Abu Musab al Zarqawi's name being promoted again

In some of the earlier articles we wrote on Profindpages News, we mentioned that al Zarqawi was the person that will eventually be "blamed" for the new 9/11 attack.

We have reprinted our latest article on this below and feel that we can expect to see this name appear much more in the next few weeks. The "connection" between al Zarqawi and Iran will also be promoted strongly and we may see the U.S. intelligence produce what they will call "conclusive" evidence to support this claim. Should this happen, you can expect the "attack" to take place within days of the announcement.

Unlike the previous 9/11 attack, where guilt and motive were placed on the attackers after the event, al Zarqawi is going to be made "guilty" before it happens this time. It's interesting to note that the name of Osama bin Laden has not appeared yet, but then he is busy enjoying his "retirement" in a nice safe house provided by certain members of the U.S. government and protected by U.S. and Pakistani troops (near a place called Chitral in Pakistan that is close to the Afghan border)

al Zarqawi link with Aqaba missile attack suggested
A missile attack in the port of Aqaba, Jordan, which only just missed the USS Ashland, has received suggestions that Abu Musab al Zarqawi may be involved.

Abu Musab al Zarqawi, who we are led to believe is now perhaps more powerful than the elusive Osama bin Laden, is often mentioned as the figure behind many "terrorist" attacks. He is also a figure that the U.S. are trying very hard to connect to Iran.

Even though the missiles fired at Aqaba and Israel were "pea-shooters" compared to many of the attacks al Zarqawi has been blamed for and appear to have been fired by "amateurs", some still try to make a link.

We have thought for some time now that al Zarqawi will be the person blamed for the "new" 9/11 attack, which is getting ever closer. As far as we are aware, al Zarqawi has never been involved in an attack quite like this. But if a connection can be "established" between the Aqaba missile attack, it will be easier to link him to any future attack that uses missiles.

The report concerning al Zarqawi came from Jordanian intelligence experts, but sounds very much like a Bush administration script. As usual, there is no proof to back up this claim and simply looks like a good opportunity to promote the idea that al Zarqawi is going to be the "fall guy" this time.

It was also interesting to hear that audio tapes from al Zarqawi, vowing to punish Jordan's rulers for "aiding the treacherous enemy America", have suddenly been mentioned. Where did these come from and when? And why did we have to wait for this "attack" to happen before anyone mentions them?

We have already seen Iran's name mentioned as been "backers" of one of the groups involved in the Aqaba missile attack, although officials can't seem to make up their minds exactly who to blame for it.

The only thing that is certain, is that Iran will continue to be mentioned in the next few weeks. The purpose of this works on the principle of "Mud sticks!"

Sadly, we feel that another "staged" 9/11 attack is still on the cards and the 11th of September still seems like the most likely date.

Was this recent missile attack a "test run" for something bigger?

We wrote an article some time ago predicting that the next 9/11 "attack" could involve a U.S. Naval ship. Was this a test run or an attempt to show us that such attacks could (and probably will) take place.

A copy of our article on this is shown below. Your comments are welcome.


Missile attack on U.S. Navy ships believed to be connected to Al-Qaeda

(19.08.2005)

At least three missiles were launched from Jordan today in what appeared to be an attempt to hit two U.S. Navy ships docked in the port of Aqaba, Jordan.

One of the missiles narrowly missed the USS Ashland, which has now put out to sea with the USS Kearsage.

Although there were no U.S. casualties, a Jordanian soldier was killed in the attack and at least one other person reportedly injured.

The missile that missed the USS Ashland, landed on a warehouse (that the killed Jordanian soldier was guarding), another landed near an airport in Israel, near the Red Sea resort of Eilat, but did not explode.

A group called "The Abdullah al-Azzam Brigades of the al-Qaeda Organization in the Levant and Egypt" have apparently claimed responsibility for the attack, but this has not been confirmed.

The missiles were launched from a warehouse in Katyusha, Jordan, and authorities are looking for a Syrian and two Iraqis. However, other reports claim that the warehouse was leased to three Iraqis and an Egyptian?

It is uncertain whether any of the missiles actually exploded and this would make the second attack (the second London "bombing" being the first) where unexploding bombs have been used.

Readers may care to read our article (The New 9/11 expected on the same date) dated the 17th of July, which was an update on how we believe the "new" 9/11 will occur. Others believe that this will take place on American soil and although this can't be ruled out, we are going to stick with our original prediction.

Could this latest attack be a test run for the USS Nimitz? Hopefully not, but if it is, be sure to remember our warning and ask plenty of questions afterwards!

Murder of Brazilian man Menezes the subject of lies and a cover up

Our second post for the News Group concerns the Brazilian man who was murdered in the Stockwell Tube Station in London. He was believed to be a suspect bomber, but this turned out to be wrong.

This man was "executed" a point blank range with a total of 8 shots! Various witness reports suggested that he was running away from police and that he was wearing a thick coat (one witness even said they saw him wearing a "bomb belt")

Obviously, someone is lying, but who? Our article (published on Profindpages News) is shown below:

Murder of Brazilian man Menezes followed by lies and cover-up attempts
(17.08.2005)

Leaked documents to the ITV, related to the probe into the "murder" of Brazilian man Jean Charles de Menezes, show a much different picture to that given shortly after his death.

The documents show that Menezes did not hurdle the barrier at Stockwell tube station as previously suggested and he was not wearing a heavy padded coat, but a denim jacket!

The police had followed Menezes into Stockwell Tube station. Menezes had walked (not run) into the station, picked up a free newspaper, walked through (and not jumped over) ticket barriers, and only ran when he saw the train arriving.

On entering the carriage, he looked around for a seat and sat down. A number of "police officers" entered the carriage and it would seem that this is the first time that police actually identified themselves to Menezes. His response (according to the leaked report) was to stand up and walk towards the officers.

Clearly, Menezes had made no attempt to avoid the police during all of this and even got up and walked towards them, when they eventually decided to reveal their identity. Yet despite this, Menezes was pushed back onto the seat in the carriage, held by one of the officers and executed!

But what of all the earlier reports and witness statements immediately after the shooting?

If you check the following BBC article dated 22nd of July http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706913.stm, you will find witness statements like:

"He [the suspect] had a baseball cap on and quite a sort of thickish coat - it was a coat you'd wear in winter, sort of like a padded jacket"

"I saw these police officers in uniform and out of uniform shouting 'get down, get down', and I saw this guy who appeared to have a bomb belt and wires coming out and people were panicking and I heard two shots being fired"

Yet in an article by the BBC today, you will find:

The latest documents suggest Mr de Menezes had walked into Stockwell Tube station, picked up a free newspaper, walked through ticket barriers, had started to run when he saw a train arriving and was sitting down in a train when he was shot.

In the immediate aftermath of the incident, police said Mr de Menezes had been acting suspiciously and suggested he had vaulted the ticket barriers.

Police also said the Brazilian electrician had worn a large winter-style coat - but the leaked version suggested he had in fact worn a denim jacket.

This version shows that "police" suggested Menezes had "vaulted" the ticket barrier and that they had said he was wearing "a large winter -style coat"

So which is correct? Did witnesses say these things or did the police? And if witnesses did give such statements, were they told to? But perhaps of additional concern is, how did the BBC manage to find so many people whose statements were clearly false?

We agree with the family of Jean Charles de Menezes that a public enquiry should be held, they have every right to see his murderers exposed for this execution. The British public should also be allowed to see exactly what is happening in their country now and what will happen to it (and its people) if these people are not stopped. Let's see these lies and cover-ups brought into the open and those responsible punished for their crimes. To let the officers involved "off" with some suspension or reduction in rank will be nothing more than a disgrace. Those who gave the orders to kill should also be dealt with in the strongest manner possible, whose actions are little better than the "terrorists" they claim they are protecting us from.

John O'Connor, the former Flying Squad commander, told the BBC the leaked report would cause "great embarrassment" to Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair, adding he would be under pressure to "go".

Hopefully, if the British public ever get to see what the PM is up to, another Blair will join the Commissioner very soon! The sooner they both "go" the better.

This is perhaps a good example that the mainstream media (even the mighty BBC) can not be relied on for accuracy all the time. This is why we encourage people to look at as many different News sources as possible. Sadly, Google News used to provide a good mixture, but even they have resorted to displaying more mainstream sources now.

It is very much a catch 22 situation. In order to become "mainstream" you need a lot of readers. But if you are not allowed to do this, it is not possible!

Our first "News Group" Newsletter!

Welcome to our very first "Newsletter" We are pleased to say that the interest in joining our News Group has been very encouraging and continues to grow.

But what do we hope to achieve with this Newsletter? Well, it is unlikely that we are going to change the way people think overnight, but then, Rome wasn't built in a day.

The main purpose is to publish and share information that we feel is not being discussed openly in the mainstream media. Most of you, who are reading this first Newsletter, found out about the News Group from an article we published concerning our worries that a new 9/11 attack is being planned. Unfortunately, we believe (like many others) that this "new" attack will be carried out by the same people that organised the first. But who really carried out the first attack?

The official line is that Al-Qaeda were the culprits behind this terrible act, led by a man called Osama bin Laden. Whilst bin Laden may have played some part in this, we believe that he was invited to do so by people connected to the U.S. government. This is perhaps not so surprising as bin Laden used to work for the CIA and helped the U.S. when Russia had invaded Afghanistan.

But could the U.S. government really have been involved in the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center that killed more than 3,000 innocent people? As terrible as it sounds, yes, we do believe that and this belief is shared by many others. But why?

Tactics like this have been used by leaders of countries before. Hitler did the same thing to give the impression that communists were threatening the security of Germany, and this helped him to gain power. The rest, as they say, is history.

If you read the history of how Hitler gained his power, you will see many similarities to the events that are happening today.

There are perhaps two reasons why certain countries in the Middle East have been added to the "axis of evil" list. Iraq and Iran both have a great deal of oil and Afghanistan (who have very little) are a necessary part of the plan because their country will be used to carry an oil pipe (to export the new found oil supply). The second reason probably involves Israel. Iran and Iraq are considered a serious danger by Israel and if the existing regimes in both countries are "removed", this will eliminate the risk and leave Israel as the major (nuclear) power in the region.

At this point we would like to make it clear that we are not anti-semitic and are not concerned whether Democrats or Republicans run America. Quite frankly, the political party politicians work for no longer seems to be that important. This is probably because the people really running the country can work with both (you may have already have got that impression from seeing Kerry conceed so quickly after the election results were being announced in November 2004). You may also be aware that Kerry and Bush are (or were) both members of a "secret club" called "Skull and Bones" at their university.

But are the people going to be fooled twice by a 9/11 attack? There are certainly a lot of people who have doubts about the first attack and they are certain to ask questions should it happen again. The people behind it are just as certain of this and it will require something spectacular to gain the support of the U.S. public (and the world). But what sort of an attack would horrify the people enough to support an attack on Iran? There has been much speculation as to where this could take place (South Carolina is one of the favourites, although we have suggested an Aircraft Carrier in the Persian Gulf), but most believe that the attack will be nuclear in nature and will kill many thousands of people.

The "attackers" are almost certainly going to be connected to Iran in some way (this will be announced very quickly afterwards) and of course this will be the reason for a retaliation attack. We have seen the foundations for this being laid for many months now. News reports have said that Iran is close to obtaining a nuclear weapon, Al-Qaeda members may be hiding in Iran and that Iran is supporting terrorists financially.

The recent bombings in London (all connected with Al-Qaeda of course) are just additional "bricks" being added to the earlier foundations, and we can probably expect to see further "attacks" in other countries shortly.

We believe that the "new" 9/11 was planned for June, but with talks between Europe and Iran still proceeding, this was delayed. These talks have now almost broken up and this leaves the door more open. You will recall that John Bolton was recently "placed" in the UN by Bush (even though a senate vote supporting this appointment was not obtained). Bolton was given the job with the aid of a rarely used option. Bush now has a powerful ally on the "inside" and this may help overcome the problems he had with the UN over Iraq.

The best we can perhaps hope for (at the moment) is that by publishing these thoughts, we may delay the event (if they think that there is a danger that people will not believe what is happening).

Sadly, getting this information noticed in the mainstream news areas is almost impossible and there is talk that websites publishing this sort of information could be "censored" in some way. Hopefully, no matter what happens, we should still be able to exchange our views on future events, whether this is via our special blog, or by email.

When this "event" will take place is uncertain, but we feel that it might happen on the 11th of September again. U.S. Military leave (according to reports) has been cancelled for September and certain other activities indicate that preparations are being made for something soon.

Anyway, these are our thoughts on the subject. We would love to hear yours. You can post a comment on this blog, but you need to register first. You don't have to give your real name and your email address will not be revealed.

We look forward to hearing from you shortly and hope you like our first Newsletter. We have included some links to other sites (that offer "alternative" news articles) and these can be found on the right hand side of the page.

Updates will be made as often as possible and of course we will try to respond to comments as quickly as we can. We did plan on doing a more traditional Newsletter, but not everyone is able to read HTML emails and this method also allows you to make contributions automatically.