The 13th Circle: Somalia’s Hell and the Triumph of Militarism

The 13th Circle: Somalia’s Hell and the Triumph of Militarism

Written by Chris Floyd

As you might expect, the New York Times buries the lede in its latest story about Somalia, but surprisingly, the general outlines of the truth of the rapidly collapsing situation on this third front in the “War on Terror” can be gleaned from the piece.

Some 14 paragraphs into the story, Establishment water-carrier Jeffrey Gettleman finally gets down to the heart of the matter, and, to his credit, delivers an admirably succinct précis of the latest imperial flameout:

In 2006, Islamist troops teamed up with clan elders and businessmen to drive out the warlords who had been preying upon Somalia’s people since the central government first collapsed in 1991. The six months the Islamists ruled Mogadishu turned out to be one of the most peaceful periods in modern Somali history.

But today’s Islamists are a harder, more brutal group than the ones who were ousted by an Ethiopian invasion, backed by the United States, in late 2006. The old guard included many moderates, but those who tried to work with the transitional government mostly failed, leaving them weak and marginalized, and removing a mitigating influence on the die-hard insurgents.

On top of that, the unpopular and bloody Ethiopian military operations over the past two years have radicalized many Somalis and sent hundreds of unemployed young men — most of whom have never gone to school, never been part of a functioning society and never had much of a chance to do anything but shoulder a gun — into the arms of militant Islamic groups.

That is pretty much it, give or take some details — such as the extent of Washington’s direct involvement in the ongoing destruction of Somalia, which as we have often noted here, involved not only arming, training and funding the Ethiopian invaders, but also dropping US bombs on fleeing refugees, lobbing US missiles into Somali villages, renditioning refugees — including American citizens — into captivity in Ethiopia’s notorious dungeons, and running U.S. death squads in Somalia to “clean up” after covert operations. (The latter is no deep dark secret, by the way; U.S. officials openly boasted of it to Esquire Magazine.)

Now, as anyone not completely blinded by imperial hubris could have predicted, the entire misbegotten exercise has collapsed into the worst-case scenario. A relatively stable, relatively moderate government which held out a promise of better future for the long-ravaged land was overthrown– ostensibly to prevent it from becoming a hotbed of radical extremism. The resulting violence, chaos and brutal occupation by foreign forces led directly and inevitably to — what else? — a rise in radical extremism. Thousands of innocent people have been killed, hundreds of thousands have been driven from their homes, millions have been plunged into the direst poverty and the imminent threat of starvation and disease, unspeakable atrocities and unbearable suffering are arising, as they always do in any situation, anywhere, when a human community is destroyed.

Yet none of this penetrates the glossy shell of imperial hubris — not even now, when the disaster is so glaring that even eager water-carriers of empire like Gettleman are forced to acknowledge reality (albeit in the closing paragraphs). For the real thrust of the Times story is not outrage at the living hell engendered by the Terror War’s third “regime change” operation. No, the Times’ “analysis” is clearly aimed at one goal: continuing the brutal occupation of the Ethiopian invaders.

The Ethiopians are making serious noises about withdrawing all or most of their troops in January. Perhaps Ethiopian strongman Meles Zenawi realizes he has been played by the great gamesters on the Potomac, expending massive amounts of blood and treasure only to end up in a face-losing retreat, and with a far more virulent, dangerous mess on his borders than before the invasion. Or perhaps he is playing games of his own. In any case, the Ethiopian threat has suddenly panicked the Lords of the West, who realize that, as in Iraq, the only thing holding up their local clients is the armed might of a foreign invader. Suddenly, the Western powers that backed the invasion are shocked — shocked! — to find that the warlords they installed in power (some of them openly in the pay of the CIA) have no popular support in the country, and, as Gettleman notes, now “controls only a few city blocks of the entire country.” The only preventing the complete collapse of Washington’s clients, he warns, is presence of the Ethiopians.

Thus the emphasis in the article on the dire consequences of Ethiopia ending its participation in the American-sponsored war crime in Somalia. Gettleman trots out some heavy Establishment lumber for the requisite fearmongering: The International Crisis Group, which he tells us is “a research institute that tracks conflicts worldwide.” No doubt it does; for the group is chock-a-block with the great and good of the bipartisan foreign policy establishment, whose raison d’etre is “conflicts worldwide.”

The ICG board is packed with such luminaries as Thomas Pickering, who served as the Reagan-Bush man in El Salvador when the US-backed government there was slaughtering civilians by the thousands to maintain its elitist-militarist rule. Pickering was a simpering apologist for the blood-letting, declaring that the dead civilians were all sympathizers with the insurgency, and thus “somewhat more than innocent civilian bystanders.” Later, as US ambassador to Moscow, he went on to applaud Boris Yeltsin’s violent suppression of democracy in Russia in 1993 — an incident that seems largely forgotten these days in all the fulminations about Vladimir Putin “introducing” authoritarian rule in Russia.

ICG Co-Chair Pickering is joined by other such worthies as hardcore neocon Ken Adelman (who presciently — and no doubt profitably — jumped ship to endorse Barack Obama before the election); Zbigniew Brzezinski, who helped create the armed global jihad movement in order to hotfoot the Soviets in Afghanistan; Wesley Clark, brave bombardier of civilians in Serbia; Prince Turki al-Faisal, who directed the sinister, extremist-promoting Saudi intelligence apparat for decades; Richard Armitage, a PNAC vet and one of the key players in the operation of the imperial war-and-domination machine for years, who, like his former boss Colin Powell, has acquired a wholly unearned reputation as a “moderate”; Yegor Gaidar, who as Yeltsin’s prime minister rammed through the “shock doctrine” economic extremism that gutted Russian society and ruined the lives of millions; and Lawrence Summers, one of the architects of the global economic meltdown, now serving as a top adviser to Barack Obama.

This group sent out analyst Rashid Abdi to use the NY Times as a megaphone to warn against the risks of ending savage, bloody foreign interventions into other countries:

“It will be bloody,” predicted Rashid Abdi, a Somalia analyst at the International Crisis Group, a research institute that tracks conflicts worldwide. “The Ethiopians have decided to let the transitional government sink. The chaos will spread from the south to the north. Warlordism will be back.”

Mr. Rashid sees Somalia deteriorating into an Afghanistan-like cauldron of militant Islamism, drawing in hard-core fighters from the Comoros, Zanzibar, Kenya and other neighboring Islamic areas, a process that seems to have already started. Those men will eventually go home, spreading the killer ethos.

“Somalia has now reached a very dangerous phase,” he said. “The whole region is in for more chaos, I’m afraid.”

Here we see the logic of militarism on full display: the only way to prevent the rise of terrorism in a country is by invading that country and occupying it with a foreign military force — which, of course, only gives rise to more terrorism in that country. This circular reasoning seems absurd on its face, but it is in fact the highly efficient dynamic that drives and sustains the ideology of militarism in practical power.

Militarism — either in its overt, unashamed form as espoused by the neo-cons and their outriders, or in the more subtly packaged, sugar-coated (and often self-deluding) version of the “humanitarian interventionists” — is the ruling ideology of the American state. Like all ideologies, it comes in different shadings, different emphases, different factions, and so on, but the national power structure is firmly committed across the board to the use of violence — and the ever-present threat of violence — to advance a bipartisan agenda of American hegemony on the world scene. Some factions take great pains to present this hegemony as benevolent and altruistic; other factions don’t care how it comes across (“Let them hate us as long as they fear us,” was a sentiment frequently voiced in high circles at the beginning of the Terror War). But all factions are willing to kill people — either directly or by proxy — to maintain that hegemony.

And that’s why, for the militarist mindset, situations such as the hell in Somalia — or in Iraq — or in Afghanistan — are always win-win scenarios. If the application of brute force in Somalia had “worked” — i.e, if the “regime change” invasion and subsequent repression had produced a quiescent client state willing to open up its resources to foreign exploitation and to jail, torture and kill any of its own citizens who threatened the profitable status quo — then the militarists would have claimed it as a template that could and should be applied over and over around the world. It would have “justified” the militarist path.

But the collapse of Somalia into a sinkhole of chaos and extremism that could “threaten the whole region,” perhaps the whole world, can equally be used to “justify” a militarist response; after all, how else can we protect ourselves from this heightened danger of terrorism, except with bigger military forces, more aggressive responses to potential threats, more power and scope for our security services, more authority for the “Commander-in-Chief” to help keep us safe, etc., etc.?

What we have long said here about Iraq and Afghanistan applies to Somalia: the imperial warmongers have won, no matter what the ultimate outcome. More than a million innocent people now lie dead across the three Terror War fronts, but the perpetrators of these crimes — not only the officials in government who order and carry out particular operations, but also the systems that sustain the militarist order (the Pentagon, the arms dealers, the military servicers, the security agencies and their shadow networks, the mercenaries, the innumerable corporations, think tanks, businesses large and small plugged into the profits of the war machine) — go on from strength to strength. The officials either stay on in government, like Pentagon warlord Robert Gates, or go off to honorable, untroubled, and remunerative retirements, like Bush and Cheney, or else park themselves on corporate boards or in their own lucrative “consulting firms” until their particular faction takes power again. Meanwhile, the systems and institutions of militarism grow ever more entrenched and unquestioned and unchallenged.

So in the coming months, as Somalia continues to descend to even deeper levels of hell than the canonical nine circles, we will doubtless hear much consternation in the imperial courts (and their media outlets) about how terrible it all is — along with many calls for even higher military budgets (and more overt and covert military operations) to deal with the “growing danger” spawned in Somalia…by the militarists themselves.

UPDATE: Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition; the masters of war are immune to recession. The Boston Globe reports on one sector of the shipwrecked American economy that is positively thriving in these uncertain times: the death-and-destruction industry. Stocks, bonds, hedge funds, houses, real estate — all are subject to the merciless vagaries of the economic cycle. But blood money always pays big dividends. It’s the safest investment there is.

Barack Obama unveils $1 trillion economic stimulus package

Barack Obama unveils $1 trillion economic

stimulus package

President-elect Barack Obama has warned that “things are going to get worse before they get better” as he outlined details of an economic stimulus package that could reach $1 trillion and is designed to lift the United States out of recession.

President-elect Barack Obama

President-elect Barack Obama

On Friday the US announced a net loss of more than half a million jobs in November, the largest drop in a single month for 34 years and bringing unemployment to 6.7 per cent. The following day, Mr Obama announced the biggest infrastructure investment since President Dwight Eisenhower created the US highway system in the 1950s.

He proposed government programmes for bridges, roads, broadband internet and schools as well as plans for greater energy efficiency and health spending. The National Bureau of Economic Research has said that America has now been in recession for a year.

Although he played down expectation for a quick economic recovery, Mr Obama said his plan was “equal to the task” that the US faced.

“The key is making sure we jump-start the economy in a way that doesn’t just deal with the short term, doesn’t just create jobs immediately, but also puts us on a glide path for long-term sustainable economic growth,” he said in an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press”.

Stronger financial regulations would make banks, credit ratings agencies, mortgage brokers and others “much more accountable and behave much more responsibly”.

He emphasised that the survival of the domestic car industry was crucial but any bailout must be “conditioned on an auto industry emerging at the end of the process that actually works”.

The president-elect criticized Detroit’s Big Three car manufacturers for “repeated strategic mistakes” and a “failure to adapt to changing times — building small cars and energy-efficient cars”.

He added, however: “The auto industry is the backbone of American manufacturing. It is a huge employer across many states. Millions of people, directly or indirectly, are reliant on that industry, and so I don’t think it’s an option to simply allow it to collapse.”

Noting the US budget deficit might exceed $1,000bn (€785bn) even before his campaign promises and new spending plans were taken into account, factored in, Mr Obama said: “We understand that we’ve got to provide a blood infusion to the patient right now to make sure that the patient is stabilised.

“And that means that we can’t worry short term about the deficit. We’ve got to make sure that the economic stimulus plan is large enough to get the economy moving.”

Mr Obama has not to put a full cost on his plan but his advisers estimate it will be more than $700 billion (£477 billion) and could even top to $1 trillion.

The Mumbai Terror Attacks: Need For A Thorough Investigation

The Mumbai Terror Attacks:
Need For A Thorough Investigation

By R.H.

08 December, 2008

In all the confusion and horror generated by the ghastly terrorist attacks in Bombay, a dimension which has not received the attention it deserves is the circumstances surrounding the death of Anti-Terrorist Squad (ATS) chief Hemant Karkare and two of his colleagues, encounter specialist Vijay Salaskar and Additional Commissioner of Police Ashok Kamte. The major pattern of operations involved well-organised attacks on a few high-profile sites in Colaba – the Taj, Oberoi and Trident Hotels, and the less-known Nariman House – while a parallel set of operations was centred on Victoria Terminus or VT (now known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus or CST) station, Cama Hospital and the Metro cinema, in the middle of which is the police headquarters where Karkare worked. The latter is an area where foreigners are much less likely to be found.

Why is a Proper Investigation Crucial?

Hemant Karkare was engaged in unearthing a terror network with characteristics which had not been seen so far. The investigation started by tracing the motorcycle used to plant bombs in Malegaon in September 2008 to a Hindu Sadhvi, Pragyasingh Thakur; it later uncovered a cellphone conversation between her and Ramji, the man who planted the bombs, in which she asked why more people had not been killed. For the first time, the Indian state was conducting a thorough professional probe into a terror network centred on Hindu extremist organisations, this one with huge ramifications, some leading into military and bomb-making training camps and policised elements in the army, others into organisations and political leaders affiliated to the BJP. One of the most potentially explosive discoveries was that a serving army officer, Lt.Col. Srikant Purohit, had procured 60 kg of RDX from government supplies for use in the terrorist attack on the Samjhauta Express (the India-Pakistan ‘Understanding’ train) in February 2007, in which 68 people were killed, the majority of them Pakistanis. Initially, militants of Lashkar-e-Taiba and other Islamist terror groups had been accused of carrying out the attack, but no evidence against them had been found.

The hostility generated by this investigation was enormous, with allegations (refuted by medical examinations) that the suspects had been tortured and that Karkare was being used as a political tool, and demands that the ATS team should be changed. Chief Minister of Gujarat Narendra Modi and BJP Prime Ministerial candidate L.K.Advani accused him of being a ‘desh drohi’ or traitor, a charge that in India carries a death penalty, and the Shiv Sena offered legal aid to those accused of the terrorist attack, complaining that ‘The government does not save Hindus from terrorists, and if Hindus defend themselves, they are maligned’. In an interview shortly before he died, Karkare admitted he was hurt by the campaign against him. On November 26, just before the terrorist attack, the police in Pune received a call from an anonymous caller saying in Marathi that Karkare would be killed in a bomb blast within two or three days.

Just as attitudes to Karkare in society at large were polarised, with some admiring him as a hero – one Maulana went so far as to call him a ‘massiha (messiah) of Muslims’, an amazing tribute from a Muslim to a Hindu – while others hated him as a traitor worthy of death, attitudes within the police force too were polarised. For example, dismissed encounter specialist Sachin Vaze (who with three colleagues was charged with murder, criminal conspiracy, destruction of evidence and concealment of the dead body in the case of Khwaja Yunus shortly before the terrorist attack) was a member of the Shiv Sena who was actively engaged in the campaign against Karkare and in support of the Malegaon blast accused. Vaze and several other encounter specialists who had been dismissed for corruption, extortion and links with the underworld also had a grudge against Salaskar, whom they suspected of informing on them.

Hard Evidence or Pulp Fiction?

Given this background, and reports that are riddled with inconsistencies, it is not surprising that many residents of Bombay are asking questions about the exact manner of the death of Hemant Karkare and his colleagues. The earliest reports, presumably relayed from the police via the media, said that Karkare had been killed at the Taj, and Salaskar and Kamte at Metro. If this was not true, why were we told this? And why was the story later changed? Was it because it conflicted with eye-witness accounts? Indeed, under the heading ‘ATS Chief Hemant Karkare Killed: His Last Pics’, IBNlive showed footage first of Karkare putting on a helmet and bullet-proof vest, and then a shootout at Metro, where an unconscious man who looks like Karkare and wearing the same light blue shirt and dark trousers (but without any blood on his shirt or the terrible wounds we saw on his face at his funeral) is being pulled into a car by two youths in saffron shirts. The commentary says that Karkare ‘could well have fallen prey to just indiscriminate, random firing by the cops’, and also reports that there were two vehicles, a Toyota Qualis and Honda City, from which the occupants were firing indiscriminately.

Later we were given two accounts of the killings where the venue is shifted to a deserted lane without cameras or eye-witnesses. The first account is by the lone terrorist captured alive, claiming to be A.A.Kasab from Faridkot in Pakistan and a member of the terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba. According to him, just two gumen, he and Ismail (also from Pakistan), first attacked VT station, where they sprayed bullets indiscriminately. (Around 58 people were killed there, over one-third of them Muslims, and many more might have been killed if the announcer, Mr Zende, had not risked his life to direct passengers to safety.) They then went to Cama, a government hospital for women and children used mainly by the poor. According to the police, Kasab claimed he and Ismail had killed Karkare, Salaskar and Kamte.

The other account is by police constable Arun Jadhav. According to him, Karkare, Salaskar, Kamte, a driver and four police constables including himself were driving down the alley from VT to the back entrance of Cama (barely a ten-minute drive) in their Toyota Qualis to check on injured police officer Sadanand Date when two gunmen emerged from behind trees by the left side of the road and sprayed the vehicle with bullets, killing all its inmates except Jadhav. They then dragged out the three officers, hijacked the vehicle, drove to Metro junction and then Mantralaya in South Bombay, abandoned it when a tyre burst, and grabbed another car. According to police accounts, they then drove to Girgaum, where Kasab was injured and arrested and his companion killed.

These accounts raise more questions than they answer. Kasab claimed that a band of ten terrorists landed and split up into twos, going to various destinations, he and his companion going to VT. He said they wanted to blow up the Taj, as in the attack on the Marriott in Islamabad; yet we are told that only 8kg of RDX were found at the Taj, and even that was not used; contrast this with 600kg of RDX and TNT used to blow up the Marriott: could they really have expected to blow up the Taj? He said that the terrorists planned to use their hostages as a means of escape, yet there was no attempt at any such negotiations; at other times, he also said they had been instructed to fight to the death. He says he is a labourer from Faridkot near Multan and only studied up to Class IV, but it is reported that he speaks fluent English and that people in Faridkot village say they have never seen him. (Moreover, how did the invaders from the sea get one bomb to go off in Dockyard Road and another in Vile Parle, 25 kilometres away, at around 11.30 p.m?)

During his interrogation, Kasab said that he and eight of the operatives had done a reconaissance trip to Bombay a few months back, pretending to be students and renting a room at Colaba market, which is close to Nariman House. It is extremely hard for Pakistani nationals to get Indian visas, and they are kept under close surveillance by the police; it is also most unlikely that the Indian immigration authorities would be fooled by forged passports of another country. In that case, the Indian immigration authorities would have visa applications of nine of the terrorists including Kasab, and could match the photographs in them to those of the terrorists: has this been done? Later, Kasab changed his mind and said that the team who carried out reconnaisance was different from the team who had carried out the attacks, but they still would be traceable.

The events in VT and Cama and the back lane also put a question mark over his story. According to witnesses, two gunmen started firing at the mainline terminus in VT at 21.55 on Wednesday night, but at precisely the same time, according to CCTV footage, two gunmen began an assault on the suburban terminus. If the first account is true, there were four gunmen at the station: where did the other two come from, and where did they go? We are shown video footage, claiming to be CCTV but without the timeline of normal CCTV footage, of Kasab and Ismail wandering around the parking lot near the mainline terminus. This surely cannot be before the shootout, since the station is completely deserted; and after the shootout, Kasab and Ismail are supposed to have escaped via the footbridge from Platform 1 of the suburban station on the other side of VT: this, again, suggests there were four gunmen. Several people have pointed out that one of the terrorists in VT was wearing a saffron wrist-band, a Hindu custom. And even if Kasab and Ismail had been shown photographs of Karkare, Salaskar and Kamte before they embarked on their trip, how could they possibly have identified the police officers in a dark alley in the dead of night?

Witnesses in Cama hospital say the terrorists spoke fluent Marathi (presumably without a Punjabi accent). The gunmen killed two guards in uniform, spared a third who was in civilian dress and begged for his life saying he was the husband of a patient, demanded water from an employee in the staff quarters and then killed him. They then appear to have made a beeline for the 6th floor (which was empty) and the terrace, taking with them the liftman, Tikhe. 15-30 minutes later, six to eight policemen arrived, and another employee took them up to the 6th floor. The policemen threw a piece of steel up to the terrace, whereupon Tikhe came running down and told them there were two terrorists on the terrace. A fierce gun-battle ensued for 30 to 45 minutes, in which ACP Sadanand Date was injured. Panic-stricken patients and staff in the maternity ward on the 5th floor barricaded the door; nurses instructed the women to breast-feed their babies to keep them quiet, and one woman, who was in the middle of labour, was told to hold back the birth; but they were not invaded. Eventually the gunmen appear to have escaped, it is not clear how. If they were Kasab and Ismail, then these two must have been fluent Marathi speakers. And why would they have taken up positions on the terrace? Was it because they would have a direct view of the lane in which Karkare, Salaskar and Kamte were later supposedly killed?

The other account is equally dubious. In his first account, Jadhav said Karkare was in the second row of the Qualis, while in the second he was supposed to be in the front row with Kamte. In the second account, Salaskar was initially sitting behind the driver, but then asked the driver to slow down and got behind the wheel himself: is it plausible that an experienced encounter specialist would deliberately make himself into a sitting duck like this when they were in hot pursuit of terrorists? In the first account they were supposed to be going to check up on their injured colleague Sadanand Date, but in the second were supposed to be looking for a red car in which they had been told the gunmen were travelling. If the report about the red car was a decoy to lure them into an ambush, it is important to know who told them that the terrorists were in a red car. If the gunmen were firing from the left side, as Jadhav claimed, how was Karkare hit three times in the chest while Jadhav himself got two bullets in his right arm? Also, the only vegetation in that part of the lane has wire netting around it, and it would be hard for anyone to hide behind it. How did two terrorists manage to kill six police personnel, including Karkare and Kamte who he said were armed with AK47s and Salaskar, an encounter specialist who had confronted and killed dozens of dangerous criminals, without getting seriously injured themselves?

There was also an intriguing report in DNA on 28 November saying that Anand Raorane, a resident of a building opposite Nariman House, heard sounds of celebration from the terrorists there when the news of Karkare getting killed was flashed on TV: isn’t that strange? The same report quoted a resident of Nariman House and a local shopkeeper who said that the terrorists had purchased large quantities of food and liquor before the attack, suggesting, at the very least, that they were not pious Muslims, and that more than two of them were planning to occupy the place for a long time. Another DNA report, on 2 December, said that sub-inspector Durgude, who had been posted in front of St Xavier’s College, between Cama Hospital and the exit point of the back lane onto Mahapalika Road, saw two young men whom he took to be students and called out to warn them that there was firing at Cama. When they ignored him, he approached them, upon which one of them turned an AK47 on him and killed him. If Kasab and Ismail were there, who was firing inside Cama? Eye-witnesses in St Xavier’s saw a man shot and lying on the pavement in front of the college around 12.30 a.m., while about three gunmen stood over him: who was that? Various reports said that two to eight terrorists were captured alive. Now there is only one in police custody: what happened to the other(s)?

A careful scrutiny of all the reports available so far suggests, to this writer anyway, that the killing of Karkare and his colleagues was a premeditated act, executed by a group that had stationed snipers at various points along the general route between VT and the Metro cinema with a view to maximising their chances of a successful murderous assault.

The Objective: Shutting Down Terrorist Networks

These are just a few of the numerous questions being asked by vigilant Bombayites who find themselves thoroughly dissatisfied with the information that has been doled out. These are citizens who understand the importance of identifying terrorist networks and shutting them down, but doubt that this will be done by the authorities. Why are they so cynical about the possibility of a genuine professional investigation? The answer is that we have too much bitter experience of investigations in which innocent people (usually Muslim youth) are rounded up, tortured and even killed, while the real culprits are allowed to go free. Karkare broke with this dismal record, but now he is dead. When a person who has been vilified, slandered and threatened with death is killed in suspicious circumstances, it is imperative that a proper investigation should be carried out soon, before too much evidence can be manufactured and/or destroyed. If Kasab aka Iman disappears or is assassinated like Lee Harvey Oswald, or is executed, that would be further evidence of a conspiracy.

The government and people of Pakistan have as much interest as the government and people of India in eliminating the terror networks that have killed President Asif Ali Zardari’s wife Benazir Bhutto and thousands of others in both Pakistan and India. The terrorists, on the other hand, be they Islamist or Hindutva, have a common interest in destroying secularism, democracy and peace within and between the two countries. That is their precise agenda. Pakistani politicians have offered a joint investigation into the terrorist attacks, a far more sensible suggestion than the belligerent statements by some Indians accusing Pakistan of harbouring terrorists who are killing Indians. It should be obvious that a military conflict between India and Pakistan would be disastrous for both countries economically, while a nuclear war, which might ensue if extremist forces captured power in both countries, would have unthinkable consequences. If the Indo-Pakistan peace process is halted, as L.K.Advani advocates, the terrorists would have won.

Indeed, without a joint investigation, the terrorist networks behind this outrage can never be uncovered: how else could the names and addresses in Pakistan revealed by Kasab be followed up to the satisfaction of all parties? A team of Pakistani investigators should be invited to come to Bombay and interview Kasab. If he is indeed a Lashkar-e-Taiba militant, he will be able to provide invaluable information, and a team of investigators from India should be invited to Pakistan to pursue the investigation there. If, as some reports have indicated, he is not what he claims to be, that too would become clear. The Indian government owes it to the memory of Karkare, Salaskar and Kamte, who died fighting terrorism of all hues, to establish exactly where, when and how they were killed, identify their killers, and make sure that their work is continued. They also owe it to us, the public, who are the prime targets of all terrorist attacks, to carry out a credible investigation which identifies and puts behind bars all the mass murderers involved in this and other attacks.

The Third Reich of Dreams

The Third Reich of Dreams

Frank Berube

“Lose your dreams and you will lose your mind.”

Ruby Tuesday, The Rolling Stones

The dreamer is describing not only how one comes to accept conditions as they are but also the state of mind in which such acceptance grows. This consists of a readiness to be deceived and a tendency to construct alibis for oneself; once one has been conditioned long enough by the right combination of pressure and propaganda, he has become so receptive and malleable that all will to resist disappears.

During the 1930′s, Nazi Germany’s rise to totalitarian power was well under way. Warning signs of the terror to come was being felt by increasing numbers of people. Among them was a young woman of great courage and insight. Charlotte Beradt recorded and collected people’s dreams about the Nazi government’s domination of their lives; dreams that tell of the painful political realities of the emerging Nazi State. In his essay at the conclusion of the volume, published in 1966, Bruno Bettelheim remarked that it was a shocking experience reading this book of dreams and seeing how effectively the Nazis murdered sleep, “forcing its enemies to dream dreams that showed that resistance was impossible and that safety lay only in compliance.”

The following dream was dreamt by a man in his 30′s living in Berlin during the early years of Nazi rule. It demonstrates the potential of our dreamworlds to produce stories that reflect the psycho-political conditions under which we live. Something within us is registering these disturbing vibrations and sending out signals of danger to the frightened conscious mind.

The author of the dream was told by the Nazi authorities to report to the Berlin Railway Station on a Sunday morning to collect money for the Party. Before leaving he said to himself, “What the heck, I won’t be bothered.” So he brought along a pillow and blanket – no collection box – and took it easy.

After about an hour Hitler appeared, wearing high patent-leather boots, dressed as a comical cross between a circus clown and a lion tamer. The dreamer watched Hitler use exaggerated, artificial gestures to win the hearts of schoolchildren. Then he adopted a stern attitude as he lectured a group of older boys and girls. At last he turned to impress a group of old maids by acting coquettish. Suddenly the dreamer began to feel uncomfortable under his blanket. He grew afraid that Hitler would notice that he had no collection box – he might be recognized as one of “the group of those who pretend to sleep.” If caught, he imagined confronting Hitler and telling him that he doesn’t approve of concentration camps.

Hitler continued his appearances around the station with different groups of people, and the dreamer was amazed to see that no one seemed to be afraid of him. He noticed that someone even kept a cigarette in his mouth while talking with him, and many more were smiling! After completing his stint at the station, he picked up his pillow and blanket and went down the main stairway in the station. Then the dreamer saw Hitler standing at the top of the stairs, concluding his appearance with a song from the imaginary opera, Magica, making extremely theatrical gestures, which had the crowd mesmerized. Everybody applauded. He bowed and then went tearing down the stairs, looking foolish in his purple trousers and holding his trainer’s whip. Hitler passed by with no bodyguards and stood in line at the cloakroom like everyone else, waiting patiently to get his coat. At this point the dreamer thought, “Maybe he’s not so bad after all. Maybe I needn’t take the trouble to oppose him.” All at once he realized that instead of a pillow and blanket, he was carrying a collection box.

This dreamer sees Hitler as a manipulator par excellence – an animal trainer – and yet the big act that Hitler puts on works in the end: the dreamer begins to feel that things are not half bad and maybe he doesn’t have to worry about Hitler after all. Winston Smith, sipping his Victory Gin with tears of gratitude in his eyes, reached a similar conclusion about Big Brother, although he got there by a different route.  The average person struggling with their conscience in the face of dehumanizing conditions, is, like Orwell’s hero, “a hero who is basically neither good nor bad, up against the effects of a political system which in the end leaves open but one direction in which he can move – the one toward the movement.” Individuals are embedded in a repressive psycho-political system, unable to act independently or resist the forces that are propelling the motion of society in the direction of Nazi domination.

The Third Reich of Dreams is a book that tells a compelling and revealing story about the hidden side of WWII. It portrays how the German subconscious mind was invaded by totalitarian fear as the Nazi’s plans reached fever pitch during the 1930′s. The grooming of Hitler and his evil cadre, the rise to power of the Nazi State, and the mobilization of the country for Total War, were all carried out with cold-blooded determination and ruthless precision by human beings whose very souls had been violated and whose minds were controlled.

Beradt collected hundreds of dreams during 1933 through 1939, referring to them as “diaries of the night,” providing a view into the inner world of fear and confusion people were feeling as their personal integrity disintegrated and their lives fell apart. The dreams she selected for the book are drawn from the lives of ordinary people who found themselves confronting the mental terror of The Third Reich during the early years of the Nazi regime. These dreams show that this was a war on the human spirit. It was secretly about capturing inner ground and blowing apart the national psyche, destroying all the ground gained over centuries of psycho-spiritual development, doing away with a whole generation of artists, writers, and scientists, and burying the work of these creative people underneath the rubble and ruin of Total War.

As American citizens who live in the land of the free and the home of the brave, we should have learned from Nazi Germany that psychologically terrified people can be pressured into giving up their democratic rights and living in a police state, once their political power has been stolen from them and their lives have been turned upside down. We now know that Nazi propaganda was bolstered with psychotronic technology that fostered an atmosphere of psycho-political terror, desensitizing feelings and thought control. We have to remember that for over a decade, the frightened minds of average German citizens were unable or unwilling to resist the insane domination of Nazi terror, and so could not, or would not, think for themselves and question authority. The horrifying things that were happening were beyond anyone’s control, and so the public was swept along by overpowering Nazi propaganda and State terror, too much in fear to object to the abuse of power, or to do anything about the atrocities carried out against Jews and Communists or others who threatened to undermine The Third Reich.

The Nazis imprisoned and executed people whom they considered sub-human, and those considered enemies of the State. Getting the public to accept this, however tenuous their consent, is something not entirely explainable or understandable by simply saying that Hitler hypnotized the masses. How can human beings stand by and allow their government to enslave and kill people in such a brutal manner and find an acceptable justification for it? Such inhuman behavior cannot be explained merely in terms of people being numbed into apathy for the fate of their fellow humans and allowing themselves to be herded into the mass hysteria of a faceless mob. We must look for the causes of this herd mentality beyond the explanation of “nationalistic frenzy.” Racism and Ideology only go so far in explaining the soul-boggling horror involved in their participation in mass slaughter. Patriotism and Blood are the “front men” for the Nazi State, providing a vessel for the forces of the collective unconscious to pour into.

It’s because of the work of renegade researchers and writers like Charlotte Beradt that we are able to see beyond the conventional historical perspective and open our minds to reviewing controversial material, and hopefully coming to understand, however vaguely, the underground forces and occult underpinnings of The Third Reich. Propaganda and state terror carried the population along on a wave of animistic hysteria, with millions obeying the rules and regulations of the Nazi mental status quo. Yet, Beradt writes, “from the very beginning people from all walks of life and in all their fear and anxiety were able, dreaming, to recognize the aims and principles of totalitarianism and foresee their consequences, so that their dreams ring prophetic in retrospect.”

Today, sixty years later in the USA, the technology of mass mind control has vastly improved and is deadly in its effectiveness. Consequently, the population of the United States is in a worse situation in terms of being forced into mental slavery than were the inhabitants of Germany, Italy, or Russia earlier in the century. American citizens are facing the 90′s form of totalitarian fear, and just like the German people thought sixty years ago, we believe that it could never happen here. But it’s clear by now that the vast majority of Americans still do not possess an adequate understanding of how their minds work, nor are many citizens any closer to comprehending how the national psyche is being manipulated; in short, we’re unable to come to terms with the fact that our subconscious minds are being controlled.

Only century-spanning, trans-generational, psychic genocide can account for the subjugation of the mind that made possible the appalling events of the 20th century. Mass mind control technology has made leaps and bounds of progress over the past half-century; it has succeeded in keeping millions bound to lower levels of consciousness and a self-absorbed existence. Our minds are sinking into the paralyzing stupor of the mental status quo, while our freedom slips away from us and we come closer to facing the apocalyptic abyss that the German people faced over a half century ago.

The Mental Status Quo
There are many inexplicable things about our volatile century that beg understanding, that are more often than not left without answers, or even end up producing more questions. Nothing much can be understood without knowing oneself within. Our inner world is much bigger than we imagine, as our dreams allow us to see. There is a hyper-dimensional world of vast inner space within your mind that is beyond the reach of the senses, accessible only by transcendent means. This hidden inner world exists beyond the perceptual horizon of the mental status quo – it is the undiscovered realm of the deep psyche where our dreams originate. Unknown to the programmed mind, your awakened perception has access to other dimensions beyond the brain and the senses, and hidden somewhere in that vast uncharted territory is your inner self, your true self. But ego-bound people are afraid that if they sail too far beyond the perceptual horizon of the mental status quo (MSQ), they’ll fall off into an inner abyss, like the ships of the flat earth that sailed too far beyond the ocean’s horizon and plunged over the edge into bottomless space.

During earlier centuries, people from Europe knew nothing of the existence of the continent that would become known as America. These days we’re prevented from exploring higher states of consciousness by an ocean of unconsciousness that isolates us on an inner island, limiting our perceptual horizons to a short egotistical range. There are still too many people in this world who are unaware that these other dimensions of consciousness are part of our inner geography.

Be warned that there are political consequences for living in our own worlds, as life in Nazi Germany has shown us. As citizens of America we can already see ourselves losing our right to privacy, and we have to retreat further and further away from society in order to escape from the ubiquitous intrusions of the media and other silent invasions of our psyche. Soon there will be nowhere to hide and no privacy for anyone, and we will be facing the horrible political conditions faced by the citizens of Germany during the 30′s and 40′s as their world fell apart around them, a scary situation illustrated by the following dream.

In 1934, a forty-five-year-old doctor dreamt that he was relaxing on the couch after his consultations reading a book, when suddenly the walls of his apartment disappeared. He looked around and saw, to his horror, that all the other apartments didn’t have walls anymore either. Then he heard a loudspeaker boom, “According to the decree of the 17th of this month on the Abolition of Walls…”

Some time later he realized what had provoked the dream. His block warden came around to ask him why he had not hung a flag at his window. Putting him off, he thinks, “Not in my four walls…” In another dream he finds that the only real escape from the “Life Without Walls” was withdrawing from the public realm, because those who give in and go along become part of the Nazi scene and must surrender their autonomy and conform to whatever mental and social conditions that are required of them. “Now that no home is private any more, I’m living at the bottom of the sea.”

The Nazi MSQ
Conforming to the Nazi MSQ means that you’re going along with a set of rules for inner behavior – thought control – while conforming to political conditions means that you’re doing what the authorities say – social control. As a result of having to deal with the rules and regulations of the Nazi regime, people were being coerced into maintaining the mental status quo, a state-approved way of thinking and behaving that came to be known and practiced by everyone, because to say or do otherwise meant getting into trouble with the authorities and putting your life in danger.

The Nazi mentality provided the mind with the linguistic rules and regulations of the German MSQ, which enabled its citizens to think and speak in standard terms. This manufactured mindset channeled thought and conversation in the direction of conformity, and accounted for the underlying set of beliefs that made up the dogma of The Third Reich, a state-sanctioned view of reality.

In 1933 the author of the following dream was a 30-year old, liberal-minded, pampered woman with no profession. In the dream, street signs had been abolished and posters were set up in their place on every corner, proclaiming the twenty words people were not allowed to say. The words were listed in English, the first was “Lord” and the last was “I,” and the rest were unclear. This dream anticipates the radical restrictions on freedom of expression about matters relating to one’s identity and beliefs that totalitarian regimes have exploited during the 20th century. The posters were substituted for the prohibited street signs, conveying the idea that people had lost their direction, were looking for signposts in their lives, and were finding that they couldn’t speak about God or reflect on who they were. The dream is a parable that illustrates “the dialectical relationship that exists between the individual and the dictatorship.”

The Untold Story of The Unconscious Mind
“What if something should go wrong with the psyche?,” asked psychologist Carl Jung over 30 years ago. Jung was a cartographer of inner space and provided humanity with maps and charts of the lost realms of the deep psyche. Without the knowledge and inspiration of Freud and Jung and other pioneering psychologists, we would still be crawling around in the dark of the mind, classifying altered states of consciousness in religious terms and dumping any kind of transcendent experience into the psychotic and delusional category. During this century it became possible to study the psyche scientifically, enabling us to understand the subconscious basis of conscious awareness, whereas before this century you could only talk about the unconscious mind in occult or religious terms.

Telling the story of the unconscious mind is difficult because it’s not so easy to put into words. All the words that could be useful have been taken over by the authorities and corrupted to the core. The reason we find it so difficult to think clearly or speak coherently about the hanky-panky going on in the unconscious mind is because most of the terms used to describe renegade states of consciousness have been stripped of their original meaning and painted over with a glossy sheen. Dictionaries and encyclopedia’s give descriptions of altered states of consciousness and non-sensory dimensions of the mind like they were psychotic episodes to be neuro-chemically controlled or rendered inactive by psycho-surgery.

It’s useless to depend on words when they have so little power over the shackled thoughts of the mentally enslaved, who wouldn’t dream of leaving the prison even if they had the keys to unlock their cells. Talking about alien ideas is something so full of verbal booby traps that it just about ruins any chance of seriously investigating what’s really going on in any other world except this one. The terms used to describe our inner world as natural and sacred have lost their ability to inspire and guide us, because their meaning has been changed and now we have no structure of thought upon which to build an understanding of ourselves.

Controlling thought in this way reduces the threat that the mind might be led astray by renegade thinking, perhaps discovering the inner curtain and pulling it aside, exposing the shady dealings of the subconscious mind and putting an end to the long-running ego drama. Inner explorers who want to throw some light on the darker side are forced to use matches to illuminate the way, because orthodox religion, behavioral psychology, and materialistic science are drawing most of the illumination from these concepts through their domination of consensus reality and control of language. You can’t talk about mind control, can’t talk about a secret government, can’t talk about hyper-dimensional realities, can’t talk about hidden history, can’t talk about the age-long story of the Human Spirit, and you can’t so much as whisper the naked truth that a big chunk of our mind is missing. Whatever is enforcing unconsciousness must be very powerful because it will not allow any self-reflection or renegade knowledge to threaten its subliminal authority and challenge its hold on the conscious mind.

The Guilt of The Guiltless
The woman who dreamt about the twenty words that couldn’t be spoken considered herself to be quite self-centered, yet her dreams reflect a deep understanding of what was at stake if one surrendered their mind to the Nazis. She had a series of dreams between April and September 1933. Not long after her dream about God and Self, she dreamt that she was all dressed up sitting in a box at an opera house with several tiers, being admired by many people as she watched her favorite opera, “The Magic Flute.” When it came to the line, “This is the devil certainly,” some policemen came stomping in and told her a machine had registered that she thought about Hitler when she heard the word “devil.” She looked imploringly to the crowd for some sign of help, but they all just ignored her. She glanced over to the old gentleman in the adjoining box trying to get his eye, but he turned and spit at her.

This dream manages to capture the way so-called respectable people behave when they’re called upon to respond to unfairness and injustice in their midst. The opera house with its levels of curved tiers is filled with people who do nothing but sit there and stare straight ahead when someone who they could help is in trouble. Later, the woman described the thought-control machine in her dream as being electric with a maze of wires, envisioning remote-control devices and other electronic methods of monitoring and control that were coming into use during the 30′s and 40′s.

One night, after being deeply disturbed by radio reports about book burnings, in which the words “truckloads” and “bonfires” were used repeatedly, she dreamt that all books were being collected and burned. Not wanting to part with the copy of “Don Carlos” that she had since her schooldays, she hid it under the maid’s bed. When the Stormtroopers arrived to take away the books, they marched straight to the maid’s room, pulled the book out from under the bed, and threw it on the truck. At this point she discovered that she hid an atlas and not her copy of “Don Carlos,” and felt guilty.

When we dream, there are psychological mechanisms that censor our unconscious motives by distorting them, preventing us from realizing that which we do not wish to be aware. If people are being subjected to extraordinary conditions of control caused by political repression, their dream content will be distorted. One explanation is that the mind is attempting to alter the circumstances that are leading to surrendering control of our lives. Because of this self-censorship, many dream scenarios that deal with themes of submission and complicity have bizarre overtones, in an attempt to change the character of threatening thoughts before they manifest themselves in our dreams.

In her next dream, the milk man, gasman, news vendor, baker, and plumber are standing around her in a circle, holding out their bills. This did not upset her until she noticed a chimney sweep among them. The 2 S’s in the German word for chimney sweep, Schornsteinfeger, along with his black outfit, made him appear like a threatening gestapo character. It reminded her of the children’s game, Schwarze Kochin, holding out their bills with arms uplifted in the familiar gesture, chanting, “Your guilt cannot be doubted.” What had provoked the dream was that, just the day before, her tailor’s son showed up wearing the uniform of a Stormtrooper, to collect the bill she owed his father. She was outraged because, before Hitler, it had been customary to send the bill through the mail, and she demanded an explanation for a government official collecting the money. The embarrassed young man replied that it had no special significance, he just happened to be in the neighborhood and wearing his uniform when he stopped by. “That’s ridiculous,” she said, but paid the bill anyway.

The woman was aware of how the newly established block warden system functioned and how intrusions were sanctioned by the party uniform. Her dream indicates that she felt guilty about yielding to slight pressure and settling the account. A minor sin of omission, but a significant one, if it leads to more grievous abdications and lapses, “barely recognizable injustices” which keep building up, producing a repressed state of mind that is hard to describe. “The guilt of the guiltless,” comes from the accumulation of these tiny abdications and hiding them away in the subconscious, where they show up in disguise in dreams.

The Language of Consciousness
It’s simply not possible to think about and discuss matters of importance such as the survival of the life of the mind and the preservation of our democratic rights, if the terms and concepts used to describe psychospiritual freedom have had their original meaning squeezed out of them. Today, we cannot speak of threats to our inner freedom, because terms like mind control, secret government, conspiracy theory, the unconscious, paranoia, hidden history – have negative connotations attached to them and deflect the mind away from investigation and study. It’s an academic “given” that all these subjects are not to be taken seriously. The inner world beyond the borders of the MSQ appears incomprehensible to people who have never experienced other dimensions of their psyche. But there is no question that an unconscious realm of the human psyche exists. Its psychological conquest and subliminal colonization has been the deepest darkest secret of the 20th century.

Influencing how we think by controlling language keeps our thoughts safely within the bounds of the MSQ, leaving us quite content with ourselves and perfectly willing to spend the rest of our lives like this. Unable to seriously address things like psychotropic warfare and a global cryptocracy, is a good example of language controlling thought, because if you speak of these things you’ll be classified as a “conspiracy theorist” or you’ll be thought of as downright crazy by members in good standing of the MSQ Club.

The dream-author had several dreams that repeatedly dealt with the new environmental conditions of total control. The woman’s dreams pictured her neighbors sitting in a large circle around her, silent and expressionless, leaving her more imprisoned and lost in each one. Finally, one dream says it all by containing no images, only words: “Am going to bury myself in lead. Tongue is already leaden, locked in lead. Will lie immobile, shot full of lead. When they come, I’ll say, ‘The leaden cannot rise up.’ Oh! They want to throw me in the water because I’m so leaden…”

She had this dream on New Year’s Eve, 1933, after the traditional pouring of molten lead. Like the doctor’s dream of seeking refuge at the bottom of the sea, she wishes to become buried in lead, wanting to completely withdraw from the public realm and hide from herself in the process. These dream-fables are a warning of the insidious mental intrusions that are gradually taking over the consciousness of the people, interfering with the relationship one has with their inner self.

The profusion of prohibitive regulations, along with the steady control the population, were placing increasing pressure on people’s lives, which wore down their will and tore away their defenses, leaving many people compliant slaves at the feet of their mental masters in only a few short years. Yet while this may have been taking place imperceptibly, so that people became gradually accustomed to the takeover of their minds, their dreams were showing this process taking place quite clearly. All the small steps it took to get to this groveling position are there to be seen in their dreams. If one reflects on such dreams and discerns their wisdom, perhaps people wouldn’t allow themselves to become disconnected from their inner selves, and they wouldn’t make very good Nazis. Which is why even dreamland is invaded by The Third Reich.

The MSQ Renegades
Drowning people’s lives in prohibitive regulations drove some people to the brink and others into denial. If they had no way of dealing with these forces of coercion and repression, the only thing they could do is surrender to the authorities and submit their lives to the will of the Nazi State. But some people must attempt to resist these insidious intrusions into their minds and try to stop this domination of their lives by performing simple acts of defiance. Everyday refusals to take part in the ritual destruction of human dignity show the Spirit surviving in the midst of dehumanization. These are the free thinkers who the authorities fear the most, because people who have discovered their inner power and are willing to stand up to The Third Reich are more threatening to the stability of the Nazi State than all their other enemies combined.

The following dream was dreamt by a student whose brother had been arrested, which caused considerable strain and difficulty in his life. There was a party going on in a large building. People who could be arrested for political crimes against the Nazi State, for example degenerate artists and performers, one-time socialists, and relatives of concentration camp inmates, were all sitting in a small attic room, making fun of the well-dressed guests arriving downstairs. The dreamer crept downstairs and overheard someone say that the whole house was filled with tension, and that the stairs to the attic had caught fire as a result.! “The suspects have to be saved ” he yelled into the bedlam. But they only shrugged, “Why shouldn’t the suspects go up in flames?” Suspects are to be defined by the State, and so they get to say who are suspects. In short, everyone is a potential enemy of the state, lumping together internee and relative, artist and friend, activist and employer, into the single category of suspect.

Communists can be dealt with using terror tactics and political subversion, but ordinary people who are inner freedom fighters are another matter altogether. They’re not so easy to dominate and they remain a threat to the State by defending the Individual Human Spirit. They won’t allow their mind to be taken over by any outer authority and they will not participate in any activity where they have to betray themselves or hurt others. As long as such people exist, there is a force for the Nazis to reckon with that is beyond their capacity to deal with and control, because the inner worlds of these human beings have not been violated by the insidious effects of mass mind control.

The following dream, which occurred in the autumn of 1933, was dreamt by an elderly woman who was a mathematics teacher. In her dream it was forbidden under penalty of death to write anything having to do with mathematics. This woman took refuge in a night club, which in waking life she would never have set foot in. The place was filled with drunkards and prostitutes and the music was blaring on. She took a piece of tissue paper from her pocketbook and wrote down a couple of equations in invisible ink, all the time being frightened to death.

Her dream reflects how absurd it is to attempt to ban something that people naturally do everyday. When asked to comment on her dream, she replied simply, “It is impossible to forbid what they are forbidding here!” In her dream, she chose a nightclub to perform her act of defiance, someplace no one would expect to find her, and a place where other forbidden things are going on.

Sitting at a table in the dimly-lit club, she works with the tools of spies to copy the equations that will ensure that her profession survives the destructive forces set against it. As the environment is being transformed by the machinations of the Nazi State, people are becoming alienated from one another and disconnected from the activities that make up their daily lives. Individuals are being taken away from their communities and being turned into obedient servants of the Reich. Yet there are always defiant ones who resist becoming dehumanized, because they are keeping alive within themselves the flame of the Individual Human spirit.

The American MSQ
Our media-saturated minds are being anesthetized with overdoses of doublethink and overflowing mouthfuls of newspeak. And our beleaguered brains are being subliminally and vibrationally assaulted everyday, to the point of dangerous psychic depletion and extreme spiritual vulnerability. New dimensions of language are needed to orient our minds to hyperdimensional realities and to provide a para-linguistic structure to work with these renegade ideas. The transcendent dimensions of language that address the life of the mind are kept out of reach of our thought processes and continue to remain inaccessible to most of us. There are powerful occult forces keeping people unconscious, so it may be expecting too much to think that we could overcome our intense fear of waking up to the transcendent dimensions of our lives.

As Orwell warned, once you take over the language, there is thought control, and then it becomes impossible to think for oneself or question the authorities. What is needed is for each mind to take back the language and personally get rid of all the hype and trivia given to terms whose meaning relates to secret dimensions of consciousness and hidden aspects of history. We need a viable language that is equal to the hyper-dimensional realities it is attempting to describe. In a mathematical way, physics was confronted by the same problem earlier in the century, when its formulas and equations ran up against hyper-dimensional phenomena it just couldn’t explain with current theories. There had to be a bigger picture to see what was happening, and relativity and quantum theories provided that greater perspective.

With the new world order closing in fast, our language needs to undergo a corresponding revolution, as the written word attempts to define and conceptualize other dimensions of reality beyond the range of the MSQ and the prevailing consensus reality. There is no other way to approach this perceptual transformation of our minds: the power of the word – freely thought, spoken, and written. Our psycho-spiritual freedom depends upon their survival.

The Upraised Arm
During the 80′s & 90′s, American citizens have lost, and are still losing, more of our political power and rights through the encroachment on the freedom of the individual of frightening federal laws, but many of us are waking up to what’s going on behind our backs, or maybe I should say, beyond our comprehension. People today are confronting the same fear of unknown forces that the German people were facing during the 30′s, and the subconscious minds of individuals are registering the steady erosion of freedom and its debilitating effects on their daily lives. As the new world order is closing in fast, perhaps people in the United States are dreaming similar dreams.

Three days after Hitler seized power in Germany, Herr S., a 60 year old factory owner, dreamt that he was under so much pressure trying to reconcile his worldly ambitions with his conscience, that he “cracked” from the stress, “breaking his backbone,” leaving him a moral invalid, and no one even laid a hand on him. In the dream, Goebbels was visiting his factory and had all the workers line up in two rows facing each other. Herr S. had to stand in the middle and raise his arm in the Nazi salute. It took him half an hour to get his arm up, inch by inch. Goebbels showed neither approval nor disapproval as he watched him struggle. When he finally got his arm up, Goebbels said, “I don’t want your salute” then turned and went to the door. There the factory owner stood, arm raised, in the midst of his workers, only able to keep himself from collapsing by staring at Goebbels’ clubfoot as he limped out of the factory. As so he stood until he woke up.

This dream recurred many times and in one version, “The effort of lifting my arm was go great that sweat poured down my face like tears, as if I were crying in front of Goebbels.” And in another: “I looked to my workers for a sign of comfort but their faces showed absolute emptiness, not even scorn or contempt.” Finally, while struggling to lift his arm, his back – his “backbone” – breaks. This was a man with lifelong political convictions and who had a strong paternalistic attitude toward his employees. Through several demeaning episodes he is forced to humiliate and debase himself in his own domain in front of his employees, by having to submit to conditions that make him lose his self-respect, and through being coerced into conforming to laws that are unfair and immoral. Herr S. was once a proud man who commanded respect, but now “he feels alienated not only from all that is real in his life but also from his own character, which has lost its authenticity.”

Dreams such as the ones Beradt collected were dreamt by ordinary people confronting repressive conditions, who were looking for psychological ways of dealing with the silent impact of explosive social changes. Charlotte had difficulty gathering material because people were afraid to confide their dreams, and she often heard them say, “I dreamt it was forbidden to dream, but I did anyway.” She states that the dreams produced by German citizens during the 1930′s, unlike the dreams of the victims of wars and revolution of previous centuries, were distinctive in character and content, because “their origin in time and place is explicit: they could only have sprung from man’s paradoxical existence under a twentieth-century totalitarian regime, and most of them nowhere but under the Hitler dictatorship in Germany.”

At some point during her investigation, Beradt realized that these dreams were important seismic readings registering the debilitating effects of totalitarian stress on the minds and lives of ordinary German citizens. Looking at how each dream reflected a personal journey toward dehumanization, with the dream-authors backing away step by step from their former way of life, demonstrated to her that “the minor incident, the personally relevant factor, shows how Nazi totalitarianism functioned.” She wrote:

“It occurred to me from time to time that a record should be kept of such dreams, a thought that now became a plan. They might one day serve as evidence when the time came to pass judgement on National Socialism as a historical phenomenon, for they seemed to reveal a great deal about people’s deepest feelings and reactions as they become part of the mechanisms of totalitarianism. When a person sits down to keep a diary, this is a deliberate act, and he remolds, clarifies, or obscures his reactions. But while seeming to record seismographically the slightest effects of political events on the psyche, these dreams – diaries of the night – were conceived independently of their author’s conscious will. They were, so to speak, dictated to them by the dictatorship. Dream imagery might thus help to describe the structure of a reality that was just on the verge of becoming a nightmare.”

At the end of her book Beradt says that these dreams contain a warning, “the warning that totalitarian tendencies must be recognized before they become overt – before the guise is dropped … before people no longer may speak the word “I” and must guard their tongue so that not even they understand what they say, and before we begin to actually live the “Life Without Walls.”

Frank Berube has written several articles for Paranoia under the pseudonym “Disembodius.” He has now decided to come out. Please send your MSQ-oriented dreams to him at: Frank Berube, 562 Buffington Street, Apt. 7, Fall River, MA 02721.

The Time is Coming…WORLD PEACE! Part 1

more about “The Time is Coming…WORLD PEACE! Part 1“, posted with vodpod

Ex-ISI chief warns India of US’ ‘deceitful’ designs


New Delhi: Former Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) chief Lieutenant General (retired) Hamid Gul on Monday rubbished all reports that say that Islamabad has agreed to arrest him and hand him over to India.

Gul was reacting to a Washington Post report that claimed Pakistan has agreed to a 48-hour timetable set by India and US to take action against Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) and arrest at least three Pakistanis.

He has accused the US of starting a disinformation campaign against him for condemning the US.

Gul also warned India calling the US deceitful, saying the Indian public and leadership should beware of the US which is using it for its own purposes.

But on the subject of the involvement of elements from Pakistan in Mumbai terror attack, Gul demanded hard evidence.

“Pakistan government has clearly enunciated, we will punish the guilty and take them to task. But so far no bodies (of the slain terrorists) or faces have been shown. The arrested man (Mohammad Ajmal Amir Kasab) hasn’t been brought in front of the cameras. Evidence has to be there. One cannot start taking action on the basis of accusations alone otherwise there’s a risk of unleashing historical changes in Indo-Pak relations. There could be a watershed in the relation btw India and Pakistan,” Gul said.

Gul also said that India has a habit of blaming Pakistan’s ISI for attacks that are actually insider jobs.

“One knows that Samjhauta was another case in which Pakistan’s ISI was accused but it turned out to be the job of militant Hindus themselves who had killed 68 passengers in their train and that it was an inside job,” he said.

He also claimed that al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden was not behind the September 11 attack on the World Trade Towers in the US.

“Mullah Omar also said that we did not believe that Osama had carried out the attack. So that’s still a mystery and it needs to be resolved. Americans have still to set up a proper enquiry commission into this. It’s very important that (president-elect) Barack Obama would do well to set up an enquiry commission into this,” he demanded.

Gul said he had no contacts with the Pakistani Taliban and its leadership or with militant commander Sirajuddin Haqqani. He also said he was not in any way involved in recruiting youth from madrassas to fight in Afghanistan.

His remarks came after reports that the US plans to send names of four Pakistanis, including that of him and other former ISI officials, as also Pakistan-based groups to the UN Security Council for imposing sanctions against them for alleged links to terrorist activities.

“I have met the Foreign Minister (Shah Mahmood Qureshi) and asked him to protect innocent citizens like me. He said he would take it up,” Gul was quoted as saying by PTI.

The inclusion of Gul and others on the UN list would lead to freezing of their assets. The News recently reported it had accessed a secret US document that listed charges against Gul.

Gul, who served as ISI chief during 1987-89, said the charges that the US was bringing against him “are all lies”.

He said he had no contacts with the Taliban and al-Qaeda and his links to leaders in Afghanistan were “purely moral and academic”.

(With inputs from PTI)

Community campaigns for UN authorisation for strikes at Pakistan terror camps

Community campaigns for UN authorisation for

strikes at Pakistan terror camps

NEW YORK: The Indian American community has launched a petition campaign all over the country urging the US to support a resolution in the UN

Security Council that would permit strikes against terrorists camps inside Pakistan.

Thousands of people have signed this petition, which is being kept outside for signatures, at the scores of condolence meetings and candle light vigil in memory of the victims of Mumbai terrorist attacks, being held across the US in the past week.

“We urge the US to support a UN Security Council resolution to permit strikes against terror camps within Pakistan, in cases where they are unable or unwilling to act,” says the petition, which according to its organizers would be submitted to the US g overnment soon.

“There is a spontaneous response to this petition. Thousands of people have already signed it,” Kiran Desai, one of the community leaders and organizers said, at a condolence meeting held in New Jersey Sunday afternoon. New Jersey, alone has hosted at least 15 condolence meetings for victims of Mumbai terror attack.

Observing that the Indian American community is generally against a direct military confrontation with Pakistan at this point of time, the petition urges the United States to demand that Pakistan should close down all its terrorist camps.

“Pakistan’s failure to comply must result in declaration of Pakistan as a terrorist State by the US Government,” it said. It also urges the US Congress to cut all financial aid to Pakistan.

In the aftermath of the Mumbai attack, several other petition campaigns ha ve been launched by the community here. In fact, two of those petitions figured in top ten of

Another petition launched by the US India Political Action Committee has urged the US Congress that funding to Pakistan should be contingent on it extraditing Dawood Ibrahim, one of the region’s most deadly underworld criminals.

“We believe that in the interests of broader peace – America needs to demand that Pakistan close down all terror camps in its territory or risk losing US funding that has amounted to over $10 billion in US Tax payer dollars since 9/11,” the petition said.

Israel allows no dual citizens in its government. Why does America?

Israel allows no dual citizens in its government.

Why does America?


16. If the speaker of the Knesset has called upon its members to make their declarations of allegiance and a member has not done so, that member shall not enjoy the rights of membership as long as he has not made the declaration.


Non-declaration due to dual-citizenship (Amendment 22)

If a Knesset member holds an additional, non-Israeli citizenship, and the laws of the country whose citizenship he holds permit him to be released from such citizenship, he shall not declare allegiance until after he has done everything required on his part to be released from such citizenship, and he shall not enjoy the rights of a Knesset member until he makes his declaration.

Terrorist Attack in Mumbai, India: When There Is a Conflict Between Factions, Why Are Jews a Target?


Terrorist Attack in Mumbai, India: When There Is a

Conflict Between Factions, Why Are Jews a Target?

Author : True Torah Jews

Category : Press Release

WASHINGTON, Dec. 7 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Together with all of the Jewish people, we mourn the indescribable loss of all those murdered in Mumbai, India, and in particular our Jewish brethren, precious souls. The unforgettable noble soul Rabbi Aryeh Leibush Teitelbaum of blessed memory, a strong follower of True Torah Jews Against Zionism, and a relative of that famous champion of the anti-Zionist cause, Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum; the well-respected Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg; Rebbetzin Rivkah Holtzberg; Benzion Korman; and other Jews. They were all murdered in cold blood by the hands of the terrorists. G-d will certainly take revenge on all who kill innocent people, and especially such precious souls, no matter what their justification was for such a heinous crime. Whoever does not respect the life of G-d's creations will have to face Heavenly retribution on the great and awesome Day of Judgment.

The question, however, is: what was the motive of the terrorists in attacking a small Jewish synagogue with a few Jews in it, when they could have attacked a large hotel or other public place and claimed many more victims?

The answer: Zionism!

Please read the following words of the only surviving terrorist, excerpted from the Times of India:

Kasab has told police that they were sent with a specific mission of targeting Israelis to avenge atrocities on Palestinians. This was why they targeted Nariman House, a complex meant for Israelis. Sources said Kasab's colleagues, killed in the operation, had stayed in Nariman House earlier.

Click here to read the full story

Read the words of the Wall Street Journal:

One of the assailants, who identified himself as Imran Babar and said his unit contained six militants, used Mr. Holtzberg's cellphone to call a popular Indian TV show on Thursday. In the call, he fumed about a recent visit by Major-General Avi Mizrahi, head of Israel's Ground Forces Command, to the disputed Indian state of Kashmir, a predominantly Muslim area where Indian forces are battling an Islamic insurgency.

Click here to read the full story.

Zionism has already brought so many misfortunes upon Jews, and they have their share in this tragedy as well.

From this tragedy we also see the obligation of the hour and the importance of making known to the entire world that Zionists do not represent Jews. True Torah Jews did not create the State of Israel, and have no connection to it. We do not vote in its elections; we do not accept their monetary benefits. It is therefore a terrible crime to blame the Jewish people in general for their actions.

At the same time, we wish to protest against the Zionists shameful act of desecration of the victims' bodies. They draped their coffins with Zionist flags, and made their funerals into a sensational Zionist ceremony, with the purpose of gaining political capital at the victim's expense. How can we bear the pain of the Teitelbaum family, who unceasingly pleaded with the Zionist officials not to hold these ceremonies? What happened would have certainly offended the deceased Aryeh Leibush. Sources say that the family offered to pay for a private plane to fly Aryeh Leibush's body to the Holy Land for burial, so that he would not have to go in the Zionist air force jet.

But all their entreaties fell on deaf ears.

Rabbi Aryeh Leibush Teitelbaum grew up in the Satmar Chassidic community in New York, a community well known for its anti-Zionist stance. He married the daughter of the Rebbe of Toldos Avraham Yitzchok, also a well known anti-Zionist group. He was an American-born Jew living in Jerusalem, and he never chose to become an Israeli citizen. He never accepted government benefits, although he needed money to support his large family of children. Instead he earned his livelihood by traveling around the world working for kosher supervising agencies.

In short, he was a strong opponent of the Zionist state, yet unfortunately, as he was laid to eternal rest, he was dealt a disgraceful blow. "For Orthodox Jews, who believe in the Afterlife, it is clear that such treatment is like a second death" said Rabbi Hersh Lowenthal

Our message to the Zionists is:

Haratzachta vegam yarashta?

Have you killed this man and inherited him as well? Is it not enough that he died as an innocent casualty of your conflict? Do you have to reap benefit from his death too?

May we be privileged to see the redemption, when there will be peace throughout the world.

SOURCE  True Torah Jews

Ariel Sharon – A True Zionist


Sharon – A True Zionist

“Even today I am willing to volunteer to do the dirty work for Israel, to Kill as many Arabs as necessary, to Deport them, to Expel and Burn them, to have everyone Hate us, to pull the rug from underneath the feet of the Diaspora Jews, so that they will be Forced to run to us crying. Even if it means Blowing up One or Two Synagogues here and there, I don’t care.”

- Israeli PM Ariel Sharon, 1982

Obama & The Neocon Middle East War Agenda


Obama & The Neocon Middle East War Agenda

By Stephen Sniegoski

Many Americans, in fact, many people in the world are under the impression that Obama’s policies will be the antithesis of those of the Bush administration. But his recent appointees would tend to bring forth the opposite question: To what extent is Obama a neocon? Well, he is not a 100 percenter like McCain. But he is oriented in that direction, as illustrated by the people he has selected.

While only a very few neocons such as Ken Adelman backed Obama before the election, many neoconservatives are now elated by his picks. As neocon Max Boot writes: “I have to admit that I am gobsmacked by these appointments , most of which could just as easily have come from a President McCain.” Almost as euphoric is David Brooks: “Believe me, I’m trying not to join in the vast, heaving O-phoria now sweeping the coastal haute bourgeoisie. But the personnel decisions have been superb. The events of the past two weeks should be reassuring to anybody who feared that Obama would veer to the left or would suffer self-inflicted wounds because of his inexperience. He’s off to a start that nearly justifies the hype.” “I’m relieved,” Richard Perle commented, “Contrary to expectations, I don’t think we would see a lot of change.” Neocon Mona Charen opines: “Superstition almost forbids me to comment on President-elect Obama’s appointments thus far. The news has been so shockingly welcome that I’m almost afraid to remark on it for fear of breaking the spell.”

Journalist Robert Dreyfuss observes that an Obama administration probably won’t be like the neocons on Iraq-and will remove combat troops over time (well, maybe)—and will not spout the bellicose rhetoric of the Bush administration. And there will be more cooperation with the international community. However, the central issue of the neocons and Israel today is Iran. And, on Iran, there is a very hawkish tinge to his administration. Remember, how Hillary talked about destroying Iran if it attacked Israel. Dreyfuss writes: “When it comes to Iran, however, it’s far too early to dismiss the hawks. To be sure, they are now plying their trade from outside the corridors of power, but they have more friends inside the Obama camp than most people realize.

Several top advisers to Obama ­ including Tony Lake, UN Ambassador-designate Susan Rice, Tom Daschle, and Dennis Ross, along with leading Democratic hawks like Richard Holbrooke, close to Vice-President-elect Joe Biden or Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton ­ have made common cause with war-minded think-tank hawks at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), and other hardline institutes.” Dreyfuss shows that these individuals have continued to be close to the neocons. He writes “Organizations like WINEP, AIPAC, AEI, BPC, and UANI see it as their mission to push the United States toward a showdown with Iran. Don’t sell them short. Those who believe that such a confrontation would be inconceivable under President Obama ought to ask Tony Lake, Susan Rice, Dennis Ross, Tom Daschle, and Richard Holbrooke whether they agree ­ and, if so, why they’re still palling around with neoconservative hardliners.”

I think that it is also the case that the neocons have successfully moved the mainstream in their direction, despite the fiasco of the Iraq war. Will Obama opt for war with Iran? Though not by any means a certainly, it is not out of the question either. The following is a possible scenario.

I would expect that initially the Obama administration will have to focus almost totally on the economy, with foreign policy put on the back burner. When all the business/financial bailouts and stimulus packages fail to rejuvenate the economy, then will be time to make use of the war card.

Continued poor economic conditions could provide the political incentive to divert attention away from the domestic arena to wars abroad. Obama, with the image of being a man of peace, would have greater credibility with the American people in pursuing a hardline policy toward Iran than either Bush or McCain, especially after he would pursue an effort at diplomacy, without offering any substantial quid pro quo to Iran.

And Obama would be pushed in this direction by the neocons outside his administration and the hawks within.

Once diplomacy broke down, tougher measures would be portrayed as the only alternative with an allegedly intransigent foe. Policies such as a naval blockade would likely lead to military confrontations and the justification for the US air attack on Iran. The Iranian response (such as an effort to block the shipping in the Persian Gulf) would cause a spiraling into a broader war.

I might add that I discussed Obama’s foreign policy picks on Press TV. The show was “American Dream” and I was on a panel with an AEI person and a Democratic Party operative. Except for my physical appearance, I think I did fairly well in the discussion.

The program also mentioned my book, “The Transparent Cabal: The Neoconservative Agenda, War in the Middle East, and the National Interest of Israel”

Press TV Interview Video

It was the Nov. 25 show. To view you must hit “windows media player”

PressTV is funded by the Iranian government but it has numerous Establishment participants, including neoconservatives, who are hostile toward Iran. The “American Dream” is an illustration. The host of the program, Elliott Francis, is an African-American television journalist.

Here is Wikipedia’s description:

Elliott Francis is a Washington, D.C.-based television journalist

Elliott Francis brings more than 25 years of experience in news reporting to his role as co-anchor for ABC-7′s Weekend News. An Emmy Award winning journalist, and former anchor and regional correspondent for The Fox News Channel, Elliott has sparked compelling and informative conversation with many top newsmakers and celebrities.

Americans behind Pogroms in Hebron

The video below shows the pogrom by the illegal jewish colonists in Hebron in the West Bank against Palestinians. Many if not most of these terrorists are US citizens. Many others are citizens of England, France, Germany, what the authorities of these countries know very well, but despite their extensive laws against terrorism, not only tolerate, but they also allow these terrorists to solicit funds and run recruitment operations.

The last example of this shameless kind of criminals is the American Morris Abraham: after even the Israeli courts rejected the claims of property to the building of the Al-Rajabi family, because the documents used to substantiate the claim to the property were obvious falsifications, the colonists around Baruch Marzel “imported” this American citizen from New York, who claims that he is the descendant of a jewish family expelled from Hebron in the 1920s and that the property belongs to him. Neither claim can be verified independently, and both are most probably preposterous. What IS verifiable about Mr. Abraham is that he finances the terrorist activities of the jewish colonizers in Hebron, which this time have surpassed everything they did in the past. Is it not time that the USA put him and others like him in jail for financing international terrorism, and have all their their assets frozen?

Spread and distribute WIDELY!

Fayez-Al-RajabiFootage filmed by Jamal Abu-Sa’ifan, a Palestinian resident of Hebron, documenting a terrorist Israeli settler shooting two members of his family.

The event occurs following the eviction settlers from a Palestinian house they occupied in Hebron. Settlers attacked the nearby house of the Abu-Se’ifan family, and during ensuing clashes, a settler fired his handgun at Hosni Abu-Se’ifan (40), who was hit in the chest and is in stable condition, and his father, ‘Abd al-Hai Abu-Sa’ifan (65) who was moderately wounded in his arm. The two were taken to a Hebron hospital. The video shows other members of the family manage to overcome the shooter, later more terrorist settlers from the nearby settlement Kiryat Arba arrives and the scene, and fires their weapon toward the Palestinian family.

Israeli “Auto Kill Zone” Towers Locked and Loaded

Israeli “Auto Kill Zone” Towers Locked and


By Noah Shachtman EmailDecember 05, 2008 | 1:00:00 PMCategories: Guns, Homeland Security, Sabras

E2ca3bc6713642d99f3d33082d3d7072lar On the U.S.-Mexico border, the American government has been trying, with limited success, to set up a string of sensor-laden sentry towers, which would watch out for illicit incursions. In Israel, they’ve got their own set of border towers. But the Sabras’ model comes with automatic guns, operated from afar.

The Sentry Tech towers are basically remote weapons stations, stuck on stop of silos. “As suspected hostile targets are detected and within range of Sentry-Tech positions, the weapons are slewing toward the designated target,” David Eshel describes over at Ares. “As multiple stations can be operated by a single operator, one or more units can be used to engage the target, following identification and verification by the commander.”

We flagged the towers last year, as the Israeli Defense Forces were setting up the systems, designed to create 1500-meter deep “automated kill zones” along the Gaza border.

“Each unit mounts a 7.62 or 0.5″ machine gun, shielded from enemy fire and the elements by an environmentally protective bulletproof canopy,” Eshel explains. “In addition to the use of direct fire machine guns, observers can also employ precision guided missiles, such as Spike LR optically guided missiles and Lahat laser guided weapons.”

Don’t fall on the wrong side of complexity, India

Don’t fall on the wrong side of complexity, India

—Moeed Yusuf

India cannot conduct an air strike without at the very least planning seriously for a potential Pakistani response, and in turn, further escalation. This is because for Pakistan, the ultimate way to put pressure on India is to threaten, indeed execute, a response that initiates movement along the escalation ladder

Senator John McCain, on a daylong visit to Pakistan along with two other US senators, brought a stern message from New Delhi. Mr McCain was quoted as saying that if Pakistan did not fulfil Indian demands, India was certain to launch air strikes.

The Indian media too has presented the possibility of an Indian air strike as an easy-to-execute, surgical option short of an all-out war. Some have even begun to invoke the US drone strikes in the northwest against select targets as a precedent for India to do the same.

This is a serious error of conflation.

Consider that in the northwest, the drone strikes serve what the Pakistan Army believes is its own cause — i.e., to target the lynchpins of militant networks. All strikes during former General-President Pervez Musharraf’s time were pre-cleared with Pakistan and while the Americans have upped the ante and ignored Islamabad’s sensitivities in conducting strikes in recent months, a tacit understanding on the permissibility of their actions remains intact.

An Indian strike would be a different story altogether.

The Army will be facing its traditional rival, inaction against whom would cause reputational concerns and alter once and for all the perceptual balance of power that has favoured Pakistan since the 1998 nuclear tests.

Moreover, with most key states having signalled clearly that they are amenable to India’s stance (although they would try to dissuade India from exercising the military option), Pakistan could, given the situation, hardly hope to score any diplomatic points by refraining from a similar response.

Finally, for Pakistan, the ultimate way to put pressure on India is to threaten, indeed execute, a response that initiates movement along the escalation ladder. As soon as that happens, the nuclear weapon equation will come to life and so will the superpower diplomacy designed to keep a lid on tensions.

Let us postulate how the scenario may play out.

India will choose a limited number of locations to strike within Azad Kashmir or Pakistan-proper, most probably in the northwest. The idea would not be to wipe out the militant leadership, which by now would have relocated from predictable targets; nor even to eliminate the alleged terrorist infrastructure. Rather, the strikes would be meant to ‘teach Pakistan a lesson’, reverse the claim of victory by the Pakistani military in the 2001-02 crisis, and challenge the impunity with which India claims Pakistan and elements within have used asymmetric warfare to prick India over the past 15 years.

In essence then, Pakistani inaction would amount to the success of India’s mission.

To thwart such a possibility, Pakistan is likely to engage Indian strikes — coming either from aircrafts or short range Prithvi missiles — using its air defence assets. Meanwhile, the air force would have to be ready for any eventuality in the skies. Moreover, to up the ante, Pakistan is certain to put its own missile batteries on high alert and even show exaggerated movement, perhaps through a mixture of real assets and decoys.

Apart from complete inaction, the above depiction would be Pakistan’s minimal response. Even then, it inevitably carries with it an escalation ladder whose top rung entails a nuclear calculus. This is so since both sides are bound to carry mutually exclusive perceptions of victory. Just as success for India entails conducting a strike without being met by a Pakistani response, any successful engagement or retaliation by Pakistan will be taken equally harshly by India.

In short, there is no room for a face-saver in a one-shot exchange. By implication, escalation would be a given as long as India initiates and Pakistan avoids complete inaction.

The nuclear calculus invariably comes into play since neither side can differentiate between each other’s strike assets in terms of conventional and nuclear delivery. While it is unimaginable that India’s initial strikes will be nuclear-tipped, New Delhi will necessarily have to include the nuclear dimension in calculating Pakistan’s response.

This is not to say that the latter will be rash enough to deploy nuclear missiles. However, if the escalation dynamic is unleashed and Pakistan does decide to respond beyond an attempt at air defence (this would happen if the air defence fails or if India ups the ante after a successful Pakistani engagement), employment of any kind of air or land-to-air assets in an escapade, no matter how limited, will bring to the fore the entire set of concerns frequently raised by proliferation pessimists — read high potential for inadvertent use of nuclear weapons.

What is being argued is not that the two sides will reach the nuclear rung. Rather, simply that both sides cannot be complacent about the threat of escalation; the calculations would be no different than in a scenario where an all-out conventional war is being contemplated. In fact, should a tit-for-tat response continue past the first exchange, both sides are likely to put their ground forces on high alert. That would then repeat the 2001-02 dynamic. The international community, led by the US would be forced to jump in to pull both sides back from the brink.

At this stage, the US would not only be concerned about the nuclear equation, but more urgently, the prospect of Pakistan pulling out its troops from the Western border. In all likelihood then, Washington would act as a relatively more neutral broker than it seems at present; it will continue to put diplomatic pressure on Pakistan but will also force India to ease tensions.

A number of lessons can be deciphered from this scenario. First, India cannot conduct an air strike without at the very least planning seriously for a potential Pakistani response, and in turn, further escalation.

Second, barring Pakistani inaction, escalation will be highly likely. Whether it spirals rapidly or stops at the level of first exchange, the situation will be inherently dangerous given the employment of dual-use air and land-to-air assets; proliferation pessimism will apply from the very onset.

Third, the situation sets up a self-defeating perverse incentive for Pakistan to escalate in response to India, both to avoid humiliation and to bring the international community to force India to call it a draw.

Fourth, it flows from the above that Pakistan should already be signalling clearly its intent to respond with force to any Indian move. At the minimum it should be conveyed unequivocally to Washington and New Delhi directly.

Fifth, no matter what the ultimate outcome, the South Asian powers would have played into the hands of the perpetrators of the Mumbai attack who wanted precisely this, i.e. force India to escalate, Pakistan to respond and mobilise on the eastern border and in effect ease pressure off from the Northwest. Pakistan pulling the troops will give them the much-sought opportunity to put their jihad against the US in top gear.

Sixth, even if Pakistan does not respond to India, Islamabad’s quitting will make the government extremely unpopular, a sentiment that would translate into street anger and thus destabilisation — just what the terrorist groups want to find recruits. It would still result in greater anti-India feeling which would feed into the objectives of the terrorist groups. This is hardly a situation the Indian planners should be aiming at — or, one dares say would like to materialise.

Finally, it must be noted that New Delhi faced virtually the same constraints when it was contemplating punitive strikes in Azad Kashmir in 2001-02. Better sense prevailed on that occasion. A sensible mind would realise the fallacy of acting rashly this time also.

That having been said, the media drumbeat and political pressure on the Congress party in India is quite acute. Inaction on New Delhi’s part would make this the second time in less than a decade that it has pulled back after huffing and puffing. Indeed, the militant enclave is eagerly watching, hoping that India takes the bait. If it does, India, Pakistan, and the US, all will have lost out to the vested interests behind the Mumbai attacks.

The writer is a research fellow at the Strategic and Economic Policy Research (Pvt Ltd.) in Islamabad and a regular contributor to The Friday Times. He can be reached at

Once Again, Pakistani Militants Burn More NATO Trucks

Pakistani Militants Burn 50 Afghanistan-Bound Military Vehicles

08 December 2008

Suspected Taliban militants have attacked another transport terminal in Pakistan’s northwestern city of Peshawar.

Pakistani firefighters extinguish smouldering trucks at a NATO container terminal near the northwest Pakistani city of Peshawar, 08 Dec 2008
Pakistani firefighters extinguish smoldering trucks at a NATO container terminal near the northwest Pakistani city of Peshawar, 08 Dec 2008

Monday’s attack was the second in as many days and destroyed about 50 containers carrying military vehicles destined for NATO and U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

Witnesses said the militants stormed the terminal, torching supply trucks and containers, and throwing grenades.

The U.S. military and NATO officials have said the recent attacks will have only a minimal impact on operations against Afghan Taliban militants.

The attacks fuel concerns that insurgents are trying to choke the supply route through the Khyber Pass, which carries around 70 percent of supplies for Western forces in landlocked Afghanistan.

On Sunday, suspected militants destroyed more than 160 trucks and military vehicles in Peshawar destined for NATO and U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

Local police say around 300 heavily armed men blasted their way into the terminals where dozens of trucks carrying Humvees (military vehicles), supplies, and fuel were parked.

Terminal manager Kifayatullah Khan told VOA the gunmen used rockets, guns and hand grenades in the raid, killing one security guard and burning all vehicles before fleeing the scene.

Last month, Pakistan temporarily closed the Khyber Pass supply route after militants hijacked 13 supply trucks traveling to Afghanistan.

Pakistan re-opened the route the following day, using security forces to escort supply convoys.

Kosovo: A European Narco State, Spook Playground

“The convergence of political, economic and security elites with organized crime syndicates in Western intelligence operations is the quintessential definition of the capitalist deep statethe deep state can be characterized by “the symbiosis between governments (and in particular their intelligence agencies) and criminal associations, particularly drug traffickers.”

Kosovo: A European Narco State

When three officers of Germany’s foreign intelligence service the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), were arrested in Pristina November 19, it exposed that country’s extensive covert operations in the heart of the Balkans.

On November 14, a bomb planted at the office of the European Union Special Representative was detonated in downtown Pristina. While damage was light and there were no injuries, U.N. “peacekeepers” detained one of the BND officers hours after the blast when he was observed taking photos of the damaged building. Two of his colleagues waited in a car and acted as lookouts. The officer named these two colleagues as witnesses that he was in his office at the time of the attack.

That office, identified by the press as the “private security firm” Logistics-Coordination & Assessment Service or LCAS, in reality was a front company for BND operations. Its premises were searched three days later and the trio were subsequently arrested and accused by Kosovan authorities of responsibility for bombing the EU building. As a result of the arrests, the BND was forced to admit the real identities of their agents and the true nature of LCAS.

A scandal erupted leading to a diplomatic row between Berlin and Pristina. The German government labeled the accusations “absurd” and threatened a cut-off of funds to the Kosovo government. A circus atmosphere prevailed as photos of the trio were shown on Kosovan TV and splashed across the front pages of the press. Rumors and dark tales abounded, based on leaks believed by observers to have emanated from the office of Kosovo’s Prime Minister, the “former” warlord Hashim Thaci, nominal leader of the statelet’s organized crime-tainted government.

When seized by authorities one of the BND officers, Andreas J., demonstrated very poor tradecraft indeed. Among the items recovered by police, the operative’s passport along with a notebook containing confidential and highly incriminating information on the situation in Kosovo were examined. According to media reports, the notebook contained the names of well-placed BND informants in the Prime Minister’s entourage. According to this reading, the arrests were an act of revenge by Thaci meant to embarrass the German government.

But things aren’t always as they seem.

On November 29, the trio–Robert Z., Andreas J. and Andreas D.–departed Kosovo on a special flight bound for Berlin where they “will face a committee of German parliamentarians who have taken an interest in their case,” according to an account in Spiegel Online.

More curious than a violent attack on the streets of Pristina, a city wracked by gangland killings, car hijackings, kidnappings and assaults is the provenance of the bomb itself. In other words, why would German intelligence agents attack their own? But before attempting to answer this question, a grim backstory to the affair rears its ugly head.

An Agency Mired in Scandal

This latest scandal comes as yet another blow to the BND considering August’s revelations by the whistleblowing website Wikileaks that Germany’s external intelligence agency had extensively spied on journalists. Like their counterparts at the CIA, the BND is forbidden by law from carrying out domestic operations.

According to Wikileaks documents, journalists working for Focus Magazine and Der Spiegel were collaborators in a scheme by the agency to learn their sources as well as obtaining information on left-wing politicians, including Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS) leaders Gregor Gysi and Andreas Lederer.

Indeed Focus Magazine journalist Josef Hufelschulte, code name ‘Jerez, wrote articles based on reports provided by the BND “intended to produce favorable coverage.” Wikileaks correspondent Daniel Schmitt and investigations editor Julian Assange comment that, “The document in general shows the extent to which the collaboration of journalists with intelligence agencies has become common and to what dimensions consent is manufactured in the interests of those involved.”

In November, Wikileaks published a subsequent document obtained from the telecommunications giant T-Systems. In addition to revealing two dozen secret IP addresses used by the BND for surveillance operations, the document provides “Evidence of a secret out of control BND robot scanning selected web-sites. In 2006 system administrators had to ban the “BVOE” IP addresses to prevent servers from being destroyed.” Additionally, Wikileaks revealed the “activity on a Berlin prostitution service website–evidence that intelligence seductions, the famed cold-war ‘honeytrap’, is alive and well?”

While the document does not spell out who was running the sex-for-hire website, one can’t help but wonder whether Balkan-linked organized crime syndicates, including Kosovan and Albanian sex traffickers are working in tandem with the BND in return for that agency turning a blind eye to the sordid trade in kidnapped women.

Kosovo: A European Narco State

When Kosovo proclaimed its “independence” in February, the Western media hailed the provocative dismemberment of Serbia, a move that completed the destruction of Yugoslavia by the United States, the European Union and NATO, as an exemplary means to bring “peace and stability” to the region.

If by “peace” one means impunity for rampaging crime syndicates or by “stability,” the freedom of action with no questions asked by U.S. and NATO military and intelligence agencies, not to mention economic looting on a grand scale by freewheeling multinational corporations, then Kosovo has it all!

From its inception, the breakaway Serb province has served as a militarized outpost for Western capitalist powers intent on spreading their tentacles East, encircling Russia and penetrating the former spheres of influence of the ex-Soviet Union. As a template for contemporary CIA destabilization operations in Georgia and Ukraine, prospective EU members and NATO “partners,” Kosovo should serve as a warning for those foolish enough to believe American clichés about “freedom” or the dubious benefits of “globalization.”

Camp Bondsteel, located on rolling hills and farmland near the city of Ferizaj/Urosevac, is the largest U.S. military installation on the European continent. Visible from space, in addition to serving as an NSA listening post pointed at Russia and as the CIA’s operational hub in the Balkans and beyond, some observers believe that Andreas J.’s notebook may have contained information that Camp Bondsteel continues to serve as a CIA “black site.” One motive for rolling up the BND intelligence operation may have been U.S. fears that this toxic information would become public, putting paid U.S. claims that it no longer kidnaps and tortures suspected “terrorists.”

When NATO partners Germany and the U.S. decided to drive a stake through Yugoslavia’s heart in the early 1990s during the heady days of post-Cold War triumphalism, their geopolitical strategy could not have achieved “success” without the connivance, indeed active partnership amongst Yugoslavia’s nationalist rivals. As investigative journalist Misha Glenny documented,

Most shocking of all, however, is how the gangsters and politicians fueling war between their peoples were in private cooperating as friends and close business partners. The Croat, Bosnian, Albanian, Macedonian, and Serb moneymen and mobsters were truly thick as thieves. They bought, sold, and exchanged all manner of commodities, knowing that the high levels of personal trust between them were much stronger than the transitory bonds of hysterical nationalism. They fomented this ideology among ordinary folk in essence to mask their own venality. As one commentator described it, the new republics were ruled by “a parastate Cartel which had emerged from political institutions, the ruling Communist Party and its satellites, the military, a variety of police forces, the Mafia, court intellectuals and with the president of the Republic at the center of the spider web…Tribal nationalism was indispensable for the cartel as a means to pacify its subordinates and as a cover for the uninterrupted privatization of the state apparatus. (McMafia: A Journey Through the Global Criminal Underworld, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2008, p. 27)

Glenny’s description of the 1990s convergence of political, economic and security elites with organized crime syndicates in Western intelligence operations is the quintessential definition of the capitalist deep state.

In Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, Peter Dale Scott describes how the deep state can be characterized by “the symbiosis between governments (and in particular their intelligence agencies) and criminal associations, particularly drug traffickers, in the stabilization of right-wing terror in Vietnam, Italy, Bolivia, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, and other parts of the world.” Indeed, “revelations in the 1970s and 1980s about the ‘strategy of tension,’ whereby government intelligence agencies, working in international conjunction, strengthened the case for their survival by actually fomenting violence, recurringly in alliance with drug-trafficking elements.”

Scott’s analysis is perhaps even more relevant today as “failed states” such as Kosovo, characterized by economic looting on an industrial scale, the absence of the rule of law, reliance on far-right terrorists (of both the “religious” and “secular” varieties) to achieve policy goals, organized crime syndicates, as both assets and executors of Western policy, and comprador elites are Washington’s preferred international partners.

For the ruling elites of the former Yugoslavia and their Western allies, Kosovo is a veritable goldmine. Situated in the heart of the Balkans, Kosovo’s government is deeply tied to organized crime structures: narcotrafficking, arms smuggling, car theft rings and human trafficking that feeds the sex slave “industry.” These operations are intimately linked to American destabilization campaigns and their cosy ties to on-again, off-again intelligence assets that include al-Qaeda and other far-right terror gangs. As investigative journalist Peter Klebnikov documented in 2000,

The Kosovar traffickers ship heroin exclusively from Asia’s Golden Crescent. It’s an apparently inexhaustible source. At one end of the crescent lies Afghanistan, which in 1999 surpassed Burma as the world’s largest producer of opium poppies. From there, the heroin base passes through Iran to Turkey, where it is refined, and then into the hands of the 15 Families, which operate out of the lawless border towns linking Macedonia, Albania, and Serbia. Not surprisingly, the KLA has also flourished there. According to the State Department, four to six tons of heroin move through Turkey every month. “Not very much is stopped,” says one official. “We get just a fraction of the total.” (“Heroin Heroes,” Mother Jones, January-February 2000)

Not much has changed since then. Indeed, the CIA’s intelligence model for covert destabilization operations is a continuing formula for “success.” Beginning in the 1940s, when the Corsican Mafia was pegged by the Agency to smash the French Communist Party, down to today’s bloody headlines coming out of Afghanistan and Pakistan, global drug lords and intelligence operators go hand in hand. It is hardly surprising then, that according to a report by the Berlin Institute for European Policy, organized crime is the only profitable sector of the Kosovan economy. Nearly a quarter of the country’s economic output, some €550 million, is derived from criminal activities.

Though the role of the United States and their NATO partners are central to the drama unfolding today, the BND affair also reveals that beneath the carefully-constructed façade of Western “unity” in “Freedom Land,” deep inter-imperialist rivalries simmer. As the socialist journalist Peter Schwarz reports,

Speculation has since been rife about the background to the case, but it is doubtful whether it will ever be clarified. Kosovo is a jungle of rival secret services. In this regard, it resembles Berlin before the fall of the Wall. The US, Germany, Britain, Italy and France all have considerable intelligence operations in the country, which work both with and against one another. Moreover, in this country of just 2.1 million inhabitants, some 15,000 NATO soldiers and 1,500 UN police officers are stationed, as well as 400 judges, police officers and security officers belonging to the UN’s EULEX mission. (Peter Schwarz, “Kosovo’s Dirty Secret: The Background to Germany’s Secret Service Affair,” World Socialist Web Site, December 1, 2008)

Into this jungle of conflicting loyalties and interests, international crime syndicates in close proximity–and fleeting alliance–with this or that security service rule the roost. It is all the more ironic that the Thaci government has targeted the BND considering, as Balkan analyst Christopher Deliso revealed:

In 1996, Germany’s BND established a major station in Tirana…and another in Rome to select and train future KLA fighters. According to Le Monde Diplomatique, “special forces in Berlin provided the operational training and supplied arms and transmission equipment from ex-East German Stasi stocks as well as Black uniforms.” The Italian headquarters recruited Albanian immigrants passing through ports such as Brindisi and Trieste, while German military intelligence, the Militaramschirmdienst, and the Kommando Spezialkräfte Special Forces (KSK), offered military training and provisions to the KLA in the remote Mirdita Mountains of northern Albania controlled by the deposed president, Sali Berisha. (The Coming Balkan Caliphate, Westport: Praeger Security International, 2007, p. 37)

But as Schwarz observed, why would the Thaci government risk alienating the German state, given the fact that after the U.S., Germany “is the second largest financial backer of Kosovo and ranks among the most important advocates of its independence.” Why indeed?

According to Balkan Analysis, the International Crisis Group (ICG) funded by billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI) and closely aligned with “liberal interventionists” in the United States, were instrumental in arguing that the United States and Germany, should guarantee “future stability,” by building up the Kosovo Protection Corps (TMK), the KLA’s successor organization, into a well-equipped army. Towards this end, the U.S. and Germany, in addition to arming the organized crime-linked statelet, have provided funds and equipment for a sophisticated military communications center in the capital.

Speculation is rife and conflicting accounts proliferate like mushrooms after a warm rain. One theory has it that senior Kosovan politicians were angered by BND criticisms linking KLA functionaries, including personal associates of Thaci and the Prime Minister himself, with organized crime. Tellingly, Schwarz reports, this “is contrary to the position taken by the CIA.”

Is the affair then, merely a falling-out among thieves on how the spoils will be divided?

The CIA: Drugs & Thugs International

As noted above, U.S. destabilization programs and covert operations rely on far-flung networks of far-right provocateurs and drug lords (often interchangeable players) to facilitate the dirty work for U.S. policy elites and American multinational corporations. Throughout its Balkan adventure the CIA made liberal use of these preexisting narcotics networks to arm the KLA and provide them with targets. In their public pronouncements and analyses however, nary a harsh word is spoken.

According to the CIA, by any standard Kosovo’s economy is a disaster, but that doesn’t prevent the Agency from seeing “significant progress”!

Over the past few years Kosovo’s economy has shown significant progress in transitioning to a market-based system, but it is still highly dependent on the international community and the diaspora for financial and technical assistance. Remittances from the diaspora–located mainly in Germany and Switzerland–account for about 30% of GDP. Kosovo’s citizens are the poorest in Europe with an average annual per capita income of only $1800–about one-third the level of neighboring Albania. Unemployment–at more than 40% of the population–is a severe problem that encourages outward migration. (Central Intelligence Agency, The World Factbook, November 20, 2008)

Needless to say, one unmentionable “fact” disappeared from the CIA’s country profile is the statelet’s overwhelming dependence on the black economy. I suppose this is what the Agency means when it lauds Kosovo’s transition to a “market-based system”! But as former DEA investigator and whistleblower Michael Levine, author of The Big White Lie, told B92, one of the wings of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) was “linked with every known narco-cartel in the Middle East and the Far East”, and that almost every European intelligence service and police has files on “connections between ethnic Albanian rebels and drug trafficking”. And dare I say by extension, the CIA itself.

One bone of contention which could have led Thaci and his henchmen to seek revenge against his erstwhile German allies was a 67-page BND analysis about organized crime in Kosovo. As Schwarz noted the dossier, produced in February 2005 and subsequently leaked to the press, “accuses Ramush Haradinaj (head of government from December 2004 to March 2005), Hashim Thaci (prime minister since January 2008) and Xhavit Haliti, who sits in the parliament presidium, of being deeply implicated in the drugs trade.”

According to the BND report, “Regarding the key players (e.g., Haliti, Thaci, Haradinaj), there exists the closest ties between politics, business and internationally operating OC [organized crime] structures in Kosovo. The criminal networks behind this are encouraging political instability. They have no interest in building a functioning state, which could impair their flourishing trade.” (WSWS, op. cit.)

Haradinaj, an American protégé, became Prime Minister in 2004. However, he was forced to resign his post in March 2005 when the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia indicted him for crimes against humanity. Among other things, Haradinaj was accused of abducting civilians, unlawful detention, torture, murder and rape. Schwarz notes he was acquitted in April 2008 “for lack of evidence, after nine out of ten prosecution witnesses died violently and the tenth withdrew his statement after narrowly escaping an assassination attempt.” Talk about friends in high places!

Mirroring evidence uncovered by journalists and investigators regarding the control of the drugs trade by 15 Albanian crime families, the Berlin Institute for European Policy laid similar charges against Thaci, stating that real power in Kosovo is wielded by 15 to 20 family clans who control “almost all substantial key social positions” and are “closely linked to prominent political decision makers.”

According to Spiegel, when the BND operation was run to ground with the possible connivance of the CIA, its secret network of informants, instrumental to gaining insight into the interconnections amongst state actors and organized crime were compromised. The BND’s Department Five, responsible for organized crime wrote a confidential report linking Thaci as “a key figure in a Kosovar-Albanian mafia network.”

Department Two, according to Spiegel, was responsible for telecommunications surveillance. In 1999, the BND launched operation “Mofa99,” a wiretap intercept program that targeted high-ranking members of the KLA–and exposed their links to dodgy criminal syndicates and Islamist allies, al-Qaeda. The program was so successful according to Spiegel that since then, “the BND has maintained an extensive network of informants among high-ranking functionaries of the KLA and the Kosovar administration.”

Functionaries in possession of many dangerous secrets and inconvenient truths!

As researcher and analyst Michel Chossudovsky wrote back in 2001, among the “inconvenient truths” unexplored by Western media is the close proximity of far-right Islamist terror gangs and planetary U.S. destabilization operations.

Since the Soviet-Afghan war, recruiting Mujahedin (“holy warriors”) to fight covert wars on Washington’s behest has become an integral part of US foreign policy. A report of the US Congress has revealed how the US administration–under advice from the National Security Council headed by Anthony Lake–had “helped turn Bosnia into a militant Islamic base” leading to the recruitment through the so-called “Militant Islamic Network,” of thousands of Mujahedin from the Muslim world.

The “Bosnian pattern” has since been replicated in Kosovo, Southern Serbia and Macedonia. Among the foreign mercenaries now fighting with the KLA-NLA are Mujahedin from the Middle East and the Central Asian republics of the former Soviet Union as well as “soldiers of fortune” from several NATO countries including Britain, Holland and Germany. Some of these Western mercenaries had previously fought with the KLA and the Bosnian Muslim Army. (Michel Chossudovsky, “Washington Behind Terrorist Assaults in Macedonia,” Global Research, September 10, 2001)

Fast forward seven years and one can hypothesize that the BND, stepping on the CIA’s toes and that agency’s cosy intelligence “understanding” with Mafia-linked KLA fighters and al-Qaeda assets, would have every reason to sabotage the BND’s organized crime operations–not that the German military intelligence service’s hands are any cleaner!

While we may never know all the facts surrounding this curious affair, one thing is certain: the role played by powerful Mafia gangs as a source for black funds, intelligence assets and CIA “agents of influence” will continue. Administrations come and go, but like motherhood and apple pie the shadowy workings of America’s deep state is an eternal verity you can count on!

Tom Burghardt is a researcher and activist based in the San Francisco Bay Area. In addition to publishing in Covert Action Quarterly and Global Research, an independent research and media group of writers, scholars, journalists and activists based in Montreal, his articles can be read on Dissident Voice, The Intelligence Daily and Pacific Free Press. He is the editor of Police State America: U.S. Military “Civil Disturbance” Planning, distributed by AK Press.

Indian paramilitary troops, police use force, prevent journalists from covering polls, protests

Media gagged, assaulted at Baramulla

Indian paramilitary  troops, police use force, prevent journalists from covering polls, protests

image Journalists run for cover after being beaten by the troops and police in Arampora village of North Kashmir’s Sopore, which went for polls on Sunday .

Izhar Ali

Baramulla/Sopore, December 7: At least six journalists, two among them were seriously injured in Arampora area of North Kashmir’s Sopore when paramilitary CRPF [Central Reserve Police Force] troops and police resorted to cane charge and fired tear gas canisters to disperse a group of people who were protesting against the conduct of elections in the state.

According to reports and eyewitnesses, hundreds of people mainly youth took to streets in Arampora village in this apple town and staged anti-elections, pro-freedom demonstrations. The troops and police that were deployed in strength resorted to cane charge and fired numerous teargas canisters to disperse the protesters. The journalists who were covering the event were severely thrashed by the troops and the policemen with bamboo stocks and rifle butts.

“Beat these media men, the people will then run away,” an injured photojournalist quoted a security official B S Tuti saying to his men.

“We were covering the protests in the area, when the troops and policemen pounced on us and thrashed severely. Had we not taken refuge in the nearby houses the troops may have caused harm to our lives,” he added

After the incident the troops and policemen deployed at Sangrama, enforced strict restrictions over the movement of the media persons covering the polls. No journalists were allowed to go to Sopore for covering the polls.

The journalists injured in the police action have been identified as , Mukhtar Khan (Associated press), Tauseef Mustafa( Agency France press), , Syed Muzaffar (Srinagar Times), Habib Naqash (Greater Kashmir), Bilal Bazaz (Imarat) Mohamad Afzal (ANI) and Fayaz Kabuli (Reuters)

In old town of Baramulla, the team of Etalaat covering the elections was harassed and threatened by a senior police official .The official blamed the team of provoking people to carry out anti-election, pro-freedom slogans.

“You leave the spot as soon as possible. Don’t create problems for us. Your presence in the area is instigating people and they are taking to streets,” the officer said.

He also refused to entertain the authority letter issued by the election commission of India to monitor the polls.

“Media persons are not allowed to enter the polling stations. You have to maintain a distance of 100 meters from polling booths while discharging your duties,” the officer said.

Meanwhile, the journalist fraternity has taken a strong notice on the assault on the media persons and demanded stern action against the troops and policemen responsible for the assault. The journalists have also lodged a complained with the police station Sopore.

State Chief Election Officer, B R Sharma has assured probe into the incident. Addressing a news conference at Media Centre, Srinagar, Sharma said that he has received complaints of assault by the forces on the media men performing their professional duties in Baramulla district.

“We have received compliant and ordered the investigations in this regard. A fair probe will be held,” Sharma said

“We will make sure that such incidents don’t take place in future,” he added

Creating an “Arc of Crisis”: The Destabilization of the Middle East and Central Asia

Creating an “Arc of Crisis”: The Destabilization of the Middle East and Central Asia

The Mumbai Attacks and the “Strategy of Tension”

by Andrew G. Marshall


The recent attacks in Mumbai, while largely blamed on Pakistan’s state-sponsored militant groups, represent  the latest phase in a far more complex and long-term “strategy of tension” in the region; being employed by the Anglo-American-Israeli Axis to ultimately divide and conquer the Middle East and Central Asia. The aim is destabilization of the region, subversion and acquiescence of the region’s countries, and control of its economies, all in the name of preserving the West’s hegemony over the “Arc of Crisis.”

The attacks in India are not an isolated event, unrelated to growing tensions in the region. They are part of a processof unfolding chaos that threatens to engulf an entire region, stretching from the Horn of Africa to India: the “Arc of Crisis,” as it has been known in the past.

The motives and modus operandi of the attackers must be examined and questioned, and before quickly asserting blame to Pakistan, it is necessary to step back and review:

Who benefits? Who had the means? Who had to motive? In whose interest is it to destabilize the region? Ultimately, the roles of the United States, Israel and Great Britain must be submitted to closer scrutiny.

The Mumbai Attacks: 11/26/08

On November 26, 2008, a number of coordinated terrorist attacks occurred across India’s main commercial city of Mumbai, which lasted until November 29. The attacks and three-day siege that ensued left hundreds dead, and roughly 295 others injured. Among the dead were a Briton, five Americans and six Israelis.[1]

Asserting the Blame

The 60-hour siege that engulfed Mumbai was reportedly undertaken by just ten, well-trained “commando killers.” Most blame has fallen on the heels of the group known as Lashkar-e-Taiba.[2]

At first, a previously-unheard of organization, known as the Deccan Mujahideen, took responsibility for the terror attacks when it sent emails to several news outlets a mere six hours after the fighting began. However, much skepticism remained about whether the group actually even exists.[3]

British intelligence then claimed that the attacks had the “hallmarks” of Al-Qaeda as it was undertaken in an effort to target westerners, similar to the 2002 Bali Bombings. British intelligence officials suggested the attacks were in “retaliation” for the recent US air attacks of suspected Al-Qaeda camps in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border region, and that India was chosen as the target because that is where Al-Qaeda has “sufficient resources to carry out an attack.”[4]

On November 28, India’s foreign minister said the attackers were coordinated “outside the country,” in a veiled reference to Pakistan.[5] India’s Prime Minister also blamed the attacks on militant groups based in Pakistan, which are supported by the Pakistani government.[6]

Then, the focus was put directly on the group, the Lashkar-e-Taiba, a militant Pakistani-based organization responsible for past attacks in India. American intelligence early on pointed the finger at this group, as well as identifying the Pakistani ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence) as its supporter.[7]

The Lashkar-e Taiba (LeT)

It is important to identify what the LeT is and how it has operated historically. The group operates out of the disputed territories between India and Pakistan, Jammu and Kashmir. It has close ties with the Pakistani ISI, and is largely known for its use of suicide attacks. However, aside from its links to the ISI, it is also closely allied with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. The LeT is even referred to as the “most visible manifestation” of Al-Qaeda in India. It has branches across much of India, Pakistan, and in Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh, South East Asia, and the United Kingdom. It primarily gets its funding from Pakistani businessmen, the ISI and Saudi Arabia. The LeT also took part in the Bosnian campaign against the Serbs in the 1990s.[8]

All the above-mentioned connections make the LeT the most desirable outfit to blame for the Mumbai attacks, as its Al-Qaeda connections, international presence and historical precedents of terror attacks set it up as the perfect target. Much like with Al-Qaeda, the LeT’s international scope could serve as a basis for taking a “war against LeT” to the steps of many countries, thus further serving the interests of the Anglo-American “War on Terror.”

Militant Islam and Western Intelligence – The Case of Yugoslavia

The LeT has not operated independently of Pakistani influence and finances. It’s close relationship with the ISI must be viewed in context: the ISI has a close relationship with Western intelligence agencies, primarily those of Great Britain and the United States. The ISI has effectively acted as a conduit for Anglo-American intelligence operations in the region since the late 1970s, when the Afghan Mujahedeen were created in collusion with the CIA. Out of this collusion, lasting throughout the 1980s until the end of the Soviet-Afghan War in 1989, Al-Qaeda was created, as well as a series of other militant Islamic organizations.

It is often stated that the CIA then discontinued its relationship with the ISI, and in turn, that the militant Islamic organizations broke off from their Western intelligence sponsors to declare war against the West. However, the facts do not support this. The ties remained, but the strategy changed. What changed was that in the early 1990s, the Cold War ended, and Russia no longer was the “Evil Empire,” and thus the excuse for an exacerbated defence budget and imperialist foreign policy receded. As George H.W. Bush declared, it was during this time that we would see the formation of the “New World Order.” And with that, there was a need for a new, elusive enemy, not in the form of a nation, but a seemingly invisible enemy, international in scale, thus taking the war to an international arena.

So in the early 1990s, Western intelligence maintained its ties to these Islamic terrorist groups. Yugoslavia is a very important case to analyze in relation to current events. The break-up of Yugoslavia was a process undertaken by Anglo-American covert interests with the aim of serving their imperial ambitions in the region. In the early 1980s, the IMF set the stage in Yugoslavia with its Structural Adjustment Programs, which had the effect of creating an economic crisis, which in turn created a political crisis. This exacerbated ethnic rivalries, and in 1991, the CIA supported the Croat move for independence.

In 1992, with the start of the Bosnian War, Al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorists began operating with the ethnic Bosnian Muslim minority in fighting the Serbs. In turn, these Al-Qaeda affiliated groups were supported with training, arming, and finances by German, Turkish, Iranian and US intelligence agencies; with additional financial support from Saudi Arabia. In 1997, the Kosovo War began, in which the militant-terrorist-drug trafficking Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) began fighting against Serbia, with training, arms and financial support from the US and other NATO countries. The CIA, German intelligence, the DIA, MI6 and British Special Forces (SAS) all provided training and support to the KLA.

Yugoslavia – Before and After Balkanization

The aim was in breaking up Yugoslavia, using ethnic rivalries as the trigger for regional conflict and ultimately war, leading to the dissolution of Yugoslavia into several countries, justifying a permanent US and NATO military presence in the region. [See: Breaking Yugoslavia, by Andrew G. Marshall, Geopolitical Monitor, July 21, 2008]

The Lashkar-e Taiba’s participation in the Bosnian War against Serbia would have in turn been financed and supported by these various Western intelligence agencies, thus serving the interests of Western Imperialist states; primarily those of Great Britain and the United States.

The LeT and Western Intelligence

The LeT has a sordid history of involvement with Western intelligence agencies, primarily those of Great Britain.

With the London 7/7 bombings [July 7, 2005] in which three underground stations and a double-decker bus had bombs explode on them; many of the suspected terrorists had interesting connections to Pakistan. For example, one of the suspects, Shehzad Tanweer, had apparently “attended a religious school run by the terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT)” while in Pakistan. Due to the LeT’s ties with Al-Qaeda, this allowed for the conclusion to be drawn that Al-Qaeda may have played a part in the London bombings, which were initially blamed on the international terrorist organization. The LeT also has close ties with the Jemaah Islamiyyah (JI),[9] an Indonesian terrorist organization, which was blamed for the 2002 Bali bombings, which also targeted tourists in Indonesia.

The Bali Bombings

Interesting to note, however, is that in the early 1990’s, when the Jemaah Islamiyyah (JI) was officially formed into a terrorist organization, it developed close ties with Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. Further, the organizations founders and leaders played a significant role in recruiting Muslims to join the Afghan Mujahideen in the war against the Soviets during the 1980’s, which was covertly directed and supported by US, British and various other Western intelligence agencies. The JI wouldn’t exist “without the CIA’s dirty operations in Afghanistan.” A former Indonesian President stated that one of JI’s key individuals was also a spy for the Indonesian intelligence agency, and that Indonesian intelligence played a more central role in the Bali bombings than the JI itself.

Bali Bombings

The JI itself, had reportedly been infiltrated by the CIA, Israeli Mossad, and that “the CIA and the Mossad, assisted by the Australian Special Action Police (SAP) and the M15 of England, are all working towards undermining Muslim organizations in an attempt to weaken the Muslims globally.” Further, one of JI’s key planners of the Bali bombings, Omar al-Faruq, was reportedly a CIA asset, and even senior Indonesian intelligence officials believed the CIA was behind the Bali bombings. The CIA subsequently “guided” Indonesia’s investigation into the bombings, which found the JI, and the JI alone, responsible for the attacks. [See: Andrew G. Marshall, The Bali Bombings. Geopolitical Monitor, November 15, 2008]

London 7/7

Much of the focus of the London bombings of July 7, 2005 (7/7), was focused on the “Pakistani connection.” The suspected bombers had all visited Pakistan, and apparently developed contacts with groups such as Jaish-e-Mohammed and the Lashkar-e Taiba. However, a less known and less publicized connection yields some very interesting information. The suspected mastermind of the London bombings, Haroon Rashid Aswat, had visited all the suspected bombers leading up to the attacks. Phone records revealed that there were “around 20 calls between him and the 7/7 gang, leading right up to those attacks.” Why is this significant? Because Haroon Rashid Aswat, apart from being an Al-Qaeda operative, also happened to be an MI6 agent, working for the British intelligence. Haroon also made his appearance on the scene of Islamic terrorism when he was in Kosovo in the 1990’s, where he “worked for British intelligence.”[10]

The Liquid Bomb Plot

Another event which brought to the forefront a “Pakistani connection” was the August 2006 London liquid bomb plot, in which terrorists supposedly were plotting to blow up nearly a dozen Atlantic airliners bound for major US cities.

The Pakistani ISI apparently helped in “uncovering” the liquid bomb plot, aiding the British in their roundup of suspects, and “tipped-off MI5.” One of the Pakistani groups accused of some involvement in the liquid bomb plot was the Lashkar-e Taiba.[11]

However, again, the suspected terrorists had been “infiltrated” and spied on by British intelligence for over a year. Further, the supposed ringleader of the bomb plot, Rashid Rauf, a dual British-Pakistani citizen, was pinpointed as the ringleader by both British and Pakistani intelligence, and was the link between the plot and Al-Qaeda. Rauf also has close ties with the ISI, and apparently had the plot approved by Al-Qaeda’s number two in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who formerly worked for the CIA during the Soviet-Afghan war. The ISI had arrested Rashid Rauf following the “exposure” of the liquid bomb plot, yet, in 2006, the charges against him were dropped, and in 2007, he amazingly escaped Pakistani custody, having “managed to open his handcuffs and evade two police guards.” [See: Andrew G. Marshall, Liquid Bomb Plot. Geopolitical Monitor: October 27, 2008]

Clearly, if the LeT is discovered to be responsible for the Mumbai attacks, its connections to Western intelligence agencies should be more closely examined and subject to investigation. The ISI, throughout its history, has not been the key player in supporting various terrorist organizations, rather, it can be more accurately described as a conduit for Western intelligence agencies to covertly fund and support terrorist organizations in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Terrorizing India

We must examine the current attacks with a backdrop of reviewing recent terror attacks in India.

1993 Bombay Bombings

March 12, 1993, Bombay (today, Mumbai) experienced a coordinated attack of 13 explosions, which killed over 250 people. A man with close connections to Osama bin laden and Al-Qaeda, Dawood Ibrahim, was believed to have been the mastermind of the attacks. He has also financed several operations of the Lashkar-e Taiba, and was believed to be hiding out in Pakistan, and receiving protection and support from the Pakistani ISI, which in 2007, reportedly arrested him. [See: Andrew G. Marshall, Political Destabilization in South and Central Asia: The Role of the CIA-ISI Terror Network. Global Research: September 17, 2008]

Mumbai Bombings, July 11, 2006: 7/11

Over 200 people were killed in Mumbai when seven bombs exploded within 11 minutes of one another on several trains. Blame for the attacks was placed with the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and the Lashkar-e Taiba (LeT), both of which have close ties with the ISI. The ISI was subsequently blamed for organizing the attacks, which were then carried out by the LeT and SIMI. The bombings led to the postponement of India-Pakistan peace talks, which were set to take place the next week. [Ibid]

Indian Embassy Bombing in Kabul, Afghanistan: July 7, 2008

On July 7, 2008, a bomb exploded at the Indian embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, killing over 50 people, and injuring over 100 others. The Afghan government and the Indian intelligence agency immediately blamed the ISI, in collaboration with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, of planning and executing the attack. Reports on the bombing suggested that the aim was to “increase the distrust between Pakistan and Afghanistan and undermine Pakistan’s relations with India, despite recent signs that a peace process between Islamabad and New Delhi was making some headway.”

Indian Embassy in Kabul

In early August, American intelligence agencies supported the claim that members of the ISI helped plan the attack, which they based upon “intercepted communications,” and that, “American officials said that the communications were intercepted before the July 7 bombing, and that the C.I.A. emissary, Stephen R. Kappes, the agency’s deputy director, had been ordered to Islamabad, Pakistan’s capital, even before the attack.” Interestingly, “a top Central Intelligence Agency official traveled to Pakistan [in August] to confront senior Pakistani officials with information about support provided by members of the ISI to militant groups.” However, the CIA knows of these connections, as it has actively supported and financed these covert ISI connections with terrorist organizations. So, what was the real purpose of this top CIA official’s visit to Pakistan?

Days after the CIA released this information to the New York Times, the US accused Pakistan of undermining NATO’s efforts in Afghanistan by supporting Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and further, “Mike Mc-Connell, the director of national intelligence, and [CIA director] Hayden asked Musharraf to allow the CIA greater freedom to operate in the tribal areas,” and was threatened with “retaliation” if he did not comply. [See: Andrew G. Marshall, Political Destabilization in South and Central Asia: The Role of the CIA-ISI Terror Network. Global Research: September 17, 2008]

The ISI and the CIA

Again, if the ISI is to be blamed for the recent Mumbai attacks, as it has played a part in several attacks and support of terrorism throughout its history, it is important to identify its relationship with the CIA.

The CIA developed close ties with the ISI in the late 1970s, as the CIA used the ISI as a “go-between” for CIA support of the Afghan Mujahideen. This relationship was also pivotal in supporting the Afghan narcotics trade, which again is rampant. The relationship between the two agencies continued throughout the 1990s, in areas such as Chechnya, Yugoslavia and India. [See: Michel Chossudovsky, Al Qaeda and the "War on Terrorism". Global Research: January 20, 2008]

A week prior to the 9/11 attacks, the head of Pakistan’s ISI was on a visit to Washington, D.C., where he met with several key policy figures, such as Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitage; Senator Joseph Biden, who is going to be Obama’s Vice President; and with his counterparts in the CIA and Pentagon, and several other officials. He was in Washington right up to and after the 9/11 attacks, and was engaged in several key consultations with US officials, pledging support for the US War on Terror instantly. However, the very same Chief of the ISI also happened to have previously approved of wiring $100,000 to the lead 9/11 hijacker, Mohammed Atta, which was also confirmed by the FBI. Thus, the ISI suddenly became a financier of the 9/11 attacks. Yet, no action was taken against the ISI or Pakistan, apart from the ISI Chief being fired upon this revelation making it into the media.

ISI Chief Lt.-General Mahmoud Ahmad

Of important significance is that this ISI Chief, Lt.-General Mahmoud Ahmad, was approved as head of the ISI by the US in 1999. From then, he was in close contact and liaison with top officials of the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), and the Pentagon. [See: Michel Chossudovsky, Cover-up or Complicity of the Bush Administration? Global Research: November 2, 2001]

Collaboration between the ISI and CIA did not end with these disturbing revelations. In 2007, it was reported that the CIA was arming and funding a terrorist organization named Jundullah, based in Pakistan’s tribal areas, with the goal of “sowing chaos” in Iran. Jundullah not only is funded and armed by the CIA, but has extensive ties to Al-Qaeda, and the ISI, as the CIA’s financial support for the group is funneled through the ISI, so as to make it more difficult to establish a link between the CIA and the terrorist outfit. [See: Andrew G. Marshall, Political Destabilization in South and Central Asia, op cit ]

As Michel Chossudovsky pointed out in his article, India’s 9/11, “In September, Washington pressured Islamabad, using the “war on terrorism” as a pretext to fire the ISI chief Lieutenant General Nadeem Taj,” and Pakistani “President Asif Ali Zardari had meetings in New York in late September with CIA Director Michael Hayden.” Following these meetings, “a new US approved ISI chief Lieutenant General Ahmed Shuja Pasha was appointed by the Chief of the Army, General Kayani, on behalf of Washington.”

Anglo-American-Israeli Intelligence and India

In mid-October, American intelligence agencies warned Indian intelligence warned India about an attack “from the sea against hotels and business centers in Mumbai.” Even the Taj Hotel, which became the key area of fighting, was listed as a specific target.[12] In late November, “India’s intelligence services had delivered at least three precise warnings that a major terrorist attack on Mumbai was imminent.”[13]

Immediately following the attacks, it was reported that, “Unprecedented intelligence cooperation involving investigating agencies and spy outfits of India, United States, United Kingdom and Israel has got underway to crack the method and motive behind the Mumbai terrorist massacre, now widely blamed on Islamist radicals who appeared to have all four countries on their hit list when they arrived on the shores of India.” Specifically, “Investigators, forensic analysts, counter-terrorism experts and spymasters from agencies the four countries are converging in New Delhi and Mumbai to put their heads, resources, and skills together to understand the evolving nature of the beast.”

Further, “Washington suggested sending US Special Forces for on-the-ground operations in Mumbai but New Delhi declined the offer, saying its own forces could take care of the situation.” This unprecedented intelligence cooperation was based upon the understanding that, “the manner in which the terrorists who attacked Mumbai are reported to have singled out Americans and Britons, besides pointedly occupying a Jewish center, has revealed that their agenda was wider than just domestic discontent or the Kashmir issue.”[14]

Shortly after the attacks began, it was reported that FBI agents were quickly flown to Mumbai to help in investigating the Mumbai attacks.[15] Israel also offered to send in its “crack commandos to Mumbai to rescue Israeli hostages held in a Jewish centre,” which was refused by India, which led to Israeli media criticizing India’s response to the attacks as “slow, confused and inefficient.”[16]

The Terrorists

Hours after the attacks began on November 26, it was reported that two terrorists were killed and two others were arrested.[17] Later on, reports surfaced in which Indian police had killed four of the Mumbai terrorists and arrested nine of them.[18] The international media was full of this reported capture of nine terrorists.

Interestingly, by November 29, the story had changed. All of a sudden, Mumbai cops had only “nabbed” one terrorist. This person has effectively become the nail-in-the-coffin for laying the blame at Pakistan’s door. As soon as this person was caught, he began to sing like a canary, and said that, “all [the] terrorists were trained in marine warfare along with the special course Daura-e-Shifa conducted by the Lashkar-e-Taiba in what at once transforms the nature of the planning from a routine terror strike and into a specialized raid by commandos.” He also stated that the terrorists “were made to believe by their Lashkar bosses that they were not being sent on a suicide mission and that they would be coming back alive.” He also revealed the names of his fellow terrorists, all of them Pakistani citizens.[19]

Along the same lines, another very interesting mystery of the Mumbai massacre is the early reports of British involvement. Shortly following the outbreak of violence, Indian authorities stated that, “Seven of the Mumbai terrorists were British Pakistanis,” and that, “two Brits had been arrested and another five suspects were from the UK.” Further, Blackberry phones found on the suspects contained “a lot of content” connecting them with the UK.[20] The Chief Minister of Mumbai had early on reported that, “two British-born Pakistanis were among eight gunmen seized by Indian commandos who stormed buildings to free hostages.”[21]

On December 1, the Daily Mail reported that, “As many as seven of the terrorists may have British connections and some could be from Leeds and Bradford where London’s July 7 bombers lived.” As a result of these revelations, Scotland Yard anti-terrorist detectives were sent to Mumbai “to assist in the investigation.” There was also speculation that one particular British Al-Qaeda suspect may have helped plan the assault, and just happened to be killed a week earlier in Pakistan by the CIA. That person was Rashid Rauf.[22] This is the same Rashid Rauf who was at first declared the mastermind of the London liquid bomb plot, who had close ties with the ISI and Al-Qaeda, who was subsequently arrested by the ISI, and then miraculously “escaped” from Pakistani custody. Barely a week before the Mumbai Massacre, Rauf was reportedly killed by a CIA drone attack on a militant Islamic base in Pakistan’s tribal region.

Early on, there was an incident in which a taxicab was blown up in Mumbai, with the driver and passenger killed. The taxi started moving through a red light when the car bomb exploded, which ended up saving the lives of “hundreds,” as opposed to if the car had moved when the light was green and intersection was full. This ensured that the only ones who died were those in the taxi.[23] This sparked an investigation into whether the driver “was aware that his car was loaded with explosives.”[24]

Why is this significant? Because this closely resembles tactics used in Iraq since the Anglo-American occupation of the country, employed by both US and British intelligence and special forces in an effort to sow chaos and create civil strife and war. [See: Andrew G. Marshall, State-Sponsored Terror: British and American Black Ops in Iraq. Global Research, June 25, 2008]

Means, Modus Operandi and Motive


While the possibility that Pakistan and the ISI (or Lashkar-e Taiba) are responsible for the Mumbai attacks should be taken into consideration, given precedence and means, we must allow ourselves to contemplate other possibilities.

While India and the west are placing the blame for the attacks on Pakistan’s ISI and the Lashkar-e Taiba, the Pakistani press is reporting on another possibility.

On November 29, the Pakistan Daily reported that, with a stiff side of anti-Israel rhetoric, that the Mumbai attack would be used “as justification for a US invasion of Pakistan.” It reported that the Israeli Mossad “has mobilized since 2000 in the Jammu and Kashmir areas of India, where the Indian government has been pursuing a ‘security’ issue with regard to the Kashmiri people.” It quoted a Times of India article that reported, “Israeli counter-terrorism experts are now touring Jammu and Kashmir and several other states in India at the invitation of Home Minister Lal Krishna Advani to make an assessment of New Delhi’s security needs. The Israeli team, headed by Eli Katzir of the Israel Counter-Terrorism Combat Unit, includes Israeli military intelligence officials and a senior police official.” There was also a reported agreement on “closer India-Israeli cooperation on all security matters.”[25]

Modus Operandi

Shortly after the start of the attacks in Mumbai, a Russia counter-terrorism presidential envoy stated that, “The terrorists in the Indian city of Mumbai, who killed more than 150 people and injured over 300, used the same tactics that Chechen field militants employed in the Northern Caucasus.” He elaborated, “These tactics were used during raids by militant Chechen field commanders Shamil Basayev and Salman Raduyev against the towns of Buddyonnovsk and Pervomaiskoye. For the first time in history the entire towns were terrorized, with homes and hospitals seized. The Mumbai terrorists have learned these tactics well.”[26]

Shamil Basayev, one of the Chechen rebel leaders, as well as many of the other Chechen leaders, were trained by the CIA and ISI in Afghanistan, in CIA-run training camps during the Soviet-Afghan war of the 1980s.[27]


On December 2, former ISI Chief Hameed Gul, said that the “Mumbai incident is an international based conspiracy to deprive Pakistan of its atomic power. Talking to a private TV channel on Friday, he said that to involve Pakistan in the incident reflected that some forces wanted to declare Pakistan a fail[ed] state as somehow it had become necessary to make Pakistan kneel down in order to snatch its atomic power away.” He elaborated that the method of attacks, and how the militants executed them, “seemed impossible without internal support.” He continued in stating that the “US wanted to see [the] Indian army in Afghanistan to disintegrate the country,” and referred to recent US maps showing a divided Pakistan in four parts, and that making Pakistan “kneel down” before the IMF was “part of a pre-planned trick.”[28]

As astonishing and outlandish as these claims may seem, the US has a long history of turning on its allies when they seek to become self-sufficient and developed, such as with Saddam Hussein and Iraq in the early 1990s. Also, it is vital to note the role of the IMF and World Bank in creating economic crises, and thus, political-social-ethnic instability, which invariably has led to all out ethnic war, genocides and “international interventions,” in countries such as Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

The International Financial Institutions (IFIs) often create the conditions for political instability, while covert Western intelligence support to disaffected and radical groups creates the means for rebellion; which then becomes the excuse for foreign military intervention; which then secures an imperial military presence in the region, thus gaining control over the particular region’s resources and strategic position. This is the age-old conquest of empire: divide and conquer.

Interesting to note is that in 2008, “Pakistan was again seeking IMF help. On Nov. 25, it won final approval on a $7.6 billion loan package after foreign reserves shrank 74 percent to $3.5 billion in the 12 months ended on Nov. 8.”[29] This loan was approved a day before the Mumbai attacks began. On December 4, it was reported that, “Tough conditions of International Monetary Fund (IMF) have now started surfacing as IMF and the Government of Pakistan (GoP) agreed to discontinue oil import support, eliminate power subsidies and budgetary support of the government, public and private entities. IMF and GoP have agreed to phase out the State Bank of Pakistan’s (SBPs) provision of foreign exchange for oil imports.” On top of this, “further steps will be taken during the remainder of the fiscal year to strengthen tax enforcement. Moreover, fuel prices will continue to be adjusted to pass through changes in international prices.” Further, “The programme envisages a significant tightening of monetary policy.”[30]

The results of these conditionalities are predictable: Pakistan will lose all subsidies; fuel prices will drastically rise, as will food and other necessary commodity prices. At the same time, a tightening of monetary policy and World Bank/IMF control over Pakistan’s central bank will prevent Pakistan from taking measures to curb inflation, and the cost of living will skyrocket as the currency value plummets. All this is going on while taxes are increased and expanded greatly, and public jobs such as bureaucratic positions, education, etc., are downsized or altogether disbanded. Money will likely continue to flow to the ISI and Army, which will create discontent among Pakistan’s deprived and disillusioned. A military coup would be likely, followed by rebellion en masse, which would in turn pit the various ethnicities against one another. This could lead to either a war against India, ultimately ending with a consolidated national security state to act as a conduit for Anglo-American imperial ambitions, such as in Rwanda; or, it could result in ethnic conflict and wars, ultimately ending up in the break-up of Pakistan into smaller states divided among ethnic lines, such as in Yugoslavia. Or, it could end with a combination of the two, a divided, warring, region engulfed in crisis.

The break up of Pakistan is not a far-fetched idea in terms of Anglo-American strategy. In fact, the plan for the destabilization and ultimately, balkanization of Pakistan has originated in Anglo-American-Israeli military strategic circles. As I previously documented in Divide and Conquer: The Anglo-American Imperial Project [Global Research, July 10, 2008], the destabilization and balkanization of the near-entire Middle East and Central Asia has been a long-held strategy for the Anglo-America-Israeli Axis since the late 1970s and early 1980s.

Divide and Conquer

This concept evolved in strategic planning circles in the late 1970s in response to regional nationalist tendencies in the Middle East and Central Asia, as well as a perceived threat of growing Soviet influence in the region. The central aim of these strategic thinkers was to secure Middle Eastern oil and Central Asian gas reserves and pipeline routes under the control of the Anglo-Americans. Control over these vital energy reserves is a strategic as much as economic concern, as most of the world gets its energy from this area; so those who control the energy, control who gets it, and thus, control much of the world. The economic benefits of Anglo-Americans controlling the regions energy reserves cannot be analyzed separately from strategic interests, as they are one and the same. Anglo-American oil companies gain control of the oil and gas, while the British and American governments install puppet regimes to look after their interests; and to act as proxies in creating conflicts and wars with countries of the region who act in their own national interest, as opposed to acting under the guidance of and submission to the Anglo-Americans.

Arc of Crisis

After the 1973 oil shocks, which were, in fact, promoted and covertly orchestrated by Anglo-American banking and oil interests, the oil producing nations grew very wealthy, such as Iran. As well as this, countries like Afghanistan were becoming increasingly leftist and progressive. Fearing possible alliances developing between Middle Eastern and Central Asian countries with the Soviet Union, as well as the even greater threat of these countries becoming truly independent, taking control of their own resources for the good of their own people; Anglo-American strategists turned to what is called the “Arc of Crisis.”

The “Arc of Crisis” describes the “nations that stretch across the southern flank of the Soviet Union from the Indian subcontinent to Turkey, and southward through the Arabian Peninsula to the Horn of Africa.” Further, the “center of gravity of this arc is Iran.” In 1978, Zbigniew Brzezinski gave a speech in which he stated, “An arc of crisis stretches along the shores of the Indian Ocean, with fragile social and political structures in a region of vital importance to us threatened with fragmentation. The resulting political chaos could well be filled by elements hostile to our values and sympathetic to our adversaries.”[36]

Anglo-American strategy in the region thus developed and changed at this time, as “There was this idea that the Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets. It was a Brzezinski concept.”[37] Bilderberg member, Bernard Lewis, presented a British-American strategy to the Bilderberg Group during the 1979 meeting, which, “endorsed the radical Muslim Brotherhood movement behind Khomeini, in order to promote balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. Lewis argued that the West should encourage autonomous groups such as the Kurds, Armenians, Lebanese Maronites, Ethiopian Copts, Azerbaijani Turks, and so forth. The chaos would spread in what he termed an ‘Arc of Crisis,’ which would spill over into the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union.”[38] Since the Soviet Union was viewed as a secular and atheist regime, having oppressed religion within its sphere of influence, the rise of radical Islamic influence and governments in the Middle East and Central Asia would ensure that Soviet influence would not enter into the region, as radical Muslims would view the Soviets with more distrust than the Americans. The Anglo-Americans positioned themselves as the lesser of two evils.

Bernard Lewis was a former British intelligence officer and historian who is infamous for explaining Arab discontent towards the West as not being rooted in a reaction toward imperialism, but rather that it is rooted in Islam; in that Islam is incompatible with the West, and that they are destined to clash, using the term, “Clash of Civilizations.” For decades, “Lewis played a critical role as professor, mentor, and guru to two generations of Orientalists, academics, U.S. and British intelligence specialists, think tank denizens, and assorted neoconservatives.” In the 1980s, Lewis “was hobnobbing with top Department of Defense officials.”[39] Lewis wrote a 1992 article in Foreign Affairs, the journal of the Council on Foreign Relations, titled, “Rethinking the Middle East.” In this article, Lewis raised the prospect of another policy towards the Middle East in the wake of the end of the Cold War and beginnings of the New World Order, “which could even be precipitated by fundamentalism, is what has of late become fashionable to call ‘Lebanonization.’ Most of the states of the Middle East – Egypt is an obvious exception – are of recent and artificial construction and are vulnerable to such a proc ess. If the central power is sufficiently weakened, there is no real civil society to hold the polity together, no real sense of common national identity or overriding allegiance to the nation-state. The state then disintegrates – as happened in Lebanon – into a chaos of squabbling, feuding, fighting sects, tribes, regions and parties.”[40]

Bernard Lewis’ Redrawn Map of the “Arc of Crisis”

A Foreign Affairs article of 1979, the journal put out by the powerful Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), discussed the Arc of Crisis: “The Middle East constitutes its central core. Its strategic position is unequalled: it is the last major region of the Free World directly adjacent to the Soviet Union, it holds in its subsoil about three-fourths of the proven and estimated world oil reserves, and it is the locus of one of the most intractable conflicts of the twentieth century: that of Zionism versus Arab nationalism.” It explained that US strategy in the region was focused with “containment” of the Soviet Union as well as access to the regions oil. [41]

It was in this context that in 1979, as Zbigniew Brzezinski later admitted, “According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.” He claimed that, “We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.” What a perfect example of what George Orwell would call “double-speak,” saying that the Americans “didn’t push the Russians to intervene” but rather, “increased the probability that they would.” In other words, they “pushed” them to intervene.[42]

This is when the Mujahideen were created, and through this, Al-Qaeda, and a variety of other radical Islamic groups which have come to plague global geopolitics since this era. Terrorism cannot be viewed, as it often is, in such a simple manner as “non-state actors” reacting to geopolitics of nations and corporations. In fact, many terrorist groups, particularly the largest, most well organized, extremist and violent ones, are “proxy state actors,” receiving covert support – through arms and training – by various state intelligence agencies. They are not simply “reacting” to geopolitics, but are important players in the geopolitical chessboard. They represent the perfect excuse for foreign militaristic adventurism and war; domestic tyranny in the form of developing police states to control populations, stifle dissent and create a totalitarian base of control.

As the San Francisco Chronicle wrote in September of 2001, shortly after the 9/11 attacks, “The map of terrorist sanctuaries and targets in the Middle East and Central Asia is also, to an extraordinary degree, a map of the world’s principal energy sources in the 21st century. The defense of these energy resources — rather than a simple confrontation between Islam and the West — will be the primary flash point of global conflict for decades to come.” Further, it stated: “It is inevitable that the war against terrorism will be seen by many as a war on behalf of America’s Chevron, ExxonMobil and Arco; France’s TotalFinaElf; British Petroleum; Royal Dutch Shell and other multinational giants, which have hundreds of billions of dollars of investment in the region.”[43] Indeed, where Al-Qaeda is present, the US military follows, and behind the military, the oil companies wait and push; and behind the oil companies, the banks cash in.

Balkanizing the Middle East

In 1982, Oded Yinon, an Israeli journalist wrote a report for a publication of the World Zionist Organization in which he advocated, “The dissolution of Syria and Iraq into ethnically or religiously unique areas such as in Lebanon [which] is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front. Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel’s targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run, it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel.”

In 1996, an Israeli think tank with many prominent American neo-conservatives, issued a report in which they advocated for Israel to “Work closely with Turkey and Jordan to contain, destabilize, and roll-back some of its most dangerous threats,” among them, to remove Saddam Hussein from power.

In 2000, the Project for the New American Century, an American neo-conservative think tank, published a report called Rebuilding America’s Defenses, in which they openly advocated for an American empire in the Middle East, focusing on removing the “threats” of Iraq and Iran.

Shortly after the US invasion of Iraq, prominent members of the Council on Foreign Relations had begun advocating the break-up of Iraq into at least three smaller states, using Yugoslavia as an example of how to achieve this.

In 2006, the Armed Force Journal published an article by retired Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters, which called for the redrawing of the borders of the Middle East. He first advocated the breakup of Iraq, and that, “Saudi Arabia would suffer as great a dismantling as Pakistan,” and that, “Iran, a state with madcap boundaries, would lose a great deal of territory to Unified Azerbaijan, Free Kurdistan, the Arab Shia State and Free Baluchistan, but would gain the provinces around Herat in today’s Afghanistan.”

Describing Pakistan as “an unnatural state,” he said, “Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier tribes would be reunited with their Afghan brethren,” and that it “would also lose its Baluch territory to Free Baluchistan. The remaining “natural” Pakistan would lie entirely east of the Indus, except for a westward spur near Karachi.” He even made up a helpful little list of “losers” and “winners” in this new great game: as in, who gains territory, and who loses territory. Among the losers are Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, the West Bank and Pakistan. And Peters made the startling statement that redrawing borders is often only achieved through war and violence, and that “one other dirty little secret from 5,000 years of history: Ethnic cleansing works.”

[See: Andrew G. Marshall, Divide and Conquer: The Anglo-American Imperial Project. Global Research, July 10, 2008]

Ralph Peters’ Map of a Redrawn Middle East – Note similarity to Bernard Lewis’ Map of a Redrawn Middle East


Ultimately, the aims of the Mumbai attacks are to target Pakistan for balkanization. The question of who is responsible – either the ISI, largely rogue of Pakistan’s civilian government and under the authority of Anglo-American intelligence; or separate Indian terrorists, likely supported by the same Anglo-American intelligence community – while important, is ultimately a secondary consideration in comparison to the question of Why?

The Who, What, Where, and When is a show for public consumption; masked in confusion and half-truths, designed to confuse and ultimately frustrate the observer – creating a sense of unease and fear of the unknown. The WHY, on the other hand, is the most important question; once you discover the why, the who, where, what, and when begin to fall into place, and create a full picture.

If the Mumbai attacks were designed to be blamed on Pakistan – as they likely were – and thus, to possibly start a war between Pakistan and India – which is now a growing reality – what is the ultimate significance of knowing if it was the ISI or Indian elements responsible? Albeit, this is important to know, however, when it comes to understanding the motives behind the attacks, it pales in comparison.

Pakistan is a strategic lynch-point in the region. Pakistan borders Iran, Afghanistan, India and China. It lies directly below the Central Asian republics of the Former Soviet Union, which are rich in natural gas resources. With NATO’s war in Afghanistan, and the Anglo-Americans in Iraq, and American forces in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, the occupation of Pakistan would position Western imperial militaries around Iran, the central Middle Eastern target. With the balkanization of Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, destabilizing forces would cross the borders into Iran, ultimately creating the conditions for political and social collapse within the country.

A conflict between Pakistan and India would not only have the effect of dismantling Pakistan, but would also greatly deter India’s rapid economic and social development as the world’s largest democracy, and would force it to come under the influence or “protection” of Western military might and International Financial Institutions. The same is likely for China, as destabilization would cross Pakistan’s borders into the most populated country on earth, exacerbating ethnic differences and social disparities.

A large Anglo-American military presence in Pakistan, or, alternatively, a NATO or UN force, combined with the already present NATO force in Afghanistan, would be a massive military strategic position against advancement of China, Russia or India into the region. With China’s massively increasing influence in Africa threatening Anglo-American and European domination of the continent, a massive military presence on the border of China could act as a powerful warning.

The Mumbai attacks do not aid India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, or any nation within the region. The beneficiaries of the Mumbai Massacre are in London and New York, in the boardrooms and shareholders of the largest international banks; which seek total control of the world. Having dominated North America and Europe for much of recent history, these bankers, primarily Anglo-American, but also European, seek to exert their total control over the world’s resources, currencies, and populations. There are many concurrent strategies they are employing to achieve this end: among them, the global financial crisis, to reign in and control the world economy; and a “total war” in the Middle East, likely escalating into a World War with Russia and China, is the perfect tool to strike enough fear into the world population to accept an over-arching supranational governance structure – to ensure no future wars occur, to ensure stability of the global economy – a utopian vision of a single world order.

The problem with utopias is that they are “ultimate ideals,” and if humanity has learned anything in its history on this planet; it is that perfection is impossible, be it in the form of an “ideal person” or an “ideal government;” humanity is plagued by imperfections and emotion. Accepting our imperfections as a species is what can make us great, and understanding that a utopian ideal is impossible to achieve is what can allow us to create the “best possible” society we can have. All utopias attempted throughout history have always turned into dystopias. We must learn from humanity’s history of sordid flaws; and only when we accept that we are not perfect, and cannot ever become perfect, in person or in politics, are we free to become humanity at it’s most advanced and at its most noble.


[1]        Damien McElroy and Rahul Bedi, Mumbai attacks: 300 feared dead as full horror of the terrorist attacks emerges. The Telegraph: November 30, 2008:

[2]        Andrew Buncombe and Jonathan Owen, Just ten trained terrorists caused carnage. The Independent: November 30, 2008:

[3]        Maseeh Rahman, Mumbai terror attacks: Who could be behind them? The Guardian: November 27, 2008:

[4]        Hasan Suroor, U.K. intelligence suspects Al-Qaeda hand. The Hindu: November 28, 2008:

[5]        Press TV, India links Mumbai attackers to Pakistan. Press TV: November 28, 2008:

[6]        Agencies, India blames Pakistan for Mumbai attacks. Gulf News: November 28, 2008:

[7]        Mark Mazzetti, U.S. Intelligence Focuses on Pakistani Group. The New York Times: November 28, 2008:

[8]        SATP, Lashkar-e-Toiba: ‘Army of the Pure’. South Asia Terrorism Portal: 2001:

[9]        Gethin Chamberlain, Attacker ‘was recruited’ at terror group’s religious school. The Scotsman: July 14, 2005:

[10]      Michel Chossudovsky, London 7/7 Terror Suspect Linked to British Intelligence? Global Research: August 1, 2005:

[11]      Michel Chossudovsky, The Foiled UK Terror Plot and the “Pakistani Connection”. Global Research: August 14, 2006:

[12]      Richard Esposito, et. al., US Warned India in October of Potential Terror Attack. ABC News: December 1, 2008:

[13]      Praveen Swami, Pointed intelligence warnings preceded attacks. The Hindu: November 30, 2008:

[14]      Chidanand Rajghatta, US, UK, Israel ramp up intelligence aid to India. The Times of India: November 28, 2008:

[15]      Foster Klug and Lara Jakes Jordan, US sends FBI agents to India to investigate attack. AP: November 30, 2008:

[16]      IANS, Israeli daily critical of India’s ’slow’ response to terror strike. Thaindian News: November 28, 2008:

[17]      IANS, Two terrorists killed, two arrested in Mumbai. Thaindian News: November 27, 2008:

[18]      Agencies, Four terrorists killed, nine arrested. Express India: November 27, 2008:

[19]      ToI, Arrested terrorist says gang hoped to get away. The Times of India: November 29, 2008:

[20]      Mark Jefferies, Mumbai attacks: Seven terrorists were British, claims Indian government. Daily Record: November 29, 2008:

[21]      Jon Swaine, Mumbai attack: ‘British men among terrorists’. The Telegraph: November 28, 2008:

[22]      Justin Davenport, et. al., Massacre in Mumbai: Up to SEVEN gunmen were British and ‘came from same area as 7/7 bombers’. The Daily Mail: December 1, 2008:

[23]      Debasish Panigrahi, Taxi with bomb jumped signal, saving many lives. The Hindustan Times: November 28, 2008:

[24]      Vijay V Singh, Was taxi driver aware of bomb in car? The Times of India: November 29, 2008:

[25]      PD, The Israeli Mossad False Flag Opperation Strikes In Mumbai. Pakistan Daily: November 29, 2008:

[26]      RT, Mumbai terrorists used Chechen tactics. Russia Today: November 29, 2008:

[27]      Michel Chossudovsky, Who Is Osama Bin Laden? Global Research: September 12, 2001:

[28]      PD, Former ISI Chief Mumbai incident international conspiracy to deprive Pakistan of atomic power. Pakistan Daily: December 2, 2008:

[29]      Yoolim Lee and Naween A. Mangi, Pakistan’s Richest Man Defies Terrorism to Expand Bank Empire. Bloomberg: December 3, 2008:

[30]      Sajid Chaudhry, Inevitable conditionalities of IMF start surfacing. The Daily Times: December 4, 2008:\124\story_4-12-2008_pg5_1

[31]      Patricia Goldstone, Aaronsohn’s Maps: The Untold Story of the Man who Might Have Created Peace in the Middle East. Harcourt Trade, 2007: pages 21-22

[32]      Patricia Goldstone, Aaronsohn’s Maps: The Untold Story of the Man who Might Have Created Peace in the Middle East. Harcourt Trade, 2007: page 22

[33]      Niall Ferguson, Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power. Perseus, 2002: pages 193-194

[34]      Herbert R. Lottman, Return of the Rothschilds: The Great Banking Dynasty Through Two Turbulent Centuries. I.B. Tauris, 1995: page 81

[35]      Patricia Goldstone, Aaronsohn’s Maps: The Untold Story of the Man who Might Have Created Peace in the Middle East. Harcourt Trade, 2007: pages 22-23

[36]      HP-Time, The Crescent of Crisis. Time Magazine: January 15, 1979:,9171,919995-1,00.html

[37]      Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America. University of California Press: 2007: page 67

[38]      F. William Engdahl, A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New  World Order. London: Pluto Press, 2004: page 171

[39]      Robert Dreyfuss, Devil’s Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam. Owl Books, 2005: page 332-333

[40]      Bernard Lewis, Rethinking the Middle East. Foreign Affairs, Fall 1992: pages 116-117

[41]      George Lenczowski, The Arc of Crisis: It’s Central Sector. Foreign Affairs: Summer, 1979: page 796

[42]      Le Nouvel Observateur, The CIA’s Intervention in Afghanistan. Global Research: October 15, 2001:

[43]      Frank Viviano, Energy future rides on U.S. war: Conflict centered in world’s oil patch. The San Francisco Chronicle: September 26, 2001:

Andrew G. Marshall is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), specializing on geopolitical issues. He is known for having contributed to breaking the Climate Change consensus in a celebrated 2006 article entitled Global Warming A Convenient Lie, in which he challenged the findings underlying Al Gore’s documentary.  He
is currently studying political science and history at Simon Fraser University, British Columbia.

Arrest Provides More Evidence India, Israel, and the U.S. Behind Mumbai Attacks

Arrest Provides More Evidence India, Israel, and the U.S. Behind Mumbai Attacks

Kurt Nimmo
Sunday, December 7, 2008

It is becoming increasingly a hard sell to pin the blame for the Mumbai attacks on Pakistan and thus set the stage for an attack on Pakistan after Barack Obama enters the White House in a few weeks. It now appears Indian intelligence played a large part in the terrorist attacks. On Saturday, the Associated Press reported that a “counterinsurgency police officer who may have been on an undercover mission” was arrested for illegally buying mobile phone cards used by the gunmen.

Mukhtar Ahmed
Mukhtar Ahmed is an Indian police operative who provided cell phone SIM cards to Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Pakistan terrorist group blamed for the Mumbai attacks.

The counterinsurgency operative, Mukhtar Ahmed, worked for the police in Indian Kashmir. “The implications of Ahmed’s involvement — that Indian agents may have been in touch with the militants and perhaps supplied the SIM cards used in the attacks — added to the growing list of questions over India’s ill-trained security forces, which are widely blamed for not thwarting the attacks,” reports the Associated Press

In other words, Indian intelligence had penetrated Lashkar-e-Taiba and were running a false flag operation through the terrorist group, putatively connected to Pakistan’s ISI.

Indian police in the Kashmir city of Srinagar told Calcutta police that Ahmed is “our man and it’s now up to them how to facilitate his release,” said one senior officer speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the information. Other police officials in Kashmir supported his account, reports the Associated Press.

Indian intelligence staging false flag terror attacks and blaming them on Muslims is nothing new. On November 23, Andrew Buncombe, writing for the Independent, reported: “India is in something of a state of shock after learning from official sources that its first Hindu terror cell may have carried out a series of deadly bombings that were initially blamed on militant Muslims.” In addition to bombing attacks in the Muslim town of Malegaon in the western state of Maharashtra in September, the Hindu terror cells are allegedly responsible for last year’s bombing of a cross-border train en route to Pakistan, which killed 68 people, according to Buncombe.

It should be noted that the head of the Maharastrian Anti-Terrorist Squad making the allegations about Hindu false flag terrorism, Hemant Karkare, was assassinated as he led his team into the Hotel Taj Kahal during the Mumbai attacks. “Killed in the line of duty, Hemant Karare was targeted as the man who was an immense problem for the BJP [the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party] because his forthright investigation revealed Hindutva terrorism and he was not about to stop. Clearly this invalidated the BJP campaign rhetoric against Muslim terrorism, but the BJP will still use the emotional fervor of Hindutva to win against the Congress party,” writes Allen Heart for OpEdNews.

An exposé carried in a national daily published in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh alleges that Indian intelligence supported extremist Hindutvadis in their murderous Malegaon campaign with the cooperation of Israel’s Mossad. “The newspaper writes that relations between Mossad and CIA are world known,” notes the Pak Alert Press blog. “The national daily… has exposed that the officials of the national intelligence agencies have categorically stated that American secret service agency, CIA together with Israel’s secret organization Mossad, has carried out several secret operation all over Asia,” Pak Alert Press reports, translating from the original Urdu.

Indian intelligence, however, is no minor player and its foreign policy objectives currently parallel those of the CIA and Mossad in regard to covert destabilization in South Asia and elsewhere. “RAW [the Research and Analysis Wing, the Indian version of the CIA] , ever since its creation, has always been a vital, though unobtrusive, actor in Indian policy-making apparatus,” writes Isha Khan.

Since its creation in 1968, RAW has been “given a virtual carte blanche to conduct destabilization operations in neighboring countries inimical to India to seriously undertook restructuring of its organization accordingly. RAW was given a list of seven countries (Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, Pakistan and Maldives) whom India considered its principal regional protagonists. It very soon systematically and brilliantly crafted covert operations in all these countries to coerce, destabilize and subvert them in consonance with the foreign policy objectives of the Indian Government.”

Specifically, RAW “considers Sindh as Pakistan’s soft under-belly. It has, therefore, made it the prime target for sabotage and subversion. RAW has enrolled and extensive network of agents and anti-government elements, and is convinced that with a little push restless Sindh will revolt. Taking fullest advantage of the agitation in Sindh in 1983 and the ethnic riots, which have continued till today, RAW has deeply penetrated and cultivated dissidents and secessionists, thereby creating hard-liners unlikely to allow peace to return to Sindh.” Sindh includes Urdu-speaking Muslim refugees who migrated to Pakistan from India upon independence.

It now appears obvious that India’s RAW with the help of the CIA and Israel’s Mossad created the current situation and have set-up Pakistan’s ISI to take the blame for the Mumbai attacks. Senator McCain, flanked by senators Joe Lieberman and Lindsay Graham, told Ejaz Haider, a senior editor with the Daily Times group, that it could be a “matter of days” before India carried out surgical air strikes if Pakistan did not act on the evidence provided to it on elements linked to the attacks, according to the Daily Star. “If the terrorists succeed in confounding relations between these two great countries, they will achieve their aim. We cannot let that happen,” McCain declared.

A conflict between the two nuclear armed nations may very well be the “international crisis, a generated crisis” Joe Biden mentioned in October that will “test” president Barack Obama.

In August, 2007, Obama said “the United States must be willing to strike al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan,” a comment that has led more than a few commentators to conclude that the U.S. will attack Pakistan in the coming months. It now appears the false flag Mumbai attacks, described as India’s “9/11,” will serve as a pretext to get the ball rolling on “surgical strikes” against Pakistan.

Mumbai False Flag Attack: Gathering Evidence

Mumbai False Flag Attack: Gathering Evidence

by Allen Heart

India’s worst terrorist assault in Mumbai killed 183 people and injured at least 325. The psychological effect is almost incalculable. As Mumbai mourners bury their dead, ineffective politicians resign, intemperate politicians snap and snarl, and peace groups march, the blame game picks up steamily from the fresh media massage:

Muslims are blamed for the terror attack on Mumbai … from Pakistan especially.

India has been hammered by horrific terrorist attacks over the past two decades. Hindutva (Hindu nationalism) was expressed politically in 1992 as hundreds of religious terrorists invaded a northern Indian city, and climbed on top of a majestic, 500-year-old mosque built by the same Muslim rulers who built the famous Taj Mahal. Filled with religious hatred, the Hindu mobs tore the building to the ground and government authorities did nothing.In 1999, a saffron-clad Hindu mob surrounded the Jeep stationwagon of Graham Staines, an Australian Anglican missionary, and his two sons, 7 and 11 years old, and burned them alive. In 2002, almost 2,500 Indian Muslim men, women and children were burned alive in the murderous attacks in Gujarat. In many cases, nationalist Hindi have attacked Sikhs, Christians, and Muslims, often with the help of the police and the Indian Army. More than 600 Christians, nuns and priests and 200 of their churches, were targeted by Hindu mobs in eastern India in August 2008. The Dalits have converted to Christianity and Hindutvas wanted to keep the Dalits as “untouchables” within the caste system. In the past two years a series of attacks have occurred in which most of the victims have been Muslim but, nevertheless, Muslims were blamed.

This summer, two members of a Hindutva group were killed while assembling a bomb. Two years earlier, two other suspected members of the same group died in a similar accident.

Shortly before the Mumbai Attack, India was surprised by news from the head of the Maharastrian Anti-Terrorist Squad (MATS): terrorist bombings on trains and at the Malegaon Muslim cemetery, and several other attacks had been carried out as false flag attacks by Hindutva with the support of officers in the Indian Army. In recent weeks, police have rounded up ten suspects of what they call a Hindu terror cell. Andrew Buncombe of The Independent, has reported that the Mumbai police:

…believe the cell may also have carried out a number of previous attacks, including last year’s notorious bombing of a cross-border train en route to Pakistan, which killed 68 people. Among the alleged members of the cell are a serving army officer and a Hindu monk.

The near-daily drip of revelations from police has also caused red faces for India’s main political opposition, the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), ahead of state polls and a general election scheduled for early next year. The BJP and its prime ministerial candidate, Lal Krishna Advani, have long accused the Congress Party-led government of being soft on terrorism that involved Muslims. However, the BJP has refused to call for a clampdown on Hindu groups, and last week Mr Advani even criticised the police over the way they questioned one of the alleged cell members, a woman called Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur.

At a press conference one week before the Mumbai Assault, the MATS chief, Hemant Karkare, denied Advani’s charge of political pressure on his department’s investigation of the Malegaon bombing, and he said that there was no substance to the charge that accused army officer, Purohit, was tortured in custody.Karkare then invoked the tough Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act against the ten accused who have been arrested so far and said that another suspect would be arrested soon.

On the first day of the Mumbai Attack, Hemant Karare was killed as he led his team into the Hotel Taj Kahal. The assault, designed to set up a gunfight ambush with anti-terror police, disguised his assassination as a terrorist rampage. Killed in the line of duty, Hemant Karare was targeted as the man who was an immense problem for the BJP because his forthright investigation revealed Hindutva terrorism and he was not about to stop. Clearly this invalidated the BJP campaign rhetoric against Muslim terrorism, but the BJP will still use the emotional fervor of Hindutva to win against the Congress party.

Bal Thackeray of another group called the Shiv Sena, the Army of Shiva, which is also responsible for communal and regional violence in Mumbai, wrote recently in his party’s magazine:

“The threat of Islamic terror in India is rising. It is time to counter the same with Hindu terror. Hindu suicide squads should be readied to ensure the existence of Hindu society and to protect the nation.”

Unlike MATS, the police and army who had been called in to end the terrorist rampage hid and refused to use their weapons, even when the terrorists were “sitting ducks” as an angry photographer had described them. The carnage went on for 60 hours, putting still more people at risk. Could it be that they knew that the terrorists were Hindutva like them and they refused to fight? Or were they ordered to stand down?Gunfire began from terrorists at Nariman House, said to be the only building in Mumbai inhabited by Jews. Local Gujarati reported that for two years suspicious activities were going on at this house, but no one in authority took notice. Neighbors of the Nariman House had thought it strange that several men were staying at the Chabad Lubavitcher center for the past two weeks. They observed men hauling in huge quantities of food, liquor and boxes that later were found to contain arms and ammunition. Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg and his wife, Rivka, the couple who ran the center, surely had to know about this large weapons cache. After all, 100 kg of meat and enough food for an army was ordered delivered to the Chabad Centre and shortly thereafter the ten terrorists showed up. Just coincidence?

The province in which Mumbai is located is home to 3,000 Indian Jews, who call themselves, “Bene Israel”. They are the remnant of a community that once was 90,000 strong. The Chabad Centre serves that community. Rabbi Holtzberg and his wife were among six Jews who died in the Mumbai Attack. Their role in the terrorism is not clear, yet. Israeli and Corporate News Media have assumed that they were victims. One or more of the Jews, however, were anti-zionist Satmar Hassidic Orthodox. The family of Rabbi Aryeh Leibush Teitelbaum rejected Israeli plans to fly his body to Israel for a state funeral. Israel took his body to Israel anyway and draped his coffin with the Flag that to him represented blasphemy and apostasy. Was this an attack on Jewish anti-Zionists, too?

Can Jews be killed or terrorized by Israeli agencies? Naeim Giladi has testified to that fact from his experience in Iraq in 1950. So has Barry Chamish and former IDF arms dealer Ari Ben-Menashe in his 1992 book, Profits of War: Inside the Secret U.S.-Israeli Arms Network. The answer is “yes.”

The probability of a Mossad/Israeli hand in the Mumbai assault cannot be ignored. Israeli agents have played a significant role in destabilizing many countries in the Middle East. Increasing evidence suggests that Israeli agents are probably operating within Islamist movements. Such a group in Yemen styling itself ‘Islamic Jihad’ is said to have close links with Israeli intel agencies. They are reportedly responsible for the bombing of the American Embassy in Sanaa. India’s leading weekly magazine, “The Week,” reported in January 2000 that Indian intelligence detained eleven ‘Muslim preachers’ on a charge of hijacking conspiracy, but they turned out to be Israeli nationals sent with false passports to infiltrate Muslim groups in India… and they were released. An al-Qaeda cell in Palestine was found to be all Israelis.

Lal Krishna Advani, former Deputy Prime Minister of India (2002-2004), former President of the nationalist BJP, strong advocate of Hindutva and current Leader of the Opposition, met the heads of MOSSAD when he visited Israel in June 2000 and advocated “closer India-Israeli cooperation on all security matters”. Israelis were responsible for security during both the 9/11 and 7/7 terrorist attacks.

In the same year, The Times of India reported on the Israeli presence in India:

Israeli counter-terrorism experts are now touring Jammu and Kashmir and several other states in India at the invitation of Home Minister Lal Krishna Advani to make an assessment of New Delhi’s security needs. The Israeli team, headed by Eli Katzir of the Israel Counter-Terrorism Combat Unit, includes Israeli military intelligence officials and a senior police official.

India has forged a strategic alliance with Israel to perfect India’s occupation of Kashmir where all Indian atrocities, mass graves of Kashmiris, shootings of civilians, rape and human rights abuses are swept under the carpet much like the crimes against humanity Israel has perpetrated against Palestinians.Narendra Modi, the chief minister of Gujarat, the Mumbai region, hopes his party, BJP, will increase its power throughout India. Modi is a fan of Israel. He has used acts of terror against Moslems in order to increase his power. The methods of Narendra Modi might appear to be similar to the methods of Israel’s Mossad.

In October 2007, the investigative newsmagazine “Tehelka” reported on the Tehelka Gujarat riots sting in which several Hindutva (Sangh) leaders explained on camera how they planned the massacre of more than a thousand Gujarati Moslems in 2002. The involvement of the Chief Minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi, complicity of the police, and connivance of the judiciary was revealed to the public on television.

1 |  2

Obama Says He Seeks ‘Strategic Partnership’ With South Asia

Obama Says He Seeks ‘Strategic Partnership’ With South Asia

By Edwin Chen and Viola Gienger

Dec. 8 (Bloomberg) — President-elect Barack Obama said he wants to develop a “strategic partnership” with Afghanistan, India and Pakistan to help protect the U.S. and South Asia from terrorism.

“We can’t continue to look at Afghanistan in isolation,” Obama said in an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press” program broadcast yesterday. “We have to see it as a part of a regional problem” that includes Pakistan, India and Iran, he said.

The broad approach, Obama said, must ensure that India and Pakistan normalize their relationship, even as their historic enmity is being inflamed as a result of the recent attacks in Mumbai by terrorists with ties to Pakistan. Both nations have nuclear weapons.

Obama ducked a question about whether India now has a right of “hot pursuit,” though he cited a “basic principle” that a country that’s attacked “has the right to defend itself.”

The president-elect, who takes office Jan. 20, reiterated his intention to quickly begin — as “one of my first acts” — a “responsible drawdown” of U.S. troops in Iraq.

Afghanistan, which harbored the al-Qaeda terrorist network before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the U.S. and is struggling against a resurgent Taliban, remains the “central front” in the war on terrorism, Obama said. It’s vital to continue pursuing al-Qaeda “fiercely in the years to come,” he said.

Effective Military Action

In addition to calling for “more effective military action” in Afghanistan, including additional U.S. troops and greater coordination with North Atlantic Treaty Organization troops, Obama said new diplomatic initiatives are needed.

“We can’t solve Afghanistan without solving Pakistan and working more effectively with that country,” he said.

Obama also said the U.S. must “ramp up” efforts in Afghanistan to promote infrastructure development and combat drug trafficking.

“Our number one goal has to be to make sure” that Afghanistan “cannot be used as a base to launch attacks against the United States,” Obama said. “And we’ve got to get bin Laden, and we’ve got to get al-Qaeda,” he said, referring to al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

On other foreign policy matters, Obama said he would “re- set” the relationship between the U.S. and Russia.

Russia has become “increasingly assertive,” especially toward Georgia and other neighboring countries, “acting in a way that’s contrary to international norms,” he said.

While there are areas of bilateral cooperation, such as combating terrorism and limiting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, Obama said that “we also have to send a clear message that they have to act in ways that are not bullying their neighbors.”

Iran’s Nuclear Program

On Iran, Obama said he intends to “ratchet up tough but direct diplomacy” with the Islamic Republic and make clear that development of nuclear weapons would be “unacceptable.”

At the same time, he said, he would present Iran with “a set of carrots and sticks” in the form of economic incentives or tougher sanctions, in concert with countries that now do business with Iran, such as China, India and Russia.

Also on television talk shows yesterday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Pakistan must take action with India and other nations against militants on its territory who may be linked to last month’s terror attacks in Mumbai.

U.S. officials have said early evidence suggests that the Mumbai attackers were tied to the Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba, which is fighting to oust India from divided Kashmir.

Rice met with Indian and Pakistani leaders in New Delhi and Islamabad last week to urge cooperation between the nuclear- armed rivals in the wake of the attacks, which killed 163 people.

‘Not Acceptable’

Rice, appearing on ABC’s “This Week” program yesterday, said she told the Pakistanis that “the argument that these are non-state actors is not acceptable.”

“Non-state actors in your territory are still your responsibility,” she said. “This is a time when Pakistan must act. They must act in concert with India, with the United States. Great Britain is helping.”

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari said last week he is still waiting for “concrete proof” that the Mumbai attacks originated within his borders.

Rice said she has stressed the death of Americans in the attacks when discussing the issue with Pakistani leaders.

“It is a matter for our relationship,” she said on Fox. “It is a very serious matter that Americans were killed in that attack. When something like this happens, the United States expects Pakistan to act.”

Final phase of Indo-US-Israeli gory drama and our response

Final phase of Indo-US-Israeli gory drama and

our response

By Asif Haroon Raja

After 9/11, India fabricated another 9/11 by stage-managing a terrorist attack on Indian Parliament in December 2001. It gave a ready-made excuse to deploy over one million troops along Pakistan border to bully Pakistan and extract concessions. While the military coercion made no impact because of tit-for-tat response by Pakistan armed forces, USA helped India in forcing Musharraf to cede to Indian demands. India has once again manufactured 9/11 like drama in Mumbai to extract further concessions from Pakistan which are the ultimate of Indo-US-Israeli sinister plan. Mumbai attacks had similarities with 9/11 attacks particularly with regard to hostile media warfare and the anger expressed.

Americans had bayed for blood and the UN hurriedly sanctioned the invasion of Afghanistan which had no role in the terrorist attacks. Afghanistan under the Taliban had neither any means to defend on military or technological planes nor on the media front and hence was made a scapegoat to assuage the rising anger of the American public. The Indian media too has gone bonkers and Indians are thirsting for Pakistan blood which has inflamed passions and fuelled the fatal enmity. Indian belligerence can be gauged from the poll taken by a private Indian channel which showed 90% Indians wanted India to attack Pakistan. BJP is in the lead role desiring revenge. Not a single voice of sanity has been heard from any quarter in India. Indian leaders were sure to harass and intimidate NRO cleared pliable leadership of Pakistan.

The soft but re-corrected response by Pakistani leadership by refusing to send DG ISI as demanded further antagonised Indian leaders. The small but razor-sharp and biting media riposte which mirrored the sentiments of Pakistanis took the Indians by surprise and flabbergasted them. Their lies started to get exposed too quickly and easily which checkmated their offensive and put them on the defensive. Their internal weaknesses and vulnerabilities which they had cleverly camouflaged under the farce of secularism were bared and the world got much wiser that India is hotbed of terrorism and Hindu extremism and biggest violator of human rights.

In order to neutralise the media strikes emanating from Pakistan, India was prompt to alert its Pakistani cronies inside and outside Pakistan to play their role. Certain Pakistani TV channels and newspapers where the Indians have invested heavy amounts were to become the platforms to damage Pakistan cause and promote Indian cause. The lackeys have begun to play their devious role by bad mouthing against Pakistan in form of writing articles and participating in talk shows.

Aakar Patel in his write up in The News on 1 December says that the horrifying scenes of brutal killing of hotel employees and other inmates when shown to the Indian public is bound to evoke uncontrolled fury. Not only he pre-supposed public anger but used it as a plank to caution Pakistan to be aware of it and try to prevent such backlash because of which it would become difficult for Indian leadership to restrain its armed forces. He advised Pakistan to tread the path of submissiveness by promptly accepting all demands of India promptly to assuage public anger. This in his view was the only way to save Pakistan from getting crushed. He equated Indian anger with American anger after 9/11 which led to decimation of Afghanistan without collecting any proof of Al-Qaeda involvement. Patel ignored the hard reality that the state sponsored media hype created within hours of the happenings and Indian leadership seething with anger had whipped up emotions of the Indian public and within first 12 hours had turned their passions into a state of frenzied fury. He claims that Indian investigators have traced the smoking gun and says that if clinching evidence is gathered from Kasab, India will be constrained to attack abodes of Jihadi groups inside Pakistan.

Patel did not like the tone and tenor of FM Mehmood Qureshi in his Press conference in Islamabad on 29 November on his return from official visit to India. He ignored the humiliating treatment meted to him by Indian leadership in India and his counter part Pranab Mukherjee as well as Manmohan having refused to meet him despite his repeated requests. He had offered full cooperation and joint mechanism to unearth the real culprits. He was handed over a terse letter in which Pakistan was rudely asked to hand over 20 suspects most of whom they had been demanding since 1993. Patel regretted that Qureshi had not used the language of diplomat. How strange, kettle unashamedly calling the pot black. Unlike all the Indian leaders, by all standards Qureshi had behaved in a very responsible, cool and measured manner in spite of being humiliated. His only fault was that he did not accept the blatant charge of Indian media that Pakistan was complicit in the Mumbai carnage.

Patel laments Pakistan reversing its decision not to send DG ISI and considers it a mistake which makes Pakistani government more vulnerable to Indian public anger. He also reprimands the negative role of Pakistani columnists who castigated Gilani’s capitulation to unwarranted demand of India. Rawalpindi based Agha Manzoor Rauf in his letter to editors to News Post of 6 December asserts that Pakistan should be generous and broadminded while dealing with India and Indian request to send DG ISI should have been accepted. He adds that a good opportunity has been lost due to misplaced egos. Hats off to his weird logic but he must have gladdened the hearts of Indians.

Foqia Sadiq based in London in her write up in The News on 4 December castigates the role of media anchors as well as security analysts on both sides of the divide. She has felt irked at the small-scale counter strokes launched by few anchors and analysts whose strength doesn’t exceed 5-7. Majority of Pakistani media anchors and analysts are diplomatic, soft and many are visibly pro-India. Foqia named Lt Gen ® Salahuddin Tirmizi and questioned as to why such jingoistic commentator was invited. She has probably either not seen the scenes of bellicosity on Indian channels or pretends to be naïve about it. But for the few counter jabs by 2-3 channels, Indian media’s jingoism would have remained in a state of frenzy. It has been deliberately stoking the emotions of Indians within hours of the occurrence of attacks in Mumbai and had gone wild in churning out half-truths and fabrications at an unprecedented momentum. Sentiments of Indian nation were whipped in a manner that 90% of Indians desired war as was evident from the survey conducted by a private Indian TV channel. Hysterical calls were made by rightist Hindus led by BJP to decimate Pakistan. The purpose of state sponsored media war was to malign Pakistan, its institutions and its people and to harass leadership to achieve sinister objectives. It had almost succeeded in flabbergasting Zardari and Gilani who feeling the heat ceded to the demand of Manmohan to despatch DG ISI. But for sense of patriotism and national spirit shown by the brave and upright ones, India would have achieved its objective without taking any physical steps.

Every country of the world has lauded the responsible and measured response of Pakistani leaders as well as the media to defuse the situation but Foqia has put both in the same basket thereby bailing out Indian detestable jingoism and irresponsible behaviour. In her view Pakistanis should not have defended Pakistan’s honour and dignity that was being soiled and instead should have continued with its traditional policy of appeasement. She fails to mention persistent efforts by highest in the land to cool down raised tempers of Indians and offering all sorts of cooperation. She strongly feels that Pakistani media should not have replied in the same coin. I only hope she expresses her view out of altruistic sentiments and independently and has not been tutored.

Praful Bidwai is a learned scholar and undoubtedly he has been commenting upon certain high-handed but well exposed actions of Indian extremists like the Gujarat carnage. The world had witnessed and commented upon the pogrom against Muslims of Gujarat perpetrated under the directions of State Chief Minister Narindra Modi. Mr Praful could not have written anything in defence of Modi even if he wanted to. With regard to Mumbai carnage, in his article in The News dated 6 December Praful terms the all out offensive of Indian media and Indian leaders and few Pakistani media jibes in self defence as a retreat into shell of nationalism. He sees it a competitive blame game; that is, tit for tat. It implies both were equally guilty and had indulged in media hype on same levels, which is far from truth. He has absolved India loving PPP, MQM and ANP government asserting that it could not have colluded with the army, ISI and terrorist groups in the Mumbai operation. He indicts the army which in his view is beyond the civilian government control.

He associates the ISI with extremist group and pronounces his verdict that those who attacked Mumbai were Pakistani nationals connected to and controlled by an extremist group (he implies Lashkar-e-Taiba (LT)), who received combat and marine training from professionals (implying army/ISI). He pronounces that LT was ISI created and trained and desires that the ISI must be reined in and punished.

He lends strength to his indictment by quoting Pakistani analysts Ahmad Rashid, Shuja Nawaz, Hussain Haqqani and Aeshya Siddiqua (known for their secular and pro-western/Indian thoughts and anti-army/ISI bias. He missed out Pervaiz Hoodbhouy). He provides the circumstantial evidence in the form of discovery of GPS, satellite phone records, e-mail tracks, ordinance factory markings on armaments (he means POF Wah), and fingerprints on boats and other materials which in his view were sufficient evidences to prove that the attackers came by sea from Karachi. The lone captured terrorist Kasab (whom he has given a new name as Muhammad Ajmal Amir Iman), (I wish he had added few more Muslim names to his name to make his case more strong), has supposedly corroborated the story.

Praful lays heavy stress on the military-style operation, which was meticulously planned and executed with precision but does not say anything as to why the planners and executors decided to provide so many clues to be found out in a jiffy. Does he not know that in today’s world of technology, carrying mobile phones and conversing on it is a sure death certificate. The militants in FATA and Swat have long thrown away their mobiles forcing the adversaries sitting across the Durand Line to resort to chip technology to locate the target. Unless they wanted to be found out before hand and killed, should the Mumbai attackers logically not have maintained radio silence till the accomplishment of the mission? Even if they had used GPS to help them in guiding their way to Mumbai shores, should they not have destroyed it the moment they landed at the objective area? Reportedly they came on Pakistan navy ships up to a point and then hijacked a trawler for covering the last hop and the ships were reportedly on their return journey and apprehended near Gujarat Coast. If so, what would have been the mode of return journey of terrorists if we take it that the GPS mapping indicated return route to Karachi? Was it planned on the trawler? Normally such dare-devil missions are suicide missions in which the terrorists are given one-side tickets and not return journey tickets.

Praful has ingeniously put the blame of targeted killings of anti-terror chief Hemant Karkare and two senior police officials who had unearthed the Hindu extremist network. Hemant’s cold-blooded murder will haunt India for a long time. He artfully reduces the strength of Indian commandoes and combat soldiers from 1200 to 500 who battled with ten terrorists for 60 hours and projects the terrorists as fanatically dedicated having received frightening level of combat training. He makes no mention of Israeli and South African specialised troops who wrapped up the operation. No mention is made of glaring loopholes in the episode that have come to bug the Indians. No mention is made of Intelligence failure and ineptness of Indian navy, security forces and other state departments.

He has given out India’s future course of action which says that if Pakistan refuses to act on the dictated terms, the matter should be taken up with (all too willing) UNSC by citing Resolution 1373. I reckon, he and all Indian nationals forget that India is the biggest violator of UN Resolutions. I may like to refresh their memory that UN Resolution on Kashmir is pending action since 6 February 1948. India draws strength from US all out support to Indian crimes. USA has promptly fallen in line with the Indian drumbeat and already corroborated the charge sheet framed by India that terrorists have links to Pakistan and Condi Rice has delivered a stern warning to listen to India and comply. Factor of non-state actors and danger to nuclear weapons is again being overplayed which exposes the real design behind Mumbai drama. Beware, the final act of the gory drama conceived by Indo-US-Israeli nexus based in Kabul is about to be put into operation.

Mercifully, the political parties have risen to the occasion and have come on a single platform to confront the Indian challenge backed by Israel and USA. Army chief has given a loud message that he would shift forces employed in FATA and Swat towards eastern border. Their hopes that the army would not be able to extricate itself have dashed because of the vociferous calls of support given by all militant groups in FATA. All have expressed their willingness to fight the Indians alongside the army and promised whole-hearted support. They have even volunteered to send thousands of suicide bombers into India to wreak havoc. Even the retired armed forces personnel whose number runs in lacs have volunteered to fight for the defence of motherland.

The state of combat preparedness of the army could not have been better than what it is today. Whatever operational, technical and logistic flaws it had had been rectified during the ten-month military stand off with India in 2002. The entire army is battle hardened carrying a rich experience of six years war under most trying conditions. Each infantry, armoured-infantry and artillery regiment has gone through the mill. The patriotic tribals too are fully battle inoculated and combination of the two would make an unconquerable force. The nation as a whole too is quite prepared for war since the people have become accustomed to bomb blasts and suicide attacks. Overall morale is high and it is a unique chance to gel the nation into a cohesive nation. All our economic indicators are down and the foreign debt too heavy to repay. We have nothing more to lose but India has everything to lose including its Silicon Valley. India is otherwise on the verge of getting imploded from within because of innumerable separatist movements and all its minorities fed up of brutal rule of Brahmans. Conflict with India would also rid Afghanistan of occupation forces which are otherwise in no mood to depart. So let India and its backers commit a folly of imposing war on Pakistan and regret its fatal decision.

Asif Haroon Raja is a retired Brig and a defence and political analyst.

- Asian Tribune -

Pakistan raids camp of group blamed for Mumbai

Pakistan raids camp of group blamed for Mumbai

By Kamran Haider

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) – Pakistani security forces on Sunday raided a camp used by Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), two sources said, in a strike against the militant group blamed by India for last month’s deadly attacks on Mumbai.

Local man Nisar Ali told Reuters the operation began in the afternoon in Shawai on the outskirts of Muzaffarabad, the capital of the Pakistani side of disputed Kashmir region.

“I don’t know details as the entire area was sealed off, but I heard two loud blasts in the evening after a military helicopter landed there,” Ali said.

An official with the Jamaat-ud-Dawa charity, which is linked to LeT, said security forces had taken over the camp.

India has demanded Pakistan take swift action over what it says is the latest anti-India militant attack emanating from Pakistani soil. No comment on the raid was immediately available from Indian officials.

At least 171 people were killed during the three-day assault last month across Mumbai, India’s financial capital, which has imperiled the improving ties between the

south Asian nuclear rivals.

Mumbai police have said the gunmen were controlled by the Pakistan-based LeT group blamed for earlier attacks including a 2001 assault on India’s parliament that nearly sparked the two countries’ fourth war since independence from Britain in 1947.

LeT was formed with the help of Pakistan’s intelligence agencies to fight Indian rule in Kashmir, but analysts say it is now part of a global Islamist militant scene. They say it is sympathetic to, and may have direct ties with, al Qaeda.


Pakistani territory was used to stage the attacks on Mumbai, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Sunday, again urging Islamabad to help bring the perpetrators to justice.

“I think there’s no doubt that Pakistani territory was used, by probably non-state actors,” Rice told CNN’s “Late Edition.”

She has just returned from a trip to the region to urge cooperation between the old enemies India and Pakistan.

“I don’t think that there is compelling evidence of involvement of Pakistani officials,” she added.

India’s foreign minister had earlier accused Pakistan of trying to dodge blame over the Mumbai attacks’ Pakistani origins by leaking a story about a hoax call to Pakistan’s president that set off diplomatic panic.

Pakistan’s Dawn newspaper reported on Saturday that Pakistan had put its forces on high alert after a caller pretending to be Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee threatened President Asif Ali Zardari while the attacks were still going on.

Police in the Himalayan region of Kashmir, over which India and Pakistan have fought for six decades, said on Sunday that one of two men arrested on Friday for helping get mobile phone cards to the gunmen had recently been hired as a constable.

“We are investigating whether he was on an undercover operation,” a top Kashmir police officer said on condition of anonymity. The man, Mukhtar Ahmed, had worked for years as an informal anti-militant informant, the officer said.

An LeT-linked man suspected of reconnoitring Mumbai well before the attacks has been in custody since February in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, police Special Task Force chief Brij Lal told Reuters.

The disclosure about Faim Ansari, a 26-year-old native of Mumbai, was the first evidence to emerge of Indian complicity in the attacks.

(Reporting by New Delhi, Mumbai and Islamabad bureaux and Sharat Pradhan in Lucknow and Sheikh Mushtaq in Srinagar; Editing by Keith Weir and Mark Trevelyan)