Is Al Qaeda a fabrication by Washington?

[isoFlux]

interesting, but i\'m sure that nobody knows all the facts to be able to really prove or disprove most of these theories. put your own twist on it and it can sound pretty crazy and true.

though i doubt very much that 9/11 was set up directly by the CIA/Illuminati/US Govnt, it was one of the biggest intelligence faliures in human history (whether deliberate or not), and was very much used by the US Govnt as a source of fear and patriotism. and then used to start a war.

*shrug*
most conspiracy theories fall under the category \"possible, but unlikely\".

[=D.C.L.I=TuRb0jUg3nD]

Pun has got a fair point, and you others are chasing ghosts. If Bush only wanted to oust Saddam, why bomb afghanistan back to stoneville? Sure, they tried creating a handy link between Al Qaida and Saddam so they could invade Iraq, but failed miserably and started touting the \"weapons of mass destruction\" chant instead (if there ever was a link between the two it was well hidden; why should strict islamist hook up with the most decadent, ungodly dictator in modern times?)

If yer looking for crimes performed by the US gov/CIA try scratching the surface of what happened in latin-america in the 70s and 80s, with the notorious US ambassador Negroponte (now ambassador to Iraq) and his stooge lackeys and death troops at the helm of terror-regimes, in the holy name of anti-communism.

Or even better; try following the money. When a Bush sits in the oval office, big business and oil will always come first.

See the problem with conspiracy theories is that you lose focus of the real, important issues. It gets clouded, it all becomes a part of a huge, overpowering conspiracy. You give up and start smoking joints instead and start conspiracy.org-like websites. Useless.

That said, I havent read the article you\'all talking about. I will, in due time ... lol

[shift]

Hmm... well, just remind you that the poll question, and also the questions that arise in the BBC documentary, doesn\'t affirm or deny anything. It\'s just about a possibility. As you have said, we probably never know the truth about all this, so all we can do is just guess and try to get as much info about this subject as we can or like.

All this is just a big question mark on global terrorism, starred by Al Qaeda, and the northern democracies, starred by the USA.

What I\'ve learned so far is that a few well directed questions with a few well placed facts can make your most firm believes shake.

For me, one of the most shocking questionings about something \"unquestionable\" was related about the man landing on the moon. Curiosly it wasn\'t a BBC documentary this time but a FOX one. There were about a dozen \"proofs\" there that pointed to deny that fact. And, hell, I was one of those guys \"proud of the human race\" that wanted to believe that we are capable of things as amazing as travelling to another space object and run over it like a rabbit in slow-motion. This doesn\'t mean that I don\'t believe that the man has ever stepped on the moon, but at least makes me more skeptic about some things about it.

So, for me this seems to be a similar case. A documentary dares to deal with one of the most delicated subjects lately, making you think about the reality of some facts spreaded by politicians or other media. That\'s good IMO.

And we shouldn\'t forget that morals or ethics have nothing to do with real politics, economics, or war strategy, etc. The need of survival or/and supremacy is enough for a state to, maybe not directly lie, but surely change the truth enough to suit your needs in orther to accomplish your objectives.

[=D.C.L.I=TuRb0jUg3nD]

i?m not really questioning the validity of the documentary at hand, IMO we need more of that stuff, or – pardon my american frieds – we need more of that stuff into the trembling swamp of yellowbellied fear-of-losing-my-job krankhaus we call the american media.

Im just questioning the seemingly never-ending eagerness to jump on any conspiracy theory as long as it seems so far fetched that nothing can be proven or dismissed. It?s futile.

[LivingTarget]

Yeah fair enough point, we\'ll know it when/if it starts hitting mainstream media.
Until then it\'s all speculation isn\'t it?

[shift]

Yep, all speculation, LT.

Well, I\'m not that sure that it\'s that futile, Turbo.
Of course this conspirancy theories are too much tasty for us when it agrees with one of our particular POV about how the World works, and that can lead to strongly affirm or deny this theories.

But if this helps to crack some iron shielded believes about some actual stuff happening around, well, that\'s good. Sometimes this kind of, erm, spectacular approaches to a delicate subject, are the only way to reach people that otherwise would never question anything.

[Crazy_Ivan]

shift Wrote:Well, then you\'ll see that that\'s just a review.
Al-Jazeera hasn\'t created the documentary, the BBC has.

Al Jazeera was part of the BBC before they got in trouble with the Saudi government over a documentary that was critical about ther government. they were given the choice to either get rid of the people who made it or to leave. they choose for dumping the journalists, and some of them were the driving power behind Al Jazeera.

Even though they are often bashed by the west for being anti-USA, they are a decent news station that tries to give an independent view on the middle-east.


To continue on the subject:

Quote:Sure, they tried creating a handy link between Al Qaida and Saddam so they could invade Iraq, but failed miserably and started touting the \"weapons of mass destruction\" chant instead (if there ever was a link between the two it was well hidden; why should strict islamist hook up with the most decadent, ungodly dictator in modern times?)

Religion match. There is no better defense against being kicked out by the majority groups in your country compared to teaming up with the sworn enemy of both of them. Shiites don\'t have anything to do with Al Qaeda (and would like to get them out ASAP), With the Kurds, same story, but add to that the fact that they are very much against the Wahabbite ideology that is one of the major supports of Al Qaeda.

For the current situation in Iraq, and what Al Qaeda has to do with that:
Al Qaeda is an ideology that is almost exclusively sunnite. This is perhaps the sole reason that at the moment Al Zarquawi has both ideological and (more important) logistical support in Iraq. The main reason for his success is the fact that most (if not all) of the secret service personnel was selected from the minority group Saddam belonged to. These guys are well trained (by Europe and the US in the 80\'s and Russia later on) and don\'t often need to use force to keep the onlookers from talking, as their reputation is known all over.

[shift]

Interesting.
I\'m glad to know that Al Jazeera tries to be independent. Until now I used to place them in the same group as the FOX, just in the oposite extreme.

[=D.C.L.I=TuRb0jUg3nD]

shift Wrote:Well, I\'m not that sure that it\'s that futile, Turbo.
Of course this conspirancy theories are too much tasty for us when it agrees with one of our particular POV about how the World works, and that can lead to strongly affirm or deny this theories.

But if this helps to crack some iron shielded believes about some actual stuff happening around, well, that\'s good. Sometimes this kind of, erm, spectacular approaches to a delicate subject, are the only way to reach people that otherwise would never question anything.

It\'s a shame, but people who go after facts, are seldom listened today, however explosive the material. For instance; did you ever hear of american journalist Greg Palast? He blew the wistle on the Florida election scam, based on meticulous, boring, tedious FACT FINDING and RESEARCH. He got it on paper, comprende? Still they wouldnt print it in the american press, before Salon.com, of all places, picked it up.

He wrote the book \"The best democracy money can buy\", about the Bush/oil/Saudi-ties, and you\'ve seen the tabloid film version I believe; It\'s called \"Farenheit 9/11\".

See what I\'m getting at? no one listens to whistle blowers any more, unless it is IN YOUR FACE on film. Woodward/Bernstein would never ever have been allowed to print the equivalent of that stuff they published under the Nixon-scandal, if it should happen today. A large part of the reason is cause the establishment can wave it away as leftist nut-job conspiracies, even when the journalist sits on a pile of evidence.

*Edit*

I realize that I have somewhat sidetracked the debate - as it actually took it?s cue from a seemingly serious docu. But the following reactions from you lot kinda sparked my rant ...

[shift]

Yes, yes, Turbo, I saw your point from post 1, it\'s just that I don\'t completely share it.

The strategy used by the cons and their pals in the USA is the same that they use here, in Spain, and probably elsewhere. In the state of terror they helped to create any discording voice is automatically tagged as \"antipatriotic\" and any step towards dialog is tagged as \"cowardy\", placing any of those theories/facts automatically in the trash bin.

Anyway, there\'re still some places where free thinking is allowed and (maybe) stimulated, and the BBC seems one of those (even with all the problems they\'re having right now). And, hey, it\'s on film, so cheers for them. It\'s the most effective media type to reach people, as you say.

It\'s obvious that being optimistic lately is hard unless you are a USA citizen (at least most of them), but the view isn\'t that black after all. That\'s where I disagree with your positioning in all this.