OSAMA BIN LADEN IS DEAD !

[Jerry_Curls]

I really don't have time to catch up with everything being said in this thread.  I glanced it over really quick and just want to make a couple points.

These "extremest" that were killed the other night. I am sad that they died, the same way I was sad whenever I saw a dead Afghan.  These are people.  They are horribly brainwashed.  Most of them didn't even know what happened on September 11th, they had no knowledge of this event.  All they knew was that a foreign army was on their land fucking their shit up. So they fought us.
They are products of their environment, brainwashing, and bad Rhetoric.  I can't hate them or be happy that they are dead when I know that they didn't know any better.

Also, the word "terrorist" is very ambiguous and interpretable.  Thats why they use it.  Anybody or anything can be labeled a terrorist, depending on the spin.
It's like Rome going to war to "spread civilization to the barbarians" What does "civilization" and "barbarians" really even mean?  Looking back we know that was a crock of shit, but they had to convince their people to go to endless wars in order to create an empire.
In recent years we now go to war to spread "freedom" and "democracy" and to eliminate "terrorist".  All of those words lack true meaning.  Which is why they are used.

Has anyone else ever read the essay by George Orwell named "Politics and the English language?" if not, and you want to try to understand what I'm getting at a little better, I would HIGHLY recommend that you take 30 min out of your day to read it and try to understand what he is saying. here is a link http://mla.stanford.edu/Politics_&_English_language.pdf It's only 9 pages

i remember in english class when everyone suddenly started talking about the mugabi regime and human rights came up and our lecturer was like, "but what is human rights?" and when everyone gave their definition of it, which was much the same but said differently, no one was able to give a concise answer as to why human rights were necessary in our society. it kind of feels like these things are a given, things like human rights. we should all have them yet most of us don't seem to understand what they mean. it's sort of trying to explain what 'being civilised' pertains to. what are civilised actions?

What I think people believe human rights are, but don't really want to say it so they don't get chastised by their peers, is "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." For someone to say that these rights are given to us by a creator/god is a touchy subject because they will come off as a Christian Fundamentalist. With me, it's the opposite. Even though I don't believe in a god, I still have the pleasure of knowing that I can express that fact and I still have these rights. It's amazing how in this country, ANYBODY can prosper, yet in some countries, one will never be able to achieve their dream because they were born into the "lower echelons" of society.  Anyways, I might have rambled and not made any sense, I'm high ^_^

has anyone ever read Simulacra and Simulation?

I have totally seen Jean Baudrillard's name in the many topics I've read on other forums, but I've never dived into anything. I just might do it!

And to get back on topic...

Ignorant Public Cheers Bin Lladen Death Outside White House
WeAreChange.org
May 2, 2011

WeAreChange journalist Luke Rudkowski hits the streets right after Obama's announcement in front of the White House on the front lines of the Infowar. The hysteria and planned propaganda have been masterfully executed by the Obama administration but watch Luke try to educate the erratic public about the truth behind Bin Laden. Luke also pleads with Geraldo Rivera to talk about WTC Building 7 (as he has in the past) in conjunction with reports about Bin Laden's death.

LINK TO VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9FQv2TS3dY&feature=player_embedded
http://www.infowars.com/ignorant-public-cheers-bin-laden-death-outside-white-house/

[blixa]

Yeah but I made him sound way dumber than he really did.  In reality he sounded just like anybody on the news or in a normal conversation.  I mean, I literally used his exact words.  Just in the contex, he sounds ridiculous. 

Imagine if someone questioned the validity of your every comment?  And don't get me wrong, I am guilty of this too.  But I'm trying to become more aware and de-program myself.  Unplug from the matrix if you will. 

has anyone ever read Simulacra and Simulation?

your mate gave such a republican response. it made me laugh. i've recently become very fixed on what i say. the last time i got semi-attacked was when i said that i would vote liberal if malcolm turnbull was leader and i got RIPPED TO SHREDS by all my greens voting friends. it was my most powerful moment because i was literally at my weakest and it made me drop the mumbo-jumbo of political talk and answer truthfully. my response was very simple. i like the guy, i like his policies, and he's not an arsehole.

i haven't read simulacra and simulation. i've read shitloads of walter benjamin though. i love the benj!

[Jerry_Curls]

As muslim i think i have to tell you ''Jihad'' means ''you HAVE TO fight  back when they come to war''  

- So I assume by you saying "they are terrorist" you're referring to Muslims?  

Yes, because Obama or other USA presidents doesnt care about if anyone casual muslim or el qaide member.
You gotta heard about HAMAS, you call them as ''terrorist'' for years, but now %80 of the world says they are ''resistance organization of Palestine aganist Isreal'' and most of country welcomes them.

- If so,that does not apply to all Muslims,but you do have Muslim Extremist,which Bin Laden was.

Most muslim countries dont control by muslims. USA,UK,FRA came to Kuwait, Iraq, Egypt, Afghanistani Endonesia..etc
They have power in the deep state on these countries. They changed their lives, their TVs, their press..
So muslims who call hamas or other organizations as terrorist are hungry and poor and they have only CNN and MTV to watch.

- I do believe the actions of 9/11,that were under the authority of Bin Laden,would count as terrorism

If they did it you are right. They did so much things but not this.
Have you ever listen the different opinion about 911 ? (except that movie)
I did. I read, i searched, i listened so basicly all i can say about it :

USA economy needs Jewish money fathers as fuck.
That was a politic and economic idea between Usa and Jews.


Dude, its really different than what youve heard from the TV

the conspiracy theories about 9/11 are complete bullshit. a lot of people believe it because we love conspiracies. just keep reading what kelly wrote. it'll make sense after a while because that's how shit went down.

when you have 'organisations' such as hamas and hezbollah who are religious extremists (lets not beat around the bush here!) and they infuse religion into their politics then damn it, the world is going to have a problem with it. bin laden did so much damage in the name of a religion which he didn't even seem to have understood. waleed aly wrote an awesome book called 'people like us'. everyone should read it.

I happen to be one of the MANY people who believe the truth of what happened on 9/11. Do you really think it's fun for people to believe that our government could do such an act? It kills me to think this, but I just can't believe the "official" story when there are so many facts that prove otherwise. The govt's actions, videos, collapse of WTC7, witness reports, just recent'y denying 9/11 first responders heathcare because they are being called "terrorists", the Project For A New American Century [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sg_NRC8ozk ], etc.  I'm reminded of this scene from 1984:

O'Brien's manner became less severe. He resettled his spectacles thoughtfully, and took a pace or two up and down. When he spoke his voice was gentle and patient. He had the air of a doctor, a teacher, even a priest, anxious to explain and persuade rather than to punish.

"I am taking trouble with you, Winston," he said, "because you are worth trouble. You know perfectly well what is the matter with you. You have known it for years, though you have fought against the knowledge. You are mentally deranged. You suffer from a defective memory. You are unable to remember real events and you persuade yourself that you remember other events which never happened. Fortunately it is curable. You have never cured yourself of it, because you did not choose to. There was a small effort of the will that you were not ready to make. Even now, I am well aware, you are clinging to your disease under the impression that it is a virtue. Now we will take an example. At this moment, which power is Oceania at war with?"

"When I was arrested, Oceania was at war with Eastasia."

"With Eastasia. Good. And Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia, has it not?"

Winston drew in his breath. He opened his mouth to speak and then did not speak. He could not take his eyes away from the dial.

"The truth, please, Winston. Your truth. Tell me what you think you remember."

"I remember that until only a week before I was arrested, we were not at war with Eastasia at all. We were in alliance with them. The war was against Eurasia. That had lasted for four years. Before that --"

O'Brien stopped him with a movement of the hand.

"Another example," he said. "Some years ago you had a very serious delusion indeed. You believed that three men, three one-time Party members named Jones, Aaronson, and Rutherford--men who were executed for treachery and sabotage after making the fullest possible confession--were not guilty of the crimes they were charged with. You believed that you had seen unmistakable documentary evidence proving that their confessions were false. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this."

An oblong slip of newspaper had appeared between O'Brien's fingers. For perhaps five seconds it was within the angle of Winston's vision. It was a photograph, and there was no question of its identity. It was the photograph. It was another copy of the photograph of Jones, Aaronson, and Rutherford at the party function in New York, which he had chanced upon eleven years ago and promptly destroyed. For only an instant it was before his eyes, then it was out of sight again. But he had seen it, unquestionably he had seen it!....

"It exists!" he cried.

"No," said O'Brien.

He stepped across the room. There was a memory hole in the opposite wall. O'Brien lifted the grating. Unseen, the frail slip of paper was whirling away on the current of warm air; it was vanishing in a flash of flame. O'Brien turned away from the wall.

"Ashes," he said. "Not even identifiable ashes. Dust. It does not exist. It never existed."

"But it did exist! It does exist! It exists in memory. I remember it. You remember it."

"I do not remember it," said O'Brien.

Winston's heart sank. That was doublethink. He had a feeling of deadly helplessness. If he could have been certain that O'Brien was lying, it would not have seemed to matter. But it was perfectly possible that O'Brien had really forgotten the photograph. And if so, then already he would have forgotten his denial of remembering it, and forgotten the act of forgetting. How could one be sure that it was simple trickery? Perhaps that lunatic dislocation in the mind could really happen: that was the thought that defeated him.

O'Brien was looking down at him speculatively. More than ever he had the air of a teacher taking pains with a wayward but promising child.

"There is a Party slogan dealing with the control of the past," he said. "Repeat it, if you please."

"'Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past,'" repeated Winston obediently.

"'Who controls the present controls the past,'" said O'Brien, nodding his head with slow approval. "Is it your opinion, Winston, that the past has real existence?"

Again the feeling of helplessness descended upon Winston. His eyes flitted towards the dial. He not only did not know whether "yes" or "no" was the answer that would save him from pain; he did not even know which answer he believed to be the true one.

O'Brien smiled faintly. "You are no metaphysician, Winston," he said. "Until this moment you had never considered what is meant by existence. I will put it more precisely. Does the past exist concretely, in space? Is there somewhere or other a place, a world of solid objects, where the past is still happening?"

"No."

"Then where does the past exist, if at all?"

"In records. It is written down."

"In records. And --?"

"In the mind. In human memories."

"In memory. Very well, then. We, the Party, control all records, and we control all memories. Then we control the past, do we not?"

"But how can you stop people remembering things?" cried Winston again momentarily forgetting the dial. "It is involuntary. It is outside oneself. How can you control memory? You have not controlled mine!"

O'Brien's manner grew stern again. He laid his hand on the dial.

"On the contrary," he said, "you have not controlled it. That is what has brought you here. You are here because you have failed in humility, in self-discipline. You would not make the act of submission which is the price of sanity. You preferred to be a lunatic, a minority of one. Only the disciplined mind can see reality, Winston. You believe that reality is something objective, external, existing in its own right. You also believe that the nature of reality is self-evident. When you delude yourself into thinking that you see something, you assume that everyone else sees the same thing as you. But I tell you, Winston, that reality is not external. Reality exists in the human mind, and nowhere else. Not in the individual mind, which can make mistakes, and in any case soon perishes; only in the mind of the Party, which is collective and immortal. Whatever the Party holds to be the truth is truth. It is impossible to see reality except by looking through the eyes of the Party. That is the fact that you have got to relearn, Winston. It needs an act of self-destruction, an effort of the will. You must humble yourself before you can become sane."

-- George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four, pp. 202-06
http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/index.html

[Oldnewtype]

misinformation is the most powerful weapon in the universe.

[blixa]

i'm on the mailing list of rev graham long, who is a pastor at the wayside chapel in kings cross. i love his emails because he's so funny and smart:

Dear Inner Circle,
Walking in this morning there was rubbish all around our front door. It was not a good look. A quick glance revealed the problem, this week of all weeks. I saw our Bin Laden.



/lollercoaster.

[Oldnewtype]

and yeah by the way orwell is awesome, our band was originally called 1984. We have a few songs based on alot of his stuff.

[blixa]

maybe america is trying to change. that was obama's slogan. i think it's a good idea to not release any photos. there were photos of tupac after he died yet there are still people who believe he's alive. just sayin'...

[bright lights, big city]

i still want photos. but i can see why they wouldn't be released. you know everyone here would go all crazy because it would show gore and blood and OH DEAR GOD



/goes and plays some violent video games.

[Jerry_Curls]

maybe america is trying to change. that was obama's slogan. i think it's a good idea to not release any photos. there were photos of tupac after he died yet there are still people who believe he's alive. just sayin'...

America is not trying to change. Especially if Zbigniew Brzezinski and his puppet, Obama, are alive. He has been quoted, telling Afghan Jihadists in the late 70's "Your cause is right. God is on your side."



Ex-Security Chief Brzezinski's Interview makes clear:
The Muslim Terrorist Apparatus was Created by US Intelligence as a Geopolitical Weapon

Le Nouvel Observateur's Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser Published 15-21 January 1998 Translated by Jean Martineau

I. Comment: The US & European States are still using Brzezinski's Muslim terrorist strategy! by Jared Israel
II. Interview with Brzezinski [Posted 6 September 2004]
=======================================
Below is our translation of an interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski.  It is important for three reasons. First, it flatly contradicts the official US justification for giving billions of dollars to the mujahideen in Afghanistan in the 1980s, namely that the US and Saudi Arabia were defending so-called freedom fighters against Soviet aggression. Not so, says Brzezinski. He confirms what opponents have charged: that the US began covert sponsorship of Muslim extremists five months *before* the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.  He says that after President Carter authorized the covert action:

"I explained to the president that this support would in my opinion lead to a military intervention by the Soviets."

Second, the interview is instructive concerning so-called "conspiracy theory." To be sure, there are plenty of nutty theories out there. And of course, there are plenty of just plain wrong theories. But as Brzezinski demonstrates, the US foreign policy establishment did, for want of a better word, conspire. Even as they claimed to oppose Muslim extremism, they knowingly fomented it *as a weapon of policy.* And they lied about what they were doing, pretending they were helping freedom fighters resist an invasion. In other words, deceit on two levels. One must ask oneself: if the US foreign policy Establishment used Muslim extremism as a weapon once, how can one argue  *in principle* that they would not use it again?  We say they *have* used it again; that they have used it continuously; and that we are seeing the fruits of this policy. Most recently we have seen the real essence of the Brzezinski doctrine in the horrendous events this past week in Russia (culminating in the school attack) and Israel (the double bus bombing).

========================================================
Lying with dollars
========================================================

Brzezinski and his protégé, Zalmay Khalilzad, set up a corporation in 1985, funded by the US congress, to train the mujahideen to sell reporters the lie that the mujahideen were freedom fighters and victims of aggression:

U.S. Provides $500,000 So Afghan Rebels Can Tell Their Story
AP, September 16, 1985, Monday, PM cycle SECTION: Washington Dateline  By JOAN MOWER WASHINGTON

Guerrillas in Afghanistan are about to get money from the United States government for a public relations campaign intended to bring their struggle against Soviet troops to the world's attention.  The money will train Afghan rebel journalists to use television, radio and newspapers to advance their cause. Reporters will be given mini-cameras to photograph the war inside Afghanistan.  "It is the goal of this project to facilitate the collection, development and distribution of credible, objective and timely professional-quality news stories, photographs and television images about developments in Afghanistan," said a notice in the Federal Register. The program will be overseen by Uncle Sam's own propaganda arm, the U.S. Information Agency. Congress appropriated $500,000 to hire experts and may provide more later.

In making the money available, Congress all but instructed USIA to consider an organization like Friends of Afghanistan, a new group whose board includes former Carter administration national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, known for hard-line anti-Soviet views.  USIA has solicited proposals, due Sept. 25.  Friends of Afghanistan includes other American foreign policy luminaries such as Lawrence Eagleburger, a former undersecretary of state, and Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad, a Columbia University political science professor and some-time paid adviser to the State Department on Afghanistan.
[Note from Jared Israel - Eagleburger played a prominent role in first Bush administration in demonizing the Bosnian Serbs.]
[...]
Afghan rebels, called the Mujahadeen, have been battling 100,000 Soviet troops who have occupied the rugged, mountainous country since December 1979.
[...]
[Excerpt from Associated Press dispatch ends here]

The Associated Press referred to Khalilzad as a "some-time paid adviser to the State Department on Afghanistan." This was in the late summer of 1985. Less than three years later Tass, the Soviet news agency, reported that Khalilzad was delivering the mujahideen an important message from the State Department.  Khalilzad told them that the State Department would continue to support them a) only if they could consolidate control of Afghanistan and b) only if they maintained an attitude of implacable hostility to the government in Kabul. In other words the US ordered the mujahideen *not* to make peace:

"'The United States has told the Afghan guerrillas that it would support them in an effort to form a provisional government if they consolidate their control of most of the country and meet other criteria,' the newspaper New York Times today quoted State Department officials as saying. A top State Department official made it clear that the government must oppose 'the soviet-backed regime in Kabul' and said that the USA did not 'accept the legitimacy' of the authorities in Afghanistan. The relevant message was delivered to the rebels in the Pakistani city of Peshawar last week by Zalmay Khalilzad, a special adviser on Afghanistan to under secretary of state Michael H. Armacost..."
[-- To Support Afghan Counter Revolutionaries New York; The Russian Information Agency ITAR-TASS, May 6, 1988, Friday]

========================================================
Applying the techniques developed in Afghanistan to Bosnia
========================================================
Brzezinski's interview has tremendous importance today.  According to a Dutch intelligence report on Bosnia, in the early 1990s Pentagon intelligence worked with the Saudis and Iranians to bring weapons and mujahideen terrorists - the 'Afghan Arabs' - into Bosnia to indoctrinate and lead Alija Izetbegovic's Muslim extremists in fighting the Bosnian Serbs.  [1] The same terrorists had been used against the pro-Soviet side in Afghanistan. Once again the media lied, claiming the Bosnian Serbs were fighting to destroy the Bosnian Muslims (i.e., genocide) when they were in fact defending their communities from the mujahideen, and were allied with a large group of moderate Muslims. [2] This picture appeared in the London Times on December 11, 1995. The caption reads: "One of the Bosnian Army's Muslim brigades marches through Zenica in a demonstration of strength by 10,000 soldiers." Note that according to the Times these 10,000 troops constituted only *one* of "the Bosnian Army's Muslim brigades..."

During the 1990s, pictures like this were as rare as hen's teeth in the Western media.  Why? Because they graphically demonstrated that the media was lying when it claimed that the "Bosnian Government" was moderate and multiculturalist and so on. The white costumes these troops are wearing are the uniforms of Middle Eastern mujahideen, not Yugoslav Muslims. The Bosnian Muslim troops wore them because they had been indoctrinated by Muslim extremists, including mujahideen imported by Iran, Saudi Arabia and other extremist states, with the participation of Pentagon intelligence.  In the early part of the Bosnian conflict (up until January 1993) Zalmay Khalilzad, the protégé of Zginew Brzezinski, was in charge of strategic planning at the Pentagon. [3]

In Afghanistan (as Brzezinski proudly states) and then in Bosnia, the US sponsored Muslim terror even as the State Department was officially condemning it. Because ordinary people would never support such a policy, it was sold to the public as support for freedom fighters (Afghanistan) or as defense of abused Muslims (Bosnia.) By the late 1980s Brzezinski's protégé, Prof. Zalmay Khalilzad, was the  top strategist of the Afghan war. Under the administration of Bush, Sr., Khalilzad was in charge of strategy at the Pentagon.  We have substantial evidence that it was under Bush, Sr., not Clinton, that the US began assisting the mujahideen in Bosnia. So, in both cases, we have Brzezinski's protégé directing the use of Muslim extremism as a weapon against a secular state, with the media misrepresenting the nature of the fight.  The Brzezinski Doctrine in action.
========================================================
2001: Brzezinski's protégé Zalmay Khalilzad was appointed Senior National Security Director for Southwest Asia, the heartland of Muslim extremist terror...
========================================================
Want some food for thought? From May 23, 2001 until November 27, 2003, Prof. Khalilzad was "Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Gulf, Southwest Asia and Other Regional Issues, National Security Council." Southwest Asia covers the area from Pakistan to Saudi Arabia, including Iraq and Iran; it includes most of the Middle East and extends to Georgia. See White House map at
http://www.politicsol.com/terrorism/maps.html
* Khalilzad was in charge of US policy on the ground in Afghanistan before and during the 2001 war. He then personally chose the Afghan government. It was under his watch that the US and Iran cooperated in convening a top level conference to give Afghanistan a government based on Muslim religious law. Now he's Ambassador and Special Envoy to Afghanistan. [4]
* Even while Khalilzad was in charge of Afghanistan he was also the key man on the ground before, during and after the invasion of Iraq. He was in charge of political relations with Iraqi exile politicians and the Iranian and Saudi governments up until the fall 2003. A crucial period.
* His area of official responsibility included Georgia during the period when the US was intensifying the financing and training of the Georgian military.  Russia accuses Georgia of aiding the Chechen terrorists.

So Brzezinski has been the key hands-on strategist, the leader on the ground, in a vast area plagued with Muslim extremist terror during most of the so-called war on terror. Oops - did I say Brzezinski? Sorry; I meant Zalmay Khalilzad...
Regarding US-Iranian cooperation to use Muslim extremist terror in Bosnia, see "How the U.S. & Iran have Cooperated to Sponsor Muslim Terror," at http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/deja.htm
Also see 'Articles Documenting U.S. Creation of Taliban and bin Laden's Terrorist Network' at http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/doc.htm
Regarding Brzezinski's protégé Zalmay Khalilzad, see http://emperors-clothes.com/archive/khalilzad-facts.htm
For more on the calculated creation of a Muslim extremist apparatus in Afghanistan in the 1980s by the US and Saudi Arabia, see the Washington Post's analysis at http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/anatomy.htm

The Brzezinski interview follows.

-- Jared Israel
Editor, Emperor's Clothes

***

Brzezinski's Interview with Le Nouvel Observateur
Le Nouvel Observateur: Former CIA director Robert Gates states in his memoirs: The American secret services began six months before the Soviet intervention to support the Mujahideen [in Afghanistan]. At that time you were president Carters security advisor; thus you played a key role in this affair. Do you confirm this statement?
Zbigniew Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version, the CIA's support for the Mujahideen began in 1980, i.e. after the Soviet army's invasion of Afghanistan on 24 December 1979. But the reality, which was kept secret until today, is completely different: Actually it was on 3 July 1979 that president Carter signed the first directive for the secret support of the opposition against the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And on the same day I wrote a note, in which I explained to the president that this support would in my opinion lead to a military intervention by the Soviets.
Le Nouvel Observateur: Despite this risk you were a supporter of this covert action? But perhaps you expected the Soviets to enter this war and tried to provoke it?
Zbigniew Brzezinski: It's not exactly like that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene but we knowingly increased the probability that they would do it.
Le Nouvel Observateur: When the Soviets justified their intervention with the statement that they were fighting against a secret US interference in Afghanistan, nobody believed them. Nevertheless there was a core of truth to this...Do you regret nothing today?
Zbigniew Brzezinski: Regret what? This secret operation was an excellent idea. It lured the Russians into the Afghan trap, and you would like me to regret that? On the day when the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote president Carter, in essence: "We now have the opportunity to provide the USSR with their Viet Nam war." Indeed for ten years Moscow had to conduct a war that was intolerable for the regime, a conflict which involved the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet Empire.
Le Nouvel Observateur: And also, don't you regret having helped future terrorists, having given them weapons and advice?
Zbigniew Brzezinski: What is most important for world history? The Taliban or the fall of the Soviet Empire? Some Islamic hotheads or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Le Nouvel Observateur: "Some hotheads?" But it has been said time and time again: today Islamic fundamentalism represents a world-wide threat...
Zbigniew Brzezinski: Rubbish! It's said that the West has a global policy regarding Islam. That's hogwash: there is no global Islam. Let's look at Islam in a rational and not a demagogic or emotional way. It is the first world religion with 1.5 billion adherents. But what is there in common between fundamentalist Saudi Arabia, moderate Morocco, militaristic Pakistan, pro-Western Egypt and secularized Central Asia? Nothing more than that which connects the Christian countries...
* Footnotes and Further Reading
[1] Regarding Alija Izetbegovic's Muslim extremism, see "Who was Alija Izetbegovic? Moderate 'George Washington' of Bosnia or Islamist Murderer?" http://emperors-clothes.com/bosnia/izet.htm  
[2]Regarding the Pro-Yugoslav Muslims who allied with the Bosnian Serbs, thus giving the lie to the charge that the Serbs were religious bigots, see "Pro-Yugoslav Muslim Leader Put on Trial," at http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/abdic.htm
[3] Regarding Khalilzad's role in the Pentagon under the first Bush administration, go to http://emperors-clothes.com/archive/khalilzad-facts.htm#head
* Regarding the Dutch intelligence report on the Pentagon's coordination of intervention in Bosnia by Muslim states (especially Iran) see http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/deja.htm#dutch
[4]Regarding Khalilzad choosing the Afghan government, see http://emperors-clothes.com/archive/khalilzad-facts.htm#3

Regarding the top level conference where the US and Iran cooperated to design an Afghan constitution based on Muslim religious law, see "The IDLO, Backed by the US and Iran, Planned Muslim rule for Afghanistan," at
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/idlo.htm  

The strategy Brzezinski helped develop is the key to understanding U.S. government actions today. See:
* "Why has USAID been Shipping Muslim Extremist Schoolbooks into Afghanistan...for 20 Years?" at http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/jihad.htm
* 'Why Washington Wants Afghanistan' by Jared Israel, Rick Rozoff & Nico Varkevisser at http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/afghan.htm

[Oldnewtype]

i laughed my ass off yesterday. About 5 minutes after obama announced that, they released photos from the raid:











of course, no osama though. Note the tail piece from the supposed "stealth black hawk" helicopter.

[Jerry_Curls]

Anyways, they story keeps changing as the week unfolds...we won't be getting any photos and now, we won't be able to see the "live footage" they said they were watching. Apparently, they didn't even get that.

'PHOTO OP:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/8493391/Osama-bin-Laden-dead-Blackout-during-raid-on-bin-Laden-compound.html

The head of the CIA admitted yesterday that there was no live video footage of the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound as further doubts emerged about the US version of events.


Leon Panetta, director of the CIA, revealed there was a 25 minute blackout during which the live feed from cameras mounted on the helmets of the US special forces was cut off.

A photograph released by the White House appeared to show the President and his aides in the situation room watching the action as it unfolded. In fact they had little knowledge of what was happening in the compound.

[Nailec]

i had no strong feelings towards all of this. but when i wake up at morning and get to hear that one of the worlds most dangerous criminals as been send to his precious virgins, i cant think how this makes the whole world a worse place to live.

that said i cant relate to those celebrating his death (i even think they behave like islamists with their cult and love for death). its not even close to an event like the liberation of nazi germany. terrorism is still a persisting threat and i dont care if more people die in bathtubs. last time i checked, we differ between murderer and accidental death, right?

oh and then there are those who secretly admired bin ladin for his "resistance" against the usa and now mourn about his death or call the navy seals a bunch of terrorists.

not to forget the lovely people from the conspiracy community for which such a event is always a win-win situation. if there is no photo-evidence of osamas death than the whole story must be a fraud according to them. but if there is a piece of evidence, then its totally faked by the intelligence service.

oh yeah
war was not the answer

[bright lights, big city]

So they still had radio contact. It's not like they were out of the loop. Either they all were sitting there listening and waiting for video, or they were that involved in watching the NBA playoffs.

[BillyNo.9]

, or they were that involved in watching the NBA playoffs.

XD

[blixa]

Anyways, they story keeps changing as the week unfolds...we won't be getting any photos and now, we won't be able to see the "live footage" they said they were watching. Apparently, they didn't even get that.

'PHOTO OP:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/8493391/Osama-bin-Laden-dead-Blackout-during-raid-on-bin-Laden-compound.html

The head of the CIA admitted yesterday that there was no live video footage of the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound as further doubts emerged about the US version of events.


Leon Panetta, director of the CIA, revealed there was a 25 minute blackout during which the live feed from cameras mounted on the helmets of the US special forces was cut off.

A photograph released by the White House appeared to show the President and his aides in the situation room watching the action as it unfolded. In fact they had little knowledge of what was happening in the compound.

it's seriously been "apparently" this and "supposedly" that. it's beginning to feel like no one seems to understand or know what is going on. i do think america has changed slightly after bush left office. you don't have a blubbering fool for a president.

[Oldnewtype]

Hilary Clinton even said that here hand was there because of allergies and not shock hahaha.

[bright lights, big city]

that's what i'm talkin 'bout.

[Jacob]

his hands are very... white.

[poofing acid]

Lolz.  Some of you are ridiculous.

[Inkblades]

He was WAY out of the Al-Qaida loop a long time ago.

How so?