certifired_img

Books and Documents

The War Within Islam (08 Sep 2018 NewAgeIslam.Com)


The Concept of Takfir – Declaring a Muslim a Disbeliever – Is a Very Modern Propaganda Weapon of Al-Qaeda and Daesh Having Its Roots in 7th Century – The Khawarij And Murji’a Groups



By Francesco Bergoglio Errico

September 6, 2018

The concept of Takfir – declaring a Muslim a disbeliever – is a very modern propaganda weapon of al-Qaeda and Daesh. But its origins are to be found in distant times. Indeed, in order to better understand this concept, it is essential to travel all the way back to the 7th Century roots – the Khawarij and Murji’a groups.

The Khawarij emerged from the battle of Siffin in 657 AD, where the fourth caliph ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib and his successor Mu’awiya bin Abi Sufyan clashed. During the battle, Mu’awiya’s troops, outnumbered and facing almost certain defeat, called on ‘Ali and his troops to accept arbitration between the two parties. ‘Ali took up the offer, but some of his own troops rejected it. They thought that ‘Ali had been swayed by Mu’awiya rather than divine guidance and that such an action should actually be seen as an affront to God’s order. These troops then seceded from ‘Ali’s camp and became the Khawarij group, the name they also applied to themselves.

The group’s first distinctive tenet concerned the possibility of revolt against Muslim rulers who had been deemed insufficiently pious. When ‘Ali agreed to arbitration with Mu’awiya, the separatists, the people later known as Khawarij, reportedly shouted “La Hukm Illa Li-Llah”, “judgement is God’s alone”. Only God has the authority to arbitrate, they held, not human beings. Not even the caliph ‘Ali, in fact.

Later on, the slogan came to represent their broad view that all judgements and rulings should be left to God. Applying Qur’anic rulings very strictly, they fought Muslims who were deemed guilty of major sins and expelled them from their community.

The consequences could not be more serious. Since they believed sinful Muslims to be Kuffar (disbelievers), they immediately applied Qur’anic lines concerning jihad against non-Muslims. This meant that, according to the Khawarij, the application of jihad was not just limited to ordinary people. If necessary, it could even include the caliph. Indeed, they assassinated ‘Ali in 661 AD.

The second tenet of Khawarij ideology addressed their conception of Iman (faith) and disbelief. In particular, what is faith? And when does a Muslim become a Kafir, a disbeliever? One of the greatest questions was whether A’mal, or deeds, acts or works, were an integral part of the faith or not. Some theologians of Islam’s early years, including Abu Hanifa, believed they were not a part of it. As a result, he equated Iman with the belief residing in the heart and its profession by tongue.

Conversely, other scholars, including Mu’tazilites and Hanabalites, believed that deeds, acts or works were indeed an integral part of Iman and that this Iman would not be complete without them.

Among other outcomes, this dispute led to what may be called the orthodox Sunni view, as well as almost all Salafi views, according to which Iman consists of assent to the Iman in the heart, its verbal confirmation by the tongue, and corresponding acts with the limbs. Respectively, Tasdeeq Bi-L-Qalb, Iqrar Bi-L-Lisan and A’mal Bi-L-Jawarih

As for the Khawarij themselves, even though they too believed that Iman consisted of these three elements and others, they placed more emphasis on A’mal than mainstream Sunnism does.

The question of what actually constitutes Iman is very important when defining enemies as unbelievers. On the one hand, if A’mal is not an integral part of Iman, sinful acts cannot undermine that Iman by themselves. On the other, if A’mal is an integral part of the Iman, sinful acts can definitely compromise faith.

Moreover, while Sunni scholars have separated major sins, Kaba’ir, from less severe ones, the Khawarij have included A’mal among major sins, such as killing one’s child, adultery and especially polytheism and idolatry, or shirk.

Scholars later separated shirk from other Kaba’ir, establishing that only an act of shirk would immediately turn a Muslim into an unbeliever, or Kafir, and therefore justify his or her excommunication from Islam, Takfir. Additionally, any further proof of a person’s unbelief through verbal confirmation was not necessary. Other major sins were certainly still considered serious and deserving of punishment, but they were not enough to turn a believer into a disbeliever – further proof was needed.

The Khawarij disagreed with this last point since, according to their beliefs; a Muslim culpable of any Kaba’ir should be avowed a Kafir, with or without further proof. This creed thus heightened ordinary major sins to the level of Kufr, making its adherents swifter to apply Takfir than those endorsing the movement later known as Sunnism.

The last relevant point about the concepts of Iman and Kufr concerns the effects of sinful acts on a person’s Iman. Not considering sins as equal to shirk, many scholars believed faith to be diminished by sinful acts and increased by good ones. This led to an understanding of Iman as flexible. The Khawarij, by contrast, believed that iman could not fluctuate. It was either present or lost as a whole through major sins. This made the Khawarij radically different from other groups, and this was reflected in their use of jihad against other Muslims holding what the Khawarij saw as aberrant ideas of iman, which made them legitimate targets, up to and including the rulers and the caliph.

Another important group criticized the beliefs of Khawarij – the Murji’a. According to most scholars, the genesis of the Murji’a can traced back to the conflicts between the third caliph, ‘Uthman bin ‘Affan, and his successor ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib. At that time, the Murji’a refused to take sides and opted for postponement of judgement, irja’, in such matters. In their view, only God could decide on these subjects. Before taking the name of Murji’a, this group were called Ahl-Al-‘Adl Wa-L-Sunna, or “the people of justice and Sunna”.

The Irja’ “postponers” concept was later dated back to the Qur’an itself by the Murji’a, in particular by referring to Sura 9:106. This verse provided them with a conceptual basis for avoiding taking sides in the conflict. In time, the Irja’ term became the most important tenet of the Murji’a.

In that regard, there are two important relevant points. The first is the development of the term Irja’. While it was initially applied to political conflicts such as the battle between ‘Uthman and ‘Ali, between the 18th and 19th Centuries it acquired a theological meaning. In particular, Irja’ was applied to people’s Iman; in other words, judgments on anyone’s faith was postponed and left to God. For that reason, unlike the Khawarij, adherents were generally loyal to rulers and only rarely supported riots against them.

The second point regards their conception of what constitutes faith and disbelief. Once again, unlike the Khawarij, they felt that Iman only consisted of the belief residing in the heart and its confirmation by the tongue, not concrete acts. Consequently, acts alone do not establish whether an individual is a believer or a disbeliever. When the takfir of such an individual was justified, then, they could ask.

In fact, from the Murji’a perspective, the Kaba’ir intrinsically could not throw someone out from Islam, except in the case of a sinner verbally confirming his disbelief, including shirk. Additionally, unlike the Khawarij and orthodox Sunni, they didn’t believe that faith could be altered by sinful acts and therefore excluded A’mal from Iman.

All of this contested history of the Takfir concept flows down to our own times.  Al-Qaeda and Daesh both use the ancient concept to justify their goals and their jihadi attacks on Muslims they see as disbelievers, including rulers. In their view, these people are enemies who are destroying the true Islam and the whole Ummah (community of believers), so jihad is warranted, indeed mandated. They defend this position by manipulating many passages of the Qu’ran and Hadith.

It is very important to underline this, because an increasingly high number of people now take the manipulations as truth, radicalizing themselves, embracing jihad, and becoming fascinated and indoctrinated by terrorist propaganda that promises salvation of the soul and access to paradise to those who embrace the “true way” or the “true Islam”.

This makes it crucial to understand what Takfir is and how the concepts of Takfir and jihad are used by the terrorist groups, not only to better comprehend how they justify their existence and their bloodshed, but also, above all, in fact, to improve strategies of disengagement and deradicalisation.

Related Article:

Demolish Kafir/ Mushrik/ Munafiq-Manufacturing Factories, Says Sultan Shahin, Defending New Age Islam against Talibani Onslaught

Source: eeradicalization.com/the-road-to-daesh-the-history-of-the-takfir-and-its-interpretations/

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/the-war-within-islam/francesco-bergoglio-errico/the-concept-of-takfir-–-declaring-a-muslim-a-disbeliever-–-is-a-very-modern-propaganda-weapon-of-al-qaeda-and-daesh-having-its-roots-in-7th-century-–-the-khawarij-and-murji’a-groups/d/116321




TOTAL COMMENTS:-   193


  • Why does Hats Off come up with such puerile analogies?


    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 11/15/2018 11:33:26 AM



  • does ascending to heaven on horse back and sitting on the right hand side of god count as miracle?

    one who will believe this can believe that 9/11 whatever, whatever?

    By hats off! - 11/15/2018 5:57:20 AM



  • The questions have never been answered nor can be answered since honest answers incriminate Uncle Sam in the 911 plot.

     

    The fig leaf that the US cannot harm its own citizens is blown away by the Operation Northwoods plan. 

     

    What is truly insane and absurd, is to believe that events took place that defy the laws of physics (unexplained and unexplainable cause of the collapse of the three buildings at free fall speed), or that the terrorists had any chance of success in a plan that required the following for its success:

     

    1. The President being away. He alone could give the order to shoot down a passenger plane as per a rule framed shortly before 911. Why this rule was made shortly before 911 is anyone’s guess. This order was not given, according to the President himself, until after the third plane had struck the Pentagon. Whether it was given at all or not we will never know because no plane was brought down.

     

    2. The Défense Secretary remaining “out of loop” during the most crucial 30 minutes while the third plane was tracked all the way till hit the Pentagon.

     

    3. The joint chief of armed forces was too busy in his breakfast meeting to be disturbed

     

    4. No attempt made to shoot down the plane using the protective shield of the White House /Pentagon consisting of ever-ready ground to air missiles. Since the capital is under the prohibited airspace, any hostile aircraft is meant to be brought down but the Vice President, by his very presence in the WH, prevented the shooting and confirmed that the “stand-down” order stood. This after two planes had already struck their targets! It is not the argument of the government either that this plane was not shot down because they did not have the President’s clearance. No attempt was made to contact the President and get his clearance during the 30-minute window available, because such clearance was not necessary for shooting down a hostile aircraft violating the capital’s prohibited airspace.

     

    5.  Four dummy exercises the same day and during the same period involving all the available air force jets leaving only four available in distant locations from where they could not have reached the hijacked planes in time. The games were not called off until “Mission Hijack” was declared closed!

     

    6. The Dummy games added to the confusion and when the hijack was reported, it was first thought that it was from the dummy exercise causing precious loss of several minutes

     

    7. Key members of FAA and NORAD were either new in the assignment or missing without a replacement causing delay in issuing necessary orders which added to the reasons why the four planes ultimately scrambled, could not reach their targets.

     

    8. The agencies (FBI, CIA and NSA) turning a blind eye and deaf ear to the several warnings of the imminence of such an attack.

     

    The terrorists, on their own, would not have even succeeded in hijacking the planes and would have been arrested much before. Even if they had succeeded in hijacking four planes, they would have been accosted by an air force jet before they hit their target. They would have only succeeded in crashing the four planes with the passengers into some open field. Even if they managed to hit WTC1 and WTC2, there is no way these two buildings could have fully collapsed, leave alone WTC7 which could not be hit by a plane because it crashed in a field before doing so. The plane crashing into the Pentagon is simply unbelievable!

     

    So be my guest Ghulam Uncle Sam and believe in miracles.



    By Naseer Ahmed - 11/15/2018 2:38:42 AM



  • Naseer sb. keeps asking the same questions again and again and will probably continue to do so ad infinitum. I shall end my participation in this discussion with the remark that believing that the U.S. government and Al Qaeda were involved in a conspiracy to destroy American buildings and American passenger planes and to kill 3000 Americans is patently absurd and insane.


    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 11/14/2018 1:40:13 PM



  • Neither Ghulam Uncle Sam nor Uncle Sam can give honest answers to the following questions without incriminating Uncle Sam. Their lies are exposed. GUS is a shameless denier of the truth.

     

    QUESTION


     In view of Operation Northwoods plan, why do you consider the 911 plan as a crazy conspiracy theory? Wasn’t the Operation Northwoods plan an equally crazy conspiracy hatched by Uncle Sam involving hijacking of planes and acts of terrorism and loss of life of its own soldiers and citizens?

     

    QUESTION

     

    Didn’t Uncle Sam have plans that required a cataclysmic event like 911 and those plans were speedily executed after the 911 event riding on people’s anger?

     

    QUESTION

    The Secret Service knew about the incoming plane for 30 minutes before it hit its target, was following it on radar, the plane was within 1 mile of the White House before it turned towards the Pentagon, had the means to shoot it down and should have done so in order to protect the capital. But they didn't. Why?

     

    QUESTION

    In regards to the exchange between Cheney and the young man can you suggest anything different from an order not to shoot down the plane, as it was approaching Washington's protected airspace?

     

    QUESTION

     

    Why were four different games of simulated hijacks being played out with all the available air force planes leaving only four available at distant locations from New York to deal with the real hijack? Why weren’t these games called off until the last hijacked plane had crashed? When the President returned in the evening, there were 300 air force planes in the air protecting the American skies. Where were 296 of them in the morning when they were needed? The answer is - they were engaged playing 4 different games on the order of the VP!

     

    QUESTION

     

    Is it merely a coincidence that the President was outside Washington on 911, the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld claimed to be “out of the loop” during the crucial 30 minutes as the plane that hit Pentagon was tracked all the way until it hit Pentagon, and Myers was not to be disturbed from breakfast with Max Cleland? The VP prevented the plane from being shot down while it came within 1 mile of the White House and when it turned towards Pentagon, the two people who could give the order to shoot viz Donald Rumsfeld and acting chief Myers were in hiding, although two hijacked planes had struck the WTC towers half an hour before!

     

    QUESTION

    Why are private investigators such as the insurers barred from their own investigation which is normal whenever they are required to settle insurance claims?

    QUESTION

    Why is the 911 Commission  silent on the collapse of WTC7. Why did NIST not explain how WTC1 and 2 collapsed beyond saying what initiated the collapse? NIST simulation ignores observed, recorded and admitted free fall in stage 2 of WTC7 besides fudging other data. It has also withheld the data used for simulation. Why unless it fears that making the data available would expose their manipulation of data?

     

    QUESTION

    Why does NIST not make its analysis with complete data available to the Universities and let them learn how this extraordinary and miraculous event defying the laws of physics took place? Why is it depriving the world and its own universities from learning from this event?

    QUESTION

     

    Why do the reports ignore the visual, audio and eye-witness evidence of melted steel, secondary blasts and of explosives going off? Why did the NIST and the 911 Commission not ask questions to the witnesses to ascertain whether they had seen or heard anything that would point to a Controlled Demolition? Why was Controlled Demolition that was widely suspected not even the subject of inquiry? Is it not because they went about establishing the lie rather than trying to find out the truth?  Neither body examined the debris or visited the site before the debris was cleared.

     

    QUESTION

     

    Why are the first responders, the affected and the family of the killed prevented from speaking out, with clauses that prevent them for doing so as a condition for availing compensation now or in future?

     

    QUESTION

     

     

    Why is there such lack of transparency and a massive cover-up to prevent the truth from emerging? Isn’t this the behaviour of a liar?

     


    By Naseer Ahmed - 11/14/2018 2:00:07 AM



  • The collapse of the three buildings was not assisted by controlled demolition. Anyone who claims they were is either a liar or an idiot.

    Anyone who claims that the planes were allowed to crash into the buildings and everything was done to clear all obstacles does not know what he is talking about. Such a scenario is outlandish and bizarre. One would have to be very stupid to believe in it.


    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 11/13/2018 11:55:20 PM



  • The truth denier Ghulam Uncle Sam pretended that "Uncle Sam wore fine clothes" and defended as long as he could. Uncle Sam stands fully exposed and Ghulam Uncle Sam is left without an answer to very pertinent and valid questions.

    What has been established beyond reasonable doubt is:

    1. The collapse of all three buildings was assisted by controlled demolition.

    2. The planes were allowed to crash into the buildings and everything was done to clear all obstacles and nothing was done even when there was a clear 30 minute window to shoot down the plane approaching White House/Pentagon

    Uncle Sam is therefore, beyond reasonable doubt, complicit in 911 attacks.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 11/13/2018 11:14:52 PM



  • There is no limits to the literature that conspiracy theorists have developed in order to support their outlandish theories. Naseer sb, is welcome to enjoy all of it but I have no intention to waste any more of my time on it.


    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 11/13/2018 1:21:17 PM



  • Watch this video from 40 to 55 minutes for the complete testimony of Mineta and the blatant attempts of the Commissioners to create confusion and discredit Mineta’s testimony. Not the behaviour of an Inquiry Commission seeking the truth but the behaviour of fixers.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=22&v=O1GCeuSr3Mk

     

    QUESTION

    The Secret Service knew about the incoming plane for 30 minutes before it hit its target, was following it on radar, the plane was within 1 mile of the White House before it turned towards the Pentagon, had the means to shoot it down and should have done so in order to protect the capital. But they didn't. Why?

     

    QUESTION

    In regards to the exchange between Cheney and the young man can you suggest anything different from an order not to shoot down the plane, as it was approaching Washington's protected airspace?

     

     

    Secretary Mineta recounted to the Commission his experience on the morning of 9/11 from the time he was notified of the first plane hitting the WTC, to his experience at the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) along with Vice President Cheney and staff. Unlike Rumsfeld who claimed to be “out of the loop“, and Myers who was not disturbed from breakfast with Max Cleland, and President Bush who was busy reading a story to kids,  Mineta was able to provide a full account of his experience that morning. Mineta testified that he arrived at the PEOC at 9:20 a.m. and that Vice President Cheney was already present with his staff. 9/11 Commission Report states that Cheney himself arrived at the PEOC at 9:58, a stunning 38 minute contradiction to Mineta’s testimony and yet neither Cheney nor Mineta have been punished for perjury since surely one of them was lying. Obviously, Mineta wasn’t lying and couldn’t be punished and Cheney was giving the “official truth” which the Commission was bound to uphold as the truth even if it was a lie.

     

    Mineta responds to an opening question by Commissioner Hamilton about the events in the PEOC and an alleged shoot down order. He describes a conversation between Cheney and a young man:

     

    Mineta: “During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President…the plane is 50 miles out…the plane is 30 miles out….and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president “do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said “Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!??”

     

    Mineta explains that while he had not known it at the time, he had surmised that the standing order the young man asked about must have been a shoot down order. Hamilton, looking a bit confused, seeks clarification about which flight the conversation was regarding, and Mineta once again clarifies that it is the flight that hit the Pentagon at 9:37 a.m. on September 11. There was good reason for the quizzical expression on Hamilton’s face. Secretary Mineta had thoroughly trashed previous accounts of the PEOC activities that had been published in the press. In a CNN piece dated 9/11/02, the timing of events had been represented differently. According to CNN:

    “After the planes struck the twin towers, a third took a chunk out of the Pentagon. Cheney then heard a report that a plane over Pennsylvania was heading for Washington. A military assistant asked Cheney twice for authority to shoot it down.”

     

    In the CNN piece Cheney aid Josh Bolton describes the same exchange between Cheney and the young man that Mineta did, but Bolton ties the exchange to “a report that a plane over Pennsylvania was heading for Washington”. This is the official White House legend, the one adopted in the White House produced 9/11 Commission Report, the one exposed by Mineta. Hamilton follows with a question about Flight 93:

     

    Hamilton: “With respect to flight 93, what type of information were you and the Vice President receiving about that flight.”

     

    Mineta: “The only information we had at that point, was when it crashed.”

     

    Chairman Kean then stresses that the Secretary’s time is limited. He moves to Commissioner Roemer, who, immediately prior to his questioning appears to be receiving counsel.

     

    Tim Roemer seeks to discredit Mineta

     

    Mineta responds to a condescending greeting by Commissioner Roemer by giving a timeline for when he arrived in the PEOC (9:20), and an estimate of when the conversation between the young man and the vice president occurred (9:25-26). Roemer paints a picture of chaos and conflicting decision making between the functioning of the Situation Room and the PEOC and proposes a confused scenario of how a shoot down order might have transpired, to which Mineta replies:

     

    Mineta: “That would be speculation on my part as to what was happening on that day.”

     

    At this point Roemer appears to attempt to discredit Mineta and imply that he, like Rumsfeld, was “out of the loop”:

     

    Roemer: “I know. Because you had been conducting official business and I’m sure you were hurriedly on your way over there…”

     

    Mineta: “As I was listening!”

     

    Thwarted, Roemer then tries to clarify how the order played out.

     

    Roemer: “Would your inference be that they scrambled the jets to shoot down the commercial airliner, it failed, and the commercial airliner then crashed into the Pentagon?”

     

    Mineta: “I’m not sure that the aircraft that were scrambled to come up to the D.C. area…were under orders to shoot the airplane down…”

     

    Mineta ultimately expressed the obvious, that the standing order was an open question only Cheney could answer. The fact that the 9/11 Commission Report discarded his testimony has never been explained.


    By Naseer Ahmed - 11/13/2018 2:12:44 AM



  • The incoming plane was identified to be hostile (hijacked, switched off transponder, not in two way radio communication, having reversed its flight path)  and heading towards the White House/ Pentagon. It was tracked all the way on radar for the last 30 minutes with foreknowledge that two similarly hijacked planes were crashed into WTC and a young officer desperately seeking the VPs orders. In the absence of the VP, they would have acted once the plane entered the prohibited airspace S56. The presence of the VP in the White House alone made them seek his orders, and it would appear that the VP was there precisely to prevent the shooting down. Shooting down a plane using the ground to air missile shield takes no effort or time once the decision to shoot is taken.

     

    A clear case of allowing the plane to hit its target and clear proof that the 911 Commissioners were doing their best to do damage control and alter the clear import and meaning of the Transport Commissioner’s testimony.

     

    Both the 911 Commission Report and the NIST report raise more question than they answer and are blatant attempts to cover up the truth and establish the official lie.


    By Naseer Ahmed - 11/13/2018 1:16:09 AM



  • Naseer sb. thinks that shooting down American passenger planes by the U.S. military is such a simple affair that American defense forces must be in full readiness all the time to do it!

    Operation Northwoods, (a crazy plan that was never adopted), targeted Cuban emigres many of whom were American citizens or were in transit on their way to seeking asylum in the U.S. Some parts of the plan may have gone beyond that but why keep talking about a crazy plan that was never approved? To compare it to 9/11 is just plain dumb.

    In any case if you want to believe your conspiracy theory, no one is stopping you. You do not have to produce all their crazy literature here. You are not going to change my mind and I am not going to change yours. So why are we wasting our time trying to do that?


    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 11/12/2018 1:35:27 PM



  • Why wasn't a ground to air missile fired to bring down the plane?

     

    How can there be a ground for attacking Cuba if there are Cuban casualties and not American?  The Operation Northwoods had all the elements of the 911 plan.

     

    Operation Northwoods was a proposed false flag operation against the Cuban government that originated within the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) of the United States government in 1962. The proposals called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or other U.S. government operatives to commit acts of terrorism against American civilians and military targets, blaming it on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba. The plans detailed in the document included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés,sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

     

    The operation proposed creating public support for a war against Cuba by blaming it for terrorist acts that would be perpetrated by the U.S. Government. To this end, Operation Northwoods proposals recommended hijackings and bombings followed by the introduction of phony evidencethat would implicate the Cuban government. It stated:

    The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere.


    Most certainly there were revisions to justify attacking seven distant countries that were not a threat to the US and to take away the freedoms and rights to privacy of its own people. The reaction and anger of the American people to be generated was of a much higher order in view of its plans. The Cuban plan was limited in comparison.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 11/12/2018 2:02:32 AM



  • "The position of the civil society is to accept the official findings," means that the civil society has accepted the official finding. It did not have any reason to doubt those findings.

    As I said, Cheney did order that the passenger plane approaching Washington DC be shot down. Several military planes were dispatched from the Langley Air Force Base but before they could shoot the passenger plane down, it had already rammed into the Pentagon.

    The 9/11 plan and the Northwoods Plan are vastly different. The Northwoods Plan did not involve any attack on American buildings, or crashing of four passenger planes or killing of 3000 American citizens. It could have involved some Cuban casualties. Moreover the Northwoods Plan was rejected by the Kennedy administration.

    Your asking me these questions assumes that I am as interested in the subject as the conspiracy theory loonies are. I am not interested in such details. I do not need to know such details in order to know that there is nothing more here than meets the eye.


    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 11/12/2018 1:08:40 AM



  • What you said is repeated verbatim “the position of the civil society is to accept the official findings” and did not respond when I asked you whether the Civil Society should accept the official findings “even when it contradicts and/or omits the relevant evidence and defies the laws of physics”.


    You haven't answered even one question, least of all why the Vice President did not order shooting down of the plane approaching the Pentagon although his orders were repeatedly sought as the plane was 50, 30 and then only 10 miles away.

     

    If the 911 plan is crazy, it is only Uncle Sam’s admitted Operation Northwoods plan with a few changes.  Uncle Sam is capable of doing crazy things beyond anyone's imagination and use their incredulity to its advantage



    By Naseer Ahmed - 11/12/2018 12:46:52 AM



  • It is not that civil society accepts all government reports. What I meant was that the civil society has accepted the report of the high-powered 9/11 Commission. There was no reason to object. The conspiracy theories are for the fringe cranky elements. No sane person would give them any credence. You just keep raising the same points that I have already answered several times. I called them idiotic and insane and I call them idiotic and insane again. 
     

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 11/12/2018 12:24:03 AM



Compose Your Comments here:
Name
Email (Not to be published)
Comments
Fill the text
 
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the articles and comments are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of NewAgeIslam.com.

Content