Slashdot Mirror
10 Years of Translated Bin Laden Messages Leaked
DragonFire1024 lets us know that Wikileaks has obtained 10 years of messages and interviews by Osama bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda. The documents were translated and the messages and interviews were authenticated by the US CIA. "The nearly three hundred page, 'official use only' packet from 2004, translated by the Foreign Broadcast Information Service, a division of the CIA, includes interviews with bin Laden from various news agencies and also includes messages he sent directly to the US from the periods of 1994 to 2004. One message includes bin Laden's denial of having anything to do with the September 11, 2001 attacks in New York City, Washington DC, and Pennsylvania."
His also an ex CIA agent (using that term a bit liberally).
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
So you're actually blaming Bush for suspecting that someone who executed something like the halabja campaign might actually ... have lied.
Are you totally insane ? Are you truly someone who would truly be surprised if a massacrer lies ? Any massacrer has pretty much proved he's not to be trusted.
Btw, the actual "rumour" is that he sold them (and the "recipe") to Syria after the invasion started. May God prevent them from getting fired at Beirut.
You are being disingenuous. Everybody knows that the WMDs Bush and his cronies were talking about were the ones they said could be launched within 15 minutes and could reach the USA and result in a mushroom cloud over an American city. That is, they tried to convince people that Saddam had nuclear and could start destroying American cities at a moment's notice. And apparently people fell for it.
They were not talking about launching chemical weapons a short distance. Apologists like you who try to change history after the fact and imply that Bush and his lying cronies were talking about near-distance chemical WMDs are as bad as the liars in power.
Next you'll be saying that nobody in the Bush administration ever implied in any way that Iraq was linked to 9/11 and that our going in to Iraq was in part a result of their having been involved in Iraq.
No US "staff sergeant" would suggest moral equivalence between the US and bin laden. I'm calling bullshit, and I'm calling you a liar.
What absolute bullshit. Nobody who has served over there thinks we have treated "Iraqis" poorly. We liberated the country from a sociopathic dictator, turned it into a democracy, and didn't even ask them to pay for it with oil revenue. Oh, and we killed a bunch of al Qaeda invaders in the process.
I am utterly astounded that the people on Slashdot are willing to give bin Laden the benefit of the doubt, but presume Bush guilty. You people are absolutely nuts, and when a US city has a mushroom cloud over it, good luck modding people like me "troll," since your computer will be dripping off of your melted face.
So, the CIA, who have operated outside the law since inception, have claimed that they didn't train OBL? What a fucking surprise!
Let me ask you a philosophical question. If an organization is charged with defending a country, and that organization has unlimited funding, no oversight, is inherently paranoid, and more subtly, is aware that it will only have these powers if the American people believe that they are always in danger, do you think that same organization would ensure the success in intercepted terrorist plans which have "acceptable" outcomes in order to have the resources to stop possibly "unacceptable" outcomes?
The CIA and British intelligence decided on their own, and with fewer than 100 people succeeded in, overthrowing a democratically elected government in 1953. And stated specifically it was so we could control their nationalized oil industry. God only knows what they are doing today.
To be fair, anyone who knows cold war history knows that the US lost credibility a long time ago.
I am going to shoot your wife. After a while the police will come, and will find an empty gun in my hands, and 7 "inert" shells on the floor.
At the trial I am going to argue that I did not have a weapon. I did not have a weapon, after all, just "inert capsules".
And since you believe me, you will agree there is no evidence whatsoever linking me and the crime.
Clearly you will agree with me at the trial that There was no weapon found in his hands. Period, and will convince the jury of this.
Correct ? Or do you see a problem here ?