Holte's corner

Who is paying Bin Laden?

A guy who calls himself Clown Hidden comments:

"More and more I think Bin Laden is still on the CIA payroll. They can't find Bin Laden, yeah, I believe that."

I don't think Bin Laden is on the CIA pay. He is too Wahabist in his religion for that. But there are a lot of conspiracy theorists who think that that is the case, and given the fact of the massive amount of propaganda, deception and weirdness, there is just too much fishy business to not be either the manifestation of the grossest incompetance, or something at least partly deliberate. Who knows maybe Bush is secretly a Wahabi himself. After all he's been around them since he was little.

Note, when I close comments it is nothing personal, it's just that if I leave them open eventually some greedy fool starts posting spam links.

Clown writes:"If the terrorists really are acting for the reasons they say, it seems to me they are completely justified in targeting the U.S."

Of course I don't believe that this kind of insanity is ever justified. These people are nuts. They talk about the honor of being able to die for a noble cause and don't give anybody any option but die or convert to Wahabism. Excuse me, five minutes of actually listening to Zawahiri ougth to disabuse you of any notion that these folks are justified to do what they are doing. Still the whole thing is fishy.

First there is the fact that all of us working with the Federal Government and even periphrially involved with the Defence department have known that Bin Laden was aiming to attack again since the first World Trade attacks. I've acquaintance with military people and I was working near the Pentagon until a year before the attacks, and believe me we knew they had evil intentions. The US was doing some of what they could. Walls were going up around the Pentagon. The security threat was used to clear out protestors from near the White House, and the Secret Service "men in black" went from polite young men one could sometimes have a polite conversation with to really scary guys. We knew things were getting dangerous and that at least some people in the Government wanted to use that as an excuse to curtail liberties most of us had come to take for granted -- like the Constitution.

Now we are finding out that the administration had some general idea of exactly what Bin Laden was planning, just not the details of place, time and who was doing it. They had some of that too, but seem to have decided that they'd wait until after the attack went forth to take action on the subject. There is something fishy about the fact that no Jet planes were nearby. When a private plane entered Air Space one year before it was escorted to a landing and nearly shot down. It is incredible to the point of imbecility or malfeasance to think that they wouldn't have had airplanes ready to scramble in this situation. But they didn't, despite having issued a warning of immediate threat:
http://www.therandirhodesshow.com/live/node/3985
"Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US," and refers to possible hijacking attempts by Osama bin Laden disciples and the existence of about 70 FBI investigations into alleged al-Qaeda cells operating within the United States. The August 6 PDB, an excerpt from which you'll find below, was presented to Bush while he vacationed at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. The digest is prepared by the Central Intelligence Agency, an official from which briefs the president on the report's contents. While Bush critics have described the August 6 PDB as a warning of an impending al-Qaeda attack, Condoleezza Rice, Bush's national security adviser, testified Thursday that the document contained "historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information."

Randi Rhodes also cites an essay written by the neo-cons (authored by the other William Krystol, who one sees on TV sometimes) that notes that only a Pearl Harbor type event would allow the kind of strategy he wanted to execute in changing the military and throwing weight around abroad. I read that essay myself (in a different context) and didn't pick up one what she said, but the quote is right in there. She writes on the Straussian theory of "Dominianism" which is an outgrowth of the ideas of Georges Sorel, Mussolini, and Portuguese and Spanish style Fascism. The article says:

http://www.therandirhodesshow.com/live/node/1971

“One of the more sinister aspects of the current crisis is the influence of Leo Strauss on the pro-war, “neo-cons” who are determining so much of our foreign policy. While the Christian right thinks it is running the show, Leo Strauss’ irreligious philosophy is actually in control. Strauss believed that the rulers should not be religious, but should use religion to manage the people — which he evidently regarded as a stupid herd. He also believed that a state of war was great for controlling and directing the masses. So it’s all come together: the weirdest book of the bible [Revelations], with its mysterious disasters; the scheming behind the scenes warmongers and an incident of terrorism that has served admirably as the Project for a New American Century’s hoped-for ‘new Pearl Harbor.’” Adrien Rain

more on Strauss: http://www.alternet.org/story/15935

She and others advance the theory that the administration knew that Bin laden was up to something and were waiting for him to do it so they'd have their Pearl harbor event. That sounds way probable given recent comments by Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney. It sounds like high treason to me, so I'd need a lot of evidence before I'd endorse this theory. But then there is an increasing body of evidence for corruption, deception, propaganda, misrepresentation, and definately the use of mythologized people and man-made legends to replace facts and to cover up the corruption and theft. All very Straussian behavior:

"Strauss believed that "those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and that there is only one natural right – the right of the superior to rule over the inferior."

Finally we get to why I don't believe that Bin Laden could possibly be on the CIA payroll. Because the Saudis also use Straussian methods and religion to control their people. They are the ones bankrolling Wahabiism, the underlying notions that guide Bin Laden and Zawahiri. Bin Laden was once a deputy of the Saudis, and was bankrolled by them when he went to attack the Russians. Of course Bin Laden has also savagely attacked the Saudis, but that just means that the source of the funds might not be the folks in power right now.

clown writes: "we've been screwing with them for a century" -- not hardly. The Saudis and other Arab Emirates have been screwing everyone for 80 years or more. Britain made a devils bargain with the House of Saud, which counts the Bin Ladens as one of its retainer families. The US picked up some of that devils bargain on behalf of the British. It's the rich Arabs who are screwing their brothers and blaming it on the West. While rich folks like Bush and company help them. We've just been acting as mercenaries for them. Osama may be a renegade, but he is their renegade, and it is pretty obvious that we've been protecting him with the help of Musharriffe and the House of Saud. Why else would we attack Iraq and create so many disciples for him? We also pulled our base out of Saudi Arabia, which was his demand, and also the Demand of the Saudis.

They are famous for playing both sides so nothing would surprise me. They want Osama to be successful enough to keep American's afraid and allow them to trample on anyone who gets in the way of their unchecked power and ambition.

"it's about time someone stood up. War and terrorism are stupid, but one side's right and one is wrong. The U.S. is not right in conducting this war and more wrong for giving up all lip service to it's ideals in doing so."

If you are talking about Iraq you are right. If you are talking about the broader war, we have no choice. However, the way to conduct this war is not the way they are doing it. Steven Decatur set the example for how to conduct a war against Islamic extremists in the first war the US ever fought against the Barbary pirates. He went ashore, he bargained, he paid the right bribes and got the support of the local leaders. It may sound good to say "never talk to terrorists" but it is ones enemies one should always talk to, so that one can convert them to rivals, and maybe even into Business partners.

Bush is turning the US into a giant version fo the Island described in the book Cats Cradle. Further readings:

http://www.eurolegal.org/neoconwars/interafghan.htm

"VO: The neoconservatives set up a lobby group to publicize the findings of Team B. It was called the Committee on the Present Danger, and a growing number of politicians joined, including a Presidential hopeful, Ronald Reagan."

Showed clips from propaganda film similar to the one being shown tonight:

"[ TITLE: The Price of Peace and Freedom / Committee on the Present Danger, propaganda film 1978 ]"

"VO: Through films and television, the Committee portrayed a world in which America was under threat from hidden forces that could strike at any time, forces that America must conquer to survive."

"ALEKSANDR SOLZHENITSYN, through interpreter: A concentration of world evil, of hatred for humanity, is taking place. And it is fully determined to destroy your society. Must you wait until the young men of America have to fall defending the borders of their continent?"

"VO: This dramatic battle between good and evil was precisely the kind of myth that Leo Strauss had taught his students would be necessary to rescue the country from moral decay. It might not be true, but it was necessary, to re-engage the public in a grand vision of America’s destiny, that would give meaning and purpose to their lives. The neoconservatives were succeeding in creating a simplistic fiction—a vision of the Soviet Union as the center of all evil in the world, and America as the only country that could rescue the world. And this nightmarish vision was beginning to give the neoconservatives great power and influence."

"HOLMES: The Straussians started to create a worldview which is a fiction. The world is not divided into good and evil. The battle in which we are engaged is not a battle between good and evil. The United States, as anyone who observes understands, has done some good and some bad things. It’s like any great power. This is the way history is. But they wanted to create a world of moral certainties, so therefore they invent mythologies—fairytales—describing any force in the world that obstructs the United States as somehow Satanic, or associated with evil."

Of course this world view is perfect for people who want to sell arms, divide and rule, or who love to fight.

Chris

Posted by cholte at September 11, 2006 10:07 PM