Printable View
They are killing our soldiers in Iraq, they have attacked several of our embassies, and they killed 3,000 American civilians on 9/11. Their publicly stated goal is to kill Americans wherever they can until we are all dead. Now imagine those people with WMD's they got from some government. Please explain how that could possibly not be a threat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alric
what a debate, how can you justify something while not knowing your own government? the good thingis i dont live in USA, and none of these problems are related to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
And yet i keep thinking on are americans blind or something? seriously everybody in east knows that bin laden never existed, nor the stupid al-qaida group.
CIA created hussain, all the terrorist group were organized just to keep americans in place like a former keeps his cows in place.
This is how the world really works no matter what country you are, you are being watched. Just like being in jail. We call it Freedom LOL!
anyway i expressed what i was laughing at hope you enjoy it :)
No matter what you believe, you do not know our government better than we do. No way. Your media is to bitterly bias against us.Quote:
Originally Posted by born_2_kill
This post makes you sound mentally challanged. "The CIA created Hussein"? My government created fanatical Muslims to keep us in place like cows?
You don't even deserve a response. It is quite obvious you are bitter for living in America's little sister.
Remember kid, more education, less brainwashing;)
Well thats the fear talking again. What if they get WMD, what if they get a nuke, what if they take of a space satellite that is really a weapons plateform that can launch missile any where in the world. You can say "what if" all you want and keep thinking of horrible things that "could possible happen" but that doesn't make it a real threat. He made the post talking about just this, and here you are doing it again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
As for terrorists attacking us in Iraq. They are not so much terrorists but iraqis. And really what happens in iraq isn't a threat to people living in the US.
They have only done one major attack on us in their 20+ years of existence, and you yourself claimed we killed 2/3rds of them. Thats hardly what I would call a real threat.
I mean isreal has hundreds of unaccounted for nuclear weapons and we are their best friends, who knows who they could be giving them to. China has nuclear weapons and they have organ farms where they murder people and sell off their body parts, you really trust them with anything? Russia was our enemy for over 50 years, and even though we act nice to each other now, nothing has changed and we both hate each other. They have even more nukes than we do.
So before you worry about "what if" you should worry about what is. And the fact is, the people we know to have the stuff are far more dangerous than some terrorists.
See this was what I was saying my agnosticism thread
Everybody wants to know
Its such arrogance, for once admitt you dont know
I dont know - see its easy
The government tells me al-Qaeda is real, the conspiracists tell me it isnt
Both groups are chronic lyers. Trust me, none of you know wether al-Qaeda exists, however, regardless of anything Islamisist terror does exist. So call it what you will, it exists. I dont support the methods and sloppyness of the war on terror or the Iraq war but I do belive steps should be taken to prevent the greatest threat to mankind in a long time.
But on topic the OPer doesnt know and niether do you arguing against him or with him
Imran
OK. Al Qaeda is trying to aquire nuclear tech. Iran is too. There is a huge hole in downtown New York. The insurgency in Iraq is being perpetuated by non-Iraqis. The 9/11 conspiracy theory is retarted. Al Qadea is going to kill a whole lot of people if they buy a nuclear bomb, same with any other Islamic terrorist group. The United States is going to lead the fight against that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alric
How can you say you can never be sure of anything, then in the same sentence, say you know something for sure? You totally contradicted yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by imran_p
I didnt say you cant know anything
I said you cant know this
the reason being you dont ahve first ahnd expeirence just information from two differnt groups both with their own agenda.
You dont know, face it,
Give me conclusive proof Al-Qaeda doesnt exist
Imran
The war in Iraq was a huge mistake. ("Saddam is connected to Al-Queda! Let's blow up Iraq!" "Saddam was in fact not connected to Al-Queda, but we're going to blow up Iraq anyway!")
That having been said, I think that the amount of evidence that Al-Queda does exist outweighs the evidence that it doesn't. Terrorist attacks have increased in frequency greatly. Of course, that could be put down to the terrorist's success in attacking the Twin Towers.
Seeing both sides of the issue seriously damages my ability to argue well.
The Nazis didn't exist. The government was lying about that. Never mind the zillions of Americans and Brits who fought them. It was a big put on, just like the moon landing and the holographic image known as the Washington Monument. And even if the Nazis did exist, they would not have been a threat. We can say, "Oh, what if they kill another 6,000,000 jews or take over another few more countries here and there and eventually the world," but that's just a bunch of "what if". Don't let fear talk for you. Professional wrestling is real. The Earth is really flat (despite the brainwashing propaganda), and The Beatles never broke up. Lennon and McCartney are writing songs together as we speak. Elvis got plastic surgery and started being known as George W. Bush.
I am blown away by the absurd turn our political discussions have taken with this thread.
Ok, I just want to say.... First of all, don't talk about our media, because 80% of OUR media, comes directly from yours. The majority of our television is American television, and the majority of Canadians watch American news more than they watch their own. I actually can't even recall ever hearing anything negative coming from our media about Americans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming
Also, saying that he's bitter for living in "America's little sister"...? I don't know, but to me, that sounds incredibly ignorant and like you're just trying to be an ass, and implying that America is better than Canada for no good reason.
His opinions are his own, I'm pretty sure he didn't get "The CIA created 'Hussain'" from any teacher or Canadian media source....
Although it is rude, I have plenty of reasons to say that America is better than Canada. But, where you live doesn't matter, as you and I live the same lives.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayside
Now you know how it feels. I get dogged for being an American all the time. We are stereotyped more than any people on the planet, and Canadians don't have to deal with that. It sucks ass, doesn't it? Now, all I said was your country was America's little sister. We are called "fat asses", "dumb asses", "fascists", and "war mongers" among many other things. I gave your country a name while others disrespect my people. Which is worse?
Mainly it was a joke, and i apologize if I offended you. I am also am sorry for myself for stooping to their level.
No problem, perhaps I took it a little too seriously.
Don't think us Canadian's don't get stereotyped either though, a good deal of people are still convinced that as soon as you hit the American/Canadian border, it's just a big sheet of snow and ice from there on, so we're all labeled as ice-fishing igloo dwellers, who love hockey and maple syrup.... We're also known as the pussies of the world pretty much. I don't mind though, the only thing that does piss me off is the complete ignorance to how we live. A lot of Americans that I've met really are convinced that it snows 10 months out of the year here, when really, we're lucky if we get maybe four actual snow storms per year in the course of maybe two or three months....
Of course though, I understand as American's are the main focus of the world right now, they obviously get it much worse and much more often than we do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayside
Canada sent troops to Iraq. As far as I'm concerned you're not pussies. I have to admitt, though, that i thought it snowed for like half the year.
My view of Canada has been that the very southern part of Canada, where almost all of the population lives, is pretty much just an extension of the United States except with a different name and a very common hatred for the United States. It is the rest of Canada that makes me think of wilderness and constantly cold weather.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
Duh, they are obviously talking about conventional weapons, not nuclear.
And, about them referencing the term "al Qaeda". According to some people, "Al Qaeda" supposedly translated into "the base". Well did you know that "Ana raicha Al Qaeda" is an Arabic colloquial for "I'm going to the toilet". Now why would hardcore terrorists determined to destroy the infidels call themselves after a euphemism for taking a crap? But also according to former house of commons Robin Cook:
"Al-Qaida," states Cook, "literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians." There you go, Al-Qaeda...
Now, I'm not saying that people with the intent of destroying and bringing terror to the west don't exist because that's obviously not true. What I am saying is, those with that intent to destroy and bring terror to the west don't automatically belong to some well-organized network that we so quickly refer to as "Al-Qaeda". There just isn't any evidence pointing to this vast and powerful network of sleeper cells existing, most definitely not to the degree that the media and goverments would have us believe. By saying it doesn't exist, I'm trying to emphasize the fact that we have, in essence, made one huge imaginary mountain out of many mole hills...in other words, isolated incidents.
Again, had you actually made the time to watch it, what the documentary was actually trying to point out was, the idea found floating around in a few young muslim men's heads is the real threat, not some imaginary interconnected and highly trained organization that they all secretly belong to without even knowing it.
So yeah...don't take my topic title out of context ;)
Do 'al Qaeda' exist?
They said we used our "most powerful weapons". That was false.Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
Did you read my link about the National Security Council and the Clinton Administration's dealings with Al Qaeda? You didn't counter any of what I said about it.
I am not a Middle East languages expert, so I don't know the ins and outs of what "Al Qaeda" means, but I have yet to hear a single Arab say, "Oh, I've got you now. The term 'Al Qaeda' is about going to the toilet and absolutely nothing else." Can you give me a petition signed by people who claim the mass media reports about what "Al Qaeda" means are totally false? There should be about a billion signatures on it.
I obviously watched the link you are talking about because I commented on the specifics of it. Duh.
As for the link you just posted, I will go back to the issue I keep bringing up without ever getting your counteranalysis. I told you why I think the competitive corporate media has more to lose by lying and is therefore far more credible than the left wing fanatic blog sites. Do you remember the details of my argument? I have told you about it several times. Please tell me why in the world I am supposed to think your link has more credibility than the competitive cut-throat corporate media.
Any rational person would know they are refering to conventional weapons since nuclear weapons haven't been used in any armed conflicts since they were first implemented. You are obviously searching for some lame excuses to immediately write the documentary off as some bad journalism without giving it a chance. When I said had you actually made the time to watch it, I meant the entire documentary not the 8minute clip which only brings up one of the many good points in there. However, I knew you wouldn't make the time to actually watch anything but the 8minute one since you love to choose to remain uninformed.
But, hey man...by all means...that's your prerogative. Do what you like. However, I'm not going to sit here and try and have a rational debate with someone who doesn't even aquire the knowledge to debate.
I watched what you posted, but I didn't watch the links within a link that add up to about four hours worth of stuff. Summarize that Dr. Chivago length arugment, and I will analyze it. And how many times do I have to keep making the same points and challenging you to counter them before you finally do it? I keep blasting holes in your bizarrre hypotheses, and all you do back is act condescending and tell me I am uninformed. I have countered your points, so come back with something, if you have anything. I don't think you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
How does posting a link to memo written in Jan 2001 refering to al Qaeda blast holes in anything? They clearly talk about the Jan 2001 meeting in which they came up with the term al Qaeda in the clip, what's your point? Even if the name was rolling around before that time, that doesn't prove anything. As I said before, the name al Qaeda was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. Definitely not the people we so quickly like to associate with the word today. Bin Laden didn't even know about the term before 9-11 because his small group lacked any real organization enough to be called anything.
Rather than continue using flawed logic to debate wording on what kind of weapons were used to blow holes in the mountains of Tora Bora where the supposed al Qaeda network of bases that didn't exist were, why not show me evidence of the advanced network of bases Rumsfeld pointed out ACTUALLY existing? Better yet, How about showing me some evidence of any WMD's in the possession of either known 'al Qaeda' terrorists or Saddam Hussein? That's right...yet again you can't...Because it's all clearly speculative BS that NEVER panned out since it's...*gasp*...NOT REAL.
My point has been there is no real threat from any organization called al Qaeda, because it's not really there. It's just some scare tactics used to make a few people look like they have a lot more organization, and are a lot more dangerous than they actually are...
All the supposed sleeper cells that president Bush twarted were all cleared of charges and quietly brushed under the carpet but those arrests were viewed of as great victories in the war on terror that you probably thought of as real, didn't you? Tsk Tsk..Silly sheeple... Trix are for kids...:chuckle:
ABC News: Secret FBI Report Questions Al Qaeda Capabilities
No 'True' Al Qaeda Sleeper Agents Have Been Found in U.S.
A secret FBI report issued this month and later leaked to the press states, “Al-Qaeda leadership’s intention to attack the United States is not in question. However, their capability to do so is unclear, particularly in regard to ‘spectacular’ operations. We believe al-Qaeda’s capability to launch attacks within the United States is dependent on its ability to infiltrate and maintain operatives in the United States. To date, we have not identified any true ‘sleeper’ agents in the US.… Limited reporting since March indicates al-Qaeda has sought to recruit and train individuals to conduct attacks in the United States, but is inconclusive as to whether they have succeeded in placing operatives in this country. US Government efforts to date also have not revealed evidence of concealed cells or networks acting in the homeland as sleepers” ABC News notes that this seemingly contradicts the sleeper cell depiction seven men arrested in Lackawanna, New York, in 2002. It also differs from warnings by FBI Director Robert Mueller and other US officials, who have warned that sleeper cells are probably in place. [ABC News, 3/9/2005] In 2002, it was also reported that no sleeper cells can be found in the US (see March 10, 2002).
The video talks about how a trial (not the meeting or the memo) BEGAN in January of 2001 and how the U.S. government needed a group to associate with Bin Laden to make it easier to prosecute him. Then it talks about how Bin Laden never used the term "Al Qaeda" until after 9/11. I took that to mean that they were suggesting that as the birth of the term, or close to it. If Bin Laden hadn't used the term yet, then the term couldn't have been around for too long, yet it had been. Bin Laden might not have used the term on video before then, but of course he had been using the term before then if the U.S. government was associating him with it.
Is that all you're going to talk about? I have made so many repeated points. Do I need to post them again? Where are the petitions I keep asking for? When are you going to tell me how your sources have more credibility than the big cut-throat corporate media? What about the other points I have made? Do you have counters for them?
By the way, that is the funniest thing I have read in this thread. Who is the actor playing Bin Laden? Is that Robert De Niro covered in make-up and towels?Quote:
Originally Posted by born_2_kill
Yea, Yea, Yea. You were still searching for stupid excuses and you know it. Why must you continue to suck on the mass media teet as if it's milk is so pure and true?
Look around and taste all the different kinds of milk before you start formulating opinions...You might find the milk you came to know and love has actually been spoiled for some time now... :p
Your empty condescenscion is worth zero. Let's see you actually do something. So AGAIN, counter the points I keep making. You remind me of somebody who shows up on a basketball court and tells everybody they suck without ever actually playing.Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
Let's start with these...
1. How are your sources more credible than the big corporate cut-throat media who actually stand everything to lose, due to the nature of large scale competition, for lying?
2. Where is the petition signed by more than a billion Arabs who say the government is wrong about the meaning of the term "Al Qaeda"?
3. How do tens of thousands of people work together in the world's biggest conspiracy and never have a leak big enough to stop them from fooling the world and getting national governments to cooperate because they are fooled by the illusion?
And from other discussions...
4. Where is the petition of Pentagon workers who claim no airplane crashed into the building when they were at work? Do you have any videos or sworn statements or anything of the kind?
5. Who flew the airplanes into the World Trade Center? Who was willing to die for somebody else's hoax?
6. What players in the conspiracy of the thousands it would have taken have come forward to admit 9/11 was a hoax?
I'll play devil's advocate here and act as if my unanswered laundry list of points doesn't exist and you have all the answers...
1. I never said they are more credible but if you watch it, there are some interesting points brought up. As for what they have to lose, when the politicians are the ones feeding them the lies as truth from the get-go it's not that hard to just report it as fact. When you watch surface-level mass media, that's what you understand and what you get. Those that scratch beneath the surface of those lies to see them for what they are, are then ridiculed for their discovery by dumb sheeple, like yourself, that have to admit they were wrong for buying into the whole facade in the first place. :rolleyes:
2. Why would I need a petition of what the term means, and how on earth does that make a valid point? I simply stated that the term was created of the American government to refer to the jolly band of men fighting the russians in Afganistan, and evolved into this vast imaginary terror network with access to and possession of WMD's, 'dirty bombs', and 'sleeper cells' already existing in the U.S. from there. How about this? How about you try actually showing me some proof of this organization's legitimacy to ANY of their supposed claims and I'll give you a cookie? Waaait a minute...you can't. ;)
3. 10's of thousands? Not sure where you got that number, but I'm sure not that many know of much. The grunts on the front lines are just dumb cannon fodder that just need to know where to point their guns for good ol' Uncle Sam in order to feel their communal 80 IQ points are going to good use. Obviously, goverment is a hierarchy. They have 'need to know' levels in government where the lies are a part of what you need or don't need to know. If you question, why, it's the same as questioning your country's motives as 'righteous' and determines your level of involvement on the, 'need to know'. I firmly believe you have to be cut of a certain breed to be at the high ends of goverment. You don't think massive cover stories are ever used in goverment even within different members of the same organization? Psshh...talk about naive. Oh, and don't forget...*whispers*... we were never in Cambodia. :chuckle:
Do you honestly trust all the things purported by politicians? 'I'm here for the greater good', and all that crap. Please don't tell me you are that naive.
4. 5. and 6. can be dealt with in their perspective thread... Although, I never claimed to know what happened at the trade centers, just what I personally saw being 5 minutes away from the Pentagon. Too bad you can't keep an open mind enough to even entertain the thought
No, you never answered the questions before now. Stop lying. And what does supposedly answering them again :rolleyes: have to do with playing devil's advocate? Playing devil's advocate is taking a position you don't agree with to illustrate the other side of an argument. Considering your apparent level of intellectual dishonesty, I guess that is what you have been doing this whole time. Freudian slip?Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
I'm not talking about that one video. I am talking about your sources in general. And the corporate media gets its information from many things other than the mere words of politicians. They also expose the lies of politicians. You are way off. But maybe your insults make up for that, at least in the world of your own mind. You have my support.Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
I asked for a petition because surely there would be one if the American government is flat out lying about what a term in a language means. If our government said the term "le stylo", which means "the pen" in French, really means "space bomb", don't you think French speaking people would be all over it? Of course you do. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...truggles_x.htm
I am talking about, for one thing, members of the CIA, DHS, and FBI who have gathered (Oh yeah... supposedly gathered) intelligence on the workings of Al Qaeda. Then you can talk about military personnel and interrogators at Guantanamo Bay. Also, airport workers and local cops could be discussed. And the officials who analyze the Bin Laden and the gang tapes. And who takes care of the actors who play Al Qaeda members? The list continues. But not a single leak? Damn, they are bad ass!Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
How many times do I have to tell you that I don't ever trust anything solely because a politicians says it? Your delusions about me seem unshakable. Hopefully it's only that you need to read more carefully.Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
I entertained it and defeated it. As for the "in their perspective thread...", let's see it, finally.Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
By the way, the link I posted earlier about the 2001 meeting has links to memos from 2000 regarding American actions concerning Al Qaeda. Did you catch that? I am talking about official documents, not babblers with mohawks.