There is NO Al-Qaeda

Originally posted by tetra50

Every single one of them cries when we say terrorist. That's why we send them a billion tons of tissues every year.

reply to post by mainidh

 

In many of said countries, the children of the poorest families sell tissues on the street for extra money. No BUWAHAHA here. This country supplies the need for all these activities, and the "fake" enemy, for the "fake" "unity" reinforces the need for this.
There was a time when I was a patriot. There was a time when I had faith. Ah, in spite of what I see now this may cause, I lament a time of believing.

To the OP, do you know WHEN the man in your posted link died hiking, by any chance?

Try telling Daniel Pearl's family there is no Al-Quaeda.

Boy for every single event or group now there is some counterculture trying to tell you what you see with your own eyes isn't really there.Their proof is on an Internet forum and nowhere else.

Originally posted by flashtrum

Originally posted by tetra50

Every single one of them cries when we say terrorist. That's why we send them a billion tons of tissues every year.

reply to post by mainidh

 

In many of said countries, the children of the poorest families sell tissues on the street for extra money. No BUWAHAHA here. This country supplies the need for all these activities, and the "fake" enemy, for the "fake" "unity" reinforces the need for this.
There was a time when I was a patriot. There was a time when I had faith. Ah, in spite of what I see now this may cause, I lament a time of believing.

To the OP, do you know WHEN the man in your posted link died hiking, by any chance?

Try telling Daniel Pearl's family there is no Al-Quaeda.

Boy for every single event or group now there is some counterculture trying to tell you what you see with your own eyes isn't really there.Their proof is on an Internet forum and nowhere else.

Good example, and I certainly do not either go along with, nor intend in any way to undermine the tragedy of what happened to Mr. Pearl. For that matter, many have died horrible, tragic deaths, and endured incredible torture, at the hands of what appear to be people from all religious persuasions, skin colors, etc. Maybe I've endured my share of torture, too....you wouldn't know, would you? I made a few other posts here in this thread, about "fomented and reinforced" enemies, intended to caution against what "appears to be." You bring up an incredibly salient point, in alluding to what we "see with our own eyes." And no, I don't think the only proof exists on some internet forum. There's plenty of science to back up the ability to trick you into thinking you are seeing something, and then define the "enemy," for you. That's just the science. You are on a conspiracy forum, where it is discussed ad nauseum, every moment of every day, attempts to "fake" things with street threater, staged scenes, and CGI, just to name a few ways, and where inculcation by advertising and media deliver an enemy for you to hate and direct your anger at.

It would be nice if it were just so simple, but the fact is it is not, and has not been for a very long time. And even time is suspect in the current paradigm. An easy answer to a multi-layered, multi-faceted issue does no one any good, and in fact, perpetuates the violence you speak of.

Ex-Text [color=grey]/Copy n Pasted

1.

One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to "fabricate an enemy". The "outside enemy" personified by Osama bin Laden is "threatening America".

Pre-emptive war directed against "Islamic terrorists" is required to defend the Homeland. Realities are turned upside down. America is under attack.

In the wake of 9/11, the creation of this "outside enemy" has served to obfuscate the real economic and strategic objectives behind the war in the Middle East and Central Asia. Waged on the grounds of self-defense, the pre-emptive war is upheld as a "just war" with a humanitarian mandate.

As anti-war sentiment grows and the political legitimacy the Bush Administration falters, doubts regarding the existence of this illusive "outside enemy" must be dispelled.

Counter-terrorism and war propaganda are intertwined. The propaganda apparatus feeds disinformation into the news chain. The terror warnings must appear to be "genuine". The objective is to present the terror groups as "enemies of America."

Ironically, Al Qaeda --the "outside enemy of America" as well as the alleged architect of the 9/11 attacks-- is a creation of the CIA.

From the outset of the Soviet-Afghan war in the early 1980s, the US intelligence apparatus has supported the formation of the "Islamic brigades". Propaganda purports to erase the history of Al Qaeda, drown the truth and "kill the evidence" on how this "outside enemy" was fabricated and transformed into "Enemy Number One".

The US intelligence apparatus has created it own terrorist organizations. And at the same time, it creates its own terrorist warnings concerning the terrorist organizations which it has itself created. Meanwhile, a cohesive multibillion dollar counterterrorism program "to go after" these terrorist organizations has been put in place.

Portrayed in stylized fashion by the Western media, Osama bin Laden, supported by his various henchmen, constitutes America’s post-Cold war bogeyman, who "threatens Western democracy". The alleged threat of "Islamic terrorists", permeates the entire US national security doctrine. Its purpose is to justify wars of aggression in the Middle East, while establishing within America, the contours of the Homeland Security State.

Ex-Text [color=grey]/Copy n Pasted

2.



Historical Background

What are the historical origins of Al Qaeda? Who is Osama bin Laden?

The alleged mastermind behind the 9/11 terrorists attacks, Saudi-born Osama bin Laden, was recruited during the Soviet-Afghan war, "ironically under the auspices of the CIA, to fight Soviet invaders".(Hugh Davies, "`Informers’ point the finger at bin Laden; Washington on alert for suicide bombers." The Daily Telegraph, London, 24 August 1998).

In 1979 the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA was launched in Afghanistan:

"With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI, who wanted to turn the Afghan Jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim states against the Soviet Union, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan’s fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. Eventually, more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad." (Ahmed Rashid, "The Taliban: Exporting Extremism", Foreign Affairs, November-December 1999).

This project of the US intelligence apparatus was conducted with the active support of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), which was entrusted in channelling covert military aid to the Islamic brigades and financing, in liason with the CIA, the madrassahs and Mujahideen training camps.

U.S. government support to the Mujahideen was presented to world public opinion as a "necessary response" to the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in support of the pro-Communist government of Babrak Kamal.

The CIA’s military-intelligence operation in Afghanistan, which consisted in creating the "Islamic brigades", was launched prior rather than in response to the entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan. In fact, Washington’s intent was to deliberately trigger a civil war, which has lasted for more than 25 years.

The CIA’s role in laying the foundations of Al Qaeda is confirmed in an 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, who at the time was National Security Adviser to President Jimmy Carter:



Brzezinski: According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, on 24 December 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979, that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the President in which I explained to him that in my opinion, this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

Question: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

Brzezinski: It isn’t quite that. We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Question: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn’t believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don’t regret anything today?

Brzezinski: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Question: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War? ( "The CIA’s Intervention in Afghanistan, Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser", Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998, published in English, Centre for Research on Globalisation, 5 October 2001, italics added.) Consistent with Brzezinski’s account, a "Militant Islamic Network" was created by the CIA.

www.globalresearch.ca...

I realize Al Quaeda and the Taliban aren't the same - but we also went to war to defeat the Taliban. I guess they are fake, too:

www.cnn.com...

Maybe unemployment wouldn't be so high if the CIA decided to recruit Americans instead of Muslims for their evil plans to make reality not reality. Or is it the other way around?

I will totally buy that the CIA is involved or has infiltrated these organizations. But people, there REALLY ARE groups of middle eastern gangs/cults/organizations (whatever you want to call them) that make it their life's work to do whatever they can to bring down western ideals and specifically the US and Western Europe. If you think that's somehow not reality than I can't even begin to have a civilized debate with you because you aren't thinking clearly.


Oh and the Soviet Union's undoing wasn't pulling out of Afghanistan (as last post suggests). Gorbachev oversaw the withdrawal of the final troops as PART of a much farther reaching overall plan. There are PLENTY of people in East Germany, the Ukraine, Poland, etc that fought for and eventually won their independence. Can we not re-write history please? We see pics of the Berlin wall coming down like it happened overnight. The fall of the Soviet Union was much more complicated than their failure in Afghanistan. Getting these now-independent countries out of the Soviet bloc took months and in some cases years.

Originally posted by tetra50

Originally posted by flashtrum

Originally posted by tetra50

Every single one of them cries when we say terrorist. That's why we send them a billion tons of tissues every year.

reply to post by mainidh

 

In many of said countries, the children of the poorest families sell tissues on the street for extra money. No BUWAHAHA here. This country supplies the need for all these activities, and the "fake" enemy, for the "fake" "unity" reinforces the need for this.
There was a time when I was a patriot. There was a time when I had faith. Ah, in spite of what I see now this may cause, I lament a time of believing.

To the OP, do you know WHEN the man in your posted link died hiking, by any chance?

Try telling Daniel Pearl's family there is no Al-Quaeda.

Boy for every single event or group now there is some counterculture trying to tell you what you see with your own eyes isn't really there.Their proof is on an Internet forum and nowhere else.

Good example, and I certainly do not either go along with, nor intend in any way to undermine the tragedy of what happened to Mr. Pearl. For that matter, many have died horrible, tragic deaths, and endured incredible torture, at the hands of what appear to be people from all religious persuasions, skin colors, etc. Maybe I've endured my share of torture, too....you wouldn't know, would you? I made a few other posts here in this thread, about "fomented and reinforced" enemies, intended to caution against what "appears to be." You bring up an incredibly salient point, in alluding to what we "see with our own eyes." And no, I don't think the only proof exists on some internet forum. There's plenty of science to back up the ability to trick you into thinking you are seeing something, and then define the "enemy," for you. That's just the science. You are on a conspiracy forum, where it is discussed ad nauseum, every moment of every day, attempts to "fake" things with street threater, staged scenes, and CGI, just to name a few ways, and where inculcation by advertising and media deliver an enemy for you to hate and direct your anger at.

It would be nice if it were just so simple, but the fact is it is not, and has not been for a very long time. And even time is suspect in the current paradigm. An easy answer to a multi-layered, multi-faceted issue does no one any good, and in fact, perpetuates the violence you speak of.

I can go along with you on some points you bring up but to suggest our real enemies are figments of the CIA's imagination is just not credible. Are the CIA involved in covert operations that can and probably are harmful to our own interests? I can't for sure say no to that point. But again to suggest these organizations are fake (see my link to today's CNN article on the murder of a woman and subsequent cheering that followed) is to in fact embrace ignorance, not deny it.

reply to post by flashtrum


Interesting, from different end of the spectrum, we are saying the same thing: denying is to guarantee the violence continues. It has, after all, for a very long time, no matter the face of the "enemy," or the "good guys."

The OP makes an extremely good and well sourced case for the historical basis for what is happening now. However, I use the word, historical, quite loosely, as we all know that this is dependent on who won and who wrote the account.

On my first reply to you, I had just looked at the CNN story and was thinking you would bring this up at some point.
And, of course, it is horrifying, no matter what. You said it was ridiculous to think that Muslim extremists attempting through violence to erode Western ideals was a figment of the imagination of the CIA. (I think this is what you said. Hope I am not wrong, there.) No one is saying that this a figment of anyone's imagination. What the OP laid out for you was the concerted and directed and long-term effort by our own government and its various agencies, branches, and employees to create, fund, provide weapons and backing, and financial and ideological reasons for this extremism to exist and to direct its actions, in an effort to override the very "western principles," of which you speak. Make no mistake: there is a contingency within the place you call your home, which seeks to control all economic, basic needs, communication and therefore, opportunity, which is supposed to be considered inalienable in our rights as human individuals by the very documents that the basis for our governing is supposed to occur. This contingency has used the extremist movement in many countries as a way of shutting down the foundation right here that I describe above, and to later apply this to all other countries as well. It is called global domination. It has been the intent for quite some time to achieve this, carried out and taken place in this place of Western ideals you speak of. Ask yourself about Imminent Domain. Do you realize you do not, in fact, own, without, question or challenge, the property you pay the mortgage for, taxes on, insurance, etc? I could go on in this vein, but will not as I am sure you get what I'm trying to say.

It is a well known military strategy, that you punish all in the group for the weakest link, and use the weakest link in this regard. Not only that, it is a well known Macchiavellian (many other names apply here, as well) strategy to manipulate the basic needs of the individuals that they must participate in a spreading taboo, as a justification for continuing said behavior and eventually applying it to everyone, by the justification that they, too, have participated. This is also at work here.

Why is ATS so full of ignorant people when it comes to the history of Al-Qa’ida,

The OP’s photo does not show the full quote but that doesn’t really matter because I suspect that its showing the wrong quote, the actually quote can be found by looking at the Guardian. Another point I really want to make here is why should I believe Robin Cook when he says Al-Qa’ida does not exist (he never said that by the way but has once been miss-quoted saying so) but I am also supposed to believe that PM Toney Blair is a liar.

Al-Qa’ida did exist it was a terrorist network set up by Osama Bin Laden independent of any western intelligence agency

reply to post by RobbieWilIiams


Please go read Jason Burks books, he makes it very very clear that Al-Qa’ida does in fact exist and while you at it why not read “talking to terrorists” by peter Taylor the BBC journalist who made the documentary the “power of nightmeres” he also say’s Al-Qa’ida does exist, that video clip you posted is a joke.

reply to post by AboveALLidiots

According to wiki

al-Qaeda (play /ælˈkaɪdə/ al-KY-də; Arabic: القاعدة‎ al-qāʿidah, Arabic: [ælqɑːʕɪdɐ], translation: "The Base" and alternatively spelled al-Qaida and sometimes al-Qa'ida) en.wikipedia.org...

Al-Qaeda or al-Qaida ? Same bull#

Just to be clear the Al-Qa’ida expert Abdel bari Atwan who met Bin Laden and has wrote extensively on the issue of Al-Qa’ida makes a point in his book “the secret history of Al-Qa’ida” that the correct spelling of “Al ’Qaeda” is in fact “AL-QA’IDA”

reply to post by iIuminaIi

But there is Al-CIAeda:

Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. - Robin Cook

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin

but I am also supposed to believe that PM Toney Blair is a liar.

what?....he would never tell a lie?

gullible is the word I have for you!

reply to post by zerozero00


The point I am making is why should I believe politician A over politician B just because politician A appears to back a “conspiracy theory”. In other words, why should I believe Robin Cook over any other politician just because he is saying “Al-Qa’ida does not exist” (he never actually said that by the way). All politicians have an agenda and they all lie.

reply to post by gladtobehere


Serously why do you 9/11 truth guys keep posting this video as some kind of proof that Al-Qa’ida does not exist then award the poster of the video with stars just because he/she has the ability to imbed a youtube vid.

Jason Burke the guy who you are all so grossly misquoting is an established author on the history of Al-Qa’ida and in all his writings he makes it very clear that the terrorist network that is (or was) Al-Qa’ida does (or did) exist, go read his books or some of the articles he has written. The BBC journalist who made the BBC documentary “The Power of Nightmares” Peter Taylor has also written extensively about Al-Qa’ida please go read his book “Talking to terrorists” again he makes it very clear that Al-Qa’ida does (again or did) exist.

Please not the reason I am saying “or did” is because there is a very strong argument for saying that Al-Qa’ida no longer exits as an independent group but it is now an ideology. On 9/11 the terrorist network known as Al-Qa’ida did exist.

I find your ignorance sometimes funny, only funnier when you all keep posting this video that can be debunked in seconds if you would only pick up a book.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


the logic is.....

Robin Cook spoke the truth = Dead

Tony Blair told porkies = European peace envoy to the middle east

its quite simple really......unless you don't believe in conspiracies and believe what you are told to believe!


how can blair be even consider for a role as a peace envoy?....its bs

reply to post by zerozero00


Who is to say Robin Cook was speaking the truth, why should I believe him over any other politician that is my point. It does not matter who I compare him to the point still remains, why should I believe Robin Cook over another politician.

Just want to note that my above point is actually rather mute because Robin Cook never actually used the words “Al-Qa’ida does not exist”.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


it don't matter what you think he said........ Robin Cook didn't believe there was an "Islamic terrorist" threat from Al Qaeda .......nor did he believe Iraq had WMD....Robin's problem was he spoke too loud in the houses of parliament

oh yer, any WMD found?...hell no!
thus giving credence to Robin and proof of Blair lying!

anyway, go do some research on both politicians then you can make an educated comparison regarding believability......like I did

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


He didn't say the words? Maybe I'm different, but it really doesn't get much clearer than how he actually said it.

The truth is there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaeda.

How is he supposed to be more specific? What you said is basically switching some words around and taking the rest out. The simplified version says pretty much the exact same thing as what he actually said.

The problem is, proving he was telling the truth. Good luck with that one.

Originally posted by mainidh
What have I seen with my own eyes....

Well, OK, maybe I should say without the rosey goggles of global worldliness.

I've seens many muslim people in my country, attack and trash anyone who asks questions. I've seen the level of violence they will go using the umbrella of Islam as a safe house. I've seen in this country, gangs of miscreants who call themselves muslim, gang rape and bash people with impunity. "We didn't know it was wrong?" they cry.

I've then seen in video and with reports from eye witnesses, muslims who behead christian children, burn down churches, destroy shops open during ramadan.

I've heard of artists killed in erupoe. No go zone areas in paris. Riots for weeks at a time in lakemba. Cartoonists threatened with death. A woman charged with blaphemy for naming a teddy bear mohammod. Another school teacher threatened with death for 'dropping a bag with a qur'an' in it. Sure sure sure..

Oh I've met 1 or 2 nice mulsims... WOW.

If the average mindset of the lower class muslim is to react with such anger and violence at the hand of nothing more than human nature, why is it so hard for your guys to accept there is a groups called al qaeda - the base - that wish to destroy us entirely?

YOU ARE IDIOTS.

they exist. They don't need me to prove it to you.

As I said, it won't be ME saying "Why did no one tell me."

It will be me kicking you out of my house when you have no where else to live.

sad.. sad state of affairs.. such ignorance..

Go hug a whale... hippies.

edit on 7-7-2012 by mainidh because: (no reason given)

You are the real idiot. Just because someone is Muslim and commits a crime, does it mean he/she did it in the name of god? If I run up to a random person and slap him in the face, does it mean I am doing it in the name of my religion?
So you've seen a dozen videos of a bunch of guys destroying property. Well let me tell you, I'm Muslim and have read every authentic Hadith and read the Q'uran, and I have never seen a verse saying destroy a place because this or that is happening. Basically, the youths have anger management problems, saw something defying their religion, and said,
"Hey look over there! A shop open during Ramadan! Lets attack it and later claim that we were doing it in the name of god!"
We all do this once in a while. Nothing that big. Just for your own personal gain.
I

reply to post by mikegrouchy


It's sounding more and more like Osama Bin Laden was killed because of what he knew, and not what he did. Trust the government to declare you a terrorist and make you disappear because they deem the knowledge you possess a matter of "national security" - whether it is or isn't.

Hey, if they can put a retired officer in prison for leaking data on war crimes committed by the U.S., there really isn't any further they can sink. Think about that when you're looking for a safehouse after blowing the lid on what REALLY happened on 9/11.