Sunday, October 25, 2009

9/11: The Untold Truth

Close to a decade has elapsed since we witnessed those incredible visuals on TV of the twin towers in New York crashing down to earth. The henchmen involved in the attack have been taken for dead in the suicide attacks, save for their masters, long believed to be the hard-core Islamic terrorist organization, Al Qaeda and the man supposed to be at its helm, Osama Bin Laden. At the time the FBI declared Bin Laden as the mastermind of the carnage, their were more than a few skeptics with eyebrows raised in incredulity, and not unnaturally, at the deduction of the investigative agencies. It was simply hard to digest the fact that a few men hiding in the desolate mountainous terrains of an equally desolate country could gain access to the resources that were employed in the highly sophisticated operation. Anyway, the conclusion was arrived at, and accepted by the world at large, and gave the Americans the license to run over any part of the world where they felt the ‘suspects’ were holed up. Two wars and a lot of destruction and death followed. The American government rode on the world-wide sympathy wave that the 9/11 attacks evoked, and began to visualize Al Qaeda and Bin Laden in every place they coveted, but could not have otherwise invaded.

With the American citizen suitably pacified, the UN conveniently subjugated and the rest of the world persuaded to ‘see’ the American point of view, the world moved on. Afghanistan, Iraq, Guantamo Bay and all those weapons of mass destruction that were never found in Iraq have all but faded from the senses and sensibilities of everybody except those caught in those dreaded areas, when a whole new version of 9/11 has sprung up in the news space and the internet. This time it is a theory that is more credible and more in consonance with the train of events before, during and after the 9/11 attacks. An article by Sean McBride (the author is a discussant in newsgroups investigating CIA involvement in drug-trade), “9 11: A Mossad False Flag Operation” that is all over the internet has injected new life into the 9/11 saga. According to this theory, the whole 9/11 operation was planned and conducted by the powerful Israeli intelligence agency, Mossad, in collusion with high profile Jewish personalities in the US and the CIA. The most sensational revelation of all is that George W Bush himself was privy to the whole operation much before its execution. The article states that Osama Bin Laden is a high profile Mossad agent who was used in the guise of an Al Qaeda Jehadist, a perfect cover for the Mossad and their American confederates. The startling revelations continue to flow as the document states that the abductors on board the hijacked planes were recruited by Bin Laden for the job of just hijacking the planes, NOT FOR FLYING THEM. In fact, the hijackers were not even aware that they have been sent to their death on a suicide mission. The planes were directed by remote control from the ground into predetermined floors on both the towers of the WTC where special thermal explosives (to intensify the heat produced in an explosion) were already planted beforehand. This surely explains the precision with which the planes struck the towers. Controlling aircraft from the ground is nothing new for the Israelis and the Americans.

The Mossad angle of 9/11 fits in very nicely with a number of other facts that have relation to the event. Firstly, none of the planners or perpetrators of the ghastly attacks were ever caught post 9/11. Secondly, the then US President, Bush, showed no surprise on receiving the news of the attacks (very reminiscent of the lack of surprise on Indira Gandhi’s countenance when she was informed of Sanjay Gandhi’s death in an accident). Secondly, the US government seems to be deliberately toning down the importance of capturing Osama Bin Laden by labeling him a “pesky parasite”, a climb-down from the days immediately after 9/11, when he was declared Mr Satan. In fact, George Bush has publicly exhorted the American people to “forget” about Bin Laden. So, did Bush want the American people to forget the 9/11 attacks as just another “event”? Or, was the capture of Bin Laden about to bring forth dangerous revelations of the role of the US government and the CIA in the whole affair? Thirdly, the attackers made sure that no Jewish person was killed in the attack, although it later emerged that one Jewish person was killed among the hundreds that perished. One Jewish company shifted its offices from the WTC just ONE DAY before the attacks. All Israelis were informed of the attack through the internet TWO HOURS before it actually happened. Fourthly, and not the least of them all, hundreds of Israelis were seen celebrating on rooftops in New York City immediately after the attacks were carried out.

It is certainly no secret that the Jews unofficially control America, and it is no secret either that many of the top personalities in the US administration are of Jewish origin. Some of these personalities are definitely sympathetic to the Zionist agendas of the Mossad and other ruthless Jewish ethnic groups in Israel and the US. An operation of the scale and ruthlessness of 9/11 is definitely not beyond these people.

Now, the question that pops up is not whether this theory of involvement of the Mossad and the Israelis and the American presidential forces in the 9/11 affair is true or not. The question is, what if it is? The way the American government is repeatedly attempting to erase the memories of the event from public memory and the way the American investigative agencies are making all out efforts to scuttle any suspicion in the established and accepted theory of the 9/11 conspiracy, it certainly reeks of some rotten business afoot. There is hardly any doubt that, if proven, this theory would not only turn the common perception of the 9/11 attacks upside down, in addition to spelling doom for George W Bush and his cronies, but would also make an irreparable dent in America’s image in the world. However, if left under the carpet, such truths are going to cause more pain for the American people in the not-too-distant future. Americans have to come to terms with the hard truth that their security is being threatened not by a group of Islamists living in caves in some remote corner of the planet but by some of their very own in whom they have entrusted the safety of their loved ones.

The Peace Nobel: A Decadence of Nobility?

Consistency is not an attribute that can be strictly associated with all human beings, however emancipated those human beings may be. Whatever is noble can never be guaranteed to get nobler or, at the least, to stay as noble. It is unfortunate that the nobility of the Nobel Prize for Peace has been the latest victim of this fickle trait. There is no doubting the fact that puzzling rationale has often been applied in the selection of awardees for the Nobel Peace Prize. Yet, the choice of Barack Obama for the 2009 award surpasses many a farcical selection.

Barack Obama was rightly and pleasantly surprised (‘astonished’ might be more apposite) to have found himself a Nobel awardee one fine morning. The arguments of the Nobel committee in favor of the strange decision have been based on the premise that Obama has taken ‘decisive’ steps in the direction of attaining world peace. A hardly cogent argument that, considering that Obama is yet an infant in the field of world politics, still in search of his first major achievement in any direction. There is no doubting the nobility of Obama’s intentions, which are amply reflected in his honest and eloquent oratory, but noble intentions alone do not a peaceful world make, and that is one fact that should not have escaped the members of the Nobel Prize committee. On the one hand, elaborate (although utterly unconvincing) reasons have been put forward over the years for excluding Mahatma Gandhi from the list of awardees while on the other, specious arguments (again thoroughly unconvincing) have been made to suffice to award the prize to a person whose role model is none other than the great Mahatma. It is almost akin to awarding a gold medal to a player even before he or she has even played the game. It is difficult to imagine, even by stretching one’s imagination to its wildest limits, that Obama’s gesture of halting the European Missile Defence programme and a few speeches elucidating the need for communal harmony are greater than Gandhiji’s four-decade long, non-violent struggle for freedom from the autocratic and racist rule of the British. One is inclined to think that the 2009 awardee has been arrived upon either in a moment of insanity or with a thought to ingratiate the powerful head of a powerful state.

For long, the Nobel Prize has been considered the ultimate award for supreme human intellectual achievement. The award has attained its stature not because of its name or its value but because of its history of fairness and impartiality. The Nobel committees have to keep in mind the huge responsibility of preserving the nobility and stature of the award in making their decisions. In awarding a Nobel to a person just on the basis of his stature or popularity without any regard to his actual accomplishments will irreparably undermine the grandeur of the award. Flippant decisions on the part of a few frivolous minds were certainly not the purport that the great founder of this great award had in mind.

Friday, October 2, 2009

Gandhi's India - A Vision Distorted

Visuals flashing across news channels today reminded me and many other Indians that the time has come once again to spare a moment of our lives to reminisce over the greatness of the Father of The Nation. As I watched the ceremonial homage being paid to the Mahatma by the various political leaders and their well-rehearsed speeches in praise of Bapu’s principles and values, I found myself unable yet again to ward off strong thoughts of cynicism from intruding inexorably into my mind. The bevy of political bigwigs making a beeline at Raj Ghat looked so much like a shameless exhibition of hypocrisy that the solemn occasion lost all its austerity in my eyes. Mahatma Gandhi gave himself up for the cause of an India free from the reins of imperialism. That he achieved his dream of living in an Independent India, that too without having to indulge in or abet any form of violence was an incredible feat in itself; a feat that should have heralded the beginning of a new India built on the foundation of the very values that secured its independence. Half a century on, the picture that independent India presents to the world is not one the great Mahatma would have envisaged. In spite of all the brouhaha over the surge in economic prosperity, a truer picture would be that of a rotting core lacquered with the glitz of development of an elite minority. The values of a country, which was borne of non-violence and unity in diversity, are being continually eroded by the unscrupulous and the ruthless. Politics and governance are steeped in crime and corruption like never before. Human life has never been so dispensable; religion and caste never so segregated; leaders never so insensate to the sufferings of the laity.

India has always been the source of great spiritual thought, starting from Gautama Buddha to Mahatma Gandhi (and many more in between). Barack Obama’s open admiration of Mahatma Gandhi and his principles bear ample evidence of the fact that the message of the Father of our nation is still alive in this world. Yet, the same noble values emanating from India that have been embraced and appreciated all over the world have been lost on the people of India itself. Today, truthfulness and honesty are regarded to be the assets of the timid. Non-violence is a principle that adorns the nostalgic discussions of people in the throes of their advancing years. Even the most optimistic of Indians will find it extremely hard to disagree that, peering through the flimsy veil of prosperity, one can see an India that is being continuously eaten away by a parasitic system. Selfishness, greed and complacency among the powers-that-be and the helplessness of the common man doesn’t augur well for the country’s future.

Mahatma Gandhi today is no more than a block of stone, a wall hanging or a statue of a stooping old man, a thing of display rather than of any relevance. The ostentatious show of remembrance and homage on this day every year is nothing short of mockery of everything that Mahatma Gandhi stood for. If only statues could weep, we would have seen quite a few droplets trickle down those stone-cold cheeks already.

Trapped in The Web

With the turn of the century, I graduated from inland letter cards to email; from landlines to mobiles; and from social visits to socia...