TruthMove Forum

Register or log in:

Username:

Password:

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

The Question of Al Qaeda & Pakistan (11 posts)

1. JohnA
   Member

   The Question of Al Qaeda & Pakistan

   At this, the start of a new administration, it is as good a time as any to refresh our understanding on these subjects. I would like to get people’s opinions these general questions:

   1 – Does Al Qaeda exist? If so – explain.

   2 – Is the Pakistan ISI connected to Al Qaeda? If so – explain.

   3 – Is the Pakistan ISI connected to elements of the US intelligence community? If so – explain.

   4 – Could it be said that the ISI/Al Qaeda represents a block-ops arm of extremist elements of the US intelligence community?

   5 – Were reports that the Bush administration allowed Al Qaeda to escape from Tora Bora (as reported in Press for the Truth) true?

   6 – Terrorist training camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan – truth or fiction?

   7 – 9/11 attacks connected to the ISI (i.e. funding and facilitation) – truth or fiction?

   Now – I know that the movement has been split on this issue. There are those who claim the following:

   1 - Al Qaeda does not exist.

   2 - Pakistan is in fact “Patsy-stan” (with Zionism as the real culprit).

   3 – No hijackers were on the planes.

   So, I guess the overarching question is whether or not enemies of peace exist in the region of Pakistan. These enemies of peace may very well have been usurped by western influences – but – exist nonetheless. They may in fact have been patsies, trained and bankrolled by the very people they were seeking to attack, but – they may very well exist nonetheless.

   Question: Could elements of western business/political/intelligence entities be utilizing these black-ops privately-owned armies?

   If so – is it altogether wrong for the current administration to view these privately-owned terrorist groups as a threat to national security?

   Question: Would it be responsible to allow the ‘elements’ to continue to prosper, organize and consolidate power?

   Last question: Was 9/11 an act of war?

   Posted 15 years ago #
2. NicholasLevis
   Member

   .

   Start here

   http://nafeez.blogspot.com/2009/01/norwegian-daily...

   or here

   http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=vie...

   .

   Posted 15 years ago #
3. JohnA
   Member

   (feigning ignorance) Oh, this is some interesting stuff.

   so... basically these points of view seem to imply that Al Qaeda elements do in fact exist - and they have been used as 'assets' to certain elements of drug cartels, western intelligence assets - and as facilitators of false flag operations.

   do you agree with this?

   if so - would you agree that these 'entities' should be destroyed?

   i mean - IF U.S. covert operations in the region have used so-called “Arab Afghan” warriors as assets, the jihadis whom we loosely link with the name and leadership of al Qaeda as your article openly claims - wouldn't it be a political necessity to neutralize these jihadists who, if you believe this line of logic, were complicit in killing 3,000 people on 9/11?

   Wouldn't 9/11 Truth involve not only exposing and destroying whatever (if any) rogue western intelligence influences were behind the attacks - but ALSO neutralizing those foreign assets that train, arm, recruit and fund attacks against innocent people as well?

   Don't these rogue elements pose a threat to peace and innocent lives?

   again - who exactly was 'allowed' to escape Tora Bora? who exactly were in those caravans moving across the border into Pakistan? imaginary people?

   i just want to be clear on who exactly we are shooting at over there.

   Posted 15 years ago #
4. NicholasLevis
   Member

   Who are "we" shooting at over there? I'm sure you'll agree: Mostly not the bad people you seem to be aiming at here. Hundreds of civilians in Pakistan, thousands in Afghanistan. Dead. "Collateral damage." Oops. Wedding parties. Predictable, inevitable, as a consequence. Consciously taken into account and judged to be worth the price of "Enduring Freedom."

   So. Question. By the same logic you seem to be implying. Do the families of the dead civilians, or perhaps their proxies, have the right to shoot at those in the United States who made the decisions that led to the horrific killings of their relatives?

   Do they also get an allowance for collateral damage casualties?

   Where does this end up?

   Besides which: In advance of answering the questions of 9/11 truth, are you looking to find a justification for the next set of missile attacks aimed at possibly those who may be involved in terror planning in Pakistan?

   In short:

   if so - would you agree that these 'entities' should be destroyed?

   No.

   There's a lot that goes into that, but the upshot is really quite simple. No.

   After supporting Musharraf all this time, how about giving a chance to Pakistan's first elected government in a decade or more to pursue its own strategy, rather than destabilizing it?

   Even if a clean elimination of these baddies you're implying can only be handled through military action by an uninvited foreign power* is possible... Would you do it at the price of breaking up Pakistan into warring sub-units?

   What do you gain then?

   Before the "escape from Tora Bora" and the "ISI airlift" ... why didn't they provide the evidence of Bin Ladin's guilt the Taliban asked for, and see if the Taliban would, in fact, turn him over?

   (* note: something you presumably wouldn't think in Rumsfeld's case, true?)

   Posted 15 years ago #
5. JohnA
   Member

   lol i am not supporting anything. i am looking for clarity. i am asking questions - granted, they are loaded - but, i think they are important ones.

   nor did i suggest that "missile attacks" were the best strategy for eliminating these 'entities'

   now - i know i kinda laid these questions out there like a bear trap for you to step into. i am quite willing to allow myself to be used as a punching bag if necessary - by playing the devils advocate - as a gateway towards opening up this very thorny issue.

   the essential question here is whether Pakistan (despite its newly 'elected government') is still in the grips of elements of the ISI/Al Qaeda - or "baddies" as you put it - and whether there is EVER a justification for taking action.

   would you NOT agree that the recent attacks on India indicate that there are STILL interested 'parties' in Pakistan that SEEK to destabalize the elected government? IF we are to believe India's intelligence - these attacks were coordinated by elements of Pakistan's intelligence community?

   and what of the assassination of Bhutto?

   should we just stick our heads in the sand and look inward to blame ourselves? or should we seek out and destroy all those complicit ON BOTH SIDES OF THE WORLD?

   i understand your issue with the horrors of war and collatoral damage. but i also know that you are smart enough to know that the overarching issue of much more complex than that - and i hope that you can in all honesty not use the theatrics of invoking the 'horrors or war' to duck the more critical questions.

   if you were president - what would YOU do with the situation? pretend that there is no threat from these 'entities'?

   Posted 15 years ago #
6. NicholasLevis
   Member

   John,

   please, if you're going to demand a consideration of the world's complexities, or even of Pakistan's, how can you present a more loaded or false dichotomy than this one:

   should we just stick our heads in the sand and look inward to blame ourselves? or should we seek out and destroy all those complicit ON BOTH SIDES OF THE WORLD?

   And if I were president -- you might as well ask, if I were an asteroid in Cygnus or a slug on the ocean floor, for all the likelihood, so please don't give me bullshit about my "utopian" solutions, I find them highly pragamatic --

   anyway, if I were president, I say, it's unlikely I'd live very long. But I'd start with a policy of disclosure to settle exactly what happened with terrorism and collusion and "rogue" covert ops in the last 20 years, and who was involved. And then I'd work for their prosecution as criminals, if crime was committed, and regardless of their nationality.

   Meanwhile, I'd tacitly acknowledge the futility of a military approach in Afghanistan and Pakistan. I'd try to extend the frame to solutions that might need 20 years or more, but at least would work. I'd try to persuade the people that even if bad things will still happen in the meantime, implementing an intelligent, long-term solution slowly is surely better than making things worse in the short term, and calling that action.

   What you seem to be supporting here is going to destabilize Pakistan and make the problems worse. Instead, you need to sit down with the elected civilian government, the first in a decade, without threats, without ultimatums, without telling them how you're going to fix their problem by your brute force on their territory, and instead see how you can help them stabilize the situation, strengthen civilian government against the historic over-hand of the military, and bring development to the regions where the greatest resistance against the West springs for rather natural reasons.

   I'd call a great power summit and in the name of reason, humanity, ecology and economy all at once, persuade them to hash out: a graduated, mutual reduction of all conventional and nuclear forces and all military spending; an end to the arms trade globally (a war on cross-border arms sales to replace the "war on drugs"); and an analogous defusion of all regional military tensions on the principle of proportional mutual disarmement. The principle should be to roll back militaries and roll back arms trade, drain the fucking swamp of covert operations, and put that capital into the global energy conversion. It doesn't have to be perfect, just looking for a few percentage points difference every year in how budgets are spent for a while. "It's time to leave behind childish things," no?

   Why do I have the dreadful feeling that one-party totalitarian dictatorships will have an easier time understanding why that would be good for all than the Pentagon, or the US right wing?

   Posted 15 years ago #
7. JohnA
   Member

   Levis in 2012

   well - lets see where things go. your response, of course, seems very reasonable. but i am unsure if the heroin, arms, black-ops trade is open to diplomacy and graduated well-reasoned diplomatic solutions.

   the problem is so entrenched in the region and the machinary of world economics and international crime and crude nationalism and religious fundamentalism and corrupt regional politics and international superpowers that your solutions seem noble - but perhaps a little naive?.

   do you really think the new civilian leadership in Pakistan has any power at all? maybe if you engage them in the right way, as you suggest, they will take a stand and you can manage to get them all killed.

   we all know that something much bigger than local politics is happening in the region. we all know that international criminals have a death-grip on the region which, unfortunately, involves usurping the indigenous tribes and passions in the region to forward their own agenda and money-making-machines and privatized armies.

   lets be real here. this problem transcends diplomacy.

   heroin. oil and natural gas. illegal arms trades. geopolitical positioning. the CENTER of the grand chessboard for the world's superpowers. bazzilions of dollars.

   it is Las Vegas in the 1950s and you want to ween the gangstas off gambling?

   The inmates are running the asylum my friend - and the crazy bling-bling money is flowing in and out of the king makers' and empire breakers' pockets. good luck with good intentions.

   international organized crime. Al Capone franchises everywhere. The Untouchables. Ruthless murderers. world criminals with their own private armies - and the complicity of the superpowers. wild wild west.

   and you want to speak of collateral damage from missile strikes?

   Bwahahahahahaha!!!

   how do we even begin to measure the shattered lives and destroyed resources of a world community at the mercy of this crime syndicate?

   9/11. The Bali bombings. Spain's railway. London's underground. These attacks are NOTHING compared to the millions who are enslaved, and have labored and died at the hands of this crime syndicate. nameless victims in numbers that we cannot even begin to fathom. tentacles that stretch to indonesia, Iraq, central america, washington DC, the IMF, and into our food and air and drinking water.

   i like your idealism Levis. But - i wonder who exactly is being naïve here? perhaps a strongly worded letter will make them stop? perhaps arresting them? who? where? how? you and what army?

   perhaps a committee of world leaders can assemble in Prague and debate whether to order the fish or the veal on their menu - while they keep an eye on their waiters as they sharpen their knives?

   perhaps a messianic figure could pursued the leaders of the world to throw themselves into the volcano - for the good of the world?

   the stakes have never been higher. the scale of this thing has never been bigger. every minimum wage employee fired from Circuit City is a casualty of this war. do you get that?

   so what's the solution?

   the bigger they are - the harder they fall. maybe it will take a falling empire to wake up and crush this syndicate.

   i can hope - can't i ?

   Posted 15 years ago #
8. NicholasLevis
   Member

   Hey, none of this "naive" bullshit. You ask me what I'd do if I were president, that's inherently a naive question right there. So we each come up with a program.

   So what's the solution, Mr. A? Who do you bomb? How does it help any? Talk about simplistic, you lump in a number of different complex factors and this is supposed to be solved by an offensive in a mess of a country with an absolutely impossible precision?!

   By the way, you say it's ridiculous to think:

   heroin, arms, black-ops trade is open to diplomacy and graduated well-reasoned diplomatic solutions.

   Of all things, heroin as a world problem can be fixed overnight. Seriously. You'd have a lot of poorer farmers, it's true. But you'd also put a lot of warlords out of business. You could end the worst manifestations of heroin trade and drug war very quickly by decriminalization. And you know this, I am certain. And the money for treatment is even there, already budgeted for "enforcement." And the system for social control is there, too, pharmacy having proven to be much more effective than "enforcement."

   So that's one down.

   Posted 15 years ago #
9. Durruti
   Member

   JohnA,

   You have confirmed my worst fears about the Obama cult.

   Here's an idea:

   "Osama" (speaking along theoretical lines) had a "right" to bomb WTC 'cause CIA had offices there. Your fellow NY'ers were "collateral damage".

   How very sad that people should surrender their principles to a leader figure with no principles. How sad that they should surrender themselves to a "leader" at all.

   I'll leave yah to it.

   Posted 15 years ago #
10. JohnA
    Member

    Durrati - you have confirmed my worst fears about the Obama bashers - they lie.

    i am not defending Obama policy in anything i wrote here. in fact, i tend to agree with Levis that missile strikes are dangerous and counter-productive.

    Posted 15 years ago #
11. JohnA
    Member

    I see Danse over at TruthAction is predicatably cherry picking my quotes to claim i am part of the "Obama Cult" LOL

    of course - they also post videos there morphing Obama into Hitler.

    Yeah - that's brilliant and objective stuff. LOL!!

    At the same time we see the intentional INSULTS Mr Danse offers up (when he is not busy cutting and pasting other people’s work there) by posting pictures equating African Americans in tears with teenagers in tears at a Beatles concert.

    I think this perfectly underscores the lack of objectivity and fairness of Mr Danse’s opinions. These African Americans in tears that he seeks to mock and degrade with this analogy are the descendents of slaves - segregated citizens who were beaten and hosed down in the streets, attacked with dogs and LYNCHED. These people in tears that Mr Danse seeks to pass judgment on and poison the atmosphere of hope and good will that this election has created, just decades ago would have been unable to be served lunch, use a water fountain or VOTE in some areas of this country. These people in tears that Danse seeks to MOCK may very well have relatives – fathers, mothers, grandfathers, grandmothers, uncles and aunts, who have suffered DIRECTLY from bigotry and hatred. They have endured church burnings and bombings. They have endured CASTRATION and hangings and assassinations and degradation on a scale that Mr. Danse can hardly even approach in understanding.

    Everyone is entitled to opinions. But when those opinions start infringing on the dignity of people who have suffered a generational holocaust – (both African-Americans AND Hitler's victims) seeking to dismiss their very legitimate emotions – I really have to wonder what side of social justice, honesty, and fairness Mr. Danse represents.

    Posted 15 years ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.