9/11 Bailout: They hate us for our freedoms

9/11 Bailout: They hate us for our freedoms

Shocked by 9-11, Americans wondered who could perpetrate such a horrible crime against people. Over two thousand Americans jumped to their death, were burned, crushed, or murdered in a spectacular collapse of the Twin Towers. In a joint session of Congress a few days later, President George W. Bush gave us the first clue who “they” were. “They” hated us for our freedoms.

It seemed incomprehensible at the time but we now have an opportunity to recognize who actually hates us for our freedoms. We can identify the culprits by this simple description: They hate us for our freedoms. We need only judge them by their actions. Do you know who has destroyed most of our treasured American freedoms? When you can answer that question you will know the identity of the criminals who conceived and orchestrated the 9-11 Attack on America. They hate us for our freedoms.

Less than a week after he spoke those words, President George W. Bush presented legislation for Congress to pass into law. The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 revoked much of the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution. Arabs and Muslims of al Qaeda didn’t do it. George did it. Congress was given only hours to read the extensive volume and no opportunity to debate. A quick vote was required.

Does that sound familiar to you? Remember the Bailout of the Banks that was rammed through Congress with little debate or deliberation? Do you recognize the similarities with the USA PATRIOT Act? Those who stood in its way received a letter contaminated with fatal weapons grade anthrax, later identified as the Ames strain which was kept under guard at Fort Detrick, Maryland. Arabs and Muslims of al Qaeda had no access to it. It was done by those who “hate us for our freedoms.” Only one senator voted against the ironically named USA PATRIOT Act. The vote in the House of Representatives was 357-66. Only a few dozen Democrats voted against the Patriot Act. Al Qaeda did not have a vote. Only those who hate us for our freedoms voted to demolish American freedoms.

Phones were tapped, emails were read, letters were opened. We saw a rapid increase in warrantless searches, secret courts, massive spying on citizens, especially those involved in political dissent. We’ve seen taser attacks by police on children, elderly, and innocent citizens. We’ve seen the creation of watch-lists, no-fly lists and similar exclusionary documents, increasing government control over private behavior. Al Qaeda did not do this. The fascist regime of George Bush, neocon Republicans, and the neoliberal Democrats did this. Are you beginning to see who hates us for our freedoms?

Torture was re-instituted and blessed in secret as America turned from human rights advocate to human rights terrorist. US Christian leaders supported Bush’s use of torture. Al Qaeda did not do this. This crime against humanity was perpetrated by those who hate us for our freedoms.

Creation of a mercenary military force such as Blackwater for foreign and domestic purposes has led the oppression and murder in Iraq and in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Al Qaeda didn’t hire them. These killers and thugs are the private militia of those who hate us for our freedoms.

Dissent is now characterized as disloyalty by government and its supporting media, protestors are herded into pens called “free speech zones,” the media supports and condones the government’s police state activities. Al Qaeda media? No, mainstream American media. Those in charge hate us for our freedoms.

People are now beaten and arrested for demanding their rights under the Bill of Rights and their President dismisses the Constitution as just a piece of paper. The President asserts the right to ignore part or all of laws passed by the national legislature and the courts increasingly support presidential use of unconstitutional powers. The President and other officials regularly lie to you, the newspapers and media lie to you, the President claims the right to make war whenever he wants and keep soldiers past their tour of duty indefinitely. Government agencies and officials declare themselves exempt from portions of the law or Constitution. Citizens lack any legal recourse to stop illegal government actions and now under the Military Commissions Act you can be imprisoned without trial, arrested and held without charges. Al Qaeda didn’t do this. It was done by those who hate you for your freedoms.

The long history of habeas corpus has disappeared after centuries of due process. Al Qaeda didn’t make these changes. These changes were made by people who hate us for our freedoms. Are you beginning to recognize who was responsible for 9-11? It was done by those who hate us for our freedoms.

You read their words in the newspapers and see them on the nightly news. Some of them hold a strong loyalty to another country.

There are those who still think they are holding the pass against a revolution that may be coming up the road. But they are gazing in the wrong direction. The revolution is behind them. It went by in the Night of Depression, singing songs to freedom. – Garet Garrett

By means of Presidential National Security Directive 51 signed by George W. Bush in 2007, the President can assume dictatorial powers without the consent of Congress. Because of the Domestic Terrorism Law what you think and what they think you think can be a sufficient cause for investigation, arrest, and imprisonment if the President determines it fits his interpretation of the definition of domestic terrorism. The Department of Homeland Security can place your name on a no-fly no-go list if Director Michael Chertoff thinks that you are a “security risk.” This can also mean that in the future you can’t get on a bus or train to go visit your grandma if someone puts your name on the list. Al Qaeda didn’t do this. This is being done by those who hate us for our freedoms.

The Washington Post has reported (April 24, 2008) that the U.S. government will order commercial airlines and cruise lines to prepare to collect digital fingerprints of all foreigners before they depart the country under a security initiative that the industry has condemned as costly and burdensome. Chertoff says fingerprints aren’t ‘personal data’. He’s not al Qaeda. He’s a dual-citizen of the US and Israel. Chertoff is a member of the Federalist Society; a cabal of radical lawyers devoted to the systematic dismantling of the Bill of Rights. He’s hired former Stasi chief Markus Wolfe and former head of the KGB General Yevgeni Primakov to oversee the American Gestapo. He was in charge of criminal investigation at the Department of Justice and responsible for the release of the Israelis seen celebrating the fall of the Twin Towers.

FEMA, an agency under his direction, has had over 600 concentration camps built by Halliburton and one out of every 100 Americans is in prison, highest in the First World nations. Surveillance cameras are everywhere. Al Qaeda didn’t put them there. People are arrested for taking photographs of buildings in the city. The FBI swoops down on private money enterprises and confiscates (steals) millions of dollars worth of gold, silver, and platinum without leaving so much as a receipt and with a warrant that lacks specific cause. Then they steal gold, silver and platinum from the people’s private mint without cause. Al Qaeda didn’t do this. Another type of terrorist did this. This other terrorist hates us for our freedoms, too.

With the dollar dropping precipitously in the world markets, President Bush negotiates with Canadian and Mexican leaders for a Security and Protection Pact that will create the North American Union with its own currency, the Amero. An unwanted war rages on in Iraq while US leaders press for another war in the Middle East, this time against Iran for seeking nuclear power for electricity, their right under international treaty. Violating Iran’s rights is a violation of US law as well as international law but no one can arrest the US leaders who have taken this position. The rule of law has become a quaint artifact of another time. Al Qaeda didn’t create the thuggery and treason around us. That’s the doing of those who hate us for our freedoms.

We have entered the period of chaos which precedes martial law but Al Qaeda isn’t responsible. Arabs and Muslims didn’t do this. It was done by those who hate us for our freedoms. These people who hate us for our freedoms are the ones who told us that 9-11 was done by those who hate us for our freedoms. In telling us their lies we can see through their propaganda and illusion to the truth.

Garet Garrett wrote:

There are those who have never ceased to say very earnestly, “Something is going to happen to the American form of government if we don’t watch out.” These were the innocent disarmers. Their trust was in words. They had forgotten their Aristotle. More than 2,000 years ago he wrote of what can happen within the form, when “one thing takes the place of another, so that the ancient laws will remain, while the power will be in the hands of those who have brought about revolution in the state.

Franklin Delano Rosenfeld brought over 4,000 communists and socialists into US Government during his regime and declared a national emergency that made him a de facto dictator. That national emergency was never ended. We think that we have a Constitution and Bill of Rights that limit the power of government. We think that our Declaration of Independence declares our independence. We think that the American Revolution and the American dream are our heritage and our destiny. We think that we have a democratic republic and that our votes count, our voices are heard. Such mirages should have evaporated in the Presidential Election of 2000 when the US Supreme Court stopped a legal recount of votes in Florida to give the win to George W. Bush, son of the man who had appointed them.

Such illusions should have disappeared when the Twin Towers dropped at the rate of free fall into their own footprints. The immutable laws of physics should have helped us discern the truth from the propaganda. But a century ago the Tavistock Institute discovered that only 13% of the population can think for themselves. The remaining 87% depend upon “authorities” whose pieces of paper on their walls tout their academic superiority.

So we are left with the power of practical observation and a bit of logic to help us discover the truth from the fiction. The horrible atrocity that was 9-11 was truly done by those who hate us for our freedoms. It might be the only way that most people can see through the lies and propaganda. In his address to a joint session of Congress following 9-11, President George W. Bush told the truth in such a way that we were supposed to think that he meant al Qaeda. He had twisted the truth into a lie.

What George told us was true! They hate us for our freedoms! Now you can see who planned and orchestrated 9-11. Perhaps now you can also understand the Bailout of the Banks. The answer lies in the simple clue: It was planned and orchestrated by those who hate us for our freedoms. The old biblical truism, “By their fruits ye shall know them.”

For more information go to They Hate Us for Our Freedoms


How America Fell

by Robert Parry

The story doesn’t explain all that’s gone wrong in the past eight years, but it reveals how aggressive right-wing operatives, aided and abetted by a lazy or complicit news media, can create an impression for millions of voters that is nearly the opposite of the truth.

So, in the razor-thin presidential election of 2000 – at the dawn of the George W. Bush era – a significant number of Americans went to the polls believing a right-wing canard, that Al Gore was implicated in a treacherous scheme to trade American nuclear secrets to China for campaign cash.

The smear had been pushed by a combination of Republicans and right-wing activists relying on the Internet, talk radio, direct mail, Fox News and TV ads. Meanwhile, the mainstream news media did little to dispel the ugly suspicions, even though exculpatory evidence existed that would have cleared Gore.

A bitter irony of the story was that Americans, who voted against Gore to stop a “traitor” whom they thought had bargained away life-and-death nuclear secrets to China, were letting back in Republicans upon whose watch the nuclear secrets apparently were leaked.

Up had become down. The votes of those misguided Americans then helped make Election 2000 close enough for Bush and the Republicans to steal the White House. [For details on that election, see our book Neck Deep.]

Daisy Ad

The “Chinagate” story surfaced dramatically in the weeks before Election 2000 when a pro-Republican group from Texas, called Aretino Industries, ran an emotional ad modeled after Lyndon Johnson’s infamous 1964 commercial that showed a girl picking a daisy before the screen dissolved into a nuclear blast.

The ad remake accused the Clinton-Gore administration of selling vital nuclear secrets to communist China for campaign donations in 1996. The compromised nuclear secrets, the ad said, gave China “the ability to threaten our homes with long-range nuclear warheads.”

The ad – airing in “swing” states including Ohio, Michigan, Missouri and Pennsylvania – suggested that a Chinese government front funneled $30,000 in illegal “soft money” donations to the Democrats in 1996 in exchange for the nuclear secrets. The most important secret had been the blueprint for the W-88 miniaturized nuclear warhead.

The allegation hit a nerve with many voters because the Bush campaign had run other ads showing grainy photos of Al Gore with saffron-robed monks at a Buddhist temple in California, implying corruption with mysterious Asians.

The daisy ad also played off an earlier report by a Republican-controlled congressional investigation into China’s apparent theft of the W-88 warhead design and other U.S. nuclear secrets. The so-called Cox report, named for the probe’s chairman Rep. Christopher Cox, accused the Clinton-Gore administration of failing to protect top-secret nuclear data from Chinese espionage.

When released on May 25, 1999, the Cox report was greeted by conservative groups and much of the national news media as another indictment of the Democrats in the aftermath of President Bill Clinton’s Monica Lewinsky sex scandal. By then the press corps, addicted to “Clinton scandals,” paid little attention to the sleight of hand in the Cox report.

Cox’s key trick was to leave out dates of alleged Chinese spying in the 1980s and thus obscure the fact that the floodgates of U.S. nuclear secrets to China – including how to build the miniaturized W-88 nuclear warhead – had opened wide during the Reagan-Bush years.

While leaving out Republican time elements, Cox shoved references to the alleged security lapses into the presidencies of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.

For instance, the Cox report’s “Overview” stated that “the PRC (People’s Republic of China) thefts from our National Laboratories began at least as early as the late 1970s, and significant secrets are known to have been stolen as recently as the mid-1990s.”

In this way, Cox started with the Carter presidency, jumped over the 12 years of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, and landed in the Clinton years. In the “Overview” alone, there were three dozen references to dates from the Clinton years and only five mentions of dates from the Reagan-Bush years, with none related to alleged wrongdoing.

Cox’s stacking of the deck carried over into the report’s two-page chronology of the Chinese spy scandal. On pages 74-75, the Cox report put all the information boxes about Chinese espionage suspicions into the Carter and Clinton years.

Nothing sinister is attributed specifically to the Reagan-Bush era, other than a 1988 test of a neutron bomb built from secrets that the report says were believed stolen in the “late 1970s,” the Carter years. Only a careful reading of the text inside the chronology’s boxes made clear that many of the worst national security breaches could be traced to the Reagan-Bush era.

But the major U.S. news media did little to challenge Cox’s misleading findings, even though some newspapers knew then or learned later that the evidence pointed to a hemorrhage of nuclear secrets during the 1980s.

For instance, the Washington Post reported on Oct. 19, 2000, just weeks before the election, that when federal investigators translated previously ignored documents turned over by a Chinese defector in 1995, they learned that the exposure of nuclear secrets in the Reagan-Bush years was worse than previously thought.

“The documents provided by the defector show that during the 1980s, Beijing had gathered a large amount of classified information about U.S. ballistic missiles and reentry vehicles,” the Post reported. But the newspaper didn’t dispute Cox’s earlier findings or debunk the treasonous “Chinagate” allegations then being spread about Gore.

[Cox is now chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, where he has come under criticism for failing to adequately regulate Wall Street banks. One of his aides on the Cox report was I. Lewis Libby, who became Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff and was later convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice in the “Plamegate” affair.]

Iran-Contra Connection

Other evidence, also available before Election 2000, suggested that conscious decisions by senior Reagan-Bush officials in the 1980s may have put communist China in a position to glean those sensitive secrets.

The rupture of U.S. nuclear secrets followed an extraordinary decision by Ronald Reagan’s White House in 1984 to collaborate with Beijing on a highly sensitive intelligence operation, the clandestine shipment of weapons to the Nicaraguan contra rebels, in defiance of U.S. law.

The collaboration was especially risky because Congress had forbidden military shipments to the contras and the administration was insisting that it was abiding by the law. In reality, President Ronald Reagan had tapped a National Security Council staffer, Oliver North, to oversee an off-the-books contra supply operation.

Reagan’s White House turned to China hoping that it would deliver surface-to-air missiles that might turn the tide of the battle against Nicaragua’s leftist Sandinista government, which had been inflicting heavy losses on the contras by using Soviet-built attack helicopters.

In his 1989 Iran-Contra trial, North described this procurement of China’s SA-7 anti-aircraft missiles as a “very sensitive delivery.”

For the Chinese missile deal in 1984, North said he received help from the CIA in arranging false end-user certificates from the right-wing government of Guatemala. But China balked at selling missiles to the Guatemalan military, which was engaged in a scorched-earth war against its own leftist guerrillas.

To resolve this problem, North was dispatched to a clandestine meeting with a Chinese military official.

The idea was to bring the Chinese in on what was then one of the most sensitive secrets of the U.S. government – the missiles were not going to Guatemala, but rather into a clandestine pipeline arranged by the White House to funnel military supplies to the contras.

“In Washington, I met with a Chinese military officer assigned to their embassy to encourage their cooperation,” North wrote in his autobiography, Under Fire. “We enjoyed a fine lunch at the exclusive Cosmos Club in downtown Washington.”

North said the Chinese saw the collaboration as a way to develop “better relations with the United States.”

Possession of this sensitive information also put Beijing in position to leverage future U.S. actions by the Reagan administration. It was in this climate of cooperation that secrets, including how to make miniaturized hydrogen bombs, allegedly went from the United States to China.

The Wen Ho Lee Case

While the details of how China learned the W-88 secrets are still unclear, it is clear that the Reagan administration authorized a broader exchange program between U.S. and Chinese nuclear physicists. The Chinese were even given access to the Los Alamos nuclear facility.

By 1985, the Reagan administration’s expanded nuclear exchanges with China were in full swing. In March 1985, Los Alamos nuclear physicist Wen Ho Lee (who would later come under suspicion of espionage) was seen talking with Chinese scientists during a scientific conference in Hilton Head, South Carolina, according to a New York Times chronology that was not published until after Election 2000 (on Feb. 4-5, 2001).

In 1986, with approval of the Los Alamos nuclear lab, Wen Ho Lee and another scientist attended a conference in Beijing. Wen Ho Lee traveled to Beijing again in 1988.

“With the Reagan administration eager to isolate the Soviet Union, hundreds of scientists traveled between the United States and China, and the cooperation expanded to the development of torpedoes, artillery shells and jet fighters,” the Times wrote. “The exchanges were spying opportunities as well.”

The fruits of any Chinese espionage during Ronald Reagan’s presidency became apparent during the presidency of George H.W. Bush.

“On Sept. 25, 1992, a nuclear blast shook China’s western desert,” the Times wrote. “From spies and electronic surveillance, American intelligence officials determined that the test was a breakthrough in China’s long quest to match American technology for smaller, more sophisticated hydrogen bombs.”

Assessing this Chinese breakthrough, U.S. intelligence experts began to suspect that the Chinese had purloined U.S. secrets.

“It’s like they were driving a Model T and went around the corner and suddenly had a Corvette,” said Robert M. Hanson, a Los Alamos intelligence analyst.

By the early years of the Clinton administration, investigators had begun looking back at the mid-1980s when the Reagan administration had authorized U.S. nuclear scientists to hold a number of meetings with their Chinese counterparts.

Though the American scientists were under restrictions about what information could be shared, it was never fully explained why those meetings were held in the first place – given the risk that a U.S. scientist might willfully or accidentally divulge nuclear secrets.

A breakthrough in the probe didn’t occur until 1995 when a Chinese walk-in to the U.S. Embassy in Taiwan provided documents indicating that China apparently had gained access to American nuclear designs back in the 1980s.


It took four more years – until March 1999 – for the Chinese nuclear story to gain national attention, when the New York Times published several imprecise front-page stories fingering Wen Ho Lee as an espionage suspect.

During those chaotic first weeks of “Chinagate,” Republicans and political pundits mixed together the suspicions of Chinese spying and allegations about illegal Chinese campaign donations to the Democrats in 1996. Clinton’s Justice Department overcompensated by demonstrating how tough it could be on suspect Wen Ho Lee.

Amid the spy frenzy, however, no one took note of the logical impossibility of Democrats selling secrets to China in 1996 that China seemed to have obtained a decade or so earlier during a Republican administration.

Instead, pro-Republican groups grasped the political and fund-raising potential, especially since President Clinton had just survived his impeachment ordeal and there was a strong appetite for more “Clinton scandals.” Plus, Clinton’s sidekick, Al Gore, was the frontrunner to succeed his boss.

Larry Klayman’s right-wing Judicial Watch sent out a letter seeking $5.2 million for a special “Chinagate Task Force” that would “hold Bill Clinton, Al Gore and the Democratic Party Leadership fully accountable for election fraud, bribery and possibly treason in connection with the ‘Chinagate’ scandal.”

The hysteria had especially ugly consequences for Wen Ho Lee, the 60-year-old physicist who was imprisoned on a 59-count indictment for mishandling classified material.

The Taiwanese-born naturalized U.S. citizen was put in solitary confinement with his cell light on at all times. He was allowed out of his cell only one hour a day, when he shuffled around a prison courtyard in leg shackles.

However, the tenuous case against Wen Ho Lee began to collapse in 2000 against the backdrop of the presidential campaign. On Sept. 13, 2000, the scientist pled guilty to a single count of mishandling classified material, and U.S. District Judge James A. Parker apologized to Lee for the “demeaning, unnecessarily punitive conditions” under which Lee had been held.

Still, the suspicions about Clinton-Gore treachery with China lingered and reemerged during the final days of Campaign 2000 with the “daisy ad” remake. The closing message was blunt: “Don’t take a chance,” the ad said. “Please vote Republican.”

George W. Bush’s campaign also exploited the “Chinagate” suspicions, albeit a touch more subtly, by running those ads showing Gore meeting with the saffron-robed monks at a Buddhist temple in California.

So, millions of Americans went to the polls in November 2000 thinking that Gore’s temple appearance and the Chinese nuclear spying were somehow linked. The mainstream news media – still bristling with hostility toward Clinton and Gore – offered no timely explanation that the Chinese espionage represented a Reagan-Bush scandal, not a Clinton-Gore scandal.

Through disinformation from the Right and acquiescence from the mainstream media, the stage was set for a historically close presidential election and for the Republicans to be returned to the White House.

The rest, as they say, is history.

Aoun to Al-Manar: Anything We Do is Targeted!


Aoun to Al-Manar: Anything We Do is Targeted!

Hussein Assi Readers Number : 115

15/10/2008 While the establishment of diplomatic ties between Lebanon and Syria turned out to be the main source of interest on Wednesday amid hopes that it would open a new “white” page between the two neighbor countries, some Lebanese prominent figures were still preoccupied in assailing the head of the Change and Reform parliamentary bloc MP Michel Aoun over his official historic visit to Iran.

However, Aoun said that the critics against his visit to Iran wouldn’t be harder than the criticism he was subject to when he supported the Resistance during the Israeli 2006 war against Lebanon, saying that his critics were like “women who always swear at others.”

“We are now in the axis of evil and the visit is targeted, and I am targeted too and anything I do will be targeted also even if I pray at the church,” Aoun told Al-Manar correspondent in Iran.

The General pointed out that the main competition in the 2009 parliamentary elections would be in Christian areas. “That is why they escalate their criticism; they are seeking to plant things in the heads of Christian voters that are different from the nature of this visit,” Aoun explained.

“We didn’t find any differences with Iran concerning Lebanese policy,” Aoun said, noting that the Islamic Republic supports the Lebanese state’s policies and not the opposition’s ones.

Aoun confirmed that no one in Lebanon was supporting terrorism, but he warned that “terrorism is infiltrating to us through states that sometimes claim to be helping us.”

Aoun met earlier in the day Iran’s nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili who thanked the FPM leader for his “constructive and positive role aimed at bolstering national unity in Lebanon, backing the resistance and developing Islamic-Christian coexistence.”

Aoun also held talks with head of the parliamentary national security and foreign affairs committee Alaa Din Broujourdi who praised the FPM leader’s “role in backing steadfastness of the resistance and helping the Arabs walk tall after defeats that some had thought are lasting.”

Meanwhile, the member of Change and Reform parliamentary bloc MP Nabil Nicolas responded to the head of the Democratic Gathering MP Walid Jumblatt who launched, two days ago, a verbal assault against Aoun, calling him the “dean of surrender and losses,” and accusing him of seeking to increase the divisions among the Lebanese people and torpedo efforts to implement the policy of positive neutrality through his visit to the Islamic Republic.

In a statement released on Wednesday, Nicolas wondered whether Jumblatt wanted to be described as the “dean of displacing and altering positions.”

“We wanted this period to be one of calm and dialogue but Mr. Jumblatt surprised all of us in his attack on General Aoun] without any justification because everybody knows that Mr. Jumblatt was the pioneer in visiting Iran and he was the one to benefit most from the Syrian regime and Iran,” Nicolas emphasized.

Nicolas stressed that Aoun had never been a conspirator but has always worked for Lebanon’s unity, sovereignty, and independence, “whether Mr. Jumblatt wants it or not.”

Nicolas concluded that the Lebanese population was the arbiter and would not be affected by the “choir of cursing” of Aoun.

Jesse Jackson says Obama will rid U.S. of ‘Zionist’ control

Jesse Jackson says Obama will rid U.S. of ‘Zionist’ control

By Haaretz service
Tags: Barack Obama, Jesse Jackson
The New York Post reported Tuesday that the Rev. Jesse Jackson said the United States will rid itself of years of “Zionist” control under an administration headed by Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

The daily quoted the veteran civil rights leader on Tuesday as having said that although “Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades” remain strong, they will lose a much of their clout when Obama enters the White House.

Speaking at the first World Policy Forum event in Evian, France, Jackson promised “fundamental changes” in U.S. foreign policy. He said the most important change would occur in the Middle East, where “decades of putting Israel’s interests first” would end.

Jackson said that Obama “wants an aggressive and dynamic diplomacy.” He went on to criticize the Bush administration’s handling of Middle East diplomacy, telling the Post, “Bush was so afraid of a snafu and of upsetting Israel that he gave the whole thing a miss. Barack will change that,” because, as long as the Palestinians haven’t seen justice, the Middle East will “remain a source of danger to us all.”

Jackson has not always been such a strong Obama supporter. In July, he apologized to the Illinois senator for “crude and hurtful” remarks he had made about him after an interview with a Fox News correspondent.

Speaking to a fellow interviewee without realizing his microphone was on, Jackson said, “See, Barack’s been talking down to black people…. I want to cut his nuts off.”

“It was very private,” Jackson said, adding that if “any hurt or harm has been caused to [Obama’s] campaign, I apologize.”

The real face of terrorism

The real face of terrorism

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 – 11:40 AM EST – 21 Reads
Section: War of Terrorism

And certainly don’t ask about the troops on bases here in Afghanistan who don’t wear uniforms, have long beards (so they can better blend in during covert operations), tattoos and don’t mingle with regular soldiers.

They eat in their own chow halls, plan their own missions and don’t talk much. They don’t talk at all to the media. They’re the men who have been called in to cross into Pakistan when the drones can’t get deep enough to find and kill their targets.

They are elite Special Operations Forces, the most-highly trained and covert of the U.S. military. They are America’s ghost warriors. According to Pakistani villagers who claim to have witnessed their operations, the “Special Ops” work in small teams, fast roping out of helicopters, air assaulting their objective before the enemy can re-group.

Their strengths are rapid violence, stealth, mobility and surprise. The Special Operations Forces don’t receive much attention or credit in the media, but they’re leading America’s secret war inside Pakistan, at least for now.


NEWS | October 9th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |

There have been reports of US incursions into Pakistan. This report clearly discusses the good, the bad and the ugly

MSNBC: JALALABAD, Afghanistan – U.S. military officials don’t talk about our secret war in Pakistan.

Don’t even ask, I was told, on U.S. military bases in Afghanistan at Bagram and Jalalabad.

Don’t ask about the remotely-controlled American drones armed with missiles that are now hunting across the Pakistani border, searching through the mountain peaks, valleys and dusty villages inside Pakistan for the leaders of a few dozen networks of al-Qaida fighters, Taliban militants, warlords, weapons smugglers and opium traffickers.

VIDEO: Pakistan struggles to maintain power in a Taliban stronghold

And certainly don’t ask about the troops on bases here in Afghanistan who don’t wear uniforms, have long beards (so they can better blend in during covert operations), tattoos and don’t mingle with regular soldiers.

They eat in their own chow halls, plan their own missions and don’t talk much. They don’t talk at all to the media. They’re the men who have been called in to cross into Pakistan when the drones can’t get deep enough to find and kill their targets.

They are elite Special Operations Forces, the most-highly trained and covert of the U.S. military. They are America’s ghost warriors. According to Pakistani villagers who claim to have witnessed their operations, the “Special Ops” work in small teams, fast roping out of helicopters, air assaulting their objective before the enemy can re-group.

Their strengths are rapid violence, stealth, mobility and surprise. The Special Operations Forces don’t receive much attention or credit in the media, but they’re leading America’s secret war inside Pakistan, at least for now.

The Army Times, a military newspaper, recently reported that the U.S. will temporarily halt ground incursions into Pakistan. The newspaper quoted an unnamed Pentagon official as saying, “We are now working with the Pakistanis to make sure that those types of ground-type insertions do not happen, at least for a period of time to give them an opportunity to do what they claim they are desiring to do.” The newspaper said the halt did not apply to the incursions by drones.

U.S. perspectiv

While details of American operations in Pakistan are sparse, several commanders have helped me understand the American motivation for the raids.

They say the cross-border incursions are necessary because the Pakistani government has failed to contain Taliban and al-Qaida fighters. Pakistan’s tribal region – 10,000 square miles along Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan – has become a no-man’s-land where radical militants train, equip, rest, regroup, refit, plan and launch attacks on American troops in Afghanistan and on the Pakistani government in Islamabad.

Pakistan has taken some action. In August, the Pakistani military launched an offensive in Bajaur, a militant stronghold near the border. The Pakistani army is also building alliances with tribal leaders who have turned on the Taliban and al-Qaida.

But Pakistan’s actions have yet to produce significant results, according to tribal elders, witnesses, and the U.S. military. The border region remains a lawless insurgent safe haven that the United States has decided it can no longer tolerate.

From the U.S. perspective, the military had to act in Pakistan, a U.S. ally, because the Pakistani government and military could not, or would not, crack down on Islamic radicals.

Pakistan’s perspective
Sipping cups of green tea in a villa in Islamabad, I recently spoke for three hours with a Pakistani military official, who also worked for several years in his country’s intelligence service, to get the other side of the story. He argued passionately that both Pakistan and the United States share the same goal – to wipe out the dangerous radicals – but that the U.S. cross-border incursions are counter-productive.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject, said Pakistan has deployed 120,000 troops along its border with Afghanistan, stationed at 1,000 posts. He compared Pakistan’s force to just over 30,000 U.S. troops at about 100 posts on the Afghan side of the border.

“You see where the insufficiency of forces is?” he asked. “I don’t understand why [the Americans] don’t just kill the militants on their side of the border. They show us videos as proof of militants crossing into Pakistan. Why don’t they just sort them out there, in Afghanistan, instead of making videos?'”

I asked the Pakistani official about the U.S. cross-border raids. Do they help? Don’t they target the same people who plot attacks against Pakistan? Unlike the U.S. military, he had a lot to say.

The official claimed there have been about 50 drone incursions into Pakistan since this summer, along with roughly 10 “physical incursions.” He claimed the raids had killed “several hundred” civilians and were causing panic in the tribal areas.

“The villagers hear the buzzing [of the drones] and are terrified. They are scared to have weddings, funerals or any social gatherings, afraid they will be blown up by the drones,” he said.

The official also claimed the U.S. strikes undermine the Pakistani military’s ability to operate in the tribal areas. It’s a problem of logistics and terrain, he explained.

The few roads in the mountainous border area run through villages. Since the Pakistani military lacks aircraft, the roads are the army’s main supply line. The official argued that if the villagers, angered by American air strikes, turn on the Pakistani military – who are after all U.S. allies – they could cut off Pakistani troops.

“We may have to pull them out completely if [the American incursions] continue. We cannot leave the troops there, if we are cut off from supplies and can’t support them.”

Human toll

While the United States and Pakistan argue over the incursions, conditions in border villages are rapidly deteriorating. The mountain town of Swat was once known as the Switzerland of Pakistan, a resort where Pakistanis vacationed to escape the bustle of Islamabad and Karachi. Today it is a battle zone.

According to a Pakistani military spokesman, in Swat Valley Taliban and al-Qaida fighters have burned down 111 girls schools, destroyed 37 government buildings, blown up 29 bridges, incapacitated the main power plant and cut the gas supply. Villagers are often completely without power. Schools that haven’t been burned down don’t operate.

Not surprisingly, more than a quarter million refugees have escaped areas like Swat and Bajour. At least 20,000 refugees have crossed into Afghanistan. Aid workers say tens of thousands more may be coming.

What can be done?

A senior U.S. military official told me he’d heard Pakistan’s argument – leave us alone, we’ll handle it, stay out – a thousand times, but had yet to see results.

But what can the U.S. actually do?

It’s difficult to fight a secret war, especially here. The Special Operations Forces must fight in the mountains, far away from their bases in Afghanistan, against a battle-hardened enemy funded by the opium trade.

Since U.S. troops must operate covertly, they also can’t afford to lose a single man, fearing the enemy would drag his body Somalia-style through the streets, exposing their presence. The Americans also can’t leave anything behind, no equipment, no bags of MREs, no tracks, no trace they were there fighting America’s newest, most secret war.

Both American and Pakistani officials seem to agree that the only long-term solution to combating the militants in the border region is through better coordination. For now, however, there’s little trust between the two sides, and suspicions are growing.