Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Share

    Kysusha
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 221
    Points : 239
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  Kysusha on Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:38 pm

    Well Ironsightsniper, you are a strange mixture; on one hand professing no interest in the political events of your country and on the other, adhering to the dictates of American Democratic Freedom. You really do have a corrugated arse! Fence sitting has become your way of life, it seems.

    Your avatar is a sickly reminder of an image you want to project and be associated with – an image of “America the great”. Yet you won’t engage in debate over the relative merits of this sick country, preferring to profess neutrality.

    Let me give you an example of what the world has to stomach from America. In the Gulf War [the first one, I am almost loosing count], an American soldier scrambled up a fallen statue of Saddam and hoisted an American flag - this crass and insensitive gesture was beamed across the world by CNN/Fox et al. Fortunately, an American colonel, with more commonsense, saw it and told the solder to remove the flag, adding, “we are liberators, not conquerors”. Too late – the damage was done! Another example of the way in which American’s [in general] are twisted by their sense of patriotism was demonstrated by a news item of “troops going home”. One crass and stupid soldier shouted from the back of his truck – “We won, we brought democracy to Iraq”. Really??! What America brought to Iraq was death and destruction, the destruction of a civilisation and way of life of millions and left anarchy and despair. Such an act is a war crime – the Geneva Convention specifically charges victors to provide for the safety, care and welfare of the vanquished. Not to leave them with total infrastructure collapse, dysfunctional government, non-existent medical care and total lawlessness. The instigators of the war should be tried a war criminals.

    However, I am getting side-tracked here. Back to your issue of conspiracy theories and your insistence on using such labels.

    I came across this post recently and was very taken by it – it covers someof the topics that I have been trying to enunciate on this forum, but this guy has the credibility that I lack – also probably the intelligence too.

    Now for cretins and other male exotic dancers who see conspiracy in every sentence and cannot see past their own prejudices – I will list the link that I got this from: http://stonefruit.blogspot.com/2010/01/towards-theory-of-conspiracy-theories.html Just so there is no mistaking the authorship of the works.

    What is described in this article is paralleled in what Ironsightsniper is trying to put forward as some sort of argument.

    Kooks – Who Names them?

    The article is written by Cass Sunstein, confidante of Obama, Harvard Law professor, current head of the federal Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, potential Supreme Court nominee - and the latest crusader against those dastardly conspiracy theories

    Recently, there was quite a hullabaloo in the blogosphere over a reprehensible academic paper Sunstein co-wrote in 2008 (available for download here), which argued for a Cointellpro-type program of government infiltration of conspiracy theorists, online and in person. Given the incredible scope and flexibility of the powers of his office, as enunciated in this September 30, 1993 executive order signed by Clinton, his proposal should certainly give us pause.

    His paper, "Conspiracy Theories," was originally scooped by Marc Estrin at Rag Blog, and covered in short order by Daniel Tencer at The Raw Story and Glenn Greenwald at Salon and pretty much went viral from there. Although Greenwald's piece was the most extensive, none of the reports really examined the paper in great detail.

    I took the time to read the whole thing. I've also read the entire academic literature on conspiracy theory and written one of my masters theses on the topic at a Division I research university. If I have the stomach for it, I may offer a more detailed analysis of Sunstein's paper in a future post, but for now I'd like to offer something else.

    More important than a detailed analysis of a single e
    ssay would be a sustained theoretical critique of the role of "conspiracy theory" in delegitimizing information contrary to the interests and consensus reality of the elite. None of the coverage of Sunstein's journal article offered this broader view. I would like to do so, by posting a revised version of something I posted here a few years back which, unfortunately, remains as timely as ever.

    Contemporary
    America is of two minds regarding conspiracy theory - or "conspiranoia" as I like to call it, a term combining conspiracy and paranoia which I got from a book by Devon Jackson of the same name.

    On one hand, it has become the default popular view, one of commodified skepticism towards history and government. It's a sentiment that has proliferated extensively since the 1960s, Watergate, and the Church Committee. With the collapse of the reassuring dualities of the Cold War in the early 1990s, it has culminated into an extremely pervasive apocalyptic teleology. It has become one of the leading intellectual leitmotifs of our time.

    On the other hand, the disavowal of conspiranoia has also become an integral part of the conventional wisdom itself, a social technology of control that establishes the boundaries of "responsible discourse" by reflecting elite consensus on the fundamental nature of social reality, in accordance with the elite's own class interests. This makes for an incredibly effective means of establishing ruling class hegemony by controlling dissent, foreclosing alternatives, engineering support, and transmuting the interests of the ruling class into that of the nation as a whole.

    As Gore Vidal once said "The way our ruling class keeps out of sight is one of the greatest stunts in the political history of any country" and conspiracy theory is one of their most potent methodologies.

    In fact, one is apt to be labelled a conspiracy theorist for merely suggesting that there is a ruling class in this country that seeks to maintain hegemony, to say nothing of the idea that the ruling class might occasionally use conspiratorial methods. Rather than conspiracy theory, most media and intellectual gatekeepers prefer to view elite behaviour through the lens of "somnambulist theory," "coincidence theory", "incompetence theory", or "spontaneity theory". No amount of intellectual gymnastics is spared to avoid arriving at the conclusion that the rich and powerful, like the rest of us, might possibly act in support of their own perceived best interests. This is, of course, in spite of a voluminous sociological literature on the power elite and "elite deviance" and a plethora of laws on the books against criminal conspiracy.

    True freedom of mind - presumably the bedrock of the informed consent of the governed in a democracy - requires not only the negative absence of constraint but the positive presence of other alternatives. Even though the rich and powerful have repeatedly used conspiracy to get richer and more powerful, to mention this sociological fact immediately draws the most vicious criticism, including charges of conspiracy mongering, and many variations on superstition, cynicism, paranoia, hysteria, and primitivism.

    Conspiranoia can and should be a tool of empirical explanation. It is possible to point fingers and name names. The powers that be, perhaps as few as thousands of people enslaving as many as six billion, act not in conspiracy but in tacit collusion fostered by the similarity of their backgrounds, calibrated at key forums and through key organizations in support of a global agenda of domination, economic plunder, and environmental devastation.

    Ultimately, however, the appeal of conspiranoia is that of narrative itself: it's ability to explain, predict, motivate, and entertain. Although conspiranoia offers the aficionado an integrated worldview, a weltanschauung, it also provides more than that. When confronted with the potential evidence of conspiracy, one must ask, as in criminal trials: "Is there motive, means, and opportunity?" All too often there is, especially at the intersection of politics, law, high finance, intelligence, diplomacy, covert military operations, narco-trafficking, organized crime, and the media simulacrasphere.

    Instead of the usual characterization of conspiracy theory as a branch of group psychopathology, "troubled minds looking for order in chaotic and rapidly changing times" as the academic literature so uniformly spins it, conspiranoia might be better and more accurately thought of as a populist fusion of life writing, historiography, and political science which provides explanatory narratives that void the epistemic warrant of the elite consensus on history, social reality, and the "conventional wisdom." This is a major development in the long tradition of popular resistance to state power and economic oligarchy, not of the right vs. left, but of the bottom vs. the top.

    At its best, conspiranoia is a radical exercise of the skepticism and critical reason at the heart of the Enlightenment project. In this sense it represents a last-ditch effort by the supposed repositories of popular sovereignty - the people - to save liberal humanism and the Enlightenment from its demented doppelganger - the program of perpetual war for perpetual peace and the enslavement of the autonomous bourgeois subject under regimes of panoptic control managed by technocrats serving the super rich, using the powerful tools of the nation-state as they've evolved since the Peace of Westphalia in the 17th century.

    Conspiranoia narratives could be empirical explanations of social reality, since it can easily be argued that, as Carl Oglesby put it in The Yankee and Cowboy War, "conspiracy is the normal continuation of normal politics by normal means...and where there is no limit to power, there is no limit to conspiracy." The knee-jerk denigration of such attitudes by the media and the academy, however, demonstrates that their disavowal has become a vital social technology of control in the late modern age.

    With the collapse of the
    Soviet Union, virtually all pre-capitalist and anti-capitalist systems have been colonized by "global monetocracy", a transnational corporate socialism that socializes the costs and privatizes the profits. This is kleptocracy by any other name, albeit a far more sophisticated version than that practiced by hacks like Marcos, Duvalier, Mobutu, and their ilk.

    Although seemingly at its moment of universal triumph, this system may in fact be teetering on the brink of economic, political, social, and environmental collapse. This collapse may even already be underway. It seems likely usher in an extremely reactionary, corporate-managed pseudo-populism and overt police state fascism in all of the core states of global capitalism - perhaps even a hybrid of revolution and civil war.

    It is precisely the dramatically escalating accumulation of these fundamental contradictions within the global capitalist system that "coincidence theorists" try to deflect public attention away from with their hysterical vilification of conspiracy theories. Their relentless disparagement continues even though, ala Occam's Razor, conspiracy theories often provide the simplest, most rational explanation for much of history and current events.

    The power elite deliberately obscure the structural limitations on free will (that they themselves largely created) to mask the sad fact that, as human civilization has evolved from slavery to feudalism to democracy, we have traded kings and tsars for presidents and prime ministers but the money power behind the scenes has remained the same. The king, the theocrat, and the money changers have conceded just enough to stave off revolution, and these small victories have only been won by long and arduous struggle.

    Their regime of capital accumulation can only survive by feeding off the subject body and stupefying the subject mind with the myth of individual agency and the "society of the spectacle" while simultaneously doing everything in their power to ensure that this alleged agency can't be used in any meaningful way. In such an environment, denigrating conspiranoia becomes a means of cordoning off from the masses the fact that they are being lied to every day of their lives by the very authority figures they trust to give them the "good life," and that the consumerist hydrocarbon-based industrial civilization they live in is arguably psychopathic and quite possibly in terminal decline.

    While the provisional government of politicians does the lying, they do so in the service of a permanent government above and behind political power, a secular oligarchy working in tacit collusion. In
    America they are the great commercial dynasties, the Fortune 500 companies and their lobbyists, the media simulacrasphere, the civil and military services, the large research universities, law firms, charitable foundations, and their ilk.

    They hire the politicians and frame the boundaries of the politicians' agenda - even the boundaries of "reasonable" political discourse itself. They authorize the production of regular election pageants to protect the brand name of American democracy. They convince a large enough portion of the general population that the system still works, so that the machinery of oppression, theft, enslavement, murder, and incarceration can continue without interruption.

    This oligarchy makes effective use of such groups and forums as the Bilderberg Group, World Bank, International Monetary Fund, World Economic Forum at Davos, Bank of International Settlements, World Trade Organization, Council of Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bohemian Grove, Group of Eight, Trans-Atlantic Business Council, and other organizations to calibrate their rhetoric, achieve consensus, and even set policy superceding that of sovereign governments. This isn't done in singular smoky star chambers, as the straw man argument against conspiracy theories routinely and condescendingly jokes.

    Instead, there are many camps within this oligarchy. Sometimes they compete, sometimes they cooperate, but all are unified by a miasmic group-think that stems from the similarity of their backgrounds, class interests, and institutional positions, and their sensitivity to the behavioral cues given off by the institutional structures within which they seek to advance. Pursuing a misguided sense of their own self interest, they pursue the interests of the global "capitalist" system as well.

    As the key nations of transnational corporate imperialism degenerate into police states, they slowly strip citizens of their rights by periodically manufacturing crises to enact the Hegelian dialectic of "crisis-response-resolution," with each new "resolution" bringing them greater control and pushing the world's resources into what George H.W. Bush has called "higher, tighter, and righter hands."

    Although conspiranoiacs exist in great variety, many share a belief in the rough outline of this dystopian nightmare. If true, it is the truth which cannot be spoken. For that reason, the media and academic gatekeepers of "credible" information will continue to dismiss anything that challenges the conventional wisdom as a "conspiracy theory" until some catalyst finally reveals enough of the horrible truth to enough people, facilitating a paradigm shift of world historical importance, a tipping point, the 100th monkey effect.

    The ills of society can neither be ameliorated nor even adequately described by means of the law alone. Nevertheless, progressive efforts to ameliorate these ills cannot succeed without committed work in the legal field. However, such work will be nece
    ssarily defensive in posture until such time as substantial extraparliamentary pressure is brought to bear on the system by means of "either grassroots citizen participation in credible progressive projects or rebellious acts of desperation that threaten the social order," as one of America's greatest public intellectuals, Cornel West, put it.

    With adequate reach into a broad enough segment of the general population by leaking past the media oligarchy, and armed with adequate credibility by weeding itself of the pervasive disinformation that so often taints it, conspiranoiac analysis has the potential to precipitate and consolidate a very significant portion of that extraparliamentary pressure of which West speaks.

    I believe it was the inimitable psychonaut philosopher Terence Mckenna who said "Like it or not, the people of the fringe are in an apocalyptical struggle: either the elite techniques of control will be perfected to the level where dissent can be abolished, or heretics will mutate to some level of consciousness where they can do holy and miraculous works to resurrect the old dream of freedom for all."

    Although this may seem a millennial hope, it may also be a cogent empirical analysis of a decisive historical crossroads, and certainly a large number of us have our eyes on
    December 21, 2012. In any event, until our individual consciousness (and our collective unconscious) is liberated, and we can finally establish abiding regimes of peace, social justice, and sustainability, as Rousseau said "Man is born free, yet he is everywhere in chains."

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  IronsightSniper on Wed Dec 01, 2010 12:33 am

    Oh great, another Garry :/

    In any case, I'll answer the first 2 statements.

    Yes, I am actually an extreme moderate. I tend to take the opinions of both sides and either sit on the border or make a quick and farce decision about it, usually, I base such decision on the most basic principles of objectivity and reasoning, but for apolitical subjects such as, "Who's really in charge of America?", I tend to just sit out because it turns to a shouting match in less than a minute.

    As for the Flag, to be quite honest, I just chose that as my avatar to piss Garry off, as we were having a lengthy discussion at that time and I can tell he disliked Americans. Sorry if I made you type all that for nothing xD

    Kysusha
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 221
    Points : 239
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  Kysusha on Wed Dec 01, 2010 1:08 am

    You might be surprised at how many "Garys" there are around the world. American arogance tends to breed them.

    lulldapull
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 188
    Points : 229
    Join date : 2010-03-29
    Location : Melbourne

    Shitbilly Ray Allen Davis in context

    Post  lulldapull on Tue Mar 01, 2011 11:00 am

    The shitbilly's that most Americans are and their behaviour around the planet is in full view for most ppl to see in this article. Actually most Americans don't even deny anymore what their terrorist government is upto these days. The war of terror is in its last gasps, and as soon as the U.S. gets routed in Iraq and Afghanistan, a former USSR syndrome will set in which will lead to a total collapse of the corrupt system. I for one will laugh out loud as pretty much everyone has had enough of these shitbilly's and the terrorism.


    I Had Ray Davis's Job, in Laos 30 Years Ago

    Same Cover, Same Lies

    By ROBERT ANDERSON

    The story of Raymond Allen Davis is one familiar to me and I wish our government would quit doing these things - they cost us credibility.

    Davis is the American being held as a spy working under diplomatic cover out of our embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan. You can understand why foreign countries no longer trust us and people are rising up across the Middle East against the Great Satan.

    In the Vietnam War the country of Laos held a geo-strategic position, as does Pakistan does to Afghanistan today. As in Pakistan, in Laos our country conducted covert military operations against a sovereign people, using the CIA.

    I was a demolitions technician with the Air Force who was reassigned to work with the CIA’s Air America operation in Laos. We turned in our military IDs cards and uniforms and were issued a State Department ID card and dressed in blue jeans. We were told if captured we were to ask for diplomatic immunity, if alive. We carried out military missions on a daily basis all across the countries of Laos, Cambodia, Thailand and Vietnam.

    We also knew that if killed or captured that we would probably not be searched for and our families back home in the U.S. would be told we had been killed in an auto accident of some kind back in Thailand and our bodies not recovered.

    Our team knew when the UN inspectors and international media were scheduled to arrive - we controlled the airfields. We would disappear to our safe houses so we could not be asked questions. It was all a very well planned operation, 60 years ago, involving the military and diplomats out of the US Embassy. It had been going on a long time when I was there during the 1968 Tet Offensive. This continued for a long time, until we were routed and had to abandon the whole war as a failure.

    In Laos the program I was attached to carried out a systematic assassination of people who were identified as not loyal to U.S. goals. It was called the Phoenix program and eliminated an estimated 60,000 people across Indochina. We did an amazing amount of damage to the civilian infrastructure of the country, and still lost the war. I saw one team of mercenaries I was training show us a bag of ears of dead civilians they had killed. This was how they verified their kills for us. The Green Berets that day were telling them to just take photos of the dead, leave the ears.

    Mel Gibson made a movie about all this, called Air America. It included in the background the illegal drug operation the CIA ran to pay for their operations. Congress had not authorized funds for what we were doing. I saw the drug operation first hand too. This was all detailed in The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia by Alfred McCoy. I did not connect all this until the Iran-Contra hearings when Oliver North was testifying about it. Oliver North was a leader of the Laos operation I was assigned to work with.

    Our country has a long history of these type programs going back to World War Two. We copied this from of warfare from the Nazis in WWII it seems. We justified it as necessary for the Cold War. One of the first operations was T.P. Ajax run by Kermit Roosevelt to overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran in 1953to take over their oil fields.

    In that coup the CIA and the State Department under the Dulles Brothers first perfected these covert, illegal and immoral actions. Historians have suggested that Operation T.P. Ajax was the single event that set in motion the political force of Islamic fundamentalism we are still dealing with today.

    Chalmers Johnson also a former CIA employee wrote a series of books too on these blowbacks that happen when the truth is held from the American public.

    If we had taken a different approach to our problems in those days an approach that did not rely on lying to our own and the people of other countries and killing them indiscriminately our country would not be in the disaster it is abroad today..

    I was young and foolish in those days of the Vietnam War, coveting my Top Secret security clearance, a big thing for an uneducated hillbilly from Appalachia. We saw ourselves much like James Bond characters, but now I am much wiser. These kinds of actions have immense and long reaching consequences and should be shut down.

    But I see from the Ray Davis fiasco in Pakistan that our government is still up to its old way of denying to the people of the world what everyone knows is true.

    When will this official hypocrisy end, when will our political
    class speak out about this and quit going along with the lies and tricks? How many more of our people and others will die in these foolish programs?

    Davis is in a bad situation now because most of the people of the world, as we see across the Middle East, are now aware of the lies and not going to turn their head anymore.

    I say “most” everyone knows, because our own public, the ones suppose to be in control of the military and CIA, is constantly lied to. It is so sad to see President Obama repeating the big lie.

    Robert Anderson lives in Albuquerque, N.M. He can be reached at citizen@comcast.net

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  GarryB on Sat Mar 12, 2011 4:46 am

    I think a lot more people would have read this if there was no swearing in the title and the title and intro was a bit clearer about what the article you are posting is about.

    Thank you for the article.

    lulldapull
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 188
    Points : 229
    Join date : 2010-03-29
    Location : Melbourne

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  lulldapull on Sat Mar 12, 2011 5:00 am

    Garry, as much as I hate the Imperialist US international relations policy, theirs and the Jewish bankster involvement in destabilizing the world for Imperialist benefit I wouldn't be harping on this site.

    anyone supporting the imperialist agenda on a Russian military site.......boy.......God help them or else I would rip them a new fun-hole! sniper

    The proof of planning, executing and implementing terror around the planet stops at the door of both the UK and the US. If some one denies that then I got a problem with that. Wink

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  GarryB on Sat Mar 12, 2011 6:18 am

    It is an old problem of course... if you take away their power and money someone else will replace them and do very very similar things.

    It is human nature unfortunately.

    Glad we have you to keep them honest and remind us that it was western propaganda that won the cold war... many including Gorby probably thought that once they had renounced communism that the west would embrace Russia and help solve its problems in a friendly constructive way... the way they rebuilt Germany and Japan after WWII to prevent a repeat of WWI.

    Unfortunately it wasn't to prevent a repeat of what happened after WWI that led to WWII, it was to prop up two countries to help in the fight against a new rival.

    China is in the WTO and has better trade relations with the US... and it is a communist country.

    It is funny they can put up with Chinas choice of government but couldn't do the same with the Soviet Union, or North Korea, or Cuba. China was used as an ally of convenience against the Communist Soviets that were seen as a greater threat. Now that Russia is a democracy you'd think if they were consistent with their rhetoric they would have an about face and invest and support Russia over China, but it is pretty clear it was never about communism and always about Russia is a big country that has potential to be a direct rival and that is the wedge in future relations with the US.
    Unfortunately the policy of the enemy of my enemy is my friend got them used to getting into bed with first communists during WWII and then in the immediate post war period they got into bed with nazis to work on their space program and japanese war criminals to work in their bio weapons programs... then in the 60s and 70s and 80s it was the communist chinese and various despots in central and south america who performed torture that makes water boarding look like fun... take two prisoners up in a helicopter... one prisoner you think knows something and the other that knows nothing... the one that knows nothing is in a full body cast and can't move... fly out over the sea and push the guy who knows nothing out of the helo into the water to drown... make sure both prisoners are very clear about what you are about to do before you do it. Then start asking the remaining prisoner some questions... he will tell you anything he knows, but you have to make it clear you will be checking his answers and if he lies or makes something up they will take him and then his family for another helicopter ride in a fully body cast... I know of this because I have read reports written by CIA operatives who were in the helos "supervising" the interrogations. Then in the 1980s it was the Pakistani ISI and the Afghan resistence that were buddies of the US, and in the 90s that became the Taleban... it was CIA money through the ISI that paid for the communications equipment and light trucks and bribe money the Taleban used to take power so quickly... only the Northern Alliance survived in the north of the country... secretly supported by Russia. Of course when the Taleban became persona non grata the US changed sides and used Northern Alliance ground forces to defeat the taleban using airpower. As the Northern Alliance moved the Taleban could either group up and defend themselves... in which case the US special forces embedded in the NA forces called in air power to wipe them out. If they didn't group up of course the NA fighters could take them out easily in small groups or individuals.
    Of course it was easy to sweep across the country like that... most of the hard core taleban fought and died and the rest just went home and pretended to be civilians and waited their time.
    The problem with using air power can be best described by a US AF pilot describing the effect of air power in Vietnam... he basically said... "See that hill up there? That is the enemies. I can bomb the heck out of it and make it mine, but as soon as I fly past and after the bombs and rockets go off it is his again."

    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 559
    Points : 687
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  nightcrawler on Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:52 am

    Thing is tht he got redhanded & wives of the murdered civilians are irritating over media again & again & this makes a hell for Raymond Davis & the US embassy alike

    lulldapull
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 188
    Points : 229
    Join date : 2010-03-29
    Location : Melbourne

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  lulldapull on Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:21 pm

    That's right Nightcrawler.........about him being caught red fukkin handed! Very Happy

    His cell phone records showed that he had made 23 calls to individuals belonging to banned terrorist outfits in Pakistan including in the off limits tribal areas to banned Pakistani Taleban affiliated individuals. Not only that the ISI has him nailed on many other totally outrageous things not being disclosed to the media.

    Not only that, evidence also shows that he was canvasing sensitive Pakistani military areas for potential terrorist operations.

    The reality Garry despite your best efforts to avoid it, and we are all fairly certain on who organizes, abets and covertly supports terrorist and suicide bombings. What we have seen in Chechnya, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan for the last few years........is all smoke & mirrors.

    The US and the UK are directly involved in conducting black ops/ false flag/ color revolutions & terrorist operations all around the world.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  GarryB on Sun Mar 13, 2011 12:47 am

    20 years ago if you had suggested such things you would have been a kook or conspiracy theorist... a member of the tinfoil hat brigade.

    Today with the internet and Wikileaks and a bit of honesty from some sectors that were afraid to speak out before... like the article quoted in the first post above... we now know that just because you are paranoid, it doesn't mean the whole world isn't out to get you.

    The problem is that if a non-western person says something they are just jealous, or have a chip on their shoulder regarding western imperialism. If a western person says it they are clearly leftist or part of the group of apologists that apologise for everything great the west has done... like educating the native americans/australians/new zealanders/etc etc... which was a fair trade for pinching their land and resources...

    The honest truth is that most in the west don't care and don't want anything done about it because they benefit from the current setup.

    It is like the German people... when US and Soviet tanks rolled through their neighbourhood they didn't support the nazis... but 3-4 years before that they were waving flags and using Polish slave labour to work their farms for free. If you asked them in 1941 whether they wanted to stop everything the nazis were doing I doubt the answer would be the same as in 1945... and sadly that is human nature. When things are good who cares about where it comes from... ask Bill Clinton.

    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 559
    Points : 687
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  nightcrawler on Sun Mar 13, 2011 9:28 am

    http://tribune.com.pk/story/122725/raymond-davis-getting-to-nowhere/

    Latest updates about Davis & his probable connection with Nuclear trafficking [conspiracy theory perhaps]. However CIA & ISI really are broken up over this issue [or so it seems]

    lulldapull
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 188
    Points : 229
    Join date : 2010-03-29
    Location : Melbourne

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  lulldapull on Sun Mar 27, 2011 12:47 am

    Yaar, no one is broken up over anything! Pakistani's know their 'auqaat' very well viz a viz the U.S.

    Punjabi's in our ISI & military understand clearly that if the slightest dissent if we showed to the U.S. we will be shut down, our economy destroyed and India sicked on our ass and terrorism will be ratcheted up big time.

    Pakistan's nuclear weapons are in the 'safe hands' of the CIA already......The whole country is infiltrated with CIA agents. Don't have any doubts about that.

    Controlled chaos is the order of the day to justify the means to an end.......

    Zardari, Nawaz Sharif and that Bitch Nazir all worked for the same people who sit in Washington. Rolling Eyes

    P.S. Syria, Jordan, Algeria, Saudi Haramia....these helpless countries are next in line for regime change from within. Al-CIAda will be infiltrated into the mix to create chaos, and produce the required justification for 'Western intervention'. Just keep watching.

    Pervius
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 259
    Points : 287
    Join date : 2011-03-08

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  Pervius on Sun May 29, 2011 9:25 am

    I met one of the Army Green beret's that was in Cambodia back then. His Govt denies he was there, he started hating his govt.

    He bought lots of land and has bunkers all over it with tunnels. He liberated US Army ordinance, has some old jammers....he's ready for something to come.

    He knows something is going to come. His son turned into a computer guru and was the first person to run Windows in a shell on Linux. He creates software for missile guidance systems now.


    America knows eventually someone's going to avenge evil deeds. Hence the need to send all countries back to the stone age and take over the world.

    1/3rd of America is about to die. That Generation loss would make America unable to defend itself and that generation would have no clue why everyone hates them.

    So the Baby Boomers need to do some more killin'. A "New World Order". Has to be done before they are dead. Hence the rush.

    ""Pakistan's nukes are safe in CIA hands"".......I don't believe that is true. Saudi Arabia has their Pakistani nukes secured. The Saud's are tied to Pakistan to the end, they need them to run/fix their technology. China is now Saudi's best friend...Pakistan just got handed lots of Chinese military hardware/ 50 new fighter jets.

    Time will tell if China/Saudi/Pakistan can fight off their threat.


    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9423
    Points : 9915
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  George1 on Sat Jul 21, 2012 5:30 pm

    Freedom Fighters they called in 80s the islamic fundamentalists in afganishtan, that now they consider them global active highly adnvance network terrorists

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jul 22, 2012 2:16 am

    The problem is that the west has interests... not friends.

    While the Soviets were a threat then helping religious fanatics in their holy jihad was useful to the west.

    This same lesser of two evils logic led to the west joining forces with Uncle Joe Stalin till the German question was sorted out.

    The same can be said now, where the removal of Assad will put pressure on Iran... the west doesn't care that Syria will change from a moderate muslim country to a fanatical Sunni muslim country that will hate all its neighbours till they share the same fanaticism.

    The real question the west has to ask is will weakening Iran in the region be worth the strengthening of the Sunni grip on the Middle East?

    When push comes to shove if there is conflict against Iran from an Assadless Syria, the US based governments in Iraq and Afghanistan will collapse over night as the Shia majority step up.

    The main problem right now is the demonising of Iran, which is actually close to being the only real democracy in the region... it certainly isn't Israel, with their aparteid structure, and no one could ever consider Saudi Arabia of being democratic...

    But then the US treated India like the enemy and befriended Pakistan... worlds most populous democracy rejected and a country with a military dictatorship befriended... because India had a good relationship with the Soviets.

    The problem with the logic of the enemy of my enemy is my friend, is that real friends have something in common... shared values and beliefs etc etc. If anything the US had more in common with India than with Pakistan and they are coming around... but mostly for other interests... the US loves to play other countries off against the other and at the moment the US sucking up to India looks more like business... 1.2 billion pairs of jeans is worth a lot of money, and of course all that cheap labour they can play them off against China... which they are beginning to realise is still communist.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Kysusha
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 221
    Points : 239
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  Kysusha on Sun Jul 22, 2012 3:11 am

    Garry, the whole process going on now – is to “Divide and conquer” ; a process the Zionists have been perpetrating for decades so as to weaken the Western world and to destroy strong opposition around their bastard state.

    The main shakers and movers in recent ‘popular uprisings’, has been MOSSAD and the CIA. Yankee money and the Zionists carrying out the delivery of weapons and ground operatives.

    How on earth anyone in their right mind can consider for one minute that Syria is a popular uprising is totally beyond me. How do they expect a local Syrian guy can go to his corner shop and buy an AK47 [or RPG]? Hell, even if he could get one there, he couldn’t afford it! This “popular uprising” is instigated, fuelled, controlled and orchestrated by MOSSAD / CIA/ MI6 and the DGSE. Add in Qatar and Saudi rebels as foot-solders and you have the bones of the up-rising.

    If the UN had any balls at all, they would declare these events and those of Iraq, Tunisia, Egypt, Georgia and Libya war crimes – acts against humanity [as was Serbia]. Kofi Annan is just a little black puppet dancing to the tune of the Zionist controlled UN and US administration.

    The emphasis of the Zionists is to destroy the fabric of other societies/culture etc while all the time remaining strong in themselves – they are the ultimate racists! Currently they are pushing “integration” into Sweden, you won’t see the Zionist integrating! In Israel, people are put in jail for talking about Christ, having the New Testament – Christianity is a forbidden religion there.

    Wake up people.

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3225
    Points : 3349
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Good terrorist vs Bad terrorist..

    Post  Vann7 on Sun Jan 11, 2015 4:44 pm


    Isn't is funny how a dozen of Europeans civilians needs to die in Europe..for they to care about the problem of Terrorism? Their current leader and the previous one have been supporting for 4 years now Islamic Fundamentalist to fight in Syria ,to overthrow its government.. talk about the collective hypocrisy .. It is bad when terrorist kill in France.. but when those terrorist kill in Syria it is a "fight for freedom" . If Europeans weren't so disconnected with the terrorism they support by sponsoring USA and NATO criminal wars.. that are still today arming and financing jihadist extremist they will not be experimenting the violence they have today at their own cities.. Terrorism exist in Europe only because Europeans have been looking to the sides for years whenever their governments directly or indirectly support terrorist in middle east.. to overthrow government. French pairliament even supported the destruciton of Libya who had an anti-islamic fundamentalist government in power.. and the destruction now of Syria in support of islamic fundamentalist.. who wants to install radical islam in Syria.. Talk about a Blow Back .


    To bring security back best way to end terrorism is to end NATO ,that its american military bases are used to smuggle not only drugs but also ISlamic JIhadist across the world and End the support of Islamic fighters , whether US government calls them freedom fighters or not. And demand sanctions against the nations sponsoring ISlamic extremist.. ie. USA .Saudi Arabia and Israel. Unite Russia to fight Islamic Fundamentalism..and demand the arrest of John McAin who is the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the world.

    But the real best way to end Terrorist.. is to to do the above things.. mentioned.. but also declare a full scale war against Saudi Arabia and install a democracy there.. and complete isolation of Turkey and Israel until they stop supporting terrorist.. That Europe United saying enough is enough , pressuring USA to stop its war against Russia or they will leave NATO and to stop support of terrorism.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Terrorists? - "Good" guys, "Bad" guys

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 11:09 am


      Current date/time is Sun Dec 04, 2016 11:09 am