|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Jul 28, 2006 15:32:45 GMT -4
By the way AG, 911:ij is, according to his profile, a guy. Thank you for pointing out my error. I'll not repeat it.
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Jul 28, 2006 15:39:09 GMT -4
(c) seems to admit that he might have been a CIA-type but is no longer. Does anyone claim this? I sure get the impression the connection was indirect; the Pakis intel organizations were the ones who dealt with him and his followers directly; now this isn't to say the CIA was out of loop, either, not by a long shot. It's all very easy to call this foolish now, hindsight being 20/20. Many seem to forget (or very possibly were too young) that tensions were high during this last quasi-proxy war of the Cold War, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The United States foreign policy theory of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" led to the mistaken support for Islamic groups fighting against Soviet expansionism. This is not disputed. Ronald Reagan called them "freedom fighters" and supplied them with Stinger missles to shoot down helicopters. Funding them through the Pakistanis another matter, but hardly out of character.
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Jul 28, 2006 15:57:52 GMT -4
The CIA must be involved. How else do you explain one of the highest level spokesman for the Taliban, seen in videos with Bin Laden denouncing the US, sheltering Bin Laden, who himself was supporting the Taliban, taking terrorism courses at Yale University. Non sequiter. One does not prove the other. An Iranian cleric named Soroush taught a class at Harvard in 2001. (Sacred Rage, Robin Wright, pg. 285) Eh? Taliban means student. Do you have a name for this individual or references for this? Oddly, being anti-American does not automatically prevent one from coming here and enrolling in college. Were his immigration or student-visa papers in order? Did the check for tuition clear? American Universities are independent of the U.S. State Department. State institutions like UCLA or SUNY are only beholden to their individual states. That's one of the many reasons we call this a "free" country. Emotional nonsense to distract from the topic. American universities do not have socialist requirements to admit anyone, especially with reductions of "affirmative action" policies in the last many years. I'll follow links to information about this guy if you post them. Otherwise it's hearsay.
|
|
|
Post by freon on Jul 28, 2006 17:28:29 GMT -4
He was the deputy foreign secretary for the Taliban. Taliban spokesman Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi taking "Terrorism : Past, Present, & Future" at Yale University. Some may have seen him in "Fahrenheit 911". Wonder how he got a visa and enrolled at Yale?
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Jul 28, 2006 18:22:48 GMT -4
Forwarded from Byu... proof of thermate thread page 13 apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=othertheories&action=display&thread=1151516191&page=13PhantomWolf wrote "Yes, there have been other examples of terrorists, however the topic at hand is Islamist extremists and their increase since 9/11, not that not islamic groups or individuals have carried out terrorist attacks in the past.[/b] But in a previous post you ask for a comparaison about the number of terrorist attacks in the past....ie before 911 You wrote Your last question seem implying that these musulmans terrorist groups were put in place in these countries after 911 very unlikely...with the increase of security measures ...I bet they were already in place before that... Edited to fix quote
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Jul 28, 2006 19:16:40 GMT -4
He was the deputy foreign secretary for the Taliban. Taliban spokesman Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi taking "Terrorism : Past, Present, & Future" at Yale University. Some may have seen him in "Fahrenheit 911". Wonder how he got a visa and enrolled at Yale? Thanks. Wikipedia has a lengthy article on him.
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Jul 28, 2006 19:30:59 GMT -4
[/b] But in a previous post you ask for a comparaison about the number of terrorist attacks in the past....ie before 911 You wrote Your last question seem implying that these musulmans terrorist groups were put in place in these countries after 911 very unlikely...with the increase of security measures ...I bet they were already in place before that... Edited to fix quote[/quote] I'm confused by this whole exchange, in part because of bad writing in the above quote. Iranian-backed terrorists were highly active in the 1980's. If anything, militant Islam is on the wane for the most part, as the Iranian revolution comes full circle and they are starting to try to "grow up" on the world stage. They were active in trying to foment Shi'ite revolutionary movements in many Islamic nations. Hezbolla may be firing Iranian rockets at Israel right now. They may be acting under Syrian influence. It's still active war, not history, so we don't have the "facts" yet. Meanwhile Iraq is experiencing carbombs and deathsquads every day. Some of this is Shia vs. Sunni conflict, some is anti-American. Again, we the citizens are being given very little information to work with. Can one of you (PW and feelfree) clarify the questions for the rest of us?
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Jul 28, 2006 21:23:19 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 28, 2006 22:35:41 GMT -4
I thought my question was pretty obvious really. There have been a lot of terrorist attacks on Israel for years prior to 9/11, but prior to 9/11 there were few extremist attacks again Western Countries, in western contries or in Western leaning Islamic Contries. The major events I can think of would be the US Baracks bombing in Beruit, The US Emabsies, Attacks on US barracks in Saudi and the USS Cole attack. Since 9/11 there has been two attacks on Westerners in Bali, the train bombing in Madrid, and 2 attacks in London (one failed), bombings in Turkey and Morocoo. Foiled attampts in the US and Australia (the groups were arrested before they could carry out the attack) and a failed aircraft bombing, A number of attacks on Western interetests in Saudi (some successful some not), The Jordanian attacks, several bomb attacks aimed at westerners in Egypt (as opposed to their previous gun attacks,) and likely some I'm missing. This doesn't include the attacks in Iraq, Afghanistan, Russia (and other ex-Soviet states) or Israel. There have been 5 years since 9/11, and yet there have been more Islamic extremist attacks against the West during that 5 years than in the 20 previous ones. If this is not a result of 9/11 and what has occured since, then what is it? If it is not an indication that more people are flocking to OBL's banner, then what is it?
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Jul 28, 2006 23:31:50 GMT -4
I thought my question was pretty obvious really. There have been a lot of terrorist attacks on Israel for years prior to 9/11, Why are you limiting the scope of terrorist attacks only to Israel prior to 911 is beyond expectation ?... read Apollo Gnomon post just before... but prior to 9/11 there were few extremist attacks again Western Countries, in western contries or in Western leaning Islamic Contries. The major events I can think of would be the US Baracks bombing in Beruit, The US Emabsies, Attacks on US barracks in Saudi and the USS Cole attack. Right the US Baracks bombing in Beruit have even inspired Bin Laden as a solution for making USA go out of Muslim countries thus he have fomented other attacks like this against US interest in Muslim countries....but I doubt he was stupid enough to carry the 911 attacks in USA....knowing this will siginfied his end and Al Quada total defeat...as well as the invasion of Afganistan and his Talibans friends .Come on! If you insist to say they were inspired by Osama and 911
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 29, 2006 3:17:54 GMT -4
Why are you limiting the scope of terrorist attacks only to Israel prior to 911 is beyond expectation ?... read Apollo Gnomon post just before...
I'm limiting the scope to not include Israel because a number odf reasons. First off, Israel is not a western country. Second the Israel/Arab conflict is seperate from the Western/Extremist Islam conflict. Yes there are connections due to the US's support of Israel, but there are a lot of other issues as well. If you want to include Israel in then we'd have to constrain the events a different way, the average number of terrorist attacks per year, since there has been way more years since 1947 to Sept 2001 than from Sept 2001 to 2006. By looking at instead the areas that did not suffer from extremist attacks prior to 2001, we can see the spreading of the problem. Either way all we tend to do is comnplicate the issue by including Israel. This is the reason I have also excluded Iraq and Afghanistan as well. There are terrorist event occuring in Iraq every day, this would simply overwhelm any real useful data, so by excluding it we can see the real trends. It appears that like usual, you wish to to the CT thing and simply muddy up the situation by complaining that certain data isn't included.
I doubt he was stupid enough to carry the 911 attacks in USA....knowing this will siginfied his end and Al Quada total defeat...as well as the invasion of Afganistan and his Talibans friends .Come on!
You are assuming here that a) he knew what the US would do in response. Previously when he had attackred the US they had at most fired a few missiles and then left him alone. he may have beleived that they would do the same things as previously, rather then invade. b) He believes that before Allah he is invincable, that he will win a war between his Islamic forces and the US. he believes this because the Soviets were defeated in Afghaistan. Under your way of thinking why hasn't he just given up and gone home? The reason he hasn't is because as far as he is conserned he's winning. He has the US tied up in conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, his forces are killing US soldiers every day, he's draining their finaces and increasing the support for his actions about the world. It is possible that the US getting involved in the Afghani civil war was unforseen by him (in fact I think likely) but I'm sure that he's more than pleased with the results, and not kid yourself. Al Quaeda is far from being in "Total Defeat". Yes it's suffered a set back or two, but a quick look about the world will show you that it;'s not dead and buried by a long way.
If you insist to say they were inspired by Osama and 911
Inspired? Many were funded by or organised by Al Quaeda!
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Jul 29, 2006 3:56:07 GMT -4
Why are you limiting the scope of terrorist attacks only to Israel prior to 911 is beyond expectation ?... read Apollo Gnomon post just before...I'm limiting the scope to not include Israel because a number odf reasons. First off, Israel is not a western country. Second the Israel/Arab conflict is seperate from the Western/Extremist Islam conflict. That is my point exactly...Israel is a separate case. As for terrorist attacks in Afganistan and Irak we agree they are inevitable retaliations against invading forces... I doubt he was stupid enough to carry the 911 attacks in USA....knowing this will siginfied his end and Al Quada total defeat...as well as the invasion of Afganistan and his Talibans friends .Come on!You are assuming here that a) he knew what the US would do in response. Hmm what was the US response after Irak invaded Koweït in 1991 do you think he believed that Hallah was not there to help Saddam ? Previously when he had attackred the US they had at most fired a few missiles and then left him alone. he may have beleived that they would do the same things as previously, rather then invade. b) He believes that before Allah he is invincable, that he will win a war between his Islamic forces and the US. he believes this because the Soviets were defeated in Afghaistan. Under your way of thinking why hasn't he just given up and gone home? The reason he hasn't is because as far as he is conserned he's winning. He has the US tied up in conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, his forces are killing US soldiers every day, he's draining their finaces and increasing the support for his actions about the world. It is possible that the US getting involved in the Afghani civil war was unforseen by him (in fact I think likely) but I'm sure that he's more than pleased with the results, and not kid yourself. Al Quaeda is far from being in "Total Defeat". Yes it's suffered a set back or two, but a quick look about the world will show you that it;'s not dead and buried by a long way. We all know that Bin Laden have put in place in many countries Al Qaeda members -ready for terrorist actions- BEFORE 911 [quote author=phantomwolf board=othertheories thread=1153419762 post=1154157474 If you insist to say they were inspired by Osama and 911Inspired? Many were funded by or organised by Al Quaeda! [/quote] My point exactly they (Al Quaeda and other Islamic terrorists)were already in place in western countries waiting for action prior to 911.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 29, 2006 4:20:17 GMT -4
That is my point exactly...Israel is a separate case.
The why keep bring it up?
As for terrorist attacks in Afganistan and Irak we agree they are inevitable retaliations against invading forces...
Except that it's not against "invading forces" and mostly not carried out by Iraqi's.
We all know that Bin Laden have put in place in many countries Al Qaeda members -ready for terrorist actions- BEFORE 911
Yes and no. Some coutries in the Middle East and other strong Islamic countries yes, but there is no evidence to their having ready cells in Spain or England previous to 9/11, or even the Iraq war.
My point exactly they were already in place in western countries waiting for action prior to 911.
You're going to suggest that the London bombers were organising prior to 9/11?
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Jul 29, 2006 4:31:42 GMT -4
That is my point exactly...Israel is a separate case.The why keep bring it up? You have bring it up in a prior post. Reply #53 As a refresher You wrote on post 53 As for terrorist attacks in Afganistan and Irak we agree they are inevitable retaliations against invading forces...
Except that it's not against "invading forces" and mostly not carried out by Iraqi's.
You are now suggesting there are no US soldiers killed in these terrorist attacks? We all know that Bin Laden have put in place in many countries Al Qaeda members -ready for terrorist actions- BEFORE 911
Yes and no. Some coutries in the Middle East and other strong Islamic countries yes, but there is no evidence to their having ready cells in Spain or England previous to 9/11, or even the Iraq war.
My point exactly they were already in place in western countries waiting for action prior to 911.
You're going to suggest that the London bombers were organising prior to 9/11?
No, I said ready for action ...which mean when appropriate.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 29, 2006 6:09:58 GMT -4
You have bring it up in a prior post. Reply #53 As a refresher You wrote on post 53
This was a response to your previous posting (#193) before this thread skipped from the Thermite thread to here. There you stated
Again the conflict in the midlle east implying Israel and the Arabs nations have nothing to do with 911...they are in conflict since the creation of Israel state in 1948.
AG also brought it up.
You are now suggesting there are no US soldiers killed in these terrorist attacks?
Are you suggesting all the those attacks on market places and Mosques are aimed at US soldiers?
No, I said ready for action ...which mean when appropriate.
So you're suggesting that all people who have been doing the attacks since 9/11 were all ready to be activated pre-9/11? That none of these groups have been created or acted as part of the anger and resentment of the Muslim world over things like Iraq, supported and bouyed by the images of what was done on 9/11?
|
|