the Neo-Cons and any dealings with him or AQ. Course one can look thru the MB and any documentation they are holding as well.

No they don't None of them acknowledge it. There was no contact with Bin Laden during the Afghan war. We barely knew who he was. Furthermore on the rare occasions when we had control over where our support was directed we tried to get it to Massoud and his fighters in Panjishir. Why would we have been seeking out a relatively unknown Saudi millionaire and his few hundred (if that) fighters? It makes no sense.
 
We've been much more heavily involved in Asia, Latin America, and Africa than we ever were in the Middle East. Yet the reaction is completely different. I think it is hard to make the case that this is merely a reaction to our foreign policy. Moreover even if it is a reaction to our foreign policy it is not necessarily an indictment of our actions. Their reaction is not the standard by which such policies are evaluated.

Have we? We've ruled over a lot of those places, but much more economically than militarily. Latin America stuff has bitten us in the butt too and often times some of the rebels we funded there turned out to run guns, drugs, commit horrible crimes, and once in office become unreceptive to America. The level of terrorist bombings? Not so much, not on our soil proper, but even the the ME terrorist attacks on the 50 States proper is also exceedingly limited. It's all low probability events.

There's a lot of historic context of conflict between the ME and the West probably stretching back to before the Crusades. But military intervention over the course of several decades isn't going to push the necessary attitudes required for us to get through the troubled times, become friends, and see the advent of friendly governments in the region.
 
No they don't None of them acknowledge it. There was no contact with Bin Laden during the Afghan war. We barely knew who he was. Furthermore on the rare occasions when we had control over where our support was directed we tried to get it to Massoud and his fighters in Panjishir. Why would we have been seeking out a relatively unknown Saudi millionaire and his few hundred (if that) fighters? It makes no sense.

But they do acknowledge somethings Sherman......which if all on each side of the coin is admitting to it. Then the facts are true. Even Pakistan's Zia ul Haq stated Osama bin laden was with Hekmetyar's faction and was a loyal and trusted friend.

Mujaheddin

In April 1978, the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) seized power in Afghanistan in reaction to a crackdown against the party by that country's repressive government.

The PDPA was committed to a radical land reform that favoured the peasants, trade union rights, an expansion of education and social services, equality for women and the separation of church and state. The PDPA also supported strengthening Afghanistan's relationship with the Soviet Union.

Such policies enraged the wealthy semi-feudal landlords, the Muslim religious establishment (many mullahs were also big landlords) and the tribal chiefs. They immediately began organizing resistance to the government's progressive policies, under the guise of defending Islam.

Washington, fearing the spread of Soviet influence (and worse the new government's radical example) to its allies in Pakistan, Iran and the Gulf states, immediately offered support to the Afghan mujaheddin, as the “contra” force was known.

Following an internal PDPA power struggle in December 1979 which toppled Afghanistan's leader, thousands of Soviet troops entered the country to prevent the new government's fall. This only galvanized the disparate fundamentalist factions. Their reactionary jihad now gained legitimacy as a “national liberation” struggle in the eyes of many Afghans.

The Soviet Union was eventually to withdraw from Afghanistan in 1989 and the mujaheddin captured the capital, Kabul, in 1992.

Between 1978 and 1992, the US government poured at least US$6 billion (some estimates range as high as $20 billion) worth of arms, training and funds to prop up the mujaheddin factions. Other Western governments, as well as oil-rich Saudi Arabia, kicked in as much again. Wealthy Arab fanatics, like Osama bin Laden, provided millions more.

Washington's policy in Afghanistan was shaped by US President Jimmy Carter's national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and was continued by his successors. His plan went far beyond simply forcing Soviet troops to withdraw; rather it aimed to foster an international movement to spread Islamic fanaticism into the Muslim Central Asian Soviet republics to destabilize the Soviet Union.

Brzezinski's grand plan coincided with Pakistan military dictator General Zia ul-Haq's own ambitions to dominate the region. US-run Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europe beamed Islamic fundamentalist tirades across Central Asia (while paradoxically denouncing the “Islamic revolution” that toppled the pro-US Shah of Iran in 1979).

Washington's favoured mujaheddin faction was one of the most extreme, led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. The West's distaste for terrorism did not apply to this unsavory “freedom fighter”. Hekmatyar was notorious in the 1970's for throwing acid in the faces of women who refused to wear the veil.

After the mujaheddin took Kabul in 1992, Hekmatyar's forces rained US-supplied missiles and rockets on that city — killing at least 2000 civilians — until the new government agreed to give him the post of prime minister. Osama bin Laden was a close associate of Hekmatyar and his faction.

Hekmatyar was also infamous for his side trade in the cultivation and trafficking in opium. Backing of the mujaheddin from the CIA coincided with a boom in the drug business. Within two years, the Afghanistan-Pakistan border was the world's single largest source of heroin, supplying 60% of US drug users.

In 1995, the former director of the CIA's operation in Afghanistan was unrepentant about the explosion in the flow of drugs: “Our main mission was to do as much damage as possible to the Soviets... There was a fallout in terms of drugs, yes. But the main objective was accomplished. The Soviets left Afghanistan.”.....snip~
 
I think that it's all you can do to avoid having to talk to the points.

Wow. I'm just dumbfounded by you.

I don't get why people talk about things they don't understand.
 
Dude, read a ****ing book.

You need a new line. Information was provided and you have nothing to address the points made other than emotionalized insult. How about instead of drab, unintelligent insult you just address the points and provide your own links?
 
Wow. I'm just dumbfounded by you.

I don't get why people talk about things they don't understand.

I don't know either, why are you still doing so?

Also, once again an entire post of yours is nothing more than emotionalize, personal insult.
 
But they do acknowledge somethings Sherman......which if all on each side of the coin is admitting to it. Then the facts are true. Even Pakistan's Zia ul Haq stated Osama bin laden was with Hekmetyar's faction and was a loyal and trusted friend.

Mujaheddin

In April 1978, the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) seized power in Afghanistan in reaction to a crackdown against the party by that country's repressive government.

The PDPA was committed to a radical land reform that favoured the peasants, trade union rights, an expansion of education and social services, equality for women and the separation of church and state. The PDPA also supported strengthening Afghanistan's relationship with the Soviet Union.

Such policies enraged the wealthy semi-feudal landlords, the Muslim religious establishment (many mullahs were also big landlords) and the tribal chiefs. They immediately began organizing resistance to the government's progressive policies, under the guise of defending Islam.

Washington, fearing the spread of Soviet influence (and worse the new government's radical example) to its allies in Pakistan, Iran and the Gulf states, immediately offered support to the Afghan mujaheddin, as the “contra” force was known.

Following an internal PDPA power struggle in December 1979 which toppled Afghanistan's leader, thousands of Soviet troops entered the country to prevent the new government's fall. This only galvanized the disparate fundamentalist factions. Their reactionary jihad now gained legitimacy as a “national liberation” struggle in the eyes of many Afghans.

The Soviet Union was eventually to withdraw from Afghanistan in 1989 and the mujaheddin captured the capital, Kabul, in 1992.

Between 1978 and 1992, the US government poured at least US$6 billion (some estimates range as high as $20 billion) worth of arms, training and funds to prop up the mujaheddin factions. Other Western governments, as well as oil-rich Saudi Arabia, kicked in as much again. Wealthy Arab fanatics, like Osama bin Laden, provided millions more.

Washington's policy in Afghanistan was shaped by US President Jimmy Carter's national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and was continued by his successors. His plan went far beyond simply forcing Soviet troops to withdraw; rather it aimed to foster an international movement to spread Islamic fanaticism into the Muslim Central Asian Soviet republics to destabilize the Soviet Union.

Brzezinski's grand plan coincided with Pakistan military dictator General Zia ul-Haq's own ambitions to dominate the region. US-run Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europe beamed Islamic fundamentalist tirades across Central Asia (while paradoxically denouncing the “Islamic revolution” that toppled the pro-US Shah of Iran in 1979).

Washington's favoured mujaheddin faction was one of the most extreme, led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. The West's distaste for terrorism did not apply to this unsavory “freedom fighter”. Hekmatyar was notorious in the 1970's for throwing acid in the faces of women who refused to wear the veil.

After the mujaheddin took Kabul in 1992, Hekmatyar's forces rained US-supplied missiles and rockets on that city — killing at least 2000 civilians — until the new government agreed to give him the post of prime minister. Osama bin Laden was a close associate of Hekmatyar and his faction.

Hekmatyar was also infamous for his side trade in the cultivation and trafficking in opium. Backing of the mujaheddin from the CIA coincided with a boom in the drug business. Within two years, the Afghanistan-Pakistan border was the world's single largest source of heroin, supplying 60% of US drug users.

In 1995, the former director of the CIA's operation in Afghanistan was unrepentant about the explosion in the flow of drugs: “Our main mission was to do as much damage as possible to the Soviets... There was a fallout in terms of drugs, yes. But the main objective was accomplished. The Soviets left Afghanistan.”.....snip~

lol

NONE OF THAT SUPPORTS WHAT YOU SAID

That's conspiracy theory, we're talking about real life. Peter Bergen and Steve Coll have written tremendous books (plural, for both) about bin Laden, I suggest you read them.
 
You need a new line. Information was provided and you have nothing to address the points made other than emotionalized insult. How about instead of drab, unintelligent insult you just address the points and provide your own links?


Information wasn't provided lol. Are you high right now? Are you katsung?
 
looooooooooooooool

Laugh all you want. People have provided argument, links, and evidence and all you've done is ridicule, insult, and dismiss. If there's someone who doesn't know what they're talking about, it's likely the one resorting to ad hominem retorts.
 
Laugh all you want. People have provided argument, links, and evidence and all you've done is ridicule, insult, and dismiss. If there's someone who doesn't know what they're talking about, it's likely the one resorting to ad hominem retorts.

Links to what? Conspiracy blogs? looool

WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH lol
 
I wonder how much good it would have done in Benghazi? (Yeah, yeah, I know it wasn't officially an embassy.) I guess I'd rather hear that they were doubling security. I doubt problems generally occur from inside an embassy, but rather from the grounds.


CNN ran a documentary Sunday night Benghazi on that I recorded and haven't seen all of it yet. From what I saw 3 different rescue operations were deployed but the nearest one was in Italy and by the time they got there it was too late. Again, I haven't seen all of it but from what I did see the problem wasn't refusing to respond but not having a military presence close enough when it was needed. If I recall (or it might have just been my reasoning as it was late and I'd just gotten home from a road trip), the administration might have believed having a big military presence in the area would create image problems with the Libyans in a culture where a strong visible US military presence builds resentment as it makes us look imperialist in their eyes and makes our troops targets. There was a small protection force in Tripoli over 600 miles away but it was thought that Tripoli was where the real threat to security was and thinking whatever they were guarding there needed to not be left vulnerable never imaging Benghazi would happen and not contingency plans or training in rapid response outside of their mission in Tripoli.

Add the political dynamic, blame game politics and an assumption that all forces in the US military have the same training and contingency planning as US Navy Seals or other Special Forces and here we are.
 
ad hominem, once again. No substance, just emotional insult.

Katsung? Hello, katsung.

I mean, I tried with you til I realized you didn't even know the four points (that you argued) that I pointed out. What more is there to do? How can you talk about NASA to someone that doesn't think the moon landing occurred? You don't. You laugh at them, you mock them, you have fun at their expense. But you don't waste time with them.
 
Back
Top Bottom