The attacks in Mumbai in November 2008 – designated as 26/11 – left 162 people dead in a traumatic event that some people described as India’s 9/11. Extensive media coverage has created the impression that all the relevant facts on this audacious operation have been reported. Unfortunately, this impression is false, says Elias Davidsson in his book on the 2008 attacks that occurred in Mumbai, India. The book is entitled, The Betrayal of India: Revisiting the 26/11 Evidence. “The book is about the betrayal of the Indian nation by a corrupt, greedy and ruthless elite for whom the lives of ordinary Indians are expendable when power and profit are at stake,” enunciates the author.
Elias Davidsson was born in Palestine in 1941 to German-Jewish parents so there is a slightest chance of him having any love lost for Pakistan. He has gained quite a fame in the area of investigative journalism primarily after the publication of his books on 9/11 and the follow-up terrorist attacks that set the world on fire. “Hijacking America’s Mind on 9/11″, followed by “Psychological Warfare and Social Denial: The Legend of 9/11 and the Fiction of Terrorism” presented a narrative fairly different from the official one.
The author very intriguingly uncovers the whole Mumbai attacks proceeds. He critically evaluates the official narrative of 26/11, as reflected in court documents and the news media, also the testimonies of those dozens of important witnesses whom Indian courts ignored because they shed a radically different light on the events. Besides, it also presents a detailed analysis of the benefits accrued by the powerful constituencies of India and US from this mass murder. The conclusion of this detailed assessment is devastating as they expose the unspoken truce between the leading news media, the political class, the police and the judicial system to cover up the real facts on 26/11 on the pretext of shielding the real offenders.
The Indian version of these attacks – the official story as narrated by the Indian government – can be found at Wikipedia (which seldom strays from government intelligence narratives) as: “The 2008 Mumbai attacks were a series of attacks that took place in November 2008, when 10 members of Lashkar-e-Taiba, an Islamic militant organization based in Pakistan, carried out a series of 12 coordinated shooting and bombing attacks lasting four days across Mumbai.” For record, both Pakistan and Lashkar-e-Taiba denied responsibility for the attacks and, Davidsson argues, they did so for good reasons.
The author also made clear how easy it was to get abundance of funds and equipment for the Mumbai police on the basis of such a narrative and why it was possible for India’s armed forces to get an immediate 21% hike in her military spending with promises of continuing increases in subsequent years.
To prove this a false flag operation, Davidsson gave a jillion arguments. One of them was the fact that the Prime Minister of India, while the attack was still in progress, implied that the perpetrators were from a terrorist group supported by Pakistan. Prof. Graeme McQueen of Global Research (Canadian think tank) explains that when officials claim to know the identity of a perpetrator (individual or group) prior to any serious investigation, this suggests that a false narrative is being initiated.
For example, Lee Harvey Oswald was identified by officials of the executive branch 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. Likewise, we had major news media pointing with confidence, by the end of the day of September 11, 2001, to Osama bin Laden and his group with no evidence at hand.
There were so many loose ends in the investigation process that leaves an inquisitive mind in a state of total perplexity. Also, the assassination of ATS chief Hemant Karkare makes the whole episode yet more dubious. Karkare was killed as he steered the investigation of the 2008 Malegaon blasts and was at the verge of exposing the BJP led Hindutva extremist forces who were fomenting terrorism in the name of Indian Muslims. Davidsson also questions about the extreme secrecy and withholding of basic information from the population, on the plea of national security.
The lone surviving alleged terrorist had no public trial. One lawyer who agreed to defend the accused was removed by the court and another was assassinated. The confession of the suspect, on which the judge leaned heavily, was given in secret. No transcript of this confession has been released to the public and the suspect later renounced the confession, saying he had been under threat from police when he gave it.
Interestingly, the public was told that there was extensive CCTV footage of the attacks, despite the mysterious malfunctioning of the majority of CCTV cameras on the days in question, the book reveals, but only a very small percentage of the claimed footage was ever released and that too suffered from serious defects – two conflicting time – stamps and signs of editing. Also, those 475 – 800 members of elite Indian commando unit that battled the eight terrorists were never allowed to testify in court. Above all, the suspect, after being convicted and sentenced to death, was presumably executed, but the hanging was done secretly in jail and his body, like the bodies of the other dead “terrorists,” was buried in a secret place which could not be confirmed.
Davidsson correspondingly casted doubt on the grotesque failure by investigating officials to follow proper procedures. Eyewitnesses to the crime differed on the clothing and skin color of the terrorists, and on how many of them there were. At least one eyewitness confessed she found it hard to distinguish “friends” from terrorists but no probe was stimulated by this odd confusion. Weird enough, of the “hundreds of witnesses processed by the court” in relation to the attacks at the CaféLeopold, 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”, author observed.
The number of contradictions and miracles present in the investigation report was more offending. One victim was apparently resurrected from the dead when his testimony was essential to the point the finger at Pakistan. A second victim died in two different places, while a third died in three places. No one in authority cared enough to solve these difficulties. Moreover, the number of terrorists who committed the deeds changed repeatedly, as did the number of terrorists who survived.
Another surprising question was raised when the forensic study of the attack at the Cama Hospital failed to turn up a single AK-47 bullet while the common narration of the attack claimed that the terrorists were armed with AK-47s. In addition, the crime scenes were violated, with bodies hauled off before they could be examined. Also, the Indian authorities declined to order autopsies on the dead at the targeted Jewish center in Nariman House. The dead, five out of six of whom were Israeli citizens, were instead whisked back to Israel by a Jewish organization based in Israel, apparently for religious reasons.
The FBI showed great interest in the attacks from the outset. Interestingly, it actually had a man on the scene during the attacks and sent an entire team directly after the event. The Bureau was, remarkably, given direct access to the arrested suspect and to his recorded confession (before he even had a lawyer), as well as to eyewitnesses. The New York Police Department also sent a team after the conclusion of the event, as did Scotland Yard and Israeli police.
Taking account of all the aspects, the author concludes that, “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, but the evidence of a deceptive investigation is even stronger.” He is convinced that India’s major institutions including the Central government, parliament, bureaucracy, armed forces, Mumbai police, intelligence services, judiciary and media, have deliberately suppressed the truth regarding 26/11 and continue to do so. Prof. Graeme McQueen opines, there are two good reasons to pay attention to evidence of a cover-up. First, to cover up a crime is itself a crime. Second, those covering up a crime implicate themselves in the original crime. If they were not directly involved in the commission of the crime, they are at least accessories after the fact.
India is in a habit of implicating Pakistan over false flag operations planned and executed by herself. Adeela Naureen, while discussing the book by Davidsson, has very rightly asked Pakistan to take India to ICJ for this indigenous false flag operation conducted by RAW and western intelligence agencies. It is high time these false flags must be exposed and ended downright. Or else the dangers of such false flag operations in this highly nuclearized zone could develop into something beyond imagination of any.