OBL already caught??

Iranian reporters say Osama Bin Laden has already been caught, and that he will be shown when it is best for W's re-election. Poo-poo'd by the Pentagon, I see where a 'super-secret' US force is on there way to the Middle-East to find OBL.

This sounds believable, as it was redicted by the political pundits months and months ago. So what if Bush uses it to boost his creditibility in the polls and on election day? Most American voters seem to be sheep any way, bleating at the latest hot issues. Besides, why the hell didn't Clinton take up Sudan's offer of OBL on the proverbial silver platter years ago, long before 09/11/01?

Please if I'm wrong or if someone can go into further detail but didn't something similar happen with the hostages in Iran when Regan was running for President the first time around? If I'm not mistaken he and his people had a huge part in having them released around the time of his election. Again if I'm wrong please correct me. Bush knows where this guy is and always has. His family is friends with the royal Saudi family and well as with the Bin Laudins. They all have business ties together. I only hope that one day the mainstream media will report this. But I am not holding my breath since I am sure it will never happen. Also if Osama is found close to the elections I hope that the American people will realize that this was all staged and not fall for the propaganda.

Hugs,

Greg

Greg Seattle Wa [email protected]

http://www.male4malescorts.com/reviews/gregseattle.html http://briefcase.yahoo.com/seaboy4hire

You are not wrong!

Reagan sold out this country in an under the table agreement to provide weapons to Iran in its war against Iraq in exchange of the release of the Iranian hostages in the 1980 election, undermining Jimmy Carter in an election publicity ploy, so worthy of the Republican party.

After using the Iranis to win the 1980 election, it was only a mere 4 years later that, he and Shrub Sr. turned around and sold weapons to Saddam Hussein to overthrow the ayatollahs in Iran and condoned the use of internationally banned chemical weapons by Saddam to suppress the northern Iraqi Kurd population in acts of genocide.

Those same weapons were directed against American soldiers during the Gulf War under Shrub 1 and are still being used to kill American soldiers today under Shrub 2.

<Lets out a huge sigh of relief I wasn't wrong> Something tells me that is what Jr has up his sleeve. Jr has many of the same guys helping him out that daddy and Regan had when they were in office and is playing the same games that daddy and Regan had played. But I think that this time the American people are just a wee bit smarter now that things are a little bit brighter and information is so easily spread around due to the boom in technology.

Hugs,

Greg

Greg Seattle Wa [email protected]

http://www.male4malescorts.com/reviews/gregseattle.html http://briefcase.yahoo.com/seaboy4hire

>You are not wrong!

Sorry to burst your little Oliver Stone conspiracy-theory party, but Seaboy was 100% wrong. The hostages were NOT released prior to the election. They were released on January 20, 1981, the day of Ronald Reagan's inaguration. Inagurations generally come AFTER the election.

There was no announcement or hint of any kind prior to the election that the hostages would be released, and anyone who claims - like Seaboy did and you endorsed - that the release of the hostages contributed to Carter's defeat could not be any more mistaken.

I was still a Republican at the time and remember being proud that the Iranians obviously decided that they wouldn’t be able to fuck with Reagan the way they did with Carter.

Even if I knew then what I know now about Republicans and what they would become, I’m not sure I would have voted for Carter. He was a good man but a most ineffective President.

We're all IDIOTS, right? Of course, the hostages were released after Reagan's 1st inaugaration, because he PROMISED to have the hostages released if he was elected. The Irani's were only fullfilling their part of the sleazy, under the table bargain, and were richly rewarded by the Reagan administration, in return, as I stated, with the weapons to defeat their enemy Iraq.

What's the matter? Were you in a cave during the IranGate hearings? You know, those little congressional inquiries into the Reagan/Bush armament policies of a KNOWN enemy against the U.S., Iran, in order to combat their enemy Iraq?

Of course Reagan/Bush part 2 circa 1984, no longer needed Iran, and as such sold weapons to Iraq and Saddam Hussein to defeat the Iranis. They turned a blind eye to Hussein's use of those weapons to commit geoncide against the Kurds!

The Republican asses actually thought they could dictate policy to the Arabs. What a joke!, but a joke with no last laughs as we are witnessing to this day. IMO, Reagan, Bush Sr and Bush Jr. should all be tried as the war criminal, human rights violators that they are! Hopefully they would be convicted of their crimes in an international tribunal and summarily executed.

>We're all IDIOTS, right?

I didn't say you were idiots. I just said - and it's true - that you were factually wrong. Seaboy said that the hostages were released prior to the election, and were responsible for Reagan's election. He asked whether he was right and you told him he was. But he wasn't. He was completely wrong.

Someone who is wrong isn't necessarily an idiot. Everyone is, at one point or another, wrong sometimes. I'd say an idiot is a person who is wrong but who is also incapable of admitting they were in error.

Of course, the hostages were

>released after Reagan's 1st inaugaration, . . .

Well, then, Seaboy was wrong, since he said the opposite, and you told him he was right.

> because he PROMISED

>to have the hostages released if he was elected.

Well, then, he fulfilled his promise.

>What's the matter? Were you in a cave during the IranGate

>hearings? You know, those little congressional inquiries into

>the Reagan/Bush armament policies of a KNOWN enemy against the

>U.S., Iran, in order to combat their enemy Iraq?

You're quite confused. The Congressional hearings into the "Irangate" scandal had nothing to do with conduct PRIOR to the election. It focused on the Reagan Administration's illegal funding of the contras by virtue of their sale of weaponry to Iran. Because "the Reagan Administration" existed only AFTER Reagan won the election over Carter, none of that had anything to do with Seaboy's point - that the release of the hostages caused Carter's defeat.

>IMO, Reagan, Bush Sr

>and Bush Jr. should all be tried as the war criminal, human

>rights violators that they are! Hopefully they would be

>convicted of their crimes in an international tribunal and

>summarily executed.

LOL!!! Do you wish the same thing for Saddam Hussein and Fidel Castro?

>This sounds believable, as it was redicted by the political

>pundits months and months ago.

That's the funniest thing I've read on here in a long time! :7

>What's the matter? Were you in a cave during the IranGate

>hearings? You know, those little congressional inquiries into

>the Reagan/Bush armament policies of a KNOWN enemy against the

>U.S., Iran, in order to combat their enemy Iraq?

I was pretty young in the early 80’s and don’t have the best memory, but I thought Irangate was also known as the Iran-Contra Affair and occurred well into the Reagan administration. Weapons sold around 83 or so and not coming to light until years after that.

Never mind. Question answered in the time it took to write it. I had other things on my mind in the 80's and thought I may have partied right through a whole scandal.

LOL! I sure do wish the same for Saddam and Fidel! I love you guys, you make it SO REAL! I most appreciate how we can agree to disagree, without nasty hostilities against each other. That's the way it should be and it is why I respect you guys, even though we are 180 degrees apart politically!