Evidence that Mumbai attacks were anglo-american operatives

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Jezus

 

The advancement of democratically elected governments around the world has lead to greater and greater freedoms of the masses. First of all, a free man must be able to feed, clothe, and provide shelter for himself and his family. In the developed nations, these are extremely easy things to do. Secondly, what is most important to a free man is his ability to develop his own ideals, express his ideals, and congregate to expand those ideals. These abilities did not exist but for a very fraction of men before 1776, but since then, those abilities have spread around the globe.

Obviously you have no clue what is means to be free or to be a slave.

Had to comment on this. To answer your first point of people being able to feed and clothes themselves proving that we are free, this is absurd for many reasons. Food and shelter may have to do with quality of life, but they have ZERO coorelation to freedom.

First, many people in the pre modern democratic era had many troubles feeding and clothing themselves at points, yet they were not slaves, and in fact had near total freedom. A person native to the land that has no government can starve to death without being a slave, can they not?

Also, most slaves in the conventional use of the term had food and shelter. Now I know your answer will be, "yeah but they didn't provide it for themselves, they were reliant on their masters". So ask yourself this, is this any different for people in the developed world today? The vast majority of the people in the developed world totally rely on the government and huge corporations for all of their food needs.

Before this great development that you are praising, most people worked in agricultural in these developed countries, and were self-sufficient for their food and clothing. So it would seem to me that if your point about being able to feed and clothe yourself gives you more freedom, then clearly less developed countries have more freedom. In fact, many people feel the reliance of government in the developing world actually is another form of slavery, just it is now wage based. (see Michelle Foucault's writings on biopower)

Again, you may think that the quality of life in these countries would be so much worse to justify the giving up of freedom, but that still goes against your point of more developed being more free.

As to your second point about people being able to express their ideals more, this too is questionable. While it would seem that a person who can vote would live in a society that was more open to individual ideals, this seems to not necessarily be the case.

As pointed out above, people that lived without governments obviously had more ability to express their own ideals than even the best modern democracies. Based on the values you have mentioned, I'm sure you would find this the ideal situation.

There are other problems. Like do people actually have a voice, in even democracies? The majority of people in the US for example vehemently opposed the governments wanton wasting of their tax dollars with the bailout, yet it went through anyways. It seems the only ideals that one is free to express are ones that don't directly interfere with the governments agenda.

Also in this vein, how much of a choice do people really have when voting. In the US, we may choose between two parties that are legally lobbied to, with the highest bidder almost always getting the party to pass laws favorable to them. It seems that again the people only have a voice in matters that the people with money and power don't care about.

A worse problem is how becoming developed was forced on countries. Many economists and intellectuals of developing countries have claimed that the developed worlds insistence on helping their countries develop have made them dependent on the developed world for their livelihood, and hence have forcibly stripped their ideals. (its late but if you message me I can post cites for this).

At the end of the day, it seems as if you are saying that life is more comfortable today because the world is developed, and you are willing to sacrifice your freedom for that comfort. I'm not saying this makes you a bad person, I'm just saying that if you are truly concerned with freedom, your stance makes little sense. This leads me to one conclusion:

Obviously you have no clue what is means to be free or to be a slave.

reply to post by Grambler


Umm, you should have read the post I was replying to, before replying to my post.

My point that people who are free is in response to jesuses claim that

You have to feed, clothe, and house prisoners and slaves.

Anyone who wants to continue to live has to feed and clothe themselves, especially people who live in freedom.

The BIG point, is that if you want to be free, you first have to be able to take care of yourself. People who must devote basically every minute of their lives just to survive are not free, You massively fanned that one.

If your entire life is occupied with survival, you aren't free, you live like an animal.

The second part, you even screwed up more. Back before 1776, taking publicly bad about the King, or whatever monarch ruled over the land you occupied would get you killed, most likely publicly tortured and then killed, and your family sold off into slavery. In the free nations of the world, you can say bad things about the leaders, you can walk around outside of the capital with a sign condeming the government.

If you can't see how this makes a difference, you are clueless.

If you don't recognize the importance of being able to speak out against ones own government, then you have no perspective of history, or understanding of what it means to be a free man or a slave.

We don't force people to want the advantages of modern civilization. People of the third world want to be able to live like people in the first world. It is the leaders of the third world, the brutal dictators who do not want the people of the third world to have what the people of the first world enjoy. You have bought into the propaganda lies of the ruthless leaders of the third world. That is how lost you are.


[edit on 2-12-2008 by poet1b]

There is evidence that America warned that this event happened and there is now evidence that it came from Pakistan with the same mindset of Jihad ideology which is spawned in the Afghan=Pakistan boarders which the Pakistan government don't want the Americans to interfere with. Well India got some of the surprise pie, let India sort out Pakistan now, while America is trying to fight the Taliban and extremist hideouts in those boarders and they are told not to the effect will be on the rest of the world, India’s tourism has been hit and so have their pride.

Not everything is a conspiracy sometimes its just maths.

[edit on 2-12-2008 by The time lord]

Almost all of this is the conspiracy that was hatched a long time ago. The CIA/ISI is setting this one up to start a war between India and Pakistan. We are going to bomb Iran and we want justification to enter or set up Pakistan. simple answer.

Originally posted by poet1b
You have bought into the propaganda lies of the ruthless leaders...

That is some ironic irony....

Everything you write about is completely irrelevant. Increased technologies and supposedly democratic elections do not equal freedom.

Originally posted by checkitb4uwreckit
I have no trust in any mainstream media source it is all propaganda....
so what other source do i have left?

Obviously you have an "alternate" news source which has no solid foundation or a path that leads toward facts.

Ahh well it passes the time for you, no?

reply to post by checkitb4uwreckit


There's a minor problem with your analysis; the media didn't "instantly" claim this terroristic act was connected to al-queda. What they immediately assumed was that the attackers were Muslim and they speculated that they were connected to Pakistan.

Assuming and speculating by the way aren't the same as lying, except to professional conspiracy theorists. But next we'll see that this "false flag" operation was ordered by Darth Cheney and his padiwan Lord Bush. I guess extreme hatred of Bush does cause paranoia among liberals.

Does it really matter what etnicity or religion these guys were from? How can knowing their etnicity or religion contribute any positive to the already disasterouse situation in that area. You guys sound like a bunch of low life morons with alot of time in your hands which allow you to speculate on every news headline out there.

How does speculation solve the problem? How does knowing their etnicity solve the problem? How can knowing their religion solve the problem? Do you guys even know the problem? Are you guys educated individuals? Because none of you sound like one.

Last question: Do they teach you problem solving in your schooling system around your area? If so take a class, all of you.

The only truth is that the CIA and ISI are setting up WWIII. The entire headlines are set ups to lead us to the One World Government that was planned exactly 1 May 1776, two months before the Declaration of Independence. this was a ruse to get a war started, establish economic control in the new World as designed by Adam Weishaupt and planned in detail also by Rothschilds. It has lasted father to son up to this day, collecting 13 families of the Illuminati.......that will soon come to the one world leader and world wide dicatorship. This is an irrefutable truth that is supported by facts, documents, quotes, history, and many more points of evidence. The final act will be one more major incident, much death, declaration of martial law, and a formation of a world government.

reply to post by Night Watchman


www.youtube.com...

I can attach many such links from you tube which showcase live conversations between the Indian media and the Pakistani terrorists - so that any one who is familiar with the Punjabi accent can tell that these terrorists are from nowhere close to South of India - who have such distinctively different accents that the rest of India has some times trouble understanding them.

Why doesn't someone mention that the news report that speculated that this attack was a US/UK effort was:
1. Done by the English speaking wing of the Al-Jazeera network - not the BBC
2. In the same breath, they agreed that 9/11 was orchestrated by the American CIA
3. Pakistan does not have any ties with Al Q or Taliban
4. Pakistan is a democracy

What a joke - Pakistan's prime ministerial candidate Benazir Bhutto, was assassinated few months ago. Pervez Musharraf took over in a coup - not a bloodless one. Zia ul Haq, when he was president of Pakistan, was killed. The list could go on and on - Pakistan is a country that has never had a stable government but they love to go India bashing. India has a stable government for the last 60 years, has had no coups and is a growing economy. India also has people from many faiths living in large numbers.

Pakistan's one big complain against India seems to be the mistreatment of Muslims in India. Then pray tell me why is the movie industry, one of the largest and wealthiest in the world, is run exclusively by Muslims in India? How come a Muslim became India's president and Pakistan has never had even a Sunni, Bahai, Ahmediyya President or Prime Minister since its independence? How come the percentage of minorities REDUCED since 1947 from 18% to less than 2% in Pakistan in the last 60 years when the population has drastically increased? Mass genocide - but you will not hear about that in any media.

Westerners typically have no idea or notion of reality when it comes to India - a country that is akin to a continent. With their pre-conceived media-spinned notions, they comment or make opinions on subjects about which they have little or no understanding. Ask someone in the West who has been to India and they usually talk about good things - yes, it is a poor country so what do you expect? There are 400 million in India without electricity even today but we produce achievers in almost every field regularly - Dr. Sanjay Gupta is a good example. Walk into an American hospital and chances are you will bump into an Indian doctor - who may be a woman. What are the chances of meeting a woman who is a Pakistani doctor working in the west? Extremely rare. Women are treated worse than cattle in Pakistan but that does not get coverage from the media. Meanwhile, please notice all around you how well Indian women are typically brought up - if you can judge characters, walk up to one and start talking.

I will rest my case here. Please investigate before you speak. I grew up with Pakistan regularly attacking India and it is hurtful today to even suggest that after live video - like the one I have attached from a place I have visited thousands of times - can be refuted in favor of a fanciful theory.

in.youtube.com...

Please watch this video and appreciate how Pakistan is all about killing creativity.

how come allmost everybody seems to be convinced the perps where muslims? The Terrorism - Muslim tune seems to have caught on bigtime.

Has everybody forgotten how the Brits sent in a couple spec-ops dressed native, carrying eplosives to 'emulate' sectarian violence in Iraq? (I think it was in Basra, not 100% sure)

They fired upon police forces and where captured, and subsequently bust out of jail by the army who laid siege to the facility, killing Iraqi law enforcers during the process.. I bet those where not muslim, either.

reply to post by resistor


Urdu, not HIndi. Both sound the same and this is not obvious to every person. Urdu is nothing but a form of Hindi which uses the identical grammatical structure but replaces Indian words with Arabic, Farsi, Turkish and Pushtu words. Most verbs are even used identically. Do your research b4 you speak.

reply to post by Jinni


Obviously, while discussing Kashmir, most Muslims, leave alone the rest of the people, have no idea what Kashmiri Muslims were like. They were a unique type of people-
- Their women do not cover their faces but the Taliban has been regularly throwing acid on uncovered women's faces. Taliban, not Indian govt.
- They worship Hindu gods along with Allah. So they can't be really termed as "Mulsims", can they?
- They actively participate in all Indian Hindu festivals.
- They have traditionally had priests who can perform Hindu and Muslim rituals and marriages.

There is no universal Muslim brotherhood. It is a myth. Saudis consider themselves better Muslims than anyone else. So-called Muslims all over the world try to appease them by growing beards, dressing like them, covering up their women and generally try to go along with pop-Muslim practices.

The attacks on Mumbai were performed by Islamic militants. Whether they were from Pakistan or not, is not the point. Many Muslims living in India consider themselves more loyal to Pakistan than their homeland. They bear and spread this antipathy among their fellow faith followers. Is this right or wrong? I will leave you to judge.

The world needs to converge on the terrorist threat that Pakistan is, not India, which is helping the growth in global economy. GE and Bank of America, to name two of many, have their back offices in India, not Pakistan or Indonesia or Bangladesh. Foreign investment in the soft sector comes to India. But Pakistan gets 100s of millions of dollars as aid which it uses to fuel more terrorist tension in India. Kashmir is not an issue, the people of Kashmir are not anything like the people in Pakistan so to claim that is insanity. It is like saying that an Iranian Shiah Muslim is the same as that of an Indonesian Shiah Muslim. They are nothing alike. When will people learn to think?

Hey,
The investigation in Mumbai, according to media says that they received several calls from Pakistan. People from Pakistan were constantly in contact with them. My friend even saw one guy, was speaking on phone, having plain normal expressions, and shooting people on the railway station one after another randomly. Even when you shoot birds, the nerves and muscles on your face get quenched, but these guys were just as usual as spraying water in the garden.

They came from Pakistan through the sea, by hijacking and changing boats, the marine investigators say.
But who knows, I am also thinking the west is involved. Because the provision of accurate timing, place, getting in to corners that even locals didn't knew about., possibly mind control devices used,
points to the involvement of the West.




[edit on 3-12-2008 by Neutron]

reply to post by cognoscente


Thanks for providing the best description of the majority of people in the US regarding the wars I have heard since 911. The people didn’t decide, it was the government. Although the people elected the government. What can we do when they make drastic decisions once they are in office?

Correct me if anyone has heard differently, but on some lamestream TV channel the official word is that there were only 10 gunmen, and 9 of them died, yet, in the horribly understated way they always do, they said the terrorists "probably had accomplices in the city." # * ^!

What's happening to the young, very novice-looking surviving gun"man" right now? Shouldn't we have been made very well aware of at least his NAME? Shouldn't his every word and move be in the media by now? Well, in a sufficiently civilized paradigm... From what little I know of the event as yet, it looks like the best way to begin proving the whole # was a false flag op is in the obvious weakness, opposition-strengthening meaninglessness (Oswald syndrome) of the psycho geek boy in custody.

Then again, it also seems possible that the fact that, since there were (presumably) 9 who were willing to give their lives and did, there could have been some twisted form of actual religion as the basis of it, but I'd bet big that their specific mission at that specific time was because of a specific motivation; not any vague claim of religion in general (if in fact religiously motivated). If necessary, I apologize for the long one-liner.

reply to post by checkitb4uwreckit


if u think Muslims don't drink specially the terrorist , search the terror camps in Pakistan there u will get to know whether Muslims drinks or not grow up men, and the captured terrorist in India is telling that he is the civilian of Pakistan ,and the FBI tracked the email sent to Indian govt which is originally sent in Pakistan by changing the server into Russia ,and the Pakistani agency's are are planned this attack to stop the tourism of India , to stop the economic growth of India and the growing better relation with U.S.A . well this is actually hurting the ISI and Pakistani army.

AND SHOWING UNITY

The Muslim community in Mumbai says it doesn't want the gunmen who attacked Mumbai to be buried in the Muslim cemetery, on the grounds that they are not Muslims.

And i am telling seriously if Pakistan violates the cease fire with India again they (Pakistanis ) are going to pay a heavy price for that , i request Pakistan to stop sending terrorist again India to their better future of their civilians.

i am not anti Muslim , i respect ISLAM ,but i hat bad things

thank you for reading this article [ reply me ]

thank you
mr.M79

Times Online reporting as follows

Police are also investigating a possible link to the United States – a mobile SIM card found with the terrorists which possibly came from New Jersey. "Nothing is confirmed, but we are looking at this and have made enquiries with mobile operators," Mr Maria said

Source to article