Has anyone watched this? I caught a bit of it on TV over the weekend and would like to get people's impressions, for and against, before I watch the whole thing.

If this topic has been posted already, could someone provide the link? I can't seem to see it in any recent thread titles.

If you would like to watch it here is a link to the 3 parts that you can watch on your computer. It is about the history of AQ, Islam, the Middle East, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It seemed to provide some interesting facts, background, and soundbites, showing a change in attitudes of the major players today. I will admit that it sheds a negative light on what they term "NeoCons" but I am more interested in how accurate the history and facts are as that is truly what I base my position on. If there is interest in discussing this, I would really like to limit it to the facts presented and not breakdown to partisan fighting as there are more than enough threads for that.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Zed

__________________
Microsoft made only $16,005 in it's first year of operation.

I've been around since "Buy American" meant "Made in the USA".

Yes, I've got a copy of it burned on a DVD (given to me by a friend). It is an absolutely amazing documentary. Highly recommended to all. It is produced by the BBC.

__________________
[I]Remember what the dormouse said, 'feed your head'. [/I]

Yes I saw it, and it is a very interesting documentary. One of the aims of the documentary was to show a juxtaposition of AQ and the NeoCons. How they are both somewhat motivated by a similar rigid conservatism and what they will do to achoeve it, and how an action by one group leads to the strengthening of the other. For instance the Iraq war has strengthened AQ, while 9/11 strengthened the neocons.

Andrew

__________________
If you succumb to the temptation of using violence in the struggle...your chief legacy to the future will be an endless reign of meaningless chaos.
~Martin Luther King, Jr.

[IMG]http://www.truthout.org/imgs.art_01/3.081006BC2.jpg[/IMG]

I am curious about one aspect that I did manage to watch. The documentary pointed out that, prior to 911, the term Al Quaeda was not used to define these terrorists, and that the various cells or groups that make up AQ were never part of an organization but independant of each other. The only link between them was the desire to spread Islam through terrorist acts and the fact that they received funding from OBL. In other words, OBL is not the mastermind he is portrayed as but merely a source of funding for these groups to execute their plans (not bin Laden's plans).

I did a few searches to see if there were any references to AQ with original sources dated before 911 but couldn't find any. Is there any truth to this? This would mean that all the criticisms of Clinton's lack of stopping AQ would be mute as there never was an AQ to stop during his presidency.

I plan on watching them later tonight and/or tomorrow to understand all the background, but I want to make sure I am not watching another Moore-type film which glosses over some aspects to prove his point. I am hoping this is a fairly unbiased report of the true origins of the history, but I am willing to accept that it may not be.

Thanks to you both for the feedback.

__________________
Microsoft made only $16,005 in it's first year of operation.

I've been around since "Buy American" meant "Made in the USA".

I cant say for certain how accurate it is.

Bu in regards to the term AQ there is the following from wikipedia:

Regarding the origin of the name, Robin Cook, the late British member of Parliament and former foreign secretary, wrote in 2005 that "Al-Qaida, literally 'the database', was originally the name of a computer file listing the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Soviets." [5] Dr. Sa'ad Al-Fagih, a surgeon at Peshawar (where the Mujahideen recruiting happened) further explained that the computer database (al-Qaeda) was necessary to fix problems associated with a lack of documentation about the fighters who were recruited. [6] Many other sources agree with this origin of the phrase [1]

The origins of this group (at a later time given the name 'al-Qaeda' by the United States Justice Department) can be traced to a few weeks after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, when a cadre of non-Afghani, Arab Muslim fighters joined the largely United States and Pakistan-funded Afghan mujāhidīn anti-Soviet resistance movement (a guerrilla war against Soviet occupation forces and the Soviet-backed Afghan government). Osama bin Laden, a member of a prominent Saudi Arabian business family, led an informal grouping which became a leading fund raiser and recruitment agency for the Afghan cause in Muslim countries; it channeled Islamic fighters to the conflict, distributed money and provided logistical skills and resources to both fighting forces and Afghan refugees.


The term AQ existed before 9/11, but I think it only became common after 9/11 because quite honestly we all need as a point of reference when discussing these people.

Andrew

__________________
If you succumb to the temptation of using violence in the struggle...your chief legacy to the future will be an endless reign of meaningless chaos.
~Martin Luther King, Jr.

[IMG]http://www.truthout.org/imgs.art_01/3.081006BC2.jpg[/IMG]

There are no "pre-9/11" references to Al-Queda!

That's what the whole documentary was about - showing how the US Government manufactured Al Queda in the period immediately following 9/11. OBL found the propaganda of such to be useful and duly picked it up.

Indeed, it is one of the greatest mysteries to me how the mass media and almost every western politician and western Government drank the same koolaid without a shread of proof.

I guess the idea of making war on one guy (OBL) seemed silly so they created an "organisation" to give the lie to their truth.

__________________
[I]Remember what the dormouse said, 'feed your head'. [/I]

That is what I understood from what I saw as well. I looked at the Wikipedia link and found that the refereces noted in Andrew's quote ([5], [6]) pointed to articles written earlier this year, and not anything going back to before 911. Perhaps the term was used, but the context since 911 has certainly taken on an entirely new meaning.

The purpose of linking all these terrorist groups under one organization is to allow an ongoing menace to be dealt with versus, as you say, a single guy, who as a sole objective, would not allow the lattitude in powers and fronts we see today.

I am still hoping to get an opposing view from someone who can debunk some of these facts, but perhaps since they are indeed facts, those who support Bush can't negate what the film presents.

__________________
Microsoft made only $16,005 in it's first year of operation.

I've been around since "Buy American" meant "Made in the USA".

It is a BBC documentary. That's some fairly impressive credentials there and hardly a partisan spin-machine.

__________________
[I]Remember what the dormouse said, 'feed your head'. [/I]

I could be completely wrong but after the embassy bombings in Africa and the USS cole attack, im pretty sure the term AQ was tossed around a bit in the media.

But the main point is correct as far as i can tell, i.e, that the term was actually used first by american policy wonks so that they could keep things simplified for the public and media.

Andrew

__________________
If you succumb to the temptation of using violence in the struggle...your chief legacy to the future will be an endless reign of meaningless chaos.
~Martin Luther King, Jr.

[IMG]http://www.truthout.org/imgs.art_01/3.081006BC2.jpg[/IMG]