1
Good news! Plus twenty-three in Afganistan. Plus lots more "detained."
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at May 09, 2005 09:22 AM (x+5JB)
2
Your 'tuna' is 75% 'dolphin'.
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 09:39 AM (/+dAV)
3
This good news is bound to often some Lefty out there.
Posted by: Carlos at May 09, 2005 09:40 AM (8e/V4)
4
“Abu al-Faraj al-Libbi, the alleged al-Qaeda leader arrested in Pakistan last week, is not the terror network's N. 3, according to European secret service sources”
http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=Terrorism&loid=8.0.164365478&par=0
Told you.
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 10:15 AM (/+dAV)
5
It seems it was ANOTHER case of mistaken identity.
25% tuna and 75% dolphin.
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 10:21 AM (/+dAV)
6
Captured Al-Qaeda kingpin is case of ‘mistaken identity’
“THE capture of a supposed Al-Qaeda kingpin by Pakistani agents last week was hailed by President George W Bush as “a critical victory in the war on terror”. According to European intelligence experts, however, Abu Faraj al-Libbi was not the terrorists’ third in command, as claimed, but a middle-ranker derided by one source as “among the flotsam and jetsam” of the organisation.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1602568,00.html
Why isnÂ’t the American media reporting this update? Because theyÂ’re complicit in this war of lies.
PRESSTITUTES!
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 10:41 AM (/+dAV)
7
Told you.
greg,
this unidentified eurowuss should identify himself, otherwise who gives a crap what he thinks (if he even exists).
This seems to confirm that a cigar is usually just a cigar after all:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4513281.stm
Posted by: Carlos at May 09, 2005 10:44 AM (8e/V4)
8
3rd in command or 300th. The guys captured, and that's what counts.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at May 09, 2005 10:50 AM (x+5JB)
9
Carlos,
Your citation is from last Wednesday. Get with the program
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 10:52 AM (/+dAV)
10
greg,
your two sources contradict each other-- not that this ever matters if you're a Leftie/dissenter. Their only goal is to discredit the official version, not to be consistent (Instead they discredit themselves).
Your first source claims they got some Paki dude with a similar name, but the wrong guy.
Your second source claims something entirely different-- that the guy they caught just isn't that high in the AQ hierarchy-- a "middle-level leader."
Which of the sources you offered is the more accurate? Both can't be true. But that doesn't matter, right? -- not if your purpose is only to discredit the official version. You continue to bleed credibility, my friend.
Posted by: Carlos at May 09, 2005 10:54 AM (8e/V4)
11
Carlos,
The two citations do contradict one another. What's certain is that this guy wasn't the #3 man. I doubt he's even Al Qaeda.
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 10:59 AM (/+dAV)
12
greg: "The two citations do contradict one another."
Then why did you cite them?
Posted by: Carlos at May 09, 2005 11:05 AM (8e/V4)
13
While they contradict each other on a point they agree that he's not #3.
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 11:10 AM (/+dAV)
14
Yeah, that's right Greg, he's not #3... anymore, dipshit.
Posted by: Editor at May 09, 2005 11:13 AM (adpJH)
15
While they contradict each other on a point they agree that he's not #3.
greg,
but for different reasons, which in the end just sounds like wishful thinking.
Do you also wish he isn't #3?
Posted by: Carlos at May 09, 2005 11:15 AM (8e/V4)
16
Carlos,
When Jawa Report first brought this to our attention I said then that I doubted the claim that he was #3 because I had never heard of him.
Turns out I'm right. He ain't #3.
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 11:18 AM (/+dAV)
17
Turns out I'm right. He ain't #3.
greg,
This goes back to my assertion about the thinking of conspiracy theorists-- they reach a conclusion, and then look for anything that might confirm it, no matter how silly it might be.
Here, you reached a conclusion, and then latched onto two contradictory sources to "confirm" it.
The fact that you would base your conclusion on two entirely contradictory sources says something about the muddled thinking of conspiracy theorists.
Posted by: Carlos at May 09, 2005 11:30 AM (8e/V4)
18
Carlos,
No. I based it originally, last week, on the fact that I'VE NEVER HEARD OF HIM BEFORE.
If you still think he's #3 then you are the conspiracy theorist.
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 11:35 AM (/+dAV)
19
I'VE NEVER HEARD OF HIM BEFORE.
Greg, for admitting this, you are even a bigger idiot than any of us could ever have imagined.
Posted by: Editor at May 09, 2005 11:36 AM (adpJH)
20
greg: "No. I based it originally, last week, on the fact that I'VE NEVER HEARD OF HIM BEFORE."
Because "greg" hasn't heard of him before.
hahaha! good one.
Posted by: Carlos at May 09, 2005 11:36 AM (8e/V4)
21
Carlos,
You think you're eating tuna but you're chowing down on dolphin. ENJOY!
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 11:40 AM (/+dAV)
22
greg,
I don't consider your way of thinking to be healthy skepticism.
It's irrational cynicism.
Posted by: Carlos at May 09, 2005 11:44 AM (8e/V4)
23
The DU isn't happy... lol
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1455911
Posted by: Ariya at May 09, 2005 11:52 AM (IXXEm)
24
Carlos,
I know you desire him to be the #3 man. It's just wishful thinking on your part. If only wishes were horses...
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 11:55 AM (/+dAV)
25
>>>"The DU isn't happy... lol"
Ariya,
nope, they aren't. They've chosen a side, and it ain't ours. Everything they see, hear, read is filtered through that reality.
Posted by: Carlos at May 09, 2005 12:00 PM (8e/V4)
26
greg,
I read your stuff precisely because I don't want to base my stuff on wishful thinking. And on occassion I'm dissuaded of those wishful thoughts. But rarely, and here is a pretty good example of why not.
Posted by: Carlos at May 09, 2005 12:03 PM (8e/V4)
27
One of my predictions for 2005 was hot pursuit across the border into Syria. I'm sticking to it.
Posted by: Dave Schuler at May 09, 2005 12:14 PM (GGDE0)
28
Carlos,
He ain't the #3 man. Now wake up and smell your underwear.
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 01:38 PM (/+dAV)
29
greg,
you've given no reason to doubt the official version.
Posted by: Carlos at May 09, 2005 01:56 PM (8e/V4)
30
Amusing that only Greg thinks his ignorance is evidence of anything.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at May 09, 2005 02:18 PM (xauGB)
31
Carlos,
I believe the one and only point Greg is stating is
that the guy caught was not the Number #3 man in Al Qaeda.
Both sources Greg cited, both supported his claim. It makes
no different if they contradict each other, as long as they
don't do so on the point Greg is making.
Off the subject, while everyone is talking about underwear
on people heads, I do believe some people might like it, depending
on whose underwear it was. I mean, Goldie Hawn or Farrah Fawcitt undies might not be to bad.
Posted by: Butch at May 09, 2005 02:19 PM (Gqhi9)
32
"the official version."-Carlos
Not ready to smell your underwear yet, eh? Can't say that I blame you.
What makes your version the official version?
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 02:23 PM (/+dAV)
33
ah, greg is just mad because the man isn't still out planning the murders of innocents. In short, he hasn't yet killed enough jews, he is small fish, we should throw him back and let him work his way up to a bigger terrorist.
Posted by: Defense Guy at May 09, 2005 02:48 PM (jPCiN)
34
Defense Guy,
At least you're not holding on to the fantasy that this joker was the #3 man.
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 02:53 PM (/+dAV)
35
It makes no different if they contradict each other, as long as they
don't do so on the point Greg is making.
Butch,
it makes all the difference. If the reasons both sources gave were consistent, then their claim could hold some weight. Given that they aren't consistent, the claims hold less weight. It comes off as just more flailing wildly in the dark. Much of the anti-Bush stuff is just that.
Posted by: Carlos at May 09, 2005 03:04 PM (8e/V4)
36
"Much of the anti-Bush stuff is just that."-Carlos
Carlos,
What the hell does this have to do with Bush?
I've given you 2 credible sources that this isn't the #3 man.
Even the source that Rusty quoted initially noted that this man was not on the FBI's most wanted list.
You're just being IGNORant.
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 03:11 PM (/+dAV)
37
"Yet the backslapping in Washington and Islamabad has astonished European terrorism experts, who point out that the Libyan was neither on the FBI’s most wanted list, nor on that of the State Department “rewards for justice” programme.
Another Libyan is on the FBI list — Anas al-Liby, who is wanted over the 1998 East African embassy bombings — and some believe the Americans may have initially confused the two. When The Sunday Times contacted a senior FBI counter-terrorism official for information about the importance of the detained man, he sent material on al-Liby, the wrong man. "
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1602568,00.html
What a bunch of bumbling idiots. Enough said.
Posted by: greg at May 09, 2005 04:21 PM (/+dAV)
38
16 different brands of tuna
chicken of the sea and big cahuna
packed in oil packed in water
dolphin friendly and dolphin slaughter.
Posted by: Howie at May 09, 2005 04:27 PM (D3+20)
39
Howie,
Don't you know? Chicken of the sea is not tuna, but chicken.
I have Jessica Simpson's word on it. And we all know that pop stars
are the smartest people in the world. So she should know.
Posted by: Butch at May 09, 2005 04:42 PM (Gqhi9)
40
Yea she is a bright one. But mmmmm. I've been pretty busy just saw gregs post about tuna and dolphin. Just leavin my mark so Ya'll know I'm still out here.
Posted by: Howie at May 09, 2005 04:56 PM (D3+20)
41
I've given you 2 credible sources that this isn't the #3 man.
greg,
Amazing. How can both be credible when they directly contradict each other? They can't. One of them is INcredible. The only question is which.
But you use BOTH to prove your case, when either one taken in isolation contradicts the other's logic.
Posted by: Carlos at May 09, 2005 05:13 PM (8e/V4)
42
Regarding "Abu Anas" al-Libbi; Read
this report from the BBC on 19 March 2002. Does anybody know if his caprure was ever confirmed? And several sources, especially those in the ME are still saying Abu Farraj Al-Libbi is No. 3. That he wasn't high up the ladder until recently. Maybe he's just No. 3 in Pakistan and only places No. 100 on a world-wide scope. They're beating the hell out of him too in Pakistan. And he still hasn't talked.
Posted by: Oyster at May 09, 2005 05:56 PM (YudAC)
43
Greg, Carlos, get a room!
Posted by: cindy at May 09, 2005 09:37 PM (o9c3W)
44
Surely 50,000 innocents had to die in the massive carpet bombings to get these poor "minutemen". If only we had an independent Italian communist to tell us what really happens!
Posted by: RicardoVerde at May 09, 2005 10:44 PM (3DOby)
45
Cindy,
my post was the last. I WIN!
Posted by: Carlos at May 10, 2005 01:30 AM (8e/V4)
46
What is really happening: Monkeys run/fly/drive around a desert looking for monkeys with turbans on their heads so the wrinkly little mighty-monkey lets them go home to their little monkey wives or bitches, perhaps some monkey babies or farm animals.
Well, now that I've written that, I must say a good thing about Bush (earlier referred to as mighty-monkey). It really meant a lot to countries under Soviet rule after WW2 (not Finland, since we actually beat back the Ruskies and tried to invade 'em a year after that, getting the whole world against us) when Bush made it publicly clear that the West thinks they were not liberated, but occupied and put under Soviet oppression. The statement turned some of the tension between EU and you into tension between Russia and you, therefore effectively turning eastern Europeans less anti-american (still not Finland, since we just don't seem to care about things outside the 1000km radius from our borders).
Posted by: A Finn at May 10, 2005 04:23 AM (cWMi4)
47
Your first source claims they got some Paki dude with a similar name, but the wrong guy.-Carlos
Your second source claims something entirely different-- that the guy they caught just isn't that high in the AQ hierarchy-- a "middle-level leader."-Carlos
Carlos,
The 2 sources don't contradict the point that "they got some Paki dude with a similar name". (See below).
While the first source says it is simply a case of mistaken identity, the second source suggests that although he isn't the man they thought he was he still may be a lower level operative. It doesn't contradiict the first source it gives additional information.
"Another Libyan is on the FBI list — Anas al-Liby, who is wanted over the 1998 East African embassy bombings — and some believe the Americans may have initially confused the two. When The Sunday Times contacted a senior FBI counter-terrorism official for information about the importance of the detained man, he sent material on al-Liby, the wrong man."
Posted by: greg at May 10, 2005 08:32 AM (/+dAV)
48
Carlos,
I accept your unconditional surrender.
Posted by: greg at May 10, 2005 02:52 PM (/+dAV)
49
greg,
my not responding to your posts can have several implications. Sometimes I don't respond if I agree and I consider the matter closed, or when there's nothing to respond to, or when your post is so weak it doesn't warrant a response and I consider the matter closed as well. In other words, not responding to your post could very well mean you have been measured and found wanting and not worth responding to-- NOT that I've surrendered. I'm not necessarily making a judgement about your last post, only that when I don't respond, it doesn't mean what you think it means.
Posted by: Carlos at May 11, 2005 01:10 AM (8e/V4)
50
Carlos,
Upon closer inspection my two sources aren't contradictory at all. I was so busy with work yesterday that I agreed with you before double checking for myself.
The first post claims that the Americans have confused the identity of the prisoner. The second post ALSO claims that the Americans have confused the identity of the prisoner but goes on to say that he may be a low level member of AQ. This is not a contradiction, it is additional analysis.
If I tell you I'm 40 and then I tell you I'm 40 and was born in March, have I contradicted myself? No, I've simply given additional information.
I urge you to take an honest look at the two posts.
Posted by: greg at May 11, 2005 08:33 AM (/+dAV)
51
Numbers always come out of one mouth and thats America's, who is struggling to save its pride and is sacrificing its sons and daughters and yes ofcourse they project the numbers when 10 Iraqis become shaheed they say 100,same happened during the Vietnam War, the U.S. military released body counts of enemy and friendly dead to the media which reported them same no investigation of the truth. Invariably, the military’s data—showing more enemy than friendly dead—was designed to give the illusion that the United States was winning the war.Similarly, in Iraq, the U.S. military cheerfully reports that attacks against U.S. soldiers have dropped by more than half since their peak in November of last year and that firefights between U.S. soldiers and Iraqi guerrillas in Iraqi towns have also diminished. But like the body counts in Vietnam, the American public is in illusion of winning the war against the resistance much larger.
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/10703534.htm
Posted by: Fahd at May 12, 2005 12:38 AM (HAykV)
52
calos,keep your save the whale crap to yourself
Posted by: U.SRobotics at May 23, 2005 09:09 AM (YlL+X)
53
carlos,keep your save the whale crap to yourself
Posted by: U.SRobotics at May 23, 2005 09:09 AM (YlL+X)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
