It seems the more we fund/use "al Qaeda", the bigger threat they become....

[Junkdrawer]

Gosh, wonder if there's a connection?

The "Syrian rebels" we're arming are largely al Qaeda. They're fighting Hezbollah, so I guess it's cool.

It's not new.

Oldie, but Goodie: (from 2007)

Notes: '˜Creating terror'™: a lateral look at 9/11, 7/7 and the War on Terror with Nafeez Ahmed acclaimed author of "The War on Truth" and "The London Bombings"

Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed teaches political theory, international relations and contemporary history at University of Sussex and is Director of the Institute for Policy Research and Development www.globalcrisis.org.uk

The War on Terror, now in its 6th year, started with the atrocities of 9/11, with horrific echoes subsequently in Bali, Madrid, London and elsewhere, creating a climate of unease and suspicion throughout the world. Yet who really are these 21st century terrorists and are we right to continue to question the official account of their activity?


http://www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/23955

Direct download

Seriously, why isn't THIS the biggest scandal in our history?

[leveymg]

1. The neocons and CIA have a lot invested in "our" terrorists, despite WTC '93, 9/11, Boston Bombings

When you look at every major terrorist attack that "succeeded" -- going back to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center -- you will find that those who carried it out were terrorists in the US on "CIA visas." That practice must stop, for a number of reasons, 9/11-type blowback and mass casualty events being just one of them.

No doubt, the American people will come to severely regret what the Obama Administration has done in Libya and Syria. Regime change and covert actions aren't nearly as cheap as some would like us to think.

[Junkdrawer]

3. You have been all over this story since jump street...

Thanks for all you do.

[leveymg]

4. I am merely performing the role that professional journalists would lose their jobs if they dared

draw the same obvious connections. Over time, nonetheless, the major media are beginning to make some of the same points, witness CNN and Jake Tapper finally picking up on the CIA's operation of a weapons transfer facility to Syrian rebels in Benghazi. I and a few others in the blogosphere made most of those connections within 72 hours of the attack. Please, see, http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=555636 , and my comment and links in that thread.

[MisterP]

17. or that Dark Jedi who told the ticket clerk that Abdulmutallab's pass wasn't

the one you were looking for

[leveymg]

21. And the one on 01/10/01 who told the Port Director at Miami Int'l to admit M. Atta who lacked a visa

Last edited Sat Aug 3, 2013, 03:47 PM - Edit history (1)

to attend flight training and had overstayed a previous visa by a month. Yet, for some strange reason, they let him in, anyway.



Also, why did the Chief INS Officer rip up the Sec. 212(d)(3) Visa Waiver application that he had begun to prepare for Atta? Atta was admitted without the waiver on a regular tourist visa, a visa with a purpose not compatible with flight training which requires approval of an H-3 Trainee Visa.

Yes, they all got CIA visas.

Yes, those Sith Lords.

P.S. Atta got several CIA visas: http://911review.org/JohnDoe2/Atta.html

January - May 2000:

"Indeed he was under CIA surveillance between January and May last year after he was reportedly observed buying large quantities of chemicals in Frankfurt, apparently for the production of explosives and for biological warfare. The US agents reported to have trailed Atta are said to have failed to inform the German authorities about their investigation. »

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/focus/story/0,6903,560733,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterror/story/0,,558871,00.html

Comment: It is one thing that the German authorities weren’t informed, but how did Atta obtain several subsequent visas to the US?

[ceonupe]

2. The goal is a destabilized Middle East

So no unification of the factions can be made.

Imagine if Iran and the Saudis reached agreement. The west would lose control of that part of the world. We swap sides every 50years or so to keep the balance of power with the side that supports our intrests.

Look at all we destroyed in Latin America to maintain our control and look now as they are building there own canal and becoming independent of the USA.

We go to war for one reason and that is trade routes and big business. We entered ww2 because te Japanese were establishing dominance and their own trade routes. We let Pearl Harbor happen. We let countries abuse women and have horible civil rights (saudis) even let their citizens murder over 3k Americans and do nothing to them because of oil relationships.

We complain about rights but support china almost 100% and only complaints u get from the administration are trade related

[Junkdrawer]

5. We go to war for Empire. Oil, other strategic mineral resources, trade routes, and....

access to cheap labor.

The basic tactics date back to at least Winston Churchill

Maintaining a standing army, Governors, civil servants etc. are too expensive, so you install puppets and destabilize when democracy and independence rears their ugly heads.

Empire on the Cheap.

[dipsydoodle]

6. Self interest.

Prior to 9/11 there may have been a hundred or so aq's in Afghanistan. The "war" gave aq almost unlimited free advertising to franchise their operation and the US got to provide their MIC and contractors with huge bundles. Looks like everyone won.

Not sure whether you realise or not but the current travel advice warning stretches from Morocco to Bangledesh.

The background to current warnings may be associated with the high number of prison outbreaks of late of what are termed terrorists - whatever that means.

[Junkdrawer]

8. Just like the goddamn Cold War...

See:

[leveymg]

14. In the case of Syria, the Cold War still is the basic agenda.

Last edited Sat Aug 3, 2013, 10:12 PM - Edit history (1)

Although there are other agendas and rationales for covert action and destabilization laid over that. Same with the destabilization and break up of the former Yugoslavia, and US role in supporting Saudi-backed Islamists in Bosnia, Kosovo, Chechnya and the TransCaucasus.

[Junkdrawer]

16. China now has a bigger checkbook than the West. They're buying oilfields....

as fast as we "liberate" them.

Conflict is just over the horizon if not already here.

[JayhawkSD]

7. And the drones are working so well

We have killed the "head of Al Queada" 12 times, the "second in command" 34 times, a "high Al Queda official" 80+ times, and Al Queda officers worth targeting more than 600 times, and here we are closing embassies and warning our people not to travel because Al Quead has reached such a threat level that half the world is a place unsafe for our people to even be.

Okay, I made up those numbers, but do I make a valid point?

[dipsydoodle]

9. Odd that "Syrian rebels" are not refered to as insurgents.

Did the US stop using that term or does it pick and chose who to apply it to ?

[Junkdrawer]

10. Remember "Freedom Fighters"?

They'd use it except THAT really would emphasize the al Qaeda connection.

[Jesus Malverde]

18. Odd that the new york times has been embedding journalists with terrorists.

Here is one of their reports, where they film the rebels using a prisoner as an unwitting suicide bomber.

Note the prisoner has been brutally tortured and is sitting there with a broken arm while the American "reporter" from the NYTimes makes the propaganda. The accompanying article was uncritical of their aims or tactics.

[Scootaloo]

11. Well, when the agenda is to destroy middle eastern nations, who cares?

You don't think we're trying to help and are just bad at it, do you? We are waging a new crusade, I'm afraid, and the goal is to either take absolute control of these states, or reduce them to ash and piles of bodies.

[Sand Wind]

12. According to the Center for American Progress, Syrians make up about 95% of the rebels.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=522610

[Junkdrawer]

13. Key Free Syria Army rebel 'killed by Islamist group'

Kamal Hamami, of the Free Syrian Army's (FSA) Supreme Military Council, was meeting members of the rival group "to discuss battle plans".

An FSA spokesman said he was told by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant that they had killed Mr Hamami.

The killing is part of an escalating struggle within the armed uprising between moderates and Islamists.

The BBC's Paul Wood says a civil war within a civil war is building within the opposition as the two sides engage in a battle that is partly over the spoils and partly ideological.

....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23283079

More reason TO STOP FUNDING THEM.

[Sand Wind]

15. It's not like you are funding them...you are not.

Qatar, Saoudia and Koweit fund them. No more for now, they now funding other groups, especially the Saoudians, who are funding mostly non religious groups, except for Islamic Dasmascus Front, who have nothing to do with Alqaida but are people from the city.

[leveymg]

22. Frankly, I don't see much difference between these groups.

Not in their ideologies, and certainly not in their methods. The last thing I want to see is the United States provide them with the anti-aircraft missiles that can be used to shoot down passenger jets. But, I am afraid, that is exactly what we have already allowed to happen under Gen. Petraeus' CIA and Hillary Clinton's State Department.

The worst part is, I don't see much has changed.

[Sand Wind]

23. I understand your concern, but I don't think US as provide so much stuff,

I'm not even sur they have provide anti-thanks. Qatar and SA yes, but not US.

[leveymg]

25. When we "liberated" Libya, we knew exactly where the MANPADs and ATs would go.

Right to the next link in the chain, and who would get them, and yes, that it would be Saudis/GCC that would pick up the tab. If there is blowback, that is considered an acceptable cost by those who planned and executed this grand strategy of regime change.

Only, it is not such a grand strategy, as it only shows how very limited, isolated and weakened the U.S. has become in such a short time.

[dipsydoodle]

19. As far as I'm aware the Taliban make up 100% of the Taliban.

[Sand Wind]

20. Ok ?

you know that there is Taliban in US ? And that they are 100 % of them self ?

[KoKo]

24. Funny how that works, isn't it? I wonder what the CNN Crowd is Thinking...

with this Huge Alert after Billions and Millions we've spent supposedly wiping out the "9/11 Terrorists."

I think the CNN Crowd is all giddy with this.

The rest of us just gotta keep going and support those who expose what's being done in our name with our Money...while we suffer under imposed Austerity!

At some point there needs to be some accountability for these wars that did nothing but cause: BLOW BACK!

[indie9197]

26. I don't believe in "al qaeda"

I think the U.S. just needs a name to call our drone victims.

[Junkdrawer]

27. Who let the dogs out?

Is rash of brazen prison breaks related? Interpol wants to know

CNN) -- Interpol has issued a global security alert, asking its member nations to help determine whether a rash of brazen prison escapes recently are linked.

Over the past month, prison breaks have taken place in nine Interpol member nations, the global police organization said in an alert this weekend.

"With suspected Al Qaeda involvement in several of the breakouts, which led to the escape of hundreds of terrorists and other criminals, the INTERPOL alert requests the Organization's 190 member countries' assistance in order to determine whether any of these recent events are coordinated or linked," the group said in the statement Saturday.

....

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/04/world/interpol-jailbreak-alert/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

[KoKo]

28. Recommend.