BY IFTIKHAR MASHWANI
The controversial statement by ex-prime minister Nawaz Sharif is over all rejected by establishment ,political leaders and many international writers,journalists.A German journalist Elias Davidsson’s book “The Betrayal of India: Revisiting the 26/11 Evidence” has raised a storm in India. Davidsson has developed his argument with detailed research and authenticated resources. Indian version of Mumbai attacks lies bare and exposed like a peeled banana.
Davidsson has concluded that Indian state’s investigation of the attacks was a big eye wash to bamboozle the state narrative and cheat Indian and international audience, just to blame Pakistan. The author blames Indian establishment and their US partners and writes, “It is highly plausible, that major institutional actors in India, the United States and possibly Israel, were complicit in conceiving, planning, directing and executing the attacks of 26/11; evidence of a deceptive investigation is even stronger”.
26/11 or Mumbai attacks in November 2008 were projected as India’s 9/11,with an objective to tell US and international community that India was a victim of Pakistani State terrorism and the world needed to ostracize Pakistan. The Indian media went into frenzy, bewildering and confounding Indian, and, to some extent, Pakistani audience, some of Pakistani channels and media houses deliberately supported Indian version and strengthened Indian case. Repeated doses of Mumbai attack mantra has created intellectual dementia in Pakistan, where no strong narrative was developed to rebut Indian claims, almost accepting it like a fait accompli and grim reality.
Elias Davidsson has rebutted the Indian narrative and proved with authenticity that Indian version was totally concocted, based on deceit and outright lies, and that it was promulgated through a well thought out disinformation campaign ensconced in hyperbole. The book is based on incisive and critical analysis of the official narrative of 26/11 and the author has endeavored to go through court documents and testimonies of dozens of important witnesses and their linkages with media outbursts parroted by Indian media
Daviddson has drawn some major conclusions:
Indian courts ignored prime evidence and failed to reach at viable conclusions, doing injustice to the whole case. Powerful institutions in India and the US were the main beneficiaries of this mass-murder conducted by Indian prime Intelligence Agency, RAW and her surrogates.
There was a deliberate and tacit consensus within mainstream media, RAW, judiciary, political elite, police and investigating agencies to cover up the true facts on 26/11,it amounted to protection of the real criminals. The author exclaims, “I could discover no hint of a desire among the aforementioned parties to establish the truth on these deadly events.”
In a review on the book, published in the Global Research, Professor Graeme McQueen has carried out an in-depth analysis of Davidsson’s narrative, his conclusions raised some important questions and are being reproduced here:
Immediate finger pointing of the perpetrator is typical modus operandi in false flag operations. When officials claim to know the identity of a perpetrator prior to any serious investigation, this suggests that a false narrative is being initiated and that strenuous efforts will soon be made to implant it in the mind of a population. Lee Harvey Oswald was identified by officials as the killer of President John F. Kennedy and as a lone wolf with no associates–on the afternoon of the assassination day, long before an investigation and even before he had been charged with the crime. In the Mumbai case the PM of India implied, while the attack was still in progress, that the perpetrators were from a terrorist group supported by Pakistan.
Key witnesses were not called to testify. Witnesses who said they saw the terrorists commit violence, or spoke to them, or were in the same room with them, were ignored by the court. Contradictions and miracles were not sorted out; one victim was apparently resurrected from the dead when his testimony was essential to the blaming of Pakistan. A second victim died in two different places, while a third died in three places.
The number of terrorists who committed the deeds changed repeatedly, as did the number of terrorists who survived. Crime scenes were violated, with bodies hauled off before they could be examined. Claims that the terrorists were armed with AK-47s were common, yet forensic study of the attack at the Cama Hospital failed to turn up a single AK-47 bullet.
Of the “hundreds of witnesses processed by the court” in relation to the attacks at the Café Leopold, Taj Mahal Palace Hotel, Oberoi-Trident Hotel or Nariman House, “not a single one testified to having observed any of the eight accused kill anyone” .-To be continued