[quote]harris447 wrote:
No, you need to make a new point every once in a while.[/quote]
Harris- I haven’t been able to make a new point with you as of yet since you’re still fumbling with my last point. The problem for you is that you haven’t even tried to intelligently debate these points with me yet. Why is it that Vroom and I discused this with no problem and you’re still fumbling with it? You need to catch up buddy.
Maybe if you could dislodge yourself from your extreme hatred of Bush, his administration, and those on this forum who don’t share your blinding hatred of anything remotely Bush related. Anger clouds the mind my friend, and I think it’s affecting your debates.
Not just anti-american, anti-American as a POLICY. There’s a big difference. I already pointed out that UBL was known to go way out of his way, and had his family and followers as well, refuse to accept American funding and aid. I was referencing sources that catalouged good reasons to believe that he didn’t accept any such training and aid. Get it?
Maybe you could find some sources to disprove me?
That’s exactly what I was saying smartguy! He cold have easily thrown that back at us, and in my opinion it would have been politically advantageous for him to do so. But he hasn’t and has gone way out of his way to prove otherwise. He is a religous fanatic, and with that in mind it would make sense that he would never want to team up with 'the great satan".
[quote]
And, for the eighth time: IT DOESN’T MATTER WHAT OSAMA BIN LADEN SAYS! He’s, you know…a liar.[/quote]
That’s why I referenced [u]more than one source[/u] in an attempt to shore up my point. You should try it some time.
I repost them for you benefit.
Bin Laden has never had any relation with America or American officials. Claims of relation with CIA or other American departments are all unfounded. Since the late seventies he had strong anti-American feeling. He committed himself and family and advised all friends to avoid buying American goods unless it was necessary.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/190144.asp?cp1=1
[i]Bin Laden himself has repeatedly denied that he received any American support. ?Personally neither I nor my brothers saw any evidence of American help,? bin Laden told British journalist Robert Fisk in 1993. In 1996, Mr. Fisk interviewed bin Laden again. The arch-terrorist was equally adamant: ?We were never, at any time, friends of the Americans. We knew that the Americans supported the Jews in Palestine and that they are our enemies.?
In the course of researching my book on Bill Clinton and bin Laden, I interviewed Bill Peikney, who was CIA station chief in Islamabad from 1984 to 1986, and Milt Bearden, who was CIA station chief from 1986 to 1989. These two men oversaw the disbursement for all American funds to the anti-Soviet resistance. Both flatly denied that any CIA funds ever went to bin Laden. They felt so strongly about this point that they agreed to go on the record, an unusual move by normally reticent intelligence officers. Mr. Peikney added in an e-mail to me:?I don?t even recall UBL [bin Laden] coming across my screen when I was there.?
There are many reasons to believe them. They knew where the money went. Both men have retired from the CIA; they have no motive to mouth an agency line. And no compelling evidence has emerged that the CIA ever paid bin Laden: no cancelled checks, no invoices, no government reports.
Those who contend that bin Laden received U.S. funds usually make the following argument: America financed the Afghan rebels, bin Laden was among the rebels, therefore, in one way or another, America gave money to bin Laden.
This ignores a key fact: There were two entirely separate rebellions against the Soviets, united only by a common communist enemy. One was financed by Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states and was composed of Islamic extremists who migrated from across the Muslim world. They called themselves ?Arab Afghans.? Bin Laden was among them. When the Saudis agreed to match U.S. contributions dollar-for-dollar, the sheikhs insisted that their funds go exclusively to the ?Arab Afghans,? possibly including bin Laden. Meanwhile, U.S. funds went exclusively to the other rebellion, which was composed of native Afghans. Mr. Bearden told me: ?I challenge anyone to give any proof that we gave one dollar to any Arab Afghans, let alone bin Laden.?
Even if the CIA wanted to pay ?Arab Afghans? – which agency officials insist they did not – bin Laden would be a far from obvious choice. Bin Laden himself rarely left the safety of Pakistan?s northwestern cities and commanded few troops of his own. At the time, bin Laden was the Arab Afghan?s quartermaster, providing food and other supplies.
If a CIA officer tried to give money to bin Laden, he probably would not have lived through the experience. The arch-terrorist was known for his violent anti-Americanism. Dana Rohrabacher, now a Republican congressman from California, told me about a trip he took with the mujahideen in 1987. On that trek, his guide told him not to speak English for the next few hours because they were passing by bin Laden?s camp. ?If he hears an American, he will kill you.? [/i]
He was saying very early in the eighties that the next battle is going to be with America. … No aid or training or other support have ever been given to bin Laden from Americans. Bin Laden would bring money from individuals donating straight to him. The weapons he had were either captured from the Soviets or bought from other factions.
Again there were no official relations with officials in Pakistani government. However, he had paramount respect by many Pakistanis including people in the army, intelligence and religious establishment. They were so penetrating that they would always leak any plan against him by the Pakistani-Saudi-American alliance.[/i]
