Expansion of the Power of Nightmares Clip dealing with Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.



The Trailer for Al Qaeda Doesn't Exist Part 1. Take with a grain of salt but think.

good post Farhad2000

interesting post.

*promote

Invocations (promote) cannot be called by Irishman because Irishman is not privileged - sorry.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'terrorism, power of nightmares, osama bin laden, creation of myth' to 'terrorism, power of nightmares, osama bin laden, creation of myth, Adam Curtis, 00s' - edited by Eklek

Adam Curtis - The Power of Nightmares, the whole documentary:
http://www.videosift.com/video/The-Power-of-Nightmares-part-1
http://www.videosift.com/video/The-Power-of-Nightmares-part-2
http://www.videosift.com/video/The-Power-of-Nightmares-part-3
*politics
*documentaries
*worldaffairs
*lies

Adding video to channels (Documentaries, Lies, Politics, Worldaffairs) - requested by Eklek.

full series starts at http://www.videosift.com/video/The-Power-of-Nightmares-part-1

"all-CIA-duh"

For a military industrial complex (Such as the US) to make money, it needs to always have a war to fight so there is always a need to manufacture weapons.

But winning or losing a war is unstable, and long wars breed resentment and low morale in the population. The best way to guarantee a stable environment for the military industry is to have a war that will never end, but is threatening enough to civilians to reinforce it's necessity.

The cold war allowed the creation of weapons for decades without actually having to fire them. and people knew the war was necessary or they would be nuked.

But the "war on terror" is even better. Not only are terrorists everywhere and unbeatable... but it allows you to remove low morale and dissent as unpatriotic and possibly a terrorist.

The only problem is you need to have a focal point for people to 'hate at'.

You can't have shades of gray. You need archetypes. You need a key villain and you need an organization so you can get a clear black and white of us and them.

Osama = Emmanuel Goldstein - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Goldstein

The Adam Curtis Documentaries (Power of Nightmares, Century of Self, and The Trap) are all on google video and all are critical viewing.

honestly, thanks for the grain of salt

it really just looks like a couple of nervy nitwits' "theories" ... with a cultured british accent thrown over that and stock video taken out of context and rather coincidentally rearranged

shouldn't be too hard for me to provide another "grain" for all of us to consider rubbing together with the former...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#History_of_the_name

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2108588&postcount=9

there you go...

something else just occurred to me from the video's mention of the "military-industrial complex" -- this being that we often don't consider much of the context of that particularly insightful eisenhower speech:

here's a gem that just precedes the now-iconic reference...

"Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.

Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology -- global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger it poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle -- with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment."

http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html

now *that's* thought-provoking =)

expounding on that in a much-later newspaper editorial is ike's close friend and former naval aide to the president:

"The science community is paralyzed by a phony, egotistical self-
guilt, and the technophobes in academia have had a field day for a
generation, teaching our young people to scorn the sciences and feel
guilty for being Americans. Aided by a couple of administration in
which "social engineering" was more fashionable than science, techno-
logical leadership is passing from the United States to nations who
have struck a more rational balance."

http://www.fortfreedom.org/n09.htm

heh heh, i think something really "got his goat"

anyway, i've always felt that the surest way of losing an argument is to overstate it... i guess i feel that that's exactly what the first video does

here's what we can take from it, at least overwhelmingly so (in the court of public opinion)

- america's "reaction" to the attacks of september 11th made al-qaeda both a household name *and* target #1 of the us government (durr)

- this most likely helped consolidate bin laden's organization, and surely polarized islamic radicalism ever further, thus increasing al-qaeda's magenetism to ends both in funding and recruiting

- prolonged military action in the "war on terror" is CONTINUING to make our "military-industrial complex" lots of money (do you really think that strong ties between "death merchantry" and government didn't exist before 2001... or even long before ike's speech??)

- america's (and the world's) "military-industrial complex" will continue to thrive until (ha) there is peace... and then probably a bit longer

- the "war on terror" probably won't end even if we get every member of al-qaeda into the same denny's restaurant and then nuke it (in a similar fashion as to arresting al capone not ending the fbi's war on organized crime)

- this will continue to make both you and me sad, and the "desth merchants" happy

...

but maybe, just maybe, we should take note of what ike first said we *should* be... STRONG ... and *then* consider our thinking on maintaining the BALANCE he warned us all should be sought in his now-pop-culture reference

The only real enemy of liberal dogma is a person who is successful and doesn't need government "help".

Everyone else is either excused or exploited as victims.

The CIA is the largest and most prolific terrorist organization in the world.

It's not liberal dogma to question the false misrepresentation the media and government created surrounding the capabilites of Al Qaeda. They would want us to believe that they are nebulous enemy in the mists out there, forever a threat, hoping we would willingly concede to any actions in their pursuit going as far as dismantle our civil liberaties in the name of security, dissolving the very freedoms that define the Western world.

Numerous documents have shown that US military action in Iraq created further recruits for Al Q, who sought to tie down the American military in Iraq, the disparity of conduct between different members who cropped up showed that Al Q is not as organized or well finiaced as the West would lead us to believe. Those whose negative views of the West had their views reinforced in illegal unilatarel and unlawful actions leading to attacks in Madrid and London.

The policy created leads to a war that lasts forever, in the words of Bush a task that is never ends. Allowing for the endless war we saw in George Orwell's 1984.

Wonder what happened to all those high tech tunnel complexes... oh none were found...

*promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Monday, January 5th, 2009 2:03pm PST - promote requested by kulpims.

But without bullshit wars, there wouldn't be any motivation to invent all those new and wonderful ways to slaughter thousands of innocent people in a single afternoon.

"atheistic in character" Yeah Fuck You, Ike!

Thanks for bringing this up again. It's funny. People opposed to truth seeking pieces such as this get very annoyed when "9-11 Truth" type info gets discussed. But these are the same people that run "Never Forget" bumper stickers on their cars.

You are damn right I'll never forget.

From the end of the trailer for Osama Bin Laden doesn't exist, "We've never made the case or argued the case that somehow Osama Bin Laden was directly involved in 9-11.."

This is an acute example of the genius of their (?) strategy. They use the media by proxy to drop hints to the public. The media covers their ass by saying things like "confident" (not "certain"). But the ploy works on 90% of the public, who just want to vent rage in some direction, and the administration claims to have said nothing of the sort.

The television was the greatest form of mind control ever invented.

Fuck, I hate these truther nutjobs.

It is such a pathetic syndrome of the Western armchair analyst.

- I have figured out exactly who is behind everything and it's the people that I read about on the internet and have seen on TV! If I do not understand an ideology or have no personal experience of something, it hasn't happened! There is no government more powerful than that of the US - they control EVERYTHING and I know ALL THERE IS TO KNOW about them!

If this were true you would all be dead; like real dissidents in Russia, China, North Korea, Cuba, Zimbabwe, DR Congo, Belarus, all Arab states except Iraq and the West Bank, Iran etc etc...

I'm probably asking a stupid question that's been talked about for years and is already answered, but I wonder if what this documentary is saying is true (it certainly sounds likely) has Osama Bin Laden ever denied involvement? Why would he let that hang over him if he was innocent? I don't get it, what have I missed?

>> ^alien_concept:
I'm probably asking a stupid question that's been talked about for years and is already answered, but I wonder if what this documentary is saying is true (it certainly sounds likely) has Osama Bin Laden ever denied involvement? Why would he let that hang over him if he was innocent? I don't get it, what have I missed?

IIRC he denied involvement from the get go. When he realized what a PR coup it was for him to claim to to be associated with a successful strike on the most powerful nation on earth, coupled with the fact that innocence would not protect him in any case, might as well cash in the street cred.

I'm not saying this video is true, but if you believe everything the government and media tell you then you're a fucking moron. If it benefits a politician or corporation to lie to the public, they will. I don't even know who declared Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda to be ones responsible for 9/11. I welcome anyone using a little critical thinking, and if you think them fools you might want to re-examine your convictions.

shit it's *dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by geo321.

rasch187 has fixed this video's dead embed code - no Power Points awarded because rasch187's points are already fully charged.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/The-Power-of-Nightmares-part-3

xxovercastxx cannot declared this a dupe of the specified video because xxovercastxx submitted the original - ignoring dupeof request by xxovercastxx.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/The-Power-of-Nightmares-part-3

This one is contained within the cited vid.
>> ^xxovercastxx:

dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/The-Power-of-Nightmares-part-3

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/The-Power-of-Nightmares-part-3

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by chicchorea. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.