You would be guessing wrong. That UBL was associated with/trained by/funded by etc the CIA is a commonly repeated meme in the same vein as he was educated in the West, or that Saddam was armed by the United States.SirDennis wrote:I'm guessing the reluctance to admit he was stems from the idea that this would make the US partly culpable for its own troubles. But that is not the point of my comment, nor do I think admitting it lends credence to conspiracy theorists' claims about 9/11. I do however point it out to maintain a measure of sanity in the face of historical revisionism and the "Ministry of Truth."Infidel wrote:UBL was not a CIA asset, former or otherwise.SirDennis wrote:And a comment from the fringe: I prefer the way Obama handled Osama over the way Bush handled Hussein. Either way it does not pay to be a former CIA "asset."
I followed from its beginning with great interest myself.As a cadet in the mid 80's I followed news of the Afghan "Freedom Fighters" (as they were known in the West) with great interest. Though memory is bit fuzzy, and though I can't swear to being aware of one OBL or his relationship with the CIA at the time, I can swear that the Mujahideen had the support of US Special Forces as well as Western mercenaries in the form of training (at the very least).
There was no relationship between UBL and the CIA. The Afghan Freedom Fighters were, well, Afghans. Bin Laden was an Arab (the two groups though with similar goals were distinct). Bin Laden was not, shall we say, fond of Americans even then.
The Mujahideen proper, the Afghans, received the support of the US. The Arabs who came in to fight the Soviets maintained their own channels of support with Arab governments, not the US.
I meant quite exactly what I said. The Afghans who fought the Soviets got support from the US. The Arabs who came got support from Arabs.Voronwë_the_Faithful wrote:I'm assuming that Infidel meant that Osama/Usama himself was never specifically a CIA asset (as opposed to Saddam, who undeniably was). I don't know whether that is true or not, but it certainly is indisputably true that the CIA supported the Mujahideen in general.
What do you mean by Saddam being a CIA asset?
No, UBL was not the leader of the Mujahideen, he was prominant among the (relatively small) Arab faction, but not even on the CIA's screen.SirDennis wrote:It follows that since Bin Laden was a (or the?) leader of the Mujahideen that he also had the CIA's support.