Übergeek 바둑이: I believe there are recorded instances of Osama Bin Laden thanking America for it's support.. and Pakistan too for helping them kill their Soviet invaders.

It is said.. that a recruitment process went on. To which.. Islamic radicals were "imported" from the rest of the world to the training camps inside Pakistan.

When it comes to CIA trained and protected terrorists, nobody beats Cuban-born Luis Posada Carriles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Posada_Carriles

He is wanted in Cuba and Venezuela for bombing an airplane and killing 73 people. He also carried out bombings of hotels and tourist facilities in Cuba in order to disrupt the tourist trade in the island.

His partner in crime and terrorism is Orlando Bosch, another CIA agent who became both a terrorist and criminal who carried out bombings in Cuba as well as against an American airline that wanted to resume flights to Cuba.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_Bosch

Of course, somebody who cimmits an act of terrorism in the name of Western Democracy is a hero. Somebody who does it against Western Democracy is a criminal and a terrorist. Men like Posada Carriles and Bosch have now become an embarrassment and a liability to the American government, even though they were heros during the Cold War. Osama Bin Laden and the Moujahadeen are the smae. Dubious allies during the Cold War, terrorist enemies now.

well.. I see Big Brother (aka 1984) rewriting of history is in place.

one instant blows everything else outta da window. Not the various uses of hijacking by various USA AUTHORITIES... not the various factions in Europe seeking homeland rule or representation.

... curious I read that Bin Laden was protected from arrest by order of various people before 9/11 despite being highly wanted.

.... Would the capture of Bin Laden cause international problems if he was interrogated over the training and support he was given by the CIA to kill Soviet troops, and how they learnt to hijack??

mmmmmmm

Artful Dodger: OK....so as was said below....apples & oranges.

Artful Dodger: hmmmmmmm....I better start thinking then ROFLMBO....don't want to be thought not to be thinking....but was there such a word as "terrorist" as it is used today, then? Would he have been called that?

Artful Dodger: thanks...that is fascinating...I would love to hear if they recover any remains. And what a way to go....jumping out of a Jet...wow

don't sound like terrorism to me.

Artful Dodger: all I get is something about a missing ballerina :(

Vikings: .. "(muslim)" no.. Al Qaeda.. yes.

Oranges.. there are later dates for Americans of a non Muslim stance using planes for revenge.. like the one in the 90's who decided after being sacked by Fedex to do a kamikaze run on a main office.

I was using that particular era in history to show how many 'states' have used terrorism. Not as a be all and end all list.

(V): apples- Terrorist (muslim) are attempting to blow up American aircraft, TODAY

Oranges-D.B. Cooper hijacked a plane for money 39 YEARS AGO.

Vikings: Old. yes, out dated... I disagree. Trivia.. without the previous decades of hijacking the precautions that were in place before 9/11 to stop hijackings have prevented many more groups from hijacking.

I was actually surprised to hear the CIA had used hijacking. I didn't know they went that far in state sponsored terrorism!! But then again that kinda info would have not been available to Joe Public or schools in the West in that era.

(V): well that's interesting information, but it is however, 100% , 37 year old out dated, completely out of context trivia

Between 1948 and 1957 there were 15 hijackings worldwide, an average of a little more than one per annum. Between 1958 and 1967, this climbed to 48—an annual average of about five. The number grew to 38 in 1968 and 82 in 1969, the largest number in a single year in the history of civil aviation; in January 1969 alone, eight airlines were hijacked to Cuba.[4] During the third 10-year period between 1968 and 1977 there were 414 hijackings, an average of 41 a year.

The Nixon Administration in 1973 ordered the discontinuance by the CIA of the use of hijacking as a covert action weapon against the Castro regime. The Cuban intelligence followed suit. That year, the two countries reached an agreement for the prosecution or return of the hijackers and the aircraft to each other's country. The Taiwanese intelligence also followed the CIA's example-vis-а-vis China.

Korea March 31, 1970: Japan Airlines Flight 351, carrying 131 passengers and 7 crew from Tokyo to Fukuoka, is hijacked by nine members of the Japanese Red Army group. 23 passengers were freed at Fukuoka Airport, mainly children or old aged. 108 passengers and all crew members with Red Army group left Fukuoka, bound for Gimpo Airport, near Seoul. Three days after, Red Army group ask to be flown to North Korean capital Pyongyang, before leaving from Seoul, 103 passenger and crew hostages are freed, and nine Red Army group members surrendered to North Korean authorities.

July 1, 1970: a Cruzeiro do Sul Sud Aviation SE-210 Caravelle VI R registration PP-PDX en route from Rio de Janeiro to São Paulo with 31 occupants was hijacked by 4 persons who demanded the release of political prisoners that were to be taken to Cuba. The aircraft was stormed and hijackers arrested. There were no victims and the hijack lasted less than a day.

September 1970: As part of the Dawson's Field hijackings, PFLP members attempted to hijack four aircraft simultaneously. They succeeded on three and forced the planes to fly to the Jordanian desert, where the hijackers blew up the aircraft after releasing most of the hostages. The final hostages were freed in exchange for seven Palestinian prisoners. The fourth attack on an El Al plane by two people including Leila Khalid was foiled by armed guards aboard.

October 15, 1970: Aeroflot Flight 244 was hijacked from Batumi, Adjar ASSR, Georgian SSR, to Trabzon, Turkey by a Lithuanian national and his son. An air hostess was killed and some other crew were injured in a shootout. The hijackers later received American citizenship.

January 30, 1971: Indian Airlines Fokker F27 on scheduled Srinagar-Jammu flight is hijacked to Lahore by two self-proclaimed Kashmir Separatists. All passengers were released by February 2 and repatriated to India, but the aircraft was blown-up—leading to an India-Pakistan air-travel ban, and suspension of overflight rights until 1976.

Republic of China March, 1971: Philippine Airlines flight was hijacked in March 1971 by six students from the Mindanao State University, opposed to the Marcos government. The plane landed in Guangzhou (Canton) in southern China, and the Chinese authorities let the students stay in the country. The plane was then allowed to fly back to the Philippines. No one was hurt.

May 1971: an IL-14 with 4 staff members and 16 passengers was hijacked by 6 men at the Oradea Airport (Romania), then forced to flew to Budapest (Hungary), then Vienna (Austria). The passengers and the crew were released in Vienna, while the hijackers flew to West Germany.[7]

November 24, 1971: A man who became known as D. B. Cooper hijacked Northwest Orient Airlines Flight 305, a Boeing 727-100 aircraft flying from Portland, OR, to Seattle, WA, received US$200,000 in ransom, and parachuted from the plane. The actual name of the hijacker remains unknown. The hijacker revealed what appeared to be a bomb to a flight attendant and demanded the ransom and parachutes. The flight landed in Seattle, and FBI agents provided the ransom money and parachutes. Cooper then released all passengers and one flight attendant. After refueling, the aircraft took off again and flew toward Reno, NV. Cooper opened the aft stairs and jumped from the plane with a parachute during a heavy rainstorm. The aircraft was forced to land with the aft stairs deployed. The FBI believes Cooper most likely did not survive, but the case remains unsolved.[8][9][10]

January 12, 1972: Braniff Flight 38, a Boeing 727, was hijacked as it departed Houston, Texas bound for Dallas, Texas. The lone armed hijacker, Billy Gene Hurst, Jr., allowed all 94 passengers to deplane after landing at Dallas Love Field but continued to hold the 7 crewmembers hostage, demanding to fly to South America and asking for US $2 million, parachutes, and jungle survival gear, amongst other items. After a 6-hour standoff, the entire crew secretly fled while Hurst was distracted examining the contents of a package delivered by Dallas police. Police officers stormed the craft shortly afterwards and arrested Hurst without serious incident.[11][12]

January 28, 1972: TWA Flight 2, Los Angeles to New York, was hijacked by con man and bank robber Garrett Trapnell while over Chicago. Trapnell demanded $306,800 in cash (to recoup the loss of a recent court case), the release of Angela Davis (as well as that of a friend of his who was also imprisoned), and clemency from President Richard Nixon. The FBI was able to retake the aircraft during a crew switch at Kennedy Airport; Trapnell was shot and wounded, no one else was hurt. Trapnell's hijacking came after a string of domestic incidents and resulted in an overhaul of flight procedures by the Nixon Administration, procedures that remained in place until the September 11, 2001 hijackings.

November 10, 1972: Southern Airways Flight 49, was hijacked by three men and flown to multiple locations in the United States, and one Canadian city. At one point, the hijackers threatened to fly the plane into the nuclear reactor at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, if their demands for $10 million in cash were not met. While stopped for refueling at McCoy Air Force Base, Orlando, the FBI shot out the plane's tires, prompting the hijackers to force pilot William Haas to take off. The hijacking came to an end when the plane landed on a partially foam-covered runway in Havana, Cuba, and the hijackers were captured after attempting to escape.

Artful Dodger: all our maintenance is done off-shore.....cheap labour.....and what price is a life....people were more than a little angry ....the plane was taxiing the runway and the passengers could here the engine making all sorts of funny noises....too scary. On the other hand THE A380 took off for London 15 minutes earlier with the CEO of Qantas on board.

Artful Dodger: ANOTHER Qantas jet engine failure....747-400 engine failure on take off...Singapore, Heathrow had to be abandoned last night and will take off in about 1/2 hour from Sydney....I wouldn't fly Qantas for all the (T) in china as I said in a post further down the page.

Artful Dodger: are you now telling me i ROFL'd for nothing........

ROFL....

Apparently some blame this on JFK and how he turned his political campaign to one of dirty tricks and unlimited campaign funds.

Artful Dodger:

I know. It is unfair in the sense that the focus is on her, and she did it in Fox News. As with George W. Bush and other previous presidents, the president's gaffes are mostly ignored by the media. As the potential Republican presidential candidate, she will be scrutinized by all those who oppose her (both in the Democrat and Republican parties). Sarah Palin has made a few comments that have put in question her experience in foreign policy. Doubtlessly her oponents will milk this to the extreme. Politics is a dirty game. Her strength as a politician will be shown in her ability to come out of things like this without being brought down by her opponents.

Just as an additional to my last post, the real king of political gaffes was Dan Quayle!

All politicians suffer from foot-in-mouth disease. Take a last name, say Clinton. Now add -ism at the end: Clintonism. Now do a search in Google. The search Reaganism, Nixonism, Bushism, Obamaism, Palinism. You will come with hundreds of very amusing bloopers, stupid speeches, misread cues, etc. Sarah Palin made one more this week. Now she is a member of the club!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2cfOcP606k

Goof or stupidity

What has happend to the hand held scanners over there? Dont they use them any more? They have been using them here for years. No need for touching just use the hand held scanner.

rod03801: If the parents agree for them to walk though the scanner, there should be no need for that. But are not some refusing to do so.

Servant:

> Islam is as much a political view as it is a religious view

All religions (I am trying hard to think of an exception) have been used as political tools at some point.

The Greeks used religion, as did the Persians, the Romans and even the Mongols. In China the Tang dynasty almost broke apart due to infighting between Buddhists, Taoists and Confucians. So the emperor declared all three as state religions in order to stop the empire from falling apart. In India the Hindus nearly exterminated the Buddhists. The Islam rose, destroyed Buddhism in Afghanistan and Pakistan, went to war over the Holy Land, and built several huge caliphates that were later destroyed by Christianity. Christians went onto exterminate 60 million natives in the Americas, along with their cultures and religions. Then Christians turned on themselves and pitted Catholics against Reformers.

Today we have fundamentalist Islam as a political movement, and people in the Tea Party preaching that "Christian" principles should be enshrined in the constitution. Some Tea party members go so far as to say that the separation of church and state is wrong and invented by "communists". Then we have Al Quaida, the Taliban, radical Zionism, Fundamentalist Christian cults, TV preachers, etc. The fun never ends.

Religion is a tool in the hands of unscrupulous people who want to cement their wealth and power. They abuse people's need for spiritual guidance and use people's religious beliefs as a conduit for political and economic beliefs. Our western society is not immune, as the influence of religion on politicians shows.

Mousetrap: Aye.. there have been many conflicts in which child soldiers are used by various factions. Seeing a kid carry an AK47 and 'ok' about it and killing.

but then again, we are in the UK not far off from when kids were cheap labour, such as going up chimneys to clean them (many got stuck and died) and other dirty and dangerous jobs where kids made ideal 'staff'... especially as they were cheaper to hire, especially in the era of the industrial revolution.

Servant: they can't enforce sharia law in the UK. It (as with Jewish courts.. "Beth Din" and Christian courts) has been allowed to deal with some civil matters (marital problems, inheritance, etc) as long as both sides agree to it.... but only as such for arbitration.

British Law is absolute in all criminal cases.

Artful Dodger:

> Some out of guilt, others out of joy.

Joy in what sense? I just gave something to somebody in need, and the joy I feel comes from knowing I did something "good". In essence, the joy comes from knowing that I am a "good" person. Let's say for a moment that I decided that being selfish is better. I turn into a Mr. Scrooge and give nothing away, not even a penny. Then the joy is gone. I am not so good any more.

My sense of ethics tells me that giving is good, and being selfish is bad. Perhaps my posts sounds harsh "launder one's conscience, guilt, etc." Notice that I did not say anything about guilt being good or bad. I merely point out the "psychological" motivation behind giving.

In capitalism the rich are constantly trying to prove how good they are. So much so, that they even sold to people Adam Smith's "invisible hand". The rich are good, really. They even created a job for you. Now you can feed your family thanks to them. So what if they make a profit at your expense? You should still be grateful that the invisible hand has made them so nice to you.

Then somebody points out at the fact that the rich exploit the poor. They pursue monopolies and use their wealth to acquire political power. Suddenly the rich don't look so nice any more. Their image has to be restored and giving to charity buys the best PR around. Now Mr. Scrooge is not some mean callous exploiter, but a nice man, reformed from his selfish ways. Suddenly the eye of the needle got bigger, and Mr. Scrooge actually fits through.

My big criticism of "giving" is that it is politicized. Governments and politicians use aid as a means to leverage political and economic advantage. They will give aid to countries only when it is politically and economically convenient.

I know very well that a lot of people give out of the goodness of their hearts. They do it with kindness and joy. It is those people that remind me that humanity is more than a bunch of selfish, consuming, abusive, bellicose, murdering apes. People that give are the ones that show that humanity can strive for better. That much is true.

Islam is as much a political view as it is a religious view, there
sharia laws are oppressive and aggressive towards those under them, and they want these laws in England and the EU. These Muslims should be watched closely as they basically want you enslaved.

where were the underwear and shoe bombers from? is anyone suggesting that blacks get profiled? oh that should go over well. there are a huge number of Black muslims in this country and the list is growing..sure.. just profile them and olive complected people...not whites though..cant wait for the outrage over that..good luck with that

rod03801: well none that you are admitting to ROFLMBO

Mousetrap: And? my innocent child has to be subjected to having a total strangers hands put in areas that I have told them they should always report if someone touches them, because it's wrong?

(Hypothetical of course, as I have no kids.. )

(V): NI is a prime example of days of yore when kids were throwing fire bombs. Kids can easily be brainwashed if taken from their families.

Mousetrap: A priest was the prime suspect in a bombing during the Northern Ireland war on the IRA side.. but it was covered up to stop "consequences" ... He was moved to the Irish Republic where the Irish police and government were use to covering up for the Catholic church... Such as nuns and priests abusing children.

Artful Dodger: That is easily answered. Personally I havent seen it. But who is to say it has never been done. That we take that chance.

Artful Dodger: Extremists use women and kids to do exactly that and protect themselves. How many times on the tv have you seen terrorists hiding behind women and kids. I know I have seen it many a time.

Artful Dodger: You took the words right out of my mouth.. err fingers.

rod03801:

> I'm assuming you didn't TRULY intend to make such a broad generalization?

I sure did intend to make that generalization. What is "social conscience"? It is middle class guilt. If I give to the poor, then I am a good man. If I don't, then I am selfish, and I feel guilty about it. So I give to the poor, to prove to myself that I am good so I won't feel guilty about being bad.

Then we come to the definition of "good person". For a Christian, a good person is typically somebody who follows what they interpret the Bible to say. "Faith, hope and charity. Of all these charity being the greatest." "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven." Hence somebody with money, knowing that the rich cannot enter the kingdom of heaven, must make ammends to prove they deserve to be good Christians and be accepted into heaven. So they launder their conscience by giving to the poor. "If I give to the poor, i am not the kind of rich guy who is compared to a camel, but the kind of rich guy who is welcome in Heaven."

Of course, many donations are tax deductible. So a rich man can buy himself a good reputation while at the same time getting himself a nice tax break. In fact, the more money I can afford to give, the more PR I can squeeze out of it, and the more of a nice guy I look. The artifice is so good, that I can literally get rid of my bourgeois sense of guilt, and even be a good Christian (or a good Moslem or whatever religion I might like).

Ultimately, everyone wants to convince themselves that they are good. Yet nobody wants to admit the truth. The poor of the world don't need charity. What they need is social justice. They don't need petty bourgeois guilt. What they need is the fair and equal distribution of wealth. But then, it is the evil godless communists who preached that. Charity is good, because as long as there is charity there is no need for real social change or revolution.

> Is that why you give to charity? WOW. It's not why I do.

Why do you give then? I give as much as I can out of guilt. I am honest. I know very well that the money I give to charity is for the most part wasted because it will never ellicit any real social change. It merely eases my guilt so I can sleep better at night. I am an atheist, so God does not play in my sense of guilt. Mine is mere middle class guilt. But then, if people don't give out of guilt, why do they give? Are they trying to prove something to themselves, or to the world? Even if they give anonymously, what is the psychological motivation behind giving?

Übergeek 바둑이: When they do something for others (like give money to charity) it is either out of guilt, fear of hell, or to cash in a nice tax break.

Is that why you give to charity? WOW. It's not why I do.

I'm assuming you didn't TRULY intend to make such a broad generalization?

Artful Dodger:

> Plymouth Colony upon communist principles

Two details: First, Communism did not exist in 1620, not as an ideology. It is something that was born in the early 19th century. Second, we should eliminate Thanksgiving as a holiday because it was invented by Communists! Since all of these pilgirms were Christians, I suppose Christians can be communist too.

Let's face it. The reason why Communism failed while individualism and capitalism won is because people are in essence greedy and selfish. It is interesting that the pilgims hated work when it was for everybody else's benefit, but had no problems with it when it was for their own individual benefit. That hasn't changed. People still think of only what is good for themselves. When they do something for others (like give money to charity) it is either out of guilt, fear of hell, or to cash in a nice tax break.

Artful Dodger:

Pan Am Flight 103
Lockerbie... 190 Americans on that flight. Just it blew up over Scotland.

It's been in the news again recently

Artful Dodger: hopefully not the Basque, or the Tamils, or davy koreshs friends, or FARC or the NLF and Tim MCveighs groups, incidently , where did the IRA get their ak's from? oh that would be Libya.. and what was the IRA doing in Columbia? and wait, A maoist group set off a Bomb in India??
?

Artful Dodger: Hopefully Hannity's prediction that this week will change this whole thing, is true.

Artful Dodger: You forget that suicide is considered a straight to hell act in the Qur'an. And the killing of captives and the like has only added to the recruitment of active combatants. Something even ex Pres Bush knows.

Artful Dodger: According to a MI5 source quoted in a UK paper there are about 1500 white British converts to Muslim fundamentalism in the UK.

And as well known, converts tend be to be more zealous than people born into a religion.

Artful Dodger: This is my favorite Republican tactic. If you repeat something enough it makes it true!

How about the likes of Timothy McVeigh and Ted Kaczynski?

And these guys: http://trueslant.com/allisonkilkenny/2010/05/19/white-domestic-terrorists-slip-off-medias-radar/

Artful Dodger:

> All, I repeat "ALL", terrorist attacks in America have been committed by Middle Eastern men between the ages of 18 and 40.

Except for that Mexican guy with the dirty bombs. I think he is called Jose Padilla, aka Abdullah al Muhajir.

Oh, and the English Jamaican shoe bomber. Richard Reid, aka Abdul Rahim.

There are a few others here and there!

Artful Dodger:

> "Cut this PC nonsense and go after the bad guys. PROFILE!"

I think the biggest problem with profiling is not so much making assertions about somebody based on external appearances, but rather what the "profile" says about an individual and how that information is used.

According to the profile, I am a Hispanic male with tattoos on his forearms. That means there is a big likelyhood that I am a member of gang and possibly involved in drug trafficking and other illegal activities. That profile has cost me dearly every time I travel. It goes without fail that at every airport I get stopped and get my luggage searched. I get questioned and harrassed. The funny thing is, I am more like a "white middle class" man. I don't drink, I don't smoke, I have never committed a crime. The hardest drug I ever took was Tylenol with codeine, and that was because of an elbow operation. I am not some homie from the hood, but a university educated chemist. The profile fails in this case. I found it insulting and deameaning.

The other day I was in a mall. I saw these two young African girls. They were wearing hijabs (head dress). By their features I could tell that they were possibly Moslems from Somalia. What were they? Terrorists? Oppressed Moslem women? Generally xenophobic Moslems? Not at all. I figured out what they were about when their conversation focused on how one of their friends got into trouble for being "too horny". It is likely they would not have that conversation at home in front of their parents, but it made me question my views based on a profile based on looks.

Sometimes profiling works. Most of the time it fails. It is the simple truth. I see a white guy, about 200 lbs overweight. What is he? A MacDonalds addict? A Walmart customer? Some redneck? No, he is diabetic, having a difficult time regulating his blood sugar and thyroid function. He is a teacher in a school, a father and a good man. Throwing a profile at him is insulting, just because of the way he looks.

Profiling and and his ugly cousin stereotyping go too closely together. Sometimes people go too far in the name of political correctness, but I would rather have that than ignore potential stereotyping and racism.

Übergeek 바둑이: thats kinda hard to explain to the victims of 9/11,imo.
its a shame that good people have to be treated like criminals.

Artful Dodger:

Until recently I had considered taking my son to Disneyland in the USA. I figured that it would have been a great family trip for all of us to go there and give my son a trip he could treasure once he grew up.

However, considering the current stance that the USA has taken with regards to travellers and visitors, I felt that the USA has become the least inviting country to visit.

Why would I want to subject my family to either x-ray machines that see through our clothes, or some goddamn paranoid xenophobic customs agent copping a cheap feel in the name of national security.

As I see it, even the North Koreans don't do that. Americans have no conception of how this is viewed around the world. Every day the USA is drifting more and more towards paranoid xenophobia. Americans can tell themselves that it is being done for "national security", but in reality it is all about control. The USA even wants personal information from people who travel through its air space, even though they will never even land in the USA. It is all a big brother scenario.

We used to travel through the USA in our way to Latin America. Then we decided that taking Mexicana and travelling to Mexico was better than subjecting ourselves to the hassle of going through the USA, even though travelling through Mexico is more expensive.

I am Canadian, a citizen of one of the countries that is the most friendly towards the USA. I can only imagine how less friendly countries see all this. All I can say is that the USA lost my tourist dollars, but then, I doubt anybody in the USA cares about that.