|
Sources: NSA Invited To Al Qaeda Conference Call
The Daily Beast has a scoop (slightly modified):
It wasn’t just any terrorist message that triggered U.S. terror alerts and embassy closures—but a conference call of more than 20 far-flung al Qaeda operatives, Eli Lake and Josh Rogin report.
The crucial intercept that prompted the U.S. government to close embassies in 22 countries was a conference call between al Qaeda’s senior leaders and representatives of several of the group’s affiliates throughout the region.
The intercept provided the U.S. intelligence community with a rare glimpse into how al Qaeda’s leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, manages a global organization that includes affiliates in Africa, the Middle East, and southwest and southeast Asia.
…
Al Qaeda members included representatives or leaders from Nigeria’s Boko Haram, the Pakistani Taliban, al Qaeda in Iraq, al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, and more obscure al Qaeda affiliates such as the Uzbekistan branch. Also on the call were representatives of aspiring al Qaeda affiliates such as al Qaeda in the Sinai Peninsula, according to a U.S. intelligence official. Also attending the call were Charles Mason, Elvis, Karl Marks and the NSA.
Sources explained that the call was conducted via strings tied to aluminum tubes.
So the intelligence people thought it useful to tell the public exactly how Al Qaeda communicates? What’s the next nonsense they will try to sell to the public? The San Fransisco-Honolulu bridge?
Of course, that whole “story” is pure bullsh*t. Al Ciada might as well have asked politely whether they could use a conference room in the zusa embassy.
Funnily enough there *are*, of course, ways to communicate without nsa having the slightest chance of knowing or understanding. But stupid as those ragheads are, they make a conference call. Sure.
The interesting question, of course, is what’s really behind it. The “They could attack in Sinai so, hell, they might as well get us in tel aviv” line might, stupid as it sounds, tell us something. For a starter that means that israel is *not* a secure place for zusa to be. Strange.
Considering the fact that that whole Al Ciada thing is one big false flag my guess is that the americans are afraid of israel staging a false flag in an arab country blaming it on Iran or Syria to keep the heat up.
Strange as it may sound it seems quite possible that zusa is finally turning against israel, having understood that israel and its eternal war mongering and meddling in internal zusa policy is the single biggest rock on zusas way way back to a halfway normal nation and recovery.
Again, I know that sounds strange. But think. dempsey told israel more than once in rather clear words that the zusa military doesn’t want to fight any more wars for them. And now obama quite firmly puts a two state solution on the table that is, he puts as a given what israel tries to negate since its very existence.
While something in my head shrieks “incredible!” I also remember that “jewish” and “zionist” is by no means identical. This became very clear during Nazi-Germany with basically two jewish factions holding clearly opposing positions. One, the classical jewish faction strived for survival above all while the other one, the zionists, actually often colaborated with the Nazi (other times opposing them) going for one goal and one goal only and above all, the creation of israel.
It should be understood (and I think many jews do understand that) that thevast majority of non-jews doesn’t differentiate that much. To them, “jewish”, “zionist”, and “israel” are basically one and the same leading to many situations where jews gets punished for (yet more) zionist/israel crimes.
Just imagine the day when israel were terminated (and quite consequentially, the zusa regime broke apart); chances are that millions of people went on the street and killed jews whereever they found them.
Many are absolutely sure that obama is just another zionist puppet. After all, wasn’t he groomed and sponsored and put into power by influential and rich jews? I’m not so sure. After all there are, I assume, many jews in zusa who clearly recognize israel, aipac & co as a possibly vital danger to themselves.
This, of course, is just a hypothesis and by no means the only one, possibly not even a strong one.
Some argue that Russia has become, surprisingly for many, a major superpower, actually one that is militarily stronger than zusa and one with a brilliant leader with integrity. And right they are, no doubts. But then, while the factor Putin explains a lot, it does not explain, why a black man wih little more than an admittedly great talent to seduce, lure and manipulate the dumbed down american masses, became president, won the internal fighting against ultra-zionist mass-murder-is-fun hillary, and became president a second time, having a rather loyal and hand-picked team in his second term after – with considerable elegance – shutting down petraeus, clinton and others.
Now if, just suppose, if zusa finally turned against israel, wouldn’t it seem logical to use Al Ciada?
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Aug 8 2013 2:07 utc | 16
|
