Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Chi sono i veri polli?

http://www.spectator.co.uk/article.php3?table=old&section=current&issue=2004
-01-17&id=3943
John Laughland says the real nutters are those who believe in al-Qa'eda and
weapons of mass destruction :
Believing in conspiracy theories is rather like having been to a grammar
school: both are rather socially awkward to admit. Although I once sat next
to a sister-in-law of the Duke of Norfolk who agreed that you can't believe
everything you read in the newspapers, conspiracy theories are generally
considered a rather repellent form of intellectual low-life, and their
theorists rightfully the object of scorn and snobbery. Writing in the Daily
Mail last week, the columnist Melanie Phillips even attacked conspiracy
theories as the consequence of a special pathology, of the collapse in
religious belief, and of a 'descent into the irrational'. The implication is
that those who oppose 'the West', or who think that governments are
secretive and dishonest, might need psychiatric treatment.
In fact, it is the other way round. British and American foreign policy is
itself based on a series of highly improbable conspiracy theories, the
biggest of which is that an evil Saudi millionaire genius in a cave in the
Hindu Kush controls a secret worldwide network of 'tens of thousands of
terrorists' 'in more than 60 countries' (George Bush). News reports
frequently tell us that terrorist organisations, such as those which have
attacked Bali or Istanbul, have 'links' to al-Qa'eda, but we never learn
quite what those 'links' are. According to two terrorism experts in
California, Adam Dolnik and Kimberly McCloud, this is because they do not
exist. 'In the quest to define the enemy, the US and its allies have helped
to blow al-Qa'eda out of proportion,' they write. They argue that the name
'al-Qa'eda' was invented in the West to designate what is, in reality, a
highly disparate collection of otherwise independent groups with no central
command structure and not even a logo. They claim that some terrorist
organisations say they are affiliated to bin Laden simply to gain kudos and
name-recognition for their entirely local grievances.
By the same token, the US-led invasion of Iraq was based on a fantasy that
Saddam Hussein was in, or might one day enter into, a conspiracy with Osama
bin Laden. This is as verifiable as the claim that MI6 used mind control to
make Henri Paul crash Princess Diana's car into the 13th pillar of the
tunnel under the Place de l'Alma. With similar mystic gnosis, Donald
Rumsfeld has alleged that the failure to find 'weapons of mass distraction',
as Tony Blair likes to call them, shows that they once existed but were
destroyed. Indeed, London and Washington have shamelessly exploited people's
fear of the unknown to get public opinion to believe their claim that Iraq
had masses of anthrax and botulism. This played on a deep and ancient seam
of fear about poison conspiracies which, in the Middle Ages, led to pogroms
against Jews. And yet it is the anti-war people who continue to be branded
paranoid, even though the British Prime Minister himself, his eyes staring
wildly, said in September 2002, 'Saddam has got all these weapons ...and
they're pointing at us!'
In contrast to such imaginings, it is perfectly reasonable to raise
questions about the power of the secret services and armed forces of the
world's most powerful states, especially those of the USA. These are not
'theories' at all; they are based on fact. The Central Intelligence Agency,
the National Security Agency, the Office of Naval Intelligence, the National
Reconnaissance Office, the Defense Intelligence Agency and other US secret
services spend more than $30,000,000,000 a year on espionage and covert
operations. Do opponents of conspiracy theories think that this money is
given to the Langley, Virginia Cats' Home? It would also be churlish to deny
that the American military industry plays a very major role in the economics
and politics of the US. Every day at 5 p.m., the Pentagon announces hundreds
of millions of dollars in contracts to arms manufacturers all over America -
click on the Department of Defense's website for details - who in turn
peddle influence through donations to politicians and opinion-formers.
It is also odd that opponents of conspiracy theories often allow that
conspiracies have occurred in the past, but refuse to contemplate their
existence in the present. For some reason, you are bordering on the bonkers
if you wonder about the truth behind events like 9/11, when it is
established as fact that in 1962 the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
Lyman L. Lemnitzer, tried to convince President Kennedy to authorise an
attack on John Glenn's rocket, or on a US navy vessel, to provide a pretext
for invading Cuba. Two years later, a similar strategy was deployed in the
faked Gulf of Tonkin incident, when US engagement in Vietnam was justified
in the light of the false allegation that the North Vietnamese had launched
an unprovoked attack on a US destroyer. Are such tactics confined to
history? Paul O'Neill, George Bush's former Treasury Secretary, has just
revealed that the White House decided to get rid of Saddam eight months
before 9/11.
Indeed, one ought to speak of a 'conspir- acy of silence' about the role of
secret services in politics. This is especially true of the events in
Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. It is the height of
irresponsibility to discuss the post-communist transition without extensive
reference to the role of the spooks, yet our media stick doggedly to the
myth that their role is irrelevant. During the overthrow of the Georgian
president, Eduard Shevardnadze, on 22 November 2003, the world's news
outlets peddled a wonderful fairy-tale about a spontaneous uprising - 'the
revolution of roses', CNN shlockily dubbed it - even though all the key
actors have subsequently bragged that they were covertly funded and
organised by the US.
Similarly, it is a matter of public record that the Americans pumped at
least $100 million into Serbia in order to get rid of Slobodan Milosevic in
2000, and huge sums in the years before. (An election in Britain, whose
population is eight times bigger than Yugoslavia's, costs about two thirds
of this.) This money was used to fund and equip the Kosovo Liberation Army;
to stuff international observer missions in Kosovo with hundreds of military
intelligence officers; to pay off the opposition and the so-called
'independent' media; and to buy heavily-armed Mafia gangsters to come and
smash up central Belgrade, so that the world's cameras could show a 'people'
s revolution'.
At every stage, the covert aid and organisation provided by the US and
British intelligence agencies were decisive, as they had been on many
occasions before and since, all over the world. Yet for some reason, it is
acceptable to say, 'The CIA organised the overthrow of Prime Minister
Mossadeq in Iran in 1953', but not that it did it again in Belgrade in 2000
or Tbilisi in 2003. And in spite of the well-known subterfuge and deception
practised, for instance, in the Iran-Contra scandal in the mid-1980s, people
experience an enormous psychological reluctance to accept that the British
and American governments knowingly lied us into war in 2002 and 2003. To be
sure, some conspiracy theories may be outlandish or wrong. But it seems to
me that anyone who refuses to make simple empirical deductions ought to have
his head examined.


...a cogliere i vari coccode'.
Giano, il centauro.

al-Qa'eda and weapons of mass destruction :
Il vero pollo direi che e' proprio lui, visto che le armi di distruzione
di massa le hanno trovate in Iraq e le ha trovate la stessa IAEA :)
Quanto ad Al-Qaida, credo che si sia vista la sua esistenza l'11
settembre.
-Stefano

 ...a cogliere i vari coccode'.
Eccolo il primo che si e' fatto subito sentire! :)
*LOL*
-Stefano

 wrote in message
news:400A37CD...@people.it...

Appunto Come Volevasi Dimostrare...Benvenuto!
Il primo cappone del mattino !*LOL*
Giano

 Il primo cappone del mattino !*LOL*
Beh, e' bello che riconosca a te stesso di essere il primo cappone del
mattino :))
-Stefano

 wrote in message
news:400A6E65...@people.it...

A De Ce' ti trovo un po' debilitato anche nel tuo gioco a centrocampo; la
panchina trema.
Io ,non facendo nessun commento al contenuto del post, mi son travestito da
volpe e sapevo gia` che il primo cappone del NG saresti stato tu (come
sempre)a cadere in trappola. Grazie per l'arrosto odierno anche a nome di
tutti i volpini a te e Namib che ha caricato la trappola.
Giano

 wrote in message
news:400A377A...@people.it...

Questa e` una ricetta un po' vecchia e strausata per come si cucinano i
polli ; se vuoi provare qualcosaltro dal solito fritto alla col.Kentocky ,
ti consiglio l'Artusi , il classico della cucina italiana:
http://www.magazine.it/gastronomia/index.htm
Giano

 settembre.
Che prove ci sono dell'esistenza di Al qaeda, oltre agli articoli di
giornale che ne affermano l'esistenza (peraltro senza portare _alcuna_
prova)?
Iudas
-- 
questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news
 segnala gli abusi ad 
ab...@newsland.it

 A De Ce' ti trovo un po' debilitato
Yaawwwnnn....
Oramai non sa piu' che cosa inventarsi... Sempre le stesse battute ...
Che noia..
-Stefano

prova)?
Articoli di giornale? :)  Ma di che stai parlando? :)
-Stefano

 wrote in message
news:400AE987...@people.it...

disse l'asino alla mucca...!
SvegliaAAA! @:-) Colpo di testa 2-0.
Giano

 Articoli di giornale? :)  Ma di che stai parlando? :)
sto parlando delle uniche 'fonti' da cui si evince l'esistenza di una roba
chiamata al qaeda, dichiarata responsabile di tutto quello che succede di
storto nel mondo dall'11/9/2001 in poi....


mondo dall'11/9/2001 in poi....
Se lo dici tu...
-Stefano

 Se lo dici tu...
John Laughland e' uno dei piu' seri analisti politici anglosassoni, oltre
che un esponente del movimento conservatore inglese tra i piu' in vista, e
un ricercatore di rigore e serieta' cristalline. A differenza tua, lui e'
un ricercatore, e come tale fa ricerche, che tu non fai. Quando si e'
occupato del colfnlitto in Bosnia, non si e' basato su qualche reportage
cazzaro della Tv, come fai tu, ma e' andato personalmente a verificare se
i famosi campi profughi e le tombe di massa di cui tutti i network avevano
parlato (CNN in testa) esistevano sul serio oppure no. E le sue scoperte
in questo campo sono gia' storia. Le 'prove' di cui tu parli sono
irrilevanti in quanto provengono da fonti di informazione (giornali,
televisione se ti piace di piu' ecc.) che sono per definizione strumenti
forgiati per distorcere la verita' e costruire prove finte confezionate
pre il piacere di chi gestisce il potere. Il valore scientifico e storico
di queste cosiddette prove e' quindi zero, e fa sorridere il tuo continuo
appellarti all'autorita' di qualcosa che per definizione non ha alcun
valore agli effetti della ricerca della verita'.
Iudas.




tu non fai.
Se lo dici tu... :))
*ROTFL*
-Stefano

 Iudas Maccabeus wrote:




Ottima risposta.
Fa capire perfettamente il tuo livello intellettuale. E con questo ti
"saluto".
Shalom
Iudas


 Ottima risposta.
Infatti.  Ad affermazioni di quel livello solo una risposta di quel
livello poteva andare bene :)
-Stefano