The Terror myth

[xtc]

One of Britain's most respected and acclaimed documentary producers has made a documentary on the terror myth. He asserts that Al Qaida is a myth, that it had no name until 2001 when the American Government gave it one in order to use the RICO act against them. He states that Al Qaida is not an organised international terror network; it does not have members or a leader. It does not have sleeper cells and it doesn't have an overall strategy. He states it barely exists at all, except as an idea about cleansing a corrupt world through religious violence.

He cites statistics from Britain's Home Office on arrests and convictions of suspected terrorists since Sept 11, 2001. Of the 664 people detained only 17 have been founded guilty. Of the 17 most were Irish Republicans, Sikh militants and other non - Muslims. Nobody has been convicted who is a proven member of Al Qaida.

The documentary was shown in three parts on the BBC. I haven't seen it but I hope to get a video of it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1327786,00.html

[Parkbandit]

1. I guess you'll have to edit that out to say "Former respected and acclaimed documentary producers".

2. Al Queda had it's name well before 2001. In fact, it was in Clark's book regarding how Rice didn't even know who it was when she took her post.

3. Who the hell is Bin Laden then?

4. Barely exists at all? Tell that to the people who died on 9-11-01. I guess the downing of those planes and buildings were all a government conspiracy as well.

5. The Guardian? That's your news source? :lol:



[Edited on 4-22-05 by Parkbandit]

[CrystalTears]

You're actually believing the "myth"?

...

:lol2:

[Edaarin]

Read up on RICO.

[CrystalTears]

Not the best source, just happens to be the first one I looked at.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaida#History_of_al-Qaeda

Al-Qaeda has been around since the 80's. Yeah, big farce. :rolleyes:

The earth is flat and no one's ever landed on the moon either.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Parkbandit
1. I guess you'll have to edit that out to say "Former respected and acclaimed documentary producers".

2. Al Queda had it's name well before 2001. In fact, it was in Clark's book regarding how Rice didn't even know who it was when she took her post.

3. Who the hell is Bin Laden then?

4. Barely exists at all? Tell that to the people who died on 9-11-01. I guess the downing of those planes and buildings were all a government conspiracy as well.

5. The Guardian? That's your news source? :lol:



[Edited on 4-22-05 by Parkbandit]

1. Not former current.

2. Clarke refers to Al Qaida by name in his book which was published after 9-11. He may use the name Al Qaida now to describe to Bin Laden and Co.

3. Bin Laden was one of the leaders in the mujahadeen back when we funded him to fight the Soviets. He is a former pal of Rumsfeld. He is also responsible for attacks on US soil. The Gov & the media has dubbed him the leader of Al Qaida.

4. The producer talks about 9-11 in his documentary. A few people were finally able to launch an effective attack on US Soil like Timothy McVeigh was able. This doesn't mean there is an organised international terrorist network.

5. The Guardian and the BBC are internationally respected news sources.

[xtc]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
Not the best source, just happens to be the first one I looked at.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaida#History_of_al-Qaeda

Al-Qaeda has been around since the 80's. Yeah, big farce. :rolleyes:

The earth is flat and no one's ever landed on the moon either.

You should read your own sources. It doesn't say Al Qaida has been around since the 80's.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Edaarin
Read up on RICO.

I have, like the Patriot Act it circumvents the Constitution and gives the Government and Law Enforcement sweeping powers.

[xtc]

I KNEW THIS POST WOULD CREATE A LOT OF CONTROVERSY. I WON'T RESPOND TO EACH POST OR I WILL BE HERE ALL DAY AND THEN SOME.

Has anyone seen the documentary?

No. I haven't seen the documentary but Al qaida claimed responsibility for the first WTC attack in 1994, the USS cole bombing and the US Embassy bombings in 1998, 1999. They are hardly nonexistent and they did exist prior to sept 11th.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by xtc
1. Not former current.

2. Clarke refers to Al Qaida by name in his book which was published after 9-11. He may use the name Al Qaida now to describe to Bin Laden and Co.

3. Bin Laden was one of the leaders in the mujahadeen back when we funded him to fight the Soviets. He is a former pal of Rumsfeld. He is also responsible for attacks on US soil. The Gov & the media has dubbed him the leader of Al Qaida.

4. The producer talks about 9-11 in his documentary. A few people were finally able to launch an effective attack on US Soil like Timothy McVeigh was able. This doesn't mean there is an organised international terrorist network.

5. The Guardian and the BBC are internationally respected news sources.

1. To you maybe. Certainly not to me.

2. I'll bet you that you are completely incorrect in your thought that the name came about after 9-11-01. Care to put your money where your conspiracy is toughguy? I'll provide the proof when a wager is agreed upon.

3. We've heard how Bin Laden came to be xtc.. doesn't make your case that Al Qaeda was never in existence prior to 9-11-01.

4. There is a pretty large difference in driving a truck full of fertilizer to a building. That took 2 people to pull off. Try hyjacking 4 jet liners with 2 people and slamming them into buildings. There is a WHOLE lot more effort needed. Financing. Getting 20 some people willing to die and knowing it. Comparing the two is retarded at best.

5. Respected by whom? That's like saying CBS or FOX news is respected. Sure, by some people.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by RangerD1
No. I haven't seen the documentary but Al qaida claimed responsibility for the first WTC attack in 1994, the USS cole bombing and the US Embassy bombings in 1998, 1999. They are hardly nonexistent and they did exist prior to sept 11th.

Way to ruin my fucking wager asshole!

[CrystalTears]

Originally posted by xtc

Originally posted by CrystalTears
Not the best source, just happens to be the first one I looked at.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaida#History_of_al-Qaeda

Al-Qaeda has been around since the 80's. Yeah, big farce. :rolleyes:

The earth is flat and no one's ever landed on the moon either.

You should read your own sources. It doesn't say Al Qaida has been around since the 80's.

:wtf:

"Al-Qaeda evolved from the Maktab al-Khadamat (MAK) — a mujahideen resistance organization fighting against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s."

"One of these was the organization that would eventually be called al-Qaeda, which was formed by Osama bin Laden in 1988."

I'll let you continue debating with yourself on this cause this is just ridiculous now with these political threads, pulling crap out of asses to be controversial.

[Parkbandit]

Family connection between attacks on USS Cole and U.S. embassy

Workers look for survivors in the rubble of the bombed U.S. Embassy in Kenya on August 7, 1998

December 11, 2000
Web posted at: 4:28 PM EST (2128 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- There is a family connection between a key suspect in the attack on the USS Cole and the 1998 bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya, CNN has learned.

U.S. and allied officials have told CNN the suicide bomber who caused extensive damage and casualties at the embassy was a cousin of a man considered a key suspect in the USS Cole investigation. Yemeni officials say the name of the Cole suspect is Mohammed Omar Al-Harazi -- though U.S. intelligence officials say he is known by at least two other names: Abdul Rahman Hussein Al-Nashari or Al-Nassir.

U.S. officials describe Al-Nashari, as they call him, as "a significant player" in the Al Queda group headed by the fugitive accused terrorist Osama bin Laden. Al-Nashari is said to be an explosives expert of Yemeni origin with Saudi citizenship. He is still at large.


The October 12 bombing ripped this hole in the USS Cole and killed 17 sailors

The Yemeni Army official newspaper said the suspect "played a major role in preparing, planning and training people who carried out the bombing. He gave them the money and necessary equipment for the attack." Al-Nashari's suspected involvement in the attack against the USS Cole is a key part of the case U.S. investigators are building that the attack may have been ordered by bin Laden.

Bin Laden and others face trial next month in New York in connection with the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, in 1998. In the indictment, Al-Nashari's cousin -- the suicide bomber in Kenya -- is described with the name "Azzam."

The apparent family connection between the attack in Kenya two years ago and the more recent one against the Cole "is another indication," one official told CNN, that the bin Laden group was most likely behind the attack on the US warship.

Source (http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/12/11/cole.family.connection/)

So much for that part of his conspiracy. :sniffle:

[xtc]

Originally posted by RangerD1
No. I haven't seen the documentary but Al qaida claimed responsibility for the first WTC attack in 1994, the USS cole bombing and the US Embassy bombings in 1998, 1999. They are hardly nonexistent and they did exist prior to sept 11th.

Bin Laden took credit. The US Government invented the name Al Qaida.

Before anyone posts about the Al Qaida manual it has been been proven false. The word Al Qaida never appears in what was seized in the Ricin case in England where all those charged were found not guilty.

"that its appellation as an "al Qaida manual" was and is an invention of the United States government. More to the point, it was the work of the Department of Justice because nowhere in the manual is the word "al Qaida" mentioned although one could find it entitled as such on the DoJ website copy. "

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/nsn/nsn-050411.htm

[xtc]

Originally posted by CrystalTears

Originally posted by xtc

Originally posted by CrystalTears
Not the best source, just happens to be the first one I looked at.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaida#History_of_al-Qaeda

Al-Qaeda has been around since the 80's. Yeah, big farce. :rolleyes:

The earth is flat and no one's ever landed on the moon either.

You should read your own sources. It doesn't say Al Qaida has been around since the 80's.

:wtf:

"Al-Qaeda evolved from the Maktab al-Khadamat (MAK) — a mujahideen resistance organization fighting against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s."

"One of these was the organization that would eventually be called al-Qaeda, which was formed by Osama bin Laden in 1988."

I'll let you continue debating with yourself on this cause this is just ridiculous now with these political threads, pulling crap out of asses to be controversial.

It claims evolved not is two separate things. The Mujahadeen worked with the US Government in the 80's, they were our ally, in defeating the Soviets.

[StrayRogue]

The Guardian is a damned site better and a hell of a lot more respected than most the trash papers in the US PB.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Parkbandit
Family connection between attacks on USS Cole and U.S. embassy

Workers look for survivors in the rubble of the bombed U.S. Embassy in Kenya on August 7, 1998

December 11, 2000
Web posted at: 4:28 PM EST (2128 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- There is a family connection between a key suspect in the attack on the USS Cole and the 1998 bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya, CNN has learned.

U.S. and allied officials have told CNN the suicide bomber who caused extensive damage and casualties at the embassy was a cousin of a man considered a key suspect in the USS Cole investigation. Yemeni officials say the name of the Cole suspect is Mohammed Omar Al-Harazi -- though U.S. intelligence officials say he is known by at least two other names: Abdul Rahman Hussein Al-Nashari or Al-Nassir.

U.S. officials describe Al-Nashari, as they call him, as "a significant player" in the Al Queda group headed by the fugitive accused terrorist Osama bin Laden. Al-Nashari is said to be an explosives expert of Yemeni origin with Saudi citizenship. He is still at large.


The October 12 bombing ripped this hole in the USS Cole and killed 17 sailors

The Yemeni Army official newspaper said the suspect "played a major role in preparing, planning and training people who carried out the bombing. He gave them the money and necessary equipment for the attack." Al-Nashari's suspected involvement in the attack against the USS Cole is a key part of the case U.S. investigators are building that the attack may have been ordered by bin Laden.

Bin Laden and others face trial next month in New York in connection with the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, in 1998. In the indictment, Al-Nashari's cousin -- the suicide bomber in Kenya -- is described with the name "Azzam."

The apparent family connection between the attack in Kenya two years ago and the more recent one against the Cole "is another indication," one official told CNN, that the bin Laden group was most likely behind the attack on the US warship.

Source (http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/12/11/cole.family.connection/)

So much for that part of his conspiracy. :sniffle:

the attack MAY have been ordered by bin Laden.

Again a few people, not an international terrorist network. Notice the word Al Qaida is missing from your quotes.

Bin Laden is also related to someone who set up Bush Jnr in the oil business. He is also related to people who build bridges in Texas.

[Edited on 4-22-2005 by xtc]

[CrystalTears]

You know, if you're going to claim now that all the links we post are bullshit, why even bother having this discussion?

http://cns.miis.edu/research/wtc01/alqaida.htm

I guess that's crap too then?

[Back]

I don’t really see the point because they sure as hell are here now.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by xtc

Originally posted by Parkbandit
Family connection between attacks on USS Cole and U.S. embassy

Workers look for survivors in the rubble of the bombed U.S. Embassy in Kenya on August 7, 1998

December 11, 2000
Web posted at: 4:28 PM EST (2128 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- There is a family connection between a key suspect in the attack on the USS Cole and the 1998 bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya, CNN has learned.

U.S. and allied officials have told CNN the suicide bomber who caused extensive damage and casualties at the embassy was a cousin of a man considered a key suspect in the USS Cole investigation. Yemeni officials say the name of the Cole suspect is Mohammed Omar Al-Harazi -- though U.S. intelligence officials say he is known by at least two other names: Abdul Rahman Hussein Al-Nashari or Al-Nassir.

U.S. officials describe Al-Nashari, as they call him, as "a significant player" in the Al Queda group headed by the fugitive accused terrorist Osama bin Laden. Al-Nashari is said to be an explosives expert of Yemeni origin with Saudi citizenship. He is still at large.


The October 12 bombing ripped this hole in the USS Cole and killed 17 sailors

The Yemeni Army official newspaper said the suspect "played a major role in preparing, planning and training people who carried out the bombing. He gave them the money and necessary equipment for the attack." Al-Nashari's suspected involvement in the attack against the USS Cole is a key part of the case U.S. investigators are building that the attack may have been ordered by bin Laden.

Bin Laden and others face trial next month in New York in connection with the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, in 1998. In the indictment, Al-Nashari's cousin -- the suicide bomber in Kenya -- is described with the name "Azzam."

The apparent family connection between the attack in Kenya two years ago and the more recent one against the Cole "is another indication," one official told CNN, that the bin Laden group was most likely behind the attack on the US warship.

Source (http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/12/11/cole.family.connection/)

So much for that part of his conspiracy. :sniffle:

the attack MAY have been ordered by bin Laden.

Again a few people, not an international terrorist network. Notice the word Al Qaida is missing from your quotes.



Come on now xtc.. you can't be retarded AND FUCKING BLIND. Here, I'll enlarge the fucking word for you so you can easily see it. This was on the CNN website in 2000. Just in case you are as retarded as you are trying to be here, 2000 is earlier than 2001.

Completely and utterly FUCKING PWNED!!!!!111111

- Arkans

[Gan]

:clap:

:lol:

[Hulkein]

http://www.pypehosting.net/files/tank.jpg

On a serious note... Canada, the land of XCalibur, seems to fit xtc quite nicely.

[xtc]

I anticipated ridicule when I posted this topic:

PB: please read my link below

Crystaltears - I never said your links were crap. I am saying they don't say that Al Qaida was formed in the 80's as you contended.

Hulkein: you added nothing of value

"It should be noted that Al Qaeda is the name the United States Government used to call Osama Bin Ladin's organization after 9/11"

http://terrorism.about.com/od/terroristorganizations/p/alqaeda.htm

I noticed none of you have seen the BBC documentary. At least Ranger started his post with that.







[Edited on 4-22-2005 by xtc]

[Parkbandit]

Al Qaida = Al Queda = Al Quada = El Queda = El Quada = El Qaida.

Seriously, if that is your biggest reason for believing in this crackpot, you need more help than I originally thought.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by xtc

Anticor: you added nothing of value


He rarely ever does... but since he didn't post in this topic, you might want to just stop being a retard.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Parkbandit
Al Qaida = Al Queda = Al Quada = El Queda = El Quada = El Qaida.

Seriously, if that is your biggest reason for believing in this crackpot, you need more help than I originally thought.

2000/2001 very close. He contends the US Government named Al Qaida not Bin Laden.

Crackpot lol? Former Oxford University Professor of Politics. One of the most acclaimed producer of documentaries in Britain.

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

The same people that acclaimed Farenheit 9/11 as an "Eye opener to all Americans"?

- Arkans

[xtc]

Originally posted by Parkbandit

Originally posted by xtc

Anticor: you added nothing of value


He rarely ever does... but since he didn't post in this topic, you might want to just stop being a retard.

Sorry working another 70 hour week is catching up to me. I meant Hulkein.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by xtc

Originally posted by Parkbandit
Al Qaida = Al Queda = Al Quada = El Queda = El Quada = El Qaida.

Seriously, if that is your biggest reason for believing in this crackpot, you need more help than I originally thought.

2000/2001 very close. He contends the US Government named Al Qaida not Bin Laden.

Crackpot lol? Former Oxford University Professor of Politics. One of the most acclaimed producer of documentaries in Britain.

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

Ok.. I'll give you another opportunity to put your money where your mouth is. Let's have a wager that says I can find the group's name prior to 2000 as well. We can keep pushing this thing back all the way to 1988 when the group was founded if you need to.

It's a stupid notion that has already been disproven.

NEXT CONSPIRACY PLEASE. I'M DONE WITH THIS ONE.

[CrystalTears]

Originally posted by xtc
Crystaltears - I never said your links were crap. I am saying they don't say that Al Qaida was formed in the 80's as you contended.

Holy crap, PB is right.. again. You ARE blind.


Anticor: you added nothing of value

Way to go, brains. He didn't even post in this thread.

Edit: Goddamnit, PB.

And no, I didn't see the documentary. Documentaries don't make anything factual though.

[Edited on 4/22/2005 by CrystalTears]

2000/2001 very close.

^

Which kinda blows his whole premise out of the water.

Alot can happen in a year, or even less.

[Edaarin]

Title 18 Racketeer INfluenced and Corrupt Organization Act (18 USC Section 1961-1968)

1961 -- basically defines racketeering activity (which is almost any criminal activity you can think of, heh...)
- also defines person as individual/entity
- defines enterprise as any group associated in fact that might not be a legal entity
- states requirement of pattern of racketeering activity

1962 -- defines prohibited activity regarding income derived from that pattern of racketeering

1963 -- criminal penalties. here we go.
- anyone who violates section 1962 can be fined/imprisoned up to 20 years (or life if the activity in 1961 carries that life penalty)
- also includes criminal forfeiture to states any property acquired through 1962

The other sections (through 1968) cover civil penalties (irrelevant here).

What sweeping powers that circumvent the Constitution does RICO grant the government? Granted all this is based on my commercial law textbook, so there may be sections excised that I'm not aware of, but enlighten me.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Parkbandit

Originally posted by xtc

Originally posted by Parkbandit
Al Qaida = Al Queda = Al Quada = El Queda = El Quada = El Qaida.

Seriously, if that is your biggest reason for believing in this crackpot, you need more help than I originally thought.

2000/2001 very close. He contends the US Government named Al Qaida not Bin Laden.

Crackpot lol? Former Oxford University Professor of Politics. One of the most acclaimed producer of documentaries in Britain.

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

Ok.. I'll give you another opportunity to put your money where your mouth is. Let's have a wager that says I can find the group's name prior to 2000 as well. We can keep pushing this thing back all the way to 1988 when the group was founded if you need to.

It's a stupid notion that has already been disproven.

NEXT CONSPIRACY PLEASE. I'M DONE WITH THIS ONE.

The point isn't when the US Government invented Al Qaida. The argument is whether they are an organised, international terrorist network.

lol, you're done with it surprise surprise and without even seeing the documentary, it reminds me of a saying from my old philosophy class

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation"

[Edited on 4-22-2005 by xtc]

I'm just going off the simple premises of what has been stated prior to this point. If he claims that Al Qaida was invented in 2001, when in actuality there are references to it well prior than that, that makes any information he has suspect.

If I can disprove one of the basic tenets of his argument with 3 minutes and a google taskbar how much can I trust the rest of his information?



[Edited on 4-22-2005 by RangerD1]

[xtc]

Originally posted by RangerD1
2000/2001 very close.

^

Which kinda blows his whole premise out of the water.

Alot can happen in a year, or even less.

No it doesn't change a thing. His contention is that Al Qaida is not a international terror network and that it is an invention of the US Government.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Edaarin
Title 18 Racketeer INfluenced and Corrupt Organization Act (18 USC Section 1961-1968)

1961 -- basically defines racketeering activity (which is almost any criminal activity you can think of, heh...)
- also defines person as individual/entity
- defines enterprise as any group associated in fact that might not be a legal entity
- states requirement of pattern of racketeering activity

1962 -- defines prohibited activity regarding income derived from that pattern of racketeering

1963 -- criminal penalties. here we go.
- anyone who violates section 1962 can be fined/imprisoned up to 20 years (or life if the activity in 1961 carries that life penalty)
- also includes criminal forfeiture to states any property acquired through 1962

The other sections (through 1968) cover civil penalties (irrelevant here).

What sweeping powers that circumvent the Constitution does RICO grant the government? Granted all this is based on my commercial law textbook, so there may be sections excised that I'm not aware of, but enlighten me.

The Federal Government has utilized a set of laws called the R.I.C.O. Act
(Racketeering and Influenced, Corrupt Organizations Act) to railroad selected established organizations, their members and associates into legal battle and jail terms. Below, you will find how the Federal Government of the United States has blatantly violated the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

R.I.C.O. vs. U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights

FREEDOM FROM GUILT BY ASSOCIATION: It is a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT UNDER AMERICAN LAW that guilt or innocence is individual, not collective That is, a person's guilt or innocence is determined by what acts he/she has performed, not by what organization he/she belongs to or associates with. UNDER R.I.C.O., YOU MAY BE TRIED FOR YOUR MEMBERSHIP IN OR ASSOCIATION WITH AN ORGANIZATION.

DOUBLE JEOPARDY: The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees that a person shall not be tried twice for the same offense But even if you have been tried, convicted, and sentenced for an offense. UNDER R.I.C.O., YOU MAY BE TRIED, CONVICTED, AND SENTENCED AGAIN FOR THE VERY SAME ACT/S. EVEN IF YOU WERE TRIED AND FOUND NOT GUILTY THE FIRST TIME, YOU CAN BE TRIED AGAIN.

STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS: Under pre-existing Federal Law, all non-capital crimes had a 5-year Statute of Limitations If you were not indicted within that period of time, no prosecution could ever be brought against you.
UNDER R.I.C.O., ALL THE GOVERNMENT NEED DO IS CLAIM THAT ONE ACT OCCURRED WITHIN THE 5-YEAR PERIOD) AND THEN THEY MAY TRY YOU FOR ANY ACT/S WHICH OCCURRED WITHIN 10 YEARS OF THE FIRST ACT, EXCLUDING PERIODS OF IMPRISONMENT.

RIGHT TO A SPEEDY TRIAL: The Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees that a Defendant in a criminal case is entitled to a speedy trial. UNDER R.I.C.O. SINCE THE U.S. GOVERNMENT CAN TRY YOU FOR CRIMES THAT OCCURRED 10-15 YEARS AGO, AND FOR WHICH YOU MAY NEVER HAVE BEEN TRIED FOR PREVIOUSLY, YOU LOSE YOUR RIGHT TO A SPEEDY TRIAL. HOW CAN YOU DEFEND YOURSELF AGAINST CHARGES THAT ARE 10-15 YEARS OLD?

FREEDOM FROM MASS TRIAL: American Law has always stood against the Government indicting large numbers of people and engaging in MASS or "SHOW" TRIALS, such as the kind which the Soviet Union periodically engaged in under Joseph Stalin. The danger of this kind of trial is that a person may be found guilty, not for what he or she did, but for what another defendant/s may have done, the jury believing that "Birds of a feather, flock together". Before the R.I.C.O. Act became law, a person could not be tried for acts which he/she did not allegedly perform or which he/ she allegedly conspired to perform.

UNDER R.I.C.O., YOU MAY BE TRIED TOGETHER WITH PERSONS WHO YOU HAVE NEVER MET AND OR OTHERWISE. EVIDENCE OF ANOTHER'S CRIMINAL ACTIONS MAY BE USED AGAINST YOU.

[xtc]

Originally posted by RangerD1
I'm just going off the simple premises of what has been stated prior to this point. If he claims that Al Qaida was invented in 2001, when in actuality there are references to it well prior than that, that makes any information he has suspect.

If I can disprove one of the basic tenets of his argument with 3 minutes and a google taskbar how much can I trust the rest of his information?



[Edited on 4-22-2005 by RangerD1]

I would see the documentary first. Being of by a very short period of time isn't exactly disproving.

[Edited on 4-22-2005 by xtc]

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by xtc

Originally posted by RangerD1
2000/2001 very close.

^

Which kinda blows his whole premise out of the water.

Alot can happen in a year, or even less.

No it doesn't change a thing. His contention is that Al Qaida is not a international terror network and that it is an invention of the US Government.




Originally posted by xtc
He asserts that Al Qaida is a myth, that it had no name until 2001 when the American Government gave it one in order to use the RICO act against them. He states that Al Qaida is not an organised international terror network; it does not have members or a leader.

You just got fucking pwned by your own post in this very thread... posted in the same day. Congrats.

[CrystalTears]

One of Britain's most respected and acclaimed documentary producers has made a documentary on the terror myth. He asserts that Al Qaida is a myth, that it had no name until 2001 when the American Government gave it one in order to use the RICO act against them.

First it was that they didn't have a name before the attacks, and now you say it doesn't matter when they were named. Bin Laden named themselves an organization in the 80's, regardless of what the name was. Quit dancing, Fred Astaire.

Edit: GODDAMNIT PB!!

[Edited on 4/22/2005 by CrystalTears]

Okay fine whatever.


that it had no name until 2001 when the American Government gave it one in order to use the RICO act against them

Bullshit. As pointed out.


He states that Al Qaida is not an organised international terror network; it does not have members or a leader

Bullshit. Tell that to Zarqwai and the rest of the people who follow his lead in Iraq and Afghanistan. Arrest records *in england* don't mean jack of shit.



does not have sleeper cells and it doesn't have an overall strategy.

Not according to Bin Laden. The guy who supposedly doesn't exist. I guess it is entirely possible that hes full shit of and hes just trying to scare the western world into believing he is capable of things he is incapable of.

Then again that would mean that the United States has done an effective job in the war on terror, a point I'd doubt you're willing to conceede.

[Apotheosis]

OMG! 1 R SC4R3D!

The Aliens + the G W Bush adiminstration and the masons are all coming to get us and turn us into zombies while their elite oil companies drain money from us in an effort to enslave the universe, while Michael Moore, who's really a spy for the communist regime in china who's in league with the Trilateral commission are trying to turn us into tree-hugging hippies. It's all in Nostradamus's Prophecies and the Book of Revelations! all you have to do is turn the pages to the right, place a dollar bill with the one eyed pyramid over the fifth paragraph and the plot is all revealed!

[Edaarin]

FREEDOM FROM GUILT BY ASSOCIATION: It is a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT UNDER AMERICAN LAW that guilt or innocence is individual, not collective That is, a person's guilt or innocence is determined by what acts he/she has performed, not by what organization he/she belongs to or associates with.
UNDER R.I.C.O., YOU MAY BE TRIED FOR YOUR MEMBERSHIP IN OR ASSOCIATION WITH AN ORGANIZATION.

If you're part of a criminal enterprise, no shit you're going to be tried. If you're culpable (knowingly being part of a criminal circuit), you're probably going to be found guilty.

UNDER R.I.C.O., YOU MAY BE TRIED, CONVICTED, AND SENTENCED AGAIN FOR THE VERY SAME ACT/S. EVEN IF YOU WERE TRIED AND FOUND NOT GUILTY THE FIRST TIME, YOU CAN BE TRIED AGAIN.

I'd hate to pull an Edine here, but I'm going to have to ask for a case in point with this one, I don't believe it. I'm thinking that in whatever case he dug up, the person was tried under a different cause of action or something

STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS: Under pre-existing Federal Law, all non-capital crimes had a 5-year Statute of Limitations If you were not indicted within that period of time, no prosecution could ever be brought against you.
UNDER R.I.C.O., ALL THE GOVERNMENT NEED DO IS CLAIM THAT ONE ACT OCCURRED WITHIN THE 5-YEAR PERIOD) AND THEN THEY MAY TRY YOU FOR ANY ACT/S WHICH OCCURRED WITHIN 10 YEARS OF THE FIRST ACT, EXCLUDING PERIODS OF IMPRISONMENT.

I was unaware of this clause. Again, I'd appreciate it if you could find the section that grants this power, or the case that established this power.

FREEDOM FROM MASS TRIAL: American Law has always stood against the Government indicting large numbers of people and engaging in MASS or "SHOW" TRIALS, such as the kind which the Soviet Union periodically engaged in under Joseph Stalin. The danger of this kind of trial is that a person may be found guilty, not for what he or she did, but for what another defendant/s may have done, the jury believing that "Birds of a feather, flock together". Before the R.I.C.O. Act became law, a person could not be tried for acts which he/she did not allegedly perform or which he/ she allegedly conspired to perform.

American law has always stood against that? News to me...

UNDER R.I.C.O., YOU MAY BE TRIED TOGETHER WITH PERSONS WHO YOU HAVE NEVER MET AND OR OTHERWISE. EVIDENCE OF ANOTHER'S CRIMINAL ACTIONS MAY BE USED AGAINST YOU.

It's not new for co-defendants of a criminal trial to be strangers. And evidence in another case can always be used against a defendant; that's part of the reason why the 5th Amendment exists. No one can FORCE you to take the stand in your own criminal trial, but they sure as hell can force you to take the stand in any other trial.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Parkbandit

Originally posted by xtc

Originally posted by RangerD1
2000/2001 very close.

^

Which kinda blows his whole premise out of the water.

Alot can happen in a year, or even less.

No it doesn't change a thing. His contention is that Al Qaida is not a international terror network and that it is an invention of the US Government.




Originally posted by xtc
He asserts that Al Qaida is a myth, that it had no name until 2001 when the American Government gave it one in order to use the RICO act against them. He states that Al Qaida is not an organised international terror network; it does not have members or a leader.

You just got fucking pwned by your own post in this very thread... posted in the same day. Congrats.

Pwned ...lol... I think not. The man may have been off by a few months big deal. It still stands that the US Government invented Al Qaeda, whether in 2000 or 2001 is irrelevant. Bin Laden has never stated he heads a global terror network called Al Qaida. Did you even read my link on Al Qiada?

ok I have to get back to work so I won't be able to argue for the rest of the day. Before you guys post 10 pages of its bullshit could you try watching the documentary first. I am going to try and find a copy this weekend.

[xtc]

Originally posted by CrystalTears

One of Britain's most respected and acclaimed documentary producers has made a documentary on the terror myth. He asserts that Al Qaida is a myth, that it had no name until 2001 when the American Government gave it one in order to use the RICO act against them.

First it was that they didn't have a name before the attacks, and now you say it doesn't matter when they were named. Bin Laden named themselves an organization in the 80's, regardless of what the name was. Quit dancing, Fred Astaire.

Edit: GODDAMNIT PB!!

[Edited on 4/22/2005 by CrystalTears]

Ah, no he has never named Al Qaida re-read your own links.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Yswithe
OMG! 1 R SC4R3D!

The Aliens + the G W Bush adiminstration and the masons are all coming to get us and turn us into zombies while their elite oil companies drain money from us in an effort to enslave the universe, while Michael Moore, who's really a spy for the communist regime in china who's in league with the Trilateral commission are trying to turn us into tree-hugging hippies. It's all in Nostradamus's Prophecies and the Book of Revelations! all you have to do is turn the pages to the right, place a dollar bill with the one eyed pyramid over the fifth paragraph and the plot is all revealed!

U R an idiot now run outside and play child

[CrystalTears]

You're dancing around semantics so it's getting kinda stupid now.

Besides, not everyone is going to download 380 MB of a documentary. And I sure can't since I'm computerless this week.

[Edited on 4/22/2005 by CrystalTears]

[Apotheosis]

Originally posted by xtc

Originally posted by Yswithe
OMG! 1 R SC4R3D!

The Aliens + the G W Bush adiminstration and the masons are all coming to get us and turn us into zombies while their elite oil companies drain money from us in an effort to enslave the universe, while Michael Moore, who's really a spy for the communist regime in china who's in league with the Trilateral commission are trying to turn us into tree-hugging hippies. It's all in Nostradamus's Prophecies and the Book of Revelations! all you have to do is turn the pages to the right, place a dollar bill with the one eyed pyramid over the fifth paragraph and the plot is all revealed!

U R an idiot now run outside and play child

No, I'm just tired of people obsessing over "conspiracy" theory.

I grew up in a conservative household, my parents and their friends all gibbered about the clinton taking over the world + new world order conspiracy + selling out our country to the UN..... and during the whole clinton administration their was a subculture of conspiracy theorists.

Now, I am in the Bush administraion era, and the liberals/libretarians/whomever, have developed an equally ridiculous conspiracy theory concept just as crazy as the conservatives during the Clinton era.

[xtc]

Originally posted by RangerD1
Okay fine whatever.


that it had no name until 2001 when the American Government gave it one in order to use the RICO act against them

1. Bullshit. As pointed out.


He states that Al Qaida is not an organised international terror network; it does not have members or a leader

2. Bullshit. Tell that to Zarqwai and the rest of the people who follow his lead in Iraq and Afghanistan. Arrest records *in england* don't mean jack of shit.



does not have sleeper cells and it doesn't have an overall strategy.

3. Not according to Bin Laden. The guy who supposedly doesn't exist. I guess it is entirely possible that hes full shit of and hes just trying to scare the western world into believing he is capable of things he is incapable of.

4. Then again that would mean that the United States has done an effective job in the war on terror, a point I'd doubt you're willing to conceede.


1. ok first no not bullshit maybe off by a few months but not bullshit.

2. Zarqawi follows Bin Laden lead? The two have been enemies for a long time. Regarding the arrests in England:

"Britain's Home Office on arrests and convictions of suspected terrorists since Sept 11, 2001. Of the 664 people detained only 17 have been founded guilty. Of the 17 most were Irish Republicans, Sikh militants and other non - Muslims. Nobody has been convicted who is a proven member of Al Qaida."

Not exactly damning.

3. Sleeper cells, since 9-11 not one single attack on US soil. So much for sleeper cells.

4. The US have done a good job weeding out terrorists? How many people have been convicted? Saying that, the fact there haven't been attacks on US soil is proof of a job well done, by the US authorities, is like the old story of the guy in China who is charged with having a radio. They search and search and find nothing but they convict him anyway, why? The State decided he was so subversive that he hid it so well no one could find it.

[xtc]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
You're dancing around semantics so it's getting kinda stupid now.

Besides, not everyone is going to download 380 MB of a documentary. And I sure can't since I'm computerless this week.

[Edited on 4/22/2005 by CrystalTears]

Semantics? You claim Bin Laden named and formed Al Qaida in the 80's. I say no such thing happened and that he has never named Al Qaida.

You provided the links they did not prove your assertion so I simply asked if you had read them.

[CrystalTears]

"The Maktab al-Khadam [edited to remove other language that forums said "no comprende"] MAK, also known as the Afghan Services Bureau, is reliably believed to have been founded in 1984 by Dr. Abdullah Azzam and Osama bin Laden to raise funds and recruit foreign mujahidin for the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. MAK became the forerunner to Al Qaeda and was instrumental in creating the fundraising and recruitment network that benefited Al Qaeda during the 1990s."

Okay, I'll give you that he personally didn't name the organization Al Quada, that was the name of the base/headquarters. He still had formed an organization, which you said had no name and no leader. That, at least, has been debunked, which is why I said you're dancing around semantics. :shrug:

[Edited on 4/22/2005 by CrystalTears]

[Ylena]

X, hon, they can call it a documentary, but that doesn't mean that it bears any resemblance to the reality that everybody but you seems to be living in. Argue that Oswald didn't kill Kennedy. I could at least make an attempt to get behind you on that one. While you're at it, can you please explain global warming, how the Holocaust never happened, and why Lyndon LaRouche was right about Queen Elizabeth being the head of the international drug cartels? Thx.

Give it up already. You're just worming your cranium farther up your posterior with every new post.

And Yswithe? Funny.as.hell.

[IntegraC]

Originally posted by xtc
You claim Bin Laden named and formed Al Qaida in the 80's. I say no such thing happened and that he has never named Al Qaida.

http://www.worldhistory.com/binladen.htm

Check year 1988. Is that too close to 2001 as well? Also, notice the references to where it is said that Al-Qa'ida is Islamic for 'The Base'.

http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/ladin.htm

Check out the Description and Activities section.

Instead of believing the BS that some fancy Brit is feeding you, how about you do some research.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by xtcIt still stands that the US Government invented Al Qaeda, whether in 2000 or 2001 is irrelevant. Bin Laden has never stated he heads a global terror network called Al Qaida. Did you even read my link on Al Qiada?



How many different ways do you want to spell that organization? No matter how many ways you spell it.. it still is the same, no? Are you saying that because one spells it Al Queda that it isn't referring to Al Qaida or Al Qiada?

Potatoe anyone?

[CrystalTears]

Which is why I said he was dancing around semantics because they named their base Al Qaeda, and he named the organization something else. Just because we're referring to both the base and the organization as Al Qaeda doesn't make it any less true. So the US would rather call it Al Qaeda than Mekalekai Hai Mekachaniho or whatever. BFD.

[Parkbandit]

You know you are fucked when even Backlash doesn't buy into the conspiracy.

[HarmNone]

The reasons for the different spelling really relate to the lack of vowels in the Arabic language. There is alef. That's the only vowel. So, when Arabic is translated to English, the spellings are often myriad, especially when it comes to the use of vowels.

[DeV]

Damn, all this over a name.

How about we just call them the bomb squad. Seems fitting.

[CrystalTears]

:lol: @ DeV

[ElanthianSiren]

XTC -- please don't think the whole Bin Laden thing has been in vain. At least Bush has learned his colors from the affair.

I don't personally care who named Al'Qaida or when. If the organization didn't exist prior to 9/11, a lot of people wouldn't be dead; since they are obviously dead, it's a moot point. -Unless you claim to say that the U.S. iteself orchestrated terror attacks on its own citizens then created the organization and exaulted Osama as its leader.

I'm not inclined to believe that. I am however inclined to believe that the administration is playing the fear from those attacks like a cheap violin.

-Melissa

It's Alif

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by RangerD1
It's Alif

:axe:

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by ElanthianSiren
XTC -- please don't think the whole Bin Laden thing has been in vain. At least Bush has learned his colors from the affair.

I don't personally care who named Al'Qaida or when. If the organization didn't exist prior to 9/11, a lot of people wouldn't be dead; since they are obviously dead, it's a moot point. -Unless you claim to say that the U.S. iteself orchestrated terror attacks on its own citizens then created the organization and exaulted Osama as its leader.

I'm not inclined to believe that. I am however inclined to believe that the administration is playing the fear from those attacks like a cheap violin.

-Melissa

At what purpose? They've already won the election.. which was the reason everyone was giving as to why the Republicans were "playing the fear card". So what is it now that motivates them to play it now? Could it actually be that there are organizations out there that would love to detonate a dirty bomb in the middle of one of our cities? Could it actually be that there are organizations that want nothing but the destruction of western civilization? Could it actually be that there are organizations that are trying to figure out how to tople our financial system?

Naw.. couldn't possibly be that. It must be that Bush is making the whole thing up just to elect his brother in 2008.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Arkans
The same people that acclaimed Farenheit 9/11 as an "Eye opener to all Americans"?

- Arkans

It actually was.

See, I saw the movie as well. It was so full of half truths that it was ridiculous. I mean, honestly, how anyone could have taken that seriously is beyond me.

- Arkans

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Arkans
See, I saw the movie as well. It was so full of half truths that it was ridiculous. I mean, honestly, how anyone could have taken that seriously is beyond me.

- Arkans

So we go from full of lies to half truths.

Slanted, yes ... half truths? Water really isn't wet is it?

This isn't the topic however.

It kind of is, Tsa'ah. It goes to show that the people "acclaiming" this guy really have their own bias. I mean, how can you call a movie "eye opening" when they believe it's okay to ignore Britian as an American ally and that all Dutch are potsmoking hippies.

- Arkans

[Atlanteax]

NEWS FLASH

Adam Curtis makes a documentary proving that Jesus was a being from outer space that brainwashed everyone that he encountered.

.

Golly, if he made it, it must be true!!! :rah:

[Latrinsorm]

I'd like to know one (any) revelation Fahrenheit 9/11 made. I didn't notice anything that I didn't know before walking in.

[Xcalibur]

Originally posted by Hulkein
http://www.pypehosting.net/files/tank.jpg

On a serious note... Canada, the land of XCalibur, seems to fit xtc quite nicely.

Hey bro, XTC and I are living in 2 DIFFERENT world.

Canada != me

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah

Originally posted by Arkans
The same people that acclaimed Farenheit 9/11 as an "Eye opener to all Americans"?

- Arkans

It actually was.

If by eye opening you mean that is was eye opening for the Fox news viewers then you're probably right.

[Back]

This whole topic is stupid because of the title.

Terrorism is not a myth. Its nothing new either. Sure, I agree with Siren, its been played up big time to achieve other objectives... but no matter how right you think you may be in this world, that does not mean you are safe.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Atlanteax
NEWS FLASH

Adam Curtis makes a documentary proving that Jesus was a being from outer space that brainwashed everyone that he encountered.

.

Golly, if he made it, it must be true!!! :rah:

Yea, because Jesus being the son of an all powerful alien being is so much more believable.

:smug:

[ElanthianSiren]

Originally posted by Parkbandit

At what purpose? They've already won the election..


So you believe that elections are the only facet of politics? It's all a big popularity contest with no legislature ever changing, being written, voted on, passed, moved and so on? I guess Bush said after he was elected, "No need to do anything now, I'm president!"

C'mon PB. Though I do have to concur that it seemed there were a lot more imminent terror threats right before the election, one could simply write this off as those evil evil terrorists trying to disrupt our democratic system.


-Melissa

Who the fuck cares about a godamn label.

Personally the statement:

"My name is Habeeb al-Muhammed the III, I will stop at nothing to blow up every infidel."

Is a lot more threatening than:

"Also, I'm a member of Aunt Jamima's Goat-Milking Terrorist Organization."

:shrug:

[xtc]

Originally posted by IntegraC

Originally posted by xtc
You claim Bin Laden named and formed Al Qaida in the 80's. I say no such thing happened and that he has never named Al Qaida.

http://www.worldhistory.com/binladen.htm

Check year 1988. Is that too close to 2001 as well? Also, notice the references to where it is said that Al-Qa'ida is Islamic for 'The Base'.

http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/ladin.htm

Check out the Description and Activities section.

Instead of believing the BS that some fancy Brit is feeding you, how about you do some research.

There wrong, as someone who is old enough to remember the 80's without wearing garanimals, Al Qaida didn't exist in the 80's. These guys are engaging in revisionist history.

The name of the organisation in Afghanistan that bin laden was involved with in the 80's was the Mujahideen.

[xtc]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
"The Maktab al-Khadam [edited to remove other language that forums said "no comprende"] MAK, also known as the Afghan Services Bureau, is reliably believed to have been founded in 1984 by Dr. Abdullah Azzam and Osama bin Laden to raise funds and recruit foreign mujahidin for the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. MAK became the forerunner to Al Qaeda and was instrumental in creating the fundraising and recruitment network that benefited Al Qaeda during the 1990s."

Okay, I'll give you that he personally didn't name the organization Al Quada, that was the name of the base/headquarters. He still had formed an organization, which you said had no name and no leader. That, at least, has been debunked, which is why I said you're dancing around semantics. :shrug:

[Edited on 4/22/2005 by CrystalTears]

That is like saying the name of your organisation is house because you live in it.

Semantics and deflection is what everyone else is engaging in. Now I have seen one of three parts of the documentary. The point is that ideas in politics have been replaced by fear. That leaders engage in fear mongering because they are bereft of ideas. That the threat to America is no where near what is being represented. That the threat is few under populated loosely organised groups. Not a well organised global terror threat.


For those of you with satelitte that pick up Canadian Channels:

http://www.cbc.ca/passionateeye/powerofnightmares/

[Edited on 4-26-2005 by xtc]

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by xtc
There wrong, as someone who is old enough to remember the 80's without wearing garanimals, Al Qaida didn't exist in the 80's. These guys are engaging in revisionist history. Crap, I don't remember the Berlin Wall falling. Sorry, Eastern Europe, back to Communism for you!

Not sure if this was touched on or not but I will be add a little bit of information to clarify.

Al Qaeda or "The Base" was created long before 2001. It original purpose was a collection of names and information about the people who answered the call for Jihad against the Russians in Afghanistan. The leaders of the "freedom" fighters there collected information about all of the foreign fighters willing to take part in a holy war. Those were people they knew they could count on to do other tasks. Sadly it turned to terrorism quickly due to the leaders perverse views of the Islamic religion.

We call things what we call them. We don't call Germany the same thing the Germans do. The organization existed and has since the 80's. Like many things it has adapted and changed into what it is today. I assure you though it is alive and well, we know there are many Cell's across the world and many in our major cities here in the states. Sadly even with the aid that the patriot act offers us we still need to catch these people in the act before we can toss them in jail.

[Edited on 5-13-2005 by Dave]

[Back]

Woah, hold on there, champ. I thought we had devastated them. That they were on the run. Now you come here and say they have infiltrated us?

Isn’t this like the second time someone has caught the number 3 man of “the base”? The Paki’s are on the hunt like we are, yet numero uno has not been caught.

[Warriorbird]

"The Paki’s are on the hunt like we are, yet numero uno has not been caught. "

:snickers:

Originally posted by Backlash
Woah, hold on there, champ. I thought we had devastated them. That they were on the run.

We have killed or captured much of the leadership, yes. When you take out the governing body of a organization they are dismantled. The hard thing about terrorist organizations is their structure. The Cells are broken down into self sustaining entities. They have their own logistics, intelligence gathering, and combat parts, much like a military. Though they now lack their governing body they are still able to carry out attacks if they can get their shit together.

Now you come here and say they have infiltrated us?
There is no now about it. There have been Al Qaeda cells in the United States for decades.


Isn’t this like the second time someone has caught the number 3 man of “the base”?.
Not sure how many times but is it surprising to have somebody promoted to fill the position that others we have captured were forced to vacate?