Osama Bin Laden Dead!

[breadandcheese]

Can someone tell me what they think about elements of western power arming, funding and supporting all the 'evil' men of the world from Hitler to Bin Laden please? Don't you think that it's a bit strange that that is always the case?

All I see are some people agreeing that folk who question the official story will never be happy and patting eachother on the back. I don't see any serious answers to questions that you should be bothered about.

Every single President and PM in our memories is involved in the same dirty business of arming despots and yet most of you seem to believe that these things are just mistakes that our leaders learn from and that they never really meant to do any harm. You don't seem to want to admit that your leaders are shits and are responsible for people like Bin Laden!

Un-be-bloody-lievable. When will you all learn that our leaders are not like us and they don't give a flying fack about your safety or quality of life?

I think your analysis regarding the arming of despots is too simplistic and ignores the political reality of the last 100 years, in particular the Cold War.

With the polemic East vs West Cold War, it became a war by proxy. So whilst the USSR was the bigger enemy, Arab dicatorships (providing they aligned themselves with the West) received military aid from us in the West. There's two ways of looking at this. The first is the way you would, that the evil West armed and funded dictators in a form of imperialism. An alternative view is that some very smart leaders and countries were active players, playing the West off against the Communists to their advantage. This helped strengthen them tremendously and led to them being fully armed and stocked with reserves.

Personally, I think it's a combination of both these views, hence the likes of Mubarak being in power for many years.

If you are asking me whether I think it's wrong, then it depends on the situation. During the Cold War, it was understandable to arm certain countries we would never consider ourselves friends with, hence the arming of Iraq (which just so happened to have the benefit of facing off in a proxy war with Iran at the time). Some of these alliances worked, such as in Jordan (although I think we can all agree that some kind of constiutional democracy akin to we have would be preferable than their current form of governance), Peru (which from the point of RealPolitik worked as they helped us in the Falklands, although Pinochet was utterly reprehensible). Others such as Iraq and the Taleban fell flat and we have egg on our faces.

To say that the West is reponsible for Bin Laden makes him a passive player in all this. He was not, using Western support for all it was worth when fighting the Communists in the 1980s and when no longer needed, jettisoning it.

[BoneDog]

I don't call the west 'evil' (just a few of the top lads). Some of the top people in the west work with all despots and big terror groups. It's a fact and it's not because they are trying to save us from somebody else.

So we armed Saddam to fight Iran did we? Then why were we arming Iran aswell? And why sell Saddam chemical weapons?

I've no doubt that most people in the CIA, the armed forces and other intelligence services are working for the good of their country and other people of the world, but when you have rogue elements of the CIA and top military people secretly funding and arming who we are fighting then all the good hard work is never going to change anything.

[BoneDog]

Perhaps people should wait to see if "proof" if forthcoming then before starting the latest round of conspiracy theories.

If a known liar shows a document saying that the DNA is Osamas, how in any way is that proof?

[Babylon]

Can someone tell me what they think about elements of western power arming, funding and supporting all the 'evil' men of the world from Hitler to Bin Laden please? Don't you think that it's a bit strange that that is always the case?

Greed (Prescott Bush and friends), sometimes the people they fund/sell to do nothing but make them money. Sometimes they turn out to be an absolute nutcase. By the time you find out which one they are it's usually a bit late.

And the old chesnut of arming x to get rid of y. But then creating another problem as y sometimes turns out to be as bad as x if not worse. It's happened throughout extended history. Some you win, some you lose.

[Steven]

Perhaps people should wait to see if "proof" if forthcoming then before starting the latest round of conspiracy theories.

You might be right and I hope you are. That said I have little confidence as the birth certificate offered up as proof by BO was a copy with incorrect details. As El Empty says, these are people with lower moral standards than you or I.

[Koke]

The people that don't believe it now won't believe it no matter what proof is offered up.

Weak argument.

But of course the US government would never lie to us would they? They have no history of lies, deception and propaganda.

I believe Osama is dead. And he's been dead for years.

[Ozwin]

[Babylon]

You might be right and I hope you are. That said I have little confidence as the birth certificate offered up as proof by BO was a copy with incorrect details. As El Empty says, these are people with lower moral standards than you or I.

The first birth certificate given to my parents has my name spelt incorrectly and the wrong date, so it's not inconceivable some clueless feck made a mistake. Not that I know what "mistakes" you are referring to.

[Babylon]

I believe Osama is dead. And he's been dead for years.

In reality you don't have a scooby doo.

[Babylon]

If a known liar shows a document saying that the DNA is Osamas, how in any way is that proof?

I think perhaps you should read my post again, have a think about it and then get back to me.

As an aside, what would you class as "proof".

[breadandcheese]

I don't call the west 'evil' (just a few of the top lads). Some of the top people in the west work with all despots and big terror groups. It's a fact and it's not because they are trying to save us from somebody else.

So we armed Saddam to fight Iran did we? Then why were we arming Iran aswell? And why sell Saddam chemical weapons?

I've no doubt that most people in the CIA, the armed forces and other intelligence services are working for the good of their country and other people of the world, but when you have rogue elements of the CIA and top military people secretly funding and arming who we are fighting then all the good hard work is never going to change anything.

I'm not saying we armed Iraq to fight Iran, but it was certainly convenient that they fought a nation considered an enemy. It was a proxy war. With regards arming Iran, I am no expert, but there must have been reasons. According to a few random websites i've just looked up, there are hints that it was a prisoner for arms swap, to recover some American hostages. Whether this is true, i do not know, as I'm relying on websites who sources I do not know. Were actual Chemical weapons sold to Iraq or the means to make them? Whilst it may seem only a small difference, it is quite important.

I'm not going to say I agree with supporting dictatorships or despots, but I can understand the reasoning of politicians and governments for doing so in certain situations (particularly during the Cold War era). There now seems to be a kind of Cold War brewing in the Middle East (I'll call it lukewarm because it's not cold), with a West vs Islamism. So it's no surprise that the West is happy to take the easy option of supporting dictatorships who dislike Iran, proxy terrorist groups or extremist Islamist groups like Al Qaeda.

Personally, I'd like to see the dictatorships of the Middle East give way to democracy, because that is what I believe in. However, if that's not viable and it's a choice of another Iran/Iranian proxy (where elections are not free nor likely to be) or a Western backed dictatorship, then unfortunately I fall to preferring the latter.

[Webbo]

Weak argument.

But of course the US government would never lie to us would they? They have no history of lies, deception and propaganda.

I believe Osama is dead. And he's been dead for years.

No offence kareem but what would convince you that in this instance the US are telling the truth?

[Babylon]

No offence kareem but what would convince you that in this instance the US are telling the truth?

Their minds are already made up.

[BoneDog]

End of the day if they do fund the evil men, what are we actually going to be able to do about it anyway? Are we funding North Korea, Iran and Russia too? If you are right and its a number of leaders over the decades that are involved, all of which have been elected, that suggests there's a power above them pulling the strings - so once again we're stuck.

So if that is the case, whats to be worried about - may as well continue with our existance as normal?

I think that there is definitely a power above our PM's and Presidents pulling the strings, and I think that most people probably think that too. There is not a chance that people like Cameron or Obama do much, if any, decision making. They are just the PR men who are supposed to keep us believing the illusion with a good old fashioned debate or speech.

If most of the population of a country decided to do something about the problems as a whole then it could possibly be stopped. The country could never run without us and, if we acted, then they would have to give in to some of our demands. I don't think that will ever happen though, because people seem happy to forget about the billions they steal from us and the many other things that are being done. It's like people just think 'oh well, the next lot will sort this mess out'. But they never do.

[zubi]

Perhaps people should wait to see if "proof" if forthcoming then before starting the latest round of conspiracy theories.

I agree, but to be honest the most likely truth we are going to get is a middle aged man in a suit with a side parting standing outside the White house with a BBC microphone in his hand reporting that American scientists have declared that the DNA matches that of Obama Bin Ladens and that NASA have run extra tests to confirm the report. And thus because the BBC said it, The White house said it and scientists have said it, 95% of people will say "hey, that proves Obama bin laden is dead, BBC and men in white suits said it, it must be true"

Yes I'm calling him Obama Bin Laden on purpose by the way.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

I think that there is definitely a power above our PM's and Presidents pulling the strings, and I think that most people probably think that too. There is not a chance that people like Cameron or Obama do much, if any, decision making. They are just the PR men who are supposed to keep us believing the illusion with a good old fashioned debate or speech.

If most of the population of a country decided to do something about the problems as a whole then it could possibly be stopped. The country could never run without us and, if we acted, then they would have to give in to some of our demands. I don't think that will ever happen though, because people seem happy to forget about the billions they steal from us and the many other things that are being done. It's like people just think 'oh well, the next lot will sort this mess out'. But they never do.

That is far too much of a simplistic view - the country would never be able to do something as a whole because 1.) we'd never all agree on the cause and end result AND 2.) Even if people as a whole did manage a revolution, it wouldn't be long until the same things started happening - there are not enough people with the high standard of moral code to effect what you're after.

In order to be elected, potential PM's and Presidents need monetry backers and the media, more than they actually need votes so to speak, so it is natural that they would lean policies towards people that have assisted them in getting into the position in the first place. Add the effects of the chain of command to decisions, it already suggests that no one man has ultimate power and so I would stay clear of a puppet master theory and go more with a clousion of ideas across a mirad of benefactors.

Regardless of what you think and how interesting the message your provaying is, I'm trying to sell you the end game realitly which is nothing can be done about it.

[Trav Le Bleu]

It's simple.

He's achieved his undercover role destablising Al-Qaeda and has now gone back to his day job with the CIA.

[Webbo]

Yes I'm calling him Obama Bin Laden on purpose by the way.

[zubi]

Personally, I'd like to see the dictatorships of the Middle East give way to democracy, because that is what I believe in. However, if that's not viable and it's a choice of another Iran/Iranian proxy (where elections are not free nor likely to be) or a Western backed dictatorship, then unfortunately I fall to preferring the latter.

Same can be said about the west, because George Bush was elected for four more years because the American elections were free

Or maybe they were right when they did the recount and realised they forgot to count his votes

[BoneDog]

Greed (Prescott Bush and friends), sometimes the people they fund/sell to do nothing but make them money. Sometimes they turn out to be an absolute nutcase. By the time you find out which one they are it's usually a bit late.

And the old chesnut of arming x to get rid of y. But then creating another problem as y sometimes turns out to be as bad as x if not worse. It's happened throughout extended history. Some you win, some you lose.

Greed is probably a big part of it, but I think there is alot more to it (but that involves all the S Society stuff ). Prescott was in a group of people that were creating WW2 and it wasn't just business gone bad by accident. And his descendents are still involved in the same shenanigans today.

I don't think that we sell the arms to anyone while thinking that they are alright and might not turn out to be nutters. We know the history and mindset of these people and yet we still sell. It's all done with future plans in mind!

[breadandcheese]

Same can be said about the west, because George Bush was elected for four more years because the American elections were free

Or maybe they were right when they did the recount and realised they forgot to count his votes

Are you really trying to say there is a moral equivalence between the United States democratic electoral process and the Iranian "democratic" electoral process? You must forward your thoughts to those Iranians who supported the Green Revolution in Iran, only to be met by violence from the ruling party.

[Steven]

Are you really trying to say there is a moral equivalence between the United States "democratic electoral process" and the Iranian "democratic" electoral process? You must forward your thoughts to those Iranians who supported the Green Revolution in Iran, only to be met by violence from the ruling party.

Edited to reflect the fact in the West we have a manipulated majority vote process which may or may not be democratic. What makes you think that opposing conventional views in the West is without harassment by the ruling elite.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13268633

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/may/03/protester-sue-police-secret-surveillance

[BoneDog]

The first birth certificate given to my parents has my name spelt incorrectly and the wrong date, so it's not inconceivable some clueless feck made a mistake. Not that I know what "mistakes" you are referring to.

It's not just spelt wrong. There are layers and masks on that birth certificate and you can easily take them apart on photoshop if you download the birth certificate file from the FBI's website (I think that's the place it is on show).

When you take off the layers there are white spaces underneath and some of the gaps are inconsistent with the black writing that has been put on top.

There is no doubt that it is a fake. And if they had it all along, why did Obama spend about $1million trying to keep it all hidden?

I personally don't care where he was born, but somethings not right about him.

[Trav Le Bleu]

There's a guy works down the chip shop swears he's Osama.

[BoneDog]

I think perhaps you should read my post again, have a think about it and then get back to me.

As an aside, what would you class as "proof".

Proof would be to see him sitting in a court, like Milosevich for example. Or a dead body that others could have verified. The only people who know what happened are the top levels of government and the few military guys who were on this job. It's all word of mouth and there is no proof whatsoever.

And then they decided to dump him at sea, which they said was for two reasons. Reason one was to not upset Muslims by keeping him for a while! Reason two was so that they didn't create a shrine.

The first reason would not please any Muslims that might be upset by his death. It would anger them because it is not a proper Muslim burial.

The second reason is more baloney. Any Muslim who reads the Koran (as these extremists supposedly do) knows that you are not supposed to have / visit shrines in Islam.

The real reason they supposedly dumped him at sea is nothing to do with either of the two they tell us. The whole scenario is as dodgy as anything I've ever heard.