9/11 Uncover : THE MYTH OF AL QAEDA IS NOW ALMOST TOTALLY EXPOSED

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

The label ‘Al Qaeda’ has been used, or rather abused, ever since 11 September 2001 when the finger of blame for that terrifying day was pointed at bin Laden and his ‘al Qaeda’ organisation. Indeed, according to George Tenet in his book, At the center of the storm: My years at the CIA, bin Laden was blamed for the attacks by at least three-thirty in the afternoon of 11 September 2001.[1]

Ever since 11 September 2001 bin Laden and/or al Qaeda have been used as an excuse for nigh on every attack that the US and the Israelis have made on Islamic peoples and their nations. An alleged relationship between Saddam Hussein and ‘al Qaeda’ was used as the casus belli for the US and its allies to invade Iraq. Dick Cheney even asserted that Saddam Hussein, with al Qaeda, was responsible for the events of 11 September 2001. But it turned out that there was no such connection at all.

As the insurgency against the occupiers in Iraq gained momentum and US and allied casualties began to mount, so the blame for the increased resistance was placed on ‘al Qaeda in Iraq’ and all those that resisted the occupation were labelled ‘terrorists’. The hate figure devised by the allies to perpetuate the propaganda myth of ‘al Qaeda in Iraq’ was ‘Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’. He gave something that young and gullible US and allied troops could go after. And when he was supposedly ‘killed’ in June 2006 there was much propaganda fanfare and mileage gained from his ‘death’ which was hailed as a ‘great victory’ against al Qaeda.

The ‘great victory’ was short-lived however, and a new hate figure, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, previously Zarqawi’s number two in Iraq, was quickly promoted before people started to believe that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s death may actually have signalled the end of the ‘war against terrorism’. It had been reported that he too had also been killed, not by allied forces but by Sunni insurgents in factional fighting, though this has not been confirmed by the US authorities in Iraq.

For some time Mossad, the Israeli intelligence organisation, have tried to plant stooges in the Gaza and West Bank among Palestinians who have tried to pass themselves off as ‘al Qaeda’. The Israelis have failed miserably in their attempts at this. For one thing, the Gaza resistance community is a very tight knit one where everyone just about knows everyone and strangers are very quickly pointed out. The same applies in the West Bank. Of late, however, the Israelis and the US have taken a new tack playing on the friction that has evolved between Hamas and Fatah. Despite the fact that Hamas was popularly elected to govern the Palestinian peoples the Israelis have constantly thwarted Hamas’ ability to so do and have attempted, almost successfully, to polarise the two groups and Palestinians. The US has been active in playing off one against the other by supplying arms to Hamas’ opposition, Fatah.

Meanwhile, in Lebanon, the same US officials responsible for working with the Israelis to undermine Hamas have also been arming and supplying a Sunni Palestinian refugee group in an effort to wedge the influence of the Shia Hizbollah predominate in southern Lebanon. The problem here is that the arrangements have backfired on the US. The group, known as Fatah al-Islam, has taken on an aggressive role against the Lebanese government. The western propaganda machine is trying to say that the Fatah al-Islam group are an ‘al Qaeda inspired’ group. In fact they are more like an ‘Elliot Abrams inspired’ group. The US is now desperately flying in big weapons to deal with this tiny group – which brings us to the next anomaly in this saga.

The group are said to be only five hundred strong at most, probably nearer three hundred, yet the US are going to a huge amount of effort to airlift a lot of weapons for the Lebanese government army. This is more than just a hammer to crack a nut. It’s more like a 300 tonne hydraulic press to squash a pea; unless, of course, the US knows something that the Lebanese don’t.

In raising the ante in Iraq, Lebanon, the West Bank and the Gaza by again raising the empty spectre of ‘al Qaeda’ in order to get at Iran, Syria and Hizbollah, the US and the Israelis have exposed their hand about the myth of ‘al Qaeda terrorism’ in the Middle East.

ENDNOTES
[1] George Tenet, At the center of the storm: My years at the CIA. (New York: Harper-Collins, 2007.) p. 169.

source:
http://lataan.blogspot.com/2007/05/myth-of-al-qaeda-is-now-almost-totally.html

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Is bin Laden Responsible for the 9/11 attacks?

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Is bin Laden Responsible for the 9/11 attacks?

Maher Osseiran

August 11, 2007

To those who are not familiar with our work, Ed Haas and I have done extensive research regarding the authenticity of the “bin Laden Confession Tape” that was released by the U.S. government on December 13, 2001. Bush administration officials pointed to the video as the smoking gun and proof that Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11.

After more than a year of research, we were able to show with a very high degree of certainty that the tape was the result of a sting operation run by U.S. intelligence, with the help of Saudi intelligence, and that bin Laden could have been captured on the date he was taped, September 26, 2001, ten days prior to the war in Afghanistan.

We concluded that bin Laden was allowed to walk because if he were captured instead of just being taped, there would have been diminished justification and therefore less support for military actions in Afghanistan. Arguably, if bin Laden had been captured or killed when the CIA had the chance on September 26, 2001 – the Bush Administration would have met much greater resistance against its invasion of Afghanistan.

This fact has many legal ramifications in many jurisdictions, from the local level, Manhattan, to the federal level, and internationally. Respectively, the Bush administration engaged in crimes ranging from aiding and abetting a murderer, bin Laden was wanted at the time by the FBI for the 1998 embassy bombings in Africa, to dereliction of duty, high treason, and finally, a high crime against humanity.

But is bin Laden truly responsible for 9/11?

We, instead of assigning guilt, preferred to call for an official, thorough and transparent investigation into the circumstances surrounding the videotape and the prosecution of anyone that has committed a crime – to include the President and Vice President.

Our findings have been shared with law enforcement and investigative bodies in all the mentioned jurisdictions along with the national and international media – but no action has been taken.

The other factor that prevented us from assigning guilt or voicing our personal opinion was the fact that the 9/11 truth movement, the most vocal movement that shares our goal of a new and transparent investigation, consists of many people who believe that bin Laden is a direct asset of the CIA and working under the CIA’s direction. Since our findings do not support this assertion, the logical option was to present our information knowing that it would be controversial in some circles, with the hope that it would promote renewed open-mindedness and prompt further debate. We understood the challenge associated with changing engrained belief systems.

After our recent appearance on the Kevin Barrett Show, we decided to co-author this piece and explain to all that are interested what we really think based on what we understand from the information that can be accessed in the public domain.

The word that we need to pay particularly close attention to is STING. A sting operation is a highly scripted series of circumstances, chain of events, dialogs, actions and reactions that relies on exploiting the weaknesses of a target with the intention of causing a very specific outcome. All has to fall into place as choreographed or the sting may fail. The more complex the sting operation is, the longer it takes to develop and rehearse.

This sting that targeted bin Laden and yielded the “confession tape” hinged on the following circumstances. First, bin Laden needed to have done something horrific or been accused of having done something horrific that caused him to go into deep hiding. Second, bin Laden needed to be eager for information he could not access from his hideout. Third, the person who had this information had to have serious difficulties hiking up mountain trails or reaching caves. Osama bin Laden was more likely to go to this person, whom we later learned bin Laden knew and somewhat trusted, thereby giving the person and the sting team control over the meeting location. This is crucial as bin Laden seldom allows meetings on terms that require concessions. The person that bin Laden agreed to meet on different terms was the paraplegic, wheelchair bound Saudi sheikh – Khaled Al-Harbi.

The first two circumstances were satisfied by the events of 9/11. Osama bin Laden, suspected to be behind the attacks, wanted “dead or alive” by Bush, went into deep hiding. On the other hand, bin Laden, the devout Muslim, was unhappy to hear that some Muslim scholars view his alleged act to be against Islamic teachings. Osama bin Laden was eager, as revealed on the videotape, to learn how certain influential Saudi religious scholars viewed the attacks.

Once these two conditions were satisfied, the sting could be launched. The person in the wheelchair, Khaled Al-Harbi, and the rest of the sting team, his necessary travel companions – one of which had a hidden video camera, were mobilized in Saudi Arabia and headed towards Afghanistan.

Here are the facts: the first specific mention of a sting operation in the corporate media was in the form of a report by UPI from Pakistan. The date of that report was August 17, 2001.

UPI – August 17, 2001: “The U.S. government has requested Pakistan to provide active support for an operation inside Afghanistan to catch terrorism-suspect Osama bin Laden, a report said Friday. The United States has also discussed with Pakistani officials the possibility of “using U.S. special forces” for a sting operation inside Afghanistan, the newspaper reported.”

How could such a leak be interpreted when some believe that Pakistani authority and intelligence services are an extension of the CIA while others believe that at the time, they were supporters of Bin Laden?

It would be naïve to think that those in authority in Pakistan are a homogeneous camp; those in the Pakistani government who were genuinely on the side of bin Laden leaked the information.

I say that because they could have informed bin Laden of the sting operation either directly or through channels and did not have to leak it to the media. By leaking it to the papers (UPI), they were actively protecting bin Laden. The leak was an indirect message to the Americans that bin Laden was informed, thereby, making the sting more difficult to execute. Also, the leak was an embarrassment to the Pakistani authorities that could no longer co-operate even if they wanted.

If we can accept that there are factions within Pakistani government, we can also understand the extraction of bin Laden from Tora Bora by his Pakistani supporters.

The pro-American camp, led by the head of ISI, seems to have been playing a dual role on behalf of American intelligence. On the one hand, the head of ISI is reported to have sent Mohammad Atta, alleged leader of the 9/11 hijackers, $100,000 prior to 9/11. On the other hand, he spent two weeks after 9/11 at CIA headquarters in Langley assisting with War on Terror planning.

We need to carefully examine the period between August 17, 2001, the date of the leak to the Pakistani press of “a” sting operation, and, September 21, 2001, thirty five days later, the date when “the” sting team was dispatched from Saudi Arabia to Afghanistan.

First of all, the sting scenario that yielded the “confession tape” is quite complex and could not have been developed between September 11, 2001, and September 21, 2001. Since it hinged on events similar to 9/11, it must have been developed by U.S. intelligence based on knowledge of bin Laden’s behavior after the bombing of the embassies in Africa or the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen, meaning, developed prior to 9/11. This is clear evidence of prior knowledge of the 9/11 events that exceeds any notion that the only failure of the Bush Administration was its inability to connect the dots as then CIA director George Tenet described it. Some people “on our side” – Americans – knew clearly of the 9/11 attacks – and at a minimum – allowed the events to unfold.

Despite the fact that nobody working for or on behalf of the U.S. government has been prosecuted for their failings or involvement with the 9/11 attacks, there were creditable warnings in August 2001 about an al-Qaeda attack. Remember the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing titled “bin Laden Determined to Strike in US’’, the starkest of warnings? The Bush Administration also received warnings from other countries, some of which were fairly specific. It could be assumed that the attempt to launch the sting operation in August 2001 through Pakistan was a high priority and urgent operation intended to stop the attack. Yet, American intelligence and law enforcement did not act with any urgency in the United States in terms of following up on leads by FBI agents and informants, alerting airlines, or even dispatching fighter jets after it was determined airliners were hijacked and the attack was unfolded.

That said, and considering its proximity to September 11, 2001, the fact that the August 2001 attempt to launch the sting operation through Pakistan had no visible urgency, and it is reasonable to suspect that the 9/11 events were allowed to unfold. Also, even though bin Laden’s camp within Pakistan thwarted the August 2001 sting operation, even before its details were shared with Pakistani authorities, it wasn’t the end of the operation. All that was needed was a different launching country to replace Pakistan. Iran was the next plausible choice.

The originally intended August 2001 sting operation was launched the day the sting team was mobilized from Saudi Arabia, September 21, 2001, ten days after 9/11. A member of the sting team tells us in the video released by the Pentagon that they left Saudi Arabia in a rush as soon as travel arrangements were concluded.

From that same tape, we understand that the sting team was composed of at least three individuals, two of which, volunteered after 9/11 to travel with the paraplegic sheikh to Afghanistan.

What I find incredible with the timeline, this ten-day period, is that these three individuals already had their passports, all three managed to get visas to Iran, and made transportation arrangements on very short notice. Not to mention having to contact bin Laden, convince him to meet with them, and agree on a meeting time and place on the Iranian-Afghani border through which they were smuggled.

We know the Saudi visitors were part of one of the most ingenious stings. Would those overseeing the sting wait until the last minute to secure Iranian visas, especially for the most critical member of the sting team, bin Laden’s lure, the visiting sheikh in the wheelchair?

The answer is no. Visas were secured way in advance, probably before 9/11, and all that was left was convincing bin Laden to meet with them.

Based on this evaluation of the time period between August 17, 2001 and September 21, 2001, it can be concluded that a component of U.S. intelligence had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks and was poised to exploit it instead of stop it.

Ed Haas’ later work regarding the authenticity of the “confession tape” caught the FBI saying: “the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.” Ed also caught the FBI admitting that authentication work on the “confession tape” is in a sealed investigative file.

The FBI would rather say bin Laden is not connected to 9/11 because revealing the results of any tape authentication, a necessary process prior to submitting it in evidence to a Grand Jury, would have also revealed the complicity of U.S. intelligence.

This brings us back to the question: Is bin Laden truly responsible for 9/11?

The answer is NO. Osama bin Laden is a patsy in the sense that his terror plans where most likely hijacked by intelligence operatives and who was aided and abetted at every turn during the execution of the attacks. He may actually believe that he pulled off the sum of 9/11 with his own resources, but he did not. The plan might have originated with bin Laden, but covert intelligence operatives orchestrated the outcome and aftermath.

If law enforcement were allowed to do their work, bin Laden’s complicity would have been limited to conspiring and planning the attacks and thousands in Manhattan, Afghanistan, and Iraq, would have been alive today.

We join hands with everyone seeking the truth about 9/11. We add our work to that of others and our voice in calling for an international and transparent investigation into the 9/11 attacks and the wars that followed.

source:
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m35264&hd=&size=1&l=e

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Insurance Companies Question 9/11

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Allianz Group proposed denying payment due to evidence of insurance fraud

“As incomplete and inadequate as FEMA’s investigation was, theirs was not the only one conducted. The World Trade Center was heavily insured, and the companies that were due to pay those claims commissioned their own private investigation.

The difference between the insurance investigation and FEMA’s study is quite remarkable.

The insurance companies had unfettered access to the site of the collapse beginning on the very afternoon of September 11th.

They were also granted access to powerful computer programs used by the Pentagon for classified research; the FEMA investigators were not.

The insurance companies have produced thousands of pages of analysis and an equally staggering number of diagrams and photographs. However, the results of these investigations have remained private.

It is interesting to note that a shareholder in Allianz Group proposed denying payment due to evidence of insurance fraud.

Allianz Group carried a significant portion of the insurance policy on the World Trade Center.

In response to the shareholders’ claim, the company made the following statement:

“When the company makes insurance payments it does so on the basis of careful scrutiny – especially with payments in the order of magnitude referred to here. Two official commissions in the USA have examined the incidents of 11 September 2001 in detail. Their findings provided no indication that the allegations submitted by the proposer are correct.”

source:
http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/2920

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

COUNTERING THE BIG LIES : Nayirah: the 15-year-old Kuwaiti liar who conned the U.S. government

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

COUNTERING THE BIG LIES

Nayirah: the 15-year-old Kuwaiti liar who conned the U.S. government

Malcom Lagauche

Nayirah: the 15-year-old Kuwaiti liar who conned the U.S. government

August 11, 2007

Syndicated columnist Georgie Anne Geyer’s most recent article (Promoting Dangerous Divisions in Middle East) is the same old re-hashing of opinions of what is happening in Iraq. It is dull and laden with self-praise for her superior intuition about events in the Middle East.

Among all her tired opinions, one statement stuck out like a black person at a Ku Klux Klan rally. Geyer wrote about being in Saudi Arabia in the fall of 1990, just across the border from occupied Kuwait: She reminisced:

What was happening with Iraqi troops all over the place? We found out soon enough. It was horror on a mass scale: piles of women’s breasts were found in bags …

I thought I had heard all the lies about the Iraqi regime, but this one is new.

Many accusations were made against Iraq before the 1991 destruction of the country as well as prior to the illegal March 2003 invasion. So many preposterous allegations came forth, yet no one in the mainstream media tried to discover the truth. To this day, all the falsehoods are still imbedded in the minds of most people in the West. A few journalists have taken the time to discover reality, but most of their work is never seen by the majority of citizens. On the occasion that a piece is discussed openly, the author is quickly denigrated for going against public opinion that is based on lies. The perpetrator becomes the victim.

On August 9, 2004, www.dissidentvoice.org published an article by Lila Fajiva (Iraqi Women and Torture) in which the author dispels some of the myths taken as fact. She stated:

Despite being totally debunked, the tale of Iraqi soldiers tossing babies out of incubators, a creation of a D.C. public relations firm, found its way into a largely fictitious account of Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait called The Rape of Kuwait, by Alabaman Jean Sasson who has made a lucrative career out of negative stories about women’s lives in the Middle East … “

A copy of The Rape of Kuwait made its way into virtually every press package sent out by the U.S. administration in the buildup to Desert Storm. In addition, every member of the U.S. government received the book. The Kuwaiti embassy in the U.S. ordered 200,000 copies for distribution.

Almost very word of this book has been discredited. But, not one U.S. politician has stated he/she used false information on which to build an opinion about Iraq. The vast majority of the people who read the book still believe the contents are accurate.

The lies transcend just one book. Rajiva added:

“Under the Saddam Hussein regime Iraqi women were not allowed to work outside the home,” said Lisa DePasquale, recycling outright propaganda.

DePasquale is a conservative columnist who is in denial of the results of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Unfortunately, her words were read by many and the absurd statement about women during the Ba’ath years is taken as standard fare in the U.S.

The most well-known debunked fairy tale is that of the Iraqi soldiers tossing babies from incubators in Kuwait and sending the incubators to Baghdad, leaving the babies to die on the floor. After Desert Storm, the truth emerged. The story was fabricated by the public relations firm of Hill and Knowlton, whom the Kuwaiti government paid $12 million for the demonizing of the Iraqi government. The supposed “eye witness” of the tossing out of the babies was a 15-year-old girl who testified to the U.S. Congress under the name of “Nayirah.” In fact, she was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the U.S. and was not in Kuwait during the occupation. Hill and Knowlton provided the script she read to the duped U.S. lawmakers.

When the story first came forth, some people questioned its authenticity. Almost immediately, Amnesty International (AI) verified the accusations. Now, there was no opposition to the huge lie; a lie that led seven U.S. senators to vote for authorizing war and who later stated that if they knew the truth they would not have given the green light.

Amnesty International is one of those groups that has an untouchable aura about it. If AI says it’ so, it must be. The truth differs. Instead of being the protector of human rights, the group may in fact be a convenient purveyor of U.S. imperialistic designs.

In Covert Action Quarterly, Issue 73, Summer 2002, Francis Boyle gave a picture of AI that contradicted that of the do-good, selfless public image the organization has.

Boyle was a member of the board of directors of Amnesty International USA from 1988 to 1992. Along the way, he found discrepancies between the group’s image and its reality. In fact, he questioned the AI report of the Kuwait incubators. According to Boyle:

Absolutely nothing happened. There was never an investigation, there was total stonewalling coming out of London. They refused ever to admit they did anything wrong. There has never been an explanation, there has never been an apology. It’s down the memory hole like 1984 and Orwell.

My conclusion was that a high-level official of Amnesty International at that time, whom I will not name, was a British intelligence agent. Moreover, my fellow board member, who also investigated this independently of me, reached the same exact conclusion. So certainly when I am dealing with people who want to work with Amnesty in London, I just tell them, “Look, just understand, they’re penetrated by intelligence agents, U.K,. maybe U.S. I don’t know, but you certainly can’t trust them.”

Boyle did not give a grand assessment of the leadership of AI. He said:

They don’t care. They’re completely and totally arrogant. “We are Amnesty International. We are the world’s largest and most powerful human rights organization. We won the Nobel Peace Prize for our work. So we do whatever we want.”

And again, if you don’t believe me, go search the Lexis-Nexis database and see if there has ever been an apology by Amnesty International for the Kuwaiti dead babies report.

Most people think that Ai may make the occasional error in judgement, but the organization is based on good deeds and the overwhelming desire to see the world rid of human rights violations. Again, this is an illusion. Boyle explained:

Amnesty International is primarily motivated not by human rights, but by publicity. Second comes money. Third comes getting more members. Fourth, internal turf battles. And then finally human rights. To be sure, if you are dealing with a human rights situation in a country that is at odds with the United States or Britain, it gets an awful lot of attention, resources, man and womanpower, publicity, you name it, they can throw whatever they want at it. But if it’s dealing with violations of human rights by the United States, Britain, Israel, then it’s like pulling teeth to get them really to do something on the situation.

In November 2005, Ayatollah Sistani (the Shi’ite religious leader who can’t speak Arabic) issued a fatwa calling for the killing of homosexuals in Iraq. Two weeks later, Bush called him a man of great integrity and courage.

Even before Sistani issued the fatwa, gays and lesbians were being hunted and killed in Iraq. After the fatwa, the program was in full swing. Iraqi gays who were fortunate enough to get out of Iraq alive broadcast the plight of homosexuals still in Iraq. The subject was publicized in Europe and other areas, but little was written in the U.S.

Almost a year after the issuing of the fatwa, and a considerable amount of press on the subject, Amnesty International was asked their opinion of the sexual-cleansing of Iraq. The organization said it had never heard of the edict or the killing of hundreds, if not thousands, of Iraqi gays and lesbians. This ignorance of the facts proves Boyle’s allegations that AI only works on cases that acquire the most publicity. Whether the cases are true or not means nothing to AI.

Recently, I had a long conversation with my colleague Husayn Al-Kurdi, an astute writer of Iraqi history and culture. He stated the urgency of those few of us who write about the real history of Iraq to keep writing and writing. Al-Kurdi brought up the fact that what little real history is available is diminishing and that the U.S. is in possession of decades of Iraqi documents that will never be brought to daylight.

The U.S. has written the books Iraq now uses in its education system. Much real history of Iraq has been destroyed. Now is the time for all scribes to set the record straight, especially in matters of debunking the outrageous lies put forth by lackey journalists and human rights organizations.

Let’s put the myths of the bags of women’s breasts and killing of babies in the trash bin portion of history and repeatedly call for the truth. The liars should be held responsible for their acts; acts that have caused the deaths of more than three million Iraqis and the destruction of the most advanced country in the Arab world.

source:
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m35270&hd=&size=1&l=e

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Bush And DU : A 4.5 Billion Year Legacy

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Bush And DU : A 4.5 Billion Year Legacy

Jeff Berg, Countercurrents.org

12 August, 2007

If the Bush family and their coterie of handlers were looking for a long lasting legacy they most surely have found the longest lasting one possible by their sanctioning of DU munitions. DU stands for Depleted Uranium and is what is left over after one has finished the process of making a nuclear bomb.

This poison will remain toxic for 4.5 billion years. The American military has acknowledged having a billion pounds of the stuff, how much more it really has is anybody’s guess and at such levels what does it really matter? After all inhaling a couple of microns of this stuff is the equivalent to about 50 times the legal allowable limit of radioactivity for someone who works at a nuclear power plant. It is also the equivalent in one breath of the damage it would take a pack a day smoker 20 years worth of smoky inhales to ‘achieve’.

The U.S. military keeps this billion pounds worth of material under lock and key in guarded military installations, underground, contained by cement and stored in barrels because they have known since 1943 just how dangerous is this stuff.

It is at its most dangerous when broken down into tiny particles and aerosolized. This is how the U.S. Army first used this substance after the Second World War testing its properties as a weaponized gas. The geniuses at DARPA (R&D team for the Pentagon) have however gone that one better.

And what has American military science done with this nightmare leftover from the making of tens of thousands of nuclear bombs? It has used it to make ordnance and munitions. You see DU is 1.7 times the density of lead and goes through armour plating like the proverbial hot knife through butter. Simultaneously it is pyroforic (burns) and when it bursts into flames it releases millions of micron sized toxic DU particles into the air.

The result of the use of thousands of tons of DU munitions in Gulf Wars I and II has been to spread trillions of micron sized particles of Depleted Uranium into the sands and air of Iraq. At least that is where it started its life or rather better said its death march. The Middle East is after all rather well known for sands and dust and winds and so where it will stop its 4.5 billion year journey nobody knows.

Sufficed to say every corner of the world can expect to be visited many upon many times before this unholy waste has run the natural course of its unnatural life.

If you’d like to know more about this crime against the planet and humanity simply Google: Leuren Moret DU

Dr. Moret is an atomic physicist who used to work for the American military industrial complex and now has lectured in more than 40 countries worldwide about the horrors and hazards of DU munitions.

www.pledgeTOgreen.ca

source:
http://www.uruknet.de/?p=m35288&hd=&size=1&l=e

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

67,000 Detainees in Iraqi Prisons : US War Crime

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

67,000 Detainees in Iraqi Prisons : US War Crime

Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq (AMSI)

Saturday, 11 August 2007

The head of the legal committee supporting the Enforcing the Law plan said there are 31,000 detainees in the Iraqi prisons.

The Lawyer Jasim Al-Bahadili added Saturday, ” There are violations inside the prisons including putting the juvenile inmates with the adults , and keeping women in detention centers, especially in night raids, rather than take them to women prisons.”

He said, “The committee contacted the heads of the jurisdiction council and the general attorney, and the Ministers of Interior and Defence and informed them of these violations,” hoping that this will be handled quickly.

Al-Bahadili said that the number of detainees in the US-run prisons is 36,000. Thus, the total number of Iraqi detainees in Iraqi and US-run prisons is 67,000 detainees.

AMSI Net

source:
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m35256&hd=&size=1&l=e

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

CAUSE OF ARAFAT’S DEATH….. POISONING

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

(Ben Heine © Cartoons)

After years of speculation, the personal physician of Yasser Arafat revealed that the cause of his death was poisoning.

Now the question remains…. WHO POISONED HIM?

This too will take years to determine as the chief suspect lies comatose on his own deathbed…. only he knows the real truth.

The following article regarding this appeared in todays HaAretz…

Arafat’s doctor: There was HIV in his blood, but poison killed him

By Danny Rubinstein , Haaretz Correspondent

Late Palestinian Authority chairman Yasser Arafat’s blood contained the deadly HIV virus, Arafat’s personal physician told Jordanian media over the weekend. Dr. Ashraf al-Kurdi stressed, however, that Arafat did not die of AIDS – which is caused by the virus.

Jordanian news site Amman quoted al-Kurdi – a former Jordanian health ministry official – as saying that the virus had been injected into Arafat’s bloodstream close to his death, and that the real cause of the chairman’s death was poison.

Hours earlier, al-Kurdi was interviewed on television news station Al-Jazeera. However, the network cut short the live interview with al-Kurdi as soon as he mentioned that the former chairman had contracted HIV.

To Amman, al-Kurdi said that Arafat’s death was suspicious in several other respects. “I would usually be summoned to attend to Arafat immediately, even when all he had was a simple cold,” said al-Kurdi, who served as Arafat’s personal physician for 18 years. “But when his medical situation was really deteriorating, they chose not to call me at all.”

According to al-Kurdi, Arafat’s wife, Suha, refused to allow the doctor to visit Arafat in the private Paris hospital where he was being treated. Al-Kurdi added that he was denied access to Arafat’s body after his death. In the Amman interview, he demanded the French government set up a commission of inquiry.

However, al-Kurdi did not explain why he did not come forth sooner and reveal the information. On September 9, 2005, al-Kurdi told Haaretz that “any doctor would tell you that [Arafat's symptoms] are the symptoms of a poisoning.”

Arafat was pronounced dead on November 11 at the age of 75. The exact cause of his illness is unknown. Arab journalists and opinion-shapers have repeatedly accused Israel under former prime minister Ariel Sharon of poisoning Arafat.

source:
http://desertpeace.blogspot.com/2007/08/cause-of-arafats-death-poisoning.html

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW