Was Al Qaeda the Real Suspect?

[wildbilln864]

A snip from Jones' truth news...
"On January 11th 2008 member of Parliament Yukihisa Fujita of the Japan Democratic party, made a 20 minute long statement at the House of Councillors, the upper house of the Diet (parliament) of Japan. He questioned the official version of 9/11 presented to the Japanese government and the public by the US administration in a session of the defense commission.

He asked the current Prime Minister Fukuda who was the Chief Cabinet Secretary under Koizumi cabinet in 2001.

“How could terrorists attacked the Pentagon?”"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX9PQayrX-s">link
Can anyone here translate? :hi:

[mrgerbik]

1. maybe a better question would be "Was Al Queda Real?"

:D

[SDuderstadt]

2. It's beyond stupid to claim...

Al Qaeda isn't real or doesn't exist

[wildbilln864]

3. It's beyond stupid to believe...

the official lie without ever having a real and independant investigstion, IMHO!

[Democracyinkind]

7. Is it now? Look I don't buy into the CIA=AQ shit, since I've read something about it

but the claim that AQ exists as a global, centralized, streamlined movement/org. is ridiculous. Maybe this is easy to say for me because where I live you can easily attend lectures by people who actually have studied Islamic Terrorism, people like Gilles Keppel for instance, author of a classic book about " radical islam " ... Or you could interview the people who've been there in the 80's, as Adam Curtis has done for the BBC for example, and they will tell you the same thing. Some of those people even have to suppress the intriguing smile when asked about AQ.

We have offered a label, a perfect brand to represent terrorism and all that is wrong with brown people and practically dared anyone to lay a claim to it. And that's pretty much what happened. Now suddenly the folks in Kabul were Brothers with the people from Syria they didn't even know about the day before. Don't fool yourself. It may be easier to live in a world where the enemy is AQ, but it certainly would do the world good to live in reality, where you have clusters of resistance and violence that have found a common rhetoric, while still operating, recruiting and financing wholly on their own.

Now, if the proposition is not that AQ is a "fictive false flag enemy", but that AQ is a label designed to make a common enemy out of different groups in order to facilitate the Narrative of the war on terrah, maybe you can give it a second thought. If not, maybe give Keppel or other people a chance, and try to cut thru the surface, where things aren't black/white all the time.
If by any chance, I have woken your interest feel free to mail me for a list of proposed reading on the subject that touches these things without getting loony. You don't need ALex Jones for the proposition I made, a visit to your library should suffice.

[pauldp]

8. Do you buy into the ISI funds and manipulates AQ shit?

I agree that AQ has become a convenient catch all label for any Sunni Jihaddis, but the fact that much of the so call AQ "leadership" KSM, Omar Saeed Sheikh, etc. were ISI assets is very significant and too often is curiously dismissed or ignored. When it comes to terrorism in Kashmir for example, the jihaddis or "Al Qaeda" were not operating, financing and recruiting on their own, they had state sponsorship.

Have you read this?

http://www.amazon.com/Deception-Pakistan-United-Nuclear-Weapons/dp/0802715540

[Democracyinkind]

9. Don't get me wrong. I think we two agree.

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.

[mrgerbik]

4. maybe a slight redefinition of real is in order...

for Mr. SD ... real meaning genuine or authentic (a truly 'grassroots' organization) - a difference from real meaning to not exist at all. :eyes:


http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=881321004838285177&q=the+power+of+nightmares&total=421&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

[wildbilln864]

5. it says the video is no longer available.

This seems to be happening more frequently. :shrug:

[NowHearThis]

6. Is the reason why you say that due to Al's origins?

Many people believe that Al Q still exists because its CIA creators never deleted it. If so, then at the least it must be
really incomplete and inaccurate.