Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (91381)	12/15/2004 7:20:15 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

OBL was CIA neither trained nor a CIA operative....

To: Grainne who wrote (91381)	12/15/2004 4:31:32 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

I'm afraid the broad brush bearers were confusing you with me. I'd said that he was CIA trained and documented it in this unanswered sprig of posting... starting Message 20852921 and ending Message 20856238 We haven't heard whether a CIA guy training a third party to train an operative while the CIA is providing funding for such actions is "CIA-trained" or not. It is a very fine line - the kind that lawyers make pay, or not. But my example stands. In U.S. regulated industry if a company trains my supervisor, and he trains a contractor, and the contractor trains me and this is all paid for by the company, then the company has established that they trained me, irrespective of how such training was administered. If there was another example where bin Laden had trained the ACLU to undermine the war effort through a bin Laden funded intermediary, an opposite argument would be made by jla. But not by me. Mine would be the same and I'd condemn such funding as well.