quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo the CIA never met Bin Laden in Afghanistan.

wow

so ok maybe just maybe the CIA never met with Bin Laden face to face but the sure as hell did support his cause to fight the Russians.

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NW...eated_Osama.htm

quote:

From the article: Milt Bearden, the CIA's station chief in Pakistan from 1986 to 1989, admitted to the January 24, 2000, New Yorker that while he never personally met bin Laden, “Did I know that he was out there? Yes, I did ... [Guys like] bin Laden were bringing $20-$25 million a month from other Saudis and Gulf Arabs to underwrite the war. And that is a lot of money. It's an extra $200-$300 million a year. And this is what bin Laden did.” In 1986, bin Laden brought heavy construction equipment from Saudi Arabia to Afghanistan. Using his extensive knowledge of construction techniques (he has a degree in civil engineering), he built “training camps”, some dug deep into the sides of mountains, and built roads to reach them. These camps, now dubbed “terrorist universities” by Washington, were built in collaboration with the ISI and the CIA. The Afghan contra fighters, including the tens of thousands of mercenaries recruited and paid for by bin Laden, were armed by the CIA. Pakistan, the US and Britain provided military trainers. Tom Carew, a former British SAS soldier who secretly fought for the mujaheddin told the August 13, 2000, British Observer, “The Americans were keen to teach the Afghans the techniques of urban terrorism — car bombing and so on — so that they could strike at the Russians in major towns ... Many of them are now using their knowledge and expertise to wage war on everything they hate.”

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo HE organized Al Queera in Afghanistan after the success of the Mujahadeen with the idea that if they were that successful against the Russians then he could organize a new Islamic order in what HE saw as a corrupt, fat, and western influenced Middle East. HE used our help in Afghanistan despite his firm belief that the West was a illegitamate corrupt influence on his homeland and his religion. AND HE HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL IN THAT ENDEAVOR.

So you are admitting that your government helped this "evil terrosist" to help them to defeat the Russians and didnt care about the future consequences of their action.

___________________
Mystic Mind - DJ Mixes
http://soundcloud.com/mystic-mind

Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/DJMysticMind

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer why is it that everytime U.S supports an individual or a regime for their own benefits it ends up back firing at them later on? You telling me that Bin Laden was a loving peaceful guy back in those days?

i dont know. perhaps they choose their "allies" by getting the best of a bad bunch? i really dont understand your point.

im sure there are numerous occasions of US influence not backfiring, but we don't hear nearly as much about them because we dont have people like you reminding us all the time

the enemy of my enemy is my friend. what happens when there is no mor enemy? the friend can often fulfill that role. i dont see how you can lay the blame of bin laden's militarism at the feet of the US. like you imply, he was already a nasty-pasty...i think if you expect all governments to avoid contact with undesirables to be a pretty naive notion.

and again, you havent actually justified how aiding the afghans in their war against the soviets was a bad thing at the time.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton He was in France a meer 4 months on a traveler's visa. Your facts are completly not accurate. Khomeani spent most of his exile in Najaf Iraq. Additionally, the takeover of the American embassy was very much triggered by the US allowing the Shah to come to the United States for treatment of cancer. This enraged the Iranian people who wanted to try the shah in court. I find it repulsive that you provide blog posting as evidence for your arguments, which are in themselves not accurate.

Bottom line is Krypton that the Iranian people have suffered alot because of their bad leaders from the past and the west's involvement in their countries politics.

___________________
Mystic Mind - DJ Mixes
http://soundcloud.com/mystic-mind

Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/DJMysticMind

Wow, nothing like a bias argument were neither side will ever admit their wrong and flame eachother in frustration at that fact to lighten up my day.

___________________
Dont expect profoundness so much as relentless and pathological destruction.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Am I hearing this right?you are actually begining to see why a country like Iran would ever want to have nuclear weapons? I ve noticed that your opinion has changed alot toward this administration for a while,but what I want to know is that lets say things were going well in Iraq right now,would still have been against the occupation?or are you against it now because things arent going the way that Bush wanted to?

If things went well in Iraq we would have seen half of Middle East under US domination right now... and other half under Israel.. the second phase of this project would have been rolled out with plans to start invading Africans next..

___________________
___________________

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Bottom line is Krypton that the Iranian people have suffered alot because of their bad leaders from the past and the west's involvement in their countries politics.

Ok, but why are saying the west supported the Ayatollah against the Shah when it was exactly the other way around?

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by The Arbiter Wow, nothing like a bias argument were neither side will ever admit their wrong and flame eachother in frustration at that fact to lighten up my day.