Mr Obama's visit to Afghanistan came against a backdrop of tension between Mr Karzai and the Americans. . . .
It seems Karzai had barely got back to Kabul from Tehran when the US Air Force One carrying Obama landed in Bagram air base north of the Afghan capital. Obama has since asked Karzai to go over to Washington on May 12.
. . . the Americans are furious that Karzai is steadily disengaging from the US's grip and seeking friendship with China and Iran. Pretences of cordiality are withering away even as Washington realizes that the ground beneath its feet is shifting.
MORE at bottom of page — see "Karzai's China-Iran dalliance riles Obama"
Monday, March 29, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Steps to undermine Muslim extremism
Jason Murphy
The Heritage Foundation
Re "Steps to Undermine Muslim Extremism: The Saudi Angle" — James Phillips' comments on 9/11
Mr Phillips attribute's 9/11 to Saudi hijackers several of whom are alive according to the BBC, and the evidence shows that 19 Muslims could not have carried out the attacks of 9/11 without the help of elements within US.
I would be pleased to debate Mr Phillips on this issue.
As for Islamic extremism, how about beginning with US extremism, and setting an example for others?
Enver Masud
Founder, The Wisdom Fund
The Heritage Foundation
Re "Steps to Undermine Muslim Extremism: The Saudi Angle" — James Phillips' comments on 9/11
Mr Phillips attribute's 9/11 to Saudi hijackers several of whom are alive according to the BBC, and the evidence shows that 19 Muslims could not have carried out the attacks of 9/11 without the help of elements within US.
I would be pleased to debate Mr Phillips on this issue.
As for Islamic extremism, how about beginning with US extremism, and setting an example for others?
Enver Masud
Founder, The Wisdom Fund
Wall Street reform missing vital ingredient
Pam Martens writes in CounterPunch: "Last Fall, it was all about the wall: financial bigwigs like former Federal Reserve Chair Paul Volcker, former Citigroup co-CEO John Reed, Governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, all espoused reestablishing the legal barrier between the derivatives casino that masquerades today as Wall Street and commercial banks holding insured deposits. . . .
"But the wall has now gone missing in the current financial reform bill".
"But the wall has now gone missing in the current financial reform bill".
Saturday, March 27, 2010
DOJ list of 'terrorism' convictions
Click on "National Security Division Statistics on Unsealed International Terrorism and Terrorism-Related Convictions 9/11/01 - 3/18/10" at bottom of page.
Iraq election: CIA connected Iyad Allawi wins narrowly
A secular coalition led by Iyad Allawi narrowly won the most seats in this month’s Iraq parliamentary elections.
Dr. Allawi was nominated to be Iraq's interim prime minister by Iraq's U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council on May 28, 2004.
In 1996, he worked with the CIA to plot a coup that was to involve Iraqi army generals toppling Hussein.
Dr. Allawi was nominated to be Iraq's interim prime minister by Iraq's U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council on May 28, 2004.
In 1996, he worked with the CIA to plot a coup that was to involve Iraqi army generals toppling Hussein.
Friday, March 26, 2010
US offers nuclear deal to Pakistan
The "US, according to analysts who spoke to Asia Times Online, wants Pakistan to walk away from the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project." In exchange, Pakistan — not a signatory to the NPT — would get US nuclear technology.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Staging Bin Laden’s 'death'
It appears that we are being primed for the "death" of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
Attorney General Eric Holder told a House panel this month that bin Laden "will never appear in an American courtroom."
Others who have examined “Bin Laden’s tapes” have concluded that Bin Laden is dead.
US Defense Secretary Robert Gates admitted that the US has had no reliable information on the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden in years.
But the US needs a neat ending to its war on Afghanistan.
Staging Bin Laden’s death will be seen as a fitting end to this genocidal war for the control of energy resources. Of course it will have to be done so that visual identification is not possible.
We suspect that when Bin Laden is “killed,” we’ll just have to trust the folks that lied us into war to confirm they got him.
Attorney General Eric Holder told a House panel this month that bin Laden "will never appear in an American courtroom."
Others who have examined “Bin Laden’s tapes” have concluded that Bin Laden is dead.
US Defense Secretary Robert Gates admitted that the US has had no reliable information on the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden in years.
But the US needs a neat ending to its war on Afghanistan.
Staging Bin Laden’s death will be seen as a fitting end to this genocidal war for the control of energy resources. Of course it will have to be done so that visual identification is not possible.
We suspect that when Bin Laden is “killed,” we’ll just have to trust the folks that lied us into war to confirm they got him.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Deformed babies: Victims of uranium munitions
There are reports of deformed babies being born in Afghanistan and Gaza — victims of uranium munitions used by the US and Israeli forces.
One in four Americans believe 9/11 was a fabrication and pretext for war
The following are the results of an Angus Reid poll:
Do you agree or disagree with this statement? – “The Sept. 11 incident was a big fabrication as a pretext for the campaign against terrorism and a prelude for staging an invasion against Afghanistan.”
Result: 26% agree; 12% not sure; 62% disagree.
The commission that investigated the events of Sept. 11, 2001 concluded that an attack was carried out by 19 hijackers who were members of the al-Qaeda terrorist organization, led by Osama bin Laden. Do you believe this is what actually happened on 9/11?
Result: 12% said no; 21% not sure; 67% said yes.
For those who do not agree with the first statement, or said yes to the second, we invite them to visit our website.
Do you agree or disagree with this statement? – “The Sept. 11 incident was a big fabrication as a pretext for the campaign against terrorism and a prelude for staging an invasion against Afghanistan.”
Result: 26% agree; 12% not sure; 62% disagree.
The commission that investigated the events of Sept. 11, 2001 concluded that an attack was carried out by 19 hijackers who were members of the al-Qaeda terrorist organization, led by Osama bin Laden. Do you believe this is what actually happened on 9/11?
Result: 12% said no; 21% not sure; 67% said yes.
For those who do not agree with the first statement, or said yes to the second, we invite them to visit our website.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Gordon Duff: Sabrosky interview ties Israel to 9/11
Dr. Alan Sabrosky, former director of studies at the US Army War College, says that the military brass now know that Israel and those traitors within our nation committed the 911 attack.
More on 9/11.
More on 9/11.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
How the West poisoned Bangladesh
The Independent (UK) reports: "Up to 20 million people in Bangladesh are at risk of suffering early deaths because of arsenic poisoning — the legacy of a well-intentioned but ill-planned water project that created a devastating public health catastrophe."
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Former cabinet minister on Britain's National Health Service
Tony Benn, former cabinet minister and the longest-serving MP in the history of the British Labour Party, on Britain's National Health Service:
It was set up in Britain in 1948, sixty-one years ago. And I have with me the statement made by the government at the time. “Your new National Health Service begins on the 5th of July. […] How do you get it?
“It will provide you with all medical, dental, and nursing care. Everyone—rich or poor, man, woman or child—can use it or any part of it. There are no charges, except for a few special items. There are no insurance qualifications. But it is not a ‘charity’. You are all paying for it, […] as taxpayers, and it will relieve your money worries in time of illness.”
It was set up in Britain in 1948, sixty-one years ago. And I have with me the statement made by the government at the time. “Your new National Health Service begins on the 5th of July. […] How do you get it?
“It will provide you with all medical, dental, and nursing care. Everyone—rich or poor, man, woman or child—can use it or any part of it. There are no charges, except for a few special items. There are no insurance qualifications. But it is not a ‘charity’. You are all paying for it, […] as taxpayers, and it will relieve your money worries in time of illness.”
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
What is terrorism?
Enver Masud, founder The Wisdom Fund, posted following at U.S. News & World Report:
In 2005, then UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, recognized this need, and called for a "universally accepted definition of terrorism, he endorsed the wording contained in the recent report from the UN High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, . . . The panel defined terrorism as any action intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organisation to do, or abstain from, any act."
Five years later, there's still no generally accepted definition of terrorism — presumably because it would include acts that major powers now commit with impunity.
The simple definition in Webster's New World Dictionary, Second College Edition, defines terrorism as the "use of force or threats to demoralize, intimidate, and subjugate, esp. such use as a political weapon or policy".
Given this definition of terrorism, together with the definition of "power politics" and "realpolitik", leads to the conclusion that frequently realpolitik equals, power politics, equals terrorism.
In 2005, then UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, recognized this need, and called for a "universally accepted definition of terrorism, he endorsed the wording contained in the recent report from the UN High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, . . . The panel defined terrorism as any action intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organisation to do, or abstain from, any act."
Five years later, there's still no generally accepted definition of terrorism — presumably because it would include acts that major powers now commit with impunity.
The simple definition in Webster's New World Dictionary, Second College Edition, defines terrorism as the "use of force or threats to demoralize, intimidate, and subjugate, esp. such use as a political weapon or policy".
Given this definition of terrorism, together with the definition of "power politics" and "realpolitik", leads to the conclusion that frequently realpolitik equals, power politics, equals terrorism.
Comments by David Ray Griffin at the Architects and Engineers press conference
A recently discovered paper on “Conspiracy Theories” by Obama appointee Cass Sunstein has rightly been receiving a lot of negative attention.
But this paper also makes an important contribution, pointing out that an idea cannot be rejected simply because it is a conspiracy theory, because there are true as well as false conspiracy theories.
We can decide between true and false theories, of course, only by seeing which ones are supported by the relevant evidence.
Sunstein says that the government’s 9/11 conspiracy theory – according to which there was a conspiracy between Osama bin Laden and 19 members of his al-Qaeda organization – is true, while that of the 9/11 Truth Movement is false. But he provides no evidence to support either claim.
The 9/11 Truth Movement, however, has presented an enormous amount of evidence to support its claims.
For example, in my 2009 book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7, I have shown that the report on this collapse put out by NIST – the National Institute of Standards and Technology – is unscientific and false.
It is unscientific because it can make its major negative claim – that the building was not brought down by explosives – only:
• by ignoring multiple testimonies about explosions going off in the building;
• by ignoring a piece of steel from the building that looked like a piece of Swiss cheese, even though fire could not have gotten anywhere close to the temperature needed to melt steel;
• by ignoring particles of metals in the dust that could have been produced only by extremely high temperatures;
• and by ignoring the existence of nanothermite, a high explosive.
The NIST report is also unscientific because it can make its major positive claim – that the building was brought down by fire – only by telling rather obvious lies:
• that a huge fire was burning on the 12th floor at 5:00 PM, even though its 2004 Interim Report had a photograph showing this fire to be completely burned out by 4:45;
• and that the building collapsed because its girders were not connected to the floor slabs with shear studs, even though that same 2004 report reported that the girders were connected with shear studs.
The NIST report is unscientific, finally, because it affirms a miracle, in the sense of a violation of basic principles of physics. Only months before NIST put out its final report, its lead investigator, Shyam Sunder, correctly stated that free fall would be physically impossible in a fire-produced collapse. But after high-school physics teacher David Chandler demonstrated in a YouTube presentation that the building came down in absolute free fall for over two seconds, NIST affirmed this empirical fact, while still maintaining its fire theory of the collapse. It thereby affirmed what it had previously acknowledged to be impossible. (All of these facts are contained in my latest book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report about 9/11 Is Unscientific and False.)
The government’s theory about the collapse of WTC 7 has, therefore, been disproved as thoroughly as a theory can be disproved. This is one of the reasons why 1,000 licensed architects and engineers are calling for a new investigation.
But this paper also makes an important contribution, pointing out that an idea cannot be rejected simply because it is a conspiracy theory, because there are true as well as false conspiracy theories.
We can decide between true and false theories, of course, only by seeing which ones are supported by the relevant evidence.
Sunstein says that the government’s 9/11 conspiracy theory – according to which there was a conspiracy between Osama bin Laden and 19 members of his al-Qaeda organization – is true, while that of the 9/11 Truth Movement is false. But he provides no evidence to support either claim.
The 9/11 Truth Movement, however, has presented an enormous amount of evidence to support its claims.
For example, in my 2009 book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7, I have shown that the report on this collapse put out by NIST – the National Institute of Standards and Technology – is unscientific and false.
It is unscientific because it can make its major negative claim – that the building was not brought down by explosives – only:
• by ignoring multiple testimonies about explosions going off in the building;
• by ignoring a piece of steel from the building that looked like a piece of Swiss cheese, even though fire could not have gotten anywhere close to the temperature needed to melt steel;
• by ignoring particles of metals in the dust that could have been produced only by extremely high temperatures;
• and by ignoring the existence of nanothermite, a high explosive.
The NIST report is also unscientific because it can make its major positive claim – that the building was brought down by fire – only by telling rather obvious lies:
• that a huge fire was burning on the 12th floor at 5:00 PM, even though its 2004 Interim Report had a photograph showing this fire to be completely burned out by 4:45;
• and that the building collapsed because its girders were not connected to the floor slabs with shear studs, even though that same 2004 report reported that the girders were connected with shear studs.
The NIST report is unscientific, finally, because it affirms a miracle, in the sense of a violation of basic principles of physics. Only months before NIST put out its final report, its lead investigator, Shyam Sunder, correctly stated that free fall would be physically impossible in a fire-produced collapse. But after high-school physics teacher David Chandler demonstrated in a YouTube presentation that the building came down in absolute free fall for over two seconds, NIST affirmed this empirical fact, while still maintaining its fire theory of the collapse. It thereby affirmed what it had previously acknowledged to be impossible. (All of these facts are contained in my latest book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report about 9/11 Is Unscientific and False.)
The government’s theory about the collapse of WTC 7 has, therefore, been disproved as thoroughly as a theory can be disproved. This is one of the reasons why 1,000 licensed architects and engineers are calling for a new investigation.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Monday, March 15, 2010
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Letter to Vice Chair, The 9/11 Commission: '9/11 Unveiled' shows that much of what we’ve been told about 9/11 is false
Mr. Lee Hamilton
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center
One Woodrow Wilson Plaza
1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20004-3027
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
"9/11 Unveiled" shows that much of what we’ve been told about that tragic day, September 11, 2001, is false.
You may download "9/11 Unveiled" free from http://www.twf.org/Library/911Unveiled.html, and read it in an hour — skip the first two sections to save time.
My varied work experience has taught me how to sift through complex, conflicting facts and opinions to arrive at defensible conclusions. I challenge the 9/11 Commission to defend theirs.
I managed the U.S. National Power Grid Study (directed a couple of dozen, multidisciplinary teams — a total of 150 persons), and the National Electric Reliability Study for the U.S. Department of Energy. I also set up and directed the Operations Review Division at the Iowa Commerce Commission. I’ve consulted for the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the World Bank — in Albania, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Indonesia, Latvia, Pakistan, Russia, and Tanzania.
I was recently on a three week lecture tour of South Africa speaking before hundreds every day, interviews on radio, and on television (broadcast to 20+ countries). Virtually all who listened came away sharing my conclusions. The U.S. embassy declined an invitation from SAfm to rebut me.
I live by the Pentagon, and would be pleased to give you a personal briefing.
Sincerely,
Enver Masud
Founder, The Wisdom Fund
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center
One Woodrow Wilson Plaza
1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20004-3027
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
"9/11 Unveiled" shows that much of what we’ve been told about that tragic day, September 11, 2001, is false.
You may download "9/11 Unveiled" free from http://www.twf.org/Library/911Unveiled.html, and read it in an hour — skip the first two sections to save time.
My varied work experience has taught me how to sift through complex, conflicting facts and opinions to arrive at defensible conclusions. I challenge the 9/11 Commission to defend theirs.
I managed the U.S. National Power Grid Study (directed a couple of dozen, multidisciplinary teams — a total of 150 persons), and the National Electric Reliability Study for the U.S. Department of Energy. I also set up and directed the Operations Review Division at the Iowa Commerce Commission. I’ve consulted for the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the World Bank — in Albania, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Indonesia, Latvia, Pakistan, Russia, and Tanzania.
I was recently on a three week lecture tour of South Africa speaking before hundreds every day, interviews on radio, and on television (broadcast to 20+ countries). Virtually all who listened came away sharing my conclusions. The U.S. embassy declined an invitation from SAfm to rebut me.
I live by the Pentagon, and would be pleased to give you a personal briefing.
Sincerely,
Enver Masud
Founder, The Wisdom Fund
Friday, March 12, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Huffington Post publishes, removes Jesse Ventura's 9/11 article
But the original is still available — for now.
Monday, March 8, 2010
A leading Japanese politician espouses a 9/11 fantasy
Re Editorial, "A leading Japanese politician espouses a 9/11 fantasy," Washington Post, March 8, 2010
If you believe it's a fantasy, why does the government refuse to answer the questions raised by more than 1000 architects and engineers, dozens of pilots, military and intelligence personnel, etc.?
During my 3-week, 9/11 lecture tour of South Africa — http://www.twf.org/911.html — I spoke to hundreds daily, was on national radio, and was interviewed on a television show broadcast to more than 20 countries. Virtually no one disagreed with me that The 9/11 Commission Report was fatally flawed.
The US embassy declined to provide someone to rebut me, despite the fact that the radio station, SABC, waited over a week for them.
I managed a multidisciplinary team of 150 persons at the US Dept of Energy, have consulted for USAID and the World Bank, and do not put my reputation on the line lightly.
The official version of events is the fantasy.
Enver Masud
Founder, The Wisdom Fund
TWF.org
If you believe it's a fantasy, why does the government refuse to answer the questions raised by more than 1000 architects and engineers, dozens of pilots, military and intelligence personnel, etc.?
During my 3-week, 9/11 lecture tour of South Africa — http://www.twf.org/911.html — I spoke to hundreds daily, was on national radio, and was interviewed on a television show broadcast to more than 20 countries. Virtually no one disagreed with me that The 9/11 Commission Report was fatally flawed.
The US embassy declined to provide someone to rebut me, despite the fact that the radio station, SABC, waited over a week for them.
I managed a multidisciplinary team of 150 persons at the US Dept of Energy, have consulted for USAID and the World Bank, and do not put my reputation on the line lightly.
The official version of events is the fantasy.
Enver Masud
Founder, The Wisdom Fund
TWF.org
Friday, March 5, 2010
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
How does Dr. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri's anti-terror fatwa define terrorism?
Dr. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri, a former Pakistani lawmaker, has issued a 600-page fatwa that bans suicide bombing "without any excuses, any pretexts, or exceptions."
In the past, we've raised a number of issues regarding suicide bombing, and commented on a previous fatwa on terrorism. The first issue is how does one define terrorism?
We did not find a definition in Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri's summary in English.
In the past, we've raised a number of issues regarding suicide bombing, and commented on a previous fatwa on terrorism. The first issue is how does one define terrorism?
We did not find a definition in Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri's summary in English.
Monday, March 1, 2010
New York Times story Iran worked on nuclear warhead 'is, quite simply, false'
Peter Casey, a Massachusetts lawyer, writes in Antiwar.com: "You do not need a degree in nuclear physics or chemical engineering to see that the New York Times story is, quite simply, false. . . .
"First, the story's lead attributes to the report statements of fact that the IAEA does not make — and has never made. Instead of stating that 'Iran Worked on Warhead,' the IAEA says that it is concerned about the possible existence of past or current activities related to the development of a nuclear payload. . . .
"Second, the report does not state or claim that the IAEA has any new information about the possibility of a nuclear weapons program. The report contains no relevant new or different facts, evidence, conclusions, or 'declarations.' On the contrary, the IAEA (at paragraph 40) is emphatic that it is summarizing information about potential military application previously reported in detail."
"First, the story's lead attributes to the report statements of fact that the IAEA does not make — and has never made. Instead of stating that 'Iran Worked on Warhead,' the IAEA says that it is concerned about the possible existence of past or current activities related to the development of a nuclear payload. . . .
"Second, the report does not state or claim that the IAEA has any new information about the possibility of a nuclear weapons program. The report contains no relevant new or different facts, evidence, conclusions, or 'declarations.' On the contrary, the IAEA (at paragraph 40) is emphatic that it is summarizing information about potential military application previously reported in detail."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)