Important news

Chief Justice???

2009-08-11T17:09:00.000-07:00

If Musharraf Committed Treason, The Chief Justice 'Abetted' Him, Will He Order To Hang Himself Too?

If former President Pervez Musharraf is charged with treason, he will not be alone. So should be the politicians who supported him and the Supreme Court judges who endorsed his coup in the year 2000. Almost all of the top judges in Pakistan today fall into this category. This is why the Supreme Court did not even mention the 1999 coup and restricted itself to condemning Musharraf for his 2007 emergency rule. The incumbent Chief Justice of Pakistan was among the judges who endorsed Mr. Musharraf's coup. The Article 6 of the Constitution charges with treason not only violators like Musharraf but also the 'abettors' like the honorable judges who endorsed the violator. What a predicament.

By Danyal Aziz

Tuesday, 11 August 2009.

WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

RAWALPINDI, Pakistan—Is Mr. Ansar Abbasi right about invoking Article 6 of the Constitution against former President Pervez Musharraf?

A dispassionate analysis of the said article of the Constitution proves that he is not right.

Article 6 states in clause 2 that "any person aiding or abetting the acts mentioned in clause 1 shall likewise be guilty of high treason".

Article 6 cannot be applied selectively on President Musharraf alone but will have to be applied equally on all those who 'abetted' him.

Musharraf abrogated the Constitution twice. First in October 1999. It was a coup against an elected prime minister. Very few judges objected to the takeover and a majority of the judges took oath under the PCO, Parliament was dissolved and remained suspended for more than three years (endorsed by the Supreme Court) until it was reinstated in November 2002. The second was in November 2007 when the so called emergency rule was imposed. Interestingly, this was not a coup. The move targeted the judiciary. The government and the Parliament remained intact and the emergency lasted for six weeks.

Once Mr. Musharraf is charged for treason, justice cannot be selectively applied only on the action of 3 November 2007 while ignoring the more serious action of October 1999. It will therefore be imperative to try Musharraf and his abettors both for October 1999 and November 2007.

Now comes the one million dollar question: Will Article 6 be applied on the abettors of the two arrogations?

The 'abettors' in the Article 6 include senior members of the present Supreme Court who abetted the coup in 1999. All members of the present Supreme Court of Pakistan had pledged their allegiance to Musharraf by taking the PCO oath in 2000.

The abettors of the coups led by generals Ayub, Yahya, and Zia ul Haq can be set aside because they and most of their abettors are no longer alive. But the 'abettors' of General Musharraf's coup are around. All of them will have to be charged for treason along with Gen. Musharraf. That is the only that across-the-board justice will be done.

Do Ansar Abbasi and Hamid Mir want to proceed with this mass trial?

My advice is this: Let's get out of the Musharraf-phobia and move on with life and the more important issues that the Nation is facing.

The writer is a Pakistani commentator who lives in Rawalpindi. He can be reached at danyal_aziz47@yahoo.com

Coup d'Etat Underway in Honduras: OBAMA’S FIRST COUP D’ETAT

2009-07-07T16:47:00.000-07:00

President Zelaya of Honduras has just been kidnapped

[Note: As of 11:15am, Caracas time, President Zelaya is speaking live on Telesur from San Jose, Costa Rica. He has verified the soldiers entered his residence in the early morning hours, firing guns and threatening to kill him and his family if he resisted the coup. He was forced to go with the soldiers who took him to the air base and flew him to Costa Rica. He has requested the U.S. Government make a public statement condemning the coup, otherwise, it will indicate their compliance.]

Caracas, Venezuela - The text message that beeped on my cell phone this morning read “Alert, Zelaya has been kidnapped, coup d’etat underway in Honduras, spread the word.” It’s a rude awakening for a Sunday morning, especially for the millions of Hondurans that were preparing to exercise their sacred right to vote today for the first time on a consultative referendum concerning the future convening of a constitutional assembly to reform the constitution. Supposedly at the center of the controversary is today’s scheduled referendum, which is not a binding vote but merely an opinion poll to determine whether or not a majority of Hondurans desire to eventually enter into a process to modify their constitution.

Such an initiative has never taken place in the Central American nation, which has a very limited constitution that allows minimal participation by the people of Honduras in their political processes. The current constitution, written in 1982 during the height of the Reagan Administration’s dirty war in Central America, was designed to ensure those in power, both economic and political, would retain it with little interference from the people. Zelaya, elected in November 2005 on the platform of Honduras’ Liberal Party, had proposed the opinion poll be conducted to determine if a majority of citizens agreed that constitutional reform was necessary. He was backed by a majority of labor unions and social movements in the country. If the poll had occured, depending on the results, a referendum would have been conducted during the upcoming elections in November to vote on convening a constitutional assembly. Nevertheless, today’s scheduled poll was not binding by law.

In fact, several days before the poll was to occur, Honduras’ Supreme Court ruled it illegal, upon request by the Congress, both of which are led by anti-Zelaya majorities and members of the ultra-conservative party, National Party of Honduras (PNH). This move led to massive protests in the streets in favor of President Zelaya. On June 24, the president fired the head of the high military command, General Romeo Vásquez, after he refused to allow the military to distribute the electoral material for Sunday’s elections. General Romeo Vásquez held the material under tight military control, refusing to release it even to the president’s followers, stating that the scheduled referendum had been determined illegal by the Supreme Court and therefore he could not comply with the president’s order. As in the Unted States, the president of Honduras is Commander in Chief and has the final say on the military’s actions, and so he ordered the General’s removal. The Minister of Defense, Angel Edmundo Orellana, also resigned in response to this increasingly tense situation.

But the following day, Honduras’ Supreme Court reinstated General Romeo Vásquez to the high military command, ruling his firing as “unconstitutional’. Thousands poured into the streets of Honduras’ capital, Tegucigalpa, showing support for President Zelaya and evidencing their determination to ensure Sunday’s non-binding referendum would take place. On Friday, the president and a group of hundreds of supporters, marched to the nearby air base to collect the electoral material that had been previously held by the military. That evening, Zelaya gave a national press conference along with a group of politicians from different political parties and social movements, calling for unity and peace in the country.

As of Saturday, the situation in Honduras was reported as calm. But early Sunday morning, a group of approximately 60 armed soldiers entered the presidential residence and took Zelaya hostage. After several hours of confusion, reports surfaced claiming the president had been taken to a nearby air force base and flown to neighboring Costa Rica. No images have been seen of the president so far and it is unknown whether or not his life is still endangered.

President Zelaya’s wife, Xiomara Castro de Zelaya, speaking live on Telesur at approximately 10:00am Caracas time, denounced that in early hours of Sunday morning, the soldiers stormed their residence, firing shots throughout the house, beating and then taking the president. “It was an act of cowardness”, said the first lady, referring to the illegal kidnapping occuring during a time when no one would know or react until it was all over. Casto de Zelaya also called for the “preservation” of her husband’s life, indicating that she herself is unaware of his whereabouts. She claimed their lives are all still in “serious danger” and made a call for the international community to denounce this illegal coup d’etat and to act rapidly to reinstate constitutional order in the country, which includes the rescue and return of the democratically elected Zelaya.

Presidents Evo Morales of Bolivia and Hugo Chávez of Venezuela have both made public statements on Sunday morning condeming the coup d’etat in Honduras and calling on the international community to react to ensure democracy is restored and the constitutional president is reinstated. Last Wednesday, June 24, an extraordinary meeting of the member nations of the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA), of which Honduras is a member, was convened in Venezuela to welcome Ecuador, Antigua & Barbados and St. Vincent to its ranks. During the meeting, which was attended by Honduras’ Foreign Minister, Patricia Rodas, a statement was read supporting President Zelaya and condenming any attempts to undermine his mandate and Honduras’ democratic processes.

Reports coming out of Honduras have informed that the public television channel, Canal 8, has been shut down by the coup forces. Just minutes ago, Telesur announced that the military in Honduras is shutting down all electricity throughout the country. Those television and radio stations still transmitting are not reporting the coup d’etat or the kidnapping of President Zelaya, according to Foreign Minister Patricia Rodas. “Telephones and electricity are being cut off”, confirmed Rodas just minutes ago via Telesur. “The media are showing cartoons and soap operas and are not informing the people of Honduras about what is happening”. The situation is eerily reminiscent of the April 2002 coup d’etat against President Chávez in Venezuela, when the media played a key role by first manipulating information to support the coup and then later blacking out all information when the people began protesting and eventually overcame and defeated the coup forces, rescuing Chávez (who had also been kidnapped by the military) and restoring constitutional order.

Honduras is a nation that has been the victim of dictatorships and massive U.S. intervention during the past century, including several military invasions. The last major U.S. government intervention in Honduras occured during the 1980s, when the Reagain Administration funded death squads and paramilitaries to eliminate any potential “communist threats” in Central America. At the time, John Negroponte, was the U.S. Ambassador in Honduras and was responsible for directly funding and training Honduran death squads that were responsable for thousands of disappeared and assassinated throughout the region.

On Friday, the Organization of American States (OAS), convened a special meeting to discuss the crisis in Honduras, later issuing a statement condeming the threats to democracy and authorizing a convoy of representatives to travel to OAS to investigate further. Nevertheless, on Friday, Assistant Secretary of State of the United States, Phillip J. Crowley, refused to clarify the U.S. government’s position in reference to the potential coup against President Zelaya, and instead issued a more ambiguous statement that implied Washington’s support for the opposition to the Honduran president. While most other Latin American governments had clearly indicated their adamant condemnation of the coup plans underway in Honduras and their solid support for Honduras’ constitutionally elected president, Manual Zelaya, the U.S. spokesman stated the following, “We are concerned about the breakdown in the political dialogue among Honduran politicians over the proposed June 28 poll on constitutional reform. We urge all sides to seek a consensual democratic resolution in the current political impasse that adheres to the Honduran constitution and to Honduran laws consistent with the principles of the Inter-American Democratic Charter.”

As of 10:30am, Sunday morning, no further statements have been issued by the Washington concerning the military coup in Honduras. The Central American nation is highly dependent on the U.S. economy, which ensures one of its top sources of income, the monies sent from Hondurans working in the U.S. under the “temporary protected status” program that was implemented during Washington’s dirty war in the 1980s as a result of massive immigration to U.S. territory to escape the war zone. Another major source of funding in Honduras is USAID, providing over US$ 50 millon annually for “democracy promotion” programs, which generally supports NGOs and political parties favorable to U.S. interests, as has been the case in Venezuela, Bolivia and other nations in the region. The Pentagon also maintains a military base in Honduras in Soto Cano, equipped with approximately 500 troops and numerous air force combat planes and helicopters.

Foreign Minister Rodas has stated that she has repeatedly tried to make contact with the U.S. Ambassador in Honduras, Hugo Llorens, who has not responded to any of her calls thus far. The modus operandi of the coup makes clear that Washington is involved. Neither the Honduran military, which is majority trained by U.S. forces, nor the political and economic elite, would act to oust a democratically elected president without the backing and support of the U.S. government. President Zelaya has increasingly come under attack by the conservative forces in Honduras for his growing relationship with the ALBA countries, and particularly Venezuela and President Chávez. Many believe the coup has been executed as a method of ensuring Honduras does not continue to unify with the more leftist and socialist countries in Latin America.

evagolinger@hotmail.com or evagolinger@gmail.com

Mr. Asif Ali Zardari: Sold Out

2009-07-07T16:39:00.000-07:00

Why is Mr. Zardari so eager to build ties with India at the expense of Pakistan? These are my sentiments in response to last week’s op-ed in Pakistani newspapers written by Mr. Asif Ali Zardari to commemorate Ms. Benazir Bhutto’s birthday. I am a young Pakistani woman residing in Canada. And, needless to say, I am not impressed.

By Sadia Khalid

Thursday, 2 July 2009.

WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

OTTAWA, Canada—In this time of recession, when the people aren’t getting the rightful price of their property, there is only one commodity cheaper than anything else and ready to be sold out: Mr. Asif Ali Zardari

He is shamelessly confessing (in his article published on 20 June 2009 in daily Jang newspaper) that the events of 9/11, the attacks on Indian Parliament and Mumbai’s Taj Mahal Hotel were somehow linked to Pakistan. The fact that even the Indians couldn’t come up with evidence to their allegations [they are battling with multiple separatist and freedom-fighting groups inside India] exposes Mr. Zardari’s slave mindset and how he is beholden to his masters.

The op-ed piece was supposed be about Benazir Bhutto. But Mr. President turned it into an attack on ‘radicals and extremists’ and on dictatorship, forgetting that he came to power thanks to the actions of one such dictatorship.

There are only two possibilities if we analyze this shameless confession; either his intellect is very poor or he is sold out to those who were behind those attacks. But an intelligent guess is: He is sold out and because of his poor intellect, he is unable to grasp the reality: He is President of Pakistan because of that ‘dictatorship’ and Pakistanis won’t his newfound love for democracy, especially one grew in the lap of dictatorship.

He is more eager to build a strong relationship between India and Pakistan then between him and people of Pakistan. He is forgetting that it is India who has failed to maintain the neighborly relationship not even with Pakistan but also its other neighbors like China, Nepal and Srilanka.

There is still time for Mr. Zardari to review his thoughts and stop acting like a prostitute. Otherwise he would be long gone leaving behind another name in the list of traitors of Pakistan. Pakistan is a sovereign country; the blood that runs in this nation’s veins is that of noble founders and faithful people. This sovereign country will soon rise. The people of Pakistan are eager to stand together to sing their national anthem. Mr. Zardari needs to make his place among such people, his own countrymen and not bet on foreign help.

Ms. Khalid can be reached at Sadia.kq@hotmail.com

My Graceless Indian Friends

2009-07-07T16:27:00.000-07:00

I have to say that the Indians are as graceless in defeat as the Sri Lankans are gracious in defeat – and in victory. Some of them do nothing except read our articles and then have a seizure. I’m thinking of starting a website. If I do, I will seriously consider posting all the demented letters I have received from my “much-better-than-us-at-everything” Indian neighbors, except the ones with abuse and downright filth.

By Humayun Gauhar

Saturday, 4 July 2009.

WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—I feel my readers expect me to write about Pakistan winning the Twenty20 World Cup at Lord’s last Sunday. There’s no denying it, I feel like writing about it too. It’s good to get away from the madding crises around us and talk of something nice for a change, especially when there is a humorous side to it as well.

One for the jealous ones!

Sure Pakistan needed some good news, as everyone is ranting on, but I find the contention rather overdone. After all, a cricket match is only a cricket match. It is not tantamount to defeating terrorists and ending foreign interference in our land much less ending all our problems. Have you ever thought about it though, that none of Pakistan’s security problems are homegrown but were begotten outside its borders and we have been left holding the baby every time like mutts? The freedom uprising in Indian subjugated Kashmir is a British-Indian creation but it is we who are landed with Kashmiri refugees and freedom fighters, including in their latest incarnation, the Lashkar-e-Tayba. The four million Afghan refugees living off us for nearly three decades are a Soviet creation. So are the Mujahideen to free Afghanistan from Soviet occupation. The Mujahideen-turned-Taliban – holy warriors of God turned terrorists in American eyes – are a creation of American abandonment and most recently of the US and NATO stepping into Soviet shoes and occupying and subjugating Afghanistan just like the Soviets did, though under different but equally facetious pretexts. The non-Afghan fighters that we are landed with that coalesced under the Al-Qaeda umbrella were created by their own countries – our Muslim brothers don’t forget – when they did not allow them back home and made them stateless non-persons. The mini-insurgency in Balochistan has historically been supported by the late Soviet Union and now Russia with India always in cahoots while our ‘great allies’ the Americans have looked the other way. I can go on and on but at the end of the day the fault, dear countrymen, lies not in our stars but in ourselves that we allow this to happen.

Let’s get back to cricket. For me the good aspect of the victory was that for a brief moment Pakistan showed that it is a nation with people celebrating in every nook and cranny of the country over a pleasant issue and not something as tragic as an earthquake or a war. Without wishing to make a big thing out of it, it does show that we are not as disunited as advertised. The only thing we lack is something good to unite around.

I have to say that the Indians are as graceless in defeat as the Sri Lankans are gracious in defeat – and in victory. So dignified, but that came through clear as crystal after the terrorist attack on them in Lahore. Not 24 hours after our victory I got a letter from a peculiar Indian without grace who writes to me and other columnists in Pakistan often (don’t these guys have anything better to do than to regularly read our articles and then have a seizure?) saying that Pakistan has copied India in everything. “We won the ODI World Cup first then you went and won it in 1992,” said this graceless Indian. “Then we won the T 20 the first time round and next you have gone and won it. Why don’t you follow our example in something that matters?” My graceless Indian correspondent forgets that India first unleashed nuclear terror in the subcontinent in 1974 and we perforce had to follow suit and acquired a fearful nuclear arsenal of our own.

Does that matter? Not to forget that India has some 79 percent of its people living in abject poverty on $2 a day or less and we have followed suit though have not yet been able to catch up with the neighbors that we’re landed with, with ‘only’ 73 percent of our population living in poverty. That must matter. But why labor the point in a happy moment?

Okay, let’s get down to cricket, but before I do so I have to mention this other graceless idiot – sorry Indian (same difference as the Indians would say) – who wrote to me only today saying that Shahid Afridi is graceless and doesn’t have a brain. Give me more brainless Afridis, I say! They are better than the brainy Indians. At least they bring the bear home. I must stress, though, that not for a minute do I mean that all Indians are idiots. Far from it. But the many that are do provide great diversion in difficult times. Thank God for them. Never would I wish them away. More power to their elbows.

India’s problem is frustration. It tried its best to isolate Pakistan from international cricket but we are still a cricketing force to reckon with after winning the T 20 World Cup. Considering that our boys hardly got an international game after 2007 they still became T 20 World Champions. India’s effort has gone down the drain. Chin up boys, next time round you might win again. Then you can start jumping and hopping and screaming “India Shining” or “Shining India” or whatever it is that you want us to believe.

Okay, finally to cricket. I promise you I will not get diverted this time, though I am waiting anxiously for the graceless and demented letters I am going to receive from my Indian neighbors in response to this article. “You don’t know anything. You don’t know India. We are much better than you in everything and anything. Why, we can even do the Indian rope trick. Can you?” And so on and so stupid forth. I’m thinking of starting a website. If I do, I will seriously consider posting all the demented letters I have received from my “much-better-than-us-at-everything” Indian neighbors, except the ones with abuse and downright filth. I might even reply to some, something I have never done, much to their chagrin. When they don’t answer my questions, why the hell should I answer theirs? For example, it has been quite a while since I asked them to explain how rubber dinghies brimming with terrorists could evade the might of the great Indian navy and coast guard in full cry during an exercise on the high seas aimed at thwarting just such an eventuality? That’s not the half of it. They managed to land at Bombay’s main pier, hail taxis under the noses of the great Indian police, load them with crates of weapons, go off and buy provisions from a market and then proceed to occupy the most high profile buildings in the city. It defies credulity. All I get in response is: “Your government has admitted that Ajmal Kasab is a Pakistani.” Okay, so he is a Pakistani. Big deal. We have many Indian terrorists in our jails as well but your government has never had the grace to admit who they are. And in any case, it doesn’t answer my questions. Was Kasab one of the passengers on one of the rubber dinghies or was he in situ already? When did he get to India? Who were the Indians who were helping them? Nothing. Not a squeak.

Yet, India’s two-time proxy prime minister (Sonia is the one they really want) goes on and on like a broken gramophone record, that we will not resume the dialogue for peace until you finish terrorism in your country first. Who the hell is going to explain to this otherwise educated gentleman that until his country finishes state terrorism, terrorism against India within our country or anywhere else will not finish? But it is our fault too for living the pipedream that India will one day agree to an acceptable Kashmir solution or that there will be peace between our countries in our lifetimes. The most we can hope for is the absence of war and needling one another – what they call ‘normalization’. We should forget about love, peace and friendship and stop wasting each other’s time. And we should stop being so stupid as to expect India to consciously shoot itself in the foot by agreeing to a Kashmir solution, causing further fragmentation.

This column appeared in The Nation on Sunday, 28 June 2009. Mr. Gauhar can be reached at humayun.gauhar@gmail.com

Chinese Develop Special "Kill Weapon" to Destroy U.S. Aircraft Carriers

2009-07-07T16:00:00.000-07:00

U. S. Naval Institute

With tensions already rising due to the Chinese navy becoming more aggressive in asserting its territorial claims in the South China Sea, the U.S. Navy seems to have yet another reason to be deeply concerned.

After years of conjecture, details have begun to emerge of a "kill weapon" developed by the Chinese to target and destroy U.S. aircraft carriers.

First posted on a Chinese blog viewed as credible by military analysts and then translated by the naval affairs blog Information Dissemination, a recent report provides a description of an anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) that can strike carriers and other U.S. vessels at a range of 2000km.

The range of the modified Dong Feng 21 missile is significant in that it covers the areas that are likely hot zones for future confrontations between U.S. and Chinese surface forces.

The size of the missile enables it to carry a warhead big enough to inflict significant damage on a large vessel, providing the Chinese the capability of destroying a U.S. supercarrier in one strike.

Because the missile employs a complex guidance system, low radar signature and a maneuverability that makes its flight path unpredictable, the odds that it can evade tracking systems to reach its target are increased. It is estimated that the missile can travel at mach 10 and reach its maximum range of 2000km in less than 12 minutes.

Supporting the missile is a network of satellites, radar and unmanned aerial vehicles that can locate U.S. ships and then guide the weapon, enabling it to hit moving targets.

While the ASBM has been a topic of discussion within national defense circles for quite some time, the fact that information is now coming from Chinese sources indicates that the weapon system is operational. The Chinese rarely mention weapons projects unless they are well beyond the test stages.

If operational as is believed, the system marks the first time a ballistic missile has been successfully developed to attack vessels at sea. Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

Along with the Chinese naval build-up, U.S. Navy officials appear to view the development of the anti-ship ballistic missile as a tangible threat.

After spending the last decade placing an emphasis on building a fleet that could operate in shallow waters near coastlines, the U.S. Navy seems to have quickly changed its strategy over the past several months to focus on improving the capabilities of its deep sea fleet and developing anti-ballistic defenses.

As analyst Raymond Pritchett notes in a post on the U.S. Naval Institute blog:

"The Navy's reaction is telling, because it essentially equals a radical change in direction based on information that has created a panic inside the bubble. For a major military service to panic due to a new weapon system, clearly a mission kill weapon system, either suggests the threat is legitimate or the leadership of the Navy is legitimately unqualified. There really aren't many gray spaces in evaluating the reaction by the Navy...the data tends to support the legitimacy of the threat."

In recent years, China has been expanding its navy to presumably better exert itself in disputed maritime regions. A recent show of strength in early March led to a confrontation with an unarmed U.S. ship in international waters.

Pirates of the Mediterranean

2009-07-01T06:55:00.000-07:00

Paul Craig Roberts
V Dare
Wednesday, July 1, 2009

On June 30, the government of Israel committed an act of piracy when the Israeli Navy in international waters illegally boarded the “Spirit of Humanity,” kidnapped its 21-person crew from 11 countries, including former US Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and Nobel Laureate Mairead MaGuire, and confiscated the cargo of medical supplies, olive trees, reconstruction materials, and children’s toys that were on the way to the Mediterranean coast of Gaza. The “Spirit of Humanity,” along with the kidnapped 21 persons is being towed to Israel as I write.

Gaza has been described as the “world’s largest concentration camp.” It is home to 1.5 million Palestinians who were driven by force of American-supplied Israeli arms out of their homes, off their farms, and out of their villages so that Israel could steal their land and make the Palestinian land available to Israeli settlers.

What we have been witnessing for 60 years is a replay in modern times, despite the United Nations and laws strictly preventing Israel’s theft of Palestine, of the 17th, 18th, and 19th century theft of American Indian lands by US settlers. An Israeli government spokesman recently rebuked the President of the United States, a country, the Israeli said, who stole all of its land from Indians, for complaining about Israel’s theft of Palestine.

I knew the “Spirit of Humanity” would fall to Israeli piracy the minute I received on June 25 from an official of an Israeli peace organization a “public advisory” that the government of Cyprus had withheld permission for the “Spirit of Humanity” to leave for Gaza. The US State Department had advised that “The Israeli Foreign Ministry informed U.S. officials at the American Embassy in Tel Aviv that Israel still considers Gaza an area of conflict and that any boats attempting to sail to Gaza will not be permitted to reach its destination.” The “Spirit of Humanity” obtained permission to leave Cyprus when all aboard signed a waiver absolving Cyprus of all responsibility for the crew’s safety at the hands of the Israelis.

As President Obama has called for humanitarian aid to be sent to Gaza, and as the International Red Cross has damned the inhumanity of Israel’s blockade of Gaza, the question that immediately comes to mind is why did not the United States send sufficient US Navy escort to see the “Spirit of Humanity” safely through international waters to Gaza? We send ships against Somalian pirates, why not against Israeli ones?

We all know the answer. The US talks a good “human rights” game, but never delivers–especially if the human rights abuser is Israel. After all, Israel owns the US Congress and President Obama. Israel even has an Israeli citizen and former member of the Israeli Defense Forces as the Chief-of-Staff in Obama’s White House. Israel owns millions of American “Christian Zionists” and “rapture evangelicals.” When it comes to Israel, the American government is a puppet state. It does what it is told.

Macho Americans might stand tall, but not when Israel snaps its fingers.

Israel, of course, will get away with a mere act of piracy. After all, Israel has been getting away with its war crimes and violations of international law for 60 years. If the UN tries to do anything, the US will veto it, as the US has done for decades.

What will happen to the kidnapped foreign nationals? Most likely they will be released and sent back to their respective countries. Israel, of course, will keep the stolen “Spirit of Humanity” to foreclose any further attempts by human rights activists to run Israel’s inhumane blockade of Gaza.

On the other hand, Israel might declare its captives to be terrorists on the ground that the Gazans elected in a free election Hamas as their government. Hamas, unlike Israel, is declared to be a terrorist organization by the puppet American State Department in Washington. Thus the human rights activists onboard the “Spirit of Humanity” are aiding and abetting terrorists by delivering goods to them. The US Department of Justice (sic) prosecutes American citizens and charities for sending aid to Palestinians on the grounds that Palestinians, if not everyone a terrorist, are governed by terrorists.

I wouldn’t be surprised if a Nobel Laureate and a former member of the US House of Representatives, along with the rest of the crew, are handed over to the Americans for indefinite detention and for torturing and waterboarding in the American torture facility at Bagram. I am certain that “Homeland Security” and the US Government are desperate to be rid of all of critics, and knocking off a Nobel Laureate and a member of the House sets a precedent for getting rid of the rest of us.

Meanwhile, California, which has become a failed state, has been denied bailout money from Washington. Israel, which has been a failed state for 60 years, can, unlike the American state of California, always count of Washington to deliver the money and the weapons to keep Israel going.

The same week that “our” government in Washington told the Governor of California “not one red cent,” President Barak Obama handed over $2.775 billion to Israel.

Online Journal (June 29) reported that the handover to Israel of the unemployed Americans’ tax dollars took place in a “tiny Capitol room” to which members of the press were denied access. I mean, really, who wants the media writing about US taxpayer dollars for Israel’s nuclear weapons while Americans are being kicked out of their homes. Not that, of course, the “Christian” supporters of Israel would mind.

Unlike every other recipient of US military largesse, Israel is permitted to bypass the Pentagon and to deal directly with US suppliers. Consequently, the Israel Lobby’s influence multiplies, because military suppliers fight for Israel in congressional committees in order to get Israel’s business. This lets Israel turn the screws on Iran. According to Grant F. Smith writing in Online Journal, Republican US Representative Mark Steven from Illinois has received $221,000 in campaign contributions from Israel political action committees (PACs). Therefore, it was a sure thing that he would introduce legislation preventing the Import-Export bank from providing loan guarantees to countries doing business with Iran.

Americans think that they are a superpower, but in fact they are a stupor-power. A puppet state if truth be known.

There is a great deal of evidence, even in Time magazine that Israel is a child abuser. “God’s Chosen People” routinely abuses captured Palestinian children. The Israelis also abuse Palestinian children by shooting them down in the streets.

Don’t take my word for it. The Geneva-based Defense for Children International says, according to Time Magazine, that “the ill-treatment and torture of Palestinian child prisoners appears to be widespread, systematic and institutionalized, suggesting complicity at all levels of the political and military chain of command.”

According to Time Magazine, “Often, children suffer lasting traumas from jail. Says Saleh Nazzal from the Palestinian Ministry of Prisoner Affairs, ‘When soldiers burst into a house and drag away a child, he loses his feeling of being protected by his family. He comes back from prison alienated from his family, his friends. They don’t like going back to school or even leaving the house. They start wetting their beds.’ Says Mona Zaghrout, a YMCA counselor who helps kids returning from prison: ‘They come out of prison thinking and acting like they are men. Their childhood is gone.’ And they often turn to another father figure–the armed militant groups fighting the Israeli occupation.’”

And so it goes. There’s no money for California, or for Americans’ health care, or for the several million Americans who have lost their homes and are homeless, because Israel needs it. Israel need the Americans’ taxpayers money to that it can create even more enemies, and, therefore, need more American money to spend with the American armament industries to oppress more Palestinians and to make more enemies, requiring more American money to protect Israel from its folly and its evil.

And the brainwashed American public goes along year after year

Israel threatens to shoot international activists

2009-06-30T18:29:00.000-07:00

The postwar humanitarian crisis in Gaza takes a turn for the worse with the Israeli Navy intercepting a relief ship headed toward the coastal strip.

A group of 21 activists sailing to Gaza said Tuesday that Israeli forces had threatened to gun down their boat unless they changed direction.

"There is a patrol boat around us and we were told that if we did not turn back they would open fire," Reuters quoted Irish activist Derek Graham as saying.

"We are continuing our course to Gaza," he added.

The Free Gaza Movement activists had left the Cypriot port of Larnaca earlier on Monday to deliver three tons of medical supplies, some tool kits and copper wiring to Gaza.

The activists onboard included an Irish Nobel peace laureate and a former US congresswoman.

Tel Aviv has tightened a blockade on Gaza, which is home to some 1.5 million people, since the democratically elected government of Hamas took power of the strip two years ago.

Israel's consistent blockades have cost Palestinians dearly with unemployment and poverty rates in the territory being amongst the highest in the world.

According to the official statistics agency of the Palestinian Authority, a steady decline is to be expected in the economy of the West Bank and Gaza.

With more than six months after Israel's three-week attack on the Gaza Strip, Palestinians are fighting to survive the acute shortages of fuel, food and medical supplies.

The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) said Friday that Israel's full-scale offensive on Gaza has taken a heavy toll on the territory's agriculture sector and has heightened risks of food insecurity and undernourishment.

Brookings Publication mentions possibility of ‘Horrific Provocation’ to Trigger Iran Invasion

2009-06-29T09:25:00.000-07:00

Jurriaan Maessen

Prisonplanet.com
June 29, 2009

In a recent policy paper published by the influential Brookings Institute, the authors propose almost anything to guarantee dominance of Persia by the new world order, including bribery, lying, cheating and mass murdering by an all-out military assault of Iran. The paper ‘Which path to Persia: Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran’ is just one of many recent and not so recent examples of the firm intent of the globalists to engage Iran militarily and acquire its natural resources in the same effort.

The group of authors- a cozy little convergence of globalists- contemplate four separate options on ‘how to deal with Iran’ in the cold bureaucratic language that poses as scientific but is really nothing more than the intelligent musings of a calculating psychopath. The first option, ‘Dissuading Tehran’ through diplomatic means is being discussed as something tried, tested and discarded. The second option, ‘Disarming Tehran’ covers several ways of rallying the ‘international community’ around the globalists’ intentions. In the third part, ‘Toppling Tehran’ the warmongering increases as the writers contemplate both covert and overt military action against the Islamic republic of Iran. In the fourth and last section, ‘Deterring Tehran’ the option of ‘containment’ is elaborated upon. The proposed final strategy predictably involves all of the above mentioned options, in roughly the same order of appearance.

To ensure the cooperation of surrounding countries, the authors propose bribery as an effective tool. After the authors assert that ‘it may be necessary to cut some deals in order to secure Moscow’s support for a tougher Iran policy’, the authors continue with their ‘brainstorming’, advising a widespread bribery campaign in order to ensure international cooperation in regards to Iran:

‘Other countries also will want payoffs from the United States in return for their assistance on Iran. Such deals may be distasteful, but many will be unavoidable if the Persuasion approach is to have a reasonable chance of succeeding.’ And further on: ‘To be successful, a Persuasion approach would invariably require unpleasant compromises with third-party countries to secure their cooperation against Iran.’

This means the US will have to cut all kinds of deals with dictators, bloodthirsty local tyrants and other corrupt kings of Arabia- even facilitating them with weapons. Besides rallying the ‘international community’ around the Anglo-American establishment with the help of these ‘unpleasant compromises’, the paper stresses it will also be necessary to persuade the Iranians themselves to topple their government (page 39):

‘Inciting regime change in Iran would be greatly assisted by convincing the Iranian people that their government is so ideologically blinkered that it refuses to do what is best for the people and instead clings to a policy that could only bring ruin on the country.’

But the authors underline the necessity of creating a favourable climate for the transnationalists in which to operate.

‘(…) any military operation against Iran will likely be very unpopular around the world and require the proper international context (…) The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support (however, grudging or covert) is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer- one so good that only a regime determined to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong reasons would turn it down. Under those circumstances, the United States (or Israel) could portray its operations as taken in sorrow, not anger, and at least some in the international community would conclude that the Iranians “brought it on themselves” by refusing a very good deal.’

Here the authors seem to abandon even the facade of civility as they proceed. Even though the authors put these vile warmongering words in quotes, they cannot mask the mindset. They mean to rally the ‘international community’ through bribery and deceit- as a steppingstone towards military strikes. The path toward such military strikes will be made smooth by economically strong-holding surrounding countries, forcing them to accept western military action as well as the justifications for it without question.
Military action. This is as acutely on the mind of the current chickenhawks, as the invasion of Iraq was on that of the neocons in the last couple of decades. Apparently, the authors feel compelled to give a justification for the bravura of their manuscript.

‘We chose to consider this extreme and highly unpopular option partly for the sake of analytical rigor and partly because if Iran responded to a confrontational American policy- such as an airstrike, harsh new sanctions, or efforts to foment regime change- with a major escalation of terrorist attacks (or more dire moves against Israel and other American allies), invasion could become a very “live” option.’

As the geopolitical feeding frenzy increases, the authors clearly begin to lose their cool as they begin to talk about the real plan behind all this elaborate brainstorming, reflecting the long-term agenda of the globalists for whom they work:

‘Like Iraq’, the authors state, ‘Iran is too intrinsically and strategically important a country for the United States to be able to march in, overthrow its government, and then march out, leaving chaos in its wake. (…) Iran exports about 2.5 million barrels per day of oil and, with the right technology, it could produce even more. It also has one of the largest reserves of natural gas in the world. These resources make Iran an important supplier of the energy needs of the global economy. Iran does not border Saudi Arabia- the lynchpin of the oil market- or Kuwait, but it does border Iraq, another major oil producer and a country where the United States now has a great deal at stake.’

And exactly in line with their masters tendency of using false flags, they allow themselves the luxury of speculating openly about a possible ‘provocation’ to escalate things to the point of armed conflict.

‘(…) it is not impossible that Tehran might take some action that would justify an American invasion. And it is certainly the case that if Washington sought such a provocation, it could take actions that might make it more likely that Tehran would do so (although being too obvious about this could nullify the provocation). However, since it would be up to Iran to make the provocation move (…), the United States would never know for sure when it would get the requisite Iranian provocation. In fact, it might never come at all.’

Now that would be a great disappointment, wouldn’t it. Under the headline ‘The Question of a Provocation’ on page 66, the authors press the point even further:

‘With provocation, the international diplomatic and domestic political requirements of an invasion would be mitigated, and the more outrageous the Iranian provocation (and the less that the United States is seen to be goading Iran), the more these challenges would be diminished. In the absence of a sufficiently horrific provocation, meeting these requirements would be daunting.’

Reminiscent of the Pearl Harbor-quote by raving neocons pre-9/11, the authors continue imagining how excellent it would be to have an Iranian-sponsored terror attack within the US to trigger war and march off toward Iran. During all this, the authors are aware how unlikely it is that Iran would actually commit such an attack on American soil (probably because they know who is usually responsible for such mass terror attacks):

‘Something on the order of an Iranian-backed 9/11, in which the plane wore Iranian markings and Tehran boasted about its sponsorship.(…). The entire question of “options” become irrelevant at that point: what American president could refrain from an invasion after the Iranians had just killed several thousand American civilians in an attack in the United States itself?‘Regarding the question of international support for an US invasion of the Islamic Republic, the Brookings people lament:

‘Other than a Tehran-sponsored 9/11, it is hard to imagine what would change their minds.’

The same goes for their plans in regards to that old favorite of the elite, covert psychological warfare, in order to subdue a sovereign nation. In chapter 7 of the manuscript, called ‘Inspiring an Insurgency’, it examines the possibility of propagandizing the Iranian people into helping out the globalists lute their nation:

‘The core concept lying at the heart of this option would be for the United States to identify one or more Iranian opposition groups and support them as it did other insurgencies in Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Kurdistan, Angola, and dozens of other locales since the Second World War. The United States would provide arms, money, training, and organizational assistance to help the groups develop and extend their reach. U.S. media and propaganda outlets could highlight group grievances and showcase rival leaders.’

Isn’t that a familiar sight? Could one way to ‘highlight’ group grievances be to mass distribute the death of a poor woman and then claim it’s all thanks to Twitter?

All this hinting at another false-flag attack underway and prepping the international community for a future invasion of Iran is becoming increasingly serious as the warmongering is being stepped up. This is the time to fix our eyes upon these globalists and their think tanks. If their blatant arrogance permits them to openly publish their bloodthirsty musings, we should be vigilant enough to pass this knowledge around lest we have another 9/11 on our hands.

Source: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2009/06_iran_strategy/06_iran_strategy.pdf

Iran’s Presidential Elections, Islamic Populism and Liberation Theology

2009-06-29T09:19:00.000-07:00

by Prof. Akbar E. Torbat

In Iran’s presidential elections, on June 12, 2009, the incumbent president Mahmud Ahmadinejad won a landslide victory. His main contender Mir-Hossein Mousavi could only secure about one third of the votes. The following is an explanation of what has happened and why Ahmadinejad has gained popularity to be reelected despite the Western media showing him differently.

Iran’s Presidential Elections 2009

A day before the election, the Iranian political activist Nasser Zarafshan said “a Ukraine-type velvet revolution” is in the cards to be played by the West in order to dominate Iran. A well financed high-tech campaign using YouTube, Facebook and twitter on the Internet and text messaging communication was underway in Iran. Yet, these means of communication are only known to a small fraction of Iran’s population. In addition, thousands of expensive posters, CDs, and other items prepared by pro-Mousavi green camp quickly flooded the streets of Tehran. The Western Media and especially the Farsi Language television programs such as the Persian BBC and Voice of America had potent impacts on the so called “reformists” or the neoliberal candidates’ supporters, but not Ahmadinejad’s constituencies that are masses not affected by such modern propagandas. The Western media boasted Mousavi’s image without knowing much about who he was. Obviously, he could not be painted as “Iran’s Gandhi” as some Western reporters ridiculously touted. Mousavi is not a charismatic leader and does not have an impressive record. In fact he was an Islamic fanatic when he became prime minster. He helped to shut down the Iranian universities for three years in order to launch the so called “Cultural Revolution”. Also, during his repressive premiership, thousands of Iranian political prisoners were executed. He has been out of politics for about 20 years and has not been socially active. He does not have broad view of what is happening in the world and especially in the neighboring countries.

In this election, behind the scene, the former president Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani was the key architect of Mousavi’s election campaign and the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei backed Ahmadinejad. Rafsanjani wishes to dominate the Islamic regime’s political structure replacing the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei who is at the top echelon of the clerical regime. Rafsanjani is very wealthy and is the most favorite cleric by the West. He does not seem to mind letting the West control Iran’s oil resources in exchange for ruling Iran by himself. In the past, people have called him “King Akbar”. In such situation, if he succeeds, the Islamic Republic could be turned into a Persian Gulf type monarchy or sheikhdom instead of a Western democracy as is dreamed by some Iranian political elites. However, Rafsanjani has been under pressure because of his corruption in arms purchases during Iran-Iraq war and the money he and his family members received to give oil contracts to the French oil company Total and his roles in ordering political assassinations of many of dissidents at home and abroad. Before the elections, Mousavi’s campaign spent conspicuously in the city of Tehran under the banner of Green color. Where he got the money from is an unanswered question.

The Presidential candidates in Iran are vetted by a twelve member body that is called Council of Guardian. In this election only three candidates from within the Islamic regime were selected by the Guardian Council to contest Ahmadinejad; the other nominees were not allowed to run. In the election, the incumbent President faced the last Iranian prime minister, Mir-Hossein Mousavi; a cleric and a former Parliament speaker, Mehdi Karroubi; and a former senior military commander, Mohsen Rezaei. However, none of the three contenders were delivering any new agenda on how to deal with the countries’ problems; they only criticized what the incumbent president had not done well in their view. Nearly 40 million Iranians or 85% of the eligible voters participated in the election. This was the highest turnout in ten presidential elections held in Iran. The official results as announced on June 14 by the Interior Ministry were: Ahmadinejad 24.5 million (63.62%), Mousavi 13.2 million (33.75%), Rezaei 0.67 million (1.73%), and Karroubi 0.33 million (0.85%) of the votes. The invalid votes canceled were 0.40 million (1.4%). The Spokesman for the Interior Ministry Ali Asghar Sharifi-Rad said the results were accurate and the representatives of all candidates had been present at the polling stations and signed off the final tallies.

Disputing the Election Results

Surprisingly, some well known Iranians became tools of Western media propaganda during and after the elections. An Iranian professor at Columbia University, an Iranian academic in the Hoover Institution, and a well known Iranian filmmaker residing in France were among many who jumped the bandwagon to claim the election was rigged. None of them showed any credible evidence to prove how a candidate who had more than 10 million votes compared to his main contender was not legitimately elected. Many filled the media with false claims, saying genuine results could not be declared as fast as they had been by the Iranian media. They misled the public because in reality about 3 hours after the poles were closed, Iranian media started announcing the election results of only 20% of the votes counted, and that was followed with more up-to-date data until the final tallies were announced at a later time. At the end, the announced results in favor of the incumbent were close to what had been predicted by several respected polling agencies (for example see The Washington Post June 15) in the runoff to the elections.

The three candidates who did not have any credible evidence for the alleged rigging asked for annulling the elections from the very beginning. They never wanted a recount because their representatives had been present at the polling stations and had already signed off on the results. They knew the numbers were not on their side as was largely predicted. In the following days, the main contender, Mousavi, brought his supporters to the streets of Tehran, the only major city he had won, to pressure the regime for annulling the results. This did not prevent millions of Iranians from coming out to the streets of Tehran and other Iranian cities to express their support for the status quo versus the West campaign to put its most favorite candidate who was Rafsanjani’s proxy in power. After a few days of protests in the streets of Tehran in which a number of people were killed; on June 19 in a powerful speech at Tehran University, the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei called for an end to street protests and assured the public that the government by no means had betrayed the votes of the nation. He blamed the Zionists and the Western powers, “specially the malicious British government”, for the post election protests and the riots.

Ahmadinejad's Populism

In 2005, Ahmadinejad advocated populist economic policies during his presidential campaign, which included “putting oil money on impoverished peoples’ dining table (Sofreh).” As a result, he gained strong grassroots’ support from urban poor and rural dwellers. Ahmadinejad became the first enduring non-cleric president who wanted to pursue the initial goals of the revolution that included economic justice and political sovereignty. When he became president, he implemented some small-scale development projects, including building hospitals, bridges, roads, and schools in the rural areas, financed by the oil money. Ahmadinejad gained support from underprivileged Iranians who favor his economic justice program. He was also supported by those who believe he has promoted Iran’s technological and defense progress. There are about three million impoverished women in Iran who weave carpets in their homes. Ahmadinejad brought a law to give them full insurance. Also, Ahmadinejad initiated distribution of some government-owned enterprises’ shares called “Justice Shares,” to redistribute state wealth to the low income Iranians. Justice shares are mutual fund shares of the state-owned enterprises that are privatized.

The election in Iran depicted a class struggle between those who live comfortably in modern urban centers and want Western style social life versus impoverished people in rural areas and smaller cities who seek better life in the traditional Islamic culture. The former had strong support from the West for social change, while the latter relied on the status quo in the country. The affluent Iranians do not like Ahmadinejad but the urban poor and those in the rural areas love him. As has been reported by the Christian Science Monitor, Ahmadinejad is greeted like a rock star when he visits small cities and rural Iran.

Some university professors and student groups do not like Ahmadinejad because they consider him to be an Islamic fanatic. In December 2005, Abbasali Amir Zanjani, a cleric was appointed the Chancellor of Tehran University. The appointment caused strong backlash from the intellectuals and the university students against the President. Zanjani was finally replaced in February 2008 by an economist Farhad Rahbar. Also, early forced retirement of a number of professors in Tehran University caused wide student protests. Tehran University is the first university established in Iran and has been historically the center of intellectual activism. As a result, Ahmadinejad became unpopular within some circles of Iranian intellectuals. But that has not affected his popularity among the majority of lower-middle class and impoverished Iranians.

Radical Islam and Liberation Theology

Ahmadinejad has been able to make alliance with some countries in Latin America. Latin America’s Catholic Church and radical Islam have something in common. Both religious movements have support of the masses to challenge domination of their countries by the Western imperial powers. There is a similarity between radical Islamists in Iran and the supporters of liberal theologians’ movements in Latin America. They both have common ideology to resist the West hegemony. Liberation theology, originated in Catholic Church, emphasizes effort to bring justice to the poor and oppressed. Liberation theology uses democratic socialism as a political theory to combat poverty. Radical Islam similarly uses political aspects of Islam as a force for creating national liberation and economic justice. Ali Shariati is known to be the first Islamist thinker who merged Islam political ideology and liberation theology. He was influenced by Frantz Fanon and Che Guevara, but unlike them who rejected religion in supporting national liberation, Shariati tailored Iran’s Islamic ideological roots as a means to mobilize masses for national liberation. However, Shariati was against clerical rule. He died mysteriously before the revolution in 1977, widely believed to be a victim of the Shah’s secret police (Savak) assassination. He did not live to see the clerics dominating political leadership in Iran.

Ahmadinejad pursues the same brand of Islamic radicalism as Shariati. He has been able to use religion to challenge the hegemony of the West as the liberation theologian leaders have done in Latin America. In this context Ahmadinejad joins similar brand of political figures such as Luiz Lula da Silva of Brazil, Hugo Chavez Venezuela, Ecuador’s President Rafael Correa, and Bolivian President Evo Morales who enjoy popularity among the Roman Catholic Church followers. However, there is an important distinction between the Islamic Republic and the Latin American governments. The Islamic Republic is a quasi-theocracy run by the clerics, while the Latin American countries are secular republics that are only supported by the Church. In the past, some Muslim political leaders have advocated Islamic Socialism. Examples are: Mohamed Ali Jinnah and Zulfakar Ali Bhutto in Pakistan, and Jamal Abdul Nasser in Egypt. Ahmadinejad too has strived for a socially just Islamic State in Iran. It remains to be seen whether he can succeed.

Akbar E. Torbat (atorbat@csudh.edu ) teaches at the College of Business Administration and Public Policy, California State University – Dominguez Hills. He has published a number of articles in scholarly journals concerning Iran. He received his Ph.D. in political economy from the University of Texas at Dallas.

US 'has agents working inside Iran'

2009-06-29T09:05:00.000-07:00

The US has intelligence agents in Iran but it is not clear if they are providing help to the protest movement there, a former US national security adviser has told Al Jazeera.

Brent Scowcroft said on Wednesday that "of course" the US had agents in Iran amid the ongoing pressure against the Iranian government by protesters opposed to the official result of its presidential election.

But he added that he had no idea whether US agents had provided help to the opposition movement in Iran, which claims that the authorities rigged the June 12 election in favour of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the incumbent president.

"They might do. Who knows?" Scowcroft told Josh Rushing for Al Jazeera's Fault Lines programme.

"But that's a far cry from helping protesters against the combined might of the Revolutionary Guard, the militias and so on - and the [Iranian] police, who are so far completely unified."

Limited options

Scowcroft's admission that Washington has agents stationed in Iran comes a day after the US president issued tougher rhetoric against the government in Iran.

Barack Obama's sterner tone came after days of deadly clashes between the opposition and Iranian security forces and militias.

Obama has been criticised by US conservative politicians for not taking a stronger line against Tehran amid the government crackdown, but Scowcroft, a former adviser to presidents Gerald Ford and the senior George Bush, said the US could only do so much.

"We don't control Iran. We don't control the government, obviously," he said.

"There is little we can do to change the situation domestically in Iran right now and I think an attempt to change it is more likely to be turned against us and against the people who are demonstrating for more freedom.

"Therefore, I think we need to look at what we can do best, which is to try to influence Iranian behaviour in the region."

At least 19 people have been killed in post-election violence in Iran, which broke out at the scene of protests questioning the veracity of the poll results.

Mir Hossein Mousavi, the main challenger to Ahmadinejad, has rejected the official results of the vote and has called for a fresh election to be held, while Mehdi Karoubi, another defeated candidate in the election, has called the new government "illegitimate".

But the Guardian Council, Iran's highest legislative body, has said that there were no incidences of major fraud in the vote and has declared that the official results will stand.

REAL LIFE DRAMA IN THE AIR Remembering 12th October, 1999

2009-06-29T09:01:00.000-07:00

October, 1999 Capt Sarwat of Pakistan International Airlines Airbus-300, an old buddy, and I had gone to Colombo , SriLanka for Airlanka Golf classic tournament.

On the 10th October, after returning from the 18th hole (towards the finish of the game) that I saw General Pervez Musharraf (chief of Joint staff and Chief of the army staff) teeing- off with the Bangladeshi COAS for a friendly match. Gen Musharraf had gone to Colombo to represent Pakistan on the 50th anniversary of Sri Lankan armed forces. On the 12th October we were to return back to Pakistan and our flight route was Colombo-Male (Maldives )- Karachi . The flight time between Male and Karachi was almost three and a half hours. Capt. Sarwat was Commander of the flight PK/805 and I was traveling as a passenger in the club class but being cockpit crew of PIA I could visit the cockpit with the consent of the Capt. of the flight. The First officer of the flight was Mr. Shami {who was on his first clearance check flight to Sri Lanka } and the flight engineer Mr. Amir. Gen Pervez Musharraf boarded the plane with his wife and two of his personal staff officers. Gen. Musharraf and his wife were seated in the front extreme right hand side seats and the PSO's occupied the last two seats on the same side. There were a total of 198 persons aboard that flight out of which almost 50 were children from the American school with six foreign teachers.

The flight to Male was bumpy due to rain and clouds. At Male, which was a transit stop, Gen. Musharraf, his wife and the PSO's disembarked to see the strange looking island which had nothing but just a runway strip. At Male, Capt. Sarwat after getting the weather information of Karachi and Nawabshah decided to refuel the aircraft, keeping Nawabshah airfield as an alternative (Nawabshah airfield is almost 110 nautical miles north east of Karachi ). It meant that the aircraft could reach Karachi and in contingency could divert to Nawabshah and keep flying in air for another 45 minutes before landing at Nawabshah which is normally the fuel policy of the airlines throughout the world.

The departure from Male was uneventful. The airplane started cruising at 29000 feet, I was sitting in the cockpit jump seat and occasionally would stand up to stretch and walk in the cabin. During the flight, the air guards and the cabin crew requested Gen Pervez Musharraf for individual and group photographs. Capt Sarwat also came to the club class from the cockpit to greet the VIP.

After two and half hours of flight and now cruising at 33000 feet, we established contact with Karachi air traffic controller. The first thing the Karachi radio controller asked was how much fuel was on board? What was our alternate airfield? And how many passengers were on board? I was standing behind the flight Engineer's seat and listening to the whole conversation through the cockpit speakers. On hearing this I did point out to Capt. Sarwat "Isn't it strange for Karachi to be asking this?" to which he nodded "yes". It was a clear night and probably the third of moon was out but we could later on see Karachi very clearly. The initial approach given to us was direct Marvi (shortest route) but after a while Karachi changed the clearance via Nansi (the longer route) and gave us descent clearance to 10000ft. As the airplane reached almost within 60 miles the Karachi tower said "PK /805 you are not cleared to land at Karachi ". "Can we proceed to Nawabshah?" Capt Sarwat asked ATC after pondering for a little while as to what must be going on down below. "Nawabshah is also closed" came the reply. "But Nawabshah is our alternate!" said Capt Sarwat forcefully. Karachi ATC said "you will land at your own risk you cannot land in Pakistan . All airfields are closed". "We do not have fuel for any other airfield!" Capt. Sarwat replied but once again but there was complete silence from the ATC.

The Karachi ATC was questioned thrice but all in vain ---- there was no answer. During the ATC conversation it seemed quite obvious that someone behind the controller was passing the instruction because more than three or more persons could be heard in the background of the reception. A KLM flight which was somewhere in air and listening to this conversation also shouted, "Karachi why don't you give the reason to the PK 805". While the commotion was on, Capt Sarwat assumed that perhaps it may be due to the VIP sitting aboard. Sarwat knowing my air force background asked me and the other crew "Partner what do you think, should I tell the general about this?" I butted in and said why not, let's get whatever help we can!"

Capt called the purser and asked him to inform the personal staff officers of the general. Both the PSO's were informed and they came rushing into the cockpit. After listening to the Capt. they went to inform the General. Meanwhile Capt Sarwat asked the flight engineer as to how much fuel was left, and if we could make it to Muscat . "No way, we have only five and a half tons of fuel left at this 10000 feet altitude" he calculated. Meanwhile General Musharraf had entered the cockpit. During the discussion between the flight crew members, two other alternate airfields for diversion were considered. Chahbahar in Iran and Ahmedabad in India . After a little discussion with the flight engineer regarding remaining fuel and new airfield and night landing facility, Chahbahar was not considered as an alternate airfield. "Do we have the approach and landing information on Ahmedabad? Please open and consult Jeppesen (the flight crew bible} immediately" Sarwat asked the co-pilot.

General Musharraf was listening to the conversation and he asserted "We will not go to India, that is not an option", to which Capt Sarwat said "okay General as you say." Now the Gen said that he wanted to talk to the Corp commander Karachi , immediately. After a while the PSO gave the mobile telephone number to the flight engineer and wrote the land telephone number of the Corp. Commander. Karachi . The flight engineer Amir tried many times to dial the telephone but there was no dial tone. In this hurry and in presence of the general, the flight engineer mishandled his flash light and broke its glass. The flight engineer Amir said we are not getting the connection through and it seems as if the telephone lines have been cut. The general then asked as to why we couldn't speak on the long range radio- the high frequency. The flight engineer tried to establish contact through company high frequency phone patch but it was all quiet, and no answer was received.

The other airplanes flying in Karachi vicinity were instructed by the Karachi ATC to divert because Karachi airport was closed. An aircraft of Pakistan Air Force which was in inbound to Karachi from Islamabad was instructed by the Karachi air traffic controller to land at Nawabshah, immediately. But the PAF Captain was not willing to accept this order and asserted that the PAF flight would go back to Islamabad . While the argument between the PAF aircraft and Karachi ATC were going on the Capt Sarwat changed the radio frequency. However later on I investigated about the PAF flight and I found out that it was a Boeing 737 VIP aircraft, which was on routine maintenance trip to Karachi but was forced to land at Nawabshah airfield. The police at Nawabshah, with special instructions was waiting for the two engine jet aircraft. Since it is difficult for a common man to distinguish between a Boeing 737 and an Airbus A-300, therefore Nawabshah police cordoned off the aircraft after parking. But as the doors were opened Pakistani Army soldiers rushed to the aircraft and shouted at the police to buzz off otherwise they would be shot at. The Police dispersed and now the army took charge of the aircraft. An Army officer entered the aircraft. To their dismay, they found the wife and children of the PAF Capt sitting inside, "Where is the General?" inquired the army officer. "What General?" asked the crew? PAF crew told them that they were going to Karachi from Islamabad . "But we were told that you are coming from Colombo " said the officer surprised

In the air at the very same time, the first officer of the aircraft saw two blips on traffic collision avoidance system and shouted "We are being intercepted; probably there are two fighter aircraft".

The conversation in the cockpit our plane had become tense and was blended with other actions in the cockpit, which had become rather twice demanding. I noticed that at no point any of the crew or the VIP lost their cool. The general insisted several times that we land at Karachi . He also inquired as to why we couldn't land at the air force runways at Karachi . But probably due to the fighter aircraft and no knowledge as to what was happening below on ground, with no runway lights landing at PAF Airfields was considered as the last option. If we could not land at Karachi or at Nawabshah due to runway blockade with tractors and bulldozers etc then Shahrah-e-Faisal or Masroor was the last option anyways. At this point Capt Sarwat changed to PIA company radio channel. Sarwat was asked about the remaining fuel. Someone at the company channel directed PK805 to proceed and land at Nawabshah, then refuel the airplane with 30 tones of fuel and once again get airborne and wait for further instructions.

After a few minutes, the Karachi ATC came on air and cleared PK805 to divert to Nawabshah. . Capt Sarwat then heaved a sigh of relief and said "Let's go to Nawabshah". The Airbus climbed like a missile to 20000 feet in no time since there was hardly any fuel left in the aircraft and it was rather light. At about 60 miles north of Karachi PK805 was redirected to come and land at Karachi by the Karachi ATC. A quick turnabout and descent was initiated. Someone from the ATC asked to speak to the general. Capt Sarwat gave his microphone to the general and said, "Sir please speak".

"This is Pervez Musharraf, who is there?" the general inquired very assertively. "I am Gen. Iftikhar sir, your retirement was announced two hours before but we are in control. Please land at Karachi "Where is the Corp Commander?" the general questioned "He is in the next room waiting for you "was the reply. Both the PSO's were listening and the younger PSO (a Major) said" Sir, ask him the name of his dog". Probably he wanted to be sure in recognizing the GOC, but the general who had kept his cool all along said confidently, "He is my man, don't worry!"(Later on this officer on ground happened to be a friend of mine who told me that General Musharraf had given him two puppies and that's how the PSO wanted to determine his identity)

Meanwhile he plane was reaching for its final approach. Suddenly the low fuel warning light of right wing fuel tank came on with an audio chime. The cockpit was dead silent and everyone was waiting to feel the touchdown as soon as possible. We had waited almost one hour and ten minutes in the air. The remaining fuel of 1.2 ton in the wing tanks, if reliable, was only available for approximately ten minutes of flight time. At twelve miles short of landing, the left wing fuel tank warning light also appeared with chime.

After touch down PK 805 was asked to park at the remote area (Bay 66) and was informed that no other person than the VIP will come out of the aircraft. After the engines shut down, the army soldiers who were almost two hundred cordoned-off the aircraft. The General was looking from the cockpit window and seemed relaxed. Before disembarking from the aircraft the general shook hands with all of us and said, "Thank you, don't worry all is well, he's my man." And he immediately passed his very first order through his PSO, "Tell them I don't want anyone to leave the country."

The General, his wife, who was trying to control her tears, and the two PSO's disembarked from the plane and were greeted by the Corp. Commander and the GOC with salutes from the soldiers. They all went inside a building for a short conference, which took almost 15 min after which the whole contingent drove away very fast. PK805 was not allowed to start the engines perhaps because of the security and almost no remaining fuel and was thus towed to the international arrival side (Bay 23). During the whole episode I was the quietest and the closest observer in the cockpit and was thoroughly impressed to watch total professionalism from Capt Sarwat and his crew. Not to mention the way General carried himself and remained confident and totally composed throughout the whole episode.

Capt. Tariq

Taliban Losses Are No Sure Gain for Pakistani's

2009-06-29T08:57:00.000-07:00

By:JANE PERLEZ and PIR ZUBAIR SHAH

For the past month and a half the Pakistani military has claimed success in retaking the Swat Valley from the Taliban clawing back its own territory from insurgents who only a short time ago were extending their reach toward the heartland of the country.Yet from a helicopter flying low over the valley last week the low rise buildings of Mingora the largest city in Swat now deserted and under a 24 hour curfew appeared unscathed. In the surrounding countryside farmers had harvested wheat and red onions on their unscarred land.

All that is testament to the fact that the Taliban mostly melted away without a major fight possibly to return when the military withdraws or to fight elsewhere military analysts say. About two million people have been displaced in Swat and the surrounding area as the military has carried out its campaign.The reassertion of control over Swat has at least temporarily denied the militants a haven they coveted inside Pakistan proper. The offensive has also won strong support from the United States which has urged Pakistan to engage the militants.

But the Taliban’s decision to scatter leaves the future of Swat and Pakistan’s overall stability under continued threat military analysts and some politicians say.The tentative results in Swat also do not bode well for the military’s new push in the far more treacherous terrain of South Waziristan another insurgent stronghold where officials have vowed to take on the leader of the Pakistani Taliban Baitullah Mehsud who remains Pakistan’s most wanted man.

Signs abound that the military’s campaign in Swat is less than decisive. The military extended its deadline for ending the campaign. Even in the areas where progress has been made the military controls little more than urban centers and roads say those who have fled the areas. The military has also failed to kill or capture even one top Taliban commander.

It was “very disappointing ” said Aftab Ahmed Sherpao a senior politician from the region that none of the commanders had been eliminated. It turned out he said that early reports of the capture of Ibn Amin a particularly brutal commander from Matta were incorrect.

Many Taliban fighters have infiltrated the camps set up for those displaced by the fighting and are likely to return with them to Swat said Himayatullah Mayar the mayor of Mardan the city where many of the refugees are staying. “Most of the Taliban shaved their beards and they are living here with their families ” he said.As of two weeks ago the police had arrested 150 people in the camps suspected of being members of the Taliban Mr. Mayar said. This figure did not include suspects arrested by the Intelligence Bureau Pakistan’s domestic intelligence outfit and the Directorate forInter Services Intelligence the country’s main spy agency he said.

Meanwhile the government led by President Asif Ali Zardari has yet to announce a full plan for how it will provide services like courts policing and health care that will allow the refugees to return home and the government to fully assert control.Those plans appear to be mired in conflict and mutual suspicion between the military and the civilian government raising serious questions about whether the authorities can secure Swat and other areas and keep them from being taken back by the Taliban military experts said.

“I’ve told the president and the prime minister and the chief of the army this is the time to act. Just take basic things and implement them ” said Gen. Nadeem Ahmad the commander of the Special Support Group an arm of the Pakistani military that is providing temporary buildings and some food for the displaced. “This is not talking rocket science.”On a notepad General Ahmad had drawn a chart of the four elements of what he called “lasting peace.” They were good government improved delivery of services including rebuilt schools speedy justice (something the Taliban had provided) and social equity.

He appeared to be skeptical that those aspects could be delivered within what he called an essential one year time frame. He said he had warned the leaders “If you don’t deliver it will be trouble. You will come back and do the operation again.”Having witnessed past episodes of deal making with the Taliban the people of Swat say they want tangible proof that the military is serious this time and that they will be safe if they return home.

From the start a rallying cry has been a demand that the army kill or capture Taliban leaders a ruthless group of highly trained fighters some with links to Al Qaeda. But the army has not been able to show any evidence that it killed any of the Taliban leaders.The daily newspaper The News said in a recent editorial that unless Maulana Fazlullah the Taliban’s main commander in Swat and Mr. Mehsud the country’s top enemy were captured “the Taliban are going to live to fight another day.”

Indeed most of the damage from the recent fighting appears confined to small agricultural hamlets outside Mingora according to interviews with displaced people. Some said they had heard from recent arrivals to the camps that areas 500 yards off the roads remained in control of the militants.

The “outlook was bleak” in Swat because the civilian government did not have the money or the skills to rebuild said Shuja Nawaz the author of a history of the Pakistani military and now the director of the South Asia Center at the Atlantic Council in Washington.Most of the two million displaced people are still living in tent camps and cramped quarters with relatives and even strangers in cities as far flung as the southern port of Karachi.

Many displaced people were fed up with the cruelties inflicted under Taliban rule and have backed the military campaign. But as the fighting drags on in places the mood among them grows increasingly despondent.Some displaced people said that they were angry at the army for indiscriminate shelling in civilian areas. Others said they were confused about why the military operation was even necessary.

“We had no problem with the Taliban ” Umar Ali a poultry trader from Qambar in Swat said as he sat on the veranda of a home in Swabi a town filled with displaced people. “We’re here because of the military shelling. I’m a trader and the thing that affects my life is the curfew.”

Earlier Pakistani campaigns against the Taliban do not offer an encouraging precedent. In Bajaur a part of the tribal areas two main economic centers the market towns of Loe Sam and Inayat Kalay remain in ruins nearly eight months after the army smashed them in pursuit of the Taliban and claimed victory.

Lobbying dollars flowing out of Pakistan at super speed

2009-06-29T08:03:00.000-07:00

By Shaheen Sehbai

WASHINTGON: At least 11 big and small, known and unknown, lobbying companies have been hired by Pakistan and state-owned Pakistani organisations in the US, paying them hundreds of thousands of dollars every month, some of them having mysterious names and almost dubious credentials.

Although lobbying is a legal profession in Washington, the way it is conducted has earned it the nickname of “officially certified corruption” and what the Pakistan government, Pakistan Embassy and Pakistani organisations are doing may come close to this unofficial definition, analysts say.

The information about these lobbying firms is public record and is available on official websites of US government agencies and organisations. But somehow Pakistani clients of these lobbying firms have tried to camouflage their widely spread activities under different names and different categories so that at one time not more than two or three companies could be officially acknowledged as government lobbyists.

The lobbying debate was fired by Geo TV’s talk show “Meray Mutabiq” hosted by Dr Shahid Masood on Saturday night but details gathered by The News revealed much more than the programme could cover.

All lobbyists are registered in the US as “foreign agents” under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) and have to disclose their activities and operations under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995. All this data is then made available to the public through information posted on their official websites.

Under FARA data seven Pakistani entities are listed as clients of at least 11 lobbying companies. One such firm was de-listed in March and its client was the PPP.

Likewise lobbyists’ info, an official organisation that keeps all the data on lobbyists for the last 40 years and is the best recognised source of latest information on lobbying and lobbyists, lists seven Pakistani entities, which have hired the 11 lobbying firms in the US. These in their order of listing include:

- Council on Pakistan Relations (CPR): This is said to be based in Michigan but no other information is available except an expensive Washington DC address, 1455 Pennsylvania Avenue, one block away from the White House and next to the famous Willard Hotel. There is a website for this organisation, www.pakistanrelations.org, but it does not name any one or any organisation, which can be identified. The details of the website are also hidden and when The News tried to find who owned the website and where it was located, Go-Daddy.com, the domain provider listed it as a secret/private website. Go-Daddy.com charges $10 extra to keep all the information about the website owner secret. CPR has hired one of the most expensive firms in Washington, Cassidy and Associates which has former Assistant Secretary Robin Raphel as one of the senior vice presidents. General Musharraf had also hired this company in October 2007 at $1.2 million per year to lobby for him just before the imposition of the emergency in Nov 07.

- Pakistan American Business Association: This is described as a non-profit organisation and has hired a big firm Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, ranked by The National Law Journal in 2006 as one of the 100 largest law firms in the country. Who are these Pak-American businessmen and where are they getting the huge dollars to pay this firm and for what results is not yet known.

- Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) has hired Benazir Bhutto’s personal lobbyist, Mark Siegel’s firm Locke Lord Strategies on a one-time payment of $150,000 to lobby for PIA’s landing rights in the US.

- Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) until recently had three lobbyists, BKSH, a subsidiary of Burson Marsteller, Mark Siegel’s firm LLS and a firm owned by one T Dean Reed. Lakhs of dollars were paid by PPP before the elections 2008 when Benazir Bhutto was trying to win over the US leaders to replace General Musharraf. On March 9, 2009 PPP terminated the contract of BKSH.

- Embassy of Pakistan in Washington: The latest information on lobbyists.info shows that the Pakistan Embassy has currently retained three main lobbying firms: Moses Boyd, Mark Siegel’s LLS and Ogilvy Public Relations (one of the names in this firm’s list of associates is Irfan Kamal. Who is he and what role he plays, whether any, is not known).

- Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Government of Pakistan: Under this name, a mysterious firm named ‘Team Eagle’ has been hired as one of the two lobbying companies, the other bang White & Case LLP in which one Pakistani name, Imran R Mir, is mentioned as an associate.

- Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting: Under this name only one name of a Pakistan-based company Asiatic Advertising is registered. No details of transactions are available for this firm.

These seven Pakistani organisations have thus hired 11 firms, separately and mysteriously in some cases, but what output and results are these companies providing is unknown and not clear. It would be a suitable case for parliamentary oversight bodies like the Public Accounts Committee to look into the details of these firms and how much they were paid for what results.

The data provided by US government under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) until June 2008 is as follows. This lists some of the firms hired and paid by the Musharraf regime and some by the PPP government. It is amusing to note that the purpose of payment in some cases is just ridiculous like training Pakistani officials in the Embassy on how to deal with US media. The following is the data as listed on FARA web site:

- BKSH & Associates #5402, 1110 Vermont Avenue, NW Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005

Pakistan People’s Party (t) Nature of Services: Public Relations.

The registrant contacted congressional staffers, members of the Congress, and the US government officials to check on status of Resolution 445 and to assist the foreign principal in its effort to promote democracy in Pakistan and in providing its views on the current political, economic and humanitarian situation on the ground in Pakistan. The registrant also contacted congressional staffers to discuss upcoming visit of representatives of the foreign principal to the United States. $31,299.65 for the six-month period ending June 30, 2008.

- Burson-Marsteller #2469 1110 Vermont Avenue, NW, 12th Floor Washington, DC 20005-3544

Pakistan People’s Party (t) 60 Nature of Services: Media Relations.

The registrant developed media monitoring reports, spoke with media representatives, secured and attended meetings for party representatives, and secured and staffed interviews for party representatives on behalf of the foreign principal. $49,837.13 for the six-month period ending April 30, 2008.

- Cassidy & Associates, Inc #5643 700 13th Street, N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005

Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (t) 60 Nature of Services: Lobbying.

The registrant contacted congressional staffers and the US government officials to promote a better understanding of the foreign principal’s political, social and economic developments. $100,000.00 for the six-month period ending March 31, 2008. Printed as of: February 11, 2009 Page 160 of 229 Pakistan.

- Dewey & LeBoeuf, LLP #5835 1101 New York Avenue, NW Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20005-4213

Ministry of Commerce, Government of Pakistan, Embassy 60 Nature of Services: Legal and Other Services/Lobbying.

The registrant provided services to the foreign principal including developing action plans that advance Pakistan’s commercial and trade objectives vis-‡-vis the US government and the private sector. $294,042.83 for the six-month period ending April 30, 2008.

- JWT Asiatic, a division of WPP Marketing Communications (Pvt.) Ltd #5722 ABN Amro Bank Building 16 Abdullah Haroon Road Karachi, Pakistan.

Government of Pakistan 60 Nature of Services: Advertising. Activities: None Reported Finances: None Reported.

- Locke Lord Strategies, LP #5856 401 9th Street, NW Suite 400 South Washington, DC 20004

Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP); Asif Ali Zardari, Co-Chairperson of the PPP 60.

Nature of Services: Lobbying.

The registrant agreed to promote the democratic transition of Pakistan and to encourage the international investigation of the assassination of Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. Finances: None Reported

- Locke Lord Strategies, LP #5856 401 9th Street, NW Suite 400 South Washington, DC 20004

The Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 60. Nature of Services: Lobbying.

The registrant will conduct strategic and governmental affairs communications on behalf of the foreign principal. Finances: None Reported

Printed as of: February 11, 2009 Page 161 of 229 Pakistan.

- Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide #5807 1111 19th Street, NW 10th Floor Washington, DC 20036

Embassy of Pakistan (t) 60 Nature of Services: Media Relations.

On behalf of the foreign principal, the registrant provided media training to embassy staff, drafted informational materials for distribution to journalists and other media outlets, facilitated the embassy’s interactions with journalists and other media outlets, and provided strategic guidance with respect to the United States media. $256,809.00 for the six-month period ending May 31, 2008.

- Reed, T Dean #5044 37277 Branchriver Road Purcellville, VA 20132-1922

Pakistan Peoples Party (t) 60 Nature of Services: Public Relations.

The registrant provided public relations advice and consultation to the foreign principal and the editing of a newsletter. $10,500.00 for the six-month period ending March 31, 2008.

- Van Scoyoc Associates, Inc. #5401 101 Constitution Avenue, NW Suite 600 West Washington, DC 20001

Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Embassy (t) 60

Nature of Services: Legal and Other Services/Lobbying.

The registrant monitored, advised and evaluated legislative issues, as well as arranged meetings and accompanied Pakistani government officials to meetings with members of the Congress, and congressional staffers to discuss general US-Pakistan issues. Representatives of the registrant also traveled to Pakistan to meet with Pakistani government officials. $330,000.00 for the six-month period ending June 30, 2008.

Courtesy: The News International, 28-06-09

Confirmation of PPPISTAN, portraits of Founders of Pakistan removed from Presidency!

2009-06-27T10:03:00.000-07:00

Just a couple of days ago, a reception ceremony in the Pakistan President Avenue was organized to honor the victorious Pakistan Cricket Team. One thing that should have been noticed but was not noticed probably, was that in the avenue, there were big portraits of former Pakistani PM Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, former PM Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto, current President Asif Ali Zardari and their son Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. The real portraits by which the Presidency should have been graced with, were missing, I am referring to the portraits of founders of Pakistan i.e. Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Dr. Allama Iqbal.

My mind is flooded with lots of questions right now. Is this the personal property of Asif Ali Zardari? Or is it their family house? No way! This is the constitutional avenue that is a big responsibility for the President. Please don’t get my wrong, I in no way mean to disrespect the Bhutto family, I respect them. But the thing is if the President is allowed to throw away the main portraits and replace with the portraits of his family, then former President Pervez Musharraf’s family’s portraits should have been there too.

This is the thing that is making me sick. The President House is the temporary residency for the President of Pakistan, and the Public Avenue of the Presidency should have remained uninfluenced. It should have been graced with the photos of founders of Pakistan and the respectable historical personalities like Liaquat Ali Khan, Maulana Muhammad Ali Johar etc.

I respect everyone’s opinion so my readers are welcomed to share their views here in the comments, as for me, I strongly condemn and Protest against such kind of blunders at the Presidency.

Road to Guntanamo

2009-06-27T07:33:00.000-07:00

The terrifying first-hand account of three Pakistani British citizens who were held for two years without charges in the American military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Known as the "Tipton Three," in reference to their home town in Britain, the three were eventually returned to Britain and released, still having had no formal charges ever made against them at any time during their ordeal.

A Minute’s Silence For The Death Of Common Sense, Please.

2009-06-27T06:21:00.000-07:00

by Dan Qayyum of PKKH.com

Just when you think our so called ‘elected representatives’ can’t embarrass us anymore, they tend to prove us wrong.

The Sindh Assembly has this morning held a minute’s silence for Michael Jackson’s sad demise. Yes, you can read that again.

Our army is busy fighting a bitter war against foreign funded terrorists, over 3 million of our people have been made homeless and we’re facing what could potentially be the worst crisis in our history if not dealt with properly. Our politicians on the other hand just cannot grasp the seriousness of the situation.

The Federal Information Minister feels it important to entertain himself with a $15,000 lapdance from an Indian hooker while on a begging round. Is begging that stressful? Maybe he should learn something off his President who doesn’t seem to mind it at all.

When did the president or any senior members of his team last visit the affected areas to show solidarity with our people? Why have they never bothered turning up and paying respect at the homes of our fallen soldiers? What have they contributed out of their own pockets towards caring for our internal refugees?

The point isn’t whether Jacko was a global superstar or that he had reportedly converted to Islam – Michael Jackson had absolutely f*ck-all to do with Pakistan, its history, its culture, its language, its people and its politics. This is the Provincial Assembly of Sindh, Pakistan, not the California State Assembly. Or are we now officially the 51st state?

What next? Will Muttahida’s gun toting ‘activists’ and PPP Jayalas forcefully shut all businesses in Karachi for a shutter-down strike next time Britney shaves her head? Or will we have a national day of mourning when Paris Hilton’s little pooch dies?

Why have we as a nation become so passive about these incompetent crooks who are turning us into a joke? And not a funny one either.

Terrorists "Made in Miami, USA" by Nil Nikandrov

2009-06-25T12:04:00.000-07:00

Miami, a coastal city in southeastern Florida, US, is known worldwide for its sandy beaches, high-class tourism and entertainment.

Well-off people from Latin America are striving to buy houses in Miami and join the clubs which are popular among American 'high society'.

Miami is a kind of Latin American bridgehead in the US territories. There you may see diverse people from countries located to the south of the Rio Grande: retired businessmen, politicians who worked for the State Department (harmfully to the national interests of their countries), popular actors, singers and also drug dealers and other criminals.

In the western media, Miami is rarely mentioned as a stronghold of terror organizations. And it is clear why. There are terrorists whom FBI, CIA and other services have long cooperated with, so the authorities and the partisan media do not view them as a threat to US national security.

The permanent anti-terror campaign launched after the 9/11 attacks in no way disturbs the terrorists in Miami. It seems that US ultra-right circles still believe those hirelings could help them in their fight against "alien" regimes in Cuba, Bolivia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Paraguay, Nicaragua and Salvador.

Secret camps for training terrorists in Miami appeared in the very first years of the CIA's existence. Their major goal was to suppress Communist-like regimes in Latin America and the countries of the Caribbean. They successfully worked in Guatemala at the time of Jacobo Arbenz`s rule (1951-1954). In late 1940s there was a wave of attacks on Soviet diplomatic missions in Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Cuba. Soviet diplomats were threatened also in Uruguay and Argentina. Those were the first years of the Cold War, and the demand was quite clear: “Soviets, get away from Latin America!” Thus Moscow had to close half of its embassies in the region.

The 'renaissance' of terror organizations in Miami happened after Fidel Castro`s triumphant guerrilla campaign. Dictator Fulgencio Batista fled Cuba, followed by hundreds of war criminals and police agents involved in bloody repressions. And they were hired into terrorist groups by the CIA to later again be sent to Cuba and serve the US there. Miami militants are responsible for hundreds of killings and assassinations in Havana and other cities. Since Fidel Castro was their major enemy, the CIA used everything - from an exploding cigar to a scuba tank with toxic gas.

The number of terrorists among Cuban immigrants grew so fast that they felt they could interfere in US domestic policies. A prominent American documentarist Michael Moore used to say that each serious incident in the US in the past few decades had Cuban trace: John Kennedy's murder, the Watergate scandal, the Iran-Contra affairs, etc.

Ramon Medina worked as the key CIA agent in the Iran-Contra case in 1985-1987. Medina (his real name is Luis Posada Carriles) was born in Cuba in 1928. Before the revolution he worked as chemist at a sugar factory. He was opposed to the regime of the Castro brothers and in February 1961 fled the country to escape detention. He decided to continue his fight...from abroad.

Posada was trained in Fort Benning (US) and soon was hired by the CIA. He is known as a very experienced militant.

In 1964 he led the training of rebels ofe so-called Revolutionary Junta.

In the 1960s he helped the CIA to develop its branches: Alpha 66, Comandos L, Movimiento de 30 Noviembre and others.

In 1967 he was sent to Venezuela to run a department of the DISIP secret police force. He pursued members of leftist parties and guerrilla brigades. An explosion on board a flight from Caracas to Havana, which took the lives of 73 passengers and all the crew, became the climax of his terror activity. Posada was arrested and jailed in Venezuela, where he stayed until 1985. He did not serve the whole term. His patrons in the CIA helped him to escape, gave him a new passport and sent him to Salvador to control the delivery of arms to the 'contras' in Nicaragua.

In 2000 Posada and three of his allies prepared an assassination on Fidel Castro in Panama .

The Cuban leader was taking part in the 10th Ibero-American summit, when his intelligence service told him about the plotted assassination attempt.

Castro disclosed the information during a press conference. The police found enough evidence, including 30 kilograms of explosives, and Posada and his team were arrested.

And again he was released by his US friends. Secretary of State Colin Powell arrived in Panama and settled the issue. His argumentation was that Panamian politician Martin Torrijos, who was one of Chavez's supporters, was about to take office as president and that he would certainly demand Posada`s extradition to try him on the Cuban plane blast.

Posada`s name has again attracted attention recently when it was made public that his agents in Central America had plotted an assassination on Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez and his Bolivian counterpart Evo Morales but luckily the two presidents were warned beforehand and escaped the danger.

The world media calls Posada “the No.1 terrorist in Western hemisphere” but the US prefers to ignore the obvious facts and accuses Posada only of 'violating migration laws'.

After the failed coup d'etat attempt and an unsuccessful oil sabotage in Venezuela in April 2002 and in early 2003, Miami terrorist organizations thought about recruiting new members. CIA agents who had given themselves away tried to escape, while migrants from Venezuela settled in Miami close to the Cuban community and aimed to solve “the problem with Chavez” by means of force. The US asked the Cuban militants to train their Venezuelan colleagues. Now it is difficult to say exactly how fruitful their joint work is, but still some facts are available already.

In the second half of 2002 the sides, represented by the Cuban Comandos F-4 led by Rodolfo Frometa and the Venezuela Patriotic Union under Luis Garcia Morales, reached an agreement on joint terror activity. Under the deal, the two groups have to share information and carry out joint operations in times which can be described as 'critical' either for Cuba or Venezuela. After being defeated by Chavez supporters, members of the Venezuelan resistance movement do not feel like coming back home 'to put an end to the dictatorship'. They prefer to hire militants from Colombia or Argentine and offer huge sums to lure them in.

The group of Venezuelan militants in Miami already have their 'heroes': several fugitive officers, who had organized attacks on Spanish and Colombian embassies in Caracas in order to demonize Bolivia. Another group of Venezuelan militants were accused of killing Danilo Anderson, a Venezuelan environmental state prosecutor, who investigated the 2002 failed coup d'etat attempt. The organizers of the oil sabotage, which almost put Venezuela on the brink of an ecological catastrophe, also live in Miami as if they had not committed any crimes. Each time Venezuela asks the US to extradite them, Washington gives vague answers or does not reply at all.

Special forces of the countries which in the western media are called 'populist' are aware of the main channels through which terrorists are being transported from Miami to the south. Many of the militants are tasked with long-term missions: to legally settle in a country and wait for the X-day. On their way the terrorists usually stay in some port cities in Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, Panama, in the capital of Costa Rica - San Jose - and in the Colombian city of Cucuta, bordered to the east by Venezuela. Recently, Mexican territories have been actively used for such kinds of operations for under President Calderon the country's special forces have practically fallen under US control. The main Carribean states, especially those bordering Venezuela, are also involved in the campaign against 'alien regimes'.

Concerned over the remaining terror threats coming from Miami, the progressive governments of Latin America are trying to get authentic information about the plotted conspiracies. In Havana they did not ever doubt that Washington helped those criminals who organized terror attacks in hotels and restaurants in Cuba or mass poisoning of humans and animals and provocations on marine and air borders.

Agents were planted into the anti-Cuban terror organization to report about the plotted operations beforehand. Gerardo Hernandez, Antonio Guerrero, Ramon Labanino, Fernando Gonzalez, and Rene Gonzalez were among the volunteers. They managed to prevent more than 170 terror attacks. Cuba sent to Washington all data these five agents had collected in the hotbed of terrorists in Miami. But Washington used the information in fighting against those who opposed the idea of terror.

In 1998 the five Cubans were arrested and tried. The whole process turned into an infamous show. The judges were intimidated by the mafia. The process was highly politicized and lacked solid evidence. In spite of this, the detainees were sentenced to prison for crimes they did not commit, like 'espionage' against the Miami-based Southern Command of the U.S Armed forces. It is worth mentioning that some retired generals of the US army attended the hearings of this case (which lasted for seven months) and testified that the five agents had not attempted to get intelligence information.

Now the release of the five agents is a matter of honor for Cuba. In many countries, including the US, people take to the streets to voice their protest over illegal imprisonment of the heroes. Some 300 committees have been operating worldwide where people can express their sympathy with the detained. The UN Human Rights Commission's working group urged the US government to undertake adequate steps to settle the issue, otherwise Washington's 'war on terror' was nothing but a fraud.

Terror organizations in Miami are posing a danger not only to the Latin American countries and its leaders. Everyone who knows the truth about the life in Miami understand that there are no 'accidental' deaths: if a person dares to think and talk differently and defend his views, he is doomed to be killed.

The long list of victims features those who wanted better relations with Havana, who welcomed Bolivarian reforms in Venezuela or supported socialists in Nicaragua and Ecuador. For example, the staff of La Replica magazine were intimidated several times for their dialog with Cuba. Most Americans cannot even imagine what cruelty and extremism are hidden under the mask of luxury and resort entertainment.

It was exactly in Miami where the cream of the CIA, the FBI, the State Department and the Cuban mafia plotted John Kennedy's assassination. The incumbent US President Barack Obama has been more than once criticized by the Miami extremists for not implementing a hard-line policy towards Cuba. So, who could guarantee security to Mr. Obama then?

Soros, the CIA, Mossad and the new media destabilization of Iran

2009-06-25T07:52:00.001-07:00

James Corbett
The Corbett Report
June 24, 2009

It’s the 2009 presidential election in Iran and opposition leader Mir-Houssein Mousavi declares victory hours before the polls close, insuring that any result to the contrary will be called into question. Western media goes into overdrive, fighting with each other to see who can offer the most hyperbolic denunciation of the vote and President Ahmadenijad’s apparent victory (BBC wins by publishing bald-faced lies about the supposed popular uprising which it is later forced to retract). On June 13th, 30000 “tweets” begin to flood Twitter with live updates from Iran, most written in English and provided by a handful of newly-registered users with identical profile photos. The Jerusalem Post writes a story about the Iran Twitter phenomenon a few hours after it starts (and who says Mossad isn’t staying up to date with new media?). Now, YouTube is providing a “Breaking News” link at the top of every page linking to the latest footage of the Iranian protests (all shot in high def, no less). Welcome to Destabilization 2.0, the latest version of a program that the western powers have been running for decades in order to overthrow foreign, democratically elected governments that don’t yield to the whims of western governments and multinational corporations.

Ironically, Iran was also the birthplace of the original CIA program for destabilizing a foreign government. Think of it as Destabilization 1.0: It’s 1953 and democratically-elected Iranian leader Mohammed Mossadegh is following through on his election promises to nationalize industry for the Iranian people, including the oil industry of Iran which was then controlled by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. The CIA is sent into the country to bring an end to Mossadegh’s government. They begin a campaign of terror, staging bombings and attacks on Muslim targets in order to blame them on nationalist, secular Mossadegh. They foster and fund an anti-Mossadegh campaign amongst the radical Islamist elements in the country. Finally, they back the revolution that brings their favoured puppet, the Shah, into power. Within months, their mission had been accomplished: they had removed a democratically elected leader who threatened to build up an independent, secular Persian nation and replaced him with a repressive tyrant whose secret police would brutally suppress all opposition. The campaign was a success and the lead CIA agent wrote an after-action report describing the operation in glowing terms. The pattern was to be repeated time and time again in country after country (in Guatemala in 1954, in Afghanistan in the 1980s, in Serbia in the 1990s), but these operations leave the agency open to exposure. What was needed was a different plan, one where the western political and financial interests puppeteering the revolution would be more difficult to implicate in the overthrow.

Enter Destabilization 1.1. This version of the destabilization program is less messy, offering plausible deniability for the western powers who are overthrowing a foreign government. It starts when the IMF moves in to offer a bribe to a tinpot dictator in a third world country. He gets 10% in exchange for taking out an exorbitant loan for an infrastructure project that the country can’t afford. When the country inevitably defaults on the loan payments, the IMF begins to take over, imposing a restructuring program that eventually results in the full scale looting of the country’s resources for western business interests. This program, too, was run in country after country, from Jamaica to Myanmar, from Chile to Zimbabwe. The source code for this program was revealed in 2001, however, when former World Bank chief economist Joseph Stiglitz went public about the scam. More detail was added in 2004 by the publication of John Perkin’s Confessions of an Economic Hitman, which revealed the extent to which front companies and complicit corporations aided, abetted and facilitated the economic plundering and overthrow of foreign governments. Although still an effective technique for overthrowing foreign nations, the fact that this particular scam had been exposed meant that the architects of global geopolitics would have to find a new way to get rid of foreign, democratically elected governments.

Destabilization 1.2 involves seemingly disinterested, democracy promoting NGOs with feelgood names like the Open Society Institute, Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy. They fund, train, support and mobilize opposition movements in countries that have been targeted for destabilization, often during elections and usually organized around an identifiable color. These “color revolutions” sprang up in the past decade and have so far successfully destabilized the governments of the Ukraine, Lebanon, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan, among others. These revolutions bear the imprint of billionaire finance oligarch George Soros. The hidden hand of western powers behind these color revolutions has threatened their effectiveness in recent years, however, with an anti-Soros movement having arisen in Georgia and with the recent Moldovan “grape revolution” having come to naught (much to the chagrin of Soros-funded OSI’s Evgeny Morozov).

Now we arrive at Destabilization 2.0, really not much more than a slight tweak of Destabilization 1.2. The only thing different is that now Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and other social media are being employed to amplify the effect of (and the impression of) internal protests. Once again, Soros henchman Evgeny Morozov is extolling the virtues of the new Tehran Twitter revolution and the New York Times is writing journalistic hymns to the power of internet new media…when it serves western imperial interests. We are being asked to believe that this latest version of the very (very) old program of U.S. corporate imperialism is the real deal. While there is no doubt that the regime of Ahmadenijad is reprehensible and the feelings of many of the young protestors in Iran are genuine, you will forgive me for quesyioning the motives behind the monolithic media support for the overthrow of Iran’s government and the installation of Mir-Houssein “Butcher of Beirut” Mousavi.

Neo-Cons Are Cheerleading For A Terrorist Who Helped Kill Hundreds Of U.S. Marines

2009-06-25T06:45:00.000-07:00

The new “patriotism” - Phony conservatives throw their support behind Butcher of Beirut who directed bloody terror campaign against U.S.

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, June 24, 2009

The horrible irony to arise out of the riots and protests in Iran is that many Neo-Cons and phony conservatives, in their unified effort to enthusiastically embrace the Anglo-American establishment’s agenda for regime change, are cheerleading for a brutal thug who directed a terrorist campaign that killed hundreds of U.S. Marines in the 1980’s.

This once again proves that slack-jawed Neo-Con twits, ditto-heads for phony conservative media whores like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, have no loyalty whatsoever to America, but only to the corrupt power structure which they like to believe they are a part of.

Apparently, the new form of ‘patriotism’, the new incarnation of ’support the troops’ - is to support someone who helped massacre hundreds of U.S. troops just two decades ago.

We are referring of course to Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the former Prime Minister of Iran who directed the bloody attacks on the U.S. embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Beirut in 1983. Sold by the media and hailed by Neo-Cons as the avatar of Iranian democracy, Mousavi was also “fingered Mousavi for the 1988 truck bombing of the U.S. Navy’s Fleet Center in Naples, Italy, that killed five persons, including the first Navy woman to die in a terrorist attack,” reports CQ Politics.

Regarding the Beirut bombings, which killed 220 U.S. Marines, CIA Middle East field officer Bob Baer wrote in TIME Magazine that Mousavi, “Dealt directly with Imad Mughniyah,” who ran the Beirut terrorist campaign and was “the man largely held responsible for both attacks.”

As Paul Craig Roberts writes, “The American media’s one-sided and propagandistic coverage of the Iranian election has made an American hero out of the defeated candidate, Mousavi.”

This charade has been vigorously amplified by phony right-wingers. As Raw Story notes, Neo-Cons have sided with the opposition against the boogeyman Ahmedinajed, to the point of grunting with delight at scenes broadcast by Fox News of police being beaten to a pulp by rioters. This makes for an odd contrast to their usual sentiment, towards anti-war protesters in the U.S. for example, for whom their newly found concern about police brutality towards demonstrators goes out of the window.

Similar feigned concern for demonstrators is being played out by TV talking heads across the networks. Take this former CIA agent for example, who informs Wolf Blitzer of his worries about how the Iranian Revolutionary Guard are treating protesters, warning that dissidents will be “disappeared”.

Oh the irony! For it was the CIA that trained the brutal Savak security force, copying techniques used by the Nazis to train the Gestapo, following the CIA’s overthrow of the democratically elected Mosaddeq government in 1953. Savak engaged in the systematic torture, disappearance, and execution of thousands of the new puppet regime’s opponents before the 1979 revolution, all with the blessing of the United States government.

Neo-Cons and establishment media figures have also seized upon the tragic death of “Neda” as another reason why regime change is needed, aghast at shocking scenes of an innocent women dying. This new found emotion at the sight of Middle Easterners bleeding to death on the streets was strangely absent during “shock and awe” and the eight year combined occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, during which hundreds of thousands have died in similar circumstances.

In a Free Republic thread about possible CIA involvement in Iran - which is a proven fact and not even up for debate - “Freepers” express their desire to see a little more meddling by way of CIA support for the opposition and the demonstrators - presumably by way of more money for Al-Qaeda offshoot terrorist groups like Jundullah and Mujahedeen-e Khalq to carry out more bombings and kill more people as part of the CIA’s now public destabilization program in Iran.

Of course, the talking heads, the establishment media whores, and the Neo-Con morons don’t really give a shit about the protesters or the opposition in Iran and indeed probably want them to be beaten and suppressed so that their real cause can be advanced - the demonization of the current Iranian government in the eyes of the world and a greasing of the skids for military invasion on behalf of the U.S., Britain and Israel.

Whistleblower Who Linked “Taliban” Leader To US Intelligence Is Assassinated

2009-06-23T23:05:00.000-07:00

analysts claim enemy of slain tribal leader is protected, funded by CIA

A whistleblower who defected from the Pakistani Taliban has been assassinated just days after he claimed that the group was working with US intelligence to destabilize the country.

Qari Zainuddin, a tribal leader of the South Waziristan region in Pakistan was shot dead on Tuesday by a gunman said to be loyal to Pakistani Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud.

Analysts said that Mr Zainuddin’s murder was a serious blow to the military campaign against the militants, as support of his faction was considered crucial, reports the London Times. “[It] is a warning to other pro government tribal commanders,” said Mahmood Shah, a retired brigadier who had served as top official in the tribal region.

Zainuddin had rejected Mehsud’s Taliban tribe, and shifted his allegiance to the Pakistani government, following a string of suicide bombings targeting mosques and civilians.

The Pakistani government also claims that Mehsud was responsible for the 2007 assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto.

One of Qari Zainuddin’s aides, who was also injured in the attack that killed the tribal leader, told the media that a lone gunman was able to enter Zainuddin’s office and open fire, before escaping uninjured.

“It was definitely Baitullah’s man who infiltrated our ranks, and he has done his job,” Baz Mohammad told the Associated Press news agency.

Zainuddin had recently hit out at Mehsud in an interview with the AP.

“Whatever Baitullah Mehsud and his associates are doing in the name of Islam is not a jihad, and in fact it is rioting and terrorism,” Zainuddin said.

Though the BBC and other mainstream sources highlighted this interview with Zainuddin, they neglected to cover the fact that Zainuddin also reportedly denounced Mehsud as “an American agent”.

Both Iranian and Pakistani media independently covered his remarks, adding that Zainuddin also described Baitullah Mehsud as having strong links with both Indian and Israeli intelligence.

In an interview with local media the defector said that Mehsud had established strong links with Israeli intelligence services, which were destabilizing the nuclear armed country, reports the Iranian news service Press TV.

“These people (Mehsud and his men) are working against Islam.” the report quotes Zainuddin as having said.

Meanwhile, Pakistan’s largest daily newspaper, The News, carried a report last Sunday that highlighted the remarks:

“In interviews to various media organisations on Thursday, Qari Zainuddin and his deputy Haji Turkistan had alleged that Baitullah was an American and Indian agent, he had killed Benazir Bhutto and that the real Jihad was going on in Afghanistan, not in Pakistan.” the report stated.

“Many diplomats contacted Foreign Office and Interior Ministry officials as well as media persons, seeking answers to their questions. Some Western diplomats were particularly confused over the claim that Baitullah was an American agent and that he had killed Benazir Bhutto. These diplomats were asking a question that if Baitullah was involved in the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, does that mean that the American authorities were also involved in the conspiracy.” the report continued.

Of course, whether you put faith in the Iranian and Pakistani media on these reports, is another question, however, there have been suspicions for some time amongst some Pakistanis that Baitullah Mehsud is on the CIA payroll and is being protected by the intelligence apparatus.

According to retired brigadier and former vice president and founder of the Islamabad Policy Research Institute, Shaukat Qadir, the Pakistani military has requested US help to kill Baitullah Mehsud on several occasions and provided the US with accurate information of his location. Despite this, he claims, Mehsud was never targeted.

Other analysts hold suspicions that Indian and US intelligence are funneling weapons, financial aid and even fighters to the Pakistani Taliban.

The history of the Taliban in Afghanistan, as we have previously reported, is replete with connections to western controlled intelligence agencies.

These facts were also recently highlighted by Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari, who admitted that the CIA and his country’s ISI together created the Taliban.

The Taliban’s spread into Pakistan has also been connected to intelligence driven plots to Balkanize the middle East.

9/11 FEMA videographer at Ground Zero goes public

2009-06-23T13:22:00.000-07:00

Voltaire Net
Tuesday, June 23, 2009

As official videographer for the U.S. government, Kurt Sonnenfeld was detailed to Ground Zero on September 11, 2001, where he spent one month filming 29 tapes: “What I saw at certain moments and in certain places … is very disturbing!” He never handed them over to the authorities and has been persecuted ever since. Kurt Sonnenfeld lives in exile in Argentina, where he wrote « El Perseguido » (the persecuted). His recently-published book tells the story of his unending nightmare and drives another nail into the coffin of the government’s account of the 9/11 events. Below is an exclusive interview by Voltairenet.

Introduction

Kurt Sonnenfeld graduated from the University of Colorado (USA) with studies in International Affairs and Economics, as well as in Literature and Philosophy. He worked for the United States government as official videographer and served as Director of Broadcast Operations for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)’s National Emergency Response Team. Additionally, Kurt Sonnenfeld was contracted by several other governmental agencies and programs for classified and “sensitive” operations at military and scientific installations throughout the United States.

On September 11, 2001, the area known as “Ground Zero” was sealed from the public eye. Sonnenfeld, however, was given unrestricted access enabling him to document for the investigation (that never took place) and provide some “sanitized” pool video to virtually every news network in the world. The tapes that reveal some of the anomalies which he discovered at Ground Zero are still in his possession.

Accused of a crime that did not occur in a manifest frame-up scenario, Kurt Sonnenfeld has been persecuted across continents. After several years of fear, injustice and isolation, he has decided to take a public stand against the Government’s official story and is prepared to submit his material to the close scrutiny of reliable experts.

Voltaire Network: Your autobiographical book titled “El Perseguido” (the persecuted) was recently published in Argentina where you live in exile since 2003. Tell us who is persecuting you.

Kurt Sonnenfeld: Although it is autobiographical, it is not my life story. Rather it is a history of the extraordinary events that have happened to me and my family at the hands of U.S. authorities over the course of more than seven years, spanning two hemispheres, after my tour of duty at Ground Zero and becoming an inconvenient witness.

Voltaire Network: You explained that your request for refugee status within the terms of the Geneva 1951 Convention is still being considered by the Argentinean Senate, while in 2005 you were granted political asylum, albeit, on a provisional basis. That probably makes you the first U.S. citizen in that situation! And no doubt the first U.S. Government official with direct exposure to the events surrounding September 11, 2001 who has “blown the whistle”. Is this what drove you into exile?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: A refugee is a person who has been forced to leave (or stay away from) his or her country for reasons of persecution. It’s undeniable that many people have been persecuted unfairly as a result of the quasi-fascist laws and policies brought about by the shock of September 11, 2001, and they deserve refugee status. But the fact is, requesting refugee status is a risky and dangerous step to take. America is the world’s only remaining “superpower”, and dissent has been effectively repressed. Any person who requests refugee status on political grounds is by nature making an extreme statement of dissent. And if your request is denied, what do you do? Once you make the request, there can be no going back.

Personally, I wasn’t forced to leave the United States, and I certainly did not “flee”. At the time I was still fairly oblivious to what was actually brewing against me. I hadn’t connected the dots yet; so that when I left in early 2003 I had every intention of returning. I came to Argentina for a short respite; to try to recuperate after all that had happened to me. I travelled here freely, with my own passport, using my own credit cards. But because of an incredible series of events, I have since been forced into exile, and I haven’t been back.

Voltaire Network: What type of events are you referring to?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: I’ve suffered false accusations for “crimes” that demonstrably did not happen, abusive imprisonment and torture as a result of those accusations, as well as outrageous calumnies against my reputation, death threats, kidnap attempts and several other violations of civil and human rights as denounced by numerous international accords. My return to the United States would not only be a continuation of those violations, but would be aggregated by the separation - perhaps permanent - from my wife and three-year old twin daughters, the only thing remaining that I have to live for. And then, after the impossibility of receiving a fair trial for a crime that did not happen, I could be subject to the death penalty.

Voltaire Network: In 2005, the U.S. Government lodged a request to have you extradited, which was turned down by a Federal Judge. Then, in 2007, the Argentinean Supreme Court – in a show of integrity and independence - turned down the U.S. appeal, but your Government persisted. Can you shed some light on the situation ?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: In 2008, the US government appealed again, this time with absolutely no legal foundation, to the Supreme Court, which will surely uphold the two already unassailable rulings made by the Federal Judge.

In one of those rulings, it was also noted that there were too many “sombras”, or shadows, surrounding my case. There were many, many obvious fabrications in the extradition order sent here by US authorities, and, thankfully, we were able prove that. The fact that there were so many fabrications has actually served to support my request for asylum. We were also able to show that we had been subject to a prolonged campaign of harassment and intimidation from US intelligence services. As a result, since my family has been assigned round-the-clock police protection. As one senator has noted about my case: “It is their behavior that belies their true motivations”.

Voltaire Network: They want you pretty badly for a “crime that did not happen”! How do you account for such doggedness? As a FEMA official, you must have been trusted by your government. At what point did the situation capsize?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: In hindsight, I realize now that the situation had capsized some time before I actually became aware that it had capsized. Initially, the false accusation against me was completely irrational, and I was totally destroyed by it. It is incredibly difficult to have suffered the loss of someone you love to suicide, but to then be accused of it is too much to bear. The case was dismissed based on a mountain of evidence that overwhelmingly absolved me (Nancy, my wife, had left behind a suicide note and a journal of suicidal writings ; she had a family history of suicide ; etc.). The prosecution was 100% sure of my innocence before requesting the dismissal of charge.

But the sustained incarceration even AFTER it was indicated that I was to be freed was what proved to me that something was happening under the surface. I was held in jail for FOUR MONTHS after my lawyers were informed that the case was to be dismissed and was finally released in June 2002. During that time, an amazing series of strange events began to occur. While still being held, I had a telephone conversation with FEMA officials in an effort to resolve the issue, but I realized that I was considered “compromised”. I was told it had been agreed that “the agency had to be protected”, especially in light of the upheaval that was threatening with the implementation of the “ Patriot Act” and the expected usurpation that would come with the new Department of Homeland Security. After all the dangers I had risked, all hardship and difficulties I had endured for them for almost 10 years, I felt betrayed. It left a void in my soul.

Because of their abandonment, I told them I didn’t have the tapes, that I gave them to “some bureaucrat” in New York, and that they would have to wait until I was released to retrieve any other documents in my possession. Soon after that conversation, my house was “seized”, the locks were changed, and men were observed by neighbors entering my house, though there is no record in the court of their entry, as would be required. When I was finally released, I discovered that my office had been ransacked, my computer was missing, and that my tape library in my basement had been dug through and several were missing. Men were constantly parked on the street near my house, my security system was “hacked” more than once, outdoor security lights were unscrewed, etc., to the point that I went to stay with some friends at their condo in the mountains, which was then ALSO broken into.

Anyone who looks for the truth recognizes that there has been an amazing series of irregularities in this case and that an appalling injustice is being carried out on me and my loved ones. This intense campaign to return me to American soil is a false pretext for other darker motives.

Voltaire Network: You have suggested that you observed things at Ground Zero that did not tally with the official account. Did you do or say anything to arouse suspicion in this respect?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: In that same telephone call I said that I would “go public”, not only with my suspicions about the events surrounding September 11, 2001, but about several contracts I had worked on in the past.

Voltaire Network: What are your suspicions based on?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: There were many things, in hindsight, that were disturbing at Ground Zero. It was odd to me that I was dispatched to go to New York even before the second plane hit the South Tower, while the media was still reporting only that a “small plane” had collided with the North Tower — far too small of a catastrophe at that point to involve FEMA . FEMA was mobilized within minutes, whereas it took ten days for it to deploy to New Orleans to respond to Hurricane Katrina, even with abundant advance warning! It was odd to me that all cameras were so fiercely prohibited within the secured perimeter of Ground Zero, that the entire area was declared a crime scene and yet the “evidence” within that crime scene was so rapidly removed and destroyed. And then it was very odd to me when I learned that FEMA and several other federal agencies had already moved into position at their command center at Pier 92 on September 10th, one day before the attacks!

We are asked to believe that all four of the “indestructible” black boxes of the two jets that struck the twin towers were never found because they were completely vaporized, yet I have footage of the rubber wheels of the landing gear nearly undamaged, as well as the seats, parts of the fuselage and a jet turbine that were absolutely not vaporized. This being said, I do find it rather odd that such objects could have survived fairly intact the type of destruction that turned most of the Twin Towers into thin dust. And I definitely harbor some doubts about the authenticity of the “jet” turbine, far too small to have come from one of the Boeings!

What happened with Building 7 is incredibly suspicious. I have video that shows how curiously small the rubble pile was, and how the buildings to either side were untouched by Building Seven when it collapsed. It had not been hit by an airplane; it had suffered only minor injuries when the Twin Towers collapsed, and there were only small fires on a couple of floors. There’s no way that building could have imploded the way it did without controlled demolition. Yet the collapse of Building 7 was hardly mentioned by the mainstream media and suspiciously ignored by the 911 Commission.

Voltaire Network: Reportedly, the underground levels of WTC7 contained sensitive and undoubtedly compromising archival material. Did you come across any of it?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: The Secret Service, the Department of Defense, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Internal Revenue Service, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Office of Emergency Management’s “Crisis Center” occupied huge amounts of space there, spanning several floors of the building. Other federal agencies had offices there as well. After September 11, it was discovered that concealed within Building Seven was the largest clandestine domestic station of the Central Intelligence Agency outside of Washington DC, a base of operations from which to spy on diplomats of the United Nations and to conduct counterterrorism and counterintelligence missions.

There was no underground parking level at Seven World Trade Center. And there was no underground vault. Instead, the federal agencies at Building Seven stored their vehicles, documents and evidence in the building of their associates across the street. Beneath the plaza level of US Customs House ( Building 6) was a large underground garage, separated off from the rest of the complex’s underground area and guarded under tight security. This was where the various government services parked their bomb-proofed cars and armored limousines, counterfeit taxi cabs and telephone company trucks used for undercover surveillance and covert operations, specialized vans and other vehicles. Also within that secured parking area was access to the sub-level vault of Building 6.

When the North Tower fell, the US Customs House ( Building 6) was crushed and totally incinerated. Much of the underground levels beneath it were also destroyed. But there were voids. And it was into one of those voids, recently uncovered, that I descended with a special Task Force to investigate. It was there we found the security antechamber to the vault, badly damaged. At the far end of the security office was the wide steel door to the vault, a combination code keypad in the cinderblock wall beside it. But the wall was cracked and partially crumbled, and the door was sprung partially open. So we checked inside with our flashlights. Except for several rows of empty shelves, there was nothing in the vault but dust and debris. It had been emptied. Why was it empty? And when could it have been emptied?

Voltaire Network: Is this what set alarm bells ringing for you?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: Yes, but not immediately. With so much chaos, it was difficult to think. It was only after digesting everything that the “alarm bells” went off.

Building Six was evacuated within twelve minutes after the first airplane struck the North Tower. The streets were immediately clogged with fire trucks, police cars and blocked traffic, and the vault was large enough, 15 meters by 15 meters by my estimate, to necessitate at least a big truck to carry out its contents. And after the towers fell and destroyed most of the parking level, a mission to recover the contents of the vault would have been impossible. The vault had to have been emptied before the attack.

I’ve described all of this extensively in my book, and it’s apparent that things of importance were taken out of harm’s way before the attacks. For example, the CIA didn’t seem too concerned about their losses. After the existence of their clandestine office in Building Seven was discovered, an agency spokesman told the newspapers that a special team had been dispatched to scour the rubble in search of secret documents and intelligence reports, though there were millions, if not billions of pages floating in the streets. Nevertheless, the spokesman was confident. “There shouldn’t be too much paper around,” he said.

And Customs at first claimed that everything was destroyed. That the heat was so intense that everything in the evidence safe had been baked to ash. But some months later, they announced that they had broken up a huge Colombian narco-trafficking and money-laundering ring after miraculously recovering crucial evidence from the safe, including surveillance photos and heat-sensitive cassette tapes of monitored calls. And when they moved in to their new building at 1 Penn Plaza in Manhattan, they proudly hung on the lobby wall their Commissioner’s Citation Plaque and their big round US Customs Service ensign, also miraculously recovered, in pristine condition, from their crushed and cremated former office building at the World Trade Center.

Voltaire Network: You weren’t alone on the Ground Zero assignment. Did the others notice the same anomalies? Do you know whether they have they also been harassed?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: Actually there were a few people on two different excursions that I know about. Some of us even discussed it afterwards. They know who they are and I hope that they will come forward, but I’m sure they have strong apprehensions as to what will happen to them if they do. I will leave it to them to decide, but there is strength in numbers.

Voltaire Network: With the publication of your book, you have become a “whistleblower” – yet another step on which there is no going back! There must be many people with inside knowledge about what really happened or did not happen on that fateful day. Yet, hardly any have stepped up to the plate and certainly no one who was directly involved in an official capacity. This is what makes your case so compelling. Judging from your ordeal, it is not difficult to imagine what is holding such people back.

Kurt Sonnenfeld: Actually, there are several other very smart and credible people blowing whistles, too. And they are being discredited and ignored. Some are being harassed and persecuted, as I am.

People are gripped by fear. Everybody knows that if you question US authority you will have problems in some way or another. At minimum you will be discredited and dehumanized. Most likely you’ll find yourself indicted for something completely unrelated, like tax evasion — or something even worse, as in my case. Look at what happened to Secret Service whistle-blower Abraham Bolden, for example, or to chess master Bobby Fischer after he showed his disdain for the US. There are countless other examples. In the past I asked friends and associates to speak out for me to counter all the lies being planted in the media, and all of them were terrified as to the ramifications to themselves and their families.

Voltaire Network: To what degree would your discoveries at Ground Zero expose the government’s involvement in those events? Are you familiar with the investigations that have been carried out by numerous scientists and qualified professionals which not only corroborate your own findings but, in some instances, far exceed them? Do you regard such people as “conspiracy nuts”?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: At the highest levels in Washington, DC, someone knew what was going to happen. They wanted a war so badly that they at least let it happen and most likely even helped it happen.

Sometimes it seems to me that the “nuts” are those who hold to what they’ve been told with an almost religious fervor despite all of the evidence to the contrary — the ones who won’t even consider that there was a conspiracy. There are so many anomalies to the “official” investigation that you can’t blame it on oversight or incompetence. I am familiar with the scientists and qualified professionals to whom you refer, and their findings are convincing, credible, and presented according to scientific protocol — in stark contrast to the findings of the “official” investigation. In addition, numerous intelligence agents and government officials have now come forward with their very informed opinions that the 911 Commission was a farce at best or a cover-up at worst. My experience at Ground Zero is but one more piece of the puzzle.

Voltaire Network: Those events are nearly 8 years behind us. Do you consider that uncovering the truth about 9/11 continues to be an important objective? Why?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: It is of absolute importance. And it will be equally as important in 10 years, or even 50 years if the truth still has not been exposed. It is an important objective because, at this point in history, many people are too credulous to whatever “authority” tells them and too willing to follow. People in a state of shock seek guidance. People who are afraid are manipulable. And being able to manipulate the masses results in unimaginable benefits to a lot of very rich and very powerful people. War is incredibly expensive, but the money has to go somewhere. War is very profitable for the very few. And somehow their sons always end up in Washington DC, making the decisions and writing the budgets, while the sons of the poor and the poorly-connected always end up on the enemy lines, taking their orders and fighting their battles. The enormous black-budget of the US Department of Defense represents an unlimited money machine for the military-industrial complex, figuring in the multi-trillions of dollars, and it will continue to be so until the masses wake up, recuperate their skepticism and demand accountability. Wars (and false pretexts for war) will not cease until the people realize the true motive of war and stop believing “official” explanations.

Voltaire Network: What is referred to as the 9/11 Truth Movement, has been asking for a new, independent investigation into those events. Do you think that the Obama Administration holds out some hope in this respect?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: I really hope so, but I’m skeptical. Why would the leadership of any established government willingly undertake any action that would result in a serious compromise to their authority? They will prefer to maintain the status quo and leave the things the way they are. The conductor of the train has been changed, but has the train changed its course? I doubt it. The push has to come from the public, not only domestically, but internationally, like your group is doing.

Voltaire Network: A number of human rights and activist groups are supporting your plight, not least Peace Nobel Prize winner Adolfo Pérez Esquivel. How have the Argentinean people in general responded to your situation?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: With an incredible outpouring of support. The military dictatorship is still fresh in the collective memory of most of the people here, along with the knowledge that the dictatorship (along with the other South American dictatorships at the time) was backed by the CIA, directed at the time by George Bush Senior. They remember well the torture centers, the secret prisons, the thousands of people “disappeared” for their opinions, the living in daily fear. They know that the United States today will do the same thing if they consider it beneficial, that they will invade a country to achieve their political and economic interests and then manipulate the media with fabricated “causus belli” to justify their conquests.

My family and I are honored to have Adolfo Pérez Esquiveland his advisors at Servicio de Paz y Justicia (SERPAJ) among our dearest friends. We have worked together on many causes, including the rights of refugees, the rights of women, for children without families and children with HIV/AIDS. We are also honored to have the support of the Abuelas de Plaza de Mayo; Madres de Plaza de Mayo, Línea Fundadora; Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS); Asamblea Permanente de Derechos Humanos (APDH); Familiares de Detenidos y Desaparecidos por Razones Políticas; Asociación de Mujeres, Migrantes y Refugiados Argentina (AMUMRA); Comisión de Derechos Humanos de la Honorable Cámara de Diputados de la Provincia de Buenos Aires; Secretaría de Derechos Humanos de la Nación; and the Programa Nacional Anti-Impunidad. On an international level, Amicus Curiae have been presented in our favor by REPRIEVE of Great Britain, along with the collaboration of NIZKOR of Spain and Belgium. In addition, my wife, Paula, and I have been received in the Congress by La Comisión de Derechos Humanos y Garantías de la Honorable Cámara de Diputados de La Nación.

Voltaire Network: As we said, deciding to write this book and to go public was a huge step. What pushed you to do it?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: To save my family. And to let the world know that things are not what they seem.

Voltaire Network: Last but not least: what will you do with your tapes?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: I am convinced that my tapes reveal many more anomalies than I am capable of recognizing given my limited qualifications. I will therefore cooperate in any way that I can with serious and reliable experts in a common endeavour to expose the truth.

Voltaire Network: Thank you very much !

Beat extremists you can, says Obama

2009-06-22T23:14:00.001-07:00

WASHINGTON: US President Barack Obama, in an exclusive interview to Dawn, has said that he believes the Pakistani state is strong enough to win the military offensive against the extremists.

In this first-ever one-on-one interview by any US president to the Pakistani media, Mr Obama assured the Pakistani nation that he has no desire to seize Pakistan’s nuclear weapons or send US troops inside the country.

The US president also emphasised the need for resuming the dialogue process between India and Pakistan, which was stalled after the Mumbai terrorist attacks in November last year.

The interview covered a wide-range of subjects — from the controversy involving the Iranian presidential election to Mr Obama’s speech in Cairo earlier this month in which he called for a new beginning between the Muslim and the Western worlds.

The venue, the White House diplomatic room with murals of early settlers, brought out the importance of Mr Obama’s historic victory in last year’s general election.

Close to the murals — under the watchful eyes of George Washington — sat a man who overcame gigantic hurdles to become America’s first non-White president.

Here was a man tasked with finding a graceful end to two unpopular wars — in Iraq and Afghanistan — and to steer America, and the rest of the world, out of an unprecedented economic crisis.

Yet, when he strolled into this oval-shaped room, Mr Obama seemed completely at ease with himself. Tall and slim, the 47-year-old US president had the youngish looks of a man who works out daily.

He walked straight towards the camera, greeting everyone, shook hands, occupied the chair reserved for him, and started talking about how he had a special affection for Pakistan and its people.

Asked to comment on Ayatollah Khamenei’s statement that the US was interfering in Iran’s internal affairs, Mr Obama said what’s happening in Iran was remarkable. ‘To see hundreds of thousands of people in peaceful protest against an election that obviously raised a lot of doubts tells us that this is an issue that the Iranian people care deeply about.’

The US and the West, he said, had been very clear that this was not an issue between the West and Iran; this was an issue about the Iranian people seeking justice and wanting to make sure that their voices were heard.

‘And it’s unfortunate that there are some inside Iran and inside that government that want to use the West and the United States as an excuse,’ he said.

‘We respect Iran’s sovereignty, but we also are witnessing peaceful demonstrations, people expressing themselves, and I stand for that universal principle that people should have a voice in their own lives and their own destiny. And I hope that the international community recognises that we need to stand behind peaceful protests and be opposed to violence or repression.’

Mr Obama said that since there were no international observers in Iran, he could not say if the elections were fair or unfair. ‘But beyond the election, what’s clear is that the Iranian people are wanting to express themselves. And it is critical, as they seek justice and they seek an opportunity to express themselves, that that’s respected and not met with violence.’

‘Your speech in Cairo indeed was a speech that created a lot of stir, both in the US and in the Muslim world. Was it the beginning of something bigger to come, or was it just a one-off thing? He was asked.

‘No, I think that this is going to be a sustained process. As I said in Cairo, one speech is not going to transform policies and relationships throughout the Middle East or throughout the world,’ Mr Obama responded.

‘But what I wanted to do was to describe very clearly that the United States not only respects Muslim communities around the world but that there’s an opportunity for I think a new day, where there’s mutual understanding, mutual tolerance; where the United States is seen as somebody who stands with people in their daily aspirations for an education for their children, for good jobs, for economic development,’ he said.

‘And just as the United States at times has, I think, not fully understood what’s happening in Muslim communities, sometimes there have been countries that haven’t understood the rich history of Muslims in America,’ he added.

‘As I mentioned in that speech, it was Morocco that was the first nation to recognise the United States. We have Muslim Americans who are doing extraordinary things. In fact, their educational attainment and income is generally above the average here in the United States. We have Muslim members of Congress. And, in fact, we have 5 million Muslims, which would make us larger than many other countries that consider themselves Muslim countries.’

Mr Obama then explained how he plans to further expand the peace process he introduced in Cairo.

‘So what we want to do is just begin to open up a dialogue around which we can constructively work together to deal with significant issues,’ he said, acknowledging that ‘part one of those issues is the issue of the Middle East.’

Mr Obama explained that he has been ‘very aggressive’ in saying that Israelis and Palestinians have to resolve their differences and create two states that can live side by side in peace and security.

He said he also has put forward a special envoy, George Mitchell, a former majority leader of the US Senate, to work with the parties involved.

‘But part of the key is also to isolate the extremists who have been wreaking havoc around the world. And we’re seeing that now in Pakistan, and I think the Pakistani government and the people of Pakistan recognise that the kind of mindless violence that we’ve been seeing, that that cannot be the answer to long-term prosperity.’

His comments led to a larger discussion on Pakistan and the issues confronting this nation of 170 million people.

‘Some people say that it is still too early to push Pakistan into a military offensive in South Waziristan; that the Pakistan army, and the Pakistani state, is not strong enough to win this war and that it may break up the country.

What do you say?’

‘Well, let me make two points. Number one, nobody can or should push the Pakistani government. The Pakistani government is accountable to the people of Pakistan,’ said Mr Obama.

‘I think the Pakistani government and the people of Pakistan recognise that when you have extremists who are assassinating moderate clerics like Dr Naeemi, when you have explosions that are killing innocent women and children, that that can’t be the path for development and prosperity for Pakistan,’ he said.

‘And so there’s been a decision that’s made that we support, that the Pakistani military and the Pakistani government will not stand by idly as extremists attempt to disrupt the country,’ Mr Obama said.

‘But ultimately these are decisions to be made by the Pakistani government and the Pakistani people. What the United States believes is, is that we are a partner in the process of peace-loving nations seeking to root out extremism, increase development, and that is the kind of role that we want to play with Pakistan.’

‘Do you believe the Pakistani state is strong enough to win this war?’

‘I have confidence in the Pakistani people and the Pakistani state in resolving differences through a democratic process and to isolate extremists. Dating back to Jinnah, Pakistan has always had a history of overcoming difficulties. There’s no reason why it can’t overcome those difficulties today,’ Mr Obama said.

‘Going back to what we discussed about the Muslim world, there are issues that are too difficult even to discuss – for instance, the Indians don’t even want the ‘K’ word (Kashmir) to be mentioned to them. In your inaugural speech you did mention Kashmir and after that it had been absent from your statements and those of other officials in your administration. Why?’ he was asked.

‘I don’t think that we’ve been silent on the fact that India is a great friend of the United States and Pakistan is a great friend of the United States, and it always grieves us to see friends fighting. And we can’t dictate to Pakistan or India how they should resolve their differences, but we know that both countries would prosper if those differences are resolved,’ said Mr Obama.

‘And I believe that there are opportunities, maybe not starting with Kashmir but starting with other issues, that Pakistan and India can be in a dialogue together and over time to try to reduce tensions and find areas of common interest,’ he said.

‘And we want to be helpful in that process, but I don’t think it’s appropriate for us to be the mediators in that process. I think that this is something that the Pakistanis and Indians can take leadership on.’

Asked if he was urging India to resume bilateral talks with Pakistan, Mr Obama said: ‘Well, what we have said is that we think that all of South Asia would benefit by reduced tensions between India and Pakistan. I think that dialogue is the best way to reduce tensions.’

Mr Obama noted that recently the Indian and Pakistani leaders met at a regional conference in Russia. Although they did not hold an extensive conversation, it was the start of what may end up being more productive talks in the future.

‘Well, I won’t engage in hypotheticals like that,’ said Mr Obama when asked if the US could seize Pakistan’s nuclear weapons to prevent the Taliban from capturing them. ‘I have confidence that the Pakistani government has safeguarded its nuclear arsenal. It’s Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal.’

His main concern, said Mr Obama, was to make sure that the Taliban and other extremist organisations were not taking root in South Asia, Afghanistan and the Middle East.

‘And we want to partner with everybody to make sure that this cancer does not grow. One of the things that I said in my speech in Cairo is that Islam has an extraordinary tradition of tolerance and peaceful coexistence and that tradition is being distorted and being warped,’ he said.

‘We do not want to be in a position where we’re having to send troops to Afghanistan, for example. We would love the Afghans’ government to be secure and stable so that it can ensure that it does not become a safe haven for organisations like Al Qaeda,’ he said.

‘We would much prefer being a partner with countries like Afghanistan or Pakistan, and simply work together on issues of common interest like commerce and increasing trade and improving development in all countries,’ he said.

‘But it’s very difficult to do that if you have people who have distorted a great religion and are now trying to wreak havoc not only in the West but most often directed against fellow Muslims in places like Pakistan. And that is something that we will always stand against.’

Responding to a question about drone attacks inside Pakistan’s tribal zone, Mr Obama said he did not comment on specific operations.

‘But I will tell you that we have no intention of sending US troops into Pakistan. Pakistan and its military are dealing with their security issues.’

The US, he said, was focussing on helping those displaced during recent military operations.

‘Our primary goal is to be a partner and a friend to Pakistan and to allow Pakistan to thrive on its own terms, respecting its own traditions, respecting its own culture. We simply want to make sure that our common enemies, which are extremists who would kill innocent civilians, that that kind of activity is stopped, and we believe that it has to be stopped whether it’s in the United States or in Pakistan or anywhere in the world.’

‘Any plan to visit Pakistan in the near future?’

‘I would love to visit. As you know, I had Pakistani roommates in college who were very close friends of mine. I went to visit them when I was still in college; was in Karachi and went to Hyderabad. Their mothers taught me to cook,’ said Mr Obama.

‘What can you cook?’

‘Oh, keema … daal … You name it, I can cook it. And so I have a great affinity for Pakistani culture and the great Urdu poets.’

‘You read Urdu poetry?’

‘Absolutely. So my hope is that I’m going to have an opportunity at some point to visit Pakistan,’ said Mr Obama.

‘And obviously one of the things that I think ties our countries together is the extraordinary Pakistani-American community that is here in the United States who are thriving and doing great work as physicians and as lawyers and as business people. And one of the great opportunities I think for Pakistan is to be able to draw on all this talent and extraordinary entrepreneurship to help provide concrete benefits to the Pakistani people, and I think that’s one of the biggest challenges for Pakistan,’ he said.

‘We want to be a partner in opening up trade opportunities, but making sure that people on the ground, day to day, they’re getting an education, children are going to school, that farmers are able to get a decent compensation for their products, that electricity and infrastructure is built, because I know the Pakistani people and I know that if the tools are there available to them, then they will thrive and continue to be a great nation.’

‘Some people say that you’re against some of the restrictions introduced in the House version of the aid to Pakistan bill. Are you?’

‘Well, my view is, is that we have to help Pakistan – to provide them the resources that will allow for development. Now, we have in the past supported, I think, Pakistan militarily. I think it is important to make sure that military support is directed at extremists and our common enemies,’ said Mr Obama.

‘But I also think that the relationship between the United States and Pakistan can’t just be based on military-to-military cooperation. It’s got to be based on something richer that involves development and exchanges of students and business people. And so we want to encourage that kind of work, as well,’ he said.

‘And we helped to lead an effort that raised $5 billion of development assistance for Pakistan at a donors’ conference in Japan, hundreds of millions of dollars that we’re trying to provide to support internally displaced people. That’s the kind of strategy that I think will bring our countries closer together. And having known the people of Pakistan, I am convinced that the future between our two countries can be very, very bright.’

‘You cannot escape cricket while living with Pakistanis. Did they leave a cricket bat with you?’

‘You know, I have to say that I have tried to get up to bat a couple of times, but I’ve been terrible. So I’m an admirer of great cricket players, but make no claims in terms of my own skills,’ said Mr Obama, breaking into a broad smile.

Neda Death Footage: Poster Child For A Million More Tragedies?

2009-06-22T22:55:00.000-07:00

Establishment media falls over itself to broadcast footage showing death of young Iranian protester, yet completely refused to show victims of Iraq and Afghanistan wars, not to forget Israel!

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, June 22, 2009

Western establishment media organs are tripping over themselves to broadcast tragic footage showing the death of a young Iranian woman allegedly at the hands of pro-Ahmadinejad forces in an effort to rally international opinion against the government of Iran, a stark contrast to their complete and total refusal to broadcast footage of the hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children killed in Afghanistan and Iraq by U.S. and UK troops.

Neda Agha-Soltan has become a poster child for the CIA-sponsored color revolution in Iran after tragic and shocking scenes of her death were uploaded to You Tube the day after she was gunned down in Tehran on Saturday.

Soltan is being hailed as a “martyr” and “the face of the Iranian protests” by major western media outlets in emotional news reports such as the following CNN piece.

The hypocrisy is almost impossible to stomach. Hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children have been slaughtered in similar fashion by coalition forces during the bombardment and occupation of both Iraq and Afghanistan, and many of these deaths have been caught on camera. And yet the establishment media has blindly refused to broadcast any of it. Indeed, it could be claimed that the footage of Neda’s death has already been broadcast more times by the corporate media than the thousands of victims whose deaths were caught on film in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last eight years.

There’s no doubt that Neda’s vivid and shocking death is tragic to witness and a terrible loss for her family. However, the repercussions of the video circulating the globe via You Tube and its propaganda-driven exploitation by the west to demonize the Iranian government could have tragic consequences for many more innocent Iranians in the years to come.

The propensity for western governments to manufacture or exploit intensely emotional stories such as Neda’s death, and tragic events involving young women and children in general, in order to hoodwink populations into supporting phony wars of “liberation” has been proven time and time again.

One of the stunts used to sell the invasion of Iraq to the American people was the alleged capture and mistreatment of young female POW Jessica Lynch, who the Pentagon claimed went down in a blaze of glory in an attempt to throw off her captors and was subsequently “rescued” by U.S. forces. Lynch later revealed that the Pentagon concocted a Rambo fable around her image and that she actually never fired her weapon and was treated very well by Iraqi doctors who released her back to the U.S. military without incident.

The first invasion of Iraq was preceded by a similarly manufactured fable perfectly designed to tug at the heart strings and create a sense of outrage that won over a hesitant population into supporting a war.

Following the (US approved) Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990, an American PR company called Hill & Knowlton was paid $10.7 million by a Kuwaiti front group to devise a campaign to win American support for the war. Stories soon began to emerge of brutal Iraqi soldiers removing babies from incubators in Kuwait hospitals. A firestorm of outrage spread across the western media and the population demanded that something be done, completely unaware of the fact that the whole story had been completely manufactured with the intention of creating that exact reaction.

Despite the fact that the Neda video shows nothing other than the sudden death of the woman after she was shot in the heart, the BBC, which the Iranian government has repeatedly accused of fomenting riots by means of bias and false reporting, quotes in a report today the woman’s fiance Caspian Makan, who states;

“Eyewitnesses and video footage of shooting clearly show that probably Basij paramilitaries in civilian clothing deliberately targeted her.”

The unedited video offers no evidence whatsoever for who killed Neda. For all we know it could have been the Al-Qaeda terrorists that the CIA has been funding to destabilize Iran. It has not even been established whether Neda was killed by a rooftop sniper or a passing motorcyclist, and yet the BBC is carrying matter-of-fact explanations of her death based on nothing more than conjecture without any clarification whatsoever.

This follows an embarrassing faux pas last week when the BBC was forced to issue a retraction of a photo they originally claimed represented a pro-Mousavi rally, when in fact the image was taken at a pro-Ahmadinejad demonstration.

The tragic death of Neda Agha-Soltan and its vivid capture on film is already being used as a propaganda tool by American, British and Israeli media outlets to harden western opinion against the Mullahs in Iran and grease the skids for a future invasion.

If we don’t heed the lessons of history and understand how sophisticated PR campaigns are routinely crafted around such events by western governments in collusion with their establishment media fronts, then the tragic death of Neda will be the catalyst for a million more tragedies in the years to come - the only difference being that you won’t see the deaths of those victims being broadcast on the BBC, Fox News or CNN.

DoD Training Manual Describes Protest As “Low-Level Terrorism”

2009-06-22T22:32:00.000-07:00

Pentagon training course says engaging in First Amendment is terrorist activity

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Monday, June 15, 2009

Current Department of Defense anti-terrorism training course material states that the exercise of First Amendment rights in the U.S. constitutes terrorist activity.

The ACLU has written to the DoD regarding its Antiterrorism and Force Protection Annual Refresher Training Course, which advises personnel that political protest amounts to “low-level terrorism”.

“It has come to our attention that the Department of Defense’s Annual Level I Antiterrorism (AT) Training for 2009 misinforms Department of Defense (DoD) personnel that certain First Amendment-protected activity may amount to “low level terrorism” The ACLU writes.

“We are writing to ask that you take immediate steps to remedy this situation.” the letter to acting Under-Secretary Gail McGinn states.

A PDF of the ACLU’s letter also contains print outs of the relevant sections of the course material.

The training introduction reads:

“Anti-terrorism (AT) and Force Protection (FP) are two facets of the Department of Defense (DoD) Mission Assurance Program. It is DoD policy, as found in DoD I 2000.16, that the DoD Components and the DoD elements and personnel shall be protected from terrorist acts through a high priority, comprehensive, AT program. The DoD’s AT program shall be all encompassing using an integrated systems approach.”

The first question of the Terrorism Threat Factors, “Knowledge Check 1″ section reads:

Which of the following is an example of low-level terrorism activity?

Select the correct answer and then click Check Your Answer.

* Attacking the Pentagon
* IEDs
* Hate crimes against racial groups
* Protests

In order to proceed, users must give the “correct” answer as “Protests”.

According to the document, all DoD personnel are required to complete the course on a yearly basis.

The ACLU points out that although in and of itself the classification of protest as terrorism is deeply disturbing, it is even more alarming when viewed in the context of the Pentagon’s long term efforts to crack down on organized dissent.

The surveillance and pre-emptive arrest of protesters, on charges of “domestic terrorism”, at last year’s RNC by the FBI is also cited by the ACLU.

Other precedents that the ACLU neglected to mention in it’s letter include, most recently, the fact that the FBI were spying on “Tea Party” protesters nationwide.

One week prior to those revelations, we also reported that the Maryland National Guard was put on alert in anticipation of the nationwide protests, while a Homeland Security spokesman refused to deny that protesters would be under surveillance from the DHS.

The Maryland National Guard issued a Force Protection Advisory on April 11 which warned the National Guard to be on alert during the Tea Party protests because Guardsmen and Guard facilities might become “targets of opportunity.” The contact point for the document was listed as the Antiterrorism Program Coordinator.

The advisory was almost exactly the same as a United States Army Reserve Command Force Protection Advisory that was issued last November before the nationwide End the Fed protests, warning that protesters were congregating across the country to demonstrate against the private Federal Reserve.

Over the last few years we have seen countless examples of security assessment reports from the likes of the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, as well as police training manuals, which state that anti-war protesters, gun owners, veterans, Ron Paul supporters and those who merely cite the Constitution should be equated with extremists.

The continued surveillance of protesters, in addition to the ongoing agenda to equate dissent with terrorism, highlights the fact that the architecture of the police state, which was massively expanded under George W. Bush, has not been dismantled or relaxed by an Obama administration that promised “change,”. If anything, it has only grown bigger.

The Obama administration’s announcement that the illegal warrantless surveillance of American citizens, a program initiated under Bush, will continue and in fact intensify under Obama, is another shining example of the fact that - no matter who is in power and no matter the political persuasion of those being watched - all Americans who have the temerity to exercise constitutional rights are considered dangerous and worthy of being targeted by the federal government with surveillance tools supposedly introduced to fight terrorists.

Ye Cup Yahin Aaya

2009-06-22T08:23:00.000-07:00

This World Cup win for Pakistan could not have been better or come at a better time. The excitement on the faces of our players and people alike was priceless, unmistakable and very much needed. Lord’s cricket stadium became a sea of green emblems. The total elation spoke exactly how much more valuable this success is for us than for any other team.

Like I said, we have been under immense pressure for the past two years especially. Pressure and strife. But today was our day, even the Sri Lankans knew it far before Mohammed Aamir took that crucial wicket and got the ball rolling in our court. Our day and our moment.

The streets of Pakistan and UK alike were flooded by ecstatic Pakistanis who had forgotten everything but the image of their well-loved team members performing a victory lap with the much desired trophy. No electricity, no money, just sheer happiness and a sense of pride.

A young man e-mailed me about the semi-final win and said “at least this is one front we have conquered’. I told him we will conquer all fronts one step at a time. We will. All we needed was one psychological boost and Allah provided us with this one. Younis Khan had said there was a lot of fighting in Pakistan, and they would be very happy of if they won this cup. Congrats, Younis all our prayers have been answered. You go now and bask in this moment and continue to represent the Islamic republic of Pakistan as well as you do now. Treat your ‘boys’. They are all our heroes.

I guess it’s official; cricket runs in our blood. Today we learned that it also gets our blood running.

by Romesa Khalid
_____________________________________________________________________________

thousands of Videos made in a single day....Pakistan is the only Nation of the World with such Patriotism for their country & Passion for Cricket....Pakistan Zindabad

Pakistan T20 Cricket World Cup Champions Final AT Lords -STAND UP FOR THE CHAMPIONS

Iran election: Guardian Council admits vote was flawed

2009-06-22T07:55:00.000-07:00

The admission was made as the main presidential challenger, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, implored supporters to renew street protests in Tehran on Monday and defy the threat of a brutal crackdown by the security forces.

Organisers of the campaign to overturn the result of the June 12 election, which gave Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the incumbent president, a landslide victory said demonstrations must continue after petering out on Sunday.

The campaign called on people to march with black candles or turn on the lights on their cars during an afternoon rally.

The calls came as the Guardian Council, the body charged with reviewing the contested election, said it had concluded an investigation but would not be overturning the result. Its spokesman, Abbas-Ali Kadkhodaei, said the number of votes collected in 50 cities was more than the number of eligible voters but the discrepancy was not sufficent to account for Mr Ahmadinejad's margin of victory.

Mr Mousavi reiterated his backing of the protests at the end of a tense weekend in which at least 10 people were killed in the Iranian capital. Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, gave the greet light to the repression when on Friday he declared the protests were illegal.

But Mr Mousavi said: "The country belongs to you ... protesting lies and fraud is your right."

The former prime minister warned supporters of the danger ahead, and said he would stand by the protesters "at all times". But he would "never allow anybody's life to be endangered because of my actions" and called for pursuing fraud claims through an independent board, not the Guardian Council.

A former president, Mohammad Khatami, backed the call. "Protest in a civil manner and avoiding disturbances in the definite right of the people and all must respect that," he said.

Meanwhile the authorities released the daughter of another former president, Hashemi Rafsanjani. Faezeh Hashemi was detained while travelling to a Mousavi rally on Saturday. Officials said she and several other relatives were held for their own safety.

Iran's foreign ministry lashed out at foreign media and Western governments. Its spokesman Hasan Qashqavi accused them of "a racial mentality that Iranians belong to the Third World".

"Meddling by Western powers and international media is unacceptable," he said.

Meanwhile, the authorities in Bahrain shut down a newspaper after it published a claim that Mr Ahmadinejad is of Jewish origin.

Samira Rajab, an MP made the allegation in Akhbar Al-Khaleej and the paper, the Gulf state's oldest, was found guilty of violating the country's press code.

Iranian leadership feud too close to call

2009-06-22T07:15:00.000-07:00

Iran's intensifying political crisis remains dangerously unpredictable. It's still too early to determine if the bitter feud within Tehran's political establishment will lead to a revolution against Iran's Islamic government that so many foreigners hope for, or eventually burn out.

Caution is advised. Much of the opinions we are getting on Iran's current crisis come from bitterly anti-regime Iranian exiles, "experts" with an axe to grind and U.S. neocons yearning for war with Iran. In viewing the Muslim world, westerners keep listening to those who tell them what they want to hear, rather than the facts. President Barack Obama properly stated he would refrain from being seen to meddle in Iran's internal affairs. He did the right thing by apologizing for the U.S.-British coup that overthrew Iran's democratic government in 1953.

But Washington also has been actively attempting to undermine Iran's Islamic government since the 1979 revolution.

The U.S. has laid economic siege to Iran for 30 years. Recently, Congress voted $120 million for anti-regime media broadcasts into Iran and $60-75 million in funding for opposition, violent underground Marxists and restive ethnic groups such as Azeris, Kurds and Arabs under the "Iran Democracy Program." Pakistani intelligence sources put the CIA's recent spending on "black operations" to subvert Iran's government at $400 million.

While the majority of protests we see in Tehran are genuine and spontaneous, western intelligence agencies are playing a key role in sustaining them and providing communications, including the newest method, via Twitter.

Repress

The Tehran government made things worse by limiting foreign news reports and trying to cover up or brutally repress massive protests.

We also hear a lot of hypocritical humbug from western capitals. Washington, Ottawa, London and Paris accused Iran of improper electoral procedures while utterly ignoring their autocratic Mideast allies such as Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, which hold only fake elections and savage any real opposition.

U.S. senators, led by John McCain, blasted Iran for not respecting human rights. That's pretty rich after they just voted to bar the public release of ghastly torture photos from U.S. prisons in Iraq.

Iran is a weird hybrid of repressive theocratic state and democracy. Its political powers are fragmented to prevent re-emergence of another despotic shah. At least Iran holds elections and allows often fierce political debate, though it often bars candidates. Its recent electoral turnout was an impressive 85%.

Popularity

There are many questions about Iran's vote, of which incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won 60. But however much foreigners may detest Iran's abrasive, incendiary elected leader, he remains widely popular at home thanks to his populist programs, generous subsidies and ascetic lifestyle. He is particularly popular among farmers, the poor, pensioners, the military and religious people. Pre-election polls that showed him headed for a big win may have been right.

Ahmadinejad's chief rival, the more moderate-sounding Mir Hossein Mousavi, is also a conservative who backs Iran's nuclear program. He is supported by Iran's young, many of whom are fed up with obscurantist restrictions imposed by the religious establishment.

In the wings, veteran politician Ali Akbar Rafsanjani is waiting to pounce. He heads the Assembly of Experts, which theoretically has the power to unseat Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The Machiavellian Rafsanjani might yet emerge the winner of the current crisis.

Dangerous decision

Ayatollah Khamenei is not a strong leader. He now faces the dangerous decision of whether to crack down on spreading protests, call a recount or a new election, any of which would undermine his authority. Khamenei's best hope is for a political compromise between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi. But he could end marginalized by a secular government.

Reuters reports Israel's intelligence chief, Meir Dagan, thinks Ahmadinejad will win out. Mossad boss Dagan reportedly worries that if Ahmadinejad falls, there will be less international pressure on Iran to end its nuclear programs. He is probably correct.

Other Mideast nations will look at Iran and conclude giving democratic rights is downright dangerous and must be avoided.

eric.margolis@sunmedia.ca

Iran: fear of foreign plotters may be justified

2009-06-22T06:55:00.000-07:00

by Simon Tisdall

Long-term instability in Iran is an alarming prospect for western countries keen to resolve disputes over the country’s nuclear programme and other contentious issues. But continuing political weakness in Tehran is also likely to produce the opposite effect — increased regime concern about external attempts to interfere, destabilise, and exploit its vulnerabilities. This paranoid trend threatens unpredictable, even dangerous consequences - but may be justified.

Pinning blame for Iran’s post-election turmoil on malign foreign enemies is already under way among so-called principalist, conservative factions. The pro-Ahmadinejad Keyhan newspaper on Tuesday denounced plots by “politically bankrupt dictators” to thwart the popular will. “The hopes of the imperialist triangle (America, U.K. and the Zionist regime) for a crawling coup d’etat in the Middle East and revival of the dead Middle East plan have been dashed,” it declared.

Javan newspaper was similarly acerbic. “Today democracy slogans have become a lever to provoke, interfere and overthrow,” it said. “By announcing results in the presidential elections that did not benefit their favourite candidate ... some foreign media such as BBC Persian [service], al-Arabiya, Fox News, CNN and some French media have started a new wave to create social and political division and cause riots.”

In largely cautious responses to Friday’s polls, Barack Obama’s administration has been careful not to feed the fires of xenophobic resentment. “It’s up to Iranians to make decisions about who Iran’s leaders will be. We respect Iran’s sovereignty and want to avoid the U.S. being the issue inside of Iran,” Mr. Obama said. But Iranian officials say U.S. protestations of non-interference would be more credible if the White House cancelled a $400m Bush era covert programme, authorised in 2007, which they say was intended to destabilise Iran, with the ultimate aim of regime change.

According to the journalist Seymour Hersh, writing in the New Yorker last year, covert operations by the CIA and the Joint Special Operations Command were used to support the PJAK Kurdish dissident group in northern Iran, the disaffected ethnic Arab minority in Khuzestan in the south-west, and militant Baluchi Sunni Muslim separatists in the south-east, bordering Pakistan.

While not officially acknowledged or disavowed in the U.S., the covert programme has been repeatedly linked by Iran to ongoing violence, bomb attacks and assassinations in all three areas, as well as to the main external opposition group, the Mojahedin-e-Khalq, which is allegedly funded and armed by the U.S. Iran also occasionally claims to have evidence of involvement by Israel’s Mossad spy agency and British intelligence.

Although the problem can be overstated, Iranian leaders of all political complexions have reason to worry about the so-called minorities question in a country comprising multiple ethno-linguistic groups, namely Persians, Azeris, Kurds, Arabs, Baluchis, Turkmen, Armenians, Assyrians, Jews and Georgians. Recent reports from Iranian Kurdistan, for example, speak of 100 or more checkpoints being erected by Revolutionary Guards and the shelling of PJAK positions inside northern Iraq.

Iranian officials have linked the recent suicide bombing of a Shia mosque in Zahedan, in Sistan-Baluchistan, to U.S., British and Israeli support for the Jundullah Sunni Muslim separatist group. A failed attempt last month to blow up a domestic airliner in Ahvaz, in Arab Khuzestan, brought similar claims.

Iran said on Tuesday that members of a foreign-backed “anti-revolutionary group” responsible for fomenting unrest and armed with bomb-making materials had been arrested. Intelligence minister Gholamhossein Mohseni-Ejei said the group “wanted to achieve its goal through explosions and terror and in this connection 50 people were arrested ... They were supported from outside the country.” Given the current uproar in Tehran, the temptation for the supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, and President Ahmadinejad to deflect attention by hitting out at real or imagined foreign enemies, for instance by indirectly re-targeting U.S. forces in Iraq or causing problems for NATO forces in Afghanistan, is growing dangerously. But even such extreme measures may not work.

The moderate Seda-ye Edalat newspaper wasn’t swallowing the regime’s line about external threats on Tuesday. “Why does the government not let the people protest peacefully?” it asked. “Why do we always want to call Iranian protesters a group of hooligans bribed by foreigners to sabotage everything?”

BBC accepts their Psy-Op deceiving millions

2009-06-21T03:43:00.000-07:00

The crisis over the Iranian election has been our lead story for most of the week. As with all our coverage, we have been careful to report what both Ahmadinejad and Mousavi supporters are saying. Similarly, we have taken care to label the pictures we use, explaining what they are of.

BBC News story Obama refuses to 'meddle' in Iran. However, on Wednesday 17 June we made a mistake in a picture caption published on BBC News online. In the story Obama refuses to 'meddle' in Iran, we mistakenly stated that a Getty agency picture of a pro-Ahmadinejad rally was a pro-Mousavi rally.

Some blogs, including WhatReallyhappened.com, are pointing out that the LA Times used a similar photograph which showed President Ahmadinejad waving to supporters. The Getty pictures we received did not show Mr Ahmadinejad.

When a reader contacted us about it, we checked our caption and corrected it. We're sorry for the mistake and have added a note explaining the correction to the story.

Are the Iranian Protests Another US Orchestrated Color Revolution?

2009-06-21T02:48:00.000-07:00

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
Counterpunch
Saturday, June 20, 2009

A number of commentators have expressed their idealistic belief in the purity of Mousavi, Montazeri, and the westernized youth of Terhan. The CIA destabilization plan, announced two years ago (see below) has somehow not contaminated unfolding events.

The claim is made that Ahmadinejad stole the election, because the outcome was declared too soon after the polls closed for all the votes to have been counted. However, Mousavi declared his victory several hours before the polls closed. This is classic CIA destabilization designed to discredit a contrary outcome. It forces an early declaration of the vote. The longer the time interval between the preemptive declaration of victory and the release of the vote tally, the longer Mousavi has to create the impression that the authorities are using the time to fix the vote. It is amazing that people don’t see through this trick.

As for the grand ayatollah Montazeri’s charge that the election was stolen, he was the initial choice to succeed Khomeini, but lost out to the current Supreme Leader. He sees in the protests an opportunity to settle the score with Khamenei. Montazeri has the incentive to challenge the election whether or not he is being manipulated by the CIA, which has a successful history of manipulating disgruntled politicians.

There is a power struggle among the ayatollahs. Many are aligned against Ahmadinejad because he accuses them of corruption, thus playing to the Iranian countryside where Iranians believe the ayatollahs’ lifestyles indicate an excess of power and money. In my opinion, Ahmadinejad’s attack on the ayatollahs is opportunistic. However, it does make it odd for his American detractors to say he is a conservative reactionary lined up with the ayatollahs.

Commentators are “explaining” the Iran elections based on their own illusions, delusions, emotions, and vested interests. Whether or not the poll results predicting Ahmadinejad’s win are sound, there is, so far, no evidence beyond surmise that the election was stolen. However, there are credible reports that the CIA has been working for two years to destabilize the Iranian government.

On May 23, 2007, Brian Ross and Richard Esposito reported on ABC News: “The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert “black” operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell ABC News.”

On May 27, 2007, the London Telegraph independently reported: “Mr. Bush has signed an official document endorsing CIA plans for a propaganda and disinformation campaign intended to destabilize, and eventually topple, the theocratic rule of the mullahs.”

A few days previously, the Telegraph reported on May 16, 2007, that Bush administration neocon warmonger John Bolton told the Telegraph that a US military attack on Iran would “be a ‘last option’ after economic sanctions and attempts to foment a popular revolution had failed.”

On June 29, 2008, Seymour Hersh reported in the New Yorker: “Late last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country’s religious leadership.”

The protests in Tehran no doubt have many sincere participants. The protests also have the hallmarks of the CIA orchestrated protests in Georgia and Ukraine. It requires total blindness not to see this.

Daniel McAdams has made some telling points. For example, neoconservative Kenneth Timmerman wrote the day before the election that “there’s talk of a ‘green revolution’ in Tehran.” How would Timmerman know that unless it was an orchestrated plan? Why would there be a ‘green revolution’ prepared prior to the vote, especially if Mousavi and his supporters were as confident of victory as they claim? This looks like definite evidence that the US is involved in the election protests.

Timmerman goes on to write that “the National Endowment for Democracy has spent millions of dollars promoting ‘color’ revolutions . . . Some of that money appears to have made it into the hands of pro-Mousavi groups, who have ties to non-governmental organizations outside Iran that the National Endowment for Democracy funds.” Timmerman’s own neocon Foundation for Democracy is “a private, non-profit organization established in 1995 with grants from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), to promote democracy and internationally-recognized standards of human rights in Iran.”

Iran's PRESSTV Versus America's CNN

2009-06-21T00:36:00.000-07:00

If you still believe that CNN’s 12-hour straight coverage of Iran is about democracy, then Hitler was my mom!

Here’s is Ahmed Quraishi who shows you, with pictures, how CNN & BBC, the leaders of the Am-Brit media, were caught lying.

Just when the Iranian protesters decided not to defy their government's ban on street trouble, CNN and the rest of the American media went into an overdrive today to provoke the Iranian protesters, and especially mislead the younger ones into creating a situation that could result in bloodshed.

In twenty years of watching CNN, I have never seen it stoop so low as it did today.

The question is: If an American or British newspaper or TV network's agenda begins to eerily resemble that of CIA or MI-6 [the Am-Brit enterprise], does this mean that these custodians of media independence are actually government mouthpieces?

Obviously, the US government and the CIA will not let this opportunity in Iran slip out of hand. Remeber that the CIA, the NSA and other American spy agencies were given millions of dollars for covert operations targeting Iran under Bush. These programs are still operational and have not been cancelled by Obama. Once there is violence, all you need to do is to unleash local agents connected to foreign elements, coupled with massive media propaganda to encourage chaos in order to create maximum trouble and instability for the government in Iran.

The US government and CIA are already using Afghanistan to insert terrorists into eastern parts of Iran.

CNN today was no different than any state-run TV channel in a dictatorship in central Africa or the Middle East. And it was funny. I mean really. CNN never devotes more than 10 or 15 minutes in extreme cases for even the most important world leaders, and here it was devoting nonstop hours to endless drivel by 'Iran experts' some of them quite literally full of s**** and a majority of them wasn’t even able to give intelligent answers. Most of whom had nothing new to say but CNN wanted to create a worldwide hype to keep Iran's government under the spotlight. CNN editors allowed many unimpressive speakers to sit and speak for hours. But since there was nothing to "cover" today in Iran, CNN resorted to "creating" a crisis, manufacturing a hype about something that wasn't even happening: the 'expected' turnout of protestors defying the government.

Protestors largely stayed indoors. But CNN kept insisting that something was happening. For special effect, CNN used old footage to mislead the international audience about the size of today’s protestors.

Obviously I can't imagine that it is any of CNN's business to keep the protests alive and prevent them from dying out. But it is certainly the interest of the US government and the CIA.

So there is only one explanation to what CNN was doing:

To encourage the younger protestors to come out and defy the security and risk deaths so that CIA could stoke more trouble.

CNN also directly attacked PRESSTV, Iran's dynamic international English-language TV news channel. CNN anchors were apparently told to disparage PRESSTV calling it a 'government mouthpiece'.

Mouthpiece, eh? Compared to what? FoxNews, which spent the last eight years working as a mouthpiece to Bush? Or CNN and BBC that often become one with their governments when it comes to foreign policy and military aggression?

If CNN's agenda appears to mirror that of US government and the CIA, with no questions asked and no room for the opposite viewpoint, doesn’t that make CNN a government mouthpiece too?

How about CNN and New York Times and others airing and printing absolute lies about Iraq's nuclear program in order to convince the world that an invasion was necessary? And then when everything turned out to be a ruse created by CIA and MI6 and promoted by CNN, NYT and others as truth, do we see the Am-Brit free media apologizing for becoming government puppets?

When nothing happened on the streets in Tehran most of the day today, CNN anchorwoman Rosemary Church kept announcing with emphasis and with Broadway-dramatism, "There is a tense calm" in Iran.

Ooooh.

But my personal favorite was this line, "A very balanced reporting" or "a very balanced analysis" that Ms. Church repeated whenever a biased one-sided reporter or 'expert' finished his or her rant on Iran.

There were two exceptions in the CNN coverage coming from two journalists: Christian Amanpour and Jonathan Mann. Both refused to turn off their professional instincts and blindly follow the instructions from the newsroom.

Ms. Amanpour surprised everyone at one point when she inadvertently exposed CNN's hypocrisy by telling her interviewer Rosemary Church that it was important to underline that a majority of Iranian protestors stayed away today after the government warning.

And then Amanpour said that most of the videos that CNN kept showing throughout the day today were old footage. Amanpour appeared to be emphasizing that viewers need to be told that CNN was playing footage from yesterday and the day before and that there were no crowds on Tehran's streets of the size being shown in the footage.

Amanpour’s comment seemed to have struck Ms. Church smack in the face. She appeared dumbstruck for a minute. It was almost as if she knew [from the instructions she must be receiving thru an earphone from the newsroom] that she was not supposed to say these things and expose CNN's game plan.

Then Jonathan Mann also violated the script and at one point stopped to ask CNN to replay a rare video that came out of Tehran today. The fresh video showed a handful of protestors, certainly fewer than ever before.

Mann inquired from his biased commentator that he wasn't able to see the streets in previous videos because of the huge number of protestors. But the new video showed empty streets barring a few kids. Again, the commentator, who was pro-American Iranian, was dumbfounded.

Here's another fine evidence of who is motivating CNN and other 'Am-Brit independent international media outlets':

CNN did not go into overdrive until quite late in the day when it became clear that the protests were dying down. My guess is that some people within the US government freaked out at this. Someone might have said [probably at Langley], 'If the protests die down, that's it. Find a way to keep the momentum and encourage the kids there to come out on the streets. Let's push the Iranian security into a murderous mishap.'

And suddenly CNN goes into a nonstop one-sided ethically-questionable coverage. I am sure that simultaneously CIA's Iran desk must be busy in 'quiet outreach' through Facebook and Twitter and through their assets on the ground in Iran.

It is time that the Am-Brit 'international media' realize that many people outside Europe and America can see through their machinations, the way they gang up on certain countries or on certain issues that hide other interests of the Am-Brit combine. We've seen this happen so many times, in Georgia and elsewhere, that it stands exposed.

To me this has nothing to do with democracy and human rights. Sure, the Iranian government has problems and it has opponents within the Iranian populace. So it’s not a big deal if a few of them gather in Los Angeles and Washington in small demos. What IS a big deal is how the Am-Brit media has rushed to play a strategic game disguised as journalism. This is the same Am-Brit media that continues to produce CIA and MI6 agents hiding as accredited journalists. The latest example is of an Iranian woman who was sent back to Iran as an American journalist so that she could get in touch with her former colleagues in a sensitive government department and obtain secret documents. She was caught with those documents. And now we have two American journalists from Korean descent sent to North Korea for the same purpose, espionage. All three spies found major American news organizations ready to give them the cover of an accredited journalist so that CIA could use them for espionage. This is the state of the Am-Brit media that sets the world news agenda.

This episode should also serve as a lesson for Iran. The Iranian government actually helped Washington and London invade Iraq and Afghanistan and supported the two invasions on military and intelligence levels. The hope was that somehow this will convince Washington and London to accept the Iranian government and start working with it.

Today, the Iranian government learns the lesson the hard way.

And the Am-Brit media can be and is manipulated by the governments in London and Washington just like anywhere else. The best part of it, of course, is that the US State Department gets to issue grade reports about how other countries fare on media freedoms.

The Am-Brit media had been exposed during the false campaign against Iraq in 2003. But people have short memories. Iran's elections in 2009 should serve as a welcome reminder on the performance of the Am-Brit media.

And these elections should also become a permanent signpost for CNN's amazing fall.

P.S.: Google and Facebook are speeding up Persian translations of their sites and BBC rushes to find other satellites to beam into Iran. Wow. Even companies feel for democracy and are willing to go the extra mile for the sake of democracy in Iran! Last question to all the buffoons who still think this is about democracy: How come we don't see Russian, German, French, Singaporean, Indian or Israeli companies feeling the pain for democracy? Why is it that only Am-Brit companies are at the forefront of the fight for Iranian democracy?!!

http://aq-lounge.blogspot.com/2009/06/presstv-versus-cnn.html

In my personal opinion this is very sad day for Muslims & Iranians all over the world. Iran was the only Islamic country left with unity in them & its not anymore. Zionists have funded nicely & they are the ones to get applaud for their victory yet again in dividing & ruling. But what is this so called Muslim Ummah of 1.5 billion full of ignorant inferiority complex animals doing????except fulfilling their desires????Obviously you can't expect anything from Pakistani journalists/anchors (bunch of fans of Cheap Justice/sharif/zardari-BB/india/musharraf) but still Iran really needs help today from against this zionist propaganda, could anyone from 1.5 billion think of any way to go against this psy-op????

1.02 billion people hungry

2009-06-20T01:11:00.000-07:00

One sixth of humanity undernourished - more than ever before

19 June 2009, Rome - World hunger is projected to reach a historic high in 2009 with 1 020 million people going hungry every day, according to new estimates published by FAO today.

The most recent increase in hunger is not the consequence of poor global harvests but is caused by the world economic crisis that has resulted in lower incomes and increased unemployment. This has reduced access to food by the poor, the UN agency said.

"A dangerous mix of the global economic slowdown combined with stubbornly high food prices in many countries has pushed some 100 million more people than last year into chronic hunger and poverty," said FAO Director-General Jacques Diouf. "The silent hunger crisis — affecting one sixth of all of humanity — poses a serious risk for world peace and security. We urgently need to forge a broad consensus on the total and rapid eradication of hunger in the world and to take the necessary actions."

"The present situation of world food insecurity cannot leave us indifferent," he added.

Poor countries, Diouf stressed, "must be given the development, economic and policy tools required to boost their agricultural production and productivity. Investment in agriculture must be increased because for the majority of poor countries a healthy agricultural sector is essential to overcome poverty and hunger and is a pre-requisite for overall economic growth."

"Many of the world's poor and hungry are smallholder farmers in developing countries. Yet they have the potential not only to meet their own needs but to boost food security and catalyse broader economic growth. To unleash this potential and reduce the number of hungry people in the world, governments, supported by the international community, need to protect core investments in agriculture so that smallholder farmers have access not only to seeds and fertilisers but to tailored technologies, infrastructure, rural finance, and markets," said Kanayo F. Nwanze, President of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).

"For most developing countries there is little doubt that investing in smallholder agriculture is the most sustainable safety net, particularly during a time of global economic crisis," Nwanze added.

"The rapid march of urgent hunger continues to unleash an enormous humanitarian crisis. The world must pull together to ensure emergency needs are met as long term solutions are advanced," said Josette Sheeran, Executive Director of the UN World Food Programme.

Hunger on the rise

Whereas good progress was made in reducing chronic hunger in the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s, hunger has been slowly but steadily on the rise for the past decade, FAO said. The number of hungry people increased between 1995-97 and 2004-06 in all regions except Latin America and the Caribbean. But even in this region, gains in hunger reduction have been reversed as a result of high food prices and the current global economic downturn (see background note).

This year, mainly due to the shocks of the economic crisis combined with often high national food prices, the number of hungry people is expected to grow overall by about 11 percent, FAO projects, drawing on analysis by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Almost all of the world's undernourished live in developing countries. In Asia and the Pacific, an estimated 642 million people are suffering from chronic hunger; in Sub-Saharan Africa 265 million; in Latin America and the Caribbean 53 million; in the Near East and North Africa 42 million; and in developed countries 15 million in total.

In the grip of the crisis

The urban poor will probably face the most severe problems in coping with the global recession, because lower export demand and reduced foreign direct investment are more likely to hit urban jobs harder. But rural areas will not be spared. Millions of urban migrants will have to return to the countryside, forcing the rural poor to share the burden in many cases.

Some developing countries are also struggling with the fact that money transfers (remittances) sent from migrants back home have declined substantially this year, causing the loss of foreign exchange and household income. Reduced remittances and a projected decline in official development assistance will further limit the ability of countries to access capital for sustaining production and creating safety nets and social protection schemes for the poor.

Unlike previous crises, developing countries have less room to adjust to the deteriorating economic conditions, because the turmoil is affecting practically all parts of the world more or less simultaneously. The scope for remedial mechanisms, including exchange-rate depreciation and borrowing from international capital markets for example, to adjust to macroeconomic shocks, is more limited in a global crisis.

The economic crisis also comes on the heel of the food and fuel crisis of 2006-08. While food prices in world markets declined over the past months, domestic prices in developing countries came down more slowly. They remained on average 24 percent higher in real terms by the end of 2008 compared to 2006. For poor consumers, who spend up to 60 percent of their incomes on staple foods, this means a strong reduction in their effective purchasing power. It should also be noted that while they declined, international food commodity prices are still 24 percent higher than in 2006 and 33 percent higher than in 2005.

The 2009 hunger report (The State of Food Insecurity in the World, SOFI) will be presented in October.

World's hungry top one billion: UN food agency

2009-06-20T01:07:00.000-07:00

ROME (AFP) — A record one billion people are undernourished around the world, the UN food agency said Friday, blaming the global financial crisis for a surge of more than 100 million hungry since last year.

Deploring "the biggest ever year-on-year increase" in world hunger, Jacques Diouf, the head of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), told a news conference: "One in six human beings does not have access to food."

The FAO chief called for a "new world food order" enshrining the "right to food and thus the right to exist," urging stepped-up investment in agriculture.

Some three weeks ahead of the Group of Eight wealthy nations' summit in Italy, Diouf said: "The problem of food security is a political one. It's a question of priorities on the world agenda."

Josette Sheeran, head of the UN World Food Programme (WFP), recalled food riots in several developing countries in the past two years and warned at the same news conference: "A hungry world is a dangerous world."

"With the right support, smallholder farmers can double or triple their yields," Sheeran said, adding: "Food has to be addressed as one of the pillar challenges that the world is facing."

Diouf said in a statement earlier: "A dangerous mix of the global economic slowdown combined with stubbornly high food prices in many countries has pushed some 100 million more people than last year into chronic hunger and poverty."

An FAO statement said 1.02 billion people do not get enough to eat and predicted an 11 percent increase for all of 2009.

An estimated 642 million of the total are in the Asia-Pacific region, the agency said in a statement. Some 265 million are in sub-Saharan Africa, 53 million in Latin America and the Caribbean and 52 million in the Middle East and north Africa.

Some 15 million are hungry in developed countries, the FAO said.

"The most recent increase in hunger is not the consequence of poor global harvests but is caused by the world economic crisis that has resulted in lower incomes and increased unemployment," the statement said.

The FAO had initially revised downward its estimate of hungry people from 963 million to 915 million because of a "better-than-expected global food supply," the agency said.

"Whereas good progress was made in reducing chronic hunger in the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s, hunger has been slowly but steadily on the rise for the past decade," the FAO said.

"This year, mainly due to the shocks of the economic crisis combined with often high national food prices, the number of hungry people is expected to grow overall by about 11 percent," the agency projects.

"The silent hunger crisis... poses a serious risk for world peace and security," the statement warned. "We urgently need to forge a broad consensus on the total and rapid eradication of hunger in the world and to take the necessary actions."

It noted that poor consumers spend up to 60 percent of their incomes on staple foods.

The agency will release its annual State of Food Insecurity in the World report in October.

During a Rome summit one year ago, FAO member states reaffirmed their commitment to halve world hunger by 2015, a Millennium Development Goal set in 2000 by the United Nations.

Diouf said last year that "with current trends, that goal will be attained in 2150, rather than 2015."

The food agency warned that "the urban poor will probably face the most severe problems in coping with the global recession, because lower export demand and reduced foreign direct investment are more likely to hit urban jobs harder."

However, it said, "rural areas will not be spared. Millions of urban migrants will have to return to the countryside, forcing the rural poor to share the burden in many cases."

CIA, Iran & the Elections riots

2009-06-19T04:20:00.001-07:00

Loud & Clear Episode 3 - Guest Gen Hamid Gul

2009-06-19T04:13:00.000-07:00

In the third episode of PKKH’s own production in association with AhmedQuraishi.com, (Loud & Clear from Islamabad – Pakistan’s first and only Web-TV show) – Former ISI Chief Gen. Hamid Gul details how he once prevented the US ambassador from traveling to Peshawar without permission and how subsequent Pakistani rulers changed the practice, why he believes Pakistani nationalist officers within the military won’t let the outsiders and their Pakistani collaborators get their hands on our nuclear weapons. Watch him also reveal the details of a meeting he says former President Musharraf held with American emissaries five days after the coup where he gave the first of many concessions to America.

Also includes a fascinating message from Gen. Hamid Gul to the Pakistani Youth. MUST WATCH.

Baitullah Mehsud exposed and denounced by Afghan Taliban!

2009-06-19T04:10:00.000-07:00

“Activities within Pakistan led to differences with Baitullah Meshsud, we are Tehreek-e-Taliban Afghanistan and we have nothing to do with Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan” – says Qari Zainuddin, representative of Afghan Taliban in an interview to a local news channel today.

PKKH has been writing that Baitullah Mehsud is a foreign asset with assigned responsibility to create chaos in FATA for destabilizing Pakistan. In earlier days of conflict, PKKH presented full coverage on Baitullah Mehsud in “Who is Baitullah Mehsud?“, then on April 5, 2009 PKKH wrote “Agent Mehsud on a mission to prove his worth” and the most latest report presented is during on-going successful operation rah-e-rast “Saving Agent Mehsud“.

During interview, Qari Zainuddin said:

“The agreement with the government is still intact. Islam does not allow carrying out activities within Pakistan and this is the main cause that led to the difference with Baitullah Mehsud.

Scholars like Maulana Hasan Jan declared suicide attacks as un-Islamic. The declaration led to the killing of Maulan Hasan. Islam cannot spread with the use of force but with invitation. Why the people who train suicide attackers not sacrifice their loved ones for the purpose. Baitullah Mehsud is ‘zalim’ (cruel) and responsible for all the destruction.

Qari Zain said security forces actions will be only against Baituallah Mehsud and not the common people as they have nothing to do with it. Whatever is done by Baitullah is supported by Indian intelligence agencies.”

Responding to a question, Qari Zainuddin, categorically rejected TTP saying, “We are Tehreek-e-Taliban Afghanistan and we have nothing to do with Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan”

Source: Geo News

Statement from Qari Zainuddin should clear that who are marginalized friends and who are disguised enemies eliminating all room for doubts in everyone’s minds. It is time that we support our troops unconditionally who are in fact fighting against foreign sponsored terrorism, help our displaced brothers and sisters and stand united against enemies of Pakistan and Islam alike.

US, Israel and India backing Baitullah Mehsud: reveals close aide

2009-06-19T04:09:00.000-07:00

June 18, 2009

Haji Turkistan Betani, a former close aide of Baitullah Mahsud, has claimed that assassination of Benazir Bhutto was plotted by Baitullah Mehsud.

Talking to Sana Bucha in Crisis Cell programme of Geo News, Haji Turkistan said that he was with Baitullah, who had stated that he had sent two persons to Rawalpindi for assassinating Benazir Bhutto. He also revealed that Baitullah is an American agent and this is the reason he has not been targeted by the US drones.

Haji Turkistan said that Baitullah is misguiding innocent youths on the instigation by Israel and India to destroy mosques and educational institutions and martyr religious scholars inside Pakistan.

This comes after Qari Zainuddin, a rival commander of Tehrik-e-Taliban Chief Baitullah Mehsud, on Wednesday disclosed that the TTP has links with India and Israel. He said that Baitullah Mehsud has acted against Islam as well as the country and if not eliminated now, militancy would surge and problems for the government would grow.

In an exclusive interview with Geo News, Zainuddin Mehsud said though Baitullah was wearing the cap of Mujahideen but all his actions were against Islam and the country, adding they would support military action against him. See (Baitullah Mehsud exposed and denounced by Afghan Taliban)

Qari Zainuddin recalled that his group and Baitullah Mehsud’s were together with Abdullah Mehsud prior to his killing. After his death, Baitullah Mehsud founded the Tehrik-e-Taliban, Pakistan leading to differences between his group and Baitullah’s. The split came over Baitullah Mehsud’s activities inside Pakistan, that Islam did not permit.

Zainuddin said after their split, they moved to Shakai.

Qari said when Maulana Hasan Jan declared suicide attacks “Haram” (forbidden) under Islam, he was martyred within three days. “These people (Baitullah) are working against Islam. When Baitullah accepts responsibilities for all such actions there is no doubt about his hand in the same,” Commander Zainuddin Mehsud said. About Baitullah’s links with al-Qaeda, the Qari said he did not know about any such thing.

On the other hand, a Taliban commander from Orakzai Hafiz Saeed rejected the claims of Qari Zainuddin. He told Geo News that Zain was playing into the hands of the government to defame the TTP. He said the Qari is neither the successor of Baitullah nor has any affiliation with the TTP.

Qari Zainuddin also conceded differences between his group and Baitullah’s when late Abdullah Mehsud took over the movement. They separated over suicide attacks and actions inside Pakistan. Actually, the Taliban movement had been formed to fight against the foreign forces in Afghanistan but Baitullah turned against Pakistan.

Zainuddin said they would have no objection if the Army launches action against Baitullah, adding if the Taliban moved into their area they would fight against them. “We would stand by the Ulema and elders of the area,” he said. He said they would welcome any action against Baitullah either by the military or by the local people. However, they would give preference to the action against Baitullah by the Mehsuds themselves adding this way casualties would be minimised. He said that his peace accord with the government is intact

Qari Zain said that Mulla Nazir in South Waziristan and Gul Bahadur in North Waziristan were their allies. They are part of Tehrik-e-Taliban Afghanistan and their alliance is against infidels and foreign troops in the neighbouring country. Foreign militants including Uzbeks were evicted from the Wazir areas by peace loving Taliban. However, in the Mehsud-inhabited areas there were around 450 to 1,500 Uzbeks. He denied having heard about the presence of Arabs in the area.

Qari Zainuddin said the whole of Fata and areas around the Durand Line including Paktika and Paktia are inhabited by the same tribesmen. People move on either side of the border whether it was peace then or strife now.

To a question about Pakistan’s alliance with the United States, he said it was for the state to adopt a policy. He said if people and Ulema support action against Baitullah Mehsud, he would be eliminated otherwise he would create more problems for the country. “It is time to eliminate Baitullah now, otherwise no such opportunity would come in future and he would further increase headache for the government,” Zain warned.

Obama’s Pakistan Embassy Reveals South Asian Strategy

2009-05-29T13:14:00.000-07:00

Call it a “Green Zone” for Pakistan and Afghanistan. The United States will spend more than a $1 billion on a brand spanking new embassy in Islamabad, along with permanent housing for U.S. government civilians and new office space in the Pakistani capital, according to McClatchy. It is said scale of the project rivals the giant U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, which was completed last year after construction delays at a cost of $740 million.




	An architect’s view of a “village” located inside the sprawling U.S. embassy in Baghdad built by slaves.

The Baghdad embassy was built by slaves. The State Department awarded contracts to First Kuwaiti General Trading & Contracting, a construction firm run by a member of one of the most powerful mercantile families in Kuwait, and the company hired low-paid Asian laborers that lived in crowded quarters, ate substandard food and had little medical care, according to David Phinney, writing for AlterNet. “When drinking water was scarce in the blistering heat, coolers were filled on the banks of the Tigris, a river rife with waterborne disease, sewage and sometimes floating bodies,” writes Phinney. First Kuwaiti General Trading & Contracting held the passports of the laborers so they would not be able to escape. Dozens of migrant workers from Nepal and the Philippines have previously accused First Kuwaiti of pressuring them to work in Iraq under U.S. military contracts against their wishes.

First Kuwaiti General Trading & Contracting came in seriously behind schedule and over budget on the project. It was plagued by allegations of shoddy construction and safety flaws, McClatchy reported in 2007. None of this was a problem with the United States because the slave-driving shyster company was hired as a subcontractor to build embassies and consulates in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, Libreville, Gabon, and Surabaya, Indonesia.

Slaves or near-slaves are employed at the Baghdad fortress-like embassy to tend landscaping and take out the trash. No Iraqis need apply. “Iraqi citizens are not currently able to be vetted so may not work on this contract,” according to a document located by Steve Peacock. “The majority of the employees are expected to be third country nationals.”

It should come as no surprise Iraqis resent the Baghdad embassy. “The presence of a massive U.S. embassy — by far the largest in the world — co-located in the Green Zone with the Iraqi government is seen by Iraqis as an indication of who actually exercises power in their country,” the International Crisis Group, a European-based research group, said in one of its periodic reports on Iraq published in 2006.

(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)

“The message is clear. Indeed, it’s gigantic for all Iraqis, for the entire world to see. A 100 acre compound — ten times the size of the typical U.S. embassy, the size of 80 football fields, six times larger than the UN, the size of Vatican City. The U.S. Embassy Compound, in the middle of Baghdad — the center for U.S. domination of the Middle East and its resources,” writes Kevin Zeese, director of Democracy Rising and a former candidate for the U.S. Senate. “The infrastructure is being put in place for a long-term military presence in Iraq. Unless Americans get tired of footing the growing and expensive bill for occupying Iraq — now at nearly $10 Billion per month — or the Iraqis are able to force the United States to leave it, looks like Baghdad will be the center of operations for the U.S. presence in the Middle East.”

Earlier this week it was reported that the United States plans to stay in Iraq for a decade or more. “Gen George Casey said the world remained ‘dangerous and unpredictable’, and the Pentagon must plan for extended US combat and stability operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan that could deploy 50,000 US military personnel for a decade,” the Telegraph reported on May 27. “His planning envisioned combat troops in Iraq and Afghanistan for a decade as part of a sustained American commitment to fighting extremism and terrorism in the Middle East.”

Casey, of course, didn’t mention that the “extremism and terrorism” was largely created by the United States as part of an order out of chaos policy. Earlier this month, Pakistan president Asif Ali Zardari said the CIA and his country’s ISI together created the Taliban.

“We should recognize that American tax dollars helped to create the very Taliban government that now wants to destroy us,” Ron Paul noted in 2001. “In the late 1970s and early 80s, the CIA was very involved in the training and funding of various fundamentalist Islamic groups in Afghanistan, some of which later became today’s brutal Taliban government. In fact, the U.S. government admits to giving the groups at least 6 billion dollars in military aid and weaponry, a staggering sum that would be even larger in today’s dollars.”

In order to fight the Taliban and al-Qaeda — perennial enemies with shades of Orwell’s Emmanuel Goldstein, a propaganda fabrication of the Ministry of Truth — the United States will need to stay in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan for the indefinite future. The Taliban and al-Qaeda will be exploited once again in order to accomplish the real objective — the engineered destruction and ultimate balkanization of the Middle East and South and Central Asia at the behest of the New World Order.

It was Obama’s foreign policy guru, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who said the United States must dominate the region in order “to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together.”

By now liberals and Democrats must realize Obama is merely a continuation of Bush and all his insincere anti-war talk and mumbo-jumbo about “change” was a sleight of hand, a parlor trick designed to fool them. Bush and Obama, however, are merely front men for a political order determined to conquer the world through never-ending violence.

More than a million dead Iraqis and the dismantling of Iraqi civil society will serve as a brutal modus that will now be used against Pakistan. Obama’s brand spanking new mega-embassy in Islamabad — complete with slaves and “third-party” servants — will be the center of operations for the dismantling of Pakistan.

The State of Police Force in Pakistan

2009-05-29T13:05:00.000-07:00

May 28, 2009 by Asim

As I pan the morning papers, I am sad and angry at what is going on in our country.

Saddened because of the un-necessary loss of life from the suicide bombing of the emergency 15 building in Lahore, where at least 26 people including 14 policemen, 6 army personnel, 6 civilians including a 12 year old boy have lost their lives and scores of others injured by the sheer magnitude of the bomb blast.

This is the seventh major attack to hit the city of Lahore since Jan-2008. The newspaper headlines are screaming bloody murder. This blast has been widely condemned by the Pakistani Leadership as well as the world and the usual statements are being read-out by the Interior Ministry that the perpetrators will be caught.

Angry because the provincial administration including the civilian security apparatus which is mainly the Police have not woken up to the fact that we are in “A State of War”. Their attitude and behaviour which can be best described as callous and casual towards a mortal enemy, which is determined, wily and cunning.

The Punjab government had claimed that it had implemented “strict security measures” to prevent such incidents from repeating after the Liberty and Manawan incidents. It is obvious that this claim has been blown to pieces.

Which brings be back to the attitude and behaviour prevailing amongst the civilian administration including the security apparatus towards security alerts provided by the federal government in the form of written memos in the wake of the ongoing operations in NWFP. Unfortunately neither the provincial government, nor the Punjab Police heeded their advice.

The Police in Pakistan is de-motivated, dis-organised, under paid, terribly corrupt. Not only that the “Elite Force” in the Police is tasked the job of protecting the VVIPs of our country 24/7, leaving the people of this country exposed to the naked aggression of the mortal enemy. Whereas, their prime duty is to provide protection to the common citizens of our country.

These days if you have the chance to venture to the major cantonments located in all major cities, you will see the “heightened security” put in place by the Pakistan Army for obvious reasons.

The civilian administrations of all the provinces along with their security apparatus need to be cognizant of the facts aforementioned and put in place similar security measures to protect the government infrastructure as well as places like malls, parks, shopping centres which are “high risk” targets for these barbarians.

If this means that the local public has to face certain hardships (as if they aren’t already) then so be it. Key roads and thoroughfares need to be blocked-off for general traffic, the Police resources need to be utilised in a fair and equitable manner for the protection of the citizens and the VVIPs. Increase the strength of the Police forces along with proper training in urban warfare to counter the menace of suicide bombings and other attacks. Heightened Intelligence gathering and co-operation amongst all the security agencies and actually taking action on the intelligence and evidence provided.

Lastly change the mind-set and behaviour of our Police. Unless they don’t understand and realise the “dangers within” posed by these so called Muslims, we will be watching the same scenes of carnage repeated (God Forbid) on our television screens.

May Allah provide us with the strength to defeat our enemies!

Ameen!

How a jilted Karachi woman saved Pak N-programme

2009-05-29T12:59:00.000-07:00

By Rauf Klasra

As the nation celebrates the eleventh anniversary of Pakistan's nuclear tests today (May 28), a shocking 30-year-old secret has been exposed. It reveals how a young woman college lecturer, feeling betrayed after a romance with a nuclear scientist of the Karachi Nuclear Power Plant (KANUPP), had given a lead to the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) in 1978, which in turn had led to the dramatic arrest of 12 Pakistani scientists and engineers, planning to sabotage Pakistan's nuclear sites at the behest of a superpower.

The startling spy ring was exposed by this female college lecturer of a Karachi Memon family to the then head of ISI Sindh Brig Imtiaz Ahmed (Operation Midnight Jackals fame), only because she wanted revenge from her lover for being unfaithful. The expose led to the arrest of Pakistani scientists who were later given

death and life imprisonment sentences by the special tribunal set up by the then president General Ziaul Haq.

Brig (retd) Imtiaz Ahmed broke his silence of over 30 years to share this amazing operation with The News on the eve of the 11th annual celebration of Pakistan going nuclear. He said that while many people take credit for saving our nuclear programme, no one actually knows how an unsung jilted girl had actually ended up saving Pakistan's nuclear project out of sheer vengeance.

Brig (retd) Imtiaz Ahmed served as director in charge Internal Security ISI for several years in Islamabad and later director general Intelligence Bureau (IB) in the first government of Nawaz Sharif. The then prime minister Benazir Bhutto had put him in jail for about three years on charges of being part of the operation to oust her in 1989 during her first government. Later, General Musharraf also put him in jail for four years till his acquittal by the Lahore High Court. He is the only spymaster of Pakistan who was jailed for eight years, after serving 15 years in the ISI and the IB.

Brig Imtiaz recalled that as a lieutenant colonel he was posted as chief ISI Sindh in 1978. One day he received a telephone call from the sister of A K Brohi, who was a psychologist in Karachi. She informed him that she was treating a female young patient who was suffering from a disease called "secret concealment" wherein a patient could not be cured unless he or she shared this secret with someone.

The lady doctor had confessed to Brig Imtiaz that she had failed to make the girl reveal the secret and thought maybe he could help her. He then went to meet the woman at the clinic. She was very beautiful and had done her Masters in English Literature and was teaching at a local college.

After some initial talk, the woman finally told him that she was carrying a very dangerous secret with her but made it clear that she would not share it even if she was killed. She told him that she knew very well that the intelligence people were not trustworthy, as they usually use the people and then don't care what had happened to them. Brig Imtiaz told her that if she was not ready to trust him, then he was ready to arrange her meetings with the then DG ISI General Riaz Mohammad (uncle of MNA Shahid Khaqan Abbasi). But, she refused. Brig Imtiaz did not lose heart and told her that he could arrange her meeting with General K M Arif who was then chief of staff to Gen Zia. When she refused again, as a last resort Brig Imtiaz offered to take her to meet President Gen Zia to share this strange secret which had made her life a living hell. But, the woman did not agree to any of these names to share her dangerous secret as she feared she might be killed.

According to Brig Imtiaz, he could have easily picked her up and kept her in a safe house for a few days in isolation to make her reveal the secret but he did not adopt this traditional style of the intelligence officers. For a few days, according to his own version, Brig Imtiaz grappled with the dilemma of whether to wait or to just pick her up and try extracting information through traditional methods.

It was during these days that one day while on his way to Clifton and driving by the consulate of a superpower, he saw a red colour Mazda car bearing a private number plate going inside at a very fast speed but he never really gave it another thought. But later, when he was sitting with the man in Clifton whom he had gone to meet, all of a sudden, his mind started working and he thought of the same red Mazda car and how it was allowed inside the consulate within a few seconds. He immediately ordered his men to stay vigilant outside the consulate and keep a tab on the car when it came out. But the red Mazda did not come out of the consulate building till late at night. Next morning, he went to his office and took out the Karachi metropolitan map and divided it into eight sectors. He gave motorcycles and cars to his ISI people with the directions to keep on roaming in these eight sectors all the time and note the registration numbers of all such red Mazda cars which were very few in those days. This exercise continued for a month but there was no big success. He kept on checking the registration numbers of red Mazda cars but no suspect was found.

One day, he got a red Mazda number which was rented out to someone from a Tariq Road showroom. One Rafique Munshi had rented that car. He had also given his address to the showroom. He was living in Garden East in MPA hostel in a suite. When the credentials of Munshi were checked, Brig Imtiaz came to know that he was working in the KANUPP as an engineer. The brigadier was immediately reminded of the female lecturer and went to meet the Memon lady. He again called the sister of Dr A K Brohi and requested her to arrange a meeting with her patient.

During the meeting, he suddenly asked the lady whether she knew Munshi. As he uttered the name, she started weeping. It took her a while to regain her composure but then she started sharing the secret which she was not ready to share earlier. She admitted that she and Munshi had been class fellows at Karachi University. Both had a serious love affair and he had promised to marry her. She said that they had also developed an illicit sexual relationship. But then he suddenly disappeared from Karachi and she could not trace him anywhere.

After four long years, he suddenly resurfaced in Karachi and was a totally changed man. Before going into hiding, he was a poor guy, but now he was loaded with dollars and leading a luxurious life. She also saw the photograph of a very beautiful foreign girl in his wallet. She then admitted to the brigadier that she was still dating Munshi but felt betrayed and cheated as she believed he had spoiled her life. She told Brig Imtiaz that she was thinking to take revenge from him but then she could not dare because it might have also harmed her.

Then the secret broke. The woman told him that one day, when Munshi left for his office, he left his safe open. She looked at the half-open safe and could not resist the temptation to check its contents. She was startled to see piles of dollars inside along with some official secret files. These papers were related to Pakistan's nuclear sites and installations. This information was enough for Brig Imtiaz to proceed further as he understood the nature of the secret the woman was carrying with her for so many months and becoming sick in the process.

He asked her to help him get a key to Munshi's suite so that he could himself inspect the stuff. She provided him the alternate key. With the help of a 70-year-old key-making expert Brig Imtiaz managed to open the foreign made safe and made copies of documents which were primarily questions and the answers related to Pakistan's nuclear sites and the people working there.

Obviously Engineer Munshi was working for the secret agency of a superpower which used to provide him questions and he used to give them the replies to those questions related to the nuclear programme. This was the same man who was seen taking his red Mazda car inside the foreign consulate. Brig Imtiaz did not touch the dollars and kept putting the documents back after making copies. He now wanted to capture the whole gang, as he came to know through the papers that the agents of this secret agency of a superpower were also present in Kahuta and other important installations where the nuclear programme was being executed.

Munshi was simply playing the role of an agent between the foreign secret agency and Pakistani scientists working at those installations. After a labour of ten months and armed with necessary information, the matter was then brought to the notice of DG ISI Riaz Mohammad.

In the meantime, Brig Imtiaz came to know through those secret communications through papers that Munshi was to meet a foreign secret agent at Hawkes Bay Karachi to hand over some documents. He decided to arrest them red handed. He only took his driver along. When the two were exchanging documents, he tried to arrest them; and to his surprise, the agent shot at him but missed. But he, along with his driver, overpowered them and shifted them to a safe house.

Soon they had the names of 12 other officers at Kahuta and other places who were part of this plan to sabotage the nuclear sites. According to the plot, these nuclear scientists and engineers working on the payroll of a secret agency, were to develop huge technical sabotage of the programme to an extent that it could not have been repaired or fixed for some years to come. They all were arrested from various places in the light of information given by Brig Imtiaz.

It was revealed that actually the foreign secret agency had deputed five handlers from Washington to deal with the nuclear programme of Pakistan. These five foreign handlers included two girls, one of whose photos was seen by the heartbroken girlfriend of Munshi which made her jealous and she decided to take revenge.

Brig Imtiaz was immediately called to Islamabad to give a briefing to General Ziaul Haq The five handlers were immediately told to leave Pakistan and General Zia was said to have called the president of this superpower to register a protest that how his country's secret agency had tried to sabotage Pakistan's nuclear programme. Zia was said to have expressed extreme displeasure over this espionage of nuclear programme. But, the president of that superpower was said to have requested Zia not to make it a public issue as it might tarnish his country's image and Zia obliged him.

A special tribunal was set up to try all those Pakistani scientists and engineers on high treasons charges. The ringleader Munshi was sentenced to death while others were awarded life sentences by the court. But one fine morning, much to his shock, Brig Imtiaz learned that President Zia had commuted the death penalty of Munshi on the recommendation of a top Sindhi leader in exchange for his political support to the Zia regime.

After the arrest of Munshi, Brig Imtiaz met the lady lecture whose tip had led to unfold this international conspiracy against Pakistan nuclear programme. She was devastated and feeling very depressed as she told the ISI officer that she loved Munshi dearly but as he had betrayed her she could not spare him.

The woman had managed to take her revenge from her lover while Brig Imtiaz was happy to unearth such a big conspiracy for which he was later decorated with a Tamgha-e-Basalat by the president of Pakistan for his services to the nation.

Listen, almost 30 years have passed since this incident, but till date I can't forget how a heartbroken woman's commitment to herself to take revenge from her lover had led to the unfolding of this secret, which, if not shared, might have deprived Pakistan of its nuclear assets and we might not be celebrating this day, remarked Brig Imtiaz while lost in the memories of the past.

Barbarians at barbarians' doorstep

2009-05-29T11:52:00.000-07:00

By Humayun Gauhar

While divorce is the absolute and undisputed Islamic right of a woman, last month in Ghotki, Sindh, which is not under Taliban control, a jirga ordered that the ears, lips and nose of a woman and her parents to be cut off for demanding divorce on grounds of torture by her husband. Such punishment is completely, totally and utterly un-Islamic and no less horrendous than what the Taliban mete out. Where is the State? Where is the famous independent judiciary? Where are the human rights activists? Where are the lawyers? Where is the media? Where is the civil society? Where are the religious scholars?

Last month in a place called Kala Dhaka, NWFP, also not under Taliban control, a couple was shot dead on the orders of a jirga for the 'sin' of eloping. Is this punishment any less horrendous than what the Taliban mete out? To get married by choice is also the absolute Islamic right of any adult man or woman and no one can stop it, including parents. An English language newspaper reported on its front page: "The jirga was held on the intervention of the political administration to review its order of killing Alia Bibi and Azeemul Haq, but it upheld its decision and they were shot dead." Political Tehsildar Jamshed Khan told: 'I regret the killing, but what can I do. There is no other law except the jirga system in this area'."

No other law? After 62 years? Where's sovereignty? Where is the State? Where is the newly independent judiciary and the rest of the shebang? Why have they not been able to end such barbaric practices? Because jirgas and panchayats have been made part of the system. Parliament should have struck this down for being un-Islamic but it seems that un-Islamic customs take precedence over Islam in this Islamic Republic of ours. It's legalised barbarity is no less than some of the barbaric practices of the Taliban that have been legalised in Swat and Malakand. We don't realise that while the jirgas and panchayats maintain the iniquitous status quo through barbarity, these Taliban too have a limited or no understanding of Islam and use religion as a tool for achieving power. Are we ashamed of tolerating such barbaric practices in the name of custom and for spoiling the name of Islam? No wonder that others consider Muslims barbarians.

Legalised barbarity in our rural and tribal areas has been ignored by us, the privileged, because it never touched us. But now that we imagine that Taliban barbarity might soon arrive at our doorsteps we are going hysterical. You think that such people can change society? All we can do is moan in drawing rooms and groan in seminars, columns, television and blogs wondering why our country is going to hell in a hand basket. We raise all sorts of issues but never our class's barbarity. It's because we are still mentally colonised.

There is slavery in Balochistan, Sindh and southern Punjab. Everyone knows but does nothing. A Sindhi landlord with his brother and son gang-raped the slave wife of his slave together. Rape is bad enough, but have you ever heard of a father and son raping a girl together for God's sake? They are not even Muslims. Tribal warlords and feudal lords own private jails. Everyone knows but does nothing. Feudal barons marry their girls to the Holy Quran to keep wealth in the family, a very high form of blasphemy against the Almighty. Yet our religious scholars make no hue and cry, issue no fatwas. Everyone knows but does nothing. Landlords make usurious loans to their desperate peasants knowing they can never pay back. When they can't, they take their wives and daughters as if they were collateralised chattel, rape them whenever they wish and keep them till the peasant pays, which means never. Usury is a very grave sin in Islam. Everyone knows but does nothing, not even our religious scholars. Instead, we honour those slave owners, usurers, private jail owners and rapists with high offices.

The State and its institutions have been party to all this un-Islamic barbarity, because those who run it are precisely those people who perpetrate this barbarity. We city dwellers too are barbarians because by remaining silent, our time occupied with elitist issues and western concerns, we become party to it. But now that a barbarous group has emerged from among those whom we have perpetrated our own barbarity upon and is about to come knocking on the doors of our mansions and citadels, we the callous and insensitive are going hysterical. It has never dawned upon us that our class was socially engineered by the English to make us mental and intellectual slaves of our colonisers past and present. How could we get rid of slavery in our midst when we are still slaves ourselves regardless of whether we are urban or rural, Oxbridge or uneducated? Now the Taliban will come to 'free' us from our slavery by putting us under their barbarity. Serves us right.

If we urban elite don't perpetrate the same kind of barbarity, we certainly tolerate it in our society by ignoring or mutely accepting it. At the end of the day we are all from the same class, urban or rural doesn't matter. We may not own agricultural lands, fiefs or be tribal chiefs, but if we don't have a flat in London as a holiday home we are not top drawer. Many of us give better food to our dogs than to our servants, who work inordinate hours for a pittance. We steal like mad if in government. We steal like mad outside it. We ignore little boys in bonded labour working all day for a few scraps of food, to be sodomized at night by the camp owner. We tolerate children working in brick kilns, not in some hinterland but in Islamabad. But if our child is deprived of air conditioning we go ape. Workers are thrown into the furnaces of these kilns and steel foundries if they raise their heads.

To make you better understand what I am saying, let me draw your attention to an extract from an address Lord Macaulay gave to the British Parliament on February 2, 1835. "I have travelled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation."

How did they do that? Macaulay showed the way in his minutes of February 1835: "It is impossible for us, with our limited means, to attempt to educate the body of the people. We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern; a class of persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect. To that class we may leave it to refine the vernacular dialects of the country, to enrich those dialects with terms of science borrowed from the Western nomenclature, and to render them by degrees fit vehicles for conveying knowledge to the great mass of the population." Note the phrase "interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern."

These then were the intermediaries between the English coloniser and the natives who helped just a few thousand Englishmen rule such a vast subcontinent for so long. We belong to this engineered class for we are the progeny of these "interpreters" and intermediaries. And we still are interpreters and intermediaries between America and our people for we are still "English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect."

The writer is a senior political analyst.

Abu Ghraib abuse photos 'show rape'

2009-05-29T11:48:00.000-07:00

Photographs of alleged prisoner abuse which Barack Obama is attempting to censor include images of apparent rape and sexual abuse, it has emerged.

By Duncan Gardham, Security Correspondent and Paul Cruickshank

At least one picture shows an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee.

Further photographs are said to depict sexual assaults on prisoners with objects including a truncheon, wire and a phosphorescent tube.

Another apparently shows a female prisoner having her clothing forcibly removed to expose her breasts.

Detail of the content emerged from Major General Antonio Taguba, the former army officer who conducted an inquiry into the Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq.

Allegations of rape and abuse were included in his 2004 report but the fact there were photographs was never revealed. He has now confirmed their existence in an interview with the Daily Telegraph.

The graphic nature of some of the images may explain the US President’s attempts to block the release of an estimated 2,000 photographs from prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan despite an earlier promise to allow them to be published.

Maj Gen Taguba, who retired in January 2007, said he supported the President’s decision, adding: “These pictures show torture, abuse, rape and every indecency.

“I am not sure what purpose their release would serve other than a legal one and the consequence would be to imperil our troops, the only protectors of our foreign policy, when we most need them, and British troops who are trying to build security in Afghanistan.

“The mere description of these pictures is horrendous enough, take my word for it.”

In April, Mr Obama’s administration said the photographs would be released and it would be “pointless to appeal” against a court judgment in favour of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

But after lobbying from senior military figures, Mr Obama changed his mind saying they could put the safety of troops at risk.

Earlier this month, he said: “The most direct consequence of releasing them, I believe, would be to inflame anti-American public opinion and to put our troops in greater danger.”

It was thought the images were similar to those leaked five years ago, which showed naked and bloody prisoners being intimidated by dogs, dragged around on a leash, piled into a human pyramid and hooded and attached to wires.

Mr Obama seemed to reinforce that view by adding: “I want to emphasise that these photos that were requested in this case are not particularly sensational, especially when compared to the painful images that we remember from Abu Ghraib.”

The latest photographs relate to 400 cases of alleged abuse between 2001 and 2005 in Abu Ghraib and six other prisons. Mr Obama said the individuals involved had been “identified, and appropriate actions” taken.

Maj Gen Taguba’s internal inquiry into the abuse at Abu Ghraib, included sworn statements by 13 detainees, which, he said in the report, he found “credible based on the clarity of their statements and supporting evidence provided by other witnesses.”

Among the graphic statements, which were later released under US freedom of information laws, is that of Kasim Mehaddi Hilas in which he says: “I saw [name of a translator] ******* a kid, his age would be about 15 to 18 years. The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets. Then when I heard screaming I climbed the door because on top it wasn’t covered and I saw [name] who was wearing the military uniform, putting his **** in the little kid’s ***…. and the female soldier was taking pictures.”

The translator was an American Egyptian who is now the subject of a civil court case in the US.

Three detainees, including the alleged victim, refer to the use of a phosphorescent tube in the sexual abuse and another to the use of wire, while the victim also refers to part of a policeman’s “stick” all of which were apparently photographed.