Sarah Palin on Syria conflict: Let Allah sort it out
Options
Comments
-
Sarah palin stuffs ? at will, end transmission
-
...which, in turn, does not actually contradict what i said above. this is what i am talking about when i say you're NOT ACTUALLY READING MY POSTS.kingblaze84 wrote: »Janklow, Brezinsky, a former head official in American govt IS ON RECORD as saying the CIA gave money to future members of Al-Qaeda.
somehow i suspect there's also a degree of willfully remembering what we want to there.kingblaze84 wrote: »HE SAID HIMSELF HE MET WITH BIN LADEN IN 1979...
no, what i am doing is siding with my sources over yours. don't bring the stereotypical "DO RESEARCH" nonsense into the debate.kingblaze84 wrote: »That's not someone who works at just lil ole Newsone....a news magazine that is actually very respected. Ignore evidence at your own peril and ignorance-
on the other hand, you literally NEVER mention Pakistan while simplifying down to "THE CIA ARMED BIN LADEN." which is entirely the point: if you're not discussing it as a complicated situation with people and countries working at cross-purposes, you're not really discussing it.kingblaze84 wrote: »...and yes I know Pakistan was involved as well. But Pakistan is known for its closet support of Al Qaeda in many parts of the country, even in govt so that shouldn't be a surprise.
-
...which, in turn, does not actually contradict what i said above. this is what i am talking about when i say you're NOT ACTUALLY READING MY POSTS.kingblaze84 wrote: »Janklow, Brezinsky, a former head official in American govt IS ON RECORD as saying the CIA gave money to future members of Al-Qaeda.
somehow i suspect there's also a degree of willfully remembering what we want to there.kingblaze84 wrote: »HE SAID HIMSELF HE MET WITH BIN LADEN IN 1979...
no, what i am doing is siding with my sources over yours. don't bring the stereotypical "DO RESEARCH" nonsense into the debate.kingblaze84 wrote: »That's not someone who works at just lil ole Newsone....a news magazine that is actually very respected. Ignore evidence at your own peril and ignorance-
on the other hand, you literally NEVER mention Pakistan while simplifying down to "THE CIA ARMED BIN LADEN." which is entirely the point: if you're not discussing it as a complicated situation with people and countries working at cross-purposes, you're not really discussing it.kingblaze84 wrote: »...and yes I know Pakistan was involved as well. But Pakistan is known for its closet support of Al Qaeda in many parts of the country, even in govt so that shouldn't be a surprise.
If you wana take your sources over mine that's fine. The evidence is clear as daylight that America and Pakistan and likely other nations gave billions to future members of Al-Qaeda back in the 80s, when the then mujahadeen fought the Soviets, many of whom later became founding members of Al-Qaeda. It was a complicated situation but it doesn't change the fact Bin Laden did get help from the CIA back in the day, directly and indirectly. The evidence is clear as day in books and online sources anytime you want to read it. Everything else is going in circles.
Here's another source proving what I am saying.....
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=163_1325281225
In mid-1979, about the same time as the Soviet Union deployed troops
into Afghanistan, the United States began giving several hundred million
dollars a year in aid to the Afghan Mujahideen insurgents fighting the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan and the Soviet Army in Operation Cyclone. Along with native Afghan mujahideen were Muslim volunteers from other countries, popularly known as Afghan Arabs.
The most famous of the Afghan Arabs was Osama bin Laden,known at the time as a wealthy and pious Saudi who provided his own money and helped raise millions from other wealthy Gulf Arabs.
As the war neared its end, bin Laden organized the al-Qaeda organization to carry on armed jihad in other venues, primarily against the United States — the country that had helped fund the mujahideen against the Soviets.
The BBC, in an article published shortly after the 9/11 attacks,
stated that bin Laden "received security training from the CIA itself,
according to Middle Eastern analyst Hazhir Teimourian."[1]
Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=163_1325281225#9YbcAOXFczQHGKU1.99
-
Continued.....
In a 2006 InDepth piece on Osama Bin Laden, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation published that,[4]
Bin Laden apparently received training from the CIA, which was
backing the Afghan holy warriors – the mujahedeen – who were tying down
Soviet forces in Afghanistan.
An article in Der Spiegel,in 2007, entitled "Arming the Middle East",
Siegesmund von Ilsemann called Bin Laden "one of the CIA's best weapons customers." [5]
According to author Steve Coll,
Overall, the U.S. government looked favorably on the Arab recruitment
drives. ... Some of the most ardent cold warriors at [CIA headquarters
at] Langley thought this program should be formally endorsed and
extended. ... [T]he CIA "examined ways to increase their participation,
perhaps in the form of some sort of international brigade" ... Robert
Gates [then-head of the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence] recalled. ...
At the [CIA's] Islamabad station [station chief] Milt Bearden felt that bin Laden himself "actually did some very good things" by putting money into Afghanistan.[6]
Robin Cook, Foreign Secretary in the UK from 1997–2001, and Leader of the House of Commons and Lord President of the Council from 2001–2003, believed the CIA had provided arms to the Arab Mujahideen, including Osama bin Laden, writing, "Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies.Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan."[7]
Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=163_1325281225#9YbcAOXFczQHGKU1.99
-
How many sources you want me to bring up Janklow? Continue choosing your sources over mine, me and the rest of the world will continue to not be in denial. American govt is as crooked and corrupt as it was back in the 80s, Obama is being a ? idiot funding these Syrian rebels. It takes a real ? to make Sarah Palin look smart.
-
That's how her husband feels about her ? lips
-
yeah, i am cool with taking my sources over yours. i think we covered this already?kingblaze84 wrote: »If you wana take your sources over mine that's fine.
it's not clear as daylight that AMERICA gave billions to founding members of Al-Qaeda. maybe you should start by naming them beyond Bin Laden.kingblaze84 wrote: »The evidence is clear as daylight that America and Pakistan and likely other nations gave billions to future members of Al-Qaeda back in the 80s, when the then mujahadeen fought the Soviets, many of whom later became founding members of Al-Qaeda.
yeah, again, i HAVE read up on this. it's not "clear as day" that Bin Laden got help from the CIA. in fact, in attempting to claim this, you said the following:kingblaze84 wrote: »-but it doesn't change the fact Bin Laden did get help from the CIA back in the day, directly and indirectly. The evidence is clear as day in books and online sources anytime you want to read it.
"The most famous of the Afghan Arabs was Osama bin Laden,known at the time as a wealthy and pious Saudi who provided his own money and helped raise millions from other wealthy Gulf Arabs."
did you actually read your own source? because Bin Laden being a wealthy Saudi who provided HIS OWN MONEY as well as millions from Gulf Arabs is exactly in line with what i have been saying to you.
further, you then went on to this:
"An article in Der Spiegel,in 2007, entitled "Arming the Middle East", Siegesmund von Ilsemann called Bin Laden "one of the CIA's best weapons customers." [5] According to author Steve Coll, Overall, the U.S. government looked favorably on the Arab recruitment drives. ... Some of the most ardent cold warriors at [CIA headquarters at] Langley thought this program should be formally endorsed and extended. ... [T]he CIA "examined ways to increase their participation, perhaps in the form of some sort of international brigade" ... Robert Gates [then-head of the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence] recalled. ... At the [CIA's] Islamabad station [station chief] Milt Bearden felt that bin Laden himself "actually did some very good things" by putting money into Afghanistan.[6]
now, i guess i should make this clear: Steve Coll is a source i'm content to run with. and if you read HIS work on this topic --which you probably should since you're inadvertently quoting it-- you'd realize he doesn't actually agree with your article as they want you to believe. note the following from their quote from Coll:
"At the [CIA's] Islamabad station [station chief] Milt Bearden felt that bin Laden himself "actually did some very good things" by putting money into Afghanistan"
...as in, Bin Laden put money into Afghanistan that the CIA did not. let me know when you want to read a book about this or something. or ? , when you want to ACTUALLY READ MY POSTS.
and frankly, it's enough with this "me and the rest of the world" noise. learn to make your damn argument without pretending you have some phantom level of support for it. it doesn't lend credence to what you're actually saying.
-
kingblaze84 wrote: »I'm shocked to say this but I actually agree with Sarah Palin. America is an Orwellian police state now and we're looking stupid around the world supporting people with strong connections to Al Qaeda in Syria. America claims to want to take Al Qaeda out, so why are we giving weapons to closet Al Qaeda members?
Al Qaeda does not exist though. -
yeah, i am cool with taking my sources over yours. i think we covered this already?kingblaze84 wrote: »If you wana take your sources over mine that's fine.
it's not clear as daylight that AMERICA gave billions to founding members of Al-Qaeda. maybe you should start by naming them beyond Bin Laden.kingblaze84 wrote: »The evidence is clear as daylight that America and Pakistan and likely other nations gave billions to future members of Al-Qaeda back in the 80s, when the then mujahadeen fought the Soviets, many of whom later became founding members of Al-Qaeda.
yeah, again, i HAVE read up on this. it's not "clear as day" that Bin Laden got help from the CIA. in fact, in attempting to claim this, you said the following:kingblaze84 wrote: »-but it doesn't change the fact Bin Laden did get help from the CIA back in the day, directly and indirectly. The evidence is clear as day in books and online sources anytime you want to read it.
"The most famous of the Afghan Arabs was Osama bin Laden,known at the time as a wealthy and pious Saudi who provided his own money and helped raise millions from other wealthy Gulf Arabs."
did you actually read your own source? because Bin Laden being a wealthy Saudi who provided HIS OWN MONEY as well as millions from Gulf Arabs is exactly in line with what i have been saying to you.
further, you then went on to this:
"An article in Der Spiegel,in 2007, entitled "Arming the Middle East", Siegesmund von Ilsemann called Bin Laden "one of the CIA's best weapons customers." [5] According to author Steve Coll, Overall, the U.S. government looked favorably on the Arab recruitment drives. ... Some of the most ardent cold warriors at [CIA headquarters at] Langley thought this program should be formally endorsed and extended. ... [T]he CIA "examined ways to increase their participation, perhaps in the form of some sort of international brigade" ... Robert Gates [then-head of the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence] recalled. ... At the [CIA's] Islamabad station [station chief] Milt Bearden felt that bin Laden himself "actually did some very good things" by putting money into Afghanistan.[6]
now, i guess i should make this clear: Steve Coll is a source i'm content to run with. and if you read HIS work on this topic --which you probably should since you're inadvertently quoting it-- you'd realize he doesn't actually agree with your article as they want you to believe. note the following from their quote from Coll:
"At the [CIA's] Islamabad station [station chief] Milt Bearden felt that bin Laden himself "actually did some very good things" by putting money into Afghanistan"
...as in, Bin Laden put money into Afghanistan that the CIA did not. let me know when you want to read a book about this or something. or ? , when you want to ACTUALLY READ MY POSTS.
and frankly, it's enough with this "me and the rest of the world" noise. learn to make your damn argument without pretending you have some phantom level of support for it. it doesn't lend credence to what you're actually saying.
Believe what you want Janklow. I have shown three different sources that show Bin Laden and future members of Al-Qaeda did receive aid from the CIA back in the 80s, along with future members of Al-Qaeda. Bin Laden did have lots of money himself true but the sources still show, including former high govt official Brezinski, who is often on MSNBC, that future members of Al Qaeda and other terror groups did receive direct and indirect funding from the crooked ass American govt. Read this again....
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=163_1325281225
In mid-1979, about the same time as the Soviet Union deployed troops
into Afghanistan, the United States began giving several hundred million
dollars a year in aid to the Afghan Mujahideen insurgents fighting the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan and the Soviet Army in Operation Cyclone. Along with native Afghan mujahideen were Muslim volunteers from other countries, popularly known as Afghan Arabs.
The most famous of the Afghan Arabs was Osama bin Laden,known at the time as a wealthy and pious Saudi who provided his own money and helped raise millions from other wealthy Gulf Arabs.
As the war neared its end, bin Laden organized the al-Qaeda organization to carry on armed jihad in other venues, primarily against the United States — the country that had helped fund the mujahideen against the Soviets.
The BBC, in an article published shortly after the 9/11 attacks,
stated that bin Laden "received security training from the CIA itself,
according to Middle Eastern analyst Hazhir Teimourian."[1]
Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=163_1325281225#9YbcAOXFczQHGKU1.99 -
And read this again.....
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=163_1325281225#9YbcAOXFczQHGKU1.99
In a 2006 InDepth piece on Osama Bin Laden, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation published that,[4]
Bin Laden apparently received training from the CIA, which was
backing the Afghan holy warriors – the mujahedeen – who were tying down
Soviet forces in Afghanistan. -
RodrigueZz wrote: »kingblaze84 wrote: »I'm shocked to say this but I actually agree with Sarah Palin. America is an Orwellian police state now and we're looking stupid around the world supporting people with strong connections to Al Qaeda in Syria. America claims to want to take Al Qaeda out, so why are we giving weapons to closet Al Qaeda members?
Al Qaeda does not exist though.
What about all those people worldwide who often pledge allegiance to Al Qaeda? Who are they really pledging allegiance to...? -
you literally have NOT shown Bin Laden did and the whole "future members of al-Qaeda" thing is either not being disputed (hence the part about you NOT READING MY POSTS) or involves you not being specific about these "future members of al-Qaeda."kingblaze84 wrote: »Believe what you want Janklow. I have shown three different sources that show Bin Laden and future members of Al-Qaeda did receive aid from the CIA back in the 80s, along with future members of Al-Qaeda.
your first source (Veterans Today) talks about the timing of the funding while making some ridiculous complaint about being "suppressed" by Google (which basically disqualifies them as a source IMO). it does not talk about Bin Laden at ALL. since no one is disputing that funding went from the US to mujahedeen, i don't understand what this article is supposed to prove if we're talking about how BIN LADEN got his funding.
your second source (NewsOne) notes that militants would later become "the Taliban, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood," which is weird because the Muslim Brotherhood LONG predates the conflicts in Afghanistan we're talking about. fine journalism there. at best it's still reliant on Cook's erroneous claim (backed by sources never named or quoted) and the fact that Brzezinski supposedly took a picture with him. of course, we're not seeing the picture.
your third source (LiveLeak) is, again, just quoting Cook and, as i already pointed out, erroneously citing Coll as if he agrees. in fact, since you're posting "read this again," why don't you read what i said about that article since you didn't read it the first time:
"in fact, in attempting to claim this, you said the following:
"The most famous of the Afghan Arabs was Osama bin Laden,known at the time as a wealthy and pious Saudi who provided his own money and helped raise millions from other wealthy Gulf Arabs."
did you actually read your own source? because Bin Laden being a wealthy Saudi who provided HIS OWN MONEY as well as millions from Gulf Arabs is exactly in line with what i have been saying to you.
further, you then went on to this:
"An article in Der Spiegel,in 2007, entitled "Arming the Middle East", Siegesmund von Ilsemann called Bin Laden "one of the CIA's best weapons customers." [5] According to author Steve Coll, Overall, the U.S. government looked favorably on the Arab recruitment drives. ... Some of the most ardent cold warriors at [CIA headquarters at] Langley thought this program should be formally endorsed and extended. ... [T]he CIA "examined ways to increase their participation, perhaps in the form of some sort of international brigade" ... Robert Gates [then-head of the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence] recalled. ... At the [CIA's] Islamabad station [station chief] Milt Bearden felt that bin Laden himself "actually did some very good things" by putting money into Afghanistan.[6]
now, i guess i should make this clear: Steve Coll is a source i'm content to run with. and if you read HIS work on this topic --which you probably should since you're inadvertently quoting it-- you'd realize he doesn't actually agree with your article as they want you to believe. note the following from their quote from Coll:
"At the [CIA's] Islamabad station [station chief] Milt Bearden felt that bin Laden himself "actually did some very good things" by putting money into Afghanistan"
...as in, Bin Laden put money into Afghanistan that the CIA did not. let me know when you want to read a book about this or something. or ? , when you want to ACTUALLY READ MY POSTS."
in fact, speaking of reading it again, how about YOU read your link again, click on the citation for that CBC claim, and read the Wikipedia article it links to. it mentions, among other things, better sources like Bergen and, again, Coll disagreeing with the argument that your single named source (Robin Cook) is advancing.
or whatever, keep posting the same thing you already did while ignoring what i am actually saying. because that's certainly working well. and it prevents you from having to read and respond to my actual posts instead of the phantom Opponent's Position that you're dreaming up. -
blakfyahking wrote: »this dumb cracka actually has somewhat of a legitimate point
the US is wrong to get involved on any level
Yeah she said some dumb ? but this was my first thought. -
after allah sorts this ? out I hope he makes a trip to alaska
-
Janklow, even if you want to ignore the source that says Bin Laden received training from the CIA, you're going to ignore the many sources that say the CIA funded future members of Al Qaeda? LOL really?
-
i am not "ignoring the source." i am saying the source is wrong. i am FURTHER saying that my sources don't agree with your source and i'd rather agree with them. was there something about this you didn't understand --especially since i thought this point was made many posts ago-- or are you just phrasing it that way because you're going out of your way to be difficult?kingblaze84 wrote: »Janklow, even if you want to ignore the source that says Bin Laden received training from the CIA-
i guess i can just quote myself again:kingblaze84 wrote: »--you're going to ignore the many sources that say the CIA funded future members of Al Qaeda? LOL really?
"the whole "future members of al-Qaeda" thing is either not being disputed (hence the part about you NOT READING MY POSTS) or involves you not being specific about these "future members of al-Qaeda.""
this was exactly ONE post ago, so, you know, if you read my posts, you might remember that. as if i needed any further proof you won't read my posts but will demand i respond to yours.
-
i am not "ignoring the source." i am saying the source is wrong. i am FURTHER saying that my sources don't agree with your source and i'd rather agree with them. was there something about this you didn't understand --especially since i thought this point was made many posts ago-- or are you just phrasing it that way because you're going out of your way to be difficult?kingblaze84 wrote: »Janklow, even if you want to ignore the source that says Bin Laden received training from the CIA-
i guess i can just quote myself again:kingblaze84 wrote: »--you're going to ignore the many sources that say the CIA funded future members of Al Qaeda? LOL really?
"the whole "future members of al-Qaeda" thing is either not being disputed (hence the part about you NOT READING MY POSTS) or involves you not being specific about these "future members of al-Qaeda.""
this was exactly ONE post ago, so, you know, if you read my posts, you might remember that. as if i needed any further proof you won't read my posts but will demand i respond to yours.
LOL that's fine.... -
kingblaze84 wrote: »RodrigueZz wrote: »kingblaze84 wrote: »I'm shocked to say this but I actually agree with Sarah Palin. America is an Orwellian police state now and we're looking stupid around the world supporting people with strong connections to Al Qaeda in Syria. America claims to want to take Al Qaeda out, so why are we giving weapons to closet Al Qaeda members?
Al Qaeda does not exist though.
What about all those people worldwide who often pledge allegiance to Al Qaeda? Who are they really pledging allegiance to...?
I have never heard of such a group of people.
you have a link?
If my understanding is correct, al qaeda means database. The word is just a blanket term used to refer to anyone that opposes the united states' imperialism. -
that's code for "still not reading janklow's posts," right? now all it's missing is the same redundant remainder of the post.kingblaze84 wrote: »LOL that's fine....
my fault, i keep forgetting you don't actually want to debate this topic like a real poster. i guess i need to write this down so i remember it in the future. -
that's code for "still not reading janklow's posts," right? now all it's missing is the same redundant remainder of the post.kingblaze84 wrote: »LOL that's fine....
my fault, i keep forgetting you don't actually want to debate this topic like a real poster. i guess i need to write this down so i remember it in the future.
We're going in circles now, what are you really trying to debate? You don't believe Bin Laden received aid from the CIA and America during the 80s, despite many sources online saying so? Do you believe America funded future members of Al Qaeda and other terror groups back then as well? I know what I believe but believe what you wish.
-
blakfyahking wrote: »this dumb cracka actually has somewhat of a legitimate point
the US is wrong to get involved on any level
But thats what we do, we get involed.
Been doing since the USA came to be.
Remember that puppet movie from years ago. ? we THE WORLD POLICE. -
dude, i specifically commented on each of your sources and why in several ways your sources aren't even supporting your claim(s).kingblaze84 wrote: »You don't believe Bin Laden received aid from the CIA and America during the 80s, despite many sources online saying so?
i have literally answered that question MULTIPLE times in this thread. go ahead and read the posts and you'll see that.kingblaze84 wrote: »Do you believe America funded future members of Al Qaeda and other terror groups back then as well? I know what I believe but believe what you wish.
-
Ok, So why I gotta' go to a hip-hop forum to get the real news though? This is a well said and argued debate on both sides. Props to you blaze, janklow and dissa. Real Talk. What the country needs is intelligent and real people like this. Carry the ? on.
-
Groups of rebels are murdering women and children for no reason...Syria may be a place we need to go but then again that's no different than how a civil war begins.
-
evoljeanyes wrote: »Groups of rebels are murdering women and children for no reason...Syria may be a place we need to go but then again that's no different than how a civil war begins.
Why should Syria be a place we need to go? Why get involved in yet another conflict in the Middle East, when America has an approval rating in the Middle East around the 30% range, if not lower?
This discussion has been closed.