The Golden Mosque- False Flag?

Saturday, 20 January 2007

To read the whole of this go to:www.informationclearinghouse.com

The bombing of the Golden Mosque��
By Mike Whitney

01/20/07 "ICHBlog" -- - We�ve heard a lot about the bombing of
Samarra�s Golden Mosque lately. Bush has brought it up twice in the
last week alone. It�s a critical part of the administration�s rationale
for the occupation of Iraq, so we can expect to be reminded of it
nearly as often as 9-11.

The destruction of the Golden-dome Mosque took place in February
2005 and has been identified as the �catalyzing event� that plunged
the country into sectarian violence. That, at least, is just the official
version. No one knows really what happened because the
administration refused to conduct an independent investigation and
the media excluded any account that didn�t square with the
Pentagon�s spin on events.

What we�re left with is mere speculation.

Here's what we know: Less than 4 hours after the explosion, the Bush
public relations team cobbled together a statement that the bombing
was the work of Sunni extremists or al Qaida terrorists. But, how did
they know? They didn�t have witnesses on the ground in Samarra and
they�ve never produced a scintilla of evidence to support their
claims. It may be that the administration simply saw the bombing as
an opportunity to twist the facts to suit their own purposes?

After all, the incident has been a propaganda-bonanza for the Bush
team. They�ve used it to support their theory that Iraq is �the central
battle in the war on terror� and that �we must fight them there if we
don�t want to fight them over here�.� It�s become one of the main
justifications for the occupation; implying that the US military is
needed as a referee to keep the warring factions from killing each
other. It�s all just nonsense that�s designed to advance the
administration�s political agenda.

If there had been an investigation, it would have shown whether the
perpetrators were experts or not by the placement of the explosives.
There�s a good chance they would�ve found bomb-residue which
could have determined the composition of the material used.
Forensics experts could have easily ascertained whether the
explosives came from Iraqi munitions-dumps (as suggested) or from
outside the country (like the USA, perhaps?)

The incident may well have been a �false flag� operation carried out
by US intelligence agencies to provoke sectarian violence and, thus,
reduce the number of attacks on American troops.

In any event, as soon as the mosque was destroyed the media swung
into action focusing all of its attention on sectarian violence and the
prospect of civil war. The media�s incessant �cheerleading� for civil
war was suspicious, to say the least.

In the first 30 hours after the blast, more than 1,500 articles
appeared on Google News providing the government version of
events without deviation and without any corroborating evidence;
just fluff that reiterated the Pentagon�s account verbatim and without
challenge.

1500! Now that�s a well-oiled propaganda system!

Most of the articles were �cookie cutter-type� stories which used the
same buzzwords and talking points as all the others; no interviews,
no facts, no second opinions; simple, straightforward
stenography---nothing more.

The story was repeated for weeks on end never veering from the
same speculative theory. Clearly, a great amount of effort was being
exerted to convince the American people that this was a significant
event that would reshape the whole context of the war in Iraq. In
fact, the media blitz that followed was grander than anything since
9-11; a spectacular display of the media�s power to manipulate
public opinion.

There were a few articles that didn�t follow the party-line, but they
quickly disappeared into a cyber-�black hole� or were dismissed as
conspiracy theories. One report in AFP said that the bombing �was
the work of specialists� and the �placing of explosives must have
taken at least 12 hours�. The article continued:

�Construction Minister Mohammed Jaafar said, �Holes were dug into
the mausoleum�s four main pillars and packed with explosives. Then
charges were connected together and linked to another charge
placed just under the dome. The wires were then linked to another
charge placed just under the dome. The wires were then linked to a
detonator which was triggered at a distance.�

Of course, what does that prove? Perhaps, al Qaida has skilled
explosives experts? But why not investigate? After all, if this was the
�catalyzing event� which was thrusting the country towards civil war;
why not have the FBI come in and have a look-around?

A professional team of investigators could have quickly determined
whether highly-trained saboteurs were operating in the area. (which
meant that American troops would be at greater risk) Isn�t that worth
checking out?

Nope. The Pentagon did nothing. There was no effort at all to find
out who might have been involved. It was an open and shut case;
wrapped up before the dust had even settled in Samarra.

Very strange.

Apparently, there was at least one witness who was interviewed
shortly after the bombing. He said that he heard cars running outside
the mosque �the whole night until morning� but, he was warned �to
stay in your shop and don�t leave until morning�.

At 6:30 AM the next morning, the vehicles outside the mosque left.
10 minutes later the bombs exploded.

None of the people living in the vicinity of the mosque were ever
questioned. Likewise, the Construction Minister Mohammed Jaafar
has never resurfaced in the news again. I expect that his comments
in the newspaper may have had something to do with his sudden
disappearance, but then maybe not.

Sister Herjihad, I find the whole article terrifying in its clarity. If you
read the whole original post, you'll see how the writer has revealed
far more to us than just the possibility that the US was behind the
bombing of the mosque.

The problem with 'conspiracy theories' is that they always contain a
grain of truth. However, I do feel the string of events since before 9/
11 are too broad and far reaching to have all been part of some
conspiracy plan. There are too many variables and possible
outcomes at play. Most conspiracy theories are worked out after the
facts, so they have the benefit of hindsight. Foresight is even harder.

I personally feel the bombing of the mosque was not carried out by
Moslems. Why were no mosques targeted before? If whoever did it
had access to such precision explosives, why haven't they used it
since, nor before, against more relevant targets (US/coallition
targets.)? I have a feeling the whole damn thing is unravelling slowly
and by the time our children are adults, it will all be in the open.

I mean, the who and the why.

We are now being fed information to prove how the civil (uncivil) war
in Iraq was bound to have happened, all shoring up the official line. I
have tremendous suspicion for all official lines, but that doesn't
make me a sucker for conspiracy theorists.

I think it is of deep importance that everybody everywhere learns
how wicked and twisted the US administration and the whole military
industrial economic set up really is. If that means wading through a
few 'conspiracy theories' so be it. Pieces like this, as you say, give us
a serious and well founded basis for 'entertaining' alternative lines to
the official ones.