Replies

This type of fund raising has been known to the FBI , to Clinton and to GW Bush for years and they did not act until compelled to by recent events when they knew to and should have acted much, much earlier.

I'm just curious... How would you defend the absoluteness of this statement after reading the following thread dated 9/6/01?

FBI RAIDS DALLAS AREA ARAB INTERNET OFFICE

Ya see? I always have problems with "absolute" statements like that. No matter who makes the absolute statement -- the NWO-believers, the Bushies, the shills, the Libertarians, the pro-abortionists, the pro-lifers, etc., etc. -- the absolute, "all black/all white" statement only serves to marginalize whoever makes it.

Oh, well... I'm not keeping up with this anyway, so I have to warn people not to put a lot of effort into an answer. I probably won't be back to read it for another 24 hours or more anyway.

I think my newfound freedom from contant Freeping is turning me into a "hit & run" poster. ;-)

Response to Nita Nupress's reply #72:

I apppreciate your reply and the spirit in which it was made.

There were several articles from reputable news outlets posted on FR about the raids on the Holy Land Foundation and InfoCom in Dallas which revealed that the FBI knew about their fund raising activites and what they were for since 1993. I replied on most of these threads and obviously read the articles. I will try to find some examples and send them to you. Perhaps Uncle Bill or golitey or BlueDogDemo can help me find them for you.

In my investigations of the OKC bombing case I have found along with other investigators known to BlueDogDemo (he is in law enforcement and he has been critical of the FBI and posted on this on many threads for the past nine months and I know him) that the FBI has known about and failed to take action against many Hamas activites in the US and especially in OKC which has had a large well established cell in OKC since late 1980s which is well documented in Steve Emerson's documentary Jihad in America.

BlueDogDemo posted the original article on FR about the 9/6/01 raid (he flagged me and golitely that very day).

I realize that making broad statements as opinions in replies without writing an article or citing a list of references is not as persuasive as most would like. I do not always have the time to write articles and do not have the equipment or archives to do a job as well as Uncle Bill can do. But since replies are usually opinions I feel it is still okay to express my opinon without as much support as an article would require. Not everyone takes the time to read all the supporting info when it is included in replies.

But broad opinions can be presented on replies just like narrow limited opinions, and it is not always my intent to win over everyone. My intent often is to present what the opinon is for people to contemplate and research if they are interested.

I am not trying to be contentious in this reply to you. I am not trying to get you to agree with my statements and I am not even trying to get you to agree with how I have chosen to present my opinions. I am as a courtesy to you trying to explain my position and thinking for your information since I take your reply to me as sincere.