Global Analyze & Current Affairs

Israel cuts 1948 'catastrophe' from Arabic texts

2009-07-27T21:43:00.001+06:00

Israel cuts 1948 'catastrophe' from Arabic texts

By MATTI FRIEDMAN Associated Press Writer

JERUSALEM—The Israeli government will remove references to what Palestinians call the "catastrophe" of Israel's creation from textbooks for Arab schoolchildren, the education minister said Wednesday.
The reference to "al-naqba," the Arabic word catastrophe, as Palestinians call their defeat and exile in the war over Israel's 1948 creation, was inserted by a dovish Israeli education minister in 2007.
The phrase remains contentious six decades later, a symptom of the continuing divisions in Israel. Many Israeli Arabs identify politically with their Palestinian counterparts in the West Bank and Gaza. As a result, some Israeli Jews accuse Israeli Arabs of disloyalty to the country.
Israel's current government, headed by Benjamin Netanyahu and his hard-line Likud Party, includes members who favor cracking down on Israeli Arabs by ordering loyalty oaths or even moving them out of Israel.
"No other country in the world, in its official curriculum, would treat the fact of its founding as a catastrophe," Education Minister Gideon Saar of Likud told Israel's parliament on Wednesday.
Israeli Arab lawmaker Hana Sweid accused the government of "naqba denial."
"It's a major attack on the identity of the Palestinian Arab citizens of the state of Israel, on their memories and their adherence to their identity," he told the Associated Press.
Teachers will be free to discuss the personal and national tragedies that befell Palestinians during Advertisement
the war, Saar said, but textbooks will be revised to remove the term, he added.
The decision applied to a third-grade textbook for Arab schoolchildren. Jewish textbooks make no mention of the term.
Yossi Sarid, a dovish former education minister, said Saar's decision showed insecurity.
"Zionism has already won in many ways, and can afford to be more confident. We need not be afraid of a word," Sarid said.
The 1948 war saw Arab nations invade the newly founded Jewish country after a United Nations decision to partition the British-controlled territory of Palestine into Jewish and Arab states. Jewish forces won, seizing territories beyond what the U.N. had allotted to it, while Egypt and Jordan took what was left of the territories the U.N. intended for a Palestinian state.
More than 700,000 Palestinians are thought to have fled or been expelled from areas that came under Israeli control.
Official Israeli histories of the country's establishment, especially those written for schoolchildren, have typically focused on the heroism of Israeli forces and glossed over the Palestinian flight, attributing the mass exile to voluntary escape if mentioning it at all.
In recent years, several Israeli historians have published books claiming that while many Palestinians did flee of their own accord, many others were forced from their homes as fighting raged.
Palestinians demand the right to repatriate the surviving refugees and more than 4 million descendants to their original homes in Israel.
Israel rejects the demand, saying the refugees should receive compensation and be resettled where they now live or in a Palestinian state.
The Arabs who remained inside Israel now make up about 20 percent of the country's population of 7.3 million.
ReprintPrint Email

UK debt reaches $1.3 trillion

2009-07-27T21:40:00.001+06:00

UK debt reaches $1.3 trillion

Britain's public sector debt has reached $1.3 trillion - the highest amount since records began 35 years ago.
The total - equivalent to 56.6 per cent of the country's gross domestic product (GDP) - comes after the government borrowed $21bn last month, double the amount of last June, the UK's Office for National Statistics said on Tuesday.
The figures reflect dwindling tax receipts following Britain's worst economic downturn in decades as well as the cost of bank bail-outs and higher spending on social security benefits.
The $21bn figure for last month was lower than the $25.5bn forecast but also a record high for the month of June.

'Extraordinary borrowing'

Alan Clarke, UK economist at BNP Paribas, a French bank, said: "It wasn't a terrible number on the day ... but it doesn't change the bigger picture that public sector finances are in bad shape."
In the April to June period, public sector net borrowing stood at $68bn, nearly double the level in the same period a year ago.
Alistair Darling, Britain's finance minister, has forecast borrowing for the full year of $288bn, a record post-war high - but several economists say $312bn is more likely.
Mervyn King, the governor of Britain's central bank, recently said the government's borrowing levels were "extraordinary".

126 US fighter jets for India and no body makes a noise!

2009-07-27T21:36:00.002+06:00

126 US fighter jets for India and no body makes a noise!

More of Nuclear supplies and no body makes a noise...

Is every body sleeping or dead? What is Pakistan media doing? Just going after Pervez Musharraf I guess?

NEW DELHI, July 20 -- The United States and India on Monday established a high-level forum designed to further strengthen a relationship that has dramatically improved in recent years. The two governments also announced relatively modest agreements that could foster potential sales of sophisticated U.S. arms and civil nuclear reactors.

The "strategic dialogue," unveiled on the final day of Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's three-day tour of India, will be one of only about a half-dozen such relationships the United States has with other countries.
The annual sessions will be co-chaired by Clinton and External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and will bring together cabinet secretaries of both countries for formal discussions.
Clinton, at a news conference with Krishna, stressed that the talks are designed to inspire broad partnerships beyond the government level, bringing Americans into closer contact with one of the world's fastest-growing economies.
"We do not, however, intend for this to be a dialogue between ministers or even between governments, but between our nations and our peoples, our scientists and business leaders, our civil society activists and academics, charitable foundations, farmers, educators, doctors, entrepreneurs," Clinton told reporters.
Underscoring that point, Clinton stretched the bounds of traditional diplomacy during her visit. She met with business leaders in the commercial capital of Mumbai, talked to poor female weavers, toured an environmentally friendly "green" building, visited a farm to learn about new crop techniques and discussed Indian education issues at a university forum.

On Monday, she delved into more-official contacts, meeting with Krishna; Manmohan Singh, the prime minister; Sonia Gandhi, the head of the ruling Congress party; and L.K. Advani, the leader of the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party.
Clinton announced that she had conveyed an invitation to Singh from President Obama to visit Washington on Nov. 24 for what would be the first state visit of the new administration. Singh accepted, U.S. officials said.
The other agreements announced Monday were of less import, essentially marking incremental steps toward realizing potential military and nuclear sales.
India agreed to accept congressionally mandated monitoring of the use of sensitive military equipment, which will allow U.S. companies to compete for the sale of 126 fighter jets worth about $10 billion. India also identified two sites for potential U.S.-made nuclear reactors, also worth $10 billion, though the Indian government must still pass a controversial law limiting liability for U.S. companies before they can compete.
Clinton and Krishna also signed a technology agreement that will permit the use of U.S. parts on Indian satellite launch vehicles and established a $30 million fund for joint science and technology projects.
The United States and India had chilly relations during the Cold War, but a thaw began during the presidency of Clinton's husband, Bill Clinton. President George W. Bush built on that foundation by inking a landmark civil nuclear agreement with India, and now the Obama administration has made it clear it wants to further deepen ties.
One U.S. official involved in this week's talks said that until recently the two countries "managed problems." It was such an unsatisfactory relationship that very few senior U.S. officials wanted to meet with their Indian counterparts. But Bush's nuclear deal, which allows India to buy civil nuclear equipment even though it did not sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, cleared away a long-standing sore point between the two nations.
Meanwhile, Singh's party won a commanding victory in May, allowing it to shed left-leaning coalition partners suspicious of Washington. The U.S. official said that now the heads of various agencies are fighting over who can join the U.S.-India dialogue. "There's a sense that we can accomplish something," he said.
Still, stark differences between the two countries on such issues as a global agreement to limit greenhouse gases were apparent during Clinton's trip.
Clinton is an Indiaphile, clearly fascinated by the country, its people and its food. Speaking to about 700 students at Delhi University on Monday, she said it would be a mistake to allow stereotypes portrayed in popular culture to influence relations between the two countries.
"People watching a Bollywood movie in some other part of Asia think everyone in India is beautiful and they have dramatic lives and have happy endings," Clinton said to laugher. "And if you were to watch American TV and our movies, you'd think that we don't wear clothes and we spend a lot of time fighting with each other."

Making Sense Of Pak Politics

2009-07-27T21:31:00.002+06:00

Making Sense Of Pak Politics: Musharraf, Zardari & Supreme Court

Ikram Sehgal: If the Army can stomach Zardari, why should they mind Musharraf back as president one day? Musharraf’s fate is the same as those who close their ears to good advice and shoot messengers bringing bad news.

In his analysis published in today’s The News International, Mr. Ikram Sehgal provides an interesting assessment of the latest episode in the Pakistani political circus. The focus is on Pervez Musharraf’s legal problems, the real strength of President Zardari versus Nawaz Sharif/Prime Minister Gilani. And, most importantly, why the Supreme Court of Pakistan under the restored Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry is avoiding taking up the NRO, the law that whitewashed financial corruption at the highest levels in government. Finally, Mr. Sehgal makes some interesting observations about how the Pakistani military leadership could be viewing this mess.

On Musharraf’s Fate:

Pervez Musharraf must be content in his London apartment, in less than a year Zardari has replaced him as the unpopular figure in Pakistan. Unlike Zardari, Musharraf always enjoyed a base of popularity. Given the present abysmal performance of the Zardari-Gilani government, this will force-multiply exponentially. If the Army can stomach Zardari, why should they mind Musharraf back as president one day? Even though Musharraf's Oct 12, 1999, takeover was illegal in all senses of the word, in all fairness it was popular in the streets with both the intelligentsia and the masses fed up with bad governance. No tears were shed for the Nawaz Sharif regime. Almost everyone welcomed, myself included, a military coup in the name of hope, or as hope is known in Pakistan, "the doctrine of necessity." That public faith in Pervez Musharraf eroded dramatically after the rigged 2002 elections was no surprise. That is the fate of all who close their ears to good advice and shoot messengers bringing bad news. As long as Asif Zardari does not meddle with the military, and until now he has shown no inclination for this rather fatal pastime, the military hierarchy seems more comfortable having him (Kayani was DG ISI before he became COAS, he cannot claim ignorance about all the Zardari controversies) around than Mian Sahib. One can understand the Army's lack of enthusiasm in repealing the 17th Amendment and Clause 58 (2) (b). Why shackle themselves for the next time around? It stands to reason they seem supportive (as does the US) of a strong president and an ineffectual prime minister.

On Whether Zardari Is Cornered:

Despite being under pressure lately, Zardari has made notable accomplishments. The success of sorts in Swat has been bought at a heavy price, the blood of our young men in uniform. Sufi Muhammad took a day as a sign of weakness the abject and shameful surrender by Pakistan's Parliament in its passage of a resolution for so-called peace in less than a day. The Taliban were not prepared for the outraged reaction of the Pakistani public. Their attempt to brutally take over Swat and adjacent districts was fully exploited by the Army. That most of the IDPs are returning is a clear measure of the military's success (and, it so happens, Zardari's). Complete success will only be possible when Maulana Fazlullah and his top aides are physically eliminated. Surviving March 15 virtually unscathed is a credit to Zardari's political craftsmanship, being reduced to a figurehead president is certainly not in keeping with his personality, or the shenanigans of his friends. A master of the art of playing for time, he has again consigned the 17th Amendment to the cold storage of a parliamentary committee. Yusuf Reza Gilani vacillated in the name of party unity when the opportunity arose to get back the prime minister's powers under the 1973 Constitution. By not maintaining the March 15 momentum he blew his chances. That the Supreme Court decision overturning Mian Sahib's conviction on the aircraft hijack case came the same day as Zardari's Raiwind visit is no coincidence. Zardari needed to head off Mian Nawaz Sharif running loose in the National Assembly with Gilani on constitutional issues.

On Double Standards Of Nawaz Sharif & THE RESTORED CHIEF JUSTICE:

While Mian Sahib must be congratulated for not becoming another political beneficiary of the infamous National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO), nonetheless his "democratic" silence about this blackest of black laws is intriguing. Even though it seems they presently seem to lack enthusiasm, there seems to be method in the Supreme Court's benign ignorance of something that has disfigured Pakistan's politics and threatens our existence as a nation. At present all eyes are on the Supreme Court as they decide on the blatantly illegal Nov 3 action. The NRO will have to be addressed; his lordships cannot ignore it forever under "a doctrine of necessity." Ordinary mortals do expect that their lordships while suo moto-ing everything under the sun, will ultimately address this black hole in Pakistan's heart. The NRO provides for London being the first (and Dubai the second) home for our leaders. Our leaders alternate in giving us bad governance, collect their booty (and their gifts which seems to be their right by being president and/or prime minister), and go back to London (and Dubai), at least till all is forgotten and forgiven by our gullible masses, and their popularity returns.

U.S. Troops in Iraq: 72% Say End War in 2006

2009-07-27T21:13:00.001+06:00

U.S. Troops in Iraq: 72% Say End War in 2006

02/28/06 Zogby

Le Moyne College/Zogby Poll shows just one in five troops want to heed Bush call to stay “as long as they are needed”
While 58% say mission is clear, 42% say U.S. role is hazy
Plurality believes Iraqi insurgents are mostly homegrown
Almost 90% think war is retaliation for Saddam’s role in 9/11, most don’t blame Iraqi public for insurgent attacks
Majority of troops oppose use of harsh prisoner interrogation
Plurality of troops pleased with their armor and equipment

An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year, and nearly one in four say the troops should leave immediately, a new Le Moyne College/Zogby International survey shows.
The poll, conducted in conjunction with Le Moyne College’s Center for Peace and Global Studies, showed that 29% of the respondents, serving in various branches of the armed forces, said the U.S. should leave Iraq “immediately,” while another 22% said they should leave in the next six months. Another 21% said troops should be out between six and 12 months, while 23% said they should stay “as long as they are needed.”

Different branches had quite different sentiments on the question, the poll shows. While 89% of reserves and 82% of those in the National Guard said the U.S. should leave Iraq within a year, 58% of Marines think so. Seven in ten of those in the regular Army thought the U.S. should leave Iraq in the next year. Moreover, about three-quarters of those in National Guard and Reserve units favor withdrawal within six months, just 15% of Marines felt that way. About half of those in the regular Army favored withdrawal from Iraq in the next six months.

The troops have drawn different conclusions about fellow citizens back home. Asked why they think some Americans favor rapid U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq, 37% of troops serving there said those Americans are unpatriotic, while 20% believe people back home don’t believe a continued occupation will work. Another 16% said they believe those favoring a quick withdrawal do so because they oppose the use of the military in a pre-emptive war, while 15% said they do not believe those Americans understand the need for the U.S. troops in Iraq.

The wide-ranging poll also shows that 58% of those serving in country say the U.S. mission in Iraq is clear in their minds, while 42% said it is either somewhat or very unclear to them, that they have no understanding of it at all, or are unsure. While 85% said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks,” 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was “to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq.”

“Ninety-three percent said that removing weapons of mass destruction is not a reason for U.S. troops being there,” said Pollster John Zogby, President and CEO of Zogby International. “Instead, that initial rationale went by the wayside and, in the minds of 68% of the troops, the real mission became to remove Saddam Hussein.” Just 24% said that “establishing a democracy that can be a model for the Arab World" was the main or a major reason for the war. Only small percentages see the mission there as securing oil supplies (11%) or to provide long-term bases for US troops in the region (6%).

The continuing insurgent attacks have not turned U.S. troops against the Iraqi population, the survey shows. More than 80% said they did not hold a negative view of Iraqis because of those attacks. About two in five see the insurgency as being comprised of discontented Sunnis with very few non-Iraqi helpers. “There appears to be confusion on this,” Zogby said. But, he noted, less than a third think that if non-Iraqi terrorists could be prevented from crossing the border into Iraq, the insurgency would end. A majority of troops (53%) said the U.S. should double both the number of troops and bombing missions in order to control the insurgency.

The survey shows that most U.S. military personnel in-country have a clear sense of right and wrong when it comes to using banned weapons against the enemy, and in interrogation of prisoners. Four in five said they oppose the use of such internationally banned weapons as napalm and white phosphorous. And, even as more photos of prisoner abuse in Iraq surface around the world, 55% said it is not appropriate or standard military conduct to use harsh and threatening methods against insurgent prisoners in order to gain information of military value.
Three quarters of the troops had served multiple tours and had a longer exposure to the conflict: 26% were on their first tour of duty, 45% were on their second tour, and 29% were in Iraq for a third time or more.

A majority of the troops serving in Iraq said they were satisfied with the war provisions from Washington. Just 30% of troops said they think the Department of Defense has failed to provide adequate troop protections, such as body armor, munitions, and armor plating for vehicles like HumVees. Only 35% said basic civil infrastructure in Iraq, including roads, electricity, water service, and health care, has not improved over the past year. Three of every four were male respondents, with 63% under the age of 30.
The survey included 944 military respondents interviewed at several undisclosed locations throughout Iraq. The names of the specific locations and specific personnel who conducted the survey are being withheld for security purposes. Surveys were conducted face-to-face using random sampling techniques. The margin of error for the survey, conducted Jan. 18 through Feb. 14, 2006, is +/- 3.3 percentage points.

Al-Qaeda's leadership

2009-07-17T18:25:00.001+06:00

Al-Qaeda's leadership based in 'terror safe haven' Pakistan: Clinton

US building an excuse out of its self-raised terrorism to invade Pakistan with Zionist help. Pakistanis must remain strong and faithful, Allah is with us and he is the best of Planners!

Washington, July 16: US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has once again highlighted that Pakistan is a terror safe haven and said that Al-Qaeda's leadership is based in that country.

Clinton's comments came a day before her significant visit to India, where she will be meeting the country's leadership. The impending threat of terrorism and several other important issues are expected to come up for discussions during her visit.
Addressing a think tank at the Council of Foreign Relations Wednesday, Clinton said that the US is ready to negotiate with the Taliban if it severs its ties with Al-Qaeda, lays down arms and participates in building a democratic Afghanistan.
She said success in Afghanistan required co-operation from Pakistan as well.
The News quoted Clinton, as saying that both Al-Qaeda and the Taliban pose an equal threat to the region, and therefore it is important to crush both.
"We and our allies fight in Afghanistan because the Taliban protects Al-Qaeda and depends on it for support. To eliminate Al-Qaeda, we must also fight the Taliban," she said.

Copyright Asian News International/DailyIndia.com

Special Reports

2009-07-17T18:16:00.002+06:00

Special Reports

Cheney’s assassination squad run out of Pentagon; allegedly targeted Benazir Bhutto

By Wayne Madsen
WMR has learned from U.S. intelligence veterans that the secret intelligence operation run by Vice President Dick Cheney was not under the aegis of the Central Intelligence Agency but was a component of the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the Department of Defense.
The JSOC unit carried out assassinations of foreign individuals, including politicians in countries friendly to the United States, under the direct orders of Cheney. One former intelligence official described the operation as a new “Phoenix Program.”
During the Vietnam War, the CIA’s Phoenix program, carried out, with the cooperation of U.S. Special Operations forces, identified key Vietcong leaders in South Vietnamese villages and towns and later assassinated them. What the CIA was involved with from the days subsequent to the 9/11 attacks was a similar operation in Afghanistan and Pakistan that identified key leaders of “Al Qaeda” and the Taliban and planned their assassinations.
However, what the CIA abandoned was Cheney’s use of the operation, in part organized under then-CIA director George Tenet’s “Worldwide Attack Matrix” or “WAM,” to target real or perceived political enemies in other countries, possibly including individuals in the United States. CIA director Leon Panetta officially terminated the CIA’s residual role in the assassination program after an eight-year involvement and informed Congress that they had been misled about the nature of the program.
The only actual part of the CIA that worked with the Pentagon’s assassination unit under JSOC was the Special Activities Division (SAD) of the CIA, itself largely comprised of former U.S. Special Operations personnel, including a number of former Delta Force members.
Far from being concerned about revelations about the program, WMR has learned that rank-and-file CIA officers are ecstatic about the revelations concerning Cheney’s operations. In knowing that most in the CIA, perhaps with the noted exceptions of deputy director of the CIA, Stephen Kappes, and acting CIA general counsel John Rizzo, were not involved in Cheney’s assassination ring, which is considered by many CIA officers to have been illegal, there is a certain amount of glee in realizing that Cheney may soon face the legal music on ordering illegal assassinations.
One retired CIA officer who was involved in the original clandestine targeting program before it was altered by Cheney, believes that the CIA has Cheney “by the balls” over the new revelations about the death squads.
WMR has been told by a U.S. intelligence source that the one person who poses the greatest threat to Cheney is former CIA director George Tenet, who claims that Cheney’s operation was so secretive he was not aware of its details. Tenet has been described as having few friends from the Bush-Cheney administration and has nothing to lose by making public what he knows about Cheney’s role in the assassination operation. Although the Cheney/JSOC operation continued under CIA directors Porter Goss and General Michael Hayden, neither are considered particularly vulnerable, except for their possible testimonies under oath before congressional committees.
The most high-profile target of the secret Cheney assassination squad, according to high-level CIA sources, allegedly was former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, assassinated on December 27, 2007, in Rawalpindi, the heart of Pakistan’s military and intelligence community.
WMR reported the assassination as follows on December 27, 2007: “Bhutto was reportedly first shot in the neck and chest and then killed in a suicide bomb blast at a campaign rally. Bhutto’s closest advisers immediately suspected the involvement of Pakistan’s military and intelligence complex in the assassination, an event which is thought by many to strengthen the hand of Musharraf and Pakistan’s dictatorship. The global corporate media, in practical unison, began echoing the tired tripe that ‘Al Qaeda’ was responsible for Bhutto’s assassination. However, ‘Al Qaeda’ was fostered by Pakistan’s military and intelligence community with large amounts of funding from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf.”
According to our CIA sources, Cheney decided that every effort should be made to ensure that his friend, Pakistan President Gen. Pervez Musharraf, remain in power in Pakistan and not be replaced by Bhutto. Cheney allegedly authorized his secret assassination unit to hit Bhutto and then maximize his political gain by blaming the attack on “Al Qaeda.”
Cheney’s alleged hit on Bhutto also involved U.S. and Pakistani electronic surveillance of her communications. On February 21, 2008, WMR reported: “The late former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto knew that all her phone conversations and e-mails were being monitored by Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and ‘other intelligence agencies,’ according to her long time friend and co-author Mark Siegel. Siegel made his comments last night in a speech at the National Press Club highlighting ‘Reconciliation,’ a book he co-authored with Bhutto shortly before her assassination. Siegel said he and Bhutto were convinced that during her five years of exile in Dubai that all their phone calls between Washington, DC, and Dubai were being monitored by ISI. Since ISI does not possess its own significant eavesdropping capability in the United States, Bhutto’s reference to ‘other agencies’ is an indication that the US National Security Agency (NSA) was eavesdropping on Bhutto and passing some of the intelligence to the ISI and the government of Pakistani dictator Gen. Pervez Musharraf.”
The House Intelligence Committee is promising to investigate the details of the program and on July 12, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) said he believes there will be additional revelations forthcoming about the super-secret Cheney program.

Israeli warships

2009-07-17T15:51:00.001+06:00

Israeli warships make rare Suez crossing on their way to Red Sea

As US says it is watching Iran and Pakistan
so we are all keeping a close eye on Israel too.

Occupied Jerusalem: Two Israeli warships sailed through the Suez Canal on Tuesday, Israeli and Egyptian officials said, a move that appeared to be a new signal to Iran that Israel's reach could quickly extend to its arch enemy's backyard.
The Suez Canal is a strategic waterway linking the Mediterranean to the Red Sea, the gateway to the Gulf. Use of the Egyptian-controlled canal means Israeli naval vessels could reach waters off Iran in a matter of days, instead of taking a much longer route around Africa.
Israeli vessels regularly use the canal. But what is noteworthy in recent weeks is that the navy's moves have been publicised, albeit unofficially, by Israel.
Two of Israel's Saar class missile boats crossed through the Suez Canal and into the Red Sea, Israeli defense officials said.
Speaking on condition of anonymity because the move was not officially publicised, they said it was connected to "the navy's recent activities around the Red Sea."
A Suez Canal official in Egypt confirmed the report.
Israel considers Iran its most serious threat, citing Tehran's nuclear program, its support for anti-Israel militant groups and bellicose statements by its hardline president.
Israel believes Iran is developing nuclear weapons - a charge Iran denies - and has refused to rule out military action if Iran pushes forward with its atomic program.
Earlier this month, Israeli defense officials said one of the navy's Dolphin class submarines had also sailed to the Red Sea through the Suez Canal in June, returning July 5.
Beyond the ability to threaten shipping, some foreign media reports say Dolphins can fire nuclear-tipped cruise missiles and serve as Israel's deterrent "second-strike" capability, allowing Israel to launch nuclear weapons from afar even if the country itself is targeted by a nuclear attack.
"There is nothing unusual about the navy being in those waters - they often train there," said Shlomo Brom, a former Israeli general and a security expert at the Institute for National Security Studies.
"What is unusual, though, is that this information was made public. I believe it was likely leaked on purpose in order to signal to Iran that Israel has the capability of reaching them," Brom said.
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmad Aboul Gheit said that under a long-standing treaty, warships can freely sail through Suez as long as they have no hostile intentions against the state that owns the canal.
He declined to say whether the maneuver was aimed at sending a message, saying "I don't want to analyse an issue that I am not fully aware of."

Destroying Gaza

2009-07-17T15:50:00.000+06:00

Destroying Gaza

Food: Assassination tool of the Israelis which they are using against the Muslims

By Sara Roy
July 14, 2009 "Electronic Intifada" -- The recent meeting between US President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu generated speculation over the future relationship between America and Israel, and a potentially changed US policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Analysts on the right and left are commenting on a new, tougher American policy characterized by strengthened US demands on Israel. However, beneath the diplomatic choreography lies an agonizing reality that received only brief comment from Obama and silence from Netanyahu: the ongoing devastation of the people of Gaza.
Gaza is an example of a society that has been deliberately reduced to a state of abject destitution, its once productive population transformed into one of aid-dependent paupers. This context is undeniably one of mass suffering, created largely by Israel but with the active complicity of the international community, especially the US and European Union, and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.
Gaza`s subjection began long before Israel`s recent war against it. The Israeli occupation -- now largely forgotten or denied by the international community -- has devastated Gaza`s economy and people, especially since 2006. Although economic restrictions actually increased before Hamas` electoral victory in January 2006, the deepened sanction regime and siege subsequently imposed by Israel and the international community, and later intensified in June 2007 when Hamas seized control of Gaza, has all but destroyed the local economy. If there has been a pronounced theme among the many Palestinians, Israelis and internationals who I have interviewed in the last three years, it was the fear of damage to Gaza`s society and economy so profound that billions of dollars and generations of people would be required to address it -- a fear that has now been realized.
After Israel`s December assault, Gaza`s already compromised conditions have become virtually unlivable. Livelihoods, homes and public infrastructure have been damaged or destroyed on a scale that even the Israeli army admitted was indefensible. In Gaza today, there is no private sector to speak of and no industry. Eighty percent of Gaza`s agricultural crops were destroyed and Israel continues to snipe at farmers attempting to plant and tend fields near the well-fenced and patrolled border. Most productive activity has been extinguished.
One powerful expression of Gaza`s economic demise -- and the Gazans` indomitable will to provide for themselves and their families -- is its burgeoning tunnel economy that emerged long ago in response to the siege. Thousands of Palestinians are now employed digging tunnels into Egypt -- around 1,000 tunnels are reported to exist although not all are operational. According to local economists, 90 percent of economic activity in Gaza -- once considered a lower middle-income economy (along with the West Bank) -- is presently devoted to smuggling.
Today, 96 percent of Gaza`s population of 1.4 million is dependent on humanitarian aid for basic needs. According to the World Food Program, the Gaza Strip requires a minimum of 400 trucks of food every day just to meet the basic nutritional needs of the population. Yet, despite a 22 March decision by the Israeli cabinet to lift all restrictions on foodstuffs entering Gaza, only 653 trucks of food and other supplies were allowed entry during the week of 10 May, for example, at best meeting 23 percent of required need.
Israel now allows only 30 to 40 commercial items to enter Gaza compared to 4,000 approved products prior to June 2006. According to the Israeli journalist Amira Hass, Gazans still are denied many commodities (a policy in effect long before the December assault): building materials (including wood for windows and doors), electrical appliances (such as refrigerators and washing machines), spare parts for cars and machines, fabrics, threads, needles, candles, matches, mattresses, sheets, blankets, cutlery, crockery, cups, glasses, musical instruments, books, tea, coffee, sausages, semolina, chocolate, sesame seeds, nuts, milk products in large packages, most baking products, light bulbs, crayons, clothing and shoes.
Given these constraints, among many others -- including the internal disarray of the Palestinian leadership -- one wonders how the reconstruction to which Obama referred will be possible. There is no question that people must be helped immediately. Programs aimed at alleviating suffering and reinstating some semblance of normalcy are ongoing, but at a scale shaped entirely by the extreme limitations on the availability of goods. In this context of repressive occupation and heightened restriction, what does it mean to reconstruct Gaza? How is it possible under such conditions to empower people and build sustainable and resilient institutions able to withstand expected external shocks? Without an immediate end to Israel`s blockade and the resumption of trade and the movement of people outside the prison that Gaza has long been, the current crisis will grow massively more acute. Unless the US administration is willing to exert real pressure on Israel for implementation -- and the indications thus far suggest they are not -- little will change. Not surprisingly, despite international pledges of $5.2 billion for Gaza`s reconstruction, Palestinians there are now rebuilding their homes using mud.
Recently, I spoke with some friends in Gaza and the conversations were profoundly disturbing. My friends spoke of the deeply-felt absence of any source of protection -- personal, communal or institutional. There is little in society that possesses legitimacy and there is a fading consensus on rules and an eroding understanding of what they are for. Trauma and grief overwhelm the landscape despite expressions of resilience. The feeling of abandonment among people appears complete, understood perhaps in their growing inability to identify with any sense of possibility. The most striking was this comment: `It is no longer the occupation or even the war that consumes us but the realization of our own irrelevance.`
What possible benefit can be derived from an increasingly impoverished, unhealthy, densely crowded and furious Gaza alongside Israel? Gaza`s terrible injustice not only threatens Israeli and regional security, but it undermines America`s credibility, alienating our claim to democratic practice and the rule of law.
If Palestinians are continually denied what we want and demand for ourselves -- an ordinary life, dignity, livelihood, safety and a place where they can raise their children -- and are forced, yet again, to face the destruction of their families, then the inevitable outcome will be greater and more extreme violence across all factions, both old and increasingly new. What looms is no less than the loss of entire generation of Palestinians. And if this happens -- perhaps it already has -- we shall all bear the cost.

Sara Roy is a senior research scholar at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at Harvard University. She is the author of Failing Peace: Gaza and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict. This article was originally published by The Harvard Crimson and is republished with the author`s permission.

India's own Abu Ghraib:

2009-07-17T15:47:00.001+06:00

India's own Abu Ghraib: The Week's story on secret torture chambers

This is what the Bollywood and Indian media will never tell you!

A 14-year-old boy, Irfan, was crossing the road near his house in Delhi when a Tavera car screeched to a halt near him, he was bundled into the car and pinned down under the heavy feet with pistol kept to his head.
The mother kept searching for the boy. Had it not the car's numberplate and the judiciary's help, the boy may not have been tracked and released in ten days, from a secret Abu Gharaib-like torture cell in faraway Gujarat where he underwent such torture which even the adults can't even dream to endure.
This explosive story by news magazine 'The Week' has caused ripples in administrative circles. After a long time, a news magazine has done such an investigative story that brings to light something which was either not known or just talked about in whispers.
The magazine's journalist has unearthed and located these secret detention camps a la Abu Ghraib in Iraq, which are present in several Indian cities. The Week's managing editor Philip Mathew has written a special full page introduction for the story and the purpose of this extraordinary revelation. He writes:
..The muffled cry will never reach you. Nor the snap of bone. It is a strange silence, as if tranquilised by terror....the cover story is vastly different from Hitlerian terror, what is common though is the sadistic streak that strips a human of his dignity and sometimes his life...
The Week's cover story on secret torture champers comes at a time when mature democracies are pausing to listen to their conscience....many innocents suffer grievously as they were picked up on mere suspicion and had no access to legal help, nor their families know where they had been taken...
The extensive groundwork and the interviews by The Week's senior correspondent Syed Nazakat are a revelation. Yes, terrorists need to be treated differently. But does the organised might of the state need to torture 14-year-old innocent minor by abducting them and keeping them in soundproof cells that don't have windows and where new definitions of torture are scripted every minute?
Many are traumatised for their life and others die in these chambers without anybody's knowledge. Former DGP and Intelligence Bureau (IB) officer, Dr KS Subramanian's interview is also an eye-opener. He doesn't deny about such practices and says, "...in terrorist-related cases, the police may feel incentive to describe people as terrorists and kill them for professional reasons and career advancement.'
He mentions how farmers were killed in the name of Naxalites. The exhaustive report also tells about the exact location of these terror cells in Kolkata, Palanpur (Gujarat), Delhi, Mumbai and Guwahati--often in houses faraway from police stations.
The importance of the story lies in the fact that often journalists working on a particular beat get sympathetic and close to the system, rather than the citizens. In turn, they turn their back on such grave abuse of human rights. However, the issue is that we always feel it is 'the other' who suffers, not us and we forget.
When women get gang raped in custody, many feel that such incidents keep happening to Dalits and Tribals or perhaps to that particular class of 'poor'. When innocents get killed in encounters, we remain indifferent. And in process cede our rights and liberties.
The use of drugs through injections, water boardings, attaching electrodes on genitals and other techniques of torture (as described by the magazine) are not something which any civilised state should allow on innocent citizens.
As the Week's editor writes, "...Irfan is not just Tasleema's 14 year old son. He is an Indian citizen with rights, just like your son and mine..... ". Read the story. Link to the editor's introduction and the story 'India's secret torture chambers'. It's chilling and shocking to say the least. Congratulations to the writer and the magazine for their courage.

Ambush kills 29 Indian policemen

2009-07-17T15:40:00.002+06:00

Ambush kills 29 Indian policemen

Untold story of the “Incredible Break Up of the Incredible India” by the hands of Separatist Movement

Maoists have a presence in 182
districts of India

The number of policemen killed in an attack
by suspected Maoist rebels in India's Chhattisgarh
state has risen to 29, police say.
The attack took place in Rajnandgaon, 90km (56 miles) from capital Raipur.
Two officers were killed initially, and a larger force sent to the scene was then attacked, according to police reports
The district police chief was also killed in what is said to be one of the worst attacks by rebels in the state.
Maoist rebels are fighting for communist rule in a number of states. The conflict has killed more than 6,000 people in 20 years.
Convoy ambushed
The first attack took place in Madanwada early Sunday morning in which two policemen were killed.
Superintendent of police for Rajnandgaon, Vinod Kumar Choubey, was killed when he was leading police reinforcements to the area, the deputy inspector general of police, Pawan Dev, said.
His convoy was ambushed between Khoregaon and Karkoti villages.
Between 200 and 300 rebels attacked the police convoy.
The two sides fought a fierce gun battle in which Mr Choubey and several other policemen were killed, Mr Dev said.
A total of 29 bodies had been recovered and search operations were continuing in the area, he said.

U.S. losing Pakistani

2009-07-17T15:38:00.000+06:00

U.S. losing Pakistani hearts and minds to China

It comes as little surprise that Pakistanis harbor antipathy toward the United States. Support for a country’s oppressive dictator and its geopolitical enemy tends to garner a little wrath. The United States has known for some time that its policies toward Pakistan and South Asia peeved off the Pakistanis but it was a price that U.S. officials were willing to pay to achieve greater strategic goals. However callous a calculation this may seem, there now exists an equally practical strategic reason for trying to win the hearts and minds of Pakistanis: China is making inroads.
A recent poll from World Public Opinion found that Pakistan’s perception of the United States under the Obama administration has not changed substantively from its perception of the United States during George W. Bush’s reign. Only 30% of Pakistanis polled had any confidence that the U.S. president would do “the right thing regarding world affairs.” Contrast this with Pakistani opinion of China’s president, Hu Jintao, who received an 80% confidence vote on the same question.
Pakistan’s favorable view of China is consistent with political realities. India is a historical rival of Pakistan’s and a strategic rival of China’s; India even fought a brief war against China in 1962. China’s strict policy of noninterference in the domestic affairs of other nations also distinguishes it quite favorably from the United States, which has long meddled in Pakistan’s domestic affairs, most recently supporting Pakistan’s strongman dictator, General Pervez Musharaf, in spite of the will of the Pakistani people to remove him from office. As recently as the Fall of 2008, China even provided a $500 million financial aid package to Pakistan to help with its balance of payments crisis as it worked out a deal with the International Monetary Fund.
Meanwhile, the United States has provided 200-400% greater military aid to Pakistan than non-military aid since 2002. On the basis of allocations of assistance alone, it is clear where U.S. priorities have been relative to China’s. While it supported Pakistan’s dictator militarily, politically, and financially, the United States simultaneously became a closer ally with India, Pakistan’s historic rival. In 2005, the Bush administration even attempted to construct a nuclear fuel agreement with India--but not Pakistan--in clear contravention of the spirit of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Pakistanis, perhaps rightly, have little faith in U.S. policy toward South Asia while viewing their relationship with China as a positive one. In the coming age of multi-polarity, it is unlikely that China and the United States will become open enemies but, even as strategic allies, they will probably remain strategic competitors. In this context, the United States will increasingly rely on its influence, popularity, and credibility--that is, its soft power--to attain U.S. interests. Ceding soft power to a rising competitor in strategically important countries like Pakistan is no way to preserve U.S. interests. The Obama administration has started signaling that it could be changing its policy toward Pakistan and well it should. Momentum should continue to build behind this kind of change.

Hundreds of Thousands of Workers

2009-07-16T20:39:00.000+06:00

Hundreds of Thousands of Workers Will Lose Unemployment Benefits Soon

WASHINGTON -- When a virulent disease is ravaging you like a cancer, you don't want a cacophony of voices promoting different or contradictory cures. Yet that is what we're starting to hear about the economic crisis, not only from a politically divided -- and pretty scared -- capital, but from within the Obama administration itself. In just the past few days, Vice President Joe Biden has said the young administration misread the depth of the recession -- an honest account, since most private economists did as well. Laura Tyson, an outside economic adviser to the White House, said it's wise to start preparing another stimulus package.

Then President Barack Obama made everything perfectly muddy when he said in an ABC News interview that the seriousness of the downturn and how to attack it is "something we wrestle with constantly." Yet in the next breath, he expressed concern about the burgeoning deficit. But if anyone's looking for some clear voices, there are 650,000 of them just waiting to be heard. That is roughly the number of long-term unemployed who will begin losing their jobless benefits in September, according to the National Employment Law Project. Remember, the recession didn't start last fall when the government bailed out AIG and the financial system froze. It began in December 2007 -- and 6.5 million jobs have been lost since then. Depending on which state and the sort of triggers that apply to benefits, hundreds of thousands of workers laid off early in the downturn are soon to be left without the basic sustenance of an unemployment check.
Meanwhile, the Labor Department says, the number of unemployed people out of work for 27 weeks or longer continues to grow, reaching 4.4 million last month. In June, three out of 10 jobless workers had been out of work for at least six months, according to the department's data. The stimulus package the president signed soon after taking office did provide extended benefits, and boosted weekly payments. But even that extension runs out on Dec. 26, and would not apply to all the unemployed. Does anyone really believe that a significant portion of the unemployed will have found new work by then? Hardly. Both private and government economists now predict that unemployment will continue to rise at least through the end of this year.

"We can't ignore this moment when all these folks are running out (of benefits)," says Maurice Emsellem of the National Employment Law Project.
"That needs to be a top priority, to help these workers." Let's stop kidding ourselves. In no contemporary economic crisis -- not even those that unfolded on the Republicans' watch -- has Congress left the unemployed completely in the lurch. So some sort of spending package -- call it stimulus, call it stopgap emergency aid, whatever works -- is going to have to be passed.

The unemployment emergency helps feed another crisis Congress is going to be forced to address: the state budget disasters unfolding around the country. So far, 42 states have cut budgets that already had been enacted for fiscal 2009, according to the National Governors Association. More and deeper cuts are expected next year.
Already states have laid off and furloughed workers -- including, in some states, the very workers who process unemployment claims. Generally speaking, states are required to balance their budgets each year, a mandate that forces them to pull money out of the economy through spending reductions and tax hikes, counteracting the federal government's efforts to juice things up. "That is what happened during the Great Depression, we had states working against what the federal government was doing," says Heidi Shierholz, an economist with the Economic Policy Institute. With red states and blue, Republican governors and Democrats, all struggling against the same relentless, recession-driven drops in tax revenue, an almost irresistible political coalition for more aid to states eventually will take shape. And with the fast-approaching September deadline for extending some unemployment benefits, there will likely emerge one of those must-pass measures that may or may not be called another stimulus bill.

Any hot air expended trying to stop it serves no purpose but to fuel political fires. Remember, that is the whole point of those now huffing and puffing most heartily. They don't want to figure a way out of this morass; they just want to figure out a way to unseat those now in office.
Marie Cocco's e-mail address is mariecocco(at)washpost.com.

(c) 2009, Washington Post Writers Group

Pakistan’s Northern Iraq

2009-07-16T20:35:00.002+06:00

Pakistan’s Northern Iraq

Like Turkey, Pakistan too has a northern Iraq. It’s called Karzai’s Afghanistan. Islamabad needs to adopt a zero-tolerance policy toward the Karzai regime. Pakistani fighter jets should cross the border and bomb the terror training camps that send terrorists to Pakistan, including suspected Indian intelligence outposts. If the U.S. military and Karzai’s intelligence service can’t do anything about a third country like India using Afghanistan to export terror, then Pakistan should. It may sound farfetched considering that the elected Pakistani government has just conferred the highest civilian award to a fourth American citizen in less than a year. But it can be done. Here’s how.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—If Pakistan were Turkey, Pakistani military commanders would have been publicly warning by now to send fighter jets into Afghanistan to pound the secret supply routes that are being used to fan terrorism and separatism in northwest and southwest Pakistan. The Afghan support bases for terrorism in Balochistan and NWFP are well known by now to Pakistani spy agencies and we’d be justified to act. The purpose wouldn’t be to start a war but force an end to the export of terrorism into Pakistan, especially the Indian intelligence and terror-training outposts on Afghan soil. This is how Turkey dealt with the situation when northern Iraq turned into a haven for anti-Turkey insurgents right under the watch – and possible encouragement – of the United States military.

This scenario might appear farfetched at the moment considering that last week another US citizen has become the recipient of our highest civil award, The Crescent Of The Great Leader [Hilal-e-Quaid-e-Azam]. That is the third [or the fourth?] American to do so in less than a year. Islamabad’s power corridors are sniggering with the quip that US citizenship has become the newest prerequisite for the prestigious award.

But banter aside, the situation on the Pak-Afghan border stands on the precipice of anarchy. Just when the Pakistan Army was preparing to corner master terrorist Baitullah Mehsud in South Waziristan, the CIA ordered a drone attack in North Waziristan targeting the pro-Pakistan tribal commander Hafiz Gul Bahadur. He was at peace with the Pakistani Army for more than a year. The CIA action has opened a new warfront for the Pakistani army that would make nabbing Baitullah more difficult.

If the – deliberate? – American blunders continue, we will end up with a fully fledged civil war in our entire northwest. Washington has already messed up Afghanistan and until a few months ago was itching to put boots on the ground in Pakistan. A full-fledged civil war would give the Americans that chance. The Kabul ruling elite and their Indian ally want nothing more than to see such a situation. It is not in Pakistan’s interest to fight the Pashtun, let alone our own Pakistani Pashtun.

We need to eliminate the terrorists who call themselves Pakistani Taliban. But in order to do so we need to shift the focus back to Afghanistan. US top diplomat William Burns has already asked the Indians to scale down or close some of their ‘consulates’ that act as terrorist planning and training outposts inside Afghanistan. Indian officials have avoided discussing this demand in public, thanks in large part to the evidence reportedly exchanged through the Pakistani-American military channels.

Now Pakistan needs to build on this through a series of fresh policy initiatives on Afghanistan. Let’s test America’s sincerity by making it clear that a US victory in Afghanistan shouldn’t come at the expense of Pakistan’s legitimate security interests. Let’s achieve our goals together instead of handing Afghanistan over to anti-Pakistan forces. It’s either this or we stop NATO supplies.

We should also declare that, unlike al Qaeda, the elimination of the Afghan Taliban or any other local Afghan faction is not a strategic objective of Pakistan. We are not occupying Afghanistan, America is. And it needs to take responsibility for its own mess. Mullah Omar can in fact help Pakistan neutralize the criminals inside Pakistan who are butchering Pakistanis in the name of fighting America. This will also help us identify and neutralize the fake Taliban who are fighting the Pakistani state for foreign-pumped money.

The American position that the resistance they face in Afghanistan comes from our tribal areas should be countered. A fresh report by a US think tank shows the Afghan resistance entrenching itself in the north. So it’s not just the Pakistani tribal belt. The main issue is the pacification of the Pashtun and other areas inside Afghanistan. Do this and the problem can be resolved inside that country.

We need to start seeing US-occupied Afghanistan as Turkey’s northern Iraq. It’s either this or we end up making America’s war against the Pashtuns our own.

Blackmail In Balochistan

2009-07-16T20:32:00.001+06:00

Blackmail In Balochistan

The truth is that the three murdered Pakistani Baloch politicians had become a political liability and a security risk for Brahamdagh Bugti and a threat to his entire infrastructure of terror inside Pakistan. The three had developed a good working relationship with Pakistani security officials during hostage negotiations. Brahamdagh and his handlers knew that the three were in direct contact with Pakistani security officials and could compromise the security of the terrorist activity and the routes of secret funding from across the border and the terrorist hideouts inside Pakistan. The inside story of five days that changed Balochistan, a story of deception, intrigue and espionage.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—Two distinct sketches are emerging of what happened in Pakistan’s largest province –Balochistan— over the past ten days.

The three murdered Pakistani Baloch political activists were in contact with Pakistani security and intelligence officials during the negotiations to release John Solecki, an American citizen and U.N. official. The three were also in contact with U.S. diplomats, U.N. officials, and with the kidnappers. In fact, the three politicians were considered to be part of the political front of the terrorist-insurgent movement that has its logistical, financial, and military bases in Afghanistan, built with generous funding over the past five years after the American occupation of that country.

So there is no question that Pakistan’s security agencies were in direct contact with the three politicians. Before their murder, the terrorists-separatists did not dare publicize their presence and actions and relied on sporadic violence to spread terror and create media impact. The triple murder changed everything. It gave these separatist and terrorist elements an opportunity for the first time to publicly display their anti-Pakistan activities. In a tribal society like that of the Pakistani Baloch, controlled by a handful of tribal bosses through intimidation, brutality and economic control, the majority succumbed to the terror.

But who murdered the three local politicians?

The following report is based on firsthand information of what transpired between April 4 and April 9, five days that give the clearest insight yet into the wider battle in and around Pakistan.

THE CAPTORS

What is beyond doubt is that Mr. Solecki was kidnapped by terrorists trained and financed by Brahamdagh Bugti, a grandson of the late politician-turned-terrorist Akbar Bugti.

[Mr. Bugti was a smalltime village thug who murdered his cousins and relatives, stole their lands and exiled them to other parts of Pakistan. He got lucky when huge reservoirs of natural gas were found in the lands under his forced control. Mr. Bugti received a fortune every year from the federal government as ‘royalty’ for selling the gas. For three decades, his village lived in abject poverty as Mr. Bugti refused to allow the government to build schools or allow the poor villagers to improve their lifestyles. Mr. Bugti spent the money on building and maintaining a small army, a chain of underground prisons and on defending himself against his numerous enemies. After the occupation of Afghanistan, it is believed that the Indians and the Americans sold him on the idea that he could launch a war for an independent country. He apparently received strong guarantees that he will be supported and protected by the United States and India in case of an angry Pakistani reaction, which encouraged him to go to extremes. An advanced insurgency infrastructure complete with printed material in Urdu and English, audio and video tapes and propaganda in local dialects was prepared inside Afghanistan and smuggled to Pakistan. Mr. Bugti launched the war in January 2005, with massive supply of weapons and money. He died almost two years later when his own cousins backed by the Pakistani government stormed into his stronghold and seized their lands and forced him to flee to the mountains.]

Brahamdagh was last sighted in Kabul. Indian intelligence agents posing as diplomats in the Afghan capital are some of his most frequent visitors. The Indian diplomacy and intelligence have been keen since 2002 on finding ways to drive a wedge between Washington and Islamabad. India’s diplomatic actions in this regard are well known but the British and the American media have been silent on growing evidence of Indian covert activities in Afghanistan under an American nod.

One of the earliest Indian actions in Afghanistan after 2002 included acting as a spoiler, poisoning the minds of U.S. military commanders on the ground regarding Pakistan. One of the most common tactics has been to identify and penetrate groups of Afghan resistance fighters and then indirectly goad them into attacking the Americans and leaving behind evidence pointing the finger at Pakistan. Similarly, there have been attacks inside Pakistan where evidence was left behind implicating U.S. intelligence operatives to mislead Pakistani investigators.

BRAHAMDAGH’S FRIENDS

One line of thinking in the current Pakistani investigation into the murder of the three politicians is that there is a high probability that the Indians initially encouraged Brahamdagh to kidnap Solecki to add new tensions to the frail Pak-American relationship. That was the original plan. The U.S. media would jump on the story as another example of anti-Americanism in Pakistan and embarrass the Pakistani government and military. The upshot for Brahamdagh would be more international news coverage.

That was apparently the original plan. What Brahamdagh and his handlers did not expect is that the kidnapping would backfire and blow the cover of the terrorists and their links all the way inside Afghanistan.

Immediately after Solecki’s kidnap, the Pakistani authorities wasted no time in reminding the Americans of the information that Pakistan shared at the highest levels with the United States in July 2008 about Indian activities inside Afghanistan. Adm. Mullen and Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency Stephen R. Kappes were shown irrefutable evidence on how the Indians were using Brahamdagh right under the nose of the U.S. military in Afghanistan.

In February 2009, after kidnapping Solecki, Brahamdagh’s men and his backers tried to create the impression that there are many separatist groups backing his cause. The first demand made by the kidnappers was to release Pakistani Baloch women detained by security forces. This turned out to be an outright lie. Prisons in the entire province and other parts of Pakistan were checked and it was confirmed there was not a single Pakistani Baloch woman in jail or detention. No one had registered any case of missing Pakistani Baloch women as the separatist propaganda from Afghanistan alleged. The elected provincial government of Balochistan, which is considered to be sympathetic to the separatist tribal chiefs including Brahamdagh, was allowed access to all parts of the Pakistani security establishment – civilian and military – to ascertain this fact. This proved a blessing in disguise. One of the most lethal propaganda tools exploited by Brahamdagh Bugti and his backers was proven false.

In the initial days after Solecki’s kidnapping, some of the Baloch tribal chieftains sympathetic to Brahamdagh and his grandfather [and equally corrupt and tyrannical like him] tried to mislead Washington and the U.N. against Pakistan by suggesting that Pakistani intelligence agencies were behind the kidnapping of Solecki.

But the Pakistani government moved quickly to turn the tables on the terrorists and their Afghan-based masters.

On Feb. 27, 2009, Frontier Corps Chief Maj. Gen. Saleem Nawaz told reporters in Quetta that all the four major separatist groups that release statements to the media don’t even exist. “Organizations like the Balochistan Liberation United Front, the Baloch Liberation Army, the Baloch Republican Party, and the Baloch Republican Army are one and the same. Brahamdagh Bugti is behind these organizations,” he said. “Brahamdagh is involved in a series of kidnappings, targeted killings, sabotage and attacks on forces and installations in different parts of the province.”

None of these groups existed before the Americans came to Afghanistan in 2001.

So the writing was clear on the wall for the Pakistanis, the United Nations and the United States that the Indians at some level were involved in kidnapping Mr. Solecki through Brahamdagh Bugti and their recruits inside Pakistan and that individuals based in U.S.-run Afghanistan issued the orders for the kidnap.

But did Pakistani intelligence agencies kill the three politicians who helped release Solecki?

Why The Three Were Killed

The timeline here is very important:
4 April 2009: Mr. Solecki is released by the terrorists after receiving a huge payment worth several million dollars.
6-7 April 2009: Mr. Richard Holbrooke receives the biggest cold shoulder any senior U.S. official has received on Pakistani soil since 9/11.
9 April 2009: The mutilated bodies of the three politicians are found dumped in a public area.

Pakistani police, security and intelligence organizations are not beginners in their fields. Even if any one of them were to kill the three activists, no one would have dumped the bodies in full public view and certainly never after a high profile hostage negotiation involving the three murdered activists where they also interacted with U.N. and U.S. officials.

The truth is that the three murdered Pakistani Baloch politicians had become a political liability and a security risk for Brahamdagh Bugti and a threat to his entire infrastructure of terror inside Pakistan. The three had developed a good working relationship with Pakistani security officials during hostage negotiations. Brahamdagh and his handlers knew that the three were in direct contact with Pakistani security officials and could compromise the security of the terrorist activity and the routes of secret funding from across the border and the terrorist hideouts inside Pakistan.

Mounting evidence indicates that Brahamdagh or his handlers in Afghanistan ordered the elimination of the three Baloch politicians. The triple murder has clearly served the interest of the separatists-terrorists and their backers. The Pakistani state has been a net loser.

THE AMERICAN CONNECTION

After Mr. Holbrooke’s failed visit to Pakistan on April 6 and 7, three things happened in fast succession.

One, Britain discovered a “very big” terrorist plot, as a British police officer described it, involving 12 Pakistani students. The British Prime Minister immediately telephoned President Zardari and threw his usual line about Pakistan needing to do more in the war against terror. The interesting part is that the Brits failed to offer any evidence to support the existence of the “very big” terrorist plot. Knowing that the charge won’t stick in the courts, London announced it was arbitrarily deporting the students.

At the same time, Indian prime minister made the startling announcement that the Afghan Taliban, who have never operated outside their country, were planning to bomb Indian elections. Again, no evidence whatsoever.

Pakistani officials smelled a rat in both of these statements coming from two close allies of the United States.

These statements, and the dramatic terrorism in Pakistan’s Balochistan province, came immediately after the dressing down that Mr. Holbrooke received in Pakistan.

Could there be an American connection to the disturbances in Balochistan in addition to the Indian connection? The answer, in my view, is yes. Balochistan has U.S. military bases dating back to 2001. Washington has been opposed to China constructing the Gwadar sea port in the province overlooking the Gulf oil supply lines. And CIA is using Pakistani Balochistan to infiltrate the Iranian province of Sistan-Balochistan and ignite a Sunni rebellion there against Iran’s religious Shia regime.

Within hours of the news that the bodies of the three Pakistani politicians were found near the Iran border, and while separatists and terrorists exploited the story to ignite violence and destroy public property, the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad released a press statement that appeared to pour fuel on fire and give the impression that Pakistan was somehow responsible for killing its own three politicians. The statement was also a blatant interference in an internal Pakistani issue where the U.S. diplomats had no business sticking their noses.

Encouraged by this unexpected support from the U.S. Embassy, some of the opportunist tribal chiefs in Balochistan who are supporting terrorism were emboldened to demand a U.N. probe, scoring a cheap point against Pakistan and implying that the state was involved in the murders.

WHAT PAKISTAN SHOULD DO

Feudal chiefs in Pakistan, whether in Balochistan or Punjab, Sindh, and NWFP, have traditionally been protégés of the British colonial rule. While there are bright exceptions of Pakistani nationalism by some of the feudal gentry, the majority damaged the interests of Pakistan over the longer run and has generally shown little commitment or a sense of nationalism and destiny with regards to the homeland.

For the short term, Pakistan needs to register murder cases against Brahamdagh Bugti and other terrorists. They should be charged of murdering the poor Pakistani Baloch driver who accompanied Mr. John Solecki’s. The driver was killed in cold blood by Brahamdagh’s terrorists.

The issue of Balochistan is part of a wider problem facing a failed Pakistani political system led by failed feudal politicians. This system needs to be changed and de-politicized to focus on economic development and providing opportunities to Pakistani citizens.

Ethnic-based provinces need to be abolished and existing districts converted into provinces with their own directly elected governors and local parliaments and development budgets. This way Pakistani politics will be localized and prevented from becoming a source of constant headache and destabilization for the state.

This change cannot come through democracy and requires a period of technocratic government backed by the military in the background and tasked with strictly executing a list of urgent political and administrative reforms.

The U.S. is clearly working against Pakistan’s vital security and economic interests in the region. Islamabad should declare Washington’s occupation of Afghanistan as illegal and advise the U.S. to desist from using Afghan soil to destabilize neighboring countries. Pakistan needs to immediately distance itself from the messy American agenda in Afghanistan that is fast turning Pakistan into a war zone. Islamabad should also confront the Americans and the Indians with the evidence that both are exporting terrorism into Pakistan and fostering insurgencies using the Afghan soil. Let the world know what the Americans and their Anglo-Indian poodles are doing in the region.

Climbing Death Toll Raises British Doubts on Afghanistan Mission

2009-07-16T20:30:00.000+06:00

Climbing Death Toll Raises British Doubts on Afghanistan Mission

WOOTTON BASSETT, England — Thousands of mourners bowed their heads in tribute Friday to the passing coffins of British soldiers killed in a new offensive in Afghanistan, where the climbing toll has created doubts in Britain about the human cost of the war.
News of 15 battlefield deaths in 10 days has many Britons rethinking the country's commitment to a conflict that seems no closer to a successful conclusion than when troops first arrived seven years ago.
A Ministry of Defense spokeswoman said a total of eight deaths were announced Friday, making it one of the darkest days of the war. She spoke on condition of anonymity in line with department policy.
"The casualties should fix peoples' minds on the fact that we've let the soldiers down," said Adam Holloway, an opposition Conservative Party lawmaker who sits on Parliament's defense committee. "The death toll means we should do it properly or we shouldn't do it at all."
Holloway, a frequent visitor to Afghanistan, said Britain has never had the troop strength needed to hold ground there and has failed to provide the promised security or reconstruction, leading many Afghans to believe the Taliban militants will outlast Western forces.
"We're in a mess," he said.
He cautioned that there is still no widespread public revolt against the government's war policy. He said his constituents do not seem extremely worried about the troubled Afghan campaign, despite the increasing casualties.
But some communities are grieving. Schoolchildren, businessmen and army veterans stood side by side in Wootton Bassett, a small market town about 85 miles (135 km) west of London, as the bodies of five soldiers killed between Saturday and Tuesday were driven through the crowds after being flown to a nearby air base.
Wootton Bassett's mayor, Steve Bucknell, said it was becoming increasingly hard to accept the rising number of British casualties.
"We keep on asking ourselves how many more? Each time we pray it's the last one, knowing it probably isn't going to be," Bucknell said.
It has become traditional for the residents to line the streets when hearses carrying soldiers' coffins pass through the town on the sad trip from a military airport to a cemetery.
The casualty count mounted Friday night when officials said five soldiers were killed in two separate explosions while on patrol. Earlier in the evening, the Ministry of Defense announced that a soldier from the 2nd Royal Tank Regiment had been killed in an explosion. Two other deaths were announced earlier in the day.
The names of the dead soldiers are likely to be released in the next 24 hours.
The deaths have come in volatile southern Helmand province in the past nine days amid a new offensive to uproot Taliban fighters. Seven years after British forces first deployed to Afghanistan — and after the loss of 185 troops — ex-military chiefs are criticizing tactics and equipment while members of the public wonder about the benefit of taking part in the conflict.
Defense Secretary Bob Ainsworth and Prime Minister Gordon Brown claim that Britain's role in Afghanistan is crucial to root out extremist terrorists who could potentially attack the United Kingdom, and to prevent a tide of Afghan heroin from reaching British streets.
Brown said Friday that the war is vital to Britain's security.
"There is a chain of terror that runs from the mountains and towns of Afghanistan to the streets of Britain," he told reporters at the G-8 summit in L'Aquila, Italy. "Having talked to President Obama and the rest of the world leaders, there is a recognition that this is a task the world has got to accept together and this is a task we have got to fulfill."
Michael Clarke, head of London-based military think tank the Royal United Services Institute, said public concern is mounting and urged politicians to be more honest about Britain's initial reasons for joining the 2001 invasion.
"What they won't really say is that it's about the credibility of the NATO alliance, and our military relationship with the United States," Clarke said.
Some critics say that Britain should either withdraw from the mission, or that troops must be provided with better equipment, including more helicopters. Britain, the United States and Canada have long complained that they have engaged in heavy fighting in Afghanistan while some European nations have shied away from combat roles.
Tony Philippson, whose son James was killed in Afghanistan in 2006, said the public remained skeptical about whether foreign troops will ever be able to suppress the Taliban and bring peace to the country.
"I've always felt it was a risky business and I think it's still on a knife edge about whether they can succeed," Philippson told the BBC.
Gen. Charles Guthrie, the head of Britain's military between 1997 and 2001, said he believes British soldiers have died as a direct result of a shortage of helicopters for troops in Afghanistan. British troops are suffering heavy casualties from roadside bombs, and a lack of helicopters mean soldiers must make more journey across Helmand by road.
"If there had been more, it is very likely fewer soldiers would have been killed by roadside bombs," Guthrie — a longtime advocate of higher defense spending — was quoted as telling the Daily Mail newspaper.
Britain's defense ministry declined to disclose how many helicopters Britain has in Afghanistan on security grounds, but said additional aircraft are being sent to support the mission.
The ministry said that the two latest casualties died in separate incidents Thursday. The bloodshed has intensified as Afghans prepare for elections planned for next month.

GM emerges from bankruptcy

2009-07-16T20:27:00.001+06:00

GM emerges from bankruptcy

Henderson said that General Motors had been
given a "second chance" by the rescue plan [AFP]

General Motors has emerged from bankruptcy - just 40 days after the US vehicle manufacturer signed a government-backed rescue deal, the company has announced.
The main assets of the troubled giant, which was once the world's largest corporation, have been transferred to a new company which will be 61 per cent owned by the government.
"Today marks a new beginning for General Motors," Fritz Henderson, the chief executive of GM, said on Friday.
"One that will allow every employee, including me, to get back to the business of designing, building and selling great cars and trucks and serving the needs of our customers.
"We recognise that we've been given a rare second chance at GM, and we are very grateful for that. And we appreciate the fact that we now have the tools to get the job done."
Jobs slashed
GM has slashed its work force, closed 40 per cent of its dealerships and shed a number of brands including Saab, Saturn, Opel and Hummer.
It will cut 6,000 jobs by October in a move that will reduce its white-collar work force by 20 per cent and a 35 per cent reduction in executive posts is also planned.
The US government has provided about $50bn in financing for the company and spearheaded the restructuring plan.
Canada, which provided more than $9bn in loans, also has a stake in the new GM along with a United Auto Workers union retiree healthcare trust fund.
The new firm has also been freed of $173bn of liabilities it had when it entered bankruptcy protection on June 1.
Creditors holding about 54 per cent of GM bonds agreed to a plan that would swap $27bn dollars in debt for a 10 per cent stake and warrants allowing them to buy an additional 15 per cent stake.

Sarkozy’s warning

2009-07-16T20:04:00.001+06:00

Sarkozy’s warning

FRENCH President Nicolas Sarkozy is not wide of the mark when he says that an Israeli attack on Iran will be ‘an absolute catastrophe’.

His statement at the G8 summit at L’Aquila, Italy, comes within days of American Vice-President Joe Biden’s remark in a television interview that his country could do nothing if Israel chose to attack Iran. In an interview with ABC News, Biden said Washington could not ‘dictate to another sovereign nation’ and that it was for Tel Aviv to decide what was in its interest. ‘Dictating’ to another country is, of course, against the basic principles of interaction among sovereign nations. But the sole superpower cannot take refuge behind this principle to shirk its responsibility and avoid action where a serious breach of international law is feared and where a recalcitrant state’s or group’s behaviour poses a threat to world peace.
The G8 summit called upon Tehran to negotiate, but thanks to Russia the conference decided not to slap further sanctions on Iran. The summiteers thus showed maturity when they gave Tehran until September to negotiate, and refused to impose another layer of sanctions on Iran.
Biden’s statement runs counter to the spirit of moderation shown by the G8 summit and to the overtures President Barack Obama has been making to the Muslim world. Obama has also exercised restraint during the West’s Iran-bashing frenzy in the aftermath of the June 12 presidential election, and he has promised a seat for Tehran at the Afghan talks.
The American vice-president’s statement, however, is fraught with consequences, for it is tantamount to giving a go-ahead for the attack. The French president perhaps pulled the rug from under Israel’s feet when he said ‘Israel should know it is not alone and should follow what is going on calmly’.

Barack McNamara Obama

2009-07-16T20:02:00.000+06:00

Barack McNamara Obama
Why Can't Obama See His Wars Are Unwinnable?

By Ted Rall
July 10, 2009 "uexpress" --- PORTLAND, OREGON--Robert McNamara, one of the "best and the brightest" technocrats behind the escalation of the Vietnam War, eventually came to regret his actions. But his public contrition, which included a book and a series of interviews for the documentary "The Fog of War," were greeted with derision.
"Mr. McNamara must not escape the lasting moral condemnation of his countrymen," editorialized The New York Times in 1995. "Surely he must in every quiet and prosperous moment hear the ceaseless whispers of those poor boys in the infantry, dying in the tall grass, platoon by platoon, for no purpose. What he took from them cannot be repaid by prime-time apology and stale tears, three decades late."
McNamara's change of heart came 58,000 American and 2,000,000 Vietnamese lives too late. If the dead could speak, surely they would ask: why couldn't you see then what you understand so clearly now? Why didn't you listen to the millions of experts, journalists and ordinary Americans who knew that death and defeat would be the only outcome?
Though Errol Morris' film served as ipso facto indictment, its title was yet a kind of justification. There is no "fog of war." There is only hubris, stubbornness, and the psychological compartmentalization that allows a man to sign papers that will lead others to die before going home to play with his children.
McNamara is dead. Barack Obama is his successor.Some call McNamara's life tragic. Tragedy-inducing is closer to the truth. Yes, he suffered guilt in his later years. "He wore the expression of a haunted man," wrote the author of his Times obit. "He could be seen in the streets of Washington--stooped, his shirttail flapping in the wind--walking to and from his office a few blocks from the White House, wearing frayed running shoes and a thousand-yard stare." But the men and women and boys and girls blown up by bombs and mines and impaled by bullets and maimed in countless ways deserve more vengeance than a pair of ratty Nikes. Neither McNamara nor LBJ nor the millions of Americans who were for the war merit understanding, much less sympathy.
Now Obama is following the same doomed journey.
"We must try to put ourselves inside their skin and look at us through their eyes," McNamara warned long after the fact, speaking of "America's enemies" but really just about people--people who live in other countries. People whose countries possess reserves of natural gas (Vietnam) or oil (Iraq) or are situated between energy reserves and deep-sea ports where oil tankers dock (Afghanistan and Pakistan).
Why can't President Obama imagine himself living in a poor village in Pakistan? Why can't he feel the anger and contempt felt by Pakistanis who hear pilotless drone planes buzzing overhead, firing missiles willy-nilly at civilians and guerilla fighters alike, dispatched by a distant enemy too cowardly to put live soldiers and pilots in harm's way?
"We burned to death 100,000 Japanese civilians in Tokyo--men, women and children," McNamara said. "LeMay said, 'If we'd lost the war, we'd all have been prosecuted as war criminals.' And I think he's right. He--and I'd say I--were behaving as war criminals." 900,000 Japanese civilians died in all.
"Make no mistake, the international community is not winning in Afghanistan," concluded the Atlantic Council in 2008. Things have only gotten worse as U.S. troop presence has increased: more violence, more drugs, less reconstruction.
Like McNamara, Obama doesn't understand a basic truth: you can't successfully manage an inherently doomed premise. Colonialism is dead. Occupiers will never enjoy peace. Neither the Afghans nor the Iraqis nor the Pakistanis will rest until we withdraw our forces. The only success we will find is in accepting defeat sooner rather than later.
"What went wrong [in Vietnam] was a basic misunderstanding or misevaluation of the threat to our security represented by the North Vietnamese," McNamara said in his Berkeley oral history." Today's domino theory is Bush's (now Obama's) clash of civilizations, the argument that unless we fight them "there" we will have to fight them here. Afghanistan and Iraq don't present security threats to the United States. The presence of U.S. troops and drone planes, on the other hand...
In fairness to McNamara, it only took two years for him to call to an end of the bombing of North Vietnam. By 1966 he was advising LBJ to start pulling back. But, like a gambler trying to recoup and justify his losses, the president kept doubling down. "We didn't know our opposition," concluded McNamara. "So the first lesson is know your opponents. I want to suggest to you that we don't know our potential opponents today."
Actually, it's worse than that. Then, like now, we don't have opponents. We create them.

Bhutto & Israel

2009-07-16T20:00:00.000+06:00

Bhutto wanted ties with Israel, sought Mossad protection

How can Benazir or any other Pakistan leader even think of accepting Israel as a State or Friend? Israel can NEVER be Pakistan’s friend; we will never accept this from anyone. Read what the first Israeli Prime Minister had to say about Pakistan:
The words of David Ben Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister, as printed in the Jewish Chronicle,9 August 1967, leave nothing to imagination:
"The world Zionist movement should not be neglectful of the dangers of Pakistan to it. And Pakistan now should be its first target, for this ideological State is a threat to our existence. And Pakistan, the whole of it, hates the Jews and loves the Arabs. This lover of the Arabs is more dangerous to us than the Arabs themselves. For that matter, it is most essential for the world Zionism that it should now take immediate steps against Pakistan. Whereas the inhabitants of the Indian peninsula are Hindus whose hearts have been full of hatred towards Muslims, therefore, India is the most important base for us to work there from against Pakistan. It is essential that we exploit this base and strike and crush Pakistanis, enemies of Jews and Zionism, by all disguised and secret plans."

Israeli media reports on Friday revealed that slain Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto intended to establish official relations with the Jewish state if elected and was seeking Mossad protection in the interim.
Speaking to The Jerusalem Post, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert grieved over Bhutto's assassination following an election rally on Thursday, and said that upon her return to Pakistan in October after years of exile Bhutto conveyed to him via a mutual acquaintance that she wanted close ties between Israel and Pakistan.
The Hebrew daily newspaper Ma'ariv further revealed that Bhutto had asked Israel's Mossad spy agency, along with the CIA and Britain's Scotland Yard, to help protect her in the run-up to Pakistan's January 8 election. Bhutto complained that current Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf was trying to make her an easy target for assassination by now allowing her to use adequate protective measures.
According to the report, Israel's Foreign Ministry was in favor of aiding Bhutto, though the government ultimately decided against it for fear of angering the Musharraf regime and upsetting relations with neighboring India, a close ally of Israel engaged in an ongoing bitter confrontation with Pakistan.
Israeli leaders lamented that Bhutto, a popular former prime minister who was twice deposed by authoritarian elements, could have served as a bridge between Israel and the Muslim world.

Employee of Baithullah

2009-07-16T19:57:00.001+06:00

EXCLUSIVE LOOK:This is what a "Suicide Bomber" looks like

India wary of Pakistan’s ‘adventurism’

2009-07-16T19:53:00.001+06:00

India wary of Pakistan’s ‘adventurism’

NEW DELHI: Pakistan’s capacity for ‘military and quasi-
military adventurism’ continues to keep New Delhi on its
toes, India’s defence ministry has said in its annual report
released on Thursday.

The routine report has acquired importance for its timing just ahead of a proposed meeting between the prime ministers of the two countries in Egypt next week.
Of particular significance is the defence ministry’s blunt claim that Pakistan state organs are involved in aiding and abetting terrorist groups.
President Asif Ali Zardari has reportedly said the same thing but in the past tense. Press Trust of India quoted the report as slamming Pakistan for expanding terrorist footprints on Indian soil.
It said India had clear evidence that the Mumbai attack was planned and launched by Pakistan and this had strained the peace process.
‘The terrorist attack on Mumbai in November 2008 and the clear evidence that the attack was planned and launched by Pakistan have thereafter led to a pause in the (peace) process’ between New Delhi and Islamabad, it said.
The 220-page report said the fact that many of the extremist outfits in Pakistan had known record of terrorist attacks against India amounted to a security challenge with serious implications for the country.
‘The continuing links of these (terrorist) organisations with organs of the Pakistan state adds greater complexities and dangers to the evolving situation confronting us,’ it said.
‘Strengthening of our security apparatus, both internally and on our frontiers is, therefore, a national priority of the highest order. Pakistan’s history of military and quasi-military adventurism underscore the seriousness of the threat we face,’ the defence ministry added.
PTI said the ministry also noted that the year had witnessed a marked rise in terrorist incidents all over Pakistan, including capital Islamabad, apart from the previously affected areas of Fata and NWFP. The defence ministry, according to PTI, said the unimpeded growth of extremist and terrorist organisations in Pakistan was marked by an increase in ceasefire violations, continued infiltration across the LoC in Kashmir, as also major terrorist attacks.
‘All this placed an immense strain on the India-Pakistan Composite Dialogue process,’ it added.
On Afghanistan, the defence ministry said the deteriorating internal security there and the resurgence of Taliban, Al Qaeda and other terror groups since 2006 constituted a threat to stability of the entire South and Central Asian region.
‘The terrorist attack on the Indian Embassy in Kabul on July 7, 2008, in which five Embassy personnel and a large number of Afghan nationals were killed, demonstrated that India’s efforts at reconstruction and development were implacably opposed by these groups,’ it said.

Taliban cash in on Pakistan’s untapped gem wealth

2009-07-16T19:50:00.001+06:00

Taliban cash in on Pakistan’s untapped gem wealth

The Taliban earned about four million rupees a week from Mingora’s
main mine, a trader from Swat says.

PESHAWAR: In the narrow lanes of a market in Pakistan's northwest capital Peshawar, dealers squat on carpets and spread out a rainbow of precious gems on the floor for potential buyers.
Chunks of bright blue lapis lazuli, and rough rocks studded with flashes of light and colour clutter window displays, but no one is buying in a city hit by a wave of deadly bombings blamed on Taliban militia.
A treasure trove of precious stones is locked in the rocks of Pakistan's rugged northwest. Violence, legal tussles and state mismanagement have deterred investors but allowed the Taliban to cash in on the bounty, dealers say.
‘God has given us enormous wealth in terms of emeralds from Swat, rubies, pink topaz, beautiful tourmaline,’ said Ilyas Ali Shah, a gemologist with the government-run Pakistan Gems and Jewellery Development Company.
Shah said that if Pakistan properly mines these deposits the impoverished country could reverse its hefty foreign debt: ‘But we need peace.’
In February this year, militants waging a bloody insurgency to expand control opened three shuttered emerald mines in the northwest Swat valley around the main town Mingora and invited villagers to blast away.
The military says it has reclaimed all Swat mines from the Taliban during a fierce offensive, but for at least three months proceeds from emerald sales lined the militants' coffers and helped bankroll their insurgency.
‘They would collect the emeralds and there would be an open tender every Sunday,’ said Azhar ul Islam, a 44-year-old gem trader from Swat. ‘The profits were divided up — two-thirds for the miner and one-third for the Taliban.’
Pakistan and neighbouring Afghanistan are believed to hold up to 30-40 per cent of the world's emerald deposits, Shah says, with the precious stone fetching up to 2,000 dollars per carat depending on quality.
Azhar told AFP the Taliban earned about four million rupees a week from Mingora's main mine — shuttered since 1995 because of a legal battle — money he said was spent on ‘buying explosives, making weapons.’
‘I was frightened what would happen if the government re-established control, so I didn't buy those emeralds from the mines, but most of my friends bought these emeralds from the Taliban,’ he said.
At the Namak Mandi market in Peshawar, another dealer from Swat who did not want to be named estimated that the militants made between five and six million rupees a week from the stones.
No one in the market would admit buying Swat emeralds from the Taliban, but one dealer said he procures green garnet from a Taliban-owned mine over the border in Afghanistan, where the militants are also waging an insurgency.
‘We don't like the Taliban, we don't buy it because we want to help them, but we want the stones,’ 30-year-old Ali Akbar told AFP.
He says his business has been crushed by spiralling insecurity in Pakistan since the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States thrust the country into the heart of the ‘war on terror’.
‘For five months I had no customers,’ he said.
Shah says Pakistan's gem-industry profits have plunged up to 50 per cent in one year because of the instability, with foreign investors staying away.
Most of the country's gems, including emeralds, garnet, pink topaz, spinel and tourmaline are located underground in North West Frontier Province (NWFP), the heartland of the Taliban insurgency.
Experts say the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata) — a mountainous area largely outside government control along the Afghan border and stronghold of Pakistani Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud — hides deposits of rare quartz and precious stones.
‘I think we have explored three per cent of the whole of NWFP. We have large areas of Fata that are not under control, so we have a lot of precious material untapped which needs to be explored and exploited,’ Shah said.
Pervez Elahi Malik, former chairman of the main gem exporters' association, blames the local NWFP government for not sorting out legal tussles and getting potentially lucrative mines up and running under state control years ago.
At the moment, local villagers and tribesmen blast away at the rocks and transport their haul to Namak Mandi — a damaging mining process that experts say can destroy 80 per cent of the stones.
‘We are lacking in technical knowledge, we are lacking stability in the country,’ said Shah. ‘Our mining is not technically sound and safe — we are destroying our wealth.’ — AFP

Operation Blue Tulsi:

2009-07-16T19:48:00.001+06:00

Operation Blue Tulsi: 15 Years in Planning, 10 Years in Preparation and Today in Execution

by Xavia Team

Every inquiry must start somewhere. We have chosen this inquiry to start in the late eighties when two junior intelligence officers one Pakistani other Indian faced each other on opposite sides of the law. The Pakistani intelligence officer had caught the Indian agent on Pakistani soil with incriminating evidence. Indian agent knew his life had come to an end. However, everything has a price. And his freedom was worth a little less than half a million rupees. A few days later the Indian agent was sitting back at home, free as a bird. And life went on for several more years until the fateful year of 1994 when the two old “chaps” met again. This time officially. The Indian agent had climbed the ladder to an important post in the government. At this side of the border the junior Pakistani agent, against all odds had become one of the top bosses at Federal Investigation Agency. Of course, this was the infamous Rehman Malik. (See: Pakistan’s Zionist Security Advisor)
The Indian side wanted Pakistani Government’s help in reducing cross-border terrorism. But Rehman Malik offered a lot more than mere reduction in “cross-border”. He had been appointed as Additional Director FIA and yielded immense power through the country. Additionally he had become the right-hand-man of Asif Ali Zardari, stashing his looted money all over the world. He offered them direct access to the jihadists which he would capture. Somewhere along the line Israel also became a party to the deal and soon Mossad agents were carrying out investigations of the captured (ISI backed) jihadists on Pakistani soil. There were millions to be made from the deal and of course Rehman Malik was working in tandem with this immediate boss Ghulam Asghar, head of the FIA and under the auspices of Asif Ali Zardari. ISI, Pakistan Military and top brass quietly kept a close watch. Although painful but capture of a few foot soldiers was bearable in the bigger national interest.
By 1995 in a little over a year the Benazir Bhutto government had expelled 2000 Arab mujahidin of the Afghan-Soviet War and imprisoned number of Pakistani mujahidin. Secondly and more significantly, Benazir Bhutto on her official visit to US in April 1995 met in secret with an Israeli delegation. On her return she faced stiff resistance from a block of military and civilian bureaucracy which had generated great suspicions of her dealings with India and Israel. Just four months later she thwarted a coup attempt against her headed by Major General Zahirul Islam Abbasi. Director General of Military Intelligence Major General Ali Kuli Khan tipped-off General Abdul Waheed Kakar who immediately ordered Chief of General Staff Lt. General Jehangir Karamat to suppress the coup. A total of 36 army officers and 20 civilians were arrested from Islamabad and Rawalpindi.
Then in November 1995 Egyptian Embassy blast occurred. Al-Qaeda was quick to claim it. Although the real reasons of the handlers of bombers remain hidden to this day, but in the next few days a silent but significant event happened. General Abdul Waheed Kakar who was given an extension in his tenure he refused it and Lt. General Jehangir Karamat was appointed as the Army Chief by the then President Farooq Leghari on 18 December, 1995. Lt. General Jehangir Karamat was the senior most general at the time, therefore the least controversial within the military – something which the military desperately needed at the time. The other three generals who were in the position to become COAS were Lt Gen Javed Ashraf Qazi, Lt Gen Naseer Akhtar, and Lt Gen Mohammad Tariq. Lt. Gen. Ghulam Muhammad Malik had already retired in October 1995. Maj Gen Naseem Rana was heading the ISI at the time, taken his charge in October 1995. Lt Gen Shujat Ali Khan was heading the ISI’s Internal Wing.
In the backdrop of these events in Pakistan, in March 1995 Israel’s Air Force chief had visited India with an entourage that included key Mossad officials. It was at this point that in a meeting Pakistan’s nuclear program was discussed. A year later Indian nuclear and missile program head, Abdul Kalam had a “top secret” visit of Israel in June 1996. It was “top secret” because no one knew about it. As it turned out, everyone knew about it even before he left India. All the much publicized secrecy and visit of such a top level official achieved the aim and nearly nobody bothered with the entourage which included a manager from the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) – Alok Tiwari. The “top secret” meetings between Abdul Kalam and his Israeli counterparts were related to purchase of UAVs. However, in every single one of those “top secret” meetings Alok Tiwari was missing. With all the attention was focused on Abdul Kalam and his “top secret” meetings no one noticed the odd thing.Just a few days later, after coming back to India Tiwari accompanied Air Chief Marshal S. K. Sareen to Israel in Israel in July 1996. In fact this was his third trip. He had also visited Israel in April 1996 along with India’s first Defence Attaché to Israel.First Wave
The effect was immediate. In late July 1996 MQM organized a province wide strike. Simultaneously a large bomb exploded at Lahore airport and a second at Faisalabad railway station. On 14th August 1996 12 SSP activists were gunned down during an Independence Rally by unidentified gunmen. By end August Punjab had been engulfed in sectarian violence, Shias and Sunnis were being gunned down in broad daylight. The political and security situation worsened by the murder of Murtaza Bhutto and reinstatement of Manzoor Wattoo as Chief Minister of Punjab. The country seemed in a political and economic turmoil with violence erupting throughout the country. At the same time, out of blue Ataullah Mengal returned from his self-imposed exile.
While everyone was busy with the current crisis a team of agents working directly under Rehman Malik were gathering information on Kahuta and A.Q. Khan. Beginning November 1996 ISI saw an increase in Indian troops movement, which finally sent alarm bells ringing through the echelons of Rawalpindi and Islamabad.
Suddenly, all the pieces fell in place and Ghulam Asghar and Rehman Malik’s shenanigans seemed a lot deeper than mere money grabbing tactics. By fourth of November a thick load of evidence had been gathered on Ghulam Asghar and Rehman Malik working with the consent of Asif Ali Zardari towards gathering information on the progress of Pakistan’s nuclear program.
On 5th November 1996, Farooq Leghari dissolved Benazir Bhutto’s government. At the other side of the border, this caused the immediate visit of Israeli naval chief Vice-Admiral Alex Tal to India. Back at home, Ghulam Asghar and Rehman Malik were imprisoned on undisclosed charges. Pakistan had narrowly escaped the storm that was brewing in its mists.Second Wave
In February 1997, Indian Defence Secretary T. K. Banerji led a high level defence delegation to Israel to discuss the “exchange of technology” between two countries. Other than the official purpose the most important topic was Pakistan’s nuclear program. By the end of the visit the two countries had decided to do “whatever” it takes to neutralize the threat.
In March next year the BJP won Indian elections and one of the immediate policies adopted was to tackle Pakistan’s nuclear issue by any means possible. With such enthusiastic approach the government even decided to take the most extreme measures if needed. In the next two months the official and diplomatic delegations between India and Israel came to a halt, however, there was a sudden rise in non-diplomatic delegations between the two countries. The last official visit was of Gen. Prakash Malik to Israel in March 1998, who was also the first serving Indian Chief of Army Staff to visit Israel since normalization. In April 1998 two out-of-the ordinary incidents happened. Air India announced its discontinuation of Tel Aviv flight on 1 April 1998 and early April the Confederation of Indian Industry announced an unplanned “Study Mission” to Israel. This was the prelude to the second wave which officially started on 11th May 1998 when India exploded its nuclear bombs.Night of 27-28 May
Pakistan resisted testing its nuclear bombs for nearly two weeks until 27th May 1998. On 27 May 1998 in a top level meeting Lt. Gen. [[[Naseem Rana]] (DG ISIP briefed the Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and army chief of the increasing intelligence reports of possible Indian attack on Pakistan’s nuclear installations. However, the panic this created was nothing compared to the next two meetings. The first report pertained to the sighting of an unidentified F-16 aircraft at the periphery of Pakistan’s airspace on 27th May. Knowing India did not have F-16, the obvious suggestion was presence of Israeli Air Force in the area (especially with the reports of Indian COAS visiting Israel just a month ago). And the second report coming just before 1am on 28th May recorded unusual movements of Indian aircrafts just across the border which suggested India was preparing for preventive airstrikes against Pakistan. The obvious response of nuclear tests on 28th May.
The tests confirmed once and for all that Pakistan has nuclear capability.Deduction
It seemed probable that BJP Government had decided to fire its nuclear bombs to force Pakistan into test firing its – if it has any. After a delay of two weeks, doubts had started rising in nearly every analytical discourse that Pakistan did not have the nuclear capability otherwise it would have responded. This was the golden opportunity to take out Pakistan/Pakistan’s nuclear installations before that Pakistan got the capability. The important visit of Indian COAS to Israel in March – in the light of proceeding events – could only be regarding Israel’s support for the planned attack. Whatever, the reasons and aims, the end result was establishment of Pakistan as a nuclear state, which completely changed the Great Nuclear Game.Third Wave
Pakistan’s test firing of nuclear bombs was a shock for the rest of the world. No one expected, in the first place for Pakistan to have the capability and secondly to fire them if it had. For India and Israel, who were two top most interested parties in destroying Pakistan’s nuclear assets, this meant a complete overhaul of their strategy.
A year later Indian National Security Adviser Brajesh Mishra came to meet Barak in September 1999 and this time he was accompanied with a familiar face – Alok Tiwari. Within a year, Alok Tiwari and another security analyst finalized a document based on their discussion the preceding year.In June 2000 L. K. Advani visited Israel in which new deals related to Mossad and Shabak espionage and cooperation with R&AW are finalized and as a result Israel was allowed to establish its own network to operate from India. Also, L.K. Advani discussed Pakistan’s nuclear program and coordination between the two countries on an operation for disarming Pakistan. During the visit, Alok Tiwari’s report was also discussed.
By July 2000 a heavy deployment of Israeli agents in Indian Occupied Kashmir was reported. Near the end of 2000 Israel’s top intelligence officers were reported to have visited India and discussed amongst other issues, Kashmir and Pakistan’s nuclear assets. One of the meetings on the agenda was regarding the report Alok Tilwar had prepared which had gone through considerable changes in Israel. By the end of the visit the top spies of the two country had agreed to cooperate on the operation detailed inside the thick volume titled: “Operation Blue Tulsi”.Operation Blue Tulsi: Preparation
We do not know what is written inside the report Operation BlueTulsi. But we can ascertain some of it by the events it had led to beginning 2001. Preparation for the mega Operation Blue Tulsi began fervently in early 2001. By mid 2001 eyebrows were being raised over R&AW and Mossad’s cooperation and in July 2001 Janes Information Group reported that RAW and Mossad are cooperating to infiltrate Pakistan to target important religious and military personalities, journalists, judges, lawyers and bureaucrats. In addition, bombs would be exploded in trains, railway stations, bridges, bus stations, cinemas, hotels and mosques of rival Islamic sects to incite sectarianism. At the same time the Balouchistan Liberation Army rose out of dead like a second incarnation and Balach Marri a Moscow graduate declares himself as the leader of BLA. Within weeks in Balochistan numerous training camps sprouted with each camp reported to be training up to a 100 militants. Intelligence of RAW, Mossad and CIA agents operating in Balochistan started coming in.
In mid 2001 reports appeared that Special Operations Division of Mossad, also known as Metsada, specializing in assassinations and sabotage have been based in India since May 2001 to train RAW operatives and Mossad and Shin Bet or Shabak were operating a number of teams in Indian Held Kashmir and were also operating a delicate spy network from Indian soil. In July 2001 RAW increased its budget for Indian consulates in Afghanistan by nearly 10 times.
Within days after Sep 11, a story was leaked into press that Pakistan is dismantling and spreading its nuclear assets to safer places implying that it would be much more difficult to pinpoint them and much more easier for extremists to get hold of. These news stories were shortly followed by another piece on 28 October 2001 which stated that Pentagon was looking into plans to dispatch an elite unit into the Pakistan to disarm its nuclear arsenal. The special unit which was trained to slip into foreign countries to ferret out and disarm nuclear weapons and operated under Pentagon control with CIA assistance and would be getting special help from Israel’s Sayeret Matkal also known as Unit 262.
On 22 December 2001 C. Raja Mohan wrote, “There is a growing belief in New Delhi that the time has come to call Pakistan’s nuclear bluff. If it does not, India places itself in permanent vulnerability to cross-border terrorism from Pakistan… India is now confronted with the possibility that its restraint in the face of nuclear escalation is taken as a fundamental weakness. India must deal with the possible assessment in Pakistan that its nuclear capability has foreclosed all conventional military options.” Same time at the other side of the globe Prof. Stephen P Cohen was saying, “South Asia may have reached a point where the two countries (India and Pakistan) are really bent on hurting each other one way or another and it may be time to consider more unilateral, more forceful American steps – diplomatically and economically forceful – to get compliance from India and Pakistan separately on some vital concerns. Clearly, we may have reached a point where the peace process is simply too little, too late, and we may have to turn to other forms of diplomacy.”
These two writers one from US and other from India very implicitly had voiced their respective governments’ policies towards Pakistan’s nuclear assets.In December 2001 Indian PM, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, while addressing the parliament said, “the question was not whether there should be or should not be a war, [the question was] under what circumstances there will be war … and whether there will be a war.”Of course the underlying message was, whether India should attack a nuclear armed country or a country which has lost its nuclear capabilities.In December 2001 Benazir Bhutto while visiting India said in her interviews, “President, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, as an army general, had planned the Kargil invasion in Jammu and Kashmir while I was the Prime Minister.” Later she also said, “Pakistan army as an institution had brought back Osama bin Laden”.
This rhetoric of Benazir Bhutto was perfectly in line with the agreement signed by US and India in 2002. Late in 2002 US and India signed an agreement on cooperation in disarming Pakistan’s nuclear assets and the two player offensive team of OperationBlueTulsi found a third partner in the form of CIA. As a result of this deal Abdullah Mehsud was freed from Guantanamo Bay and returned to Pakistan with millions in cash.Benazir Bhutto’s statements in India were the major reason Pervez Musharraf’s declaration of Benazir Bhutto as a “security risk” during a chat with Pakistan’s leading editors and correspondents in April 2002. Pakistani security agencies already had a great deal of intelligence regarding Benazir Bhutto, Asif Zardari and Rehman Malik’s involvement with Mossad and India in 1995-96 and their collaboration against Pakistan’s nuclear assets.
In January 2002 under orders from L. K. Advani R&AW and other intelligence agencies submited a detailed report on military options for solving Kashmir issue and in case of a full-fledged war, for neutralizing Pakistan’s nuclear assets. One major outcome of the report was creation of Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) in March 2002 with the authority to conduct external operations supported by a huge budget.
Also, a Lawyers’ Struggle surfaced in October 2003 under the leadership of Hamid Ali Khan (now drowned under the infamous Lawyers’ Movement). The first prominent protest of the “struggle” was held on 15 October 2003 in which the President of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Hamid Ali Khan said, “Musharraf’s very presence within the army and holding of other important offices and Shaikh Riaz Ahmad’s continuation as chief justice after his retirement are undoubtedly illegal and unconstitutional… Let’s think collectively, move forward collectively and act collectively to outs usurper generals and judges (who had collaborated with Pervez Musharraf including Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry). However, like a B-grade movie twist, four years later Iftikhar Chaudry becomes the hero to these same lawyers who wanted to oust him. Like a script from past, this protest had followed a “Long March”. And the “struggle” then moved to other cities one by one asking Musharraf, Riaz Ahamad and among others Iftikhar Chaudhry’s removal from office. At this point along with Hamid Ali Khan, Kazim Khan was at the forefront. Lacking the charisma and cunning of their successors, assassination of a leader, and shortage of “unlimited” billions of rupees their names and their Lawyers’ Struggles has been confined to the dusty pages of history with their names ascribed against the words, “traitors”. Also, there is no evidence to support that assassination attempts on Pervez Musharraf were somehow related to the timing of the Lawyers’ Struggle. (See: Black Revolution: Pakistan’s Lawyers Movement: The Bush Administration’s Last Color Revolution)
By mid 2004 the government had ample evidence that BLA and some Baloch leaders were conspiring against the government, aided by foreign countries.On 13th August 2004 the Chief Minister of Baluchistan, Jam Muhammad Yousaf is quoted by The Herald (Sep 2004-Karachi): “Indian secret services (RAW) are maintaining 40 terrorist camps all over the Baluch territory”. While this was happening on ground, there was talk of “Peace Talks” everywhere in the air. And Jan Muhammad Jamali had become a laughing stock of the media for his suggestion of foreign agents operating in Balochistan, which despite the ground facts forcefully opposed such thoughts.
However, he was already too late. The preparation for the Operation Blue Tulsi were nearly complete and the Government of Pakistan had wasted all opportunities for stopping the inevitable.Operation Blue Tulsi: Start
1st January 2005 was the starting date. The local agents got the signal and the operation started with the ominous rape of a female doctor in Sui on 2nd January 2005. As expected the incident created headlines all round and culprits not being found created a much supported backlash. This was shortly followed by rocketing of gas installation at Sui on 7th January which put a hole in Pakistan’s gas supply for nearly a week.
2005 was a busy year with Baloch terrorists continuously creating havoc in Balochistan and adjacent areas and ended with assassination attempts on Musharraf in December. After President Gen Pervez Musharraf escapes a rocket attack on his life in December 2005 and the Inspector General Frontier Corps survives an assassination attempt, Navtej Sarna, the Indian External Affairs Ministry’s spokesman said, “The Government of India has been watching with concern the spiralling violence in Balochistan and the heavy military action, including use of helicopter gun-ships and jet fighters by the Government of Pakistan to quell it… We hope the Government of Pakistan will exercise restraint and take recourse to peaceful discussions to address the grievances of the people of Balochistan”.The Indian Government had realized that the two assassination attempts would surely result in backfire on the Indian assets in Balochistan, which it needed to safeguard for its final aim, especially Akbar Bugti. Just as suspected, the Government of Pakistan intensifies its operation against Baloch militants.
And in April 2006 Government of Balochistan is setup with its offices in Jerusalem under Azaad Khan Baloch. In a laughingly stupid mistake, Azaad Khan Baloch who is representing Balochis of Pakistan decided to spell his name according to Hindi transliteration with double “a” in Az”aa”d, rather than a single “a” as used in Pakistan, i.e. Azad. Or more probable, “Azad Khan Baloch” is not a Pakistani.
Meanwhile in Balochistan the government operation against Akbar Bugti intensified who took shelter in the rugged mountain range and coordinated the activities of his militants from there. Ultimately the military found him and during the process of capture Akbar Bugti died because of cave-roof collapse on 26 August 2006. (See: The Story of Bugti’s Death)
This proved a minor setback in the overall plans. However, beginning 2007 events in the country took a completely different turn. Starting March 2007, every incident occurring in the country was tied to the aim of ousting Pervez Musharraf, including the much profitable Lawyers’ Movement. Intelligence agencies were having a field-day bringing in pile after pile of reports proving involvement of CIA, RAW, Mossad and MI6 towards Musharraf’s ouster. True to some extent but unlike analyzed, ouster of Pervez Musharraf was just one milestone towards the main goal, which every agency completely missed. Thus, all their efforts went into controlling the situation to secure Musharraf, while in the backdrop, silently the wheels kept turning. While Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan were burning Swat was sitting quietly, unnoticed and out of radar. Within a period of few months, the numbers of “Pakistani Taliban” in Swat surged and just as well their ammunition, latest military equipment a country like Pakistan would dream of. A portion of this ended up in the ill-fated Lal Masjid. While intelligence and military were busy keeping Musharraf’s seat safe in Pakistan, a new political game started in UAE. Rehman Malik enthusiastically started pursuing the goal of National Reconciliation Ordinance. He became instrumental in the final deal between Benazir Bhutto, US and Pervez Musharraf and NRO. Since Benazir Bhutto did not have much to lose without NRO she was never very interested in it. That was the reason two options were thrown at Musharraf, i.e. either eliminating the two term condition or NRO. Rehman Malik on the other hand was vehemently pursuing NRO, as of the three (Asif Ali Zardari, Benazir Bhutto and Rehman Malik) the Government of Pakistan only had clear evidence against Rehman Malik and it was enough to put him in jail for life (i.e. involvement in espionage and working with Mossad and RAW). However, at that point no one knew the real motivations of Rehman Malik other than that he was working to get the path clear for Benazir’s return. Amazingly, FBI also was putting its weight behind NRO rather than eliminating the two term condition. While, if US had really wanted Benazir Bhutto as Prime Minister of Pakistan, logic dictates that they would want the two term condition eliminated to assure her easy succession to the premiership. It needs to be noted here that Rehman Malik had also tried to do a similar deal in 2005, which never materialized. This time it did.
Near the end of 2007, intelligence and military were convinced that a conspiracy had been hatched in the country with the sole aim of removing Musharraf from power. Assassination of Benazir Bhutto, simultaneous rioting throughout the country, terrorist activities occurring in every province had considerable similarities to the Bush Administration backed Color Revolutions. In order to keep Musharraf in power the government kept giving into one demand after the other. As a result Rehman Malik becomes head of Interior Ministry, Yusuf Raza Gilani becomes the Prime Minister of Pakistan and sweeping changes are made in the security and intelligence community. Still, the government saw the war finally over when in one move Gilani puts ISI under Interior Minister on 27 July 2008. Until that time ISI and top brass had thought all Rehman Malik wanted was to get-rid of extremist elements from ISI and Pakistan’s establishment.
It was the end of July 2008 when the alarm bells started ringing again in the high echelons. Intelligence machinery went into extra high gear and millions later it came back with the name: Operation Blue Tulsi.Operation Blue Tulsi: the Revelation
The Establishment, only now realized the full extent of the operation which they had been witnessing since the beginning of 2000. More worryingly, the current operation had eerily similar modus operandi to the 1995-96 debacle – which left the country tethering onto its nuclear assets – just that this time it was vastly more sophisticated and greater in size. In matter of hours the priorities changed. Keeping Pervez Musharraf in power suddenly paled in comparison to the real threat. As the agencies reopened recent reports, reading them in the light of newest finding all the pieces fell in place. It was a disastrous lapse on behalf of the multibillion dollar strong organizations. Overnight the report was prepared and the summary was sent to President Pervez Musharraf next morning.
In 1995-96 India came up with a plan to destroy Pakistan’s nuclear facilities before that Pakistan developed a nuclear capability. The plan was prepared by a RAW agent Alok Tiwari (who has recently been compromised). At that time Mossad was already active in Pakistan and once it heard about the project for elimination of Pakistan’s nuclear facilities jumped in by first streamlining the project further and then using its assets in Pakistan. Somewhere in early 1996 the operation was given go-ahead. At that point FIA Director General Ghulam Asghar and his ADG Rehman Malik in a deal with India and Israel were hunting down Pakistan based Kashmiri and Arab militants. These two proved to be the front line in the operation and when contacted by Indian agents fully agreed to supply all the necessary information regarding Kahuta and A. Q. Khan’s operations. Towards mid 96 demonstrations and chaos erupted throughout the country. The aim was to destabilize the country enough that when the two confirmed Pakistan did not have any nuclear capabilities India would go-ahead with all out assault. General Jehangir Karamat who was already weary of the two chaps and Asif Ali Zardari’s complicity took immediate action and Benazir Bhutto’s government was dissolved. The duo of Asghar and Malik and Zardari had already come into military’s radar the year before when they tried to lure General Abdul Wahed Kakar.
Then five years later, Alok Tiwari submited an updated version of his older report. Israel was again consulted and this time L. K. Advani vehemently pursued it. Towards the end of 2000 a delegation of top Mossad brass visited India and the combined operation titled: Operation Blue Tulsi was finalized and put into operation which had only one aim:
Destroy Pakistan’s nuclear assets followed by its Balkanization.Approach:Resurrect Baloch insurgency. Pakistan was fine with it, as it had thirty years of experience with it, starting with the Afghan-Soviet War.Buy officials in military, bureaucracy, politics and law. ISI was fine with it, as it had sixty years of experience in dealing with traitors.Plant agents in top positions in Taliban, FATA and NWFP. A shocker for everyone.
Taliban were the foster child of ISI and the agency had no contingency for enemy agents in top positions. The best option they came up with was to buy back the agents with more money and as a result they were deceived time and again and again. Top on the list, Baitullah Mehsud. The twenty million dollars he got in suitcases was one of the stupidest moves in the world espionage history and ISI top brass to this day are vengefully pursuing him.Milestones:Friendly political government. Asif Zardari in place, Aslam Raisani in Balochistan (though first choice Akbar Bugti unfortunately dead, MQM’s omnipresence in Sindh, Fazlur Rehman and ANP in NWFP)Friendly judiciay. Iftikhar Chaudhry, Munir A. Malik, Atizaz AhsanFriendly secretaries. ??Friendly Civil Society. Ansar Burney, Asma JehangirFriendly Generals. ??Unrest in NWFP and immediate threat of Taliban taking control of Islamabad. Back in 2002 US had agreed with India that if ever Pakistan seemed to destabilize or falling into the hands of extremists, it would help India in destroying Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities. The situation they agreed upon is well defined by the Pakistani media’s current theme song of “Taliban are coming to Islamabad”Immediate Countermeasures
By August 2008 the operation was too deep rooted and it was clear if attention was diverted towards saving Musharraf there was more than a probability of loosing nuclear capability in near future. With Musharraf gone, ISI estimated a window of opportunity of 18 to 20 months before either Taliban or Asif Zardari with his shenanigans destabilized Pakistan. In the greater interest Musharraf decided to step down peacefully. ( See: Musharraf Era Performance & Musharraf’s Pakistan Had True Potential)Operation Blue Tulsi: In Operation
Musharraf stepped down and Asif Ali Zardari took over, but by then the order had been sent and the agents in Swat Valley and FATA who had been preparing for the day for the last eight years launched an all out assault on the military with a single aim of destabilizing Pakistan. In the eventful month of December 2007 Baitullah Mehsud had already announced officially the formation of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan. Although right after the victory of PPP Baitullah Mehsud has negotiated peace with the government which led to the great debacle of US$ 20 million by August 2008 he was again involved with the military in a full on battle. ISI and military by this time had realized the foremost importance of ridding the Taliban off foreign agents and assets by any means and costs.
At one end Pakistan military still is trying to safeguard its own assets while tracing out and eliminating foreign agents, while at the other end US is trying its best to safeguard its prime asset of Baitullah Meshud who had taken over after the death of Abullah Mehsud. Until very recently, there had been not a single drone attack on Baitullah Mehsud, while ISI aligned Taliban had been bombed repeatedly, as a result of which many have turned their backs against Pakistan. Only in the recent months four drone attacks on Baitullah Mehsud’s territory have been reported.Operation Blue Tulsi and Future
Currently the entire country is gripped by the ongoing operations of military against the Taliban. Media which once championed itself as the sympathizers of the Taliban and were chanting “Taliban are coming to Islamabad” have suddenly changed their tunes, especially after being declared by the Taliban as kafirs and thus “killable”.
The economy is in doldrums and corruption is rampantly high but the top brass knows Pakistan is first and for Pakistan nuclear assets come first. Thus, until the country is cleansed of all the foreign agents in FATA and Taliban, the military and intelligence has only one goal, to stop Operation Blue Tulsi at this stage, making sure it never goes into Phase TWO – attacking and destroying Pakistan’s nuclear assets because extremist elements have destabilized Pakistan.

JSOC: Joint Special Operations Command

2009-07-16T19:37:00.002+06:00

JSOC: Joint Special Operations Command

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Active: December 15, 1980

Country: United States

Branch: Joint activity

Type: Counter-terrorism

Part of U.S. Special Operations Command

Nickname: JSOC

Engagements: Operation Urgent Fury (1983)

Operation Just Cause (1989)

Operation Acid Gambit (1989)

Operation Gothic Serpent (1989)

Battle of Mogadishu (1993)

Operation Anaconda (2002)

Commanders

Current commander VADM William H. McRaven

The Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) is a component command of the United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) and is charged to study special operations requirements and techniques to ensure interoperability and equipment standardization, plan and conduct special operations exercises and training, and develop Joint Special Operations Tactics. It was established on December 15, 1980, in the aftermath of the failure of Operation Eagle Claw, the unsuccessful attempt to rescue the 53 hostages from the American embassy in Tehran, Iran.[1] It is located at Pope Air Force Base and Fort Bragg in North Carolina, USA.

Overview

The JSOC is the "joint headquarters designed to study special operations requirements and techniques; ensure interoperability and equipment standardization; plan and conduct joint special operations exercises and training; and develop joint special operations tactics"[2]. For this task, the Joint Communications Unit (JCU) is tasked to ensure compatibility of communications systems and standard operating procedures of the different special operations units.
The Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) also commands and controls the Special Mission Units (SMU) of United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). These units perform highly classified activities.[3][4][5] So far, only three SMUs have been publicly disclosed: The Army's 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment - Delta (Delta Force), the Navy's SEAL Team 6 or Naval Special Warfare Development Group (DEVGRU), and the Air Force's 24th Special Tactics Squadron. Intelligence Support Activity (ISA) which often operates under various cover names such as Royal Cape, Granite Rock and Powder Keg were some, Centra Spike and Torn Victor. However, it most recent known cover names was Gray Fox. The army once maintained the Activity, but after September 11 attacks the Pentagon shifted direct control to Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) at Fort Bragg, NC.[6] If needed, Army Rangers and Night Stalkers can be transferred under the JSOC command. JSOC’s primary mission is believed to be identifying and destroying terrorists and terror cells worldwide.[7]
USSOCOM/JSOC cannot conduct covert action operations, as the CIA is the only organization that has the authority to conduct these actions.[8] However, USSOCOM has an excellent relationship with the CIA's elite Special Activities Division and the two forces often operate together with exceptional results.[9][10] The CIA's Special Activities Division's Special Operations Group often selects their recruits from JSOC[11]

Security Support

JSOC has provided support to domestic law enforcement agencies during high profile, or high risk events such as the Olympics, the World Cup, political party conventions and Presidential inaugurations. Classified portions of PDD-25 are reported to exempt the JSOC from the Posse Comitatus Act, which makes it illegal for military and law enforcement to exercise jointly.[12] Title 10 of the US Code expressly allows the Secretary of Defense to make military personnel available to train Federal, State, and local civilian law enforcement officials in the operation and maintenance of equipment; and to provide such law enforcement officials with expert advice.[13] Additionally, civilian and uniformed military lawyers said provisions in several federal statutes, including the Fiscal Year 2000 Defense Department Authorization Act, Public Law 106-65, permits the secretary of defense to authorize military forces to support civilian agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, in the event of a national emergency, especially any involving nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons.[14]
In January 2005, a small group of commandos were deployed to support security at the Presidential inauguration. They were allegedly deployed under a secret counter-terrorism program named Power Geyser. The New York Times quoted a senior military official as saying, "They bring unique military and technical capabilities that often are centered around potential WMD events," A civil liberties advocate who was told about the program by a reporter said that he had no objections to the program as described to him because its scope appeared to be limited to supporting the counterterrorism efforts of civilian authorities.[14]

Operations in Pakistan

According to The Washington Post, JSOC's commander Lieutenant General Stanley A. McChrystal operates on the understanding with Pakistan that US units will not enter Pakistan except under extreme circumstances, and that Pakistan will deny giving them permission.[15]
That scenario happened according to the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA), in January 2006, JSOC troops clandestinely entered the village of Saidgai, Pakistan, to hunt for Osama Bin Laden. Pakistan refused entry.[16]

Operations in Iran

On January 11, 2007, President Bush pledged in a major speech to "seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq."[17] The next day, in a meeting of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Chairman Senator Joseph Biden (Delaware), informed United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the Bush Administration did not have the authority to send US troops on cross-border raids. Biden said, "I believe the present authorization granted the president to use force in Iraq does not cover that, and he does need congressional authority to do that. I just want to set that marker."[18]
Sometime in 2007, JSOC started conducting cross-border operations into Iran from southern Iraq with the CIA. These operation included seizing members of Al-Quds, the commando arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and taking them to Iraq for interrogation, as well as the pursuit, capture, and/or execution of “high-value targets” in the “war on terror”. The Bush administration allegedly combined the CIA's intelligence operations with JSOC covert military operations so that Congress would only partially see how the money was spent.[19]
In mid-March of 2008, President Bush signed a secret finding authorizing a covert offensive against Iran. Bush’s secret directive covers actions in a large geographical area in the middle east and is far more sweeping in the type of actions permitted under its guidelines. The intent is to escalate covert operations against Iran to destabilize the country's religious leadership, gather intelligence about Iran's suspected nuclear-weapons program and support the minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organizations, and assassination of targeted officials. The finding was swiftly approved with bipartisan support which included an initial outlay of $300-400 million to finance its implementation.[20][21]

List of JSOC commanders

Name and Affiliation	Start of Term	End of Term
MG Richard A. Scholtes	December 1980	August 1984
MG Carl Stiner	1984	January 1987
MG Gary E. Luck	1989	1990
MG William F. Garrison	1992	1994
MG Wayne A. Downing	September 1997	November 1997
MG Peter J. Schoomaker	1995	1996
BG Michael A. Canavan	1997	1997
LTG Dell L. Dailey	2001	March 2003
LTG Stanley McChrystal	September 2003^[22]	June 2008
VADM William H. McRaven	June 2008^[23]	present

India to launch media campaign against Pakistan’

2009-07-16T19:31:00.001+06:00

India to launch media campaign against Pakistan’

By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: The Indian government is preparing to launch a media campaign against Pakistan in the border areas of Indian-held Kashmir (IHK), India’s Junior Minister Information and Broadcasting CM Jatua said on Tuesday.
Speaking in the Lok Sabha, the junior minister said anti-India propaganda was being aired by Pakistan from across the Line of Control (LoC) in Azad Jammu and Kashmir. To counter this, the Indian government was considering increasing the coverage of All-India Radio and Doordarshan – the Indian state media – in the region, he said.
He said a special package had been approved for the Kashmir region in September 2007, whereby Doordarshan had provided direct-to-home TV sets to the IHK government. Jatua said the ministry had undertaken a motivational programme to sensitise people living along its international borders to check the spread of any anti-India sentiment.

Government re-imposes Petroleum Development Levy

2009-07-16T19:29:00.000+06:00

Government re-imposes Petroleum Development Levy

ISLAMABAD: Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari ordered the reintroduction of a petroleum levy on Thursday, to make up for revenue lost when a court order forced the government to abandon a separate new carbon tax a day before.

Zardari’s move is the latest twist in a tussle over fuel taxes that has seen prices raised, cut, and then raised again over the course of just over a week.

It comes as Pakistani officials meet with an International Monetary Fund (IMF) mission in Istanbul to discuss the country’s performance under a $7.6 billion emergency IMF programme, secured in November.

The IMF has said that one of the important tasks of the government was to increase tax revenue.

The price of petrol has now been raised back up to 62.13 rupees (76 US cents) a litre, the price announced when the state Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority (OGRA) originally increased prices on July 1.

The Supreme Court’s order had forced the OGRA on Wednesday to slash fuel prices by 18.7 per cent from that level. The court said on Thursday that it would uphold Zardari’s reimposition of the original tax.

By reintroducing the ‘petroleum development levy’ with slight changes, the government has plugged a potentially big hole in its balance sheet after the Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered the suspension of a new carbon tax meant to replace the original development levy.

Asim Hussain, adviser to prime minister on petroleum, told reporters after the court hearing that the government needed revenues from petroleum products to cut the budget deficit of 722 billion rupees ($8.83 billion).

‘Our aim is to give relief to people, but how could the budget deficit be reduced? Your budget is already in deficit of 722 billion rupees and if another 122 billion rupees is added on then you’ll face another economic slowdown,’ Hussain said.

‘You need this money to boost your economy.’

The Supreme Court, in upholding the new levy, said the opposition lawmakers who had originally petitioned against the new carbon tax would have to file a new petition if they objected to the resumption of the petroleum development levy.

Lawyer Ikram Chaudhry, who represents the lawmakers, said he intended to do just that.

‘We believe it comes under ‘over and excessive’ taxation and if the government needs money, they should cut their expenditure rather than shifting the burden on people,’ said Chaudhry. — Reuters

UK weapons inspector

2009-07-16T19:26:00.001+06:00

UK weapons inspector who was found dead was writing expose: paper

By John Byrne

British weapons inspector Dr. David Kelly was writing an expose about his work with anthrax and his warnings that Iraq possessed no weapons of mass destruction at the time of his death in July 2003, according to a report published in a British newspaper.
Kelly’s death — said to have been a suicide — has stirred controversy, as it came on the heels of testimony to the House of Commons about a memo which purported that Britain had “sexed up” a dossier on Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction. A Parliamentary inquiry ruled that the death had been suicide, though it also included testimony from a former British ambassador who quotes Kelly as having said, “I will probably be found dead in the woods” if Iraq were invaded.
The new report says Kelly had spoken with an Oxford publisher several times about a book.
“He had several discussions with a publisher in Oxford and was seeking advice on how far he could go without breaking the law on secrets,” the UK Daily Express alleged.
Kelly’s computers were seized in the wake of his death. He was a signatory to Britain’s Official Secrets Act, which allows for the prosecution of those who talk to the press about state secrets and prescribes a more stringent framework for secrecy than in the United States.
According to the paper, “he was intending to reveal that he warned Prime Minister Tony Blair there were no weapons of mass destruction anywhere in Iraq weeks before the British and American invasion… and was also intending to lift the lid on a potentially bigger scandal, his own secret dealings in germ warfare with the apartheid regime in South Africa.”
The allegations of a potential Kelly expose come from a new film about biological weapons being debuted in London on the sixth anniversary of Kelly’s death titled “Anthrax War” (the documentary aired earlier this year on Canadian public television). Kelly was an expert in biological warfare agents, as well as a former United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq.

‘Anthrax War’

‘‘The deeper you look into the murky world of governments and germ warfare, the more worrying it becomes,” the film’s director, Bob Coen, is quoted as saying. “We have proved there is a black market in anthrax. David Kelly was of particular interest to us because he was a world expert on anthrax and he was involved in some degree with assisting the secret germ warfare program in apartheid South Africa.”
According to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s summary of the film, Coen “was raised in Zimbabwe where the former white regime has been accused of unleashing anthrax against the black population… [who] embarks on a journey that raises troubling questions about the FBI’s investigation of the 21st century’s first act of biological terrorism.
“Coen’s investigation takes him from the U.S. to the U.K. and from the edge of Siberia to the tip of Africa. In a rare interview, Coen confronts ‘Doctor Death’ Wouter Basson, who headed Project Coast, the South African apartheid-era bio-warfare program,” the network’s website adds. “Project Coast used germ warfare against select targets within the country’s black population.
“Anthrax War also investigates the mysterious deaths of some of the world’s leading anthrax scientists, including Dr. David Kelly, the UK’s top military microbiologist, the Soviet defector Dr. Vladimir Pasechnik, and Dr. Bruce Ivins,” the CBC continues. “The FBI claims - despite the doubts of highly ranked U.S. officials - that Ivins was the only person behind the U.S. anthrax murders.”

A Torrent download of Anthrax War is available at this link. Several shorter clips are also available on YouTube

Israeli foreign minister welcomes

2009-07-16T19:22:00.000+06:00

Israeli foreign minister welcomes Biden's statement that Israel makes own decisions on Iran

By MARK LAVIE , Associated Press

JERUSALEM - Israel's hard-line foreign minister on Monday welcomed Vice President Joe Biden's statement that Israel can make its own decision about whether to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, calling it "logical."
But other Israeli leaders avoided comment, a low-key reaction that suggested Israel did not see Biden's comments as a green light to strike against its biggest Mideast rival. President Barack Obama underlined that diplomacy with Iran remains an option.
Israel considers Iran a strategic threat because of its nuclear program and long-range missile development, dismissing Iranian denials that it intends to build nuclear weapons. Israel has been nervous over the Obama administration's attempts to engage Iran, and Israel has pointedly sent clear signals of its military capabilities while urging world action to rein in Tehran.
Meanwhile, the U.S. goal of dialogue with Tehran has been rattled by Iran's heavy crackdown on protesters in the country's disputed presidential election, though Washington says it still hopes the policy will bear fruit.
Interviewed by ABC-TV on Sunday, Biden appeared to depart from his previous comment that an Israeli attack on Iran would be "ill-advised."
Asked about the possibility of an Israeli attack against Iran's nuclear facilities, Biden replied Sunday, "Israel can determine for itself — it's a sovereign nation — what's in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else."
The White House said Biden's remarks did not signal a shift in U.S. policy. In an interview published by the New York Times on Monday, President Barak Obama indicated the diplomatic option was still viable. "We have offered a pathway for Iran to rejoining the international community," he was quoted as saying.

URGENT: India Pays

2009-07-16T19:21:00.000+06:00

URGENT: India Pays Baitullah Mehsud To Attack Pakistan’s Nuclear Sites, Plan Deployed

The Indians working with their allies in the Karzai government have designed a foolproof plan to attack Pakistani nuclear sites using hired terrorists. They think they can pull it off and permanently damage Pakistan’s standing internationally and hasten calls for denuclearizing Pakistan. Any attack on Pakistani nuclear sites in the coming days will be taken as a declaration of war by India and will be dealt with equal force. There should not be confusion on this.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—India has paid terrorist leader Baitullah Mehsud and his well armed and trained terrorist army around U.S. $ 25 million to mount a spectacular attack on a major Pakistani nuclear site. A special force of around 500 recruits has been assembled and trained to mount the operation that is supposed to shock the world. The purpose is to create an event that will create a global media scare and convince the world of the need for military intervention in Pakistan. Another objective is to neutralize voices of reason within the U.S. government that believe Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is secure.

The bulk of the terrorists in the special 500-strong force put together by Mehsud have been trained inside Afghanistan by trainers suspected of having links to the Indian intelligence. Although most of the recruits are expected to be Pakistanis from Mehsud’s tribe, an unknown number of Afghan and Indian elements with special operations training have been inserted in the Mehsud group in order to ensure the success of this high profile operation.

It is not clear when this plan was conceived and whether the 500-strong force divided into crack teams to carry out the attack(s) is ready. But Pakistani officials are taking no chances. The nation’s security setup is on high alert. As for the nuclear installations, the managers of Pakistan’s strategic arsenal maintain unrestricted universal operability to fulfill the arsenal’s role as a deterrent. For them, no day is a normal day.

But this latest disclosure of a plan to attack the nuclear sites has raised alarm bells, to say the least.

A rough sketch of the plan and how the attack(s) are expected to unfold goes as follows:

1. A team or several teams of terrorists attack one or more Pakistani nuclear sites and attempt to enter the facilities.
2. Within each crack team only a small core is supposed to be equipped with modern communications equipment, special operations gear, and modern weapons; highly trained to exact maximum damage.
3. Where possible, the terrorists plan to break in and hold the fort, a la Mumbai attacks, in order to generate maximum media coverage and embarrassment for the Pakistanis.
4. The international media, and especially the main American and British news outlets, turn this into a global crisis, comparable to the Bay of Pigs in 1962.
5. The event generates enough pressure to justify an ‘international demand’ to neutralize Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal and force Pakistanis to accept ‘international’ supervision.
6. Depending on the aftermath, and after a few days or weeks, a small nuclear weapon is used somewhere, maybe against the US military or NATO bases in Afghanistan since it would be difficult to do it anywhere else, in order to confirm that the Afghan Taliban or generally the ‘Islamic extremists’ managed to steal a weapon from the earlier attack(s) on Pakistani sites.

This last point is critical. According to the available information, the mysterious disappearance of a senior Indian nuclear scientist and his subsequent death in May is linked to at least some parts of this plan. The scientist, Mr. Lokanathan Mahalingam, 47, had access to Indian’s sensitive nuclear information and worked at the prestigious Kaiga Atomic Power Station in the southern Indian state Karnataka, close to Project Seabird, a major Indian military base. His disappearance received limited coverage in the Indian media and there was almost a blackout on the circumstances surrounding how his dead body was found in a lake. The media in the U.S. and Britain also ignored the story. It is believed that Mr. Mahalingam was either involved in or had some knowledge about the planning for securing a small nuclear weapon that would leave no fingerprints, to put it this way, in order to execute the idea in paragraph 6 above.

The Indians have been working on this scenario for some time now.

On 16 May, the Israeli security website Debka under a story titled, ‘Singh warns Obama: Pakistan is lost,’ reported the following:

“India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has told President Obama that nuclear sites in Pakistan's restive frontier province are "already partly” in the hands of Islamic extremists.”

The Times of India, reporting the story, complained about “Washington's misplaced confidence in, and [careless] approach towards, Pakistan's nuclear assets,” and grumbled that “Pakistan is ramping up its nuclear arsenal even as the rest of the world is scaling it down.”

The Indian interest is obvious. But so is the Israeli interest. It is quite revealing that the story was broken by a news outlet known in international circles for its links to the Israeli government.

Official circles in Washington, including the White House, the State Department, Pentagon and CIA are cognizant of a history of cooperation between India and Israel in security issues. India’s security establishment is largely focused on Pakistan and on controlling Kashmir where the population is fighting the Indian military. At least in one incident, during the limited Pakistan-India war in 1999, the Israelis directly intervened to help the battered Indian army overturn a tactical victory by Pakistani and Kashmiri fighters.

As recently as two days ago, Bruce Riedel, a former CIA analyst and an Obama adviser known for his strong anti-Pakistan views, wrote an article published at the Brookings Institute website that demonstrates how far the anti-Pakistan lobby is willing to go to prove that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is not safe.

In Mr. Riedel’s case, he went as far as lying.

He used a recent terrorist attack on a bus carrying employees of KRL, a Pakistani nuclear facility, to say that Pakistani nuclear sites are already under attack. What he conveniently ignored is that the said bus was in fact traveling through a densely populated part of the city and not anywhere near any nuclear site. The bus most probably became a target of opportunity because it carried a plate indicating it was a government vehicle.

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s statement quoted by an Israeli source which was widely reported and never denied by the Indians, the Israelis or the Americans, was not the first to promote the alarmist and the unreal scenario of Pakistani nuclear weapons getting into the wrong hands. Mr. Singh came on record during an interview with CNN in 2005 to say this:

“I am worried about the security of Pakistan’s nuclear assets should President Pervez Musharraf be replaced, since there is always the danger of Islamic militants seizing power and taking control of the country’s nuclear assets.”

There is little question that influential parts of the Indian government are involved in exporting terrorism into Pakistan from bases inside Afghanistan. Attempts to incite ethnic unrest in Pakistan’s southwest were traced by investigators to Indians in Afghanistan. Pakistani investigators reached the same conclusion with some of the evidence found in northwest Pakistan where terrorists are killing Pakistanis. And now there are reports of an impending attack on Pakistan’s nuclear facilities using Baitullah Mehsud.

The Indians and those who are supporting them should be under no illusions. Any attack on Pakistani nuclear facilities in the coming days will be construed as a declaration of war by India against Pakistan. Knowing of Mehsud’s previous contacts with Indians and with Karzai’s people, any miscalculated attempt by his terrorists will not be seen as anything less than a direct Indian attack. In this case, Pakistan will consider itself in a state of war, and retaliate accordingly. There should not be any confusion on this.

Peter Chamberlin: Time Has Come For Pakistan To Decide

2009-07-07T04:46:00.005+06:00

Peter Chamberlin: Time Has Come For Pakistan To Decide

History has proven that some of America’s most trusted friends and allies have been the recipients of her most insidious and deadly intrigues. Pakistani leaders are delusional if they think that their friendship with the United States is stronger than that of Italy or Germany. The CIA turned Pakistan into the “epicenter of terrorism” for a reason. The Army and the ISI were always intended to be America’s scapegoat. That time has come. The recent assassination of Pakistan’s other “ace in the hole, Qari Zainuddin, has destroyed Pakistan’s last chance to restore the writ of the state without resorting to all-out civil war. Either Gen. Kayani submits entirely to Obama’s will, including the planned submission to Indian domination afterwards, or he stands-up to the United States, meaning he stops the drone attacks and reveals the entire ugly scenario that the CIA cannot allow anyone to reveal.

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The trusted watch-keepers of the world have turned their hearts to midnight plunder, while they carried-out their duty standing guard over mankind, who blissfully, unaware, continued to sleep. Morning rapidly approaches and the householders are sure to demand an accounting.

The exploding world economy and the expanding war are but symptoms of the great mental sickness that afflicts society, waves of warning of the tsunamis that lie directly ahead. The dominant
ideas and ideology that drive our world are all collapsing around us, falling from the weight of their own corruption and immoral baggage.

In the ongoing warfare of ideas, the selfish immorality of the old order is proving to be its downfall, as it meets the impenetrable resistance of the higher ideals of selflessness and human compassion. When the heart of the people is exposed to the emotionally crippling images of the children of war, then and thereafter, their only concern becomes the ending of the scourge of war.

Human nature is naturally compassionate, no matter how much the person has changed from the innocence of their youth. Even evil men must feel the heart’s emotional tugging at their consciences, no matter how deeply they have buried it, at the sight of such a suffering little one. Knowing that you and your government did this to these children and thousands more just like them, just like your own children that you so dearly love. We are the authors of what you see.

For God so loved the world that he sent us all sons and daughters, to melt our cold hearts and to expose our buried consciences. Human suffering is probably the most powerful motivation for good on this earth. It moves men to take-up arms to avenge it. It motivates others to offer their own lives that others might suffer less.

Humankind has the means to save itself from itself, just as surely as it has the means to cause its own extinction, all that separates the two is the gulf of choice and human freewill. Those of us who believe in a higher power, The One who created all things both great and small, know for certain that mankind will one day rise to the challenge before him. We know that the promise of eventual world peace is a solid truth, just waiting for enough people to understand and choose to reach out with us. Peace is truly just a handshake away, all that is lacking is the will to effect change and the desire to leave this world a better place.

The only question is how long before we as a people begin to care about our fellow man? This is the one factor that determines how much the suffering will intensify before we arrive at our predetermined solution. Efforts spent shoring-up the old collapsing political/economic structure only add to the suffering by adding to the length of the suffering and wasting limited resources in futile attempts to repair the rotten, immoral order that compelled mankind’s sprint to self-destruction.

Military adventures, intended to deflect the coming collapse merely increase our national guilt for having failed in our voluntary task of standing watch at the ramparts of freedom, guarding the rights of God’s creation with one arm, while we killed and indiscriminately erased both people and human rights with the other strong arm. Our military became our means of plundering our brothers’ resources and rights, because we were trusted it to defend our friends against foreign aggressors.

We reach-out our hand to both friend and foe, expecting commerce, while preparing to wage covert war upon them. We buy our friends in the world, the rest we simply intimidate or secretly undermine. From behind the shield of nearly omnipotent military power we have bribed and browbeat the world into submission to our ideas, our ideology, our economic schemes. Our cutthroat system of buying, selling and extorting our friends based solely on profit instead of need, therefore it is designed to weed-out everyone (regardless of their needs) who don’t have the cash to meet they need. The “haves and have-nots” exclusionary economic system is about to be crushed under the impending weight of the hungry misery it spreads far and wide.

The immorality of the current system will bring forth a new moral economic system from the violence of the old one dying. Each war or epidemic of violence that wracks the nations is a cry for help, as a segment of society explodes as a result of the local contradictions.

The war on Pakistan is a case in point. Here we have compelled our most faithful ally to engage in full-scale civil war as the means to salvage our failing economic order, by way of seizing the Caspian oil and gas reserves. We have forced Pakistan onto a path towards its own destruction as a feeble-minded calculated gamble to avert our own deserved dissolution. It seems only logical that a nation which feeds its own insatiable appetite for more of everything by depriving the poorest of the poor nations of the little that they have to call their own, would seek to avert its own profit loss by spreading death and suffering amongst the very people who have time and again proven to be among its best friends.

History has proven that some of America’s most trusted friends and allies have been the recipients of her most insidious and deadly intrigues. Pakistani leaders are delusional if they think that their friendship with the United States is stronger than that of Italy, or Germany.

The CIA turned Pakistan into the “epicenter of terrorism” for a reason. That reason went way beyond the mission against the Soviets, or else the training camps would have been shut-down and some attempt would have been made to clean-up the mess they had made when the Russians left Afghanistan. The CIA kept the camps and the madrassas running, turning-out thousands of good jihadis. By relying on the factor of “deniability,” they put the training camps in Pakistani hands. This should have been understood by Pakistan’s leaders for what it was, a euphemistic way to express the reality that the Army and the ISI were always intended to be America’s scapegoat. That time has come.

America has turned the tables on Pakistan. Just as Pakistan has used their proxy army, the local Taliban to stage running battles (some were for real), in order to fool the United States about Pakistani intentions in the war on terror, the new administration is using their own creation, the “Pakistani Taliban” (TTP), to call the Army’s bluff about its latest war in its tribal region. The generals can no longer get away with merely chasing the local Taliban from one agency into another, or anything less than waging total war in all of FATA and the NWFP. Pakistan’s “double-game” is over, while America’s double-games have barely begun.

Gen. Kayani has been trying to follow in Musharraf’s footsteps, running a limited pretend all-out war production, even following the same order of the previous war on Waziristan, tribal jirgas, lashkars, economic siege, etc. The General’s neatly dressed, never dirty, determined-looking soldiers faithfully posed for countless publicity shots, putting on a great show for the international circus media. Army spokesmen claim to have killed 1,500 terrorists in Malakand and elsewhere, always taking place beyond the range of the camera’s lens. There are no “embedded reporters” in Pakistan. The only news coming out of the region is approved after passing through several layers of filtering by the controlling governments there, especially by the one all-controlling super government. If Pakistan is really out to get Mehsud, as Kayani boasted, then it is because that is what Obama wants Pakistan to do.

The Predator strikes are the Pakistani strategy, intended to ease their citizenry into a renewed fight in S. Waziristan. (SEE: Paramilitary Pretense, Who Controls the Predators?) The last two attempts to carry the operation into the militant home base were met by fierce resistance on the ground, as well as in Pakistan’s streets. The people became so enraged that this path of slowly boiling Pakistan’s “frogs” became the only feasible alternative. This theory means that Mehsud is either an asset of the ISI or their CIA bosses. And the regular terror attacks upon Shiites and their shrines, even attacks on outposts of the Frontier Corp are likely the work of the ISI, just as the militants have been claiming in various interviews. As unlikely as this all seems, no other theory explains the curious behavior of Pakistan’s government and military and mountains of circumstantial evidence linking the ISI to the militants.

“So while Pakistan’s dysfunction is entirely Pakistan’s fault, American naivete cannot get a pass because Pakistan is a basket case. In the Age of Obama, America has to do better. Anyone that was really interested in debilitating the Punjabi-dominated, Hindu-hating, right-leaning, military-dominated Pakistani establishment would have to be recklessly foolish if it went and helped rebrand the Pakistan army in the wake of eight years of Musharraf and a devastating and humiliating defeat at the hands of the country’s lawyers. Yet that’s exactly what President Zardari has done since the May 8 offensive was launched into Swat. The Swat offensive has helped rehabilitate the image of the military.”

If Pakistan was really pursuing a policy of “divide and rule” in its negotiations with Mullah Nazir, seeking to separate the powerful warlord from Baitullah Mehsud before launching a new war in S. Waziristan against him, then the Army would not have allowed the continuing Predator attacks on Nazir to take place, or go unanswered. None of this happened. If they were serious about overtures made to the Wana warlord then they most certainly would not have shelled his offices.

Obama is driving the former enemies together. This is Langley’s intention. Mullah Nazir has not been the sole target of drone attacks for the past year to thwart Pakistan’s peace initiatives with the militants (since Washington controls everything Islamabad does), the reason is much more sinister than that.

If the United States government was truly at odds with the Army over American attacks upon Pakistani citizens, carried-out in order to sabotage Pakistan’s war plans, then there would be swift reprisals, because such an affront to Pakistan’s sovereignty would be far worse than merely “counter-productive.” Everything is going according to the Imperial game plan–American drones attack all pro-Pakistani militant leaders, ignoring everyone who is killing Pakistanis. The targeted leaders coalesce into a powerful, motivated union.

The generous benefactors of Maulana Fazlullah and his TNSM forces were sponsors of state terrorism, directed mostly at girls’ schools and CD shops in the North West Region. Their murderous rampage and deceptive Shariah pacts forced Army intervention. Predator attacks upon Mullah Nazir intensify, until he begins to fight back, forcing the Army to scrap plans to divide the Taliban as a means to avoid a massive tribal war, focusing only on Mehsud. Meanwhile, some unknown outfit bombs Shia mosques and shopping areas (Nazir blames the attacks upon the Army), stoking the war in Kurram. Bahadur honors his pact with Nazir and Mehsud; he fights back, forcing the Army to broaden their planned offensive to include N. Waziristan against their better judgment.

Never once, do the generals complain, or offer resistance to American violations of sovereignty. Instead, they follow the orders of their American masters, while the President of Pakistan continues to represent the President of the United States, instead of his own people, who are being killed by the dozens and the hundreds by the good old USA!

Hard as they may try to set their own course, Pakistan’s generals have surrendered their souls to the devil when they plotted with American generals to deceive their countrymen into passively, even enthusiastically accepting the new war. The war in Waziristan (both North and South) will be fought on Obama’s terms.
According to Army spokesman, Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas:

“It was thus obvious that the confrontation between the militants and the military in North Waziristan would escalate because the US is unlikely to give up its policy of using drones to target militants positions.”

In other words, for the first time, one of the silent generals dared to explain the Army’s position. ISI concerns about “shaping the battlefield” and confining the war in Wana to Mehsud didn’t amount to a hill of beans to Petraeus and Mullen, Obama insists that Pakistan go against the generals’ better judgment and incite a “tribal uprising.”

The attacks in N. Waziristan by Gul Bahadur and the artillery strikes upon Nazir’s headquarters, both a bi-product of the Predator prevarications, as well as the recent assassination of Pakistan’s other “ace in the hole, Qari Zainuddin, have destroyed Pakistan’s last chance to restore the writ of the state without resorting to all-out civil war. Either Gen. Kayani submits entirely to Obama’s will, including the planned submission to Indian domination afterwards, or he stands-up to the United States, meaning he stops the drone attacks and reveals the entire ugly scenario that the CIA cannot allow anyone to reveal. “Al Qaida” is fake. The war on terror is a fraud. The fraud is a plan for world war. And we all know that neither Gen. Kayani, nor any other Pakistani official will ever reveal the “great game” or the plot to destroy the Islamic Republic.

The United States corporacracy is a monstrous devouring beast and “Islamist terror” is her illegitimate offspring.

Six Jewish Companies Own 96% of the World’s Media

2009-07-07T04:32:00.002+06:00

Six Jewish Companies Own 96% of the World’s Media

The power of lies, deceptions and disinformation as Americans pay the price of collective stupidity.

“You know very well, and the stupid Americans know equally well, that we control their government, irrespective of who sits in the White House. You see, I know it and you know it that no American president can be in a position to challenge us even if we do the unthinkable. What can they (Americans) do to us? We control congress, we control the media, we control show biz, and we control everything in America. In America you can criticize God, but you can’t criticize Israel…”

Facts of Jewish Media Control

Electronic News & Entertainment Media

The largest media conglomerate today is Walt Disney Company, whose chairman and CEO, Michael Eisner, is a Jew. The Disney Empire, headed by a man described by one media analyst as a “control freak”, includes several television production companies (Walt Disney Television, Touchstone Television, Buena Vista Television), its own cable network with 14 million subscribers, and two video production companies. As for feature films, the Walt Disney Picture Group, headed by Joe Roth (also a Jew), includes Touchstone Pictures, Hollywood Pictures, and Caravan Pictures. Disney also owns Miramax Films, run by the Weinstein brothers. When the Disney Company was run by the Gentile Disney family prior to its takeover by Eisner in 1984, it epitomized wholesome, family entertainment. While it still holds the rights to Snow White, under Eisner, the company has expanded into the production of graphic sex and violence. In addition, it has 225 affiliated stations in the United States and is part owner of several European TV companies. ABC’s cable subsidiary, ESPN, is headed by president and CEO Steven Bornstein, a Jew. This corporation also has a controlling share of Lifetime Television and the Arts & Entertainment Network cable companies. ABC Radio Network owns eleven AM and ten FM stations, again in major cities such as New York, Washington, Los Angeles, and has over 3,400 affiliates. Although primarily a telecommunications company, Capital Cities/ABC earned over $1 billion in publishing in 1994. It owns seven daily newspapers, Fairchild Publications, Chilton Publications, and the Diversified Publishing Group. Time Warner, Inc, is the second of the international media leviathans. The chairman of the board and CEO, Gerald Levin, is a Jew. Time Warner’s subsidiary HBO is the country’s largest pay-TV cable network. Warner Music is by far the world’s largest record company, with 50 labels, the biggest of which is Warner Brothers Records, headed by Danny Goldberg. Stuart Hersch is president of Warnervision, Warner Music’s video production unit. Goldberg and Hersch are Jews. Warner Music was an early promoter of “gangsta rap.” Through its involvement with Interscope Records, it helped popularize a genre whose graphic lyrics explicitly urge Blacks to commit acts of violence against Whites. In addition to cable and music, Time Warner is heavily involved in the production of feature films (Warner Brothers Studio) and publishing. Time Warner’s publishing division (editor-in-chief Norman Pearlstine, a Jew) is the largest magazine publisher in the country (Time, Sports Illustrated, People, Fortune). When Ted Turner, a Gentile, made a bid to buy CBS in 1985, there was panic in media boardrooms across the nation. Turner made a fortune in advertising and then had built a successful cable-TV news network, CNN. Although Turner employed a number of Jews in key executive positions in CNN and had never taken public positions contrary to Jewish interests, he is a man with a large ego and a strong personality and was regarded by Chairman William Paley (real name Palinsky, a Jew) and the other Jews at CBS as uncontrollable: a loose cannon who might at some time in the future turn against them. Furthermore, Jewish newsman Daniel Schorr, who had worked for Turner, publicly charged that his former boss held a personal dislike for Jews. To block Turner’s bid, CBS executives invited billionaire Jewish theater, hotel, insurance, and cigarette magnate Laurence Tisch to launch a “friendly” takeover of the company, and from 1986 till 1995 Tisch was the chairman and CEO of CBS, removing any threat of non-Jewish influence there. Subsequent efforts by Turner to acquire a major network have been obstructed by Levin’s Time Warner, which owns nearly 20 percent of CBS stock and has veto power over major deals. Viacom, Inc, headed by Sumner Redstone (born Murray Rothstein), a Jew, is the third largest megamedia corporation in the country, with revenues of over $10 billion a year. Viacom, which produces and distributes TV programs for the three largest networks, owns 12 television stations and 12 radio stations. It produces feature films through Paramount Pictures, headed by Jewess Sherry Lansing. Its publishing division includes Prentice Hall, Simon & Schuster, and Pocket Books. It distributes videos through over 4,000 Blockbuster stores. Viacom’s chief claim to fame, however, is as the world’s largest provider of cable programming, through its Showtime, MTV, Nickelodeon, and other networks. Since 1989, MTV and Nickelodeon have acquired larger and larger shares of the younger television audience. With the top three, and by far the largest, media companies in the hand of Jews, it is difficult to believe that such an overwhelming degree of control came about without a deliberate, concerted effort on their part. What about the other big media companies? Number four on the list is Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, which owns Fox Television and 20th Century Fox Films. Murdoch is a Gentile, but Peter Chermin, who heads Murdoch’s film studio and also oversees his TV production, is a Jew. Number five is the Japanese Sony Corporation, whose U.S. subsidiary, Sony Corporation of America, is run by Michael Schulhof, a Jew. Alan Levine, another Jew, heads the Sony Pictures division. Most of the television and movie production companies that are not owned by the largest corporations are also controlled by Jews. For example, New World Entertainment, proclaimed by one media analyst as “the premiere independent TV program producer in the United States,” is owned by Ronald Perelman, a Jew. The best known of the smaller media companies, Dreamworks SKG, is a strictly kosher affair. Dream Works was formed in 1994 amid great media hype by recording industry mogul David Geffen, former Disney Pictures chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg, and film director Steven Spielberg, all three of whom are Jews. The company produces movies, animated films, television programs, and recorded music. Two other large production companies, MCA and Universal Pictures, are both owned by Seagram Company, Ltd. The president and CEO of Seagram, the liquor giant, is Edgar Bronfman Jr., who is also president of the World Jewish Congress. It is well known that Jews have controlled the production and distribution of films since the inception of the movie industry in the early decades of the 20th century. This is still the case today. Films produced by just the five largest motion picture companies mentioned above-Disney, Warner Brothers, Sony, Paramount (Viacom), and Universal (Seagram)-accounted for 74 per cent of the total box-office receipts for the first eight months of 1995. The big three in television network broadcasting used to be ABC, CBS, and NBC. With the consolidation of the media empires, these three are no longer independent entities. While they were independent, however, each was controlled by a Jew since its inception: ABC by Leonard Goldenson, CBS first by William Paley and then by Lawrence Tisch, and NBC first by David Sarnoff and then by his son Robert. Over periods of several decades, these networks were staffed from top to bottom with Jews, and the essential Jewishness of network television did not change when the networks were absorbed by other corporations. The Jewish presence in television news remains particularly strong. As noted, ABC is part of Eisner’s Disney Company, and the executive producers of ABC’s news programs are all Jews: Victor Neufeld (20-20), Bob Reichbloom (Good Morning America), and Rick Kaplan (World News Tonight). CBS was recently purchased by Westinghouse Electric Corporation. Nevertheless, the man appointed by Lawrence Tisch, Eric Ober, remains president of CBS News, and Ober is a Jew. At NBC, now owned by General Electric, NBC News president Andrew Lack is a Jew, as are executive producers Jeff Zucker (Today), Jeff Gralnick (NBC Nightly News), and Neal Shapiro (Dateline). The Print Media After television news, daily newspapers are the most influential information medium in America. Sixty million of them are sold (and presumably read) each day. These millions are divided among some 1,500 different publications. One might conclude that the sheer number of different newspapers across America would provide a safeguard against Jewish control and distortion. However, this is not the case. There is less independence, less competition, and much less representation of our interests than a casual observer would think. The days when most cities and even towns had several independently owned newspapers published by local people with close ties to the community are gone. Today, most “local” newspapers are owned by a rather small number of large companies controlled by executives who live and work hundreds or ever thousands of miles away. The fact is that only about 25 per cent of the country’s 1,500 papers are independently owned; the rest belong to multi-newspaper chains. Only a handful are large enough to maintain independent reporting staffs outside their own communities; the rest depend on these few for all of their national and international news. The Newhouse empire of Jewish brothers Samuel and Donald Newhouse provides an example of more than the lack of real competition among America’s daily newspapers: it also illustrates the insatiable appetite Jews have shown for all the organs of opinion control on which they could fasten their grip. The Newhouses own 26 daily newspapers, including several large and important ones, such as the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the Newark Star-Ledger, and the New Orleans Times-Picayune; the nation’s largest trade book publishing conglomerate, Random House, with all its subsidiaries; Newhouse Broadcasting, consisting of 12 television broadcasting stations and 87 cable-TV systems, including some of the country’s largest cable networks; the Sunday supplement Parade, with a circulation of more than 22 million copies per week; some two dozen major magazines, including the New Yorker, Vogue, Madmoiselle, Glamour, Vanity Fair, Bride’s, Gentlemen’s Quarterly, Self, House & Garden, and all the other magazines of the wholly owned Conde Nast group. This Jewish media empire was founded by the late Samuel Newhouse, an immigrant from Russia. The gobbling up of so many newspapers by the Newhouse family was in large degree made possible by the fact that newspapers are not supported by their subscribers, but by their advertisers. It is advertising revenue–not the small change collected from a newspaper’s readers–that largely pays the editor’s salary and yields the owner’s profit. Whenever the large advertisers in a city choose to favor one newspaper over another with their business, the favored newspaper will flourish while its competitor dies. Since the beginning of the 20th century, when Jewish mercantile power in America became a dominant economic force, there has been a steady rise in the number of American newspapers in Jewish hands, accompanied by a steady decline in the number of competing Gentile newspapers–primarily as a result of selective advertising policies by Jewish merchants. Furthermore, even those newspapers still under Gentile ownership and management are so thoroughly dependent upon Jewish advertising revenue that their editorial and news reporting policies are largely constrained by Jewish likes and dislikes. It holds true in the newspaper business as elsewhere that he who pays the piper calls the tune.

Three Jewish Newspapers

The suppression of competition and the establishment of local monopolies on the dissemination of news and opinion have characterized the rise of Jewish control over America’s newspapers. The resulting ability of the Jews to use the press as an unopposed instrument of Jewish policy could hardly be better illustrated than by the examples of the nation’s three most prestigious and influential newspapers: the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post. These three, dominating America’s financial and political capitals, are the newspapers which set the trends and the guidelines for nearly all the others. They are the ones which decide what is news and what isn’t, at the national and international levels. They originate the news; the others merely copy it, and all three newspapers are in Jewish hands. The New York Times was founded in 1851 by two Gentiles, Henry Raymond and George Jones. After their deaths, it was purchased in 1896 from Jones’s estate by a wealthy Jewish publisher, Adolph Ochs. His great-grandson, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr., is the paper’s current publisher and CEO. The executive editor is Max Frankel, and the managing editor is Joseph Lelyveld. Both of the latter are also Jews. The Sulzberger family also owns, through the New York Times Co., 33 other newspapers, including the Boston Globe; twelve magazines, including McCall’s and Family Circle with circulations of more than 5 million each; seven radio and TV broadcasting stations; a cable-TV system; and three book publishing companies. The New York Times News Service transmits news stories, features, and photographs from the New York Times by wire to 506 other newspapers, news agencies, and magazines. Of similar national importance is the Washington Post, which, by establishing its “leaks” throughout government agencies in Washington, has an inside track on news involving the Federal government. The Washington Post, like the New York Times, had a non-Jewish origin. It was established in 1877 by Stilson Hutchins, purchased from him in 1905 by John McLean, and later inherited by Edward McLean. In June 1933, however, at the height of the Great Depression, the newspaper was forced into bankruptcy. It was purchased at a bankruptcy auction by Eugene Meyer, a Jewish financier. The Washington Post is now run by Katherine Meyer Graham, Eugene Meyer’s daughter. She is the principal stockholder and the board chairman of the Washington Post Co. In 1979, she appointed her son Donald publisher of the paper. He now also holds the posts of president and CEO of the Washington Post Co. The Washington Post Co. has a number of other media holdings in newspapers, television, and magazines, most notably the nation’s number-two weekly newsmagazine, Newsweek. The Wall Street Journal, which sells 1.8 million copies each weekday, is the nation’s largest-circulation daily newspaper. It is owned by Dow Jones & Company, Inc., a New York corporation which also publishes 24 other daily newspapers and the weekly financial tabloid Barron’s, among other things. The chairman and CEO of Dow Jones is Peter Kann, who is a Jew. Kann also holds the posts of chairman and publisher of the Wall Street Journal. Most of New York’s other major newspapers are in no better hands than the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. The New York Daily News is owned by Jewish real-estate developer Mortimer B. Zuckerman. The Village Voice is the personal property of Leonard Stern, the billionaire Jewish owner of the Hartz Mountain pet supply firm.

Other Mass Media

The story is pretty much the same for other media as it is for television, radio, and newspapers. Consider, for example, newsmagazines. There are only three of any note published in the United States: Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News and World Report. Time, with a weekly circulation of 4.1 million, is published by a susidiary of Time Warner Communications. The CEO of Time Warner Communications, as mentioned above, is Gerald Levin, a Jew. Newsweek, as mentioned above, is published by the Washington Post Company, under the Jewess Katherine Meyer Graham. Its weekly circulation is 3.2 million. U.S. News & World Report, with a weekly circulation of 2.3 million, is owned and published by Mortimer Zuckerman, a Jew. Zuckerman also owns the Atlantic Monthly and New York’s tabloid newspaper, the Daily News, which is the sixth-largest paper in the country. Among the giant book-publishing conglomerates, the situation is also Jewish. Three of the six largest book publishers in the U.S., according to Publisher’s Weekly, are owned or controlled by Jews. The three are first-place Random House (with its many subsidiaries, including Crown Publishing Group), third-place Simon & Schuster, and sixth-place Time Warner Trade Group (including Warner Books and Little, Brown). Another publisher of special significance is Western Publishing. Although it ranks only 13th in size among all U.S. publishers, it ranks first among publishers of children’s books, with more than 50 percent of the market. Its chairman and CEO is Richard Snyder, a Jew, who just replaced Richard Bernstein, also a Jew.

The Effect of Jewish Control of the Media

These are the facts of Jewish media control in America. Anyone willing to spend several hours in a large library can verify their accuracy. I hope that these facts are disturbing to you, to say the least. Should any minority be allowed to wield such awesome power? Certainly, not and allowing a people with beliefs such as expressed in the Talmud, to determine what we get to read or watch in effect gives this small minority the power to mold our minds to suit their own Talmudic interests, interests which as we have demonstrated are diametrically opposed to the interests of our people. By permitting the Jews to control our news and entertainment media, we are doing more than merely giving them a decisive influence on our political system and virtual control of our government; we also are giving them control of the minds and souls of our children, whose attitudes and ideas are shaped more by Jewish television and Jewish films than by their parents, their schools, or any other influence.

Baitullah Mehsud is buying children for suicide bombers: report

2009-07-07T04:29:00.000+06:00

Baitullah Mehsud is buying children for suicide bombers: report

Taliban leader, Baitullah Mehsud, is buying children as young as 7 to serve as suicide bombers in the growing spate of attacks against Pakistani, Afghan and U.S. targets, citing U.S. Defense Department and Pakistani officials, Washington Times reported. A Pakistani official, who spoke on the condition that he not be named because of the sensitive nature of the topic, said the going price for child bombers was $7,000 to $14,000. "[Mehsud] has turned suicide bombing into a production output, not unlike [the way] Toyota outputs cars," a U.S. Defense Department official told reporters recently. He spoke on the condition that he not be named because of ongoing intelligence efforts to catch Mehsud, a prime target for a U.S. and Pakistani anti-Taliban campaign. An apparent U.S. effort to kill Mehsud last week failed. On Sunday, the Pakistani government offered a reward of about $615,300 for information leading to the capture of Mehsud, dead or alive. The U.S. State Department has offered a bounty of $5 million for Mehsud, who is thought to be hiding in the tribal areas near the Afghan border. The U.S. official said the price depends on how quickly the bomber is needed and how close the child is expected to get to the target. "[Mehsud] produces these suicide bombers, which are sold or bartered, which can be used by [Afghan Taliban leader Mullah] Omar's Taliban or ... other groups," the U.S. official said. In some cases, he said, the children are kidnapped and then sold to Mehsud. Efforts to reach a spokesman for Mehsud were not successful, the report said.

We stand committed to global peace: General Kayani

2009-07-07T04:22:00.001+06:00

We stand committed to global peace: General Kayani

KARACHI: Pakistan stands committed to global and regional peace and wishes to live in peace and harmony with all its neighbours. This was stated by the Chief of the Army Staff (COAS), Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.
He was speaking as chief guest at the 91st Mid-Shipmen Commissioning Parade here at the Pakistan Naval Academy (PNA) on Friday, APP reported.
The COAS said that Pakistan will not enter into any arms race but will maintain balance through a strategy of minimum credible deterrence. Strong armed forces of Pakistan are guarantors of peace and stability, he added.
Gen. Kayani pointed out that today Pakistan is confronted with multifaceted challenges. It is complex in its nature. Its spectrum is both diverse and intense, he said. He said that while external threat to Pakistan continues to exist, it is the internal threat that merits country and its people’s immediate attention.
The COAS said that the forces of extremism and terrorism pose a threat to the national security and stability.
He stated that country’s fight against extremism and terrorism is fully supported by the nation.
Our nation is proud of its soldiers, airmen and sailors who have laid their lives in recent operations, he said.
‘Let me assure you that in line with our proud traditions, the armed forces of Pakistan will never flinch whenever the nation gives us a call,’ the COAS remarked.
‘I can say with conviction that with the help of the people of Pakistan, we will succeed in our fight against terrorism,’ he added.
The COAS told the passing out mid-shipmen that the PNA has provided them with a solid foundation in line with its highest traditions of excellence.
‘The nation has reposed its trust in you. Now it is your responsibility to uphold that trust as professional sailors. It is your duty to come up to the expectations of the nation and the Navy,’ he added. ‘I pray that Almighty Allah gives you the courage and strength to discharge your responsibilities in the best interest of Pakistan.’
Gen. Kayani remarked adding that ‘To live up to the traditions of Pakistan Navy you have to work hard. You are expected not only to live to the glorious traditions of PN but also to further strengthen it by your own accomplishments and achievements.’
The COAS also told the commissioning mid-shipmen that their professionalism and conduct will be watched closely by their subordinates and therefore their behaviour must always remain exemplary.
He also reminded them that the only way to lead is to lead from the front. On the occasion, Gen. Kayani also congratulated the passing out mid-shipmen.
The Chief of the Army Staff also reviewed the commissioning parade.

UAE gives $0.5m for UN probe into BB murder

2009-07-07T03:53:00.001+06:00

UAE gives UN $0.5m for Benazir murder probe

Why our govt. is begging in front of others?
Mr. Asif Zardari cannot afford this cost from his own pocket?????
We have state to state relations with UAE not UAE vs. Individual
so why Mr. Zardari is using his authority for Personal gains??

ISLAMABAD - The UAE has announced a contribution of US $500,000 to the UN Trust Fund for Benazir Bhutto Inquiry Commission.Presidential Spokesperson Farhatullah Babar in a statement on Friday said that the UAE Embassy in Islamabad had informed Pakistan’s Foreign Office conveying the decision of the government of UAE.The Commission is led by Chile’s UN Ambassador and includes a former Indonesian attorney general and Ireland’s former deputy police commissioner as members. The Irish member of the team was also a member of the inquiry commission into the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005.The spokesperson said that the commission’s mandate was to inquire into the facts and circumstances of Benazir’s assassination. He said that commission, which had already begun to assemble in New York, was expected to arrive in Islamabad in mid-July and complete its work within six months. The commission will submit its report to the UN Secy Gen who in turn will submit it to the UN Security Council and also share it with the govt of Pakistan. The task of determining the criminal responsibility of the perpetrators of the crime is of the government of Pakistan.“The government of Pakistan has thanked the UAE government for its gesture,” Babar said.

JEWS transferred huge amount of Gold from Europe to US

2009-07-07T03:46:00.002+06:00

JEWS transferred huge amount of Gold from Europe to US during 1st and 2nd World War - Ship found!

As told by BrassTacks earlier, significant amount of Gold was transferred by JEWS from Europe TO USA during First and Second World War. In Jan 2009 one ship has been found in deep sea giving proof of this transition.

…may contain10 tons of gold bullion, 70 tons of platinum,
11/2 tons ofindustrial diamonds and 16 million carats of gem-quality diamonds

A United States-based marine research and recovery firm, Sub Sea Research, has claimed that it has located the wreck of a merchant ship under some 800 feet of water approximately 40 miles off the coast of Guyana.In efforts to protect its find, Sub Sea Research will not divulge the exact location of the wreck until the ship’s cargo has been brought to the surface. The name of the ship is also not being released, but in the meantime, the ship has been dubbed the ‘Blue Baron.’

The ‘Blue Baron’ is thought to
look similar to this ship.

According to the founder of Sub Sea Research, Greg Brooks, “This British freighter had an extremely valuable cargo, and we decided there wasn’t a lot of point in leaving it at the bottom of the sea. This will definitely be the richest wreck ever.”According to the US-based company, the Blue Baron was crewed largely by British nationals, and had just left a European port, bearing goods for the United States Treasury. It is expected that the sheer scale of the treasure trove that is thought to be aboard the wreck will let loose a number of rival claims from interested parties.Since laws concerning salvaging items from the ocean floor can be quite complex, experts think that it could be years of legal disputes before ownership of the wreck is attributed to any party.It is believed that the Blue Baron first sailed, sometime during World War II, to a location somewhere in South America, before heading in convoy towards New York. Before reaching New York, Sub Sea Research is claiming, the convoy was intercepted by a German submarine.The submarine is said to have sunk the Blue Baron with two torpedoes in June 1942. According to Sub Sea Research, the cargo aboard the Blue Baron may include at least ten tons of gold bullion, 70 tons of platinum, one and one-half tons of industrial diamonds and 16 million carats of gem-quality diamonds.Added to this, the company is reporting that there may have been several thousands tons of tin and a few thousand tons of copper ingots. Even though the tin and copper may have been devalued after spending decades on the ocean bed, Sub Sea Research is estimating the total haul to be worth approximately US$3,532,375,151.Presently, a salvage vessel is being equipped to sail to the wreck site and recover the cargo, which lies in international waters. Sub Sea Research has refused to divulge which Government may have been sending the valuables to the United States aboard the Blue Baron, or which country was the Blue Baron’s last port of call in Europe. Speculation surrounds the idea that much of the treasure could be both Russian and British.Sub Sea Research had to make its discovery public when it filed a claim on the treasure in a US Federal Admiralty Court. So far, no counter claims have yet been filed. “No one has stepped forward to make a claim yet, probably because the Government that lost it does not realise. We are trying to keep it as quiet as possible, until we have it in our possession,” said Brooks.He added that they believe that the cargo of the ship may belong to more than one country.At the time when it is believed the ship was sunk, both Britain and Russia shipped large amounts of valuable cargo to the United States, noted an expert in Salvage Law at Wolverhampton University, Mike Williams.

(UK Telegraph)

'US trains Jundullah members'

2009-07-07T03:40:00.002+06:00

'US trains Jundullah members'
Iran Hangs Them But In Pakistan Politicians Are Silent

A senior member of the Jundullah terrorist group says that the group has been trained and financed by "the US and Zionists". Abdolhamid Rigi, the brother of Jundullah leader Abdolmalek Rigi made the remarks in a court session held in the southeastern city of Zahedan on Wednesday.

Abdolhamid Rigi was among the thirteen members of the Jundullah who were accused of terrorist activities, Fars news agency reported. Pakistani security forces arrested Abdolhamid last year and extradited him to Iran. The defendants told the court that foreign spy agencies support Jundullah. Citing the defendant's confessions, the court's judge said that after the extradition of Abdolhamid, foreign intelligence agencies had incited Jundullah members to step up their terrorist attacks in Iran including hostage takings to put pressure on Iran to release Abdolhamid.

Uneducated Asif Ali Zardari

2009-07-03T02:07:00.004+06:00

Broker Asif Ali Zardari
Unfortunately the President of Islamic Republic Pakistan

Worth: £900m ($1.8billion) Industry: Politics

ZARDARI’S LOCAL ASSETS ARE:

Plot no. 121, Phase VIII, DHA Karachi.
Agricultural land situated in Deh Dali Wadi, Taluka, Tando Allah Yar.
Agricultural property located in Deh Tahooki Taluka, District Hyderabad measuring 65.15 acres.
Agricultural land falling in Deh 76-Nusrat, Taluka, District Nawabshah measuring 827.14 acres
Agricultural land situated in Deh 76-Nusrat, Taluka, District Nawabshah measuring 293.18 acres
Residential plot No 3 (Now House) Block No B-I, City Survey No 2268 Ward-A Nawabshah
Huma Heights (Asif Apartments) 133, Depot Lines, Commissariat Road, Karachi
Trade Tower Building 3/CL/V Abdullah Haroon Road, Karachi
House No 8, St 9, F-8/2, Islamabad
Agricultural land in Deh 42 Dad Taluka/ District Nawabshah
Agricultural land in Deh 51 Dad Taluka Distt Nawabshah
Plot No 3 & 4 Sikni (residential) Near Housing Society Ltd. Nawabshah
CafT Sheraz (C.S No.. 2231/2 & 2231/3) Nawabshah
Agricultural land in Deh 23-Deh Taluka & District Nawabshah
Agricultural property in Deh 72-A, Nusrat Taluka, Nawabshah
Agricultural land in Deh 76-Nusrat Taluka, Nawabshah
Plot No. A/136 Survey No 2346 Ward A Government Employee’s Cooperative Housing Society Ltd, Nawabshah
Agricultural land in Deh Jaryoon Taluka Tando Allah Yar, Distt. Hyderabad
Agricultural land in Deh Aroro Taluka Tando Allah Yar, Distt. Hyderabad
Agricultural land in Deh Nondani Taluka Tando Allah Yar, Distt. Hyderabad
Agricultural land in Deh Lotko Taluka Tando Allah Yar, Distt. Hyderabad
Agricultural land in Deh Jhol Taluka Tando Allah Yar, Distt. Hyderabad
Agricultural land in Deh Kandari Taluka Tando Allah Yar, Distt. Hyderabad
Agricultural land in Deh Deghi Taluka Tando Mohammad Khan
Agricultural land in Deh Rahooki Taluka, Hyderabad
Property in Deh Charo Taluka, Badin
Agricultural property in Deh Dali Wadi Taluka, Hyderabad
Five acres prime land allotted by DG KDA in 1995/96
4,000 kanals on Simli Dam
80 acres of land at Hawkes Bay
13 acres of land at Maj Gulradi (KPT Land)
One acre plot, GCI, Clifton
One acre of land, State Life (International Center, Sadar)
FEBCs worth Rs. 4 million

SHARES IN SUGAR MILLS INCLUDE:

Sakrand Sugar Mills Nawabshah
Ansari Sugar
Mills Hyderabad
Mirza Sugar Mills Badin
Pangrio Sugar Mills Thatta
Bachani Sugar Mills Sanghar

FRONT COMPANIES IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES:

Bomer Fiannce Inc, British Virgin Islands
Mariston Securities Inc, British Virgin Islands
Marleton Business S A, British Virgin Islands
Capricorn Trading S A, British Virgin Islands
Fagarita Consulting INc, British Virgin Islands
Marvil Associated Inc, British Virgin Islands
Pawnbury Finance Ltd, British Virgin Islands
Oxton Trading Limited, British Virgin Islands
Brinslen Invest S A, British Virgin Islands
Chimitex Holding S A, British Virgin Islands
Elkins Holding S A, British Virgin Islands
Minister Invest Ltd, British Virgin Islands
Silvernut Investment Inc, British Virgin Islands
Tacolen Investment Ltd, British Virgin Islands
Marlcrdon Invest S A, British Virgin Islands
Dustan Trading Inc, British Virgin Islands
Reconstruction and Development Finance Inc, British Virgin Islands
Nassam Alexander Inc.
Westminster Securities Inc.
Laptworth Investment Inc 202, Saint Martin Drive, West Jacksonville
Intra Foods Inc. 3376, Lomrel Grove, Jacksonville, Florida
Dynatel Trading Co, Florida
A..S Realty Inc. Palm Beach Gardens Florida
Bon Voyage Travel Consultancy Inc, Florida

ZARDARI’S PROPERTIES IN UK ARE:

355 acre Rockwood Estate, Surrey (Now stands admitted)
Flat 6, 11 Queensgate Terrace, London SW7
26 Palace Mansions, Hammersmith Road, London W14
27 Pont Street, London, SW1
20 Wilton Crescent, London SW1
23 Lord Chancellor Walk, Coombe Hill, Kingston, Surrey
The Mansion, Warren Lane, West Hampstead, London
A flat at Queensgate Terrace, London
Houses at Hammersmith Road, Wilton Crescent, Kingston and in Hampstead.

ZARDARI’S PROPERTIES IN BELGIUM ARE:

12-3 Boulevard De-Nieuport, 1000, Brussels, (Building containing 4 shops and
2 large apartments)
Chausee De-Mons, 1670, Brussels

ZARDARI’S PROPERTIES IN FRANCE ARE:

La Manoir De La Reine Blanche and property in Cannes

ZARDARI’S PROPERTIES IN USA :
in the name of Asif Zardari and managed by Shimmy Qureshi are:

Stud farm in Texas
Wellington Club East, West Palm Beach
12165 West Forest Hills, Florida
Escue Farm 13,524 India Mound, West Palm Beach
3,220 Santa Barbara Drive, Wellington Florida
13,254 Polo Club Road, West Palm Beach Florida
3,000 North Ocean Drive, Singer Islands, Florida
525 South Flager Driver, West Palm Beach, Florida
Holiday Inn Houston Owned by Asif Ali Zardari, Iqbal Memon and Sadar-ud-Din Hashwani

ZARDARI’S BANK ACCOUNTS IN FOREGN COMPANIES ARE:

Union Bank of Switzerland (Account No. 552.343, 257.556.60Q, 433.142.60V, 216.393.60T)
Citibank Private Limited (SWZ) (Account No. 342034)
Citibank N A Dubai (Account No. 818097)
Barclays Bank (Suisse) (Account No. 62290209)
Barclays Bank (Suisse) (Account No. 62274400)
Banque Centrade Ormard Burrus S A
Banque Pache S A
Banque Pictet & Cie
Banque La Henin, Paris (Account No. 00101953552)
Bank Natinede Paris in Geneva (Account NO.. 563.726.9)
Swiss Bank Corporation
Chase Manhattan Bank Switzerland
American Express Bank Switzerland
Societe De Banque Swissee
Barclays Bank (Knightsbridge Branch) (Account No. 90991473)
Barclays Bank, Kingston and Chelsea Branch, (Sort Code 20-47-34135)
National Westminster Bank, Alwych Branch (Account No. 9683230)
Habib Bank (Pall Mall Branch).
National Westminster Bank, Barking Branch, (Account No. 28558999).
Habib Bank AG, Moorgate, London EC2
National Westminster Bank, Edgware Road, London
Banque Financiei E Dela Citee, Credit Suisse
Habib Bank AG Zurich, Switzerland
Pictet Et Cie, Geneva
Credit Agricole, Paris
Credit Agridolf, Branch 11, Place Brevier, 76440, Forges Les Faux
Credit Agricole, Branch Haute – Normandie, 76230, Boise Chillaum

Wary of dollar, China wants super-sovereign

2009-06-30T22:33:00.000+06:00

Wary of dollar, China wants super-sovereign

* China's central bank calls for super-sovereign currency

* Dollar's dominance has intensified risk, worsened crisis

* IMF should manage part of its members' FX reserves

By Zhou Xin and Chris Buckley

BEIJING, June 26 (Reuters) - China's central bank renewed its call on Friday for the creation of a super-sovereign reserve currency to reduce the dollar's global domination, which it said had worsened the financial crisis.
In its annual financial stability report, the central bank did not mention the dollar by name but said it was a serious defect that one currency should tower over all others.
"An international monetary system dominated by a single sovereign sovereign currency has intensified the concentration of risk and the spread of the crisis," the People's Bank of China said.
In thinly-veiled criticism of loose U.S. monetary and fiscal policies, the PBOC urged the International Monetary Fund to exercise closer supervision of the economic and financial policies of major reserve-issuing countries.
The 170-page report dusted off a call by the bank's governor, Zhou Xiaochuan, for the creation of a super-sovereign currency.
In an essay in late March, Zhou caused a stir by suggesting that the Special Drawing Right, the IMF's unit of account, could eventually displace the dollar as the principal reserve currency. [ID:nPEK184558]
Friday's report not only advocated a full role for the SDR but said the IMF should be entrusted with managing a portion of its member countries' foreign currency reserves.
"To avoid intrinsic shortcomings in using a sovereign currency as a reserve currency, we need to create an international reserve currency that is divorced from sovereign states and can maintain a stable value over the long term," the report said.
DOLLAR DILEMMA
Chinese officials have expressed growing concern in recent months that massive U.S. fiscal and monetary stimulus will generate inflation and drive down the dollar, handing Beijing big losses on its vast portfolio of U.S. bonds.
Bankers say China holds perhaps 70 percent of its $1.95 trillion in official currency reserves in dollars.
"When a national currency becomes the global price-setting currency for primary products, the trade settlement currency and the reserve currency, that national currency has great difficulty attending to both domestic monetary policy goals and the reserve currency needs of various countries.
"And the economic development model of debt-based consumption is most difficult to sustain," the report said.
The PBOC also levelled criticism at international banking rules, drawn up by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, which it said had paid inadequate attention to the risks inherent in complex credit securities.
Oversight of derivatives had also been lax, the report said.
Turning to the domestic economy, the PBOC said the slump in global trade caused by the international financial crisis would spawn risks for China's banks as exporters ran into difficulties.
By weighing on incomes, the crisis might also slow China's drive to develop a consumption-led economy, the PBOC said.
The central bank also said China could face inflationary pressure in the medium- to long-term as a result of liquidity now being pumped into the global financial system, coupled with extensive deficit spending by many governments. (Reporting by Zhou Xin, Aileen Wang and Chris Buckley; Writing by Alan Wheatley; editing by Patrick Graham

Are French Bribes Stopping Zardari Govt

2009-06-30T22:30:00.002+06:00

Are French Bribes Stopping Zardari Govt. From Buying German Submarines?

German Submarines, French Bribes, Pakistani Corruption

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—The stench of a multimillion dollar scam can be smelled in the Pakistani capital. This time it has to do with the estimated $1.5 to 2 billion deal that the Pakistan Navy has almost finalized with Germany. But it seems there are strong lobbies in Islamabad that want to oblige France and buy French vessels because Paris is willing to pay heavy bribes. To ensure the deal is sealed with France instead of Germany, a junior bureaucrat has been appointed as Pakistan’s ambassador in Paris bypassing the Pakistani foreign office. Reports accuse President Asif Ali Zardari of orchestrating this appointment.

No one would be more disturbed at these developments than the government of Angela Merkel in Germany. Berlin went out on a limp to approve the Pakistani request for the submarines in the face of strong opposition to selling weapons to Pakistan.

India, whose 90% of weapons continue to be aimed at Pakistan while feigning peace and making excuses about threats from China, has launched a quiet diplomatic effort to convince Germany not to sell the vessels to Pakistan.

The deal with Germany is ready to be inked and the Germans await Pakistan to make a formal order for the submarines. But this order is not coming despite the visit by Pakistani Army Chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani to Berlin on 18 June. The Defense minister has also visited Germany earlier to discuss the deal.

Seven months ago, the CEO of the company that building the submarines for Pakistan visited Karachi and told The News International that the deal between Germany and Pakistan was “95% done”.

So why is the Pakistani side reluctant now?

On Friday, security analysis service BRASSTACKS issued an alert that said:

“All is set for the new [German] submarines. Almost all hurdles have been removed. But we fail to understand why there is no pressure from the Naval Headquarters (NHQ) on DP MoD [Director of Purchases at the Ministry of Defense] to finalize the contract. Already the Indians are exploiting the situation and pressurizing the Germans to stop the sale. It is not less than a miracle that the Germans are adamant on going ahead with the sale despite the pressures. Pakistan Navy is set to lose this deal due to a lack of will, lack of decision making, and due to other vested interests.”

One reason could be France. The French are lobbying to get Pakistan to cancel the German deal and buy French submarines.

Coincidentally, in 1995, the Pakistan People’s Party was in power when the government bought three French Agosta 90-B submarines. President Zardari was an investment minister then. The incumbent French President Nicolas Sarkozy was also in power at the time as a minister and key aide to then French President Edouard Balladur. Ironically, both were powerful men who operated behind the scenes. And now both of them stand accused of receiving lavish kickbacks from the Agosta deal.

The French media has accused President Zardari of being part of a list of powerful people in both Paris and Islamabad who received kickbacks. The French judges have also accused others besides Mr. Zardari especially within the military of receiving parts of the bribe. On the French side, the bribe money from the deal helped finance the reelection campaign of Mr. Balladur in which Mr. Sarkozy played a key role.

A French judge has even accused some powerful Pakistanis including Mr. Zardari of having something to do with the murder of 11 French engineers in Karachi in May 2002 as a retaliation for the decision of France’s new government to cease bribe payments from the 1995 deal.

As recently as Friday, 26 June 2009, The Independent of London published a report titled Bribes and Bombs that mentioned the names of both President Zardari and President Sarkozy as prime suspects among others in receiving bribes for the French submarines. The opening paragraphs of the report said this:

“A political scandal is gathering pace over claims that 11 French submarine engineers were murdered in a bomb attack in Karachi seven years ago to punish France for the non-payment of arms contract "commissions" to senior Pakistani officials. Lawyers for the French victims' families believe the attack, allegedly carried out by Islamist terrorists, was in fact part of a web of financial chicanery and political maneuvering which may yet severely embarrass senior figures, including the French President Nicolas Sarkozy and his Pakistani counterpart Asif Ali Zardari.”

Interestingly, when Mr. Zardari decided to pay a visit to Paris in May, Mr. Sarkozy wasn’t exactly a happy man. The French media highlighted a letter that the families of the 11 engineers sent to the French president showing displeasure at meeting Mr. Zardari. The German news agency, DPA, reported that Mr. Zardari’s decision to visit Paris “has placed the French president in a delicate position.”

The Independent newspaper report published the following list of the key figures in the French submarine bribes scandal. This list is based on the French investigation into the murder of the 11 engineers.

The key figures: 15 years ago and now
Edouard Balladur, 80
THEN Centre-right prime minister in cohabitation with the Socialist president, François Mitterrand. Ran for presidency in 1995 but was knocked out by Chirac in first round.
ROLE It is alleged in documents seized by French police that his campaign – quite possibly without his knowledge – benefited from illegal kickbacks.
NOW Retired.
Jacques Chirac, 76
THEN Mayor of Paris and leader of the centre-right RPR party. Ran for the presidency in 1995 for the third time and won.
ROLE As president, he ordered the cancellation of the Pakistani "commissions", allegedly in pique against M Balladur.
NOW Retired.
Charles Millon, 63
THEN Chirac's defence minister in 1995.
ROLE Admits he cancelled Pakistani commissions on Chirac's orders.
NOW Faded from mainstream politics.
Asif Ali Zardari, 53
THEN Minister in government of his wife, Benazir Bhutto, who was murdered in 2007 after she returned to Pakistan.
ROLE Alleged to have "distributed" part of the commissions paid by France, which were legal under French law.
NOW President of Pakistan.

What is compounding suspicions is the decision by the Pakistani government to appoint a civil servant from the District Management Group [a classification within the Pakistani bureaucracy] as the Ambassador of Pakistan to France. This is an unusual appointment. For the first time, the Pakistan Foreign Office and the veteran diplomats there have been bypassed for this critical station. Again, Mr. Zardari’s name has come up as the man behind the move and his spokesman had to step in to deny it.
So is the delay in the issuing of the order for the German submarines that were almost finalized in December 2008 has something to do with President Zardari’s meeting with President Sarkozy of France in May 2009? Is the appointment of a junior civil servant as the envoy to Paris related to this? And has all of this something to do with the reluctance of the Ministry of Defense in issuing a purchase order for the German submarines?

The delay could also be an attempt at hurting the fast developing military ties between Pakistan and Germany.

Pakistan and Germany have deepened military and security ties over the past years.

Germany has become the fourth country after the United States, Japan and Russia to begin a strategic dialogue with Pakistan.

There are regular political-military talks with Pakistan army officials on security and military issues which include counter- terrorism and training of Pakistani officers in Germany.

Pakistani officers have received military training and education in Germany in recent years as part of military education and training programs

Pakistan needs the German Class-214 submarines. India’s military buildup is coupled with renewed aggressiveness toward Pakistan. The Indians are expected to use the naval buildup to bully Pakistan. It is imperative that Islamabad build up its naval defense to maintain peace through deterrence.

Why Pakistan Will Never Catch Terror Leader Alive

2009-06-30T22:25:00.001+06:00

Why Pakistan Will Never Catch Terror Leader Alive

The mess in Pakistan’s western areas is not just a battle with religious extremism. A larger part is a battle of proxies. There are credible reports that Indian and Israeli intelligence involvement in U.S.-controlled Afghanistan has deepened in the past seven years. American military and intelligence officials are impressed with the record of both countries in fighting Islamic groups in Kashmir and the Mideast. Israel invested heavily in establishing schools that study the art of Islamic indoctrination. These schools were used to learn how clerics can brainwash recruits and then exploit them politically. Israeli spymasters have used this knowledge to penetrate Islamic groups and plant agents. They have passed this technique on to the Indians to help them counter pro-Pakistan religious groups in Kashmir. In the Kargil war in 1999, Pakistanis and Kashmiris faced a direct Israeli special operations intervention on the side of the Indian military.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—Pakistan will probably never catch terrorist leader Baitullah Mehsud alive. Why? For the same reason that we will never really know why uncircumcised dead fighters have been turning up from the bunkers of what is supposed to be Pakistani Taliban. Or why alcoholic beverages were found from some of their hideouts. Or why citizens of China and Sri Lanka – two close military allies of Pakistan – were brutally attacked on Pakistani soil by people claiming to be fighting America. Or why this new Taliban is so eager to kill ordinary Pakistanis and harass anti-India Kashmiri activists and demand they fight Pakistan.

Similarly we will never know why listed companies like Google and Facebook are speeding up Persian translations of their sites when no profit is involved. [Will their stockholders accept democracy instead of profits?] Or why the government of President Zardari exerted pressure for the removal of the Saudi ambassador in Islamabad. And why the government did not object when the U.S. and other allied donors tried to create a special fund for Balochistan and NWFP with the condition that it operate outside Pakistan’s control. And why the Saudi ambassador strongly opposed the plan when Mr. Zardari’s team almost endorsed it. Could this be one of several reasons why the Saudi ambassador became unwelcome here, received threats to his life and then was unable to meet the President before leaving despite several attempts?

The popular Pakistani understanding of the battle against Baitullah Mehsud is more American than Pakistani. This prevents us from accepting that this insurgency is wrapped in multiple layers of deceit. The entire prevailing narrative of the situation is exclusively American, tailored to suit Washington’s worldview. It talks about a uniform threat of Taliban and al Qaeda with no distinction made between the Afghan Taliban and the new Pakistani version; the American narrative does not explain how or why the ranks of the Pakistani Taliban have been swelling steadily when the Afghan Taliban is not experiencing a similar surge; and why the American narrative suppresses any discussion of Pakistani grievances about an organized anti-Pakistan terror wave emanating from Afghanistan.

The Pakistani counter narrative is missing on the government level and is probably limited to some circles within the Pakistani strategic and intelligence communities. The impression is that the Pakistani government is essentially bartering silence for U.S. aid.

This is a dangerous bargain.

It means that Pakistani officials won’t take a stand on the use of Afghan soil to export terror to Pakistan. In fact, there are strong grounds to conclude that while other parts of the U.S. government engage Pakistan, freewheeling elements within the Central Intelligence Agency are probably conducting their own foreign policy on the ground in the region. The simultaneous trouble in both the Pakistani and Iranian parts of Balochistan is but one case in point.

Another downside to our enthusiasm for U.S. aid money at any cost is our waning ability to resist the upcoming American plan to install India as the resident guardian over Pakistan and Afghanistan. A senior US national security official is expected to bring this plan to Pakistan in the next few days. Islamabad’s obsession with US aid while staying mum on vital Pakistani interest is absurd. Why is Prime Minister Gilani complaining now about the US ‘surge’ in Afghanistan when Mr. Zardari and his foreign minister wasted no time in warmly welcoming it when Mr. Obama unveiled the plan in March?

This explains why Mr. Zardari signed an American-proposed agreement to give India overland trade routes to Afghanistan. No wonder U.S. diplomats in Islamabad are so emboldened that recently some of them spent half the day camped at the federal petroleum ministry to force a rollback of the Iran gas deal.

There are also fresh questions on the extent of support the United States is getting from two of its closest allies India and Israel in Afghanistan. There are credible reports that Indian and Israeli intelligence involvement in U.S.-controlled Afghanistan has deepened in the past seven years. Some American military and intelligence officials are impressed with the record of both countries in fighting Islamic groups, especially the Indian experience in occupied Kashmir. The Israelis have invested heavily in establishing schools that study the art of Islamic indoctrination. These schools were used to learn how clerics can brainwash recruits and then exploit them politically. Israeli spymasters have used this knowledge to penetrate Mideastern Islamic groups. They have passed this technique to the Indians to help them counter pro-Pakistan religious groups in Kashmir. In the Kargil war in 1999, Pakistanis and Kashmiris faced a direct Israeli special operations intervention on the side of the Indian military.

The mess in Pakistan’s western areas is not just a battle with religious extremism. A larger part is a battle of proxies. None of this means that we should treat Washington as an enemy. But it does have an agenda that is increasingly diverging from Pakistan’s strategic interests.

US Heavy Meddle in Iran

2009-06-30T22:20:00.001+06:00

AJAX REDUX: US Heavy Meddle in Iran

Tehran August 19, 1953

Tehran June 13, 2009

The Western press has clearly taken a side and has successfully managed to drag its uninformed audience along with it. News reports all refer to the continuing groundswell of protest to the election results as an "unprecedented" show of courage, resistance, and people power against the government not seen in Iran since the 1979 revolution.
But what we have seen this past week seems to have far more in common with the events of fifty-six years ago, rather than just thirty.
In 1953, the United States government, at the behest of Britain, tasked CIA operatives Kermit Roosevelt, Jr. and Donald Wilber to overthrow the democratically-elected government of Iran, in order to put an end to the process of oil nationalization by Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh. This nationalism "outraged the British, who had 'bought' the exclusive right to exploit Iranian oil from a corrupt Shah, and the Americans, who feared that allowing nationalization in Iran would encourage leftists around the world." The coup d'etat, which took a mere three weeks to execute, was accomplished in a number of stages. First, members of the Iranian Parliament and leaders of political parties were bribed to oppose Mossadegh publicly, thereby making the government appear fragmented and not unified. Newspaper owners, editors, columnists and reporters were then paid off in order to spread lies and propaganda against the Prime Minister.
Furthermore, high-ranking clerics, influential businessmen, members of the police, security forces, and military were bribed, as well. Roosevelt hired the leaders of street gangs in Tehran, using them to help create the impression that the rule of law had totally disintegrated in Iran and that the government had no control over its population. Stephen Kinzer, journalist and author of All the Shah's Men, tells us that "at one point, [Roosevelt] hired a gang to run through the streets of Tehran, beating up any pedestrian they found, breaking shop windows, firing their guns into mosques, and yelling, 'We love Mossadegh and communism.' This would naturally turn any decent citizen against him." In a stroke of manipulative genius, Roosevelt then hired a second mob to attack the first mob, thereby giving the Iranian people the impression that there was no police presence and that civil society had devolved into complete chaos, with the government totally incapable of restoring order. Kinzer elaborates,They rampaged through the streets by the tens of thousands. Many of them, I think, never even really understood they were being paid by the C.I.A. They just knew they had been given a good day’s wage to go out in the street and chant something. Many politicians whipped up the crowds during those days...They started storming government buildings. There were gunfights in front of important buildings.After all was said and done, Prime Minister Mossadegh had been deposed and a military coup returned the monarchy to Iran by installing the pro-western Mohammed Reza Pahlevi on the Peacock throne. The Shah's brutal, tyrannical dictatorship - established, supported, and funded by the United States - lasted 26 years. In 1979, the Iranian people returned the favor.
So what have we been seeing in Iran this past week?
Whereas there is scant evidence of any actual voter fraud or ballot rigging in the recent reelection of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the popular movement we've been seeing on the streets of Tehran and elsewhere is being treated by the American media as some sort of new revolution; an energized, grassroots, and spontaneous effort to overthrow the leaders of the Islamic Republic in favor of a secular, pro-Western "democracy."
Yet, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that, whereas there are surely thousands of sincere and committed activists and participants in the recent protests, what we are witnessing may very well be the culmination of years of American infiltration and manipulation of both the Iranian establishment and public.
Back in 2005, the United States government was already funding groups it designated as terrorist organizations to carry out violent attacks within Iran in order to destabilize the Iranian government. In 2007, ABC News reported that George W. Bush has signed a secret "Presidential finding" which authorized the CIA to "mount a covert “black” operation to destabilize the Iranian government." These operations, according to current and former intelligence officials, included "a coordinated campaign of propaganda broadcasts, placement of negative newspaper articles, and the manipulation of Iran's currency and international banking transactions."
In May of that same year, the London Telegraph reported that Bush administration zealot John Bolton revealed that an American military attack on Iran would “be a ‘last option’ after economic sanctions and attempts to foment a popular revolution had failed.” Two weeks later, the Telegraph independently verified the ABC report, saying that, “Mr. Bush has signed an official document endorsing CIA plans for a propaganda and disinformation campaign intended to destabilize, and eventually topple, the theocratic rule of the mullahs.”
Daniel McAdams tells us that, at the time, "the president met with the Congressional Star Chamber, the “gang of 8″ House and Senate leaders, and was granted the authorization to use some $400 million for among other things, as the Washington Post reported, “activities ranging from spying on Iran’s nuclear program to supporting rebel groups opposed to the country’s ruling clerics…"
Then, in early May 2008, Counterpunch's Andrew Cockburn revealed that "Six weeks ago, President Bush signed a secret finding authorizing a covert offensive against the Iranian regime that, according to those familiar with its contents was 'unprecedented in its scope.'"Bush’s secret directive covers actions across a huge geographic area – from Lebanon to Afghanistan – but is also far more sweeping in the type of actions permitted under its guidelines – up to and including the assassination of targeted officials. This widened scope clears the way, for example, for full support for the military arm of Mujahedin-e Khalq, the cultish Iranian opposition group, despite its enduring position on the State Department's list of terrorist groups.
Similarly, covert funds can now flow without restriction to Jundullah, or "army of god," the militant Sunni group in Iranian Baluchistan – just across the Afghan border - whose leader was featured not long ago on Dan Rather Reports cutting his brother-in-law's throat.
Other elements that will benefit from U.S. largesse and advice include Iranian Kurdish nationalists, as well the Ahwazi Arabs of southwest Iran.Of course, US officials denied any "direct funding" of Jundallah, but admitted regular contact since 2005 with its leader Abd el Malik Regi, who was widely reputed to be involved in heroin trafficking from Afghanistan. Funding has reportedly been funneled through Iranian exiles with connections in Europe and the Gulf States.
Furthermore, on June 29, 2008, Seymour Hersh of the New Yorker confirmed all of these reports, writing, “Late last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and Congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country’s religious leadership.” Among the activities Hersh cited were "gathering intelligence about Iran's suspected nuclear-weapons program", "undermining Iran's nuclear ambitions" and "trying to undermine the government through regime change [by] working with opposition groups and passing money."
But the US campaign against Iran didn't come to a halt with the ascension of President Obama. There is no evidence to conclude that the $400 million dollars Bush signed off on has been put to different use (like, say, funding public schools or healthcare.) In early June 2008, Justin Raimondo of Antiwar wrote, "Obama, with his peace overtures [to Iran], serves as the smiley-face mask for some pretty loathsome activities. The U.S. government claims to be fighting terrorism, yet is sponsoring groups that plant bombs in mosques, kidnap tourists as well as Iranian policemen, and fund their activities with drug-running in addition to covert subsidies courtesy of the U.S. taxpayers." He continues,"What’s going on in Iran today – a sustained campaign of terrorism directed against civilians and government installations alike – is proof positive that nothing has really changed much in Washington, as far as U.S. policy toward Iran is concerned. We are on a collision course with Tehran, and both sides know it. Obama’s public "reaching out" to the Iranians is a fraud of epic proportions. While it’s true that our covert terrorist attacks on Iran were initiated under the Bush regime, under Obama we’re seeing no letup in these sorts of incidents; if anything, they’ve increased in frequency and severity."Days before the Iranian election, a suicide-bomber killed at least 25 people, and wounded over 125 others, inside a prominent Shi'a mosque in the city of Zahedan, in the southeast province of Sistan-Baluchistan. The rebel Sunni group, Jundallah, which is linked to the US, claimed responsibility for the blast, which was immediately followed up by attacks on banks, water-treatment facilities, and other key installations in and around Zahedan, including a strike against the local campaign headquarters of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Last year, Jundallah ( which is committed to establishing a Baluchi Islamic state in southeastern Iran and parts of Pakistan and one of whose founding members is allegedly the infamously waterboarded al Qaeda operative Khalid Sheikh Mohammed) kidnapped 16 Iranian policemen and videotaped their execution. There was also recently an attempted bombing of an Iranian airplane, which took off from the southwestern city of Ahvaz on the Iraqi border, which has a heavily Arab population. These recent events add up to what Raimondo refers to as "a small-scale insurgency" arising in Iran’s southern provinces.
Both the White House and State Department immediately denounced these attacks and denied any involvement in what they called "recent terrorist attacks inside Iran." Furthermore, there were reports that the Obama administration was considering adding Jundallah to the State's Department's list of terrorist organizations. However, analyst Steve Weissman notes, "the administration suddenly backed away from making the terrorist designation or from otherwise indicating that it would stop the destabilization campaign."
(Incidentally, one of the only two provinces in Iran that went for Mousavi last Friday was Sistan-Baluchistan and crowds of about 2,000 people have taken to the streets in Ahvaz since the election.)
Support for Jundallah - which in what could be the result of a savvy public relations suggestion by the Pentagon, recently changed its name to the Iranian People's Resistance Movement - is just one way the United States has worked to foment an anti-Iranian united front within the country on the verge of the Presidential elections. As such, we are told, "the U.S. is, in effect, conducting a secret war against Tehran, a covert campaign aimed at recruiting Iran’s ethnic and religious minorities – who make up the majority of the population in certain regions, such as in the southeast borderlands near Pakistan – into a movement to topple the government in Tehran, or, at least, to create so much instability that U.S. intervention to 'keep order' in the region is justified."
Ken Timmerman, the executive director of the right-wing Foundation for Democracy in Iran, which is the Persian Service of Voice of America (VOA), "spilled the beans on activities of the other arm of US meddling overseas, the obscenely mis-named National Endowment for Democracy, in a piece written one day before the election," McAdams tells us. Timmerman apparently stated that “there’s the talk of a 'green revolution' in Tehran," prompting McAdams to "wonder where that 'talk' was coming from. Timmerman did not appear to be writing from Iran." McAdams continues,Timmerman went on to write, with admirable candor and honesty, that:
“The National Endowment for Democracy has spent millions of dollars during the past decade promoting ‘color’ revolutions in places such as Ukraine and Serbia, training political workers in modern communications and organizational techniques.
“Some of that money appears to have made it into the hands of pro-Mousavi groups, who have ties to non-governmental organizations outside Iran that the National Endowment for Democracy funds.”
Yes, you say, but what does a blow-hard propagandist like Timmerman know about such things? Well, he should know! His very spooky Foundation for Democracy in Iran has its own snout deep in the trough of NED’s “open covert actions” against the Iranian government.
How does the “Foundation for Democracy in Iran” seek to “promote democracy” in Iran with our tax dollars? Foundation co-founder Joshua Muravchik gives us a hint in his subtly-titled LA Times piece, “Bomb Iran.”Additionally, Weissman warns of Timmerman's devious sincerity: "Please note that this comes from a very involved right-wing critic who personally knows the expatriate Iranian community," he writes. "It is impossible to know how much government money went to these groups, since Congress has purposely exempted the National Endowment for Democracy from having to make public how it spends taxpayer money."
Even more recently, commentator Stephen Lendman reports that former Pakistani Army General Mirza Aslam Beig told Pasto Radio on June 15 that "undisputed" intelligence proves CIA interference in the internal affairs of Iran. "The documents prove that the CIA spend $400 million inside Iran to prop up a colorful-hollow revolution following the election" and to incite regime change for a pro-Western government.
So, are we finally seeing that $400 million pay off in Iran this past week?
There are plenty of clues that reveal the Iranian street protests we're seeing daily in the news may not be all we're told they are. Indeed, the sheer numbers of protesters are impressive and anyone who feels that an injustice has occurred should certainly take to the streets - and not be subject to any sort of police brutality - but much of what we've seen and heard in the past two weeks shows signs of orchestration and bears fingerprints of foreign manipulation.
Many of the protesters we have seen are well-dressed westernized young people in Tehran who are carrying signs written in English, reading, “Where is My Vote?” and other such slogans in English. If the young voters of Iran were addressing their frustrations to their own government, why weren't they speaking the same language? Protesters seen in many YouTube videos and interviewed on American television also speak perfect English. An early message received through a social networking site after the election, sent to the National Iranian American Council and subsequently reported by the American media, came from (allegedly) an Iranian in Tehran. It read:“I am in Tehran. Its 3:40 in the morning. I’ve connected with you [by hacking past the government filter]. It’s a big mess here. People are yelling from their houses – ‘death to the dictator.’ They are setting up a military government. No one dares to go out. No one has seen Mousavi today. Rumor has it that they have arrested him. I don’t have an email but I will contact you again.
Help us.”The idea of an Iranian, aware of the long history of US interference in Iranian affairs, beseeching an audience in America for "help" is, to put it lightly, dubious.
(The same should definitely be said about a recent OpEd featured in the New York Times last Sunday which was supposedly written by "a student in Iran." The article, clearly hoping to galvanize the American readership into strongly supporting pro-Mousavi protesters against the Iranian government, was almost surreal. In it, the author - curiously named "Shane M." which is perhaps the least Iranian name ever - denies the accuracy of pre-election polling by writing, "let’s not cloud the results with numbers that were, like bagels, stale a week later." Later, he describes a scene from the widespread pre-election pro-Mousavi street parties in Tehran, including this observation: "A girl hung off the edge of a car window “Dukes of Hazzard” style." What possible young "Iranian student" would casually reference bagels and Dukes of Hazzard is beyond me, but I can probably think of a few CIA agents that may enjoy both.)
As for the widespread claim, published in nearly every major newspaper, that Mousavi had been disappeared, imprisoned, or put under house arrest, it obviously wasn't true considering that the very next day Mousavi was addressing a crowd of tens of thousands in the middle of Tehran from the roof of his car.
Furthermore, the chants we hear of “death to the dictator, death to Ahmadinejad” don't make much sense coming from Iranian citizens. As Paul Craig Roberts points out, "Every Iranian knows that the President of Iran is a public figure with limited powers. His main role is to take the heat from the governing grand Ayatollah. No Iranian, and no informed westerner, could possibly believe that Ahmadinejad is a dictator. Even Ahmadinejad’s superior, Khamenei, is not a dictator as he is appointed by a government body that can remove him." Roberts goes on to say,The demonstrations, like those in 1953, are intended to discredit the Iranian government and to establish for Western opinion that the government is a repressive regime that does not have the support of the Iranian people. This manipulation of opinion sets up Iran as another Iraq ruled by a dictator who must be overthrown by sanctions or an invasion.Early reports of the Tehran rallies revealed that pro-Mousavi protesters were throwing rocks at Iranian police and security forces, as well as burning police motorcycles, city buses, and even private and government buildings. In contrast, we also heard of riot police beating protesters, gas and water cannons being used on crowds, and Basiji paramilitary groups opening fire on peaceful demonstrators. Even though Iranian officials have blamed recent street violence on Mousavi supporters and marchers point to pro-government gangs, accusing them of staging incidents in order to justify further "crackdown" of dissent, the truth may be even more sinister. As one pro-Mousavi protester, who has taken part in every single march so far this week, told Newsweek, "I think some small terrorist groups and criminal gangs are taking advantage of the situation." American money well-spent, perhaps.
According to the national intelligence services, a group of US-linked terrorists who had planned to set off twenty explosions in Tehran were discovered. Nevertheless a bomb still went off near the shrine of Iran's revolutionary founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, killing one and injuring two.
Despite the rise in violence in the past week, Khamenei has consistently differentiated between what he believes are rebel groups and non-political protesters and "the electoral fans and supporters" of Mousavi. He is quoted as saying that "those who devastate the public assets and private belongings of the people are carrying out the aggressive actions without any political purposes" and urged the defeated presidential candidates to utilize "legal venues" to voice their complaints. Khamenei stated, "the destiny of elections would be determined on the ballots, not on the palm of the streets."
Officials in the Iranian government are well-aware, and appropriately suspicious, of foreign meddling in their domestic affairs. Ali Larijani, the pragmatic, moderate conservative Speaker of Parliament and frequent Ahmadinejad opponent, said recently in a live televised speech, "those who under the mask of political fans of a certain movement or candidate impose damages to the public properties or paralyze the daily life of ordinary people are not among the protestors who want their votes to be virtuously preserved," adding that "the liberty of demonstrations should be respected, and those who are in charge of issuing certifications to legitimize the protesting rallies should cooperate and issue them constructively."
The Western media is certainly not helping matters. It should be remembered, first off, that both the BBC and New York Times played important roles in the 1953 overthrow. Bill Van Auken's The New York Times and Iran: Journalism as State Provocation tells us of the documentation of journalism as the media arm of the imperial state, including the direct military participation of one of its CIA-connected reporters in the coup against Mossadegh:In 1953, [the New York Times] correspondent in Tehran, Kennett Love, was not only a willing conduit for CIA disinformation, but also acknowledged participating directly in the coup. He subsequently wrote of giving an Iranian Army tank column instructions to attack Mossadegh's house. Afterwards, the Times celebrated the coup and demanded unconditional support for the Shah’s regime.The BBC is known to have spearheaded Britain's own propaganda campaign, broadcasting the code word ("exactly") that launched the coup d'état itself. Even the rise and importance of new media has to be viewed critically - something Western journalists aren't very good at. CNN recently created a new disclaimer icon to account for all the "unverified" material they've been broadcasting 'round the clock in their effort to stand with protesters and against the Iranian government.
The Iranian "twitter boom" has, to a certain extent, been engineered by a small group of anti-Ahmadinejad advocates in the United States and Israel. Whereas media organizations excitedly report about young Iranians twittering away on the streets of Tehran, it's clear that most of the activity is simply Americans "tweeting" amongst themselves. Nevertheless, the US government requested that Twitter postpone a scheduled downtime for maintenance so that tweeting from Iran could go uninterrupted. But, of course, this isn't meddling. Additionally, Caroline McCarthy of CNET News reports that "Users from around the world are resetting the location data in their profiles to Tehran, the capital of Iran, in order to confuse Iranian authorities who may be attempting to use the microblogging tool to track down opposition activity." While I'm not sure about "confusing" Iranian authorities, I am sure that actions like this serve to overhype the scope, reach, and importance of social networking and alternative media in Iranian politics and activism. The voices of the Iranian people should, of course, be heard and listened to - but the twittering mass of American, European, and Israeli support can hardly be said to speak on behalf of the Iranian public.
This disingenuous statement of President Obama may offer us some insight. In the early days of the post-election protests, he said, "It is not productive, given the history of US and Iranian relations to be seen as meddling in Iranian elections."
American meddling, Mr. Obama? Never! Especially not when our government is responsible for thirty years of sanctions, overt and covert operations designed to weaken one of the only countries that has ever successfully stood up to American imperialism in the face of aggressive efforts to foment dissent and promote regime change.

DMG group officer made ambassador to France

2009-06-30T22:18:00.001+06:00

DMG group officer made ambassador to France

ISLAMABAD, June 24: The federal government has appointed an officer of the district management group (DMG) Pakistan’s ambassador to France, creating unease among career foreign service diplomats.
Jahanzaib Khan is probably the first DMG officer to get an ambassadorial assignment and that too in one of the most important capitals in the world.
Earlier, Jalil Abbas Jilani, High Commissioner in Canberra and a relative of the prime minister, had been tipped as the next ambassador to France.
Some officials alleged that the appointment had been made under pressure from the presidency, but presidential spokesman Farhatullah Babar said the prime minister’s office made all foreign appointments and Mr Khan had worked for the embassy in Paris as commercial counsellor.
Mr Khan’s deputy at the embassy, Rafiuz Zaman Siddiqui, a career diplomat, is senior to him.
Contrary to a tradition of posting Grade-22 diplomats to Paris, the government has made the new appointment of an officer who is in BPS 20.
According to sources, diplomats belonging to the 12th Common — a much senior batch of civil servants than Mr Khan’s — have only recently begun getting posted as ambassadors in lesser known capitals. They said Mr Khan’s appointment appeared to be a part of the policy to appease the district management group. Another DMG officer, Sohail Ahmed, was earlier appointed chairman of the Federal Bureau of Revenue.—Baqir Sajjad Syed

Pakistan's Founder Jinnah Has No Place In His Homeland

2009-06-30T22:12:00.002+06:00

Pakistan's Founder Jinnah Has No Place In His Homeland

This picture was an official handout from the Presidency on June 26, 2009, showing President Zardari and Prime Minister Gilani receiving Pakistan's cricket team, winners of the T20 World series. The portraits of the PPP leaders can be seen in the background. No trace of the official portrait of the Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Pakistan's Founding Father.

The current democracy in Pakistan was installed by the United States. All the parties in power now in the country are pro-American and pro-Indian: the PPP, MQM, JUI-F and ANP. The last one, ANP, spent most of its career supporting separatist ideas. MQM's chief has just given a statement that opposes the very independence of Pakistan saying the country should not have been "partitioned" from India [someone needs to teach him history; the day Pakistan got independent, India was still a British colony and wasn't officially independent until one more day.] But these ruling parties are not alone in completely ditching the Pakistani flag and the official portraits of the Founding Father of the nation. There is PMLN, JI, and other smaller parties that never raise the Pakistani flag in their rallies or public events.

This is how The News International, the largest Pakistani English-language daily newspaper, reported the story on Saturday, June 27:
The portraits of Founder of Pakistan Quaid-e-Azam Muhammed Ali Jinnah have been removed from the Prime Minister House and Presidential House, Geo News revealed Saturday.Two days ago, President Asif Ali Zardari hosted a reception in the honour of national cricket team on winning the ICC Twenty20 World Cup title. On this occasion, the team players and officials had a group photo with President Zardari and Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani.There are pictures of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, Benazir Bhutto, Bilawal Zardari Bhutto and President Zardari without any picture of founder of Pakistan are seen hung in the backdrop of photo.Similarly, an Internship Award ceremony was held with PM Gilani in chair on Friday. On this occasion, the stage was decorated with the pictures of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, Benazir Bhutto, President Zardari and PM Gilani; however, there was no picture of Quaid-e-Azam.In a similar photograph, President Zardari was administering oath of Federal Mohtasib to Dr Shoaib Suddle; however, the backdrop flashed with a picture of Quaid-e-Awam sans any photo of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammed Ali Jinnah.Similarly, in a meeting with US delegation, no photograph of Muhammed Ali Jinnah was visible.Under law, to hang the portrait of Quaid-e-Azam at offices of government officials, President and Prime Minister is compulsory.

I still stand by my belief that the existing political elite in Pakistan is inept, uncreative and now compromised thanks to the 'outreach' done by the US and the UK embassies in Islamabad.

The best way is still this:

1. Ban any political party that is based on ethnicity/language. This will eliminate 98% of these parties.

2. Enforce fair and free internal elections, monitored by the Election Commission of Pakistan. No party allowed to run for office without this condition.

3. An interim, technocratic government in Islamabad for a minimum of five years, assigned to execute a visionary plan of reform that would include more administrative provinces and new laws organizing political activity and absolute focus on economic and education rebuilding.

4. Harsh measures against politicians who try to defy this plan. Harshest measures if necessary.

5. Stern warning to countries such as the US and UK to desist from interfering in Pakistan's internal matters. If they are allies, then they should support the stabilization of Pakistan. See this PPPistan or Nawazistan or Altafistan or Pakistan?

A Minute’s Silence For The Death Of Common Sense, Please.

2009-06-30T22:10:00.000+06:00

A Minute’s Silence For The Death Of Common Sense, Please.

Just when you think our so called ‘elected representatives’ can’t embarass us anymore, they tend to prove us wrong.
The Sindh Assembly has this morning held a minute’s silence as a mark of respect to Michael Jackson, on his sad demise. Yes, you can read that again.
Our army is busy fighting a bitter war against foreign funded terrorists, over 3 million of our people have been made homeless and we’re facing what could potentially be the worst crisis in our history if not dealt with properly. Our politicians on the other hand just cannot grasp the seriousness of the situation.
The Federal Information Minister feels it important to entertain himself with a $15,000 lapdance from an Indian hooker while on a begging round. Is begging that stressful? Maybe he should learn something off his President who doesn’t seem to mind it at all.
When did the president or any senior members of his team last visit the affected areas to show solidarity with our people? Why have they never bothered turning up and paying respect at the homes of our fallen soldiers? What have they contributed out of their own pockets towards caring for our internal refugees?
The point isn’t whether Jacko was a global superstar or that he had reportedly converted to Islam – Michael Jackson had absolutely f*ck-all to do with Pakistan, its history, its culture, its language, its people and its politics. This is the Provincial Assembly of Sindh, Pakistan, not the California State Assembly. Or are we now officially the 51st state?
What next? Will Muttahida’s gun toting ‘activists’ and PPP Jayalas forcefully shut all businesses in Karachi for a shutter-down strike next time Britney shaves her head? Or will we have a national day of mourning when Paris Hilton’s little pooch dies?
Why have we as a nation become so passive about these incompetent crooks who are turning us into a joke? And not a funny one either.

Talks with Tehran

2009-06-30T22:08:00.000+06:00

Talks with Tehran to be affected, says Obama: Iranian panel to report on poll

TEHRAN, June 26: Iran’s election watchdog is to set up a panel, including representatives of defeated candidates, to report on the disputed poll, its spokesman said on Friday while insisting the election was the country’s cleanest ever.
In Washington, US President Barack Obama said that direct dialogue with Tehran would be affected by events in Iran, but said multilateral talks would continue.
The Group of Eight leading world powers, meanwhile, urged Tehran to halt post-election violence but without questioning the result of the June 12 poll.
The Guardians Council will form a commission, including representatives of defeated candidates, to carry out a partial re-count and draft a report on the poll, spokesman Abbasali Kadkhodai said, quoted by ISNA news agency.
“The Guardians Council has decided to set up a special commission of political figures and representatives of candidates who have been protesting (poll results) to draft a report on the election,” Mr Kadkhodai said.
“Ten per cent of the votes will be re-counted in the presence of this commission and a report for the public will be published,” he said, adding that media would also be present for the re-count.
Mr Kadkhodai earlier rejected opposition allegations of fraud in the poll.
“After 10 days of examination, we did not see any major irregularities,” he told the state news agency IRNA.
“We have had no fraud in any presidential election and this one was the cleanest election we have had. I can say with certainty that there was no fraud in this election.”
Two weeks after the vote, protests in Tehran over President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s re-election have receded after the authorities responded to the worst crisis since the 1979 Islamic revolution with a crackdown.
State-run English-language Press TV said on Thursday that 20 people have been killed in the protests, including eight members of Iran’s Basij militia.
Other state media have reported that 17 civilians have been killed.
Mr Obama, who has made diplomatic overtures to Iran since taking office, said the crackdown on protesters would affect direct dialogue with Tehran.
“There is no doubt that any direct dialogue or diplomacy with Iran is going to be affected by the events of the last several weeks,” Mr Obama said.
But “you’re going to continue to see some multilateral discussions with Iran,” he added.
Foreign ministers from G8 leading powers meeting in Italy urged Iran to immediately put a halt to post-election violence but refrained from calling into question the poll result.
Despite calls from Italy and France for a firm condemnation, the G8 foreign ministers backed off from harsh criticism and instead said the crisis should be settled “soon” through peaceful means.
“We want violence to stop immediately,” Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini.
“We are concerned about the aftermath of the Iranian presidential election,” the foreign ministers from Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States said in their statement.
“We fully respect the sovereignty of Iran. At the same time we deplore post-election violence which led to the loss of lives of Iranian civilians and urge Iran to respect fundamental human rights.”
But in a nationally broadcast sermon at Friday noon prayers in Tehran, a cleric, Ahmad Khatami called upon the government to impose even tighter controls on the foreign media.
“How can they be allowed to wander round the country with their satellite phones giving information that provokes people to take to the streets,” he asked.
Mr Khatami suggested that any demonstrator who resorted to violence during the protests should face the toughest punishment. “Anyone who takes up arms against the people is a mohareb and Islam has prescribed the toughest punishment for such offenders,” he said.—AFP

Kayani spends day in S. Waziristan:

2009-06-30T22:02:00.001+06:00

Kayani spends day in S. Waziristan: Troops told to avoid civilian deaths: COAS

ISLAMABAD, June 25: Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani visited South Waziristan on Thursday and spent the day interacting with the field commanders and troops.
The visit indicated that the stage was set for a full-scale operation against Baitullah Mehsud and his group.
It is believed that the army chief discussed operational details of the offensive during his stay in Wana, the regional headquarters, and Tiarza, a 'hotspot' in the area. He was briefed on the situation by the general officer commanding.
Gen Kayani urged local tribes to support the government and the armed forces in their campaign to isolate and eliminate terrorists.
According to an official, he said that most of the local tribes were peaceful and terrorist elements wanted to impose their own version of Islam.
He praised troops’ performance and high morale and offered Fateha for security personnel who had lost their lives during the operation.
Gen Kayani said the army was executing a deliberate ‘campaign plan’ to re-establish the writ of the state while ensuring that there was minimum loss of life and damage to property.
He said the security forces had been asked to go for precision strikes and avoid collateral damage even if they had to take risks.
He thanked the people of the country for their whole-hearted support which, he said, was an essential element for the success of unconventional military operations. He paid tribute to the role played by air force in the operations.
Military sources said troops and equipment had been positioned and more troops were available in reserve.
They said a full-scale operation in South Waziristan was likely to be launched soon.
Meanwhile, security personnel apprehended three terrorists and seized arms and ammunition in Malakand and Dir on Wednesday and Thursday. According to the ISPR, a hunt for terrorists was carried out in Akhun Kale, Gamon bridge, Rangeela, Khazana, Wakilabad, Baiddarra and Garai in Swat. A suspected terrorist of Khawazakhela was held in Besham.
A soldier was injured in a clash in Kabal.
A similar operation was carried out around Zhoaib and Lal Qila in Dir.
Two soldiers were injured by a mine and another by firing.A militant commander, Iqbal, and another terrorist were arrested and a signalling device, two rifles with ammunition and two small machine-guns were seized during a search operation in Shewa and Utala areas of Adinzai.
Army engineers were reported to be repairing the Malakand-Barrikot, Barrikot-Udigram and Udigram-Balogram roads.
In Mingora, 43 tube-wells have been made functional.Five truckloads of food and relief goods were distributed among displaced people.

The Military Intervenes

2009-06-26T22:36:00.000+06:00

The Military Intervenes To Affirm Nuclear Pakistan Is Here To Stay

“While the US media continues to leak information about possible compromise by the Zardari government on the Pakistani nuclear program [there are reports that Mr. Zardari has agreed to transfer used Pakistani uranium to US for disposal, in addition to reports about increased access for foreigners to the offices of the Strategic Plans Division, which oversees the nuclear and strategic arsenal], the Pakistani military intervenes once again at the highest level to confirm this will not be allowed. This is reassuring because it is difficult to trust an elected government that has come to power with full foreign backing and some of its key figures appear to be working on a foreign agenda.”

Who Says Pakistani

2009-06-26T22:35:00.000+06:00

Who Says Pakistani Nukes Are ‘Not Ready’?

We all heard and read the leaked and calculated propaganda in the American media that seeks to spread worldwide confusion and alarm about Pakistan. Part of this campaign is the recent interesting American reports that Pakistani nuclear weapons are stored ‘disassembled’, as if Pakistan made huge investment in its strategic weapons only to end up storing them in pieces. Here is a credible and strong argument that sets the record straight, from one of Pakistan’s eminent nuclear experts.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—This is in reference to your editorial of June 8, 2009, titled “Safe and sound ".

While I am appreciative of the broader position taken by you on the safety and security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons, on which there must be no doubt, western propaganda notwithstanding; there are at least two aspects that need to be seen in the correct perspective.
Firstly, while your assertion that Pakistan has invested heavily in the security of its facilities and weapons is absolutely valid, your interpretation that the warheads are 'stored in a disassembled state in more than one location. No warhead is attached to a delivery system. No delivery system is located in the same facility as the warhead parts' is basically speculative, conjectural and conveys a state of operational unpreparedness, which would be a very dangerous situation and seriously erode the credibility of our nuclear deterrence.

I have never seen any official statement, and I emphasize on 'any' official statement, depicting the status that you describe in your editorial. The best description that one comes across is the position that our weapons are not on hair trigger, contrary to the Cold War times regarding the American and Soviet nuclear weapons. Now, not being on hair trigger does not imply scattered and disassembled weapons. Somehow the latter perception seems to have caught the imagination, and needs to be corrected. Any military would want to strike a balance between operational readiness and preventing accidental or unauthorized use.
Secondly, I agree with your concern that there can be individuals in our society who may tend to think of an agenda to find links with people within Pakistan's strategic organisations to gain nuclear knowledge, thereby creating an 'insider threat'. This must, however, be seen in consideration of Pakistan's proactive response to such possibilities. Nuclear security is a multi-dimensional and robust mechanism that covers all aspects of security, including physical security tiers, intelligence systems, counter-intelligence set-ups, technical solutions to security and more importantly the so-called Personnel Reliability Programme (PRP) that amply covers the human factor risk. All individuals within the nuclear establishment are subjected to the PRP, which commences from background checks, police records, medical records, etc and goes on to include security screening, periodic, as well as random security clearances, closely monitored access controls, two-person rule, sensitive material accounting, etc. The list is long and stringent. While one is never complacent about security systems and one must never be- we should rest assured that any potential tendency of a possible 'insider threat' would be identified at the outset and would be nipped in the bud. Finally, much seems to have been made of the so-called US assistance in this area. To the best of my information, it has been extremely modest, focused on very elementary training and mostly inconsequential -- and most certainly non-intrusive. All of the security solutions in place are home-grown and entirely indigenous.

Taliban avert attacks with US equipment

2009-06-26T22:32:00.001+06:00

Taliban avert attacks with US equipment

Some fighters using infrared patches on shirts to signal they are ‘friends’
GAO official says few regulatory controls exist for military technology sold domestically
Lawmaker says infrared patches should be treated as munitions
Retired four-star general says risk may be overstated

Daily Times Monitor

LAHORE: Some Taliban fighters have been able to ward off attacks by US aircraft by wearing special infrared patches on their shirts that signal they are friends rather than foes.
The patches, which can also help suicide bombers get close to US targets, are supposed to be the property of the US government alone, but can be easily purchased over the Internet for about $10 each, a report published in The Washington Times had revealed. Some of the patches have been stolen during raids on US re-supply convoys in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and reveal an American flag when looked at with an infrared light and are designed to avoid friendly fire during night-time battles.
Few controls: In a recent investigation, the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) bought patches using fake names and a front company with only a valid credit card. Jonathan Meyer, assistant director of forensic audits and special investigations for the GAO, told The Washington Times: “Based on our conversations with the Department of Defence, terrorists have used US uniforms and the infrared patches to get close to US and allied forces on the battlefield and at bases. This is more of a potential suicide-bomber risk.” Meyer, who helped lead the GAO investigation, concluded that few regulatory controls exist for dual-use and military technology sold domestically.
Representative Bart Stupak, Michigan Democrat, who chairs the House Energy and Commerce oversight and investigations subcommittee, said the infrared patches are also made in China. “It is rather simple technology,” he said. “We not only sell this on the domestic market here, and they sell them to anybody, but you can get them from China, and the Chinese will sell them to others. They have been used by the enemy in the war. It’s of grave concern because you don’t know who is friendly or not,” he added.
“An enemy fighter wearing these [infrared] flags could potentially pass as a friendly service member during a night combat situation, putting US troops at risk,” the GAO report said. “Nevertheless, these items are completely legal to buy and sell within the US.” The report followed up on a 2008 GAO study that exposed the fact that military-surplus items, such as spare parts for fighter jets, could be purchased on eBay and Craigslist.
Munitions: Representative Brad Sherman, California Democrat and chairman of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee that deals with export controls, said that it may be time to treat the infrared patches as a munition that would need to be controlled through the Arms Export Control Act. “If there is an item that has only a military use, like the patches, the fact that they are non-lethal doesn’t mean we should not treat them as munitions,” he said.
Overstated: However, a retired four-star general, Jack Keane, said the risk had been overstated. “Since the beginning of warfare, people have been dressing up as the enemy to infiltrate,” he said. “We certainly have done this in the past to our enemies, and our enemies have done this to us.” But “it would seem to me that something we are using to help identify ourselves should not be available to the general public, and it should be something that is only acquired through military channels,” he added.
Lieutenant Colonel Patrick Ryder, a Pentagon spokesman, said the military was reviewing the report. “The Department of Defence takes force protection very seriously. As a matter of course, we are concerned any time sensitive equipment has the potential to fall into enemy hands,” he said.
A spokesman for the Justice Department’s National Security Division, Dean Boyd, said that since October 2007, the US government has created 20 counter-proliferation task forces to look at the issue. However, he said “no one is really taking responsibility” in the US government to deal with the problem. The National Security Council, the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security have declined comment on the GAO report.

Army in final stage of Swat offensive

2009-06-26T22:31:00.001+06:00

Army in final stage of Swat offensive

ISLAMABAD: The army said on Monday it had completed the exercise of pre-positioning forces and equipment in South Waziristan to launch a decisive action against Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan chief Baitullah Mehsood and his network.

Military spokesman Maj-Gen Athar Abbas told a press briefing that the preparatory manoeuvring phase had already started to clear a key road in Wana, the headquarters of South Waziristan.
The objective of the operation would be to dismantle ‘suicide attack schools’ being run by the Mehsud network, he said.
According to him, a large number of foreign terrorists were holed up there.
In reply to a question, Gen Abbas said there was no authentic information about the encirclement of Baitullah Mehsud. However, he added, the main leadership of militants was being continuously targeted and many of them were reported to have been killed and secretly buried at unknown places. ‘We, however, do not have evidence in hand.’
Maj-Gen Abbas said the Swat operation had entered a final phase. The last stronghold of terrorists in Biha valley had been secured and Shamozai area was being cleared, the ISPR chief said.
He said that search operations were continuing in the secured areas to ensure safe return of the displaced people. He said that all areas, except Kabal and Shamozai, were safe for government employees and hence they had been asked to return to their duty.
‘A security cover will be available for government employees and there is no cause of concern that could hinder their return.’
He said that 1,592 terrorists had been killed and over 60, including foreigners, captured since the operation began last month.
The spokesman said that success had been achieved on the basis of information provided by the arrested militants and intelligence reports.
Photographs of over 50 dead militants, secret tunnels and hideouts and arms and ammunition recovered during the operation were screened during the briefing.
Maj-Gen Abbas said the level of preparation by insurgents was astounding as tunnels, hideouts and the quantity of arms recovered spoke volumes for their preparation for a ‘full-scale war’.
He said that troops had neutralised a number of improvised explosive devices and destroyed several tunnels.
Meanwhile, the ISPR said 22 militants had been killed and five captured during an operation in Malakand division on Sunday and Monday. Fourteen militants were killed on Shamozai bridge alone.
Eight IEDs left on the bridge were defused.
Security forces have cleared Biha valley and Bartana, south of Chuprial. Three small tunnels were destroyed in Loi Namal.
A jirga handed over a militant to security forces in Bahrain. Four militants were caught in Wanai, Shalkosar, Bashkhela and Drushkhela.
Eight militants were killed and one was injured during clashes with a tribal lashkar in Lower Dir.

India issues warrants for 22 Mumbai suspects

2009-06-26T22:26:00.001+06:00

India issues warrants for 22 Mumbai suspects

MUMBAI, June 23: An Indian court issued arrest warrants on Tuesday for 22 Pakistani nationals accused of masterminding last year’s deadly Mumbai terrorist attacks, including the founder of a militant group recently freed by a Pakistani court.
An Indian prosecutor demanded that Islamabad extradite all the suspects, though Pakistan has vowed that it will not transfer any Mumbai suspects to India, saying instead it will try them in its own courts.

The warrants were issued in response to a prosecutors’ motion in the ongoing trial of Mohammed Ajmal Kasab, the only surviving suspected gunman in last year’s attacks that left some 166 dead in a three-day siege.
Among those sought for arrest were Hafiz Mohammed Saeed, founder of Lashkar-i-Taiba, which India blames for the launching attacks, and Zaki-ur-Rahman Lakhvi and Zarar Shah, two leaders of the group.

Pakistan arrested all three in December after Indian diplomats provided a dossier of evidence in a rare sharing of intelligence between the nuclear-armed rivals, who have fought three wars since independence. However, a court in Lahore earlier this month freed Saeed. Indian officials condemned the move.The Indian court’s issuance of arrest warrants on Tuesday had been expected, since New Delhi has long identified the 22 suspects as terrorists.

Still, the demand for extradition, which Pakistan is unlikely to meet, emphasised the animosity between the neighbours since teams of gunmen rampaged through Mumbai last November.
Public prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam said on Tuesday that the warrants would be handed to Interpol to deliver to the Pakistan government for extradition.
“We want the suspects to be sent to India to stand trial. There is sufficient evidence to prosecute them in India,” Nikam told The Associated Press.

On Tuesday, Nikam told Special Judge M.L. Tahiliyani that Saeed, Lakhvi and others planned the Mumbai terror attacks and gave training to those who carried out the assault.
Pakistan has acknowledged the Mumbai attacks were partly plotted on its soil.
Judge Tahiliyani is presiding over the trial of the only surviving suspected gunman, Kasab, who has pleaded not guilty to all charges against him in the Indian court, including waging war against the country and murder. Kasab, said to be in his early 20s, will face the death penalty if convicted

Confidential memo reveals US plan

2009-06-26T22:22:00.000+06:00

Confidential memo reveals US plan to provoke an invasion of Iraq

Jamie Doward, Gaby Hinsliff and Mark Townsend

A confidential record of a meeting between President Bush and Tony Blair before the invasion of Iraq, outlining their intention to go to war without a second United Nations resolution, will be an explosive issue for the official inquiry into the UK's role in toppling Saddam Hussein.
The memo, written on 31 January 2003, almost two months before the invasion and seen by the Observer, confirms that as the two men became increasingly aware UN inspectors would fail to find weapons of mass destruction (WMD) they had to contemplate alternative scenarios that might trigger a second resolution legitimising military action.

Bush told Blair the US had drawn up a provocative plan "to fly U2 reconnaissance aircraft painted in UN colours over Iraq with fighter cover". Bush said that if Saddam fired at the planes this would put the Iraqi leader in breach of UN resolutions.

The president expressed hopes that an Iraqi defector would be "brought out" to give a public presentation on Saddam's WMD or that someone might assassinate the Iraqi leader. However, Bush confirmed even without a second resolution, the US was prepared for military action. The memo said Blair told Bush he was "solidly with the president".

The five-page document, written by Blair's foreign policy adviser, Sir David Manning, and copied to Sir Jeremy Greenstock, the UK ambassador to the UN, Jonathan Powell, Blair's chief of staff, the chief of the defence staff, Admiral Lord Boyce, and the UK's ambassador to Washington, Sir Christopher Meyer, outlines how Bush told Blair he had decided on a start date for the war.
Paraphrasing Bush's comments at the meeting, Manning, noted: "The start date for the military campaign was now pencilled in for 10 March. This was when the bombing would begin."

Last night an expert on international law who is familar with the memo's contents said it provided vital evidence into the two men's frames of mind as they considered the invasion and its aftermath and must be presented to the Chilcott inquiry established by Gordon Brown to examine the causes, conduct and consequences of the Iraq war.

Philippe Sands, QC, a professor of law at University College London who is expected to give evidence to the inquiry, said confidential material such as the memo was of national importance, making it vital that the inquiry is not held in private, as Brown originally envisioned.

In today's Observer, Sands writes: "Documents like this raise issues of national embarrassment, not national security. The restoration of public confidence requires this new inquiry to be transparent. Contentious matters should not be kept out of the public domain, even in the run-up to an election."

The memo notes there had been a shift in the two men's thinking on Iraq by late January 2003 and that preparing for war was now their priority. "Our diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning," Manning writes. This was despite the fact Blair that had yet to receive advice on the legality of the war from the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, which did not arrive until 7 March 2003 - 13 days before the bombing campaign started.

In his article today, Sands says the memo raises questions about the selection of the chair of the inquiry. Sir John Chilcott sat on the 2004 Butler inquiry, which examined the reliability of intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war, and would have been privy to the document's contents - and the doubts about WMD running to the highest levels of the US and UK governments.
Many senior legal experts have expressed dismay that Chilcott has been selected to chair the inquiry as he is considered to be close to the security services after his time spent as a civil servant in Northern Ireland.

Brown had believed that allowing the Chilcott inquiry to hold private hearings would allow witnesses to be candid. But after bereaved families and antiwar campaigners expressed outrage, the prime minister wrote to Chilcott to say that if the panel can show witnesses and national security issues will not be compromised by public hearings, he will change his stance.

Lord Guthrie, a former chief of the defence staff under Blair, described the memo as "quite shocking". He said that it underscored why the Chilcott inquiry must be seen to be a robust investigation: "It's important that the inquiry is not a whitewash as these inquiries often are."
This year, the Dutch government launched its own inquiry into its support for the war.

Significantly, the inquiry will see all the intelligence shared with the Dutch intelligence services by MI5 and MI6. The inquiry intends to publish its report in November - suggesting that confidential information about the role played by the UK and the US could become public before Chilcott's inquiry reports next year.

The Zionist Elephant In The Room

2009-06-26T22:08:00.003+06:00

The Zionist Elephant In The Room

... BUT SEE IT AND YOU'RE 'RACIST'

Hello all ...

The political creed of Zionism has big ears and a long trunk and I think it's time that was pointed out. It also stampedes through our lives at every level and that needs to be said, too.

It has created a pincer-movement on the human mind by hijacking staggering amounts of political, corporate, banking and media power on one side and by using the fear of being called 'anti-Semitic' if you dare to state the bloody obvious.

They have been able to do this by equating in public perception that Zionism = Jewish people. It does not. Zionism is a political creed introduced by the House of Rothschild to advance the goals of the Illuminati families that are largely controlled by the Rothschilds.

When people think of Zionism they think of Jewish people. When they think of Israel they think of Jewish people. That's understandable given the propaganda, but it is seriously misleading and those instant connections need to be broken if we are going to understand what's going on here. Zionism means Rothschild just as Israel means Rothschild.

When we see the extraordinary number of Zionists in key positions around the world we are looking not at 'manipulating Jews', but manipulating Zionists representing the interests and demands of the Rothschilds.

Significant numbers of Jewish people are not Zionists and oppose that appalling creed while many Zionists are not Jewish. These include the Christian Zionists and Obama's vice-president, Joe Biden, who told Israeli television 'I'm a Zionist'. Here's the clip if you can stand it ... If, as Biden rightly says, you don't have to be a Jew to be a Zionist, how can it be a racial rather than a political movement? It can't. It's just made to appear like that to manipulate public perception because opposing Zionism then becomes opposing Jewish people as a whole and the 'you're a racist' card can be played over and over.

Far from protecting and advancing the interests of the mass of Jewish people it has often been devastating for them and caused millions to be labelled unfairly by the actions of the Zionist elite. On the Jews Against Zionism website one feature highlights how Rothschild Zionism targeted Jews who had lived for generations in Palestine side-by-side with Arabs in peace and harmony:

'The religious Jews who by virtue of their faith, clearly contradicted Zionist nationalism, and who had lived peacefully with their Arab neighbors for generations, became unwillingly identified with the Zionist cause and their struggle with the Arabs.

They requested the United Nations that Jerusalem be designated as a defacto international city. They appealed to the diplomatic corps assigned to Jerusalem -- but to no avail. They were hence confronted with the choice of either becoming a part of the Zionist State, which diametrically opposed the interests of Jews as a religion, or abandoning the land of which their forefathers were the first Jewish settlers.

Let's get this straight. Zionism doesn't give a damn about Jewish people. To the Rothschilds and their Zionist gofers and thugs the Jewish people as a whole are merely cattle to be used and abused as necessary - just like the rest of the human population.

The networks of the House of Rothschild were behind Hitler and the rise of the Nazi Party in the Rothschild heartland of Germany where they had changed their name from Bauer in 18th century Frankfurt and launched the dynasty that was to control global finance. After the war the Rothschilds used public sympathy for Jewish people targeted by the Nazis to press for a homeland in Palestine. This was the alleged reason for the founding of Zionism, but that is only part of it.

As I show in my books, the campaign to impose a Rothschild fiefdom in Palestine goes back at least to the earlier part of the 19th century and probably long before. It was given a massive boost with the Balfour Declaration in 1917 when the British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour declared in a letter his government's support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. This letter was sent by Balfour, an inner-circle member of an elite secret society called the Round Table, to Baron (Walter) Rothschild who funded the Round Table.

Today, Rothschild Illuminati fronts like the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg Group, Royal Institute of International Affairs, and others, still answer to the Round Table which string-pulls and coordinates from the shadows. This is why Zionists in government are invariably connected with these Rothschild-controlled organisations.

The Rothschilds funded the early settlers from Europe to relocate in post-war Palestine and they also funded and armed the terrorist groups, like Irgun, which bombed and terrorised Israel into existence in 1948, a campaign which forced 800,000 Palestinians to leave the land of their birth.

Israel is simply the State of Rothschild and how appropriate that they paid for the construction of the Israeli parliament building, the Knesset, and the Israel Supreme Court. The name Rothschild means Red-shield and it originates with the red shield 'Star of David' symbol (not a Jewish symbol before the Rothschilds) which they displayed on their house in Frankfurt ...

... Seen it somewhere before ...?

The very flag of Israel tells you who owns it. There are many reasons why the Rothschilds and their allies wanted to hijack Palestine and one was to keep the Middle East in a state of disruption and turmoil from which a global war can eventually be triggered to usher in the New World Order of world government dictatorship.

The creation of Israel is a means not an end and the Rothschilds will be quite happy to leave the Jewish population to their fate if it suits them. After all, they've done it before. The world's second biggest Zionist population is in the United States and given that both America and Israel are controlled by the Rothschild networks it is not hard to fathom why that slither of land in the Middle East receives around a third of all US overseas aid.

An average $3 billion a year is handed to the State of Rothschild as a result of decisions made by American administrations that are always, 'Republican' or 'Democrat', controlled by the Rothschilds. One hand of the network hands over the cash to another. This explains why the United States never talks about the arsenal of nuclear weapons stockpiled by one of the world's most trigger-happy states. Israel refuses to discuss them and the American policy, recently reconfirmed by Obama, is never to ask or bring up the subject.

The last two US administrations are testament to the extent of Zionist (Rothschild) control of America and thus its foreign policy, not least with regard to Iraq, the former land of Sumer and Babylon, which according to some just happens to be part of the 'Greater Israel' that the Zionists seek to secure. The 'Bush' government was the glove-puppet of the so-called neo-cons, or neoconservatives, whose only political philosophy in truth was the interests of Zionism.

At the heart of the Rothschild-controlled neocon cabal were Richard Perle (Zionist), Paul Wolfowitz (Zionist), Dov Zakheim (Zionist), Douglas Feith (Zionist), John Bolton (Zionist), Lewis Libby (Zionist), the list goes on and on. These were the people who orchestrated the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq on behalf of the Rothschilds.

Economic policy was dictated through the years of Reagan-Bush, Father Bush, Clinton and most of Boy Bush by Alan Greenspan (Zionist), chairman of the privately-owned US 'central bank', the Federal Reserve. Privately owned, that is, by the Rothschilds through a network of front people and organisations.

Greenspan introduced the policies of deregulation that culminated, as designed, in the free-for-all frenzy of greed by banks and financial markets in general that led to the crash in the last weeks of the Bush presidency. Greenspan resigned from the Fed before the consequences of his long-term game-plan exploded in lost homes, jobs and savings. He was replaced by Bernard Bernanke (Zionist).

Greenspan was enthusiastically supported in his deregulation through successive administrations by Treasury Secretaries in the Clinton years, Robert E. Rubin (Zionist) and Larry Summers (Zionist), and also by the President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the most powerful in the Fed cabal, Timothy Geithner (Zionist). When Mr. Fake Change won the presidency amid the gathering financial crisis, caused by all of the above, and others, he appointed Geithner as his Treasury Secretary and Summers as head of the White House Economic Council.

Both are protégés of Robert Rubin who resigned from Citigroup earlier this year for his role in 'advising' it to the brink of collapse. Obama's Budget Director is Peter Orszag (Zionist) who headed the company that advised the Icelandic Central Bank in the prelude to the crash of Iceland's financial system. This has led to Iceland being fast-tracked into the Rothschild-created European Union to 'save' its economy.

Orszag also advised the Russian Treasury when state-owned assets and resources were handed to Zionist oligarchs, including Roman Abramovich who is famous in the UK as the owner of Chelsea Football Club. Add to all this the fact that the World Bank is headed by Robert Zoellick (Zionist), who replaced Paul Wolfowitz (Zionist), and that the International Monetary Fund, or IMF, is run by Dominique Strauss-Kahn (Zionist).

Anyone still doubt that the Rothschild network controls global finance and therefore the lives and choices of virtually every man, woman and child on the planet? The Rothschilds are at the heart of the Obama White House in the form of Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel (Zionist) and Chief White House Advisor David Axelrod (Zionist). Emanuel has served in the Israeli army and his father was an operative with the Rothschild terrorist group, Irgun, as it bombed Israel into being. This included the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem in 1946 that killed 91 people.

Rahm Emanuel also worked closely Robert E. Rubin (Zionist) during the Clinton years to impose NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, which was designed from the start to be a stepping-stone to a North American, and eventually an American Union, along the lines of the EU. The Zionist world is very small indeed.

David Axelrod ran Obama's election campaigns and now oversees his every word slavishly read from his teleprompter screens. There is little that Obama says that his Zionist handlers don't tell him or give him to say. They have also ensured that US policy for Iran and the Persian Gulf is headed by Dennis Ross (Zionist) who has served Israeli interests in successive American administrations.

There will not be a cigarette paper behind the scenes between him and that trio of tyranny, Netanyahu, Lieberman, Barak, the prime minister, foreign minister and defence minister of Israel. Rothschild stooges, in other words. Zionist Mandelson works for the pyramid The most influential figure by far in the current British government is Peter Mandelson (Zionist) who continues to amass more titles and powers from the beleaguered Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

Mandelson is an insider operative for the Rothschilds and has frequently accepted hospitality from his close friend and associate, Nathaniel Rothschild. This week Mandelson called for the UK to join the (Rothschild) single European currency. Meanwhile, the hapless and hopeless Gordon Brown did as he was told and appointed Ivan Lewis (Zionist) to be minister of state with responsibility for, wait for it ...

British policy on the Middle East. Lewis, vice-chair of the Labour Friends of Israel, was an outspoken supporter of Israel's slaughter of the innocent in Gaza this year. Lewis said of his new job: 'My responsibility for the Middle East peace process is particularly poignant. I have never hidden my pride at being Jewish or my support for the State of Israel.' What chance do the Palestinians have of fairness and justice? None.

In France, as I mentioned last week, President Sarkozy (Zionist) is a long-time asset of Mossad, the Rothschild enforcement agency masquerading as the intelligence agency of Israel. Mossad has been implicated in terror attacks and other horrors all over the world because it represents the Rothschild global agenda and not the people of Israel.

Look also at the Zionist (Rothschild) control of the entertainment and media industry in the form of people like Fox News President Peter Chernin (Zionist); Paramount Pictures Chairman Brad Grey (Zionist); Walt Disney CEO Robert Igor (Zionist); Sony Pictures Chairman Michael Lynton (Zionist); Warner Brothers Chairman Barry Meyer (Zionist); CBS CEO Leslie Moonves (Zionist); MGM Chairman Harry Sloan (Zionist); and NBC/Universal Studios CEO Jeff Zucker (Zionist).

The Rothschilds control America

The Los Angeles Times columnist Joel Stein (Zionist) wrote an article proclaiming that Americans who don't think Jews (Zionists) control Hollywood are just plain 'dumb'. Stein went on: 'The Jews are so dominant. I had to scour the trades to come up with six Gentiles in high positions at entertainment companies. But lo and behold, even one of that six, AMC President Charles Collier, turned out to be a Jew! ...

As a proud Jew, I want America to know of our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood.' And not only Hollywood. Shahar Ilan, a daily features editor with the leading Israeli newspaper, Ha'aretz, wrote: 'The Jews do control the American media. This is very clear, and claiming otherwise is an insult to common knowledge'. Zionists have truly massive influence over the news media with the likes of Rupert Murdoch (Zionist) with his vast television and newspaper empire, and the Sulzberger family (Zionists) who own the New York Times.

The list is enormous across television, radio, newspapers and the Internet. When you look at the number of Zionists in key positions of power and control in politics, banking, corporations, news media, Hollywood and so on, it is sobering to think that Jewish people are just 1.7% of the American population and many of those won't be Zionists. What if the same situation happened with Arab people or Chinese, Irish or even black Americans?

There would be an outcry and questions asked about how one group can have so much influence over the lives of a whole nation, indeed many nations. And I stress again that, in the end, this control system leads to the Rothschilds and the spider they represent at the centre of the web.

B'nai Brith Front Man Harry Abrams

The Rothschilds established B'nai B'rith in 1843 to prevent exposure of the global Zionist networks. The ' BB' is an offshoot of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry and operates worldwide to brand as 'anti-Semitic' anyone who exposes the Rothschild operation.

In 1913, B'nai B'rith launched an organisation specifically to target and defame researchers, in fact anyone, who questions, criticises or exposes Israel and the ever-gathering Zionist influence across the world. With typical irony they called it the Anti-Defamation League, better known as the ADL, and claimed it was there to protect Jewish people. As Plato said: 'This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector'.

The ADL is, in fact, a sub-agency of the Israeli (Rothschild) centre for covert operations, the Mossad, which, according to a former agent, has the motto: 'By way of deception, thou shalt do war'. If that isn't the motto, it should be. The ADL is behind the introduction of 'hate laws' which are aimed at silencing dissent against Zionism or Israel. The Jewish academic, Noam Chomsky, said this of the ADL in his book, Necessary Illusions:

'The ADL has virtually abandoned its earlier role as a civil rights organization, becoming "one of the main pillars" of Israeli propaganda in the U.S., as the Israeli press casually describes it, engaged in surveillance, blacklisting, compilation of FBI-style files circulated to adherents for the purpose of defamation, angry public responses to criticism of Israeli actions, and so on.

These efforts, buttressed by insinuations of anti-Semitism or direct accusations, are intended to deflect or undermine opposition to Israeli policies, including Israel's refusal, with U.S. support, to move towards a general political settlement.' The American rabbi, Michael Lerner, agrees:

'The ADL lost most of it credibility in my eyes as a civil rights organization when it began to identify criticisms of Israel with anti-Semitism, still more when it failed to defend me when I was receiving threats to my life from right-wing Jewish groups because of my critique of Israeli policy toward Palestinians (it said that these were not threats that came from my being Jewish, so therefore they were not within their area of concern).'

Firstly, the ADL has never been a civil rights organisation. Its very purpose has been to take them away.

Secondly, it is not there to defend anyone, Jewish or otherwise. It's there to represent the sadistic interests of the House of Rothschild and the wider Illuminati.

It is so important that people are aware of this background to Zionism because at the moment it is basically speeding along unchallenged through lack of awareness and fear of being dubbed 'racist'.

Well, I couldn't care less what people say about me with regard to this or anything else. I want to uncover the truth, not win a popularity contest. Please, let's circulate this information as effectively as we can and bring it from the shadows to public attention.

We must refuse to be intimidated into silence over this.

Martin Luther King said: '... we must straighten our backs and work for our freedom. A man can't ride you unless your back is bent.' It is time to stand up, in every sense.

Obama's Undeclared War Against Pakistan Continues, Despite His Attempt to Downplay It

2009-06-26T21:59:00.002+06:00

Obama's Undeclared War Against Pakistan Continues,
Despite His Attempt to Downplay It

In a new interview, Obama said he has “no intention” of sending US troops into Pakistan.
But US troops are already in the country and US drones attack Pakistan regularly.

By Jeremy Scahill

Three days after his inauguration, on January 23, 2009, President Barack Obama ordered US predator drones to attack sites inside of Pakistan, reportedly killing 15 people. It was the first documented attack ordered by the new US Commander in Chief inside of Pakistan. Since that first Obama-authorized attack, the US has regularly bombed Pakistan, killing scores of civilians. The New York Times reported that the attacks were clear evidence Obama “is continuing, and in some cases extending, Bush administration policy.” In the first 99 days of 2009, more than 150 people were reportedly killed in these drone attacks. The most recent documented attack was reportedly last Thursday in Waziristan. Since 2006, the US drone strikes have killed 687 people (as of April). That amounts to about 38 deaths a month just from drone attacks.
The use of these attack drones by Obama should not come as a surprise to anyone who followed his presidential campaign closely. As a candidate, Obama made clear that Pakistan’s sovereignty was subservient to US interests, saying he would attack with or without the approval of the Pakistani government. Obama said if the US had “actionable intelligence” that “high value” targets were in Pakistan, the US would attack. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, echoed those sentiments on the campaign trail and “did not rule out U.S. attacks inside Pakistan, citing the missile attacks her husband, then-President Bill Clinton, ordered against Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan in 1998. ‘If we had actionable intelligence that Osama bin Laden or other high-value targets were in Pakistan I would ensure that they were targeted and killed or captured,’ she said.”

Last weekend, Obama granted his first extended interview with a Pakistani media outlet, the newspaper Dawn:

Responding to a question about drone attacks inside Pakistan’s tribal zone, Mr Obama said he did not comment on specific operations.
‘But I will tell you that we have no intention of sending US troops into Pakistan. Pakistan and its military are dealing with their security issues.’

There are a number of issues raised by this brief response offered by Obama. First, the only difference between using these attack drones and using actual US soldiers on the ground is that the soldiers are living beings. These drones sanitize war and reduce the US death toll while still unleashing military hell disproportionately on civilians. The bottom line is that the use of drones inside the borders of Pakistan amounts to the same violation of sovereignty that would result from sending US soldiers inside the country. Obama defended the attacks in the Dawn interview, saying:

“Our primary goal is to be a partner and a friend to Pakistan and to allow Pakistan to thrive on its own terms, respecting its own traditions, respecting its own culture. We simply want to make sure that our common enemies, which are extremists who would kill innocent civilians, that that kind of activity is stopped, and we believe that it has to be stopped whether it’s in the United States or in Pakistan or anywhere in the world.”

Despite Obama’s comments about respecting Pakistan “on its own terms,” this is how Reuters recently described the arrangement between Pakistan and the US regarding drone attacks:

U.S. ally Pakistan objects to the U.S. missile strikes, saying they violate its sovereignty and undermine efforts to deal with militancy because they inflame public anger and bolster support for the militants.
Washington says the missile strikes are carried out under an agreement with Islamabad that allows Pakistani leaders to publicly criticise the attacks. Pakistan denies any such agreement.

Pakistan is now one of the biggest recipients of US aid with the House of Representatives recently approving a tripling of money to Pakistan to about $1.5 billion a year for five years. Moreover, US special forces are already operating inside of Pakistan, along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border in Baluchistan. According to the Wall Street Journal, US Special Forces are:

training Pakistan’s Frontier Corps, a paramilitary force responsible for battling the Taliban and al Qaeda fighters, who cross freely between Afghanistan and Pakistan, the officials said. The U.S. trainers aren’t meant to fight alongside the Pakistanis or accompany them into battle, in part because there will be so few Special Forces personnel in the two training camps.

A senior American military officer said he hoped Islamabad would gradually allow the U.S. to expand its training footprint inside Pakistan’s borders.

In February, The New York Times reported that US forces are also engaged in other activities inside of Pakistan:

American Special Operations troops based in Afghanistan have also carried out a number of operations into Pakistan’s tribal areas since early September, when a commando raid that killed a number of militants was publicly condemned by Pakistani officials. According to a senior American military official, the commando missions since September have been primarily to gather intelligence.

It is clear—and has been for a long time— that the Obama administration is radically expanding the US war in Afghanistan deeply into Pakistan. Whether it is through US military trainers (that’s what they were called in Vietnam too), drone attacks or commando raids inside the country, the US is militarily entrenched in Pakistan. It makes Obama’s comment that “[W]e have no intention of sending US troops into Pakistan” simply unbelievable.

For a sense of how significant US operations are and will continue to be for years and years to come, just look at the US plan to build an almost $1 billion massive US “embassy” in Islamabad, which is reportedly modeled after the imperial city they call a US embassy in Baghdad. As we know very clearly from Iraq, such a complex will result in an immediate surge in the deployment of US soldiers, mercenaries and other contractors.

Operation to continue till all Taliban eliminated, says Malik

2009-06-26T21:54:00.001+06:00

Operation to continue till all Taliban eliminated, says Malik

ISLAMABAD: Interior Minister Rehman Malik made clear the government intention that the military operation against terrorists will continue till the last Taliban remnant is killed or tracked down by the forces.

Speaking to a group of media persons outside the Parliament House, Mr. Malik said latest reports indicate that the most troubled areas of Malakand and Swat had been cleared of the militants/terrorists and the forces in the second phase would stop Taliban from regrouping.

He said when each and every Pakistani citizen has stood up and says ‘No’ to Taliban, only then would it be possible to trace the sources who were providing finances, vehicles, infrastructure, ammunition, FM. Radio stations etc. to them.

Addressing the National Assembly earlier, interior minister said that the disturbance and suicide attacks in D.I. Khan were result of its location close to North and South Waziristan agencies as well as sectarian disturbance.

He assured the house that a detailed report on the D.I. Khan law and order would soon be presented in the lower house.

He told that two terrorists were nabbed by Islamabad police in the last twenty-four hours, one of whom intended to target the parliament house, while the other wanted to hit sensitive installations in Rawalpindi.

Responding to a query, the interior minister said that Pakistan was ready to nab anyone found guilty of Mumbai attacks to punish him under the law of land, provided India extends its cooperation. He however reiterated that there was no compromise on the principle that no Pakistani will be handed over to Indian authorities in the name of investigation.

‘Let me tell you that each Kalashnikov and every bullet is being provided to Taliban from Afghanistan and the Pakistan government has raised this issue with Afghan government at every available forum.

‘The terrorists who used to impose their own brand of Islam on Pakistani civilians have fled from Swat after having shaved their faces and now are on the run. We will not let them stay anywhere and would track them down,’ he added.

We have also urged the international community to help and expose such elements as our youth is being made drug addicted,’ he added.

‘We would not allow balkanization of the country and all the fanatic elements involved in target killings would be dealt with in real manner. Some elements are involved in target killing of Hazara and Punjabi settlers in Balochistan and the government would take them to task,’ he remarked.

On the murder of commander of Abdullah Mehsud group Qari Zainuddin, the minister said the investigation was on and all the aspects would be examined in the investigation.

Twenty20 Winner's Plea For Pakistan Cricket

2009-06-22T10:01:00.002+06:00

Twenty20 Winner's Plea For Pakistan Cricket

Pakistan captain Younus Khan has made an emotional appeal for teams to visit his troubled nation after lifting the Twenty20 World Cup at Lord's.

Younis Khan lifts the trophy above his head as his team celebrate victory

Younis dedicates World Cup to nation

Pakistan captain Younis Khan dedicated his team's World Twenty20 title to their troubled homeland on Sunday.

Pakistan defeated Sri Lanka by eight wickets to claim their first major title in 17 years at a sell-out Lord's with all-rounder Shahid Afridi named man of the match for his unbeaten 54 off 40 balls.

"We were underdogs and had less pressure, but we came good in the big games. It's a credit to the country and to the team," said Younis. "We hadn't won anything since Imran Khan's team at the World Cup in 1992. This is a gift to our nation. Hopefully, it will help cheer them up. "Afridi knows he's a great cricketer. He's a match winner and he's been fantastic for us."

Afridi was hailed as 'awesome' after the mercurial star led his country to the title. Afridi smashed his second consecutive half-century, while former captain Shoaib Malik made 24 not out during a match-winning partnership of 76 for the undefeated third wicket. "It was a pressure match. When I walked out to the wicket I was thinking I have to stay until the 20th over," said Shoaib. "Shahid was awesome today and all credit to him. I told him to stay at the wicket and I will get some runs, that we can finish the game.

He's a great cricketer." Afridi paid tribute to skipper Younis Khan. "I asked the captain to send me up the order and that's what he did," said Afridi. "He just said don't worry about anything, just go out and play your natural game. The guys were really motivated. The captain and coaches tell us to enjoy our cricket and entertain. That's great motivation.

" It was Sri Lanka's first defeat of the tournament, but skipper Kumar Sangakkara insisted his team will recover and become a better side. "I'm proud of the way we competed. We enjoy our cricket and I believe we can go forward from here," said Sangakkara. "We'll take this and come back stronger in next year's tournament. We have the best bowling unit in the world. "We'll get better, we'll learn. We look forward to getting tougher mentally and physically."

Twenty20 triumphs on longest day

2009-06-22T09:51:00.002+06:00

Twenty20 triumphs on longest day

Pakistan, that strange, sad nation that never seems to deliver good news, earned the right on Sunday to a raucously united celebration for the first time in 17 years.

On a midsummer afternoon in London, the national cricket team won the World Twenty20 Cup, beating Sri Lanka before a packed house at Lord's by eight wickets with eight balls to spare.
It is a seemingly immutable Pakistani tradition that its cricketers should be either appalling or brilliant, never messing about in between.

In this fortnight-long tournament, they have given a vivid demonstration of this - losing abysmally in a qualifier to England, who themselves had lost to the part-timers from Holland.
This phenomenon was embodied by their all-rounder Shahid Afridi, who until Friday had forgotten how to hit the ball and then played two blazing match-winning innings to take Pakistan to the trophy, first over the favourites South Africa and then Sri Lanka.

Pakistan were chasing a sub-par total of 138 for six on Sunday. Twice there was just a hint that they might be struggling to keep up with the run rate against the varied and imaginative Sri Lankan attack. Twice Afridi blasted the ball over mid-wicket for six to loosen the bonds.

There was excitement, all right but not much tension. After scrambling the winning run, he splayed his arms and legs in a victory gesture of raw exuberance not often seen at Lord's. Most of the team then faced east, knelt and praised Allah.

Their win illustrated the point that the art of winning World Cups - in football, rugby, cricket or whatever - is like winning at Ascot. The horse that storms to the front early on is rarely there at the end.

Sri Lanka, unbeaten before the final, ran out of puff: Tillakaratne Dilshan, the inventive opening bat who was named man of the tournament, was out for a fifth-ball duck and from then on they struggled, collapsing to 70 for six before the captain, Kumar Sangakkara, led a partial recovery.
For Pakistan, Sri Lanka were just the fall-guys. They always have to beat their own demons to prevail, which they have done only once before in a sporting event on this scale - the 1992 World Cup.

But above all, they have to do better than India, winners of the first Twenty20 final in 2007 but also-rans this time. Most of their supporters' banners made the point: "Are you watching, India?" (Knowing Indian cricket fans, almost certainly not. They would rather watch the test card than a Pakistan win.)

On the longest day of the year, the shortest form of cricket should have produced a great finale to end a tournament that, after a terrible opening ceremony, turned into a much-admired success.

In fact, it was a double anti-climax. The women's final, served as an hors d'oeuvre, was even more one-sided: England won by six wickets after bowling New Zealand out for 85.
England are unquestionably the best in the world at women's cricket. There may be another sport where this supremacy is true, though the list is not a long one. And the decision to play the two competitions together has raised the status of the women's game.
Indeed, the Twenty20 format works well for them, bringing out their skills in a way that longer games do not.

For the top male cricketers, a 240-ball match is an entertainment rather than a genuine examination of their cricketing merits. This event has again proved popular, as it did on its debut in South Africa two years ago. But cricket administrators are bound to wreck a good idea by overkill: it's an addiction with them. There are already signs that the public's appetite is being tested. And it is best not to exaggerate its success. In Britain, Sky has claimed its best viewing figures since it acquired a monopoly of live cricket on British television four years ago. But the base figure was a low one and this Twenty20 event has come nowhere near matching the 2005 Ashes as the focal point of national conversation. You only get that from being on the free-to-air channels.

In Britain, Susan Boyle remains more famous than Shahid Afridi. But not in Karachi.

Not today.

By Matthew Engel

Younus bows out a hero

2009-06-22T09:49:00.001+06:00

Younus bows out a hero

PAK vs SL, 21st Jun 2009

The Lord's: Pakistan captain Younus Khan announced his retirement from Twenty20 International cricket after leading his side to victory in the World Twenty20 Final at Lord's.
The 32-year-old waited until the end of his post-match press conference before dropping the bombshell, departing the scene without further elaboration.
Younus had earlier told the media throng of his delight in bringing some joy to a nation that has endured a difficult existence in recent times.
"Everybody knows, especially the players, that we needed a victory like that," said Younus. "Especially the World Cup, it's a big achievement for us and all credit goes to the boys and team management. I think it's a gift for the whole nation."
The right-handed batsman is hopeful his side's triumph - ultimately achieved through an eight-wicket victory against Sri Lanka on Sunday - will bring about a move to return international cricket to the country, a status that was revoked following the terrorist attack on Sri Lanka's cricketers in Lahore.
"Now we are champions - and everybody follows Twenty20 cricket these days - hopefully we will have some series or something like that," said Younus. "So I think that all of the countries must come to Pakistan. Everybody knows [the situation in Pakistan is] not good but it's not our [the players] fault. Youngsters, especially, need home series because if there is no cricket in Pakistan how can we motivate the youngsters, especially the school level and college level? So I think this will help to build us a new structure in Pakistan."
Pakistan's form going into the World Twenty20 had been poor - faring badly in the warm-up matches - and it hardly improved at the start of the tournament proper when they lost their first two games against established nations. Despite that, the outgoing skipper was always hopeful his side could prevail.
"Before the World Twenty20 I was chatting to the media and there were two or three teams [particularly] capable of reaching the last four - especially Pakistan and West Indies," said Younus. "And everybody thought I was mad. But I knew that Pakistan and West Indies had matchwinnners - especially in this form of the game - so I knew that if we reached our potential then we could reach the last four and then in the semis and final we would need our luck and the last two games we were lucky. That's why we won the World Cup."
And just a few minutes later Younus was gone - a happy, retiring, but never shy captain

Afridi the hero as Pakistan triumph

2009-06-22T09:11:00.002+06:00

Afridi the hero as Pakistan triumph

PAK vs SL, 21st Jun 2009

The Lord's: Pakistan beat Sri Lanka by eight wickets to win the World Twenty20 Final at Lord's.
Shahid Afridi capped another fine all-round performance when he made 54 not out from 40 balls to follow 1-20 with the ball.
Sri Lanka had appeared to give themselves a fighting chance when they reached 138-6 having been 32-4 at one stage.
That was not to account for a highly professional batting effort in response as Pakistan got home with eight balls to spare.
Pakistan's reply got off to a contrasting start from their opponent as Kamran Akmal hammered Angelo Mathews's third ball through the covers for a boundary as eight were taken from the opening over.
Lasith Malinga immediately replaced Mathews at the Nursery End and he bowled a much tighter first over - conceding just one - as Pakistan were pegged back.
Isuru Udana's second over then tipped the balance in favour of the batting side as 14 were taken from it - though not all of the runs were scored convincingly.
That forced Sri Lanka captain Kumar Sangakkara to take the pace off the ball through spinners Muttiah Muralitharan and Ajantha Mendis.
Akmal greeted Mendis by depositing him over midwicket for six with the final now entering its pivotal phase.
The Pakistan wicketkeeper-batsman carried on the attack to the Sri Lankan bowlers when he flicked Udana over midwicket for the second six of the innings.
With the situation reaching a critical position, the Sri Lankans made a belated breakthrough when Akmal's confidence got the better of him as he advanced down the track to Sanath Jayasuriya's first ball and was stumped for 37 (28 balls).
Pakistan continued to have the better of things against Mendis (who finished with 0-34) when his second over went for the 11 - including two perfectly timed boundaries by Shahzaib Hasan.
The opener was another to then suffer from a rush of blood when he top-edged a sweep off Muralitharan to short fine-leg at the start of the next over for 19.
Pakistan reached the halfway stage on 65-2, needing a further 74 from the last 10 overs.
Runs began to dry up - despite the presence of the big-hitting Afridi and Shoaib Malik at the crease - as the required rate hit eight for the first time at the start of the 13th over.
Clearly risks needed to be taken and Afridi was the right man for the moment - swinging Jayasuriya over midwicket for six and then cover-driving him for a boundary off the next ball.
Pakistan entered the last five overs on 103-2, needing another 36 from 30 balls.
With 19 runs needed from 14 balls, Afridi once again lifted the pressure on the batting side when he first swung Udana over midwicket for six and then tickled a no-ball to the leg-side boundary (bringing up his 50 off 37 balls in the process).
Just seven were then required off the last two overs and that equation was reduced to one from nine balls with Afridi fittingly on strike.
A leg bye was perhaps not the final flourish the batsman would have wished for but his joyous reaction at the end suggested he was not overly disappointed.
Afridi's partnership with Malik (24 not out) of 76 off 59 balls was an effort worthy of winning any one-day final.
Sri Lanka's earlier effort, after winning the toss, had centred around Sangakkara, who top-scored with 64 not out (off 52 balls) as the batting side recovered well following a disastrous start to their innings.
Mohammad Aamer opened up at the Pavilion End with a menacing wicket maiden, peppering Tillakaratne Dilshan with a succession of short-pitched deliveries before removing him off the fifth ball.
The right-hander attempted a pull but could only find Shahzaib at short fine-leg, who took a comfortable catch.
Disaster struck again for the Sri Lankans in the second over when Jehan Mubarak, elevated up the order, was removed by Abdul Razzaq for a second-ball duck. The left-hander got a leading edge, as he looked to work the ball to leg, and skied a second catch to Shahzaib, this time in the extra cover position.
Aamer didn't concede a run until his ninth ball, but then two boundaries came off successive deliveries from the bat of Sangakkara.
Jayasuriya struck the first six of the innings when he pulled Razzaq over midwicket at the start of the fourth over.
Razzaq got ample revenge off the fifth ball of the over, however, when Jayasuriya (17) edged a cut-shot onto his stumps.
Mahela Jayawardena (1) became Razzaq's third victim when he steered the ball into the hands of Misbah-ul-Haq standing in a second slip position.
Sri Lanka ended the Powerplay on a lamentable 34-4.
There was no let-up from Pakistan as that heralded the entry of spin duo Afridi and Saeed Ajmal into the attack - both among the seven leading wicket-takers in the tournament going into the final.
Malik replaced Ajmal at the Nursery End for the 10th over, at which point Chamara Silva swept the off-spinner for a boundary to bring up the 50.
Umar Gul then, in turn, replaced Malik as the anticipated arrival of the seamer was delayed no more. As has become a common theme, Gul's impact was instant as he removed Silva (14) with his third legitimate delivery when the batsman pulled tamely to midwicket.
Afridi continued the rout when he bowled Udana with a googly for one.
Sri Lanka went into the last five overs on 79-6 - with Sangakkara their last hope of posting a defendable total.
The left-hander brought up his half-century (44 balls) with a flick off his legs to the boundary that just evaded the leap of Shazaib at midwicket.
Sangakkara was assisted by Mathews (35 not out off 24 balls) in a stand of 68 for the sixth-wicket as 59 were accumulated from the last five overs to give Sri Lanka some hope with their potent bowling attack now required to pull one last rabbit out of the hat.
Alas, for them, it was not to be as Pakistan claim a victory that will not only constitute ample consolation for losing the inaugural World Twenty20 Final, in 2007, but also salvage some lost pride to a nation ravaged by recent terrorist attacks.
Now the world thinks of cricket when it thinks of Pakistan.

Pakistan storm into World T20 final

2009-06-19T19:46:00.002+06:00

Pakistan storm into World T20 final

The South African team react during their defeat against Pakistan in their ICC World
Twenty20 cricket semi-final match in Nottingham.—Reuters

NOTTINGHAM: Shahid Afridi shone with bat and ball as Pakistan dumped South Africa by seven runs to storm into the World Twenty20 final here on Thursday.
The maverick batsman smashed 51 from 34 balls and then grabbed 2-16 with his leg-spin as Pakistan successfully defended 149-4 to restrict the favoured Proteas to 142-5 before a sell-out crowd at Trent Bridge.

Pakistan, runners-up to India in the inaugural World Twenty20 in South Africa two years ago, await the winners of Friday's semi-final between Sri Lanka and the West Indies in Sunday's final at Lord's.
Afridi plundered eight boundaries, including four in succession off Johan Botha, after Pakistan elected to bat on a wicket that slowed down as the evening progressed.
Veteran Jacques Kallis made a brave attempt to take the South Africans home, striking seven fours and a six in 64 from 54 balls, but the other batsmen faltered against the spot-on attack.
South Africa made a steady start in reply as openers Kallis and Graeme Smith reached 40 by the sixth over.
Smith failed to make use of an early chance when he was dropped by Umar Gul as he skied a return catch to Mohammad Aamir after making 10.
Afridi, coming on to bowl in the seventh over, struck twice in four deliveries when he bowled Herschelle Gibbs and AB de Villiers to make South Africa 50-3 in 8.3 overs.
Afridi and fellow-spinner Saeed Ajmal, made runs hard to come by, and when the dangerous Gul came on to bowl in the 14th over, South Africa needed a further 77 from 42 balls.
Kallis and JP Duminy raised South Africa's hopes by adding 61 from 53 balls for the fourth wicket, but Ajmal broke the threatening stand by having Kallis caught in the deep in the 18th over.
Duminy remained unbeaten on 44 from 39 balls but the task of needing 23 runs in the last over bowled by Aamir proved too much for him and Mark Boucher.
It did not matter at the end that Pakistan, who were 120-3 after 15 overs, failed to build on the early advantage and managed just 29 runs in the final five overs.
Pakistan had made a frenetic start, racing to 28 off the first 15 deliveries but at the cost of two wickets.
After Kamran Akmal had taken eight runs in Dale Steyn's first over, Shahzaib Hasan fell in the second over for zero when he miscued a big hit off left-arm seamer Wayne Parnell.
Akmal struck a six in Steyn's second over, but fell off the next delivery as he top-edged a pull to Morkel at mid-on. Akmal made 23 from 12 balls with four boundaries and a six.
Afridi, promoted to number three, swung Kallis for two fours in one over as Pakistan reached 47-2 by the time the field restrictions ended after the sixth.
Afridi brought up his half-century off 33 deliveries after slamming off-spinner Botha for four consecutive boundaries in the 11th over that realised 18 runs.
A desperate Smith turned to slow bowler Duminy in the 13th over and struck gold first ball as Afridi holed out to mid-wicket.—AFP

Link Between Baitullah & US

2009-06-19T19:42:00.002+06:00

Baitullah dismissed Omar’s offer to fight Afghan Jihad: Baetani

Updated at: 0630 PST, Friday, June 19, 2009

ISLAMABAD: The former right hand of Baitullah Mehsud, Haji Turkistan Baetani has alleged Mehsud of plotting the assassination of Shaheed Benazir Bhutto.Talking to Geo news, Baetani said I myself heard him say, “I have moved two of my associates to Rawalpindi slaying of Mohtarma B.B”.He also divulged that Baitullah Mehsud is an American agent so US never targeted him through drone attacks.Mehsud is being funded by Israel and India for brainwashing of young innocent Muslims to prepare them for suicide bombings in Pakistani mosques and educational institutes, he concluded.

US prepared for likely NKorean missile

2009-06-19T19:39:00.001+06:00

US prepared for likely NKorean missile launch to Hawaii: Gates

Updated at: 0500 PST, Friday, June 19, 2009

WASHINGTON: The United States has concerns about a possible North Korean missile launch towards Hawaii and has taken steps to ensure the protection of US territory, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Thursday."We do have some concerns if they were to launch a missile ... in the direction of Hawaii," Gates told a news conference.Gates said he had approved the deployment of THAAD missile defense weaponry to the US state and radar "to provide support" in case of a possible North Korean missile attack.And he said that ground-based defenses in Alaska were also at the ready."I would just say I think we are in a good position should it become necessary to protect American territory," he said.The Theatre High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) weaponry is designed to shoot down ballistic missiles.US and South Korean officials have said North Korea might be readying another ballistic missile test after three previous launches in 1998, 2006 and this year.Pyongyang said its latest April 5 launch put a satellite into orbit, while the United States and its allies labeled it a disguised test of a Taepodong-2 missile theoretically capable of reaching Alaska.

Clashes at Maoist 'area' in India

2009-06-19T19:31:00.002+06:00

Clashes at Maoist 'area' in India

Protesters have blocked roads with trees to keep the authorities out

Indian security forces have clashed with protesters in the Lalgarh region of West Bengal state, where Maoist rebels have taken control.
Hundreds of baton-wielding police charged and fired tear gas shells at a crowd of almost 3,000 in Pirakata.
Villagers backed by the rebels have blocked roads to prevent security forces from entering Lalgarh.
The state government has called in more than 1,000 paramilitary troops to retake the area after police fled.
Meanwhile, the bodies of four more communist workers have been found, taking the number of party workers killed in recent violence to 10.
The four bodies were found outside Lalgarh. The men were among six party workers who police suspect were kidnapped by the rebels.
Maoist-linked violence has killed 6,000 people in India over the past 20 years.
'Bloodbath' fears
Reports from Lalgarh say tension is running high in the area as the villagers have formed "human shields" to prevent the security forces from moving in and wresting control of the area.

West Bengal interior minister Ardhendu Sen has appealed to villagers to allow the security forces to enter Lalgarh.
"Please don't get used by the Maoists. Please move away. We don't want a bloodbath," Mr Sen said in an appeal to the villagers.
Separately, rebel leader Kishanji told the BBC in a telephone interview that the federal and state governments should stop troops from entering the area.
He said the government should hold meetings with the local people to learn about their grievances.
The tribespeople-dominated Lalgarh area in West Bengal's West Midnapore district has been under the virtual control of the rebels since November.
Armed rebels are now reportedly patrolling roads there.
Over the past few days, villagers backed by the rebels have taken over more villages in the area and burnt down and demolished offices belonging to the ruling Communist Party of India (Marxist), or CPI(M).

'Liberated zone'

The BBC's Amitabh Bhattashali in Calcutta says hundreds of CPI(M) workers have left Lalgarh in recent days.

Communist party offices have been
set on fire by villagers in Lalgarh

Maoists claimed it as their first "liberated" zone in West Bengal.
Our correspondent says that taking control of Lalgarh is part of a long-term plan for the Maoists.
The area encompasses vast tracts of the forests of West Midnapur, Purulia and Bankura districts of West Bengal and adjoins parts of the states of Jharkhand and Orissa.
Violence in Lalgarh began last November after West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharya narrowly escaped a landmine blast blamed on the rebels.
Protests were launched when a number of locals were arrested on suspicion of attempting to assassinate him.

Muslim pilgrim found to have swine flu in Saudi

2009-06-19T19:26:00.003+06:00

Muslim pilgrim found to have swine flu in Saudi

RIYADH: Saudi Arabia is gearing up for a possible outbreak of swine flu among Muslim pilgrims to Mecca after the first case in the holy city was detected in a Malaysian boy, a senior health official said. The nine year old boy was found with his family in a hotel near Mecca’s Grand Mosque and referred to a local hospital after tests showed he was infected with the A(H1N1) flu virus, the health ministry said. His was one of five new cases announced on Wednesday, taking the total to 22 since the disease first appeared in the kingdom on June 3. The case underscored the threat of an outbreak of the disease among the more than two million Muslims expected to arrive in the country from around the world during the August-December pilgrimage season, health ministry spokesman Khaled Marghlani said. Host to Islam’s two holiest sites, Mecca and Medina, the Saudi government is already working with experts from the World Health Organisation and other international organisations to finalise a plan for dealing with the threat, Marghlani told AFP on Wednesday. ‘The whole world is worried about it,’ he said. ‘We are trying very hard. The people coming here are guests of Allah.’ The health ministry has stockpiled doses of the antiviral medication Tamiflu equivalent to 10 per cent of the country’s 25.3 million population, he said. Commercial pharmacies have been reporting heavy sales of the drug as well amid rising public concern, according to media reports. Tamiflu is effective in treating swine flu in its early stages. Before the Malaysian boy’s case, members of a Mauritanian family visiting Medina from Canada were diganosed with A(H1N1), underscoring the threat that already exists from the thousands of off-season pilgrims undertaking the umrah, or minor pilgrimage. The government expects the threat to rise dramatically when the umrah season picks up in late August, during the fasting month of Ramadan, and then with the main hajj pilgrimage in late November, Marghlani said. The hajj sees some 1.7 million people from around the world jam into Mecca and Medina for a two-week period, most of them arriving through the Red Sea city of Jeddah. Marghlani said Saudi Arabia already has a well-organised health plan for prevention and then care of disease among pilgrims. ‘The hajj and umrah have a pretty sophisticated surveillance system,’ he said, adding that there have been no major disease outbreaks among pilgrims in recent years. For swine flu, the health ministry expects to finalise its plans with the WHO this month. The kingdom is already inspecting airport arrivals with thermal cameras.However, the recent infections underscore the challenge. The Malaysian boy and a Saudi student arriving from the United States on June seven were detected with feverish temperatures by thermal equipment at Jeddah airport. But for unexplained reasons both were able to continue travelling — the student taking another domestic flight — before finally being contacted by health officials and taken to hospital. In addition, some of the newest infections are hospital staff who came in contact with the infected patients, the health ministry said.

Captain Bilal Zafar Shaheed

2009-06-19T04:09:00.003+06:00

Captain Bilal Zafar Shaheed

“Think not of those who are slain in Allah’s way as dead.
Nay, they live, finding their sustenance in the presence of
their Lord; They rejoice in the bounty provided by Allah.
And with regard to those left behind, who have not yet
joined them (in their bliss), the (martyr’s) glory in the fact
that on them is no fear, nor have they (cause to) grieve.”

Al-Quran (3: 169-170)

Captain Bilal Zafar, a commando of the Pakistan army SSG (the world’s best elite force), embraced martyrdom on the 17th of May, 2009 – fighting terrorists and militants in the embattled valley of Swat.
He always used to say “Bullets can’t harm me”, and thus it proved true. He was hit on the arm by a bullet but he carried on until he was hit by an RPG (Rocket propelled grenade) where he embraced martyrdom on the spot.
His last message has been circulated widely on print and electronic media. This is what he had to say:
“In the volleys of fire…in the thunder of bombs, there are a few who just do not stop…knowing that they are surrounded by death…knowing that they could leave their wives widows and children orphans…but they just keep on moving because something is pumping in their hearts…and flowing through their veins known as honour, devotion and motivation…death over surrender…that is why they say death before disgrace…Pakistan Army Zindabad”.
We Salute your courage, Sir! This sacrifice of your’s for this nation will never be forgotten. At least not by us: the people of Pakistan. Let this martyrdom also dispel the notion that the army lacks any motivation to defeat these extremist militants, it is obvious that their spirits are very high.

We need trade, not aid, says Zardari

2009-06-19T04:05:00.001+06:00

We need trade, not aid, says Zardari

We hope to secure better access to European markets
rather than more aid, Zardari told journalists in Brussels.

BRUSSELS: President Asif Ali Zardari said Wednesday he hoped to secure better access to European markets rather than more aid, ahead of a landmark EU-Pakistan summit focused in part on trade.
‘What I need is trade, not aid. I'm looking for MOUs (memoranda of understanding) and not IOUs and I intend to get them,’ he told journalists after meeting with Nato ambassadors in Brussels.
‘I'm always hopeful. I'm a man who has walked from the gallows to the presidency.’
Zardari was speaking shortly before heading to the first ever EU-Pakistan summit where trade links are to top the agenda with the ultimate goal being further down the line of a free trade agreement.
According to a draft text, the EU will ‘explore’ how Pakistan could benefit from its preferential tariff regime, which affords customs privileges in return for respecting principles in the areas of workers' rights and the environment.
Meanwhile, a European Commission official said the EU will pledge to give Pakistan 20 million euros in humanitarian aid to help cope with the aftermath of fighting in the Swat valley.
The official said the executive Commission would also urge member states to set aside a further 45 million euros in aid from a reserve fund during a summit that will discuss the fight against terrorism and trade.
‘The Commission will announce later today that the EU will give Pakistan 20 million euros in humanitarian aid,’ the official said before talks scheduled between President Zardari and EU officials.
‘The Commission will also request from member states and the European Parliament to provide an additional 45 million euros from the EU's reserve fund,’ the official said, referring to a fund set aside for emergencies.
The summit is the first between the 27-country EU and Pakistan.

Clinton urges better US-India-Pakistan co-operation

2009-06-19T04:00:00.002+06:00

Clinton urges better US-India-Pakistan co-operation

This time this co-operation should be on equal level because now Pakistan
can’t trust both India and the US

WASHINGTON: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has confirmed reports that the Obama administration is quietly urging India and Pakistan to resume their dialogue stalled after the Mumbai terror attacks.
‘We believe that India and Pakistan actually face a number of common challenges, and we welcome a dialogue between them,’ said Mrs Clinton in her address to the US-India Business Council in Washington.
‘As we have said before, the pace, scope and character of that dialogue is something that Indian and Pakistani leaders will decide on their own terms and in their own time,’ she added.
In early June, the United States launched a diplomatic push, sending Special Representative Richard Holbrooke and Under-Secretary of State William Burns to South Asia. On Wednesday, Secretary of State Clinton confirmed that she would visit India and Pakistan next month.
After the Swat operation, the Americans believe that Pakistan is now serious in combating the Taliban and want India to help Islamabad win this fight.
Secretary Clinton also acknowledged this in her speech, saying that ‘as Pakistan now works to take on the challenge of terrorists in its own country, I am confident that India as well as the United States will support those efforts’.
Other US officials, however, say that a full revival of the dialogue process is not possible yet. But they point out that Washington’s efforts are already beginning to show results.
On June 15, President Asif Ali Zardari and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh met for the first time since the November 2008 Mumbai attacks.
Officials in Washington say that US diplomatic pressure played a major rule in arranging this brief meeting between the two leaders on the sidelines of a Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Russia.
Diplomatic observers in Washington say the Obama administration sees easing India-Pakistan tension as an essential part of its regional stabilisation strategy.
The Americans believe that it would enable the Pakistani military to focus on fighting the Taliban without having to worry about its eastern border with India.
APP adds: The US has also sought more engagement from European countries with Pakistan and Afghanistan. ‘We are indeed actively encouraging the Europeans to do more on the civilian side in Afghanistan and Pakistan, just as we are (doing),’ Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Philip Gordon told a Congressional hearing, according to the Business Standard.
‘There’s a Pakistan pledging conference this week, and we have been strongly encouraging our European allies to get more engaged there and do what they can, because we have also reached the conclusion that you can’t solve Afghanistan unless you solve Pakistan, and that requires a lot of assistance,’ Mr Gordon said.
‘We have told them we understand there are constraints on what you can do on the military side, but it’s in our common interest that you do more on the civil side. And we hope that they will,’ he said in his testimony.