There is no Al-Qaeda (remove tinfoil hats)

[Sultan]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/...al-qaida-structure.htm

Shura/Advisory Council - Usama bin Laden's inner circle; they direct the overall strategy of the organization.
Sharia/Political Committee - Responsible for issuing fatwas.
Military Committee - Resposible for conceiving and planning operations, as well as managing training camps.
Finance Committee - Responsible for fund-raising, and the concealment of assets.
Foreign Purchases Committee - Responsible for the acquisition of foreign arm and supplies.
Security Committee - Physical protection, intelligence, and counter-intelligence.
Information Committee - In charge of propaganda.

From your own website:

This chart is derived from STAFF STATEMENT NO. 15: Overview of the Enemy by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States.

I am not trying to enter a pissing contest or trying to antagonize you. But I still dont see why you completely choose to dismiss the above documentary's arguments. Even the above goes on to show Adam Curtis was right.

Don't know what you're talking abotu concerning the caves. As far as sleeper cells:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles...608.html?oneclick=true

Washington: The captured terrorist mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was carrying the names and phone numbers of members of al-Qaeda sleeper cells in North America when he was apprehended, according to intelligence officials.

I cannot read this article as I have to subscribe. The documentary highlights the caves as mentioned by Mr. Rumsfield. I would suggest you see it.

As for the above issue regarding the sleeper cells and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed carrying the names and phone numbers of member of al-Qaeda sleeper cells in North America, I can only provide you with the following information from the website (Guardian) you yourself earlier posted:

Of the 664 people detained up to the end of last month, only 17 have been found guilty. Of these, the majority were Irish Republicans, Sikh militants or members of other groups with no connection to Islamist terrorism. Nobody has been convicted who is a proven member of al-Qaida.

Aren't all the al Qaeda members still in Gitmo? Have it even been determined yet whether they are getting a trial?

They are being held without charge, and it has never been proven they are Al-Qaeda members.

It was used in '98 by Clinton. Time for you to start doing some of your own homework here, pal. Pretending something is not true instead of finding out yourself for a fact first is not good discussion practice.

I have searched plenty. Bin Laden's name has been used, in the Embassy bombings, USS Cole bombing and the subsequent cruise missile attacks on Afghanistan but I have yet not found a statement from him or his administration using the word Al-Qaeda. I am REQUESTING you to please find me such a statement. Maybe it will change my opinion about this documentary. Thats the whole point of discussing this documentary and your contribution to this thread, isnt it?

And he "challenged" your viewpoints after you attacked his reasoning right here:

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Forsythe
[edit]
* Now it finally makes sense, i've allways wondered why the name al-qaeda had no official spelling, everybody splled it differently, now i makes sense! I mean, if Bin Laden had come up with that name, everybody would know how to spell it. And even i fell for it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I guess by that reasoning that means Quadafi, erm...Ghadaffi, err...Kadafi doesn't actually exist then? The leader of Libya is merely a figment of our imagination?

You attacked his reasoning even though it obviously was a light humor, without watching the video, and he just cited your beliefs, which so far you have only emphasized. You do believe in this worldwide network of terrorists.

I suggest staying off personal attacks and you also doing your part in keeping forum discussions civilized.

Are we clear now?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Sultan

http://www.globalsecurity.org/...al-qaida-structure.htm

Shura/Advisory Council - Usama bin Laden's inner circle; they direct the overall strategy of the organization.
Sharia/Political Committee - Responsible for issuing fatwas.
Military Committee - Resposible for conceiving and planning operations, as well as managing training camps.
Finance Committee - Responsible for fund-raising, and the concealment of assets.
Foreign Purchases Committee - Responsible for the acquisition of foreign arm and supplies.
Security Committee - Physical protection, intelligence, and counter-intelligence.
Information Committee - In charge of propaganda.

From your own website:

This chart is derived from STAFF STATEMENT NO. 15: Overview of the Enemy by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States.

I am not trying to enter a pissing contest or trying to antagonize you. But I still dont see why you completely choose to dismiss the above documentary's arguments. Even the above goes on to show Adam Curtis was right.

Actually, it goes to show that Curtis is mostly wrong. I don't see why you are attempting to dismiss the argument that al Qaeda is more than an idea, it's an actual entity. Ideas don't form committees.

I can agree with Curtis to a point, but he steps far beyond the line in an attempt to forward some type of world-shaking theory. Sure al Qaeda is losely affiliated and it's primarily comprised of disparate terrorist groups. However, it does have an orginazational and command structure and directives and funding are being handed out from the top.

Don't know what you're talking abotu concerning the caves. As far as sleeper cells:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles...608.html?oneclick=true

Washington: The captured terrorist mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was carrying the names and phone numbers of members of al-Qaeda sleeper cells in North America when he was apprehended, according to intelligence officials.

I cannot read this article as I have to subscribe. The documentary highlights the caves as mentioned by Mr. Rumsfield. I would suggest you see it.[/quote]
I watched it late last night when I finally had the time. Thanks for the assumptive suggestion though.

As for the above issue regarding the sleeper cells and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed carrying the names and phone numbers of member of al-Qaeda sleeper cells in North America, I can only provide you with the following information from the website (Guardian) you yourself earlier posted:

Of the 664 people detained up to the end of last month, only 17 have been found guilty. Of these, the majority were Irish Republicans, Sikh militants or members of other groups with no connection to Islamist terrorism. Nobody has been convicted who is a proven member of al-Qaida.

Those in custody haven't even been tried yet. Your point is a red herring.

Aren't all the al Qaeda members still in Gitmo? Have it even been determined yet whether they are getting a trial?

They are being held without charge, and it has never been proven they are Al-Qaeda members.

Except for the ones that were released from Gitmo because they supposedly were "innocent" who were subsequently killed or recaptured fighting for the Islmofascists in the ME.

It was used in '98 by Clinton. Time for you to start doing some of your own homework here, pal. Pretending something is not true instead of finding out yourself for a fact first is not good discussion practice.

I have searched plenty. Bin Laden's name has been used, in the Embassy bombings, USS Cole bombing and the subsequent cruise missile attacks on Afghanistan but I have yet not found a statement from him or his administration using the word Al-Qaeda. I am REQUESTING you to please find me such a statement. Maybe it will change my opinion about this documentary. Thats the whole point of discussing this documentary and your contribution to this thread, isnt it?

You are now moving the goalposts. I never said anything about bin Laden usign the term, you did.

And he "challenged" your viewpoints after you attacked his reasoning right here:

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Forsythe
[edit]
* Now it finally makes sense, i've allways wondered why the name al-qaeda had no official spelling, everybody splled it differently, now i makes sense! I mean, if Bin Laden had come up with that name, everybody would know how to spell it. And even i fell for it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I guess by that reasoning that means Quadafi, erm...Ghadaffi, err...Kadafi doesn't actually exist then? The leader of Libya is merely a figment of our imagination?

You attacked his reasoning even though it obviously was a light humor, without watching the video, and he just cited your beliefs, which so far you have only emphasized. You do believe in this worldwide network of terrorists.

I suggest staying off personal attacks and you also doing your part in keeping forum discussions civilized.

Are we clear now?

And I responded with humor. It was no personal attack either as the humor was directly related to the topic and not my personal worldview or beliefs. Nice try at manufacturing bunk, Sultan, but it falls way short upon inspection.

Are we clear now?

 

[Sultan]

Actually, it goes to show that Curtis is mostly wrong. I don't see why you are attempting to dismiss the argument that al Qaeda is more than an idea, it's an actual entity. Ideas don't form committees.

I can agree with Curtis to a point, but he steps far beyond the line in an attempt to forward some type of world-shaking theory. Sure al Qaeda is losely affiliated and it's primarily comprised of disparate terrorist groups. However, it does have an orginazational and command structure and directives and funding are being handed out from the top.

The committee and command structure you speak of comes from the United States government, which as Curtis says also highlights huge underground cave bunkers, the overstatement of effects of dirty bomb, etc, etc. Therefore, it is not viable proof that such a command structure exists. You cannot negate Curtis argument with something that the US government claims to be facts without any proof. Even the Staff Statement No. 15 just lists the structure as such, without any reference whatsoever on where and how they determined this kind of organization to exist. In fact, it says:

This organizational structure should not be read as defining a hierachical chain of command for specific terrorist operations. It served as a means for coordinating functions and providing material support to operations.

This is nothing but a hypothetical understanding of how a terrorist organization would coordinate functions and provide material support to operations. The organizational components of this chart are basically any MidEast governments basic structure.

I watched it late last night when I finally had the time. Thanks for the assumptive suggestion though.

I'm glad you did. I didnt assume you didnt, I just suggested you should watch it. No need to be on the defensive all the time. Did you see the part about the caves then?

Those in custody haven't even been tried yet. Your point is a red herring.

Which does not negate the fact that uptil now, 3 years after 9/11, nobody has been convicted who is a proven member of Al-Qaeda.

Except for the ones that were released from Gitmo because they supposedly were "innocent" who were subsequently killed or recaptured fighting for the Islmofascists in the ME.

This is something totally new that I've heard. I guess the US Intelligence system still sucks.

You are now moving the goalposts. I never said anything about bin Laden usign the term, you did.

No, I think you misundertood. I said that I have not yet read a statement by Clinton or his administration using the term Al-Qaeda. They did use bin Laden's name, but not al-Qaeda as you said. I therefore REQUESTED you to please provide a statement where Clinton or his administration used the term Al-Qaeda before 2001.

And I responded with humor. It was no personal attack either as the humor was directly related to the topic and not my personal worldview or beliefs. Nice try at manufacturing bunk, Sultan, but it falls way short upon inspection.

I believe it was not I but Forsythe who took it to be a personal attack. His post right after yours and Chadder007 asked both of you not to attack him personally. But since you are not indulging in personal attacks any more, lets just leave this at that.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Sultan

Actually, it goes to show that Curtis is mostly wrong. I don't see why you are attempting to dismiss the argument that al Qaeda is more than an idea, it's an actual entity. Ideas don't form committees.

I can agree with Curtis to a point, but he steps far beyond the line in an attempt to forward some type of world-shaking theory. Sure al Qaeda is losely affiliated and it's primarily comprised of disparate terrorist groups. However, it does have an orginazational and command structure and directives and funding are being handed out from the top.

The committee and command structure you speak of comes from the United States government, which as Curtis says also highlights huge underground cave bunkers, the overstatement of effects of dirty bomb, etc, etc. Therefore, it is not viable proof that such a command structure exists. You cannot negate Curtis argument with something that the US government claims to be facts without any proof. Even the Staff Statement No. 15 just lists the structure as such, without any reference whatsoever on where and how they determined this kind of organization to exist. In fact, it says:

This organizational structure should not be read as defining a hierachical chain of command for specific terrorist operations. It served as a means for coordinating functions and providing material support to operations.

This is nothing but a hypothetical understanding of how a terrorist organization would coordinate functions and provide material support to operations. The organizational components of this chart are basically any MidEast governments basic structure.

I though you told me you did some research into this already. Why don't you do some more to find out where the US government got its info on the al Qaeda organizational structure from? I'll give you a hint, they didn't just make it up hypothetically.

I watched it late last night when I finally had the time. Thanks for the assumptive suggestion though.

I'm glad you did. I didnt assume you didnt, I just suggested you should watch it. No need to be on the defensive all the time. Did you see the part about the caves then?

I watched it so of course I did. You seem quite a bit fixated on those caves.

Those in custody haven't even been tried yet. Your point is a red herring.

Which does not negate the fact that uptil now, 3 years after 9/11, nobody has been convicted who is a proven member of Al-Qaeda.

Hitler's body has never been discovered either. I suppose that means he never really died?

You can't have a conviction without a trial. Claiming that nobody has been convicted of being al Qaeda is meaningless and does not imply that there must therefore be no al Qaeda. It is faulty logic.

Except for the ones that were released from Gitmo because they supposedly were "innocent" who were subsequently killed or recaptured fighting for the Islmofascists in the ME.

This is something totally new that I've heard. I guess the US Intelligence system still sucks.

I think there's suckage on both sides in this case.

You are now moving the goalposts. I never said anything about bin Laden usign the term, you did.

No, I think you misundertood. I said that I have not yet read a statement by Clinton or his administration using the term Al-Qaeda. They did use bin Laden's name, but not al-Qaeda as you said. I therefore REQUESTED you to please provide a statement where Clinton or his administration used the term Al-Qaeda before 2001.

:sigh:

I really wish you'd check these for yourself before throwing down the gauntlet and I have to prove you wrong.

http://www.washtimes.com/natio...40624-112921-3401r.htm

The other pronouncement is contained in a Justice Department indictment on Nov. 4, 1998, charging bin Laden with murder in the bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.
The indictment disclosed a close relationship between al Qaeda and Saddam's regime, which included specialists on chemical weapons and all types of bombs, including truck bombs, a favorite weapon of terrorists.
The 1998 indictment said: "Al Qaeda also forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezbollah for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States. In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."

And I responded with humor. It was no personal attack either as the humor was directly related to the topic and not my personal worldview or beliefs. Nice try at manufacturing bunk, Sultan, but it falls way short upon inspection.

I believe it was not I but Forsythe who took it to be a personal attack. His post right after yours and Chadder007 asked both of you not to attack him personally. But since you are not indulging in personal attacks any more, lets just leave this at that.

No problem.

 

[piasabird]

British Press is mostly liberal dogma anyway.

 

[Sultan]

I though you told me you did some research into this already. Why don't you do some more to find out where the US government got its info on the al Qaeda organizational structure from? I'll give you a hint, they didn't just make it up hypothetically.

From the link you provided, it appears their command structure that you stated is hypothetical as no references or explanations have been found as to how this command structure was realized.

I watched it so of course I did. You seem quite a bit fixated on those caves.

I'm concerned as to how the administration overstated the capabilities of Osama bin Laden and his band. At least they dont exist, correct?

Hitler's body has never been discovered either. I suppose that means he never really died?

You can't have a conviction without a trial. Claiming that nobody has been convicted of being al Qaeda is meaningless and does not imply that there must therefore be no al Qaeda. It is faulty logic.

Your analogies are really... Anyways, dont you think after 50 years since Hitler, one would think that 3 years without even charging a person gives a reasonable man sufficient doubt to the veracity of the claims put forth by the government? With Al-Qaeda spread across 60 countries, with thousands of members, even within the United States, and not a single conviction... at least it proves that Al-Qaeda is not that big an organized terrorist network, or will you not even agree to that?

I really wish you'd check these for yourself before throwing down the gauntlet and I have to prove you wrong.

http://www.washtimes.com/natio...40624-112921-3401r.htm

You didnt need to prove me wrong. I just requested the said information. And yes, you are right. The 1998 indictment did include the term Al-Qaeda. I am sure to email Adam Curtis about this.

A more comprehensive listing is here: Link

Lets see what Mr. Curtis has to say about this...

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Sultan

I though you told me you did some research into this already. Why don't you do some more to find out where the US government got its info on the al Qaeda organizational structure from? I'll give you a hint, they didn't just make it up hypothetically.

From the link you provided, it appears their command structure that you stated is hypothetical as no references or explanations have been found as to how this command structure was realized.

Google "al Qaeda Jamal Ahmed al-Fadl."

al-Fadl was a defector from al Qaeda, after embezzling money, that provided the US govenment with the information on al Qaeda's organizational structure.

I watched it so of course I did. You seem quite a bit fixated on those caves.

I'm concerned as to how the administration overstated the capabilities of Osama bin Laden and his band. At least they dont exist, correct?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1714905.stm

The BBC reports there were. There were/are plenty other reports of caves used by al Qaeda in Afghanistan as well.

Hitler's body has never been discovered either. I suppose that means he never really died?

You can't have a conviction without a trial. Claiming that nobody has been convicted of being al Qaeda is meaningless and does not imply that there must therefore be no al Qaeda. It is faulty logic.

Your analogies are really... Anyways, dont you think after 50 years since Hitler, one would think that 3 years without even charging a person gives a reasonable man sufficient doubt to the veracity of the claims put forth by the government? With Al-Qaeda spread across 60 countries, with thousands of members, even within the United States, and not a single conviction... at least it proves that Al-Qaeda is not that big an organized terrorist network, or will you not even agree to that?

You can't have a conviction until you have a trial. The al Qaeda in custody have not been put on trial yet, so the cart is being placed before the horse. Since when is a conviction the only valid measurement of someone being in al Qaeda?

 

[Alistar7]

So there actually is a real terrorist group called Al-Qaeda??????


PLEASE TELL ME, I NEED TO KNOW IF I SHOULD PUT MY TIN FOIL HAT BACK ON BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE.
It will protect me from a WMD attack, right????????????????

 

[klah]

One of the main assertions of the series, that neocons put together the plan to fund the mujahidin in Afghanistan to supports some sort of global vision they had is completely false, and has been known to be untrue for almost a decade. It was Jimmy Carter who devised this plan and put it into action.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v26/n20/john04_.html

In his memoir published in 1996, the former CIA director Robert Gates made it clear that the American intelligence services began to aid the mujahidin guerrillas not after the Soviet invasion, but six months before it.
...
President Carter's national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski:
"on 3 July 1979 President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And on the same day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained that in my opinion this aid would lead to a Soviet military intervention.
The secret operation was an excellent idea. It drew the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? On the day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter, saying, in essence: "We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War.""

So the documentary completely ignores the claims of the former CIA Director and Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser, and instead uses uncontested interviews with the defense attorneys of accused terrorists to support their thesis.