Actually it was just a simple question. Don't get your panties all up in a bunch about it so to speak. Seriously, do you deny that you didn't substaniate your claim?

Do you deny that it had an anti-American tone or could be construed that way?

Do you deny that it was disinformation?

You mean you are going to attack a couple of strawmen? Go ahead, waste your time.

BINGO!!!

Note that none of your sources say that, just you.

The Afghan Moojies (Mujahadeen) are not Taliban, they hate the Taliban. They fought them to the death. Who do you think ousted the Taliban and kicked them on their keesters?

Methinks you might have a bad case of Islamophobia going on there Helene, just because someone is a Muslim who resisted the USSR that does not necessarily mean they are Taliban terrorists. Although since you are from Europe, you may think that anyone who resists socialism/communism is some kind of radical terrorist. People in Europe have lived under the USA security umbrella for way too long.

mantra goes "All hail the Welfare state", blah blah. Hold up a bannar of some soon to be dead persons face and chant "death to America"

What makes you think I haven't heard that bullshit you are spewing 1000 times before? I've read several books dedicated to the subject. None of them substantiate your blather.



Note that none of your sources say these 35,000 dudes (where you got that number you refuse to say) became the Taliban. Sure the Taliban hired some mercenaries later, and a few were probably moojies, but you still don't back up your claim that Carter created the Taliban.



hey don't get sassy with me if you can't back up your longheld belief that smacks into a brick wall the first time someone challenges it. It's not my fault if you can't substantiate your claims.


You still dodge the question.

What "secret prison" did Bush deny existed?

Why do you refuse to answer the question.

__________________
... ..................
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I do not see what my panties have to do with it.

Anything can be construed in any way, depending on the paranoia of the perceiver.

Yes. It wasn't perhaps the most nuanced and detailed information, but then, it wasn't presented as such.

There are a lot of fractions in Afghanistan. The Taliban is just one of them. The Mujahadeen is not one group, that is against the Taliban, the Mujahadeen consisted of many different groups, that splintered after the fall of the Societ Union.

"The popularity the Taliban's success brought them led the American and Pakistani intelligence services, allied in the region, to see the Taliban as the force for pacification they had been seeking."
http://www.worldpress.org/1018afghanistan.htm

I didn't say that all the muslims in Afghanistan became the Taliban. I said that the Taliban came from the forces trained by the CIA.

Which books did you read? Please show us some of your knowledge. So far, you've only managed to come across as a petulant child whining: "OH no! She said something bad about the US! Make her STOP"

I didn't claim that Carter "created" the Taliban. Carter wasn't around by that time. Reagan did most of the funding. And the Taliban was hailed as welcome pacification of the region when they did show up, in 1995.

The secret CIA prisons in Europe.

Helene

__________________
Don't make me seem like the unhealthy crazy one, when you're the one who wouldn't tell me what to do!

I remember reading in Life Magazine, back at the time it was happening, that the British were urging the US to direct their Afghan aid to Ahmed Shah Masood, but that the Reagan officials were more comfortable with Gulbuddin Hekmatyr, because of his deeply held religious beliefs.
Massood became the leader of the Northern Alliance and was assasinated by Al Quaeda just before 9/11. Hekmatyr's group became part of the Taleban.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

Clinton said he had no legal way to pick up and arrest Bin Laden at that time. He wishes in hindsite that he could have done so. It's all fine to be a Monday morning quarterback now, but at that time Clinton at least had Bin Laden in his sites, unlike Bush in August 2001, who ignored the August 6th memo and went on vacation for the month. Clinton barely took any vacations and was a workaholic. Clinton was also very busy dodging all the sex investigations your lovely Republicans were harrassing him with. Investigations that were petty and had nothing to do with running the country. During that time when he was being impeached I was sick to my stomach about the puritanical bullshit the Republicans were putting our country through and I thought to myself, I bet there is something important not getting done while the President has to deal with these hypocrites (Newt Gingrich led the charge, after divorcing his cancer stricken wife while she was dying)....and guess what? I was right, Clinton was busy with that crap while Bin Laden was planning to attack us. Clinton told Bush, Bin Laden is the most important thing you will deal with, Bush igged him.

But thanks Matt, for the page

Of course, Clinton is not telling the truth here. These events transpired after the bombing of the WTC, and Bin Laden could easily have been held as a material witness, without even having anyone at the Department of Justice break a sweat.

Clinton lacked the courage to admit to the Monica thing. Why would anyone ever expect him t tell the truth about his failure to act on this opportunity to snare Bin Laden?

And once again, having nothing to say about Clinton's failure to do anything about Bin Laden (and you now say Clinton had him "in his sites", which means Clinton was aware of his whereabouts and intentions), you try to shift to Bush. Weak.

Let me ask you this, Sam - If Clinton had never been offered Bin Laden, why would he claim there was no legal way to take him? Why would there be a debate as to whether they could legally take him if there were no offer?

Then maybe you should be asking yourself this - if Clinton had been man enough to admit what he had done, when he knew he was caught, rathe than drag it out for months and months and directly and vehemently lie to the American people, what might he have done about Bin Laden?

But instead of that tough question, you'd rather examine Bush, and Gingrich, and whatever else you can pull in to avoid the truth - Clinton completely blew it when it comes to Bin Laden.

And thousands of people died in part because of that failure.

Matt

Oh, and just out of curiosity, do you even ponder what is not getting done now while Bush takes time out to deal with the protests, etc?

Or does that concern only apply to Clinton?

Matt

Another Turkey Award for Matt.

Matt, what sort of significant work is Bush doing regarding the protest? He is notorious for IGNORING protests and refusing to addressing them.

Would you like to list the activities Bush has been involved in regarding "taking time out to deal with the protests?"

You always, always try to find a parrallel and knowing you were unable to find any, you begin to make shit up.

How many press conferences has he been in since the war started? He is also known for notoriously dodging the press whenever he can.

There is no such thing as "Bush takes time out to deal with the protests", so don't put it on the debate table.

Nothing like a convicted perjuror to demand, and lecture on....the truth...eh?

/chuckle

__________________

ya that shit cracks me up

a guy who totally skirted a fucking blow job

good lord

Does that come out of his vacation time?
Or is it taken out of his 4 hour workday?

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

I guess I really do have "numberous" Turkey Awards now. Gosh.

Coming from Mr. Anonymous Internet Dude, this is truly funny. Thanks for the laugh.

I never suggested there was anything significant being lost. I was just wondering if the same partisan "oh, gosh, what might have been" blather can be applied both ways.

Apparently not.

Yawn.

Matt

"Don't get your panties in a bunch" is a figure of speech in the USA, it isn't meant to be taken literally.

When you make unsubstantiated anti-American propaganda, how do you expect that to be percieved by an American? How woiuld you take it if I said the Netherlands created the Taliban and couldn't back it up?

Yes, just vague unsupported anti-American propaganda.

Actually, you are wrong, they were never united in the first place, so how could they become "splintered"? The US backed Gen. Massoud of the Northern Alliance tried to unite them against the Taliban, and was somewhat successful, but that wasn't until later after the CIA started directly helping him (not through the ISI), but unfortunately Al Qaeda assassinated him two days before the 9/11 attacks.

I'd say the facts that the US refused to recognize the Taliban government, cut off the massive funding to the ISI whom they suspected of backing the Taliban, and backed the UNSC resolutions 1267 and 1333 cutting off funding and arms to the Taliban contradicts those claims.

You are wrong, the Taliban came from Madrassas in Pakistan. Where is your evidence that the CIA trained the forces that became the Taliban? How do you know it isn't the Netherlands that trained them?.

CIA directors Brzezinski and then Casey certainly did back the ISI with funding (lots of it). But where did you come up with this info that the CIA trained the forces that became the Taliban? None of your sources even claim that.

Well, First of all, I'd say the personal attacks are uncalled for. There is no reason to call me a "petulant child" Helene. And actually I didn't ask you to stop, on the contrary, I asked you to elaborate and back up your claims.

As far as books relating to the subject I've read, The Red Army on Pakistan's Border, Ghost Wars, Revolutin Unending, Holy War and Holy Victory, The Bear Trap, and Main Enemy among others. (I'm kind of a modern history buff, especially military history)

I highly recommend the Pullitzer prize winning book "Ghost Wars" by Steve Coll. Extremely well written/sourced/researched by a guy that knows many of the players personally. Also the most readable of the bunch. Even if you think history is boring, you can enjoy this one because of the way it's presented, as a real-life drama instead of the tedious encyclopedic way most non-fiction history books are usually presented. He makes the book hard to put down, and makes it all interesting, kinda in the same way that Massie can make the naval battles of WWI interesting, by putting you into the characters' shoes so to speak.


Not by everyone, and certainly not by the US.



Which secret prisons in Europe, and when did Bush deny they existed, can you quote him, or are you just making this shit up, or just repeating misinformation from a "news source" or what?

When did Bush deny there was secret CIA prisons in Europe?

__________________
... ..................
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

At least 2650+ Americans didn't die for these type of lies!



Don't you consider these lies more egregious than an extra-marital affair?

__________________

So this is how liberty ends... with thunderous applause