As a primer on the background of the new western strategy and the role of the 
Mumbai attacks watch two videos on YouTube by historian/analyst Webster Tarpley 
- the second one deals specifically with Pakistan and the Mumbai attacks, but 
to understand it watch Part I first.
 
- Brzezinski (who successfully created the Taliban during Carter's presidency 
and used them to first draw the Soviet Union into Afghanistan to defend the 
country's socialist government and then to defeat them) - is back in power as 
Obama's main advisor., Obama is just a front man for the new policy to ensure 
US/British domination of the world for the next 100 years  
 
- Brzezinski correctly sees that to continue world domination, it is a waste of 
time to focus on the Middle East. The real obstacles to US/Britain are 
Russia and China. That's where Pakistan comes in. Pakistan is allied with China 
and it has a strong military. The war in Afghanistan is going badly for the US. 
Remember when the US was losing in Vietnam and began bombing neighboring Laos 
and Cambodia giving as reason that the Vietnamese resistance was hiding in the 
border areas of Laos and Cambodia? We now have a replay. US is losing in 
Afghanistan so now Obama's plan is to unilaterally bomb the border areas of 
Pakistan.Even Mrs Clinton and rightwinger McCain disn't dare to go that far.
 Obama has not yet been inaugurated as President  but we are seeing non-stop 
UNILATERAL bombing of Pakistan, supported by 'antiwar candidate' Obama. 
For this to proceed, Pakistan must be demonized and viewed as a terrorist 
nation. Obama is proceeding with plans to send 30,000 more US troops to 
Afghanistan  Meanwhile other countries that have deals with China, Sudan and 
the Congo have already been attacked,not directly, but via neighboring 
countries. Ethiopia in the case of Sudan and 'rebels from Rwanda' in the case 
of the Congo.Here they are hoping that India will lend a hand and attack 
Pakistan. .  
 
The men behind Barack Obama part 1 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MouUJNG8f2k&feature=related
 
The men behind Barack Obama part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-KJCMWcoms&feature=related 
 
Webster Tarpley is famous for his free internet book re. George Bush I
George Bush:The Unauthorized Biography 

by Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin 

 
http://www.tarpley.net/bushb.htm
 
It's fascinating, but it's old history - the Tarpley videos try to explain and 
predict what is happening NOW and what we should expect next theyare more 
important

--- On Tue, 12/23/08, Thomas Victor <sys...@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Thomas Victor <sys...@yahoo.com>
Subject: [ZESTAlternative] Fwd: Cover-up in Mumbai - Indian View: By Sandhya 
Jain
To: "zest" <zestalternative@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, December 23, 2008, 8:26 PM













http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=265
 




Reduce VIP security and interrogate survivors, please         

Sandhya Jain















While there is no way the sartorially elegant Shivraj Patil could have survived 
the gory 62-hour blood-and-bullets nightmare that descended upon Mumbai last 
week, the appointment of P. Chidambaram as Union Home Minister, after a 
disastrous innings as Finance Minister, hardly inspires confidence. Coupled 
with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's refusal to accept the resignation of M.K. 
Narayanan, this suggests that Congress intends to learn nothing from the 
colossal failure of intelligence, for which the National Security Adviser and 
Sonia Gandhi-loyalist was critically responsible. 

Public confidence in this decision could, however, follow if the Union Cabinet 
takes a decision to scale down VIP security across the board, beginning with 
the ruling dispensation in New Delhi. If the Congress-dominated UPA believes 
national security should continue to be manned by men who should be quartered 
and hung for letting Mumbai happen, and that public opinion can be doused by 
the token removal of Shivraj Patil and perhaps Vilasrao Deshmukh while a 
political oligarchy quietly enhances its personal security, then it is living 
in a fool's paradise. 

While stock-taking has only just begun, it already appears as if some things 
are being covered up. In these circumstances, the retention of Narayanan who 
was invisible during the entire crisis though he was too visible in the hated 
Indo-US nuclear deal does nothing to inspire confidence. In an atmosphere when 
media hype persistently reminds us of the Twin Towers tragedy in New York, one 
can only think of the success of Prince Bandar in escorting all well-connected 
Saudi youth out of America in the immediate aftermath of 11 September 2001.  

Some things deserve an immediate answer – how many terrorists were there 
actually; how did they reach their respective destinations inland; and is it 
possible that "super-terrorists" simply walked out with the real survivors 
after having utilised the "mercenaries" to the hilt, just as they had murdered 
the navigators of the boats that brought them to Mumbai? 

Current media reports and government sources say that the terrorists came by 
sea, landing near the Gateway of India or Colaba. This certainly explains the 
attacks on the sea front hotels like Taj, Oberoi and the Nariman House. But the 
question remains – how did they get to the CST station, Cama Hospital, and 
other places inland? Someone must have provided transport and back-up. 

By no logic can anyone believe that nine separate sites in a city could be held 
to ransom by just 10 men. It is particularly difficult to believe that gigantic 
hotels like the Taj could be ruined and scores of guests killed or injured by 
just two men (sometimes the figure goes to six). Even two men per floor could 
not have caused the kind of death and destruction that did happen. A small 
place like Nariman House, yes, but Taj and Oberoi – I don't believe it. And 
if there were six persons at Taj and at least two at Nariman House, that means 
only two persons destroyed the Oberoi? 

Rediff.com has interviewed the doctors who conducted the post-mortems on the 
dead hostages and terrorists, and it is their expert opinion that a battle of 
attrition took place over three days at the Oberoi and Taj hotels. The 
mutilation of the bodies was unlike anything they had seen in their careers in 
forensics. 


For one, the bodies of the victims bore horrible signs of torture. Now this is 
understandable if the victims are being tormented by half-human beasts, but it 
seems strange that two terrorists could simultaneously fight and keep Indian 
commandos at bay for 62 hours, and also have the time to torture their victims. 
Yet the doctors were emphatic that: 
"It was apparent that most of the dead were tortured. What shocked me were the 
telltale signs showing clearly how the hostages were executed in cold blood." 

To my mind, it seems apparent that the terrorists who kept the NSG commandos 
engaged and those who tortured and killed the hotel staff and guests were two 
separate groups. 

This suspicion is intensified by the startling revelation that the terrorists 
also did not meet a clean death. Doctors who conducted the post-mortem said the 
bodies of the terrorists – especially their faces - were beyond recognition. 
The security forces identified the bodies as those of terrorists [on TV they 
said it was because of the presence of weaponry near the bodies]. 


One terrorist was shot through either eye (i.e., both eyes!!!). As the NSG 
commandos never got to such close range with the terrorists, and nobody commits 
suicide by shooting both his own eyes, it follows that the killers were 
somebody else. Since none of the hotel guests could have the kind of weaponry 
used in the conflict, this suggests the presence of a mysterious third party, 
making the terrorists the victims of a classic double-cross – the stuff of 
spy thrillers. Actually, it reminds one of the convenient murder of the alleged 
killer of President John F. Kennedy. 

Hence it would be entirely in order to closely interrogate each and every 
guest, especially the foreign guests, before allowing them to leave the 
country. Without false emotionalism, we should also fingerprint them for the 
future; who knows what Interpol cooperation may throw up. 

Top Russian counter-terrorism expert, Vladimir Klyukin, an Afghan war veteran, 
opines that the Mumbai attackers were not "ordinary terrorists" and were 
probably trained by the special operations forces set up in Pakistan by US 
intelligence prior to the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan. In his view, the 
nature of the Mumbai events suggests the signature of the 'Green Flag' special 
operations forces created by the Americans in Pakistan, just a year before the 
Soviet withdrawal. 

Guerrilla operations of the Mumbai kind require at least two-three years of 
preparatory work with experienced instructors. Raw trainees cannot hold four 
huge complexes in a city to ransom for so long. The Russian Interfax news 
agency reported the former KGB veteran as surmising the involvement of at least 
50 terrorists, given the geography and sheer scale of the attacks. This seems 
like a legitimate estimation. 

What is more, the only way 9 coordinated attacks can occur simultaneously is by 
using Global Positioning Systems (GPS) or live maps for communication and 
control. These are not normally owned by private parties. Initial 
investigations also suggested that as many as seven terrorists included mostly 
British-born Pakistanis, and one does hope that these leads are not covered up. 
The reports also suggested some gunmen were captured, but later media reports 
highlighted that only one terrorists was caught alive at the railway station. 
So there is a lot of confusion here that needs to be cleared up. 



Certainly the hints about British involvement, openly asserted by the outspoken 
Lyndon LaRouche, need investigation.   



Media has been heavily criticized in some quarters for airing visuals of NSG 
commandos dropping on the hotel roofs from helicopters, and thus giving 
operational secrets away to the militants watching TV inside. If the criticism 
is to be valid, however, we will have to accept that the terrorists had more 
men inside who could be deployed to watch TV and give information which would 
enable them to react and rebuff the aerial assault. There is no way 2 to 6 
terrorists could torture victims sadistically and kill them brutally, watch TV, 
fight and keep the security forces at bay for 62 hours, and then kill 
themselves or each other in impossible ways. 

The death of terrorists points to a clear double-cross and also the possibility 
of the involvement of more than one religious denomination. That the terrorists 
did not prepare for death by carrying potassium cyanide is well known; nor did 
they simply intend to blow themselves up like the usual suicide bombers. The 
surviving terrorist has revealed that they were told of an escape plan – and 
no doubt that plan was used by those who killed their fellow terrorists and 
walked out free! 

This writer has consistently stated that modern, late 20th-21st century jihad 
is qualitatively different from the medieval jihad in which Muslim armies led 
by generals or kings ran over much of the world in Europe, north Africa, and 
Asia. Contemporary jihad is a mercenary tool of Western colonialism, serving a 
colonial intent with devout slavishness, and this seems borne out by the events 
of Mumbai. 

What remains to be seen, however, is whether or not the Islamic world wakes up 
to the reality of its own self-enslavement. India on its part has demonstrated 
that no matter how long it takes to get operational, no matter the cost in 
terms of live and property, the territory of Bharat Mata will be protected. 

It is more than likely that Pakistan was rebuked by its British and American 
'friends' (read Masters) for agreeing to send the ISI chief to assist in the 
investigations, and forced to backtrack on a solemn assurance. The teams from 
Scotland Yard and America, ostensibly coming to assist India in the probe, are 
more likely trying to ascertain the extent of evidence with India. 

It is pertinent that the recovery of a satellite phone from the trawler 
abandoned with the body of the Gujarati captain revealed that the trawler had 
been hijacked to Karachi Port, and while there, calls were made even to 
Australia (where the CIA has a famous outpost!) 
 

Interestingly, General Leonid Ivashov, who was Chief of Staff of the Russian 
armed forces when the Twin Towers tragedy happened on 11 September 2001, 
insists that there is no such thing as international terrorism and that "the 
September 11 attacks were the result of a set-up. What we are seeing is a 
manipulation by the big powers; this terrorism would not exist without them." 
Instead of faking a "world war on terror", the best way to reduce such attacks 
is through respect for international law and peaceful cooperation among 
countries and their citizens 
[http://www.voltairenet.org/article133909.html]


Globalization creates the conditions for the emergence of this terror. It seeks 
to design a new world geo-strategic map; appropriate the resources of the 
planet; erase cultural identities; and subjugate States before a global 
oligarchy. Thus, terrorism, according to Gen. Ivashov, is an instrument of 
world politics, "a means to install a unipolar world with a sole world 
headquarters, a pretext to erase national borders and to establish the rule of 
a new world elite. It is precisely this elite that constitutes the key element 
of world terrorism, its ideologist and its "godfather". 


Contemporary international terrorism combines the use of terror by State and 
non-State political structures to attain political objectives through 
intimidation of people, psychological and social destabilization, elimination 
of resistance inside power organizations, and the creation of appropriate 
conditions for the manipulation of the countries' policies and the behaviour of 
people. Media complicity helps. But terrorism is not possible without the 
support of political and business circles that wield the funds to finance it 
– and Pakistan is notoriously bankrupt. 


More pertinently, only secret services and their current or retired chiefs have 
the ability to plan and execute an operation of such complexity and scale. It 
is secret services that create, finance and control extremist organizations. 


Is it possible that M.K. Narayanan has been retained by the current pro-Western 
dispensation to "help" the Western secret services (State actors) in the 
current mess, to facilitate their long-term agenda by manipulating and 
misleading the nation and the people? We deserve an answer; we demand to know.  


The author is Editor, www.vijayvaani.com
 

Reply via email to