THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a compelling factual history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century. Click on image above for details.

Sunday, September 21, 2008


Take a step back, have a look at the bigger picture and cast aside any preconceived subjective ideas that the western mainstream media propaganda machine may have instilled in you. After an objective and unbiased analysis of the events that preceded the bombing of the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad, Pakistan, there emerges a picture that is starkly different from what the people of the west have been told by their mainstream media.

Last Thursday a US Predator drone aircraft fired off four Hellfire missiles into Pakistan killing seven people. This was just hours after the US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, had personally assured President Asif Ali Zardari that the US would in future respect the sovereignty of Pakistan after previous US incursions both into Pakistani airspace and on to Pakistani soil that had resulted in the deaths of Pakistani civilians. Relations between the US and Pakistan immediately floundered. Just a couple of day’s later, right on cue, there’s this massive blast at the Marriott Hotel that virtually destroys the hotel and kills scores. ‘Terrorists’ are blamed – the same Islamic extremist ‘terrorists, so we and the Pakistani government are told, who the US was trying to get just a couple of days earlier. And now there’s US National Security Advisor (and one of the few warmongering ultra neocons that is still in the Bush administration), Stephen Hadley, trying to tell the Pakistanis that they need the US to go into Pakistan to get these ‘terrorists’ because Pakistan hasn’t got the wherewithal to do it themselves.

We know, of course, that the Americans and their allies are not above this kind of false flag attack, (USS Liberty, Lavon Affair, Operation Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin, etc.). And, since there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that the explosion was caused by a suicide bomber as claimed, or even that the perpetrator was from one of the so-called Islamic extremist organisations, one can, considering the circumstantial evidence, come to the conclusion that it may more than likely have been a false flag attack perpetrated by the US or their allies than one carried out by Muslim extremists who would, incidentally, have absolutely nothing to gain, especially at that time, from such an attack.

We should get over this ‘our government would never do a thing like that’ mentality and take a good hard look at the geo-political reality of what is actually happening in our world and has been happening for some considerable time.


Anonymous said...

Whatever your rhetoric here, the evidence points to a cover-up. The news media in the US and Britain seems to be blocking (after CNN first made it available) what is either a CCTV surveillance video or perhaps a private party's digital or other camera recording of the truck blast, followed by a raging fire in an intact truck and NO further explosion. Of course, the media (rather than investigating whether such fires can leave explosives waiting to go off within them), has told us another Just So story, taking its cue undoubtedly from government. We now do not get to see the desultory truck fire, with people running to put it out. Instead, we see the beginning of the truck fire (a blast) followed by blankness, culminating in pictures of the ruin which is the Marriott, complete with blasted out taxis. What happened after the truck fire? People spoke of gas line fires in the hotel but little else can connect the destruction with this initial fire. It's a cover-up. We are being lied to --- again.

Anonymous said...

Iraq refuses to bow down and kiss Uncle Sam's arse and they get invaded.

Shortly afterwards, car and truck bombs start lighting up the Iraqi sky.

Same with Afghanistan, even though they had offered to turn over Bin Laden if the US provided PROOF he was behind 9/11.

We didn't hand over proof, but we did show them we could make the rubble bounce.

Pakistan is now acting "uppity," refusing to be part of Uncle Sam's "New World Order," and poof, truck and car bombs start popping off there.

Tell me, why aren't vehicle bombs going off in Syria and Iran?

Because they don't have a contingent of MOSSAD and CIA personnel roaming about the country?

And can I ask these questions without getting savagely attacked by the Zionist hit squads?

How much further can we be dragged into fighting wars for Israel and Empire before we wake the fuck up?

Anonymous said...

The explosives created a 30 foot deep crater in the hotel compound. Now, what kind of people possess these kind of explosives. The military (you know which one). Same as Bali bombing. This is a false flag operation to quiten the new Pakistani president. The people may be dumb when they cannot see the truth in this news. It is also a shame if the American public keeps quiet after learning the truth. The bigger the lie, the more people will believe. (9/11).

Anonymous said...

Anytime I see a large "HOLE" in the
ground I say to myself . . how does a car bomb explode ? ? ?
These large and deep holes in the
ground look more like airborne
methods of attack.

Anonymous said...

The following is posted on Project Humanbeingsfirst's website.




For Heavens sake peoples of Pakistan and the World: stop blaming India's RAW, Jihadis' Taliban and Al-Qaeeda, etc., as the prime-movers of this new atrocity on the Pakistani peoples. Misdiagnosing a systemic disease is a sure protocol for never finding its cure!

A note on the article on this website and the comments left by others: to my humble knowledge, and I am an ordinary Pakistani, there is no real dissenting viewpoint, effectively, among the President of Pakistan, the Pakistan military brass, and the United States' ubermensch imperatives and all of its instruments.

What is said in Pakistani parliament by those who turn on a dime, and in the news media by the 'native informants', is mainly rhetoric for public consumption. The nation's ruling elite is entirely bought and paid for, while her plebeians serve in voluntary servitude.

One would hope that every nation-state might stay independent, and self-ruling in its own peoples' best interests, but the reality is that some servile client-states lost that status a long time ago, just as the United States itself is about to lose that status at the altar of NAU enroute to World Government. To first order, such a unipolar world is already in effect through WTO/WB/IMF/Dollar-reserve hegemony, never mind the McDonald Douglas and F-16s backing the McDonalds and big-macs!

Thus one might wonder why a "horse's head" would be additionally needed when all are willingly pushing an open door? Please see

I humbly see this new attrocity upon the Pakistani peoples as merely continued destablization of Pakistan no different than the continued destablization of Iran - the future of the two countries are in-separably linked, and this bombing is similar to the Shiraz bombing in its purpose, if not its modalities of execution.

Seeking common modality of execution is meaningless and a red herring - for first world experts can continually find new ways of blowing up things with patsies galore willingly taking the fall!

Zahir Ebrahim

nolocontendere said...

As soon as I saw this had happened, and caught a picture of the crater, it was deja vu all over again.

Anonymous said...

I also find it very strange that Shiites and Sunnis lived together and intermarried for centuries without blowing up each others' mosques -- until USrael got there.

Anonymous said...

Hit nail on the head again, Damo.

those poor poor poor vicitms, just horrific.

It's always the little guys that get blasted by these false flags, never the real targets such would go for, like , say, Mullens who only just visited.

And where is the fake video with teh accdidental star of david in teh background as one of them had, lol.

Bet they are shocked by the huge scepticism the internet has greeted this event with , I havent seen one MSM or other site where scepticism doesnt rule about this one.

Cya, Annie

Anonymous said...

Tragically you see commonality between this Marriott attack and World trade center attack.Both seem to have been bombed by explosives put inside the buildings and then letting a truck and airplanes make to look as if they did it.But hey,the truck exploded much before going to the building of Marriott.Is it the steel boxes put by US marines at 300am on 4th floor, probably which contained explosives went off by some remote device at the particular time?.The US mainstream media started on harping on the official line given to them from US dept of state that it was a suicide bomb.Surely US media is called public relation firms of US state department.One should see carefully the video issued and can be seen on

Anonymous said...

oh^i totally feel lyk that as well.
I am sick and tired of US and UK using the media for there own benefits. and no doubt, theyr losing this war on "terror"
i cant wait until bush goes, but then and again, after one evil comes another.
obama wants to concentrate on afghanistan and mccain, well he just wants to kill.
Maybe some day, muslims will realise that what is needed from us is unity.

michael said...

That crater is like the one which was formed under President Rafik Hariri's armoured car in March 2005. At the lip of that crater was standing upright a only slightly damaged SUV. Why was it even there ? Why was it not blown 100meters away from the epicentre of the blast if it was a surface blast, and as a mangled wreck looking barely recognisable ?

Same here at the Islamabad Marriott. There is what looks like a dumpster at the very rim on the extreme right. Again, why is it still even there if it was a truck bomb which allegedly can excavate out such a huge quantity of earth and rock but leave the dumpster right where it was - like the SUV above?

The fires in all the windows of the hotel burning of an even intensity in one of the pictures suggests simultaneous flash ignition of the heavy drapes at all the windows, although in the later picture the rooms closest are still burning as might be expected from the increased intensity of the flash.

The distance across the rim appears to be about 20 meters and as the depth is given as 9 meters we can see that the sides of the crater are steep, consistent with the sort of hole a very large aerial bomb dropped from a great height, which buries itself first before exploding, will make.

But an aerial bomb of this kind would need a heavy aircraft which would have been detected. So it was not an aerial bomb.

Think too, that there would be a meter distance between the tray of the truck and the hard sealed road which means much much less cratering than if contiguous with the ground.

Even if contiguous with the ground, say a ton of HE on a pallet, the effect would still be relatively negligible unlike burying it 9 meters down as no less would do since the almost instantaneous energy seeks the path of least resistance.

Some of the several side by side parked cars are still standing where parked, tyres and wheels undamaged, but their upper parts destroyed. Suggests to me more from intense flash burns, than blast effect - the bulk of the latter having gone to throwing off the earth overburden.

So what was it ? A micro nuke coffee mug sized inserted in a utility tunnel - electricals or sewage.

True, a lot of its energy is wasted shifting the tremendous earth overburden, but in the nature of such devices there is plenty plenty plenty plenty of energy to spare, unlike bulky chemical based military grade explosives.

On detonation, the near instantaneously formed and swelling fireball threw off the earth overburden, and as it erupted flash burned more than blasted for a considerable radius.

But, but the truck ? Window dressing, along with a little blast and a little fire just for the CCTV - and nightly news, so we confuse that with the main bomb.

Why two suicide bombers ? Obviously a no brainer as one is sufficient, meaning they weren't suicide bombers, just guys in a truck sent on a fools' pretext to get argumentative with the sentry for the later reportage about it to make us think it was the main game - when it wasn't.

Look at it another way, does it make any sense at all for the detonation of a huge truck bomb to be first presaged by a small explosion in that same truck ?? Of course not !

This was no truck bomb, just misdirection in that direction away from what it really was and where it really was. Is it suggested that the location of the sentry point was in the same optimal position a truck bomb would be located ?

Obviously, a sentry box is not going to be located exactly where a bomb would do most damage to the target building - thus will be located at the furthest periphery on the precincts.

So, if the sentry box is still standing, why is it as the burning truck was barred? What of the `two suicide bombers` ? Alive, and doing whatever they normally do.

Anonymous said...

okay...damian can i ask...
ur muslim right and from australia????

anyway nyc blog

Damian Lataan said...

Of course you may ask Freedom Fighter. I am not a Muslim, I am to the ‘left’ and I do live in Australia. I support the rights of all peoples to freedom regardless of their religion or their race or where they are on our planet.

Anonymous said...

lol. u seem lyk a a right character.
but if only there were more people like u, the world would be better.
i've always seen aussies as a bit rascist and prejudice, but its good to see even in the other side of the world, we hav good people doing good work.
here in the uk, the real "brits" want us out, even tho we're born and bred here. yeah totally daft but people here are like that.
anyway, thanks for letting me know, i wont comment anything thats "heat" on ur site hopefully, (if u get wot i mean)
tc and keep this up
"Religions are many and diverse, but reason and goodness are one"

Damian Lataan said...

Unfortunately, Freedom Fighter, your view of Aussies being racist and prejudiced is correct. Not all of course, but still far too many. Australia now likes to put up a façade of our racism being a thing of the past and we try to present to the world as a nation that is happily multi-cultural and multi-racial. But it is only a façade. Beneath the façade our society still seethes with racial intolerance and, in some cases, outright hatreds.

The nature of our racism has changed somewhat. In the past the racism has been based on biology and blood which usually means colour. Today our racism has shifted from blood and biology to religion and culture. The racism of blood and biology still remains but is confined more to older generations and those that pretentiously consider themselves as upper class. Their views on Aboriginal peoples for example remain largely patronising and paternalistic.

In the past Australia was very racist. It would not tolerate any immigrant unless from northern Europe. Older Australians were at first even intolerant of Greeks and Italians coming to Australia. Now, ironically, the descendants of some of those Greek and Italian immigrants are among Australians that are intolerant of what is now regarded as the ‘new racism’ of religion and culture though they deny that there is such a thing. Unfortunately, Islamophobia is as rife here in Australia as it is in the UK even among those that consider themselves ‘liberal-minded’.

Anonymous said...

okay. thanks for that. but i better clear it up, here in the UK the sitaution ain't so bad.
Yeah, since 9/11 and 7/7 there is some prejudice, however its all over the world really.
It depends what area u live in, but middle class brits realise that the country is nothing without the immigrants. who would do the jobs that no "brit" is willing to do?
we have upper class who still think this should be a "white-mans" only place. in my local community, its very multi-cultural and tolerant.
yes, obviously certain people are not, but i would like to say, that its mostly the politicians, police forces and the ones that are high ranked that really have true hatred against immigrants.
born and bred in britain, i still never feel like im accepted, not because of the people of my community and neighbourhood, but rather of the people we are supposed to trust.
they are always on about "integrating" but what can we do when we are never accepted.
british culture is work, sleep, drinking, clubbing, affairs and back to work.
much of this is unacceptable in islam.
maybe i'm being a pessimist, but i dont hold much hope for the future of ethnic and religious minorities, not only in britain, but all across the west.

(and the day i really feel british, will be wen i can walk into bluewater shopping mall and not feel out of place)


Damian Lataan said...

Freedom Fighter, I may have inadvertently given you a slightly lopsided impression of racism in Australia. While trying to explain racism in Australia one tends to talk about the negatives of the effect of racism because… well, we’re talking about racism; there’s nothing positive about it. However, because we’re talking about the negative aspects of racism it is easy to overlook the many positive aspects that a multi-cultural and multi-religious community can provide for its people.

I may have given the impression that the majority of Australians are racist. This is not the case. It’s just that those that are tend to be vocal – and very subtle about it as well. Most Australians are very tolerant and willing to accept new cultures and ideas but there are a number of racists in the mainstream media who deny their racism preferring to simply call their racism ‘anti-Islamic extremism’ but when one examines their associated writings one quickly realises that their anti-Islamic views go far beyond the notion of basic extremism or fundamentalism but engulfs all of Islam and everything about it taking the idea ‘them and us’ to new levels. It is this that has brought about the ‘new racism’.

michael said...

I define racism as the absolute right of any community, any society - when a community gets too large to be still called a community, to have the right to say who lives amongst them and without the slightest need to apologise to anyone for any inconvenient decision.

So, i respect the right of Islamic countries to decide who lives amongst them and that Islamic guys should understand that they are being used by zionists and banksters to create problems in white majority societies to destroy those societies through racial tension, fear and violence, as the otherwise tranquil existence within white societies will lead to trust developing between people to the point that instead of incessant public discussion about a football player's injured knee, there will be public discourse about how it is that banks actually make money.

And that is the banksters' greatest fear, for it will be discovered by the people that banksters make money out of the vacuum, not even thin air, which isn't a problem provided that they charge no interest on loans and debts.

It was this one fault of Mr Hitler which caused the zionist international banks in Britain and America to labour mightily for the next 6 years to get these two govts, which they controlled, to send their armies in to destroy him and, in particular, his creative people.

These international zionist banksters did not care about whatever tensions there were between Germans and Jews, and in fact, a medallion was struck commemorating the mutuallity of purpose of both local communities - having the Swastika on one side and the Star of David on the other, for the over riding concern for the banksters was that Mr Hitler told them that he would no longer be needing their services as he could print the money himself, and would lend it out without charging interest, nor would interest be paid on loans.

I will end by saying that 26,000 Australians died in WW2 defending the private banksters right to working life enslavement of their descendants, two generations on, to the impossible to pay mortgage on their dwelling.

They did not know they were dying for this, nor would i have then.

Anonymous said...

@Michael: Your theory of mini-nuke is quite interesting. Are you saying it was planted near the truck? or somewhere else? and what about the fire that broke at 4th and 5th floors where Marines were staying?

michael said...

Kashif, the micro nuke was planted separately from the truck. CCTV of the truck at the sentry point is available and when you look at it you see the truck trying to ram through the gate unsuccessfully, whereupon flaring starts within the truck and the guys on sentry duty are running away.

Then there is a jump in the video.

I know this because suddenly the running guys are not there and as suddenly the small fire is large and the guys are then back with fire extinguishers in action. End video.

We are meant to associate the truck fire with the bomb and not think it through that the truck was just a decoy for the CCTV for later replay on the TV news.

What the jump in the video also crucially covers up is that the `suicide bombers` left the vehicle.

I have recently read that the sentry box is still there.

If you look at the several pictures published you will see that the crater is at the front of the main entrance and far enough away to produce a generalised flash burning - more flash than blast energy, which is why in one of the pictures the fires are burning uniformly across the whole hotel front interiors as the heavy curtains simultaneously had caught fire.

But in a later picture only the rooms closest to the crater are still burning, the reason for this would be that the whole of the interiors here became ablaze, and not just the curtains as in the rooms to either side and further away.

Marines on the 4th and 5th floor would be just innocent guests and i wouldn't read anything into it as the job of the controlled media is to seguay our attention to where their owners direct. Editors don't need direction, they know. These are in the nature of political appointments but vastly more important than Cabinet postings.

Put it this way, since the controlled media in all the yards of reportage about this does not give even one line to the forensics - lest we begin to think, but devotes all the space exclusively to deaths and damage and political context - especially political context, you know that without the controlled media monopolising the reportage these bombings just would not happen.

For example, i have not seen anything about where the crater is in relation to the sentry box.

So, if ever there are war crimes tribunals for the perpetrators, then in that category, having equal billing, should be the media proprietors.

I should acknowledge the work of the late Joe Vialls in bringing to the net readership awareness that micro nukes do exist and are made in Israel, but may also be made in the USA. He said that these things can be preset to deliver between 2 and 10 tons TNT equivalent energy.

Considering that military people thought that it was a one ton bomb which made the crater under Lebanese President Rafik Hariri's armoured car, and now that this crater outside the Marriott is the same size, one can conclude that the setting was at the lower end, and then the device was placed in a limited access underground utility walkway associated with sewage pipes and telephony.

Why do i think Joe Vialls made a lot of sense ? It is because if you try to place or drop that quantity of conventional explosive on a site like that, the logistics make it impossible to do undetected.

Anonymous said...

@ damian

from wot u say, i think aussies are a bit more "say what they think" i knw for myself, that each individual brit has a level of rascism in them, but they tend to keep it inside, or in their own gatherings. u barely get "open" rascism, and in both ways, advantages and disadvantages in being on the recieving end.
ofcourse, i would never say rascism is any good, but with the closed rascism, u get the looks and moving away and petty stuff like that. with open racism its shouting vulgar things, spitting and sometimes to extreme levels of assault.
i may hav my asian colour, and wear my hijab, and hav a different religion, yet i knw wherever i go i will get a level of rascism/ prejudice.
like you said, there is a lot of good in coming from a multi-cultural society, however, here in britain, the bad outweighs the good.
im a person that doesnt like it wen i get looks, and i like to say what i think. however, wen someone gives u looks, u practically cant say anything because they haven't
i think im ranting on a bit, but all im trying to say is, our parents and grandparents brought us to the west for our future, so we could hav a good upbringing. but honestly, i would never want to bring up my child here.
not becoz its multi-cultural, but how hard it is, and was even for me, to keep my identity.
here its are u british? no
are you asian? no
are you muslim? yes

i've realised to identify myself with my religion and beliefs, (beliefs not necessirly being religious, rather values)

i hav people that would say, u were born and bred here, went to our schools (wen i actually didnt), use our healthcare, and live on our taxes, and dont identify urself as brit.


hopefully, sum day b4 i hav children, i hope to move out of this country.

Damian Lataan said...

Freedom Fighter, you might like to have a read of this:,22049,24417720-5001021,00.html

The real interesting stuff is in the comments that come after the article. I think it gives a reasonable picture of where things stand in New South Wales at least though the extent of racism in Australia varies from state to state. I live in South Australia where there is nowhere near the kind of racism that there is in NSW.

I am closely associated with university life here and there has been a massive influx of foreign students into our universities due to the universities needing to bring in fee-paying students. Students come mainly from SE Asia including Indonesia and a large number come from China. African students are also here in reasonable numbers.

I have not seen any signs of racism at all on the campus here though I hear that other universities in other Aussie states do have some problems.

I do know about the 'looks' as you put it. In my youth I spent some time in Africa and the Middle East where a north European white boy sticks out like a sore thumb. But I quickly was able to tell the difference in the kind of looks I got. For the most they were of simple curiosity and often a welcoming smile since some places I visited rarely saw a white face. But one could always tell that other kind of 'look'; the one that had you momentarily both worried and disappointed.

I don't blame you for wanting to get of the UK. I'm not sure anywhere else in Europe is any better. You may need to consider somewhere further afield - South Oz isn't too bad a place to be!

michael said...

Freedom Fighter and Damiam, the problem of contemporary racism is bankster manufactured.

They know well that racism is genetic to all of us, and as natural as breathing has been for millions of years.

That then is the cue for them to exploit to the max.

So as a substitute for their overly destructive wars of the 20th Century, they seek to disorient those majority ethnicities in targetted countries which are, sooner than others, by virtue solely of stability, likely to ask about how it is that banks actually conduct their business.

That is to say, that after a period of tranquillity in any given commercial, industrial or agricutural nation - whatever the mix, the banksters know that the people will have worked out that they make their money by creating it out of thin air; that is, they lend money in a multiple of up to 12 times that of deposits.

This in itself would not be a problem as people would just have to pay back, somehow, what they have borrowed - even if it's just hot air that was loaned to them. Which it is.

But that would not make profits for the banksters. But what does is the charging of interest, which, of course, is obscenely profitable.

This is why Mr Hitler and the German people had to be destroyed by bankster controlled western nations - Britain and the USA in particular were such bankster victims, as he issued money for constructive purposes interest free. Pre-existing debts also were.

As banksters knew that awareness amongst stable societies would renew soon enough after 1945 about their malodorous practices, and as continued pushing for wars behind the scenes - as is their historical want, would be exposed and acted upon, they hit upon the idea of multiracially based relentless immigration into the target countries without asking permission, by way of referendum, of the host peoples.

This last is absolutely critical to understanding the contemporary problems for white/non white relations in the UK and Australia as these countries would otherwise have, 50 years ago, begun to recover from the war, and would also then have started to ask pointed questions about banksters' behind the scenes activities which cost 60,000,000 lives by 1945.

Freedom Fighter, now that you know this, and if your parents have not passed on, please regard yourselves in the same way as white people would if they were forced by economic circumstances to seek a change of abode in, say, Pakistan.

I certainly hope that Pakistan would not let them in for reasons they do not need to state, let alone justify.

And so too for America Damian, for the key to the Wall St Bankster manufactured crisis, 29 Sep 2008, is recognising that 43 yrs of open border, uninvited by the host people, immigration into the USA was designed to focus these host peoples' attention on something other than how banksters' make their money.

Australia has the same problem, but longer standing.

Had the American people continued to retain from 1965 to the present day control over their own borders the banksters would have had to relinquish what they had usurped in 1913 with the Federal Reserve Act long before now; which means that the financial history to 29 Sept 2008 would have been very, very different.

Anonymous said...

funny micheal that u put an example of "pakistan" for me, and "america" for damian.
well over here, if u hav a tanned skin colour, ur called "paki" the dumb fools dont know any place except it.
so i suggest u micheal, actually realise that not all non-whites are "paki's" , i for one am not
so there u go, just from that, i can tell U r prejudice.
look further than the skin colour.

and @ damian, interesting article, the comments seemed very anti-immigration, kind of "get out of our land" way of thinking.

in regards to where to go, i really font know. majority of europe is just as bad as uk, if not worse. esp, eastern europeans.
and whilst im on the subject, here in th uk, we hav had scores of eastern europeans emigrating to this country, in the last 5 years.
we try to accept them, however our condition isn't the same as theirs.
they hav the white skin colour, and could easily be mistaken for white. only thing is their english, but couple of generations down the line, that will have changed.

south australia....hmm maybe.
i was thinking somewhere in the middle east, however like i said, i love multi-cultural places, having been born and bred here, and therefore maybe that would be too much one single race and religion kind of thing.

nsw...just from those comments, seems frighteningly rascist, dunno how any non-white would adapt there.

micheal---i really did not understand ur whole...banker theory.
lost me

michael said...

Freedom Fighter, i did say that racism is genetic to all of us, that means you too, and that's fine by me. If that's not obvious to you, do some introspection.

You need to re read what i said as i did not assume your parents were from Pakistan, but since the issue started with Islamabad's Marriot, then Pakistan as a point of reference would do.

And then you say that you do not understand my banker theory. Again the solution is to re read what i said - carefully this time, and also when you do some homework on banks you will then more fully understand why banks need clashes and tensions between different groups, and you, like me, are pawns in the banksters' game. Your parents went to the UK and mine went to Australia, and in the case of post war immigration to Australia starting 60 yrs ago, it was European and not Asian, only because it would have started a revolt against the govt of the time.

But the banksters plan all along was to replace white people here in Australia, as it is in the UK, USA and the EU, and so Phase 2 with Asian immigration was started in about 1977, having softened up the Anglo Australian over the previous 30 yrs with European immigration. In more recent yrs, Phase 3 with African immigration was started to keep racial tensions high lest the people think about how banks really get their money.

In other words, don't be their cat's paw, and if you, FF, think me racist, i do not care, because i know non whites are as much, but will keep on whining about it until there is enough of them here in Australia and the UK to fully reveal that to us whites.

FF, the purpose of banksters is to deny all people their humanity, and that is done thru their wars against all humanity, and between wars the tensions continue thru in-your-face-uninvited-by-the-host-people-immigration.

Constant churning and chaos, and mutual finger pointing everywhere that it can be instituted on the planet, will assure banksters their goal of complete murderous dominance. FF, look behind the arranged racism and see who is instigating it, and how it is done.

Lastly, i know that Damian is located in Sth Australia - only a half hour time zone difference.

Damian Lataan said...

Freedom Fighter, ‘the get out of our land’ rhetoric coming from white Australians is a bit rich considering it’s not ‘their’ land anyway to tell anyone to get out of. It annoys me no end when I hear some of these people demanding that if ‘foreigners’ want to come to Australia then they should adopt the ‘Australian’ culture – whatever that is. Very few white Europeans that came here originally with the First Fleet and Captain Cook bothered to adopt ‘Australian’ (Aboriginal) culture. In fact white Europeans were so self-righteous about their race and culture that they tried very hard to eliminate those indigenous peoples that originally occupied this land and, when that didn’t work, then tried to literally ‘breed’ them out of existence by removing the children from their parents and placing them into white homes. Unfortunately, little, at least in attitude, of some people hasn’t changed though it is very slowly improving. Better late than never.

Michael, in trying to create a better world for us all to live in, it is, I think, far more useful to understand history and learn from it rather than to use to justify a continuance of history. In other words, I think its better not to just try and improve what we have because what we have is merely a band aid version of what we’ve had before, but to change our whole way of thinking particularly in how we think about other people. One world. Many races. Enjoy the differences. Feel free to go where we please and enjoy each others company rather than be intolerant of it.

michael said...

Damian, the Aborigine lost 200yrs ago because he didn't have muskets, just like Saddam lost because he didn't have at least one nuke and means of delivery - the Zionists knew he didn't but lied to us that he did, and now 2,000,000 Iraqis are brutally murdered.

The fall back position for Aboriginal survival would have been to demand that the continuing invasion otherwise known as immigration be stemmed by means of Invasion Control Boards staffed entirely by Aborigines.

Because Aborigines don't ever ask, let alone demand, the establishment of such boards they will become extinct as a identifiable group faster than you can blink - speaking in geological time scales.

As for `One world. Many races. Enjoy the differences`, it is indeed one world that the banksters want as their ambition is a slave planet under their utter domination but what stands in the way is the existence of the many races, as each race left to itself and its distinctive culture will evolve its own banking independant of the global central banks and will have no use for said central banks which would then wither and die.

That is why we have the bankster engendered relentless application of uninvited immigration into the target countries of European settlement so that we do not achieve the tranquillity whereby we collectively can twig to the bankster fraud of cosmic proportions which is the legalised counterfeiting of what would have been our money and the deliberate destruction of our savings thru programmed inflation.

When Decentralised People's Banking replaces Centralised Private Banking then we can bask in the reflected ambience of, as you put it; One world. Many races. Enjoy the differences. Feel free to go where we please and enjoy each others company rather than be intolerant of it.

Damian Lataan said...

Michael, the Aborigines didn’t lose because they didn’t have guns; they lost because the white invaders did. There is an important difference. I’ll leave it to you figure out what it is. Suffice to say it goes to the heart of how people conduct their affairs with each other today.

michael said...

There is no difference Damian;

Saddam lost not because he didn't have deliverable nukes but because the US did ?

Is that it ?

Don't you wish he did have nukes as that would have saved the lives of 2,000,000 of his own people and 4,500 Americans ?

Standoff would have been the result.

Go back to 1991, same again, Bush 41 knew that Saddam had no serious capacity so soon after the depletions of the 1980-88 Iran Iraq war - and certainly no nukes, as the Israelis put paid to that at Osirik in 1981.

Or is it the rhetorician's glass half full/empty perspective ?

Damian Lataan said...

You’ve missed the point Michael. It’s not about who has the bigger weapons; it’s about changing the mindset from threatening and taking because you have the bigger weapon to sharing and enriching each other mutually with our joint resources and cultures without the need for weapons.

We need to learn from history; not repeat it.

michael said...

Damian, maybe Saddam could have retained you as his close advisor in 1990 and you would have been at his side when April Glasbie said to him on 28 July that the US Govt has no interest in inter Arab disputes when he had asked her what the attitude of the US Govt would be to his entering Kuwait ?

You would have advised him that the problem really is that the US Govt is armed and not that Iraq is relatively weak, and i am sure the 3,500,000 dead Iraqis since that time are eternally grateful - and they have plenty of time in which to be so.

The position you take Damian, is really New Age psychobabble and was carefully crafted to help disarm the populace in the face of the intended fascistic zionist bankster world govt, and hundreds of millions will die - at a minimum, if they succeed.

How come you fall for such stuff, as it's people like you who will get the rest of us killed by telling us that it's OK to lay down our arms because the other side ought to ?!

Is that it ?

Anonymous said...

@ damian...exactly, the brits have nothing of their own really. they went all across the world, and took all the resources.
from africa to asia and beyond. here, they dont even know how to control some little island. at the end of the day, if they didnt want me here, they shud have changed their immigration laws then, they should have voted out whoever made the laws, rather than 20-30 years down the line, giving us trouble.
this is no-one's land. ther should be no borders or various countries. we are all part of the human race. until we learn that, there will never be peace. there will always be the likes of britain, US, australia and the west, who think they are higher and more supreme than other nations and other people.

@ how exactly do the banks "really get their money"???
no, we are not naturally rascist, thats just sum lame excuse to shout out remarks at a person that isnt the same colour, race, culture, or religion as you.
WE ARE ALL ONE...people need to get over that fact.

and u 2 on about guns and weapons, we know how USA works, they massacre those who dont agree in their policies and stand in the way of their beliefs and "god given" right to rule. look at pakistan right now, in absoulute shambles, because the people are getting annoyed at US forced coming into pakistani territory. Look at iran, it doesnt take any middle east expert to know that its not long until they are going to have a stand off against USA. but like u said micheal, they have the ability to defend themselves, whilst saddam didn't. The UN is just another puppet organization, which helps the "higher" countries and states pass whatever, embargos and crap that they want to.
i understand damian, that fighting is never the solution, and that we should be following how people in the past got over their differences, but maybe its about time that a real force, stood upto the real dictators of this world.
maybe then americans, brits, aussies and others will realise that we are no better than a servant in africa, or a sick person in china, or an orphan in india.

Damian Lataan said...

As I said Michael, it’s about changing the mindset of the aggressor. Don’t mistake that for some kind of weakness. Until the mindset of the aggressor has changed then clearly those that need to defend themselves against the aggressor will need to be likewise so armed.

Freedom Fighter, the world needs to learn peace but if you are attacked you must defend yourself. There'll be no peace until people learn to defend themselves against an agressor that cannot change their mindset. The big battle, however, is not defending oneself but changing the mindset.

Anonymous said...

changing the mindset or whatever, i dont believe it could happen.

if these people whose mindset we are trying to change, are the like that open, and still carry on holding innocents in guantanamo, and (we all know the methods to extract forced information they use)how exactly dyu change those peoples mindsets?

its not possible damian, as much as we try to be peaceful and optimistic, its just not possible.
me, i'm a freedom fighter for muslims, but not only muslims, but for real freedom and justice.

i will defend lands and people, not for my sake, not at all. because as you know, i hav this lovely "home" (if i can call it that) i live in peace, but im willing, along with many others, to give up this peace, in order for others to have their peace.

this isn't what i think "certain" "radical" people do, rather those who care about the world outside their little bubble. when i switch on the internet, the first thing i check is the news, before my email and blog. why? because in order to live in this world as a human, i must care about other humans.

to really mean what im saying, i would try to look for a quote from a famous person, sumthing not religious.
However, the only way i can sum it up, is with a beautiful saying of our prophet muhammad (peace be upon him)
and before i actually say it, please dont be dismissive of it, because it is religious, but it really sums up MY struggle personally. sumtyms when i think the whole entire world is against my one goal of peace i remember this and feel satisfied:

"the believers regard themselves as one body, therefore if one part of this body is not well, the rest of the body shares this same feeling"
(not exact wordings"

its beautiful, and everyday, i feel for the innocent orphans, the widows, and young men seperated from their families. not because my life isn't enuf, or i care too much about other things, but simply because its my personal integrity.


michael said...

Freedom Fighter, go to .

We are all naturally racist, and by racist i want to make clear that i define it as being aware of differences, which is that you can see that i am a white fella and i can see that you are not, and that is racist - and is absolutely natural, and if the intelligence is also there for a race to build a nuke, and only by this criterion they are fully human and can join the club of humanity.

The Europeans, Israelis, Chinese, Indians, Pakistanis, Japanese, Koreans, Iraqis and Iranians are in that club.

Others are not to be impeded in their attempts, for we show our humanity by affording the right of the defenseless to acquire nukes through building them. The nuke is not to be given, it is to be built, and when built needs periodic maintenance which is their continuing test of skills.

I hope that the Latin Americans will, when they have thrown off the American yoke of servitude - and this is imminent, look to prove their worthiness by joining this club.

We show our inhumanity when we use nukes against the defenseless - Hiroshima and Nagasaki are, of course, seared in the collective memory for all time by this criterion.

To sum up, we show our humanity when we build nukes and show our inhumanity when we use them against the defenseless.

If a race cannot build a nuke and shows no potential to, then it is still evolving, and is not to be taken advantage of in any way - much like not taking advantage of disabled children.

Damian Lataan said...

Michael, it is a complete nonsense to claim that we are all racist simply because we are aware of our physical differences. And there will never be peace while the mindset is confrontational.

Education is the way to change the mindset. It will take a long time and one must aim for the seemingly impossible. There is no other alternative at all. We can only hope that the process of education is completed before humans, regardless of race, cause their own extinction.

A good start in the pursuit of peace is to rid ourselves of the notion of any racial exceptionalism. There’s no point in arming everyone; the risk of conflict rises. The race that delusionally thinks it is racially exceptional will be tempted eventually to believe that the use of nuclear weapons is an acceptable option in maintaining what it thinks is its status quo. It’s far better if we were all disarmed.

The notion that killing a quarter of a million people in 1945 was for the greater good of mankind is an illusion. Furthermore, the people that used those weapons had no illusions at all about the real purpose for using those weapons.

michael said...

I was taking away the pejorative from the word racist by adding a additional meaning to it, so that when someone calls me that, i am happy to respond by saying that i define it differently; ie, to see a black, yellow, white, brown, bronze or reddish bronze man is also to acknowledge that there are different breeds of dogs or cattle. Same thing.

And as each breed of dog or cattle or fish or fowl has its attributes, and we can't help but notice them; so why is it `confrontational` to notice this with humans ?

In horticulture there are the different kinds of beans or flowers or nuts or cabbage. Same thing again.

Once we elevate ourselves as being apart from the rest of living nature we drift to self worship from which the sociopathy of wanting to acquire nukes arises.

The only antidote to this contemporary madness is not being nice and smiling and welcoming, for we know what happened to colonized peoples when they were.

Colonized peoples' tried educating the less than humble self worshipping invaders about the harmony with nature that they had achieved; which got them what Damian ?

Massacres. Millions of innocents in sum. Right ?

The only way to achieve disarmament is thru self armament by the manufacture of nukes by more states than at present, which takes a high tech state to do and not a village.

Right now, USrael is looking to obliterate Iran using nukes because Iran does not have any. What do you propose in this example about to go ballistic Damian ? `Education`?

USrael wants most everywhere to remain a village and exploitable to the max, and any village that is evolving towards reaching the real defensive capability is seen not as a source of future aggression but as a obstacle to globalisation by private central bankers, for whom USrael is cat's paw.

Damian, ask the Palis what making nice and `educating` a nuclear power has done for them these last 60 yrs.

Result? More than 60,000 dead Palis.

I don't know how you can read into my remarks that i was conveying that killing all those people of Japan was for the greater good of mankind. I did say that the criterion of inhumanity was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Or when you say that the people who used those weapons had no illusions about the real purpose of using those weapons.

That strikes me as being irrelevant, as purpose is nullified the moment the instrument of purpose, the nuke, is balanced by the potential of nuclear counterstrike. At which moment, `real purpose` can be put in a pipe and go up in smoke.

Really a case of,`I don't care what your grand geostrategic motive is for wanting to use a nuke on me is - that's your problem, just remember, you hit me and you'll be surprised in like measure`.

That Damian, is `education` that USrael clearly does understand as the old USSR survived only because it did have nukes, as does N.Korea.

The `delusional race` is not about the maintenance of the `status quo`, as you say, rather, it is about violently changing it if recalcitrants do not obey orders by the liberal application of nukes.

The bottom line is that nukes in the possession of otherwise targetted nations instantly guarantees the peace.

Damian Lataan said...

Michael, your notion of race seems to be based on perceptions. The sensory perception of sight seems to be your preferred method of differentiating races. You talk of “…to see a black, yellow, white, brown, bronze or reddish bronze man is also to acknowledge that there are different breeds of dogs or cattle. Same thing.” Pure garbage! It’s not the same thing at all.

You go on to ask: “And as each breed of dog or cattle or fish or fowl has its attributes and we can't help but notice them; so why is it `confrontational` to notice this with humans?”

Colour does not at all determine human attributes. Colour certainly does not determine superiority of physical or intellectual attributes. To even suggest that it does is ‘confrontational’ – not to mention racist!

Noticing attributes (human, animal or vegetable), is one thing, pretending that one set of human attributes are better than another human’s set of attributes is racist and confrontational. Skin colour is not an ‘attribute’ that determines anything except, perhaps, the ability or lack thereof of resisting sunburn.

Your assertion that “The only way to achieve disarmament is thru self armament by the manufacture of nukes by more states than at present, which takes a high tech state to do and not a village,” is ridiculous in the extreme and will lead only to further confrontation which could well lead to a scenario where just one crazy – in a world now full of them thanks to your lunatic idea of putting more nukes into the hands of even more crazy people – has the power to destroy the planet.

You reckon: “USrael is looking to obliterate Iran using nukes because Iran does not have any. What do you propose in this example about to go ballistic Damian ? `Education`?”

It seems you are in need of some education. The US and Israel are not seeking to destroy what they think is Iran’s nuclear weapons program – they both know that Iran doesn’t have one and the assertion that they have is pure propaganda and rhetoric designed shape western public opinion against Iran. The US and Israel will not be using nuclear weapons to destroy Irans ‘nuclear program’. What the US and Israel are after is regime change; not obliteration. Western public opinion is not accepting the idea that Iran needs to be attacked with US and Israeli nuclear weapons, nor, indeed, any weapons at all. The people of America and the world now know that the lies that started the war against Iraq are the same lies that are being used now against Iran. And they now know because they have been ‘educated’. The truth has been revealed to them. There were no WMDs.

You can’t get a better education than having been taught the knowledge of truth. And there is no better weapon than being armed with the truth. All the nuclear weapons in the world will not change the truth. But they can suppress it which is why fear pervades in your confrontational world and your simplistic perceptions of race based on colour being a part of those fears.

michael said...

~Almost 1 million white Americans were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by black Americans in 1992, compared with about 132,000 blacks who were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by whites, according to the same survey.

Blacks thus committed 7.5 times more violent inter-racial crimes than whites even though the black population is only one-seventh the size of the white population. When these figures are adjusted on a per capita basis, they reveal an extraordinary disparity: blacks are committing more than 50 times the number of violent racial crimes of whites.~

As blacks vastly disproportionately are very much into offensive racism, may i be indulged in a little defensive racism ?

By that i mean, may i take some pre emptive evasive action by being party to the decision making process of deciding who comes into the country, as i don't fancy the space between my ribs being sought by a knife of their's for an easier plunge ?

Wouldn't it be ironic were you yourself Damian, to be a victim of just such a tender pointed steely embrace by a people whose mindset so often is resonating with the subliminal chant of,`Kill whitey, kill whitey` ?

To the dying victim it really is academic whether there is a genetic basis for that predisposition to kill whitey, as rarefied pursuits of this kind by physically shielded academics invariably will come up with findings pleasing to the Masters of the Universe - to which expression there has been surprising media reference of late in connection with the financial upheavals of their own making.

Damian Lataan said...

I can assure you Michael, that over the course of the last few centuries far more black people have died a result white racism than whites have been killed by blacks. Slowly but surely education is eroding the power of racist hatreds.

michael said...

For as long as Zionism exists, conflict between different groups along lines of ethnicity or religion are to be encouraged.

When Zionism is no more - through exposure, then all problems between peoples of all races - including the various races of which Jews are comprised, and religions will be resolved in a matter of months. Literally !

Take note, this gratuitous devastation of Gaza just now is a repeat of what happened to Lebanon and her innocent people 2 1/2 yrs ago, and these genetically based criminals(God's Chosen or Sons of Satan is what i mean) thought they could get away with it one more time.

No More !!!!

Tell them that we know they are planning a third hit soon - again for fun, because they think they can get away with it.

Classic motiveless crime. Incomprehensible to non Jews.

There will not be an end to this until we, all 7,000,000,000 of us can anticipate what they will do next, and to let them know in no uncertain terms that we the people of the world have had it up to here with their infantile Stone Age tantrums !

This is the permanent modern era and Stone Age behaviour patterns have had their use by date a long time ago, but the practitioners of these hateful of others patterns need to be told that firmly; that they are out of date and out of time!

Having read the Fortune Parks Hotel contribution i can say with complete certainty that when Zionism is no more, security won't be necessary as we all will feel secure in each other's company.

durga said...

just linked this article on my facebook account. it’s a very interesting article for all.
Emigrating To Australia From UK

durga said...

My cousin recommended this blog and she was totally right keep up the fantastic work!
Emigrating To Australia From UK