Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasha
Whoa Sasha, chill ma. You know I'm ya boy. I was actually speaking on your behalf. I really thought you were referring to the Middle Eastern Indians. It only makes since right? I mean, you were speaking on terms of retaliation. It would only make since that the Indians (middle eastern) retaliated for the bin Laden assassination. Anyway, I think I got confused. No harm, no foul ma.
I agree, honestly , I'm getting kinda tired of people always thinking something is a conspiracy....Quote:
Originally Posted by seanchai
yess in deed OSAMA poor thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Sasha
I don't think it's that far-fetched re: Bush given that his failure to bring the troops home was one of the major knocks against him. Whether you think it's a conspiracy or not, you can't deny that it's easier to sell the public on a war on terror when you can sell them on the idea that the "primary orchestrator of 9/11" is still at large. You could maybe make an issue about his ability to keep his killing from leaking, but motive wise there's definitely an incentive to make people think he's still out there.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigdicki
What do you mean "outta ya country"? Do you think the terrorism by Al Qaeda is exclusive to America.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasha
I half just giving you shit Sasha but also half, trying to give you some facts or correcting where you've just posted errors!
Given that someone tried to blow up a plane with a shoe, some underwear, someone tried to blow up a truck in Times Square, plus several other incidents... no one needs a boogeyman to sell a war on terror. In fact, we are Americans; we don't ever need to be sold on going to war. We have been in active combat in various nations in EVERY decade since 1940.Quote:
Originally Posted by phi0820
What is in fact more plausible is that Bush's negligence and Osama's network of allies in the Pakistani military and Taliban kept him safe for years. President Obama just did what a real Chitown ni**a does; he tracked his ass down and popped some caps in him. He learned some hood shit while living on the South Side. :p:cool:
dont worry, i dont get it eitherQuote:
Originally Posted by seanchai
I think Sasha was originally trying to draw comparison with the conspiracy that Osama was/is made up by the media and Native Amercians. A rather crazy comparison I know but thats what I was getting from her posts.
I know there are a few conspiracists that believe Osama was made up by western media to give reason for the War on Terror which, incorporates various other conspiracies including (but not limited to) 9/11 being government orchestrated. I think that in support of these conspiracies Sasha linked this to European settlers mistreatment of Native Americans in the 1600s and suggests that this hate of Native Amercians might still be prevelant so we should expect (as a joke) a new terrorist to surface who is Native American. I came to this conclusion as Sasha referred to Chrisopher Columbus when talking about 'Indians'.
Anyway...
I'm still not really sure what to think about the whole Osama incident and am still reserving full judgement. Now to make my stance clear I believe Osama was a real person and the head of Al Queda. I'm still not sure if he was killed on Sunday but he may have been dead for some time. I don't believe he is still alive as making up the raid and killing completely would be preposterous.
I personally think he could have been dead for some time firstly due to the timing of the killing (in line with re-elections) and also due to the reluctancy to release photographic or video evidence. I believe Reuters has already annonouced that photo's where taken at the scene and video was shot of Osama's burial at sea. The Whitehouse have said these have not been released due to possible retaliation from Al Queda and the Taliban based on the graphic appearence of Osama post mortem. This all makes logical sense at first glance but when compared to Saddam Hussien's execution being recorded and posted online within hours back in 2006 it seems unlikely that the US government would be so reluctant to show the world their accomplishment.
I'm am still undecided however due to firstly the Government being a different one from 2006 and also due to Obama's run in office. As I am not a US citizen I seldom follow Obama but I have come to the conclusion that his intentions are generally good compared to past presidents. He may not have worked the miracles expected of him before entering office but his determination behind universal healthcare alone leaves a good impression with me so him dishonestly announcing Osama's death would be out of character for me.
There is another think that I have found worrying though. Despite the obvious worry of retaliation from Al Queda and similar Jihadi groups there seems to be a rather harsh undertone from US Goverment spokespeople when referring to Pakistan. Over the last 10 years the US and UK in my opinion have worked hard to form alliances with Pakistan but I have seen over the last few days various comments suggesting distrust of the Pakistani Government. As their Government is Military based and the head of state was not elected through Democratic voting there should be more cause for concern with how volatile this government could be. I'm sure the last thing The US want is to loose an ally in the Middle East and potentially gain an enemy.
On a final note in reply to Bigdicki, although I believe Obama was born in Hawaii your comment on Kenya not existing in 1961 is incorrect. In 1961 Kenya was Colonial Kenya i.e. it was part of the British empire and that had been since 1890 when the British Empire took Kenya from Germany.
hmmmm tough tittyQuote:
Originally Posted by kittymatthews
QUOTE=vidman;30030]Whoa Sasha, chill ma. You know I'm ya boy. I was actually speaking on your behalf. I really thought you were referring to the Middle Eastern Indians. It only makes since right? I mean, you were speaking on terms of retaliation. It would only make since that the Indians (middle eastern) retaliated for the bin Laden assassination. Anyway, I think I got confused. No harm, no foul ma.[/QUOTE]
na i didnt mean to quote ya my bad babe and it real ly had to do with indians joke plain and simple "there is always a "gimmick" first pakistan attack us what next indians are something"
Or
maybe china
maybe africa
maybe ya moma
i mean its suppose to be that serious lol
now u people gotta go into be shady and all that extra stuff about something that was a little joke (bad writers):confused:didnt even have to be that serious i see why i have avoided the forum\...yall must not be getting enough god damn good content yall need to release some stress im lookin at the threads and yall argue sometimes and debate over the most simple shit lol Ive ever seen. maybe a handful of serious topics i wasnt comming here for drama. yet have fun and celebrate(plus bored in the house cause im recovering) So If u dont get the joke ok whomp whomp move along but all the extra sarcastic comments arent needed... well now that i got that off my chest ill let u get back to the "MAIN TOPIC" or let you guys do what you tend to always do "MAKING 10 DAMN PAGES TALKING ABOUT NOTHING ON THE SAME THREAD" this is my last msg on this thread than imma go get a burger a blow job...I dont have see why people enjot this so much lol i havent bust one nut from it (arguing and debating where is the love):D