Bush Proves Karl Marx Right About ‘Capitalism’

Bush Proves Karl Marx Right About ‘Capitalism’

Unfairly, a bailout price tag of some 700 billion dollars will be picked up by the American middle and poorer classes. None of those actually bearing the brunt of this transfer of wealth will benefit from it directly. The beneficiaries are those among some one percent of the nation who own about 99 percent of its total wealth.

According to US wealth distribution data compiled by ‘The State of Working America’, ‘Wealth distribution in the U.S. is extremely concentrated at the top –even more so than income.’

These statistics, on the other hand, only hint at the L-Curve phenomenon because the top 1% isn’t scrutinized in sufficient detail. Still, compare the net worth of the top half of the top 1% with the bottom half of the top 1%! If you add them together and proportion them out, 3/4 of the wealth in the top 1% is actually in the top 0.5%.–US Wealth Distribution Data

Only a tiny group of Americans –Bush’s ‘base’ –will benefit from the bailout directly.

The top and bottom halves of the top 0.5% would undoubtedly show even greater disparity if the data were presented with enough resolution. Note that nothing on this page even mentions billionaires. The largest fortunes are in the $100-billion range. The statistics on billionaires are diluted by lumping them in with mere millionaires. –op cit,

I have a better idea. Let’s plot US wealth on a curve. Pro-rate the bailout. Let those getting the bigger share on the back-end bear the burden proportionally gong in. It is absurd to expect someone earning only $40,000 per year to cough up the same amount of money as, say, Bill Gates. I’m told Bill has given most of his money away. But, as he was once the richest man in the world, he is as good an example as anyone. Anyone whose ‘net worth’ is some $60 billion dollars shuld be expected to pay proportionally or between 10 and 15 percent of the total bailout.


AMERICAN POLICE STATE – the First Combat Troops Hit the Streets In 3 Days

Here to Stay, 14,000 Strong, and Armed

With Non-Lethal Weapons – America,

Meet Your New Local Military

There are times when certain headlines fly through the news that make your heart drop. Sometimes, it’s a simple headline that can do the trick. Other times, it takes a bit more research before things start to get scary. Follow me as I play connect the dots and introduce you to the military unit that will be stationed near you, in America. To answer your first question: yes they will be available to be used to control civil disobedience. To answer your next question: as long as the military wants them to stay. Perhaps your last question: October, 2008.

A few days ago, small reports were coming out about a new military unit that was going to be stationed within the United States of America. I first heard the report from a friend and suddenly I found myself dizzied by the amount of curse words flying through my head.

The original story that I read was in a blog that included a small excerpt. The title was enough to get me started:

“Army Unit to Deploy in October for Domestic Operations”

The excerpt left a lot to be desired on the information front. So, I decided to start doing my own research into the subject. Ladies and gentleman, I am not comfortable with what is going to be happening in our country in the next couple of years relating to this. It’s sickening and frightening. But, here goes.

First, you need to familiarize yourself with the organization that we are going to be talking about. From my research, it appears that since 1999, the Department of Defense has been actively seeking a solution to quick responses in times of crisis for the country. Whether it be from terrorism, natural disaster, they wanted to have a way to quickly deploy “aid” to places in need. This search was exacerbated by the 9/11 attacks, Katrina, and the various other catastrophic failures of the administration.

There are a few acronyms that you now need to familiarize yourself with:

* CBRNE – Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear or high-yield Explosive
* CCMRF – CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force – also (possibly originally) pronounced “sick-merf” it has been changed to a more friendly pronunciation of “sea-smurf”
* JTF-CS – Joint Task Force – Civil Support
* USNORTHCOM (informally NORTHCOM) – United States Northern Command

Now that you have been introduced to the players, you need to understand how they relate to each other. CBRNE is a generic term used to describe the type of work and not an organization. CCMRF is the focus of this post. The JFT-CS is under command of the United States Fifth Army. As I understand it, the CCMRF falls under the JTF-CS category. However, the CCMRF unit is under the command of NORTHCOM.

First and foremost is the fact that the CCMRF will be divided into three forces: CCMRF-1, CCMRF-2, CCMRF-3. These forces are from the Marines, Army, Navy, Air Force and National Guard. This is to encompass the vast array of duties this unit will be responsible for carrying out. Each CCMRF force will consist of approximately 4,500 troops. In an interview conducted by the Air Force Times, Army Lt. Col. Rob Cunniff, head of NorthCom’s Future Operations revealed a lot of detail about what the force will be. He envisions that the forces will be split up in thirds as the country would be: 1 force for the West, 1 for the East and 1 in the middle. The first unit would be the greatest mix of forces while the 2nd and 3rd would be made up of mostly Guard units.

One of the larger forces that will be part of CCMRF-1 has been training since at least 2007. More on that later, however. The large force is the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team. They have spent 35 of the last 60 months in Iraq. Army Col. Louis Vogler, another chief of NorthCom future operations:

“Right now, the response force requirement will be an enduring mission. How the [Defense Department] chooses to source that and whether or not they continue to assign them to NorthCom, that could change in the future. Now, the plan is to assign a force every year.”

A new force, every year. I have yet to find any plans or mentions of this operation ever ceasing.

One striking piece of information is that this unit will be equipped with the Army’s first ever non-lethal arsenal of weapons. Not just beanbag guns but tasers, batons, shields, etc. I’ll let the Army speak for itself here again. 1st BCT commander Col. Roger Cloutier:

“…the first ever nonlethal package that the Army has fielded,” 1st BCT commander Col. Roger Cloutier said, referring to crowd and traffic control equipment and nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals without killing them.

“It’s a new modular package of nonlethal capabilities that they’re fielding. They’ve been using pieces of it in Iraq, but this is the first time that these modules were consolidated and this package fielded, and because of this mission we’re undertaking we were the first to get it.”

The package includes equipment to stand up a hasty road block; spike strips for slowing, stopping or controlling traffic; shields and batons; and, beanbag bullets.

“I was the first guy in the brigade to get Tasered,” said Cloutier, describing the experience as “your worst muscle cramp ever — times 10 throughout your whole body.

“I’m not a small guy, I weigh 230 pounds … it put me on my knees in seconds.”

The first time the Army has deployed this is going to be within the country intended for use on it’s own citizens? Are you serious? Couldn’t they have tested some non-lethal equipment somewhere else? Anyway, the rabbit hole gets deeper and deeper.

Although the unit is supposed to be for Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear or high-yield Explosive (at least according to the acronym), it has been slated for other causes. This includes assisting with local officials against civil disobedience, hurricanes, anthrax and really a whole slate of other things that could possibly go wrong.

So, now you know you can expect around 15,000 troops to be stationed in the country with tasers that can drop a 200+ lb. man and training with batons, shields and roadblocks. If that isn’t scary enough, the head of NORTHCOM will be sufficient.

On March 23, 2007 a new head of NORTHCOM was appointed. Victor E. Renuart Jr. is a highly decorated man that is the commander of NORTHCOM and he also happens to be the head of NORAD. So the person in command of determining whether there is a threat anywhere in the country is also the person in command of the units that will be able to respond to the “threat.” Doesn’t it seem like there should be one someone to check the authority here? Apparently, that’s just a bit too logical.

Now then, I have respect for an officer in the military. However, I cannot say that this guy’s credentials are what I want when I’m looking for a commander of a military deployed within this country. Why is that? Well, according to Wikipedia, Mr. Renuart:

“oversaw the planning and execution of all joint and allied combat, humanitarian assistance and reconstruction operations for Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom.”

So, the person who oversaw all of the completely chaotic, ineffective, dangerous, and terrible “operation” in Iraq, is the one who is going to be in command of the unit deployed in this country? Please tell me this is a dream so I can wake up.

So, how can this unit be deployed? Someone has to give the go ahead, correct? I was able to find the manual dealing with CCMRF and found this gem:

“(e) USARNORTH accomplishes its CBRN CM mission in strict adherence of public law and DOD policies. Deployment of USARNORTH, at the direction of the USNORTHCOM commander and on the authority of the Secretary of Defense, occurs only after a governor requests federal assistance from the President, and after the President issues a Presidential Disaster Declaration. In any DSCA setting, USARNORTH remains in support of the lead federal agency throughout the CBRN CM operation.”

Did anyone else just read that it takes a governor to ask for this authorization? Can anyone recall a governor suddenly becoming a prominent public figure for no apparent reason?

Oh that’s right. Governor Sarah Palin from Alaska. Quite possibly the least capable or experienced candidate to ever run for the position.

Alaska you say?

Allow me to introduce AKS/NE ’07. Alaska Shield/Northern Edge training mission. This would be one of the first large-scale training missions that would be done in conjunction with other states. However, the Alaskan operation was a huge one involving multiple types of training.

I don’t think it’s possible that the Governor of Alaska would have not been involved in this in some way.

It seems fair to say that it’s possible that Sarah Palin has a more intimate knowledge and familiarity with CCMRF because of this exercise. Wouldn’t a candidate, who’s already comfortable with a military deployment in the country, be a perfect running mate for John McCain? Suddenly, it’s likely there may actually be a reason that they would have chose her. Given the secessionist background, it seems both Sarah and her “first dude” would be pleased as punch with a military unit installed in the country that can be called on by a governor.

Obviously there is a lot of additional information out there on all of these subjects. So please, go out and do your own research and let’s see what is really going on here.

To recap:

* 3 forces, around 4,500 strong will be deployed in the East, West and middle of the country
* They will be replaced every year
* They are under the command of the person who oversaw Operation Iraqi Blunder
* They will be armed with the Army’s first non-lethal weapons package
* They can be deployed by the governor of a state
* The last state they had a big training operation in was Alaska
* The governor of Alaska was surprisingly chosen as the Vice Presidential candidate for John McBush

We’re gonna have a problem here.

digg_url = ‘http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/36358’;
digg_title = “Here to Stay, 14,000 Strong, and Armed With Non-Lethal Weapons – America, Meet Your New Local Military”;
digg_bodytext = “I Love Bonnie\r\n\r\nThere are times when certain headlines fly through the news that make your heart drop. Sometimes, it’s a simple headline that can do the trick. Other times, it takes a bit more research before things start to get scary. Follow me as I play connect the dots and introduce you to the military unit that will be stationed near you, in America. To answer your first question: yes they will be available to be used to control civil disobedience. To answer your next question: as long as the military wants them to stay. Perhaps your last question: October, 2008.\r\n\r\nA few days ago, small reports were coming out about a new military unit that was going to be stationed within the United States of America. I first heard the report from a friend and suddenly I found myself dizzied by the amount of curse words flying through my head.\r”;

digg_skin = ‘standard’;

The US, India and Fake Talebans: Brothers in Arms

The US, India and Fake Talebans: Brothers in Arms


Baitullah Mehsud

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—One telephone call seven years ago was enough for Islamabad to accommodate Washington’s entire wish list. But United States pressure tactics will not work now. Pakistan’s army chief, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, is leading a military and a nation that is determined to resist Washington’s plan to bring to Pakistan the ethno-civil wars of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Pakistani military’s brisk response is not just a reaction to the deliberately humiliating and outrageous unilateral American decisions to include Pakistan in the Iraq/Afghanistan war theater.

There is a bigger problem here. Pakistani policy analysts are convinced that United States has been a duplicitous ally during the past seven years, using the sincere Pakistani cooperation on Afghanistan to gradually turn that country into a military base to launch a sophisticated psychological, intelligence and military campaign to destabilize Pakistan itself.

The objective is to weaken the control of the Pakistani military over geographical Pakistan and ignite an ethnic and sectarian civil war leading to changing the status of Balochistan and NWFP, possibly even facilitate the break up of both provinces from the Pakistani federation.

The defeatist stance of Pakistan’s elected government in the face of U.S. belligerence is discussed later in this paper. But it is worth noting that President Zardari has refused to publicly back the military’s warning to U.S. He also delayed his China visit to go to London to hunker down with Gordon Brown. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Yousaf Reza Gilani, in a statement that deprives Pakistan of strategic advantage and dampens the psychological effect of army chief’s warning, has said that ‘Pakistan can’t wage war with U.S.’ In comparison, the governor of NWFP, Mr. Owais Ghani, has become the only government official to publicly state the truth.

On Sept. 12, the governor’s office issued the following statement: “Foreign forces based in Afghanistan and militants are working on the same anti-Pakistan agenda and both are following the same strategy to weaken the country […] while the coalition troops were threatening to extend their war to Pakistan, the militants are also attacking the country and creating a war-like situation. It appeared that both the forces were working on the same agenda to weaken Pakistan.”

(al qaeda and americans allied who would have thought we would see this day. it would have been funny if it wasnt so dangerous and sinister)

In one sign of the grand double game, despite the poor relations with Iran, Washington has encouraged Karzai and the Indians to complete the construction of a road that links Afghanistan to an Indian-built Iranian seaport. The purpose is to end the dependence of both U.S. army and the Karzai regime on Pakistan for access to sea(are the iranians in on it as well, i find that hard to believe). U.S. military officials have also been seeking permission to use Russian air space for military cargo to replace Pakistani facilities.

These American actions show a degree of long term planning and are not connected to the recent American grievances against Pakistan and its intelligence agencies.

A segment of the U.S. policy establishment had decided to take the war to Pakistan from the outset in 2001. Washington first used Islamabad to occupy Afghanistan and then used the Afghan soil to start series of insurgencies inside Pakistan. The strategy was an alternative to a direct confrontation with a nuclear-armed country. A weak Pakistani state with a neutered military was envisaged as an ideal situation to protect U.S. interests with regards to China, Russia and India.

It is not clear how much the rest of the departments of the U.S. government knew about the destabilization plans for Pakistan. If the entire U.S. political and military strategy on Pakistan since Sept. 11, 2001 was based on consensus, then Pakistanis have been massively deceived by their American allies.

The anti-Pakistan lobby in Washington found willing allies in the Indians and the Northern Alliance component of the Karzai regime in Kabul.

The idea to destabilize Pakistan appears to have started with simple and clear thoughts. The U.S.- and India-backed Kabul regime proposed reviving Pashtun nationalism and the secession of Pashtun regions from Pakistan. The Indians offered their decades-old experience in penetrating Pakistani territories for espionage. The Indians offered something else too: The revival of the so-called Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA). The Soviets and Indians together created this terrorist organization in the 1970s and used Afghan soil to foment an ethnic-based civil war inside Pakistan. The idea died out naturally, until the Indians offered the Americans to revive it after 9/11 as a punishment for Pakistan.

Pakistan’s tribal belt, Balochistan and Swat were peaceful until early 2005. Since then, series of insurgencies have erupted led by shady ethno-religious characters. One of them, a tribal thug who stayed in American and Karzai custody for several years, was released only to enter Pakistan and begin targeting Chinese citizens in the country. Another thug in Balochistan was convinced by handlers in Afghanistan that he would be made the head of an independent Balochistan with U.S. help if he agreed to launch an insurgency and help recruit young Pakistanis to get training to fight their own country.

Between 2005 and now, the entire western Pakistan from the Arabian Sea to the border with China has turned into a cocktail of ethnic and religious insurgencies focused on fighting the Pakistani state and the Pakistani military.

On July 12, 2008, when U.S. Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen and CIA Deputy Director Stephen R. Kappes were in Rawalpindi on a secret visit, Gen. Kayani, former President Musharraf and Pakistani intelligence officials confronted the American duo with conclusive evidence that showed U.S. complicity in feeding and sustaining a terrorist movement in Balochistan, where China is building a strategic seaport.

Pakistanis now also have damning evidence that shows that Karzai’s security apparatus, which is heavily infested with Indian security and intelligence advisers, has been directly supplying weapons and money to clusters of thugs masquerading as ‘Pakistani Taliban’.

The main assignment for these fake ‘Taliban’ is to target and kill Pakistanis – military and civilians – and kidnap Chinese citizens in Pakistan. Which is surprising because the Afghan Taliban, the real Taliban, are focused on targeting U.S. occupation forces in Afghanistan and not on spreading fear and chaos among Pakistanis. This is more like someone is trying to punish Pakistan through a planned effort.

In the latest incidents, over 25 worshippers perished when unknown terrorists lobbed hand grenades inside a mosque in northern Pakistan. The real Taliban would never indulge in such senseless violence targeting Pakistani citizens. Moreover, two Chinese engineers have been kidnapped. It is strange that the Chinese are the only foreigners being targeted in Pakistan, while citizens of United States and other NATO member countries are spared.

The de facto Pakistani interior minister, Rehman Malik, in an interview to CNN on Sept. 11, stopped short of accusing U.S. and India of using Afghan soil to target Pakistan. He said these unknown insurgents emerged from nowhere in 2005 and since then the quality of their weapons and equipment has dramatically improved. “Where are they getting support from? Not Pakistan,” he said.

Even if U.S. officials deny that parts of the U.S. government are privy to this destabilization effort, there is no question that the U.S. military is inexplicably ignoring the Karzai-Indian export of terrorism into Pakistan.

The U.S. role is certainly suspicious. Starting in early 2007, the U.S. media unleashed an organized demonization campaign against Pakistan that was unprecedented in the history of Pak-U.S. relations. U.S. media made a concerted effort to create world hostility against Pakistan and spread ‘anti-Pakistanism’ globally. Washington’s media managers were apparently trying to prepare the world public opinion for a possible American military intervention in Pakistan on the pretext of either saving the country’s nukes or to fight al-Qaeda.

Besides India, the United States is the only other country in the world busy in this deliberate creation of hostility against Pakistan. Take the example of this quote from an article that appeared in the conservative, pro-Bush magazine, The Weekly Standard, in Nov. 2007:

“A large number of ISI agents … should be thrown in jail or killed. What I think we should do in Pakistan is a parallel version of what Iran has run against us in Iraq: giving money [and] empowering [anti-state] actors. Some of this will involve working with some shady characters.”

On Feb. 1, 2008, New York Times, published an op-ed piece that discussed in detail the division of Pakistan into three independent states. The article was an example of malicious fear-mongering but the real surprise was that a prestigious paper carried it. NYT is the same paper that allowed itself to be used by Bush administration spin masters to promote fake stories about WMD and Iraq before U.S. invaded that country. Pakistan’s ace diplomat, Mr. Munir Akram, who has recently been removed by the Zardari government from his job as Pakistan’s envoy to the U.N., saw the NYT article and sent a letter to the paper’s editor, although it was not his job to do so but the responsibility of the press attaché in the Pakistan Embassy in Washington.

Mr. Akram wrote: “[The op-ed] will confirm the belief of many Pakistanis that there is an international conspiracy to destabilize and disintegrate Pakistan […] The orchestrated campaign against President Pervez Musharraf, the denigration of the Pakistani Army, calls for the capture of Pakistan’s nuclear assets, the string of suicide bombings and terrorism in Balochistan are all seen as aimed at this malevolent design.”

This American media campaign against Pakistan continues unabated. Last month, Mr. Harlan Ullman, a Washington columnist with strong ties to U.S. military, visited Islamabad and returned to float this stunning idea: “Pakistan should create integrated and joint operations centers at ISI or Army GHQ with U.S. military, State Department, law enforcement and intelligence officers in residence.”

This U.S. media campaign has been going hand in glove for the past eighteen months with a wave of terrorism inside Pakistan targeting Pakistani civilians and government. The blame for these acts was laid at the doors of something called ‘Pakistani Taliban’ which is, in major part, a creation of Indian and Karzai intelligence setups inside Afghanistan.

It is highly suspicious that U.S. military attacks inside Pakistan in recent weeks have targeted pro-Pakistan tribesmen. Somehow the U.S. drones and spy satellites are unable to target the shady rebel leaders who are exclusively fighting Pakistan and never attack U.S. soldiers across the border.

Also, the American war strategy neatly fits in with the secessionist campaign that seeks to turn Pakistani Pashtuns against their own country. With every U.S. attack that kills women and children, Pakistani Pashtun are becoming convinced that their country, Pakistan, is either unwilling or incapable of defending its citizens. The military operations conducted by Pakistani military to kill these shadowy terrorists are indirectly sending the message that Islamabad is also party to spilling Pashtun blood. All of this is strengthening the case of those who are promoting a secessionist propaganda that the NWFP and the Pashtun areas must secede from Pakistan.

This is the first time in decades that the idea of Pashtuns, the real liberators of Azad Kashmir, turning against Pakistan is appearing to be a possibility.

Military Speaks,

Politicians Silent

There is no question that Pakistan’ military waited for a cue from the country’s elected leadership to respond to U.S. violations of Pakistani territory.

On Sept. 6, marked as Pakistan Defense Day in memory of a failed Indian invasion of Pakistan in 1965, the Pakistani air force chief tried to send a message to the elected government. He told reporters that the Pakistani air force was ready to respond if the government made a policy decision.

The Zardari-Gilani government chose to ignore U.S. attacks. In fact, the defense minister, Mr. Ahmed Mukhtar, made statements on multiple occasions that raised eyebrows. At one point he said U.S. drones flew too high for Pakistani military to respond. At another point he justified U.S. attacks inside Pakistan by saying ‘there must be a reason’ for Washington to violate the border.

Then came Hamid Karzai to plant a misleading story in the Pakistani media when President Zardari invited him to his oath-taking ceremony on Sept. 9. After his arrival, Karzai called some journalists and leaked to them that Arabs were killed in the Sept. 8 U.S. attack on the house of the veteran Afghan commander Jalaluddin Haqqani in Miramshah.

This was a perfect justification for the violation of Pakistani territory and it helped the Americans tell their reluctant European allies that attacking Pakistan was justified. Karzai leaked the information, complete with names and numbers of the dead Arabs.

The sinister part of this exercise was that ‘sources close to the Haqqani family’ were cited to confirm the report. Major Pakistani news organizations picked up the story and made it their lead for several hours. This was the height of cynicism. The Haqqani family was in mourning, with several members of the family, women and children dead while a disinformation campaign was using their name to confirm the existence of foreign fighters in their house.

The truth was that Haqqani’s house was never a secret hideout. His family maintained a house in Pakistan since the 1980s. Haqqani lived and operated in Afghanistan and the people in the house where his extended family relatives, ordinary people with no link to the war in Afghanistan. This is like Afghan resistance groups deciding to target Mr. Karzai’s extended family members who have nothing to do with Karzai’s activities just to get back at him. The Afghan resistance has never done it. But Karzai and his American allies have no problem in resorting to this method.

The devastated Haqqani family corrected the story later and questioned the source of the story since there were no Arabs or foreign or any fighters at all in the house. The U.S. attack was a deliberate act of terrorism to cause maximum pain to the Afghan commander.

Pakistani military quietly watched the Zardari-Gilani government take no position on the U.S. attacks. Then came the bombshell when, last week, Bush and his military chief, Adm. Mullen, said Pakistan was now part of the Iraq-Afghanistan ‘war theater’ and New York Times published a leak that said Bush had authorized attacks inside Pakistan without Islamabad’s consent.

The purpose behind the leak was to put Pakistan on notice and somehow force the issue down on Islamabad in the hope that Pakistan will grudgingly accept it.

Zardari’s Strange


After Gen. Kayani’s tough-worded counter statement, an embarrassed Prime Minister Gilani said the statement reflected his government’s policy.

But the biggest question mark is the silence of President Zardari. He did not endorse Gen. Kayani’s statement. Even more shocking for Pakistanis was that Mr. Zardari reneged on his promise that China will be his first foreign visit as President. Instead he left for London after a call from British Prime Minister Gordon Brown ‘inviting’ him to London to discuss the new U.S. strategy.

It is clear that President Zardari supports the new U.S. policy and does not agree with the Pakistani military’s warning that it will defend against attacks on Pakistan’s at all costs.

Mr. Zardari is in power thanks to the arrangement – known as the ‘deal’ – that Washington and London forced Pakistan to accept. His assets are mostly in United States and Britain. There is no way he can risk alienating his backers.

The deal originally envisaged the return of Benazir Bhutto to power in Pakistan. Former President Musharraf was forced to – or he personally accepted to help – make Mrs. Bhutto the new prime minister. Mrs. Bhutto accepted U.S. help in bringing her back to power in return for her commitment that she will allow Washington to do all or most of the things that Musharraf was not willing to do: mainly permit U.S. boots on the ground in Pakistan.

There is every possibility that President Zardari has been convinced by close advisors, especially Ambassador Husain Haqqani in Washington, to tacitly accept U.S. operations inside Pakistan and not allow the Pakistani military to dictate its terms.

Ambassador Haqqani is strongly sympathetic to Washington’s position(practically their servant). Last year, he played a major role in convincing Benazir Bhutto to make public statements accepting U.S. boots on Pakistani soil and American access to Dr. A. Q. Khan. Before his present assignment, Mr. Haqqani has been closely linked to the same hawkish U.S. think tanks that are the biggest advocates of U.S. military intervention in Pakistan. The elected government’s soft position on U.S. attacks has a lot to do with the work of Ambassador Haqqani and another American figure—Zalmay Khalilzad, President Zardari’s ‘secret’ American adviser.

It is a foregone conclusion; based on Ambassador Haqqani’s intrusive record at the Pakistan Foreign Office in the past four months, that he has a direct link to the bizarre statement by Prime Minister Gilani [“Pakistan can’t wage war with U.S.”-Sept 12] and the series of statements made by Defense Minister Ahmed Mukhtar that justified U.S. attacks against Pakistan [“U.S. drones fly too high, we can’t attack them” and “If U.S. attacks, there must be a reason.”].

Pakistan’s Options

If Pakistani military tries to block U.S. military violations, there is a possibility of limited armed conflict between Pakistani and American soldiers on the Afghan border.

Gen. Kayani’s warning of retaliation did help NATO make a public statement that it does not share Washington’s idea of taking the war to Pakistan. However, no one in Islamabad is convinced that NATO will remain neutral in the event that U.S. military tries to engage Pakistan in a conflict.

In case of conflict, Washington is expected to signal to India to open a front in the east in order to divert Pakistani military resources. Intelligence assets that have been planted inside Pakistan with links in Afghanistan will be activated and will possibly try to ratchet up the campaign of public terror in order to spread chaos and exert pressure on Pakistan military. More Chinese targets can be attacked or killed in order to strain ties between Beijing and Islamabad.

But Pakistan is not without options. In fact, the Pakistani position is stronger than what it appears to be. Islamabad can activate old contacts with a resurgent and rising Afghan Taliban inside Afghanistan. The entire Pakistani tribal belt will seize this opportunity to fight the Americans. The attempts to divide Pakistanis along sectarian lines have failed and the Americans cannot expect to repeat what they did in Iraq in March 2003. Pakistanis will fight and resist. There is a possibility that Pakistani tribesmen could cross the border in large numbers using secret routes to dodge aerial bombardment and join the Afghan Taliban and find their way to Kabul.

The misguided ‘Pakistani Taliban’ who appear to be operating as an extension of U.S. military in Afghanistan will also come under pressure of the tribesmen and will be forced to target the occupation forces instead of fighting the Pakistani government.

Washington might be tempted by the idea of signaling to the Indians to engage Pakistan from the east. But the fact is that the Indian army has a dangerous rebellion on its hands in the valley. By opening a front with Pakistan, Indian soldiers will have to protect their front and rear simultaneously. The Pakistani military has contingency plans for dealing with hostilities on two fronts.

U.S. soldiers also will not have it easy if they enter a conflict. This is why the Americans are hoping they will scare Pakistanis into submission. Pakistan’s economic crisis is being exploited. Pakistani officials say that IMF and World Bank have received U.S. instructions to go hard on Pakistan. Washington is also trying to convince Gulf Arabs not to support Pakistan this time.

But the situation between Islamabad and Washington does not have to come to this. Islamabad can help tip the scales in Washington against the hawks who want a war with Pakistan. Not all parts of the U.S. government accept this idea and this must be exploited. Pakistan must make it clear that it will retaliate. Statements like that of Prime Minister Gilani must be stopped. His statement virtually damaged the psychological effect of army chief’s warning.

U.S. military posturing aside, Washington has recently seen a string of diplomatic defeats. Russia has cut American meddling in Georgia to size. In Iraq, a coalition of Shiite parties is forcing the Americans to leave the country. And both Bolivia and Venezuela have expelled U.S. ambassadors, and, in Bolivia’s case, the world has suddenly become alert to Washington’s intrusive meddling in that country’s domestic politics and the role of the U.S. ambassador in fueling separatism. Which is not very different from the U.S. role inside Pakistan, where U.S. diplomats have created political chaos by directly engaging the politicians, coupled with creating and feeding insurgencies to weaken the country.

The only way to entrap Pakistan now is to either orchestrate a spectacular terrorist attack in U.S. and blame it on Pakistan, or to assassinate a high profile personality inside Pakistan and generate domestic strife that will make it impossible for the military to resist U.S. attacks.

© 2007-2008. All rights reserved. AhmedQuraishi.com.

Meet Pakistan’s most feared militant Baitullah Mehsud

Baitullah Mehsud, who heads the loose grouping of militants known as the Pakistan Taleban, has given a rare press conference to invited journalists. They included the BBC’s Syed Shoaib Hasan.

Taleban militants in Pakistan's Waziristan district

“I hope your trip has been enjoyable so far,” our host asks us.

Ordinary garden tea party talk except for two things – the venue and the host.

We are in Pakistan’s tribal region of South Waziristan. Our host is the region’s top Islamic militant, Baitullah Mehsud.

Commander Mehsud has recently been named in Time magazine’s 100 most influential people in the world. Newsweek has labelled him “more dangerous than Osama bin Laden”.

President Pervez Musharraf accused him last year of being responsible for dozens of suicide attacks which led Pakistan into emergency rule.

The CIA says he was the brains behind the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minster Benazir Bhutto.

With such a reputation, it is not surprising that there is a sense of awe as this short, plump, bearded man greets us.

Breakneck speed

We are part of a group of journalists invited by Mr Mehsud to his stronghold to see for ourselves “the atrocities committed by the Pakistan army in its recent campaign in the area”.

Pakistan’s army and pro-Taleban militants led by Baitullah Mehsud have recently agreed to a ceasefire after being locked in battle for most of 2007.

Baitullah Mehsud

Baitullah Mehsud is reluctant to be photographed

The ceasefire is part of attempts to secure a lasting peace in the area.

Earlier this month the army brought in journalists to show their successes against the militants in January.

Now it’s the militants’ turn to have their say.

Our journey with the Taleban had begun with a long wait for them at a petrol station in the town of Mir Ali, just inside North Waziristan.

A caravan with over half a dozen vehicles took off, travelling at breakneck speed through beautiful valleys and towering mountains.

Our escorts were on their guard, the speed is as much for security as for safety.

We saw very little of the heavy presence of troops in the area that the government talks about.

We did see plenty of abandoned check posts and bunkers destroyed by the Taleban.

In the town of Makeen in South Waziristan we switched to four-wheel drives.

Our destination was the district of Sararogha, very much the heart of Taleban territory.


It was dark when we finally arrived at a madrassa (religious school) high up on the mountains where we stayed in a nearby house for the night.

The next morning we headed down to the valley below to be shown the damage caused by bombing raids carried out by military aircraft.

The villages were a scene of havoc, with almost all the houses having suffered some damage.

Some have been completely destroyed, leaving their owners homeless.

Buildings damaged by air force bombing

Buildings damaged by air force bombing

“I have no money left now,” says Ali Khan, a local of Golrama village in the Kotkai area.

Mr Khan’s house was bombed by jets after he had fled the fighting with his family.

“I worked in the UAE since 1980 to build this… all my life’s savings.”

“There are no Taleban in my house, why did the government do this?”

Many families who fled during the intense fighting have been coming home to similar scenes.

Our last stop was Spinkai market which is now a mile long stretch of rubble.

Angry shopkeepers and irate locals line up to express their anger.

“The place they said was used to train suicide bombers is, in fact, a flour mill,” says Haji Khan, whose shop was also destroyed.

“We were all traders here and now our means of earning a living is gone.”

As he complains, a line of vehicles passes us on its way back to the nearby hamlets and villages.

The ceasefire, it seems, is already starting to take effect.

No choice

But will it last, or go the way other deals have gone before?

destruction after clashes in Waziristan

The army says it has dismantled the Taleban’s capacity in the region

In our garden meeting, “Amir Sahib” (honoured leader) – as Baitullah Mehsud is affectionately called by his men – smiles and shakes his head when this query is raised.

Around us, dozens of militants armed to the teeth listen intently to their leader.

“The Taleban are committed to their word,” he says.

“The onus is now on the government – whether they hold to their word, or remain in the alliance with the US.”

If that persists, Commander Mehsud says, the militants will have no choice but return to their path of resistance.

“We do not want to fight Pakistan or the army. But if they continue to be slaves to US demands, then we our hands will be forced.

“There can be no deal with the US.”

journalist Syed Saleeem Shazhad of Asia Times online propaganda exposed

journalist Syed Saleeem Shazhad of Asia Times online

propaganda exposed

Recently journalist Syed Saleeem Shazhad of Asia Times online released a video, the video shows Syed Saleem Shazhad interviewing a person who is claiming to be a commander of Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, for the provinces of Nooristan and Kunar. Theunjustmedia forwarded this video to the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan official spokesperson, Zabihuallah Mujahid, after watching the video this is what he had to say.

“In Nooristan and Kunar provinces, we do not have any commander with Ziaur Rahman name, nor do we identify the person in this video, who is alleging to be a commander of Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. Islamic Emirate commander for the provinces of Nooristan and Kunar is Malvi Abdul Raheem. Before, any commander or fighter of Islamic Emirate speaks to a journalist, he must first get permission from the Media department of Islamic Emirate, also any journalist who enters Afghanistan must first get permission from the Islamic Emirate, cause more than sixty percent of Afghanistan in under the control of Islamic Emirate.

Syed Saleeem Shazhad who is claiming in this video to have travel in different parts of Afghanistan, Islamic Emirate, rejects this claim of his. The fake commander in this video also claims that there is money on his head, here we like to clear out that all commanders of Islamic Emirate on who’s heads the American invaders and its allies have put up money, Islamic Emirate has their name list and this fake commander name is not on that list.” Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan official spokesperson Zabihuallah Mujahid

Theunjustmedia is puzzled at why would this journalist make a video and then tell the world that it is the Taliban, what is he trying to achieve with this lie, who is paying him to lie to the world about the Taliban and to spread information which is not true. We advice the concern citizens of this world to be aware of Syed Saleeem Shazhad who is a deceitful journalist, who’s actions are tarnishing the noble profession of journalism.

Please forward this information to as many people as you can, also those websites and forums which posted this fake Taliban video, please let your readers know that this video is not of the Taliban movement but a propaganda. Thank You


A shattering moment in America’s fall from power

A shattering moment in America’s fall from power

The global financial crisis will see the US falter in the same way the Soviet Union did when the Berlin Wall came down. The era of American dominance is over

John Gray

Our gaze might be on the markets melting down, but the upheaval we are experiencing is more than a financial crisis, however large. Here is a historic geopolitical shift, in which the balance of power in the world is being altered irrevocably. The era of American global leadership, reaching back to the Second World War, is over.

You can see it in the way America’s dominion has slipped away in its own backyard, with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez taunting and ridiculing the superpower with impunity. Yet the setback of America’s standing at the global level is even more striking. With the nationalisation of crucial parts of the financial system, the American free-market creed has self-destructed while countries that retained overall control of markets have been vindicated. In a change as far-reaching in its implications as the fall of the Soviet Union, an entire model of government and the economy has collapsed.

Ever since the end of the Cold War, successive American administrations have lectured other countries on the necessity of sound finance. Indonesia, Thailand, Argentina and several African states endured severe cuts in spending and deep recessions as the price of aid from the International Monetary Fund, which enforced the American orthodoxy. China in particular was hectored relentlessly on the weakness of its banking system. But China’s success has been based on its consistent contempt for Western advice and it is not Chinese banks that are currently going bust. How symbolic yesterday that Chinese astronauts take a spacewalk while the US Treasury Secretary is on his knees.

Despite incessantly urging other countries to adopt its way of doing business, America has always had one economic policy for itself and another for the rest of the world. Throughout the years in which the US was punishing countries that departed from fiscal prudence, it was borrowing on a colossal scale to finance tax cuts and fund its over-stretched military commitments. Now, with federal finances critically dependent on continuing large inflows of foreign capital, it will be the countries that spurned the American model of capitalism that will shape America’s economic future.

Which version of the bail out of American financial institutions cobbled up by Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke is finally adopted is less important than what the bail out means for America’s position in the world. The populist rant about greedy banks that is being loudly ventilated in Congress is a distraction from the true causes of the crisis. The dire condition of America’s financial markets is the result of American banks operating in a free-for-all environment that these same American legislators created. It is America’s political class that, by embracing the dangerously simplistic ideology of deregulation, has responsibility for the present mess.

In present circumstances, an unprecedented expansion of government is the only means of averting a market catastrophe. The consequence, however, will be that America will be even more starkly dependent on the world’s new rising powers. The federal government is racking up even larger borrowings, which its creditors may rightly fear will never be repaid. It may well be tempted to inflate these debts away in a surge of inflation that would leave foreign investors with hefty losses. In these circumstances, will the governments of countries that buy large quantities of American bonds, China, the Gulf States and Russia, for example, be ready to continue supporting the dollar’s role as the world’s reserve currency? Or will these countries see this as an opportunity to tilt the balance of economic power further in their favour? Either way, the control of events is no longer in American hands.

The fate of empires is very often sealed by the interaction of war and debt. That was true of the British Empire, whose finances deteriorated from the First World War onwards, and of the Soviet Union. Defeat in Afghanistan and the economic burden of trying to respond to Reagan’s technically flawed but politically extremely effective Star Wars programme were vital factors in triggering the Soviet collapse. Despite its insistent exceptionalism, America is no different. The Iraq War and the credit bubble have fatally undermined America’s economic primacy. The US will continue to be the world’s largest economy for a while longer, but it will be the new rising powers that, once the crisis is over, buy up what remains intact in the wreckage of America’s financial system.

There has been a good deal of talk in recent weeks about imminent economic armageddon. In fact, this is far from being the end of capitalism. The frantic scrambling that is going on in Washington marks the passing of only one type of capitalism – the peculiar and highly unstable variety that has existed in America over the last 20 years. This experiment in financial laissez-faire has imploded.While the impact of the collapse will be felt everywhere, the market economies that resisted American-style deregulation will best weather the storm. Britain, which has turned itself into a gigantic hedge fund, but of a kind that lacks the ability to profit from a downturn, is likely to be especially badly hit.

The irony of the post-Cold War period is that the fall of communism was followed by the rise of another utopian ideology. In American and Britain, and to a lesser extent other Western countries, a type of market fundamentalism became the guiding philosophy. The collapse of American power that is underway is the predictable upshot. Like the Soviet collapse, it will have large geopolitical repercussions. An enfeebled economy cannot support America’s over-extended military commitments for much longer. Retrenchment is inevitable and it is unlikely to be gradual or well planned.

Meltdowns on the scale we are seeing are not slow-motion events. They are swift and chaotic, with rapidly spreading side-effects. Consider Iraq. The success of the surge, which has been achieved by bribing the Sunnis, while acquiescing in ongoing ethnic cleansing, has produced a condition of relative peace in parts of the country. How long will this last, given that America’s current level of expenditure on the war can no longer be sustained?

An American retreat from Iraq will leave Iran the regional victor. How will Saudi Arabia respond? Will military action to forestall Iran acquiring nuclear weapons be less or more likely? China’s rulers have so far been silent during the unfolding crisis. Will America’s weakness embolden them to assert China’s power or will China continue its cautious policy of ‘peaceful rise’? At present, none of these questions can be answered with any confidence. What is evident is that power is leaking from the US at an accelerating rate. Georgia showed Russia redrawing the geopolitical map, with America an impotent spectator.

Outside the US, most people have long accepted that the development of new economies that goes with globalisation will undermine America’s central position in the world. They imagined that this would be a change in America’s comparative standing, taking place incrementally over several decades or generations. Today, that looks an increasingly unrealistic assumption.

Having created the conditions that produced history’s biggest bubble, America’s political leaders appear unable to grasp the magnitude of the dangers the country now faces. Mired in their rancorous culture wars and squabbling among themselves, they seem oblivious to the fact that American global leadership is fast ebbing away. A new world is coming into being almost unnoticed, where America is only one of several great powers, facing an uncertain future it can no longer shape.

Pakistan Emulating US, Tribals Their “Blackwater”

Pakistan Emulating US,

Tribals Their “Blackwater”

Continuous making of new factions

Now since last month Pak Army has adopted same strategy which US adopted in Korea and Vietnam, provide arms and divide local peoples, locals are pushed to burn homes and kill their brethren Pushtoon’s. It is another mistake which army is doing after creating war lords in Afghan war, look with another angle in opinion of liberal fascists and PPP that entire population of that area is Deobandi, Ahle Hadis or Wahabi, and Wahabi doctrine is biggest danger for neo-Imperialism, it means one group of Wahabi’s is removed from the list but bigger Wahabi group is emerging with sophisticated weapons.

It mean army is again using proxy warriors for their safety, Pakistan army and PPP along with ANP are not silly that those did not understand tribal culture, blood is blood, an unending war is being ignited. It will suit to state till victims will keep dyeing on the name of Pakistan, (their sons, daughters, mothers and children’s are dying in barbaric actions), so humans have limit to tolerate and there is a limit of patriotism.

See reports of only September 27, 2008 how army is creating new war lords. (Please search reports of previous days on internet)

1. 600-strong lashkar assisting police in rural Peshawar

2. Kalla Khel lashker to impose Rs 5 million fine, demolish houses of Taliban backers
The Kalla Khel tribes in the Khyber Agency formed a 300-strong lashkar against the Taliban in the Bara area.

3. A Zakha Khel tribe jirga announced to form a lashkar against the Taliban after Eid separately.

4. The political administration warned the tribesmen it would block the Ziarai Road if they fail to stop the militant group Lashkar-e-Islam from using the road

  1. Another tribe takes up arms against militants
    BARA: Another tribe in Khyber Agency Friday raised lashkar (armed volunteer squad) to purge the area of miscreants. Elders of the Kalakhel decided to raise an armed lashkar to assist security forces in maintaining law and order in the area, also decided to demolish the houses of those found sheltering the militants. The jirga also decided to impose a fine of five millions on those violating the agreement.
    It is decided that the volunteers would patrol the area alongside security forces. They also decided that the personnel of the armed lashkar would also be deployed at the security check posts. (1)
  2. Shafeerullah Khan, political agent, Bajaur Agency, briefed the media about the role of tribal Lashkars of Salarzai and Utmankhel tribesmen against the militants. The elders of Salarzai and Utmankhel tribes also informed the media about the activities of their respective armed Lashkars against the militants. (2)
  3. Gen Tariq claimed that over 1,000 militants had been killed in the operation so far, in which five were important foreign and local militant commanders. The foreigners killed in the operation belonged to various countries, including Egypt, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and other Arab states, he added. (2)
  4. A tribal Lashkar comprising more than 3,000 armed volunteers on Thursday set all the three main Taliban hideouts on fire after chasing the militants associated with the banned Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) out of their area in Jamrud Tehsil of the Khyber Agency. The elders leading their sub-tribes were Malak Imdad, Malak Fazle Mullah, Haji Bacha Gul, Rozi Gul and Haji Aziz. (3)

So this is storey of “our on war’ and “proxy warriors” of PPP and Pak army. When Pak army was going to involve in civil war all leading scholars requested them not to do so, now those are using tanks, helicopters and jets on unarmed civilians, if Pak army claims that strength of TTP is only 1000 then it a matter of laugh that three division army is fighting with them, it looks that after 1965 by passing 30 years army has forget meanings of war, so it is their equivalent to second world war. Proxy warriors who are protecting them are a sign of private army operating at Iraq or Afghanistan under protection of war lords.

We will wait for new war lords when those will be declared Wahabi and Lashkar e Jhangvi or Saudi financed. It will not take so long to wait. PPP is nothing except a bunch of beneficiaries who were waiting since long to fill their stomach, however their leaders separately saved looted money, but it is duty of Pak army to think patiently whether current genocide of Pushtoon’s and Baloch’s is justifiable.