Who did more to support terrorism? Reagan or Bin-Laden

[Radical Activist]

I'm tired of the conservative revisionist history of the Reagan administration that glosses over his support of terrorism on several continents. Let's be honest about what Reagan did as President.

He trained and armed terrorist militia groups in Latin America.
He sold arms and provided intelligence to Iran which was a state sponsor of terrorism.
He provided chemical and biological weapons agents to Iraq, which also supported terrorists.
He provided military and foreign aid to various dictators, some of which oppressed their own people, who in turn blamed the United States for their suffering. That inspired hatred against the US, which leads to more terrorism directed against us.
There were surely other covert instances of US sponsored terrorism that will remain classified for years to come.

Does anyone else have more examples?

Obviously Bin-Laden dedicated more of his life to supporting terrorism, but Bin-Laden didn't have the resources of the US government.

[understandinglife]

1. Bu$h and the NeoCONsters (nt)

Peace.

[Wilms]

2. You beat me to it, UL!

:hi:

[Radical Activist]

4. Well that's a given.

It doesn't get said about Reagan because he is the conservatives' hero...and he's dead.

[jdots]

3. He made those " Bedtime for Bozo "terrorist films

The thing about Reagan that really sucks is that people think he wasn't in the loop and slept thru it all.

[Radical Activist]

28. Notice they're trying the same thing with Bush.

"It was just bad intelligence! He didn't lie on purpose!"

They keep playing dumb as if that makes it ok.

[RevolutionaryActs]

5. I wonder who voted for Bin-Laden?

And why? :shrug:

[Radical Activist]

9. Freeper troll most likely.

Anyone with a basic understanding of Reagan's foreign policy knows the correct answer.

[RevolutionaryActs]

10. Damn, and I thought I was exceptionally smart for knowing the answer.

:evilfrown:

[Radical Activist]

11. You are

but for other reasons.

[RevolutionaryActs]

13. Aww you're sweet.

And I love your thread. I do, I really do. :)

[physioex]

6. LMAO...

This is the exactly the kind of stuff that inflames the Freeps. I love it.........

[Radical Activist]

7. Honestly

I was hoping to get mentioned in a DU watching thread on one of those freeper sites. lol

Besides, pissing them off is fun. Especially when they can't accept or comprehend truths like what their hero Reagan really did as President.

[Radical Activist]

12. Then again

It would really piss them off it this made it onto the Greatest page.

[ck4829]

14. Consider it done. I'm nominating this.

[Radical Activist]

16. Thanks

:)

[physioex]

19. OK I'll pitch in & vote.....EOM

:)

[saltpoint]

8. Happy to cast a vote for Ronald Reagan.

Despite numerous domestic policy oversights and misjudgments, the Reagan administration oversaw the flagrantly illegal war against various Central American governments and supported and supplied terrorists to undermine and overthrow those governments, in part by "disappearing" human beings by death squads.

A disgraceful record.

[Radical Activist]

15. "Happy to cast a vote for Ronald Reagan"

That's a phrase you don't see on DU too often. :)

I wonder how much harder it would have been for Bush to convince people to invade Iraq if most people knew a detailed history of what Reagan did in Latin America and the Middle East. People don't fall for that kind of garbage so easily if they know recent history well.

[saltpoint]

18. Hi, Radical Activist. I loved the first line of your reply --

-- to me.

This post was a lift because it helps clarify issues attendant to Reagan's presidency. I just about puke every time someone gives him credit for ending the Cold War.

Thanks for posting this tonight.

[Radical Activist]

21. Thanks for the gracious response. n/t

[Radical Activist]

17. Does anyone have more examples?

Of terrorism sponsored by the Reagan administration. I know there are people on DU with much better knowledge of the topic than I.

[imenja]

27. part of this has to do with the use of the term "terrorism"

In the 1980s, we didn't use the term as we do today. Then we called them guerrillas and death squads. Today, everyone we disagree with is a terrorist. I dislike acquiescing to Bushspeak.

[Radical Activist]

20. And for the freepers who don't believe it

Here's an interesting article.

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB2/nsaebb2.htm

Apparently Ollie North also helped drug traffickers in another effort to aid the contras. What a good Christian! Best of all, the proof is all in official government documents that have been declassified so they can't pull the liberal media bias card. I can't understand why a man who sold weapons to Iran, a declared enemy of the US and sponsor of terrorism, hasn't been tried for treason. I can hardly take the irony of North talking about terrorism on Fox News considering how much the man has done to aid terrorists in the Middle East and Nicaragua.

Here's my favorite picture of Reagan's special envoy to the Middle East, just for old times sake.

[OfTheTaco]

22. I'm pretty sure

Reagan helped train terrorist, but I could be wrong...am I?

[Radical Activist]

25. Yes, he did.

Mostly in Latin America. Study the Iran-Contra affair and the School of the Americas to learn more about it.

[Frederik]

35. And, we must not forget

the massive aid to the Afghan Mujaheddeen, although they weren't "terrorists" at the time of course, it's the very people who would later become al-Qaida. Some were trained in the US, they were given lots of fancy weaponry, and the CIA supported the indoctrination of the fighters in fundamentalist Islam. US-printed schoolbooks that incite hatred against the infidels are reportedly still in use in the madrasas in Pakistan.

[Wilms]

23. And, of course, Ollie had plenty of help from Fawn Hall...

...when she wasn't playing tennis.

Here's some of my favorite pictures of Ollie's special envoy, just for old times sake. ;)





"I felt uneasy, but sometimes, like I said before, I believed in Col. North and there was a very solid and very valid reason that he must have been doing this. And sometimes you have to go above the written law, I believe."

Then, apparently sensing the impact of what she had said, she went on: "I don't know -- it's just I felt -- I believed in Col. North. Maybe that's not correct, it's not a fair thing to say. I felt uneasy to begin with . . . . "

-Fawn Hall

[Radical Activist]

24. I've never heard of her

But the tennis picture is kind of cute in an odd way. Is that who he cheated on his wife with? We know those Republican leaders all have good morals, like Gingrich and Delay.

I was pretty young when the Iran-Contra stuff actually happened, so I don't remember it.

[Wilms]

31. And I didn't know Ollie was a good christian adulterer.

Learn something new everyday, or more around here.

Fawn was Ollie's aide. Perhaps they had thing. But this is how she spent her 15 minutes of fame...

Hall Testifies of Necessity 'To Go Above Written Law'
North Walked 'Fine Line,' Ex-Secretary Says

By Dan Morgan and Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, June 10, 1987; Page A01

Former White House secretary Fawn Hall said yesterday that she shredded telephone records of her boss, Lt. Col. Oliver L. North, last Nov. 21 to prevent the Iran-contra initiatives from becoming "unraveled," and explained that there were "times when you have to go above the written law."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/longterm/tours/scandal/fawnhall.htm


Walsh Investigation

Thomas C. Green served briefly as attorney for Lt. Col. Oliver L. North during November 1986. In connection with this representation, there is evidence that Green assisted North and North's secretary Fawn Hall in removing official National Security Council documents from the White House after North was fired.

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_07.htm

[imenja]

26. Your point is well taken

But I despise the use of the term "revisionist history." All history is revisionist. Historians are continually revising interpretations. If they didn't, we'd still believe slavery was a benevolent institution. Also, the Reagan administration is not distant enough in the past to have gone through many states of interpretation.

I disliked Reagan a great deal, but I misinterpreted him in one key respect. I always believed him to be a war monger. It's now clear that he actually worried a great deal about nuclear war. His goal was actually to bring about a reduction in nuclear weapons but believed he needed to operate from a position of strength to do so. In retrospect, he turned out to be right. He negotiated the ABM treaty, that held until Bush unilaterally abrogated it. The PBS series "American Experience" did an interesting series of the Reagan administration. I will never forget the mass graves throughout Latin America that resulted from his policies. But he was effective when it came to direct negotiation with the Soviets.

[Iterate]

36. I'd be interested in the Russian perspective

Personally, I always felt the evidence was stronger that his 'evil empire' posturing extended the cold war and resulted in lives lost through the proxy wars, continuing even now. I'd be interested in a Russian/ex-Soviet persecutive as to whether his actions forced the collapse, or whether all of the other factors (Poland, economy, Afghanistan, a new generation of leaders, etc.) had more influence. Haven't seen any work on the topic yet that I've been motivated enough to pick up, though the archives from that time are opening up.

[imenja]

37. I'm sure you could find it

but my point wasn't about the collapse of the Soviet Union. Rather, it was about Reagan's views on nuclear disarmament. I think it's mistake to credit Reagan with the collapse of the Soviet Union. One could probably argue he served as a catalyst or a contributing factor, but there must have been long term internal factors that led to its demise.

[Iterate]

40. Gotcha

A knee-jerk reaction on my part. I've heard some of these things so often I'm overly sensitive.

And your point about Bin Laden is well taken. Some of these things get simplified as they get repeated, even when the truth is bad enough.

[ClintonTyree]

41. The United States bankrupted them...............

Reagan spent so much on defense and the USSR tried to keep pace, but in the end they couldn't. And WE couldn't stand the crushing debt that Reagan produced in the process of out-spending them.
In my opinion, that's the only contributing factor he made to "winning" the cold war.
And now bush is trying his best to re-heat the damn thing, despite all of his lovey-dovey trysts with "pooty-poot".
The entire world now walks the razor's edge because of the fake, little cowboy's arrogance.

[NewJeffCT]

46. The USSR was on the verge of collapse when Reagan came into office...

The USSR was on the verge of collapse when Reagan came into office in January of 2001. Reagan's hard line stance just invigorated the hard liners in the Kremlin and caused them to hold out much longer than they would have otherwise. If Carter had won the election, I think the USSR would have opened up much earlier - 1982 or 1983 instead of the late 80s. And, we would not have had to have spent the extra trillion or so in defense build-up and we would not have had trickle down economics running up an extra 2 trillion in debt.

[Iterate]

29. Do you mean state sponsored terrorism?

<>

And with WMD?

That was December 1983, after Iraq had begun using gas in the war with Iran. DR was back in Iraq after both the UN and the State Department has issued reports saying so. At the same time they were selling SH and Iraq helicopters.

Ok, so maybe that was war and not terrorism. Sometimes I confuse the two.

But in 1988, those same helicopters were used to gas the Kurds. That sure seemed like terrorism. The Reagan administration then fought hard to keep the news out of the press.

In 1991 southern Iraqi Shiite saw more American helicopters used by SH to pound them into dust. SH used gas there also, though it hasn't been widely reported. Sure sounds like terror to me, but it doesn't count here because it wasn't RR.

http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news2/history-complicity.html
http://www.democracynow.org/static/rumsfeldcloset.shtml

In 1981, Sec. of State Haig declared the 'war against international terrorism' a priority, directed it largely toward Angola, Mozambique, and Zimbabwe. He used South African "commandos" or "terrorist cells" if you'd rather call them that. They broke things, blew up things, assassinated leaders, destroyed railways and bridges, general terror, economic warfare. They bombed the ZANU political headquarters, they blew up oil pipelines.

There were no good guys in that war, only casualties. Those countries are still broken.

I think I could go on for a few hours listing more. Some for every country, volumes worth.

[Radical Activist]

30. Thank you

This is very interesting. I'm not even close to being a foreign policy expert so I don't know the specifics about the events I've read about.
Please add more if you get bored.

[Iterate]

32. Does mining a harbor count?

as in mining the harbors of Nicaragua? Is that terrorism, or warfare, or what? Or does it only count if you're in a boat heading into the harbor?

Is aiming a first-strike nuclear tipped MX missile at someones head terrorism, or is it something else?

I'm having a bit of trouble with my definitions this morning.

[DemonFighterLives]

33. Don't forget

Give the :evilfrown: his due. Poppy traveled with Casey to set up the October surprise which brought Reagan/poppy to power. Poppy also knew the Hinckleys who tried to assassinate Raygun. Densepack all!

[Frederik]

34. False dichotomy

as Bin Laden worked for Reagan at the time. Bin Laden recruited terrorists to be trained in the US; see http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/073104Burns/073104burns.html

[imenja]

38. Bid Laden has adamantly claimed he never took money from the CIA or any US

agency. Bin Laden was himself a source of funding for the Mujaheddin. Why would he have needed or wanted to take money from the CIA? Also, Bid Laden's significance in Afghanistan grew after the US withdrew support.

The allegations regarding Bid Laden in this piece you link to are weak. The only mention of him is: "If you ask Springmann, it was conspiracy: "I issued visas to terrorists recruited by the CIA and its asset, Osama bin Laden." The period overlapped with the CIA's ongoing strategy of supporting bin Laden's mujaheddin, to inconvenience foreign powers including the Soviet Union."
The man granted visas. He doesn't say he gave a visa to Bin Laden, nor was he in a position to know who the CIA's assets were. The bulk of this article makes no mention of Bin Laden.

US policy sowed the seeds of current terrorism and animosity toward the US in many ways, including support of the Mujaheddin. But to make a direct allegation that Bid Laden worked for the CIA based on this is less than convincing, particularly when Bid Laden himself has denied it.

[Radical Activist]

39. Of course Bin Laden would never admit

to receiving help from the US. It would destroy his credibility among the people he's trying to lead. How can you fight the great Satan if you're taking money from them? I'm not saying that makes the allegation true, but a denial from Bin Laden is meaningless and tells us nothing. He will deny it whether its true or not.

[H2O Man]

45. There is no reason to think otherwise.

Usama bin Laden had no direct connections to the US/CIA while he fought in Afghanistan. In those years, he was a little-known Muslim, who was actually forming his world view. He also was from a family background that excluded his needing funding. The groups he was associated had no connections to the US support of the rebels.

I am not making any value judgement on what he did, and didn't do, in those years. But I am saying that there is absolutely no truth to the claim that he was in any way connected to the CIA or US government in any way.

His family, of course, had extremely significant connections to the Bush family and other powerful interests in the USA. Those family connections are actually "closer" than any Afghan experience he had. But again, even those do not link Usama bin Laden with the CIA.

[Frederik]

50. That is correct

But Bin Laden's denial may indicate several things. See for instance this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=116&topic_id=9580

Even if the assertion made by the former KGB chief in Tehran and former acting KGB chief are incorrect - despite being corraborated by a wealth of circumstantial evidence - that does not mean that Bin Laden, in one way or another, did not work for the US back in the 80s. Remember that it was the ISI that for the most part executed the operations on the ground. Money from several source, incuding the United States and Saudi oil barons, was funnelled to the mujaheddeen through the ISI. Still, the CIA was definitely the senior partner in the CIA-ISI-Saudi joint venture. Insofar as Bin Laden played a central role in the operation - which I think he did - it would not be incorrect to say that he "worked for the CIA", even if he never met a person who identified himself as CIA or working for the Americans. But then, I find it unlikely that he didn't.

Considering Bin Laden's current status (real or imaginary) as spiritual leader and figurehead for the global jihad, there is reason to think that he would downplay any previous involvement with American intelligence agencies. Not least since it is a central tenet of the jihadists that they brought about the fall of the Soviet Union more or less on their own.

The extent to which the guerrilla war in Afghanistan was a US operation was not fully realised until long after the war ended. Former CIA director William Colby admitted in his memoirs that the CIA had initiated destabilising operations in Afghansitan a year before they officially intervened, with the hope hat it would lure the Soviets to attack. The architect of this audacious plan was Carter's national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, who himself admitted having provoked the Russian attack in an interview some years ago. As for Bin Laden, who of course comes from a family well connected to the American ruling class and not least to former CIA director George HW Bush, he very quickly took on the role of recruiter for the Afghan jihad on the Arabian peninsula. At the same time, the Afghan heroin trade exploded. There are a lot of things there that are still very murky, but my educated guess is that Bin Laden had a much closer connection to US intelligence than he is willing to admit.

It may be added that it is conspicuous how Bin Laden and his minions has had a tendency to show up everywhere the US has a covert operation going in the Muslim world, and fight on the side being backed by the US. This was the case in Bosnia, where the "Afghan" mujaheddeen showed up at the time the US started their secret arming of the Bosnian Muslims in 1994(a Bosnian friend of mine told me about how women in black burkhas suddenly became a common sight in certain areas). This was repeated in Kosovo in 97-98, when Bin Laden showed up to help the UCK (KLA) at the time the US started supporting them (and there, too, heroin was an indispensable source of funding for guerrilla activities). Same thing in Chechnya, where the US in all likelyhood are backing the rebels ("terrorists"). And even in the Philipines, where there are indications of US backing of the Abu Sayyaf, who of course provide the pretext for the American presence there.

The covert operations in Afghansitan, Chechnya, Bosnia, and Kosovo (as well as in Georgia, Ukraine and elsewhere) can all be viewed as manifestations of the Brzezinski doctrine of containing Russia and establishing US domination of "Eurasia", as he quite bluntly lays it out it in his "The Grand Chessboard" from 1997 (Caspian oil and its routes of transport also play an important role, of course). Z-big is to this day an important mover & shaker in the corridors of power, and one of his protégés is Madeline Albright, who pursued his doctrine relentlessly in the Clinton admin. But it is the Bush* administration that has brought it almost to fulfilment, with the establishment of an American military presence in the middle of what used to be Soviet territory or sphere of influence, potentially containing the expansion of both Russia and China and securing US access to Caspian oil. And with the help of some old friends? Who knows.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

42. Have you seen this site.... and are you familiar with what

has been done at this Fort for a very long time?? This pretty much verifies what you have presented... and the freeps would have a hard time contesting what all is revealed at this site.


www.soaw.org

SOA Watch Updates and Actions

Eleven SOA Watch Activists Report to
Federal Prisons Across the US Today

Eleven SOA Watch activists – including a Maryknoll nun, a 79-year-old retiree, students, and a farmworker – will report to federal prisons around the country today to begin serving three- to six-month sentences for their acts of nonviolent civil disobedience opposing the School of the Americas/ WHINSEC. The eleven were arrested at Fort Benning in November of 2004 as part of the annual demonstration calling for the closure of the SOA/ WHINSEC.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

43. For those who may not read down, or even check the link....

About the SOA/ WHINSEC

The US Army School of Americas (SOA), based in Fort Benning, Georgia, trains Latin American security personnel in combat, counter-insurgency, and counter-narcotics. SOA graduates are responsible for some of the worst human rights abuses in Latin America. In 1996 the Pentagon was forced to release training manuals used at the school that advocated torture, extortion and execution. Among the SOA's nearly 60,000 graduates are notorious dictators Manuel Noriega and Omar Torrijos of Panama, Leopoldo Galtieri and Roberto Viola of Argentina, Juan Velasco Alvarado of Peru, Guillermo Rodriguez of Ecuador, and Hugo Banzer Suarez of Bolivia. Lower-level SOA graduates have participated in human rights abuses that include the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero and the El Mozote Massacre of 900 civilians. (See Grads in the News.)

[Radical Activist]

53. For the last three years

I've been wanting to go to the big protest at Fort Benning, but something always keeps me from being there. I didn't see a date planned for this year's protest but I hope I can make it this time.

[Imperialism Inc.]

44. Lebanon.

Both through direct actions and support of their terrorist ally a.k.a. Israel.

Who are the Global Terrorists?
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/200205--02.htm

Reagan's condemnation of the "evil scourge" was issued at a meeting in Washington with Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres, who arrived to join in the call to extirpate the evil shortly after he had sent his bombers to attack Tunis, killing 75 people with smart bombs that tore them to shreds among other atrocities recorded by the prominent Israeli journalist Amnon Kapeliouk on the scene. Washington cooperated by failing to warn its ally Tunisia that the bombers were on the way. Shultz informed Israeli Foreign Minister Yitzhak Shamir that Washington "had considerable sympathy for the Israeli action," but drew back when the Security Council unanimously denounced the bombing as an "act of armed aggression" (US abstaining).NOTE{_NYT_, Oct. 17, 18; Kapeliouk, _Yediot Ahronot_, Nov. 15, 1985. Foreknowledge, _Los Angeles Times_, Oct. 3; Geoffrey Jansen, _Middle East International_, Oct 11, 1985. Bernard Gwertzman, _NYT_, Oct. 2, 7, 1985.}

A second candidate for most extreme act of Mideast international terrorism in the peak year of 1985 is a car-bombing in Beirut on March 8 that killed 80 people and wounded 256. The bomb was placed outside a Mosque, timed to explode when worshippers left. "About 250 girls and women in flowing black chadors, pouring out of Friday prayers at the Imam Rida Mosque, took the brunt of the blast," Nora Boustany reported. The bomb also "burned babies in their beds," killed children "as they walked home from the mosque," and "devastated the main street of the densely populated" West Beirut suburb. The target was a Shi'ite leader accused of complicity in terrorism, but he escaped. The crime was organized by the CIA and its Saudi clients with the assistance of British intelligence. NOTE{Boustany, _Washington Post Weekly_, March 14, 1988; Bob Woodward, _Veil_ (Simon & Schuster, 1987, 396f.).}

The only other competitor for the prize is the "Iron Fist" operations that Peres directed in March in occupied Lebanon, reaching new depths of "calculated brutality and arbitrary murder," a Western diplomat familiar with the area observed, as Israel Defense Forces (IDF) shelled villages, carted off the male population, killed dozens of villagers in addition to many massacred by the IDF's paramilitary associates, shelled hospitals and took patients away for "interrogation," along with numerous other atrocities. NOTE{_Guardian_, March 6, 1985. For details and sources, see my "Middle East Terrorism and the American Ideological System," in _Pirates and Emperors_ (New York: Claremont 1986; Montreal: Black Rose, 1988), reprinted in Edward Said and Christopher Hitchens, eds., _Blaming the Victims_ (London: Verso, 1988).} The IDF high command described the targets as "terrorist villagers." The operations against them must continue, the military correspondent of the _Jerusalem Post_ (Hirsh Goodman) added, because the IDF must "maintain order and security" in occupied Lebanon despite "the price the inhabitants will have to pay."

Like Israel's invasion of Lebanon 3 years earlier, leaving some 18,000 killed, these actions and others in Lebanon were not undertaken in self-defense but rather for political ends, as recognized at once in Israel. The same was true, almost entirely, of those that followed, up to Peres's murderous invasion of 1996. But all relied crucially on US military and diplomatic support. Accordingly, they too do not enter the annals of international terrorism.

[doodadem]

47. But Reagan doesn't REMEMBER doing it.........

[Radical Activist]

54. And Bush didn't know he was lying about WMD's in Iraq!

It was just the people around him who lied so he's innocent. They keep using these same excuses.

[LynnTheDem]

48. Reagan supported OBL so the answer has to be Reagan...but where's bush

on the list??? NO ONE supports terrorism the way BUSH does.

[varun]

49. Reagan created the Taliban and ISI

...The Pakistani spy agency that ultimately was responsible for 9/11

[uppityperson]

51. Reagan's policies supported Osama so I vote Reagan

Reagan was a stooge, a handsome (to many) kinglike figurehead whose administration was run by the same minions Mr.bush has, including papabush. I really don't think Reagan had much of a clue that what he did was real, was too stuck in actor mode. HOWEVER, what he did do was real and caused so many problems around the world, did so much hypocritical bs, lied, cheated, supported people his administration said it was against. Osama is another charismatic evil guy, out to destroy the world for his own reasons, and doing quite well in conjunction with Mr.bush.

[da_chimperor]

52. Bin laden probably wouldn't be around if it wasn't for Reagan

He gets my vote.






Wow, I can't believe I actually said that. :silly:

[Radical Activist]

55. The problem with freepers

Is that they can justify anything if its done in the name of fighting the great evil of communism. I'm sure that's why Reagan approved some of what he did. Fighting communism was an obsession and people around him were able to manipulate that.

I must have missed the verse in the Bible where Jesus says its wrong to rape, kill, and torture innocent civilians UNLESS you're fighting the Soviet Union. Those Republicans are such good Christians! :hi:

[Radical Activist]

56. dupe

wardrobe malfunction

[Runcible Spoon]

57. is anyone else here in love with radical activist?

ROCK ON!

***sigh************

[The_Mule]

58. What about Poppy Bush?

I'll vote for Reagan, but Poppy had his hands all over Iran-Contra.

[Dirk39]

59. Without Reagan and Brezinski...

Al Quaida wouldn't exist and you would be the first person on this entire planet, who mentioned the name Osama-kidney-Laden on a message board, read by more than 4,5 people.

I'm voting for Reagan, the head of Al-Quaida, the head of the "freedom fighers" in Afghanistan, the founder of the Koran-schools in Afghanistan, the founder of the "freedom-fighters" in Kosovo...


O.K. Reagan didn't have any brain at all and he didn't know or understand, what he and his Junta were doing. Ever since he was rejected as a member of the communist party in the USA, it was just going worse...

But Bin Laden did never find a Junta, besides the CIA. He had to take the piss in Afghanistan and he had to take the piss on 9/11.

Poor little Bin Laden,
Hello from Germany,
Dirk