Can the US Government go to war in Syria if they are officially “shut”
By Dark Politricks
Not being an American I have no idea why you put up with your duopoly of parties controlling the stage. Over here in the UK we may have 3 main central parties but we also have Greens, Independents, Socialists, Nationalists, UKIP and so on.
These parties may never win the grand prize – the chance to kiss the feet of the US President and send our boys to die fighting wars that have nothing to do with us, but they are gaining traction in European and National polls. I only hope the same happens in the US.
What I want to know is this. If the Federal Government is officially “closed for business” and the Department of Defence is a Federal institution. How can any war with Syria happen now there is no Government and no $$$ in the kitty?
Is Israel be shitting it? Are they busy pulling strings and plopping secret million dollar bills into Congressmen purses. All to ensure they vote for a return to normal state of play: massive debt that can never be payed off, war, socialism for the rich all whilst fucking the poor?
Can the POTUS declare war on a nation when the Federal Government is official closed? Or can the POTUS under his national emergency acts, NDAA, PATRIOT CRAP ACT and all the other NAZI style acts enacted after 9.11 still have the power to overrule Congress and send your sons and daughters to die on another Middle Eastern battlefield for reasons they won’t actually reveal.
No mention of a Greater Israel. No mention of al-Qaeda being allies in at least 4 of the US wars in the last 30 years:
Afghanistan in the 80’s when bin-Laden was lauded as a hero freedom fighter.
Serbia in the 90’s when we went to war on the wrong side and instead helped the terrorist organisation known as the KLA. Who were also helped and funded by al-Qaeda. Kosovan gangs if non Europeans don’t know are now one of the biggest criminal enterprises known in Europe. Specialising in drugs and people smuggling.
Libya, when we recently rejected our new found friendship with Gaddafi to let ex Gitmo detainees and known al-Qaeda / LIFG terrorists kill, rape and plunder what was once Africa’s most successful country in terms of birth survival rates, education, health and many more factors that indicate a life worth living. What did we replace that with? Gangs of terrorists ruling regions, kidnapping Presidents, killing US ambassadors and summarily executing people they consider Gaddafi loyalists.
And of course Syria. Where the Axis of War has secretly been helping the Free Syrian Army and their Islamic brothers chop off heads, eat hearts and lungs and execute people who refuse to convert to Islam.
We don’t exactly have a good record when it comes to picking sides in wars and this is the best reason why we should be staying out of them unless the threat of invasion is imminent.
Therefore to all those people who have constantly said “Get the Government out my life” I say, well your now lucky enough to be living in your dream land.
I just hope that due to the US Government officially being shut and broke now, means they won’t be propping up evil dictators like those in Saudi Arabia, or funding al-CIAduh terrorists in their battles with ex dinner party guests.
Anti Syrian War Campaign – “I didn’t join the military to fight for al-Qaeda” #IdidntJoin #NoSyriaWar
By Dark Politricks
It looks like a new anti Syrian war campaign has been launched online and I urge every serving military member or veteran to support it if they don’t believe that their country should be fighting alongside al-Qaeda in Syria.
I have made article after article detailing how we are basically funding, supporting and fighting alongside al-Qaeda rebels from Libya to Syria. It now seems that many serving military feel the same. They don’t want to fight alongside the same people the US Government blame for terror attacks against the US people.
Since the Arab Spring started which is basically a US backed plot to cause de-stabilisation around the Middle East we have witnessed Libya, Tunisia and now Egypt turned into failed states. Syria and then Iran are next on the list.
Al-Qaeda, The Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic extremists like al-Nusra Front aim to, and have succeeded in some cases to control their own areas of the countries they are causing havoc in and in the countries already wiped clean with our help such as Libya and Egypt there is no functioning government to speak of.
The Libyan rebel commanders we supported with tax payers money are even people our Government once claimed were terrorists and some were even locked up in Gitmo such as Abdelhakim Belhaj the founder of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. This is the al-Qaeda linked group that ex British MI6 agent, David Shayler and two French reporters with links to ex-president Jacques Chirac claimed the British paid to assassinate Col. Gaddafi in 1996.
Why is it our leaders are so keen to back the heart eating, beheading, child killing nutters that are basically the same people who kill our own soldiers such as the horrible case of Lee Rigby in London?
How strange it is that terrorist are friends one minute then enemies the next. Their status changes so fast it is hard to know whether we are supposed to hate them or support them. Obama would certainly like us to support them in another illegal adventure in Syria.
As I wrote in my recent article “Are we ready to go to war with Russia over Syria” there is plenty of evidence that recent chemical attacks weren’t even carried out by the Assad regime as the mainstream propaganda would like us to believe. In fact there is more than enough evidence and credible witnesses who claim it was Syrian rebels who deployed the weapons, either by mistake because they didn’t know how to use them, or on purpose to blame on the Syrian regime.
Experts like John Hart, head of the Chemical and Biological Security Project at Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Gwyn Winfield, editor of CBRNe World magazine, which specialises in chemical weapons issues and even the Israeli paper Haaretz have cast doubts on the claims that the chemical weapons attack was an Assad job.
The fact that the British parliament voted against joining the US in any attack, a first that I know of, and that Russian President Vladimir Putin has called for Obama to present his evidence at the UN is a sign that many outside the axis of war believe there isn’t enough evidence to go to war over this. The problem is our war mongering leaders just don’t want to listen.
The mainstream media seems to be very quiet when it comes to evidence that points away from President Assad but even if he did carry out the attack are we really prepared to send our sons and daughters to fight alongside these Islamic nutters?
The mainstream media has been strangely quiet on all the Christians who are being killed, their churches and graveyards destroyed and the peril they will be in if we allow Islamic extremists to take over these countries.
President Assad may be a dictator, but Christians and Muslims have lived side by side in Syria for hundreds of years. The problem is he is not “our dictator” and the chemical weapons he supposedly used were not authorised by us. Not like during the Iraq / Iran war in which we didn’t kick up too much of a fuss when Saddam Hussein gassed thousands of Iranians with our knowledge.
We are now considering backing these various groups of Islamic extremists in Syria.
Both the al-Nusra Front and al-Qaeda rebels are fighting President Assad in their civil war and they want to establish an Islamic al-Qaeda state if successful. Do you really think they will be grateful for our support or are they just using us for their own ends. Do you really see them handing over any weapons that fall into their hands from NATO supplies after any war is over? They sure didn’t in Libya.
So if there is a campaign starting online I am all behind it. I hope as many soldiers from countries planning on fighting join it as possible.
Why the fuck would any US or NATO soldier for that matter want to fight on the same side as al-Qaeda. Weren’t they the whole reason this war on terror was started in the first place?
Anyone who knows anything realises the CIA control these rebels and they are used as the perfect patsies to de-stabilise countries so that we can enter on white horses as saviours to humanity. The sad thing is that we are no such thing, we are moral relativists who have no ethical boundaries when it comes to war. If there is money to be made or oil to be drilled then that is all the excuse we need.
I just hope this campaign catches on. Hashtags #IdidntJoin and #NoSyriaWarseem to be the ones to use when posting your own “I didn’t join the military to fight alongside al-Qaeda” photos on Twitter.
Here are just a few of the photos from the #IdidntJoin campaign.
America caught funding al-Qaeda, from day 1 to now, the history of deceit
By Dark Politricks
Most people who haven’t had their heads up their asses for the last decade have realised that something wasn’t quite right concerning our supposed “mortal enemy” al-Qaeda.
For those citizens soaked in mainstream propaganda and believers of everything the government says, al-Qaeda is the new Soviet Union.
They are North Korea and Iran combined with the possibility of a dirty nuke or two thrown into the mix.
They were the architects of 9.11 and the reason we have been at war for the past decade.
They are the reason some people are willing to give their lives fighting for “freedom” in Afghanistan or Iraq.
However for those people who know some history they have never been too far away from our intelligence agencies control. As Robin Cook the ex UK Home Secretary informed us after the London bombings in an article he wrote for the Guardian. Al-Qaeda are nothing more than a creation of the CIA.
“Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. al-Qaeda, literally “the database”, was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. ” – Robin Cook, The Guardian, 2005
Created as a pawn by Zbigniew Brzezinski to play on his Grand Chessboard. Al-Qaeda, or as they were known back then, the Mujahideen, were a group of CIA funded Islamic “freedom fighters” who were fighting the USA’s proxy war against the USSR during the 80’s. Designed to draw the Soviet Union into their very own Vietnam and sap the strength and morale from the conscript army, the clash of civilisations was never meant to be the west versus Islam but the atheist communists fighting the huge swathes of Islamic people contained within their old borders.
The Afghan war certainly did as the USA wanted and a decade was spent funding what we know now as al-Qaeda. Osama bin-Laden and other Islamic fighters were trained, funded and even praised by the USA back then as heroes and revolutionaries as they took out Soviet helicopters with American ground to air missiles and used the opium harvests to get the Soviet conscripts addicted and de-moralised whilst spending the profits on their war.
Ronald Reagan meets the Mujahideen / al-Qaeda rebels at the White House
The “Islamic Jihad” (or holy war against the Soviets) became an integral part of the CIA’s intelligence ploy. It was supported by the United States and Saudi Arabia, with a significant part of the funding generated from the Golden Crescent drug trade:
“In March 1985, President Reagan signed National Security Decision Directive 166 … [which] authorize[d] stepped-up covert military aid to the Mujahideen, and it made clear that the secret Afghan war had a new goal: to defeat Soviet troops in Afghanistan through covert action and encourage a Soviet withdrawal. The new covert U.S. assistance began with a dramatic increase in arms supplies — a steady rise to 65,000 tons annually by 1987 … as well as a “ceaseless stream” of CIA and Pentagon specialists who travelled to the secret headquarters of Pakistan’s ISI on the main road near Rawalpindi, Pakistan. There, the CIA specialists met with Pakistani intelligence officers to help plan operations for the Afghan rebels.” – Steve Coll, The Washington Post, July 19, 1992.
What is less known by many is that these close links between al-Qaeda and the west continued far after the end of the Afghan / Soviet war. The Mujahideen were recruited by the CIA from a large number of Muslim countries including jihadists from the Soviet Muslim republics.
Among these recruits was the leader of the Chechnya rebellion Shamil Basayev who in the immediate fall of the USSR led Chechnya’s first secessionist war against Russia. Shamil Basayev had links to US intelligence from the late 1980s. He was involved in the 1991 coup d’Etat which led to the break-up of the Soviet Union and was subsequently involved in Chechnya’s unilateral declaration of independence from the Russian Federation in November 1991.
During his training in Afghanistan, Shamil Basayev linked up with Saudi born veteran Mujahideen Commander “Al Khattab” who had fought as a volunteer in Afghanistan. Barely a few months after Basayev’s return to Grozny, Khattab was invited (early 1995) to set up an army base in Chechnya for the training of Mujahideen fighters. According to the BBC, Khattab’s posting to Chechnya had been “arranged through the Saudi-Arabian based [International] Islamic Relief Organisation, a militant religious organisation, funded by mosques and rich individuals which channeled funds into Chechnya”. – BBC, 29 September 1999.
Therefore it is no lie to suggest that the CIA and the west created and supported what was later known as al-Qaeda. In fact bin-Laden and his group were actually a very small organisation and when the time came to paint them as a bogey man it was apt that the CIA’s own book of jihadists would be the name for the new bogeyman under the bed.
The UK, as attested to by ex MI5 agent David Shayler, funded an al-Qaeda offshoot called the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) to assassinate Col. Gaddafi during the 90’s. His whistleblowing led to his imprisonment for breaking the official secrets act and the case rocked the front pages of the UK press for quite a time.
As reported by major UK papers the plot involved:
“..contacts between MI6 and a group of Middle Eastern plotters who tried unsuccessfully to blow up Gadaffi’s motorcade. The report, coded CX95/ 53452, was passed to senior Foreign Office officials. It revealed when and where the assassination attempt was due and said that at least 250 British-made weapons were distributed among the plotters. The four-page CX document was published on the California-based Yahoo! website. The Sunday Times has complied with a request by Rear-Admiral Nick Wilkinson, secretary of the government’s defence, press and broadcasting advisory committee, not to print the address of the website on which the CX report is published.” – Sunday Times, 13 February 2000
In fact we were so concerned about the dangers of the LIFG, al-Qaeda and bin-Laden that we even ignored an Interpol arrest warrant that was issued by Libya for bin-Laden and even helped linked terrorists evade capture by granting them political asylum.
“British intelligence paid large sums of money to an al-Qaeda cell in Libya in a doomed attempt to assassinate Colonel Gadaffi in 1996 and thwarted early attempts to bring Osama bin Laden to justice…. two French intelligence experts ……reveal that the first Interpol arrest warrant for bin Laden was issued by Libya in March 1998. According to journalist Guillaume Dasquié and Jean-Charles Brisard, an adviser to French President Jacques Chirac, British and US intelligence agencies buried the fact that the arrest warrant had come from Libya ……. Five months after the warrant was issued, al-Qaeda killed more than 200 people in the truck bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania…. The Libyan al-Qaeda cell included Anas al-Liby, who remains on the US government’s most wanted list with a reward of $25 million for his capture. He is wanted for his involvement in the African embassy bombings. Al-Liby was with bin Laden in Sudan before the al-Qaeda leader returned to Afghanistan in 1996. Astonishingly, despite suspicions that he was a high-level al-Qaeda operative, al-Liby was given political asylum in Britain and lived in Manchester until May of 2000” – The Observer, 2002.
Then there was the Kosovan war in the Balkans in which we decided to support the Islamic separatists against their Serbian government and fought alongside the al-Qaeda linked KLA. The Washington Times reported on reports from Janes Defence Review that:
“..the town of Tropoje, Albania was a”common staging area” for Bin Laden’s and the KLA’s forces, and thus “a center for Islamic terrorists.” US intelligence also acknowledged that Bin Ladin’s al-Qaeda had “both trained and financially supported” the Albanians, and that the Kosovo border had been infiltrated by Bosnian, Chechen and Afghan mujahedeen, in “…crossings (which) originated in neighboring Albania and, according to the reports, included parties of up to 50 men.” – Washington Times, 4th May 1999.
Lenard Cohen a professor of political science at Simon Fraser University stated that:
“The arrival in the Balkans of the so-called Afghan Arabs, who are from various Middle Eastern states and linked to al-Qaeda, began in 1992 soon after the war in Bosnia.”
Mujahedeen Fighters, who had fought in Afghanistan against the Soviet occupation in the 1980s later “migrated to Bosnia hoping to assist their Islamic brethren in a struggle against Serbian [and for a time] Croatian forces.”
Slobodan Milosevic actually tried to present this evidence at his trial in the Hague for war crimes and logically it seems strange that the western NATO forces were fighting alongside known terrorists against a Christian country. commenting on Milosevic’s evidence, James Bissett, an expert on Balkans affairs and a former Canadian ambassador to Yugoslavia stated that:
“Milosevic is right. There is no question of their participation in conflicts in the Balkans. It is very well documented.”
“Many members of the Kosovo Liberation Army were sent for training in terrorist camps in Afghanistan,”
So it was well-known that during the 90’s when al-Qaeda was starting to be pushed by the media as a worldwide terrorist organisation that we still had close links to this dangerous force. Were our western intelligence agencies actually in control of this terrorist group or were we only in control of key assets within al-Qaeda like bin-Laden who enabled us to pull their strings?
I don’t know but even after 9.11 when the world was up in arms at the group for supposedly attacking the USA in the most sophisticated terrorist attack known in history evidence emerged to show that we were still closely linked to the group.
Even worse it suggested we were even linked to the terrorists who had carried out the attacks! Were we funding them? Were they double-crossing us or did we allow them to carry out the attack to fulfil the aims prophesied in the Project for the New American Century document – Rebuilding America’s Defences.
Sibel Edmonds, an ex FBI translator, was gagged and prevented from telling the world what she knew. She has offered to break her silence on US mainstream news but oddly no news channel has taken her up on this offer. However we do know from her comments that she claims:
“With those groups, we had operations in Central Asia,” said former Turkish language translator Sibel Edmonds on Friday speaking on the radio program, the Mike Malloy Show. Sibel said the US maintained ‘intimate relations’ with bin Laden, and the Taliban, “all the way until that day of September 11.”
These ‘intimate relations’ included using bin Laden for ‘operations’ in Central Asia, including Xinjiang, China. These ‘operations’ involved using al-Qaida and the Taliban in the same manner “as we did during the Afghan and Soviet conflict,” that is, fighting ‘enemies’ via proxies. – Sibel Edmonds, Times of India, Aug 3rd 2009.
So the American government doesn’t want the close ties between the US government and al-Qaeda to be known otherwise they wouldn’t have gagged Sibel Edmonds. Also we know from investigations carried out after 9.11 that the Israeli government was closely following the 9.11 terrorists around the USA, even living doors away from them at times. If this is true then why didn’t they tell the USA, and if they did then did someone ignore their warning? Was this deliberate?
Even the staunch right wing, nationalistic and pro-war FOX News carried out a 4 part investigation into these Israeli spy rings. An investigation which was soon taken down from their website due to pressure by pro-Israeli pressure groups. You can read the full investigation on my site but key parts include:
“Since Sept. 11, more than 60 Israelis have been arrested or detained, either under the new patriot anti-terrorism law, or for immigration violations. A handful of active Israeli military were among those detained, according to investigators, who say some of the detainees also failed polygraph questions when asked about alleged surveillance activities against and in the United States.”
“Fox News has learned that one group of Israelis, spotted in North Carolina recently, is suspected of keeping an apartment in California to spy on a group of Arabs who the United States is also investigating for links to terrorism. Numerous classified documents obtained by Fox News indicate that even prior to Sept. 11, as many as 140 other Israelis had been detained or arrested in a secretive and sprawling investigation into suspected espionage by Israelis in the United States.” – Carl Cameron investigated Israeli Spy Rings in the USA.
A German newspaper Die Zeit also reported on the Israeli spy ring that was following a number of the 9.11 hijackers around the USA. They also claim that the Mossad spy ring informed the USA about the terrorists and the planned attacks but that the warnings were ignored.
“According to a report of the French intelligence agency that Die Zeit examined, “according to the FBI, Arab terrorists and suspected terror cells lived in Phoenix, Arizona, as well as in Miami and Hollywood, Florida from December 2000 to April 2001 in direct proximity to the Israeli spy cells.”
“According to the report, the Mossad agents were interested in the leader of the terrorists, Mohammed Atta and his key accomplice, Marwan al-Shehi. Both lived in Hamburg before they settled in Hollywood, Florida in order to plan the attacks. A Mossad team was also operating in the same town. The leader, Hanan Serfati, had rented several dwellings. “One of Serfati’s apartments was located on the corner of 701st St. and 21st Ave. [sic] in Hollywood, right near the apartment of Atta and al-Shehi.”, French intelligence reported later. Everything indicates that the terrorists were constantly observed by the Israelis. The chief Israeli agent was staying right near the post office where the terrorists had a mailbox. The Mossad also had its sights on Atta’s accomplice Khalid al-Midhar, with whom the CIA was also familiar, but allowed to run free. The Mossad apparently warned their American counterparts several times about the terrorists, especially about al-Midhar. The American government later admitted that they had received such warnings prior to September 11.” – Die Zeit, October 14th 2002
So not only did the Americans and Israeli’s know about the 9.11 hijackers whereabouts but they were being closely monitored. One only has to read up on the ABLE Danger program to realise how much foreknowledge the US government had about the terror plot which makes one wonder with all this information why it wasn’t stopped before hand.
The 9.11 attacks relied on so much co-incidence and luck that I call it the biggest co-incidence theory in world history.
Not only were the hijackers lucky to take over four planes with rudimentary weapons but they managed to get on the flights even though many were known to the authorities. They also managed to expertly fly these huge planes perfectly into their targets, even supposedly managing to break known laws of physics by getting a Boeing 757 to fly 400mph a few feet from the ground without crashing first into the first floor of the Pentagon.
They also were so lucky that previously whenever a weak nose of a plane has hit a re-inforced concrete wall the plane has crumbled into dust and the wall remained. However on this day not only did they manage to make a plane punch through 3 re-enforced concrete walls at the Pentagon but they managed to carry out expert manoeuvres that even expert pilots claim couldn’t be made.
That’s not even mentioning the fact that they were lucky enough to carry out their attacks on a day that NORAD was carrying out pretend hijacking exercises which confused air traffic control and prevented planes being flown to stop the hijacked planes. Not only that but they were lucky enough to cause 3 high towered sky scrapers to explode into dust by only hitting two of their targets.
Therefore the hijackers were very, very lucky that they managed to have everything go their way on 9.11!
So it seems the west has been in close links with al-Qaeda all the way up to 9.11, but what about after? Haven’t we been fighting them in Afghanistan and Iraq for the past 10 years?
Well supposedly, but a news story by Tony Capaccio from Bloomberg News refers to a report to Congress by the Special Inspector for Afghan Reconstruction John Sopko. This report revealed that Sopko asked the US Army Suspension and Disbarment office to cancel 43 contracts to known Al Qaeda and Taliban supporters. They refused. The reason? The Suspension and Disbarment Office claims it would violate Al Qaeda and Taliban “due process rights.”
It seems President Obama is ignoring the law – again – and has decided to fund al-Qaeda linked rebels such as the al-Nusra Front who are busy cutting people’s heads off, stoning woman and massacring whole villages.
(Reuters) – President Barack Obama has signed a secret order authorizing U.S. support for rebels seeking to depose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his government, sources familiar with the matter said.
Obama’s order, approved earlier this year and known as an intelligence “finding,” broadly permits the CIA and other U.S. agencies to provide support that could help the rebels oust Assad. – Reuters 2012
These rebels are of a similar ilk to those we supported in the other throw of Col. Gaddafi. These rebels are still in control of large quantities of NATO supplied weapons paid for by western tax payers. The leaders of the mish mash of rebel groups in control of Libya now are busy fighting each other, locking up and executing people with dark skin and implementing Sharia law where they can. We really helped to modernise Libya with that bold move and it’s not as if they are even that grateful.
We have had British World War cemeteries destroyed by Islamic fundamentalists and the US ambassador Chris Stevens was murdered in an attack by jihadists not long back.
Senseless: A man kicks down headstones of 150 British servicemen killed in North Africa 70 years ago
Even the rebels at the time admitted they were being supported by al-Qaeda and had no problem with their brand of extremism
The Daily Telegraph ran a recent story in which an interview with the leader of the rebel army we are supporting in Libya‘s civil war admitted that he had recruited al-Qaeda fighters and called them not terrorists but good Muslims.
Mr al-Hasidi insisted his fighters “are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists,” but added that the “members of al-Qaeda are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader”.
Al-Qaeda’s own leaders even released statements in support of the rebels and also called for the other throw of Gaddafi who they felt was an obstacle to their ideal Islamic Caliphate.
It seems after Libya the rebels have flocked to Syria and whilst we debate arming these jihadists they are busy killing Christians, eating lungs and hearts on film and beheading everyone they can get their hands on.
And this isn’t the only massacre carried out by the anti-Assad forces we are so keen to back at any cost.
Earlier this year another massacre was filmed and showed Rebel Free Syrian Army (FSA) fighters capture a policeman who the FSA allege is a “Shabiha” or pro-regime militiaman, on July 31, 2012, as the rebels overran a police station in Aleppo.
The footage shows several bloodied men stripped down to their underwear being forced to kneel by a wall amidst a throng of excited, machine gun-touting men.
Once their captors open fire, the camera jerks away as the crowd momentarily disperses, seemingly unprepared for the nearly 40 seconds of uninterrupted shooting that follows. As the gunfire dies down, shouts of “Allahu Akbar!” resound as the once skittish onlookers victoriously raise their guns in the air, approaching what appears to be a pile of stripped-down corpses.
One of the victims has been identified as Ali Zein Al-Abidin Al-barri; the rebels accused him and his family of killing 15 FSA soldiers during a truce in Aleppo.
The rebels are certainly not afraid of using terrorism as a tactic in Syria. Not only have they massacred whole villages but they are not afraid of using huge Iraqi style car bombs to kill as many innocent people as possible.
Earlier this year the Free Syrian Army (supposedly moderate when compared to al-Nusra Front) admitted carrying out a car bombing attack in Damascus which killed the president’s defence minister, brother-in-law and the head of his crisis team whilst meeting at the national security headquarters.
“The president’s defence minister, brother-in-law and head of his crisis team were at a meeting at national security headquarters in Damascus…”
“The rebel Free Syrian Army (FSA) and a jihadist group calling itself Lord of the Martyrs Brigade both said they were behind the security headquarters bombing.”
“Security sources say the suspected bomber worked as a bodyguard for members of President Bashar al-Assad’s inner circle.”
As I have written on many occasions since we started our latest round of wars in the Middle East it seems very strange that we declare al-Qaeda to be our mortal enemy and spill our own soldiers blood and guts fighting them in certain parts of the world yet fund and arm them in countries we want to other throw such as Libya and Syria.
Not only are we basically supporting our own enemy because of “realpolitik” but it seems we have no moral line in the sand at all.
How can we declare al-Qaeda to be such an evil, all-powerful terrorist group, one in which we must lay down our civil liberties by the bucket load to defeat on one hand and yet support them and their offshoots on the other because they are fighting another one of our enemies?
It really does seem that the saying, the enemy of my enemy is my friend in this case and history shows that al-Qaeda is a lot more than just our enemy. In fact from the very beginning it seems they were created as our own group of Jihadists to be let off the leash whenever we want to de-stabilise an area or cause panic at home.
Want to implement a new liberty destroying law such as the PATRIOT ACT or the NDAA, then let’s get one of our patsies to get on a plane with a bomb in his pants. Oh he’s on a no-fly list, don’t worry we will just usher him through passport control and give him entry to the USA so that we can arrest him in a blaze of glory and scare everyone witless during Christmas.
It is very clear our political leaders have the moral backbone of jellyfish and their duplicity is beyond comprehension.
It should also be noted that the use of Chemical weapons was the “red line” Obama was willing to engage in the Syrian conflict if crossed. The problem seems to be that the line was crossed by our own side not President Assad.
So lets all be clear here as I summarise the points.
al-Qaeda was created by the CIA to fight the USSR in Afghanistan.
After the war we used al-Qaeda to fight the Russians in Chechnya and the Serbs in Kosovo.
British intelligence not only harboured al-Qaeda linked terrorists but funded them to carry out illegal assasination plots in Libya.
The first Interpol warrant issued for bin-Laden was ignored by western intelligence and bin-Laden was allowed to escape.
A well placed whistleblower, ex FBI agent Sibel Edmonds, claims the USA had intimate ties with al-Qaeda and bin-Laden right up to 9.11. Apparently they were used to fight proxy wars and to destabilise areas which the US had an interest in.
Even the 9.11 hijackers were monitored by Mossad spies, the US was warned about their plans, ABLE Danger had identified them but for some reason no action was taken.
9.11 was then used to justify the war on terror which has led to over a decade of war, the massive loss of liberties at home and the rise of the surveillance state. All under the auspices of protecting us from terrorism.
The risk of death from terrorism is minimal. You are 11,000 times more likely to die from a plane crash than you are from a terrorist attack.
Even though we are supposedly fighting al-Qaeda in Afghanistan we are at the same time funding the Taliban through re-construction programs.
We have recently armed and fought alongside al-Qaeda linked rebels to other throw Col. Gaddafi in Libya. Libya is now in a mess and run by Sharia law imposing rebels. Before our intervention Libya was one of the richest, healthiest and educated populations in Africa.
We are now funding and arming Syrian rebels that are linked to al-Qaeda. These rebels have been taped on numerous occasions beheading people, eating the lungs and hearts of victims, executing captured soldiers and massacring whole villages.
Even though President Assad is a dictator during his reign he has modernised the country and Christians and Muslims lived side by side in peace. Now the Islamic fundamentalists are killing Christians, using chemical weapons and imposing Sharia law.
Just like in Libya these terrorists are not likely to hand back any guns, rocket launchers and other weapons we provide them. It is more likely they will be used against Europeans and Americans in terrorist attacks.
It is also likely that any further terrorist attacks will be used to impose more draconian police state laws and Internet surveillance.
Here are some video’s which show the type of people we are supporting in our “war of terror”.
M16 was involved in the rendetion and torture of one of the top leaders in the new Libyan terrorist government that NATO helped to install.
Abdel Hakim Belhaj, a confirmed Libyan jihadist with links to al-Qaeda and who is currently a top military commander in the new Libyan government is suing both the MI6 and the British government, accusing them of complicity in his illegal rendition and alleged torture at their behest.
For those people who haven’t heard of the type of people who we as “humanitarians” helped other-throw Gaddafi for. Abdel Hakim Belhaj is the founder of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG).
After the Taliban took power in Kabul in 1996, the LIFG kept two training camps in Afghanistan; one of them, 30 kilometers north of Kabul – run by Abu Yahya – which was strictly for al-Qaeda-linked jihadis.
After 9/11, Abdel Belhaj moved to Pakistan and also to Iraq, where he befriended none other than hardcore terrorist and al-Qaeda beheading expert in Iraq Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
Then in 2003 Abdel Belhaj was arrested and taken extraordinary rendition-style, to a secret Bangkok prison, and duly tortured by the Americans.
Then in In 2004, the USA decided to send him as a gift to Libyan intelligence until he was freed by Saif Islam al-Gaddafi in March of 2010, along with other 211 terrorists.
Before being set free Abdel Belhaj and the other terrorists had to sign a 417-page confession in which they declared the jihad against Gaddafi illegal and finally over. Then I guess he just melted away until he became useful again to the globalists when they decided to other-throw the once foe, then friend again Col Gaddafi.
So as the BBC is now finally reporting only many months later than the alternative media #altnews, this rebel leader is now suing us for our actions before he became our ally and the top commander of our now free and liberal Libya.
A kind and loving place where women can walk with their heads held high without fear of rape, and all men are treated equal whether they be homosexual, Christian or Jew.
A place where our western human rights have been imported and taken on-board wholeheartedly, and a place any European or American would now willingly love to holiday to or maybe relocate for life – of course I kid. The place is a mess (we created) full of tribal infighting and hate seen only a few weeks ago when a World War II cemetery was destroyed by Libyan rebels.
Gaddafi may have been evil but I guess a lot of these people are just as evil and as Libya is now a tribal mess of revenge, death, rape and summary executions of anyone blacker than light brown.
It seems we have created the potential for more than a little blowback down the years. How that blowback bites us in the ass we shall have to wait and see but the new Libya is already sending fighters to Syria to fight Assad, another al-Qaeda backed war we seem to be on the same side with.
From the BBC News website today and reported on it’s news channels – only a few months later than reported on sites like this and others.
UK government ‘approved Abdel Hakim Belhaj’s rendition’
Mr Belhaj is now head of the Tripoli Military Council in the new Libya
The UK government approved the 2004 rendition of a terror suspect to the Gaddafi regime, the BBC can reveal.
A letter from an MI6 officer refers to Abdel Hakim Belhaj’s rendition to Libya. It congratulates the Libyans on the “safe arrival” of the “air cargo”.
Mr Belhaj says he was tortured in jail. Successive UK governments have denied complicity in rendition or torture.
But BBC correspondent Peter Taylor says he understands Mr Belhaj’s rendition was given ministerial approval.
However it is not clear at what level of government the decision was authorised.
The letter from the senior MI6 officer, Sir Mark Allen, to Col Gaddafi’s intelligence chief, Musa Kusa, was found last year in the rubble of Musa Kusa‘s headquarters, which were bombed by Nato.
As well as congratulating the Libyans on the arrival of the “cargo”, it points out that “the intelligence was British”.
The letter was sent in 2004 when Mr Belhaj was the leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.
MI5 believed the group was close to al-Qaeda and involved in recruiting young Muslims in Britain to fight in Iraq.
Our correspondent says it appears MI6 had discovered that Mr Belhaj was in Malaysia and about to head for London in the hope of obtaining political asylum.
MI6 informed its foreign intelligence partners, and as a result Mr Belhaj was intercepted in Bangkok, presumably by the CIA, and rendered to Libya.
Our correspondent says the letter suggests MI6 was complicit in Mr Belhaj’s illegal rendition and alleged torture in Libya – but that MI6 was not acting unilaterally.
He says his understanding is that MI6 obtained authorisation from the Labour government of the time for its action.
Jack Straw was the Labour Foreign Secretary in 2004 when the rendition took place. In an interview on BBC Radio 4 last year he said:
“We were opposed to unlawful rendition. We were opposed to any use of torture or similar methods. Not only did we not agree with it, we were not complicit in it and nor did we turn a blind eye to it.”
He added:
“No foreign secretary can know all the details of what its intelligence agencies are doing at any one time.”
His office told the BBC Mr Straw had nothing further to add in the light of the current allegations.
Legal action in UK
Mr Belhaj – now a senior military commander in the new Libya that Britain helped create – is suing MI6 and the British government, accusing them of complicity in his illegal rendition and alleged torture.
He says he believes he was rendered from Bangkok to Libya by the CIA.
The Metropolitan Police is also investigating his allegations.
Mr Belhaj worked with Nato as one of the leaders of the forces that helped overthrow Col Muammar Gaddafi.
But he claims that during his more than four years in prison he was interrogated by agents from countries including the UK and US.
He had been living in exile in Beijing after leading opposition to Col Gaddafi.
In 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron established a Detainee Inquiry into “whether Britain was implicated in the improper treatment of detainees, held by other countries, that may have occurred in the aftermath of 9/11”.
However, the inquiry was mothballed in January 2012 after the Metropolitan Police announced it was investigating Mr Belhaj’s claims.
Justice Secretary Ken Clarke said the government was committed to holding a judge-led inquiry once these were investigated.
Afghan Police and local residents stand around a mini van carrying the bodies of the victims who were killed by a US soldier
The question needs to be asked again and again and almost on a weekly if not daily basis – “why are we still fighting in Afghanistan?”
As the recent burning of the Korans and now the murderous rampage by a US solider shows, we are doing more harm than good by being there and the people of Afghanistan sure don’t want us “helping them” or whatever poor excuse we are using to justify our existence there propping up the corrupt Mayor of Kabul – someone most of the Stan sees as a US puppet up to his eyes in drug dealing and corruption.
The solider who went on the latest killing spree, murdering 16 women and children in the middle of the night, was obviously suffering some form of mental illness, probably from the multiple tours of duty expected by US soldiers nowadays.
Maybe it was PTSD that comes from witnessing your friends being blown to bits by IED’s. Or maybe he had become so desensitized from all the death, blood and guts that he’d have witnessed over his multiple tours that he just couldn’t function as a compassionate human being anymore.
It could happen to anyone. Physiological studies have proved it time and again.
The soldier had a traumatic brain injury at one point and had problems at home after his last deployment, officials told ABC News.
After returning from his last deployment in Iraq, he had difficulty reintegrating, according to the reports, but officials said he “worked through” those issues before deploying to Afghanistan.
He is accused of walking out of the Zangabad base in Kandahar’s Panjwai district early Sunday morning before going on his murderous spree. Nine children were among the dead.
What does it say about the state of mind of our troops in the Stan and all the other covert wars we are not supposed to be but are most definitely fighting around the world when they break down and go on murder sprees for fun, or kill kids and women because they have just witnessed a friend being injured?
When boys are brought up on computer games such as Call of Duty and Medal of Honour and trained from an early age to treat death and war as a game then it must come as quiet a shock to their senses when they actually enter a real war zone.
It must be a life changing experience when you have to hold your dying friend in your arms as he coughs up blood and brain matter and you know there is nothing you can do but look into his dying eyes and hold his hand wishing you hadn’t joined the army in the first place.
What does it feel like to see your best mates head or limbs ripped from their bodies as they step onto a hidden mine or shot from a snipers rifle through the eye exploding brain matter all over your face. How does that affect you as a human being?
How would you feel if you saw your friends, your brothers in arms, routinely killed and blown to smithereens whilst patrolling the Afghani villages all the while believing that you are “helping” the locals by weeding out Taliban and Terrorists.
Now reverse that.
How would you feel if you saw your best friend, mother, father or son brutally slaughtered in front of you for doing nothing more than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Killed for just sleeping in their beds and hoping for a better day. One in which a bomb doesn’t fall from the sky because some American drone controller things you and your donkey carrying food to your family looks like a Taliban “Terrorist” smuggling arms into Helmand Province.
Would you want revenge? Of course you would!
Would you feel the kind of rage and emotion that can turn the veil of civility that we all like to assume into a more base instinct still within us after million years of evolution. An instinct that can take a person from a well-mannered civil human being into a vicious animal intent on death within seconds?
I bet you would. I know I would. I have been there before.
I have seen friends about to be hospitalised for life and gone from a still silent person into a fighting machine prepared to suffer injury to protect my mate.
When you are in that state of mind you don’t feel the punches and kicks raining down on you. In fact you don’t feel anything. People have said that they have been shot multiple times and not even realised it until after the combat has finished. Adrenaline does that to you.
Is that how the solider in Afghanistan felt as he moved from room to room hunting for people to kill.
“I heard a gunshot. When I came out of my room, somebody entered our house,” a 26-year-old villager named Mohammad Zahir said.
“After that, I saw him moving to different areas of the house – like he was searching.” Mr Nazir’s father, unarmed, then took a few steps out of his bedroom. Then the soldier fired.
How do you imagine the Afghanistan citizens feel who have just suffered this outrage?
Are they not well within their rights to demand justice and vengeance for the act of barbarity inflicted on their wives and children?
Would you not expect the same if you were in their shoes?
The longer we stay in Afghanistan, the more of these incidents will occur.
We have already had torture of innocents at Bagram, the “kill squad” who killed civilians for jollies, the multiple instances of Korans being burned insulting millions of people’s religions by our callousness and carelessness.
We have had soldiers kill livestock for fun and now we have soldiers killing people for fun – is that just a logical progression or is it what our “leaders” want us to do. To dehumanize us and turn us into killing machines that can murder whole families of children and women without even a second thought?
The reason we went to war in Afghanistan is now over and has been for many years.
We killed bin-Laden – in fact he most certainly died a natural death in 2001 but whether you believe that or not is beside the point.
We are not fighting al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, they can be counted on one hand and even then they are probably all linked to black ops from various intelligence agencies. Used like Sibel Edmonds claims as a perfect excuse to cause instability in a region so that we can come in and restore “order”.
How much “order” exists in Afghanistan at the moment? Not much by the looks of things.
We are killing more civilians, less al-Qaeda (due to their not being there anymore) and creating more resentment, anger and people willing to fight for the Taliban with every drone attack and murder spree we go on.
“Anti-Government Elements increased their use of IEDs and suicide attacks against obvious civilian targets. In incidents where intended targets appeared to be military, those responsible for placing or detonating IEDs showed no regard for the presence of civilians and no evidence of distinguishing between civilian and military targets in violation of the international humanitarian law principles of distinction, precaution and proportionality. Anti-Government Elements also deliberately targeted and killed civilians not taking a direct part in hostilities, mainly individuals who supported, or were perceived as supporting the Government of Afghanistan or international military forces”
We are not fighting a “just war”. We went to war in the Stan after 9.11 because the Taliban were allowing al-Qaeda to train there.
The Taliban were willing to hand over bin-Laden and the other terrorists if only the US would provide some modicum of proof that bin-Laden and co were responsible for the attacks.
Did we? Of course not – we don’t need proof, not when the culprit has already been proved guilty in the court of public opinion and an expensive oil pipeline requires building.
Even without real proof and only doctored and false evidence including fake videos of bin-Laden and ones of him talking about 9.11 with his words mistranslated and taken out of context (something we have become experts at – see Iran wanting to wipe Israel off the map) we still waged war on a 7th century country.
Even with an interview with bin-Laden where he absolutely denies all involvement in the attacks of 9 .11 and actually according to Sibel Edmonds still was working closely with the CIA (I wonder what he was doing for them), we still went to war against a country that had not put one hijacker on the 9.11 planes.
They were mostly Saudi Arabian, still one of our best friends despite their awful human rights abuses, feudal system, mistreatment of women. But then they have oil and let us use their country as a base for our wars of aggression.
The war with al-Qaeda was won quite quickly and the Taliban sunk back into the shadows becoming the civilians they always were, biding their time waiting for the US to take their eye off the ball. They didn’t have to wait long.
As soon as another phony war in Iraq was set in motion the Taliban began the most successful tactic when fighting large powerful armies – guerilla combat and insurgency.
Civilians that are also your enemy are hard to fight as Vietnam proved.
With every civilian the US/UK axis of war killed another two or three Taliban supporters were formed.
We have basically killed so many civilians in that country that we are no longer fighting terrorists or even the Taliban but Afghani citizens.
We will never win this battle.
Therefore it comes down to a simple thought experiment and a question that I pose to you.
If China invaded the USA or UK and bombed the hell out of us before installing a corrupt heroin dealing regime in Washington or London what would we think – would we great them with open arms, as saviours coming to remove our existing corrupt leaders only to replace them with others that served different masters.
Would we be happy with a duplicitous regime that pretended to be pliant puppets of their foreign masters but at the same time supported the insurgency fighting them. Would you see the thousands of bombs dropping from planes and drones on your families weddings and funerals as the Chinese “helping to restore democracy” or as a great recruitment tool that made you want to fight the foreign invaders even more.
What if the Chinese kept burning bibles and going on killing sprees for fun. Throwing grenades into houses for a laugh and shooting up whole villages because they were drunk and suffering from PTSD. Would we forgive them with open arms?
What would you do if a Chinese soldier broke down your family home’s door in the middle of the night and killed your wife, kids and parents in front of you?
What if you escaped with your life from such a killing spree. Would you hand yourself over to Chinese troops or pick up a gun and fight the people who had ruined your life.
Would you still accept your new Chines overlords with open arms or would you find the nearest militia or band of rebels prepared to fight the invaders to regain their country and put your life on the line to gain revenge?
A new video has been released that shows the missile / plane hitting the Pentagon on 9.11.
The video is shot at a higher angle and I don’t know why it has taken this long to be released or if it has why I have not come across it before seeing it on an interview Gordon Duff did with Press TV the other week.
It seems very odd that someone would have this kind of very important footage and decide to keep it to themselves for so long.
I want to know the details of who shot it, why they didn’t release it earlier and what kind of links they have to either the government or anti-government pro 9.11 Truth groups, maybe they have none to either.
I have no way of verfifying whether it is real or not but it certainly looks real and it sure beats the only other previous video we have been shown from a Pentagon CCTV camera.
It seems strange that it comes on the 10th annivesary of the 9.11 attacks and it is either some kind of set-up or very weird co-incidence that a video of this magnitude would appear at this time.
A time that we have been supposedly fighting al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen whilst helping them beat an ex ally to become rulers and possessors of all Col Gaddafi’s military hardware, billions of cash and stockpile of WMD including enough poison gas to kill most London tube travellers.
Ten years of a rising Police State at home, a massive loss of liberties and for travellers a chance of a free sexual encounter with the TSA. And who can forget the “assassination” of Bin Laden where no photos before he was shot were released from the SEALS helmet cameras and of course his quick burial at sea like Blackbeard.
Nothing to see here, we’ve only just killed the person supposedly responsible for the last 10 years of war. Unlike the capture of Saddam Hussein there was no parade in front of cameras of the captured enemy and no glorified photos to show the world that the USA had finally succeeded in their decade old mission to hunt down the big bad bogey man.
Even the Liberal Democrats, the supposed protectors of freedom and liberty and the only main party in the UK that was officially against the Iraq war – supported the “humanitarian” intervention on one side of a civil war in an oil rich country and reneged on the only decent part of their manifesto that I actually supported e.g their Freedom Bill that became a “Heres some things we don’t mind you do” bill.
Literally the guts were ripped from the bill and smeared across the floor of parliament in a great show of disdain to all supporters of their hypocritical power hungry party that took their pieces of silver, ministers cars and luxury travel in return for all their principles and any future hope of a student voting for them.
So the 10 year anniversary of 9.11 is going to bring out a lot of documentaries discussing the day’s events and I can well imagine some of those straw men hit pieces the BBC like to do about “conspiracy theories” being the realm of loons and crazies as if ex Mossad Spies who freely admit carrying them out as official policy for Israel are just figments of our imagination.
So a video of this importance being released just before the anniversary is suspicious in my mind to say the least purely as I want to know why I and others haven’t seen it before.
There maybe a purely innocent explaination for this release but it is no lie to say that the 9.11 Truth movement has grown from strength to strength and during the ten years since that day the number of people who doubt the official story in at least one way has grown in the millions.
So this video of a plane or a missile hitting the Pentagon is a big event and we must remember that the Oxford definition of a missile is this:
an object which is forcibly propelled at a target, either by hand or from a mechanical weapon.
a weapon that is self-propelled or directed by remote control, carrying conventional or nuclear explosive.
Therefore a plane of any shape or size that was remotely or automatically controlled rather than flown by a pilot would in my mind at least count as a missile. This technology to fly a plane by remote control existed way before 9.11.
This is supposedly a big Boeing 757 plane that Gordon Duff claims he has spoken to people from Boeing that have reportedly claimed that a plane of that size would not be able to fly that fast and that low to the ground saying:
“We have engineers at Boeing the company that manufactured the plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon that say it couldn’t fly that fast, it can’t fly that low, it can’t make those turns and it couldn’t have been there,”
We also have the size of the hole left in the building.
Notice that there are no wing markings either side of the hole at all.
Even if the wings fell off of crunched up into infinity they would still have left some form of marking against the wall as they first hit the building. Even if it was just a dusty mark the length of a Boeing 757 wing but we find no such markings.
Notice how clean the walls are either side of the nice round hole in the first floor where wing marks should be. Not even a piece of brick dust out of place.
We also have the issue of falsified or real altitude data from the NTSB which has been analysed and shows a discrepancy in the height of Flight 757 at the time of its approach.
If the data is to be believed then the actual aircraft altitude was 300 feet higher than claimed and the plane didn’t hit the Pentagon. You can find details over at http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pentagon.html which has a detailed analysis of the flight recorder data.
This means either the data released to the public was falsified and someone left a mistake in by accident (or maybe they were sending a clue OR a big “fuck you”) or the actual plane flew over the building.
It certainly cannot mean that the plane hit the first floor. A Boeing 757 plane of this size supposedly flew at 400mph and only 30ft above the ground hitting the Pentagon as you can see from the photo at the very bottom of the first floor.
Whatever you believe about the 9.11 attacks and the attack at the Pentagon we now have another piece of the picture to slot in to all the other recently released videos and tape recordings.
We have witnesses prepared to testify who can’t and senior government figures ready to go public about what they know of the Bush Cheney axis of evil. The question is will we ever live to see the day when a proper inquiry into the attacks of 9.11 ever happens?
I haven’t really had time to digest the news that the longest game of hide and seek the world has ever known has abruptly come to an end with
yesterday’s news that Osama Bin Laden was shot dead in a night raid in Pakistan.
I have yet to see any pictures of his dead body so as far as I know they could have just shot a few holes through a look a like / body double
and then lied about the DNA test they supposedly carried out to prove it was him.
However I do have a few questions
a) Why was he buried so quickly and at sea like a Viking or Sailor? Was this to get rid of the body so no-one could independently verify it was him
or did they care so much about the worlds biggest super villains Islamic burial rights that they put those ahead of any other consideration?
b) Why haven’t any pictures been released of the body. Supposedly President Obama sat up late at night and a good old snuff movie night watching live as his special forces stormed the massive million dollar mansion Bin Laden was hiding out in (right next to a Pakistani Military Base) and had a good old chuckle as his troops murdered everyone inside including the woman Bin Laden was supposedly using as a human shield.
I can remember when Saddam Hussein was caught in his little hole that he was paraded for the press and then filmed as he swung his last few breaths on a rope on YouTube for millions to watch. Can we expect to see this “snuff” video on YouTube anytime soon and if not is it because the thought of watching US troops storm a building shooting and killing anything that moved would be just too untasteful to watch even for a public that has been de-sensitized so much by TV and movies over the years.
Surely a picture of Bin Laden‘s dead body is not too much to ask for?
c) Would it not have been better to catch him alive and prove to the world that
He was alive after all these years.
The US Troop had finally managed to find him and put him on trial for all his crimes proving that yes we are actually civilised and justice does not just mean murdering unarmed criminals no matter how evil they may be.
Get some kind of statement from him about how he managed to survive for so long with all his health problems, how he escaped the Tora Bora mountains when we had him surrounded and who in the Pakistani government was helping him hide out all these years.
Prove to all those people who have thought he was dead since 2001 that they were wrong and that the US hadn’t just dug him up from his 2001 grave.
d) Maybe some of these questions are ones that President Obama doesn’t want answered and maybe we will never find out for sure. One thing is for sure and that is the sudden killing of the worlds foremost hide and seek champion and arch super villain comes at the most perfect time for him.
With his poll ratings down, the US dollar tanking and the economy in a depression within a week he has silenced his critics on the right by producing his birth certificate as well as accomplishing the one task his predecessor George W Bush couldn’t do which was hunt down and kill Bin Laden. I wonder how his poll ratings look this morning?
e) Does this now mean our war on terror can be wound down? We went to war in Afghanistan supposedly because the Taliban were harbouring al-Qaeda terrorists who had commited the 9.11 attacks. Now that the architects of this crime have been killed or captured there is surely no need for the war to continue.
As President Karzai alluded to in his speech yesterday surely the fact that Bin Laden‘s hideout was in the center of Pakistan and right next to a military base infers that at a very high level at least members of the ISI, Pakistani Army or even the government itself were complicit in keeping Bin Laden hidden, and that actually the war on terror should be now re-focused to that country instead of his own.
Most of the people in Afghanistan haven’t even heard about 9.11 let alone know anything about al-Qaeda and most of the Taliban fighters are fighting the US/UK forces because
They see them as invaders who need repelling just like the dozens of armies that have been defeated before hand including the UK and Soviet armies.
They are out for revenge for all the weddings, funerals and “collateral damage” that have been incurred during the decade of drone attacks and murder squads killing for fun.
They pay better money than any other job going.
f) Most of the reports of Bin Laden’s demise came from Pakistani sources including ex premier President Benazir Bhutto and other high up ISI or army intelligence officers. Were they colluding in a “fake death” scenario to keep him alive or did they honestly believe he was dead. What about all the other intelligence reports from Israel and the FBI who also believed he was dead. Were they “in the know” so to speak and just trying to keep the knowledge of his whereabouts quiet so the ISI couldn’t tip him off?
g) Most importantly what does this mean for the “fake organisation” named al-Qaeda (or the base) now that it’s main figure head is supposedly dead. Will the US/UK forces continue their war in the Stan just for the hell of it because to most Americans the words Taliban and al-Qaeda can be interchangeable and are basically the same thing e.g. terrorists.
This is all I can think of at the moment but I am sure I will have more thoughts as the information rolls in.
I have not heard very much in the main stream media about how our intervention in Libya on the side of the rebel army has meant that we are now fighting alongside al-Qaeda, our supposed mortal enemy and supposedly the reason we have been at constant war for the last decade.
The Daily Telegraph ran a recent story in which an interview with the leader of the rebel army we are supporting in Libya‘s civil war admitted that he had recruited al-Qaeda fighters and called them not terrorists but good Muslims.
Mr al-Hasidi insisted his fighters “are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists,” but added that the “members of al-Qaeda are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader”.
Al-Qaeda’s own leaders have released statements in support of the rebels and have also called for the otherthrow of Gaddafi who they feel is an obstacle to their ideal Islamic Caliphate.
Abu Yahia al-Libi who is supposedly a commander of the main enemy in our “war on terror” claimed that after the fall of Egypt and Tunisia it was Libya‘s turn to fall and that “it would bring shame to the Libyan people if the strongman were allowed to die a peaceful death.”
When Col. Gaddafi claimed early on in the rebellion that the rebels were Al Qaeda terrorists the western media derided him as crazy and mad however it now seems that the evidence actually backs up these claims which makes the west’s involvement in an internal civil war all the more troubling.
On one side we have the typical strongman Arab leader. A reformed supporter of terrorists such as the IRA and PLO, who has provided western armament and oil companies with lots of money since he was famously rehabilitated by Tony Blair in the “deal in the desert” a few years back.
No matter how much of a despot Gaddafi may be, no matter how many people his police state apparatus may have kidnapped, tortured and killed and no matter how many civilians he may have already murdered there is a very good chance that we have picked the wrong side to support in this civil war.
The Middle East is currently ablaze with rebellion and we have countries including Bahrain, Yemen, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Iraq all dealing with protesters demanding more civil rights and democracy and often using deadly force to do so.
Yet it is only Libya in which we have decided to go that extra step from supporting the rights of people to protest to helping ferment a full blown rebellion by a portion of the country. What is it that makes Libya more deserving of our support than the thousands who have already died in Darfur or the current state orchestrated massacres in Yemen and Syria.
Why is the life of a Libyan worth more than the life of a Yemeni or Syrian?
Why do we risk the lives of our own armed forces in defence of one country yet another half dozen or so in the same region have to suffer on their own, without insurmountable air support and Tomahawk cruise missiles to defend their right to protest.
Defence of innocent civilians was supposedly the main reason for the UN resolution yet this has quickly turned from a no fly zone into full support for one side of an Al Qaeda backed rebel army who are engaged in an attempt to other-throw the existing regime.
There is a very good chance that in getting rid of Gaddafi we might end up replacing him with something a whole lot worse which could well include a new Islamic state based on sharia law. This is now starting to worry a large number of people who are legitimately asking why is it that we are suddenly fighting on the same side as al-Qaeda, our supposed mortal enemy.
Now this isn’t the first time that the west has found itself in bed with our enemy. Many people rightly question whether or not the whole idea of al-Qaeda being a Spectre like organisation with tentacles all around the world and a Jihadist under every bush is just a fantasy sold to a gullible public in order to sell foreign wars and increased security measures at home.
So there seems to be a history of Gaddafi actively trying to peruse and capture the worlds most wanted man and leader of the most feared terrorist group alive as well as a history of the west thwarting any attempt to do so as well as actively using the same terrorist group to do it’s bidding. Pure co-incidence?
Not only has 10 years of continuous war and thousands of innocent civilians dead due to “collateral damage” failed to capture the worlds most wanted man but the group he leads which is supposedly responsible for 9.11 is now our ally in an attempt to other-throw a Middle Eastern despot.
A rational person might suggest that our willingness to fight alongside and in support of people who are supposedly terrorists responsible for major atrocities across the world might mean that when it comes to al-Qaeda all is not quite what it seems. Surely if we are at war with terror and al-Qaeda is the definition of terror we are supposedly fighting then logic would dictate that we would actually be supporting Gaddafi rather than the rebels.
However before we are labelled a conspiracy theorist and jump to the conclusion that maybe al-Qaeda is in fact just a figment of the wests imagination that is used by western intelligence agencies to destabilise countries, carry out attacks by proxy and used as an excuse to bring in western “help” to resource rich countries we should look for some supporting evidence.
We already know for a fact that western intelligence agencies use false flag attacks as a means to an end and we have history to back us up all the way back from antiquity to the modern day. There is a lot of evidence that Al Qaeda is a mere creation of an intelligence agency such as Mossad or the CIA which is wheeled out from time to time in various countries to commit outrages that can then be used to further their own geo-political ambitions.
Whether they were handling them or just monitoring them we can only guess yet as the pulled FOX News investigation into Israeli spying asked “how could they have not known” about the planned terrorist attacks and if they did know why didn’t they tell the US government, and if they did why didn’t the US government act on this intel?
We have example after example of intelligence officers from all over the world caught in the act planting explosives ready to be blamed on terrorists such as the Russian apartment bombings or the Lavon affair. We also have instances of mass murderers being allowed to carry on torturing and killing such as the infamous British agent Stakeknife who lived and murdered for years as mole within the IRA.
We know that the most gagged woman in US history Sibel Edmonds claimed that the USA maintained intimate relations with bin Laden, and the Taliban, “all the way until that day of September 11”. These “intimate relations” included using bin Laden for Central Asian “operations” in the same manner “as we did during the Afghan and Soviet conflict,” that is, fighting our enemies through proxies.
We also know from our involvement in the bombing of Serbia in defence of the breakaway Kosovan Muslims that we are perfectly happy to support al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist groups such as the KLA (Kosovan Liberation Army) when it suits our purpose to do so. The KLA was linked to a massive heroin smuggling route into Europe from Taliban occupied Afghanistan, received funding and financial support from al-Qaeda and during the Serbian conflict was also supported secretly by the CIA.
A German TV investigation into the KLA showed that just months before the events of 9.11 occurred the USA was involved in a rescue mission to extract al-Qaeda linked KLA fighters who had trained in Afghanistan and fought in Chechnya from Macedonia where they were involved in stoking up further ethnicity based trouble.
Therefore it is more than just wild assertions and assumptions to draw parallels with the west’s previous support of the al-Qaeda backed Kosovan Liberation Army and the current al-Qaeda backed rebels in Libya.
It is also more than conspiracy theorizing to suggest than rather than being the unbeatable super enemy that the media portrays al-Qaeda as, it is in fact a useful tool to manipulate the stupid and the blind.
It is also the basis of the perfect bedtime story to be read to kids so that they grow up in fear and become the next NATO air force pilot dropping million dollar bombs on a country we have no business being in.
Just heard Tom Ridge the ex Homeland Security Secretary from 2003-2005 talk on CSPAN’s Weekend Journal about the real and existant threat of Al Qaeda on American citizens. He was talking about the next possible threat and why certain security apparatus needs to be in place and then he made an interesting aside at the end of the statement when he said that the threat to Americans from Al Qaeda was real “whether Bin Laden exists or not.”
Now this just may mean nothing at all or it may mean everything and be a freudian slip alluding to what many people already suspect in that Bin Laden is dead and has been since 2001.
Obviously there are many real terrorists out there in the world. There are also many terrorist groups who have been inflitrated by various intelligence agencies such as the CIA, MI6, Mossad, FSB, ISI, RAW and any other combination of capital letters you can think of.
We know from history that when terrorist groups have been infliltrated by various intelligence agencies with either plants, informers or persons who have been caught and freed on the proviso they provide intel that the worth of the intelligence gained from being within such an organisation often outweighs the possible dangers to the public that the group may or may not pose.
We all know that our police force regularly infiltrates important crime gangs and even no so important protest movements such as the recent revelation that our UK Police force felt it appropriate to spend large amounts of public money in keeping undercover agents implanted for years at a time inside various protest movements.
We also know from books, TV programmes (documentaries and fiction) and interviews that on many occasions the handlers and their superiors will allow certain events involving these groups and their agents to take place without fear of arrest so that further intelligence can be gained. Like a drug arrest where the arrestee is flipped and then the chain is worked up so that a bigger fish can be caught. Large amounts of drugs are brought into the country, informers are given a free reign to carry out their own illegal acts as long as rivals are handed over on a plate and the implanted officers are even allowed to commit various crimes themselves so that their covers are not blown.
Now replace the local or state police force with your national intelligence agency of choice or even the intelligence agency of a rival not so friendly country. The methods are the same, the decisions that are made can still effect innocent people and there are many examples of the public being served up on a platter so that intelligence can be gained.
Can you now think of an intelligence agency who may have control over a terrorist organisation in a similar manner who gained intel that an attack was planned on another country apart from their own. Lets take the Mumbai attacks on India for a perfect example of two countries who are enemies, both countries with powerful intelligence agencies and both countries engaged with terrorist organisations.
As Bob Woodward disclosed in his latest book the ISI created and helped fund the Lashkar-e-Taiba organisation behind the Mumbai attack and the head of the ISI admitted in the aftermath of the attack that the planners of the attacks had ISI links but it was not an authorised operation. Lieutenant General Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the head of the Pakistani ISI admitted that they were agents of his but “rouge” ones and the Americans took him at his word apparently.
Whether you believe they were rouge or the attacks were authorised it was apparent that the terrorists had ISI links. How many other terror attacks have been carried out by rouge agents I wonder? How many other attacks were authorised but then once the links to an intelligence agency made clear used the “agents gone rouge” excuse.
Can you imagine the flip side. A terrorist group inflitrated or partially controlled by India who receives intel that an attack is likely to occur not on an Indian city but in Islamabad or Karachi. Would they allow the attack to happen maybe in revenge for the Mumbai attacks or would they immediately call their ISI counterparts and warn them.
What about if instead of Pakistan and India it was Russia and the USA, China and Japan, Israel and Iran or the UK and the French. All countries who have a history of animosity towards each other. Does it depend on who the intelligence comes to for authorisation. What if the person making the decision had a personal grudge against his counterpart or political aspirations that he could see being furthered by not going up the chain or not passing the intel along.
Would they feel that any potential intelligence they may receive from having overt or covert control of this group would be worth the 50 or 60 lives lost in the attack on their perceived enemy? What if they knew some major geo-politcial goal could be achieved or advanced by allowing the attack to occur?
What if the attack was not on an opposing country but on their own? Can we all be 100% sure that these types of decisions are always made in our best interests and not the interests of the few?
These decisions are made a lot of the time and whether people like to think about it or not there is plenty of evidence that our governments feel that your life, my life and many other peoples lives are worth less than any potential intelligence gained or any political capital that a successful attack may gain them if it’s allowed to achieve fruition.
With the recent Moscow Airport bombing which was caught on camera and killed 35 people we can only remember the staged terrorist attacks that brought the previous president and current prime minister Vladimir Putin into power.
The FSB apartment bombings killed 300 people, involved FSB agents caught in the act of planting explosives and has seen many people who brought government involvment in the attacks to public knowledge assassinated as well as wall of silence from the current Putin regime who refused to co-operate with an attempted independent investigation into the matter.
These bombings on Russian citizens that many people believe were authorised by Putin to propel him into power, cement him as an authoritarian strong man and deliver him his much wanted second war with Chechnya. There is good evidence that these bombings were either staged or manipulated by agent provacateurs working on behalf of the Russian state apparatus.
Once you have seen all the evidence it’s not hard to believe is it? That someone like Putin in a country just coming out of Communism could do something like this to his own people. That agents of the ex KGB like Alexander Litvinenko are telling the truth when they say that they used to assassinate political and business rivals on Putin’s direct orders.
Now lets flip this over to the great conspiracy theory of the 21st century, the attacks of 9.11. The attacks that we joined with Israel and went to war with Islam for. A war in search of oil, precious metals, drugs and other Central Asian real estate whether by design or just happy co-incidence. The events that put Tom Ridge into his position as head of the new American Stasi at Homeland Security.
Can we be totally satisfied after the failure of the 9.11 commission to properly investigate the whole event rather than just the “intelligence failures” that led to it that no-one in any of the myriad of US intelligence agencies didn’t have to make some sort of decision as those I have just mentioned.
Whilst the US political apparatchiks have decided that no more questions surrounding 9.11 need answering others do not and more and more people are realising that unless these questions are not answered conspiracy theories will flourish and grow in their place. Richard Falk, the UN Human Rights activist was recently attacked for being anti Israeli just for diplomatically making the legitimate statement of fact that serious questions remain over the events of the day. Questions such as:
Why has Bin Laden not been caught. Why does no-one seem to care whether he is caught or not. Why do so many people believe that he is dead yet the the USA are still apparently searching for him? If he is actually dead then who is making all the false video and audio recordings of him and who is planting all the stories about his whereabouts being in the next target for attack Iran?
Why were the people who should have lost their jobs for failure to protect the country all promoted e.g:
Richard Myers, in charge of the Pentagon on 9/11
Ralph Eberhart, in charge of NORAD on 9/11
Captain Charles J. Leidig, acting NMCC Director
Brigadier General Montague Winfield
Ben Sliney, in charge of FAA on 9/11
Steven Abbot, coordinator of Dick Cheney’s task force on problems of national preparedness
Michael Maltbie, the supervisor handling the case at the FBI’s Radical Fundamentalist Unit
Pasquale D’Amuro, in charge of counterterrorism in New York
Why has no authority explained the collapse of WTC-7 the third tower, not hit by a plane, that collapsed into it’s own footprint later that day. A building that has been admitted by NIST broke the laws of physics by freefalling for over 2 seconds which could not have happened without a controlled demolition.
Why has there not been more video released of the Pentagon attacks. Why cant all the video tapes confiscated from nearby garages and hotels just after the event be released. Unlike the WTC attack no idenependant witnesses caught the plane hitting the building therefore to dispell consipiracy theorists all video tapes should be released whatever they show.
Why did none of the extremley expensive supposedly automated defence equipment that is supposed to protect the most restricted piece of airspace in the world go off on 9.11. Why was no effort made at all to shoot down the incoming plane that was approaching this supposedly safe airspace?
What is the meaning of the “let the orders stand” quip by Cheney as the blip approached and then hit the Pentagon as testified to by Norman Mineta. What were those orders. The logical inference from the statement and the fact that the plane was allowed to hit it’s target is that the orders were not to shoot it down otherwise some form of action would have occurred. What is the official explanation for this?
What is the nature of the massive roundup of Israeli citizens after the attacks and the Israeli Art student spy ring that were trailing some of the hijackers from town to town sometimes living literally only doors away. Were they spying on the hijackers and if so did they know of their plans and if they did which authority or persons in the US government did they inform and what did they do about it?
What is the real story behind those dancing Israeli’s who were “Sent to document” the event. How did they know this event was to occur. How did they know to put the camera in the right position to follow the planes into the building. Who were they and who sent them and what political pressure was put on the US government to release them.
What of the other Israeli’s who were rounded up and arrested after the 9.11 attacks some after police chases, smelling of explosives, with box cutters, passports and lots of cash. Why were they held for so long and what information did they reveal?
What is the official explanation for the explosive materials & molten metal dust particles found on nearby buildings after the WTC collapse that were found during Deutsche Banks insurance claim? What is the official explanation for all the secondary explosions we now know did occur after the initial planes hit their targets and which were denied up until recently released tapes proved they happened.
And what of Sibel Edmonds repeated claims that the US maintained close and intimate relations with Bin Laden right up until the events of 9.11. Who was the last agent from the USA to contact Bin Laden and what did they discuss. What were the nature of these intimate relations?
Are all of these questions really not worth trying to answer? Can any discussion of the unanswered questions surrounding 9.11 in the mainstream media always be shut down by a strongly worded letter from certain pro Israeli lobby groups or people who feel that any attempt to solve such questions only casts aspersions on their past president or current administration.
It is only by trying to answer such questions that conspiracy theories can be put to bed, families rest in peace and reckless wars and foreign adventures come to an end. If we are all still fighting to catch Bin Laden and he is dead as Tom Ridge may have accidentally acknowledged this morning then we will be stuck in this war on terror for a very long time. Certain quarters may feel that this is desirable but the majority of citizens do not.
Veteran Middle East correspondent Alan Hart: Largest engineering firm studied collapse of twin towers and said there was no doubt it was a controlled explosion
Respected Middle East expert and former BBC presenter Alan Hart has broken his silence on 9/11, by revealing that the world’s most prominent civil engineering company told him directly that the collapse of the twin towers was a controlled demolition.
Speaking on the Kevin Barrett show yesterday, Hart said he thought the 9/11 attack probably started as a Muslim operation headed up by Osama Bin Laden but that the plot was subsequently hijacked and carried out by Mossad agents in collusion with elements of the CIA, adding that since its formation, Israel has penetrated every Arab government and terrorist organization.
“My guess is that at an early point they said to the bad guys in the CIA – hey this operation’s running what do we do, and the zionists and the neo-cons said let’s use it,” said Hart, making reference to how top neo-cons like Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and their fellow Project For a New American Century authors had called for a “catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor,” the year before 9/11.
“The twin towers were brought down by a controlled ground explosion, not the planes,” said Hart, adding that this view was based on his close friendship with consultants who work with the world’s leading civil engineering and construction firm.
Hart asked the company to study the collapse of the twin towers, after which they told him directly, “There’s absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the towers were brought down by a controlled ground explosion.”
Hart then explained how the five dancing Israelis seen celebrating the attack on the World Trade Center in New Jersey as it unfolded, who turned out to be Mossad agents, proves at at a minimum Israel knew the attack was going to happen. Hart went further in speculating that the planes had been fitted with transponders and that the Israelis were guiding them in to the towers.
Host Barrett pointed out that to carry out the successful controlled demolition of three of the biggest buildings in history, the conspirators would have to ensure that they were hit, making the use of remote controlled airliners a distinct possibility. In addition, Barrett mentioned the fact that he had interviewed numerous pilots who dismissed the chances of accurately guiding a huge commercial airliner into a building while flying at sea level at around 600 miles per hour, especially considering the alleged 9/11 hijackers struggled to even fly basic Cessna light aircraft.
“Sounding a chilling note, Hart added that the U.S. is in grave danger of an Israeli-instigated false-flag nuclear attack, perhaps using an American nuclear weapon stolen from Minot Air Force Base during the “loose nukes” rogue operation of August, 2007. The motive would be to trigger a U.S. war with Iran, and perhaps to finish the ethnic cleansing of Palestine under cover of war–which Hart is convinced the Zionists are planning to do as soon as the opportunity presents itself,” writes host Barratt.
Given his biography and standing, Hart’s comments are not to be taken lightly. Hart is a former Middle East Chief Correspondent for ITN News and has also presented for BBC Panorama specializing in the Middle East. He was also a war reporter in Vietnam and the first journalist to reach Suez Canal with the Israeli army in 1967. Over the decades, Hart has developed close relationships with numerous high profile political figures, including the Shah of Iran, Yasser Arafat and Shimon Peres.
Hart has been a successful author for years and has no reason to fabricate the fact that a top construction firm told him point blank that the towers were brought down in a controlled demolition.
In forwarding this information, Hart joins legions of other credible experts who to some extent or other have all publicly challenged the official 9/11 story, with many outright stating that the attacks were an inside job, people like 20-year decorated CIA veteran Robert Baer, who told a radio host that “the evidence points at” 9/11 having had aspects of being an inside job.
Dark Politics is a site dedicated to reporting on the darker side of politics including the war on terror, the high tech police state, privacy and Internet freedom as well as civil rights, freedom of speech and social justice.
Please visit the main site www.darkpolitricks.com for the latest news, more articles, cool features and much more.
Dark Politics 