It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Al Qaeda: "The CI-A Team"

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 01:37 PM

The CI-A Team

Video and writeup by IIB

Prelude: The Cold War

Our story begins during the Cold War. The nature of the Cold War is remains fuzzy to most people, despite it lasting some 45 years, and the primary reason is because it was a covert war.

It is generally characterized as a battle between the 2 “superpowers”, or empires. It was best characterized as the United States (USSA) and the USSR competing in conducting covert operations in foreign nations on a global scale. It was obviously a struggle between 2 competing cross-spectrum economic systems and political ideologies. Extreme capitalism on the “right” (ultraconservatism), and extreme socialism (communism) on the “left’.

The means and methods the 2 sides used for control in their goals of imperial conquest were virtually identical:

1) Destabilization: This caused nation-states and various regimes to “need” the support of whichever side “they” identified with.

2) Revolutionary Uprisings: A primary vehicle for destabilization and covert regime change, or for ‘controlling’ “secular’ regimes. Revolutionary factions were trained in all forms of terrorism to reach their political goals.

3) Instigating Regional Conflicts: This caused the target nation states (wherever there were “interests”) to need to buy weapons from the military-industrial-complex driven empire-states (USSA & USSR). Often times the empires would even support both sides of a conflict if they had the opportunity.

Both sides were equally guilty of these crimes or at least the intentions of such. The victory all came down to efficiency. Obviously, the U.S. won, and so did the economic system as evidenced by today’s “globalization” (most global states were “nationalist” systems before the end of the Cold War).

U.S. Style Covert Control:

Choice examples of U.S. style Cold War “foreign policy”, for this essay, are as follows:

1: Create or support conservative violent uprisings to overthrow leftist regimes that maintained or sought to establish “nationalized” natural resources.
A choice example of this would be Nicaragua Contras who were radicalized Christian revolutionaries. This is what the “Iran-Contra” conspiracy was about.

2: Installation of right-wing military dictatorships.
The best example of this would be Operation CONDOR, which the U.S. supported all throughout the 1970’s. This conquest involved overthrowing the democratically elected governments of most of the nations in all of South America. It involved assassinations (terrorism), and the torture and murder of hundreds of thousands of political dissidents (people protesting the hijacking of their country).

Then for the other ‘heathen’ side of the globe (Middle Eastern Asia), different and somewhat opposite tactics were employed:

A: The installation of ‘secular’ regimes.
With this strategy the U.S. would put the secular regimes into power, if necessary, and then destabilize the region with radical Islamists. This would create a need for U.S. weapons and even presence in the form of military bases for “security”. Choice examples would be Saddam Hussein (who the CIA put into power), Egypt and so on. These are 1970’s examples. This sort of behavior actually goes back to 1953 with operation AJAX in Iran.

B: Supporting monarchist or similar repressive regimes.
A good example here would be Bahrain and Saudi Arabia; again, 1970’s examples. Ideally, in all of the covert conquests, existing regimes would be persuaded or coerced into playing the ideal roles for their regional scenarios.

There are other forms and examples, but these are the most prominent.

X: Destabilization:
Ultraconservative’s (radical Islamists for example) were/are still guided and supported overall by the U.S. to play out their roles in destabilizing their regions (thus requiring the regimes to need U.S. backing).

While the Islamists are ideal tools for destabilizing a region, they’re not what the U.S. considers ideal regimes to hold power. While the US may seek to destablize ‘regions’ to gain influence and control, conversely it seeks regimes that will stabilize US led “globalization” efforts to gain resources and cheap slave labor. Regimes that destabilize globalization, whether secular or radical Islamic, are typically what you’d find on “terrorist state sponsors” lists as evidenced by Libya, Syria, Iraq, Iran and so on. Islamist regimes, in resource rich lands generally tend to destabilize globalization so they’re generally not given enough support to achieve their goals, while the secular regimes are.

Islamist revival movements gained followers across the Muslim world, but failed to secure political power except in Iran and Sudan.
-9/11 Commission Report; p.53

A good analogy for this destabilization concept is when leaders use fear mongering to scare their populations into supporting imperialistic militarism or domestic police state programs. You scare their grasp on security and self-“control” and they’ll accept the “solution”. This tactic can and often is applied to not only individuals but also entire regions. It’s a particular favorite of imperialist powers as far back as well recorded history goes. Of course, the USSR used similar but somewhat politically-opposite tactics, and so on.

Now there’s destablization in general, and then there’s more direct thuggish destabilization. Ideally, you install regimes in regions that are sure to produce opposition to ensure the new regimes codependency on US weapons and “aid’. This is a sort of ‘endemic’ self-sustaining destabilization. But then there often comes a need for directly focused destabilization to attain specific political goals, and this is where ‘focus groups’ such as Al Qaeda come in.


[Note to admins: I tried posting this once and the browser crashed. I've checked all means and cant detect that post anywhere. If it surfaces zap that one instead of this please.]

posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 01:45 PM
Afghanistan 1979-89: The Cold War Final Showdown:

The general version we get is that we helped the poor Afghani’s defend their territory from the “Evil Empire” the USSR, or, the other “superpower”. Then, after they (the mujahadeen) “won” the imperialist driven conflict, some of them branched off into “Al Qaeda” and decided to go after US, the remaining “superpower’.

1977-1981: The Nationalities Working Group Advocates Using Militant Islam Against Soviet Union
1978: CIA Begins Covert Action in Afghanistan
July 3, 1979: President Carter Approves Covert Aid to Anti-Soviet Forces in Afghanistan
December 8, 1979: Soviet Forces, Lured in by the CIA, Invade Afghanistan
Early 1980: Osama bin Laden, with Saudi Backing, Supports Afghan Rebels
1982: Pakistani ISI Begins Recruiting Arab Fundamentalists to Fight in Afghanistan
Afghan opium production rises from 250 tons in 1982 to 2,000 tons in 1991, coinciding with CIA support and funding of the mujaheddin.
1984: Bin Laden Develops Ties with Pakistani ISI and Afghan Warlord

And now our story begins to take shape.

For perspective, however, one must consider the nature and relationship of the Bush’s and Saudi’s, which is rather common knowledge these days, but stretches back into the 70’s when GHWB was the CIA Director and established his Saudi / Bin laden relationship. Many of the ‘tactic’ examples above actually occurred during his tenures with the CIA in the 70’s and his vice-presidency during the 80’s, and much more.
[For space and time I wont cite or go into full detail about these dynamics or many of those aforementioned. If anyone has doubts they can easily be google’d or I can expand on all of these points in the ensuing debate, while I’m sure this particular topic has been covered many times already here at ATS]

This assistance was funneled through Pakistan: the Pakistani military intelligence
service (Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, or ISID), helped train the rebels and distribute the arms.

Post-Cold War: Finding an “Enemy”; Gaining a Tool

At least since the Cold War there has been a need for excuses to maintain our imperial posture while distracting Americans from noticing that we're an imperialist state. This is easy to do with "justifiable" and covert wars, but when the wars aren't justifiable or covert people begin to wake up to the reality. ‘Coincidentally’, a new “Islamofacsist” ‘empire’ (anti-US Imperialism ragtag groups scattered throughout a vast region) began to appear.

These groups were none other than the majuahadeen religious freedom fighters that “we’ trained during the Afghan War. Their number one leader was the Bush connected Saudi money handler that helped the CIA coordinate the mujahadeen uprising, while his family and their associates were the ones in the Middle East who stand to gain from his anti-American exploits and the future “War on Terror”. Ironically, the imperialist-elitist leaders from the U.S. even stand to gain from his groups future exploits.

1980 and on: The U.S. itself as a Tool for American Imperialism
The US is used for volunteer mujahadeen solider & fund-raising from early in the Afghan conflict. Mujahadeen support centers are established throughout the U.S.

A Muslim organization called al Khifa had numerous branch offices, the largest of which was in the Farouq mosque in Brooklyn. In the mid-80’s, it had been set up as one of the first outposts of Azzam & Bin Laden’s MAK.[40] Other cities which included branches of al Khifa included Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Tucson.

The upcoming group, “Al Qaeda”, is later useful for agenda setting terror attacks throughout the US. It’s usefulness is 2 pronged: On the one hand it has effective use for domestic policy setting, and the other bring use for a new ‘never-ending’ “War on Terror” scheme of global imperialistic domination.

It is later found to be connected with the OKC bombing, and of course 9/11. Of course, the OKC connectosn are completely ignored by the government as it weakens their anti-militia stance, and this is all about control.

1989: Azzam, the primary leader of the mujahadeen, and seeker of peaceful political movements for revolutionary change throughout the Middle East, is mysteriously assassinated. Western journalists would later assert that UBL was responsible the assassination.

Enter Iraq

Ever since Hussein was placed into power by the CIA, he became increasingly arrogant and impossible to play like a puppet by the US establishment. Efforts to use traditional CIA tactics like overthrows and assassinations were futile thanks to his use of body doubles and family centralized power.

1989: Usama returns home.

He denounced Saddam Hussein, claiming the Iraqi leader was about to invade Kuwait. In Saudi, such behaviour did not endear him to the authorities. He was told to shut up and refused, but all the time he was quietly advising the Saudi King Fahd of the danger coming from Iraq.

August 1990: Saddam invades Kuwait after being given the green light by the US.

Google Video Link

UBL pleads to Saudi royals to summon majahadeen to fight Hussein. The Royals, and the policy setting U.S., decide that the job is too big for the mujahadeen. UBL’s mujahadeen strategy dispatched to northern Iraq to fuel a Kurdish insurgency, to destabilize Hussein in his weakest moments. U.S. levels Iraqi forces, but then decides to back off since imperial control couldn’t be fully established with the multi-national coalition, plus Hussein might finally obey.

This plan fails, UBL attempts to work with Kurds through the 90’s. Saddam grows even more defiant to the US over time. We all know the rest.

Bin Laden had in fact been sponsoring anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan, and sought to attract them into his Islamic army.
-9/11 Commission Report; p.61


posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 01:48 PM
Libya: Putting Qadhafi in Check

"We are not in need of bin Laden, we don't need his money and we don't need his protection and we don't want to use him or be used by him.

LIFG's next big operation, a failed attempt to assassinate Qadhafi in February 1996 that killed several of his bodyguards, was later said to have been financed by British intelligence to the tune of $160,000, according to ex-M15 officer David Shayler.

Here classic Mafioso bullying “protection” tactics are used twofold: On the one hand Qadhafi can seek ‘protection” from Al Qaeda, or on the other hand he can “join” the United States in “combating” the former. It’s really a no-brainer for any regime that’s trying to seek respect in the “civilized” world, as to take option one would only secure his name in the history books as a ‘barbaric’ state sponsor of terrorism.

Ironically, the common thread running through Libya, bin Laden and the U.S. is the 1979-1988 Afghan war.

LIGF was founded in the fall of 1995 by Libyans who had fought against Soviet forces in Afghanistan.

Far from being soul-mates, Qadhafi and bin Laden have long been at odds; it was Qadhafi who, in March 1998, issued the first Interpol arrest warrant for bin Laden, a fact little known in the West.

Colonel Muammar Qadhafi's decades-long confrontation with the West has never given him much purchase among militant Islamists in Libya. In fact, the LIFG has waged a violent insurgency for ten years – with a hostility toward the eccentric dictator so implacable that it refuses even to negotiate with his envoys.

These groups came into open conflict with security services in the mid 1990s and also made a number of assassination attempts against Qadhafi, most notably in 1996 and 1998.

Operation a success, and the sellout:

A Canadian intelligence report says al-Qaeda-backed militants in Libya want to assassinate Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, providing a possible explanation for the dictator's recent attempts to improve relations with the West.

The United States and Britain announced last Friday that Col. Gaddafi had agreed to dismantle Libya's weapons of mass destruction programs. UN weapons inspectors are to arrive in the country as early as next week.

Yesterday, Col. Gaddafi called on other "rogue states" to follow his dramatic example if they were to prevent "tragedy" from striking their nations.

The Balkins: 1992-Present

I’d say this Al Qaeda supported history speaks for itself. Al Qaeda, the mujahadeen, weapons an heroin showed up right about the same time the US military was ready to move in. An echo of the Afghan War, but I thought “we” were done using these measures?

1991: US Convinces Bosnian President to Renege on Agreement
1992-1995: Pentagon Helps Bring Islamic Militants to Fight with Bosnians Against Serbs
1992-1995: KSM Fights and Fundraises in Bosnia
1993: Bosnian President Said to Grant Bin Laden Passport as Gesture of Appreciation
1993: Albanian Drug Smuggling Profits Fund Muslim Arms Buildup in Balkans
1993: US Begins Construction on Airfield Used for Bosnia Arms Pipeline
1994: Bin Laden Meets with Albanian Government Officials
August 30, 1995: NATO Launches Bombing Campaign Against Bosnian Serbs
1995-1998: Alleged Ties Between Al-Qadi Charity and Terrorist Groups Are Uncovered; No Action Taken
February 1995: Albanian Narco-Terrorism Destabilizes the Balkans
1996-1999: Albanian Mafia and KLA Take Control of Balkan Heroin Trafficking Route
February 1998: State Department Removes KLA from Terrorism List
Shortly Before February 1998 and After: KLA Receives Arms and Training from US and NATO
May 7, 1998: Al-Qaeda Leader Visits Bosnia; US Charity Is Funding Al-Qaeda There
October 1998: Islamic Conference Calls KLA Struggle ‘Jihad’
1999: US and British Special Forces Train KLA Operatives in Albania
Late March-June 1999: NATO Begins Bombing Campaign Against Serbs
June 2001: The KLA Begins an Offensive in Macedonia
Late June-Early July 2001: KLA Forces Are Rescued by US in Macedonia
July 15, 2001: The KLA Begins Ethnic Cleansing of Tetovo-Kosovo Corridor in Macedonia
September 20, 2002: Saudi Charity in Bosnia Linked to Al-Qaeda

In the 1990s the US and UK led a military campaign to restore peace to Yugoslavia. The allies celebrated their status as the peace police of the world. A few years later, we learn that the war opened the door for the US oil industry to a vast new oil supply that had just been discovered.

The Balkan Route was once the dominant route for trafficking opiate products to Europe. … To make the trip through the Balkan Route, opium, morphine base, and heroin from Afghanistan are shipped directly to Iran or are transported to Peshawar or Quetta in Pakistan before crossing the Iran-Pakistan border for transport to Turkey. From there, opiates are then trafficked through Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary and Czechoslovakia or through a southern leg in Albania and Yugoslavia before heading to the rest of Europe. The seaport of Karachi, Pakistan is also a main trafficking center for shipments overseas.

[Note: There has been a decrease from 80% to 50% through this region, but it can be said that it’s now US controlled, while it wasn’t before.]

posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 01:52 PM
'Honorable Mention': The Philippine's

They were a US colony for nearly 50 years. Eventually they were given 'independence' after WW2.

They finally booted our bases between 91-92, and "Al Qaeda" support moved in shortly thereafter.

In September 16, 1991, despite lobbying by President Aquino, the Philippine Senate rejected a treaty that would have allowed a 10-year extension of the U.S. military bases in the country. The United States turned over Clark Air Base in Pampanga to the government in November, and Subic Bay Naval Base in Zambales in December 1992, ending almost a century of U.S. military presence in the Philippines.

Since its inception in the early 1990s, the group has carried out bombings, assassinations, kidnappings, and extortion in their fight for an independent Islamic state in western Mindanao and the Sulu Archipelago with the stated goal of creating a pan-Islamic superstate

President Arroyo has demonstrated total support for the U.S.-led campaign, offering intelligence, logical support, and the use of Philippine air space, and opening two former American military bases, Clark Air Force Base and Subic Bay. Most recently, she has agreed to receive U.S. troops’ advice and logistical support in the country’s fight against the Abu Sayyaf.

By sending American troops to aid Filipino forces in defeating the Abu Sayyaf, the Philippines has become the only country besides Afghanistan to receive direct involvement of U.S. troops in the fight against terrorism.

In "The CI-A Team" video, note the analogy with the 80's TV show action superhero theme, as thats how "Osama" is portrayed: an invincible TV show character, who ironically enough is like the equivalent of 'Ahnold' or Sly Stallone celebritydom in the Middle East.

For those who doubt all of this and maintain that UBL is a legitimate enemy of the US establishment, learn about his “phone”:

And how “we” had plenty of warnings that 9/11 was coming:
[Link ]

More information on U.S. drug “interests”:

And, finally, where this American Imperialism is heading:

[edit on 4-4-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

[edit on 4-4-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

[edit on 4-4-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 04:52 PM
I have to give this a bump.
Simply an awesome presentation.

This deserves attention and recognition.

You have voted IgnoranceIsntBlisss for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 05:08 PM
Awesome post.
I love informative posts that backup their theories.

While Alqaeda is a foe, I think they exist a little more in paper, and in the minds than actually as fighters.

In the famous footage we see on TV of Osama surrounded by militia men, these men were actually paid to come and stand around for the purpose of that video.
They were even told to bring their own weapons.

Alqeada, I believe is a mentality more than a group.
If your in jihad against the infidels, your alqaeda.
Osama never actually referred to them as alqaeda.

Another execellent docco is Power of nightmares.
It maps out how Alqaeda came to be, and has some excellent footage.

posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 07:24 PM

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

In the famous footage we see on TV of Osama surrounded by militia men, these men were actually paid to come and stand around for the purpose of that video.
They were even told to bring their own weapons.

Any evidence of that?

Alqeada, I believe is a mentality more than a group.
If your in jihad against the infidels, your alqaeda.
Osama never actually referred to them as alqaeda.

Another execellent docco is Power of nightmares.
It maps out how Alqaeda came to be, and has some excellent footage.

Al Qaeda is a global network working along with others. Thats why Osama Bin Laden himself mentions about exporting Jihad to other countries.

posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 07:34 PM
Yes, but alqaeda doesnt exist in a form of hunderds of people sitting around waiting for orders.
Osama doesnt give orders like most think.

Like I said, go watch 'the power of nightmares' it gives you a very different understanding compared to what the MSM tells you.

posted on Apr, 9 2007 @ 08:35 AM
FACT: Hundreds of thousands of 'radical islamists' exist in the world, and they're known as the "mujahadeen" (how I usually spell it at least).

FACT: UBL helped fund and coordinate these mujahadeen (had-een, hi-deen, etc) in Afghanistan during the clandestine Soviet-Afghan War.

FACT: Mujahadeen training camps were still in use and some even assisted by UBL up until shortly after 9/11. They were mainly supported and exploited by the Pakistani ISI.

From there thousads of Islamists traveled there from all over the 'Muslim World' to train as insurgents (see definition of). UBL, being a supporter of and supported by the ISI and said camps has/had access to to recruiting volunteers to do various operations. Even the 911 Commission Report states that UBL basically rounded up the 911 hijackers after getting the 'planes' plan by KSM and approving to support it. UBL has/had inside access, or better access than most for gathering up recruits for various operations, but the important part is that most of all Mujahadeen are/were at said camps to learn how to overthrow their governments in their homelands to install religious theocracies, or "insurgencies". [See: destablization arguments above.]

In the "P.o.N.", Adam Curtis hit it pretty dead on, but I wouldn't go as far as some of his experts do in the 'no alqaeda' concept.

To understand the AlQaeda phenomenon a few perspectives should be entertained:
UBL does have connections and resources comparable to a mafioso / black market sort of infastructure. This doesnt mean that everyone he's "connected" to should be viewed as "Al Qaeda Operatives" no more than a crack dealer on the street corner should be viewed as part of the drug cartel(s) that supplies the city. Nor are all drug cartels one in the same because they're all in the same line of business in exploiting or being employed by the same governments.

Whatever "Al Qaeda" really is, or whoever is truly "in" "it", does function on a parallel that mimics "spies" or the methods of intelligence agencies, which is no surprise as they were originally trained by the CIA/ISI, and remained trained by at least the ISI.

Celebrity-dom: UBL is like Arnold Schwarzenegger over there, or Tom Cruise. I belive it was Cruise who said he'd leave the contry if Bush was given the 2000 US Presidency. Well, he didnt leave, and neither did his millions of fans and scientologists. UBL's messages appeal to the attitudes common Muslim'er, but that doesnt mean that the common Muslim'er is ready to fly planes into buildings.

Conversely, the Mujahadeen movement is NOW thriving thanks to Imperial USSA invading Afghanistan and especially Iraq, because now the US has done specifically what the USSR did to start where all of this came from to begin with. ... A "war on terror' is impossible.

[edit on 9-4-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

posted on Apr, 17 2007 @ 12:23 AM
Well, I've heard (read) Al Qaeda initially was the name of database in some Mecca or Jedah bank back in the 80s, an electronic account system with an electronic messages system attached.

BTW, excellent, well founded OP, IIB

What I would say, a message board is the origin of the name Al Qaeda.

Some day it might be ATS to be blamed being behind it all.

posted on May, 25 2007 @ 09:07 PM

This news report from the day of 9/11 confirms several of the cases I've listed above. You might notice that the only example listed that wasn't "on our side" is Somalia.

posted on May, 25 2007 @ 09:29 PM
Bin laden is nothing more than a figure head, somebody that can put a face and voice to the Al-qeada movement.

He is the martyr and the idol, it doesn't matter if he is alive or death, Al-qeada will still be active and running with plenty of bodies to give themselves to the service.

Ideologies can not be kill, for the looks of how the war on terror has been fought our government doesn't want it death either.

Great thread.

posted on May, 25 2007 @ 10:16 PM

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Like I said, go watch 'the power of nightmares' it gives you a very different understanding compared to what the MSM tells you.

The Power Of Nightmares was produced by Achaeron Films for the BBC, and is just about as mainstream as you can get.

[edit on 25/5/07 by Implosion]

posted on May, 25 2007 @ 10:26 PM
Yeah, funny you find a maintstream docco that actually has some truth in it these days!

posted on May, 25 2007 @ 10:53 PM
So Saad Bin Laden, his son, who is running the operations in Iraq through Iran is also a CIA operative? Nice post but Al-qeada has become not just an organization but an ideology. This is war thousands of years in the making and the weapons are now available to finally end it. If you think that Iran will not use nuclear weapons, you are deluded.

There is much more to Al-qeada than Bin laden, he is but a small part of a much much larger picture.

posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 10:25 AM
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I have no idea how I missed this thread!

still reading and doing some research of my own because of what is happeing in Venezuela and used the ATS search feature... and this came up first. Great info.

kudos... s & f from me.

posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 11:48 AM
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

sorry to reply twice but I am gobsmacked at the info. Watched the Truth is Viral again and it is so gut wrenching to see what has happened and then to read this.

new topics

top topics


log in