Analysis of a Conspiracy Theory about 26/11 Mumbai Terror Attack.

Who controls the Past controls the Future. Who controls the Present controls the Past. – George Orwell in 1984.
World events, especially geo-political, economic, Industrial, & business related, are rarely reported with concern for truth. News today has become an industry and there are only a few media empires, which control the flow of news. What should not be reported, if possible, is censored. If not feasible, then it appears as inconsequential news buried deep inside inner pages.   Inconvenient events that are too big to hide, and most other events of significance will of course appear after filtering and suitable spin have been applied to them to give a desired and strategic slant. News has thus been commoditized. News comes packaged. Consumerist culture’s ultimate victory lies in creating consumers of *packaged news*. Efforts are on to reach that goal soon, but luckily world is not there yet. Truth has a dirty habit of surfacing eventually no matter what. Sadly, it is often way too late on the scene to bring tangible succour. For it to succeed, it surely needs honest seekers.
Fortunately, such honest seekers are still extant in abundance. Internet has made it possible, during last decade particularly, for such seekers to know each other, collaborate, and reach the fragile truth out to as many people as possible. My curiosity led to the discovery of many fine journalists, reporters, authors, who have steadfastly pursued truth despite severe odds, sometimes at real and credible risk to their lives. But, off late I also came across disturbing tendency among some to go overboard with wild speculation, conspiracy theories, & unsubstantiated allegations; may be as a counter to misleading and even vicious propaganda in mainstream media. Falsehoods cannot and should not counter falsehoods. Especially, when one knows that establishment is always immensely powerful, resourceful, more skilled, and has a head start. Such tactics from the voices of dissent that are out to seek truth spread truth; will prove suicidal. Establishment could & would easily discredit and trash dissent. Credibility is the foremost virtue of Dissent, because Dissent is always a Minority affair.
Just like 9/11, even in the case of *26/11* Mumbai terror attacks too there are too many discomforting loopholes, inconsistencies, downright lies, & attempts at secrecy in the news reports, Commentary,  & official position covering the event and its aftermath.  These need to be and to some extent have been thoroughly investigated and exposed. There are also abundant conspiracy theories about who actually attacked Mumbai and why. Many of them emanate from US and Canadian sources. I had come across them before, but ignored them as wild allegations. Recently, during an email exchange with a credible US person, I was sent surfeit of Web-material to prove that Mumbai Terror attack was in fact a conspiracy by *Imperialist-Zionist-Hindutva* forces. I picked up one article from an otherwise serious and credible source : http://www.globalresearch.ca/. What follows is my analysis of that article, which in turn triggered the foregoing introduction.
*India’s 9/11. Who was Behind the Mumbai Attacks? : Washington is Fostering Political Divisions between India and Pakistan.
by Professor Michel Chossudovsky. *
Introductory Comments.
1. This article has lot of possible hypotheses, but without much proofs. Some of the *speculation* may fit some of the *facts*, but that cannot be an overarching theory resting on solid evidence.
2. Article cites links, but at times these do not support the assertions they are quoted to support.
3. There are too many internal inconsistencies and contradictions within the article.
4. The heading very challengingly asks, “Who was Behind the Mumbai Attacks?” However, beyond alleging US-UK-Israeli manipulation it has very little to offer by way of evidence based answers.
Analysis of the article.
1. A virtually unknown group called “the Deccan Mujahideen”, has according to reports, claimed responsibility for attacks. The Deccan Plateau refers to a region of central-Southern India *largely cantered in the State of Andhra Pradesh*”. <comment :="" It extends over eight Indian states and encompasses a wide range of habitats, covering most of central and southern India Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deccan_Plateau>
2. “President Asif Ali Zardari had meetings in New York in late September with CIA Director Michael Hayden. (*The Australian*, September 29, 2008)”. <comment :="" makes no mention of such a meeting>.
3. In this regard, the pressures exerted by the Bush administration contributed to blocking a parliamentary initiative led by the PPP government to put the country’s intelligence services (ISI) under civilian authority, namely under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Interior. In other words, Washington exerts more control over the ISI than the duly elected civilian government of Pakistan”. <comment :="" General Kayani without Bush needing to exert himself would have nipped such a move by Zardari in the bud >
4. Upon his appointment, Lt Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha implemented a major reshuffle within the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), replacing several of the ISI regional commanders. (Daily Times, September 30, 2008)”.
5. At the same token, this anti-American sentiment has also served, in the months preceding the Mumbai attacks, to promote a renewed atmosphere of cooperation between India and Pakistan”.
6. Under the heading of *Mumbai Attacks* Pak President Zardari is credited with this : “Barely a week prior to the attacks, Pakistan president Asif Ali Zardari “urged opening the Kashmir issue to public debate in India and Pakistan and letting the people decide the future of IHK (what is IHK?).” He also called for “taking bilateral relations to a new level” as well as forging an economic union between the two countries”. Here reader is asked to believe what Zardari said. However, on the other hand, under the heading of *Islamabad Delhi Shuttle Diplomacy* it cites this- “The Pakistan’s People’s Party government under the helm of Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani has no control over the military and intelligence apparatus, which continues to maintain a close rapport with its US counterparts. The Pakistani civilian government, in many regards, is not in control of its foreign policy. The Pakistani Military and its powerful intelligence arm (ISI) call the shots. In this context, president Asif Ali Zardari seems to be playing on both sides: collusion with the Military-Intelligence apparatus, dialogue with Washington and lip service to prime minister Gilani and the National Assembly”-, and reader is asked to disbelieve very same Zardari. < Comment :It is another matter that Zardari himself has little credibility in the eyes of Pakistanis, and rest of the world knows he is powerless without Army’s approval. In fact, within days of Mumbai attacks, Zardari’s civilian government announced that it would send the ISI chief Shuja Pasha to India for consultations. But had to rescind almost immediately when Army disapproved of it. If professor states that Pakistani military & intelligence apparatus maintains a close rapport with it US counterparts, then where is the need for the US to make use of Mumbai attacks for its objectives cited under *Divide and Rule*>
7. In 2006, the Pentagon had warned that another [major 9/11 type terrorist] attack could create both a justification and an opportunity that is lacking today to retaliate against some known targets(Statement by Pentagon official, leaked to the Washington Post, 23 April 2006). In the current context, the Mumbai attacks are considered “a justification” to go after “known targets” in the tribal areas of North Western Pakistan”. <comment *“known targets” in the tribal areas of North Western Pakistan* going by Professor’s own citation of “Pakistan is publicly complaining about U.S. air strikes. But the country’s new chief of intelligence, Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha, visited Washington last week for talks with America’s top military and spy chiefs, and everyone seemed to come away smiling.” (David Ignatieff, A Quiet Deal With Pakistan, Washington Post, November 4, 2008, emphasis added)”>
8. Under the heading ‘Divide & Rule’, the first objective the US is accused of achieving using Mumbai attacks is : “1) Foster divisions between Pakistan and India and shunt the process of bilateral cooperation and trade between the two countries”. <comment :="" Behind the agreement was a recognition by the Zardari government, and by Pakistan’s new military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kiyani, that the imminent threat to Pakistan’s security comes from Islamic terrorists rather than from arch-rival IndiaDavid Ignatieff, A Quiet Deal With Pakistan, Washington Post, November 4, 2008”. This implies that on the contrary US wanted to reassure Pakistan that it need not worry about threat from India, but, instead, concentrate fully on assisting US in its *war on terror* >
9. Under the heading, *US Interference in the Conduct of the Indian Police Investigation*, there is a speculation that *The role of the US-UK-Israeli counter terrorism and police officials, is essentially to manipulate the results of the Indian police investigation*.
This kind of shoddy workmanship in the analysis of a very sensitive & bloody episode won’t do.
 
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: