[J m HofMarN]

You know that shit always did puzzle me. What the hell is a marine standing in an airport going to do?

"Oh, I was going to fly a plane into a building and kill myself for my cause today but, ya know, that marine looks mighty intimidating!"

Bullshit! These guys are just there to intimidate the public and send the statement that the government is protecting us from something when in fact they're making us less safe by practically daring Bin Laden to commit further acts of terrorism.

[civilian_number_two]

Sorry to come in so late.

Yes Hoff is right about the airport security. Airplanes are unsafe because the airlines (and airports) were built on an unsafe model. It was proposed long ago that airplanes needed two simple changes:

1. A pilot area that could NOT be accessed from anywhere else inside the plane.
2. A baggage compartment where the hull was weaker than the rest of the plane, so that any explosion would cause the baggage compartment (and its contents) to be lost but the plane would remain intact.

Nobody wanted to do this, since it would cost money at a time when airports were employing anyone willing to take a dollar above minumum wage.

Marines hanging around forcing old men to tak off their shoes without so much as the courtesy of a chair to sit on don't make airlines safe, but they're the reason I won't ever consider a flight to Mexico that stops in the US. Not that I'm an old man, but I'm not paying hundreds of dollars to have some asshole tell me I need to take off my shoes. I won't want to get on a plane in the US unless I have to.

-----------------

Anyway, I fear Bush more than Osama. Here is why.

Bush: One day after 9/11, with zero intelligence, Bush declared that the crime had been instigated by Osama bin Laden. Similar to Clinton's claim that OBL had committed the Oklahoma bombings, this claim was neither refuted nor investigated. Dissimilar from Clinton's claim, no further evidence ever came to light, so the claim = true just because no-one has ever refuted it.

Bush has declared two wars based on this claim, and is working up to a third. "Democratic elections" for Iraqis is a farce, as though a democratically elected leader can't tyrannize civilians as much as someone born to power or who seized power in a coup. PS: a military act that ousts the government in power and then plants another government, by any means, even faux-democratically, is a coup.

Bush made the famous declaration "If you're not with us, you're against us," and that led to the hysterical renaming of deep-fried potatoes all over that great nation. Bush's statement was undemocratic and terrifying; even things like the great blackout on the East Coast became subjects of national namecalling, with "Blame Canada" all over the news. It started to become common to hear journalists talking about how all of the terrorists in the US were entering through Canada, unveiled threats arose about zero tolerance and life imprisonment for Canadian pot smugglers (lol; the majority of US imported pot comes in through Mexico), insults to Canada and of course France started appearing in primetime television shows. Of course, who's in Afghanistan now? Cleaning up and keeping the peace? UN security forces, utterly shy of US support. Soldiers including Canadians, including a couple of friends of mine.

Bush lied about an act of terrorism, started a war, and now friends of mine are on their way to Afghanistan. I know, they made a decision to join the army, but still.


Osama: Was not responsible for 9/11, is long dead and therefore easy to present as the face of terror (like the mythoical Goldstein, he is a face without a voice), and will never put anyone I know in harm's way. The culprits on the planes that hit the WTC were Saudi, not Afghani, and they entered the US from Egypt, not Canada. Osama bin Laden may have been responsible for the embassy bombings in West Africa, but no-one has ever genuinely linked him to 9/11. NO: I don't accept this recent videotape, wherein he finally claims responsibility more than three years after the fact. That strikes me as bullshit. What about you guys?

This post has been edited by civilian_number_two: 05 January 2005 - 12:51 PM

[Chefelf]

While I don't like to buy into conspiracy theories, one thing strikes me as odd.

Hours after 9/11, when the first reports that Osama was responsible for it, Osama supposedly went public and denied it. That seems strange. If he had any involvement I find it unlikely that he would deny it. It goes against his past actions and his philosophy. I would think he wouldu take great pride in admitting he was behind it. Instead he seemed to say, in essence, "I didn't do it, but I am glad someone did."

I don't know who did it. It doesn't really seem to matter at this point.

[Jordan]

LIke I told you civillian, the war was an excuse to open up a military base to counter any threat from China. IT's not to close to cause a stir, but it's close enough for tactical advantage.

Iraq was small and weak and therefore easy to dispose. The US has a past beef with them too, so it made it all the much easier to attack.

The troops will never leave~ It's a new base of operations. That is what the war was about. NOt oil. In order to pay for this campagin and keep the troops there, it will require a shit load of oil to break even. And it's not like the US will just start stealing all of it. That will cause flak from everyone.

That is my personal theory, compiled together from numerous sources.

This post has been edited by Jordan: 05 January 2005 - 01:40 PM

[J m HofMarN]

I remember suggestions started flying that it was Saddam Hussein. This struck me immediately as being completely absurd. While Osama's boys operate on the principal of dying for their beliefs and jyhad and glory et al, Saddam's folks only work for him so they won't be killed. Therefore he'd have looked a bit silly saying "If you don't kill yourselves by flying planes into buildings than I will kill you." I'm rather curious as to why more research ahs not been done into the lives of the 9/11 pilots.

Also, for the people who fear Bin Laden, I was wondering if you could maybe provide a logical argument for why aside from "He's a terrorist" I mean do you go to the supermarket and look behind the boxes of frozen TV dinners to see if theres a terrorist with a gun there? Do you work in the Pentagon and that's why you're worried about him? Because otherwise I really can't understand.

The people who are afraid of Bush have put forth numerous good reasons, for instance his illegal detention and kidnapping of people in the US and even American citizens, his ideology that people are either with him or with the terrorists, and his willingness to spy on people and violate their rights. I just don't see the reason to fear Bin Laden.

This post has been edited by J m HofMarN: 05 January 2005 - 01:46 PM

[Slade]

I've been feeling the Goldstein vibe too, Civ. But I won't participate in a Two Minute Hate, and thankfully, neither does most of the US population. Of course, that doesn't mean the government needs to respect that in the slightest...

[not this crude matter]

Sorry to come in so late.

Yes Hoff is right about the airport security.  Airplanes are unsafe because the airlines (and airports) were built on an unsafe model.  It was proposed long ago that airplanes needed two simple changes:

1. A pilot area that could NOT be accessed from anywhere else inside the plane.
2. A baggage compartment where the hull was weaker than the rest of the plane, so that any explosion would cause the baggage compartment (and its contents) to be lost but the plane would remain intact.

Nobody wanted to do this, since it would cost money at a time when airports were employing anyone willing to take a dollar above minumum wage.

Marines hanging around forcing old men to tak off their shoes without so much as the courtesy of a chair to sit on don't make airlines safe, but they're the reason I won't ever consider a flight to Mexico that stops in the US.  Not that I'm an old man, but I'm not paying hundreds of dollars to have some asshole tell me I need to take off my shoes.  I won't want to get on a plane in the US unless I have to.

-----------------

Anyway, I fear Bush more than Osama. Here is why.

Bush: One day after 9/11, with zero intelligence, Bush declared that the crime had been instigated by Osama bin Laden.  Similar to Clinton's claim that OBL had committed the Oklahoma bombings, this claim was neither refuted nor investigated.  Dissimilar from Clinton's claim, no further evidence ever came to light, so the claim = true just because no-one has ever refuted it.

Bush has declared two wars based on this claim, and is working up to a third.  "Democratic elections" for Iraqis is a farce, as though a democratically elected leader can't tyrannize civilians as much as someone born to power or who seized power in a coup.  PS: a military act that ousts the government in power and then plants another government, by any means, even faux-democratically, is a coup.

Bush made the famous declaration "If you're not with us, you're against us," and that led to the hysterical renaming of deep-fried potatoes all over that great nation.  Bush's statement was undemocratic and terrifying; even things like the great blackout on the East Coast became subjects of national namecalling, with "Blame Canada" all over the news.  It started to become common to hear journalists talking about how all of the terrorists in the US were entering through Canada, unveiled threats arose about zero tolerance and life imprisonment for Canadian pot smugglers (lol; the majority of US imported pot comes in through Mexico), insults to Canada and of course France started appearing in primetime television shows.  Of course, who's in Afghanistan now?  Cleaning up and keeping the peace?  UN security forces, utterly shy of US support.  Soldiers including Canadians, including a couple of friends of mine.

Bush lied about an act of terrorism, started a war, and now friends of mine are on their way to Afghanistan.  I know, they made a decision to join the army, but still.
Osama:  Was not responsible for 9/11, is long dead and therefore easy to present as the face of terror (like the mythoical Goldstein, he is a face without a voice), and will never put anyone I know in harm's way.  The culprits on the planes that hit the WTC were Saudi, not Afghani, and they entered the US from Egypt, not Canada.  Osama bin Laden may have been responsible for the embassy bombings in West Africa, but no-one has ever genuinely linked him to 9/11.  NO: I don't accept this recent videotape, wherein he finally claims responsibility more than three years after the fact.  That strikes me as bullshit.  What about you guys?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Im pretty sure Osama was responsible for 9/11. He probabley got scared shitless after he saw all the damage it had done and he denied it a little bit. I remember seeing him in a video talking with others about how to plan and carry out the attack. He goes on tto say something like he predeicts 6 stories will burn. Obviously he predicted way wrong. BTW, how do you kow he is dead. He made a recent video appearance and is now trying to convince the Iraqi people not to vote in their elections ( yeah sounds like a guy trying to do the right thing for the Iraqi people ) So if I may ask, what the F$@* are you talking about?

This post has been edited by not this crude matter: 05 January 2005 - 06:50 PM

[Jordan]

It doesn't matter who is responsible any more. They will never catch the guy and if they do, big deal, the middle east is littered with terrorism organizations, namely Saudi Arabi- I saw some creepy footage years ago on the camps they have there. My pinko comy pal showed me the footage on a tape he got from his creepy underground organization. He used it to show me that Saudi, the USA's friend, is worse than Iraq. (we had a debate about the first gulf war)

[Slade]

But see, Saudi Arabia didn't stop giving us oil in 2001.

And Civ and I are saying that its a possibilty all of these terrorist videos are just bullshit propaganda created to frighten the masses into being complacent toward the imperialism of the government. "Oh nos! That mean guy with a beard who I can't understand and who lives thousands of miles away and who also hates me because I have freedom is saying on a video that he's going to do something! The country had better wage war on an entirely unrelated country!" et. al.

[J m HofMarN]

Not this crude matter- Do you absolutely have to quote someone's entire post? Why not just address your reply to them or take points from it that you prefer to debate upon? You should write as if you're speaking, and if you made a speech as long as Civilians (no insult to Civilian, it was a fine post and all just don't need to see it twice) I wouldnt have time to repeat the entire thing and then reply. I'd just say "When you said such and such I think you were wrong and here's why.

Everyone else- Is noone going to tell me a logical reason to fear Bin Laden?

[SimeSublime]

I did for a bit. I was working at the Rugby World cup a bit over a year ago. As that was a world event, I was a little worried about it being a target for terrorism. But apart from that, it would just be stupid to attack here, from a terrorist point of veiw.

[Dr Lecter]

Not this crude matter- Do you absolutely have to quote someone's entire post? Why not just address your reply to them or take points from it that you prefer to debate upon? You should write as if you're speaking, and if you made a speech as long as Civilians (no insult to Civilian, it was a fine post and all just don't need to see it twice) I wouldnt have time to repeat the entire thing and then reply. I'd just say "When you said such and such I think you were wrong and here's why.

Everyone else- Is noone going to tell me a logical reason to fear Bin Laden?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

well since we can safely assume he was most likely not involved in 9/11 due to no evidence whatsoever pointing towards any muslims or him

he is wanted for other bombings on america emmissaries aboard i dont know if hes pulled any off in america before so i'll gladly retract that if he has

to put it quite bluntly hes the obvious person that would pull this off and it seems to be just the guy they point the finger at. that and hes already wanted for enough to get him the death penality

but his terrorism that we know hes responisble for is alot smaller scale than that of bush since hes got billion apon billions to spend on killing people that isnt even his own money whereas osama has to use his own wallet to pay

[J m HofMarN]

Dr. Lecter, you might consider reading my post as well there's a hidden message in it. Anyhow I wasn't asking for reasons why Bin Laden caused the WTC attacks or should be suspected, I asked why people would be afraid of him. So far Sime is the only one who's actually had a logical answer to it.

[Dr Lecter]

ps the resaon why i quoted your entire post is because the first thing you said in it was that people shouldnt do that i thought it would be funny

[civilian_number_two]

Crude Matter: If Osama bin Laden is alive, AND if Osama bin Laden masterminded the WTC attacks, THEM Osama bin Laden is alive and well and living in Saudi Arabia, the origin of the majority of the martyrs. NOT in Afghanistan, and certainly NOT in Iraq.

IF Osama bin Laden masterminded the attacks on the WTC, THEN George Bush started two bullshit wars with zero genuine provocation, all the while maintaining strong ties with the country that had harboured the man who had planned the attack.

Bush is ten times scarier than Osama, even if Osama is alive. Since I'm sure Osama is dead (it's easier to blame him that way). then for sure I fear Bush more. More Americans are killing in Osama's name right now than Osama's people ever did.