3 ms·

> Most people do not have the capability to appreciate the criminality that has gone on in Washington, London and elsewhere over the years. So this criminality

by dpwm 9y ago

> Most people do not have the capability to appreciate the criminality that has gone on in Washington, London and elsewhere over the years. So this criminality goes on and the Western democracies exist in their special lawless way, preparing for war and actively beating up the world for profit. The problem is that the idea of law is one of the Western definition. Unless I'm not aware of something, it is almost certainly (domestically) lawful for Washington to act in a way that allows for expansionist and imperialist policies. Whether it is a good idea in the long term (winning hearts and minds) is another debate to be had. > The funniest bullshit is the 'al-qaeda' nonsense. Not one person has ever met an al-qaeda person even if dead people in brown parts of the world are obviously al-qaeda. In previous wars you at least knew the enemy existed, now it is just fake news that you have to believe, on the Koolaid. I'm really not sure if I have understood you correctly. I'm inclined to believe Al-qaeda was a thing. Whether it was an existential threat the the US is certainly questionable and whether the military response was therefore justified is certainly questionable, especially given that they have so far included four of the six countries listed in Rebuilding America's Defences [0]. I am inclined to agree there was a degree of dehumanisation of the civilian casualties of the ensuing wars that had at least the undertones of racism. [0] Rebuilding America's Defences was a 2000 publication by "The Project for the New American Century." It contains a a list of countries the think tank argued the USA should invade, including Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya and North Korea. Afghanistan was mentioned as a training ground for terrorism. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/RebuildingAmeri...

Theodores 9y ago
Your only knowledge of the existence of 'al-qaeda' is from what the people that brief the news men have chosen to tell you. For instance, there was a stand off between India and Pakistan during the glory days of The War Against Terror where it was alleged that there was 'al-qaeda' in between the two countries causing the trouble and that Uncle Sam could fix it. Obviously there were also the fake terror warnings where it could be red or orange depending on what random rubbish had been told to the media that day. Then there are independence movements in Africa where it is too complicated so 'al-qaeda' gets 'affiliated' so the story is explained that way. Then there is the actual creation myth of 'al-qaeda', wasn't it made up on the testimony of one unreliable witness in a New York court room? Wasn't there motive for inventing 'al-qaeda' in trying to prosecute Osama bin Laden under RICO laws, for which some organisation needed to be invented? Or did I imagine that? I think you need to be checking primary sources for this 'al-qaeda' and doing some checking of facts, 'inclined to believe' is fine if it is a religion, but history is not a religion.
- dpwm 9y ago
  I had no idea this was contentious, but it really does seem it is. Robin Cook, a former UK Minister who I had immense respect for due to his stepping down over the invasion of Iraq, had this to say shortly before his death: > Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by Western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. [0] As you imply you know of some, could you give some pointers for primary sources surrounding this? [0] https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/jul/08/july7.development https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/jul/08/july7.development

by dpwm 9y ago

Theodores 9y ago

Your only knowledge of the existence of 'al-qaeda' is from what the people that brief the news men have chosen to tell you. For instance, there was a stand off between India and Pakistan during the glory days of The War Against Terror where it was alleged that there was 'al-qaeda' in between the two countries causing the trouble and that Uncle Sam could fix it. Obviously there were also the fake terror warnings where it could be red or orange depending on what random rubbish had been told to the media that day. Then there are independence movements in Africa where it is too complicated so 'al-qaeda' gets 'affiliated' so the story is explained that way. Then there is the actual creation myth of 'al-qaeda', wasn't it made up on the testimony of one unreliable witness in a New York court room? Wasn't there motive for inventing 'al-qaeda' in trying to prosecute Osama bin Laden under RICO laws, for which some organisation needed to be invented? Or did I imagine that? I think you need to be checking primary sources for this 'al-qaeda' and doing some checking of facts, 'inclined to believe' is fine if it is a religion, but history is not a religion.

dpwm 9y ago
I had no idea this was contentious, but it really does seem it is. Robin Cook, a former UK Minister who I had immense respect for due to his stepping down over the invasion of Iraq, had this to say shortly before his death: > Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by Western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. [0] As you imply you know of some, could you give some pointers for primary sources surrounding this? [0] https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/jul/08/july7.development https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/jul/08/july7.development