Who Will Stop the AIPAC Jews Before it is Too Late?

Who Will Stop the AIPAC Jews Before it is Too Late?

by Medea Benjamin
Wednesday, May 6, 2009

While I was being tackled by security guards at Washington’s Convention Center during the AIPAC conference for unfurling a banner that asked “What about Gaza?,” my heart was aching. I wasn’t bothered so much by the burly guards who were yanking my arms behind by back and dragging me-along with 5 other CODEPINK members-out of the hall. They were doing their job.

What made my heart ache was the hatred I felt from the AIPAC staff who tore up the banner and slammed their hands across my mouth as I tried to yell out: “What about Gaza? What about the children?”

“Shut the f— up. Shut the f— up.” one staffer yelled, red-faced and sweating as he ran beside me. “This is not the place to be saying that shit. Get the f— out of here.”

What makes my heart ache is thinking about the traumatized children I met on my recent trip to Gaza, and how their suffering is denied by the 6,000 AIPAC conventioneers who are living in a bubble-a bubble where Israel is the victim and all critics are anti-Semitic, terrorist lovers or, as in my case, self-hating Jews.

I found it fascinating that AIPAC’s executive director Howard Kohr opened the conference admitting that there was now a huge, international campaign against the policies of Israel. He painted a picture of 30,000 people marching in Spain, Italian trade unionists calling for a boycott of Israeli products, the UN Human Rights Council passing 26 resolutions condemning Israel, an Israeli Apartheid Week that is building a global boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign.

This global movement, he warned, emanates from the Middle East, echoes in the halls of the United Nations and the capitals of Europe, is voiced in meetings of international peace organizations, and is spreading throughout the United States-from the media to town hall meetings, from campuses to city squares. “No longer is this campaign confined to the ravings of the political far left or far right,” he lamented, “but increasingly it is entering the American mainstream.”

But Kohr failed to explain why there has been such an explosion in this movement, even among the American Jewish community. He didn’t tell the attendees that the world was shocked and outraged by Israel’s devastating 22-day attack on Gaza that left over 1,300 people dead-mostly women and children. He didn’t mention the killing of civilians fleeing their homes, the use of white phosphorous, the bombing of homes, schools, mosques, hospitals, UN buildings, factories. He didn’t talk about the continuing, cruel blockade of the Gaza Strip that is keeping desperately needed humanitarian aid from reaching 1.5 million people and making rebuilding impossible.

There were no seminars at the conference by human rights groups like Amnesty International that are calling for an immediate and comprehensive suspension of arms to Israel. Instead, one after another, U.S. elected officials eager to curry favor with AIPAC pledged continued U.S. financial support for Israel. Senator Kerry, despite that fact that he was one of only a handful of legislators who visited Gaza, didn’t say one word about the massive destruction he witnessed and pledged that as Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he would do everything to ensure that the $30 billion in military aid to Israel is “delivered in full.”

“America will continue our military aid, and Israel will keep its
military strength,” he insisted. Instead of calling for talks with the
democratically elected government of Hamas, Kerry said: “Hamas has
already won one election-we cannot allow them to win another.” He ended his speech shouting several times in Hebrew, “Am Yisrael Chai-Israel lives!”

Even Vice President Biden, who at least told AIPAC that Israel should freeze new settlement activity, didn’t say a word about the ongoing humanitarian crisis caused by Israel’s invasion and continued blockade of Gaza. No U.S. officials, and there were hundreds at the conference, dared echo the call of the United Nations or the world community to lift the siege of Gaza.

Republican Congressman Eric Cantor was one of the most emotional speakers, portraying Israel as the victim of an evil global movement determined to wipe out Israel and all Jews. Evoking the “shivering, naked victims who were herded into the gas chambers,” he wondered when it would become too late to protect Israel. “When is it too late?”, he repeated over and over.

I wonder the same thing. When is it too late, I wonder, to stop Israel from destroying itself? When is it too late to tell AIPAC attendees that more violence and hatred is not the answer? When is it too late to open the hardened hearts of my people, once victims of a terrible holocaust, to realize that by occupying Palestine we have become they evil we deplore? When is it too late to restore meaning to the Hebrew term “tikkun olam” by truly working to heal the world? When is it too late for the Jews of the world to weep for the children of Gaza, recognizing that they, too, are the children of God?

I couldn’t ask my questions at AIPAC. My mouth was muzzled by the sweaty hands of hate-filled staffers demanding that I “shut the f— up.” But despite AIPAC’s massive funds and influence, I feel certain that more and more members of the Jewish community will step forward and refuse to be silent. I just pray it is not too late.

For information on upcoming delegations to Gaza, see http://www.codepinkalert. org/gaza.

Medea Benjamin (medea@globalexchang e.org) is cofounder of Global Exchange (www.globalexchange .org) and CODEPINK: Women for Peace (www.codepinkalert. org).

Concerning Catastrophes and Cooperation

Concerning Catastrophes and Cooperation

tidal%20wave-1.jpg
In the end, we, all of us, have to ask ourselves whether we wish to have more of everything (manufactured goods, vacation homes, holidays in far away locations and so on) in the short term or do we want to stretch out our use of resources to give the Earth a break to heal and to try to help ensure that future generations can more easily survive. Do we want a little inconvenience now or the formation of a whole lot of it down the road? (Surely if our forebears on the African plains could learn to live within their daunting limits, we can manage a little personal discomfort or irritation so as to generally improve life on Earth for all.) Do we have a sufficient supply of self-control and compassion toward our unknown descendants to curb our boundless desire for ever more merchandise, petrol, electricity and offspring? Can we find some modicum of happiness within deliberately self-proscribed limits? – Emily Spence


By Emily Spence
December 28, 2007

Until fairly recently, anthropologists and geologists were greatly puzzled by an unusual finding. Their perplexity concerned the almost total disappearance of humankind many years ago.

Finally, they were able to put together the various factors related to this happening and came up with the following scenario.

Over much of the Earth, crude stone tools have been found at the geological layer roughly corresponding to 74,000 years ago. Based on the various rock types used, their rate of wear and the number of implements uncovered in each setting, the population could be estimated for many regions of the globe. In addition, migration patterns could be charted based on similarities in tool designs combined with their varying quantities in assorted locales. As the seasons changed and the animal location shifted — so did the hunter-gatherers. The related movement could be mapped for several clans.

Then suddenly, signs of all tools, abruptly and completely, vanished across nearly the entire globe. The disappearance was almost completely universal except, for the most part, in one small region of Eastern Africa. At the same time, there existed, instead of the tools elsewhere, layer upon layer of volcanic ash corresponding to a time period many years in duration.

Based upon the amount of powder found in each locality, its composition and other characteristics, the epicenter of the “event” was, eventually, determined to be the place now called Lake Toba. Lake Toba is a large, serene and pastoral body of water roughly 100 km long and 30 km wide (sixty miles by eighteen) in Sumatra, Indonesia. It wasn’t always peaceful [1].
Because the region lies close to the Sumatra Fracture Zone (SFZ), it is a seething hotbed of subterranean geological activity. This is because the subduction of the Indian Ocean plate under the Eurasian plate is occurring at the rate of 6.7 cm per year and is a part of the basin dubbed “The Ring of Fire” [2], a horseshoe shaped expanse extending across the Pacific rim, while, at the same time, being prone to numerous earthquakes and volcanic activity. For example, the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami can be attributed to the instability of these shifting tectonic plates and the seismically activity situated in this, generally, unstable zone.

Furthermore, one (of several) volcanic eruption from Toba caldera was so gigantic (with a Volcanic Explosivity Index of 8, termed “mega-colossal”) that it spewed an estimated volume of 2,800 cubic kilometers ((670 cubic miles) of materials upward and outward. ( 1.609 km equals one mile.) A good basis of comparison is provided by Mount St. Helene, which emitted 1.2 cubic km of matter during its most recent flare-up.

In other words, the sheer magnitude of these two volcanic disturbances were vastly different. Moreover, this largest Toba blast (named the Toba Tuff) was of such a magnitude that at least 20,000 square kilometers were enveloped in pyroclastic flows while the original breaching material was 600 meters (1,800 feet) thick near the point of origin.

As such, ash quickly covered a territory approximately half the size of the US and it has been retrieved as far away as the bay of Bengal and India, where it exists 15 cm (6 in) thick in deposition over the entire Indian subcontinent This is around 3100 km (1,900 miles) from Lake Toba. In short, this eruption was likely the biggest one in the past twenty-five million years.
Moreover, it has been calculated that the upsurging plume column was between 50 to 80 km (30 to 50 miles) in height so as to be capable of spreading gases and debris, via upper atmospheric winds, over an ever increasing and extensive portion of terrain for quite an interval of time. In addition, 1010 (ten to the tenth power) metric tons of sulphuric acid exploded into the air while causing an extremely toxic fallout of acid rain to, likewise, blanket a large area of the globe.

With all of these factors combined in impact, massive weather change ensued. Resultant temperatures varied downward 3 to 3.5 degrees Celsius for a number of years (with evidence collected as far away as Greenland through ice core samples), sunlight sufficient for photosynthesis was blocked in many regions due to light ash dust and other atmospheric impediments trailing the eruption. Furthermore, an enormous number of plants would have died off even if sufficient light were to have been present. This is because vegetation was inundated by ash, acid rain and other noxious byproducts — a phenomenon that has been studied, via the use of duplicative conditions, in botany laboratories at several university sites.

So, in the end, there was a massive die-off engulfing the planet. Indeed, an ice age developed on account of the eruption and lasted approximately a millennium.

At the same time, there is evidence, drawn from mitochondrial DNA and the aforementioned diminishment of tools, that humankind, in all likelihood, experienced a genetic bottleneck [3] due to Toba Tuff. According to information collected by some genetic researchers, the human population probably shrunk to only two to ten thousand of members.

All or most of these lived within around 200 miles of the Rift Valley in Kenya. The advantages by doing so were clear…

Because of the reduced plant and animal life, there was not a large margin of error in terms of acquiring food. If a single animal, for example, were found, it had to be killed on the first try as there were not many more extant from which to select. As such, tools had to be very light, sharp, easily shaped and highly effective. Indeed, they could reflect all of these features in this location as obsidian, an ideal rock for the task (and, ironically, formed by volcanic activity), was in plentiful supply in the Rift Valley.

However, tribes gathering this material could not all live near its source as there was an insufficient food supply in the area. In addition, they had to share (at least the obsidian) and cooperate while communicating with others (strangers from other families) in that they could not expend inordinate energy and time in battle in lieu of primarily focusing on obtainment of enough food and clean water.

In other words, those tribes that chose to fight, for the most part, died off and their genetic legacy did so, too. Meanwhile, it has been speculated that the other groups — the ones that made it to the obsidian deposit without battling — traded, shared and aided each other while there, as well as (later) bartered obsidian with clans too far from the rock bed to make the trek, themselves.

As a result, our ancestors, all of them for everyone on Earth, likely came from these small bands of people and we all inherited a genetic foundation imbued with a propensity towards accommodation, sharing and cooperation!

Now, flash forwarding into the near-present, and there is another, smaller and more personal calamity being addressed. In shock, I am standing in the shell of a house on Water Island, near St Thomas. It is my mother’s home and was built to stand close to 200 miles an hour of hurricane force. It was build by my father and a work crew to withstand, approximately, twenty-five miles an hour above any maximum storm thrust.

In order to be so, it was built with a venting roof to handle changes in air pressure and wind, as well as had three 3″ thick rebars running one yard down into the earth while, also, embedded in each of the building’s 2′ X 2′ X 12′ concrete support columns. In addition, the structure contained other well thought out, protective features. All the same, I am cleaning up the mess left from Hurricane Marilyn (1995) — the second time for such a going-over on account of Hurricane Hugo (1989) having created similar, although less thorough, ruin.

Unfortunately, not much was left of the home this succeeding time. Most of the columns are lying on their sides split in pieces like a chopped stick of butter. My mother’s dresser drawers and clothes were found strew more than a mile away. Our refrigerator held its place, but our neighbor’s refrigerator flew through a foot thick concrete wall so as to leave a gaping new window the exact size and shape of its outline (due to winds clocking in at 220 mph in the near vicinity). At the same time, the inner walls held in our home, but the roof, windows and most household items lay spread out everywhere. Even some broken plumbing pipes, ripped from the interior of walls, lay scattered here and there, along with everything else.

Meanwhile, my mother’s grief over this trouble was only superceded by the torment created by the deaths of her husband, firstborn child and parents. At the same time, we wondered that the hurricanes could be so much more powerful than the US Weather Service set as the standard for maximum force.

How ever tragic such individual losses are from hurricanes, floods, wild fires and other causes indirectly related to global warming, nothing will likely approach the gargantuan magnitude of demise caused by such events as Toba Tuff. Nothing will, also, match the humongous enormity of further devastation that is likely advancing towards us due to the greenhouse effect and other kinds of environmental damage. Not even regional wars, unless they were to be full-scale nuclear in nature, can come close. Here are the reasons…

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) was conducted by 1,300 researchers from ninety-five nations over a four year period. it comprises of the most comprehensive analysis of current planetary conditions ever undertaken and resulted in a detailed report compiled by World Resource Institute (WRI) and approximately thirty partners.

Their ultimate conclusion is that human actions endanger the Earth’s capacity to maintain future generations. Meanwhile our current circumstances include these factors:

As human demand for resources grows exponentially, most ecosystems across the globe have been seriously impaired due to exploitation and the natural processes that support life on Earth are falling apart. Indeed of twenty-four environments that have been assessed, fifteen are seriously damaged. Furthermore, it is only within the past fifty years that this severe destructive change has taken place in which sixty percent of worldwide ecosystem benefits (such as clean air, fish, fiber, timber, etc.) have significantly deteriorated. In addition, human water usage have doubled over the past forty years and, currently, forty to fifty percent is being used. However this will change as drought areas spread in addition to glacial runoff and snow packs disappearing due to global warming. Moreover, fish stock is depleting at an extraordinarily rapid pace, coral reefs are dying, large oceanic dead zones are spreading, whole forests are vanishing, pollution of watersheds (in large measure due to agrochemicals) has led to eutrophication of waters and species extinction rates are now 100-1,000 times above their normal speed of occurrence. In addition, further extreme problems are arising due to the devastation produced by carbon loading.

If this isn’t sufficiently gloomy by itself, the 2007 study by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) offers further grave information. It is that greenhouse gases, with a ninety percent certainty to be caused by our too great reliance on fossil fuels, are driving cataclysmic level of climate change. These, in turn, will introduce other grim perils of which many are already irreversible.

Some of the worst include that there will be increasingly severe water shortages in many regions, dramatic increase in virulent diseases, decreased food supply, greater extremes in weather causing habitat loss (such as the indigenous life forms and my family faced on Water Island), rising oceans, unbearable levels of heat in some spots so that some life (including many humans) will perish from it, vastly expanding desert regions and other dreadful upshots.
For example, the melting of the permafrost will release further CO2 into the atmosphere and, thereby, accelerate the melting. Along with no longer cooling the earth by a sort of refrigeration effect, the lack of much frost, white snow and ice reflecting light back up into the atmosphere will increase the heat trap on earth.

All considered, James Lovelock, the originator of the Gaia model (in which the planet is viewed as an interdependent, integrated super-organism), postulates that billions of humans (far more than was killed by the Toba Tuff) will, ultimately, die off due to global warming. As such, he recommends that all communities and countries try to postpone this inevitable outcome (along with delimiting the numbers to be killed) by taking EVERY measure possible to cut back the greenhouse gases. Meanwhile, many others share his bleak outlook while, also, expanding upon it [4].

Despite that we do not know the Earth’s ultimate carrying capacity for people, we do know that it is definitely finite. We, likewise, know that we are running out of critical commodities (most notably fossil fuels, certain ores, some minerals, as well as the plants and animals that our species will, both directly and indirectly, cause to become extinct). In the same vein, we know that there will be massive loss of human life due to various effects of global warming, including ones related to shrinking food production.

All considered, we are faced with a looming cataclysm that perhaps begins to move towards
the scale of the Toba Tuff. While our travails are not entirely of human making, they, largely, ARE due to human behavior. This is because they are caused by our collective greed for ever more products, our reproductive patterns doubling the population nearly every thirty years, and the fact that certain resources (such as fossil fuels) have rigidly preset limits while others (such as marine life and trees) are being reduced too rapidly to sufficiently replenish themselves.

In the end, it matters not that, as a species, we are not programmed to react to danger unless it is immediate (rather than slowly evolving), dramatic and concrete (such as is a flood or fire), and in close proximity. It matters not that we deny the existence of global warming and would prefer to think about pleasant topics rather than those that cause discomfort and dismay. This is because, like it or not, the changes that humankind have created for the planet are happening, anyway, due to most people wanting ever more affluence and grander lifestyles, ever more prgeny, and ever more personal wealth largely obtained from turning other species into wares. As such, Toba Tuff and other catastrophes give us a little glimpse (and warning) about just how bad life can get when climates radically alter.

This in mind, whoever is left a hundred or so years from now will wonder about the reason that our generation amused themselves with such questions as, “Should I buy Gucci or Prada shoes?” They, certainly, won’t be trying to select between taking an overseas vacation in Madrid or Tokyo. They might not even know what a jet or cruise liner is unless they go to a museum (that is, if there is any museum left and a way to get to it).

They, also, will likely see the ironic, contradictory folly of jetting in droves to the Great Barrier Reef to study the best way to save it from destruction caused by our large carbon footprint. Likewise, they will probably wonder as to the reason that we didn’t willingly cut back on population growth rather than let “nature” handle the problem for us through tragic and painful means. Similarly, they will almost certainly be, to some degree, angry at us as our need for constant self-pampering and ever more babies led into the state of affairs that they will have inherited from us. At the same time, perhaps they will be the offspring of sets of individuals who, like the East African tribes of 74,000 years ago, were the most prone to cooperate, share and render mutual assistance rather than war over the last remaining resources in such predatory fashion as is now taking place in the Middle East.

In any case, let us hope that they will learn better methods for conservation than our feeble attempts, feel more greatly protective of the natural world, and look at the wilderness as a necessity rather than as, primarily, a site to plunder. If not, they will have to learn all over the understandings that we are just now starting to know and it certainly will NOT be easier for them given the voluminous amount of the Earth that we, right here and now, are utterly destroying so as to turn it broken over to them as our legacy.

In the end, we, all of us, have to ask ourselves whether we wish to have more of everything (manufactured goods, vacation homes, holidays in far away locations and so on) in the short term or do we want to stretch out our use of resources to give the Earth a break to heal and to try to help ensure that future generations can more easily survive. Do we want a little inconvenience now or the formation of a whole lot of it down the road? (Surely if our forebears on the African plains could learn to live within their daunting limits, we can manage a little personal discomfort or irritation so as to generally improve life on Earth for all.) Do we have a sufficient supply of self-control and compassion toward our unknown descendants to curb our boundless desire for ever more merchandise, petrol, electricity and offspring? Can we find some modicum of happiness within deliberately self-proscribed limits?

If not, it is almost inevitable that we will, eventually, wind up with far less people, inadequate energy sources and minimized per person consumption due to the mounting harm to our globe that we are now producing… Our forebears had no choice but to deal with the effects of Toba Tuff. We, though, DO have a choice and it is a clear one with high stakes. Thus, can we start changing immediately out of our growing recognition that it is absolutely essential that we do so? In the least, we owe it to the future generations to make a determined effort to cooperate together to create better methods to reduce our ecological damage! Literally, their lives depend on it!

[1] Excellent portrayals of the Toba Tuff can be found at: March Resources @ National Geographic Magazine (magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0503/resources_), as well as the related films listed at Supervolcano – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supervolcano) and (http://natgeochannel.co.uk/explore/earthshocks/index.aspx).

[2] To learn more on this topic, please refer to: Pacific Ring of Fire – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Ring_of_Fire).

[3] This is defined at: Population bottleneck – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck).

[4] A replete and striking overview of this stance is provided by Juan Santos at: The Fourth World: Apocalypse No! part 3: The Law of Life and… (http://the-fourth-world.blogspot.com/2007/01/part-3-of-apocalypse-no-law-of-life-and.html).

Global Crisis: How Much Time do We Have?

A good doctor is one who will tell his patient what ails him, no matter how bad the news…  A good doctor begins by making a correct diagnosis of his patient’s condition.  A bad doctor, however, either cannot make a proper diagnosis (because he lacks expertise) or, worst still, he hides the truth afrom his patient…
When a dread disease patient is told what he is suffering from, before actually accepting the envitable he first goes through the stages of disbelief and denial.  There’s disbelief when we hear the patient say “this is not right: the doctor’s made a mistake!”.   But when the dignosis of his illness is confirmed, then in dispair he goes info full denial saying “Impossible!  This can’t be happening to me!!”.
A good doctor helps his patient weather this painful process, guiding him towards acceptance of his predicament.  Only then can the healing begin.     Something similar happens – albeit more abstractly -, when the People are hit by social turmoil as a consequence of severe crises arising from what Carl G. Jung called “epidemics of the mind and soul”.
Below, we address some key issues that we feel reflect the fact that a cycle is coming to an increasingly abrupt end in the whole world, even though the global media may be looking the other way (i.e., hiding the truth and generating smoke screens), most politicians hardly understand what is going on (on account of their ignorance), the bulk of the population in all countries see and feel this but cannot rationalize what’s happening (disbelief), and some intelectuals may actually understand what’s going on and where we’re being dragged, but find it too hard to accept (i.e., denial).
In our communiqué No. 52 of October 3, 2008 dealing with the Global Financial “crisis” that had then just broken out, we said that there was no such “crisis”.  Rather, what began Monday, September 15, 2008 was the beginning of a terminal and irreversible collapse of the global financial system, which is part of a controlled Model through which other objetives will be achieved.  Those objective go far beyond merely financial goals: rather, they seek to advance towards the next geopolitical stage in the “New World Order” (NWO).  And this is nothing more and nothing less than the enthronement of a WORLD GOVERNMENT.   At that time, we also described the NWO Elite’s three basic “Plans”, i.e.,:
- Plan “A” seeks to resolve the on-going financial “crisis” through merely financial measures.  It’s not working….
- Plan “B” will seek to resolve the “crisis” by a comprehensive overhaul of the global financial system, which among other factors will include introducing a New Dollar, backed by “foolproof” gold bullion.  This will allow the global elites to transfer the bulk of Wall Street and European bankers’ losses to other geographies (amongst them, China, which is one of the focus of present crisis, as well as Latin America), and
- Plan “C” that will seek to “kick the chessboard”, so to speak, triggering a planetary war.
We believe that these three “Plans” are presently in different stages of implementation: Plan “A” is almost dead.  Plans “B” and “C” are about to be activated. Let’s see where we stand at present….
1) WORLD GOVERNMENT -
First, we must understand that ”New World Order (NWO)” is not an actual “stage” in the global political structure but, rather, it’s a generic term.  Thus, we had several “New World Orders” over the past century:
- in 1919, when World War I ended and the Council on Foreign Relations (New York) and Royal Institute of International Affairs (London) were created, as geopolitical controlling and planning organizations bent on promoting Anglo-American-Zionist interests throughout the world.

- in 1945, when the Post-World War II Bipolar World was designed: i.e., Bretton Woods, Yalta, the UN, the “cold war”.

- in 1991, after the USSR was thrown into the dust bin of History to make way for NWO “globalization”, as announced by George HW Bush, Sr. (on 11-Sept.-1991!), and

- in 2008, when now ambiguous and dying “globalization” begins phasing out, to be replaced by something far more ambitous: an authoritarian and mandatory World Government, as announced in the London “Financial Times” on December8, 2008 by Gideon Rachman.
Today we are undergoing the violent stage just prior to imposition of World Government.    Amongst its goals:
- Disolution and destruction of all National Sovereignties (the demise of the Nation-State promoted by the CFR, Trilateral and Bilderbergers)

- The Twilight of the United States of America as the “indispensable” superpower (ergo, Obama was allowed into the Oval Office)

- Drastic depopulation of the world (pendemic hysteria)

- Total electronic surveillance and control of surviving citizenry (Psywar drills that increasingly lower people’s resistance to inocculation), and

- Monolithic centralization and strict comprehensive control over politics, the economy, finance, the military, culture, the media, technology and even religious activities.
All of this CANNOT be achieved without war.  Thus, Plan “C” has just been activated.
2) CONFRONTATION WITH RUSSIA AND CHINA -
Over the past months, China has been looking at the US and the Wall Street parasites with an increasingly fixed and unblinking gaze…
They want to know what is going to happen with the 1.7 Trillion Dollar-denominated Reserves that they are holding on to (some Washington observers call this “The Chinese Nuclear Bomb”).  The US is not answering because they simply don’t have any answer to give…
Were China to make a “strong move” (such as changing their US Dollar-denominated Reserves into Euros on very short notice), the effect would lead to the collapse the US Dollar (for this Contingency they have Plan “B” as described).
Actually, one of the main sources of financing of American public deficits is, in fact, China which until recently had been soaking up huge tranches of American Public Debt (today these needs are running as high as u$s 170 billion a week!!).
The recent mysterious fly-over of Air Force One, low over Manhattan in New York City, triggering panic and the evacuation of the World Financial Center and other Manhattan skyscrapers, seems to be linked to this: it appears that Obama and some from his team had decided to meet with Trustees and representatives from China and other foreign powers to try to reach some agreement/solution.  But Obama did not properly consult with “those upstairs who have the final say”, who then decided otherwise and ordered Air Force One to land in Washington DC, doing that with a more than threaterning demeanor.  Fearing the worst, the Air Force One pilot decided to protect his plane by having it “seen by millions” over the skies of New York City, in such a way that the two F16 fighter jets “escorting” him could do nothing ”strange” (see the incredible low fly-by videos on YouTube).   Later on, the missions of these foreign creditors of the US - Chinese included – were involved in a confussing shoot-out with FBI operatives that left several agents dead…
3) THE ISRAELI DETONATOR -
The State of Israel continues moving forward with its announced plans of unilateral attack on Iran.  We have been informing about this for more than two years now.  This will be a premeditated, unjustified, unilateral attack perpetrated by the State of Israel, the only country in the Middle East that wields Weapons of Mass Destruction – 400 nuclear artefacts ceded by the US -, and shows an unequivocable willingness to use them.  Naturally, their excuse is Iran’s nuclear program.  The London “Times” newspaper, in its April 18,2009 edition informs that the Israeli Air Force is fully ready to attack and are only waiting to receive the green light from the new ultra-right wing Israeli primer minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his even more ultra-right wing foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman, and the IDF high command (see article “Israel stands ready to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites”).
THAT will be the trigger for generalized war involving WMD’s – biological, chemical and nuclear.  Israeli sources say that they will attack Iran with or without the Obama Administration’s green light, knowing full well that Zionist power in America is above any Administration, whether Democrat or Republican.  Netanyahu will meet with Obama on May 18th.  Either way, once Israel attacks and Iran retailiates, the Obama Administration will be FORCED by Zionist power structures in control of the US, to fight for them (see “The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy”, Stephen Walt & John Mearsheimer).   This was just been ratified by “The Daily Telegraph” of 7th May.
4) GEOPOLITICS FOR A WORLD GOVERNMENT -
This “Israeli Detonator” goes hand in hand with the repositioning of the US military along the lines suggested by Zbigniew Brzezinski’s geopolitical strategic thought, which calls for the US detaching from the Iraqui mess and focusing on Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Taliban and the Caspian Sea oil fields.  Afghanistan is in a horrific mess, with the Taliban having recovered the better part of that country.  Today, they stand a mere 160 kms from Islamabad, in Pakistan, which too is in a horrific crisis.  US bombs fall on Afghanistan and Pakistan daily without their puppet governments doing anything about it.
From their respective viewpoints and interests and with varying criteria and levels of alarm, Iran, Russia and China closely observe these threatening maneouvers (supplemented by NATO’s dangerous encircling strategy against Russia in Poland and other parts of Europe).   The three, however, recognize that they have the same adversaries: The US (for Russia and China), Israel and the US (for Iran).  A truly explosive formula, but a necessrary risk for the NWO elite bent on enthroning World Government.
This ought to be a wake-up call for all countries around the world.  Red lights should be blinking and alarm bells ringing in every nation, because  World Government will not leave any country out; and any country not wanting to “voluntarily join” this World Government geared on US, UK and Israeli global interests, will be automatically branded a “Rogue State”, “antidemocratic”, “contrary to humanity”, “anti-Semitic”, and when that happens, we all know what comes next…
5) MORE AND MORE BANKRUPTCIES: UNEMPLOYMENT AND POVERTY FOR MILLIONS OF WORKERS -
US and European banks are bankrupt, many major industries are bankrupt (Chrysler being the latest to fall), global insurers and reinsurers are technically broke, whilst most all financial institutions are technically unsound, at best, and unviable at worst.  First World Governments must bail out company after company.  Yet more proof that, when left to its own dynamics, Extreme Capitalism leads to a Soviet-like system in which the State  takes over corporations (“too large to fail”, naturally) and runs the economy to protect the bankster Nomenklatura…
Time and again, we see the same cycle: first come decades of privatizing huge profits which flow straight into the pockets of bankers, “investors”, speculators and parasites of all sorts, types and shapes, and then when the whole System comes crashing down as happens now, the ensuing and predictable gigantic losses are socialized by way of government funded bail-outs with taypayer money, and irresponslble money printing to save those who should sit in jail.  Everybody else is left high and dry, and on their own.
The US-Dollar has been technically hyperinflated, even though no one is saying “the king is nude!!”…  Not yet, anyway…
We now learn that recession in the US, Europe and Asia is “much worse than thought and expected”, so say the experts…
Millions loose their jobs and livelihood, millions loose their homes and assets, millions loose their pensions and life’s savings, millions start taking to the streets: manifestations, “tea parties”…  Social War… Reprisal and repression.
6) FRAUD AND MORE FRAUD -
“Wall Street Inversor” Bernard Madoff (ex-president of NASDAQ y director of Yeshiva Univerrsity in Tel Aviv) has become a symbol of the white collar Banker Mega-fraud which is an integral part of the Extreme Capitalist system (using the Ponzi Scheme Pyramid as its basic model), with his 70 billion dollars stolen from other ”investors” (ha!…they now seem to have fallen into a modern version of cannibalism, taking bites amongst themselves..!).
We should, however, be “kinder” to Bernie Madoff because he’s taking all the blame and getting all the bad “Ponzi Schemer” headlines, whilst the the truth is that the ENTIRE global financial system is one vast Ponzi pyramid.   This is how CitiCorp (William Rhodes, Robert Rubin), Bank of America, Goldman Sachs (Henry Paulson, Timothy Geithner), Morgan Stanley, AIG (Maurice Greenberg) and most all other global banks and insurers operate all the time.
To get a better idea of what’s really happening behind the scenes, take a look at Freddie Mac whose recently appointed 41 year old Chief Financial Officer David Kellermann ”commited suicide”.  Russian intelligence sources, however, point to a more credible cause of death linked to the fact that Kellermann appeared to have discovered that Freddie Mac had syphoned over 50 billion dollars to Zionist and Israeli interests and organizations, and he was about to become a whistleblower going public with that explosive information…   Bear in mind that when Freddie Mac collapsed late last year, one if its directors was Rahm Emanuel, today president Obama’s dual-citizenship (Israeli and US) chief-of-staff, also suspected of being an Israeli Military Intelligence operative.
7) H1N1 SWINE FLU “EPIDEMIC” -
This would seem to be yet another smoke screen imposed on the world media’s headlines, in order to keep the above dramatic events as much out of the front pages and newscasts, as possible.  So far, there are only around 2000 H1N1 cases globally; of the 160 Mexican deaths originally reported by FoxNews a couple of weeks ago, we are now down to around 30…  The same goes for the rest of the world.  The media have gone into Hysteria Over-drive, generating what one major risk consultancy has labelled “pandemic hysteria”, to the great joy of major Pharmaceutical Labs who are having near record sales of “Tamiflu” and other Influenza medications.   The NWO people were also able to test and assess results of their PsyWar Operations, geared on controlling large masses of people by instilling fear, so they can be willingly inocculated.  Face masks, quarantines, mass vaccinations, cancelled flights, the whole circus of a global drill… as occured with the Bird Flu scare, back in 2004 and 2005 (whatever became of that??).
At some point, they will no doubt let loose some synthetic “selective” virus which will target increasingly focused social groups and types (was HIV a precursor?), because one of the key objetives of World Government is to trigger intensive depopulation of the world, as recommended by Henry Kissinger’s National Security Strategic Memoranum 200, back in 1974.
Finally, the seven issues we address above should not be seen as isolated and unconnected.  Rather, they are inter-related and should be viewed holistically, as part of a much vaster strategy geared on imposing World Government, one way or another…  Addressing these and other factors jointly, and projecting their medium- and long-term effects will allow us to begin to understand what is really happening in the world; which is a very different story than what we hear on CNN, FoxNews, the BBC, The New York Times, Washington Post, Daily Telegraph, ABC, CBS or NBC…
In short, the key question we must ask should become increasingly obvious to us all, everywhere: How much time do we have left?   How much time do we really have in the US, in Europe, in Argentina, in the whole world?
You be the judge… you make your own choice.  You can either be a Homer Simpson-like couch potato, zapping on your TV remote control, or… we can all start getting a grip on this whole disaster – no matter where each of us is - and start doing something about it….
Whatever we do, we had better start doing it fast!

Adrian Salbuchi www.asalbuchi.com.ar

A Speech by my Grandson to his Class (8th) in Canada.

[Submitted by Ayaz]

“A Speech by my Grandson to his Class (8th) in Canada.”

Speech by Hadhy to his class.

Mrs. Class-Knight, fellow students, every day we go about our lives
following the same routines the same patterns as we enjoy luxury,
opportunity, and most importantly a sense of security. Even so we constantly
bicker complaining about our stately lives without realizing there are those
out there who don?t have that luxury. Take for example the Afghans a people
who have been living in a country that has been ravaged by war since its
very creation. The Median and Persian Empires, as well as the Seleucids,
Indo-Greeks, Turks, Mongols, Alexander the Great, the British, and most
recently the Soviets have all tried and failed to conquer what is now known
as the graveyard of superpowers. The current war in Afghanistan was launched
during 2001 by the United States and its allies in response to the 9/11
terrorist attacks. There are two major military operations in Afghanistan:
the first is Operation Enduring Freedom which consists of 28 000 US troops;
the second is International Security Assistance Force or ISAF created by the
UN Security Council which involves 58 000 troops from 41 nations including
2800 Canadian troops. This massive coalition backed by the 82 000 troops in
the The Afghan National Army has waged war against terrorism in Afghanistan
for the past nine years yet no end is sight.

Perhaps the biggest Afghanistan related mistake the Canadian government has
made was misleading the Canadian populace to believe that our forces were in
Afghanistan primarily as part of a peace-keeping mission. In truth their
mission is first and foremost a search and destroy operation. Small
victories have come at a heavy cost for Canada as 118 Canadian troops have
lost their lives in the country. Just take a moment and ask yourself ?Was
this war worth 118 Canadian lives? Even if the answer is ?yes? the fact
remains that the Canadian government had no right to deceive its own people.
Isn?t a government supposed to be ?of the people, by the people, and for the
people??

The coalition of forces invading Afghanistan made several critical
mistakes on deciding how best to address the situation in Afghanistan. They
knew that the Taliban had only a loose relationship with Osama bin Laden and
it would have been far less costly to negotiate his handover. In fact,
following the initial bombings of the country they offered to hand over
Osama and his associates given that they were provided with proof of his
guilt. Former US President George W. Bush replied to this by saying ?We
don?t need to discuss innocence or guilt, we know he?s guilty!? Think of it!
Osama Bin Laden could have been apprehended, his terrorist cell consequently
destroyed yet the Bush Administration chose to dive head-first into a bitter
war that has so-far claimed over 50 000 lives including the lives of 118
Canadian men and women and in the process dragged us along with them.

In addition to making the mistake of invading Afghanistan our post-invasion
war tactics were also obtuse and ineffective. The only way of ensuring a
victory in Afghanistan is winning the hearts and minds of the people through
assimilation not aggression. However our tactics were to instill fear,
anger, and hatred in the hearts of the Afghan people by overthrowing their
government and replacing it with a minority government after killing nearly
30 000 civilians during bombing runs. The so called President of Afghanistan
is in fact an American citizen funded entirely by the United States. It?s
only natural for the population to rise up against foreign forces forcing
their leadership on them. For example if Russia invaded Canada and forcibly
made the French speaking citizens of Quebec the Supreme commanders of Canada
the majority of Canadians would be sure to fight back. Our situation would
be similar to that of the Afghanis. However the difference would be that
while we are peace-loving people the Afghanis never stop fighting until they
win or until they  are all dead and they are not dead yet.
As I finish up today I would like for all of you to leave with one detail in
your minds. We as Canadians have the power to drastically change the
circumstances of the Afghan people, a people that have been hurting for so
very long. What the world needs to understand is that the Zeitgeist of
hatred and animosity must come to an end. It?s not about ?us? or ?them?,
?Canadians? or ?Afghans?, ?you? or ?me?. It?s about all of us as human
beings. It doesn?t matter that we may have different skin colours , speak
different languages, and believe in different religions, what matters at the
end of the day is that we are all human beings that deserve to be treated
equally. Once we realize this one fundamental truth the wars and the
killings will at last come to an end, of this I promise you

Assault on Sufism

Assault on Sufism

The mausoleum of 17th century Sufi poet Rehman Baba in Peshawar was the site of a vicious bomb attack. The attack is the latest sign that hard-line Muslims are attempting to strengthen their hold over others in the region who follow a traditional, mystical brand of Islam.

Devotees gather in the courtyard of the shrine after a bomb destroyed its main

A man walks through the rubble left in the wake of the bomb – Reuters photo.

Worshippers walk past the ruins of the mausoleum – AFP photo.

Policemen investigate the extent of the damage – Reuters photo.

Devotees shake their heads in disbelief as they walk past the shrine – AP photo.

A young boy clears away the rubble from the blast – AFP photo.

The grave of Rehman Baba suffered some damage during the attack – Reuters photo.

The mausoleum suffered extensive damage – AFP photo.

A man walks past the shrine’s main entrance – AFP photo.

The bombers laid waste to buildings which had stood the test of time – AP photo.

Lovingly maintained marble columns were destroyed in a few seconds of madness – AP photo.

The sign, all that remains after the vicious attack, reads ‘God the most merciful’ – AP photo.

Militants destroy another shrine in Peshawar

Militants destroy another shrine in Peshawar

Police inspect the damage to Rehman Baba’s shrine – File photo.

PESHAWAR: Weeks after the Rehman Baba shrine was destroyed in Peshawar, another mausoleum in Peshawar’s Regi area was the scene of a brutal attack.

DawnNews quoted police as saying that the shrine of Sheikh Omar Baba was completely destroyed when it was attacked by militants early in the morning on Friday.

Police sources said the militants came to the area before blowing up the shrine and fled the scene when police opened fire at them, only to return again to obliterate the shrine with heavy explosives.

According to eye witnesses the militants shifted religious books and Qurans from the shrine to the nearby mosque before the explosion.

In another development a market was blown up in Adezai Area of Peshawar, destroying some 25 shops.

According to the Mattni police, targeting the market has become commonplace, and a group of long-active local militants was likely behind the incident.

No casualties have been reported so far.

‘US seeks unity government in Pakistan’

[Anything that has the support of the British, the Americans and the Saudis CANNOT be good for Pakistan!]

‘US seeks unity government in Pakistan’

* Time magazine claims US has quietly urged Nawaz Sharif to join government
* Says British and Saudis have also joined effort to broker unity government
* Political observers sceptical of plan, say ‘it’s like mixing oil and water’

Daily Times Monitor

LAHORE: Although President Barack Obama on Wednesday pledged unwavering support for President Asif Zardari’s government, the Americans have quietly urged former prime minister Nawaz Sharif to also join the government, the Time magazine claims.

No surprise, the paper goes on to say, considering Zardari’s approval ratings are perilously low.

When the US brokered a deal with former president Pervez Musharraf to allow former prime minister Benazir Bhutto and her husband, Zardari, to return, Nawaz, seen too close to Islamists, was left out. His party finished second to Zardari’s Pakistan People’s Party in the election but as Zardari’s political fortunes have plummeted, Nawaz has re-emerged as a contender.

US analysts believe the military will launch a concerted offensive to roll back Taliban gains only if the campaign had broad-based public support. Nawaz has lately spoken out strongly against the Taliban and shares Zardari’s belief in peace with India.

Critics say while serving as prime minister, Nawaz had sought to anoint himself Commander of the Faithful, and to introduce sharia law. His aides, however, deny that he sympathises with fundamentalism.

The effort to broker a unity government has been joined by the British and the Saudis.
But political observers are sceptical of the plan. “This is going to be a very difficult political exercise,” says former ambassador to Washington Riaz Khokhar. “It’s like mixing oil and water. Between these two big leaders, Sharif and Zardari, the level of mistrust is so high. Ideologically, too, they are on different wavelengths. After all they were in the cabinet together last year, and they had serious differences of opinion.”

“It is an open secret that many friends of Pakistan want a unity government,” a PML-Nawaz spokesman told Time. “They realise that our party has popular support. But the point is that we have already made it very clear that we fully support the government on all national issues.” He said the ruling party had not “shown any seriousness” in implementing the constitutional reforms agreed between the two parties.

Another senior party leader said Nawaz was also weighing tactical considerations. “If the PPP government is discredited in the public eye then our party is there as an alternative,” he said. “But if we join the government, and the government is discredited, who will be the alternative? Power could slip to the extremists in that case. For democracy in this country it is important that there is a strong opposition. Besides, as a junior coalition partner, we cannot set the agenda.”

The PPP too appears divided on power sharing. “I think it is a good idea for Nawaz to come into the government and share the burden,” said a senior government official. Another aide to Zardari however tersely dismissed the notion of Nawaz’s joining the government as “pressure tactics” from Washington and yet another accused the US of trying to “micro-manage” Pakistani politics like South Vietnam.

“Eventually, the solutions will have to come from within Pakistan,” said Khokhar. “Anything manufactured in Washington, London or Riyadh will only have limited success.”

There is also the view that Pakistan now faces a crisis too profound to be fixed by a mere realignment of the political establishment. “What is needed is better governance,” said a politician, “not a better-looking government.”

Petraeus Spins Web of Bull Shit to Justify Pakistan’s Coming Destruction

[MOVE was right; he is Gen. Betray-us!]

Al Qaeda’s global base is Pak: Petraeus

AlQaedasglobalbaseisPakPetraeus_4736

Senior leaders of al Qaeda are using sanctuaries in Pakistan’s lawless frontier regions to plan new terror attacks and funnel money, manpower and guidance to affiliates around the world, according to a top American military commander. Gen. David Petraeus, who oversees the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, said in an interview that Pakistan has become the nerve center of al Qaeda’s global operations, allowing the terror group to re-establish its organizational structure and build stronger ties to al Qaeda offshoots in Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, North Africa and parts of Europe. The comments underscore a growing U.S. belief that Pakistan has displaced Afghanistan as al Qaeda’s main stronghold. “It is the headquarters of the al Qaeda senior leadership,” said the general, who took the helm of the military’s Central Command last fall.
In the interview, Gen. Petraeus also warned of difficult months ahead in Afghanistan, saying Taliban militants are moving weapons and forces into areas where the U.S. is adding troops, planning a “surge” of their own to counter the U.S. plan. The commander said the U.S. had intelligence showing that the Taliban were deploying new fighters to southern Afghanistan, appointing new local commanders, and prepositioning weapons and other supplies. “We have every expectation that the Taliban will fight to retain the sanctuaries and safe havens that they’ve been able to establish,” he said. Senior Obama administration officials have spoken publicly for weeks about the threat posed by Pakistan. In late March, President Barack Obama said that Pakistan’s lawless border region had “become the most dangerous place in the world” for Americans. Pakistani officials have acknowledged that their country is facing a growing threat from al Qaeda, the Taliban and other armed Islamist groups. Appearing at the White House on Wednesday with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari pledged to “stand with our brother Karzai and the people of Afghanistan against this common threat, this menace, which I have called a cancer.” Pakistani Ambassador Hussein Haqqani said in an email that his government is “determined to eliminate Al Qaeda and the terrorist Taliban.” He added, “We have launched a major offensive against the Taliban and look forward to acting on any actionable intelligence shared with us by our American partners.” U.S. officials once believed that years of strikes had broken al Qaeda’s leadership into smaller, less effective splinter groups. But in the interview, Gen. Petraeus said U.S. intelligence information suggested that al Qaeda has re-emerged as a centrally directed organization capable of helping to plan attacks in other countries. “There is a degree of hierarchy, there is a degree of interconnection, and there is certainly a flow of people, money, expertise, explosives and knowledge,” he said. A U.S. soldier returns fire from a base camp on a Taliban position in the Korengal Valley of Afghanistan’s Kunar Province on Friday. Gen. Petraeus painted a picture of a globalized al Qaeda that maintains extensive logistical and communications links to terror groups in Morocco, Somalia and other countries. He said militants and supplies pass through southern Iran, helped by Sunni Arab “facilitators” in the predominantly Shiite Persian country. A ring of Tunisian suicide bombers who were recently apprehended in Iraq appear to have received their directions from al Qaeda figures in Pakistan as well, he said. “There’s absolutely no question about these links,” he said. American intelligence agencies have used drones to fire missiles at dozens of militant targets inside Pakistan in recent months, killing several top al Qaeda figures. But U.S. officials acknowledge that al Qaeda’s senior leadership has survived those attacks. Al Qaeda’s resurgence in Pakistan is posing a policy dilemma for the Obama administration and senior U.S. commanders like Gen. Petraeus. Pakistan’s government won’t allow U.S. military personnel into the country. That is forcing the U.S. either to strike targets from a distance, which doesn’t always work, or to rely on Pakistan’s own security personnel, who have so far been largely unwilling to venture into al Qaeda’s remote sanctuaries. The Pentagon has looked at possible changes in Afghanistan amid concern over the course of the conflict — some of which have met resistance from current military leaders including Gen. Petraeus. A task force formed by Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is conducting a broad review, according to a copy of its agenda. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is expected to appoint an additional general to handle day-to-day operations there, senior defense officials say. A spokesman for Gen. Petraeus has declined to comment. Gen. Petraeus spent the past week in Washington as part of the Obama administration’s summit with presidents Karzai and Zardari. He said the Pakistani Taliban appear to have overreached by sending fighters into the Buner District, just 60 miles from the capital. Echoing recent comments from top Obama administration officials, he said Pakistan’s government, military and people seemed to have finally accepted that the Taliban pose a threat to their country’s future and must be dealt with. “There’s a sense of collective determination to respond forcefully,” he said. “The Taliban challenged the very writ of the Pakistani government, and that’s being taken very seriously.” Still, he said it was too soon to gauge the full magnitude or duration of the Pakistani response.

White House to Send Predators to “Pearly Gates,” in Search of Dead Leader

Osama needs to be brought to justice: White House

Submitted 4 hrs 28 mins ago

US President Barack Obama believes that Osama bin Laden, the most wanted terrorist of the world, along with others must be brought to justice and also the war against terrorism is just not related to one individual, the White House said. However, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said the United States at present does not have any information if Osama bin Laden is dead or alive. “I think the President certainly believes that Osama bin Laden and others should be brought to justice. I think also the President has discussed and I think it’s obvious with what’s going on in Pakistan and Afghanistan now is that our focus has to be in addressing all of the security concerns, not just focusing on one individual,” he said.

At least 8 killed, 7 injured as US drone fired four missiles in South Waziristan

[Don't even think about ending your offensive, Kayani!]

At least 8 killed, 7 injured as US drone fired four missiles

in South Waziristan

Submitted 49 mins ago

At least 8 killed, 7 injured as US drone fired four missiles in South Waziristan

At least eight persons were killed and seven injured in U.S. drone missile attacks at Sararogha area in South Waziristan Agency (SWA). Sources said that the U.S. drones fired four missiles on one house and madrassa at Sararogha area of South Waziristan, which left at least eight killed and seven wounded. The local people helping themselves recovered eight bodies from under the debris, while seven persons were wounded, sources said. A suspected US drone fired missiles at a compound used by militants in a northwestern Pakistan tribal area bordering Afghanistan Saturday, causing casualties, officials said. The missiles hit a compound at Tabbi Langar Khel village in restive South Waziristan tribal district bordering Afghanistan, two security officials said. “I can confirm a missile strike at a compound at Tabbi Langar Khel,” one of the security officials said. “According to initial reports there could be casualties,” the official said, adding that insurgents were active in the area where missile strike took place. The latest drone strike comes as Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari is visiting the United States. Around 370 people, including suspected militants, have died in around 39 such attacks since August 2008. Pakistan has paid a heavy price for its alliance with the US in its global fight against extremism with militant attacks killing more than 1,700 people since July 2007. The US military does not, as a rule, confirm drone attacks, but its armed forces and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operating in neighbouring Afghanistan are the only forces that deploy drones in the region.

US drone fires missiles into South Waziristan

[Once again, Obama tries to force open a second front in FATA, in a determined effort to overwhelm the Pakistani Army, thus proving that Pakistan cannot survive without American military intervention.  As if to say, "Zardari is my bitch," or that we own Pakistan, the United States is telling the world that we can do what we want in the region, no matter what anyone says.  This is a warning to Gen. Kayani and Prime Minister Gillani against trying to end their American-ordered offensive in Swat without first cleaning-out Waziristan.]

US drone fires missiles into South Waziristan

ISLAMABAD: A suspected pilotless US drone aircraft fired missiles into South Waziristan, a major sanctuary for al Qaeda and the Taliban, on Saturday.

‘At least four missiles were fired near Sarorogha village but we have no reports where they struck or if there are any casualties,’ said an intelligence official in the region on the Afghan border.

‘I can confirm a missile strike at a compound at Tabbi Langar Khel,’ a security official told AFP.

‘According to initial reports there could be casualties,’ the official said, adding that insurgents were active in the area where the missile strike took place.

DawnNews reported that at least five people were killed in the drone attack.

Pakistan fighting sparks exodus

Pakistan fighting sparks exodus

Appeal for funds to shelter the displaced
have been issued by aid agencies [Reuters]

Pakistan is preparing for a humanitarian crisis as hundreds of thousands of people flee fighting between the Taliban and government troops in the country’s northwest.

Helicopter gunships blasted Taliban positions in the Swat valley on Saturday, as frequent curfews prevented residents from joining those who have already fled.

Sohail Rahman, Al Jazeera’s correspondent reporting from Islamabad, said local residents faced heavy odds in fleeing the fighting,

“Its very difficult because as soon as sporadic fighting occurs between the military and the Taliban then the curfew – unannounced – gets reimposed in that area.”

The UN refugee agency (UNHCR) and Pakistani officials say that about half a million people have been displaced in the last few days since the Pakistani government launched a major offensive against the Taliban.

Another 500,000 people had reportedly been displaced by sustained violence in the region over the last few months, bringing the total number of displaced people to a million.

Aid appeal

Antonia Paradela, a spokeswoman for Unicef, the UN children’s rights organisation, said aid agencies would need more funding to cope with the influx of refugees.

In video

Swat fighting threatens Pakistan army unity
Behind Buner’s frontlines

“We need urgently more funds – for example Unicef needs at least $10m to continue helping the previous group of displaced families, which is more than half a million people. We’re talking now more than 200,000 – and more [are] on the move,” she told Al Jazeera.

The fighting has prompted the abandonment of a peace deal, agreed in February, between the government and the Taliban.

The pact, brokered by a local religious leader, allowed for the enforcement of the Taliban’s strict interpretation of sharia, or Islamic law, across Malakand division – which includes Swat valley – in return for peace.

In depth

Video: Obama says Pakistan is toughest US challenge
Video: Turning to the Taliban
Video: Thousands flee Pakistan Taliban clashes
Q&A: The struggle for Swat
Talking to the Taliban
Pakistan’s war

The deal had been criticised both at home and abroad and  its critics, especially in the US, have welcomed the government’s offensive.During a visit to Washington, Asif Ali Zardari, Pakistan’s president, pledged an all-out war against the Taliban fighters.

“This is an offensive – this is war. If they kill our soldiers, then we do the same,” Zardari told America’s PBS public television.

Zardari was in Washington for talks with Barack Obama, the US president, and Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president.

For his part, Obama pledged a “lasting commitment” to both Pakistan and Afghanistan, where the US is itself fighting Taliban forces.

‘On the run’

Up to 15,000 members of the security forces have been deployed in Swat, located in Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province (NWFP).

The military says it has killed scores of fighters and claims to be beating back the Taliban.

“They are on the run,” the army said in a statement on Saturday, without making clear exactly how much progress it had made in driving fighters from their positions.

People fleeing the area have also accused the military of killing civilians in its bombardment of the area.

Balochistan is the ultimate prize

Balochistan is the ultimate prize

By Pepe Escobar
PART 1: Obama does his Bush impression

It’s a classic case of calm before the storm. The AfPak chapter of Obama’s brand new OCO (“Overseas Contingency Operations”), formerly GWOT (“global war on terror”) does not imply only a surge in the Pashtun Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). A surge in Balochistan as well may be virtually inevitable.

Balochistan is totally under the radar of Western corporate media. But not the Pentagon’s. An immense desert comprising almost 48% of Pakistan’s area, rich in uranium and copper, potentially very rich in oil, and producing more than one-third of Pakistan’s natural gas, it accounts for less than 4% of Pakistan’s 173 million citizens. Balochs are the majority, followed by Pashtuns. Quetta, the provincial capital, is considered Taliban Central by the Pentagon, which for all its high-tech wizardry mysteriously hasnot been able to locate Quetta resident “The Shadow”, historic Taliban emir Mullah Omar himself.

Strategically, Balochistan is mouth-watering: east of Iran, south of Afghanistan, and boasting three Arabian sea ports, including Gwadar, practically at the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz.

Gwadar – a port built by China – is the absolute key. It is the essential node in the crucial, ongoing, and still virtual Pipelineistan war between IPI and TAPI. IPI is the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline, also known as the “peace pipeline”, which is planned to cross from Iranian to Pakistani Balochistan – an anathema to Washington. TAPI is the perennially troubled, US-backed Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline, which is planned to cross western Afghanistan via Herat and branch out to Kandahar and Gwadar.

Washington’s dream scenario is Gwadar as the new Dubai – while China would need Gwadar as a port and also as a base for pumping gas via a long pipeline to China. One way or another, it will all depend on local grievances being taken very seriously. Islamabad pays a pittance in royalties for the Balochis, and development aid is negligible; Balochistan is treated as a backwater. Gwadar as the new Dubai would not necessarily mean local Balochis benefiting from the boom; in many cases they could even be stripped of their local land.To top it all, there’s the New Great Game in Eurasia fact that Pakistan is a key pivot to both NATO and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), of which Pakistan is an observer. So whoever “wins” Balochistan incorporates Pakistan as a key transit corridor to either Iranian gas from the monster South Pars field or a great deal of the Caspian wealth of “gas republic” Turkmenistan.

The cavalry to the rescue
Now imagine thousands of mobile US troops – backed by supreme air power and hardcore artillery – pouring into this desert across the immense, 800-kilometer-long, empty southern Afghanistan-Balochistan border. These are Obama’s surge troops who will be in theory destroying opium crops in Helmand province in Afghanistan. They will also try to establish a meaningful presence in the ultra-remote, southwest Afghanistan, Baloch-majority province of Nimruz. It would take nothing for them to hit Pakistani Balochistan in hot pursuit of Taliban bands. And this would certainly be a prelude for a de facto US invasion of Balochistan.

What would the Balochis do? That’s a very complex question.

Balochistan is of course tribal – just as the FATA. Local tribal chiefs can be as backward as Islamabad is neglectful (and they are not exactly paragons of human rights either). A parallel could be made with the Swat valley.

Most Baloch tribes bow to Islamabad’s authority – except, first and foremost, the Bugti. And then there’s the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) – which both Washington and London brand as a terrorist group. Its leader is Brahamdagh Bugti, operating out of Kandahar (only two hours away from Quetta). In a recent Pakistani TV interview he could not be more sectarian, stressing the BLA is getting ready to attack non-Balochis. The Balochis are inclined to consider the BLA as a resistance group. But Islamabad denies it, saying their support is not beyond 10% of the provincial population.It does not help that Islamabad tends to be not only neglectful but heavy-handed; in August 2006, Musharraf’s troops killed ultra-respected local leader Nawab Akbar Bugti, a former provincial governor.

There’s ample controversy on whether the BLA is being hijacked by foreign intelligence agencies – everyone from the CIA and the British MI6 to the Israeli Mossad. In a 2006 visit to Iran, I was prevented from going to Sistan-Balochistan in southeast Iran because, according to Tehran’s version, infiltrated CIA from Pakistani Balochistan were involved in covert, cross-border attacks. And it’s no secret to anyone in the region that since 9/11 the US virtually controls the Baloch air bases in Dalbandin and Panjgur.

In October 2001, while I was waiting for an opening to cross to Kandahar from Quetta, and apart from tracking the whereabouts of President Hamid Karzai and his brother, I spent quite some time with a number of BLA associates and sympathizers. They described themselves as “progressive, nationalist, anti-imperialist” (and that makes them difficult to be co-opted by the US). They were heavily critical of “Punjabi chauvinism”, and always insisted the region’s resources belong to Balochis first; that was the rationale for attacks on gas pipelines.

Stressing an atrocious, provincial literacy rate of only 16% (“It’s government policy to keep Balochistan backward”), they resented the fact that most people still lacked drinking water. They claimed support from at least 70% of the Baloch population (“Whenever the BLA fires a rocket, it’s the talk of the bazaars”). They also claimed to be united, and in coordination with Iranian Balochis. And they insisted that “Pakistan had turned Balochistan into a US cantonment, which affected a lot the relationship between the Afghan and Baloch peoples”.

As a whole, not only BLA sympathizers but the Balochis in general are adamant: although prepared to remain within a Pakistani confederation, they want infinitely more autonomy.

Game on
How crucial Balochistan is to Washington can be assessed by the study “Baloch Nationalism and the Politics of Energy Resources: the Changing Context of Separatism in Pakistan” by Robert Wirsing of the US Army think-tank Strategic Studies Institute. Predictably, it all revolves around Pipelineistan.

China – which built Gwadar and needs gas from Iran – must be sidelined by all means necessary. The added paranoid Pentagon component is that China could turn Gwadar into a naval base and thus “threaten” the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean.

The only acceptable scenario for the Pentagon would be for the US to take over Gwadar. Once again, that would be a prime confluence of Pipelineistan and the US empire of bases.

Not only in terms of blocking the IPI pipeline and using Gwadar for TAPI, control of Gwadar would open the mouth-watering opportunity of a long land route across Balochistan into Helmand, Nimruz, Kandahar or, better yet, all of these three provinces in southwest Afghanistan. From a Pentagon/NATO perspective, after the “loss” of the Khyber Pass, that would be the ideal supply route for Western troops in the perennial, now rebranded, GWOT (“global war on terror”).

During the Asif Ali Zardari administration in Islamabad the BLA, though still a fringe group with a political wing and a military wing, has been regrouping and rearming, while the current chief minister of Balochistan, Nawab Raisani, is suspected of being a CIA asset (there’s no conclusive proof). There’s fear in Islamabad that the government has taken its eye off the Balochistan ball – and that the BLA may be effectively used by the US for balkanization purposes. But Islamabad still seems not to have listened to the key Baloch grievance: we want to profit from our natural wealth, and we want autonomy.

So what’s gonna be the future of “Dubai” Gwadar? IPI or TAPI? The die is cast. Under the radar of the Obama/Karzai/Zardari photo-op in Washington, all’s still to play in this crucial front in the New Great Game in Eurasia.

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His new book, just out, is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).

He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.

REBRANDING THE LONG WAR, Part 1

REBRANDING THE LONG WAR, Part 1

Obama does his Bush impression
By Pepe Escobar

The “lasting commitment” Washington war-time summit/photo-op between United States President Barack Obama and the AfPak twins, “Af” President Hamid Karzai and “Pak” President Asif Ali Zardari was far from being an urgent meeting to discuss ways to prevent the end of civilization as we know it. It has been all about the meticulous rebranding of the Pentagon’s “Long War”.

In Obama’s own words, the “lasting commitment” is above all to “defeat al-Qaeda”. As an afterthought, the president added, “But also to support the democratically elected, sovereign governments of both Pakistan and Afghanistan.” To have George W Bush’s man in Kabul and former premier Benazir Bhutto’s widow defined as “sovereign”, one would be excused for believing Bush is still in the White House.

In yet another deployment of his impeccable democratic credentials, Karzai has just picked as one of his vice presidential running mates none other than former Jamiat-e-Islami top commander and former first vice president Mohammad Fahim, a suspected drug warlord and armed militia-friendly veteran whom Human Rights Watch deplores as a systematic human-rights abuser. Faheem is Tajik; Karzai is Pashtun (from a minor tribe). Karzai badly needs the Tajiks to win a second presidential term in August.

Possibly moved by the obligatory “deep regret” expressed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Karzai refrained from throwing a tantrum in Washington concerning the latest “precise” US air strike in ultra-remote Farah province in western Afghanistan which, according to local sources, may have incinerated over 100 Afghans, 70% of them women and children. Context is key: it was the inept, corrupt, dysfunctional Karzai administration – monopolized by warlords and bandits – which made so much easier the return of the Taliban in full force.

Obama’s opium war
By now it’s clear that the upcoming, Pentagon-enabled, summer essentially as Obama’s new opium war. In a spicy historic reversal, the British Empire (which practically annexed Afghanistan) wanted the Chinese to be hooked on its opium, while now the American empire wants Afghans to stop cultivating it.

The strategy boils down to devastating the Pashtun-cultivated poppy fields in southern Helmand province – the opium capital of the world. In practice, this will be yet another indiscriminate war against Pashtun peasants, who have been cultivating poppies for centuries. Needless to say, thousands will migrate to the anti-occupation rainbow coalition/motley crew branded as “Taliban”.

Destroying the only source of income for scores of poor Afghans means, in Pentagon spin, “to cut off the Taliban’s main source of money”, which also happens to be the “main source of money” for a collection of wily, US-friendly warlords who will not resign themselves to being left blowing in the wind.

The strategy is also oblivious to the fact that the Taliban themselves receive scores of funding from pious Gulf petro-monarchy millionaires as well as from sections in Saudi Arabia – the same Saudi Arabia that Pentagon supremo Robert Gates is now actively courting to … abandon the Taliban. Since the Obama inauguration in January, Washington’s heavy pressure over Islamabad has been relentless: forget about your enemy India, we want you to fight “our” war against the Taliban and “al-Qaeda”.

Thus, expect any Pashtun opium farmer or peasant who brandishes his ax, dagger, matchlock or rusty Lee-Enfield rifle at the ultra-high tech incoming US troops to be branded a “terrorist”. Welcome to yet one more chapter of the indeed long Pentagon war against the world’s poorest.

You’re finished because I said so
As for the “Pak” component of AfPak, it is pure counter- insurgency (COIN). As such, His Master’s Voice has got to be Central Command commander and surging General David “I’m always positioning myself for 2012″ Petraeus.

Enter the Pentagon’s relentless PR campaign. Last week, Gates warned the US Senate Appropriations Committee that without the approval of a US$400 million-worth Pakistan Counter-insurgency Capability Fund (itself part of a humongous, extra $83.5 billion Obama wants to continue prosecuting his wars), and under the “unique authority” of Petraeus, the Pakistani government itself could collapse. The State Department was in tune: Clinton said Pakistan might collapse within six months.

Anyone is excused for believing this tactic – just gimme the money and shut up - is still Bush “war on terror” territory; that’s because it is (the same extraordinary powers, with the State Department duly bypassed, just as with the Bush administration). The final song, of course, remains the same: the Pentagon running the show, very tight with the Pakistani army.

For US domestic consumption purposes, Pentagon tactics are a mix of obfuscation and paranoia. For instance, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell says, about Pakistan, “This is not a war zone for the US military.” But then Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – who’s been to Pakistan twice in the past three weeks – says the Taliban in AfPak overall “threaten our national interests in the region and our safety here at home”.

He was echoing both Clinton and Gates, who had said that the Taliban are an “existential threat” to Pakistan. Finally, Petraeus closes the scare tactics circle – stressing in a letter to the House Armed Services Committee that if the Pakistani Army does not prevail over the Taliban in two weeks, the Pakistani government may collapse.

That unveils the core of Pentagon’s and David “COIN” Petraeus’ thinking: they know that for long-term US designs what’s best is yet another military dictatorship. Zardari’s government is – rightfully – considered a sham (as Washington starts courting another dubious quantity, former premier Nawaz Sharif). Petraeus’ “superior” man (his own word) couldn’t be anyone but Army Chief of Staff General Ashfaq Kiani.

And that’s exactly how Obama put it in his 100-day press conference last week, stressing the “strong military-to-military consultation and cooperation” and reducing Zardari to smithereens (“very fragile” government, lacking “the capacity to deliver basic services” and without “the support and the loyalty of their people”). Judging by his body language, Obama must have repeated the same litany to Zardari yesterday, live in Washington.
The money quote still is Obama’s appraisal of Pakistan: “We want to respect their sovereignty, but we also recognize that we have huge strategic interests, huge national security interests in making sure that Pakistan is stable and that you don’t end up having a nuclear-armed militant state.”

Pakistani “sovereignty” is a joke; Pakistan is now openly being run from Washington. “We want to respect their sovereignty” does not mean “we” actually will. Obama and the Pentagon – which for all practical purposes treat Pakistan as a pitiful colony – would only be (relatively) comfortable with a new Pakistani military dictatorship. The fact that Pakistani public opinion overwhelmingly abhors the Taliban as much as it abhors yet another military dictatorship (see the recent, massive street demonstrations in favor of the Supreme Court justices) is dismissed as irrelevant.

The Swat class struggle
In this complex neo-colonial scenario Pakistan’s “Talibanization” – the current craze in Washington – looks and feels more like a diversionary scare tactic. (Please see The Myth of Talibanistan, Asia Times Online, May 1, 2009. ) On the same topic, a report on the Pakistani daily Dawn about the specter of Talibanization of Karachi shows it has more to do with ethnic turbulence between Pashtuns and the Urdu-speaking, Indian-origin majority than about Karachi Pashtuns embracing the Taliban way.

The original Obama administration AfPak strategy, as everyone remembers, was essentially a drone war in Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) coupled with a surge in Afghanistan. But the best and the brightest in Washington did not factor in an opportunist Taliban counter-surge.

The wily Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM – Movement for the Enforcement of Islamic Law), led by Sufi Muhammad, managed to regiment Swat valley landless peasants to fight for their rights and “economic redistribution” against the usual wealthy, greedy, feudal landlords who happened to double as local politicians and government officials.

It’s as if the very parochial Taliban had been paying attention to what goes on across South America … Essentially, it was the appropriation of good old class struggle that led to the Taliban getting the upper hand. Islamabad was finally forced to agree on establishing Nizam-e-Adl (Islamic jurisprudence) in the Swat valley.

Continued 1 2

Everyday is Doomsday in Washington

Everyday is Doomsday in Washington

by Tom Engelhardt

A front-page New York Times headline last week put the matter politely indeed: “In Pakistan, U.S. Courts Leader of Opposition.” And nobody thought it was strange at all.

In fact, it’s the sort of thing you can read just about any time when it comes to American policy in Pakistan or, for that matter, Afghanistan. It’s just the norm on a planet on which it’s assumed that American civilian and military leaders can issue pronunciamentos about what other countries must do; publicly demand various actions of ruling groups; opt for specific leaders, and then, when they disappoint, attempt to replace them; and use what was once called “foreign aid,” now taxpayer dollars largely funneled through the Pentagon, to bribe those who are hard to convince.

Last week as well, in a prime-time news conference, President Obama said of Pakistan: “We want to respect their sovereignty, but we also recognize that we have huge strategic interests, huge national security interests in making sure that Pakistan is stable and that you don’t end up having a nuclear-armed militant state.”

To the extent that this statement was commented on, it was praised here for its restraint and good sense. Yet, thought about a moment, what the president actually said went something like this: When it comes to U.S. respect for Pakistan’s sovereignty, this country has more important fish to fry. A look at the historical record indicates that Washington has, in fact, been frying those “fish” for at least the last four decades without particular regard for Pakistani sensibilities.

In a week in which the presidents of both Pakistan and Afghanistan have, like two satraps, dutifully trekked to the U.S. capital to be called on the carpet by Obama and his national security team, Washington officials have been issuing one shrill statement after another about what U.S. media reports regularly term the “dire situation” in Pakistan.

Of course, to put this in perspective, we now live in a thoroughly ramped-up atmosphere in which “American national security” – defined to include just about anything unsettling that occurs anywhere on Earth – is the eternal preoccupation of a vast national security bureaucracy. Its bread and butter increasingly seems to be worst-case scenarios (perfect for our 24/7 media to pounce on) in which something truly catastrophic is always about to happen to us, and every “situation” is a “crisis.” In the hothouse atmosphere of Washington, the result can be a feeding frenzy in which doomsday scenarios pour out. Though we don’t recognize it as such, this is a kind of everyday extremism.

Being Hysterical in Washington

As the recent release of more Justice Department torture memos (which were also, in effect, torture manuals) reminds us, we’ve just passed through eight years of such obvious extremism that the present everyday extremity of Washington and its national security mindset seems almost a relief.

We naturally grasp the extremity of the Taliban – those floggings, beheadings, school burnings, bans on music, the medieval attitude toward women’s role in the world – but our own extremity is in no way evident to us. So Obama’s statement on Pakistani sovereignty is reported as the height of sobriety, even when what lies behind it is an expanding “covert” air war and assassination campaign by unmanned aerial drones over the Pakistani tribal lands, which has reportedly killed hundreds of bystanders and helped unsettle the region.

Let’s stop here and consider another bit of news that few of us seem to find strange. Mark Lander and Elizabeth Bumiller of the New York Times offered this tidbit out of an overheated Washington last week: “President Obama and his top advisers have been meeting almost daily to discuss options for helping the Pakistani government and military repel the [Taliban] offensive.” Imagine that. Almost daily. It’s this kind of atmosphere that naturally produces the bureaucratic equivalent of mass hysteria.

In fact, other reports indicate that Obama’s national security team has been convening regular “crisis” meetings and having “nearly nonstop discussions” at the White House, not to mention issuing alarming and alarmist statements of all sorts about the devolving situation in Pakistan, the dangers to Islamabad, our fears for the Pakistani nuclear arsenal, and so on. In fact, Warren Strobel and Jonathan Landy of McClatchy news service quote “a senior U.S. intelligence official” (from among the legion of anonymous officials who populate our nation’s capital) saying: “The situation in Pakistan has gone from bad to worse, and no one has any idea about how to reverse it. I don’t think ‘panic’ is too strong a word to describe the mood here.”

Now, if it were the economic meltdown, the Chrysler bankruptcy, the bank stress tests, the potential flu pandemic, or any number of close-to-home issues pressing in on the administration, perhaps this would make some sense. But everyday discussions of Pakistan?

You know, that offensive in the Lower Dir Valley. That’s near the Buner District. You remember, right next to the Swat Valley and, in case you’re still not completely keyed in, geographically speaking, close to the Malakand Division. I mean, if the Pakistani government were in crisis over the deteriorating situation in Fargo, North Dakota, we would consider it material for late night jokesters.

And yet, in the strange American world we inhabit, nobody finds these practically Cuban-Missile- Crisis-style, round-the-clock meetings the least bit strange, not after eight years of post-9/11 national security fears, not after living with worst-case scenarios in which jihadi atomic bombs regularly are imagined going off in American cities.

Keep in mind a certain irony here: We essentially know what those crisis meetings will result in. After all, the U.S. government has been embroiled with Pakistan for at least 40 years and for just that long, its top officials have regularly come to the same policy conclusions – to support Pakistani military dictatorships or, in periods when civilian rule returns, pour yet more money (and support) into the Pakistani military. That military has long been a power unto itself in the country, a state within a state. And in moments like this, part of our weird extremism is that, having spent decades undermining Pakistani democracy, we bemoan its “fragility” in the face of threats and proceed to put even more of our hopes and dollars into its military. (As Strobel and Landy report, “Some U.S. officials say Pakistan’s only hope, and Washington’s, too, at this stage may be the country’s army. That, another senior official acknowledged Wednesday, ‘means another coup.’”)

In the Bush years, this support added up to at least $10 billion, with next to no idea what the military was doing with it. Another $100 million went into making that country’s nuclear-weapons program, about which there is now such panic, safer from theft or other intrusion, again with next to no idea of what was actually done with those dollars. And now the Obama administration is rushing to create a new Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund that will be controlled by General David Petraeus, head of U.S. Central Command.

If Congress agrees – and in this panic atmosphere, how could it not? –there will be an initial rushed down payment of $400 million to train the Pakistani military, probably outside that country, in counterinsurgency warfare. (“The fund would be similar to those used to train and equip Iraqi and Afghan soldiers and police, Petraeus said.”)

Doomsday Scenarios

Oh, and speaking of extremism, the ur-extreme statement of the last few weeks came from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and was treated like the most ho-hum news here. In congressional testimony, she insisted that the situation in Pakistan – that Taliban thrust into Swat and the lower Dir Valley – “poses a mortal threat to the security and safety of our country and the world.”

Umm… Okay, the situation is unnerving – certainly for the Pakistanis, the large majority of whom have not the slightest love for the Taliban, have opted for democracy and against military dictatorship with a passion, and yet strongly oppose the destabilizing American air war in their borderlands. It could even result in the fall of the elected government or of democracy itself – not exactly a rare event in the annals of recent Pakistani history. It’s undoubtedly unnerving as well for the American military, intent on fighting a war in Afghanistan that has spilled disastrously across the open border. (As Pakistan expert Anatol Lieven wrote recently: “The danger to Pakistan is not of a Taliban revolution, but rather of creeping destabilization and terrorism, making any Pakistani help to the U.S. against the Afghan Taliban even less likely than it is at present.”)

In other words, it’s not a pretty picture. If you happen to live in the tribal borderlands, or Swat, or the Dir Valley, squeezed between the Taliban, the Pakistani Army, whose attacks cause great civilian harm, and those drones cruising overhead, you may be in trouble, if not in flight – or you may simply support the Taliban, as most of the rest of Pakistan does not. If you happen to live in India, you might start working up a sweat over what the future holds on the other side of the border. But all of this is unlikely to be a “mortal threat” even to Islamabad, the Pakistani military, or that nuclear arsenal American national security managers spend so much time fretting about. It is certainly not a “mortal threat to the security and safety of our country.”

So here’s a little common sense. If Pakistan poses a mortal threat to you in New York, Toledo, or El Paso, well then, get in line. Believe me, it will be a long one and you’ll be toward the back. Despite constant reports that lightly armed Taliban militants are only 60 miles from the “doorstep” of Islamabad, Pakistan’s national capital, and increasing inside-the-Beltway invocations of Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1979 revolution in Iran, you’re unlikely to see a Taliban government in Islamabad anytime soon, or probably ever. As one unnamed expert commented recently in the insider Washington newsletter, the Nelson Report, “I find it troubling that we are hyping the ‘security situation’ in Pakistan. Pakistan is not being taken over, the FATA [Federally Administered Tribal Areas] is. This has been happening since 2004.”

Mind you, when Vice President Joe Biden said something extreme about flu precautions – don’t take the subway! – the media didn’t hesitate to laugh him off stage. When Hillary Clinton said what should be considered the equivalent about Pakistan, everyone treated it as part of a sober national-security conversation.

Of course, when it comes to hysteria, nothing helps like a nuclear arsenal, and in recent weeks nuclear doomsday scenarios have broken out like a swine flu pandemic, even though a victorious Taliban regime in Islamabad with a nuclear arsenal would undoubtedly still find the difficulties of planting and detonating such devices in American cities close to insurmountable.

By the way, for all our kindly talk about how the poor Pakistanis just can’t get it together democracy-wise, the U.S. has a terrible record when it comes not just to promoting democracy in that country, but to really giving much of a damn about its people. In fact, not to put too kindly a point on things, Washington has, over the past decades, done few favors for ordinary Pakistanis. Having played our version of the imperial Great Game first vis-à-vis the Soviets and, more recently, a bunch of jihadist warriors, we are now waging a most unpopular and destabilizing air war without mercy in parts of that country, and another deeply unpopular war just across its mountainous, porous border.

And this brings us to perhaps the most extreme aspect of the mentality of our national security managers – what might be called their empathy gap. They are, it seems, incapable of seeing the situations they deal through the eyes of those being dealt with. They lack, that is, all empathy, which means, in the end, that they lack understanding. They take it for granted that America’s destiny is to “engineer” the fates of peoples half a world away and are incapable of imagining that the United States could, in almost any situation, be part of the problem, not a major part of its solution. This is surely folly of the first order and, year after year, has only made the “situation” in Pakistan worse.

Closing the Empathy Gap?

To complete our picture of this over-the-top moment, we have to leave the heated confines of Washington and head for California’s China Lake. That’s where the U.S. military tests some of its advanced weapons.

On April 20th, Peter Pae of the Los Angeles Times reported the following: “A 5-pound missile the size of a loaf of French bread is being quietly tested in the Mojave Desert north of Los Angeles as the military searches for more deadly and far more precise robotic weapons for modern warfare.”

This tiny missile called the Spike will someday replace the 100-pound Hellfire missiles mounted on our Predator and more advanced Reaper unmanned aerial drones flying those assassination missions over the tribal lands of Pakistan. New weaponry like this is invariably promoted as being more “precise,” and so capable of causing less “collateral damage,” than whatever we’ve been using; that is, as an advance for humanity. But in this case, up to 12 of these powerful micro-weapons will someday replace the two Hellfires now capable of being mounted on a Predator, which means a future drone will have to come home far less often as it cruises the badlands of the planet looking for targets.

According to Pae, this new development is considered a “milestone” in weaponizing robot planes. Chillingly, he quotes Steven Zaloga, a military analyst with the Teal Group Corporation as saying, “We’re sort of at the same stage as we were in 1914 when we began to arm airplanes.”

Not only that but the Spike may someday soon be mounted on a new generation of more deadly drones, one of which, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems’ Avenger or Predator C, is already being tested. It will be able to fly 50% faster than the Reaper and at up to 60,000 feet for 20 hours before returning to base.

In other words, the decisions to be made in future panicky “crisis” meetings in Washington, when “American security” once again faces a “mortal threat,” are already being predetermined in the Mojave desert and elsewhere. In the Pentagon’s eternal arms race of one, a major vote is being cast at China Lake for future Terminator wars. In a crisis mood of desperation, we tend to fall back on what we know. This, too, plays into Washington’s national-security extremism.

By now it should be obvious enough that the military approaches to Afghanistan and Pakistan (or the newly merged Af-Pak battlefield) have been in the process of failing for years. Take just our drone wars: they are not only killing significant numbers of civilians, but also destabilizing Pakistan’s tribal lands – military and civilian officials there have long begged us to ground them – and so creating an anti-American atmosphere throughout that country. Recently, former advisor to Gen. David Petraeus and counterinsurgency expert David Kilcullen told Congress:

“We need to call off the drones… Since 2006, we’ve killed 14 senior Al Qaeda leaders using drone strikes; in the same time period, we’ve killed 700 Pakistani civilians in the same area. The drone strikes are highly unpopular. They are deeply aggravating to the population. And they’ve given rise to a feeling of anger that coalesces the population around the extremists and leads to spikes of extremism… The current path that we are on is leading us to loss of Pakistani government control over its own population.”

Sage advice. If President Obama temporarily suspended the Bush-era drone war, which his administration has recently escalated, it would represent a start down a different path, one not already strewn with the skeletons of failed policies. And while he’s at it – and here’s a little touch of extremism by American standards – why not declare a six-month moratorium on all drone research of any sort, a brief period to reconsider whether we really want to pursue such “solutions” ad infinitum?

Why not, in fact, call for a six-month moratorium on all weapons research? A long Pentagon holiday. Militarily, the U.S. is in no danger of losing significant military ground globally by shutting down its R&D machine for a time, while reconsidering whether it actually wants to lead the planet into a future filled with Spikes and Avengers.

If, however, nothing else was done, at least the president should order his national security team to calm down, skip those crisis meetings on Pakistan, tamp down the doomsday scenarios, and try to take a few minutes to imagine what the world looks like if you’re not in Washington or the skies over our planet. Are there really no solutions anywhere that don’t need to be engineered first in our national capital?

Note: You could easily drown in the tsunami of recent semi-hysterical pieces about the Pakistan or Af-Pak situation. Fortunately, I have Juan Cole’s Informed Comment, Paul Woodward’s The War in Context, and Antiwar.com to depend on to help me sort through the crucial reportage of this moment. What would I do without them? Let me thank as well Christopher Holmes, TomDispatch Tokyo bureau chief, whose keen eye keeps these posts relatively free of goofs. Note as well the appearance of the first TD author photo in this piece. Site photographer Tam Turse took it. We’ll probably be phasing in more of her author photos over the coming months.

Tom Engelhardt is co-founder of the Nation Institute’s TomDispatch. com, is the co-founder of the American Empire Project. His book, The End of Victory Culture, has recently been updated in a newly issued edition. He edited, and his work appears in, the first best of TomDispatch book, The World According to TomDispatch: America in the New Age of Empire (Verso), an alternative history of the mad Bush years.

The New “Face” of Israel

“Lieberman sees us Europeans as a pile of cowards.”

Lieberman and Israeli...

Lieberman and Israeli Ambassador to Germany Yoram Ben-Zeev leave a German parliament building after a meeting with the Foreign Committee of the German Parliament in Berlin on Thursday.
Photo: AP

Afghans riot over air-strike atrocity

Afghans riot over air-strike atrocity

Witnesses say deaths of 147 people in three villages came after a sustained bombardment by American aircraft. Patrick Cockburn, in Herat, reports

Shouting “Death to America” and “Death to the Government”, thousands of Afghan villagers hurled stones at police yesterday as they vented their fury at American air strikes that local officials claim killed 147 civilians.

The riot started when people from three villages struck by US bombers in the early hours of Tuesday, brought 15 newly-discovered bodies in a truck to the house of the provincial governor. As the crowd pressed forward in Farah, police opened fire, wounding four protesters. Traders in the rest of Farah city, the capital of the province of the same name where the bombing took place, closed their shops, vowing they would not reopen them until there is an investigation.

A local official Abdul Basir Khan said yesterday that he had collected the names of 147 people who had died, making it the worst such incident since the US intervened in Afghanistan started in 2001. A phone call from the governor of Farah province, Rohul Amin, in which he said that 130 people had died, was played over the loudspeaker in the Afghan parliament in Kabul, sparking demands for more control over US operations.

The protest in Farah City is the latest sign of a strong Afghan reaction against US air attacks in which explosions inflict massive damage on mud-brick houses that provide little protection against bomb blasts. A claim by American officials, which was repeated by the US Defence Secretary Robert Gates yesterday in Kabul, that the Taliban might have killed people with grenades because they did not pay an opium tax is not supported by any eyewitnesses and is disproved by pictures of deep bomb craters, one of which is filled with water. Mr Gates expressed regret for the incident but did not go so far as to accept blame.

The US admits that it did conduct an air strike at the time and place, but it is becoming clear, going by the account of survivors, that the air raid was not a brief attack by several aircraft acting on mistaken intelligence, but a sustained bombardment in which three villages were pounded to pieces. Farouq Faizy, an Afghan radio reporter who was one of the first to reach the district of Bala Baluk, says villagers told him that bombs suddenly, “began to fall at 8pm on Monday and went on until 10pm though some believe there were still bombs falling later”. A prolonged bombing attack would explain why there are so many dead, but only 14 wounded received at Farah City hospital.

The attack was on three villages – Gerani, Gangabad and Koujaha – just off the main road. It is a poppy growing area of poor farmers and there were several fields of poppies near the villages. The Taliban are traditionally strong here and the police and soldiers waiting around the villages were said by eyewitnesses to be frightened. This would explain why Afghan army commanders might have been eager to call for US airstrikes, though they would have needed the agreement of American special operations officers.

Provincial officials, including the governor Rohul Amin, say that in the lead-up to the bombing there was heavy fighting between hundreds of Taliban and the Afghan Army and police. Going by Mr Faizy’s account there had been, “a fight some seven or eight kilometres from the three villages in which two Afghan Army and a US Humvee were destroyed. A third Afghan Army vehicle was captured.” Three police were killed and four wounded, as was one American and one Afghan army soldier. This was hardly a major military engagement, but the pro-government forces seem to have got the worst of it and their burned out vehicles still stand in the road.

The loss of life in Afghanistan from air strikes is often worse than in Iraq where houses are more modern and usually have basements. In the villages in Farah, people were living in compounds with mud brick walls which crumbled easily. Pictures of the aftermath of the attack show people standing beside the remains of a relative which often only looks like a muddy pile of torn meat. One elderly white bearded man, said by neighbours to have lost 30 members of his family, squats despairingly beside a body that has been torn into shreds. Among the few wounded to stay alive is a child with a badly burned face.

One reason why US bombing inflicts such heavy civilian casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq is that both are very poor countries in which houses are very crowded. When the US used air strikes and heavy artillery with little restraint in the siege of Fallujah in 2004 it caused serious loss of life. Wedding parties in both countries have often been mistaken for “terrorist” gatherings and bombed.

In Afghanistan opinion polls show that support for the Taliban and for armed attacks on foreign forces rises sharply after events like the bombing in Farah. President Hamid Karzai frequently criticises the US military for wantonly inflicting civilian casualties, attacks which his opponents say is an opportunistic effort to burnish his nationalist credentials.

The Taliban increasingly use tactics developed by insurgents in Iraq, notably suicide bombing on a mass scale and IEDs, or mines in the road detonated by a control wires or electronically. In Helmand province yesterday a suicide bomber killed 12 civilians in an attack on a foreign military convoy near the bazaar of the town of Gereshk. No foreign troops were killed by the explosion, though two were wounded.

US troops massacre over 120 civilians in Farah Afghanistan

US troops massacre over 120 civilians in Farah Afghanistan

Over 120 innocent civilians, many of them women and children, were massacred when US war planes bombed villages of Gerani and Gangabad in Bala Baluk district of Farah Province on May 5, 2009.

This is one out of many war crime cases committed by the US troops in Afghanistan over the past few years. The number of innocent civilians killed since Obama took office in Jan.21, reaches to 300 and his so-called “new” strategy for Afghanistan and surge in number of troops has resulted in more such terrible tragedies.

Civilians pay price of war from above

Civilians pay price of war from above

We live, they die. We don’t risk our brave lads on the ground – not for civilians. Not for anything.

Robert Fisk

An Afghan boy places dirt over the grave of one of his family members

A wounded child in Farah yesterday. Up to 120 people, including civilians, were reported to have been killed in a series of US airstrikes on two villages. (Photo: The Times) (more photos)

Of course there will be an inquiry. And in the meantime, we shall be told that all the dead Afghan civilians were being used as “human shields” by the Taliban and we shall say that we “deeply regret” innocent lives that were lost. But we shall say that it’s all the fault of the terrorists, not our heroic pilots and the US Marine special forces who were target spotting around Bala Baluk and Ganjabad.

When the Americans destroy Iraqi homes, there is an inquiry. And oh how the Israelis love inquiries (though they rarely reveal anything). It’s the history of the modern Middle East. We are always right and when we are not, we (sometimes) apologise and then we blame it all on the “terrorists”. Yes, we know the throat-cutters and beheaders and suicide bombers are quite prepared to slaughter the innocent.

But it was a sign of just how terrible the Afghan slaughter was that the powerless President Hamid Karzai sounded like a beacon of goodness yesterday appealing for “a higher platform of morality” in waging war, that we should conduct war as “better human beings”.

And of course, the reason is quite simple. We live, they die. We don’t risk our brave lads on the ground – not for civilians. Not for anything. Fire phosphorus shells into Fallujah. Fire tank shells into Najaf. We know we kill the innocent. Israel does exactly the same. It said the same after its allies massacred 1,700 at the refugee camps of Sabra and Chatila in 1982 and in the deaths of more than a thousand civilians in Lebanon in 2006 and after the death of more than a thousand Palestinians in Gaza this year.

And if we kill some gunmen at the same time – “terrorists”, of course – then it is the same old “human shield” tactic and ultimately the “terrorists” are to blame. Our military tactics are now fully aligned with Israel.

The reality is that international law forbids armies from shooting wildly in crowded tenements and bombing wildly into villages – even when enemy forces are present – but that went by the board in our 1991 bombing of Iraq and in Bosnia and in Nato’s Serbia war and in our 2001 Afghan adventure and in 2003 in Iraq. Let’s have that inquiry. And “human shields”. And terror, terror, terror. Something else I notice. Innocent or “terrorists”, civilians or Taliban, always it is the Muslims who are to blame.

An injured Afghan woman from the Bala Baluk

An injured Afghan woman from the Bala Baluk is seen on a bed at the hospital in Farah province. (Photo: AP)

An Afghan boy places dirt over the grave of one of his family members

An Afghan boy places dirt over the grave of one of his family members after air strikes in Ganj Abad of Bala Buluk district, in Farah province, May 5, 2009. (Photo: Reuters)

Afghan villagers mark new burial site of victims

Afghan villagers mark new burial site of victims who were allegedly killed during the coalition airstrikes in Bala Baluk district of Farah province. (Photo: AP)

A wounded Afghan villager stands amid the rubble of destroyed houses

A wounded Afghan villager stands amid the rubble of destroyed houses after the coalition airstrikes in Bala Baluk district of Farah province. (Photo: AP)

Category: Women, US-NATO, Children, HR Violations – Views: 344

Related

05.05.2009: ‘US air-raid kills over 100 civilians in Farah’
03.05.2009: ISAF troops kill civilian, wounds 2 more in W Afghanistan
30.04.2009: What do Obama’s First 100 Days Mean to Common Afghans?
20.04.2009: America’s Imperialism: We need to see the horrors
18.04.2009: ISAF soldiers kill three civilians in Helmand
15.04.2009: An Apology for an Occupation
13.04.2009: NATO operation killed six civilians in Kunar province of Afghanistan
12.04.2009: America’s Afghan War: The Real World versus Obama’s Marketed Imagery
10.04.2009: Afghan father says his baby dies in coalition raid
09.04.2009: US troops kill five civilians in Afghanistan, governor says
25.03.2009: Bomb kills 10 civilians in eastern Afghanistan
23.03.2009: US-led raid kills five Afghan civilians: officials
11.03.2009: Afghanistan: Terror, U.S. style
20.02.2009: Uncomfortable Others: Afghan Civilians Wounded by America
02.02.2009: Obama More Deadly for Afghan Civilians than Bush (in Jan 2009): “Change” Afghans Should Look Upon with Skepticism
25.01.2009: From Hospital, Afghans Rebut U.S. Account
20.01.2009: Locals claim US-led coalition killed 25 civilians in Kapisa

Afghanistan: DOD Makes Excuses, CNN Rushes to Repeat the Spin

Afghanistan: DOD Makes Excuses, CNN Rushes to Repeat the Spin

By: Siun Thursday May 7, 2009 8:20 am

0
diggs
digg it

Yesterday, while Sec. of State Clinton was expressing “deep regret” over Monday’s civilian deaths in Bala Baluk, US military spokespeople were telling a different story. After similar incidents, one of the usual claims made is that the civilian casualties are inevitable since villagers are “used as human shields by the Taliban” but this time, DOD is spinning at a whole new level, claiming that the Taliban rounded up civilians and killed them with grenades – then loaded the bodies into trucks to use are an anti-American photo op. CNN quickly had Barbara Starr on air repeating the DOD version within hours of the Clinton apology.

Unfortunately for the DOD spinmeisters, the International Committee of the Red Cross has detailed information from the scene – and given the ICRC’s normal reticence and careful neutrality, their credibility certainly beats that of a source that once before attempted to pass off a report from Ollie North that no civilians were killed in a similar attack as a report from a legitimate embedded journalist.

As noted yesterday, the ICRC not only sent investigators after the fact but also had “contacted all sides to warn them that there were civilians and injured people in the area” in advance:

Tribal elders in the villages called the ICRC during the fighting to report civilian casualties and ask for help. As soon as we heard of the attacks we contacted all sides to warn them that there were civilians and injured people in the area.

And their investigating team later concluded:

“We know that those killed included an Afghan Red Crescent volunteer and 13 members of his family who had been sheltering from fighting in a house that was bombed in an air strike,” said the ICRC’s head of delegation in Kabul, Reto Stocker.

The ICRC has been unable so far to confirm a final death toll but Patrick Cockburn writing from Kabul reports:

A ‘Misdirected US air strike’ has killed as many as 120 Afghans, including dozens of women and children. The attack is the deadliest such bombing involving civilian casualties so far in the eight years since the US-led invasion of Afghanistan.

Families in two villages in Farah province in western Afghanistan were yesterday left digging for bodies in the ruins of their mudbrick houses

Survivors said the number of dead would almost certainly rise as the search for bodies continued…

US Marine Special Forces supporting the Afghan army apparently called in the air strike on Tuesday on two villages in Bala Baluk district after heavy fighting with the Taliban.

And RAWA reports:

Dr Atiqullah, a resident of the village, told Pajhwok Afghan News the bombardment destroyed the whole village and some of the mutilated bodies were beyond recognition.

He said they had so far retrieved 123 dead bodies from beneath the debris of the destroyed homes by using tractors.

Finally, a report in Reuters provides more information on the air strike:

People who survived the bombing of houses packed with terrified civilians told Reuters dozens from one extended family alone had died. They wept as they spoke of orphaned children and burying their loved ones’ fragmented remains.

The air strikes, which lasted about an hour, killed 50 members of Sayed Azam’s extended family, he said.

“There were Taliban in the area, and fierce fighting during the day but it ended when it was dark. People thought the fighting was over when suddenly bombings began.”

I wonder if CNN will continue to cover this story – and mention that there was both advance notice of the danger the civilians were in – and that reliable sources contradict the DOD spin?