[InternetMarketer]

Do you think the embassy closings are a fake distraction to say NSA spying is a good thing? I think that the US is exaggerating the threat.

[TheSlayer]

I do find it incredibly odd that after Snowden revealed that the NSA was basically intercepting every phone call, email, and tracking all online activity, Al-Qaeda decides to get chatty and US spy agencies intercept their "messages". It just doesn't smell right.

On the other hand these stupid terrorists are stupid. Maybe they (NSA etc.) did find something online, after all the 9/11 anniversary is next month.

I'll put my money on the former though. It could be just a giant ploy to justify NSA's Big Brother ways and the public will be even more accepting now. It's a lose-lose scenario for us.

[Pyre]

Yes! Couldnt help but think Wag the Dog type made-up story to justify the NSA's illegal activities.

[kosko]

Al-Queda has no credibility as the USA Govt actively supports them, anything Al-Queda says on the record is a Psy-Op for the American people.

[Mack Four]

All that conspiracy stuff sounds great until something blows up. Then the haters will come out and fry the President for that, just like Benghazi.

Damned if he does, fucked if he don't.

I'm guessing he's going the better safe than sorry route.

[Seth_Rose]

(08-05-2013 03:19 PM)kosko Wrote:  

Al-Queda has no credibility as the USA Govt actively supports them, anything Al-Queda says on the record is a Psy-Op for the American people.

That is a very bold statement sir. Care to elaborate?

And as for embassies closing, sure it could be the NSA covering their ass, but embassies have been targets historically for those with anti-American sentiment, almost exclusively in the Islamic world too. Here's a list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorist_a...facilities

I had the opportunity to work in an embassy abroad recently and security there is no joke. They take their shit very, very seriously, but to close numerous embassies does seem a bit suspect.

[kosko]

(08-05-2013 04:00 PM)Seth_Rose Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 03:19 PM)kosko Wrote:  

Al-Queda has no credibility as the USA Govt actively supports them, anything Al-Queda says on the record is a Psy-Op for the American people.

That is a very bold statement sir. Care to elaborate?

And as for embassies closing, sure it could be the NSA covering their ass, but embassies have been targets historically for those with anti-American sentiment, almost exclusively in the Islamic world too. Here's a list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorist_a...facilities

I had the opportunity to work in an embassy abroad recently and security there is no joke. They take their shit very, very seriously, but to close numerous embassies does seem a bit suspect.

I'm on my phone. Do the research, it has been brought up on this forum before specially detailing the situation in Syria and Libya and will have detailed links for you to follow. The Internet is littered with information also, it's to abundant to ignore just don't expect CNN to tell you anything though.

Al-Queda has always been a USA intelligence front from its start till now. The word did not even exsit prior to 9-11, Al-queda is the street of a UPS shipping plant in Yemen/Jordon and the intelligence database was named off that. Just a bunch of broke rag tags they use to radicalize strategic areas in the Arab world. Saudi Arabia whom has been funneling money to them for close to 20years now has faced zero ramifications from this.

[polymath]

Kosko just went off the deep end...

[Seth_Rose]

So essentially your saying the government is funding Al-Queda to commit terrorist attacks against the US and their allies including the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of...da_attacks

This would allow the US government to have them as a scape goat to pursue their hegemonic goals in the Mideast seen in the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, bombing in Libya, drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan. Al-Queda is now expanding into West Africa and Syria and the US is getting involved there too. This is very plausible seeing as I just explained it to myself right there.

Yet, at the same they could just very well be individuals who hate Western values, American support for Israel, and American Imperialism in the Mideast. The 9/11 attacks are what make this seem more plausible. Sure, there's many that say that 9/11 was an inside job. I don't believe that. We had Edward Snowden come out and leak all the shit the NSA has done, Julian Assange with Wikileaks, and yet there hasn't been a single whistleblower in 12 years to say what happened on 9/11? Why would this be? Is it that simple to cover up the highjacking of 4 jetliners, destroying two of the largest buildings in the world by placing explosives inside? Yes, I am skeptical...

Sorry to get sidetracked there with 9/11 stuff, but I think it plays into the equation. Kosko, thanks for enlightening me I'll make sure to check some stuff out. Post any links when you get the chance.

[PoosyWrecker]

We have to close our embassies because of some crusty naan bread eating, dressed like Jesus, desert barbarians with mostly Cold War vintage weapons! thought the President's been telling us we've got Al Qaeda on the run...

[InternetMarketer]

The U.S. is in a win-win situation. If nothing happens, spying is justified. If something happens, then they could say that destruction was minimized by the spying programs.

If you take a look at the history of the U.S. government you begin to understand that some of these conspiracy theories aren't too far off.

[scorpion]

(08-05-2013 08:42 PM)Seth_Rose Wrote:  

So essentially your saying the government is funding Al-Queda to commit terrorist attacks against the US and their allies including the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of...da_attacks

This would allow the US government to have them as a scape goat to pursue their hegemonic goals in the Mideast seen in the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, bombing in Libya, drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan. Al-Queda is now expanding into West Africa and Syria and the US is getting involved there too. This is very plausible seeing as I just explained it to myself right there.

Yet, at the same they could just very well be individuals who hate Western values, American support for Israel, and American Imperialism in the Mideast.

You ignore the possibility that these conditions are not mutually exclusive. In other words, it's perfectly reasonable to believe that Al Qaeda was largely the creation of Western intelligence agencies/military industrial complex and that at the same time there are individuals who hate the West fighting under the banner of Al Qaeda.

The West needed a new boogeyman after the fall of the Soviet Union, so they created the nebulous Al Qaeda, headed by the nefarious Osama Bin Laden (a former CIA-trained asset). Having manufactured this threat out of thin air, the West then declares war on it, and proceeds to invade two countries. Radical Islamic militants who objected to the actions of the U.S. and Israel then decide to organize themselves into independent franchises of the Al Qaeda brand name, which has become hugely popular in the Islamic world for no other reason than because the U.S. and Israel have declared war on it.

Essentially, the U.S. and Israel took their database of former CIA assets from the Afghan mujahideen (which they had recruited and organized to fight the Soviets in the 1980s) and declared it to be the roster of an organization called "Al Qaeda" ("The base", short for "The database"). Scattered militants opposed to U.S./Israeli militarism then decided to organize under this banner due to its widespread name recognition.

This sounds pretty insane if you haven't taken the geopolitical red pill, but research outside the mainstream media will inevitably lead one to this conclusion. Hell, even the mainstream media occasionally point it out, as seen in this BBC clip: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xao8cj_...isted_news

[Seth_Rose]

Yes your right they don't have to be mutually exclusive and your point seems very valid and in fact seems the most reasonable.