Obama Sets-Out to Prove That He Is the Anti-Christ

Israel weighs peace with all Muslims

Abraham Rabinovich, Jerusalem | May 13, 2009

Article from: The Australian

ISRAELI Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is to explore the possibility of a comprehensive peace with the entire Muslim world, rather than just a narrow Israeli-Palestinian accord, when he has his first meeting with US President Barack Obama next week in Washington.

As reports surface this week that Arab leaders were looking to offer Israel a “57-state solution” involving peace with the entire Muslim world, Mr Netanyahu met Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and said the Jewish people wanted “harmonious relations” with the Muslim world.

“Israel yearns to reach peace with its Palestinian neighbours and with all the Arab nations,” hesaid.

“We all live in this region and we are all the sons of Abraham.”

The much-anticipated meeting between Mr Netanyahu and Mr Obama is expected to lay down the first clear marker on the direction of the Middle East peace process in the coming years.

Mr Obama has strongly indicated his intention to pursue the process vigorously and not to let it wither, as it has in recent years. He has also spoken approvingly of the Saudi-initiated Arab Peace Plan, which calls for Israel’s withdrawal to the pre-Six Day War borders in return for peace with the Arab world, although he has not specifically endorsed all its provisions.

Mr Netanyahu has until now rejected several of its key provisions, including withdrawal from the Golan Heights, the return of Palestinian refugees to Israel and the establishment of a Palestinian capital in east Jerusalem. It is not clear how the two leaders will propose resolving these issues.

The London-based Arabic-language daily al-Quds al-Arabi reported last week that at Mr Obama’s request, the Arab League was in the process of revising the peace plan to make it more amenable to Israel.

The revisions would reportedly stipulate that a future Palestinian state be demilitarised and, in a major concession, the Palestinians would forfeit the right of refugees to return to Israel proper.

Instead, some of the refugees would be resettled in the Palestinian state to be established on the West Bank and Gaza Strip and the rest would be absorbed in the Arab states where they are now dwelling.

Such changes would go a long way to softening Israeli reservations about the plan, but Arab League Secretary-General Amr Mussa denied the report yesterday, saying there would be “no sweetening” of the plan for Israel.

In an interview with The Times of London, Jordan’s King Abdullah said the entire Muslim world, from Morocco to Indonesia, would recognise the Jewish state if it accepted the Arab peace plan.

“We are offering a third of the world to meet them with open arms,” said the monarch, whose late father, King Hussein, signed a peace agreement with Israel in 1994. King Abdullah warned, however, that there could be another war within 18 months if Israel rejected the peace initiative.

Since the Oslo accords 15 years ago in which Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organisation, headed by Yasser Arafat, began a fitful peace process, it has led only to dead-ends. Whether a regional approach can overcome this deadlock is a major question.

Mr Netanyahu’s recent election appeared to mean a retreat from even the theoretical possibility of peace with the Palestinians because of his outright rejection of a two-state solution, in which an independent Palestinian state would exist alongside Israel. Instead, he suggested building up the Palestinian economy and its institutions to the point of self-government but not sovereignty.

It is considered possible, perhaps likely, that he will feel obliged in his meeting with Mr Obama to shift his position.

“He will have to clearly accept the two-state principle and commit himself to the civic, economic and security development of the Palestinian Authority,” wrote analyst Gidi Grinstein in Ha’aretz yesterday.

They want another 911

more about "They want another 911", posted with vodpod

Pakistan Obediently Prepares American Offensive Against Baitullah Mehsud

[Here is Gen. McChrystal's war being prepared.  I hope Pakistani troops are prepared to take their orders directly from the American commander, because if they are uncooperative they will be taken out of the way.]

Pak planning offensive against Baitullah Mehsud

CNN-IBN

New Delhi: The Pakistani Army is planning to launch an offensive in Waziristan against Beitullah Mehsud next month. Sources close to the Pakistani military said the goal would be to restore state control over the area.

Western diplomats in Islamabad also confirmed plans for the offensive and said Islamabad could declare an emergency in the North West Frontier Province to facilitate the operation.

The province is already facing the pressure of having to care for an estimated half a million refugees fleeing the fighting in Swat and Buner.

The US is rushing $5 million in emergency assistance but is facing an uphill battle trying to convince Congress on releasing $400 million in counter-insurgency funding for the Pakistani military and nearly $2 billion in State Department assistance.

On Tuesday missiles fired by a US drone flattened a house in remote Pakistani tribal areas bordering Afghanistan killing eight people, all militants, official said.

Two missiles fired by the drone hit a compound in Sara Khwara in South Waziristan tribal region, in the second such drone attack in less than two days.

The house, according to officials, was being used by militants to stay before crossing the border or coming back from Afghanistan.

Obama’s Middle East Imperialism

by Shamus Cooke

Global Research, May 10, 2009

The velvet gloves are off and the reality of Obama’s Middle East plans are being revealed: a bare-fisted pummeling of Afghanistan and Pakistan — with Iraq’s fate yet to be determined. The media have been preparing this for months, with incessant talk about the alleged “troop drawdown” in Iraq, the “surge” in Afghanistan and the “immediate threat” that supposedly is represented by Pakistan. It’s now crystal clear that zero “change” will be forthcoming when it comes to U.S. foreign policy, minus a strategic shifting of troops.  This fact was highlighted recently when Obama asked for an additional $83.4 billion in “emergency spending” to fight the Iraq/Afghan/Pakistan wars. It must be noted that so-called “emergency funds” were precisely the avenue Bush chose to fight his wars, enabling him to skirt the already-gigantic military budget. The 2010 military budget is now set at $534 billion (!), not counting emergency spending; a 4 percent increase from the previous year.  At a time when jobs, education, health, and public services are being slashed all over the country, calling such a budget “highly immoral” would be an understatement. Also morally questionable is the extension of the Afghanistan war into Pakistan, a bitter pill to swallow for those who once sincerely believed in Obama’s antiwar rhetoric.  The house appropriations committee recently approved $2.3 billion in “emergency spending” for “assistance” to Pakistan, most of it for the purpose of making war: training Pakistani “counterinsurgency” forces and police and building a fortified U.S. super embassy. In an attempt to fool the American public about Pakistan, Obama has substituted the always-unpopular ground troops with unmanned drones, stepping up the use of this highly inaccurate form of combat since becoming President and consequently killing hundreds of civilians.  Obama has also laid down the law for his puppet presidents in Afghanistan and Pakistan: they will fight his war to the end or be replaced.  The recent scene in Washington of these two Presidents declaring “unity and cooperation” with Obama’s war plans was perhaps the most farcical imperialist media show in recent history. The “historic” meeting took place after weeks of U.S. government and military officials denouncing the two Presidents, along with open suggestions that a “better” leader should lead either country, i.e., wage Obama’s wars.  In the Washington Post we read: “On all fronts,” said a senior U.S. official, “Hamid Karzai has plateaued as a leader.” And: “Obama intends to maintain an arm’s-length relationship with Karzai in the hope that it will lead him to address issues of concern to the United States, according to senior U.S. government officials.”  (May 5, 2009) What are these “issues of concern”? The Post explains: “Obama wanted a renewed commitment by Karzai to better coordinate operations with Pakistan and the U.S., which will expand its military presence in Afghanistan under the president’s revised war strategy against the Taliban.” Karzai got the message, and so did Zardari in Pakistan, who received similar messages from both the media and politicians (the Post article states that Obama has only spoken to Karzai twice since becoming President!).  Above all, Obama wanted completely pliable puppets, as opposed to the anti-American rhetoric both Presidents had used on multiple occasions so as not to appear complicit in having their own people massacred. The meeting of the Presidents quelled this.  Both Presidents sounded as if they were reading scripts as they talked about their “unwavering” fight against the Taliban.  Ironically, a convenient test of loyalty occurred during the summit: it was discovered that American fighter jets had massacred at least 147 people in Afghanistan.  Both Obama and the Afghani President were utterly stoic about the news. Instead of addressing the immense human suffering of the slaughter, they renewed their commitment to the war, while blandly adding: “Every effort is made to reduce civilian casualties.” Although the latest bombing resembles in every way the horrors depicted in Picasso’s painting Guernica, it is not especially unique.  Using fighter jets against the Afghani people has now become common place, with the number of bombing raids increasing month to month.  The Washington Post article explains: “As Taliban activity has increased in recent years, overwhelmed soldiers have increasingly resorted to calling in air strikes, resulting in numerous civilian casualties.” The tried and true colonial tactic of terrorizing a population into submission is now the route being employed in Afghanistan — shock and awe Vietnam style. And although Obama has stated repeatedly that he is trying to “finish up” Bush’s wars, he is in fact escalating them.  The above-mentioned military spending prompted Democratic congresswoman Lynn Woolsey to point out the obvious: “[The spending] will prolong our occupation of Iraq through at least the end of 2011, and it will deepen and expand our military presence in Afghanistan indefinitely.” (Obama promised recently that all troops would be out of Iraq by 2011, the date the Bush administration had previously negotiated.) The question must be asked: Why is Obama pursuing this policy? One easy explanation is Obama’s extremely close ties to Wall Street.  U.S. banks are but one type of corporation that benefit greatly from a U.S.- dominated Middle East.  Becoming the primary banker for the region would be a very profitable endeavor; this applies with equal weight to weapons producing companies, and those paid to “reconstruct” a country after it is destroyed, not to mention corporations — oil, mining, U.S. exporters, etc. — that benefit from having a monopoly over a fully “pacified” nation. Straying from this policy would require that the government pursue policies that directly benefit ordinary people, instead of those that cater to corporations and the rich that own them. Breaking the corporate dominance over social life requires that the market economy (capitalism) itself be opposed, since nothing is produced unless it can be sold for profit on the world market, and where the struggle to dominate this market leads corporations based in different countries to advocate for a policy of never-ending war. Shamus Cooke is a social service worker, trade unionist, and writer for Workers Action (www.workerscompass.org). He can be reached at shamuscook@yahoo.com

The real vs fake Taliban

By Nauman Qaiser | Published: May 13, 2009

The recent threats to young girls – be it outside Park Tower in Karachi, any place where the elite class studies in Lahore, works or hangs out in the urban centres of the country – that they should cover themselves completely and shun western dress, else their faces would be defaced beyond recognition point to the glaring fact that the religious bigots who call themselves “Taliban” are not only at our door steps, but are here to stay. In the meanwhile, the number of terrorism-related incidents in the country, where the prime targets are the personnel of various security agencies besides hundreds of innocent civilians, are increasing day by day. Where does all of this take us?
To answer this question, we must first analyse the primacy of these so-called Taliban, who are known by name of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), and are lead by an ever-elusive Baitullah Mehsud. The common perception, which was recently reiterated after my discussion with an activist of a youth-based organisation that staged a protest demonstration in Lahore against the drone attacks, is that the group of Taliban led by Baitullah Mehsud is an outgrowth or a subsidiary of the Taliban fighting the American forces in Afghanistan, and is, therefore, an antithesis of America and its imperialistic policies in the region. On my suggestion that they should, after the successful demonstration against the drone attacks, stage a protest demonstration against TTP and the extremism spawn by it, the activist was of the view that since Taliban and America are each other’s sworn enemies, a protest against Taliban would favour and please America and its agenda in the region, which their youth organisation wouldn’t want.
This is where the whole problem lies; we haven’t, as yet, been able to differentiate between what I call the “real” Taliban who solely focus on fighting the occupation forces in Afghanistan, and the “fake” Taliban, who are working on a hidden agenda of the United States and its ally, India, to disintegrate Pakistan. I call them fake, because it was during Musharraf’s nine-year rule, whilst we considered ourselves an American ally, that the secret agencies of United States, India, Britain and Afghanistan established their hold throughout the length and breadth of Pakistan by setting up an extensive espionage network of their own, which recruited and subsequently released thousands of trained operatives garbed in the cloths of “Taliban” into the Pakistani territory.
This can be substantiated by the accounts of many journalists covering the war in the north western border of Pakistan, which suggest that the 25,000 strong fighters led by Baitullah Mehsud are not only highly trained but also have state-of-the-art weapons at their disposal. Now one wonders that where does the unabated supply of money and latest war gadgetry come from? These “Taliban” do not have the luxury of windfall revenues generated by the poppy cultivation, as their counterparts in Afghanistan do; neither could they be funded by the ISI, given the kind of havoc they are wreaking in Pakistan. Therefore, all the circumstantial evidence leads to the involvement of some hidden hands, which have their own axe to grind.Moreover, the ease and impunity with which Baitullah and his loyalists address the journalists from their cell phones without being traced down by the modern tracking technology is mind boggling, to say the least. This is the question that troubles a thinking mind that how come a person on whom there is bounty of million of US dollars, and who is known to be freely moving around in the border areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan, get away scot-free from the wrath of US drone attacks? In order to quell misgivings like this and to bring home the point that US is not playing a double game with Pakistan, a series of cosmetic drone attacks on Baitullah’s territory have recently been carried out, in which no serious damage has been done to TTP’s infrastructure.
After the in-depth appraisal of our real enemies, we are in a better position to ascertain that, if unchecked, where this “fake” terrorism and extremism would lead us to. The answer lies in following the chain of history since the Soviet war of 1980s, and its comparison with the current ‘war on Pakistan’.
In the present ‘war on Pakistan, as in the jihad against the “Russian infidels”, America is the key player which is planning and financing the whole project; the role played by Pakistan in the Afghan war has now shifted to India and Afghanistan, both of whom are dealing with the operational level details; the mujahedeen in that war were recruited by Pakistan and US from all over the Islamic world, while the Taliban in the present war against Pakistan are being recruited by US, India, Afghanistan and Britian. Further comparison between the two wars will lead us to the results which US and its allies like India want from this ‘war on Pakistan’.
The prime objective of the War, which is also called Operation Enduring Turmoil by the secret agencies of the US, is to disintegrate Pakistan – give northern Pakistan to Afghanistan, Southwest Pakistan to the Balochs, east of Pakistan to India – by first bringing these fake Taliban into power and than attacking a Pakistan led by these bigots on the plea that the nuclear-armed mullahs would prove very dangerous for the security of the world. This situation is reminiscent of the times when the Taliban in Afghanistan were brought into power only to be attacked in the aftermath of 9/11 on baseless and flimsy grounds. The idea behind the both manoeuvres is the same – in the Afghan war and its aftermath, to bring a puppet regime in Afghanistan; in the present war, to disintegrate Pakistan, and thus to serve Indian interests, besides checking the influence of China and Iran in the region. The so-called insurgency in NWFP and Balochistan is also part of this ‘Big Game’.
By capitulating to these Taliban in the shape of the promulgation of the Nizam-e-Adl regulation, the Pakistani government is implicitly helping the ulterior motives of the great powers involved in this ‘Big Game’. The power given to Maulana Sufi Muhammad and his cohorts to deal on part of the Taliban smacks of utter disregard on part of the government of the sensitivities involved. The flogging of a teenage girl and the threats to the girls in the main cities of the country; Maulana’s interpretation of the Swat deal that the Taliban are allowed to wield weapons, and that they would be immune from being prosecuted in the new “justice” system; his vow to extend the Nizam-e-Adl to other parts of the country, and latest edict saying that appeals in the High Court and Supreme Court are un-Islamic – all of this is not only swiftly “talibanising” the country but also putting the very existence of the country in danger, given the involvement of the world and regional powers in the whole game.
Given the stakes involved, the government needs to act fast, as any dithering on the issue could be fatal for the very existence of the country. The government must, first of all, very candidly discuss with the American officials that this hidden agenda pursued by their country has been exposed, and it would be better if the United States stopped playing the double game forthwith. If the US does not oblige, of which there are great chances, Pakistan should, inter alia, also re-think its cooperation on the War on Terror. Time has come when we see the imperialists and their allies eye-to-eye, else no one would be able to stop the spread of “Talibanisation” and the subsequent disintegration of the country.
The writer is a corporate lawyer based in Lahore
E-mail: naumanqaiser@hotmail.com

Militants attack NATO terminal in Peshawar: police

Submitted 6 hrs 33 mins ago

Dozens of Taliban fighters attacked a terminal for NATO supply trucks outside Pakistan’s northwest city of Peshawar Wednesday, destroying eight vehicles, police said. “Around 40-50 armed militants attacked the depot before dawn. They lobbed several petrol bombs and fled,” police officer Mohammad Ehsanullah said. Two trucks loaded with food for landlocked Afghanistan were gutted in the attack, said senior police officer Abdul Ghafoor. The supplies were being shipped under a transit trade pact between the two countries. Six containers were also destroyed but they were empty, he said. “No NATO supply truck was hit,” Ghafoor said. The militants fled when police reached the area. Firefighters struggled for two hours to bring the blaze under control, he said. Taliban militants routinely attack trucks carrying supplies for US and NATO-led troops fighting a Taliban-led insurgency in Afghanistan. The bulk of supplies and equipment required by those foreign troops across the border is shipped through northwest Pakistan’s tribal region of Khyber.

More B.S. from Petraeus: al-Qaida not operating in Afghanistan

[Again, more B.S. from the head soldier, "al Qaida" conveniently only exists where the US Army wants to go next.  Magically, Afghanistan is clear of the pesky little devils, while Pakistan has just been infused with new visions of demonic little jihadis running-around the country causing all kinds of mayhem that can only be cured with a good dose of "Special Forces."  Once again, for those who aren't paying attention: bin Laden is dead; his terror organization was never called "al Qaida"; most terror attacks blamed on "al Qaida" were committed by other terror groups or the main source of terrorism in the world, the CIA militant network; the words "al Qaida" and CIA are interchangeable, substitute CIA for "al Qaida" in news reports and you would be hearing truth.]

Petraeus: al-Qaida not operating in Afghanistan

Associated Press – May 10, 2009 8:43 AM ET
WASHINGTON (AP) – The chief of the U.S. Central Command says al-Qaida no longer is operating in Afghanistan. But Gen. David Petraeus (peh-TRAY’-uhs) says affiliated organizations still have “enclaves and sanctuaries” in the country.

Petraeus says al-Qaida, which carried out the Sept. 11 attacks, has suffered “very significant losses” in recent months in its hide-outs across the rugged, mountainous border in Pakistan.

He’s praising Pakistan for its offensive to root out Taliban militants sheltering al-Qaida.

Petraeus spoke Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

China, S Arabia, Turkey, UK likely to offer aid for IDPs

By Qudssia Akhlaque

ISLAMABAD: Amid mass exodus from conflict zones leading to an unprecedented humanitarian crisis in Pakistan there are strong indications from diplomatic circles in Islamabad that China, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Britain will soon offer substantial assistance to the government for rehabilitation of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs).

While no formal announcement has been made by these countries yet, representatives of their governments have already conveyed to Pakistan at diplomatic and political levels in the past week or so that aid is in the offing, according to informed official sources. Notably even after the devastating November 2005 earthquake in Pakistan these countries were among the first to come forward with relief assistance.

“Yes, Beijing is definitely considering assistance to help the IDPs and would make a formal announcement shortly,” sources close to the Chinese Embassy told The News on Tuesday. This matter is likely to figure at the third round of the 3-day Pakistan-China Strategic Dialogue, which commenced in Beijing on Tuesday. Pakistan’s Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir is leading the Pakistan delegation while the Chinese team is led by the vice foreign minister.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown is also expected to make some announcement regarding relief assistance for the IDPs after his talks with President Asif Ali Zardari at 10-Downing Street on Wednesday, a senior diplomat hinted on the eve of their meeting.

The outgoing Saudi Ambassador Ali Awadh Asseri recently informed a senior bureaucrat here about the Saudi Arabia’s intention of a major donation for these people, it is learnt. There are signals from the Foreign Office that Turkey will also be forthcoming in this respect with a senior official declaring: “We are expecting something from Turkey soon.”

After giving the green light for launching a new full-scale military operation in Swat last week, Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani appealed to the international community on May 7 to help Pakistan in the rehabilitation of the IDPs. The PM also announced that 1 billion rupees had been allocated by the government for the displaced people in the affected areas.

The Obama Administration, which assured Pakistan last week that it would extend assistance, was the first to announce on Monday $4.9 million emergency in this regard. On Monday ambassadors of UAE and Oman also assured Acting President Dr Fehmida Mirza in separate meetings with her that their governments would help in the rehabilitation of the people of the conflict-hit area.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has responded positively to Pakistan’s appeal for aid, assuring all possible help. He told Interior Minister Rehman Malik in a meeting last week in New York that relevant agencies of the world body had been asked to assess the situation to effectively respond to the urgent needs of the IDPs.

The NWFP government on Monday declared that according to its latest assessment at least 90 billion rupees would be required for the rehabilitation of the estimated six million people of Malakand.

International aid agencies including the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the NWFP government have been warning of the intensifying humanitarian crisis in the latest military offensive against militants in Swat and adjoining areas. They fear the number of displaced persons from the conflict zones in NWFP, which currently stands at an estimated 1.2 million, could swell to 1.5 million, leading to an unprecedented humanitarian crisis. International aid agencies are quick to point out that Pakistan faces the biggest internal displacement since its independence in 1947 and hence the worst human crisis in the country’s history.

It is believed if this massive displacement is not handled on war-footings it could potentially lead to anarchy and result in another disaster. Even President Zardari while drawing attention of the Obama Administration to the plight of the IDPs during his visit to the US warned that if these persons were not properly taken care of, the entire area would become a breeding ground for militancy.

WAR IN WANA: Another Drone attack kills 10 more in S. Waziristan

[Now that Pakistani Army is taking half of the rap for these Predator strikes, they can no longer be called "aggressions," or "acts of war."  Pakistan's "chicken shit" leaders would rather bask in US dollars and pretend that they are fighting real invaders in the persona of the "Pakistani Taliban," than risk fighting against the real daily incursions into Pakistani airspace!  What chance do you have to escape seeing your entire country overrun with refugees and invaders (from both borders) if your Army is unwilling to shoot down the pilotless drones hitting your people?  ANSWER: Pakistan's odds are "0."  You are screwed! Your Army is ours.  Your unbeatable ISI still works for the CIA.  I never thought that I would have to say that.]

Drone attack kills 10 more in SWA

By our correspondent

WANA: Twelve people were killed in yet another US drone attack in South Waziristan Agency (SWA) near the Pak-Afghan border on Tuesday morning.

Tribal sources said six, or possibly more, missiles were fired at three to four houses at Sunrai Zyara Leeta border village at 8 am. One of the houses was destroyed and others were damaged.

The villagers managed to pull out 10 bodies from the rubble of the destroyed house. Five persons were injured and two of them were in critical condition. Most of those killed were related to each other. Tribal sources told The News that two US drones were seen flying over the area during the attack.

Initial reports said the missile strike by the US drones took place in Sra Khawra area in SWA. Subsequently, another report suggested that the target of the US spy plane was Dray Nishtar area, which falls in the North Waziristan Agency. The Sunrai Zyara Leeta village is located in the same area, which is a confluence of South and North Waziristan tribal agencies close to the border with Afghanistan. The area is thinly inhabited.

A senior government official, requesting anonymity, claimed the targeted compounds were being used by local militants as a training and transit camp to launch attacks in Afghanistan. He conceded there was no government presence in the area. He also had no information about the identity of those killed and injured.

Meanwhile, tribal sources said the US drone attack appeared to have been a retaliatory strike for a cross-border assault on the US and Nato forces that originated from the Pakistani territory. There were reports that a Pakistani Taliban commander Noor Wazir had led the attack on the foreign forces in Afghanistan. The US-led Nato forces had reportedly also targeted Noor Wazir’s men and hit targets in the Pakistani territory with the drones.

It was the second US drone attack in three days. Many people were killed in a similar attack in the SWA on Saturday. AFP: No high-value targets were killed in the strike. “It was a drone strike on a compound, where militants used to stay before crossing the border or after coming back from Afghanistan. Ten people were killed — four civilians, four local Taliban and two foreigners,” said one security official on condition of anonymity.

Another security official said two missiles were fired, killing seven to eight militants. “Foreigners and local Taliban were assembled there. It was a compound — like a house in the mountains,” added the official.

But one official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said two women and two children were among those killed in the strike, executed on intelligence that militants were heading to Afghanistan intending to carry out an attack.
By our correspondent

WANA: Twelve people were killed in yet another US drone attack in South Waziristan Agency (SWA) near the Pak-Afghan border on Tuesday morning.

Tribal sources said six, or possibly more, missiles were fired at three to four houses at Sunrai Zyara Leeta border village at 8 am. One of the houses was destroyed and others were damaged.

The villagers managed to pull out 10 bodies from the rubble of the destroyed house. Five persons were injured and two of them were in critical condition. Most of those killed were related to each other. Tribal sources told The News that two US drones were seen flying over the area during the attack.

Initial reports said the missile strike by the US drones took place in Sra Khawra area in SWA. Subsequently, another report suggested that the target of the US spy plane was Dray Nishtar area, which falls in the North Waziristan Agency. The Sunrai Zyara Leeta village is located in the same area, which is a confluence of South and North Waziristan tribal agencies close to the border with Afghanistan. The area is thinly inhabited.

A senior government official, requesting anonymity, claimed the targeted compounds were being used by local militants as a training and transit camp to launch attacks in Afghanistan. He conceded there was no government presence in the area. He also had no information about the identity of those killed and injured.

Meanwhile, tribal sources said the US drone attack appeared to have been a retaliatory strike for a cross-border assault on the US and Nato forces that originated from the Pakistani territory. There were reports that a Pakistani Taliban commander Noor Wazir had led the attack on the foreign forces in Afghanistan. The US-led Nato forces had reportedly also targeted Noor Wazir’s men and hit targets in the Pakistani territory with the drones.

It was the second US drone attack in three days. Many people were killed in a similar attack in the SWA on Saturday. AFP: No high-value targets were killed in the strike. “It was a drone strike on a compound, where militants used to stay before crossing the border or after coming back from Afghanistan. Ten people were killed — four civilians, four local Taliban and two foreigners,” said one security official on condition of anonymity.

Another security official said two missiles were fired, killing seven to eight militants. “Foreigners and local Taliban were assembled there. It was a compound — like a house in the mountains,” added the official.

But one official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said two women and two children were among those killed in the strike, executed on intelligence that militants were heading to Afghanistan intending to carry out an attack.

Taliban not creation of ISI but CIA, says Kaira

NEW YORK, May 11: Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting Qamar Zaman Kaira has said that Taliban were not the creation of ISI but rather CIA.

Addressing to Pakistani community here, the federal minister said that CIA Chief delivered lecturers on the importance of Jihad while visiting Pakistan during the period emerged after the attack of Russia then Soviet Union on Afghanistan.

Talking on on-going military operation, the federal minister said that nearly 1,20,000 brave Pakistani troops are fighting against militants, adding militants would be eliminated completely.

He said that Pakistan at present is the center of war on terror, adding peace in the world is linked with Pakistan.

The minister said that the government is taking all possible resources to take care of people migrating from areas where operation is underway.

Commenting on world’s reservations on seminaries, the minister urged the need of reforms in this regard.

Obama, Pakistan and the Rule of Law

By

Peter Dyer

In the first hour of his administration President Barack Obama affirmed his dedication to the rule of law:

“Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils that we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man — a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience sake.”

In his first full day in office President Obama said: “Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this administration.”

The remarkable campaign and inspiring oratory of the first African-American to be elected to the planet’s most powerful public office sparked worldwide optimism and hope for new and creative approaches to serious national and international challenges.

Two days later, on Jan. 23, the CIA launched two missile attacks on Pakistan. Fifteen people in Waziristan, in Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier Province, were killed by Hellfire missiles launched from unmanned drones.

The attacks were the latest in a series that began several years earlier and intensified in 2008.

As such, despite the Obama campaign mantra, “Change We Can Believe In,” they represented the President’s commitment to a critical component of the Bush administration’s foreign and military policy: expansion of what George W. Bush dubbed the “global war on terror” – from one key theater of the GWOT in Afghanistan across the border into Pakistan.

The attacks are ostensibly aimed at leaders of al-Qaeda who are blamed for the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, and at Taliban militants who slip across the Afghan border to attack U.S., NATO and Afghan government forces.

Hawkish Address

Candidate Obama outlined his position in a hawkish address at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington on Aug. 1, 2007. He said:

“Al-Qaeda terrorists train, travel, and maintain global communications in this safe haven. The Taliban pursues a hit-and-run strategy, striking in Afghanistan, then skulking across the border to safety. This is the wild frontier of our globalized world. …

“But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. … If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and [Pakistan’s leader] won’t act, we will.”

Since the start of the Obama administration about 170 people have been killed inside Pakistan in at least 17 of these attacks. The Pakistan newspaper, “The News,” says the great majority have been civilians.

For many, the killings have thrown a shadow over early hopes for new thinking about Bush’s GWOT, which the Obama administration rebranded as the “Overseas Contingency Operation.”

The missile attacks indicate, as well, that President Obama’s perspective on the rule of law may have less in common with the uplifting eloquence of January than with the disdain consistently displayed during the previous eight years by his predecessor in the Oval Office.

Killing people in Pakistan with Hellfire missiles is against the law.

The attacks violate the Geneva Conventions, the International Covenant on Political and Civil Rights, the United Nations Charter, UN General Assembly Resolution #3314 and the Nuremberg Charter.

Even when the missiles hit their intended targets in Pakistan, the orders to fire are given from thousands of miles away by CIA officials watching on computer screens in North America. CIA teams sit, in effect, as collective judge, jury and executioner.

Protocol II, Article 6(2) of the Geneva Conventions says: “No sentence shall be passed and no penalty shall be executed on a person found guilty of an offence except pursuant to a conviction pronounced by a court offering the essential guarantees of independence and impartiality.”

Extrajudicial Killings

The 170 or so people who have been killed by Hellfire missiles in Pakistan since Inauguration Day represent 170 extrajudicial killings – outlawed not only by the Geneva Conventions but by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights:

Article 6(1): “Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.”

Article 6(2): Sentence of death “can only be carried out pursuant to a final judgment rendered by a competent court.

Unless the Pakistani government has invited the United States to fire missiles into Pakistan, the attacks violate the United Nations Charter Article 2(4): “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”

Perhaps the most far-reaching aspect of the illegality of the drone attacks is that each is an act of aggression.

The United Nations Definition of Aggression, General Assembly Resolution #3314, provides a list of acts defined as aggression, including Article 3(b):  “Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State.”

Article 5 makes it clear — aggression is never legal: “No consideration of whatever nature, whether political, economic, military or otherwise may serve as a justification for aggression.”

This was the position of the Tribunal at the first Nuremberg Trial. At Nuremberg 22 of the most prominent Nazis were tried for war crimes, crimes against peace (aggression), crimes against humanity and conspiracy following World War II.

In the judgment the Tribunal left no doubt as to the enormity of the crime of aggression, labeling it “the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”

Eight German leaders were convicted of aggression at Nuremberg. Five of these received death sentences.

Certainly the scale of American aggression in Pakistan is small compared to that of German aggression in World War II.

But how many civilian deaths, destroyed homes and summary executions does it take for the firing of remote-controlled missiles into Pakistan to qualify as a crime?

Creative Alternatives

It’s not as if there is a lack of compelling and creative alternative visions being proposed by smart people with experience in and knowledge of the region.

For example, as recently reported in The Nation, Akbar Ahmed, former High Commissioner from Pakistan to the UK emphatically told the Congressional Progressive Caucus on May 5 that the best strategy in Pakistan is to work through tribal organizations and networks. He emphasized aid, education and the certain failure of an approach that is primarily military:

“The one thing every Pakistani wants for his kids is education…. Within one to three years you will turn that entire region around. The greatest enemies of the Americans will become their allies.”

In the book outlining Barack Obama’s vision, Change We Can Believe In — Barack Obama’s Plan to Renew America’s Promise, are these words (p. 104) “To seize this moment in our nation’s history, the old solutions will not do. An outdated mind-set which believes we can overcome these challenges by fighting the last war will not make America safe and secure.”

Unfortunately, in its first few months the Obama administration has been fighting the last President’s war. As far as Pakistan is concerned, neither the President’s foreign policy nor his perspective on the rule of law seem to be materially different from those of President Bush.

However, President Obama apparently is now “re-evaluating” the missile strikes, in light of their widespread unpopularity in Pakistan and the threat to the survival of Pakistan’s government.

Perhaps now is a good time to look for an approach that is both legal and more effective in the long term than extra-judicial killings of Taliban militants, al-Qaeda extremists and Pakistani civilians.

Perhaps this is an opportunity for change we can believe in.

Peter Dyer is a freelance journalist who moved with his wife from California to New Zealand in 2004. He can be reached at p.dyer@inspire.net.nz .

A curious time to find so many “spies”

More information about the “spies” arrested recently is needed.

The number of “Israeli spies” arrested in Lebanon in the past three weeks – 15 since April 14 – is shocking, and the information released about the accused is woeful. Espionage is a serious crime, and those who commit it are traditionally put to death. We call on both the state and Hezbollah to be more forthcoming with information on these individuals, especially since the discovery of these new “spy rings” is so conveniently timed.

We doubt there is a coincidence between Egypt’s accusations against Hezbollah in early April and the arrest of the first round of alleged spies on April 14. It seems plausible that Hezbollah maneuvered to protect itself from accusations of plotting against fellow Arabs by saying it was merely trying to help the Palestinians in Gaza – the party did not opine on the value of only sending weapons to a starving population, however.

While Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak may not be the most popular ruler in the Arab world, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah would no doubt lose some of the widespread support he enjoys among Arabs if seen as trying to depose Egypt’s head of state. The party needed a distraction.

Spies are sexy, and their capture makes headlines. The discovery of spy rings casts Hezbollah as a victim, besieged by the neighborhood bully. That becomes the topic of conversation instead of what Hezbollah may or may not have been up to in Egypt.

It is also difficult to ignore how close to the parliamentary elections these “secret agents” are being uncovered. Domestically, Hezbollah and its allies benefit from the conversation focusing on the party as a victim after its brutal show of force nearly one year ago.

The outcome of this election rests on the strength of Michel Aoun, and highlighting the “weakness” of a Hezbollah plagued by spies no doubt softens the party’s image in the minds of undecided Christian voters. If anyone stands to benefit electorally from all this espionage business right before the election, it’s Hezbollah’s main Christian ally.

Without information on how these “spies” were discovered and how the investigation was conducted, we can only guess. Like so much in this country, the rounding up of all these alleged undercover agents has been an opaque process that citizens are expected to blindly trust.

We do know that all of the “spies” arrested in 2009 except one – Marwan Faqih, Hezbollah’s apparently disloyal car dealer arrested in February –were apprehended by the Information branch of the Internal Security Forces.

The Information branch is one of the organs of the Lebanese security apparatus Hezbollah has not infiltrated. That said, as a retired member of the security services told NOW, there is no doubt that any investigation into spies within the party was initiated by the party. It seems Hezbollah fed the Information branch intelligence to avoid investigating alone and potentially being accused of fabricating this spy tale.

Using the Information branch in such a way also creates the false impression that Hezbollah defers in any way to state authority – again an attempt to soften the image it forged for itself last May in advance of elections. But why the Information branch went along on this is unclear.

The 15 people arrested in the last three weeks on accusations of espionage may well turn out to be spies. Without a full explanation of this investigation, we are left to speculate and cast a curious eye at the seemingly perfect timing of these recent discoveries.

CIA Drones Continue to Pry Open Second Front in S. Waziristan, While US Army Drones Pretend to Help Pakistan

[If this story is true then it represents the ultimate sell-out by Zardari, or was the Army responsible for this latest atrocity?  Giving Pakistan permission to name targets for Army drones, but NOT the CIA drones which are actively trying to force-open a second front in S. Waziristan, is NOT a solution; it is a ploy.  Anything less than repelling foreign intruders (whatever their nationality), or breaking-off all cooperation with US/NATO forces is an act of national suicide.  If Pakistani leaders fail to try to defend their people from the rapidly approaching covert war by non-cooperation with American plans, then Pakistan will be another Iraq, within a year.]

Pakistan gets a say in drone attacks on militants

Islamabad and the U.S. military team up to carry out Predator attacks on the Taliban and Al Qaeda. The program marks broad new roles for both.

By Julian E. Barnes and Greg Miller
May 13, 2009

Reporting from Washington — The U.S. military has launched a program of armed Predator drone missions against militants in Pakistan that for the first time gives Pakistani officers significant control over routes, targets and decisions to fire weapons, U.S. officials said.

The joint effort is aimed at getting the government in Islamabad, which has bitterly protested Predator strikes, more directly engaged in one of the most successful elements of the battle against Islamist insurgents.

It also marks a broad new role for the U.S. military in hunting the Taliban and its Al Qaeda allies, who pose a growing threat to both Pakistan and Afghanistan. For years, that task has been the domain of the CIA, which has flown its own Predator missions over Pakistan.

Under the new partnership, a separate fleet of U.S. drones operated by the Defense Department will be free for the first time to venture beyond the Afghan border under the direction of Pakistani military officials, who are working alongside American counterparts at a command center in Jalalabad, Afghanistan.

“This is about building trust,” said a senior U.S. military official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the program has not been publicly acknowledged. “This is about giving them capabilities they do not currently have to help them defeat this radical extreme element that is in their country.”

The program represents a significant departure from how the war against the Taliban has been fought for most of the last seven years. The heavy U.S. military presence in Afghanistan has been largely powerless to pursue the Islamic extremists who routinely escape into Pakistan.

But the initiative carries serious risks for Pakistan, which is struggling to balance a desire for more control over the Predators with a deep reluctance to become complicit in U.S. drone strikes on its people.

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, on a visit to Washington last week, reiterated his nation’s request for its own fleet of Predators. U.S. officials have all but ruled that out, and they described the new, jointly operated flights as an effective compromise.

Pakistani officials said Tuesday that they were working with U.S. officials to better utilize the American technology. In a statement, Husain Haqqani, Islamabad’s ambassador to Washington, said Pakistan remained concerned that the “unilateral” CIA drone strikes violated the nation’s sovereignty.

“Pakistan has not been averse to using every available means in tracking down Al Qaeda and other terrorists,” Haqqani said. “We have been working with the U.S. side to find ways in which the U.S. technological advantage matches up with our desire to uphold our sovereignty within our borders.”

CIA Predators flown covertly in Pakistan continue to focus on the United States’ principal target, Al Qaeda. The military drones, however, are intended to undermine the militant networks that have moved closer to Islamabad, the capital, in recent weeks.

Over the last month, officials said, the U.S. has offered Pakistan control over multiple flights involving the Defense Department’s Predator and more heavily armed Reaper drones.

Pakistan declined an offer to use the drones for its recent military offensives in the Swat Valley and Buner areas, and poor weather has caused other sorties to be scrapped. But the senior U.S. military official said that at least two missions had been flown in recent weeks under Pakistani direction.

The missions have not involved the firing of any missiles, and some U.S. officials have expressed frustration that the Pakistanis have not used the Predator capabilities more aggressively. Officials said Pakistan was given the authority to order strikes on the jointly operated flights as long as there was U.S. agreement on the targets.

Over the last year, Navy Adm. Michael G. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has made repeated trips to Islamabad to push for greater Pakistani cooperation.

The program is part of a broader overhaul of the U.S. military approach in the region. Army Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, named this week to become the new top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, expanded the use of Predators while in Iraq and is expected to do the same in his new post.

The missions are being controlled from the jointly operated command center in Jalalabad. The center contains a “fusion cell” that merges information gathered from American surveillance with human intelligence collected by Pakistani and Afghanistan forces.

Debates between Pakistanis and Americans have taken place within the center over whether potential targets are Taliban leaders or Pakistani tribesmen with only a loose affiliation with the extremists. Nonetheless, U.S. officials said most Pakistani officers in the command center understood the militant threat and were eager to move aggressively.

Pakistani superiors have had more reservations and have equivocated when asked for permission to fire on suspected militants.

Pakistanis have repeatedly emphasized to U.S. military officers that they are reluctant to fire missiles at their own citizens. “They have asked us to try and understand what it is like to be a military that is now required to go against its own people,” said the senior military officer. “I do not think we always have the right perspective of how difficult it is.”

The Pakistani reluctance may also reflect ambivalence in Islamabad over the CIA’s Predator program. The intelligence agency is in the midst of a campaign of strikes on Al Qaeda operatives in Pakistan’s tribal frontier.

The most recent strike came Tuesday, reportedly killing eight people in the South Waziristan region of Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas. Since August, the agency has carried out at least 55 strikes, compared with 10 reported attacks in 2006 and 2007 combined. U.S. officials have said the flights are authorized by the Pakistani government. CIA officials credit Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency with providing on-the-ground information that often leads to Predator strikes. In turn, the CIA has shared sensitive imagery and intercepts with Pakistani counterparts.

Despite that arrangement, U.S. officials avoided offering Pakistan greater control over the CIA drones, in part out of concern about giving Pakistan direct access to a sensitive and secret intelligence operation. At times, U.S. intelligence officials have voiced suspicions that elements of the ISI, which has long-standing relationships with Taliban leaders, have warned targets in advance of U.S. strikes.

U.S. officials also cited a reluctance to take CIA drones away from their efforts to track and kill senior Al Qaeda figures, and stressed that the military drones would pursue a different set of targets, mainly Taliban-linked fighters.

“If it’s true that Pakistan is actually controlling some of these drones, that undermines the concerns [they express] about the attacks,” said Seth Jones, a counter-terrorism expert at Rand Corp.

Pakistan’s permission is crucial to Predator operations, experts said.

“The key is you’ve got to have the approval of the host government,” said Scott Silliman, a former Air Force lawyer who is now a law professor at Duke University. “If you do not, you cross over the line of invading the territorial sovereignty of another country.”

julian.barnes@latimes.com

greg.miller@latimes.com

A General Steps From the Shadows

[The general, besides being leader of an assassination network, is another tool of the One World conspirators, the Council on Foreign Relations.  The reports on this guy just keep going from bad to catastrophic.]

A General Steps From the Shadows

Mannie Garcia/Reuters

Stanley A. McChrystal shown in 2003 with Victoria Clarke, an assistant secretary of defense.

By ELISABETH BUMILLER and MARK MAZZETTI

Published: May 12, 2009

WASHINGTON — Lt. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the ascetic who is set to become the new top American commander in Afghanistan, usually eats just one meal a day, in the evening, to avoid sluggishness.

He is known for operating on a few hours’ sleep and for running to and from work while listening to audio books on an iPod. In Iraq, where he oversaw secret commando operations for five years, former intelligence officials say that he had an encyclopedic, even obsessive, knowledge about the lives of terrorists, and that he pushed his ranks aggressively to kill as many of them as possible.

But General McChrystal has also moved easily from the dark world to the light. Fellow officers on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, where he is director, and former colleagues at the Council on Foreign Relations describe him as a warrior-scholar, comfortable with diplomats, politicians and the military man who would help promote him to his new job.

“He’s lanky, smart, tough, a sneaky stealth soldier,” said Maj. Gen. William Nash, a retired officer. “He’s got all the Special Ops attributes, plus an intellect.”

If General McChrystal is confirmed by the Senate, as expected, he will take over the post held by Gen. David D. McKiernan, who was forced out on Monday. Obama administration officials have described the shakeup as a way to bring a bolder and more creative approach to the faltering war in Afghanistan.

Most of what General McChrystal has done over a 33-year career remains classified, including service between 2003 and 2008 as commander of the Joint Special Operations Command, an elite unit so clandestine that the Pentagon for years refused to acknowledge its existence. But former C.I.A. officials say that General McChrystal was among those who, with the C.I.A., pushed hard for a secret joint operation in the tribal region of Pakistan in 2005 aimed at capturing or killing Ayman al-Zawahri, Osama bin Laden’s deputy.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld canceled the operation at the last minute, saying it was too risky and was based on what he considered questionable intelligence, a move that former intelligence officials say General McChrystal found maddening.

When General McChrystal took over the Joint Special Operations Command in 2003, he inherited an insular, shadowy commando force with a reputation for spurning partnerships with other military and intelligence organizations. But over the next five years he worked hard, his colleagues say, to build close relationships with the C.I.A. and the F.B.I. He won praise from C.I.A. officers, many of whom had stormy relationships with commanders running the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“He knows intelligence, he knows covert action and he knows the value of partnerships,” said Henry Crumpton, who ran the C.I.A.’s covert war in Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 attacks.

As head of the command, which oversees the elite Delta Force and units of the Navy Seals, General McChrystal was based at Fort Bragg, N.C. But he spent much of his time in Iraq commanding secret missions. Most of his operations were conducted at night, but General McChrystal, described nearly universally as a driven workaholic, was up for most of the day as well. His wife and grown son remained back in the United States.

General McChrystal was born Aug. 14, 1954, into a military family. His father, Maj. Gen. Herbert J. McChrystal Jr., served in Germany during the American occupation after World War II and later at the Pentagon. General Stanley McChrystal was the fourth child in a family of five boys and one girl; all of them grew up to serve in the military or marry into it.

“They’re all pretty intense,” said Judy McChrystal, one of General McChrystal’s sisters-in-law, who is married to the eldest child, Herbert J. McChrystal III, a former chaplain at the United States Military Academy at West Point.

General McChrystal graduated from West Point in 1976 and spent the next three decades ascending through conventional and Special Operations command positions as well as taking postings at Harvard and the Council on Foreign Relations. He was a commander of a Green Beret team in 1979 and 1980, and he did several tours in the Army Rangers as a staff officer and a battalion commander, including service in the Persian Gulf war of 1991.

One blot on his otherwise impressive military record occurred in 2007, when a Pentagon investigation into the accidental shooting death in 2004 of Cpl. Pat Tillman by fellow Army Rangers in Afghanistan held General McChrystal accountable for inaccurate information provided by Corporal Tillman’s unit in recommending him for a Silver Star. The information wrongly suggested that Corporal Tillman had been killed by enemy fire.

At the Joint Staff at the Pentagon, where General McChrystal directs the 1,200-member group, he has instituted a daily 6:30 a.m. classified meeting among 25 top officers and, by video, military commanders around the world. In half an hour, the group races through military developments and problems over the past 24 hours.

Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, brought General McChrystal back to Washington to be his director last August, and the physical proximity served General McChrystal well, Defense officials said. In recent weeks, Admiral Mullen recommended General McChrystal to Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates as a replacement for General McKiernan.

One other thing to know about General McChrystal: when he was a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations in 2000, he ran a dozen miles each morning to the council’s offices from his quarters at Fort Hamilton on the southwestern tip of Brooklyn.

“If you asked me the first thing that comes to mind about General McChrystal,” said Leslie H. Gelb, the president emeritus of the council, “I think of no body fat.”

Precious Water

THIRST

Algeria: Former Islamist leaders call on rebels to give up

Adam Turner

Three former leaders of the now extinct Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) late Friday called on armed Islamists still active in Algeria to lay down their weapons and surrender.

Omar Abdelber, Abu Zakaria and Mosaab Abu Daoud issued their appeal on national radio so that the armed Islamist rebels might benefit from a charter for peace and reconciliation which offers amnesty under certain conditions.

The trio said that Amari Saifi alias Abderrazak El-Para, arrested in 2006, had for the first time sent a letter to the still active armed guerrillas in which he praised the initiatives by President Abdelaziz Bouteflika to restore peace and security, APS news agency reported.
Abdelber gave an assurance that armed elements prepared to repent could “trust” the Algerian authorities, going from the experience of those who had already given themselves up.

In 2007 the GSPC took up the name of Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Magreb, a group which in February claimed the kidnapping of two Canadian diplomats and four European tourists.

Four were released on April 22 but a British and a Swiss national remain in captivity. Malian negotiators said they were in the hands of the “group headed by Abdelhamid Abu Zeid”, normally known by the UN as Abid Hammadou. (FOXNews) (AFP)

Tillman’s parents want general’s record reviewed

[Three shots to the head from an American weapon, in a tight grouping from close range, after Tillman and his soldier brother began to speak-out about the war, case closed!  A general who participated in fogging-up the facts on this case has no business running a war against Pakistan.]

Tillman’s parents want general’s record reviewed

By LARA JAKES, AP

WASHINGTON — The parents of slain Army Ranger and NFL star Pat Tillman voiced concerns Tuesday that the general who played a role in mischaracterizing his death could be put in charge of military operations in Afghanistan.

In a brief interview with The Associated Press, Pat Tillman Sr. accused Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal of covering up the circumstances of the 2004 slaying.

“I do believe that guy participated in a falsified homicide investigation,” Pat Tillman Sr. said.

Separately, Mary Tillman called it “imperative” that McChrystal’s record be carefully considered before he is confirmed.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said Defense Secretary Robert Gates has complete confidence in McChrystal, whom he hopes can be confirmed by the Senate before month’s end.

“We feel terrible for what the Tillman family went through, but this matter has been investigated thoroughly by the Pentagon, by the Congress, by outside experts, and all of them have come to the same conclusion: that there was no wrongdoing by Gen. McChrystal,” Morrell said.

Aides to the top Democrat and Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, which will consider the nomination, said they were unaware of

any opposition to McChrystal.

McChrystal, a former “black ops” special forces chief credited with nabbing one of the most-wanted fugitives in Iraq, was tapped Monday to lead U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan. If confirmed by the Senate, he would replace Gen. David McKiernan, who was fired in an unusual wartime shake-up.

In April 2004, McChrystal approved paperwork awarding Tillman a Silver Star after he was killed by enemy fire — even though he suspected the Ranger had died by fratricide, according to Pentagon testimony later obtained by the AP.

The testimony showed that McChrystal sent a memo to top generals imploring “our nation’s leaders,” specifically the president, to avoid cribbing the “devastating enemy fire” explanation from the award citation for their speeches. In 2007, the Army overruled a Pentagon recommendation that McChrystal be held accountable for his “misleading” actions.

In a book published last year, Mary Tillman accused McChrystal of helping create the false story line that she said “diminished Pat’s true actions.”

Her one-sentence e-mail to the AP on Tuesday said: “It is imperative that Lt. General McChrystal be scrutinized carefully during the Senate hearings.”

Last year, however, the Senate unanimously approved promoting McChrystal from a two-star general to a three-star general as director of the Pentagon’s Joint Staff.

Similarly, this time around, Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., “does not foresee any problems with Gen. McChrystal’s confirmation” with the committee, a Levin aide said Tuesday.

Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the committee’s top Republican, backs the decision to change leadership in Afghanistan and will support McChrystal’s nomination, said Brooke Buchanan, a McCain spokeswoman.

McCain was highly critical of the Army’s handling of the Tillman investigation, and in April 2007 he called the service’s actions “inexcusable and unconscionable.”

“My life is over. To hell with it. I’m going to get even with ‘em”

Father: Army ‘broke’ soldier accused of killing 5

AP – Wilburn C. Russell, 73, wipes his eyes after talking to reporters in front of the house his son U.S. …

By SCHUYLER DIXON, Associated Press Writer Schuyler Dixon, Associated Press Writer – 18 mins ago

SHERMAN, Texas – The father of a U.S. soldier accused of killing five fellow troops in Iraq said his son “forfeited his life” but the military bears some responsibility for the rampage.

Wilburn Russell said Tuesday that 44-year-old Army Sgt. John M. Russell wasn’t typically a violent person, but counselors “broke” him before gunfire erupted in a military stress center Monday in Baghdad.

“John has forfeited his life. Apparently, he said (to his wife), ‘My life is over. To hell with it. I’m going to get even with ‘em,’” said the elder Russell, 73.

His father said the younger Russell, an electronics technician, was at the stress center to transfer out of active duty. He said his son was undergoing stressful mental tests that he didn’t understand were merely tests, “so they broke him.”

“I hate what that boy did,” said the elder Russell, speaking in front of the two-story house his son was buying with his German wife in a new subdivision. “We’re sorry for the families, too. It shouldn’t have happened.”

Excerpts of his military record, obtained by The Associated Press, show Sgt. Russell previously did two one-year tours of duty in Iraq, one starting in April 2003 and another in November 2005. The stress of repeat and extended tours is considered a main contributor to mental health problems among troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sgt. Russell, who is facing charges of murder and aggravated assault, was about six weeks from the end of his third tour of duty in Iraq, his father said. Wilburn Russell said his son e-mailed his wife in Germany early this month, telling her officers threatened him during what he called the two worst days of his life.

“His life was over as far as he was concerned,” said the elder Russell, who didn’t know whether his son was being disciplined or facing a discharge. “He loved the military.”

The soldier’s son, John M. Russell II, said he has communicated with his father by e-mail regularly. In the last message he received — April 25, the day after his 20th birthday — the younger Russell said his father sounded normal and planned to be back in Texas to visit in July.

“He’s not a violent person,” the son said. “He’s just a loving, caring guy. He doesn’t like to see anyone get hurt. For this to happen, it had to be something going on that the Army’s not telling us about.”

Sgt. Russell grew up in a rural, unincorporated area of Grayson County and graduated from Tom Bean High School in 1985. Records show he entered the Army National Guard in 1988 and served in the Guard until 1994, when he became an active duty soldier. His military record shows Russell served in Serbia through the last half of 1996 and Bosnia and Herzegovina in the last half of 1998.

He lives with his wife in Germany, where he’s been for most of the past 10 to 15 years, but comes home a couple times a year, his father said.

The elder Russell said his son went active-duty after working various maintenance jobs around Sherman, a town of about 35,000 located about 60 miles north of Dallas. He’d also had a divorce and a few minor criminal scrapes in his hometown before enlisting.

When Russell’s ex-wife sued for divorce in 1991, she obtained a temporary restraining order against him and an order withholding earnings for child support.

In an affidavit attached to the divorce petition, Denise Russell said her husband had committed “acts of family violence” and should be barred from coming within 200 yards of her or their son, then 2 years old. The document specifically cited an incident in which John Russell allegedly took the child after a confrontation with Denise Russell’s mother.

“During this time, respondent physically attacked my mother, age 58, hitting her on the shoulders and about the head,” the affidavit stated.

A call and visit to Russell’s ex-wife weren’t answered Tuesday.

In 1993, a month after the divorce decree was issued, Russell was charged with misdemeanor assault by threats, Grayson County online records show. The matter was later dropped.

Jack McGowen, listed as Russell’s attorney for the divorce as well as the threat case, said Tuesday he couldn’t recall either matter.

Reuben Torres w/Peter Chamberlin

Obama’s War on Pakistan

more about “Reuben Torres w/Peter Chamberlin“, posted with vodpod

Images from the Pakistani Exodus–Reuters

Gen. Stanley McChrystal and Cheney’s Assassination Unit

[According to this article from Paul Joseph Watson, Major Gen. Stanley McChrystal

commanded the assassination unit that answered to Dick Cheney, as revealed by Seymour Hersch.  The ISI and Pakistani Special Forces units are going to have their hands full.]

Cheney Assassination Unit and their Conspiracies

Paul Joseph Watson

Prison Planet.com
Saturday, March 14, 2009

Revelations that a political assassination unit which reported solely to Dick Cheney was in operation during the Bush administration are absent the fact that the unit in question, the Joint Special Operations Command, has been active for decades, has been deployed domestically in the U.S., has killed U.S. citizens, and is an integral part of Barack Obamas expanded wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Seymour Hersh dropped a bombshell when he told a University of Minnesota audience on Tuesday that the Joint Special Operations Command is, An executive assassination ring essentially, and its been going on and on and on, Hersh stated. Under President Bush’s authority, they’ve been going into countries, not talking to the ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people on a list and executing them and leaving. Thats been going on, in the name of all of us.

Subsequent media coverage of Hershs comments, such as a special feature on last nights Countdown with Keith Olbermann, has framed the story in the inaccurate context that the JSOC was a personal hit team acting on behalf of Cheney alone, when in reality the unit was created in 1980 and continues to play a central role in Barack Obamas continuation of the so-called war on terror.

As we learn from the Global Security website, the Joint Special Operations Command in fact comprises mostly of Delta Force soldiers and SEALs. The unit was established in 1980 and is located at Pope Air Force Base, North Carolina and at nearby Fort Bragg.

The assassination unit was not a creation of the Bush administration or Dick Cheney, it has in fact been involved in a number of covert military operations over the last two decades, including the covert U.S. invasions of Panama and Granada, as well as search and rescue missions in Somalia, and searching for alleged war criminals in Yugoslavia.

Notably, the unit also routinely provides support to domestic law enforcement agencies during high profile events such as the Olympics, the World Cup, political party conventions; and Presidential inaugurations, including the 2005 inauguration of George W. Bush, at which a small group of commandoes were deployed under a secret counterterrorism program named Power Geyser.

It was also reported that Delta Force were involved in the largest ever single act of slaughter of civilians by law enforcement in US history – the 1993 siege on the Branch Davidian compound at Waco.

In 1999, Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair revealed that Delta Force units based out of Fort Bragg had been enlisted as part of the assault team on the Branch Davidian Compound. 76 people died in the siege, including 21 children and two pregnant women.

Alex Jones has gone up against Delta Force on numerous occasions while reporting on urban warfare training drills around the country. Delta Force conducted mock raids, dropping bombs in San Antonio, Kingsville, Alice, and Corpus Christie amongst other Texas towns. In many cases, the local authorities were not even warned before Delta Force invaded, and in one case, they even tried to pay off a police chief in San Antonio before he kicked them out.

According to Global Security, Bill Clintons 1994 Presidential Decision Directive 25 exempt(s) the Joint Special Operations Command from the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 18USC Sec.1385, PL86-70, Sec. 17[d]. which makes it illegal for military and law enforcement to exercise jointly.

The Joint Special Operations Command is a sub-unit of the United States Special Operations Command, which is described at the Department of Defenses front man in the global war on terrorism. A New York Times article from last year reported that the Joint Special Operations Command were conducting ground raids in Pakistan supposedly aimed at hunting Al-Qaeda members. Such raids have only increased since Obama came to power.

Once again, the corporate media has completely fudged the most prescient issue arising out of Hershs revelation, which is the fact that the Joint Special Operations Command (mainly comprising of Delta Force) was not merely the brainchild or personal political assassination wing for Dick Cheney, but it has been in operation for decades, including inside the United States, has been involved in the murder of U.S. citizens, and is an integral part of Barack Obamas expansion of the so-called war on terror.

By failing to reverse Bill Clintons PDD25 and not abolishing the Joint Special Operations Command, Barack Obama is in violation of Gerald R. Fords Executive Order 11905, which states, No employee of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, political assassination.”

Lt. General Stanley McChrystal

[Gen. Stanley McChrystal commanded units so secret their existence was denied, running hunter/killer assassin teams in Iraq.  This is further proof of what is in store for Pakistan, as US forces prepare to up their level of daily violations of Pakistani airspace and soil, by launching a war of assassins inside Pakistan, using the most deadly US Special Forces units at their disposal.  Prepare to see many Farah air assaults, backing-up ground assault units.]

Commander’s Intent: Lt. General Stanley McChrystal

Funny thing about the new commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal: for a brief period of time, his name was left out of the Pentagon phone books. That’s because, of course, he was general officer of a series of units whom the Pentagon stubbornly refuses to admit the existence of, even though popular culture and selective leaks have them quite famous and much admired.   Since 9/11, the activities of the Joint Special Operations Command have been hidden, and appropriately so, from the perspective of the government. The Bush Administration declassified the existence of one elite unit, “Grey Fox,” for the benefit of Bob Woodward’s book about the war in Afghanistan. A few commanders of Delta Force, the Army’s top counterterrorist/direct action unit, have written books about the failure to capture Osama Bin Laden.  McChrystal and theater commander David Petreaus developed a close friendship over the past several years, and Petraeus came to view McChrystal as a kindred spirit who saw the war and its progression as he did. An insurgency expert recently retired from the military told me that McChystal shared what Petraeus’s “commander’s intent” — the ability to decipher and implement the strategy as the commander in chief intended. The outgoing commander, McKiernan simply did not inspire Petraeus’s confidence.  And here we are.

Pentagon officials were reluctant to talk about McChrystal’s most recent position but they did not discourage reporters from assuming that his work in special operations meant that the U.S. strategy will rely quite heavily on the capabilities of special operations forces trained in counterinsurgency techniques.

Andrew Exum, a former Army Ranger  who served in Iraq, wrote yesterday on his pseudonymous blog, Abu Muqawama,  that ” I do know that many policy-makers and journalists think that McChrystal’s work as the head of the super-secret Joint Special Operations Command was the untold success story of the Surge and the greater war on terror campaigns.”

Woodward hinted at some of these missions in his latest book and made a public spectacle out of his refusal to provide details.  (Basically, these units used sophisticated biometric identification and advances in signal intelligence technology to track hundreds of militants, and then killed them. The scope of the Pentagon’s insurgency biometric program is much larger than has been reported; my sense is that hundreds of U.S. intelligence collectors used data collected from secret cameras and scanners set up throughout the high insurgency areas.)

Sy Hersh is the Howard Zinn to Woodward’s conventional historian these days, and Hersh is reportedly working a book that would expose a lot about these Pentagon special missions units in the first few years after 9/11. He has reported in the New Yorker that these units were given the authority to track and kill terrorists with minimal oversight, and that special interrogation task forces organized under a program called “Copper Green” were given a green light to use harsh, unapproved interrogation methods against detainees. The Copper Green program might be the Pentagon’ equivalent to the CIA’s “GST” umbrella, the covert series of rendition, collection and interrogation programs that are being widely debated in Congress right now. Hersh calls McChrystal the leader of[these “executive assassination” unit and promises to reveal more in the future. One can accept the basic truth of Hersh’s allegation — that Delta Force and Seal Team Six killed lots of insurgents under a broad classified authority granted to them by the Bush administration — without thinking that the actions were somehow wrong or suspect. On the other hand, if the authority was granted illegally, if the targets were not terrorists… well, then JSOC will have a problem. We will see.

Even though the activities of the JSOC units are as controversial — if not more so — than what the CIA or NSA is alleged to have done under the banner of fighting terrorism, there have been few investigations into the conduct, and few calls to investigate. That’s because, in part, Congress doesn’t know a lot about JSOC’s missions and since 2001 has shown them quite a bit of deference. Congressional investigations into detainee policy and Defense Department practices have focused largely on the activities of policy makers and regular units.

McChrystal must be confirmed by the Senate, and some senators have expressed an interest before in learning more about the JSOC’s recent history.  Knowing how savvy the Defense Secretary is, it’s hard to imagine that McChrystal would have gotten the appointment if he’d been mixed up in potential misconduct or extra-legal behavior that Congress could uncover. The only public blight on McChrystal’s record is his role in the cover-up of Army Ranger Pat Tillman’s death. Congress will be interested to hear him speak about this — it’s hard to get the JSOC commander to testify in public, which was why McChrystal has not spoken about the affair in public — but his confirmation will probably not be jeopardized by this incident alone.

New Commander Prepares Special Ops War

Success and Scrutiny Mark General’s Career

By PETER SPIEGEL and YOCHI DREAZEN

Associated Press

In this April 14, 2003 file photo, then-Major Gen. Stanley McChrystal briefs reporters at the Pentagon.

WASHINGTON -- Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he wants a new commander in Afghanistan to fight the kind of complex counterinsurgency warfare that has come to dominate the campaign there.

His recommendation, Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, certainly fits that bill. Gen. McChrystal, a Green Beret who has spent most of the last year as the top staff officer to Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, spent the previous five years commanding special operations forces in Iraq — units that specialize in guerilla warfare, including the training of indigenous armies.

It was also those skills that officials said Adm. Mullen was counting on when last month he appointed Gen. McChrystal to head a task force to improve Afghan war strategy with a broad mandate to review the entirety of the campaign — including, according to an agenda for the task force viewed by The Wall Street Journal, “appointment of key leaders.”

Like Gen. David H. Petraeus, who will become Gen. McChrystal’s new boss and is credited with turning around the Iraq campaign, Gen. McChrystal has won over converts in the Pentagon because of his intellectual rigor and a flexible decision-making process that lends itself to irregular warfare, senior military officers said. Gen. David McKiernan, the man Gen. McChrystal is succeeding, comes from the more traditional ranks of the Army, having commanded heavy armor brigades and divisions during his 37-year career.

Units under Gen. McChrystal’s chain of command have had notable successes, including the capture of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in 2003 and the killing of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the head of Al Qaeda in Iraq, in 2006.

But the units have also come under intense scrutiny. When Gen. McChrystal was nominated to his current job as director of the Joint Staff last year, the confirmation was delayed because senators wanted more information about the treatment of detainees by special-operations units.

The Pentagon investigated dozens of such allegations, including one Army-related case in which military investigators concluded that an Iraqi military officer in U.S. custody died of “blunt force injuries and asphyxia.”

Though a spokesman, Gen. McChrystal declined to comment. His appointment was eventually approved by the Senate.

A Pentagon inquiry in 2007 into the death of Army Ranger Cpl. Pat Tillman, the former NFL player who gave up a contract with the Arizona Cardinals to volunteer in the Army after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, found that Gen. McChrystal was responsible for forwarding “inaccurate and misleading” information about Cpl. Tillman’s death.

Cpl. Tillman was awarded the Silver Star in 2004 after the Army sent a citation that said he had been killed by enemy insurgents, even though several senior officers had been warned that Cpl. Tillman was likely killed by mistaken gunfire from his own unit, or friendly fire. The Army later determined that he had died from friendly fire. The finding didn’t result in any punishment of Gen. McChrystal.

Knowing and promoting one thing and writing something else to deceive public

This is how propaganda goes. The promoters of the war of terrorism know and promote one thing and write quite the opposite. See this article Pakistan’s ethnic fault line by By Selig S. Harrison in Washington Post, May 11, 2009. S. Harrison writes:

To American eyes the struggle raging in Pakistan with the Taliban is about religious fanaticism. But in Pakistan it is about an explosive fusion of Islamist zeal and simmering ethnic tensions that have been exacerbated by U.S. pressures for military action against the Taliban and its al-Qaeda allies. Understanding the ethnic dimension of the conflict is the key to a successful strategy for separating the Taliban from al-Qaeda and stabilizing multiethnic Pakistan politically.

The reality is that it is the propagandists like S. Harrison who made the struggle an issue of religious fanaticism in the first place. The propagandists as well as the warlords they promote and serve fully know that this crisis is of their own making. The labels are their own creation. The ethnic tensions were deliberately, cunningly and systematically developed by targeting the tribal pashtuns in the name of bombing and eliminating Taliban. When they resisted, everyone of them was labeled as Taliban and at the same time terrorists were inducted from outside so that no peace deal could last between the invading army and the helpless victims of their aggression. The lies about the existence of Alqaeda are used to seamlessly stitch together different pieces of lies and deceptions. harrison writes that “understanding the ethnic dimension of the conflict is the key to a successful strategy….” In fact, there is no strategy in the waiting. This dimension has already been fully understood and exploited for inflaming the war within Pakistan. Only fools would believe that the objective is to “separate Taliban from Al-Qaida and stabilizing Pakistan politically.” What does separation mean? If your stated goal is elimination of the bogey monster, a realistic strategy will be to go for the kill and let God sort them out. This show of compassion for the Pakistan’s existence exposes the malicious intentions.

Harrison goes on to write:

The Pakistani army is composed mostly of Punjabis. The Taliban is entirely Pashtun. For centuries, Pashtuns living in the mountainous borderlands of Pakistan and Afghanistan have fought to keep out invading Punjabi plainsmen. So sending Punjabi soldiers into Pashtun territory to fight jihadists pushes the country ever closer to an ethnically defined civil war, strengthening Pashtun sentiment for an independent “Pashtunistan” that would embrace 41 million people in big chunks of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

“The Pakistani army is composed mostly of Punjabis.” Do you believe this is news or a top classified secret that this person is now revealing to help the US develop a strategy. This is what has already been fully exploited by forcing the Pakistani forces to invade Pashtun areas. Bombing Pashtun villages and telling Musharraf to accept responsibility for the resulting massacres. And that long-term Zionist stooge will come on TV and accept the responsibility for the massacre of young children by the US forces. That was an effective way to put Pashtun against Punjabis.

“For centuries, Pashtuns living in the mountainous borderlands of Pakistan and Afghanistan have fought to keep out invading Punjabi plainsmen.” And the US forced the Punjabi dominated army to do exactly the same in the name of taking out “high value targets” which are not coming to an end in the past 7 years. So, know full well the consequences, the US forced Pakistan to send army into the tribal areas under the pretext of fighting “Jihadists.”

The warlords knew that if “jihadists” are not there, the aggression will naturally produce resistance which will be labeled as jihadists and help perpetuating the crisis. The more you read this article, the more you will understand that this author is describing the strategy which they already promoted and which the warlords have successfully implemented. These write-ups are show pieces to spread new lies and deceptions by continuing to mix truth with falsehood for the next phases in the war.

Harrison sums up the propaganda pieces with quotes from two sold-out souls. The last para of his article gives an indication of what is going to happened and also shows how they have made sure it happens that way: He writes:

In the conventional wisdom, either Islamist or Pashtun identity will eventually triumph, but it is equally plausible that the result could be what Pakistani ambassador to Washington Husain Haqqani has called an “Islamic Pashtunistan.” On March 1, 2007, Haqqani’s Pashtun predecessor as ambassador, the retired Maj. Gen. Mahmud Ali Durrani, said at a seminar at the Pakistan Embassy, “I hope the Taliban and Pashtun nationalism don’t merge. If that happens, we’ve had it, and we’re on the verge of that.”

Did you notice from the events in Pakistan how religious sentiments have deliberately been mixed with nationalistic and ethnic sentiments. Use one dominant group to kill another. Propagate the lies that the victims are terrorists, Islamists, Talibs. Pay others so that they could declare the invaders of Pashtun villages and towns as Kafirs, that will automatically bring religious flavor to the conflict. Supports others from outside so that their terrorist acts could be blamed on the non-existent al-Qaeda and tensions could never ease and the conflict escalates with each passing day.

This article describes exactly how the US proceeded in its war on Pakistan. It only needs a carefully eye to read the propaganda between the lines.

Lebanon displays tools it says Israel used to spy

A police officer shows some of the tools that were seized from suspected Israeli agents spying on Lebanon and Hezbollah militants which include a water cooler, an engine oil can, digital cameras and CD-ROMs, during a news conference in Beirut, Lebanon, Monday, May 11, 2009. In recent weeks, Lebanese authorities have arrested at least 14 people for allegedly spying for Israel as part of the two countries’ long-running espionage battle, security officials said. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla)

By Hussein Malla (AP)
Published: 2009-05-11 15:10:06
Location: BEIRUT

Lebanese police displayed sophisticated devices Monday that they said Israel used to spy on Hezbollah, including a water cooler fitted with sensors to survey the landscape.

Other devices shown to reporters and photographers included a car battery charger that the police said was used to store and transmit data and USB flash drives containing detailed maps of Lebanon. Some of the maps showed bridges and military outposts that were hit by Israeli warplanes during the 2006 war with Hezbollah, police said.

The equipment was seized from Palestinians and from Lebanese who were spying for Israel, they said.

In recent weeks, Lebanese authorities say they have arrested at least 14 suspected spies in the latest episode in the long-running espionage battle between the two countries.

The arrests, which took place mainly in southern Lebanon, appear to be part of a stepped-up campaign against those suspected of gathering information on Hezbollah militants for Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency. The Iranian-backed Hezbollah guerrilla group fought a 34-day war with Israel in 2006 that killed 1,200 people in Lebanon and 159 in Israel.

“Based on the investigation, it appears that their basic logistics mission focused on defining locations, targets, buildings and outposts as demanded by the enemy intelligence,” a police officer told reporters as he displayed the captured items at police headquarters.

The suspected spies were also asked to monitor specific people and strategic targets and to conduct a wide-scale survey of many areas in Lebanon and Syria by using highly sophisticated surveying equipment, the officer said, refusing to be identified by name in line with government regulations.

“Military maps were seized from some agents who defined hundreds of targets in Lebanese territory” before and after the 2006 war, the officer said. He added that investigation showed that all these targets, including buildings, bridges and military outposts, were bombed by Israeli warplanes during the war.

A masked officer pointed to the items as his colleague read from a prepared statement and refused to take questions.

He said the agents used the equipment provided to them by Israel to relay information via “coded radio messages” through satellite or the Internet. One coded transmission device shown to reporters was built into the interior of a cabinet.

Officers also seized forged Lebanese passports and job application forms that they said were to be filled out by potential agents either in southern Lebanon or abroad in the name of a commercial company.

Most of the recent arrests were based on information from a retired Lebanese general charged with spying for Israel last month along with his wife and his nephew, who was a government security agent, Lebanese security officials have said.

Israeli officials have refused to comment on the recent arrests. “It is not our practice to comment on these sorts of allegations when they arise, not in this case, not in any case,” government spokesman Mark Regev said Friday.

Lebanon considers itself at war with Israel and bans its citizens from having any contact with the Jewish state.

Hezbollah’s TV station has said the arrests were the result of coordinated efforts between the group’s security branch and the intelligence arms of the police and the military.

U.S. Engineering A New Disaster In Islamabad?

U.S. Engineering A New Disaster In Islamabad?

The United States engineered – with President Musharraf’s consent – the ‘BB-Musharraf’ deal that turned Pakistani politics upside down. Now the Americans are planning another disaster that could add to the instability. To Pakistani politicians and military: Let’s push for redefining the game instead of repeating mistakes.

By Ahmed Quraishi

Tuesday, 12 May 2009.

WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—The signs are not good. Peter Lyall Grant, a senior British diplomat, was seen in Washington a coupe of weeks ago. He laned quietly in the American capital, coming to see Hillary Clinton and Richard Holbrooke.

Grant, or Sir Grant in Britain, is one of the godfathers of the Benazir-Musharraf deal in 2007 that produced the current political setup in Pakistan. While in Washington he must have also quietly met Husain Haqqani, the Pakistani ambassador to Washington and one of the ‘handlers’ entrusted by Washington to ensure that Mr. Zardari is keeping his end of the deal that brought him to power.

The Saudis have also been approached for help. To move things faster, the U.S. media has already leaked the ‘information’ that the Zardari government may not survive for long. The objective behind this manufactured scare is probably what has been leaked in another story, by another U.S. newspaper, that Washington wants Mr. Nawaz Sharif to join Mr. Zardari’s government as a coalition partner, in order to use Mr. Sharif’s supposed ties to religious parties to help ease Afghan Taliban attacks in Afghanistan.

I haven’t seen anyone in the American newspapers that publish these leaks question the wisdom of their government’s meddling in domestic Pakistani issues. Strange how the free U.S. media is always ready to be manipulated by the government in Washington for such leaks, but that’s another story.

Our American friends are getting ready for another bout of disastrous political engineering in Pakistan. Their last ‘deal’, the Benazir-Musharraf arrangement, where the former Pakistani president blundered by giving the Americans unprecedented rights to form governments in Islamabad, was disastrous because it forced a hasty and unnatural change on domestic stability for which the country was not ready. This is the shortest recipe for destabilizing a nation. It worked in Pakistan. It also worked in Russia in the 1990s until Vladimir Putin came along and ended the Anglo-American political meddling.

Every single day that passes is increasing the price that Pakistan pays for a whole list of American mistakes – both accidental and deliberate. There is no question of stabilizing Pakistan, including the militant-infested areas bordering Afghanistan, without negotiating a new arrangement with Washington based on a new Pakistani doctrine of zero tolerance toward anti-Pakistan threats in the region. Both the Pakistani military and the parliament should adopt this doctrine. This also means confronting our American friends on the following issues without delay:

1. Afghanistan First: The Americans must demonstrate through actions that they are stabilizing Afghanistan. Islamabad must not let Washington get away with knocking its Afghan failure off the news headlines and replace it with Pakistan. Our problems stem from the American mismanagement next door. Pakistan should refuse helping U.S. without a timeframe for U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, demonstrable peace with the Afghan Taliban, and the return of the Pashtuns to the Afghan power structure.

2. American Anti-Pakistanism: The U.S. media is behind the most spectacular anti-Pakistan media campaign ever against our country. It continues unabated, with the purpose of softening the international opinion for a possible military intervention in Pakistan. There is no question this campaign is backed by official U.S. quarters. This has to stop.

3. U.S. Must Stop Grooming Separatists Inside Pakistan: With prodding from CIA, academic programs are being launched in the U.S. that advocate redrawing Pakistani borders. There is a sudden rise in activity on the American think-tank circuit sponsoring ethno-separatist Pakistani seminars and activists. This is in addition to the revival of BLA and its support infrastructure inside Afghanistan under American watch. The fate of this and the undercover Indian intelligence outposts in that country must be settled once and for all.

4. Don’t Lecture Us On India: Apologetic Pakistani officials should tell the U.S. that India in 1971 unilaterally invaded Pakistan exploiting a domestic political crisis. Pakistan had never done anything similar to India before that year. India is portrayed as a responsible country despite having committed aggression against a smaller neighbor without provocation. Can the Americans guarantee India will not repeat this? Three-fourths of Indian military is deployed against Pakistan. We will be fools to trust the Indian ruling establishment. Why should we listen to American lectures on moving our soldiers from the Indian border?

5. Eliminating Afghan Taliban Is Not Pakistan‘s Responsibility: Pacify the Afghan opposition and end this festering regional wound.

6. Stop Backing Insurgencies: Militants in Buner and Dir have been found with anti-aircraft machine guns and other high caliber weapons. These weapons are coming from Afghanistan. Question is: Who on the Afghan soil is arming Pakistani troublemakers?

Instead of letting Washington engineer a new political disaster inside Pakistan, our people in government and the military need to push for redefining the game. Why is Pakistan continuing with the same rules of the game as if 9/11 happened yesterday and not eight years ago?

© 2007-2009. All rights reserved. AhmedQuraishi.com & PakNationalists