The United States and its comrade-in-arms, Al Qaeda

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 06:32 AM
link   
Source

Author is William Blum of www.killinghope.org



Afghanistan in the 1980s and 90s ... Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s ... Libya 2011 ... Syria 2012 ... In military conflicts in each of these countries the United States and al Qaeda (or one of its associates) have been on the same side. 1 What does this tell us about the United States' "War On Terrorism"?




Why is the United States supporting Islamic Terrorists in Libya and Syria who are persecuting Christians?


The"War on Terror" is a farce, a psyop. There is no "enemy" other than the CIA, on behalf of the White House.

That Al Qaeda is a US military asset is beyond question, what is in question is how this changes our support of the war. Even the brave soldiers, they're being played for fools. Of course, it's the "military industrial complex" that is really reaping the profits, but for the rest of the world it's looking bleak.




posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 07:19 AM
link   
reply to post by harryhaller
 


I too regularly read the “Anti-Empire Reports” form Mr Blum and I have even read his books.

In this article he is not arguing that Al-Qa’ida is a subdivision of the CIA, what he is arguing about is the morality of US foreign policy for one minute attacking Al-Qa’ida and the next minute supporting them when they are supposedly the enemy. To be clear I do not entirely agree with Blum’s assessment but I do give him some credit for the other points he makes such as America ranting on and on about the need for democracy in places like Libya yet its biggest allies in the Middle East, Bahrain are run by monarchies.

Morality requires some consistency and in American Foreign policy this consistency is lacking, you know “Gaddafi tortures people”…… “let’s ignore Guantanamo” it creates this “its ok for us to do it but not for you to do it”. The same applies to nuclear weapons for example America has a do as I say not as I do foreign policy and Blum is right to criticize it.


BUT I think you have missed this point entirely, Blum is not saying Al-Qa’ida is an asset of the US military, to my knowledge he has never made such a claim. Rather his is doing his usual, being highly critical of American foreign policy particularly when he perceives that America is attempting a regime change.
edit on 12-8-2012 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-8-2012 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 07:45 AM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


The point is that they are the same side, operating in co-operation for mutual benefit.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by harryhaller
 


Not it’s not Blum is quite clearly talking about the morality of America’s Foreign policy he is not saying that America is supporting Al-Qa’ida only that they have a similarly goal in Syria like they did in Libya.

One key difference to point out here is that In Libya Al-Qa’ida represented a very small proportion of fighters and the agenda was nationalistic not Islamic. However in Syria there is a larger presence of Al-Qa’ida however they are not working as part of the FSA, rather they are working separately but with the approval of the FSA.

That’s besides the point however because Blum is talking about morality at no point is he claiming that America has some kind of control over Al-Qa’ida as your thread implies.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 07:54 AM
link   
What a world we live in... And there is nothing we can do about it



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin

That’s besides the point however because Blum is talking about morality at no point is he claiming that America has some kind of control over Al-Qa’ida as your thread implies.






I can't keep up. Clear evidence that the US and Al Qaeda are allies and you say that's not good enough?

Obama has broken his own laws, you know the reason for strip searching invalids at airports and all manner of other stupidity. People have all been played, the US government are liars, death dealers and shysters. By their own admission.

Eurasia is at war with Eastasia. We've always been at war with them.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by harryhaller
 

I've missed the clear evidence personally... Al Qaeda didn't exist as such in the 80's and the vast majority of the Mujaheddin America trained formed the Northern Alliance that we linked back up with in 2001 and helped chase the Taliban and AQ fighters off into Pakistan.

It's an interesting argument to make if the suggestion becomes one of elements within the Government double dealing out the back door for Al Qaeda and it wouldn't be the first time that kind of stunt has happened...Iran/Contra comes to mind. We dealt with the Devil to help...well..some pretty questionable rebels.

However, there is one thing no one making this claim ever seems to answer. Why, if Al Qaeda is actually our own Asset, have they made a specific point and goal of killing CIA Case Officers and Supervisor level Officers whenever humanly possible? I suppose one could argue CIA would sell out our troops..tho I find that hard too, but CIA is supposed to be running the same group that is killing them at every turn? Thats kinda odd...



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by harryhaller
 




Clear evidence that the US and Al Qaeda are allies


Brilliant, just show me the evidence and we can end the debate right now.

Just to recap, in you OP you are saying quite clearly that “Al-Qa’ida” is a American millitary asset based on a source that is talking about the morality of American foreign policy and does not state that Al-Qa’ida is a American military asset. But if you have some proof to state otherwise, specifically in regards to Syria I would just love to see it.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Markive
What a world we live in... And there is nothing we can do about it



Why not?



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 08:44 AM
link   
We all know by now, at least those of us who pay attention, that the CIA loves to LARP around in other countries, posing as other groups of people.

Hell sometimes, they even create those groups, takes years, but they are really committed to taking down certain countries and destabilizing certain regions.

The insulting part is they lie about it. I mean the government lies about everything, but when it tells you the sky is red, when you can just look up and see it's clearly blue, well you get my point.

~Tenth



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by harryhaller
 

I've missed the clear evidence personally... Al Qaeda didn't exist as such in the 80's and the vast majority of the Mujaheddin America trained formed the Northern Alliance that we linked back up with in 2001 and helped chase the Taliban and AQ fighters off into Pakistan.

It's an interesting argument to make if the suggestion becomes one of elements within the Government double dealing out the back door for Al Qaeda and it wouldn't be the first time that kind of stunt has happened...Iran/Contra comes to mind. We dealt with the Devil to help...well..some pretty questionable rebels.

However, there is one thing no one making this claim ever seems to answer. Why, if Al Qaeda is actually our own Asset, have they made a specific point and goal of killing CIA Case Officers and Supervisor level Officers whenever humanly possible? I suppose one could argue CIA would sell out our troops..tho I find that hard too, but CIA is supposed to be running the same group that is killing them at every turn? Thats kinda odd...

Actually the entire premise is laughable.Yet this passes for reality among the"awakened"here at ATS.Star Rabbit for setting this issue strait.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


How can we?
I'm not up for being found a field like David Kelly, found chopped up in a suitcase in the bath or dead in bed with Polonium in me etc etc

If you say won 8 billion dollars on the lottery or you were very wealthy, you now have the resource to travel and find out things you've always wanted to know, or see the real news in front of your eyes instead of watching the particular gumpth the MSM are piping into our homes

I think that would put oneself in danger if you were to stumble upon such evidence and mention what you found out.

So back to the "what can we do about it"..



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
 

I've missed the clear evidence personally... Al Qaeda didn't exist as such in the 80's


Yes you missed the evidence.

I would tell you to research, but you know full well the history you're now trying to twist.

You're arguing against historical record. Al Qaeda is a product of the CIA, from the Afganistan war with the USSR in the 80's. Simple fact. It proves that the entire war on terror against all people of the world is in fat conducted by terrorists. These terrorists are based in the white house.

Lies lies and more lies .. that's all western military is these days.

By deception shalt thou make war.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by harryhaller
 

You don’t get this do you?

William Blum in the article you have posted does not say that Al-Qa’ida is a CIA controlled creation.


You're arguing against historical record

No, what I am arguing for is the historical record, what I am arguing against is your alternative historical account as it is based mostly on lies, paranoia, ignorance and bias views.


Al Qaeda is a product of the CIA, from the Afganistan war with the USSR in the 80's.

I would really love to see your evidence because I happen to know that Al-Qa’ida wasn’t created until 1988 when Bin Laden saw a new vision for the “Jihad” just as the Soviets were starting their retreat form Afghanistan.


It proves that the entire war on terror against all people of the world is in fat conducted by terrorists

So what because you make a unsubstantiated claim that has no historical basis it is proof that the war on terror is being waged by terrorists, the implication being that it is the American intelligence community and government that are the terrorists. I bet you can’t even comprehend the definition of terrorism with all its complexities.

Just also want to point out to you that currently the “War on terror” is being called the “war on al-Qa’ida” or “overseas contingency operations” by the Obama administration to avoid the negative connotations of a state of perpetual war and the Bush era.


These terrorists are based in the white house.

Names and evidence please



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
your alternative historical account as it is based mostly on lies, paranoia, ignorance and bias views.


After that i lost interest.

Now i know what a CIA agent sounds like



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by harryhaller
 




After that i lost interest.


No you lost the debate.



Now i know what a CIA agent sounds like


And there we have a perfect example of a conspiracy theorist’s response in defeat as soon as you realise that you’re out of your depth, that your debating out of your league you just go for the “ahhh you’re a government agent line”.

Do you really not have more of a counter argument other than those two little lines, after all you seemed pretty sure about all of this when you started this thread.

edit on 12-8-2012 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin

And there we have a perfect example of a conspiracy theorist’s response


Indeed, my inability to counter your lies means that the war against truth is winning.

Your comments confirm that clearly you see yourself as some kind of "opposition" to conspiracy theorists.

So you're not "like us", you're here with an agenda.

Consider yourself ignored henceforth.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 01:35 AM
link   



www.upi.com... 012/08/13/CIA-allegedly-overseeing-arms-into-Syria/UPI-93401344880820/
Aug. 13 (UPI) -- Syrian opposition officials claim the CIA is controlling weapons flow to Syrian insurgents.

"Not one bullet enters Syria without U.S. approval," a Syrian opposition, speaking in Istanbul, told The Australian newspaper.


So the CIA is really running things, who'd have thought that.

So much for civil war, rebels, ethnic anythings, this is an armed invasion.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by harryhaller
Indeed, my inability to counter your lies means that the war against truth is winning.


Seriously?.. What a pathetic comment.
You're constantly displaying your inability to comprehend the article you quoted yourself, and now when you go crashing down you say your lack of intelligence in this matter is what makes your truth 'win'?

I think you need to take a step back and look at what you read + what you write at a higher resolution. You really give the impression that you have no idea what you're rambling about, as explained thoroughly by more than one person, more than one time in this thread.

My honest opinion.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by IsraeliGuy

Seriously?.. What a pathetic comment.

My honest opinion.


Sorry, what?





new topics
top topics
 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join