BBC now admits al qaeda never existed

Of course al-CIAduh never existed before 9/11. According to terrorism czar Richard Clarke, Condi Rice hadn't even heard of them before she joined the BushCo neocon criminal cabal.

The "threat" from communism went away and the U.S. needed a new invincible "global" enemy. Osama bin Laden is simply Emmanual Goldstein from the novel 1984. A phony enemy meant to frighten and control the sheeple.

And who would name their new terrorist organization "the anus" or "the toilet", which is Arabic slang for al-Qaeda (the base.) Most likely nothing more than a CIA database of fighters recruited to fight the Soviets in the 80s.

Originally posted by masonwatcher
So if this position by the BBC is true the question is what portion of the official version of 9/11 is untrue?

Uhhh, all of it?

P.S. Many of the world's intelligence agencies believe Bin Laden has been dead since December 2001.



[edit on 8-8-2009 by GoldenFleece]

reply to post by jprophet420

I admit they changed the name, not the MO or the players.

Clearly you don't know very much but you have an opinion. Scary thought but as the saying goes "Different strokes....".

[edit on 063131p://pm3144 by masonwatcher]

Originally posted by masonwatcher
reply to post by jprophet420

 

I admit they changed the name, not the MO or the players.

Clearly you don't know very much but you an opinion. Scary thought but as the saying goes "Different strokes....".

So that means you either didn't read the post from external source that I made or didn't believe it. If you didn't believe it you should have said so.

reply to post by GoldenFleece


Sorry, I am dipping in and out of ats. What I meant to say was;

So if this position by the BBC is true the question is what portion of the official version of 9/11 is true?

a rhetorical question.

This is very interesting, its nice to see how he comes into all of this in a clearer picture, hearing how he used to be a CIA Tactician, this sheds a bit more light on the situation.

reply to post by jprophet420


I had a look at the link you provided and it refers to the mujahideen killing and torturing in their war against the Soviets.

Firstly, anyone fighting the Soviet invader was called mujahid. Of the mujahideen a small portion were foreigners that were both encouraged and permitted to go and help the Afghan mujahideen. Of those mujahideen that were foreign, their details were kept in a database or databases. No doubt for security to prevent Soviet infiltration of the resistance. I also think the US would have had access to this database since it was an ally of the Afghan mujahideen too.

The mujahideen were largely made up of civilians that took up arms to repel the Soviet invader. The vast bulk were locals, some of whom were mountain people with no literacy or awareness of the proper conduct expected in war. As far as they were concerned, they wanted the invading foreigners out of their country.

As you know the Soviets were a superpower that flooded the country with heavily armed soldiers. The kill ratios were horrendous and lopsided.

In this context you choose to condemn guerilla fighters of being less than observant of the Geneva Conventions while ignoring the atrocities committed by the Soviets. Further still, you condemn a mountain people for not being able to distinguish between a Germans and Russians and killing them.

I wonder what you would expect of mujahideen, who where ducking Hind helicopter gunships and T72s, to do with captured prisoners in a no holds barred war?

In your earnest efforts to draw correlations between the Bush creation of an international network of coordinated terrorists and the mujahideen, you are attempting point at the brutality of war as evidence of their same pedigree.

I have got news for you, war is very ugly and your point is weak and not relevant.

The existences of a database or databases has no bearing on the Bush creation of AQ. At the time of the Afghan war against the Soviets, bin Laden was a bit player who brought a fat wallet with him.

reply to post by masonwatcher


Yes its completely irrelevant that the pioneer of both organizations is the same person. My bad.

reply to post by jprophet420


There were many factions of different ideologies or ethnicities that wouldn't mix. Bin Laden was in one. He cannot be credited to have created or organised the moudjahideens. Besides, moudjahideens are not terrorists, they are trained to fight wars.

reply to post by masonwatcher


Your beginning to worry me i keep finding myself agreeing with you. Bravo i usually have to correct you on historical points but lately your spot on! Let me add Terrorism had nothing to do with soviet invasion of Afghanistan other than it allowed Muslim extremists the ability to learn combat skills. The mujahadeen were not equipped to take prisoners identify enemy they were small groups each acting independently for a common goal. Now that i think about it maybe that is the start of terrorism as we know it thats the basic skill set right there I will have to think about that.

Originally posted by Manouche
[
The CIA funded the mudjahideens in 79 and after, in 1979 it's not Al Qaeda. They are distinct denominations for two different things. Al Qaeda originates from the mudjahideens, everyone agrees I think.

Who remembers this .........

Rambo 3

Rambo’s commander, Colonel Trautman, whilst captured by the Soviet army, utters this prophetic warning regarding Afghanistan and the Mujahadeen:

“There won’t be a victory. Every day, your war machines lose ground to a bunch of poorly armed, poorly equipped freedom fighters. The fact is that you underestimated your competition. If you’d studied your history, you’d know that these people had never given up to anyone. They’d rather die than be slaves to an invading army. You can’t defeat a people like that.”

link





Just over a decade later .......Afghanistan revisited.

========================================





edit: to add link
[edit on 8-8-2009 by UmbraSumus]

[edit on 8-8-2009 by UmbraSumus]

I'm guessing Osama used the term Al Quaeda when Obama was doing his impersonation of him dressed for the part.

There are people who know the truth. There are people that hide the truth. There are people the seek the truth, there are people who find the truth.

Which one are you?

.

Enjoy the rest of your lives before you die because you will die that is for sure and may you all get what you deserve. Be aware that those involved will have to pay for it right down to my time spent typing these last few letters.

God bless.

I would like to give a shout out to my homies in the Sayeret Matkal.



[edit on 9-8-2009 by CaptainAmerica2012]

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by jprophet420

 

Which group are we discussing? The mostly Afghani Muslims that the CIA assisted through the ISI? Or the Arab Muslims funded by people like Osama Bin Laden? You do realize that there were TWO seperate groups in Afghanistan right?

There were a lot more than two groups. In total something like 300,000 people passed through training camps in the 1980s as part of Cyclone, though obviously not all of them fought in Afghanistan.

To talk of militant Islam as a single monolithic body of people or ideas or operations or methods is just ignorant. Look at Jundullah - we've been using them as part of the P2OG program to attack Iran to try to further the ongoing struggle between Sunnis and Shias.

There are a lot of people here who seem to have read one book that supports what they wanted to believe and are just parrotting what that book said. Saying that, Ghost Wars by Steve Coll isn't a bad place to start.

In building a case for invading Iraq and ousting Saddam Hussein from power, the Administration asserted that the regime of Saddam Hussein had a working relationship with the Al Qaeda terrorist network. The Administration stated that the relationship dated to the early 1990s, and was based on a common interest in confronting the United States. The Administration assertions were derived from U.S. intelligence showing a pattern of contacts with Al Qaeda when its founder, Osama bin Laden, was based in Sudan in the early to mid-1990s and continuing after he relocated to Afghanistan in 1996. Another pillar of the Administration argument rested on reports of contacts between Baghdad and an Islamist Al Qaeda affiliate group, called Ansar al-Islam, based in northern Iraq in the late 1990s. Some Administration officials have said there are indications Iraq was involved in the September 11, 2001 plot, although there are major differences
within the Administration on this analysis.

I`ve written that from the CRS report to Congress in 2004.

Was WMD an actually weapon or a group, think about it.

Saddam was doomed, he tried to regain his stance forming an alliance with Asnar Al-Islam, though that just upset Al Qaeda even more.

Czech intelligence reported on the Iraq-Atta meeting in which the Iraq Admin helped support & plan 9/11.

Al Qaeda never did 9/11, but it did push for it, it served several useful outcomes for Al Qaeda.

Getting rid of Saddam being one & Bin knew the USA would begin a war.

Al Qaeda does not mean base, ask any Arab.

Any google of the word has come to that conclusion, its in the media.

Where is Al Qaeda currently workin ?

IRAN.



[edit on 9-8-2009 by electrodom]

[edit on 9-8-2009 by electrodom]

So what if

Al Qaeda is a CIA Cointelpro type operation in which old Bin Laden is still a fully paid up member of the CIA, tasked with destroying the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Saddam etc etc from the inside.

Now how powerful is Al

That would be genius.

wow this is an old video.

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by masonwatcher

 

Yes its completely irrelevant that the pioneer of both organizations is the same person. My bad.

Like I said, you don't know very much but you have strong opinions.

reply to post by dragonridr


dragonridr you will have to agree with me on this; I am mostly right but on the occasions I get small details wrong, it is because of carelessness.

reply to post by masonwatcher

Its pretty hard not to just type **** you and take the warn. However, as i pointed out, the founder of both organizations is the same, and the MO is the same. I don't have the kind of intel to prove that the bulk of the people were the same either, but then you don't have access to that kind of intel either. And for you to front like you do is kind of weak.

However, we do have the educated guess, and all evidence points to the "freedom fighters" became "terrorists".

Note the definition of terrorist:

S: (n) terrorism, act of terrorism, terrorist act (the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear)

Which is exactly what "freedom fighters" do. During our revolutionary war thats what happened. Same with the civil war. And WWI. AND WWII. And Vietnam. And Iraq I. And Iraq II. AND Afghanistan. And to say that they are trained to fight a war, not terrorism, well you can say I have a lack of knowledge all you want but the fact is they are fighting a war right now. Thats facts, not speculation.

The West is at war with Al Qaeda, the West has always been at way with Al Qaeda.

Big Brother Blair declared there were weapons of mass destruction that could be directed against the UK in 20 minutes. Therefore there have always been weapons of mass destruction that could be directed at the UK within 20 minutes.