Bin Laden Had Plan To Sell Poisoned Cocaine To Americans

Bin Laden Had Plan To Sell Poisoned Cocaine To Americans In 2002

Stories that make you go “woah”.

Damn…that’s even worse that cutting with baking soda. :frowning:

It makes sense. He is an ex-CIA trained opperative. You got to get cash to fund covert activities somehow.

[quote=“Josefus”]Bin Laden Had Plan To Sell Poisoned Cocaine To Americans In 2002

Stories that make you go “woah”.[/quote]

Poisoned Cocaine That’s funny, is there any other kind?

what do you think the memorial would have looked like. Would there have been a multi-billion dollar fund for the victims?

Osama bin Laden was not ever a CIA operative nor in any way trained by the CIA. He was not funded by the US nor was he given support by the US. He happened to be fighting against the Soviets and the US supplied certain groups as well as sent CIA support. This never, however, directly involved Osama. Feel free to prove me wrong.

The only connection? The US was supporting groups fighting in Afghanistan and Osama was fighting in Afghanistan.

[quote=“fred smith”]Osama bin Laden was not ever a CIA operative nor in any way trained by the CIA. He was not funded by the US nor was he given support by the US. He happened to be fighting against the Soviets and the US supplied certain groups as well as sent CIA support. This never, however, directly involved Osama. Feel free to prove me wrong.

The only connection? The US was supporting groups fighting in Afghanistan and Osama was fighting in Afghanistan.[/quote]

Ohhh, is that a challenge? Shall I provide links and quotes to counter what ever you got waiting for when I do so? You saying ‘no no no’ about Osama being connected to the CIA proves nothing too.

[quote=“NaTaS”][quote=“fred smith”]Osama bin Laden was not ever a CIA operative nor in any way trained by the CIA. He was not funded by the US nor was he given support by the US. He happened to be fighting against the Soviets and the US supplied certain groups as well as sent CIA support. This never, however, directly involved Osama. Feel free to prove me wrong.

The only connection? The US was supporting groups fighting in Afghanistan and Osama was fighting in Afghanistan.[/quote]

Ohhh, is that a challenge? Shall I provide links and quotes to counter what ever you got waiting for when I do so? You saying ‘no no no’ about Osama being connected to the CIA proves nothing too.[/quote]

OK, then. Please provide the links and quotes. :unamused:

[quote=“Tigerman”][quote=“NaTaS”][quote=“fred smith”]Osama bin Laden was not ever a CIA operative nor in any way trained by the CIA. He was not funded by the US nor was he given support by the US. He happened to be fighting against the Soviets and the US supplied certain groups as well as sent CIA support. This never, however, directly involved Osama. Feel free to prove me wrong.

The only connection? The US was supporting groups fighting in Afghanistan and Osama was fighting in Afghanistan.[/quote]

Ohhh, is that a challenge? Shall I provide links and quotes to counter what ever you got waiting for when I do so? You saying ‘no no no’ about Osama being connected to the CIA proves nothing too.[/quote]

OK, then. Please provide the links and quotes. :unamused:[/quote]

Ahem…Tigerman, I’m not going to let you get away with that. Please provide links and quotes! :wink:

I think a lot of Americans would cheer him on.

. . . Shall I provide links and quotes . . . ? . . . [/quote] OK, then. Please provide the links and quotes. :unamused:[/quote] . . . Please provide links and quotes! :wink:[/quote]

I can’t prove fred smith’s negative claim, but I offer this for consideration:

[quote=“In 1996, Robert Fisk of the Independent”]Osama Bin Laden sat in his gold-fringed robe, guarded by the loyal Arab mujahedin who fought alongside him in Afghanistan. Bearded, taciturn figures . . . watched unsmiling as the Sudanese villagers of Almatig lined up to thank the Saudi businessman who is about to complete the highway linking their homes to Khartoum for the first time in history.


Into [Sudan] . . ., Mr Bin Laden has brought the very construction equipment that he used only five years ago to build the guerrilla trails of Afghanistan.


When the history of the Afghan resistance movement is written, Mr Bin Laden’s own contribution to the mujahedin - and the indirect result of his training and assistance - may turn out to be a turning- point in the recent history of militant fundamentalism; even if, today, he tries to minimise his role.


Within months [i.e., of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan], Mr Bin Laden was sending Arab fighters [there]. . . . He supported them with weapons and his own construction equipment. Along with his Iraqi engineer, Mohamed Saad - who is now building the Port Sudan road - Mr Bin Laden blasted massive tunnels into the Zazi mountains of Bakhtiar province for guerrilla hospitals and arms dumps, then cut a mujahedin trail across the country to within 15 miles of Kabul.


[Osama said,] ''Personally neither I nor my brothers saw evidence of American help. When my mujahedin were victorious and the Russians were driven out, differences started between the guerrilla movements so I returned to road construction in Taif and Abha. I brought back the equipment I had used to build tunnels and roads for the mujahedin in Afghanistan."

    • *[/quote]
      (The bracketed material is mine.)

(A reprint of the Independent piece is here.)

For all I know, CIA money, weapons, etc., may have ended up helping Osama. But if the Robert Fisk piece is believed (i.e., the parts about Osama’s personally shipping construction equipment, funding the construction of mountain tunnels, recruiting a small army, and then afterwards, funding highway construction in yet another country), it doesn’t appear that Osama needed CIA help. That is, CIA help doesn’t appear to have been a vital precondition to Osama’s exploits in Afghanistan. Nor does he appear in any way to have been prompted by the CIA to act as he did in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation of that country.

fred smith made a negative claim that would be very difficult, perhaps impossible, to prove. Such a claim may be justifiably dismissed, but there’s no sense in requiring proof of something that we know is practically impossible to prove.

However, Tigerman did not make such a claim. It seems to me that the person who made the assertion that Osama is an “ex-CIA-trained operative,” not Tigerman, is obligated to back up his or her claim with some kind of evidence, especially since that person offered to do so and Tigerman took the person up on the offer.

If it were OK to make any kind of bald assertion, then people could pile one bald assertion upon the other, and their opponents could simply ignore the assertions and counter with their own unsupported assertions.

The result would resemble some parts of the International Politics Forum.

A couple of decades ago, I had a friend who was a historian de facto, but who refused to turn in his massive Ph.D. dissertation because he did not think it complete. The head of his committee had told him in essence, I like it, turn it in, I guarantee the committee will accept it, and I’ll put it up for an award. But my friend, obsessed with completing it, declined.

On one occasion my friend, after destroying with his usual ease one of my assertions about a historical issue, offered this criticism of my approach to argument: “You start off really well, but after a while you get this gleam in your eye. . . .”

Around these precincts there seem to be a goodly number of continuously gleaming eyes.

[quote=“Josefus”]Bin Laden Had Plan To Sell Poisoned Cocaine To Americans In 2002
Stories that make you go “woah”.[/quote]
Doesn’t surprise me at all. In fact, I’m pretty damn sure it was Osama that sold me some God-awful grass back in university - nothing but skunk! :fume: Fucking terrorists! :raspberry:

Because Tigerman made such a compelling argument here is a few links. Don’t worry, they are not all from left wing, conspiracy sites.

guardian.co.uk/terrorism/sto … 38,00.html

copvcia.com/free/ww3/02_11_02_lucy.html

greenleft.org.au/back/2001/465/465p15.htm

plp.org/misc/oblncia.html

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/155236.stm

I have more, but I don’t feel like turning this into a 12 page debate of ‘us Vs them’ so I’ll leave what I got here and that’s it. All and all, why would it be so hard to believe that the CIA had a hand in helping Bin Laden at one point in time? It wouldn’t be the first time one of the CIA’s experiments went beyond their control and what they let out made a mess of things. As well, it’s not like the CIA or Bin Laden would admit it anytime soon. it makes him look weak and it would make the CIA look very guilty in the eyes of many everywhere who have suffered because of both sides actions.

xp+10K said it best that claims from any side can be dismissed and they are hard to prove, It pretty much comes down to you, what you choose to believe and what you see as right for how ever you may lead your life. Though having a bogeyman out there under any name whatever side someone is on really makes things a lot more easy. That way what ever ‘side’ you may be on it becomes ok to slander other human beings in a section of the planet for their government, religion, color or what else they choose that is set different from where you are at and where you stand on issues most times you have no real control over anyways.
Peace

Uh, I didn’t make any argument at all. You said you have links. I merely asked you to provide a link or links.

:unamused:

In any event, here is what another cite says:

[quote][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden]“While the charges that the CIA was responsible for the rise of the Afghan Arabs might make good copy, they don’t make good history. The truth is more complicated, tinged with varying shades of gray. The United States wanted to be able to deny that the CIA was funding the Afghan war, so its support was funneled through Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence agency (ISI). ISI in turn made the decisions about which Afghan factions to arm and train, tending to favor the most Islamist and pro-Pakistan. The Afghan Arabs generally fought alongside those factions, which is how the charge arose that they were creatures of the CIA. Former CIA official Milt Bearden, who ran the Agency’s Afghan operation in the late 1980s, says, “The CIA did not recruit Arabs,” as there was no need to do so. There were hundreds of thousands of Afghans all too willing to fight, and the Arabs who did come for jihad were “very disruptive . . . the Afghans thought they were a pain in the ass.” Similar sentiments from Afghans who appreciated the money that flowed from the Gulf but did not appreciate the Arabs’ holier-than-thou attempts to convert them to their ultra-purist version of Islam. … There was simply no point in the CIA and the Afghan Arabs being in contact with each other. … the Afghan Arabs functioned independently and had their own sources of funding. The CIA did not need the Afghan Arabs, and the Afghan Arabs did not need the CIA. So the notion that the Agency funded and trained the Afghan Arabs is, at best, misleading. The ‘let’s blame everything bad that happens on the CIA’ school of thought vastly overestimates the Agency’s powers, both for good and ill.” [Holy War, Inc.: Inside the Secret World of Osama bin Laden (New York: The Free Press, 2001), pp. 64-66.]

The accounts of some journalists and investigators, however, do suggest that CIA money and weapons reached the Afghan Arabs and bin Laden indirectly through the ISI.[/url][/quote]

[quote=“Tigerman”]

Uh, I didn’t make any argument at all. You said you have links. I merely asked you to provide a link or links.

:unamused: [/quote]

Here is just one more link, just for you Tiger;)

dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=sarcasm

[quote=“NaTaS”][quote=“Tigerman”]

Uh, I didn’t make any argument at all. You said you have links. I merely asked you to provide a link or links.

:unamused: [/quote]

Here is just one more link, just for you Tiger;)

dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=sarcasm[/quote]

You know what? I know what sarcasm is and what it means. However, I do not think you understand when and why to use it.

The dictionary definition of “sarcasm” is as follows:

[quote]A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.

A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.[/quote]

You stated that you had links to support your assertion. I asked you to provide those links. You responded with what you now seem to be saying was “sarcasm”.

Why? :unamused:

Did I touch a nerve Tiger? I only added you’re name as a sarcastic remark (And admit it, doing so was sarcastic) because you contributed nothing beyond a stupid little emoticon at that time. Question my understanding of the word and how to use it all you want! You and your link provides nothing more heavy hitting and substantial as well.

As stated in my post with the links, (Which I don’t think you read beyond your own name) I am done with this, I honestly at the end of the day couldn’t care about Bin Laden, the CIA and all the evils both have done. If you see one as a means to an end over another or that you got to break a few eggs to make an omlet etc, great! Good for you and all the power to you. This is getting boring and I got the rest of my evening ahead, Say all you want about Binny-Boy, the CIA, me or what ever else strikes your fancy, I’m out! Maybe I’ll catch you later, if not, Peace.

Not at all. I just think your post was stupid.

Uh, no… I asked you to provide the links you stated that you could provide. I used the :unamused: emoticon because I thought it silly of you to say you have links but not to provide them.

You haven’t yet demonstrated that you understand the concept.

I think it does.

I read enough to ascertain that they were reporting mere speculation.

That’s nice.

So I will assume after this exchange that once again those who engage in these little whisper campaigns and conspiracy theories about US involvement with Osama will now admit: It ain’t true.

Second, the US did not arm Saddam either. Check out www.iraqwatch.org where we find out that the US supplied less than 1 percent of Saddam’s conventional weapons and less than 3.5 percent of his wmds and wmd equipment. The big ones were Russia 59%, France 13% and China 12% for conventional and Germany 50%, Switzerland 8%, and 5% each for France, Italy, Croatia, Brazil and Austria.

So what was involved in the 1% of US conventional arms sales (mostly helicopters). What was involved in US sales of “wmd” materials to Saddam? Mostly supercomputers which “could” have dual purposes. Germany, however, had no such excuse and it sold more than 50 percent of Saddam’s chemical, missile and nuclear technology and equipment. THAT is why Iran is suing Germany for the deaths caused during the Iran Iraq War and no one else.

Finally, the US did sell some weapons to Saddam and Rumsfeld was famously photographed with Saddam right? Yes, but it all occured mostly within the one year 1982-3 when it looked like the Iranians would overrun Basra and keep going through to Saudi Arabia. Was it a difficult moral decision? Yes, but we also cooperated with Stalin against Hitler.

So can we now finally put these two little myths: the US armed and trained and funded Osama and armed Saddam to bed once and for all? Please? I am so tired of the ignorance that exists out there regarding this issue.

You wish. If you have, I certainly fail to see it. Unless you mean that you spurred Tigerman on to ask a few more pertinent questions?

This must be another example of sarcasm and is most amusing in the context considering that you quite rightly note with sarcasm that it was you that provided nothing.

I get that too! I am starting to really love this sarcasm thing. Very very amusing. Bravo!

Absolutely hillarious.

You slay me!!!

There you go again. What evils? Got a link again? haha

What’s this about? Food then? Hmmm, getting hungry myself!

That doesn’t sound sarcastic. It sounds hurt, frustrated and desperate. Do you need a hug? a good cry?

I would think that you were being sarcastic again but somehow the truth of your statement shines through in all its brilliance. (so I will add the sarcasm this time if you don’t mind? Can I play along?)

[quote]
and I got the rest of my evening ahead,[/quote]

haha sort of like that old joke: What’s that up in the road? ahead? (a head as in one head, get it?) har har har

This is very cryptic. Hmmm first names nay even nicknames with Binny as in Osama bin Laden. I don’t know what to make of this, I am perplexed… but you are “out” so if Binny “catches” you he can have a “piece?” hmmm more sarcasm? I wonder… You aren’t really John Walker Lindh are you? hahah har har HAR HAR HAR HEE HEEE HEE HOOOO HOOO