Sunday, April 02, 2006

Al-Qaeda and Al-Pentagon

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross shows how al-Qaeda suddenly realised after last year’s hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico that oil supply cut is Archilles heel of USA. He says that in his 1996 declaration of war against the West, Osama bin Laden indicated that Saudi oil wealth was off limits as a military target because he viewed it as a key resource for the pan-Islamic super-state that he wished to establish and hence to protect it.

Then, in a December 2004 audiotape, Osama reversed his call and for the very first time, and called for attacks on the oil industry, especially in Iraq and the Gulf area. (How convenient!).

Later on, deputy al-Qaeda leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri's August 2005 videotape warned the US to "stop stealing our oil and wealth." He has called for attacks against oil facilities in the Gulf region.

Then a videotape that appeared on Al Jazeera television December 7, 2005 al-Zawahiri called for Iraqis to unite in an effort to force U.S.-led coalition forces out of Iraq, also urging jihadist to "concentrate their campaigns on the stolen oil of the Muslims, most of the revenues of which go to the enemies of Islam." And oil marched above $60 immediately.

Isn’t that strange? The US government claims that oil wealth in the region supports or goes into the pockets of terrorism, and al-Qaida claims that stolen oil revenues go into to the pockets of enemies of Islam. In the mean time, oil companies have had historical profits.

Why would al-Qaida target “oil of Islam”? Oh yes, many would argue that al-Qaida mentioned “oil facilities” whose damage could be repaired but not oil fields. But even oil facilities, such as pipelines and oil terminals are damage to oil of Islam. So, it does not make sense.

Iraq was invaded because of its proclaimed support to al-Qaida, even though no September 11 attackers were Iraqi national. In fact all the attackers were nationals of the US allies. And now Iran is in the row because it also supposedly supports al-Qaida. Does that make sense?

The spread of Wahhabi doctrine is “fanatically hostile to Shi’ite and Suffi Muslims, Jews, Christians, women, and modernity” says former CIA director James Woolsey in his testimony before the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on November 16, 2005. “On all points except allegiance to the Saudi state Wahhabi and al Qaeda beliefs are essentially the same” he adds. He also underlines “their common genocidal fanaticism about Shia, Jews, and homosexuals. So Wahhabi teaching basically supports al Qaeda ideology.”

If that is the case, why then Iran should support al-Qaeda?

Or is it Pentagon that is the missing link between al-Qaeda and Iran (and Iraq)?

Why does the National Defense University list Bin Laden’s Fetwah and Al-Zawahiri’s Letter to Al-Zarwaqi under “Great Speeches on Contemporary National Security Issues”?

…to be called Al-Pentagon?


Post a Comment

<< Home