olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 I'm not wrong, my facts are right Quote
waldo Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Wait...it gets funnier. The same partisan ilk will point to Dick Cheney's SecDef brilliance for not going into Iraq the first time around. WMD fabrication takes a while, ya know! So to does setting up his Halliburton legacy retirement fund. Besides Cheney wanted to properly show his brilliance in proclaiming, "we'll be greeted as liberators"! He wanted to have his/Rummies brilliance shine through with the prediction of a, "few weeks war"! He wanted a chance to showcase his brilliance when he proclaimed the, "insurgency was in its last throes." Such a brilliant guy! Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 from the washington post, right here, this is what happened (read it all) http://www.alvinsnyder.com/the_truth_about_korean_airlines_flight_007_8994.htm Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 WMD fabrication takes a while, ya know! Yes we know...just like global warming climate change hysteria. Looks like Cheney did a much better job. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Wild Bill Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 I'm not wrong, my facts are right Well, Wiki totally disagrees with you! Of course, Wiki has problems from time to time but they have a very detailed report with tons of footnotes! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007 Here's just a couple of pertinent points: Here's some quotes from the actual Soviet pilot who shot the plane down: "In a 1991 interview with Izvestia, Major Genadi Osipovich, pilot of the Su-15 interceptor that shot the 747 down, spoke about his recollections of the events leading up to the shootdown." "Later we began to lie about small details: the plane was supposedly flying without running lights or strobe light, that tracer bullets were fired, or that I had radio contact with them on the emergency frequency of 121.5 megahertz." "In 1992, Russian president Boris Yeltsin disclosed five top-secret memos dating from a few weeks after the downing of KAL 007 in 1983.[Notes 7] The memos contained Soviet communications (from KGB Chief Viktor Chebrikov and Defense Minister Dmitriy Ustinov to General Secretary Yury Andropov) that indicated that they knew the location of KAL 007's wreckage while they were simulating a search and harassing the American Navy; they had found the sought-after cockpit voice recorder on 20 October 1983 (50 days after the incident),[111] and had decided to keep this knowledge secret, the reason being that the tapes could not unequivocally support their firmly held view that KAL 007's flight to Soviet territory was a deliberately planned intelligence mission." "The third memo acknowledges that analysis of the recorder tapes showed no evidence of the Soviet interceptor attempting to contact KAL 007 via radio nor any indication that the KAL 007 crew was aware of warning shots being fired." If indeed your facts are right perhaps you could dig up something to back them up! Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
waldo Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Yes we know...just like global warming climate change hysteria. Looks like Cheney did a much better job. your sensitivity tell... is quite telling! Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) If indeed your facts are right perhaps you could dig up something to back them up! I prefer going by a Washington Post article than wikipedia http://www.alvinsnyder.com/the_truth_about_korean_airlines_flight_007_8994.htm as for his credibility look at his endorsements http://www.alvinsnyder.com/works.htm Edited February 13, 2012 by olpfan1 Quote
Wild Bill Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 I prefer going by a Washington Post article than wikipedia http://www.alvinsnyder.com/the_truth_about_korean_airlines_flight_007_8994.htm as for his credibility look at his endorsements http://www.alvinsnyder.com/works.htm Okay! The Wiki article cites investigations involving hundreds if not thousands of people, in organizations from countries all over the globe. You cite one guy, working for one American department, who incidently makes claims that the USA exploited the tragedy to the utmost, using camera tricks and the like to make things appear even worse for the USSR. However, HE NEVER CLAIMS THE EVENT DIDN'T HAPPEN! AND HE OFFERS NO SPECIFIC PROOF THAT THE SOVIET PILOTS ACTUALLY TALKED WITH KAL 007 ON THE INTERNATIONAL RADIO FREQUENCY! I've no doubt that the Americans DID pump it up the way he said! That doesn't mean the Soviets were blameless! Or that it was all a hoax! We have the words of the actual Soviet pilot who shot the airliner down telling us that reports they had had radio contact were lies! You're sliding all over the place here! Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 You believe what you believe and I will do the same Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 You believe what you believe and I will do the same History being relative n' all. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 History being relative n' all. History is seen through different angles..depends which angle you're looking at Americans are taught they won the war of 1812, Canadians are taught that the British won the war of 1812 which side is right? it depends on the angle you look at it you could look at it from both angles and declare nobody won or that both countries won but that is a cop out wars are meant to be won or lost not tied I've done enough research on this subject of the South Korean airlines 007 to decide for myself Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 History is seen through different angles..depends which angle you're looking at Americans are taught they won the war of 1812, Canadians are taught that the British won the war of 1812 which side is right? it depends on the angle you look at it you could look at it from both angles and declare nobody won or that both countries won but that is a cop out wars are meant to be won or lost not tied I've done enough research on this subject of the South Korean airlines 007 to decide for myself Yes...and 2+2=5 when? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Yes...and 2+2=5 when? The + 1 is invisible, only a few people can see it Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) The + 1 is invisible, only a few people can see it I call BS. There's only one way anything unfolded. Your bias is just as big a factor as getting the dates right. You claim that American school children are taught 1812 was a victory. My wife recalls no such thing. As well, I don't recall being taught that 1812 was a British victory, either. The FACT is both sides fought several battles on land and at sea which ultimately ended as a draw. That's what I learned. And seeing both Canada and America exist, I think we can safely say that's what happened. Now if you want to talk popular opinion, I think you'd get a typical 'we won' response if a layman is asked. But, if one knows anything about that war, that's not the conclusion. Edited February 15, 2012 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 I call BS. There's only one way anything unfolded. Your bias is just a big a factor as getting the dates right. You claim that American school children are taught 1812 was a victory. My wife recalls no such thing. As well, I don't recall being taught that 1812 was a British victory, either. The FACT is both sides fought several battles on land and at sea which ultimately ended as a draw. That's what I learned. And seeing both Canada and America exist, I think we can safely say that's what happened. Now if you want to talk popular opinion, I think you'd get a typical 'we won' response if a layman is asked. But, if one knows anything about that war, that's not the conclusion. I was going by an article I read on GlobeandMail ..but a poster posted the same article from Yahoo! http://ca.news.yahoo.com/war-1812-important-because-kept-u-government-snooki-090017088.html OTTAWA - The War of 1812 may be one of the world's oddest conflicts, if only because both sides are confident they won. A new survey suggests Canadians and Americans have vastly divergent attitudes towards the border war that broke out in 1812 and bumbled along for three years. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 I was going by an article I read on GlobeandMail ..but a poster posted the same article from Yahoo! http://ca.news.yahoo.com/war-1812-important-because-kept-u-government-snooki-090017088.html OTTAWA - The War of 1812 may be one of the world's oddest conflicts, if only because both sides are confident they won. A new survey suggests Canadians and Americans have vastly divergent attitudes towards the border war that broke out in 1812 and bumbled along for three years. Yes...I read it. Popular opinion doesn't count in history. The Red Baron didn't have an evil curly moustache nor did he wear a Pickelhaube...but, let's see how many folks out of 100 describe him that way. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Guest Derek L Posted February 14, 2012 Report Posted February 14, 2012 wow! Jeb "the next one" Bush should hire you - you could work to have all those numerous references out there squashed; the one's "supposedly" written by Vietnam veterans contrasting their birth dates and service record to JBush's not-so-much. I don’t suppose you feel like linking to a couple of those numerous references? Quote
Bob Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 According to a relative, bin Laden advised his children to live in peace in the West and to get a university education: Slain Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden urged his children to go live peacefully in the West and get a university education, his brother-in-law said in an interview published Sunday. Zakaria al-Sadah, the brother of bin Laden's Yemeni fifth wife Amal, told Britain's Sunday Times newspaper that the Saudi-born extremist believed his children "should not follow him down the road to jihad." "He told his own children and grandchildren, 'Go to Europe and America and get a good education,'" al-Sadah told the Sunday Times. link I think I'm speechless. The part they're not telling you is the motivation OBL had for encouraging Muslim children to get educated in the West - so that they can use those skills against the West via Jihad. Moreover, he and many others like him also suggest that one long-term strategy for fighting in this conflict-of-civilizations between the West and Islam is demographic warfare - emigrate to the West, have lots of kids, and conquer the West for Islam "peacefully". Quote My blog - bobinisrael.blogspot.com - I am writing on it, again!
Guest American Woman Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 The part they're not telling you is the motivation OBL had for encouraging Muslim children to get educated in the West - so that they can use those skills against the West via Jihad. Moreover, he and many others like him also suggest that one long-term strategy for fighting in this conflict-of-civilizations between the West and Islam is demographic warfare - emigrate to the West, have lots of kids, and conquer the West for Islam "peacefully". If they are living in peace, where does the "conquer[ing]" come in? How is anyone "conquered" when everyone is living in peace? Quote
Bob Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 If they are living in peace, where does the "conquer[ing]" come in? How is anyone "conquered" when everyone is living in peace? First of all, why are we accepting the word of one of OBL's relatives at face-value? According to OBL and many other Jihadists, "living in peace" is a temporary condition until the right time to engage in Jihad. He and many other Jihadists have stated this many times. Quote My blog - bobinisrael.blogspot.com - I am writing on it, again!
Guest American Woman Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 First of all, why are we accepting the word of one of OBL's relatives at face-value? According to OBL and many other Jihadists, "living in peace" is a temporary condition until the right time to engage in Jihad. He and many other Jihadists have stated this many times. "living in peace" is a temporary condition until the right time to engage in Jihad. Except he supposedly told them not to engage in jihad. Quote
Bob Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 "living in peace" is a temporary condition until the right time to engage in Jihad. Except he supposedly told them not to engage in jihad. You're taking an OBL relative at his word? Quote My blog - bobinisrael.blogspot.com - I am writing on it, again!
Post To The Left Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 You're taking an OBL relative at his word? Not to mention OBL has a bunch of relatives. His first wife said that he used to prepare his children for suicide bombings. Osama bin Laden was a tyrant who trained his own children to be suicide bombers and murdered their pets, his first wife, Najwa Ghanem ... [she] told how she gave birth to 11 of his 14 children because bin Laden said that Islam needed many warriors.in the 1990s, bin Laden took his family of four wives and 14 children on a camping trip to the desert of Sudan. After finding an isolated spot, bin Laden ordered his sons to dig a ditches in the sand and all of the children, even one and two-year-olds, were forced to climb in. The ordeal was supposed to be training for a future war between the West and Muslims. ‘You must be gallant,’ he warned his frightened children. ‘Do not think about foxes or snakes. Challenging trials are coming to us.’ Living with Osama bin Laden: First wife tells of husband's bid to train his sons as suicide bombers Quote
Guest Manny Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 I don't think there is a way to know for sure. Documents can be forged. It could be made up. He is not alive so one can't be 100 % certain it's real. Dead men tell no tales. Which is why people should not be assassinated, if we want to get the real information from them. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 15, 2012 Report Posted February 15, 2012 (edited) Dead men tell no tales. Which is why people should not be assassinated, if we want to get the real information from them. Personally, I'd have liked to have seen OBL on "Dancing With The Stars" opposite Kirstie Alley. Alas...this will never be. Edited February 15, 2012 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.