Indian anti-corruption official: state “orchestrated” Islamist terror Mumbai atrocities enabled by intelligence operations of India, Pakistan and the United States

https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/indian-anti-corruption-official-state-orchestrated-islamist-terror-35e4f0fc2a74

A senior Indian police officer and anti-corruption investigator last month accused the Indian government of orchestrating the Mumbai terror attacks which occurred nearly seven years ago, according to an Indian government official. 

 R. V. S. Mani, a former undersecretary in India’s home ministry now in the urban development ministry, testified in July that a senior police officer who investigated the 2004 ‘encounter killings’ of four Indian Muslims in Gujarat by the Ahmedabad Police Crime Branch, had told him that the 2008 Mumbai attacks were “set up” by the Indian government. 

The police officer, Satish Verma — currently Principal at the Police Training College in Junagadh — is well-known for his secondment to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), India’s elite anti-corruption law enforcement agency, to lead the probe into the 2004 ‘encounter killings.’

Full story: https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/indian-anti-corruption-official-state-orchestrated-islamist-terror-35e4f0fc2a74

Young, bored, naive, stupid and always right? ISIS NEEDS YOU!

 

Posted by 5Pillarz

 

Are you young and naive, asks journalist Hassan Alkatib? Just finished a boring university degree perhaps? Are you the sort of person who’s itching to swap your British citizenship for a “Muslamic” one? Or maybe you’re looking for something more worthwhile than arguing on Facebook with Sufis about whether Milad is haram?

Well I have just the answer for you young lad! Here are five good reasons why you should join the unfairly maligned Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS).

1. Takfirism has become the favourite sport amongst Muslamic people in the last few years. Next time someone disagrees with you, on absolutely anything, just make takfir on them! How dare they disagree with you! Your uni degree obviously qualifies you more than most Islamic scholars out there. So what better way to do this than to join like-minded takfiris all gathered together under one banner?

But these guys don’t stop at takfir…

2. They exterminate! Killing, destroying, and ethnically cleansing has recently become a very fun and well paid job. Those shrines, mosques, churches, religious minorities and Muslim apostates obviously need to be destroyed. How on earth did the Companions (ra) of the Prophet (saw) miss them? No matter, you can put them to shame by showing how much more Muslamic you are. Just don’t forget to say “Takbeer” when you chop or blow their heads off.

3. The demonization of Islam and Muslims is just not enough, you’ve got to demonise Islam even more! How dare the Western kuffar do that when the oh-so holy Muslamic warrior, like you, can do it tenfold. This is your opportunity to distort and violate the teachings of Islam…and do it on camera for the whole world to see!

4. Your ideal dream of a massive Caliphate that would spread to the four corners of the earth is really going to come true! Just look at what the Great Caliph Osama Bin Laden achieved; he has a state encompassing Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and the Caucuses. Boko Haram have the whole of Africa right under their control (with Al-Shabab controlling regions in eastern Africa, and Ansar al-Sharia controlling all of north Africa). Even our friend Anjem Choudary has established Muslamic law in London.

So what the heck can go wrong?

5. Which brings me to my final point. Much more important than all the above. In fact, just carrying this out is better than anything you could ever do!

How about you serve the neo-con, Zionist, Western colonial agenda in the region and back home? Why not? Don’t worry, they’re not Shi’ites, so they’re fine. You should join hands with those that want to destroy the Ummah. You should create chaos, destruction, and hatred. You should distract resistance groups from fighting Israel. You should endeavour to split Muslim nations bit by bit until there are hundreds of Taifas.

Remember those? The small Muslim kingdoms in Spain that emerged from fighting and disunity in the 11th century. They later sowed the seeds of the elimination of Al-Andalus in 1492. Maybe you’ll be lucky enough to do the same to the whole Ummah!

So now that you know the ground rules, go on and join the Muslamic State of Idiots and Shambles, otherwise known as ISIS.

PS. If you’ve figured out that this is a satirical article then good, if not please join ISIS immediately!

Tsarnaev brothers are 9/11 truthers - and obviously innocent!

The real Boston bomber

The vast majority of the world's Muslims understand that 9/11, Bali, Madrid, 7/7, Mumbai, and similar events have been false flag attacks conducted by the enemies of Islam. As a 2011 Pew Poll found:

"There is no Muslim public in which even 30% accept that Arabs conducted the (9/11) attacks."

In Pakistan, the nation that knows "Al-CIA-duh" best, only 3% believe the official story of 9/11.

Among the vast majority of Muslims who know the truth about false-flag terror: The accused Boston Marathon bombers and their mother.

Dzokhar Tsarnaev's entirely-normal Twitter account included:

“Idk why it’s hard for many of you to accept that 9/11 was an inside job, I mean I guess fuck the facts y’all are some real #patriots #gethip”.

His older brother Tamerlan Tsarnaev agreed.

According to the Rothschild-owned AP wire service:

"(Tamerlan Tsarnaev) began opposing the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. He turned to websites and literature claiming that the CIA was behind the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001..."

The brothers' mother,  Zubeidat Tsarnaeva, knows that "9/11 was purposefully created by the American government to make America hate Muslims" and says that her sons are innocent patsies in yet another anti-Islam false flag operation.

Their father, Anzor Tsarnaev, agrees that his sons were set up as false-flag patsies: "Somebody clearly framed them. I don't know who exactly framed them, but they did."

Virtually everyone who knew the Tsarnaev brothers says they are obviously innocent, and obviously incapable of the crimes of which they are accused.

Here is Dzhokhar Tsarnaev protesting "I never done it. They set me up" in his last Facebook post before he was shot by police, unarmed and trying to peacefully surrender, and then handed over to "Israeli doctors." Shades of Lee Harvey Oswald's famous last words: "I'm just a patsy!"

The mainstream media, owned and operated by fanatical enemies of Islam, has spun these facts in an Orwellian attempt to make the Tsarnaevs look like "radical Muslims."

But wait a minute. Muslims who know that this kind of terrorism only benefits the enemies of Islam OBVIOUSLY would never commit such acts!

The fact that the Tsarnaevs are 9/11 truthers proves their innocence.

Hyderabad bombing: Looks like another false flag

Just as in all the other cases of "Muslim extremist attacks" in India, which always turn out to be false flags, the BBC is promoting the big lie and suppressing any mention of false-flag terror.

Indian scholar-activist Feroze Mithiborwala gets it right the first time.

Feroze Mithiborwala

"You Strike and We will Strike back"

The message of ‘21/2 Hyderabad serial terror attack’:

By Feroze Mithiborwala

The strategic & political target of the terror attack, is the historic 2-day Strike of the Working classes, where more than 12 crore or 120 million workers both from the organized & unorganized sectors participated & brought India to a halt. This working class strike surmounted all calculations due to the scale at which the enraged working classes participated. This strike has shaken up the corporate-political elite & that is why they have struck back with a serial terror attack, where now more than 15 citizens have died & 50 grievously injured. The terror attack was orchestrated in Dilsukh Nagar, where there is a busy market & many cinema halls.

If the working class unrest takes the proportions which we witness in many nations across the world such as Greece & Spain, the ruling elite will witness a massive crisis, due to the growing burdens of price-rise, decreasing wages, increasing scams, spiraling inflation, the growing insecurity of the peasantry, workers & laboring classes, as well as the ever-widening rich-poor divide.

The sheer scale of the two-day strike has taken the entire country by surprise, as the Left-Working class forces were supposed to have lost ground against the neo-liberal corporate juggernaut. Even cities & towns in the Northern belts, where the working class movements have been historically weak, have witnessed massive marches & even militant struggles. Towns such as Noida & Gurgaon that adjoin New Delhi, have witnessed the most militant & popular mobilization. The nervous & cold-blooded ruling corporate elite had to hit back & they have promptly, without wasting a moment, as they can see trouble brewing in the distance.

All it requires is for the black-ops teams to place the bombs in various parts of the city & quietly walk away & then sit back & watch the mayhem & terror on the TV screens, even whilst TV anchors call upon the very same ‘leaders’, who know exactly what is going on, who address us calling for unity & calm, whilst chuckling to themselves within & mocking at a frightened & gullible population.

The other reasons for the terror attack also need to be analysed. The false-flag terror cell, again the handiwork of the Deep-State & the Black-ops cells that function within every Government & security apparatus.

Then are the other factors that needed to be swept below the carpet of blood. There was a dire need to change the contours of the debate away from the BJP-RSS terror network & the statement that was made by the Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde. This terror attack will lessen the heat on the RSS-BJP brigade. Also it was in the background of the Shinde remark on RSS terror, that the Government went ahead & murdered Afzal Guru. This card was aimed at the General Elections of 2014, where the Congress is aiming at the conservative Hindu vote, whilst knowing that the liberal secular Hindu vote is safely in the bag, whilst the Minorities have nowhere to go, with Modi's dark shadow loomimng large. Yes, it was not a hanging, it was sheer murder & more & more voices across the country were being raised. Thus now this terror attack in Hyderabad will deal with all these issues.

And Hyderabad has been marked out as the target for the fact that since the last few months, it is this city that has emerged as the most communally sensitive due to the Charminar-Temple dispute & the infamous Akbaruddin Owaisi statement. Thus it will be easy to portray the handiwork of ‘Sleeper Cells’ of disgruntled Muslim youth, who will begin to be picked up from the lanes of this city. Most of the unfortunate victims will be police informers & petty criminals who will be entrapped into owning up for this terror attack. Also the National Investigation Agency has stated that the Mecca Masjid terror attack was the handiwork of RSS related terror cells such as the Abhinav Bharat & the Sanatan Sanstha, even whilst the falsely accussed Mulsim youth have been found to be innocent & thus too Hyderabad has been targeted.

On our part, we have to continue to persevere with analysing & exposing the politics of terror, which has now become a perverse gory art-form in the hands of the ruling elite. The politics of communal riots & terror are part of state-craft & a strategy used to control & manipulate entire populations. The agenda is to create a perpetual state of fear & a climate of chaos & confusion, thus ensuring that the exploitation & oppression carry on with the least resistance of the masses, who will remain divided along communal fault-lines. But the people will see through these devious designs, though there is a lot of work to be done, a path strewn with struggle.


--
Feroze Mithiborwala

Former 60 Minutes consultant says Burgas bus bombing a fabrication

Friday February 15th   Big News Network

CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts - The Bulgarian government earlier this month made a mockery of its political independence by publicly implicating Lebanon's Hezbollah in last year's attack on an Israeli bus in the resort city of Burgas, despite the fact that its "official investigation is still going on".

Sofia has yet to make an official announcement and there is an absence of trustworthy evidence to back the claim.

Under pressure for months by Washington and Tel Aviv to name Hezbollah as the culprit for the attack that killed five Israelis and a Bulgarian bus driver, as well as the terrorist carrying the bomb, Sofia has appeased Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who within half hour of the bombing last July publicly pointed the finger at Hezbollah and Iran.

Unsurprisingly, Netanyahu was extremely gratified by the news from Sofia and wasted no time in calling on Europeans to put Hezbollah on their list of terrorist organizations, a significant move that would likely exacerbate the present civil rights of Muslims in Europe, particularly those who are involved in charitable fund raising for Hezbollah's plethora of social welfare services in Lebanon.
The US government likewise conveniently interpreted as "conclusive" the preliminary finding in the Burgas investigation that the "military formation of Hezbollah might be involved" in that attack, to paraphrase carefully chosen words from Bulgarian Interior Minister Tsvetan Tsvetanov.

According to a Bulgarian expert, Professor Vladimir Chukov, Tsvetanov made a "hybrid statement" that "like Britain" makes the distinction between Hezbollah as a group and its "military wing". "This is a hybrid situation that goes on to suggest that there is little chance that Bulgaria will name Hezbollah and Iran as culprits," Professor Chukov has told the Bulgarian media.

Tell that to the mainstream media that wasted no time in its avalanche of reports that Bulgaria has implicated Hezbollah in the Burgas bombing. Case in point, in the various reports in the Wall Street Journal, London's Guardian, BBC, etc, there is virtually no mention of the fact that there is no official position of the Bulgarian government as of yet, and that the investigation is still on-going. According to Professor Chukov, the interior ministry's news leak was meant simply as "a test". Yet by all indications this is a poor and politically motivated move by an official of the Bulgarian government.

"It is obvious that Bulgaria's government has chosen a political approach and is only repeating the interpretation alleged by Israel on the very next day following the attack, when the investigation had not even started," said Sergey Stanishev, the head of Bulgarian Socialist Party, who is also the Chair of Party of European Socialists. "The investigation is currently under way and there is no way one can be talking about decisive evidence regarding the direct perpetrators, much less regarding the organization that is behind this tragic event ... This is absolutely unjustified in view of national security and the risks that are taken with respect to people in Bulgaria."

There is no dearth of suspicion in Bulgaria and beyond that the government official's statement that the bombing "was most likely" the work of Hezbollah militants and that there are "obvious links" to Hezbollah is based less on hard facts and more on external political pressure. According to Minister Tsvetanov, two individuals - one Canadian and the other Australian - who have lived in Lebanon since 2006 and 2010 respectively, have been linked to the attack and "there is data showing" their "obvious links to Lebanon."

Tsvetanov's statements are backed by Rob Wainwright, the director of Europol, claiming that there is "reasonable assumption" based on "forensic evidence, intelligence sources and patterns in past attacks" that "point to Hezbollah's involvement." Not so according to Stanishev, who has labeled as "poor evidence" the data cited by officials to point accusatory fingers at Hezbollah. In fact, there is a great deal of contrary evidence to suggest the attack was a carefully orchestrated Israeli "false flag" operation aimed at smearing Hezbollah and Iran and pressuring the European Union to brand Hezbollah as a terrorist organization.

The distinct possibility of an Israeli 'false flag' operation can be garnered by a careful and methodical examination of the public information, including the photographs, amateur videos and instant reports on the bus attack that occurred at exactly 5:30 pm last July 18, on the anniversary of the 1994 bombing in Argentina that Israel insists was the work of Iran and Hezbollah. That was perfect timing for Israel's propaganda machine.

As stated in this author's investigative article written immediately after the bus attack, there are at least 10 valid reasons to question the official story that a busload of Israeli tourists was the target of a terrorist bombing. Lest we forget, the autopsy results in Sofia have shown that the dead terrorist was "white and had light eyes" and initially was identified as a member of al-Qaeda, much to the chagrin of Israelis who have shown zero interest in any suspect other than Hezbollah-Iran.

To reiterate the gist of this author's own probe of this matter, a good deal of evidence exists that suggest the targeted bus was empty and the only passengers hurt were inside the adjacent bus and received light injuries.

This author has carefully examined dozens upon dozens of photographs of the Israeli tourists in question, who no doubt would have received much worse facial and other bodily injuries if they were inside the targeted bus. After all, the severed head of the bomber had been discovered some 60 meters away from the bus and an instant video shows the bus in full flames, ie, impossible for the majority of 42 purported passengers, especially the elderly females seen on stretchers en route to the hospital in various photos, to escape with little or no bodily harm, thus warranting the following 10 questions:

1. Why the amateur video of the bus taken within seconds of the explosion doesn't show anyone jumping down the bus?

2. Why so many passengers survived with only light hand and foot injuries in an explosion involving (according to the Bulgarian officials) three kilograms of TNT in front of the bus?

3. Why did the Israeli group known as Zakar appear immediately on the site and collected the bodies of the dead, per several images, when this should have been done by Bulgarians? Why was this group at the airport at that time? And where were the Bulgarian security officials during the whole time monopolized by the Zakar individuals (in yellow uniforms)? Indeed, the fact that the Bulgarians allowed the Zakar all over the crime scene and move the dead victims (who were then frisked quickly to Israel) speaks volumes about the travesty of police investigation in Bulgaria.

4. Why did the bomb kill the Israelis sitting in the back of the bus (per reports in the Israeli media) while simultaneously killing the bus driver in the front and leaving the vast majority of bus passengers only lightly harmed?

5. Why have some bus witnesses told the media that they tried to get out through the front door but found it locked and managed to get out through a "hole on the side" when both the videos and reports indicate an instant fire following the explosion engulfing the bus?

6. Why is there no report of any injuries to the bus driver in the next bus, which sustained major damage especially on the driver's side? Could the bus driver killed be the one in the second bus?

7. Why was there no extra security precaution even though according to the Israeli media prior to the landing of Israeli passengers the tour company had received a call that they would be "greeted with two bombs"?

8. Why was the trunk of the targeted bus empty and no sign of any luggage (per numerous images that also show the inside of the bus and the absence of any section for luggage contrary to the claim of one of the Israeli passengers who is quoted widely)?

9. Why did the passport and license of purported terrorist remain intact despite the raging fire in the bus?

10. Why did Israel rush all the passengers back to Israel early next morning instead of allowing the Bulgarian investigators to interview them? After all, Israel made no similar attempt to protect the lives of thousands of other Israeli tourists vacationing in Burgas, bottom line since it had no real worries about any terrorist attack against them after having pulled off its spectacular 'false flag' that must surely be a source of current pride among its Mossad intelligence officials.

Mossad agents must be patting themselves on the shoulder now for a job well-done, but then again their script perhaps was too neatly executed, given Netanyahu's instant finger toward Hezbollah and Iran, or the widespread use of a replica bus on full flame, which on closer examination shows to be different from the actual targeted bus.

The Israelis have now mastered the art of political manipulation and their latest victory in Bulgaria simply educates us about why they are ahead of the game and keep winning the battle for the world public opinion.

(The writer Kaveh L Afrasiabi, PhD, has worked as a consultant to CBS's "60 Minutes" and has appeared on CNN, MSNBC, Voice of America, and Al-Jazeera. He is a regular contributor to The New York Times, International Herald Tribune, Boston Globe, San Francisco Chronicle, Global Dialogue, and Asia Times. Afrasiabi is the author of After Khomeini: New Directions in Iran's Foreign Policy (Westview Press). He is author of Reading In Iran Foreign Policy After September 11 (BookSurge Publishing, October 23, 2008) and Looking for Rights at Harvard. His latest book is UN Management Reform: Selected Articles and Interviews on United Nations CreateSpace (November 12, 2011).

9/11 follow-ups were inside jobs too

The US government admits that this anthrax letter was sent by a non-Muslim American germ warfare scientist. But they're covering up the identity of the Battelle Laboratories CIA-Mossad team that was responsible.

The 9/11-follow-up attacks, obviously coordinated by the same people that brought us 9/11, include:

* The anthrax mailings, which the US government now admits were false-flag attacks designed to demonize Muslims and convince Americans that "Israel's enemies are America's enemies."

* The Bali bombing of October 12th, 2002, which slaughtered Australian tourists and brought Australia into the phony "war on terror." A miniature nuclear weapon must have been used, given the size of the crater, and all the evidence points toward Israel as the culprit.

* The Casablanca bombings of May 16th, 2003, were designed to demonize the peaceful, democratic Islamist opposition which had been on the verge of taking over the country and ending the US/Zionist-sponsored monarchy.

* The Madrid bombings of March 11th, 2004 (exactly 911 days after 9/11), which the Spanish people immediately recognized as a false-flag attack, causing them to hand the complicit government a huge defeat in the subsequent elections.

* The Beslan massacre of September 2004, which the Russian government blamed on a "foreign intelligence agency."

* The London bombings of 7/7/2005 - a "terror drill gone live" and proven inside job.

* The Mumbai train bombings of July 11th 2006, followed by the attacks of 11/26/2008. (See Feroze Mithiborwala's article David Colemann Headley Is A CIA-FBI Agent.)

* The Mossad's massacre of the next generation of Norwegian pro-Palestine leaders on 11/26/11 - exactly three years to the day after the second Mumbai attack. (What's with all these elevens?!)

The wave of false-flag terror unleashed by 9/11 is a global problem, not just an American one. Please support the efforts of Italy's Chief Justice Imposimato to prosecute these crimes, starting with 9/11, in the International Criminal Court.

"Million Muslim march" to US capitol on 9/11/2013!

Support the Million Muslim March - join the FaceBook page!  (Non-Muslim supporters welcome!)

The vast majority of Muslims, both in the USA and worldwide, 
do not accept the official story of 9/11.

Are Muslims terrorists?

by Isa Hodge, American Muslim Political Action Committee

On September 11th 2001 the tragic events in New York and Washington put all Muslims on trial. Politicians and media outlets spread Islamophobia to the American public. They created fear and hatred for every Muslim man with a beard, every Muslim woman with a head scarf, or anyone speaking a foreign language.

The word “terrorist” became synonymous with Muslims and no one else. According to my research, the definition of terrorism changed on 9/11. The media brandished this ugly word in an orchestrated smear campaign against 1.6 billion Muslims, using techniques designed to manipulate audience emotions.

A terrorist is defined in Merriam-Webster's © 2000 as : “a person or a group of people who use the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.” But after 9/11 the New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy © 2005 defines it as: “Acts of violence committed by groups that view themselves as victimized by some notable historical wrong. They stage unexpected attacks on civilian targets, including embassies and airliners, with the aim of sowing fear and confusion.”

In reality, terrorism is not specific to one group or another; it is sometimes hard to distinguish who is and who isn’t a terrorist. As Gearld Spencer wrote in his book “Harry’s Game” (1975): “ One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”

The word terrorist isn’t about Muslims; it describes a small minority of people from all races and religious beliefs.

At first, the accusation was: “All Muslims are terrorists.” When the media who made this statement realized no one in their right mind would believe that all 1.6 billion Muslims in the world could be terrorists, they reversed their statement to sound more objective and fair: “All Muslims may not be terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims.”

Really?

Someone sympathetic to Islam might respond with an example of Timothy McVeigh or the KKK. Yet the average American will continue to watch the mainstream media day in, day out and see pictures of “Muslim terrorists” flashed across the screen or spoken about for hours on the radio.

This is Anders Behring Breivik who on July 22nd 2011 dressed as a policeman and set off a series of explosions with a fully automatic rifle killing 93 people in Oslo Norway. Breivik's online 1500 page manifesto clearly stated his motives for this, as every media outlet called it, “murderous rampage” or “random act of violence” (not terrorism or terror attacks): his hatred of the “Muslimization” of his country had gone too far and he was calling on all conservative Christians to start the 4th Christian Crusade. He advocated deadlier attacks including ones involving the use of Weapons Of Mass Destruction, as reported on ABC World News on July 25th 2011.

So how does the threat from Breivik's "Christian terrorism" compare to the threat from "Muslim terrorism"?

The truth is that Muslims commit very little terrorism, compared to other groups. According to the FBI database there have been 318 terrorist incidents in the US from 1980-2005. That includes 209 bombings and 43 arson. Out of those incidents, 42% were committed by Latino groups, 24% by Extreme Left Wing groups, 7% by Jewish Extremists, 6% by Muslim Extremists, and 5% by Communists.

Also not a single U.S. civilian has been killed by Muslim extremists since 9/11. And only three out of 83 acts of terrorism between 9/11 and 2009 were done by Muslim extremists. Most were by animal rights and environmental activists.

Remember the quote “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter"? In 1985, then-President Ronald Reagan received a group of bearded men wearing turbans and looking very mean. After the meeting Reagan said: “These are the moral equivalent of America’s founding fathers.”

The men the President was speaking about were the Afghan Mujahiddin now known as Al Qaeda.

 You may be reluctant to consider the Founding Fathers as terrorists. But their violence was intended to frighten or terrorize enemies. As Ted Robert Gurr writes in Violence in America: Protest, Rebellion, Reform: “Physical violence was commonly used and some groups used torture and lynchings to intimidate and punish Loyalists.”

We as Americans don’t see these as acts of terrorism, but as the acts of freedom fighters, even though England was the ruling government at that time. By today standards they would be terrorists. According to the 2005 definition discussed earlier and The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85) terrorism is "the unlawful use of force and violence ... to intimidate or coerce a government ... in furtherance of political or social objectives.”

So what does Islam say about terrorism?  At the time the Qur'an was revealed (7th century A.D.), there was no United Nations or Amnesty International to keep the peace or expose injustice. Inter-tribal violence and vengeance were commonplace. Nevertheless, the Qur'an repeatedly urges forgiveness and restraint, and warns believers not to "transgress" or become "oppressors." For example:  Chapter 6 verse 151 "...and do NOT take any Human being's life - the life which God has declared to be sacred - otherwise than in pursuit of justice: this has He enjoined upon you so that you might use your reason!”   The Quran clearly forbids us to take any human being's life either Muslim or non-Muslim, unless it be “in pursuit of justice” meaning punishing someone for committing murder or in self defense.

So why do alleged Muslim terrorists usually receive the most coverage despite the fact that they are near the bottom of the list when it comes to terrorist activity - and their religion forbids terrorism?

 Now that the facts are clear, do you think anyone would dare to rephrase the statement and end with “almost all terrorists are…” Latinos, leftists, environmentalists, Christians, Sikhs or Jews? I doubt it. This twisted logic is only applied to Muslims, not anyone else. So next time you hear of a “terrorist,” think of the facts behind the perceptions, not the images from the media infiltrating your mind. As a famous statement goes: “Image is everything.” Indeed, everything but the truth.

India's false-flag follies continue: Journalist and Iranians were innocent patsies

Almost all of India's "radical Muslim terror" has been exposed as radical Hindu-Zionist false-flag terror designed to fan the flames of the Zionists' global war on Islam.

  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.:

Israel bombs own embassy in Buenos Aires, March 17th, 1992, and then bombs the Jewish Mutual Building on July 18th, 1994, in failed efforts to implicate Iran

Former MI5 agent reveals: Israel bombed own embassy in London

Below is  the first  installment of Gareth Porter's three-part report.

-Kevin Barrett

Evidence in Delhi Embassy Bombing Suggests Journalist Was Framed

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/

Al-CIA-duh exposed!

Who are Al Qaeda's enemies?

By Elias Davidsson
August 23, 2012

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. 

End

Elias Davidsson, born in Occupied Palestine to parents who escaped the Nazi holocaust, is a German-based musician and human rights activist. His research established years ago that there is no evidence that any Muslims were involved in hijacking any planes on September 11th, 2001, and that the 19 accused "9/11 hijackers" were innocent men defamed by the US government.

Anwar al-Awlaki: Murdered for telling the truth about false-flag terror?

Was Anwar al-Awlaki murdered for telling the truth?

Though never charged with any crime, al-Awlaki, an innocent US citizen and a gifted scholar, was murdered by terrorists posing as US government operatives. (We know they're terrorists, not the government, because by definition the US government is constrained to follow the Constitution; so if they kill US citizens without trial, they're not the government any more.)

Then al-Awlaki's equally innocent child was also murdered.

The cowardly terrorist scum who murder people with predator drones have got to be the sorriest excuses for human beings that ever existed.

Anwar al-Awlaki, a hero and a martyr, was supposedly killed for insisting that Muslims, like all other peoples, have the right to defend themselves against aggression.

But was that the real reason he was killed? Or could it be that he was murdered in part because he exposed the widespread use of false-flag terror by US forces?

All Terrorists Are Muslim, Except the 94% that Aren't

As I showed in my book Questioning the War on Terror: As a US citizen, your chances of being killed by a terrorist - any terrorist - are far lower than your chances of being struck by lightning. Yet the Zionist-dominated media keep whipping up fear of the statistically insignificant "terrorist threat" - and use that fear to stoke Islamophobia. In reality, however, Jewish-extremist terrorism is a bigger threat to Americans than Islamic-extremist terrorism...and Latinos and left-wingers are a vastly bigger threat than Jews and Muslims put together! If anyone you know is gullible enough to believe the "Muslim terrorist threat" propaganda they're getting from the Zionist-dominated media, please send them this story from loonwatch.com (excerpted below).

-Kevin Barrett, editor, Muslims for 9/11 Truth website

Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Soil by Group, From 1980 to 2005, According to FBI Database

From the story at Loonwatch.com

According to this data, there were more Jewish acts of terrorism within the United States than Islamic (7% vs 6%). These radical Jews committed acts of terrorism in the name of their religion. These were not terrorists who happened to be Jews; rather, they were extremist Jews who committed acts of terrorism based on their religious passions, just like Al-Qaeda and company.

Yet notice the disparity in media coverage between the two. It would indeed be very interesting to construct a corresponding pie chart that depicted the level of media coverage of each group.

* * *

The Islamophobes claim that Islam is intrinsically a terrorist religion. The proof? Well, just about every terrorist attack is Islamic, they retort. Unfortunately for them, that’s not quite true. More like six percent. Using their defunct logic, these right wingers ought now to conclude that nearly all acts of terrorism are committed by Latinos (or Jews). Let them dare say it…they couldn’t; it would be political and social suicide to say such a thing. Most Americans would shut down such talk as bigoted; yet, similar statements continue to be said of Islam, without any repercussions.

The Islamophobes live in a fantasy world where everyone is supposedly too “politically correct” to criticize Islam and Muslims. Yet, the reality is the exact opposite: you can get away with saying anything against the crescent. Can you imagine the reaction if I said that Latinos should be profiled because after all they are the ones who commit the most terrorism in the country?

* * *

Full article (well worth reading): All Terrorists are Muslims…Except the 94% that Aren’t - Loonwatch.com

See also:

Europol Report: All Terrorists Are Muslims...Except the 99.6% that Aren't

RAND report: Threat of homegrown jihadism exaggerated, Zero U.S. civilians killed since 9/11

Zionist media tries to blame Muslims for Islamophobe's act of terrorism

Why do Zionist-owned-and-operated outlets like the New York Times and Washington Post keep peddling the "Muslims are terrorists" blood libel? Could their fanatical loyalty to Israel, which can only survive by tricking the West into waging war on Zionism's enemies, have something to do with it? Congratulations to honest and independent Jewish observers like Glen Greenwald and Richard Silverstein (no relation to Larry, obviously!) who dare to speak out against the endless flood of Islamophobic mainstream media sewage. -KB

* * *

Saturday, Jul 23, 2011 07:24 ET

By Glenn Greenwald, Salon.com

The omnipotence of Al Qaeda and meaninglessness of "Terrorism"

AP

An injured woman is assisted from a damaged building in Oslo, Friday, after an explosion rocked the city.

(updated below - Update II)

For much of the day yesterday, the featured headline on The New York Times online front page strongly suggested that Muslims were responsible for the attacks on Oslo; that led to definitive statements on the BBC and elsewhere that Muslims were the culprits. The Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin wrote a whole column based on the assertion that Muslims were responsible, one that, as James Fallows notes, remains at the Post with no corrections or updates. The morning statement issued by President Obama -- "It's a reminder that the entire international community holds a stake in preventing this kind of terror from occurring" and "we have to work cooperatively together both on intelligence and in terms of prevention of these kinds of horrible attacks" -- appeared to assume, though (to its credit) did not overtly state, that the perpetrator was an international terrorist group.

But now it turns out that the alleged perpetrator wasn't from an international Muslim extremist group at all, but was rather a right-wing Norwegian nationalist with a history of anti-Muslim commentary and an affection for Muslim-hating blogs such as Pam Geller's Atlas Shrugged, Daniel Pipes, and Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch. Despite that, The New York Times is still working hard to pin some form of blame, even ultimate blame, on Muslim radicals (h/t sysprog):

Terrorism specialists said that even if the authorities ultimately ruled out Islamic terrorism as the cause of Friday’s assaults, other kinds of groups or individuals were mimicking Al Qaeda's brutality and multiple attacks.

"If it does turn out to be someone with more political motivations, it shows these groups are learning from what they see from Al Qaeda," said Brian Fishman, a counterterrorism researcher at the New America Foundation in Washington.

Al Qaeda is always to blame, even when it isn't, even when it's allegedly the work of a Nordic, Muslim-hating, right-wing European nationalist. Of course, before Al Qaeda, nobody ever thought to detonate bombs in government buildings or go on indiscriminate, politically motivated shooting rampages. The NYT speculates that amonium nitrate fertilizer may have been used to make the bomb because the suspect, Anders Behring Breivik, owned a farming-related business and thus could have access to that material; of course nobody would have ever thought of using that substance to make a massive bomb had it not been for Al Qaeda. So all this proves once again what a menacing threat radical Islam is.

Then there's this extraordinarily revealing passage from the NYT -- first noticed by Richard Silverstein -- explaining why the paper originally reported what it did:

Initial reports focused on the possibility of Islamic militants, in particular Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami, or Helpers of the Global Jihad, cited by some analysts as claiming responsibility for the attacks. American officials said the group was previously unknown and might not even exist.

There was ample reason for concern that terrorists might be responsible.

In other words, now that we know the alleged perpetrator is not Muslim, we know -- by definition -- that Terrorists are not responsible; conversely, when we thought Muslims were responsible, that meant -- also by definition -- that it was an act of Terrorism. As Silverstein put it:

How's that again? Are the only terrorists in the world Muslim? If so, what do we call a right-wing nationalist capable of planting major bombs and mowing down scores of people for the sake of the greater glory of his cause? If even a liberal newspaper like the Times can't call this guy a terrorist, what does that say about the mindset of the western world?

What it says is what we've seen repeatedly: that Terrorism has no objective meaning and, at least in American political discourse, has come functionally to mean: violence committed by Muslims whom the West dislikes, no matter the cause or the target. Indeed, in many (though not all) media circles, discussion of the Oslo attack quickly morphed from this is Terrorism (when it was believed Muslims did it) to no, this isn't Terrorism, just extremism (once it became likely that Muslims didn't). As Maz Hussain -- whose lengthy Twitter commentary on this event yesterday was superb and well worth reading -- put it:

That Terrorism means nothing more than violence committed by Muslims whom the West dislikes has been proven repeatedly. When an airplane was flown into an IRS building in Austin, Texas, it was immediately proclaimed to be Terrorism, until it was revealed that the attacker was a white, non-Muslim, American anti-tax advocate with a series of domestic political grievances. The U.S. and its allies can, by definition, never commit Terrorism even when it is beyond question that the purpose of their violence is to terrorize civilian populations into submission. Conversely, Muslims who attack purely military targets -- even if the target is an invading army in their own countries -- are, by definition, Terrorists. That is why, as NYU's Remi Brulin has extensively documented, Terrorism is the most meaningless, and therefore the most manipulated, word in the English language. Yesterday provided yet another sterling example.

One last question: if, as preliminary evidence suggests, it turns out that Breivik was "inspired" by the extremist hatemongering rantings of Geller, Pipes and friends, will their groups be deemed Terrorist organizations such that any involvement with them could constitute the criminal offense of material support to Terrorism? Will those extremist polemicists inspiring Terrorist violence receive the Anwar Awlaki treatment of being put on an assassination hit list without due process? Will tall, blond, Nordic-looking males now receive extra scrutiny at airports and other locales, and will those having any involvement with those right-wing, Muslim-hating groups be secretly placed on no-fly lists? Or are those oppressive, extremist, lawless measures -- like the word Terrorism -- also reserved exclusively for Muslims?

UPDATE: The original version of the NYT article was even worse in this regard. As several people noted, here is what the article originally said (papers that carry NYT articles still have the original version):

Terrorism specialists said that even if the authorities ultimately ruled out terrorism as the cause of Friday's assaults, other kinds of groups or individuals were mimicking al-Qaida's signature brutality and multiple attacks.

"If it does turn out to be someone with more political motivations, it shows these groups are learning from what they see from al-Qaida," said Brian Fishman, a counterterrorism researcher at the New America Foundation in Washington.

Thus: if it turns out that the perpetrators weren't Muslim (but rather "someone with more political motivations" -- whatever that means: it presumably rests on the inane notion that Islamic radicals are motivated by religion, not political grievances), then it means that Terrorism, by definition, would be "ruled out" (one might think that the more politically-motivated an act of violence is, the more deserving it is of the Terrorism label, but this just proves that the defining feature of the word Terrorism is Muslim violence). The final version of the NYT article inserted the word "Islamic" before "terrorism" ("even if the authorities ultimately ruled out Islamic terrorism as the cause"), but -- as demonstrated above -- still preserved the necessary inference that only Muslims can be Terrorists. Meanwhile, in the world of reality, of 294 Terrorist attacks attempted or executed on European soil in 2009 as counted by the EU, a grand total of one -- 1 out of 294 -- was perpetrated by "Islamists."

UPDATE II: This article expertly traces and sets forth exactly how the "Muslims-did-it" myth was manufactured and then disseminated yesterday to the worldwide media, which predictably repeated it with little skepticism. What makes the article so valuable is that it names names: it points to the incestuous, self-regarding network of self-proclaimed U.S. Terrorism and foreign policy "experts" -- what the article accurately describes as "almost always white men and very often with military or government backgrounds," in this instance driven by "a case of an elite fanboy wanting to be the first to pass on leaked gadget specs" -- who so often shape these media stories and are uncritically presented as experts, even though they're drowning in bias, nationalism, ignorance, and shallow credentialism.

• 
  

New Year's Eve Church Bombing in Egypt Yet Another False-Flag by Islamophobes

One of the biggest sparks that set off the Egyptian revolution was blacked out of the US media.

That spark was widespread anger that Mubarak's regime collaborated with the Israeli Mossad to bomb a Coptic church in Alexandria on New Years Eve - and blame it on Muslims. The whole Middle East saw right through it immediately, and the Egyptian people's disgust was a big part of what led them to overthrow Mubarak.

False-flag terror only works on populations that don't understand it. The vast majority of Middle Eastern people know that 9/11 was an inside job. They have been on the receiving end of continuing Zionist false-flag terror for sixty years.

-KB

See:

Daily Kos: Egyptian bomb drops - Interior Minister threw it!
The Daily News Egypt: Prosecution investigates Interior Minister's alleged involvement in church attack
Press TV, Mossad Behind Egypt Church Blast
Jerusalem Post, Egyptian Lawyers Blame Israel for Church Bombing
IlLoubnan (Lebanese newspaper): Mufti Qabbani: "The assault is a criminal act with Zionist finger prints"
Muslim Brotherhood Hints Israel Behind Church Attack


* * *

From JT Waldron via Tony Gosling and UK-911-Truth:

http://weeklyintercept.blogspot.com/2011/02/new-years-eve-church-bombing-in-egypt.html
http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=154144#154144

Had it not been for the remarkable uprising in Egypt this last week and a half, the church bombing that killed 24 in Alexandria last New Year's Eve would easily serve as justification to fear Muslim extremists in the region. Instead, we have learned now that Habib el-Adly, former interior minister of Egypt, is a suspected mastermind in the deadly church attack with the intent to blame it on Islamists, escalate the Egyptian government's crackdown on them, and gain increased western support for the Egyptian regime.

The two patsies, Jundullah leader Mohammed Abdelhadi, and frequent prisoner and Muslim Brotherhood supporter Mohamed Khaled, were apparently set up to meet after the explosion by interior ministry officer Major Fathi Abdelwahid to evaluate the success of the attack. During their meeting, Major Fathi Abdelwahid and his security forces promptly arrested the patsies. This neat operation with the "suspects" in custody was suddenly upended when mass uprisings lead to the prison break. The two patsies fled to the British embassy in Cairo and reported that the plot was developed by Interior Minister Habib el-Adly.

Apparently, under el-Adly's orders, Major Fathi Abdelwahid recruited the Jundullah leader and the Muslim Brotherhood supporter to wire a car with explosives, hire a driver (Abdelrahman Ahmed Ali) to bring the explosives to the church, then detonate the bomb. The two escapees claim Major Fathi Abdelwahid detonated the bomb before driver Ahmed Ali could escape.
After this information hit the English embassy and various news outlets, Egypt's general prosecutor opened a probe on former Interior Minister Habib el-Adly's role in the bombing via proclamation 1450, which refers to British intelligence documents and points to the news reports sourcing a UK diplomat. This diplomat explained the reasons why Britain has insisted on the immediate departure of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and his regime, especially his interior ministry's security apparatus previously directed by el-Adly.

If the accusations are true, what do these developments mean?

1. Hosni Mubarak is a likely accomplice to this activity, because Habib el-Adly worked directly under Mubarak up until he was replaced on January 31, 2011 (the night of the explosion), as part of a cabinet reshuffle aimed at appeasing the 2011 Egyptian protests.

2. The U.S. must be aware of this development and were likely informed by English authorities once the patsies reached the embassy. England's strong stance against Mubarak must have weighed heavily with the U.S. leaders and this false flag attack had to be part of the conversation.

3. It is highly probable that Omar Suleiman was aware of these operations. Egypt's exterior security apparatus, the Egyptian General Intelligence Service, was run by Omar Suleiman since 1993 until his appointment as Vice President of Egypt two days before the explosion.

4. The operation suggests an ongoing campaign designed to foster fear of the Muslim Brotherhood within Egypt and throughout the world. If the government of Egypt has to kill its own citizens to convince the rest of the world to fear Muslims, that fear is likely exaggerated. This is consistent with reactions from Coptes in the area who do not seem to have bought the idea that the Muslim community has suddenly become hostile and dangerous. Apparently, the attack in Alexandria was not successful in achieving its goal of creating fear of Islamic extremists within Egypt.

5. This attack on a Christian church was described by Hosni Mubarak as an attack by unnamed foreign elements. It was meant as a suggestion that Al Qaeda or Hamas was somehow involved. Despite the absence of any cell affiliated to the label of Bin Laden, the minister presented the Gaza Strip as a true seedbed of terrorists more or less dependent on Hamas and Al-Qaida. This attack had the requisite ancillary elements meant to justify the siege against Gaza.

So far, U.S. news has remained silent over this story, but the official site for the Muslim Brotherhood has printed the story, Hamas has issued a press release in response to this story, various Arabic papers have printed their versions of the story and Ramzi Mamdouh, the prosecutor who issued proclamation 1450, has spoken with Al Jazeera.

Should the allegations be true, it would mean that the U.S. is throwing its endorsement behind a government that kills its own citizens in order to justify hatred of Islamists and escalate the Egyptian government's crackdown on its citizens.

J.T. Waldron

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=154144#154144

Reports from India: "Islamic extremist terror" a hoax staged by Islamophobes

"Terror Swami" Aseemanand has confessed to staging false-flag terror attacks that until now have been falsely blamed on Muslims.

BBC News: Hindu holy man Aseemanand in custody over India blasts

Related BBC stories:
Hindu radicals 'threaten India'
'Hindu terrorism' debate grips India
India army officer on bomb charge
Minister in Mumbai police furore
Dozens dead in India train blasts

An Indian court has remanded in custody a Hindu holy man accused of a string of bomb attacks previously thought to be the work of Muslim militants.

Swami Aseemanand allegedly admitted to placing bombs on a train to Pakistan, at a Sufi shrine and at a mosque.

He has also allegedly confessed to carrying out two assaults on the southern Indian town of Malegaon, which has a large Muslim population.

He has been remanded in custody for the four attacks until 27 January.

Police say that Mr Aseemanand gave them details of his role in the mosque attack in the city of Hyderabad in 2007 in addition to attacks on a graveyard in Malegaon and a Sufi shrine in Ajmer.

THE FOUR ATTACKS
February 2007: on the Samjhauta Express train
May 2007: on the Mecca Masjid mosque in Hyderabad
October 2007: Sufi shrine in the city of Ajmer
September 2008: Three bombs in the city of Malegaon

Several Muslim men were arrested for those attacks - and some reports said that they had been tortured. Most are still in custody.

Mr Aseemanand was arrested in November after being in hiding for two years, police said.
According to India's Tehelka magazine, which has obtained a copy of his 42-page confession, he told his interrogators that the attacks on Muslim places were in response to attacks by Islamist militants in India.

It quotes him as saying that many of those involved in the bombings were members of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) - the right-wing parent organisation of India's main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party.

The bomb attack on the Samjhauta (Friendship) Express train travelling from India to Pakistan in February 2007 killed 68 people. Many of the passengers who died in the incident were Pakistanis returning home.

The 2008 blast in the town of Malegaon killed seven people and left more than 100 injured. A female Hindu priest, Sadhwi Pragya Singh Thakur, and a serving Indian army officer were among 11 people who were arrested in connection with the attack.

In May 2007, at least 14 people were killed in an explosion during Friday prayers at the Mecca mosque in Hyderabad. It is one of India's biggest mosques, and there was rioting afterwards.
And in October 2007, a bomb attack on a famous Sufi Muslim shrine in the city of Ajmer - in the state of Rajasthan - killed two people.

Anger over leaks

Most of these blasts were initially blamed on local militant groups and several Muslim men were arrested for alleged involvement.

But correspondents say the police were unable to make much headway in their investigations.
Opposition politicians were angered recently after leaked diplomatic cables suggested Rahul Gandhi, widely tipped as a future Indian PM, believed Hindu radicals might pose a greater threat than Islamist militants.

According to Wikileaks, Mr Gandhi told a US envoy last year there was some support among Indian Muslims for militants such as Lashkar-e-Taiba.

But he told ambassador Timothy Roemer the greater threat could come from the growth of radical Hindu groups.

* * *

Flawed war on terror: Time to undo wrongs against Muslims

The author is Secretary General of Lok Janshakti Party in India. He explains how (Hindu extremist) Hinduvta/RSS terrorists backed by some Indian politicians and intelligence agencies staged false flag bombings and blamed them on Indian Muslim patsies, i.e. the typical Zionist trick like 9/11, 7/7, Madrid, London, Mumbai, etc.

In the aftermath of the bomb blasts at Ajmer Sharif Dargah (2006), Malegaon (2006), Mecca Masjid (2007) and Samjhauta Express (2007), our intelligence agencies claimed that these gruesome attacks were the handiwork of Islamist terrorist groups. The disclosures were followed by large-scale arrests of suspects -- predictably all of them Muslims. That was not all!

The intelligence agencies fed the media with detailed accounts of how the accused had planned the mass killings in cahoots with their Pakistani and Bangladeshi counterparts. As tangible evidence, Muslim men and even boys with beards and skull caps were paraded as the perpetrators of terror before an unquestioning media, and in turn some mischievous media men coloured the incidents with a communal hue. It was no surprise then that during this period, a vicious SMS proclaiming “all Muslims are not terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims” was widely circulated in a clear attempt to reinforce prejudices and further the divide between Hindus and Muslims in the country.

Biased war on terror and ordinary Muslims

The woes of the ordinary law-abiding Muslim have been compounded by these mindless acts of terror. Living as he is on the margins of society, discriminated against in the job market, in education, when seeking loans and even when looking for accommodation, he is now burdened with the stigma of being in tacit collusion with the terrorists. His commitment to the nation is being questioned because of the widespread belief, fuelled by the intelligence agencies and media that all terrorists were Muslims. Numerous Muslims have complained about being called “aatankvaadis” sometimes by their associates and sometimes even by strangers. An entire community is being punished for the crimes of an aberrant few. Scores of Muslims have been rounded up, detained without any proof of wrongdoing and tortured.

So insecure is the Muslim mindset that following every terror attack, we have the spectacle of Muslim leaders and celebrities of every hue condemning the barbaric attacks. Clearly the Muslim celebrity feels that unless he publicly condemns the terrorist acts, the general impression would be that he actually approves of these acts or was indifferent to them; perhaps at the back of their mind was the infamous statement of the former Prime Minister Vajpayee who almost justified the Gujarat riots 2002 by stating that the Muslim condemnation of Godhra incident was not loud enough: hence the loud protests. They tiresomely proclaim the universal truth that terrorists have no religion. And yet Muslims feel insecure and harried with every terrorist attack as they sense the country’s negative focus on them.
Now truth about Hindutva terror is out

But now the truth is out. Swami Aseemanand’s confession has finally and indubitably confirmed what Hemant Karkare had first exposed—the Hindutva nexus with terror. The brave Karkare’s investigations had sent shock waves through the nation and inevitably invited the wrath of known Muslim baiters such as Bal Thackeray and L.K. Advani. Despite the grave allegations against Sadhavi Pragya of inspiring the terror attacks, the President of a national party visited her in jail and came out strongly in her defense. But somehow the media and public at large did not seem too outraged by the open support given to such criminal, anti-national elements by leading functionaries of a national party. There is a lesson here somewhere. Would the nation at large be as tolerant if a Muslim leader had visited the perpetrator of the 26/11 attacks and spoken in his defense? Such a Muslim leader would most certainly have been pronounced an antinational. Clearly, there are dual standards in assessing actions of the dominant and minority communities respectively.

That the Hindutva terror network has spread far and wide is evident from the fact that apart from the Sadhavi, the Swami, myriad underworld figures, there is an army colonel involved in planning the attacks. For some strange reason there has hardly been any discernible public disquiet at revelations that Hindutva terrorists have executed a series of terrorist acts. However, it would be dangerous to dismiss the evil of Hindutva terror as a mere aberration or ‘the handiwork of a few hotheads’ when they should actually be regarded as monsters for the heinous acts committed. What is disturbing is that many misguided Indians believe that these mass murderers are giving Muslims a dose of their own medicine and therefore deserve commendation. Little do they realize that violence is a zero sum game. There are no winners in this awful expression of hate.

4 steps to undo wrongs against Muslims

There is no doubt that the fight against terrorism in this country is coloured with religious overtones. It is therefore essential that the government act firmly and without prejudice in stamping out this cancer.

(1) The first job of the government should be to unconditionally release all those Muslims detained in connection with the blasts admittedly authored by Aseemanand and his group. The government and its law enforcement agencies cannot possibly undo the hurt caused to the hundreds of Muslims who have been persecuted for no fault of theirs, but by releasing these innocents unconditionally, the government would be sending a message that a grievous wrong is being corrected.

(2) Our country has been extremely sensitive to victims of any form of devastation whether natural, social or accidental. While no amount of compensation can make up for the torture and harassment undergone by countless Muslims for crimes they knew nothing of, it is imperative that the government adequately compensate the victims and their families. Apart from monetary compensation jobs should be given to each victim or some members of his family.

(3) The law enforcement authorities have been merciless in dealing with Muslim organizations such as SIMI, IM… that are suspected of nurturing terrorists. While the government may have strong reasons for the stringent action taken, it is intriguing that there is no move to ban equally dangerous organizations like the RSS, VHP, Bajran Dal and Abhinav Bharat. Soft peddling on this issue would not only encourage these antinational groups to continue their criminal activities aimed at the minority community, but also heighten the sense of insecurity among Muslims. It was that great visionary, Nehru, who had sanctioned that by virtue of numbers as well as in other ways, it was the responsibility of the dominant community not to use its position in any way which might prejudice the secular ideal of the nation. If the fundamentalist outfits are not challenged and defeated, this country will continue to live in the shadow of terrorism.

(4) In the last two decades, innocent Muslims have suffered grievously at the hands of religious fundamentalist groups. The Mumbai pogrom of 1993, the Gujarat genocide of 2002 were not random killings but mass murder of a particular community, and both these ghastly happenings were at least as heinous as the dastardly Sikh Killings of 1984. Our Prime Minister rightly felt that the nation owed an apology to the Sikhs for that terrible act and it was indeed honourable of him to tender such an apology. In the last four years, scores of innocent Muslims have been rounded up, confined and tortured for bomb blasts engineered by fundamentalist Hindutva groups. Would it not be in the fitness of things for the Prime Minister to say sorry to the Muslims for the suffering that they have had to undergo for no fault of theirs?

(The author is Secretary General of Lok Janshakti Party. Email:
lokjanshaktiparty@gmail.com)

* * *

From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 8, Issue 2, Dated January 15, 2011

In the words of a zealot…

Swami Aseemanand’s chilling confession is the first legal evidence of RSS pracharaks’ involvement in the Samjhauta Express and 2006 Malegaon blasts. ASHISH KHETAN scoops the 42-page document that reveals a frightening story of hate and deliberate mayhem

ON 18 DECEMBER 2010, a team of CBI sleuths escorted an elderly Bengali man Naba Kumar Sarkar, 59 — popularly known as Swami Aseemanand — from Tihar jail to the Tis Hazari court in Delhi, where he was produced before metropolitan magistrate Deepak Dabas. Aseemanand is the key accused in the 2007 Mecca Masjid blast that killed nine people. This was his second court appearance in a span of little over 48 hours. On 16 December, Aseemanand had requested the magistrate to record his confession about his involvement in a string of terror attacks. He stated that he was making the confession without any fear, force, coercion or inducement.
In accordance with the law, the magistrate asked Aseemanand to reflect over his decision and sent him to judicial custody for two days — away from any police interference or influence.
On 18 December, Aseemanand returned, resolute. The magistrate asked everybody except his stenographer to leave his chamber. “I know I can be sentenced to the death penalty but I still want to make the confession,” Aseemanand said.

Over the next five hours, in an unprecedented move, Aseemanand laid bare an explosive story about the involvement of a few Hindutva leaders, including himself, in planning and executing a series of gruesome terror attacks. Over the past few years, several pieces of the Hindutva terror puzzle have slowly been falling into place — each piece corroborating and validating what has gone before. First, the arrest of Sadhvi Pragya Thakur, Dayanand Pandey, Lt Col Shrikant Purohit and others in 2008. The seizure of 37 audio tapes from Pandey’s laptop that featured all these people discussing their terror activities. And most recently, the Rajasthan ATS’ chargesheet on the 2007 Ajmer Sharif blast. Aseemanand’s confession, however, is likely to prove one of the most crucial pieces for investigative agencies.

Unlike police interrogation reports or confessions, under clause 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), confessions before a magistrate are considered legally admissible evidence. Aseemanand’s statement, therefore, is extremely crucial and will have serious ramifications.... (read the complete story here)