[WOSG]

So, first you insist that 'yes we did' then you admit "no we didnt give bin laden money" ...


---

You deny this, but that is the direct quote in the earlier post. Then you state another falsehood:

"This doesn't mean we didn't funnel any
money,supples,or equipment to other people through him,though. "

We never did that. We did not use Bin Laden as a conduit.
He was a 'freelance' supporter of mujahadeen in Afghanistan,
and frankly unimportant. There was Saudi support for Afghan rebels, something the US encouraged to help foot the bill.
That is all.

"Are you trying to deny that CIA or other covert assets ever provided any equipment or weapons to anybody connected
to bin Laden and his organization that they needed training to operate?"

CIA worked only with ISI and some muhajadeen in Afghanistan. We did not fund, train or support Bin Laden. The people we supported were fighting the USSR directly in Afghanistan and we were supporting nothing else but the liberation of Afghanistan from USSR. The Al Quaeda was created after the support operation achieved success, in the late 1980s.

If you can criticize the CIA and US, it is that we simply left Afghanistan to its own devices when the USSR was kicked out.

The overall anti-American "moral equivalence" view you are espousing is self-contradictory:
If the US supplied materials to Japan in the 1930s, does that make US culpable in Pearl harbor and not Japan?

[sneakypete]

The overall anti-American "moral equivalence" view you are espousing is self-contradictory: If the US supplied materials to Japan in the 1930s, does that make US culpable in Pearl harbor and not Japan?

You and a lot of others are missing the point. The point being that the blind supporters of this war started out claiming it was justified because Hussein was directly related to the terrorists who flew the planes into the WTC on 9-11. After a couple of months of not being able to find any evidence of this,they are now claiming he has WMD that he might supply to terrorists,and that is a justification for attacking Iraq. You are completely overlooking that WE also supplied known terrorists with weapons,money,supplies,and traing. It was a matter of convenience instead of convictions that led us to do this,but none the less we did do it in the past,and will most likely do it again in the future. Unless we are prepared to accept these same charges being lodged against us by other nations,we need to find a better reason to invade and start a war with a sovereign nation that things we have done ourselves,and things they MIGHT do in the future. Punishing people and nations for things they "MIGHT" so is one huge slide down the slippery slope to a police state.