PDA

View Full Version : Arming bin Laden



Gayle in MD
01-09-2008, 09:27 AM
http://www.hermes-press.com/BushSaud.htm

LWW
01-10-2008, 05:31 AM
So, your source is a site trying to sell a book.

Quite revealing.

[ QUOTE ]
Claims have been made that the American government, and in particular the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), are responsible for enabling "Afghan Arabs," and in particular Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda.

Following the 1979 invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviet Army, the United States gave several hundred million dollars a year in aid to the Afghan Mujahideen insurgents fighting the Soviet Army and Afghan Marxist government in Operation Cyclone. Along with native Afghan mujahideen (fighters of jihad or "holy warriors") were Muslim volunteers from other countries, popularly known as "Afghan Arabs". The most famous of the Afghan Arabs was Osama bin Laden, known at the time as a wealth and pious Saudi who provided his own money and helped raise millions from other wealthy Gulf Arabs. As the war neared its end, bin Laden organized the al-Qaeda organization to carry on armed jihad in other venues, primarily against the United States, the country that had helped fund the mujahideen against the Soviets.
A number of commentators have described Al-Qaeda attacks as "blowback" or an unintended consequence of American aid to the mujahideen. In response, the American government, American and Pakistani intelligence officials involved in the operation, and at least one journalist (Peter Bergen) have denied this theory. They are maintaining the aid was given out by the Pakistan government, that it went to Afghan not foreign mujahideen, and that there was no contact between the Afghan Arabs (foreign mujahideen) and the CIA or other American officials, let alone, arming, training, coaching, indoctrination, etc.<hr /></blockquote>

and it took days for you to hunt down even that lame source.

Her's a goodun: Actually researched evidence into the issue to offset the allegations made by someone selling a book that no major publishing house would touch! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_assistance_to_Osama_bin_Laden)

Join us in the light Gayle.

LWW

hondo
01-10-2008, 07:01 AM
Uh, oh! I'm noticing a subtle shift here.
When I became a Brother of the Light it meant
enough of the name-calling and be civil to each other.
Your last post would indicate that it is starting to mean embracing neo-conservatism.
Not me, bubba.
If I had any doubts about that, and I didn't, they were solidified by your refusal to denounce the hate philosophy of Larry Lotter.
Will I still be respectful to you and the gang?
You bet. It's the right thing to do.
Do I expect the same respect from y'all. Yep.
But I am seriously thinking of renouncing my membership in the Brothers of the Light because of serious mis-representation.
Of course, in the true American spirit, I could always be bribed to stay.

LWW
01-10-2008, 07:20 AM
What was out of line hondo?

Nobody expects everyone to all believe the same thing. D'UH!

That doesn't meant that someone who doesn't wish for peaceful dialog can sit and snipe and post without ever being called on it.

I really don't care if Gayle agrees with me or not, she does not however own the forum nor is she entitled to any special treatment allowing her to pass along lies, half truths, and innuendo from Carleton Sheets and the like hawking books without a counterbalance being put in place by people who don't believe in such fairy tales.

LWW

Gayle in MD
01-10-2008, 07:31 AM
You'll notice, if you read all the links, that it is stated that NO ONE CAN SAY, how many of those groups in Afghanistan ended up joining al Qaeda.

Our foreign policy has been convoluted by a number of presidents.

Funding radical organizations, when we perceive that to be in our interests, has only been successful in increasing the number of people around the world who hate us. We are not supposed to act unilaterally, or pre-emptively. According to our own international agreements, we are only supposed to act preventively, not pre-emptively, and only then, when there is a real and present danger, not some possibility of some future danger.

Invading Iraq, was illegal. Supplying radical organizations with weapons, which eventually are used to kill our soldiers, and foment hatred from civilians who are killed by them, is plain stupid.

Even if one believed that Saddam was a bad man, it was still illegal, and against our international agreements.

Gayle in Md.

LWW
01-10-2008, 08:46 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr>Invading Iraq, was illegal.

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>
Actually it wasn't.

GWI never ended, only a cease fire which Saddamite Hussinsein violated with near impunity for 8 years.

The mistake Bush made was in attempting to get the UN to resolve to live up to it's own law.

THAT alone set the tone for his political misery and for that he deserves it.

That being said, arguing that the US even actually invaded is a gross distortion as the 1991 ceasefire gave us express consent to enforce said ceasefire and Iraq's adherence to the many UN resolutions.

The path that led to the position we are in doesn't need revisionism to cover the errors of the past.

It needs a recognition of the errors and a way forward.

LWW

hondo
01-10-2008, 01:31 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote LWW:</font><hr> What was out of line hondo?

Nobody expects everyone to all believe the same thing. D'UH!

That doesn't meant that someone who doesn't wish for peaceful dialog can sit and snipe and post without ever being called on it.

I really don't care if Gayle agrees with me or not, she does not however own the forum nor is she entitled to any special treatment allowing her to pass along lies, half truths, and innuendo from Carleton Sheets and the like hawking books without a counterbalance being put in place by people who don't believe in such fairy tales.

LWW

<hr /></blockquote>

WADR, I honestly don't see that your response has anything to do with my post. Please re-read what I posted.
Thanks.

wolfdancer
01-10-2008, 01:48 PM
It doesn't, although it did give him a chance to misspell Carlton Sheets again. (for the record...I bought the Sheets course....waste of my $$$; as reading lww's posts is a waste of my time))