Reply #9: Don't get me wrong. I think we two agree. [View All]

[Democracyinkind]

Actually, when we are talking the 80's, I sure as hell don't know who ran whom, and who worked for whom. With OBL it's really complicated, and it is pretty much an open debate. ( Even trying to determine if he's still alive has proven to be an almost impossible task)

When it comes to Kashmir... Same thing. Yes I am open to the notion that those Ops are run largely by the "ISI Cabal".. There is evidence for that. But then. Who does the ISI follow? are they independent? SOmetimes they look like real jihadists and then on the other hand they have aspects that are plain CIA.

My previous post was intended to highlight that saying " The CIA is Al Kaida " doesn't make much sense, because it is exactly like you stated: there is such commingling, interlocking and interdependence that it's quite hard to figure out who's on what side for what reasons and for how long. We have a definite connection to Osama Bin Laden (who knows, maybe Tim Osman style)and the ISI was - like many other Intel Services - pretty much built, conceived and propped up by the USA. Pakistan is pretty baffling and I encourage anyone to try to make sense of everything going on, that's why I tried to speak up against the simplistic view that "AQ" (whose existence in the way it was presented by Bushco and the MSM I, like many others, do not believe) is just an arm of the CIA. Just because we spit in the soup doesn't mean we're cooking it, although that sounds better in german.

Anyway. To make it short. I think we two could agree.

And thanks for the link. Haven't heard of that book yet, but I will definitely buy it. I have done some research on the "Khan Proliferation Network" and I have had some insights because I am pretty near one of the "crime scenes": Switzerland. The people I talk to have repeatedly pointed out to me how suspect the whole Khan story is. Tinner, the swiss connection to Khans network turns out to have been turned CIA somewhere along the line. While investigating that story the question of when exactly he has become a CIA mole turned up, and that's where it gets fishy. There's circumstantial evidence that the whole swiss operation was conceived by the CIA to trap the Iranian nuclear program. Funny thing is: Tinner's presence and confirmed actions for the CIA don't exactly fit the description of mole/saboteur - one guy who studied the plans and how the manipulated the parts they delivered goes so far as to claim that he only sabotaged worthless pieces that the iranians could produce themselves while the essential stuff mysteriously arrived unharmed. There's allot to it. Maybe when I have some time thru Summer I'll be able to make a thread about that. I was hoping that maybe we would know more by now but the Tinner affair proves to be a real clusterfuck.