Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonder who wrote (49138)	10/3/2002 1:08:02 PM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 281500

It is an unfortunate twist of fate Happens all the time, zonder. Israel originally supported Hamas as an alternative to Arafat's gang. It is funny, but tragic, to look back now and realize that our big fear when we were supporting the rebels in Afghanistan was that they would turn around and use our stinger missiles against us. The Afghanistans who are on our side now, the Northern Alliance Warlords, were on Russia's side in the first war, as I recall. lindybill@theenemyofmyenemy.com

To: zonder who wrote (49138)	10/3/2002 1:13:17 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I am willing to bet bragging rights that you did NOT read in the Economist that the CIA gave bin Laden financial support. Because it's simply not true. You may have read a paraphrased distortion of something like that on a black helicopter website. At the time the CIA was funding the mujahideen bin Laden was a rich kid who liked to throw his money around and was very welcome because he bought the mujahideen lots of toys. He was, and is, a multimillionaire. His father died when he was 15 and left him something like $80 million.

To: zonder who wrote (49138)	10/4/2002 11:34:29 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

I assure you that there are very serious sources ("The Economist" only one of them) stating that the US not only financially supported, but trained Bin Ladin in warfare. Well, I would admit the likelihood that the CIA "directed" funds through Bin Laden's corporations for supporting the Mujaheddin, but I don't beleive that Bin Laden actually attended official CIA training. And the reason for that is that Bin Laden would have feared for his reputation as an independent supporter of the Afghani resistance against the Soviets. He would not have desired having one of his likely "CIA classmates" revealing to his fellow Mujaheddin leaders that Bin Laden had such direct connections to the CIA. With such a "resume", it would be VERY difficult for Bin Laden to command the respect required to become the "coordinator" of global terrorism and not be perceived as a tool of the CIA. But, that said, it has been noted that many members of Bin Laden's organization had been trained by the CIA, either officially at Camp Perry, or unofficially, in local camps by graduates of these official schools. And one thing else that should be considered. Money provided to the Afghan resistance was normally provided to the individual warlords. Had the CIA been suspected of created a force of "Arab mercenaries" which could potentially challenge the authority of the local warlords, there would have been some serious repercussions. So while I don't exclude the possibility of Bin Laden having been an official CIA "asset" (on the payroll with case officer "handling" him), I don't give it much credence either... Hawk