Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 3,424
» Latest member: useryloaky
» Forum threads: 571
» Forum posts: 1,993

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 19 online users.
» 7 Member(s) | 12 Guest(s)
abepedor, azinupurag, Derrance, hiпроооо, oximmejego, Poinivat, Shannonbet

Latest Threads
Another London false flag...
Forum: Alternative therories
Last Post: globalvision2000administrator
03-23-2017, 10:03 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 1,084
Max keiser
Forum: Multimedia
Last Post: globalvision2000administrator
03-15-2017, 10:52 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 5,592
Trumps Muslim Travel Bans
Forum: Alternative Theories
Last Post: globalvision2000administrator
03-07-2017, 12:18 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 9,351
Muslim Solidarity
Forum: Think Tanks (Rest of the world)
Last Post: globalvision2000administrator
03-06-2017, 04:16 PM
» Replies: 45
» Views: 51,537
The Venus Project
Forum: Western
Last Post: globalvision2000administrator
03-06-2017, 04:14 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 10,871
Globalisation and the glo...
Forum: Western
Last Post: globalvision2000administrator
02-22-2017, 12:51 PM
» Replies: 119
» Views: 205,010
Authoritarianism and Dict...
Forum: Think Tanks (Rest of the world)
Last Post: globalvision2000administrator
02-21-2017, 07:52 AM
» Replies: 66
» Views: 46,408
What led to the biggest t...
Forum: Alternative Theories
Last Post: globalvision2000administrator
02-21-2017, 07:40 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 1,885
ESCHATOLOGY IN THE 21ST C...
Forum: Alternative Theories
Last Post: globalvision2000administrator
02-20-2017, 03:16 PM
» Replies: 6
» Views: 13,110
Bizarre far right billion...
Forum: Multimedia
Last Post: globalvision2000administrator
02-20-2017, 03:09 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 6,132

 
  Another London false flag?
Posted by: globalvision2000administrator - 03-23-2017, 10:03 AM - Forum: Alternative therories - No Replies

[Image: barrett.jpg]
Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist, is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror. 

He is Host of Show More


Another London false flag?
By Kevin Barrett on March 22, 2017



Gladio B strikes London on Satanic holiday - one year after Brussels

Ole Dammegard recently predicted a false flag attack on Big Ben – he will appear tomorrow on Truth Jihad Radio
By Kevin Barrett

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/03/22/.../london-ff



A MASSIVE, ICONIC terror event (a couple of people hit by a car, a policeman stabbed, an alleged perp shot) shocked and galvanized the world today. STOP THE PRESSES!


[Image: 1-brussels-640x597.jpg]


Another “radical Islamic attack” on a satanic holiday – one year to the day after  http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/03/22/322/]the big Brussels false flag


But wait a minute. More than 270,000 pedestrians are killed by vehicles each year, while well over a million are injured. That means more than a thousand are killed, and perhaps three or four thousand injured, every day. Of the thousands and thousands of vehicular casualties that happen every day all over the world, a tiny fraction just occurred near the Parliament building in London. The logical inference: Somebody spent a rather small sum of money to arrange a publicity stunt which did not even make a faint blip on the day’s (much less the year’s) accident statistics — but which reaped hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars worth of virtually free publicity for the perpetrators.
Now who would do a thing like that?

Quote:As in all criminal cases, we must answer that question with another: Cui bono? Who benefits?

More often than not, these things are blamed on “radical Muslims.” (The dead perp in the photo has the typical, iconically-“Muslim” salafi beard.) But it’s hard to see how actual radical Muslims, whose goal is to push Western imperialists and colonialists out of historically Muslim lands, gain anything from such deeds. On the contrary, attacks on Western civilians provide a huge PR boost to the imperialists and colonialists, and free up huge sums of money to be spent on military action against “radical Muslims.”


So whoever did this presumably wants to convince you to give up your hard-earned money, and perhaps your freedom as well, and support the hyper-militarization of the West — and an accelerated war against Muslims. Just like the previous London attack in July 2005! Watch terror consultant Peter Power confess that his company was running “terror drills” at the exact times and locations that the real bombs went off!

Another clue: The “vehicular attack” and “stabbing attack” motifs are Israeli. These are among the types of attacks that have characterized the latest Intifada, or Palestinian war of self-preservation against slow-motion Zionist genocide. (The real Palestinian attacks target Israeli soldiers and settlers, who are defined as Occupation forces and thus legitimate targets under international law; while any attacks targeting civilians should be assumed to be false flags.)
Israel wants the West to join its genocidal war on the people of the Middle East. As the Dancing Israelis, part of the Israeli team that blew up the Twin Towers and WTC-7, told the police who arrested them on September 11th, 2001:

Quote:“We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem.” (ABC News)

After Israeli agent Michael Chertoff shipped the 9/11 perp “Dancing Israelis” home to Israel, they went on national television and stated:

Quote:“The fact of the matter is we are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event.” (ABC News)

The Israelis are desperate to drag the West into the Israeli war against Islam, Muslims, and Middle Eastern people in general. That is why virtually every major “Islamic terror” event since the Cold War ended in 1989 is a known or suspected Gladio B operation with Israeli fingerprints all over it.



Are “Islamic terror” events false flags? Read the [/url]: [url=http://wearenotcharliehebdo.blogspot.com/]We Are NOT Charlie HebdoANOTHER French False Flag, and  Orlando False Flag


Another sign of a suspected false flag is the “dead perps don’t talk” syndrome. If a terror event were real, the authorities would do everything possible to capture the perp alive in order to interrogate him and take down his terror network. But when terror perps are shot down like dogs, with no attempt made to save their lives so they can be interrogated, one must suspect that they are being silenced. (Seriously: How hard would it be to kneecap or otherwise incapacitate a guy with a knife?)

And yet another sign of a false flag is iconic location. London’s Parliament, with Big Ben in the background, is as iconic as they come. That’s why the filmmakers in V for Vendetta chose it for their most spectacular scenes.


Quote:London’s Parliament is also the site of the false flag that created the modern world as we know it: the gunpowder plot, in which “radical Catholic” patsy Guy Fawkes was set up with a barrel of wet gunpowder beneath Parliament in a fake terror plot designed to whip up hatred of Catholics and unleash a century of war against Spain and Portugal.

Did we just witness a modern-day “gunpowder plot” false flag? The perp with a car and a knife posed relatively little threat, statistically at least, but garnered billions in free publicity; just as Guy Fawkes posed no threat whatsoever to Parliament with his wet gunpowder, yet provided British imperialists with the equivalent of billions in free publicity and launched the wars that created the British Empire.


In this case, however, it is the Israeli Empire, not the British Empire, that stood to gain the most from the crime.
Another sign of a false flag is the “iconic date,” often featuring the numeral 11 or multiples thereof. Today is 3/22, the first anniversary of the false flag attack in Brussels Airport. (322, a big time satanic number and date, is the identifier of the Skull and Bones secret society.) As I wrote one year ago today:

Quote:As the freemasonic Satanists invoke Isis (or ISIS) on 3/22, they also pay homage to another female deity: Ishtar, the “goddess of fertility, love, war, and sex.”
And it gets better (or worse, depending your point of view): Ishtar “was particularly worshipped in the Upper Mesopotamian kingdom of Assyria (modern northern Iraq, north east Syria and south east Turkey).” That would be the territory that is currently ruled by … you guessed it … ISIS.

So to sum up: It seems the ISISraelis are continuing their heroic efforts to convince the West that “radical Islam” (i.e. the Palestinians that Israel is exterminating) are a threat to all of civilization. Maybe it’s time to set off the chimes in Big Ben’s belltower and wake the world up to the truth?


UPDATES: Here are some of the questions being raised about this suspected false flag:


*Is it just a coincidence that massive ‘terror drills’ were held on the River Thames a few days before this event?

*Is the guy in the kippah taking selfies in front of the “carnage” another Dancing Israeli getting souvenir photos of an operation he participated in? (The Dancing Israelis famously took photos of each other celebrating and flicking cigarette lighters in front of the burning and then exploding Twin Towers.)


 

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT, VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians, or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. LEGAL NOTICE - COMMENT POLICY 

Print this item

  Max keiser
Posted by: globalvision2000administrator - 03-15-2017, 10:52 PM - Forum: Multimedia - No Replies

EPISODE 1042

https://www.rt.com/shows/keiser-report/379943-episode-max-keiser-1042/
In this episode of the Keiser Report, Max and Stacy discuss why neoliberalism didn’t make us richer. In the second half, Max interviews professor Steve Keen about Quantitative easing (QE) and its role in financial crisis.

Check Keiser Report website for more: http://www.maxkeiser.com/

Print this item

  Trumps Muslim Travel Bans
Posted by: globalvision2000administrator - 03-07-2017, 12:18 PM - Forum: Alternative Theories - No Replies

FORMER FBI AGENT - MUSLIM BAN 'NOT ABOUT SECURITY' 
CLAIMS TRUMP IS A RECRUITING SERGEANT FOR ISIS]
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/03/tr...29171.html


TRUMP's MUSLIM BAN IS A DANGEROUS DISTRACTION
Donald Trump's executive orders are smoke and mirrors to distract his supporters from the promises he won't be keeping
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion...23073.html


THE MUSLIM AS A 'MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE
The imperial-age idea of the 'conspiratorial Muslim' has re-emerged with new force and scope
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2017/01/muslim-manchurian-candidate-170116085751234.htm




WHY CAN'T MUSLIMS TALK ABOUT THE MUSLIM BAN ON US TV ?
US cable news media's coverage of Trump's 'Muslim ban' featured predominantly white men instead of Muslims
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion...53137.html



MYTH OF THE MODERATE MUSLIM
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion...19521.html



WHY WESTERN ATTEMPTS TO MODERATE ISLAM ARE DANGEROUS 
[i]An analysis of the dangers posed when Western governments and the Muslim establishment limit Muslim political activism.
[/i]

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2016/01/western-attempts-moderate-islam-dangerous-160118081456021.html


ALL INTERNATIONAL LAWS TRUMPS MUSLIM BAN IS BREAKING 
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2017/02/international-laws-trump-muslim-ban-breaking-170202135132664.html



JESSE JACKSON SPEAKS OUT AGAINST ISLAMOPHOBIA 
The civil rights leader compared the plight of Syrian refugees to that of Jews fleeing Nazi Germany
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/feature...29819.html

Print this item

  The Venus Project
Posted by: globalvision2000administrator - 03-06-2017, 04:14 AM - Forum: Western - No Replies

WELCOME TO THE FUTURE 
Jacque Fresco
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLclf96rJCc

Print this item

  What led to the biggest terrorist attack on a mosque in Canadian history
Posted by: globalvision2000administrator - 02-21-2017, 07:40 AM - Forum: Alternative Theories - No Replies

WHAT LED TO THE BIGGEST TERRORIST ATTACK ON A MOSQUE IN CANADIAN HISTORY
https://crescent.icit-digital.org/articl...an-history

February 9 2017


The outpouring of sympathy from Canadians for their Muslim neighbors following the terrorist attack on a Quebec City mosque on January 29 has been absolutely stunning. Total strangers have reached out to members of the Muslim community all across Canada to offer condolences and support. This must be unique among people of different faiths across the globe.

In the aftermath of the attack there has also been vigorous debate about the reasons behind the attack. How could this happen in Canada, supposedly this oasis of peace, tranquillity and multiculturalism, many have asked. January 29 has become a wakeup call for Canadians, especially the federal and provincial governments as well as the security agencies.

It should not have been since the far right extremists were on the radar screen and known to intelligence agencies for many years. Successive governments, however, turned a blind eye to the real threat they posed because they were all fixated on the supposed threat from Muslims. Will this tragedy change anything or after a few days of uttering meaningless platitudes, the issue will be shoved down memory’s black hole?

It is interesting to note that whenever radicalization has been mentioned in the Canadian context, it has referred only to Muslims. In fact it has become a global phenomenon. This line of thinking assumes that only Muslims are prone to radicalization. There must be something in their genes that forces them toward extremism or that there is something inherently wrong with Islam.
Unfortunately a number of so-called experts have sprung up in the West prattling on television about radicalization and the threat from terrorism. Since such talks fits into the policy perspectives of the warlords in Western capitals—the neo-cons in Washington and their fellow travelers in Nato—this narrative has been given ample airtime. And then there are the opportunist Muslims—the ‘House negroes’, in the celebrated words of the martyr, Malcolm X—that would do anything to ingratiate themselves to their white masters. These bootlickers have added their own spice to the supposed threat from ‘radicalized Muslim youth’ to the peaceful of life in the West.

Quote:It is interesting to note that whenever radicalization has been mentioned in the Canadian context, it has referred only to Muslims. In fact it has become a global phenomenon.

Several Western governments, including that of Canada, have instituted de-radicalization programs for Muslim youth. A number of Imams in Canada have jumped on the bandwagon offering their services! How many youth they have de-radicalized is not difficult to guess: zero. We say this because according to Canadian security agencies, there are very few radicalized Muslim youth. In the entire province of Quebec with a population of 10 million or more, there are no more than a handful of ‘radical Muslim youth.’ This is not the impression one would get from media accounts though.

In fact, no Muslim has killed anyone in Canada despite the media hype. The only exceptions are the two converts—Martin Couture-Rouleau and Michael Zehaf Bibeau—both from the province of Quebec that were involved in killings on October 21 and October 24, 2014 in Montreal and Ottawa respectively. Couture-Rouleau was on the RCMP radar and his passport had been seized along with some 90 other suspected extremists. He was also under surveillance yet he managed to drive his vehicle into two soldiers after waiting for them in a parking lot for two hours! He was shot and killed.

Bibeau was a drifter. He was thrown out of a mosque in Vancouver, British Columbia when he was heard uttering threats. He moved to Ottawa and was living in a shelter for homeless people in the federal capital. It has still not been explained how he obtained a high velocity rifle with which he shot and killed Corporal Nathan Cirillo standing guard, unarmed, at the Soldiers’ Memorial outside the Parliament Building in Ottawa. Bibeau then ran across the lawn outside the Parliament Building with a rifle in hand and entered the building while there were guards. 



He was shot and killed only inside the building. Why he was not incapacitated and arrested to find out the truth? He was known to be mentally unstable. Had he survived, this fact would have become widely known.


But the former prime minister, Stephen Harper, a well known Islamophobe who has done great damage to the Canadian social fabric, jumped on these two killings to ram through parliament Bill C-51 whose provisions specifically target Muslims. Mercifully, Harper was booted out of office in October 2015 but in his 10 years in office, he had caused enough damage whose ramifications were felt by innocent Muslims at prayer in Quebec City Mosque on the night of January 29.

A host of politicians in Quebec also contributed to the anti-Islamic campaign. For them, Muslim women in hijab or niqab were a threat to their way of life. The Parti Quebecoise, the separatist party, as well as the Quebec liberals added their poison against Muslims seeing them as ‘enemies’ while white supremacist groups flourished right under their noses.

There are “more than 100 right-wing groups throughout Canada,” according to Caroline Biotteau of the group, Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (January 31, 2017), most of them in the province of Quebec.

Unfortunately, Canadian academics have also generally ignored the rise of white supremacist groups. Among the few exceptions are James Ellis and Richard Parent, of the Canadian Network for Research on Terrorism, Security and Society. They had warned that Canada was not immune to the rise of far right extremism and it was a mistake to assume that such extremism was confined to Europe or to groups south of the border. They warned of the potential risk for far greater acts of violence from white supremacist groups whose horrific consequences were witnessed on that fateful night of January 29 in Quebec City.

A number of right wing extremist groups can be easily identified. These are the Aryan Guard, Blood and Honour and the Neo-Nazis as well as their Jewish counterpart, the Jewish Defence [Offense] League (JDL). This Zionist group that follows the racist ideology of Kahane Chai, a group banned in Israel, and the JDL that is banned in the US, continues to operate freely in Canada and is even patronized by some politicians. A member of the JDL had accompanied Harper on his trip to Israel.

Now a new group La Meute, “The Wolf Pack”, has emerged in Quebec. The group propagates such nonsense as the invasion of pro-Sharia Islamic radicals that pose an imminent threat to Quebec society. It would be wrong to assume that only this group, that attracted more than 43,000 new social media followers in just over a year, is pushing an Islamophobic agenda. Quebec politicians and French Canadians in general seem to be suffering from an inferiority complex for which they demand a price in blood from Muslims.

Even while some security agencies have pointed to the danger from these right-wing terrorist groups, politicians have turned a blind eye. In the Canadian parliament, there are many committees studying these phenomena.
In one such report in 2015, Sylvain Guertin from the Sûreté du Québec’s [Quebec Police] Division of Investigation on Extremist Threats for the Standing Senate on National Security and Defence, stated: “The majority of the service’s active files deal with the extreme right and, for 25 per cent of the files, with hate crimes”. The same report also attributed slightly less than 25 percent of the active files to Islamic radicalization (italics added).

Given such overwhelming data about white extremist groups, why some politicians and the media’s lurid fixation on Muslim extremist violence? The answer lies in the endless wars that the US and its Nato allies are waging against Muslims in other lands. Since Canada is a member of Nato, it also perpetrates these myths. If Muslims over there are ‘bad’, Muslims over here must also be ‘bad’. Without this policy of demonization, the wars of aggression cannot be successfully sold at home.
There is no better way to describe Western hypocrisy but unfortunately, innocent Muslims have had to pay a steep price!

Print this item

  Bizarre far right billionaire behind Bannon and Trump
Posted by: globalvision2000administrator - 02-20-2017, 03:09 PM - Forum: Multimedia - No Replies

THE BIZARRE FAR RIGHT BILLIONAIRE BEHIND BANNON AND TRUMP's PRESIDENCY 
http://therealnews.com/t2/story:18114:Th...Presidency

Print this item

  A BRAND new politics
Posted by: Admin - 03-24-2015, 08:49 PM - Forum: Multimedia - No Replies

A BRAND NEW POLITICS : RUSSELL BRAND INTERVIEW WITH MEHDI HASAN

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3PalrfEF4g


RUSSELL BRANDS's REVOLUTION: INTERVIEW WITH OWEN JONES

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JduqBw2jIbo


Print this item

  The Circus: How British intelligence primed both sides of the terror war
Posted by: Admin - 03-01-2015, 05:03 PM - Forum: Alternative therories - Replies (2)

THE CIRCUS: HOW BRITISH INTELLIGENCE PRIMED BOTH SIDES OF THE 'TERROR WAR’


http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/cir...Zc4eL.dpuf


‘Jihadi John’ was able to join IS for one simple reason: from Quilliam to al-Muhajiroun, Britain’s loudest extremists have been groomed by the security services. Every time there’s a terrorist attack that makes national headlines, the same talking heads seem to pop up like an obscene game of “whack-a-mole”. Often they appear one after the other across the media circuit, bobbing from celebrity television pundit to erudite newspaper outlet.

A few years ago, BBC Newsnight proudly hosted a “debate” between Maajid Nawaz, director of counter-extremism think-tank, the Quilliam Foundation, and Anjem Choudary, head of the banned Islamist group formerly known as al-Muhajiroun, which has, since its proscription, repeatedly reincarnated itself. One of its more well-known recent incarnations was "Islam4UK".

Both Nawaz and Choudary have received huge mainstream media attention, generating press headlines, and contributing to major TV news and current affairs shows. But unbeknown to most, they have one thing in common: Britain’s security services. And believe it or not, that bizarre fact explains why the Islamic State’s (IS) celebrity beheader, former west Londoner Mohammed Emwazi – aka “Jihadi John” - got to where he is now.

A tale of two extremists

After renouncing his affiliation with the Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT), Maajid Nawaz co-founded the Quilliam Foundation with his fellow ex-Hizb member, Ed Husain.

The Quilliam Foundation was set-up by Husain and Nawaz in 2008 with significant British government financial support. Its establishment received a massive PR boost from the release of Ed Husain’s memoirs, The Islamist, which rapidly became an international bestseller, generating hundreds of reviews, interviews and articles.

In Ed Husain’s book - much like Maajid Nawaz’s tome Radical released more recently to similar fanfare - Husain recounts his journey from aggrieved young Muslim into Islamist activist, and eventually his total rejection of Islamist ideology.

Both accounts of their journeys of transformation offer provocative and genuine insights. But the British government has played a much more direct role in crafting those accounts than either they, or the government, officially admit.

Government ghostwriters

In late 2013, I interviewed a former senior researcher at the Home Office who revealed that Husain’s The Islamist was “effectively ghostwritten in Whitehall”.

The official told me that in 2006, he was informed by a government colleague “with close ties” to Jack Straw and Gordon Brown that “the draft was written by Ed but then ‘peppered’ by government input”. The civil servant told him “he had seen ‘at least five drafts of the book, and the last one was dramatically different from the first.’”

The draft had, the source said, been manipulated in an explicitly political, pro-government manner. The committee that had input into Ed Husain’s manuscript prior to its official publication included senior government officials from No. 10 Downing Street, the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre, the intelligence services, Foreign & Commonwealth Office and the Home Office.

When I put the question, repeatedly, to Ed Husain as to the veracity of these allegations, he did not respond. I also asked Nawaz whether he was aware of the government’s role in “ghostwriting” Husain’s prose, and whether he underwent a similar experience in the production of Radical. He did not respond either.

While Husain was liaising with British government and intelligence officials over The Islamist from 2006 until the book’s publication in May 2007, his friend Nawaz was at first in prison in Egypt. Nawaz was eventually released in March 2006, declaring his departure from HT just a month before the publication of Husain’s book. Husain took credit for being the prime influence on Nawaz’s decision, and by November 2007, had joined with him becoming Quilliam’s director with Husain as his deputy.

Yet according to Husain, Nawaz played a role in determining parts of the text of The Islamist in the same year it was being edited by government officials. “Before publication, I discussed with my friend and brother-in-faith Maajid the passages in the book,” wrote Husain about the need to verify details of their time in HT.

This is where the chronology of Husain’s and Nawaz’s accounts begin to break down. In Radical, and repeatedly in interviews about his own deradicalisation process, Nawaz says that he firmly and decisively rejected HT’s Islamist ideology while in prison in Egypt. Yet upon his release and return to Britain, Nawaz showed no sign of having reached that decision. Instead, he did the opposite. In April 2006, Nawaz told Sarah Montague on BBC Hardtalk that his detention in Egypt had “convinced [him] even more… that there is a need to establish this Caliphate as soon as possible.” From then on, Nawaz, who was now on HT’s executive committee, participated in dozens of talks and interviews in which he vehemently promoted the Hizb.

I first met Nawaz at a conference on 2 December 2006 organised by the Campaign Against Criminalising Communities (CAMPACC) on the theme of “reclaiming our rights”. I had spoken on a panel about the findings of my book, The London Bombings: An Independent Inquiry, on how British state collusion with Islamist extremists had facilitated the 7/7 attacks. Nawaz had attended the event as an audience member with two other senior HT activists, and in our brief conversation, he spoke of his ongoing work with HT in glowing terms.

By January 2007, Nawaz was at the front of a HT protest at the US embassy in London, condemning US military operations in Iraq and Somalia. He delivered a rousing speech at the protest, demanding an end to “colonial intervention in the Muslim world,” and calling for the establishment of an Islamic caliphate to stand up to such imperialism and end Western support for dictators.

Yet by his own account, throughout this very public agitation on behalf of HT from mid-2006 onwards, Nawaz had in fact rejected the very ideology he was preaching so adamantly. Indeed, in the same period, he was liaising with his friend, Ed Husain – who at that time was still in Jeddah – and helping him with the text of his anti-HT manifesto, The Islamist, which was also being vetted at the highest levels of government.

The British government’s intimate, and secret, relationship with Husain in the year before the publication of his book in 2007 shows that, contrary to his official biography, the Quilliam Foundation founder was embedded in Whitehall long before he was on the public radar. How did he establish connections at this level?

MI5’s Islamist

According to Dr Noman Hanif, a lecturer in international terrorism and political Islam at Birkbeck College, University of London, and an expert on Hizb ut-Tahrir, the group’s presence in Britain likely provided many opportunities for Western intelligence to “penetrate or influence” the movement.

Dr Hanif, whose doctoral thesis was about the group, points out that Husain’s tenure inside HT by his own account occurred “under the leadership of Omar Bakri Mohammed,” the controversial cleric who left the group in 1996 to found al-Muhajiroun, a militant network which to this day has been linked to every major terrorist plot in Britain.

Bakri’s leadership of HT, said Dr Hanif, formed “the most conceptually deviant period of HT’s existence in the UK, diverting quite sharply away from its core ideas,” due to Bakri’s advocacy of violence and his focus on establishing an Islamic state in the UK, goals contrary to HT doctrines.

When Bakri left HT and set-up al-Muhajiroun in 1996, according to John Loftus, a former US Army intelligence officer and Justice Department prosecutor, Bakri was immediately recruited by MI6 to facilitate Islamist activities in the Balkans. And not just Bakri, but also Abu Hamza al-Masri, who was recently convicted in the US on terrorism charges.

When Bakri founded al-Muhajiroun in 1996 with the blessings of Britain’s security services, his co-founder was Anjem Choudary. Choudary was intimately involved in the programme to train and send Britons to fight abroad, and three years later, would boast to the Sunday Telegraph that “some of the training does involve guns and live ammunition”.

Historian Mark Curtis, in his seminal work, Secret Affairs: Britain’s Collusion with Radical Islam, documents how under this arrangement, Bakri trained hundreds of Britons at camps in the UK and the US, and dispatched them to join al-Qaeda affiliated fighters in Bosnia, Kosovo and Chechnya.

Shortly before the 2005 London bombings, Ron Suskind, a Wall Street Journal Pulitizer Prize winning investigative reporter, was told by a senior MI5 official that Bakri was a longtime informant for the secret service who “had helped MI5 on several of its investigations”. Bakri, Suskind adds in his book, The Way of the World, reluctantly conceded the relationship in an interview in Beirut - but Suskind gives no indication that the relationship ever ended.

A senior terrorism lawyer in London who has represented clients in several high-profile terrorism cases told me that both Bakri and Choudary had regular meetings with MI5 officers in the 1990s. The lawyer, who works for a leading firm of solicitors and has regularly liaised with MI5 in the administration of closed court hearings involving secret evidence, said: “Omar Bakri had well over 20 meetings with MI5 from around 1993 to the late 1990s. Anjem Choudary apparently participated in such meetings toward the latter part of the decade. This was actually well-known amongst several senior Islamist leaders in Britain at the time.”

According to Dr Hanif of Birkbeck College, Bakri’s relationship with the intelligence services likely began during his “six-year reign as HT leader in Britain,” which would have “provided British intelligence ample opportunity” to “widely infiltrate the group”. HT had already been a subject of MI6 surveillance abroad “because of its core level of support in Jordan and the consistent level of activity in other areas of the Middle East for over five decades."

At least some HT members appear to have been aware of Bakri’s intelligence connections, including, it seems, Ed Husain himself. In one passage in The Islamist (p. 116), Husain recounts: “We were also concerned about Omar’s application for political asylum… I raised this with Bernie [another HT member] too. ‘Oh no’, he said, ‘On the contrary. The British are like snakes; they manoeuvre carefully. They need Omar in Britain. More likely, Omar will be the ambassador for the khilafah here or leave to reside in the Islamic state. The kuffar know that - allowing Omar to stay in Britain will give them a good start, a diplomatic advantage, when they have to deal with the Islamic state. Having Omar serves them well for the future. MI5 knows exactly what we’re doing, what we’re about, and yet they have in effect, given us the green light to operate in Britain.”

Husain left HT after Bakri in August 2007. According to Faisal Haque, a British government civil servant and former HT member who knew Ed Husain during his time in the group, Husain had a strong “personal relationship” with Bakri. He did not leave HT for “ideological reasons,” said Haque. “It was more to do with his close personal relationship with Omar Bakri (he left when Bakri was kicked out), pressure from his father and other personal reasons which I don’t want to mention.”

Husain later went on to work for the British Council in the Middle East. From 2003 to 2005, he was in Damascus. During that period, by his own admission, he informed on other British members of HT for agitating against Bashar al-Assad’s regime, resulting in them being deported by Syrian authorities back to Britain. At this time, the CIA and MI6 routinely cooperated with Assad on extraordinary rendition programmes.

Husain then worked for the British Council in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, from late 2005 to the end of 2006.

Throughout that year, according to the former Home Office official I spoke to, Husain was in direct contact with senior Whitehall officials who were vetting his manuscript for The Islamist. By November, Husain posted on DeenPort, an online discussion forum, a now deleted comment referring off-hand to the work of “the secret services” inside HT: “Even within HT in Britain today, there is a huge division between modernisers and more radical elements. The secret services are hopeful that the modernisers can tame the radicals… I foresee another split. And God knows best. I have said more than I should on this subject! Henceforth, my lips are sealed!”

Shortly after, Maajid Nawaz would declare his departure from HT, and would eventually be joined at Quilliam by several others from the group, many of whom according to Nawaz had worked with him and Husain as “a team” behind the scenes at this time.

The ‘ex-jihadists’ who weren’t

Perhaps the biggest problem with Husain’s and Nawaz’s claim to expertise on terrorism was that they were never jihadists. Hizb ut-Tahrir is a non-violent movement for the establishment of a global “caliphate” through social struggle, focusing on the need for political activism in the Muslim world. Whatever the demerits of this rigid political ideology, it had no relationship to the phenomenon of al-Qaeda terrorism.

Nevertheless, Husain and Nawaz, along with their government benefactors, were convinced that those personal experiences of “radicalisation” and “deradicalisation” could by transplanted into the ongoing “war on terror” - even though, in reality neither of them had any idea about the dynamics of an actual terrorist network, and the radicalisation process leading to violent extremism. The result was an utterly misguided and evidence-devoid obsession with rejecting non-violent extremist ideologies as the primary means to prevent terrorism.

Through the Quilliam Foundation, Husain’s and Nawaz’s fundamentalist ideas about non-violent extremism went on to heavily influence official counter-terrorism discourses across the Western world. This was thanks to its million pounds worth of government seed-funding, intensive media coverage, as well as the government pushing Quilliam’s directors and staff to provide “deradicalisation training” to government and security officials in the US and Europe.

In the UK, Quilliam’s approach was taken up by various centre-right and right-wing think-tanks, such as the Centre for Social Cohesion (CCS) and Policy Exchange, all of which played a big role in influencing the government’s Preventing Violent Extremism programme (Prevent).

Exactly how bankrupt this approach is, however, can be determined from Prime Minister David Cameron’s efforts to express his understanding of the risk from non-violent extremism, a major feature of the coalition government’s Orwellian new Counter-Terrorism and Security Act. The latter establishes unprecedented powers of electronic surveillance and the basis for the “Prevent duty,” which calls for all public sector institutions to develop “risk-assessment” profiles of individuals deemed to be “at-risk” of being drawn into non-violent extremism.

In his speech at the UN last year, Cameron explained that counter-terrorism measures must target people who may not “encourage violence, but whose worldview can be used as a justification for it.” As examples of dangerous ideas at the “root cause” of terrorism, Cameron pinpointed “conspiracy theories,” and most outrageously, “The idea that Muslims are persecuted all over the world as a deliberate act of Western policy.”

In other words, if you believe, for instance, that US and British forces have deliberately conducted brutal military operations across the Muslim world resulting in the foreseeable deaths of countless innocent civilians, you are a non-violent extremist.

In an eye-opening academic paper published last year, French terrorism expert and Interior Ministry policy officer Dr Claire Arenes, noted that: “By definition, one may know if radicalisation has been violent only once the point of violence has been reached, at the end of the process. Therefore, since the end-term of radicalisation cannot be determined in advance, a policy intended to fight violent radicalisation entails a structural tendency to fight any form of radicalisation.”

It is precisely this moronic obsession with trying to detect and stop “any form of radicalisation,” however non-violent, that is hampering police and security investigations and overloading them with nonsense “risks”.

Double game

At this point, the memorable vision of Nawaz and Choudary facing off on BBC Newsnight appears not just farcical, but emblematic of how today’s national security crisis has been fuelled and exploited by the bowels of the British secret state.

Over the last decade or so - the very same period that the British state was grooming the “former jihadists who weren’t” so they could be paraded around the media-security-industrial complex bigging up the non-threat of “non-violent extremism” - the CIA and MI6 were coordinating Saudi-led funding to al-Qaeda affiliated extremists across the Middle East and Central Asia to counter Iranian Shiite influence.

From 2005 onwards, US and British intelligence services encouraged a range of covert operations to support Islamist opposition groups, including militants linked to al-Qaeda, to undermine regional Iranian and Syrian influence. By 2009, the focus of these operations shifted to Syria.

As I documented in written evidence to a UK Parliamentary inquiry into Prevent in 2010, one of the recipients of such funding was none other than Omar Bakri, who at the time told one journalist: “Today, angry Lebanese Sunnis ask me to organise their jihad against the Shiites… Al-Qaeda in Lebanon… are the only ones who can defeat Hezbollah.” Simultaneously, Bakri was regularly in touch with his deputy, Anjem Choudary, over the internet and even delivered online speeches to his followers in Britain instructing them to join IS and murder civilians. He has now been detained and charged by Lebanese authorities for establishing terror cells in the country.

Bakri was also deeply involved “with training the mujahideen [fighters] in camps on the Syrian borders and also on the Palestine side." The trainees included four British Islamists “with professional backgrounds” who would go on to join the war in Syria. Bakri also claimed to have trained “many fighters,” including people from Germany and France, since arriving in Lebanon. Was Mohammed Emwazi among them? Last year, Bakri disciple Mizanur Rahman confirmed that at least five European Muslims who had died fighting under IS in Syria had been Bakri acolytes.

Nevertheless in 2013, it was David Cameron who lifted the arms embargo to support Syria's rebels. We now know that most of our military aid went to al-Qaeda affiliated Islamists, many with links to extremists at home. The British government itself acknowledged that a “substantial number” of Britons were fighting in Syria, who “will seek to carry out attacks against Western interests... or in Western states”.

Yet according to former British counterterrorism intelligence officer Charles Shoebridge, despite this risk, authorities “turned a blind eye to the travelling of its own jihadists to Syria, notwithstanding ample video etc. evidence of their crimes there,” because it “suited the US and UK’s anti-Assad foreign policy”.

This terror-funnel is what enabled people like Emwazi to travel to Syria and join up with IS - despite being on an MI5 terror watch-list. He had been blocked by the security services from traveling to Kuwait in 2010: why not Syria? Shoebridge, who was a British Army officer before joining the Metropolitan Police, told me that although such overseas terrorism has been illegal in the UK since 2006, “it’s notable that only towards the end of 2013 when IS turned against the West’s preferred rebels, and perhaps also when the tipping point between foreign policy usefulness and MI5 fears of domestic terrorist blowback was reached, did the UK authorities begin to take serious steps to tackle the flow of UK jihadists.”

The US-UK direct and tacit support for jihadists, Shoebridge said, had made Syria the safest place for regional terrorists fearing drone strikes “for more than two years”. Syria was “the only place British jihadists could fight without fear of US drones or arrest back home… likely because, unlike if similar numbers of UK jihadists had been travelling to for example Yemen or Afghanistan, this suited the anti-Assad policy.”

Having watched its own self-fulfilling prophecy unfold with horrifying precision in a string of IS-linked terrorist atrocities against Western hostages and targets, the government now exploits the resulting mayhem to vindicate its bankrupt “counter-extremism” narrative, promoted by hand-picked state-groomed “experts” like Husain and Nawaz.

Their prescription, predictably, is to expand the powers of the police state to identify and “deradicalise” anyone who thinks British foreign policy in the Muslim world is callous, self-serving and indifferent to civilian deaths. Government sources confirm that Nawaz’s input played a key role in David Cameron’s thinking on non-violent extremism, and the latest incarnation of the Prevent strategy; while last year, Husain was, ironically, appointed to the Foreign Office advisory group on freedom of religion or belief.

Meanwhile, Bakri’s deputy Choudary continues to inexplicably run around as Britain’s resident “terror cleric” media darling. His passport belatedly confiscated after a recent pointless police arrest that avoided charging him, he remains free to radicalise thick-headed British Muslims into joining IS, in the comfort that his hate speech will be broadcast widely, no doubt fueling widespread generic suspicion of British Muslims.

If only we could round up the Quilliam and al-Muhajiroun fanatics together, shove them onto a boat, and send them all off cruising to the middle of nowhere, they could have all the fun they want “radicalising” and “deradicalising” each other to their hearts content. And we might get a little peace. And perhaps we could send their handlers with them, too.

Nafeez Ahmed PhD, is an investigative journalist, international security scholar and bestselling author who tracks what he calls the 'crisis of civilization.' He is a winner of the Project Censored Award for Outstanding Investigative Journalism for his Guardian reporting on the intersection of global ecological, energy and economic crises with regional geopolitics and conflicts. He has also written for The Independent, Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Scotsman, Foreign Policy, The Atlantic, Quartz, Prospect, New Statesman, Le Monde diplomatique, New Internationalist. His work on the root causes and covert operations linked to international terrorism officially contributed to the 9/11 Commission and the 7/7 Coroner’s Inquest.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Print this item

  Greek Public coffers expected to run dry next month
Posted by: Admin - 02-05-2015, 07:28 PM - Forum: Multimedia - No Replies

GREEK PUBLIC COFFERS EXPECTED TO RUN DRY NEXT MONTH
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?opti...ival=13516



SYRIZA NEEDS ALLIANCE AGAINST GERMAN "BEGGAR THY NEIGHBOUR" POLICIES
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?opti...ival=13130


FINANCE MINISTER OF GREECE OFFERS DEBT SWAP OPTIONS TO THE EUROPEANS
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?opti...ival=13116

WILL THE SYRIZA VICTORY SPARK A BROAD ANTI- AUSTERITY STRUGGLE IN EUROPE?
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?opti...ival=13093


THE SYRIZA CHALLENGE IN GREECE(2/2)

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?opti...ival=13023



THE SYRIZA CHALLENGE IN GREECE (1/2)

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?opti...ival=13005

Print this item

  Paris Massacre: Lessons that need to be learned by our war making governments  
Posted by: Admin - 01-08-2015, 05:58 PM - Forum: Alternative Theories - Replies (2)

PARIS MASSACRE : LESSONS THAT NEED TO BE LEARNED BY OUR WAR MAKING GOVERNMENTS
http://www.stopwar.org.uk/news/paris-mas...overnments


It is not Muslims who are the problem but the foreign policies that have helped create terrorism. That is what needs to change. No one can have anything but the profoundest condemnation for the attacks on the Paris offices of the satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo. It is reported that 12 people are dead, shot in a commando style attack, and that at least nine of them are journalists.

The magazine has recently published a cartoon of the Islamic state leader, and has a record of publishing anti-Islamic satire. The gunmen are assumed to be in some way connected with Islamic State (ISIS).

There can be no justification for the attack. It should be possible to satirise or to criticise ideas without this being something that can result in death or injury. There must, however, be a response to it that does not lead either to an increase in future terrorist attacks or in a rise in attacks on Muslims.

Neither outcome, unfortunately, is likely if responses so far and in the past are anything to go by.

The one effective response to such attacks would be to change foreign policy, which has helped to create precisely the terrorism that it now abhors. ISIS has grown in Iraq and Syria as a consequence of the failed wars there. The instability created in Iraq as a result of western intervention, the backing of a sectarian and oppressive government by the occupiers, and the current air strikes which are helping to win support for ISIS, have all contributed to the strengthening of this organisation. ISIS has received weapons and money from the Saudis and Qataris, has grabbed weapons provided by the west for other anti Assad groups, and has received material support from Turkey.

These are precisely the western allies -- Turkey also being a Nato member -- who sign up for the ‘war on terror’ but practice something different. The interventions they supported have greatly increased instability, for example in Libya where the British and French led bombing in 2011 continues to result in bitter civil war and conflict. The prediction made by, among others, former head of MI5 Eliza Manningham-Buller that the war on Iraq would lead to a much greater threat of terrorism has unfortunately proved to be the case.

In recent years France, under presidents Sarkozy and Hollande, has played an increasing role in these interventions. That the wars are all blamed on Muslims ignores the fact that the Libyan groups and ISIS are of course in large part fighting other Muslims. The refugees coming out of Syria, left on crewless boats to sink or swim in the Mediterranean, are also Muslims.

The consequences of the wars, with hundreds of thousands dead and many more refugees, have incensed people around the world. The large marjorities in western countries who have opposed these interventions have been ignored by their warmongering governments.

Muslims have also faced a growing level of racism and prejudice, see in the rise of far right parties, the restrictions on Muslim dress, the infringements of civil liberties, and the branding of all Muslims as somehow extremists or proto terrorists.

In France, there is a very strong far right party in the shape of the Front National, and the country has legislated some of the worst restrictions on Muslims -- for example over wearing the hijab. In Germany, the anti Islamic Pergida demonstrations have linked Muslims to crime. Levels of racism in Britain have grown, focussed both on immigrants and on Muslims.

The latest attack will lead to a greater backlash and greater levels of Islamophobia. But it is not Muslims who are the problem but the foreign policies that have helped create terrorism. That is what needs to change.

Print this item