by Ishaal Zehra
The headlines of nearly all colossal newspapers carried the same tag line on that particular day, they said “President Barack Obama had a clear message in his speech to the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) On March 4, 2012: It's war.” Critiques say by addressing this powerful pro-Israel lobby, Obama actually delivered messages to multiple political audiences: Israel, Iran, Jewish voters, a restless Congress, a wary international community and the three Republican presidential contenders in line.
For Iran, President Barack Obama says that he would not hesitate to attack Iran to keep it from getting a nuclear bomb. And for Israel, it’s just a mere hope that his forceful assurance will discourage Israel from launching a unilateral strike that could ignite the Middle East and drag the U.S. into war.
Interestingly, Obama offered the lines Israel wanted to hear, framing the Iranian threat as a problem for the entire world, and asserting Israel's right to defend itself how it sees fit. Alternatively, this tough note can be considered as a whip up to the Republican criticisms that he has been too tough on Israel and too soft on the Islamic republic which according to him has had crossed a red line. But his summing up of speech said the other way, “America's national security is too important. Israel's security is too important," he said, to sustained applause by the crowd. Closing tag of his speech was a line from a predecessor, Theodore Roosevelt, which said: "Speak softly, but carry a big stick."
Earlier, talking to The Atlantic magazine, the American president cautioned that 'when the US says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say'
In his vociferous remarks on nuclear Iran, Obama told the magazine that Iran and Israel both understand that "a military component" is one of a mix of options for dealing with Iran, along with sanctions and diplomacy. Probably, Pakistan has been warned in harsh words and shown strong displeasure for the IPI pipeline Project just incase Iran does not have any other support in the region. What so ever, at the core it is always United States’s bullish assertion that the United States will never settle for containing a nuclear-armed Iran or fail to defend Israel.
To understand American interests in the region, I would rather mention Mr. M. Hossein Bor’s believe that America has a greater appeal in the region even beyond one can judge. (http://asiapacificreporting.blogspot.com/2012/02/no-peace-in-balochistan-without.html) Pakistan, Iran and China all are connected in this great game. Bor, being the one with deep subject matter expertise in foreign trade and investment in Southwest Asia, perfectly accounts for foreign hands in Balochistan activism. According to Bor, “there are many interrelated issues at play. When one discusses Balochistan, you are discussing a way to contain China. You are also discussing economic relationships between Iran and Pakistan. And, you are talking about energy security for the U.S. and its allies.”
With respect to China, Bor says that the strategic and economic importance of Baluchistan cannot be underestimated: “If (the Chinese) build their port in Gwadar, they will have a land route from Western China to the Indian Ocean. This is of strategic interest to the United States because Chinese ships would have a direct route to China and no longer have to transit past the Indian and American navies. Whereas, talking about Iran: “Iran is an empire and they are using Baloch lands to try to become the dominant regional player. The Iranians are using the Strait of Hormuz as a chokepoint for a huge percentage of the world’s oil. They also are building a pipeline to Pakistan which violates U.N. sanctions. Such growing Iran-Pakistan cooperation is a major concern.” In his mind, an independent Balochistan extending from Karachi to the Strait of Hormuz would not only contain an emerging Iran but also provide a long-term security guarantee against China, Iran, and Pakistan emerging as revisionist maritime powers in the region.
Relating all this together, Iran, Pakistan, China & Afghanistan all are the victims of this game. For Iran, Obama clearly stated that he understood that Israel cannot "tolerate a nuclear weapon in the hands of a regime that denies the Holocaust, threatens to wipe Israel off the map, and sponsors terrorist groups committed to Israel's destruction." where, Israelian PM Netanyahu, before heading to Washington for a meeting with American President, distinctly underlined that Obama had refused to rule out military action, while emphasizing that Israel had the right to "defend itself by itself." For the troubled Pakistan, America has lately been holding a big rigid stick with a proper order chart in hand which she insists to be appropriately followed or else the consequences are severe. The all messed up Afghanistan has already given up in front of United States, whereas China alone is so far the only one playing safe, but stakes are high for China too if considered levelheadedly. At this time the only viable preference would be a likeminded block to oppose America’s supremacy in our region. While Pakistan, China & Iran should collectively craft future plans for energy sharing and economical advancement for the three. Afghanistan may join the team if she wishes too. This would be beneficial for them as well the region as a whole.
http://paktribune.com/articles/US-Israel-Nexus-Danger-to-Peace-242881.html
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
"US Has Lost Sleep for Balochistan"
Bossy US & Pakistan: No Love Lost
by Ishaal Zehra
Eddie Walsh, foreign correspondent of Al Jazeera English, in his article “Should the US support an independent Balochistan?” interestingly writes “Over the last few months, a small faction of congressmen, minority Afghan groups, Baloch nationalists, and their supporters have laid out the framework for an alternative US policy approach for Southwest Asia. This alternative policy centres on backing remnants of the Northern Alliance and Baloch insurgents, who seek to carve out semi-autonomous territories or independent states from Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran.
While supporters of this new approach are motivated by a variety of interests, they appear unified in their rejection of what they see as three cornerstones of the Obama administration's current regional policy approach: 1) Normalising relations with Pakistan's government and military; 2) Incorporating the Taliban into the current Afghan political system; 3) Overly accommodating an emerging Iran.”
Although, things might not be evident in their favor today but they seem quite consistent in their approach. They do not (yet) have broad support for their initiative, however the campaign is maturing and garnering increased attention in Congress and beyond. The point can be proved with the three recent high-profile events: a Balochistan National Front strategy session in Berlin, a US congressional hearing on Balochistan, and the introduction of a Baloch self-determination bill before the US Congress.
A glimpse into Balochistan region confirms the large number of militant, insurgent and sectarian attacks in 2010. It is a region torn apart with separatist organisations attacking the state, sectarian and ethnic attacks, and crime, including kidnapping for ransom. The issue of Balochistan is turning sensitive, and this sensitivity comprises of two main reasons. One, the real and unattended grievances of the Baloch people (not the made up one by few Pakistani journalists). Second, hype created by the media, which actually seems in coherent with the greater foreign plan against Pakistan. Media is an instrument which is being exercised by every nation to mould the situations for the purpose of acquiring desired results. Unfortunately, a chunk of Pakistani media is not exercising this approach while dealing with the important and sensitive issues like Balochistan.
Here the role of US is also an interesting point to debate. American double standards are visible as a day light. Surprisingly their lost love for Balochistan is quite evident by their documented resolution. The Representatives from California presented a resolution regarding Balochistan’s precarious condition asks for the independence of Balochistan from Pakistan on the basis of right of self rule, and the bill unexpectedly has been passed by the US Congress.
The congressmen seem quite eager in interfering in Pakistan’s internal issue while on the other hand they have closed their eyes from the real and persistent issue of Kashmir. Point to ponder is as to why Kashmiries have been denied right to independence on the basis of right of self rule? Nobody dares ask India to let the Kashmiries exercise their right to hold free and impartial plebiscite? The reply is simple, Kashmir issue does not fall in between their plan of carving out semi-autonomous territories or independent states from Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran.
To understand Balochistan, one simply cannot look at it through the Afghanistan-Pakistan (US’s AfPak) box. Mr. M. Hossein Bor, as the only witness of Baloch ethnicity to speak at the recent Balochistan public hearing before the United States Congress, agrees to this. Not only he was the lone witness able to speak as a Baloch, he also was the only one with deep subject matter expertise in foreign trade and investment in Southwest Asia. And interestingly his testimony sheds light on the unrealized strategic and economic opportunities that an independent Baluchistan would provide to Americans, including the ability to contain a rising China and an emerging Iran, prevent an adversarial Pakistan from achieving strategic depth in Afghanistan, and ensure Baloch-American economic prosperity through new energy and mineral resource agreements in future.
The Pakistani Embassy made it clear that “Balochistan’s affairs and issues are an internal matter of Pakistan, and it is for the people of Pakistan and our democratic institutions to address these [issues].”
“We would advise those behind this resolution to reserve their concern and solicitude for problems closer to home. Needless to say, provocations such as these will seriously impact the Pakistan-US relations. We value this relationship but not at the cost of our dignity, sovereignty and territorial integrity,” the Embassy statement added.
locking it up, It’s high time, foreign finger prints traced in Balochistan should be brought upon in media with concrete proves and let the Baloch people know who is playing the game at the cost of their precious blood and national prosperity. And may be Pakistan, Iran & China should also move a symbolic resolution on forceful acceding of California and Texas to Mexico about a century back, after all they are the victims to this great game of great America.
by Ishaal Zehra
Eddie Walsh, foreign correspondent of Al Jazeera English, in his article “Should the US support an independent Balochistan?” interestingly writes “Over the last few months, a small faction of congressmen, minority Afghan groups, Baloch nationalists, and their supporters have laid out the framework for an alternative US policy approach for Southwest Asia. This alternative policy centres on backing remnants of the Northern Alliance and Baloch insurgents, who seek to carve out semi-autonomous territories or independent states from Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran.
While supporters of this new approach are motivated by a variety of interests, they appear unified in their rejection of what they see as three cornerstones of the Obama administration's current regional policy approach: 1) Normalising relations with Pakistan's government and military; 2) Incorporating the Taliban into the current Afghan political system; 3) Overly accommodating an emerging Iran.”
Although, things might not be evident in their favor today but they seem quite consistent in their approach. They do not (yet) have broad support for their initiative, however the campaign is maturing and garnering increased attention in Congress and beyond. The point can be proved with the three recent high-profile events: a Balochistan National Front strategy session in Berlin, a US congressional hearing on Balochistan, and the introduction of a Baloch self-determination bill before the US Congress.
A glimpse into Balochistan region confirms the large number of militant, insurgent and sectarian attacks in 2010. It is a region torn apart with separatist organisations attacking the state, sectarian and ethnic attacks, and crime, including kidnapping for ransom. The issue of Balochistan is turning sensitive, and this sensitivity comprises of two main reasons. One, the real and unattended grievances of the Baloch people (not the made up one by few Pakistani journalists). Second, hype created by the media, which actually seems in coherent with the greater foreign plan against Pakistan. Media is an instrument which is being exercised by every nation to mould the situations for the purpose of acquiring desired results. Unfortunately, a chunk of Pakistani media is not exercising this approach while dealing with the important and sensitive issues like Balochistan.
Here the role of US is also an interesting point to debate. American double standards are visible as a day light. Surprisingly their lost love for Balochistan is quite evident by their documented resolution. The Representatives from California presented a resolution regarding Balochistan’s precarious condition asks for the independence of Balochistan from Pakistan on the basis of right of self rule, and the bill unexpectedly has been passed by the US Congress.
The congressmen seem quite eager in interfering in Pakistan’s internal issue while on the other hand they have closed their eyes from the real and persistent issue of Kashmir. Point to ponder is as to why Kashmiries have been denied right to independence on the basis of right of self rule? Nobody dares ask India to let the Kashmiries exercise their right to hold free and impartial plebiscite? The reply is simple, Kashmir issue does not fall in between their plan of carving out semi-autonomous territories or independent states from Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran.
To understand Balochistan, one simply cannot look at it through the Afghanistan-Pakistan (US’s AfPak) box. Mr. M. Hossein Bor, as the only witness of Baloch ethnicity to speak at the recent Balochistan public hearing before the United States Congress, agrees to this. Not only he was the lone witness able to speak as a Baloch, he also was the only one with deep subject matter expertise in foreign trade and investment in Southwest Asia. And interestingly his testimony sheds light on the unrealized strategic and economic opportunities that an independent Baluchistan would provide to Americans, including the ability to contain a rising China and an emerging Iran, prevent an adversarial Pakistan from achieving strategic depth in Afghanistan, and ensure Baloch-American economic prosperity through new energy and mineral resource agreements in future.
The Pakistani Embassy made it clear that “Balochistan’s affairs and issues are an internal matter of Pakistan, and it is for the people of Pakistan and our democratic institutions to address these [issues].”
“We would advise those behind this resolution to reserve their concern and solicitude for problems closer to home. Needless to say, provocations such as these will seriously impact the Pakistan-US relations. We value this relationship but not at the cost of our dignity, sovereignty and territorial integrity,” the Embassy statement added.
locking it up, It’s high time, foreign finger prints traced in Balochistan should be brought upon in media with concrete proves and let the Baloch people know who is playing the game at the cost of their precious blood and national prosperity. And may be Pakistan, Iran & China should also move a symbolic resolution on forceful acceding of California and Texas to Mexico about a century back, after all they are the victims to this great game of great America.
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Istanbul Conference – A Partial Focus On Afghan Stability by Bassam Javed
The year 2011 has opened new vistas for Afghanistan as concerted efforts being put in by all stake holders have provided a glimmer of hope to achieve what has eluded Afghans for too long: stability, peace, development and prosperity. The year not only marks the end of the decade of foreign intervention in Afghanistan after eviction of Taliban from Kabul but is also turning out to be a decisive year wherein strategic accords are being worked upon to create Afghan peace and stability by the time US-led forces are withdrawn.
Two conferences are coming up in this regard; one in Istanbul on 2 November and the other in Bonn on 5 December to augment and support Afghan efforts in building peace, developmental infrastructure and prosperity in Afghanistan. Here, we will be focusing on Istanbul Conference that will be attended by regional countries comprising ‘Heart of Asia’ and some other members of the international community. The aim of the Istanbul Conference as projected in the preparatory conferences held elsewhere in Oslo and Kabul was to define a vision for regional peace and development through participants’ commitments for a stable and independent Afghanistan and to discuss regional economic cooperation.
Notwithstanding the urgent need to stabilize Afghanistan, the half hearted and un-coordinated peace efforts undertaken by various stake holders independently have failed. Also, the withdrawal time line of the foreign forces has not been worked out. With these two major shortcomings, holding of Istanbul Conference does not appear to be in consonance with other dynamics required for Afghan stability. More so, instead of articulating modus operandi to extract solemn and formal pledges from participating countries the draft declaration focuses on erecting a new architecture to oversee peace process, stability, development and prosperity in Afghanistan. This architecture will be composed of fourteen countries from South and Central Asian and the Middle East. The selection of the countries is liable to be challenged by countries bordering Afghanistan at the very start of the conference as some of these countries do not share borders with Afghanistan.
The conflicting objectives of Istanbul Conference i.e. one relating to Afghanistan and the other on the regional countries dilute the importance of each other. The draft document projects that the internal stability of Afghanistan can be achieved utilizing external initiatives through a regional architecture tantamount to give an impression that all of Afghanistan’s problems are external. Going by Istanbul document will mean that focus on progress and reconciliation, resurrection of Afghan governance, return of refugees from Iran and Pakistan, endorsement of peace process and Afghan sovereignty by the countries bordering Afghanistan, has been over ridden by focus on corroboration and support by a larger group of countries on regional agreements that would derive out of the Conference. Not only this, there is a move by the US to create a ‘contact group’ of countries to consult on Afghan security. The original agenda may also be hijacked by the US as it is feared that the Conference will be utilized to devise a mechanism for speedy withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan. The forums of purported regional architecture and creation of the contact group will not deliver on Afghanistan since bilateral strategic issues between some of the countries forming the core groups will spoil the Afghan peace stabilization process.
The critical issue faced by Pakistan and also by Iran has been completely side lined in the draft Istanbul Conference prepared is the presence of millions of Afghan refugees that has tremendously burdened the respective economies. The draft declaration has no mention about the fate of those refugees. Also, to the detriment of both Pakistan’s and Iran’s security interests, the document also equates immediate neighbors like Pakistan and Iran with distant neighbors like India. The document also enhances the role of India in Afghan affairs.
Pakistan shares 2560 Kms long border with Afghanistan and its security gets affected by events in Afghanistan. The Istanbul Conference will do well by focusing only on an all acceptable declaration that establishes principles accompanied by an implemental plan for a sustained economic assistance from international community to built and develop Afghan infrastructure. In the context of Pakistan’s interests, the draft document prepared by Turks for Istanbul Conference does not cater for them. Pakistan has always been proud of its decades old relationship with the Turks. Both the countries have been of great strength to each other in times of crises. What compelled Turkey to off-set Pakistan’s interest in the draft document is not known. May be Turkey wanted to win back the West’s confidence that spiraled down for its firm and moral stand on Palestinian issue and the Middle East through extra regional agenda on Afghanistan. But then should it be done in complete disregard of the interests of its age old friend, Pakistan?
Two conferences are coming up in this regard; one in Istanbul on 2 November and the other in Bonn on 5 December to augment and support Afghan efforts in building peace, developmental infrastructure and prosperity in Afghanistan. Here, we will be focusing on Istanbul Conference that will be attended by regional countries comprising ‘Heart of Asia’ and some other members of the international community. The aim of the Istanbul Conference as projected in the preparatory conferences held elsewhere in Oslo and Kabul was to define a vision for regional peace and development through participants’ commitments for a stable and independent Afghanistan and to discuss regional economic cooperation.
Notwithstanding the urgent need to stabilize Afghanistan, the half hearted and un-coordinated peace efforts undertaken by various stake holders independently have failed. Also, the withdrawal time line of the foreign forces has not been worked out. With these two major shortcomings, holding of Istanbul Conference does not appear to be in consonance with other dynamics required for Afghan stability. More so, instead of articulating modus operandi to extract solemn and formal pledges from participating countries the draft declaration focuses on erecting a new architecture to oversee peace process, stability, development and prosperity in Afghanistan. This architecture will be composed of fourteen countries from South and Central Asian and the Middle East. The selection of the countries is liable to be challenged by countries bordering Afghanistan at the very start of the conference as some of these countries do not share borders with Afghanistan.
The conflicting objectives of Istanbul Conference i.e. one relating to Afghanistan and the other on the regional countries dilute the importance of each other. The draft document projects that the internal stability of Afghanistan can be achieved utilizing external initiatives through a regional architecture tantamount to give an impression that all of Afghanistan’s problems are external. Going by Istanbul document will mean that focus on progress and reconciliation, resurrection of Afghan governance, return of refugees from Iran and Pakistan, endorsement of peace process and Afghan sovereignty by the countries bordering Afghanistan, has been over ridden by focus on corroboration and support by a larger group of countries on regional agreements that would derive out of the Conference. Not only this, there is a move by the US to create a ‘contact group’ of countries to consult on Afghan security. The original agenda may also be hijacked by the US as it is feared that the Conference will be utilized to devise a mechanism for speedy withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan. The forums of purported regional architecture and creation of the contact group will not deliver on Afghanistan since bilateral strategic issues between some of the countries forming the core groups will spoil the Afghan peace stabilization process.
The critical issue faced by Pakistan and also by Iran has been completely side lined in the draft Istanbul Conference prepared is the presence of millions of Afghan refugees that has tremendously burdened the respective economies. The draft declaration has no mention about the fate of those refugees. Also, to the detriment of both Pakistan’s and Iran’s security interests, the document also equates immediate neighbors like Pakistan and Iran with distant neighbors like India. The document also enhances the role of India in Afghan affairs.
Pakistan shares 2560 Kms long border with Afghanistan and its security gets affected by events in Afghanistan. The Istanbul Conference will do well by focusing only on an all acceptable declaration that establishes principles accompanied by an implemental plan for a sustained economic assistance from international community to built and develop Afghan infrastructure. In the context of Pakistan’s interests, the draft document prepared by Turks for Istanbul Conference does not cater for them. Pakistan has always been proud of its decades old relationship with the Turks. Both the countries have been of great strength to each other in times of crises. What compelled Turkey to off-set Pakistan’s interest in the draft document is not known. May be Turkey wanted to win back the West’s confidence that spiraled down for its firm and moral stand on Palestinian issue and the Middle East through extra regional agenda on Afghanistan. But then should it be done in complete disregard of the interests of its age old friend, Pakistan?
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Clearing misunderstandings for peace in Afghanistan by Abdul Zahoor Khan Marwat
Recently, Pentagon released the summary of an inquiry into the death of a US serviceman, Army Major Larry Bauguess, who was shot dead in an ugly incident at the Pak Afghan border on May 9, 2007.
At that time, officials in the US military had claimed that the killing of the US major was part of a plot allegedly hatched by the Pakistan Army. This, according to them, was done to avenge the death of Pakistan Army personnel who were killed in friendly fire by the US forces.
Reports about the incident said that a trilateral meeting was taking place at Teri Mangal, attended by Pakistani, Afghan and US officials. After the meeting, when the US major was boarding a helicopter to leave, a man in militia uniform opened fire on him. The US troops returned the fire, killing not only the gunman but also six innocent bystanders.
Now the inquiry has found that the US serviceman was killed by a lone attacker, who had no connection to the Pakistan Army or the country’s intelligence agencies. The summary of the report said: “This appears to have been a premeditated event on part of the initial shooter. There is little evidence to support collaboration with the Pakistani militia or military”.
The summary of the inquiry has been welcomed by all elements who want to see better relations between the US and Pakistan and those who are working in this direction. Thus, the importance of the Pentagon’s report in removing Pak-US misunderstandings cannot be overlooked as it presents stubborn facts.
There has been a plethora of charges that have been levelled against the Pakistan Army and its intelligence agencies, which is not surprising given the volatile geopolitical situation in the region and conflicting interests of several countries.
One allegation is that Pakistan Army had sheltered bin Laden in Abbottabad. Considering the consequences of such a move, it is unfathomable why Pakistan would ever do so.
Again, it has been repeatedly claimed that Pakistan Army is supporting the Taliban factions in their fight against the foreign forces in Afghanistan.
No concrete evidence has ever been presented in this regard while statements of disgruntled elements within the Afghan armed forces and Taliban cannot be relied upon.
The charge of sheltering the Quetta Shura also remains unproven. Where is it located? Most experts say in this era of GPS, satellites and sophisticated listening devices, any spot on the face of earth cannot remain hidden for long.
The charges of helping the Haqqani group to attack the US embassy in Kabul have been retracted. It has also been proven that the ISI was not involved in the Mumbai attacks.
Meanwhile, a retired Indian general has praised the Pakistan Army after it quickly returned the intruding Indian helicopter, saying that Pakistan Army was a highly professional institution that conducted the helicopter episode in a responsible manner.
At the root of many allegations is the absence of a clear understanding of regional situation and players. The recent volley of charges against the Pakistan armed forces and intelligence agencies has certainly not been helpful in creating a better understanding between Pakistan and the US. But the Pentagon report will be helpful in removing the distrust.
Both countries should work together to bring peace in the region and that could be done quietly, avoiding the historically negative influence of some neighbouring countries.
At that time, officials in the US military had claimed that the killing of the US major was part of a plot allegedly hatched by the Pakistan Army. This, according to them, was done to avenge the death of Pakistan Army personnel who were killed in friendly fire by the US forces.
Reports about the incident said that a trilateral meeting was taking place at Teri Mangal, attended by Pakistani, Afghan and US officials. After the meeting, when the US major was boarding a helicopter to leave, a man in militia uniform opened fire on him. The US troops returned the fire, killing not only the gunman but also six innocent bystanders.
Now the inquiry has found that the US serviceman was killed by a lone attacker, who had no connection to the Pakistan Army or the country’s intelligence agencies. The summary of the report said: “This appears to have been a premeditated event on part of the initial shooter. There is little evidence to support collaboration with the Pakistani militia or military”.
The summary of the inquiry has been welcomed by all elements who want to see better relations between the US and Pakistan and those who are working in this direction. Thus, the importance of the Pentagon’s report in removing Pak-US misunderstandings cannot be overlooked as it presents stubborn facts.
There has been a plethora of charges that have been levelled against the Pakistan Army and its intelligence agencies, which is not surprising given the volatile geopolitical situation in the region and conflicting interests of several countries.
One allegation is that Pakistan Army had sheltered bin Laden in Abbottabad. Considering the consequences of such a move, it is unfathomable why Pakistan would ever do so.
Again, it has been repeatedly claimed that Pakistan Army is supporting the Taliban factions in their fight against the foreign forces in Afghanistan.
No concrete evidence has ever been presented in this regard while statements of disgruntled elements within the Afghan armed forces and Taliban cannot be relied upon.
The charge of sheltering the Quetta Shura also remains unproven. Where is it located? Most experts say in this era of GPS, satellites and sophisticated listening devices, any spot on the face of earth cannot remain hidden for long.
The charges of helping the Haqqani group to attack the US embassy in Kabul have been retracted. It has also been proven that the ISI was not involved in the Mumbai attacks.
Meanwhile, a retired Indian general has praised the Pakistan Army after it quickly returned the intruding Indian helicopter, saying that Pakistan Army was a highly professional institution that conducted the helicopter episode in a responsible manner.
At the root of many allegations is the absence of a clear understanding of regional situation and players. The recent volley of charges against the Pakistan armed forces and intelligence agencies has certainly not been helpful in creating a better understanding between Pakistan and the US. But the Pentagon report will be helpful in removing the distrust.
Both countries should work together to bring peace in the region and that could be done quietly, avoiding the historically negative influence of some neighbouring countries.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Our ‘ally from hell’: a rejoinder to US hawks
Shireen M Mazari
The Atlantic and the National Journal last week published a story on Pakistan’s nuclear weapons with the title “The Ally from Hell” and proceeded to create the usual scare about our weapons safety and the jihadists waiting to grab these national assets - or even a worse nightmare for the US, the military turning into a jihadist combine controlling these weapons.
Of course there is nothing new in these assertions which emanate from the US periodically - especially in times of worsening relations with Pakistan. One knows only too well the link between the US media and the US state and it is not a point on which more proof is needed. The present story’s timing again coincides with the Pakistan military seeking to delink from the US on certain policy issues as well as President Zardari’s now notorious memo asking the US to save him in power from the Pakistan military in return for total subjugation alongside the destruction of Pakistan’s military intelligence especially the ISI - the permanent bete noir of the Yanks despite the excessive cooperation ISI has been meting out to the US military!
One needs to look at the absurdity of some of the more “serious” and certainly wilder allegations contained in the article. After checking up carefully I discovered that neither the authors nor any other stringer linked to the relevant publications actually talked to or interviewed anyone in SPD or GHQ. Yet a reference is made to General Kayani in the article almost as if the authors witnessed him calling General Kidwai after the Abbottabad incident! This is just one of the many imaginary flights of fancy the article contains.
There is the usual mantra of how the world is anxious about the security of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and, according to the authors, with good reason because Pakistan is “the epicentre of global jihadism” - of course who fanned it in the aftermath of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan is not mentioned - and foremost supplier of nuclear technology to Iran and North Korea! It is ironic that Pakistan is consistently being accused of supplying North Korea with uranium enrichment technology even though the Korean nuclear programme was plutonium based! As for Iran, it continues to assert that it is seeking peaceful nuclear energy and remains interacting with the IAEA despite the new IAEA chief’s submission to US diktat.
Of course at the end of the day Pakistan broke no international commitments in the alleged supply of nuclear technological information to other countries especially since our programme was also a clandestine one at that time. Again the issue of who is supplying dual use technology to India right now against its NPT commitments and who are the Western states who helped build Israel’s clandestine nuclear programme is something that none of the so-called investigative journalists from the West, especially the US, ever want to discuss in the context of nuclear proliferation.
As for the security of a country’s nuclear arsenal, the US journalists really should examine their own country’s dismal record with planes taking off with live nukes and no one knowing how it happened and where they went! Again, nuclear accidents like Three Mile Island have also happened on US territory. So it would appear if anyone is going to steal nukes the US sites may be the most vulnerable!
The authors also write as if they are privy to information that so far the US government itself does not have - that “these weapons are stored on bases and in facilities spread across the country (possibly including one within several miles of Abbottabad...).” Interesting how they have information that foreign governments do not have despite the US trying for years to gain definitive locations of our nukes!
Then comes the real clincher - what is really eating up the US and Israel: that Pakistan, as the authors point out, “is the only Muslim-majority state, out of the 50 or so in the world, to have successfully developed nuclear weapons”.
Then we have the usual accusations of how the Pakistan military and security services are totally infiltrated by jihadis and their sympathizers - of course this must be a conclusion drawn from the US experience where the US military and administration are totally infiltrated by Zionists and their sympathizers and at present that goes right to the top to President Obama himself.
The icing on the cake is the cited assertion by Graham Allison. His assertions in this article are more amusing than rational. His first assertion that terrorists would steal a nuke and take it to New York makes no sense unless the nuke is stolen from a US site since no terrorist can carry a radioactive weapon through the various security checks and arrive safely carting the weapon to New York. Figure it out! His second assertion is equally mind boggling - that a jihadi group would transfer a nuclear weapon to Iran. Why? Iran has no delivery systems to target the US! Also the jihadi groups being talked about are diehard anti-Shia so why would they give this nuke “gift” to Iran and why would Iran want to deal with such people? There is no evidence for any of these assertions. Allison’s third assertion plays on the instability of the Pakistani state that is the present US mantra - that a militant group would takeover nuclear weapons during “a period of instability or splintering of the state.” Well Allison better tell the US not to attempt such a move in Pakistan; but on a more serious note the fact of the matter is that so far our nukes are more secure than US nukes and militants have enough lethality in terms of conventional weapons as has sadly been shown.
The authors do assert that Pakistan’s weapons are de-mated which seems to reassure them so one would not like to educate them on this issue. But the most hilarious assertion is the claim that Pakistan has begun moving its nukes in “low-security vans on congested roads to hide them from US spy agencies”! Given how the US does not know where the weapons are located, why would we move them in low-security vans and to where?
The whole article, based on conjecture and wild assertions, is meant to target Pakistan and its nuclear assets and is part of a long-term US strategy on this count. The background of the authors is also interesting. Jeffrey Goldberg served in the Israeli Defence Forces and was a prison guard during the First Intifada - so one does not have to imagine too much to understand where he is coming from.
As for Marc Ambinder, the White House correspondent for the National Journal, he has had a psychological battle against obesity and his wife works for the Boston Consulting Group which includes amongst its current and former employees Israel’s extreme right wing leader Benjamin Netanyahu! I rest my case of the US being our “ally from hell”.
The Atlantic and the National Journal last week published a story on Pakistan’s nuclear weapons with the title “The Ally from Hell” and proceeded to create the usual scare about our weapons safety and the jihadists waiting to grab these national assets - or even a worse nightmare for the US, the military turning into a jihadist combine controlling these weapons.
Of course there is nothing new in these assertions which emanate from the US periodically - especially in times of worsening relations with Pakistan. One knows only too well the link between the US media and the US state and it is not a point on which more proof is needed. The present story’s timing again coincides with the Pakistan military seeking to delink from the US on certain policy issues as well as President Zardari’s now notorious memo asking the US to save him in power from the Pakistan military in return for total subjugation alongside the destruction of Pakistan’s military intelligence especially the ISI - the permanent bete noir of the Yanks despite the excessive cooperation ISI has been meting out to the US military!
One needs to look at the absurdity of some of the more “serious” and certainly wilder allegations contained in the article. After checking up carefully I discovered that neither the authors nor any other stringer linked to the relevant publications actually talked to or interviewed anyone in SPD or GHQ. Yet a reference is made to General Kayani in the article almost as if the authors witnessed him calling General Kidwai after the Abbottabad incident! This is just one of the many imaginary flights of fancy the article contains.
There is the usual mantra of how the world is anxious about the security of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and, according to the authors, with good reason because Pakistan is “the epicentre of global jihadism” - of course who fanned it in the aftermath of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan is not mentioned - and foremost supplier of nuclear technology to Iran and North Korea! It is ironic that Pakistan is consistently being accused of supplying North Korea with uranium enrichment technology even though the Korean nuclear programme was plutonium based! As for Iran, it continues to assert that it is seeking peaceful nuclear energy and remains interacting with the IAEA despite the new IAEA chief’s submission to US diktat.
Of course at the end of the day Pakistan broke no international commitments in the alleged supply of nuclear technological information to other countries especially since our programme was also a clandestine one at that time. Again the issue of who is supplying dual use technology to India right now against its NPT commitments and who are the Western states who helped build Israel’s clandestine nuclear programme is something that none of the so-called investigative journalists from the West, especially the US, ever want to discuss in the context of nuclear proliferation.
As for the security of a country’s nuclear arsenal, the US journalists really should examine their own country’s dismal record with planes taking off with live nukes and no one knowing how it happened and where they went! Again, nuclear accidents like Three Mile Island have also happened on US territory. So it would appear if anyone is going to steal nukes the US sites may be the most vulnerable!
The authors also write as if they are privy to information that so far the US government itself does not have - that “these weapons are stored on bases and in facilities spread across the country (possibly including one within several miles of Abbottabad...).” Interesting how they have information that foreign governments do not have despite the US trying for years to gain definitive locations of our nukes!
Then comes the real clincher - what is really eating up the US and Israel: that Pakistan, as the authors point out, “is the only Muslim-majority state, out of the 50 or so in the world, to have successfully developed nuclear weapons”.
Then we have the usual accusations of how the Pakistan military and security services are totally infiltrated by jihadis and their sympathizers - of course this must be a conclusion drawn from the US experience where the US military and administration are totally infiltrated by Zionists and their sympathizers and at present that goes right to the top to President Obama himself.
The icing on the cake is the cited assertion by Graham Allison. His assertions in this article are more amusing than rational. His first assertion that terrorists would steal a nuke and take it to New York makes no sense unless the nuke is stolen from a US site since no terrorist can carry a radioactive weapon through the various security checks and arrive safely carting the weapon to New York. Figure it out! His second assertion is equally mind boggling - that a jihadi group would transfer a nuclear weapon to Iran. Why? Iran has no delivery systems to target the US! Also the jihadi groups being talked about are diehard anti-Shia so why would they give this nuke “gift” to Iran and why would Iran want to deal with such people? There is no evidence for any of these assertions. Allison’s third assertion plays on the instability of the Pakistani state that is the present US mantra - that a militant group would takeover nuclear weapons during “a period of instability or splintering of the state.” Well Allison better tell the US not to attempt such a move in Pakistan; but on a more serious note the fact of the matter is that so far our nukes are more secure than US nukes and militants have enough lethality in terms of conventional weapons as has sadly been shown.
The authors do assert that Pakistan’s weapons are de-mated which seems to reassure them so one would not like to educate them on this issue. But the most hilarious assertion is the claim that Pakistan has begun moving its nukes in “low-security vans on congested roads to hide them from US spy agencies”! Given how the US does not know where the weapons are located, why would we move them in low-security vans and to where?
The whole article, based on conjecture and wild assertions, is meant to target Pakistan and its nuclear assets and is part of a long-term US strategy on this count. The background of the authors is also interesting. Jeffrey Goldberg served in the Israeli Defence Forces and was a prison guard during the First Intifada - so one does not have to imagine too much to understand where he is coming from.
As for Marc Ambinder, the White House correspondent for the National Journal, he has had a psychological battle against obesity and his wife works for the Boston Consulting Group which includes amongst its current and former employees Israel’s extreme right wing leader Benjamin Netanyahu! I rest my case of the US being our “ally from hell”.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Absurd Accusations, Pay Nothing
By Ishaal Zehra
Pakistan as a country and Pakistani people as a nation are going through very tough times. John Kerry, the first American politician to visit Pakistan since Osama bin Laden was shot dead in the incident of unilateral action by the US forces on May 2nd 2011, told the country's military and civilian leaders that they could lose billions of dollars in funding if they fail to tackle militant safe havens in the mountainous border areas.
Things have clearly changed after the May 2nd incident of unilateral action in the sovereign independent state of Pakistan, unfortunately, by its own ally in war against terror. How absurd American accusations are that Osama bin Laden was able to hide in the country due to either an official support network or the ‘incompetence’ of Pakistani authorities. Just to let the so-called ally of ours know that we as a nation have full confidence in the high command of the Pakistan Armed Forces and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). Throwing the entire responsibility on external factors and absolving oneself from any responsibility is absurd as well as ridiculous. Pakistan is not the birthplace of al Qaeda. Taliban and al Qaeda was born in an allusion to US funding for the Afghan mujahidden in the 1980s war against Soviet troops in Afghanistan, it is unfair for Pakistan to own all the blame.
To cover its own failures the US always blamed Pakistan for not doing enough or for harboring terrorists on its soil. These terrorists nurtured by the US for its own objectives and then abandoned could not be get rid off so suddenly. Moreover the high handed US policies and killing of innocent people through indiscriminate bombing made things more difficult and complicated. Intervention in Afghanistan by regional powers like India and Iran further compounded the problem. How can Pakistan overcome such well entrenched insurgents in one of the roughest terrain in the world while its so-called allies and the Afghan government complicated matters and vitiated the atmosphere. This monster of terrorism has engulfed the region and Pakistan is clearly not responsible. Everyone including the US must take its share of responsibility for its own failings.
The contribution of this country in the US-led war against terrorism was always well above average. 248 al Qaeda operatives, among them senior leaders, had been captured by Pakistani armed forces. No other country in the world and no other security agency have done so much to interdict al Qaeda than the ISI and our armed forces. We have lost more or less 35,000 people of Pakistan including our civilian brothers and armed forces.
Pakistan was a peaceful country with a tolerant population till the time the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, after which the bad days for Pakistan started. The US, apparently, started to feel the pain for the “poor” Afghans. While this is no more a secret now that the US actually had no love lost for Afghan freedom as they themselves are a historic demon who had committed grave atrocities against other countries - not forgetting Japan, Korea, Vietnam and the total elimination of the native American. However this apparent pain was not for freeing the Afghans from Soviet occupation in fact, the US saw a golden opportunity to avenge its humiliation in Vietnam.
The proof is provided by Mr. Zbigniew Brzezinski (National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter) in his interviews. He acknowledge the fact that the US worked towards inducing the Soviets to invade Afghanistan through covert actions.
Billions of dollars in military aid were provided to the most ignorant, bigoted and obscurantist forces to fight the Soviets. Thousands of criminals were released from prisons in US allied Arab countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia etc to fight a holy war in Afghanistan. Hundreds of Madrassahs were opened to give militant religious education to young Afghan and Pakistanis to indoctrinate them to fight the Soviets. This was all done without any regard to the fact that this monster that was being created will one day attempt to devour its own creator. The area became awash with sophisticated weapons. After the Soviet withdrawal the US and its allies conveniently withdrew, leaving battle hardened warriors looking for another enemy. They found one in the United States. Al Qaeda an organization created by US trained zealots prepared for ten years while the US remained blissfully ignorant, of its plans. The terrorists struck the US on 9 September 2001. The US reaction was immature and beyond proportion. The sympathy wave generated due to the tragic events faded as the US policies became bankrupt and counter productive.
And the Great Satan then started the Great Global Game. Ever since then all what is happening on the world stage is been directed and produced by the Great Satan himself. The war in Iraq lead to Afghanistan is now being purposely drawn in to Pakistan. The Osama’s presence here in Abbottabad just paved a way for further advancement of US plans in the region.
Fortunately for us Pakistanis, the chief outcome of this incident is that Pakistan is now bound to deal with its problems internally. Expectantly it will give a little troubled feeling to the allies of GWOT but humbly it is stated that we cannot afford to put off the flaring self esteem which has aroused in the wake of this costly war.
Collectively, we must acknowledge facts and see our faces in the mirror of history and if the American mirror, unfortunately showing them vandalized then its not Pakistan’s fault.
Pakistan as a country and Pakistani people as a nation are going through very tough times. John Kerry, the first American politician to visit Pakistan since Osama bin Laden was shot dead in the incident of unilateral action by the US forces on May 2nd 2011, told the country's military and civilian leaders that they could lose billions of dollars in funding if they fail to tackle militant safe havens in the mountainous border areas.
Things have clearly changed after the May 2nd incident of unilateral action in the sovereign independent state of Pakistan, unfortunately, by its own ally in war against terror. How absurd American accusations are that Osama bin Laden was able to hide in the country due to either an official support network or the ‘incompetence’ of Pakistani authorities. Just to let the so-called ally of ours know that we as a nation have full confidence in the high command of the Pakistan Armed Forces and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). Throwing the entire responsibility on external factors and absolving oneself from any responsibility is absurd as well as ridiculous. Pakistan is not the birthplace of al Qaeda. Taliban and al Qaeda was born in an allusion to US funding for the Afghan mujahidden in the 1980s war against Soviet troops in Afghanistan, it is unfair for Pakistan to own all the blame.
To cover its own failures the US always blamed Pakistan for not doing enough or for harboring terrorists on its soil. These terrorists nurtured by the US for its own objectives and then abandoned could not be get rid off so suddenly. Moreover the high handed US policies and killing of innocent people through indiscriminate bombing made things more difficult and complicated. Intervention in Afghanistan by regional powers like India and Iran further compounded the problem. How can Pakistan overcome such well entrenched insurgents in one of the roughest terrain in the world while its so-called allies and the Afghan government complicated matters and vitiated the atmosphere. This monster of terrorism has engulfed the region and Pakistan is clearly not responsible. Everyone including the US must take its share of responsibility for its own failings.
The contribution of this country in the US-led war against terrorism was always well above average. 248 al Qaeda operatives, among them senior leaders, had been captured by Pakistani armed forces. No other country in the world and no other security agency have done so much to interdict al Qaeda than the ISI and our armed forces. We have lost more or less 35,000 people of Pakistan including our civilian brothers and armed forces.
Pakistan was a peaceful country with a tolerant population till the time the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, after which the bad days for Pakistan started. The US, apparently, started to feel the pain for the “poor” Afghans. While this is no more a secret now that the US actually had no love lost for Afghan freedom as they themselves are a historic demon who had committed grave atrocities against other countries - not forgetting Japan, Korea, Vietnam and the total elimination of the native American. However this apparent pain was not for freeing the Afghans from Soviet occupation in fact, the US saw a golden opportunity to avenge its humiliation in Vietnam.
The proof is provided by Mr. Zbigniew Brzezinski (National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter) in his interviews. He acknowledge the fact that the US worked towards inducing the Soviets to invade Afghanistan through covert actions.
Billions of dollars in military aid were provided to the most ignorant, bigoted and obscurantist forces to fight the Soviets. Thousands of criminals were released from prisons in US allied Arab countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia etc to fight a holy war in Afghanistan. Hundreds of Madrassahs were opened to give militant religious education to young Afghan and Pakistanis to indoctrinate them to fight the Soviets. This was all done without any regard to the fact that this monster that was being created will one day attempt to devour its own creator. The area became awash with sophisticated weapons. After the Soviet withdrawal the US and its allies conveniently withdrew, leaving battle hardened warriors looking for another enemy. They found one in the United States. Al Qaeda an organization created by US trained zealots prepared for ten years while the US remained blissfully ignorant, of its plans. The terrorists struck the US on 9 September 2001. The US reaction was immature and beyond proportion. The sympathy wave generated due to the tragic events faded as the US policies became bankrupt and counter productive.
And the Great Satan then started the Great Global Game. Ever since then all what is happening on the world stage is been directed and produced by the Great Satan himself. The war in Iraq lead to Afghanistan is now being purposely drawn in to Pakistan. The Osama’s presence here in Abbottabad just paved a way for further advancement of US plans in the region.
Fortunately for us Pakistanis, the chief outcome of this incident is that Pakistan is now bound to deal with its problems internally. Expectantly it will give a little troubled feeling to the allies of GWOT but humbly it is stated that we cannot afford to put off the flaring self esteem which has aroused in the wake of this costly war.
Collectively, we must acknowledge facts and see our faces in the mirror of history and if the American mirror, unfortunately showing them vandalized then its not Pakistan’s fault.
Whose Blame it is Anyways??
Some intrigues keep one’s mind amused for quite some time. Apparently Al-Qaeda creation and usage for US’s (not national but few peoples) interests always make me salute the higher ups in the west whose mind is always busy in creating and controlling the scenarios with such an ease that the US citizens (actually the burden carriers of this war in form of taxes and their lives) don’t even try to think what is lost and what is at stake. This is really an accomplishment on the behalf of their government.
Pakistan and its army both are paying the cost of being an ally to the US in return of so-called aid which surely cannot live up to the cost of lives of thousands of its people (both Civil & Military) and the gone serenity of its land of pure. but in spite of a recognition, the tribute paid to us by the sweetheart ally of ours is that we are a party to OBL. it was an intelligence failure on behalf of security forces but the cost it has paid so far is much much more than this petty little failure. Even CIA was not able to find any trace of Bin Laden in spite of having far better technology and assistance then why to blame others for something even you were not able to do. US simply cannot null n void all the efforts Pakistan has done for crushing the devil they have actually nurtured.
Following is a salute to those who have the guts to admit own folly and pointing out own culprits rather than just blaming others for it. The piece is a cross post from “Take Over World” and can be accessed at
http://www.takeoverworld.info/brzezinski_quotes.html
Let's take a look at what "Al-Qaeda" has accomplished so far:
• 1) Two entire countries turned over the western oil interests, Afghanistan now run by former Unocal consultants.
• 2) 3000 dead American civilians in NY, many more sickened by toxic and carcinogenic air, dying of cancer and other diseases, since Bush ordered EPA to tell them air was fine.
• 3) 6000 (approx) dead Afghani civilians, tens of thousands more starved to death, frozen, maimed and missing arms, legs, eyes, though the countryside is in utter chaos.
• 4) CIA-run heroin production which Taliban stopped, now skyrocketing.
• 5) 700,000 (approx) dead Iraqi civilians, with triple or quadruple that number permanently maimed, terrorized, displaced, dislocated. Robbed of all their possessions of a middle class lifestyle, or farming lifestyle, or whatever. Iraq being carved up by GLOBAL oil interests, with American companies in the lead, not simply to acquire oil for the US market, but to prevent other countries from buying oil directly without subservience to the Washington Consensus, i.e. neo-liberalism, or as Poppy Bush said, "What we say, goes".
• 6) 2500+ American troops dead (which Kissinger called soldiers stupid animals to be used as cannon fodder for political games), probably 20,000+ maimed and psychologically damaged (don't mention psychologically maimed Iraqis), many with permanent injuries, but don't worry, we'll cut veterans benefits (as in the past) so taxpayers aren't affected.
(according to Time, "... founders of the Chowder and Marching Society, formed in 1949 by 15 fractious young Republicans of the House [[Nixon and Ford among them] to oppose monthly bonuses for war veterans, ...") (see Bonus Marchers shot by Army)
• 7) 600+ Lebanese civilians dead, Shiite, Sunni, Druze and Christians of all sects, mostly farmers, shepherds, and the very poor in the cities, based loosely off America's War against Al-Qaeda, and with Al-Qaeda offering to "help" Hezbollah, Hz refusing Al-Qaeda's help (i think Hz is a legit resistance, as opposed to Al-Qaeda)
• 8) Uncounted numbers (mostly Arabs, and American troops, but worldwide) who will die from cancer and other conditions and have an epidemic of birth defects, due to dumping radioactive waste (depleted uranium) all over Iraq, Bosnia, Lebanon.
• 9) A few hundred dead Israelis, civilians and soldiers.
(as one American officer said about the staged Pearl Harbor event, "It was a cheap price") http://www.silverbearcafe.com/infamy.html (Lieutenant Commander Joseph Rochefort, head of the Navy’s Mid-Pacific Radio Intelligence Network.)
Gosh, it looks like this Al-Qaeda Project, rather than being good for Arab liberation, actually serves the role getting them killed and dominated by foreigners.
Who Benefits? entirely predictable
Since Al-Qaeda was undeniably, irrefutably an American-British Intelligence creation in the first place ... Hmmm ... Makes you wonder.
Arab people must be saying, with friends like him, who needs enemies?
If I were an oil speculator/investor, I'd be sending Osama a case of Old Malt Scotch for Christmas. Who's he working for anyhow?!!
(The current President is literally an American Intelligence creation ... by his father. And John Kerry, like Bush and like Heinrich Himmler, is admittedly a member of Skull and Bones ... only he and Bush told a giggling Tim Russert they can't talk about it.)
Pakistan and its army both are paying the cost of being an ally to the US in return of so-called aid which surely cannot live up to the cost of lives of thousands of its people (both Civil & Military) and the gone serenity of its land of pure. but in spite of a recognition, the tribute paid to us by the sweetheart ally of ours is that we are a party to OBL. it was an intelligence failure on behalf of security forces but the cost it has paid so far is much much more than this petty little failure. Even CIA was not able to find any trace of Bin Laden in spite of having far better technology and assistance then why to blame others for something even you were not able to do. US simply cannot null n void all the efforts Pakistan has done for crushing the devil they have actually nurtured.
Following is a salute to those who have the guts to admit own folly and pointing out own culprits rather than just blaming others for it. The piece is a cross post from “Take Over World” and can be accessed at
http://www.takeoverworld.info/brzezinski_quotes.html
Let's take a look at what "Al-Qaeda" has accomplished so far:
• 1) Two entire countries turned over the western oil interests, Afghanistan now run by former Unocal consultants.
• 2) 3000 dead American civilians in NY, many more sickened by toxic and carcinogenic air, dying of cancer and other diseases, since Bush ordered EPA to tell them air was fine.
• 3) 6000 (approx) dead Afghani civilians, tens of thousands more starved to death, frozen, maimed and missing arms, legs, eyes, though the countryside is in utter chaos.
• 4) CIA-run heroin production which Taliban stopped, now skyrocketing.
• 5) 700,000 (approx) dead Iraqi civilians, with triple or quadruple that number permanently maimed, terrorized, displaced, dislocated. Robbed of all their possessions of a middle class lifestyle, or farming lifestyle, or whatever. Iraq being carved up by GLOBAL oil interests, with American companies in the lead, not simply to acquire oil for the US market, but to prevent other countries from buying oil directly without subservience to the Washington Consensus, i.e. neo-liberalism, or as Poppy Bush said, "What we say, goes".
• 6) 2500+ American troops dead (which Kissinger called soldiers stupid animals to be used as cannon fodder for political games), probably 20,000+ maimed and psychologically damaged (don't mention psychologically maimed Iraqis), many with permanent injuries, but don't worry, we'll cut veterans benefits (as in the past) so taxpayers aren't affected.
(according to Time, "... founders of the Chowder and Marching Society, formed in 1949 by 15 fractious young Republicans of the House [[Nixon and Ford among them] to oppose monthly bonuses for war veterans, ...") (see Bonus Marchers shot by Army)
• 7) 600+ Lebanese civilians dead, Shiite, Sunni, Druze and Christians of all sects, mostly farmers, shepherds, and the very poor in the cities, based loosely off America's War against Al-Qaeda, and with Al-Qaeda offering to "help" Hezbollah, Hz refusing Al-Qaeda's help (i think Hz is a legit resistance, as opposed to Al-Qaeda)
• 8) Uncounted numbers (mostly Arabs, and American troops, but worldwide) who will die from cancer and other conditions and have an epidemic of birth defects, due to dumping radioactive waste (depleted uranium) all over Iraq, Bosnia, Lebanon.
• 9) A few hundred dead Israelis, civilians and soldiers.
(as one American officer said about the staged Pearl Harbor event, "It was a cheap price") http://www.silverbearcafe.com/infamy.html (Lieutenant Commander Joseph Rochefort, head of the Navy’s Mid-Pacific Radio Intelligence Network.)
Gosh, it looks like this Al-Qaeda Project, rather than being good for Arab liberation, actually serves the role getting them killed and dominated by foreigners.
Who Benefits? entirely predictable
Since Al-Qaeda was undeniably, irrefutably an American-British Intelligence creation in the first place ... Hmmm ... Makes you wonder.
Arab people must be saying, with friends like him, who needs enemies?
If I were an oil speculator/investor, I'd be sending Osama a case of Old Malt Scotch for Christmas. Who's he working for anyhow?!!
(The current President is literally an American Intelligence creation ... by his father. And John Kerry, like Bush and like Heinrich Himmler, is admittedly a member of Skull and Bones ... only he and Bush told a giggling Tim Russert they can't talk about it.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)