An immediate threat, or a preparatory signal to attack Pakistan in the future?

An immediate threat, or a preparatory signal to attack Pakistan in the future?

The WaPo is a mouth piece front for gossip and posturing for sections of the American intelligence community and Jewish elite of the JEWSA. Most of what it writes is pure fiction, but also crucially represents the views and perspectives of certain important people in the JEWSA who through this particular paper articulate and sound out their fundamental policies to the rest of America.

It played a prominent role in the fake drum beat towards war against Iraq.

That Secretary of State Clinton should be threatening Pakistan with unilateral attacks, just as she has been doing for a couple of years Iran and North Korea is no surprise.

NORTH KOREA is belligerent and tough in the face of USA threats, and is backed by China.

IRAN is belligerent and tough in the face of USA threats, and is backed by Syria, Turkey increasingly it seems, and Russia China to an extent.

PAKISTAN on the other hand is the proverbial monkey dancing to the American organ grinder. The more the Americans grind their repulsive tune of endless attacks against Pakistani civilians, AND shouting/demanding orders for endless security ops in the NWFP the more the Pakistani monkey dances……..lacking the common sense and wit that this is all heading towards ultimate KIAMAT and total disaster for Pakistan.

The Pakistani military and Zardari cannot see that the simultaneous attacks by America and the Pakistani military against the Pakistani people is there to weaken the long term cohesion and survival of the Pakistani state.

The USA has been attacking Pakistan slowly especially since 2006, through destabilization and infiltration under the guise of being an essential friend of Pakistan.

The average Pakistani (90%) applying his simple common sense actually know this reality, but the top brass of the Pakistani military trained in the UK/USA can’t see this, and…………..OR or as with the top politicians of the PPP have simply been bought with big fat Swiss bank accounts. Zardari is protected by mercenary Christian Fundamentalist American forces based in and around Islamabad, not by Pakistani security.

Under International Law, affirmed by cases after cases Pakistan has a duty to aid, shelter, feed and arm the Afghan resistance against any alien occupying power in Afghanistan under the principles of “Self Determination”, just as Pakistan did with the Afghan resistance under Soviet occupation 1980–1989. In 9 years of war the Soviet Union never murmured once about Pakistan’s training of 85,000 Mujaheddin fighters and 12,000 Jihadis from various Muslim countries, armed and funded by the USA, Israel and the Gulf countries.

The Soviet Union after 9 years of fighting lost 20,000 dead/MIA and 50,000 wounded in Afghanistan.

The USA after 9 years of fighting has lost 1000 dead and about 3000 wounded in Afghanistan……….but is already complaining that it is Pakistan’s fault for “not doing enough” or Iran’s fault. For good measure as a strategy of pressure and blackmail the USA has also carried out a false flag terror op in NY and blamed it on the TTP, which also regularly claims to carry out terror ops within Pakistan very successfully, unlike the NY fizzle bomb.

The TTP is believed to be an American intelligence front made of ex-Guantanamo detainees who have subsequently been turned, and thus given freedom.

The criminal Kleptocracy of Zardari along with the all powerful military fully and mysteriously cooperates with this fake narrative AGAINST PAKISTAN’S INTERESTS without the slightest bit of murmur or public contradiction…………just like trained monkey’s to the American organ grinder.

The Pakistani elite and media by aiding the JEWSA with the “al-Qaeda” myth, and sending the same Jehadis into Indian Kashmir since 1989, have turned what was wholly a domestic Afghan resistance movement with very specific local intentions, dominated and run by Pakistan for Pakistan…….have inadvertently conflated the Afghan Taliban through the miscalculated policies of the Pakistan military with international terrorism. The slippery JEWSA is merely exploiting this miscalculation.

I have always argued that the Pakistanis need to disengage from the USA fully, rather than try to maintain the rather paradoxical, unsustainable and one may say deeply dishonest position of being on the one hand an ally of the USA taking billions $ worth of aid, allowing American military personnel and mercenaries into sensitive parts of the country, whilst simultaneously hosting the Taliban Afghan Shura in Quetta, who are directly responsible for the death of American servicemen in Afghanistan.

It can’t go on like this.

Pakistan logically needs to eject the Taliban Afghan Shura, even if they are not related to the TTP……… ……..even if they clearly have no internationalist pretensions, and therefore highly unlikely to have undertaken the false flag attack in NY recently.

The slippery bankrupt JEWSA is desperate, and is groping around for any excuse to attack Pakistan MORE COMPREHENSIVELY, then the current levels through drone attacks.

______________________________________

U.S. To Plan Pakistan Strike

White House eyes retaliation if Taliban pull off major strike inside U.S.

By GREG MILLER (Hopefully not related to Judith Miller)

Washington Post — The U.S. military is reviewing options for a unilateral strike in Pakistan in the event that a successful attack on American soil is traced to the country’s tribal areas, according to senior military officials.

(Thats been the talk since 2004 at least, and is building momentum as more American servicemen and mercenaries swamp Pakistan, and the Zardari government becomes more dependent on USA largess——the actual ultimate objective is of course to secure Pakistan’s nukes for Israel {an Israeli objective since the 1970′s}, so that in the event of an Israeli nuclear attack against Iran {Israeli nuclear armed submarines are already in the Persian Gulf} Pakistan won’t be able to come to the rescue of Iran in any possible way…….as it will have been occupied quietly by the USA …….also an Israeli attack on Iran will obviously have political repercussions on Pakistan, a neighbor.

Also we must remember that Bush in his secret talks with Blair in January 2003 and subsequently leaked by 2 British civil servants, did say that after Iraq, Iran would be invaded, and then Pakistan…….thus the objective has not changed, but the time line has.

In signing the pipeline deal with Iran after 16 years of hard negotiation, perhaps Pakistan is signaling that it does not want to obediently wait in the queue, after Iran is attacked to be occupied by the USA eventually…….though the security cooperation with Iran is superficial and Kiyani has no linkages with his counterparts in Iran. Common sense again tells us that since both countries are on the “list” of to do and attack by the USA that both countries should fully cooperate in the security sphere. This is natural survival instinct, not even high politics and sophisticated strategizing.

OF course there will be counter measures to create schism between the two….such as Shia/Sunni animosity, but the two must act clearly for their mutual interests )

Ties between the alleged Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, and elements of the Pakistani Taliban have sharpened the Obama administration’s need for retaliatory options, the officials said.

(Disinformation—–There are no ties; TTP have not taken credit, realizing even as American intelligence fronts the very serious nature for them {being attacked by the Pakistan military and the American military simultaneously} should such acts be traced back to them……Shahzad’s sheer amateurish and inexplicable action in NY suggests he had no training in Pakistan under the TTP, and the TTP have not claimed him as their own……the TTP understands that their job for the USA is to destabilize Pakistan which they have successfully done since 2006………..NOT conduct attacks against the USA, which logistically as puppets of the USA they are wholly incapable of doing, but as OBL found out in 2001 which he subsequently denied to the Pakistani media, the American’s often have a habit of changing the job description of their created puppets without telling their puppets…….

Warning to Kiyani

Warning to Zardari

But as Musharaf found out in 2007-8, as Zia ul Haq found out, as Ayub Khan found out eventually…”Friends not Masters”)

They stressed that a U.S. reprisal would be contemplated only under extreme circumstances, such as a catastrophic attack that leaves President Obama convinced that the ongoing campaign of CIA drone strikes is insufficient.

(The American security state is so huge consuming perhaps as much as $1.5 trillion each year, and so sophisticated according to Chalmers Johnson {ex-CIA analyst} that it simply is not possible for two bit organizations such as the TTP to conduct terror ops in the USA. The TTP it must be repeated again and again is an American intelligence front created out of ex-Guantanamo detainees to attack Pakistani targets within Pakistan, and thus squeeze Pakistan towards the USA’s way of thinking……………nearly ALL the big and medium terror ops in the USA are conducted by the USA government for specific agenda’s…….introducing MRE security laws which give the state greater powers, and puts potential foreign targets on their back foot….Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003, Iran, Pakistan, Syria and so on)

“Planning has been reinvigorated in the wake of Times Square,” one of the officials said…………..(this has been ongoing since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, and when the Clinton’s came to power in 1993…….2010)

‘(Con)Fusion centers’ (centers for destabilization of Pakistan)

At the same time, the administration is trying to deepen ties to Pakistan’s intelligence officials in a bid to head off any attack by militant groups. The United States and Pakistan have recently established a joint military intelligence center on the outskirts of the northwestern city of Peshawar, and are in negotiations to set up another one near Quetta, the Pakistani city where the Afghan Taliban is based, according to the U.S. military officials. They and other officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity surrounding U.S. military and intelligence activities in Pakistan.

(The ISI was created by the departing British Raj, as its primary instrument of influence in its former colony…….so London saab was its initial master, so that in the early 1950′s it destabilized civilian governments and paved the way for eventual military takeover of Pakistan in 1958, with Washington’s blessing.

With increased American military and economic aid $4 billion 1950–1969, naturally the USA became the master of the ISI.

At present the USA is the absolute master of the ISI, as the USA bankrolls most of its operations.

The ISI DOES NOTHING WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF THE USA.

The ISI runs the Afghan Taliban for the USA, but not the Pakistan Taliban which is run directly by the USA.

In internet lingo the Afghan Taliban are known as “ineffective Controlled Opposition”…..by the USA, and that is why THEY HAVE A SAFE HAVEN IN QUETTA DIRECTLY UNDER THE NOSES OF THE Americans for 9 uninterrupted years.

Further for the Pakistani people to win real freedom, and avoid being a perennial nuisance to her neighbors {India, Afghanistan, Iran}……..ALL USA Western aid,….. military and economic must be severed.

For the Pakistani people to win real freedom, and avoid being a perennial nuisance to her neighbors……ALL senior figures within government must be trained in Pakistan and not sent on refresher course to London and the USA, where they develop their official mindset and lingo……..Gilani, Kiyani, Haqqani, Zardari…….fine Iranian sounding names….how about acting like the actual people?

For the Pakistani people to win real freedom, and avoid being a perennial nuisance to her neighbors……Pakistan needs to disengage from the American led security operations within Pakistan)

The “fusion centers” are meant to bolster Pakistani military operations by providing direct access to U.S. intelligence, including real-time video surveillance from drones controlled by the U.S. Special Operations Command, the officials said. But in an acknowledgment of the continuing mistrust between the two governments, the officials added that both sides also see the centers as a way to keep a closer eye on one another, as well as to monitor military operations and intelligence activities in insurgent areas.

Obama said during his campaign for the presidency that he would be willing to order strikes in Pakistan, and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said in a television interview after the Times Square attempt that “if, heaven forbid, an attack like this that we can trace back to Pakistan were to have been successful, there would be very severe consequences.”

Obama dispatched his national security adviser, James L. Jones, and CIA Director Leon Panetta to Islamabad this month to deliver a similar message to Pakistani officials, including President Asif Ali Zardari and the military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kiyani.

Jones and Panetta also presented evidence gathered by U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies that Shahzad received significant support from the Pakistani Taliban.

Retaliatory blows (major intrusion into Pakistani sovereign territory)

The U.S. options for potential retaliatory action rely mainly on air and missile strikes, but could also employ small teams of U.S. Special Operations troops already positioned along the border with Afghanistan. One of the senior military officials said plans for military strikes in Pakistan have been revised significantly over the past several years, moving away from a “large, punitive response” to more measured plans meant to deliver retaliatory blows against specific militant groups.

The official added that there is a broad consensus in the U.S. military that airstrikes would at best erode the threat posed by al-Qaeda and its affiliates, and risk an irreparable rupture in the U.S. relationship with Pakistan.

“The general feeling is that we need to be circumspect in how we respond so we don’t destroy the relationships we’ve built” with the Pakistani military, the second official said.

U.S. Special Operations teams in Afghanistan have pushed for years to have wider latitude to carry out raids across the border, arguing that CIA drone strikes do not yield prisoners or other opportunities to gather intelligence. But a 2008 U.S. helicopter raid against a target in Pakistan prompted protests from officials in Islamabad who oppose allowing U.S. soldiers to operate within their country.

The CIA has the authority to designate and strike targets in Pakistan without case-by-case approval from the White House. U.S. military forces are currently authorized to carry out unilateral strikes in Pakistan only if solid intelligence were to surface on any of three high-value targets: al-Qaeda leaders Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, or Taliban chief Mohammad Omar. But even in those cases, the military would need higher-level approval.

“The bottom line is you have to have information about targets to do something [and] we have a process that remains cumbersome,” said one of the senior military officials. “If something happens, we have to confirm who did it and where it came from. People want to be as precise as possible to be punitive.”

U.S. spy agencies have engaged in a major buildup inside Pakistan over the past year. The CIA has increased the pace of drone strikes against al-Qaeda affiliates, a campaign supported by the arrival of new surveillance and eavesdropping technology deployed by the National Security Agency.

The fusion centers are part of a parallel U.S. military effort to intensify the pressure on the Taliban and other groups accused of directing insurgent attacks in Afghanistan. U.S. officials said that the sharing of intelligence goes both ways and that targets are monitored in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Delicate trade off

In the Peshawar fusion cell, which was set up within the last several months, Pakistanis have access to “full-motion video from different platforms,” including unarmed surveillance drones, one official said.

The fusion centers also serve a broader U.S. aim: making the Pakistanis more dependent on U.S. intelligence, and less likely to curtail Predator drone patrols or other programs that draw significant public opposition.

To Pakistan, the fusion centers offer a glimpse of U.S. capabilities, as well as the ability to monitor U.S. military operations across the border. “They find out much more about what we know,” one of the senior U.S. military officials said. “What we get is physical presence — to see what they are actually doing versus what they say they’re doing.”

That delicate arrangement will be tested if the two sides reach agreement on the fusion center near Quetta. The city has served for nearly a decade as a sanctuary for Taliban leaders who fled Afghanistan in 2001 and have long-standing ties to Pakistan’s powerful Inter-Services Intelligence directorate.

U.S. officials said that the two sides have done preliminary work searching for a suitable site for the center but that the effort is proceeding at a pace that one official described as “typical Pakistani glacial speed.” Despite the increased cooperation, U.S. officials say they continue to be frustrated over Pakistan’s slow pace in issuing visas to American military and civilian officials.

One senior U.S. military official said the center would be used to track the Afghan Taliban leadership council, known as the Quetta shura. But other officials said the main mission would be to support the U.S. military effort across the border in Kandahar, Afghanistan, where a major U.S. military push is planned.

__________________________________

The more Pakistan entangles itself with the JEWSA in security and at all other levels, the more problems will multiply as the JEWSA tries out its base instincts and ego against ordinary Pakistanis in the service of Israel.

POSTED BY ALI.MOSTAQUE

Harvard Project–the Essence Of the Anti-Soviet Psywar

“The specialized surveys focused on identifying, collating and grouping personal and psychophysical characteristics of people, especially those characteristics that make a person of leader in a group and in society. To accomplish this, American intelligence gave the experts involved in the Harvard Project an enormous amount of material on the personal characteristics of distinguished world political figures and giants of science, technology and culture. Particular attention was devoted to the study of Lenin’s personality in order to identify the psychophysical qualities of the “leader complex.”

It was found that the majority of world leaders had a pronounced innate authority complex. People with this complex usually win a power struggle, especially if they do not follow generally accepted standards of morality. If they are assisted by a well organized group of specialists (so-called puppet masters) equipped with the knowledge of human psychology gained in the Harvard Project, their opponents simply have no chance of winning.
Today, we can say with complete certainty that a professional group of “puppet masters” is able to identify and move future leaders into positions of power like pawns in an international game of chess.”

Harvard Project

From the history of information-psychological war against the USSR

Vladislav Swede
26.03.2010

The Cold War transformed the former allies in the anti-Hitler coalition – the United States and the Soviet Union – in the opponents. The Americans set the task to fill an information niche for political and psychological operations of its intelligence services in the USSR. As a result, in March 1948 in the U.S. began a secret document entitled “Use of refugees from the Soviet Union in the U.S. national interest.

Stone’s bosom

On the eve of the 65 th anniversary of the Victory many good words said about our allies in the anti-Hitler coalition: the United States and Britain. All true, but we should not forget that in these allied relations has a dark side. It is known that on Aug. 20, 1943 in Quebec (Canada), U.S. leaders and Velieobritanii Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill with American and British Chiefs of staff discussed the question of how the Germans could hold Russian as far as possible in the east.

The meeting adopted two plans: Overlord, which was contemplated in the 1944 Allied landing in France (it was guidance allies informed of the USSR in November-December 1943 in Tehran), and second, top secret, “Rankin”, the purpose of which was – “turn against Russia the power of unbeaten Germany. In April 1945, the development plan, “Rankin”, Churchill gave the British troops the order: prepare for Operation Unthinkable.

The essence of this operation was that the July 1, 1945 troops of Britain, the USA, Canada, along with the Polish Corps and 10-12 nerazoruzhennymi German divisions were supposed to start fighting against the Soviet Union.

Prevented this plan the power of crushing blows, which the Red Army inflicted by Nazi Germany at the end of the war. “Allies” have calculated the prospects of his adventures and realized that a week after the start of “Operation Unthinkable, Soviet tanks would reach the Atlantic Ocean and take control of all of Europe.

However, after mastering the United States nuclear weapons, plans for the strike on the territory of the USSR again became topical. Recall that, starting from the end of 1945, the military leadership of the United States each claimed more grandiose plans for the nuclear bombing of the USSR.

However, the Americans remember that the enormous damage inflicted by Nazi Germany to the Soviet Union bombing and total destruction of infrastructure, failed to weaken its economic power and break the spirit of Soviet people. In this regard, the Air Force United States set a target to determine the ultimate strength of the Soviet people in the case of massive atomic bombing. To solve this problem the Americans helped the following circumstance.

The Second World War gave rise to unprecedented in human history, the movement of peoples. By May 1945 the number of refugees in Europe exceeded 40 million. Many of them were forcibly evacuated by the Nazis in Germany, as the labor force (in January 1944 it was more than eight million people). A considerable part of them were Soviet citizens. Since the end of May 1945 in accordance with the Yalta agreement began their repatriation to the USSR. It should be noted that the bulk of Soviet citizens willingly return to their homeland. However, there were those who did not want to leave Europe. The motives of the Soviet “defectors” were different. Thus, war criminals and those who collaborated with the Nazis, could not count on the “warm welcome” in the Union. However, it was quite a few who did not take the Soviet system with its restrictions and pressure on the individual.

It is believed that in Western Europe by June 1947 left about 250,000 Soviet “defectors”. Many of them appeared in the American zone of occupation. They were chosen object for sociological studies of American experts.

As already mentioned, the U.S. Air Force, Harvard financing the project initially, put the narrow task – by interviewing these individuals to assess the psychological vulnerability of the Soviet civilian population in the massive atomic bombing. But soon, during the Cold War, the project has outgrown the framework.

The initiator of the refugees from the Soviet Union in the framework of the Harvard project was John Paton Davies (John Paton Davies), a member of the Group of Policy Planning U.S. State Department, headed by renowned Sovietologist, future U.S. ambassador to the Soviet Union, George Kennan. As a result, American experts in the early 1950′s were able to handle in 67 refugee camps and in some cities in Germany, more than 13,000 oral interviews and written questionnaires. This gave grounds for American scientists to draw conclusions that have caused American politicians “shock” reaction.

They found that rejection of the Soviet system of refugees from the Soviet Union did not mean that it rejected literally everything. The discontent of the Soviet “defectors”, as it turned out, caused not so much the Soviet political system itself, as the communist leadership of the country. In response to a question that should be retained from the Soviet system in the case, if the regime fell, literally everything prioritized education and then health and social protection.

Moreover, the “defectors” were proud of the successes of industrialization, and those positions that the Soviet Union occupied in the international arena. Most welcomed the commitment regime, its activity and confidence in the future of the country.

Underlines the very significant achievements of the Soviet Union in the field of culture. Revelation for the Harvard researchers has a positive assessment of the former Soviet people the state’s role in the economy.

It was called a lot of negative aspects in the Soviet system, including excessive bureaucratization and poor planning, but in general, “former Soviet” people were convinced: the welfare state can not be built on the basis of private enterprise. About two-thirds of respondents favored the state planning and state ownership in the economy. It must be borne in mind that this was the opinion of people who were dissatisfied with the Soviet system and deliberately did not want to return to the USSR.

More information about the Harvard Project and its development at this stage can be read in a book of doctor of historical sciences, professor Eugenia Codina “Harvard Project” (Moscow: Russian Political Encyclopedia “, 2003). Many interesting things can be found in Arcadia Medvedev “Harvard project: half a century later” (“Union. Belarus-Russia”. 04. 09.2003 town № 35/135).

Birth of “puppeteer”

To implement the plan information and psychological war was necessary to develop effective psychotechnologies impact on the Soviet people. During the Second World War that were active in Nazi specialists from the Office of Alfred Rosenberg, a native of the Baltic and “expert” east of the soul. After the war, experts have begun this “Harvard Project. As already mentioned, the work was carried out on the basis of surveys of former Soviet citizens.

Thus began the famous “Harvard Project» (Harvard Project on the Soviet Social System) – one of the most ambitious political-sociological studies of Soviet society. It was carried out by the Centre of Russian Studies, specially created at Harvard University in 1948.

The project carried out two types of surveys: biographical (A-Schedule interviews), in which collected general sociological data and specialized (B-Schedule interviews). In the past going “sotsioantropologicheskie” data in the field of economic, family relations, social stratification system of power relations, etc.

In conducting specialized surveys focused on identifying, collating, grouping of personal and psycho-physical human qualities, especially those that make him a leader in the community and society. For this to the experts involved in the Harvard project, “American intelligence agencies have provided enormous material relating to the personal characteristics of prominent world political figures, geniuses of science, technology and culture. Particular attention was paid to the study of personality and Lenin, to identify mental and physical qualities, forming a “complex leader.”

Novikov, a professor Stratfordskogo University, notes that “in the process of working on this project, hundreds of Soviet refugees were subjected to special psychological research. For this purpose the so-called Rorschach tests, tests with the ink stains, tests with incomplete sentences, up to the most intimate interviews on sexual themes, where each word was recorded on tape. Giving and other tests, where with the help of psychoanalysis find out various psychological complexes. One of these complexes, as found experts garvardtsy was some weird “set of Lenin.”

It was found that the majority of world leaders have pronounced innate set of authorities. In the struggle for power, people with such a complex, usually win, especially if they do not follow generally accepted standards of morality. If you help them make well-organized group of experts (the so-called puppeteers) with knowledge of human psychology in the Harvard project, then the opponents simply has a chance to win.

Today, with full confidence it can be argued that the professional group “puppeteers” ability to find and promote, as pawns in the global chess game, future leaders to power.

On this he wrote in his scandalous book “God’s people,” one of the former participants of the Harvard Project defector from the Soviet Union Gregory Klimov (Kalmykov Igor): “Any well-organized group of people who have knowledge on this forbidden subject, may find and promote to power future leaders as pawns in the global chess game. It goes without saying that the leaders of the degenerate sects who know this problem on their own skin and practices in this game for several thousand years, have a huge advantage over those who play without knowledge, without preparation, but also blind. “

Despite the fact that many of the conclusions of Klimov are controversial, and some even can not be accepted, it should be noted the validity of his claim that the effectiveness of such leaders can be comparable to weapons of mass destruction. For the Soviet Union it was even higher.

Examples of the success of the puppeteers are in the post-presidential election Saakashvili, Yushchenko and others

In early 1970 I had the opportunity to observe the use of American methods of testing to identify the leaders among the students the first year of the Vilnius Higher Military-Technical Institute of Radio Electronics. After 3 years of test results were confirmed by more than 80%.

An important outcome of the “Harvard Project” was to develop management techniques, as different groups and individuals. A classic example of effective tactics “puppeteers” in terms of manipulating the human personality is shown in the American film “The Game” with Michael Douglas in the title role. Circumstances formed by a group puppeteers organizers and psychologists, forcing the main character to go on suicide. But all ends happily, as this was a game that was supposed to return the hero Douglas zest for life.

There is no doubt that the “puppeteers” who have technique and knowledge of human psychology, can not only promote the power of future leaders, but to create the desired socio-political situation. However, as practice shows, the knowledge and anticipation of the main techniques used by Western puppeteers, in many cases can successfully resist them. So take Harvard method is absolutely invulnerable and super-efficient should not be.

Unfortunately, dogmatic certainty top Soviet political leadership in the “all-conquering power of Marxist-Leninist doctrine” is not allowed to organize a tribute to the opposition to these methods, when they became widely used against the USSR.

In this regard, it should be recognized that the collapse of socialist values and ideals is largely due to the methods of information-psychological war which the West spent on the basis of the Harvard Project. The results were largely determined the forms and methods of influence of Western special services and the media on citizens of the USSR. This is most clearly traced in radio broadcasts to the Soviet Baltic states and, in particular, to Lithuania. Implicit monitoring of public opinion, systematically conducted after the war, Western experts in Lithuania, is possible to change the tone of information to foreign broadcasts.

For example, until the 1960′s speakers “Free Europe and Voice of America” called Lithuanians resist Soviet power and wait for the combined forces of the West released the Baltic countries. But in the mid 1960′s tone changed. There were calls to join the Komsomol, the party, to enter higher education, work well and achieve a high position in Soviet society and to hold leadership positions.

This theme in the early 1970′s in the Komsomol Central Committee of Lithuania took zamzav. propaganda department Valery P. Systematized them the results of research topics and direction of Western radio stations broadcasting in Lithuania, were impressive. There was no change in tactics and strategy of our main ideological enemy the United States. These materials P. went to the Communist Party of Lithuania. There, however, after listening to them, said they were not of particular interest and suggested that this topic is no longer engaged.

Explain this, later identified as simply. In the event that the objectivity of research results SP are under suspicion significant part of Lithuanian intellectual elite, who came to the high Party and economic positions in the 1960-1970-ies.

Harvard will live?

The major cause of loss in information-psychological war of the West against the Soviet Union was the neglect of the Kremlin leadership to improve the welfare and living standards of the Russian people, as gosudarstvennoobrazuyuschey nation in the broad sense of the word. Having lived nearly half a century in Lithuania, in 1996-2000, I traveled to many regions of Russia and was shocked by the collapse and poverty. Of course, said the last 10 years of perestroika and the collapse of the USSR, but in 1985 the level and the living conditions of the Russian people in order yielded the same Baltic republics. Not accidentally, the Lithuanians, arguing with the Russian, as a rule, said: “What you teach us to live? First learn to live like human beings! “.

To learn how to live in central Russia, in an interview in 1990 suggested the President of Turkmenistan Saparmurat Niyazov: “In fact what is happening today, the Russian people not to blame. His system has brought. I was in the Russian villages, still working in the CPSU Central Committee in 1984, oversaw the Kursk and Belgorod region. Even then, in the villages of peasants ruin oneself by drink. And it is – the black earth! It is not rich in the USSR, not nazhilos or at whose expense. Yes, and at whose expense has been preying? In Indonesia, Khrushchev built the 100-thousand stadium, but we did not have a private playground. In the Congo, shipped heavy machinery, but here in the donkeys and camels to transport oil. So we have a common past, we at no one get offended, especially to Russia.

With the end of the Cold War, “Harvard Project” did not go into oblivion. In August 1997 Harvard Institute through “Nezavisimaya Gazeta» (№ 9, “NY-scripts”) informed the Russian public about the development of the New Harvard Project. Then a number of Russian analysts again rushed to the aid of Harvard experts. However, their advice to Harvard seemed maloprofessionalnymi.

Probably for this reason that in recent years began to appear on the creation of a new “Houston project, which is a logical continuation of Harvard, but focuses on contemporary Russia.

However, believing that technique Harvard-Houston project in the U.S. and in modern Russia are set to “distant” regiment in the archive, prematurely. “Bold” a piece of the pie of the world, which is Russia, will always be coveted Western transnational corporations and states. And for the comfortable consumption of this pie Russia should be weak, fragmented and not able to conduct an independent policy. So Harvard informational-psychological techniques impact on the Russians for a long time to be in the arsenal of our “good western friends.

To understand this truth is enough to analyze the information and mental focus is not only western, but Russian media. But in matters of falsifying the historical path of Russia, “Harvard spirit” felt a mile away. In a word “Harvard lived, Harvard alive, Harvard will live!”. Nevertheless, “Harvard wolf” is not so terrible as it draws some Russian commentators, if the Russians will not forget what world “predators” they live and not repeat past mistakes.

Especially for the

Afghan Taliban Destrot Six NATO Fuel Tankers Headed To Kandahar

Four Afghans killed in blasts, Taliban torch 6 NATO fuel tankers

Four Afghans killed in blasts, Taliban torch 6 NATO fuel tankers

Four civilians were killed in separate blasts in Afghanistan, as Taliban militants torched six fuel tankers destined for NATO forces in southern region, officials said Sunday.

The civilians, including a child and a woman, were killed in a total of four separate blasts in eastern provinces ofKhostNangarhar and Paktika and western province of Ghor on Saturday, the Afghan Interior Ministry said in a statement.

Eight other civilians, including four women, were injured in the attacks, it said. Three of the blasts were triggered by roadside bombs, which were planted by “enemies of our country”, the statement said, referring to Taliban fighters.

The fourth explosion was caused by an old rocket shell, the statement added.

Separately, Taliban militants torched six fuel trucks near the capital city for southern province of Ghazni on Sunday morning, Abdul Ghani, a senior police official in the province said.

The trucks were en route to the southern province of Kandahar for NATO forces, he said, adding that the attackers fled the area before police forces were deployed.

Turkmenistan Takes Delivery of Russian Surveillance Drones

At the armed Border Turkmenistan received drones

In the border troops of Turkmenistan received new aircraft – a plane equipped with special equipment for aerial surveillance, and unmanned aircraft capable of day and night in all weather conditions to fly, “which will allow more control to protect the state border have become even stronger barrier to any trespassing the territory of our country, including drug smuggling, the State News Agency of Turkmenistan (TDH).
Features of the new aircraft were demonstrated on May 27 President of TurkmenistanGurbanguly Berdymukhammedov at a military airfield Akdepe near Ashgabat.

“Turkmenistan’s border – a border of peace and friendship, – said at the conclusion of the demonstration the president. – But we will continue to take all necessary measures to ensure that our borders remain inaccessible in the case of attacks on the peaceful fabric of life of Turkmenistan, on any threats security of the country.

Zala Aero To Deliver UAVs To Ministry of Internal Affairs of Turkmenistan

February 06, 2009

Zala Aero has won a contract to deliver the ZALA 421-12 unmanned aerial system to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Turkmenistan (the former Soviet Republic Turkmenia).

The ZALA 421-04М unmanned airplane has been built to meet the requirements of law enforcement services and is already used by units of the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs. The flying-wing design features a 1.6 m wing span and 3.9 kg maximum take-off weight and is equipped with a low noise electric motor.

It is capable of performing two hour-long flights within a 40 km radius of the control station a nd can carry a range of payloads including a colour video camera and a thermal surveillance device capable of viewing the whole lower hemisphere below the aircraft.

It is launched by pneumatic catapult and the ground control station can be integrated into any existing data transmission network and used to relay video data from the area of interest to remote receiver terminals in real time.

It is understood that the ZALA 421-12 UAVS will be operated by special units of Ministry of Internal Affairs of Turkmenistan to provide support in surveillance missions and on counterterrorist operations.

Zala Aero company specialises on research and development, manufacture and after sale support services of the UAV systems. So far, Zala have delivered fixed and rotary-wing UAV systems to several Russian customers including Frontier Service, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Ministry of Defense. They are also be used for monitoring main gas pipelines for Gazprom.

British and Israeli companies also bid for the contract.

By Denis Fedutinov – Editor of UAV.RU

Russia and the Kyrgyzstan future

Russia and the Kyrgyzstan future

Kyrgyzstan’s ‘Roza Revolution’ – Cui Bono: (Part 3)

by F. William Engdahl*

In this third part of his work, F. William Engdhal examines the essential geopolitical importance of Kyrgyzstan for Russia, the second geopolitical player for the control of Eurasia’s land space. Considering its military encirclement by NATO and the U.S., a neutral regime in Kyrgyzstan would contribute to stabilize Russia’s regional environment, allowing it to reposition itself on the Central Asian chessboard. Suspected by some of having precipitated the violent events in Kyrgyzstan, Russia recently referred to them as “unconstitutional”.

- Part 1: Kyrgyzstan as a Geopolitical Pivot
- Part 2: China and the Kyrgyz geopolitical future

JPEG - 24.5 kb
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev (R) and his Kyrgyz counterpart Kurmanbek Bakiyev shake hands after signing documents in Moscow February 3, 2009.
(Xinhua/Reuters Photo)

What happens in Kyrgyzstan is clearly also of utmost strategic importance to Moscow. The fact that Russia has been swift to establish recognition of the new provisional government in Bishkek and to extend financial aid clearly signal the importance of politics in that country for Moscow. Not only was Kyrgyzstan an integral part of the Soviet Union before 1991, it remains a key geographic region. Whether friendly to Moscow or hostile, Kyrgyzstan can be of immense help in stabilizing the Central Asian periphery of Russia, or in destabilizing it.

Clearly the Medvedev-Putin regime is creatively using every level — from energy pipeline deals with the state-owned Gazprom, to military trade — to rollback the threatening NATO encirclement that reached its peak in 2004-2005 with Washington’s ‘Color Revolutions’ in Georgia, Ukraine and finally Kyrgyzstan, the Tulip Revolution that brought strongman Bakiyev into power.

As noted in a previous article, Ukraine Geopolitics and the US-NATO Military Agenda: Tectonic Shift in Heartland Power [1], the outcome of Ukraine’s presidential elections earlier this year was a significant positive development from the standpoint of Moscow’s military security. The threat of Ukraine’s joining NATO is now off the table, as well as threats to further disrupt Russia’s gas pipelines that pass through Ukraine to Germany and other parts of western Europe, a residue of the Soviet era of economic integration.

In January Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan all signed a Customs Union agreement. Belarus is a vital partner to Russia on her western border with Ukraine and Poland. Kazakhstan is a pivotal former Soviet state between Kyrgyzstan and Russia, and source of major energy supply to China as location of vast oil and other resources. It is also the world’s largest uranium miner.

The creation of a neutral regime in Kyrgyzstan friendly to both Kazakhstan and Russia would open up a major zone of potential economic development for Russia, as well as helping to stabilize the volatile Ferghana Valley, the agriculturally rich population center of Central Asia bordering Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan in Central Asia.

JPEG - 39.1 kb
The most densely populated area in Central Asia, the Ferghana Valley has seen periodic instability and social unrest since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

On April 19, according to Moscow’s RIA Novosti, Kyrgyzstan’s First Deputy Prime Minister Almazbek Atambayev said after meeting with Kazakh Prime Minister Karim Masimov that his country wants to join the Russian-led customs union. He stated, “We have a common past with Kazakhstan and Russia and obviously our future will be with them in a common economic space and a common customs space.” Atambayev also said Russia and Kazakhstan were not behind the recent events in Kyrgyzstan. “Russia and Kazakhstan are not involved in any intrigues, they just want to help [Kyrgyzstan],” he said [2].

For Moscow, having a pro-Moscow or even a rigorously neutral Bishkek constitutes a major repositioning on the Eurasian chessboard. As of this writing, the situation remains unstable from all accounts, and Russian President Medvedev has sounded a note of caution during an important press conference with Uzbek President Islam Karimov in Moscow. “Russia has given humanitarian aid to Kyrgyzstan, but full-fledged economic cooperation is possible only after the institutions of state are restored,” Medvedev said [3].

Uzbekistan warms to Moscow

One significant apparent gain for Moscow following the turmoil in Kyrgyzstan is a clear warming of previously uneasy relations between Uzbekistan’s President Islam Karimov and the Moscow regime.

On April 20 Karimov flew to Moscow to hold talks with Medvedev and told the Russian press that the two sides had set aside various disputes and shared a common concern about the danger of the instability in Kyrgyzstan spreading. If the Kyrgyz unrest spins out of control, Karimov reportedly fears Uzbekistan might be next [4]. Just weeks before the ouster of Bakiyev in April, US Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke had paid a visit to Karimov in Uzbekistan as part of a careful US attempt to woo him back into the US camp. That seems now to have gotten a significant setback [5].

Since 2003 Russia has enjoyed its own military basing rights at Kant airbase near Bishkek. It was the first established by Russia outside its borders since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. In addition to the airbase, Moscow also has a strategic base at the eastern end of Lake Issyk-Kul where Russia tests submarine and torpedo technology including the super-cavitating VA-111 Shkval torpedo designed originally to sink US aircraft carriers, travelling at a speed of more than 200 knots. Russia signed an indefinite lease for the base in March 2008 for an annual lease of $4.5 million [6].

JPEG - 40.9 kb
Fomer Presidents Vladimir Putin of Russia (L) and Askar Akayev of Kyrgyzstan during the inauguration ceremony at Kant Air Base on 23 October 2003. The Russian base is less than one quarter the size of the U.S. base at Manas.

Russia’s 2003 airbase agreement with Kyrgyzstan was one reason Washington initiated its Tulip Revolution in order to bring in the Washington-friendly Bakiyev regime in 2005.

Some observers were initially convinced that the new transitional government of Roza Otunbayeva would move to cancel US basing rights at Manas on the urgings of Russia. Surprisingly, however, Otunbayeva appears to have reversed an initial commitment and has stated that the base will remain open to the US Central Command, and there has so far been little reaction in Moscow.

Russian sources close to the government report that Moscow is considering whether it might gain more by letting Manas airbase continue to supply the US war effort in Afghanistan for the next couple of years. In exchange, Moscow would step up recent demands on Washington to stop opium flows from Afghanistan into Russia [7]. “The airbase will not be closed,” this source stated, “but will be used as a lever to influence Americans about narcotics, among other things. In a few months the yearly contract (for Manas-W.E.) ends, and it is an occasion to put some conditions to them” [8].

In October 2009 then-Kyrgyzstan President Bakiyev disbanded the country’s Drug Control Agency that had been responsible for intercepting illegal drugs transiting from Afghanistan to Russia. Reports are that Bakiyev’s brother thereby consolidated control over Afghan drug flows through the country [9]. Whether that played a role in Moscow moves to unseat Bakiyev this Spring is not clear.

Whatever the actual thinking in Moscow about Manas as a bargaining chip, both China and Russia having clear strategic interests in a stable and friendly Kyrgyzstan. Moreover, with the three countries along with Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan all founding members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization – the emerging Eurasian economic and military cooperation organization – the significant gains for Russia from closer cooperation with Kyrgyzstan lead some to call it Moscow’s ‘rollback’ of Washington’s encroachment into the Eurasian space [10]. How that develops in the months ahead remains to be seen.

What then are the stakes now for Washington’s Central Asia and Eurasia strategy of Full Spectrum Dominance? This we examine in Part 4. The answer is: everything.

 F. William Engdahl
Author of Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation.. He also authored A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order (Pluto Press). His latest book is Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order (Third Millennium Press)