How many freedoms has 9/11 cost us?

Did America bring 9/11 on itself. It backed the Mujahideem against the Russians, used a very wealthy, very intelligent, media savvy warrior as a leader of this. Do you simply throw away a man like that and expect no consequences?

As a result of Osama Bin Laden's actions America and it's allies embarked on a war it could not win in the graveyard of empires and like so many others before it is leaving with its tail between its legs.

The war has had huge financial cost on the western world, at least in part leading to the financial crisis in the U.S.

Furthermore, the people of the west have been locked down through the use of this threat by their elites.

Who really has come out of this as a winner? What freedoms have you lost?

Freedom isn't free
It costs folks like you and me
And if we don't all chip in
We'll never pay that bill
Freedom isn't free
No, there's a hefty in' fee.
And if you don't throw in your buck 'o five
Who will?

Originally posted by Turkey Pie
Did America bring 9/11 on itself. It backed the Mujahideem against the Russians, used a very wealthy, very intelligent, media savvy warrior as a leader of this. Do you simply throw away a man like that and expect no consequences?

Originally posted by Turkey Pie
Do you simply throw away a man like that and expect no consequences?

you mean as happened throughout most of Eastern Europe and Central/South America?

How many Nicaraguan Bin Ladens do you think there might have been? Hell, thats almost like suggesting Che and Castro were going to attack Russia.

Originally posted by Turkey Pie
What freedoms have you lost?

all of the freedoms

Yeah, that's another thing, we didn't "throw away" Bin Laden, and he would have gone after America even if we'd never intervened in Afghanistan.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
we didn't "throw away" Bin Laden

very true. People seem to have the idea that he was a direct CIA asset at the time. Hell, he wasn't even a Saudi asset at the time; most of the Royal Family was happy he wasn't still in the kingdom (and after the war he moved to Yemen because the Saudis weren't particularly interested in having a jihadi recruiter/financier with military experience living in their nation).

The freedom to not be publicly groped every time I want to travel by air. Sometimes they take me in the back and strip me, once they even performed a colonoscopy to make sure I didn't have a bomb up my ass!

At least, that's what they told me the reason was. The truth is that I'm just a devilishly handsome white male and the security guards were very lonely. 😠

Exactly three freedoms.

this thread is probably being monitored

"Freedom? That is a worship word. You will not speak it."

Originally posted by Oliver North
very true. People seem to have the idea that he was a direct CIA asset at the time. Hell, he wasn't even a Saudi asset at the time; most of the Royal Family was happy he wasn't still in the kingdom (and after the war he moved to Yemen because the Saudis weren't particularly interested in having a jihadi recruiter/financier with military experience living in their nation).

Lol at the use of "asset". As if the state of any "asset" can truly be known outside of the intelligence community. You amuse me.

Originally posted by Turkey Pie
Lol at the use of "asset".

isn't that the actual term though?

Originally posted by Turkey Pie
As if the state of any "asset" can truly be known outside of the intelligence community.

fair point, though in both The Looming Tower by Lawrence Right, and Taliban by Ahmed Rashid (the latter having the distinction of being published in the months prior to 9/11) Bin Laden's role in the conflict is diminished, and for a number of reasons, while it may be true that somehow, through his own connections, got his hands on some CIA money or equipment, because he was an Arab he couldn't get support through the ISI, who were the primary channel through which American funded the Muj. I've never seen anything that supports Bin Laden being a CIA asset, do you have any evidence?

Originally posted by Turkey Pie
You amuse me.

thanks 😄

Originally posted by Oliver North
isn't that the actual term though?

fair point, though in both The Looming Tower by Lawrence Right, and Taliban by Ahmed Rashid (the latter having the distinction of being published in the months prior to 9/11) Bin Laden's role in the conflict is diminished, and for a number of reasons, while it may be true that somehow, through his own connections, got his hands on some CIA money or equipment, because he was an Arab he couldn't get support through the ISI, who were the primary channel through which American funded the Muj. I've never seen anything that supports Bin Laden being a CIA asset, do you have any evidence?

thanks 😄

I have no evidence he is a CIA asset, however, if I was in the Intelligence business it would seem sensible to spread disinformation about someone who people believe may or may not be your creation, if indeed they were your creation.

As for asset, who knows I have seen it used in films over the last twenty years. However prior to that, not really was it art imitating life, vice versa or neither.

Will we ever know, do we really know why the BBC broadcast the event before it happened?

Originally posted by Turkey Pie
do we really know why the BBC broadcast the event before it happened?

which event?

Originally posted by Oliver North
which event?

9/11

I don't know that the events of 9/11 have cost Americans to lose any freedoms. We have certainly lost luxuries though. American citizens are being monitored and profiled much more since 9/11. However, privacy was never a freedom we had. We may have and have had a greater since of personal privacy due to freedom but we still have all the freedoms we did before 9/11. Some freedoms may be under threat of change, but they're still there. The profiling and surveillance monitoring was always going to end up in the state that it has become. I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing either.

It must have cost us anywhere from 9 to 11 freedoms.

Originally posted by Turkey Pie
Will we ever know, do we really know why the BBC broadcast the event before it happened?

Did you know there's a bit of a time delay between the U.S. and Europe? So, like, if something happened here in New York around 9:00am, the BBC could easily have footage and be broadcasting it by about 4:30am their time, making it appear like the BBC had footage before it actually happened. And that's assuming they even did that.

So unless they broadcast it like a week before I wouldn't think it's such a major conspiracy proving thing.

Originally posted by MooCowofJustice
Did you know there's a bit of a time delay between the U.S. and Europe? So, like, if something happened here in New York around 9:00am, the BBC could easily have footage and be broadcasting it by about 4:30am their time, making it appear like the BBC had footage before it actually happened. And that's assuming they even did that.

So unless they broadcast it like a week before I wouldn't think it's such a major conspiracy proving thing.

You are absolutely right! I have a friend in Africa, and we joke about him being in my future. 😆