Muslim in Suffer

Bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem. Assalamu\’alaikum Warohmatullahi Wabarokatuh!

Archive for January 24th, 2008

How did Western Civilization get a monopoly on “moral conscience” when it has no morality?

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

The “Brutal World”

How did Western Civilization get a monopoly on “moral conscience” when it has no morality?

By Paul Craig Roberts

“The first use of nuclear weapons must remain in the quiver of escalation as the ultimate instrument to prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction.”
Five Western military leaders.

23/01/08 “ICH” — — I read the statement three times trying to figure out the typo. Then it hit me, the West has now out-Owellled Orwell: The West must nuke other countries in order to prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction! In Westernspeak, the West nuking other countries does not qualify as the use of weapons of mass destruction.

The astounding statement comes from a paper prepared for a Nato summit in April by five top military leaders–an American, a German, a Dutchman, a Frenchman, and a Brit. It can be found here: [ http://www.guardian.co.uk/nato/story/0,,2244782,00.html ]

The paper, prepared by men regarded as distinguished leaders and not as escapees from insane asylums, argues that “the West’s values and way of life are under threat, but the West is struggling to summon the will to defend them.” The leaders find that the UN is in the way of the West’s will, as is the European Union which is obstructing NATO and “NATO’s credibility is at stake in Afghanistan.”

And that’s a serious matter. If NATO loses its credibility in Afghanistan, Western civilization will collapse just like the Soviet Union. The West just doesn’t realize how weak it is. To strengthen itself, it needs to drop more and larger bombs.

The German military leader blames the Merkel government for contributing to the West’s inability to defend its values by standing in the way of a revival of German militarism. How can Germany be “a reliable partner” for America, he asks, if the German government insists on “special rules” limiting the combat use of its forces in Afghanistan?

Ron Asmus, head of the German Marshall Fund and a former US State Department official, welcomed the paper as “a wake-up call.” Asmus means a call to wake-up to the threats from the brutal world, not to the lunacy of Western leaders.

Who, what is threatening the West’s values and way of life? Political fanaticism, religious fundamentalism, and the imminent spread of nuclear weapons, answer the five asylum escapees.

By political fanaticism, do they mean the neoconservatives who believe that the future of humanity depends on the US establishing its hegemony over the world? By religious fundamentalism, do they mean “rapture evangelicals” agitating for armageddon or Christian and Israeli Zionists demanding a nuclear attack on Iran? By spread of nuclear weapons, do they mean Israel’s undeclared and illegal possession of several hundred nuclear weapons?

No. The paranoid military leaders see all the fanaticism, religious and otherwise, and all the threats to humanity as residing outside Western civilization (Israel is inside). The “increasingly brutal world,” of which the leaders warn, is “over there.” Only Muslims are fanatics. All us white guys are rational and sane.

There is nothing brutal about the US/Nato bombing of Serbia, Iraq, and Afghanistan, or the Israeli bombing of Lebanon, or the Israeli ethnic cleansing of the West Bank, or the genocide Israel hopes to commit against Palestinians in Gaza.

All of this, as well as America’s bombing of Somalia, America’s torture dungeons, show trials of “detainees,” and overthrow of elected governments and installation of puppet rulers, is the West’s necessary response to keep the brutal world at bay.

Brutal things happen in the “brutal world” and are entirely the fault of those in the brutal world. None of this would happen if the inhabitants of the brutal world would just do as they are told. How can the civilized world with its monopoly on morality allow people in the brutal world to behave independently? I mean, really! God forbid, they might attack some innocent country.

The “brutal world” consists of those immoral fanatics who object to being marginalized by the West and who reply to mass bombings from the air and to the death and destruction inflicted on them through myriad ways by strapping on a suicide bomb.

Unable to impose its will on countries it has invaded with conventional arms, the West’s military leaders are now prepared to force compliance with the moral world’s will by threatening to nuke those who resist. You see, since the West has the monopoly on morality, truth, and justice, those in the outside world are obviously evil, wicked and brutal. Therefore, as President Bush tells us, it is a simple choice between good and evil, and there’s no better candidate than evil for being nuked. The sooner we can get rid of the brutal world, the sooner we will have “freedom and democracy” everywhere that’s left.

Meanwhile, the United States, the great moral light unto the world, has just prevented the United Nations from censuring Israel, the world’s other great moral light, for cutting off food supplies, medical supplies, and electric power to Gaza. You see, Gaza is in the outside world and is a home of the bad guys. Moreover, the wicked Palestinians there tricked the US when the US allowed them to hold a free election. Instead of electing the US candidate, the wicked voters elected a government that would represent them. The US and Israel overturned the Palestinian election in the West Bank, but those in Gaza clung to the government that they had elected. Now they are going to suffer and die until they elect the government that the US and Israel wants. I mean, how can we expect people in the brutal world to know what’s best for them?

The fact that the UN tried to stop Israel’s just punishment of the Gazans shows how right the five leaders’ report is about the UN being a threat to Western values and way of life. The UN is really against us. This puts the UN in the outside world and makes it a candidate for being nuked if not an outright terrorist organization. As our president said, “you are with us or against us.”

The US and Israel need a puppet government in Palestine so that a ghettoized remnant of Palestine can be turned into a “two state solution.” The two states will be Israel incorporating the stolen West Bank and a Palestinian ghetto without an economy, water, or contiguous borders.

This is necessary in order to protect Israel from the brutal outside world.

Inhabitants of the brutal world are confused about the “self-determination” advocated by Western leaders. It doesn’t mean that those outside Western civilization and Israel should decide for themselves. “Self” means American. The term, so familiar to us, means “American-determination.” The US determines and others obey.

It is the brutal world that causes all the trouble by not obeying.

source: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19142.htm

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

9/11 Hoax : The BBC’s ‘WTC 7 Collapsed At 4:54 p.m.’ Videos

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

The BBC’s ‘WTC 7 Collapsed

At 4:54 p.m.’ Videos

At 21:54 GMT on 9/11/2001 the BBC announced that WTC 7 had collapsed. There was just one problem with this news: WTC 7 did not collapse until 22:20 GMT.The videos below show the BBC World broadcast.

The two screenshots below show WTC 7 behind the reporter.

The following screenshot shows the satellite feed mysteriously breaking up roughly five minutes before the actual collapse.

BBC News 24 also broadcast that WTC 7 had collapsed, and a corroborative time stamp was on their broadcast. [357kB WMV video download]

21:54 GMT is 16:54 (4:54 PM) East Coast time, 26 minutes BEFORE WTC 7 actually collapsed.

Richard Porter, the head of news at BBC World issued this explanation of the BBC World video:

1. We’re not part of a conspiracy. Nobody told us what to say or do on September 11th. We didn’t get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down. We didn’t receive press releases or scripts in advance of events happening.2. In the chaos and confusion of the day, I’m quite sure we said things which turned out to be untrue or inaccurate – but at the time were based on the best information we had. We did what we always did – sourced our reports, used qualifying words like “apparently” or “it’s reported” or “we’re hearing” and constantly tried to check and double check the information we were receiving.

3. Our reporter Jane Standley was in New York on the day of the attacks, and like everyone who was there, has the events seared on her mind. I’ve spoken to her today and unsurprisingly, she doesn’t remember minute-by-minute what she said or did – like everybody else that day she was trying to make sense of what she was seeing; what she was being told; and what was being told to her by colleagues in London who were monitoring feeds and wires services.

4. We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of cock-up, not conspiracy). So if someone has got a recording of our output, I’d love to get hold of it. We do have the tapes for our sister channel News 24, but they don’t help clear up the issue one way or another.

5. If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error – no more than that. As one of the comments on You Tube says today “so the guy in the studio didn’t quite know what was going on? Woah, that totally proves conspiracy… “

Below are some selected comments made in reply to Mr Porter’s explanation:

How deservedly ironic that the BBC gets exposed for what it really is (a propaganda bureau that attempts to indoctrinate Britain and the world with a false reality) so soon after the airing of the appalling hit piece (9/11 conspiracy files) last Sunday night. Please show some respect for the BBC and the license fee paying public by answering a simple question. How did the BBC know that Building 7 was going to collapse 20 minutes before it actually did when prior to 9/11 no steel-structured building had ever collapsed due to fire?
I’m not a conspiracy nut. But this footage of your reports of WTC7 collapsing a full 20 minutes prior and repeatedly discussing it’s collapse is highly suspicious.If you were talking about a building that never did collapse, well then you’d just look incompetent. But as we all know, building 7 did, in a feat that suspended all laws of physics and logic, collapse spontaneously due to fires on floors 7 & 12.

You can’t possibly expect us to believe this. Let’s look at all the pieces here.

1. BBC reports for 20 solid minutes that WTC7 has collapsed when even in the live shot it stands as sturdy as the day it was built.

2. The idea that WTC7 would collapse spontaneously due to minor fires and minimal damage to the north face is laughable and an insult to intelligence. But it did, approximately 5 minutes AFTER BBC’s report….or at least 5 minutes after Jane Standley’s live shot was disconnected.

3. BBC loses all of it’s 9/11 footage so this cannot be reviewed or explained. My nephew still has all his VHS tapes from that day. He recorded almost every news station for 24 hours straight. He’s 19 now. He was 13 when it happened. So, a 13 year old can be more responsible with his VHS tapes than one of the largest news organizations?

4. The archive footage is mysteriously pulled off of YouTube and Google video repeatedly and without provocation or explanation.

5. BBC’s response is, ‘there is no conspiracy. it was a mistake.’

Grant us logical thinkers at least one thing. This is highly suspicious. The BBC needs to reveal what source they drew the conclusion that WTC7 had collapsed.

Oh, and the ez-out phrases like ‘it appears’ and ‘we’re receiving reports that..’ were not used throughout this footage.

Especially when the anchor starts talking about the (lack of) body count since there was so much time to evacuate since the collapse of WTC 1-2.

The BBC needs to reveal what source they drew the conclusion that WTC7 had collapsed. I do not necessarily think the BBC is a witting participant in some 9/11 conspiracy, but it’s definitely looking like you were a pawn. Revealing who/where the BBC received the information that WTC7 had collapsed would be a good start in clearing your name.

To report that a building had collapsed before it had done so would be an odd sort of error, wouldn’t it? A bit like reporting that the Lord Mayor’s trousers had fallen down before they did so.
Let’s say for a second that you messed up and reported a building going down that didn’t – why the exact one that DID? What are the odds? Why not by mistake report a building going down that DIDN’T actually go down?You lose footage of one of the most important days in modern history… 😉
(Good job! That way no one can “prove” anything that day…)Out of all the surrounding buildings that suffered massive damage – WTC 3,4,5,6 – and assorted others that suffered minor damage (amoung them, WTC 7 – Salomon Brothers Building), BBC – by merely a mistake and in confusion – picked exactly the right one that was going to fall -…. 😉
(Good job! Hey, BBC is incompetent – they lose tapes AND they claim buildings fall that haven’t – but what LUCK! They hit the lottery! What a ‘lucky guess’, huh?)

BBC should go to Vegas, with those odds – you’d be rich.

BBC is not part of the conspiracy – but you are just a bunch of pathetic dupes.

You capture the biggest smoking gun in history … and your response is ….. to call yourselves incompetent and go play ‘blind/deaf/dumb monkey’ on your public.

Good job, Guys!!

“If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error – no more than that.”Uh, it WASN’T an error… That’s the point. You keep harping on about what a chaotic day it was. Then why didn’t the anchor say something like, “We’re getting some unconfirmed reports of some other building apparently collapsing… We’ll have to check up on this… etc.” No, he had (23 minutes before hand) the name of the building, the correct # of floors in the building (47), the explanation of the collapse (weakened by other collapses), and he was reporting that the building was apparently empty. You even had graphics made up for the scrolling info at the bottom of the screen. That is some pretty precise reporting for a day of chaos when everyone was “…trying to make sense of what they were seeing… and what was being told by colleagues in London who were monitoring feeds and wires services.”

And there lies the key (perhaps). No doubt the info was just being fed to the anchor and reporter off the wires as the news would cross… So, which agency fed that bit about WTC7 collapsing? AP? Reuters? VOA? We’ll probably never know, but you got the information from some source more than 23 minutes before it happened (had to be longer than 23 minutes, because there must have been some delay from the time the story came over the wires and the time the anchor actually got the news out on the air).

Do I think the BBC is “…part of a conspiracy”? No… but you were played perfectly by some entity, IMO.

With respect, the response to this issue is unacceptable. At the very least you are minimizing your error and trivializing the life’s lost or the potential of life’s that could have been saved.In the most important final 7 minutes and 15 seconds of the said segment the words “apparently”, “it’s reported” or “we’re hearing” ARE NOT USED in context of building 7.The words used are those have definite and past tense.

“Now more on the latest building collapse in New York,…the Solomon Brothers Building collapse… and indeed it has”

“What can you tell us about the Salomon Building and it’s collapse?”

“When it collapsed”

Ticker –“The 47 storey Salomon Brothers building close to the World Trade Centre has also collapsed.”

Who is responsible for the newsroom in desk and floor prompters being used by the news presenter?
Who is responsible for the news report on the bottom screen news ticker?
Who is responsible as the newsroom floor source for giving these people information?
What is the complete list of editors and journalists responsible for this program on said day?

The words in your statement #4 of footage being lost may very well redefine irresponsible. The BBC Media Management policy clearly states TWO broadcast standard copies be retained one on a separate site as a master.

As follows.

Ref No.
Policy Area / Policy Statement
01
Components to be Retained
01-01

The following components to be retained:-

Two broadcast standard copies of all transmitted/published TV, Radio and BBCi output – one to be stored on a separate site as a master

One browse-quality version for research purposes, to protect the broadcast material

http://www.bbc.co.uk/foi/docs/historical_information/archive_policies/media_management_policy
_overview.htm#top

If the footage had continued, we’d all have been able to watch WTC 7 collapse right on your program.Good thing you lost the feed five minutes before THAT happened in front of all your viewers.

What in the world would you have said if that had happened?

What is going on here?

I’d like a little truth please.

I never actually thought I would live to see the day that things would surpass even Orwell, Huxley, Wells, Jack London, Sinclair Lewis, Zamyatin, Ayne Rand, on and on…but, the virtual reality that the “media” create for us now is truly more unfathomable than even those great minds warned us of.
Contrary to the dismissive tone of the “explanation”, whether or not the building was known to be about to fall goes to essential point of culpability for 9/11, foreknowledge.Those who are in the dock and being cross-examined are not allowed to wave their hands and create a plausible explanation. It’s gone too far for that. There is a disastrous war built on false evidence, and that falsification process may have begun much sooner than is generally now understood.

In ordinary life, a witness who lies about one thing will be assumed to lie about everything. And we aren’t talking about private matters, but about the essential role of a government to defend its country. This issue is about credibility of news sources during a terror attack, in which a rush to judgment resulted shortly in an invasion of a sovereign nation, and the BBC know it.

Thousands upon thousands of lives have been lost thus far, and there are doubtless more to come.


source: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/bbc_wtc7_videos.html

See also:

Larry Silverstein, WTC 7, and the 9/11 Demolition
Seffen’s Folly: Attempted 9/11 Hoax By Cambridge And The BBC Was A Failure

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

9/11 Contradictions: When Did Cheney Enter the Underground Bunker?

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

9/11 Contradictions: When Did Cheney Enter the Underground Bunker?

David Ray Griffin

The Canadian

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

With regard to the morning of 9/11, everyone agrees that at some time after 9:03 (when the South Tower of the World Trade Center was struck) and before 10:00, Vice President Dick Cheney went down to the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC), sometimes simply called the “bunker,” under the east wing of the White House. Everyone also agrees that, once there, Cheney was in charge—that he was either making decisions or relaying decisions from President Bush. But there is enormous disagreement as to exactly when Cheney entered the PEOC.

According to The 9/11 Commission Report, Cheney arrived “shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58” (The 9/11 Commission Report [henceforth 9/11CR], 40). This official time, however, contradicts almost all previous reports, some of which had him there before 9:20. This difference is important because, if the 9/11 Commission’s time is correct, Cheney was not in charge in the PEOC when the Pentagon was struck, or for most of the period during which United Flight 93 was approaching Washington. But if the reports that have him there by 9:20 are correct, he was in charge in the PEOC all that time.

Mineta’s Report of Cheney’s Early Arrival

The most well-known statement contradicting the 9/11 Commission was made by Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta during his public testimony to the 9/11 Commission on May 23, 2003. Saying that he “arrived at the PEOC at about 9:20 AM,” Mineta reported that he then overheard part of an ongoing conversation, which had obviously begun before he arrived, between a young man and Vice President Cheney. This conversation was about a plane coming toward Washington and ended with Cheney confirming that “the orders still stand.” When Commissioner Timothy Roemer later asked Mineta how long after his arrival he overheard this conversation about whether the orders still stood, Mineta replied: “Probably about five or six minutes.” This would mean, Roemer pointed out, “about 9:25 or 9:26.”

This is a remarkable contradiction. Given the fact that Cheney, according to Mineta, had been engaged in an ongoing exchange, he must have been in the PEOC for several minutes before Mineta’s 9:20 arrival. If Cheney had been there since 9:15, there would be a 43-minute contradiction between Mineta’s testimony and The 9/11 Commission Report. Why would such an enormous contradiction exist?

One possible explanation would be that Mineta was wrong. His story, however, is in line with that of many other witnesses.

Other Reports Supporting Cheney’s Early Arrival

Richard Clarke reported that he, Cheney, and Condoleezza Rice had a brief meeting shortly after 9:03, following which the Secret Service wanted Cheney and Rice to go down to the PEOC. Rice, however, first went with Clarke to the White House’s Video Teleconferencing Center, where Clarke was to set up a video conference, which began at about 9:10. After spending a few minutes there, Rice said, according to Clarke: “You’re going to need some decisions quickly. I’m going to the PEOC to be with the Vice President. Tell us what you need.” At about 9:15, Norman Mineta arrived and Clarke “suggested he join the Vice President” (Against All Enemies, 2-5). Clarke thereby implied that Cheney was in the PEOC several minutes prior to 9:15.

In an ABC News program on the first anniversary of 9/11, Cheney’s White House photographer David Bohrer reported that, shortly after 9:00, some Secret Service agents came into Cheney’s office and said, “Sir, you have to come with us.” During this same program, Rice said: “As I was trying to find all of the principals, the Secret Service came in and said, ‘You have to leave now for the bunker. The Vice President’s already there. There may be a plane headed for the White House.’” ABC’s Charles Gibson then said: “In the bunker, the Vice President is joined by Rice and Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta” (“9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings,” ABC News, September 11, 2002).

The 9/11 Commission’s Late-Arrival Claim

The 9/11 Commission agreed that the Vice President was hustled down to the PEOC after word was received that a plane was headed towards the White House. It claimed, however, that this word was not received until 9:33. But even then, according to the Commission, the Secret Service agents immediately received another message, telling them that the aircraft had turned away, so “[n]o move was made to evacuate the Vice President at this time.” It was not until “just before 9:36” that the Secret Service ordered Cheney to go below (9/11CR 39). But even after he entered the underground corridor at 9:37, Cheney did not immediately go to the PEOC. Rather:

Once inside, Vice President Cheney and the agents paused in an area of the tunnel that had a secure phone, a bench, and television. The Vice President asked to speak to the President, but it took time for the call to be connected. He learned in the tunnel that the Pentagon had been hit, and he saw television coverage of the smoke coming from the building. (9/11CR 40)

Next, after Lynne Cheney “joined her husband in the tunnel,” the Commission claimed, “Mrs. Cheney and the Vice President moved from the tunnel to the shelter conference room” after the call ended, which was not until after 9:55. As for Rice, the Commission added, she “entered the conference room shortly after the Vice President” (9/11CR 40).

The contradiction could not be clearer. According to the Commission, Cheney, far from entering the PEOC before 9:20, as Mineta and others said, did not arrive there until about 9:58, 20 minutes after the 9:38 strike on the Pentagon, about which he had learned in the corridor.

Cheney’s Account on Meet the Press

The 9/11 Commission’s account even contradicted that given by Cheney himself in a well-known interview. Speaking to Tim Russert on NBC’s Meet the Press only five days after 9/11, Cheney said: “[A]fter I talked to the president… I went down into… the Presidential Emergency Operations Center… [W]hen I arrived there within a short order, we had word the Pentagon’s been hit.” Cheney himself, therefore, indicated that he had entered the PEOC prior to the (9:38) strike on the Pentagon, not 20 minutes after it, as the Commission would later claim.

Dealing with the Contradictions

How did the 9/11 Commission deal with the fact that its claim about the time of Cheney’s arrival in the PEOC had been contradicted by Bohrer, Clarke, Mineta, Rice, several news reports, and even Cheney himself? It simply omitted any mention of these contradictory reports.

Of these omissions, the most important was the Commission’s failure to mention Norman Mineta’s testimony, even though it was given to the Commission in an open hearing—as can be seen by reading the transcript of that session (May 23, 2003). This portion of Mineta’s testimony was also deleted from the official version of the video record of the 9/11 Commission hearings in the 9/11 Commission archives. (It can, however, be viewed on the Internet.)

During an interview for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in 2006, Hamilton was asked what “Mineta told the Commission about where Dick Cheney was prior to 10 AM.” Hamilton replied: “I do not recall” (“9/11: Truth, Lies and Conspiracy: Interview: Lee Hamilton,” CBC News, 21 August 2006). It was surprising that Hamilton could not recall, because he had been the one doing the questioning when Mineta told the story of the young man’s conversation with Cheney. Hamilton, moreover, had begun his questioning by saying to Mineta: “You were there [in the PEOC] for a good part of the day. I think you were there with the Vice President.” And Mineta’s exchange with Timothy Roemer, during which it was established that Mineta had arrived at about 9:20, came immediately after Hamilton’s interrogation. And yet Hamilton, not being able to recall any of this, simply said, “we think that Vice President Cheney entered the bunker shortly before 10 o’clock.”

Obliterating Mineta’s Problematic Testimony

To see possible motives for the 9/11 Commission’s efforts to obliterate Mineta’s story from the public record, we need to look at the conversation he reported to the Commission. He said:

During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, “The plane is 50 miles out.” “The plane is 30 miles out.” And when it got down to “the plane is 10 miles out,” the young man also said to the Vice President, “Do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, “Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?”

Mineta’s story had dangerous implications with regard to the strike on the Pentagon, which occurred at 9:38. According to the 9/11 Commission, the military did not know that an aircraft was approaching the Pentagon until 9:36, so that it “had at most one or two minutes to react to the unidentified plane approaching Washington” (9/11CR 34). That claim was essential for explaining, among other things, why the Pentagon had not been evacuated before it was struck — a fact that resulted in 125 deaths. A spokesperson for Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, when asked why this evacuation had not occurred, said: “The Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way” (Newsday, Sept. 23, 2001). Mineta’s testimony implied, by contrast, that Cheney and others knew that an aircraft was approaching Washington about 12 minutes before that strike.

Even more problematic was the question of the nature of “the orders.” Mineta assumed, he said, that they were orders to have the plane shot down. But the aircraft was not shot down. Also, the expected orders, especially on a day when two hijacked airliners had already crashed into buildings in New York, would have been to shoot down any nonmilitary aircraft entering the “prohibited” airspace over Washington, in which “civilian flying is prohibited at all times” (“Pilots Notified of Restricted Airspace; Violators Face Military Action,” FAA Press Release, September 28, 2001). If those orders had been given, there would have been no reason to ask if they still stood. The question made sense only if the orders were to do something unusual — not to shoot the aircraft down. It appeared, accordingly, that Mineta had inadvertently reported Cheney’s confirmation of stand-down orders.

That Mineta’s report was regarded as dangerous is suggested by the fact that the 9/11 Commission, besides deleting Mineta’s testimony and delaying Cheney’s entrance to the bunker by approximately 45 minutes, also replaced Mineta’s story with a new story about an incoming aircraft. According to The 9/11 Commission Report, here is what really happened:

At 10:02, the communicators in the shelter began receiving reports from the Secret Service of an inbound aircraft… At some time between 10:10 and 10:15, a military aide told the Vice President and others that the aircraft was 80 miles out. Vice President Cheney was asked for authority to engage the aircraft… The Vice President authorized fighter aircraft to engage the inbound plane… The military aide returned a few minutes later, probably between 10:12 and 10:18, and said the aircraft was 60 miles out. He again asked for authorization to engage. The Vice President again said yes. (9/11CR 41)

The 9/11 Commission thereby presented the incoming aircraft story as one that ended with an order for a shoot down, not a stand down. And by having it occur after 10:10, the Commission not only disassociated it from the Pentagon strike but also ruled out the possibility that Cheney’s shootdown authorization might have led to the downing of United Flight 93 (which crashed, according to the Commission, at 10:03).

Given the fact that the 9/11 Commission’s account of Cheney’s descent to the bunker contradicted the testimony of not only Norman Mineta but also many other witnesses, including Cheney himself, Congress and the press need to launch investigations to determine what really happened.

source: http://prisonplanet.com/articles/january2008/230108_cheney.htm

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

False Pretenses

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

False Pretenses

Following 9/11, President Bush and seven top officials of his administration waged a carefully orchestrated campaign of misinformation about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

By Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith

President George W. Bush and seven of his administration’s top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses.

On at least 532 separate occasions (in speeches, briefings, interviews, testimony, and the like), Bush and these three key officials, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (or was trying to produce or obtain them), links to Al Qaeda, or both. This concerted effort was the underpinning of the Bush administration’s case for war.

It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to Al Qaeda. This was the conclusion of numerous bipartisan government investigations, including those by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (2004 and 2006), the 9/11 Commission, and the multinational Iraq Survey Group, whose “Duelfer Report” established that Saddam Hussein had terminated Iraq’s nuclear program in 1991 and made little effort to restart it.

In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003. Not surprisingly, the officials with the most opportunities to make speeches, grant media interviews, and otherwise frame the public debate also made the most false statements, according to this first-ever analysis of the entire body of prewar rhetoric.

President Bush, for example, made 232 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and another 28 false statements about Iraq’s links to Al Qaeda. Secretary of State Powell had the second-highest total in the two-year period, with 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq’s links to Al Qaeda. Rumsfeld and Fleischer each made 109 false statements, followed by Wolfowitz (with 85), Rice (with 56), Cheney (with 48), and McClellan (with 14).

The massive database at the heart of this project juxtaposes what President Bush and these seven top officials were saying for public consumption against what was known, or should have been known, on a day-to-day basis. This fully searchable database includes the public statements, drawn from both primary sources (such as official transcripts) and secondary sources (chiefly major news organizations) over the two years beginning on September 11, 2001. It also interlaces relevant information from more than 25 government reports, books, articles, speeches, and interviews.

Consider, for example, these false public statements made in the run-up to war:

  • On August 26, 2002, in an address to the national convention of the Veteran of Foreign Wars, Cheney flatly declared: “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.” In fact, former CIA Director George Tenet later recalled, Cheney’s assertions went well beyond his agency’s assessments at the time. Another CIA official, referring to the same speech, told journalist Ron Suskind, “Our reaction was, ‘Where is he getting this stuff from?’ “
  • In the closing days of September 2002, with a congressional vote fast approaching on authorizing the use of military force in Iraq, Bush told the nation in his weekly radio address: “The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons, is rebuilding the facilities to make more and, according to the British government, could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order is given. . . . This regime is seeking a nuclear bomb, and with fissile material could build one within a year.” A few days later, similar findings were also included in a much-hurried National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction — an analysis that hadn’t been done in years, as the intelligence community had deemed it unnecessary and the White House hadn’t requested it.
  • In July 2002, Rumsfeld had a one-word answer for reporters who asked whether Iraq had relationships with Al Qaeda terrorists: “Sure.” In fact, an assessment issued that same month by the Defense Intelligence Agency (and confirmed weeks later by CIA Director Tenet) found an absence of “compelling evidence demonstrating direct cooperation between the government of Iraq and Al Qaeda.” What’s more, an earlier DIA assessment said that “the nature of the regime’s relationship with Al Qaeda is unclear.”
  • On May 29, 2003, in an interview with Polish TV, President Bush declared: “We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories.” But as journalist Bob Woodward reported in State of Denial, days earlier a team of civilian experts dispatched to examine the two mobile labs found in Iraq had concluded in a field report that the labs were not for biological weapons. The team’s final report, completed the following month, concluded that the labs had probably been used to manufacture hydrogen for weather balloons.
  • On January 28, 2003, in his annual State of the Union address, Bush asserted: “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production.” Two weeks earlier, an analyst with the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research sent an email to colleagues in the intelligence community laying out why he believed the uranium-purchase agreement “probably is a hoax.”
  • On February 5, 2003, in an address to the United Nations Security Council, Powell said: “What we’re giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence. I will cite some examples, and these are from human sources.” As it turned out, however, two of the main human sources to which Powell referred had provided false information. One was an Iraqi con artist, code-named “Curveball,” whom American intelligence officials were dubious about and in fact had never even spoken to. The other was an Al Qaeda detainee, Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi, who had reportedly been sent to Eqypt by the CIA and tortured and who later recanted the information he had provided. Libi told the CIA in January 2004 that he had “decided he would fabricate any information interrogators wanted in order to gain better treatment and avoid being handed over to [a foreign government].”

The false statements dramatically increased in August 2002, with congressional consideration of a war resolution, then escalated through the mid-term elections and spiked even higher from January 2003 to the eve of the invasion.

Click to Enlarge
Click to Enlarge

It was during those critical weeks in early 2003 that the president delivered his State of the Union address and Powell delivered his memorable U.N. presentation. For all 935 false statements, including when and where they occurred, go to the search page for this project; the methodology used for this analysis is explained here.

In addition to their patently false pronouncements, Bush and these seven top officials also made hundreds of other statements in the two years after 9/11 in which they implied that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or links to Al Qaeda. Other administration higher-ups, joined by Pentagon officials and Republican leaders in Congress, also routinely sounded false war alarms in the Washington echo chamber.

The cumulative effect of these false statements — amplified by thousands of news stories and broadcasts — was massive, with the media coverage creating an almost impenetrable din for several critical months in the run-up to war. Some journalists — indeed, even some entire news organizations — have since acknowledged that their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical. These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided additional, “independent” validation of the Bush administration’s false statements about Iraq.

The “ground truth” of the Iraq war itself eventually forced the president to backpedal, albeit grudgingly. In a 2004 appearance on NBC’s Meet the Press, for example, Bush acknowledged that no weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq. And on December 18, 2005, with his approval ratings on the decline, Bush told the nation in a Sunday-night address from the Oval Office: “It is true that Saddam Hussein had a history of pursuing and using weapons of mass destruction. It is true that he systematically concealed those programs, and blocked the work of U.N. weapons inspectors. It is true that many nations believed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. But much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong. As your president, I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq. Yet it was right to remove Saddam Hussein from power.”

Bush stopped short, however, of admitting error or poor judgment; instead, his administration repeatedly attributed the stark disparity between its prewar public statements and the actual “ground truth” regarding the threat posed by Iraq to poor intelligence from a Who’s Who of domestic agencies.

On the other hand, a growing number of critics, including a parade of former government officials, have publicly — and in some cases vociferously — accused the president and his inner circle of ignoring or distorting the available intelligence. In the end, these critics say, it was the calculated drumbeat of false information and public pronouncements that ultimately misled the American people and this nation’s allies on their way to war.

Bush and the top officials of his administration have so far largely avoided the harsh, sustained glare of formal scrutiny about their personal responsibility for the litany of repeated, false statements in the run-up to the war in Iraq. There has been no congressional investigation, for example, into what exactly was going on inside the Bush White House in that period. Congressional oversight has focused almost entirely on the quality of the U.S. government’s pre-war intelligence — not the judgment, public statements, or public accountability of its highest officials. And, of course, only four of the officials — Powell, Rice, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz — have testified before Congress about Iraq.

Short of such review, this project provides a heretofore unavailable framework for examining how the U.S. war in Iraq came to pass. Clearly, it calls into question the repeated assertions of Bush administration officials that they were the unwitting victims of bad intelligence.

Above all, the 935 false statements painstakingly presented here finally help to answer two all-too-familiar questions as they apply to Bush and his top advisers: What did they know, and when did they know it?

source: http://www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

George W Bush, White House told 935 lies after September 11

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

George W Bush, White House told 935 lies after September 11

By staff writers

January 23, 2008 06:24pm

US President George W Bush and other top officials issued almost one thousand false statements about the national security threat from Iraq following the September 11 attacks, according to a study by two not-for-profit organisations.

The Associated Press reports the study, published on the website of the Centre for Public Integrity, concluded the statements “were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanised public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretences”.

According to the study, 935 false statements were issued by the White House in the two years after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

In speeches, briefings and interviews, President Bush and other officials stated “unequivocally” on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had links to al-Qaeda, or had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to get them.

“It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaeda,” wrote the study’s authors Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith.

“In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003.”

The study found that President Bush alone made 259 false statements – 231 about weapons of mass destruction and 28 about Iraq’s links to al-Qaeda.

The other officials named in the study are vice president Dick Cheney, then-national security advisor Condoleezza Rice, then-defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld, then-secretary of state Colin Powell, deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz and White House spokesmen Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan.

“The cumulative effect of these false statements – amplified by thousands of news stories and broadcasts – was massive, with the media coverage creating an almost impenetrable din for several critical months in the run-up to war,” the study concluded.

“Some journalists – indeed, even some entire news organisations – have since acknowledged that their coverage during those pre-war months was far too deferential and uncritical. These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided additional ‘independent’ validation of the Bush administration’s false statements about Iraq.”

George W Bush / AFP

The fish was this big … George W Bush and his officials reportedly told 935 blatant lies about Iraq, WMDs and al-Qaeda after September 11 / AFP

source : http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23098129-401,00.html

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

8 US officials lied 935 times on 532 separate occasions during 2 years in run up to Iraq war

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

8 US officials lied 935 times on 532 separate occasions during 2 years in run up to Iraq war

Article image

Study: False Statements Preceded War

Washington | January 23

AP – A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks.

The study concluded that the statements “were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses.”

The study was posted Tuesday on the Web site of the Center for Public Integrity, which worked with the Fund for Independence in Journalism. White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said he could not comment on the study because he had not seen it.

The study counted 935 false statements in the two-year period. It found that in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues, Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them or had links to al-Qaida or both.

“It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida, according to Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Fund for Independence in Journalism staff members, writing an overview of the study. “In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003.

Named in the study along with Bush were top officials of the administration during the period studied: Vice President Dick Cheney, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan.

Bush led with 259 false statements, 231 about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 28 about Iraq’s links to al-Qaida, the study found. That was second only to Powell’s 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq and al-Qaida.

http://agonist.org/20080122/study_false_statements_preceded_war


How many lies told by US officials in run-up to Iraq war?

Study: 8 US officials lied 935 times on 532 separate occasions during 2 years in run up to Iraq war.

WASHINGTON – Top US officials ran roughshod over the truth in the run-up to the Iraq war, lying 935 times in a two-year period leading up to the Iraq war, a study released Wednesday found.The Center for Public Integrity’s founder Charles Lewis and researchers helping him write a forthcoming book, identified “935 false statements by eight top administration officials that mentioned Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction, or links to Al-Qaeda, on at least 532 separate occasions” ahead of the March 18, 2003 invasion of Iraq, they said in a statement.With the fifth anniversary of the war looming, the center underscored that its work calls into question “the repeated assertions of (George W.) Bush administration officials that they were merely the unwitting victims of bad intelligence.”

Among those who made the false statements: Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of State Colin Powell, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and White House press secretaries Ari Fleisher and Scott McClellan, the study said.

“This is a report like no other, which calls into question more than 900 false statements that were the underpinnings of the administration’s case for war,” argued the CIJ’s Executive Director Bill Buzenberg.

The CIJ maintains that “Bush and seven of his administration’s top officials methodically propagated erroneous information over the two years beginning on September 11, 2001.”

“These false statements dramatically increased in August 2002, just prior to congressional consideration of a war resolution and during the critical weeks in early 2003 when the president delivered his State of the Union address and Powell delivered his memorable presentation to the UN Security Council,” the CIJ added.

Bush was the chief of misstatement, with 260 — about weapons of mass destruction and links to Al-Qaeda in Iraq, trailed by then-secretary of state Powell with 254, the study charged. Print Printer Friendly Version

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=24014

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

What Happened on 9-11? Scott Ritter Former U.N. Weapons Inspector Says, “Absolute Requirement to Know What Happened on 9-11”

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

What Happened on 9-11? Scott Ritter Former U.N. Weapons Inspector Says, “Absolute Requirement to Know What Happened on 9-11”

By Jason Charles | TruthAlliance.net | Jan. 21, 2008

In his usual form, former U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter told a packed crowd at the Oriental Theater in Denver to stop whining about corporate media and become their own intelligence operatives. We the people have the same resources and tools that intelligence networks rely heavily on; it’s called “Google” he said.

In his hilarious analogy, the American people like baby birds wait each night in front of their television sets for the corporate news bird to land in their living room and lovingly puke down our necks with that day’s regurgitated news. Suggesting that as our own intelligence operatives we can’t allow CNN, FOX, NBC, and ABC to edit and cherry pick information, but ask questions and find the answers ourselves.

In that vein TruthAlliance.net Editor Jason Charles had a few questions for Mr. Ritter which he graciously allowed us to film. We explored 3 topics, if the Bush admin got its way in the mid-east what would it look like, how can these dis-separate yet justice driven revolutions in America unite, and his amazing thoughts on a new, fully empowered investigation into the cause of 9-11.

He asked, “Did Bush and Cheney Plan the demise of the building? Was this a terrorist attack by Al-Qaeda? Or was it something in between? Well frankly we don’t know.” How important is this to establishing justice? Mr. Ritter seems to think it is an “absolute requirement to know what happened on 9-11”

source : http://truthalliance.net/News/Vault/tabid/67/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/416/Default.aspx

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Who is Jerome M. Hauer? THE KEY PLAYERS OF 9-11 ( STILL ANOTHER TRAITOROUS JEWISH ZIONIST IN THE US GOVERNMENT)

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

Who is Jerome M. Hauer?

THE KEY PLAYERS OF 9-11 ( STILL ANOTHER TRAITOROUS JEWISH ZIONIST IN THE US GOVERNMENT)

By Christopher Bollyn

http://www.bollyn.com

Yesterday, a reader sent me a document that contained a link to a very interesting 9-minute video clip called “The 9/11 Solution.”

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/146563-The-9-11-Solution-RESTORED-The-Video-Google-Censored

This short video, which I recommend, is about how the “9-11 cover story was sold to the public.” It shows how – in the first hour after the attacks – the controlled media conspired, or was used, to promote the fairy tale that became the official story about why the World Trade Center towers collapsed, i.e. structural failure caused by fire.

The short video is composed of a couple clips taken from network television news on the very morning of 9-11.

The first is a clip of an unknown person in the street who provided a detailed explanation of how and why the towers collapsed. This simple man on the street, wearing a Harley-Davidson shirt, claims that the towers collapsed due to structural failure due to intense fires.

Although this person was not named, his non-expert opinion was echoed by highly-placed experts who were interviewed on the first news shows after the collapses. In hindsight, this video shows how manipulative and effective this “random” interview was in seeding the official explanation of 9-11.

The second clip is even more interesting. This is a Dan Rather interview with Jerome M. Hauer, the first director of the Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM). Not only does Hauer second the opinion that burning jet fuel brought down the towers – he even goes so far as to put the blame on Osama Bin Laden.

Now wonder they call him a “Terrorism Expert.”

This is a very important video clip because it shows how Jerome Hauer, the former director of OEM, was instantly ready to speak to the mass media about the attacks in New York – from San Diego, I presume.

The buildings had just collapsed but Hauer, from a distance, stated that the “velocity” of the planes and the fuel were responsible for the collapses, which certainly looked explosive to real explosion experts, such as Van Romero of New Mexico Tech.

Hauer then went on to say that the attacks carried the “fingerprints of Osama bin Laden.” How could he possibly make such a damning determination of responsibility before any evidence had even been collected?

Hauer did not work in New York on 9-11. He had left his position as head of the director of the OEM in New York City in February 2000. He had then joined Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), a large consulting concern based in San Diego, as a vice president and associate director of its Center for Counterterrorism Technology and Analysis.

Like Benjamin Netanyahu, Jerome Hauer is a Zionist expert on terror.

WHO IS JEROME HAUER?

Jerome Hauer is among the small group of key individuals who are suspected of playing crucial roles is setting the stage for Israeli false-flag terror attacks of 9-11.

Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani of New York appointed Jerome M. Hauer, left, to lead the newly created Office of Emergency Management in 1996

Hauer was the first director of Mayor Giuliani’s Office of Emergency Management. He directed the agency since 1996, when Giuliani shifted responsibility for the city’s emergency preparedness from the Police Department to the new agency – headed by Hauer, a person he did not even know. How odd.

The New York Times wrote in May 2007:

Mr. Giuliani and Mr. Hauer began their relationship in January 1996 when Mr. Hauer was hired to lead the new Office of Emergency Management, created to coordinate the city’s response to crises. Mr. Hauer, who was little known before he became a Giuliani aide, had previously run emergency management programs for the State of Indiana and IBM.

Oddly, the New York Times never mentions Jerome Hauer’s deep family roots in the New York Jewish Zionist community. From reading the Times, one might think that Hauer is from Indiana.

This can only be intentional. Hauer’s mother, Rose Muscatine Hauer, is the retired Dean of the Beth Israel School of Nursing and the Honorary President of the New York Chapter of Hadassah, the Daughters of Zion movement that is one of the central Zionist organizations involved in the creation and maintenance of the State of Israel.

Rose Muscatine Hauer, nurse

Rose M. Hauer, dean of Beth Israel School of Nursing

Jerome Hauer is the son of the late Milton G. Hauer and Rose Muscatine who married April 4, 1949. His mother’s parents, Hyman David Muscatine (1881-1964) and Rebecca Bertha (nee Gartner), were Hebrew-speaking Zionists. They both came to the United States in 1908-1909; Hyman from “Russia Poland” in 1908 and Rebecca from the Austrian Empire in 1909.

His father’s parents, Moritz and Gussie Hauer, immigrated from Hungary before the turn of the century.

Jerome Hauer, however, is best known for being the director of the OEM when he made the decision to build a $13 million crisis center on the 23rd floor at 7 World Trade Center. This bizarre crisis center was unveiled in June 1999, and became the subject of tension between the agency and the Police Department, whose own command center at 1 Police Plaza had until then been the focus of emergency preparedness operations.

Jerome M. Hauer, who has strong family connections to the State of Israel, built the bizarre crisis center for the Office of Emergency Management in Larry Silverstein’s WTC 7, the 47-story tower which was demolished by explosives in the afternoon of 9-11

As the first director of the new crisis center, “one of Hauer’s first tasks was to find a home for an emergency command center to replace the inadequate facilities at police headquarters,” according to the Times.

Reports indicate that the OEM crisis center at the World Trade Center was not being used on 9-11 by the usual personnel. The center had been temporarily relocated to Pier 92 on Manhattan’s West Side, due to a FEMA drill which was supposed to begin on the day after 9-11, according to statements made by Mayor Giuliani.

So who was in the OEM center in Larry Silverstein’s building on 9-11? That’s the question the needs to be answered.

Hauer’s “crisis center” for the Office of Emergency Management occupied the 23rd floor of the Israeli-built tower owned by Larry Silverstein. It should be noted that the OEM crisis center was constructed (like the damaged section of the Pentagon) by the same British company (AMEC) who was contracted to clean up the rubble from the WTC and the Pentagon. The blast-proof bunker occupied the floor with the blue glass stripe, about halfway up the tower.

As Mayor Giuliani told the 9-11 Commission:

The reason Pier 92 was selected as a command center was because on the next day, on September 12, Pier 92 was going to have a drill, it had hundreds of people here, from FEMA, from the Federal Government, from the State, from the State Emergency Management Office, and they were getting ready for a drill for biochemical attack. So that was gonna be the place they were going to have the drill. The equipment was already there, so we were able to establish a command center there, within three days, that was two and a half to three times bigger than the command center that we had lost at 7 World Trade Center. And it was from there that the rest of the search and rescue effort was completed.

The OEM crisis center in WTC 7 is suspected as being the control center for the pre-planned demolition of the towers. The center, and all of the evidence of the crime, was destroyed when the 47-story tower was completely demolished at about 5:25 p.m. on 9-11. This blast-proof command and control bunker with its own air and water supply was fortified to withstand incredible forces. What role did it play in the demolition of the World Trade Center?

So, who decided to build the OEM crisis center in the only WTC tower actually owned by Larry Silverstein?

It was Jerome Hauer, of course.

“Mr. Hauer said he decided that offices on the 23rd floor of 7 World Trade Center, next to the twin towers and just a few blocks from City Hall, seemed the best choice,” Russ Buettner of the New York Times reported in May 2007.

The site was immediately controversial because it was part of the trade center, which had already been the location of a truck bomb attack in 1993. City officials, though, including Mr. Hauer, have long defended their decision, even after the command center had to be evacuated during the 2001 terror attack.

Last week, in an interview with Fox News, Mr. Giuliani again faced questions about the site. He put responsibility for selecting it on Mr. Hauer.

“Jerry Hauer recommended that as the prime site and the site that would make the most sense,” Mr. Giuliani said. “It was largely on his recommendation that that site was selected.”

Jerome Hauer clearly belongs to the very small group of people who were involved in setting the stage for 9-11. Like the others, people like Michael Chertoff, Alvin K. Hellerstein, Michael B. Mukasey, Ronald Lauder, Larry Silverstein, Frank Lowy, Rupert Murdoch, Michael Goff, James Rodney Schlesinger, and the Israeli brothers Elad and Amit Yoran, who controlled U.S. cyber-security, Hauer is also a Zionist Jew from a family with strong ties to the State of Israel.

This is, in fact, the one characteristic that is shared by all of the people who played key roles in setting the stage for the most disastrous terror attack in U.S. history – or covering up the truth afterwards.

This is not to say that these individuals are all necessarily witting accomplices in the crime. It is actually more likely that they were used, almost like mules, and because of their devotion to Israel they were placed in positions where they could be influenced to make decisions that would facilitate the attacks, demolitions, and subsequent destruction of the evidence and obstruction of the discovery and litigation processes to obtain justice for the victims.

Finis

Christopher Bollyn is an independent journalist and 9-11 researcher who is working on a book entitled Solving 9-11. Bollyn is dedicated to explaining what really happened and bringing the events of 9-11 into historical perspective.

This work to increase understanding and clarity of this critical subject can only be completed with the support of readers and interested citizens.

To support Bollyn’s research and writing
on this important book project,

To support his efforts, please send a donation by PayPal to:

shop@bollynbooks.com or bollyn@bollynbooks.com

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=117351

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Lest We Forget the Real Holocaust and It’s Bolshevik Jewish Perpetrators! The Ukrainian Holocaust of 1932-33

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

Lest We Forget the Real Holocaust and It’s Bolshevik Jewish Perpetrators! The Ukrainian Holocaust of 1932-33

“Stalin is century’s bloodiest figure”

by Eric S. Margolis
margolis@foreigncorrespondent.com

Foreign Affairs Editor for Sun Media Newspapers
London Free Press
December 12, 1998
London, Ontario, Canada

… In 1932, Soviet leader Josef Stalin unleashed genocide in Ukraine, Stalin determined to force Ukraine’s millions of independent farmers – called kulaks – into collectivized Soviet agriculture, and to crush Ukraine’s growing spirit of nationalism.

Faced by resistance to collectivization, Stalin unleashed terror and dispatched 25,000 fanatical young party militants from Moscow – earlier versions of Mao’s Red Guards – to force 10 million Ukrainian peasants into collective farms. Secret police units of OGPU began selective executions of recalcitrant farmers.

When Stalin’s red guards failed to make a dent in this immense number, OGPU was ordered to begin mass executions. But there were simply not enough Chekists (secret police) to kill so many people, so Stalin decided to replace bullets with a much cheaper medium of death – mass starvation.

All seed stocks, grain, silage and farm animals were confiscated from Ukraine’s farms. (Ethiopia’s Communist dictator Mengistu Haile Mariam used the same method in the 1970s to force collectivization. The resulting famine caused one million deaths.)

OGPU agents and Red Army troops sealed all roads and rail lines. Nothing came in or out of Ukraine. Farms were searched and looted of food and fuel. Ukrainians quickly began to die of hunger, cold and sickness.

When OGPU failed to meet weekly execution quotas, Stalin sent henchman Lazar Kaganovitch to destroy Ukrainian resistance. Kaganovitch, the Soviet Eichmann, made quota, shooting 10,000 Ukrainians weekly. Eighty per cent of Ukrainian intellectuals were executed. A party member named Nikita Khruschchev helped supervise the slaughter.

During the bitter winter of 1932-33, mass starvation created by Kaganovitch and OGPU hit full force. Ukrainians ate their pets, boots and belts, plus bark and roots. Some parents even ate infant children.

Britain, the U.S. and Canada were fully aware of the Ukrainian genocide and Stalin’s other monstrous crimes. (Soviet Leader Josef Stalin committed genocide in the ’30s, then became an ally against Hitler in the ’40s)

The precise number of Ukrainians murdered by Stalin’s custom-made famine and Cheka firing squads remains unknown to this day. The KGB’s archives and recent work by Russian historians show at least seven million died. Ukrainian historians put the figure at nine million or higher. Twenty-five per cent of Ukraine’s population was exterminated.

Six million other farmers across the Soviet Union were starved or shot during collectivization. Stalin told Winston Churchill he liquidated 10 million peasants during the 1930s. Add mass executions by the Cheka in Estonia, Lativia and Lithuania, the genocide of three million Muslims, massacres of Cossacks and Volga Germans, and Soviet industrial genocide accounted for at least 40 million victims, not including 20 million war dead.

Kaganovitch and many senior OGPU officers (later, NKVD) were Jewish. The predominance of Jews among Bolshevik leaders and the frightful crimes and cruelty inflicted by Stalin’s Checka on Ukraine, the Baltic states and Poland led the victims of Red Terror to blame the Jewish people for both communism and their suffering. As a direct result, during the subsequent Nazi occupation of Eastern Europe, the region’s innocent Jews became the target of ferocious revenge by Ukrainians, Balts and Poles.

While the world is now fully aware of the destruction of Europe’s Jews by the Nazis, the story of the numerically larger holocaust in Ukraine has been suppressed, or ignored. Ukraine’s genocide occurred eight to nine years before Hitler began the Jewish Holocaust and was committed, unlike Nazi crimes, before the world’s gaze. But Stalin’s murder of millions was simply denied or concealed by a left-wing conspiracy of silence that continues to this day. In the strange moral geometry of mass murder, only Nazis are guilty.

Socialist luminaries like Bernard Shaw, Beatrice and Sidney Webb and Premier Edouard Herriot of France, toured Ukraine during 1932-33 and proclaimed reports of famine were false. Shaw announced: “I did not see one under-nourished person in Russia.” New York Times correspondent Walter Duranty, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his Russian reporting, wrote claims of famine were “malignant propaganda.” Seven million people were dying around them, yet these fools saw nothing. The New York Times has never repudiated Duranty’s lies.

Modern leftists do not care to be reminded their ideological and historical roots are entwined with this century’s greatest crime – the inevitable result of enforced social engineering and Marxist theology.

Western historians delicately skirt the sordid fact that the governments of Britain, the U.S. and Canada were fully aware of the Ukrainian genocide and Stalin’s other monstrous crimes. Yet they eagerly welcomed him as an ally during the Second World War. Stalin, who Franklin Roosevelt called “Uncle Joe”, murdered four times more people than Adolph Hitler.

None of the Soviet mass murderers who committed genocide were ever brought to justice. Lazar Kaganovitch died peacefully in Moscow a few years ago, still wearing the Order of the Soviet Union and enjoying a generous state pension.

– by Eric S. Margolis

Presented in the interests of truth by James W. Black who is of Ukrainian and Scottish descent. Some of his relatives were interned in the Nazi forced labour camps and died in the camp during World War Two. His grandmother’s brother, who was a Ukrainian nationalist, was arrested in Ukraine for wearing Ukraine’s national colours and reading Ukrainian poetry to his friends and then sent to the Gulag. He was never seen nor heard from again.

This entry was posted on Monday, January 21st, 2008 at 8:03 am and is filed under Editor’s Zone, Canadian Politics, Mainstream Mindcontrol Media (M3), Political Zionism, ‘state’ of Israel, Israeli Terrorism, Freedom of Expression, Internet Freedom, Zionist Atrocities, anti-Semitism, Jewish Porn Industry, Jewish Lobby, Christianity, Jews Behind Bolshevik Revolution, Canadian Identity/Sovereignty, Zionist Jews in Russia, Jewish Banking Cartel, Law & Justice, Jewish Holocaust Industry, Human Rights/orgs, B’nai Brith, Anti-Defamation League (ADL), Jewish Media Monopoly, Freedom of Thought, Canadian Human Rights Commission, Canadian Jewish Congress. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=660

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

‘Beginning of the end of America’

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

Olbermann: ‘Beginning of the end of America’

Olbermann addresses the Military Commissions Act in a special comment

SPECIAL COMMENT

By Keith Olbermann

Anchor, ‘Countdown’ updated 3:00 p.m. ET Oct. 19, 2006

FREE VIDEO

Special Comment: Beginning of the end
Oct. 18: Keith Olbermann addresses the signing of the Military Commission Act into law in a special comment.
Bush: Pathological liar or idiot-in-chief?
Olbermann: We have either a president who is too dishonest to restrain himself from invoking World War III about Iran at least six weeks after he had to have known that the analogy would be fantastic, irresponsible hyperbole, or we have a president too transcendently stupid not to have asked, at what now appears to have been a series of opportunities to do so, whether the fairy tales he either created or was fed were still even remotely plausible.

We have lived as if in a trance. We have lived as people in fear. And now—our rights and our freedoms in peril—we slowly awaken to learn that we have been afraid of the wrong thing.

Therefore, tonight have we truly become the inheritors of our American legacy.

For, on this first full day that the Military Commissions Act is in force, we now face what our ancestors faced, at other times of exaggerated crisis and melodramatic fear-mongering:

A government more dangerous to our liberty, than is the enemy it claims to protect us from.

We have been here before—and we have been here before, led here by men better and wiser and nobler than George W. Bush.

We have been here when President John Adams insisted that the Alien and Sedition Acts were necessary to save American lives, only to watch him use those acts to jail newspaper editors.

American newspaper editors, in American jails, for things they wrote about America.

We have been here when President Woodrow Wilson insisted that the Espionage Act was necessary to save American lives, only to watch him use that Act to prosecute 2,000 Americans, especially those he disparaged as “Hyphenated Americans,” most of whom were guilty only of advocating peace in a time of war.

American public speakers, in American jails, for things they said about America.

 

And we have been here when President Franklin D. Roosevelt insisted that Executive Order 9066 was necessary to save American lives, only to watch him use that order to imprison and pauperize 110,000 Americans while his man in charge, General DeWitt, told Congress: “It makes no difference whether he is an American citizen—he is still a Japanese.”

American citizens, in American camps, for something they neither wrote nor said nor did, but for the choices they or their ancestors had made about coming to America.

Each of these actions was undertaken for the most vital, the most urgent, the most inescapable of reasons.

And each was a betrayal of that for which the president who advocated them claimed to be fighting.

Adams and his party were swept from office, and the Alien and Sedition Acts erased.

Many of the very people Wilson silenced survived him, and one of them even ran to succeed him, and got 900,000 votes, though his presidential campaign was conducted entirely from his jail cell.

And Roosevelt’s internment of the Japanese was not merely the worst blight on his record, but it would necessitate a formal apology from the government of the United States to the citizens of the United States whose lives it ruined.

 

The most vital, the most urgent, the most inescapable of reasons.

In times of fright, we have been only human.

We have let Roosevelt’s “fear of fear itself” overtake us.

We have listened to the little voice inside that has said, “the wolf is at the door; this will be temporary; this will be precise; this too shall pass.”

We have accepted that the only way to stop the terrorists is to let the government become just a little bit like the terrorists.

Just the way we once accepted that the only way to stop the Soviets was to let the government become just a little bit like the Soviets.

Or substitute the Japanese. Or the Germans. Or the Socialists. Or the Anarchists. Or the Immigrants. Or the British. Or the Aliens.

The most vital, the most urgent, the most inescapable of reasons.

And, always, always wrong.

 

“With the distance of history, the questions will be narrowed and few: Did this generation of Americans take the threat seriously, and did we do what it takes to defeat that threat?”

Wise words.

And ironic ones, Mr. Bush.

Your own, of course, yesterday, in signing the Military Commissions Act.

You spoke so much more than you know, Sir.

Sadly—of course—the distance of history will recognize that the threat this generation of Americans needed to take seriously was you.

We have a long and painful history of ignoring the prophecy attributed to Benjamin Franklin that “those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

But even within this history we have not before codified the poisoning of habeas corpus, that wellspring of protection from which all essential liberties flow.

You, sir, have now befouled that spring.

You, sir, have now given us chaos and called it order.

You, sir, have now imposed subjugation and called it freedom.

For the most vital, the most urgent, the most inescapable of reasons.

And — again, Mr. Bush — all of them, wrong.

We have handed a blank check drawn against our freedom to a man who has said it is unacceptable to compare anything this country has ever done to anything the terrorists have ever done.

We have handed a blank check drawn against our freedom to a man who has insisted again that “the United States does not torture. It’s against our laws and it’s against our values” and who has said it with a straight face while the pictures from Abu Ghraib Prison and the stories of Waterboarding figuratively fade in and out, around him.

We have handed a blank check drawn against our freedom to a man who may now, if he so decides, declare not merely any non-American citizens “unlawful enemy combatants” and ship them somewhere—anywhere — but may now, if he so decides, declare you an “unlawful enemy combatant” and ship you somewhere – anywhere.

And if you think this hyperbole or hysteria, ask the newspaper editors when John Adams was president or the pacifists when Woodrow Wilson was president or the Japanese at Manzanar when Franklin Roosevelt was president.

And if you somehow think habeas corpus has not been suspended for American citizens but only for everybody else, ask yourself this: If you are pulled off the street tomorrow, and they call you an alien or an undocumented immigrant or an “unlawful enemy combatant”—exactly how are you going to convince them to give you a court hearing to prove you are not? Do you think this attorney general is going to help you?

 

This President now has his blank check.

He lied to get it.

He lied as he received it.

Is there any reason to even hope he has not lied about how he intends to use it nor who he intends to use it against?

“These military commissions will provide a fair trial,” you told us yesterday, Mr. Bush, “in which the accused are presumed innocent, have access to an attorney and can hear all the evidence against them.”

“Presumed innocent,” Mr. Bush?

The very piece of paper you signed as you said that, allows for the detainees to be abused up to the point just before they sustain “serious mental and physical trauma” in the hope of getting them to incriminate themselves, and may no longer even invoke The Geneva Conventions in their own defense.

“Access to an attorney,” Mr. Bush?

Lieutenant Commander Charles Swift said on this program, Sir, and to the Supreme Court, that he was only granted access to his detainee defendant on the promise that the detainee would plead guilty.

“Hearing all the evidence,” Mr. Bush?

The Military Commissions Act specifically permits the introduction of classified evidence not made available to the defense.

Your words are lies, Sir.

They are lies that imperil us all.

“One of the terrorists believed to have planned the 9/11 attacks,” you told us yesterday, “said he hoped the attacks would be the beginning of the end of America.”

That terrorist, sir, could only hope.

Not his actions, nor the actions of a ceaseless line of terrorists (real or imagined), could measure up to what you have wrought.

Habeas corpus? Gone.

The Geneva Conventions? Optional.

The moral force we shined outwards to the world as an eternal beacon, and inwards at ourselves as an eternal protection? Snuffed out.

These things you have done, Mr. Bush, they would be “the beginning of the end of America.”

And did it even occur to you once, sir — somewhere in amidst those eight separate, gruesome, intentional, terroristic invocations of the horrors of 9/11 — that with only a little further shift in this world we now know—just a touch more repudiation of all of that for which our patriots died — did it ever occur to you once that in just 27 months and two days from now when you leave office, some irresponsible future president and a “competent tribunal” of lackeys would be entitled, by the actions of your own hand, to declare the status of “unlawful enemy combatant” for — and convene a Military Commission to try — not John Walker Lindh, but George Walker Bush?

For the most vital, the most urgent, the most inescapable of reasons.

And doubtless, Sir, all of them—as always—wrong.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Be carfeul if leaving your Vehicle unattended in a public place

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

—– Original Message —–

Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 2:04 PM
Subject: [AhleSunnah] Be carfeul if leaving your Vehicle unattended in a public place

Please pass on.


BECAREFUL 

Military intelligence has information that terrorists have devised a new method of targeting and exploding bombs.

Example – You park your vehicle in a public area and go away to attend to your job. Some one can plant a bomb in your vehicle connected with GPS system and track your movements/whereabouts and activate the bomb when you are passing or close to the desired target area.

Hence it is best for us to be vigilant at all times as this could be a possibility which the terrorists will look at.

The bad side of this is unknowingly you can be carrying a bomb with you and if you are stopped at a check point you will become an innocent victim and it goes without saying what trouble you will have to go through thereafter.

Please be mindful of such possibilities.

Regards,

Syed Ali Abbas.

Supervisor FMU South,
Card Centre Karachi.
(021-4324191-99, Ext: 241)

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Israeli actions in Gaza ‘not a war crime’, says EU official [ Italian jew]

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

Israeli actions in Gaza ‘not a war crime’, says EU official [ Italian jew]

By: EJP on: 23.01.2008 [18:52 ]

Article image

EJP Updated: 23/Jan/2008 17:06

HERZLIYA (EJP)—An EU official said Israeli retaliation actions in the Gaza Strip “did not constitute war crimes.”

European Commission Vice-President Franco Frattini also said that “Europeans should have understood Israel’s concern sooner.”

Speaking to Israeli reporters on Tuesday in the framework of his visit in Israel, he declared: “We have to take into account that the Gaza Strip has become a base from where rockets are launched every day against innocent people in Israel.”

“Ultimately, Hamas was responsible for the conditions under which Gazans lived,” he added.

Earlier, in a speech to the annual policy conference of the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, Frattini, who is a former Italian Foreign Minister, said that “Hamas cannot be a viable interlocutor, neither for the international community, nor for the poor Palestinian people who should sooner rather than later realize that Hamas has brought them only disaster.”

In his address, Frattini also said that “Europeans should have understood Israel’s concerns sooner.”

EU Commissioner: ‘I am against collective punishment of Gaza’

“Your predicament in the face of terrorism is the same as ours,” he told the audience.

“There has been a large misunderstanding in recent years between Europe and Israel. For too long, we ignored Israel’s fears and legitimate concerns about terror, fanaticism and the refusal of key groups in the Arab camp to come to terms with Israel’s existence, let alone its legitimacy.”

‘Too much blame on Israel’

“Israel has been complaining for years about Europe, sometimes not without reason. For too long, European public opinion and some of its leaders put too much of the blame for the failure of the peace process on Israel’s shoulders,” he added.

The EU official also noted that “as friends it was our duty to criticise, politely and respectfully, our friend and ally when we felt that you were in the wrong. But, too often, our criticism fell short of at least acknowledging the dilemmas that Israel faced.”

“We asked our friend to take risks, but did not always offer reassurances that in taking those risks Israel would not be left to stand alone.”

Frattini said that today Europe “is better prepared to take real risks itself and to take on board Israeli concerns and interests in a way that was not on our agenda in the first years of intifada.”

In the course of his visit, the Commisioner met with Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter.

“We have decided to hold a joint EU-Israel seminar on financing of terrorism, a subject on which both Europe and Israel shared similar concerns. This would stress the means of increasing the transparency of financial transactions,” he said.

He also discussed Israel’s desire to play a greater role in Europol, the European law enforcement organisation. “We would like to encourage an exchange of data with Israel but this will depend on whether Israel’s legislation on data protection adheres closely enough to European legislation on data protection,” Frattini said.

http://www.ejpress.org/article/23426

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

More than 72,043 battlefield casualties from Iraq and Afghanistan

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

More than 72,043 battlefield casualties from Iraq and Afghanistan

By: Aaron Glantz on: 23.01.2008 [17:21 ]

More than 72,043 battlefield casualties from Iraq and Afghanistan

by Aaron Glantz Page 1 of 1 page(s)

http://www.opednews.com

Wish the Presidential candidates would talk more about ending the War in Iraq.

The Pentagon officially reported 72,043 battlefield casualties from Iraq and Afghanistan through Jan. 5, 2008. In addition, VA hospitals and clinics have treated 263,909 unplanned patients from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. On top of that, VA reported 245,034 disability claims from veterans of the two wars. Those are some of the disturbing new statistics released by the group Veterans for Common Sense, which gathered that data through use of the Freedom of Information Act (typical of the rest of its secrecy, the Bush Administration doesn’t just release this information to the public as a matter of course).

That concealment is the latest example of the Bush Administration’s downplaying of the true cost of the Iraq War. Remember, the President initially refused to make public photos of fallen soldiers returning home in flag-draped coffins at Dover Air Force Base.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_aaron_gl_080123_more_than_72_2c043_bat.htm

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

SATIRE : The savage brutality of Hamas

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

The savage brutality of Hamas

SATIRE…

________________________________________________

Jews claim they created the Gaza death camp to control a continuous barrage of rockets fired at innocent Israelis.

We don’t know how many of these rockets (if any) are actually fired, or how many are false-flag operations, or how many Jews (if any) are actually injured. All we have is the word of the Chosen People, who are famous for their love, their truthfulness, and their desire for peace.

Now we have PHOTOS of the Hamas weapons program!

Clearly we must protect Israel against these weapons of hate…

hamas-weapons.jpg

I just noticed there are some misspellings in the image.
Oh well. You get the idea.

barrage.jpg

qassam.jpg

source: http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/5422

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments »

MUST IT TAKE GAS CHAMBERS TO DECLARE THE EVENTS IN GAZA A HOLOCAUST?

Posted by musliminsuffer on January 24, 2008

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

=== News Update ===

MUST IT TAKE GAS CHAMBERS TO DECLARE THE EVENTS IN GAZA A HOLOCAUST?

Image ‘Copyleft’ by Carlos Latuff

How far does Israel have to go to prove to the world that they are conducting a holocaust against the people of Gaza? How many deaths, and by what method are required to fit that particular definition?

No, there are no gas chambers in Gaza. No, there are no crematorium in Gaza. But YES, there have been mass murders, targeted assassinations, starvation, deprivation of every essential needed to survive… including food,the lack of water, electricity, medical supplies, medical facilities, heating oil for homes, and diesel for transportation.

The worst possible is happening NOW… Don’t wait to speak out against this holocaust…. don’t wait till the numbers of dead reach the millions… ONE DEATH BY MURDER IS ONE DEATH TOO MANY….

There are things you can do NOW to help the people of Gaza…. here is just a partial list of what/where to start…..

ACTION ALERT: END THE CLOSURE OF GAZA NOW!Call (202-895-5400) or email (Embassy@egyptembdc.org) the Egyptian Embassy and demand that Egypt open the Rafah crossing

(1/22/08) Since Friday, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza has escalated to previously unimaginable levels. Over the past five days, Gaza has been completely shut off from the rest of the world due to an Israeli – and Egyptian-enforced – closure of all border crossings. By Sunday, approximately 800,000 Gazans were left without electricity as Gaza’s only power plant ran out of fuel. Many of the hospitals and medical clinics were also left with dwindling medical supplies and little to no fuel to power generators. As a result, approximately 75 Palestinians have already died from the closure, and a number of patients in intensive care units have died as their emergency life support equipment cannot function without electricity. Many hospitals are forced to choose which equipment to keep running: dialysis machines, neonatal units, or heart and oxygen machines.

Furthermore, with no fuel or electricity for the water pumps and sewage treatment plants, most Gazans have now lost their running water, with several neighborhoods, including the large Zatoun neighborhood east of Gaza City, flooded with sewage.

The closure has resulted in a deliberate and collective punishment of the entire civilian population of Gaza (nearly 1.5 million Palestinians). Such collective punishment directly contravenes explicit provisions of the 4 th Geneva Convention, to which Israel is a signing party.

John Ging, director of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) in Gaza said the civilian population was living in “abject misery” and had been stripped of their human dignity.

“People here in Gaza have been living in abject misery and hardship now for a long time,” Ging told Al-Jazeera. “On top of that they are living in darkness… You have to see how miserable the situation is. The civilian population is under occupation. It is collective punishment – they are victims.”

For its part, Egypt has willingly assisted Israel in the closure, preventing any Palestinian from leaving Gaza through the Rafah crossing. In particular, several ambulances carrying critically ill patients have been refused entry by Egyptian authorities. Faced with starvation and death, a group of Palestinian female protesters attempted to leave Gaza, only to be turned away by water cannons, gunfire, and baton-wielding Egyptian soldiers. At least 25 Palestinians have been injured by Egyptian soldiers enforcing Israel’s closure.

Though the media has reported that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak telephoned Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to express opposition to the humanitarian crisis, Mubarak has followed these empty words with affirmative acts to enforce the closure. Egypt does have the power to alleviate Palestinian suffering by at least allowing entry of fuel, emergency medicine and medical supplies, and supplies needed by aid agencies to distribute food .

Call the Egyptian Embassy in Washington D.C. and demand that Egypt open the Rafah crossing, and cease enforcing the closure of Gaza now!

Embassy of Egypt
3521 International Ct. NW
Washington, DC 20008
TELEPHONE: (202) 895-5400 – or – (202) 966-6342 –or- (202) 667-3402
Email: Embassy@egyptembdc.org

For example: “As an [Arab/Arab-American/Egyptian/Concerned American], I am concerned with the humanitarian crisis that is currently transpiring in Gaza. I am especially concerned with Egypt’s participation in the closure, and refusal to open the Rafah crossing as hundreds of thousands of Palestinians are trapped in life-threatening conditions.”

Call the Israeli Embassy in Washington D.C. and demand an end to the closure of Gaza now!

Embassy of Israel
3514 International Dr., NW
Washington, DC 20008
TELEPHONE: (202) 364-5500

Emergency Protests

Anaheim, California: Saturday, Jan. 26, 1 p.m. 512 S. Brookhurst St. Between Orange Ave. & Broadway)

Washington DC: Friday, Jan. 25 (time tba), at the Israeli Embassy, 3514 International Dr. N.W.

San Francisco, California: Friday, Jan. 25, 4-6 p.m., Israeli Consulate, 456 Montgomery St. (near California)

New York, New York: Saturday, Jan. 26, 1 p.m. at the Israeli Embassy, 43rd St. and 2nd Ave.

Chicago, Illinois: Tues., Jan. 29, 5 pm at the Lakeshore Theater, 3175 North Broadway (at benefit for the Friends of the Israeli Defense Force).

Seattle Washington: Friday, January 25, 4 p.m., Westlake Park, 4th & Pine Sts.

Info for this post was taken FROM

===

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »