Whether you choose to admit it or not, "The West" is the enemy of Islam. Maybe you've heard of a little country called Iraq?

Mumbai: 180 dead
9/11: 3000 dead.
Iraq: ONE MILLION DEAD

We started the Iraq war by bombing a suburban restaurant, murdering innocent people. How is that any different than a suicide bomber? ...other than the fact that the perpetrator flew away rather than getting an up-close look at the carnage he caused. ...and ignoring the detail that no suicide bomber has ever walked around with two tons of explosives strapped to his waist. ...and conveniently forgetting that at least the Muslims are honest about why they're doing it.

It's hard to play the victim when you shot first, and have murdered far more people than those you claim to be protecting yourself from.

So, okay, they're killing for Mohammed, and we're killing for Christ. The problem isn't the prophet - the problem is the killing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hope islam is the biggest enemy of west because the sao called west has always collaborated with islam to do terrorism in other countries.

25th october 2002


On the day chechnyan terrorists tokk hostage of 500 civilains in
A Moscow theatre, The headline of BBC was not about that but about sharp shooter terrorist being suppsedly caught in washington> In fact theis chechnyian news was fifth in item(including head line) . These days atlast the british media even say about chechnyian terrorist as terrorist otherwise 2 years ago they were always calling them freedom fighters(which they are -but that is another story). In fact the british media and england as a country had been actively supporting and giving material help to checnyaina terrorists9aided by cia and british spy and british media aswell).
If you lok at the report of british media then you realize the british involvemnt in terrorism by the chechnyian terrorists. When three multistory falts were wiped pout by terrorist in central Moscow a few years ago there was a gleee in british reprting and a criticism of later security arrangemnt by Russian forces in Moscow. ofcourse the british media would have been horrified and bar=king like a dog(which they are) if the Russians had decided to destory checknian civilians as the americans did in afganistan. Then you realize the humbug of british propaganda against terrorism-it is selective and meant to facilitate british infiltration in other countries, In fact the afganistan govet(after fall of Taliban) was oppsed to british tyroops (after all americans fought -what have british got?)presence in afgansitan-but armtwisting by british through american help ensures that rbtitish troops are there in afgansitan0they are forgeing infioltrators and thus should be eliminated(they have less legal reason to be in afgansitan than the soviets who had been primarily invited by the govt, of the day). the british involvemtn in international terrorism is not confined to agasnt Russian interset only.
When the kashmiris killed several Indian soldiers(regular phenomenon) the british paper(independent) blamed India for being a target of terrrism and not talking enough with what it called freedom fighters.(terminology changes according to british interts). Infact during the 80s when India was really relatively stable and srtongatlest the govet, was) then the british decided to destabilize India by sponsoring Sikh terrorismand taliban terorism aswell(agasnt INDIA AND AFGANSITAN). It is only when India has virtually been subjugated to look after british and american interst in economics and (with rteal weakening of india as military power) that the british decided to take supprt for terrrism somewhere else.
The whole world is being put under sieze by theis thrird rate power-england-a nation of plumbers(graduation from a nation of pirates turned shopkeepers) The modus operandi of english is by propaganda and spying through british media-paper, bbc and television-they have infiltrated american media and holly wood and are taking jobs from real americans too, They are real enemy of europe and are the main peple respnisnble for truning nations into thrild world and putting them down to status of thrirld world. Look ate how they destryed japansesw economy through manipulative stock market-while their market never crashes and their low life living in factory turned apartmnets-so ugly-never gets busted.
The world has to rise against this anglosaxon who are waging race war agasint all non anglosaxonas -, That evil can be defeated and eliminated -only people have to recognize real enemyaand then eliminate them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

april 2007 ---

"starroute said...

I also noticed that reference in the French documents to Chechen rebels -- and what it immediately reminded me of was not Feith's and Perle's adventures, but Peter Dale Scott's "The Global Drug Meta-Group."

I've never felt I've fully understood Scott's article, bit as a result I get something new out of it every time I look at it. In this case, what jumped out at me was these paragraphs:

(The goal of splitting up Russia attributed here to Surikov is that which, in an earlier text co-authored by Surikov, is attributed by Russian "radicals" to the United States:

The radicals believe that the US actively utilizes Turkish and Muslim elements....From Azerbaijan, radicals foresee a strategic penetration which would irrevocably split the Federation. US influence would be distributed to the former Soviet Central Asian Republics, to Chechnya and the other North Caucasus Muslim autonomous republics of T[at]arstan and Bashkortostan. As a result Russian territorial integrity would be irreparably compromised.) . . .

In my conclusion I shall return to the possibility that U.S. government might share common goals with Hizb ut-Tahrir and the meta-group in Russia, even while combating the Islamist terrorism of al-Qaeda in the Middle East and the West.

Most major media outlets have spelled out with a profusion of details the "exact" events that led to the death of what some claim to have been hundreds of people in the eastern Uzbekistan town of Andijan on May 13. Led by British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, the world media condemned much-maligned Uzbekistan President Islam Karimov for yet another bloody and ruthless suppression of "public dissent". Yet, all the details so far provided do not explain who the real players were or their end objectives.

It is certain, however, that the puzzle cannot be solved unless the London factor is understood. The answers lie in London, Birmingham, Bradford and Liverpool. The old British colonial establishment, with former intelligence officer Bernard Lewis as its mentor, appears to have set in motion a series of events that will bring endless bloodshed to Central Asia. London's objective would appear to be to keep both China and Russia under an open-ended threat. At this point, there is no one who can better serve this "Lewis Doctrine" than Muslims nurtured in Britain - the Hizbut-Tehrir (HT). . . .

Apart from various Islamic preachers, two major Islamic groups function in the Ferghana Valley, whose common objective is to change the regimes in Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan. These are the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) and the HT. While the IMU openly thrives on violence, the HT is strongly promoted by the United Kingdom, where it is headquartered, as peaceful. But records indicate that that the IMU and the HT work hand-in-hand. Most of the IMU recruits are from the HT, according to Rohan Gunaratna, an expert on world terrorist outfits. Gunaratna claims that Khaled Sheikh Muhammad, the alleged mastermind of the September 11, 2001, terror attacks in the US, and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian of Chechen origin who has remained active in the Iraqi insurgency against the US occupying forces, were both once members of the HT. . . .

The West's policy - in other words, the policy of the Anglo-Americans, as the European Union does not have a policy worth citing - toward the Middle East has long been formulated by Bernard Lewis. The British-born Lewis started his career as an intelligence officer and has remained in bed with British intelligence ever since. Avowedly anti-Russia and pro-Israel, Lewis reaped a rich harvest among US academia and policymakers. He brought president Jimmy Carter's virulently anti-Russian National Security Council chief, Zbigniew Brzezinski, into his fold

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All fundamentalists are enemies of all fundamentalists. We should have a pit somewhere for them to bathe in each other's blood. Currently foremost among the enemies of the west and of all non-muslims is the US. The US has slaughtered more innocents in the last two decades than any other power, and we have more capacity to do so than all other powers combined. We harbor a greater percentage of hateful bigots like H the N than most nations. Why are we so despicable? Part of the reason is that we are a Christian nation. And while Christians are very insistent that other faiths renounce any of their members who are violently fundamentalist, our own extremists are considered noble defenders of the faith. While Muslims who even contemplates associating with terrorists are considered guilty of a crime heinous beyond crime, Christians who commit acts of terror on a massive scale and call it "shock and awe" instead of "terror" are heroes deserving of praise and prayers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Many Muslims are not fundamentalists. Many Muslims are little different from other moderate people around the world. Such people are no more an enemy of anyone as your average Hindu, Jewish, Christian, or (gasp) Atheist moderate living next door and working in your workplace as a productive, joe-average member of society.

Fundamentalism is the problem. Muslim FUNDAMENTALISM. Hindu FUNDAMENTALISM. Jewish FUNDAMENTALISM. And yes, Christian FUNDAMENTALISM. And where does Fundamentalism come from? People who feel that the complex, modern world has left them behind or doesn't have a place for them.

So, Mr Honky the Nihilist, cease and desist with the dumb-assery. Okay?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"We progressives would also do well to remember that the World Trade Center attacks are now an international symbol for a nation's grief and courage in the face of terrorism."

The World Trade Center attacks are the international symbol of a corrupt government seeking empire and willing to kill thousands of its own citizens in the process.

This video shows how world leaders view Bush.
They know who was behind 9/11.
Bush at G20

I dropped my subscription to the Nation Magazine shortly after 9/11 because they became part of the coverup. I see they are still at it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Meyrav posted the following from NYT on another thread:

NYT offers the following "accumulating evidence from around the globe":

1. A former Defense Department official in Washington, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that American intelligence analysts suspect that former officers of Pakistan’s powerful spy agency and its army helped train the Mumbai attackers.

2. According to the Indian police, the one gunman who survived the terrorist attacks[so was the gunman target of the terrorists attack? or was he the terrorist?], Mohammad Ajmal Kasab, 21, told interrogators that he trained during a year and half in at least four camps in Pakistan and at one met with Mohammad Hafeez Saeed, the Lashkar-e-Taiba leader.

3. And according to a Western official familiar with the investigation in Mumbai, another Lashkar leader, Yusuf Muzammil, whom the surviving gunman named as the plot’s organizer, fielded phone calls in Lahore from the attackers.

The above reminds me of the Judith Miller fraud all over again.

Who is behind the attacks? And where is the evidence?

And as the Indian novelist and writer Amitav Gosh, reminds as Mumbai massacre can hardly be described as India's 9/11.

After the assasination of Indian PM Indira Gandhi, the Hindu extremists and Congress party workers went on a killing spree of the Sikh community. The pogrom claimed the lives of an estimated 2000 Sikhs.

And recently, the State sponsored pogroms against muslims in Gujurat killed a lot more people than in Mumbai's massacre.

This is not to say that the massacre in Mumbai or the deaths are insignificant. But context matter, and in India, Mumbai massacre doesn't rise up to the level of 9/11.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the US and Europe keep telling India to concede to the Muslim extremists. Where's the outrage ? This is why both the Far Right and the Far Left suck big time. If this were Israel, the western media would be singing a different tune. Until the Left quits accepting trouble makers in the Muslim community as "heros" which they often do, they should not expect to be taken seriously.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

and the british hid the main perpetrator of that school siege. that ground shoudl be sufficinet for R$ussia to annihilate the whole of england to dust .
so why are the british and americans so eager about atrocities in mubmay when the same british and americans have organised many terrorism acts inside India from 80s onwards?
is it because the british abstrds want to take advantage of this tragedy to pressrise paksintan to allow nato into paksitan? (with teh stipulated promsie to paksis that bnritish and americans would not allow allow india to attack paskitan.ofocurse british agent indian pm manmohan singh will do the bidding of anglosaxon bastrds).
the whole point seems to be british sinpired plan to destablise the india and paksitan to allow nato -really an arm to protect rbitish interests only-inside south asia.
Instead of ao so many millions being kileld in far away place itis better if england is bombed to oblivion and the whole pronble of humanity solved.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lots of good commentary here. First let me get this out of the way: the Indian gummt failed big time. They were asleep at the wheel as usual, and the corrupt b*st*rds who call themselves Indian politicians as usual too busy politicking to actual pay attention. Having said that, there is also a lot of hypocricy from the West on this issue. These terrorists attacked a major target in India: its financial centre. Very similar to the 9/11 attacks on the WTC. The gummt despite warnings failed to act in time. Very similar to the 9/11 attacks. The terrorists have very clearly been traced back to Pakistan. Just as the 9/11 terrorists were traced back to Afganistan. Yet Condi goes over there repeating her same old garbage about "restraint". No-one lectured the US about going after the 9/11 terrorists with far less evidence so why lecture India like a small child? Let me quickly add, I don't favour war. However, India must make it clear that they will accept nothing less than Pakistan overhauling its nasty ISI apparatus, and bringing the sickos that did this to trial. If Pak says it has no control over them, then its time for an international force to move into Pak's lawless areas and deal with them. If necessary then India should move troops to the border to let Pak and the US it means business. Its time India stopped being taken for granted

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mumbai certainly seems to be shaping up as an Indian 9/11, but not in any way the author contemplates. Like in 9/11, militant, fundamentalist, rightist elements in the Indian government seem to be involved in ensuring that the attacks were a spectacular success. The author notes that the attackers didn't seem to be seeking out westerners, which he apparently thinks is the most important fact. But they were seeking out someone. They identified their victims. It seems unlikely that prominent enemies of the Hindu right were targetted by coincidence. They left Pakistan in a boat owned by a Indian national, according to reports. They penetrated a well guarded maritime border with no difficulty. Sound familiar? The most important thing to understand about terrorism is that unless it is used by a govermnet against their own people, it is profoundly stupid and counterproductive. I would guesstimate that half of all terrorist attacks or more are aided by rightist, fundamentalist, militant factions in the country that is attacked. Consequently, in more than half the cases, perhaps the best thing we can do in response to a terrorist attack is to ignore it. The worst thing we can do is to take the spin and propaganda surrounding the attack seriously, as this author apparently does.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This and other analysis of the Mumbai bombings might make sense, but then why did they hit the one Jewish center in Mumbai. How is that an internal Indian act? How does this relate to Kashmir, Indian/Pakistani relations, etc?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This article, as I read it, told me that the recent terror attack in Mumbai is not another 9/11, based on an unclear us/them dichotomy, but I think whether or not the attackers were Indians or Pakistanis is less of a point than the fact that this was an orchestrated, successful surprise attack that disrupted the city and unsettled the world. No, it didn't hurt the global economy like 9-11, but the taking of hostages to maximize tv coverage was a new twist, in the way the 9-11 attacks had new twists that have forever changed the way authorities think of possible terror strategies.

And why be divisive? Muslims were killed in the 9-11 attacks as well as the Mumbai attacks. And the living attacker is a Pakistani, so that's not an internal actor. I would like to see more coverage of these attacks and the aftermath and more analysis of what they mean for India, southest asia, and the western world. I want to read about possible cover-ups, intelligence failures, every shred of evidence as it is uncovered, I want to know about the victims, I want to hear from goverment agents in India, and I do not want to hear self-righteous and pointless nomenclature debates.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

“We progressives would also do well to remember that the World Trade Center attacks are now an international symbol for a nation's grief and courage in the face of terrorism”.

To suggest “the Nation” speaks for what its writer calls “we progressives” is one grotesque travesty.

9/11 remains a proven criminal coverup as motive for the vast killing fields and genocide of false 9/11 “war on terror” of a thousand lies . A coverup that even Kean and Hamilton cannot and will not defend. The World Trade Center attacks share common ground with a falsified Tonkin Gulf incident for Vietnam War and false-flag Operation Gladio where many hundreds of Europeans were killed by CIA-MI6 thugs to frame so-called leftists and extort European nations. Of course, CIA Operation Mockingbird was created to keep a lid on the sting and on the mainstream media.

9/11 is a symbol of Fascism and blood money avarice.

What happened at the Mumbai massacre is nothing like what happened at the World Trade Center attacks.

To propose that 9/11 is somehow about “patriotism” or “an international symbol for a nation's grief and courage in the face of terrorism” is no better than naked propaganda in support of the malefactors that perpetrated the blatant coverup and the crime itself.

A magazine such as the Nation has an apparent purpose to oppose and reveal status quo wrongdoing. In other words – as its founding prospectus says: The Nation will not be the organ of any party, sect, or body. It will, on the contrary, make an earnest effort to bring to the discussion of political and social questions a really critical spirit, and to wage war upon the vices of violence, exaggeration, and misrepresentation by which so much of the political writing of the day is marred.

To see the Nation and countless others enable and support the felons and lies that operate a Washington corporate MSM axis says volumes about what kind of extortion the west is run by and what kind of Organized Corporate Crime Rule drives it with impunity.


"Deception is a state of mind and the mind of the State"
James Jesus Angleton (Head of CIA Counter Intelligence from 1954-1974)

"He who gains most advantage from a crime is the one most likely to have committed it.”
Seneca (renowned Roman playwright, philosopher and politician 5 BC - 65 AD)

"The citizen who sees his society’s democratic clothes being worn out and does not cry it out, is not a patriot, but a traitor.”
Mark Twain (arguably American’s greatest writer and commentator 1835-1910)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]