We did not train, fund, or materielize a young Osama bin laden.
Reader comment on item: Rauf Lecture Reveals Radicalism

Submitted by Proxywar, Aug 27, 2010 04:56

We can also see that our training and materiel for a young Osama Bin Laden

Read more at: http://www.investigativeproject.org/2121/rauf-lecture-reveals-radicalism

We can also see that our training and materiel for a young Osama Bin Laden

Read more at: http://www.investigativeproject.org/2121/rauf-lecture-reveals-radicalism the CIA did not finance, train, or create UBL/Al-qaeda. This is a moonbat myth told by many troofers. Mr.Quevedo is really trying hard to protect his sham of a religion. It's ok I've heard it all the excuses from islamic-apologists before.

Someone fax these links to him so he can educate himself.
http://www.911myths.com/html/bin_ladin_links_to_t...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#Etymology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#Alleged_CIA...

"Osama bin Laden explained the origin of the term in a videotaped interview with Al Jazeera (journalist) Tayseer Alouni in October 2001: "The name 'al-Qaeda' was established a long time ago by mere chance. The late Abu Ebeida El-Banashiri established the training camps for our mujahedeen against Russia's terrorism. We used to call the training camp al-Qaeda. The name stayed."

"A variety of sources — CNN journalist Peter Bergen, Pakistani ISI Brigadier Mohammad Yousaf, and CIA operatives involved in the Afghan program, such as Vincent Cannistraro — deny that the CIA or other American officials had contact with the Afghan Arabs (foreign mujahideen) or Bin Laden, let alone armed, trained, coached or indoctrinated them."

"But Bergen and others argue that there was no need to recruit foreigners unfamiliar with the local language, customs or lay of the land since there were a quarter of a million local Afghans willing to fight; that Arab Afghans themselves had no need for American funds since they received several hundred million dollars a year from non-American, Muslim sources; that Americans could not have trained mujahideen because Pakistani officials would not allow more than a handful of them to operate in Pakistan and none in Afghanistan; and that the Afghan Arabs were almost invariably militant Islamists reflexively hostile to Westerners whether or not the Westerners were helping the Muslim Afghans."

"According to Peter Bergen, known for conducting the first television interview with Osama bin Laden in 1997, the idea that "the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden ... a folk myth. There's no evidence of this. ... Bin Laden had his own money, he was anti-American and he was operating secretly and independently. ... The real story here is the CIA didn't really have a clue about who this guy was until 1996 when they set up a unit to really start tracking him."

Osama was of the ARAB-Afghans. ie. Of the foreign Arabs who showed up in Afghan to help out the local Muslim Afghans fighting against the USSR. This conflict is not over either. It now continues in Chechnya for offensive jihad-build-up purposes.

No

No the CIA did not finance, train, or create UBL/Al-qaeda. This is a moonbat myth told by many troofers. Mr.Quevedo is really trying hard to protect his sham of a religion. It's ok I've heard it all the excuses from islamic-apologists before.

Links to educate yourself.
http://www.911myths.com/html/bin_ladin_links_to_t...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#Etymology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#Alleged_CIA...

Good book on this subject: Disinformation : 22 Media Myths That Undermine the War on Terror

"Osama bin Laden explained the origin of the term in a videotaped interview with Al Jazeera (journalist) Tayseer Alouni in October 2001: "The name 'al-Qaeda' was established a long time ago by mere chance. The late Abu Ebeida El-Banashiri established the training camps for our mujahedeen against Russia's terrorism. We used to call the training camp al-Qaeda. The name stayed."

"A variety of sources — CNN journalist Peter Bergen, Pakistani ISI Brigadier Mohammad Yousaf, and CIA operatives involved in the Afghan program, such as Vincent Cannistraro — deny that the CIA or other American officials had contact with the Afghan Arabs (foreign mujahideen) or Bin Laden, let alone armed, trained, coached or indoctrinated them."

"But Bergen and others argue that there was no need to recruit foreigners unfamiliar with the local language, customs or lay of the land since there were a quarter of a million local Afghans willing to fight; that Arab Afghans themselves had no need for American funds since they received several hundred million dollars a year from non-American, Muslim sources; that Americans could not have trained mujahideen because Pakistani officials would not allow more than a handful of them to operate in Pakistan and none in Afghanistan; and that the Afghan Arabs were almost invariably militant Islamists reflexively hostile to Westerners whether or not the Westerners were helping the Muslim Afghans."

"According to Peter Bergen, known for conducting the first television interview with Osama bin Laden in 1997, the idea that "the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden ... a folk myth. There's no evidence of this. ... Bin Laden had his own money, he was anti-American and he was operating secretly and independently. ... The real story here is the CIA didn't really have a clue about who this guy was until 1996 when they set up a unit to really start tracking him."

Osama was of the ARAB-Afghans. ie. Of the foreign Arabs who showed up in Afghan to help out the local Muslim Afghans fighting against the USSR. This conflict is not over either. It now continues in Chechnya for offensive jihad-build-up purposes.

Smack whoever told you this lie.

Ronanld reagan took Saddam off the terrorist watch list twice once in 1983 and another time in 1984 and then sent Rumsfeld to meet with Saddam knowing that saddam had gassed the Kurds, but America needed Saddam to keep the Mullahs at bay. This was confirmed in a defense department document which stated: "no one had any doubts about (the Iraqi's) continued involvement in terrorism." Moreover, the israelis convinced Reagan that their were moderates inside the Iranian theocracy that he could make deals with, which then lead to Reagan selling arms to Iran in exchange for Lebanon hostages which was Illegal. The proceeds from that quid pro quo then went to funding the anti-communist Contras. Iran then double crossed us by not reigning in Hizbullah in Lebanon and in the Gulf. Then followed it up with missile boat attacks against unarmed Kuwaiti oil tankers. Reagan ignored the seminal lesson of the Barbary wars: Providing arms to pirate states in the Middle East only produces more piracy. So to defend America's oil supply from Kuwait, Reagan sent our Navy back into action. Mind you, the Kuwaiti news papers like the Saudi news papers at this time were slandering the USA with Osama bin laden-esque rethoric. I won't even get into how Reagan romanticized the Mujahideen as freedom-fighters not knowing the whole time they hated US and the RUSSKIES just as bad. The only thing Reagan was good at was pubically speaking about conservative prinicples though he never really followed them in practice. Reagan couldn't out smart Middle East cut-throats.

Here you have point, but context is everything.

Note: IPT will moderate reader comments. We reserve the right to edit or remove any comment we determine to be inappropriate. This includes, but is not limited to, comments that include swearing, name calling, or offensive language involving race, religion or ethnicity. All comments must include an email address for verification.