The late Crown Prince Nayef, an early 9/11 truth supporter
Aangerfan points out that, according to Fareed Zakaria, the late Crown Prince Nayef of Saudi Arabia was murdered by the CIA. A possible motive: Nayef shook the world in 2001 when he "stated that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by the Jews." According to the New York Times:
"After the 9/11 hijackings, Prince Nayef infamously peddled the theory that the attacks were a Jewish plot...'The Saudis are being framed, accused of things that they did not do,' he said at a news conference at the time."
Al-Jazeera reports: "In November 2002, Nayef told the Arabic-language Kuwaiti daily Assyasah that Jews were behind the 9/11 attacks because they have benefited from subsequent criticism of Islam and Arabs."
Indeed, the primary beneficiary of the genocidal wave of islamophobia unleashed by 9/11 is the "Jewish state."
For some unknown reason, people who support the genocidal Big Lie that 9/11 was done by Muslims are rarely rebuked for their bigotry; while those like Alan Sabrosky and Prince Nayef who cite the undeniable and overwhelming evidence that 9/11 was perpetrated by and for supporters of the self-proclaimed "Jewish state," are smeared by the Zionist-dominated media.
As Alan Sabrosky, former Director of
Strategic Studies at the US Army War College, told
Press TV: “I have had long conversations over the past two
weeks with contacts at the Army War College, at the Marine Corps
Headquarters, and I have made it absolutely clear in both cases that
it is 100 percent certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation. Period.
If Americans ever know that Israel did this, they are going to scrub
them off the earth.”
May Allah have mercy on Crown Prince Nayef, and forgive him his sins, considering his brave appeals for 9/11 truth.
"I would just like to say something, ladies and gentlemen. Something
that I think is very important. It is that, you, we -- we own this
country. We -- we own it. It is not you owning it, and not politicians
owning it. Politicians are employees of ours. And -- so -- they are
just going to come around and beg for votes every few years. It is the
same old deal. But I just think it is important that you realize that
you're the best in the world. Whether you are a Democrat or Republican
or whether you're libertarian or whatever, you are the best. And we
should not ever forget that. And when somebody does not do the job, we
got to let them go. Okay, just remember that. And I'm speaking out for
everybody out there." - Clint Eastwood, from his speech at the 2012 Republican National Convention.
The reaction to Clint Eastwood's speech at the RNC has been mainly
negative. But I have a different and more positive view of the speech.
In an era of prepared and polished speeches given by
emotionally pulverized politicians it is refreshing to see a man on the
biggest national stage in America speak from his heart. It is a rare
sight. We never get to hear honest speeches in the house of illusions
that is Western politics.
There is nothing like an honest speech from the
heart, regardless of how it is delivered. People say Eastwood's
rugged speech was hard to watch. Really? Why is it hard to watch
a patriot give a real speech from the heart? It's much
more painful to watch fake men like Obama and Romney give fake but
polished speeches about absolute bullshit. Obama gives nothing but empty
platitudes so an empty chair suits him perfectly. Emptiness is the essence of his heart and soul.
Eastwood reminded all Americans, no matter their party loyalties, that politicians are
employees who are there to perform a public service, and who must be questioned, not
worshiped. He also introduced an important concept into the collective
psyche: Invisible Obama.
On the biggest questions, issues, and controversies
of the day, President Obama and the entire Western political class has
been invisible. They are invisible on the
issue of 9/11 truth; Indefinite detention of political dissidents;
Transnational banking fraud, and so many other political scandals. They
might as well not be there. They are not leaders of a grand civilization but political pimps of a dying one.
In his speech,
Eastwood addressed an invisible President Obama on an empty chair. It
worked well with the audience, but not with the viewers at home. It was a
gutsy move, though. And if you think it is hard
to carry on a make-believe conversation with an invisible Obama, it's
much harder to talk to the real Obama in person. From what I've read,
Obama is not "mentally there." He is not open, and that is not
a good leadership quality, especially when your country is in a crisis.
In this article, I've taken Eastwood's approach of
speaking to an invisible man on an empty chair and applied it to 9/11 truth. Imagine
if "9/11 truth" was an invisible chair of truth in a room full of invisible lies,
legends, fantasy, and falsehoods. What follows is my dialogue with this
invisible chair.
II. Lifting The Cloak of Invisibility: Talking To The Invisible Chair of 9/11 Truth
Excavator: Invisible 9/11 truth, who sits on your golden
throne? How
can an individual who is on the stage of life and the journey of
self-discovery carry on a conversation with you? And why are you
rejected by the spellbound audience as unreal and invisible? Are they
right? Am I speaking to a non-entity? Are the rumours of your existence
just crazy rumours or are you real?
Invisible 9/11 Truth Chair [ITC]: Oh,
I'm real alright. But to answer your question in more depth, it depends
on who you ask in the audience. Some doubt my existence and call you
crazy for pointing me out in the room. And there are some others such as
enlightened sufis who consider me an empty truth on an invisible chair.
They pay me no mind. They know I exist, but I mean nothing to them
because they view me as an inferior form of truth. So they treat me as
invisible because they have their eye on a higher truth.
Excavator: A higher truth? Interesting. So you are a lesser
truth compared to other invisible, greater truths? If so, then what is
your relationship to them? Do your foot stools open or block the gateway
of the visible world to a richer reality? And do your foot stools open
the door of death in the mind? If so, why? Why not move away from the
entrance and let the door
close shut in our house of reality? Even if it is a constructed reality,
why ruin the intellectual infrastructure of a perfectly good house? Why
let in the wind of death into the quiet rooms of the sleeping guests?
Is this
house of reality not good enough for you? Does it stink with lies? But
what house doesn't stink with lies on this plane of existence? And is
not the
sweet smell of lies better than the rotten smell of death? Why replace
the sweet smell with the rotten smell? You are just a chair. You can
stand the smell of death. But what about those who sit on you? They were
lying on the floor of legends and lies with content and calm before
they awoke and saw you in the corner of the room.
You expect them to stop lying down with bliss in their hearts and sit up
straight on a cold, wooden chair, frozen with terror?
ITC: I cannot speak for the souls
who choose to sit on me over another chair, whether invisible or not,
and whether in this or that house. They are free to come and
go as they please. As for the charge that my poor little foot stools jam
the doorway to the outside world and bring in the wind and smell of
death into the house, all I can say is
what kind of house do you want to live in? A house that is filled with
illusions and stops the terror of death at the door? If a house of
illusions, shadows, and moral corruption is good enough for you then be
my guest.
Or do you want to live in a house that
takes as its foundations all the facts of existence and life? Which
house is the healthier house? The wind of death will enter your little
house any way because there is no escaping this wind. You can either welcome
this wind as a guest or it will knock down the foundations of your false house
with the velocity that only the force of nature is capable of.
Excavator: Enough talk of death. Let's change the subject. What
if newly awakened souls realize that you are only a small chair of
truth with only a smattering of gold covering? What if they look into
the distance and see there is a bigger chair in the house down the
street? Which chair should the soul sit on? What do you advise a soul to
do in this situation?
Should those
who walk on the path of self-discovery in the night sit on you at the
end of their painful journey at the break of dawn? Or are you too cold
and hard for their tired legs, souls, and arms? Why shouldn't they sit
on a chair that is soft and has rainbow coloring? If it gives them joy
and relief, then why not sit on the chair where the sun's radiant light
shines upon it rather than a chair that stands in the bitter shade?
ITC: Every soul has its own
preference. I am not an envious chair. I do not ask to be sat on. I
represent life to one soul and death to another. Some souls choose
the shadow
of death in place of the sun of life for their own reasons. Some see no
sun in this life but only the shadow of death. Of course,
it is easy to mistake the two. For instance, in a room coloured by
falsehoods and deceptions one loses sight of what's real; of what's the
light and what's the shadow. But I cannot decide for the soul. It
depends on its own sense of perception,
intelligence, judgment, and other factors. Some souls do not like the
air and quality of real
chairs so they mark them as invisible, as they did with me at first.
Excavator: What do you make of the charge that you are a conspiracy chair?
ITC: That is a funny charge against me. Before I was the
invisible chair. I was not to be even considered. I was not in the room.
I was non-existent. But the force of reality imposed itself, forcing
the half-awake audience and its spiritual managers to at least recognize
that I exist.
It is a funny charge because I
can't be both an invisible chair and a conspiracy chair. I am a visible chair of truth. Since my accusers have conceded on the
point of my existence, they must take me seriously. But they don't. I'm
pushed to the side of the room. They say only the fringe lunatics gather
around me. But is truth fringe? Is justice fringe? Is God fringe? Is
the global movement for world peace and universal brotherhood fringe?
How can I be fringe when souls the world over discover me and stand by
me? I am the furthest thing from a conspiracy chair and a fringe chair.
Excavator:
Okay. You're not a conspiracy chair. That has been established. I want to move on. Where do you
stand in the hierarchy of the invisible world of chairs? Are you the only invisible chair of truth? And what about
the visible world? Is the visible electric chair on death row your
cousin? Is the visible chair of torture your cellmate in the invisible
prison?
ITC: I am sorry
but I cannot assist you in the journey to the invisible world of chairs or show
you the way. I have said too much already. I cannot answer your
questions. They are for you to discover at your own pace. It takes regular spiritual exercises to reach
the level of understanding that you seem to be aiming for.
Excavator: Fair enough. I'll ask you more specific questions.
Many of the people who sit on you are described as "truthers." What do
you think of them? And who else sits on you? Do you expect a president
of the US empire to sit on you? Is not his ass of lies too big for you?
He will break you down to pieces, will he not? And what about God? Is he
the pilot and are you the chair in the cockpit?
ITC: God is too big for me. And he is not a sitter. As for the
"truthers," they know I exist because they can see and feel me. They
cannot be persuaded that I am invisible and unreal by the managers of
public thoughts and perceptions. They are not crazy because I am not the
chair for the mentally handicapped.
Excavator: One final question. What did you think about Clint
Eastwood's fictional encounter with an invisible Obama represented by an
empty chair at the RNC?
ITC: It was a neat dramatic invention by a master director
through which Obama's empty soul was revealed to the American people on a
big stage.
Now investigative journalist Gareth Porter has exposed India's latest false-flag scandal: The framing of innocent journalist Syed Mohommed Ahmad Kazmi and four innocent Iranians for the false-flag bombing of an Israeli embassy car. If history is any guide, Israel bombed its own embassy car and paid off its assets in the Indian police to frame the designated patsies.
Israel has been caught repeatedly bombing its own embassies, Jewish community centers, etc.:
Tuesday, 28 August 2012 13:31 By Gareth Porter, Inter Press Service | Report
In "The Delhi Car Bombing: How the Police Built a False Case", a three-part series beginning today, award-winning investigative journalist Gareth Porter dissects the Delhi police accusation against an Indian journalist and four Iranians of involvement in the Feb. 13 bombing of an Israeli embassy car.
Washington - New Delhi police officials have released hundreds of pages of documents from their investigation into the Feb. 13 bombing of an Israeli Embassy car. The documents aimed to show that a well-known Indian Muslim journalist aided an Iranian conspiracy to plan and carry out the bombing.
But a review by IPS of the evidence filed in the case suggests that the Indian journalist accused in the case has been framed by the police, at least in part to implicate the Iranians in the terror plot.
The "charge sheet" on the embassy car bombing filed by the "Special Cell" (SC) of the Delhi police July 31 claims Indian journalist Syed Mohommed Ahmad Kazmi confessed to helping officials from Iran plan the bombing plot in return for payments totalling 5,500 U.S. dollars.
It also says that a moped used for reconnaissance by the Iranian said to have carried out the bombing was found in Kazmi's residence and that forensic bomb-making evidence was discovered in the hotel room of that same Iranian.
But an analysis of the documentation included in the filing reveals that the evidence is highly questionable.
The SC has a long history of cases against alleged terrorists that were rejected by the court as involving framing people and planting false evidence.
Kazmi is an unlikely candidate for participation in an Iranian terrorist plot. A 50-year-old senior Indian journalist, he had his own web-based news service, a regular job as a columnist for the leading Urdu-language weekly and a retainer as Urdu newscaster for India's state-owned television channel Doordarshan.
He did not need the 5,500 U.S. dollars police claim he received for helping the Iranians plan the bombing. Nor did he need the 2.26 million rupees (40,000 U.S. dollars) in foreign remittances that Delhi police chief B. K. Gupta asserted in a press conference in mid-March that the journalist and his wife had received in their bank accounts. Gupta declared that Kazmi and his wife had been "unable to explain" those remittances.
But Kazmi's family has produced bank documents showing that the remittances had come from relatives in the UK and Singapore in 2009 and 2010. Furthermore, the "Economic Directorate" of the Indian Police assigned to investigate the remittances could find nothing incriminating in them, the Indian press has reported.
A more serious problem with the SC case is that it depends heavily on Kazmi's alleged confession of guilt. That confession, consisting of five separate statements between Mar. 6 and 24, is inadmissible as evidence under Indian law on the assumption that police will inevitably coerce those in their custody to make confessions.
Kazmi has denounced all the "disclosure statements" attributed to him as false. He charged in a handwritten petition to the court Apr. 16 that the SC had coerced him into providing his signature on blank pages. He said the police threatened that his family with "dire consequences" if he did not do as they directed.
Except for the very first "disclosure statement" dated Mar. 6, all of them are followed by the handwritten notation "Accused refused to sign".
Most of the five "disclosures" were clearly written by the Special Cell in order to implicate both Kazmi and three Iranians in the bombing plot. The disclosures make Kazmi appear eager to incriminate himself, even though the police account offers no reason for considering Kazmi a suspect, except that his mobile phone number was said to have been called by a Houshang Afshar Irani, who in turn was said to have been contacted by an Iranian involved in the Feb. 14 explosion in Bangkok.
The disclosure dated Mar. 6 and supposedly given to police before Kazmi was even under arrest confesses to having been informed of the plot for a bombing in Delhi by a Seyed Ali Mahdiansadr during a visit to Tehran in January 2011, and having agreed to help the plotters.
Kazmi is also portrayed in the statement as admitting to having been given a Kinetic brand moped by Irani for safekeeping at his home during the first week in May 2011. The police cite that statement as the justification for immediately arresting him and for allegedly seizing the moped from Kazmi's residence.
There is good reason to believe that the police had already followed Irani's trail during his two-week visit to Delhi in late April and early May 2011 and had learned before Kazmi's arrest that he had purchased a used black Kinetic moped at a commercial showroom in Delhi on Apr. 26.
Kazmi's family and lawyer Mehmood Pracha say the moped taken away from his residence Mar. 6 was not the one identified in the police "seizure memo", which has the same identification number as found on the receipt for Irani's purchase of the scooter, but one left by Kazmi's brother two years ago and never used during that time.
The memo for the scooter is signed and dated by Deputy Chief of Police Sanjeev Yadav, the senior police official in the SC investigation, and one other officer. It is signed but not dated by a third officer. The fact that Kazmi's signature is on the document without any date suggests that he signed a blank sheet of paper.
The Kinetic moped is crucial to the SC effort to link Kazmi to Irani's alleged reconnaissance of the Israeli embassy to prepare for the bombing, because there is no other evidence except Kazmi's own discredited "disclosures". But the story about the moped raises serious questions about its plausibility.
It would have made no sense for a terrorist to purchase a moped for that purpose, since Kazmi owned a car that would have made the task far easier as well as more secure.
The alleged turnover of the moped to Kazmi by Irani at the end of his two-week visit makes even less sense, because it suggests that he was planning to use it again for the actual bombing operation. But someone contemplating an operation to affix a magnet bomb to a car would never have considered using a moped for the job. A Kinetic moped normally cannot go faster than 20 miles per hour and is notoriously poor in acceleration, making a getaway for the bomber highly problematic.
In the event, Irani rented a motorcycle when he returned, suggesting that had probably disposed of the moped by reselling it cheaply.
Another sign that the police had trouble linking Kazmi to Irani's reconnaissance of the Israeli Embassy is the statement attributed to him in one of the "disclosures". Whenever he met with Irani, his supposed disclosure says, "I used to leave my mobile phone at my residence."
That sentence was evidently included to explain why a search of Kazmi's mobile phone records would not reveal any activity in the area where the "disclosure" claims Kazmi and Irani were carrying out reconnaissance of the Israeli Embassy during Irani's two-week stay.
The police used the same argument in a 2007 terrorism case in which they had alleged that the accused had taken a trip to Kashmir to collect explosives but had left his mobile phone at his guest house.
The Court did not find the assertion credible, however, and threw out the charges.
*This story is the first in a three-part series, "The Delhi Car Bombing: How the Police Built a False Case", in which award-winning investigative journalist Gareth Porter dissects the Delhi police accusation against an Indian journalist and four Iranians of involvement in the Feb. 13 bombing of an Israeli embassy car. http://www.ipsnews.net/2012/08/evidence-in-delhi-embassy-bombing-suggests-journalist-was-framed-part-1/
In a fatwa allegedly issued by Osama bin Laden in 1998, he called on Muslims to kill Americans and Jews in order to contribute to the liberation of the Muslim people from US and Zionist oppression. After that date, Osama bin Laden was designated by Western leaders and media as the leader of the ubiquitous Al Qaeda, and as the prime enemy of Western democracy.
Taking Osama bin Laden’s fatwa seriously, one would have expected Muslim volunteers to start a world-wide campaign of attacks specifically targeting Americans and Jews around the world. We discover, however, that this did not happen. On the contrary, hardly any Jews and Israelis were attacked by Al Qaeda. And only a few Americans died at the hand of Al Qaeda operatives. Here a brief overview:
Al Qaeda does not target Israelis, Jews and Americans
(a) Despite Al Qaeda rhetoric of solidarity with the struggle of the Palestinian people and the aforementioned fatwa attributed to Osama bin Laden, there are no recorded attacks by Al Qaeda aimed at Israeli territory, Israeli installations abroad or Israeli citizens.
(b) There are only two or three known attacks attributed to Al Qaeda that allegedly targeted Jewish synagogues (Djerba, Tunisia and Istanbul, Turkey). Yet in Djerba no Jew is known to have died (most victims were German tourists) and in Istanbul most victims were Muslims. These attacks were, incidentally, not properly investigated. There are no known Al Qaeda attacks directed against European or North-American Jews.
(c) A few attacks attributed to or claimed by Al Qaeda were, admittedly, aimed at American citizens or installations. A review of these attacks demonstrates, however, the complicity of the U.S. authorities in each of these attacks: - The attack on the WTC in 1993 was facilitated by the FBI, as revealed in the trial of the suspects. - The attack on the US embassies in East Africa in 1998 was facilitated by a US covert agent, Ali Mohamed, a declared operative of both the CIA and FBI. His participation was revealed in court. - The massive and deadly operation on September 11, 2001, caused the deaths of 3,000 people, for the most part Americans. Yet, it is now well established that these attacks were most likely mounted by the US military, without even a nominal participation by Al Qaeda. At the very least, there is not a shred of forensic evidence that Al Qaeda members or sympathizers participated in the operation and the FBI admitted in June 2006 that it possessed no evidence of a connection between Osama bin Laden and the attacks.
(d) Despite the availability of thousands of vulnerable U.S. targets worldwide, including numerous U.S.-based corporations, American tourists and loosely defended U.S. military bases, Al Qaeda has refrained from attacking these targets.
Who are the actual victims of Al Qaeda?
1. Muslims
Most Al Qaeda victims are Muslims, particularly Shi’a Muslims and moderate, secularized Muslims.
In Iraq The largest deadly campaign by Al Qaeda against Shi’a Muslims has taken place in Iraq. Thousands of Shi’a Muslims have been literally slaughtered by Al Qaeda operatives in Iraq since the demise of the Saddam regime. Hardly a week passes in which no terrorist attack against Iraqi Shi’a is mounted by Al Qaeda. Sometimes, such attacks are presented as emanating from former supporters of Saddam Hussein.
In Pakistan Since 2001, over 1,000 terrorist attacks have been committed in Pakistan. The overwhelming majority of the fatalities are Pakistani Muslims. According to a detailed study by the present author of 110 major terrorist attacks committed in Pakistan between 2001 and 2009, most of these attacks were aimed at civilians and were not claimed by a bona fide organisation. It is likely that at least part of these attacks have been mounted by Al Qaeda or groups linked to Al Qaeda.
In Algeria Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) has, since approximately 2006, supplanted the former GIA (Armed Islamic Group), as the terrorist organisation most active in Algeria and the Sahel region. The GIA and AQIM are known to have been heavily infiltrated by the Algerian secret services and actually directed by these services. The targets of AQIM are both ordinary Algerian citizens (Muslims) or foreign tourists. Since 1992, it is estimated that 200,000 Algerians had died in a covert war masterminded by the Algerian security services, with the help of GIA and AQIM.
In Libya During the period of Col. Ghaddafi’s rule, Al Qaeda operatives were hired by the British MI5 to assassinate the Libyan leader. That operationi failed. In 2011, Al Qaeda participated in the uprising of Islamic forces in Libya to topple Ghaddafi’s regime, killing thousands of Libyan Muslims in the process. These activities were supported by NATO bombings.
In Jordan Al Qaeda mounted a number of deadly operations in Jordan, killing dozens of Jordanian civilians, all of them Muslims. In one case, Israeli tourists were forewarned of the attacks and left the site before the bombing.
In Syria Al Qaeda is currently participating in the civil war in that country, in an attempt to destabilize the Syrian regime and ensure the balkanization of the country, in conformity with long-term Israeli strategic aims formulated in the 1980s.
(2) Serbs
Al Qaeda fighters were transported to Bosnia and Kosovo with the assistance of the British and U.S. governments to fight against Serb forces. Al Qaeda helped dismember former Yugoslavia, a strategy pursued by Western powers and initiated by the IMF.
(3) Russians
Al Qaeda fighters participate in the fight of Chechnya separatists against the Russian authorities. Chechnya separatism is congruent with Western strategic interests to weaken the Russian army and dismember the Russian federation.
(4) Chinese
Al Qaeda is operating in the Uighur province of China, as part of a long-term strategy to destabilize and probably dismember China. These activities remain, for the time being, relatively small-scale.
(4) Hindus
Al Qaeda fighters have been recruited to mount operations in India, that are made to appear as if masterminded by Pakistan. The apparent aim of such operations is to stir tensions between Pakistan and India and prevent these nuclear powers to join forces against Western imperialism.
(5) Africans
Al Qaeda fighters have mounted various operations in African countries aimed at whipping up distrust and hatred against Muslims. The aim of such operations is to prevent Africans from uniting, a vision promoted by Col. Ghaddafi.
The role of Al Qaeda in the imperialist strategy
According to available information, Al Qaeda is most likely micro-managed and financed by Saudi Arabia and strategically steered by U.S. and British intelligence services. For all practical purposes, it is best to consider Al Qaeda as an Islamic militia of the CIA/MI5. Al Qaeda operations are an integral part of imperialist strategy. These operations have multiple purposes:
(a) To maintain within the Western world fear of a deadly enemy and thus justify the maintenance of a large military contingent and foreign expeditionary operations. Without the appearance of a deadly enemy, the populations in Western democracies are likely to demand a significant reduction in military expenditures and forcefully oppose foreign interventions, which are the lifeblood of imperialism.
(b) To stir up civil wars in Muslim countries, and justify thereby so-called humanitarian interventions.
(c) To stir up distrust and hatred between African Muslims and non-Muslims, in order to prevent African unity
(d) To keep the Muslim world intellectually and technologically backward by supporting religious fanatism.
(e) To justify mass surveillance within the Western world, in the garb of preventing terrorism.
(f) To destabilize and balkanize the remaining pockets of potential resistance against imperialism, including the major federal states of Russia, China, India, Iran and Indonesia.
by Adam Credo
A Democratic Party caucus chairman who has speculated about Jewish involvement in the 9/11 terrorist attacks has launched a new political action committee dedicated to supporting “anti-Zionist” Muslim candidates who believe “the ‘war on terror’ is a hoax and that the official story of 9/11 is not true,” according to the group’s website.
MD Rabbi Alam is an Obama campaign ally and Missouri-based Democratic activist who came under fire in July after he told the Free Beacon that “not a single Jew” was killed during the 9/11 attacks. (Alam is not a rabbi.) ...
Called the American Muslim Political Action Committee (AMPAC), the group aims to get “Muslims elected to office” and become more active in the American political system. Alam is listed at the website’s owner.
* * *
AMPAC response:
Dear Adam Credo,
Your article "Missouri Democrat launches 9-11 Truth PAC" is misleading, perhaps even libelous, and ought to be corrected.
The phrases "speculated about Jewish involvement" and "not a single Jew"
give the reader a false and arguably libelous impression of MD Alam's
position on 9/11. In fact, MD has publicly declared that he mis-spoke
when he made these statements, and he has apologized to the Jewish
community. He has corrected himself by explaining that he was referring
to the fact that there is documented proof of Israelis (not Jews as
such) being warned and vacating the Towers prior to 9/11, resulting in a
"miraculous" dearth of Israelis killed in the three controlled
demolitions that day.
http://m911t.blogspot.com/2012/07/top-missouri-democrat-questions-911.html
For proof of controlled demolitions, see http://www.AE911truth.org
Also, your article suggests that AMPAC's primary or sole focus is 9/11,
Zionism, and the "war on terror." Even a cursory examination of the
website http://ampacus.webs.com/apps/blog/ shows that this is not the
case. The truth is that AMPAC will be supporting essentially all Muslim
candidates for office, and will be focusing on a wide range of issues.
Please publish a correction establishing, for the record, the facts as stated above.
A federal judge in the
US has rejected a lawsuit filed against the country’s administration
over spying by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on Muslims in
Orange County, California.
US District Judge Cormac J. Carney made the decision on Tuesday,
claiming that if the suit proceeds, it may disclose ‘sensitive
government data.’
The move came in response to a lawsuit filed last year when FBI sent
an undercover informant, named Craig Monteilh, to the mosques of Orange
County. Muslims say the agency has violated their civil liberties.
Following the ruling, the non-profit American Civil Liberties Union
(ACLU) of Southern California and the US-based organization of Council
on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which had lodged the compliant on
behalf of three Orange County Muslims, said they would appeal the
judge’s decision.
Press TV has conducted an interview with Abdul Alim Musa, the Imam
of Masjid al-Islam, from Washington, to further discuss the issue.
The program also offers the opinions of two other guests: Richard
Becker, with A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, from San Francisco, and Dr. Kevin
Barrett, with the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance, from Madison. The
following is a rough transcription of the interview with Abdul Alim
Musa.
Press TV: Let’s look at and zoom in on that new racial
profiling because it seems like not a new story but occurring time and
again. I’d like to ask you this, Abdul Ali Musa, why is it that it keeps
continuing?
Maybe you can shed light on this if you have personal experience of
it yourself. I know that in some examples, Muslims, persons of religious
faith of Islam, going through, for example, airports in the United
States get looked at in a different light.
Musa: [In the Name of God - Most Beneficent; Most Merciful]
First of all, I would like to say that on the situation of Orange
County, I’ve spoken there several times at the University of Irvine. The
imam at the masjid in Irvine that was there a few years ago, Imam
Sadullah Khan from South Africa, we have been personal friends for
decades.
What I found there was not only infiltration of the masjid and the
workings in Orange County from the low end but also the second in
command of our organization, a notorious saboteur and infiltrator, we
used to call him Amir Abdul Malik Ali, it seems as though he worked in
perfect cooperation with Israeli agents and American institutions to
arrange situations in Orange County especially at the university.
This person was based in Oakland but would go to Orange County or go to Irvine at least once or twice a week for several years.
It seems as though they would arrange situations that would justify
the government infiltrating. They have to have a pretext or a reason,
like our brother said earlier about 9/11 and all of these government
arranged processes. The same thing happened in Orange County.
Why is it a repeat in our history? Anyone in America that wants to
do good, the race doesn’t matter: if you are Philip Berrigan, if you’re
Martin Luther King or if you’re Malcolm X, it didn’t matter.
If you want to make a better world or institute a new program
improving the condition of humanity, the government has a set pattern to
come out and crush you anyway it can.
We go back to the Judge [Robert] Bork days when he was trying to get
in the Supreme Court, over 25 years ago when the government lost a case
against the Palestinian Nine -- they called them the Palestinian Nine,
they were not all Palestinians - in the mid 1980s, the government lost
its case. It was thrown out because the government used illegal means to
acquire information, and it was thrown out.
That was the beginning of this stage for the renewal of the changing
or the arrange for the changing of the laws of the United States and
what we call a constitutional dictatorship to the point that now we are
targeted killings, we have Anwar al-Awlaki and his son droned to death,
we have drones in Pakistan, we have drones all over the Muslim world
killing people without any due process, without any justification and
without any explanation.
Now, the laws inside the United States, the Constitution, have been
removed from society. Technically, the Bill of Rights doesn’t exist.
This is why the government now feels free to say we can’t disclose any
of the illegal doings that we do because it’s a state secret.
Well, everything that they do is a state secret but they feel free
to trample on our so-called constitutional rights and guarantees.
We believe this is an arranged process. We believe that there are
three main - when we talk about terror, we talk about the American
government militarily around the world, the Israeli government with the
media, the Israeli affiliates throughout the world and their operatives
that control the media, the books and everything else that feed us a
diet of disbelief.
Then we have Saudi Arabia. When you hear about al-Qaeda, when you
hear about Taliban, when you hear about all of these disjointed Muslims
killing other Muslims, then you’re talking about Saudi Arabia.
Remember, when you tied a triangle of terror together, you have
American military, Israeli or Zionist media, and then you have the Saudi
Arabians which help arrange things.
In 9/11, they said most of them were Saudi Arabians. So, if they
were from Saudi Arabia, why didn’t they invade Saudi Arabia instead of
invading Afghanistan?
Press TV: Imam Musa, since our guest there in San Francisco
talked about the Occupy movement, we had news last week that came out
that the US government has through their security apparatus raided some
homes of Occupy protesters in certain states and actually retrieved some
of the documents there including, perhaps, documents stored in their
computers.
Why have they gone this far? Do they think the problem will be
resolved in this form and manner when the bigger picture that the Occupy
movement is preaching is not something that’s being addressed? -At
least that’s the feeling that the Occupy movement has.
Musa: We can clearly see -- again, I am here in Washington
D.C. and our original office, masjid and center is in Oakland,
California. Oakland, California, has been one of the centers of the
Occupy movement.
When I went down to visit several times, I could see clearly that
they had already arranged many saboteurs, many infiltrators, many people
to cause trouble and make it look like this totally non-violent
movement was involved in violence, dope smoking.
In Dallas and other places, they sent homeless people and drug
addicts and everything to press on the movement and join the movement;
and it justifies the police again in cracking down.
As our brother said earlier, this system, automatically, I don’t
know why we have to repeat it so much, it automatically goes into the
mode of oppression.
If you take issues like Imam Luqman who was assassinated three years
ago in Detroit, it was a setup, it was arranged, and was a clear
assassination; whether it’s the masjid in New York, whether it’s our
centers in Washington D.C., in Oakland.
There was a report this month, the August edition of Horizon, this
is a national Islamic magazine, and they did research and they came up
with a number: they feel there have been over 500,000 interviews by the
Federal government since 9/11 of Muslims - just one point - 15,000
agents...
The brand-new American Muslim Political Action Committee (AMPAC) is hosting a conference call every Friday at 6 pm Central (7 pm Eastern, 4 pm Pacific) to discuss and develop our mission. The Telephone Access Code 1-(559) 726-1000, PIN - 217357#
Here is the email invitation:
From: "MD RABBI ALAM for Missouri Secretary of State" rabbituli00(at)yahoo(dot)com
Date: August 9, 2012 3:45:05 AM CDT
To: KC_Muslim_Community@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [KC_Muslim_Community] Conference Call With Dr. Kevin Barrett and Educating the Community
Please join me and Dr. Kevin Barrett every Friday at 6:00PM Central Standard Time (CST) and share your thoughts on how to address American Muslim Political Engagement and bring a new generation of hope for PEACE for American Muslims.
The Telephone Access Code 1-(559) 726-1000, PIN - 217357#
This Conference Call will be held on Every Friday for next 60 Months. So make your schedule around this Conference Call.
Hope you can join the Conference Call and help us to be educated.
* * *
AMPAC FAQs
Q: Why another organization? We already
have CAIR and ISNA and MPAC and other groups.
A: None of these organizations focuses
exclusively on getting Muslims involved in the political process: (1)
Getting Muslims elected to office, (2) Getting Muslims out to vote,
and (3) Making sure that the views and values of Muslims help make
policy in America.
Q: What are “the views and values of
Muslims?” Aren't Muslims diverse in their political views?
A: AMPAC will focus on those issues
that are of special importance to the Muslim community, and where
there is a significant degree of agreement among Muslims. For
example, there is widespread agreement in the community (though this
is censored by the current leadership) that the “war on terror”
is a hoax and that the official story of 9/11 is not true. See:
http://muslimsforasafeamerica.org/?p=83
Since Muslims have suffered extreme discrimination due to the phony
“war on terror,” this issue deserves to be at the top of Muslims'
list of political priorities. Also, the majority of Muslims are
pro-peace, anti-Zionist, and opposed to usury (riba). Perhaps
most importantly, Muslims oppose corruption (al-fasaad) and
support clean, honest and transparent governance. We will support
candidates according to their positions on these and other important
issues.
Q: Aren't some of these views too
“radical”? Won't they alienate non-Muslims?
A: The history of the Jewish-Zionist
lobby AIPAC shows that it is more effective to be “radical” and
express one's views strongly and honestly, than to be fearful and
timid. The best defense is a good offense. Most of our seemingly
“radical” positions are closely aligned with the views of the
majority of the American people, who oppose the 9/11 wars, want to
cut military spending, dislike the Patriot Act and other
unconstitutional laws, and hate big bankster usury. Polls even show
that 36% of the American people think it is likely that 9/11 was a
false-flag operation! That is more people than voted for President
Obama.
Q: Will there be any favoritism toward
Democrats versus Republicans, since M.D. Alam is a well-known
Democrat?
A: No. AMPAC is nonpartisan. But our
support for candidates will be partly determined by their positions
on issues important to Muslims. For example, in the Republican Party,
Mitt Romney is a strong supporter of Zionism and the “war on
terror” while Ron Paul is not, so we would be inclined to support
Paul over Romney. Another reason to support Ron Paul is that Paul is
an opponent of the corrupt, usury-based Federal Reserve monetary
system. We believe Muslims should support Ron Paul and other
like-minded Republicans, as well as pro-peace and pro-civil-liberties
Democrats. Our support for candidates will be determined by their
positions on issues important to Muslims, not by which party they
belong to.
Q: What, specifically, will AMPAC do?
A:
AMPAC will provide monetary support to Muslim and Muslim-friendly
political candidates; encourage Muslims to run for office and provide
logistical and monetary support to those who run; highlight specific
political campaigns deserving of Muslim support; educate American
Muslims about the political system and how they can and should get
involved; and educate the American public about Muslim values,
Muslim involvement in politics, and why Muslims hold the political
views that they do.
We
hope and expect that all Muslims running for office will contact us
so we can list their campaigns on our website and offer America's
millions of Muslims a convenient way to donate to their campaigns,
and if possible volunteer.
Once
we are up and running, we hope to have a newsletter aimed at
politically mobilizing Muslims. We will also regularly issue press
releases to the general media designed to educate non-Muslims and win
support for our positions and activities, and solicit TV and radio
interviews and news stories.
