Monday, June 26, 2006

In Praise of the Daily Kos

This little post may get me drummed out of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, but I am going to praise the Daily Kos and its proprietor, Markos Moulitsas. I was not aware of this previously, but apparently Kos has a standing rule against posting the 9-11 "Truth" stuff.

Diaries on certain topics are likely to generate angry responses. Most of these topics fall under the general heading of "conspiracy theories", i.e. "JFK was killed by Martians". The rule for posting such diaries is "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". The more extreme the claim, the higher the burden of proof that commenters will demand. If you can't provide evidence to back up your claim, it is best not to post the diary. This guideline also applies to recommending extraordinary-claims diaries. If a diary makes an extreme claim with little or no evidence to back up that claim, it shouldn't be recommended, no matter what that claim is.

Controversial 9/11 Diaries

DailyKos accepts that the 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by agents of Al-Qaeda. It is forbidden to write diaries that:

1. refer to claims that American, British, Israeli, or any government assisted in the attacks

2. refer to claims that the airplanes that crashed into the WTC and Pentagon were not the cause of the damage to those buildings or their subsequent collapse

Authoring or recommending these diaries may result in banning from Daily Kos.


It is relevant to note that this procedure was instituted over at Kos on July 8, 2005, the day after the London subway bombings.

General nutter Mike Malloy of Air America apparently just found out about this, and went off onto one of his typical rants. The segment on Kos and 9-11 Truthers begins about 9:22. Here's a transcript of Malloy's tirade.

When I listen to people who question the official story of what happened on 9/11… it stimulates me to question it myself. Now, as in any of these instances, there may be certain people involved in the 9/11 Truth community who I might consider or you might consider to be really out there in tin-foil hat land. And that may be because of our perspectives.

On the other hand, there are people who challenge the official story of September 11th who are as solid, and sensible, and logical as you are, and as I am.

So, this is a story, (the attack on this country September the 11th, 2001), that became the basis for US foreign policy… according to Bush and these murderous bastards who now run this country.

57 Comments:

At 26 June, 2006 16:12, Blogger BG said...

Mike Malloy, The Daily Kos & 9/11

 
At 26 June, 2006 16:15, Blogger default.xbe said...

im gonna start calling you adsense from now on

 
At 26 June, 2006 16:45, Blogger JoanBasil said...

Markos is making his living off his site so I expect that to be his prime consideration. The Democratic establishment is complicit/part of the cover-up known as the Kean Commission and Markos wants to live off the Democratic establishment somehow or other, ergo . . .

Mike Malloy makes perfect sense. The 9/11 events are being used to keep this country at war for the next 30 years with people who never threatened or attacked us, so that our country's leaders can rule the world with violence.

Ha! If Joe Lieberman burps there's 10 Kos diaries about it. Its not like Markos' mission is to debate the important issues of the day and make a difference.

Seriously, you're not for this censorship are you, Pat? First they came for the 9/11 "conspiracy theorists," etc.

 
At 26 June, 2006 17:45, Blogger shawn said...

First off, if Kos is truly part of the "Democratic establishment" they'll never get reelected.

Secondly, I never thought I'd say I agree with Kos in my entire life.

 
At 26 June, 2006 17:45, Blogger Alex said...

The Democratic establishment is complicit/part of the cover-up known as the Kean Commission and Markos wants to live off the Democratic establishment somehow or other, ergo . . .

Uhuh, yeah, taht's exactly it. Couldn't have anything to do with the fact that he realizes you're all nuts, and doesn't want to be associated with whacky theories. Really, he's just a Zionist CIA shill.

Mike Malloy makes perfect sense. The 9/11 events are being used to keep this country at war for the next 30 years with people who never threatened or attacked us, so that our country's leaders can rule the world with violence.

Yep, that's why the US keeps invading third world shitholes. Because everyone knows that if you want to rule the world, you don't attack the powerfull countries; instead you invest trillions of dollars into destroying dictatorial regimes with a net GDP lower than that of NYC, and then rebuilding them into democracies. Yep, that's the way to do it.

First they came for the 9/11 "conspiracy theorists," etc.

What the hell? The internet's an open forum, and websites are privately owned. Getting banned from a site in no way infringes on your freedom of speech. If you come into my house and start yelling about Zionists trying to take over the world, I'll boot your ass out too, and that wouldn't be infringing on any of your rights either. You're more than welcome to start up your own site and write about whatever insane ideas you can think up.

 
At 26 June, 2006 17:47, Blogger shawn said...

First they came for the 9/11 "conspiracy theorists," etc.

The little statement you're referring to is on the New England Holocaust Memorial fifteen minutes from my house. Never compare you whackos to the people who were slaughtered sixty years ago.

 
At 26 June, 2006 17:49, Blogger shawn said...

Couldn't have anything to do with the fact that he realizes you're all nuts, and doesn't want to be associated with whacky theories.

Well, this is the guy who said "screw 'em" when several of his countrymen were tortured, burned, and dragged around a city.

 
At 26 June, 2006 17:55, Blogger Alex said...

Well, this is the guy who said "screw 'em" when several of his countrymen were tortured, burned, and dragged around a city.

Hey, don't get me wrong, I think the guy's a moron and an asshole, but he doesn't come close to the level of insanity of our resident CT'ers.

 
At 26 June, 2006 18:04, Blogger default.xbe said...

The little statement you're referring to is on the New England Holocaust Memorial fifteen minutes from my house. Never compare you whackos to the people who were slaughtered sixty years ago.

in case anyone is wondering this is the full quote:

First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.


but its perfectly alright to belittle their memories now isnt it? since the holocaust never happened, right? honestly sometimes you people make me sick

same "justification" avery uses when he mocks mark bingham

 
At 26 June, 2006 18:24, Blogger James B. said...

Because everyone knows that if you want to rule the world, you don't attack the powerfull countries; instead you invest trillions of dollars into destroying dictatorial regimes with a net GDP lower than that of NYC, and then rebuilding them into democracies.

I have seen anti-globalist nutjobs say that we got involved in Bosnia and Kosovo in order to make money for the global elites.

Yeah, right. The entire exports of both of them combined is equivilent to the sales of your average suburban shopping mall.

 
At 26 June, 2006 18:48, Blogger BG said...

Left Blogosphere Implosion!

By Good Lieutenant

It hasn't been a good two weeks in left-wing blogdom.

Kos is emerging as a slimy pay-to-play Democrat, partnered with a potential criminal - despite the hype and promise to be "different" than the typical politico. Not only that, but he coordinated with other top lefty bloggers to get them to stay silent on the story. For your enjoyment, The Freshmaker!

 
At 26 June, 2006 18:51, Blogger shawn said...

Kos is emerging as a slimy pay-to-play Democrat, partnered with a potential criminal - despite the hype and promise to be "different" than the typical politico. Not only that, but he coordinated with other top lefty bloggers to get them to stay silent on the story. For your enjoyment, The Freshmaker!

You do realize that most of us are pretty up-and-up on the blogosphere, right? We're not arguing that Kos is a good person (he's obviously a disgusting human being), but he even realizes this is all nosense.

 
At 26 June, 2006 19:35, Blogger JoanBasil said...

bg,
Not that I'm such a fan of David Brooks but his column the other day was about the Markos/Armstrong enterprise
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/06/25/opinion/25brooks.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fColumnists%2fDavid%20Brooks

Its kind of strange to see Markos in a Ned Lamont commercial. Did that run on TV? Or is it something just pasted together or what? It looks real (except for the soundtrack). The percentage of voters who know or care about DailyKos has to be so small. Its like being endorsed by the mailman.

If I lived in Connecticut, I would vote for Lamont in that primary. Lieberman reminds me of an elderly relative who deliberately upsets everyone to get attention. There's something kind of senile/childish about the way Lieberman has deliberately provoked the anger of so many people in his own party the last few years.

 
At 26 June, 2006 20:00, Blogger shawn said...

The percentage of voters who know or care about DailyKos has to be so small.

Also, no candidate he's ever backed has won.

 
At 26 June, 2006 20:02, Blogger CHF said...

Every now and then the looney left CT fridge needs a reminder as to what they are.

You know you're fucked up when even Kos doesn't want to be associated with your pathetic uneducated beliefs.

 
At 26 June, 2006 20:06, Blogger roger_sq said...

That Al Qaeda was established by the United States in coordination with Saudi Arabia is not even in dispute (with exception to the 9/11 commission, which could not find any connection despite an exhaustive investigation covering a CBS news interview and the memoirs of a crazy arab).

I guess the consensus belief is that the CIA quit training terrorists when they got into drug smuggling and dealing crack?

 
At 26 June, 2006 20:15, Blogger CHF said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 26 June, 2006 20:25, Blogger nesNYC said...

Quick, see this before it's gone again!!!

Fox News - 911 The Israeli Connection

 
At 26 June, 2006 20:27, Blogger CHF said...

roger,

"...is not in dispute"

"...as has been established..."

"...it is a fact that...."

99% of the time when you guys use these sort of "I-know-what-I'm-talking-about" terms you have no clue.

 
At 26 June, 2006 21:11, Blogger shawn said...

I guess the consensus belief is that the CIA quit training terrorists when they got into drug smuggling and dealing crack?

Hey, genius, Al Qaeda was formed and funded by a Saudi.

The CIA funded NATIONALS in Afghanistan.

 
At 26 June, 2006 21:11, Blogger shawn said...

99% of the time when you guys use these sort of "I-know-what-I'm-talking-about" terms you have no clue.

Isn't it hilarious when they use those terms and then they say something without any basis in reality whatsoever?

 
At 26 June, 2006 21:31, Blogger roger_sq said...

Hey, genius, Al Qaeda was formed and funded by a Saudi.

The CIA funded NATIONALS in Afghanistan.


You aren't that dumb.

Try again?

 
At 26 June, 2006 21:43, Blogger BG said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 26 June, 2006 21:45, Blogger BG said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 26 June, 2006 21:46, Blogger BG said...

joan,

You are taking my comment more seriously than I meant it. The idea that there is any cognitive activity going on at this blog is questionable. I do respect the time that has been spent to do some of the research and composition of the blog posts here. As far as these comments, I post links in hopes that some might follow and enjoy learning rather than just holding steadfast to their unenlighted positions. I also comment only to mess with people that I would probably like and respect if I knew them personally, but I find infuriating in their blindness to 9/11.

The comment about Kos was only to mess with the whole idea that this blog post, somehow praising Kos for his good sense, shows the it's not easy to keep gathering and posting material to bash Loose Change.

 
At 26 June, 2006 21:49, Blogger James B. said...

You are taking my comment more seriously than I meant it. The idea that there is any cognitive activity going on at this blog is questionable.

Yeah BG, you are just so much smarter than we are. I don't know how I manage to tie my shoes in the morning.

 
At 26 June, 2006 21:56, Blogger shawn said...

You aren't that dumb.

Try again?


How about you try again and prove to me they funded and formed al-Qaeda.

"Personally, neither I nor any of my brothers saw evidence of American help." - Osama bin Laden, quoted by Robert Fisk

In Knights Under the Prophet's Banner al-Zawahiri wrote that Afghan mujihideen were funded by Arabs and Americans, but that the non-national mujihideen were funded by Saudis and others from the Arab world.

 
At 26 June, 2006 21:56, Blogger shawn said...

The idea that there is any cognitive activity going on at this blog is questionable.

Irony alert.

 
At 26 June, 2006 22:01, Blogger James B. said...

Shawn is right. Osama being under the CIA is a common myth. The CIA armed the native Afghans such as Masood, and Hekmatyar, the Saudis and other Gulf states supported the foreign mujahadeen.

People still make the same mistake nowadays. The Taliban are Afghan, although many grew up in Pakistan, the foreigners are Al Qaeda.

 
At 26 June, 2006 22:03, Blogger shawn said...

I can almost see the circular logic they'll whip out now:

Al-Qaeda is a CIA invention, so of course the members would pretend to not be funded/trained by the CIA so that we can keep fighting a phantom war so the New World Order can be established.

 
At 26 June, 2006 22:13, Blogger James B. said...

Another common misnomer is that these are the same organizations. Neither Al Qaeda nor the Taliban came around until the mid-90s, well after the Soviets left Afghanistan.

 
At 26 June, 2006 22:28, Blogger roger_sq said...

Personally, neither I nor any of my brothers saw evidence of American help." - Osama bin Laden, quoted by Robert Fisk


"I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act."-Osama Bin Laden BBC Monitoring Service.

ruh-roh... is Osama Bin Laden a reliable source now?


In Knights Under the Prophet's Banner al-Zawahiri wrote


When did Saudis start manufacturing M-16's? That's the same lame source the 9/11 commission used. Memoirs of a psychotic terrorist.

Alas, yer just a conspiracy theorist. Got any other terrorist testimonials to offer up? Because I know Chuck Shees isn't exactly top shelf, but...

 
At 26 June, 2006 22:29, Blogger roger_sq said...

Another common misnomer is that these are the same organizations. Neither Al Qaeda nor the Taliban came around until the mid-90s, well after the Soviets left Afghanistan.

wrong.

 
At 26 June, 2006 23:01, Blogger Pat said...

Joan, it's not censorship for Kos to control what is printed on his site. It's his and he pays the bandwidth charges. If anybody wants to write a blog about 9-11 conspiracy theories, they can go over to Blogger, as our buddy BG has, or they can post over at DU, which has a whole section devoted to 9-11 (and which furnishes us with some pretty wild material).

Kos has taken heat, sometimes unfairly, from conservative bloggers over some of the stupid things that appear in recommended diary entries. His system is pretty easy to game; just post a diary, then send an email (or a forum post) to ten friends asking them to recommend it, and suddenly your diary's on the front page. I'd strongly suspect that if you went back to July 8 of last year (day after tube bombings) you'd find a bunch of recommended diaries about how Tony Blair was behind it all, and that this was indeed the British 9-11. And further, you'd probably find Right Wing News pointing to these crazy recommended diaries over at Kos. Hell, I know John Hawkins at RWN; I'm sure he had something posted about the Kossacks' reaction.

 
At 26 June, 2006 23:01, Blogger James B. said...

When did Saudis start manufacturing M-16's? That's the same lame source the 9/11 commission used. Memoirs of a psychotic terrorist.


When did the Mujahadeen start using M-16s?

 
At 26 June, 2006 23:57, Blogger Pat said...

BG, no denying we are running short on material here; the Loosers have a couple of months before they come out with the new film, and we've only been picking the current one apart for what, 2 months now?

On the Kostroversy, I'd love to see the little doinkster go down, but in the end he still controls his fiefdom and the issue is minor. I despise him, but for the "screw 'em" comment more than anything else.

 
At 27 June, 2006 06:00, Blogger JoanBasil said...

pat,
The word "censor" is appropriate and the reasons that he does that are self-serving, not that he knows more about 9/11 than, say, Dr. Griffin. (IMO, big shot Democrats getting so involved with Markos is of a piece with what happened with the Republicans and Abramoff. I wonder how much the politician is influenced simply by not wanting to look like a snob or not wanting to look like he's not a regular guy.)

I don't know what "conservative" or "liberal" means any more; I agree with Lionel, the radio hosted that 911blogger linked to for podcasts last week, that these terms and mentality are "dinosaurs." When you say "conservative," I think its more like "Republican partisan." Why would they take Markos seriously? Nothing that he writes has any depth of research (as far as I could see). His audience is very small and he doesn't have a "Loose Change" to reach out and bring in new people.

 
At 27 June, 2006 08:15, Blogger shawn said...

wrong.

I love how we support our points and roger never does.

Roger, notice Osama then changed his position on 9/11? Nerver changed it on the CIA nonsense.

I figure even with your low brain cell count you could figure out the difference between my quote and yours.

 
At 27 June, 2006 08:16, Blogger shawn said...

And the only American weapons I've seen used by terrorists have been in Iraq...y'know weapons they captured.

 
At 27 June, 2006 09:17, Blogger Pat said...

Joan, yes, Kos was in that awful commercial for Lamont. Allahpundit did a great parody of that ad, remixing it as a Mentos commercial. I agree that Kos isn't very deep and few Republicans read him, but his audience is immense--400,000 uniques a day.

 
At 27 June, 2006 10:53, Blogger debunking911 said...

Yeah, I've listen to Air America since the first day and most are normal radio host. I think Malloy is a coke head. At least he acts like one.

Joanbasil points out what is actually happening to the fringe left. By design or not this issue is being used to split the democrat vote into another small piece. Al Franken and others have come out against this nonsense at air america but I guess freedom means letting Malloy ramble on.

Lets fact it. If you want to say government is bad this conspiracy theory is a good vehicle.

 
At 27 June, 2006 12:38, Blogger roger_sq said...

I love how we support our points and roger never does.

I love how you make totally false statements such as these. I only alot myself a few minutes a day to waste preaching to brainwashed retards, sorry if blatant fallacies (Taliban is brand spankin' new if yer a moron, or a thousand years old if you actually have a clue) don't always warrant a sourced reply. Go look it up, it ain't that hard.


Roger, notice Osama then changed his position on 9/11? Nerver changed it on the CIA nonsense.


Yeah, I'm really fucking surprised that the two top ranking islamic terrorists in the world deny receiving assistance from The Great Satan.

Hmmm... I wonder why nobody on the 9/11 commission thought TO ASK THE CIA? What a concept. But that would come dangerously close to a legitimate investigation.


I figure even with your low brain cell count you could figure out the difference between my quote and yours.

The difference is that one quote supports your delusion and one does not. Very Loose Change of you to make your own distinction though.

 
At 27 June, 2006 14:01, Blogger Alex said...

Yeah, I'm really fucking surprised that the two top ranking islamic terrorists in the world deny receiving assistance from The Great Satan.

Hmmm... I wonder why nobody on the 9/11 commission thought TO ASK THE CIA? What a concept. But that would come dangerously close to a legitimate investigation.


So terrorists will deny the connection, but the CIA will say....what?

"oh, yeah, yep, that was us. we did it. what's the big deal? hey, is that a boston cream donut?"

Things sure are strange in your world....

 
At 27 June, 2006 15:30, Blogger JoanBasil said...

It would seem like the 9/11 Commission could have nailed down whether bin Laden was using a dialysis machine. Thats not like a toothbrush that you can take into hiding; there'd have to be lots of evidence of it. If he needed dialysis, how could he possibly be alive? Or even have lived into 2002?

 
At 27 June, 2006 16:46, Blogger default.xbe said...

It would seem like the 9/11 Commission could have nailed down whether bin Laden was using a dialysis machine. Thats not like a toothbrush that you can take into hiding; there'd have to be lots of evidence of it. If he needed dialysis, how could he possibly be alive? Or even have lived into 2002?

another question to ask is are we 100% certain he needs a dialysis machine?

 
At 27 June, 2006 17:01, Blogger shawn said...

Hmmm... I wonder why nobody on the 9/11 commission thought TO ASK THE CIA?

Ask them something that has no factual basis? Why not ask them if they funded the rise of the Soviet Union while you're at it?

 
At 27 June, 2006 17:05, Blogger shawn said...

(Taliban is brand spankin' new if yer a moron, or a thousand years old if you actually have a clue)

I hope you're not mistaking the Taliban for the caliphate.

I only alot myself a few minutes a day to waste preaching to brainwashed retards, sorry if blatant fallacies

This from the guy who thinks Zinn's biased history is a ok and has only given a subjective view of a gun as his evidence for a JFK conspiracy. This excuse doesn't hold water, it's like a creationist going "I don't have the time to argue with you, so I don't need to support my points."

The difference is that one quote supports your delusion and one does not

Why do you continue to substitute words with their antonyms? I'm not delusional, you are. Your worldview is based on faith and an ignorance of geopolitics and history.

 
At 27 June, 2006 18:10, Blogger roger_sq said...

So terrorists will deny the connection, but the CIA will say....what?

"oh, yeah, yep, that was us. we did it. what's the big deal? hey, is that a boston cream donut?"

Things sure are strange in your world....


The difference, in my strange world, is that Osama is a fanatic muslim terrorist, and the CIA is a government agency subservient to their masters- the American citizenry who pay their salary.

The fact that YOU can't make the distinction speaks well for you and for the current situation in this country.

 
At 27 June, 2006 18:16, Blogger roger_sq said...

Ask them something that has no factual basis? Why not ask them if they funded the rise of the Soviet Union while you're at it?

Apparently you never heard of NEC, Lend-Lease, or UNRR but that's beside the point. There's plenty of people in government today who know very well what 'the base' really refers to. It is a fact. That is why nobody asked about it.

 
At 27 June, 2006 19:00, Blogger James B. said...

Apparently you never heard of NEC

The Nippon Electric Company? I used to have a monitor made by them. What does that have to do with anything?

 
At 27 June, 2006 19:21, Blogger default.xbe said...

IIRC correctly Lend-Lease was a US program to aid our allies in WWII, which at the time did include the Soviet Union, although id hardly consider it "building" them

all i can find for UNRR is Unable to Approve Route Requested, which doesnt even match the acronym

 
At 27 June, 2006 20:00, Blogger roger_sq said...

IIRC correctly Lend-Lease was a US program to aid our allies in WWII, which at the time did include the Soviet Union, although id hardly consider it "building" them

That's because you've hardly considered it- period.


all i can find for UNRR is Unable to Approve Route Requested, which doesnt even match the acronym"

But I'm the ignorant one. Mhmmm...

 
At 27 June, 2006 20:08, Blogger James B. said...

So... care to enlighten us on what NEC and UNRR are referring to, oh educated one?

 
At 27 June, 2006 20:55, Blogger shawn said...

The difference, in my strange world, is that Osama is a fanatic muslim terrorist, and the CIA is a government agency subservient to their masters- the American citizenry who pay their salary.


And that's how it works. Osama is in fact a fanatic Islamist terrorist, and the CIA neither created nor funded him. There is ZERO evidence the CIA funded al-Qaeda or Osama, but you can continue to have your blind faith.

Apparently you never heard of NEC, Lend-Lease, or UNRR but that's beside the point.

The OSS wasn't even around when the Soviet Union came into being, Einstein. (hahah me not hearing about something having to do with WW2, hilarious)

None of those had anything to do with actually building the USSR (or did you forget about our whole mini-invasion on the side of the Whites?). The Soviet Union had already been around for decades by the time we aided them.

To quote Churchill: "If Hitler invaded Hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons."

That's because you've hardly considered it- period.

Your knowledge of history is so laughable you have no right being coy with someone else.

 
At 27 June, 2006 21:36, Blogger shawn said...

The UNRR is the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (it predates the founding of the UN, so "United Nations" refers to the Allied nation). It was a program for aiding refugees from liberated nations, and lasted from '43 to '49.

NEC can mean a whole slew of things, but none have to do with the Soviet Union. I assume he's referencing the National Economic Council, which didn't exist until two years after the fall of the Soviet Union.

 
At 27 June, 2006 21:50, Blogger James B. said...

That would be UNRRA. It makes a difference when you leave letters out of acronyms. Regardless it still has nothing to do with the establishment of the Soviet Union.

He could mean NEP, but that was a Soviet Program, not a US one. Lenin's attempts to stave off economic collapse before he died and Stalin took over and killed everyone.

 
At 28 June, 2006 03:38, Blogger JPSlovjanski said...

On support for Osama Bin Laden by the CIA: This is a problem I have with a lot of leftists who keep repeating this mantra of "THE CIA FUNDED BIN LADEN!!" It becomes a problem because CTs and Libertarians(the two go together well I have noticed) turn that comment into "THE CIA CREATED AND CONTROLS BIN LADEN!!"


The things is this: In 1986 Bin Laden and Abullah Azzam created something called Maktyab Al-Khidimat, often referred to as the MAK. This means "Services Bureau", and it was designed not only to provide military aid to the Mujahadeen but also relief aid to refugees as well as construction projects(this was Bin Laden's field of expertise). Al Qaeda, created some time later, was basically an expansion of the MAK but with a more international scope. Essentially, it is not a "terrorist organization" in is much that it is a source of funds, training, and intelligence for various Islamic insurgent groups around the world.

US Funding: US and Western aid to aid to Afghanistan was delivered to the Pakistani ISID. This was the US' point of contact with the war. Granted, they had to know about Bin Laden and the MAK, but it is impossible to determine how much, if any, logistical support was directly given to the MAK.

What CTs need to realize is that people like Bin Laden actually have a documented history, and it might be a good idea to READ that before making commments on how he is a "CIA asset".


SOURCES:

Through Our Enemies' Eyes
Imperial Hubris (both by Michael Scheuer)

Tactics of the Crescent Moon by H. John Poole. (This has some detailed history on Mujahadeen logistical support in Afghanistan).

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home