Burn in Hell Al Queda (Margaret Hassan murdered)

SkepticOne

MeatProduct wrote:

Unhappily enough that doesn't sound so strange to me.

Yes, they probably paid those guys to take flying lessons in Florida, including the guy who wasn't interested in take-offs and landings but just wanted to learn to control an airliner and who was later arrested. CIA agents who died for the cause.

MeatProduct

Captain Trips wrote:

The likening is most akin to the bombing of the Reichstag.

Who benefitted from 9/11? Al Queda (which doesn't even exist as an entity other than one coined to focus minds on a single enemy)? the neocons? My money is on the neocons - e.g., oil prices have gone way up, Condi has made a fortune. The military corps like Lockheed, GD, Northrop - check msn.com and look at the stock prices since 9/11. Increased police powers? Does that benefit Al Queda? Does it benefit the citizens? Or do increased police powers benefit the...eh....police!

1 plus 1 also, as it turns out, makes 2.

Unfortunately this story will never be told by the media so most of the public will shy away from the responsibility that that ultimately presents to the individual. That your governmant actually doesn't give a crap and is just using you as a fear puppet is just too much. It is also very understandable why people should act in that manner also.

Saying that it could just be a string of remarkable coincidences that makes it seem like the US admin engage in mass deception.

Nick

SkepticOne

Captain Trips wrote:

1 plus 1 also, as it turns out, makes 2.

This bit I agree with. Not sure of the rest, but perhaps a case can be made for it.

MeatProduct

SkepticOne wrote:

Yes, they probably paid those guys to take flying lessons in Florida, including the guy who wasn't interested in take-offs and landings but just wanted to learn to control an airliner and who was later arrested. CIA agents who died for the cause.

It was sort of convienient how they found Mohammad Atta's passport 6 blocks from the disaster when everything else was vapourised. Also that they found in one of the cars in the airport a: flight manual, a copy of the koran and a flight plan. I don't want to get into this here but there is quite a lot of blatently obvious evidence that appeared to support the US admins cause.

It's just a matter of keeping an open mind as much as possible. Not an easy task given all the rubbish we are bombarded with.

Nick

SkepticOne

MeatProduct wrote:

Unfortunately this story will never be told by the media

Maybe a comedy about conspiracy nuts?

MeatProduct

SkepticOne wrote:

Maybe a comedy about conspiracy nuts?

Indeed.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Redleslie2

I don't see how Mrs.Hassan's death could possibly benefit the Americans. She could work away for 30 years in Saddam's evil Iraq no bother but only last 18 months in the US occupation. What conclusions can be drawn from that.

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

The truth of course is that everything is just fine and apart from a few minor misunderstandings that have resulted in 100 dead troops and hundreds more wounded in the last 2 weeks, the most serious problem facing the overwhelmingly popular Mr.Allawi's interim government is that Iraqi children have run out of sweets and flowers to throw at US troops and need to be resupplied urgently.

mycroft

Moriarty wrote:

What the hell? Where's the followup news articles about the trial then? Are allegations really enough for you? Is it ok if I say there are WMD in Iraq because those were allegations which were made too?

Moriarty you asked for proof, I posted an article linking to the story, and how attempts at justice are being hindered by the US govt, on very flimsy excuces, and how they've granted leave to two people a US ambassdor believes has links to the US govt. It's in the US governments interest that the trial doesn't happen, and the truth doesn't win out.

You asked for an example I gave you one.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Gurgle

Captain Trips wrote:

Who benefitted from 9/11? Al Queda (which doesn't even exist as an entity other than one coined to focus minds on a single enemy)?

Hardly. (Though it definitely does exist as an entity but not on the scale that it could be responsible for all thats attributed to it)

Captain Trips wrote:

the neocons? My money is on the neocons - e.g., oil prices have gone way up, Condi has made a fortune. The military corps like Lockheed, GD, Northrop - check msn.com and look at the stock prices since 9/11.

Yes, they certainly turned the situation to their advantage. Thats how most rich people get rich. Doesn't implicate them in the attack though.

It also gave GWB the opportunity to persue his personal plans for the middle east.

Don't forgot, shortly after the attack, Bin Laden said it wasn't him (though he did congratulate whoever did do it).

So who could have done it?
That attack required a (relatively) little cash, a lot of planning & organizing and a few suicidal maniacs.

Could really be pretty much any of these people.

ionapaul

Gurgle wrote:

Don't forgot, shortly after the attack, Bin Laden said it wasn't him (though he did congratulate whoever did do it).

So who could have done it?

IIRC, Bin Laden admitted his organisation planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks in his last video message. Something about deciding to destroy 'those towers in America' in revenge for American attacks on Muslims?

Course, you could ignore this and all the other evidence and see the true picture THEY* don't want you to see. THEY planned the attacks, heck, I read on alt.news.conspiracyntruth that GW Bush piloted one of the aircraft, sky-diving to safety a few seconds before impact, Bond style. The few Palestinians shown celebrating post-attack were actually the Crawford Christian Choral Society in disguise on a movie set. And the.....whoops, my tin-foil hat almost came off! Let me re-adjust it for safety...anyhow you get the picture. THEY are in control, people!!!

*THEY include all neo-cons, registered Republicans, Democrats, independants, business owners, gun nuts, white people, males, SUV drivers, and (most importantly) Cher, the evil genius behind it all

SkepticOne

ionapaul wrote:

I read on alt.news.conspiracyntruth that GW Bush piloted one of the aircraft, sky-diving to safety a few seconds before impact, Bond style. The few Palestinians shown celebrating post-attack were actually the Crawford Christian Choral Society in disguise on a movie set.

Less of this speculation. I think it's fairly well established at this stage that the CIA did it using specially trained dolphins.

Redleslie2

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

I don't think anyone in the prediction industry got it right but some were a lot more wrong than others.

Redleslie2

Redleslie2 wrote:

I don't see how Mrs.Hassan's death could possibly benefit the Americans.

Actually I do now. Her organisation pulled out of the country. MSF pulled out of Afghanistan and Iraq because of "the co-optation of humanitarian aid by the coalition for political and military motives." The US seems to want to be able to control who gets what aid.

The US ambassador to Iraq is John Negroponte.

He is a controversial figure because of his involvement in covert funding of the Contras and his covering up of human rights abuses carried out by CIA-trained death squads in Honduras in the 1980s.

GreeBo

ionapaul wrote:

IIRC, Bin Laden admitted his organisation planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks in his last video message. Something about deciding to destroy 'those towers in America' in revenge for American attacks on Muslims?

Yeah but he would wouldnt he?!
Free publicity, why not?

bonkey

I'm beginning to wonder if I should move this to :

1) Humour
2) The Cuckoos Nest
or
3) Nowhere, but ask the admins nicely if maybe we need a TinFoilHat forum.

I know its Friday....but dear Lord...this is beginning to <fnord> sound like......

Everyone knows it was the Discordians, supported by EmTeeVee, The Fiendish Flouridators, with a +4 bonus for each of two opposing alignments, and a Privileged Attack declared.

jc

mycroft

bonkey wrote:

Everyone knows it was the Discordians, supported by EmTeeVee, The Fiendish Flouridators, with a +4 bonus for each of two opposing alignments, and a Privileged Attack declared.

[cough]
nerd
[/cough]

I'm sorry I got involved in this, all I did is point out that the US have behaved in a suspicious manner in the murder of the El Salvadorian nun incident, habouring potential suspects and squashing an investigation in a possible link between the potential killers and the school of the americas. So there is some kind of prescedent. However there is not a shred of evidence to emerge that there is anything remotely suspicious in Magaret Hassan, I was merely offering Moriarty the example of a potentially similar situation he asked for.

Redleslie2

A poll on urban75 asking who's responsible has the CIA and the SWP on the same number of votes.

Moriarty

but they're interfering with our precious bodily fluids damnit!

mycroft

Redleslie2 wrote:

A poll on urban75 asking who's responsible has the CIA and the SWP on the same number of votes.

That swp have been linked because of piles of unsold copies of the Socialist Worker at the scene.

Suggestions that margaret hassan had recently joined the party and had been made an example of because she failed to reach her quota of papers sold cannot be confirmed or denied at the time of going to press

Sand

3) Nowhere, but ask the admins nicely if maybe we need a TinFoilHat forum.

We can but dream.

Christian_H

Rock Climber wrote:

This has been discussed before and no one could point to me where a court had declared coalition actions illegal.
That illegality was never declared by the body responsible for policing whether it was illegal or not ie the UNSC.
Untill it does, theres two opinions, one that it was illegal and the other that it wasn't.
Both are just opinions.

Where was that declared illegal??

Hitler invading Poland?
Saddam Invading Kuwait?
Argentina Invading the UK?
Ireland invading Iceland?

Here something else, the US have not officaly declared teh WAR over. If they did by the conventions they have ignored through the act of invading these countries. The US as the invading force would be bound by these international laws, one being the Geneva Convention to provide humanitarian support for the population of IRAQ.

So by the US not declaring hte WAR "officially" ended they are avoiding responsibility (via the convention) to provided humnaitarian support for the 25 million Iraqs they have subjected to an act of aggression.

Kofi Anann has declared the War illegal. People who spend there lives interpreting international law have declared it illegal. the Dogs on the street feel its illegal... but

Look the US has repeatedly stated that it will not recognise the international war crimes court. It will only agree to recognize its powers if its soliders are immune.

the US will never hand over any of its troops for prosecutuion by a foreign War Court.

i don;t care if it is illegal or not it not my point and many people get hun up on it.

WAR is not right WAR is wrong. Morally, socially, enviromentally, cosmically, legally.

If the US says its not illegal its not illegal. In the context they make the rules becasue they are the largest, most powerful force on the planet.

Here is a list of all the countires the US has a military presence in, troops, bases etc.

Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Antigua
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belgium
Belize
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Bulgaria
Burma
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Chad
Chile
China
Colombia
Congo
Costa Rica
Cote D’lvoire
Cuba
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominican Republic
East Timor
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Fiji

Finland
France
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Guatemala
Guinea
Haiti
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iraq
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Latvia
Lebanon
Liberia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Mali
Malta
Mexico
Mongolia
Morocco
Mozambique
Nepal
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
North Korea
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Qatar
Romania
Russia
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia and Montenegro
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovenia
Spain
South Africa
South Korea
Sri Lanka
Suriname
Sweden
Switzerland
Syria
Tanzania
Thailand
Togo
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
Uruguay
Venezuela
Vietnam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe

135 countires.

SkepticOne

Christian_H wrote:

If the US says its not illegal its not illegal. In the context they make the rules becasue they are the largest, most powerful force on the planet.

Here is a list of all the countires the US has a military presence in, troops, bases etc.
[...]
Ireland

Do you mean the Shannon connection?

Christian_H

Quote:
The US invaded a soverign state 18 motnhs ago. Illegally.
Wrong.

You are Right I was wrong, its 22/23 months ago, they invaded in March of 2003. It being an invasion & iraq being a soverign state as we uncerstand them are & were entirely correct.

Quote:
Previous to that the Americans invaded Afghanistan. Illegally.
Wrong again.

Excuse me? Did the US not invade Afghanistan?

I beg to differ I believe they did and you are, wrong.

Afghanistan did not Declare War, nor Attack the US nor provide an ther was no iminent threat to world peace.

Therefore the UN international declaration on these matters indicates it to be illegal.

Quote:
So now the US is involved in 2 seperate campaigns on the Planet. To me this looks like a world war, WWIII if you will.
Wow.....2 campaigns = World War.... what deduction....

Quote:
Now if you follwed the coverage you will note, that the usual extermist or rebellion groups have claimed not to have abducted Margar Hassan. There is much evidence to suggest it was a criminal gang. Who knows maybe this has political deeds behind it.

And of course we all know that these people never lie !

So, they manage to abduct a high profile target who is know to the Media whihc causes the Media to overreact to a singular incident in the context of a WAR and do not use it to there advantage? Are you for real?

Are you missing any logical faculties. Have you stopped to think about the complexitiy if this situtaion one bit?

Quote:
Either way the truth has been mangled and we will not know for a long time what really happend.

We know she is DEAD and the terrorists killed her.

Her killing at the time of writting was not 100%. Now that it is we still do not know who killed her. How can you be so certain when I myself would be more cautious.

Have you contacts better than your average person?

Quote:
Lets remember the US have killed thousands of innocent civilian, it could be anything from 10,000 to over 100,000. One death is too many.

So you claim. And I don't agree 1 life is too many to liberate 20 million people. If it were then almost no country in the world would be free... including our own.

Its seems to me that the inherint logic, life is worthless but your life is more worthwhile than that of the person killed so you can continue to live on this planet.

Quote:
I remember sadly now, when Michael D Higgins proclaimed that 10,000 or more innocent civilains would be killed maybe even hundreds of thousands. He was publicly laughed at in the Dail, deried for exaggerating.

He was and is a monumental idiot who predicted over a million, IIRC and never gave a damn about the plight of the Iraqi people under Saddam.. and was happy to leave him in place slaughtering and torturing his people.

Now you are suddenly concerned with the quality of Iraqs lives?
I am confused by your mixing of personal opinion and inability to logically think through your position on the WAR?

The US use depleated & un depleted unranium tipped heavy artillery shells. You tell me uranium is fine to have lying all ovr the place since the first gulf War. Increased Cancer is a now a longterm certain thanks to the US just throwing around irrdaited materials on the land

Quote:
I think the reality has proved him and the 100,000 who marched against our involvement in such war crimes.

The reality has proved that 25 million Iraqis are free from Saddam now despite the efforts of these 100,000 to appease him.

The US is as much as an illegal occupier/dictator as saddam ever was. The puppet government headed by a formwer Saddam Batth Party member has instilled a state of emergency and brouhg back marshall law. Has presided over the torture Iraqs by the US continui g ignorance of the geneva convention and so on....

Quote:
To expect national people to behave in War civily when they have been savagely invaded by one of the most repressives regimes globally is in all honest naieve.

Only in a fictional land occupied by the terminally naive.

Right, what are you talking about, you sarcasm is getting in the way of informed debate. You do not seem to havve a tangable position and continually resort to one liner reflex non sensical hypocritical statments.

I take it though that you are agreeing with me on this point?

Quote:
Thanks. Lets hope this is the last great conflict the world has ever to endure.

Oh I am sure you are right there.... the last... ever !

I said "hope".

Clearly your assessment of the world is a million miles from reality. That's the only thing I would agree with.

You agree with your own statement here. Not mine.

I hate to have to "analy" reply to such poor rebuttle of my point and I won't do it again. Such poorly thouhgt out logic really only shows your ignorance of the issues. I do not declare to know more but I| am concerned that the Truth is being abused to maniulate you and I and everyone else sitting here on planet earth.

Rock Climber

Christian_H wrote:

Therefore the UN international declaration on these matters indicates it to be illegal.

I thought the UN authorised action in Afghanistan?
Even Pakistan assisted...
Where was it declared illegal?

Afghanistan did not Declare War, nor Attack the US nor provide an ther was no iminent threat to world peace.

I see so AlQ'eda Bin Laden et al were training in the McGillycuddy reeks with the support of Kerry county council then

They had no connection to the Taliban at all then,who didnt shelter the organisers of September 11th :rolleyes:

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

bonkey

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

The examples where war was started for the greater good, though, are fewer and further between.....and off the top of my head, I can't think of any which were not insurrectionist/civil in nature.

jc

Moriarty

(cba with the rest of it, I'll just take this one)

Christian_H wrote:

The US use depleated & un depleted unranium tipped heavy artillery shells.

Link to back up the claim they're using enriched uranium in weapons, please? I'm fairly sure you won't be able to provide any.

Christian_H wrote:

You tell me uranium is fine to have lying all ovr the place since the first gulf War. Increased Cancer is a now a longterm certain thanks to the US just throwing around irrdaited materials on the land.

DU is less of a risk in the environment than naturally occouring uranium in the ground.

I'm not exactly a staunch proponent of DU weapons, but a lot of people vastly overstate their danger.

Christian_H

Rock Climber wrote:

I thought the UN authorised action in Afghanistan?
Even Pakistan assisted...
Where was it declared illegal?

"No international or national law or policy legalizes these attacks on Afghanistan. No resolutions of the United Nations' Security Council or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization could provide a legal justification for these attacks and none do."

The above is a quote from a website you can find it here, http://www.canadianliberty.bc.ca/liberty-vs-security/gail-davidson-war-on-afghanistan.html.

I see so AlQ'eda Bin Laden et al were training in the McGillycuddy reeks with the support of Kerry county council then

Osam Bin Laden, is not a Head of any state. Therefore by international law (which the IS would expected to be treated by)the war is illegal as no soverign state declared war or attacked america.

Heres another thing. When the US invaded Iraq they directly targeted Saddam Hussein. It is illegal by the same conventions to attack the head of any state in order to kill them. If you do this the nation cannot surrender to your forces.

There deck of cards was a depraved TV/MEDIA debasing of the true nature of WAR and only served to some how legitimize this horrible WAR with the kind mind numbing presentation you would find on a TV quiz show. It was disgusting.

The US has taken the world for a ride not disimilar to what happened in WWII with Hitler. I mean we have been lied to and continually lied to even when the rest of the world has disagreed and proved all to that effect. Yet in politics if you keep saying some that is an ill-truth then eventually it becomes a type of relaity. Then people start to believe it without much thouhgt. It muddies the water so to speak.

They had no connection to the Taliban at all then,who didnt shelter the organisers of September 11th :rolleyes:

The US in 1980 boycotted the Olympic Games in the USSR because of the USSRs invasion of the territory which you resulted in a ten year if I remeber correctly where the Regan administration began to fund and arm the taliban which cuased such an entrenched war. This ultimately led to the collapse of the USSR among some other events. The US takes full credit for this and the Republicans credit Regan for bringing the USSR to its end. Ths ending the cold war and leaving the US in it uni-polar power position.

Remember when they were attacking and were so sure of the position they where hitting, well the reason why is because the CIA funded and set up the mjority of the canps. The irony was at the time and still is that the US no-backing down policy of goinf after states that harbour terroists comically ment that they should of attacked themselves if you follow the warped logic.

Today, the US is and has been the largest sponsor of contra, terrorist. Its a fact. Well document over time and will always be the case as long as they try to hold econmic power throuigh military means.