Osama Bin Laden Dead!

[zubi]

Sorry, were you being serious?

Sure, If countries invaded Aghanistan purely just to tackle the threat from Al Qaeda and the taliban and liberate the Afghans, they would have to invade countries like N.Korea, Congo, I Coast, Pakistan, Checnya, somalia etc etc. Countries which posess far more fire power and also harbour hatred towards the west. Maybe not so much of the African countries hating the west but surely they should step in and reorganise their govts and help stop opposing forces and bring in democracy.

Face it, the taliban are hardly a threat to the west, they may be equipped with weapons, but they will hardly ever attack the west, the worst they can do is to burn flags and burn a human effigy.

[Webbo]

Sure, If countries invaded Aghanistan purely just to tackle the threat from Al Qaeda and the taliban and liberate the Afghans, they would have to invade countries like N.Korea, Congo, I Coast, Pakistan, Checnya, somalia etc etc. Countries which posess far more fire power and also harbour hatred towards the west. Maybe not so much of the African countries hating the west but surely they should step in and reorganise their govts and help stop opposing forces and bring in democracy.

Face it, the taliban are hardly a threat to the west, they may be equipped with weapons, but they will hardly ever attack the west, the worst they can do is to burn flags and burn a human effigy.

And blow up embassies and fly planes into building. But you still haven't told me why America has to invade Afghanistan for opium when it can be grown in a hundred other countries with a similar climate.

[zubi]

And blow up embassies and fly planes into building. But you still haven't told me why America has to invade Afghanistan for opium when it can be grown in a hundred other countries with a similar climate.

Well you can argue that, but quite frankly I dont believe it, but If you can explain the explosions at the base of the buildings which took place on 9-11 and show me proof that the Pentagon was hit by a plane I will gladly admit defeat.

oh and in answer to your question. Afghan Opium is the shizzle!!!

[Finnegan]

Neither North Korea, the DR Congo, the Ivory Coast, Pakistan, Chechnya nor Somalia hijacked passenger aircraft and flew them in to two massive super-skyscrapers.

Afghanistan was a statement to the world about "fucking with America," it was an assertion of their military power and an attempt to re-assure their own populace that they were still the international Alpha Male after having their entire "Untouchable" ideology questioned for the first time in contemporary history.

It was not a war about resources.

As for 9/11 Conspiracy theories - do you really think that the world's many, MANY leftist critics, commentators, comedians, writers, philosophers and intellectuals would all readily eat up the Bush administration's "lie" if there was any doubt about the events of that day? There's a reason that the massive majority of people dismiss, with a mixture of repulsion and amusement, these nonsensical notions.

Not all conspiracies are theories, true. But 9/11 was the work of a terrorist organization that the West and the States have spent years intentionally and unintentionally provoking.

[Webbo]

Well you can argue that, but quite frankly I dont believe it, but If you can explain the explosions at the base of the buildings which took place on 9-11 and show me proof that the Pentagon was hit by a plane I will gladly admit defeat.

If the witnesses, the CCTV and the f#cking great hole in the side of the building can't convince you what chance have I got?

[mancunianfox]

*I'd just like to state at this point that my opium comment was entirely sarcastic.*

Afghanistan was not invaded because it was a threat to the west but because for a long time it was where Bin Laden was based. We invaded Afghanistan in order to catch OBL as the Taliban regime would never have co-operated with Western security forces to help locate him.

[Unit]

If the witnesses, the CCTV and the f#cking great hole in the side of the building can't convince you what chance have I got?

I thought the big argument was there wasn't any CCTV of that?

[Webbo]

I thought the big argument was there wasn't any CCTV of that?

I'm sure I've seen some on the news but the conspiracy nuts claimed it was faked.

EDIT, there are some clips on youtube made by the conspiracy theorists but they claim it proves that it wasn't by a plane.

[Zingari]

I'm sure I've seen some on the news but the conspiracy nuts claimed it was faked.

EDIT, there are some clips on youtube made by the conspiracy theorists but they claim it proves that it wasn't by a plane.

you won't find any photos because there aren't any , (only 4 or 5 stills have been released and they are inconclusive inasmuch as they don't show an aeroplane just the effects of the impact

don't you think it's odd that you can't find any photographic evidence of a plane hitting supposedly the most secure building on the planet ?

the place is riddled with cctv cameras yet not one conclusive photo or film footage of the approach or impact ?

are you really saying that you don't find this just a little bit suspicious ?

[Webbo]

are you really saying that you don't find this just a little bit suspicious ?

Not really, but it's nice to have you back.

[BoneDog]

We invaded Afghanistan in order to catch OBL.

No we didn't.

Have you ever read Brzezinski's book The Grand Chessboard? In there you will find the real reason why we invaded.

Seperate issue now, but all you folk who look up to Obama should watch this fricker. Brzez is talked about in here. This guy's predictions are some of the best at what will happen in the coming years. This vid is two years old but he's getting things right.

The video really gets going at the one minute mark. Part two will come up in the related links at the end of video if anyone's interested.

[BoneDog]

It's good to see Zingari back.

[Zingari]

It's good to see Zingari back.

i've been on a secret mission for the last couple of weeks

thanks chaps

[Babylon]

No we didn't.

Have you ever read Brzezinski's book The Grand Chessboard? In there you will find the real reason why we invaded.

Seperate issue now, but all you folk who look up to Obama should watch this fricker. Brzez is talked about in here. This guy's predictions are some of the best at what will happen in the coming years. This vid is two years old but he's getting things right.

The video really gets going at the one minute mark. Part two will come up in the related links at the end of video if anyone's interested.

How many things he says don't come true? Cherry picking the odd one and putting them on YouTube is about as convincing as the Nostradamus rantings. As the old saying goes, throw enough shit and some of it will stick.

Oh and the book gives his opinion, not THE reason.

[Babylon]

don't you think it's odd that you can't find any photographic evidence of a plane hitting supposedly the most secure building on the planet ?

Most CCTV cameras are on time lapses. A plane could have been going at several hundred miles an hour at least, hardly shocking that it wouldn't have been caught on camera if it has something even as small as a one second time lapse.

[BoneDog]

How many things he says don't come true? Cherry picking the odd one and putting them on YouTube is about as convincing as the Nostradamus rantings. As the old saying goes, throw enough shit and some of it will stick.

Oh and the book gives his opinion, not THE reason.

The video is an interview with Webster Tarpley, not some Youtube westboro baptist type nitwit.

The book is by Brzezinski. Do you know who he is? Watch the video and you might find out a bit about him. He has more influence and power than Obama and he talks about why we went into Afghanistan in his book. It was nothing to do with Osama, he was the excuse used. It was to do with oil pipelines and future conflicts.

[Babylon]

If you can explain the explosions at the base of the buildings which took place on 9-11 and show me proof that the Pentagon was hit by a plane I will gladly admit defeat.

If you can prove there were explosions caused by planted explosive devices, and can prove it wasn't hit by a plane then we'll admit defeat. If you can't (which you can't) then perhaps you should move on.

[Webbo]

The video is an interview with Webster Tarpley, not some Youtube westboro baptist type nitwit.

The book is by Brzezinski. Do you know who he is? Watch the video and you might find out a bit about him. He has more influence and power than Obama and he talks about why we went into Afghanistan in his book. It was nothing to do with Osama, he was the excuse used. It was to do with oil pipelines and future conflicts.

Never trust anyone called Webster.

[BoneDog]

Most CCTV cameras are on time lapses. A plane could have been going at several hundred miles an hour at least, hardly shocking that it wouldn't have been caught on camera if it has something even as small as a one second time lapse.

Get a grip! We're not talking about some cctv outside a chip shop. We're talking about cameras at the most important military headquarters in the world. They had hundreds of the very best video cameras pointing to the area. These cameras would be way ahead of anything we can buy.

You can buy into the story that they haven't got any pictures if you want to, but that just makes you a bit of a fool.

[Zingari]

Most CCTV cameras are on time lapses. A plane could have been going at several hundred miles an hour at least, hardly shocking that it wouldn't have been caught on camera if it has something even as small as a one second time lapse.

i would imagine the cctv cameras at the pentagon to be of the most sophisticated types , don't you ?

yet there are plenty of images captured of flight 175 hitting the south tower made on mobile phones etc

there is even one of a flight 11 hitting the north tower and that was captured by accident on the naudet brothers documentary

( obviously because no -one knew it was going to happen )

yet you seriously believe that the most secure building on the planet didn't manage to capture one single discern-able photograph of the plane that supposedly slammed in to it ?

sorry , it won't wash . if a plane hit the pentagon there would be ample photographic from every conceivable angle , yet this is all you get ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paWiZ2Y8fRg&feature=related

[Babylon]

The video is an interview with Webster Tarpley, not some Youtube westboro baptist type nitwit.

The book is by Brzezinski. Do you know who he is? Watch the video and you might find out a bit about him. He has more influence and power than Obama and he talks about why we went into Afghanistan in his book. It was nothing to do with Osama, he was the excuse used. It was to do with oil pipelines and future conflicts.

Webster Tarpley may as well be a westboro nitwit. Same old conspiracy theory codswallop, no evidence, all rumour, half truths etc.

As I said, that's his opinion on the reason. Doesn't make it the real reason.

[BoneDog]

If you can prove there were explosions caused by planted explosive devices, and can prove it wasn't hit by a plane then we'll admit defeat. If you can't (which you can't) then perhaps you should move on.

Man, you love the official stories don't you!

Many firemen (among others) at the scene have talked about the explosions in the basements and I trust those guys a million times more than I do a government spokesperson.

You know, those fireman who are more like me and most other people who have to grind through life, I believe their words. While you believe the words of guys who are not like me and most people in the world. You believe people who are known to f*%k around with our and our families money and lives. Real scumbag people.

SHAME ON YOU AND YOUR ILK Here, have a Santa and stick it up your ass.....sideways!

[BoneDog]

Webster Tarpley may as well be a westboro nitwit. Same old conspiracy theory codswallop, no evidence, all rumour, half truths etc.

As I said, that's his opinion on the reason. Doesn't make it the real reason.

Have you ever watched and listened to what he has to say? I don't think you have. I think you just constantly agree with liars stories and you're beginning to sound like a total boot-licker.

Webster Tarpley talks far more sense than the guys you love to trust!

[Babylon]

i would imagine the cctv cameras at the pentagon to be of the most sophisticated types , don't you ?

yet there are plenty of images captured of flight 175 hitting the south tower made on mobile phones etc

there is even one of a flight 11 hitting the north tower and that was captured by accident on the naudet brothers documentary

( obviously because no -one knew it was going to happen )

yet you seriously believe that the most secure building on the planet didn't manage to capture one single discern-able photograph of the plane that supposedly slammed in to it ?

sorry , it won't wash . if a plane hit the pentagon there would be ample photographic from every conceivable angle , yet this is all you get ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paWiZ2Y8fRg&feature=related

CCTV cameras are not mobile phones/camcorders. They are time lapsed for a reason. To capture enough detail without taking up too much recording space. The picture quality is excellent and the time lapse low compared to most CCTV pictures

They are set to a speed that's enough to capture people, vehicles etc. They are not set to capture something traveling at something like 200mph plus.

Why would it be, it's unheard of for anything like that to eve happen. I'll say again? Just because you don't see a picture doesn't mean it didn't happen. I'm yet to see ANY evidence that does not have a rational explanation.

[Zingari]

CCTV cameras are not mobile phones/camcorders. They are time lapsed for a reason. To capture enough detail without taking up too much recording space. The picture quality is excellent and the time lapse low compared to most CCTV pictures

They are set to a speed that's enough to capture people, vehicles etc. They are not set to capture something traveling at something like 200mph plus.

Why would it be, it's unheard of for anything like that to eve happen. I'll say again? Just because you don't see a picture doesn't mean it didn't happen. I'm yet to see ANY evidence that does not have a rational explanation.

so basically what you are saying is that the security cameras at the pentagon are a pile of shit and no fookin use whatsover if anything happens to the building

yeah ok , stupid fookin americans