Tags » Abbottabad

Abbottabad

Hey everyone, welcome to my second entry in my travel diary. Me and my family recently went on a trip to northern areas of Pakistan and here’s the first city we went to. 562 more words

Pakistaniblogger

Vacation in Pakistan - III

I have so many pictures that it’s getting difficult to choose which ones to upload, so here few of the closeup of some flowers I took during various places.

Hope you will like it.

Life

Vacation

I have been travelling so extensively since I came in Pakistan that for a moment, it looks as if I am not on annual vacation but on a tour. 460 more words

Life

Painting murals on a rainy day

July 4th, 2017

Abbottabad, Pakistan


As I stand across the green and blue of Abbottabad, I feel my fingers tingle; I feel a need to paint; to let my heartstrings tug my fingertips and create art, in its surreal yet raw essence. 258 more words

Short Story

Independent Journalists Reveal America's Sinister War in Syria

UK Proscribed terrorist organization, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), maintains large presence in Manchester area and is now being linked to recent blast. 

May 24, 2017 (

1,640 more words

USA

Mr. Militant Negro reblogged this on The Militant Negro™ and commented:

Independent Journalists Reveal America’s Sinister War in Syria

UK Proscribed terrorist organization, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), maintains large presence in Manchester area and is now being linked to recent blast. 

May 24, 2017 (Tony Cartalucci – LD) – As suspected and as was the case in virtually all recent terror attacks carried out in Europe – including both in France and Belgium – the suspect involved in the recent Manchester blast which killed 22 and injured scores more was previously known to British security and intelligence agencies.
The Telegraph in its article, “Salman Abedi named as the Manchester suicide bomber – what we know about him,” would report:
Salman Abedi, 22, who was reportedly known to the security services, is thought to have returned from Libya as recently as this week.
While initial reports attempted to craft a narrative focused on a a “lone wolf” attacker who organized and executed the blast himself, the nature of the improvised explosive device used and the details of the attack revealed what was certainly an operation carried out by someone who either acquired militant experience through direct contact with a terrorist organization, or was directed by a terrorist organization with extensive experience. A Thriving Terrorist Community in the Midst of Manchester  The same Telegraph article would also admit (emphasis added):
A group of Gaddafi dissidents, who were members of the outlawed Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), lived within close proximity to Abedi in Whalley Range. Among them was Abd al-Baset Azzouz, a father-of-four from Manchester, who left Britain to run a terrorist network in Libya overseen by Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden’s successor as leader of al-Qaeda.  Azzouz, 48, an expert bomb-maker, was accused of running an al-Qaeda network in eastern Libya. The Telegraph reported in 2014 that Azzouz had 200 to 300 militants under his control and was an expert in bomb-making.  Another member of the Libyan community in Manchester, Salah Aboaoba told Channel 4 news in 2011 that he had been fund raising for LIFG while in the city. Aboaoba had claimed he had raised funds at Didsbury mosque, the same mosque attended by Abedi.
Thus, the required experience for the recent Manchester attack exists in abundance within the community’s Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) members. LIFG is in fact a proscribed terrorist group listed as such by the United Kingdom’s government in 2005, and still appears upon its list of “Proscribed terrorist groups or organisations,” found on the government’s own website. The accompanying government list (PDF) states explicitly regarding LIFG that:
The LIFG seeks to replace the current Libyan regime with a hard-line Islamic state. The group is also part of the wider global Islamist extremist movement, as inspired by Al Qa’ida. The group has mounted several operations inside Libya, including a 1996 attempt to assassinate Mu’ammar Qadhafi.
Thus, astoundingly, according to the Telegraph, a thriving community of listed terrorists exists knowingly in the midst of the British public, without any intervention by the UK government, security, or intelligence agencies – with members regularly travelling abroad and participating in armed conflict and terrorist activities before apparently returning home – not only without being incarcerated, but apparently also without even being closely monitored. LIFG also appears on the US State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. Astoundingly, it appears under a section titled, “Delisted Foreign Terrorist Organizations,” and indicates that it was removed as recently as 2015. Elsewhere on the US State Department’s website, is a 2012 report where LIFG is described:
On November 3, 2007, [Al Qaeda (AQ)] leader Ayman al-Zawahiri announced a formal merger between AQ and LIFG. However, on July 3, 2009, LIFG members in the United Kingdom released a statement formally disavowing any association with AQ.
The report also makes mention of LIFG’s role in US-led NATO regime change operations in Libya in 2011 (emphasis added):
In early 2011, in the wake of the Libyan revolution and the fall of Qadhafi, LIFG members created the LIFG successor group, the Libyan Islamic Movement for Change (LIMC), and became one of many rebel groups united under the umbrella of the opposition leadership known as the Transitional National Council. Former LIFG emir and LIMC leader Abdel Hakim Bil-Hajj was appointed the Libyan Transitional Council’s Tripoli military commander during the Libyan uprisings and has denied any link between his group and AQ.
Indeed, a literal senior Al Qaeda-affiliate leader would head the regime put into power by US-led military operations – which included British forces.
Not only this, but prominent US politicians would even travel to Libya to personally offer support to Bil-Hajj (also spelled Belhaj). In one notorious image, US Senator John McCain is seen shaking hands with and offering a gift to the terrorist leader in the wake of the Libyan government’s collapse. The US State Department’s report regarding LIFG ends with information about its “area of operation,” claiming (emphasis added):
Since the late 1990s, many members have fled to southwest Asia, and European countries, particularly the UK.
For the residents of Manchester, the British government appears to have categorically failed to inform them of the threat living openly in their midst. While the British population is divided and distracted with a more general strategy of tension focused on Islam, Muslims, and Islamophobia, the very specific threat of US-UK sanctioned terrorists living and operating within British communities is overlooked by the public. However – for British security and intelligence agencies – it is unlikely that such an obvious security threat was merely “overlooked.” That extremists thrive within British communities without government intervention indicates complicity, not incompetence. LIFG Terrorists Are Anglo-America’s Helping Hands The Guardian in a 2011 article titled, “The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group – from al-Qaida to the Arab spring,” would claim:
British intelligence and security service interest in Libya has focused for 20 years on the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), whether it was opposing Muammar Gaddafi and working with al-Qaida, later renouncing its old jihadi worldview – or taking part in the armed uprising that has now overthrown the regime.
The article in reality is nothing more than an attempt to portray a listed terrorist organization as “reformed” ahead of increased public awareness regarding the true nature of Libya’s US and British-backed “rebels.” LIFG members would not only assist the US and British governments in the 2011 overthrow of the Libyan government, they would also move on – with Western arms and cash – to NATO-member Turkey where they staged an invasion of northern Syria. The Telegraph in a November 2011 article titled, “Leading Libyan Islamist met Free Syrian Army opposition group,” would report:
Abdulhakim Belhadj, head of the Tripoli Military Council and the former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, “met with Free Syrian Army leaders in Istanbul and on the border with Turkey,” said a military official working with Mr Belhadj. “Mustafa Abdul Jalil (the interim Libyan president) sent him there.”
The article would continue by reporting:
The meetings came as a sign of a growing ties between Libya’s fledgling government and the Syrian opposition. The Daily Telegraph on Saturday revealed that the new Libyan authorities had offered money and weapons to the growing insurgency against Bashar al-Assad.  Mr Belhaj also discussed sending Libyan fighters to train troops, the source said. Having ousted one dictator, triumphant young men, still filled with revolutionary fervour, are keen to topple the next. The commanders of armed gangs still roaming Tripoli’s streets said yesterday that “hundreds” of fighters wanted to wage war against the Assad regime. 
Revealed once again is a convenient intersection of terrorist and US-British interests – this time in pursuit of regime change in Syria in the wake of successful US-UK backed regime change in Libya. Confirming that these plans to send Libyan extremists to fight in Syria were eventually executed is CNN’s 2012 article, “Libya rebels move onto Syrian battlefield,” which reported:
Under the command of one of Libya’s most well known rebel commanders, Al-Mahdi al-Harati, more than 30 Libyan fighters have made their way into Syria to support the Free Syrian Army rebels in their war against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
Al Harati’s army of Libyan terrorists would expand to hundreds, possibly thousands of fighters and later merge with other Syrian militant groups including Al Qaeda’s Syrian franchise – Jabhat Al Nusra. In Libya, LIFG fighters have divided themselves among various warring factions, including Al Qaeda and Islamic State affiliates.
As these terrorists filter out of Syria and back home, those hailing from LIFG are mainly returning to the UK where they have been known by US and British security and intelligence agencies for years to exist. With them they will be bringing back the technical knowledge and experience needed to carry out devastating attacks like the recent blast that targeted Manchester. It is terrorism that follows as a direct result of British foreign and domestic policy – supporting terrorists abroad and deliberately refusing to dismantle their networks at home – all as they feed fighters and resources into the US-UK proxy war still raging in Syria. The British government is directly responsible for the recent Manchester blast. It had foreknowledge of LIFG’s existence and likely its activities within British territory and not only failed to act, but appears to have actively harbored this community of extremists for its own geopolitical and domestic agenda. The recent blast will only reinforce the unsophisticated “tolerance versus bigotry” narrative that has gripped British society, entirely sidestepping the reality of government sanctioned terrorism wielded both abroad and against its own people – not for ideological or religious purposes – but purely in pursuit of geopolitical hegemony. That the US and UK are using terrorists to expedite their respective geopolitical objectives should come as no surprise – particularly in regards to LIFG – since the organization itself branched out of Washington’s mercenary fighters used against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s. What is surprising is that the Western public continues to react emotionally to each terrorist attack individually rather than rationally, seeing the much larger picture and pattern. And until the Western public sees that bigger picture and pattern, fear, injustice, murder, and mayhem will continue to dominate their lives and futures.

The Speech Of Speeches

Trump made his much anticipated speech to the Islamic Conference…and I have two questions.

One, Who the Hell wrote this speech?

Two, Was this a campaign speech? 752 more words

International Situations

Mr. Militant Negro reblogged this on The Militant Negro™ and commented:

The Speech Of Speeches

Trump made his much anticipated speech to the Islamic Conference…and I have two questions. One, Who the Hell wrote this speech? Two, Was this a campaign speech? First, the speech was not a Middle East reset….it is business as usual since 1943 Second it sounded more like an American campaign speech than one for an international audience. I can say with some certainty that Mr. Trump delivered a speech and it was subdued and as respectfully as he can be.  The one problem is he said he was not there to lecture the region and then set about doing just that. As for it being a “game changer”….I think not. IN case you would like to read the speech for yourself……(please do especially if you think you have something to offer) Source: Full transcript of Trump’s Riyadh speech, as released by White House – He gave some big lines as he worked his way around the room…..

President Trump addressed the Muslim world on Sunday, taking a more moderate tone than he did as a presidential candidate, when he declared that “Islam hates us,” reports the New York Times. On Sunday, in his speech in Saudi Arabia to Muslim leaders from around the world, he said that the US is “not here to lecture—we are not here to tell other people how to live, what to do, who to be, or how to worship.” Instead, he added, “we are here to offer partnership—based on shared interests and values—to pursue a better future for us all.” The Washington Post has a transcript. Highlights:

  • Trump also made headlines for what he didn’t say, specifically the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism.” Story here(It will be interesting to see if Trump as much grief as Obama for NOT using the term)
  • “A better future is only possible if your nations drive out the terrorists and drive out the extremists. Drive them out. Drive them out of your places of worship. Drive them out of your communities. Drive them out of your holy land, and drive them out of this earth. (See this clip here.)
  • “This is not a battle between different faiths, different sects or different civilizations. This is a battle between barbaric criminals who seek to obliterate human life and decent people, all in the name of religion—people that want to protect life and want to protect their religion. This is a battle between good and evil.”
  • “The nations of the Middle East cannot wait for American power to crush this enemy for them.” They “will have to decide what kind of future they want for themselves, for their countries and, frankly, for their families and for their children.”
  • The US will “make decisions based on real-world outcomes, not inflexible ideology,” and “wherever possible, we will seek gradual reforms, not sudden intervention.”
  • He called Islam “one of the world’s great faiths.”
  • Trump criticized Iran for spreading “destruction and chaos” throughout the region.
  • There is one point he neglected to point out……The Saudis export an extremist interpretation of Islam, Wahhabism, around the globe. Over the past three decades, Saudi Arabia has spent about $4 billion per year on mosques, madrassas, preachers, students, and textbooks to spread Wahhabism and anti-Western sentiment. Let’s not forget that 15 of the 19 fanatical hijackers who carried out the 9/11 attacks were Saudis, as was Osama bin Laden himself.
  • The Saudis fund terrorism worldwide. A Wikileaks-revealed 2009 cable quotes then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying, “Donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide … More needs to be done since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Lashkar e-Tayyiba and other terrorist groups.”
Keep in mind he made a speech last year about fighting terrorism (if you would like to compare the two)….. Source: Full text: Donald Trump’s speech on fighting terrorism – POLITICO All in all it was a good speech…not a great one but adequate and no bonehead slogans or diatribes…..but the speech was written by someone with very little knowledge of the Middle East…..did I expect more?  No pretty much what I though it would be…… I am waiting to see if there is any blow back from those half witted supporters…..(of course there won’t be)……he refused to use “radical Islamic terrorism” and a more damnable sin was he bowed to the king of Saudi Arabia….will these get him criticized? (Don’t hold your breath) “Hypocrites get offended by the truth” “Hypocrites are those who apply to others the standards that they refuse to accept for themselves” Need we say more?