you know, people, Al-qaeda and other terrorists DO exist

[ButterflyBlood]

while I think there might be some validity to LIHOP, I find it just silly that people here blame Bush for EVERY terrorist attack. The recent one had hardly any benefit to him at all. What, take attention away for a day? If the BFEE is behind EVERY terrorist attack, then what are Al-qaeda and the other terrorists doing? Do they also not exist? Is bin Laden just a propaganda creation?

Let's only blame Bush and co. only for things that actually have a shred of evidence pointing toward them, or else we'll sound like the freepers whining about how Clinton's penis has caused all problems in the world today.

[tom_paine]

1. Agreed.

[seabeyond]

2. sounds good to me

:thumbsup:

[Melodybe]

4. Bull they are on the Bush payroll

The more afraid Americans are the more likely they will vote repug.

[theoceansnerves]

3. oh my goodness

YES

i think it's just giving people talking points about how "nuts" people on DU are. this and that horrible thread wishing ashcroft to die. blaaaah.

[ButterflyBlood]

6. I couldn't care less about the ashcroft comments

but blaming Bush for something with no direction relation to the US and no benefit for him is pretty stupid.

This reminds me of the Freepers claiming the Democrats killed Wellstone because he was losing to Coleman in all the polls (which is complete bullshit since he was tied with Coleman in the worst polls but whatever)

[tobius]

38. how about the claim that bush killed wellstone?

if the terrorist attack had a direct relation to the US and bush had a benifit, would that mean he did it?

[CaptainMidnight]

42. BushCo DID kill Wellstone!

You'll never prove it in court, but it had all the hallmarks of a Black Op.

WHO BENEFITS?

Duh!

"Make it look like an accident" is a cliche line from the movies for a REASON!

Captain Mike

[cheezus]

49. There's no reasonable explaination for the crash

and the feds got there earlier than possible had they not known about it in advance.

[Mari333]

5. and there are more Al Queda then EVER BECAUSE of Bush

and his pre emptive strike on Iraq...ergo, Bush is a friend of Al Queda, because he has done MORE to help them then any president ever.

[ButterflyBlood]

7. correct

so that would make him INDIRECTLY responsible, but not DIRECTLY.

[Sugarbleus]

43. Not only that but

I've been thinking about how the neocons were saying: Clinton didn't "follow through" in catching or killing OBL...he didn't do "enough"--even though we know what Clinton did do to try to blow OBL out of the water and dig up info on the sect etc. As it happens, guess what? NEITHER HAS BUSH!! He didn't stop OBL or his minions, nor did he follow through in Afgahistan and in other ways..............the bombs keep coming.

Bush is NO BETTER than any other president in dealing with the terrorists. But he IS really good at destroying democracy and threatening all the people of the world and sending soldiers into unwarranted battlefields.

Frankly, this latest bombing should SHOW people that Bush is not God. Bush can't stop a damn thing.

[yardwork]

8. I think W is to blame for the rapid proliferation of al Quaida

I was ok with taking out the Taliban, but after that W made a crucial mistake, if his real aim was fighting terrorism. We should have put all our energy and resources into rebuilding Afghanistan. Instead, we left it in pieces and wandered off to Iraq, ignoring al Quaida for two and half years.

Meanwhile, our attack on Iraq made the whole world mad at us and gave al Quaida excellent talking points to stir up trouble. Since the rest of the world is mad at us, they're not cooperating with us on finding the terrorist cells that are active in many European and Asian nations.

The U.S. blew a wonderful opportunity to be the leader of a multi-national, global campaign against terrorism. Instead, we're known as the jerks who invaded Iraq.

I do hold W responsible for al Quaida's world-wide strength right now. I really do.

[ButterflyBlood]

9. that's true and I agree

but there's a difference between saying that Bush is responsible for increasing Al-qaeda's strength and saying the White House was directly involved in the attack.

[DeepModem Mom]

10. You're right, BB --

[mobuto]

11. Couldn't agree more

n/t

[Q]

12. Interesting...

...that some Dems just can't find enough excuses to exonerate Bush* before all the facts are known. That's your right of course...but it's just more of the same appeasement that we've seen since 2000.

- I've seen very few people 'blame Bush* for every terrorist attack'. What they ARE saying is that Bush* is actually encouraging terrorism with his own terrorist policies...that in turn breed a new generation of terrorists like rabbits.

- And frankly...I'm tired of being told what to think and how to post by other DUers grasping for straws to let Bush* off the hook. Trends show that it tends to be the very same people that told us to 'move on' about stolen elections, obstruction of justice concerning 9-11 and lies about Iraq.

- Why do you seemingly care so much how others percieve our posts? Your political correctness stands in the way of finding the truth. It's disgusting the way you compare DUers to FReepers because they want to discuss issues you find unacceptable.

[ButterflyBlood]

29. wrong

-I never said that Bush* wasn't to blame because of that, but you have people here saying Bush* was DIRECTILY behind for the Madrid bombings without a single shred of proof.

-It's not about exonerating Bush*. It's about the fact that while he is guilty of many things, he is still innocent until proven guilty on all new actions, including this.

-No, I've never said that over issue discussion. I'm saying that it sounds ridiculous whenever the Freepers blame Clinton for any random bad thing that happens no matter how irrevelant it is to him. So why should we be doing the same? We're above them.

[mot78]

13. I agree

besides, you MIHOP people, and even some of the LIHOP on this board are doing nothing but giving quotes to RW media whores (you ARE aware that DU is trolled by numerous Conservatives, especially Limbaugh)I bet the day the 9/11 Commission releases a report, the media whores will start taking quotes off this site and invite Freepers to DOS us again (this exact same scenario happened the day after Saddam Hussein was captured)

[HalfManHalfBiscuit]

14. I think many of the conspiracy whacks are just looking for attention

It is quite easy to blame the US for something (without a shread of proof) and play the "prove the US did not do it" card.

Third grade logic.

[leesa]

22. It's quite easy to blame Al Qaeda or another terrorist group for something

(without a shred of proof), like 9-11, and play the "prove Al qaeda did not do it" card.

Do you believe the totally whacky coincidence conspiracy theory about 9-11 put out by a WH administration proved to be liars over and over again?? Virtually none of it made rational sense...purely based on a belief system... "the US is good and would not lie". But we know that's wrong now, don't we?

[HalfManHalfBiscuit]

28. Like I said, third grade logic.

Reverse third grade logic doesn't work any better.

LOL.

[ButterflyBlood]

30. no one ever said we believed what the WH said about 9/11

this is a complete strawman.

[arcos]

15. I agree with you...

I can't believe some people are blaming the Madrid attack on Bush.

And I'm a LIHOP'er.

[Must_B_Free]

16. This Just In: Spanish Government says "probably ETA"

So why was TV news so quick to declare it Al Queda contrary to the suggestions? Especially if if "doesn't help Bush"

Recall that AQ also claimed responsibility for the blackout in the US.

[Djinn]

17. possibly

because it doesn't fit ETA's long established MO, second because they denied responsibilty, not much point killing for a cause if you don't let people know about it...I don't know who blew up the trains in Madrid but my first reaction was "doesn't sound like ETA"

[arcos]

21. Aznar's party wants ETA to be guilty..

the Partido Popular has made national security an important part of their campaigns in the last decades. They've been tough on ETA, while supporting the war on Iraq. If it turned out to be Al Qaeda, the war thing would certainly backfire on them, and remember we are only 2 days away from the general elections.

They were ahead in the polls, but this would be a bloody reminder to the Spanish people that they should have never gone into Iraq. It would harm Mariano Rajoy, PP's candidate.

[alcuno]

27. I was amazed at how quickly they blamed ETA this morning.

Something like ten bombs go off in different areas and they were immediately saying ETA. This in spite of the fact that Bin Laden threatened Spain months ago because of their support for the Iraq invasion.

[ButterflyBlood]

33. Because AQ is rather high profile now

and would typically be blamed for almost all terrorist attacks at first. Not suprising. It's hardly proof it was done by the CIA. sheesh.

[MadHound]

18. Sure BB, they exist, but who controls them, who sets them up,

Who runs the show? Who knows? We've seen glimpses here and there, hints, allegations, and on occasion the brighter wits amongst us may have even seen a piece of the truth.

Don't you find it odd that the head of al Qaeda is a "former" CIA contract agent(or as the old saying goes, once in the agency, always in the agency)? Don't you find it odd that on 9/12/01, the only civilian flight overseas was the one who carried members of the chief suspect's family? Don't you think it strange that al Qaeda's frequent running partner in crime, Hamas, is originally a creation of Israeli intelligence, made so as to dilute the influence of the PLO twenty five years ago?

Look, US intelligence agencies have been pulling fun and games tricks for years and decades. Haiti, Chile, Vietnam, Laos, El Salvador, the list is endless. The same can be said of Israeli, British and a few other countrie's intelligence agencies. Black ops is an ongoing, everyday occurence in this world and the sooner that people wake up and realize this, the better off this world will be. Scoffing at people who ask legitamite questions and have a healthy sense of skeptisism is playing right into the hands of the powers that be, who like nothing better than when all they have to deal with is sheeple.

You're worried about the oh so precious rep of an internet chat board. Many of us are worried about the fate of both our country and our world. Which sounds more important to you?

[ButterflyBlood]

32. the point is

there is absolutely NO reason whatsoever to believe the US was directly involved in the Madrid bombings. Even a motive is lacking. You are completely wrong if you think I'll exonnerate the US on everything that happens that it is responsible, I just want some actual evidence.

[MadHound]

35. I agree, there needs to be evidence

However, the unfolding and reporting of this event is following a script that I feel I know all too well. A vehicle, in the open, with damning evidence for all to see:eyes: The ratcheting of fear, the blaming of a scapegoat with little or no evidence. And the opposition leader is once again that man with so many CIA, Bushco, and intelligence ties.

It could all be on the up and up, but somehow I fear that once again we're all through the looking glass.

[Monkey see Monkey Do]

19. Thanks for saying that!

[leesa]

20. Are you kidding me?? They must keep the fear alive. Expect one

in Britain and the US too. There are very FEW Muslim or other 'terrorists' in the world. There is a great deal of evidence and proof of US terrorists acts perpetrated around the world. Faaar more terrorism by the US and the timing is critical. The coalition MUST keep the fear of Al Qaeda alive and well.

[BradCKY]

23. Ok sure.

Just keep telling yourself that "terrorists" are very rare. I guess Bush was responsible for all the Palestine suicide bombings in Israel. They took place on almost a daily basis until they tightened up security.

Terrorists may be few in number but they unfortunately make themselves very visible.

[Sterling]

36. You nailed the potential motive.

"The coalition MUST keep the fear of Al Qaeda alive and well."

[ButterflyBlood]

39. but all more attacks prove

is that this misadministration is incompetant at fighting Al Qaeda. That argument is bullshit.

yes, US terrorist attacks around the world happen. but there is absolutely not a single shred of evidence that the bombing in Spain was one. Even a motive is missing.

[foreigncorrespondent]

24. Yep!

But Bush* has proven to be the biggest terrorist of them all.

[Jacobin]

25. It's weird to see the number of Osama deniers here

Its as if they haven't figured out how bad we've pissed off many muslims. I mean, our track record with supporting dictators who repress muslims, our rape of their resources, unconditional support of Likkudnicks in the palestinian conflict......doesn't anyone think they might be a tad pissed?

[BradCKY]

26. Yup

I totally agree. :)

[Media_Lies_Daily]

45. It's even more weird that despite all of the lies told by the NeoCons...

...that the mere possibility that they may ALSO have lied about who was REALLY responsible for 911 is considered to be unthinkable.

Do a search for Operation Northwoods, and then tell me how unthinkable it really is.

[anti-NAFTA]

31. Partially true.

Al Qaeda does exist. But whose interests are they serving? Bin Laden was financed by America to help the reactionaries in Afghanistan in the 80s. Isn't it reasonable to assume that he's still on CIA payroll since everything he does is to further Bush's agenda?

[orwell]

34. Know Nothing

Nobody "knows" anything, yet they are busy pointing fingers. The theories tell us more about our own belief systems, superstitions, than any truth.

The only thing we "know" is that a bunch of people are dead. As far as theories, at this point any theory is as good as any other because so little evidence has been gathered.

O

[Minstrel Boy]

37. Al Qaeda exists. But do you know what it is?

It's an intelligence asset.

To know what I mean, read about the relationship of the CIA to Pakistan's ISI, and the ISI's relationship to Al Qaeda. Not least of which: ISI director Mahmood Ahmed wiring $100,000 to Mohammed Atta, and meeting top US officials in Washington for a week, near the end of which 9/11 occured.

And read about Michael Springman, a 20-year veteran of the State Department, who says he witnessed - and objected to, to the point of losing his job - that the CIA used the Jeddah visa bureau to channel Al Qaeda terrorists into the US for training, a practice which continued until the summer of 2001. 15 of the 9/11 hijackers entered the US through Jeddah, the home of Osama bin Laden and the base of his operations before his expulsion from Saudi Arabia. Springman says the dead of 9/11 "may have been sacrificed in order to further wider US geopolitical objectives."

Mohammed Atta attended the International Officers School at Maxwell Air Force in Alabama. Saeed Alghamdi studied at the Defense Language Institute in Monterey. At least three other alledged 9/11 hijackers received training at secure US military installations.

During the War in the Balkans, Al Qaeda overtly assisted US interests in Kosovo.

FYI, a video lecture by Professor Michel Chossudovsky of the University of Ottawa, on War and Globalization, and the nature of Al Qaeda:

http://hamilton.indymedia.org/local/webcast/uploads/chossudovskylecture.wmv

[9215]

51. Good post Minstrel Boy.

For some reason my computer wont' play the indymedia vid of Michel. I posted this on a freep board and it gave them a fit.

Al Qaeda worked or works for the CIA. In the Balkans they were in direct support of Halliburton interests.

[mobuto]

53. The ISI is very different from the CIA

Yes the ISI backed Al Qaeda. That's hardly the same thing as the CIA backing them.

[eridani]

40. They are a diffuse network

Al Qaeda is not the only terrorist organization around--not even the only Islamic fundie one.

[HollywoodLiberal]

41. Why blame muslims?

Because BushCo would never ever bomb innocent civilians to tighten their own evil grip of the world?

[rman]

44. if they can do it once

(9-11 lihop) and before that, numerous covert/fals-flag operaions by the CIA...
Ok let me rephrase the subject: "if they can do it many times" ... then why could they not do it again?
Where "they" isn't so much bush, bfee or cia, but the global capitalist elite for whome the cia is just one of many tools, and where bfee currently happens to play a prominent role.

Outside of that no doubt there are groups and individual who on occasion commit attrocities all on their own.

Nobody actually claimed, as you say, that "all terrorism is comitted by bfee".

[Media_Lies_Daily]

46. Operation Northwoods...do a search.

[9215]

52. I think the BFEE is the center

of these terrorist networks and global fascist-capitalists. If the BFEE isn't destroyed nothing much will change.

[Q]

47. Your thread title implies a falsehood...

..and RWing talking point: that Democrats don't take terrorism seriously and are out to 'weaken' Bush's* glorious fight against the evil ones.

- The underlying assumption is that Bush's* war on (some) terrorism is the only and right way to proceed. But do you really think that dropping bombs and killing innocents is the ONLY way?

- You suggest that we make claims without evidence. But isn't that exactly what the Bushies are doing when they ask us to 'trust' them as they accuse people of being terrorists and invade countries without providing ANY evidence?

- Perhaps you're trusting the wrong people?

[randr]

48. If you really think about it

Clinton's penis did cause all the trouble we are in.
Still the Spanish authorities have a good idea of who was responsible and, I have no doubt, will conduct a professional and open inquiry into the horrible act and bring those responsible to justice.
Meanwhile we have yet to bring one, not one, person to trial for 9/11 and continue to use the "Al-quaeda did it" response to every instance of terrorism. It reminds me of the old "red scare" tactics that worked so well for half a century.
Terrorists only win when they bring you down to their level.

[T_i_B]

50. We don't even know who did this yet

Could be Eta, could be Al-Quaida, we just do not know.

If you ask me it is absurd to jump to conslusions about what has happened in Madrid just yet other than to come to the conclusion that it was an appalling and horiffic act.

Well said ButterflyBlood!