It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

BBC now admits al qaeda never existed

page: 3
45
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur

Originally posted by masonwatcher
Only after 9/11, the term 'al qaeda' was given a special meaning and the first letters capitalised.


you must have missed the links to the original media use of the term in 1993. shall I repost it for you?


Originally posted by masonwatcher
Even in Afghanistan, the mujahideen, were never a unified force but guerrilla forces spread across the Afghan mountains.


they were, as pointed out, a bunch of rich kids looking for thrills. apparently, the real freedom fighters wanted nothing to do with Bin Laden and his crew.
Do you really need to be condescending like that? Of course you do because you are a douche bag.




posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 09:20 PM
link   
^ That was unnecessarily rude.

I don't like how loaded the thread title is. BBC "admits" Al Qaeda never existed. This implies the BBC was covering up their lack of existence and is the body of authority on the subject. BBC "suggests" might be more accurate, or even better: Here's what I inaccurately inferred from a news piece.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 09:34 PM
link   
I had heard the name Bin Laden associated with terrorist style attacks well before 2001 but my understanding then at that time was El Queda was simply an Arabic Word to mean Data Base or Network.

The way I had understood it was that as Bin Laden and his associates came in contact with various millitant fundamendalist they simply entered that person's name, skills and contact information into a data base Bin Laden was personally comprising.

In other words Vinnie the Chin in New York City wants to hit Sal the Baker but needs to make it look like the flour in his bake shop exploded and killed him so Vinnie the Chin calls up Max the Mad Flour Bomber in Cleveland because Vinnie has heard that Max knows how to blow people up with Flour who he is and how to get a hold of him through a network or data base of criminals.

Max gets to decide if he wants the job, how much he wants to charge and Vinnie gets to decide if he wants to hire him and pay it.

It's contract work though and Max doesn't work for Vinnie full time or anytime Vinnie wants, just when Max wants to take the job.

My understanding was that Bin Ladens El Queda data base worked the same way as basically just a directory of who is who in the Islamic Militant World of Wet Work and how to get in touch with them.

The morning of September 11th, 2001 when the second tower at the World Trade Center got hit, I had read enough about Bin Laden to think and say to myself at that time "Wow this has to be Bin Laden doing this"...

A few hours later when the Networks and the White House started bandying about Bin Ladens name I thought I was pretty darn clever for making the initial call but the more I thought about the more I realized that there was just no plausible way from a law enforcement standpoint that they could have come up with that much proof that quickly to actually name is as the primary and only suspect without having prior knowledge of the attacks and plot. It didn't seem likely that they would have had prior knowledge of the plot or attacks or they would have figured out a way to stop it.

I really don't think Bin Laden carried out the attacks, the way the attacks appear to be carried out and I really don't think El Queda was an orginization but simply a data base of like minded people with potential skills willing to work with others for the right job, goal or price.

I do know that prior to 9-11 El Queda was considered just a registry and data base and not an orginization.



[edit on 7/8/09 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 10:03 PM
link   
www.cdi.org...

Intel!

news.bbc.co.uk...
Hmmmm... this one gives names... something to follow up in research? Please note the date of 2003 in above link.

Interesting. Below, even MI5 lists them. security.homeoffice.gov.uk...

A bite! A report on russian counter measures mentions NOTHING on the bastards. studies.agentura.ru...

Germany knows them well...
www.historycommons.org...
Ill have more comming.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by shug7272
 


Wow, get a grip and look at how you are acting.


After this post, guess I better make it clear that Al PooPoo was just a joke, because Al Cracker was already taken. Didn't realize some people were all that upset over the topic.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:33 PM
link   
al qaeda existed before 9/11 but not as a enemy of the u.s.a but more like an asset for the c.i.a. they are the perfect boogeyman. the old style of warfare is over. in the 20th century you knew who your "enemy" was by simply pointing on a map. but in the 21st century its a little different. heres a enemy that has no real country. moves around in the shadows. has a front man that hasnt ben seen for years but still releases audio tapes every know and then. i still cant believe that people still believe this crap. wake the # people, the u.s government lies over and over again, why do you still believe them?



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 12:22 AM
link   
Welcome to 2004!

Seriously, it's a great documentary, but it's hardly news.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 12:30 AM
link   
It's a BBC Documentary by Adam Curtis: The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear

Part 1 Baby It's Cold Outside and Part 2 The Phantom Victory are equally as good as the third part which is featured in the OP.

I suggest everyone watch all three 1-hours episodes.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 01:50 AM
link   
The point here is not that Bin Laden's network of terrorists did not exist, but that the name "Al Qaida" was given to it by the West. In order to remain in cognito, Bin Laden avoided naming his organisation, insofar as there was an organisation outside of him and his immediate associates.

Jason Burke is the foremost Western expert on Bin Laden and his associates, those who criticise him (and those who don't) should read his books "Road to Kandahar" and "Al Qaida", indeed it is almost impossible for anyone to seriously investigate the roots of Al Qaida, Bin Laden and his associates without doing so. Burke's interest in central Asia, and Afghanistan in particular, pre-dates 9/11 by some 10 years (virtually all Western authors on the subject only developed their interest post 9/11) and he is scrupulous in his research.

Burke also explains at great length that the expression "Al Qaida" has a great range of meanings in Arabic including "the base" or "foundation" and may even be used to refer to doctrine in general - hence it's considerable usage by former Mujahadeen and Uslamic terrorists in East Africa and Central Asia. If you have not read Burke's books yet, do so - it will give you an excellent insight into Central Asia, it's people and the activities of Bin Laden and his fellow former Mujahadeen. His bibliographies also amount to a definitive reading list on the subject.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 01:52 AM
link   
Wow, GREAT FIND!!!!!!

Star and flag friend!

We've all heard the stories here and there in alternative news, but here are all the pieces, and a whole lot I never even knew...

AND IN THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA!!!

This is big.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 02:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Naboo the Enigma
The point here is not that Bin Laden's network of terrorists did not exist, but that the name "Al Qaida" was given to it by the West. In order to remain in cognito, Bin Laden avoided naming his organisation, insofar as there was an organisation outside of him and his immediate associates.

Jason Burke is the foremost Western expert on Bin Laden and his associates, those who criticise him (and those who don't) should read his books "Road to Kandahar" and "Al Qaida", indeed it is almost impossible for anyone to seriously investigate the roots of Al Qaida, Bin Laden and his associates without doing so. Burke's interest in central Asia, and Afghanistan in particular, pre-dates 9/11 by some 10 years (virtually all Western authors on the subject only developed their interest post 9/11) and he is scrupulous in his research.

Burke also explains at great length that the expression "Al Qaida" has a great range of meanings in Arabic including "the base" or "foundation" and may even be used to refer to doctrine in general - hence it's considerable usage by former Mujahadeen and Islamic terrorists in East Africa and Central Asia.



This is of course the answer. There really is an Al Qaida, just as Capitalism, Communism, Cosa Nostra, Wahhabism, very much exist - but don't have corporate head offices, a designer logo, secretaries answering the phone, official T shirts, etc.

Going virtual is the way to survive and thrive when your activities are highly illegal and apolitical.

Bin Laden is a complex figure. Yes a rich egocentric kid. The overwhelming success of the 9/11 attacks caught even him by surprise. He was suddenly thrust into a new role as the most sought out person in the world. He quickly grew into his pop identity as a Messianic Rebel Force. In some ways too bad he didn't live long enough to see the end of the movie he was starring in.

Much retro-engineering of history, events, and personages in the last decade. The press, the intelligence services, the Muslim world itself use the Al Qaida handle at their convenience. One can easily call out misuses based on context. But you might as well say the Mafia doesn't exist.

Even an internally conflicted not very sophisticated BBC is aware of that.

Based in it's purposefully misleading subject line, this is unfortunately yet another of those agenda driven borderline threads.


Mike



[edit on 8-8-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 03:50 AM
link   
They did exist but as it has been pointed out they were simply unknowing dupes being sponsored by various intelligence agencies.Now this "al queda" in Gaza that's a new one to me,a Mossad-backed terrorist group what a way to ensure that there is constant warfare between the Israelis and Palestinians.Have them hit a few settlements and claim it's an " al qaeda in Gaza" attack and presto! you have instant American government support.

[edit on 033131p://5226 by mike dangerously]

[edit on 033131p://5226 by mike dangerously]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 04:48 AM
link   
Are there many extremist Islamic fighters that are hell bent on destroying the western world? - Yes there are certainly more now than before 2003 - and now they are really pissed & their hatred against the western world has almost become insanity

Have their numbers grown since we in the western world have had such a bloody history of manipulating their societies politically since the bloodbaths of our insane crusades to Jerusalem?!

And more recently this century! - killing their political leaders & installing dictators - stealing their resources - through wars & atrocites to their people - Invasions of their lands killing innocent women & children through collateral damage etc!

Yes! we are sadly guilty of all that!

As guilty as their damn extremists through awful terrorists acts & atrocities against innocent people! the extremist have destroyed the good name of Islam- no doubt about that!

Both sides have become totally insane! - doesn't matter who started it!

But the most crazy and disturbing result of painting the picture to the sheeple that all angry young foreign Islamic men belong to a organized and "hyped" AQ - is the implications from the new "Anti-Terror Laws" that have been written in & rushed into many countries around the world without any afterthoughts, whatsoever!

Heck! almost all countries in the world are now affected by these Laws & Acts.

(all people/citizen in the opposition of a Western World Friendly Goverment in Middle Easterns countries could be labled AQ if they protest against their corrupted puppet Goverment - and the uninformed world sheeple/citizens & spectators would be none the wiser)

And we have to ask ourselves, who benfits of keeping the agenda & conflict alive & kicking?

Cui bono?

Among others that I can see who benefit from the conflict is the International Elit and Banksters & International Military Industrial Complex and their political henchmen

(They invented & keep nourishing the "hype" to implement fascist laws into our western societies - for what reason? - Profits? - The Great Game? - NWO? - or all these?)

Now they can also lump ALL foreign freedom fighters & opposition into a group and can call it AQ - exactly like they once did with the "Mafia" and after that could call some misdemeanor/offence (if it fitted their agenda) - organized crime etc.

Now many are thinking - well! this is about the so called extremist in the Middle East so I don't care! let them burn in hell!

Well It's not that simple!

Everything isn't just black or white in this world!

With their pesky propaganda tactic & Anti-terror Laws and "Grouping Tactic" they can also make you (on the paper) an extremist and a terrorist!

So now when you're in the opposition to their pesky agenda, they just call you a terrorist/extremist - and they have made their case - they can now tap your phone & Internet etc - and you can't do anything about it.

That gives them a 'carte blanche' to do whatever they want without any oversight, and that is not democracy - that's fascism!

According to them, ALL Ron Paul supporters and Tea-Party Protesters or all future protesters are now per definition: RIGHT WINGERS EXTREMISTS & TERRORISTS

(The same goes for the militia)

They can of course not lable the opposistion of American citizen's to belong to AQ because that would make them look like fools in the public & political eyes around the world.

Instead they now bundle ALL opposition into being 'Right Winger Extremists' and therefore 'Low Level Terrorists' - but the effect is the same as for lumping all foreign freedom fighters & opposistion together and call them AQ.

In one corner you now have the result of "grouping" all the foreign opposistion into AQ

In the other corner you now have the result of "grouping" all domestic opposition into RIGHT-WINGER EXTREMISTS!

The effect & consequences are the same!

They have fooled all of us! - Western World or the Middle Eastern World - doesn't matter!

Foreign Opposition or Domestic Opposition! - doesn't matter anymore!

A very sad consequence but also a very funny (in a sad way) consequence of all this "Grouping Tactic is:

The same group and the one's in the western world who screamed the loudest for "revenge" "eye for an eye" and "nuke them" and kill all the towelhead bastards! - is now their target for their domestic agenda & purposes! - they have drawn you out in the open - like insects who are drawn into the light - they hung up that light especially for you!

They now know who screamed the loudest! - Now they can seperate you from the others and put an "EXTREMIST LABLE" on you!

And all of these men & women of the opposition in the western world are NOW (Per definition of the rulers) bundled into ONE domestic group of the political spectrum (according to the definition) and NOW! suddenly! these people are finding themselves to be in trouble and in the crosshair of the International Fascists & Globalists!

These men & women has NOW gotten the "Terrorists & Extremists Lable" all over them! - can anyone say; TOTALLY SCREWED SUCKERS!

It came back! biting you in the arse!

It doesn't matter if you're LEFT or RIGHT on the political spectrum anymore - If you protest against ANYTHING that disturbs their aganda - you're an EXTREMIST and therefore you belong to the opposition, who according to them are RIGHT-WING EXTREMISM - and that's their lie that they will sell (Divide et impera) to the masses of uninformed & unwakened ignorant sheeple through Television News and other MSM.

Welcome to Western World FASCISM!

They played all of us in the western world like sheeple in line for a slaughter! and we bought it! hook, line & sinker!

It's a sad time for the world! - we can not let the fascists win this one!

In some way, we must resist them!

Don't let them have the pleasure of playing us for fools anymore!

In some way, we must unite together against them before it is too late!

Rant over!



(Sorry for the bad English)


[edit on 8-8-2009 by Chevalerous]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odessy

Originally posted by cooler
bbc report

bbc dont report they specialise in government left wing multiculturist political correctness propaganda for the mindless.
ohh man if you seriously use bbc as a news source

bbc are part of msm & their for are not allowed to tell the trueth or they may cause trouble & hurt peoples feelings

if you want to know some thing about al qaeda it might be a good idea to read the wahhabism teachings of islam.


thats not entirely fair...
While BBC is main stream media, they are britains top legit news source... unlike the Sun, which people here still seem to go by.
But BBC is just as much as a joke as FOX, CNN, etc, so yes, you do have to question what comes out of it because its basically what big brother wants you to think...
So then, if most of Britain gets their news from the BBC, then why would they want us to think Al Qaeda is a fabrication?

Also, every once and while news reporters at major news medias such as Fox do, infact, try and report the truth, no matter where that gets them:


i disagree bbc has become so extreme politic correct drivel that i think sky news is now more popular uk news drivel station but they are both msm
so like i pointed out whist news drivel station may & or may not use such quotes as "al qaeda is a fabrication" but as far as i understand it, al qaeda is based on the wahhabi teachings on islam so as long as their is a single muslim actually forcing other people to practice wahhabi islam then ide have to assume that al qaeda is alive & well.
wahhabism is probably the most extreme version of islam with strong ties to soudi arabia.
& as long as extreme islam is practiced their will likley be al qaeda type terrorist groups enforcing strict rules with guns & bombs.
the bbc/sky & other msm`s can be useful to find out where the latest bomb has detonated but as for trying to tell me the quran has suddenly become peacefull

the quran will never be peacefull as the quran is more like a book of war.
& the quran has about as much to do with peace as hitlers mein kampf.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Naboo the Enigma
The point here is not that Bin Laden's network of terrorists did not exist, but that the name "Al Qaida" was given to it by the West. In order to remain in cognito, Bin Laden avoided naming his organisation, insofar as there was an organisation outside of him and his immediate associates.


As I explained above, this is not true. There is a memo going back to 1988 which uses the term 'Al Qaeda' (though I think they use the 'Qaida' spelling) to describe either Bin Laden's organisation, or the process of forming an organisation.


Jason Burke is the foremost Western expert on Bin Laden and his associates, those who criticise him (and those who don't) should read his books "Road to Kandahar" and "Al Qaida", indeed it is almost impossible for anyone to seriously investigate the roots of Al Qaida, Bin Laden and his associates without doing so.


I've been investigating Al Qaeda for years, and Burke's book is an exceptionally partial and limited analysis.

The most obvious reason for this is that he only really talks about the Middle East and North Africa, overlooking the Asia-Pacific, Chechnya/the Balkans and barely touching on former Soviet central Asia. That's three incredibly important areas in the history of Islamic militancy that hardly even get mentioned, let alone studied in his work.

As someone who has studied all of these places, in detail, I can say that Burke has left out far more than he has put in.


Burke's interest in central Asia, and Afghanistan in particular, pre-dates 9/11 by some 10 years (virtually all Western authors on the subject only developed their interest post 9/11) and he is scrupulous in his research.


As I explained on the opening page, no he isn't. He relies almost entirely on first-hand interviews, which means if people are mistaken, or lying, or confused, he doesn't bother to verify it, he just sticks it in his reporting and his books. Half of his sources are anonymous, making it impossible for any reader to check the veracity of his material.

Plus he gets basic details wrong, like claiming that all the evidence suggests Mohammed Atta died a virgin on 9/11, when there's abundant evidence that Atta was a cokehead, a heavy drinker, who was #ing a stripper during his time in Florida when he was likely working on CIA drug smuggling operations in the Carribean.

Likewise, he never mentions the ongoing involvement of Western and western-backed government support of Islamic militants in various parts of the world, for which there is abundant evidence.


Burke also explains at great length that the expression "Al Qaida" has a great range of meanings in Arabic including "the base" or "foundation" and may even be used to refer to doctrine in general - hence it's considerable usage by former Mujahadeen and Uslamic terrorists in East Africa and Central Asia. If you have not read Burke's books yet, do so - it will give you an excellent insight into Central Asia, it's people and the activities of Bin Laden and his fellow former Mujahadeen. His bibliographies also amount to a definitive reading list on the subject.


His bibliographies include virtually nothing from the world of military intelligence, making them not only not definitive, but completely inadequate.

Burke is a lot like Chomsky, in that he denies the official version of Al Qaeda only to put a much bigger and more frightening version in its place. He is a journalist, not a historian, and he's missed FAR MORE than he's discovered. As someone who has read his work, and lots and lots of other people's work on this subject, I can firmly say Burke does not stand out as particularly important.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:34 AM
link   
Shortly before his untimely death, former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook told the House of Commons that "Al Qaeda" is not really a terrorist group but a database of international mujaheddin and arms smugglers used by the CIA and Saudis to funnel guerrillas, arms, and money into Soviet-occupied Afghanistan. Courtesy of World Affairs, a journal based in New Delhi, WMR can bring you an important excerpt from an Apr.-Jun. 2004 article by Pierre-Henry Bunel, a former agent for French military intelligence.

Al Qaeda - the Database



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:45 AM
link   
Every thing and any thing that is needed to know about (see top right of link, inside al qeada) al Qaeda, can be found sampled at this review ISBN 0-425-19114-1.

I have and still use an updated book for keeping and researching notes on terrorists. Have since even before going to Iraq, it is very valuable. I personally have field and academic knowledge of terrorism. Having read about and seen first hand terrorism, also eventually had Mahdi army along side us.

There is a wealth of information to be had, and a must for any one who is serious about info on the network of terror.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Manouche

Originally posted by Crakeur


It was using that name whey they bombed the WTC in 93, among other attacks that the non-existant group claimed to have perpetrated.


No, it was not. That's is the exact point of the thread



The claim of responsibility for the 1993 WTC bombing came from Ramzi Yousef as he left the US on the night of the bombing. It was made in the name of the 'Liberation Army, Fifth Battalion' and said the motivation was US military involvement with Israel. Nothing about Islam, nothing about Saudi Arabia, nothing really like Bin Laden's fatwas.

Ramzi himself was no Islamic fundamentalist, least of all a Salafist. He was a sociopathic freelance terrorist genius who had some sort of affiliation with the Palestinians, though he'd never been to Palestine, was born in Kuwait to a family from Baluchistan. He was called into the WTC bombing plot at quite a late stage.

The plot was ideologically led by the Blind Sheikh, himself an asset of the CIA who got into the country and eventually took the position of Imam at the Al Farooq mosque in Brooklyn despite being on the watchlist. This was back in the late 80s, when he was helping recruit people to fight against the Soviets. In the early 90s this organisation (which included Al Muhajiroun in the UK) switched its focus to the Balkans, initially Bosnia. The Blind Sheikh was the leader of the Egyptian group Gamaat Islamiya.

Most of the members of the group (Salameh, Abouhalima and so on) were trained by Ali Mohamed, a CIA asset who'd also worked for the US Special Forces and would later become an FBI informant. He and some of those he trained were veterans of the Afghan conflict, his connection to Bin Laden was through Zawahiri's Egyptian Islamic Jihad group.

The original bomb appears to have been built by former Egpytian army offier and FBI asset Emad Salem, who fell out with his handlers towards the end of 92, at which point Yousef was called in. Yousef himself turned up at the airport stating one name and presenting a passport with a different name, but after a brief questioning that all apparent asylum seekers get he was let into the country. Some sources suggest he was helped by the Pakistani ISI, who'd recruited him when he turned up in the camps towards the end of the Afghan war during a summer break from his engineering NVQ in Swansea.

In summary, it had very, very little to do with Bin Laden, and if we are looking for an organisation to blame then the one with the most connections to it is the CIA.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:52 AM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 06:05 AM
link   
All the sources used in the book are not even contradicted online. Show me the errors or inaccuracies, and I'll reconsider the book. Until then, and from what I have seen it is useful.

Do you have a personal issue on this, some bad blood between you and the author or publisher? You seem a bit emotional in your responce.

Please provide sources that this publication is baseless and trash, I would like to see why your attacking the and discrediting a potential tool. The diclaimer is if you read anything else, is because he personally interviewed terrorists.

It would be their info that would be speculative at best isn't it? Not a man who is and has be involved in multi national advise on terrorism.




new topics

top topics



 
45
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join