Skip to comments.
China's Role in WTC Attack on America is Revealed
PrnNewsWire (via DrudgeReport) ^
| January 8, 2002
| Gordon Thomas
Posted on 01/08/2002 10:09:51 AM PST by OKCSubmariner
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-86 next last
To: Jeff Head; joanie-f
61
posted on
01/09/2002 8:58:22 AM PST
by
Dukie
To: ChaseR
A good evening to you! I'm here listening to Aloha Ronnie and Bob Dornan speak.
Comment #63 Removed by Moderator
Comment #64 Removed by Moderator
To: Black Jade
The China/Taliban connection goes deeper then we will ever know, or care to admit if we do know. China should be taken out, end of story. Why is it that China or Saudi Arabia have not been warned about their dealings with terroists? I would love to hear GW talk up the Iran talk to either of those countries....never happen though. Why? For the same reasons he won't cut ties with Arafat.
65
posted on
01/11/2002 8:18:57 PM PST
by
Mixer
Comment #66 Removed by Moderator
Comment #67 Removed by Moderator
To: Black Jade; goldilucky; backhoe; Snow Bunny; BeAChooser; OKC Submariner
I
" don't envy you at all because I would not want to be defending the Bush administration's record on PNTR for the PRC." Unfortunately, I have to agree. :(
68
posted on
01/11/2002 8:34:09 PM PST
by
ChaseR
To: Black Jade; OKCSubmariner, Hopalong, all
Communist China would definitely have an interest in giving arms to a force fighting both the US military and Russian-allied proxies in a neighboring country. [China has also helped Iraq and they helped Yugoslavia - why else do you think the US really bombed the Chinese Embassy?] They also know the US would not invade China if the weapons were found, because they know the US govt knows they (China) have nukes and are not afraid to use them.
None of this precludes other side deals with the bin Laden/Taliban crowd to get them to call off the Uyghurs. This isn't very different than the US going substantial aid to the mujahadeen war against the Soviets while US bases in were left largely unmolested as jihadists directed their energies elsewhere.
69
posted on
01/11/2002 10:19:11 PM PST
by
Plummz
To: Black Jade
What do you mean "take out" China?Although it will never happen I think we should place China on a warning. They were helping the Taliban and they are arming more nuclear missles at us. I am so sick of hearing that China is warning us about this and that and taking our people and planes hostage. Enough is enough. China will one day try to become the superpower and with 25 nukes pointing at the West Coast....well let's just say it won't be pretty.
I am well aware of the ties between GW and SA and I know that SA will always be on the exempt list.
70
posted on
01/12/2002 8:40:04 AM PST
by
Mixer
Comment #71 Removed by Moderator
Comment #72 Removed by Moderator
To: Black Jade
Well, before we go on the war path because the PRC is "aiding the Taliban," we'd better start thinking about how the CIA aided Al Qaeda operatives in the BalkansAmerica has always faced the same problem. We arm our (future) enemies.
73
posted on
01/15/2002 6:14:29 AM PST
by
Mixer
To: Black Jade
I'm not asserting any proof at this point beyond what has been reported re: weapons caches and secret meetings. I'm just pointing out that funding/assisting Islamic forces in order to destabilize other world powers (and incidentally keep them from attacking the funding state for the time being) is nothing new and it would not be remarkable at all if the PRC is lending assistance to Al Qaeda or, for that matter, Abu Sayaff (sp?) in the Phillipines.
74
posted on
01/15/2002 8:24:05 AM PST
by
Plummz
To: Black Jade
before we go on the war path because the PRC is "aiding the Taliban," And to further clarify, I don't think any of this makes a good case for attacking the PRC. I don't think that would be the brightest of moves.
75
posted on
01/15/2002 8:25:54 AM PST
by
Plummz
Comment #76 Removed by Moderator
Comment #77 Removed by Moderator
To: Black Jade
>>Both the US & the PRC built up the Afghan "mujahideen" to get the Russians out of Afghanistan,
Arming "future enemey" is a common practice in politics. All major powers did that sot of things. China armed North Vietnam in Vietnam War and they turned against China with Chinese weapons and supplies right after the war. North Korea could be the same case. The North Korean border guards are very hostile to Chinese tourists. The same thing happened to the Khmer Rouge. Four Chinese soldiers of the UN peacekeeping forces were killed by the Khmer Rouge in 1992 after China stopped supporting them. The USSR supported the CCP in the civil war against the KMT, but Mao turned against them 10 years after liberation.
78
posted on
01/18/2002 8:00:17 PM PST
by
Lake
To: Black Jade
A) I don't think the people making the decisions are guided by emotions as much as (sometimes twisted) logic.
B) I don't particularly believe what a president implies
C) "They" only release/approve what "proof" they want to.
79
posted on
01/18/2002 10:17:29 PM PST
by
Plummz
To: Lake
Mao turned against them 10 years after liberation. Mao was a liberator?
80
posted on
01/18/2002 10:19:46 PM PST
by
Plummz
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-86 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson