Posted on 03/02/2002 9:24:40 AM PST by My Favorite Headache
Saying soldiers killed in assault in Afghanistan....
That's what I was thinking a few yards back. You want to stand well away from these things from what I've heard.
Probably not a pretty sight inside the caves.
No sarcasm here!! I was replying to a guy (JimSEA) who hoped that the Taliban/al-Qaeda will learn not to bunch their forces against a foe that has superior airpower (US)! I questioned why he would hope for that - doesn't he want US to win. Its to our benefit to have them in a bunch - as they are now in Gardez - makes targeting for the B-52 and AC130 strikes easier.
If you wish to see the original post that got my curiosity up, see JimSEA's post #77 on the topic. I just wonder where he is comming from!
Let me get this straight. You come on this thread and unload a basket case full of unsubstantiated, unsupported, accusations about our government being partially responsible for, or had prior knowledge of, the attacks against our peoples, property, and interests at home and abroad, your only claim to proof being some articles on FR and how "half" of all cabs stayed away from the WTC area at the time of impact, and I'm supposed to prove what you said is wrong? You're nuts. Why don't you provide proof that supports your outrageous claims? Start with how you know how many cabs were in the WTC area on that day (and what that number was), and how you know how many were there on a normal day (and what was that number). Then prove that the numerical difference (if there was one) was due to the fact that all the drivers knew the terrorists were gonna strike that day.
BTW, did you hear bin Laden himself bragging that not even the hijackers being sent to their deaths knew of the mission before they hit the buildings? Or was that tape we all saw just a government (CIA,FBI,CID,NSA) produced propaganda video made by the same people that faked the moon landings? I suppose I'm supposed to prove it wasn't government propaganda right?
Anyway, I have better things to do than humor far out conspiracy theorist wacko's like you ... be seeing ya (through my super secret access to the man tracking satellite monitor in the basement of the science building). Signing out, roger wilko!
Then when questioned try to support those asinine statements by saying
the first WTC bombing in '93 was the result of an FBI sting gone bad. ... Through a "miscommunication" the FBI did not intercept the group in time and several lives were lost.
As if the FBI wanted the bombing to go ahead for some reason
Then you blame the U.S. for "creating binLaden to help fight the Russians" as if he and his millions would not exist if it weren't for the U.S.
Then you insinuate that the U.S. really isn't trying to find bin Laden and pals by saying It sure is strange how we have military satellites that can ID a dime on the ground but somehow can't help track the whereabouts Osama and his boys.
Then you start to completely lose it when you said FYI, 9/11 would not have happened if our intelligence agencies had heeded warnings from the Israeli Mossad and other foreign security groups.
Again as if the CIA was told where, when, and how, the attacks would go but then decided they wanted the attack to take place or didn't want to stop it, but you never say why ...
Then you fall off the little yellow bus and say, How could half the cab drivers in NYC know not to be in the vicinity of the WTC yet the FBI/CIA supposedly knew nothing, heck the knowledge of what was coming was so prevalent in the NY Arab community that some morons were even caught with video cameras in place to film the event. Don't tell me this was some event beyond our control.
Now our government not only HAD to know, but was in control of the attacks.
All that while stating if someone doesn't agree with you they are either ignorant or believe everything Dan, Ted or Peter tells them.
And NOW you say you're not alleging any conspiracy???? How is anyone supposed to take you seriously?
As far as your other comments all I can say is that FR has had numerous threads over the last few weeks that discussed the warnings about 9/11 that were virtually unheeded by intelligence agencies plus Atty. Gen'l Ashcroft. Assuming you're capable of doing so do some key word searches including an interview Alex Jones did with David Schippers regarding what he knew about 9/11 and how he was stonewalled in receiving a meeting with Ashcroft. As I said previously, sometimes when someone receives info from sources other than the mainstream media it's easy to lapse into such an emotional state of denial and ridicule of the messenger. I certainly feel your pain and I suggest you stay as sheletered from the real world as possible.
Do you apply sinister motives the the US government in regard to the terrorist attacks that were perpetrated against us?
If you aren't implying sinister motives, then do you admit that the perpetrators of the attacks should be harshly dealt with?
Do you think the fact that the FBI didn't/couldn't stop the attacks, for whatever reason, means that we shouldn't respond to such attacks?
If you think we should still respond, why would you claim the missions designed to punish the groups responsible for those attacks are "missions that seemingly have no purpose"?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.