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.

 

Is terrorism a hoax?

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 07:35 PM
link   
I'm not saying terrorists don't exist, and that there aren't Islamic extremists, but do you think the whole Al-Qaeda/Islamists vs. the West thing is all made up propaganda?

Remember, Osama Bin Laden denied involvement in 9/11 at first. It wasn't until later that tapes came out with "him" claiming to be behind it.

The Taliban just issued a statement saying they're not interested in attacking America, but they will fight us if we're over there. The US government then said they were fighting Al-Qaeda, not the Taliban. WTF?

I question not only the motive, but the existence of the threat of Muslim extremists. Why doesn't the government declare war on cars, they kill a lot more people than terrorists!

It's about something else.




posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Terrorist is the 21st century term for Freedom Fighters many times. The media and the government is used to blur the two to pinpoint who is the enemy from THEIR point of view. But that doesn't mean every terrorist is really a terrorist. Yes, there are terrorists, but many are also freedom fighters, whose have the right to defend their own country from the invaders.

By my opinion the Al-Qaeda is a fictive organization, which is existed somewhere in the past. But now, it's mostly controlled by the government to create fear. The Taliban is existing, but from their point of view, they're freedom fighters. Of course those ones, whose are blowing up themselves and killing innocent civilians, regardless where they're from, they're real terrorists, whose are killing innocent for their own ideals.

A terrorist is fighting for a higher ideal, usually blindly.
A freedom fighter is fighting for his / her own country, because of love; love for their own people and land.

The media is merging the two and using the word terrorist, while in many cases, those people are just fighting for their home. But as I said above, there are also terrorists.

[edit on 8-10-2009 by Sharrow]



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Long story short, yes.



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 08:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 


"Terrorist" exists in the same metaphorical realm as "infidel" or "blasphemer". It is a rhetorical device, a figure of speech, a trope, and as such doesn't exist. It is a convenient term to invoke connotations of all the sorts of things that define a terrorist. It is not static, or dependent on the signifier for meaning; it's interpretation is up to the beholder.

There is no "Al Qaeda", just as there is no real NATO or UN. It is simply an idea, an agreement, and when the name "NATO" is invoked it is understood that NATO represents certain interests, certain people, and has an agenda. When insurgent groups carry out their operations, create websites, and make statements and identify themselves as "Al Qaeda", they are making a similar statement as to their intent and what they stand for.

As for the 20th century origins of terrorism, or terrorist acts as a viable tactic, look no further than the Nazis. Otto Skorzeny, Hitler's top commando, made friends with Yasser Arafat and Qaddafi after the war. Otto was an expert in guerilla tactics and unconventional warfare. He, and many other ex-Nazis, lent their expertise to the Palestinians, along with any other violent organizations opposed to Israel and jews. Fascism has close ties to terrorism. It's not the whole story, but a good place to start.



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by John_Brown
 
No, not the Nazis again. Can we skip the Nazi topic just one more time? Please?

Terrorism has no connection to them at all. It's just a label, nothing more. Some are calling the Palestinians are terrorists, others are calling the Israelis as terrorists. It's only a point of view, presenting who is the evil from one side's view. But that doesn't mean automatically that's the truth.



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Look bro,

It doesn't matter what the crisis is, as long as there is a crisis.
Currently, that crisis in America is "Terrorism". It has taken other forms as well such as Communism etc. In order to keep the majority of Americans in-line, there must be an external threat that will unite most of the country. This has been the way things have worked for thousands of years. If your interested, Read Plato's "The Republic".

Keep in mind, ITS ALL PROPAGANDA.

Osama Bin Laden used to work for the CIA and America used to be BFFs with Saddam Hussein.

In short, yes, terrorism does exist. However, it is exacerbated and propagated to the layman of America to further the cause of uniting us against a common foe.

Believe a small percentage of what you read and nothing of what you watch on the news. And always, ALWAYS have your BS detector 100% operational.



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 08:46 PM
link   
I don't know if terrorism is a complete hoax, however, every decade there is something else for us freedom loving, first world dwelling citizens to fear.

Communism, terrorism, the cold war, viruses, natural disasters. There is always something that our governments claim we must live in fear of. In my opinion, it is fear that these same people use to justify their existence. It is fear that they use to gradually strip us of our freedoms under the guise of protection.

If we were to ignore their fear mongering, we could inch that much closer towards true freedom.



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 08:52 PM
link   
Have your nation stand against a common enemy, and they will unite, but more importantly, seek their leaders out for comfort. And when they do that, they start making compromises. The political elite gains power.
It has been done countless time. When the Argentinian dictator Galtieri was trying to hush up the mass abductions of thousands of intellectuals/innocents/political acitve people he tried to use our patriotism as an excuse to begin a war against England when we didn't have neither the resources nor the man power to handle it; people were so caught up in that bs excuse of 'having the Malvinas back' that they sent their kids to war. They ate line, hook and sinker.
It works, time and time again, because they take advantage of the human's social nature; we identify with a group and we tend to defend it to death, because that means that we're defending our own identity.



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   
If terrorism is a hoax used to unite Americans, why is America more divided than ever? Half want more troops in Afghanistan, half want them to come home. How is the threat of terrorism uniting America?



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   
terrorism was created by america ... they created the terms, they invented the enemies, and now, really, terrorism exists ...

so, america, congrats, you guys live in a hollywood movie 11



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Like I said their existence revolves around our fear.

If their is a threat that the governments can exploit, then they will do so in order to maintain their power structure throughout the world.

If we have nothing to fear, then these individuals have very little reason to exist. And without their existence, the bureaucratic nightmare ceases to exist, and our freedom is restored. That is why there has been a threat to our way of life for many decades now. Because without that threat, there is little reason to justify their existence and we all progress towards actual freedom.



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Behind every great lie there's a bit of truth. Real terrorist attacks (Lockerbie, truck bomb on US marine barracks in Beirut, Japan subway, etc.) are the perfect cover for staged events (i.e. false flag) that had us begging TPTB to shred our constitution and give us the police state we now have.

Terrorism isn't a complete hoax, but then intelligence agencies that snoop on "terrorist networks" can just as easily plant "signs" that other agencies pick up and view as a real threat - allowing for a false flag operation to be carried out and full blame to be given to the "terrorists", and further exacerbating the need for a fully-encompassing police state to "protect" us.

In the past, false flag operations would be used to lead into a war that we (or the perpetrators of the op) would benefit from. The false flag op would make an enemy nation the scapegoat, such as the "Gulf of Tonkin" incident which goaded America into war in Vietnam, "which handed President Johnson the carte blanc charter he wanted for future intervention in Southeast Asia."

"Operation Northwoods" was another false flag event that would be blamed on Cuba, giving then Joint Chief of Staff Lemnitzer the excuse he needed to go rampaging through Cuba and even heavily Cuban populated areas of Florida (pro-Cubans were going to be framed for domestic acts of terrorism)

But planting seeds of war through false flag attacks works far better when it's not being used to frame countries, but rather secretive, evil terrorist organizations that could be anywhere, or at least in countries you'd like to invade. Operation Northwoods, with a little updating, became 911. The very "freedom fighter" we aided and supplied arms and intelligence to, Osama Bin Laden would be groomed into the very face of evil by his former benefactors.

The threat of terrorism is a boon to the Pentagon, it's military suppliers, and a segment of the federal government that want's total dominion over it's citizenry, no questions asked. It's a never ending war that can be morphed into any direction. This doesn't mean real terrorists don't exist, only that they are occasionally helped out by a far more sinister group planting false flags. Like I said, behind every great lie (terrorism false flags) is a bit of truth (real terrorists).



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Are you talking about England? The US is certainly no police state, although the city I live in is pretty strict at enforcing driving laws.
Why would the federal government want to control everyone, and who are these mindless robots who would work for a government agency who would go along with such a plan? Most people I know work for the government in one way, or another, and none are mindless robots as many on here would think. Regular people work for the government, most of whom would expose such wild plans about population control.
in case you didn't know, it is nearly impossible to keep secrets in DC. Someone always talks.



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by stevegmu
If terrorism is a hoax used to unite Americans, why is America more divided than ever? Half want more troops in Afghanistan, half want them to come home. How is the threat of terrorism uniting America?

Because they don't want it united for a really long period of time. Think. United we stand, divided we fall. They want your country (or the majority of it) united so war seems justified for your people. They want to have an excuse to go to war... and when they get it, you can't do anything to stop them. They get what they want, and after that they don't care if the country is divided again... after all, it's better if they bicker among themselves about something that was already succesful for those who started it, and the whole war starts to become a whole cover up for another thing. Your news show war images 24/7, everyone talks about the war, and other things are forgotten. They obtain what they want, and while the country goes on bickering about the war, they continue with their next plan.



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Aelur
 


We have what are called elections of politicians who can stop war. Why do you think our government wants to be in a perpetual state of war? War costs money and lives.
Really? What news channels are you watching?



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by stevegmu
 


If you think that democracy really works, and that you can really elect a politician who cares for your people, I wonder what kind of news are you watching. And please don't put words in my mouth, I never said governments wanted to be in a perpetual state of war. They just created a situation around a disaster that enabled them to get their hands on the middle east, and manipulated people through the idea of a 'big bad terrorist' to create a common enemy people would like to fight against, therefore gaining support.
Lives are meaningless in the political game, they're just numbers. Money? In modern western wars you never lose money, because wars are profittable. The money goes into the wrong pockets, of course. Your government isn't going to win contracts or anything, but the private parts behind the political figureheads will do.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 02:16 AM
link   
What we call terrorism is simply how a much weaker group fights a stronger, more organized one. The Muslim world isn't altogether thrilled by the US presence in its countries, especially when we support brutal, corrupt regimes that cater to our demands. Lacking an army to fight us, they resort to "terrorism". It is terrorism, but it is the only way to fight.

We (the US) did something similar with England. We had no well-trained, organized army; the British did. So we resorted to unconventional warfare, attacking unpredictably, shooting from behind trees, ignoring all the rules of war. In the meantime the British remained in ranks, marched together (instead of breaking up), and adhered to conventional forms of fighting. That was one reason they lost. Another reason was that they were fighting the entire population, not just an army.

We're doing the same in Iraq and Afghanistan. We try to fight conventionally; they use IED's, car bombs, suicide bombs, all sorts of unconventional and often unpredictable tactics. Since it is the population fighting us, not armies, we stand to lose in both wars. How can we win, when the entire country wants us out of there? And who's going to surrender? Who's even got the authority to surrender?

Even if we wind up killing bin Laden, that won't stop the war. It could give us an excuse to stop fighting, which would probably be a good thing. But Al Quaeda will continue on without him. It's a loosely-knit grouping of fighters, motivated primarily by hatred of the US. That hatred is fueled by our continually killing civilians in a country where we don't belong. It won't end until we leave the countries.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 


I feel the same way, both in the way you mentioned and in America. If there are so many terrorists why aren't they crashing into gas trucks, and blowing up malls??



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 11:53 PM
link   
Terrorism is certainly not a hoax (as I suspect our friends across the ocean will attest to, quite readily). However, "Terrorism" in America is a lot like "Communism" was during the whole McCarthyism trap.

Most likely, this isn't a conspiracy, it's just a sign that American culture dictates that we should overreact to the fear-mongering of politicians. [sarcasm]Because, you know, their opinions matter a whole lot. And if they say that it's a bad thing, then it must be worse than bad.[/sarcasm]



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 08:23 AM
link   
This first question is what exactly is Terrorism?


Legal Dictionary
Main Entry: ter·ror·ism
Pronunciation: 'ter-&r-"i-z&m
Function: noun
1 : the unlawful use or threat of violence esp. against the state or the public as a politically motivated means of attack or coercion
2 : violent and intimidating gang activity terrorism> ter·ror·ist /-ist/ adj or noun —ter·ror·is·tic /"ter-&r-'is-tik/ adjective
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

Source: dictionary.reference.com...

I dont think the whole terrorism issue is a hoax but it is certainly over-hyped and is being used to attain political goals. Terrorism is not just limited to muslims but all kind of races, religious terrorist are there.

Jihad , often mistranslated as "holy war," literally means "struggle." or to struggle to improve one's self and/or society." Thus jihad imo is not terrorism.

Terrorism is the act of scaring people for a social or political reason using violence (or threat of violence). A person who uses terrorism is called a terrorist.

Terrorirsts for me are people who pretend to be jihadists but have other goals behind it such as imposing Sharia Law, , stealing land forcefully in case of Palestine (including other strct religious laws), for goals like money, personal profit, religious goal (bible/torah/quarn) increasing own power or in simple words are doing it as a profession.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join