Is Al Quaeda a Creation of Western Security Services ?

Expatgirl – here is the information I mentioned today, in response to your post on the death of David Kelly.

Robin Cook wrote a Guardian article headed “Terrorism Cannot be Defeated by Military Means” June 11th 2005. He died suddenly a month later. Cook was the Cabinet Minister who resigned from the Cabinet in protest against the war on Iraq. His resignation speech is the only speech ever to have received a standing ovation in the Houses of Parliament.

Cook identified Al Quaeda as “the database” of muslim fundamentalists who were available to work for the CIA. This is part of the article:

Quote :

Osama bin Laden is no more a true representative of Islam than General Mladic, who commanded the Serbian forces, could be held up as an example of Christianity. After all, it is written in the Qur'an that we were made into different peoples not that we might despise each other, but that we might understand each other.
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-Qaida, 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. Inexplicably, and with disastrous consequences, it never appears to have occurred to Washington that once Russia was out of the way, Bin Laden's organisation would turn its attention to the west.
The danger now is that the west's current response to the terrorist threat compounds that original error. So long as the struggle against terrorism is conceived as a war that can be won by military means, it is doomed to fail

.

The rest of the article, along with other sources, is here:
http://shaphan.typepad.com/blog/g8_bombings/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Cook

http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/2007/04/al-qaeda-ties-to-western-intelligence.html

In the next post, I am leaving a copy of material by Nafeed Ahmed, a writer and researcher, on the links between western intelligence and Al Quaeda / radical islamists.

A nice post Cactus. But the well is even deeper, as I'm sure you're aware.

When Russia was given the boot, the commanders of the Northern Alliance, actively tried to form a government. There was some infighting etc. The US decided that the various commanders would not be forming a government and thus propped up a puppet government, called the Taliban. The fact that the Taliban were a bunch of religious and misogynistic bigots, never once bothered the US administration. It never bothered them, that is, until the Taliban attempted to play hard to get with a certain pipeline deal. 9/11 offered the perfect opportunity to set the Taliban right and their card was marked. There was no way of avoiding what was coming, even offering to comply with all US demands regarding Bin Laden was to fall on deaf ears. Afterall, they really didn't and don't care about Bin Laden.

Anyway, the US did not declare war on Afghanistan. Instead they offered assistance to the Northern Alliance, so that they might take back their country from the oppressive Taliban. Of course, when the Taliban were sufficiently ousted, but not too beaten, the US again decided not to facilitate the various commanders of the Northern Alliance in forming a government. Instead, they opted for the old faithful, they installed a puppet government. The fact that this government are a bunch of religious and misogynistic bigots doesn't seem to bother the US. Indeed this time they've insisted on the writing of a constitution that promotes infighting, division and religious bigotry and have installed a former oil executive to ensure things run smoothly.

Wash, rinse and repeat.

Another generation taught to hate the west and whatever figureheads the powers that be promote to being in charge of ficticious terrorist organisations will not mean a whole hill of beans. They'll simply provide an excuse to begin the next round of sub-human behaviour.

Some more "awkward facts" .... from the author and researcher Nafeez Ahmed:

Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Norwegian Daily: Terrorists Working for Western Countries
It came to my attention that a senior correspondent, Kristin Aalen, working for a national Norwegian broadsheet - Stavanger Aftenbladet (Stavanger Evening News) - just recently printed a detailed article in the newspaper on Western covert operations sponsoring al-Qaeda after the Cold War... based almost entirely on my research in The War on Truth: 9/11, Disinformation and the Anatomy of Terrorism.

Entitled "Terrorists Working for Western Countries" (24.11.08), it even gives a country-by-country summary breakdown complete with a handy geopolitical world map of the wide arc of these operations. It's a very useful piece from a mainstream national European paper that very effectively summarises the thrust of my research into this unpalatable subject. A shame that the British press is so reticient about such issues.

There are some caveats. Kristin sometimes oversimplifies my geopolitical explanations, and this can lead to serious misinterpretations, such as her rendition of my examination of Pentagon sponsorship of al-Qaeda fighters in the Balkans - she says that the US and NATO helped the Bosnian Muslims against the Serbs, provoking them, and thus preventing peace. This is caricature of my argument, which is more fully fleshed out in The London Bombings: An Independent Inquiry. The Serbs were, in fact, encouraged to act with impunity, and the US Defense Intelligence Agency's influx of mujahideen fighters into the Bosnia predictably aggravated the crisis. Ensuing NATO airstrikes were thoroughly ineffective, and indeed the US, UN and NATO, having accelerated the disintegration of Yugoslavia, acted in concert to do nothing when the Serbs committed genocide against Bosnian Muslims in Srebrencia and beyond.

Anyway. What follows is a basic translation of the piece.

=========

-Terrorists working for western countries

We have been told that Western countries would do everything they could to eradicate Al-Qaeda in the "war on terror". But Western intelligence has from the 1990s, used terrorists to do dirty work in a number of countries.

By Kirstin Aalen
24th November 2008

During the Cold War, the United States was concerned to break the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. The CIA cooperated with Saudi Arabian and Pakistani intelligence to support Muslim guerrilla soldiers - mujahedin - in the fight against the communists.

Thousands of Islamic jihadists (holy warriors) were trained in Osama bin Laden's training camps until the late 1980s. They came from Arab countries in the Middle East and North Africa and was called Arab Afghans. In 1988, Al-Qaida was founded.

So what?

The Soviets gave up Afghanistan in 1989. Bin Laden's men fought in a couple of years of civil war that followed. So against whom should the jihadists now fight their holy war ? The regimes they came from would not tolerate fundamentalist guerrilla fighters in their own backyard.

Western intelligence services saw an opportunity. Documentation proves that British and American players in particular exploited the brutality of Al-Qaeda. "The goal has been to destabilize regions where Anglo-American power wanted to secure control over oil and gas resources," said the British terrorism analyst Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed. He has written several books on the subject.

Flown on

In 1991 came three US military agents arrived in Azerbaijan. They arranged to fly in over 2,000 mujahedin soldiers. The job was to create rebellion and remove Russian influence. Bin Laden established an Al-Qaida's office in Baku. It was a base for terrorist actions in the Muslim neighborhood near Russia. After two years of unrest the democratically elected president was overthrown in June 1993. The corrupt Alijev took power. Now western and Saudi oil companies could secure a lucrative contract. Construction of the pipeline oil Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan could begin - bypassing Russia.

Moved forward

In 1992 the war in Bosnia began. An official Dutch report authored in 2002 by Professor Cees Wiebes from the University of Amsterdam shows that the Pentagon secretly flew thousands of Al-Qaida soldiers into Bosnia, ostensibly in support of Bosnian Muslims. But these brutal thugs provoked the Serbs so that a peaceful solution was impossible. Nato and the United States supported the Bosnian Muslims with the air strikes.

In 1996, the Kosovo Liberation Army was trained by a high-ranking Al-Qaeda-operative across the border to Albania. But simultaneously, British and US military experts helped.

Macedonia

In 2001, jihadists turned up in Macedonia, now in the guise of the nationalist sister faction, the National Liberation Army (NLA), which was secretly sponsored by Nato and the United States for years as revealed in the Dutch and German media.

Yet Macedonian intelligence reported that Al-Qaeda was also training the NLA in the Kumanovo-Lipkovo region. This information was sent to the CIA and National Security Council in the United States.

Libya

In 1997, the British MI5 anti-terror agent David Shayler revealed that British intelligence in 1995-96 gave 100,000 pounds to Al-Qaida's network in Libya, to plan and complete an assassination of the head of state Col. Mohammar Gaddafi.

Ahmed points out that the other areas where Western covert operations have used al-Qaeda terrorists include Algeria, Egypt, Chechnya (see Graph) and even the Philippines. These case studies show how the activities of Islamic terrorist groups linked to Al-Qaeda through training, money, weapons and fighters have been sponsored by the Anglo-American alliance. "Either by direct or indirect support through state intermediaries. The overall purpose has been to secure control over raw materials, especially oil and gas," said Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed.

===
translation of text in Graph:

KOSOVO 1996-99:

Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) was financed by the heroin trade from Afghanistan and from Osama bin Laden. Many soldier-mercenaries were trained in terrorist camps in Afghanistan. According to Interpol, a KLA unit led by one of bin Laden's senior men, probably Mohammed Al-Zawahiri, was a brother of bin Laden's right hand, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

TRAIN: From 1998 the KLA also trained and armed by NATO. British and U.S. experts helped in the training of Tropoje in Albania.

PURPOSE: The British and the Americans used the KLA to destabilize Kosovo and the increase ethnic animosity. They would gain control of the land areas that could open the way for an oil pipeline via Bulgaria, Macedonia and Albania, except Russia and Iran.

LISTED: This happened despite the fact that the KLA in 1998 was put on the U.S. list of terrorist organizations.

ALGERIA 1992-99:

GIA: Early in the 90s emerged the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) - strong in Algeria and with close ties to Osama bin Laden in Sudan. Throughout the 90s committed a series of atrocities in Algeria, which led to 150,000 civilians killed.

REVELATIONS: In 1997 it was revealed that the massacres took place in cooperation between the GIA and the Algerian etterret-business service and military. Western regimes denied the connection, but several whistleblowers claimed that they have known about this connection.

SALE: Sunday Times and Reuter reported in 2000 that Britain sold a large batch weapons to Algeria. U.S. and Algerian military increased their cooperation in 1999.

BOSNIA 1992-95:

SHOCK: Brutal mujahedin / Al-Qaida fighters were used to fight for Bosnian Muslims against Bosnian Serbs. 10,000 participated.

PENTAGON: A Dutch official report revealed in 2002 how the Pentagon leased Islamic jihadists to fight for Bosnian Muslims.

BOSNIAN PASS: Osama bin Laden had Bosnian passports in 1993. He held meetings in Zagreb in Croatia for Arab-Afghan leaders who were Al-Qaida-emissaries in Bosnia.

WEST: the United States and Britain supported the right nationalist President Alija Izetbegovic to sideline and defeat the multi-ethnic policies of popular rival Bosnian Muslim leader Fikret Adbic. This gave the green light to the fragmentation of Yugoslavia. U.S. and NATO bombers contributed to this.

CHECHNYA 2000:

RUSSIA: Key Chechen cooperation in 1999 with high-ranking Al-Qaida operatives about attacks in the Caucasus.

USA: By the summer of 2000 American private security firms armed al-Qaeda-infiltrated Chechens and their Islamist allies to make rebellion in the region and lead holy war against Russia. The U.S. intention was to destroy a Russian pipeline.

AZERBAIJAN 1991-93

AGENTS: Three agents from the U.S. military flew in at least 2,000 al-Qaeda fighters from Afghanistan to Baku in Azerbaijan. Bin Laden's Al-Qaeda established an office in the city, as a base for terrorism in several areas.

USED TO: Hired fighters made rebellion to reduce Russian influence in the country. Elected president Albufas Eltsjibej fled in June -93. In came Heidar Alijev. Several major oil companies supported the coup.

GOALS: Britain's BP led a consortium of Western and Saudi oil companies that would secure a major contract. In the signed to build an oil pipeline from Baku through Georgia to Ceyhan in Turkey, free from Russian control.

LIBYA 1995-97:

In 1997, MI5 anti-terror agent David Shayler revealed that the British MI6 intelligence agency in 1995-96 paid 100,000 pounds to Al-Qaida's network in Libya so that the terrorists would assasinate country's head of state. The operation failed, ended up under the wrong car, killing six innocent Libyans. The British government denied that it was involved, but two French intelligence experts documented that MI6 in the murder plot had hired bin Laden's highly trusted man, Anas al-Libya. He is on the FBI's "Most Wanted" list for the attack on the U.S. embassies in Africa in 1998.

MACEDONIA 2001:

GUERRILLAS: KLA soldiers went on to form the NLA in Macedonia. At one time, the insurgents were surrounded by the Macedonian security forces, but were rescued by NATO and the United States, though their spokesmen denied this. The news was leaked in Dutch and German media in June 2002.

REPORT: Macedonians reported to the CIA and National Security Council that Al-Qaida had trained the NLA in the region. Received only a polite response from U.S. intelligence.

EGYPT 1997:

In the first half of November 1997 the CIA sent a man called Abu-Umar Al-Amriki to Osama bin Laden's close allies, Ayman al-Zawahiri, in Peshawar, Pakistan. There was a deal made between the Egyptian terrorist leader and the CIA. It was that al-Zawahiri would get 50 million U.S. dollars to ensure that U.S. forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina were not attacked by Islamic mujahedin. Egypt would in turn be able to use the money to "to rule over Egypt." Some weeks later, in December 1997, the al-Zawahiris organization, Al-Jihad, the terrorist attack in Luxor.

MOHAMMED ALI:

Was a double agent for Al-Qaida and the CIA / FBI. He was sent in 1984 by al-Zawahiri to infiltrate the CIA. He joined the U.S. Army and worked at the Special Warfare Center in Fort Bragg, where he stole a manual-fighting techniques. He was among other terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center in New York in 1993, but was not sentenced himself. Also under the name of Abu-Umar Al-Amriki (American). Sent by the CIA in 1997 to broker deal with Al-Zawahiri.

Osama bin Laden:

Lived in Afghanistan in 1984-89 and was one of Al-Qaida's leading theoreticians.

1989-91: In Saudi Arabia, but his harsh criticism of the authorities meant he had to go into exile.

1992-96: Ran Al-Qaida from Khartoum in Sudan.

From 1996: Back in Afghanistan. Established a close cooperation with the ruling Taliban government until the US-led invasion in October 2001.

FINANCING: Bin Laden-financed Al-Qaida in part with money from their own family wealth, and partly from funds collected. But in 1994 when he lost his Saudi citizenship and had all their accounts frozen by the bin Laden family dynasty, he lost the ability to generously support his jihadists.

MUJAHEDIN: Different groups of mujahedin - Muslim guerrilla fighters - were supported by among others the United States, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to fight against the USSR in Afghanistan (1979-89). Saudi Arabian Osama bin Laden built the Tora Bora plant with support from Pakistani intelligence (ISI). Here he could - inspired by Palestinian jihadist theoretician Abdullah Azzam and supported by Egyptian aid Ayman Al-Zawahiri - recruit and train fighters in the jihad (holy war). They also ran an al-Kifah Center (aid office) for jihadists in Peshawar in Pakistan. A number of similar assistance centers were created in the U.S. and Europe.

Al-Qaida:

In Arabic, short-hand for "database". Was founded 17 May 1988 by Osama bin Laden and his closest colleagues.

LEARNING: Al-Qaida offered in their first year training to 10,000 to 20,000 volunteers in several camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan. They were Arab Afghans, given lessons in fighting techniques, weapons handling and use of explosives in addition to ideological training.

ARTICLES:

"Azerbaijan throws raw recruits Into Battle" by Steve Levine, Washington Post 21/4-1994; "Fortune hunters Lured U.S. into volatile Region "by Dan Morgan and David B. Ottaway, Washington Post, 4/10-1998;" U.S. Supported al-Qaeda cells during Balkan Wars "; Isabel Vincent, National Post, 16/3-2002. "Bin Laden linked to Albanian drug gangs" by Colin Brown, Independent, 21/10-2001; "America Used Islamist two Arm the Bosnian Muslims: The Screbenica Report Reveals the Pentagon's Role in a Dirty War," Richard J. Aldrich, Guardian , 22/4-2002. "The Kosovo Liberation Army: Does Clinton Policy Support Group with Terror, Drug Ties? From "Terrorists" two "partners" by Larry E. Craig, United States Senate Rebublican Policy Committee 31/3-1999. "European Intelligence: The U.S. betrayed us in Macedonia" by Christopher Deliso, Randolph Bourne Institute, 22/6-2002. "Do not Shoot the Messenger" by David Shayler, the Observer 27/8-2000.
Posted by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed at 11:55 PM 1 comments Links to this post

Hermes wrote:

Anyway, the US did not declare war on Afghanistan. Instead they offered assistance to the Northern Alliance, so that they might take back their country from the oppressive Taliban. Of course, when the Taliban were sufficiently ousted, but not too beaten, the US again decided not to facilitate the various commanders of the Northern Alliance in forming a government. Instead, they opted for the old faithful, they installed a puppet government. The fact that this government are a bunch of religious and misogynistic bigots doesn't seem to bother the US. Indeed this time they've insisted on the writing of a constitution that promotes infighting, division and religious bigotry and have installed a former oil executive to ensure things run smoothly.

Mmm, not to drag us off-topic, but I thought the Northern Alliance/United Front were the eventual participants in government. This is not something I know a huge amount about and I am happy to be corrected on. Half of them were warlords and criminals, but this was all forgotten in the heat of the anti-Taliban sentiment (just as the Islamic extremism of the Taliban was forgotten in the heat of the ant-Soviet sentiment) and the dire state of the Kabul government reflects that. The surge in drug production had a lot to do with it too I thought.

There are a few good books out there; the Base, by Jane Corbin, pretty much exposes the US "investment" in the Mujahideen of the 80s. The Islamist, by Ed Hussain, is an interesting one re Islamists in the UK. Karen Armstrong wrote a pretty good history of Islam.

I think I read that article by Robin Cook when it came out....

Anyone got any economic figures for how the UK and US military-industrial complexes are coping with the recession?? I do hope they're not a growth industry. I can't believe the UK are still spending on Trident

905 wrote:

Hermes wrote:

Anyway, the US did not declare war on Afghanistan. Instead they offered assistance to the Northern Alliance, so that they might take back their country from the oppressive Taliban. Of course, when the Taliban were sufficiently ousted, but not too beaten, the US again decided not to facilitate the various commanders of the Northern Alliance in forming a government. Instead, they opted for the old faithful, they installed a puppet government. The fact that this government are a bunch of religious and misogynistic bigots doesn't seem to bother the US. Indeed this time they've insisted on the writing of a constitution that promotes infighting, division and religious bigotry and have installed a former oil executive to ensure things run smoothly.

Mmm, not to drag us off-topic, but I thought the Northern Alliance/United Front were the eventual participants in government. This is not something I know a huge amount about and I am happy to be corrected on. Half of them were warlords and criminals, but this was all forgotten in the heat of the anti-Taliban sentiment (just as the Islamic extremism of the Taliban was forgotten in the heat of the ant-Soviet sentiment) and the dire state of the Kabul government reflects that. The surge in drug production had a lot to do with it too I thought.

You're not fully wrong, but you're not fully right either. There are a few members of the Northern Alliance who are part of the regime. But they were voted in and not installed by the US, at least not directly.

The real issue here is the lack of a declaration of war and that the only possible legitimacy that could be associated with the US attack was their recognition of the the legitimacy of the Northern Alliance's war with the Taliban. This in turn was a de facto recogniton of the Northern Alliance being the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan. Of course, once the smoke began to clear, the various acts of recognition evaporated too, and along with this all legitimacy of the American aid and muscle, offered to the Northern Alliance, went poof too, and thus, the true agenda was exposed.

expat girl wrote:

There are a few good books out there; the Base, by Jane Corbin, pretty much exposes the US "investment" in the Mujahideen of the 80s. The Islamist, by Ed Hussain, is an interesting one re Islamists in the UK. Karen Armstrong wrote a pretty good history of Islam.

I think I read that article by Robin Cook when it came out....

Anyone got any economic figures for how the UK and US military-industrial complexes are coping with the recession?? I do hope they're not a growth industry. I can't believe the UK are still spending on Trident

Did the UK not annouce they were building two new warships? There were jobs making missile systems announced last week in the north. Tear gas sales are booming.

Arms will be a growth industry as Governments go off their unruly inhabitants and the military and security services press the urgency of spending more on securing energy sources and putting down the natives/populace.

Building an aircraft carrier is not really going to do you much good against land based unruly inhabitants .

johnfás wrote:

Building an aircraft carrier is not really going to do you much good against land based unruly inhabitants .

That'll be the teargas, smarty pants

The two new aircraft carriers have been in the pipeline for a long time and in fairness to the UK they are replacements for the Invincible carriers that you see when you get the ferry from Southampton to France and are pushing 30 years old at this stage. They announced the build for their replacements about 4 years ago. The reason they were in the news lately is that they are slowing their production in order that they employ more people during the building process.

I don't disagree with you that we are going to see an increase in military and other combative spending though.

Curtis' documentary "The Power of Nightmares" made the case for this a few years ago. It certainly made for good television.

905 wrote:

Hermes wrote:

Anyway, the US did not declare war on Afghanistan. Instead they offered assistance to the Northern Alliance, so that they might take back their country from the oppressive Taliban. Of course, when the Taliban were sufficiently ousted, but not too beaten, the US again decided not to facilitate the various commanders of the Northern Alliance in forming a government. Instead, they opted for the old faithful, they installed a puppet government. The fact that this government are a bunch of religious and misogynistic bigots doesn't seem to bother the US. Indeed this time they've insisted on the writing of a constitution that promotes infighting, division and religious bigotry and have installed a former oil executive to ensure things run smoothly.

Mmm, not to drag us off-topic, but I thought the Northern Alliance/United Front were the eventual participants in government. This is not something I know a huge amount about and I am happy to be corrected on. Half of them were warlords and criminals, but this was all forgotten in the heat of the anti-Taliban sentiment (just as the Islamic extremism of the Taliban was forgotten in the heat of the ant-Soviet sentiment) and the dire state of the Kabul government reflects that. The surge in drug production had a lot to do with it too I thought.

Osama did the Taliban a favour in the couple of weeks preceding 9/11 by getting rid of their main enemy, Ahmed Shah Massoud - he was killed by Al Qaeda agents posing as journos with a bomb in a cheap TV camera (See Paris Match for photos of the assasins and a brief account by one the journalists who flew in to the Panshir Valley on a Northern Alliance helicopter with them).
Bin Laden had a dual motivation...Massoud was the best military mind opposing the Taliban and had a significant support base. He deprived the US of their most likely candidate for a new leader.
Since the US had to search for a new post Taliban leader, it made sense to them to choose a Pasthun - President Karzai - as the US wanted to court the Pasthuns from whose ranks the Taliban draw their men.
The current administraton is made up of Karzai and figures from Massoud's grouping along with General Dosthum.


Bosnia.
The Iranian embassy is Sarajevo grew both in size and stature as the Bosnian conflct dragged on and the Western arms embargo served the cause of well armed serbs.
The growing influence of Iran and the arrival of the jihadis only encouraged the US to push the Serbs and Milosevic for peace.
Part of that push led the US, through private companies to train and equipp the Croatian army and the Croats were supposed to hand over arms to the Bosniak forces.
The Croats eventually launched their Krajina offensive - causing one of the largest refugee movéments since World War 11 though since the victims were Serbs they recevied very little public sympathy.

The US airstrikes can only be described as "ineffectual" from a narrow damage analysis point of view. While militarily no big deal, politcally they were of huge singnificane. They stopped the shelling of Sarajevo, showed that the US was now prepared to act and made Milosevic decide not to risk his fate for the Bosnian Serbs.
The airstrikes made Richard Holbrooke's Dayton agreement possible.

Post Dayton, the US was quick to pressurise Sarajevo to deport jihadis.

Just one other point that's always worth repeating.

The US through combined military and diplomatic pressure ended the brutal siege of Sarajevo and the Bosnian Serbs' rabibly nationalistic war.

The US did this while Europe wringed is futile hands.

Any thoughts about this, KB ?

Quote :

Flown on

In 1991 came three US military agents arrived in Azerbaijan. They arranged to fly in over 2,000 mujahedin soldiers. The job was to create rebellion and remove Russian influence. Bin Laden established an Al-Qaida's office in Baku. It was a base for terrorist actions in the Muslim neighborhood near Russia. After two years of unrest the democratically elected president was overthrown in June 1993. The corrupt Alijev took power. Now western and Saudi oil companies could secure a lucrative contract. Construction of the pipeline oil Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan could begin - bypassing Russia.

Moved forward

In 1992 the war in Bosnia began. An official Dutch report authored in 2002 by Professor Cees Wiebes from the University of Amsterdam shows that the Pentagon secretly flew thousands of Al-Qaida soldiers into Bosnia, ostensibly in support of Bosnian Muslims. But these brutal thugs provoked the Serbs so that a peaceful solution was impossible. Nato and the United States supported the Bosnian Muslims with the air strikes.

In 1996, the Kosovo Liberation Army was trained by a high-ranking Al-Qaeda-operative across the border to Albania. But simultaneously, British and US military experts helped.

Macedonia

In 2001, jihadists turned up in Macedonia, now in the guise of the nationalist sister faction, the National Liberation Army (NLA), which was secretly sponsored by Nato and the United States for years as revealed in the Dutch and German media.

Yet Macedonian intelligence reported that Al-Qaeda was also training the NLA in the Kumanovo-Lipkovo region. This information was sent to the CIA and National Security Council in the United States.

BOSNIA 1992-95:

SHOCK: Brutal mujahedin / Al-Qaida fighters were used to fight for Bosnian Muslims against Bosnian Serbs. 10,000 participated.

PENTAGON: A Dutch official report revealed in 2002 how the Pentagon leased Islamic jihadists to fight for Bosnian Muslims.

BOSNIAN PASS: Osama bin Laden had Bosnian passports in 1993. He held meetings in Zagreb in Croatia for Arab-Afghan leaders who were Al-Qaida-emissaries in Bosnia.

WEST: the United States and Britain supported the right nationalist President Alija Izetbegovic to sideline and defeat the multi-ethnic policies of popular rival Bosnian Muslim leader Fikret Adbic. This gave the green light to the fragmentation of Yugoslavia. U.S. and NATO bombers contributed to this.

Al-Qaida:

In Arabic, short-hand for "database". Was founded 17 May 1988 by Osama bin Laden and his closest colleagues.

LEARNING: Al-Qaida offered in their first year training to 10,000 to 20,000 volunteers in several camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan. They were Arab Afghans, given lessons in fighting techniques, weapons handling and use of explosives in addition to ideological training.

ARTICLES:

"Azerbaijan throws raw recruits Into Battle" by Steve Levine, Washington Post 21/4-1994; "Fortune hunters Lured U.S. into volatile Region "by Dan Morgan and David B. Ottaway, Washington Post, 4/10-1998;" U.S. Supported al-Qaeda cells during Balkan Wars "; Isabel Vincent, National Post, 16/3-2002. "Bin Laden linked to Albanian drug gangs" by Colin Brown, Independent, 21/10-2001; "America Used Islamist two Arm the Bosnian Muslims: The Screbenica Report Reveals the Pentagon's Role in a Dirty War," Richard J. Aldrich, Guardian , 22/4-2002. "The Kosovo Liberation Army: Does Clinton Policy Support Group with Terror, Drug Ties? From "Terrorists" two "partners" by Larry E. Craig, United States Senate Rebublican Policy Committee 31/3-1999. "European Intelligence: The U.S. betrayed us in Macedonia" by Christopher Deliso, Randolph Bourne Institute, 22/6-2002. "Do not Shoot the Messenger" by David Shayler, the Observer 27/8-2000.

cactus flower wrote:

Any thoughts about this, KB ?

Quote :

Flown on

In 1991 came three US military agents arrived in Azerbaijan. They arranged to fly in over 2,000 mujahedin soldiers. The job was to create rebellion and remove Russian influence. Bin Laden established an Al-Qaida's office in Baku. It was a base for terrorist actions in the Muslim neighborhood near Russia. After two years of unrest the democratically elected president was overthrown in June 1993. The corrupt Alijev took power. Now western and Saudi oil companies could secure a lucrative contract. Construction of the pipeline oil Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan could begin - bypassing Russia.

Moved forward

In 1992 the war in Bosnia began. An official Dutch report authored in 2002 by Professor Cees Wiebes from the University of Amsterdam shows that the Pentagon secretly flew thousands of Al-Qaida soldiers into Bosnia, ostensibly in support of Bosnian Muslims. But these brutal thugs provoked the Serbs so that a peaceful solution was impossible. Nato and the United States supported the Bosnian Muslims with the air strikes.

In 1996, the Kosovo Liberation Army was trained by a high-ranking Al-Qaeda-operative across the border to Albania. But simultaneously, British and US military experts helped.

Macedonia

In 2001, jihadists turned up in Macedonia, now in the guise of the nationalist sister faction, the National Liberation Army (NLA), which was secretly sponsored by Nato and the United States for years as revealed in the Dutch and German media.

Yet Macedonian intelligence reported that Al-Qaeda was also training the NLA in the Kumanovo-Lipkovo region. This information was sent to the CIA and National Security Council in the United States.

BOSNIA 1992-95:

SHOCK: Brutal mujahedin / Al-Qaida fighters were used to fight for Bosnian Muslims against Bosnian Serbs. 10,000 participated.

PENTAGON: A Dutch official report revealed in 2002 how the Pentagon leased Islamic jihadists to fight for Bosnian Muslims.

BOSNIAN PASS: Osama bin Laden had Bosnian passports in 1993. He held meetings in Zagreb in Croatia for Arab-Afghan leaders who were Al-Qaida-emissaries in Bosnia.

WEST: the United States and Britain supported the right nationalist President Alija Izetbegovic to sideline and defeat the multi-ethnic policies of popular rival Bosnian Muslim leader Fikret Adbic. This gave the green light to the fragmentation of Yugoslavia. U.S. and NATO bombers contributed to this.

Al-Qaida:

In Arabic, short-hand for "database". Was founded 17 May 1988 by Osama bin Laden and his closest colleagues.

LEARNING: Al-Qaida offered in their first year training to 10,000 to 20,000 volunteers in several camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan. They were Arab Afghans, given lessons in fighting techniques, weapons handling and use of explosives in addition to ideological training.

ARTICLES:

"Azerbaijan throws raw recruits Into Battle" by Steve Levine, Washington Post 21/4-1994; "Fortune hunters Lured U.S. into volatile Region "by Dan Morgan and David B. Ottaway, Washington Post, 4/10-1998;" U.S. Supported al-Qaeda cells during Balkan Wars "; Isabel Vincent, National Post, 16/3-2002. "Bin Laden linked to Albanian drug gangs" by Colin Brown, Independent, 21/10-2001; "America Used Islamist two Arm the Bosnian Muslims: The Screbenica Report Reveals the Pentagon's Role in a Dirty War," Richard J. Aldrich, Guardian , 22/4-2002. "The Kosovo Liberation Army: Does Clinton Policy Support Group with Terror, Drug Ties? From "Terrorists" two "partners" by Larry E. Craig, United States Senate Rebublican Policy Committee 31/3-1999. "European Intelligence: The U.S. betrayed us in Macedonia" by Christopher Deliso, Randolph Bourne Institute, 22/6-2002. "Do not Shoot the Messenger" by David Shayler, the Observer 27/8-2000.

Cactus...this post-stamps of info are difficult to deal with...there could be the odd covert op but the main thrust of US policy in Bosnia outside of the possibility of humanitarian pressures - not to be laughed at Al Gore comes out well in A Problem From Hell America in the Age Of Genocide teh Pulitzer winning book by the Irish Obama aide that had to resign, Samatha Power. But there was a definate policy to curb Iranian growth. Bosnian Muslims had no tradition of radicalism. In fact many were Muslim in name only, having converted for material reasons during the Ottaman times. Their slaughter, however, worked to radicalise some. I find it hard to believe that they would take the risks with jihadis when they had so mcuh more control over the Croats.

10,000 seems huge to me. You have to remember the airport was under Bosniak control but the area between it and the city was under Serb control.
And even if there were 10,000...the idea that they were all Al-Qaeda is very suuspect.


Re the KLA, yes Special Forces went in with KLA units and trained them to relay info. Could the KLA have aslo received training from a former Afghan jihadi in Albania? No doubt.

But even if this was the case, it's a huge, hop skip and jump and trampoline to 9/11


Then a good balanced account of Oil pipeline background lies in respected Pakistani journailist Ahmed Rashid's book on the Taliban

This is just anecdotal - correspondence with a very well connected UK Pakistani person whom I know. He's very weternised in his views though aware of what the US is up to as well. Here is his take on things at the moment. It puts some of what you've been discussing in a broader context, perhaps:

Quote :

It hard to tell what he [Obama] is is up to (or Hilary). I'm not sure what the feeling is on the ground, but it was very interesting that bombing has continued. However, I'm sure the Pak govt knew about it, but have to pretend they didn't and then have to complain about them because of the position they are in.

I think USA have had to leave India out of it because of Bombay ...but that doesn't mean that Kashmir will come up. I think they must know that Pakistan is in a difficult position: large numbers of those sympathetic to the growing dangerous and vociferous radical minority vis a vis the west / USA and the rest of the Pak population. This then has to be balanced up against the fact that India wants to erase Pakistan altogether and the 'radicals' are a key weapon against them. Pakistanis feel that Kashmir is a total outrage and that India's insistence that it is a bilateral matter is totally ridiculous (like a squatter refusing to recognise the courts) and that the USA / west should intervene and help enforce what is natural justice - that Kashmir should be independent or part of Pakistan (self determination ...although the Indians have killed so many people there and have moved so many Hindu families there ....I wonder!).

So the answer is: sort out Kashmir, tell the Indians to back off and make friends and play nice. Then Pakistan doesn't have a war on two fronts and can get to the business of getting rid of radicalism and pushing them back into Afghanistan. Bear in mind that the Afghanis all came to Pakistan during the Soviet invasion and the US used Pakistan to shelter, train and arm them ....before that Pakistan was very moderate, but since then there are quite a few million Afghanis in Pakistan. The way to help push back radicalism into Afghanistan needs to be a a full joint effort with Pakistan with reconstruction and aid for both Afg and Pak ...people stop being angry and religious if they are safe and clean.

The other thing is that it is a mistake to assume that you can make a race / nation jump centuries. The things that are often cited as being bad about the religious radicals are simply part of Afghan culture ...you can't really force women out onto the streets - it wont work. You can invest, build and educate and wait a couple of generations! Bombing and strong arming creates more angry people who have had relatives killed - ie people who are radicalised, that isn't what the west want ...or is it?

One other thing - the translation for Al-Qaeda is disputed.The Observer's Jason Burke in his book Al Qaeda refers to the base, the group.
"Data-base" gives a sense of some US Dr Strangejihadi sitting in the Pentagon co.mpiling a list of extremists.
At the start of the war, the Bosniaks had no means of defence as Alia Izebegovic had refused to armin order not to create alarm or gives the Serbs a pretext.
So when the city first came under attack, the majia were the only ones armed

Cactus - I would dump and ignore what's been said above, maybe not in the references given but in the main text as the below is not alone, biased and inaccurate but its lies.

"WEST: the United States and Britain supported the right nationalist
President Alija Izetbegovic to sideline and defeat the multi-ethnic
policies of popular rival Bosnian Muslim leader Fikret Adbic. This gave
the green light to the fragmentation of Yugoslavia. U.S. and NATO
bombers contributed to this."


Phew - Where's Milosevic.
The bombing came after the former Yougoslavia was already torn asunder.

There is an argument that Germany by recognising indepedendent Croatia set the parameters for the conflict. Then Slovakia, Then we come to Bosnia. Then the war. And finally the US bombing.
Round two was Kosovo.

The name Milossevic is conspicuous by its absence. And there is this scary tendency by those who have a knee jerk reaction to the US to overlook the fact that Milosevic carries most of the blame.

Listen, when these things get going, everyone ends up as compromised as everyone else. So judging initial motives is a good way to work out who is responsible. And Milosevic by cynically dumping socialist fraternity for nationalist zenphopia started the show.

Check the articles, I would say, and ignore this person's assumptions,

This is all complex stuff and my knowledge isn't good enough to make a judgement. I am not hung up about the answer on 9/11 one way or the other. I respect Robin Cook's knowledge and principle and think it very unlikely that he was lying about the nature of Al Quaida. I find it striking how Al Quaida's actions and statements pretty consistently support the interests of the US, particularly in its toxic role in Iraq in fuelling internal division in the Iraqi population. Al Quaida hits vulnerable and innocent people and destabilises political relations.

I would make the observation though that the US consistently (and to a lesser extent France and the UK) has shown itself to work against strong democratic governments in resource rich areas and to ruthlessly exploit ethnic and religious fault lines to weaken or destroy them.

There has also been a consistent US strategy of "Balkanising" eastern Europe and trying to create a US zone of military and political influence in eastern Europe.

Our posts crossed Kevbar - I have a lot to learn on this and will try to read the book you suggest as well as Nafeed Ahmed's.

Robin Cook's resignation speech (about 10 minutes), over the invasion of Iraq.