Osama Bin Laden is Dead
- Thread starter SciWriter
- Start date
Let me simplify it for you SAM
Bin Laden was killed, the rest of the details aren't overly relevant.
Besides, we'll eventually sort out most of the details.
But anyone who has been in anything even remotely like this knows that in the adrenaline rush afterwards it takes time to piece the story together accurately.
Not everyone sees everything the same way or from the same vantage point. Descriptions of what happened to person A are mixed up with a similar person b and even people there make invalid assumptions about what they saw.
Later when multiple accounts and actual physical evidience are reviewed one can get a better sense of the event.
That said, the administration didn't do themselves any favors by releasing those very early blurbs until they had done this level of analysis, just fuels BS conspiracy theories which mental midgets will use to spam forum boards with for the next decade.
Arthur
Bin Laden was killed, the rest of the details aren't overly relevant.
Besides, we'll eventually sort out most of the details.
But anyone who has been in anything even remotely like this knows that in the adrenaline rush afterwards it takes time to piece the story together accurately.
Not everyone sees everything the same way or from the same vantage point. Descriptions of what happened to person A are mixed up with a similar person b and even people there make invalid assumptions about what they saw.
Later when multiple accounts and actual physical evidience are reviewed one can get a better sense of the event.
That said, the administration didn't do themselves any favors by releasing those very early blurbs until they had done this level of analysis, just fuels BS conspiracy theories which mental midgets will use to spam forum boards with for the next decade.
Arthur
wait a minute, didn't they have cameras on the soldiers?
The story has not substantially changed. Some details have, but that kind of thing is to be expected.
If you want to know what the next moves are going to be, here's a good article. . . .
GORDON DUFF: “ON THE ROCKS,” THE RE-DEATH OF BIN LADEN’S FROZEN CORPSE (Multiple confirmations with BBC/VT PODCAST)
May 4, 2011 pos
THE FAIRY TALES START AGAIN…
Osama bin Laden’s death, who do you believe?
Hope you don't live in Europe. . . .
Osama B.L. died ten years ago. The Feds keep him alive because they need a false flag enemy to maintain the "war on terror". Now US economy can't support them for such an expensive war. To finish it, they need fulfil their last step - war on Iran. So they push out such a soap drama, it is a "provocative action", sychronized with "Quran burning" in Florida and "veil ban" law passed in French, to justify a coming "dirty bomb attack" which will lead to war on Iran like what 911 leading to war on Afghanistan and Iraq.
This is an cheating operation done by the Feds.
This is an cheating operation done by the Feds.
Don't give them ideas. God. You know they are a bit thick.
Any evidence for that, K?
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
I was wondering when the frozen corpse and the 'international jew' would rear its ugly head.
Why hasn't anyone forwarded the notion that Bin Laden's mother was really a Jew? That's what Alex Jones seems to think:shrug:
His mother was a jew and he was being funded by Israel and those nasty Tel Aviv diamond traders.
Yep, now we're getting down to brass tacks.
Source?
Halliburton made billions. Exxon made more money in one year than any commercial entity in the history of the world ever had before.adoucette said:
Who's "we"?
The problem is that the people announcing the discoveries of the alleged sorting have no credibility left, in this matter. They need to take extraordinary measures to back up their claims, however intuitively reasonable, because nobody can take their say so for anything like this.adoucette said:
Again: who's "we"?
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
It's what was said on Alex Jones radio show prison planet.
What if war does not start up with Iran, will you commit your self to an asylum?
Total BS to think we went to war in Iraq for the sake of Halliburton.
Indeed, Halliburton sold off the KBR division that was most involved with Iraq reconstruction and supply in 2006.
But Halliburton is the world's second largest oilfield services corporation with operations in more than 70 countries. It is a worldwide company and employs over 50,000 people, so of course it makes Billions of dollars each year in Revenue, but not from friggin Iraq deals.
http://www.halliburton.com/ps/
Exxon isn't making much money off of Iraq oil as they are still not pumping that much, indeed, Exxon only is invested in just one oil field in Iraq and there are 7 major fields and 14 other oil companies working with Iraq to increase their production levels.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Iraq
Arthur
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
I didn't initially believe this but its actually correct. Although Halliburton DID make billions from reconstruction it did not really benefit from the oil. As a matter of fact the US as a whole didn't really benefit from Iraqi oil which puts a dent into war for oil unless your willing to believe it was done for the benefit of the Chinese:
WASIT, Iraq —
A red banner hangs at the entrance of the office of the company — the Iraqi affiliate of China's state-owned China National Petroleum Corp. — its Chinese characters promising anyone who can decipher them: "We will try our best to make this project a success."
From among the most outspoken of critics of the 2003 U.S.-led invasion to topple Saddam Hussein, China has emerged as one of the biggest economic beneficiaries of the war, snagging five lucrative deals. While Western firms were largely subdued in their interest in Iraq's recent oil auctions, China snapped up three contracts, shrugging off the security risks and the country's political instability for the promise of oil.
The result of its efforts is that about half of China's oil comes from the region. It has ousted the United States as OPEC kingpin Saudi Arabia's top oil customer. Saudi Arabia has also set up a joint venture refinery in China.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37577656...il_and_energy/
CONTINGENCY OPERATING BASE BASRA, IRAQ - Oil executives buzz in and out of this American base, the former British base connected to the Basra airport, some for meetings with officials, some staying the night – or longer.The American mission in Basra, Iraq’s oil capital, is perhaps unlike that of any U.S. outpost in the world: to ensure the world’s largest oil companies have as few problems as possible as they start work on Iraqi oil contracts that could see the country become the largest producer ever.It’s also a tricky prerogative, considering the country’s lack of weapons of mass destruction but abundance of oil, which only bolsters the claims of those who say economic bounty was the motive for the U.S.-led invasion.
“U.S. government policy at this time is that the USG in Iraq should assist in facilitating the mobilization of these companies without regard to the nationality of the companies,” said Kenneth Thomas, head of the energy and transportation section of the Basra Provincial Reconstruction Team, a U.S. Embassy initiative. “If more American companies come into Iraq, we will of course assist them in any way we can.”
http://www.iraqoilreport.com/oil/pro...oil-boom-4871/
Washington Post
But as the U.S. military draws down and Iraq opens up to foreign investment, China and a handful of other countries that weren't part of the "coalition of the willing" are poised to cash in. These countries are expanding their foothold beyond Iraq's oil reserves -- the world's third largest -- to areas such as construction, government services and even tourism, while American companies show little interest in investing here.
"The U.S. really doesn't know what to do in Iraq," said Fawzi Hariri, Iraq's industry minister. "I have been personally, as the minister of industry, trying to woo U.S. companies into Iraq. There is nothing yet. Nothing tangible."
In the past two years, Chinese companies have walked away with stakes in three of the 11 contracts the Iraqi Oil Ministry has signed in its bid to increase crude output by about 450 percent over the next seven years. They also renegotiated a $3 billion deal that dates to when Saddam Hussein was in power.Only two American firms won stakes in oil deals, an underwhelming showing that industry analysts and U.S. officials say reflects deep concerns about doing business in a country besieged by insecurity, corruption and political turmoil.
"People know they didn't participate in the invasion or the sanctions, and they have an old participation in Iraq that predates Saddam Hussein," said Ahmed Abdul-Redha al-Zanki, the senior engineer for Iraq's North Oil Co., which is working with the Chinese to develop the field. "They work with us as partners," in stark contrast to the condescending practices of Western companies, he said.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...070103406.html
It made Billions in Revenues but they are not the same as Profits.
You don't hire people to supply and rebuild in Iraq cheaply.
As of 2008, 87 KBR workers were killed and 849 wounded by hostile action in Iraq
Indeed,this was part of the reason Halliburton sold the KBR division that did that specialized work in 2006 and has done better without it.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
@Sam
Robert Baer, veteran CIA who wrote 'See No Evil' offers his take on the Bin Laden's raid from Truthdig.com:
http://ianmasters.com/sites/default/files/mp3/bbriefing_2011_05_2a_robert_baer.mp3
Robert Baer, veteran CIA who wrote 'See No Evil' offers his take on the Bin Laden's raid from Truthdig.com:
http://ianmasters.com/sites/default/files/mp3/bbriefing_2011_05_2a_robert_baer.mp3
Who's "we"? Is it BS to think that Cheney, W, Rice, and Rumsfeld went to war in Iraq for the sake of Halliburton et al?adoucette said:
After five years of war profiteering, it rids itself of a legal problem and makes a tidy profit doing so.adoucette said:
In 2000, before the Cheney wars, Halliburton was in financial difficulties, facing large payouts in asbestos claims and other problems. Its 1999 revenue was 14.9 billion, after the great increase under former defense secretary and well-connected CEO Richard Cheney, but its profits were low and apparently fraudulent - Cheney had been cooking the books (his accounting firm was Arthur Anderson). Just one of the no-bid or oddly bid contracts for those wars, granted under Cheney's purview as an unusually powerful VP - the 2002 LOGCAP contract with the Army as preparations for the Iraq invasion - was worth 7 billion dollars. That kind of bailout, coupled with the friendly behavior of the Justice Department under W's management, made Cheney's transition to VP, 34 million dollar severance pile, and continued presence in the stock option lists, a sound investment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HalliburtonAnnualRevenue.JPGadoucette said:
This frequently seen reaction remains puzzling. How does dominating the world's market controlling field of sweet crude fail to benefit the people who planned and pushed the Iraq war? And actions - especially military, the US's specialty - for the benefit of (or control of) the Chinese, are likely to become more common rather than less, as the debt squeeze locks in.Lucy said:
Yes, because Cheney had severed all financial ties to Halliburton.
He couldn't sever the deferred compensation or Stock options, but he did take out an insurance policy that guaranteed the deferred compensation, regardless of what happened to Halliburton, thus severing that financial tie and he donated ALL of the after tax profits from the Stock Options to Charity thus eliminating that incentive.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1819260/posts
So? That's what B&R does and that's what every company tries to do, make a profit. That is no indication that we went to war so Halliburton could make a reasonable profit on a LOGCAP contract which are Cost plus 1 to 3% profit.
NOPE, that lawsuit, brought by Judicial Watch, was dismissed.
No, the contract was not a No-Bid or even oddly bid, and it was never for $7 Billion dollars, that was the CAP on the LOGCAP award. Big difference.
See:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/943371/posts
Not puzzling because it's not true.
Last edited:
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Yeah, I was wondering if the military force in Libya isn't really the same kind action on the part of the US since they don't really stand to gain from the oil in Libya whereas Europe and China do. I love how the chinese sit back and watch everyone else rock the world while they just sit back and reap the rewards without putting anything on the line.