moeloubani

Well, can't say I didn't give you an out.

Here comes the crush.

First point:

"Bin Laden worked directly with the CIA decades ago when Russia was invading Afghanistan.... thats all on the record and undisputed history... whats never been explained is how and when that relationship officially ended. The fact is we had a close relationship with the man who is now supposidly our biggest enemy, but the details of that relationship are vastly unexplained."

The reality:

The U.S. government officials and a number of other parties maintain that the U.S. supported only the indigenous Afghan mujahideen. They deny that the CIA or other American officials had contact with the Afghan Arabs (foreign mujahideen) or Bin Laden, let alone armed, trained, coached or indoctrinated them. They argue that with a quarter of a million local Afghans willing to fight there was no need to recruit foreigners unfamiliar with the local language, customs or lay of the land; that with several hundred million dollars a year in funding from non-American, Muslim sources, Arab Afghans themselves would have no need for American funds; that Americans could not train mujahideen because Pakistani officials would not allow more than a handful of them to operate in Pakistan and none in Afghanistan[12]; that the Afghan Arabs were militant Islamists, reflexively hostile to Westerners, and prone to threaten or attack Westerners even when they knew the Westerners were helping the mujahideen.

Second point:

"Why was Pakistani intelligence chief Ahmad (who wired the 9/11 hijackers $100,000) in Washington DC meeting with US officials on the morning of 9/11? Why did the 9/11 comission not include this in their investigation? Why was he allowed back to Pakistan, then retired and disappeared without any followup???"

The reality is that this guy didn't retire then just disappear, he had a trial and was found guilty of murder and sentenced to death.

Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh (Urdu: احمد عمر سعید شیخ) (sometimes known as Umar Sheikh, Sheikh Omar[1], Sheik Syed[2], or by the alias "Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad"[3]) (b. December 23, 1973) is a British-born militant of Pakistani descent with alleged links to various Islamic-based organisations, including Jaish-e-Mohammed, Al-Qaeda, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen and Taliban.

He was arrested and served time in prison for the 1994 abduction of several British nationals in India, an act which he acknowledges, he was released from captivity in 1999 and provided safe passage into Pakistan, apparently with the support of Pakistan and the Taliban (the hijackers were Pakistanis) in an Indian Airlines plane hijacking. He is most well-known for his alleged role in the 2002 kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. Sheikh Omar Saeed was arrested by Pakistani police on February 12, 2002, in Lahore, in conjunction with the Pearl kidnapping,[4] and was sentenced to death on July 15, 2002[5] for killing Pearl. His judicial appeal has not yet been heard. The delay has been alleged to be due to his reported links with Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence.[6]

Third point:

"Why did members of the 9/11 comission claim "There were all kinds of reasons we thought we were set up to fail." citing lack of cooperation from the white house. On this same note why would Bush only speak to them if it was off the record, together with Cheney, and he wasnt under oath?"

Actually what happened is that members of the 9/11 commission didn't say that, however one member did write it in a book. This is what he says about why he though they wanted them to fail):

We had a lot of skeptics out there, who really did not want the Commission formed. Politicians don?t like somebody looking back to see if they made a mistake.
The Commission had to report right, just a few days before the Democratic National Convention met, in other words, right in the middle of a political campaign. We had a lot of people strongly opposed to what we did. We had a lot of trouble getting access to documents and to people. We knew the history of commissions; the history of commissions were they.. nobody paid much attention to 'em.

Fourth Point:

"WHO THE HELL WARNED OAKLAND MAYOR WILLIE BROWN NOT TO FLY? This is from the goddamn SF Chronicle and has since been burried with no explination. ( SF Chronicle Sept 12th )"

The reality:

"It was not an abnormal call. I'm always concerned if my flight is going to be on time, and they always alert me when I ought to be careful."

So because this guy got a call the day before 9/11, a call he gets all the time, it means he was warned about 9/11? My dick hurt that morning, must mean my dick is a danger alarm.


For a guy who claims to be posting honest things ('I'm the only one in this entire thread who posted anything remotely honest.') You sure are full of alot of shit.

And you have the nerve to post this?

"It's that sloppyness that leads to 'truthers' jumping to dramatic conclusion, and the equally disgusting anti-truthers who pretend their gap-filled story makes sense."



So what do you have to say now? Now that you were proven to be a LIAR on each point you made? Still think you posted something even remotely honest?



In this I'm Mugatu, and you're Todd.