It was the trigger happy Solo that shot him in the first place. He thought he could claim the bounty.Quote:
Originally Posted by OumaFan
Printable View
It was the trigger happy Solo that shot him in the first place. He thought he could claim the bounty.Quote:
Originally Posted by OumaFan
you believe in spaghetti monsters?Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboYou believe Bush capable of writing his own memoirs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Youngblood
point is, no one is going to sign their name to a failure of that magnitude, given all the costs, in lives, dollars, and reputation falsely. As much as there is/was to dislike about him and his policies, it is one of the few truths he was capable of, if even in hindsight.
with his sidekick in tow
http://www.nerdnirvana.org/wp-conten...acca-dog-1.jpg
It was only a failure if their goal was to kill Bin Laden. But if their goal was merely to use him as a face for the war on terror in order to carry out their agenda in the Middle East how did they fail?Quote:
Originally Posted by Youngbloodyou believe in spaghetti monsters?Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboYou believe Bush capable of writing his own memoirs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Youngblood
point is, no one is going to sign their name to a failure of that magnitude, given all the costs, in lives, dollars, and reputation. As much as there is/was to dislike about him and his policies, it is one of the few truths he was capable of, if even in hindsight.
Was it a failure that they didn't find WMD's in Iraq or did they only use that claim as a pretext for going in?
Were they really concerned about the loss of life in Vietnam? Certainly not the Viet Cong they werent, Nixon wanted to nuke them all or blows the dams and dykes to drown them all in their villages.
Capturing Bin Laden and the war on terror was never their goal, that was merely the false flag story they told in order to carry out their aims. Bit difficult to justify going into Afghanistan and Iraq if they have done nothing to you.
you keep moving the goal posts bilbo. deflecting the point because you are on weak ground. if reason and logic don't fit, you just move on to something else. zomg guys, it can't be true..pearl harbor, remember?
Well, Iraq never did anything to us, even if you believe (gullible fucks) that Al Qaeda really pulled of 9/11.
Keep living in the Matrix YB....Quote:
Originally Posted by Youngblood
They won't take me though. This hobbit knows how deep the rabbit hole is and what pills to take.
Bilbo, why did we say that almost all of the hijackers were Saudis? Seems like a strange choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OumaFan
Mate I dont write the fucking conspiracy stories I only believe them!
;D Solid.
I just don't see why we couldn't find any Iraqis or Afghanistanis to do it. Since it was a CIA operation (they had ties with him, that's not a conspiracy theory, just the truth.)
I mean granted it didn't matter, they were able to convince a gullible and scared American public that a bunch of Saudis flying planes into the twin towers meant we had to invade Iraq. But, still, you'd think they could have found some Iraqis to do it. It would have added something to the war buildup.
how did my picture get removed that fast? I liked that picture.
insta hotlinking killer. to make up for it, here's a talking dog.Quote:
Originally Posted by OumaFan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGeKSiCQkPw
This thread is what I imagine an Oliver Stone brain storming session is like. Seriously some of yall need to go into script writing b/c the international intrigue and mystery is scintillating.
I just cant believe Amir Khans relatives were working with Bin Laden on that compound...it just mind bottling.
Amir Khan? It would have to be him and his relatives wouldn't it? I am really not impressed.Quote:
Originally Posted by No Contest