Dispelling the CIA-Bin Laden Myth

FOX ^ | September 24, 2003 | Richard Miniter

[Tailgunner Joe]

Two years after the Sept. 11 attacks, no memorial service, cable-news talkfest or university seminar seemed to have been complete without someone emerging from the woodwork to wonder darkly why the CIA ever financed Usama bin Laden "in the first place."

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

I know people who think that Bush Sr actually met with Bin Laden.

[smadurski]

too many people think the xfiles was a documentary.

[marron]

Bin Ladin was not a CIA agent. He was a Saudi agent.

[WIGGY]

I recently read a book by a former SAS member you may want to check out. The author (Tom Carew) talks about British Ops. during the Russo-Afgani conflict. There are is a brief mention of U.S. involvement in teaching guerrilla tactics and unothodox methods. I'm not sure of the validity of the piece but you may want to read JIHAD The Secret War in Afganistan.

[Recovering_Democrat]

Oh, gee...TWO different foes (Saudi + Western) united against a COMMON ENEMY (Soviets)? Man...so do you think maybe there MIGHT be some truth in TWO different foes (Iraq + Al Qaeda) uniting against a COMMON ENEMY (USA)?

Someone wake Ted Kennedy up out of his sauce induced sleep.

[Susannah]

Oh, gee...TWO different foes (Saudi + Western) united against a COMMON ENEMY (Soviets)? Man...so do you think maybe there MIGHT be some truth in TWO different foes (Iraq + Al Qaeda) uniting against a COMMON ENEMY (USA)?

GO TO THE HEAD OF THE CLASS!

The enemy of my enemy is my ally.

[lainde]

bttt

[Zeroisanumber]

Oh, gee...TWO different foes (Saudi + Western) united against a COMMON ENEMY (Soviets)? Man...so do you think maybe there MIGHT be some truth in TWO different foes (Iraq + Al Qaeda) uniting against a COMMON ENEMY (USA)?

In Afghanistan you had two parties (the "Afghan Arabs" and the native Afghans) who shared a mutual hatred for the Soviets and a deep commitment to conservative, tribal Islam. If not close allies, they were at least comfortable with each other (until later).

Though both Iraq and Al Quaeda wished us harm, there isn't any evidence that the ever collaborated on any sort of joint venture. Saddam was a secular tyrant, and OBL is a fundamentalist wack-job. Both of them hated the US, but their very different ideologies made them mutually antagonistic to one another. Besides which, Saddam didn't trust anyone whom he did not directly control or otherwise have some hold over. If he'd wanted terrorist proxies there were candidates in Palestine who were much better developed as allies and much closer to home.

Bush himself has come out denying that there was a Saddam/Al Quaeda link, we would do well to drop this false lead before it becomes the next Democrat talking point.

[Long Cut]

"Bush himself has come out denying that there was a Saddam/Al Quaeda link, we would do well to drop this false lead before it becomes the next Democrat talking point."

Let us clarify this:

The President said there was no evidence of a link between Iraq and 9-11. He has NEVER stated that there was "no link" between Saddam and Al-queda. In fact, independant evidence suggests otherwise.

What you posted IS, in fact, a "false lead".

[walden]

"Bush himself has come out denying that there was a Saddam/Al Quaeda link, we would do well to drop this false lead before it becomes the next Democrat talking point."

The official administration line is that they have no evidence connecting Saddam and 9/11. Which is not at all the same thing as saying that Saddam and Al Quaeda didn't work together.

The beautiful thing about being a conservative is that we read a lot, assess the evidence, and form our own opinions. We're not Democrats, hewing mindlessly to this week's talking points.

[alnick]

Bush himself has come out denying that there was a Saddam/Al Quaeda link

Absolutely false. Bush has said that he has no hard evidence that Saddam had any direct involvement in 9/11. He said, practically in the same breath, that there are and were links between Saddam and Al Qaeda.

[TomB]

bump

[Cvengr]

I know people who think that Bush Sr actually met with Bin Laden.

Well, who can blame them, now....if we realized the aliens had taken them captive on the same UFO, it's not that unreasonable of a conjecture, is it?..../tin foil hat now being firmly removed

[aristeides]

What about indirect funding through the ISI?

[aristeides]

The CIA also denies meeting with bin Laden in Dubai in July 2001. Radio reports new CIA-Bin Laden details .

[DTA]

Perhaps the putting of OBL in the driver's seat in Afghanistan is hard to prove (Brzezinsky, anyone?), but Clinton Adminsitration helped OBL to establish a foothold in the heart of Europe.

9-11 was a thank-you note

[DTA]

>>>>>this myth weakens America’s case for the war on terror by setting up a moral equivalency between America and Al Qaeda<<<<

Clinton admininistration waged a war on behalf of KLA,an Al-Qaeda ally and the remnants of Clinton Adminstration in The State Department still provide overt and covert support to Al Qaeda allies in Kosovo, Bosnia and FYR Macedonia.

WOT? Yeah, right.

[DTA]

>>>>>What about indirect funding through the ISI?<<<<<

You mean, The Operation Cyclone?

[DTA]

see this:

"By 1984 he was running a front organization called Maktab al-Khidamat (MAK), which funneled money, arms and fighters into the Afghan war. MAK was nurtured by Pakistan's state security services and the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI), the United States Central Intelligence Agency's primary mechanism for the covert conduct of war against the Soviet occupation. By 1988, Bin Laden had split from the MAK and established a new guerilla group, dubbed al-Qaida, which included many of the more militant MAK members he had met in Afghanistan.

Maktab al-Khidamat (MAK),is an interesting story

For further reading, search under "Senator Orrin Hatch".