Vodpod videos no longer available.
[This probably shows that his captors were not Taliban, unless they fell victim to the universal hatred of lawyers, expressed so vividly by Mr. Shakespeare: “The first thing we do,” said the character in Shakespeare’s Henry VI, is “kill all the lawyers.”]
DERA ISMAIL KHAN: A former Pakistani intelligence officer abducted by an alleged militant group last month was found shot dead Friday in a northwest tribal region, officials said.
Khalid Khawaja went missing in late March along with another ex-intelligence official known as Col. Imam and a filmmaker. There was no word on the fate of the two others.
Khawaja’s body was found on the road between Miramshah and Mir Ali, the two main towns in North Waziristan. Local TV channels broadcast a picture of what appeared to be Khawaja’s body.
He had been shot in the head and chest, and a note attached to his body accused him of being an American spy, said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to be named by media.
The men were first reported abducted in late March. Soon after, a previously unknown militant group calling itself the Asian Tigers claimed to be holding the men in a video delivered to local media. Any demands they had were not made public.
Khawaja was known to be sympathetic to the militants cause, often appearing on television speaking in defense of suspected extremists.
He has claimed to be close to Osama bin Laden in the early days of the Afghan resistance to the Soviet Union.
Recently, he has spoken up in defense of five young American terror suspects on trial in Pakistan.
He also filed a petition in a Pakistani court to stop any attempt by Islamabad to extradite recently arrested Afghan Taliban leaders, including the movement’s No. 2 Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar.—AP
[Amid speculation about Musharraf’s part in the assassination of Benazir Bhutto and the ridiculous national posturing about the dictator forming a new political party to ease his return to power, I felt it equally important to open speculation into whether Musharraf ordered the 911 attacks upon America, or if he gave a “green light” to the Pakistani “al Qaida” groups who organized them. As with all forms of free enterprise in Pakistan, the radical Islamist groups are dominated, or even owned by ex Pak Army and Air Force officers. This intimate link in Pakistan between military and militants is seen in all major terror attacks, but it is never reported on by Western, Pakistani, or even Indian media.]
By: Peter Chamberlin
The war for the future of the human race is more about truth –vs- lies, than it is about a physical contest between hostile adversaries. The strangest part of it all is that no one is seeking absolute vindication in this war of perceptions as either a liar or a “truth” teller. No one wants to pin down the other side for telling obvious lies. Why is that? Everybody has something to hide in the war on terror.
Dig too deeply, or expose the most dangerous lies strung together to tie-up the world in a state of permanent limited war, and the flimsy alliances and “coalitions of the willing” begin to fall apart. The utter hypocrisy of the entire “war on terror” brings to the front all the worst traits of mankind, in an endeavor that is the most stupendous fraud ever perpetuated upon the human race.
The weavers of the lies at the root of the war have created a paradoxical production that is manifested in our mission, fighting terror while simultaneously creating terrorists. We wage war on an open-ended battlefield, where the “enemy” is always allowed an escape route, pursuing an ultra-violent strategy that is guaranteed to convert the survivor relatives of murdered militants into terrorists themselves. The world is being engulfed with a wave of not-undeserved anti-Americanism and America has no plans to change the behavior of our leaders who have created the situation in the first place.
Anger at America within the Pakistani military is the direct cause of the war on terror. Military defectors and veterans form the hardcore center in all of the outfits involved in starting the war. This is because American leaders have chosen the Pakistani people to be their primary source of cannon fodder in America’s many aggressions, over the past thirty years, and payback time has arrived for some of them.
The wave of hatred came at us on September 11, 2001 because of past criminal American interactions with the Islamic world. We built an international army of mercenaries in secret, to fight both friend and foe in illegal, undeclared, wars of aggression, without civilian control or oversight. We used and abused the Muslim Umma in this manner for our own purposes up until the turning point came, since then, everything has been payback. The war to defeat the radical extremists that we have created has been a series of attempts to preempt further reactions to our abuse of Muslim men as our militant foot soldiers, as well as their families, who have suffered in our retribution.
Obama has accepted responsibility for carrying on this war, which has been completely blamed on Bush. The liberal press refuses to lay the blame for this war squarely at the feet of the Democratic Party for starting this with their interventionist policies throughout the world. This war belongs to them as much as it does to Reagan and both Bushes. (SEE: BILL CLINTON: FIRST NEOCON PRESIDENT) It was Jimmie Carter who armed the first Muslim mujahedeen in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan. It was Bill Clinton who hired mostly Pakistani, but also Iranian veterans of Carter and Reagan’s Afghan “holy war,” to send them off to fight the Serbians in Yugoslavia.
The future of the human race will be determined by the decisions that this Democratic administration will make. Will Obama listen to the millions of voices of reason and end this God-forsaken war, or will he continue the modern-day Crusades, intended to remake the Middle East into a safe place for radical Zionists, by eliminating several million angry Muslims? If Obama chooses to secretly send a new wave of Muslim mercenaries into the Middle East and Central Asia, then he will be choosing the losing side in this struggle for the soul of humankind. More than anything else, the war on terror is a gigantic flashing sign, telling us that we have to change our ways.
Pakistan is in flames today because everyone refuses to sort-out the truth from the lies in the contest taking place there, even the Pakistanis themselves. In order for the world to keep on spinning, without upsetting all the “apple carts” in every corner of every kingdom, world opinion must accept the lie—that Pakistan has created the Frankenstein monster of international terrorism on its own, and American forces are only there to clean it all up. The world accepts the next lie—that the American hand in creating the Afghan mujahedeen (who are at the center of every “Islamist” outfit) was a benevolent one, intended only to “rid the world of the menace of Communism,” and that support for Muslim extremists is a thing of the past. We must accept—that menace that later grew out of this effort was not America’s, or the CIA’s fault, even if the agency has once again been given the benefit of the doubt in its endless string of “mistakes.”
The Pakistani situation will be the death of the United States, if we do not face-up to the truth of what we have done there and the forces that have arisen as a result. The forced conversion of Muslim holy warriors into “Islamist” mercenaries to fight for Clinton and the Democrat-led interventionists has not been without repercussions. The merger of fanatic Shiite and Sunni Islamists into a mercenary army fighting for the “great Satan” in Yugoslavia produced simmering resentments, especially amongst the Sunnis, who had mostly been drawn from Pakistan’s sectarian Sunni outfits.
The movement of Sunni veterans of the Bosnian and Croatian wars into the struggle in Kashmir, where the United States was blamed for Pakistan’s defeat at Kargil, moved some of the extremists who fought and lost there to plot their revenge against us for this latest slap in the face, following our long history of abuse. September 11 was their payback for that abuse, but mostly for dishonoring Islam and “betrayal” at Kargil.
It is here where the whole narrative gets sticky, because Kargil was Gen. Musharraf’s gambit, and according to the official version of events, it was lost because most of the Pakistani Air Force was grounded due to American anti-nuclear sanctions, which denied them vital spare parts for their F-16s.
The 911 attacks were the work of a bunch of pissed-off Afghan veterans, though American leaders like to call them “al Qaida.” The most important players were ex-military men, primarily Pakistani Air Force veterans. Amjad Farooqi and Ramzi bin al-Shibh were allegedly both Pakistani Air Force personnel, both had fought in Bosnia, both had manned the hilltop outposts in Kargil in 1999, both were acquaintances of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, both belonged to the anti-Indian Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, and both trained at the Khawar Zilli camps in Afghanistan’s Khost, which was also one of the targets of Clinton’s cruise missile strikes. Bin Laden’s boys were also at Kargil, though, at that time, they called themselves the Al-Badar Brigade and Tehrik-i-Jihad, under the banner of the International Islamic Front. Bin Laden allegedly dug the hilltop fortifications used by the paramilitary infiltrators at Kargil. The Stinger missiles that they used to defend these positions from the Indian Air Force came from Afghanistan, courtesy of the USA (the ISI refused to return the leftover missiles, as agreed on).
After Clinton’s cruise missile strikes, group leader, Fazlur Rehman Khalil subsequently said that HUM would take revenge on the United States.
“The USA has struck us with Tomahawk cruise missiles at only two places, but we will hit back at them everywhere in the world, wherever we find them. We have started a holy war against the US and they will hardly find a tree to take shelter beneath it.”
At that time, the militants were all united under the Taliban, which has always been under the Pak. Army’s thumb, via the ISI and CIA network. The militants of HUM could not act without ISI permission. No matter how much Musharraf and the other generals wanted their own retribution for imaginary American crimes at Kargil that would have seemed too much like cutting their own throats. But there were other ramifications that arose from the defeat at Kargil which had entered the equation and had to be considered.
The failure of the generals’ gambit forced a severe rethink of the military’s situation. Even though Pakistan had established its own nuclear deterrent to Indian aggression, the attack at Kargil was going to force some kind of Indian retaliation. Pakistan could not afford to resort to nuclear war to defend against an overwhelming Indian attack, given their F-16 problems and now that India had acquired laser-guided munitions. Gen. Musharraf knew that Pakistan needed American help, to avert the coming Indian attack. On October 11, 1999, Gen. Musharraf and his co-conspirators overthrew the democratic government of Pakistan.
This newfound sense of total power, and with that total responsibility for Pakistan’s fate, may have moved him to make a fatal decision to lend covert support to the plot to draw America into Afghanistan. Since the Army commander of the Kargil operation was Lt. Gen. Mehmud Ahmad, and it has been reported since then that telephone intercepts pegged Gen. Ahmad as the man who had Omar Sheikh wire $100,000 to Mohammed Atta, who was also the roommate of Ramzi bin al-Shibh in Hamburg, Germany, then it does seem quite plausible.
But surely, all of this has been apparent to American military and intelligence bureaus for a long time, after all, all of the key militants in the plots are nearly all either dead now or rotting in some hell-hole, while the generals who secretly supported the militants became America’s top allies in the fight to erase our past mistakes. They were our partners in the militants’ creation, rightly, they should be part of the militants’ end.
But nothing ended, except for the lives of a lot of militants and regular Pakistani civilians. The plan was successful, in that it bogged American forces down in a state of endless war in the center of the world’s energy basket, but that was exactly what our leaders have wanted, all along. Which leads us to the next assumption, that Pakistan’s generals were only doing what American generals wanted them to do, just as they had done for the past thirty years or more.
Even though nuclear war between the two eternal antagonists was impossible, conventional war was ruled-out because of America’s presence in the region, which successfully restrained India’s forces. With Israel’s help, a covert war within Pakistan was then begun, following the pattern set by Pakistani “ultras,” otherwise known as paramilitaries, militants, or simply terrorists.
The ball of retribution was set in motion, opening the door for other Pakistani militant groups, organized by other military veterans of Kargil; this time from the Pak. Army. The Lashkar e-Taiba (LET) outfit was headed by Special Forces commando Ilyas Kashmiri. Possibly with the aid of Dawood Ibrahim’s criminal underworld, LET attacked the Indian Parliament on Dec. 13, 2001.
The same combination of Lashkar and underworld forces was later repeated in the 2008 Mumbai attack, if reports based on forced confessions from lone terrorist Ajmal Kasab can be believed. The question being pondered today is—Was that operation actually carried-out by Pakistan, or was it a duplication of the earlier attack in a “false flag” operation meant to advance the agenda of the American/Indian partnership? The ongoing controversy over American/Lashkar e-Taiba spy David Headley may give the answer. Since the US has partnered with both sides in this conflict and is obviously pitting one side against the other, this question will probably go unanswered until the violent resolution that one side (probably the big dog’s side) has planned plays-out.
The victor in all of this drama will determine the fate of the human race, whether that is to be a martial reshaping of the planet, or the struggling of the survivors is anyone’s guess at this point. All that I really know is, that all of these lies must come to an end and let the chips fall where they may. All we can do is to keep investigating and exposing whatever we find, no matter what we find.
The truth must prevail.
21 APRIL 2010 16 COMMENTS
Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke admitted the central bank created $1.3 trillion out of thin air to buy mortgage backed securities. This shocking admission came from the Joint Economic Committee hearing on Capital Hill last week. I was dumbfounded when I saw Bernanke shake his head in the affirmative as Representative Ron Paul said, “Well, where did you get the money? You created this money. So you did monetize debt, and that went into the banking system.” I was amazed he admitted this. I looked up the original hearing on C-Span to make sure the clip was not edited. It was not.
What is even more shocking is I could not find a single mainstream news agency that covered this revelation. Congress just finished voting on the bitterly contested Obama health care bill that is supposed to cost nearly a trillion dollars over ten years. (Some contend it will be more than twice that amount.) The mainstream media doesn’t even bat an eye over the Fed creating $1.3 trillion in a little more than a year to buy worthless debt no one else will touch. I do not get it. I guess we could have asked the Fed to print up a trillion dollars to pay for health care and avoided that drawn out battle in Congress.
Then, Rep. Paul brings up printing another $105 billion to bailout Greece. Bernanke answers by saying, “. . . I think one of the agreements that the G20 leaders came up with was sort of a mutual commitment to put more money into the IMF as a way of addressing the financial crisis around the world. . .” Notice how Bernanke used the term “mutual commitment.” I think what that really means is an agreement between all the G-20 nations of a “mutual debasement of their currencies.” I think this is why gold has been rising in price around the globe. I have been saying for months that we are going to have some very big inflation. (Real inflation is already at 9.5% according to shadowstats.com.) I wrote about this last November in a post called “The Fix Is In.”
I think Bernanke just opened the Fed playbook and revealed money will be printed to fix all financial problems. I don’t think he’s even trying to hide it anymore. Rep. Paul also brought up the big debt trouble coming soon with many, many bankrupt cities and states such as Los Angeles and California. I think they will all be bailed out one way or another by the printing press.
New York Fed President William Dudley seems to be on the same page as his boss. Dudley recently said, “The fact that our foreign indebtedness is for the most part denominated in our own currency is a huge advantage in the event the dollar were to come under significant downward pressure.” (Zero Hedge has a complete text of Dudley’s speech, click here) Is Dudley making a not so subtle hint about devaluing the U.S. dollar? Once again, I say yes.
Anyone with a savings account or money market denominated in dollars should be terrified. You have scrimped and saved only to have the Fed print money and devalue what you have worked so hard for! Inflation has been chosen for you by the Federal Reserve, and we the taxpayers can’t even audit its actions. Below is the video from the Joint Economic Committee Hearing last week. Watch for yourself Bernanke nod yes to printing $1.3 trillion:
BRITAIN appears to be evolving into the first modern soft totalitarian state. As a sometime teacher of political science and international law, I do not use the term totalitarian loosely.
There are no concentration camps or gulags but there are thought police with unprecedented powers to dictate ways of thinking and sniff out heresy, and there can be harsh punishments for dissent.
Nikolai Bukharin claimed one of the Bolshevik Revolution’s principal tasks was “to alter people’s actual psychology”. Britain is not Bolshevik, but a campaign to alter people’s psychology and create a new Homo britannicus is under way without even a fig leaf of disguise.
The Government is pushing ahead with legislation that will criminalise politically incorrect jokes, with a maximum punishment of up to seven years’ prison. The House of Lords tried to insert a free-speech amendment, but Justice Secretary Jack Straw knocked it out. It was Straw who previously called for a redefinition of Englishness and suggested the “global baggage of empire” was linked to soccer violence by “racist and xenophobic white males”. He claimed the English “propensity for violence” was used to subjugate Ireland, Scotland and Wales, and that the English as a race were “potentially very aggressive”.
In the past 10 years I have collected reports of many instances of draconian punishments, including the arrest and criminal prosecution of children, for thought-crimes and offences against political correctness.
Countryside Restoration Trust chairman and columnist Robin Page said at a rally against the Government’s anti-hunting laws in Gloucestershire in 2002: “If you are a black vegetarian Muslim asylum-seeking one-legged lesbian lorry driver, I want the same rights as you.” Page was arrested, and after four months he received a letter saying no charges would be pressed, but that: “If further evidence comes to our attention whereby your involvement is implicated, we will seek to initiate proceedings.” It took him five years to clear his name.
Page was at least an adult. In September 2006, a 14-year-old schoolgirl, Codie Stott, asked a teacher if she could sit with another group to do a science project as all the girls with her spoke only Urdu. The teacher’s first response, according to Stott, was to scream at her: “It’s racist, you’re going to get done by the police!” Upset and terrified, the schoolgirl went outside to calm down. The teacher called the police and a few days later, presumably after officialdom had thought the matter over, she was arrested and taken to a police station, where she was fingerprinted and photographed. According to her mother, she was placed in a bare cell for 3 1/2 hours. She was questioned on suspicion of committing a racial public order offence and then released without charge. The school was said to be investigating what further action to take, not against the teacher, but against Stott. Headmaster Anthony Edkins reportedly said: “An allegation of a serious nature was made concerning a racially motivated remark. We aim to ensure a caring and tolerant attitude towards pupils of all ethnic backgrounds and will not stand for racism in any form.”
A 10-year-old child was arrested and brought before a judge, for having allegedly called an 11-year-old boya “Paki” and “bin Laden” during a playground argument at a primary school (the other boy had called him a skunk and a Teletubby). When it reached the court the case had cost taxpayers pound stg. 25,000. The accused was so distressed that he had stopped attending school. The judge, Jonathan Finestein, said: “Have we really got to the stage where we are prosecuting 10-year-old boys because of political correctness? There are major crimes out there and the police don’t bother to prosecute. This is nonsense.”
Finestein was fiercely attacked by teaching union leaders, as in those witch-hunt trials where any who spoke in defence of an accused or pointed to defects in the prosecution were immediately targeted as witches and candidates for burning.
Hate-crime police investigated Basil Brush, a puppet fox on children’s television, who had made a joke about Gypsies. The BBC confessed that Brush had behaved inappropriately and assured police that the episode would be banned.
A bishop was warned by the police for not having done enough to “celebrate diversity”, the enforcing of which is now apparently a police function. A Christian home for retired clergy and religious workers lost a grant because it would not reveal to official snoopers how many of the residents were homosexual. That they had never been asked was taken as evidence of homophobia.
Muslim parents who objected to young children being given books advocating same-sex marriage and adoption at one school last year had their wishes respected and the offending material withdrawn. This year, Muslim and Christian parents at another school objecting to the same material have not only had their objections ignored but have been threatened with prosecution if they withdraw their children.
There have been innumerable cases in recent months of people in schools, hospitals and other institutions losing their jobs because of various religious scruples, often, as in the East Germany of yore, not shouted fanatically from the rooftops but betrayed in private conversations and reported to authorities. The crime of one nurse was to offer to pray for a patient, who did not complain but merely mentioned the matter to another nurse. A primary school receptionist, Jennie Cain, whose five-year-old daughter was told off for talking about Jesus in class, faces the sack for seeking support from her church. A private email from her to other members of the church asking for prayers fell into the hands of school authorities.
Permissiveness as well as draconianism can be deployed to destroy socially accepted norms and values. The Royal Navy, for instance, has installed a satanist chapel in a warship to accommodate the proclivities of a satanist crew member. “What would Nelson have said?” is a British newspaper cliche about navy scandals, but in this case seems a legitimate question. Satanist paraphernalia is also supplied to prison inmates who need it.
This campaign seems to come from unelected or quasi-governmental bodies controlling various institutions, which are more or less unanswerable to electors, more than it does directly from the Government, although the Government helps drive it and condones it in a fudged and deniable manner.
Any one of these incidents might be dismissed as an aberration, but taken together – and I have only mentioned a tiny sample; more are reported almost every day – they add up to a pretty clear picture.
Hal G. P. Colebatch’s Blair’s Britain was chosen as a book of the year by The Spectator in 1999.
[This is a warning that should be heeded by anyone who surfs the Net, especially people who cruise alternative news sites (even more dangerous than porno sites). Antivirus failure, or no anti-malware protection can corrupt all your files and your whole computer, usually causing the loss of all data that has not been saved to hard disc. I have purchased three different fake, or inadequate, anti-virus programs in the past, meaning that I no longer have such nice things as pictures of my grandkids, or other valued information. F.Y.I., I now run AVG 9.0, the free version; Malwarbytes, professional; and Super anti-spyware pro version. This combination has let be run without problems for about 8 months now (fingers crossed). I have also been using Google Chrome, which has built-in protection.]
Millions of computer users are being duped in to installing software they think will protect them online but actually leaves their computer vulnerable to hackers, a study found.
By Claudine Beaumont, Technology Editor
Google analysed more than 240 million web pages in the last 13 months, and found that fake antivirus programs accounted for 15 per cent of all the malicious software it detected online.
Cyber criminals are using increasingly sophisticated tactics to trick unsuspecting computer users in to downloading and installing software laced with malicious code, which, when activated, gives hackers “back door” access to a computer. This allows criminals to use the machine to send spam emails, or to try and capture personal information and login details for online banking and email accounts.
Security experts have warned that one of the most popular scams is to frighten computer users by popping up messages on their screen, warning them that a virus has been detected on their machine, and advising them that the only way to remove the virus is to download the advertised antivirus software.
But users who click on the link are in fact duped in to handing over their credit card details to cyber criminals in exchange for software laced with malicious code that can put their machine at the mercy of crooks.
“The fake antivirus threat is rising in prevalence, both absolutely and relative to other forms of web-based malware,” said Google in its findings. “Clearly, there is a definitive upward trend in the number of new fake antivirus domains that we encounter each week.
“Surprisingly, many users fall victim to these attacks and pay to register the fake antivirus software. To add insult to injury, fake antivirus programs are often bundled with other malware, which remains on a victim’s computer, regardless of whether a payment is made.”
More than half of the fake antivirus software is delivered through adverts. Google said that although it uses special tools to filter out websites containing malicious code from its search results, cyber criminals were quickly moving the sites between different web addresses to throw them off the scent. Google identified more than 11,000 web domain names used to distribute malware-laced antivirus software.
Security experts have advised computer users to ensure they only install legitimate antivirus programs from reputable companies, such as Norton and McAfee, and not to click on any unsolicited pop-ups that claim to have detected a virus, and offer tools to remove it.
LEE JAY WALKER
By Lee Jay Walker | The Ottoman Empire was the last major Islamic assault on Europe in order to Islamize the continent because the earlier Islamic conquest of Spain had crumbled into dust. However, in the mindset of modern Islamists it is clear that Bosnia is “the Islamic bridge” whereby a new Islamic power can rise in the Balkans and then link with Islamists in Western Europe.
This may appear absurd to some people, however, in the mindset of the former Muslim leader and radical Islamists then this is the case. For many moderate Muslims in Bosnia or secular minded Bosnian Muslims this may also seem groundless but history tells us something different.
After all, in modern day southern Thailand the Muslim insurgency once was based on nationalism or identity but today many Islamists want to cleanse southern Thailand of all Buddhists and many Buddhist monks have been killed. Therefore, within a few generations in southern Thailand it is clear that radical Islam is growing and any accommodation with Buddhism is no longer warranted and instead it is pure Islamization.
Therefore, current events in places like southern Thailand can be linked to places like Bosnia because it is like a re-run of past history. After all, it is clear that the Islamic ideology often rises up from the ashes and the logical conclusion of this is the complete destruction of all things not deemed to be Islamic.
In my article called Southern Thailand and Islamization, which was published by the Assyrian International News Agency, I stated that “In the past the conflict in southern Thailand was mainly an internal struggle between the majority Muslim community of three southern provinces (Pattani, Narathiwat, and Yala) and the government of Thailand. Therefore, for many decades you had the desire for an Islamic state but nationalism was also a core base for demanding independence. However, in recent times it is clear that the Pattani United Liberation Organization (PULO); the Barisan Revolusi Nasional-Coordinate (BRN-C); Bersatu; Gerakan Mujahadeen Islam Pattani (GMIP); and others, desire an Islamic state and they have a jihadist agenda.”
“In the past the Muslim insurgency was aimed at the government and military of Thailand but times have changed. Therefore, since 2001 it is clear that you now have an overwhelming Islamic jihadist agenda and this is aimed at forcing the Buddhists to flee and moderate Muslims are also being killed because they are deemed to be traitors.”
If we return back to Bosnia it is also clear that Alija Izetbegovic had a pan-Islamic dream and he welcomed Islamic terrorists from all over the world and accepted funding from nations like Saudi Arabia in order to Islamize society. Izetbegovic was fully aware that Saudi Arabian funding and other forms of Islamic funding was part and parcel of his dream which was to Islamize Bosnia.
After all, Saudi Arabia is not interested in supporting all the communities of Bosnia because this does not serve their Sunni Islamic Wahhabi cause. Therefore, irrespective if Orthodox Christian or Roman Catholic, both are deemed to be infidels. The bigger agenda is the creation of an Islamic state and then for this state to be the foundation of a pan-Islamic super-state.
Izetbegovic stated that “… Muslim nations will never accept anything that is explicitly against Islam, because Islam here is not merely a faith and the law, Islam has become love and compassion. He who rises against Islam will reap nothing but hate and resistance. …”
Alija Izetbegovic therefore shared a common thread with the global jihad movement because he also stated“… In one of the thesis for an Islamic order today we have stated that it is a natural function of the Islamic order to gather all Muslims and Muslim communities throughout the world into one. Under present conditions, this desire means a struggle for creating a great Islamic federation from Morocco to Indonesia, from the tropical Africa to the Central Asia. …”
Vojin Joksimovich who is the author of “The Revenge of The Prophet” stated that “The jihadists, from their bases and support facilities in Iran, Sudan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and elsewhere, did not come to Bosnia only to fight against the ‘Serbian aggressor,’ but for the first European religious state at large, for the establishment of the only faith among the European Muslims.” (Page 145)
This clearly rings true because this is what Izetbegovic believed in and Vojin Joksimovich continues by stating that the “Creation of Islamic states, so-called Jamahirya states, was the ultimate objective of all these movements. With the Koran in their hands the jihadists did not distinguish between Catholicism and Orthodoxy, only between believers and unbelievers.” (Page 145)
According to Western media the war in Bosnia was about the Serbian aggressor against the innocent Muslim lamb. However, the innocent Muslim lamb invited Islamists and terrorists from all over the world and clearly Izetbegovic had an important agenda and this was the Islamization of Bosnia because he laid down his theories
Izetbegovic had written “The Islamic Declaration” (“Islamska deklaracija”) and he clearly had an agenda because he desired to start the stepping stone and major Western nations either fell into “the trap” or had “covert interests” in order to further their ambitions in the Balkans? Either way, for radical Islamists and Izetbegovic it became apparent that major Western nations would do their bidding and on the ground it would be up to the Islamic community to make the most of this golden opportunity.
This “hidden agenda” was kept from people because it did not fit the media image of an innocent community which was being victimized. However, if the truth had been told then clearly serious questions would have been raised and the Western media would have been forced to have given a neutral version.
Yet the “hidden agenda” and the reality of thousands of Islamic terrorists entering Bosnia and killing and slaughtering innocent Christians remained hidden from the general public. The same applies to major funding from Saudi Arabia and other nations, and the real motives of Izetbegovic were never stated.
Turning back to the writer Vojin Joksimovich he states that “The Saudi Wahhabists, as a part of Wahhabi proselytism, lavishly funded penetration of Islamism into the Balkans. As an example, Saudi scholar Ahmed ibn-Nafi of Mecca circulated a summon to all centers of the Pan-Islamic Salvation Committee at the outset of the conflict in Bosnia.” (Page 144)
Ahmed ibn-Nafi of Mecca stated “We entrust you to see to the imminent establishment of the Caliphate in the Balkans, because the Balkans are the path to the conquest of Europe. Every individual imam in our states, and especially Turkey, is ready to help. Know, therefore brothers, that the time is working for us. Let us help our brothers who are fighting for the holy cause in Bosnia. Let us help them for the sake of Allah, by sending them money and weapons as we can, by sending them new mujahideen……The Caliphate is at hand.” (Page 144 – Israeli, 2002)
Therefore, radical Islamists in collusion with certain Western governments had a shared interest and the mass media acted shamelessly by denying these facts. Islamists obviously had a different long-term agenda but surely Afghanistan should have been a learning curve for Western governments which had special vested interests because the same forces which were unleashed could not be contained.
Pakistan today is paying the same price because Islamists were welcomed and supported in order to defeat communism in Afghanistan but the very same Islamists today have turned on their master. Therefore, in modern day Pakistan you have many terrorist attacks and Islamization is a threat to the central state and all religious minorities, notably Christians, Hindus, Ahmadiyya Muslims, and Sikhs, suffer daily persecution.
Despite this, the Izetbegovic agenda and Islamic dream was supported and in a strange irony you had the democratic world supporting an ideology which desires to defeat and destroy democracy.
Izetbegovic had stated that “… In perspective, there is but one way out in sight: creation and gathering of a new intelligence which thinks and feels along Islamic lines. This intelligence would then raise the flag of the Islamic order and together with the Muslim masses embark into action to implement this order. …”
Therefore, just like Osama Bin Laden it is clear that Izetbegovic desired to raise “the flag of the Islamic order” and while secularists may deny this in modern day Bosnia, it is clear that others have a different agenda.
If we turn back to southern Thailand then it is clear that you once had a nationalist movement but today we are talking about the systematic annihilation of Buddhism in southern Thailand by radical Sunni Islamists. At the same time we are witnessing the destruction and marginalization of Hinduism and Buddhism in modern day Bangladesh.
The Islamic agenda may ultimately fail in Bosnia and the same applies to an Islamic caliphate in the Balkans. However, one thing is for sure and this is that Islamists and funding from Saudi Arabia and other nations will certainly try. After all, their version of the world is based on an Islamic ideology which desires power and to enforce dhimmitude on non-Muslims.
LEE JAY WALKER is a reporter for THE MODERN TOKYO TIMES
[Here we see from this poor Google translation from Russian that the Armenian/Azerbaijan contest is not what it seems at first look. Contrary to the message carried in the Western media, it looks as though Russia has enlisted American support to handle the tangled mess in the Caucasus. If neither side can bomb "strategic" targets, because Russia maintains ownership of all railway, pipeline, hydro infrastructure, then, neither Russia nor America can safely route pipelines from Baku to Turkey. The ethnic conflicts that make the area unsafe require some very tricky, convoluted solutions. With America playing the "bad cop," instead of Russia, then perhaps the historical antagonism between the former Soviets and their former clients can be temporarily pushed aside long enough to grab the gas and oil.]
International diplomatic operations for the withdrawal of Armenia from the deadlock of communication failed. Memorable snapshots of the world October 10, 2009, which sealed the foreign ministers of Armenia and Turkey, the signing of the Armenian-Turkish protocols, and the background are smiling Hillary Rodham Clinton, Sergei Lavrov and Javier Solana, has lost its relevance. Today, the media publish more photos – the crowd, burning national flags of Turkey and Armenia in Yerevan and Istanbul. And this is only an intermediate result. What can end the Transcaucasian performance with Turkish actors, it’s hard to imagine but now it is obvious that Armenia should have no absolutely no illusions.
At one time one of the famous Armenian political scientist said that in the Caucasus, there are only two problems – the Georgian-Russian and Armenian-Turkish. To this we add that these two issues are being very closely intertwined, because in the dry residue, is the result of competition, Russia and Turkey for influence in the region. In that context, Russia has traditionally and with varying success protects the security of Armenians from Turkey, and Turkey, also traditionally and with the same success, strengthens the Georgians against Russia. Not accidentally, the events of August 2008, when Russia in a hard-force regime crushed Georgia, became an original starting point for the Turkish Armenian activity in the area.
Watching how to build relations between Georgia and Turkey after the August war, you will notice a sharp drop in the intensity of contacts in the military and political level. Obviously, during the fighting against Russia in Tbilisi expect from Ankara – its main arms supplier and a key conduit for NATO – what you like, but do not block U.S. ships in the approaches to the Black Sea and the nomination of so-called "platform of peace and security in the Caucasus .Moreover, the platform is focused not on Abkhazia with South Ossetia, and Armenia, Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh. Could Georgia do not pay attention and coordinated between Azerbaijan and Turkey to stop the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline and the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum for two or three days before the bombing of Georgian territory by Russian airplanes. In fact, in Georgia at that time had every reason to suspect Turkey of betraying their interests. Participation after the arrest of Turkish merchant ships and their crews – the nervous reaction of the Georgian side, which was fairly easy to fixed cautionary remarks of Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu in Tbilisi.
In fact, Turkey has had its problems, having nothing to do with the protection of Georgia from the Russian counterattack. Premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan arrived in Moscow almost daily completion of a five-day war, carefully highlighted the role of Turkey in the Caucasus and, apparently, described in detail the scope of Turkish interests in the current postwar situation. In fact, the Turkish political elite was inclined to consider the Georgian-Russian war as a very convenient moment to address the Armenian-Turkish problems, part of which is the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. To motivate the need for urgent solution to the problem of the Armenian Turkish prime minister was not so difficult, because at that time the territory of Georgia were prudently blow up the bridge leading to the Armenian territory. In the blockade was not only the economy of the republic, but also the military base of Russia on its territory.
Any further action by the Russian leadership – from August 2008 until the present moment – may indicate, at least, increased efforts in Moscow in Karabakh process. It was signed by the infamous declaration Mayendorfskaya not vozymevshaya no practical effect, held several rounds of summits, including in Sochi, where he was put forward the need to update the Madrid (basic) principles of Karabakh conflict settlement. However, Turkey does not see the tangible results of the Russian mediation mission, and, judging by the reaction of Foreign Minister of this country, is going to encourage Moscow to be more active. "Turkish leaders intend to discuss with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev during the upcoming May his official visit to Ankara on the issue settlement of the Karabakh problem" – said April 26 Davutoglu minister, speaking at the Turkish Parliament. "We view this problem as its own, and will continue to keep it on the agenda of every platform," – said the minister. "We very much hope that Mr Medvedev will take all necessary steps in this direction. Because the stability in the Caucasus in the interest of all countries in the region," he said. "We are against the continuation of the status quo in the Caucasus", – said the head of Turkish diplomacy.
It is noteworthy that this speech Davutoglu inadmissibility prevailing status quo in the Caucasus "was delivered on the day of the visit of Minister of Foreign Affairs of Georgia Grigol Vashadze in Ankara. Obviously, the status quo with the decision of the Georgian-Russian conflict, but active Armenian-Turkish are not satisfied with Turkey, and break it in a special situation were not working. Another interesting point is that neither Moscow nor in Yerevan voiced Davudoglu agenda of negotiations with the Russian president did not respond.
Meanwhile, Azerbaijani Defense Minister Safar Abiyev moved from direct threats to the "Karabakh separatists" to threats to the CSTO member-states of Armenia. April 23, he stated that the Azerbaijani army is equipped with the most modern types of weapons, including armored vehicles, antiaircraft missile launchers and aircraft and has the potential "hit any targets on the territory of Armenia." Abiyev also said that the recent military exercise involving all types of troops were fulfilled, among other things, and "offensive." He reported on the strengthening of the capacity of intelligence units, equipping them with modern means, including unmanned aircraft, training of military personnel Armenian language. They expressed Abiyev Supreme Commander of Ilham Aliyev, the Azerbaijani armed forces "able to perform the task to liberate the occupied territories of Azerbaijan.
Here it is worth paying attention to the fact that the Armenian-Azerbaijani expert debate on the Karabakh problem has recently been completely lost its rational content and revolves around the choice of potential targets in the territories of two countries. In this context, referred to various strategic sites, including oil and gas pipelines, and even nuclear power station. These arguments are not worth paying any attention, if Defense Minister Abiyev not threatened strikes rocket artillery on Armenian territory. Meanwhile, virtually all of the strategic infrastructure of Armenia – nuclear power plants, gas pipelines, railways, communication towers, high voltage electrical networks and hydroelectric power plants – one way or another, partially or fully owned by Russia. And in this case is not clear where exactly will aim Abiyev. Even more incomprehensible silence, which met in Russia, the threat of the Azerbaijani Minister. "The offensive" against Armenia Azerbaijani Armed Forces under the Charter of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, is an offensive operation against Russia itself. On the rest of the defense of the block should not be here to speak, although the same of Kazakhstan, who heads the OSCE declared the priority of security in the conflict zone, known by his silence and initially his chairmanship of the OSCE have failed, not to mention the devaluation of its role in the CSTO.
Anyway, after the Georgian-Russian war which, as already stated, to the obvious increase in Turkey’s regional ambitions and the beginning of a dense discussion of the Karabakh problem in Russian-Turkish bilateral agenda, Armenia has been, to put it mildly, in a very difficult situation.In these circumstances, the American initiative for normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations in isolation from the Karabakh problem might seem to the Armenian side in this "savior". In the meantime, and in the U.S. in the region at that time were its complexity and its long-term calculations.
The American strategy deployment in the Caucasus, which was built with an emphasis on the territory of Georgia, in August 2008 was a difficult and a member of a hard conflict not only with Russia’s regional interests, but also directly border security in Russia itself. The war in Georgia showed that the Bush administration has not been calculated before the end of the consequences of their policies. March of Russian troops to the U.S. base of Senaki and its destruction of nearly two years, turned off Georgia from the U.S. foreign policy orbit. The expediency of further use of Georgian territory as a springboard for regional reference, was the subject of a new study in Washington. While this process is not completed and proof of that vacuum, in which resides the Georgian foreign policy. Suddenly deprived of the subject "strategic" dialogue with Washington, the Georgian ruling elite was forced to return to the harsh reality, to redefine the external priorities, but in a narrow regional space – between Russia, Turkey and Iran, with an eye on the situation of Azerbaijan and Armenia. And so, until Mikhail Saakashvili is trying to re-inspire all Americans to the indispensability of the Georgian military and transit capacity, the head of the Georgian Foreign Ministry holds consultations in Tehran and Ankara, and the Georgian political opposition in the broad composition of searching for contacts in Moscow and participated in forums in St. Petersburg.
In turn, the U.S., lost his balance in Georgia, and being deprived initially be fully compatible with a complex partner – Azerbaijan, constrained Iranian and Turkish influence, drew his attention to Armenia, by this time trapped in a rather sad state. However, as events proved last year, hope the Americans to use their traditional lever – the problem of recognizing the Armenian Genocide, as well as their lobbying capabilities in Europe (Sweden sudden recognition of the Armenian genocide – the fruit of an American, not the Armenian lobbying) to the expected results have not led. Turkey is closely tied process of normalizing relations with Armenia in the Karabakh issue, and to U.S. efforts to answer a number of anti-American actions, in particular, found the unprecedented warm relationship with Iran and Russia, reinforced the anti-Israel rhetoric, defeated the Israeli-American stronghold in Turkish military circles, and so on.
Russia, which formally supported the U.S. initiative for normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations, in reality, played in this process, a dual role. Moscow began an intensive rapprochement with Azerbaijan, the government is very nervous reaction to U.S. plans to unlock Armenia in isolation from the settlement of the Karabakh conflict. Feeling supported by the Russian pole, Baku safely deployed a powerful pressure on Turkey. Although, in fact, the Azerbaijani-Turkish "contradictions" of the last period, miraculously removed from the agenda, in particular in the gas field, after the failure of the Armenian-Turkish dialogue, quite calmly could be co-ordinated action, whose purpose was to demonstrate the impossibility of the Americanplan as a whole.
As a result, it is necessary to note that the Armenian-Turkish talks were deadlocked efforts of Ankara and Baku, with the tacit consent of Moscow. It was quite obvious that Armenia ratified the protocols in the form in which they have been signed in Zurich in October 2009, immediately after they are accepted by the Turkish Parliament. However, fears of Yerevan were quite justified. Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan in the presence of the American leader Barack Obama has explicitly stated that the Turkish Parliament to ratify the documents do not meet until the Karabakh problem. Armenian leader had only one thing to withdraw records from the operational agenda of the Armenian parliament, which he did on his return from the U.S.. The minutes were left in a large agenda of the Armenian parliament in the hope that the U.S. is their active operations again will call on them to life. However, hopes for a little no.
Summarizing the situation in Transcaucasia, the current after the events of August 2008 and the failure of the American initiative to unblock the Armenian-Turkish border, select the following provisions:
1. The problem of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict arose on a regional agenda with particular urgency.At the same time, Turkey and Azerbaijan are virtually issued an ultimatum requiring Russia to exert pressure on Armenia. Russia after the war with Georgia being deprived of the field for maneuver. Balancing between Azerbaijan and Armenia, to some extent lost its meaning, since a massive involvement in the process of Turkey, Armenia and Azerbaijan have ceased to be equated with the military-political point of view of regional poles. No longer just land, but safe and air links with Armenia denies Russia the chance to fully supply its military base in Gyumri, in the case of renewed hostilities tactical space.
2. The sharp weakening of the American factor contributed regionalization of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem. Azerbaijan lobbies connected to the process of Turkey. On the other hand, the willingness to mediate in the process, but in fact its right to participate in the new regional redistribution said Tehran. Rhetorical Azerbaijan’s consent to the Iranian initiative – hot-expressed anti-American move, indicating that the Azerbaijani side makes every effort to withdraw from the process of the United States and France to strengthen its position in the region through closer relations with Turkey, Iran and Russia simultaneously.
3. Agreed Baku and Ankara shooting priority for the European gas project NABUCCO was intended to keep European countries from the pressure on Turkey to unblock the Armenian-Turkish border. Here the "rigid" position of Baku, long time not signing gas agreement with Turkey, has played a role of lightning rod for Turkey. The very next day after the failure of the Armenian-Turkish negotiations, Azerbaijan and Turkey execute the necessary agreement.
4. The weakening of U.S. influence in the region is strictly contrary to the interests of Georgia.President Saakashvili held in the United States more than three weeks, trying to facilitate the return of Washington into action. In this case, Saakashvili has indirectly for Armenia. New destabilization of Georgia in the consolidated Azerbaijani-Turkish offensive could lead to unfortunate consequences Armenia. U.S. in some way dilute the stringent regional realities, allowing Yerevan for a long time to balance in foreign policy.
5. Turkey in every possible way to strain the situation, trying to urge Russia to fulfill a verbal agreement reached in August 2008. Shortly before the official visit of President Dmitry Medvedev in Ankara, Turkish authorities have updated the problem of Nakhichevan, actually declared himself the guarantor of security in this autonomous republic within Azerbaijan. Accusing Armenia in that it represents a threat to the security of the enclave, devoid of all possible ties with Azerbaijan, Turkey is actually called a legitimate reason for possible action against Armenia. However, Turkey has openly declared its right to Nakhichevan, referring to the provisions of the Treaty of Kars, which can be regarded as a kind of signal to Azerbaijan, demonstrating lately some degree of independence in foreign policy.
6. Turkey is a long-term threat for Georgia, strengthening its political and economic presence in Adjara. Obviously, in the case of large-scale destabilization of the situation in the region, Ankara reclaim their rights and to this territory – the same logic as in the case of Nakhichevan, and with reference to the same document.
7. May 8, 2010 in Moscow will meet the Presidents of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia. In May, is also expected to visit Russia’s President Dmitry Medvedev in Turkey. Russian president to be an easy task. Its complexity lies in the fact that the bargaining position of Yerevan and Baku for nearly 20 years of negotiations, not one iota closer. The key issue – the problem of the future status of Nagorno-Karabakh. The rhetoric of the Azeri leadership leaves no doubt that the official Baku in this part of the concessions is not going to go, even if the status will be determined by time-delayed referendum and after the phased delivery of Azerbaijan controlled by Armenian side areas – security belt around Nagorno-Karabakh.
The separatists want to divide Kyrgyzstan
Kyrgyzstan separatists urge to share two democratic republic – South and North, with the delegation that they have equal powers. Interim authorities consider these ideas as “dangerous tendencies”, and former Prime Minister Kulov is sure: people will never support such a division.
The appeals of the section of the State into two parts, began to sound in the south of Kyrgyzstan. Journalists were told by the acting Minister of Internal Affairs of the Republic Baktybek Alymbekov, relevant leaflets and videos are distributed in the Osh and Jalal-Abad certain “destructive forces”. “We have considered this issue at the commission, the distributors will apply appropriate measures” – he promised.
At the same time head of the committee protect the deposed president, Kurmanbek Bakiyev – Tolon Dyikanbaev told Azattyk Radio’s intention to work towards a federal system in Kyrgyzstan. The separatists consider that to stabilize the situation in the country can only be divided into two democratic republics – South and North, with the delegation that they have equal powers. According Dyykanbaeva, the initiative group intends to apply to this proposal to the Provisional Government of the Republic and hopes that this initiative will be reflected in the new constitution, whose draft is being discussed in Kyrgyz society.
The deputy head of the Provisional Government on constitutional reform Tekebayev has already expressed its position, calling the proposal bakievtsev dangerous trend. The new authorities of the country, he said, aware that with elections approaching, the subversive work of the separatist nature will only intensify. “The closer the legalization, the greater the risk. During the six months before the parliamentary elections we will be vulnerable to political risks. And if you join the economic risks, the situation will get worse,” – admitted Tekebayev.
According to experts, the federal structure will cause the “destruction of statehood in the presence of large regional differences and underdeveloped institutions of the State in the country, “said the radio station.
Former Prime Minister of Kyrgyzstan Felix Kulov, for its part, believes that the partition of the country will not happen. “There will be no federal system in Kyrgyzstan. Too close economic, social and demographic connection between north and south. The people do not get no divided into two parts, and he would never agree to the division of the country’s south and north. Such appeals are heard only at the level political elites “, – quotes the policy of” Kommersant “.
According to Kulov, all in Kyrgyzstan understand “if the country is divided into two parts, it will lead to a colossal collapse of the economy in the south.” The purpose of these leaflets are not just dividing the country, and discredit the provisional government, I’m sure ex-prime: “Such things are bad for the image of the Provisional Government, because they underscore – this government can not govern the country.”
Customers campaign, according to Kulov, may well be people Bakiyev – in particular, his brothers, which issued the warrant and that the period of destabilization can freely move and exist. ”
According to the media, supporters of Bakiyev had already planned a date for the return of its counter-retired leader to power: rebellion appointed on 17 May. Own the counter-revolution going to arrange and youth organizations in Kyrgyzstan. So until full settlement of the situation in the country far.
Author: Vera ILJINA
|Source – Respublika-kaz.info|
Source New Pakistan:
The Supreme Court’s verdict against a billion-dollar liquefied natural gas (LNG) supply contract on Wednesday has been met mostly with uninterest, most people seeming to view it as a routine matter of the court policing a lack of transparency in the awarding of government contracts. While I will certainly not suggest that lack of transparency is not a problem, there are a few items about this particular case that I find curious. Namely, the little talked about relationship between the court and the military in this case.
The first curious thing about the case was that it was a suo moto action. That means that the court took it upon itself to take up the case without a complaint from any party. This might be the case, but if there was a problem with the award of the contract to French company GDF Suez, why did no other company make a complaint?
This brings us to the next curious fact: the company that supposedly had the lowest bid was Fauji Foundation – an investment group run by former military officers.
[The Supreme Court] took up the natural gas deal case after media reports that Pakistan had lost $1 billion when senior petroleum ministry officials ignored the lowest bid by the Fauji Foundation, an investment group run by former military officers, and European company Vitol, and chose France’s GDF Suez.
So, the government took bids for an LNG supply contract and awarded to a French company. The Supreme Court, without any complaint from another company, took it upon itself to step in and void the contract. One of the losing bidders just happens to be tied to the military.
This would be curious enough by itself, but the situation becomes more so when we take a step back and consider the context for this action.
Pakistan is presently suffering a severe energy crisis. Actually, the energy crisis is one of the top reasons that people are unhappy, and also a top reason why Pakistan has had difficulty attracting Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). The contract with GDF Suez would have provided 3.5 million tonnes of liquefied natural gas supplies every year for six years. Surely this would have gone a long way towards solving the energy problem and attracting new foreign investment.
Of course, making progress on energy and foreign investment would also be seen as a success for the present government, which the court has constantly attacked. Cancelling this contract is also seen by foreign analysts as a means for the Chief Justice to assert his own power as supreme.
One analyst said a Supreme Court seen as intrusive would be bad for business, in a country struggling to keep its budget deficit at the levels required under politically sensitive reforms the International Monetary Fund is pushing for.
“To what extent is the action on the part of Chaudhry great and to what extent is it stifling matters?,” asked Kamran Bokhari, regional director for the Middle East and South Asia at STRATFOR global intelligence firm.
“This issue of cancelling a deal because it wasn’t transparent is a tool by which the judiciary asserts itself because ultimately it is also a power.”
Then there is the fact that the military is involved. Following Ahsan Iqbal’s (PML-N) recent statements that there is a “third force” trying to cause a clash between judiciary and government, one must wonder if there
is some relationship here. Is this all part of an effort to execute a ‘coup by judiciary’?
Awarding of government contracts should be transparent, fair, and in the best interest of Pakistan. The government should not give away contracts to one company if there is a better deal from another. Also, the government should not give away contracts to former military officers if some other company can do a better job. The fact that the Supreme Court has inserted itself into this situation without being asked by party to the contract process raises serious questions about whether the court is being honest and transparent itself.
[While they are looking, maybe they can provide the intercepted tapes which implicate Mehsud’s associates in the Islamabad Marriott bombing?]
The easiest way for the military to put to rest any suspicions that the Musharraf government was involved in the death of Benazir Bhutto is to produce the audiotape of the conversation between Baitullah Mehsud and his associate which Brigiadier Cheema claimed that the ISI had intercepted on Dec 27 2007. The joint investigative team of the FIA formed after the release of the UN Report has approached the ISI directly but apparently been rebuffed and so the Interior Ministry is now approaching the ISI via the Defence Ministry to get this tape.
Why isn’t the military releasing this tape for analysis? If the military is unable to produce the tape then the only conclusion is that the Musharraf government deliberately falsified evidence immediately following the death of Benazir Bhutt
Committee to Protect Journalists
New York, April 29, 2010—The Committee to Protect Journalists urges members of Russia’s parliament to reject a sweeping new bill that would return censorship rights to Russia’s KGB successor, the Federal Security Service, if passed.
Amendments to the country’s administrative code and the law on FSB activities would give the security agency the right to summon journalists for questioning and demand that editors remove articles that “aid extremists” or “appear undesirable” from their publications. The proposed amendments introduce penalties that range from a fine of up to 50,000 rubles (US$1,710) to a 15-day detention for noncompliance.
“Instead of focusing their energy on fighting work-related violence against journalists inRussia, authorities are gearing up to fight the journalists for doing their job,” CPJ Europe and Central Asia Program Coordinator Nina Ognianova said. “The bill, which gives the security services Soviet-style power to censor information, must be scrapped immediately.”
Particularly disturbing is an “explanatory note” to the proposed law amendments, which openly blames “certain media outlets” for the rise of extremist activities in Russia and singles them out. The note reads:
An analysis of the information available to the organs of federal security attests to intensification of the activities of radical organizations, which leads to the rise of social tension and the strengthening of negative processes in society, in the first place among youth.
Certain mass media outlets, including print and electronic, openly aid the formation of negative processes in the spiritual sphere, the affirmation of the cult of individualism and violence, the mistrust in the ability of the state to defend its citizens, thus practically involving the youth in extremist activities.
Immediately after the introduction of the vaguely worded bill on April 24, Russian media experts, lawyers, and editors criticized its formulation as too broad, and noted that it returns the country’s main security agency the unlimited censoring powers that its predecessor, the KGB, had in Soviet times. Andrei Soldatov, a prominent expert on the activities of the FSB, told The Moscow Times, that the bill gives the security services the right to act preemptively against media outlets, without having to go through a prosecutor.
Yuliya Latynina, a journalist and political commentator who specializes in the North Caucasus, told the Moscow-based Ekho Moskvy radio: “According to this draft law, if I or my editor mention the absolute inability of the authorities to arrest [North Caucasus] separatists, we would be held responsible for our comments.” She added: “Obviously, it is easier to arrest editors than terrorists.”
The new amendments follow in the footsteps of two sets of amendments—on the law on extremism—which were passed in 2006 and 2007 amid domestic and international criticism. Those broadened the definition of extremism to include media criticism of state officials as a social group and public discussion of extremist activities. A number of individual journalists and media outlets have been prosecuted under those laws since.
On March 31, the independent Moscow-based newspaper Novaya Gazeta received a warning from the state media regulator Roskomnadzor, accusing the paper of distributing extremist information because of its reporting on the activities of the neo-Nazi group Russky Obraz (Russian Image). The newspaper had reported on the group in January as part of its investigation into the double murder of its journalist Anastasiya Baburova and lawyer Stanislav Markelov; the two suspects in the murder are reportedly affiliated with Russky Obraz. A publication can be closed down after receiving two official warnings.
By Matt Robinson
TBILISI, April 29 (Reuters) – The collapse of a plan to end a century of hostility between Armenia and Turkey may have its biggest repercussions in the dispute over Nagorno-Karabakh, a flashpoint near a corridor bringing oil and gas to the West.
The peace initiative between two of the players in a complex web of relationships in the south Caucasus crumbled last week when Armenia suspended ratification of the accord.
Observers said the pact, which would have established diplomatic relations and opened their land border, was already deadlocked as neither parliament had approved the deal.
But its suspension has left another, potentially explosive issue hanging in the balance — the fate of Nagorno-Karabakh, a mountainous region lost by Azerbaijan to Armenian-backed forces in the bloodiest of the ethnic conflicts that accompanied the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union.
Many had hoped normalised relations between Armenia and Turkey would help unlock talks on the enclave, which has run its own affairs with the support of Armenia since splitting away from Azerbaijan. It is connected to Armenia by a slim corridor.
Azerbaijan, a close Turkish ally and energy trading partner, saw the accord as a betrayal, potentially robbing it of leverage over Armenia in negotiations on Nagorno-Karabakh.
Analysts say the suspension will do little to soothe Azeri concerns.
“The process has left Azerbaijan isolated, and effectively pulled the rug from under its foreign policy framework,” said Svante Cornell of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute.
“It also leaves Armenia’s leadership weakened. thus — more frustration and more insecurity, the last thing the region needs,” he said. The deal agreed a year ago was the closest Turkey and Armenia had come to moving past the World War One mass killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks that has poisoned their relationship.
The United States and Russia both backed the accord as a means of stabilising the south Caucasus and encouraging greater trade and prosperity.
Turkey stood to reap diplomatic kudos in the West as it bids for membership of the European Union. Landlocked Armenia would have benefited from the reopening of its western frontier, closed by Turkey in 1993 in solidarity with Azerbaijan.
Washington said last week the deal was not dead, but more time might be needed to “create some new momentum”. But diplomats say they see little chance of Turkey dropping its demand for Armenian concessions on Nagorno-Karabakh, or of Armenia complying in exchange for an open frontier.
STRAINED AZERI-TURKISH TIES
The peace overtures have severely strained ties between Turkey and Azerbaijan, affecting negotiations on gas supplies key to the planned Nabucco pipeline, which aims to bypass Russia to supply gas to the European Union.
Azerbaijan late last year struck deals to sell more gas to Russia, whose South Stream pipeline project is the main rival to Nabucco. such deals will draw supplies away from Nabucco and make it harder for the project to get off the ground.
In the belief that Washington was the main driver of the Turkish-Armenian thaw, Azerbaijan this month cancelled joint military exercises with the United States and threatened to reconsider their “strategic relationship”.
“Long-term peace and normalisation of relations in the south Caucasus cannot be achieved by rewarding aggression and by excluding the region’s strategically most important country,” Novruz Mammadov, chief foreign policy adviser to Azeri President Ilham Aliyev, wrote last week.
An estimated 30,000 people died in the Nagorno-Karabakh war before a ceasefire was agreed in 1994. More than 15 years of mediation by Russia, the United States and France have yielded a loose framework of “basic principles”, but no peace deal.
Snipers and landmines on the frontline meanwhile pick off young Azeri and Armenian conscripts on a regular basis. Intensified negotiations last year between Aliyev and Armenian President Serzh Sarksyan fuelled hope that some sort of solution might be close. The International Crisis Group thinktank warned this month of a threat from “domestically entrenched maximalist forces” opposed to a Nagorno-Karabakh deal in Armenia and Azerbaijan.
“If the talks fail now, Armenia and Azerbaijan may find themselves trapped in a spiralling military escalation which will have unpredictable consequences for both countries and for wider regional security,” ICG analyst Tabib Huseynov wrote.
Thanks to its elevated position and heavy fortifications, military experts say Nagorno-Karabakh would be difficult to retake. But that has not stopped Azerbaijan from spending heavily on its military and frequently threatening to try.
“The Azerbaijan army has all capabilities to hit any target on the territory of Armenia if necessary,” Defence Minister Safar Abiyev said last week.
A resumption in hostilities could quickly suck in other powers in a region criss-crossed by energy pipelines.
Russia’s largest military base outside its borders is located in armenia, and the two countries are close allies. (Editing by Sonya Hepinstall)
Forbes Asia Magazine dated May 10, 2010
Balochistan is treacherous territory for many, but Beijing keeps buying its way in.
In the Pakistani province of Balochistan, South Asia and central Asia bleed into the Middle East. Bordered by Afghanistan, Iran and the Persian Gulf, and well endowed with oil, gas, copper, gold and coal reserves, Balochistan is a rich prize that should have foreign investors battering at the gates. But for a half-century it has been the exclusive playground of the Pakistani government and its state-owned Chinese partners. China would prefer it to stay that way.
China is Pakistan’s oldest military and political ally, but in the last two decades it is the economic component of the alliance that has taken center stage. Pakistan, and in particular Balochistan, is China’s physical link to its sizable investments in Iranian gas, Afghan hydropower and Gulf oil. Explains Andrew Small, a fellow at the German Marshall Fund, the Sino-Pak relationship “matters more now, because of India’s economic growth. Pakistan being a trade and energy corridor means that possible pipelines and projects [in Pakistan] have a strategic significance beyond the specific investments.” Chinese control of Pakistan’s commodities corridor can “bind India down in South Asia, restricting its capacity to operate elsewhere.”
Chinese companies have poured at least $15 billion into Baloch projects: an oil refinery, copper and zinc mines and a deepwater port at Gwadar, in the Gulf of Oman. “They wanted Gwadar to be another Dubai,” says Khurram Abbas, the port’s managing director, “to capture the transit trade with countries that are landlocked, like Afghanistan, and to encourage transshipment trade from the Persian Gulf to East Africa.”
China’s Tianjin Zhongbei Harbor Engineering has invested $200 million to build the first three berths and plans to invest a total of $1.6 billion to expand the port in the future. But business at Gwadar has been slow. Though the three berths have the capacity to handle $2 billion worth of cargo a year, the port saw only $700 million in 2009. “The challenge,” says Abbas, “is that Gwadar is not yet linked to the rest of the country. The government was supposed to provide road connectivity. Without roads there can be no commercial activity [in Balochistan]. And we need commercial activity, investors to set up factories around Gwadar, to get cargo for the port.”
China is taking matters into its own hands, starting to build a highway from Gwadar to the capital of Balochistan, Quetta, on the Afghan border, where it will connect to Pakistan’s national highway network, and from there to the Karakoram Highway that leads into China. China’s Harbor Engineering Corps is also working on a new airport at Gwadar, due to open in 2013.
Infrastructure is not the only challenge that Chinese investors in Balochistan face. The province is a key battleground in the wars currently threatening Pakistan. Quetta is rumored to be hiding wanted leaders from the Afghan Taliban. Small towns in the Baloch heartland, meanwhile, are a launchpad for a decades-old separatist movement that capitalizes on populist resentment of federal agencies and foreign investment.
Three sisters have suffered serious facial burns after two unidentified men on a motorbike threw acid at them in Pakistan’s Balochistan province.
The sisters, aged between 14 and 20 years old, were attacked as they walked from Kalat city to Pandarani village – one is still in a serious condition.
Political activists held a protest in Kalat shortly after the attack.
There are no reliable statistics, but campaigners say there may be 150 acid attack victims in Pakistan each year.
The police named the girls as Fatima Bibi, 20, Saima Bibi, 16 and Sakina Bibi, 14.
They were taken to a government hospital in Kalat, but Fatima Bibi was later shifted to a hospital in the provincial capital, Quetta.
No arrests have been made as yet.
Two weeks ago, an unknown group – the Baloch Ghairatmand Group (the Honourable Baloch Group) – claimed responsibility for a similar attack on two women in a market in Dalbandin city.
The group had warned women to wear the hijab, the traditional Muslim headscarf, and not to visit markets unaccompanied by men from their families.
The attack was criticised by Balochistan’s political leaders as well as armed rebel groups, who said it had been carried out by elements that wanted to push the Baloch people back in time.
The Pentagon’s been trying to get ahead of the curve on neuroscience for years, toying with ideas like mind-reading whether people are lying and performance-degrading drugs for enemy combatants. Now, it’s launching a major effort to harness neuroscience in a way that might better prepare soldiers for the mental rigors of modern warfare.
In a series of small business solicitations released last week, the Office of the Secretary of Defense outlined plans for a new “Cognitive Readiness Technology” program with the aim of “making our warfighters as cognitively strong as they are physically strong.”
Neuroscience is at the locus of the program. Before they can super-charge cognition, Pentagon scientists need to understand exactly how it works. So they’re launching “Neuromorphic Models of Human Social Cultural Behavior” (HSCB) to accurately model human cognition, including how we perceive, learn and retain information. HSCB models already exist, and are used by troops and decision-makers to predict the outcome of a choices during a mission. But the models “are only as good as the fidelity of the human behavior representations (HBR) that form them.” Right now, those representations are based entirely on empirical observation, which the military wants to swap out for a model that can tap into “the functions of the brain that give rise to actual human cognition.”
It’s not the first time the Pentagon has tried to map the human mind. Last year, research agency Darpa requested proposals for systems that would synchronize neural brain waves to optimize the mind’s storage capacity and memory recall. The agency has also tried to create synthetic versions of living brains, complete with “neuroscience-inspired architecture.”
The military wants cognitive mapping to help assess troop readiness in a war-zone. Their small-business solicitations include a request for embeddable body sensors that could automatically determine mental preparedness, which can be influenced by factors like fatigue, cognitive overload or stress, based on physiological and neural data. The sensors would do more than just analyze the cognitive status of their wearer — they’d be combined with the data from other team members, to instantly identify just how performance-ready a given unit actually is.
But no matter how cognitively capable troops become, they’ll still rely on computers to handle much of their workload. Humans, the solicitation notes, “are quick to arrive at initial decisions,” but computers can more quickly calculate pros and cons of different tactics. That’s why the military also wants neuroscience to “bridge the human-machine systems gap” and turn troops and computers into collaborative units. Their “neuro-cognitive control of human machine systems,” would tap into the neural signals that indicate desired actions, then transmit them to a computer to determine the optimal approach and carry it out.
And a training program that emphasizes brawny brains over bodies reflects a trend across Pentagon departments: Just last month, the Army announced a redesign of their physical-fitness program to accommodate troops spending more time behind computer screens than they do on their feet.
Photo: U.S Army
Jon Stewart, shame on you. You’re a propaganda spewing puppet and you’re no better than Glenn Beck.
In fact, the episode had been on the South Park website for viewing at any time for the past few years (they just removed it)… and nothing happened.
For 4 seasons they had that image in their opening segment for every single show… and nothing happened.
So for years on end no Muslim group, “radical” or otherwise, has threatened Matt and Trey or Comedy Central about the image of Muhammad that has been available for all to see every single day.
All of a sudden last week a group called “Revolution Muslim” threatened violence against Comedy Central if they aired an image of Muhammad which forced Comedy Central to censor the show and now you have even liberals talking about those “radical Muslims” and their threats of violence. Karl Rove couldn’t have done it any better.
Problem is, Revolution Muslim was started and run by a “converted” Israeli settler who studied at an orthodox rabbinical school in Israel before becoming a settler in the occupied territories.
You don’t think a orthadox Israeli settler would have any desire to see progressive Americans start to hate “radical Muslims” do you? You think “Revolution Muslim” helps or hurts the Israeli PR campaign after Operation Cast Lead and the Goldstone Report?
Here’s the research your team should have done before you went out and spun-up the neoconish ”radicalized Muslim” hype for your progressive audience…
“Revolution Muslim” is always there to say just the wrong thing to make Americans hate “Radical Muslims”. They praised the killing of Daniel Pearl with a childish puppet show. They sent “Get Well” wishes to the guy who shot those 13 people at Fort Hood.
Yousef al-Khattab, 41, a radical Muslim in the borough of Queens who runs RevolutionMuslim.com, claims on the site that the soldiers massacred at the Texas base deserved to be massacred, and he insists the victims are in “eternal hellfire.” As for the suspected gunman — Army psychiatrist Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan — Al-Khattab hails him as a hero. Fox News
You can count on “Revolution Muslim” to say the wrong thing at the right moment to get Americans to hate all those “radical” Muslims.
But the only thing is… “Revolution Muslim” (his creative fake “Scary American Terrorist” website) was started and ran by a man named Yousef al-Khattab. Yousef al-Khattab was born Joseph Cohen, in Brooklyn, New York. He was jewish. But not just jewish, he was a settler who went to Palestine to live on the illegal Israeli settlements.
Joseph Cohen isn’t alone though. There is another “radical Muslim” convert from Judaism (the original fake “scary American Terrorist“) who makes sure that “radical” Muslims are hated in America, his name is Adam Pearlman and he went by the “radicalized” Muslim name “Adam Gadahn“. Adam Pearlman is actually the grandson of a member of the board of directors of the Anti-Defamation League (at least he was on the board… Dr. Carl Pearlman died in 1998).
Gadahn grew up on a goat farm in rural Riverside County and moved to Santa Ana to live with his grandparents, the late Dr. Carl Pearlman and his wife, Agnes, in the mid-1990s. It was here that he learned of Islam via the Internet and later fell in with a radical sect at the Islamic Society of Orange County OC Register
And the funny thing is, after all that hate speech and those calls to violence, Cohen never got arrested. Hell, even Fox News knew exactly where he was. Guns, death threats, and all the rest and amazingly Yousef al-Khattab (Joseph Cohen) was never arrested.
A New York City bicycle cabbie who mocked the murder of journalist Daniel Pearl and posted a prayer on the Web calling for the murder of Jews is now sending a ‘Get Well Soon’ message to the suspected Fort Hood gunman, the New York Post reported.
After growing up in a jewish neighborhood in New York and attending a orthodox rabbinical school in Israel, Joseph Cohen went to live in a settlement in the West Bank to help steal Palestinian land from Palestinians.
His story is that he “converted” to Islam after meeting someone in a chat room. You know what “settlers” are like in the occupied territories don’t you Mr. Stewart? Ever see that video of them beating the old Palestinian woman with a baseball bat?
Al-Khattab has claimed that he has nothing to do with the site anymore but the person he founded it with left prior to all of this earlier this month. al-Khattab claims to have quit the site in late Dec. last year. His partner who started it with him also claims to have quit the site earlier this month. I guess no one wanted to go to jail for issuing death-threats over the internet. But someone did it.
I find it funny that after being born and raised as a jewish person, after attending orthodox rabbinical school in Israel, and after being radical enough to move to occupied territories in Palestine to live as a settler (the most hard-core of Israeli Zionists), ALL OF A SUDDEN Joseph Cohen dropped all of that teaching and suddenly became a “radical Muslim’ after a chat in a chat room. He became a “radical Muslim” then just HAPPENED to move back to the city he lived in before… Brooklyn, N.Y.
Anybody believe that crap? Jon Stewart does. So much so he mocks “radical Muslims” for threatening South Park.
Now, go here and watch Jon Stewart joke and make derogatory comments about the group that threatened the creators of South Park for showing the image of Muhammad on their recent show. Then he thanks all the “other” religions for not behaving like the “Radical Muslims” did when Stewart makes fun of their religion. He then shows clip after clip showing how they have made fun of Jewish people without anyone threatening violence.
Radical Muslim is a COINTELPRO site, run by a “converted” jewish settler pretending to be a “radical Muslim”. He is the ONE Muslim that complained about the South Park episode… an ex-radical Israeli settler, Mr. Stewart… real Muslims haven’t threatened South Park once since 2001 when they FIRST ran an image of the prophet on their show.
From What Really Happened:
Fake Al Qaeda
|“The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive the TV watcher to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US . . .” — Former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook
“Ana raicha Al Qaeda” is colloquial for “I’m going to the toilet”. A very common and widespread use of the word “Al-Qaeda” in different Arab countries in the public language is for the toilet bowl. This name comes from the Arabic verb “Qa’ada” which mean “to sit”, pertinently, on the “Toilet Bowl”. In most Arabs homes there are two kinds of toilets: “Al-Qaeda” also called the “Hamam Franji” or foreign toilet, and “Hamam Arabi” or “Arab toilet” which is a hole in the ground. Lest we forget it, the potty used by small children is called “Ma Qa’adia” or “Little Qaeda”.
So, if you were forming a terrorist group, would you call yourself, “The Toilet”?
The Phony (Mossad) Al Qaeda Cell in Palestine
Adam Yahiye Gadahn: The Fake Terrorist
The FBI lists Gadahn’s aliases as Abu Suhayb Al-Amriki, Abu Suhayb, Yihya Majadin Adams, Adam Pearlman, and Yayah.
But Adam Pearlmen is his REAL name! Adam is the grandson of the late Carl K. Pearlman; a prominent Jewish urologist in Orange County. Carl was also a member of the board of directors of the Anti-Defamation League, which was caught spying on Americans for Israel in 1993, much as AIPAC has been caught up in the more recent spy scandal.
Damian Thompson, writing for the Daily Telegraph, says there will be plenty of conspiracy theories floating around cyberspace in response to the death of Polish president Lech Kaczynski and a large number of Polish VIPs in a plane crash last week.
“One of the nastier consequences of international disasters is that conspiracy theorists rush to judgment — and I do mean rush,” writes Thompson. “The fact that the president and so many of the Polish elite were on a visit to Russia will feature prominently in the fantastic stories being cooked up in cyberspace right now. And I can say with confidence that they are being cooked up, because Poland, like most East European countries, is obsessed with conspiracies. Russians, Jews, Americans, Freemasons — they will all be blamed. Some stories will be more credible than others.’
He missed one: the international bankster cartel.
Not only did Poland decline to be a victim of the bankster loan sharking operation, Poland’s central bank had the audacity to offer the IMF a loan to “help other countries overcome the effects of the global crisis,” the AFP reported on March 29, 2010.
Poland was the only member of the 27-nation European Union to have experienced growth in 2009 and the IMF forecast that its economy would expand by 2.75 percent this year and by 3.25 percent in 2011.
Poland’s zloty grew by 1.7 percent in 2009, a remarkable feat given that European Union countries contracted by an average of 4.1 percent and no other EU economy grew at all. “Poland avoided eastern Europe’s worst lending binges. Kaczynski frustrated some of his opponents by being in no rush to head towards the euro party,” the Daily Telegraph reports today.
Earlier this month, Czech Central Bank Vice Deputy Mojmir Hampl said the IMF fueled Eastern Europe’s crisis to create a situation that would compel regional states to request the help from the globalist loan sharking operation.
“He said that the institution, which offered emergency funds for Hungary, Lithuania, Ukraine and Romania, misinterpreted some data because they are looking for new clients as the leadership changed,” HotNews reported.
Indeed, the leadership has now changed in Poland and it looks like a pro-euro political leader may replace Kaczynski. “Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s pro-euro Civic Platform party is likely to cement its grip on power in a presidential election that must now be held by June after President Lech Kaczynski died in a plane crash,” reports Bloomberg today.
Kaczynski resisted Tusk’s effort to resist adopting the euro. “Kaczynski, who over the past three years had tried to block government efforts to overhaul Poland’s debt-ridden healthcare and pension systems, was also the last EU leader besides Vaclav Klaus of the Czech Republic to sign the Lisbon Treaty, and opposed Tusk’s euro adoption goal.”
In addition, Kaczynski placed a euro-skeptic ally in charge of the central bank, Slawomir Skrzypek, who was also killed in the crash.
It looks like Poland may soon join the EU Borg hive with open arms.
Who gains from the death of so many leading Polish figures?
The main winner is Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk who has wiped out the entire opposition to his pro-euro, pro-IMF, pro-New World Order policies, even though they appear to be some allies sacrificed on the plane, including the pro swine flu vaccine ombudsman.
Nevertheless, the backbone of Polish opposition to the NWO appears to have been killed.
“Among the victims were key members of Poland’s biggest opposition party, Law and Justice, including current and former heads of the party’s parliamentary caucus, Grazyna Gesicka and Przemyslaw Gosiewski as well as the party’s main economic expert Aleksandra Natalli-Swiat, and deputy parliamentary speaker Krzysztof Putra.
The list also includes deputy parliamentary speaker Jerzy Szmajdzinski, who was the presidential candidate of the opposition Left Democratic Alliance. That means the crash killed the presidential candidates of two of Poland’s three largest parties. Kaczynski had already won the endorsement of the opposition Law and Justice party. He was to officially declare his candidacy in May,” reports Bloomberg.
With President Kaczynski out of the way and the two presidential candidates, the next president can appoint the top army leaders and the central bank governor as well as judges – in short replace the entire Polish government with people friendly to the New World Order and Bilderberg agenda.
Tusk’s presidential candidate Komorowski has just said he would set the date of a presidential election which had been due in October forward to June, giving Tusk’s party an added advantage.
Tusk appears to be just a puppet for the NWO, operating across countries, and including Putin, who is supposed to be leading the probe in the crash in Russia.
The bodies of the victims have been taken to Moscow.
There is evidence that many government officials work for the private interests of an international corporate crime syndicate, gearing up for the total destruction of nation states and the US dollar and euro to establish a one world government under the UN flagship.
Poland’s top leaders have defied the NWO by refusing the swine flu vaccination and postponing joining the euro, a “must”, according to IMF head Dominique Strauss-Kahn.
They have paid a heavy price.
True, Tusk appeared to support his health minister when she refused to buy the swine flu vaccine last autumn. But even the Austrian Health Minister criticized WHO for declaring a pandemic prematurely – but only after he saw how big the opposition to the vaccines in Austria already was.
Acting skills are vital for leadership, Adolf Hitler said.
By purging Poland of its top leadership and opposition, the NWO has sent out a signal, a clear warning to other government figures not to resist its agenda.
It is less likely that the Polish Health Minister will dare refuse vaccine the next time WHO declares a pandemic after this incident.
It is less likely that Greece’s central bankers and opposition parties will push for Greece to leave the eurozone or operate a domestic currency in parallel with the euro.
That, anyway, is the calculation of the New World Order.
The murder of the Polish leaders signals the start of a new era of terror and could be the start of a whole series of purges of government officials opposing their agenda. (read HERE)
[All the states within the sights of the overlords of the pipeline wars have been primed for revolution in the same manner, with the same likely outcomes, by the same “freedom” loving people at Freedom House. The alternative press functions as a social engine, revving-up the people’s natural discontent and driving them straight into the halls of government. In the aftermath, groomed stooges of the overlords are pushed to the front of the protests. In this set-up, there will be no other potential leaders who are willing to take the risk that comes with the burden of guiding the revolution into a state of true democracy and freedom for all.
Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Russia and all the rest of you unfortunate nations, better cultivate your networks of friends and find your own natural leaders at the grass roots level, to push them to the forefront of the revolutions on your own.
–Before it is too late.]
It’s a question that is being asked in the region in the wake of Kyrgyzstan’s bloody antigovernment demonstrations earlier this month.
The events have been portrayed as a wake-up call to other Central Asian leaders, lest their citizens follow the example set in neighboring Kyrgyzstan. And there are ample similarities between Kyrgyzstan and its fellow Central Asian states to give credence to the suggestion.
The five Central Asian countries all come under criticism in varying degrees over constraints on political freedoms, government pressure on independent media, and free speech. Nepotism and corruption, two key ingredients behind the Kyrgyz unrest, are common complaints across the region.
In Kyrgyzstan, the wave of discontent over Bakiev’s appointment of his children, siblings, and other relatives to key official posts eventually swept his government away. In an ironic twist, it was virtually the same wave Bakiev himself rode to power five years before, when his predecessor, Askar Akaev, was ousted as a result of the Tulip Revolution.
Elsewhere in Central Asia — with the exception of Turkmenistan, where tribal politics reign — members of presidential families control major businesses, banks, and wield enormous influence in politics.
In Uzbekistan, Gulnara Karimova is often touted as a potential successor to her president father, Islam Karimov. The first daughter enjoys a life of fame as a European-based fashion designer, and riches due to her reputed control of the company Zeromax, which oversees a wide range of oil and gas businesses in Uzbekistan.
In Kazakhstan, President Nursultan Nazarbaev’s second daughter, Dinara Kulibaeva, has immense influence over the resource-rich country’s energy sphere along with her husband, Timur Kulibaev, one of the country’s richest men.
In Tajikistan, Rustam Emomali, President Emomali Rahmon’s eldest son, recently made his political debut by gaining a seat on Dushanbe city council, sparking speculation that he is being groomed for the presidency.
In the weeks leading up to the Kyrgyz uprising, citizens became increasing vocal in expressing their belief that the presidential family was expanding its influence and wealth as a result of corruption, while the rest of the country struggled with poverty.
Such sentiments can also be found among ordinary people throughout Central Asia, who often feel their respective governments leave them to deal with poverty, unemployment, and lack of opportunities on their own.
Lack Of Organized Opposition
Many analyses and commentaries published after the Kyrgyz unrest predicted it wouldn’t be long before people would be demonstrating against their leaders in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and elsewhere in the region.
“The poverty, corruption, and harsh economic conditions that bred resentment in Kyrgyzstan are also present in abundance in neighboring states,” read a passage from an article posted on eurasia.net on April 21. “None of [Central Asian leaders] can rule out turmoil at home.”
But while a number of similar ingredients can be found in Kyrgyzstan and its neighbors, this doesn’t mean they will bring about the same result.
While Kyrgyzstan exhibited signs of a nascent democracy for years — for example, it is the only country in the region in which the opposition has a parliamentary faction — the powers that be in the other Central Asian states have maintained a much tighter grip.
The parliament in Uzbekistan, for example, is filled by ruling party members and their colleagues from other pro-government groups. Turkmenistan still practices a one-party system. In Kazakhstan, all parliamentary seats belong to the pro-presidential Nur Otan party.
Tajikistan’s opposition Islamic Renaissance Party officially held onto its two parliamentary seats following a February election. But for years, even though one of its two legislators was terminally ill and bed-ridden, it wasn’t allowed to replace him with another candidate.
Tajik political analyst Sabur Vahhob says that, compared to Kyrgyzstan, the other Central Asian states lack strong opposition figures. “There aren’t experienced political [opposition] leaders, capable of gathering people around themselves,” he says. “People need a leader whom they can trust, but we can’t see such personalities yet.”
Loyal Security Teams
In addition, while Bakiev’s government in recent years took steps to clamp down on independent media and imprison opposition leaders, it remained the only country in the region where people enjoyed relative freedom to hold antigovernment protests. Bakiev himself, speaking from exile in Minsk last week, implied he didn’t see anything wrong in demonstrations taking place.
Governments across Central Asia have been criticized for restricting political freedom and persecuting their political opponents.
Perhaps the harshest example in recent years came in Uzbekistan, when a rare public demonstration in the eastern town of Andijon in 2005 was brutally suppressed by government forces who fired into the crowd. The government claims 187 people, including police, were killed in the violence, but rights groups say several hundred protesters were killed. Hundreds fled the country following the crackdown, fearing imprisonment.
A key difference between Bakiev and other Central Asian leaders can be found in the people surrounding them. Most of regional leaders have taken firm control over key ministries — security, defense, and interior — by appointing close allies. Even at the level of middle management in the security and law enforcement agencies, only those most loyal to the presidential office can be found.
Bakiev, on the other hand, placed a sibling in charge of the elite presidential guard, but was at odds with his defense minister and onetime ally, Ismail Isakov, whom he eventually imprisoned.
The minimal coverage of Kyrgyz events by state-run media in Central Asia is indicative of the efforts taken in the region to prevent any carryover effect. Official media in all Central Asian countries have downplayed the scope and significance of the Kyrgyz events, while the Turkmen media has completely ignored them.
No Central Asian leader has officially recognized the interim government in Bishkek. But that does not mean the events have gone unnoticed by the governments of Central Asia.
When the unrest in Kyrgyz began to unfold, Kazakh President Nazarbaev was vocal in predicting that similar events would not take place in Kazakhstan. According to Nazarbaev, people in his oil-rich country are content with their living standards.
Speaking during the Eurasian Media Forum in Almaty on April 27, Nazarbaev described the situation in Kyrgyzstan as a mere “fight for power.” He added: “It was not a revolution. It was complete banditry.”
Others in the region appear to have taken steps designed to ensure a Kyrgyz-like political scenario does not unfold on their territory. Tajikistan appears to be taking the soft approach, while Uzbekistan is reportedly taking a hard line.
In an April 24 address to the nation, Tajik President Rahmon instructed all local government heads to have “open doors” every Saturday to meet with people and listen to their opinions, problems, and complaints.
The Uzbek response has been starkly different. According to RFE/RL’s Uzbek Service, law enforcement officials along with neighborhood committees in the southeastern Ferghana Province are asking people to sign “loyalty letters,” promising they will not agitate against the government. Such letters reportedly appeared shortly after the Kyrgyz unrest, and mainly target relatives of dissidents, political activists, and conservative religious people.
If history is any indication, the chances of any export of the revolutionary spirit seen in Kyrgyzstan depend largely on how successful the uprising is at bringing about real democratic change.
The Tulip Revolution five years ago initially brought hope of such change, and was widely welcomed by younger people in Central Asia. But those hopes faded as many expected reforms failed to materialize. This, Kyrgyz say today, merely demonstrated that the 2005 revolution wasn’t about democracy, but simply replaced once corrupt strongman with another.
Likewise, if Kyrgyz hopes once again turn into disenchantment, their neighbors’ criticisms of the “chronic revolutions” in Kyrgyzstan that lead to nothing will only be strengthened.
KARACHI: The government will register a case against former president General (r) Pervez Musharraf in light of the findings of the UN report on the assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Secretary General Senator Jahangir Badar said on Wednesday.
The PPP leader was addressing a press conference along with Sindh Chief Minister Syed Qaim Ali Shah at the Chief Minister’s House. Badar said a case would be registered against the people who were responsible for the killing of Benazir Bhutto and two committees had been formed by the prime minister and the inspector general of Punjab Police to look into this matter. The senator said the PPP would unmask the killer of Benazir Bhutto but the party did not want to get revenge from anyone. He told the media that the inquiry into the assassination of the former prime minister would be done according to the aspirations of the people. Earlier, the PPP stalwart inaugurated the membership campaign of the PPP in Sindh. app
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s former military ruler Pervez Musharraf is planning to launch a political party in a comeback bid two years after he was unseated in elections, officials said Wednesday.
Musharraf, who has been abroad since ending his nine-year stint in power, could face a criminal trial if he returns home and he is wanted for questioning by the government over the assassination of former premier Benazir Bhutto.
An aide and election official confirmed to AFP that the retired general had applied to register a new political party with the electoral authorities in the Pakistani capital Islamabad.
Mohammad Ali Saif, a former cabinet minister and now a legal adviser to Musharraf, said election authorities would hear the application on May 10.
“I have formally applied for a new political party called All Pakistan Muslim League. Pervez Musharraf is the head of this party and we will formally announce it after getting registered,” he told AFP.
Saif, an unofficial spokesman for Musharraf, is active in organising the new political party and said the former president had told him in London that he intended to return to Pakistan and fight a criminal case.
Pakistan police registered a case against Musharraf last August, a precursor to potentially putting the ex-president on trial for detaining judges in 2007 as he attempted to cling onto power.
Musharraf imposed a state of emergency and sacked about 60 judges in November 2007 when the supreme court appeared poised to declare him ineligible to contest a presidential election while in military uniform.
“Musharraf will certainly come. He will face all the charges. These are politically motivated cases with no evidence,” said Saif.
“I am in Punjab to establish our party structure here. We will establish it across Pakistan. I can see a bright future for Musharraf in Pakistan.”
Sabir Hussain Gilani, a spokesman for the election commission of Pakistan, confirmed that the body had received the application.
“They want to register their party as All Pakistan Muslim League but there are two more applications wanting the same name,” he said.
The chief election commissioner has issued notices to all the applicants and will decide on their application next month, the spokesman added.
BEIJING: China has agreed to build two new civilian nuclear reactors in Pakistan, a report said Thursday, amid persistent concerns about the safety of nuclear materials in the restive south Asian state.
Chinese companies will build at least two new 650-megawatt reactors at Chashma in Punjab province, a British daily said.
China began building a reactor at Chashma in 1991 and broke ground on a second one in 2005, which is expected to be completed next year, it said.
A statement posted on the website of the China National Nuclear Corporation on March 1 said financing for two new reactors at Chashma was agreed by the two sides in February.
Supporters of ousted Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev called for the creation of Kyrgyzstan federation, dividing the country on the southern and northern republic. At the same time, a number of Kyrgyz political scientists believed that the idea of switching to the federal system can provoke the destruction of statehood in the presence of large regional differences and the underdeveloped state institutions in Kyrgyzstan.
T. Dyikanbaev believes that without resolving this issue, it is impossible to stabilize the situation in Kyrgyzstan. In their vision, Kyrgyzstan should be divided into two democratic republics – South and North, with the delegation that they have equal powers.
However, this idea of a provisional government as a recognized source, greeted without enthusiasm. The Interior Ministry of the CD set up a special group which will focus only on “this direction”, and if necessary, will take adequate measures are taken. On the evils of such ideas expressed and the head of the Kyrgyz special services K. Duishebayev, uglyadev for this initiative, the shadow bakievtsev.
A number of Kyrgyz political scientists believed that the idea of switching to a federal structure could trigger the destruction of statehood in the presence of large regional differences and the underdeveloped state institutions in Kyrgyzstan.
As previously reported Azattyk, the population of southern regions of Kyrgyzstan are campaigning for the office of the country on South Kyrgyz democratic republic. According to the source, supporters handed out residents of Kyrgyzstan razchleneniya Free CD-ROMs, leaflets with appeals and zayavleniyaimi deposed President Kurmanbek Bakiev in which he all the blame for the incident, including blood shed on the square in Bishkek on April 7 confers on members of the opposition.
told Azattyk resident of Osh Tologon Keldibekov, an attempt to adjust the population in the south against the temporal power is almost openly, CDs and leaflets and plant at the door of the tenants in the bazaars and shops. Chapter GSNB K. Duishebayev said it – the handiwork bakievtsev, on all these facts under investigation, and against the separatists would be taken legal action.
By Matthew Nasuti
|US Plans to Withdraw Its Troops But Leave Behind Toxic Mess|
The American military presence in Afghanistan consists of fleets of aircraft, helicopters, armored vehicles, weapons, equipment, troops and facilities. Since 2001, they have generated millions of kilograms of hazardous, toxic and radioactive wastes. The Kabul Press asks the simple question:
“What have the Americans done with all that waste?”
The answer is chilling in that virtually all of it appears to have been buried, burned or secretly disposed of into the air, soil, groundwater and surface waters of Afghanistan. While the Americans may begin to withdraw next year, the toxic chemicals they leave behind will continue to pollute for centuries. Any abandoned radioactive waste may stain the Afghan countryside for thousands of years. Afghanistan has been described in the past as the graveyard of foreign armies.
Today, Afghanistan has a different title:
“Afghanistan is the toxic dumping ground for foreign armies.”
The (U.S.) Air Force Times ran an editorial on March 1, 2010, that read: “Stamp Out Burn Pits” We reprint here the first half of that editorial:
“A growing number of military medical professionals believe burn pits are causing a wave of respiratory and other illnesses among troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. Found on almost all U.S. bases in the war zones, these open-air trash sites operate 24 hours a day, incinerating trash of all forms — including plastic bottles, paint, petroleum products, unexploded ordinance, hazardous materials, even amputated limbs and medical waste. Their smoke plumes belch dioxin, carbon monoxide and other toxins skyward, producing a toxic fog that hangs over living and working areas. Yet while the Air Force fact sheet flatly states that burn pits “can be harmful to human health and environment and should only be used until more suitable disposal capabilities are established,” the Pentagon line is that burn pits have “no known long-term health effects.”
On April 12, 2010, the Richmond Times-Dispatch carried an article by David Zucchino who investigated the American burn pits in Iraq. He interviewed Army Sgt. 1st Class Francis Jaeger who hauled military waste to the Balad burn pit which was being operated by a civilian contractor for the Pentagon. Jaeger told Zucchino:
“We were told to burn everything – electronics, bloody gauze, the medics’ biohazard bags, surgical gloves, cardboard. It all went up in smoke.”
The Pentagon now admits to operating 84 “official” burn pits in Iraq and Afghanistan. The number of unofficial burn pits is not known. The Pentagon claims that it is phasing out its burn pits in favor of incinerators and that 27 incinerators are currently operating in Iraq and Afghanistan with 82 more to be added in the near future.
According to a website called the “Burn Pits Action Center,” hundreds of American veterans who came in contact with burn pit smoke have been diagnosed with cancer, neurological diseases, cardiovascular disease, breathing and sleeping problems and various skin rashes. In 2009, they filed more than 30 lawsuits in Federal courts across the United States, naming Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR), and its former parent company Halliburton. These companies were named because of their involvement in the LOGCAP (Logistics Civil Augmentation Program) contracts for Iraq and Afghanistan. Several KBR entities either managed or assisted in the management of the American military’s waste in both countries and allegedly operated some or all of the burn pits. Additional lawsuits were filed in 2010, including one in Federal District Court in New Jersey.
The lawsuits reveal that the Pentagon has ignored American and international environmental laws and the results appear to be the widespread release of hazardous pollutants into the air, soil, surface water and groundwater across Afghanistan.This is a persistent problem that continues today. Unlike Saudi Arabia which insisted that American forces cleanup their pollution after the war to oust Iraq from Kuwait in 1991, or the Government of Canada which likewise insisted on a strict cleanup of American bases on its soil, the Government of Afghanistan has been unable to force the Americans and their allies to repair all the environmental damage that they have caused and continue to cause. Afghanistan does not want to wind up like Vietnam. While American ground combat units withdrew from South Vietnam in 1972, neither Vietnam nor its people have recovered from the long term environmental damage and mutagenic effects that American military operations and their exotic chemicals caused.
Tajik General Rauf Yusufov, the senior Interior Ministry official in Tajikistan’s northern Sughd Province, said on April 28 that all of the suspects are from Sughd. He said most currently live in or near Moscow and maintain ties with IMU members inside Tajikistan.
Yusufov claimed that the Moscow-based suspects are raising funds to support the IMU in northern Tajikistan. He also alleged that they force Tajik labor migrants in Russia to join the IMU and to pay membership fees.
The IMU is known to have some support in northern Tajikistan, especially in the Isfara district that borders Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan.
The Interior Ministry office in Sughd announced earlier this month that two suspected IMU activists had been deported from Russia.
During the Tajik Civil War (1992-1997), many IMU activists joined the United Tajik Opposition and fought against government forces. After the signing of the 1997 peace agreement ending the conflict, many of those IMU members moved to Afghanistan and joined armed Islamic groups.
Last year the head of the IMU in Isfara, Anvar Qayumov, was detained in Afghanistan and deported to Tajikistan where he was sentenced to life imprisonment.
At least 16 other suspected IMU members were jailed in Tajikistan last year, four of them for life.
Setback for CIA after Pakistan intelligence official admits drone attack failed to kill the Pakistan Taliban commander
The Taliban leader in Pakistan, Hakimullah Mehsud, survived an American drone strike in January and is alive and well, a senior official with Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence agency told the Guardian today.
Mehsud was reported to have died in a CIA drone strike in South Waziristan in January but, although Pakistan’s interior minister claimed he had been killed, the death was never confirmed by either US or Pakistani intelligence.
Today the senior intelligence official said he had seen video footage of the missile attack on Mehsud but other intelligence had since confirmed the insurgent leader survived. He declined to elaborate further.
“He is alive,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “He had some wounds but he is basically OK.”
Mehsud’s apparent survival will be a blow to the CIA, which intensified efforts to kill the flamboyant young Taliban leader early this year after heappeared in a video alongside an al-Qaida operative who killed seven American spies at a base in southern Afghanistan in late December.
The failed attack on Mehsud came at the start of an unprecedented onslaught by CIA-controlled unmanned aircraft in the tribal belt. The CIA has carried out 38 attacks so far this year, the official said, compared with 49 in the whole of 2009.
“The US government is under pressure because it is unable to achieve much in Afghanistan. This is one way of hitting their al-Qaida enemies, as they define them,” the official said.
Drone strikes are deeply unpopular in Pakistan because of civilian casualties. The New America Foundation recently reported that between January 2009 and March 2010 the drones killed 690 alleged insurgents and 181 innocent villagers. CIA figures put the civilian tally for the same period at 20.
The Pakistani official estimated the civilian toll was “between the two figures” but insisted that targeting had improved. “For the Americans, this is an effective way of doing things from a distance with little collateral damage. I give full credit to the CIA for this.”
The Washington Post reported this week that the CIA has started usingmore compact drones and smaller missiles in an effort to reduce civilian casualties.
The intelligence official denied reports that the Taliban deputy leader, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, had been captured in Karachi last January “by accident”.
US intelligence pinpointed Baradar in a housing estate in a well-to-do part of Karachi, he said, but the raid to capture him was entirely Pakistani. “There was no American around,” he said.
Baradar was being jointly interrogated by CIA and ISI agents and had yielded useful information, he said. For example, he claimed to have last met the Taliban leader in Afghanistan, Mullah Muhammad Omar, two years ago.
He also rejected claims that Pakistan had captured Baradar to scupper nascent Afghan peace talks, saying that Baradar had disdained President Hamid Karzai as “not even a real Pashtun”.
In March, Kai Eide, the UN’s former special representative to Afghanistan said he believed Pakistan wanted to prevent talks between the UN, the Afghan government and the Taliban, to retain control of the process.
The senior official said the ISI would be “very, very willing” to play a role in negotiations with the Taliban, but only if called upon by both the Afghan and US governments. For now, he said, Pakistan’s spies are “sitting on the sidelines, watching”.
“There are a number of different efforts and nobody knows what anyone else is doing. It’s a very fragmented effort.” He added that “if it’s meant to confuse the Taliban, it’s working”.
One stumbling block, he said, was the clashing policies of Britain and the US. “The British are more amenable to negotiations and talking,” he said. “The Americans are attempting to create conditions where the Taliban will be forced to come to the table. In my opinion they will never achieve that.”
A western diplomat in Islamabad said British officials were more inclined to talks than their US couterparts, but said policy had not been fixed in either country because “otherwise things would be happening”.
The ISI official denied his agency retains close ties with Jalaluddin Haqqani, an al-Qaida-linked warlord whom America blames for recent mayhem in Afghanistan, including a suicide attack on the Indian embassy.
He admitted the agency had once been close to Haqqani but insisted that recent US allegations came from people who “lived in the past”. He regretted that Pakistan had broken its links with the warlord because “otherwise, resolution of the problems in Afghanistan today would be so much easier for all of us”.
The ISI was heavily criticised in a recent United Nations report into the death of Benazir Bhutto in December 2007. The official described the report as a “sub-standard work with a clear agenda”.
He said: “In the report, statements are made and inferences drawn on condition of anonymity and hearsay. Who in God’s name does that?”
Hakimullah Mehsud’s apparent survival represents a second miraculous escape in the career of a youthful, ruthless militant leader.
The Pakistani government previously reported that the flamboyant tribesman, thought to be about 30 years old, was killed during a leadership struggle last August.
Despite his remarkable good fortune, however, Hakimullah’s days as a Taliban leader may be numbered. According to a senior ISI official, his Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan organisation has been weakened by a sweeping army assault on its South Waziristan stronghold.
Mehsud’s leadership has been challenged by other figures, too, including his rival Wali-ur-Rehman. “He may not be in the leadership position,” the intelligence official said. “His rise was accidental. He was mister nobody, people found it difficult to accept him.”
Mehsud rose to militant fame on the back of his ambition and showy cruelty. He sprang to prominence in 2007 with the humiliating kidnapping of over 200 Pakistani soldiers in South Waziristan.
A year later, he led dozens of ambushes on Nato supply convoys as they passed through the Khyber Pass; in one instance he invited reporters to film him at the wheel of a looted American Humvee.
Hakimullah became Taliban leader in August after a CIA drone killed the Tehrik-i-Taliban founder, Baitullah Mehsud. He also became known for cruelty. In Orakzai tribal agency, which was under his sway, Taliban fighters preyed on minority Sikhs and carried out bloody sectarian attacks on Shias.
Whatever Mehsud’s fate, the Taliban remain a potent force. Yesterday, a suicide bomber rammed his car into a checkpoint on the outskirts of Peshawar, killing five policemen. In North Waziristan, a clash at a checkpoint left four militants dead and injured one soldier.
90,000 Okinawans Attend Massive April 25 Rally Demanding Closure of the Futenma U.S. Marine Base & Opposing A “Replacement” Base In Henoko
Massive rally in Okinawa on April 25. 90,000 people attended. Many more intended to join the rally, but were stuck in traffic en route. Okinawa Governor Nakaima addressed the crowd, promising to listen to the protests.
基地を撤去 (Kichi wo tekkyo) means “Remove the bases”
Update: Later on April 25, 0ver 1,200 attended a candle vigil in Tokyo (photos below).
At the solidarity event in Tokyo’s Meiji Park on Sunday evening, candles were lit and 1,200 people formed the letters NO BASE OKINAWA.
Let’s be honest – there is no military threat in the Far East that really requires tens of thousand U.S. soldiers or marines to be based here. The only recent event when the Okinawa marines were useful was when “papa Bush” as he is called in Japan decided to send them to Kuwait in 1991, almost 20 years ago.
And Japan’s tax payers are reluctantly footing a huge part of the bill, as part of deals made in the 1970s by the corrupt Liberal Democratic Party law maker and shadow “king maker” or “most ruthless” “back-room string puller” Shin Kanemaru.
This is what Prime Minister Hatoyama is trying to change: “The 2008 Japanese defense budget allocated ¥146.3 billion for labor costs, ¥36.2 billion for FIP, ¥25.3 billion for utilities, ¥500 million for training relocation, for a total of ¥208.3 billion.” – Wikipedia
Photo The Mainichi
From Satoko Norimatsu of Peace Philosophy Centre Blog:Number: 90,000. With the rallies on the two other islands, 93,700. Not quite reached the goal, but significant.
My husband said: “Governor Nakaima just had a loud voice.”
Nakaima made two main points: elimination of Futenma danger, and reduction of base burden of Okinawans. Both ambiguous terms. He made only one clear point though: permanent use of Futenma could not be tolerated.
People’s New Party’s Shimoji, the only MP who was absent (Even LDP’s Shimajiri was there!!!), could say all those things too and stay politically correct.
But again, any Nakaima is better than No Nakaima.
The three mayors, Iha of Ginowan, Inamine of Nago, and Shimabuku of Uruma, all made powerful and convincing statements, pretty much what they have been saying every day.
Japanese Communist Party’s head Shii was there. He was the only party head present. I am disappointed Social Democratic Party’s Fukushima did not attend.
All 41 municipalities participated: 39 mayors attending and 2 their reps.
The biggest significance was that this was the first all-party rally of this magnitude in Okinawa and Japan.
Two more photos from the Tokyo event at former NHK directorShimura’s blog:
Video from Okinawa Times:
Eco News from Japan and Asia!
Buenos Aires News.Net
Wednesday 28th April, 2010
Egyptian military forces have killed four Palestinians by pumping poisonous gas into a cross-border tunnel.
The tunnel, that was being used to transport smuggled goods form one side of the border to the other, was sprayed with the poison gas, suffocating the occupants.
The Hamas Interior Ministry later said the gas used to try to clear the tunnel was poisonous. Besides those killed, six people were injured.
Egyptian border security official have not commented on the deaths but Hamas security officials have reported that Egyptian security forces have sprayed gas into tunnels before, without killing people.
Egypt has been under pressure to seal off the hundreds of tunnels which are sometimes used to bring in weapons for Islamic militants, but which are normally used to transport consumer goods.
—S P Seth
There is an often-heard cliché that there are three dominant elements in Pakistan’s polity: Allah (religion), Army and America — its order varying according to the prevailing situation
For some years now, Pakistan has been getting a lot of international attention but for the wrong reasons. It is fighting the Taliban but without being sure of its strategic rationale. Hence, its on-again off-again deals with the militants, while still keeping up the military pressure, have not borne fruit.
The lack of strategic clarity is at the root of a lot of Pakistan’s problems. Pakistan is a country with great potential. But this potential has been squandered by its leadership, sadly lacking in a coherent vision or blueprint for the country. In other words, Pakistan has been badly served by its leaders.
Because its political leadership failed to develop self-sustaining constitutional processes (a working democracy), it enabled the country’s military leadership to subvert an imperfect political system. Not only that. The army generals even acted like they were the country’s saviours. Indeed, when the political rot reached its stinking worst (with large-scale corruption and a political culture of impunity), the people of Pakistan did believe, at times, that the generals were their best bet.
But, by God, the generals proved as self-aggrandising as the politicians they overthrew or co-opted. In other words, Pakistan went on in circles, with its establishment (political as well as military) forsaking the country’s good for their own gratification. And the process continues.
Some commentators believe that the proposed devolution of political power to the prime minister in cabinet might herald a change. But this is deceptive. The dominance of the army in the country’s political culture, whether directly running the country or in the background, is too much a fact of life in Pakistan.
In the midst of all this, it is the people of Pakistan who are paying a high price, with increasing poverty, high unemployment, loss of social cohesion and so on. The allocation of financial resources, both budgetary and in terms of foreign aid (largely from the US), were disproportionately diverted to the army and even lined the pockets of those entrusted with national good. It is no wonder that the Taliban have become the recruiting ground for many Pakistanis who have lost faith in the country’s leadership and what is left of its governing system.
Two basic requirements for any credible governance are the physical and economic security of the people at a minimal level. And on both of these counts, Pakistan is under terrible strain. In some areas, like the tribal belt and parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, militants seem to operate at will. Even Lahore is now prone to random attacks.
The military obviously reacts to such violence with its own operations, which tends to only compound the situation. The military operations in Swat, and now in the tribal belt, are a colossal tragedy in terms of displacement of the civilian population and civilian casualties, whether through US drone operations or the army’s action. And the result of these on-off operational activities is that more and more people are losing confidence in the state’s capacity to deal with the militants. There seems to be a growing sense of helplessness among the people caught in the middle.
The dominance of the army in Pakistan’s national affairs, since almost independence, has had the effect of narrowing the country’s national perspective. As Ahmed Rashid wrote in The New York Review of Books last year: “The army has always defined Pakistan’s national security goals. Currently, it has two strategic interests: first, it seeks to ensure that a balance of terror and power is maintained with respect to India, and the jihadis are seen as part of this strategy.” Rashid goes on: “ Second, the army supports the Afghan Taliban as a hedge against US withdrawal from Afghanistan and also against Indian influence in Kabul, which has grown considerably.”
Indeed, a perceived threat from India has been a constant, which has had the effect of elevating the army’s role in national affairs, and distorting and skewing the country’s national priorities. National security thus came to be seen largely as a function of the army and its weaponry. But a country’s national security is much more than just military hardware. For a country to feel secure and confident, it needs a secure economic base with a blueprint for the future.
This has been sorely lacking, thus making Pakistan subordinate to the strategic objectives of external powers, principally the US. Since the 1950s, it has been tied up, willingly or unwillingly, with the US strategy in our part of the world, first, against the Soviet Union and now as part of the US war against the Taliban and terrorism.
But it is important to note that, by and large, Pakistan joined the Western alliance system for its own strategic reasons: to secure political, military and economic assistance from the US to strengthen its position against a perceived security threat from India. But it did not quite work like that. It never does in a dependency situation. In the bargain, though, it compromised its sovereignty to the policy dictates of the US. This dependence on the US also distorted its internal polity. The often-heard cliché that there are three dominant elements in Pakistan’s polity: Allah (religion), Army and America (its order varying according to the prevailing situation) might be an over-simplification. But, like all clichés, this too has some truth to it.
For instance, the execution of Prime Minister Bhutto in 1979, most likely, would have created a strong reaction from the US. But General Ziaul Haq was on his way to become an important US ally in the wake of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. And, in some fundamental ways, Pakistan’s polity took a turn toward an extreme version of Islam, which is haunting the country to this day.
There is a need for a complete rethink of Pakistan’s national ethos, with more emphasis on the needs of people rather than the self-aggrandisement of its leaders. If people can be galvanised into a national movement to redefine the country’s charter, Pakistan will be a reckonable country. It will also channel people’s energies into a constructive enterprise, as against the mayhem being inflicted by the extremists and militants.
It is a tall order. But without a new beginning, Pakistan is likely to keep going in circles until it has no way to reclaim its national identity.
The writer is a senior journalist and academic based in Sydney, Australia
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters)- Iran and Egypt are gearing up for battle against the United States and its allies over Israel and developing countries’ rights to atomic technology at a major meeting on the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is expected to attend the conference, which opens on Monday and runs until May 28. He will be facing off with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who heads the U.S. delegation at the meeting at U.N. headquarters.
Diplomats expect Ahmadinejad to take a defiant stand against the United States and its Western allies, accusing them of trying to deprive developing states of nuclear technology while turning a blind eye toward Israel’s nuclear capability.
The 189 signatories of the landmark 1970 arms control treaty — which is intended to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and calls on those with atomic warheads to abandon them — gather every five years to assess compliance with the pact and progress made toward achieving its goals.
The last NPT review conference in 2005 was widely considered a disaster. After weeks of procedural bickering led by the former U.S. administration, Egypt and Iran, the meeting ended with no agreement on a final declaration.
Analysts and U.N. diplomats hope things will be different this time and that the conference can breathe new life into a treaty that has failed to prevent North Korea from building a nuclear bomb or force Iran to stop uranium enrichment. A Pakistani-led illicit nuclear supply network and slow progress on disarmament have also highlighted the NPT’s weaknesses.
Israel is presumed to have a nuclear arsenal but neither confirms nor denies having one. Like India and Pakistan, it has not signed the NPT and will not participate in the conference.
Ahmadinejad is the highest-ranking official attending the conference. He will travel to New York [ID:nN28144835] as diplomats from the five permanent U.N. Security Council members and Germany are meeting nearly every day in Manhattan to hammer out a draft resolution imposing a fourth round of sanctions against Tehran over its nuclear program.
Diplomats say the six are far from agreement as Russia and China push to dilute a U.S-drafted sanctions proposal.
THE IMPORTANCE OF SUCCESS
“A successful conference would add legitimacy to the treaty at a time when its effectiveness is in doubt because of Iran’s and North Korea’s nuclear programs,” David Albright, head of the Institute for Science and International Security, said in testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs.
North Korea withdrew from the treaty in 2003 and tested nuclear devices in 2006 and 2009. Western powers have called for stiffer penalties for nations that withdraw from the pact, making tougher U.N. inspections mandatory, and other steps that would make it difficult for states to develop atomic weapons.
Western envoys say a successful meeting would yield a declaration that hits all three NPT pillars — disarmament, non-proliferation, and peaceful use of nuclear energy.
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said the United States and other governments “understand the crucial importance of this conference … and indeed the risk to the viability of the Non-Proliferation Treaty Regime if this conference, following 2005, does not make progress” in all three areas.
Western diplomats said U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration, unlike that of his predecessor George W. Bush, was trying to promote a unanimous agreement at the conference.
This time, diplomats said, it was France that was actively opposing a proposed reaffirmation of disarmament pledges made at an NPT conference in 2000 — despite public statements from Paris that it is committed to disarming.
In 2005, the Bush administration repudiated those pledges that it and the other countries allowed to keep nuclear arms under the NPT — Britain, China, France and Russia — had made in 2000, enraging the 118-nation bloc of non-aligned nations.
Rice said Obama’s April 2009 speech in which he called for a world without nuclear weapons and a new U.S.-Russian arms reduction deal showed “how committed the United States is to the non-proliferation regime and to disarmament.”
Speaking to reporters this week, Egypt’s U.N. Ambassador Maged Abdelaziz praised Obama’s new disarmament moves but said developing nations wanted more. He also said it was important not to focus exclusively on the nuclear threat posed by Iran.
“Success in dealing with Iran will depend to a large extent on how successfully we deal with the establishment of a nuclear-free zone” in the Middle East, Abdelaziz said.
“We refuse the existence of any nuclear weapons … whether it is in Iran or whether it is in Israel,” he said.
Egypt has submitted a working paper to the review conference demanding an international meeting with Israel’s participation that would begin work on a treaty to establish a nuclear-arms-freeze zone in the Middle East.
Diplomats told Reuters that the United States, Russia and the other three permanent U.N. Security Council members were open to the idea and hope to strike a compromise with Cairo.
(Editing by Mohammad Zargham)
Image by ramtops via Flickr
“We have them thinking that we can track them anywhere, that we’ve got devices in their cars, their houses, everywhere,” said the former official, who remains a consultant on intelligence issues.
“They’re so afraid to stay in their houses at night they’re digging foxholes to sleep in.”
The whispering campaign, carried out by local Pakistanis and Afghans on the CIA payroll, is made all the more potent by actual drone attacks, which now involve the use of smaller missiles and advanced surveillance technology to minimize civilian deaths, according to a report today by The Post’s Joby Warrick and Peter Finn.
Contributing to the frequency of the attacks in Pakistan and Iraq is the ever-increasing ability of the CIA and its Pentagon partners to quickly react to the intercepted cell-phone calls of insurgency leaders.
“As soon as they go up on a phone, if we’ve got one of those numbers, we can almost instantly trace it and locate it,” a U.S. counterinsurgency operative working on the Af-Pak border told me recently. “And they relay that information to us, so we can catch them crossing the border” into Afghanistan.
“It’s like mowing a lawn,” he said. “The problem is, like a lawn, they keep coming.”
Al Qaeda’s top inner circle, on the other hand, long ago discarded cell phones in favor of "6th century technology," the former official said — messages delivered by hand — to foil the drones.
In 2008 the Post’s Bob Woodward wrote of new, top secret techniques that were proving to be a game-changer for U.S. forces battling al Qaeda in Iraq.
"This is very sensitive and very top secret, but there are secret operational capabilities that have been developed by the military to locate, target, and kill leaders of al Qaeda in Iraq, insurgent leaders, renegade militia leaders. That is one of the true breakthroughs," Woodward told "60 Minutes" while promoting his new book, "The War Within: A Secret White House History 2006-2008."
Woodward compared the new techniques to the Manhattan Project, the top-secret, $20 billion project during World War II to build an atomic bomb.
Jack “Steppe Eagle”
yesterday in Almaty, Kazakhstan formed a second battalion of peacekeeping brigade, as well as the opening ceremony of a training center Kazbriga and rewarding 1976 Almaty soldiers taking part in an international operation in Iraq.
– Training Center worth 780 thousand dollars consists of a set for training fire at Ili range and computerized language classes in the military unit 61993, – said Head of International Cooperation Department, the U.S. Armed Forces Lt. Col. James Yonce.
A special representative of NATO Secretary General for the Caucasus and Central Asia, Robert Simmons, said:
– Training Center Kazbriga designed to improve the training Kazakhstan, participating in international peacekeeping operations. In addition, the center will be open today, is indispensable for conducting exercises – such as scheduled for August this year, maneuvers “Steppe Eagle 2010”.
Asked whether the citizens of Kazakhstan to take part in the hostilities of an international force, U.S. Ambassador to Kazakhstan Richard Hoagland said :
– Perhaps the mission of Kazakhstan will be of assistance to civilians and police patrols. Kazbrig wonderfully proved itself in Iraq, and it is possible that a similar mission will carry out in Afghanistan.
After the presentations, Kazakh peacekeepers who served in Iraq from 2003 to 2008, they were awarded with memorable characters.
– If you give command, again I go to hot spot – said receiving the award, the Colonel Ruslan Zhakupov.
[It is time for the Russians to expose some of the history of the CIA and its drug-running operations.]
WorldPoliticsReview / Matthew C. DuPee and Sara Kauffman | 20 Apr 2010
Russian officials have recently accused U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan of “conniving with drug producers” and urged the coalition to pursue aggressive aerial eradication operations against Afghanistan’s opium poppy crops. Despite having spent over $1 billion on counternarcotics programs in Afghanistan since 2002, including eradication efforts, the U.S. and the U.K. have failed to curb the illicit drug industry there.
Moscow’s tough stance on narcotics stems from its own internal consumption levels, which have steadily reached epidemic proportions. According to 2008 records, up to 21 percent of the world’s production of illicit opiates ended up in Russia, resulting in 30,000 deaths blamed on heroin-induced overdoses annually.
“We are obviously very dissatisfied with the lack of attention from NATO and the United States to our complaints about this problem,” Dmitry Rogozin, Russia’s envoy to NATO, told reporters on March 12. Russia is not convinced the U.S. and NATO are doing enough to stifle the cultivation of opium poppy and the processing of opium into heroin.
The complaints focus on the recent decline in the amount of poppy eradicated annually in Afghanistan. Between 2008 and 2009, only 10,000 hectares of opium poppy, or less than 4 percent of the land devoted to its cultivation, were eradicated, compared to 19,000 hectares eradicated in 2007 and 15,300 hectares in 2006. The massive decrease in eradication reflects NATO’s new emphasis on attacking entrepreneurs who benefit from the drug trade higher up the value chain, while sparing the lower-level participants, such as farmers.
Russian officials have slammed this approach and instead are demanding that NATO pursue an aerial eradication program designed to eliminate 25 percent of Afghanistan’s poppy fields, a notion previously endorsed by the U.S. State Department but rejected by the Afghan government in 2007. The growing divide between Russian and NATO officials over Afghanistan’s war on drugs once again brings a highly controversial counternarcotics issue to the table: to spray or not to spray?
Over the past few decades, aerial spraying has been used against narco-landscapes across the world, including Mexico, Peru, Colombia and Burma — always with disastrous or misleading results. In 2002, just four years after the high-profile aerial eradication campaigns linked to the Plan Colombia initiative were first introduced, the CIA concluded that Colombia’s coca production had increased by 25 percent. A decade before, in 1988, considerable concern arose when the Reagan administration proposed an aerial eradication campaign that would spray the herbicide Spike (tebuthiuron) over the vast coca plantations of central Peru. Scientists noted the wide-ranging hazards Spike posed to the tropical environment, including the poisoning of waterways. Spike contained known carcinogens, which made it illegal to use in the United States at the time and ultimately prompted it to be taken off the international market by 1989.
Similarly, the aerial spraying of Burma’s opium crops in 1986 and 1987 with 2.4-D, known better by its commercial name, Weed-B-Gone, sickened thousands of villagers while poisoning waterways and rice paddies in the surrounding areas. The tons of herbicide dropped from U.S.-supplied Thrush Turbo spray planes had little meaningful impact on the cultivation of opium poppies in Burma. Despite the aerial spraying campaign, Burmese opium production rose from 350 tons in 1985 to 1280 tons in 1989, due to favorable weather conditions.
Russia’s criticism of NATO’s disappointing counternarcotics campaign in Afghanistan reflects a bitter irony of the tragedy that has unfolded in Afghanistan over the past 30 years.
After all, it was the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan that helped propel the country into the realm of industrial-scale narcotics production. [The author of this piece seems to be clueless about the CIA efforts to use opium/heroin as an anti-Soviet weapon.]
Fierce resistance to the Soviet invasion, particularly in the rural areas, provoked harsh retaliations from Soviet forces, which intentionally targeted farms, orchards, harvests, irrigation systems and canals. Soviet scorched-earth operations resulted in the destruction of one-quarter to one-third of all irrigation systems — such as the karez (underground aqueducts) as well as above-ground irrigation ditches and canals — causing a severe disruption in water distribution.
The lack of functioning irrigation systems led many farmers to seek out alternative high-value crops that consumed little water, like opium poppy. By 1987, analysts reported that the devastation caused to Afghanistan’s agricultural infrastructure prevented most farmers from accessing agricultural inputs such as improved seed, fertilizer, and agricultural machinery for legal crops.
Not surprisingly, Afghan drug production soared to record levels under the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan between 1979 and 1989. Opium production nearly doubled between 1982 (300 tons) and 1983 (575 tons), and had almost tripled by 1987 (875 tons). By 1991, Afghanistan’s role as a global opium producer was firmly established, with the production of 1,980 tons.
Recognizing the growing number of drug addicts among their citizens, the Soviets launched their own unsuccessful eradication campaign against illicit drugs — Operation Poppy-86 — in 1986, destroying 7,500 acres of poppy fields and 250,000 acres of marijuana fields, and arresting over 4,500 traffickers. The effort did little to curb the growing appetite for illegal drugs throughout the Eastern bloc. Last year, the U.N. estimated that drug dealers in Russia stood to make $13 billion from selling the 50 tons of illegal heroin available on the streets of Moscow alone.
Although materializing into a game of political tit-for-tat on the international stage, Russia and NATO’s squabble over the counternarcotics campaign in Afghanistan is at least bringing much-needed attention to the scourge of the global heroin business. The knee-jerk reaction of offloading hundreds of tons of toxic chemicals over Afghanistan’s agricultural sector has been wisely rejected by NATO and Afghan officials, sparing Afghanistan’s ecosystem and rural livelihoods alike. However, without addressing more critical aspects of the drug trade, such as border-security measures and interdiction along the narcotics value chain — including the illicit trade in the vital precursor chemicals needed to refine opium into heroin in the first place — current counternarcotics efforts, both in Afghanistan and market destinations like Russia, will remain stymied.
News.Az interviews Eldar Zeynalov, director of the Azerbaijani Human Rights Centre.
This region is plagued with instability; there has been tension in the North Caucasus, including terrorist attacks and murders of high ranking state officials over the past 20 years. Three conflicts – Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia and Abkhazia – are still unresolved. Against this backdrop, the Winter Olympics will be held in Sochi in 2014. What is the likelihood of new threats and risks in the region?
Well, it’s madness to hold the Olympics near such a centre of tension as Chechnya. In saying ‘near’, I don’t mean geographically, as it’s not that close, but don’t forget that Chechens got to Budennovsk and armed Chechens came within 500 metres of the Kremlin when they took hostages at the performance of Nord-Ost at the Dubrovka theatre. Because of corruption in the law-enforcement agencies, the militants can move unnoticed and such an event as the Olympic Games may attract the attention of terrorists. They will try to do something to achieve their political goals and attract attention.
And let’s not forget that this is a border with Georgia. I mean the internationally recognized border, not Abkhazia. Once, before 1918, this territory was part of Georgia, until either Denikin or someone else in the White Army occupied Sochi. Since that time it has been considered Russian territory and Georgia has recently recalled this. Moreover, as soon as rumours emerged about Sochi’s chance of hosting the Olympic Games, we saw some unpleasant incidents there, some explosions on the beaches and so on. This is something of a hint and the first signal.
Sochi is also a place for show business and criminals. It is not a quiet spot in terms of security for the competitors. I think a place could have been found well away from the centres of tension. Sochi is near Abkhazia and Chechnya. I do not know who suggested it, but whoever it was was extremely incautious. I mean the international figures who voted for this.
You mentioned Chechnya. Might the United States and the West try to prevent the Olympic Games being held, since it is no secret that Washington once did its utmost to bring about the collapse of the USSR?
I don’t think this is the same. Why? Because whatever might be said about international organizations and others, the world is balanced because of the agreement of the superpowers and the Americans will never penetrate Russia, as they could be caught. For example, there has not been a single case of an American or American organization being caught in Chechnya supporting Chechens. The Arabs support them and it’s clear that the Arabs are quite friendly towards America.
Nevertheless, America does not go there, because it’s too risky. The geopolitical balance includes such elements, as, for example, the communist government of Cuba, the left-wing regime in Nicaragua, the unstable regime in Venezuela. As soon as America makes a mistake somewhere, the strategic bombers leave for Venezuela, Nicaragua recognizes the independence of Abkhazia and so on. These are pro-Moscow steps. Therefore, no one will try to hamper the Olympic Games. I don’t think they will. It could have been done at the stage when the venue for the games was being selected.
What undercover steps may Moscow take to ensure security at the Olympic Games?
I think these will be steps taken for show, not undercover. Broad, counter-terror operations will be conducted in the North Caucasus to ensure the security of the participants in the Olympic Games. In addition, as Sochi is at issue, it will be possible to justify such operations and such pressure even beyond the scope of the Chechen conflict. For example, laptops were confiscated from human rights activists in Krasnodar because there was something Chechen there and a criminal case was almost instituted against the human rights activists beyond Chechnya.
Are changes to be expected in the Karabakh, Abkhaz and Ossetian conflicts in connection with the Olympic Games in Sochi in 2014?
Well, it’s not worth expecting any major changes in the Karabakh conflict until most of the Caspian oil has been pumped out. Some major change in the balance that would make the Americans get more involved in Caucasian affairs is unlikely. And until then, there will be peace in Karabakh without a single peacekeeper, no one will change the status quo and no one will try to annex land or expand their territory.
As for Ossetia and Abkhazia, these tiny states are backed by a great superpower with a truncheon in his hand and whoever tries to use force will have to deal with Russia’s Ivan. A similar situation could once be seen in Serbia. Until Russia gave up on Milosevic, no one could do anything to him. After his surrender, bombing started, there was American military pressure on Serbia, the opposition became bolder and took to the streets and something changed. It will be the same with Abkhazia and Ossetia. Until Russia surrenders them, nothing will change. Meanwhile, Russia is not interested in changing anything there. It feels at ease there and plans to have a reserve naval base in Abkhazia instead of one in Crimea, in Sevastopol. And if this plan goes ahead, Russia will never leave, just as the Americans do not leave Guantanamo.
Sixties Activist Timothy Fitzgerald Reflects on the Fortieth Anniversary of the Invasion of Cambodia and Kent State Killings
At his book signing for his memoir “The Wawona Brotherhood: The San Jose State Campus Revolt,” sixties activist and author Timothy Fitzgerald plans to discuss the fortieth anniversary of the United States’ invasion of Cambodia and the Kent State killings. On April 29, 1970, President Nixon announced the invasion of Cambodia. Thus, he widened the war effort in South East Asia. At San Jose State University in California, thihs happened to coincide with a national conference of the New Mobilization. This thrust San Jose State into playing a key role of protesting the war in Cambodia the following weekend. The impressions taken throughout May 1970 into the summer of 1970 are reported in Fitzgerald’s memoir.
San Jose, Calif. (PRWEB) April 28, 2010 — At his book signing in San Jose for his memoir “The Wawona Brotherhood: The San Jose State Campus Revolt,” sixties activist and author Timothy Fitzgerald (http://www.timfitzgerald.org) plans to discuss the fortieth anniversary of the United States’ invasion of Cambodia and the Kent State killings.
On April 29, 1970, President Nixon announced the invasion of Cambodia. Thus, he widened the war effort in South East Asia. At San Jose State University in California, this happened to coincide with a national conference of the New Mobilization. This thrust San Jose State into playing a key role of protesting the war in Cambodia the following weekend.
|“Looking back over the span of forty years, it is evident that the protests of the invasion of Cambodia and the killings at Kent State made a significant impression on national student anti-war movement,” said author and activist Timothy Fitzgerald.|
The impressions taken throughout May 1970 into the summer of 1970 are reported in Fitzgerald’s memoir. From April 23, 1970 to May 10, 1970, Mr. Fitzgerald, who was an acting senior student body official at San Jose State, was involuntarily confined to a mental health facility under suspicious circumstances. During this time, four student anti-war protestors were killed at Kent State on May 4, 1970.
After Fitzgerald was released, he urged the movement on campus to assign UC Berkeley the responsibility for organizing further demonstrations. San Jose State having received brutal backlash from plainclothes police when the students attempted a five hundred person off-campus protest and march. Nonetheless, as a result of playing this leadership role, the campus was visited by key leaders of the national anti-war movement who urged students to organize and resist the draft.
“Looking back over the span of forty years, it is evident that the protests of the invasion of Cambodia and the killings at Kent State made a significant impression on national student anti-war movement. About 60 percent of campuses across the nation protested the killings,” said author and activist Timothy Fitzgerald. “This moved many students who were undecided about the war to join hand-in-hand with veteran anti-war leaders. As is evidenced by their presence on San Jose State campus immediately after the Kent State massacre.”
Despite the fact that in the mid-1960s, Fitzgerald had been a member of San Jose State campus ROTC, he vehemently opposed the Vietnam war. When Timothy Fitzgerald took a break from San Jose State in 1967, he was drafted that summer at age of 21. Due to a hearing disability, Fitzgerald failed the physical for the draft. As a result, he was not drafted. He soon became involved the student anti-war protests on San Jose State in 1968.
For over three decades, Mr. Fitzgerald has been an activist in San Jose. He is the former Vice Chairman of the Disability Advisory Commission in San Jose; and he was a Green Party state leader for over a decade. Fitzgerald is considered an authority on the Vietnam era in the standard San Jose State history class for that period.
At the age of 64, Mr. Fitzgerald is now completing his third master’s degree at San Jose State University. He is on track to be awarded this degree in fall 2010.
Book Signing for Author Timothy Fitzgerald
Date: Saturday, May 15, 2010
Time: 1:00 p.m.
Place: Barnes and Noble
3600 Stevens Creek Blvd
San Jose, CA 95117
Book: “The Wawona Brotherhood: The San Jose State Campus Revolt”
Hardcover: 328 pages
Publisher: Strategic Book Publishing
For more information about author and community activist Timothy Fitzgerald, visit his Web site www.timfitzgerald.org. For interviews, e-mail timothyfitzgerald97(at)yahoo(dot)com or call 408.726-9940
[The author of the following gives a diplomat’s viewpoint of the unfolding political contest that is the major component of the terror war and the pipeline war (which may or may not be the same war, even though both are run by the same people). The war upon the people of the earth, called “Globalism,” is a brutal campaign to create a capitalist utopia, where only the strong are deemed worthy to survive while the weak and helpless are left on their own. A perfect example of a globalist solution to a local catastrophe, look at Haiti. The “diplomat” is left to deal with the social unrest and the balancing act to maintain America’s image afterward. The intensive splitting of the populations into the haves and the have-nots that is caused by globalization, coupled by the cannabalizing of local production, especially food production, to make local facilities part of the global market, intensifies human suffering and anger, thus necessitating “gated communities” to protect those who prosper from the suffering masses who have nothing except the weapons in their hands.
This is all part of Clinton’s “intellectual” solution, which tends to leave most of us behind.]
“As the erstwhile global village goes heteropolar, it is coming to resemble something akin to a patchwork of gated communities surrounded by seething seas of shantytowns. As competing sources of power and influence collide, tensions will be generated and sparks will fly. To address the vexing issues arising from the polarizing downside of globalization, knowledge-based problem-solving and complex balancing skills will be foremost.”
Asymmetric conflicts are fundamentally political in nature, and require the application of all elements of national power. Success will be less a matter of imposing one’s will and more a function of shaping behaviour—of friends, adversaries, and most importantly, the people in between.
—US Secretary of Defense William Gates, Landon Lecture, 2007
The prevalence of so-called “Three-Block,” “Fourth-Dimension” or “expeditionary” wars of the 21st century, many taking the form of counter-insurgency or “stabilization” campaigns, is refocussing the attention of policy-makers on the role of public affairs and information programs.
These programs are directed typically at both opposing forces and civilian populations. Some take the form of coercive communications such as threats, bribes and blandishments conveyed through strategic communications and psychological operations conducted by the military and intelligence agencies. Others are based on efforts to increase attraction through the use of influence and persuasion involving dialogue, collaboration and exchange, which are the province of public diplomacy.
Among the many voices advocating a re-investment in foreign ministries and the diplomatic function, Mr. Gates has been perhaps foremost amongst them. He has also famously observed that there are more musicians in military marching bands, and lawyers in the Pentagon, than there are diplomats in the State Department.
Gates worries aloud that the simple existence within the military of delivery capacity risks attracting a variety of taskings better undertaken by others. He has even proposed to transfer funds in support of specialized skills—such as diplomacy—available elsewhere in government.
The defense secretary understands that military superiority alone is insufficient to prevail in contemporary unconventional warfare. Other instruments—most related to soft power, economic recovery and the promotion of internal reconciliation, good governance, and the rule of law—can be crucial. In counterinsurgency, as in complex emergencies, such elements are essential in addressing issues which are not amenable to the application of armed force.
When it comes to civil relations, much turns on the ability to communicate cross-culturally, and the conduct of international political communications is central to the mandate of foreign ministries.
Over the past several months, I have had occasion to visit many capitals; most diplomatic practitioners with whom I spoke have also concluded that public diplomacy, whereby practitioners connect directly with populations, is the new diplomacy. Many have also come to terms with Gates’s observation that in conflict zones, “diplomatic space,” “information space” and “battle space” are, for all intents and purposes, one and the same.
The use of communication to support both military and political objectives in conflict zones is not new. What is new, however, is the transformation of the environment in which such communication takes place:
n Contemporary conflicts are highly transparent as a result of 24/7 media coverage, often in real time, and the profusion of non-professional citizen reporters with digital devices and broadband uplinks.
n In counterinsurgency, military and developmental objectives frequently overlap, with the goals of nation-building in a fragile state pursued at the same time as fighting.
The difficulties inherent in adapting to these rapidly evolving circumstances, often in combination with pressing budgetary problems, have diverted discussion in foreign ministries away from a central issue: What does all of this mean for political officers?
This question has become acute because, in an increasing number of locations worldwide, political officers are—or should be—finding themselves on the frontline in conflict zones and at the centre of the security/development nexus.
Two implications in particular stand out.
Under the authority of the Mead of Mission, political officers should function as whole-of-government international policy integrators. That is not anyone else’s job, and desperately needs doing. But that role will be challenging—and likely challenged—in places where diplomats are vastly outnumbered by the military and by representatives of other government departments.
It may also be the easy part.
If they are to be effective, diplomats will, in many countries, have to become much more involved in the process of long-term, equitable and human-centred development, which underpins security. They will require a detailed knowledge of history, advanced language skills and extreme cultural competence. Perhaps most importantly, they will have to spend much more of their time operating not only “outside the bubble,” but outside the wire.
Political officers must be capable of swimming, with comfort and ease, in the sea of the people, and never be seen flopping around like a fish out of water when venturing beyond the chancery.
Absent this quality—more easily learned through ground-level world travel or NGO experience than over years spent in Ivy League colleges—there is no way that foreign ministries will be able to generate vital, granular intelligence about place. This often overlooked aspect is the basis the foreign ministry’s comparative advantage and should be its ace in the hole vis-à-vis competition with other international policy actors.
To be sure, the scale and scope of the re-orientation required represents a tall order for chronically under-valued and desperately under-resourced diplomatic institutions. But there is more, even, than that.
In my book Guerrilla Diplomacy, I have argued that diplomacy, at a time of limited demand for policy initiatives or strategic international advice, has ossified. It has become mainly transactional. Process has become the new substance and, at a time when there is little else to do, endless internal reviews and career advancement tend to become the overarching priorities.
And here is the rub. It is one thing to put more people into the field—that is clearly needed. Yet any new corporate design intended to shift headquarters functions out into the field will almost certainly have the unintended but pernicious effect of forcing those posted abroad to spend even more time in their offices and at their desks. In other words, exactly where they shouldn’t be.
If called upon to write briefing notes, organize visits and provide services not only to travelling Canadians, but also to the increasing numbers of mission staff—over 50 per cent in some embassies—who come from elsewhere in government, there will be precious little time for diplomacy, guerrilla or public.
The world, needs more diplomacy, not more bureaucracy.
The conclusion? As the erstwhile global village goes heteropolar, it is coming to resemble something akin to a patchwork of gated communities surrounded by seething seas of shantytowns. As competing sources of power and influence collide, tensions will be generated and sparks will fly. To address the vexing issues arising from the polarizing downside of globalization, knowledge-based problem-solving and complex balancing skills will be foremost.
From that it follows that diplomats—not soldiers, talented amateurs or well-intentioned volunteers—must lead.
But none of this will matter much if the political officers are chained to their desktops, servicing clients and talking with the like-minded about what might be going on, while outside, hearts and minds are being won—by others.
The views expressed above are purely personal and responsibility for their expression is the author’s alone. Daryl Copeland is the author of Guerrilla Diplomacy: Rethinking International Relations. He has served as a Canadian diplomat with postings in Thailand, Ethiopia, New Zealand and Malaysia. He is now adjunct professor and senior fellow at the University of Toronto’s Munk School of International Studies and research fellow at the University of Southern California’s Center on Public Diplomacy. For more commentary and information, see http://www.guerrilladiplomacy.com.
LAHORE: The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has learned that a man is still missing 15 months after his arrest by “plainclothed intelligence agents”, although officials admit he is in custody, according to an AHRC press release. The commission says that while the Supreme Court has made strong efforts to locate missing citizens, it “remains unable to hold the military staff… answerable for illegal detentions”. Jalil Ahmed Reki Baloch (35) was abducted by plainclothed agents on Saryab Road in Quetta on February 13, 2009. The commission says the nearby police station did not allow Jalil’s father – Abdul Qadeer Reki Baloch – to file an FIR the following day. Qadeer had to file a habeas corpus petition with the Balochistan High Court on February 16. The commission says on 22 February, an independent group of rights activists met the chief minister, who admitted Jalil Reki and another man, Bashir Azeem, were in the ISI’s custody. The team filed their statements on the meeting as affidavits with the Supreme Court and the Balochistan High Court. Following SC orders in the missing persons’ case, Jalil’s father successfully lodged an FIR on February 14. The FIR holds two people responsible: Maj Gen Saleem Nawaz, Frontier Corp (FC) chief in Balochistan, and Brigadier Saad Khattak, then head of the ISI in the province. The Balochistan High Court has ordered the attorney general of the province to submit his comments on whether the ISI and FC provincial chiefs should appear in court. The next hearing is scheduled for June 2010. pr
Doctors attending on radiation exposure patients at All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) in New Delhi have given up hope after the death of one of the patients.
Rajender, 35, a worker at a shop in Mayapuri scrap market, died at AIIMS on Monday. He was shifted there on April 13 from the DDU hospital, where he was initially admitted.
“We have given up hope on other patients. It’s only a wait and watch situation,” says the doctors treating the radiation exposure patients.
“After one patient’s death yesterday, all other patients are very depressed, we are now counselling them,” the doctors added.
“There is hardly any literature on how to deal with radiation patients, that’s our handicap. Cancer of the thyroid and blood pose serious danger for these patients,” the doctors further said.
Four other radiation exposure patients are still admitted in AIIMS, while Deepak Jain, the owner of the scrap shop from where radioactive material Cobalt-60 was recovered, is at Apollo Hospital. Another patient Ajay Jain is undergoing treatment at Army Research and Referral Hospital.
Ten sources of Cobalt-60 had been found in the Mayapuri scrap market earlier this month and eight persons were hospitalised. One of them has been discharged.
Cobalt-60 is a radioactive isotope of cobalt, which is a hard, lustrous, grey metal. It is used in cancer therapy machines and other medical equipment.
He is alive and somewhere in the tribal areas
By Rahimullah Yusufzai
PESHAWAR: Is Swat Taliban leader Maulana Fazlullah in Afghanistan or Pakistan? His spokesman Omar Hasan Ahrabi said Sunday that he is somewhere in Pakistan, but is easily able to cross the border to Afghanistan whenever the need arises.
When Fazlullah escaped from Swat late last year, he phoned reporters in Peshawar and elsewhere to claim that he was safe and sound and had crossed over to Afghanistan. He had used an Afghan mobile phone number to show that he was actually in Afghanistan. However, it is no secret that Afghanistan’s mobile phone service is available in certain tribal areas of Pakistan.
Fazlullah’s dramatic escape embarrassed the government and the security forces as they had been claiming that he was cornered in Swat and would be captured soon. It was also claimed that he was wounded and was unlikely to survive. As it turned out, he wasn’t under siege and was thus able to make good his escape. It is still not clear if he was injured. Even if he had suffered injuries it is possible that he may have recovered now after medical treatment.
According to Swat Taliban’s new spokesman Omar Hasan Ahrabi, who called The News from an unknown place apparently in the tribal areas, Maulana Fazlullah was alright and was never injured. “I am in touch with him through handwritten letters. He is in our ‘watan’ (our homeland) and is able to cross over to Afghanistan whenever he wishes,” the Taliban spokesman claimed.
The spokesman said a new video of Fazlullah would be released in the near future to put to rest all speculations about his health. However, he didn’t say when the video would be issued.
There would be renewed interest in Fazlullah now that his men are reappearing in Swat and target-killing pro-government political and social activists. Five anti-Taliban activists were assassinated in Mingora, Dherai and Koza Bandai within the span of 10 days recently. The target-killings caused fear among people who formed anti-Taliban lashkars or openly criticized the militants. On Sunday and Monday, though, the security forces claimed Taliban militants involved in these target-killings had been eliminated in encounters in Kanju town near Mingora and in Ghalegai in Barikot tehsil.
The Swat Taliban had claimed responsibility for the target-killings and threatened to eliminate those forming lashkar against them and supporting the government. Their spokesman, Ahrabi, had also claimed responsibility for the recent suicide bombings in Timergara in Lower Dir district.
Fazlullah, in his early 30s, is the most wanted Taliban leader in Swat with a headmoney of Rs50 million. He is the son-in-law of Tanzim Nifaz Shariat-i-Mohammadi (TNSM) founder Maulana Sufi Mohammad, who is being held in Central Prison Peshawar since the past several months. Fazlullah’s whereabouts have been a matter of speculation. It is believed he could be in one of the tribal areas, most likely in Mohmand or Orakzai. Many Swati Taliban had first taken refuge in Bajaur Agency but military action against the militants in the Mamond and Charmang areas forces them to shift to Mohmand Agency or other tribal areas.
The provincial government had announced monetary reward for his capture and that of 20 top Taliban commanders in Swat. The headmoney for these 20 wanted militants was Rs10 million each. Some of them including Sher Mohammad Qasab, Bakht Farzand and Maulana Mohammad Alam Binori alias Maulana Khalil have been killed by the security forces. Claims were also made about the death of Swat Taliban deputy leader Maulana Shah Dauran and Commander Omar Rahman alias Fateh, but there has been no hard evidence to prove this. Still it is widely believed that Shah Dauran is dead.
The Swat Taliban leaders who were captured and are in government custody include Muslim Khan, Mahmood Khan, Bashir Ahmad and Liaqat. Besides Fazlullah, other important Swat Taliban commanders still at large are Sirajuddin, Ibne Amin, Qari Mushtaq, Shahinshah and Akbar Hussain.
[When will someone charge him for some of his many crimes against Pakistan?]
Not to extend visas of Musharraf’s SSG men
By Murtaza Ali Shah
LONDON: The British government has decided to withdraw expensive security contingent containing 3-4 Scotland Yard officers, an armoured car and any protocol to the former president, Pervez Musharraf, The News has learnt.
The British government’s decision follows the release of United Nations inquiry report on the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December 2007 in a bomb attack in Rawalpindi. The UN report lambasted the former dictator and the security agencies for failing to provide adequate security to Benazir Bhutto after her return to Pakistan when the danger to her life from the militants was obvious. The UN report also singled out Interior Minister Rehman Malik and Dr Babar Awan for abandoning the martyred leader at the murder scene.
Before his resignation, President Musharraf had purchased a luxury apartment in the heart of central London on famous Edgware Road, also known as Little Arabia for the rich Arabs throng the area to enjoy luxuries and carefree lifestyle, and has been living here since he left Pakistan with his wife Begum Sehba Musharraf.
Musharraf had brought with him his most trusted Special Services Group (SSG) for a full-time security duty. In the initial months, serving and retired Army officer of major and colonel rank were deputed with him, but the military quietly decided to pull the serving officer out of the security detail.
Highly credible sources toldThe News the British government has decided not to extend the visas of the retired SSG men, who were shadowing Musharraf everywhere. The sources said the SSG men were Musharraf’s most trusted and he would feel incredibly insecure and paranoid without their protection.
In a further blow, the sources said, Pervez Musharraf will no more have the security contingent, armoured car or any protocol provided by the British government. Speaking to Geo television, Musharraf’s spokesman advocate Fawad Chaudhry denied the reports, saying the former president is provided with vehicle and security when required.
Musharraf has been living outside Pakistan, mostly in London, since April 2009. Several cases have been filed against him in Pakistan and courts have also issued notices to him. While in London, the former general has spent his time playing his favourite bridge, eating out at fashionable eateries, visiting theatres and cinemas, protected by the Scotland Yard security team and his own protection men.
Making full use of his time and to make extra money, Musharraf has grabbed any opportunity to deliver lectures at a heavy fee to the speaking circuit in the West. A close aide of Musharraf told The News Musharraf returned from his extensive visit to America, Singapore and Abu Dhabi a couple of days ago and was living in London. He refused to discuss any other matter related to the former president. His loyalists were planning to gather in London after mid-April to make major announcements but the plan didn’t materialise and it is believed that his key supporters will meet in London shortly to deliberate over the political future of Musharraf.
A spokesman for the Pakistan High Commission in London said it had nothing to do with what must have been an arrangement between General Musharraf and the British government. The spokesman added that the Pakistan High Commission — whenever instructed by the Pakistan Foreign office as requested by him, used to send its protocol officer to receive him. The PHC did not provide him any security, car or anything else. It used to be his personal arrangement.
As such the British authorities were not obliged to inform the PHC regarding the withdrawal of security and bullet-proof car given to him.
The spokesman further said the PHC was not aware if the facilities – if any extended to him earlier – have now been withdrawn. A spokesman at the British Home Office stuck to the usual official position of neither denying nor confirming the questions on Musharraf’s security. “We do not comment on security arrangements for individuals and organisations,” said the spokesman.
Lord Nazir Ahmed, who has been at the forefront of campaigning against Musharraf and his engagements in London, welcomed the news and said he would be writing to the police and the prime minister again to make sure that Musharraf is not accorded the protocol again.
He (Musharraf) should remain as an ordinary citizen here, Britain is a safe place and we should not waste any public money needlessly. Lord Ahmed asked the government of Pakistan to issue red warrants against the former president and make him to stand trial for the numerous charges he is facing in Pakistan. “I am asking President Asif Ali Zardari not to hesitate in doing everything to bring Musharraf to justice,” he added.
Associated Press Writer= TOKYO (AP) — Tens of thousands of Okinawan residents and leaders demanded a U.S. Marine base be moved off the island at a mass rally Sunday, inflamed by speculation the government may finally accept a plan to merely relocate it to another part of the southern Japanese island.
Okinawans have long complained of the burden of hosting most of 47,000 American troops in Japan under a security pact. Okinawa was under U.S. occupation until 1972 and many residents resent the U.S. military presence as legacy of Japan’s World War II defeat.
Tokyo and Washington agreed in 2006 to move sprawling Futenma Marine Corps air field to a less crowded part of Okinawa and to move 8,000 of its Marines to Guam. But when Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama took power last September he said he would not honor the deal struck by his political rivals and promised to find a site off Okinawa for the troops.
“We will not allow the base to stay here,” Okinawa Gov. Hirokazu Nakaima told the cheering crowd. “We want the Hatoyama government to keep its promise.”
Hatoyama has delayed a decision in the face of rejection by potential relocation sites.
About 90,000 people from across the island gathered in the town of Yomitan, carrying banners and placards with anti-U.S. military slogans and demanding Hatoyama keep his promise and move the Futenma base outside the island.
The protesters were particularly upset as media reports said earlier Sunday that Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada had told U.S. Ambassador John Roos last week that Tokyo was moving to accept much of the 2006 deal.
Okada acknowledged he met with Roos, but denied he made such concessions as reported.
“No to a new base! No to a relocation within the island!” Nago Mayor Susumu Inamine said, criticizing Hatoyama’s government for “playing with the Okinawans’ feelings.”
Hatoyama’s attempt to please both Washington and Okinawa has apparently frustrated both. His perceived lack of leadership and indecisiveness have caused support for his Cabinet to fall to around 30 percent in recent public polls, down sharply from around 70 percent last year.
Hatoyama has also faced growing pressure from Washington to observe the 2006 agreement, which U.S. officials say is the only “viable” option.
But he has been unable to obtain consent for any potential sites or even enter talks with local officials. Hatoyama on Saturday denied accepting the earlier agreement and that he would closely monitor Sunday’s rally.
Hatoyama, who has promised to resolve the dispute by the end of May, told Friday’s parliamentary session that he would “stake his job” to do so. Opposition leaders have demanded his resignation if he fails to meet the deadline.
Reported options include a temporarily transfer of some of Futenma’s heliport functions to nearby Camp Schwab or reclaiming land off the U.S. Navy’s White Beach facility on Okinawa.
The government is also considering Tokunoshima island, north of Okinawa, but residents held a massive protest this month and local officials rejected Tokyo’s request for talks.
Posted: 26 Apr 2010 03:06 PM PDT
[This is terrible news to the Baloch people, as if they were not suffering enough already. If smaller American drones become part of the Pak Army’s war on Baloch resistance, then it will resemble the war against the rebel Mehsuds. This is terrible news.]
WASHINGTON: The US Central Intelligence Agency is now using smaller missiles in Pakistan’s tribal areas in the hope of minimising civilian casualties, the US media reported on Monday.
The Washington Post reported that the new missiles are equipped with advanced surveillance gadgets that may help sharply reduce civilian casualties.
US officials told journalists in Washington that the new technology has enabled more accurate strikes that have provoked relatively little public outrage.
The airstrikes have also helped eliminate hundreds of suspected insurgents since early 2009.
The CIA does not publicly comment on its operations in Pakistan, but two counter-terrorism officials told the Post that they were satisfied with the results of the new technology.
One such missile was used by the CIA last month in Miramshah, South Waziristan.
The missile, weighing about 16 kg, blasted the second floor of a house in the area in March, killing a top Al Qaeda official and nine other suspects. But no one else in the town of 5,000 was hurt, US officials claimed.
The lighter missiles and miniature drones are replacing 100-pound Hellfire missiles fired from remotely controlled Predator planes. The new systems also have made operations in urban areas more feasible.
This may enable the drones to target suspects in large cities as well. US intelligence officials insist that Taliban and Al Qaeda suspects often hide in cities like Quetta and Karachi.
They argue that ground operations against such targets are not very effective and the fear of large civilian casualties prevents them from using the drones.
New surveillance equipment will also be added to the drones the US plans to give Pakistan but those aircraft will carry no weapons.
Last month the US announced it would deliver 1,000 laser-guided bomb kits to Pakistan. The deal, which includes the delivery of 18 new F-16 fighter jets and a dozen surveillance drones later in the year, was an apparent pay-off for greater co-operation against Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
At the time US military officials said that the sales, mostly funded by US grants, were intended to enhance the Pakistani military’s capacity to strike militant targets accurately and with minimum civilian casualties in the tribal areas near the Afghan border.
The US military, which operates in Iraq and Afghanistan, does not use weapons designed for Cold War combats as they are often too powerful for low-intensity conflict and counter-insurgency.
The CIA, however, did use such weapons in Pakistan.
The AGM-114 Hellfire missile packs a warhead that was originally designed to destroy a main battle tank.
New Delhi, Apr 27: Pakistan has rejected India’s evidence against LeT founder and suspected 26/11 Hafiz Saeed, on the ground that the Indian evidence cannot be used under their laws for prosecution.
In its response to the three dossiers given by India, Pakistan has said that all the evidence given by India was not credible and was insufficient to prosecute any individual in a Pakistani court.
Stating that the evidence given by India against Saeed and others accused in 2008 Mumbai terror attacks was mainly based on Kasab’s confessional statement, Pakistan said that the evidence were not admissible under Pakistan law.
Pakistan has dismissed India’s claims about Pakistan Army Major and dreaded terrorist Ilyas Kashmiri’s role in the 26/11 attacks as just a “figment of imagination”.
Pakistan’s response to the dossier was handed over Indian Deputy High Commissioner Rahul Kulshreshth by Foreign Office Foreign Office officials on Monday, Apr 26.
In a dossier given to India, Pakistan has asked for the handing over of Kasab, so that his confessional statement can used against the LeTs operations commander Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi and six other suspects in the ongoing 26/11 trail in Pakistan.
In its request Pakistan has asked that three Indian officials, including two magistrates and an investigator, be permitted to travel to Pakistan to testify that they had recorded Kasab’s statement.
Quetta: Gunmen on Tuesday shot dead a woman university professor in Quetta, where targeted killings blamed on tribal insurgents, sectarian groups and militants are increasing, police said.
Nazima Talib, 48, had just stepped into a rickshaw at the gate of Balochistan University in Quetta city when gunmen riding a motorbike sprayed her with bullets, senior police officer Tariq Manzoor said.
“She received multiple bullet wounds and died before she could be taken to hospital,” Manzoor told AFP. “It was a targeted killing,” he said.
Talib came from Punjab that regional insurgents in Balochistan accuse of siphoning off their resources and denying them independence, police said. She was a senior teacher in the mass communications department.
In the present globalizing world of the early 21st century – where people of different confessions and cultures constantly interact with each other – the correlation of religion with politics and violence could be important as never before. Majority of the recent resounding terrorist attacks were characterized by direct or indirect religious emphasis. And this arouses the gravest concern ever.
In the last decades of previous century and early in this century, religious terrorism has become one of the most important challenges to global security. The state whereby political violence merges with religious beliefs, is utterly dangerous. “Religious” terrorists (exactly in quotation marks!) consider violence to be their duty, which is justified by the Holy Scriptures (be that the Bible, Qur’an or other holy writings). Legitimized by religion, violence becomes self-sustaining as violent acts, per se, are considered to be “licensed” by God. Moreover, religion-motivated terrorist groups exhibit enhanced viability, compared to terrorist structures that have something else as their underlying motivation (extreme left- and right-wing ideologies, nationalism, etc.).
The mass media and popular thinking hold onto a stereotype, that attributes “religious” terrorism almost entirely to radical Islam. Although there is quite a few extremist groups acting under the auspices of Islam, religious motivation is equally able to prompt followers of other religious confessions unto violence.
Can the extremists determine the face of either religion by spreading hate and death, regardless of the high and sacred ideals they are moved by? The answer is clearly no.
Nevertheless, we are faced with the following problem: to what extend this or that religion must be held responsible for the actions of people that are ready to commit violence in the name of their faith? Admittedly, almost all global religions essentially propagate the ideas of peace and love. Though this is definitely true, we are not to discard the fact that “religious extremists” use certain grounds to base their ideological inferences upon as they confidently appeal to religious traditions, sacred religious scriptures and writings by distinguished theologians.
Another question is to what extent the extremists distort the spirit and letter of religion, i.e. to what extent they represent the views of respective confessional environments. This line of thinking makes one disagree with the opinions of those, who tend to base extremism and terrorism upon the essence of religion. Whereas world religions have existed for many centuries, the history of “religious” terrorism emerged right in front of our eyes.
The concept of blaming the actions of terrorists and extremists upon ethnic or religious communities is both essentially erroneous, faulty and extremely dangerous. Moreover, should one discard extremists and terrorists’ outward attributes and specific religious content, their theory and practice will hardly reveal the specific constituent resulting from religious definition. On the contrary, the spirit of intolerance and hate toward “others” is capable of uniting extremists of many various “colors,” including both secular and strictly pious ones.
In order to resolve problems related to religious extremism and terrorism, governments should uncover terrorist groups in action, execute justice and discover the underlying cause of emerging terrorism within various communities. Paradoxical as it might be, in order to efficiently resist the danger of terrorism, emanated by religious extremism, efforts should be made to hear their truth amid antagonistic and hateful rhetoric. It is quite apparent that potential followers of extremist trends and propaganda are not attracted by groundless causes. Amongst conditions, contributing to the spread of terrorism, are conflicts, poverty, poor development, violation of fundamental human rights and lack of the rule of law. Short-term, simplistic, demagogic and repressive solutions provide the growth of extremism and terrorism with a nourishing environment, and as such are not only useless, but also dangerous.
The ideologists of extremism deftly take advantage of real problems faced by people; the problems are skillfully emphasized, at times, exaggerated and often distorted. We might be talking about corrupted regimes maintained in some countries, cruel political repressions executed against dissidents, the all-embracing concept of western policy implemented in the third world countries, madly imposed westernization including all of its advantages and defects. Manipulated, these subjects often result at least in an empathetic attention towards extremist rhetoric on the part of many believers.
In this case, it is extremely important to consider another fact: ideologies of religious extremism should be confronted by real ideals, morality and ideas which can serve as alternatives for people. Ideological and moral emptiness and/or attempts to replace it by artificially created and imposed ideological schemes fail to prevent extremists from hiring new “recruits” and, instead, urge the youth to join their ranks.
Radicalism, extremism and terrorism with religious motivation are complicated multifaceted phenomena which cannot be substantiated by simple explanations. Its origins are linked to a whole set of reasons and sources. Indeed, for this reason, the roots of contemporary terrorist movement cannot be cut by simple tools. It is not enough to make only military and social efforts. It is necessary to conduct a serious intellectual and religious soul-searching. The efforts must be made to subvert the intellectual foundation of extremist movement, regardless of auspices that they are active under and to do everything possible to hold the influx of new terrorists. In this respect, of course, representatives of those religious confessions on whose behalf extremists act by spreading death, hate and discrimination, must voice out their position.
The threat posed by religious terrorism for humankind is not confined to numerous fatalities it brings. The climate of mutual suspicion and death sown by terrorist activities between – and within – various confessions is no lesser threat and calamity. This violence entrenches ethnic and religious misunderstandings, and, most dangerous of all, it lays a time bomb for decades and centuries to come.
We have to do everything in our powers to ensure rapprochement of different communities, to persuade people that diversity of social models and cultures is amongst the most valuable achievements of the civilization and thus enriches us all. Therefore, development of inter-confessional and intercultural dialogue is of utmost importance. And such dialogue shall go deeper than a thin layer of political, religious, economic and intellectual elites to become a truly mass global phenomenon. The youth must feature prominently in such dialogue. A dialogue of religions, cultures and peoples is powerful vaccine to developing strong immunity to terrorism and extremism. Of course, we must realize that the dialogue alone can not exterminate these malignant tumors, but fighting an ideology of hate and violence without a dialogue is simply impossible. Russia as a multi-ethnic and multi-confessional state can not and shall not remain outside of these processes.
Religious communities should develop common approaches to key challenges facing the humankind. We must seek ways for achieving peaceful and just world order, ways for defusing current threats and enlivening inter-confessional dialogue. It is important to understand: cultural identities must be preserved in the globalizing world. Evidently, all cultures and civilizations must have access to decision-making affecting their fate and the fate of the world. Often, colonial heritage leads to a disbalance of interests of various cultures in the modern world. But this existing disbalance should not be a source of frustration leading to extremism. There is a need to understand that some humility may be more beneficial in the long run. Variations in human development can be very unexpected, and as the Bible says, the last may become the first…
Do you have any feedback? Contact our journalist at email@example.com
[This tells the story of the Safari Club, the secret organization created the CIA to circumvent the Congress of the United States. It could be accurately described as the “secret government” of the United States. This secret government is basically a privatized facsimile of the real government with its own financing and intelligence arms, but most of them are not American citizens. “Retired” American intelligence and military men and their Saudi and Pakistani counterparts have joined with this organization, where they have been implementing the covert American foreign policy for thirty years or more. When stories refer to shady mercenary types as “Blackwater,” they are usually referring to the Safari Club mercenaries. Some people call them “al Qaida.”]
Recorded August 28, 2005
Since 9/11, there has been a height ened level of dis cus sion on the pos si bil ity of nuclear ter ror ism, par tic u larly in light of the A.Q. Khan net work and the smug gling of nuclear tech nol ogy from Pak istan to a num ber of other coun tries. This broad cast sets forth informa tion that demon strates the com plic ity of the Safari Club in the devel op ment of the “Islamic Bomb.” An out sourc ing of U.S. intel li gence func tions to Saudi Ara bia and (to a lesser extent) Pak istan, the net work was the prin ci pal ele ment in the CIA’s sup port network for the Mus lim mujahideen that drove the Sovi ets out of Afghanistan. Of course, it was that con flict that spawned Osama bin Laden as a war rior. In this pro gram, the devel op ment of the Pak istani “Islamic Bomb” by the A.Q. Khan net work is seen as a quid pro quo for Pak istani and Saudi help in fight ing the Sovi ets. In addi tion to the fact that the Saudis were in effec tive to con trol of the A.Q. Khan network’s oper a tions, the show demon strates that CIA assets asso ci ated with that net work were allowed to oper ate in the United States until well after 9/11!
Pro gram High lights Include: The impor tant role of the BCCI in the financ ing of the A.Q. Khan network’s oper a tions (the BCCI milieu is deeply involved in the events in, and around, 9/11); U.S. pres sure on British inves ti ga tors to aban don their inves ti ga tion of the A.Q. Khan net work; the oper a tions of Nazir Ahmed Vaid, an appar ent CIA asset whose opera tions on behalf of the A.Q. Khan net work con tin ued in the United States until after 9/11; the George W. Bush administration’s relax ing of sanc tions imposed on Pak istan by the Clin ton admin is tra tion because of its efforts at promot ing the spread of nuclear tech nol ogy; the par tic i pa tion by the Theodor Shackley/Thomas Clines/Edwin Wil son network in the Afghan Mujahideen sup port effort.
1. The broad cast begins by pre sent ing back ground infor ma tion on the Safari Club. That infor ma tion is con tained in FTR#522. Under writ ten by Saudi Ara bia, the Safari Club entailed the out sourc ing of U.S. intel li gence oper a tions to the Saudis and other coun tries. It is in the con text of the Safari Club that the Saudi-funded Islamic Devel op ment Bank under took much of the financ ing of the A.Q. Khan net work and its devel op ment of the Islamic bomb.
“The same lead er ship that pro mul gated the Safari Club—the Saudi royals—also strongly funded and sup ported the Islamic Devel op ment Bank. Begun in 1973, the IDB now has 55 mem ber states, with Saudi Ara bia dom i nat ing, with 27.33 per cent of the bank’s fund ing. As a com par i son, Egypt con tributes 9.48% and Pak istan just 3.41% of the bank’s total cap i tal. It was through the bank’s sci en tific and eco nomic devel op ment efforts that huge amounts were fun neled into Pak istan, which ended up in the hands of A.Q. Khan and his now-infamous nuclear bomb-building syndicate.”
2. U.S. involve ment with the A.Q. Khan network’s devel op ment of the Islamic bomb was a quid pro quo for Pak istani coop er a tion with the covert war against the Sovi ets in Afghanistan—the same war that spawned Osama bin Laden.
“The effort that began prior to the Soviet inva sion of Afghanistan—and that Pres i dent Carter’s National Secu rity Adviser warned was a seri ous effort to build the first Islamic bomb—was delib er ately ignored by Carter in order to secure Saudi and Pak istani coop er a tion for the anti-Soviet effort in Afghanistan. Like almost every thing about the anti-Soviet effort, the Rea gan admin is tra tion expanded on it; and the CIA directly assisted the Pak istani nuclear effort by allow ing Pak istani nation als to pro cure hard ware for the pro gram in vio la tion of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.”
3. In RFA’s 4, 29, 30—avail able from Spitfire—we exam ined the pri va tized intel li gence net work devel oped to extend U.S. intel li gence oper a tions beyond the over sight of Con gress. Uti liz ing the tal ents of Edwin Wil son and Frank Ter pil, this net work was oper ated prin ci pally by Theodore Shack ley and Thomas Clines, two of the lead ing fig ures in CIA covert oper a tions through out much of the agency’s exis tence. This net work was deeply involved with the Afghan support effort. It should be noted that the elder George Bush was deeply involved with the Wilson-Shackley-Clines oper ations, as well as the Safari Club. As we saw in FTR#522, the Safari Club, in turn, sub sumed the oper a tions of the Wilson-Shackley-Clines net work to a con sid er able extent.
“ ‘There was noth ing more impor tant than prop ping up a free Afghanistan. One of the things I did was try to get the Afghan king, then liv ing in exile in Italy, to come back to Afghanistan so we could build a new gov ern ment,’ Tom Clines recalled. Although he was out of the CIA and offi cially retired, ‘I was try ing to do my part in keep ing Afghanistan in our col umn. . . .Shack ley was work ing with the Royal fam i lies in the Gulf . . . all were con tribut ing to the effort in the early 1980’s.’”
“Clines con ceded that the off-the-books intel li gence oper a tions had been melded into the Afghan war effort. ‘We worked for who was help ing the United States the most. The Saudis worked very closely with us.’ Clines recalled how Bernard Houghton, who had run Nugan Hand Bank in Saudi Ara bia until it ran out of money, played a key role, work ing with Prince Turki and the Saudi GID.”
5. Out of the enor mous amounts of money the Saudis and the Safari Club chan neled to the Afghan mujahideen support effort, the Pak ista nis diverted a large sum in order to under write the cost of their nuclear network.
“What many peo ple do not know was that the Safari Club had made a deal with Pak istan at the expense of the Afghan peo ple. The Safari Club was run by the Saudis. It was a club to serve their pur poses through the CIA. Shack ley and Wil son were not mem bers; only nations could belong. Shack ley and Wil son were men who served the club in exchange for power, influence, and money. Pak istani Intel li gence would han dle all the money going to facil i tate the proxy war against the Sovi ets. That meant that hun dreds of mil lions of dol lars from the United States and Saudi Ara bia were being run through Pak istan with no account abil ity. ‘Unfor tunately,’ said Robert Crow ley, ‘the Pak ista nis knew exactly where their cut of the money was to go.’ Where the money went was into an Islamic nuclear-weapons pro gram sup ported by Saudi Ara bia and accepted by the United States.”
(Ibid.; p. 314.)
6. Despite U.S. claims to the con trary, this coun try did not inter dict the A.Q. Khan net work. On the con trary, the U.S. blocked British attempts at inter dict ing A.Q. Khan’s operations
“Dur ing the early 1990’s, British Cus toms began look ing closely at the United States—Pakistan nuclear net work. One of their top agents was an Arabic-speaking Mus lim who trav eled the world track ing down A.Q. Khan’s net work. The British soon learned that the United States had no inter est in shut ting down the net work, which had been oper at ing for years. The Mus lim customs agent, whose iden tity must be pro tected for his own safety, was actu ally con fronted by Khan in Dubai, where the agent had traced a num ber of Khan’s front com pa nies. The agent tes ti fied in a trial involv ing asso ciates of Khan’s that the father of the Pak istani bomb confronted the Mus lim cus toms agent and called him ‘a trai tor to Mus lim peo ple’ for uncov er ing the nuclear net work that was sup ply ing weapons equip ment to Libya, Iran, Malaysia, and North Korea.”
“A top French Intel li gence offi cial, who asked that his name be with held from pub li ca tion, described the U.S.—Pakistani cover-up of the Khan net work as hav ing ‘an impor tant precedent. Just as the U.S. allowed Israel to develop nuclear weapons, under pres sure from the Saudis, the U.S. allowed Pak istan to be Saudi Arabia’s proxy as the first Islamic nuclear state. The Saudis put up the cash and have clean hands as Pak istan builds the bomb for its supposed defense against India over Kash mir . . . but my coun try and the British received no coop er a tion start ing in the 1980’s when we dis cov ered traces of Khan’s net work. The U.S. did not want to dis cuss it.’”
(Ibid.; pp. 314–315.)
8. The U.S. actu ally shipped some of the hard ware to A.Q. Khan’s operation!
“A senior source in the British gov ern ment, who asks not to be named, con firms that Khan ran the net work and that parts for the nuclear-weapons pro gram came from the United States. Khan’s daugh ter, attend ing school in Eng land, was being tutored, and at the ends of faxes deal ing with logis tics for her edu ca tion, Khan would some times write, in his own hand, items he needed for the nuclear program.”
(Ibid.; p. 315.)
9. Next, the pro gram details some of the his tory and back ground of the Pak istani nuclear effort:
“Pakistan’s quest for nuclear weapons had begun some fif teen years ear lier. Shortly after taking office in 1972, Pak istani Prime Min is ter Zul fiker Ali Bhutto expressed his deter mi na tion to develop a nuclear capa bil ity. His pur pose was two fold: to off set the inher ent threat posed by Pakistan’s much larger neigh bor and avowed enemy, India; and to make his coun try a leader of the Islamic world. After India det o nated its first atomic weapon on the Pak istani bor der in 1974, Bhutto pushed his nuclear pro gram into high gear. To lead the effort, he tapped Abdul Qadeer Khan, an accom plished met al lur gist and busi ness man with a strong desire for wealth. To finance his ambi tious pro gram, Bhutto turned to his country’s oil-rich ally, Saudi Ara bia, and to Libya. China also pledged assis tance. By 1976, when George Bush served as CIA Direc tor, U.S. intel li gence esti mates reported, in a secret CIA report on Pak istan, that Pak istan was engaged in ‘a crash pro gram to develop nuclear weapons.’”
10. As men tioned above, the U.S. “signed on” with the Pak istani nuke pro gram after the start of the Soviet inva sion of Afghanistan.
“In 1979, while await ing exe cu tion fol low ing his over throw, Bhutto wrote in his mem oirs that his goal as prime min is ter had been to put the ‘Islamic Civ i liza tion’ on an even foot ing with ‘Chris t ian, Jew ish and Hindu Civ i liza tions’ by cre at ing a ‘full nuclear capa bil ity’ for the Islamic world. The man who over threw Bhutto, Gen eral Muham mad Zia ul Haq, car ried on that effort. In April 1979, when Pres i dent Zia refused to halt work on the ‘Islamic Bomb,’ Pres i dent Jimmy Carter cut off Amer i can eco nomic and mil i tary aid to Pak istan. Just eight months later, however, fol low ing the Soviet Union’s inva sion of Afghanistan, Carter struck the ulti mate Faus t ian bar gain in order to win Zia’s approval for using Pak istan as a base of oper a tions for the mujahideen. Zia’s for tunes fur ther improved fol low ing the 1980 elec tion of Ronald Rea gan and George H.W. Bush.”
(Ibid.; pp. 315–316.)
“With the covert U.S. war in Afghanistan inten si fy ing, the Pak istani dic ta tor gained sig nif i cant advan tage and used it. In addi tion to win ning large eco nomic and military-aid pack ages for his coun try, he extracted a promise from the Reagan-Bush admin is tra tion that there would be no U.S. inter fer ence in Pakistan’s ‘inter nal affairs.’ That meant no com plaints about Zia’s dic ta to r ial rule and no obstruc tion of his efforts to build an Islamic Bomb. To keep up appear ances, Zia pub licly main tained that he was not devel op ing nuclear weapons. How ever, in 1983, a secret State Depart ment brief ing memo revealed that there was ‘unam bigu ous evi dence’ that Pakistan was ‘actively pur su ing a nuclear weapons devel op ment pro gram’ and that China was pro vid ing tech no log i cal assis tance. At the time, U.S. law pro hib ited pro vid ing assis tance to any coun try that was import ing cer tain nuclear-weapons tech nol ogy. The Reagan-Bush admin is tration sim ply ignored the leg is la tion, argu ing that cut ting off aid to Pak istan would harm U.S. national interests.”
(Ibid.; p. 316.)
12. Texas Con gress man Char lie Wil son was a major backer of the Afghan mujahideen and actively encour aged the Pak ista nis to con tinue to develop their nuclear program.
“Through out the 1980’s, Con gress man Char lie Wil son, the for mer Ed Wil son asso ciate, act ing in con cert with the CIA, repeat edly blocked Con gres sional efforts to halt Amer i can fund ing of Pak istan in order to pro tect a key ally in the covert Afghan war. Wil son went so far as to tell Zia, ‘Mr. Pres i dent, as far as I’m con cerned you can make all the bombs you want.’ Zia pri vately assured the con gress man that Pakistan’s nuclear pro gram was peace ful and that it would never build a deliv ery sys tem. ‘The truth was the Amer i cans had lit tle choice,’ [Dawud] Salahud din said. ‘Zia was wor shipped by the mujahideen. He was the only for eign leader who attracted uni ver sal admi ra tion amongst them, even though they were well aware that his ISI [Inter Ser vice Intel li gence] guys were tak ing what the Afghans fig ured was a 60-percent cut on all that was being sent to them. None of that took any glow off Zia’s halo. He was the only one to open his coun try to the Afghan resis tance, allowed train ing camps, and there were always more Afghan refugees in Pak istan than in Iran. The Ira ni ans did noth ing of the sort or the scale in the mil i tary sphere. . . .The guy was almost saint-like for the resistance.’”
(Ibid.; pp. 316–317.)
13. Amer i can com plic ity with the pro gram was assisted by Pak istani pres i dent Zia’s equiv o ca tion about the goals of their nuclear pro gram, which he main tained were peaceful.
“Zia con tin ued to deceive the United States about his nuclear-weapons ambi tions. In the mid-1980’s, he flatly told the U.S. Ambas sador to the United Nations, Ver non Wal ters, that Pakistan was not build ing a bomb. When senior State Depart ment offi cials later con fronted him about the mis rep re sen ta tion, Zia told them, ‘It is per mis si ble to lie for Islam.’ He even tu ally gave up the pre tense, telling Time mag a zine in 1987 that ‘Pak istan has the capa bil ity of building the bomb.’”
(Ibid.; p. 317.)
“By 1985, the Saudi royal fam ily had suc ceeded in draw ing the United States into an Islamic morass. Over the years, the Wah habi sect, a rad i cal form of anti-Western Islam, had increasingly caused the high-living royal fam ily polit i cal prob lems at home. To deal with this, the royal fam ily gave the Wah habi lead ers free rein and paid lip ser vice to their dia tribes against the West and Israel. But after the fall of the Pea cock Throne in Iran, reli gious divi sions sur faced within the royal fam ily, con tribut ing to a schiz o phre nia in Saudi Arabia’s for eign pol icy: with one hand the Saudis sup ported the sec u lar Sad dam Hus sein against the Islamic regime in Iran, and with the other they dis patched Osama bin Laden and oth ers as mem bers of Saudi Intel ligence to work with the most rad i cal Islamic ele ments fight ing to secure con trol of Afghanistan. The anti-Communist Reagan-Bush pol icy mak ers focused only on the goal of weak en ing the Soviet Union, ignor ing the threat of rad i cal Islam.”
15. The Pak istani nuclear effort was sub si dized through the BCCI—a vehi cle for much of the covert oper at ing of the 1980s. Cur rent FBI direc tor Robert Mueller led the offi cial “inves ti ga tion” into BCCI, and cov ered up much of what was there to be discovered.
“The efforts by the Saudis, Rea gan, Casey, and Bush to desta bi lize the Soviet Union through the war in Afghanistan car ried a huge price in terms of both money and the num ber of Afghan lives lost. Hun dreds of mil lions of dol lars poured into Pak istani Intel li gence from the United States, with almost no con trol on how the funds were spent. The same BCCI bank accounts being used to fund the Afghan resis tance were also used to fund the Pak istani nuclear-bomb pro gram, accord ing to a Sen ate report on BCCI.”
“The Reagan-Bush pol icy vio lated both Amer i can law and inter na tional non pro lif er a tion treaties. But this type of vio la tion was not unprece dented: the United States had allowed covert aid to Israel to help with their nuclear-weapons pro gram in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s. In 1964, Lyn don John son had given James Angle ton per mis sion to assist Israel in further devel op ing its nuclear-weapons pro gram. Now the Rea gan admin is tra tion was lev el ing the play ing field. The Saudis claimed that Israel had directly aided India in devel op ing its program and had thus cre ated a dan ger ous imbal ance in the region. Allow ing Pak istan to develop a weapon, but not to deploy it, seemed like a work able com pro mise and, the Saudis argued, the only solu tion. The 1979 memo from Zbig niew Brzezin ski to Pres i dent Carter—had warned that the price of lur ing the Sovi ets might include aban don ing efforts to stop nuclear pro lif er ation in Pak istan. Just six years later, the Reagan-Bush team played a huge role in mak ing the first Islamic nuclear weapon possible.”
(Ibid.; pp. 317–318.)
17. CIA Soviet ana lyst Melvin Good man was among those few Amer i can intel li gence ana lysts who noted that we were back ing the wrong Islamic groups in Afghanistan. Arms dealer Sarkis Soghan lian (deeply involved with the Bush-Reagan-Safari Club clan des tine oper a tions of the 1980’s) main tains that the A.Q. Khan net work was at all times directed by the Saudis.
“By the mid-1980’s, so much money was flow ing through the Pak istani ISI that the CIA did not have a han dle on where it ws going, accord ing to Melvin Good man, a for mer CIA ana lyst on the Soviet Union. ‘They were fund ing the wrong Islamic groups . . . ‚’ said Good man, ‘and had lit tle idea where the money was going or how it was being spent.’ Sarkis Soghana lian, who prof ited from pro vid ing arms for the secret-aid pro gram, put it bluntly: ‘As in Iraq, the U.S. did not want to get its hands dirty. So the Saudis’ money and the U.S. money was han dled by ISI. I can tell you that more than three quar ters of the money was skimmed off the top. What went to buy weapons for the Afghan fight ers was peanuts.’ Accord ing to Soghana lian, the funds were first laun dered through var i ous BCCI accounts before being dis bursed to ISI and into an elab o rate net work run by A.Q. Khan. ‘Khan’s net work was con trolled by the Saudis, not Khan and not Pak istan,’ Soghana lian said. [Empha sis added.] ‘The Saudis were in on every major deal includ ing Iran, Libya, North Korea, and Malaysia.’”
(Ibid.; p. 318.)
“After two decades of silence on Pakistan’s nuclear-proliferation net work, the CIA went pub lic in 2004, tak ing credit for uncov er ing the net work. After A.Q. Khan’s bizarre con fes sion, apology, and sub se quent par don (‘There was never any kind of autho riza tion for these activ i ties by the gov ern ment,’ Khan said on Pak istani tele vi sion. ‘I take full respon si bil ity for my actions and seek your par don’), the CIA claimed it had suc cess fully exposed Pakistan’s nuclear efforts. In fact, Khan’s net work was only the tip of a huge nuclear-technology iceberg.”
(Ibid.; pp. 318–319.)
19. Recent claims by the CIA that they had “uncov ered” and “inter dicted” the A.Q. Khan net work are as disin gen u ous as Khan’s pre pos ter ous pub lic procla ma tion that he alone—and not the Pak istani government—was respon si ble for the oper a tion. That’s right, A.Q. Khan was a “lone nut!”
“The truth of how much the CIA and the pri vate intel li gence net work knew in the 1980’s and what their actual role might have been is sug gested by a pair of crim i nal cases—one in Lon don and one in Hous ton. In each case, the defen dant received very kind treat ment from author ities, who allowed the nuclear-proliferation net work to con tinue operating.”
(Ibid.; p. 319.)
20. Much of the rest of the pro gram is devoted to a chill ing dis cus sion of the myr iad oper a tions of Nazir Ahmed Vaid, one of the A.Q. Khan network’s prin ci pal oper a tives. In addi tion to the fact that Vaid’s oper a tions appear to have been con ducted while he func tioned as a CIA asset, it is vitally impor tant to note that his U.S.-based activ i ties were allowed to con tinue after 9/11!! The George W. Bush admin is tra tion turned a blind eye to Pakistan’s nuclear efforts as yet another quid pro quo—this one in exchange for Pakistan’s “coop er a tion” in “the war on ter ror.” As was the case with much of the rest of the Khan network’s efforts, Vaid’s activ i ties were also con ducted through the BCCI, to a cer tain extent.
“In June 1984, the U.S. fed eral agents arrested Nazir Ahmed Vaid, a thirty-three-year-old Pakistani, as he attempted to smug gle out of Hous ton fifty high-speed elec tronic switches of a kind used to trig ger nuclear bombs. At the time of the arrest, U.S. Cus toms agents seized several let ters directly link ing Vaid to S.A. Butt, the direc tor of Pakistan’s Atomic Energy Com mission. Butt was already well known to U.S. and Euro pean arms con trol offi cials as ‘they key oper a tive in Pakistan’s suc cess ful attempts in Europe in the 1970’s to obtain the tech nol ogy and resources for the enrich ment of ura nium and the repro cess ing of plu to nium.’ Vaid reportedly offered to pay for the switches in gold, later deter mined to have been sup plied by BCCI. U.S. fed eral offi cials, how ever, never informed the pros e cu tors that the let ters con nected Vaid to the Pak istani bomb pro gram. Instead, a very spe cial deal was worked out.”
21. Note the evi dence of U.S. com plic ity in Vaid’s activities!!
“Vaid ulti mately pleaded guilty to one count of ille gally attempt ing to export the switches, known as kry trons, with out a license. U.S. Dis trict Judge James DeAnda sen tenced Vaid to five years’ pro ba tion, the min i mum pos si ble sen tence. At Vaid’s sen tenc ing, both Judge DeAnda and the pros e cu tor agreed that Vaid was not a for eign agent. DeAnda described him sim ply as a busi ness man ‘try ing to expe dite what he thought was a busi ness deal.’ Just three weeks later, Vaid was deported. Accord ing to reporter Sey mour Hersh, Arnold Raphel, who served as the U.S. Ambas sador to Pak istan, later revealed that there had been a ‘fix in’ on the Vaid case and that the CIA had arranged for the mat ter to be han dled quietly.”
(Ibid.; pp. 319–320.)
“Because of his con vic tion and depor ta tion, Vaid was pro hib ited from return ing to the United States. His name appears on a U.S. Bureau of Immi gra tion and Cus toms Enforce ment (ICE) data base of banned indi vid u als. Nev er the less, accord ing to an ICE spokesman, Vaid has entered the coun try more than a half dozen times dur ing the past sev eral years. By sim ply drop ping his last name and becom ing ‘Nazir Ahmed,’ Vaid ‘fraud u lently’ obtained mul ti ple visas from the U.S. State Depart ment, accord ing to ICE.”
(Ibid.; p. 320.)
“Dur ing his recent visits—some after the Sep tem ber 11, 2001, attacks—Vaid has estab lished, in Texas, a string of com pa nies with for eign affil i a tions. Three in par tic u lar stand out. On July 22, 2002, Vaid, using the name Nazir Ahmed, and his brother, Mohammed Iqbal Vaid, incor porated Najood Trad ing, Inc., and Idafa Invest ments, Inc. The sole share holder in Majood is a com pany of the same name based in Dubai, United Arab Emi rates. The Emi rates are known to have been used as a trans ship ment point by the Khan net work. The Dubai com pany iden ti fies itself as being engaged in, among other things, ‘Build ing Ser vice Mate ri als Trad ing, Con struction Mate ri als Trad ing, Roof ing Mate ri als & Acces sories.’ The direc tors of the Texas com pany are ‘Nazir Ahmed’ and Ahmed Ali, whose address is the same as that of the Dubai par ent company.”
“The sole share holder in Idafa Invest ments is an Islamic invest ment firm of the same name based in Mum bai, India. The Web site for the par ent com pany iden ti fies it as a broad-based invest ment advi sory and man age ment firm that oper ates on Quranic prin ci ples. The founder of the Indian com pany is listed as Ashraf Abdul-Haq Moham edy. One of the direc tors of the Texas com pany is Ashraf Abdul hak [sic] Moham edy. The oth ers are Mohamed Ashraf Abdul hak Moham edy, Moham mad [sic] Vaid, and ‘Nazir Ahmed.’ The Indian company’s Web site pro vides a link to Islamic Quest, an orga ni za tion ‘estab lished to present the cor rect posi tion of Islam to Non-Muslims.’ The con tact per son for Islamic Quest is listed as Ashraf Abdul haq Mohemedy.”
“Mohammed Vaid signed the incor po ra tion papers for both Majood and Idafa on the same day, July 19, 2002, and before the same notary pub lic. On that same day, and before the same notary. ‘Nazir Ahmed’ signed the incor po ra tion papers for yet another com pany, MEC Enterprises (USA), Inc. (The sig na ture above the printed words ‘Nazir Ahmed’ appears to read simply ‘Vaid.’) The sole share holder in the com pany is MEC Engi neer ing is a met als machin ing and man u fac tur ing com pany. Its many ‘func tions,’ as listed on its Web site, include: ‘Tanks Ves sels & Shells,’ ‘Phar ma ceu ti cal Machiner ies & Equip ment,’ ‘Waste Water Treat ment,’ and ‘Engi neering Pipeline Con struc tion.’ The own ers of MEC Engi neer ing are Abdul Qavi Qureshi and Abdul Majid Qureshi. The direc tors of the Texas sub sidiary, MEC Enter prises, are ‘Nazir Ahmed’ and Mohammed Aslam Qureshi of Karachi.”
(Ibid.; p. 321.)
“As recently revealed, Khan’s mid dle man, B.S.A. Tahir, helped estab lish a sub sidiary of a Malaysian metal machin ing com pany and used it to man u fac ture parts for high-speed centrifuges for enrich ing ura nium. The parts were trans shipped through Tahir’s Dubai-based front com pa nies to end users such as Libya.”
“The first known U.S. com pany the Vaids set up fol low ing Nazir’s depor ta tion was Fina tra Commu ni ca tions, Inc. The com pany was incor po rated by a third party, Ameen M. Ali of Hous ton, in August 1996. The share hold ers were Mohammed Vaid, 20 per cent, and ‘Nazir Ahmed,’ 80 percent. Both listed res i den tial addresses in Hous ton. In 1999, the Vaids changed the name of the com pany to Fina tra Group of Companies.”
“Nazir Vaid also oper ates a branch of Fina tra in Pak istan. A 1997 arti cle in Pak istan & Gulf Econ o mist refers to ‘Nazir Ahmed Vaid’ as the chief exec u tive of Finatra’s Cyber cafe in Karachi, report edly the first such estab lish ment in Pak istan. The par ent of the Cyber-café is the Fina tra Group of Com pa nies, also based in Karachi. Fina tra Group con trols sev eral busi nesses, including a Web-hosting ser vice, and energy-generation com pany, phone and cell-phone men tal agen cies, and a pre paid call ing card dealer called Fina tra Com mu ni ca tions Pri vate Lim ited. In 1998, Fina tra Com mu ni ca tions signed a con tract with Pakistan’s offi cial phone com pany, Pakistan Telecom mu ni ca tions Com pany Ltd., to pro vide pre paid phone-card ser vice in Pak istan. The ser vice also allows direct inter na tional dial ing. All of these busi nesses could be use ful to an intel li gence ser vice or a ter ror ist orga ni za tion. In 2004, U.S. Cus toms was plan ning to detain Vaid on his next trip to the United States after being warned by a reporter that Vaid was trav el ing freely between the U.S. and Pak istan. In the fall of 2004, a U.S. Cus toms agent inex plic a bly told Vaid’s son that there was a deten tion order out on his father. That inci dent raises major ques tions about Vaid’s rela tion ship with the United States government—and about secu rity in the Cus toms Service.”
(Ibid.; pp. 321–322.)
29. Again, note that Vaid was able to func tion in the U.S. after 9/11!
“Accord ing to an ICE spokesman, Vaid last left the United States on Novem ber 1, 2002. More than one CIA source said that Nazir Vaid is a CIA ‘asset.’ In a tele phone inter view, Vaid flatly denied work ing for U.S. or Pak istani Intel li gence. He also insists he is not engaged in the trade or ship ment of nuclear technology.”
(Ibid.; p. 322.)
30. The George W. Bush admin is tra tion was “shocked, shocked!” to learn of Pakistan’s Islamic bomb pro gram. Note that the Clin ton admin is tra tion had imposed sanc tions on Pak istan because of its nuclear activ i ties. The Bush admin istra tion lifted those sanc tions two weeks after 9/11!
“The George W. Bush admin is tra tion expresses shock at the fact that Pakistan’s declared Islamic Bomb pro gram became just that—a pan-Islamic nuclear-weapons super mar ket. This is the same Bush admin is tra tion that, in an eerily famil iar move—just two weeks after the ter rorist attacks on Sep tem ber 11, 2001—lifted the sanc tions that had been imposed by the Clin ton admin is tra tion on Pak istan because of its nuclear-weapons activ i ties. The Bush change was to win Islamabad’s assis tance in the new war in Afghanistan—the ‘war on ter ror ism.’ This is also the same admin is tra tion that—publicly, at least—accepts A.Q. Khan’s absurd con fes sion that he is respon si ble personally—and not as an agent of the Pak istani government—for dis sem inat ing nuclear weapons know-how to North Korea, Iran, and Libya.”
“The fact that the United States had pro tected the Islamic Bomb pro gram also emerged in the Edwin Wil son case. Dur ing the time Wil son was fugi tive, the for mer CIA front man sent the Rea gan White House and the CIA detailed infor ma tion about the Libyan nuclear pro gram. The mem o ran dum went from Wil son in Libya, through his lawyers, to Ted Shack ley and the National Secu rity Adviser. Wil son would later say he was never asked or ques tioned about what he had learned about the Libyan nuclear program. . . .”
(Ibid.; pp. 322–323.)
[Considering that the Saudis helped Pakistan construct its nuclear arsenal and build the first “Islamic bomb,” this is a legitimate question that someone must ask. In the process of forcing Israel’s overlooked atomic arsenal out into the open and bringing about a nuclear free Middle East, every player in the region will have to show his cards. SEE: The Safari Club and the ‘Islamic Bomb’]
According to a Nov. 28th UPI report, Iranian sources were quoted as saying that Saudi Arabia has access to nuclear weapons and technology, the Middle East Newsline reported.
“The sources said Saudi Arabia and Pakistan signed an agreement in 2003
that stated Pakistan would assist the Arab kingdom in the deployment of nuclear weapons and missile delivery systems.”
India has arrested a woman working as a diplomat in its Islamabad embassy on charges of spying for Pakistan.
Madhuri Gupta, 53, is a second secretary in the embassy and works in the press and information section. She was arrested on a work trip to Delhi.
Officials say she is suspected of handing over classified documents to Pakistan’s ISI intelligence service.
There was no immediate response from Pakistan. The neighbours have a history of mistrust and have fought three wars.
An investigation has begun and Ms Gupta is co-operating, the Indian ministry of external affairs spokesman Vishnu Prakash said.
“A number of inquiries have been held and a number of questions have been asked,” Mr Prakash said.
“We have reasons to believe an official in the Indian high commission in Pakistan has been passing information to Pakistani intelligence officials.”
The Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency, quoting sources, said Ms Gupta had been arrested four days ago after being summoned to Delhi on the pretext of discussing a regional summit being held in Bhutan this week.
She was produced in court on Monday and has been sent to police custody for another five days, PTI said.
Ms Gupta has worked in Islamabad for three years, reports say.
The head of India’s intelligence agency RAW (Research and Analysis Wing) in Islamabad is also being investigated, PTI reports.
Authorities must be “on the alert” and apprehend anyone who cuts electricity cables connected to the grid, Chavez said. Such sabotage has caused power failures in some regions and exacerbated the effects of severe energy shortages, he said.
“Be on the lookout! Patrols must be carried out to capture the saboteurs because those responsible must be caught and put in prison,” Chavez said during his weekly television and radio program, “Hello President.”
The accusations were vague and Chavez provided no evidence supporting them.
Energy Minister Ali Rodriguez echoed the allegations.
“I have no doubt that many of the failures that are occurring are the product of sabotage. We are investigating,” Rodriguez said.
CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — A day after saying he hopes to eventually cool tensions withColombia, President Hugo Chavez charged that his neighbor recently allowed a U.S. military plane to carry out “electronic warfare” operations against Venezuela.
Chavez told a crowd of soldiers Monday that his intelligence services detected the American aircraft that he said took off from a Colombian base and flew along the border between the two South American nations, which have seen long tense relations worsen in recent months.
Without giving details, he said Venezuela’s military intelligence intercepted a conversation between the pilot and air traffic controllers in the northern Colombian city of Barranquilla. The aircraft conducted espionage operations, he said.
“Through our strategic intelligence, we detected an RC-12 airplane belonging to the U.S. Air Force,” Chavez said during a talk to an auditorium packed with military officers, rank-and-file soldiers and cadets.
“It was a plane specialized for electronic war, and it was carrying out electronic war operations,” he added.
U.S. Embassy spokeswoman Robin Holzhauer would not directly respond to Chavez’s accusation during a telephone interview on Monday, saying only that “the United States and Colombia engage in a number of bilateral activities,” all of which “respect the sovereignty of other nations.”
No one was immediately available at U.S. Southern Command in Miami to comment.
Chavez has made similar accusations in the past, saying in December that a U.S. military plane had entered Venezuelan airspace and was met by his military’s F-16s and escorted out. The P-3 plane took off from the Dutch Caribbean island of Curacao, he said.
The U.S. Southern Command denied it.
Chavez didn’t elaborate on the alleged spying incident, but the former paratrooper accused Colombia’s government of allowing the U.S. military to use its territory to mount what he called “an aggression” against Venezuela.
Relations between Venezuela and Colombia have been rocky for years, but frictions have intensified recently over Colombia’s agreement to give the U.S. increased access to its military bases a deal that Chavez calls a threat to his country.
Colombia, meanwhile, accuses Chavez’s government of supporting Colombia’s Marxist rebels. Chavez rejects the allegation.
Chavez’s comments came a few hours after Colombia’s conservative president, Alvaro Uribe, accused the Venezuelan leader of meddling in Colombia’s presidential election campaign by trying to influence the outcome of the vote.
On Sunday, the socialist Chavez said he hoped for improved relations with Colombia’s next president, but warned that efforts to reduce tensions would face serious obstacles if Uribe’s ally former Defense Minister Juan Manuel Santos wins the May 30 election.
Chavez, who has repeatedly clashed with Uribe and Santos, also said Colombia’s government could become a threat to its neighbors if Santos was elected.
“It’s an insult to the Colombian people that a foreign government attempts to coerce their free political will to pick the next president,” Uribe said.
He accused Chavez of trying to “intimidate” Colombians by warning that a Santos victory could lead to armed conflict.
“The Colombian people are not going to accept this blackmail,” said Uribe, whose term ends Aug. 7.
Santos is among the favorites to win Colombia’s presidential election.
After lambasting Santos on Sunday, Chavez denied he is trying to influence the outcome of the vote.
A leader of the interim authorities in Kyrgyzstan says the ousted president of the Central Asian country has been charged with organizing mass killing,Xinhua reported.
Kurmanbek Bakiyev fled the capital on April 7 after security forces fired on protesters and the demonstrators stormed government buildings. At least 85 people died in the violence.
Bakiyev tried to rally support in his home region in Kyrgyzstan’s south, but eventually fled the country and surfaced last week in Belarus.
Azimbek Beknazarov, a vice-premier of the opposition forces that claimed provisional control of the country, told a news conference Tuesday that Bakiyev also has been charged with abuse of power and that his presidential immunity will be stripped.
Two state representatives called on Gov. Pat Quinn Sunday to deploy the Illinois National Guard to safeguard Chicago‘s streets.
Chicago Democrats John Fritchey and LaShawn Ford said they want Quinn, Mayor Richard Daley andChicago Police Supt. Jody Weis to allow guardsmen to patrol streets and help quell violence. Weis said he did not support the idea because the military and police operate under different rules.
“Is this a drastic call to action? Of course it is,” Fritchey said. “Is it warranted when we are losing residents to gun violence at such an alarming rate? Without question. We are not talking about rolling tanks down the street or having armed guards on each corner.”
What he envisions, Fritchey said, is a “heightened presence on the streets,” particularly on the roughly 9 percent of city blocks where most of the city’s violent crimes occur.
Weis previously identified those “hot spots” and said he plans to create a 100-person team made up of selected and volunteer police personnel to respond to crime there. If guardsmen were to assist police, they could comprise or contribute to that force, Fritchey said.
So far this year, 113 people have been killed across Chicago, the same number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan combined in the same period, Fritchey said.
“As we speak, National Guard members are working side-by-side with our troops to fight a war halfway around the world,” Fritchey said. “The unfortunate reality is that we have another war that is just as deadly taking place right in our backyard.” While the National Guard has been deployed in other states to prevent violence related to specific events and protests, the Chicago legislators said they are unaware of guardsmen being deployed to assist with general urban unrest.
Weis countered that the only scenario in which the National Guard would be helpful is in the situation of a tornado, earthquake or flood. If the military were brought in to help with city violence, they wouldn’t answer to police command — creating a “major disconnect” in mission and strategy.
Alluding to the 1970 Kent State University incident where the National Guard was called in and protestors and students were shot, Weis said having guardsmen handle crime could be “disastrous.” But he said if the Daley suggested it, he would consider the option.
“I’m open to anything that reduces violence. But I have concerns when you mix law enforcement and the military,” Weis said.
But Fritchey and Ford said prompt action is needed because summer is right around the corner and with the warm weather comes an increase in violence.
Fritchey and Ford serve two different constituencies, representing the North Side and the West Siderespectively. “One half of this city views this as a part of daily life,” Fritchey said. “Another part of the city doesn’t care because it doesn’t affect them.” Yet the lawmakers said they are coming together because gun violence should be a priority to all Chicagoans.
“No help is too much help” Ford said. “This is not just about the murders. It’s about the crime. It’s about people being stabbed, robbed and in the hospital on life support.”
Fritchey said he spoke to representatives from Quinn’s office about deploying guardsmen and they “seemed open to the idea.” The lawmakers had yet to speak to Weis or the mayor’s office.
“I don’t anticipate the governor implementing it over the objection of the mayor,” Fritchey said.
“I hope this doesn’t become a territorial issue. I hope this doesn’t become an ego issue. This isn’t about public relations or politics. This is about reclaiming our communities.”
Vodpod videos no longer available.
Ukrainian opposition MPs shower parliament speaker with eggs
Chaos has erupted in the Ukrainian parliament during a debate over the extension of the lease on a Russian naval base in Ukraine.
The chamber’s speaker had to be shielded by umbrellas as he was pelted with eggs, while smoke bombs exploded and politicians brawled.
But the debate continued and the chamber ratified the lease extension.
Kiev has prolonged the lease on the Sevastopol base by 25 years in return for cheaper supplies of Russian gas.
The deal, which came amid rapidly improving ties between Russia and Ukraine following the election of Ukraine’s pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych in February, has been bitterly opposed by Ukrainian pro-Western opposition politicians.
The clashes in parliament broke out as MPs debated ratification of the agreement, which was made by Mr Yanukovych and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev last month.
Opposition MPs hurled eggs at the speaker, Volodymyr Lytvyn, who had to be protected by two aides holding black umbrellas.
Deputies were seen throwing punches on the floor of the chamber, and covering their faces with handkerchiefs to protect themselves from the smoke.
Despite the chaotic scenes, the debate continued and the deal was backed by 236 out of 450 members of the chamber.
The Russian lower house of parliament approved the deal shortly afterwards, with 410 members voting in favour and none against.
On Monday, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin visited Kiev, where he announced offers for wide ranging co-operation on aircraft manufacturing, shipbuilding and the generation of nuclear power.
“We are talking about creating a large holding which would bring together joint power generation, joint power station construction and the fuel cycle,” he was quoted as saying.
He said the controversy over the base deal was “to be honest, unexpected”.
The price Ukraine had asked was “beyond all reasonable limits”, he said, and the gas subsidies would cost Russia $40-45bn (30-34bn euros, £26-29bn) over 10 years.
But he added that the deal was “not just a question of money”.
“Military co-operation, without a doubt, increases trust between two countries, gives us an opportunity to do work full of trust in the economic and social and political spheres,” he said.
“This is in fact the main thing.”
|on 2010/4/27 0:00:00 (2 reads)|
|ccupied Balochistan, QUETTA-A large number of relatives of Baloch missing persons on Monday staged a demo in front of Quetta Press Club to protest against delay in recovery of missing persons, who, they alleged, have been whisked away by govt agencies.
The protest was organised by Voice for Baloch Missing Persons (VBMP) led by its Chairman Nasrullah Baloch. Relatives of around 40 missing persons attended the demonstration.
The participants of demo were carrying placards, portraits of their dear ones and banners inscribed with various demands.
They were also shouting slogans such as ‘Release all missing persons’, ‘Down with so called democracy and Assemblies’.
Addressing on the occasion, VBMP President Nasrullah Baloch strongly criticised the rulers and alleged that violation of human rights was still continuing in Balochistan.
He said that children and women had been protesting and organising rallies for the recovery of their beloved ones for a long time but neither govt nor judiciary was taking notice of these protests.
Nasrullah Baloch alleged that govt had promised to recover all missing persons but instead of honouring its commitment more people were being whisked away by law enforcement agencies.
‘Law enforcement agencies have started a massive crackdown in different Baloch populated areas and violating sanctity of Chaddar and Chardiwari in the name of search drive’, he alleged.
He demanded of the govt that if missing persons were involved in any unlawful activity then they should be produced before court of law instead of putting them in different torture cells.
He also demanded of UN and humanitarian organisations for taking immediate notice of the matter and exerting pressure on govt so that missing persons could be recovered.
He warned that if their demands were not accepted, VBMP alongwith relatives of missing persons would stage sit-in outside Baloc-histan High Court and resort to protests.