THE HIMALAYAN TALK: INDIAN GOVERNMENT FOOD SECURITY PROGRAM RISKIER

http://youtu.be/NrcmNEjaN8c The government of India has announced food security program ahead of elections in 2014. We discussed the issue with Palash Biswas in Kolkata today. http://youtu.be/NrcmNEjaN8c Ahead of Elections, India's Cabinet Approves Food Security Program ______________________________________________________ By JIM YARDLEY http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/indias-cabinet-passes-food-security-law/

THE HIMALAYAN TALK: PALASH BISWAS CRITICAL OF BAMCEF LEADERSHIP

[Palash Biswas, one of the BAMCEF leaders and editors for Indian Express spoke to us from Kolkata today and criticized BAMCEF leadership in New Delhi, which according to him, is messing up with Nepalese indigenous peoples also. He also flayed MP Jay Narayan Prasad Nishad, who recently offered a Puja in his New Delhi home for Narendra Modi's victory in 2014.]

THE HIMALAYAN DISASTER: TRANSNATIONAL DISASTER MANAGEMENT MECHANISM A MUST

We talked with Palash Biswas, an editor for Indian Express in Kolkata today also. He urged that there must a transnational disaster management mechanism to avert such scale disaster in the Himalayas. http://youtu.be/7IzWUpRECJM

THE HIMALAYAN TALK: PALASH BISWAS LASHES OUT KATHMANDU INT'L 'MULVASI' CONFERENCE

अहिले भर्खर कोलकता भारतमा हामीले पलाश विश्वाससंग काठमाडौँमा आज भै रहेको अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय मूलवासी सम्मेलनको बारेमा कुराकानी गर्यौ । उहाले भन्नु भयो सो सम्मेलन 'नेपालको आदिवासी जनजातिहरुको आन्दोलनलाई कम्जोर बनाउने षडयन्त्र हो।' http://youtu.be/j8GXlmSBbbk

THE HIMALAYAN TALK: PALASH BISWAS LASHES OUT KATHMANDU INT'L 'MULVASI' CONFERENCE

अहिले भर्खर कोलकता भारतमा हामीले पलाश विश्वाससंग काठमाडौँमा आज भै रहेको अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय मूलवासी सम्मेलनको बारेमा कुराकानी गर्यौ । उहाले भन्नु भयो सो सम्मेलन 'नेपालको आदिवासी जनजातिहरुको आन्दोलनलाई कम्जोर बनाउने षडयन्त्र हो।' http://youtu.be/j8GXlmSBbbk

THE HIMALAYAN TALK: PALASH BISWAS BLASTS INDIANS THAT CLAIM BUDDHA WAS BORN IN INDIA

THE HIMALAYAN VOICE: PALASH BISWAS DISCUSSES RAM MANDIR

Published on 10 Apr 2013 Palash Biswas spoke to us from Kolkota and shared his views on Visho Hindu Parashid's programme from tomorrow ( April 11, 2013) to build Ram Mandir in disputed Ayodhya. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77cZuBunAGk

THE HIMALAYAN TALK: PALSH BISWAS FLAYS SOUTH ASIAN GOVERNM

Palash Biswas, lashed out those 1% people in the government in New Delhi for failure of delivery and creating hosts of problems everywhere in South Asia. http://youtu.be/lD2_V7CB2Is

Palash Biswas on BAMCEF UNIFICATION!

THE HIMALAYAN TALK: PALASH BISWAS ON NEPALI SENTIMENT, GORKHALAND, KUMAON AND GARHWAL ETC.and BAMCEF UNIFICATION! Published on Mar 19, 2013 The Himalayan Voice Cambridge, Massachusetts United States of America

BAMCEF UNIFICATION CONFERENCE 7

Published on 10 Mar 2013 ALL INDIA BAMCEF UNIFICATION CONFERENCE HELD AT Dr.B. R. AMBEDKAR BHAVAN,DADAR,MUMBAI ON 2ND AND 3RD MARCH 2013. Mr.PALASH BISWAS (JOURNALIST -KOLKATA) DELIVERING HER SPEECH. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLL-n6MrcoM http://youtu.be/oLL-n6MrcoM

Imminent Massive earthquake in the Himalayas

THE HIMALAYAN TALK: PALASH BISWAS CRITICIZES GOVT FOR WORLD`S BIGGEST BLACK OUT

THE HIMALAYAN TALK: PALASH BISWAS CRITICIZES GOVT FOR WORLD`S BIGGEST BLACK OUT

THE HIMALAYAN TALK: PALASH BISWAS TALKS AGAINST CASTEIST HEGEMONY IN SOUTH ASIA

Palash Biswas on Citizenship Amendment Act

Mr. PALASH BISWAS DELIVERING SPEECH AT BAMCEF PROGRAM AT NAGPUR ON 17 & 18 SEPTEMBER 2003 Sub:- CITIZENSHIP AMENDMENT ACT 2003 http://youtu.be/zGDfsLzxTXo

Welcome

Website counter
website hit counter
website hit counters

Tweet Please

Palash Biswas On Unique Identity No1.mpg

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Condemn crimes against US women+Historic shoora+Penn State horror no surprise+Iran plot researched+Yemen+holocaust debate+sects forbidden in Islam

New Trend Magazine.Phone: 410-497-4988
Subscription for printed edition: $10 for 3 months. Mail check to: 
 New Trend, P.O. Box 84, Oxford Pa. 19363. [That's our NEW address.] 
 Disclaimer: Views expressed are not necessarily shared by the editors. 

 New Trend does not endorse violence of any kind. Information on news or views related to violence is for analysis and understanding, not for endorsement.
 
 New Trend is against racism, classism, gender superiority, Zionism and Imperialism. The Qur'an and the authentic Hadith are our foundation.
 All views are welcome but only a selection can be published owing to high volume of mail. Anyone criticized in New Trend has the right of reply up to 300 words.
 web site: www.newtrendmag.org
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Dhulhijja 18, 1432/November 14, 2011
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
National Islamic Shoora of Jamaat al-Muslimeen: Historic Meeting held on November 12. 
Peaceful Resistance to War, Occupation, Zionism, Racism & the Exploitation of Women 

Imam Badi Ali hosted the Central Committee [National Islamic Shoora] of Jamaat al-Muslimeen In Greensboro, North Carolina on November 12. The meeting lasted 13 hours with breaks for prayers, lunch and dinner. The local community provided abundance of delicious Arab style food. Prayers, Zuhr, Asr,  Maghreb and Isha were led by Dr. Abdulalim Shabazz. 

Jamaat al-Muslimeen is spreading its message of peaceful resistance to oppression, exploitation and war in: 

Maryland, 
Washington, DC., 
North Carolina 
Pennsylvania 
Tennessee 
New York 
Michigan 
California 
Texas and 
Louisiana 

The  Central Committee of the Shoora was addressed on November 12 by: 

Dr. Kaukab Siddique, Ameer of JAM. He quoted extensively from the Qur'an and the Hadith to explain the Islamic concepts of organization and communication to bring up effective opposition to the power structure within the limits of the law. 

Dr. Abdulalim Shabazz, distinguished and famous professor of Mathematics, spoke in detail about the links between racism and Zionism. He introduced  a new research work on slavery produced  by the NOI. He showed how "white supremacy" now appears in the shape of Zionist Jews and their networks in America. 

Imam Khalil Abdur Rahman spoke on the struggle of Imam Jamil Abdullah al-Amin, being held in a sound proof cell in a maximum security prison in Colorado. He stated the latest situation of Imam Jamil, his steady efforts to stand for Islam in his life, and the legal steps being taken on his behalf which are facing challenges from the authorities 

Various brothers and sisters led discussions on the following: 

Jamaat al-Muslimeen's Mission and Message. 

"Occupy Wall Street." 

Extending hand of friendship to Christians: Methodology for Approach to Christians. 

JAM activities in support of African Americans, Native Americans, homeless people, other non-Muslims.

Overview of the activities of puppet groups [also known as the 4 letter groups] 

Conditions of Muslim prisoners in the US prison systems. 

Palestine, Pakistan, the re-colonization of Africa, the Arab Spring. 
--------------------------------------------- 
Resolutions Passed Unanimously by the National Islamic Shoora at 11 PM on November12. 
Advice to the Muslim Ummah and its friends. [Please distribute widely.] 

Resolutions about our home, America: 

1. We urge US Muslims to unite on the basis of the Qur'an and the authentic Hadith. That's the only Islamic unity. 

2. America's ten million Muslims should work through independent organizations to give a positive direction to America's policies related to Muslim countries. 

3. We condemn the murders, rapes and violence being committed against American women on an ongoing basis as evidenced almost on a daily basis in the local news. Many rapes are not reported. 

4. We condemn the battering of approximately 4,000,000 women in America . These horrendous official figures indicate that domestic violence is a permanent ingredient of life in America. 

5. Exploitation by commercial interests, demeaning behavior on a daily basis, trivialization on the media, all under the umbrella of captalism, have eroded respect for women and has led on to mistreatment of minors. 

6. We oppose capitalism in all its details, including interest on loans and credit cards, the debt trap through mortgage, the Obama bail out for capitalistic exploiters. 

7. We support the Occupy Wall Street movement and we oppose police brutality against the protestors. However. we see the protests as related to various sectors of society. Some of the protestors are from the "99%" but others are there for political reasons and some are simply from the well -to- do sections of society griping about their comfortable lives. 

8. We support the rights of political prisoners being held across America in humiliating conditions. We also condemn police brutalities which spark tension and instability in cities across America. 

9. In view of the deteriorating economic conditions in America, the massive doses of aid  the US government and its ancillaries keep sending to Israel should be stopped. It's a moral outrage against Americans. 

10. We support the creation of independent media owing to the low quality and slanting of the corporate media productions. 

11. Racism should be changed through education which focuses on God [Allah Almighty]. 

12. We should not be surprised at the awful sexual acts carried out against children under the aegis of Pennsylvania State University. This evil is widespread in America and remains unchallenged in any decisive way. 

13. The judicial system in America, the death penalty, the life long prison sentences are linked to the development of the prison industrial complex. Related to the injustices is the tremendous growth of perjured witnesses. What happened to Troy Davis and Tookie Williams, and is happening to Peltier, Ali Timimi, the Blind Shaikh and many others indicates the collapse of justice and the prevalence of perjury and injustice. 
----------------------- 
Resolutions on Issues overseas 

1. PALESTINE is the central issue for the Muslim world. There is potential in the "Arab Spring" for the liberation of Palestine. Zionism is racism and global unity against Israeli crimes is needed. 

2. US Muslims oppose and condemn the occupation of ALL Muslim lands, be it Palestine, Kashmir, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, as well as moves against the Muslims of  Somalia, Nigeria, Sudan and Libya. 

3. We strongly oppose all extra judicial killings be it those of Shaykh Osama or Shaykh Anwar al-Awlaki. Without due process of  law, America is destroying its own moral foundations. 

4. As Muslims, we oppose poverty, terror, hunger and oppression as much as we oppose aggression and occupation. 

5. Western intelligence agencies [including those of Israel, Japan and Russia] are working against Islam and Muslims. We urge Muslims to be aware of the disinformation which comes from these sources. 

6. As American and European economies are hurting, the wealth of Africa is luring these powers to trythe recolonization of Africa. We urge the people of Africa to unite under the banner of Islam. 

7. The bombing of Pakistani villages by US drones is an ongoing violation of international law. Pakistani civilians are being killed 
------------------------------------------------ 
With thanks to Sis. Kristi 
[Horrific Crimes against Children at Top US University were Covered up as far back as 1998 
The Investigator Disappeared! - Ed]

 
Missing DA investigated Sandusky case
By Jean Casarez, November 10, 2011 [From HLN].
Editor's note: Jean Casarez is a correspondent for In Session on truTv.
I spoke with Detective Matthew Rickard, who has been leading the investigation into the 2005 disappearance of the elected District Attorney of Center County Pennsylvania, Ray Gricar.  
In 1998, Gricar decided not to pursue charges after the mother of a young man reported to Penn State Police that her son had been inappropriately touched by Jerry Sandusky as they showered together in thePennStatelocker room.
Rickard tells me he is currently working to see if there could be any possible link between Gricar's disappearance and the currently charged activity againstPennStateathletic officials, but says there has been nothing to suggest Gricar -- who is still missing -- had knowledge of any of the other alleged activities.
Although the conspiracy theories are being pushed forward, Rickard tells me, from knowing Gricar himself, and the type of prosecutor he was, there must not have been the evidence to prosecuteSanduskyback in 1998. Rickard admits that is speculation on his part, and is in the midst of finding out more information on Gricar's investigation ofSanduskyback in 1998.
In April, 2005 Gricar disappeared from the District Attorney's office never to be seen again. He called his girlfriend and said he was going to take a leisurely drive that afternoon. His abandoned car was found near an antiques store inLewisberg,Pennsylvania. His computer was found later in theSusquehanna River, but the hard drive had been taken out. Months later when the river banks receded, the hard drive was found about 100 yards from where the computer had been located. It was determined by investigators that the hard drive had been intentionally removed from the computer and repeated tests, including one done by the FBI, could not retrieve any data. The hard drive was too damaged 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

From the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust. November 2. 

Jewish Groups's Attempt to Muzzle Free Speech & Research
The German Ambassador and the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists 
Ambassador Peter Ammon
Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany
2300 M Street NW, Washington, DC 20037
 Dear Ambassador Ammon:
 We are writing to call attention to the worrisome activities of the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists (IAJLJ). It is holding a promotional event in Berlin entitled Holocaust Denial and Freedom of Speech in the Internet Era November 15-19 2011.
 The agenda of the IAJLJ is presented in a string of policy statements posted athttp://tinyurl.com/3j6fzp9 the tenor of which can be seen in the following quote:
"The Hamas so-called  Charter is a cruder and more action-oriented version of Mein Kampf, calling explicitly for the destruction of the State of Israel and the murder of all Jews. The release of the Hamas prisoners by the Palestine Authority constitutes an invitation to these artisans of death to resume their terrorist bombing campaign in Israel's population centres, for the consequences of which the Palestinian leadership will be held directly responsible."
IAJLJ policies include a defense of  Sharon's infamous 2000 "Strut through the Mosques," a demand for the release of convicted spy Pollack, a call for the revocation of United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379, a denunciation of the Durban World Conference Against Racism, and a demand that a human rights conference be canceled because it "will have prominently on its agenda allegations of violations of the human rights of the inhabitants of the Palestinian territories."  No mention is made of thousands of deaths of Palestinians. In short, the IAJLJ does little more than promote the reactionary, racist, and repressive agenda of the extremist right-wing. The IAJLJ is noteworthy only for its brazen hypocrisy of masquerading as a human rights organization and its notorious stand against free speech. 
Unfortunately, this group solicits governmental officials of good will to participate in its pseudo-educational promotional events by touting itself as "a membership organization whose object is to advance human rights everywhere." In fact the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists now has the sinister distinction of being the most militant anti-free speech group in the world. 
We are a group of historians, scholars and concerned laymen who feel that the up-coming conference in Berlin will only serve as a propaganda tool for restricting free speech and open discussion.
The IAJLJ regularly defames Revisionists as "anti-Semites who claim the Holocaust is only Jewish propaganda." That is not what we at CODOH argue. Briefly, we believe that much of the history we are taught today has been influenced by Soviet, British and American wartime propaganda which exaggerated and exploited real tragedies for propaganda purposes. This concerns not just Jews but Slavs, Roma, Jehovah's Witnesses and, in some versions, Gays. There is considerable research that supports this point of view and it should be inconceivable that anyone be threatened with prison for stating in public that they doubt what they believe they have good reason to doubt.
The one-sided presentation of anti-Revisionist Conferences like this one have led to Draconian laws in a number of European nations against "Denial," laws that go against fundamental Western ideals of free speech and open discussion. We respectfully request that the government of the Federal Republic of Germany reconsider its participation in the IAJL show.
 
Bradley Smith
Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH)
PO Box 439016
San Ysidro, California 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
[Sarkozy's attack on the Niqab and prayers in the streets backfired - Editor] 

Islam Overtaking Catholicism in France 
Hudson New York 
http://www.hudson-ny.org/2355/france-islam-overtaking-catholicism 

Islamic mosques are being built more often in France than Roman Catholic churches, and there now are more practising Muslims in the country than practising Catholics. Nearly 150 new mosques currently are under construction in France, home to the biggest Muslim community in Europe. The mosque-building projects are at various stages of completion .. ..By contrast, the Roman Catholic Church in France has built only 20 new churches during the past decade, and has formally closed more than 60 churches, many of which are destined to become mosques. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Yemen: From Yemen On Line 
Anti-Terrorist Chief Killed: Countrywide Breakdown as masses Rally 
 
November 4: A car bomb killed Ali al-Haddi the head of the anti-terror force near the coastal city of Aden in Yemen's restive southern Abyan province , a Yemeni security official said. 
Security has broken down across Yemen during the nine-month popular uprising against autocratic President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who has ruled the country for more than 30 years. Demonstrations raged around the country on Nov. 4 .
Al-Qaida-linked militants have taken over a number of towns in Abyan, along the country's south coast, where they regularly engage in deadly clashes with security forces. Yemeni authorities also accuse them of targeting security officials.
Tens of thousands marched in anti-government demonstrations across Yemen . Protesters have been on the streets nearly every day since January, despite a bloody government crackdown.
In the central city of Taiz, security forces opened fire on marchers carrying the bodies of protesters killed in recent days, wounding five people, activists said.
Thousands also marched in the capital Sanaa, where government troops have been clashing with army defectors who have joined the protests and armed men loyal to Yemen's most powerful tribal chief, who supports the opposition.
A medical official said a 28-year-old woman was killed in crossfire Friday in Sanaa during a gunbattle between the two sides.  

[Photo below dated November 10 shows Yemeni Muslim women rallying in San'a, urging the US-backed dictator to "leave."] 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Debunking the Iran "Terror Plot"  
by Gareth Porter
At a press conference on October 11, the Obama administration unveiled a spectacular charge against the government of Iran: The Qods Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had plotted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States, Adel al-Jubeir, right in Washington, DC, in a place where large numbers of innocent bystanders could have been killed. High-level officials of the Qods Force were said to be involved, the only question being how far up in the Iranian government the complicity went.
The US tale of the Iranian plot was greeted with unusual skepticism on the part of Iran specialists and independent policy analysts, and even elements of the mainstream media. The critics observed that the alleged assassination scheme was not in Iran's interest, and that it bore scant resemblance to past operations attributed to the foreign special operations branch of Iranian intelligence. The Qods Force, it was widely believed, would not send a person like Iranian-American used car dealer Manssor Arbabsiar, known to friends in Corpus Christi, Texas as forgetful and disorganized, to hire the hit squad for such a sensitive covert action.
But administration officials claimed they had hard evidence to back up the charge. They cited a 21-page deposition by a supervising FBI agent in the "amended criminal complaint" filed against Arbabsiar and an accomplice who remains at large, Gholam Shakuri. It was all there, the officials insisted: several meetings between Arbabsiar and a man he thought was a member of a leading Mexican drug cartel, Los Zetas, with a reputation for cold-blooded killing; incriminating statements, all secretly recorded, by Arbabsiar and Shakuri, his alleged handler in Tehran; and finally, Arbabsiar's confession after his arrest, which clearly implicates Qods Force agents in a plan to murder a foreign diplomat on US soil.
A close analysis of the FBI deposition reveals, however, that independent evidence for the charge that Arbabsiar was sent by the Qods Force on a mission to arrange for the assassination of Jubeir is lacking. The FBI account is full of holes and contradictions, moreover. The document gives good reason to doubt that Arbabsiar and his confederates in Iran had the intention of assassinating Jubeir, and to believe instead that the FBI hatched the plot as part of a sting operation.
The Case of the Missing Quotes          
The FBI account suggests that, from the inaugural meetings between Arbabsiar and his supposed Los Zetas contact, a Drug Enforcement Agency informant, Arbabsiar was advocating a terrorist strike against the Saudi embassy. The government narrative states that, in the very first meeting on May 24, Arbabsiar asked the informant about his "knowledge, if any, with respect to explosives" and said he was interested in "among other things, attacking an embassy of Saudi Arabia." It also notes that in the meetings prior to July 14, the DEA informant "had reported that he and Arbabsiar had discussed the possibility of attacks on a number of other targets," including "foreign government facilities associated with Saudi Arabia and with another country," located "within and outside the United States."
But the allegations that the Iranian-American used car salesman wanted to "attack" the Saudi embassy and other targets rest entirely upon the testimony of the DEA informant with whom he was meeting. The informant is a drug dealer who had been indicted for a narcotics violation in a US state but had the charges dropped "in exchange for cooperation in various drug investigations," according to the FBI account. The informant is not an independent source of information, but someone paid to help pursue FBI objectives.
The most suspicious aspect of the administration's case, in fact, is the complete absence of any direct quote from Arbabsiar suggesting interest in, much less advocacy of, assassinating the Saudi ambassador or carrying out other attacks in a series of meetings with the DEA informant between June 23 and July 14. The deposition does not even indicate how many times the two actually met during those three weeks, suggesting that the number was substantial, and that the lack of primary evidence from those meetings is a sensitive issue. And although the FBI account specifies that the July 14 and 17 meetings were recorded "at the direction of law enforcement agents," it is carefully ambiguous about whether or not the earlier meetings were recorded.
The lack of quotations is a crucial problem for the official case for a simple reason: If Arbabsiar had said anything even hinting in the May 24 meeting or in a subsequent meeting at the desire to mount a terrorist attack, it would have triggered the immediate involvement of the FBI's National Security Branch and its counter-terrorism division. The FBI would then have instructed the DEA informant to record all of the meetings with Arbabsiar, as is standard practice in such cases, according to a former FBI official interviewed for this article. And that would mean that those meetings were indeed recorded.
The fact that the FBI account does not include a single quotation from Arbabsiar in the June 23-July 14 meetings means either that Arbabsiar did not say anything that raised such alarms at the FBI or that he was saying something sufficiently different from what is now claimed that the administration chooses not to quote from it. In either case, the lack of such quotes further suggests that it was not Arbabsiar, but the DEA informant, acting as part of an FBI sting operation, who pushed the idea of assassinating Jubeir. The most likely explanation is that Arbabsiar was suggesting surveillance of targets that could be hit if Iran were to be attacked by Israel with Saudi connivance.
"The Saudi Arabia" and the $100,000          
The July 14 meeting between Arbabsiar and the DEA informant is the first from which the criminal complaint offers actual quotations from the secretly recorded conversation. The FBI's retelling supplies selected bits of conversation — mostly from the informant — aimed at portraying the meeting as revolving around the assassination plot. But when carefully studied, the account reveals a different story.
The quotations attributed to the DEA informant suggest that he was under orders to get a response from Arbabsiar that could be interpreted as assent to an assassination plot. For example, the informant tells Arbabsiar, "You just want the, the main guy." There is no quoted response from the car dealer. Instead, the FBI narrative simply asserts that Arbabsiar "confirmed that he just wanted the 'ambassador.'" At the end of the meeting, the informant declares, "We're gonna start doing the guy." But again, no response from Arbabsiar is quoted.
Two statements by the informant appear on their face to relate to a broader set of Saudi targets than Adel al-Jubeir. The informant tells Arbabsiar that he would need "at least four guys" and would "take the one point five for the Saudi Arabia." The FBI agent who signed the deposition explains, "I understand this to mean that he would need to use four men to assassinate the Ambassador and that the cost to Arbabsiar of the assassination would be $1.5 million." But, apart from the agent's surmise, there is no hint that either cited phrase referred to a proposal to assassinate the ambassador. Given that there had already been discussion of multiple Saudi targets, as well as those of an unnamed third country (probably Israel), it seems more reasonable to interpret the words "the Saudi Arabia" to refer to a set of missions relating to Saudi Arabia in order to distinguish them from the other target list.
Then the informant repeats the same wording, telling Arbabsiar he would "go ahead and work on the Saudi Arabia, get all the information that we can." This language does not show that Arbabsiar proposed the killing of Jubeir, much less approved it. And the FBI narrative states that the Iranian-American "agreed that the assassination of the Ambassador should be handled first."  Again, that curious wording does not assert that Arbabsiar said an assassination should be carried out first, but suggests he was agreeing that the subject should be discussed first.
The absence of any quote from Arbabsiar about an assassination plot, combined with the multiple ambiguities surrounding the statements attributed to the DEA informant, suggest that the main subject of the July 14 meeting was something broader than an assassination plot, and that it was the government's own agent who had brought up the subject of assassinating the ambassador in the meeting, rather than Arbabsiar.
The government reconstruction of the July 14 meeting also introduces the keystone of the Obama administration's public case: $100,000 that was to be transferred to a bank account that the DEA informant said he would make known to Arbabsiar. The FBI deposition asserts repeatedly that whenever Arbabsiar or the DEA informant mention the $100,000, they are talking about a "down payment" on the assassination. But the document contains no statement from either of them linking that $100,000 to any assassination plan. In fact, it provides details suggesting that the $100,000 could not have been linked to such a plan.
The FBI deposition states that the informant and Arbabsiar "discussed how Arbabsiar would pay [the informant]," but offers no statement from either individual even mentioning a "payment," or any reason for transferring the money to a bank account. Furthermore, it does not actually claim that Arbabsiar made any commitment to any action against Jubeir at either the July 14 or 17 meetings. And when the informant is quoted in the July 17 meeting as saying, "I don't know exactly what your cousin wants me to do," it appears to be an acknowledgement that he had gotten no indication prior to July 17 that Arbabsiar's Tehran interlocutors wanted the Saudi ambassador dead. The deposition does not even claim that Arbabsiar's supposed handlers had approved a plan to kill Jubeir until after the Iranian-American returned to his native country on July 20.           Nevertheless, Arbabsiar is quoted telling the informant on July 14 that the full $100,000 had already been collected in cash at the home of "a certain individual." Preparations for the transfer of the $100,000 had thus commenced well before the assassination plot allegedly got the green light.
The amount of $100,000 does not even appear credible as a "down payment" on a job that the FBI account says was to have cost a total of $1.5 million. It would represent a mere 6 percent of the full price. Bearing in mind that the DEA informant was supposed to be representing the demand of a ruthlessly profit-motivated Los Zetas drug cartel for a high-stakes political assassination well outside its purview, 6 percent of the total would represent far too little for a "down payment."
The $100,000 wire transfer must have been related to an understanding that had been reached on something other than the assassination plan. Yet it has been cited by the administration and reported by news media as proof of the plot — and key evidence of Iran's complicity therein. [2]           The Qods Force Connection           The FBI account of the July 17 meeting shows the DEA informant leading Arbabsiar into a statement of support for an assassination. The informant, obviously following an FBI script, says, "I don't know what exactly your cousin wants me to do." But the deposition notes "further conversation" following that invitation for a clear position on a proposal coming from the informant, indicating that what Arbabsiar was saying did not support the administration's allegation that assassination plot was coming from Tehran.
After the FBI evidently sought again to get the straightforward answer it was seeking, however, Arbabsiar is quoted as saying: "He wants you to kill this guy." The informant then presents a fanciful plan to bomb an imaginary restaurant in Washington where Arbabsiar was told the Saudi ambassador liked to dine twice a week and where many "like, American people" would be present. "You want me to do it outside or in the restaurant?" asks the informant, to which question the Iranian-American replies, "Doesn't matter how you do it." At another point in the conversation, Arbabsiar goes further, saying, "They want that guy done. If the hundred go with him, fuck 'em."
These statements appear at first blush to be conclusive evidence that Arbabsiar and his Iranian overseers were contracting for the assassination of Jubeir, regardless of lives lost. But there are two crucial questions that the FBI account leaves unanswered: Was Arbabsiar speaking on behalf of the Qods Force or some element of it? And if he was, was he talking about a plan that was to go into effect as soon as possible or was it understood that they were talking about a contingency plan that would only be carried out under specific circumstances?           The deposition includes several instances of Arbabsiar's bragging about a cousin who is a general, out of uniform and involved in covert external operations, including in Iraq — clearly implying that he belongs to the Qods Force. Arbabsiar is said to have claimed that the cousin and another Iranian official gave him funds for his contacts with the drug cartel. "I got the money coming," he says. Subsequently, in one of the most extensive quotations from the recorded conversations, Arbabsiar says, "This is politics, so these people they pay this government…he's got the, got the government behind him…he's not paying from his pocket." The FBI narrative identifies the person referred to here as Arbabsiar's cousin, a Qods Force officer later named as Abdul Reza Shahlai, but again, there is not a single direct quotation backing the claim. And the reference to "these people" who "pay this government" suggests that "he" is connected to a group with illicit financial ties to government officials.
This excerpt could be particularly significant in light of press reports quoting a US law enforcement official saying that Arbabsiar had offered "tons of opium" to the drug cartel and that he and the informant had discussed what the New York Times called a "side deal" on the Iranian-held narcotics. [3] If these reports are accurate, it seems possible that Arbabsiar approached Los Zetas on behalf of Iranians who control a portion of the opium being smuggled through Iran from Afghanistan, while seeking to impress the drug cartel operative with his claim to have close ties to the Qods Force through Shahlai. But if the DEA informant then pressed him to authenticate his Qods Force connection, he may have begun discussing covert operations against Iran's enemies in North America.
The only alleged evidence that Arbabsiar was speaking for Shahlai and the Qods Force is Arbabsiar's own confession, summarized in the criminal complaint. But, at minimum, that testimony was provided after he had been arrested and had a strong interest in telling the FBI what it wanted to hear.           The deposition makes much of a series of three phone conversations on October 4, 5 and 7 between Arbabsiar and someone who Arbabsiar tells his FBI handlers is Gholam Shakuri, presenting them as confirmation of the involvement of Qods Force officers in the assassination scheme. But the FBI apparently had no way of ascertaining whether the person to whom Arababsiar was talking was actually Shakuri. After the October 4 call, for example, the FBI account merely records that Arbabsiar "indicated that the person he was speaking with was Shakuri."           On their face, moreover, these conversations prove nothing. In the first of the three calls, the person at the other end of the line, whom Arbabsiar identifies to his FBI contact as Shakuri but whose identity is not otherwise established, asks, "What news…what did you do about the building?" The FBI agent again suggests, "based on my training, experience and participation in this investigation," that these queries were a "reference to the plot to murder the Ambassador and a question about its status."
But Arbabsiar is said to have claimed in his confession that he was instructed by Shakuri to use the code word "Chevrolet" to refer to the plot to kill the ambassador. In a second recorded conversation, Arbabsiar immediately says, "I wanted to tell you the Chevrolet is ready, it's ready, uh, to be done. I should continue, right?" After further exchange, the man purported to be "Shakuri" says, "So buy it, buy it." Despite the obvious invocation of a code word, it remains unclear what Arbabsiar was to "buy." "Chevrolet" could actually have been a reference to either a drug-related deal or a generic plan having to do with Saudi and other targets.
In a third recorded conversation on October 7, both Arbabsiar and "Shakuri" refer to a demand by a purported cartel figure for another $50,000 on top of the original $100,000 transferred by wire earlier. But there is no other evidence of such a demand. It appears to be a mere device of the FBI to get "Shakuri" on record as talking about the $100,000. And here it should be recalled that the account in the deposition shows that the transfer of the $100,000 had been agreed on before any indication of agreement on a plan to kill the ambassador.
The invocation of a fictional demand for $50,000, along with the dramatic difference between the first conversation and the second and third conversations, suggests yet another possibility: The second and third conversations were set up in advance by Arbabsiar to provide a transcript to bolster the administration's case.
Terrorist Plot or Deterrence Strategy?
Even if Qods Forces officials indeed directed Arbabsiar to contact the Los Zetas cartel, it cannot be assumed that they intended to carry out one or more terrorist attacks in the United States. The killing of a foreign ambassador in Washington (not to speak of additional attacks on Saudi and Israeli buildings), if linked to Iran, would invite swift and massive US military retaliation. If, on the other hand, the Qods Force men instructed Arbabsiar to conduct surveillance of those targets and prepare contingency plans for hitting them if Iran were attacked, the whole story begins to make more sense.
Iran lacks the conventional means to deter attack by a powerful adversary. In its decades-long standoffs with the United States and Israel, amidst recurrent talk of "preemptive" strikes by those powers, Iran has relied on threats of proxy retaliation against US and allied state targets in the Middle East.  The Iranian military support for Lebanon's Hizballah, in particular, is widely recognized as prompted primarily by Iran's need to deter US and Israeli attack. [5]           In one case in 1994-1995, Saudi Arabian Shi'i militants carried out surveillance of potential US military and diplomatic targets in Saudi Arabia, in a way that was quickly noticed by US and Saudi intelligence. Although the consensus among US intelligence analysts was that Iran was preparing for a terrorist attack, Ronald Neumann, then the State Department's intelligence officer for Iran and Iraq, noted that Iran had done the same thing whenever US-Iranian tensions had risen. He suggested that Iran could be using the surveillance for deterrence, to let Washington know that its interests in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere would be in danger if Iran were attacked.           Unfortunately for Iran's deterrent strategy, however, Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda was also carrying out surveillance of US bases in Saudi Arabia, and in November 1995 and again in June 1996, that group bombed two facilities housing US servicemen. The bombing of Khobar Towers in June 1996, which killed 19 US soldiers and one Saudi Arabian, was blamed by the Clinton administration's FBI and CIA leadership on Iranian-sponsored Shi'a from Saudi Arabia, with prodding from Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan, despite the fact that bin Laden claimed responsibility not once but twice, in interviews with the London-based newspaper, al-Quds al-'Arabi.
Hani al-Sayigh, one of the Saudi Arabian Shi'a accused by the Saudi and US governments of conspiring to attack the Khobar Towers, admitted to Assistant Attorney General Eric Dubelier, who interviewed him at a Canadian detention facility in May 1997, that he had participated in the surveillance of US military targets in Saudi Arabia on behalf of Iranian intelligence. But, according to the FBI report on the interview, al-Sayigh insisted that Iran had never intended to attack any of those sites unless it was first attacked by the United States. And when Dubelier asked a question later in the interview that was based on the premise that the surveillance effort was preparation for a terrorist attack, al-Sayigh corrected him.            With threats of an Israeli or US bombing attack on Iran, with Saudi complicity, mounting since the mid-2000s, a similar campaign of surveillance of Saudi and Israeli targets in North America would fit the framework of what the Pentagon has called Iran's "asymmetric warfare doctrine." If Arbabsiar spoke of such a campaign in his initial meeting with the DEA informant, he certainly would have piqued the interest of FBI counter-terrorism personnel. And this scenario would also explain why the series of meetings in late June and the first half of July did not produce a single statement by Arbabsiar that the administration could quote to advance its case that the Iranian-American was interested in assassinating Adel al-Jubeir or carrying out other acts of terrorism.
A plan to conduct surveillance and be ready to act on contingency plans would also explain why someone as lacking in relevant experience and skills as Arbabsiar might have been acceptable to the Qods Force. Not only would the mission not have required absolute secrecy; it would have been based on the assumption that the surveillance would become known to US intelligence relatively quickly, as did the monitoring of US targets in Saudi Arabia in 1994-1995.
The Qods Force officials were certainly well aware that the Drug Enforcement Agency had penetrated various Mexican drug cartels, in some cases even at the very top level. US court proceedings involving Mexican drug traffickers who were highly placed in the Sinaloa drug cartel between 2009 and early 2011 reveal that the US made deals with leaders of the cartel to report what they knew about rival cartel operations in return for a hands-off approach to their drug trafficking. [10] Further underlining the degree to which the cartels were honeycombed with people on the US payroll, the DEA informant in this case was not merely posing as a drug trafficker but is reportedly an actual associate of Los Zetas with access to its upper echelons, who has been given immunity from prosecution to cooperate with the DEA.
When Did Arbabsiar Become Part of the Sting?
The Obama administration's account of the alleged Iranian plot has Arbabsiar suddenly changing from terrorist conspirator to active collaborator with the FBI upon his September 29 arrest at John F. Kennedy Airport in New York. He is said to have provided a confession immediately upon being apprehended, after waiving his right to a lawyer, and then to have waived that right repeatedly again while being interviewed by the FBI. Then Arbabsiar cooperated in making the series of secretly recorded phone calls to someone he identified as Shakuri.           For someone facing such serious charges to provide the details with which to make the case against him, while renouncing benefit of counsel, is odd, to say the least. The official story raises questions not only about what agreement was reached between Arbabsiar and the FBI to ensure his cooperation but about when that agreement was reached.
One clue that Arbabsiar was brought into the sting operation well before his arrest is the DEA informant's demand in a September 20 phone conversation with Arbabsiar in Tehran that he either come up with half the $1.5 million total fee or come to Mexico to be the guarantee that the full amount would be paid.           Yet the FBI account of that conversation shows Arbabsiar telling the informant, without even consulting with his contacts in Tehran, "I'm gonna go over there [in] two [or] three days." Later in the same evening, he calls back to ask how long he would need to remain in Mexico. Even if Arbabsiar were as feckless as some reports have suggested, he would certainly not have agreed so readily to put his fate in the hands of the murderous Los Zetas cartel — unless he knew that he was not really in danger, because the US government would intercept him and bring him to the United States. Making the episode even stranger, Arbabsiar's confession claims that when he told Shakuri about the purported Los Zetas demand, Shakuri refused to provide any more money to the cartel, advised him against going to Mexico and warned him that if he did so, he would be on his own.
Further supporting the conclusion that Arbabsiar had become part of the sting operation before his arrest is the fact there was no reason for the FBI to pose the demand — through the DEA informant — for more money or Arbabsiar's presence in Mexico except to provide an excuse to get him out of Iran, so he could provide a full confession implicating the Qods Force and be the centerpiece of the case against Iran.           The larger aim of the FBI sting operation, which ABC News has reported was dubbed Operation Red Coalition, was clearly to link the alleged assassination plot to Qods Force officers. The logical moment for the FBI to have recruited the Iranian-American would have been right after the FBI recorded him talking about wiring money to the bank account and casually approving the idea of bombing a restaurant and before his planned departure from Mexico for Iran. The only way to ensure that Arbabsiar would come back, of course, would be to offer him a substantial amount of money to serve as an informant for the FBI during his stay in Iran, which he would receive only upon returning. If Arbabsiar had already been enlisted, of course, it would also mean the keystone of the case — the wiring of $100,000 to a secret FBI bank account — was a part of the FBI sting.
FBI Trickery in Terrorism Cases          
FBI deceit in constructing a case for an Iranian terror plot should come as no surprise, given its record of domestic terrorism prosecutions based on sting operations involving entrapment and skullduggery. Central to these stings has been the creation of fictional terrorist plots by the FBI itself. In 2006 the "Gonzales Guidelines" for the use of FBI informants removed previous prohibitions on actions to "initiate a plan or strategy to commit a federal, state or local offense."
Perhaps the most notorious of all these domestic terrorism sting operations is the case in which Yassin Aref and Mohammed Hossain, leaders of their Albany, New York mosque, were sentenced to 15 years in federal prison for allegedly laundering profits from the sale of a shoulder-launched missile for a Pakistani militant group that was planning to assassinate a Pakistani diplomat in New York City.
In fact, there was no such terrorist plot, and the alleged crime was the result of an elaborate FBI scam directed against two innocent men. It began when an FBI informant pretending to be a Pakistani businessman insinuated himself into Hossain's life and extended him a $50,000 loan for his pizza parlor. Only months after the informant had begun loaning the money did he show Hossain a shoulder-launched missile, and suggest that he was also selling arms to his "Muslim brothers." It was a devious form of entrapment; the prosecutors later argued that Hossain should have known the loan could have come from money made in the sale of weapons to terrorists and was therefore guilty of money laundering.
The FBI approach to entrapping Hossain's friend Aref was even more underhanded. Aref was never even made aware of the missile or the phony story of the illegal arms sale. But on one occasion, when he was present to witness the transfer of loan money, what was later said to have been the missile's trigger system was left on a table in the room. Prosecutors then argued the theory that Aref had seen the trigger, which looks much like a staple gun, and thus had become part of a conspiracy to "assist in money laundering."
Many other domestic terrorism cases have involved deceptive tactics and economic inducements deployed by the FBI to involve American Muslims in fictional terrorist plots. The Center for Human Rights and Global Justice at New York University's Law School found more than 20 terrorism cases that involved some combination of "paid informants, selection of investigation based on perceived religious identity, [and] a plot that was created by the government." This history makes it clear that the Justice Department and FBI are prepared to go to extraordinary lengths to fabricate terrorism cases against targeted individuals, and that misrepresenting these individuals' intentions and actual behavior has long been standard practice. The trickery and deceit in past "counter-terrorism" sting operations provides further reason to question the veracity of the Obama administration's allegations in the bizarre case of Manssor Arbabsiar.

GARETH PORTER  is an investigative historian and journalist with Inter-Press Service specialising in U.S. national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, "Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam", was published in 2006.
  My thanks to the Middle East Research and Information Project 
--------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Do Muslims know that Sects are Prohibited in Islam? 
Compiled by Ehtesham Khan [Chicago] 

1. Muslims Should be United   
It is a fact that Muslims today, are divided amongst themselves. The tragedy is that such divisions are not endorsed by Islam at all. Islam believes in fostering unity amongst its followers.  
The Glorious Qur'ân says: "And hold fast, all together, by the rope which Allaah (stretches out for you), and be not divided among yourselves" [Al-Qur'ân 3:103]
Which is the rope of Allaah that is being referred to in this verse? It is the Glorious Qur'ân. The Glorious Qur'ân is the rope of Allah which all Muslims should hold fast together. There is double emphasis in this verse. Besides saying 'hold fast all together' it also says, 'be not divided'.
Qur'ân further says,  
"Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger" [Al-Qur'ân 4:59]
All the Muslim should follow the Qur'ân and authentic Ahaadeeth and be not divided among themselves.
 
2. It is Prohibited to make sects and divisions in Islaam
The Glorious Qur'ân says: "As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: Their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did." [Al-Qur'ân 6:159]
In this verse Allah (swt) says that one should disassociate oneself from those who divide their religion and break it up into sects.
But when one asks a Muslim, "who are you?", the common answer is either 'I am a Sunni, or 'I am Shia'. Some call themselves Hanafi, or Shafi or Maliki or Hanbali. Some say 'I am aDeobandi', while some others say 'I am a Barelvi'.
 
 
One may ask such Muslims, "Who was our beloved prophet (pbuh)? Was he a Hanafi or aShafi, or a Hanbali or a Maliki?" No! He was a Muslim, like all the other prophets and messengers of Allah before him.
 
It is mentioned in chapter 3 verse 52 of Al-Qur'ân that Jesus (pbuh) was a Muslim.
 
Further, in chapter 3 verse 67, Al-Qur'ân says that Ibrahim (pbuh) was not a Jew or a Christian but was a Muslim. 
 
 
 
4. Qur'ân says call yourselves Muslim
 
a. If anyone poses a Muslim the question who are you, he should say "I am a MUSLIM, not aHanafi or a Shafi". Surah Fussilat chapter 41 verse 33 says "Who is better in speech than one who calls (men) to Allah, works righteousness, and says, 'I am of those who bow in Islaam (Muslim)?' " [Al-Qur'ân 41:33]
 
The Qur'ân says "Say I am of those who bow in Islam". In other words, say, "I am a Muslim".
 
b. The Prophet (pbuh) dictated letters to non-Muslim kings and rulers inviting them to accept Islam. In these letters he mentioned the verse of the Qur'ân from Surah Ali Imran chapter 3 verse 64:   
Say ye: "Bear witness That we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah's Will)."[Al-Qur'ân 3:64]
 
5. Respect all the Great Scholars of Islaam
 
We must respect all the great scholars of Islam, including the four Imaams, Imaam Abu HanifaImaam ShafiImaam Hanbal and Imaam Malik (may Allah be pleased with them all). They were great scholars and may Allah reward them for their research and hard work. One can have no objection if someone agrees with the views and research of Imam Abu Hanifa or Imam Shafi, etc. But when posed a question, 'who are you?', the reply should only be 'I am a Muslim'.
 
6. Some may argue by quoting the hadeeth of our beloved Prophet from Sunan Abu Dawood Hadeeth No. 4579. In this hadeeth the prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, "My community will be split up into seventy-three sects."
 
This hadeeth reports that the prophet predicted the emergence of seventy-three sects. He did not say that Muslims should be active in dividing themselves into sects. The Glorious Qur'ân commands us not to create sects. Those who follow the teachings of the Qur'ân and Sahih Hadeeth, and do not create sects are the people who are on the true path.
 
According to Tirmidhi Hadeeth No. 171, the prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, "My Ummah will be fragmented into seventy-three sects, and all of them will be in Hell fire except one sect." The companions asked Allah's messenger which group that would be. Whereupon he replied, "It is the one to which I and my companions belong."
 
The Glorious Qur'ân mentions in several verses, "Obey Allah and obey His Messenger". A true Muslim should only follow the Glorious Qur'ân and the Sahih Hadeeth. He can agree with the views of any scholar as long as they conform to the teachings of the Qur'ân and Sahih Hadeeth. If such views go against the Word of Allah, or the Sunnah of His Prophet, then they carry no weight, regardless of how learned the scholar might be. 
 
If only all Muslims read the Qur'ân with understanding and adhere to Sahih Hadeeth, Inshallaah most of these differences would be solved and we could be one united Muslim Ummah 


"0, our Lord! We have wronged our souls a great wrong, and none forgiveth sins save Thou alone. Then forgive us and have mercy on us. Verily, Thou art the oft Forgiving, and most Merciful." (Al Baqarah)
 
*Duniya is for Test, Aakhirat is for rest, Life is only best when Quran is in our chests* 

 
MAY ALLAH GUIDE US AND SHOW US THE STRAIGHT PATH (AMEEN)
 
 

No comments:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...