There is something very, very important to understand about the terrorist attack in Manchester on Monday night.
And it is something that virtually all mainstream media outlets have failed to – or will continue to deliberately avoid – talking about.
Because they don’t want their average audiences – and the general public – to have any sense of context, perspective or history.
At this time when people are very emotional, when there are armed soldiers being deployed into public places, and when mainstream radio super-bitches (someone called Katie Hopkins) literally called for “a final solution” to the ‘Muslim problem’, it is hugely important to have a true perspective about what happened in Manchester.
The game right now is to have us all in fixed paradigms and tensions that are binary and emotional. Part of that controlled perspective is to divorce current events from their real context and to divorce cause and effect from each other.
They don’t want you thinking critically or logically – but to instead be stuck in the vicious cycle of anxiety, insecurity, and anger.
There is a mainstream context to all of this: which, basically, centers on the problem of radicalisation and an extreme version of Islam.
And then there’s a different context to all of this – which I will try to comprehensively lay out in this article in a way that makes things very clear.
Concerning that first context – radicalisation and Islam – I am not denying there is a serious problem. For one thing, the government should ban all ‘madrasas’ operating in the UK – there is no justification for their existence. For another, they should ban foreign-funding (particularly from Saudi Arabia) for British mosques or educational facilities.
But that’s only half of the story. I want to present here the other half of the story – the version that’s not going to be appear in any of the newspapers: and it is replete with ironies and with basic truths that mainstream broadcasters and journalists appear unwilling to touch, even after such a horrible thing as what happened at the Manchester arena.
This is the true story of the British government’s role in the attack in Manchester; its role in the current ‘clash of civilisations’ paradigm, and its role in ‘Salman Abedi’ – the 22 year-old fuckwit thought to have carried out the heinous attack.
Because the attack at the Ariana Grande concert wasn’t just related to radical Islam: but also to MI5 and MI6, the British Deep State, and in particular to Britain’s leading role in the overthrowing of the government in Libya (a subject I am particularly well-versed in). It involves the origins of the radical group that ‘Salman Abedi’ is connected with, includes the testimony of a former MI5 agent, and entirely explains why we appear to now live in this age of mass terrorism.
For a much broader explanation of that conspiracy, my book ‘The Libya Conspiracy‘ goes into much more detail. But I’ll focus more squarely here on how it pertains to what happened in Manchester. At the macro level, I wrote in the book that one of the primary reasons for Britain and NATO to ‘intervene’ in Libya was to create a ‘failed state’ that would immediately become an extremist ‘caliphate’ from which the manufactured ‘clash of civilisations’ programme could be expanded and played out across the world.
I wrote that in the book about two years ago. Much earlier, in January that year, I wrote the following paragraphs in an article after the Charlie Hebdo attack – which I want to reproduce here, so that ‘Salman Abedi’ and this entire horror story can be properly understood.
The argument put forward in the excerpts below can then be demonstrably backed up by the rest of this article in regard to Manchester.
I wrote; ‘Extremist/terrorist networks and sleeper cells in the West are almost certainly being kept in place (with or without their own knowledge) by various Western intelligence agencies in order to be utilized whenever they’re needed for these kinds of attacks. These attacks are inevitable; they’re going to be happening periodically for their psychological and social effect on Western populations, as well as for various other reasons beneficial to governments, intelligence agencies and (corporate and military-industrial) foreign policies. This state of affairs has its basis the type of operations NATO intelligence engaged in during the Cold War with similar networks of radicalised militants at their disposal to be used both as foreign mercenaries and domestic agent-provocateurs, which are now commonly known as ‘Operation Gladio’.’
I continued, ‘Iraq, Libya and Syria – three stable, mostly secular Arab nations – have been methodically destabilised and callously turned into terrorist playgrounds and training arenas by NATO, the US and other international conspirators, providing vast arenas and battlegrounds for disaffected young men, wannabe jihadists and ‘holy warriors’ to be trained, further radicalised, desensitized and most importantly to get real-world experience of terrorist activity, guerrilla warfare, mass killing and blood-lust on the streets of Libyan, Iraqi and Syrian cities and towns… and then they come back to their countries, bringing that psychological damage and blood-lust with them.’
I concluded, ‘The frankly apocalyptic situations engineered in Iraq, Libya and Syria are serving to produce enough extremists and would-be terrorists to last for a generation.’
That’s the macro level – and we’ve seen it being played out everywhere from Raqqa, Aleppo, Mosul and Tripoli to Paris, Berlin and now Manchester.
But actually the micro level of smaller details is even more interesting.
It has quickly emerged that the named perpetrator of the Manchester attack – Salman Abedi – was a product of the British/Western-backed programme to overthrow Gaddafi and the Libyan state.
There are ‘unconfirmed reports’ that Abedi’s father, Abu Ismail, was linked to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group – a Salafist/Wahhabist extremist group that was working for years to overthrow the secular government of Muammar Gaddafi and establish an Islamist ‘caliphate’ in North Africa.
It also being reported that he had in fact gone back to Libya in 2011 to take part in the NATO-backed uprising to overthrow the republic.
It is in fact being reported that Salman Abedi himself ‘had flown in from Libya’ just shortly before carrying out the Manchester attack; this suggests he may have been in ISIS, Al-Qaeda or LIFG training camps that were established in the formerly prosperous country (read more) after Britain and its NATO allies helped overthrow the state.
According to a report by The Telegraph, the area of Manchester in which Abedi lived was also home to a number of dissidents linked to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). These were people essentially who fled Libya during the Gaddafi era because the Gaddafi-era government was cracking down on Islamist extremists and jihadist movements.
Some were given refuge in England, where the British intelligence community could work with them for years to plan and eventually execute a foreign-backed coup in Libya.
Salman Abedi’s own father is reported to have escaped Tripoli in 1993 and been given asylum in Britain after Gaddafi’s security authorities had issued an arrest warrant.
Among these ‘exiles’ living in England was someone called Abd al-Baset Azzouz, who reportedly left Manchester to go to Libya and run a 200-300-strong militant network for Osama Bin Laden’s successor, Ayman al-Zawahiri. Azzouz – described as an ‘expert bomb maker’ – ran the Al-Qaeda network in eastern Libya; the same network that was absolutely central to the unrest that destroyed Libya in 2011.
We’ll come back to Salman Abedi shortly; but some background on the LIFG is important.
There had been Salafist extremists in parts of Libya for many years; they had festered for decades in eastern Libya, but were mostly rendered impotent by the Gaddafi government which had zero tolerance for religious fundamentalists or Salafists and their dreams of toppling the secular state. Most of this came from the CIA’s Mujahideen operation in Afghanistan – which had involved some of the key players in the LIFG – who, after successfully ejecting the Soviets from Afghanistan, wanted to use the same tactics to overthrow Gaddafi.
The first thing that should be understood is that the CIA and the British state (and MI6), along with others (including the Saudis) absolutely wanted them to do this too.
Gaddafi’s own complaints in 2011 (“They are going to turn Libya into another Afghanistan, another Iraq” he had warned) weren’t just the ramblings of someone on the defensive – he knew who these people were and had been fighting them for decades. In the opening weeks of the 2011 turmoil, Gaddafi himself repeatedly told Western journalists that Al-Qaeda and other extremist/Salafist groups were behind the uprising.
The key thing to understand is that these Salafist/extremist groups were working in collusion with the British government.
And their existence and operations go back to the early 1990s, at a time when Libya was under international sanctions and the British state – along with the CIA and other agencies – was working with exiled Libyans to establish the means by which to remove Gaddafi and create the ‘caliphate’.
As was highlighted in the book, the entire plan to force a regime change in Libya was concocted in Britain, France and the United States in the first place.
For example, the call for a “Day of Rage” in Libya on the 17th February 2011 (the day the ‘Arab Spring’ came to Libya), which had flooded highly suspect social media and on-line platforms virtually overnight, hadn’t originated anywhere in Libya at all, but from the London-based Libyan opposition leaders of the ‘NCLO’.
But this operation was simply a culmination of many years worth of preparation.
The goal was always – as highlighted in the book – to topple the Gaddafi regime and create an extremist Salafist caliphate, turning Libya into a terrorist haven from which terrorist/jihadist attacks could be launched around the world – including on Europe and the West. To begin with, the fall of Libya allowed for the vast transfer of weapons and jihadists into Syria (overseen by the CIA, Hillary Clinton and the US State Department and involving Turkey) to escalate that conflict.
This was always part of an engineered ‘clash of civilisations’ programme; a programme that was seeded by the CIA in Afghanistan in the 80s and fully brought into play via the 9/11 false-flag and subsequent ‘War on Terror’. After 9/11, the ‘interventions’ in Iraq and Libya were the next key stages of the agenda – to literally *create entire countries* in which terrorists could operate, train and flourish.
As I’ve said before, it is no coincidence that the intervention in Libya came precisely 10 years after 9/11 and occurred in the same year that Osama bin Laden was supposedly killed in Abbotabad. Bin Laden wasn’t needed anymore and wasn’t scary enough anymore – a new phase was about to begin, beginning with the creation of a caliphate in Libya and one in Syria/Iraq and leading quickly to the rise of ‘ISIS’ and this new, scarier ‘clash of civilisations’.
The LIFG’s role in advancing that plan was crucial: and the LIFG was working with the British government.
What is the LIFG?
According to some sources, the group was founded in Afghanistan by Al-Qaeda operative Abu Laith Al Libi, during the CIA-sponsored ‘Mujahideen’ war against the Soviet Union (the same project that birthed ‘Al Qaeda’ and Bin Laden – or the CIA’s ‘database’ as the late British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook referred to it – read ‘Will There Ever Be An Investigation into the Death of Robin Cook?‘).
There’s no doubt that many of the key figures in the ‘opposition’ that went into Libya in 2011 were Western assets (as I demonstrate more comprehensively in the book), including extremist or Al-Qaeda/LIFG figures. Another example of how this worked was Khalifa Haftar – not an extremist or terrorist, but nevertheless a Libyan exile who spent years living right next to CIA Headquarters in Langley, Virginia, before being air-lifted into Benghazi by the Americans in 2011 and announced as a ‘leader of the rebels’.
The LIFG’s leader is Abdelhakim Belhadj. Belhadj (or ‘Abel Hakim al-Hasidi’) was an Al-Qaeda leader, and moreover a CIA/MI5 collaborator.
Also known as the ‘butcher of Afghanistan’, Belhadj was long known to be a British/CIA intelligence asset and an asset for the Vitol Oil company. In 2011, during the bloody violence, he was sent to take control of Tripoli. Not long after the NATO/Al-Qaeda operation to overthrow the Libyan state, Belhadj (pictured below with Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham) became a senior part of ‘ISIS’ in Libya.
In October 2011, just prior to Gaddafi’s murder in Sirte, Belhadj was also part of the NATO-backed Libyan ‘transitional government’ delegation that went to Syria to meet with the Salafist/jihadist groups trying to overthrow the Assad government and to offer training, weapons and support.
Huge parts of Syria – like in Libya – were soon turned into vast, lawless terrorist playgrounds (or ‘caliphates’) too.
The LIFG is in fact a proscribed terrorist group and is listed as such by the British government (and has been since 2005 – six years before the British government and its international allies militarily supported the LIFG in the plot to overthrow Gaddafi).
It is still listed as such now on the government’s website. The PDF, which clearly hasn’t been updated for a long time, states the LIFG’s agenda plainly; ‘The LIFG seeks to replace the current Libyan regime with a hard-line Islamic state. The group is also part of the wider global Islamist extremist movement, as inspired by Al Qa’ida. The group has mounted several operations inside Libya, including a 1996 attempt to assassinate Mu’ammar Qadhafi.’
Nevertheless, the British government – along with its NATO allies – chose to support Belhadj, the LIFG and the rest of the Libyan ‘revolution’ in 2011, not just in propaganda terms, but with full NATO military firepower and air support.
The long-term plan that the LIFG, British intelligence and Al-Qaeda had been preparing was now being put into full operation.
And whenever anyone raises the phony counter-argument that ‘maybe we didn’t know who we were helping’, I remind people that British operatives were also there on the ground in Libya (as I illustrated in the book) and would’ve therefore been clear about who they were working with. Even The Daily Mail confirmed at the time: ‘MI6 operatives backed by the SAS are to land in the east around the key rebel stronghold of Benghazi ‘within days’,’ the newspaper reported. ‘In addition, 600 soldiers of the Black Watch are on 24-hour standby…’
But, in case you have any doubts about this, let’s go back further.
In fact, the British government’s collusion with the LIFG, Al-Qaeda and extreme Islamists in Libya goes back much further than the 2011 conspiracy.
As far back as the mid 90s, a former MI5 agent, David Shayler, testified that British intelligence were employing the services of an Al-Qaeda cell inside Libya, paying them a large fee to assassinate Gaddafi (at least one assassination attempt was carried out at that time). Shayler revealed that while he was working on the Libya desk in the mid 90s, British Secret Service personnel were collaborating with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), which was connected to one of Osama bin Laden’s trusted lieutenants.
As far back as 2002, The Guardian was reporting that British intelligence paid large sums of money to an Al-Qaeda sleeper-cell in Libya in an ongoing programme to assassinate Gadaffi in 1996 (the article also portrays how MI6 thwarted early Libyan attempts to bring Osama bin Laden to justice).
This revelation centered on the disclosures of Shayler. Shayler was famously sent to prison for his disclosures.
During his closing speech in court, he affirmed that he had been gagged from talking about “a crime so heinous” that he felt he’d had no choice but to go to the press. During Shayler’s trial, the then Home Secretary David Blunkett and the Foriegn Secretary Jack Straw had signed Public Interest Immunity documents that banned journalists from being able to report on the plot against Gaddafi or on MI6’s involvement with the LIFG and Al-Qaeda.
According to Shayler, MI6 passed £100,000 to the plotters. In 1998 Libya released TV footage of the grenade attack on Gaddafi, which they insisted had been carried out by a British agent.
What all of this also confirmed was that Gaddafi had been *the* first international leader to issue an arrest warrant for Osama bin Laden – Britain, the US and others refused to do until many years later.
At any rate, with Gaddafi dead and Libya in total collapse, the British government (with France and the US) and its allies had accomplished their goal. The Salafist/Islamist ‘caliphate’ could now spread across multiple Libyan towns and cities – and a global ‘War on Terror’ that had been running out of steam ten years after 9/11 could now be revitalised and escalated to levels beyond Osama bin Laden’s wildest dreams.
The point I’m trying to put across here, at any rate, is that the ‘LIFG’ and the other extremist/Salafist factions in Libya were always allied to the British government.
*As soon as you acknowledge that fact*, the entire context of ‘Salman Abedi’ and the attack in Manchester becomes very different to the simple idea of the ‘lone wolf’ terrorist or the oft-repeated question of ‘what do we do about radicalisation?’
Given Salman Abedi’s family background and connections to the LIFG, the question inevitably emerges of whether he was *working* for British intelligence elements or whether someone in British intelligence was fully aware of what he was going to do (what I have referred to elsewhere as ‘state-enabled terrorism’).
Media outlets seemed to know very quickly that he had just returned from Libya. Authorities therefore must’ve known he had been to Libya too. It is already being reported in the press that this guy was ‘on the radar’ of the intelligence services (aren’t they always?).
Several of Abedi’s (Muslim) friends are reported to have contacted the National Anti-Terrorism Hotline on multiple occasions and warned about the 22 year- old’s behaviour.
The Mirror reports that ‘A member of Manchester’s Libyan community, who did not want to be named, said the Abedi family, who are Salafists, returned to Tripoli in 2011, after the fall of Gaddafi. Asked if Abedi could have had terror training, he said: “I wouldn’t be surprised. A lot of people who went there after the revolution got trained for the militia by the people now controlling Libya”…’
The Guardian also reports that Libyans in the UK had ‘warned about Manchester radicalisation for years’.
According to NBC News, members of Salman Abedi’s family had warned British security officials about him in the past, saying that he was “dangerous”.
It has come out also that Abedi had been expelled from his local mosque for extremist views that he had expressed.
Salman Abedi is reported to have also had a friendship with Raphael Hostey, a known ‘ISIS’ recruiter (also known as Abu Qaqa al-Britani) who reportedly went to Syria to engage in the Western-backed Salafist/Wahhabist war against the secular Syrian state (the same Salafist war that was waged in Libya – Syria and Libya were the same war, involving the same groups and players and the same international sponsors). This Hostey or ‘al-Britani’ was killed in a UK drone strike in Syria last year; but one wonders how many of these figures were or are actually British intelligence assets.
It doesn’t take much fact-checking to make the possibility viable. A number of previous extremist figures have been revealed to have been attached to the intelligence community.
According to Sky News (in 2005), the mastermind behind the 7/7 London Bombings in 2005 was Haroon Rashid Aswat. Which is significant.
Because according to former Justice Department prosecutor and terror expert, John Loftus, at the time of the 7/7 London bombings Haroon Rashid Aswat was “working for British Intelligence”. Suggestions persist too that the alleged leader of the 7/7 bombers, Mohammad Sidique Khan, was an MI5 contact. According to a government report published in May 2009, in fact, at least two of the bombers had a prior relationship with MI5. French Interior Minister at the time of the bombings (and future Libyan War Criminal Nicolas Sarkozy), told the press that at least two of the bombers had been arrested and released by the UK authorities in 2002. An embarrassed Charles Clarke, then British Home Secretary, simply responded that he was not “personally aware” of the arrests.
Haroon Rashid Aswat, an Indian-born man living in Dewsbury, was known about as far back as 1999, when Seattle prosecutors wanted to prosecute him for terrorist activity, but were ordered by the US Justice Department to leave him alone because he “was working for British Intelligence”.
We might also note that the alleged Westminster attack in March took place right next to MI6 Headquarters and involved a perpetrator who was known to MI5 (and bore all the hallmarks of an intelligence asset – for one thing, his multiple aliases).
All of that being taken into account, ‘Salman Abedi’ could’ve easily been either (a) a direct British intelligence operative, (b) a former British intelligence asset who ‘went rogue’ or went ‘full ISIS’.
Whichever answer is most likely, it doesn’t really even matter. Because, either way, he was likely just as much a product of British intelligence and foreign policy as he was a product of radical Islam: which immediately raises the possibility that Manchester was another ‘state-enabled’ act of terrorism.
And radical Islam itself (Salafist/Wahhabist groups) have been nurtured and utilised by the British intelligence community. They’ve been used both for foreign nation-destroying and for domestic terrorism. It’s precisely the same way that the FBI has been exposed on multiple occasions for building up ‘terrorists’ to carry out attacks in America.
If the British government hosted a known community of ‘Salafist’/extremist members of the LIFG in Manchester for the purposes of waging terrorism against the Libyan state, it’s not much of a stretch beyond that to think they might’ve also allowed elements of the same group to conduct terrorism in Britain.
It could even be that Salman Abedi himself was just a straight-up extremist/terrorist – but it looks like his father and possibly other family members might’ve been working with the British intelligence community anyway. Either way, their extremism/Salafism was certainly encouraged by elements of the British state – at the very least, for the purposes of the Libyan operation, if nothing else.
The British state’s hosting of Libyan operatives also goes beyond the 2011 conspiracy, even after it was abundantly clear (even to stupid people) that the NATO/Salafist regime-change operation in Libya had resulted in utter catastrophe and failure and had led to the creation of a vast terrorist/jihadist playground.
In March 2013, for example, Sadiq Ghariani, a ‘Grand Mufti’, had issued a ‘fatwa’ against the UN Report on Violence Against Women and Girls, condemning it. This was no longer the secular Gaddafi era of women’s rights and equality. Later in 2013, Libyan lawyer Hamida Al-Hadi Al-Asfar, advocate for women’s rights, was abducted, tortured and killed – targeted for criticising the Grand Mufti’s declaration. No arrests were made. It turned out that Ghariani had in fact been using the UK as his base.
Based in Britain, the cleric had been encouraging and propagandising for violent extremism, including the Islamic State, to consolidate their control of post-Gaddafi Libya.
‘ISIS’ – which joined Al-Qaeda, the LIFG and other extremist factions in Libya (read more) after the collapse of the post-Gaddafi state – has been known for some time to train young jihadists to carry out attacks overseas. For example, the Tunisian, Seifeddine Rezgui, who murdered 38 tourists (30 of them British) at a Tunisian beach resort, was trained by ‘ISIS’ in Libya.
But of course there BE NO ‘ISIS’ in Libya to train such brainwashed fuckwits had the British government (along with the others) not unleashed the full military might of NATO against that country’s secular government in 2011 for the sake of the jihadist ‘caliphate’.
And of course there would’ve BEEN NO ‘uprising’ in Libya in the first place had the British government not been working with, funding and nurturing the ‘Libyan Islamic Fighting Group’ and Al- Qaeda for years – the very same Salafist/extremists that Manchester attacker ‘Salman Abedi’ came from.
That’s where we are. It wasn’t just avoidable – it was actively sought after.
And why are journalists and broadcasters unwilling to talk about any of that? Even the ones who’ve reported Salman Abedi’s LIFG connections and the role of the LIFG in Libya have only mentioned it in passing; as if it is a minor, trivial detail that warrants no great exploration. None of them mentioned the long history of the British government harbouring LIFG members for the sake of controlled terrorism.
This isn’t just journalistic negligence: some of it probably is just journalists and broadcasters who are genuinely clueless, but mostly it is a measured policy.
I suggested why, in a recent post on the ongoing ‘psy-opera’ of state-enabled terrorism; ‘It is, in part, designed to divorce the attacks from any association with, for example, the Iraq War or the collapse of Libya. It is meant to create the impression that all of this occurs in a vacuum, where these great sentinels of liberty and civilisation – like London, Berlin or Paris – are being attacked for their inherent goodness or their modern sensibilities… ‘They’ attack ‘us’ because we’re so good and noble and they’re so barbaric: and that is all. Again – forget all the complex webs of cause and effect or the history, don’t think or analyse, just stick to the symbols, catchphrases and emotions, and submit to the divide-and-conquer game…’
Nothing in this article is intended to excuse the 22 year-old extremist fuckwit Salman Abedi or anyone connected with his activities or to somehow lessen the gravity of the crime (anyone who would do what he did is evil).
It is simply intended to provide a larger perspective and context than the one being played out in mainstream commentary. This situation is much larger, much more sinister, than a radicalised 22 year-old.
See all ‘Libya’ posts here. See all ‘False-Flag Terror’ posts here.
The feature image at the top of the article is courtesy of my friend ‘El-Machete Illustrated‘; it aptly sums up the key stages of general public reaction.
The first part of the image shows the general apathy six or seven years ago when all the horrible terrorism (sponsored by our governments) was happening ‘far away’ in Libya; the second part shows an unchanged reaction as the danger/terror starts to transfer closer to home (Europe); the third part finally shows the mass hysteria when the problem finally arrives on our doorstep…
Something that you may have overlooked in your otherwise very thorough article, is the part “Teflon” Tony Blair played in the rehabilitation of Qaddafi and Assad. Was this a deliberate ploy to get Qaddafi and Assad on-side, ostensibly for the purpose of business, but in reality to allow a variety of agents to work under cover in Libya and Syria to make contacts and prepare the way for future intervention?
Blair is a curious character: his father was a Tory councillor and Blair’s “New” Labour went further down the road to Thatcherism than Thatcher and Major dared. If you search the internet, you’ll find some netizens claiming that Blair was an MI5/6 asset from his Cambridge days. This was the theme of the movie Ghost Writer, which only a fool would not see as a portrait of Blair.
You’ll notice that the Great Statesman, Blair, never mentions (and is never asked by the media) about his hosting Qaddafi and Assad with their many hugs and kisses and shared photo ops and handshakes and return visits to Libya and Syria. That period has disappeared as far down the memory hole as Iraq’s anthrax attacks on the US.
That’s a good point. I have always assumed Blair was genuinely reaching out to those leaders for corporate reasons. But maybe you’re right to be more suspicious. It’s also little known that Saif Gaddafi was being wined and dined by Rothschilds during that period too. And the other Gadaffi son was being cosied up to by Hillary Clinton and Condoleeza Rice.
Reblogged this on sand49.
When you mention salafists/Salafi’s you should be mentioning KHAWARIJ (renegades) because that’s who these extremists are and followthe khawarij ideology. It’s wrong to associate them with Salafi’s because Salafi’s don’t believe in committing acts of terrorism.
Read this to gain a deeper more clearer understanding http://www.kharijites.com/kj/
As for the so called “wahhabi” slander please read this http://www.masjidtawheedchicago.org/books/thewahabimyth.pdf
hey guys i found latest facts about salman abedi here http://atominik.com/34HI
> and when mainstream radio super-bitches (someone called Katie Hopkins) literally called for “a final solution” to the ‘Muslim problem’
I caught some of James O’Brien’s stuff on YouTube following this incident and wondered who he was referring to when he was talking about whether he should have protested by boycotting the show etc etc. He wouldn’t mention her by name. Now I know. For a while I was thinking it was Nick Ferrari.
> ban all ‘madrasas’ operating in the UK
Would be great if you url linked ‘madrasas’ to a decent definition of what this is for simpletons like myself. Cheers! 🙂
> For another, they should ban foreign-funding (particularly from Saudi Arabia) for British mosques or educational facilities.
I saw the special edition of Question Time on YouTube and found it interesting the stark differences of opinion debating whether this was indeed fact or not from the members of the audience.
> For a much broader explanation of that conspiracy, my book ‘The Libya Conspiracy‘ goes into much more detail.
FTFY. You forgot to say, ‘my *free book….’.
> David Blunkett and the Foriegn Secretary Jack Straw had signed Public Interest Immunity documents that banned journalists from being able to report on the plot against Gaddafi or on MI6’s involvement with the LIFG and Al-Qaeda.
Wait, what? Is that even possible? Is that still in effect???! Shit, here I was deluded into thinking that the UK also had some sense of ‘freedom of the press’ like they do in the States.
> The Mirror reports …
Something wrong with the beginning of such a sentence. Can the ‘journalist’ responsible for the article (not to even mention the editorial staff over at The Mirror) can even be credible?
Overall, damn interesting investigative work, old chap. We’ll have to see if any investigative journalists or other outlets will eventually corroborate your reasons on the son’s motivations. Hopefully, more information being released to the public on the Interwebs shall prove fruitful.
Hey, old friend.
On the subject of Public Interest Immunity; yeah, the government does this all the time. The current government is also developing new anti-whistleblower laws that could mean jail time not only for whistleblowers but for journalists who reproduce the information.
On The Mirror as a credible source, it isn’t the only source – it’s just the one I linked to.
On ‘madrasas’, I’ll send you some information.
Major mistake…the Libyan LIFG and the wars in the Middle East are NOT salafist , nor follow the Salafi movement which is to practice Islam according to the Salaf (pious predecessors of the first three generations). It is very far from being Salafi…
This is a Western – Shia propaganda against true Islam upon the evidence and unfortunately the author has not investigated what Salafi is and has picked up mainstream media rhetoric. This attitude stinks of ‘well it’s Islam so who cares whether we are reporting correctly or not.”
I would request the author of this article to investigate what is Salafism and then compare it to who he is attributing it to and then rectify his mistake.
Afiyyah, I don’t think you’ll find many other bloggers who’ve spent as much time defending ‘Muslims’ and attacking Islamophobia as much as I have. And, instead of perceiving that, you seem to think it’s somehow an offense to Islam that I’ve talked about Salafists or Wahhabism.
I’m not sure what you’re taking issue with: it’s almost as if you’re implying that extremism doesn’t exist or that there is no jihadist warfare.
They call *themselves* Salafists – I have simply referred to them as such, instead of doing the *actual* lazy thing of framing everything as ‘Islamic terrorism’.
Reblogged this on Cucumber Lodge.
„Africa Under Attack! And the Refugees? May Get Drowned!“ http://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2013/11/11/africa-under-attack-and-the-refugees-may-get-drowned/
Reblogged this on Taking Sides.
Brilliant analysis! Thanks for putting this together – I shall send it far and wide.
Thanks, WoC. It was easy this time, as I already had most of the information in my head.
I totally agree with you about all you have said about Western collusion and conspiracies against Libya, Syria and Iraq and support for ISIS . The facts are undeniable , I still have not read from you or anyone else why Western Power Centres should want to let loose terrorism in the Western civilised world . What is the dividend of frightened populations at home ?
These are the words of right-wing terrorist Vincenzo Vinciguerra who was active in the Gladio campaign:
“You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the State to ask for greater security. This is the political logic that lies behind all the massacres and the bombings which remain unpunished, because the State cannot convict itself or declare itself responsible for what happened.”
Thanks WoC, that’s an extremely helpful quote – and also answers some of the other commenters’ questions directly.
Having read about CIA involvement in Afghanistan, suggestions that MI6 were involved in this wk’s atrocity comes as no surprise, but to what end is all this killing committed?
What is th ultimate purpose of all this terrorism?!
mlbradford, ‘Wall of Controversy’s’ comment below is a good answer to your question.
In general, there are multiple purposes for state-enabled terrorism: sometimes it is to justify surveillance laws, restrictions of civil liberties, etc. Sometimes to justify imminent foreign policy decisions or military action and geopolitics abroad. In general, it is to keep the general public insecure and on-edge.
Thank u for your reply, sir.
I found another Post where u discuss these multiple purposes.
All in all, it is a nasty and abhorrent situation
Thank u for bringing all this to our attention