The War on Terror is a Fraud,Pakistan TV Report Contradicts US

The War on Terror is a Fraud
A decade of war started, and both fueled & fought by the same
corporate-financier interests.
From the beginning, even for those wanting to believe the
fairy tale that 9/11 was carried out by cave dwellers carrying
box cutters directed by Osama Bin Laden, who by all accounts
was dying or already dead from kidney failure in 2001 –
“unfortunate blunders” in US foreign policy can still be
blamed for the creation and perpetuation of the ubiquitous,
unceasing terror organization known as Al Qaeda.
However, in light of recent events in Libya, Syria, Iran, and
Algeria, there is exposed a truth, many have known for over 10
years, and many more are catching onto now – that the “War on
Terror” is an absolute fraud, started, fueled and
simultaneously fought against by the same handful of
corporate-financier interests for the sole purpose of
spreading Wall Street and London’s hegemony across the globe.
Inception: Al Qaeda Made in USA
By all accounts, including admissions by former Secretary of
Defense Robert Gates and former National Security Adviser
Zbigniew Brzezinski, Osama Bin Laden’s organization that would
become Al Qaeda was created during the Soviet-Afghan war in in
the late ’70s and throughout the ’80s. The funding of these
militants did not begin after the Soviet invasion, but
actually several years before the invasion. US intervention in
Afghanistan by training and arming Afghanistan’s Mujaheddin,
along with Osama Bin Laden’s Arab fighters, is one of the
leading factors that led to the murderous and protracted
decade-long war, according to the Nation in an article titled,
“Blowback, the Prequel.”
Photo:
Former
US
National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski meeting with
Osama Bin Laden, then leading the CIA’s Arab legionaries in
Afghanistan. Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda would later spin off into
regional terrorist organizations, covertly armed, trained, and
protected by the CIA to this day, including LIFG in Libya, MEK
in Iraq and Iran, and Baluchi terrorists in Pakistan.
….
Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda would continue to fight after the Soviets
were expelled from Afghanistan, this time in Kosovo’s bid for
independence from Serbia in the late 1990s. Al Qaeda-trained
Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) militants garnered a Serbian
response which was then used by NATO as a pretext for
intervention. NATO’s entry into the war led to the eventual
carving up of the nation. Again, the CIA was found to
be propping up Bin Laden’s terrorist legionaries. Serbia’s
president, Slobodan Milošević would later be removed from
power by yet another arm of American interventionism, the
National Endowment for Democracy via Optor, now known as the
infamous CANVAS organization which, with US funding, trained
activists ahead of the now admittedly US-engineered “Arab
Spring.”
Despite Al Qaeda quickly becoming America’s arch enemy,
filling the void left by a collapsed Soviet Union, and
justifying America’s continued absurd defense spending as well
as its enormous tactical holdings overseas throughout the
’90s, it appears the organization was still very much a
vehicle carrying forward US foreign policy. And despite
accusations that it was a terrorist organization, it continued
receiving covert support from US and British intelligence
agencies, as did many other extremist groups which eventually
were integrated with Al Qaeda after September 11, 2001.
From Heroes to Villains, and Back Again
In the ’80s when the CIA was fueling Afghanistan’s decade-long
war with the Soviet Union, in part provoked by US meddling in
the region years before the invasion even took place, the
Mujaheddin were portrayed as heroes and freedom fighters quite
publicly. No better example can be cited of how this image was
nurtured by the West’s massive propaganda machine than
Hollywood’s Rambo III, an entire movie literally dedicated to
the “gallant people of Afghanistan.” Many of those that fought
in Afghanistan, particularly foreign fighters armed, trained,
and brought in by the CIA, would go on to become some of the
world’s most notorious terrorist groups, many of which are
listed to this day on the US and UK foreign terrorist
organization lists.
Image: (Top) Rambo meets
the Afghan Mujaheddin, who aid him in his heroic exploits.
These people would later fight US invaders after expelling the
Soviets. (Bottom) The credits for Rambo IIIbegin with this
dedication to the “gallant people of Afghanistan.” Throughout
the film, the Mujaheddin are depicted as “freedom fighters”
much in the same light as the current Libyan rebels are. In
short time, these “gallant” “freedom fighters” would become
America’s arch enemies and the subject of a 10 year occupation
that is still ongoing. More recently, Rambo IV featured
Myanmar – still called “Burma” by neo-imperialists – and was
used in a similar manner to portray an entire nation as the US
State Department saw fit. The film is being used by US-backed
youth group “Generation Wave” as propaganda, just as the US
State Department intended.
….
These CIA-fostered terrorist groups include the Libyan Islamic
Fighting Group (LIFG), which was created in Afghanistan with
Libyan militants previously armed and trained by the CIA to
overthrow Qaddafi in the early 1980s. After Afghanistan, and
several failed attempts to seize Libya by force, these
fighters would filter back into Afghanistan to fight US troops
who were now invading the “gallant people of Afghanistan.”
This time, the Afghans were no longer “gallant,” but rather
medieval savages in need of Western democracy and UN
sanctioned nation-building. The Libyans for their part would
continue fighting the US in Afghanistan, and when the US
invaded Iraq in 2003, they would begin fighting US troops
there as well. This is of course, all according to a report
from the West Point Combating Terror Center.
And even as US forces occupy Afghanistan for their tenth year,
with fighting reaching unprecedented levels of violence,
Afghanistan’s LIFG Libyan cohorts are receiving US and British
air support, French and Qatari arms, billions in aid, NATO
special forces assistance, and full diplomatic recognition by
the US State Department and the UK Foreign and Commonwealth
Office, as they rise up against Qaddafi in Libya. It must be
noted that these Libyan rebels, who like the Afghan Mujahedin
were portrayed as “freedom fighters,” are in fact led and
consist almost entirely of LIFG militants, many of whom have
spent time in Iraq and Afghanistan killing US troops. It
should be noted that LIFG is listed by the US Stated
Department (#26) and the UK Home Office as a foreign terrorist
organization.
This is a narrative that first saw these militants as heroes,
then the world’s most scorned villains for nearly a decade of
war, before emerging out the other side once again as heroes.
For the thousands of US troops who have died in Iraq and
Afghanistan, the tens of thousands maimed, and the hundreds of
millions of Americans facing a bankrupted nation that has paid
trillions for this “War on Terror” to unproportionately
wealthy mega-corporations and banks, it is becoming clear that
they were taken for a ride by a shadowy elite with an obscure
agenda masked in a now unraveling veil of lies.
The War on Terror is Actively Kept Alive by the West
In Libya, Qaddafi has fought for nearly three decades to crush
the extremist militants of Libya’s eastern region, centered on
the cities of Darnah and the current epicenter of the NATObacked rebellion, Benghazi. This eastern region is considered,
according to West Point’s CTC report, as one of the highest
concentrations of terrorists in the world. It is also a region
the CIA and MI6 have helped fund, arm, and train over the same
30 years.
At one point, Qaddafi had almost entirely extinguished the
movement, in particular LIFG, most of whose leadership fled,
and ironically sought refuge in London, Langley, and
Washington. Qaddafi would attempt to re-approach the West by
abandoning his WMD programs and inviting Western intelligence
agencies in to help counter the remnants of LIFG and other
regional terror organizations. The CIA and MI6 instead,
rearmed, reorganized, and redirected these terrorist
organizations back at the Qaddafi regime culminating in the
February 17, 2011 “Day of Rage” and the subsequent NATO
intervention. Indeed, the US, UK, France, Qatar, and other
NATO member states are overtly deposing Qaddafi in favor for a
regime made up of hardcore terrorists.
In other words, a terrorist organization on its death bed, was
intentionally brought back to life by NATO. Having done so,
LIFG is already shipping weapons to another notorious
terrorist organization in the region, Algeria’s Al Qaeda in
the Islamic Magreb (AQIM) (#37 on US State Department’s list
of foreign terrorist organizations). Algeria, like Libya, has
fought a long battle against terrorism at the cost of
protracted unrest now known as the “lost decade.” After a
failed attempt at stirring regime change in Algeria through
Egyptian-style street protests and internal defections, it
appears the US through NATO is attempting to revive AQIM and
initiate a violent revolution.
Already, Bruce Riedel, a Brookings Institution policy wonk and
co-author of the “Which Path to Persia?” report engineering
the use of terrorism to destabilize Iran, is licking his chops
over the prospects of Algeria “being next.” In a report, aptly
titled, “Algeria will be next to fall,” Riedel sets the
rhetorical stage, just as he helped to do with Libya, for
another “spontaneous” “indigenous” uprising, with the prospect
of NATO, and more specifically, French intervention looming
over them. In reality, as we can clearly see, AQIM would not
be in any position were it not for NATO arming and handing a
neighboring nation to their allies amongst Libya’s LIFG.
Similarly in Syria, the Muslim Brotherhood was all but routed
by Bashar al-Assad’s father, Hafez al-Assad. Now, these
militants are receiving covert arms, the full support of the
Western media’s selective journalism, and both political and
financial support by the US, UK, and EU. Should the West
succeed, yet another extremist organization will be reanimated
and unleashed on a population that has sacrificed much trying
to burying it.
Iran has been fighting a battle against another State
Department listed terrorist organization (list as #28),
Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK.) US policy makers, after admitting MEK
has the blood of US soldiers and civilians on its hands and
that it has “undeniably” conducted terrorist attacks,
shockingly wants to remove it from the US foreign terrorist
organization list so that it can be worked with more closely
in toppling the Iranian government. This is revealed in the
Brookings Institution’s “Which Path to Persia?” report.
“Potential Ethnic Proxies,” page 117-118 (page 130-131 of the
PDF): “Perhaps the most prominent (and certainly the most
controversial) opposition group that has attracted attention
as a potential U.S. proxy is the NCRI (National Council of
Resistance of Iran), the political movement established by the
MEK (Mujahedin-e Khalq). Critics believe the group to be
undemocratic and unpopular, and indeed anti-American.
In contrast, the group’s champions contend that the movement’s
long-standing opposition to the Iranian regime and record of
successful attacks on and intelligence-gathering operations
against the regime make it worthy of U.S. support. They also
argue that the group is no longer anti-American and question
the merit of earlier accusations. Raymond Tanter, one of the
group’s supporters in the United States, contends that the MEK
and the NCRI are allies for regime change in Tehran and also
act as a useful proxy for gathering intelligence. The MEK’s
greatest intelligence coup was the provision of intelligence
in 2002 that led to the discovery of a secret site in Iran for
enriching uranium.
Despite its defenders’ claims, the MEK remains on the U.S.
government list of foreign terrorist organizations. In the
1970s, the group killed three U.S. officers and three civilian
contractors in Iran. During the 1979-1980 hostage crisis, the
group praised the decision to take America hostages and Elaine
Sciolino reported that while group leaders publicly condemned
the 9/11 attacks, within the group celebrations were
widespread.
Undeniably, the group has conducted terrorist attacks—often
excused by the MEK’s advocates because they are directed
against the Iranian government. For example, in 1981, the
group bombed the headquarters of the Islamic Republic Party,
which was then the clerical leadership’s main political
organization, killing an estimated 70 senior officials. More
recently, the group has claimed credit for over a dozen mortar
attacks, assassinations, and other assaults on Iranian
civilian and military targets between 1998 and 2001. At the
very least, to work more closely with the group (at least in
an overt manner), Washington would need to remove it from the
list of foreign terrorist organizations.”
It turns out that MEK is already receiving US funding,
weapons, and other assistance to conduct a militant campaign
against the government of Iran. This was revealed in Seymour
Hersh’s New Yorker article “Preparing the Battlefield,” which
stated:
“The M.E.K. has been on the State Department’s terrorist list
for more than a decade, yet in recent years the group has
received arms and intelligence, directly or indirectly, from
the United States. Some of the newly authorized covert funds,
the Pentagon consultant told me, may well end up in M.E.K.
coffers. “The new task force will work with the M.E.K. The
Administration is desperate for results.” He added, “The
M.E.K. has no C.P.A. auditing the books, and its leaders are
thought to have been lining their pockets for years. If people
only knew what the M.E.K. is getting, and how much is going to
its bank accounts—and yet it is almost useless for the
purposes the Administration intends.”
Moves have also been made to get MEK de-listed as a terrorist
organization by the US State Department so that even more aid
can
be
rendered
to
this
admitted
terrorist
organization. Seymore Hersh in an NPR interview, also claims
that select MEK members have received training in the US. Also
implicated by Hersh in his article, were Kurdish militants
straddling the Iranian, Syrian, and Iraqi borders and now
wrecking havoc against Syria’s Assad regime, and Baluchi
militants based along the Iranian-Pakistani border. The
Baluchi militants are also being directed toward the Pakistani
government with US assistance.
In each instance, whether it is in Libya, Algeria, Syria,
Iran, or Pakistan, immense efforts have been made by these
governments to destroy entirely these organizations. In each
case, the US purposely arms, trains, and shelters these
organizations, with troupes of dissent leaders populating
London, Washington, and Langley, Virginia, creating a “rouge’s
UN” of sorts. Careful observers who check the backgrounds of
“experts” brought onto the duplicitous BBC, CNN, or Al Jazeera
networks for interviews can see sometimes 2-3 of these exiled
extremist leaders at a time being given airtime and dressed up
as “freedom fighters.” The threat of militant extremism is one
the United States government and its allies have been
purposefully perpetuating as a pretext for expanding military
and economic power into sovereign nation-states disinterested
in their Wall Street and London centric “globalization.”
War on Terror: President X’s War
While many may say the “War on Terror” was Bush’s war, a
legacy Obama has inherited, it is clear through Obama’s
“actions” that the war has continued on in earnest, even
expanded, following the same path with all but superficial
rhetoric affixed to give it a more “progressive’ look. The
current conflagration in the Middle East and North Africa was
planned all the way back in the early ’90s with each president
since then, rubber stamping the steps necessary to push the
plan for a “new Middle East” forward.
It was Bush Sr. who ravaged Iraq and left US troops
permanently stationed in the Middle East. Clinton oversaw Al
Qaeda’s ushering in of NATO intervention in the Kosovo
conflict. Bush Jr. of course was in office when Afghanistan
and Iraq were invaded and occupied. Now, Obama is overseeing
the “Arab Spring” for which activists were trained and
bankrolled by the US State Department before he even came into
office. He is also overseeing the destruction of Libya, and
the destabilization of Syria (for more information, see
Globalists Coming Full Circle).
As the 2012 US election nears, we are confronted with the
obvious establishment candidate of choice, Rick Perry, facing
off against another 4 years of Obama’s servile obedience to
the corporate-financier agenda driving American policy. Rick
Perry assures us that he will bring change, stating that
America “cannot afford four more years of this rudderless
leadership.” However, in reality, the same US policy makers
that have engineered the last 10 years of the global “War on
Terror” are already lined up behind Perry to ensure that
indeed we do get “four more years of this rudderless
leadership.”
Foreign Policy recently reported that warmongering NeoConservatives including Douglas Feith, William Luti, Andrew
McCarthy, Charles Stimson, and Daniel Fata, with the help of
certified warmonger and corporate fascist Donald Rumsfeld, had
been introduced to Rick Perry to help him “brush up” on
foreign policy. Also meeting with Perry was Dan Blumenthal of
the Neo-Con, Fortune 500-funded AEI, Peter Brookes of
the Fortune 500-funded Heritage Foundation (page 35), and
Zalmay Khalizad, a fellow Neo-Conservative warmonger, PNAC
signatory, and a member of the extraterritorial
meddling National Endowment for Democracy’s board of
directors, to help Perry define his “hawk internationalist”
foreign policy stance.
By “hawk internationalist,” Foreign Policy indicates that it
means, “embracing American exceptionalism and the unique role
we must play in confronting the many threats we face.” In
actual terms it means embracing more wars, more meddling
abroad, and more corporate driven agendas to expand Wall
Street and London’s financial, military, and economic hegemony
worldwide. Perry will simply take what both Bush and Obama
have done, affix the appropriate spin, rhetoric, and
propaganda, and continue spilling American blood and wasting
American treasure. Perry is merely a public relations officer
ready to take the heat for the next four years while the real
policy makers continue operating out of the sight and mind of
the American public.
The “War on Terror” is a Fraud
If Bush, Obama, and Perry are not making decisions, who is?
Who are the chief proponents of this “War on Terror,” who are
the architects behind the policy and who is bankrolling them?
More importantly, how can they have spent the last 10 years
sending American kids to fight Al Qaeda and now are overtly
handing them the nation of Libya?
The Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) is a
corporate and US State Department-funded policy institute
that claims to be dedicated to promoting “pluralism, defending
democratic values, and fighting the ideologies that threaten
democracy.” It is decidedly “Neo-Conservative” and focuses
almost exclusively on starting and maintaining wars at
America’s expense.
FDD’s “executive team” includes James Woolsey and Clifford
May, while its “leadership council” includes Bill Kristol –
all signatories of a recent Foreign Policy Initiative letter
addressed to House Republicans asking them to discard the UN
mandate for NATO’s Libyan intervention and commit more support
specifically for regime change. Acting Senator Joseph
Lieberman also can be found on FDD’s “leadership council” and
has been a chief proponent of war with Libya, as well as Syria
and Iran, alongside John McCain. FDD has a myriad of
publications expressing the elation of the “Neo-Conservative”
establishment over current operations against Libya and the
possible springboard the Libyan war serves toward US
intervention in Syria and Iran. FDD’s only criticism of Obama
is that more should be done, faster, and at a greater expense
to America. Michael Ledeen, a “freedom scholar,” expresses
this well in his article titled, “Lessons of Libya (and Syria,
and, Some Day, Iran),” where he throws in his organization’s
collective desire to intervene in both Syria and Iran, for
good measure.
The Atlantic article, “Al-Qaeda Is Winning,” written by FDD
“senior fellow” Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, expresses the true
contempt these individuals have toward their audience. In this
piece reflecting on the last 10 years of the “War on Terror,”
Gartenstein-Ross claims that Al Qaeda’s ability to use cheap
means to provoke the United States into a multi-billion dollar
defense is rendering an Al Qaeda victory through a “strategy
of a thousand cuts.” Of course, the x-ray machines and other
security apparatuses being installed across the United States
and the tremendous amount of money being used to sustain
combat operations around the world “hunting terrorists,”
doesn’t go into a black hole. Instead, it goes into the
pockets of the very people funding the work of Mr. Daveed
Gartenstein-Ross and his peers throughout his and other US and
British think-tanks.
Other notorious think-tanks promoting the “War on Terror” as
well as literally engineering the latest war in Libya, and
with extensive blueprints for destabilizing and overthrowing
Syria and Iran, include the Brookings Institution mentioned
above, the International Institute for Strategic Studies
(IISS), and the Atlantic Council covered in depth in “Atlantic
Council: Is Libya a “Global Con?”” All three are predictably
funded, chaired, and directed by the largest banks, oil
companies, and defense contractors on earth, as well as their
representatives in the corporate-owned media, public relations
and law firms, as well as acting corporate board members
themselves.
The Brookings Institution who wrote the definitive blueprint
for covert destabilization within a foreign sovereign nation,
“Which Path to Persia?” is funded by, among many others, Bank
of America, Goldman Sachs, the Rothschilds, Citi, Exxon,
Chevron, Shell, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing,
General Electric, Raytheon (makers of the Tomahawk cruise
missile used extensively throughout NATO’s Libya campaign),
and Google (who has already renamed Libya’s Green Square to
the contrived “Martyr’s Square” on Google Maps). One would
assume those at Brookings would carry forward with shame and
fear with such obvious conflicts of interest muddling their
“policy making,” instead they are beyond arrogant, bolstered
by the ignorance and apathy of the masses. A full list of
their corporate sponsors can be found in their 2010 annual
report, starting on page 19.
Likewise the IISS was instrumental in analyzing, promoting,
and guiding NATO’s military intervention in Libya as well as
maintaining the myth of “global terrorism” and the necessity
of continuing the “War on Terror.” They too are
representatives of some of the largest corporate-financier
interests on earth, all of whom have enriched themselves with
their self-promoted, unending war, with their board of
trustees containing current and former representatives from
Rothschild, DeBeers, the Anglo American Corporation, Merrill
Lynch, Smith Barney and Bankers, Rolls-Royce, Thales, the
notorious Council on Foreign Relations, and ABC News.
We have seen how in nearly every case, national governments
have attempted to crush Al Qaeda, and in every case the US and
UK have propped them up again. We see how each war is
explicitly engineered and promoted by the same corporatefinancier interests capitalizing on them at everyone else’s
expense. In the 1930s United States Marine Corps General
Smedley Butler stated, “war is a racket,” and explained that a
racket is best described “as something that is not what it
seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside”
group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit
of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a
few people make huge fortunes.”
Clearly today, this “racket” has become so advanced, so
elaborate, so pervasive in politics and culture, that the
label of “racket” doesn’t quite suit it. A better term could
be a, “scientific dictatorship” where teams of highly trained
propagandists, in tandem with the corporate-owned media,
including Hollywood, the music industry, publishing houses,
and PR firms, all work to manage the public’s perception on a
global scale. It is both terrifying as it is perhaps
overreaching. The “War on Terror” is a fraud, and one that is
now unraveling. For every lie that is told, a vast amount of
resources must be spent to sell it and continue propping it
up. No matter how much is spent, if a mind wakes up to the
fraud, it does so permanently. However vast the fraudulent
“War on Terror” is, those speaking the truth face a downhill
battle now reaching critical mass. Libya is being handed over
to terrorists by the same exact people who told our sons and
daughters to lay down their lives to fight these very same
people. No amount of propaganda, however scientifically
formulated, can obfuscate the treason that has taken place.
The next step of course, after speaking out about the truth,
is to review the above-mentioned corporate-financier
interests, represented by corporations and banks we depend on
daily, driving this treasonous agenda, and put each one out of
business by boycotting and replacing them systematically. The
“War on Terror” is an absolute fraud, fabricated in whole, and
it is only our apathy and inaction coupled with our unwitting
patronization of these corporate-financier interests that
allows this fraud to continue on.
Tony Cartalucci, Activist Post, Friday, September 9, 2011
Pakistan
TV
Report
Contradicts US Claim of Bin
Laden’s Death
In my recent article, “Creating
Evidence Where There Is None,” about
the alleged killing of Osama bin Laden
by a commando team of US Seals in
Abbottabad, Pakistan, I provided a link
to a Pakistani National TV interview
with Muhammad Bashir, who lives next
door to the alleged “compound” of Osama
bin Laden. I described the story that
Bashir gave of the “attack” and its
enormous difference from the one told
by the US government. In Bashair’s
account, every member of the landing party and anyone brought
from the house died when the helicopter exploded on lift-off.
I wrote that a qualified person could easily provide a
translation of the interview, but that no American print or TV
news organization had investigated Bashir’s account.
An attorney with a British Master of Laws degree in
international law and diplomacy, who was born in Pakistan,
provided the translation below. He writes: “I have no problem
with being identified as the translator, but would prefer to
remain anonymous.”
The translator provides these definitions and clarifications:
“Gulley” is generally referred (in Urdu) to a sidewalk or
pavement. Also for the space between two houses.
“kanal” is a traditional unit of land area, so that one kanal
equals exactly 605 square yards or 1/8 Acre; this is
equivalent to about 505.857 square meters.
Muhammad Bashir refers to himself as “We”. This is common
respectable language for the self; to use the plural term
instead of singular. The English language equivalent would be
the “Royal, We”.
Urdu is the national language and lingua franca of Pakistan.
The translator:
I have translated the entire text of the video.
I have tried my best to keep words in a chronological order,
but in some cases this is not possible, as in translation
words must be replaced in reverse order to make sense!
However, I have had to put a few words in brackets to clarify
meaning. If you want to ask about any section – please supply
time stamp and I will supply a contextual text.
Video Transcript:
welcome back! – Muhammad Bashir, Abotabad Area, Bilal Town
resident, Looks like an ordinary person, but he is no ordinary
person! Muhammad Bashir, lives in Abotabad’s, Bilal Town
Opposite Bin Laden’s House.
Night of 2nd May Muhammad Bashir was on the roof of his house,
whereupon, the entire OBL, American operation was seen with
his own eyes.
Last night, when our team was in Abotabad, Bilal Town, near
OBL house, Muhammad Bashir approached me and said that:
“Sister, I want to tell you something that is a great burden
on my heart and conscience” – Listen to what he said:
00:59 Muhammad Bashir: I.. today… would like to comment about
todays Abotabad operation events, until now, what I am about
to say, no person has said.
01:08: Reporter: But, Muhammad Bashir sahib appeared
frightened. While speaking to me, Muhammad Bashir sahib phoned
his
relative; leader, M.E.A. of Jamaat-e-islami, Abotabad, Abdul
Razaq Abaasi on the phone.
01:21: reporter: Tell me your name and where do you live?
Muhammad Bashir: – One minute, first I need to speak to him…I
am going to give an interview, a complete interview. Shall I
give a complete interview or half?
Reporter: Complete! – complete!
Muhammad Bashir: I first need to phone him, I need to speak to
him
Reporter: I could of…
01:39: Reporter: Muhammad Bashir sahib, on that night’s events
of the American operation, that took place, he expressed such
comments about circumstances that have never been expressed
before, therefore, we checked his ID card, his place of
residence and we can confirm that he definitely lives there
and we also approached senior politicians and asked about him,
after hearing his comments, we were amazed – now you watch
what he said.
01:57: Muhammad Bashir: The events that happened are thus; we
were awake, we were not asleep.
02:00: Muhammad Bashir: a Helicopter came, and circled and
dropped some people there.
02:07: Muhammad Bashir: in that house… where they are saying;
Osama lives here, on that house’s roof, they dropped people,
after that, the helicopter returned and went back.
02:16: Reporter: How many people were they?
02:18: Muhammad Bashir: They were ten, twelve people
02:20: Muhammad Bashir: After that it left and for
approximately 20 minutes, there behind us, on those mountains,
it kept going around, the top of the mountains.
02:27: After 20 minutes, it returned. When it returned, at
that time there were TWO more helicopters arrived. One came
from the West and one came from the North. When it approached
for landing, after that…
At this point;Video cut and resumed:
02:41: Muhammad Bashir: that helicopter, there was an
explosion within it and there was fire within it, immediately,
we came out and arrived there. When we arrived, the helicopter
was on fire, it was burning. After that, about twenty minutes
later the Army arrived, the police arrived. They moved all of
us back…
03:04: Muhammad Bashir: …and all the people inside it, all of
them…we think; if Osama was inside it, or inside this house –
then who took him to the Americans?
03:16: Muhammad Bashir: Because America…the helicopters that
America is saying; IT carried out the operation. If America
did this operation and it’s army came and it’s helicopter
came, then that helicopter that came from the American’s,
within that, all the people that came, those people with the
explosion were finished, got destroyed!
03:35: Muhammad Bashir: Within it, there was fire, those
people, all of them died!
03:39: and if Osama was there, they would have put him in the
helicopter. Obviously, if the helicopter caught fire, Osama
could have died there. If their own people were gone, (dead)
so could have Osama. After that, the fallen helicopter was
destroyed after this, how can Osama be, with them in America?
this is a strange thing!
Video cut & resumes
03:59: Muhammad Bashir: They are saying we killed Osama here.
After that, they picked him up and took him away.
04:04: Muhammad Bashir: PICKED HIM UP AND TOOK HIM AWAY – how
did they do this? This, what we are thinking!
04:07: Muhammad Bashir: The Americans’ helicopter that came,
that fell here and got destroyed!
04:09: Reporter: There was only ONE helicopter?
04:11: Muhammad Bashir: ONE helicopter landed down here, the
second helicopter came from above and went towards Mansera.
It did not land. No second helicopter landed!
04:20: Only ONE helicopter, that first dropped it’s
passengers, the SAME returned to pick the people and there was
an explosion within it.
04:27: Reporter: People were inside it?
04:29: Muhammad Bashir: People were inside it!
04:30: Reporter: How do you know this?
04:32: Muhammad Bashir: These people, we seen them all
04:34: Reporter: In the helicopter… you saw dead people?
04:36: Muhammad Bashir: We saw dead people!
04:38: Reporter:How many people?
04:39: Muhammad Bashir: This, we could not count, within the
compound there was fire.
04:43: Muhammad Bashir: and we… the gate was open, we entered
the gate, at that time the Army had not arrived.
04:48: Muhammad Bashir: Police had not arrived. Some people
from the agencies, were present, but they did not prevent
anybody, they kept entering, every person was looking , now,
nobody is saying, but everyone from the mohalla
(neighbourhood) and all the people present from the mohalla
arrived first. We saw the gate open, we entered inside, saw
the burning helicopter, the people inside were dead. After
that everything was lifted. Now, there is nothing there!
05:16: Reporter: How many dead bodies did you see?
05:18: Muhammad Bashir: Look, you cannot count, the dead
bodies were in pieces everything else was broken pieces, some
here, some there, some broken, some half, some like this.
05:27: Reporter: Tell me fully – what happened?
06:30: Reporter: Tell me the full events
05:31: Muhammad Bashir: I told you, this is…
05:32: Reporter: You did not…I cannot believe this, that’s
why.
05:36: Muhammad Bashir: Look, what I have said – that’s it!
Video Cut!
05:39: Reporter: When you saw the American craft, (Helicopter)
what did you think, why they came here?
05:42: Muhammad Bashir: We thought… this is it…why did they
came? we thought why did they come? maybe..we… did not expect
them to do anything, we thought maybe our Army is arriving at
some centre and the army people were sleeping, there was no
explosions or events taking place, nothing was happening,
everybody was sleeping, for 20 minutes or so…
06:05: Reporter: The craft landed in front of your house, how
did you feel about this?
06:08: Muhammad Bashir: I thought..just…understand…imagine..we
thought we’re dead!
Video cut:
06:13: Reporter: But, how did the Americans return?
06:16: Muhammad Bashir: This is what I am saying; their Craft
came and the helicopter was destroyed, HOW, could they return?
06:22: Reporter: Tell me this; you say, that you saw the dead
bodies yourself….
06:25: Muhammad Bashir: one more thing, Madam, may I tell
you;The people who were dropped from the craft, That walkway …
that ..where our gates are…they banged them hard…and shouted…
don’t come out…don’t do this, don’t do that, if you come out
you will be shot..we will do this, we will do that, all the
people who were dropped, all of them spoke Pashtu
(Afgahni Language) – Pakhtun!
06:49: Reporter: Who were these people?
06:49: Muhammad Bashir: This I do not know! Those who were
dropped from the craft (helicopter), those people.
06:54: Reporter: This, somebody else told me – that they spoke
Pashtu.
06:57: Muhammad Bashir: They WERE Pashtun! we do not know if
they were working for the Americans, we do not know if they
were working for Pakistan, we do not know if they were army
people or civilian, what people, BUT they SPOKE PASHTU!
07:07: Reporter: You said you heard they were asking for
Osama?
07:09: Muhammad Bashir: No, they didn’t ask me about Osama,
they just said, do not come out, if you come out from your
house, we will shoot you!
07:16: Reporter: Were these Pakistani people?
Muhammad Bashir: who?
07:18: Reporter: The ones who were saying that if you come
out, we will shoot you.
07:20: Muhammad Bashir: They said that in Pashtu!
07:22: Reporter: so did they..were you coming out…exactly
where were you, where was you standing when this happened?
07:26: Muhammad Bashir: Inside the house, on top of the roof,
I was not in the house, just on top of the (flat)roof
07:29: Reporter: from Above the roof these people in the
helicopter…
07:30: Muhammad Bashir: I was on the roof, sitting, no, lying
down, on the roof,lying and watching this and what was
happening
07:37: Reporter: Fear, was you not afraid? did you not think
to phone someone?
07:40: Muhammad Bashir: From the house, They were calling me
from downstairs, the children were calling me, come down, come
down, and I told them stop making noise! go into your rooms, I
am watching what is happening. Afterwards, I found out about
this, that, Osama was killed here!
07:53: Reporter: How did you get inside? (the compound)
Muhammad Bashir: where?
Reporter: when there was fire.
Muhammad Bashir: the gate was open, when there was fire, the
gate was open.
08:02: Reporter: The house gate was open?
08:03: Muhammad Bashir: The outer gate, the big gate, was
open.
08:06: Reporter: You came from upstairs to downstairs?
08:08: Muhammad Bashir: I came down, from my own house into
the gulley, I didn’t go alone inside the other house, 200
other people went inside! Everybody saw it!
08:15: Reporter: All 200 saw the dead bodies?
08:17: Muhammad Bashir: Everybody saw this.Whoever went inside
they saw everything!
08:20: Reporting:the events at that time that are in your
mind, please express them.
08:28: Muhammad Bashir: I have told you this and this, in my
mind, this is what I have seen, when we were there, when we
entered the gate, When the helicopter exploded, it scattered
everywhere, one piece fell over there, one fell here, one
here, a lot of pieces fell in the gulley outside, they reached
up to the gulley and our house and also some pieces managed to
reach onto my roof. so, the area of the open space there (in
front of the house) is about four Kanal in size. It is a very
large compound. You cannot see all of it from one location.
Four Kanal is a big area, only in a small area you could
possibly see everything. There I saw some people, in broken
pieces, someone’s leg, someone’s arm, someone’s torso,
someone’s head. Beside this, I did not see intensely, who are
they, how are they, because I thought that one of our own
craft had fallen and the people within it were our own people.
Because they spoke Pashtu they could be pakistani.
09:35: Muhammad Bashir: but language does not necessarily
mean.. by speaking it…the American language could be spoken,
the agents can speak all sorts of languages. It could be that
it is the American army and they could speak Pashtu and the
people would think that it is our own people.
09:54: Reporter: Seeing the dead bodies – did you not feel
fear?
09:57: Muhammad Bashir: But we were thinking about ourselves
at the time, but seeing the dead bodies who felt frightened?
10:00: Reporter: When you went inside, what did you do after
that, how did you come out?
10:02: Muhammad Bashir: we came out, our Army reached there,
when the army arrived, they moved all the people back. Move
aside, move aside! So we moved aside.Then they closed the area
down.
10:13: Reporter: did Rais see this?
Muhammad Bashir: What?
Reporter: where was your cousin?
10:18: Muhammad Bashir: My cousin was at that time in the
house.
10:20: Reporter: Did he go with you?
10:21: Muhammad Bashir: He was with me, but I did not notice
when he was picked up.
10:28: Reporter: Has he returned yet?
10:29: Muhammad Bashir: Yes, he has returned. They picked him
up and took him away.
10:32: Reporter: What is he saying?
10:34:Muhammad Bashir: I have not met him yet, he is at home
they will not let him come out, we are not allowed to visit
him, they will not let him come out.We have not met.
10:40: Reporter: You was not able find out, but since when
have you been allowed out.
10:45: Muhammad Bashir: I did not go home, by going home…
Reporter:You have seen the fire you have seen the bodies how
long did you stay there?
Muhammad Bashir: approximately, after five or six minutes, I
left and came out..five, six minute..what happened …. the
reason we left, was that after we entered, there was another
small explosion, I do not know if the engine fail and there
was another fire, it was a small explosion, after this
explosion all the people ran out.
11:06: Muhammad Bashir: when we went out, nobody let us go
back in again.
11:11: Reporter: Besides you, why is nobody else saying these
things? why are you alone in this?
11:16: Muhammad Bashir: Look, what we have seen, that is what
we are saying and we are speaking for this reason that, we are
sad that such humble and nice people of our town, that has
never seen such events, no fighting, no arguments, no
animosity, No murders, such nice people of ours in this town
and they have been branded as terrorists.
11:43: Reporter: Tell me; two helicopters came, lifted and
took the rest of the people?
11:46:Muhammad Bashir: No – they did not take the rest of the
people, because they did not even land, One came from the West
and it left towards the North, the one that came from the
North, left towards the South. They did not land!
12:00: Studio Reporter: these events that we showed you from
Abotabad, there are many more things that we discovered about
the compound where OBL was staying, there were vegetables
planted there, what kind of vegetables, the person who grows
the vegetables is the cousin of this person (Muhammad Bashir),
whose interview we have shown. An extraordinary thing that he
has said and he has sworn repeatedly on the veracity of his
statement. this is from his own account and upon this account
do view this. Yesterday we found out and it has been confirmed
that there were two Ashfaq’s who lived there (in the
compound):Mr Arshad and Mr Tariq who went shopping locally and
used to buy international brands, the items they found in the
house, dry dates, dried meat and things like this, this person
who you saw in the interview in his house there was food from
OBL’s house, he was given Kaabli Pillau (Rice) and such items
were presented to him, There the view of local mosque people,
what they think of OBL all these things we will present to you
in an exclusive program an important newsbeat, todays time is
finishing, do write to us at [email protected] where you can
get other information as well and you can join us at newsbeat
with Fareeha Idrees thats my favourite bit, do write to us,
the time is up now, By your permission to leave, take care of
yourself, In Allah’s care.
13:20: Reporter: I am now at standing in front of Abdullah Bin
Zubair Mosque, this is the same mosque that is within walking
distance from OBL’s house. Are you saying that if people found
out that OBL was living here, would they be happy?
1st man: Possibly, people could be happy.
2nd man: He wasn’t living here, but he was a Muslim, he
believed in Allah.
End of translation
Anyone fluent in Urdu who wishes to dispute the translation
should do so.
I asked the translator if he might contact the Pakistani news
organization and inquire if the reporters had further
investigated Bashir’s story. He replied that he could do so,
but exactly 24 hours later “for some unknown reason” the news
organization started to discredit Bashir by connecting “him to
his cousin, who is accused of receiving foodstuffs from the
household of OBL.”
Bashir’s cousin is the person who, according to the reporter
(see 12:00 time line) had a vegetable garden inside the wall
of the alleged bin Laden compound. Is it likely that with a
hunted and dangerous person hiding within, locals would be
permitted to have vegetable gardens inside the compound? The
cousin’s vegetable garden obviously had to be redefined as
“receiving foodstuffs from OBL.”
The translator offers his view on the 13:20 timeline:
“The final seconds of the video clip contain random people to
generate and show some kind of sympathy with OBL in the
district.
“It would be very difficult to find people in Pakistan who
sympathise with OBL or the Taliban. The only people who do
sympathise are the poor illiterate people who do not know
about the religion and can easily be convinced of a distorted
version of Islam.
Therefore, the closing part of the video contains, out of
context expressions:
“1st man: Possibly, people could be happy. (Meaning it is
possible that SOME people could be happy.)
2nd man: He wasn’t living here, but he was a Muslim, he
believed in Allah. (Meaning; he claimed to be Muslim, so he
must have believed in Allah.)
“Therefore, it seems that although initially, the TV station
was overjoyed with this interview, they changed their tune,
twenty four hours later. (for some unknown reason.)”
Readers can arrive at their own conclusions. It seems clear
that under intense pressure and serious threats from the US
government, the Pakistani government fell in line with the US
government’s claim that a commando raid had killed bin Laden
and all had returned safely, and that the TV news organization
also got the message to get in line.
It is likely that the many witnesses who observed the dead
from the helicopter crash have been warned to keep quiet.
However, a news organization, should one be so inclined, could
certainly interview Bashir and the 200 others who saw the dead
bodies. A good reporter, perhaps accompanied by trained
psychologists, would be able to tell if people were lying out
of fear and encourage some to speak anonymously.
I am confident that no news organization believes that it
could confront such an important US national myth in this way.
The killing of bin Laden satisfies the emotional need for
revenge and justice. In the least, a news organization that
challenged the government’s story would be cut off from all
government sources and be denounced by politicians and a large
percentage of the US population as an anti-American terroristserving organization.
OBL’s death will remain one of those many “truths” that rest
on nothing but the government’s word.
Paul Craig Roberts, Infowars.com, August 8, 2011
What
Else
Will
The
Governments Special Chip In
Your Cellphone Do?
The Obama administration is engaged in a totalitarian takeover
of all communications
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
The announcement that Americans are set to be bombarded with
mandatory government propaganda via their cellphones
represents a shocking lurch forward in the Obama
administrations bid to launch a total takeover of all
communications as part of a wider move towards controlling the
Internet, developing an omnipresent wiretap system, and
creating a constant environment of suspicion and distrust by
enlisting citizens to spy on each other.
Short of implanting a microchip in peoples heads, the US
government has opted for the next best thing, a chip in your
cellphone. But what else will these special chips be used for?
Presidential and local emergency messages as well as
Alerts would appear on cell phones equipped with special
and software, under the new program which was launched
in New York and is set to be rolled out across all
cities by the end of next year,reports CBS New York.
Amber
chips
today
major
Cellphone users would not be able to opt out of presidential
messages, with Verizon and AT&T, the nations largest cell
phone carriers, already on board.
For now, the alerts are capable on certain high-end cell
phones but starting next year, all cell phones will be
required to have the chip that receives alerts, adds the
report.
The messages will supersede all other phone traffic and have a
unique signal and vibration, meaning that your private
conversation could be cut off to make way for government
propaganda in a program that resembles Minority Report-style
invasiveness on steroids.
What else these special chips that will be mandatory in all
cellphones will do is not explained, but given the recent
scandal where it emerged that cell phone companies were
building location databases of where their users had traveled,
the skys the limit.
Cell phone providers already have the capability to send out
text messages to all their subscribers instantly, so why the
government needs a special chip to be installed will only
heighten suspicions that this is a trojan horse for an
omnipresent wiretap that will feed every scintilla of
information from your phone directly to big brother.
As one respondent to the story put it, Surely you only need a
database of all phone numbers to send out text messages. Am I
only person wondering why all handsets need to be fitted with
special chips in order to receive text messages? The special
chips can only be being introduced to serve other purposes.
This seems very suspicious. Why can people not opt out of the
presidents messages? asked another. They pay for their phones
they should dictate what it does, not Obama.
Would the special chips also empower Obama to shut down all
cell phone traffic on a whim in a time of declared national
emergency?
Obama already has the power to override all radio and
television networks under the recently expanded Emergency
Alert System, which allows FEMA to break in on live broadcasts
to send out alerts.
His administration is also pushing cybersecurity legislation
that would hand Obama a figurative kill switch for the
Internet. The term kill switch is an oversimplification, what
the agenda actually revolves around is the ability to
impose Chinese-style censorship over the world wide web and
develop an ID system that would force users to have their
access controlled by a state-run licensing procedure.
The government-mandated chips would also help achieve the
Department of Transportations aim of blocking all cellphone
use in cars. The chip would allow authorities to prevent use
of the phone by measuring the speed you are traveling via GPS
technology and shutting down the handset.
This trifecta of broadcast media, Internet, and cellphone
traffic represents a total takeover of the entire spectrum of
communications in the United States by the Obama
administration.
Aside from the terror fearmongering, the system is also wide
open for abuse in more prosaic terms, with some fearing that
the messages could include PR talking points and political
electioneering. Indeed, the image that accompanies a USA Today
piece about the story is of a cellphone displaying an
infomercial about Obamas 2012 campaign.
The plan to harass cell phone users with specious terror
alerts is part of a larger agenda of fear-based social
conditioning by the government. As we noted last month, the
Department of Homeland Security announced a new system to
replace the old color-coded one. Now so-called terror threats
that inevitably turn out to be either false alarms
or politically motivated scams will be posted on Facebook and
Twitter pages in addition to broadcast over television, radio
and cell phones.
As we have exhaustively documented, the move has nothing
whatsoever to do with keeping Americans safe from
terrorism. More Americans are killed every year by bumble bees
or peanut allergies than they are by terrorists.
Even with the September 11 attacks included in the count, the
number of Americans killed by international terrorism since
the late 1960s (which is when the State Department began
counting) is about the same as the number of Americans killed
over the same period by lightning, accident-causing deer, or
severe allergic reaction to peanuts, writes Ohio Universitys
John Mueller in a report entitled A False Sense Of Insecurity.
The real agenda behind the program manifests itself in
numerous ways. On the one hand, this is a further
intensification of the Big Sis see something say something
campaign, its designed to condition Americans that terrorists
are lurking around every corner and that they must spy on
their community to prevent attacks, when in reality every
major terror plot that has been uncovered in the United States
was either staged or provocateured by the federal government
itself.
This is also about capitalizing on the dubious Bin Laden raid
to return Americans to a state of post-9/11 intellectual
castration, corralling subservience to a system that utilizes
fear to control the population and eviscerate constitutional
rights.
With
the
compliant
and
castrated
media
increasingly
distrusted, Americans are either moving to alternative news
sources or tuning out altogether. This has necessitated the
government to launch a wide spectrum takeover of all
communications in its bid to keep the population under the
firm control of state-issued propaganda.
We are now just a few steps away from having literal
telescreens installed in our homes that beam directly into our
brains the latest government fables about who were bombing
now, what level chocolate rations are this month, as well as
Michelle Obamas mandatory exercise program.
Winston Smiths world of 1984 has come home to roost.