Siti Musdah Mulia Mengakui Lesbian dan Homoseksual

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

=== News Update ===

WAHYU DAN AKAL – IMAN DAN ILMU
[Kolom Tetap Harian Fajar] – H.Muh.Nur Abdurrahman
822 Siti Musdah Mulia Mengakui Lesbian dan Homoseksual

Berita ini ditimba dari <http://hidayatullah.com/index2.php?option=com_content&task=emailform&id=6605&itemid=1>
Senin, 31 Maret 2008 aktivis “Islam” liberal Siti Musdah Mulia mengatakan, lesbian dan homosekstual diakui dalam Islam. Homoseks-Homoseks dan homoseksualitas bersifat alami (wajar) yang diciptakan oleh Allah, seperti itu diizinkan dalam Islam, dan bahwa pelarangan homoseks dan homoseksualitas hanya merupakan tendensi para ulama. Demikian salah satu ucapan Musdah Mulia dalam sebuah diskusi di Jakarta pada hari Kamis, 27 Maret 2008. Diskusi itu diorganisir oleh LSM Arus Pelangi. Perlu diketahui, bahwa Arus Pelangi dibentuk pada tanggal 15 Januari 2006 di Jakarta dengan kantor secretariat di Jalan Tebet Dalam 4 no 3 Jakarta Selatan. Arus Pelangi, adalah LSM tempat mangkalnya kaum lesbian dan homoseks.

Salah satu azab Allah paling dahsyat yang dikisahkan dalam Al-Quran dan Perjanjian Lama adalah tentang pemusnahan kaum yang melakukan praktek homoseksual. Sodomi atau aktivitas homoseks, berasal dari nama negara-kota Sodom, yang penduduknya sudah demikian jatuh ke dalam limbah kebobrokan dekandensi moral, yaitu kaum laki-lakinya hampir semuanya homosexual dan kaum perempuannya juga hampir semuanya lesbian. Negara-kota tetangganya yaitu Gomorra (Qamran) juga telah mengalami hal yang sama, sehingga dalam Perjanjian Lama selalu disebut beruntun Sodom dan Gomorra. Celakanya ummat Nabi Luth AS yang meninggalkan Ur singgah bermukim di luar kota Sodom dan Gomorra, hampir semuanya juga ikut terseret ke dalam aktivitas homosex dan lesbian yang biadab itu.

Serangkaian percobaan ilmiah dengan metode simulasi di Universitas Cambridge membangun tiruan tempat berdiamnya kaum Sodom dan Qamran di laboratorium, lalu mengguncangnya dengan gempa buatan. Simulasi dataran terbenam dan miniatur rumah tergelincir masuk lalu terbenam di dalamnya. Penemuan arkeologis dan percobaan ilmiah ini mengungkap satu kenyataan penting, bahwa kaum Sodom dan Qamran bukanlah suatu mitos, melainkan disebutkan dalam Al-Quran dan Perjanjian Lama, mereka itu sungguh-sungguh pernah hidup di masa lalu, kemudian mereka punah diazab Allah akibat kebejatan moral mereka. Semua bukti terjadinya bencana itu kini telah terungkap secara arkeologis dan sesuai benar dengan pemaparan Al Qur’an dan Perjanjian Lama.

– FAKhDzTHM ALShYht MSyRQYN . FJ’ALNA ‘ALYHA SAFLHA WAMThRNA ‘ALYHM hJARt MN SJYL (S. AlhJR, 15:73,74), dibaca:
– fa akhdzathumush shaihatu musyriqi-n . fa ja’alna- ‘alaiha- sa-filaha- wa amthrna- ‘alaihim hija-ratan min sijji-l, artinya
– Maka ledakan keras menyambar mereka itu waktu matahari terbit . Lalu Kami jadikan negeri mereka yang di atas jadi di bawah (terbongkar) dan Kami hujani mereka dengan batu dari tanah yang keras.

[Kejadian 19:15,24] Ketika fajar telah menyingsing, kedua malaikat itu mendesak Lot, supaya bersegera, katanya: “Bangunlah, bawalah isterimu dan kedua anakmu yang ada di sini, supaya engkau jangan mati lenyap karena kedurjanaan kota ini.”
[Kejadian 19:27,28] Dan Ibrahim bangun pagi-pagi sekali menuju ke tempat ia telah berdiri menghadap hadirat Tuhan . Dan ia melihat ke arah Sodom dan Gomorrah, dan ke arah segenap tanah padang datar itu, dan amboi, asap membubung naik dari negeri itu laksana asap dari tungku.

Apa yang dikatakan aktivis “Islam” liberal Siti Musdah Mulia di atas itu, bahwa pelarangan homoseks dan homoseksualitas hanya merupakan tendensi para ulama, itu bohong besar. Berani dan lancang benar aktivis “Islam” liberal Siti Musdah Mulia membohongi publik. Padahal Allah telah menghukum kaum Sodom dan Qamran yang homoseks dan lesbian itu seperti diungkap oleh Al-Quran dan Perjanjian Lama.

Dalam sebuah hadits yang shahih, Nabi SAW bersabda, “Allah telah melaknat orang yang melakukan perbuatan kaum Luth (homoseks), Allah telah melaknat orang yang melakukan perbuatan kaum Luth (homoseks), Allah telah melaknat orang yang melakukan perbuatan kaum Luth (homoseks).” (HR.Ahmad dan Abu Ya’la)

Dalam hal ini, tidak ada hadits yang memuat ancaman dengan laknat sedemikian tegas hingga Rasulullah SAW sampai mengulanginya tiga kali. Dalam kasus zina, beliau hanya menyebut laknat sekali saja, demikian juga dengan laknat yang diarahkan kepada sejumlah pelaku dosa-dosa besar; tidaklah lebih dari sekali. Hal itu, ditambah lagi dengan sikap para shahabat yang sepakat memberikan ancaman mati bagi homoseks di mana tidak seorang pun dari mereka yang mengambil sikap berbeda. Mereka hanya berbeda dalam hal bagaimana eksekusi terhadapnya.

***

Seperti dituliskan di atas, ummat Nabi Luth AS berasal dari Ur. Mereka beremigrasi meninggalkan Ur kemudian singgah bermukim di luar kota Sodom dan Qamran. Mereka di tempat asalnya Ur tidaklah homoseks dan lesbian, nanti setelah bermukim di daerah Sodom dan Qamran, barulah hampir semuanya juga ikut terseret ke dalam aktivitas homoseks dan lesbian yang biadab itu. Itu artinya homoseks dan lesbian penyebabnya bukanlah genetik, melainkan penyakit sosial yang menular. Jadi apa yang dikatakan oleh aktivis “Islam” liberal Siti Musdah Mulia bahwa homoseksualitas bersifat genetik atau alami (wajar), itu adalah bohong besar.

Indonesia ini kini mendapat serangan bertubi-tubi secara bergiliran dari tentera Allah: angin (puting beliung), api (gunung meletus) air (banjir), tanah (longsor), itu adalah pringatan keras dari Allah SWT. Maka para homoseks/lesbian dan para pendukungnya, para pezina dan para managernya, para koruptor dan para pelindungnya, bertobatlah. WaLlahu a’lamu bishawab.

***

Makassar, 6 April 2008
[H.Muh.Nur Abdurrahman]
http://waii-hmna.blogspot.com/2008/04/822-siti-musdah-mulia-mengakui-lesbian.html]

===

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

Torturing the Geneva Convention

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

=== News Update ===

---

Khaleej Times – 06 April, 2008

There must be a growing chill in the US Congress as the recent release of the full text of a March 14, 2003 memo confirms that the assault on prized US principles, international humanitarian laws and the Geneva Convention found sanction from the highest echelons of the neocon White House.

Observers will remember how the Pentagon tried to brush the issue under the carpet when the memo’s general contents were revealed in ’04, attempting to strip the subject of relevance by implying it was no longer operative. Information coming this week, though, understandably shook lawmakers and the public alike, confirming government complicity in the most savage offensive on core principles, US domestic and international, followed by straight face lies on the part of the government to escape embarrassment.

The question staring America square in the face now is obvious; how much more did the government lie about? Saddam’s fabled WMDs, Iraq’s ties with Al Qaeda, US torture techniques to extract information, all go to show Washington didn’t lose much sleep over feeding lies to Americans as well as the international audience to achieve its own goals in a war that goes on with no end in sight. To make matters worse, the Bush administration has practically nothing to show for departure from the norm as the situation goes from bad to worse in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Significantly, it has been pretty well known since Abu Ghraib that illegal torture had been sanctioned by senior Bush administration officials. However, it has now been confirmed that they also planned a lengthy strategy to protect themselves from prosecution should their antics be exposed, which started happening when disturbing torture pictures made headlines.

The latest developments, while rightly causing all and sundry to suspect more wrongdoing on part of Bush and Co, also raise the question of what is to happen next now that both breaking the law and lying about it have been established on the part of the president and his men. It needs little emphasising that the matter is made much more serious because of the millions that have met death, pain, misery, torture, rape, etc, because of a policy that banked on blatant lies and misuse of power to be legitimised. Now, not only those who have had to bear the brunt of Washington’s misgivings directly, but also those who cried hoarse trying to knock sense into things, will be out for blood as they stand vindicated.

There must be some sort of payback, some sort of legal process, lest the impression is left that the world’s most powerful people can get away with anything, even savagery.

source: http://www.gulfinthemedia.com/index.php?m=editorials〈=en&id=393169&title=Torturing%20the%20Geneva%20Convention&

===

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

It Has Happened: I’m a 9/11 Truther; A New Investigation, Broad Amnesty, and Forgiveness

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

=== News Update ===

It Has Happened: I’m a 9/11 Truther; A New Investigation, Broad Amnesty, and Forgiveness

by Ralph Lopez

April 3, 2008 at 23:36:35

The biggest problem with the 9/11 Truth Movement is where it leads: a place dark and evil beyond imagination. Even if deep down you believed it was an inside job, you would need to deny it.

So when hundreds of American military officers, pilots, engineers, and CIA veterans stepped forward to say they believed the official story to be a monstrous lie, I was shaken to the core. There had to be an explanation for everything. The combination of forces and heat that took down the towers was unique; no engineer could give a definitive answer. The hijackers got lucky, including a good dose of incompetence and shortsightedness on the part of the government, which is nearly criminal, but not complicit. It’s always easier for governments to lie than admit how stupid they are. The conspiracies led to the deep dark hole that we are ruled by criminal psychopaths, who, in one theory, had knowledge of impending attacks by bin Laden, and made sure they would succeed.

But are we? Hundreds of military officers of the highest rank with everything to lose (since their paychecks are signed by the US government), and scientific and engineering professionals, their credentials an open target, as well as the legions of Americans who sacrificed jobs or emptied their 401Ks to perform the thousands of hours of research, retrieval of video clips seen once on television then strangely disappeared, and all the other thankless, payless tasks associated with putting together evidence that can no longer be ignored. This tells me our republic is alive and well, and we can only be ruled by a cabal if we let them.

The credentials of patriotsquestion911.com read like a wall of shining brass and silver mounted on wood, the accomplishments of lifetimes decorating grandpa’s study: Former Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, 1981 – 1984. Also commanded the U.S. Army’s Electronic Research and Development Command and the U.S. Army’s Intelligence School and Center. Retired commercial airline captain with 27 years experience. Aircraft flown: Boeing 727, 757 and 767, McDonnell Douglas MD-80, and Fokker F-100. Retired fighter pilot. Former Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School (Topgun). Professor Emeritus, Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Former President, Joint Committee on Structural Safety, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.

And there are HUNDREDS of them.

Those buildings were full of people. How could anybody “pull” them down? How is it possible for a human being to do this?

It was happening to me. Reading all that two and four-star brass saying it looked like a conspiracy put me face-to-face with it. I was becoming a 9/11 Truther. Kooks, lunatics, nuts. Everyone knows this. But these experts were just too credible, something the movement hadn’t been before. I didn’t need to be an expert or do much more research. It had been done, by military personnel with more flying time and expertise than I would have in a dozen lifetimes. And if they said there were a hell of lot of questions that needed to be answered in a new commission, That was good enough for me. I am now a 9/11 Truther. Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.

Their words are unparsed and direct: “a joke,” “a cover-up,” “a monstrous series of lies,” “a pretext for war,” “not a serious piece of analysis,” riddled with “serious shortcomings,” “omissions,” and “major flaws.”

Here finally was the testimony I both sought and dreaded, confirming, in many cases, my first instincts on hearing the news on that terrible day. Amateur pilots flew these planes HOW FAR and threaded needles in a haystack? That pilot did a steep HOW MANY degree dive to hit the Pentagon? Everyone who has seen a demolition on TV is to believe that these were NOT demolitions, buildings falling at free-fall speed into their own footprint? But I’m no expert on much of anything. I leave it to the people who make this stuff their study 8 hours a day, year after year, and have the degrees to show for it.

Of the corkscrew dive which supposedly put a commercial airliner into the Pentagon, Pilots For 911 Truth say:

“Once this maneuver was completed, without going into a graveyard spiral, he started to pull out of the descent at 2200 feet and accelerated only 30 knots more at full power to 460 knots in a descent from 2200 feet to the pentagon in about a minute (Whats Vmo at sea level for a 757? Flap speed? Since it looks like he may have found the flap handle only accelerating 60 knots from 7000 feet, the from 2200 feet at full power). AA77 crossed the highways, knocking down light poles, entered ground effect, didnt touch the lawn and got a 44 foot high target (Tail height of 757) into a 77 foot target completely, without overshooting or bouncing off the lawn, or spreading any wreckage at 460 knots. With a 33 foot margin for error. Wow, impressive. Takes a real steady hand to pull that off. I know it would take me a few tries to get it so precise, especially entering ground effect at those speeds. Any slight movement will put you off 50 feet very quickly. Im sure we all would agree.”

“So, who pulled off this stunt? Hani Hanjour. Reported to have 600TT and a Commercial Certificate (see quotes right margin). Hani tried to get checked out in a 172 a few weeks prior at Freeway Airport in MD. Two seperate CFI’s took Hani up to check him out. Baxter and Conner found that Hani had trouble controlling and landing a 172 at 65 knots. Bernard, the Chief CFI, refused to rent him the 172. I have instructed many years. I have soloed students in 172′s when i had 300 hours as a CFI. How anyone could not control a 172 at 600TT and a Commercial is beyond me. Flight Schools keep going till you “get it” if you are a bit rusty, and then rent you the plane. They are in business to make money after all. .right? The Chief CFI basically refused any further lessons and basically told him to get lost.”

The question becomes: how do people deal with the monstrous implications of this? I think most people, even if they are convinced, could not deal with the enormity of an entire government this evil. But a limited cabal of criminal psychopaths I can wrap my mind around. That can be excised. Other countries have gone through their velvet revolutions, gone through truth commissions, like the silent protests of Mothers of the Disappeared in Argentina, and they have gone on. Pinochets and Fujimoris have been put on trial, or near it, and the countries have gone on. This can be done without civil strife and social upset. Some of the most important people in this kind of truth movement, the nation’s military officers, are speaking out.

For every sign of being surrounded by evil, I see three other signs of being surrounded by brave, fearless patriots. The relatively small cabal that the 9/11 Truth Movement leads us to involves, according to Lt. Col. Guy S. Razer, MS, U.S. Air Force (ret), “treasonous perpetrators that have infiltrated the highest levels of our government.”

The 9/11 Truth Movement should be about reconciliation and finding out the truth. Full amnesty should be offered to military officers who step forward who are privy to details of the stand-down, the Pentagon operation, or other military-technical details. Immunity should also be granted to members of Congress who believe they received briefings which may make them complicit. We have questions. Lots of questions. Mr. Wolfowitz, please elaborate on the phrase “absent a catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor” in reference to the Project for a New American Century’s clear advocacy of a military invasion of Iraq, page Section V of the essay “Rebuilding America’s Defenses.” Am I to take it that a new Pearl Harbor would have been welcomed? As a major policy-maker do you understand how close this is to treason, sir?

source: http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_ralph_lo_080402_it_has_happened_3a_i_m.htm

===

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

Robert Fisk: The fearful lives in a land of the free

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

=== News Update ===

Westerners assume that anyone with a Canadian passport is safe

I was given the chance to talk to 600 Muslim Canadians a few days ago. The dinner was in an Ottawa banqueting room and the guests also included the imam of the Ottawa mosque, the Ottawa chief of police and sundry uniformed Canadian army officers.

The imam sat between me and the Canadian capital’s top cop – a genuinely decent guy who wanted Muslim Canadians to regard him as a friend – and we were even able to joke about the reality of those “random checks” which Muslims of Middle Eastern origin and a certain R Fisk seem to receive at North American airports. All well and good, then, until I got up to speak.

I warned the audience they might not like all they heard from me. And sure enough, when I told the audience that they were perfectly at liberty to condemn Israel and America – indeed, that they should condemn both when they abuse human rights, occupy other people’s countries and shoot innocent civilians – but that I wanted to know why I so rarely heard them condemn the vicious police states in the Middle East and other areas of south-west Asia from which they originally came, I was greeted with silence. A smattering of Muslim diplomats sat like statues, thus identifying the cruelty of their regimes. The only immediate applause came when I remarked that the moment Western soldiers started shooting at Muslims in Muslim lands, it was time for the soldiers to withdraw.

Two interesting phenomena emerged from this remark. The first was that, when I finished, both the police chief and the Canadian army officers joined the applause. Canada’s hopeless military involvement in Afghanistan is a subject of considerable controversy within the Canadian military. When the politicians have had their say, I’ve discovered, soldiers usually let us know their views.

Much more revealing, however, was the long car journey I took next day across the frozen tundra of Canada during which two Muslim Canadian men – yes, yes, they had beards – explained to me just why their community was so silent about the iniquities perpetrated by their local dictatorships back home. I had suggested that they were rather too beholden to those regimes – for funding and political support. They agreed – up to a point.

“Mr Robert, you have to understand something,” the driver suddenly said. “They have their ‘mukhabarat’ agents here in Canada. Whenever there is even a dispute between families, anyone who’s angry can report back that his antagonist is anti-regime. We have to remember that we have families still in our Arab countries. They can be arrested. Or we can be arrested when we go back to visit them.”

Of course. Only a Westerner – only someone who automatically assumes that anyone with a Canadian passport is safe – could have failed to spot the flaw in the country’s brave multiethnic society: not that Canada’s vast communities from every part of the world live in the land of the free – which they do – but that their freedom is frighteningly circumscribed by the ruthlessness and lack of freedom in the countries from which they came.

And so I began to learn what it is like to be an Arab Canadian. It takes only a local argument to have an email winging its way back to Tripoli or Cairo or Damascus or the Gulf, informing the local despots that their dual citizen – Mohamed or Hassan or Abdulrahman or whatever – is a potential subversive and, ergo, a terrorist. And, so great is the co-operation between our beloved Western intelligence agencies and the torturers of these repulsive dictatorships that this “intelligence” is shared.

So only days after the original message has gone off to the Arab world, the “mukhabarat” privately tell the Canadian intelligence service – a truly silly institution called CSIS – that Mohamed or Hassan or Abdulrahman is a “terrorist”. At which point, Mohamed or Hassan or Abdulrahman come under observation from CSIS as potentially dangerous terrorists in Canada.

At which point I realised exactly why my remarks in the Ottawa banqueting hall were greeted with a frozen silence. It isn’t long ago, for example, that Maher Arar, who lives in Canada, was picked up by the FBI’s goons while in transit at JFK airport and “renditioned” to an underground prison and torture in Syria, courtesy of information provided by CSIS and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

The Canadian government subsequently awarded Arar $10m for this outrageous experience. But who wants to speak out against one’s country of origin if it’s going to end in the company of a well-trained torturer?

Just as Tariq Ali revealed the darkness behind the Bhutto legend in the London Review of Books last year, so my favourite lawyer, Gareth Peirce – she of In the Name of the Father fame – has now shone her crimson torch upon the British version of these iniquitous goings on.

In the same publication, she has given the most detailed account so far of the fraudulent British promises given to Arabs who chose to return to their savage homelands – rather than languish under a form of house arrest in the UK – that they would be neither tortured nor imprisoned after they went home.

When Benaissa Taleb and Rida Dendani were packed off back to Algeria, for instance, a British diplomat had promised that they would be detained for only a few hours. But they were both interrogated and beaten for 12 days in Algiers before being sentenced to years in prison. When Dendani appealed desperately to the British Special Immigration Appeals Commission, the SIAC didn’t even bother to reply. And there was no reason why they should.

As Peirce has now revealed from court papers, private memoranda between the Home Office and Anthony Blair (I am truly sorry that I must mention this wretched man’s name again), a caution from civil servants about the probable torture to which deported Egyptians might be subjected if sent to Cairo, was greeted by our former prime minister with the words: “Get them back.” In reference to the Home Office’s concern that Egyptian assurances could not be trusted, Blair wrote: “This is a bit much. Why do we need all these things?”

Am I the only one to react to the preachy, hypocritical sermon by this detestable man at Westminster Cathedral on Thursday with something more than disgust? Because it is his callous, immoral reaction to that deportation case – and the response of countless political leaders like him – towards Muslims in Europe and North America that led to that cold, hollow, frightening silence in the Ottawa banqueting hall. If I had been among the audience, I now realise, I would have remained silent too.

source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/fisk/robert-fisk-the-fearful-lives-in-a-land-of-the-free-804914.html

===

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

Survey: “19% Say USA on Right Track.” Who ARE These People?

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

=== News Update ===

Posted April 5, 2008 | 05:31 PM (EST)

The lead NY Times story yesterday is headlined: “81 Percent in Poll Say Nation Is Headed on Wrong Track” and the first paragraph tells us this is the highest number since 1992 poll (this Times/CBS News poll was first conducted in 1991) and way up from the 35 percent figure in 2002.

Hmmm…
1. The last time four-fifths of the nation was so negative about the future of the United States was in the last year of the presidency of Bush 41.
2. The percentage of people generally happy with the direction of the country has been steadily declining during the presidency of Bush 43.

The surprising thing to me is not that 81 percent are depressed and say that “things in the country have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track” but that 19 percent are not. It means that out of 233 million noninstitutionalized American adults, 44 million believe the country is “generally going in the right direction.”

Think about it – 44 million noninstitutionalized adult Americans with continuing faith that our ship of state is sailing on the right course.

A puzzler is that 28 percent of those surveyed think Dubya is doing a great job, i.e., 65 million Americans. So 21 million Americans (65 million minus 44 million) think the United States is on the wrong track but Dubya does a great job. The ship is heading in the wrong direction, but the captain is a heckuva helmsman.

In fairness, the poll was taken before the BLS released the news that in the first three months of 2008 the U.S. economy had shed 232,000 jobs, which includes not only a job loss of 80,000 in March – the largest monthly decline in five years – but also major upward revisions of job losses in the previous two months. The last time we had three consecutive months of job loss was in the second quarter of 2003. If we need 100,000 new jobs a month to keep pace with population growth, the economy has a cumulative shortfall of more than half a million jobs so far this year. The unemployment data were also ominous, with the unemployment rate resuming its upward climb, rising to 5.1 percent from 4.8 percent in February.

source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-tepper-marlin/survey-19-say-usa-on-righ_b_95243.html

===

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

Proof Bush Deceived America

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

=== News Update ===

Ray McGovern

January 13, 2006

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour. A 27-year veteran of the CIA’s analysis ranks, he is now on the steering group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

James Risen’s State of War: the Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration, may hold bigger secrets than the disclosure that President George W. Bush authorized warrantless eavesdropping on Americans.

Risen’s book also confirms the most damning element of the British Cabinet Office memos popularly called the “Downing Street memos;” namely, that “the intelligence and the facts were being fixed around the policy.” The result is that it is no longer credible to maintain that the failures in the Iraqi intelligence were the product of a broken intelligence community. The Bush administration deliberately fabricated the case against Iraq, lying to Congress and the American people along the way.

Risen, a senior reporter for The New York Times, reports that British Prime Minister Tony Blair had an urgent need in the summer of 2002 to get the equivalent of a “second opinion” regarding Bush’s plans for war in Iraq—insight independent of his own telephone conversations with the president and independent of what Blair was hearing from his own foreign office.

During his April 2002 visit to Crawford, Blair had gone out on a limb in pledging to support war on Iraq. The following months saw him getting nervous. So he chose what intelligence parlance calls a “back channel,” and sent the chief of British intelligence, Richard Dearlove, to Washington to sound out his counterpart: the garrulous CIA director George Tenet, who he knew to be very close to the president.

The highly revealing Downing Street memo contained the minutes of Dearlove’s briefing of Blair and his top advisers upon his return from Washington on July 23. But what the memo left unanswered was the question of who gave Dearlove the confidence to say this to his prime minister:

Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and the facts were being fixed around the policy.

When the Sunday Times published the minutes of that key briefing on May 1, 2005, it seemed a safe bet that Dearlove’s source was Tenet, and I said so.

Now we have the confirmation. Risen writes that George Tenet was reluctant to receive Dearlove, but acquiesced when the British made clear that Blair considered the back-channel meeting urgent. Tenet then rose to the occasion—with a vengeance. Risen, quoting a former senior CIA official who helped host the British for a session that lasted most of Saturday, July 20, 2002, reports that Tenet and Dearlove had a 90-minute one-on-one conversation, during which Tenet was “very candid.”

Risen adds that by the time of this “intelligence summit,” senior CIA officials had concluded that “the quality of the intelligence on weapons of mass destruction didn’t really matter,” since war was inevitable. That perverse attitude certainly prevailed two months later, when the fabricated National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq and WMD was produced by Tenet’s National Intelligence Council in a successful attempt to deceive Congress into voting for war.

A former CIA official told Risen that after the conversation with Tenet, Richard Dearlove could certainly “figure out what was going on; plus, the MI6 station chief in Washington was in CIA headquarters all the time, with just about complete access to everything.” In any case, we now know that Blair got what he wanted out of the visit—the inside scoop from someone enjoying the complete trust of, and daily access to, President Bush.

The president now says that he does not want his political opposition to dwell on how he lied to Congress and the American people in order to invade a country and kill tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians and more than 2,200 U. S. troops—not to mention the many thousands maimed for life. Perhaps he knows that Risen’s book could do as much damage to his administration by calling renewed attention to the Downing Street memos as is likely to be done by the revelations of the secret NSA wiretapping.

One world leader recognizes the extreme danger of official lies told to a nation in the service of an aggressive war. He also happens to be a leader who survived the horrors of fascism in the last century. In a Jan. 1 address to the world, Pope Benedict XVI spoke about the consequences of lies such as these, in what can only be a thinly veiled reference to the president of the United States:

…Sacred Scripture, in its very first book, Genesis, points to the lie told at the very beginning of history by the animal with a forked tongue, whom the Evangelist John calls ”the father of lies” (Jn 8:44). Lying is also one of the sins spoken of in the final chapter of the last book of the Bible, Revelation, which bars liars from the heavenly Jerusalem: ”outside are… all who love falsehood” (22:15). Lying is linked to the tragedy of sin and its perverse consequences, which have had, and continue to have, devastating effects on the lives of individuals and nations. We need but think of the events of the past century, when aberrant ideological and political systems wilfully twisted the truth and brought about the exploitation and murder of an appalling number of men and women, wiping out entire families and communities. After experiences like these, how can we fail to be seriously concerned about lies in our own time, lies which are the framework for menacing scenarios of death in many parts of the world.

The ethos of the Central Intelligence Agency in which my contemporaries and I worked was chiseled into the marble at the entrance of CIA headquarters: “You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

Sadly, the agency has come a long way.

source: http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/01/13/proof_bush_deceived_america.php

===

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

US forces are getting increasingly bogged down in the Afghanistan quagmire

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

=== News Update ===

US forces are getting increasingly bogged down in the Afghanistan quagmire

By Kaleem Omar

4/6/2008 At a NATO summit that ended in the Romanian capital of Bucharest on Friday, US President George W. Bush promised that the United States will increase its forces in Afghanistan next year no matter what happens in Iraq. He told a NATO session that included Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Thursday that the US is committed to “winning the war” in Afghanistan and will remain committed even after he leaves office in January 2008. His statement came in the wake of a pledge by the US’s European allies to supply nearly 2,500 more troops themselves to join 3,500 additional US Marines sent by Bush.

“The president wanted to make it clear that the United States is committed to Afghanistan for the long haul and to send a signal to our allies that at the same time we are asking them to commit additional troops to Afghanistan that they know that we will also continue to have a significant troop presence there…regardless of the situation in Iraq,” said White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe.

A report published in the Washington Post on Saturday said, “The pledge comes as violence and insurgent activity is spiking in parts of Afghanistan. The administration’s promise of more troops could indicate the beginning of a push, similar to the buildup of (US) forces in Iraq over the past year, to step up counterinsurgency operations next year. Such a decision would probably fall to Bush’s successor, but Defence Secretary Robert M. Gates said he senses bipartisan support.”

The Post quoted Gates as telling American reporters traveling with him on Friday as he left the Bucharest summit for a Middle East trip, “I think that no matter who is elected president, they will want to be successful in Afghanistan.”

The Post said that US National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley signaled the commitment to sending additional American troops to Afghanistan in 2009 during a media briefing in Bucharest on Thursday. “We have plans to contemplate additional contributions of troops in Afghanistan in the south in 2009,” Hadley said, adding that “these are all in addition to the 3,500 Marines now going to Afghanistan.”

But neither Hadley nor Gates indicated how many troops. The Post report noted that “commanders in Afghanistan have said they could use as many as two or three additional brigades, or nearly 10,000 troops. The report quoted Gates as saying that he would like to wait until after the US Marines in Afghanistan return home later this year to decide on 2009 troop levels.

Meanwhile, General David W. McKiernan, the nominated commander of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, told the US Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday that the United States should examine options for deploying more brigades. “There are certainly no signs that the insurgency is ready to collapse,” McKiernan said.

In plain words, all this suggests that the US and ISAF forces are getting increasingly bogged down in the quagmire that is Afghanistan today, and are making little headway in their efforts to defeat what they call the “insurgency”.

What they are actually facing, however, is not an “insurgency” but a resistance movement made up of Afghans who want to get rid of the foreign forces that have occupied their country.

The Geneva Convention, to which the United States and all the other NATO countries are signatories, says that it is perfectly legal for the citizens of a country occupied by foreign troops to attack those troops in an effort to drive them out. The US-led ISAF is not an “international security assistance force”; it is a foreign occupation army that has no business being in Afghanistan in the first place.

When General McKiernan said that “there are no signs that the insurgency is ready to collapse,” he should have known that history shows that the Afghani people have never accepted the occupation of their country by foreign troops and have never stopped fighting them – as the Soviet Union learned to its cost in the 1980s when it had an occupation force of more than 100,000 troops in Afghanistan. More than 10,000 Soviet troops were killed and 37,000 wounded in ten years of fighting between anti-Communist Muslim Afghan guerillas (mujahideen) and Afghan government and Soviet forces.

The conflict had its origins in the 1978 coup that overthrew Afghan president Sardar Muhammad Daud Khan, who had come to power by ousting his cousin King Zahir Shah in 1973. Daud was assassinated and a pro-Soviet Communist government under Noor Mohammad Taraki was established. In 1979 another coup, which brought Hafizullah Amin to power, provoked an invasion (in December 1979) by Soviet forces and the installation of Babrak Karmal as president.

The Soviet invasion, which sparked Afghan resistance, initially involved an estimated 30,000 troops, a force that ultimately grew to over 100,000. In the beginning, the mujahideen fought the Soviet troops on their own, using little more than antiquated rifles against Soviet troops equipped with massive firepower. It wasn’t until about two years later (when the world saw that the mujahideen were more than holding their own against the mighty Soviet military machine) that outside aid began to flow to the Afghan fighters. The mujahideen were supported by aid from the United States, China and Saudi Arabia, channeled through Pakistan, and from Iran.

Although the Soviet Union had superior weapons and complete air control (just as the US forces have today), the Afghan guerillas successfully eluded them. The conflict largely settled into a stalemate, with Soviet and puppet Afghan government forces controlling the urban areas, and the Afghan guerillas operating fairly freely in mountainous rural regions. As the war progressed the Afghan guerillas improved their organisation and tactics, and began to use imported and captured weapons, including US anti-aircraft Stinger missiles, to neutralise the technological advantages of the Soviet Union.

In 1986, Babrak Karmal resigned and Mohammed Najibullah (who until then had been chief of the infamous Afghan intelligence agency) became head of a collective leadership. In 1988, following several rounds of the so-called “proximity talks” in Geneva between Soviet officials and Pakistani government officials, then-Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev announced the withdrawal of Soviet troops, which was completed in February 1989.

In the spring of 1992, Najibullah’s government collapsed. Najibullah himself (probably the most hated man in Afghanistan at the time) ended up being publicly hanged. After 14 years of rule by the pro-Soviet People’s Democratic Party, Kabul fell to a coalition of mujahideen groups under the military leadership of Ahmed Shah Massoud.

Years of internecine fighting between the various mujahideen groups followed, in which much of Kabul was reduced to rubble by artillery shelling. In November 1996, Kabul fell to Taliban forces advancing from their southern stronghold of Kandahar.

The war left Afghanistan with severe political, economic and ecological problems. Most of the country’s infrastructure had been destroyed. Economic production was drastically curtailed, and much of the land was laid waste. More than 1 million Afghans died in the war and 5 million became refugees in neighbouring countries, including 3 million in Pakistan, which welcomed them with open arms and has continued to look after them to this day, despite the fact that Afghanistan was the only country which had voted against Pakistan’s entry into the United Nations in 1948.

At the end of the war against the Soviet Union, more than 5 million Soviet landmines littered vast tracts of the countryside, where they will continue to pose a threat to human and animal life well into the 21st century.

In response to the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York and the Pentagon building in Washington, the United States and the United Kingdom launched a war against Afghanistan on October 7, 2001. It was the beginning of the Bush administrations so-called “war on terrorism”.

The stated purpose of the invasion was to capture Osama bin Laden, destroy al-Qaeda and remove the Taliban regime.

More than six years down the road, neither the first nor the second of the three US objectives has been achieved. And while the Taliban regime in Kabul was ousted within a few days of the start of the invasion, it was more a case of the Taliban fighters withdrawing from the capital and melting away into the countryside than a case of a military victory for the United States.

Now, the US-led ISAF and NATO forces are facing an increasingly resurgent Taliban, who control much of the countryside in the south.

source: http://www.thenews.com.pk/print1.asp?id=105158

===

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

SADDAM IS INNOCENT, AGAIN

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

=== News Update ===

Bush II shows gratitude to Emir of Kuwait for saving his daddy

SADDAM IS INNOCENT, AGAIN

Saturday-Monday, April 5-7, 2008

Recently, the Pentagon has been releasing information from more than 600,000 pages of intelligence reports and thousands of hours of audio and video tapes stolen from the legitimate Iraqi government. One would think that the reason for the release of information would be to bolster the Bush administration’s decision to attack Iraq. Curiously, this is not the case.

A couple of weeks ago, the Pentagon said that, according to the documents, there was absolutely no collaboration between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin-Laden. This is not earth-shattering news, but the admittance of the Pentagon of non-collusion is.

A few days ago, another statement, based on the intelligence information came forth from the Pentagon: there was no Iraqi plot to kill George Bush I in Kuwait in April 1993. To this day, many people still believe the fairy tale. Again, those who followed the issue knew all along Iraq had not created such a scenario.

The March 23, 2008 issue of Newsweek ran an article called “Saddam’s Files,” written by Michael Isikoff. It stated:

President Bush said lots of things about Saddam Hussein in the run-up to the Iraq War. But few of his charges grabbed more attention than an unscripted remark he made at a Texas political fund-raiser on Sept. 26, 2002. “After all, this is a guy who tried to kill my dad at one time,” Bush said. The comment referred to a 1993 claim by the Kuwaiti government—accepted by the Clinton administration—that the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) had plotted to assassinate President George H.W. Bush during a trip to Kuwait that spring. Ever since, armchair psychologists have suggested that personal revenge may have been one reason for the president’s determination to overthrow Saddam’s regime.

But curiously little has been heard about the allegedly foiled assassination plot in the five years since the U.S. military invaded Iraq. A just-released Pentagon study on the Iraqi regime’s ties to terrorism only adds to the mystery. The review, conducted for the Pentagon‘s Joint Forces Command, combed through 600,000 pages of Iraqi intelligence documents seized after the fall of Baghdad, as well as thousands of hours of audio- and videotapes of Saddam’s conversations with his ministers and top aides. The study found that the IIS kept remarkably detailed records of virtually every operation it planned, including plots to assassinate Iraqi exiles and to supply explosives and booby-trapped suitcases to Iraqi embassies. But the Pentagon researchers found no documents that referred to a plan to kill Bush. The absence was conspicuous because researchers, aware of its potential significance, were looking for such evidence. “It was surprising,” said one source familiar with the preparation of the report (who under Pentagon ground rules was not permitted to speak on the record). Given how much the Iraqis did document, “you would have thought there would have been some veiled reference to something about [the plot].”

The stated reason behind the cowardly attack that killed Iraqi artist Layla al-Attar was as bogus as any given during the demonizing of Iraq from 1990 to 2003. Clinton proclaimed that information was in-hand that showed Iraqi operatives were behind an aborted assassination attempt on former President George Bush in April 1993 at a ceremony praising him in Kuwait. Clinton added that Saddam Hussein ordered the attempt on Bush’s life. At the last minute, those who were to carry out the attack were apprehended and Clinton had to teach the Iraqis a lesson.

To this day, the big lie still persists. Those arrested were merely drug and alcohol smugglers. In the aftermath of the June 26 missile attack, one-by-one the mythical would-be assassins were released from Kuwaiti jails, but, the U.S. media did not consider this information newsworthy. It was not as exciting as assassination plots and missile attacks.

On November 1, 1993, the New Yorker published an article by Seymour Hersh titled “A Case Not Closed.” In it, Hersh went into detail about the entire event and basically showed there was no validity to Clinton’s claim.

Why did Clinton order this attack? At the time, Republicans and pro-war Democrats criticized him for being “weak” on Iraq and other invisible threats against the U.S. Clinton had to earn respect. What better target than Iraq, a defenseless country that was isolated because of U.S. propaganda?

According to Hersh:

Three of the million-dollar missiles missed their targets and landed on nearby homes, killing eight civilians, including Layla al-Attar, one of Iraq’s most gifted artists. The death toll was considered acceptable by the White House. Clinton administration officials acknowledged that they had been “lucky,” as one national security aide put it, in that only three of the computer-guided missiles went off course.

Thus, on a Saturday in June, the president and his advisors could not resist proving their toughness in the international arena. If they had truly had full confidence in what they were telling the press and the public about Saddam Hussein’s involvement in a plot to kill George bush, they would have almost certainly ordered a far fiercer response than they did. As it was, confronted with evidence too weak to be conclusive but, in their view, perhaps not weak enough to be dismissed, they chose to fire missiles at night at an intelligence center in the middle of a large populous city.

This coming, and every subsequent June 26^th, most Iraqis will mourn the assassination of Layla al-Attar. And, on that day, those resistance fighters who are at work will remember her.

One-by-one, each lie put forth as a reason to invade Iraq has been dismantled. Some have been debunked a while ago, while others are now being highlighted. The difference is that now the mainstream U.S. press is publishing the lies. Still, no one has been called to take legal responsibility for war crimes, so the only use for the current coming clean is that people like me can say, “I told you so.” Once called “wackos,” we have been vindicated.

There is only one more occurrence that will herald the significance of the re-writing of the re-written falsehoods about Iraq. That day will come when the progressive and leftist elements of the U.S. anti-war and peace movements stop stating, “The war was wrong, but at least Saddam Hussein is gone.”

source: http://www.malcomlagauche.com/id1.html

===

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

Zionism A Lethal Virus In Western Politics Political Poison. Where is the antidote?

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

=== News Update ===

Political poison

Zionism A Lethal Virus In Western Politics Political Poison. Where is the antidote?

Western politics is infected with a lethal virus, diagnoses Eric Walberg

This year’s sixth international Cairo Conference against imperialism and Zionism continued the same themes as last year: dialogue between the left and Muslims, the struggle against Islamophobia, press censorship, torture and dictatorship, and the chance for Western peace groups to network on Middle East issues. The most inspiring project was the growing campaign to boycott Israel in the West and plans to coordinate this on an international level with the long- standing Arab and Muslim boycott campaign.

Otherwise, there was little to gladden activists, for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan continue apace, not to mention the increased brutality of Israel against the Palestinian people. There are changes going on in Western countries, with increased activism of students and trade unionists. But the political scene is dismal, despite the overwhelming unpopularity of US-NATO/Israeli wars, as governments continue to bow to Zionist pressures — both internal and external.

A case in point is Canada, which was unofficially represented at the conference by 14 members of the Canadian Peace Alliance (CPA) and others from student organisations. Delegates to last year’s conference were attacked in the right-wing National Post and Ottawa Citizen for consorting with “terrorists” and “shouldn’t be surprised if they come under scrutiny of the Canadian security services”, simply for their willingness to dialogue with Muslims fighting the various wars now being inflicted on them. But they were not intimidated and returned full of energy. The conference gave them the opportunity to continue to share their experiences and make valuable contacts in the anti-war struggle. Al-Ahram Weekly spoke with several delegates about what is happening in the land of the maple leaf.

The Canadian political scene has been transformed in the past year, and not for the better. The 2,500 Canadian troops in the dangerous southern Kandahar region of Afghanistan had their mission extended to 2011 on 13 March in what was billed as a fateful parliamentary vote, as the pro-war Conservatives have only a minority government and the war is deeply unpopular among Canadians. In a recent poll, only 15 per cent favoured extending the troop presence to 2011, with 60 per cent in favour of bringing the troops home now. In fact, the vote was a walk-over, with the Liberals voting alongside the minority Conservative government, with only the small social democratic New Democratic Party (NDP) and the Bloc Quebecois voting against.

How was this possible? The Liberal Party leader, Stephane Dion, should be a natural opponent of the war. In fact, as Liberal critic for foreign affairs in 2006, he voted against extending Canada’s original commitment of troops, which was to end in 2005. Quebec politicians — mainly Liberal — opposed WWI and WWII, and the federal governments of the time dared not introduce conscription, fearing the collapse of the Canadian confederation. Yet Dion was manipulated into supporting the Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper and forcing his own Liberals to vote against what is clearly a violation of Canada’s sacred role as peacemaker in international affairs. Despite strict pressure by party whip Karen Redman, 20 Liberals didn’t show up and one — Newfoundland MP Bill Matthews — dared vote against. Redman issued a statement saying she “would make whatever decisions need to be made” to punish the truants and the lone rebel. Meanwhile, in a less than subtle propaganda ploy to counter French-Canadian distaste for “fighting other people’s wars”, the media is always highlighting Quebecois troops bravely fighting the “detestable scumbags and cowards”, as Canadian Chief of Defence Staff General Rick Hillier famously called the Taliban.

A partial answer to Dion’s political about-face was revealed at a bi-election meeting two days after the parliamentary vote, on 15 March in Toronto. Bob Rae, an ex-NDP leader and born- again Liberal, was running in a safe Liberal constituency. When CPA members heard about the meeting, 10 snuck in the back door, raised their anti-war banner and demanded to hear why, in a democracy, the overwhelming opinion of the electorate was being ignored by the leading candidate. Dion, who was present, was paralysed, while Rae smoothly offered the protesters their 30 seconds but proceeded to ignore their question. When establishment journalists took up the theme, he neatly sidestepped the issue and escaped unscathed. Interestingly, Rae, a committed Zionist — his wife is vice-president of the main pro-Israeli lobby, the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) — came second to Dion during the last leadership convention, and is clearly being preened as the heir apparent when the Liberals collapse in the next election.

An earlier bi-election last year in another supposedly safe Liberal riding in Quebec backfired even more spectacularly for the Liberal leader. Outremont has been Liberal for 68 of the 73 years it has existed, and the NDP traditionally fares abysmally in Quebec. Yet they won 48 per cent of the vote there in an election that NDP leader Jack Layton called a “referendum on Afghanistan”. Layton is called “Taliban Jack” by pro-war critics, just one step away from being put on a terrorist watch list like last year’s Cairo Conference delegates presumably have been. His is virtually the only clear anti-war voice on the national scene, despite the solid anti-war sentiment in Canada, which stubbornly refuses to bow to the pro-war media.

The Afghan debacle has already cost over 80 Canadian soldiers’ lives (vs Britain’s 91), and the Canadian taxpayers well over $5 billion (official figures are $3 billion by 2009), as the government hurries to slash social spending. An intelligent and brave politician should be able to take this issue and run with it. But just as Democratic presidential contender Obama Barack’s anti-war position is now being deriding by US media as his “weak point”, no Canadian politician is allowed to do what should come naturally in any democracy worthy of the name.

All this is in fact an eerie replay of John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt’s argument about the Israeli lobby in the US, whose “core” is “American Jews who make a significant effort in their daily lives to bend US policy so that it furthers Israel’s interests.” Its Canadian counterpart, led by the CJC and Bnai Brith, through extensive media control and privileged access to the highest levels of government, has poisoned the Canadian political scene, paralysing the anti-war majority and choking all debate, pushing the Liberals into the Conservatives’ arms on the one issue that could win them the next election. Canada’s continued agony in Afghanistan is vital to the Israeli lobby; after all, a rejection of the Canadian role in the genocide in Afghanistan is a step down the slippery slope of a rejection of blind support for Israel’s genocide in Palestine.

Instead, the Liberals are now very likely to lose — probably resoundingly, with their indecisive leader flip-flopping on the one issue that could secure him victory. Just as McCain is now the favourite of the US pro-Israeli lobby and US anti- war sentiment is stifled and ignored, Harper has earned their Canadian counterpart’s favour and anti-war proponents are silenced, allowing the Conservatives to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat in the next election, with the media cheering him on and a disillusioned electorate splitting the vote among lesser parties or merely staying home.

This poison has unfortunately infected the NDP as well as shown by its caving in to the Zionist lobby on its campaign to boycott Durban 2, the UN Conference against Racism to be held next year in South Africa. The upcoming conference was loudly denounced by both Harper and Dion for daring to criticise Zionism as a form of racism, and NDP foreign affairs critic Paul Dewar, apparently without clearance from Layton, joined the chorus. When CPA activists protested to Layton personally, he claimed ignorance and to his credit had all references to this criticism of the UN conference removed from NDP websites. However, he did not actually support the conference and certainly would never dare criticise Israel or Zionism in any significant way. On the contrary, several NDP MPs are outspoken supporters of Israel. None openly support Palestine. So the rot goes deep into all parties on the Canadian political scene.

An interesting footnote to poor Canada’s plight is how it is being used as a Trojan Horse to encourage more NATO troops to actively fight the Taliban alongside Canadian troops. CAP activist Sid Lacombe told the Weekly his Dutch and German colleagues explain that their foreign/defence ministers would never try to convince unsympathetic electorates that the US needs help. Instead, they talk about how “Canada helped liberate us from the Nazis,” arguing “we Europeans owe them one.”

The sorry state of Canada’s political scene is replicated in Britain, according to peace activist Ian Taylor, who told the Weekly the one hope to fight their Israeli lobby, George Galloway’s newly minted Respect Party, is collapsing under the weight of too many expectations and media loathing. Labour was long ago co-opted by the Zionists (the latest bribery political scandal involves Labour Friends of Israel). A trip through Western “democracies” surely would turn up similar sad cases of political near death from poisoning. Where is the antidote

source: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2008/891/in3.htm

===

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