??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 gray. 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 Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI). ISI in turn made the decisions about which Afghan factions to arm and train, tending to favor 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.
There was simply no point in the CIA and Afghan Arabs being in contact with each other. The Afghan Arabs functioned independently and had their own sources of funding. The CIA did not need the Afghan Arabs, and the Afghan Arabs did not need the CIA. So the notion that the Agency funded and trained the Afghan Arabs is, at best, misleading. The ??let??s blame everything bad that happens on the CIA? school of thought vastly overestimates the Agency??s powers, both for good and ill.?
- Peter Bergen, Holy War Inc.: Inside the Secret World of Osama bin Laden (New York: The Free Press, 2001), 64-66

I knew the moment would come when Ron Paul would give away just what a pathetic fraud he really is. Well, I was watching ?? and I am a bit ashamed to admit this ?? Real Time with Bill Maher earlier tonight, where he made an appearance. At once, my wait was over.

The hype about Paul from his supporters seems to be that he is the only one among the presidential hopefuls from either side who ??really gets it.? He is heralded as the only one who knows his shit when it comes to American foreign policy, the only one who knows the ??facts? and is ??educated? on the matter. All others who don??t share his views are ignorant, war-mongering fools with Israel??s dick in their mouths, and they should discover the real truth of things by reading the books Rogue Nation, Perilous Power, and the Koran.

I won??t deny it ?? I am disgusted by just how many people are ecstatic at the prospect of rallying behind Ron Paul??s policy of appeasement. At the same time, there is no debate that can be successfully had with such people. At the end of the day, you cannot debate questions of morality. If the Ron Paulists out there believe that the torture and murder alike of thousands of innocent people, the monstrous decapitation of hostages, the mutilation and enslavement of women, the vow to remorselessly detonate nuclear weapons if acquired, the pledge to destroy democracy and erect a brutal theocracy upon its ruins, the complete eradication of all civil liberties (that would include the right to bitch about the eradication of all civil liberties), the annihilation of all art, sports, and scientific research, and the bombings of public works, markets, and schools are ever justified/understandable/called for in the name of anything, there is nothing that I or anyone else can say that will change their minds, and make them see it my way. (My way being that all those things are wrong. Always.)

I can, however, try my best to challenge Ron Paul??s cult of personality as the ultimate political sage. I need only draw from one factual fuck-up out of the many he has certainly committed to debunk his alleged intellectual superpowers.

On the last (and I do mean last, both as in the most recent, and as in the last that will air until late August? After all, everyone is entitled to a Maher-free summer) episode of Real Time, Ron Paul, while going off about how the United States has made its bed, claimed among other things, with that usual shit-eating grin of his, that the U.S. funded and trained Osama bin Laden during the Soviet-Afghan War in the eighties.

I know that some ?? many, actually - who would hear this will think, ??Yeah, and? That??s common knowledge! We did fund and train Osama in the eighties!?

No, we didn??t.

But it doesn??t disturb me that much when I hear uninformed civilians make bogus claims such as the above. It??s when someone who wants to be the President of the United States makes them that I draw the line.

If the excerpt I saw fit to start out this thread with doesn??t do it for you, here is a very brief history lesson on the matter.

MYTH: Osama bin Laden was funded and trained by the CIA.
FACT: American funding for the Afghan resistance began under the Carter presidency at the urging of Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter??s national security advisor. Later, Reagan agreed to match all the money the Saudis were pouring into the resistance, meaning of course that funding from the U.S. increased enormously. But here??s the thing: the U.S. was giving its money NOT to the Saudis, but to Pakistani intelligence, which in turn put the money into official Afghan fighters, of which Osama was not a member. The Saudis, on the other hand, preferred to fund the ??Afghan Arabs,? who were but an external radical and militant group made up of, guess what, no Afghans at all, just Muslim extremists. Osama bin Laden worked with this group. In short, no money from the U.S. ever found its way into Osama bin Laden??s coffers.

There exists no evidence whatsoever ?? I??m talking testimonies, receipts, documents, checks ?? that Osama bin Laden and the organization he belonged to were ever on the U.S.??s payroll. Yes, they were fighting a mutual enemy, but for different reasons, and U.S. funding never went to the Afghan Arabs. Saudi money did, and the U.S. and the Saudis had forged this ??dollar for dollar? agreement ?? hence, we get this ??Osama funded by CIA? myth from shortsighted people who don??t do all of their homework.

The Afghan Arabs hated America. Writes Richard Miniter in his book Disinformation: 22 Media Myths That Undermine the War on Terror:
??Moreover, the handful of Americans who had heard of bin Laden in the 1980s 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 Laden??s encampment. Rohrabacher was told: ??If he hears an American, he will kill you.? If a CIA operative had tried to recruit bin Laden, he probably would not have lived through the experience.?

Miniter goes on to note:
??The Saudis saw the effort as a way of protecting their kingdom, spreading their severe version of Islam, and extending their influence to the non-Arab Muslim world. The Reagan administration was no more responsible for the anti-Soviet Arab Afghans than bin Laden and his fellow jihadis were responsible for Reagan??s principled anti-Communism.?

Need even more proof? What if you were to hear it from Osama bin Laden??s mouth himself?

Robert Fisk is a British journalist who interviewed bin Laden twice, once in 1993, and again in 1996. In 1993, he asked bin Laden about American assistance during the 1980??s anti-Soviet war, to which Osama replied, ??Personally, neither I nor any of my brothers saw evidence of American help? in Afghanistan. (Robert Fisk, ??Anti-Soviet Warrior Puts His Army on the Road to Peace,? Independent, December 6, 1993.

In 1996, Fisk got a chance to repeat the question. He asked, ??Did not the Americans support the mujihideen??s war against the Soviets??
Bin Laden: ??We were never at any time friends of the Americans. We knew that the Americans support Jews in Palestine and that they are our enemies.? (Robert Fisk, ??Why We Reject the West, by the Saudis?? Fiercest Arab Critic,? Independent, July 10, 1996.)

Despite the myth in question being so-called ??common knowledge? amongst some people, no respectable politician or reputable expert in this country will give this myth the consideration it doesn??t deserve. And rightly so. I wouldn??t be surprised if you could dig up a Chomsky piece where he himself is humble enough to admit it??s all bullshit. (As he - somewhat - did, by the way, in regard to The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy - ZNet |Foreign Policy | The Israel Lobby?.)

Because it is. And anyone who has bothered to go beyond the rumors, or the murky suppositions, and leafed through the most basic of high school textbooks dealing with the Soviet-Afghan War will come to understand this.

So to get back on track: What the fuck is Ron Paul talking about? How could he hold such a laughable misbelief, how could he possibly know so little about the Middle East and history as a whole, history of his own government??s affairs no less, and believe himself to be fit for the presidency?

This is the man you credit with such an enlightened understanding and knowledge of our foreign policy? This is the man who ??gets it?? This is the man who ??knows?? This clown who comes on TV and makes an illiterate ass of himself by claiming one of the basest of historical fairy tales as fact? So is it upon these fatuous falsehoods that Ron ??The Shit? Paul builds his ??we??re asking for it? case?

Perhaps it is Mr. Paul who needs to use that library card more often.

Oh, and in case you were wondering, yes, the animals that make up Maher??s audience went absolutely crazy for the guy. :jumphappy:Even Maher was surprised.
Gigliozzi Reviewed by Gigliozzi on . It's official: Ron Paul doesn't know what he's talking about ??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 gray. 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 Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI). ISI in turn made the decisions about which Afghan factions to arm and train, tending to favor the most Islamist and Rating: 5