http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/010891.php
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/060222/2006022201.html
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/us-accused-of-funding-somali-clash/2006/05/17/1147545390362.html
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=45918
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/06/eveningnews/main616006.shtml
..how are you going to stop terrorism if you keep funding it?
2006-10-07 01:44:51 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Good points from people.. except you pay the Sauds for their oil, and they fund terrorism by proxy. I don't think that's an accident somehow.
What I'm trying to put through here is that the US seems insistent on bribing allsorts for its own interests like it has always done in the past- including supporting terrorism NOW.
2006-10-07 02:26:52 · update #1
As long as we buy their gas, we'll support the terrorists.
Buy Citgo, and support an American company!
2006-10-07 01:47:04 · answer #1 · answered by Villain 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
The Communist risk replace into genuine. it could have been felt in Europe the place they planned to stop the tanks on the west coast of Europe, attainable in eire yet actual uk. that's push all till now them, the west could properly have been compelled to apply tactical nukes to hold back the numbers and would have delivered approximately WWIII that would kill an poor lot of human beings and render countries uninhabitable. the actuality that they fell (communist regimes) does not do away with the prospect that replace into there in the chilly war. Terrorist risk is distinctive. They use suicide assaults through fact the norm. They cover in a inhabitants and tension unsavoury responses. they opt to tension you to carry on with their faith or kill you or the two, they do basically no longer care approximately you in my opinion. in the event that they ever got here to power you would be venture to their draconian rules or you die. distinctive threats, the two could be confronted. Iraq could by no potential have occurred as this has stoked the fires.
2016-12-08 10:01:45 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Did you read any of the articles you posted - only two even imply that the US are funding parties that might be opposed to the governments in power (Somali and Venezuela) which are at best suspicious claims - although I am sure the US supports opposition groups. The actions of Saudi Arabia are not America and supporting political parties in Syria that are opposed to the government is not supporting terrorism either (besides the Syria opposition leaders rejected the money - lol). The US does not support terrorism - but a nice try at an anti-America message - not a good one mind you - but a nice try at one. Actually I am kidding it wasn't any good either.
2006-10-07 02:01:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Sadly we depend on oil producing countries for our economy.
Please don't buy CITGO it is owned by Venezuela and one of our enemies Chavez the Dictator. Seven Eleven has stopped using Citgo and I hope we can stop using Citgo in our country. We can go back to horses and Buggies, that will be the only way not to contribute to terrorist countries. Not feasable in todays high tech society.
2006-10-07 01:57:48 · answer #4 · answered by mimi 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Another stupid fool right here. Let's see if memory serves me well, Iran is the main funding source for terrorist. So please give us some legitmate reading source not those above. And stop making yourself seem like a total dumb ***.
2006-10-07 02:10:25 · answer #5 · answered by TJ 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Now ain't that the GOP way?
Bush and North?
2006-10-07 01:50:09 · answer #6 · answered by cork 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sounds like a conspiracy.
2006-10-07 01:47:28 · answer #7 · answered by Dr Dee 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
bush has a great thing going. not.
2006-10-07 02:00:46 · answer #8 · answered by cassandra 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Wow you choose all liberal websites.....but I would expect nothing more from them........
2006-10-07 01:47:33 · answer #9 · answered by Duhh 2 · 0⤊ 4⤋