The “War On Terror” Has Changed, and Not One In 1,000 Americans Has Noticed: What You Should Know about this “Unthinkable” Development…

In George Orwell’s novel 1984,  the country of Oceania has been in a war against Eurasia for years.

Oceania suddenly switches sides, naming Eastasia as its enemy and making its mortal enemy, Eurasia, its new ally.

The government uses propaganda to convince people that, “We’ve always been at war with Eastasia”.  The dumbed-down public doesn’t even notice that they’ve switches sides, and blindly rallies around Eurasia as its perennial friend and ally.

The same thing is happening in real life with Al Qaeda.

Western governments and mainstream media have admitted that Al Qaeda is fighting against the secular Syrian government, and that the West is supporting the Syrian opposition … which is helping Al Qaeda.

Similarly, the opposition which overthrew Libya’s Gadaffi was mainly Al Qaeda … and they now appear to be in control of Libya (and are instrumental in fighting in Syria.)

The U.S. also funds terrorist groups within Iran.

Of course, Al Qaeda was blamed for 9/11, and the entire decades-long “War on Terror” was premised on rooting out Al Qaeda and related groups.

So the fact that we now consider Al Qaeda fighters to be allies in any way, shape or form is positively Orwellian.

Remember, as Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser admitted on CNN, we organized and supported Bin Laden and the other originators of “Al Qaeda” in the 1970s to fight the Soviets.  (he also told the Senate in 2007 that the war on terror is “a mythical historical narrative”. )

As professor of strategy at the Naval War College and former National Security Agency intelligence analyst and counterintelligence officer John R. Schindler documents, the U.S. supported Bin Laden and other Al Qaeda terrorists in Bosnia.

But obviously we lost control and they turned against us … and then it took us years to hunt down and kill Bin Laden. Right?

Maybe, but:

  • A retired Colonel and Fox News military analyst said:

    “We know, with a 70 percent level of certainty — which is huge in the world of intelligence — that in August of 2007, bin Laden was in a convoy headed south from Tora Bora. We had his butt, on camera, on satellite. We were listening to his conversations. We had the world’s best hunters/killers — Seal Team 6 — nearby. We had the world class Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) coordinating with the CIA and other agencies. We had unmanned drones overhead with missiles on their wings; we had the best Air Force on the planet, begging to drop one on the terrorist. We had him in our sights; we had done it ….Unbelievably, and in my opinion, criminally, we did not kill Usama bin Laden.”

  • A United States Congressman claims that the Bush administration intentionally let Bin Laden escape in order to justify the Iraq war

The shenanigans started even before 9/11:

  • Attacks on the Twin Towers with planes were foreseen for years, but the U.S. did nothing to stop them.
  • A high-level military intelligence officer says that his unit – tasked with tracking Bin Laden prior to 9/11 – was pulled off the task, and their warnings that the World Trade Center and Pentagon were being targeted were ignored
  • The CIA may have helped many of the 9/11 hijackers get their visas to the U.S.


We’ve always been at war with Eastasia …

Category: Think Tank, War/Defense

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

6 Responses to “The “War On Terror” Has Changed”

  1. Artimus says:

    I disagree with some of your points. The U.S. has hardly switched sides and become an ally of Al Quaeda. One of the reasons the U.S. is treading carefully and pursuing diplomatic and economic pressure against Syria rather than arming the opposition is because Al Qaeda and jihadist sympathers make up part of the opposition. I’ve seen much debate
    In the media and punditry about whether it would be better to leave the current regime in power than take a chance on having radical government in control.
    Also I’m not sure why you feel the need to remind us that we supported Bin Laden before 9-11, that is rather well known and understood.
    About your claims of a coverup. Could be true. Could be bureaucratic incompetance. Could be just the usual wacky conspiracy theories.
    But I think you’re way overboard with the Orwellian analogy. Although I’m sure many in Internetland will agree with you.


  2. whskyjack says:

    Never attribute to evil, when stupidity will suffice. There was lots of stupidity in Bushco.

  3. denim says:

    I learned of this effect from a commenter on Krugman’s blog this morning. Something to watch out for…especially leading up to and during the “fog of war.”
    “The Dunning-Kruger effect occurs when incompetent people not only fail to realise their incompetence, but consider themselves much more competent than everyone else. Basically – they’re too stupid to know that they’re stupid. ”

  4. Greg0658 says:

    :-) whiskey .. I see it in reverse
    never attribute to stupidity, when evil will suffice
    :-| whata ya do .. baby steps towards supreme evolution
    LOL .. neva happen

  5. howardoark says:

    Really!? You quoted Fox news as your source!? Really? Washington blog, have you no shame?

    There is no Al Queda. There are just a bunch of Sunnis and Shia duking it out to see who can organize the next Caliphate. The idea that the US is allied with a non-existent organization is ridiculous when you consider how many individuals (who might loosely consider themselves allied, but who wouldn’t take orders from each other) we’re killing in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen on a daily basis.

  6. kilfarsnar says:

    The 1984 comparison is apt. Further, I think Osama bin Laden was being used as our Emmanual Goldstein. That’s why he was left alive when there were opportunities to kill him; his propaganda value was just too high.

    As this article shows, the US intelligence community and those of other countries have been intertwined with Al Qaeda for decades. That relationship would be quite confusing to people with a good guys/bad guys view of how the world works, and is counter to the way it’s generally portrayed in the media.