Why isn't Bin Laden wanted for 9-11?

Wanna threaten to come see me too you fucking worthless coward? Lol.....

no thanks. i dont go inside trailer parks.

see..I told you these debwunkers just love to have imaginings the people that oppose their point of veiw work as minumum wage workers or live in trailers or basements ..they cant deal with facts and have to escape into fantasy

the statistics speak for themselves. twoofers are generally poor and uneducated.
 
here ya go. found the statistics....

in response to the statement "The 9/11 attacks were carried out by the U.S. government"

strongly agree 5.1%
somewhat agree 4.3%
somewhat disagree 11.2%
strongly disagree 74.7% (pretty overwhelming)

now here is when it gets funny. we get to see what a "typical twoofer" looks like if we take a look at the demographics of the 5.1% that strongly agree. (the following percentages would be of all those surveyed and also said they strongly agree)

Region:
East: 6.1%
South: 6.7%
Central: 3.8%
West: 3.9%

Age Group:
18-29: 6.3%
30-49: 6.2% (close second)
50-64: 1.9%
65+: 5.1%

Education:
Less than High School: 6.7%
High School: 6.5%
Some College: 4.0%
College+: 3.5%

Race:
White: 4.4%
Hispanic: 7.6%
African American: 4.7%
Asian: 2.9%
Other: 14.7%

Status:
Married: 3.1%
Single: 11.2%
D/W/S: 5.0%

Own/Rent
Own: 3.0%
Rent: 7.5%
Other: 34% (still living at home with mommy and daddy, i guess)

Gender
Male: 7.1%
Female: 3.3%

Income
Less Than 25k: 7%
25k-35k: 10.9%
35k-50k: 9.6%
50k-75k: 2.3%
75k-100k: 3.9%
Over 100%: 0% (ZERO!!!!)

http://www.zogby.com/za0911.pdf

so basically a typical twoofer would be an uneducated male of "other" descent (arab?), who cant get a girl, doesnt make much money and lives at home with mommy.
 
Personally, I think Bin Laden is going to die on his yak powered dialysis machine in the cold and empty mountains of Pakistan wondering, lamenting, howling to Allah, why, oh why, did he never live to rule a universal caliphate?

Live by the delusion, die in the delusion.

*Royalty check to Dennis Miller for "Yak powered dialysis machine."

Bin laden has been dead for about 7 years. That's my view anyways.

holy shit...

i actually agree with you on something. :eek:
 
Why would you say that? Saddam killed members of his own family to stay in power. He certainly wouldn't invite such a threat into his country.

Bin Laden, along with al Qaeda, tried to put together a coalition to drive Saddam from Kuwait. Bin Laden became angry when other Arab countries turned towards US and not him. That is the basis for the reason Bin Laden gives for the attack on the WTC.

How can you debate when you know so little? If you had more sense, you would be ashamed.

Saddam's al Qaeda Connection | The Weekly Standard

In case you don't know Tenet was the CIA director.


The Tenet letter declassified CIA reporting on weapons of mass destruction and Iraq's links to al Qaeda. Two sentences on WMD garnered most media attention, but the intelligence chief's comments on al Qaeda deserved notice. "We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and al Qa'ida going back a decade," Tenet wrote. "Credible information indicates that Iraq and al Qa'ida have discussed safe haven and reciprocal non-aggression. Since Operation Enduring Freedom [in Afghanistan], we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al Qa'ida members, including some that have been in Baghdad. We have credible reporting that al Qa'ida leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities. The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to al Qa'ida members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs." In sum, the letter said, "Iraq's increasing support to extremist Palestinians, coupled with growing indications of a relationship with al Qa'ida, suggest that Baghdad's links to terrorists will increase, even absent US military actions."



Below is a link to an article that quotes excerpts from a DOD memo that gives over 50 links between Al Qaida and Hussein.

I don't feel like copy and pasting so just go to the link.

Case Closed | The Weekly Standard


ROTFL!!!!!!!! The Weekly Standard? Are you fucking retarded or do you actually think this is amateur hour? Are you aware of the Pentagon report on this or are you hoping others are as uninformed as you are?

You truely are a twit.

From the link

The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It was written in response to a request from the committee as part of its investigation into prewar intelligence claims made by the administration. Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. Much of the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources. Some of it is new information obtained in custodial interviews with high-level al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials, and some of it is more than a decade old. The picture that emerges is one of a history of collaboration between two of America's most determined and dangerous enemies.

5. A CIA report from a contact with good access, some of whose reporting has been corroborated, said that certain elements in the "Islamic Army" of bin Laden were against the secular regime of Saddam. Overriding the internal factional strife that was developing, bin Laden came to an "understanding" with Saddam that the Islamic Army would no longer support anti-Saddam activities. According to sensitive reporting released in U.S. court documents during the African Embassy trial, in 1993 bin Laden reached an "understanding" with Saddam under which he (bin Laden) forbade al Qaeda operations to be mounted against the Iraqi leader.

...8. Reporting from a well placed source disclosed that bin Laden was receiving training on bomb making from the IIS's [Iraqi Intelligence Service] principal technical expert on making sophisticated explosives, Brigadier Salim al-Ahmed. Brigadier Salim was observed at bin Laden's farm in Khartoum in Sept.-Oct. 1995 and again in July 1996, in the company of the Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti.

...10. The Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti, met privately with bin Laden at his farm in Sudan in July 1996. Tikriti used an Iraqi delegation traveling to Khartoum to discuss bilateral cooperation as his "cover" for his own entry into Sudan to meet with bin Laden and Hassan al-Turabi. The Iraqi intelligence chief and two other IIS officers met at bin Laden's farm and discussed bin Laden's request for IIS technical assistance in: a) making letter and parcel bombs; b) making bombs which could be placed on aircraft and detonated by changes in barometric pressure; and c) making false passport [sic]. Bin Laden specifically requested that [Brigadier Salim al-Ahmed], Iraqi intelligence's premier explosives maker--especially skilled in making car bombs--remain with him in Sudan. The Iraqi intelligence chief instructed Salim to remain in Sudan with bin Laden as long as required.

...11. According to sensitive reporting, Saddam personally sent Faruq Hijazi, IIS deputy director and later Iraqi ambassador to Turkey, to meet with bin Laden at least twice, first in Sudan and later in Afghanistan in 1999. . . .

14. According to a sensitive reporting [from] a "regular and reliable source," [Ayman al] Zawahiri, a senior al Qaeda operative, visited Baghdad and met with the Iraqi Vice President on 3 February 1998. The goal of the visit was to arrange for coordination between Iraq and bin Laden and establish camps in an-Nasiriyah and Iraqi Kurdistan under the leadership of Abdul Aziz.

15. A foreign government service reported that an Iraqi delegation, including at least two Iraqi intelligence officers formerly assigned to the Iraqi Embassy in Pakistan, met in late 1998 with bin Laden in Afghanistan.

16. According to CIA reporting, bin Laden and Zawahiri met with two Iraqi intelligence officers in Afghanistan in Dec. 1998.

17. . . . Iraq sent an intelligence officer to Afghanistan to seek closer ties to bin Laden and the Taliban in late 1998. The source reported that the Iraqi regime was trying to broaden its cooperation with al Qaeda. Iraq was looking to recruit Muslim "elements" to sabotage U.S. and U.K. interests. After a senior Iraqi intelligence officer met with Taliban leader [Mullah] Omar, arrangements were made for a series of meetings between the Iraqi intelligence officer and bin Laden in Pakistan. The source noted Faruq Hijazi was in Afghanistan in late 1998.

18. . . . Faruq Hijazi went to Afghanistan in 1999 along with several other Iraqi officials to meet with bin Laden. The source claimed that Hijazi would have met bin Laden only at Saddam's explicit direction.

An analysis that follows No. 18 provides additional context and an explanation of these reports:


Reporting entries #4, #11, #15, #16, #17, and #18, from different sources, corroborate each other and provide confirmation of meetings between al Qaeda operatives and Iraqi intelligence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. None of the reports have information on operational details or the purpose of such meetings. The covert nature of the relationship would indicate strict compartmentation [sic] of operations.

Information about connections between al Qaeda and Iraq was so widespread by early 1999 that it made its way into the mainstream press. A January 11, 1999, Newsweek story ran under this headline: "Saddam + Bin Laden?" The story cited an "Arab intelligence source" with knowledge of contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda. "According to this source, Saddam expected last month's American and British bombing campaign to go on much longer than it did. The dictator believed that as the attacks continued, indignation would grow in the Muslim world, making his terrorism offensive both harder to trace and more effective. With acts of terror contributing to chaos in the region, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait might feel less inclined to support Washington. Saddam's long-term strategy, according to several sources, is to bully or cajole Muslim countries into breaking the embargo against Iraq, without waiting for the United Nations to lift if formally."
 
You kind of ignored the fact you accused me of claiming
Silverstein was in on a conspiracy when i never made the accusation.

Fair enough.

Now back to the rest of your stoopdity. Silverstein did not win by outbidding. Here is the WTC site:

"The Port announced in February 2001 that Vornado Realty Trust won the lease by outbidding Silverstein Properties by $50 million. When Vornado later withdrew, Silverstein ’s bid was accepted on July 24th, 2001. The $3.25 billion deal for the 99-year lease was the largest real estate transaction in New York City ’s history."
Http://www.wtc.com/about/silverstein-properties-as-wtc-leaseholder

How could Silverstein outbid a bid that was no longer there you dumbfuck? You ever going to prove how he could have flipped the lease or, like the bid thing, continue to prove yourself fucking ignorant?

Eta: the reason Vornado withdrew their bid is because they wanted a 39 year lease but the Port Authority would not reduce the 99 year lease. If the lease was transferable why would Vornado care to the point of withdrawing their bid? Also, Silverstein tried to make the insurance companies pay double the amount he had the WTC properties insured for.

A shorter lease has optionality that is valuable. A shorter duration allows the leaseholder to "put" back the lease to the owner. The longer out in time the put option, the more economic risk for the buyer of the lease. If the buyer can't sell the lease, they can put it back to the building owner. Some buyers will take on the risk of longer put optionality, some won't. A shorter lease allows the firm to get out of it sooner if need be. It is less risky.

My family has owned 99 year-leases on residential property that we subsequently sold. We paid almost nothing for them when we took out them out. My firm participates in multi-billion dollar real estate deals. There is no way we would buy a 99-year lease that was nontransferable. That's like buying a building and legally binding yourself not to sell it for a century. Would you do that? If not, then why would you expect people pouring billions of dollars into a building to do so?

As for the insurance claims, of course he'd file two claims. Wouldn't you? That's the rational thing to do. But that doesn't prove anything other than would do whatever everyone else would do.

As for the ultimate price, it makes no difference. The point is that there were multiple bidders on the properties. In fact, it makes it even less likely that Silverstein was in on some conspiracy. If one was sure that one was going to make billions on a deal, what does $50 million matter? Why not pony up and pay?
 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM]YouTube - Bush admits that Iraq Had Nothing To Do With 9/11[/ame]

oh and Chimpy admitted as much as well.
 
Bush and Cheney consistently said that they didn't have evidence that Hussein was involved in planning 911.

However, there is plenty of evidence of ties between Hussein and Al Qaida that have gone back a decade.
 
Last edited:
lets all take the word of some anonymous fuck stick like Mike on a message board.
 
connections?....... like that they were clearly working together for a common goal or that maybe they had connections like 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon connections?
 
Last edited:
my friend Mike is a body guard down in Victoria and he worked for Keifer Sutherland for awhile and Keifer Sutherland starred with Kevin Bacon in the movie Flatliners....clearly there is a connection between me and Kevin Bacon.
 
clearly there is a connection between the U.S and Saddam.


handshake300.jpg

Shaking Hands: Iraqi President Saddam Hussein greets Donald Rumsfeld, then special envoy of President Ronald Reagan, in Baghdad on December 20, 1983.


 
So no there was no working connection between Saddam and Bin Laden.
2nd reason for the invasion of Iraq was WMD's -

DOH! Rove Admits Wrong on WMD

rove-dancing.jpg


Republican strategist Karl Rove says in a new memoir that the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq badly damaged the Bush administration's credibility and led to dwindling public support for the war.

Oooooops.
 
So no there was no working connection between Saddam and Bin Laden.
2nd reason for the invasion of Iraq was WMD's -

FONT]

No.

They didn't have evidence that Hussein did 911.

However, there is a lot evidence that Iraq and Al Qaida have had ties for over a decade.

I posted from the DOD and CIA detailing this.
 

Forum List

Back
Top