I don't know why you're under the delusion that Al-Qaeda was magically created just for 9/11, but it seems so strong that nothing could dissuade you from that thought.
Because, I was in the intelligence field before 9/11. Iraq was my specialty. 9/11 changed everything, including a complete re-write of our own history and theirs, as well as the roles of all the players to match our political goals. You either went along with it or you got out.
Parts of "Al Qaeda" were very well known to us, but there was no (and there still isn't) any "unified entity" or "compartmentalized organization". They aren't nearly as coordinated as the CIA's anti-communist cells of the 50's and 60's, which seems to be the nearest thing to the fantasy version of "Al Qaeda". Most of the funding for the various wahabi (radical Sunni Islamic) organizations comes from people that we still consider allies, Pakistani government, Saudi oil and construction magnates, Russian mafia, etc.
Believe me, I wasn't always all cool and edgy. I come from a long line of family that were all ex-military or defense industry Cold Warriors. My grandpa still thinks Nixon was screwed (no joke).
I love how some people think that if they throw in a few quotes from 1984 they look all "edgy" and "zomg rebelling against bush."
Yeah, I guess it's only really funny to those who actually read it. Be careful, it contains a few big words and nothing about a pet goat.
http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/go-goldstein.htmlIn past ages, a war, almost by definition, was something that sooner or later came to an end, usually in unmistakable victory or defeat. In the past, also, war was one of the main instruments by which human societies were kept in touch with physical reality. All rulers in all ages have tried to impose a false view of the world upon their followers, but they could not afford to encourage any illusion that tended to impair military efficiency. So long as defeat meant the loss of independence, or some other result generally held to be undesirable, the precautions against defeat had to be serious. Physical facts could not be ignored. In philosophy, or religion, or ethics, or politics, two and two might make five, but when one was designing a gun or an aeroplane they had to make four. Inefficient nations were always conquered sooner or later, and the struggle for efficiency was inimical to illusions. Moreover, to be efficient it was necessary to be able to learn from the past, which meant having a fairly accurate idea of what had happened in the past. Newspapers and history books were, of course, always coloured and biased, but falsification of the kind that is practiced today would have been impossible. War was a sure safeguard of sanity, and so far as the ruling classes were concerned it was probably the most important of all safeguards. While wars could be won or lost, no ruling class could be completely irresponsible.
But when war becomes literally continuous, it also ceases to be dangerous. When war is continuous there is no such thing as military necessity. Technical progress can cease and the most palpable facts can be denied or disregarded...The war, therefore, if we judge it by the standards of previous wars, is merely an imposter. It is like the battles between certain ruminant animals whose horns are set at such an angle that they are incapable of hurting one another. But though it is unreal it is not meaningless. It eats up the surplus of consumable goods, and it helps to preserve the special mental atmosphere that a hierarchical society needs. War, it will be seen, is now a purely internal affair. In the past, the ruling groups of all countries, although they might recognize their common interest and therefore limit the destructiveness of war, did fight against one another, and the victor always plundered the vanquished. In our own day they are not fighting against one another at all. The war is waged by each ruling group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make or prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society intact. The very word 'war', therefore, has become misleading. It would probably be accurate to say that by becoming continuous war has ceased to exist. The peculiar pressure that it exerted on human beings between the Neolithic Age and the early twentieth century has disappeared and been replaced by something quite different.
Orwell's dream come true, a war without end. The War on Terror.
Last edited by GorillaTicTacs (2007-01-06 15:01:32)