It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Spy Balloons Become Part of the Afghanistan Landscape, Stirring Unease

page: 7
7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Juanxlink

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Bin laden was working for the CIA.


No, he wasn't.



Remember he was funded by the CIA in the 1980s did you forget that?


No, he wasn't.



We gave him the weapons and training to plan those attacks.


No, we didn't.




You do realise you are denying proven facts? I mean, ATS will end up meaning, Anything That Smells.


I'm ready for you to "prove" them any old time.

When are you ready to start?




posted on May, 17 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 





Yup, it's ok to keep the pressure on, because it didn't take us 10 or 20 years to get our knickers unwadded and get down to business.


Well then it was ok for them 10 years after the fact as well for the 9/11 situation. And our knickers are still wadded because we are still angry about 9/11 ten years after the fact.



But Saddam Hussein was the ONLY justification you could think of at that point, so it's clear that you believe OBL attacked on behalf of Hussein.


No that is not the only justification I could think of. I stateed numerous other things. Let me refer you to my post where I state MANY reasons:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

No it is not clear, nor do I state anywhere that OBL attacked on behalf of Hussein. I have clearly stated that he attacked on behalf of Muslim countries, and not any individual



Furthermore, Iraq was a secular country, which happened to have Muslims living there, not a "Muslim country" in the same sens as Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan.


Majority Muslim rule




t his motivation was conquest, not revenge, and it turned out poorly for him. Would YOU like the transcript?


No he stated his motivation was not conquest but the reason for the 9/11 attacks was US interference. If he said conquest it would be in retaliation to US attacks. Conquest of what? Their own lands back




That rationale makes perfect sense - to a madman. I know that if Timmy gives ME a pop in the yap, I always retaliate by smacking Hubert in the gob instead of Timmy. makes PERFECT sense!


The same rationale with which some caveman who we funded and trained his factions then comes back and bites us in the ass, then we get our panties in a twist and wage a war against a third world country to look big and tough yet are getting our asses handed to us.



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by nenothtu
 





It's not assumption. It is written into every single line you type. YOU prove it yourself,


You made the accusation, therefore it is up to you to prove it. Prove it is written into every single line.


No problem. I invite all to read this, every post by THE_PROFESSIONAL in this thread. Anyone is welcome to find anything there to contradict my claim. Attention from SpecOps, current or former, honest PROFESSIONALS is especially invited. You know who you are.

You also know who he ain't.




You are not one at all.


Prove it, once again little boy you are assuming


See above. I'll just sit here and wait for the calumny against my claim to overwhelm me when they can find any evidence at all to back your contention.




You can now go tell your mamma that you've just been cyber-slapped by a "little boy". She'll be so proud of you.


Oh boy here come the 'mamma' side diversions. Once again assuming.


Well, to be fair it was YOU who gave me the "little boy" ammo. that was your claim, not mine. I just ran with it!



With talk like that i am going to assume that you are still being breastfed lol


Absolutely! At least 4 times a day! that might be your problem - no love in your life!



I never admitted to not being around the block. I know what a riyal is, we just dont use it here or wherever I may be. Ive been around the block more times than I have been around your mother (since you brought up the mamma situation)


"Or wherever you may be"!
That's a hoot! If it wasn't against T+C, I swear to God (or Allah if you prefer) that I would expose your exact position on earth right here and right now in this thread! Fortunately, you have already done that yourself, for the discerning reader. I have no doubts you have never been outside the boundaries of your state, much less "around the block" in the sense of the wider world.

P.S. If you ever run into my ma, it's more likely than not that no one will ever find your carcass - they have ways of dealing with that out there, and she ain't no slouch of a shot... getting grouchy in her old age, too!



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by nenothtu
 


So you are saying that murder is OK? No wonder your behaving like such, and no wonder the Afghanis want murderers out of their country (if that is where you are)


Murder? Nowhere have I condoned murder.

Simple killing is another thing altogether.

This is yet another example proving that you are not the sort of "professional" you claim to be - they know the difference.

See what I mean? You prove me right yourself, with every word you utter.

ETA: No, I'm not in Afghanistan. I already said earlier in the thread that my wars were long ago.




edit on 2012/5/17 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 





No problem. I invite all to read this, every post by THE_PROFESSIONAL in this thread. Anyone is welcome to find anything there to contradict my claim. Attention from SpecOps, current or former, honest PROFESSIONALS is especially invited. You know who you are. You also know who he ain't.


I am a PRO, haters gonna hate



See above. I'll just sit here and wait for the calumny against my claim to overwhelm me when they can find any evidence at all to back your contention.


Prove it, get my SSN, passport and video and photographic evidence to demonstrate your claims.




Well, to be fair it was YOU who gave me the "little boy" ammo. that was your claim, not mine. I just ran with it!


You are the one who started it with first with little snippet comments such as:



Whatever sort of "professional"





There is a gear stripped in your head somewhere




A practical demonstration of that ability to think at some point in your "PROFESSIONAL" career would be a plus.




Absolutely! At least 4 times a day! that might be your problem - no love in your life!


So you admit you are a little boy, guess I was right all along




P.S. If you ever run into my ma, it's more likely than not that no one will ever find your carcass -


You saying she is hungry all the time for donuts and will eat just bout anything?



If it wasn't against T+C, I swear to God (or Allah if you prefer) that I would expose your exact position on earth right here and right now in this thread!


No ones stopping you, do it. So you admit your paid to look into such things if they are true?
edit on 013131p://5America/ChicagoThu, 17 May 2012 13:39:18 -0500 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


Nice try, attempting to turn your speculation on the "invasion and mop up of the US" into speculation of the future Obama plans in Afghanistan, but no cigar.

Could I interest you in some Cubans?



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 




This is yet another example proving that you are not the sort of "professional" you claim to be - they know the difference.


That is not proof. That is your Opinion.

I am a professional and I know the difference. I just educated you on the difference between opinion and proof.
edit on 013131p://5America/ChicagoThu, 17 May 2012 13:49:53 -0500 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Hey you turned this into speculation about my extremely professional background the topic of convo. Yes I could go for some cubans.



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by nenothtu
 




You said before because iof the Iraq War in 1991. Now you go back ANOTHER ten years, and claim the Lebanese civil war as a justification!


I am just telling you from what we know that OBL/Aq said was the prime motivation for the attacks.


Meh. he said a lot of things over time, you picked one, I picked another. wasn't it not long ago that you were claiming he wasn't responsible for the attacks at all? I may be misremembering there, with all the 9/11 fluff flying around...




It sure takes a long time for you guys to get your asses in gear, doesn't it? No wonder you've struggled to win a war against anyone else since Martel turned you back at Tours!


Well they are terrorists so they don't actually have a real military dude...Struggled to win a war? Just like how the US is struggling for 10 years in Afghanistan? LOL


Well, I was trying to be nice - I can't think of many wars at all you guys have won since then, except against each other. I would say the crusades come to mind as one example of one you won, but according to OBL, they are still ongoing, so it can't yet be considered a "win".




maybe if you guys could sort your targets out a bit better?


Tell that to our drones who have killed numerous innocents. Maybe the hiroshima or nagasaki bomb could better sort targets?


yeah, pretty much. They seem to be killing folks in war time, rather than just attacking randomly out of the blue. I don't have the stats on how many "innocents" have been killed by drones. Perhaps you could enlighten me - after you first specify in writing what you consider to be "innocents".



And don't call me 'you guys' I am an American and have nothing related with them.


Sure, "dude". "Nothing related". Got it. All I can really say in reply to that is THIS, again.



edit on 2012/5/17 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 




Meh. he said a lot of things over time, you picked one, I picked another. wasn't it not long ago that you were claiming he wasn't responsible for the attacks at all? I may be misremembering there, with all the 9/11 fluff flying around...


Why do you think he said the things you quoted? Because we were interfering dude.




Well, I was trying to be nice - I can't think of many wars at all you guys have won since then, except against each other. I would say the crusades come to mind as one example of one you won, but according to OBL, they are still ongoing, so it can't yet be considered a "win"


Them guys, not us. I am not one of them dude, gotta keep correcting you. It's them lol




Perhaps you could enlighten me - after you first specify in writing what you consider to be "innocents"


Innocents are people who had nothing to do with 9.11. For instance the drone attacks in Pakistan:



1) US Drone Strike Statistics estimate according to the New America Foundation analysis of Newspaper articles.[2] Year Number of Attacks Number Killed Min. Max.
2004 1 4 5
2005 2 6 7
2006 2 23 23
2007 4 56 77
2008 33 274 314
2009 53 369 725
2010 118 607 993
2011 70 378 536
2012 13 68 81
Total 296 1,785 2,771


Are you telling me all these people had something to do with 9/11?




Sure, "dude". "Nothing related". Got it. All I can really say in reply to that is THIS, again.


And you quote my first OP of this thread which is supposed to prove that I am related to them somehow?

Please make a thread using this my OP here to prove a relationship with 'them'



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Just as Afghanistan is not responsible for the various OBL/Aq trainers.


Sure they are. They allowed them to set up and operate the training camps, specifically and knowingly, then sheltered them for it.



They have been sheltered, why are they not in Gitmo for training terrorists? Why havent we droned them?


Well, I can see you aren't a legal PROFESSIONAL, either. If you were, you would know the element of "intent" necessary for laws to have been broken. their intent was not to train terrorists, their intent was to train geeks how to fly.

Now, the AQ camps in Afghanistan, on the other hand, like the one at Darunta....



tell Mike to drop me an e-mail about the matter. He already has my address. I would like to discuss this "top CIA OBL hunter" claim with him, any how.


He is probably too busy with the likes of us, if you want to get a hold of him you've got his information. He actually has a few books out. You should read them and you will understand.


Obviously not. You claimed you got your info from him...



Whoa wait a minute ar you disputing the fact that he was one of the top CIA OBL hunters?


ROFLMFAO! last it was he was THE "Top CIA OBL Hunter", now he's been demoted to ONE OF the "top CIA OBL hunters"... I have to wonder just how far I can back you down off that stance, but I'll try and play nice instead. It's really a side issue and an attempt by you at distraction, anyhow.

Mr. Schreuer has done good service in the past, and he has a lot of good ideas, but he's not infallible, nor has he said just exactly everything that his words have been twisted into. I'll leave it at that.


edit on 2012/5/17 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 





Sure they are. They allowed them to set up and operate the trianing camps, specifically and knowingly, then sheltered them for it.


Just as we allowed the CIA to operate training camps here and then sheltered it for them. So The USA is just as responsible.



ROFLMFAO! last it was he was THE "Top CIA OBL Hunter", now he's been demoterd to ONE OF the "top CIA OBL hunters"... I have to wonder just how far I can back you down off that stance, but I'll try and play nice instead. It's really a side issue and an attempt by you at distraction, anyhow.


Same thing,top cia hunter, one of the top, same exact thing. just word play. The Top OBL hunter would actually be the POTUS, but the most specific would be this individual Michael Scheuer




but he's not infallible, nor has he said just exactly everything that his words have been twisted into


Then care to explain what of his is incorrect and infallible? Have you read something of his which you think is incorrect? Please state it.
edit on 023131p://5America/ChicagoThu, 17 May 2012 14:07:19 -0500 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Well they got us once already on 9/11...bet they felt real froggy then.. Are you happy about that? Those 3000 people died and boy it sure is an interesting way to die by forcing people to jump off a 100 story building to their own deaths... Sure cost a lot less than a carpet bombing, only cost a few box cutters, them mofos are efficient


Yup, they did, and yup, they are. You learn to work with what's available and improvise. Sure did cost 'em a lot, though. Do you suppose they've done a cost/benefit analysis yet? I wonder when that analysis will say is another good time to get froggy?




I said invade the homeland because of the terrorist training bases eg CIA, the flight training. None of those were formed in 1607. Therefore there was no reason to invade in 1607. There is a justification now for the invasion.


Well, you might try saying what you mean and meaning what you say, then. If you'll be so kind as to point out the CIA terrorist training bases, I'll look into that. I've already been to The Farm near Williamsburg, and found nary a terrorist there, but you may have others in mind. I'll willing to scope 'em out if you can point 'em out.



Plus I would not be surprised if the US military turned on itself right now. Even panetta does not trust his own troops he is making them all disarm before he speaks to them


That's probably a GOOD thing! Word is "the troops" (both uniformed and not so much so) don't much trust Panetta, either. I know I sure as hell don't.

ETA: Truce in effect - no further responses.



edit on 2012/5/17 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   

ATTENTION!!!!!



There's way too many posts that have no iota of relation to the the topic.
Post to the topic.....

The bickering, personal remarks and all the rest stop NOW!!!!
You are responsible for your own posts.

We expect civility and decorum within all topics - Please Review This Link.

Refusal to do the above will result in further post removals....and possible temporary posting bans.

This thread will be closed for a brief time to allow members to read this post....



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Domo1
 


And when did this thread become about me?


Probably post #2 when you posted this little piece of nonsense:


We went over their for no reason, overthrew their government, installed a puppet, tell hem how to live theri lives and constantly monitor them.



It is about the Illegal war in afghanistan which had nothing to do with 9.11


clearly incorrect.


The afghani people had absolutely nothing to do with 9.11


but the Taliban who governed a large part of Afghanistan sheltered the planners and leaders who organised it. they even said so themselves.

To claim that there is no link between 9/11 and the invasion of Afghanistan is nonsense.


and this war is illegal and unjustified and anyone who participated is an oppressor of those people.


How about the Northern Alliance, who welcomed it?

Or the whole of the rest of the world who said "yep - fair enuf"

you are conflating Iraq with Afghanistan I think - trying to lump them together as if they were the same.



edit on 17-5-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 





This is only going to come to the USA.


The Balloons over the USA would have to be protected from free energy conspirators.
Only a small amount of Helium runs a Papp Engine for a long time.
But who could ever believe such a thing.
You must be right.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join