Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is Al Qaeda Just a Bush Boogeyman? (LA Times)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
eric144 Donating Member (67 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-11-05 03:43 PM
Original message
Is Al Qaeda Just a Bush Boogeyman? (LA Times)
Robert Scheer

January 11, 2005

Is it conceivable that Al Qaeda, as defined by President Bush as the center of a vast and well-organized international terrorist conspiracy, does not exist? To even raise the question amid all the officially inspired hysteria is heretical, especially in the context of the U.S. media's supine acceptance of administration claims relating to national security. Yet a brilliant new BBC film produced by one of Britain's leading documentary filmmakers systematically challenges this and many other accepted articles of faith in the so-called war on terror.

"The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear," a three-hour historical film by Adam Curtis recently aired by the British Broadcasting Corp., argues coherently that much of what we have been told about the threat of international terrorism "is a fantasy that has been exaggerated and distorted by politicians. It is a dark illusion that has spread unquestioned through governments around the world, the security services and the international media."

Stern stuff, indeed. But consider just a few of the many questions the program poses along the way:

If Osama bin Laden does, in fact, head a vast international terrorist organization with trained operatives in more than 40 countries, as claimed by Bush, why, despite torture of prisoners, has this administration failed to produce hard evidence of it?

How can it be that in Britain since 9/11, 664 people have been detained on suspicion of terrorism but only 17 have been found guilty, most of them with no connection to Islamist groups and none who were proven members of Al Qaeda?

Why have we heard so much frightening talk about "dirty bombs" when experts say it is panic rather than radioactivity that would kill people?

Why did Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld claim on "Meet the Press" in 2001 that Al Qaeda controlled massive high-tech cave complexes in Afghanistan, when British and U.S. military forces later found no such thing?


http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-sc...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LibertyorDeath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-11-05 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. Love that headline!
The truth starts to seep out.

Cheers to the BBC

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
39. BBC: The Power of Nightmares, Part 1 ---------------------> mp4
Edited on Wed Jan-12-05 09:06 PM by bpilgrim
http://news.globalfreepress.com/movs/PON/PON-1.160x120....

part 2&3 comming soon :evilgrin:

audio video not so hot (GIGO) copied from realplayer

quicktime will play it for ya for free ;->

http://apple.com/quicktime/download

psst pass the word ;->

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibertyorDeath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #39
42. Thanks for this
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibertyorDeath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-11-05 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
2. W E L C O M E ! to DU
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ruffhowse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-11-05 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
3. My feelings exactly. I've felt this way ever since 9/11. It was just the
boogy man conservatives needed to push their agenda forward. All this homeland security crap is a waste of time and money, and diverts the public's already short attention span away from more important things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-11-05 04:04 PM
Response to Original message
4. Wow! Did that appear in the print version or just online?
Even if it's just an op-ed, it's great the LA Times is putting it out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Briar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-11-05 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
5. What a pity that the new series of 24
seems to be specifically designed to pump up the Power of Nightmares. We need more articles like this, and no fictionalised scenarios which endorse and justify the Bushreich's policies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eric144 Donating Member (67 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-11-05 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. What terrorists do
Edited on Tue Jan-11-05 05:35 PM by eric144
is

1) destroy things
2) claim responsibilty

if they don't get what they want

3) repeat 1 and 2

A good example was the provisional IRA whos campaign lasted almost 30 years, not the two hours that Bin Laden managed.

In America, you only got number one which shows that these were very strange terrorists indeed. None of the alleged hoardes of islamic fundamentalists has even broken an American window since 9/11. The idea that US intelligence went from 100% incompetence to 100% efficiency overnight isn't credible.

I personally do not believe any of the Bin Laden confession videos were real.

Thanks for the welcome by the way !




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashmanonar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #6
26. this was a thought i had...
terrorists don't strike and hide, they strike and fuckin PARADE IT...they show off to the world what they're doing, bc that leads to more funding and some legitimacy. (the old all publicity is good publicity quandary.)

another thought that i've seen pondered, but also thought of myself...is OBL really an international terrorist? or is he a figurehead that bush uses to scare people? last i heard, before the 911 attacks, OBL was a CIA asset...not a CIA target...then suddenly, he becomes evil incarnate...

where did this switch take place?

oh, and another thing...does anyone know what al qaeda means? do we have any arab-language speakers on DU? please pm or reply if you do know, it may help to pin down bush's atrocities...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kurtyboy Donating Member (968 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #26
37. I said from day one that OBL was the real-life version of
Keyser Sose--the imaginary villain in "The Usual Suspects"---nothing more than a figment used to scare people into political action. Even if there is a real OBL (it seems there is), the myth is bigger than he'll ever be, by design.

That said, on to your question. If memory serves correctly, the literal translation of al Qaeda is "the base". It was not originally an organization name, but rather just the check-in point for mujahadeen fighters from all over the Islamic world on their way to fight Soviets in Afghanistan. The Base was actually located in Pakistan, and the CIA had their hands buried deep into the bowels of it. When the fighters checked in, they gave their names, nations of origin, next-of-kin contact info, and so on. This way they could be identified and tracked in the war effort.

After the defeat of the Soviet forces in Afghanistan, the database remained--several tens or even hundreds of thousands of names and addresses of Islamic warriors. OBL used this databaase later to organize a new kind of resistance to a different "imperialist" which had "occupied" Saudi Arabia and built bases there in the first Gulf War. Of course, this was the United States. OBL deamnded that the US get its troops out of Saudi Arabia, home of the holiest Islamic sites.

Only later did OBL add the Palestinian conflict to his list of beefs--probably to shore up wider Islamic support. The grand irony in it all is that the US is now pulling all of our troops out of Saudi Arabia, mothballing the bases, and moving to Iraq--where new PERMANANT bases are being constructed. Because of 911, and the subsequent "linking" of Iraq and al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden got compliance to his demands.

Crap, what a crazy world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashmanonar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #37
43. THANK YOU!
i've been wanting to know what al qaeda meant.

well then, it makes much more sense. it also tells us where obl probably is...*coughpakistancough*...oh, but we can't just invade there, they've got nukes and wouldn't be afraid to use them.

so i guess we just let him go free (if he actually is a terror group leader), so bush has a boogeyman to pull out 4 years from now so jeb gets elected.

meh, this all doesn't make sense, must be too late at night...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sauber Donating Member (9 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #37
51. Re "I said from day one that OBL was the real-life version of"
I agree on our involvement in Afghanistan/Soviet invasion. I'm halfway through a book that says that the Pakistani ISI did not allow us any direct link to the fighters though so I'm not sure we kept a database of all of them. though no doubt we were aware of who the power players were. Interestingly Bin Laden hasn't turned up on the radar in the book.

Question: by stating that a database exists and that OBL got it from faction groups in the ISI aren't you in fact refuting R. Scheers claim that Al-Qaeda didn't exist. To me this sounds like your saying that OBL is the leader of AQ and is more organized than some here would like to believe.

AQ's press statements began to include the Palestinian conflict shortly after Ayman Al Zwahiri joined the group. Zhawhiri is notable for founding Islamic Jihad, an Egyptian based terror group solely interested in abolishing the Israeli State.

To your Usual Suspects quote: "The greatest trick the Devil ever played on the world was making it believe he didn't exist" He did exist and his power lay in his anonymity.

Scott
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kurtyboy Donating Member (968 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-14-05 01:49 AM
Response to Reply #51
57. Scott, I didn't actually mean that al Qaeda doesn't exist
Edited on Fri Jan-14-05 01:50 AM by kurtyboy
And I don't think Scheer did either.

But they've been blown way out of proportion by the Western governments--starting with Clinton, BTW. (It seemed like every bad thing that happened to us ended up being OBL and AQ--from embassy bobmings to Somalia, fer cryin' out loud--Somolia!?!?! I still can't fathom the link between M. Aideed and OBL....)

That's the problem--every damned difficulty we have overseas gets blamed on al Qaeda--instead of us looking for a (more complex and) realistic cause. The insurgency in Iraq, for example, was not initially organized by al Qaeda, but we blamed it on them the whole time.

When we spend our time chasing the wrong people, the real villains are free to plan to really kick our asses.

As far as the database goes--I never said the it was us keeping track of the Islamic warriors (but I bet our folks have at least part of the list somewhere---didn't you ever wonder where the gang gets the stats about the enemey that they throw around to drum up support?). It is also likely that many names in the AQ database belong to warriors who lost their lives, or became incapacitated, or just lost the will to fight---it happens after a few years--settle down, raise a few little muslims, retire....

The point is, the big list, which gets cited as a way to illustrate the enormity of the threat, just cannot have been all that big after a decade and a half. SPECULATION: AQ was weak and getting weaker, and 911 was a swan song, UNTIL the US began to make them the bogeyman, attacked Iraq, and now their recruiting is stronger than ever.

WHaddayathink?

ON EDIT---I don't believe in the Devil, so save that stuff for someone else...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sui generis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
7. color me heretical
If al qaeda was all that well organized and well funded we would have daily news reports of thwarted al qaeda attacks in the U.S.

They just aren't what this administration paints them to be. But I have said this before on DU and been burnt at the stake here by some peasants with pitchforks :evilgrin:, nonetheless it IS a bogeyman, and a perfect one at that. It's just that the evidence of their omnipotence is sadly lacking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inchhigh Donating Member (182 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. You can watch the first episode...
Edited on Wed Jan-12-05 08:12 AM by inchhigh
The Power of Nightmares Part I "Baby it's Cold Outside" at this link:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/video1037.htm

Amazing stuff!

Edit: There is also a transcript of you don't have time to watch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 08:13 AM
Response to Original message
9. Wildly cheering the LA Times. Thanks for posting. Best news today.
Edited on Wed Jan-12-05 08:35 AM by Vidar
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Paradise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Ditto! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 08:13 AM
Response to Original message
10. So what does that mean about Osama Bin Laden?
If Al Queda doesn't exist, then OBL is not a leader of it. Then, he couldn't possibly have masterminded 9/11. So, what does that say about 9/11?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sunnystarr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. I recall that after 9/11 bin Laden denied having anything to do
with the attack. That struck me as strange at the time since bin Laden and other terrorrist organizations never seemed to have a problem claiming and embracing responsibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #10
34. The programme doesn't deny that bin Laden helped organise 9/11
what it says is that bin Laden does not have an organisation that reaches to many countries. He's got (or had, anyway) money, which did finance 9/11, by getting the hijackers sent to the USA, but bin Laden has argued with many Islam extremists in other countries - Afghanistan was about the only place left for him to go.

The name 'al Qaeda' was first picked up internationally when it was used in a racketeering allegation against bin Laden.

From a transcript of the programme:

In January, 2001, a trial began in a Manhattan courtroom of four men accused of the embassy bombings in east Africa. But the Americans had also decided to prosecute bin Laden in his absence. But to do this under American law, the prosecutors needed evidence of a criminal organisation because, as with the Mafia, that would allow them to prosecute the head of the organisation even if he could not be linked directly to the crime. And the evidence for that organisation was provided for them by an ex-associate of bin Ladens called Jamal al-Fadl.
...
The picture al-Fadl drew for the Americans of bin Laden was of an all-powerful figure at the head of a large terrorist network that had an organised network of control. He also said that bin Laden had given this network a name: Al Qaeda. It was a dramatic and powerful picture of bin Laden, but it bore little relationship to the truth.

The reality was that bin Laden and Ayman Zawahiri had become the focus of a loose association of disillusioned Islamist militants who were attracted by the new strategy. But there was no organisation. These were militants who mostly planned their own operations and looked to bin Laden for funding and assistance. He was not their commander. There is also no evidence that bin Laden used the term Al Qaeda to refer to the name of a group until after September the 11th, when he realized that this was the term the Americans have given it.

In reality, Jamal al-Fadl was on the run from bin Laden, having stolen money from him. In return for his evidence, the Americans gave him witness protection in America and hundreds of thousands of dollars. Many lawyers at the trial believed that al-Fadl exaggerated and lied to give the Americans the picture of a terrorist organisation that they needed to prosecute bin Laden.

http://billstclair.com/nightmares/31.html


The rest of the transcripts are here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demigoddess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #10
53. what i have been saying all along,
one shot johnnies. I know, it is an old saying but very true here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
13. We watched bush switch from OBL to Zarqawi as the new "boogeyman"
Edited on Wed Jan-12-05 09:51 AM by Straight Shooter
It was Zarqawi this, Zarqawi that, Zarqawi here, Zarqawi there. I believe the bush plan was to capture this one-legged (or two-legged, whatever) man and then boast to the world how the U.S. had "cracked the back of al Qaeda in Iraq."

Well, it didn't happen, and of course Zarqawi has more or less slid off the radar screen of the public's awareness. Too many bush supporters in our society are insidiously afflicted with ADD of the worst kind ... ignorance combined with apathy.

edit typo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
14. This is a dupe, but is on the homepage, please continue here:
Edited on Wed Jan-12-05 09:53 AM by patdem
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrfrapp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
15. More detail
From the article:

" How can it be that in Britain since 9/11, 664 people have been detained on suspicion of terrorism but only 17 have been found guilty, most of them with no connection to Islamist groups and none who were proven members of Al Qaeda?"

To expand on that, only three of those seventeen were convicted for association with "Islamist groups"; and not for terror plots but for fundraising and possession of Islamist literature! The remaining 14 convictions were of members of Irish terrorist groups such as the UVF or the "Real IRA".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
16. well, duh!
Note how a former CIA chief, AB "Buzzy" Krongard, is now saying that bon Laden is better off remaining uncaptured.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmannatl Donating Member (10 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. He should know
Since Buzzy is reported to have had a hand in the insider trading issue of 9/11, he probably does have opionions as to what to do with bin Laden...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
really-looney Donating Member (330 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
18. Terror Alerts
Has anyone noticed the raising of the terror alerts since the election. I have not, maybe I am just missing something but it seems to me that since the election there have been none.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildmanj Donating Member (611 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
19. boogeyman
so what's new---do so and so and get out of sight--saddam did it, saddam did it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janetle Donating Member (395 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
20. Return to normal??
And now that Bush has been "re-elected" and we seem to no longer have terror warnings, the Today Show has returned to pre 9/11 news and is resurrecting the Gary Condit/Shandra Levy story. Ugh!

(Don't get me wrong about this poor woman's death, God rest her soul; I hope the killer is found.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chico Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
21. The image of Osama Bin Laden is priceless to the Bush Admin
The Bush Admin has certainly passed "Psychology 101", "Intro to Fear", and "The Nature of Symbols."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Soth Donating Member (110 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
22. "Osama bin Laden...I am frankly not that concerned about him..."
"...because he's really not all that powerful and we made up Al Qaeda, to tell ya the truth, and..."

"Sir. Sir!"

"What?"

"You're doing it again."

"I am? Oh, crap! I mean...uh...he must be brought to justice!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
23. Actually-- bin Laden initally, then Saddam, now it is Social Security!
And to be fair, OBL was a boogeyman for Clinton too, but Clinton played the whole thing much cooler.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
24. NEXT step on the question path: WHO IS BEHIND THE "SUCCESS" OF 9/11?
If the great bogeyman of Al Quaeda isn't so great after all, then how long will it take for people other than we "conspiracy theorist kooks" to finally begin to question the official story of the events of 9/11? I believe that keeping the true story buried is behind a number of Bush admin decisions - because they know that THIS is the scandal that would bring down the whole cartel if it escaped its wraps.

The official story of the events of 9/11 was never even a well-constructed one, and there are plenty of people who question it already. So, if you take away its presumed motive and organizing force, who is left as the prime mover -- or enabler -- of the attacks? Hello, major media? Are you possibly considering maybe opening one eye?

The 9/11 attacks were the turning point, converting an unpopular president and a suspicious populace almost overnight into a wildly venerated president -- to speak against whom was seditious--and a populace so cowed and angry at the new straw man that they would allow absolutely anything. Invading Iraq, Patriot Act, every horrible policy that they would have otherwise opposed. It was the launching point for the whole B* admin program.

And it was either planned or enabled by that administration. How long before more people finally begin to take this possibility seriously? Will anyone finally begin to connect the dots?

The WMD search has now been called off, conveniently after the election. Now we hear that Bin Laden and his organization aren't such a big deal, again conveniently after the election. The admin has gotten most of what it wanted and, with all three branches of government under control, is confident that it will get the rest.

I believe that we should increase emphasis on investigation and publication of 9/11 evidence that contradicts the administration version. THIS would be enough for impeachment and enough outrage to end their grip on power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pberq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Right on!!!

You have got it, Nothing w/o Hope!

Here are some important resources:

Crossing the Rubicon, By Michael Ruppert

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0865715408/qid=1 ...

After reading this book, my whole outlook was changed. It is copiously documented with sources from MSM, U.S. Government, etc.

As just one example from this vast book: Chapter 9, "Business with the Bin Ladens: The Real Saudi Arabia", starts with these two paragraphs:

"Osama bin Laden is probably the last witness the United States would like to have interrogated. There is a compelling case to be made that Osama bin Laden has long been a well-cultivated, protected, and valued asset of the US and British intelligence. It is also possible that he has been used.

The bin Laden family of Saudi Arabia is vastly different from what has been described in the American press. Much of its wealth, power, sophistication, and political and economic influence have been overlooked. A close examination leads directly to US economic and intelligence interests. And this does much to explain why American corporate media has avoided discussing it in detail.

He then goes on to conclusively show that the myth of OBL as a family outcast is just that: a myth.
Heres an example of the source material:

http://www.unansweredquestions.net/timeline/timeline_be ...

Spring 2000 (C): Sources who know bin Laden later claim that bin Laden's stepmother has a second meeting with her son Osama in Afghanistan (see Spring 1998). The trip is approved by the Saudi royal family. The Saudis pass the message to him that they wouldn't crack down on his followers in Saudi Arabia as long as he set his sights on targets outside the desert kingdom. In late 1999, the Saudi government had told the CIA about the upcoming trip, and suggested placing a homing beacon on her luggage. This doesn't happenSaudis later claim they weren't taken seriously, and Americans claim they never received specific information on her travel plans. < New Yorker, 11/5/01 , Washington Post, 12/19/01 >


Michael Ruppert's website:
http://www.fromthewilderness.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
manxkat Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 01:36 AM
Response to Reply #25
46. yes indeed.... and here's a new article on the Osama propaganda
"New Osama Tape, Deeper Propaganda Twists" by Larry Chin
http://fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/011205_deeper_pro...

<snip>

With the Osama image, propaganda manufacturers have created a demonic and lurid icon designed to divide and provoke. With repetition, the Osama image has become a universal icon of "evil" in American culture. Indoctrinated, brainwashed and ill-informed individuals in the US, viewing the image, have had their thinking shaped to think: "Whatever this image is saying is evil and untrue. Therefore, I support whatever is the opposite."

<snip>

The Osama image issues a specific comment about oil: "Stop the Americans from getting hold of the oil. Concentrate your operations on the oil, in particular in Iraq and the Gulf."

It is a fact, that the current world war (and the "war on terrorism") has been waged for the purpose of seizing, occupying and controlling key energy and resource regions in preparation for the worldwide depletion crisis known as Peak Oil (see the extensive analysis of Peak Oil at FromTheWilderness.com).

The effect of the Osama image's statement, then, is to make US/Western populations support "American efforts to get the oil in Iraq and the Gulf" as a way to "fight bin Laden and 'terrorists.'"


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashmanonar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. i know this'll probably go under "tinfoil hatter stuff"
but here's a link to a very interesting site that takes every aspect of the 911 attacks and debunks the official story...dunno the reliability of it, but hell, it's the best investigation i've seen so far! 9-11 Research
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. I don't think it's tinfoil hattery. I think it's the biggest B* scandal
...and that's saying something!

The site you mention is my favorite as well. Another that I ran across is http://www.911truth.org . I'm sure there are a lot of others, possibly better ones known by better informed people than I am. I'm not a 9/11 expert or maven. I'm just convinced by what I have seen, heard and read that this is something that desperately needs to be fully investigated and the truth exposed at last.

That there are terrible things hidden is acknowledged by all who have taken even a cursory look, and it is also implied by the steps the B* admin has taken to silence and suppress the truth.

But not for long, I am hoping very hard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashmanonar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. indeed
thankee for not putting the :tinfoilhat: on my head...it's just hard to say anything, even on DU, and not be attacked for having a different opinion about the subject.

my favorite response to the people who attack tinfoil...is a definition of the words "conspiracy theory", in fact, it's the opposite of what it seems...check on dictionary.com if you don't believe me!

so by saying that these sites that try to expose the 911 attack as something else than they say it is are conspiracy theorists, they're ACTUALLY saying that there is a conspiracy of criminals that should be investigated!

and yes, i want this to be exposed as what it is...i'm sure bush will fire someone important soon, and that person will tell EVERYTHING that bush has done wrong, and i think the fundies may actually be a powerful ally in taking bush out of office...he's well on his way to piss them off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tngledwebb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #24
49. Read Griffins The New Pearl Harbor.
Google Killtown for key 9/11 issues and key links. Keep an open mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Borgnine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
28. They needed a new enemy.
Communism was no longer a "threat." Conservatives can't operate their self-serving agendas without a foreign enemy that will destroy us at any given moment.

Really, it was brilliant how they pulled it off. We now have a never-ending crusade against "turrer." An enemy that will never go away? Cha-ching!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 03:44 PM
Response to Original message
29. Wow! I love the LA Times!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginnyinWI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 05:20 PM
Response to Original message
32. shades of George Orwell's 1984
In the book, The Party keeps an endless war going, to keep the Proletariat population both fearfully in submission, and sufficiently impoverished, so that it can maintain its hierarchical styled government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrstick Donating Member (48 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
33. It's been sitting in my living room for months now
I might take the time to watch it this weekend, I'll tell you all how it is.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vlad Donating Member (62 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 08:40 PM
Response to Original message
35. To Anyone-Al Qaeda question..
I've heard this statement 2 or 3 times, and by nobody important or that I know, but the statement/question went something like..
" If those Terrorists died on those planes, why have they been seen in Europe/ why have they been seen in Pakistan/ why has two of their bank accounts gone back into use?"
Has anyone here heard people say this or seen this written?
I guess I should get the names and research them, but I really wondered.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
manxkat Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 01:15 AM
Response to Reply #35
45. yes, here's a BBC article, plus some 9/11 resources
Hijack 'Suspects' Alive and Well
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm

Plus, check out this page from 911Review.com on the mythology of the hijackers:

Alleged Hijackers
http://www.911review.com/myth/hijackers.html

The hijacker story had a great deal of appeal to the American audience. The hijackers were all Muslim extremists, far removed from mainstream American culture. Their fanaticism made their success against overwhelming odds seem more plausible.

Despite its attractive features, the hijacker story is challenged by the facts:
There is no credible evidence that any of the alleged hijackers were on any of the jetliners, and considerable evidence to the contrary.

- None of the passenger lists published by the airlines contained any of the alleged hijackers.
- No airport video shows any of the alleged hijackers boarding the flights.
- Several of the alleged hijackers turned up alive after the attack.


Read the entire page because it's a mind-blower.

If you're new to 9/11 truth movement, here are some recommended web sites:

http://911Review.com
http://911Truth.org
http://SeptemberEleventh.org
http://CooperativeResearch.org
http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/08/coinciden...
http://FromTheWilderness.com
http://www.911truthradio.com

Two excellent books which I highly recommend:

+++++ "Crossing the Rubicon" by Michael C. Ruppert
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/store
This is a detective story that gets to the innermost core of the 9/11 attacks. It places 9/11 at the center of a desperate new America, created by specific, named individuals (Cheney and others) in preparation for Peak Oil: an economic crisis like nothing the world has ever seen.

+++++ "The New Pearl Harbor" by David Ray Griffin
http://www.newpearlharbor.com /
From a skeptical vantage-point, but also taking to heart the classic idea that those who benefit from a crime ought to at least be investigated, Griffin, an eminent philosopher and theologian, brings together an account of the national tragedy that is far more logical than the one we've been asked to believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democrat Dragon Donating Member (699 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
36. Hey, what is that awful scent in the air?
Do I smell MIHOP inside a well-hidden package?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tinrobot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
38. Emmanuel Goldstein
Osama Bin Laden = Emmanuel Goldstein.

Simple as that...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
manxkat Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #38
47. agreed, and here's one link to explain it
Is 'Al Qaeda' the Modern Incarnation of 'Emmanuel Goldstein'?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/goldstein.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
manxkat Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
40. LINKS to the BBC video HERE
Great to see Robert Scheer putting out that review of "The Power of Nightmares" -- I downloaded the video file (using BitTorrent) and watched the entire series in late November. Everyone I've showed this film to is blown away. This is a MUST-SEE, and fortunately it's available on the 'net:

Hi-resolution versions are the best. These require BitTorrent installed before downloading:

The Power of Nightmares at UKNova.com

Lo-resolution versions are available from Information Clearinghouse, although these leave something to be desired -- audio stutters (although you can read the transcript) and video is small:

The Power of Nightmares, lo-res (requires Realplayer)
Part 1: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/video1037.htm
Part 2: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/video1038.htm
Part 3: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/video1040.htm



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sellitman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
41. No matter what I think of this article....
Just the fact that it exists must drive the Repukes nuts. For that alone it's worth it's weight in gold.

;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blower Donating Member (195 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-12-05 11:48 PM
Response to Original message
44. More...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pert_UK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 08:04 AM
Response to Original message
48. Brit DUers talked about this a while back - you MUST see it.
It's a brilliant and frightening history of how we got to where we are in this "war on terror", plus a debunking of lots of right-wing political spin, plus some massive and comprehensive attacks on Rumsfeld + the Bushs' involvement in conspiracies and generally massively misleading the world for decades.

It's amazing....for example, all this talk about threats from dirty bombs, but no serious expert says it would actually cause and big problems.

Think about it - if Al Qaeda is a serious threat to the US (or the UK) where are the suicide bombers, the car bombers, the disruption to water / electricity supplies? It would be farsically easy for them to cause widespread problems but since 9/11 has there been ANY significant terrorist act in the US or the UK? OK, there was the Madrid train bombing (which was heinous) and some attacks a LONG way from the UK or the US but on our embassies and people.......But the IRA caused more problems in mainland Britain than Al-Qaeda ever have, and they were never supposed to be this "global terror network" of sleeper cells....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sauber Donating Member (9 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
50. Reality Check
A couple of points here rebutting R. Scheer and the Documentary

1. Is Scheer saying that we have come accross no proof that Al-Qaeda exists? Al-Qaeda is a clearing house for many disparate terrorist groups not a single homogenous entity. And as such it has strength because it has no official letterhead or address.

Question for DU'ers; what for you, would constitute hard evidence that Al Qaeda existed?

2. I cant speak to this as I don't follow the British front on GWOT.

3. We've heard so much about dirty bombs simply because it's the new hotness and the media fixates on the flashiest eye catching headlines they can. So exactly who is doing all the frightening talk about dirty bombs? Quick searches turn up lots of media outlets. Interestingly enough though the experts R. Scheer speaks of release sensible cautious guidelines.

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-shee...

this is the first link that pops up on google when I type "Dirty Bomb" So Scheer is correct but he's dishonest. He's dishonest by failing to reveal that the sensible experts are most likely associated with the govt. Instead he attempts to paint the hypers as the govt. More to the point how does this hype disprove the existence of Al-Qaeda?

4. UK and US forces did find large and extensive cave networks. You could take issue with the phrase high-tech because a cave is really just a hole in the ground. But in the context of mining engineering you can make the case that many of the caves were built using advanced/modern practices. Don Rumsfeld knew this because we were involved covertly in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation.

One thing the poster left out of the article is this passage:
----
While the BBC documentary acknowledges that the threat of terrorism is both real and growing, it disagrees that the threat is centralized
---

I think you'll find that the US Govt. agrees with the BBC. Al Qaeda is a worthy opponent for the very fact that is so de-centralized.

When Pres. Bush made statement that Osama was less important than he had been many on this very site decried this as a US policy/military failure. Yet many of you now believe that Osama is indeed a straw man and no doubt blame Pres. Bush for the hype.

R. Scheer has picked some weak points here and upon believing that he has refuted them believes that by logic Al-Qaeda must not exist.

Scott
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #50
52. Government hype on dirty bombs
(and using this to justify the Iraq invasion too):

And the terrorist groups already using chemical and biological agents with money to spend, do we really believe that if Al Qaida could get a dirty bomb they wouldn't use it? And then think of the consequences. Already there is fear and anxiety, undermining confidence. Think of the consequences then. Think of a nation using a nuclear device, no matter how small, no matter how distant the land. Think of the chaos it would cause.

That is why Saddam and Weapons of Mass Destruction are important.

Tony Blair 15 Feb 2003


At the moment, I accept that association between them is loose. But it is hardening.

And the possibility of the two coming together - of terrorist groups in possession of WMD, even of a so-called dirty radiological bomb is now, in my judgement, a real and present danger.

And let us recall: what was shocking about 11 September was not just the slaughter of the innocent; but the knowledge that had the terrorists been able to, there would have been not 3,000 innocent dead, but 30,000 or 300,000 and the more the suffering, the greater the terrorists' rejoicing.

Tony Blair 18 March 2003


Now, a radioactive "dirty bomb" involves exploding a conventional bomb that not only kills victims in the immediate vicinity but also spreads radioactive material that is highly toxic to humans and can cause mass death and injury.

Ashcroft June 10 2002
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sauber Donating Member (9 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #52
54. Government Hype on Dirty Bombs
Well I'll cede the Blair arguments, rather grudgingly though because I always thought he had a rousing way with words but whatever.

The Ashcroft quote seems less grandiose. All I'm saying is that it wasn't the govt. who would spend an hour every night explaining the Dirty Bomb with their supposed experts.

My link above shows that the Nuclear Regulatory Agency offers sound advice, information and effects on the type of radiation likely generated.

Let us not forget the uproar created when it was revealed the air quality at ground zero 9/11 wasnt' exactly safe. That was just concrete and building material particulate. Imagine the public lynching if a dirty bomb went off here and the public wasn't previously warned about their existence and effects.

The govt. informed us of their existence and the news media blew it out of proportion with their paid experts

Again why is Scheer using this week ass point as proof that Al Qaeda doesn't exist?

Scott
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StopBushit Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
55. Same as it ever was...
First you get a scapegoat, ala LHO (Lee Harvey Oswald), then, through the use of "crisis management", the press-peddling of fear, etc., you pull off the coup d'etat. Follow that up with the expansion of war and the military-industrial complex, and you've got the formula for the next 50+ years of unobstructed "neo"con power. Osama bin Oswald, 9-11 or 11-22, Warren Commission or 9-11 Commission, just repeat performances of a successful play. It's changed a little over the years, from bullets to ballots mostly, but everything else is very much the same. If America remains asleep, the madness will not end. There is ONE saving grace and you're looking at it. Protect this right with your life. It's not too late. Don't be a scapegoat.
Thanks DU! You're saving America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buddysmellgood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-05 10:17 PM
Response to Original message
56. BOO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 16th 2014, 10:56 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC