My recent thoughts on this

[madrusso]

i was reading about this recent Bin Laden interview. Where he justifies the Sept. 11 attacks but denies his responsibility.

What if its not him?

i mean this sick motherfucker deserves to die, no doubt about it, but if he justifies it, why wouldnt he take the responsibility then?

Because, if its not him, there is somebody out there who is behind the whole thing, and the world's attention is concentrated on Bin Laden while this sonofabitch walks free, and probably plans other shit.

Just my thoughts.

peace,

[msoprano]

Originally posted by madrusso

i was reading about this recent Bin Laden interview. Where he justifies the Sept. 11 attacks but denies his responsibility.

What if its not him?

i mean this sick motherfucker deserves to die, no doubt about it, but if he justifies it, why wouldnt he take the responsibility then?

Because, if its not him, there is somebody out there who is behind the whole thing, and the world's attention is concentrated on Bin Laden while this sonofabitch walks free, and probably plans other shit.

Just my thoughts.

peace,

yo i agree with you bro....the u.s. has not put together one piece of evidence pointing to or linking bin laden to the attacks....there is not a doubt in my mind that he is involved one way or another but facts are facts....i had a speaker come to my school who was a freedom fighter during the russian invasion in afghanistan....he said that bin laded trained between 60,000-80,000 known terrorists in pakistan alone...these people went over the boarder got trained and went back to pakistan.,.....someone please answer me the question, how do u fight and win a war against someone you cant see?????????????????

[msoprano]

Originally posted by madrusso

i was reading about this recent Bin Laden interview. Where he justifies the Sept. 11 attacks but denies his responsibility.

What if its not him?

i mean this sick motherfucker deserves to die, no doubt about it, but if he justifies it, why wouldnt he take the responsibility then?

Because, if its not him, there is somebody out there who is behind the whole thing, and the world's attention is concentrated on Bin Laden while this sonofabitch walks free, and probably plans other shit.

Just my thoughts.

peace,

yo i agree with you bro....the u.s. has not put together one piece of evidence pointing to or linking bin laden to the attacks....there is not a doubt in my mind that he is involved one way or another but facts are facts....i had a speaker come to my school who was a freedom fighter during the russian invasion in afghanistan....he said that bin laded trained between 60,000-80,000 known terrorists in pakistan alone...these people went over the boarder got trained and went back to pakistan.,.....someone please answer me the question, how do u fight and win a war against someone you cant see?????????????????

[nycmuzik]

Originally posted by msoprano13

someone please answer me the question, how do u fight and win a war against someone you cant see?????????????????

I dont think there is a straight forward answer to that question. We all need to consider the fact that most of the fighting is going to be done by US Special Op's Forces. For these soldiers to complete their missions they need to operate in the shadows. As far as the gov't is concerned, the Delta Force does not exist. And thats the way it should be. Also, I'm pretty sure there is alot the gov't knows but doesnt want to tell us because its going to be on CNN, Reuters, MSNBC, and every other possible TV station and website within the hour.

BTW, everyone go check out Black Hawk Down on January 18th. Based on a true story. http://www.spe.sony.com/movies/blackhawkdown/

[DJGaryMatthews]

Originally posted by msoprano13

yo i agree with you bro....the u.s. has not put together one piece of evidence pointing to or linking bin laden to the attacks

i disagree. im sure the govt has tons of evidence that links the attacks to bin laden. they just havent released it to the public or the media. most of the shit that the govt knows about this and is doing about this we will probably never know about, cuz everything is a covert operation.

[sassa]

Originally posted by xtcgspot

i disagree. im sure the govt has tons of evidence that links the attacks to bin laden. they just havent released it to the public or the media. most of the shit that the govt knows about this and is doing about this we will probably never know about, cuz everything is a covert operation.

Good guess.But how can you be sure about this as well?Maybe the other side is right?We'll never know,until the government decides to divulge...

[msoprano]

Originally posted by xtcgspot

i disagree. im sure the govt has tons of evidence that links the attacks to bin laden. they just havent released it to the public or the media. most of the shit that the govt knows about this and is doing about this we will probably never know about, cuz everything is a covert operation.

sorry kid i gotta disagreeeee with you..lol....a week after the attacks colin powell said that the u.d, govt will be realeasing to the public in a press conference the evidence about how bin laden is responsible...well the next day at the press conference a reporter asked about his statement the day before and powell said that it was classified info...if thats the case then fine but why would you announce on tv the day before that evidence will be released to the public..bad move on there part

[ggfella4]

Originally posted by xtcgspot

i disagree. im sure the govt has tons of evidence that links the attacks to bin laden. they just havent released it to the public or the media. most of the shit that the govt knows about this and is doing about this we will probably never know about, cuz everything is a covert operation.

i disagree... the taliban said "give us evidence that bin laden is responsible and we will turn him over" so if we have all this evidence then why wouldnt we turn it over so that we can get this asshole.. all bush says is... we know hes guilty , turn him over. Bush doesnt say "hes guilty because we have this , that and the other thing...just somethign to think about.

peace out

gianni

[vodkaredbull]

Well they Have allready put forth a breifing stating that if Bin Laden is innocent then he should put forth some type of evidence to prove it. Other then that He has made no attempt to prove himself... Plus It is allready known that he is in connection we other terrosist attacks which have killed innocent people. The fact is he still needs to be brought to Justice for his other actions even if he is not responsible for sept, 11th( rolling eyes and thinking BS) :rolleyes:

[silente]

First of all, vodkardedbull - PHAT ASS screenname!!! Add a little champaigne to that, and you've got my very favorite drink in all the world. :grin:

In terms of the conversation....

* The US and Britain released a joint statement about a month after the attacks outlining the de-classified evidence against bin Laden. Granted, it was sketchy, because there's not much they could safely say, but it was something.

* There are a bunch of reasons Bush couldn't give solid evidence to the Taliban. Partially, it was because he didn't to look like he was negotiating with them. (Mostly bs, but he had to tell the public *something*). Basically, though, it was because, by doing so, he would tell them something about how we're spying on them. (ie - if certain phone conversations were cited, they'd know what lines we had tapped, etc). That could seriously jeopardize the lives of our people over there.

* Fighting an enemy we can't see is retarded - that's why this war is ridiculous. There's no way we're going to catch bin Laden with tanks and planes. If we don't know where he is, what his plans are, or who he's working with, then there's no way he can be caught. We need people on the ground and in the groups that can be our eyes and ears for us. That's why we've got the "office of homeland security." I'd be willing to put money on that becoming basically Cabinet level special ops position, in charge of what the military did during the Cold War (knock down officials or governments we don't like through assassinations, stirring up coups, etc, and set up puppet governments that answer to us. Come on...you didn't think Africa got fucked up on it's OWN, did you?).

If we're really serious about eradicating terrorism, we're gonna have to get REALLY messy. We've already lost a host of civil liberties in a knee-jerk reaction by Congress, and I'm sure this isn't the end. If we have to add serious international law violations to our already weakend civil liberties, I think we have to start asking ourselves seriously if it's really worth that price.

[Rad_Z]

HAHAHA, the "the office of homeland security" is basically just BS!

It is not meant to assasinate foreign officials or topple an enemy gov't. Blah, thats (the 70's& 80's similar shit) what caused a lot of the problems that are happening these days anyways.

The homeland security position is basically just so that the naive citizens can think that they are safe again after the 9/11 incident. The office, in reality, suppose to have power and full cooperation with all special US agencies, but in reality, it cant really enforce them fully (ex: limited funds, diff agencies have their own agendas and wanna protect their own power).

If im not mistaking, it basically was so that future terrorist attacks and such can be prevented and more defined procedures applied whenever such incidents do occur.

Rad_