FBI whistle-blower Sibel Edmonds was described as "the most gagged person in the history of the United States" by the American Civil Liberties Union. Was the Sunday Times pressured to drop its investigation into her revelations?
By Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
Posted on Thursday, May 16, 2013
A whistleblower has revealed extraordinary information on the U.S. government’s support for international terrorist networks and organised crime. The government has denied the allegations yet gone to extraordinary lengths to silence her. Her critics have derided her as a fabulist and fabricator. But now comes word that some of her most serious allegations were confirmed by a major European newspaper only to be squashed at the request of the U.S. government.
raise awareness about the true nature of the events that changed the world 9 years ago.
In light of two wars in the middle east and ever increasing restrictions on our civil liberties, understanding
what happened on the day has become more important than ever.... Join us in opening up the debate.
Featuring: high profile speakers, documentary screenings, comedy, live performances, discussion, workshops.
On Sunday 12th September join us for public outreach as we take
the message of 9/11 Truth for Peace to the streets and people of London
Ahmed has significantly updated this article and added endnotes - loose nuke
October 2009 • Issue 426
OUR TERRORISTS: Islamic fundamentalist militants are the enemies of Israel and Western governments, right? Think again. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed reports.
Once upon a time, the CIA trained, financed and supported Osama bin Laden and his mujahidin networks in Afghanistan to repel the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. After the end of the Cold War, bin Laden turned against the West and we no longer had any use for him. His persistent terrorist attacks against us for more than a decade, culminating in 9/11, provoked our own response, in the form of the ‘War on Terror’. This is the official narrative. And it’s false. Not only did Western intelligence services continue to foster Islamist extremist and terrorist groups connected to al-Qaeda after the Cold War; they continued to do so even after 9/11.
The CIA’s jihad
( via http://nafeez.blogspot.com )
By Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
The conviction of Abdullah Ahmed Ali, 28, Tanvir Hussain, 28, and Assad Sarwar, 29, in relation to the liquid bomb plot has been seen as a major triumph for British police and intelligence efforts. Yet, despite this being the second re-trial, the prosecution was still only able to convict the three for conspiracy to murder, including their intent to bring down an airplane – but not to prove their capability to carry out the plot...
by Nafeez Ahmed, February 9, 2008
Why is the Obama administration hell-bent on continuing rendition, and covering-up torture? Why are Western states complicit in these illegal activities? How can the systematic perpetuation of such criminal practices under the rubric of the 'War on Terror' be conducted by the very states who claim to be the guardians of 'international law' and 'human rights'?
The practice of rendition, linked inextricably to the facilitation of torture, is an integral part of the conduct of the western ‘War on Terror’, initiated after 9/11. It therefore needs to be understood in the context of western geopolitical, strategic and economic strategies, and their connection to national security policies. Only by grasping this wider context can rendition be understood in terms of its relationship to the logic of current western strategies, which are themselves rooted in longstanding social, political, ideological and economic processes tied to the protection of powerful vested interests. The movement against rendition will be ineffective if it fails to understand and confront precisely these underlying strategies, processes and interests in the context of which rendition is being practiced and facilitated by western states...
by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed - Monday, January 26, 2009
The arrival of the Obama administration will not fundamentally alter the course of military expansion accelerated during the Bush era. The origins of these policies do not lie uniquely in neoconservative ideology. While the election of President Obama may offer new opportunities for progressive forces to delimit the damage, their space for movement will ultimately be constrained by deep-seated structural pressures that will attempt to exploit Obama to rehabilitate American imperial hegemony, rather than transform it.
Indeed, the radicalization of Anglo-American political ideology represented by the rise of neoconservative principles and the militarization processes of the 'War on Terror', constituted a strategic response to global systemic crises supported by the American business classes. The same classes, recognizing the extent to which the Bush era has discredited this response, have rallied around Obama. Therefore, as global crises intensify, this militarization response is likely to undergo further radicalization, rather than a meaningful change in course. The key differences will be in language and method, not substance.
(Via Nafeez Ahmed's blog)
It came to my attention that a senior correspondent, Kristin Aalen, working for a national Norwegian broadsheet - Stavanger Aftenbladet (Stavanger Evening News) - just recently printed a detailed article in the newspaper on Western covert operations sponsoring al-Qaeda after the Cold War... based almost entirely on my research in The War on Truth: 9/11, Disinformation and the Anatomy of Terrorism.
Entitled "Terrorists Working for Western Countries" (24.11.08), it even gives a country-by-country summary breakdown complete with a handy geopolitical world map of the wide arc of these operations. It's a very useful piece from a mainstream national European paper that very effectively summarises the thrust of my research into this unpalatable subject. A shame that the British press is so reticient about such issues.
An interview I conducted with Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed where he discusses the need for an independent public enquiry into 7/7 bombings in London , the failings of the 9/11 commission, deep links between supposed terrorist masterminds and the inteligence services and the nature of the term Conspiracy theory.
Nafeez Ahmed's books on 9/11 are fine examples of scholarship that deconstruct the official story of 9/11. His first book, "The+War+on+Freedom:+How+&+Why+America+was+Attacked,+September+11,+2001", convinced me personally that 9/11 was in reality not the event that was delivered to us by the U.S. and Western corporate press, fed by Western intelligence agencies. "The War on Freedom" won praise from Gore Vidal, among others. It was published in 2002, and ranks among the first serious deconstructions of the "War on Terror".
In 2005, Ahmed followed up with "The+War+on+Truth", which continued his fine analysis of the propaganda and disinformation that goes hand in hand with the "War on Terror" and delineates an unbroken series of relationships between "al Qaeda" and Western intelligence, primarily, the CIA and the DIA, that continued after the end of the Cold War, and even after the bombing of US assets in the late 1990s.
In 2006, Ahmed published his last position on "al Qaeda" in "The Hidden History of 9-11-2001" (coming soon in softcover from Seven Stories Press);
“It has no existence as an independent concrete entity. It designates a highly developed category of Western covert operations designed to secure destabilization through the creation, multiplication, mobilization, and manipulation of disparate mujahideen groups. The evidence suggests that this was certainly the case on 9-11.”
In this C-SPAN BookTV segment from 2005, Ahmed talks about his research in "The War on Truth" and is 50 minutes of time very well spent.
If Matt Taibbi had even one percent of Gore Vidal's intellectual grasp of American history, perhaps then it would make reading his presumed 'leftist' opinion about 9/11 a little easier to stomach. (I presume that Taibbi pitches from the left, because his screed is published at Alternet.org and AfterDowningStreet.org.) Fortunately, we don't need him. Gore Vidal is still among us, and it is his image and voice in the new Italian documentary 'Zero: an investigation into 9/11', that expresses a critical perspective of 9/11 that will ring true to the ears of those who will hear, and will help to free the prisoners currently living out the Allegory of the Cave, mesmerized by shadows of terror, cast upon the wall by the likes of yellow journalists like Taibbi.
Playlist URL: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=605E68182CFB244A
Transcript of the entire briefing and submitted documents here:
Direct link to Congressional Record, 109th Congress:
In the wake of Philip Shenon's best-seller, "The Commission", comes another wave of Americans snapping out of a media-induced trance. On another front, to a different audience, Willie Nelson is waking up another sector of the sleepwalking masses with his skepticism. Whatever route you took that made you take a second look at 9/11, welcome... and, you've got some catching up to do.
If Shenon's book was your introduction to the simple fact that the 9/11 Commission failed in its mandate on several levels, then you are probably unaware that serious criticism of the 9/11 Commission was entered into the Congressional Record of the 109th Congress. This criticism was the result of a Congressional Briefing conducted by former Congressional Representative, Cynthia McKinney of Georgia. (McKinney is currently seeking the Presidential nomination for the Green Party of the United States.)
The briefing was held on July 22nd, 2005, subsequently broadcast by C-SPAN, and studiously ignored by the corporate press. A comprehensive collation of the briefing has not been made available online, but thanks to the magic of YouTube, I have chopped the most pertinent testimonies from that day into neat 10 minute segments that are easily digestible for the busy internet surfer. You may have seen some of the footage from the briefing in the documentary, "Press for Truth", where Lorie Van Auken talked about her husband's fate on 9/11. Beyond that, not much of this footage has been circulating on the net.
So, if you are new to 9/11 Truth, or 9/11 skepticism, or you just have some questions, this is a great start. This briefing does not present much speculation or theory, but does break down the Commission on its bureaucratic failings, and lists a host of anomalies that will send you researching for days if this is all new to you. (This briefing does not discuss controlled demolition theories at all, it wasn't until physicist Steven Jones came on the scene in 2006 that CD "exploded" into the massive topic for 9/11 skeptics that is currently is. There was a lot of research already published online, and some in books, but it took a PhD to kick it over the top.)
The YouTube series is in 25 parts, and begins with McKinney's opening statement;
Recent research by authors Nafeez Ahmed, and Diana Ralph, points to the year 1979 as a turning point for Western policy that on the one hand began to facilitate covert warfare and destabilization via the Mujihadeen in Afghanistan, and on the other began to propagate a meme that has become known as "International Terrorism". Most recently, Ahmed gave a talk at the Indian YMCA in London that reiterates his focus on that year.(1)
1979 was definitely pivotal for the United States, as the CIA convinced President Jimmy Carter to sign off on covert operations in Afghanistan, before the Soviet invasion, that would ultimately produce "al Qaeda".(2) Research that dates back to 1982 reveals that at the same time that the CIA was incubating the nascent 'Arab+Foreign+Legion' in Afghanistan, in Israel, some familiar names were busily framing the concept of "International Terrorism" at the 'Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism'. A paper by a student named Phillip Paul titled, “International Terrorism”: The Propaganda War, (available at the San Francisco State University Library for review), has been cited separately by independent researcher Diana Ralph as well as Ahmed.
(Continued after the jump)
From 1979 until 2007 ... this amorphous network designated by the term al Qaeda has functioned seamlessly as a mercenary proxy force mobilized in diverse strategic regions in the service of Anglo-American imperial expansionism. It hasn't ever had a break. The extent of it is absolutely shocking ... Western state sponsorship, indirectly and directly, of al Qaeda as a destabilizing force in strategic regions.
Meanwhile, innocent citizens are being killed. They are being killed since 1993 ... yet the policy has not shifted. On the contrary it's now escalating in the context of developling an even more catastrophic conflict with Iran.
This has damning moral implications. It means that at some level, policy makers are morally indifferent to the deaths of our own citizens in al Qaeda terrorist attacks. Other strategic imperatives, such as the control of increasingly scarce energy resources are more important. There has been a shift of priorities, something in the National Security structure, since 1979, has relegated civilian life way at the bottom.
- Nafeez Ahmed, 7-13-2007.
Nafeez Ahmed's talk "Creating Terror" Putfile stream:
High-quality MP3 D/L from the a-infos Radio Project:
In just over one hour, Nafeez Ahmed presents historical context for the "War on Terror" in a talk titled "Creating Terror". This is an excellent introductory talk on the causes of contemporary False Flag terrorism; a historical and sociological analysis that doesn't rely on "blowback", but blends geopolitical strategy and engineered terrorist events into a coherent paradigm of control, manipulation, and purposeful misdirection.
The talk was presented at the Indian YMCA in London, on Friday, July 13th, 2007, where Ahmed has spoken before.
(Continued after the jump.)
London 9/11 Truth double billing 9th & 13th July:
1) Monday 9th July, 7.30 Another chance to hear the sensational
personal testimony of WILLIAM RODRIGUEZ, survivor & hero of 9/11, who
cannot be dismissed as a 'conspiracy theorist' because HE WAS THERE!
Bring your friends who still believe the official story and help give
William a rousing send-off from London as he departs on the European leg
of his tour;
2) Friday 13th July, 7.00 'Creating Terror': a lateral look at 9/11,
7/7 and the War on Terror, with NAFEEZ AHMED, author of 'The War on
Truth' & 'The London Bombings'. An opportunity to take a rain-check on
the WOT on the 2nd anniversary of 7/7, in the light of the latest
extraordinary goings-on in the UK.
Both events are at the Indian YMCA, Mahatma Gandhi Hall, 41 Fitzroy
Square, London W1 (Warren St or Great Portland St tube). Admission FREE.
EDIT: Article updated 8:25 pm Central Time. (In this new piece, Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed analyzes the latest foiled "terrorist" events in the UK, and uncovers a familiar series of anomalies. -r.)
© Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
How to understand the attempted but largely failed terrorist plots uncovered since last Friday? Police officers on June 29 dismantled two car bombs made from gas canisters, gasoline and nails, parked in central London’s major theatre and shopping districts. A day later, two men rammed a Jeep Cherokee, filled with flammable material, into a terminal entrance at Glasgow airport. The series of attempted attacks follows hot on the heels of an attempted al-Qaeda attack in the United States earlier in June.
The chronology requires further probing, and indeed, preliminary analysis raises some unresolved questions.
"The American empire is imploding and going down, it is already visible before our eyes. The ideological and the political currency and cachet of this government... it's disgraced around the world. The American government is hated more than at any time in my lifetime, so we really have an empire that's in a slow-motion decline and it will decline. My two worries are... they are going to do a lot of bloodshed, a lot of wreckage before it goes down, and that what stands to replace them is the Chinese empire, and the Chinese empire is a lot more experienced than the American empire, which would be rather parvenue by Chinese standards. "
- Prof. John McMurtry.
I've blogged a couple of times now about a forthcoming documentary from the Australian production company, Upstream Media, called Shadowplay. I'm happy to report that Shadowplay is finally coming to fruition due to the dedicated work of Upstream's Gillian Norman. Her long-distance co-producer is Ian Woods of Global Outlook.
Thanks in part to donations from visitors of 911blogger, Shadowplay is emerging as a strong piece with a serious focus on 9/11 and the decline of the American empire.
We are at War
against International Terrorism,
defending our Values
and our Civilization.
Western anti-terror legislation does not allow the state to be considered in any way culpable for terrorist activities. As far as our elected representatives are concerned, terrorism is a problem of loosely associated groups of reactionary fanatics “attacking our freedoms”. The assumption, never explicitly stated for then it would be revealed, and easily and permanently ridiculed, is that the state is innocent, immune to indulging in such barbaric practices. Written into the rule of law itself, this assumption posits the state as a paternal Fuhrer, a God figure whom we must all entrust our lives and liberties to.
Yet whichever way you look at it, international terrorism has its origins in the state itself. There are many ways of understanding this, but perhaps the most pertinent for our purposes is contemporary history. We don’t need to go very far back either. Only twenty odd years, to the era of the Cold War, when we were also getting Trigger-Happy trying to defend the “Free World” from the “Evil Empire” of International Communism, as Ronald Reagan put it so aptly.
The “strategy of tension” denotes a highly secretive series of interconnected covert operations conducted jointly by the CIA and MI6 largely in Western Europe during the this period. Well-documented by several respected historians, confirmed by official inquiries, and corroborated by former intelligence officials, the “strategy of tension” is one of those unsavoury moments in contemporary history that we don’t learn about in school, or even university.
My favourite book on the subject, and the most authoritative in my view, is Dr. Daniele Ganser’s NATO’s+Secret+Armies:+Operation+Gladio+and+Terrorism+in+Western+Europe (2004). Published in the UK as part of the “Contemporary Security Studies” series of London-based academic press Routledge, Ganser’s study is the first major historical work to bring the “strategy of tension” into the mainstream of scholarship.
"By late 1918, stalemate on the Western Front and the entry of America into the war forced Germany and the Central Powers to accept Wilson's terms for peace. The subsequent Paris Peace Conference of 1919 resulted in the harsh Treaty of Versailles...
Attending the Paris peace conference were President Woodrow Wilson and his closest advisers, Colonel House, bankers Paul Warburg and Bernard Baruch, and almost two dozen members of "the Inquiry." The conference attendees embraced Wilson's plan for peace, including the formation of a League of Nations. However, under American law, the covenant had to be ratified by the U.S. Senate, which failed to do so, apparently distrusting any supernational organization.
Undaunted, Colonel House, along with both British and American peace conference delegates, met in Paris's Majestic Hotel on May 30, 1919, and resolved to form an "Institute of International Affairs," with one branch in the United States and one in England. The English branch became the Royal Institute of International Affairs. This institute was to guide public opinion toward acceptance of one-world government or globalism." (1)
Nafeez Ahmed gave an excellent talk last month in London that takes a "big picture" look at international terrorism and 9/11's place in that spectrum.
Reposting from Nafeez's blog:
Sunday, December 03, 2006
Well, it's good to be back online again. And lots has happened since my last post. A few weeks ago I did a talk in Maida Vale, which has been received with some interest in certain circles. Here's a brief description of the talk as advertised by the venue, Islamic Centre England:
"Nafeez will give an introduction into the covert intelligence operations, economic intrigues and rampant political corruption that have dominated Western 'national security' policies since the end of the Second World War. Using newly declassified secret government files and other reliable documentation, Nafeez will reveal the official deceit that justified Anglo-American imperial expansion during the Cold War, post-Cold War and post-9/11 periods. He will lay bare the dynamics behind historical and current US and British militarism, its overarching goals, and the escalating political, economic and ecological crises generated by the current global imperial system."
The talk was recorded in full, including the Q & A session, by the London Sound Posse, and is available online here.
(Edit: looks like Nafeez wasn't on the show today, but Abrahamson was on.)
Alex welcomes Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed the Executive Director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development (IPRD) in London to discuss possible recent false-flag terror attacks as well as new developments in the 9/11 Truth Movement
Later Alex speaks with independent journalist, researcher, and the editor of False Flag News, Daniel Abrahamson, to discuss upcoming war games going on worldwide and how they have been used in the past to conceal government sponsored terror attacks.
In the name of security -- that is in the name of defending our security, the security of you and me, the British public -- the government has systematically erected a vast legal apparatus of social control, which in both principle and practice violates our most cherished and hard-won human rights and civil liberties.
Ironically, the government has quite cynically used the law, to violate the very rule of law itself. The overarching direction of the anti terror and civil contingency laws is simple:
1) broadening the scope of activity of the police and intelligence agencies and their ability to not only monitor individuals in both their public and private lives; but also proliferating the array of instruments and pretexts available to them to take punitive action, be it through indefinite detention; obtaining convictions using so-called ‘secret’ evidence whose validity cannot be impartially assessed; deportation; the appropriation of private property, at will, in conditions deemed by the government to constitute civil emergencies, etc.
INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM: THE SECRET HISTORY -- 9/11, 7/7, AND BEYOND.
Lecture by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, author of The+London+Bombings:+An+Independent+Inquiry (Duckworth, 2006)
Sunday 12th November 2006
Starts at 18:00hr.
Venue: Islamic Centre of England, 140 Maida Vale, London W1 9QB Tel 020 76045500 [Nearest Tube Station, Kilburn on Bakerloo line]
Nafeez will give an introduction into the covert intelligence operations, economic intrigues and rampant political corruption that have dominated Western "national security" policies since the end of the Second World War. Using newly declassified secret government files and other reliable documentation, Nafeez will reveal the official deceit that justified Anglo-American imperial expansion during the Cold War, post-Cold War and post-9/11 periods. He will lay bare the dynamics behind historical and current US and British militarism, its overarching goals, and the escalating political, economic and ecological crises generated by the current global imperial system.
(This may seem off topic, but stigmatizing Muslims generally, and perpetuating that stigmatization is indeed a cultural phenomenon that ebbs and flows in the wake of 9/11. -r.)
by Nafeez Ahmed
Saturday, October 07, 2006
Muslims, it seems, are a problem. No, I should rephrase that. Muslims, it seems, are perhaps the problem of our times. Or at least one might be forgiven for believing that after the last few weeks and months. We've just had Jack Straw, the Leader of the House of Commons, and former Foreign and Home Secretary, tell us that Muslim women who cover the face with a veil or niqab make community relations "more difficult." And this is because, he says, concealing the face is "a visible statement of separation and difference."
So what is Straw saying? He's not just saying that he finds it "uncomfortable" to talk to a Muslim woman whose face he can't see. He's saying that the fact that some Muslim women choose to cover their face is a direct cause of communal tension, and a confirmation from Muslim women themselves that they indeed are different, and do not wish to engage in society.
Straw later went on to elaborate that he'd rather those Muslim women who wear the veil simply don't do so at all.
Straw's little outburst comes hot on the heels of a series of remarks, observations and political maneuverings consistently pointing at the various problems that Muslim pose to British, and western, society. In August, we had the 'liquid bomb' plot which both former and active military and intelligence experts have found to be either impossible or barely existing.
Poor old General Musharraf. His PR trip trying to rehabilitate the image of Pakistan around the world appears to have been slightly scuppered by the leak of the now widely-reported UK Defence Academy paper. Notwithstanding the predictable chorus of denial from the corridors of power, namely, from those who for all intents and purposes stand accused (at the current time Musharraf, Blair, Bush, etc.), the leaked report is entirely consistent with a wealth of evidence in the public record.
The leaked report, authored by a British intelligence official with a military background, is based on interviews with Pakistani Army officers and academics. BBC News has flagged-up one of the most important sections of the document, which says:
The Army's dual role in combating terrorism and at the same time promoting the MMA and so indirectly supporting the Taliban (through the ISI) is coming under closer and closer international scrutiny. Pakistan is not currently stable but on the edge of chaos.
[The West has] turned a blind eye towards existing instability and the indirect protection of Al Qaeda and promotion of terrorism.
Indirectly Pakistan (through the ISI) has been supporting terrorism and extremism - whether in London on 7/7 or in Afghanistan or Iraq.
The US/UK cannot begin to turn the tide until they identify the real enemies from attacking ideas tactically - and seek to put in place a more just vision. This will require Pakistan to move away from Army rule and for the ISI to be dismantled and more significantly something to be put in its place.
Musharraf knows that time is running out for him...
"...We got back from Bradford on Sunday evening. I had forgotten my mobile at home, and had a backlog of messages, one from my Dad, so I called him back. He had very bad news.
My uncle in Bangladesh had been shot on Saturday morning while I was speaking on my panel in Bradford. A nationally-respected professor of political science at Dhaka University, Dr. Aftab Ahmed, had been attacked in his own home on the university premises by unidentified gun-men, who had pushed their way into the apartment and shot him four times at close range in the upper body, in the presence of his wife (my aunt) and 9-year old disabled daughter (my cousin).
This evening, at around 8 pm, my Dad called to let me know that my uncle passed away earlier this morning. He had been recently demoted from a government-appointed post as Vice-Chancellor at Bangladesh's National University. In that position, he had tackled entrenched issues of political corruption and bribery, the legacy of the previous Allawi League government, when hundreds of university staff had been systematically recruited solely for their political support of the govt, as opposed to their merits as teachers. In a politically explosive and unpopular move, he had fired all staff recruited on the basis of corruption and moved to revitalize academic standards in university recruitment.
This wasn't the first time my uncle had made enemies. He was well-known as a Marxist dissident, and had often been imprisoned by previous governments for his loud opposition and participation in demonstrations and strikes. In 1995, he co-authored a powerful critique of the lack of accountability Bangladesh's purportedly democratic institutions, warning of "the intransigent attitude of the bureaucracy" and highlighting "the lack of willingness and ability ofMPs to seriously enquire into government policies and operations."
In another notorious episode, my uncle had made a few off-hand televised remarks suggesting the Bangladeshi national anthem be amended for a new time, and to give new impetus to the people. He was harshly criticized by hardline nationalists in a concerted campaign that almost lost him his job. But such things never bothered him.
My uncle was a courageous academic who stuck by his principles, and spoke what he believed. For unswervingly doing what he was convinced was just, he was murdered in a brutal assassination, unprecedented in the history of Bangladesh. As the world turns and the newsbites chatter, I pray for uncle's soul, and hope that his legacy of political activism on behalf of freedom and, always, against oppression and corruption, will be carried forward in Bangladesh, this beleaguered icon of Third World devastation from which I am descended. To those out there who believe, please pray with me..."
Instead of clogging Ahmed's inbox and blogger account with messages, please feel free to post your condolences in the comments thread below, and I'll make sure Ahmed sees this.
Looks like that dissident bone runs in the family.
My deepest sympathy to you and your family, Nafeez. I hope that justice is served on the assassins.
In case you want to send something more tactile, here is an address to send cards, etc.;
Institute for Policy Research & Development
Suite 301, 20 Harewood Avenue
Nafeez Ahmed - "Ties With Terror: The Continuity of Western-Al-Qaeda Relations in the Post-Cold War Period"
(This essay was originally submitted as part of the record for Rep. Cynthia McKinney’s congressional briefing; “The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later, A Citizens' Response: Did the Commission Get it Right?”, re-published with permission of the author. Download the complete transcript and submitted written material from McKinney’s briefing here; 2.5 MB PDF)
© Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
An accurate understanding of the history of US relations with the Afghan mujahideen who went on to join al-Qaeda’s international terrorist network is crucial to understanding the anatomy of international terrorism today.
Friday, September 15, 2006
One of the things that really bothers me is the marginalization of the 9/11 families, the people who lost their loved ones in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Not only have the families, and their call for an investigation even now, been marginalized by the Bush administration; they have also been marginalized by the 9/11 "truth" movement which has largely shown little interest in what the families have been saying.
More than anyone, it's been the 9/11 families who have been at the forefront of the ongoing campaign for an independent public inquiry into the attacks that might truly hold the authorities to account, and result in full disclosure of what happened, how and why. Indeed, one of the most powerful resources demonstrating how little we really know about 9/11 comes in the form of the huge list of 9/11 Unanswered Questions on the website of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Independent Commission. In all, there are, I believe, several hundred questions pertaining to virtually every single dimension of the terrorist attacks. (NOTE: by the way, when I cited 9/11 widow Lauri van Auken in my article below "Interrogating 9/11", although she spoke on behalf of many 9/11 families, she did not speak on behalf of the 9/11 Families Steering Committee as the latter had been disbanded in January 2005 already)
by Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed
Five Years On, Being a Sceptic Doesn’t Automatically Mean You’re A Lunatic… Although It Might Do
Five years after the terrorist attacks in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania that shook the world, scepticism about the Bush administration account of what happened, as well as of the “War on Terror” in general, has increased exponentially. This has accompanied the emergence of all kinds of pet theories about what happened, some of them truly bizarre, others intriguing but vacuous, and perhaps a few based on compelling facts.
For someone not familiar with these theories, it’s difficult to know where, and why, to start. And particular variants of 9/11 “truth”, such as the “no planes” theory that the whole event was merely an audiovisual technicolor chimera concocted on our TV screens, don’t help.
But is it all just a pile of lunacy? If only it was, I could sleep much better at night. Unfortunately, beneath the mountain of theories and speculations, there remain disturbing and persistent anomalies that have yet to be resolved. In this respect, the mainstream media’s approach to criticism of the 9/11 official narrative has been wanting in the extreme, focusing largely on bizarre pet theories and fringe speculations, suggesting that anybody who has doubts about the official story must be delusional, dumb, or both.
by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
In a little-noted article printed in early August in the Armed Forces Journal, a monthly magazine for officers and leaders in the United States military community, early retired Major Ralph Peters sets out the latest ideas in current US strategic thinking. And they are extremely disturbing.
Ethnically Cleansing the Entire Middle East
Maj. Peters, formerly assigned to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence where he was responsible for future warfare, candidly outlines how the map of the Middle East should be fundamentally re-drawn, in a new imperial endeavour designed to correct past errors. "Without such major boundary revisions, we shall never see a more peaceful Middle East," he observes, but then adds wryly: "Oh, and one other dirty little secret from 5,000 years of history: Ethnic cleansing works."
Thus, acknowledging that the sweeping reconfiguration of borders he proposes would necessarily involve massive ethnic cleansing and accompanying bloodshed on perhaps a genocidal scale, he insists that unless it is implemented, "we may take it as an article of faith that a portion of the bloodshed in the region will continue to be our own." Among his proposals are the need to establish "an independent Kurdish state" to guarantee the long-denied right to Kurdish self-determination. But behind the humanitarian sentiments, Maj. Peters declares that: "A Free Kurdistan, stretching from Diyarbakir through Tabriz, would be the most pro-Western state between Bulgaria and Japan."