Egypt Cutting Gaza Lifeline—Subterranean Steel Wall

Egypt reported working on Gaza border wall



GAZA (Reuters) – Egyptian earth-moving machinery was at work on the Gaza Strip border on Wednesday and an Israeli newspaper said a project was under way to build a subterranean metal wall to block Palestinian smuggling tunnels.


Witnesses in the Gaza border town of Rafah said they could see Egyptian vehicles working just across the fenced frontier but not what they were doing precisely.

Egyptian security sources said the authorities had started digging and placing steel tubes through the ground at several points on the border, without giving details.

Suleiman Awwad, a council representative on the Egyptian side of Rafah, which straddles the border, said the authorities had uprooted trees along the boundary to pave a dirt road and plant devices to monitor and secure the border.

He also did not give details about what the work on the border, where smugglers have built tunnels to take goods into blockaded Gaza. Israel says the tunnels are also used to supply militants of the Islamist Hamas group with explosives and arms.

Awwad said farmers affected by the work on the border were being compensated with about 150 Egyptian pounds ($27) per peach tree and 250 pounds for each olive tree.

The Israeli daily Haaretz reported Egypt was installing an underground metal wall about 20 to 30 meters (70-100 feet) deep along the short border strip where Palestinians have dug a warren of tunnels to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza.

Haaretz said the wall would be nearly 10 km (6 miles) long and "impossible to cut or melt."

Egyptian officials could not be reached to comment on the Haaretz report. Hamas, which rules Gaza, said it was checking.

In spite of Israeli aerial bombing, the tunnel network has not been shut down. Palestinian sources say the flourishing business works with the paid collusion of local Egyptian border guards who are supposed to impede it.

Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005 and its border with the coastal enclave is tightly controlled by the military. Egypt controls the southern border of the strip in a security arrangement with Israel.

(Reporting by Nidal al-Mughrabi in Gaza and Yusri Mohamed in Ismailia; writing by Douglas Hamilton in Jerusalem and Marwa Awad in Cairo; editing by Samia Nakhoul)

($1=5.480 Egyptian Pound)



Allegory about Afghan Shura and Al-Qaeda in Pakistan

Brig Asif Haroon Raja

Brig Asif Haroon RajaLike the myth of Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda headquartered in FATA which I discussed in my previous write up, another absurd claim has been made that Mullah Omar along with his Shura is based in Quetta. This story woven by spin doctors has caught the imagination of policy makers in Washington and they are playing it impishly. Pakistani leaders already harassed by never ending allegations are at a loss how to respond to the latest assault since denials make no impression on the accusers.

After repeating the story several times, US officials laid bare their actual motive by mentioning their flaming desire to employ the horrible drones in Baluchistan including its capital as well. Let us carryout a dispassionate appraisal of this claim. It is now a well known reality that Afghan Taliban hold control of nearly 80% Afghan Territory and wield complete sway in southern, eastern and to some extent western Afghanistan. These regions provide them a secured base to operate into western, central and northern Afghanistan and return back. Had their hold over southern and eastern Afghanistan been weak, it was logical to assume that they might have made FATA or Pashtun belt of Baluchistan adjacent to Helmand Province as their bases of operation.

Now that over 30000 troops of Pakistan Army have taken full control of South Waziristan and division plus force is in North Waziristan, part of which is in Makeen area, any possibility of Afghan Taliban operating from these regions is ruled out. Same is applicable to Al-Qaeda. The only possible space which still requires further scanning is the countryside west of Ladha and Makeen towards Afghanistan border. Using boots on ground strategy, our troops are gradually clearing these areas as well.

Within Afghanistan, morale of US-NATO forces has sunk low and bunker mentality has crept in. Karzai regime has no control over state affairs and his credibility after August fraudulent electionAfghan Shura has eroded further. He is seen as an American stooge at the mercy of non-Pashtun Northern Alliance. Afghan National Army and Police are in bad shape and operationally unfit to confront Taliban challenge. Afghan Pashtuns which are the predominant ethnic entity hate Americans because of their discriminatory attitude against them and are supportive of Taliban. Gulbadin Hikmatyar led Hizb-e-Islami and Jalaluddin Haqqani are also anti-American and anti-Karzai.

Given the favourable operational environment in Afghanistan for the Taliban, it will be utterly foolish on part of Mullah Omar and his Shura to abandon the fully secured bases in Afghanistan and opt for insecure base in Quetta where CIA, FBI, US marines, Blackwater, MI-6, RAW, BLA, BRA, BLF command strong influence. Target killings by BLA in Quetta have become a norm. Jacobabad and Pasni air bases are still under the operational control of US troops as revealed by Lt Gen ® Shahid Aziz and confirmed by Defence Minister. Shamsi base near Kharan had been in use for launching drones. Quetta being the capital city is too open and conspicuous for Mullah Omar to hide particularly when heavy head money for him has been announced and success or failure of Taliban resistance movement depends upon his survivability. Pashtun areas in Baluchistan have not only kept themselves dissociated from RAW backed Baluch insurgency, now turned into separatist movement, but also kept both Afghan and Pakistani Taliban at bay. Under such insalubrious environments, it is preposterous for the US to keep insisting that Afghan Shura is in Quetta. Latest fabrication is that Afghan Taliban Shura has shifted to Karachi under the supervision of ISI where Omar has established a Madrassah.  

If for discussion sake we accept the wacky claims of presence of Afghan Shura in Quetta and that of Osama led Al-Qaeda in FATA theoretically; it implies that as far as US is concerned battle for Afghanistan is almost over. The news should have logically transported Gen McChrystal and his team with joy that the entire Taliban leadership and Al-Qaeda have fled to Pakistan and it will now be much easier for them to get hold of few thousand rag tag Taliban fighters and not more than 100 Al-Qaeda fighters abandoned by their leaders or to win them over? The only precautionary measure required to be taken was to prevent re-entry of Afghan Shura and Al-Qaeda leadership by enhancing border check posts and surveillance means along the entire Afghan-Pakistan border as frequently requested by Pakistan. In addition, he needed to fence and mine the entire length of border as repeatedly proposed by Pakistan but refused by Karzai and USA for reasons best known to them. No such thing has happened since Chrystal is depressed because of Osama phobia. Within Pakistan, once US intelligence agencies acquired credible intelligence, should they not have carried out joint raids on suspected locations without wasting a minute? CIA, FBI and US diplomats should not have encountered any bottlenecks since they move about in Pakistan unchecked and enjoy full cooperation of all law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Was it wise on part of US leadership to broadcast the locations of Omar and Osama prematurely thereby giving them full chance to runaway?

Well knowing that Pakistan Army is deeply committed in fighting foreign agencies sponsored terrorists in various parts of NWFP and FATA and achieving fruitful results, the US instead of feeling mighty pleased and encouraging it to further stabilise these vital regions, it has once again begun to sing the nauseating mantra of ‘do more’ and that too in new areas. Areas in Waziristan which are presently quiet and neutral are being provoked through drone attacks to make them restive. Orakzai Agency is being developed into another bastion. The US is pressing Pakistan to shift more troops from its eastern border and to start operations in Wazir inhabited South Waziristan and in North Waziristan where it alleges most runaways have fled. It is trying to create conditions wherein Pakistan Army is compelled to fight the combined force of Maulvi Nazir, Hakimullah Mehsud and Gul Bahadur. United front would ease up pressure on Hakimullah led TTP, which is in disarray. The US also want the Army and FC in Baluchistan to shift its focus from Baluch held areas where RAW-CIA-MI-6 backed separatist movement is raging and to concentrate towards peaceful Pashtun areas including Quetta where it suspects Afghan Shura is hiding. The US-NATO forces after their failed operation in Helmand are expected to launch another operation in that province once additional US troops arrive so as to force the militants to flee to neighbouring Pashtun belt of Baluchistan and make it volatile.

Having fully committed the army in fighting a futile US war on terror, RAW sponsored terrorists duly aided by Blackwater elements are playing havoc into major cities of Pakistan through almost daily bomb blasts and suicide attacks. Focus is on such targets which hurts the military the most. Attack on a mosque during Friday prayers in Rawalpindi on 27 November, frequented mostly by army senior officers and their sons, was most gruesome. ISI set ups have been repeatedly struck since it is frustrating the designs of enemies of Pakistan. Focus is now towards destabilisation of Punjab, after which emphasis will shift to Sindh to upturn main economic base of Pakistan. While CIA and FBI along with its shady outfits are fully involved in the destabilisation game, the US leaders are hypocritically singing tunes that Pakistan is a key ally and the US seeks its stability and prosperity. Our leaders having been provided with clinching evidence of involvement of RAW in terrorism have still not picked up courage to expose India and to forcefully ask USA to bridle its strategic ally.          

Fact of the matter is that Omar, Osama and nuclear cards are being played with devious intentions. The real purpose behind it is to cast aspersion on Pakistan that Pakistan Army and the ISI are aligned with Afghan Taliban and Al-Qaeda and sheltering them. It implies that there is a nexus between Pakistan-Afghan Taliban and Al-Qaeda and Pakistan is fully supporting Taliban and Al-Qaeda in their war against US-NATO forces in Afghanistan. With leadership of the two deadly organisations based inside Pakistan, it becomes a fit case for USA to mount an offensive against Pakistan to root out safe sanctuaries and turn the corner. Cambodia model is on the cards. Indian forces have begun to mark time in concentration area. Desire for hot pursuit operations inside Pakistan and to extend the radius of action of drones has again been expressed.

The US civil and military leadership instead of wasting time in superfluous blame game and monkey tricks is better advised to concentrate on its work in Afghanistan and put things in order so that Pakistan could become peaceful. Pakistan Army having performed admirably, it is now the turn of Gen McChrystal led US-NATO forces to perform at its end by doing more and creating suitable conditions for safe and honourable exit from the quagmire of Afghanistan.     

Brig Asif Haroon is a Member Board of Advisors, Opinion Maker He writer is a defence and security analyst based in Pakistan.

Administration Threatens To Sidestep Congress In Environmental “Greenmail”

Administration Warns of ‘Command-and-Control’ Regulation Over Emissions

The Obama administration is warning Congress that if it doesn’t move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take a "command-and-control" role over the process in way that could hurt business.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson gestures during a briefing in the U.S. center at the Climate Conference in Copenhagen Dec. 9. (AP Photo)

The Obama administration is warning Congress that if it doesn’t move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take a "command-and-control" role over the process in a way that could hurt business.

The warning, from a top White House economic official who spoke Tuesday on condition of anonymity, came on the eve of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson’s address to the international conference on climate change in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Jackson, however, tried to strike a tone of cooperation in her address Wednesday, explaining that the EPA’s new powers to regulate greenhouse gases will be used to complement legislation pending in Congress, not replace it.

"This is not an ‘either-or’ moment. It’s a ‘both-and’ moment," she said.

But while administration officials have long said they prefer Congress take action on climate change, the economic official who spoke with reporters Tuesday night made clear that the EPA will not wait and is prepared to act on its own.

And it won’t be pretty.

"If you don’t pass this legislation, then … the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area," the official said. "And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it’s going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty."

Climate change legislation that passed the House is stuck in the Senate, but the EPA finding Monday was seen as a boost to the U.S. delegation in Denmark trying to convince other countries that Washington is capable of taking action to follow through with any global commitments.

The economic official explained that congressional action could be better for the economy, since it would provide "compensation" for higher energy prices, especially for small businesses dealing with those higher energy costs. Otherwise, the official warned that the kind of "uncertainty" generated by unilateral EPA action would be a huge "deterrent to investment," in an economy already desperate for jobs.

"So, passing the right kind of legislation with the right kind of compensations seems to us to be the best way to reduce uncertainty and actually to encourage investment," the official said.

Republicans fear that the EPA will ultimately end up stepping in to regulate emissions — though many oppose the congressional legislation as well. They had urged Jackson to withdraw the finding in light of leaked e-mails from a British research center that appeared to show scientists discussing the manipulation of climate data.

Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., ranking Republican on the House Select Committee for Energy Independence and Global Warming, said Tuesday he is going to attend the Copenhagen conference to inform world leaders that despite any promises made by President Obama, no new laws will be passed in the United States until the "scientific fascism" ends.

"I call it ‘scientific fascism,’" Sensenbrenner said during a press conference with fellow climate change skeptics. Sensenbrenner said, "The U.N. should throw a red flag" on scientists who support global warming to the exclusion of dissent.

Administration officials, though, said the e-mails do not change the debate.

Former Vice President Al Gore, a leader in the movement on man-caused climate change, told CNN on Wednesday that the e-mails in questions were 10 years old and taken "out of context."

Spying begins on UK web users

[File-sharing seems to be the target this time.]

Spying begins on UK web users

Paul Marks, technology correspondent
We reported last week on plans to enforce copyright law by forcing internet service providers to spy on consumers to detect and report every piece of copied music, movies, e-books, games and software.
Now one UK ISP, Virgin Media, is trialling some of the technology needed to do that on about 1.6 million of its customers.
Provided by Detica, a subsidiary of defence firm BAE Systems, the system is being used to try and gauge the size of the alleged piracy problem. CView, as the system is known, will take a snapshot of the scale of peer-to-peer music transfers over a few months.

It will do so by copying every packet of data that passes by, and looking for the digital signatures of data transferred using the popular bittorrent, gnutella, and edonkey file sharing protocols.
Whenever it finds a data packet that matches, it will extract the code these protocols use to identify the contents of the packet.
CView will then compare that code with a database of "musical fingerprints" to identify any music being shared, allowing it to work out if the data packet infringes copyright.
As a result, Virgin will find out how much file-sharing traffic is infringing copyright, and what the most-pirated tracks and albums are, the Register reports.
CView won’t be able to finger individual users, because the IP addresses that identify each computer’s connection will be stripped from every packet. But some Virgin customers are worried about the potential for it to be used for snooping at a later date.
CView’s technology could conceivably be used to identify people accessing certain data, for example.
Or it could block certain content, in much the same way as China’s "great firewall".
The anonymisation of the data in Virgin’s assessment phase, and the fact that no humans see it, should mean the technology does not count as illegal interception, says Richard Clayton at the University of Cambridge’s security lab.
But he says on the security group’s blog that "it may take some case law before anyone can say for sure".

We are at war

We are at war

9 December 2009 by Mike Gogulski
Posted in philosophywar10 Comments »

“The State, completely in its genesis, essentially and almost completely during the first stages of its existence, is a social institution, forced by a victorious group of men on a defeated group, with the sole purpose of regulating the dominion of the victorious group over the vanquished, and securing itself against revolt from within and attacks from abroad. Teleologically, this dominion had no other purpose than the economic exploitation of the vanquished by the victors.”

– Franz Oppenheimer, The State, 1908 (emphasis mine)

“The positive testimony of history is that the State invariably had its origin in conquest and confiscation. No primitive State known to history originated in any other manner. On the negative side, it has been proved beyond peradventure that no primitive State could possibly have had any other origins. Moreover, the sole invariable characteristic of the State is the economic exploitation of one class by another. In this sense, every State known to history is a class State.”

– Albert Jay Nock, Our Enemy, the State, 1935 (emphasis mine)

“In Western Europe, as in many other civilizations, the typical model of the origin of the State was not via a voluntary “social contract” but by the conquest of one tribe by another. The original liberty of the tribe or the peasantry thus falls victim to the conquerors. At first, the conquering tribe killed and looted the victims and rode on. But at some time the conquerors decided that it would be more profitable to settle down among the conquered peasantry and rule and loot them on a permanent and systematic basis. The periodic tribute exacted from the conquered subjects eventually came to be called “taxation.””

– Murray Rothbard, For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto, 1973

If we accept the thesis that the states arise and have arisen, not through the hocus-pocus of “social” “contracts”, but through conquest, and are perpetuated as systems of exploitation — especially, to use Nock’s terminology, “of one class by another” — does it not follow that we are at war?

Does it not follow that all people living under state domination and exploitationought to rebel, right now?

Does it not follow that all of the state’s edicts, decrees, laws, proclamations and regulations which affront the sensibility of the individual, the tribe, the family, the neighborhood, ought rightly be ignored, denounced, ridiculed and overthrown?

Does it not follow that state agents are the enemy and deserving, perhaps qualifiedly in some cases, of the same response given to those who violate a peaceful person, a peaceful tribe, a peaceful family, a peaceful neighborhood?

And yet this does not happen. It does not happen despite the noble efforts of generations of philosophers, revolutionaries, scholars, activists and teachers.

The whole planet has been conquered. The whole planet has been beingconquered, and held under conquest and exploitation for the benefit of the smallest, most despicable number, for a great many centuries.

They live. We sleep. And it is we who live the nightmares.

Copenhagen climate summit: global warming ’caused by sun’s radiation’

Copenhagen climate summit: global warming ’caused by sun’s radiation’

Global warming is caused by radiation from the sun, according to a leading scientist speaking out at an alternative “sceptics’ conference” in Copenhagen.

By Louise Gray
Published: 5:10PM GMT 08 Dec 2009

Professor Henrik Svensmark argued that the recent warming period was caused by solar activity. Photo: REUTERS

As the world gathered in the Danish capital for the UN Climate Change Conference, more than 50 scientists, businessmen and lobby groups met to discuss the arguments against man made global warming.

Although the meeting was considerably smaller than the official gathering of 15,000 people meeting down the road, the organisers claimed it could change the course of negotiations.

Professor Henrik Svensmark, a physicist at the Danish National Space Center in Copenhagen, said the recent warming period was caused by solar activity.

He said the last time the world experienced such high temperatures, during the medieval warming period, the Sun and the Earth were in a similar cycle.

Professor Nils-Axel Morner, a geologist from Stockholm University, said sea level rise has also been exaggerated by the “climate alarmists” using computer models.

He said observational data from lake sediments, coast lines and trees show sea levels have remained stable.

Professor Cliff Ollier, another geologist from the University of Western Australia, also said the environmental lobby have got it wrong on ice caps. He said the melting of ice sheets is caused by geothermal activity rather than global surface temperatures.

Professor Ian Plimer, from the University of Adelaide, claimed carbon dioxide from volcanoes rather than humans is driving warming as part of a natural process.

The meeting was organised by Danish group Climate Sense and the lobby group Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT).

Craig Rucker, Executive Director of CFACT, admitted the organisation have taken funding from Exxon Mobil in the past but pointed out that many environmental groups are also receiving funding from major corporations.

Graham Capper of Climate Sense said manmade global warming was a myth and scientists who said otherwise were lying. :

“There are people who know they are lying and do it simply for money and others who think they are doing good,” he said. “But they not good scientists.”

Lord Monckton, a former adviser to Margaret Thatcher, said he was speaking to delegations from the US and Canada about question marks over the science.

He said a recent poll by the Telegraph, that shows only one in two people accept man made climate change, show people are questioning the consensus being pushed by the UN summit.

“As anybody knows who follows the opinion polls in Britain and Australia and the US, in the last few weeks and months there has been a rapid collapse in the global warming chimera so while we still have our freedom, let us speak out.”

Palestinians Must Pay Israelis for Demolition Costs, or Tear It Down Themselves!

[A perfect example of the warped thinking patterns exhibited by Israelis and their leaders.  A normal, non-psychopathic personality, could not even conceive of such outrageous things as this, or the fact that they get away with such behavior on a daily basis.  Don't try to tell me that the world isn't controlled by Zionists and their sympathizers.]

Destroy Your Homes: Israel to Palestinian

Sulaiman Bashrat

IOL, December 6, 2009

WEST BANK – With a desperate look in his eyes, Ghazi Dodeen is gazing at his house in the West Bank village of Hijra.

“I have always dreamed of building this house on this land,” Dodeen told Sunday, December 6.

“Now, I’m asked to either demolish it by my own hands of let Israeli bulldozers do it.”

The helpless Palestinian man received an order from occupation authorities to demolish the house by himself or get Israeli bulldozers bring it down.

The order, which was sent to four other families, warns that the villager would pay the demolition expenses if the house is razed by Israeli bulldozers.

“I’m torn apart,” a heart-broken Dodeen said.

“Demolishing the house by my own hands would haunt me the rest of my life,” he said.

“And if I refused, Israeli bulldozers would destroy it and I would be suffering all my life to collect money to pay for the demolition expenses.”

For decades, Israel has been adopting a series of oppressive measures against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, including systematic demolition of their homes.

Israeli authorities do not issue building permissions for Palestinians who are also banned from renovating their houses unless with an Israeli permit, which they rarely get.

In 1968, Israel enacted a law allowing “illegal” houses to be razed even if permits are pending in the bureaucratic pipeline.

Israel’s HaMoked Center for the Defense of the Individual said last week that Israeli authorities have revoked residency permits of 4,577 Palestinians in 2008, a figure greater than half the total revoked in the past 40 years.

A recent UN report has warned that thousands of Palestinian houses in Al-Quds are facing the risk of mass demolitions by Israel.


Analysts see the unprecedented Israeli demolition order as an attempt to deceive the world about the situation in the occupied lands.

“It aims to convince the international community that the Palestinians demolished the houses by themselves because they were built (in violation of the law),” said Gamal Al-Omla, director of Land Research Center.

“(The order aims to show) that the demolition is a legal order and has nothing to do with violating Palestinian rights.”

Suhail Khalilia, of the Applied Research Institute (ARIJ), agrees.

“It is meant to legitimize Israel’s forced immigration of Palestinians,” he said.

Analysts opine that the demolition orders are also a means to swallow Palestinian lands.

“It would help Israel to decide any future political solution according to the situation on the ground,” said Omla.

Abdel-Hadi Hantch, an expert on Israeli settlement policy, shares his view.

“The Israeli occupation is issuing this kind of demolition order as a means of deceiving the world public opinion,” he told IOL.

“It is also a way to pressure the Palestinians to leave the area,” added Hantch, a member of the National Committee for the Defense of Palestinian Lands.

“Israel is trying to limit the geographical expansion of the West Bank cities in order to be able to expand the settlements in the future.”

There are more than 164 Jewish settlements in the West Bank, eating up more than 40 percent of the occupied territory.

The international community considers all Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land illegal.

For Dodeen, demolishing his house would nip his dreams in the bud.

“The occupation is seeking to kill the joy in the hearts of the Palestinians,” he said.

“What kind of torture the occupation is trying to impose on us?” the desperate Palestinian asked.

“Isn’t enough our daily suffering from Israeli closures, checkpoints and settler assaults?”

:: Article nr. 60825 sent on 07-dec-2009 03:20 ECT

The Afghan War Pipeline

Ramping up Afghanistan war to control Caspian oil and gas transport routes

By Jerry Mazza

December 8, 2009

The 800-pound gorilla standing in the auditorium at West Point is still waiting for an answer to why Obama made his surge-speech for 30,000 more troops and $30 billion to pay for them. That gorilla wonders “why” Obama pitched so hard for the US to stay and surge through Afghanistan and Pakistan. The reasons given were that the Afghanistan Taliban and Al Qaeda led by Osama bin Laden were the people that attacked us on 9/11, which was an iteration of George W. Bush’s reasons for the War on Terror. They are as phony now as the day Bush promised to smoke out Bin Laden.

But, here are Obama’s actual words, pointed out by Christopher Bollyn on page 2 of his article, Why Afghanistan?

“1. I am convinced that our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is the epicenter of the violent extremism practiced by al-Qaeda. It is from here that we were attacked on 9/11, and it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak.

“2. It is important to recall why America and our allies were compelled to fight a war in Afghanistan in the first place. We did not ask for this fight. On September 11, 2001, 19 men hijacked four airplanes and used them murder nearly 3,000 people.

“3: If I did not think that the security of the United States and the safety of the American people were at stake in Afghanistan, I would gladly order every single one of our troops home tomorrow.”

Also, as early as Oct. 14, 2001, a month and three days after 9/11, Bollyn wrote in The Great Game – The War For Caspian Oil And Gas: “President Bush’s ‘crusade’ against the Taliban of Afghanistan has more to do with control of the immense oil and gas resources of the Caspian Basin than it does with ‘rooting out terrorism.’

“Once again an American president from the Bush family is leading Americans down an oil-rich Middle Eastern warpath against ‘enemies of freedom and democracy.’

“President George W. Bush, whose family is well connected to oil and energy companies, has called for an international crusade against Islamic terrorists, who he says hate Americans simply because we are ‘the brightest beacon of freedom.’

“The focus on religion-based terrorism serves to conceal important aspects of the Central Asian conflict. President Bush’s noble rhetoric about fighting for justice and democracy is masking a less noble struggle for control of an estimated $5 trillion of oil and gas resources from the Caspian Basin.

Bollyn goes on to explain that the elder Bush’s Desert Storm military campaign in 1991 yielded secure access to the huge Rumaila oil field of southern Iraq. It was made to happen by expanding the boundaries of Kuwait after the war. This enabled Kuwait, the former British protectorate and home to American and British oil companies’ investments, to double its prewar oil output . . .” Bollyn got it down cold even then.

He told how the infamous Enron, the now bankrupt Texas gas and energy company, along with Amoco, British Petroleum, Chevron, Exxon Mobil and Unocal were wrapped in a cabal to suck up the multi-billion dollar reserves of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Terkmenistan, three freshly independent Soviet republics bordering the Caspian Sea. The American negotiators included the usual suspects, James Baker, Brent Snowcroft, Dick Cheney, and Jon Sununu.

Bollyn also pointed out that Turkmenistan and Azerbijan had close ties to Israeli interests and intelligence. In Turkmenistan, the ex-intel agent, and main go-to for Israeli was Yosef A. Maiman, president of Merhav Group of Israel. He was the anointed negotiator and policy maker tasked to “develop” energy resources there. And that holds to this day.

Back then, Maiman also mentioned to the Wall Street Journal his role was to further the “geopolitical goals of both the US and Israel in Central Asia. We are doing what US and Israeli policy could not achieve, controlling the transport route is controlling the product.”

James Dorion, an energy expert, had written as early as September 10, 2001, in Oil & Gas Journal, “Those that control the oil routes out of Central Asia will impact all future direction and quantities of flow and the distribution of revenues from new production.” Could it be any clearer, given the US oil and gas interests in the Caspian Basin that Afghanistan was to be reined in, especially when Iran, which paralleled it north to south was not a pipeline option, giving its mutual hostilities with the US.

Enron, Bush’s number one campaign contributor in 2000, ran a feasibility study on the Trans-Caspian-gas pipeline, price-tag $2.5 billion, to be built as per a joint venture agreement penned and signed in February 1999 by Turkmenistan and US companies, Bechtel and GE Capital Services, with Maiman as the intermediary, his “cut” or stake in the pipeline not to be discussed, as noted in Bollyn’s article.

Everything seemed ready to go, including a Washington lobby firm, until the war in Afghanistan led the various parties to withdraw. The terrain was too politically unstable to begin a huge project. In fact, members of the Taliban were brought to Texas in 1999 to talk with the oilmen, but the bearded ones with their turbans and robes and general toughness caused the deal, but not the idea, to be put on ice. Another route to controlling Afghanistan would need to be taken. It all percolated, the thought of all that gas and oil and money flowing like an endless gift from the gods. But the answer had been found. And it exploded like two airliners into the World Trade Towers on 9/11/2001.

In a matter of days, pictures of 19 Muslim hijackers of the planes were plucked magically out of FBI files, which Robert Mueller claimed in 2002 could not really be proven to be the perpetrators. But the truth died first on that awful day and it still struggles to breathe, going on nine years later, that the catastrophe was an “inside job.” Within days, without any real investigation, the War on Terror was declared, and a gung-ho George W. Bush and Company sent the US military to “bomb Afghanistan back to the Stone Age” and “smoke out Osama.”

Unfortunately, the false-flag op worked so well at first in the US and Afghanistan that it actually set the Taliban back for a while. That is, until, Bush & Company were distracted by Saddam Hussein and his mythic Weapons of Mass Destruction, about to create another 9/11-like mushroom cloud on the horizon. But creating a second front was a huge military mistake, even for all the possibilities of controlling Iraq’s huge supply of sweet and inexpensive crude. As soon as the US dove in with “shock and awe” into Iraq, the Taliban began a resurgence that continues to this day. Actually, Al Qaeda members inAfghanistan number only about 100 today. So the need to ramp up Al Qaeda terror-talk has become essential.

Yet none of this, none of this, had or has to do with bringing democracy or stability to Afghanistan, or ridding Iraq of a despot we originally placed there, Saddam Hussein. It was all about controlling oil and gas, and vast amounts of money to be made if the US could master the Middle East’s geopolitical landscape. Unfortunately, or fortunately, according to one’s politics, we bit off far more than we could chew, and received much more blowback than we imagined, both in Iraq and, subsequently, in Afghanistan. This brings us back to today, and that 800-pound gorilla sitting in the darkened, silent auditorium of West Point, mumbling to himself.

What he’s repeating to himself is that US bases align with the proposed pipeline that will start at the Caspian Basin and go south down through Afghanistan to Pakistan and to ports at the Indian Ocean where the oil can be shipped east to India and China. What’s more, the Afghan war has been amped up to include Pakistan, which is presently being bombed by missile-spitting, remote-guided drones on select targets or individuals who don’t agree with our efforts there, but mainly wiping out innocent civilians.

In fact, Scott Shane wrote in the NY Times, CIA To Expand Use of Drones in Pakistan, that “Two weeks ago in PakistanCentral Intelligence Agencysharpshooters killed eight people suspected of being militants of the Talibanand Al Qaeda, and wounded two others in a compound that was said to be used for terrorist training.

“Then, the job in North Waziristan done, the C.I.A. officers could head home from the agency’s Langley, Va., headquarters [itals mine], facing only the hazards of the area’s famously snarled suburban traffic.

“It was only the latest strike by the agency’s covert program to kill operatives of Al Qaeda, the Taliban and their allies using Hellfire missiles fired fromPredator aircraft controlled from half a world away.”

Shane stated that “The White House has authorized an expansion of the C.I.A.’s drone program in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas, officials said this week, to parallel the president’s decision, announced Tuesday, to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan. American officials are talking with Pakistan about the possibility of striking in Baluchistan for the first time — a controversial move since it is outside the tribal areas — because that is where Afghan Taliban leaders are believed to hide.”

As repugnant as depersonalizing killing is, the likelihood of killing more innocents is even greater and more repugnant. This is a new low, both militarily and morally, even for the CIA. Yet it is regarded by anti-terror “experts” as a “resounding success.”

Shane writes, “About 80 missile attacks from drones in less than two years have killed ‘more than 400’ enemy fighters . . . offering a number lower than most estimates but in the same range.”

The fact is, the latest model, the MQ-9 Reaper can fly at 50,000 feet with a maximum internal payload of 800 pounds and external payload more than 3,000 pounds, carrying up to four Hellfire II anti-armor missiles and two laser-guided bombs. That’s a lot of death, which could have been used in earlier drone incarnations to create part of 911’s havoc. And there’s more to come.

Additionally the infamous Blackwater, now called Xe, is at work for the CIA, which is spearheading the covert Pakistan war, and this all costs money, big money. So, fortunately, the agency still has the opium crop to cover the shortfalls in budget or cash, and the so-called 2010-11 pull-out mandate is already up in smoke, according to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Thus, the real reasons for this surge have to be McChrystal clear even to a blind man or Congress. The hope is that seeing-eye dogs like Bollyn, now living in writer’s exile, and Craig Murray, the UK’s former ambassador to Uzbekistan, and even my humble self and other writers, can be of assistance.

Murray, in a recent chilling article, not only asserted that the CIA sent people to be ‘raped with broken bottles’ in Uzbekistan in order to obtain whatever confessions for “intelligence” they needed to justify their twisted actions. On the third page of the story, regarding US troop presence, the subhead reads, “It’s The Pipeline, Stupid,” and Murray asserts “that the primary motivation for US and British military involvement in central Asia has to do with large natural gas deposits in Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. As evidence, he points to the plans to build a natural gas pipeline through Afghanistan that would allow Western oil companies to avoid Russia and Iran when transporting oil and natural gas out of the region.

Murray alleged that in the late 1990s the Uzbek ambassador to the US met with then-Texas Governor George W. Bush to discuss a pipeline for the region, and out of that meeting came agreements that would see Texas-based Enron gain the rights to Uzbekistan’s natural gas deposits, while oil company Unocal worked on developing the Trans-Afghanistan pipeline.

He points out, as Bollyn and I have in previous articles, that “The consultant who was organizing this for Unocal was a certain Mr. Karzai, who is now ‘president of Afghanistan . . .”

Murray goes on to say that the motive in ramping up “the threat of Islamic terrorism in Uzbekistan through forced confessions was to ensure the country remained on-side in the war on terror, so that the pipeline could be built.”

Murray adds, “There are designs of this pipeline, and if you look at the deployment of US forces in Afghanistan, as against other NATO country forces in Afghanistan, you’ll see that undoubtedly the US forces are positioned to guard the pipeline route. It’s what it’s about. It’s about money, it’s about oil, it’s not about democracy.”

As he tells us, ” The Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline is slated to be completed in 2014, with $7.6 billion in funding from the Asian Development Bank.”

Murray was let go from his post as ambassador in 2004, following his first public allegations that the British government relied on torture in Uzbekistan for intelligence.

Let the high-minded causes of bringing peace, democracy, stability or anything but pain and pillage to Afghanistan and Pakistan be brought down like flags to half mast, and let us realize there are far baser motives of wealth, power, and geopolitical control rising. It’s not really rocket science and shouldn’t be, especially for a Harvard constitutional lawyer, yes, our own Barrack Obama, President for Change.

That said, maybe the 800-pound gorilla in the room can get a decent night’s sleep.

Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer living in New York City. Reach him His new book, State Of Shock: Poems from 9/11 on” is available at, Amazon or
Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journa


When It Comes, Will Reinforcements be Brought Home From Iraq?

[The following article is probably pure B.S., considering that it is from a Russian source on a Pakistani website, but it raised some questions that we should consider.  Will much of the Iraq war really be shut-down, in order to return combat vets to the homeland for defense against the anticipated revolution?  When the economy actually collapses (after vain attempts to save it run their course), meaning the ATMs shut-d0wn and market shelves begin to empty, there will be widespread looting and robbery on a national scale.  Martial law will be enacted.  What then?  Will the government get American forces to fire on rioting civilians, even if they are backed with thousands of combat vets?  It is more likely that the troops would turn their guns on the government pushing them to kill their countrymen.  Contrary to the message in this article, bringing home troops to defend the guys that screwed it all up  would probably be the politicians last fatal mistake.   Take heed, Washington.
We know you are listening.]

Obama Orders 1 Million US Troops To “Prepare For Civil War”

by pakalert

Russian Military Analysts are reporting to Prime Minister Putin today that US President Barack Obama has issued orders to his Northern Command’s (USNORTHCOM) top leader, US Air Force General Gene Renuart, to “begin immediately” increasing his military forces to 1 million troops by January 30, 2010, in what these reports warn is an expected outbreak of civil war within the United States before the end of winter.

According to these reports, Obama has had over these past weeks “numerous” meetings with his war council about how best to manage the expected implosion of his Nations banking system while at the same time attempting to keep the United States military hegemony over the World in what Russian Military Analysts state is a “last ditch gambit” whose success is “far from certain”.

And to Obama’s “last ditch gambit”, these reports continue, he is to announce in a nationwide address to his people this coming week that he is going to expand the level of US Military Forces in Afghanistan by tens of thousands of troops, while at the same time using the deployment of these soldiers as a “cover” for returning to the United States over 200,000 additional American soldiers from the over 800 bases in over 39 countries they have stationed around the Globe bringing the level of these forces in America to over 1 million, a number the US Military believes will be able to contain the “explosion of violence” expected to roil these peoples when they learn their economy has been bankrupted.

These reports further state that at the same time Obama will be attempting to keep his Nation from violent disintegration, the tens of thousands of additional troops he will send to Afghanistan are to be ordered to Kandahar where the Americans and their NATO allies will begin their final attempt to secure their TAPI (Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India) pipeline, which without the Western Nations, due to their grave lack of alternative energy resources, and being cut off from these vast Central Asian supplies (which both Russia and China are seeking to insure), are warned will totally collapse.

Making the American’s (and by extension the West’s) situation even worse are new reportscoming from the International Energy Agency stating that “under pressure” from the US government they have been “deliberately underplaying” a looming Global oil shortage for fear of triggering panic buying and raising the Americans fear over the end of oil supremacy because it would threaten their power over access to our World’s last remaining oil resources.

To the scariest “end game” maneuvers being made by Obama, in his attempt to protect Americas Global hegemony, is his record shattering move in plunging the United States $3.5 Trillion further into debt, and which raises the total amount owed by the United States, to its citizens and the World, to the unprecedented height of over $106 Trillion.

So alarming has Obama’s actions become (especially since they are being imitated by all of the Western powers) that the  managing-director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF),Dominique Strauss-Kahnwarned this past week that the “stimulus actions” of the West (which in essence is nothing more than the printing of money with nothing to back it up) has now become a “threat to democracy” as millions of people are expected to erupt in violence against their governments over the theft of their money and their futures.

Most unfortunately for the American people though is that this IMF warning fell on “deaf ears” in the United States with the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis President, James Bullard, saying this week that the US would continue its “stimulus actions because they “would give more flexibility to US policymakers”, a most absurd statement especially when viewed in the light of the unprecedented debt payments currently looming over the American economy they have no ability whatsoever to pay.

To the ability of the West’s banking giants to save their Nation’s economies, even worse news came this week with the US ratings giant Standards & Poors issuing a warning that “every single bank in Japan, the US, Germany, Spain, and Italy included in S&P’s list of 45 Global lenders remain unsafe”, a warning which then lead to one of Europe’s largest banks, Société Générale,  warning its clients to prepare for a “total Global Economic Collapse”.

To the fears of Obama over the United States erupting into civil war once the full extent of the rape and pillaging of these peoples by their banks and government becomes known to them, grim evidence now shows the likelihood of this occurring much sooner than later, especially in new poll figures showing that Obama’s approval rating among white Americans has now fallen to 39%. A number made more significant when one realizes that the white population of the United States comprises 74% of their estimated 398 million citizens, or put more ominously in these reports as “over 220 million American people armed to the teeth and ready to explode”.

And so fearful has the white population of the United States become that upon the election of Obama to the Presidency he was named as the “Gun Salesman of the Year” by the Outdoor Wire, the US’s largest daily electronic news service for the outdoor industry, who report “panic buying” of weapons and ammunition by those fearful of the destruction of their country at the hands of man they believe is not even an American citizen and had been foisted upon them by their elite classes seeking to enslave them.

Though the coming civil war in the United States is being virtually ignored by their propaganda media, the same cannot be said of Russia, where leading Russian political analyst, Professor Igor Panarin has long warned that the economic turmoil in the United States has confirmed his long-held view that the US is heading for collapse, and will divide into separate parts.

Professor Igor Panarin further stated in his warning that “the US Dollar is not secured by anything. The country’s foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse.”

What remains to be seen, and these reports do not speculate upon, is if the citizen-soldiers of the United States will fire upon and kill their fellow countrymen during the coming conflict, but if history is to be our guide clearly shows this will be the case as the once great American Nation continues its headlong plunge into the abyss of history. May God have mercy upon all of them.

Turkey To Israel: Cross Our Airspace To Bomb Iran & We Will Respond Like An Earthquake

Turkey To Israel: Cross Our Airspace To Bomb Iran & We Will Respond Like An Earthquake

By politicaltheatricsPublished: December 8, 2009

Turkey To Israel: Cross Our Airspace To Bomb Iran & We Will Respond Like An Earthquake

Admins Comments:
The following has been translated from its original Arabic by the site administrator.

Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan stated that if Israel crossed over into Turkey’s airspace in order to bomb Iran then their answer to Israel shall be like that of an “earthquake“.

Erdogan’s response was due to a question, in an interview with Lebanese newspaper “Al Safir”, over information indicating that Israel had violated Turkish airspace in the process of spying against Iran.

Erdogan continued,saying that certainly “the information [stating that Israel was using their airspace to spy on Iran] is incorrect,” but he stated that, “if Israel did so, they will receive a response equal to that of an earthquake.”

He also said it was not reasonable that Israel went to Gaza and “swept” the population and later had the audacity to believe that they would still be permitted to train with Turkish defense forces after they have wrought havoc on the Gaza Strip.

“We,the elected government,came into being due to the will of our people. We cannot then challenge the feelings of the Turkish people, who were greatly effected by what happened during that aggression on Gaza. Our respect for the sentiment of the Turkish people played a decisive role in the background of our decision in refusing to conduct exercise “Anatolian Eagle”.

Furthermore,the Israeli’s cannot use the relationship they have with us that is declared on paper in order to hit Iran and we will not stand neutral or with folded hands”

“He said that most worry about in the Palestinian issue now is to develop the Gaza Strip”, which Turned into a big prison open, everyone stands idly by and indifferent to it. Which should not be Silence him, not only by the countries of the region, but also by the civilized world that respects Human rights “.” He described Israel’s war on Gaza as “aggression”, he is a crime against humanity in all its Standards, where Israeli forces used white phosphorus against civilians

He said that “after the aggression,which led to the destruction of Gaza: killing 1,500 of its people and wounding 5,000, a meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh had been agreed in order to rebuild what was destroyed. And there had been millions of dollars dedicated to help rebuild the strip, but the decision was not implemented. The ruins of Gaza have remained unchanged.Worse still; the blockade continues to deprive all basic needs of the people. I have heard that they have had to use the tunnels for the smuggling sheep in order to celebrate Eid al-Adha. “

This is a desperate situation and inhumane situation requires special effort in order to better treat it, so it was natural to include a list of the agenda of the visit “which is currently in Washington”. Erdogan added that there are other items which occupy his mind in this context -The first is that the cessation of settlement activity by Israel which is a necessary condition to return to peace negotiations. And second, Erdogan says that they will do their part in mediating between Israel and Syria. He has, so far, held five rounds of negotiations between the two parties.

In response to a question about the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wherein the Israeli PM made clear that he was no longer assured of the mediation capability of Turkey in this regard, and preferred the mediation of France, Erdogan replied:
“We wish to mediate between both parties, and if we receive this desire will again respond to them. If Netanyahu does not wish for us to mediate, then we will not” Nor will Turkey pressure Israel into accepting them as a mediator.
Erdogan mentioned that Turkey had made a deal 7 years ago in order buy a non-pilot aircraft but, “this [deal] has not been fulfilled by the government of Tel Aviv” and as a result Turkey had to lease an aircraft due to necessity.
Israel still has the remainder of 40 days to fulfill the deal and “if [after the 40 days] they do not fulfill the contract made over the unmanned airplane we will declare the agreement void”.

Al Safir asked whether or not Iran would be a topic of interest during Erdogan’s visit to Washington wherein he replied by saying that, “it would not be strange to bring up Iran during the trip to Washington” he continued to point out that the “understanding between Turkey and Iran has come a long way in containing many things surrounding the two countries” and noted that they were becoming the most influential nations in the region, and the volume of imports and exports between the nations was,as of now, 10 Billion dollars. There was an expressed hope that it will rise to 30 billion within a short period of time.

The “two countries are in a position of great significance in the Middle East” Erdogan stated, “without any direct intervention with either nations internal affairs”.


The article, as written by The Arab Times wherein they covered an interview by Al Safir Newspaper, can be found at Arab Times entitled: “اردوغان يهدد اسرائيل برد مزلزل ان هي اخترقت الاجواء التركية لضرب ايران ويحذر من الوضع الانساني البائس في غزة”

Copenhagen climate summit in disarray after ‘Danish text’ leak

[Unknown leaker once again scuttles attempt by world’s powers to ram through an underhanded document meant to transfer, “in writing,” control over global activities to the powers that be.  These leaks are the equivalent of the “Pentagon Papers,” which scuttled the secrecy over illegal American actions in S. Vietnam.  The empire’s intentions, revealed in today’s “Copenhagen Papers,”  is to subvert the UN and transfer power to a “new order,” further proof that Obama is replacing Bush’s “ballsiness” with his own underhandedness.  At least with Bush we knew what he was going to do in most cases, because he told us, more or less, bragging about it.  Obama acts in secret.  Sneaky bastard.]

Copenhagen climate summit in disarray after ‘Danish text’ leak

Developing countries react furiously to leaked draft agreement that would hand more power to rich nations, sideline the UN’s negotiating role and abandon the Kyoto protocol
Read the ‘Danish text’

COP15: A Haitian delegation during second-day session at the Bella center in Copenhagen

The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents. Photograph: Attila Kisbenedek/AFP/Getty Images

The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN’s role in all future climate changenegotiations.

The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.

The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as "the circle of commitment" – but understood to include the UK, US and Denmark – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week.

The agreement, leaked to the Guardian, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol‘s principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.

The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as "a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks".

A confidential analysis of the text by developing countries also seen by the Guardian shows deep unease over details of the text. In particular, it is understood to:

• Force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts and measures that were not part of the original UN agreement;

• Divide poor countries further by creating a new category of developing countries called "the most vulnerable";

• Weaken the UN’s role in handling climate finance;

• Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.

Developing countries that have seen the text are understood to be furious that it is being promoted by rich countries without their knowledge and without discussion in the negotiations.

"It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process," said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.

Antonio Hill, climate policy adviser for Oxfam International, said: "This is only a draft but it highlights the risk that when the big countries come together, the small ones get hurting. On every count the emission cuts need to be scaled up. It allows too many loopholes and does not suggest anything like the 40% cuts that science is saying is needed."

Hill continued: "It proposes a green fund to be run by a board but the big risk is that it will run by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility [a partnership of 10 agencies including the World Bank and the UN Environment Programme] and not the UN. That would be a step backwards, and it tries to put constraints on developing countries when none were negotiated in earlier UN climate talks."

The text was intended by Denmark and rich countries to be a working framework, which would be adapted by countries over the next week. It is particularly inflammatory because it sidelines the UN negotiating process and suggests that rich countries are desperate for world leaders to have a text to work from when they arrive next week.

Few numbers or figures are included in the text because these would be filled in later by world leaders. However, it seeks to hold temperature rises to 2C and mentions the sum of $10bn a year to help poor countries adapt to climate change from 2012-15.

Gates Dissembles on Afghan History

[If it wasn’t for the hypocrites and liars in Washington dispensing the “official version” of events to the gullible masses and the fawning unquestioning mainstream media, truth might have a chance of being heard.  As it is, people like Gates can freely reinforce the conditioning lies, such as the one where “George Bush abandoned Afghanistan in ‘89.” with no concern that reporters will question him.  The truth is, the mission of the CIA and the ISI simply changed in 1989, from the former mission of creating a national “Islamic” state within Afghanistan, to creating an international Islamic state (a “caliphate”) to serve as the world’s perennial enemy in a state of perpetual war .  The CIA knew that they had a good thing going in their little Islamic army and they weren’t going to let it go to waste.  Missions were created all over the world, wherever American interests called for a little destabilizing terror, the CIA’s boys in “the base” (al Qaida in Arabic) were sent in.  The attack to jumpstart the war on terror was simply their latest mission.]

Gates Dissembles on Afghan History

By Robert Parry

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who last week was hailed in the Washington Post as someone “incapable of dissembling,” dissembled to a gullible press corps about the history of U.S. dealings with Afghanistan while en route to that country on Monday.

The headline from Gates’s in-air briefing of reporters was that “we are in this thing to win,” a statement which undercut President Barack Obama’s more nuanced explanation of U.S. goals as blocking the Taliban from restoring Afghanistan as a safe haven for al-Qaeda terrorists.

But Gates went further, declaring "that we are not going to repeat the situation in 1989" when the United States supposedly abandoned Afghanistan once the Soviet Union had withdrawn its last military units on Feb. 15, 1989.

However, while that story of the 1989 abandonment may be a powerful conventional wisdom in Washington – popularized by the movie “Charlie Wilson’s War” – it is substantially untrue, and former CIA Director Gates knows it to be a myth.

What actually happened in 1989 was that President George H.W. Bush rebuffed overtures from Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev for a negotiated settlement of the war that envisioned a coalition government involving Soviet-backed President Najibullah and the CIA-backed mujahedeen warlords.

Instead, Bush escalated the purpose of the conflict, revising the intelligence finding that had justified the U.S. covert operation. Instead of Ronald Reagan’s goal of helping the Afghans drive out the Soviet army, Bush approved a more elastic rationale, seeking Afghan self-determination.

The reason for rebuffing Gorbachev and continuing the war was simple: Gates’s CIA analytical division – which he had packed with Cold War hardliners – was projecting a rapid collapse of Najibullah’s government. That would mean a complete humiliation of the Soviets and a total triumph for the United States and the CIA.

In 1989, I was a correspondent for Newsweek magazine covering intelligence issues. After the Soviets left Afghanistan, I asked CIA officials why they were continuing the bloodshed. Why not, I asked, just look for a way to bring the war to an end with some kind of national unity government? Hadn’t the U.S. national interest of driving out the Soviets been achieved?

One of the CIA hardliners responded to my question with disgust. “We want to see Najibullah strung up by a light pole,” he snapped.

What I thought I was hearing was CIA bravado, but the comment actually reflected an internal U.S. government debate. Since the last year of the Reagan administration in 1988, the CIA had been predicting a quick end to the Najibullah government – if and when the Soviet army left.

State’s Dissent

However, the State Department foresaw a drawn-out struggle. Deputy Secretary of State John Whitehead and the department’s intelligence chief Morton Abramowitz challenged the CIA’s assumptions and warned that Najibullah’s army might hold on longer than the CIA expected.

But Gates pushed the CIA analysis of a rapid Najibullah collapse and prevailed in the policy debates.

Gates described this internal battle in his 1996 memoir, From the Shadows,recalling how he briefed Secretary of State George Shultz and his senior aides about the CIA’s prediction prior to Shultz flying to Moscow in February 1988.

“I told them that most analysts did not believe Najibullah’s government could last without active Soviet military support,” wrote Gates, who also was predicting privately that the Soviets would not depart Afghanistan despite Gorbachev’s assurances that they would.

After the Soviets did withdraw in early 1989, some U.S. officials felt Washington’s geostrategic aims had been achieved and a move toward peace was in order. There also was concern about the Afghan mujahedeen, especially their tendencies toward brutality, heroin trafficking and fundamentalist religious policies.

Yet, the new administration of George H.W. Bush – with Gates having moved from the CIA to the White House as deputy national security adviser – chose to continue U.S. covert support for the mujahedeen, funneled primarily through Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISI.

However, instead of a fast collapse, Najibullah’s regime used its Soviet weapons and advisers to beat back a mujahedeen offensive in 1990. Najibullah hung on – and the war, the violence and the disorder continued.

Gates finally recognized that his CIA rapid-collapse analysis was wrong. In his memoir, he wrote: “As it turned out, Whitehead and Abramowitz were right” in their warning that Najibullah’s regime might not collapse so quickly.

Another comment in his memoir bears on Gates’s statement to reporters on Monday reiterating the myth about the United States having immediately abandoned the Afghan cause once the Soviets left in February 1989. By his own hand, Gates wrote that he understood the true reality, that the U.S. government hadn’t bailed out of Afghanistan right away.

“Najibullah would remain in power for another three years [after the Soviet pull-out], as the United States and the USSR continued to aid their respective sides,” Gates wrote in his memoir. “On Dec. 11, 1991, both Moscow and Washington cut off all assistance, and Najibullah’s government fell four months later. He had outlasted both Gorbachev and the Soviet Union itself.”

Misleading the Press

So, in telling reporters that the United States had abandoned the Afghan cause in 1989, Gates was at best dissembling, playing to a popular conventional wisdom that he knew to be false but that buttresses his current case that the United States must escalate the Afghan War to “win.”

In truth, Gates seems to have learned nothing from the real lesson of 1989 – that a misguided determination for total victory in Afghanistan only prolongs the violence, makes matters worse, and harms U.S. national security.

Instead of seeking a negotiated peace among adversaries in 1989, President George H.W. Bush embraced Gates’s hard-line strategy, rejecting Gorbachev’s olive branch and adopting a triumphalist approach to the complex Afghan civil war.

By the time it became apparent to Bush that the Gates-CIA scenario of a quick mujahedeen victory was an illusion, Gorbachev was no longer in a position to broker an Afghan peace deal. He was fighting for his own political survival against hard-line communists in Moscow. [By the way, Gates and his politicized CIA analytical division also missed the coming collapse of the Soviet Union.]

It was not until late 1991 after Gorbachev’s government had collapsed – along with the Soviet Union – that Russia’s new president, Boris Yelsin, and the United States finally stepped back from the Afghan quagmire.

Najibullah’s belated fall in 1992 may have brought an end to the communist regime, but it didn’t stop the war. The capital of Kabul came under the control of a relatively moderate rebel force led by Ahmad Shah Massoud, an Islamist but not a fanatic. Massoud, a Tajik, was not favored by Pakistan’s ISI that backed more extreme Pashtun elements of the mujahedeen.

The various Afghan warlords battled for another four years as the ISI readied its own army of Islamic extremists drawn from Pashtun refugee camps inside Pakistan. With the ISI’s backing, this group, known as the Taliban, entered Afghanistan with the promise of restoring order.

The Taliban seized the capital of Kabul in September 1996, driving Massoud into a northward retreat. The ousted communist leader Najibullah, who had stayed in Kabul, sought shelter in the United Nations compound, but was captured.

The Taliban tortured, castrated and killed him, his mutilated body hung from a light pole, just as CIA hardliners had envisioned seven years earlier.

The triumphant Taliban then imposed harsh Islamic law on Afghanistan. Their rule was especially devastating to women who had made gains toward equal rights under the communists, but were forced by the Taliban to live under highly restrictive rules, to cover themselves when in public, and to forgo schooling.

Old Allies

In the late 1990s, the Taliban also granted Saudi exile Osama bin Laden and his extremist al-Qaeda organization a safe haven when they were on the run from the United States and its allies angered over bombings of U.S. embassies in Africa and other terrorist attacks.

Bin Laden, who shared the Taliban’s fundamentalist view of Islam, was welcomed back because bin Laden and his fellow Arab militants had collaborated with the CIA-supported Afghan rebels in their war against the Soviets in the 1980s.

By the late 1990s, however, bin Laden and al-Qaeda had a new enemy: the United States. The stage was set for the 9/11 attacks.

Though Gates is familiar with all this ugly history – and even recounts some of it in his memoir – he was happy to mislead the journalists who were aboard his plane on his Monday trip to Afghanistan, and the reporters either didn’t know enough or didn’t dare to challenge him.

Gates also has eagerly promoted another useful myth – the one about the “successful surge” in Iraq – as a way to lock President Obama in on following Gates’s internal recommendation that Obama sign off on a “surge” of 30,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, bringing the total to about 100,000, roughly the same number that the Soviet Union committed in the 1980s.

Although the “successful surge” myth in Iraq is now a cherished conventional wisdom in Washington, the actual evidence of why Iraqi violence declined points to many other reasons – some predating President George W. Bush’s 2007 order to send in more than 20,000 additional troops. [See’s “Explaining the Drop in Iraqi War Dead” and “Obama Pleases the Neocons.”]

Which brings us to another myth, the one about Gates as a new Wise Man who would never mislead the public.

Last Friday, Washington Post columnist David Broder, who is called “the dean of the Washington press corps,” continued the deification of Gates with praise about the Defense Secretary’s forthrightness. In commenting about the Afghan War and the Obama administration’s decision to escalate, Broder wrote that Gates is “incapable of dissembling.”

The absurdity of Broder’s column is another reflection of how the Washington press corps has veered away from its responsibility to speak truth to power. From his earliest days at the CIA, Gates has been a master of deceit. [See’s “The Secret World of Robert Gates.”]

Yet, with one Washington myth layered upon another and another, the Obama administration now heads off into the dangerous terrain of Afghanistan with a plan that repeats – more than it learns from – the mistakes of the past.

[For more on this topic see,'s "Why Afghanistan Really Fell Apart."]

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush, was written with two of his sons, Sam and Nat, and can be ordered at His two previous books, Secrecy & Privilege: The Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq and Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & ‘Project Truth’ are also available there. Or go to

To comment at Consortiumblog, click here. (To make a blog comment about this or other stories, you can use your normal e-mail address and password. Ignore the prompt for a Google account.) To comment to us by e-mail, click here. To donate so we can continue reporting and publishing stories like the one you just read, clickhere.

Iraqi oil power may shake Iran more than Saudi

Iraqi oil power may shake Iran more than Saudi

* Iraq to tie up big oil investment, leaving little for Iran


* Iran’s finances and economy could be hurt as Iraq develops

* Saudi suspicious, but wants to see stable Iraq

By Michael Christie and Simon Webb

BAGHDAD/DUBAI, Dec 9 (Reuters) – The geopolitical power balance in the Middle East faces upheaval if Iraq succeeds in tripling oil output, and fellow Shi’ite power Iran will feel more threatened than rival Sunni oil giant Saudi Arabia.

Iraq’s potential leap into the ranks of the top three global oil producers could result in a strengthened Shi’ite Muslim front within OPEC if Baghdad aligns supply policy with Tehran.

That would rattle Riyadh, already suspicious of the rise to political supremacy of Iraq’s Shi’ite majority since the fall of Sunni dictator Saddam Hussein. Disunity within OPEC could increase, undermining efforts to present an image of harmony.

But oil development in Iraq is more likely to feed tensions with Iran, draw away potential foreign investment from Iraq’s neighbour and fuel social discord by depriving Tehran of much-needed money should it result in lower oil prices.

Revenue from the additional 4.5 million or more barrels per day that Iraq is hoping to pump could also give it the economic might to challenge Iran’s influence over the Shi’ite world.

“Iraq’s development is inevitable,” said analyst Gala Riana of IHS Global Insight. “The changes in the balance of power won’t be immediate, they are longer term and bring difficulties that Iraq and surrounding countries will need to deal with.”


Both Iraq and Iran need huge investment in their dilapidated oil industries. Iraq’s opening to global energy firms, albeit on tough terms, gives it the edge in attracting the billions it needs to execute oilfield development of an unprecedented scale.

That would make it harder for Tehran to attract the cash it needs at a time when the Iranian state is already under enormous social and political pressure following the contested re-election of hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Even worse, Chinese state energy giants are participating in Iraq, leaving them less resources for elsewhere. Tehran has turned to Asian state firms for money and technology as Western companies have shunned it due to politics and sanctions.

“Why would you want to invest in Iran? It’s very risky. You have the sanctions and the politics. If you’re in Iraq, you would want to limit your exposure to another risky country in the region,” said a senior western oil executive.

Iran could well become the destination for those that lose out in Iraq’s oil auctions, he added.

If all of the contracts Baghdad is offering are signed, Iraq could boost its output capacity to 10 million bpd – rivalling Saudi Arabia’s 12.5 million bpd and Russia’s 10 million bpd, and leapfrogging over Iran, which says it can pump 4.2 million bpd.

Iran is more dependent than top oil exporter Saudi Arabia on high oil prices to finance social spending programmes. Higher output from Iraq would be bearish in the long term for the oil price and could also claw away market share from others.

“Another price downturn like that of last winter would really put the squeeze on the Iranian government, already suffering unpopularity from economic mismanagement, as well as the obvious political problems stemming from the election,” said David Mack, a former U.S. envoy to the Middle East.


Saudi Arabia will watch the rise of Iraqi oil power and its relationship with Tehran with caution. Dominated by the puritanical Wahhabi sect, many of whose adherents view Shi’ites as apostates, Riyadh regards Persian Iran as its arch-foe.

But analysts say the view that post-Saddam Iraq is under the sway of Iran is often overstated.

Many of Iraq’s Shi’ite leaders sought shelter in Tehran under Saddam, but Iraqi nationalism runs strong, as do memories of the 8-year Iran-Iraq war that killed a million people.

Even if a general election next year ushers in an overtly pro-Iranian government in Baghdad, the impact that increased Iraqi oil output might have on economic and political tensions inside Iran may drive the two neighbours apart, analysts say.

Ultimately, staunch U.S. ally Saudi Arabia would rather see a developing and prosperous Iraq than a country that serves as a base for al Qaeda. The kingdom has become entangled in neighbour Yemen’s internal conflict and deepening instability.

“It’s in our interest that Iraq emerges stable, we don’t want another Yemen,” said one Saudi official. “If Iraq becomes a regional economic power, that will help the Saudi economy.” (Additional reporting by Rania El Gamal in Kuwait; editing by James Jukwey)

Morocco vs. Aminatou

Morocco vs. Aminatou

by alle

A hunger strike in Lanzarote is turning into a serious crisis in and between Spain and Morocco. Center stage is occupied by Western Saharan human rights leader and pro-independence activist Aminatou Haidar. This former prisoner-of-conscience, “desaparecido”, and mother of two, has been a major name in Sahrawi politics since May 2005, when a picture of her smashed into a pulp by Moroccan police officers went viral, as the kids say, among Sahrawi activists. The photo of her in her blood-drenched melhfa became, for them, the first iconic image of the Sahrawi independence struggle, waved as both memento of Moroccan cruelty and as a stand-in for the banned flag. To add insult to injury, she was jailed after the abuse, but eventually released after heavy foreign pressure. Displaying a rather remarkable steel in her  spine — whatever you think of her politics, there’s no doubting her courage — she’s been charging in a one-woman full frontal assault ever since, campaigning publicly and frequently meeting foreign politicians and the press, in what seems to be a deliberate gamble to raise her profile and make her untouchable. So far, it’s been working all right. She’s been monitored, harassed, made unemployable and had her family placed under perpetual pressure, but the government hasn’t really had the stomach to touch her personally again since HRW and Amnesty aimed their spotlights at her; remember that Morocco’s overarching strategy is to keep the Saharan front as quiet as possible.

Bruised, not beaten: the photo of Aminatou before her arrest in 2005

Now, however, a harsher note has been sounded in Moroccan policy against the independence movement, with King Mohamed VI’s speech recently, where he declared that you are “either a patriot or a traitor”. Clearly, the velvet gloves, if such there were, are off: seven leading activists are being hauled off to a military court, and a number of other arrests have been made.

In the case of Aminatou Haidar, she was supposed to return from the United States, where she had received the Robert F. Kennedy Award John Train Civil Courage Prize for her human rights work, but was held up at el-Aaiun airport, after having signed “Western Sahara” as her country of residence — not “Morocco”. (She claims to have done this routinely in the past, without problems.)

This is, of course, strictly speaking true: she lives in el-Aaiun, which is internationally recognized as being in Western Sahara, not Morocco proper, and where there’s even a UN mission deployed to determine final sovereignty. The Moroccan government, however, sees things otherwise. She was stripped of her Moroccan passport (which she had held from birth, having been born in a Sahrawi area of southern Morocco rather than Western Sahara), and forcibly put on a plane to Spain. According to the Moroccan authorities, she herself signed a document saying that she is no longer a Moroccan citizen and threw away her passport to effectively make herself stateless; she denies this. The truth is impossible for an outsider to tell, but one might note that the authorities haven’t in fact been able to produce this much-talked-about document. (Also, Spanish papers claim that Morocco had booked her return flight long before she arrived to the airport, which would mean that the expulsion was planned beforehand, and the travel paper formality was simply an excuse.)

A few days after being expelled, Aminatou began a hunger strike in Lanzarote airport, refusing to move; when they threw her out overnight, she huddled up under blankets in the airport parking. She says she will not go to Spain, or any third country, but is determined to return to her home, dead or alive. The latter is of course impossible as long as the Moroccans refuse to let her in, alive, which they now do saying she hasn’t got valid travel documents (…since they took them from her). The Moroccan press, having gone into one of its Sahara-induced fits of spittle-and-foam wingnuttery, is saying a lot of other things as well — most of it some spikily worded variation on the theme of her being an ungrateful daughter of Morocco and/or a hostile Algerian agent, and oh, oh the irony that she’s demanding her Moroccan passport back. (Which is of course true, in a way, but it’s not as if she’s got a choice; not even POLISARIO wants Sahrawis in Western Sahara to burn their passports, since that would only leave them politically crippled.)

Released from prison in 2006

Released from prison, 2006

Spain is terribly discomfited by the whole affair. The Western Sahara solidarity movement (which is uniquely strong in Spain, post-colonial guilt and all) has mobilized like crazy around the issue, and the Socialist government is facing a barrage of fire from right and left on behalf of Aminatou. Should she die in the airport, as medical staff in the solidarity campaign claim she may do very soon, it would not only be hideous stain on the country’s image — and self-image — but also a really nasty domestic scandal. The government has tried to give her refugee status or even Spanish citizenship, having presumably secured a promise from Morocco to let her back on a tourist visa or something similar, but Aminatou remains intransigent: she’s not having any of that, she’s having her identity papers back and thank you very much. For a while, Spain apparently thought they had a deal — or possibly Zapatero tried to chicken-race King Mohamed — but a plane sent out to bring Aminatou back was forced to turn by the Moroccans.Adding to the pressure is the rapidly growing international attention, with continual updates from the major news agencies and criticism of both Spain and Morocco from Amnesty, HRW and similar groups, all driven by a sense of urgency and fear that Aminatou really is determined to go all the way and starve herself to death. There’s no doubting that official Spain shivers at the prospect:

The extraordinary power of Aminatou to shame her hosts, whom she has accused of connivance with Morocco in failing to defend her rights and helping to have her sent home, led a Foreign Ministry representative to tell her in the hall of Lanzarote airport that the Spanish authorities did not actually recognize the 1975 Madrid Accords, which saw her territory carved up without any consultation with the local people.

Of course, Morocco isn’t really interested in her dying there either. Sure, the government would like nothing more for her than to quietly pass away, but not while she’s in the media spotlight. There’s also the problem that the longer the affair drags on, and certainly if she should die, Spanish-Moroccan relations (which are quite crucial to Rabat, perhaps less so to Madrid) may take a serious hit, given how unpopular Zapatero’s conciliatory strategy towards Rabat is already in much of his political base. But a humiliating climbdown would really irk the Rabat government, having loaded the issue with so much prestige. Also, there’s the fear in Morocco that caving to Aminatou’s demands could set a precedent: that Sahrawis, or at least their diehard core of independence activists, can write whatever the hell they like on entry forms; or that, if Morocco allows the UN to help her back, or there is some other special arrangement, this could potentially be construed as a chip off of Morocco’s sovereignty over the territory. Both things of course anathema to the government, and to the oolitical elite and the press — although the latter been known to bark on command, and be shut up as easily, when it comes to the Sahara.

All in all, a tough stalemate to break. Spain is working fervently to find a solution — any solution — but Morocco hasn’t budged, and neither has Aminatou, although there are increasing pleas for her to at least break off her hunger strike. The question, now, in this battle of wills between the government of Morocco and a lady in an airport parking, seems to be who will flinch first.

Pakistan’s Peshawar, epicenter of jihad

Pakistan’s Peshawar, epicenter of jihad


By Michael Georgy 1 hr 39 mins ago

PESHAWAR, Pakistan (Reuters) – Pakistani provincial minister Amir Haider Khan Hoti spends much of his time handing out envelopes containing checks. Some people still suffering from shrapnel woundslimped to collect them.

Others wept and hugged him after the names of their deceased sons were read out as dozens of others waited for their turn.

It has become a ritual in Peshawar, where those devastated by bombings — the worst in the country in a militant campaign against the government — receive compensation from authorities.

"We are facing an insurgency at its best. It’s natural that I have to give maximum time for these activities," Hoti, Chief Minister for the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) , told Reuters. "If we lose this war. God forbid. This country will go to the dogs."

Peshawar and its surrounding areas near the border with Afghanistan are the epicenter of the battle against militants, who recently raised security alarm bells with a suicide bombing and gun attack near Pakistan’s military headquarters, 30 minutes from the capital.

Failure to contain violence in Peshawar could mean more operations like that one because it would make it easier for militants to get to large cities and strategic areas, spreading more chaos and fear in the nuclear-armed country.

Authorities seem well aware of that, judging by Peshawar’s siege atmosphere. Military and state police check vehicles for weapons and bombs at checkpoints. Behind them soldiers with machineguns keep an eye out forsuicide bombers.

Sandbags have been placed in front of vital businesses. School children are taught drills to follow in the event of a bomb.


But tight security may only produce short-term success in Peshawar, a run-down city 105 miles northwest ofIslamabad, once home to al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

Militants often exploit poverty and unemployment, enticing impressionable young men with promises of glorious holy war. Winning long-term trust in the state is half the battle.

"It’s not only the military operations. Military operations are to be followed by relief, reconstruction and rehabilitation," said Hoti.

"The space that was exploited by these (militant) elements. We need to fill that space. Administrative issues, political issues. The social sector. Poverty. You name it. A system of good governance."

Two students in a market area reinforced that view. Taliban fighters in their village paid other young men "good" money to join the group and take up arms, they said. At first Peshawar had offered high hopes. Until the bombings killed more and more people, hundreds since October.

They spend their time hanging out in a hunting gun shop and making small talk with its owner. The ripple economic effects of violence has cut his sales to a rifle a month.

"I am afraid I am going to die," said one of the students, Azhar Farooq.

During the 1980s, Peshawar became a den of spies and jihadis when the United States and Saudi Arabiacovertly funded a mujahideen guerrilla war to expel Soviet troops from Afghanistan. Pakistan also supported the effort. It’s a bitter irony.

Nowadays, Peshawar police chief Liaquat Ali Khan sits at his desk explaining how Taliban, al Qaeda and criminal elements are coordinating in a shadowy network trying to terrorize the city.

Khan is a confident hard-nosed man who says he has no doubts the police will emerge victorious, perhaps in a few months. But his description of the police force’s resources, and the methods of the enemy, highlighted the magnitude of the task.

The police force needs highly sophisticated bomb and weapon detectors. They only own a handful to improve the safety of a city of 1.5 million.

Militants, on the other hand, are brainwashing boys as young as 14, or threatening to blow up their homes and families, to force them to become suicide bombers, said Khan.

For now, he must rely on police officers like Inspector Khaista Khan, whose picture hangs on a wall outside the police chief’s office. On Saturday, he was killed after pouncing on a suicide bomber outside a Peshawar court who killed nine people. The act may have prevented a much higher death toll.

"A suicide bomber comes and the policeman goes and hugs him and takes all the blast for himself and protects the public. I think this needs motivation, devotion to duty and courage," Khan told Reuters. "This you can only find in the Peshawar police."

Afghan Victory Unachievable Until Osama Rises from the Dead

[This new wonder-general is as delusional or deceptive as the rest of the big chiefs have been. He links the outcome in Afghanistan to a known dead man, claiming that as long as he remains free, victory is impossible.  Every claim that we are searching for the leader who has not been seen or heard anywhere in the world since 2001, is an outright lie, intended to elicit public acquiescence to spreading the war even further.  America’s love affair with its military is being taken advantage of by the military, as they drag us into the arms of the military dictatorship.]

Gen McChrystal: Bin Laden is key to al-Qaeda defeat

The top US commander in Afghanistan has said al-Qaeda will not be defeated unless its leader, Osama Bin Laden, is captured or killed.

Testifying to the US Congress, Gen Stanley McChrystal said Bin Laden had become an "iconic figure".

He said President Barack Obama’s deployment of 30,000 extra troops to Afghanistan meant success was possible.

But he said the mission was "undeniably difficult" and the next 18 months would be crucial.

"I don’t think that we can finally defeat al-Qaeda until he’s captured or killed," said Gen McChrystal of Bin Laden.

"I believe he is an iconic figure at this point, whose survival emboldens al-Qaeda as a franchising organisation across the world," he said.

The general said that killing or capturing Bin Laden would not spell the end of al-Qaeda, but that the movement could not be eradicated while Bin Laden remained at large.

The militant leader is believed to be living in the border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said last week that officials have had no reliable information on Bin Laden’s whereabouts for "years".

Four India trucks carrying arms caught: Malik

[I guess all those "conspiracy theories" about India and her US allies waging war on Pakistan were right, weren't they?  Will the Army go on the offensive against the source, to defend the country?]

Four India trucks carrying arms caught: Malik

ISLAMABAD: Federal Minister for Interior Affairs Rehman Malik revealed security forces have caught as many as four Indian trucks, laden with arms and ammunitions, from here Islamabad on Wednesday, Geo news reported.

He said forces have also recovered from Bara area heavy amount of Indian made weaponry.

This Rehman Malik stated talking to newsmen outside parliament house. Interior Minister said we level allegations on basis of concrete evidences and the same have been entrusted to Indian foreign ministry.

He said foreign ministry is taking the issue of rising Indian intrusion with India.

To a question, he said many names, among those enlisted on the list of missing people in Balochistan province, are fabricated, baseless and concocted and the government will prove that.

Socialists at UN demand trillions in ‘climate debt’

Socialists at UN demand trillions in ‘climate debt’

The following is based on an article by Cliff Kincaid for Accuracy in Media.

Part of the agenda of the UN Copenhagen Climate Change Conference and another climate summit at the UN on Dec. 18 is something called "climate justice."   ShareThis

Ignoring the fallacies behind the “science” of man-made global warming, a new U.N. report on “climate justice” says the U.S. and other countries owe $24 trillion in “climate debt” to the rest of the world. The report, “Climate Justice for a Changing Planet,” argues that the United States is “historically the largest global emitter” of greenhouse gas emissions and therefore has the biggest “debt” to pay.

But another U.N. report puts the figure at $45 trillion.  President Obama seems prepared to accept this bogus claim by attending the United Nations conference on Dec. 18.

The U.S. failure to pay, argues leftist Canadian writer Naomi Klein, has already produced “climate rage” and a “global movement for climate justice” led by Bolivia’s socialist President Evo Morales. The implication is that if the U.S. doesn’t pay up, protests and even violence could break out.

In a statement, the Morales regime declared that “What we call for is full payment of the debt owed to us by developed countries for threatening the integrity of the Earth’s climate system, for over-consuming a shared resource that belongs fairly and equally to all people, and for maintaining lifestyles that continue to threaten the lives and livelihoods of the poor majority of the planet’s population.”

In other words, Americans are supposed to feel guilty over having a successful industrial economy. It is a system that has produced more wealth for more people than any in human history.

A detailed proposal from Bolivia says “a wealthy minority,” presumably in the U.S. and other “rich” nations, “has already over-consumed a considerable amount of environmental space,” thus “denying it to the poorer majority who needs it in the course of their development.”

Naomi Klein describes the proposed payments as “reparations.”

But as startling as the figure of $24 trillion sounds, a separate report from the U.N. Environmental Program says the cost could be as high as $45 trillion. It is estimated that “a package to address climate change and energy development needs at the global level may require US $45 trillion up to 2025,” it says.

The March 2009 “Global Green New Deal” report says that the global financial crisis is an opportunity to usher in a new international socialist order. “The rules of financial architecture and of global environmental governance are being simultaneously re-written in 2009,” the report explains. “We believe that there is a unique historical opportunity now to create the basis of a new Green Economy that is able to allocate natural capital and financial capital in a far more effective and efficient manner into the foreseeable future. We must not miss this chance to fundamentally shift the trajectory of human civilization.”

The author of this report was Professor Edward B. Barbier of the University of Wyoming. His “Global Green New Deal” report was prepared in consultation with the U.S. Presidential Climate Action Project, a little-known entity launched by the University of Colorado whose advisory board includes ousted White House communist “Green Jobs Czar” Van Jones. World Net Daily highlighted Jones’ role in the group in a November 30 story by Aaron Klein.

Co-authored by Barbara Adams and Gretchen Luchsinger, the most recent United Nations report on “climate justice” says “because the world’s richest countries have contributed most to the problem, they have a greater obligation to take action and to do so more quickly.” Paying a “climate debt” is the way to make sure that “extreme imbalances in development are evened out.”

“China now produces the largest amount of overall national emissions, topping the United States,” the report says. “But this figure must be qualified by the fact that China’s population is four times as large as that of the United States, making its per capita emissions rate roughly 75 percent less.”

Hence, the U.S. is still the chief culprit and should pay the most.

The report was launched in conjunction with the U.N. climate change conference now taking place in Copenhagen and is designed for the consideration of policy makers and non-governmental organizations. It is being distributed by the United Nations Non-Governmental Liaison Service.

“Given the escalating pace of global warming,” the report argues, the world “now has to act with far greater urgency…” But change is possible only with “major economic and political rearrangements around the core principles of equity and sustainable development.”

These are euphemisms for destroying private property rights and the free enterprise system and creating a global socialist superstate.

Under a heading about the need to “transform the systems and institutions that have created climate change,” the authors say that “tinkering around the edges” will not suffice and that “Governance and development models should be built around notions of justice and equity, with the objective of working for the planet and people as a whole, and evening out imbalances that are not sustainable. It is not enough to talk about low-carbon pathways through technology, for example, without also rethinking current models of production, global trade and consumption patterns.”

Proposals for “climate change financing” include a Comprehensive World Climate Change Fund, into which payments could be made, and a global carbon tax.

The ATTAC movement says, “Change the system, not the climate!” ATTAC, which stands for the Association for the Taxation of Financial Transactions for the Aid of Citizens, favors global taxes on currency transactions.

A more detailed article on “climate justice” explains that “It isn’t simply a matter of asking the rich world to pay for the devastation climate change is causing in the developing world. As a report recently launched by World Development Movement and Jubilee Debt Campaign points out, ‘climate debt’ questions a global free market system which has pushed many developing countries into high carbon pathways that they now need to find a way out of.”

This is about as clear as it gets — free markets will give way to a worldwide socialist state, created under the guise of solving a climate crisis that does not really exist.

The authors, Nick Dearden and Tim Jones, attempt to throw cold water on Lord Christopher Monckton’s contention that this amounts to a blueprint for “world communist government.” However, they acknowledge that the proposal does imply “fundamental changes in the global economy” and the “radical redistribution of the world’s resources.”

Do you think we can count on the major media attending the conference to report on the real agenda behind the event?

At Least 127 Killed, around 450 Wounded in Five Attacks in Baghdad

At Least 127 Killed, around 450 Wounded in Five Attacks in Baghdad

Readers Number : 133

08/12/2009 At least 127 people were killed and around 450 wounded when five massive car bombs rocked Baghdad in quick succession on Tuesday, an interior ministry official told AFP. Sporadic gunfire then sounded and the sirens of emergency vehicles were also heard.
Three car bombs exploded near offices of the labour, interior and finance ministries. The fourth explosion was a suicide attacker in a car struck a police patrol in Dora, in southern Baghdad, causing 15 deaths, an interior ministry official said. 12 of the deaths were students at a nearby technical college, where the other 3 fatalities are police men.
The fifth car bomb targeted a courthouse in Mansur, western Baghdad.
The Baghdad goverment and the US military have warned of rise in attacks in the run up to a general election expected to take place in February.
Bloody attacks in Baghdad killed more than 250 people in August and October.
Tuesday’s bombings came two days after the war-torn country’s parliament passed a law governing the election, which will be the second national ballot since the 2003 US-led invasion. The United Nations on Monday urged Iraq to announce "as soon as possible" the date for the vote after more than two months of delays.
US diplomats, most notably Christopher Hill, Washington’s ambassador to Baghdad, had pushed MPs to pass the law, seeking to avoid delays to the planned pullout of tens of thousands of American troops in 2010.
The United States has 115,000 soldiers in Iraq, but that figure will drop to 50,000 next year as all of its combat troops are pulled out before a complete withdrawal by the end of 2011.
Britain condemned car bombings, predicting that they would not derail progress towards peaceful government in Iraq.
Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s spokesman promised to continue what he described "close work" with the Iraqi government to "continue progress".

Native Orientalists at the Daily Times – the US-Israeli Master’s Voice for a Slave Pakistan


Native Orientalists at the Daily Times – the US-Israeli Master’s Voice
for a Slave Pakistan


“The more a ruling class is able to assimilate the foremost minds of
the ruled class, the more stable and dangerous becomes its rule.” -
Karl Marx.

( – A few days back, I received a ‘Dear friends’ email
from Mr. Najam Aziz Sethi, ex editor-in-chief of the Daily Times (DT),
Pakistan, announcing that he, together with several of his colleagues,
had resigned from their positions in the newspaper.

In his e-mail, Mr. Sethi thanked his ‘friends’ for their “support and
encouragement…in making Daily Times a ‘new voice for a new Pakistan’.”
Wistfully, he added, “I hope it will be able to live up to your
expectations and mine in time to come.”

I am not sure why Mr. Sethi had chosen me for this dubious honor.
Certainly, I did not deserve it. I could not count myself among his
‘friends’ who had given “support and encouragement” to the mission
that DT had chosen for itself in Pakistan’s media and politics.

Contrary to its slogan, it was never DT’s mission to be a ‘new voice
for a new Pakistan.’ The DT had dredged its voice from the colonial
past; it had only altered its pitch and delivery to serve the new US-
Zionist overlords. Many of the writers for DT aspire to the office of
the native informers of the colonial era. They are heirs to the brown
Sahibs, home-grown Orientalists, who see their own world (if it is
theirs in any meaningful sense) through the lens created for them by
their spiritual mentors, the Western Orientalists.

Pakistanis had failed to seize sovereign control over their country at
its birth. In August 1947, the departing British had few worries about
losing their colonial assets in Pakistan. They were quite confident
that the brown Sahibs, who were succeeding them, would not fail in
their duty to protect these assets. Within a few years, these brown
Sahibs had strapped the new country to the wheels of the neocolonial
order. Without effective resistance from below – from intellectuals,
workers, students and peasants – these neocolonial managers have been
free to cannibalize their own people as long as they could also keep
their masters happy.

This is not a cri de coeur – only a diagnosis of Pakistan’s misery. It
is a misery that only Pakistanis can remedy once they make up their
minds to terminate the system that has castrated them for more than
six decades. The best time to do this was in the first decades after
their country’s birth, when the Western imperialist grip was still
weak, and with courage and organization, Pakistanis could have set
their newly free country on the course of irreversible independence.

Grievously, Pakistanis had failed at this task. Pakistan’s elites
produced few men and women of conscience, who could transcend their
class origins to mobilize workers and peasants to fight for their
rights. More regrettably, Pakistan’s emerging middle classes have been
too busy aping the brown Sahibs, stepping over each other to join the
ranks of the corrupt elites. As a result, Pakistan’s elites have grown
more predatory, refusing to establish the rule of law in any sphere of

Ironically, the enormous success of Edward Said’s Orientalism, his
devastating critiquing of the West’s hegemonic discourse on the
‘Orient,’ has deflected attention from the recrudescence of a native
Orientalism in much of the Periphery in the last few decades. Its
victory in Pakistan is nearly complete, where it has been led by the
likes of Ahmad Rashid, Pervez Hoodbhoy, Najam Sethi, Khaled Ahmad,
Irfan Hussain, Husain Haqqani, and P.J. Mir, etc. Not a very
illustrious lot, but they are the minions of Western embassies and
Western-financed NGOs in Pakistan.

In the euphoria of Edward Said’s success, left intellectuals have
nearly forgotten that the West’s servant classes in the Periphery
produce an indigenous Orientalism. I refer here to the coarser but
more pernicious Orientalism of the brown Sahibs, who are free, behind
their rhetoric of progress, to denigrate their own history and
culture. A few of these native Orientalists are deracinated souls, who
put down their own people for failing, as they see it, to keep up with
the forward march of history. Most, however, are opportunists,
lackeys, or wannabee lackeys, eager to join the native racketeers who
manage the Periphery for the benefit of outside powers.

In the closing years of the colonial era, the nationalists had kept a
watchful eye on native informers. In recent decades, as their power
has grown several fold, this treasonous class has received little
attention from left circles. Post-colonial critics continue to produce
learned books and essays on the language, structures, tools,
intricacies and even the arcana of Orientalism, but they pay scant
attention to native Orientalism. These critics prefer to concentrate
their firepower on the ‘far enemy,’ the Western protagonists of
Orientalism. Perhaps, they imagine that the native Orientalists, the
‘near enemy,’ will vanish once the ‘far enemy’has been discredited. In
truth, the ‘near enemy’ has grown enormously even as the ‘far enemy’
treads more cautiously.

Quite early, writing in the 1950s, Franz Fanon, in The Wretched of the
Earth, had sounded the alarm about the treachery latent in the
‘national bourgeoisie’ poised to step into the shoes of the white
colonials and settlers in Africa. About this underdeveloped
bourgeoisie, he writes, “its mission has nothing to do with
transforming the nation; it consists, prosaically, of being the
transmission line between the nation and a capitalism, rampant though
camouflaged, which today puts on the mask of neocolonialism.”

“Because it is bereft of ideas,” Fanon writes, “because it lives to
itself and cuts itself off from the people, undermined by its
hereditary incapacity to think in terms of all the problems of the
nation as seen from point of view of the whole of that nation, the
national middle class will have nothing better to do than to take on
the role of manager for Western enterprise, and it will in practice
set up its country as the brothel of Europe.” Although Fanon was not
writing about Pakistan, no truer words – nothing more prescient -
could have been written about the brown Sahibs who have managed US-
Zionist interests in Pakistan.

To return to the DT, surely some Pakistani – moved by the instinct of
self-preservation – could have produced at least one damning monograph
documenting the methods that this new flagship of native Orientalism
has employed to advance the strategic interests of the US-Zionist
confederates in Pakistan and the Islamicate. Oddly, you are unlikely
to find even a few articles that shine the spotlight on the DT’s
unabashed advocacy of the US-Zionist agenda in Pakistan.

The DT was launched in April 2002, simultaneously from Lahore and
Karachi, just a few months after the United States had invaded and
occupied Afghanistan, with indispensable logistic support from
Pakistan. Was this timing a mere coincidence? Or was the launching of
an aggressively pro-American and pro-Zionist newspaper, led by a team
of mostly US-trained editors and columnists, an imperative of the new
geopolitics created by the Pakistan’s mercenary embrace of the US-
Zionist global war of terrorism?

Coincidence or not, the DT has served its masters with verve. Its
pages have carried countless editorials justifying Pakistan’s
induction into the US led war against Afghanistan, under the cover of
the attacks of September 11, 2001. The editors and columnists at DT
have routinely excoriated the patriots who have opposed Pakistan’s
surrender to US-Zionist demands, as naive sentimentalists unaware of
the tough demands of realpolitik. Endlessly, they have argued that
Pakistan – with the world’s sixth largest population, a million-strong
military, and an arsenal of nuclear weapons – can save itself only
through eager prostration before the demands of foreign powers.

In advocating national surrender, these native Orientalists boldly and
unashamedly declared that Pakistan’s elites draw their power from
Washington, London and Tel Aviv, not from the will of the people of
Pakistan. It is an insult that has since been sinking, slowly but
surely, into the national psyche of Pakistanis.

Taking advantage of what appeared to be – after the invasion of Iraq
in March 2003 – the irreversible US assault against the sovereignty of
Islamicate nations, Pakistan’s ruling elites openly began broaching
the need to recognize Israel. Once again, the native Orientalists at
DT were leading the charge, arguing that Pakistan could advance its
national interests by recognizing Israel. Their rationale was pathetic
in its naivete. Grateful to Pakistan, the brown Sahibs argued, the
powerful Zionist lobby would neutralize the Indian lobby’s
machinations against Pakistan in the United States. Only determined
opposition from nationalists in Pakistan defeated this treacherous

When resistance against US occupation of Afghanistan gained momentum,
once again the DT was reading its master’s lips. Shut down the
madrasas [Islamic schools], they demanded; and without delay, attack
the Pakistanis in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) who
were supporting the Afghan resistance. Repeated US and Pakistani
bombings of the resistance groups in FATA, which has killed thousands
of civilians, called forth new Pakistani-Pashtun factions that have
been attacking military and civilian targets in Pakistan. With barely
concealed glee, the DT cheers when the Pakistan military carries its
war deeper into the country’s towns and villages.

In 2007, when the lawyers in Pakistan took to the streets to demand
the restoration of the Pakistan Supreme Court Chief Justice, Mr.
Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, sacked by the military dictator, General
(R) Pervez Musharraf, the DT did not support them. Instead, it
defended the sacking, and repeatedly made the case for a ‘gradual
transition’ to civilian rule in Pakistan. A civilian government, they
were afraid, might not be as compliant to US pressures as Pakistan’s
military rulers.

When elections became unavoidable, the United States and Pakistan’s
generals worked on a plan to bring to power the pro-American Benazir
Bhutto, the exiled corrupt leader of the Pakistan People’s Party
(PPP). At US prodding, Dictator Musharraf passed an illegal National
Robbers Ordinance (NRO) withdrawing all criminal cases against the
leadership of the PPP. With luck, the US plan succeeded. The openly
pro-American PPP followed General Musharraf into power.

Space allows us to list only a few egregious examples of the
Orientalist mindset on display in the pages of the DT. As the paper’s
chief native Orientalist, Khaled Ahmad, for several years surveyed the
foibles and follies of Pakistan’s Urdu media. He berated the benighted
Urdu writers for their ‘naivete’, ‘emotionalism’ and ‘foolish’
advocacy of national interests that collided with realpolitik (read:
US-Zionist interests). Ejaz Haider, the paper’s op-ed editor,
distinguished himself by writing his endlessly clever political
commentaries in the racy street lingo of the United States. Did this
make him a darling of the American staff at the US Embassy in

Consider one more ‘exhibit’ that captures DT’s servile mentality. In a
regular column, oddly titled, ‘Purple Patch’, the newspaper ladles out
wisdom to its readers. This wisdom is dispensed in the form of article-
length passages lifted from various ‘great’ writers, who are always of
Western provenance. Presumably, the editors at DT still believe, with
their long-dead spiritual mentor, British Lord Thomas Babington
Macaulay (1800-1859), that “a single shelf of a good European library
was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia.”

Will the departure of Mr. Sethi and his distinguished colleagues make
a difference? I doubt if the owners [PPP corrupt traitor Salmaan
Taseer and other venal sycophants] of DT will have difficulty finding
their replacements, voices equally shrill in their advocacy of foreign
powers. More than at any other time, growing numbers of Pakistanis
have been grooming themselves for service to the Empire, as their
predecessors once eagerly sought to serve the British Raj. This
groveling by Pakistan’s elites will only change when the people act to
change the incentives on offer to the servants of Empire. It will only
change when the people of Pakistan can put these mercenaries in the
dock, charge them for their crimes against the people and the state,
and force them to disgorge their loot.

This will take hard work and some Pakistanis insist that this hard
work is underway. It daily gains momentum, and at some point, the will
of the people will catch up with the craven and corrupt elites who
have bartered the vital interests of Pakistan and the Islamicate for
personal profit. When the ‘near enemy’ has been decapitated -
metaphorically speaking – the ‘far enemy’ too will recede into the
mists of history.

[Dr. M. Shahid Alam is an eminent Professor of Economics at the
Northeastern University, College of Arts & Sciences, based in Boston,
MA, USA. This article is an excerpt from his forthcoming book, Israeli
Exceptionalism - The Destabilizing Logic of Zionism (Macmillan,
November 2009). Contact E-Mail: - Website: - 1 December 2009]



Open Threats To Send the Special Forces Back Into Pakistan

Tackle Taliban or we will, US tells Pakistan


is turning up the pressure on Pakistan to fight the Taliban inside its borders.

The US has warned Pakistan that if it does not act more aggressively, it will use considerably more force on the Pakistani side of the border to shut down Taliban attacks on US forces in Afghanistan, US and Pakistani officials said.

The blunt message was delivered in a tense encounter in Pakistan last month, before President Barack Obama announced his new war strategy, when General James Jones, Mr Obama’s national security adviser, and John Brennan, the White House counter-terrorism chief, met the heads of Pakistan’s military and its intelligence service.

US officials said the message did not amount to an ultimatum, rather it was intended to prod a reluctant Pakistani military to go after Taliban insurgents in Pakistan who are directing attacks in Afghanistan.

The Pakistanis interpreted the message as a fairly bald warning that unless Pakistan moved quickly to act against two Taliban groups they have so far refused to attack, America was prepared to take unilateral action to expand Predator drone attacks beyond the tribal areas and, if needed, to resume raids by Special Operations forces into the country against al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders.

One senior Administration official declined to go into details, but said that: ”I think they read our intentions accurately.”

A Pakistani official who has been briefed on the meetings said: ”Jones’ message was that if Pakistani help wasn’t forthcoming, the US would have to do it themselves.”

The security demands followed an offer of a broader strategic relationship and expanded non-military economic aid from the US.

Pakistan’s politically weakened President, Asif Ali Zardari, replied in writing to a two-page letter that Mr Jones delivered by hand from Mr Obama. But Mr Zardari gave no indication of how Pakistan would respond to the incentives, which were linked to the demands for greatly stepped-up counter-terrorism actions.

The implicit threat of not only ratcheting up the drone strikes but also launching more covert US ground raids would mark a substantial escalation of the Administration’s counter-terrorism campaign.

US Special Operations forces attacked al-Qaeda militants in a Pakistani village near the border with Afghanistan in early September 2008, in the first publicly acknowledged case of US forces conducting a ground raid on Pakistani soil.

But the raid caused a political furore in Pakistan. This saw the US back off what had been a planned series of such strikes.

During his review of strategy, officials said, Mr Obama concluded that no amount of additional troops in Afghanistan would succeed in a new mission if the Taliban could retreat over the Pakistani border to regroup and resupply. But the Administration has said little about the Pakistani part of the strategy.

■ An American at the centre of an international terrorism investigation has been charged with helping plot the 2008 rampage in Mumbai, India, that left 173 people dead, according to the US Justice Department.

David Headley, of Chicago, is accused of helping identify targets for a Pakistani-based terrorist group, Lashkar-e-Taiba, whose two-day attack on luxury hotels, a popular restaurant, a Jewish community centre and a crowded train station brought India’s financial capital to a halt and shocked the world.