The Real Causes of 9/11

[RickSp]

Here are excerpts of an an article worth reading by Peter Bergen, a scholar and journalist who has spent considerable time in Afghanistan and other troubled parts of the Middle East and has interviewed Bin Laden and other senior Al Qaeda leaders. "His most recent book is "The Osama bin Laden I Know: An Oral History of al Qaeda's Leader" (Free Press, 2006). It was named one of the best non-fiction books of 2006 by The Washington Post. "

He reviews the range of answers to the question "what caused al Qaeda to launch the attacks?"

In response to the "clash of civilization" argument he writes:

Samuel Huntington famously predicted that clashes between civilisations would replace cold war rivalries, and 9/11 seemed to vindicate his theory. But did it? Most Muslims condemned 9/11, and after the attacks Bin Laden's attempt to ignite a clash of civilisations fizzled out. It is rather the US war of choice in Iraq that galvanised anti-Americanism among Muslims.

The article concludes:

To conclude, 9/11 was collateral damage in a civil war within the world of political Islam. On one side there are those, like Bin Laden, who want to install Taliban-style theocracies from Indonesia to Morocco. On the other side there is a silent majority of Muslims who are prepared to deal with the west, who do not see the Taliban as a workable model for modern Islamic states, and who reject violence. Bin Laden adopted a war against "the far enemy" in order to hasten the demise of the "near enemy" regimes in the middle east. And he used 9/11 to advance that cause. That effort has, so far, largely failed. Yet Bin Laden and his attacks on the US have shaped an ideological movement that will outlive him. Binladenism has drawn tremendous energy from the war in Iraq, and will probably gain further adherents from the conflict in Lebanon. Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak was prescient when he warned in 2003 that the Iraq war would spawn "100 new Bin Ladens." It is that new generation of militants that is Bin Laden's legacy.

[PatrickHenry]

Bergen seems to be coining the term "binLadenism."

If so, he is one of its premiere proponents, in the sense that he focuses on the style, cult and influence of this Arab leader as an opponent of "Western" values.

I think Bergen himself is a "binLadenist" along with GW Bush and likely a large segment of the mass media. Not that they agree with OBL's agenda, but that they proclaim him as the source of conflict.

My own views, over which I have often sparred with you, RickSp, are that OBL is a pawn in the game of accelerating elitist tyranny, militarism and corporatist greed, along with an agenda of Zionist conquest and regional hegemony in the Middle East.

But Bergen is smart, I'll give him that. An excellent explicator of the Official Story.

[RickSp]

Yah I know Pat. It is all a conspiracy, remote control planes, demolition squads, yada yada, yada.

What I admire about Bergen is that he has spent more time in Afghan caves than he has in think tanks. If you want to call his the "Offical Story", fine. Whatever.

I rather doubt that his comments about Bush's "war of choice in Iraq ... galvanis[ing] anti-Americanism among Muslims" would please the powers that be or that "Binladenism has drawn tremendous energy from the war in Iraq" would make the imperialists happy either.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: RickSp ... I rather doubt that his comments about Bush's "war of choice in Iraq ... galvanis[ing] anti-Americanism among Muslims" would please the powers that be or that "Binladenism has drawn tremendous energy from the war in Iraq" would make the imperialists happy either.

True!

The elitists don't want their secrets leaking out!

[GHook93]

Quote by: RickSp Here are excerpts of an an article worth reading by Peter Bergen, a scholar and journalist who has spent considerable time in Afghanistan and other troubled parts of the Middle East and has interviewed Bin Laden and other senior Al Qaeda leaders. "His most recent book is "The Osama bin Laden I Know: An Oral History of al Qaeda's Leader" (Free Press, 2006). It was named one of the best non-fiction books of 2006 by The Washington Post. " He reviews the range of answers to the question "what caused al Qaeda to launch the attacks?" In response to the "clash of civilization" argument he writes: The article concludes:

That actually sounds like a good book. I might pick it up. '

It makes a good point. The war in Afganistan was necessary and still is necessary. After 9/11 we had the sympathy and backing of a large percentage of the world. Within a short time the Giant Douche lost that. Iraq has been a failure on all fronts.

[Osborn F Enready]

The real cause of 9-11.

American Interventionism.

[GHook93]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Bergen seems to be coining the term "binLadenism." If so, he is one of its premiere proponents, in the sense that he focuses on the style, cult and influence of this Arab leader as an opponent of "Western" values. I think Bergen himself is a "binLadenist" along with GW Bush and likely a large segment of the mass media. Not that they agree with OBL's agenda, but that they proclaim him as the source of conflict. My own views, over which I have often sparred with you, RickSp, are that OBL is a pawn in the game of accelerating elitist tyranny, militarism and corporatist greed, along with an agenda of Zionist conquest and regional hegemony in the Middle East. But Bergen is smart, I'll give him that. An excellent explicator of the Official Story.

Yea that makes a hell of a lot more sense! :rolleyes: You forgot the part that GWB caused 9/11 in order to invade Afganistan to created the oil pipe line through it and also for the CIA to control the opium plants.

Too much LSD in the '60s protesting the war Pat? :eek:

[RickSp]

I just noticed that I inadvertantly did not post the link to the article. Sorry.

The Real Causes of 9/11

[Chaossaber314]

Quote by: GHook93 That actually sounds like a good book. I might pick it up.

I agree. I'll have to keep an eye out for this.

[ByaKya]

The book will do ghook and chassabre tons of good. they need it
they then need to put their thinking caps on to link Israel into it, at least ghook does. After which a new era will dawn

[Chaossaber314]

And maybe you'll start posting like someone with a basic grasp of logic. Nah, I guess that's too much to ask.

[ByaKya]

Quote by: Chaossaber314 And maybe you'll start posting like someone with a basic grasp of logic. Nah, I guess that's too much to ask.

Arent/werent you a neocon? didnt you support the iraq war (at first)?
and yet you talk to me about logic?

[Chaossaber314]

Quote by: Byakya Arent/werent you a neocon?

No. Never have been.

didnt you support the iraq war (at first)?

Yes, back when I, like just about everyone else, thought Saddam Hussein was replenishing his stockpiles/building new weapons etc. I mean, we know he had weapons of mass destruction because we gave them to him to fight the Iranians. Did that mean he had operational or new ones in 2003 like was claimed? No.

At its core I supported the removal of Saddam Hussein. The reasoning why we had to do it now, and everything else that came since his regime collapsed, is what I have a very big problem with.

and yet you talk to me about logic?

Yes, since you clearly don't know much about my political ideology/background but assume you do.

[ByaKya]

Quote by: Chaossaber314 Yes, back when I, like just about everyone else, thought Saddam Hussein was replenishing his stockpiles/building new weapons etc. I mean, we know he had weapons of mass destruction because we gave them to him to fight the Iranians. Did that mean he had operational or new ones in 2003 like was claimed? No. .

Just like everybody else? only some intelligence agencies said so and even then they would follow their conclusions with a "maybe".
who aside from britian thought the "maybe" was worth it? the rest of the countries in the coalition were so willing to throw in their 1,000 troops detachment for symbolism only.

France, Germany, our allies said hold on, if the inspectors havent found them yet, its only more and more proof saddam doesnt have them, thats obvious!

Bush knew this, and accelerated the acting of diplomacy, anymore time given to inspectors would bring closer the moment the inspectors claim "there are no wmds in iraq" and bushs plans would be ruined.

Well useing logic, i asertained he had no WMDs.
Having WMDs in the past =/= having WMDs now
Useing WMDs in the past =/= will use them in the future

I listened to what the INSPECTORS on the ground said, and they said they needed more time, and until proven otherwise, i believed useing the logic of "inspectors said so"

Get the book

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: GHook93 Yea that makes a hell of a lot more sense! :rolleyes: You forgot the part that GWB caused 9/11 in order to invade Afganistan to created the oil pipe line through it and also for the CIA to control the opium plants. Too much LSD in the '60s protesting the war Pat? :eek:

I see you think you're being funny.

There are millions who know that what you laugh at is the actual story...

[gr8fuldaniel]

Im with you Pat

Quote by: Chaossaber I mean, we know he had weapons of mass destruction because we gave them to him to fight the Iranians.

We also know that they were destroyed as per UN directives. All Dubya had to do was wait 2 weeks for the UN Report. The inspectors were coming back with the "wrong" answers. No WMD.
Forget the Alamo, remember the Downing Street Memos

[Chaossaber314]

Whoops. I meant to have a "at some point" at the end of the thought concerning WMD's in the past.

[Cephus]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready The real cause of 9-11. American Interventionism.

Of course. We can't keep our noses out of everyone else's business, I don't understand why we're surprised when we get smacked in the nose from time to time.

[Nono]

Quote by: Chaos We can't keep our noses out of everyone else's business.

Yes, but you could withdraw it from time to time, just for a change.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Nono Yes, but you could withdraw it from time to time, just for a change.

In regards to foreign policy, our ability to keep our noses in others' business while at the same time managing to have our heads stuck so far up our collective ass is rather remarkable.