View Full Version : 7 CIA agents killed by double agent
So what the heck is going on with this? Apparently a Jordanian double agent working for CIA and Al Queda was invited into a CIA head quarters for interrogation. He set off a bomb and killed himself and 7 CIA agents. I've even heard the reporters now calling this guy a triple agent.
I've been hearing about this all day. Sad day for us. Here is an article, I haven't read the article because I've been hearing about on NPR all day today.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/01/04/bombing.cia/index.html
just shows you can't trust anyone. this sounds like some james bond shit.
you can't trust guys in the military, you can't trust CIA agents and you most certainly can't trust our politicians, especially our CIC.
sad fucking day it is.[Bang]
When you say you can't trust guys in the CIA, you mean like, if you were some other kind of agent like KGB or something?
Happened day before New Year
What's worse an Army officer they knew had problems?
Or a person that should have been watched at all times?
The Agency has had a lot of double agents.
Like I've said else where
Prayers and thought sent out for all our brave who have fallen.
there are ways to stop this.
I can not share them because it might hurt people's feelings.
ChunkyMonkey
01-05-2010, 17:41
hurt feeling < lost lifes
When you say you can't trust guys in the CIA, you mean like, if you were some other kind of agent like KGB or something?
I would imagine it would be hard to trust any CIA agent...considering you never really know what their job entails, who they might be working for, if they are out to get information on you etc etc.
ok here goes.
(this works for all suicide bombers, not just the guy in this case)
ID the bomber's family.
then send the CSPD after them, and bury them in tickets.
ba dum bum, pish! [ROFL1]
sorry I couldn't resist.
ok here's the real deal.
ID the bomber.
Then, identify and locate his family.
Then, send teams of morally unencumbered operatives to eliminate them. Every man, woman and child. Pets too if there's time.
Teach the radical fundamental islamic types that if they choose to martyr themselves to gain their eternal reward, they'll have plenty of company as they'll be talking all of their loved ones with them.
Pretty harsh no? well, I'm the guy who thinks we should nuke mecca if 9/11 part 2 happens.
too many violent video games as a kid, I guess.
all the "we can't stoop to their level" types may commence crying... now.
ok here goes.
(this works for all suicide bombers, not just the guy in this case)
ID the bomber's family.
then send the CSPD after them, and bury them in tickets.
ba dum bum, pish! [ROFL1]
sorry I couldn't resist.
ok here's the real deal.
ID the bomber.
Then, identify and locate his family.
Then, send teams of morally unencumbered operatives to eliminate them. Every man, woman and child. Pets too if there's time.
Teach the radical fundamental islamic types that if they choose to martyr themselves to gain their eternal reward, they'll have plenty of company as they'll be talking all of their loved ones with them.
Pretty harsh no? well, I'm the guy who thinks we should nuke mecca if 9/11 part 2 happens.
too many violent video games as a kid, I guess.
all the "we can't stoop to their level" types may commence crying... now.
I am unsure about the family retaliation unless there is evidence they knew what he was going to do. Sometimes families haven't a clue what a member of that family is doing or going to do and I would have a hard time holding them personally responsible when it wasn't their fault or action.
as far as nuke mecca, I am with you. I would love to see all of the middle east turned into a glass exportation company after all the sand turns to glass and we should get about .10 a gallon gasoline...6 cents of that being tax.
I am sure my logic is completely contradictory as far as each feeling but I don't really care[ROFL1]
SA Friday
01-05-2010, 21:07
It's tragic but it's been a hard lesson of all the agencies running sources against muslim terrorist org's. We (AFOSI) lost three agents in Iraq to bad source handling a couple years back. I knew one of them, not well, but I knew him.
Arab's in peticular think very long term. They have a saying; the son of my son will avenge me. I can only speculate, but this feels to me as a long term type plot they would work against a counterintelligence agency.
I am unsure about the family retaliation unless there is evidence they knew what he was going to do. Sometimes families haven't a clue what a member of that family is doing or going to do and I would have a hard time holding them personally responsible when it wasn't their fault or action.
as far as nuke mecca, I am with you. I would love to see all of the middle east turned into a glass exportation company after all the sand turns to glass and we should get about .10 a gallon gasoline...6 cents of that being tax.
I am sure my logic is completely contradictory as far as each feeling but I don't really care[ROFL1]
Well, at least you admit it. :D
ID the bomber.
Then, identify and locate his family.
Then, send teams of morally unencumbered operatives to eliminate them. Every man, woman and child. Pets too if there's time.
Teach the radical fundamental islamic types that if they choose to martyr themselves to gain their eternal reward, they'll have plenty of company as they'll be talking all of their loved ones with them.
Pretty harsh no? well, I'm the guy who thinks we should nuke mecca if 9/11 part 2 happens.
too many violent video games as a kid, I guess.
all the "we can't stoop to their level" types may commence crying... now.
wait a second there. back up and stop for just a bit.
are you really suggesting that we fight to win?
holy crap! what a novel idea!
Pets too if there's time.
[Help] Not my goldfish!! NNNOOOOOO!!!!!!! [M2]
[LOL]
rhineoshott
01-06-2010, 12:11
ok here goes.
(this works for all suicide bombers, not just the guy in this case)
ID the bomber's family.
then send the CSPD after them, and bury them in tickets.
ba dum bum, pish! [ROFL1]
sorry I couldn't resist.
ok here's the real deal.
ID the bomber.
Then, identify and locate his family.
Then, send teams of morally unencumbered operatives to eliminate them. Every man, woman and child. Pets too if there's time.
Teach the radical fundamental islamic types that if they choose to martyr themselves to gain their eternal reward, they'll have plenty of company as they'll be talking all of their loved ones with them.
Pretty harsh no? well, I'm the guy who thinks we should nuke mecca if 9/11 part 2 happens.
too many violent video games as a kid, I guess.
all the "we can't stoop to their level" types may commence crying... now.
Then you're playing their game, treating their family as property and negotiation/punishment material. The family is innocent if they havn't done anything. This is very un-American because you're treating people as property.
rhineoshott
01-06-2010, 12:14
Pretty harsh no? well, I'm the guy who thinks we should nuke mecca if 9/11 part 2 happens.
If you think that they're the ones who did it...
Then you're playing their game, treating their family as property and negotiation/punishment material. The family is innocent if they havn't done anything. This is very un-American because you're treating people as property.
yuppers, play their game and play it better, harder and longer.
It's not un-American at all.
The U.S. didn't win WWII by being nice. We won in by firebombing Dresden and dropping the nuke. Twice.
Playing nice is what led to 9/11 in the first place.
Of course, we could make it safer for Americans and just carpet bomb the suicide bomber's hometown instead. More collateral damage, but less American lives at risk.
Punish them until they beg us to stop?
Yes we can!
rhineoshott
01-06-2010, 17:26
yuppers, play their game and play it better, harder and longer.
It's not un-American at all.
The U.S. didn't win WWII by being nice. We won in by firebombing Dresden and dropping the nuke. Twice.
Playing nice is what led to 9/11 in the first place.
Of course, we could make it safer for Americans and just carpet bomb the suicide bomber's hometown instead. More collateral damage, but less American lives at risk.
Punish them until they beg us to stop?
Yes we can!
Well then why don't we just bomb the entire world outside US borders?
You're letting them decide what your morals are. Answer why the killing of innocent blood is acceptable? In any situation.
This isn't playing nice, it's just playing against those who are even playing in the first place.
You're whacked if you think these are the principles that US was founded on.
Do you really think "terrorists" brought down the towers? Look at the evidence.
My friends, It's not Obama or whoever stupid that causes me distress about what's to come in America. It's the Friendly Fire so to speak. It's "conservatives" who who just don't understand why we're conservative. They like the looks of a free sociotey, but not the foundation or the reason to have a free sociotey. They have no morals! They just want no restraints so that they can do whatever they want (good or bad)!
Do you really think "terrorists" brought down the towers? Look at the evidence.
besides airplanes crashing into them?
rhineoshott
01-06-2010, 17:51
besides airplanes crashing into them?
Yep.
Airplaines were the show. The stuff to get the fools hooked on.
This site goes into detail if you're interested. Do your own research. There are so many reasons showing how it was a controoled demolition that I can't even remember them all. Post what you learn if you like.
http://www.ae911truth.org/
Elhuero, your idea is... less than well thought out.
We aren't fighting a budding mobster or street gang who are trying to expand their territory. You want to kill the families of the fundamentalist version of someone who already murder their own daughters and call it an "Honor Killing." You want to attack the families of a fundamentalist that already shames their family two fold by first becoming a terrorist, and then by committing suicide? You're essentially talking about approaching the problem of someone who will willingly kill them selves for their hatered of you, by giving them nothing to live for? That would result in nothing less than disaster.
I figure if we nuke every square mile within Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan, The Gaza Strip, The West Bank, Somalia, Pakistan and Afghanistan we'd probably stamp out the vast majority of current and future Muslim Fundamentalists. Then we simply tell the remaining nations that if they don't reign in their radical elements, we'll do the same to them...
Of course that would make us the worst mass murderers of all time. In one stroke we'll have desecrated the ideals and sacrifices of our Fore Fathers and spit on the grave every Patriot who has ever died for this nation. We are better than our enemies. We must hold the moral high ground or this struggle is pointless.
Retaliating against a terrorist's family (unless they are accomplices) is morally abhorrent and violates every principle our nation is founded on. We do not kill innocent people.
Killing innocent civilians by indiscriminate bombing is abhorrent. To the comment we did it during WWII, we did only because we had no choice. Unlike now where we can guide a single munition down a ventilation shaft and kill just the bad guys, we had no such capability in WWII. Then the only way to ensure destruction of valid military targets spread throughout a city was to carpet bomb. Had we any other choice, we would have chosen not to kill so many innocents.
As for using the bomb on Japan, that was only done after all other military options were exhausted. Japan was given an ultimatum before we dropped them. Japan chose the path of nuclear destruction. Even then I believe we grudgingly used these weapons after calculating it would result in the fewer casualties (for both sides) versus a full invasion of the Japanese mainland.
And in regards to the original intent of this post, the memory of those agents who died protecting this nation needs to be honored. That memory deserves better than us resorting to same cowardly tactics that took their lives.
At all costs we MUST be politically correct to everyone...
Killing innocent civilians by indiscriminate bombing is abhorrent. To the comment we did it during WWII, we did only because we had no choice.
Had we any other choice, we would have chosen not to kill so many innocents.
Wrong.
It was a calculated move to demoralize the enemy and destroy their will to fight.
Yep.
Airplaines were the show. The stuff to get the fools hooked on.
This site goes into detail if you're interested. Do your own research. There are so many reasons showing how it was a controoled demolition that I can't even remember them all. Post what you learn if you like.
http://www.ae911truth.org/
pardon my french, but
holy shit. you believe that crap?
you are a doofus.
Wrong.
It was a calculated move to demoralize the enemy and destroy their will to fight.
So you think that if the Allies had the ability to do pinpoint strikes on military and strategic targets in Axis cities, they would still have chosen to destroy civilian areas and such acts would be justifiable?
You and I have very different views of what's morally justifiable.
And if you are just referring to the fire bombing of Dresden, a very controversial series of bombing raids even back then, here's what Air Chief Marshall Arthur Harris had to say about it:
"I ... assume that the view under consideration is something like this: no doubt in the past we were justified in attacking German cities. But to do so was always repugnant and now that the Germans are beaten anyway we can properly abstain from proceeding with these attacks. This is a doctrine to which I could never subscribe. Attacks on cities like any other act of war are intolerable unless they are strategically justified. But they are strategically justified in so far as they tend to shorten the war and preserve the lives of Allied soldiers. To my mind we have absolutely no right to give them up unless it is certain that they will not have this effect. I do not personally regard the whole of the remaining cities of Germany as worth the bones of one British Grenadier. The feeling, such as there is, over Dresden, could be easily explained by any psychiatrist. It is connected with German bands and Dresden shepherdesses. Actually Dresden was a mass of munitions works, an intact government centre, and a key transportation point to the East. It is now none of these things."
Sounds like the bombings had some very real military value to him.
theGinsue
01-06-2010, 22:13
Arab's in peticular think very long term. They have a saying; the son of my son will avenge me. I can only speculate, but this feels to me as a long term type plot they would work against a counterintelligence agency.
I believe that if you kill a terrorist and he has children, those children will become the long term plan and seek to take as many non-Muslim lives that they can. If you "sink to their level" as someone here has said then you essentially wipe out hte ability of that family - including it's future generations - to seek revenge against us infedels.
Punish them until they beg us to stop?
I have to say that I agree with this logic. You've got these governments over there who turn a blind eye to the terrorists they raise the terrorist camps on their soil where better terrorists are being trained, and attacks against Americans are being planned while these nations proclaim to the U.S. "Uh, sorry. We don't condone these actions".
Bull Shit (sorry for the language but this is something I'm adament about)!
If we make them hurt - and hurt bad - it will either kick them all into gear to try to wipe us out (at which time we solve the problem once and for all), or they will do as Elhuero said and make them beg us to stop. We let them know that either THEY take care of the problem, or we will and it'll get done with collateral damage because we're not risking any more of OUR troops lives to do it cleanly.
I also believe that we need to publicly bury the bodies/body parts of their terrorists with portions of pigs (I know, this isn't fair to the pigs). Their religion teaches that this will keep them from entering their heaven do to the pigs uncleanliness (these people don't bathe and they claim PIGS are unclean?). While it is a matter of debate whether it actually happened or is just an urban legend, it has been largley discounted that General Pershing did this very thing in the Phillipines. Whether Pershing did it or not, I believe that it would help to demoralize the martyr attitude if they believed that they would be prevented from going to heaven.
Very un-PC? Yes and I make no apologies for it either.
Back to the original theme of this thread, my thoughts and prayers go out to these 7 CIA agents who only sought to increase the safety of each and every one of us.
So you think that if the Allies had the ability to do pinpoint strikes on military and strategic targets in Axis cities, they would still have chosen to destroy civilian areas and such acts would be justifiable?
Damn right.
World War II was fought in a different era.
If you believe that killing innocents will help end terrorist aggression towards us; then you also must accept that if instead of blowing up airplanes, terrorists came over here and started raping and killing our families, that we would say, "Oh man, this isn't worth it, we're going to have to just leave those guys alone."
Americans are not the only people ever to feel a sense of pride, seek justice or vengeance.
theGinsue
01-06-2010, 22:22
Well, then there is this solution:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z23fZSa-QY4
If you believe that killing innocents will help end terrorist aggression towards us; then you also must accept that if instead of blowing up airplanes, terrorists came over here and started raping and killing our families, that we would say, "Oh man, this isn't worth it, we're going to have to just leave those guys alone."
Americans are not the only people ever to feel a sense of pride, seek justice or vengeance.
I never said anything about raping.
The extremists hate us anyway. There's nothing we can do to make them not hate us.
Pardon my french, but fuck their culture.
Saddam used to pay money to the families of bombers. I wouldn't doubt that Iran does it now.
As has been pointed out, these are people who kill their own daughters if they interact too much with non muslims (or do pretty much anything else dad doesn't like)
All the more reason to NOT be nice to them.
Honor killings are repugnant, more so than rap music, and I'll be damned if that's the type of "diversity" I will respect. (you can all you want)
Personally, I think it would give a would-be suicide bomber pause to think instead of "well, I'll be dead but my family will be set up for life" to have the thought "well, I'll be dead and then the Americans will hunt down mom, dad, sissy, uncle abul and auntie hekkeba"
but then, that's me.
I'm weird.
like this guy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCHtw6WbbnM
The extremists hate us anyway. There's nothing we can do to make them not hate us.
[snip]
Personally, I think it would give a would-be suicide bomber pause to think instead of "well, I'll be dead but my family will be set up for life" to have the thought "well, I'll be dead and then the Americans will hunt down mom, dad, sissy, uncle abul and auntie hekkeba"
but then, that's me.
I'm weird.
Actually, given your intended scenario, it's much more likely to be that because we've indiscriminately and randomly bombed a bunch of uninvolved people, we've recruited a bunch more bad guys from the vast majority of people who wouldn't really have cared in the first place. It's the same way that holding people in prison for years because they were sold to you for bounties pretty much ensures if they weren't America hating terrorists before, they certainly will be now.
It's not rocket science -- reverse the positions and put your innocent self in the scenario. What would you do if BigGov put you in jail wrongly for many years, or killed all your family because one of the neighbors was a criminal?
I never said anything about raping.
Honor killings are repugnant, more so than rap music, and I'll be damned if that's the type of "diversity" I will respect. (you can all you want)
I said something about raping. If in addition to bombing public places, terrorists would select an entire family to rape and kill, would that get the point across to you that you should leave them alone?
Also, not a single person in this thread has said anything about respecting diversity, but you are confusing the acceptance of gross human rights violations with accepting cultural differences. Let's get real.
Also, just out of curiosity, what would it take to convince you to go into Iran and blow yourself up in the middle of a market? No restrictions, financially, threats against your family, the key to your favorite brothel, etc. Be creative and really consider what it would take to get you to blow yourself up in a public place in another country. Think about it long and hard, then get back to me.
rhineoshott
01-07-2010, 13:14
pardon my french, but
holy shit. you believe that crap?
you are a doofus.
That's quite a statement there. Assuming you've done no research. Give me some logical reasons why I'm a doofus for holding to those beliefs. So far you're at 0! You act like as if have the upper ground already. Man up and give some reasons! You're the doofus for beleiving whatever is fed into your mouth for you to eat and repeat. Is the government your mommy that you trust? Is it beyond you're imagination for the government to tell a lie? You need to hold your toung and see what you're saying before you say it, like the rest of us well respected americans.
Fellow members of the board, Please pardon my indignant tone.
Logical reasons? The most logical reason against it being a controlled demolition is that to rig both towers for controlled demolition would have taken months and hundreds of technicians, but none of that work was ever witnessed and none of those technicians have ever come forward.
The problem with conspiracy theories is that you start with a ridiculous conclusion, and work backwards, picking and choosing some facts and leaving out others in order to arrive at the conclusion that you originally imagined. If you just laid out the fact from beginning to end, there is no way you'd even come close to whatever wacky conspiracy.
I've been hearing all the most common conspiracy theories for 9/11 since it happened, I've yet to ever have anyone even attempt to tell me what the US government would gain by slamming planes into buildings.
By creating a false scenario, the government can control the people through fear and deciet.
You think it's the first time that a gov. has started a war for no apparent reason?
Another reason to grab your freedoms.
That doesn't seem strong enough for me. It only takes the death of one person to start a war, did they need to disrupt the entire national economy to start a war? Not likely.
Why not?
The NWO has to have an impact on the World to be able to convince the masses to jump on board.
Oh, you mean the NWO that will be able to supercede our constitution once they actually have a standing army because Obama made that EO to allow interpol to do so?
I see how it all fits together so nicely now. Now all we have to do is fit contrails into the equation some how. We already know that the planes delivering the contrails take off and land on the swastika shaped run ways at DIA because it has a secret NWO military base underneath it, evidenced by that keystone with the Mason symbol on it. Anything I'm missing here?
Yep.
Airplaines were the show. The stuff to get the fools hooked on.
This site goes into detail if you're interested. Do your own research. There are so many reasons showing how it was a controoled demolition that I can't even remember them all. Post what you learn if you like.
http://www.ae911truth.org/
and what say you about United Flight 93 where the pilots had their throats cut with box knives, paxs that tried to fight the terrorists ultimately crashing in PA killing everyone aboard where they were able to recover the CVR and flight data recorder.
I only ask because I knew Jason Dahl and his family...the captain of that flight.
I also watched it live on TV while sitting in 11th grade physics class, watched the 2nd plane hit tower 2, watched them collapse without secondary explosions.
GoldFinger
01-07-2010, 15:32
It's true that the Government may have "benefited" from this, but it's just not the likely scenario. Occam's Razor.
and what say you about United Flight 93 where the pilots had their throats cut with box knives, paxs that tried to fight the terrorists ultimately crashing in PA killing everyone aboard where they were able to recover the CVR and flight data recorder.
I only ask because I knew Jason Dahl and his family...the captain of that flight.
I also watched it live on TV while sitting in 11th grade physics class, watched the 2nd plane hit tower 2, watched them collapse without secondary explosions.
Yeah, but none of that counts. These guys were top notch professionals (who can't even silence a few nutty conspiracy theorists).
I don't beleive nor disbeleive all the theories. Simply stating that when you look at what the government does and what they can do you have to beleive they "really" have your well being in mind...
Anyone remember agent orange?
The LSD experiments?
Electric shock treatments?
all for the well being of the citizens.
Yeah, but none of that counts. These guys were top notch professionals (who can't even silence a few nutty conspiracy theorists).
precisely...when I watch something happen with my own eyes I deem it to be completely true...especially since I don't do drugs and I wasn't drinking in class. And I highly doubt they would show an education film that shows LIVE on CNN about terrorists attacking the trade centers with heavily fueled commercial airliners.
Also, youtube the videos that are taken from live footage and tell me which one shows any type of a secondary explosion that caused either of the towers to collapse. I surely never saw one.
Did you also think that when a 150,000 airplane with probably 20,000-30,000 gallons of jet fuel (roughly 4500 gallons) might be able to do enough damage to supports throughout several floors to collapse the building...then once it gets started there is no way to stop it?
I just highly question the stability and the intelligence of anyone who truly believes a conspiracy theory as to 9/11
anyone explain why tower 7 that was not hit went down?
Were there this many conspiracy theories surrounding the federal buildings in Ohio? I know that there are some pretty hyped up theories, but I was too young at the time to hear about them.
Do you really think "terrorists" brought down the towers? Look at the evidence.
LOL are you talking about the evidence that was presented by that little teenage prick who made loose change from shit he found on google?
The one that comes to mind is that McVeigh was a government experiment gone bad. and his qiuck capture execution and silencing of all those that know him covered the governments ass.
I read something that recently came to light (I think) about missing footage from security cameras, but I don't remember all the details. I think the Wikipage on that event covers some of that fishy stuff.
rhineoshott
01-07-2010, 16:03
LOL are you talking about the evidence that was presented by that little teenage prick who made loose change from shit he found on google?
I am unfarmiliar with this incident. Please inform.
Always fishy stuff involved.
I am unfarmiliar with this incident. Please inform.
No you aren't. This one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E3oIbO0AWE
rhineoshott
01-07-2010, 16:17
and what say you about United Flight 93 where the pilots had their throats cut with box knives, paxs that tried to fight the terrorists ultimately crashing in PA killing everyone aboard where they were able to recover the CVR and flight data recorder.
I only ask because I knew Jason Dahl and his family...the captain of that flight.
I also watched it live on TV while sitting in 11th grade physics class, watched the 2nd plane hit tower 2, watched them collapse without secondary explosions.
Which direction was 93 headed? I don't remember. Personally I believe it was meant for the Pentagon or WTC7. It didn't make it so they had to blow it up anyway. They have never provided any footage of an airplane hitting the pentagon. The Pentagon I'm sure had excelent surveliance that would have documented such an occurence.
All the footage I've ever seen has been from news cameras or privately filmed footage. There was probably a limited amount of camera footage of the Ft Hood shootings late last year as well, but how much have you seen? I haven't seen any, just like I don't expect the government to release security footage from Pentagon cameras.
GoldFinger
01-07-2010, 16:28
Actually, the government was forced to release footage. You can see the plane (just barely) coming in low and fast from the right. The Frame speed is REALLY slow on this camera, it's a parking lot camer, so it sucks.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/16/terror/main1622101.shtml
Perfect example. A parking lot security camera hardly reveals where cameras may be at the Pentagon.
And it is thet supposed Only footage realeased.
A gas station across the street was also supposed to have film, but it seemingly disappeared.
That's quite a statement there. Assuming you've done no research. Give me some logical reasons why I'm a doofus for holding to those beliefs. So far you're at 0! You act like as if have the upper ground already. Man up and give some reasons! You're the doofus for beleiving whatever is fed into your mouth for you to eat and repeat. Is the government your mommy that you trust? Is it beyond you're imagination for the government to tell a lie? You need to hold your toung and see what you're saying before you say it, like the rest of us well respected americans.
Fellow members of the board, Please pardon my indignant tone.
I'm not going to waste my time trying to debunk your crackpot theories. You have your mind made up.
I could print out all the voluminous info that has been used to debunk that crap, wrap it around a brick and smack you in the face with it and it still wouldn't change your mind.
Believe what you want to believe. I'll do the same. I don't think there were any conspiracies, extra explosives, cruise missiles, or psychic CIA whippoorwills. I do think 9/11 truthers are idiots, and I don't have to justify my opinion or prove anything to you. Deal with it.
Just as there seems to be folks that agree with you on this, I'd be willing to bet there are folks (quite possibly more of them) here that agree with me as well.
You think 9/11 was an inside job, go start your own thread about it and be indignant all you want.
Keep this one on topic.
You think 9/11 was an inside job, go start your own thread about it and be indignant all you want.
Keep this one on topic.
This thread hasn't been on topic since page one. Speaking of which, I'm still waiting to hear what it would take for you to blow yourself up in a public place.
BOT,, the agents were killed by a Manchurian candidate.
This thread hasn't been on topic since page one. Speaking of which, I'm still waiting to hear what it would take for you to blow yourself up in a public place.
Well the answer to your question is nothing, because I'm not an insane islamobot.
what's the point of the question?
I never suggested that we use the jihaidi tactics against them in a literal manner and send americans to blow themselves up in markets.
I also never suggested that we carpet bomb cities. I used that in an facetious manner to illustrate that my opinion, that we should punish (nay, MURDER!) the poor innocent families of the poor innocent suicide bombers, is actually a more humane yet delightfully brutal alternative to wreaking mass destruction on thousands.
It's funny how folks are arguing with me like they think they have a chance in hell of painting me into a corner and getting me to change my view.
Some feel that there are things we shouldn't do to our enemies because we'd be "stooping to their level" and that would make us "no better than they are"
That's fine.
Like I told conspiracy man. Beleeve what you like.
Your opinion can be like our nations soft, kind heart.
And mine can be like our nation's foot.
In a boot.
Pressing down on their neck.
chew on this amigos. front page of CNN.
It compares our current war to what happened in the Philippines one hundred years ago. (a long time before we bombed dresden)
Talks about why we won then, and why the idea of political correctness, playing nice, and "we can't stoop to their level" is gonna lose the current one
for us.
http://afghanistan.blogs.cnn.com/2010/01/07/past-war-offers-afghanistan-lessons-and-its-not-vietnam/
juicy tidbits:
Filipino fighters deliberately sought to drag the war on with hit-and-run tactics that would turn the American public against the war, historians say. It was the classic guerilla strategy: Win by avoiding big, pitched battles and melt into the civilian population.
But the U.S. military responded to the guerilla strategy with a simple strategy of their own, some historians say: Kill them all.
Civilian casualties were not accidental, but intentional, says Lt. Col. Michael E. Silverman, an Iraq war veteran and a counterinsurgency training consultant for the U.S. Army.
and one comment by some guy named Sean:
The main differences between the current wars and those past ones we were able to win are the ROE. In the past the ROE were created with the pure intent to win. Todays ROE are designed to have as little collateral damage as possible and has nothing to do with the intent to win a war.
I asked the question because I correctly anticipated your answer. You can't even comprehend what it would take to become a suicide bomber, yet you are solidly convinced that if you use the method you think is harsh, based on your mindset and beliefs, and think that they will apply to a person who is so different from yourself that you can't even relate to them. That is like suggesting using reverse psychology on a dog to get it to stop chewing up your shoes.
Look, I thought the made up story in The Usual Suspects about the maffia war was cool too, but in this situation I don't think it is really an effective tactic to get the result that you want.
Which direction was 93 headed? I don't remember. Personally I believe it was meant for the Pentagon or WTC7. It didn't make it so they had to blow it up anyway. They have never provided any footage of an airplane hitting the pentagon. The Pentagon I'm sure had excelent surveliance that would have documented such an occurence.
direction has nothing to do with it. that is unknown what they were going after...the whitehouse, who knows.
The pentagon never has and never will release footage because it would compromise the interior of the building. the only footage released was the parking lot security camera that had about a 1 frame per ten second rate on it which is damn near worthless.
Did you watch the attack live? I did and I can tell you airliners hit the building and they collapsed, not some weird conspiracy
I think there were 500,000,000 reasons for wtc 7 coming down and not some absurd .gov plot.
Pretty sure it was Bush's fault....
I think it is interesting that people see that there are things that don't immediately make sense (Tower 7 falling without being hit) and then jump straight to a conclusion that makes just as little, or even less sense (it was the US gov) than the original event.
Several terrorist sleeper cells infiltrate the country, remain dormant for years and years while they go through flight school to learn the basics of flying planes. They fly some planes straight into some buildings, some unexpected stuff happens (EVERYTHING is unexpected when something happens that has never happened before) and instead of reasoning that perhaps the terrorist sleeper cells ALSO infiltrated another common industry in America (demolition, building construction, etc) it is automatically assumed that the US gov is behind everything? That doesn't make sense.
Sorry if my interjections made that comment flow poorly.
I asked the question because I correctly anticipated your answer. You can't even comprehend what it would take to become a suicide bomber, yet you are solidly convinced that if you use the method you think is harsh, based on your mindset and beliefs, and think that they will apply to a person who is so different from yourself that you can't even relate to them. That is like suggesting using reverse psychology on a dog to get it to stop chewing up your shoes.
Death is a great deterrent for any mindset.
Death is a great deterrent for any mindset.
Evidently not.
Death is a great deterrent for any mindset.
not for the extremists who think they will be showered with virgins.
the only way to get them is to show them if they do kill themselves in the name of allah they will get 20 Rosie O'Donnell. I bet we could all be friends then.[ROFL1]
rhineoshott
01-08-2010, 16:57
Did you watch the attack live? I did and I can tell you airliners hit the building and they collapsed, not some weird conspiracy
Yes I did watch live. The buildings fell about 40 minutes after the impact of the plane. Obviously the impact of the plane is not what brought it down. Scientifically it's impossible for kerosene/jet fuel to melt steel (What the building is made of). Experts insist that there was never any molten steel (since jet fuel cannot ever burn hot enough to melt steel). The towers fell at free fall speed. The "experts" hold to what they call the "pancake effect" as the only possible explanation for the total collapse of the building. It's where the outer trusses become detached from the core frame and stack as they fall. This obviously cannot happen at free fall speed since the falling objects would encounter at least some resistance. This leaves us with a big question as to what brought the buildings down.
SWEET i'm "conspiracy man" now!
You don't need to melt steel to compromise its strength enough to collapse under tremendous weight.
rhineoshott
01-08-2010, 17:06
You do to achieve free-fall speed
You don't need to melt steel to compromise its strength enough to collapse under tremendous weight.
This leaves us with a big question as to what brought the buildings down.
Gravity...
I asked the question because I correctly anticipated your answer. You can't even comprehend what it would take to become a suicide bomber, yet you are solidly convinced that if you use the method you think is harsh, based on your mindset and beliefs, and think that they will apply to a person who is so different from yourself that you can't even relate to them. That is like suggesting using reverse psychology on a dog to get it to stop chewing up your shoes.
Look, I thought the made up story in The Usual Suspects about the maffia war was cool too, but in this situation I don't think it is really an effective tactic to get the result that you want.
I find it interesting that nobody has disputed the links I posted.
Those that disagree with me can not deny that what I think should be done has a proven track record of working, unlike the koombaya crap that obama is going for.
Where are the revenge strikes from the Philippines, Japan, and Germany? Never happened.
That's what happens when you destroy the enemy's willingness to fight. The Japanese were suicidal as well, look what that got them.
That's because the suicide attack has always been a last ditch effort of a beaten enemy. If it was an effective military tactic, then our bombers in WWII would have sought targets to auger into after their payloads were dropped. It is a highly less effective combat tactic.
However, this less effective tactic becomes successful if your enemy says "Wow, they're suicidal. We can never stop that, might as well throw in the towel"
Which is exactly what anyone who disagrees is advocating.
The jihadis were able to change the course of the elections in Spain a few years ago with a couple of lives and some bombs on trains.
Buy pussing out, you hand them victory on a silver platter.
Plus, the "Elhuero doctrine" has the novelty of never having been tried yet in this conflict.
If it doesn't work we can always grovel for the forgiveness of our islamic overlords later. (well, at least you all can. by that point I'll be long dead, defending my freedom or executed as an infidel)
I find it sickening that our government has already thrown in the towel.
They don't even want to call it a war on terror anymore. Napolitano calls terrorism "man made disasters". They liken terrorism to hurricane or tornado, that cannot be not be stopped, only avoided and survived.
That, my friends, is bullshit. Pardon my french.
Patton is rolling over in his grave.
It doesn't matter to us what a radical's view on death or the afterlife is, if he's already dead.
I'll might not change any minds by stating my case, but I'm glad to see at least a couple of folks agree with me.
in closing, here's another link backing up my reasoning:
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2010/01/07/96634.html
that bitch is going to teach that to her children.
the lesson moms should be teaching their children in that part of the world is "Don't fuck with the U.S."
pardon my french.
I never read your link. I'll look at it when I get home probably. It's not that your idea can never be effective for any enemy, just that I don't think it will be effective for this particular enemy. When you say that Sadam paid families of suicide bombers, I seriously doubt he was "setting them up for life."
You do to achieve free-fall speed
start yer own thread
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v93/elhuero/gifs/7868c9eaa99d.gif
This is my thread bub, I'll debate both of you at the same time. Not right now though, I got busy at work and will have to pick this up later.
I find it interesting that nobody has disputed the links I posted.
Those that disagree with me can not deny that what I think should be done has a proven track record of working, unlike the koombaya crap that obama is going for.
Did you read your own link? Because it basically talks about the policy of attrition during the Philippine-American war and then goes on to list all the reasons why this policy wouldn't work in Afghanistan.
Yes I did watch live. The buildings fell about 40 minutes after the impact of the plane. Obviously the impact of the plane is not what brought it down. Scientifically it's impossible for kerosene/jet fuel to melt steel (What the building is made of). Experts insist that there was never any molten steel (since jet fuel cannot ever burn hot enough to melt steel). The towers fell at free fall speed. The "experts" hold to what they call the "pancake effect" as the only possible explanation for the total collapse of the building. It's where the outer trusses become detached from the core frame and stack as they fall. This obviously cannot happen at free fall speed since the falling objects would encounter at least some resistance. This leaves us with a big question as to what brought the buildings down.
SWEET i'm "conspiracy man" now!
are you positive they reached free fall speed? do you know what the free fall speed of each piece of that building is?
Did you ever think that the pure impact of 150,000+ lbs of airplane flying over 250 MPH might do a little damage to supports?
Heat from the crash would weaken the metal over time, doesn't have to melt it. All you need is a weak point and the whole thing starts down from sheer weight + gravity. after that Newton's laws take effect causing the building to collapse.
And where are these "experts" at? Did the "experts" also listen to the chief engineer who said the buildings were not engineered correctly and weren't designed to withstand the impact of an airliner?
There is no question as to what brought the buildings down. gravity did. unless you have a conspiracy about that too?
you still didn't answer if you saw an explosion within the building either just before the collapse or during the collapse of EITHER building.
there are plenty of videos from all angles...something would be seen somewhere.
Also, why would they attack the trade centers first, why not the white house, why weren't there several attacks across the country, why did the guys do training at flight schools in florida instead of the .gov conducting the training.
where are all the people saying they placed explosives to detonate after the attacks, why even bother with the airplanes when they could say the building collapsed on its own due to poor engineering. I can have a million "WHYS" myself, but there isn't a WHY in my head as to watching two airplanes, one LIVE on TV crash into a building and the building subsequently collapsing.
I feel like I am arguing with a Liberal at this point. FACTS just don't seem compute with them.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.