Two senior al Qaeda leaders are among those thought to have been killed in the Sept. 8 Predator strike in Pakistan’s Taliban-controlled tribal agency of North Waziristan.
Ilyas Kashmiri and Mustafa al Jaziri may have been killed during the strike in the village of Machi Khel near Mir Ali. Unmanned US strike aircraft are reported to have hit a car and a madrassa in the attack, The News reported.
Initially five Uzbeks from the Islamic Jihad Group were thought to have been killed, but the report was revised to state that two Arab al Qaeda members, three Punjabi jihadis, and two or three local Taliban fighters were killed.
Mustafa al Jaziri is a senior military commander for al Qaeda. “Jaziri sits on al Qaeda’s military shura [council],” a senior US military intelligence official told The Long War Journal. “He is an important and effective leader.” Jaziri is an Algerian national.
Ilyas Kashmiri is “one of al Qaeda’s most dangerous commanders” the official said. He is the operational commander of the Harkat-ul Jihad Islami (HuJI), an al Qaeda-linked terror group that operates in Pakistan, Kashmir, India, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh. Kashmiri was recently listed as the fourth most wanted terrorist by Pakistan’s Interior Ministry.
Kashmiri is thought to have played a major role in the multi-pronged suicide attack against government and security installations in the eastern Afghan province of Khost in May, the military intelligence official said.
Last year, Kashmiri reportedly drafted a plan to assassinate General Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani, Pakistan’s top military officer, but the plan was canceled by al Qaeda’s senior leadership, according to a report in the Asia Times.
Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami, Laskhar-e-Jhangvi, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and several other Pakistani terror groups have merged with al Qaeda in Pakistan, and operate under the name of Brigade 313. This group is interlinked with Pakistan’s Taliban and also recruits senior members of Pakistan’s military and intelligence services, a senior US official told The Long War Journal.
Brigade 313 has been behind many of the high-profile attacks and bombings inside Pakistan, including multiple assassination attempts against former President Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Gilani. Brigade 313 is one of the six known units in the Lashkar al Zil, al Qaeda’s paramilitary Shadow Army.
“If we got Kashmiri, this would be the most successful strike against al Qaeda this year,” the official said. Kashmiri’s death would be on par with that of Osama al Kini, al Qaeda’s operational leader in Pakistan, who was killed during a New Years Day airstrike, the official noted.
US intelligence officials contacted by The Long War Journal would neither confirm nor deny that Kashmiri and Jaziri had been killed in the airstrike.
In Delhi on 27 April, the 13th meeting of the Steering Committee for the gas pipeline Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI), whose members were unable to determine the price of Turkmen gas.
The Turkmen side at the meeting were Minister of Petroleum and Mineral Resources Bairamgeldy Nedirov and chairman of state concern Turkmengaz Amana Hanalei .As reported by the Indian newspaper «The Hindu», the parties could not agree on gas prices and transit costs.
“The next meeting will be held in Kabul on May 13-14, where should decide the issue of setting fees for the transit of natural gas. With the positive outcome of this meeting, participants would gather in Turkmenistan to discuss gas prices “- the newspaper notes.
Meanwhile, the Indian newspaper «Economic Times» reports that India was not willing to pay the proposed price for Turkmen natural gas to Davletabadskogo deposits, which may be higher than the price of liquefied natural gas (LNG). “India is willing to pay about 12.67 dollars per 1 million British thermal units (mBTU – a measure of fuel) gas, while Turkmenistan requires the binding rates to the market value of LNG.Turkmenistan requirement may mean the price of 14-15 dollars per mBTU », – publication of results in view of anonymous Indian official. According to this same official, India is not going to invest in pipeline Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI), if there is a possibility to import LNG is cheaper than buying Turkmen gas.
BACRIM growth forced the government to create a specialized intelligence center, called CI2. And last August kicked off the National Unity against emerging bands of the Prosecutor, who won last week, capturing 11 members of security agencies that helped Chocó Rastrojos.
DRUG TRAFFIC in Choco capture of 11 members of the security agencies of complicity with the Rastrojos raises the question of how far the so-called criminal gangs are the continuity of the paramilitaries.
In Bahia Solano and Nuquí, Chocó, 24 people were arrested on May 31, through links with the group of the stubble, among whom were 11 members of the security agencies, a councilman and a secretary of court, which puts on the fore the issue of whether this is an isolated case of corruption again, typical of the modus operandi of drug traffickers, or is another example of a link of continuity between the old paramilitary groups such as Los Rastrojos, replaced in many regions.
Among those captured in Bahia Solano are seven police officers, two noncommissioned officers of the Navy, the coordinator and a researcher at the CTI, the secretary of the municipal criminal court and a council of Nuqui. According to partial data collected by week, some 700 members of the security forces are being investigated for alleged complicity with those groups, according to police, filled in 152 municipalities in the spaces left by the AUC. The military says nearly 350 of its members are under scrutiny. Police have dismissed about 300 and the DAS, 30. The Navy has captured nine. And a dozen prosecutors were investigated for this reason.
In some cases, there officers involved. Late last year, the CTI captured an army colonel and a lawyer for the prosecution that, for two years, stealing night vision goggles and other weapons from 11 battalions to sell to new groups, and increasing the Police Intelligence was fired for cooperating with countries. Some senior officers have been removed on suspicion of links with these organizations.
Even with the name they gave-BACRIM, “the authorities of the previous government and have tried to disentangle the new groups of former paramilitaries. Gen. Oscar Naranjo said that paramilitary status would give them “reward” for drug traffickers. However, several signs, in addition to the cases of links between members of the security forces and seven criminal gangs recognized by the authorities indicates that they are important elements of continuity with the old paramilitaries.
It is estimated that only between 7 and 10 percent of the BACRIM file members are exparamilitares, but of the 63 heads of these groups caught up earlier this year, 53 percent come from the AUC. Some experts say that these gangs recruit retired soldiers, as did the paramilitaries. In Cordoba, Bajo Cauca, Valle and Nariño operate with territorial control methods, with uniforms and rifles. Massacres and threats have revived popular leaders and victims’ movement and, as Social Action, were responsible for the displacement of 133,000 people between 2007 and 2010. And as the AUC, ally or battle with the guerrillas, depending on the needs.
Catches in the Chocó put on the table that BACRIM are a complex phenomenon, an expression of the new conditions of armed conflict in the country. Although no doubt his main occupation is the drug (it was also for ‘Macaco’ and ‘Cuco Vanoy’ of the AUC) to the civilian population are a threat as real as the paramilitaries. Also show a capacity for territorial control and penetration of the state as having the stop-and remains to be seen what will they do in local elections in October.
The mere label of organized crime groups does not explain these realities. Without understanding the links of continuity between the paramilitaries and the ‘BACRIM’ on their territorial control methods, forms of penetration of the state and its relations with members of the security forces are not able to design effective strategies to control and protect civilians from the violence generated.
Medical staff who treated protesters accused of plotting to overthrow kingdom’s monarchy amid reports of more violence.
This still, taken from a video uploaded to YouTube, appears to show Bahraini forces firing on Shia marchers in Ma’ameer. Al Jazeera cannot independently verify the contents of the video, as journalists
are barred from reporting from such gatherings [Al Jazeera]
Scores of Bahraini doctors and nurses who treated injured anti-government protesters have been charged with attempting to topple the kingdom’s monarchy.
The 23 doctors and 24 nurses were formally charged on Monday during a closed door hearing in a special security court.
The 47 accused have been in detention since March, when the country declared martial law in order to clamp down on a wave of demonstrations that swept the tiny kingdom earlier this year.
Though the emergency law was lifted last week, Bahraini authorities have warned opposition activists of “consequences” in case of any further challenges to the government.
‘Firing on marchers’
On Sunday, Bahraini police clashed with Shia marchers at religious processions in villages across the country, the country’s opposition al-Wefaq movement and residents said.
Police used tear gas, rubber bullets, sound grenades and birdshot to break up the marches, which were taking place in several Shia villages around Manama, the country’s capital, residents and members of al-Wefaq said.
This map, compiled by Bahraini blogger Fahad Desmukh, shows the sites of reported clashes between
security forces and Shia mourners on June 5.
View the full map here.
Residents said that some gatherings were purely religious, while at others marchers shouted slogans against the ruling al-Khalifa family, including “The people want the fall of the regime”, a chant that has become the symbol of similar protests in Tunisia and Egypt which dethroned long-time rulers.
In Sitra, residents said that several people were injured and that a house was set on fire.
“We condemn this attack, this kind of attack will make the situation even worse,” said Sayyed Hady of al-Wefaq. “This event is so, so normal in Bahrain, we’ve been doing it for centuries … the authorities said they won’t attack religious events, but this is what they did.”
On Sunday, a government official denied that widespread clashes had taken place.
“There are no clashes really, there were some outlaws who caused some problems but these were small incidents that were quickly stopped. The situation is stable and back to normal,” he told Reuters.
Journalists have been unable to verify the reports, as police have set up checkpoints sealing many Shia-majority areas. From outside those areas, the Reuters news agency reported that its reporters heard shouting and smelled tear gas.
The Shia villagers, some beating their chests and chanting religious verses, were marching to commemorate the festival of one of their 12 Imams.
Months of unrest
The fresh unrest comes just two days after the country’s Formula One Grand Prix was reinstated. The race had been postponed from its original March date due to widespread protests at the time.
As that decision was announced, security forces were engaged in a fresh crackdown, firing tear gas and rubber bullets at activists gathered in Manama for the funeral of a protester they said had been killed by tear gas inhalation.
In March, Bahrain’s Sunni rulers asked for military support from its Gulf Arab neighbours to suppress the protests, which have in particular called for democratic reforms and more rights for the country’s Shia-majority citizens.
Bahrain is home to the US Navy’s Fifth fleet, and as such is a key ally for that country in the region. Saudi and Emirati forces appear to be set to remain the country indefinitely in order to ensure that the protesters do not achieve their goals.
Protestors in Sana called for the ouster of Yemens president, Ali Abdullah… (Ahmad Gharabli/AFP/Getty Images)
SANA, Yemen — Yemeni forces opened fire on a protest camp and killed more than 20 demonstrators yesterday in the southern city of Taiz while government warplanes launched air strikes on another southern town seized by radical Islamists.
The new attempts to suppress the uprising against President Ali Abdullah Saleh with overwhelming force, after a weekend when high-level military defectors formed a united front in support of the protesters, all pointed to the longtime leader’s increasingly tenuous grip on power.
Early today, residents said multiple explosions were heard in several parts of Sana, apparently from heavy weapons and shells. They said clashes were in progress in the capital. There were no immediate details of who was fighting or whether there were casualties.
More than three months of mass street protests have posed an unprecedented threat to Saleh’s 33-year rule, splintering his security forces and battering the country’s already frail economy.
Saleh has raised the specter of an Islamist takeover of Yemen to solicit international funds and rebuff calls that he stand down.
Government jets bombed the town’s outskirts yesterday, the loud booms sending up columns of smoke, resident Ali Dahmis said by phone. He said the army was targeting residential areas.
The strikes were the government’s hardest hit yet against the Islamists since hundreds of them streamed in Friday, seizing banks and government buildings.
Moammar Khadafy is ready for a truce to stop the fighting in his country, South Africa’s president said yesterday after meeting the Libyan ruler, but he listed familiar Khadafy conditions that have scuttled previous cease-fire efforts. Rebels quickly rejected the offer.
President Jacob Zuma said Khadafy is ready to accept an African Union initiative for a cease-fire that would stop all hostilities, including NATO airstrikes in support of rebel forces. “He is ready to implement the road map,’’ Zuma said.
Zuma said Khadafy insists that “all Libyans be given a chance to talk among themselves’’ to determine the country’s future. He did not say Khadafy is ready to step down, which is the rebels’ central demand.
In Benghazi, the de facto rebel capital, rebel Foreign Minister Fathi Baja, rejected the African Union plan. “It is only some stuff that Khadafy wants to announce to stay in power,’’ he said.
A prominent Egyptian activist was summoned yesterday for questioning by the country’s military rulers over comments criticizing their human rights record.
Hossam el-Hamalawy, 33, said he was ordered to appear before military prosecutors today after he accused the head of the military police of abuses against activists in an interview on a popular TV program.
Critics say the military, which has been managing the transitional period following the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak on Feb. 11, has been slow in introducing changes to uproot former regime officials and has often put civilians on military trial.
The National Transitional Council in Libya is slowly trying to establish itself as the legitimate successor to Gaddafi. The West has helped the rebel movement by widely promoting it and calling for countries throughout the world to officially back the new regime. However while the U.S , the U.K, France, Italy,Portugal, Spain and Canada have officially recognised the political organisation as the new legitimate representative body of the Libyan people, countries in Africa and in the Middle East have been so far less inclined to do so.
ReutersIran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (R) walks hand with Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah as they arrive for the opening of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) summit in Doha December 3, 2007.
While the Arab league officially supports the Nato-led operation in Libya, only Qatar and Kuwait have formally recognized the council, a move followed by only two African countries, which are Senegal and The Gambia. Given the fact that Gaddafi was highly criticised by numerous Arab states and has been increasingly ostracised in the last few years (thanks to his own actions), it seems surprising that countries such as Saudi Arabia have not taken a much stronger stand in support of the Libyan rebels. Looking at the reactions emanating from the Middle East it seems that the Libyan conflict has put more than one country in an awkward position.
Saudi Arabia Its no understantement to say that there never was any love lost between Gaddafi and King Abdullah of Saudi. For years the two have been locked in an incessant circle of accusations and public spats. Indeed, over the years, Libya has been accused of subversion by several Arab countries, including Egypt, Sudan, Tunisia, Morocco, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. For example, Libyan agents reportedly planned on several occasions to disrupt the pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia. In addition, for many years Libya supported the mostly Christian rebels in southern Sudan, against the central government in Khartoum. Libya was considered to be so unfriendly and untrustworthy, as Gaddafi was known to change alliances rather quickly, that when the United States bombed its cities in April 1986, only a few countries condemned the action strongly. Also, in 2003, Saudi Arabia claimed they had unveiled a Libyan plot aiming at the assassination of the then Crown Prince Abdullah. The men arrested included, according to Saudi investigative documents, eight Saudis and five Libyans, four of whom were Libyan intelligence agents The Libyans were caught delivering more than $1 million in cash at a hotel in Mecca to Saudi dissidents hired to assassinate Crown Prince Abdullah. The Libyan agents had allegedly recruited the Saudis to launch grenades and other explosives into Abdullah’s apartment in Mecca, the documents show. At the time, Saudi, U.S. and British officials maintained they had traced the origins of the plot to a public exchange of insults between Abdullah and Col. Moammar Gaddafi, Libya’s long time ruler, at an Arab League summit in March 2003. During the summit, held shortly before the start of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, Gaddafi accused the Saudi prince of “making a pact with the devil” by supporting U.S. military forces in the region. Abdullah, who has long had a testy relationship with the Libyan leader, responded: “Your lies precede you and your grave is in front of you.” Of course the Libyan authorities denied any involvement in the plot, but the relationship between the two leaders did not ease as in 2009 Gaddafi famously told King Abdullah: “You are propelled by fibs towards the grave and you were made by Britain and protected by the US.” When the uprising started in Libya many expected the Saudi King to seize the occasion and support the rebel movement to punish Gaddafi. Obama was quick to ask for the support of Saudi Arabia in arming the rebels. However so almost nothing has been heard on the subject from Saudi Arabia. The Saudi regime has gone quiet and has stood clear of the rebels. Four weeks ago it even prevented the new Libyan leaders from reaching Qatar, where they had meetings planned, by forbidding them to cross their airspace. When asked about the reasons behind their decision, the authorities refused to comment. Unfortunately it seems that the U.S. demand came at a time where the regime was itself trying to suppress a nascent protest movement in Saudi, as they banned all street protests to try and supress the uprising. The Saudi monarchy knows that its position is fragile as in the region people see its demise as just a question of time. Moreover, the U.S. involvement in getting European countries and Nato involved in the conflict bared an uncomfortable truth to Saudi King Abdullah and many of his counter-part in the region: Washington will help to push you out of power if it finds it politically advantageous. As much as siding with the rebels to get to Gaddafi might sound attractive, Saudi it seems has for now decided to follow the lead of most Arab countries, that is not breaking with their tradition of doing absolutely nothing when controversial conflicts arise. Iran Saudi Arabia is not the only country that the Libyan conflict has put in an awkward position. Tehran has tried to balance support for the Libyan opposition, which it views as part of a region-wide “Islamic awakening,” with rejection of the Nato-led military strikes. Keeping in with their anti-Western outlook, Iranian officials still insist that the U.N.-endorsed military intervention on humanitarian grounds is hypocritical and part of a secret Western agenda. Tehran has made no secret of the fact that it opposes any military intervention in the Middle East, even if in Iran’s interest, and had also opposed the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, despite the fact Saddam Hussein was Iran’s main adversary in the region. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad confirmed Iran’s anti-intervention attitude and said: “The intervention of some European countries and America in the regional nations increases concern and makes circumstances more complicated.” “The double standard action of the Western countries in Bahrain and Libya and their silence towards the atrocities of the Zionist regime against the innocent Palestinians shows their contradictory performance in the world.” However its seems that the person who illustrates the best Iran’s dichotomist position is the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who explained, “Iran utterly condemns the behaviour of the Libyan government against its people, the killings and pressure on people, and the bombing of its cities… but it (also) condemns the military action in Libya.” Additionally to their similar awkward reaction to the Libyan conflict, it is important to point out that the two countries are also both oil exporters. Could they see the Libyan Transitional Council as a potential business competitor, and is the Council already warning them that a new player is in the game by attempting to seek diplomatic ties with Israel, who currently have to look very far afield for their oil, a move that is set to particularly upset Iran?
As the news that 270 people went missing after a fishing boat carrying migrants from Libya to Italy broke down just off the Tunisian coast hit, French writer Bernard Henri Levy announced he delivered a message on Thursday from Libyan rebel leaders to Israel‘s premier saying they would seek diplomatic ties with Israel if they came to power.
Levy told AFP he passed on the verbal message from Libya’s National Transitional Council during a 90-minute meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem.
“The main point was that the future Libyan regime would be moderate and anti-terrorist and will be concerned with justice for the Palestinians and security for Israel,” Levy said.
“The future regime will maintain normal relations with other democratic countries, including Israel,” he added.
Levy a French philosopher and writer, who helped engineer France’s recognition of Libya’s fledgling rebel authority, visited the rebel-held Libyan city of Misrata last weekend.
Talking about his encounter with the Israeli Prime minister he said that Netanyahu “did not appear surprised” at the content of the Libyan message.
Netanyahu’s office confirmed the meeting with the French writer and philosopher but refused to further comment on the discussion. “The prime minister likes to meet intellectuals,” a spokesman said.
In early March, Levy went to the eastern Libyan town of Benghazi, days after its capture by rebel forces.
While Levy went to eastern Libya and visited Benghazi in early March, he met members of newly formed National Transitional Council and arranged for some of them to meet French President Nicolas Sarkozy in Paris on March 10.
Following the meeting with the rebel representative, France became the first country to recognise the provisional body as legitimate and to call for Nato’s involvement.
[The American strategy remains unchanged–to so destabilize Southeast Asia that it remains unsafe for pipeline construction, thus bottling-up Asian energy reserves until they can be harvested through the European “Southern Corridor,” Nabucco and the Caspian projects. This indirect form of economic warfare fits better into the “Russian reset” psyop. Should the SCO meeting actually bring Pakistan and India into the club, doesn’t necessarily mean that the TAPI project will proceed, but it does clarify the geostrategic alignment intended to disrupt American destabilization plans for south Asia. The US will then be checked, but not “check-mated,” leaving the American Imperialists just one more move, total war with the SCO alliance. Are American leaders actually that insane or desperate? It seems pretty obvious to me that they are.]
There might have been a difference of opinion between the classical Greek dramatist Aeschylus and British romantic poet Percy Bysshe Shelley regarding the circumstances of the release of the Titan god Prometheus from captivity: whether it followed reconciliation with Jupiter, as the classicist thought, or a rebellion, as the romantic insisted. In either case, Prometheus was “unbound”.
The exact circumstances of the endgame in Iraq and Afghanistan will remain a moot point, but the outcome is certain to be that the United States, which like Prometheus was chained to a mountain where he was daily punished by Jupiter’s eagle and underwent immense suffering, is being “released” to normal life.
For Prometheus, it came as an existential moment and when Hercules came to unbind him, he was so relieved at the freedom “long desired/And long delayed” that he pledged to his love that they “will sit and talk of time and change/As the world ebbs and flows, ourselves unchanged”.
The United States, too, is re-emerging “unchanged”. There is a flurry of activity as if making up for lost time – “unilateralist” military intervention in Libya; deployment of a F-16 squadron in Poland; establishment of military bases in Romania; resuscitation of the George W Bush era plans for deployment of a US missile defense system in Central Europe; revival of the entente cordialeamong “new Europeans”; threatened “humanitarian intervention” in Syria; renewed talk of military action against Iran; a push for a long-term military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan; revving up of the expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) into Central Asia; violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Pakistan; the threat of “regime change” in Sri Lanka; and last weekend the announcement of the deployment of light combat ships in Singapore.
All this has happened within a 100-day period. It was almost inevitable that the Caspian great game would be revived, too. After the unexplained hibernation in the period since the exit of the Bush presidency in the beginning of 2009, Richard Morningstar, the US’s special envoy for Eurasian energy, has returned to the arena.
If his testimony at the hearing conducted by the US House Committee on Foreign Affairs last week had one single message, it was that the US’s Eurasian energy strategy remained “unchanged” in its core agenda, namely, to challenge Russia’s potential to use its vast reserves as an energy exporter to re-emerge as a big power on the world stage.
Cold War rhetoric surfaces
The geopolitical agenda of the US’s Eurasian energy strategy was spelt out with characteristic bluntness at the same congressional hearing by noted Russia expert Ariel Cohen. There may be nothing strikingly new, arguably, in Cohen’s thesis about Russia’s “expansionist agenda” reflected in its energy policies, but nonetheless it merits reiteration by way of providing the backdrop to Morningstar’s testimony. He was constrained by the norms of diplomatic practice to hold back on direct criticism of Russia, with which the Barack Obama administration is engaged in a “reset” at the moment:
The Kremlin views energy as a tool to pursue an assertive foreign policy.
Europe’s level of dependence on Russia for energy is unacceptably high.
Russia’s attempts to exclude the US from Central Asian and Caspian energy markets.
Russia is using energy to “re-engage” India, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America.
Russia forces neighboring countries to direct their energy exports via its pipeline system.
The absence of a “rule of law” blocks Western companies’ entry into Russia’s energy sector.
Russia remains disinterested in developing energy ties with the US.
Cohen candidly spelt out the geopolitics. One, European demand for energy is projected to grow further and it could lead to greater dependence on energy from Russia, which has serious implications for Moscow’s ties with Europe.
The point is, the US apprehends that Moscow will exploit the growing energy ties to stabilize its relationship with the countries of Western Europe, and that could weaken the spirit of Euro-Atlanticism and incrementally loosen the US’s trans-Atlantic leadership.
Two, Germany has taken a strategic decision to abandon nuclear energy and to instead increase its energy imports from Russia. From the US viewpoint, steadily growing Russo-German ties have not only a historical resonance of great significance for European security but they could eventually weaken European unity and the underpinnings of NATO itself, which the US commands as its principal instrument for the pursuit of its global strategies.
Three, Russia is aspiring to graduate from the role of energy exporter to Europe to participation in the continent’s energy distribution system and retail trade as well. Europe may eventually “face tough choices between the cost and stability of their energy supply, and siding with the US on key issues”.
Conversely, Cohen anticipates, “As oil prices rise, it is safe to expect Russia’s cockiness to return.” What is this “cockiness” about? In geopolitical terms, it means a more assertive Russia in global politics. Cohen mentioned India more than once as a worrisome prospect for the US.
Chalk circles in South Asia
In essence, countries like India, where the US hopes to become entrenched as a strategic partner, may choose to be autonomous or “non-aligned” if Russia succeeds in developing stronger energy ties with them. With regard to India, in particular, the implications are far-reaching since the US’s Asia-Pacific strategy and its containment policy toward China would become seriously debilitated if New Delhi opted out.
Interestingly, Cohen brings in Syria in this context. He claimed that Russia was “seeking to re-engage in a centuries-old balance of power in the Middle East” and Syria – like India in the Asia-Pacific – is pivotal, which is the reason why Moscow is rebuilding naval bases in Tartus and Ladakiye and is “supplying modern weapons” to it – like it does with India.
Four, Russia is fostering the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) as an exclusive preserve to keep out the US, especially in the grouping’s energy club. The SCO comprises China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.
The US is getting frantic that the SCO is gearing up to admit India and Pakistan as full members and Afghanistan as an observer. So far, the US had banked on the reservations of Russia and China over the SCO membership claims of Pakistan and India respectively, but the rethink in Moscow and Beijing on this score has set alarm bells ringing in Washington.
Moscow is outflanking the US by rapidly building up ties with Pakistan. A crucial vector in this accelerating relationship is energy cooperation. Moscow has begun discussing with Pakistan the nuts and bolts of its participation in the TAPI (Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India) gas pipeline project.
The countries are restoring their air links; they have held two summit-level meetings within a year; and begun closely coordinating their approach to the stabilization of Afghanistan (which is integral to the execution of TAPI). Incidentally, Russia’s special representative on Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov (the Kremlin’s ace hand on Afghanistan) visited Islamabad last week for in-depth consultations.
The thrust of the Russian approach is to augment Pakistan’s strategic autonomy so that it can withstand Washington’s bullying. And Moscow estimates that Pakistan is keen to reciprocate. As a prominent South Asian scholar in Moscow, Andrey Volodin, wrote last week, “[Pakistan President] Asif Zardari’s visit to Russia has shown that Pakistan is actively diversifying its foreign economic ties and foreign policy. This attitude is welcomed by Pakistan’s main all-weather ally, China, which is pursuing a policy of ‘soft reverse containment’ of America in Asia, including Pakistan.”
No more a Turkmen pipedream
Thus, the Russian-Chinese initiative to induct Pakistan and India as full SCO members holds out the prospect of dealing a devastating blow to the US’s strategy to get “embedded” in Asia. The underpinning of a regional energy grid tapping into Turkmenistan’s energy reserves gives a profound character to the matrix.
The fact is that the US all along paid lip-service to the TAPI, but its real interest has been in the so-called Southern Corridor for transporting Turkmen energy to Western Europe so that Russian dominance of the European market would be whittled down.
Russia is killing two birds with one stone. By diverting Turkmen gas to the huge energy guzzlers of South Asia – India is potentially one of the world’s two or three biggest consumers of energy in the coming decades – Moscow is on the one hand undercutting the US’s Eurasian energy strategy to evacuate the gas to Europe, while at the same time retaining its pre-eminent footing on the European energy market from being challenged by the Turkmen gas.
The big question mark on TAPI has been all along two-fold. First, there was doubt regarding Turkmenistan’s energy reserves. However, the confirmation by British auditor Gaffney, Cline & Associates last week that Turkmenistan is sitting on the world’s second-largest gas field – South Yolatan – completely changes the scenario. (Afghan President Hamid Karzai made an air dash to Ashgabat as soon as he heard the news.) The vast South Yolatan field covers an area of about 3,500 square kilometers – bigger than the country of Luxembourg – and as a top executive of the British auditor put it, “The South Yolatan field is so big that it can sustain several developments in parallel.”
In short, Turkmenistan has the proven capacity to meet the energy requirements of China, India and Pakistan for many decades to come, and would still be left with a surplus for exports to Russia. The prospect is shocking for US strategy if the so-called “SCO energy club”, which is an idea that then-Russian president Vladimir Putin floated in 2005 a little ahead of time that is finally coming to fruition.
Thus, the robust Russian and Chinese diplomacy on Pakistan to encourage a paradigm shift in its Afghan policy; the growing US impatience over Pakistan’s “recalcitrance”; the SCO’s keenness to get involved in the stabilization of Afghanistan; the US’s insistence that it must have direct dealings with the Taliban rather than through an “Afghan-led” peace process; Washington’s push to establish a long-term military presence in Afghanistan; Russia’s and China’s hurry to get India and Pakistan on board as SCO members; the US’s overtures to India with a partnership that US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates described last week in a speech in Singapore at a regional gathering of defense ministers (including from China, Russia and India) as the “indispensable pillar of stability in South Asia and beyond”; Gates’ affirmation of US commitment to a “robust” and “enhanced” military presence in Asia, especially in the Malacca Straits – all these have a hugely important “energy dimension”, too.
Cohen is a Russia expert, but he mentioned Central Asia more than once in this testimony and pointedly brought to the notice of US congressmen that Russia was attempting to “push the US out of Central Asia, and successfully limited US participation in new Caspian energy projects, excluding it from the SCO’s energy club”.
Containing the energy superpower
Ambassador Morningstar in his congressional testimony kept up the diplomatic decorum and neatly sidestepped the geopolitics, sticking to a detailed presentation of the US’s Eurasian energy strategy, which he projected as a mix of continuity from the George W Bush era but imbued with new realities. The principal vectors of the US strategy can be identified in the following terms:
The US’s intention to be deeply involved in Europe’s energy security is never in doubt since “Europe is our partner on any number of global issues from Afghanistan to Libya to the Middle East, from human rights to free trade.
The US will work for Europe’s “diverse energy mix” both in terms of its sources of supply and transportation routes as well as the type of energy – ” diversity of suppliers, diversity of transportation routes and diversity of consumers, together with a focus on alternative technologies, and renewable and other clean energy technologies, and increased energy efficiency”. (The US is entering the European market as a big exporter of shale gas, which competes with Russia’s natural gas.)
The US’s aim is to encourage Europe to develop a “balanced and diverse energy strategy with multiple energy sources with multiple routes to market”. (Read reduce the dependence on Russia which is supplying one-third of Europe’s energy needs currently).
The US will encourage and help Central Asian and Caspian countries to “find new routes to the market”. (Read bypassing Russian territory and pipelines).
The US will push for the energy sector to be privatized, and to this end, will “create the political framework” in the post-Soviet space within which “businesses and commercial projects can thrive”.
The Obama administration’s commitment to the so-called Southern Corridor – to bring natural gas to Europe via Turkey from the Caspian and “potentially other sources beyond Europe’s southeastern frontiers” – is no less than that of the previous US administrations of Bill Clinton and Bush. The US will actively promote the three separate European pipeline consortia – the Nabucco, ITGI and TPA groups – and is “confident that a commercially viable Southern Corridor will be realized. The investment decisions to make that possible should occur by the end of this year.”
Washington pays particular attention to promoting Turkmenistan as a major supplier of gas for Europe via the Southern Corridor.
The US will pitch for the integration of the Baltic states into the European energy market so they do not remain vulnerable to Russian supplies and/or political pressure.
The US will challenge Russia’s efforts to get a monopoly hold over Ukraine’s energy sector.
Europe should develop a single market for energy so that the kind of bilateral relationships that are developing between Germany and Russia or Italy and Russia or France and Russia do not happen.
Europe should have more focus on shale gas development, which can be a substitute for Russian gas.
Europe should take initiatives for “unbundling the distribution and supply functions of energy firms” so that Russia’s leviathan company Gazprom’s efforts to penetrate downstream activities can be stalled.
It’s the Eurasian heartland, stupid
The US’s Eurasian energy strategy almost entirely aims at “containing” Russia’s pre-eminent role as Europe’s energy supplier and its vast influence over the Central Asian and Caspian energy-producing countries. Cohen spoke of a future role for NATO as provider of security for the non-Russian pipelines, but unsurprisingly, Morningstar didn’t visit the controversial idea, which was first mooted by the Bush administration. What is of utmost interest is that Morningstar didn’t say a word about the feasibility of Turkmenistan or the Central Asian region providing energy for the South Asian region, although US diplomats traveling to Delhi unfailingly profess a keen interest in TAPI. What emerges is that the US’s one hundred percent focus is on Europe’s energy security – how supplies can be developed from the Caspian, Central Asian and Middle Eastern regions for Europe – and it pays lip-service to the TAPI.
Clearly, the SCO summit meeting scheduled to be held in Kazakhstan next week becomes an historic occasion for the geopolitics of energy. The US congressional hearing in Washington last week was well-timed. The US apprehends a paradigm shift in the Asian power dynamic. The odds are heavily stacked against the US insofar as Russia and China are recrafting their South Asia polices that aim at harmonizing their ties with Pakistan and India respectively within the umbrella of the SCO.
A leading Chinese scholar, Yan Xuetong, director of the Institute of International Studies at Tsinghua University, stated at a recent seminar of the Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, a branch of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences:
If we can establish relations with neighboring countries like what we are doing with members of the SCO, we will also succeed in moving fast. The establishment of SCO in the 1990s was widely recognized as one of China’s most successful diplomatic moves. The purpose of establishing the SCO is to challenge the American strategic intention of extending its military breach to Central Asia.
It destroyed America’s intention of making Central Asia its sphere of military influence. With the SCO, China’s relations with countries in the region have been greatly improved. In order to establish SCO-style relations with surrounding countries, China must … establish all-weather strategic partnerships with them. Or it will be impossible for China to have more and better friendly international relationships than America.
Indeed, the Afghan endgame is inspiring the several tracks in the geopolitics of Eurasia and Central Asia and South Asia, some running tracks, some dormant, some visible, some others nor so visible, to begin to converge. But the focal point is Eurasia.
Indeed, Sir Halford John Mackinder (1861-1947), the great English geographer and scholar-diplomat, who is considered one of the founding fathers of the esoteric subjects of geopolitics and geostrategy, based his famous Heartland Theory on the basis that Eurasia remains the heartland of international politics. Curiously, when Prometheus had his liver eaten out daily by Jupiter’s eagle – only to be regenerated at night – he was also chained to a rock in the Caucasus.
Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.
When the truth is too horrible to acknowledge, then it becomes very easy to believe in a series of lies instead. If the truth is that our leaders are really monsters, who have purposely manufactured a planned genocidal world war, in order to preserve America’s fading position in the world, then the truth becomes almost impossible to believe.
It is difficult to believe, but there are some people who were shocked to learn that White House spokesmen issued 935 documented falsehoods to lie us into the Iraq war. This says nothing of the far greater number of lies told to create the “war on terror” itself. If it wasn’t for the flowing river of lies known as the “US Government,” we would not now be staring down the barrel of the nuclear gun at another innocent Muslim country. It took thousands of dedicated war party disinformation agents, working non-stop for decades, to give substance to the myth of al Qaida, the official justification for the war. It has taken many thousands more to sustain the war based on lies, against an imaginary enemy. It is only another small step to extend those lies about wars against imaginary enemies to Iran, an imaginary enemy with imaginary nuclear weapons.
Bush and both of his Congresses have chosen to ride the raging river of lies known as the war on terrorism like lunatic “surf-Nazis,” blinded to the dangers swimming just beneath the surface, oblivious to the destruction left in their wake. The bill for the war and for the destruction that we have sown is coming due, before the end goals are met – before the world war can be jump-started. Strategic alliances are falling apart in reaction to America’s obvious goal of total world domination. Old friends are turning their backs on us, in revulsion to the bloody misery that our leaders are intentionally inflicting upon the world. The lying mainstream media is content to bask in the glorious presence of the American Reich, while they spread the official lies which are meant to divide the American people and keep them ignorant, everyone apparently oblivious to the diabolical nature of the plot and the costs that the world will pay for us to preserve our bloated “way of life.”
The war based on lies is fought on many national battle fronts, where carefully constructed lies (grand conspiracies) are inserted into unsuspecting populations in order to further the myth of an international terrorist conspiracy. The preferred method of transmission is to use gossip “grapevines” to spread new distorted versions of conspiracy theories. This is most successfully accomplished if the disinformation is spread by trusted locals. This is true for introducing damaging misleading rumors into like-minded communities, no matter the size of the rumor, or its nature. A rumor’s source determines its credibility just as much as the truth of the rumor itself. The purpose is always to create division within the group, by the use of false information to cover-up vital knowledge, which would otherwise unite and inspire the people.
The basis of the psyops campaign directed at the world (war on terrorism) is the big lie, a lie that is so big as to make it incomprehensible. The big lie always concern a conspiracy theory, created through a series of “whispering campaigns.” The people are subjected to a series of self-confirming lies which serve to corroborate each other when brought together, giving convincing proof of a design that cannot be explained by “coincidences.” The aim of the real all-encompassing grand conspiracy theory is to hide proof of its existence, for as long as possible. By pumping-out semi-true information about lesser conspiracies, real information is obscured in the ensuing uproar, truth-seekers are successfully discredited and mislabeled as “conspiracy theorists.”
Here in America, where we have not yet crossed the threshold of unbridled government violence, the deception is aimed at the political opposition groups who are digging-away at the official lies and cover-ups that have made the insanity of the war on terrorism possible. The anti-war movement, the Constitutionalist movement and the 911 Truth movements all threaten to derail the machinery that is carrying us into the police state, the ghettoized America that awaits everyone outside of the elite. The time will come when the secret army of truth-seekers will overcome the official lies that cover-up the truth about what has been done to America, and America has done to the world. When the thousands of patriotic Americans and the even greater number of truth-seekers worldwide who hate us manage to break through the wall of official lies, the government of the United States will fall. It is inevitable.
In searching for proof of state terrorism in the 911 attacks, too many people have proven themselves to be more than willing to abandon logic, whenever unfolding answers to the vital questions lead them into uncomfortable territory. There is ample proof here of a conspiracy between national intelligence services to kill thousands of Americans, as a first step in a plan to commit genocide on a global scale. To say otherwise is to participate in another big lie. The power of the big lie is that it immobilizes decent people, who cannot believe that there are other humans, their fellow countrymen, who could be so inhumane as to join a plot to kill half the human race.
Out of sheer laziness and overwhelming fear, motivated by an organized campaign of hyper-patriotism, the American people have embraced a plan for the wholesale slaughter of innocent people, the scope of which, would have embarrassed Hitler’s most grandiose dreams. The ugly truth is that our sons and daughters, and their sons and daughters, are going to be conscripted in a perpetual war to kill half of the world. The innocent children of the world do not deserve what we are about to do to them. Our grandchildren deserve a better inheritance than this.
A large portion of those innocent unfortunate souls who live in the nations targeted for the hot war (every country between Palestine and Pakistan) are marked for death. Every effective leader in the targeted group must be eliminated, co-opted through some act of corruption, or otherwise rendered harmless to their would-be masters, even if that means the elimination of entire nations. Another ugly truth is that the elimination of nations and masses of “useless eaters” is one of the end goals.
The elimination of nations is accomplished by disintegration, where a splintering process is begun through war and terrorist attacks. The people are divided through a series of “false flag” terrorist attacks which are staged in a manner intended to implicate a minority faction. A complex conspiracy theory is introduced into the local population through a whispering campaign of lies which seem to prove the minority guilty of the crimes. As leaders arise within the populist majority movement, the assassinations begin, again attributed to the minority leadership. The validity of the substituted misinformation is substantiated by targeted assassinations. Nothing confirms the existence of a nefarious conspiracy like the assassination of the leadership of the movement, especially when the killing can be tied to someone in the opposition.
As the tensions are whipped-up by sleeper agents working for the American, British and Israeli intelligence agencies (or for local agencies), counter-movement leaders in the minority are killed. The object is to ignite civil or sectarian war and to ignite anti-Western resistance. We cannot forcefully pacify the world, without this justification. In the end, resistance to America’s attacks is reported as “terrorism,” when forced through the American lie machine. The web of lies spun around the al Qaida myth turns every American-contracted terror incident into an attack by an “al Qaida-related group.” Popular opinion does not seem to register the fact that America and al Qaida have a symbiotic relationship, sharing mirror image goals, each side profiting the other with their attacks and propaganda efforts.
Wherever the myth of al Qaida is introduced in the zone of war, through the local gossip “grape vines,” conspiracy theories begin to reflect the new manufactured paradigm that has secretly been provided for them by local agents of the Western conspiracy. In Iraq, this process of fracturing and distortion of native belief systems is so far along that the sectarian conflict which it has generated can no longer be traced back to the sources of the rumors which were used to give it life. While some of the terrorist groups and the shadowy government death squads can be traced back to the many intelligence agencies operating in Iraq (who were instrumental in carrying-out the US “El Salvador option”), the reaction of waves of revenge attacks and counter-attacks has effectively covered the tracks of the original provocateurs behind it all.
Lebanon is a country at a crossroads, standing on the threshold separating hopeful democracy from full-blown civil war. We have glimpsed secretive elements of hired mercenaries who labor in the dark for their Western co-conspirators and their devious secret services. This organization of killers and criminals has constructed parapets and pitfalls for their unsuspecting neighbors, on America’s behalf. The handiwork of traitorous neoconservatives like Elliot Abrams and David Welch is revealed in US agents Saad Hariri and Saudi Prince Bandar, who have eagerly constructed “straw men” for American allies to knock down. The Fatah el Islam terrorists, allegedly “associated with al Qaida,” are facilitating the US-induced disintegration process in Lebanon, fighting to give the United States a foothold in Northern Lebanon in the form of a massive new naval base, opposite the new Soviet naval base that is under construction in Tartus, Syria.
In Afghanistan and Pakistan, the main front in the war against truth, we see evidence emerging, almost on a daily basis, which confirms for us that the US misdirection in that area is also taking the form of a massive “whispering campaign,” meant to sow mistrust and confusion among the targeted Pashtun and Balochistan tribesmen. Recent revelations about British MI6 involvement with a plan in Afghanistan to create a new false “Taliban” front, follows on the heels of other similar reports about a MI6 operation (or part of the same one) in creating a false Balochi group, the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA).
Across the Durand Line into Pakistan we see an even more complex situation unfolding, where at least four intelligence operations play-out in the Frontier Provinces, all centered upon Baitullah Mehsud and the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) organization he heads.
Since his appointment to this position by Taliban leader Mullah Omar, a series of intrigues have been introduced through local gossip mills and various disinformation news sites to discredit him. Most notable of these disinformation sources appears to be Asia Times correspondent, Syed Saleem Shahzad. This site has been very outspoken about Syed, labeling him as a CIA tool.
Syed Shahzad has proven to be an indispensable source for disseminating misinformation and disinformation relating to the al Qaida myth and the region. His reports consistently support the current CIA line on al Qaida. He and fellow Asia Times Online contributor CIA disinformation agent Michael Scheuer are leading “experts” on bin Laden, who regularly validate taped messages from the dead Islamist leader for the controlled mass media.
Syed’s version of the “Taliban split” between forces loyal to Baitullah Mehsud and Waziri tribesmen following local leader, Maulvi Nazir has been developed over many months through his exclusive reporting obtained in his frontline excursions into the Western Provinces. Mehsud is supposed to be the al Qaida puppet-master trying to topple the Pakistani government. In the new conspiracy theory outlined by Syed, we are led to believe that Maulvi Nazir and Mehsud (both of whom are shadowy unknowns who have seemingly burst on the scene out of nowhere) are fighting because of a deadly tribal disagreement over Uzbek al Qaida fighters and their ruthless and zealous over-enforcement of Sharia law. Nazir comes off as simply a dedicated Islamist who gathered together a small army (a “lashkar”) of 900 fighters to expel “al Qaida-related” bad Islamists and their Mehsud sponsors from his region. When Pakistani Army support for Nazir’s efforts openly shifted from simply re-supplying to actively helping Maulvi Nazir with artillery fire, both sides in the Taliban fight turned on the government forces.
Some of the latest news from the area claims that Mullah Omar has (allegedly) removed the wanted militant leader Baitullah Mehsud as the commander of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) for fighting the Pakistani army. This rumor traces back to a single report from Asia Times by Syed Saleem Shahzad.
The (un)official CIA story on Mehsud is somewhere between that given by Syed Shahzad and the public pronouncements of the Musharref government. Mehsud, whom Musharref has blamed for the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, has allegedly been “sacked” by Mullah Omar as the head of the TTP, according to Asia Times. Every report on this development can be traced back to Syed’s original article.
“Thus, Uzbeks are not the only community present in the FATA, but are the only one being targeted…Uzbek militants are being targeted only in South Waziristan, there too only in a limited area…the Mahsuds, are not involved in the ongoing fighting… The primary reason for the local hatred vis-à-vis the foreigners, is attributed to Uzbek fighters’ attempts to dominate the local tribesmen and to their involvement in criminal activities… numerous local tribesmen were beheaded or kidnapped on the charge of spying for the government or for the US… the Uzbeks had killed more than 200 tribal elders… Apparently an Arab militant belonging to Al Qaeda was killed by the Uzbek fighters, which infuriated Maulvi Nazir, who is close to the Al Qaeda and Taliban… There is split in the ranks of Al Qaeda and Taliban. Yuldashev and his Uzbek fighters have fallen out of favour with the Al Qaeda-Taliban high command… The tribal militia formed against the Uzbeks was “authorized to demolish homes of supporters of the Uzbek militants, impose Rs 1 million fine on them and expel them from the area with their families.” See “ ‘Jihad’ declared against Uzbeks,” Dawn, 3 April 2007… there have been no hints of this fighting spreading to other parts of South Waziristan or other tribal Agencies, especially North Waziristan and Bajaur.”
The battles being fought in Waziristan over Baitullah Mehsud’s leadership of the Pakistani Taliban are attempts by agents of the intelligence agencies to divide and demoralize the Pashtun fighters. It is necessary that we find the point of divergence, where the nefarious scenarios of the nefarious plans of the competing secret services (CIA, Mossad, MI6, ISI, etc.) come into collision, to understand where the collusion between them ends.
Information provided by Hassan Abbas at CTC Sentinel confirms much of the information in the previous Pakistan Security Research article, while simultaneously contradicting Syed, Musharref and the CIA pronouncements about Mehsud. According to Abbas, Nazir’s entire anti-Uzbek fight was commissioned by ISI, much like a previous shadowy attempt On October 23, 2006 to create a false copy of Tehrik-i-Taliban before the real group had even announced its own existence.
“a credible newspaper in Pakistan disclosed that five militant groups joined hands to set up an organization named Tehrik-i-Taliban in Mohmand Agency with a goal ‘to flush out gangs carrying out criminal activities in the name of Taliban’.”
The real December 14, 2007 announcement was tainted with suspicion because of the previous bogus claim.
This version of the conspiracy story, provided by Rahimullah Yusufzai, also seems to confirm Hassan Abbas’ views on the situation.
“The split in the Taliban happened over a dispute concerning the segment that refused to honor Jirga judgment made to attack Pakistani troops who were harassing Mehsud’s supply lines, making the Afghan fight more difficult…This failure defied a Taliban decision that every Taliban group was required to come to the assistance of others in its area of operation that were under attack from the Pakistan Army…. Taliban factions in Mohmand, Bajaur and Orakzai tribal regions and also in the Swat district of the NWFP launched attacks against the security forces during this period as part of a strategy to ease military pressure on Mehsud and his men. But instead of launching attacks on the military, the Taliban fighters [Maulvi Nazir’s men] in North Waziristan announced an extension of their unilateral ceasefire with the government and even issued a warning to Mehsud to stay out of their territory…”
Apparently, Nazir played on local resentment towards the Uzbeks in their region (who were a small minority despised by many Waziris because of their success and prosperity), trying to use them as scapegoats in an American/Pakistani plan to foment an intra-Taliban civil war. Again, deferring to researcher Hassan Abbas, Nazir was associated with Gulbuddin Hekmatyar’s Hezb-e-Islami, a favorite of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) during the days of the anti-Soviet jihad. In addition:
“Nazir has always looked for economic opportunities, and soon after his first victory over Uzbek militants he publicly urged the Pakistani government to initiate development work in the area and specifically asked mobile phone companies to start their services in the area.”
We find confirmation of this part of Abbas’ report in news about the recently exposed secret British MI6 operation to create a false Taliban in Afghanistan’s Helmand Province.
“Two European diplomats accused of holding secret talks with the Taliban in Afghanistan were thrown out of the country following a complaint by the US, intelligence officials in Kabul have told The Sunday Telegraph… The source claimed that the US alerted Afghan authorities after learning that the diplomats were providing direct financial and other support – including mobile phone cards – to the Taliban commanders, in the hope of persuading them to swap sides… These claims will reinforce perceptions of a rift between the US and its international partners in Afghanistan, including Britain.”
The report says that the CIA exposed the British operation, highlighting the developing split between the United States and its NATO allies over the ongoing war along the Afghan/Pakistani border region. The political fight over defective US leadership in its war on terrorism is alienating the corrupt, murderous American government from its former allies and disrupting old alliances one-by-one. When their conspiratorial plans completely blow-up in their faces, Bush and his equally guilty Congress will be left alone (except for the Israeli government). Like caged animals, they will strike-out with every weapon at their disposal. It is only a matter of time.
It is standard operating procedure for our government to never divulge the truth to the American people, unless it cannot be avoided. Press conferences and news releases are tailored to hide the truth behind the official lies. Entire electoral campaigns are composed of nothing but orchestrated lies. The State of the Union message is a compilation of the noblest lies, meant to inspire the people with lofty-sounding pseudo-truths, arranged in a colorful message of hope, tied-up with the applause of “bi-partisan” approval. Nothing is more chilling than the sight of 535 elected leaders applauding a leering, pompous, would-be emperor of the world, as he sends the world’s most powerful military force, to slaughter millions of the world’s most defenseless people, all in the name of maintaining inflated profits.
There is nothing more threatening to tyrants than an informed public. That is why there is no place for truth in our collapsing democracy today. If, in the end, a shrine to truth cannot be erected within our government, then our Republic may still remain standing, but there will be nothing democratic about it. Personally, I don’t intend to allow that to happen, do you?
I am here to fight the lies as long as I can. Stand with me.