“….Jeffrey may still think that he is still a world leader…” (Onlooker Politics). Actually what I said was “pretentions of a world leader”. That’s because I don’t know any acknowledged and credible world leader who have opined publicly that von Bulow’s CIA staged conspiracy of 9/11 could be credible or that Jews “held whole governments to ransom. Even after their massacre by the Nazis of Germany, they survived to continue to be a source of even greater problems for the world. The Holocaust failed as a final solution” with the nuance leaving it open for interpretation as if it might (who knows?) be good thing in the world for the Holocaust to have succeeded as a final solution.

An imaginary question and answer session with Dr Mahathir on allegations of his “ability to work both sides of the street”.

On Barry Wain’s first charge: why display in 1984 public antipathy against Americans and yet allow their troops to crawl all over Malaysian jungles in training pursuant to secret military understanding with the US administration?

Mahathir’s reply: “Whats the beef ? It was not for free. It was based on the Bilateral Training and Consultation Treaty with US covering quid pro quo reciprocal arrangements for Malaysian military officers to train in the US under her IMET program. Don’t forget that since 1980s the US has become the biggest source of our foreign investment, and had been Malaysia’s biggest customer adding to prosperity of the country! What of allowing the US to set up a small-ship repair facility at Lumut and a plant in Kuala Lumpur to repair C-130 Hercules transport aircraft when these generated employment for local Malaysians? The Hercules contract also benefited Airod and created employment for Malaysians. Later Airod was even awarded the contract to assemble the undercarriages for the F5E and other aircraft. This had increased our Malaysian technology skills. This is pragmatism. Yes US’s administration is bad. Its foreign policy is bad but what has that got to do with business and economic pragmatism that we should rightly pursue? Business is business: if US is bad as I criticise her on world stage, there’s nothing wrong for Malaysia to make money and receive economic benefit from this bad boy so that we have the resources to render economic help to the good boy like Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe!.

Whats the next point of criticism?”

Ok this point of his procuring photoshoot with US President Bush in the White House in February 2002 at the cost of a RM4.6 million lobby effort involving the then Malaysian Ambassador to the United States..

The gravament of the charge/accusation :

The World Trade Centre fell, and a wing of the Pentagon was attacked on 11 September 2001.

If Bush & his administration were complicit in this self inflicted injury to hoax the world out of Islamophobia, a view Mahathir is sympathetic to, why then did Mahathir lobby at RM4.6 million expense to have a photoshoot session with Bush a year later in February 2002 after he knew about this???

Ok Dr M’s will reply in defence:

1. “I never initiated the lobby. Well wishers did. When I knew, I went along. Not that I admired/bodek Bush but more of not disappointing well wishers and their efforts! OK?”

2. “Sept 11? Well arrangements to have photoshoot were afoot (without my knowledge) well before 11 September 2001 (the attacks on World Trade Centre & Pentagon)”.

3. “Besides I only came to suspect Bush complicity in 9/11 attacks only after the photoshoot – a year earlier when I heard about Andreas von Bülow’s controversial hypothesis alleging CIA conspiracy and Bush’s complicity in his book but that book you will note was published only in 2003, a year after the photoshoot. So you can’t blame me of hypocrisy or working both sides of the street!Any more criticisms?”

TDM writes again, not using ghost writer I assume in his blog, to repeat his earlier belief in conspiracy theory – that the buildings’ collapse straight down, floor upon floor, and not sideways was more like controlled demolition ; that 4 planes hijacked at the same time to initiate the attack, needed good planning but the muslim terrorists “are not good at planning, they just strap bombs to themselves and storm into a crowd”….

The octogenarian knows that people’s psychology is such that they will choose to believe what they like to believe and refuse to acknowledge the obvious facts of the attack that they don’t like to believe, notwithstanding inconsistencies of the conspiracy theories.

This is a deliberate stoking of and appealing to emotions of those of his target audience who refuse to acknowledge that Islamic terrorists perpetrated the attack, preferring to blame the heinous acts to the Zionist sympathethic US administration instead.

What agenda is he up to?