Bin Lid is no more...

[thatbloke]

I posted the source in either this thread or the other bin laden thread, its hard to keep track.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1550366.stm

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/preplanned.html

“if the military action went ahead, it would take place before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest.”


http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/nov2001/afgh-n20.shtml

Iraq fell quickly

, surely you mean Afghanistan?

It fell quickly because of the months and months of planning that took place , before 9/11.

Mr Naik was told that if the military action went ahead it would take place before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest.

He said that he was in no doubt that after the World Trade Center bombings this pre-existing US plan had been built upon and would be implemented within two or three weeks.

And he said it was doubtful that Washington would drop its plan even if Bin Laden were to be surrendered immediately by the Taleban.

They were not after Bin Laden , they were after control of Afghanistan.

 

[ellal]

But then you don't have a balanced view of things do you!... Even when the evidence is put right in front of your nose...

Nope, you're a lunatic.

Ah yes, nothing further to add as usual..

Maybe you'd like to comment on this?

Linky Linky

The big news this morning was that bin Laden was killed while hiding behind a female "human shield", believed to be his wife, and while firing an AK-47 at the attacking US Special Forces and refusing to surrender - that was all via John Brennan, the administration's anti-terror chief, who said that a woman “presumed to be bin Laden’s wife” was “positioned in a way that indicated that she was being used as a human shield, whether bin Laden or his son put her there, or she put herself there.”

However, now that position has been "clarified" - or, to be less charitable, 100 per cent reversed. According to the latest reports from White House officials, "Osama bin Laden 'was not armed and did not use wife as human shield'". Nor was he armed; and his wife, who was reported to have been killed, is alive, albeit injured.

"A different guy's wife was killed", said the website Politico, quoting an unnamed official who had briefed US television media, with the official adding that Bin Laden's wife was "injured not killed", having been shot in the calf.

The discrepancy between earlier accounts and the new version of events was put down to "confusion" by the White House, who said that the "fact pattern" on the assault was only now becoming clear as more of the participants were interviewed.

Who's the looney now?...

and a gullible one too (as ever) ...

 

[ellal]

..

 

[EngStudent]

Apart from the BBC, your sources are hardly official, or reliable. Even the BBC source sounds very far-fetched. 17,000 Russian troops on standby?

Prior to the invasion of Afghanistan, the US made 6 demands.

1. Deliver to the U.S. all of the leaders of Al-Qaeda
2. Release all foreign nationals that have been "unjustly imprisoned"
3. Protect foreign journalists, diplomats, and aid workers
4. Close immediately every terrorist training camp
5. Hand over every terrorist and their supporters to appropriate authorities
6. Give the United States full access to terrorist training camps for inspection

I don't see anything about a pipeline?

Your argument so far has centred on civilian casualties. According to the UN, 76% of civilian casualties in 2009 were as a result of Taleban actions. Human rights watch says that in 2006, "at least 669 Afghan civilians were killed in at least 350 armed attacks, most of which appear to have been intentionally launched at non-combatants." 16 IED's were planted in girls' schools by the Taleban. Colonel Richard Kemp, a former commander of British forces over there, states that Taleban snipers routinely and deliberately position themselves in houses full of women and children.

There will always be speculation about why we went into Afghanistan, but until it's proven, it's just speculation. Nothing more, nothing less. I've given you the facts re: civilian casualties caused by both sides.

I made reference to Iraq simply to give a comparison of the strength of the two armies.

 

[thatbloke]

may i see your source please?

 

[thatbloke]

You can read about the TAP here,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline
Its no secret.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_Oil_Pipeline

reading through the facebook group for the people who worked in the pipeline will show you how before the invasion the workers were constantly under threat from the Taliban.

 

[EngStudent]

may i see your source please?

Gladly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#Targeted_killings (scroll down a bit)

Your sources claim 'critics' say the pipeline was a reason for invading Afghanistan. No evidence whatsoever.

It should be noted at this point that Wikipedia shouldn't be relied upon as a reliable source, but I'm too lazy/busy to find official stuff.

 

[LastMagicBean]

But then you don't have a balanced view of things do you!... Even when the evidence is put right in front of your nose...

Nope, you're a lunatic.

Ah yes, nothing further to add as usual..
Who's the looney now?...
and a gullible one too (as ever) ...

Nothing further to add????????? I think you'll find that even though this is your thread I've made more of a sensible contribution than you.

Gullible?????? Would this be in the context of being accused of reading/watching news reports that you don't agree with, only to be faced with your continual posting of links to.......yep you guessed it.......More news reports. (the ones you agree with that is.) ????????????

Why would I want to comment on your latest link???
When did I ever mention anything about holding his wife as a human shield. I couldn't give a monkeys either way.

Your a very humourous character in your own way ellal.
Cool as a Cucumber.....Head like a Melon.

 

[ellal]

Well there we have it...

Further b*llocks from Last tragic bean instead of addressing the point yet again

Sad that 'tragic' can't bear to directly reply to a post purely because of an inability to cope with facts that are uncomfortable..

And saying that you 'couldn't give a monkeys either way' about the events, rather sums things up!

 

[LastMagicBean]

Further b*llocks from Last tragic bean

I see what you did there with the Magic and Tragic Very good. How long did that take you???

A genius Melon in the making......You couldn't make it up.

 

[ellal]

Keep digging tragic...

 

[spacecat]

Ellal

The problem you are facing is that you are trying to have a rational conversation with people who are as entrenched in their viewpoints as the terrorists they hate so much.

No matter what factual evidence you point out, no matter points you raise you will never get through because like all fundamentalist/fanatics they cannot countenance that they may have got it wrong in any shape or form rather like all people of this type of mindset. Such as right wing christians, extremist muslims, white supremacists,BNP
Etc

That is why we will continue with this tit for tat atrocities into the everlasting future

 

[Norcon]

that bloke wrote

reading through the facebook group for the people who worked in the pipeline will show you how before the invasion the workers were constantly under threat from the Taliban.

Would you rather these pipelines were bombed and people have their oil/gas supplies shut off?

What does it matter what the afghan invasion was started over as long as the oil keeps flowing eh?

Bin ladens gone. Good riddance.

If spacecats gas or oil was shut off he would be the first one on the streets protesting against the government I suspect.

 

[spacecat]

[quote="Norcon";p="1976808]
What does it matter what the afghan invasion was started over as long as the oil keeps flowing eh?

.[/quote]

1st honest comment you have made

 

[thatbloke]

It matters because the cost of this oil is over 100000 men women and children's lives.