(Salimanology’s Monthly Intelligent Report)
April, 2010
By Salim I. Hassan (Salimullah)

These are the lies of the last century. The mass media has told the American people a ‘Big Lie’ about 9/11 attack, in the words of David Duke (1). From all practical experiences, the America is aiming at tarnishing Islam and to cause it politically eradicated. To make that possible there should be a reason to justify their military attack on Islamic people and their lands. Thus, 9/11 attack was officially invented to serve that purpose, and also to serve their long term aim of oil economic exploitation in the Mid East. I hither to, challenge the world to practically prove the complicity of the Muslims in the horrific 9/11 attack. In its commission report on the attack, America tried to make separation of Islam and Islamic terrorism to justify their attack when the latter (Islamic terrorism) was never existed. This could mean it is an attack on Islam, only disguised. The main weakness of the report lies in the fact that it failed to address the issue of terrorism in a broader sense and more objective way as if only Islam is evil to be terminated. Other acts of terrorism perpetrated by some Jews and Christians were totally ignored; some were attacks on Muslims and some on Americans. Any American foreign policy (particularly in relation to Muslim world) is reflecting antagonism, enmity and hatred towards Islam. However, they always tend to cover their evil attitude with the slogans of democracy – justice, liberty, rights and freedom – an idea only but not realistic.

The same act of cover-up employed in the commission report to show that their war is on Islamic terrorism but not on Islam – for Islam is not the threat, the world great religion. This appeasement goes thus: “Islam is not the enemy. It is not synonymous with terror. Nor does Islam teach terror. America and its friends opposed pervasion of Islam, not the great world faith itself…..The enemy is an ideology that feeds intolerance, a single stream of Islam (a minority tradition), from at least Ibn Taymiyyah, through the founders of Wahhabism, through the Muslim brotherhood to Sayyid Qutb”(2). But, the practical manifestation of their war on terror negates this theoretical claim. And again, how can one insult Ibn Taymiyya, the great Islamic scholar, worker and a prolific writer, the Islamic scholar respected by mainstream Muslims, and yet claim to sanctify Islam. Obviously can’t be possible for this is an absolute contempt to Islam.

So we should first know what terrorism, Islamism, and Islamic terrorism is. Terrorism is by nature political because it involves the acquisition and use of power for the purpose of forcing others to submit, or agree, to terrorist demands”(3). In this context, America was a complicit in Alqaeda’s terrorism during Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. But why was that not considered as terrorism. In fact, America declared them ‘Freedom Fighters’ but only today ‘terrorists’. This is probably because in the former case the Alqaeda/Taliban were doing America’s Job but today they are doing Islamic one. If I were Russian I would have helped today’s Taliban in expelling the invaders as the U.S. did it against the former Soviet. FBI authorities defined terrorism as “{a} violent act or an act dangerous to human life, in violation of the criminal laws of United States or of any state, to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social goals” (4). Furthermore, Islamism is defined “as an Islamic militant, anti-democratic movement, bearing a holistic vision of Islam who final aim is the restoration of the Caliphate” (5). Islamic terrorism, as interpreted by America, is any act of attacking freedom and democracy, most often, by targeting innocent people and foreign offices. As former president Bush alluded to this meaning that these acts were born out of hatred to freedom (6). Bush must have been a victim of sentimentality for his weakness to know why America was under attack. A senior American intelligence who understands the reality writes: “…Bin Laden is out to drastically alter U.S. and Western policies toward the Islamic world, not necessarily to destroy America, much less its freedoms and liberties” (7). In American perspectives, Islamic terrorism is evil that was rooted deeply in Islamic scriptures. However, in fairer way, presumably Islamic terrorism is that act of terrorism perpetrate by Muslim activists in defence of Islam and Muslim lands. But, in reality there is nothing like Islamic terrorism for terrorism is general; everyone tends to employ it to achieve certain goals. America has done it severally in Iraq, Vietnam, Afghanistan (both during the Soviet invasion and today). If there does exist Islamic terrorism there must do exist Christian terrorism, Jewish Terrorism and so on. The fact that there is no mention of such expression in Western Media (despite of similar violent act by Jews and Christians) shows clearly the American nocuous and evil attitude towards Islam.

The 9/11 commission report’s bias and impartiality also emerged in some other faulty lines as aptly described by Mounzer Sleiman P.hd, a senior political-military analyst in the U.S:

“The commission report attempted to present a fair and balanced analysis of Islam. However, claiming that Islam is not synonymous with terror or that it does not teach terror, and yet still associating Islam with terrorism, lacks credibility”. (He adds that) “The commission used words like struggles and zealots when it discussed other major religions but terrorism when it discussed Islam. The word terrorism is becoming so loaded with political, religious, ideological, and cultural connotations that I completely reject the association of terrorism with Islam – be it in this report, government statements, the media or academic circle. We need to focus on judging all acts of violence by international and domestic laws as either self-defense or illegitimate” (8)

Over and again, the weakness and bias could also be seen in the deliberate omission or absence of mention of domestic terrorism – those terrorist acts perpetrate by others than Muslims. There are many more terrorist acts committed by non-muslims; however seldom were they mentioned in the media. Even if they were mentioned other terms like domestic, rioters, zealots and e.t.c. were used to describe such relevance; only if when committed by Muslim that they soon call it Islamic terrorism. I can give you example of such violent acts committed by either Christians or the Jews but not labeled as terrorism. Think of despicable act of Timothy McVeigh and Eric Rudolph who were judiciously convicted of bombing abortion clinics culminated in killing innocents (9), but labeled Christian terrorism, even the word ‘terrorism’ was not applied in the discussion of the matter. Why a is the Jewish Defence league (JDL) not labeled a Jewish terrorist organization when on December 12, 2001 two of their men were arrested amidst of preparation to attack Muslim and Arab-American organizations in America (10). William Mettles was arrested attempting to blow up a federal courthouse with 1,500 pounds of ammonium nitrates. And many more examples could be cited not exactly a concern for Al-qaeda or any other Islamic activist group. Every reasonable person can see the gross injustice in every of American policies. Recent instance is the case of Iranian Nuclear that made the U.S to loose control and started beating the war drum. Meanwhile, Israel’s (possessing over 200 nuclear warheads) was not even mentioned in American war of nuclear disarmament. It is this kind of conspicuous injustice and bias that makes many in the world to believe America has gone crazy. Let us even assume it to be the act of some Muslim activists, in the report the U.S officials intentionally dismissed to address and identify the underlying causes of the attack, knowing fully, it was as a result of their injustice in the world, particularly their support of terrorist state of Israel against the Palestinians, and for their unnecessary interference with Muslim affairs too often, distancing them from their own system of government (Shari’ah/Islamocracy). However, Bush has made a “Big Lie” as David Duke declared, when he uttered “they attacked us because we are free” or that “because they hate freedom”. Enver Masud cited one American saying “. U.S foreign policy invites ‘terrorism’; to end it we must end policies that create it” (11). Mr. Fuller wrote in Los Angeles Times (August 24, 1998): “It is dangerous to divorce terrorism from politics, yet the U.S. media continue to talk about an abstract war against terrorism without mention of the issue or context that lie behind them”.

By the way, America abused Islam and Muslims in their impartial report despite of their inability to substantiate the claim of the Muslim complicity in the 9/11 attack. Many appear today, to believe that America has fooled the world by creating deliberate saga of 9/11 attack. Of course, Muslims are paying the price of what they are innocents of. The U.S. must be wicked and arrogant! They vowed to fight terrorism; but could they end it? they admitted to take revenge by capturing the alleged leader of the attack, Bn Laden; but today, they killed more than 500,000 innocent people without capturing Bn Laden. In fact 20 civilians have to be killed in killing one Talibanist or Al-qaedist. Even though Bn Laden was not captured, was not no it suffice as a revenge taking away the lives of hundreds thousands of Muslims (500,000-plus) for murdering only 3,000 Americans? Mounzer Sleiman (PhD) alludes to this point in reference to his American state policy of war as thus: “The desire for revenge was portrayed as a right of self-defense and a license to use our enomors military power to attack or invade any place that we felt had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks. In the course of executing our revenge, we inflicted enomors damage to property and death to innocents, and we are still looking to do more under the pretext of preventing another 9/11” (12). In an attempt to combat terrorism, the same act of terror is spread by American Washington state. In Duke’s words:
“Any nation that bombs another naturally creates millions of angry enemies against it. America has repeatedly done that in recent times. We have taken sides in foreign conflicts, offered military assistance and weapons, and even bombed other nations. Our actions have caused the loss of many thousands of lives, including the lives of thousands of civilians. Many of the nations we bombed had never harmed a single American or acted in any way against the interests the United States” He adds: “We warned that if America sheds blood overseas, that eventually blood would be shed in our own country. I feel no satisfaction in saying that we were right” (13).

(1) “The Big Lie”, An Article By David Duke (Oct 8, 2001)
(2) 9/11 Commission Report. P.362 (cited in First Impression: American Muslim Perspectives, p.32).
(3) Encarta 2009.
(5) First Impression: American Muslim Perspectives, (p.9)
(6) “The Big Lie”, An Article By David Duke (Oct 8, 2001)
(7) Anonymous, Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror (Dulles, VA: Brassey’s Inc., 2004).
(8) First Impression: American Muslim Perspectives (pp. 1-2)
(9) Ibid…. (p. 5).
(11) M. Enver (2000-2003). The War On Islam (p.77)
(12) First Impression: American Muslim Perspectives, (p.77)
(13) “The Big Lie”, An Article By David Duke (Oct 8, 2001). reached at

Israelis Behind Al-Mabhou’s Assassination:Whence Justice Will Come?:


(Inside Nigeria)
Salim I. Hassan
Education Department
(Written On 15 April, 2010)
(Part I & II)
It is too long I have been detesting Tukur Mamu’s monthly Desert Herald for what I might observed of partiality, fabrication and sheer absurdities – probably for personal interest. However, sometimes I could not help escape myself from sense of sprinkling of justice and truth as it may tends to appear here and there in Mamu’s magazine. It is not only because he was surrounded by gifted writers/journalists, in fact his DH is smart at reporting and writing news information in a well organized manner. Not only have that, they can easily convince the audience. Look at how they were almost able to implicate Gov. Shekarau, assumed to being an accomplice in Sheik Ja’afar’s assassination. I am more than convinced that Mamu fabricated lies against Gov. Shekaru in that particular matter.

But this time around I should like to endorse (devoid of surmise) wholeheartedly, the document I read in Desert Herald, written by Maryam Musa. It has been exactly the hypothesis of what happened in reality today; that Namadi Sambo has personally thought of this ambition to become VP, knowing fully he is bound to miss the second term in Kaduna state’s governorship, mainly being threatened by Makarfi’s popular influence. Being that the case he has to look for alternative – described as Plan B in DH. If not of the practical reality that I saw today I would not even trust DH’s report. To make you more than convinced the document was gathered before Yar’adua’s demise which means it has been a set up plan in advance. Today Namadi was named as would-be-a-VP waiting for Senate’s approval (which they must).

Namadi has inquired into this ambition of becoming VP to acting GoodLuck Jonathan; he nurtured this ambition and put it into practice. “His plan ‘B’ is to be the vice president to acting President Goodluck Jonathan, should Yar’adua be impeached” reported in DH. Namadi based his ambition to be attained on the possibility of Yar’adua’s impeachment. Abruptly enough, death has done a damn thing in favour to the man longing for VP’s chair. I guessed when Yar’adua’s death was announced the greedy might utter ‘thanks to God, the threat was completely removed; and it was an everlasting opportunity to me’.

When he first thought of his ambition, Namadi was reported in DH, that he formed a committee of six people namely: Sen. Haruna Aziz, Sec. Gen. of CAN in Northern region, Elder Sa’idu Dogo, Kaduna State CAN’s chairman, Reverend Sam Kujiyat, Charity Shekari Mr. Aboki Galadima, Gen. Zamani Lekwot, all of whom from Southern Kaduna senatorial zone. They were entrusted with the task of devising strategies to achieve the top ambition. Namadi had asked his deputy Patrick Ibrahim Yakowa to select the present finance commissioner, Mukhtar yero as his deputy, should he (Yakowa) become a governor. The six-committee people were given N10 million to carry out the mission and were first met with Middle Belt forum under the leadership of Isaac Shaho in Abuja. Lt. Col. Jeremiah Usein, Solomon Lar, Sen. John Shagaya also attended the meeting. Namadi’s motive of pushing his agenda frankly and boldly to Christian elders, and without any hesitation (despite of the high competition in the position he aspires for) was that he was now serving Christian interest of taking over Kaduna state’s governorship – a position they have been trying to secure for long lasting years, but all previous attempts had failed. As to him, this will serve as a bribe to CAN elders to support him to accomplish his plan ‘B’. The committee together with Middle Belt Forum, after their meeting, they immediately went and met Gen. Theophilus Danjuma in Abuja, being informed he welcomed the idea of making Namadi Sambo the vice president, on the condition that, having someone among Christians from the Southern Kaduna state to become governor for the first time in Kaduna state’s history of political establishment. This is how Sambo speculated and today is a fact and reality. Well done Job Sambo: you have agreed to rob peter in order to pay paul.

Recently, with the naming of Sambo as would-be-a-vp I trust mamu’s DH 99% because if these things were not planned in advance they could hardly be predicted by someone no matter how intelligent he is. We may believe such narration of plan hatched in Sambo’s mind had really happened. Yesterday the ambition is a hypothesis and today is more than a theory, but a fact. I will make my trust 100% and will indubitably put my credence in DH’s report as soon as conventional Mukhtar Yero is made Deputy Gov. to Patrick Yakowa. This fulfillment will make DH’s report 100% true. However, any irony will not render the report absurd, should the planners would change their policy as they see their scheme is being uncovered. To remind you of this very vital issue, in the process of making their plan achievable, partrick Yakowa was urged (on behest of Sambo) to make Mukhtar Yero, the current finance commissioner, his deputy, once Sambo goes for VP. Sambo has really sold out Muslims’ power in favour of Christians’ one, motivated by his expedient plan ‘B’.

The Christians must see this as a unique and great opportunity for them to at least consolidate their power and political structure to facilitate their efforts to dominate the leadership in the near future. Even if they could not secure victory in the forthcoming 2011 election they can at least achieve some major of their interest. As proverb says in for a penny, in for a pound (meaning trying to achieve a little objective facilitate you to achieve a major one). Christians in Kaduna are now guided by this notion. Muslim should take care in Kaduna state. KEEP ON SURVEILLANCES PLEASE.

Sultan’s Unusual Stance
It is highly unusual – and what a manner of position – the stance taken by the Sultan of Sokoto on this horrific matter. I, like many others, with deep respect to the Sultan, deeply feel suspicious about his statement reported in Daily trust. Before his regrettable statement a rumour was penetrating the public alleging that the Sultan had asked Sambo to decline and step down his nomination, as just a kind of advice to Sambo. Sultan have frankly denied this allegation and described it as baseless rumour. If he has said such a thing to Sambo it would have been better and more appropriate for him. But he rejected the claim: “it is not true at all. Nothing like this happening”, reported DT. As a Muslim leader he has such a right of guiding and enjoining the Muslims state governments in all arising matters affecting their states. I believe th Sultan did not say such a statement, but I think it is the right thing to do at this right time – Sambo needs to be admonished as a Muslim. But, unfortunately, in his refutation remarks the Sultan has said the worse thing. Instead of opposing the horrific decision with wisdom and clarity of thought, he vehemently favours the evil cause – he endorses the decision that Kaduna should be devolve to Christians, as to him there is nothing faulty in that. In fact this decision must be opposed and halted islamically speaking.

Driving by paranoia (perhaps for the fear of national wolves), the Sultan declared that (Muslims) are not only ones in the state as such “why should anyone feel that a Christian should not be the governor of Kaduna state” as reported in DT. Is the state not a predominantly Muslim one? Is it not among the 19 Muslim Northern states of Nigeria? Can such a thing be allowed to happen in a definite predominant Christian state, should a Muslim become their governor? Or can’t we see how Muslims are being denied even minor political seats in Plateau-Jos? He went on further alluding to the fact that having a Christian governor in Muslim state does not in anyway hinder Muslims from practicing their religion. It is highly unprecedented to hear such a statement from such a noble man, considered to be ‘King of Faithful’ by many Nigerian Muslims. Even a layman like me, I believe there is no power (political or military) that can suppress Muslims from their religion. Even the West’s led power (I mean the USA) it is not fighting Muslims to stop their religion; rather it is fighting them to destroy their political structure, influence and power in the world (and it did achieve). The same thing is applied to Kaduna’s case. The Sultan, instead of viewing the situation from a narrow religious angle, he has to perceive it from the political angle – what are the likely negative consequences that may affect Muslims’ power in the state, politically speaking. As Muslim activists, the motive of our fear is the potential collapse of our political power and influence in the state, and not that of losing of our religion. The Christians will use this slight opportunity to on one hand, consolidate their political power/influence and to strengthen their structural establishment, and on the other hand, will seek to weaken and diminish Muslim’s political influence and their structural establishment as predominant political entity in the state. His Majesty the Sultan, with due respect to him, this is what we fear. And for this reason and many others, we must oppose, with strong hatred, this evil decision, even if after it was implemented.

We all have to believe that there shall be no threat(s) to stop Muslims from their ways of worship (religion). What we fear is loss of political power, structure, and influence in the state. Note! Christians are very active and seem to dominate Kaduna just as Muslims have been as such in Plateau-Jos. We all believe that Christians are having a hidden agenda against Muslims. Please, I am not intending for sedition, but I think the truth should be spoken out. It is time we have to learn some lessons from Plateau-Jos. Our sufferings there in the hands of Christians should be an excuse to us (if we are sensible) not to let any one of our states to slip to Christians. To do as such we must been slipped up.

Finally, this is not a trivial matter but a serious one fraught with damaging repercussions. What we can do as Muslim civilians (having no power and authority) is to pray for God to come into our save from this evil decision thought out by some careless people. Our leaders (in all kind of leadership) must be blamed for this recklessness. “…You took it lightly while it was a very serious offence in the sight of Allah” (Q24:15)



The confused man can no longer be at ease.