Phony 'Al-Qaeda' Responsibility Claim a Hoax!
tony
Are there paid disinformation agents on Usenet?
;)
With regard to the so-called claim of responsibility for the London bombings
from an unknown Al-Qaeda group which the British government is treating as
'serious,' MSNBC reported,
MSNBC TV translator Jacob Keryakes, who said that a copy of the message was
later posted on a secular Web site, noted that the claim of responsibility
contained an error in one of the Quranic verses it cited. That suggests that
the
claim may be phony, he said.
"This is not something al-Qaida would do," he said.
Furthermore, the website posting doesn't even claim personal responsibility,
it
simply references "the heroic mujahedeen" in the third person. The posting
praises the attack, it doesn't even take responsibility for it.
These facts didn't stop countless newspapers and Neo-Con websites
automatically
assuming Al-Qaeda (or Al-CIAda) was behind the attack.
-mellstr
Pan
Here's one possible starting point for people who want to look into
the history of the name "Al Qaeda" and the ideological orientation of
people who call themselves "Al Qaeda," whether in Afghanistan,
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, or Europe. Here's the key point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Qaida
"Al-Qaeda's religious inspiration comes from a combination of the
fundamentalist Wahabbi ideology of Saudi Arabia and the philosophy of
the Muslim Brotherhood, which gave rise to most of the principal
militant Islamist movements in the Middle East today. Though it
adheres to no particular sect, in general its philosophy is Salafist."
We're talking about an anti-nationalist Salafist world jihad movement.
The particular extremists who committed the atrocities in London may
be English Muslims or may come from elsewhere, but if the claim of
responsibility is accurate, the main point is that they share the
ideology of those operating in other countries that call themselves
"Al Qaida."
Michael
If you would like to send a private email to me, please take out the NOTRASH. Please do not email me something which you also posted.
tony
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fakealqaeda.html
...and that's what I'm refering to!
Also, about Israel getting the warnings before the first blast... here it
is; right from the horses mouth:
Report: Israel Was Warned Ahead of First Blast
10:43 Jul 08, '05 / 1 Tammuz 5765
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=85346
(IsraelNN.com) Army Radio quoting unconfirmed reliable sources reported a
short time ago that Scotland Yard had intelligence warnings of the attacks a
short time before they occurred.
The Israeli Embassy in London was notified in advance, resulting in Finance
Minister Binyamin Netanyahu remaining in his hotel room rather than make his
way to the hotel adjacent to the site of the first explosion, a Liverpool
Street train station, where he was to address an economic summit.
At present, train and bus service in London have been suspended following
the series of attacks. No terrorist organization has claimed responsibility
at this time.
Israeli officials stress the advanced Scotland Yard warning does not in any
way indicate Israel was the target in the series of apparent terror attacks.
"Pan" <panNO...@musician.org> wrote in message
news:6g3vc152r8pucvpnt...@4ax.com...
AnakMalaysia
>"tony" is a hoax.
I am getting tired of these lame attempts by Tony to 'psycho' readers.
He and the writers of the conspiracy websites/mailing lists that he is
a fan of, need to attend Psychology 101.
If they want to fark with my mind, they need to do a whole lot better.
:)
tony
I'm trying to point out here is that there is still NO evidence at all
implicating Al Qaeda! Once the police done their investigation and present
their findings, then only we can accuse whoever did it!
"AnakMalaysia" <spam...@eatcrapanddie.net.zoo> wrote in message
news:j09vc15tpd9ocjf3f...@4ax.com...
tony
what I'm trying to get across here is that we have to look very carefully at
the incident & evidence; i.e: Who Benefits The Most!!
Nor can we be clear that the perpetrators are Bin Laden's lieutenants,
despite the internet claims being attributed to groups linked with al-Qaida.
In 1995 Paris was hit by metro station bombings, believed to be the work of
Algerian Islamists punishing the French for their support of the Algiers
government. No one declared responsibility for the attacks, and they were
attributed to the GIA, one of Algeria's more radical anti-government groups.
But subsequent evidence under oath from former members of the Algerian
military, now widely acknowledged to have infiltrated the GIA, pointed the
finger at the Algerian secret services.
"AnakMalaysia" <spam...@eatcrapanddie.net.zoo> wrote in message
news:j09vc15tpd9ocjf3f...@4ax.com...
tony
Yes, thank you for defining the actual name of Al Qaeda.
What I'm trying to point out is that this is a phoney site; pls go and read:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8496293/
and the warning to Netanyahu here seems a bit strange that the London Police
was informed of the pending Terror attacks (sorry, if I gave the impression
that the Israelis was the one who gave the warning (but they infact do gave
warning to the British government a few days before).
Israel Army Radio reported that UK authorities had received prior
warning, and had told the Israeli embassy, which told Netanyahu, who
changed his movements accordingly. The radio broadcast must have
occurred before the web article that refers to it, i.e. before
13:30 7 Jul 2005 [Israel time]
= 10:30 GMT
= 11:30 BST [British Summer Time]
Note: I think the Israel figure is using summer time. ('Time without
summer time' would not be as meaningful as in the UK, where this gives
GMT). But if it isn't, this would push the BST time forward to 12:30.
Associated Press report by Amy Teibel says the same as the above:
07:14 7 Jul 2005 ET
= 12:14 BST
So the radio report looks like it came first by more than 44 minutes.
Bomb 1 exploded at 08:49 BST. Some reports give 08:51 BST.
First blamed on a power surge, which may have been a prearranged code.
09:40 British Transport Police blame a power surge.
10:14 Eyewitness tells PA of bus explosion
10:25 Andrew Marr of BBC, at Gleneagles with Tony Blair, says Downing
Street "still unsure" whether there has been a 'terrorist attack'.
10:25 Press Association reports two separate bus blasts
11:18 London police chief Ian Blair says there have been six explosions
Before 11:30 Israel Army Radio report that Netanyahu received prior
warning (see above)
12:05 Tony Blair says there has been a series of terrorist attacks
12:14 AP report by Amy Teibel (See above)
-- Banana
"Pan" <panNO...@musician.org> wrote in message
news:6g3vc152r8pucvpnt...@4ax.com...
tony
by CONSPIRACY PLANET
Al Qaeda is not and never has been a "terrorist organization."
"Al-Qaida,(sic) literally 'the database,' was originally the computer file
of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from
the CIA to defeat the Russians," admits former British Foreign Secretary
Robin Cook, whose Foreign Office portfolio included control of British
Intelligence Agency MI-6 and the Government Communications Headquarters
(GCHQ), in a column published by the UK Guardian newspaper.
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1523838,00.html)
In other words, the so-called Al Qaeda, which has been promoted by the Media
Cartel as the cause of all bombings and terrorism since the destruction of
the World Trade Center in New York on September 11, 2001, is simply a
database of CIA trained "terrorists" (or "freedom fighters," depending on
your perspective) which has become a convenient Global Boogeyman for the
21st Century.
What does this mean? The entire planet has been fooled into believing that
an Islamic "organization" exists to promote the destruction of Western
society, when in fact this "organization" is just a list of Pentagon/ CIA
trained assassins, who can be used and discarded as needed.
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=80&contentid=2420
"Pan" <panNO...@musician.org> wrote in message
news:6g3vc152r8pucvpnt...@4ax.com...
Observer
"tony" <to...@streamyx.com> wrote in message
news:42d0d280$1...@news.tm.net.my...
> 'Al Qaeda': How the Pentagon/ CIA Made an 'Enemy'
> by CONSPIRACY PLANET
> Al Qaeda is not and never has been a "terrorist organization."
>
> "Al-Qaida,(sic) literally 'the database,' was originally the computer file
> of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help
from
> the CIA to defeat the Russians," admits former British Foreign Secretary
> Robin Cook, whose Foreign Office portfolio included control of British
> Intelligence Agency MI-6 and the Government Communications Headquarters
> (GCHQ), in a column published by the UK Guardian newspaper.
> (http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1523838,00.html)
> "Pan" <panNO...@musician.org> wrote in message
> news:6g3vc152r8pucvpnt...@4ax.com...
> > "tony" is a hoax.
> >
> > Here's one possible starting point for people who want to look into
> > the history of the name "Al Qaeda" and the ideological orientation of
> > people who call themselves "Al Qaeda," whether in Afghanistan,
> > Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, or Europe. Here's the key point:
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Qaida
Ok....let weigh this in perpective..
Tony's source is The Guardian...with Robin Cook...
former Blairs' Minister...and Mike's source is.....
WIKIPEDIA?
Somehow there's some lack of quality control
somewhere...
LOL.
Observer
> by CONSPIRACY PLANET
> Al Qaeda is not and never has been a "terrorist organization."
>
> "Al-Qaida,(sic) literally 'the database,' was originally the computer file
Kah..kah..kah.
Finally somebody managed to find some
of the MEANINGS of the words...
Al Qaid....the method...the way...the procedure...
Osama should have chosen "Lick-My-Arse" in
Arabic...so that all the stupid rednecks will then
herald it as a new discovery in security intelligence.
LOL.
Pan
Does the origin of the name prove that the organization doesn't exist
or never calls itself by that name? Do you know what the origin of the
name "Impressionism" in art is?
AnakMalaysia
>No, I'm not trying to F*ck up your mind.
Oh purleaze. You are.
Today, luke and tom23 has also joined in the fray. Are they your
other names?
> That's you alone can do it. What
>I'm trying to point out here is that there is still NO evidence at all
>implicating Al Qaeda!
That's not entirely the truth.
Your posts are geared to deny any possible Al-Qaeda involvement. You
are not even entertaining the possibility that they might be involved
in some way.
>Once the police done their investigation and present
>their findings, then only we can accuse whoever did it!
Likewise, why don't you let them complete the investigations instead
of implying it has nothing to do with Al-Qaeda?
The stuff you post betray your true leanings and your real intentions.
You can deny all you want but it is pretty obvious.
AnakMalaysia
>AnakMalaysia, I'm very sorry if I'm offending you with these postings,
You didn't.
> but
>what I'm trying to get across here is that we have to look very carefully at
>the incident & evidence; i.e: Who Benefits The Most!!
>
You sure come across as someone not looking carefully at the evidence
and the event. All I see are attempts to point everywhere but at
Al-Qaeda.
If you are truly objective, you will look and consider everything.
See what I mean about taking Psychology 101? Starting off so strongly
will often lead others to adopt a totally opposite stance from you.
>Nor can we be clear that the perpetrators are Bin Laden's lieutenants,
>despite the internet claims being attributed to groups linked with al-Qaida.
>In 1995 Paris was hit by metro station bombings, believed to be the work of
>Algerian Islamists punishing the French for their support of the Algiers
>government. No one declared responsibility for the attacks, and they were
>attributed to the GIA, one of Algeria's more radical anti-government groups.
>But subsequent evidence under oath from former members of the Algerian
>military, now widely acknowledged to have infiltrated the GIA, pointed the
>finger at the Algerian secret services.
Oh, whatever.