BIN LADEN'S NUCLEAR WEAPONS

Has no one noticed the absolute dearth of evidence linking Binladen to the embassy or WTC attacks? Afganistan has been offering to turn him over to the US for five years, if only our gov't would supply enough evidence to start extradition. Clinton refused, and Shrub said essentially, "Give us your war hero, who helped liberate your country and who controls troops that help to keep the rapists and mass murderers of the Northern Warlords at bay. In exchange we give you nothing and your leadership looks like cowards to the world and to your own people." Under the circumstances I wouldn't have handed him over either. (Don't even talk to me about that stupid video. No sane person would trust something that the CIA admits it has had control of for three weeks. What a joke.) Binladen is regarded as something of a holy man throughout much of the Muslim world for his strict adherence to his beliefs and willingness to die for them. He swore in an interview to a Pakistani newpaper that he had nothing to do with the WTC attacks, although he congratulated whoever had carried them out. Unlike in the US, where we are accustomed to the likes of Robertson and Falwell, in the Muslim world it is almost unheard of for a holy man to lie to other true believers. I don't believe for a minute that he did it. Let's face it Quix, if Binladen wanted to build a nuke he would have done so a long time ago. It's easy and with the collapse of the Soviet Union it's even cheap. Delivery is even easier and cheaper. Terrorism is not the focus of al Queda, training soldiers for the Jihad, the fight against the infidel, is the whole thrust of groups like it. Terrorism is just a byproduct, not the purpose.

Ok I will take your bait...

" Binladen is regarded as something of a holy man throughout much of the Muslim world for his strict adherence to his beliefs"

You sir are soo far in left field you can't even see the ball. I have many friends who are muslim and a few good ones who are also Afghani...BinLaden's actions are not based on a strict adherence of Islam. He is a fraud.... as for respect from his Islamic brothers, he distorts the belief system and garners the most respect from the uneducated sheeple and hate filled fanatics of the middle east.

With the way you speak of Bush referring to him as Shrub, I guess you relate well to the hate filled fanatics...
You still can't deal with the election can you?

They're Afghan, not Afghani.

I disagree totally. Many of the christians that I know find Pope John Paul, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell to be poor christians and disgusting people preaching a distorted version of Christ's message, but all of them have followings in the millions. Unlike Baptists, however, Muslims do not accept hypocracy or lying by their leaders (except for Muhommed himself, but that belongs in another forum). If Binladen tells me that he did or didn't do something I would take it with a grain of salt since I know that he considers me an infidel. When he tells religious leaders of his own faith the same thing I would tend to believe it. The consequences of lying are too great, and it's out of character for a devout Muslim.

Of course he gains the most respect from the poor, ignorant and uneducated. Pretty much every religion I've seen relies on the great unwashed masses for support, especially those sects with fringe or violent tendencies. That's just history.

Want to see who did it? Follow the money. Al Queda had little to gain and much to lose by carrying out the WTC operation (as we've seen). Why did the CIA's proxy in Pakistan, the ISI, send Mohommed Atta $100,000 a few weeks before the attacks? What was the "business" the head of the ISI was conducting in the US during the two weeks before the attacks? Who did the short selling of American and United before their attacks, and why did they run their transactions through the CIA's favorite bank, A.B. Brown? Who had apparently just finished pumping around $100 million in credit card transactions through the system the moment the attack occurred?

Biggest question: Why won't the U.S. just show the world the evidence of Binladen's guilt, unless it doesn't exist?

(No, I'm not over it. I never liked Gore, but I think that the manner that the presidency was stolen is disgusting and should be condemmed for the crime that it was. That's neither here nor there.)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.