How to start a world war redux
December 3, 2008 - 3:06am.
The recent Mumbai attacks are beginning to look more and more like a false flag event. What's a false flag event? Things like the Gulf of Tonkin incident involving the USS Maddox that escalated the fighting in Vietnam. Or the USS Maine explosion being blamed on Spain by Hearst press setting off the Spanish-American war. Google it to learn more about the secret history of these events.
They captured but one of the perpetrators of the Mumbai attack. Someone that they are claiming is from Faridkot, Pakistan. But there's just one problem, as McClatchy now reports, no one from Faridkot has ever seen or heard of this person that supposedly was born and raised there.
The names given for this terrorist thus far, Ajmal Amir Kamal, Azam Amir Kasav, or Azam Ameer Qasab are all common names in Pakistan. Like blaming a Smith, Williams, Johnson in the United States and then expecting to find only one.
The BBC reports that three men walked into the Leopold Cafe, drank beer, settled their bills and walked out. Then they fished out guns from their bags and began firing. Just one problem there, alcohol is forbidden in Islam.
The BBC further reports an eye witness account from Gaffar Abdul Amir, an Iraqi tourist from Baghdad, stating he saw at least two men who started the firing outside the Leopold Cafe.
They did not look Indian, they looked foreign. One of them, I thought, had blonde hair. The other had a punkish hairstyle. They were neatly dressed.
Yet today the Overseas Security Advisory Council, a division of the US Department of State, is clearly placing blame for the attack on Pakistan. But here's an odd note, the OSAC sources the claim on the media, while the media sources the claim on the OSAC. The OSAC states:
Trained by Lashkar-e-Tayyiba according to
press reports
a confidential U.S. intelligence analysis concludes that some of the Mumbai terrorists were likely trained by the Lashkar-e-Tayyiba terrorist group, with "camps located in Mansera and Muzzarafabad in Pakistani-administered Kashmir."
And Indian security forces stood around and waited for the military to be called in instead stopping the violence on their own. This allowed the incident to escalate and more lives to be lost. Update: India is now owning up to the lapses.
The whole affair smells like a false flag event designed to bring India into a more active role in the War on Terror, and rein in control of the Indian/Afghani/Pakistani region with NATO/US forces. With much of the world now demanding Pakistan agree to inspections and an investigation, they seem to be winning the minds of those who don't bother to question what they are spoon fed on the television.
That means we will now see an escalation of the War on Terror from Afghanistan into the surrounding countries, all without any sort of declaration of war or any type of authorization coming from the US Congress. This will bring the count of our invasion of sovereign nations via the War on Terror and Bush Doctrine to three.
Just remember that Pakistan is a nuclear power. When I was at university we ran a number of scenarios concerning the India/Pakistan fighting over the Kashmir area. Once a nuclear weapon was used, the scenarios almost always escalated into an all out world war.
And that's where we stand, on the precipice of a third world war should cooler heads not prevail. And it seems as though it has all been made this way by deliberate misleading information from the governments of India, the United States, and the global corporate media.
UPDATE 12/10/2008: President George W. Bush is upping the rhetoric on attacking Pakistan saying by doing so he is really defending America. And folks wondered how this lame duck could screw things up even more.
UPDATE 12/20/2008: Seems I was closer to the truth than anyone would like to admit. It's all coming out into the open now. The Mumbai attacks are specifically referenced by the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff as a reason to expand the fighting in Afghanistan into Pakistan. Hate being right about these types of things.
UPDATE 12/24/2008: The BBC is now reporting that a man arrested in connection with supplying mobile phone SIM cards to the Mumbai attackers is in fact an operative of the police in Indian-administered Kashmir. Funny how the more evidence that is revealed, the more it looks like it was India which sponsored this event and not Pakistan.
Technorati Tags: - woody188's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer friendly version
Oh wow...I think you might
Oh wow...I think you might be right.
I need to go back to bed and pull the covers over my head.
Are you claiming that the
Are you claiming that the Indian Government trained and inserted these guys and allowed them to kill almost 200 people in furtherance of some nefarious scheme? Or are you claiming that someone else trained and inserted these guys, hoping to start a blowup between India and Pakistan? If you are making such a claim, could you be so kind as to give us some idea who would have been able to do this and what their motivation might be?
I also want to point out some things about your post that may not stand the smell test.
1. They are claiming the guy in custody is from a particular town, one where no one seems to know him. Where did that information come from? William of Occam would tell you it came from the terrorist himself. And of course, once captured, he is certainly constrained to tell the truth, right?
2. These guys could not have had a beer in Leopold's Bar because Muslims do not consume alcohol. That's not much of an argument. Muslims don't as a rule go around murdering other people in cold blood.
3. One eyewitness said two of the shooters did not look Indian. One may have had blond hair and the other had a punkish hairstyle. One eyewitness out of how many? How reliable was that one eyewitness and why is he or she apparently the only one making this claim?
4. ". . . Overseas Security Advisory Council, a division of the US Department of State, is clearly placing blame for the attack on Pakistan."
I'm sorry, I don't think this is true. It's like saying that since Lee Harvey Oswald had recently lived in the Soviet Union that country was directly responsible for the death of JFK. OSAC may have said the attackers were Pakistani, but NO ONE in the US has directly blamed Pakistan for the attack.
In fact, from the article you cited comes this:
"The brutal, prolonged attack on India's financial capital has some roots in Pakistan, a senior State Department official said. That's the closest the U.S. has come to placing blame for the coordinated assaults, although the official was careful to say that not all the evidence is in. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing."
It seems to be a very long reach from the raid to the conclusion that we stand on the brink of nuclear war.
How should I know who
How should I know who trained them and inserted them? Do you know?
Yes, I'm claiming it's designed to broaden the War on Terror into the territories surrounding Afghanistan and bring India in as one of the major local powers supporting the War on Terror.
Step back and ask what the terrorists hoped to accomplish?
Who is benefiting from the attacks?
The only demand was
1. McClatchy reported:
Indian officials, news media officials, and police made the claim. It does not state where they received that information. Being flippant won't help your case. We should assume these entities did not single source their claims from the suspect or else they are wholly incompetent. Or if you believe like myself, they are just saying whatever they want to pin it on Pakistan.
2. Fanatics do not typically pick and choose which tenets of their religion to follow. It shows a general disregard for Muslim beliefs on the part of the attackers which doesn't seem likely from suicide attackers. Perhaps they should have just shot themselves the infidel drunks.
3. Ask the BBC, it's their interview. How do you know there was only one witness making the claim?
Do you think the BBC runs around asking every witness questions and then prints the one answer that was unlike any other?
That seems like a recipe for disaster for a news organization seeking to report what happened in any given event. What you should be asking is why there is only a couple of pictures of the attackers, and why the pictures all show only two men, one the man that was caught, out of some 10+ estimated attackers.
4. From the OSAC PDF file:
The Indian government claimed to have evidence the attack was linked to Pakistan. And according to the Guardian Condi Rice said:
You know, because "we don't want that smoking gun to come in the form of mushroom cloud" Rice has been down this road before helping convince everyone Iraq was a threat.
It's not a reach on the nuclear war statement. We've been close to it many times before between these two nations. If Pakistan does not have full control over all the elements of the old regime, then it's less a stretch and closer to a sure thing.
There was the same concern when the Soviet Union fell and they had to track down all their nuclear weapons or else the worry was they would end up on the black market to the highest bidder. Why is Pakistan different?
At any rate, we've already ran military incursions into Pakistan against their wishes, and it's now only a matter of time before we start hearing about the plans for occupation of that territory by NATO(US), US, or UN(US) forces. Oh wait, they already did as part of Obama's regional strategy to the conflict: