Washington’s Al Qaeda doesn’t exist and never did

Discussion in 'Politics' started by poncho, Dec 12, 2013.

  1. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    TAMPA, December 11, 2013 — For twelve years, the Bush and Obama Administrations have promoted a narrative about the War on Terror. It has changed slightly in superficial ways, as when President Obama gave it a new name, but the crux of the narrative has not changed. The United States is fighting a war against a worldwide terrorist organization called al-Qaeda, formerly headed by über-terrorist Osama bin Laden.

    Americans are led to believe that this organization has a single mission against the United States and is directed by a hierarchy of terrorist leaders, all reporting up to a senior command located somewhere in Afghanistan. Many of the lawmakers and cabinet personnel who promote this narrative likely believe it themselves, at least to some degree.

    Washington sees al-Qaeda the way it sees itself, a centralized, top-down hierarchy with a chain of command reporting up from every corner of the earth. It makes for a good story, but it’s not even remotely true. Virtually every incident involving this fictional organization refutes the narrative.

    < snip >

    All of this leads to one, inescapable conclusion. The United States has accomplished nothing in twelve years of war in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Iraq War actually expanded the presence of Islamic militant groups and led to a fundamentalist Islamic state there, with strong ties to Iran.

    Rather than waging a war against a centralized, top-down organization with divisions in several Middle Eastern countries and agents embedded all over the world, Washington is actually playing a deadly game of “whack a mole,” with new moles popping up out of new holes every time Washington swings its mallet.

    That means that triumphant announcements about killing “the number three man in al-Qaeda” mean absolutely nothing. That al-Qaeda hierarchy doesn’t exist. Instead, independent groups all over the world discover a kinship with each other all centered around one phenomenon: U.S. intervention in their nations. Intervention could be military, covert or merely aid to a local dictator.


    http://communities.washingtontimes....hingtons-al-qaeda-doesnt-exist-and-never-did/

    The MSCM is finally catching up with the truth.
     
    #1 poncho, Dec 12, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 12, 2013
  2. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,293
    Likes Received:
    783
    I have never understood AlQueda to be "this organization has a single mission against the United States" on this board or anywhere else in the world nor do I know anyone who does. That is a mischaractericterization at best.
     
  3. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    You're more informed than most Rev. And I've done all I can to make sure BB members are more informed than the "majority" of people outside this board.

    Whether they like it not! :smilewinkgrin:
     
    #3 poncho, Dec 12, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 12, 2013
  4. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,293
    Likes Received:
    783
    Most do not believe that. What they believe is that Alqueda has a much bigger agenda and the US is only part of that.
     
  5. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    It's been my experience that most people believe whatever the mega corporations (through their control of the mass media) tell them. Of course that has been changing lately.

    People are learning the corporate media has one purpose make that two. To manipulate public opinion in favor of corporate interventionism. Be it in the affairs of other nations or every aspect of our lives here at home. And to keep us divided and arguing amongst ourselves. To "keep the barbarians from colluding" (to put it in terminology ZB used in The Grand Chessboard) and figuring out who is really to blame for running America into the ground.

    Government is no longer at the top of the power structure. Mega multinational corporations are.

    I doubt very much the MSCM will "catch up" to that truth anytime soon though.

    Boy Howdy! But when they do expect a big "I told you so" from me.
     
    #5 poncho, Dec 12, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 12, 2013
  6. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,189
    Likes Received:
    611
    Of course this is false in China, India, Russia, and the Muslim nations, or roughly 85% of the world.

    In the West, to show that multinational corporations are really in charge they enjoy being regulated and taxed by the government and willingly comply with government programs like Obamacare. :)

    BTW, you just distracted, deflected, and went off topic in YOUR OWN THREAD!
     
    #6 InTheLight, Dec 12, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 12, 2013
  7. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    It's called a back story. That's probably a strange term to someone that gets all their info from mega corporations and their useful media idiots that never offer them. In my world it's all about historical context. In your world it's all about reacting to what the corporations tell you today.

    The insurance companies wrote "Obamacare". Google it and learn something.

    Which is the greater, the lender or the borrower?

    “When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” Napoleon Bonaparte

    Napoleon built an empire. what have you done?
     
    #7 poncho, Dec 12, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 12, 2013
  8. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    Poncho at home with his favorite family pet ...

    [​IMG]
     
  9. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    [SIZE=-1]5. No trolling. Trolling consists of provoking large volumes of responses by posting absurdities, deliberately offensive insults, etc.[/SIZE]

    [SIZE=-1]12. Limit image size. Any image used in a post may not exceed the size of the BB logo at the top of the homepage.

    http://www.baptistboard.com/postingrules.html

    You're big on telling others they have to obey the "laws" but you aren't real big on doing it yourself are ya?




    [/SIZE]
     
    #9 poncho, Dec 12, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 12, 2013
  10. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    That's not true about the communists. They are still around the edges in Russia and very much in control in China. They are threatening in Venezuela, the jungles of Colombia, in Ecuador, Bolivia and Nicaragua.

    And that does not take into account all of the communist professors in the Ivy League and all of the communist preachers in the mainline churches and all of the communist bureaucrats in Washington DC.

    Furthermore the US military power to contain North Korea/China is now in question when combined with the rising tide of Islam and Iran's march to the atomic bomb.

    Finally, Islam is more threatening than communism because Islam could not be broken by communism. As for the notion that our presence in Saudi caused the trouble, it is true that we have so much oil that we do not need Arab oil in this country, however we still are Europe's dog and we come running with money and blood when Europe whistles and they send us for their oil. Moreover, we are protectors of Saudi Arabia because the Saudis could not fight their way out of a wet paper bag and the Saudis, as recent news emphasized, do not want a nuclear Iran anymore than the Israelis do.

    Communism is not dead. It is in the White House. If you think Islam is nice, good live in Algeria.
     
  11. Sapper Woody

    Sapper Woody
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,112
    Likes Received:
    104
    I just got a pen and wrote down this date. Because, on this auspicious day, I agree with Poncho. At least to a greater degree than I think I ever have.

    Working in intelligence, those of us on the ground know that not all terrorist attacks come from one group. In Iraq in our area, we had Al Qaeda, ISI, and the Mujahedeen. Now, most attacks were attributed to ISI (Islamic State of Iraq), but most were independent cells. ISI took credit for every uncredited attack, and it was "cool" to be ISI even if you weren't really.

    Now, in Afghanistan, the majority of the attacks were Taliban. In fact, I can't think of any intelligence that credited a different group.

    The goal of the terrorists over there isn't the downfall of America per se. But that certainly fits in with their agenda. Their goal is the spread of Islam and their own power base by any means necessary.
     
  12. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,293
    Likes Received:
    783
    What is it you agree with that its all the US fault?
     
  13. Sapper Woody

    Sapper Woody
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,112
    Likes Received:
    104
    Not at all. But I agree that we aren't fighting a single, unified group, and that our presence has spurred the creation of independent cells.

    I make it a point to never argue about whether we should have been in Iraq and Afghanistan. But I know that right or wrong, we handled it wrong. We should have gone in there, completed a stated objective, and then got out.

    It became a self perpetuating war. We were only staying there because attacks kept happening, but attacks only kept happening because we stayed there.

    One of the senior intelligence officers of our region in Iraq once told us in response to some Intel that stated that a battalion of Al Qaeda was on the area, "They aren't battalions, brigades, and companies. They are just a few handfuls of dudes tryin' to make a buck by placin' IEDs for someone else." We all understood that there wasn't one head man planning all these attacks, but that our presence had perpetuated a hand full of groups that wanted us gone (usually because we challenged their corrupt power base).

    Most of the people in both countries were grateful for our presence. But a very vocal and active minority wasn't. Those are the people who attacked us most. Very rarely was an attack actually planned and executed by Al Qaeda.

    Like I said, Afghanistan was different, probably due to the landscape and living differences. In Afghanistan, a vast majority of the attacks were Taliban. These were more thought out and planned.
     
  14. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    I don't think that the Bush administration ever thought that Bin Laden controlled all the Islamic terrorism in the world. However, attacks were worldwide and Bid Laden was behind some of them here and there. Nevertheless, with the death of Bin Laden attacks, Islam has continued to be on the march and we are not in struggles in North Africa as well as Asia. We are not safe in this country and Europe is very vulnerable.

    Also, communism is alive and well and China/North Korea are not our friends. Putin is a KGB general, as you know.

    Islam is more dangerous than communism because Islam is more fanatical and torture by communism did not break Islam in Afghanistan or anywhere else.

    The key to breaking Islam is to develop America's vast oil resources and take away the main source of income of the Islamic world. Islam must be contained as communism has been. Islam is only quiet when the Islamic states become poor and unable to afford weapons.

    Wouldn't the recent attack in the Kenyan mall where innocent shoppers were murdered prove that Islamic terrorism is alive and well?

    People who think that Islam is benign should move to Algeria. Algiers may be lovely this time of year--you tell me.
     
  15. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    The "regime change" policy is at fault. When you go into another nation and remove the "regime" that has been in control you destabilize the country and it tends to create alot of chaos. Like "civil war".

    It gets alot of people killed. This group attacks that group until one group is either all dead or forced to relocate to another location as refugees.

    One of those groups that are getting attacked are Christians.

    Washington removes the "regime" in control and the rest happens automatically. If you want to claim that what ever happens after the "regime change" isn't Washington's fault you could but that would be the same as trying to convince someone that you didn't pour the water out of the bottle you just opened the bottle and held it upside down.

    Funding and arming "Jihadis" for purposes of "regime change" (see Libya and Syria) is another thing wrong with the "regime change" policy.

    "Hey we just fund and arm them it's not our fault they run around murdering people and blowing things up."

    Sometimes even the US should take responsibility for it's actions Rev. Or are we too "exceptional" for all that?
     
    #15 poncho, Dec 15, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2013
  16. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,293
    Likes Received:
    783
    The title to the op is Alquaeda never existed do you believe that?
     
  17. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Al Qaeda never existed as a centralized global terrorist network as the neocons and corporate media sold it.

    I starting posting on this about the same time Bush and Cheney were trying to link Iraq to 9/11 while saying they never tried to link Iraq to 9/11 while they were watching videos of themselves tryng to link Iraq to 9/11.

    Remember that? I had a huge problem trying to make sense of their propaganda campaign back then because they were so bad at it. I mean Rumsfeld was on national tv saying "I never said that" while there was a video of him saying it looping in the background! Understanding how it ever worked to fool so many people for so long is beyond my powers of comprehension. Cognitive dissonance is the only reason I can come up with.

    I got the same type response back then that you just used above.

    Reject all the evidence go directly to default setting and accuse opposition of believing something outlandish or "extreme".

    "So you don't believe terrorists exist huh?"
     
    #17 poncho, Dec 15, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2013
  18. Sapper Woody

    Sapper Woody
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,112
    Likes Received:
    104
    No, the title to the OP is "Washington's Al Qaeda doesn't exist...". You left out "Washington's", a key point. And I agree wholeheartedly that Al Qaeda as a central unified group doesn't exist. The organization exists, but not as it is perceived. Not sure why this is a big deal. Facts are facts.
     
  19. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,293
    Likes Received:
    783
    Excuse me who made it a big deal?
     
  20. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    Al Qaeda is still in the news. Even the ultra-leftist New York Times newspaper recently was talking about Al Qaeda and Syria.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/04/w...roups-gain-in-turmoil-across-middle-east.html

    Libertarianism sits on a three-legged stool: 1. They have adopted the leftist foreign policy of the Democrat Party because that makes Libertarians seem more popular with the Democrats. 2. Libertarians pretend to support the GOP conservatives on economic policy but it is mostly talk because Libertarians are mostly wealthy and quite insulated from economic shocks. 3. Libertarians have an anything-goes social policy that is neo-barbarian. It is mostly inspired by the Democrats, who also favor abortion, gay marriage, legalization of drugs, and legalization of prostitution.
     

Share This Page

Loading...