Post #21,334
12/13/01 11:44:36 AM
12/13/01 11:54:21 AM
|
Transcript here.
[link|http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2001/US/12/13/transcript/binladentape.pdf|http://i.cnn.net/cn...adentape.pdf]
On first read, it seems to me that bin Laden knew about the attack before it happened, but I didn't see anything that lead me to believe he "masterminded" it.
At one point, for example, bin Laden says:
"then he said: Those who were trained to fly didn't know the others. One group did not know the other group."
Who the fsck is "he"? That sounds like bin Laden had been briefed on the plan, not like he came up with the plan.
Edited by mmoffitt
Dec. 13, 2001, 11:49:04 AM EST
Edited by mmoffitt
Dec. 13, 2001, 11:54:21 AM EST
|
Post #21,347
12/13/01 12:38:03 PM
|
On masterminding...
UBL: The brothers, who conducted the operation, all they knew was that they have a martyrdom operation and we asked each of them to go to America but they didn't know anything about the operation, not even one letter. But they were trained and we did not reveal the operation to them until they are there and just before they boarded the planes. The "we" looks pretty explicit to me... Regards,
-scott anderson
|
Post #21,348
12/13/01 12:49:33 PM
|
Inconclusive, I'd say.
Suppose OBL gave them money. They come up with this plan. They tell Bin Laden of it. He loves it, embraces it as his own (he is a major part of the network clearly, so the "we"'s make sense in that context). He's obviously been told of non-trivial elements of the plan [see post above]. I can see where your quote on its own implies he orchestrated the plan. But, when coupled with the one I posted, it becomes less clear.
My point is simply that we've all been told he was the "mastermind" behind this plan. If he isn't (and even this alleged "smoking gun" tape leaves open the possibility that he wasn't), then imo we ought to know who was. For me, the events of 9/11 are a criminal act and should be investigated as such. This tape, contrary to what was promised, leaves as much unanswered as it answers. And this is, purportedly, the best evidence against Bin Laden personally. To me, all it shows is that he was aware of the plan, made some predictions about its efficacy and that he enjoyed seeing it executed. In my view, it also suggests that he was not the primary orchestrator of it.
|
Post #21,353
12/13/01 1:10:44 PM
12/13/01 1:11:13 PM
|
Who masterminded it?
Could it be the "AntiChrist" that the book of Revelations and Nostradamus predict will come out of the shadows?
Is there someone planning these attacks and using Osama and others as a patsy? Sort of using their men and resources and then pinning the blame on them while they hide in the shadows?
Nostradamus called him the man in the blue turbin or Albus or Malbus?
"Oy! Seats taken mate!" - "Brilliant!" on BBC America
Edited by nking
Dec. 13, 2001, 01:11:13 PM EST
|
Post #21,357
12/13/01 1:28:18 PM
|
Look, we just bombed hell out of a country...
because that country (while not involved directly in an assault upon us) was harboring "THE GUY" who was responsible for planning the attack.
It would be nice to know that we targetted the right guy, and if we didn't, who it was.
|
Post #21,359
12/13/01 1:36:52 PM
|
We locked up Gotti on less
His guys told him about the crimes and he enjoyed the heck out of watching them. He just led the crew not a real mastermind.
thanx,
bill
tshirt front "born to die before I get old"
thshirt back "fscked another one didnja?"
|
Post #21,374
12/13/01 4:04:31 PM
12/13/01 4:09:59 PM
|
Don't confuse the facts.
The man - Osama yomama bahama... is irrelevant. The reason we bombed the shit out of Afghanistan is because their "ex"- "government" was allowing Osama AND HIS BOYS, THE AL-QAIDA TERRORISTS to set up shop there. This is, was, will be a war on TERRORISM and TERRORISTS - not Osama yomama bahama pajama whateverthefuckhisnameis... We have stated from the first weeks the allegations against the Al Qaida network... There were strong ties with this one network (which happens to be headed by bahama pajama mama) and that is why we went to the stan... Do you doubt that Pajama's group was responsible for the bombings on Sept. 11 or the embassy bombings in Africa or the Kohl?
Keep to the facts and you won't get confused... Or try to confuse us...
Just a few thoughts,
Screamer
"I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..."
P. Townshend
"Nietzsche has an S in it"
Celina Jones
Edited by screamer
Dec. 13, 2001, 04:09:59 PM EST
|
Post #21,383
12/13/01 5:19:53 PM
|
Re: Don't confuse the facts.
How do you define terrorists and terrorism?
Just wondering, have you ever try to view it from the perspective of the innocent Afghanis that got their families/relatives/friends kill in the process?
Do they not view the pilots and the tactics employed as terrorists and terrorism?
It is NOT confusing if you choose not to view the other parties' POV(s). It's always very clear cut when only a POV is being considered.
|
Post #21,394
12/13/01 6:04:02 PM
|
That's a comparable Q to one posed on NPR radio recently,
~~ If it is 'justified' that the US maintains nuclear weapons, how is it then impermissible for other less-wealthy countries to possess chemical and biological weapons of defense? [or at least parity, one might reword - 'offense/defense' are an inseparable unity.] BTW - the resident Expert replied, .. .. that's an excellent question. I can't recall that he 'answered' it..
Ditto of course re any country with nukes VS any without, however aspiring. (Naturally, life being unfair - we may leave that word out of any tortured equation involving homo-saps and their efforts to deal with each other's God-fantasies, and stay rich too.)
A.
|
Post #21,448
12/14/01 12:15:28 AM
|
anyway we want to how do you define it :)
tshirt front "born to die before I get old"
thshirt back "fscked another one didnja?"
|
Post #21,510
12/14/01 1:52:07 PM
|
In my best Jeff Foxworthy voice...
If you strap a bomb to yourself and walk into a crowded bus station... you may be a terrorist.
If you fly a commercial jet into a building killing thousands of civilians... you may be a terrorist.
If you ram a boat filled with explosives into another boat... you may be a terrorist.
If you drive a truck filled with explosives into an embassy... you may be a terrorist.
In other words, I find your first question laughable.The folks we are going after in Afghanistan are definately terrorists or members of terrorists "enablers". I really hope that is not what you meant by your questioning. If you don't understand that these folks are terrorists (by any definition) then, I'm affraid I can't help you. Oh, and by the way, we at least were civil enough to declare two to four weeks prior to that we would be dropping bombs as a sort of heads up to their civilians. The Al Quada didn't show us the same courtesy with the Trade Center or the Pentagon...
If you mean is a relativistic way, how do I differentiate the suffering of the Afghan civilians with the people of New York? I don't. The suffering is just as great. How can I then justify feeling that this is a just cause with the people suffering in Afghanistan? Tough question, but one I can answer. Their suffering was great before we came in there. These people (the Taliban and terrorists) would have done something sooner or later to a "less pacifistic" culture that may have not have used "smart" weapons that actually do minimize civilian casualties. In the greater scheme of things, I truly believe that we (as the remaining superpower) are actually helping the Afghan people (as a whole) by this action - at least half of their population of the XX chromosome. It is not as if this action is not in any way justified... We were provoked. So, in a nutshell, the brutality of this war, when done, may provide a greater good for most of the Afghan people as well as rid the world of people the world should be rid of. In essence, there is a potential for a greater good. I am cynical, but humanistic and somewhat of an optimist. I don't believe other than our flagrant materialist tendencies, the US is all that bad.
I work with a great deal of foreigners (at a major international university), including Afghani's and Pakistani's and am not one who is into villifying people because they fall under any label. The statements that I made above are in large part parroting of what my Afghani friends have said. I still stand by the statement that this is a "just" war (Using the Christian concept of a just war stated in the 60's) on the whole.
Just a few thoughts,
Screamer
"I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..."
P. Townshend
"Nietzsche has an S in it"
Celina Jones
|
Post #21,761
12/17/01 6:52:41 PM
|
One thing I don't feel good about.
For as long as I can remember, I have despised bullies. The trouble is, the United States is the biggest bully in the world. Whatever the justification is for our current so-called "war", one message that is abundantly clear to everyone is: "Don't jack with us. You have to accept any amount of unjust treatment that we care to dish out because we are the baddest mother-fsckers in the valley."
To be sure, for many decades we have possessed the world's most efficient killing machine. That power, it seems, grants us the right to be as unjust as we care to be without ever having to answer for it or explain it. This is not a popular notion in America today - how many times have you heard, "I don't care why they don't like us! They're going to pay!" or even that it's "un-patriotic to question the policies that brought so many to think so little of us"?
Several hundred thousand, that's HUNDRED THOUSAND, children die in Iraq and yet we are not terrorists. We support Israel without question while it commits terror equal to that experienced here, but we do not support terrorism. In Central America, we fund and arm death squads, yet we maintain complete innocense when it comes to terrorism. I could go on, but why should I? We don't have to answer to anyone for that because if any one complains, we will bomb them a thousand times until they are left shell-shocked and their property is in complete ruin.
For these reasons, I have a really hard time feeling "good" about our victories.
bcnu,
Mikem
-I'd have a sig, but we Americans "have to watch what they [we] say now".
|
Post #21,765
12/17/01 7:17:55 PM
|
Introspection is for the loosers..
Until we somehow become less full of ourselves and our sanctimonious belief in our inherent and unique Righteousness. Will the last-straw come internally or from external forces?
Does it matter? It will come. (But maybe not, in time.) Still, watching the progression of this play - IS ugly. A tragedy without any of the wisdom of a Shakespeare, so as at least to make crystal clear.. some repetitive lesson we never get.
Imagine an adult 'imagining'! ...a War Against Evil\ufffd - and, that piece of doggerel being greeted with, applause! as by, the MPython "audience of knitting ladies".
(Crass mercantilism may have finally succeeded in delivering the death blow to Language itself - in our time?)
A.
|
Post #21,817
12/18/01 9:04:28 AM
|
huh? let saddass sell some of his palaces and feed the
fscking kids. Sumbich has money out the ass and claims we are starving his kids? What embargo? Jordan has a direct pipeline to bahgdad with everything Iraq wants. Dont even start on Israel. In Central America guilty as charged. Dont let the rhetoric affect yer brain.
thanx,
bill
My Dreams arn't as empty as my concience seems to ne
|
Post #21,388
12/13/01 5:45:07 PM
|
I thought this was a crackdown on all terrorists?
Isn't Osama just one of a dozen more guys like him who run terrorist groups? Or is there more than a dozen?
Are we attacking just one arm of the beast and it has many more?
"Oy! Seats taken mate!" - "Brilliant!" on BBC America
|
Post #21,396
12/13/01 6:05:32 PM
|
There are exactly 17.52
|
Post #21,760
12/17/01 6:38:34 PM
|
Wrong. The answer is 42.
|
Post #21,474
12/14/01 9:58:46 AM
|
The point that you should consider
Is that while he may not be the one from whom the plan sprang, the tape makes it appearant that he played a large part in supporting the actions. This tape clears up the main hole in our case against bin Ladin: did he know about the attack beforehand, and did he play a part in it's preparation. Our government has made it clear that we plan on taking out all major players in this attack (dead or alive), and Osama is definately high on that list.
~~~)-Steven----
"I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.
He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country..."
General George S. Patton
|
Post #21,366
12/13/01 2:11:53 PM
|
Masterminds...
I source I have here at work says that the guy who was supposed to go on trial 9/12 (for the 1993 bombing) originally proposed flying planes into the World Trade Center.
I wonder if he would qualify as a "mastermind".
|
