The Great American Conspiracy Theory

[msufan]

The problem I still have with all of this is that if Bin Laden would have to be an ALLY of ours to keep quiet, otherwise he would out the US govt. and turn world sentiment even further against us.

[chachi]

Originally Posted by msufan

I just read that entire thing and I am sold. There were explosives involved.

I have presented this artice to MEs, CEs, EEs, Physicists, idiots, drunks and chicks and NO ONE can/will refute the points in the article. Many try to attack the "why?" but no one who honestly reads it tries to refute it.

[Feckweed]

Originally Posted by msufan

If this is a conspiracy, then the government definitely has no interest in capturing Bin Laden, as he is worth more to them alive.

As far as my PERSONAL views, even though you directed this at CIO, I have a problem with ALL of it.

That makes absolutely no sense. Obviously his capture would boost Dubya's ratings. And nobody is gonna believe the threat of AQ would no longer exist with his capture. Care to explain why the gov't would have "no interest"?

[chachi]

Originally Posted by msufan

The problem I still have with all of this is that if Bin Laden would have to be an ALLY of ours to keep quiet, otherwise he would out the US govt. and turn world sentiment even further against us.

I personally would forget Bin Laden, he is just a "role" or "charachter".

[chachi]

Originally Posted by ****weed

That makes absolutely no sense. Obviously his capture would boost Dubya's ratings. And nobody is gonna believe the threat of AQ would no longer exist with his capture. Care to explain why the gov't would have "no interest"?

Once he is captured we would be expected to pull out/reduce numbers in Afghanistan. As long as we are "searching" we have a "valid" reason to be there.

You are right though, if W needs a boost it is possible Bin Laden will be 'captured'.

[msufan]

Originally Posted by ****weed

That makes absolutely no sense. Obviously his capture would boost Dubya's ratings. And nobody is gonna believe the threat of AQ would no longer exist with his capture. Care to explain why the gov't would have "no interest"?

The government has no interest in capturing Bin Laden because what would happen to him then? He would go to trial? What would happen then? He'd talk about what he knows about 9/11 and more?

They want to avoid that at all costs.

[Feckweed]

Originally Posted by msufan

The government has no interest in capturing Bin Laden because what would happen to him then? He would go to trial? What would happen then? He'd talk about what he knows about 9/11 and more?

They want to avoid that at all costs.

I never said anything about being captured alive. His death would cover all your bases, so what's preventing the US from "killing him in action"?

[chachi]

Originally Posted by ****weed

I never said anything about being captured alive. His death would cover all your bases, so what's preventing the US from "killing him in action"?

Chicken hawks need a chicken to hunt.

[msufan]

Originally Posted by ****weed

I never said anything about being captured alive. His death would cover all your bases, so what's preventing the US from "killing him in action"?

If they ARE going to get him, it would be dead, not alive. And that does have some merit in terms of raising Bush's popularity for a short stint.

On the other hand, it would cause Bin Laden to get to be "marytred" for the cause, turning more radical jihadists against us, and it would also take away one of our reasons for maintaining a presence in the area.

[wingfanjim]

Originally Posted by ****weed

Exactly. And that has nothing to do with AQ and 9-11, so a conspiracy such as that is not logical here

However, remember the contentious way that the president came into office in 2000. He wouldnt' have had the political capital or the unity to go to war if 9/11 had not happened. Especially since foreign policy was generally considered an afterthought of the 2000 election. If you recall, the issues were almost primarily domestic issues (see social security and the "locked box"). The country was at peace with no apparent enemies in sight. However, 9/11 happens and all of a sudden we have an enemy again. We have threats, our sense of safety has been shattered. NOW you go to the newly frightened American people and tell them that our old enemy Saddam Hussein poses a threat to us too and he has weapons of mass destruction (not true) and he might be in cahoots with OBL (not true) and he's intefering with UN weapons inspectors (true) and the American people rally around the flag and say "GO TO WAR!". A scared, beleagured populace is capable of accepting many things (see Germans under the Nazis). Not to say that we have fallen to the level the Germans did at that time, but i am saying that a fearful populace is much more succeptable to suggestions such as war and violence than a confidant populace living in peace is. Iraq could NOT have happened without 9/11.

[Feckweed]

Originally Posted by MSU_CIO

Chicken hawks need a chicken to hunt.

and all this time I thought the term chicken described the predator, not the prey.

OK

[msufan]

I remember a Bush speech about Bin Laden where he said Bin Laden was cornered and they knew where he was. He sort of pooh-poohed Bin Laden as being irrelevent. And the spin has definitely shifted away from catching Bin Laden into just containing his effects. This would be in line with the thinking that they don't want to catch Bin Laden at all.

[Feckweed]

Originally Posted by msufan

If they ARE going to get him, it would be dead, not alive. And that does have some merit in terms of raising Bush's popularity for a short stint.

On the other hand, it would cause Bin Laden to get to be "marytred" for the cause, turning more radical jihadists against us, and it would also take away one of our reasons for maintaining a presence in the area.

turning radical jihadists against us? So these radical jihadists aren't against us now, but so long as Bin laden is martyred Americans be damned

[msufan]

Originally Posted by wingfanjim

However, remember the contentious way that the president came into office in 2000. He wouldnt' have had the political capital or the unity to go to war if 9/11 had not happened. Especially since foreign policy was generally considered an afterthought of the 2000 election. If you recall, the issues were almost primarily domestic issues (see social security and the "locked box"). The country was at peace with no apparent enemies in sight. However, 9/11 happens and all of a sudden we have an enemy again. We have threats, our sense of safety has been shattered. NOW you go to the newly frightened American people and tell them that our old enemy Saddam Hussein poses a threat to us too and he has weapons of mass destruction (not true) and he might be in cahoots with OBL (not true) and he's intefering with UN weapons inspectors (true) and the American people rally around the flag and say "GO TO WAR!". A scared, beleagured populace is capable of accepting many things (see Germans under the Nazis). Not to say that we have fallen to the level the Germans did at that time, but i am saying that a fearful populace is much more succeptable to suggestions such as war and violence than a confidant populace living in peace is. Iraq could NOT have happened without 9/11.

Good points. And they threw in anthrax for good measure, since we were SURE that there were WMDs and chemical weapons in Iraq.

[msufan]

Originally Posted by ****weed

turning radical jihadists against us? So these radical jihadists aren't against us now, but so long as Bin laden is martyred Americans be damned

Clarification: Turning more Muslims INTO radical jihadists.

[Al Czervik]

Here is Mike Ruppert's take:

"I believe that bin Laden was, and remains, a CIA/US government/Wall Street asset. This would explain why he has never been caught. There are still wars to fight. He can't be caught for a variety of reasons, including his family's enormous and diverse financial connections to the same elites that control the United States financial system, and his close interrelationship with a Saudi ruling class that could pull the plug on the US economy even before Peak Oil does. Osama bin Laden also knows way too much, and without him, the Bush administration would have had no excuse for any of what it has done over the last four years. From a strategic point of view, Osama is Dick Cheney's best friend."

And Osama videos are the CIA's best weapons.

It is not a stretch to expect future bin Laden tapes to issue more specific planted facts about a variety of issues that the Bush administration wants American citizens to oppose.

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/fre...opoganda.shtml

[wingfanjim]

Originally Posted by msufan

The problem I still have with all of this is that if Bin Laden would have to be an ALLY of ours to keep quiet, otherwise he would out the US govt. and turn world sentiment even further against us.

Who was Vice President and former head of the CIA when the United States was giving support to OBL and the Moujahadeen in Afghanistan in the 1980s? Bush 41. Family ties. OBL and the US were allies back then. Who's to say they ever stopped.

[msufan]

Originally Posted by wingfanjim

Who was Vice President and former head of the CIA when the United States was giving support to OBL and the Moujahadeen in Afghanistan in the 1980s? Bush 41. Family ties. OBL and the US were allies back then. Who's to say they ever stopped.

Good point.

Another layer: Something else that frustrates me about Bush is his affinity for racking up massive spending deficits each year. Could the conspiracy theory extend there, along the lines of, hey, if we're going to be running out of oil in the very near future anyway, we might as well spend like crazy, borrow as much as we can, get the oil for as long as we can, and push back the crash as long as we possibly can -- hopefully beyond our lifetimes?

[wingfanjim]

Also, look how the trial of Saddam Hussein keeps getting delayed by assasinations on his lawyers. The longer they turn the Saddam Hussein trial into a spectacle, the longer they have to NOT talk about bin Laden. Also, look at how little we even bring up Bin Laden any more, or at least the politicians. It is now all about Zarqowi (I know I spelled that wrong). He's the one who is taking credit for the attacks now. Bin Laden has fallen off the map and now we have a new public enemy.

[wingfanjim]

Originally Posted by msufan

Good point.

Another layer: Something else that frustrates me about Bush is his affinity for racking up massive spending deficits each year. Could the conspiracy theory extend there, along the lines of, hey, if we're going to be running out of oil in the very near future anyway, we might as well spend like crazy, borrow as much as we can, get the oil for as long as we can, and push back the crash as long as we possibly can -- hopefully beyond our lifetimes?

Like how they passed $50 billion in spending cuts (much of which came from programs helping the poor) yet decided to continue the $60 billion in tax relief. That's a $10 billion deficit by my math.

[msufan]

The American public has a short attention span when it comes to politics, and is mostly just focused on keeping a job, taking care of their family, raising kids, etc. Bush and his staff members know that if they just keep saying nothing, these topics will go away quietly, at least in the minds of most people.

[Bullwrinkle]

Originally Posted by msufan

The government has no interest in capturing Bin Laden because what would happen to him then? He would go to trial? What would happen then? He'd talk about what he knows about 9/11 and more?

They want to avoid that at all costs.

They are covering up the fact that Bin Laden actually shot JFK from the Grassy Knoll.

[msufan]

Originally Posted by Bullwrinkle

They are covering up the fact that Bin Laden actually shot JFK from the Grassy Knoll.

Did you read any of the links? What parts specifically do you disagree with?

[Bullwrinkle]

Originally Posted by msufan

Did you read any of the links? What parts specifically do you disagree with?

The part where they said he was on the Grassy Knoll. Everyone knows he was actually in Ford Theater holding hands with Mary Todd Lincoln.

[msufan]

Originally Posted by Bullwrinkle

The part where they said he was on the Grassy Knoll. Everyone knows he was actually in Ford Theater holding hands with Mary Todd Lincoln.

This may be precisely the type of attitude the government counts on. You know, the "pssshhh" (eye roll) -- "that could never happen in this country" attitude.

Check the links.