Mother Of All Bombs (MOAB) Used in Afghanistan (NEW VIDEO!)

GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast (commonly known as the Mother of All Bombs) was just used for the first time in combat. This is our largest non-nuclear bomb in the U.S. arsenal (a 21,000lb bomb). Thank you ISIS for being the prime “real world” test platform for the MOAB. God’s speed to hell. (See more at the WASHINGTON TIMES)

KEY STATS:

✦ Nicknamed the ‘Mother of all Bombs’
✦ The world’s largest non-nuclear weapon
✦ Each bomb costs around $16 million (£12.8 million)
✦ Its explosion is equivalent to 11 tons of TNT and the blast radius is a mile wide
✦ First tested by US forces in 2003
✦ It is designed to destroy heavily reinforced targets or to shatter ground forces and armour across a large area
✦ 30 feet (9 metres) long and 40 inches (1 metre) wide
✦ Weighs 21,000lbs (9,500kg) – heavier than the Hiroshima nuclear bomb
✦ Blast radius stretches a mile in each direction
✦ Leaves no lasting radiation effect

HOW IT IS DEPLOYED

✦ The bomb has ‘grid’ fins that fold into the body during carriage
✦ It can only be deployed out of the back of large cargo plane due to its size
✦ The bomb rides on a pallet – a parachute pulls the pallet and bomb out of the plane
✦ The pallet then separates so that the bomb can fall to its target
✦ The bomb’s grid fins extend to help control the bomb’s descent
✦ It accelerates rapidly to its terminal velocity and is partially guided to its target via satellite
✦ It explodes six feet (1.8 metres) above the ground
✦ The idea behind this ‘airburst’ mechanism is to spread its destructive range

|DAILY MAIL|

Should We Feel Sorry for the Boyle Family, the Taliban Captives?

As a Christian prayer for their safe return should be the issue along with a prayer for a true enlightenment about Islam and a true conversion to the Messiah. But that being said, countries (the U.S. and Canada) shouldn’t exchange anything for these people. I wouldn’t even send in Spec-Op guys to rescue them because why would we put the lives of our best on the line for such mendacity? UNLESS there is a Taliban leader there that needs to be six-feet under.

This was a story I remember from a few years back. My memory was jogged about it because of the recent video by the couple. I will not post the video, as, you can watch it if you wish, HERE. But you can see how it is reported via ABC:

HEAVY notes this interesting fact:

  • Boyle’s ex-wife is the sister of Omar Khadr, a Canadian citizen captured by U.S. forces in 2002 when he was only 15 and imprisoned for 10 years at Guantanamo Bay after being involved in a firefight with U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

Oh, but there is more, Boyle is a convert to Islam. Here a commentator noted of an MSM article on JIHAD WATCH:

…But buried deeply in the middle of the article is this astounding tidbit:

“Joshua Boyle was previously married to the sister of Omar Khadr, a Canadian man who spent 10 years at Guantanamo Bay after being captured in 2002 in a firefight at an al-Qaida compound in Afghanistan, but U.S. officials discount any link between that previous family tie and his capture. One called it a ‘horrible coincidence.’”

Right. It was just a “horrible coincidence” that this guy was previously married to the sister of an Al-Qaida terrorist and they just happened to wander up into the Afghan mountains, where he grew a long beard and she donned a full length black Burqa. (see photo that accompanies article)

I wonder how long it will be before our government swaps more Gitmo terrorists for this lovely couple? Obama loves him some deserters, traitors and Islamic terrorists.

BARE NAKED ISLAM asks the question we all should ask, and that is, “should we feel sorry for this couple?”

  • A new video from the Taliban features Canadian convert to Islam, Joshua Boyle, and his American wife, Caitlan Coleman, pregnant at the time, who were kidnapped while hiking through Afghanistan in 2012. (Who goes hiking in Afghanistan with a pregnant wife? Who chooses a country like Afghanistan to go hiking in the first place?)

This photo was taken before their trip to Afghanistan. There is word that Boyle converted to Islam prior to this… I asked about this and may update this post when I get a response from someone who would know… that being said, as you will see, there seems to be more than “bad luck” going on here.

More on this via GLOBAL NEWS:

….Coleman’s father, James Coleman, told AP in 2012 it was possible the couple may not have realized how dangerous an area they were heading to.

“They’re both kind of naive, always have been in my view. Why they actually went to Afghanistan, I’m not sure… I assume it was more of the same, getting to know the local people, if they could find an NGO (non-governmental organization) or someone they could work with in a little way,” he told AP.

But, Boyle’s interest in the region and his connections to it go deeper than adventure seeking with his wife.

Boyle had a fascination with terrorism, Canadian counterterrorism and security.

“Anything related to terrorism on Wikipedia, I wrote, pretty much,” the University of Waterloo graduate told the Globe and Mail in May 2009.

He also had an interest in the family of Omar Khadr — the Canadian who was captured in Afghanistan and detained at Guantanamo Bay from 2002, when he was just 15, until he was returned to Canada in 2012.

That interview happened after he married Omar Khadr’s oldest sister, Zaynab Khadr, a prominent and outspoken figure herself.

So out spoken that, in a 2009 profile, Maclean’s reported her younger brother’s lawyers “repeatedly begged her to keep quiet.”

In that same article it was noted Boyle was Khadr’s third husband, but it was the first of her marriages that was not arranged by her late father, Ahmed Said Khadr, who was killed in a 2003 shootout with Pakistani forces near the border with Afghanistan.

One of her marriages was attended by Osama bin Laden, according to Khadr herself.

They met on the Internet: he emailed her in 2008 and “to introduce himself and offer support,” according to the 2009 Globe and Mail article.

The Globe and Mail reported he attended the hearings of one of her other brothers — Abdullah, who was facing extradition to the U.S. on terrorism charges, but was later ordered free by an Ontario judge.

Boyle reportedly played a role in organizing his Khadr’s 2008 hunger strike on Parliament Hill, to protest her brother’s detention.

They got married in January 2009 and lived together in Toronto, along with her daughter from her second marriage.

Boyle said his parents, both fundamentalist Christians who live in Ottawa, supported his relationship with Khadr.

“My family is supportive of my marriage and of their extended family, and they believe in the need for justice for all Canadian citizens. We have faith in God and we have faith in justice and we have faith in the Canadian people to do the right thing,” he told Maclean’s.

In the Associated Press article published Wednesday, U.S. officials dismissed his marriage to Khadr as having any sort of connection to his and Coleman’s abduction.

One official called it a “horrible coincidence,” according to AP.

To Be Clear, The WH Doesn’t Think the Taliban are Terrorists

These guys are in charge of our safety remember. Feel safe yet?

If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck… you get the point, via the Diplomat:

Pakistan Taliban Pledges Support to the Islamic State

The Pakistani Taliban were said to have sworn allegiance to the Islamic State (IS) on Saturday though it was later revealed that this was merely an offer of support. The move was not considered a complete surprise when the news broke on Saturday because the Islamic State has been recruiting and advertising in the Pashtun-dominated areas of Pakistan, many of which are sympathetic towards the Islamic State. However, the move would not have been anticipated either, with many believing instead that the less influential jihadi groups would align with IS in order to take advantage of their infamy.

A Taliban offer of aid to IS, which came during the Muslim holy festival of Eid al-Adha, was accompanied by astatement from the Pakistani Taliban spokesman Shahid Shahidullah in Urdu, Pashto, and Arabic. “Oh our brothers, we are proud of you in your victories. We are with you in your happiness and your sorrow. In these troubled days, we call for your patience and stability, especially now that all your enemies are united against you. Please put all your rivalries behind you. All Muslims in the world have great expectations of you. We are with you, we will provide you with mujahedeen and with every possible support,” Shahidullah said.

Reports initially suggested that this statement represented the Pakistani Taliban’s growing estrangement from Al-Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban, rivals of the Islamic State. In the eyes of many Pakistani Taliban, jihadists in Pakistan have been much less effective than those fighting for the Islamic State. This coupled with rivalrieswithin the Pakistani Taliban, were said to have influenced its alleged decision.

Al Qaeda and the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban have been creating a South Asian zone of operations for jihadist groups aligned to them that would rival the Islamic State in the Middle East. Al Qaeda established a newfranchise in the subcontinent called Al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent (AQIS) last month, which was designed to bring together the region’s various jihadist groups under one umbrella. Al Qaeda itself also renewed its old pledge of allegiance to the leader of the Afghan Taliban, Mullah Muhammad Omar last month. Al Qaeda’s leader Ayman al-Zawahiri repeatedly stressed that all Al-Qaeda groups were under the authority of Mullah Omar who was the “commander of the faithful,” a title traditionally used by caliphs. It was assumed that the Pakistani Taliban shared the same position until Saturday.

…read more…

A dude sitting at a desk in his home can show that the Taliban has gone in with the Islamic State. Are they still an “insurgency”?

Foreign Policy: Even the Mainstream Media Called Obama’s Bluff

This comes from a great post over at Gateway Pundit, and has to do with a previous post regarding Canadian special forces engaging in ground battles with the Islamic State. Can you guess where? In Iraq. IN OTHER WORDS, our allies (as well as U.S. special forces) are on the ground in Iraq. so to hear this critique from the mainstream media is refreshing… but as I will note, it is indicative of the worldview of the Obama admin:

Richard Engel in the above video got it exactly right… Obama is looking at the world as how he “wishes” it could be. The Left has a view of economics, politics, and world affairs that especially since the “new Left” of the 60’s has displayed a Utopian proclivity. While the following audio is long (and you can choose to skip it), the insight into how this new Left thinks outside of the real world is required listening for the person interested in political science:

The President’s SOTU speech on foreign policy was soo bad that even “thrill up my leg” Matthews got it, Wolf Blitzer as well. But the conservative (who is typically more religious, by far) has a belief that ONLY God can bring perfection to earth. The leftist (typically more secular, by far) believes that mankind can impose perfection by edict (e.g., government legislation). This is why Democrats in a majority think man can control weather by legislation as well as calling millions of years of Nature (or God, or both) honing the male/female species into question. It is hubris that knows no bounds.

Here is some Utopian ideals defined via Conservapedia:

A utopia is a fictional society considered perfect by its proponent, but whose implementation in reality is unrealistic. The term, greek in origin, was first used by Thomas More, for its 1516 eponymous book, which describes a fictional state whose laws and organization are purportedly ideal. However, More’s intent was, at least in part, ironical, as some ambiguities in the text clearly show: the word “utopia” can mean both “good place” or “place that doesn’t exist”, and the narrator’s last name, Hythlodaeus, literally means “purveyor of nonsense”.

Utopian literature was, however, not created by More; it comes from the fusion of several archetypes, which can be found in classical literature and mythology, religion, and philosophy. The most important influences were the Greek accounts of voyages in faraway, fantastic lands (such as Hyperborea or Thule), the narration of a fall from a privileged and carefree condition in religion and mythology (such as Hesiod’s Golden Age, or the Genesis’ Fall from Eden), and philosophical inquiries about the nature of the perfect state, of which the most influential was undoubtedly Plato’s Republic. More and Plato disagree on what makes a perfect society: for example, while both societies are socialist, Plato advocates the communion of women and families, whereas More, a Christian, could not agree with that. This shows that utopias are, by their own nature, subjective and arbitrary, as different individuals will have different ideas on what constitutes a “good” society. A utopia, seen from a different point of view, can become a dystopia, that is, the description of a society which claims to be ideal but which ends up being a nightmare.

It is also interesting to note that utopias, while having some similarities with religious paradises, are incompatible with them: to be perfect, a paradise only needs an act of will by a deity; man only needs to gain access to the paradise through his actions on Earth (the exact requisites change from religion to religion: in the old Norse religion only valiant warriors fallen in battle could access the Valhalla, whereas the Christian Paradise is reserved for the righteous) and no special laws or measures are required to keep that paradise perfect. On the contrary, Utopia is a man-made paradise; it is perfect because it is carefully engineered to be so, and constant human intervention is required to prevent it from declining or falling.

This, according to professor of sociology Krishan Kumar, reflects two particular Christian views of human perfectibility: utopianists believe in the Pelagian view that man can make himself perfect through his actions, whereas the dystopian view reflects St. Augustine’s doctrine: God can be the only source of perfection, everything that man does is doomed to fail, and only faith can save man….

Dispelling The “CIA Trained-Funded Bin Laden/Taliban” Myth/Mantra

Politicians and leaders from both sides of the aisle make mention of this myth that we funded/created Al Qaeda via weapons, training, and money to the likes of Osama Bin Laden. The Daily Caller in 2013 notes:

…in just a one-month span, Sen. Paul has — not once, but twice — advanced a conspiracy theory that says that during the Reagan era, the U.S. funded Osama bin Laden.

During John Kerry’s secretary of state confirmation hearing, Paul said ”We funded bin Laden” — a statement that prompted Foreign Policy magazine’s managing editor, Blake Hounshell, to fire off a tweet saying: “Rand Paul tells a complete falsehood: ‘We funded Bin Laden.’ This man is on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.”

But that didn’t discourage Paul. During a much anticipated foreign policy speech at the Heritage Foundation today, Paul doubled down, saying: “In the 1980’s the war caucus in Congress armed bin Laden and the mujaheddin in their fight with the Soviet Union.”

The only problem is that this is, at best, highly speculative — and, at worst, the perpetuation of an outright myth.

This also puts Paul in the same camp as Michael Moore, who said: ““WE created the monster known as Osama bin Laden! Where did he go to terrorist school? At the CIA!”….

…read it all…

And this is the crux of the matter.

Truthers took Michael Moore’s non-evidential presentations and statements and ran with themAnother example that shows this myth isn’t necessarily one owned by strictly by politicians, as, this conversation on a friends FaceBook shows:

Antony: failed foreign policy means today’s buddies are tomorrows boogiemen.

Hunlsy: I just love the fact they’re fighting us with the weapons and training that we gave them.

Antony: Oh where oh where did Iran get those P3s and F-14 Tomcats?

Antony: it was the US – we used to be buddies with Iranians too. We played both sides of the Iran/Iraq war, which predicated Gulf I.

Hunsly: Likely from the Russians. Regardless, we’re fighting a group, not a country. This group makes all of its IEDs & buys all of their weapons with the money that we gave them.

Here is my short intercept of the above conversation. More info will follow it:


Weapons

This is somewhat of a myth — that we sold the majority of weapons to the Taliban, to Iraq, and the like. For instance, in the following graph you can see that (in the instance of Iraq, which I was told over-and-over-again was weaponized by the U.S.) you have to combine the U.K. and the U.S. to equal 1%.

Iraqi Weapons

Moral Position

Much like us supporting Stalin in defeating Hitler, we were aligned with people whom we didn’t see eye-to-eye with in order to beat the USSR during the Cold War (WWIII)… a war that was fought from 1947–1991.

History

And thirdly, the Taliban didn’t exist when Reagan said this:

Reagan didn’t say that about the Taliban because the Taliban didn’t exist yet. He said that of the Mujahedin, the same men who would later go on to fight the Taliban under the name “Northern Alliance”

The Afghan Northern Alliance, officially known as the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan (Persian: ‏جبهه متحد اسلامی ملی برای نجات افغانستانJabha-yi Muttahid-i Islāmi-yi Millī barā-yi Nijāt-i Afghānistān), was a military front that came to formation in late 1996 after the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (Taliban) took over Kabul. The United Front was assembled by key leaders of the Islamic State of Afghanistan, particularly president in exile Burhanuddin Rabbani and former Defense Minister Ahmad Shah Massoud. Initially it included mostly Tajiks but by 2000, leaders of other ethnic groups had joined the Northern Alliance. This included Abdul Rashid Dostum, Mohammad Mohaqiq, Abdul Qadir, Sayed Hussein Anwari and others.

The Northern Alliance fought a defensive war against the Taliban government. They received support from Iran, Russia, India, Tajikistan and others, while the Taliban were backed by al-Qaeda. The Northern Alliance was mostly made up of ethnic Tajiks, but later included Uzbeks, Hazaras, and Pashtuns. The Taliban government was dominated by Pashtuns with other groups being the minority. After the US-led invasion and establishment of the Karzai administration in late 2001, the Northern Alliance broke apart and different political parties were formed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Alliance

The mujaheddin fighters who had previously defeated the communist government and formed the Islamic State of Afghanistan (ISA) came under attack and in 1996 lost the capital to the Taliban. At this juncture the Mujahedin resorted to the creation of UIF because Rashid Dostum and other warlords who belonged to various tribes but to no specific political party did not want to recognize the ISA as a legal entity, so the defeated government devised a military strategy to utilize these forces while not offending their political sensibilities.

In October 1996 in Khinjan, Ahmed Shah Massoud and Dostum came to an agreement to form the anti-Taliban coalition that outside Afghanistan became known as the Northern Alliance.


CNN was doing a special on Afghanistan and Peter Bergen asked for questions from viewers that he would answer. One of the questions is as follows: “If it’s true that bin Laden once worked for the CIA, what makes you so sure that he isn’t still?”~ Anne Busigin, Toronto, Canada

Peter Bergen responds:

This is one of those things where you cannot put it out of its misery.

The story about bin Laden and the CIA — that the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden — is simply a folk myth. There’s no evidence of this. In fact, there are very few things that bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the U.S. government agree on. They all agree that they didn’t have a relationship in the 1980s. And they wouldn’t have needed to. Bin Laden had his own money, he was anti-American and he was operating secretly and independently.

The real story here is the CIA didn’t really have a clue about who this guy was until 1996 when they set up a unit to really start tracking him.

One person in a forum that was similarly challenged pointed out that this surely wasn’t the Taliban because they hated women in any position of authority — look at the pic at the top again.

As you read on, keep in mind Mr. Bergen was not a fan of conservatives, or Republicans. With that in mind, enjoy the rest, it is posted here so it will never disappear on me:

Northern Alliance (WIKI)

U.S. government officials and a number of other parties maintain that the U.S. supported only the indigenous Afghan mujahideen. They deny that the CIA or other American officials had contact with the Afghan Arabs (foreign mujahideen) or Bin Laden, let alone armed, trained, coached or indoctrinated them. Scholars and reporters have called the idea of CIA-backed Afghan Arabs (foreign mujahideen) “nonsense”,[6] “sheer fantasy”,[7] and “simply a folk myth.”[8]

They argue that:

  • with a quarter of a million local Afghans willing to fight there was no need to recruit foreigners unfamiliar with the local language, customs or lay of the land
  • with several hundred million dollars a year in funding from non-American, Muslim sources, Arab Afghans themselves would have no need for American funds
  • Americans could not train mujahideen because Pakistani officials would not allow more than a handful of U.S. agents to operate in Pakistan and none in Afghanistan;[9]
  • the Afghan Arabs were militant Islamists, reflexively hostile to Westerners, and prone to threaten or attack Westerners even though they knew the Westerners were helping the mujahideen.

Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri says much the same thing in his book Knights Under the Prophet’s Banner.[10]

Bin Laden himself once said “the collapse of the Soviet Union … goes to God and the mujahideen in Afghanistan … the US had no mentionable role,” but “collapse made the US more haughty and arrogant.” [11]

According to CNN journalist Peter Bergen, known for conducting the first television interview with Osama bin Laden in 1997,

The story about bin Laden and the CIA — that the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden — is simply a folk myth. There’s no evidence of this. In fact, there are very few things that bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the U.S. government agree on. They all agree that they didn’t have a relationship in the 1980s. And they wouldn’t have needed to. Bin Laden had his own money, he was anti-American and he was operating secretly and independently. The real story here is the CIA did not understand who Osama was until 1996, when they set up a unit to really start tracking him.[8]

Bergen quotes Pakistani Brigadier Mohammad Yousaf, who ran the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Afghan operation between 1983 and 1987:

It was always galling to the Americans, and I can understand their point of view, that although they paid the piper they could not call the tune. The CIA supported the mujahideen by spending the taxpayers’ money, billions of dollars of it over the years, on buying arms, ammunition, and equipment. It was their secret arms procurement branch that was kept busy. It was, however, a cardinal rule of Pakistan’s policy that no Americans ever become involved with the distribution of funds or arms once they arrived in the country. No Americans ever trained or had direct contact with the mujahideen, and no American official ever went inside Afghanistan.[12]

Marc Sageman, a Foreign Service Officer who was based in Islamabad from 1987–1989, and worked closely with Afghanistan’s Mujahideen, argues that no American money went to the foreign volunteers.

Sageman also says:[13]

Contemporaneous accounts of the war do not even mention [the Afghan Arabs]. Many were not serious about the war. … Very few were involved in actual fighting. For most of the war, they were scattered among the Afghan groups associated with the four Afghan fundamentalist parties.

No U.S. official ever came in contact with the foreign volunteers. They simply traveled in different circles and never crossed U.S. radar screens. They had their own sources of money and their own contacts with the Pakistanis, official Saudis, and other Muslim supporters, and they made their own deals with the various Afghan resistance leaders.”[14]

Vincent Cannistraro, who led the Reagan administration’s Afghan Working Group from 1985 to 1987, puts it,

The CIA was very reluctant to be involved at all. They thought it would end up with them being blamed, like in Guatemala.” So the Agency tried to avoid direct involvement in the war, … the skittish CIA, Cannistraro estimates, had less than ten operatives acting as America’s eyes and ears in the region. Milton Bearden, the Agency’s chief field operative in the war effort, has insisted that “[T]he CIA had nothing to do with” bin Laden. Cannistraro says that when he coordinated Afghan policy from Washington, he never once heard bin Laden’s name.[15]

Fox News reporter Richard Miniter wrote that in interviews with the two men who “oversaw the disbursement for all American funds to the anti-Soviet resistance, Bill Peikney – CIA station chief in Islamabad from 1984 to 1986 – and Milt Bearden – CIA station chief from 1986 to 1989 – he found,

Both flatly denied that any CIA funds ever went to bin Laden. They felt so strongly about this point that they agreed to go on the record, an unusual move by normally reticent intelligence officers. Mr. Peikney added in an e-mail to me: “I don’t even recall UBL [bin Laden] coming across my screen when I was there.[16]

Other reasons advanced for a lack of a CIA-Afghan Arab connection of “pivotal importance,” (or even any connection at all), was that the Afghan Arabs themselves were not important in the war but were a “curious sideshow to the real fighting.”[17]

One estimate of the number of combatants in the war is that 250,000 Afghans fought 125,000 Soviet troops, but only 2000 Arab Afghans fought “at any one time”.[18]

According to Milton Bearden the CIA did not recruit Arabs because there were hundreds of thousands of Afghans all too willing to fight. The Arab Afghans were not only superfluous but “disruptive,” angering local Afghans with their more-Muslim-than-thou attitude, according to Peter Jouvenal.[19] Veteran Afghan cameraman Peter Jouvenal quotes an Afghan mujahideen as saying “whenever we had a problem with one of them [foreign mujahideen], we just shot them. They thought they were kings.”

Many who traveled in Afghanistan, including Olivier Roy[20] and Peter Jouvenal,[21] reported of the Arab Afghans’ visceral hostility to Westerners in Afghanistan to aid Afghans or report on their plight. BBC reporter John Simpson tells the story of running into Osama bin Laden in 1989, and with neither knowing who the other was, bin Laden attempting to bribe Simpson’s Afghan driver $500 — a large sum in a poor country — to kill the infidel Simpson. When the driver declined, Bin Laden retired to his “camp bed” and wept “in frustration.” [22]

According to Steve Coll, author of “Ghost Wars”, the primary contact for the CIA and ISI in Afghanistan was Ahmed Shah Massoud a poppy farmer and militia leader known as the “Lion of the Panjeer”. During the Afghan Civil War which erupted once the Soviets had left, Massoud’s army was routed by the Taliban (who were being helped by Pakistan’s ISI) and restricted to the northern region of the country. A loose entente was formed with several other native tribal militias which became known as the Northern Alliance who operated in opposition to the Taliban. On September 10, 2001 a camera crew was granted access to Massoud under the premise they were interviewing him for a documentary about the Mujahadeen. The crew members were actually Al Qaeda operatives who detonated a bomb killing themselves and Massoud. The purpose of the assassination was to eliminate a key ally for the US in anticipation of an invasion in retaliation for the 9/11 attacks which were to take place the following day.

And here is another great post responding to the non-evidential/conspiratorial [leftists] on the subject:

Bin Laden trained and funded by the CIA

“Osama bin Laden was trained and funded by the CIA” – you’ll read the claim everywhere, and it’s rarely opposed: everyone just seems to accept that it’s true. But why? How much evidence have you ever seen presented to support this?

The reality is that there are many people who say this is simply a myth. And we’re not just talking about neo-con friendly journalists, either.

Take Jason Burke, for instance, a major contributor to the BBC documentary “The Power of Nightmares”. In his book “Al Qaeda”, he wrote the following:

It is often said that bin Ladin was funded by the CIA. This is not true, and indeed it would have been impossible given the structure of funding that General Zia ul-Haq, who had taken power in Pakistan in 1977, had set up. A condition of Zia’s cooperation with the American plan to turn Afghanistan into the Soviet’s ‘Vietnam’ was that all American funding to the Afghan resistance had to be channeled through the Pakistani government, which effectively meant the Afghan bureau of the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), the military spy agency. The American funding, which went exclusively to the Afghan mujahideen groups, not the Arab volunteers [bin Ladin’s groups], was supplemented by Saudi government money and huge funds raised from mosques, non-governmental charitable institutions and private donors throughout the Islamic world. Most of the major Gulf-based charities operating today were founded at this time to raise money or channel government funds to the Afghans, civilians and fighters. In fact, as little as 25 per cent of the monet for the Afghan jihad was actually supplied directly by states.

Page 59, Al Qaeda: The true story of radical Islam, Jason Burke

Steve Coll, former Managing Editor of the Washington Post, also suggests bin Ladin passed largely unnoticed by the CIA, in his book “Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001”:

…According to [Ahemd] Badeeb, on bin Ladin’s first trip to Pakistan he brought donations to the Lahore offices of Jamaat-e-Islami, Zia’s political shock force. Jamaat was the Pakistani offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood; its students had sacked the US embassy in Islamabad in 1979. bin Ladin did not trust the official Pakistan intelligence service, Badeeb recalled, and preferred to fund his initial charity through private religious and political networks.From the beginning of the Afghan jihad, Saudi intelligence used religious charities to support its own unilateral operations. This mainly involved funneling money and equipment to favoured Afghan commanders outisde ISI or CIA control… “The humanitarian aid-that was completely separate from the Americans”, Badeeb recalled. “And we insist[ed] that the Americans will not get to that, get involved–especially in the beginning,” in part because some of the Islamist mujahedin objected to direct contact with Western infidels…

In spy lexicon, each of the major intelligence agencies began working the Afghan jihad–GID [General Intelligence Department, Saudi Arabia], ISI and the CIA– began to “compartment” their work, even as all three collaborated with one another through formal liasons…

bin Ladin moved within Saudi intelligence’s compartmented operations, outside of CIA eyesight…

Page 86/ 87, Ghost Wars, Stevel Coll

In a Q&A session following the release of his book, Coll said:

Wheaton, Md.: There have been accusations from the left that have directly accused the CIA of funding and training bin Laden. Is there any truth to this ? Steve Coll: I did not discover any evidence of direct contact between CIA officers and bin Laden during the 1980s, when they were working more or less in common cause against the Soviets. CIA officials, including Tenet, have denied under oath that such contact took place. The CIA was certainly aware of bin Laden’s activities, beginning in the mid- to late-1980s, and they generally looked favorably on what he was doing at that time. But bin Laden’s direct contacts were with Saudi intelligence and to some extent Pakistani intelligence, not with the Americans.

Missouri EDU

Peter Bergen expanded on the supposed CIA/ bin Ladin links in his book, Holy War Inc:

But were the CIA and the Afghan Arabs in cahoots, as recent studies have suggested? One author charges: “The CIA had funded and trained the Afghan Arabs during the war”. Another refers to “the central role of the CIA’s Muslim mercenaries, including upwards of 2,000 mercenaries in the Afghanistan war”. Both authors present these claims as axioms, but provide no real corroboration.Other commentators have reported that bin Ladin himself was aided by the CIA. A report in the respected British newspaper The Guardian states: “In 1986 the CIA even helped him [bin Ladin] build an underground camp at Khost [Afghanistan] where he was to train recruits from across the Islamic world in the revolutionary art of jihad”…Bin Ladin, meanwhile, had expoused anti-American positions since 1982, and thanks to the fortune derived from his family’s giant construction business had little need of CIA money. In fact, the underground camp at Khost was built in 1982 by an Afghan commander, with Arab funding.

A source familiar with bin Ladin’s organisation explains that bin Ladin “never had any relations with America or American officials… He was saying very early in the 1980’s that the next battle is going to be with America… No aid or training or other support have ever been given to bin Ladin from Americans.” A senior offical unequivocally says that “bin Ladin never met with the CIA.”

While the charges that the CIA was responsible for the rise of the Afghan Arabs might make good copy, they don’t make good history. The truth is more complicated, tinged with varying shades of grey. The United States wanted to be able to deny that the CIA was funding the Afghan war, so its support was funneled through Pakistan’s military intelligence agency, Inter Services Intelligence agency (ISI). ISI in turn made the decisions about which Afghan factions to arm and train, tending to fund the most Islamist and pro-Pakistan. The Afghan Arabs generally fought alongside those factions, which is how the charge arose that they were creatures of the CIA.

Former CIA officer Milt Bearden, who ran the Agency’s Afghan operation in the late 1980’s, says: “The CIA did not recruit Arabs,” as there was no need to do so. There were hundreds of thousands of Afghans all too willing to fight…

Moreover, the Afghan Arabs demonstrated a pathological dislike of Westerners. Jouvenal says: “I always kept away from Arabs [in Afghanistan]. They were very hostile. They would ask, ‘What are you doing in an Islamic country?” The BBC reporter John Simpson had a close call with bin Ladin himself outside Jalalabad in 1989. Travelling with a group of Arab mujahideen, Simpson and his television crew bumped into an Arab man beautifully dressed in spotless white robes; the man began shouting at Simpson’s escorts to kill the infidels, then offered a truck driver the not unreasonable sum of five hundred dollars to do the job. Simpson’s Afghan escort turned down the request, and bin Ladin was to be found later on a camp bed, weeping in frustration. Only when bin Ladin became a public figure, almost a decade later, did Simpson realise who the mysterious Arab was who had wanted him dead.

Page 67/68, Holy War Inc, Peter Bergen

This level of hostility to Westerners doesn’t suggest a warm working relationship with the US, and there’s some confirmation in a story retold by Richard Miniter:

…the handful of Americans who had heard of bin Ladin in the 1980’s knew him mainly for his violently anti-American views. Dana Rohrabacher, now a Republican congressman from Orange County, California, told me about a trip he took with the mujihideen in 1987. At the time, Rohrabacher was a Reagan aide who delighted in taking long overland trips inside Afghanistan with anti-Communist forces. On one such trek, his guide told him not to speak English for the next few hours because they were passing by bin Ladin’s encampment. Rohrabacher was told, “If he hears an American, he will kill you.” 

Page 16, Disinformation, Richard Miniter

Bin Ladin was himself asked about US funding by Robert Fisk:

Fisk: …what of the Arab mujahedin he took to Afghanistan – members of a guerilla army who were also encouraged and armed by the United States – and who were forgotten when that war was over? bin Ladin: “Personally neither I nor my brothers saw evidence of American help…

Fisk interview, 1996

And Ayman al-Zawahiri, second-in-command of al Qaeda, explains more in his text “Knights under the Prophet’s Banner”. Here he claims the “Afghan Arabs” had plenty of funding from various Arab sources, and points to other indications that they never supported the US:

“While the United States backed Pakistan and the mujahidin factions with money and equipment, the young Arab mujahidin’s relationship with the United States was totally different.”Indeed the presence of those young Arab Afghans in Afghanistan and their increasing numbers represented a failure of US policy and new proof of the famous US political stupidity. The financing of the activities of the Arab mujahidin in Afghanistan came from aid sent to Afghanistan by popular organizations. It was substantial aid. “The Arab mujahidin did not confine themselves to financing their own jihad but also carried Muslim donations to the Afghan mujahidin themselves. Usama Bin Ladin has apprised me of the size of the popular Arab support for the Afghan mujahidin that amounted, according to his sources, to $200 million in the form of military aid alone in 10 years.

Imagine how much aid was sent by popular Arab organizations in the non-military fields such as medicine and health, education and vocational training, food, and social assistance (including sponsorship of orphans, widows, and the war handicapped. Add to all this the donations that were sent on special occasions such as Id al-Fitr and Id al-Adha feasts and during the month of Ramadan.”

“Through this unofficial popular support, the Arab mujahidin established training centers and centers for the call to the faith. They formed fronts that trained and equipped thousands of Arab mujahidin and provided them with living expenses, housing, travel, and organization.”

Changing Bin Ladin’s Guard

About the Afghan Arabs’ relationship with the United States, Al-Zawahiri says in his book: “If the Arab mujahidin are mercenaries of the United States who rebelled against it as it alleges, why is it unable to buy them back now? Are they not counted now-with Usama Bin Ladin at their head-as the primary threat to US interests? Is not buying them more economical and less costly that the astronomical budgets that the United States is allotting for security and defense?”

“The Americans, in their usual custom of exaggeration and superficiality, are trying to sell off illusions to the people and are ignoring the most basic facts. Is it possible that Usama Bin Ladin who, in his lectures in the year 1987, called for boycotting US goods as a form of support for the intifadah in Palestine, a US agent in Afghanistan?….

“Furthermore, is it possible that the martyr-as we regard him-Abdallah Azzam was a US collaborator when in fact he never stopped inciting young men against the United States and used to back HAMAS with all the resources at his disposal?

“Is it possible that the jihadist movement in Egypt can be a collaborator movement for the United States when Khalid al-Islambuli and his comrades killed Anwar al-Sadat, even before the phenomenon of the Arab mujahidin in Afghanistan emerged?”

“Is it possible that the jihadist movement in Egypt can be a US collaborator movement when in fact it brought up its children, ever since the movement started, to reject Israel and all the agreements of capitulation to it and to consider making peace with Israel as a contravention of Islamic Shari’ah?”

Book, His Own Words: A Translation of the Writings of Dr. Ayman Al Zawahiri

Richard Miniter has a little more on this in “Dispelling the CIA-Bin Ladin Myth“, and while you may not exactly trust the source, there were further comments worth at least a look on the US State Departments “Identifying Misinformation” site.

A National Story Hits Close To Home Via Our Veterans Park

We have a neighbor who served her country with honor and distinction.

Really.

Not the White House’s post-modern/Orwellian understanding of “honor and distinction,” she really served our country. (See Bowe Bergdahl’s fellow unit members react to Jay Carney saying Bowe served with “honor and distinction [second video].) At any rate, she was at a park in our valley designated to honor our local veterans to check in on her own brick, and she saw this:

Being the curious sort of gal she is… she had to see it was. This is who:

Can you believe it? I checked, Bowe has no connection to our Valley… and people who pushed for the brick really had no idea of all the circumstances surrounding Bowe’s predicament, but here is a conservative blogger from our valley pushing for the brick to be added to our City of Santa Clarita Veterans Historical Plaza… here is the post on the matter he entitled, “Let’s Get a Brick for Bowe Bergdahl

For a long time, I have followed the story of Bowe Bergdahl. He is an American soldier from Idaho who was captured by the enemy in Afghanistan. To my knowledge he is the only POW from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

I would like to lead an effort to purchase a brick at the Veteran Historical Plaza in Newhall to bring his plight to the attention of our community and keep his name public in an appropriate manner. To my way of thinking, this commemoration is more meaningful if it is supported by a few individuals who share this belief than by one individual. Therefore , I am inviting four other patriots in joing me to purchase a brick for Bowe Bergdahl to be placed in Veterans Historical Plaza prior to Memorial Day, 2012…..

Again, I doubt Mr. Petzold had any idea about the entirety of the circumstances that led to Bowe being in Taliban hands… but I have a feeling that that brick will be removed. If not, I will lead a movement to have it removed.

Funny how things hit home. We have a large veteran community in town, and I guarantee most of them are scoffing at the “honor and distinction” twist the current Admin is salting this story with. We are blessed as well to have one of the most pro-military reps in Congress from our district, Howard “Buck” McKeon, who, will be involved with this case intimately.

Well all this doesn’t affect the liberal elites in their cozy homes… it only bothers those nameless/faceless people far-far away: Survivors of Afghan Village Massacre Fume Over Obama’s Prisoner Swap. It isn’t like they are destroying wine cellars:

Who cares about them? It’s not like this action will put the Taliban back on their feet from their heels?  

Taliban strikes close on Obama’s heels

The Taliban struck back less than two hours after President Barack Obama left Afghanistan on Wednesday, targeting a foreigners’ housing compound with a suicide car bomb and militants disguised as women in an assault that killed at least seven people.

It was the second major assault in Kabul in less than three weeks and highlighted the Taliban’s continued ability to strike in the heavily guarded capital even when security had been tightened for Mr. Obama’s visit and Wednesday’s anniversary of the killing of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in neighbouring Pakistan….

(The Hindu)

 (US Defense Department)

….Coalition and Afghan forces have reversed the Taliban’s momentum and will continue to build on that success, a senior Pentagon spokesman said today.

“The Taliban’s momentum has not only been thwarted, it’s been thrust back,” Navy Capt. John Kirby told reporters. “We believe they are in a much weaker position.”

[….]

“The Taliban [are] in a much weaker position as we head into this spring than they were as little as a year ago,” Kirby said.

[….]

“It was over by the next morning,” he said. Another attempted attack in the hours after Obama’s visit to Afghanistan last week was “completely ineffective,” he added.

U.S. officials believe the Taliban are on their heels. “It is much more difficult for them to move around, to resource, to plan and execute,” Kirby said, though he added it’s too early to count the Taliban out.

“They are still a resilient, determined enemy,” he said. “We understand that. But we really do believe that we have wrested the momentum from the Taliban.”


Mike Rogers thinks different:

Bergdahl’s Former Platoon Fights Back Amid Criticism ~ The Kelly File

Via The Kelly File ~ Awesome Stuff!

(Gateway Pundit) Former Army Sgt. Evan Buetow, the team leader the night Bowe Bergdahl initially disappeared, and five former Bergdahl platoon mates went on The Kelly File on Thursday to discuss the latest Obama scandal.

  • Former Sgt. Buetow: He walked away in the middle of Afghanistan on the farthest front lines you could be on to go seek out the Taliban.
  • Megyn Kelly: Do you feel that was an affront to you, that to say his service was with honor and…
  • Beutow: Saying that’s honorable. Saying that walking away, whatever his agenda was with trying to connect with the Taliban, explain to me how that’s honorable? I mean that’s spitting in the face to everyone who deployed, came back, and…
  • Second Bergdahl platoon mate: Not even every one in this company but every single one in the military.

Former Army Sgt. Evan Buetow, the team leader the night Bowe Bergdahl initially disappeared, told The Kelly File on Thursday that, I had to leave the room,” when Obama announced his deal with the Taliban in the Rose Garden.

Buetow joined five platoon mates on The Kelly File tonight. All six platoon members said they consider Bergdahl a deserter.

“He’s a Deserter Who Sought Out the Taliban” ~ Sgt Evan Buetow

See my earlier — in-depth — post on this topic, HERE.

Via Media’ite (h/t d’Smock):

In an appearance on CNN with Jake Tapper on Tuesday, former Army Sgt. Evan Buetow, U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s team leader on the night he disappeared from his base in Afghanistan, asserted that he had access to radio intercepts which indicated that Bergdahl actively sought out the Taliban. Following Bergdahl’s capture, Buetow alleged, the Taliban’s attacks on Americans became “far more directed.”

Buetow told CNN that, within days of Bergdahl’s disappearance, military teams monitoring radio communications intercepted radio chatter and telephonic communication which indicated that an American was searching for Taliban members who spoke English.

“When we heard that, it told us, okay, he’s actively seeking out the Taliban,” Buetow said. “And, yes, over the next couple of months, all the attacks were far more directed.”

“I heard it straight from the interpreter’s lips as he heard it over the radio,” Buetow told Tapper. “There’s a lot more to this story than a soldier walking away.”

..read it all…

Via Gateway Pundit:

Colonel David Hunt told Bill O’Reilly tonight that Bowe Bergdahl was a deserter.

“Bowe Bergdahl was a deserter. Bergdahl on June 20, 2009 crawled underneath a wire at his fire base with water, food, a change of clothes, a knife and a cell phone. He called his unit the day after he deserted to tell his unit he deserted… Bill, we lost 14 soldiers, killed, searching for a deserter. He left his unit in combat. It’s non-arguable… We don’t know yet if he joined the Taliban or not. But, there’s no question he deserted.

And according to liberal extraordinaire, Jeffry Toobin, CNN legal analyst, says Obama clearly broke the law (The Blaze):

CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin claimed on Monday that President Barack Obama “clearly broke the law” by failing to provide notice to Congress at least 30 days before trading five Taliban members from Guantanamo Bay in exchange for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.

Swatting down the Obama administration’s justification, Toobin argued that a presidential signing statement doesn’t mean the commander-in-chief no longer has to comply with the law.

“I think he clearly broke the law. The law says 30-days’ notice. He didn’t give 30-days’ notice,” Toobin said. “It is true he issued a signing statement, but signing statements are not law. Signing statements are the president’s opinion on what the law should be.”