New Zealand's War on Terror

[Sid Walker]

Those nifty New Zealand cops have outsmarted the terrorists again! Or perhaps it was - after all - just a few hunting types having a bit of fun?

What's great about New Zealand is their laid back approach to the WoT. Police too busy to bring the case to court quickly. Busy with what? Issuing parking tickets?

The next time an Artab or Muslim gets framed with high explosives in other, less civilized parts of the English-speaking world, they should use the New Zealand defence: "Your Honour, I was looking after (the explosives) for some other person I trusted. Some were a bit odd and unless you really had knowledge, you wouldn't recognise them."

That's if they ever get to see His Honour before they confess under torture...

Symphony musician charged over explosives

By DEAN CALCOTT and JOANNA DAVIS - The Press | Wednesday, 11 April 2007

JOHN KIRK-ANDERSON/The Press

A Christchurch Symphony musician has been charged with unlawfully possessing explosives, some allegedly military in origin.

Bernard David Shapiro, 35, a french-horn player, was allegedly found with a cache of weapons, including military-style explosives, on March 29.

Police say the cache included five military flares, two anti-personnel mines, eight sticks of Powergel and two cans of black powder.

Shapiro has had a public profile because of his full-time employment with Christchurch Symphony as well as for his less conventional pursuits as an amateur historian, including solo tramps around the South Island dressed in 19th-century attire.

He has been an enthusiastic member of a fringe group, Alf's Imperial Army.

Shapiro's wife said last night he would not comment before the court case.

"If you've read the stories (in The Press) about him, you will know it's not something that he would do intentionally," she said.

His lawyer, Jonathan Eaton, said the court case had been delayed because police were busy with more serious cases. He hoped the matter could be dealt with outside the courts.

"I don't think anybody's suggesting there was a high level of culpability associated with this," Eaton said. "He was looking after (the explosives) for some other person whom he trusted. Some were a bit odd and unless you really had knowledge, you wouldn't recognise them."

Christchurch Symphony concertmaster Jan van den Berg said he did not believe the matter reflected on the orchestra.

New Zealand Defence Force spokeswoman Major Charmaine Pene said the army had a strict accounting system for arms and munitions. It included regular stocktakes and checks. Items were secured in alarm-equipped armouries.

Shapiro received a registrar's remand on bail to July 5 for a status hearing.

Edited April 12, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Len Colby]

I glad that Sid brought this highly important story to our attention and am glad the Kiwis were able to apprehend this obvious psychopath and thwart his plans. The evidence that he was indeed quite dangerous is quite clear consider the following:

He:

- is a French-horn player with the Christchurch Symphony

- is an amateur historian

- goes around alone “dressed in 19th-century attire”

- is a member “Alf's Imperial Army” ‘a "paradoxical army" that fought for fun’ that goes around in 19th (or is it 18th ) century military attire

http://www.wizard.gen.nz/alfsarmy.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20031210142330/...ry/invadenz.jpg?

-is a hunter and hunting guide so obviously he has no qualms about killing innocent little animals, killing people is the obvious next step.

Obviously this the cover of an alienated terrorist intent on killing numerous innocents to achieve his goals after all he had:

- 5 military flares

Which he was probably planning to use to scare the residents or an old age home to death with or start a deadly sheep stamped

- 2 cans of black powder

Which is commonly used

a) by “ceremonial regiments” like Alf’s Imperial Army which use centuries old muzzle loaders or modern replicas – I guess they want us to believe it’s just a coincidence he happened to belong to such a regiment and had a couple cans of gunpowder. I wonder how many “military exercises” the “Army” was planning.

in fireworks

c) for model rockets

d) by the mining industry because as a low intensity explosive it spilts rock rather than shatters rock into small fragments.

Heck with two cans of the stuff he could probably blow out all the windows of a good size house, scare everyone with in a several block radius or cause a stampede of kangaroos

Oooops I forgot they don’t have kangaroos in New Zeeland he must have been planning to use the 5 flares and the 2 cans of powder to cause a really big sheep stampede. I bet he was gonna play his horn and fire his muzzle loader at the same time as the blasts which undoubtedly would have really freaked those sheep out and caused a gargantuan stampede, that devious psycho!

- 8 sticks of Powergel

Which is sold to anyone with an appropriate permit and is used in mining and avalanche control. http://www.oricaminingservices.com/product...ProductTypeID=2

I wonder how much bang you can get out of 8 sticks. I wonder if the ever well informed Mr. Walker from ‘down-under’ (as opposed to the other Mr. Walker from ‘up over’) can tell us.

Yes he did have 2 anti-personnel mines I wonder if they working or replicas or deactivated authenticated ones apparently people collect such items*. You think if they were the real think we would have heard about the local bomb squad having swung into action.

* http://cgi.ebay.com/MINE-ANTI-PERSONNEL-M1...1QQcmdZViewItem

In any case they don’t seem to make idea terrorist weapon in a peaceful country being more suited for the battlefield. Since they have to be buried they would be difficult to plant without being noticed.

He doesn’t seem to fit the profile of terrorist, which might explain the relaxed attitude of police. He is married, gainfully employed presumably doing something he enjoys, has hobbies. There are no indications he is involved in political or religious let alone extremist groups, Nor are there any indications he planned on using any of the items that we can’t even be sure are his to harm anyone. Simply possessing illegal explosives doesn’t make someone a terrorist suspect.

Edited April 17, 2007 by Len Colby

[Sid Walker]

He doesn’t seem to fit the profile of terrorist, which might explain the relaxed attitude of police. He is married, gainfully employed presumably doing something he enjoys, has hobbies. There are no indications he is involved in political or religious let alone extremist groups, Nor are there any indications he planned on using any of the items that we can’t even be sure are his to harm anyone. Simply possessing illegal explosives doesn’t make someone a terrorist suspect.

Quite so, Len. My point exactly.

He is married, gainfully employed presumably doing something he enjoys, has hobbies.

In that respect, he sounds very much like Mohammad Sidique Khan

Simply possessing illegal explosives doesn’t make someone a terrorist suspect.

I agree 100%.

Now, how about a simple demonstration to prove this important point, Len?

Dress up in drag, like one normallly would at Carnivale - but this time be a little more risque and wear purdah and sunglesses.

Take a walk to the nearest Town Hall with a couple of belts of explosives stapped to your waist. Using your best Semitic accent, explain to the nice man at the door that you have come to inspect the foundations and you'd prefer to use the stairway that isn't monitored by CCTV.

Remember to leave a note explaining that your logically impeccable view that "possessing illegal explosives doesn’t make someone a terrorist suspect" just in case you don't make it through the day.

Anyhow, Len, welcome back. I had vaguely wondered where you've been the last week or so.

Busy with a damage-limitation assignment in New Zealand?

Edited April 17, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Len Colby]

“He is married, gainfully employed presumably doing something he enjoys, has hobbies.

In that respect, he sounds very much like Mohammad Sidique Khan

Simply possessing illegal explosives doesn’t make someone a terrorist suspect

I agree 100%.”

Let consider some important difference between Khan and Shapiro and their explosives.

EXPLOSIVES

“Shapiro’s” explosive were presumably found in his house, there are no indications they were going to be used for any purpose anytime in the near future or that they ever were intended to be used to harm anyone. Part of them were quite innocuous.

Khan’s explosives were detonated while he was wearing them under his clothes while he was on a crowded subway (underground) train killing himself and 6 people. The attacks he organized killed 48 people and 4 terrorists.

INTENT

There is no indication Shapiro wanted to harm anyone.

Khan indicated in his martyrdom video he wanted to kill as many people as possible.

HOBBIES

Shapiro’s hobbies included

-studying history,

-hunting,

-marching around with friends dressed as “paradoxical” 18th or 19th century soldiers and engaging in mock battles and

-walking around alone dressed in 19th century civilian (presumably) attire.

Khan’s “hobbies” included

-traveling to Pakistan and Afghanistan to get jihad training,

-possible involvement in previous bomb attacks in Bali and Tel Aviv and a failed attack in London and

-radicalizing his students at a local Islamic center.

RELIGIOUS/POLITICAL OUTLOOK

We don’t have any indications Shapiro was particularly interested in religion or politics.

Khan associated with other jihadists

Gee why is the former not considered a terrorist suspect like the latter? Why the “ ‘double’ standard”? Oh yes it must be because Khan was a Muslim and Shapiro is (presumably) Jewish [sid seems to have been driving at this since the “get go”] the evil Zionist controlled media and police strike again!

“Now, how about a simple demonstration to prove this important point, Len?

<snip>

Take a walk to the nearest Town Hall with a couple of belts of explosives stapped to your waist.

<snip>

Remember to leave a note explaining that your logically impeccable view that "possessing illegal explosives doesn’t make someone a terrorist suspect" just in case you don't make it through the day”

You’ve made some ludicrous points in the past but this time you’ve out done yourself. Possessing explosives in ones house especially when there is no evidence you are planning on using them to harm anyone is one thing wearing them strapped to ones body and trying to gain entrance into a public building or detonating them in crowded place (like Khan and his co-conspirators) is obviously something else entirely.

“Using your best Semitic accent,” just what are you driving at Sid?

[Sid Walker]

“He is married, gainfully employed presumably doing something he enjoys, has hobbies.

In that respect, he sounds very much like Mohammad Sidique Khan

Simply possessing illegal explosives doesn’t make someone a terrorist suspect

I agree 100%.”

Let consider some important difference between Khan and Shapiro and their explosives.

EXPLOSIVES

“Shapiro’s” explosive were presumably found in his house, there are no indications they were going to be used for any purpose anytime in the near future or that they ever were intended to be used to harm anyone. Part of them were quite innocuous.

Khan’s explosives were detonated while he was wearing them under his clothes while he was on a crowded subway (underground) train killing himself and 6 people. The attacks he organized killed 48 people and 4 terrorists.

INTENT

There is no indication Shapiro wanted to harm anyone.

Khan indicated in his martyrdom video he wanted to kill as many people as possible.

HOBBIES

Shapiro’s hobbies included

-studying history,

-hunting,

-marching around with friends dressed as “paradoxical” 18th or 19th century soldiers and engaging in mock battles and

-walking around alone dressed in 19th century civilian (presumably) attire.

Khan’s “hobbies” included

-traveling to Pakistan and Afghanistan to get jihad training,

-possible involvement in previous bomb attacks in Bali and Tel Aviv and a failed attack in London and

-radicalizing his students at a local Islamic center.

RELIGIOUS/POLITICAL OUTLOOK

We don’t have any indications Shapiro was particularly interested in religion or politics.

Khan associated with other jihadists

Gee why is the former not considered a terrorist suspect like the latter? Why the “ ‘double’ standard”? Oh yes it must be because Khan was a Muslim and Shapiro is (presumably) Jewish [sid seems to have been driving at this since the “get go”] the evil Zionist controlled media and police strike again!

“Now, how about a simple demonstration to prove this important point, Len?

<snip>

Take a walk to the nearest Town Hall with a couple of belts of explosives stapped to your waist.

<snip>

Remember to leave a note explaining that your logically impeccable view that "possessing illegal explosives doesn’t make someone a terrorist suspect" just in case you don't make it through the day”

You’ve made some ludicrous points in the past but this time you’ve out done yourself. Possessing explosives in ones house especially when there is no evidence you are planning on using them to harm anyone is one thing wearing them strapped to ones body and trying to gain entrance into a public building or detonating them in crowded place (like Khan and his co-conspirators) is obviously something else entirely.

“Using your best Semitic accent,” just what are you driving at Sid?

Chill out Len,

Most people today, of course, who speak a Semitic language, speak Arabic.

To understand my earlier post, the reader needs (a) a sense of humour ( an understanding of what the philological term 'Semitic' really means.

I should have realized you may not qualify on either count.

My point, in case you really didn't get it, my central point is that the bogus 'War of Terror is really an assault on a certain 'profile'.

If a young man from South Korea shoots a group of American students, that's a 'mass killing' or 'atrocity'.

If a Syrian student does the same thing, it's 'terrorism".

Geddit?

You wrote:

Possessing explosives in ones house especially when there is no evidence you are planning on using them to harm anyone is one thing

Yes. It is one thing which, if you are a young Arab living in a western country post 2001, may well lead to a 20+ years in jail.

Now, I realise that you may not share my view (how could a defender of modern Israel share it?), but I happen to believe that laws should apply equally to all.

We shouldn't have one law for Arabs and Moslems, and other laws for other people, even though this may be the norm in Zionist-occupied Palestine...

Edited April 18, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Len Colby]

To understand my earlier post, the reader needs (a) a sense of humour ( an understanding of what the philological term 'Semitic' really means.

I should have realized you may not qualify on either count.

No Sid I am quite aware of the meaning of the word “Semitic” and you failed to consider the possibility I didn’t find your attempt at humor funny because it wasn’t rather than due to a lack of a sense of humor on my part.

My point, in case you really didn't get it, my central point is that the bogus 'War of Terror is really an assault on a certain 'profile'.

No I got your point nor did I ever indicate I didn't, but it was poorly made. There are many reasons other than ethnicity for Shapiro not being a suspected terrorist. Similarly as per your proposed scenario obviously anyone independant of their ethnicity trying to enter a building wearing explosives would be considered a terrorist, a suicide bomber with political and/or religious motives with known ties to terrorist groups would be considered a terrorist if they were Arab, Irish, Austalian or Brazilian.

If a young man from South Korea shoots a group of American students, that's a 'mass killing' or 'atrocity'.

If a Syrian student does the same thing, it's 'terrorism".

Geddit?

You may have a point but it would depend on the circumstances, if the Syrian was a loner with previous signs of being psychologically unbalanced and no known connections to terrorist or radical religious or political groups it probably wouldn’t be considered terrorism. A good example would be the guy who killed Mier Kahane, most people considered him to be a “lone nut” rather than a terrorist.

You wrote:

Possessing explosives in ones house especially when there is no evidence you are planning on using them to harm anyone is one thing

Yes. It is one thing which, if you are a young Arab living in a western country post 2001, may well lead to a 20+ years in jail.

Please cite an example of “a young Arab living in a western country post 2001” who received a lengthy jail sentence SIMPLY for “possessing explosives” in his house when there was no evidence he was “planning on using them to harm anyone”.

Now, I realise that you may not share my view (how could a defender of modern Israel share it?), but I happen to believe that laws should apply equally to all.

We shouldn't have one law for Arabs and Moslems, and other laws for other people, even though this may be the norm in Zionist-occupied Palestine...

Miracles can happen, for once you said something I can agree with, I also “believe that laws should apply equally to all” but you have failed to produce any evidence that Arabs (or Moslems) would be treated differently than someone who belonged to another ethnic group (or practiced a different religion) if explosives were found in their house.

[Sid Walker]

To understand my earlier post, the reader needs (a) a sense of humour ( an understanding of what the philological term 'Semitic' really means.

I should have realized you may not qualify on either count.

No Sid I am quite aware of the meaning of the word “Semitic” and you failed to consider the possibility I didn’t find your attempt at humor funny because it wasn’t rather than due to a lack of a sense of humor on my part.

My point, in case you really didn't get it, my central point is that the bogus 'War of Terror is really an assault on a certain 'profile'.

No I got your point nor did I ever indicate I didn't, but it was poorly made. There are many reasons other than ethnicity for Shapiro not being a suspected terrorist. Similarly as per your proposed scenario obviously anyone independant of their ethnicity trying to enter a building wearing explosives would be considered a terrorist, a suicide bomber with political and/or religious motives with known ties to terrorist groups would be considered a terrorist if they were Arab, Irish, Austalian or Brazilian.

If a young man from South Korea shoots a group of American students, that's a 'mass killing' or 'atrocity'.

If a Syrian student does the same thing, it's 'terrorism".

Geddit?

You may have a point but it would depend on the circumstances, if the Syrian was a loner with previous signs of being psychologically unbalanced and no known connections to terrorist or radical religious or political groups it probably wouldn’t be considered terrorism. A good example would be the guy who killed Mier Kahane, most people considered him to be a “lone nut” rather than a terrorist.

You wrote:

Possessing explosives in ones house especially when there is no evidence you are planning on using them to harm anyone is one thing

Yes. It is one thing which, if you are a young Arab living in a western country post 2001, may well lead to a 20+ years in jail.

Please cite an example of “a young Arab living in a western country post 2001” who received a lengthy jail sentence SIMPLY for “possessing explosives” in his house when there was no evidence he was “planning on using them to harm anyone”.

Now, I realise that you may not share my view (how could a defender of modern Israel share it?), but I happen to believe that laws should apply equally to all.

We shouldn't have one law for Arabs and Moslems, and other laws for other people, even though this may be the norm in Zionist-occupied Palestine...

Miracles can happen, for once you said something I can agree with, I also “believe that laws should apply equally to all” but you have failed to produce any evidence that Arabs (or Moslems) would be treated differently than someone who belonged to another ethnic group (or practiced a different religion) if explosives were found in their house.

Regarding your claim that "obviously anyone independant of their ethnicity trying to enter a building wearing explosives would be considered a terrorist".... you may like to check out this report from mid-October 2001: Two Israelis arrested with bombs in the Mexican Congress

Both were walking armories. Both were subjected to the inconvenience of overnight detention, then flown (first class?) to Israel.

Rather better treatment than the average Arab might receive in those circumstances, don't you think?

You further claim that I "have failed to produce any evidence that Arabs (or Moslems) would be treated differently than someone who belonged to another ethnic group (or practiced a different religion) if explosives were found in their house."

I don't know what might convince you about that, Len.

I'll offer Craig Murray's report on last year's 'Airline Plot' as Exhibit A.

In their case, there weren't even any bombs!

Those still in custody for that heinous 'Airline Plot', I understand, face very long prson sentences indeed. They have been charged under new 'anti-Terrorism' laws which are really a charter to lock up whoever is deemed a threat for as long as the State pleases (what Universal Declaration of Human Rights?)

Contrast the fate of three young 'Americans' who burnt down NINE churches down in the southern USA recently.

A terrorist act perhaps?

At the very least a hate crime?

Not at all!

Read this fascinating account by an informed and disgusted commentator:

''We're looking to make sure this is not a hate crime and that we do everything that we need to do," FBI Special Agent Charles Regantold reporters in Birmingham. Make sure this is not a hate crime? If 10 Brooklyn synagogues went up in flames in a little over a week, wouldn't investigators start from the assumption that the arson was motivated by hatred of Jews? If 10 Cuban-American shops and restaurants in Miami were deliberately burned to the ground, wouldn't the obvious presumption be that anti-Cuban animus was involved?

Apparently Baptist churches are different.

''I don't see any evidence that these fires are hate crimes," Mark Potok, a director of the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center, told the Los Angeles Times. ''Anti-Christian crimes are exceedingly rare in the South."

Edited April 19, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Mark Stapleton]

Fascinating stuff, Sid.

Thanks for posting that link to the article about the Israelis arrested with bombs INSIDE the Mexican Congress. I have never heard of this before and the fact that they were released because of Israel's influence within the Military Industrial Complex is disgusting.

Where was the fearless US media? Missing in action, as usual. Disgusting.

It makes one wonder how many other failed false flag operations we have not been told about.

As far as I'm concerned, your point is well made. The treatment meted out by authorities to suspected terrorists depends entirely on the ethnic background of the suspects. If the suspects happen to be people from 'our side' then it's all hush hush and frantic high level diplomatic negotiations take place to keep it that way. However, if the suspects are Muslim, then it's another story. The media and politicians combine to condemn the suspects with or without evidence. They are also detained indefinitely.

Bush, Blair, Howard and the mainstream media have been bitterly disappointed at the lack of a major terrorist attack in the last couple of years, imo.

Those damm terrorists have failed to keep their side of the bargain.

[Len Colby]

Wow Sid you think you could dig up a less reliable source than “What Really Happened”? I guess there’s the source of their article “La Voz de Aztlan” which is openly anti-Semitic and frequently goes on about how “the nefarious Jews” are out to destroy Hispanic culture and take over the world citing the Protocol of the Elders of Zion*

* http://www.aztlan.net/cross_la_seal.htm , http://www.aztlan.net/911_commission.htm

BTW - how’s your Spanish? According to the Mexican newspaper El Universal it turns out that only one them, Salvador Guersson Schmeke, was armed with a 9mm for which he had permit and worked for a private security company which complied with all Mexican laws. No mention is made of any explosives.

http://www2.eluniversal.com.mx/pls/impreso...mp;tabla=nacion

This corresponds with the only source cite by your article a dispatch from the Mexican Prosecutor’s Office which only mentions Schmeke who they describe as a Mexican carrying a duly licensed 9mm but makes no mention of any other weapons.

http://www.pgr.gob.mx/cmsocial/bol01/oct/b69701.html

Neither source said either of them were Mossad agents or that Schmeke had served in the Israeli military. I don’t think either of them said that the Israeli was illegally in Mexico but by Spanish isn’t perfect. If you don’t understand Spanish at all you can try translating the articles with Babelfish but is comes out mostly gibberish.

http://babelfish.altavista.com/tr

As for the liquid bombs case we’ve been over that on another thread, from what I recall there were various indications they were planning an attack but I haven’t had time to go over that again. In any case none of the suspects have been tried yet let alone convicted.

But you still haven’t met my challenge, cite a case where an Arab or Moslem has been given a lengthy jail sentence for possession of explosives when there was no evidence they were planning on using them to harm anyone.

I’m not familiar with the Alabama case. I will look into it when I get the time

[Sid Walker]

Wow Sid you think you could dig up a less reliable source than “What Really Happened”? I guess there’s the source of their article “La Voz de Aztlan” which is openly anti-Semitic and frequently goes on about how “the nefarious Jews” are out to destroy Hispanic culture and take over the world citing the Protocol of the Elders of Zion*

* http://www.aztlan.net/cross_la_seal.htm , http://www.aztlan.net/911_commission.htm

BTW - how’s your Spanish? According to the Mexican newspaper El Universal it turns out that only one them, Salvador Guersson Schmeke, was armed with a 9mm for which he had permit and worked for a private security company which complied with all Mexican laws. No mention is made of any explosives.

http://www2.eluniversal.com.mx/pls/impreso...mp;tabla=nacion

This corresponds with the only source cite by your article a dispatch from the Mexican Prosecutor’s Office which only mentions Schmeke who they describe as a Mexican carrying a duly licensed 9mm but makes no mention of any other weapons.

http://www.pgr.gob.mx/cmsocial/bol01/oct/b69701.html

Neither source said either of them were Mossad agents or that Schmeke had served in the Israeli military. I don’t think either of them said that the Israeli was illegally in Mexico but by Spanish isn’t perfect. If you don’t understand Spanish at all you can try translating the articles with Babelfish but is comes out mostly gibberish.

http://babelfish.altavista.com/tr

As for the liquid bombs case we’ve been over that on another thread, from what I recall there were various indications they were planning an attack but I haven’t had time to go over that again. In any case none of the suspects have been tried yet let alone convicted.

But you still haven’t met my challenge, cite a case where an Arab or Moslem has been given a lengthy jail sentence for possession of explosives when there was no evidence they were planning on using them to harm anyone.

I’m not familiar with the Alabama case. I will look into it when I get the time

Here's the report carried in Diario de México, 11th October 2001. I trust the translation is accurate?:

Thursday, October 11, 2001

Two arrested, one a foreigner

Bomb in San Lázaro

* Were carrying attaché case with explosives and grenades

Carrying guns, were arrested by guards

THERE was uproar in the Chamber of Deputies, provoked by the arrested of two individuals, presumed to be of Israeli origin, who were carrying a high power gun and an attaché case with nine grenades, three magazines with 53 cartridges and C-4 explosives, considered to be highly powerful.

The arrested men who said they were called Salvador Gerson Sunke, of Mexican nationality, and Sar ben Zui, who said he was a colonel of the Israeli special forces, remained in custody for over three hours in the legislature building, during which they said nothing, before they were interviewed by officials of the Public Prosecutor's office (PGR) who removed them from the arrested men removedLegislature Palace, concealed in hoods, and placed them under arrest.

[The article continues on an inside page by saying that the two arrested Israelis were also found to be carrying Pakistani passports]

You won't like the source of that article, either, Len.

Ah, how much easier life would be (for some) if all the critics of Zionism were snug in jail following prosecutions in which truth is no defence!

Edited April 19, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Mark Stapleton]

This source states they were both carrying 9mm automatics and one had a military style grenade and wired up explosives. I suppose Len will now accuse Pravda of anti-Semitism:

http://english.pravda.ru/main/2001/10/13/17982.html

btw Len, the sources you cited aren't worth much. They're either in Spanish or strongly pro-Zionist.

Anyway, what the hell were they doing in there? Silence from the Western media doesn't exonerate the Israelis from suspicion. It simply underscores the strongly pro-Israel sympathies which exist within that media.

Why the lack of reports from the West?

Did they consider this incident to be not newsworthy? Why?

[Sid Walker]

This source states they were both carrying 9mm automatics and one had a military style grenade and wired up explosives. I suppose Len will now accuse Pravda of anti-Semitism:

http://english.pravda.ru/main/2001/10/13/17982.html

btw Len, the sources you cited aren't worth much. They're either in Spanish or strongly pro-Zionist.

Anyway, what the hell were they doing in there? Silence from the Western media doesn't exonerate the Israelis from suspicion. It simply underscores the strongly pro-Israel sympathies which exist within that media.

Why the lack of reports from the West?

Did they consider this incident to be not newsworthy? Why?

I didn't see the story reported in the mainstream media either Mark.

I encountered it first in one of the places Len would rather folk don't look.

The Mixican papers seem to confirm the story - but NO follow-up at all (that I noticed) in the western mass media.

This is from a newsgroup posting on misc.activism.progressive:

October 2001: ISRAELIS ARRESTED IN A FOILED ATTEMPT TO BLOW UP MEXICAN

PARLIAMENT

Initially after 911, Mexico did not respond to Bush's "war on terror" theme.

Mossad decided that it was time for a false-flag operation to convince them.

On October 10, 2001, CNN made a brief mention of a foiled terrorist bomb plot

in the Mexican Parliament building. They promised to bring any further

developments of this story to their viewers, but the incident was never heard

of again in America. But the story appeared in bold headlines on the front

page of the major Mexican newspapers (2) and was also posted on the official

website of the Mexican Justice Department. (3) Two terror suspects were

apprehended in the Mexican Chamber of Deputies. Caught red-handed, they had in

their possession a high powered gun, nine hand grenades, and C-4 plastic

explosives (great stuff for demolishing buildings!) Within days, this

blockbuster story not only disappeared from the Mexican press, but the

Israelis were quietly released and deported! The two terrorists were Salvador

Gerson Sunke and Sar ben Zui. Can you guess what their ethnicity was? Sunke

was a Mexican Jew and Zui was a colonel with the Israeli special forces

(MOSSAD). (4)

The story in El Diario de Mexico went on to reveal that the Zionist terrorists

had fake Pakistani passports on them. Can you say "false flag operation?" The

probable motive of this particular botched terrorist operation was to involve

oil rich Mexico in the "War on Terrorism". (The War on Israel's enemies would

be a more accurate description). Mexico is no military power, but the

psychological trauma of an "Arab" attack on Mexico would surely have induced

Mexico to provide unlimited cheap oil to her American "protector". With cheap

oil flowing to America at low prices from Mexico, the US could better afford

to break off relations with the oil rich Arab states in general and Saudi

Arabia in particular. That's why the planners chose 15 Saudi identities to

steal for the 9-11 operation.

Many Mexicans expressed shock at the release of the two Israelis. But when you

learn that Mexico's Secretary of Foreign Relations is a Zionist named Jorge

Gutman, it's not surprising!...

So, if this account is correct, it wasn't a complete non-story in the Ministry of Truth, just a once-only story.

One could be excused for missing it, among the hudnreds and hundreds of daily references to 'Arab terrorism'.

[Len Colby]

This source states they were both carrying 9mm automatics and one had a military style grenade and wired up explosives. I suppose Len will now accuse Pravda of anti-Semitism:

http://english.pravda.ru/main/2001/10/13/17982.html

Gee Mark your research skills and critical thinking are as impressive as ever! Pravda in case you haven’t noticed is complete crap, they recently ran a story saying that right-wing racist TV and radio commentator Dom Imus wasn’t fired because he referred to a mostly Black woman’s basketball team as “a bunch of nappy-headed ‘hos [i.e. whores]” but because he was about to spill the beans on 9/11.

You obviously failed to notice that the Pravada article was an exact “reprint” of the “La Voz de Aztlan” article originally cited by Sid’s source i.e. it is suspect to say the least.

btw Len, the sources you cited aren't worth much. They're either in Spanish

??????? uuuuuh, in case you hadn’t noticed the story took place in Mexico, they speak Spanish there, is the Mexican government and press under an obligation to provide translations of every pronouncement? Are you insinuating that I’m mistranslating? That would be a rather dumb tactic because the likelihood that a member of this forum would speak Spanish well enough to catch me would be quite high. If I was ever intentionally misleading on this or any other forum perhaps you can point it out.

If you can neither understand Spanish nor get someone who does to help you nor make sense of the computer translations from Altavista. You’ll just have to trust me.

or strongly pro-Zionist.

??????? uuuuuh which “pro-Zionist” source did I cite? LOL!

Anyway, what the hell were they doing in there?

Why would security consultants be visiting the parliament of a Latin-American country? I can think of a few reasons that would make more sense than a false flag bombing. See below.

Silence from the Western media doesn't exonerate the Israelis from suspicion. It simply underscores the strongly pro-Israel sympathies which exist within that media.

Why the lack of reports from the West?

Did they consider this incident to be not newsworthy? Why?

One possibility is that is was covered by Western media but that now 5 ½ years later they don’t turn up in internet searches. Most news sites only keep stuff online for a week or two and then delete them or more likely put them in a paid archive.

Perhaps it didn’t get wider attention because they didn’t deem it newsworthy. There is no evidence the story was picked up by Al-Jazeera or other western language Arab/Muslim news outlets were they swayed by “strongly pro-Israel sympathies” or even in Venezuela or Cuba. Not even the ardently anti-Israel ‘American Free Press’ published by virulently racist and anti-Semitic Hitler admirer and Holocaust denier Wilis Carto it seems to have picked it up, could it be that their was nothing to it?

If the Israel lobby is so powerful and adept at keep such stories out of the news then how do you explain Cameron’s “Israeli Art Student” series on Fox or all the media accounts of Israelis getting arrested after 9/11?

Here's the report carried in Diario de México, 11th October 2001. I trust the translation is accurate?:

Thursday, October 11, 2001

Two arrested, one a foreigner

Bomb in San Lázaro

* Were carrying attaché case with explosives and grenades

Carrying guns, were arrested by guards

THERE was uproar in the Chamber of Deputies, provoked by the arrested of two individuals, presumed to be of Israeli origin, who were carrying a high power gun and an attaché case with nine grenades, three magazines with 53 cartridges and C-4 explosives, considered to be highly powerful.

<snip>

You won't like the source of that article, either, Len.

Great another openly anti-Semitic Holocaust denying site. But yes it is an accurate translation of the accompanying Spanish text, odd though that no link was provided to the original and that the photo of the front page is too small to read anything but the headlines.

But lets assume the Spanish text was what was reported in that paper. There is a possibility the report was in error the grenades and explosives weren’t mentioned in the other newspaper article or the prosecutor’s press release or even a press release from the Mexican congress the supposed target which said the contents of the attaché case were ‘unknown’ or ‘not identified’ (una maleta con contenido desconocido) and says they had one gun (“un arma de fuego”).

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:Vk8xI...l2001/oct10.htm

The Diario article makes no mention of wires, detonators, dynamite or bombs (which what you get when you connect a detonator to explosives). If the 2nd newspaper account is accurate why would they have entered the grounds of the congress with this material? Let’s see:

- To market their services, they could have had an appointment with a prospective client (a congressman or a person responsible for security) and say “look what we were able to bring here no problem,”

- As a test to see if they could do so if they already were working for someone connected to the congress. The press and government authorities have done similar tests/demonstrations at US airports and other supposedly secure locations. Since Latin Americans are sensitive about sovereignty issues they might not want to own up to contracting Israelis (or an Israeli) for securing a government installation recently there was an uproar in Brazil because an American “security” company had been hired to spy on government officials.

http://www.mre.gov.br/portugues/noticiario...&Imprime=on

- To sell them to someone. Since the deal might have been exactly ‘kosher’ the buyer might not want to be publicly identified.

Sid and Mark will surely scoff that none of my proposed scenarios are very probable but how much sense does theirs make?

1) What possible benefit would Israel derive from Mexico entering the “war on terror”? To get them to “commit troops and all the oil it could spare to combat Islamic terrorism” as spelled out in Sid’s first article? That reminds me of the story (probably apocryphal) the Hitler fell of his chair laughing when told that Haiti had declared war on the Axis. Mexico is not exactly known as a military powerhouse its army wasn’t even able to deal effectively with the Zapatistas.

There was never a hint of an oil shortage during the Afghan war indeed two “Gulf States” pledged their assistance and Saudia Arabia and the others were unlikely to cut off supplies in any case Mexico is unlikely not to have done everything possible to meet the needs of it most important trade partner without being attacked.

2) Numerous other countries aided the US and it’s NATO allies in the Afghan war without being attacked.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_End...anistan:_Allies . Likewise 49 countries including 6 Central American ones and Colombia entered the “coalition” against Iraq. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...0030327-10.html

3) If Israel (and the Bush administration) has such influence in Mexico that it (they) can get two of its “agents” who were going to blow the congress released not only without any protests from the Mexican press, government or congress but with a cover up on their part, why would it need a terrorist attack to get Mexico involved? Especially since 7 of Mexico’s neighbors entered the “WoT” without being attacked.

4) What motive for the attack would be given? Muslim extremist attacks have been against a) countries supporting Israel and/or the “WoT” (US, UK, Spain etc) predominantly Moslem countries with governments that don’t meet their approval (Indonesia, Algeria, Egypt, Turkey etc) c) non-Moslem countries with Moslem minorities seeking an independent state (Philippines, Thailand, Russia, India etc) d) Jewish or to a lesser extent Christian targets (Tunisia, Argentina, Turkey, Pakistan etc.).

5) The behavior of the “Israelis” doesn’t seem consistent with “black ops” agents on a ‘false flag’ mission. Presumably they would want to attract as little attention to themselves as possible but according to the “La Voz de Aztlan” they were posing as press photographers drew the attention of the sugar plantation workers due to their suspicious behavior. This basically correlates with an account given in a forum posting on the official Mexican Presidential cite which indicates “Salvador Gerson Smike” (sic) was taking photos of the workers and drew their attention due to his suspicious behavior, only taking photos from the waist down (“sólo les tomaba fotos de la cintura para abajo”) and was carrying a pistol (“armado con una pistola”). As with other accounts it only mentions “Smike” as carrying a gun. Why would they draw attention to themselves photographing the sugar workers? Why would one (or both) of them be carrying a not very well concealed 9mm? None on the accounts said they had a working bomb. What do we suppose their plan was to hook up the bomb after they had drawn attention to themselves? Wouldn’t the most logical thing been to have gone in with the bomb already ready discretely left it some where and left? Why enter the ground of the Congress? A car bomb or flying a plane into a target would have been much easier to pull off.

Ah, how much easier life would be (for some) if all the critics of Zionism were snug in jail following prosecutions in which truth is no defence!

I didn't see the story reported in the mainstream media either Mark.

I encountered it first in one of the places Len would rather folk don't look.

The Mixican papers seem to confirm the story - but NO follow-up at all (that I noticed) in the western mass media.

This is from a newsgroup posting on misc.activism.progressive:

October 2001: ISRAELIS ARRESTED IN A FOILED ATTEMPT TO BLOW UP MEXICAN PARLIAMENT

Initially after 911, Mexico did not respond to Bush's "war on terror" theme.

Mossad decided that it was time for a false-flag operation to convince them.

On October 10, 2001, CNN made a brief mention of a foiled terrorist bomb plot

in the Mexican Parliament building. They promised to bring any further

developments of this story to their viewers, but the incident was never heard

of again in America.

So, if this account is correct, it wasn't a complete non-story in the Ministry of Truth, just a once-only story.

Very big “IF”. The source of that post was an article called “Stranger Than Fiction: An Independent Investigation of 9/11” some times attributed to ‘anonymous’ and at others to “Dr. Albert D. Pastore Ph.D” which according to Amazon is a “pen-name”* and indeed I couldn’t find any references to any one named ‘Albert D. Pastore’ or anyone named Albert Pastore’ with the title Dr. or Ph.D that didn’t reference the article or from CT sites or forums. So it’s the an unsourced claim by an anonymous author. It wouldn’t surprise me if the story did get a brief mention on CNN though, and if it I’d like to know what exactly they said and if there was any follow up

* http://www.amazon.com/Stranger-Than-Fictio...e/dp/1893302474

Edited April 19, 2007 by Len Colby

[Len Colby]

bump

[Sid Walker]

Dreadfully sorry to have caused you such a lot of work over this unfortunate Mexican Parliament business, Len.

A touchy subject, eh?

Shades of the USS Liberty - another event barely mentioned in the western media because the offenders didn't fit the approved profile?