The Amazing Arrogance of the Zionist State

[It really is an amazing thing to see this little piss ant of a fascist country thumbing its finger into the eye of its only patron in a sea of hostility.  The world has never seen such a thing as this shitty little state that struts about the world stage thumping its chest boasting “I am Israel, God on earth, I can do as I will and none can stand before me.  And the really sick part is, they are right.  Israel can do whatever it wants and Washington and its Jewish owners will do nothing to change Israel’s path of racist supremacist destruction.]

Israel rebuffs criticism on new Jerusalem settlement

Posted: 19 November 2009 0055 hrs

Photos 1 of 2

Jewish settlers look towards Palestinian areas in east Jerusalem as the foundation stone is laid for a new settlement neighborhood

JERUSALEM: Israel defended on Wednesday its decision to build hundreds of new Jewish homes in annexed Arab east Jerusalem as US President Barack Obama warned the “dangerous” move pushed peace further away.

New settlement construction “embitters the Palestinians in a way that could end up being very dangerous,” Obama said in an interview with Fox News.

“I think that additional settlement building does not contribute to Israel’s security. I think it makes it harder for them to make peace with their neighbours,” he said.

Earlier on Wednesday, Israeli Interior Minister Eli Yishai defended his ministry’s decision to build 900 new homes in east Jerusalem that drew international criticism.

Israel considers mainly Arab east Jerusalem to be an integral part of its capital, but the Palestinians want to make it the capital of their promised state.

“Freezing construction in Gilo is just like freezing construction … in any other neighbourhood in Jerusalem and Israel,” Yishai told AFP. “Construction in Jerusalem cannot be halted, and Gilo is in Jerusalem.”

Gilo is one of a dozen Jewish settlements in the eastern part of the Holy City, which Israel has annexed in a move not recognised by the international community.

Israeli news reports said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had rejected a request from US ally to halt construction in Gilo, but it was not clear whether the request concerned the project approved on Tuesday night.

Only hours after the decision was announced, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said he was “dismayed.”

“At a time when we are working to relaunch negotiations, these actions make it more difficult for our efforts to succeed,” Gibbs said.

Russia slammed the expansion as “unacceptable for the Middle Eastern peace process.”

The move is likely to further hamper Washington’s so far futile efforts to get Israel and the Palestinians to restart peace talks, which were suspended during the Gaza war at the turn of the year.

In another move likely to exacerbate tensions, Israel demolished a Palestinian house in east Jerusalem. Palestinians often build in east Jerusalem without permits because these are nearly impossible to get.

The European Union, United Nations, Britain, France and Saudi Arabia added their voices to the criticism of the decision to expand Gilo, a move that flew in the face of Palestinian calls for a complete freeze on all settlement activity for peace talks to resume.

The EU presidency stressed that “settlement activities, house demolitions and evictions in east Jerusalem are illegal under international law.”

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, who was holding talks with Israeli leaders in Jerusalem on Wednesday, said: “It is a decision that we regret.”

Speaking one day after he held talks with Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas in Amman, Kouchner also said it was urgent that negotiations should resume between Israelis and Palestinians.

“Abbas is determined to return to a process of political dialogue,” he said. “That is the urgency.”

But UN chief Ban Ki-moon said the decision to build new homes in Gilo “undermined efforts for peace and cast doubt on the viability of the two-state solution.”

Britain called the decision “wrong.”

The Palestinians’ chief negotiator Saeb Erakat accused Israel of “making a mockery of existing agreements and sabotaging all prospects for a return to genuine negotiations.”

Israel captured east Jerusalem during the 1967 Six-Day War and later annexed it. It views the entire Holy City as its “eternal, indivisible” capital and does not consider Jewish neighbourhoods in the eastern sector as settlements.

Meanwhile, a group of visiting US Jews on Wednesday laid a symbolic cornerstone of a new Jewish neighbourhood in east Jerusalem.

“I’m sending a message to President Obama – leave Jerusalem alone,” Danny Danon, an MP with Netanyahu’s Likud faction, said at the ceremony.


Canada’s Military Developing Urban Warfare Camouflage for Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver

[Why do they need camo that only works in their major cities?  Sounds like they are preparing for the next battlefield.]

Soldiers could get uniforms for urban jungle

Camo tailored for Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver — but not Ottawa

By David Pugliese, The Ottawa CitizenOTTAWA — Future Canadian soldiers could be wearing new uniforms designed to provide camouflage on the streets of our largest cities.

The Defence Department will know by March what designs might work for what is being called a Canadian Urban Environment Pattern.

Those designs are to be based on the “unique requirements” of the urban settings of Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto, according to an outline of the project being co-ordinated by scientists at Defence Research and Development Canada in Suffield, Alta.

Ottawa, the nerve centre of government and the military, was left off the list because it doesn’t rate as a major metropolitan centre.

“We’re not trying to slight any city in the country,” explained Scott Duncan, head of the soldier and systems protection group at DRDC Suffield. “We chose the three largest urban centres to have baseline data in this early development project.”

He said information gathered on what patterns might work best in those three cities could also have applications for other urban centres.

Duncan said the $25,000 study to come up with camouflage patterns did not necessarily mean a new uniform would be produced for the Canadian Forces anytime soon. Once the patterns are determined, the results will be presented to the Canadian military and it will be up to the leadership on how to proceed, he added.

“If you were to refer back to the Canada First Defence Strategy, one of the principal mandates that has been given to our military is that they must provide protection to the citizens of Canada and help exercise Canadian sovereignty,” Duncan said.

“Given our large urban population, should any operations be required, there’s a good probability that some of them will be taking place in urban environments.”

However, Eric Graves, the editor of Soldier Systems Daily, a U.S. website that reports on the uniform and equipment industry, questioned whether it made sense to have camouflage based on the landscape of Canadian cities. Various studies indicate the world’s population in developing nations is becoming more focused in urban areas and military officers often talk about future warfare being in those areas.

“It makes zero sense for the Canadian military to produce an urban pattern based on their own cities unless they plan on fighting there,” Graves noted.

“If that’s the case, then it is the perfect choice.”

Still, Graves said, if the Canadian military strategy is to continue supporting the United Nations and NATO on its operations, “the answer is that they have to take a broader look, and develop a pattern more suited to use in ungoverned or under-governed areas that are rapidly urbanizing.”

The contract for the Canadian camouflage pattern was awarded to HyperStealth Biotechnology Corp. in Maple Ridge, B.C.

The original contract requirement from DRDC Suffield noted that the current military uniform to protect against chemical, biological and radiological substances was available in only the desert and temperate woodland patterns.

Clement Laforce, deputy director general for DRDC Suffield, said the patterns that would be produced are not just for chemical or biological protective suits, but also for general use for the Canadian Forces.

An urban camouflage uniform was designed in the U.S. in the 1990s based on slate grey patterns. It is used by some U.S. police tactical teams, U.S. special forces on urban missions and a number of foreign special forces and law enforcement units.

However, Duncan said uniforms designed for a U.S. urban environment might not work in a Canadian setting. “There’s factors such as light, the amount and types of vegetation and weather patterns,” he said. “These are all parameters you take into consideration when you develop these patterns.”

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

Unsettling Revelations Regarding U.S. Lease of Colombian Military Bases

“opportunity for conducting full spectrum operations throughout South America” against threats not only from drug trafficking and guerrilla movements, but also from “anti-U.S. governments” in the region.

Unsettling Revelations Regarding U.S. Lease of Colombian

Military Bases

by COHA Research Associate Christina Esquivel

U.S. Air Force Reveals Another Possible Explanation Behind Bilateral Defense Cooperation Agreement

On Friday, October 30, U.S. and Colombian officials signed the controversial Defense Cooperation Agreement (DCA), granting the U.S. armed forces access to seven Colombian military bases for the next ten years. The deal has been the subject of anxious speculation and heated debate since talks were first confirmed over the summer, as many policymakers throughout the hemisphere are now grappling with the reality of a heightened U.S. military presence in South America.

Though details were not released to the public prior to the signing of the agreement, official statements from both governments have continuously affirmed that the leased facilities would be exclusively used to support counternarcotic and counterinsurgency initiatives within Colombia. However, a recently publicized U.S. Air Force document presents a far more ominous explanation for massive congressional funding for the forthcoming military construction at the Colombian bases. It emphasizes the “opportunity for conducting full spectrum operations throughout South America” against threats not only from drug trafficking and guerrilla movements, but also from “anti-U.S. governments” in the region.

The day after the signing of the DCA, the Colombian newsweekly Semana publicized the document, which was submitted to the U.S. Congress in May. The Budget Estimate Justification Data for the Military Construction Program of the U.S. Air Force was intended to defend the appropriation of $46 million to outfit and update the Palanquero air base, the largest such facility in Colombia and one of the seven to be leased through the DCA. Submitted long before the security accord was reached in mid-August, the Air Force budget justification document constitutes the first official declaration of the rationale for the agreement with Colombia, a statement of intent met with approval from the U.S. Congress. The document appears to validate the persistent reservations expressed by Colombia’s neighbors, particularly Venezuela, in regards to the real motivation and potential scope of the DCA, and has added further strain to the already tense relations that the U.S. and Colombia have with other South American countries.

Behind Closed Doors: The Defense Cooperation Agreement

Details of the agreement between the United States and Colombia have been shrouded in secrecy since the summer, when an article in the Colombian magazine Cambio first drew international attention to the $46 million appropriation earmarked by the House of Representatives to upgrade the Palanquero base, signaling possibility of a military deal between the two countries. In response to the article, three Colombian ministers held a press conference in Bogotá that marked the first in a series of attempts to offset speculation that the operations of U.S. military personnel and civil contractors on the leased bases may not remain limited only to countering security threats within Colombia. The session was also intended to reassure the public that the agreement would not permit unilateral U.S. operations nor the creation of new U.S. bases there. The ministers confirmed that the seven existing Colombian bases leased as a result of the deal— Palanquero, Malambo, Tolemaida, Larandia, Apíay, Cartagena and Málaga— would remain fully under Colombian jurisdiction. Days after the August 14 accord was reached, the State Department issued a statement confirming that the DCA, which was then under review, would “facilitate effective bilateral cooperation on security matters in Colombia, including narcotics production and trafficking, terrorism, illicit smuggling of all types, and humanitarian and natural disasters.”

Colombia’s neighbors remain skeptical as to the objectives of the arrangement, and despite international pressure to publicize the terms of the agreement, transparency has been lacking. The DCA was only released to the public on Tuesday, November 3, nearly three months after the accord had been reached and days after it was signed by Colombian Foreign Minister Jaime Bermúdez and the U.S. Ambassador to Colombia, William Brownfield. President Álvaro Uribe submitted the agreement to be reviewed by the Consejo de Estado (State Council), a non-partisan state advisory institution. However, Uribe ignored the Council’s recommendation to make the DCA open to congressional debate, even though the agreement unquestionably enjoys the support of the majority of Colombians. The Council urged further review in order to resolve critical concerns that make the agreement excessively “vague and unbalanced,” as well as potentially problematic for Colombia. Among these concerns are the agreement’s ambiguous wording regarding the cooperative relationship, time frame, legal status of U.S. personnel stationed in the country, use of satellites, and the role of third countries. Refusing to release the DCA to the already supportive Colombian public generated even more suspicion of the Uribe administration.

Justifying Strategic Interests: The Military Construction Budget Estimate
The U.S. Air Force construction budget for the Palanquero base, published by Semana magazine on Saturday, October 31, appears to validate existing regional anxieties regarding the implications of the long-obscured military base deal. The Budget Estimate Justification document, which outlines the specific destination and purpose of the funds, gave further weight to the questions first raised in July surrounding the pending deal and the purpose of U.S. military funding destined for the Colombian bases. In contrast to the Defense Cooperation Agreement, this document stands as a far more concrete declaration of intent for U.S. military presence in South America, as “an opportunity for conducting full spectrum operations throughout South America.” Contrary to public statements from both governments, this document confirms the potential of the military cooperation to extend beyond Colombian borders. Furthermore, it suggests that the base could be used for continental combat operations and to neutralize regional governments considered “anti-U.S.,” presumably Venezuela but also likely including Bolivia, Ecuador, Cuba and Nicaragua.

Located near the Magdalena River 100 kilometers (60 miles) northwest of Bogotá, the Palanquero base has the capacity to lodge over 2,000 personnel, hangar space for 50-60 airplanes, and the longest runways in the country, Palanquero is already Colombia’s largest military base and one of the most advanced in Latin America. Leasing this Colombian facility would provide the U.S. Air Force with “access to the entire continent.” According to the budget justification, the planned structural and operational improvements are intended to “leverage existing infrastructure to the maximum extent possible, improve the U.S. ability to respond rapidly to crisis, and assure regional access and presence at minimum cost.” The upgrade is also intended to “increase [the U.S. Air Force’s] capability to conduct Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR).” Within this budget justification, stated interests in counternarcotic and counterinsurgency operations within Colombia are sidelined in favor of promoting strategic military and security throughout the hemisphere.

This explanation marks a critical departure from the public representation of the agreement embodied in official statements that have been made since the summer as well as in the recently released DCA. U.S. Southern Command spokesman Jose Ruiz dismissed the document as “budget, not policy,” maintaining that only the DCA would govern the activities of the U.S. military in Colombia. However, with so much left up to interpretation by the DCA itself, the budget justification document may represent “a more candid declaration of intent,” according to John Lindsay-Poland, co-director of the Fellowship of Reconciliation Task Force on Latin American and the Caribbean. Rather than a firm policy framework, Lindsay-Poland explains that instead the DCA is “an empty vessel that provides a structure for military cooperation, whereas the budget document is a declaration of the military’s intent for how that structure will be used.” He argues that the Pentagon is looking to gain strategic capacity in the region over the long term. Weak non-interference provisions in the DCA are unlikely to succeed where accords by the United Nations (UN) and Organization of American States (OAS) have failed, as in the case of the U.S.-backed attack on Ecuador by Colombian forces in 2008. The vague terms of the DCA as well as the secrecy of the talks surrounding it have raised questions not only concerning its present intent, but also its future exploitability over its ten-year duration.

Escalating the Latin American Arms Race

In much of Latin America, the Defense Cooperation Agreement has been understood as a threatening act of aggression, especially in light of the combative language used in its budget justification. In the news article revealing the existence of the budget document, Semana magazine characterized the deal with the U.S. as an escalation of the ongoing arms race in the region, calling it the beginning of a “new Cold War.” Prior to the amplification of its strategic partnership with the U.S., Colombia lacked the capital to compete with the weapons arsenal accumulated by its neighbors, particularly Venezuela and Brazil. Former presidential security advisor Armando Borrero noted that with U.S. resources and support, Colombia no longer “had to involve itself in the regional arms race” that it could scarcely afford. According to Semana, for Colombian military leaders who had long sought a way to obtain the personnel and equipment to engage Venezuela on an equal military footing, “this accord seemed to fall from the sky.”

Since talks on the deal were first publicized over the summer, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez has perceived the amplification of U.S. military presence in the region as targeting his country for a possible attack. At the summit of the Union of Southern Nations (UNASUR) in August, he denounced the agreement as a sign that the “winds of war are starting to blow.” Chávez has since used the bilateral pact as both an opportunity to question Colombia’s sovereignty, and more importantly to justify further arms purchases for Venezuela. In a speech on September 14, he reasoned, “what could we do if the Yanquis are establishing seven military bases?” On Thursday, November 5, following the signing of the DCA, Chávez carried out his promise to sever diplomatic ties with Colombia; he also froze trade between the two nations, which already had fallen by nearly half in September.

The U.S. Air Force document, which designates funding to “increase our capability to conduct Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR),” gives substantial weight to Chávez’s fears of destabilization by the U.S. and Colombia, particularly in the wake of the Venezuelan government’s recent accusation of espionage by the Colombian intelligence agency (DAS). Speaking before the National Assembly on October 29, Venezuelan Interior Minister Tarek El Aissami presented documents allegedly originating from DAS, which showed that Colombia had sent spies to Venezuela, Ecuador and Cuba as part of a CIA-linked operation. While Colombia heatedly denied the allegations, they did not refute the validity of the intercepted DAS documents. By pursuing this vague and open-ended deal with Colombia and approving the combative language of the budget justification document, U.S. officials have accelerated the simmering conflict between the neighboring South American countries by legitimizing Venezuela’s suspicions and precipitating the closure of vital channels of communication and exchange.

While international and regional governing bodies have neglected their mediating role in the face of the escalating conflict, Brazil has taken the initiative to engage the two countries in a constructive dialogue. On Friday, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva announced his intention to bring Uribe and Chávez together for a November 26 summit in the Brazilian city of Manaus. However, in order for talks to proceed between Colombia and Venezuela, the United States must better define the nature of the cooperative relationship established by the DCA and clarify the strategic regional interests suggested by the U.S. Air Force budget justification document. Transparency going forward is crucial to undoing the tangle of suspicion and antagonism fostered up to now by the U.S.-Colombian military cooperation deal.

‘Musharraf passed atomic information to US’

‘Musharraf passed atomic information to US’

By Ali Masood Syed

LAHORE: Nuclear scientist Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan has expressed his firm conviction that former military ruler Pervez Musharraf had transferred very sensitive information relating to Pakistan’s atomic programme to the US.

Dr Khan said he was ready to record the facts before the court of law.Talking to this correspondent he confirmed the contents of the recent Washington Post story and said these were drawn from the copy of his letter, which he addressed to his wife and handed over to his daughter Dr Dina Khan in 2004 as a precautionary measure when she was leaving for Dubai. The letter had ultimately landed at Musharraf’s table after being recovered from the baggage of his daughter.

Musharraf referred to the letter in his book also and now it has appeared in the press, Dr Khan said. He said on the orders of the dictator, humiliating search operations were carried out in his residence and all documents, personal diaries and family photos were confiscated. The computerised national identity cards were returned after several written requests.

He confirmed the observations of columnist Jabbar Mirza that Musharraf was hell bent upon handing him over to the US. In this connection, Dr Khan said, the then-prime minister Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali had himself confided that he was under severe pressure to sign his exit order, which he refused after taking the federal cabinet into confidence. He said Musharraf kept a C-130 plane ready to fulfil his nefarious designs.

Dr Khan questioned what type of justice it was that the truth was made secret for countrymen while it was transferred to the US. The nation must know that national secrets were handed over to Washington by the former president who was an American stooge, he said. He said the nation knew well who its well-wisher was.

He said one-sided action was taken against him during the Musharraf regime and a deliberate and well-calculated policy was implemented to brand him a culprit. It may be recalled that the letter published by the Washington Post leads to information, which proves that China helped Pakistan in the initial stages of Pakistan’s atomic programme. On the contrary, Dr Khan had started mutual cooperation by briefing the Chinese officials with regard to the European centrifuges. The letter leads to the conviction that every thing was done for the mutual interest. The letter discloses that uranium hexafluoride (UF6) was procured in return for invertors, valve flow metres, pressure gauges and other machines. After being self sufficient in 1982, Pakistan offered to return the same but the Chinese were gracious enough having asked to retain them as gift. The letter that appeared in the Washington Post is also significant because therein Dr Khan had quoted people who were alive as against accusations that he always referred to the people who were dead.

He told this correspondent that a comprehensive strategy against him and Pakistan’s atomic programme had been drawn at a secret meeting between Musharraf and former CIA director George Tenet at a hotel in New York on Sept 24, 2003. It was the meeting which both of them in their books had referred to. It is interesting that many assertions made by them are conflicting with one another.

Musharraf claimed to have recognised the Pakistani P-1 Centrifuge design shown by George and told him that it was the same manufactured under Dr Khan’s supervision. Dr Khan said these sketches were sealed in 1982-83 and at that time Musharraf had no access even up to the threshold of Kahuta plant.

Khan demanded inquiry and trial against Musharraf and his coterie. It is an open secret that Musharraf had deep-rooted contacts with Israel and God knows how many secrets he had transferred to them. He said under a planned policy the former president had transferred all responsibility over his shoulders, which he was not going to deny. But, he demanded to expose his confessional statement secured under duress or to record his statement afresh so that real facts might be revealed.

Dr Khan said he was a resident of Bhopal in India and had opted to migrate to Pakistan, dedicated his life to the country and pledged to serve Ummah. How could a person with such plans become a traitor?

It may be recalled that Dr Khan had always been a sour in the eyes of the US, India, Israel and some European countries because he had openly stated why atomic programme in Muslim world was condemned when European nations were carrying forward jointly the same. Why Pakistan was not allowed to sign atomic agreements when the US had been doing the same. He had a clear vision that atomic program should be aimed at maintaining balance of power in the world and doing away with one-sided persecutions. However, under the current circumstances he had been devoting solely to issues pertaining to health, education and other developmental projects.

IBM: Computing rivaling human brain may be ready by 2019

IBM: Computing rivaling human brain may be ready by 2019

According to IBM, ‘BlueMatter, a new algorithm created by IBM researchers in collaboration with Stanford University, exploits the Blue Gene supercomputing architecture in order to noninvasively measure and map the connections between all cortical and sub-cortical locations within the human brain using magnetic resonance diffusion weighted imaging. Mapping the wiring diagram of the brain is crucial to untangling its vast communication network and understanding how it represents and processes information.’

(Credit: IBM)

Computers capable of mimicking the human brain’s power and efficiency could be just 10 years off, according to a leading researcher at IBM.

According to the researcher, Dharmendra Modha, the manager of IBM’s cognitive computing initiative, scientists from his company and some of the world’s most prestigious universities have already managed to simulate the computing complexity of the feline cortex, a feat that could augur a day not too far off when it will be possible to ramp up to what the human brain can accomplish.

Last year, IBM and five universities were awarded a DARPA contract to work on a cognitive computing project aimed at eventually achieving that goal. Just a year later, Modha said, his team, working in conjunction with the universities’ scientists, have achieved two major milestones.

The first was a real-time cortical simulation that achieved more than 1 billion spiking neurons, as well as 10 trillion individual learning synapses. According to Modha, that exceeds what a cat’s cortex is capable of.

Second, the scientists created a fresh algorithm they’re calling BlueMatter that is aimed at spelling out the connections between all the human brain’s cortical and sub-cortical locations. That mapping is a critical step, Modha suggested, for a true understanding of how the brain communicates and processes information.

The human brain, Modha said, is fundamentally different from today’s computers in power and size, and he and the many scientists he is working with are eager to learn from the brain how to build new kinds of computing architectures. Part of the reason, he added, is that as our world gets more and more complex, a “tsunami” of data is being produced and analyzing those data demands “a new kind of cognitive system, a brain-like system, to make sense of it.”

To achieve the goal, Modha and his fellow scientists are combining supercomputing, neuroscience, and nanotechnology research to demonstrate what’s possible. The work they’ve done has progressed in just a year from the granting of the DARPA contract to today’s achievements.

Modha said that examples of what could be done with computers working at this scale are realistic analysis of the world’s water supply systems, or financial systems. The idea is to detect causality behind phenomena, and to make those connections quickly and effortlessly, the way the human brain works. Writing such a program using today’s computers would be impossible, he said, but these future computers would be able to quickly distill answers to these kinds of enormous problems.

There’s no promise, of course, that Modha and his colleagues will be able to advance the difference between the power of the cat and human cortexes in the next decade. After all, there’s a difference of a factor of 20 between the two. But he sounded optimistic that a decade is a realistic goal.

But regardless of the timing, the aim is clear: reverse-engineer the human brain and learn its computational algorithms. And then deploy them in a bid to solve some of the world’s most complicated computing problems.

Daniel Terdiman is a staff writer at CNET News covering games, Net culture, and everything in between. E-mail Daniel.

One or the Other–Pak Army Playing Games, or Simply Incompetent?

[There has never been an army like the Pak Army–they always leave the escape door open, when allegedly going after their militants, you know the ones, sometimes they are “miscreants,” sometimes (when they threaten India, for instance) they are considered “patriots.”  Which label fits, this time, Kayani?]

Where are Taliban and al Qaeda commanders, US media asks Pak



Washington: A day after senior Pakistani army commanders claimed that their forces have captured all major towns and population centres of the extremist-ridden South Waziristan, Taliban and foreign militants appear to have disappeared and not been eliminated.

Army officials said that they have killed as many as 550 Taliban militants a month after the military began its campaign into the lawless territory, yet they acknowledge that hundreds, perhaps thousands more have melted away.

As the offensive into the area, considered to be a sanctuary of al Qaeda and Taliban militants gained momentum, Boston Globe said, “Vast numbers of Taliban and foreign terrorists had disappeared into the vast desert scrub and craggy hills surrounding their strongholds of Sararogha and Ladha”.

“Where are they? That’s what bothers me,” New York Times quoted a senior American intelligence officer as saying.

Azam Tariq, a Tehrik-i-Taliban spokesman claimed that the militants has suffered hardly any casualties.”Ours is a strategic withdrawal”.

“We will wage a guerrilla war and inflict heavy casualties on the army”, he said.

The paper commented that “lasting success” has been elusive for the Pakistani forces. It said that tempered by an agile enemy that has moved easily from one part of the tribal areas to the next–and even deeper into Pakistan–virtually everytime it has been challenged.

The Boston Globe said, it appears that the die-hard Taliban ranks and their top commanders as well as men of the shadowy al Qaeda are postponing the fight for another day to test the army’s resolve to continue to pursue them.

Despite the gung-ho mood in the Pakistan Army ranks in the wake of these recent advances, The Washington Post quoted military officials acknowledging that Taliban was well organised, armed and equipped, and that the campaign against them is far from won.

Post said, the Pakistani Army estimated there were 10,000 to 12,000 active Taliban fighters in Waziristan, “which means that only a fraction have been killed”.

American journalists taken by helicopters to the erstwhile Taliban strongholds of Sararogha and Ladha by the Pakistan Army said, questions remain where the terrorists have slipped away.

US intelligence and military officials are not sure how long the military will be able to hold the Taliban territory captured.

They wonder once the army leaves, the militants will simply come back.

Media reports said that over the last five years Waziristan’s town like Sararogha and Ladha had become mini Taliban states.

While the Americans want the Pakistan Army to keep up the hunt for Taliban and al Qaeda leadership, they fear that Islamabad might end the campaign after crushing Mehsud and cut permanent peace deals with other Pakistani militant factions.

Success in the region, in the remote mountains near the Afghan border, New York Times said could have a direct bearing on how many more American troops are ultimately sent to Afghanistan, and how long they must take.

“There is reason to harm children if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us”

“Israeli Ministries Funding the Rabbi who Endorses Killing Gentile Babies”

Readers Number : 376

17/11/2009 Israeli daily Haaretz published a report on Tuesday in which it said that there are Israeli ministries funding Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira, the rabbi who endorsed killing gentile babies.

The Haaretz repost says:
“Right-wing spokesmen, including some elected officials, rushed to place Yaakov “Jack” Teitel in the fringe group alongside Yigal Amir, Eden Natan Zada, Eliran Golan, Asher Weisgan, Danny Tikman and a few other “political/ideological” murderers. True, they acknowledge, there are among us several lunatic rabbis who agitate to violence. Really, just a handful; even a toddler could count them. The more stringent will note that unlike the Hamas government, our government does not pay the salaries of rabbis who advocate the killing of babies.”

“Is that so? Not really,” Haaretz continues.

“For example, government ministries regularly transfer support and funding to a yeshiva whose rabbi determined that it is permissible to kill gentile babies “because their presence assists murder, and there is reason to harm children if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us … it is permissible to harm the children of a leader in order to stop him from acting evilly … we have seen in the Halakha that even babies of gentiles who do not violate the seven Noahide laws, there is cause to kill them because of the future threat that will be caused if they are raised to be wicked people like their parents.”

Lior Yavne, who oversees research at the Yesh Din human rights organization, checked and found that in 2006-2007, the Ministry of Education department of Torah institutions transferred over a million shekels to the Od Yosef Hai yeshiva in Yitzhar.

The Israeli Ministry of Social Affairs has allocated over 150,000 shekels to the yeshiva since 2007, scholarships for students with financial difficulties studying there. And what can they learn with the help of public funding from the head of the yeshiva, Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira? According to selected items published last week in the media, the boys can learn that Teitel is not only innocent, but also a real saint.”

“Their spiritual leader stated in his book, “Torat Hamelekh” that “a national decision is not necessary in order to permit the shedding of blood of an evil kingdom. Even individuals from the afflicted kingdom can attack them.”

The commandments in the book do not suffice only with gentiles; you can also find in them approval to attack leftist professors: every citizen in the kingdom opposing us who encourages the fighters or expresses satisfaction with their actions is considered a pursuer and his killing is permissible,” wrote the rabbi and adds, “and also considered a pursuer is someone whose remarks weaken our kingdom or have a similar effect.”

Not long ago, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman announced that he would ask European Union countries to halt their support for the Breaking the Silence organization because he was displeased with their publications.

The Israeli minister surely has reservations about the rabbi’s publications. He is invited to approach his colleagues at the Ministry of Education and at the Ministry of Social Affairs.”