Beware of the real lies

The establishment in Washington, its media and allies didn’t lie about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That was outright bullying the world, particularly those who refused to go knee deep in innocent blood.

Their actual lies are far deadly and more malicious. Unfortunately, the real lies, which they continue to tell, are still believed by most of the Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

It was a well known fact that there were no WMD. Everyone knew that from the day one. The millions who marched in streets, published articles and sent petitions knew it all along. They have not been deceived or cheated. They were simply bullied along with the United Nations which for the first time in its life, indicated that it good for approving silent genocides, but not the blazing “shock and awe” adventures

Now that the US is officially acknowledging that it has lied about Iraqi WMD, very few realize that this admission is, in fact, a cover to hide two things:

1) The single most important motivating factor that forced the US into the latest round of invasions and occupations.

2) The real lies that help the war lords in the US manufacture public consent for keeping these wars going.

The single most motivating factor behind all these adventures is holding Muslims from living by Islam. This objective is now being publicly acknowledged. However, it is done with a mix of deadly lies to make their objective look very benign and in the benefit of the humanity.

The US administration started the real adventures of chicanery and deceit when the Taliban declared Afghanistan as an Islamic Emirate and the Qur’an as its constitution. That was the real wake-up call for the war lords in the West whose work is totally independent of Bush, Clinton or someone else in the power.

Of course, the Taliban were neither perfect, nor able to implement living by Islam in a proper way without recognition by other Muslim states at least, external assistance and full support from those who could help them set up a basic governing mechanism. They had to start from the scratch, immediately after 15 years’ of bloodshed an unbelievable devastation.

The shell-shocked war lords in Washington immediately put their thought mills into ceaseless activity to one way or the other hold Afghanistan from becoming a model Islamic state. The issue was not the Taliban, but Islam. Lies against the Taliban started pouring in. This war of words was complemented with infiltration of the Taliban ranks with CIA agents, non-recognition, support to Northern Alliance and different kinds of sanctions.

People with as high religious status as Mufti Abdur Rahim from Pakistan were bought over by the CIA to undermine the Taliban’s rule and make them blunders that could bolster the neo-cons’ propaganda against Islam.

The underground Lashkars (militant operatives) of these so-called Muftis and apparent friends of the Taliban were so strong in Pakistan that despite obtaining evidence of their leaders’ collaboration with the CIA, writers could not expose the Muftis’ dealing in the press without jeopardizing their own lives. That’s why the writers could give only reference but not real names of these black sheep.[1]

Multi-million dollar organizations, such as Al-Rashid Trust of Mufti-Abdur Rashid, were co-opted into working for the CIA. Mufti Abdur Rashid was at death bed, but his name was exploited by his associates like Mufti Abdur Rahim. Their investment in erecting on sign boards in Afghanistan was way more than the actual humanitarian assistance they claimed to be providing to the needy Afghans.

The real objectives of the CIA-funded infiltrating organizations were to misguide the gullible Taliban in the guise of Muftis and sheikhs. [2] The Taliban’s innocent crowd took them for saints, but these sell-out Musftis were good enough to make them do whatever they wanted.

The Taliban destroyed the statues in Bamiyan. These Muftis actually convinced the Taliban to ban photography but exempted themselves from the ban. They brought photographers form their CIA-funded Newspaper Zarbe-e-momin to take pictures of the operation for statue-destruction. [3]

The proof of these facts lies in the US declaring Al-Rashid Trust a terrorist outfit days after 9/11 and days before invading Afghanistan because it could no longer sustain the funding and other support to it when the real objective was achieved.

In short, the Taliban were incapable, inexperienced and totally unprepared for achieving what they wanted to achieve. Out of all the problem, only the systematic lies from the war lords in Washington broke their back.

Taliban have been removed but what their promotion and subsequent deionization has achieved will help the war lords to go a long way. Their lies continue to perpetuate. They have become bedrock for what General Abizaid calls a "Long War."

Wherever, there is a reference to Muslims struggle to live by Islam, the same lies are paraded to remind the world that whenever and wherever there is a community living by Islam, it would look like the Taliban’s crowd in action. With such a picture of the Taliban, nothing comes to mind except the lies dutifully prepared and systematically disseminated by the "mainstream media" in the US.

The same liars somehow staged 9/11 and paved the way for the already planned invasion of Afghanistan.

While consequences of bullying in the name of WMD are still unfolding, the media and war lords on the political front are busy in adding more deadly lies to what they had started against Islam years ago. Just like the Taliban happened to become the scapegoats, this time the scapegoats are the determined individuals whose prime objective is to throw the occupiers out.

We need to keep the mysterious killing of Neck Berg and associated video and the attacks of churches in mind to understand how work is underway to portray the freedom fighters as inhuman savages and the GIs who have killed more than 100,000 people, as kind liberators.

The crusader neocons, however, feel that if they lose in installing secular puppet regimes in Muslim countries, their adventures could backfire and lead to the emergence of an Islamic states. They are now tangled in their own web of lies and deception

The New York Times is the only US newspaper that came out with an editorial on the so-called lies about weapons of mass destruction on January 13, 2005. As usual, in the first part of the article it has done a good analysis only to lead it to the preconceived new lies in the conclusion.

It blamed the so-called lies about WMD on "spin and faulty intelligence." The editorial argues, "Mr. Bush did such a good job selling the weapons-hunting nostrum that 40 percent of Americans recently said the weapons were there" as if it was Bush alone, sitting at the editorial and production boards of the media houses in the US and directing them to promote the lies without giving any heed to commonsense. It is an attempt on the part of New York Times to show that media is not responsible for promoting the filth produced by the neocons-dominated establishment.

Towards the end of the editorial, NY Times resorts to the same tactics of covering the real motives for war with new lies. It concludes with what it believes would polish the earlier lies. It tries to make the world believe that the 1,200 military personnel, who were assigned to his search team "are now fighting Iraqi insurgents." Wishing them success, it says: "If they do not [succeed], large swaths of Iraq could become a no man’s land, where terrorists will be free to work on W.M.D. projects and United Nations weapons inspectors cannot go to thwart them."

So, the first of the new and far deadly lies is that there is just an "insurgency" in the occupied lands. The second of these lie is that if the US failed to "stay the course" – means, installing client secular regimes – in Iraq and Afghanistan, "terrorists" would come to power.

The question to ask is, where were these terrorists before the invasion? If they were so fond of killing and dying, why didn’t they kill themselves and others to come to power when Saddam Hussein was considerably weakened towards the end of his rule? Why didn’t they attack the US interests despite the US taking lives of 1.8 million of their innocent people?

Instead of answering these questions, the New York Times promotes new lies and its chief war lord, Friedman, beefs up these lies. In his skewed theory, the "decent outcome" in Iraq would not come about unless the US defeats "fascist insurgents." (January 13, 2005).

So the list of reasons for invasions and occupations is now reduced to defeating "fascist insurgents," a task which Gen. Abizaid believes would take decades (David Ignatius, the Washington Post, December 26, 2004) without paying attention to the ever increasing number of crimes against humanity and the number of lives they have taken in the first two years of translating centuries old intellectual war into a physical war.

To promote the new lies Washington Time (Jan 13) published an article by Congressman George Allen in which he encourages Bush and his team to "stay the course."

Allen’s choice of words shows as if all the war lords are writing from the same text book. That’s how the campaign against the Taliban was launched. He says: "these attacks are being carried out by vicious terrorists who detest freedom and aim to push back not just the election, but to keep democratic elections from ever taking place in Iraq. Their ultimate goal and victory would be to return Iraq to a repressive state or an intolerant theocracy."

It is important to note that the freedom fighters in Iraq have not yet uttered a single word about governing Iraq. These freedom fighters have the same status of Mujahideen which the US bestowed on the freedom fighters in Afghanistan. Their energies are focused on expelling the occupiers. However, their determination not to collaborate with occupiers makes the aggressors feel that their success might get translated into the establishment of an Islamic state.

Unfortunately, thwarting the possibility of an Islamic government coming to power was the primary motive behind staging 9/11 and invading Afghanistan. Pure personal vendetta lead Bush into overthrowing Saddam, but in the quagmire of Iraq, he faces what he and his fellow war lords wanted to avoid in Afghanistan.

The result of the earlier lies is before our eyes. Everyone, whether they proposed or opposed the war in Iraq, are in full agreement over the legitimacy of the US invasion and occupation of Afghanistan because brain-washed by earlier lies, they agree on not to let Muslims live by Islam.

The evidence is before our eyes: See Los Angeles Times (Jan 13, 2005) where Margaret Carlson has bitterly criticized Bush and his team. Right from the headline she is at war with those who in her perception lied about the reason for war in Iraq. Her title says it all: "The Truth Shall Set You Back: Lying is no sin for Bush minions."

However, when it comes to defeating the "fascist insurgents," she is as much for sending more troops to Iraq as Thomas Friedman. Confirming her belief in the new lies in circulation, she writes: : "Bush gives those medals to people who keep their mouths shut, like L. Paul Bremer III, who got one for not saying until he retired that Bush hadn’t sent enough troops to Iraq."

Success of the previous campaigns of lies were so effective that a spokesman for Bush said on January 12, 2005 that the president still believes he was right to invade Iraq even though investigators have not turned up proof to back up his primary argument for going to war: "Based on what we know today, the president would have taken the same action because this was about protecting the American people," said Scott McClellan, Mr. Bush’s press secretary. "This was about advancing freedom and democracy in a dangerous region of the world."

The question is: What do they know today? They only know that minus Saddam and minus US troops, whoever comes to power will revive an Islamic way of life in Iraq after decades of secularist, Baathist rule. That is what they do not want and that is why they would lie upon lie for crossing all boundaries to avoid their fear from becoming a reality.

The actual lies are the lies about the main target: the Islamic rule and Muslims’ living by Islam. The Taliban, WMD and now the “insurgents” are mere scapegoats. They are not even the issue. The issue is Islam.

Before the lies that generate the fear of an Islamic rule and living by Islam, lies about WMD pale by comparison. And in this deadly campaign of actual lies Bush and his neocon war lords are not alone. In fact, they carry just a fraction of the total responsibility that lies on the shoulders of collaborating and non-collaborating Muslims.


[1]. Note, for example this article, written just a week before September 11, 2001. It was pointed out at that time: "The avowed seculars and anti-Taliban crusaders cannot hurt the Taliban as much as these people in the garb of grand Muftis and Humanitarians. These people are pawns of the US two-point agenda in relation to the Islamic threat: One, to discredit the Taliban to the extent that everything associated with Islam becomes abominable. Secondly to financially, militarily and diplomatically weaken Pakistan to the extent of mortgaging its nuclear capability and following every command from Washington." This is the reality today.

[2]. Read "diggers of a Common Grave" for details:

[3]. Here is the references to Zarb-e-Momin newspaper in the above reference, which the author could not name at that time: "One famous newspaper, published from Pakistan, prints pro-Islam news of Afghanistan with much fervor, but ignores all anti-Islam developments in Pakistan. None of the reporters from around the world was allowed to photograph Bamiyan Buddha at the time of its destruction except this newspaper."