State Terrorism - Darkforum.com - Dark Stories, Dark Art, Poetry, Photography, Debates and Discussions

Corporate Pig · **State Terrorism -** 08-18-04

Here's an interesting story I stumbled across...

It appears that the Philipine Gov't - an ally to the US in the "War on Terror",
may be bombing its own people, to 'present' its [apparent] terrorist threat to the US, to gain US "aid" dollars...

Either way; I suppose it supports my held belief that:-
"Money is the root of all evil".

It also (again) raises the interesting question about Michael Meiring. A US citizen injured in his hotel room, from his own bomb - who was then escorted out of the phipipines by the FBI.. which was against the wishes of the philipne gov't.

Quote:

Stark message of the mutiny

Is the Philippine government bombing its own people for dollars?

Naomi Klein
Friday August 15, 2003
The Guardian
Refer: http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/st...019169,00.html

What does it take to become a major news story in the summer of Arnie and Kobe, Ben and Jen? A lot, as a group of young Philippine soldiers discovered recently. On July 27, 300 soldiers rigged a giant Manila shopping mall with C-4 explosives, accused one of Washington's closest allies of blowing up its own buildings to attract US military dollars - and still barely managed to make the international news.

That's our loss, because in the wake of the Marriott bombing in Jakarta and newly leaked intelligence reports claiming that the September 11 attacks were hatched in Manila, it looks like south-east Asia is about to become the next major front in Washington's war on terror.

The Philippines and Indonesia may have missed the cut for the axis of evil, but the two countries do offer Washington something Iran and North Korea do not: US-friendly governments willing to help the Pentagon secure an easy win. Both the Philippine president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and the Indonesian president Megawati Sukarnoputri have embraced Bush's crusade as the perfect cover for their brutal cleansing of separatist movements from resource-rich regions - Mindanao in the Philippines, Aceh in Indonesia.

The Philippine government has already reaped a bonanza from its status as Washington's favoured terror-fighting ally in Asia. US military aid increased from $2m (£1.25m) in 2001 to $80m a year, while US soldiers and special forces flooded into Mindanao to launch offensives against Abu Sayyaf, a group the White House claims has links to al-Qaida.

This went on until mid-February, when the US-Philippine alliance suffered a major setback. On the eve of a new joint military operation involving more than 3,000 US soldiers, a Pentagon spokesperson told reporters that US troops in the Philippines would "actively participate" in combat - a deviation from the Arroyo administration's line that the soldiers were only conducting training.

The difference is significant. A clause in the Philippine constitution bans combat by foreign soldiers on its soil, a safeguard against a return of the sprawling US military bases that were banished from the Philippines in 1992. The public outcry against the February announcement was so strong that the entire operation had to be called off and future joint operations suspended.

In the six months since, while all eyes have been on Iraq, there has been a leap in terrorist bombings in Mindanao. Now, post-mutiny, the question is: who was responsible for these? The government blames the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF). The mutinous soldiers point the finger back at the military and the government, saying that by inflating the terrorist threat, they are rebuilding the justification for more US aid and intervention.

The soldiers claim that:

· Senior military officials, in collusion with the Arroyo regime, carried out last March's bombing of the airport in the southern city of Davao, as well as several other attacks. Thirty-eight people were killed in the bombings. The leader of the mutiny, Lieutenant Antonio Trillanes, claims to have "hundreds" of witnesses who can testify to the plot.

· The army has fuelled terrorism in Mindanao by selling weapons and ammunition to the very rebel forces the young soldiers were sent to fight.

· Members of the military and police helped prisoners convicted of terrorist crimes escape from jail. The "final validation", according to Trillanes, was Fathur Rohman al-Ghozi's July 14 escape from a heavily guarded Manila prison. Al-Ghozi is a notorious bomb-maker with Jemaah Islamiah, which was linked to both the Bali and Marriott attacks.

· The government was on the verge of staging a new string of bombings to justify declaring martial law.

Arroyo denies the allegations and accuses the soldiers of being pawns of her unscrupulous political opponents. The mutineers insist they were not trying to seize power but only wanted to expose a top-level conspiracy. When Arroyo promised to launch a full investigation into the allegations, the mutiny ended without violence.

Though the soldiers' tactics were widely condemned in the Philippines, there was widespread recognition in the press, and even inside the military, that their claims were "valid and legitimate", as retired navy captain Danilo Vizmanos put it to me.

Local newspaper reports described the army's selling of weapons to rebels as "an open secret" and "common knowledge". General Narciso Abaya, the chief of staff of the Philippine armed forces, conceded that there is "graft and corruption at all levels". And the police have admitted that al-Ghozi couldn't have escaped from his cell without help from someone on the inside. Most significant, Victor Corpus, the chief of army intelligence, resigned, though he denies any role in the Davao bombings.

Besides, the soldiers were not the first to accuse the Philippine government of bombing its own people. Days before the mutiny, a coalition of church groups, lawyers and NGOs launched a "fact-finding mission" to investigate persistent rumours that the state was involved in the Davao explosions. It is also investigating the possible involvement of US intelligence agencies.

These suspicions stem from a bizarre incident on May 16 2002, in Davao. Michael Meiring, a US citizen, allegedly detonated explosives in his hotel room, injuring himself badly. While recovering in hospital, Meiring was whisked away by two men - who witnesses say identified themselves as FBI agents - and flown to the US. Local officials have demanded that Meiring return to face charges, to little effect. BusinessWorld, a leading Philippine newspaper, has published articles openly accusing Meiring of being a CIA agent involved in covert operations "to justify the stationing of American troops and bases in Mindanao".

Yet the Meiring affair has never been reported in the US press. And the mutinous soldiers' incredible allegations were no more than a one-day story. Maybe it just seemed too outlandish: an out-of-control government fanning the flames of terrorism to pump up its military budget, hold on to power and violate civil liberties. Why would Americans be interested in something like that?

Synikul · 08-18-04

Quote:

Now, post-mutiny, the question is: who was responsible for these? The government blames the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).

MILF.

Corporate Pig · 08-18-04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synikul

Quote:

Now, post-mutiny, the question is: who was responsible for these? The government blames the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).

MILF.

Quote:

The mutinous soldiers point the finger back at the military and the government, saying that by inflating the terrorist threat, they are rebuilding the justification for more US aid and intervention.

Why do u claim it was MILF?
How do u know it wasn't the Gov't itself?

John Preston · 08-18-04

I thought he was laughing at the acronym.
MILF, it does a body good.

Synikul · 08-19-04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporate Pig

Why do u claim it was MILF?
How do u know it wasn't the Gov't itself?

:iyf:

LMFAO

RedMeat · 08-19-04

We`re all MILF hunters now.

Synikul · 08-19-04

Seriously though, I don't care. If we can blame muslims for something and it gets our bases back, then it's good. Bases in the Phillipines would be handy when the war with China starts.

These muslim groups come up with the best names. This one is MILF. The militia of arabic peace loving muslims in Sudan that are raping and killing the black peace loving muslims are called The Janjaweed.

John Preston · 08-19-04

If we can blame Muslims for something and it gets our bases back, then it's good?

You are a fucking racist.

Synikul · 08-19-04

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Preston

If we can blame Muslims for something and it gets our bases back, then it's good?

You are a fucking racist.

I've admitted publicly that I'm a fucking racist several times on this board. Unfortunately for you, I'm not the kind of person that will shut up because of you calling me what you percieve as a dirty name.

Anyway, this isn't racism. I hate Muslims, and my hate for Muslims trancends race. I like Asians, but there are millions of asian muslims in Indonesia and the Phillipines. I hate them. There are also millions of white muslims in Albania, Chechnya, Kosovo, and other parts of eastern Europe. I hate them.

Islam is a poisonous cult of tyranny, death, and ignorance. It's the death of freedom, and that's why I hate it.

And before you, or anyone else on this board criticizes me for that, then I had better see you making posts that you don't like all the Christian bashing that is rampant here.

John Preston · 08-20-04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synikul

Anyway, this isn't racism. I hate Muslims, and my hate for Muslims trancends race.

*Sounds the buzzer*

I'm sorry, but by hating muslims you are hating a race. Muslims ARE a race, whether you would like to admit to that or not.
As such, you hate a race, for basically no logical reason, and as such you are a racist.

If you would like a complimentary prize please contact RedMeat for a huggle. Cause RedMeat is just so meaty.

diogenes · 08-20-04

Okay lets touch on a couple of things here-

1) Muslims are not a race, Muslim is defined as a believer in Islam. There are several people who consider themselves Muslims who are members of various sects and sub-sects of Islam including: Islamist, Mohemmedan,Shi`te, Suni,Mujahid ( one who engages in Jihad-these are the bad guys), Wahabi and Moor.

2) as for the hatred of Muslim/ Islamist-My only question on this matter is the one I direct at all people who consider themselves hatefull, racist etc.

WHY?

Islamist extremists, the Mujahid mentioned above, are the ones who cary out terrorist actions against the 'enemies of Islam' (whatever the fuck that means). The Islamist holy text, the Quran, is one of the oldest spiritual text on the planet and teaches as much about wipeing out the infedels as Jesus did about the Crusades. There are extremeist factions in all religious and political groups, but WHAT IS THE LOGICAL VALIDATION behind hating a group collectivly for the actions, allbiet horrific actions, of a very few.

I don't want to make a judgement on you about this, I would just like to know your reasons?

John Preston · 08-20-04

race1 ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rs)
n.
A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics.
A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the German race.
A genealogical line; a lineage.
Humans considered as a group.
Biology.
An interbreeding, usually geographically isolated population of organisms differing from other populations of the same species in the frequency of hereditary traits. A race that has been given formal taxonomic recognition is known as a subspecies.
A breed or strain, as of domestic animals.
A distinguishing or characteristic quality, such as the flavor of a wine.

diogenes · 08-20-04

Okay, so you proved my case-muslims are located all over the world and are recognized bieng of all ethnicities-thier a religion-not a race-whats wrong with that?

Synikul · 08-20-04

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Preston

*Sounds the buzzer*

I'm sorry, but by hating muslims you are hating a race. Muslims ARE a race, whether you would like to admit to that or not.
As such, you hate a race, for basically no logical reason, and as such you are a racist.

If you would like a complimentary prize please contact RedMeat for a huggle. Cause RedMeat is just so meaty.

This is the most ignorant post I've ever seen from you. Muslims are believers in a RELIGION, not a race.

Synikul · 08-20-04

Quote:

Originally Posted by diogenes

Islamist extremists, the Mujahid mentioned above, are the ones who cary out terrorist actions against the 'enemies of Islam' (whatever the fuck that means). The Islamist holy text, the Quran, is one of the oldest spiritual text on the planet and teaches as much about wipeing out the infedels as Jesus did about the Crusades. There are extremeist factions in all religious and political groups, but WHAT IS THE LOGICAL VALIDATION behind hating a group collectivly for the actions, allbiet horrific actions, of a very few.

I don't want to make a judgement on you about this, I would just like to know your reasons?

I'm not talking about the terrorists. You're right about them. The ones that will strap a bomb to their chests are a lunatic fringe minority.

I'm more fearful of the "mainstream" peaceful muslims. Islam is simply incompatible with western culture. The muslim hordes that are peacefully immigrating into western nations, and breeding like flies, are the greatest threat to freedom that we've ever faced. Even worse than communism. Someday this century, it will happen in Europe and Canada first, they will be a large enough voting block that they can vote in their babaric Islamic law. At that point one of two things will happen, either the western concept of individual freedom will die, or there will be civil war.

diogenes · 08-21-04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synikul

I'm more fearful of the "mainstream" peaceful muslims. Islam is simply incompatible with western culture. The muslim hordes that are peacefully immigrating into western nations, and breeding like flies, are the greatest threat to freedom that we've ever faced. Even worse than communism. Someday this century, it will happen in Europe and Canada first, they will be a large enough voting block that they can vote in their babaric Islamic law. At that point one of two things will happen, either the western concept of individual freedom will die, or there will be civil war.

Point#1: Okay your making assumptions on how those 'barbaric' Islamist Laws would work in the U.S. Laws never function in the U.S. as they do in Europe.

Point #2: If that did happen it would be a system voted in by the majority interest, which is the essence of our democratic republic.

More than likeley if Muslims did become a large enough social base to effect MASSIVE changes in the law, they would still have to abide by the constitution and do that whole 'seperation of church and state' thing. Now if your talking about an overthrough of the American system of govermetn (somthing I'm normally for, but we'll leave that alone in this case) than were not talking about voting issues here, we're talking about a takeover that destroys even the fundamentals that this country is based on. At that point, yes the time has come to rise up violently-just as it would if any group tried to take over and impose restricitve laws. However if it's still a large Muslim population in a democratic republic that your worried about, they would still have to abide by basic american biliefs (i.e. the bill of rights, constitution, etc) which outside of a few dramatic exa,ples still does a fairly good job of keeping religious fanaticisim out of governing laws.

By the way in this instance your not 'racist' you are a 'creedist'

Synikul · 08-21-04

Quote:

Originally Posted by diogenes

However if it's still a large Muslim population in a democratic republic that your worried about, they would still have to abide by basic american biliefs (i.e. the bill of rights, constitution, etc) which outside of a few dramatic exa,ples still does a fairly good job of keeping religious fanaticisim out of governing laws.'

Those are pieces of paper. They only have power if a majority wants them to.

diogenes · 08-21-04

so what are you afraid of?
the majority following the democratic process-they would be the majority
or
Do just fear an invasion of muslims?

Synikul · 08-22-04

Quote:

Originally Posted by diogenes

so what are you afraid of?
the majority following the democratic process-they would be the majority
or
Do just fear an invasion of muslims?

Just because something happens through a democratic process doesn't make it right.

This isn't the same thing as republicans vs. democrats. When democrats were in charge, republicans didn't like the higher taxes, environmental laws, and new gun control. Now that republicans are in charge, democrats don't like the tax cuts, reduced gun control, etc. etc.

But no matter which party has the majority in the government, nothing happens that radically alters the minority's daily lives, because we're all Americans, with a common culture.

Islam doesn't fit with that culture. In Islamic nations, if you don't want to be a muslim, you can be put to death. (I can provide a link to this)Maybe the immigration advocates are right when they think these Muslims are going to magically change their barbaric nature by moving to the civilized world, but I don't want to roll the dice on that. The stakes are too high.